sameness; and if it be not transferred, the identity of an infant's body cannot be constituted by the majority of those particles, which, in a more advanced state, fall into the grave.

The final conclusion from these premises, therefore, must be, that the identity of the body cannot consist either in the whole of the corporeal mass, or, in any given number of particles indiscriminately taken from that mass; or in the majority of those particles which fell into the grave when the body died. It cannot consist in the first; for this supposition would make the body of an enormous size, and would be contradicted also by fact, as in the case of cannibals. Nor can it consist in the second case, which we have supposed; for this would leave room for many identities of the same body, which would be absurd. Neither can it be in the last case, which we have supposed; because this will lead us to suppose an identity without sameness, or a transfer of sameness from one system of atoms to another. And, as each of these conclusions is in itself absurd in the highest degree, and carries with it its own refutation, we are finally led to this point, that the identity of our future bodiès cannot consist in either of the cases, which has hitherto been considered, or which we have thus far been able to explore.

But, whatever difficulties may attend this subject of our inquiry, of this we are certain, that the identity of the body does exist; and it seems equally certain, that it must consist in something, which

retains its sameness under all the changes of life, the shocks of death, and must continue the same to eternity.

SECT. II.

Arguments tending to prove, That the sameness of our future Bodies must be constituted by some Germ, or Stamen; and that we now possess all the Evidence of a Resurrection, which we can rationally expect in the present State.

WE have seen in the preceding section, those insuperable difficulties which are connected with the various modes, in which we have hitherto considered the identity of the human body, both in time and in eternity. It now remains to be considered, whether those objections which are brought against the supposition, that identity consists in some germ or stamen, have in them sufficient validity to counteract the probable evidence, which can be advanced in favour of its reality. And also, whether we have or have not all the evidence in favour of a resurrection, which we might rationally expect in the pre

sent state.

It is not improbable, that our notions of some germ being lodged within the compages of our bodies, were first taken from the lips of inspiration, in that grand description which St. Paul has given us of the resurrection of the dead. It is upon this, as one leading idea, that he builds the system which he has there laid down. And notwithstanding the in

comprehensibleness of its nature, the perfect analogy which subsists between the powers of vegetation and the final restitution of the body from the grave, presents to us an evidence, which, taken in all its parts, will render the subject before us probable in the highest degree.

I have already observed, that were the analogy to be minutely examined, the probability appears much more in favour of the resurrection, than in favour of vegetation; when considered in all its parts, and in connection with all its circumstances. What once had life, we well know must have been capable of it; but what was never endued with life, has not so much as this distant possibility to recommend it. We well know that what once had life must be capable of life in future; but, what never was endued with life, may for aught we know, be so constituted as to be incapable of possessing it.

That the body is now endued with life, we have the most unquestionable evidence; and therefore may thence presume that it may be again restored, because we are thus assured that the materials of which our bodies are composed, are capable of receiving it. But, the vegetative power of grain could not originally have had this evidence to recommend it. Yet, in that subject which seems most improbable, we behold the fact actually accomplished in each succeeding harvest; and even this circumstance gives us every reason to believe, that when the allotted period shall arrive, our bodies shall be reanimated also, though the ways and modes by which each of these is accomplished are

in both cases alike unknown to us, and so through eternity.

66

may remain

By the term germ or stamen, I understand a certain principle of future being, which was lodged in the human body at its primary formation ; —which has grown with its growth" through all the intermediate stages of life;--which constitutes perpetual sameness; and which shall form the rudiments of our future bodies.-That it shall remain for ever as a radical and immoveable principle; and shall either collect matter around it, which collected matter shall adhere for ever, or contain within it all those particles which are necessary to constitute those bodies which we shall perpetually possess.

On its magnitude and dimensions I will not presume even to risk a thought; and the recess of its residence, while included in the present vehicle, is perhaps of such a nature as will not admit of investigation. It may be diffused throughout the present body, by an innate expansive power which it possesses, and by the shock of death it may be capable of such contraction, as to render it impervious to attack, and invulnerable by all assaults. During its repose in the grave, it will, no doubt, be preserved from incorporating with the identity of other bodies, and from putting forth any operations except such as are peculiar to its state.

We see this principle of sameness perfectly preserved in every species of grain, which is around us; and we can have no kind of conception that a germ of future wheat can, by any possible process, become a constituent part of a grain of rye, or of

barley. This strange commixture would break down the order which God has established in the empire of nature; and finally tend to banish sameness from the world. The identity of grain, must therefore be preserved; and if the identity of grain must be preserved, why should we suppose that the germ of future life, (in which consists the identity of the body, and which is now lodged within its confines,) should be swallowed up in diversity, sooner than that of a simple grain, with which St. Paul has compared it? The same power, which has preserved and which does preserve the one, can without doubt preserve the other also. The order and harmony of all nature require it. In the case of grain, events have fully demonstrated it; and the veracity of God is engaged to ensure to us the certainty of its preservation in man. And the evidence is of equal validity in both cases, so far as the progress of time will identify the correspondent analogy.

There was a period in the origin of things, which elapsed between the creation of grain and the first harvest; when the evidences of that fact, and of the resurrection of the human body were precisely the same. And, if God were now to create any given form of matter, endued with a vegetative principle, as remote from all resemblance to grain, as it should be from the human body, the cases would be precisely similar, and the evidences on both sides would be nearly equal. But, when the effect of vegetation should come forth to substantiate, by ocular demonstration, the certainty of its