upon the Ebionites. There may have been real heretics under that name; but I believe that, in the beginning, the name was, on account of its Hebrew meaning, given to, or adopted by, some poor mistaken men-perhaps of the Nazarene way- who sold all their goods and lands, and were then obliged to beg. I think it not improbable that Barnabas was one of these chief mendicants; and that the collection made by St. Paul was for them. You should read Rhenferd's account of the early heresies. I think he demonstrates about eight of Epiphanius's heretics to be mere nicknames given by the Jews to the Christians. Read "Hermas, or the Shepherd," of the genuineness of which and of the epistle of Barnabas I have no doubt. It is perfectly orthodox, but full of the most ludicrous tricks of gnostic fancy — the wish to find the New Testament in the Old. This gnosis is perceptible in the Epistle to the Hebrews, but kept exquisitely within the limit of propriety. In the others it is rampant, and most truly "puffeth up," as St. Paul said of it.

What between the sectarians and the political economists, the English are denationalized. England I see as a country, but the English nation seems obliterated. What could redintegrate us again? Must it be another threat of foreign invasion?

I never can digest the loss of most of Origen's works: he seems to have been almost the only very great scholar and genius combined amongst the early Fathers. Jerome was very inferior to him.

SOME MEN

January 20. 1834.

LIKE MUSICAL GLASSES.

SUBLIME AND NONSENSE. ATHEIST.

SOME men are like musical glasses; to produce their finest tones, you must keep them wet.

Well! that passage is what I call the

sublime dashed to pieces by cutting too close with the fiery four-in-hand round the corner of nonsense.

How did the Atheist get his idea of that God whom he denies?

February 22. 1834.

PROOF OF EXISTENCE OF GOD. - KANT'S ATTEMPT. - PLURALITY OF WORLDS.

ASSUME the existence of God, - and then the harmony and fitness of the physical creation may be shown to correspond with and support such an assumption; — but to set about proving the existence of a God by such means is a mere circle, a delusion. It can be no proof to a good reasoner, unless he violates all syllogistic logic, and presumes his conclusion.

Kant once set about proving the existence

of God, and a masterly effort it was. * But in his later great work, the "Critique of the Pure Reason," he saw its fallacy, and said of it that if the existence could be proved at all, it must be on the grounds indicated by him.

I never could feel any force in the arguments for a plurality of worlds, in the common acceptation of that term. A lady once asked me "What then could be the intention in creating so many great bodies, so apparently useless to us?" I said — I did not know, except perhaps to make dirt cheap. The vulgar inference is in alio genere. in the eye of an intellectual and omnipotent Being is the whole sidereal system to the soul of one man for whom Christ died?

What

* In his essay, “ Der einzig mögliche Beweisgrund zu einer Demonstration des Daseyns Gottes.” "The only possible argument or ground of proof for a demonstration of the existence of God." It was published in 1763; the "Critique" in 1781.- ED.

March 1. 1834.

A REASONER.

I AM by the law of my nature a reasoner. A person who should suppose I meant by that word, an arguer, would not only not understand me, but would understand the contrary of my meaning. I can take no interest whatever in hearing or saying any thing merely as a fact-merely as merely as having happened. It must refer to something within me before I can regard it with any curiosity or care. My mind is always energic -I don't mean, energetic; I require in every thing what, for lack of another word, I may call propriety,—that is, a reason why the thing is at all, and why it is there or then rather than elsewhere or at another time.