My opinion of Aftronomy has always been, that it is not the beft medium through which to prove the agency of an intelligent Creator; but that, this being proved, it fhews, beyond all other fciences, the magnificence of his operations. The mind which is once convinced, it raifes to fublimer views of the Deity, than any other fubject affords; but is not fo well adapted, as fome other fubjects are, to the purpofe of argument. We are deftitute of the means of examining the conftitution of the heavenly bodies. The very fimplicity of their appearance is againft them. We fee nothing, but bright points, luminous circles, or the phafes of fpheres reflecting the light which falls upon them. Now we deduce defign from relation, aptitude, and correfpondence of parts. Some degree therefore of complexity is neceffary to render a fubject fit for this fpecies of argument. But the heavenly bodies do not, except perhaps in the inftance of Saturn's ring, prefent themfelves to our obfervation as compounded of parts at all. This, which may be a perfection in them, is a difadvantage to us, as enquirers after their nature. They do not come within our mechanics.

And what we fay of their forms, is true of their motions. Their motions are carried on without any fenfible intermediate apparatus: whereby we are cut off from one principal ground of argumentation and analogy.