1
"^"^^^^^^99999^^^^^
>iOyOmi
Y WV
i:*'i
IJI
^
(if it
^»V»^*i^^,^^
.^ I ■'*'?;>'
'■■it;»vP^'-. P'., »>_. J-
^■. ».J. ^, 14. ^-
U Ik U< tk
».»>
^
THE
ADVANTAGE and NECESSITY
OF THE
CHRISTIAN REVELATION,
SHEWN FROM THE
STATE OF RELIGION
I N T H E
ANTIENT HEATHEN WORLD:
ESPECIALLY WITH RESPECT TO
THE KNOWLEDGE AND WORSHIP OF THE ONE TRUE GOD :
A RULE OF MORAL DUTY:
AND
A STATE OF FUTURE REWARDS and PUNISHMENTS.
TO WHICH IS PREFIXED, A PRELIMINARY DISCOURSE on NATURAL and REVEALED RELIGION.
IN TWO VOLUMES.
By JOHN LELAND, D. D.
Author of the View of the Deistical Writers, &c.
VOL. IL
LONDON:
Printed by W. Richardson and S. Clark;
AndSolJ by R. and J. Dodslev in Pail-mall, and T. Longman in Pater-nofter-Row.
M Dec LXIV.
[ "i ]
PREFACE
TO THE
SECOND VOLUME.
ALTHOUGH in the general preface prefixed to the former volume, I have given an account of the nature and defign of this work, yet I think it not amifs to fay fomething farther in the beginning of this volume, for removing or obviating fome prejudices, which might be conceived againft the plan I have formed, and the manner in which it is executed.
Some learned perfons feem not willing to admit, that the main principles of religion and morality were originally communicated by Divine Revelation to the firfl: parents of mankind, and from them conveyed by tradition to their pofterity. They think it more probable, that they were led by their own natural fenfe and reafon to the knowledge of thofe principles. I readily own, that thofe principles, when once difcovered, will be found upon examina- tion to be perfedlly agreeable to the beft reafon of mankind j but I think enough is offered in this treatile to fliew, that in fadt the firfl notices of thefe things were communicated to the firfl anceflors of
a 2 the
IV
PREFACE.
the human race by a revelation from God, And In this 1 liave the fatisfaction of agreeing witli many eminent divines, and with thofe two great mafters of reafon, and who are juftly reckoned among our beft; writers on the law of nature, Grotius and Puffendorf. The fuppofing the knowledge of the main principles of religion to have been originally owing to a Divine Revelation, does not at all deny that thofe principles are really founded in the nature of things, and confirmed by the dictates of pure and unprejudiced rcafun. Thefe things are pcrfcftly confiflent ; and when taken together, give one a more extenfive view of the wifdom and goodnefs of God in his difpenfations towards mankind, and the various ways that have been taken for leading men into the know- ledge of religion and morals. That this is moft agreeable to tlie Mofaic accounts, is fufficiently fhewn both in the former volume and in this. And that there were very antient traditions among the Heathen nations, concerning fome of the main principles of religion, though in procefs of time greatly depraved and cor- rupted, appears from the accounts that are given us by the Hea- then writers themfelves.
But there is another objedion which I have met witii, and which deferves to be more particularly confidercd. It is this. That the making fuch a reprefcntation, as I have done, of the ftatc of the Pagan world, may poflibly be turned to the difad- vantage of natural religion itfelf, and may tend to the weakening thofe principles which lie at the foundation of all religion and morality.
If
PREFACE. V
If by natural religion be meant religion as it is founded in na- ture, and which may be proved to be agreeable to the beft and founded principles of human reafon, there is nothing in this work that can bring any real prejudice to it. And though I am far from thinking that the Gofpel is merely a republication of the law of nature, yet this may be fafely affirmed, and is what I have en- deavoured in the courfe of this work to fhew, that it is one excel- lent defign of the Chriftian Revelation to confirm and eftablifli it, to place it in the propereft light, and to clear it from that amazing load of rubbifli which had been heaped upon it in a long fucccffiun of ages. No-where is natural religion, taken in the fenfe I have mentioned, fo well underftood, fo clearly explained, and fo ftrongly afferted, as where the Chriftian Religion is duly enter- tained and profcfled.
But if by natural religion be underftood religion as it flands merely on the foot of the powers of unaffifted reafon, entirely independent on Divine Revelation, and as it was actually taught and profefled by thofe who made the higheft pretences to reafon and religion in the Pagan world, I confefs it has been one prin- cipal part of my defign in this work to fhew its weaknelTes and defedls. And as a high admiration of the antient philofophers, efpecially thofe who flouriflied in the celebrated nations of Greece and Rome, has infpired many with a contempt of the Holy Scrip- tures, and caufed them to entertain mean and undervaluing thoughts of the glorious Gofpel of Chrift, I cannot but think it a real fervice to religion, to fliew how unfit thofe boafled
licrhts
vl PREFACE.
lights of the Pagan world were to be the guides of mankind ; and that they fell valHy fliort of the firft teachers and publifhers of Chriftianity, mean and illiterate as fome have efteemed them.
The Scriptures make the mofl: flriking reprefentatlons of the darknefs and corruptions of the Heathen world. And the antient apologlfts for Chriftianity give the fame account of the ftate of the Pagan nati ins. They fet themfelves to expofe their grofs idolatry and polytheifm, the impurities and abominations of their religion and worflilp, their great corruption and diflblutenefs of morals, and the uncertainties and contradidlions of their beft writers, and thence argue the great need there was of the ufeful- nefs and ncceflity of the Chriftian Revelation, and the advantage it was of to mankind. And whoever would have a juft and full view of the ineftimable benefits and privileges we are made par- takers of by the Gofpel, ought by no means to lofe fight of this.
It is not the intention of any thing that is faid in this book to degrade and vilify human reafon, as if it were of no ufe in reli- gion, and only fit to lead men aftray. I am fully perfuaded that reafon, duly exercifed and improved, is very friendly to religion and morals : and that the main principles of the Chriftian religion, if fet before men in a proper light, w,ill approve themfelves to right reafon, when freed from vicious and finful prejudices. It is by reafon that we are enabled to deted falfc revelations, and to difcern the proofs and evidences of the true, and the glorious cha- radlers of wifdom and goodnefs, of purity ami truth, which (liine
in
PREFACE. vii
in it. But I confefs I am far from conceiving fo high an opinion of reafon, if left merely to itfclf in the prefent ftate of mankind, as fome have entertained of it. I am fully convinced by argu- ments drawn from undeniable fail and experience, that reafon, when puffed up with a prefumptuous conceit of its own ability and flrength, and neglefting or defpifing proper afllftances, or when boldly intruding into things too high for it, or led afide by corrupt cuftom and mere human authority, by vicious prejudices and paffions and carnal interefls, is often apt to pafs very wrong judgments on things, efpecially in divine matters. Nor do I ap- prehend, that it is any difparagement to reafon, to lay open the faults and errors of thofe who have made the greateft pretenfions to it, or that it follows from this, that reafon is a vain thing, and has no certain foundations to rely upon. Thus, e. g. if fome that have profefTed to govern themfelves by reafon, have entertained very wrong notions of God, of his.perfe(5lions, attributes, and pro- vidence, it by no means follows, that the proofs of the divine na- ture and perfedtions, or of God's governing providence, are not built upon fure and folid grounds, or' that reafon is not able to difcern the force of thofe proofs, when clearly fet before it. In like manner with regard to morals, it would be wrong to con- ■clude that there is no certainty in any moral principles, becaufe fome perfons of great name have paflcd very falfe judgments in matters which appear to be of great importance in morality : or .that there is nothing bafe or deformed in vicious aftions or af- fections, bccaufc in fome nations and ages, and in the opinion of perfons pretending to fuperior wifdom, they have been regarded
as
viil PREFACE.
as matters of indifFerency, and as either no faults at all, or very flight ones.
In the courfe of this work, efpccially in that part of it which relates to the flate of morality in the Heathen world, I have been under a necefllty of taking notice of feveral things which can fcarcc hi mentioned without being offenfive to virtuous minds, though frequently pradifed among thofe that have paffed for the moft learned and polite of the Heathen nations, and even by many of the philofophers themfelvcs. The fubjedl was fo difagreeable to me, that I intended more than once to have paffed it over al- together, or to have mentioned it very llightly, and only in a ge- neral way. But what determined me to infift upon a full proof was, that otherwife the charge might have been looked upon to be groundlefs and calumnious. And not only have fome real friends to Chriflianity attempted to clear them from it, but others of a different charadter have taken occafion to cenfure the apoftle Paul, as having made an unjuft and odious reprefentation of the flate of the Gentile world, beyond what can be juftiiied by truth and fadt. The proofs I have brought are from the antient Hea- then writers themfelves, and not from any Chriflian authors, ex- cept as far as they are fupported by the former. Nor can I think tlierc is any danger of what fome good perfons might poffibly be apprehenfive of, that this might tend to diminifli the horror of vices, which are juflly accounted moft deteftable and odious. The only inference that can juftly be drawn from it is, that the biafs of corrupt cufloms, and vicious appetites and paffions, are i apt
PREFACE. W
apt to over-rule the moral fentiments of the human mind, and tend to ilifle the remonftrances of confcience, and even to bribe reafoa to iudge too favourably concerning practices which it would othervvife reje£t with abhorrence. It alfo fliew?, that a Divine Revelation, and an exprefs law of God, enforced by the {Irongeil fanftions, may be of great ufe in point of morals, even with rc- fped: to the reftraining men from thofe things, the evil and turpi- tude of which feem to be mod apparent to reafon and nature. Notvvithflanding the corruptions that have prevailed among many who have taken upon them the name of Chriftians, and whicli fome have taken pains to exaggerate, the moft abominable vices have been far from being fo general among them, as they were in thofe that have been efleemed the mofl refined nations of Pa- ganifm. It is not to be doubted, but that vaft numbers of thofe who believe the Gofpel have.ibeen and are preferved by the purity of its precepts, and the power of its fandtions, from vices. to which otherwife they would have given a boundlefs indulgence. Nor can any who believe the Chriftian religion allow them- felves in vicious pradices, without finning againft the cleared: light, and breaking through the ftrongeft engagements. I do not fee, therefore, how they can be accounted real friends to the pu- rity of morals, who are for taking away or diminifliing the force of thofe motives and fandtions which the Gofpel propofes, and which, where they are really believed, tend both to animate good men to a holy and virtuous pradice by the mofl: glorious hopes and profpedls, and to deter the wicked from their evil courfes by the moft amazing denunciations of God's righteous vengeance. Vol. IL b V^iru
2 PREFACE.
"When wc confider the flrange fiuftuations of perfons of the greateft abihtles in the Pagan world, with refpedt to feveral im- portant points of religion and morality, and to the retributions of a future ftate, it ouglit furely to make us highly thankful that we have a written well-attefted Revelation in our hands, to which we" raayTiave recourfe, both, foraflifting us to form a right judgment in matters of the greateft confequcnce, and for regulating our pra<5tice. And it has pleafed God in his great wifdom and good- nefs to eftablifti its divine authority by fuch an abundance and variety of proofs, as are every way fuitable to the importance of the cafe, and are amply fufficient to engage though not to con- ftrain the afTent. Chriftianity is not afraid of the light, or of a- free and impartial examination and inquiry. It has always met with the beft reception from thofe who have examined ir, in the integrity of their hearts, with that ferioufnefs and attention which the great importance of it well deferves. Let us therefore, with minds freed as far as poffible from vicious prejudices, confider the nature and excellency of the Chriftian religion, the fpirituality and heavenlinefs of its doiflrines, the difcovcries that are there made to us of thofe things which it is of the higheft concernment to us to know, efpecially relating to the wonderful methods of the Divine Wifdom and Grace for our redemption and {i\lvation, the unqucftionahle excellency of its morals, and purity of its laws, the power of thofe motives by which the pradice of them is en- forced, and the admirable tendency of the whole to promote the glory of God, and the caufe of rightecufnefs, piety, and virtue in the wodd : let us then make proper refledions on the holy and
fpotlefs*
PREFACE. xl
fpctlefs life, and moft perfedt and fubllme charaifter of the great Founder of our religion, and alfo on the charadcr of his difciples, who publilhed it to the world in his name : that they appear to have been perfons of great probity and fimplicity, incapable of carrying on an artful iinpofturc, or of being themfclves the in- ventors of that fcheme of religion which they taught, and which was contrary in feveral inftances to their own flrongeft prejudices : nor is there any thing in their whole temper and condud, in the do<flrine they preached, or in the manner of propagating it, that favours of the views of worldly policy, or that is cunningly ac- commodated to humour men's prejudices and vicious paflions, and gratify their ambition and fenfuality. But efpecially let us con- fider the illuftrious atteftations given from heaven to the divine miflion, both of the firft Author and publifliers of the Chriftian religion, by a feries of the mofl woiKlerful works, done in exprefs confirmation of the religion they taught, and which manifcflly tranfcendcd all human power or iTcill, and bore the evident tokens of a divine interpofition : and that the truth of thefe fadls is afcer- tained to us with all the evidence that can be reafonably defired in fuch a cafe, and which, all things confidered, is as great as could be expeded concerning any fadls whatfoever done in pafl: a£:cs. To all this may be added the evidence arifing from clear and, exprefs prophecies, relating to events which no human fagacity could forefee, fome of them undeniably delivered and committed to writing many ages before their accomplifliment, and yet in due time pundlually fulfilled. All thefe are of great force, even Separately confidered ; but when viewed and taken together in
b a their
xii PREFACE.
their juft connexion and harmony, form fuch a chain of proofs^ as carries a mighty force of conviction with it to an honeft and unprejudiced mind, that is animated with a fincere love of truth. The advocates of Chriftianity have frequently urged thefe argu- ments with great clearnefs and ftrength ; and whilfb thcfe prooft continue firm, and the original fadls are well fupported, the truth and divine authority of the Chriftian religion fland upon folid and immoveable foundations. Nor fliould we fuffer preju>- dices arifing from the ill condudl of many of its profcffors and teachers, or from fomc particular pallages of Scripture hard to be underflood, or the difficulty of comprehending fome of its dodrines which relate to things of a very fublime and myfterious nature, at all fliake our belief of true original Chriftianity. It is a rule laid down long fince by Ariflotle, and the juftnefs of which has never been controverted, that we ought not to expedl in all things the fame kind of evidence, but in every thing to content ourfelves with fuch proofs as the nature of the fubjedl will bear. To infid upon mathematical demonftration in matters of religion and mo- rality, is perfetflly abfurd and unreafonable ; and yet the evidence may be fuch as is fufficient to produce a certainty, though of an- other kind, and which may very fully fatisfy the mind, and make it reafonable for us to give our aflent to it, notwithftanding fome objections that may be made againft it, and from which fcarcc any truth is entirely free.
I fliall on this occafion confider a pretence that has been often made ufc of by men of fccptical minds, that without an abfolute
certainty
PREFACE. xill
certainty (which they pretend is not to be had in what relates to rehgion) they may reafonably and fafely withhold their aflent. But fuch perfons ought to confider, that if tlicre be a probabiHty on the fide of religion, though fhort of an ablblutc certainty, this would induce an obligation upon them to receive it, and to govern their temper and condu<ft by the rules it prcfcribes. Where a thing appears to be probable, i. e. that there is more reafon for it than the contrary, this does not leave the mind in a perfed: equi- librium', and at liberty abfolutely to fufpend its aflent if it be a matter of fpeculation, or to abftain from ading if it be a matter of practice. This tlie Pyrrhonifts, who carried fcepticifm to the greateft height, were fenfible of, and therefore would not allow that any one thing is more probable than another j which feems to me to be one of the greateft extravagancies that any man pre- tending to reafon can be guilty ofj nor do I believe that any one man, whatever he might pretend in words, could really bring himfelf to think fo. Thofe of what was called the New Aca- demy, though at the bottom little better than fceptics, faw the abfurdity of this, and therefore though they would not acknow- ledge a certainty, yet allowed a probability in things j and if they had purfued this concefllon to its genuine confequences, it would have fubverted the fcheme they had in view of a perpetual fufpenfion of aflent. It is an undeniable maxim, that we ought to follow evidence as far as it appears to us, and that therefore that which is probable ought to :\viiy our judgment, and influence our pradicc, according to the 'iicafure of its probability, and the- preponderancy of the reafo' i which are brought for it. It is
manifcfl-
3^iv PREFACE.
maiiifcfl to every one that has any knowledge ol niankiiAl, that it is probability which generally govvrns our conduCl, if we adl prudently; and that the Author of our beings defigned it fliould be Co. We arc fo conflituted, that in alnioll all cafes relating to pradlicc, we are obliged to follow wliat appears to us upon a pro- per confideration of it to be moft probable j and for any man wil- fully to neglecfl a thing which would probably be of great ad- vantage to him, or to do any thing which probably will expofc him to great lofs and damage, would be juftly deeoied a very foolidi and unreafonable tondudt, and in matters where duty is con- cerned a very guilty one. Some of thofe who were otherwife much addided to fcepticifm in fpeculation, have yet acknowledged, that in the affairs of common life, people ought to follow probable appearances. And if this is to be done in what relates to our pre- fent temporal intereft and advantage, why not in that which re- lates to our higheft happinefs ? The more important any affair is, and the greater the danger is in negleding it, or the damage to be fuftained by fuch a negledt, the more we are obliged, by the foundeft maxims of reafon and good fenfc, to govern ourfelves, and adl according to what appears to us upon a diligent enquiry to be moft probable. And what reafon can be affigned, that we Hiould not adl fo in matters of the greateft confequence, and in which our everlafting falvation appears to be nearly concerned ? In cafes of this nature, if the hazard be vaftly greater on one fide than on the other, all the rules of prudence leads us to take that part, which has the leaft hazard attending it, even though the icvidencc on that fide fhould be fuppofed to be no greater, or
perhaps
PREFACE. XV
perhaps fomething Icfs, than on the other. But when both the evidence is much ftronger on one fide, and at the fame time the hazard men run by rejeding it much greater, to take that fide which is both lefs probable and more dangerous, would be the moft foolifh and inexcufable condudl in the world.
If therefore, upon a fair enquiry, there is at leaft a great pro-^ bability tliat the Chriftian Revelation came from God, it is both our wifdom and duty to embrace it, and to govern ourfelves by its excellent rules. No man in that cafe could run a hazard by embracing the Gofpel, or at leaft a hazard in any degree equal to' what he would expofe himfelf to by rejecting it. Let us fuppofe that by complying with the terms of falvation which are there propofed, he fliould deny himfelf fome of thofe liberties which he would otherwife indulge, and controul his paflic:is by th& Chriftian rules, which do not require us to extirpate the paflions and appetites, but to govern and keep them within the bounds of moderation and temperance, this is no more than the wifeft men have advifed as the propereft way for fecuring a man's own tran- quillity, and for preferving body and foul in a r?^ht temper. In other cafes, men think it reafonable to hazard fome prefent lofs, and to undergo fome prefent hardships and inconveniencies, on the probable profpedl of avoiding a much greater evil, or procuring fome valuable and fuperior advantage. But when the advantage propofed is fo infinitely great as the rewards promiL-d to good men in the Gofpel, and the evils fo great as the punifiiments- there denounced agalnft the obftinately impenitent and difobedient,
it
xvi PREFACE.
it ought certainly to have proportionably a more powerful In- fluence.
I hope every reader tliat brings with him a mind fincerely dif- pofed to know the truth and follow it, will join with me in earneft fupplications to God, who is a lover of truth and holinefs, that he would be gracioufly pleafed to clear our minds from vi- cious prejudices, and difpel the clouds of ignorance and error, that we may receive the truth in the love of it, may behold it in its convincing light, and feel its transforming power, and may bring forth fruits fuitable to it in a holy and virtuous life, to the ^lory of God, and our own eternal falvation.
CONTENTS
CONTENTS
O F T H E
SECOND VOLUME.
PART II.
JW
CHAP. I.
''AN appears from the frame of his nature to be a moral agent, and defigned to be governed by a law. Accordingly^ God hath given him a law to be the rule of his duty. The fchetne of thofe who pretend that this law is naturally and neceffarily known to all men without inflruSlion, contrary to fa^ ajid experience. Tet there are feveral ways by which men come to a knowledge of this law, and of the duty required of the7n ; viz. by a moral fenfe implanted in the hum in heart ; by a principle of reafon judging from the natures and relations of things ; by education, and human inJlruBion : befides all which, God hath made dif- coverics of his 'u:ill concerning our duty, in a way of extraordi- nary Divine Revelation. Page i , 2
C H A P. II.
The principal heads of moral duty were made known to mankind
from the beginning, and continued to be known and acknowledged
Vol. II. c in
CONTENTS.
in the patriarchal ages. When men fell from the right knoic- ledge of God, they fell alfo in important injlancei from the right knowledge of moral duty. The law given to the people of Ifrael was defigned to injlrucl and direct them in morals, as ■aril as in the kiwictvdge and worjhip of the one true God. A great deal ivas done in the methods of Divine Provideiice, to preferve the fenfe and knoioledge of morals among the heathen nations; but they did not make a right ufe of the helps afforded them. p. 20
CHAP. III.
A particular enquiry into the flate of morality in the Heathen •world. A complete rule of morals ^ taken in its ju/l extent^ xcmprehcnds the duties relating to Gcdy our neighbours, and ourf'lves. If the Heathens had fuch a rule among them, it nvould appear either in the precepts of their religion, or in the prefcriptions of their civil laws, or cufloms lahich have the force of laws, or in the doBrines and in/lr unions of their philofophers and moralijis. It is propofed diflinSly to confider each of thf'c. As to what pflffed among them for religion, morality did not properly make any part of it, nor ivas it the office of their priefls to teach men virtue. As to the civil laws and confiitutions, fuppofmg them to have been never fo proper for civil government, they were not fitted to be an adequate rule of morals. The befl of them were, in feveral refpeSIs, greatly defeSlive. Various inflances produced of civil laws, and of cufloms which had the force of laws, among the mojl civilized nations, efpecially among the ant lent Egyptians and Greeks, which were contrary to the rules of morality. P- 3^
CHAP.
CONTENTS.
CHAP. IV.
Farther injlanca of civil laws and cufioms among the Pagan iia- tiom. Tbofe of the antient Ro/nans confiderej. Tije laxvs of the tivehe tables, though mightily extolled, icere far from eX' hibiling a complete rule of morals. The law of Romulus con- cerning the expofing of difeafed and deformed children. This con- tinued to be pradlifed among the Romans. Their cruel treatment of their Jlaves. Their gladiatory peivs contrary to humanity. Unnatural lufls common among them as well as the Greeks. Oh- fervations on the Chinefe laws and cuftoms. Other laws (tnd cujloms of nations mentioned, which are contrary to good morals. p. ^?
CHAP. V.
Concerning morality as taught by the antient Heathen philofophers. Some of them faid excellent things concerning moral virtue, an. I their writings might in fcveral refpcBs be of great ufe. But they could not furnijh a perfeSi rule of morals, that had Jufficient certainty, clearnefs, and authority. No one philofopher, or feci of philofophers, can be abfolutely depended upon as a proper guide in matters of 7norality. Nor is a complete fyjlem of morals to be extracted from the writings oj them all collectively confidered. The lianity offuch an attempt Jhewn. Their fentiments, how excel- lent foever, could not properly pafsfor laws to mankind, p. 8o
CHAP. VI.
Many of the philofophers were fundamentally wrong in the firfl principles of morals. They denied that there are any moral dif-
c 2 fcrcnccs
^l/J^J^J^J^JJ^J^m^'Jj^J « « ill 1 « i # i . t i I 4 . i
r-ir^' .-'.•'* ^.r^'*^-*!^**" J* ^* * * € ^ t 1 .1 ■« « 1 I • 4 « "i « ■■■'% m 'M m
M^t^^ t tjtjt Mjkji M '« m m m m bm
i
J
CONTENTS.
iu the patriarchal ages. When men fell from t ledge of God, they fell alfo in important inftance. knowledge of moral duty. The law given to the •was defgned to injlruci and direB them in mora, the kiwii'ledge and ivorflnp of the one true God. ivas done in the methods of Divine Providencey fenfe and knowledge of morals among the heath they did not make a right ufe of the helps affords
CHAP. III.
' right knoiii- ^rom the right leople of Ifrael as well as in A great deal 0 preferve the ■ nations; but them. p. 20
A particular enquiry into the flate of morality j the Heathen world. A complete riile of moraU^ taken in 'ts ju/l extent, ecmprehends the duties relating to God, our eighboun, and ourfelves. If the Heathens had fiich a rule mong them, it would appear either in the precepts of their n gion, or in the prefcriptions of their civil laws, or cufloms whi > have the force of laws, or in the doSlrines and inftruSi'tons of eir philofophers and moralijis. It is propofed diflinQly to confii. '' each of tbefe. As to what pafj'ed among them for religion, loralify did not properly make any part of it, nor was it the o^i^ of their priefls to teach men virtue. As to the civil laws , '.d conflitutions, fuppofing them to have been never fo proper for , vil government y they were not fitted to be an adequate rule of ; orals. The beji of them were, in fever al refpeSIs, greatly de^ Siive. Various inflances produced of civil laws, and of cufio s which had the force of laws, among the mofi civilized nations, fpecially among the antient Egyptians and Greeks, which we. cofitrary to the rules of morality. p- 3^
CHAP.
ti'.'u
CHAP.
CONTENTS.
CHAP. IV.
Farther iu ances of civil laws and cufionn among the^^ tions. \'}ofe of the antient Rotnans confidered. 'The the tijael ? tables, though mightily extolled, ivere far hibiting complete rule of morals. The law of Ro cerning t • expofing of difeafed and deformed chiidtf^. tinued to r praSlifed among the Romans. Their en of their 'aves. Their gladiatory Jljeivs contrary JJnnaturi lufls common among them as loell as the fervation on the Chinefe laws and cu/loms. O ctijioms " nations mentioned, which are (idni morals. -'^
CHAP. V.
Concerning oralify as taught by the antient J^ea Some of tnn faid excellent things concerning their wrangs might in feveral refpcSis be they couldnot furnijh a perfeSl rule of moral certainty clearnefs, and authority. No on. of philofo'p^ers, can be abfolutely depended z/ in matt eAof morality. Nor is a complete extratledrom the writings of them all coll •uanity ofiich an attempt fiewn. Their lentfoev\ could not properly pafsfor i
CHAP. V!*
Many of th philofophers were fun dam t principles f morals. They denied the
CONTENTS.
fcrencci of things founded in nature and reafon, and refohed them wholly into human laivs and cujloms. Obfervatlons on thofe phltofophcrs icho made mans chiej good confiji In pkafure^ and fropofcd this as the hlghejl end oj morals^ •without any regard to a Divine Law. The moral fy/i em of Epicurus confide red. His high pretences to 'virtue examined. The inconjljiency of his prln~ clples Jhenvn, and that. If purfued to their genuine confequences^ they are really dfruBroe of all virtue and good morals. p- 5> 2
C H A P. VII.
The fentlmcnts of thofe who are accounted the beji oj the Pagan moral philofophers ccnfidered. They held In general, that the law is right reafon. But reafon alone, without a fuperlor au- thority^ does 770t lay an obliging force upon men. The liifjl Heathens taught, that the original of law was from God, and that from him It derived its authority. As to the quejllon, hciv this law comes to be hiown to us, they fometlmes rcprefent It as naturally kno%vn to all men. But the principal way of knowing it is rejblved by them Into the mind and reafon of wife men, or, in other words. Into the doBrlnes and Injlrudllons oj the philo- fophers. The uncertainty of this rule of morals Jhewn. Th<y talked highly oj virtue in general, but differed about matters oj great importance relating to the law of nature : fome injlances of which are mentioned. p. up
CHAP. VIII.
"EplBetuss obfrvatlon concerning the difficulty of applying general preconceptions to particular cafes, verified in the antient philo- j'ophers. Ibey were generally wrong with reJ'pcSt to the duty and
worjhlp
CONTENTS.
worJJ.yp proper to be rendered to God, though they tlx'mf elves ac-^ knoiul edged it to be a point of the kigheji importance. As to fo' cial duties, fome eminent philofophers pleaded for revenge and againfl forgivencfs of injuries. But e/pecia'ly they were deficient in that part of moral duty 'which relates to the government of the fenfual appetites and paffions. Many of the philofophers counte- nanced by their principles and praSlice the mojl unnatural lujls and vices. Thofe of them that did not carry it fo far, yet en- couraged an impurity inconlijlent with the ftriSlnefs and dignity of virtue. Plato very culpable in this rejpeSl, fo alfo -were the Cynics and Stoics. Simple fornication generally allo'wed atnong/i them. Our modern deijls very loofe in their principles vslth re- gard to fenfual impurities. P- 1 3 2
C H A P. IX.
7'he Stoics the mojl eminent teachers of morals in the Pagan ivorld. Mightily admired and extolled both by antients and moderns. Ohfervations on the Stoical maxims and precepts %)ith regard to piety towards God. Their fcheme tended to take away^ or very much weaken, the fear of God as a punifjer of fin. It tended alfo to raife men to a fiate of /elffufficiency and independency, inconpftent with a due veneration for the Supreme Being, Extravagant firains oj pride and arrogance in fome of the prin- cipal Stoics. Confefiion of fin in their addreffes to the Deity mad^ no part of their religion. p. ij^
CHAP. X.
'The Stoics gave excellent precepts with regard to the duties men ewe to one another. Yet they carried their docJrine of apathy fo
CONTENTS.
. Jti>\ as to he in fame injlances not properly cofijijlent laith a hu- I'lanc difi^ojuion and a charitable Jympatlyy. 'They f aid fine things concerning Jorgivlng injuries and bearing •ivith other men's faults. But in J'everal refpeSls they carried this to an extreme, and placed it on wrong foundations^ or enforced it by improper motives. "This is particularly Jhewn with regard to thofe two eminent philofophcrs EpiSletus and Marcus Antoninus. The viojl ontient Stoics did not allow pardoning mercy to be an ingredie7it in a peffeB charaSler. P- 1S3
CHAP. XL
Ihe Stoical precepts with regard to fclf-government confidered. They talk in highfirains of regulating and fubduing the appetites and paffions ; and yet gave too great indulgence to the fleflily con- ciipifcence, a7id had not a due regard to purity and chajlity. Their do5lrine of fuicide confidered. Some of the mojl eminent wife men among the Heathens, and many of our modern admirer % of natural religion faulty in this refpeB. Thefal/l?ood and per- nicious confcquenccs cf this do&rine Jhencn. p. 2c6^
CHAP. XII.
The Stoics profefjed to lead men to perfcSl happincfs in this prefent life^ abjlraBing from all confideration of a future Jiate. Their fcheme of the abfolute fufjiciency of virtue to kappinef's, and the indifferency of all external things, confidered. They were fome- timcs obliged to make conccffions which were not very confijlcnt with their fyjlcm. Their phihfophy in its rigour not reducible to pra^icc, and had little infucnce either on the people or on ^ themfelves.
CONfENTS.
themfehes. They did mt glv a dear idea of the nature of that 'virtue ivbich tb-; fo bigbk extolled. The hofe do&rine of mam of the Stoics J as ivell as other philojophers, with regard to truth and lying. p. 229
CHAP. XIII. The nations ivere funk into a deplorable Jiate of Corruption, "with regard to morals, at the time of our Sa\iour's appearing. To recover them from their 'wretched and guilty jiate to holinefs and bappinejs, one principal e?id for which God fent his Son into the world. The Gofpel Difpcnfition opened with a free offer of pardon and fahation to perip.nng finncrs, upon their returning to God hy faith and repentance, and new obedience : at the fatne time the beji direBions and ajijlances were giwn to engage them to a holy and virtuous praSlice. Ihe Gofpel fcheme of morality exceeds whatfoever bad been publified to the world before. A fummary reprefentation of the excellency of the Gofpel precepts with regard to the duties we o^ve to God, our neighbours^ and ourfehes. Thefe precepts enforced by the mojl powerful and im- portant motives. The tendency of the Go/pel to promote the prac- tice of holinefs and virtue, an argument to prove the Divinity of the Chrijlian Revelation. p. 2 53
PART
CONTENTS.
PART iir.
CHAP. I.
The importance of the doBrine of a future flate. It is agreeable to right reafon. The natural a?id mora! arguments for a future Jlate of great weight. Tet not fo evident, but that if tnen were left merely to their own unajfifted reafon, they would be apt to labour under great doubt and difficulties. A "Revelation from God concerniiig it would be of great advantage. p. 295", 296
CHAP. II.
Some 7iotions of the immortality of the foul and a future fate ob- tained among vianUnd from the mofl antiejit timcs^ and fpread
' ' 've'ry generally through the nations. This was not originally the effcB of human reafon and philofophy, nor was it merely the in- vention of legifators for political purpofes ; but was derived to them by a vjoft antient tradition from the earlicfl ages, and was probably a part of the primitive religion communicated b\ Divine Revelation to the firfi of the human race. p. 303
C H A P. III.
The. antient traditions concerning the immortality of the foul and a future fate became in procefs of time greatly ohfctired and cor- rupted. It was abfolutcly denied by many of the philofophers, and rcjcSled as a vulgar error. Others reprefcntcd it as alto- gether uncrlain, and having no f Aid foundation to fupport it.
The
CONTENTS.
The various and contre.d'iSiory fentments of the phllofophers con^ cerning the nature of the human foul. Many of the Peripatetics denied the fubfiftence of the foul after Aeath, and this fcems to have been Arifiotle's own opinion. 'The Stoics had no fettled or conftftent fcheme on this head : nor isyas the do6lrine of the im~ mortality of the foul a doSirine of their fc hoc!, d future flat: not acknoioledged by the celebrated Chinefe philofopher Confucius^ nor by the fe^ of the learned who profefs to he his difciples. p. 3 1 4
C H A P. IV.
Concerning the phihfophers -who profefj'ed to believe and teach the immortality of the foul. ' Of thefe Pythagoras is generally efleemed ■ one of the mojl eminent. His doSlrine on this head fjcwn to be not well confiflent with a flate of future rewards and piinijh- ments. Socrates believed the immortality of the foul -and a future flate, and argued for it. In this he was followed by Plato. The doSirifie of Cicero with regard to the immortaUty of the foul confidered. As alfo that of Plutarch. P* 334
C H A P. V,
\rhofe of the antient philofopher s who argued for .the immortality of the foul., .placed it on wrong foundations ^ and mixed things with it which wealien^\l the belief of it. Some of them afferted, that the foul is immortal, as being a portion of the Divine Efj'ence. They univerfally held tJ}e • pr^e-exiflence vf the human foul, and . laid the chief firefs upon this for proving its itiunortality. Their. doSlrine of the tranfmigraiion of fouls was a great corruption of the true doBrinc of a future flate. Thofs whi faid the highefl •. Vol. II. d things
CONTENTS.
.tkin-s of future happinefi^ confuiered it as cotifimd chiefiy ui perfom of eminence, or to thofe of pbilofophical minds, and af- forded fhal I encouragement to the common kind of pious and vir- tuous perfons. The rewards of E/y/ium icere but temporary, and of a fliort duration : and even the happinef of thofe privi- leged fouls, tvho "Were fuppofed to be admitted not 7nerely into Elyfium, but into heaven, icas tiot cverlafing in the friSi and proper fenfe. 'The Gofpel doElritie of eternal life to all goad ■ and righteous perfons was tiot taught by the antient Pagan philo- fophers. p. 3^0
CHAP. VI.
Thofe that feemed to be the mofl flrenuous advocates for the immor^ tality of the foul and a future fate among the antients, did not pretend to any certainty concerning it. The uncertainty they •were under appears from their way of managing their confolatory
•' difcourfes on the death of their friends. To this alfo it was owing, that in their exhortations to virtue they laid Utile flrefs on the rewards of a future fate. Their not having a certainty concerning a future fidte, put them upon fchemes to fupply the want of it. Hence they infifled upon the felf-fujiciency of virtue for complete happinefs without a future recompence : and affcrtcdy that afhort happinefs is as good as an eternal one. p. 380
CHAP. VII.
J fate of future rewards neceffarily connotes future punijhncnts. The belief of the former without the latter might be of pernicious confluence. The antient philofophers and legifators were fen-
fbk
CONTENTS.
fibk of the importance and necejfity of the doufrine of future pu-> 7jif}me}tts. Tet they generally rejeSled and difcarded them as "jain and fuperflitious terrors. The maxim uni-oerfally held by the philofophers, that the gods are never angry ^ and can do no hurt, confidered. p. 402
CHAP. VIII.
The generality of the people, efpecially in the politer natio?is of Greece and Rome, had fallen in a great meafure from the belief of a future fiate before the time of our Saviour s appearing. This is particularly flieivn concerning the Greeks, by the tefli- monies of Socrates and Polybius. The fame thing appears -with regard to the Romans, Future punifJjments were difregarded and ridiculed even among the vulgar, who in this fell from the religion of their anceflors. The refurreSlion of the body rejedled by the philofophers of Greece and Rome. p. 423
CHAP. IX.
Our Lord Jefus Chrifi brought life and immortality into the jnofl clear and open light by the Gofpel. He both gave the fullefl af- furance of that everlafling happinefs lohich is prepared for good men in a future fate, and made the mofi inviting difcoveries of the nature and greatnefs of that happinefs. The Gofpel alfo con^ tains exprefs declarations concerning the Tunifhment which fhall he infiiSled upon the wicked in a future flat e. The necefjity and itfiportance of tins part of the Gofpel Revelation f:ewn. The conclufion, with fame general refections upon the whole, p. 442
ERRATA to the SECOND VOLUME.
Ta^e 29. Note, line ult.fir Navjretti's, rwrf Navarcttj's. P. 43. /. "i.fsr polilic»l, r. policed. P. 44. '. i/r. j> Abfton. r. AblUn. P. 48. /. uli.fcr Paris, r. Davis. P. 49. /. 11. /or Kpwlia, r. xjiIt'ij. P. 65. Note, /. yfer ut, »•. et. P. 69. Nitc, I. 2. /or egrcgibu5, r. e gregibui. /Wrf. /. 4. for philofophii, r. philofophis. P. 71. Tb'cr.', /. 7./or chap. 7. r. chap". 6. /*. /. lo./or 15. r. 14. P. yy. /. i-j./tr Tri- tantius, r. Tiig.iltius. P. 76. /. 8. /or »ny, r. an. P. 77. Ni>te, I. ■2.. f,r i. r. ii. ari/ /. .v/r./w ibid. r. )ib. i. P/90. ). ig./ir laid, r. had. P. 9;. /. ti't.fir 9S. r. 93. P. 9?. /. n/r. .i/Jfr critiqacs, r. torn. I. Uttrc iv. P. 102. A'c/f, /. i./r j8, r. 132. P. 114. A'-/.-, /. i. _/or cap. 6.. r. cap. 5. P.. 115./. 17. /jr 9£»),avT», r. &eo^:5>-ra. P. 116. /or re O, r. reft. P. III. A'o/s, /. 7. /or ut, r. eU. P. 126. /. 19. /or laudato, r. laudata. P. 136. /. ull.far lib. i. r. lib. iv. P. 137. Site, I. ■^.for fcft. S. r. fefl. 3. p. <4<'- l.i.fir Opero, r. Opcr. /*. /. 9./r 901. r. 909. P. i ;s. /. 18. /or Alpian, r. t/lpnn. P, 362. /. 7. ff/Jcr part, r. of. p. 166. /. nil. fii 1043. *■• 'O-IO- ^' >73' '• i5./or vocis, r. votis, ard/or fa tc, r. f.K re. P. 174. Nile, I. 10 /or cp. 17. r. cp. 18. P^ i84.if. iD./arfervitas, r. fcrvitus. P. 199. Nuie, I. 6. /or 108. r. 109. P. 196. /. 4. dele and, P. 19S. Noli, I, i. /r//,r Medit. r. book v. P. 203. /. 21. /jr 78. r. 17S. P. 20+. /. 7. r. a fapicnte. P. 107. A'o.v, /. i.yir iS. r. 13. P. zog. A'ac, A j./r 31. r. 33. P. 214. Ncie, 1. i. fir cap. 2a. r. ep. 22, P. 215. Nete, !. 1. fir !t(\. 2. r. feO. ;, P. 2l6. 7. uli.fir modeft, r. modcfty. P. 220. A'lff, /. fj.fcr Bounhours, r. Bouhoi'rs. P. 232. iV'or, 7. I. </r.r DilVut. r. lib. V. P. 233. Ni(e, I. ^.for 236. r. 239. P. »42. Nofe, /. I. ie/cre f.pift. >, Pk- tarch. Oper. torn. II. p. 1034. /A. /or chap. 6. r. chap. 16. P. 249. /. j./or v|.£Ljai, r. 4u3si. P. 25S, Xi'cu, I. 4. /Ir John, r. Job. P. 266. /. 10. after iuft, </t/<- of.. /*. /. u/t.fir I J.hn ii: 3. r. 1 John ii. i, 2. P. z&». Ncte, /. I./or Micah vi.2. r. vi. 8. P. 273. 7Vi,«, /. i./.rPf, Ixxxv. r. Pf. Ixxxii. P. 174.' Jtf.«, /. 5./r 16. r. 12. P. 276. A'o/t, /. i.fir Prov. vi. r. Prov. v. P. 278. A'c.v, /. 2. a/fr M.itt. vi. 24. r. Mark x. 24. P. 282. A'o«, /. 3. /or 17. r. 7. P. 293, Afo/r, /. 3. r. aujourdhui. P. 304. /. nil. fir 387, r. 378. P. 307. Noft, /. 2. fir humaioe, r. heureufe. P. 320. /. rJt.fir foul, r. fouls. P. 321. A'o.v, /, T. /;.• 228. r. 226. P. 331. /. I. /or caflical, r. cladicil. P. 332. /. ulr.fir 197. r. 199. P. 338. /. 23, _/«r mortcs,. r. n)«rti«. P. 342. /. ^.fir rcvertitur, r. revtrtetur. P. 359. A n/f. /or Confol. ad uxorjr, de fcra numihis vindicla. P, 363. AW, /. 4^/r 370. r. 379. Ii. I. 17. iT/>fr Enncad, r.v. P. 366./. T-i-fir fingualar, r. fingular. P. 369. /. 14. yir principal, r. principle. P. 381. /. 5. for Ji;r;^:.fio-aiui>, r. >ii>;)^i;fjToi/«i>. p. 387. /. ult.fir 353. r. 358. P. 411. /. 15. fir maneat, r. nianeant, P, 413, A'o'r, /. 4./r 566, I. 556, P 416, A'o/r, /. 5. fer nofcerc, r, nocere. /A. /. nil. fir cap. 2. r. cap. 3. P. 420. JVo«, f. I. r. iSi. P. 421. "Nue, t. I. fir 521, r. 518. /A. /. 3./>r Amaior. r. adverf. Colot. P. 424. /. 15. r. iwiWav. P. 427. /. 4./:r belief, r. didclief. P. 429. Ai'f, /. I./or cap. 5. r. cap. 51, /*. 443. .'. 9. r. the immortality of the foul. P. 446. Nile, I. 5. ij/I^r ix. r. 12. P. 45^, A'..'*, /. I./or /j6. r. 43, Jb. I, 2./r49, r. 59. P. 461. A's.r, /. 2. /or nations, r, r«cci\eJ notions.
THE
ADVANTAGE and NECESSITY
OF THE
CHRISTIAN REVELATION,
SHEWN FROM THE
State of Religion in the antient Heathen World.
PART ir.
Relating to a Rule of Moral Duty.
C H A P. I.
Man appears from the frame of his nature to be a moral agent, and defigncd to be governed by a law. Accordingly, God hath given him a law to be the rule of his duty. The fcheme of thofe -ivho pretend that this law is naturally and necejj'arily known to all men without inJiruSlion, contrary to fa[i and experience. Tet there are federal ways by which men come to a knowledge of tbts law, and of the duty required of them ; viz, by a moral Vol. II. B fe„fe
Ac:,. P. 26',
Mark x. r. 37S. I. /J-.-i:.;
<ic fcra ,:
r. iiio-^f;r...
N<fti, I. 4. y",, jP. 420. Note, I.
P- 424- A 15. r.
-to../-. 43. /i_ /,
AslfC
*Lir^
f ■ ff f i i
•V
Moral Duty. J
as to aflert, that all men have a
of their duty by an intimate con-
' univerfal light, independent of
they apply that paffage of Lu-
.vMi
|
^llis |
|||||
|
nafcentibus au6tor |
|||||
|
, f. ■.;. P. |
1^ |
very birth, the whole of regard to their duty, fo iier vocal or verbal in- Herbert's fcheme, and tituled, " Chriftianity |
|||
|
• r, ■ |
frequently exprefles natural Revelation |
||||
|
z knov^^ledge from |
|||||
|
' Where he fup- |
|||||
|
^f nature, and all |
|||||
|
i'..'P.4i;'. iiml.Cofc |
• |
ely and infallibly that " it is a. |
|||
|
,.v.v'...> |
Man appear from tL\ and defig. d to be gove, given bin. a law to be tl.\ who pre tad that this laio |
vays making, is intelligible oned to the sit,"Tgg |
|||
|
all men Tet there this law Vol. |
■it bout i7jJiru6iion, re feveral ways by ii md of the duty requ I. |
iii B |
3 |
fi
2 M(jn is a Moral Jgent, Part II.
fejife iviplanted i?i the hinuin heart j by a principle of reajoii judging from the natures and relations rf things ; by education, and human inJlruSlion : be fides all which, God hath made dif- coverics of his lisill concerning our duty, in a ivny of extraordi- nary Divine Revelation.
HAVING confidered the ftate of the antient Heathen Nations, with refpedt to the knowledge and worfliip of the one true God, and fliewn the need they flood in of an extraordinary Divine Revelation, to recover thcni from that amazing ignorance of God, and that idolatry and polythcifm, into which they were falleaj I now proceed to the next tiling I propofed, which was to confider the ftate of the antient heathen world with regard to a rule of moral duty.
That it is of great importance to mankind to have clear di- veftions given them concerning moral duty in its juO; extent, and to have it enforced upon them by a fufficient authority, and by proper arguments and motives, is evident to a confulering mind. And many have been of opinion, that this is fo manifcfi: and obvious to natural reafon, that there is no need of Divine Revela- tion, either to teach men their duty, or to enforce upon them moral obligations. This feems to have a plaufiblc appearance, if we confider the m:itter abftradlly, and in a way of fpeculation. But the furcft: vvay of judging of it is from fadt and experience : for if it appears that in fa6t the moft knowing and civilized natiorrs in the heathen world, and the wifcft and ablcft men among tlxim, have labourtd under great uncertainties, and even fallen into
dangerous
Chap. I. (iftd defigned to he governed by a Law. 3
dangerous errors with regard to fcveral important branches of moral duty } and that they have alfo been greatly deficient in the propofing fuch motives, as might be moll proper and efficacious for enforcing tlie practice of it j this affordctli a llrong prefumption of the weaknefs of human reafon in this rcfped:, when left merely to itfelf in the prefent flate of mankind : and that an exprcfs Re- velation from God, both for inflrudting us in moral duty in its jufl extent, and enforcing it upon us by the moll powerful mo- tives, would be of the greateft advantage to mankind.
To prepare our way for a due confideration of this fubjedl, it will be proper, in the firfi: place, to offer fome general obfervations concerning man as a moral agent, and concerning the feveral ways by which he may be fuppofed to conae to the knowledge of hi* duty.
That man is a moral agent, the proper fubjecl of moral go- vernment, is as evident as that he is a reafonable creature, or that he is capable of virtue and vice, praife and blame. And what- ever fome perfons may difpute in a way of fpeculation, moral or free agency, though it may be difficult to fettle the precife meta- phyfical notion of it, or to anfwer all the objections which fub- til and fceptical men may form againfl it, is what all men arc intimately confcious of The fclf-approving and felf-condemning refledlions of a man's own mind plainly fhew it to be fo. God hath not only given man a body, and animal powers and inftinds, fuited to the ufcs and enjoyments of the animal and fenfitive life, but he hatli made him capable of difcerning the moral differences
B 2 of
4. God hath given a Lain to Mankind Part II.
of things, and hath given him a fenfe of good and evil, right and wrong, a felf-determining and a felf-refledling power, whereby he is capable of chufing and adling for himfelf, and of pafling a judgment on his own adtions. There are few, but have had experience of an inward felf-approbation or difapprobation, arifing from the workings of a confcious principle within, according as they have been fenfible of their having performed, their duty or the contrary. And God's having made them creatures of fuch a kind, i. e. reafonable and moral agents, capable of a fcnfe of moral obligation, is a demonftrative proof, that he defigned thtm to be governed in tliat way, in which it is fit for mord agents to be governed ; i. e. by giving them laws to be the rule of their duty. And if God hath given men laws, it mufl be his will that thofe laws fhould be obeyed j and as a wife and righteous moral go- vernor, he will deal with them agreeably to the laws which he hath given them, and will reward or puniih them according to their obedience or difobedience to thofe laws.
But fince no law is obligatoiy, except it be promulgated, and in fome way publiihed to thofe who are to be governed by it, we may reafonably conclude, that if God hath given a law to man- kind, which they are obliged to obey, he hath not left them under an invincible ignorance of that law, but hath made fuch difcoveries of it tc^ them, that if it be not their own fault, they may know what that duty is which. God rcquireth of them, as far as it is ncccffary for them to do fo.
Some
Cliap. I, as a Rule of Moral Duty. j
Some have carried this io far as to aflert, that all men have a natural knovvledge of the" whole of their duty by an intimate con- fcious perception, and an inward univerfal light, independent of all outward teaching. To this they apply that paffage of Lu- can,
" — — — nee voclbus ullis " Numen eget, dixitque femel nafcentibus audtor " Quicquid fcire licet."
As if God di<flated to all men from their very birth, the whole of what is neceflciry for them to know with regard to their duty, fo that they ftand not in need of any farther vocal or verbal in- flrudtion. This feems to have been Lord Herbert's fcheme, and is that of Dr. Tindal, in his famous book, intituled, " Chriftianity " as old as the Creation." Lord Bolingbroke frequently exprefles himfelf to the fame purpoffs. He fays, that " natural Revelation " (as he calls it) produces a feries of intuitive knowledge from *' the firft principles to the lafl: conclufions [a)." Where he fup- pofes, that both the firft principles of the law of nature, and all the conclufions drawn from them, are intaitively and infallibly known to every man. Accordingly he declares, that " it is a •' perpetual ftanding Revelation always made, always making, " to all the fons of Adam," and affirms, that " it is intelligible " at all times and all places alike, and proportioned to the " meaneft undcrftanding [h)." Or, as he elfewhere has it, " The
{(j) BolIhgbroke'S Works, Vol. IV. p. 276. edit. 410. {k) Ibid. p. 91. 94. 96, 97.
" tables
6 'The Knoioh'Jge of Moral Duly i'art II.
•' tables of the natural law are fo obvious to the fight of ail men, *' that no man who is able to read the plaineft characters can " miftake them (<:)." According to this fcheme, there is not the Icaft need of any extraordinary external Revelation. And it would equally prove, that all the endeavours of philofophers, moralifts, and legiflators, to inftruft mankind in matters of morality, were perfedlly necdlefs and fupcrfluous. I have already offered fonie confiderations to Hiew the abfurdity of this fcheme {d) : and the following treatife will contain the fullcft confutation of it; by which it will appear how prone mankind have always been to miftake the law of nature, in very important inflanccs of moral duty. It is indeed fo contrary to the experience and obfervations of all ages, that one would be apt to wonder that any men of fenfe fliould infift upon it : and yet the fame pretence is ftill re- peated by the enemies of Revelation. And fome others of a dif- ferent charadler have expreffed themfelves very inaccurately and unwarily on tliis fubjedt.
But though tliis pretence of the univerfal clearnefs of the law of nature to all mankind, independent of all farther inftrudion, cannot be admitted, as being contrary to the moft evident fadl and experience, yet it muft be acknowledged, that a great deal hath been done in the courfe and order of Divine Providence, to lead men into the knowledge of the duty required of them.
(f) Bolingbroke's Works, Vol. V. p. 153.
((/) See the fiift volume of this Work, Preliminary Difcourfc, p. 7, 8.
And
Chap. I. ccnimtinicalcd to Mankind in various Ways. j
And I . There is a moral fenfe implanted in the human mind, which, if duly cultivated and improved, might be of great ule for leading men, in many inllaiice?, to the notion and praftice of moral duty. I know this is a point that has been contefted, and I ihall not here enter into the debate. But it feems to me, that fomething of this kind, by whatfoever name it is called, muft be admitted. Whofoever carefully examines his own heart, will be apt to think that there are moral feelings, difUntt from mere reafoning, which incline him to certain ways of adting; and that the mind of man is fo conrtltutcd, as to have an inward fenfe of moral beauty or deformity in alllc] ions and a6lions, which, when the human nature is in its right ftate, carries him to delight and take a complacency in feme adtions as right and fit, beautiful and lovely, and to diflike and difapprove the contrary. Some traces of this are to be found in the human mind, even in its mofl: de- generate ftate, and which can fcarce ever be utterly erafed. As there are natural inftinct^ dirtind: from reafon, which tend to the prelcrvation and convenience of the animal antl vital frame, fo there fcem to be inftinfts of a moral kind, or propenfions and inclinations, which, when duly regulated and improved, are of eonfiderable ufe for leading men to a proper courfe of adion. Such are the fecial and kind afTcdionSj lb natural to tlie human heart, that they have obtained the name of humanity, and which, fliew that men were born not merely for thcmfelves, but were defigned by the author of their beings for mutual alliftance, and' the offices of benevolence.
But
8 ^he Kiiowledge of Moral Duty Part II.
Bat then, for preventing miflakes in this matter, there are fe- veral things proper to be here obferved. One is, that this moral fenfe is not of equal ftrength and force in all men. It is moil: con- fpicuous and eminent in fome noble and generous minds, in which a kind of natural propcnlity to juftice, benevolence, gratitude, &c. remarkably appears, and powerfully operates : and in otliers it is fo weak, as fcarce to be perceived, or is overpowered by vicious habits and corrupt affedions and appetites. It mufl be acknowledged on the one hand, that the moral fenfe is capable of being improved and ftrcngthened by reafon and refledtion : and that on the other hand, it may be greatly perverted and depraved by vicious cuftoms, inordinate lufls, and felfifli intercfts, by falfe judgments of things, and evil examples. And I think it cannot be denied, that it is fo much weakened in the prcfent ftate of the human nature, that it is no way fit to be alone a fufficient guide in morals, but ftandeth in great need of farther diredlion and affiftance. Some have carried their notions of the extent and efficacy of this moral fenfe beyond what reafon and experience will warrant. The ingenious and polite Earl of Shaftelbury, after having obferved, that there is a natural beauty of adlions as well as figures, adds, that " no fooner are adlions viewed, no fooner the " human affedlions and paflions difcerned (and they are moft of " them difcerned as foon as felt) than llraight an inward eye di- " ftinguifhes, and fees the fair and fliapely, the amiable and ad- " mirable, apart from the deformed, the foul, the odious, and def- " picablc." This is elegantly exprcfled : but I fliould think, that any one who impartially confiders human nature, as it appears in tlid generality of mankind, muft own ^hat the inward eye, the eye of I the
Chap. I. communicated to Mankind in various Ways. p
the mind, is now very much vitiated and obfcured, and that there are many things which hinder its juft difcernment. The expe- rience of all ages fliews, that men have been generally apt to miftake idolatry and fuperftition, than which nothing in the opinion of this noble author can be more odious and defpicable, for the moft amiable thing in the world, true religion and piety. And even with refped: to the duties men owe to one another, and the government of their own affediions and paffions, how often have they been miftaken in their notions of the f;iir, the amiable, and admirable, apart from the foul and deformed, the odious and defpicable ? The cuftom of expofing weak and helplefs children, which, one fliould think, is contrary to the moft in- timate feelings of humanity, obtained very generally among the moft civilized nations ; and yet they do not appear to have been fenfible that in this they adled a wrong and inhuman part, but rather looked upon it to be a prudent and juftifiable pradlice. The various tribes of American favages, whom feme have re- • commended as following the genuine dictates of nature, are fo far from feeling any remorfe for the moft cruel inftances of revenge on their enemies, or thofe who, they think, have injured them, that they rejoice and glory in them as the noblcft exploits, and both applaud themfelves, and are applauded by others, on the account of them. Many other inftances of the like kind might be mentioned, fome of which I fliall have occafion to take notice of in the courfe of this work. It is not therefore a rule to be de- pended on, which fome have laid down, that no man can violate ^he law of nature without condemning himfelf. The pleafure or remorfe men feel in their refledions on their own adions, is fur Vol. II. C from
lo the Kncwlc/lge of Moral Duty Part 11.
from being a lure mark and criterion of the moral gooilnefs or evil of an adion in the prefent ftate of mankind. It is true, that the mind is naturally carried to approve what it takes to be right and fit, and praile-worthy, and to dilapprove and condemn what it takes to be bafe and wrong; but then, in many inftances, it ftands in need of direction and inftrudlion as to what is right and wrong. And when it is well informed, then it is that it is fitly qualified to approve and condemn in the proper place. It appears, therefore, that what is called the moral fenfe was not defigned to be an adequate guide in morals; nor is it alone confidered, and left merely to itfelf, fit to have the fupreme diredtion as to the moral conduft. It never was intended to preclude the ncccflity of inllrudion, but to be an afTiflant to our reafon, to incline the mind more readily to its duty, and produce a complacency in it ; and to create a diflike and abhorrence of that which is evil and bafe, and to re- train us from committing it.
This leads me to obferve,
2dly, That there is in man a principle of reafon, wliich is de- figned to prefide over the propcnfions and affedions, and to dired the moral temper and condud:. Man has an underftanding given him, by which he is capable of enquiring into the natures and relations of things, and confidering what thofe relations require. And whatfoever clearly appeareth from the very nature and re- lations of things to be fit and right for reafonable creatures to per- form, we may juAly conclude, that it is the will of God who conftituted that nature and thofe relations they fliould perform ; ^ and
Chap. I. communicated to Mankind in various Ways. 1 1
and when once it is confidered as the will of God, the fupremc univerlal Lord and moral governor, then it is regarded not merely as fit and realbnable in itlelt", but as a divine law, in the ftrideft and propereft fenfe.
This way of difcovering our duty by fearching into the nature and relations of things, when rightly performed, is of great ex- tent. It fignifies, that we muft form jufl and worthy notions of God, and of his glorious attributes and perfedlions, and the rela- tions between him and us : that we mufl know ourfclves, and the frame and conftitution of our own natures, as alfo the rela- tions we {land in towards our fellow-creatures : that we muft carefully confider and compare all thefe, and the fitnefles and ob- ligations arifing from them ; and thence colledt our duty towards God, our neighbours, and ourfelves. There are many who re- prefcnt this not only as the furelT; way of coming to the right knowledge of the duty which God requircth of us, but as cafy and obvious to all mankind. Lord Bolingbroke frequently talks, as if every man was able in this way to form a complete fyftem of Religion and Morals for himfelf, without the leaft difficulty. He fays, that " we more certainly know the will of God in this " way, than we can know it in any other :" and, " that it admits " of no doubt (i')." And that " by employing our reafon to col- " IciSt the will of God from thefund of our nature phyfical and mo- " ral, and by contemplating frequently and ferioufly the laws that " are plainly and neceflarily deducible from them, vve may acquire
(<••) Bolingbrokc's Works, vol. IV. p. 287. and vol. V. p. 196. edit. 4(0.
C 2 not
11 The Knoxvledge of Moral Diif\' Part 11.
" not only a particular knowledge of thofc laws, but a general, " and in fome fort an habitual, knowledge of the manner in " wliich God is pleafed to exercife his fupreme power in this " fyftem, beyond which we have no concern (/)." I readily own, that this fearching into the relations and conftitution of things, when carried on in a proper manner, may be of great ufc for coming at the knowledge of the law of nature, and for fhew- ing, that the main principles of moral duty are founded in the nature of things, and are what right reafon, duly exercifed, will approve, when fairly explained and fet in a proper light. But certainly this is not the ordinary way for the bulk of mankind to come to the knowledge of their duty. There are few who have leifure or capacity, or inclination for profound enquiries into the natures and reafons of things, and for drawing proper conclufions from them concerning the will of God. That which the inge- nious and noble author now mentioned feems to lay the principal flrefs upon, viz. the employing our reafon to colle<ft the will of God from the fund of our nature phyfical and moral, is far from being fo eafy a tafk as he reprefcnts it. The knowledge of the human conftitution, taken in a phyfical and moral view, includes a knowledge of body and foul in man, of the diftindlion between them, and the union of both, from whence duties refult relating to the welfare of the whole compound : it takes in the knowledge of our appetites and paflions, our affedions and inftindts, and of our rational and moral powers, that by comparing all thefe, we may know wherein confifteth the proper order and harmony of
(/) Bolingbrokc's Works, vol. V. p. loo. Sec .ilfo p. 154. 178. 196. 27J.
our
Chap. I. communicated to Mankind in various Ways. 13
our natures, what are the jufl limits of our appetites and paffions, how far they are to be gratilied, and how far to be retrained. And can it be pretended, that every particular perfon, if left merely to himfelf, is able, without afiiftance or inftrudlion, to confider and compare all thefc, and to deduce from them a com- plete fyftem of laws for his own condud; ? The rule which a noted author has laid down as fufficient for the diredlion of man- kind is this, that " they are fo to regulate their appetites, as will " conduce to tlie exercife of their reafon, the health of their *' bodies, and the pleafure of their fenfes, taken and confidered " together, lince therein their happinefs confifts (^)." But if thii be all the law that any man has to govern him in this matter, it is to be feared, that the biafs of his appetites and paffions, and the pleafures of his fenfes, would generally bring over his reafoa to judge in their own favour. Lord Bolingbroke, who, in the pafTage cited above, fuppofes that all men may eafily colledl the will of God from the fund of their own nature phyfical and moral, gives this account of the human fyftem : that " man has two " principles of determination, affedions and paffions excited by " apparent good, and reafon, which is a fluggard, and cannot " be fo excited. Reafon muft be willed into action : and as this " can rarely happen, when the will is already determined by af- •* fedlions and paffions ; fo when it docs happen, a fort of com- " pofition generally happens between the two principles : and if " the affedions and paffions cannot govern abfolutely, they obtain *' more indulgence from reafon than they deferve, or than fhe
{g) ChriAianity as old as the Creation, p. 14.
" would
I .J. The Knoivkdge of Moral Duty Part II.
" would Ihew if flie were entirely free from their force {h)." And he exprefly affirms, that " the appetites, paflions, and im- " mediate objefts of pleafure, will always be of greater force to " determine us than reafon (;)." This, indeed, is too univerfally ex'prellcd. It is not true, that the appetites and paflions, and immediate objeds of pleafure, will always be of greater force to determine us than reafon. Many inftances tliere have been of excellent perfons, in whom reafon has been of greater prevalence to determine them, than the paffions or prefent fenfual pleafure. But it cannot be denied, that, in the prefent ftatc of mankind, the cafe is generally as his Lordfhip reprefents it : and that, as he clfewhere fpeaks, " amidft the contingencies that muft arife from " the conftitution of every individual, the odds will be on the fide " of appetite (/:)." To fet up every man therefore for his own legiflator, as if he were fit to be left to form a fyfliem of law and duty for himfclf, without any farther inftrudlions, is a romantic fcheme, and would tend to introduce a general confufion and li- centioufnefs, to the fubverfion of all good order and morality. As to the duties we owe to God, it fufficiently appears, from what was obferved in the former part of this Work, how little man- kind arc qualified, if left to themfelves without infiirudtion, to form a right judgment concerning them. And with refpedl to that part of our duty wiiich relates to the government of our own
(*) Dolingbrokc's Works, vol. V. p. 150. Sec alfo ibid. p. Ii6. 137. 227. (;) Ibid. p. 267, 268. (/) Ibid. p. 479.
appetites
■Chap. I. communicated to Mankind in vurious Ways. i r
appetites and pafTions, it will be eafily acknowledged, that the bulk of mankind are not fit to be left to indulge them, as far as they themfclves think reafonable. If every man was to judge of his duty by what, in his opinion, tends moft to his own happinefs in the circumltances he is in (which is the rule laid down by thofe who make the higheft pretences to the Law and Religion of Nature (/) in oppofition to Revelation) it would foon bring in a very loole morality: fince there is nothing in which men are more apt to deceive themfelvcs, and to form falfe judg- ments, than in what relates to their proper happinefs. And even as to that part of morals which relates to our duty towards man- kind, and which includes the exercife of juftice, fidelity, benevo- lence, charity, and the various oflices of the focial life, though there feem to be ftrong traces of it in the human mind, and it is what right reafon muft approve as agreeable to the relations we bear to one another, yet I believe it will be granted, that it would not be very proper to leave every man merely to himfelf, to fix the meafures of juft and unjull, of right and wrong, in his deal- ings and tranfadlions with other men. He would be often apt to judge by falfe weights and meafures, and would be in great danger of being led afide by his paflions and felfifh affcvflions and interefls, which, it is to be feared, would frequently bribe his reafon to form wrong and partial judgments of things. No human govern- ment could be fafe upon this plan, if every man were to be left abfolutely to his own diredion, without any other guide. All the laws enacled by ftates and commonwealths, and all books of
(/) Dr. Tindal, Morgan, and others.
morality,
i6 'Jhe Knowledge of Moral Duty Part. II.
morality, written by the wifeft men in all ages, proceed upon this fuppofition, that men fland in need of inftrudlion and af- fiftance, in order to the right forming and regulating their moral condud:.
Accordingly, I would obferve,
3dly, That another way by which men come to the know- ledge of moral duty, is by the inftrudtions of others. This feems to be manifeftly intended by the Author of our beings. We come into the world in an infant ftate : we receive our firfl ideas of things, the firfl rudiments of knowledge, from our parents, and thofe about us : and the notions which are inftilled into our minds in our early years, often make a deep and lafting impreflion, and have no fmall influence upon our after-condudt. It is therefore one of the principal duties of parents to endeavour to train up their children betimes to worthy fentiments. Thus we find that, in the Jewilh law, it is the exprefs command of God, frequently urged by the higheft authority, that parents (liould take great and afliduous care to inftrudl their children in the flatutes and precepts which God had given them, and in the duties there required. It 16 mentioned to the praife of that excellent perlbn Abraham, that " he commanded his children and houftiold after him to keep •' the way of the Lord, to do juftice and judgment {m)." TJie wifeft men in all ages have been fenfible of the great advantage of a
(w) Gen. xviii. 19.
good
Chap. I. commimicaicd to Mankind JH varicus Ways. 17
good education («), and that men are not to be left merely to follow the did;ates of rude, undifciplined, and uninftruded na- ture. As to matter of fadl, it can fcarce be denied, that no fmall part of the notions men have of right and wrong, and of what is blanieable and praife- worthy, comes by education and cuftom, by tradition and inftrudion. And the vulgar almoft every where adopt that fcheme of religion and morals, which pre- vails in their refpedive countries. That great ftatefman and mo- ralifl: Puffendorf, who was remarkable for his knowledge of the law of nature and of mankind, afcribes " the facility which *' children and ignorant people have in determining between juft " and unjuft, right and wrong, to the habitude which they have " inftnfibly contraded from their cradles, or from the time they " firft began to make ufe of their reafon ; by obferving the good " approved, and the evil difapproved, the one commended, and " the other puniflied : and that it is owing to the ordinary pradlicc " of the principal maxims of natural law in the events of com- " mon life, that there are few people who have any doubt whe- " ther thefe things might not be otherwife (0)." And Mr. Bar- beyrac, in his notes upon it, after having obferved that " there h " a manifcft proportion between the maxims of natural law, and " the didlates of right reafon ; fo that it is perceived by the moft " fimpie people from the moment they are propofed to them, and " that they attend and examine them;" adds, that " perhaps they
(»r) See the Preliminary Difcourfe, in the fiifl volamc of this Work, p. 8. (e) De Jur. Nat. et Gent. lib. ii. cap. 3. feci. 13.
Vol. II. D " could
l8 The Knowledge of Moral Duty Part II.
" could never have difcovered them of themfclves, and cannot al- " ways comprehend the reafons of them, or diA:hi(ftly explain what " they perceive concerning them ; and tiiat though no man who is " arrived at the age of difcretion can rcafonably pretend to excufe " himfelf as to this matter by invincible ignorance, yet it is never- " thelefs true, that education, inftrudlion, and example, are the *' ordinary canals by which thefe ideas enter into the minds of " men : without this, the greater part of mankind would either " almofl: entirely extingui(l:i their natural light, or would never *' give the leaft attention to them. Experience fliews this but " too plainly. Many things there are among favage people, and " even among the moft civilized nations, fufficicnt to juftify this " melancholy and mortifying truth. From whence (faith he) it " ought to be concluded, that every man Ihould ufe his beft en- " deavours to contribute, as far as is in his power, to infcrudt " others in their duty, to eftablifh, ftrengthen, and propagate fo " ufcful a knowledge (/>)." This is certainly one confidcrable inflance in which the Author of our beings intended that men fliould be helpful to one another, in proportion to their abilities and opportunities. But it is, in a particular manner, incumbent upon parents, mafters of families, Icgiflators and magiftrates, the minifters of religion, and thofe who profefs to inflrud: men in the fcience of morals. And fuch inftrudtions properly given are, no doubt, of great advantage, and what we ought to be very thank- ful for. But it is manifeft from experience, that merely human inftrudion cannot be abfolutcly depended upon : and that men
(/) See Earbeyr.i(.'s Puffendoif, torn. L p. 217. not. 7. edit. Amfl.
have
Chap. I. communicated to Mankind in various Wap. i o
have been often led into wrong notions of morality, in very im- portant inftances, by thofe who ought to have inftrufted them better.
I would therefore obferve farther, that befides the feveral ways which have been mentioned, whereby men come to the know- ledge of moral duty, there is great need of a Divine Revelation, in order to the fetting their duty before them in its juft extent, and enforcing it upon them by the highed authority. It cannot reafonably be denied, that God can, if he thinks ht, make dif- coveries of his will to mankind, in a way of extraordinary Revela- tion (y) ; and it is manifeft, that if he fliould pleafe to do fo, fuch a Divine Revelation, confirmed by fufficient evidence, and prefcribing in his name the particulars of our duty in plain and exprefs precepts, would be of great ufe, and would come with much greater weight and force, than merely human laws, or the reafonings of philofophers and moralifts : and this method alfo hath God taken in his dealings with mankind; which is a con- vincing proof of his goodnefs, and the care he hath exercifed to- wards them, in order to the leading men to the right knowledge and pradice of their duty.
(y) See concerning this in tlje Preliminary Dlfcourfc prefixed to the formsr vo- lume, p. 17. et fcq.
Da CHAP
ao The principal Heads of Moral Duty made knonn Part IL
C H A P. IL
97)1? principal heads of moral duty loere viade knoivn to mankind from the beginning, and continued to be hioion and acknowledged in the patriarchal ages. When men fell from the right know- ledge of God, they fell alfo in important injlances from the right htowledge of moral duty. The law given to the people of Ifrael ivas defigned to inflruSl and direB them in morals, as well as in the knowledge and laorfhip cf the one true God. A great deal was done in the met/jods cf Divine Providence, to preferve the fenfe and knowledge of morals among the heathen nations ; but they did not make a right ufe oj the helps ajfordcd them.
IT has been fTiewn, in the former part of this work, that as the firft man was formed in an adult ftate, and placed in a world ready prepared, and amply provided for his reception and entertainment, lb there is great reafon to think, that God com- municated to him the knowledge of religion, in its main funda- mental articles, cfpecially relating to the exiftence and perfedtions of the Deity, and the creation of the world, that he might be in an immediate capacity of ferving his maker, and anfwering the great end of his being. And one of the firft: and moft: natural enquiries, when he was made acquainted with the exiftence of .a God of infinite perfedlions, his Creator and Sovereign Lord, muft: have been what God would have him to do, and what was the duty required of him, in order to fccurc the Divine Favour and Approbation. For it cannot reafonably be fuppofcd, that he was
left
Chap. II. to Man in the Beginning by Divine Revelation. 2 1
left abfolutely to himfelf, and to his own will, to adl as he thought fit, without any higher direcftlon or law to govern him. He could have no human inftrudor to teach, or to advife him : he had no f)arents or progenitors, whofe knowledge and experience might have been of ufe to him : and as he had no experience of his own, it is not probable that, in his circumflances, he was left to frame a rule of duty for himfelf, and to find out the will of God by pro- found difquifitions into tlie nature and relations of tilings. We may therefore juftly fuppofe, that a wife and good God, who dc- figned him to be governed by a law, gave him a law by which he (hould be governed, and communicated his will to him in re- lation to the duty required of him. And that this was aftualiy the cafe in fatft, may be concluded from the fliort account given us by Mofes of the primeval ftate of man. From that account it appears, that man was not left at his firfl formation to acquire ideas in the ordinary way, which would have been too tedious and flow as he was circumftanced, but was at once furniflied with the know- ledge that was then neceflary for him. He was immediately en- dued with the gift of language, which ncceffarily fuppofes that he was furnifhed with a flock of ideas ; a fpecimen of which he gave in giving names to the inferior animals, which were brought before him for that purpofe. The fixme gift of language was imparted to the confort provided for him ; and they both were admitted in feveral inftances to a near intercourfe with their iVIaker, and were immediately favoured with notions of feveral things which it concerned them to know. It plcjfcd God to ac- quaint them with tiie dominion he had inverted thera with over the feveral creatures in thi^ lower wmlJ : they bad a divide
allowance
2 2 The principal HccjJs of Mcral La-v) male known Part II.
allowance and diicdions as to the food it was proper for them to eat: they were inftiucftcd that they were to be the parents of a numerous offspring, asid that they weie to repknilh the earth. The inftitution and law of marriage, which was given them, fliews that they were made acquainted with the duties of the con- jugal relation ; with which are nearly conneded the duties required of them as parents towards the children which fliould proceed from them, and the duties which their children fliould render to them, and to one another. As God gave them the law of the Sabbath, we may well conclude that he diredled them as to the proper way of fandifying it by worfliipping him the great Creator and Lord of the univerfe, and celebrating his glory as fliining forth in the creation of the world, of which the Sabbath was de- ligned to keep up a religious remembrance. The precept and injundion which was laid upon them not to eat the forbidden fruit, comprehended a confiderablc part of the moral law under it. It was defigned to inftrud them that they were not the abfolute lords of this lower world, but were under the dominion of an higher Lord, to whom they owed the moft entire fubjecftion, and unreferved obedience, in an implicit refignation to his fupremc wifdom and goodnefs : that they were bound to exercil'e a go- vernment over their appetites and inclinations, and not to place their higheft happincfs in the gratification of them ; and that they were not only to govern their bodily appetites, but to guard againft an inordinate ambition, and to reftrain their defircs of knowledge within jufl: bounds, without prying with an unwarrantable cu- riofity into things which God thought fit to conceal from them. Upon the whole, we may juftly conclude, that tlic firft parents
of
Chap. II. to Man in the Beginning by Divine Revelation, 23
of the human race had the knowledge of God, and of the main articles of their duty divinely communicated to them, as far as was proper, and fuited to the flate and circumflances they were in (/•).
After the fall and difobedience of our fiift parents, new duties arofe fuited to the alteration of their circumflances. They were now to regard God as their offended Sovereign and Lord : difco- veries were made to them both of his juftice and righteous dif- pleafure againft fin, and of his placablenefs towards penitent finners, and his pardoning mercy ; without an afTurance of which they might have funk under thofe defponding fears which a con- fcioufnefs of their guilt was apt to infpire. Repentance towards God, a fubmifTion to his juflice in the punifliment inflifted upon them for their difobedience, hope in his mercy, and a reliance on the promife he was gracioufly pleafed to make to them, a fear of offending him for the future, and a dcfire of approving themfelves to him by a new and dutiful obedience; thefe were difpofitions which it was the will of God they fhould exercife. And as they flood in great need of a divine diredion in thofe circumflances,
(/■) Puffl-ndorf, who mud be acknowledgctl to be a very able judge in what relates to the law of nature, declares, in a pafTage I cited before, that " it is very " probable, that God taught the firft men the chief heads of natural law, which " were afterwards prcferved and fpread among their defcendants by means of edii- " cation and ciiftom." He adds, that this does not hinder, but that the know- ledge of them may be called natural, inafmuch as the truth and certainty of them may be difcovtrcd in a way of reafoning,
Grorius alfo gives it as his opinion, that the law was oiiginalty promulgated to Adam, the father of mankind, and throut^h him to the human race ; and again to Noah, the fccond father of mankind, and by him tranfmittcd to his defcendants.
it
z^ The principal Heads oj Moral La-w made knoivn Part II.
it is reaforablc to think that he fignified his will to them in rela- tion to tlvciv iiiture conduct, and the religion required of fallen creatures. T^:e hiflory which Moles has j^lvcn of the antedilu- vian world is very fl)ort: but in the account given of Cain and Abel it is plii.ily intimated, that there was in thofe early ages an intercourfe between God and man, tliat he did not leave them without discoveries of his will, that a law had been given them with relation to the external worfliip of God, and particularly con- cerning the offering of facrifice. Accordingly they both obfcrvcd it as an a6t of religion ; but Abel, who was a better man, with a more pious difpofition than Cain. He is faid, by the facred writer to the Hebrews, to have offered facrifice by faith, which feems plainly to refer to a divine inftitution and appointment; and that he well knew it was a rite which God required, and would accept. And its having fpread fo univerfally, among all nations from the moft antient times, can fcarce be accounted for but by fuppofing it to have been a part of Religion tranfmitted from the firfl ages to die whole race of mankind (i). What was faid to Cain, and the curfe inflidled upon him, fuppofed a divine law obliging to mutual love and benevolence, and of which the violence committed on his brother was a manifefl breach. There were in the old world preachers of Righteoufnefs, who, we have reafon to think, de- clared the will and law of God to men, and urged it upon them in his name, and by his authority, So Noah is called, z Pet.
(j) The reader may compare what is here faid with the firft chapter of the former vohunc, in which fcveral of the tilings here mentioned are more fully in- fifted upon ; but it was neccfFary to t.ike fome notice of them in this place, to flicw that God from the bejini»ing made difcoverics of his will to meu conccraiof^ their duty.
7 '"• i-
Chap. II. toManin the Beginning by Divine Revelation. 25
ii. 5. and fuch was that excellent perfon Enoch, and probably fe- veral others. To which it may be added, that if God had not made exprefs difcoveries of his will to men, and given them laws bound upon them by his own Divine Authority, their guilt would not have been fo highly aggravated as to draw down upon them fo dreadful a ruin and condemnation. But they finned prefumptu- oufly, and with a high hand: they allowed themfelves in an un- reftrained indulgence of their lufts and appetites, and committed all forts of violence, rapine, and wickednefs, in the moft mani- felt oppofition to the divine law. They feem to have fallen into an atheiftical negledt and contempt of all religion ; and therefore are juftly called " the world of the ungodly," 2 Pet. ii. f. And the prophecy of Enoch, mentioned by St. Jude, fcems particu- larly to charge them with the moft audacious profanenels, and open contempt of Religion, both in their words and adions, tor which the divine judgments were denounced againll them.
Noah, with his family, wlio furvived that deflru6lion, was no doubt well acquainted with thofe divine laws, for the tranfgrefTion of which the finners of the old world were fo feverely puniflied j and a man of his excellent charader, we may be fure, took care to tranfmit them to his children and defcendants : and the awful proofs of the divine juftice and difpleafure againrt: the wicked and difobedient, tended to give the inftrudions and admonitions de- livered to them by this preacher of Righteoufnefs a peculiar force. It appears from tlie brief hints given by Mofes, that God made renewed difcoveries of his will after the flood to this fccond father of mankind, and gave laws and injundions which were dcfigned
Vol. II. E to
z6 TLe principal Heads of Moral Laxv7nade knov)n Part II.
to be obligatory on the whole human race. The tradition of the Jews relating to the precepts delivered to the fons of Noah is well known. And though we have not fufficient proof, that they were prccifcly in number or order what they pretend, yet that the fubftance of thofe precepts was then given and promul- gated to mankind by Divine Authority, there is good reafon to be- lieve. And confidering the narrownefs of the Jewifli notions, their ilrong prejudices againft the Gentiles, and the contempt they had for them, this tradition of theirs dcferves a particular regard. For it ihews, that it v/as an antient tradition among them, derived from their anceftors, that God was the God not of the Jews ojily but alfo of the Gentiles ; that he had not entirely cad the Gentiles off" from the beginning, without making difcoverics of his will to them concerning religion, and their moral duty; but had given them laws, upon the obfervance of which they were in a itate of favour and acceptance with God (/"). The moral laws which were afterwards publiflied to the people of IlVael, a fummary of which is contained in the ten commandments, were in fubrtance
[t) In the Tiilmudkal books mention is made of " the pious among the nations " of the world," and a portion is afligned to them, as well as to the Ifraelites, in the world to come. Agreeably to this determination, Maimonides pofitiveiy allerts, •hat the pious among the Gentiles have a portion in the world to come, De Poeniu cap. 3. i. e. as it is there explained, thofe that obferved the precepts given to the fons of Noah ; by whom they imderftood all mankind. Sec alfo Gemar. Babylon, ad titul. Aboda Zara. Gip. i. MenaiTeh Ben Ifrael de Rofur. Mort. lib. ii. cip. 8 et 9. Thefe, with other teftimonies, are cited by Scldcn de Jure Nat. et Gent. Kb. vij. cap. 10. p. 877. edit. Lipf. The paflage there quoted by him from the Gemara Babylonica ad titul. Aboda Zara, is remarkable ; which he tranllates thus^ *' etiam Pag^num, qui diligenter legem obfervavcrit, veluti PontiHcem Maximum " habendum:" i. c. as Mr. Scldcn explains it, " later prim.irios Ebraorum, •* q^uaotum ad pr^miiun atticct, ccufcnduxn."
7 kuQwa
Chap. II. to Man in the Beginning by hiiiine Uevelation. 2 J
known before in the patriarchal times. And thefe divine in- jundlions, which were regarded as having been given by God to men, and enforced by a Divine Authority, may jullly be fup- pofed to be referred to in that remarlcable paflage, Gen. xviii. 19. v.here God faith concerning Abraham, " I icnow him, that he " will command his children and his houfliold after him, and " they fhall keep the way of the Lord to do juflice and judg- *' ment." And no doubt that great patriarch did what God knew and declared he would do : and from him proceeded many and great nations. If we examine the antient book of Job, who de- fcended from Abraham, and lived before the promulgation of the Mofaic law, we lliall find that there is fcarce any one of the moral precepts, which were afterwards publiflied to the people of Ifrael, but what may be traced in the difcourfcs of that excellent man and his friends, and which are there reprefented as having been derived by tradition from the mofl antient times (?/).
(«) Grotius mentions fome inftitutions and cuftoms common to all men, .md which cannot be fo properly afcribed to an inflin(5l of nature, or the evident con- clufions of reafon, as to a perpetual and almoft uninterrupted tradition from the firft ages, fuch as tiie flaying and offering up of faciifices, the pudor circa res venereas, the folemniiies of marriage, the abhorrence of inccftuous copulations. De Vcrit. Relig. Chrift. lib. i. fe(ft. 7. See alfo De Jur. Bel. et Pac. lib. ii. cap. 5. fcift. 13. And Mr. Le Clerc, though fond of the hypothefis. that many of the Mofaic rites were inftituted in imitation of thofe of the Egyptian-!, yet, fpeaking of the offering of the Hrfl-fruits to God, which was in ufe both among the Egyptians and the Hebrews, fays, that it was not derived from the one of thefe nations to the other, but came to both from the earliefb ages, and probably was originally of divine appointment. And he add?, that p>crliaps from the fame fource many other ufages among both thofe people were dcrivsJ, Sic Cleric. Commcntar. La Pcntat. in his notes on Levit. xxlii. 10.
E 2 After
28 A great deal -was done for the Heathen Nations Part II.
After the deluge, it is probable that the heads and leaders of the difperfion, carried with them feme of the main principles, both of religion and law, into the feveral places where they re- fpedively fettled : from whom they were tranfmitted to their de- fcendants. For in thofe early ages, as Plato' obfcrves, in the be- ginning of his third book of Laws, the people were wont to follow the laws and cuftoms of their parents and anceftors, and of the moll anticnt men among them. It ftrengthens this, when it is confidered, that the mofl important moral maxims were de- hvered in the earlieft times, not in a way of reafoning, as they were afterwards by the moralifi: in the ages of learning and phi- lofophy> but in a way of authority, as principles derived from the antients, and which were regarded as of a divine original. It was a notion which generally obtained among the Heathens, that tlie original of law was from God, and tliat it derived its obliging force from a Divine Authority. The leari^.ed Selden has colleded many teftimonies to this purpofc from poets, philofophers, and other celebrated Pagan writers {x). It is probable that this notion was owing not only to the belief which obtained among them of a divine fupcrintending providence, but to the traditionary ac- counts they had of God's having given laws to tiie firfi: men in the mod anticnt times. And (o ftrongly was a fenfe of this im- preflcd upon the minds of the people, that it belonged to the Divinity to give laws to mankind, that the mofl: antient legiflators, in order to give their laws a proper weight and authority, found it neceffary to perfuade them that thefe laws were not merely of
(x) De Jure Nat. ct Gent. lib. i. c.np. 8. p. 94. et feq. edit. Lipf.
tlicir
Chap. 1 1, to lead them to the right Kno-ivledge of Moral Duty. 2 p
their own contriving, but were what they had received from the gods. And it is probable, that they took Ibme of the chief heads of nioral law, which had been handed down by antient tradi- tion, into the laws of their refpedive flates and civil communi- ties, efpecially as far as they tended to the prefervation of the public order and good of the fociety. It was in the eaflern coun- tries, where men firil fettled after the floot^, that civil politics were firft formed : there they were near the fountain-head of an- tient tradition, and there the greatetl remains of it were pre- ferved (>■). And from thence the legiflators in Greece and Italy, and the weftern parts, principally derived their laws.
It appears from the account which hath been given, that a great deal had been done, in the courfe of the Divine Providence, for leading men into the knowledge of their duty. God had given laws to mankind from the beginning, and made exprefs difcoveries of his Will to the firft parents and anceftcrs of the human race, concerning the principal points of duty required of
(_y) " The eaftern fages were famous for their excellent moral maxims, derived " by tradition from the mod antient times. This is obfervable conccraing the " aatlent wife men among thePerfians, Babylonians, DKftrians, Indians, Egyptians. " That celebrated Chinefe philofupher and moriUift Confucius, did not pretend " himfelf to be the author of the moral precepts he delivered, but to have derived " them from wife men of mucii greater antiquity : particularly from Pung, who' " lived near a thoufand years before him, and who alfo profeffed to follow the doc- " trine of the anticnts ; and tfpecuUy from Tao and Xun, two eminent Ciiincfc Ic- " giflators, who, according to the Chinefe chronology, lived above 1500 years be- " fore Confucius. Or, if we (hould fuppofe their chronology not to be cxaft, yet rtill' " it would follow, that the knowledge of morals was derived to them from the ear- " lieftages, when philofbphy and the fiicucos had made but fmall proijrefs." Sec Navaretii'si Hlil. of Clun.i, p. 123. fviul Scientia Siaeniis Latine cxpofita, p- 120,.
thcni-
;o j1 great deal teas doiiejor the Heathen Nations Part II.
them. They were bound by his authority, and by all manner of obligations, to tranfmit the knowledge of them to their defcendants. And this was the more eafily done, as they were agreeable to the befl moral fentiments of the human heart, and to the dictates of rea- fon, which, if duly exercifed, might fee them to be conformable to the nature and relations of things. To which it maybe added, that the good tendency of them was confirmed by obfervation and experience. And accordingly, the bulk of mankind, in all ages and nations, have flill retained fuch notions of good and evil, as have laid a foundation for the approbation and difapprobation of their own minds and confciences. Taking all thefe things toge- ther, the laws and precepts originally given by Divine Revelation, the remains of which continued long among the Gentiles, the moral fenfe of things implanted in the human heart, and tie didlates of natural reafon and confcience, which were never utterly extingui^lied in the Pagan world, together with the prefcriptions of the civil laws, which in many inftances exhibited good di- redlions for regulating the condudtj I fay, taking all thefe things together, it muft be acknowledged, that the Pagans were not left deftitutc of fuitable helps, which, if duly improved, might have been of great ufe for leading them to the right knowledge and pradice of moral duty {z). And undoubtedly there were eminent
examples
(2) St. Paul reprefents the Ccntilcs ns having the " work of the law written in " their hearts." The cxpreflion is evidently metaphorical, and not to be pufheJ too far. It is not defigned to fignify, as feme have underflood it, that all mankind have the whole law of God, comprehending every part of moral duty, written in plain charafters upon their hearts : for this would prove that all men have narur.illy •T clear knowledge of the whole of their duty without lnrtrn<5lion : which is contrary
IQ
Chap. II. to lead them to the right Knowledge of Moral Duty. 3 \
examples among them of generofity, patience, fortitude, equani- mity, a love of juftice, benevolence, gratitude, and other virtues. In Greece and Rome, in their befl times, there feem to have been fome hereditary notions, derived from their anceflors, and cheriflied and confirmed by education and cuftom, of what is virtuous, honourable, and praife-worthy, and the contrary ; which had a great effecS: upon their condudl. But, after all, it cannot be denied, that the notions of morality among them and the other Pagans, were in many refpects greatly defedive, and de- praved with corrupt mixtures.
to the raofl evident fa(^ and experience, and to what theapoflleelfewhere obferves concerning the Gentiles. But though this could not be his meaning in this manner of expreffion, yet it certainly fignifies, that the Gentiles, who had not the written law in their hands, were not left entirely deftitute of a law. And when in any inftances, they did fome of the things contained in the law (for they were far from doing all things therein contained, as the apoftle proves) they (hewed that in thofe inftauces tliey had the work of the law written in their hearts ; i. e. that they had un inward fenfe of the Divine Law in fome of its important branches, fo as to lay a foundation for the felf-approving or fclf-condemning reflccfllons of tiicir own minds, and for their being judged by God on the account of them. This is evidently the apolHe's intention in this paflage. And it muff be acknowledged, that there were fcarce any of the Heathens, even in times of their greatcft degeneracy, but had in fome refpeffs the work of the law written in their hearts, i. e. fome inward fenfc of right and wrong, of good and evil \ to which their confciences bore witnefs : though undoubtedly this {tn^z of moral duty w;\s in fome of them far clearer and of greater extent than io others, and in all of them vaAly fltort of what we enjoj-, w ho have the benefit of the Chriftian Revelation. The apoAle, fpeaking of the Gentiles at the time of the publication of the Gofpel, reprefents them as amazingly corrupted, even in their moral notions of things. He gives it as their general cha- laOer, that they " had their undeiflandings darkened, being alienated from the " life of God through the ignorance that was in them, becaufe of the blindnefs ot" *' their hearts." And then he goes on to fhcw the happy change that was wrought in thofe of them who were " taught the truth as it is in Jefus," Eph. iv. 17, i <{, ly, zo, 21, &c.
52 Idolatry had a Ixid Eff^ tn co'rrupfing Part. II.
As they fell from the right knowledge of the one true God, which, as a learned author {a), who is a warm advocate for the Morality of the Pagans, obfcrves, is " the great foundation of " morality, " they fell alfo from a juft knowledge of moral duty in very important inftunccs. Idolatry not only introduced a great corruption into the worfliip of God, and all that part of duty ■which immediately rclateth to the Supreme Being, but alio into their moral conduil in other refpedls. Efpecially, when the worfiiip of hero deities became general, many of whom gave examples of vicious conduct, the worfliip of fuch gods naturally tended to corrupt their moral notions and fcntiments, and to make them very loofe and dlflblute in their practice : to which may be added bad and immoral cuftoms, owing to various caufcs. And in many places their civil laws, though they were of ufe to their morals in fevcral inflances, yet led them aftray in others. And even their wife men and philofophers frequently advanced notions inconfiftent with the truth and purity of morals : of which full proof will be given in the enfuing part of this treatife.
When idolatry and polythcifm began to fpread generally among the nations, it pleafed God to feledl a peculiar people, among whom a polity was ereded of an extraordinary kind; the funda- mental principle of which was the knowledge and worlhip of the one true God, and him only, in oppofuion to all idolatry. Pie alfo gave them a code of holy and excellent laws, containing the main articles of the duty which God requires of men, in pl.iin
(a) Sykes's Conncft. and Principles of NaturiU and Revealed Religion, p. 364.
and
Chap. II. their Moraf Notions (r?ut FraSiicei, jj
and exprefs precepts. The moral laws obligatory on all man- kind were fummarily comprehended in the Ten Commandments, which were promulgated by God himfelf with a moft amazing folemnity at mount Sinai, and written in the two tables of ftone, to be a Handing law to that people. They were not left to them- felves, to work out a fyftem of moral duty merely by their own reafon^ Even fuch things as feemed moft plain to the common fenfe of mankind, as the precepts prefcribing the honouring our parents, and forbidding to kill, fteal, and commit adultery, were bound upon them by exprefs laws from God himfelf, and enforced by his own Divine Authority. And he commanded them to be very affiduous and diligent in teaching thofe laws to their children, and inftrudling them in the particulars of the duty which God required of them [b). And it is very probable, that the fame of their laws, and the glorious proofs of a Divine Authority by which they were enforced, was fpread abroad among the nations. This feems to be plainly fignified in what Mofes declares to the people of Ifrael, when fpeaking of the ftatutes and judgments which the Lord commanded them, he faith, " Know therefore, and do " them ; for this is your wifdom and your underftanding, in the " fight of the nations, which fhall hear all thefe ftatutes, and " fay, Surely this great nation is a wife and underftanding people." He adds, " And what nation is there fo great that hath ftatutes " and judgments fo righteous as all this law which I fet before " you this day [c) ?" It may reafonably be fuppofed, that as the
(A) Deut. vi. 6, 7, (f) Ibid. iv. 6. 7, 3.
Vol. II. F repatatioa
3+ The Laiv givcJi to the PeopfF of Ifracl of Vfe Part II.
reputation of Mofes as a lawgiver was very high among the na- tions, his laws'might, in feveral inftances, ferve as a pattern to otlicr lawgivers, who might borrow fome of the Mofaic precepts and inftitutions. Artapanus, as cited bv Eufcbius, probably fpeaks the fentiments of many other Heathens, when he fo highly extols the wifdom of Mofes and his laws, and faith, that he delivered many things very ufeful to mankind, and tiiat from him the Egyptians themfelves borrowed many inftitutions {d). This might be true in feveral inftances, though he is miftakcn in thofe he particularly mentions. Many learned men have obferved a great affinity between fome of the laws cnadted in Athens and other ftates, and thofe of Mofes, who publiflied his laws before the moft antient legillators that we know of publilhcd theirs. And there is good reafon to believe, tl^it tlic Mofaic laws were the iirft laws that were ever committed to writing.
But though it is probable the laws given by Mofes, in the name of God himfclf, were of advantage, in many inftances, to pre- ferve the fenfe and knowledge of moral duty among the nations, yet as thofe laws were in a fpecial manner delivered to one parti- cular nation, who were for wife ends kept feparatc by fome peculiar ufages from other people, they were not lo well fitted for univcrfal ufe. It pleafed God, therefore, at the time which feemed moft fit to his infinite wifdom, in compairion to the wretched ftate of piankind, after having exercifed long patience and forbearance towards them, to make a new Revelation of his Will, which
{d) Eufcb. Pracp. Evangel, lib. ix. cap. 27. p. 432.
was
Chap. II. to pre ferve the Kno-wledge of Moral Duty. ^^
was commanded to be published to all nations, in which their duty is fet before them in its juft extent, enforced by God's own exprefs authority, and by fuch arguments and motives, as are moft proper to work upon the mind. This Revelation and fyftem of Divine Laws is brought us by the moft illuftrious meflenger that could be fent for that purpofe, the Son of God in human fle(h. His Divine Miffion was confirmed by the moft convincing attefta- tions ; and he hath alfo exemplified to us the Divine Law in all its purity and excellency, in his own Sacred Life and Pradlice, and hath provided the moft gracious afliftances to help our in- firmities, that we may be the better enabled to perform the duties required of us. And what great need the world ftood in of fuch. a Revelation, and confequently how thankful wc fliould be for fo: great a bleffing, is what I now proceed diftindly to ftiew.
Fa CHAP
j4f An Enquiry into the State of Morality Part II.
CHAP. III.
A particular enquiry into the /late of morality in the Heathen •world. A complete rule of morals, taken in its jufi extent^ comprehends the duties relating to God^ our neighbours, and ourfehes. If the Heathens had fuch a rule among them, it would appear either in the precepts of their religion, or in the prefcriptions of their civil laivs, or cufloms 'which have the force of laws, or in the do&rines and inftr unions of their philofophers and tnoralifs. It is propofed diJlinElly to confider each of thefe. As to what pa[fed among them for religion, morality did not properly make any part of it, nor was it the office of their priefls to teach men virtue. As to the civil laws and conftitutions, fuppofmg them to have been never fo proper for civil government, they were not fitted to be an adequate rule of morals. The befl of them were, in feveral refpeSls, greatly defeSlive. Various infiances produced of civil laws, and of cufloms which had the force of laws, among the mofi civilized nations, efpecially among the ant lent Egyptians and Greeks, which were contrary to the rules of morality.
MORAL duty, taken in its jufl extent, is uAially and iiillly divided into three main branches. The firft relates to tlic duties of piety we more immediately owe to God, which incKides the rendering him tliat rehgious worfhip and adoration, that love and reverence, that trufl and affiance, tiiat uiirelerved rubmilTion,
refignation, +
Chap. III. in the Heathen World. 37
refignation, and obedience, which is due to him from his reafon- able creaturesi. The fecpiid relates to the duties we owe to our neighbours, or to mankind, which takes jp all that is comprehended in the exercife of juftice, charity, mercy, benevolence, fidelity towards our fellow-creatures, and all the various offices and virtues of the focial life. The third relates more immediately to ourfelves, and includes dl the duties of (elf-gpvernment, the keeping our appetites and paflions under proper regulations, and maintaining a purity of body and fqul, and whatfoever tends to the right or- dering of our own ternper, and to the attaining the true reditude and perfection of our nature. That cannot be faid to be an ade- quate rule of moral duty, which does not extend to all thefe, with fufficient authority, clearnefs, and certainty. By this let us examine the flate of morality in the Heathen world : and, upon an impartial enquiry, we (hall find, that though that part of moral law, which relates to civil duty and focial virtue, was for the mort; part preferved, as far as was neceffary to the peace and order of fociety ; yet as to the other branches of duty, that which relates to the duties we more immediately owe to God, and that wliich relates to felf-government and purity, it was through the corruption of mankind greatly perverted and depraved. If the Heathens had among them a complete and fettled rule of moral \ duty in its jufl: extent, it muft be found either in the precepts of their Religion, and inftrudions of its Minifters, or in the pre- fcriptions of the civil laws and the inftitutions of the magiftratcs, or in cuftpms that had the force of laws, or laflly, in the dodtrincs and maxims of their philofophcrs and moralifls.
There
38 Morality made no proper Part Part II.
There needs not much be faid as to the firft of thefe. Reli- gionj when it is of the right kind, and confidered in its moft comprehenfive notion, takes in the whole of moral duty, as ne- ceflarily belonging to it, and' both prefcribes it in its juft extent, and enforces it by the higheft authority, that of God himfelf, and by the moft important motives. But in this the Heathen Religion was very defeftive. There were indeed fome general principles of Religion, which were in fome meafure preferved among the Pagan nations, and never were entirely extinguirtied, relating to the exiftence and attributes of the Deity, and to a Providence exercifing an infpedion over human actions and affairs, and rewarding the virtuous and punifliing the wicked. The no- tions of thefe things, though attended with much obfcurity, and perverted and debafed with many corrupt mixtures, yet had a good effedl in laying reftraints upon vice and wickednefs, and encouraging virtue, and keeping up the face of order among the people} and were actually made ufe of by the wifcll: and ablcft legiflators for that purpofe. But what pafled for religion among the Pagans, and was eftabliHicd by their laws, and adminiftreci by their priefts, neither taught any fcheme of doftrines neceflary to be believed, nor held forth a code of laws or rule of moral duty for regulating and direding the pradtice. It confifted properly in the public rites and ceremonies to be obferved in the worfhip of their deities. " The priefts (as Mr. Locke obftrves) made it •' not their bufincfs to teach men vircue (c)." Their office was,
accoi diner
o
(e) To the fame purpofe Laftanthis obfcrvcs, that thofc who taiijiht the woifliip of the goJs, g.ive no dii c<5\ions as to what related to the regiihition of men's m.-.nnerf ,
and
Chap. "III. of the Heathen Religion. 35)
according to the account Varro gives of it, to hiftrud men what gods they were to worfhip, what facrifices they were to offer to their feveral deities, and to diredl them in what manner they were to obferve the appointed rites. It is true, that Cicero, in his Oratio pro domo fua ad Pontifices, reprefents them as having a general infpedlion over the manners of the citizens : but this they did not properly as priefts of religion, but as minifters of the ftate. For in the Roman government, the fame perfons aded in both capacities, and the priefthood was fo modelled as to anfwer the civil and political views of the commonwealth. It is a juft obfer- vation of the Baron Puffendorf, that "What the Romans called " Religion was chiefly inftituted for the benefit of the ftate, that " they might be the better able to rule the minds of the people, " according to the conveniences and exigences of the public." He adds, That " there were no certain heads or articles of religion " among the Romans, whence the people might be inftrudled " concerning the Being and Will of God, or how they ought to " regulate their pradice and adlions fo aS to pleafe God (/)." Thofe who were diligent in the obfervation of the facred cuftomary rites, and worfhipped the gods according to the laws, were looked upon as having fulfilled the duties of religion. But no farthw regard was had to their morals, than as the intereft of the ft^te
and to the conduft of life. " Nihil ibi difTeritur, quod proficiat .id mores ex- " colendos, vitamque foimandam." And that ainong the Pagans, philofophy [or The doiflrine of morals] and the religion of the gods, were entirely diftinft, and icparatcd from one another. " Philofophia et relit'.io dcoium difjun(fla funt, Jonge- ■" que difcreta." Dirln. Inftit. Irb. iv. cap. 3. See aifo' Angiiftin. dc Civit. JDq, lib. ii. cap. 4. 6 tt 7.
(/) Puffendorf 's Intro.lucT:. to the Hift. of Europe, chap.V.'-ftxT-'. 10. " '
4© Morality no proper Fart cj the Heathen Religion. Part II.
was concerned. If at any time the public was expofed to great calamities, and it was thought neceflary to appeafe the gods, and avert their difpleafure, repentance and a reformation of manners was never prefcribed by the priefts, as one of the means appointed by religion for that purpofe : but they had recourfe on fuch occa- lions to fome odd and trifling ceremony j fuch as the didator's llriking a nail into a door, or fomething of the like nature {g). So far was the Heathen religion, and the worfliip of their deities, from giving men a right notion of morality, or engaging them to the practice of it, that in many inftances the rites made ufe of in the worfliip of their gods \Vere of an immoral nature, and inftead of promoting the pradlice of virtue, had a tendency to encourage vice and licentioufnefs. This fufliciently appears from the inflances produced in the former volume, chap. vii. To the inftances there mentioned, I now add, what a very learned writer has obferved, that Ariftotle, in his Politics, " having Wamcd all lewd and ob- *' fcene images and piftures, excepts thofe of the gods, whicli " religion has fandified=(Z))."
It appears then, that if a complete rule of morals was to be Tound among the the Pagans, we muft not look for it in their religioii, but either in the civil laws and conftitutions, and cuftoms which obtained the force of laws, or in the dodrines and precept*; of the philofophers and moralifts.
(^) Hume's Nat. Hiftory of Religion, p- 105- I^'V. Lcg.ition of Mofts, vol. I. p. p7. edit. 4th.
(A) Ibid. p. 154.
Many
Chap. III. Civil Laics and Cujloms of the Heathens confidered. 41
Many have fpoke with admiration of the ci\ril laws and conftl- tutions, which were in force among the Pagan nations, as if they were fufficient to dired and regulate their moral condud. Some of the mofl eminent of the antient philofophers feem to refolve the whole duty of a good man into obedience to the laws of his coun- try. Socrates defines the jufl man to be one that obeys the laws of the republic, and that he becomes unjufi: by tranfgrefling them (/). And Xenophon accordingly obfervcs, that that philofopher was ia all things for adhering clofely and inviolably to the laws, both publicly and privately, and exhorted all men to do fo {k). And many paflages might be produced to fhew, that both he and Plato, and the philofophers in general, urged it as the duty of the ci- tizens to make the laws of their country the rule of their pradlicc, both in religious and civil matters. Some modern authors have talked in the fame flrain, and have laid the chief ftrefs on human laws and government, as giving the beft diredlions, and fur- niftiing the moft efFedtual means, for the fecuring and improving the moral ftate (/). It cannot be denied, that there were many excellent laws and conftitutions among the Heathen nations, and which were of great ufe in regulating the manners of men, and preferving good order in fociety : but it is no hard matter to prove, that the civil laws of any community are ver}' imperfedl meafures
(/) Xenopli. Memor. Socr. lib. iv. cap. 4. fcft. 13.
(*) Ibid. lib. i. fe<ft. i, 2, et feq.
(/) Lord Bolinghroke's Works, Vol. V. p. 480, 481. edit. 410. This alfo is the fche'me of the author of the book De I'Efprit, who makes the la<v of the Ifatc to be the only rule and mcafurc of virtue and due}', and what he calls a good Ic- jjiflation to be the only means of promoting it.
Vol. II. G of
4.2 Civil Laias no adequate Rule of Morals. Part 11.
of moral duty. A man may obey thofc laws, and yet be far from being truly virtuous : he may not be obnoxious to the penalties of thofe laws, and yet be a vicious and bad man. Nor indeed is it the proper defign of thofe laws to render men really and inwardly virtuous, but fo to govern their outward behaviour, as to maintain public order. The higheft end they propofe is the temporal wel- fare and profperjty of the ftate. The heart, the proper feat of virtue and vice, is not within the cognizance of civil laws and human governments. Nor can the fandlions of thofe laws, or any rewards and punifliments which the ableft human legiflators can contrive, be ever applied to enforce the whole of moral duty. They cannot reach to the inward temper, or the fccret affcdious and difpofitions of the foul, and intentions of the will, on which yet the morality of human adions, or their being good and evil in the fight of God, does principally depend. Seneca fays very well, that " it is a narrow notion of innocence to meafurc a man's " goodnefs only by the law. Of how much larger extent is the " rule of duty or of good offices, than that of legal right ? How ** many things are there which piety, humanity, liberality, ju- " ftice, fidelity require, which yet are not within the compafs of " the public flatutes ? — Quum angufta innocentia eft ad legem " bonum efle ? Quanto latius officiorum patet quam juris regula ? " Quam multa pietas, humanitas, liberalitas, juftitia, fides cxi- " gunt, qux omnia extra publicas tabulas funt [m) ?"
But
(ni) Sen. de Ira. liS. ii. cnp. 27. The learned bifhop of Clouccftcr has ftt this m.itter in a very citar light, in his Divine Legation of Mofes, vol. I. book i. ftft. 2. p. 13, et fcq. where he (Ikws, that the laws of civil focicty, alone confulci-ed, are
infufHcicnt
Chap. III. Concerning the Egyptian Laivs u?id Cufloms. 43
But let us more particularly enquire into the mofl celebrated civil laws and inftitutions among thofe that have been accounted the moft civilized and beft political nations.
The Egyptians were antiently much admired for the wifdom of their laws, which were looked upon to be well fitted for the maintenance of public order : but they were far from furnifliing adequate rules of virtue, and were, in fome refpedls, greatly de- ficient. There is a paflage of Porphyry, which has been thought to give an advantageous idea of the Egyptian morality. He ir^- forms us, that when they embalmed the body of any of the nobles, they were wont to take out the belly, and put it into a chefl ; and then holding up the chefl towards the fun, one of the em- balmers made an oration or fpeech in the name of the defundl perfon ; which contained the dead man's apology for himfelf, and the righteoufnefs on the account of which he prayed to be ad- mitted to the fellowfliip of the eternal gods. " O Lord the Sun, " and all ye gods that give life to men, receive me, and admit me " to the fellowfhip of the eternal gods : for whilft I lived in the " world, I religioufly worfhipped the gods which my parents " {hewed me : thofe that generated my body I always honoured : " I neither killed any man, nor fraudulently took away any thing " that was committed to my trufl ; nor have I been guilty of any
infufficient to prevent or cure mornl difordcrs ; that they can have no further effi- cacy than to reftrain men from open tranfgrenions ; nor can their influence be ex- tended thus far in all cafes ; efpecially where the irregularity is owing to the violence of the fenfual paflions : they alfo overlook what arc called the duties of impcrfcift obligation, fuch as gratitude, hofpitulity, charity, &c. though tliefc duties .arc of confiderable importance in the moral charaifter.
G a " other
44 Co7icerni}!g the Egyptian Laivs and Cnfloms, Part II.
" other very heinous or inexpiable wickednefs : if in my Hfe-time " I offended in eating or drinking any of the things which it was " not lawful for me to eat or drink ; the offence was not com- " mitted by myfelf, but by thefe j" pointing to the cheft, which contained his belly and entrails, and which was then thrown into the river : after which, the rcfl of the body was embalmed as pure. Porphyry cites for this Euphantus, who tranflated this prayer or oration out of the Egyptian tongue («). This may fcem to have been well contrived to point out the moft eminent parts of a virtuous life and charadler, which tended to recommend a man to the divine favour. But it is to be obferved, that the fun is here addrefTed to as the Supreme Lord, together with other gods, who are reprefented as the authors a4id givers of life : and that the firfl and principal thing here mentioned as a proof of the perfon's pietv is, his having worfliipped the gods which liis parents had fliewn him. And what kind of deities they were which the Egyptians worfliipped is generally known. So that tliey were wrong with refpedl to the fundamental principle of morality, the knowledge and worfliip of the one true God. A late learned and ingenious author has fliewn, that though the Egyptians had fbmc very good conflitutions, there reigned in their government a multi- tude of abufes and effential defeats, authorized by their laws, and the fundamental principles of their flate. There were great inde- cencies and impurities in many of their public effabliflied rites and ceremonies of religion. It was permitted among them for brothers and fifters to marry one another. There is a law of
(/.) Porpli. de Abfcon. lib. iv. k(\. lo.
6 their?,
Chap. III. Concerning the Gracian Laws and Cujlomu ^j,
theirs, mentioned by Diodorus Siculus, lib. i. cap. 9. p. 6p. edit. Amft. and by Aulus Gellius, lib. ii. cap. 20. which, under pre- tence of making it eafy for the citizens to recover what was flolen from them, really encouraged and authorized theft : it not only affiired the thieves of impunity, but of a reward, by giving them the fourth part of the prize, upon their relloring that which they had flolen (0). The fame author obferves, that the Egyptians were univerfally cried out againft for their want of faith and honefty, as he fliews from many teftimonies (/>). And Sextus^ Empiricus informs us, that among many of the Egyptians, for women to proilitute themfelves was accounted evK?.sis, a glorious or honourable thing (j).
It is univerfally acknowledged, that the Greeks were amongft the moft knowing and civilized nations of antiquity. There the mofl celebrated pbilolbphers and moralifts opened their fchools, and among them learning, and the arts, eminently flouriflied. Accordingly, they had a very high opinion of their own wifdom, and looked upon the reft of the world as much inferior to them, and to whom they gave the common title of Barbarians. Let us fee therefore whether their laws and conftitutions bid fairer for improvement in morals, than thofe of other nations. Some of their wifeft men and legiflators travelled into Egypt, and other parts of
(7) De rOrigine des Loix, dcs Arts, &c. torn. I. liv. I. nrt. 4. p. 49, et torn. III. p. 28. et p. 352. a la H:iye 1758.
(/) Ibid. p. 354.
(y) Pyrrh. Hj'potyp. lib. iii. cap. 2-1.
the
46 Tlje Graclan La%vs ajiil Cujlorn Part. II.
the eaft, to obferve their laws, and tranfpknt fuch as they mod approved into their own. It has been already hinted, that the learned have obferved a near affinity in fome remarkable inflances between the antlent Attic laws, as alfo thofe of the twelve tables, and thofe of Mofes (r) ; which makes it probable, that the laws delivered to the Ifraelites, which were of a divine original, and were of greater antiquity than any of the laws of the Graecian ftates, were in feveral refpedls of great advantage to other nations. Excellent laws and conftitutions there undoubtedly were in feveral of the Grecian republics : but if the beft of them were feleded, and formed into one code, they would be far from exhibiting a complete rule of morals. They were all, like the laws of other nations, fundamentally wrong in all that part of moral duty which relates to the ferviee and adoration we owe to the one true God ; and in feveral refpedls alfo in granting too great an indulgence to the fenfual paflions, and in making fome important points of mo- rality give way to what they looked upon to be the intereft of the ftate.
The laws of Lycurgus have been highly celebrated both by antients and moderns. Plutarch obferves, that this lawgiver was pronounced by the oracle the Beloved of God, and rather a God than a Man : that he ftands an undeniable proof, that a perfeft
(r) Sec Sam. Petit. Comment, in Leg. Attic, printed at Paris 1635. See alfo Grot. In Matt. v. 28. et dc Verit. Rcl. Chiill. lib. i. feft 15. p. 28. edit. Cleric. It is true, that Mr. Le Clerc, in a note which he has there added, fiippofes, after Dr. Spenfcr, that both tiie Athenians and the Hebrews derived the laws Grotiiis re- fers to from the Ef^yptians. But no authorities can be produced to flicw that the Egyptians had fuch laws, but what are much poAcrior to the times of Mofcs.
wile
Chap. III. in many Injlances contrary to good Morals. 47
wife man is not a mere notion and chimera, as fome have thought, and has obliged the world with a nation of philofophers. He exprefles a high admiration of the Lacedaemonian inftitutions, as excellently fitted to form men to the excercife of virtue, and to maintain and prorrwte mutual love among the citizens. He prefers them to the laws of all the other Grecian ftates, and ob- fcrves, that all thofe who have written well of politics, as Plato, Diogenes, Zeno, and others, have taken Lycurgus for their mo- del : and that Arillotle himfclf highly extols him, as liaving de- ferved even greater honours than the Spartans paid him, though they offered facrifices to him as to a god {s). Many of the mo- derns, and among others the celebrated Monf. de Montefquieu profefTeth himfelf a great admirer of the laws of Lycurgus. He obferves, that he promoted virtue by means which feemed con- trary to it (/•). But I think there are feveral of his laws and infti- tutions to which this obfervation cannot juftly be applied j and which, inftead of promoting the pradlice of virtue, counter- afted it in important inftances. Some of his admirers have ac- knowledged, that his laws were all calculated to eftablifli a mili- tary commonwealth, and that every thing was looked upon as juft, which was thought to contribute to that end. Plato obferves, ia his firft book of laws, that they were fitted rather to repder men valiant than juft. Ariftotle makes the fame obfervation {u). And
{s) See Pl-Jtarcli"s Life of Lycurgiis, efpeci.illy at the latter end.
(t) L'Efprlt lies LoLx, vol. I. livre iv. ch. 6. p. 49, 50. edit. Ediiib.
(«) Arift. Politic, lib. ii. c.ip. 9. p. 331. et lib. vii. cap. 14. p. 443. Oper. torn. II. edit, P.iris.
Plutarch
48 Ihe Grcvciiin Laii:s and Cujlonn Part II.
Plutarch owns, tliat fome perfons blamed the laws of Lye irgus as well contrived to make men good foldiers, but very defective in ci\'il juflicc and honefty. It appears from the teftim in of feveral authors, as well as from fome remarkable fafts, that they were for facrificing probity, and every other confideration, to what they thought the good of the flatc required ; and judged every me- thod lawful which might procure them fuccefs. The breach of laith cofl them nothing. Herodotus fays, that they who were acquainted with the genius of that people knew that their adions v/cre generally contrary to their words, and that they could not depend upon them in any matter (a). And though they were un- doubtedly very brave, yet they valued a vicflory more which was gained by deceit and guile, than one that was obtained by open valour. How haughtily and cruelly, as well as perfidioully, did they behave towards Athens and Thebes, and all tliofe whom tliey thought it their interefl to opprefs !
Many of their laws and cufloms were contrary to humanitv. And the rigour of their difcipline tended in feveral inllances to f^ifle the fentiments of tendernefs and benevolence, of mercy and companion, fo natural to the human breaft. I have in the former part of this Work, chap. vii. taken notice of their cuflom of whipping boys, even to death, at the altar of Diana Orthia. To whicTi it may be added, that their young men and bovs were wont to meet and fight with the utmoft: rage and fiercencfs on certain ■days of the year ; of which Cicero fays he himlclf wn-^ witnefs (j).
(a:) HcroJ. lib. ix. n. 51. Francof. 1605.
{y) Tufcul. Difput. lib. v. cap. 27. p. 401. tdit. r.iris.'
nut
chap. III. in many Jnftances contrary to good Morals, 4^
But nothing could exceed their cruelty to their flaves, the hclotes, as they called them, who laboured the ground for them, and per- formed all their works and manufadturcs. Thefe flaves could have no juftice done them, whatey.^r infults or injuries they fuf- fered. They were regarded as the flaves not merely of one par- ticular mailer, but of the public, fo that every one might Injure them with impunity. Not only did tli&y treat thcni in their ge- neral conduct with great harfhnefs and infcilenc^, but it was part of their policy to maifacre them, on feveral occafions, in cold blood, and without provocation. Several authors have mentioned their K^wTraa, fo called from their lying in ambufcade, in thickets and clefts of the rocks, from which they ifl"ued out upon the helotes, and killed all they met ; and fometimes they fet upon them in the open day, and murdered the ablefl and fl:outefl: of them, as they were at work in the fields. The defign of this was to pre- vent their flaves from growhig too numerous or powerful, which might endanger the flate. But, as M. de Montefquieu very pro- perly oblerves, the danger was only owing to their cruel and un- juft treatment of them ; whereas among the Athenians, who treated their flaves with great gentlenefs, there is no infliance of their proving troublefome or dangerous to the public (z). Plutarch is loth to believe that this inhuman cuftom was inflituted by Ly- curgus, though he does not deny that it was in ufe among the Lacedaemonians. But Ariftotle fays, it was an inftitution of Ly- curgus. And whoever duly confiders the fpirit of feveral of his laws, will not think him incapable of it. And from the
(:) L'Efprit des LoIn, vol. I. liv. xv. chnp i6, p. 356, 357.
Vol. II. n ' fame
JO The Gracian Laios and Cujioms Part II.
fame cruel policy it was, that, as Thucydidcs informs us, they deftroyed two thoufand of the helotes, whom they had armed, when the exigences of the ftate required it, and who had fervcd them bravely and faithfully in their wars.
Another inftance of the inhumanity of tlie laws of Lycurgus was this. The father was obliged by the laws to bring his child to a certain place appointed for that purpofe, to be examined by a com- mittee of the men of that tribe to which he belonged. Their bufinefs was carefully to view the infant, and if they found it deformed, and of a bad conftitution, they caufed it to be cafl into a deep cavern near the mountain Taygetus, as thinking it neither good for the child itfelf, nor for the public, that it (hould be brought up. Plutarch, who takes notice of this, pafles no cenfure upon it. And he pronounces in general, at the conclufion of his life of Lycurgus, that he could fee no injuflice, or want of equity, in any of that lawgiver's inftitutions.
Many have taken notice of that conftitution of his, by which the Spartan boys were trained up to dextrous thieving. They were obliged to fteal their viduals, or be without them ; which put them upon watching opportunities, and feizing what they could lay their liands on. It behoved them to do this with dex- terity and adivity ; for if they were taken in the fa(fl:, they were • whipped moft unmercifully J not for ftealing, as SextusEmpiricus obfcrvcs, but for being catchcd {a). This was defigned to fliarpen
(fl) Pyrrhon. Hypotyp. lib. iii. cnp. 24.
their
Chap. III. in many Injhinces conirary to good Morals. 51
their invention, and to exercife their agility and courage. . Some authors, and among others, the celebrated, \\x. RoUin, in his An- tient Hiflory, are of opinion, that this could not be callijd theft^ becaufe it was allowed by the ftate. Cut, I think, it cannot be denied, that in this method the youth were early enured to arts of rapine, and were taught to think there was no great hurt in invading another man's property, and to form contrivances ior tiiat purpofe.
Notwithftanding all the aufterity which appeared in the laws of Lycurgus, there were fome of his conftitutions, which feemed to be very little confident with modefty and decency. There were common baths in which the men and women bathed to- gether. And it was ordered, that the young maidens fhould ap- pear naked in the public exercifes, as well as the young men, and that they fliould dance naked with them at the folemn feflivals and facrifices (b) : and as to the married women, Lycurgus
allowed
{b) That eminent philofopher Plato, ia forming the model of a perfeft common- wealth, propofed the laws of Lycurgus, in this and other inftances, for his pattern, as I (hall have occafion to obfcrve afterwards. Thus neither the pliilofopher nor law- giver fhewed any great regard to the rules of modefty and purity. A remarkable proof this, that thegreateft men among the Pagans, when left to their own judgments in matters of morality, were apt to form wrong notions concerning it, even in in- ftances where one rtiould think the dilates of nature and reafon might have given them better direflions. It may not be improper, on this occafion, to mention aa obfervation of an eminent political writer Monf. de Montefquieu. He obferves, that all nations arc agreed in looking upon the incontinence of women as a thing that defer\'es contempt : and he fiippofes that " a natural modefty is implanted in " women, as a defence and prefcrvative againft incontinence : that therefore it is " not true, that incontinence follows the laws of nature : it violates thofe laws : " and ou the contrary, it is moJeIfy and refervedQefs that follows thofc laws."
H 2 He
j2 Some of the Greecian Laws and Citjloms Part. II.
allowed hufbands to impart the ufe of their wives to handfome and deferving men, in order to the begetting healthy and vigorous children for the commonwealth. It is a little odd to obferve that learned and grave philofopher Plutarch endeavouring to ju- ftify thefe conftitutions, in his life of Lycurgus. That lawgiver was for facrificing modefty, and the fandity of the marriage-bed, to what he thought was for the benefit of the ftate. But thefe conflitutions had, as might reafonably have been cxpeiSed, a very bad influence upon their morals. The Spartan women were ac- counted the moft immodeft and licentious of any in Greece, as Ariftotle obfcrves {c).
I fliall conclude this account of the Lacedaemonians, and of their laws and cufloms, with the account given of them by a late iiigenious author : that they were a people proud, imperious, de- ceitful, perfidious, capable of facrificing every thing to their am- bition and their intereft, and who had no efteem of the liberal
He adds, that " where the phyfical force of certain climates carries perfons to " violate the natural law of the two fexes, and that of intelligent beings, it is the " bufinefs of the magirtmtc to m.ake civil laws, which may overcome the nature ■** of the climate, and re-eftablifh the primitive laws of nature *." According to This way of rcafoning, a legiflator is ranch to be blamed, who, like Lycurgns, enabliihes conflitutions which tend to break down that natural fence of modefly, which is dcfigned as a prcfcrvativc againll incontinence. In tliis certainly M. de Montcfquieu has judged much better than another wiiter of the fame nation, the author of the book De I'Efprit, who fccms to make the great art of Icgiflation to conlift in giving a loofc to the moft licentious inclinations, and propofes the in- dulgence of them as a reward to merit, and an inceutlvc to the noblcft aiTtions.
(f) Arin. Politic, lib. ii. cap. 9.
* L'Efiiii Jo« Loix, vd. I. )iv. xvi. chap. ii. p. 3:3, 374.
arts
Chap. III. contrary to good Morals. ^^
arts and fclences. And after fome other ftrokes of tlie like nature, he concludes, " Such were the manners and the genius of a people *' admired and propoled by all profane antiquity as a pattern of *' wifdom and virtue. — Telles etoient les moeurs et le genie d'un *' peuple admire et propose par toute I'antiquite profane, comme *' un modele de fagefTe et de vertu (^)."
The law and cqftom of expofing children, fo contrary to the didates of nature and humanity, was not peculiar to Lacedaemon, but was common in other parts of Greece, as well as among other nations. And it is reckoned as a fingular thing among the Thebans, that the law forbade any Theban to expofe his infant under pain of death {e). Even the mofl: eminent philofophers, in their treatifes of laws, prefcribcd or approved this unnatural pra;^ice. Plato would have it ordered by law, that men or women, who are paft the age of getting and conceiving ftrong children, fliould take care that their offspring, if they fhould have any, ihould not come to the birth, or fee the light j or if that fliould happen, they fhould ex- pofe them without nourifhment (/). Ariftotle exprefly fays,, that it fhould be a law not to bring up or nouriOi any child that is weak or maimed : and that when the law of the country for- bids to expofe infants, it is neccffary to limit the number of thofe that fhould be begotten : and if any one begets children above
{<!) Dc rOrigine des Loix, des Arts, Sec. tome III. p. 380.
{e) iElian. Hiftor. var. lib. ii. cap. 7.
(/) Plato Republ. lib. v. Oper. p. 461. edU..Lugd.
the
54. ^'Om^' cfthc GiiTciiin Laws and Ciif^civ. Part IT.
the number limited by the laws, he advifes to procure abortion before the foetus has life and fenfe {g). Juftly is this mentioned by Mr. Locke, as a rcm.arkablc inftance to flicw, that " reafon " had failed mankind in a pcrfedt rule, and refolved not the " doubts that had rifen amongfl: the ftudious and thinking philo- " fophers J nor had been able to convince the mofl; civilized parts " of the world, that they had not given, nor could without a " crime take away the lives of their children, by expofing " them {h)r
But what I would efpecially take notice of as a palpable proof of the great corruption of the Greeks, both in their notions and practice, with regard to morals, is, that the mofl unnatural lilthi- iiefs was countenanced and encouraged, in feveral places, by their public laws, and almoft every-where by their known cuftoms.
It is a charge that has been often brought againfl them, that they were very much addi<fled to the impure love of boys. I am fenfible there is a great authority againfl: it. The learned Doiflor, afterwards Archbifliop Potter, in his excellent Greek Antiquities, has taken great pains to clear them from that charge ; and fcems willing to have it thought, that the love of boys, fo generally allowed and pradlifed among them, was perfectly innocent and virtuous. And it were to be wiflicd, for the honour of human nature, that it could be proved to be io. I am f.ic from faying,
(5) Arift. Politic, lib. vii. cap. 16. Opcr. torn. II. p. 447. edit. Tarif.
(*) Locke's RcafoD. of Chrill. in his Works, vol. II. p. 534. edit, 3d.
that
Chap. III. contrary to good Morah, ^^
that the love of boys, for which the Greeks were fo noted, was univerfally of the criminal and vicious kind. But that this moft abominable and unnatural vice was very common among thetx\, and, in fome of their cities and ftates, encouraged by their laws, admits of a clear proof. There need no other vouchers for it, than the authors produced by this learned writer himfclf. One of thefe authors is Maximus Tyrius. And it is obfcrvable, that, at the end of his tenth diflertation, he celebrates it as a moft he- roic adl of Agefilaus, a more glorious conquefl than any he had atchieved againft the Perfians, and as more to be admired than the fortitude of Leonidas, who died for his country, that being in love with a beautiful Barbarian boy, he fufFered it to go no farther than looking at him, and admiring him (i). Nothing could be more impertinent and abfuid than this encomium on Agefilaus, if the Spartan love of boys was generally as pure and innocent as the fame author in that very differtation reprefents it. The teftimonies of Xenophon and Plutarch are produced to fhew that the love of boys at Sparta, and which was prefcribed by the Laws of Lycur- gus, was pure and laudable. But the prejudices thefe two great authors had in favour of the Lacedaemonians, the high opinion they entertained of their laws and cufioms, and their willingnefs
(/) Epiftetus has a paflage not unlike this in commendation of Socrates's extra- ordinary virtue. " Go to Socrates (fnys he) and fee him lying by Alcibiades, yet ■" flighting his youth and beauty. Confider what a -viftory he was confcious of " obuining ! What an Olympic prize! So that, by heaven, one might jufUy " faiute him; Hail! incredibly great, univerfal viiftor!" If this niamcful vice had not been extremely common, even at Athens, Socrates's abftaining from k could not have been celebrated, as it is here by Epi(fletus, as an aft of virtue that dcfervcs the highcll admiration. See Epit'^ctus's DUTsrc. book ii. ch. i S. fevt, 4.
to
^6 The Lo.ivs and Cujlomt among the Greeks Part II.
to put the faireft colours upon them, is well known, and does not a little weaken the force of their teftimony. It will foon appear, that Plutarch is not very confiftent with himfelf in what he ad- vances on this head. As to Xenophon, it is to be obfcrved, that at the fame time that he vindicates the Lacedaemonians, he repre- fents that criminal love as very common among the Greeks, and in many places authorized by the laws : " I know (fays he) that there ** arc many who will believe nothing of this •" i. c. that the love of boys among the Spartans was innocent and virtuous; " nor do " I wonder at it, the unnatural love of boys is become fo common, " that in many places it is eftablifhed by the public laws." This teftimony of Xenophon is very remarkable with regard to others of the Greeks, though he will not allow that the Lacedasmonians were guilty of it. But Plato, his cotemporary, whofe teftimony muft be allowed to be of great weight, in his eighth book of laws, fuppofes that the mafculine love, which he there condemns as contrary to nature, was allowed both among the Lacedaemonians and the Cretans {k). The exxellent writer above-mentioned will by no means allow that the love of boys ufual among the Cretans was criminal ; and aflerts, that nothing pafled between them and •their lovers that was contrary to the ftricfteft rules of virtue: for which he quotes Maximus Tyrius and Strabo, who tell us, that the Cretans profefled that it was not fo much the external beauty of a boy, as his virtuous difpofition, his courage and conduct, that recommended him to their love. And this might be the pretence they alledged ; and in fome inftances might really be the cafe. But, I think, wliofoever
(A) Plato dc Leg. lib. viii. Opcr. p. 645. C. H. eJit. Lugd.
impartially
5
diap. III. contrary to good Mcrals. 57
impartially examines what Strabo fays concerning it, will not be apt to look upon the love he there fpeaks of as very innocent. The whole turn of the pafTage feems to me to have a contrary appearance. And I find the learned and ingenious author De rOrigine des Loix, &c. looks upon it in the fame light, and cites this very pafiage of Strabo to fliew that unnatural lufl: was en- couraged by the Cretan law. And Plutarch, at the fame time that he reprefents the love of boys in ufe at Athens and Sparta as having nothing blameable in it, exprefly condemns that fort of it in Crete, which they called by the name of a ^Ta^'wo? (/), which is that very love which Strabo fpeaks of in the paflage referred to (/«). Plato, not only in the eighth book of laws already cited, hut in his firfl book of laws, blames the Cretans for mafculine mixtures ; and intimates, that they were wont to juftify them- fclves by the example of Jupiter and Ganymede («). Ariflotle tells us, that to prevent their having too many children, there was a law among the Cretans, for encouraging that fort of unnatural love (f).
It appears from fome pafifages of Pfutarch, that he was willing to have it thought that the love of boys in ufe among the Greeks was a pure and generous afFedion : but at other times he makes acknowledgements which plainly flitw the contrary. In his life
(/) Plutarch, de liber, cducandis. Opcr. torn. H. p. 11, edit. Xyl.
{m) Strabo, lib. x. p. 739, 740. edit. Atnft.
(«) Plato de Leg. lib. i. Opcr. p. 569. G. edit. Lugd. 1590.
(a) AriA. Politic, lib. ii. cap. 10, Oper. torn. II. p. 333. !\. edit. Paiif. 1629.
Vol. II. I of
r8 The Laiv! and CuJIoms nmofig the Greeks Partll.
of Pclopidas, he tells, that the legiflators encouraged the love of boys, to temper the manners of their Youth, and that it produced excellent effedls, and particularly among the Thebans. But the fame great philofopher, who undoubtedly was inclined to give a favourable account of the Thebans, whofe countryman he was, in his treatife De liberis educandis, exprefly declares, that fucli mafculine loves were to be avoided, as were in ufe at Thebes and Elis (/)). And his joining Thebes with Elis fliews that it is a very criminal palhon he fpeaks of. For we have the teftimony ef Maximus Tyrius, in that differtation in which he endeavours to vindicate fome of the Grascian flates from the charge, that the Elians encouraged that licentioufnefs, as he calls it, by a law {q). Nothing can be more evident than it is from Plutarch's treatife called '£f;^Ti)c5,-, or Amatorius, that this abominable vice had made a great progrcfs among the Greeks, and was openly coun- tenanced and pleaded for. One of his dialogifts there argues for it at large, and highly commends it. He reprefents the Lacedje- monians, Ba;otians, Cretans, and Chalcidians, as much addidled to it. And another of his dialogifts, who, it is to be fiippofed, exprefles Plutarch's own fentiments, condemns it in very ftrong terms, and Ihews its pernicious effedls. Athcnjrus tells us, that it was not only pradtifed, but encouraged and promoted in many of the cities of Greece {r). At Athens indeed there was a law againfl; it. And Plutarch fccnis to recommend the love of boys
(/) Plutarch, ubi fupra, p. ii.
{q) Max. Tyr. Dirtert. lo, p. i;8. Oxon. 1677.
(r) Deipnofoph. lib. xiii. p. 602. edit. Liigd.
in
Chap. Iir. contrary to good Mcrah. jp
in ufe at Sparta and Athens as virtuous, and worthy to be emu- lated, tliough he condemns that at Thebes and Elis [s). As to Sparta, the accounts given of it by antient authors, and by Plu- tarch himfelf, feem to vary. But, whatever might have been the original dcfign of the conftitution eftabliflied by Lycurgus with rcfpedt to it, there is too much reafon to think, that, as it was generally praiflifed among the I-acedasmonians, it was not very innocent. With regard to the Athenians, Plutarch tells us concerning their great lawgiver Solon, that it appears from his poems, that he was not proof againfl: beautiful boys, and had not courage enough to refifl: the force of love. He obferves, that he was in love with Pififlratus, becaufc of his extraordinary handfomenefs : and that by a law he forbade pasderafty or the love of boys to Haves ; making that, as Plutarch obferves, an honourable and re- putable a(3:ion ; and as it were invitii>g the worthy to (he pradlice of that which he commanded the unworthy to forbear [t). And in his Amatorius above referred to, he introduces Protogcnes, one of his dialogifls, arguing in favour of that pradlice, from this conftitution of Solon [u). Maximus Tyrius, who takes a great deal of pains to vindicate Socrates from that charge, owns, that at the time when this philofopher flouriflied, this vicious paflioa had arrived to the greatell height, both in other parts of Greece, and particularly at Athens; and that all places were full of unjull or wicked lovers, and boys that were enticed and deluded (.v).
{s) Plutarch, ubi fupni.
{/) Plutarch. See PlutaicU's Life of Solon, at the begntiir.g.
(//) Plutarch: Oper. torn. I[. p. 751. cJit XylanJ.
(.t) Max. Tyr. dldlrt lo, iniiio.
I 2 So '
6o 71. c Lams and Gufiomi among. ike Grech Part II..
So iLut it there was a iaw againll it at Athens, it ieems to have been little regarded.
To the tcftimonles which have been produced may be added that of Cicero, who reprefents that practice as very common among the Greeks : and that what helped to introduce and fpread it, was the cuflotn of the youths appearing naked in the public cxercifes. And he obferves, that their poets, great men, and even their learned men and philofophers, not only pradifed, but gloried in it ()•). And accordingly he elfewhere reprefents it as the cuftom, not of particular cities only, but of Greece in general. Speaking of the things that might be thought to contribute to Dionyfius's happi- nefs, he mentions his having paramours of that kind " according " to the curtom of Greece. — Habebat, more Grxcia:, quofdam " adolefcentcs amore conjuniftos (sr)." And in a paflage cited by Ladlantius, he mentions it as a bold and hazardous thing in the Greeks, that they confecrated the images of the Loves and Cupids in the places of their public cxercifes [a).
I iiave infilled the more largely upon this, becaufe there cannot be a more convincing proof, tliat the laws and ciiftoms, even in the moft learned and civilized nations, are not to be depended upon as proper guides in matters of iporality. The Greeks are
{y) Tufcul. Difput. lib. U'. cap. 33.
(2) Ibid. lib. V. c.ip. 20. p. 385. edit. Davis.
(a) " Magnum Cicero audaxqiic confilium fufccpini- Grxciam dicit, quod Cu- " pidinum c-t Amorum fimulachrx in gymnafiis confccrairet." Laiflant. Divin. Inftit. lib. i. cap. 20. p. 106. Lugd. Bat. 1660.
rcrrardcd
CJiap. III. contrary to good Morah. 6 1
regarded and admired as the mofl eminent ol" the Pagan nations, for their knowledge in philofophy, and elpecially in morals, and as having cultivated their reafon in an extraordinary degree. They valued themfelves mightily upon their wifdom, and the Oiicellency of their laws ; and yet their laws, or generally allowed cuftoms, fliewed that they were become amazingly corrupt, both in their notions and pradtices, with regard to morals ; and that in inftances, as to which one would have thought the light of nature would have given them a fufficient diredtion. I fay, they were become very corrupt in their notions as well as pradlices. For though fome of them acknowledged the evil and turpitude of that unnatural vice, yet, in the general opinion, it feems to have pafied among them for no fault at all, or a very light one. And many of their philofophcrs and moralifts, as I fliall have occafionto fliew after- wards, reprefented it as a matter perfeftly indifferent. Barolefanes, an antient and learned writer, in a large extradl quoted from him byEufebius, after having mentioned fome barbarous nations, which were much addidled to that vice, and others who had it in ab- horrence, obferves, that in Greece fuch kind of mafculine loves were not accounted difgraceful, even to the wife [h). St. Paul, therefore, in drawing up his charge of an amazing corruption of morals in the Heathen world, very juftly puts this in the firft place, as being both of the highcft enormity, and very common not only among the people, but the philofophcrs themfelves. Nor is it probable, that any thing Icfs than a Divine Law, enforced by the
'J>) Eufcb. Pia-p. Evangel, lib. vi. cap. lo. p. z-C). D.
authority
62 TZ^ La'jvi and Cujlotns among the Greeks, Cfc. Part II.
authority of God himfelf, and by the moft exprefs denunciations of the Divine Wrath and Vengeance againft fuch crimes, could have over-ruled the force of fuch inveterate cuftom and example, coun- tenanced by the maxims and pradicc of thofe who made high pre- tences to wifdom and reafoD.
c 11 A r.
Chap. IV. La'i^s and Cujioms of the antient Romans confidered. 63
CHAP. IV.
Farther tnjlancei of civil Imvs and cujloms among the Pagan na- tions. Thofe of the antient Romans confidered. The laws of the twelve tables, though mightily extolled, ivere far from ex- hibiting a complete rule of f/iorals. The law of Romulus con- cerning the expofing of difeafed and deformed children. This con- tinued to be pra6lifed among the Romans. Their cruel treatment of their Jlaves. Their gladiatory foews contrary to humanity. Unnatural lufis common among them as well as the Greeks. Ob- fervations on the Chinefe laws and cujloms. Other laws and cufoms of nations mentioned, which are contrary to good mo- rals.
FROM the Greeks let us pafs to the Romans, whofe good policy and government has been greatly admired, and who have been regarded as the moft virtuous of all the Pagan nations. And it mufl: be owned, that in the moft antient times of the Ro- man ftate, they were free from thofe vices which luxury and ef- feminacy are apt to produce. There were Ihining examples among them of probity, juftice, fidelity, fortitude, a contempt of plcafures and riches, and love to their country. But the body of the people were rude and ignorant to a great degree, funk in an idolatry and fuperftition, than which nothing could be more grofs and ftupid. Their virtue was rough and favage : they made
glorjr
^4 The Laws and Cajioms of Part II.
glcry to confin: chiefly in military bravery: and their love to their country was, for the moft part, only a ftrong paflion for rendering it the miftrefs of all others. To this they made every thing give wayj and often broke through the rules cA jufticc and equity, to promote what they thought the intercft f the {late ; jealous of any people, that were for prefcrving themi":lves in a ftate of li- berty and independency. To which it may be added, that they were for a long time without a written code of laws. And the people fuffered fo much by the injuilice, infolence, and arbitrary oppreflion of their magiftrates and great men, even in what are accounted the moft virtuous times of the republic, that they in- fifted very juftly upon having a written body of laws, which fliould be the ftanding rule of judgment. This was accordingly accom- pliflied. Selcd perfons were chofen to colledt and compile laws for the commonwealth, who travelled into Greece for that pur- pofe ; and with great fagacity chofe the beft inftitutions of the Graecian ftates, and other nations. Hence came the famous laws of the twelve tables, which have been fo much celebrated both by antients and moderns. Cicero, who was certainly a very able judge, frequently fpeaks of them in terms of the higheft approba- tion. And particularly, in his firft book De Oratore, in tlie per- fon of that great lawyer and orator L. Craflus. He not only pre- fers them to all other civil laws and conftitutions, particularly to thofc of the Greeks, but to all the writings of the philofophcrs. He makes no fcruple to declare, that though all men fliould be difpleafed at him for it, he would freely own it as his opiniors " That the fingle book of the twelve tables was fuperior to the
" librariei
Chap. IV. the antient Romans conf.dtred. 6 J
" libraries of all the philofophers, both in the weight of its au- " thority, and in the abundant utility arifing from it (c)."
But however thofe laws might deferve great praife, confidered as good civil conftitutions, I believe there are few that will pre- tend, that they exhibited a perfedl rule of morals, or gave men a clear and full diredtion as to every branch of their duty. That part of thofe laws which related to facred things, was evidently calculated, like the laws of other Heathen nations, to uphold the public idolatry and polytheifm. The body of thefe laws was de- figned to regulate the condudl of the citizens towards the public, and towards one another, to fettle men's private rights, and to be the rule of judyment for the regulation of the civil policy, and for the fecurity ant advantage of the ftate. And many of their con- ftitutions were undoubtedly excellent, taken in this view j but, like other civil lawi, could be of no great force for regulating the in- ward temper and difpofitions of the mind. Monf. de Montefquieii obferves, that there was an extreme fcverity in feveral of their laws, fuitable to the rudenefs and rigidity of the antient Romans. The law concerning debtors is mentioned by feveral authors, and was remarkable for its inhumanity. The creditor was allowed to keep the debtor in clofe confinement fixty days ; and afterwards, in cafe he did not pay the debt within the time prcfcribed by the law, or find fuflicient fecurity, he was condemned to lofe his
(c) " Fremant omnes licet, dicam quod fentiam, bibliothecas omnium philofo- " phorum, unus mihi vidctur duodecim tabularum libcllus, fiquis legum fontes " ct capita viderit, ut authoritatis ponderc et utilitails ubertate fuperare," Cic. de Orat. lib. i. cap. 42, 4;?.
Vol. II. K head,
CS The immoral Laws and Cujloms Partll.
head, or to be fold as a flave. This might feem to be fevere enough, but the law went farther ftill, and permitted the creditors, if there were feveral of them, to cut the dead body of the debtor in pieces, and divide it among them. Nothing can excufe the barbarity of this law, even fuppofing it to have been defigned only in terrorem. And indeed the laft part of it was fo fliocking, that we are told there was no inftance of its being put in execu- tion, but it fell, and was abrogated by difufe (i).
Dionyfius HalicarnafTeus, who was a great admirer of the infli- tutions of the antient Romans, informs us, that Romulus obliged the citizens to bring up all their male children, and the cldeft of the females. They were allowed, therefore, to deftroy all their female children but the eldeft. And even with regard to their male children, if they were deformed or monftrous, he permitted the parents to expofc them, after having fhewn them to live of their nearcft neighbours [e). There is a paflage in Cicero's third book of laws, from which it has been concluded, that the law of Romulus with regard to the expofing and deftroying male chil- dren that were remarkably deformed, was confirmed by a con- ilitution of the twelve tables ( / ). A very learned writer has taken notice of a remarkable pafTage in Terence, from which it appears, that this inhuman cuftom of expofing and deflroying
{d) Quiatilian takes notice of this law, lib. v. cap. 6. So docs A. Gcllius. And Tertullian refers to it, Apol. cap. 4.
(r) Dion. Ilalic. Roman Antiquities, lib. ii.
(/) Cic. de Leg. lib. iii. cap. 8. p. xo;. where fee Dr. D.ivjs's note.
children.
Chap. IV". atfiong the antlent Romans. ^j
children, efpeclally females, was not uncommon, even among parents of the beft charadters. After having obferved, that " of " all the moral painters, Terence is he who fcems to have copied *' human nature mort: exadlly," he adds, that " yet his man of " univerfal benevolence, whom he draws with fo much life in " that mafterly flroke. Homo fum, humani nihil a me alienuni " puto, is the fame perfon who commands his wife to expofe his " new-born daughter, and flies into a pafTion with her, for having " committed that hard tafk to another, by which means the infant " efcaped death. — Si meum imperium exequi voluiffes, interemp- " tam oportuit. — And he [Chremes] chara<5lerizes fuch who had " any remains of this natural inftindl as perfons — qui neque jus, *' neque bonum atque squum fciunt {g)" Such were the fcnti- ments published with applaufe on the Roman theatre. And it ap- pears from a paflage of Seneca, that i.o late as in his time, it was ufual among the Romans to deftroy weak and deformed children. " Portentofos foetus extinguimus : liberos quoque, fi debiles mon- " ftrofique editi funt, mergimus (/&)."
The cruelty of the Lacedaemonians towards their flaves has beea taken notice of. The laws and cuftoms of the Romans, with re- fpcdl to them, were little better. It was not unufual for the mafters to put their old, fick, and infirm flaves into an ifland in the Tyber, where they left them to pcrifli. And fo far did fume of them
{g) Divine Legation of Mofcs, vol. I. book i. feci. 4. p. 58. tnnrg. notf, edit. 4th.
[h) Sen. dc Iia, lib. i. cap. 1 5.
K a carry
63 7I:e immoral Laws and Cuftomi Part. II.
carry their luxury and wantonnefs, as to drown their flavcs in the fifh-ponds, that they might be devoured by the fifli, to make their fle{h more deHcate (/). The cuflom of gladiatory fliows, which obtained univerfally among the Romans, even when they ■were famous for the politer arts, and were thought to give a pattern of good government to other nations, was alfo contrary to the rules of humanity. They were exhibited at the funerals of great and rich men, and on many other occafions, by the Roman confuls, prastors, asdiles, fenators, knights, priefts, and almoft; all that bore great offices in the ftatc, as well as by the emperors ; and in general by all that had a mind to make an intcrefl: with the people, who were extravagantly fond of thofc kinds of fliows. Not only the men, but the women ran eagerly after them, who were, by the prevalence of cuftom, fo far diverted of that com- paffion and foftnefs which is natural to the fex, that they took a pleafure in feeing them kill one another, and only defired that they fhould fall genteelly, and in an agreeable attitude. Such was the frequency of thefe fliows, and fo great the number of men that were killed on thefe occafions, that Lipfius fays, no war caufcd fuch flaughter of mankind, as did thefe fports of pleafure, throughout the feveral provinces of the vafl: Roman empire.
That odious and unnatural vice, which (as has been fliewn) prevailed too much in Greece, was alfo common among the Ro- mans, efpecially in the latter times of their flate. Many paflages might be produced from their poets, which plainly refer to it.
(/) See L'Efprit, di.l-. z. chap. 24.
2 To
Chap, IV. among the antient Romans. 6p
To which I (hall add what a learned author obfcrves, that " Cicero introduces, without any mark of difapprobation, Cotta, " a man of the firft rank and genius, freely and famiharly owning " to other Romans of the fame quality, that worfe than beaftly " vice, as pradlifcd by himfelf, and quoting the authority of an- " tient philofophers in vindication of it [k)." It appears from . what Seneca fays, in his 5)jth epiftle, that in his time it was pracftifed at Rome openly, and without fliame. He there fpeaks of flocks and troops of boys, diftinguiflied by their colours and nations; and that great care was taken to train them up for that, dtteftable employment (/).
It is not ncceffary to add any thing more to fliew, that among the Greeks and Romans, the mod celebrated nations in the antient Pagan world, their laws and conftitutions, though in many re- fpedls excellent, were far from exhibiting a proper rule of morals to guide the people : they failed in very important inftances : and fome of the cultoms, which at length became very prevalent among them, were of a moft immoral nature and tendency, and
{k) Dr. Tailour's Notes and Parnphrafe on the Epiftle to the Romans, on chap. i. 26. " Qiiotiis enim quifqiie formofus eft ? Athenis cum efTem, egregibus " EphaeboiucTi vix fmgu'.i repericbantur. Video quid fubrifci is. Scd t.imen ita fe " res habet. Dcinde nobis, qui concedentibiis phiiofophii adolefcontiilis deiefla- " mur, cti.im vitia fepejucundafunt." And he immediately after mentions Alcaeus's being ple;ifcd v. ith a bltmifh in the boy he was in love with ; and Q^Catulus's being in love with Rofcius, who had diftorted eyes. Cic. de Nat. Dtor. lib. i. cap.. 23.
(/) " Pucrorum infelicium grcges, agtnlna exoletorum, per nationes coloreiqiiii " dtfcripta," &c. Ep. 95.
fliewei
7P The Chinefe La-ws and Conjlitutlom Part II.
■{hewed them to be funk into an amazing corruption and depravity of manners.
It may not be improper, on this occafion, to take notice of the Chinefe, who have been mightily extolled for their antiquity, the extent of their empire, the wifdom and excellency of their laws and conflitutions, and the goodnefs of their morals. A noted author, who has diftinguiflied himfelf in afferting the clearnefs . and fufficiency of the Law and Religion of Nature in oppofition to Revelation, lays a particular ftrefs upon this. He reprefents " the infidels of China (as he calls them) as having the preference " to Chriftians in relation to all moral virtues." And he tells us, from the famous Mr. Leibnitz, that " fuch is our growing cor- " ruption, that it may almofl: feem neceflary to fend fome Chinefe " miflionaries to teach us the ufe and pradtice of Natural Theo- " logy, as we fend miflionaries to them to teach them Revealed " Religion (w)." But if we take their laws and conflitutions in the mod advantageous light, it mufl be owned, indeed, that they are well calculated for preferving external public order and de- cency, and for the regulation of the civil polity, but are altogether infufficient to furnifli a complete rule of morals, or to lead men into the pradtice of real piety and virtue, conOdered in its juft extent. F. Navarette, who lived many years in China, and was well acquainted with their language, their laws, and books, and who fccms to have given an honeft and impartial account of
(fn) ChrlAianity as old as the Creation, p. 366, 367. edit. Svo.
them
Chap. IV". no perfc5i Rule of Morals, yt
them («), fays, that " he believes the outward behaviour is not " taken care of fo much in any part of the world, as it is in *^ China : that whatever they do or fay is fo contrived, that it*may " have a good appearance, pleafe all, and offend none : and that " doubtlefs that nation excels all others in outward modefty, gra- " vity, good words, courtefy, and civility (o)." Yet what he fays of them in feveral parts of his book, gives one a very difad- vantageous idea of their morals. He reprefents the fin againfl: na- ture as extremely common among them : and that in the time of the former Chinefe emperors, there were public ftews of this kind at Pequin, though not now allowed by the Tartars (/!>). That they do not look upon drunkennefs to be a crime (^). That every one takes as many concubines as he can keep (r). That many of the common people pawn their wives in time of need, and feme lend them for a month, or more, or lefs, according as they agree (s). That there are many things in China which make matrimony void, fome of them very trifling. He quotes a book
(«) I do not find that Father Navarette's name appears in the lift of the authors, whofc names are prefixed to F. Du Halde's Hifiory of China, and out of whofe accounts he compiled his hiftory. But as he found fault with the wrong and par- tial accounts given by feveral authors of the fociety, I fuppofe it was thought pro- per to take no notice of him ; though he well deferved to have been mentioned simong the beft of thofe wjio have given accounts of China.
(o) See Navarette's Account of the Empire of China, book ii. chap. 7. p. 122, 1^23 . in the firft volume of Churchill's Colleftion,
(p) Ibid, book i. chap. 13. p. 29. and book ii. p. 68.
{q) Ibid, book i. cliap. 15.
(r) Ibid, book ii. chap. 7. p. 68_
(x) Ibid>
of
•jz Immoviil Ciifiomi among the Chincfe Parti I.
of great authority among them, in which it is faid, concerning the antient wife men of China, who are there celebrated as men of greater finccrity and virtue than the moderns, that they turned away their wives, becaufe the houfe was full of fmoke, or becaufe they frightened the dog with their difagreeable noife. And tliat the anticnts difTolved the knot of matrimony without a word fpeaking. In the fame book it is determined, that when tiie wife is turned off, the hufband may marry another (/). F. Navarette farther obferves, that the Chinefe fell their fens and daughters when they pleafe, and do it frequently («). But what is llill worfe, very many of them, rich as well as poor, when they •are delivered of daughters, ftifle and kill them. Thofc who are more tender-hearted leave them under a veflel, where they let tliem die in great mifcry : of which he gives a moft affediing inilaace to his own knowledge. And he fays, it was the com- mon opinion, that there were about ten thoufand female children murdered every year within the precinds of the city Lao Ki, where he lived fome time. " How many then (fays he) mufl " we imagine periflied throughout the whole empire (.v) ?" Yet, he fays, " all the feds among them, cx'cept that of the learned, '■'■ think it a fin to kill living creatures: they plead humanity and ^' compaflion, thinking it a cruel thing to take that life wliich " they cannot give. But it is very well worth remarking (fays
{t) Navarctte's Accourt of the Empire of Chhi;i, book ii. thap. 7. p. 67. (m) Ibid, book i. chap. 20. p. 47, (at) Ibid, book ii. ch.ap. 10. p. 77.
" he)
Chap. IV. and other ant lent Heathen Nations. 7^
*' he) that they fhould endeavour to fliew themfelves merciful " to hearts, yet murder their own daughters." He adds, that " in India they have hofpitals for all forts of irrational creatures, " and yet they let men die without affifting them in their fick- " nefs (_>')•" Many have talked of the brotherly afFedlion and benevolence of the Chinefe towards one another ; but it appears, from the fame writer, that though they carry a fair appearance, and " are exquifite at concealing the mortal hatred they bear any *' man for feveral years, yet, when an opportunity offers, they " give full vent to it. It often happens, that in law fuits, the " defendant hangs himfelf, only to ruin and avenge himfelf of " the plaintiff: for when he is hanged, all his kindred repair to " the judge, complaining that he hanged himfelf to avoid the " trouble and vexation the plaintiff put him to, having no other " remedy left him. Then all join againft the plaintiff, and the " judge among them ; and they never give over, till they ruin " him and all his family (z)." Father Trigantius, and from him Cornelius a Lapide, fay, concerning the Chinefe, that " they " wonderfully follow the track of nature and reafon, and are " courteous, and apt to learn, as well as ingenious and great po- " liticians, and therefore very capable of Chriftian wifdom," fee.
(_)») Navareitc's Account of tlie Empire of China, book ii. chip. 10. p. 77.
(2) IbiJ. book i. chap. 20. p. 47. What N;ivarcttc here fays concerning the litigioufnefs of the Chinefe, is confirmed by the tefUmony of the Jcfuits, who compiled the Scientia Sinenfis Latinc expofita. They obfcrve, that there is an infinite number of law fuits in China, and every-wherc a thoufand arts of cheat- ing, of which all the tribunals are full. " Infiniius litiutn ct litigantium in China " hodie efl numerus; mille ^aflim fallcndi fingcndlve artcs, qnibus tribunalia " omnia plena funt." Sclent. Sin. lib. i. p. 12.
Vol. II. L F. Navarette,
74 Immoral Cujioms among the Chlncfe Part II.
F. Navarette, who mentions this, remarks upon it, that " if tlicir " being fo addiifled to fiiperftitions, fodomy, fraud, lying, pride, " covetoufnefs, fenfuality, and other vices, is following the courfe " of nature and reafon, then that flxther was in the right (d)." To what has been produced from F. Navarette, I would add, that an author of great reputation for political knowledge has obfcrvcd, that " the Chinefe, whofe whole life is entirely governed by the " ellablilLed rites, are the mofl. void of common honefty of any " people upon earth j — Ic pcuple le plus fourbe de la terrc>" and that the laws, though they do not allow them to rob or to fpoil by violence, yet permit them to cheat and to defraud [hi). Agree- able to this is the character given of them in Lord Anfon's Voyages, where there are ftriking inftances of the general difpofition that is among them to commit all kinds of fraud.
It were eafy to produce feveral other laws and cufloms of dif- ferent nations contrary to the rules of morality. Some nations there have been, among whom theft and robbery was accounted honourable. Others gave a full indulgence by law to all maimer of impurity and licentioufnefs, both in men and women. Others, as the Perfians, allowed the mofl inceftuous mixtures. And there were feveral nations, among whom it was ufual to expofe and deftroy their nearell: friends and relatives, and even then- parents, when they grew old and very fick, clleeming thofe to be moll
(<j) Navarette's Account of the Empire of China, book v. p. 173.
(i) L'Efprit des Loix, vol.1, llv. xi.x. chap. 17. p. 437- ct 'L-id. ch.ip. :o. p. 440, 441. edit. Edinb.
■ p xniferable
Chap. IV. and other aiitient Heathen Nations. 75
miierable who died a natural death {c). Eufebliis gives fevcral ether inftances of ablurd and immoral laws and cuftoms, which obtained among many people before the light of the Gofpel flione amongfl them. But he obferves, that no fooner did any of them embrace Chriftianity, but they abandoned thofe laws and cuftoms, which nothing could prevail with them to do before. And this he juftly mentions as a proof of the happy effedls produced by the Gofpel, in reforming tlie manners of men (</).
The fame learned father has a long extrad from Burdefanes, an eminent antient writer, concerning the various cuftoms and laws in different nations, partly written, and partly unwritten, fome of which were good and laudable, others of an immoral nature and tendency. It is too long to be tranfcribed here, but may be feen in the fixth book of Eufebius's Evangelical Prepara- tion, cap. 10. p. 175. et feq. The reader may alfo confult Sextus Empiricus, Pyrrhon. Hypotyp. lib. iii. cap. 24. and a modern author, who has made a large coUeftion of abfurd and fhameful laws and cuftoms in fcveral nations, antient and modern, efpe- cially fuch as tend to encourage all manner of lewdnefs and
(c) The .luthor of a Kite periodical paper, piiblidied at Paris, intituled, Lc Confei-vateur, pleads in favour of the laws of thofe nations, which ordered old and infirm pcrfons to be put to death. He pretends, that there is nothing in this, but what is conformable to rtafon, though he owns it is not reconcilcablc to the Gofpel. And he thinks it would be fit and reafonablc, to determine by law the term beyond which perfons fliould not be fulTcrcd to live. Le Confcrvuteur for March 1757, as cited by the Abbe Gauchet, in his Lcttres Critiques. An iu- ftance this, among many others that mi<:;ht be mentioned, of the extravagancies men are apt to fall into, through a high opinion of their own rcafon.
((/) Prxpar. Evangel, lib. i. cap. 4. p. 11, 12. edit. Paris.
L 2 debauchery
76 Fdtther Injlcinces of immoral Latcs arid Cti/Iowi Part If.
debauchery {e). It is eafy to obferve, that this laft-mentioned writer enlarges upon fome of thofe laws and cuftoms, which are contrary to all the rules of niodedy and purity, in a manner which fliews that he is far from difapproving them, and feems rather to recommend them as models of a wife legiflation. We may fee by this what hne fyilems of legiflation might be ex- pedled from fome of thofe, who make the highell pretences to any extraordinary fagacity ; and what an advantage it is, not to be left merely to what men's boafled reafon, which is too often guided and influenced by their paflions, would be apt to didate in morals.
I fhall conclude what relates to the laws and cuftoms of the Pagan nations, with obferving, that Lord Bolingbroke, who, as hath been already hinted, feems to lay the princi^>al flrefs on human laws, as furnifliing the moft effedlual means for pro- moting and fecuring the pradlice of virtue, yet has thought fit to .own, that " the law of nature has been blended with many ab- " furd and contradidory laws in all ages and countries, as well " as with cufloms, which, if they were independent on laws, have " obtained the force of laws [f) The fame noble writer, who frequently reprefents the law of nature as univerfally clear and obvious to all mankind, has made this remarkable acknowledg- ment, that " the law of nature is Ixid from our fight by all the
(f) L'Efprir, tome I. difc. 2. chap. 14 et 15.
(/) Bolingbroke's Works, vol. V. p. ij. cJit. 410.
** variegated
Chap. IV. ammig the Pagan Nations. 77
" variegated clouds of civil laws and cuftoms. Some gleams of " true light may be feen through them, but they render it a " dubious light, and it can be no better to thofe who have the " keeneft fight, till thofe interpofitions are removed (^)." It may not be improper here to add a paffage or two from a cele- brated antient, relating to civil laws. Cicero declares, that " the " commands and prohibitions of human laws have not afufficient " force, either to engage men to right adiions, or avert them " from bad ones. — Intelligi fie oportet, jufia ac vetita populorum *' vim non habere ad redle fadla vocandi, et a peccatis avo- " candi (/»)." And he pronounces, that " it would be the " greateft folly to imagine, that all thofe things are juft which " are contained in popular inftitutions and laws. — Illud flultifli- " mum exiftimare omnia jufta efle, qu£B fita funt in populorum " inftitutis aut legibus (/')."
Thus it appears, with great evidence, that the civil laws and conftitutions in the Pagan world were far from affording a fafe and certain rule, which might be depended upon, for the diredlion of the people in moral duty.
As to the myftieries of which a very eminent writer has made a beautiful reprefentation, as an excellent expedient contrived by
(_g) Bolingbroke's Works, Vol. V. p. 105. edit. 410.. (A) De Leg. lib. i. cap. 4. (i) Ibid. cap. 1 5.
ihe
yt 77)e Heathen My/Ieries of no great Advantage Part II.
the legi/lators and civil raagiftrates, for reclaiming the people from their idolatry and polytheifm, and engaging them to a life of the ftridleft virtue, I need not here add any thing to what is offered on this fubjedl in the former volume [k). It is there Ihewn, that there is no fufficient reafon to think that the myfteries were in- tended to dete<ft the error of the vulgar polytheifm, but rather on the contrary, by ftriking (hows and reprefentations, to create a greater awe and veneration for the religion of their country. And as to morals, notwithftanding the high pretenfions of fome Pagan writers, efpecially after Chriftianity had made fome progrefs, it does not appear, that the original defign of them went farther, than the humanizing and civilizing the people, and encouraging them to the practice of thofe virtues, and deterring them from thofe vices, which more immediately affect fociety. It will fcarce, I believe, be pretended, that admitting the moft favour- able account of the myfteries, the people were there inftrufted in a complete body of morals. But the truth is, there were great defe(fl:s and faults in the original conftitution of them, which naturally gave occafion to corruptions and abufes, which began early, and continued long; fo that it is to be feared, the my- fteries, as they were managed, greatly contributed to that amazing depravation of manners, which, like a deluge, over- fpread the Pagan world. It is obferved by the celebrated author above referred to, that " God, in punilhment ' for turning his " Truth into a lie,' fuffcrcd their myfteries, which thcv credcd
(*) Sec vol. I. chap, viii and ix.
" for
Chap. IV. to the Morals of the People. j^
" for a fchool of virtue, to degenerate into an odious fink of " vice and immorality, giving them up unto all uncleannefs and " vile affe(Sions (/)."
(/) Divine Legation of Mofes, vol. I. book ii. feifl. 4. p, 196. margiaal note, edit. 4th.
CHAT.
go Concerning Morality Part II.
CHAP. V.
Concerning morality as taught by the antient Heathen philofophcrs. Some of them /aid excellent things concerning moral virtue, and their writings might in feveral refpeBs be of great life. But they could not furnipi a ferfeB rule of morals, that had fuficient certainty, clearnefs, and authority. No one philofopher^ or feSl ofphilofophers, can be abfohitely depended upon as a proper guide in matters of morality. Nor is a complete fyjlem of morals to be extracted from the writings of them all colleBively confidercd. The vanity of fuch an attempt f^ewn. Their fentiments, hoia excellent foever, could not properly pafs for laws to mankind.
THOUGH the civil laws and conftitutions, or thofe cuftoms which obtained the force of laws, in the Heathen world, could not furnifli out a rule of morality, which might be de- pended upon, to guide men to the true knowledge and pradlice of moral duty in its juft extent, yet it may be alledged, that the inflrudllons and precepts of the philofophcrs were, if duly at- tended to, fufficient for that purpofe. This is what many have infifted on, to flicw that there was no need oi an extraordinary Divine Revelation to give men a complete rule of moral duty. It is well known what praifcs many of the anticnts have bellowed on philofophy, and that they have particularly extolled its great ufcfulnefs and excellency with regard to morals. Cicoro has
feveral
Chap. V, trs taught hy the Heathen Phi/ojophcrs. 8i
feveral remarkable pallages to this purpofe (w). He fays, that " philofophy is the culture of the mind, and pkicketh up vice " by the roots : that it is the medicine of the foul, and hcaleth " the minds of men : that from thence, if we would be good " and happy, we may draw all proper helps and afilftances for " leading virtuous and happy lives: that the correftion of all our " vices and fins is to be fought for from philofophy." And he breaks forth into that rapturous encomium upon it : " O philo- " fophy, the guide of life ! the fearcher out of virtue, and ex- " peller of vice ! What fliould we be, nay, what would the " human life be without thee ! Thou waft the inventrefs of " laws, the miftrefs or teacher of manners and difcipline. To " thee we flee : from thee we beg afTiftance, And one day " fpent according to thy precepts is preferable to an immortality " fpent in fin." Seneca fays, that " philofophy is the ftudy of " virtue («)•" ■''^"^ fome of the moderns have come little behind the antients, in the admiration they have exprelfed for the Heathen moral philofophy.
(m) " Cultura anirai philofoph'w eA, haec extrahit vitia radicitus : eft profcfto " animi meJicina philofophia, medetur animis : ab ea, fi et boni et beati volumus " efTe, omnia adjumenta et aiixilia peteinus bene beateque vivendi : vitiorum pec- " catorumque noftrorum, omiiis a philofophia petenda correiftio eft. O vitae phi- " lofophia dux ! virtutis indagatiix, expultrixqiie viriorum ! Quitl non modo " nos, fed omnino vita hominuin, fine te efte potuiiret ! Tu invcntrix legum, tu " magiftra morum et difciplinx f uifti. Ad te confiigimiis : a te opcni petemus. " Eft autem unus dies bene et ex prxceptis tuis aiftus, peccanti imrnoi talitati antc- " ponendus." See Cicero Tufciil. Difput. lib. ii. cap. 4 et 5. lib. iii. cap. 3. lib. iv. cap. 38. but efpetially ibid. lib. v. cap. 2.
(/;) " Phiiolbphia Audiiim virtutis eft." Sen. epift. 89. ct cpift. 90.
Vol. II. M lam
8 2 Pretence that no Moral Duty is taught in the Go/pel Part II.
I am far from endeavouring to dctradt from the praifes which are jufllydue to the antient philofophers and morahils among the Pagans. Admirable paflages are to be found in their writings. They fpeak nobly concerning the dignity and beauty of virtue, and the tendency it hath to promote the perfeftion and happinefs of the human nature ; and concerning the turpitude and deformity of vice, and the mifery that attends it. They give ufcful and excellent dire(flions as to many particular virtues, and Ihew the reafons upon which they arc founded, in a manner which tends to recommend them to the efteem and practice of mankind. And I doubt not fome of them were ufeful inftruments, under the dircdlon and affiftance of Divine Providence, for preferving among men an efteem and approbation of virtue, for ftrengthening and improving their moral fenfe, and giving them, in many inftances, a clearer difcernment of the moral reafons and differences of things.
But It will by no means follow from this, that therefore man- kind ftood in no need of a Divine Revelation, to fct before them a clear and certain rule of duty, in its juft extent, and enforce it upon them by a Divine Authority. It hath been confidently af- ferted, by thofe that extol what they call Natural Religion in op- pofition to Revelation, that " there is no one moral virtue, which " has not been taught, explained, and proved by the Heathen " philofophers, both occafionally and purpofely." And that " there is no moral precept in the whole Gofpel, which was not " taught by the philofophers (c)." The fame thing has been
(5) BoUngbroke's Works, vol. V. p. 205, io6. 218. edit. 410.
fkid
Chap. V. but what icas taught by the P hi lo fop hers esauwied. 8 j
faid by other writers of a different charatSter, and who affert the Divine Original and Authority of the Gofpel Revelation. The learned Dr. Meric Cafaubon, in his preface to his tranflation of Antoninus's Meditations, exprefles himfelf thus : " I muft needs " fay, that if wc eftcem that natural, which natural men of beft: " account, by the mere ftrength of human reafon, have taught " and taken upon them to maintain as juft and reafonable, I " know not any evangelical precept or duty, belonging to a Chri- " ftian's pradice (even the harfheft, and thofe that fcem to or- " dinary men mod: contrary to flefh and blood not excepted) but " upon due fearch and examination will prove of that nature." In like manner, another learned and ingenious writer has lately afferted, that " there is not any one principle, or any one pracftice " of morality, which may not be known by Natural Reafon with- " out Revelation. By Reafon we may come at a certainty of the " Exiftence of God, and of his Providence, his Juftice, Mercy, " and Truth : by that we may trace out our duty to him, and " may difcover a future ftate of rewards and punifliments: by " that we may come at the knowledge of fuch truths as relate " to our neighbours, and the correfponding duties to them : what " we are to do in focial life ; how we arc to behave towards go- " vernors, and what obedience is to be paid in the civil ftatc : " wherein true happincfs confills, and what it is that muft lead " to it; and what we ought to do in our private relations. Thefe " and fucli like points may be traced out by Natural Reafon ; nor " do I know of any one point of duty towards God or man, but " what reafon will fuggeft, and fupply us with proper motives to
M 2 "do
8.f Pretence that no Moral Duty is taught in the Go//'el Part II.
" do it (/')." lie afterwards obferves, that " as the powers of " Reafon are fufficicnt in themkh'es to difcover all and every " duty, and likewife to difcover proper and fufficient motives to " do them, Revelation may add many more ; and if fo, it muft " be deemed by them that have it a fingular advantage (q)." We fee here, that this learned writer aflerts, that the powers of Reafon alone, without any afiiftance from Revelation, are fuiH- cient to difcover all and every duty towards God, our neighbours, and ourfelves, and alfo to fupply proper and futficient motives to do them : and all that he leaves to Divine Revelation, is not to make a difcovery of any part of our duty, but only to furniHi feme additional motives to duty, befides what the light of our own unaflillcd Reafon is able of itfclf to difcover. I readily allow, that if Revelation did no more than this, it would }'et be of great advantage to thofc that have it, and what they ought to be very thankful to the Divine Goodnefs for. But I cannot think this is all the benefit we have by Divine Revelation, and that it gives us no knowledge or information with refpe(5l to any part of the duty required of us, but what the light of Natural Reafon was able clearly and certainly to difcover, and adlually did dif- cover, by its own unairifted flrength. I join with the learned Dodlor in the declaration he makes, that " there can be no furer " way of knowing what Reafon can difcover, and what not, than " by examining what proficiency was adtually made in moral
(/i) Dr. Sykes'i Principles and Connection of Natural and Revealed Rcligiorv, p. io8, 109.
(j) Ibid. p. iiQ,
*' knowlcdgCj
Chap. V. but ivhat li-as taught by the PhUofophers examined. 85
" knowledge, by thofe who lived where Revelation was un- " known (r)." Let us therefore put it to this iflue. But then it is to be obferved, that there is one capital mirtake, which runs through all that this very ingenious and able writer, and others of the fame fentiments, have advanced on this head ; and that is, that they take it for granted, that whatever the Heathen moralifls and philofophers have taught with regard to religion, or any part of duty, they difcovered it merely by an effort of their own rea- fon, without any light derived from Revelation at all. But tiiij is impoflible for tliem to prove. There is jufl ground to believe, as has been fliewn, that the kno .vledge of the one true God, the Creator of the World, and of the main principles of rehgion and morality, were originally communicated by Divine Revelation to the firft parents and anceftors of the human race, and from them tranfmitted to their defccndants ; fome traces of which flill con- tinued, and were never utterly extinguilhed in the Heathen world. Befides which, the chief articles of moral duty were delivered and promulgated with a moft amazing folemnity, by an exprefs Di- vine Revelation, to a whole nation, and committed to writine, before any of thofe philofophers, who are fo much admired, publiftied their moral difcourfcs. And it is well known, that many of thofe great men travelled into countries bordcrinp- upon Judea, in order to gain knowledge, efpccially in matters of religion and morality. And thofe of that nation were pretty early fpread abroad in fcvcral parts of the Pagan world. This learned
(r) Dr. Sjkes's Piincii>les and Connection of Natural nnd Revealed Religion, p. lop.
authce:
%6 The Sentiments of the Philofophers Part II.
author himfelf acknowledges, that the wifeft men in Greece tra- velled into Egypt, that they might come at the knowledge of the ynity of God j fo that they did not attain merely by the force of their own unaflifted reafon to the knowledge of that which he himfelf affirms to be the fundamental principle of all morality (f ). To which it may be added, that fomc of the mofl eminent of thofe philofophers were fenfible of the great need they ftood in of a Divine Afliftance, to lead them into the right knowledge of re- ligion and their duty, and frequently take notice of anticnt and venerable traditions, to which they refer, and which they fuppofe to have been of divine original.
But if we fliould grant that they had all which they taught in relation to religion and morals purely by their own reafon, it is far from being true that there is not any one evangelical precept, or point of moral duty, taught and enforced in the Gofpcl, that was not taught by the Heathen philofophers. I fliall at prefent only inftance in one, which is of very great importance : it is that pre- cept mentioned by our Saviour, " Thou flialt worfliip the Lord *' thy God, and him only flialt thou fervc." Matt. iv. lo. The philofophers were univerfally wrong, both in conforming them- felves, and urging it as a duty upon the people to conform in their religious worfliip, to the rites and laws of their fcveral countries, by which polytheifm was eftablifhed, and the public worlhip was
{s) Dr. Sykts's Principles and Connexion of Natural and Revealed Religion, p. 383-
z diredcd
Chap. V. were not Lcjzas obHgatory upon Mankind. %-j
directed to a multiplicity of deities. This was a grand defcA, and fpread confufion and error through that part of duty which re- lates to the exercifes of piety towards God, which fome of the philofophefs themfclves acknowledged to be an cflential branch of morality. I fliall have occafion afterwards, in the courfc of this work, to take notice of fome other evangelical precepts which were not taught by the philofophers.
But, not to infift upon this at prefent, I would obferve, that it cannot reafonably be pretended, that a complete fyftem of mo- rality, in its juft extent, and without any material defedl, is to be found in the writings of any one philolbpher, or fedl of philo- fophers. The utmoft that can be alledged with any fhew of rea- fon is, that there is no one moral duty prefcribed in the Gofpel, but which may poffibly be found in the writings of fome or other of the antient Pagan philofophers. But if this were fo, what ufe or force could this be fuppofed to have with refpeft to the people, or the bulk of mankind ? muft they be put to feck out their duty amidft the fcattered volumes of philofophers and moralifts, and to pick out, every man for himfelf, that which fcemeth to him to be the bed in each of them ? Or, if any one philofopher ftiould undertake to do it for the people, and feledt out of them all a fyftem of morals, which in his opinion would be a complete rule of duty, upon what foundation could this pafs for a code of laws, obligatory on all mankind, or even on any particular nation or pcrfon, unlefs enforced by fome fuperior authority ? Mr. Locke has exprelTed this fo happily, that I cannot give my fcnfe of it
better
SS The Sentiments of the Philofophen Part II.
better than in his words. Speaking of moral precepts, he faith, " Suppofing they may be picked up liere and there, fome from " Solon and Bias in Greece, others from Tully in Italy, and to " complete the whole, let Confucius as far as China be con- " fulted, and Anacharfis the Scythian contribute his fliare ; " what will all this do to give the world a complete morality, " that may be to mankind the unqueftionable rule of life and " manners ? Did the faying of Ariflippus or Confucius give it " an authority ? Was Zeno a lawgiver to mankind ? If not, " what he or any other philofopher delivered was but a fliying " of his. Mankind might hearken to it or rejedt it as they " pleafed, or as fuited their interefts, paffions, inclinations, or " humourSj if they were under no obligation [t)"
Let us fuppofe that the lelTons and inflrudlions given by philo- fophers and moralills, with rcfpeft to any particular duty, appear to be fit and reafonable, this is not alone fufficient to give them a binding force. A thing may appear to be agreeable to reafon, and yet there may be inducements and motives on the other fide, which may keep the mind fufpended, exxept there be an higher authority to turn the fcale. The obfervation which Grotius ap- plies to a particular cafe, holds of many others. That " that " which has Icfs utility is not merely for that reafon unlawful : " and it may happen that a more confiderable utility may be
(/) Locke's Rcafoinblenefs of Chiiftianiry. Sec his Woiks, vol. II. p. 533. edit. 3d.
" oppofcd
Ch ap. V. ivere not Laws obligatory upon Mankind. 89
" oppofcd to that which we have in view, whatever we fuppofe it " to be. — Neque enim quod minus utile eft ftatim iUicitum eft, " adde quod accidere poteftj ut huic qualicunque utilitati alia " major utilitas repugnet (w)." In matters of practice, a thing may leem to be reafonable, and yet cannot be proved to be cer- tainly and neceflarily obligatory. So much may be And in oppo- fition to it, as may very mucli weaken the force of what is offered to recommend it : and a prevailing appetite, or worldly intereft, has often a great influence on the mind, and hinders it from- pafling an impartial judgment. But a Divine Revelation, clearly afcertaining and determining our duty in thofe inftances, in plain and exprefs terms, and enforcing it by a Divine Authority, and by fandions of rewards and punifliments, would decide the point, and leave no room to doubt of the obligation. A noble author, fpeaking of the philofopherSj faith, that " fome few particular " men may difcover, explain, and prefs upon others the moral " obligations incumbent upon all, and our moral ftate be littler " improved (x)." And therefore he lays the principal ftrefs upon' the inftitutions of civil laws and governments, and the various' punilhments which human juftice inflicts to enforce thofe laws. But how little fitted thofe inftitutions are to enforce morality and" virtue, taken in its true notion and proper extent, has been ah-eady fhewn. The greatcft men of antiquity fcem to have been fenfible, that neither bare reafon and philofophy, nor a mere human
(tt) Grotius de Jure Belli et Pads, lib. ii. cap. 5. ftrt, 12. {x) Bolingbroke's Works, Vol. V. p. 480;
Vox. II. N author it y^,
po The Sciil'iiiJCJits of the Philofophers Part II.
authority, is fufficient to bind laws upon mankind. Accordingly, the laft mentioned author, who was eminent for his political knowledge, has obferved, that " the mofl: celebrated philofophers " and lawgivers did enforce their doctrines and laws by a Divine " Authority, and call in an higher principle to the afliftance of " philofophy and bare reafon. He inftances in Zoroafter, Ho- " llanes, the Magi, Minos, Numa, Pythagoras, and all thofe " who framed and formed religions and commonwealths, who " made thefe pretenfions, and pafTed for men divinely infpired and " com miflioned (_)•)." And thefe pretenfions, though not vouched by fufficient credentials, gave their laws and inflitutions a force with the people, which otherwife they would not have had. But as the feveral fedls of philofophers in fucceeding ages, among the Greeks and Romans, only flood upon the foot of their own rea- foning, and could not pretend to a Divine Authority, this very much weakened the effedl of their moral leiTons and precepts. And, indeed, the beft and wifcft amongfl: them acknowledged on feveral occafions the need they flood in of a Divine Revelation and Inflrudion. That the philofophers in general laid no great weight with the people, appears from what is obferved in the lirfl volume of this work, chap lo. To which it may be added, that Cicero, after having given the liighefl encomiums on phi- lofophy, efpecially as the befl guide in morals, adds, that " it is " fo far from being efleemed and praifed, according to what it *' merits of human life, that it is by the moft of mankind ncg-
{y) Bolingbroke's Works, Vol. V, p. 227-
" Ic(fled,
Chap. V, IV ere not Laws obligatory upon Mankind. cfi
" ledted, and by many even reproached. — Philofophia quidem
" tantum abed, ut proinde ac de hominum eft vita merita,
" laudetur, ut a plerifque neglefta, a multis etiam vitupere-
« tur (z)."
(z) Tufcul. Difput. lib. v. cap. 2. p. 344. edit. Davis.
N 2 CHAP.
g2 Many of the Fhilofophen "jsere ivrong Part 11.
CHAP. VI.
Many of the philofophers loere fundamentally ivroig in the frf principles of morah. They denied that there are any moral dif- ferences of things founded in nature and reafon, and refohed them wholly into human laws and cujloms. ObJ'ervations on thofe philofophers who made mans chief good confiji in pleafure, and propofed this as the highejl end of morals, without any regard to a Divine Law. The moral Jy^em of Epicurus confidered. His high pretences to virtue examined. The inconfiflency of his prin- ciples Jliewn, and t hat y if purfued to their genuine confequences, they are really defru£live of all virtue and good morals.
MORAL philofophy, properly fpeaking, lud its beginning among tlie Greeks with Socrates. Cicero fays, " he was *' the firfl that called down philofophy from heaven, and intro- " duced it into cities and private houfes, and obliged it to make " life and manners the fubjedt of its enquiries. — Primus philo- *' fophiam devocavit a coelo, et in urbibus collocavit, et in do- " mus etiam introduxit, et coegit de vita et moribus, rebufque " bonis et malis quaerere {a)." Not that he was the firfl: philo- fopher that ever treated of morals, but, as the fame great man elfe- where obferves, Socrates was the firft that, quitting abflirufe difqui- fitions into natural things, and curious fpeculations. about the hea- venly bodies (which had principally employed all the philofophers
ia) Tufcul. Difput. lib. v. c.ip. 4.
before
Chap. VI. /« the fundamental Prindpki of Morah. 513
before him) as being things too remote from our knowledge, or, if known, of little ufe to diredt men's conduft, brought philo- fophy into common life, and made virtues and vices, things good and evil, tlie only objedl of his philofophy {b). From his time the fcience of morals was cultivated. All the different fcfts of philofophers treated of morality, but they went upon very different principles.
Some of the philofophers were wrong in the very fundamental principles of morals. And fince the foundation was wrong, they could not build upon it a proper fyflem, nor be depended upon for leading mankind into right notions of their duty. Such were thofe who maintained, that nothing is juft or unjufl by nature, but only by law and cuflom. This was the opinion, as Laertius informs us, of Theodorus, Archelaus, Ariftippus, and others. This way alfo went Pyrrho, and all the fceptic?, who denied that any thing is in itfelf, and by its own nature, honed; or dif- honeft, bafe or honourable, but only by virtue of the laws and cufloms which have obtained among men : for which they are defervedly expofed by Epidletus (c). Plato reprefents it as a fafhionable opinion, which very much prevailed in his time, and was maintained and propagated by many that were efteemed wife men and philofophers, " That the things which are accounted
(/') Academic, lib. i. cap. 4,
(c) Epi(flet. DifTert. lib. ii. cap. 20. fnft. 6. Our modern fceptics, as well as the antient, fet themftlvcs to fliew the uncertainty of morals. Mr. Bayle has many paflTages which look that way. And this particularly is what the author of a late remarkable traft, intituled, Lc Pyrrhonifnjc du Sage, has attempted to flicw.
" juft,
94, ^i<in'j of the Vhilofophen "were 'wrong Part II.
" juft, are not lb by nature : for that men are always differing *' about them, and making new conftitutions : arid as often as " they are thus conftituted, they obtain authority, being made " juft by art and by the laws, not by any natural force or " virtue {d)."
Thus did many of the philofophcrs refolve all moral obligations into merely human laws and conftitutions, making them the only meafure of right and wrong, of good and evil. So that if the people had a mind to be inftrudled, what they fliould do or for- bear, they fent them to the laws of their feveral countries, and allowed them to do whatfoever was not forbidden by thofe laws. And in this thofe philofophers agreed with the politicians. When Alcibiadcs afkcd Pericles, What is law ? he anfwercd, That all thofe are laws which are prefcribed with the confent and approba- tion of the people, declaring what things ought to be done, or ought not to be done : and intimated, that whatfoever things are appointed by legal authority, are to be regarded as good, and not evil (t'). And indeed Socrates himfelf, and the moft celebrated philofophers and moralifts, thoi^h they acknowledged a real foundation in nature for the moral differences of things, yet every- where inculcate it as a neceftary ingredient in a good man's cha- radler, to obey without referve the laws of his country. But what uncertain rules of morality the civil laws and conftitutions are, and that they might often lead men into vicious and im-
(d) Plato do Leg. lib. x. Oper. p. (166. C. edit. Lugd. (*•) Xcuoph. Mcinor. Socr. lib. i. cap. i. fcit. .'^2.
Chap. VI. in the fundamental Principles of Morals. ^j
moral pradices, fufficiently appears from what hath been aheady obferved.
Some of the philofophers, as Laertius tells us of Theodoriis, declared without difguife, that " a wife man might, upon a fit " occafion, commit theft, adultery, and facrilege, for that none " of thefe things are bafe in their own nature, if that opinion " concerning them be taken away which was agreed upon for " the fake of reftraining fools." Tov (nra^oiiov y.xi-\iiv te -^ {jloi- 'yivaiivt >i lepoavXriasiv-) tv x.xtpuy fAvS'h yap hvcci tutcov at^^ov (pi><rg/> Trii Itt' dvroTi S'o^vi aiPojJ.iV'nit % avyy.snxi svex.ix rvi rcov aippovuv cu- yo^rii (/). Ariftippus, who alfo held that " nothing is by nature " juft, or hono