The pride of Philofophy has too highly exalted reason, the mock humility of Enthufiafm has debased it. Moreover, while the Deift from felf-fufficiency has spurned the aid and denied the neceffity of Revelation, the well meaning advocate for Christianity has collected and exaggerated all the instances of ignorance and depravity to be found in the heathen world, and enquiries have been often made how much of the heathen morality was borrowed from Revelation, and it has been taken for granted that because some of the Greek philofophers travelled into Egypt, all their knowledge of the Deity and all their precepts respecting the private and focial duties of man, were brought from thence. Their acquiefcence in the popular religion is alledged as a proof of the grofsnefs of their minds, and they are generally reprefented as not having themselves, much lefs inculcating in others, any ideas of thofe fublimer moral precepts, which, it is contended, are to be found only in the Gospel. The hiftory of all kingdoms in a state of barbarity is uncertain, and it must be allowed that no one ever emerged from such a state by its own mere effects. But whatever knowledge the philofophers carried from the Eaft, they certainly improved upon

it-They were not ignorant that purity of intention is neceffary to conftitute real goodnefs, that a defire of revenge is a mean and groveling paffion, that man is not fuch a judge of his own happiness as to know what to request of heaven, and that he is infufficient of himself to become what he was intended to be, without fupernatural affiftance -Nor are we to impute to Cicero all the fcepticism apparently to be found in his writings. He gives the opinions of every fect the most plaufible appearance, and leaves the reader to judge for himself. The greatness of mind, which his morality difplays, will delight an intelligent reader, as it will expofe the mean and the profligate of every age and every country. Nor need any one be alarmed, if we should in fome degree think more highly of the fages of Greece and Rome than we ought to think. Much vanity and pride, much unneceffary fubtlety and refinement, much temporary compliance and pufillanimous condefcenfion, to be found amongst them, will abundantly justify the cenfure of St. Paul, and fet forth the fuperior excellence of the Gospel. Every age has abounded with Deifts, and the prefent age has not the smalleft number. The Church of Rome, by im

pofing too many articles of belief, has tempted many to disbelieve every thing: And every other Communion of Chriftians which has extended the boundaries of faith beyond the line fixed by Revelation, has indirectly, however unintentionally, added to the number of infidels. After the moft earneft endeavours, our good will be evil spoken of; only let not this be the effect of our own imprudence.

It perhaps was never thoroughly known how much a vigorous understanding, joined with unwearied diligence, might effect. In controverfy, it is fafer to allow too much than too little. For to thofe, who are favoured with a Revelation, who have not fhut their eyes against the light, it is not of the greatest moment to know precisely what they could have been or what they could have difcovered in the days of ignorance and fuperftition—

But we may be afked, whether we intend to deny the existence of natural religion or to depreciate its excellence? St. Paul himself has authorized us to fuppofe, that independent of revelation, there are certain obligations, both to God and our fellow creatures, which ought, under all circumstances, to have been

C

been better understood and more univerfally practised than they were. The invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly feen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; fo that they are without excufe: Because that when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. And again, When the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, thefe having not the law, are a law unto themselves; which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their confcience alfo bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accufing or elfe excufing one another. So little are the inspired penmen disposed to weaken the just pretenfions even of deism.

d

It is a position, which surely can admit of little doubt, that, if Jefus Christ had not come into the world, first to instruct us and afterwards to die for us, there would have been certain duties which man ought to have practifed, and that without an useless disquifition concerning the feveral fources of information, we can discriminate between fuch dud Ibid. ii, 14, 15. A 4

Rom, i, 20, 21.

ties

ties and the additional obligations which Christianity impofes. When this difcrimination is made, it is clearly feen what is or what ought to be understood by natural, and what by revealed religion. We are not now speaking of practice; for in practice Whatsoever is not of faith, is fin. Whatsoever we do, actuated folely by motives of common prudence and mere morality, has in it the nature of fin. But what is united in practice may be diftinguished in fpeculation. The fuccessful movement of a machine depends upon a proper union and a regular co-operation of all its powers: but this neither prevents nor difcourages us from analysing them, and determining how much of each power is neceffary to render the whole compleat. We, therefore, fee, by the way, with what propriety our Theological ftudies are affifted by the previous perufal of a fyftem of Ethicks, for though our Ethicks and our Theology may proceed from the fame. fource, yet in contemplation they are distinguished from each other, giving and receiving mutual aid and affistance. For from whence arifes the internal evidence of the Chriftian religion? Does it not arife from the fense of right and wrong implanted in the human breast?

e Rom. xiv. 23.