We are told of absolute law, and referred to Hooker. Hooker, as is known, pleaded the cause of the Episcopalian establishment against Travers, resting it on the nature of law, with a view to justify the obligation of what was not contained in scripture. I have nothing to do with his views; but it is singular enough that what is referred to, contains the germ of the two principal infidel doctrines of the present day, and of the Puseyite movement. Quite unknown, surely, to himself; but a false principle bears its fruit in its own season. One the subjecting God to the law he has imposed on himself in a way which destroys His sovereignty; the other exalting conscience under the name of right reason, quoting Plato, Aristotle, &c., for proof, so as to give conscience a title, enfeebling that of scripture; and on the other hand, insisting (contrary to the reformers) that scripture does not prove itself, but we must have proof of it from another source; and further, that scripture does not contain full direction for men. I quite admit he did not contemplate the consequences. But the great standpoint of infidels now is, that God acting necessarily by, and having established, uniform law, miracles are impossible; and that conscience or right reason must judge of scripture. That scripture cannot prove itself is the warhorse of popery, as is its insufficiency.