that "the dark places of the earth are full of the habitations of cruelty ?"

But it may be asked, could philosophy do nothing to stem this overwhelming torrent of superstition, sensuality, debauchery, and cruelty? So far from doing any thing in the way of restraint, it was when philosophy was most cultivated, and brought to the highest point which it appears to have been naturally capable of attaining, that these enormous evils prevailed most. Those who called themselves philosophers, were separated into various sects. These may be divided generally into two great classes, both of whom felt the pressure of evil and sorrow in life, but neither were able to discover a remedy. In this situation, the one class sought a refuge in sensuality and extreme indulgence, "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die." The other, wrapping themselves up in pride, taught men to brave the ills of life, as not worthy of the consideration of a wise

man.

Most of the philosophers, who were not sceptics, acknowledged one God as superior to the rest, but corrupted the doctrine of the Unity by making him to be of the same nature as the other gods, though of a higher order. And thus originated the custom of the priests, who, in all their sacred ceremonies and devotions, after addressing themselves to the special deities to whom it was necessary at each particular time to offer up prayer or sacrifices, were wont to invoke all the gods in general. Socrates, the most enlightened among the philosophers, represents the worshipping, not of one God, but of the gods, as the first and most universal law of nature. Both by precept and example, he countenanced the false religion of his country, and taught his disciples to conform themselves to it. He sacrificed at the public

altars, and sent to consult the oracle of Delphi. At his trial, he pleaded these facts as known to his accusers, to prove that he had not denied the gods. If at any time he spoke against the established religion of his country, it was only in secret and feebly. The last order he gave before he expired, was to sacrifice, in his name, a cock to Esculapius. That he died a martyr to the doctrine of the unity of the divine substance, Bishop Horsley asserts to be a vulgar error. Aristotle affirmed, that though there was one eternal first mover, yet the stars are also true eternal deities. Plato says expressly, that it is not easy to find the parent of the universe, nor prudent to discover him to the vulgar when found. In his treatise of Laws, and in his books of the Republic, he orders worship and rites to be performed to the gods, and to the demons, and to Esculapius. He prescribes the worship of the stars, which are indeed the divinities he principally recommends to the people. Cicero often speaks as if he believed that there was a plurality of gods. In arguing for the existence of God, he leads the people to a plurality, and asserts expressly that those who were accounted gods of the higher order, were taken from among men. He very much approves of the custom of paying divine honours to famous men, and of regarding them as gods.

Many of the most renowned among the philosophers held the doctrine of the TO 'EN. God was with them a sort of subtile spirit, which penetrated all nature, and was therefore literally "the soul of the universe." The souls of men were particles of this universal mind; and, after their separation from the bodies to which they had been united, were absorbed into the To iv, or animated other bodies in endless progression. The consequences of this system are obvious. It is much the same as that re

vived by Spinoza. The idea of God is totally evaporated, since it allows of no being superior to ourselves. This pantheism, or mixture of the absurdities of atheism with the reveries of pride, which excluded prayer, humility, and whatever belonged to religious worship, except their hypocritical conformity to the established religions of their country, was the system of most of the ancient philosophers, and was still more impious than all the fables of the Pagan vulgar.

The first and highest God was not, according to the philosophers, concerned in the creation of the world. Cicero would not allow that God created the matter out of which the universe was made. Some of them held that the world was eternal, others that it was formed by a fortuitous concourse of innumerable atoms; but it was commonly supposed that the world owed its origin to chance. Much was ascribed to matter, or to what they called fate. It was a universal notion among them, that the Supreme Being did not concern himself with the affairs of this world, but committed them wholly to inferior deities.

Respecting the immortality of the soul and a future state, those of the philosophers who did not disbelieve them altogether, were in entire uncertainty; and of the resurrection of the body, they seem to have formed no idea. On the two former points they never came to any fixed opinion. Socrates concludes a long discussion, relative to the state of souls after death, by saying, "That these things are so as I have represented them, it does not become any man of understanding to affirm." In this strain of conjecture and uncertainty he continued to speak to the last. In his apology to his judges, he comforts himself with the consideration that "there is much ground to hope that death is good; for it must

necessarily be one of these two, either the dead man is nothing, and has not a sense of any thing, or it is only a change or migration of the soul hence to another place, according to what we are told. If there is no sense left, and death is like a profound sleep and quiet rest, without dreams, it is wonderful to think what gain it is to die; but if the things which are told us are true, that death is a migration to another place, this is still a much greater good." Aristotle asserts that "death is the most dreadful of all things, for that it is the end of our existence; to him that is dead, there seems nothing further to remain, whether good or evil."

"Whilst I shall exist," says Cicero, " I shall not be troubled at any thing, since I am free of all fault; and if I shall not exist, I shall be deprived of all sense." Referring to the several opinions concerning the nature and duration of the soul, he says, "Which of these is true, God alone knows, and which is most probable, is a very great question." Seneca thought the soul could last only for a determined period; for a time was to come when a general conflagration would take place, and all things be reduced to their primitive chaotic state. Pliny, the naturalist, labours to expose the absurdity of ascribing immortality to the soul. Speaking of opinions relating to a future existence, he affirms that "these are childish and senseless fictions of mortals who are ambitious of a never-ending state of existence. Plutarch, having spoken of the cares and troubles of life, and quoted some passages respecting them from the poets, says, "If such then be the condition of human life, as they speak, why do we not rather applaud their good fortune who are freed from the drudgery of it, than pity and deplore them, as some

men's folly prompts them to do? Socrates," he adds, said, that death was like either to a very deep sleep, or to a journey taken a great way and for a long time, or to the utter extinction of soul and body; and, if we examine each of these comparisons, we shall find that death is not an evil upon any account; for if death be sleep, and no hurt happens to those who are in that innocent condition, it is manifest that neither are the dead ill dealt with." "Homer," he observes, "saith, death is made of iron, thereby intimating to us that it is insensible; neither hath he spoken much amiss." A little after, he adds, "The words of Socrates to his judges seem to me to be spoken even with inspiration :— To fear death, is nothing else than to counterfeit the being wise when we are not so; for he that fears death, pretends to know what he is ignorant of; for no man is certain, whether death be not the greatest good that can befall a man, but they positively dread it as if they were sure it was an evil."" In harmony with this ignorance of the philosophers respecting a future state, the Greek and Roman poets urge men to a full indulgence of their appetites, on the ground that life is short, and that death will entirely terminate our existence.

The philosophers admitted their own ignorance on these subjects, and the necessity of further instruction. Socrates meeting Alcibiades going to the temple to pray, dissuaded him from it, because he knew not how to do it till one should come to teach him. "It is altogether necessary," says he, "that you should wait for some person to teach you how you ought to behave yourself, both to the gods and men." Plato tells the Athenians, that they would remain in a state of sleep for ever, if God did not out of pity send them an instructor. Cicero "I do not suppose that Arcesilas engaged in

says, VOL. I.

B