nasseus.

ancient mythology, may be added that of Dionysius HalicarThis celebrated critic and historian, in the first book of his Roman History, does not deny that some of those fables might possibly in some cases be of use; yet observes that small was the benefit which could accrue from them, and this only to those who could penetrate into their hidden meaning and design. But that few there were who attained to this kind of philosophy: and the rude and unlearned multitude loved to take those stories concerning the gods, in the grossest sense, and were thereby in danger either of contemning the gods, or of giving themselves an unrestrained liberty in committing the basest and wickedest actions, when they saw that the gods themselves warranted then by their practice. This passage of Dionysius is cited with approbation by Lord Herbert, De Relig. Gentil. cap. xi. p. 130, et 136. Edit. Amstel.

8vo.

CHAP. VII.

The civil theology of the Pagans considered. That of the ancient Romans has been much commended, yet became in process of time little less absurd than the poetical, and in many instances was closely connected and complicated with it. The pernicious consequences of this to religion and morals. Some account of the absurd and immoral rites which were anciently practised in the most civilized nations, and which made a part of their religion; being either prescribed by the laws, or established by customs which had the force of laws. The politicians and civil magistrates took no effectual methods to rectify this, but rather countenanced and abetted the popular superstition and idolatry.

FR

ROM the poetical or fabulous let us proceed to the civil theology of the Pagans, which was the public and authorized religion, established by the legislators and the magistrates, or chief men of the community, the principes civitatis, as Varro calls them. And this is the rather to be considered, as it was that which the philosophers themselves, whatever private opinions or speculations they might entertain, or dispute of in their schools, universally conformed to in their own practice, and also exhorted others to do so. It must therefore be allowed by all, that from this we may justly take our measures of the state of religion in the heathen world. Varro describes it to be that which ought to be known and practised by the citizens, and which was administered by the priests: and that it particularly determined what gods they were publicly to worship, what sacred rites they were to observe, and what sacrifices to offer. "Quod in urbibus cives, maximè sacerdotes, nosse et administrare debent. In quo est, quos deos publice "colere, quæ sacra et sacrificia facere quemque par sit.”*

66

And, in considering the civil theology of the Pagans, I shall have a particular regard to that of the Romans. Dionysius Halicarnasseus praises the Roman institutions of religion, especially those which were appointed at the first establishment of their state. He observes that they made use of the best of the Grecian institutions, but did not admit any of those

* Varro ap. August. C. D. lib. vi. cap. 5. p. 117.

fables of theirs which contained things unworthy of the gods into the public religion. And that, in what related to the sacred ceremonies and worship of the gods, all things were done with a becoming piety and gravity, in which they far excelled both Greeks and barbarians.* The ordering of the public religion was all along in the hands of the wisest and greatest men of the state. Cicero, in his Oratio pro Domo sua ad Pontifices, extols the wisdom of their ancestors, in appointing that the same persons who had the chief administration in civil affairs, should also preside over the ceremonies of religion. He speaks of the office of the priests with great respect; and tells them, that the honour and safety of the commonwealth, the public liberty, the houses and fortunes of the citizens, and the gods themselves, were committed to their wisdom and care. And, in his Oratio de Haruspicum Responsis, he mentions it as the peculiar praise of the Romans, that they were the most religious of all people, and excelled all nations in piety, and especially in this eminent point of wisdom, that they clearly perceived that all things are governed by the providence and divinity of the immortal gods.†

Let us therefore inquire how the public religion stood with the ancient Romans.

It is a general observation, which affects the whole civil theology of the Pagans, that of the Romans as well as of other heathen nations, that the public worship which was instituted by their most celebrated legislators, and prescribed and established by the laws of their several cities and countries, was paid not to one only God, but to a multiplicity of deities. In the passage now quoted from Cicero, when he so highly extols the religion of the ancient Romans, he takes particular notice of this, that

* Dion. Halic. Histor. lib. ii.

+ "Quam volumus licet, patres conscripti, ipsi nos amemus, tamen nec numero "Hispanos, nec robore Gallos, nec calliditate Pœnos, nec artibus Græcos, nec "denique hoc ipso hujus gentis et terræ domestico nativoque sensu, Italos ipsos "ac Latinos; sed pietate ac religione, atque hâc unâ sapientiâ, quod Deorum im"mortalium numine omnia regi gubernarique perspeximus, omnes gentes nationesque superavimus." Orat. De Harusp. Respons. N. 9.

46

they were persuaded that all things are governed by the divinity of the immortal gods. Their religion therefore was properly polytheism. And the providence they acknowledged was the providence not of one God, but of many gods. Lord Bolingbroke indeed has taken upon him to affirm "that the "worship of this multiplicity of gods did not interfere with the "supreme Being, in the minds of those who worshipped them.”* But I cannot see upon what foundation this can be pretended. The same author elsewhere speaking of the crowd of divinities among the heathens, declares that "they intercepted the wor"ship of the supreme Being; and that this monstrous assem"blage made the object of vulgar adoration."+ It was to prevent this that all manner of worship of inferior deities was so strictly prohibited in the law of Moses, and the people were expressly commanded to have no other gods but one; to worship the one true God, the Creator of the universe, and him only; whereby it was gloriously distinguished from all other laws and constitutions. This constitution was peculiar to the Jews; and its being established among them was owing not merely to the superior wisdom of their lawgiver, but to his hav

* Bol. Works, vol. v. p. 505. Edit. 4to.

Ibid. vol. iv. p. 80, and 461.

Dr. Hyde, in his celebrated book, De Religione Veterum Persarum, has taken great pains to show that the ancient Persians worshipped the one true God. Some persons of great learning and judgment have thought that his authorities were not sufficient. But, if we allow the account he gives to be a just one, they were instructed, as he observes, in the true ancient patriarchal religion by their great progenitors Shem and Elam, who derived it from Noah and Adam, to whom it originally came by divine revelation. And, upon their deviating from it, the patriarch Abraham introduced a reformation among them; and, when they again lapsed into the Sabaitical idolatry, they were reformed by Zerdusht or Zoroaster, who lived in the reign of Gushtasp Loroasp, or Darius Hystaspes. And this Zerdusht, according to the accounts given of him by Dr. Hyde from the oriental writers, must have learned the principal things in his religion from the Jews; having been a disciple of one of the Jewish prophets, and having incorporated many of the rites prescribed in the law of Moses into his own. This is what the learned Doctor set himself particularly to show in his tenth chapter, the title of which runs thus; "Persarum religio in multis convenit cum Judaicâ, et ab eâ magnâ ex "parte desumpta fuit."

ing had the advantage of an extraordinary revelation from God, the authority of which was confirmed by a series of the most illustrious divine attestations. Whereas among other nations where the worship of many gods was countenanced and established by the laws, they lost and confounded the knowledge and worship of the one true God amidst a multiplicity of idol deities, and served and worshipped the creature more than the Creator.

The learned Dr. Cudworth, though very much inclined to put the most favourable construction upon the Pagan theology, acknowledges, that "the civil theology of the Pagans, as well "as the poetical, had not only many fantastic gods in it, "but an appearance of a plurality of independent deities; it "making several supreme in their several territories and func"tions: as one to be the chief ruler over the heavens, another "over the air, another over the sea, one to be the giver of "corn, another of wine, &c." And he produces a remarkable passage from Aristotle, in which he argues against Zeno thus: "Whereas Zeno takes it for granted, that men have an idea "in their minds of God, as one the most excellent and power"ful being of all: this doth not seem to be according to the "law; for there the gods seem to be mutually better one than "another, respectively to several things. And therefore Zeno "took not this account of mankind from that which vulgarly "seemeth."* Here Aristotle intimates that, according to the laws of cities and countries, that is, in the civil or political theology, there seems to be no one absolutely powerful or all-perfect being, but a plurality of gods, one of which is supposed to be more powerful as to one thing, another as to another.

I do not deny that even the vulgar among the Pagan polytheists seem, for the most part, to have had some notion of one supreme God. It was before observed that the Jupiter in the Capitol was regarded by the Romans as the chief god in their

* See Aristotle's treatise De Xenophane, Zenone, et Gorgia, Oper. tom, I, p. 1246. Edit. Paris 1629.