ly, if to this we add, that craft and fubtlety, with which many of them acted, in the manner of their inftruction; having a two-fold doctrine; the one internal, the other external. The internal one contained the real fentiments of their minds, quite different from the opi nions of the vulgar, whom they accounted unworthy to be initiated into the great mysteries of truth, and from whom they ftudiously concealed them; delivering them only to a few favourite felect companions, to fome choice fpirits, and philofophical minds; whilst the external doctrine, which they openly avowed to the multitude, was wholly fuited to their gufts and prejudices, and calculated rather to confirm them in their errors, than to convince them of, and reclaim them from them.

And if they had been lefs blameable on thefe accounts than they were, yet their manner of inftruction was fuch, as had but little tendency to bring the world to better fentiments and practices. Socrates himself was a real Sceptick, and declared, that he doubted almoft of every thing, and fcarce knew any thing, but that he knew nothing at all. And with regard to fome of the most effential principles of religion, a future ftate, and the rewards and punishments of virtue and vice, he lived and died in a ftate of the greatest uncertainty about them. Befides, his manner of

in

*Plat. Apolog. p. 21. D. E. et in Menon. p. 80. C. Cicer. Acad. 1. 1. §. 4.

Plat. Apol. Soc. p. 40. C. D. et fine.

† ld. ibid. p. 37. in fine. Cicer. Academ: 1. 2. §. 5.

inftruction was frequently ironical and farcaftick, fometimes metaphyfical and abstruse, and at other times mixed with fuch kind of fubjects, as had nothing of dignity in them, no tendency to convey any folid and useful knowledge; in fo much that he tells one, † who applied to him for wisdom, that he knew little elfe but fome fmall love affairs, and other trifling things of a like nature: not to add feveral foibles, errors and abfurdities, from which all his penetration, wisdom and philofophy were not able to exempt him.

I may add, that the number of thofe, who pretended to give any inftructions in subjects of a moral nature, was but comparatively few; whilft the generality of those, who were esteemed wife men, inftructed their disciples in things of a quite different nature; in matters of mere fpeculation, curious questions, debates about words, the elegance of fpeech, the arts of polity, and other things of a like kind, of not the leaft relation to true religion and morality, and that had nothing to do with the nature and reafons of mens acceptance with, and happiness in God; whilst none of them profeffed to be the teachers of true religion, nor pretended to have themfelves, or give to others any rational confiftent scheme of it in principle or practice. And on this account human philofophy was utterly incapable of bringing the world to the fervice and worship of the true God, by the C 2 fruits

† Platon. Theag. p. 128. B.

fruits of righteoufnefs, and a life of uniform and regular virtue; becaufe principles of religion are the beft fupports and fecurities of virtue; the intereft of which can never be maintained against the corruptions of the world, and the powerful incentives to vice that every where abound in it, without a rational fenfe of Deity, and the awes that flow from the belief of his infpection and juflice, and the equitable retributions of a future flate,

Had there been any of the celebrated philofophers, who pretended to a better scheme of religion, than what was generally received, and to a more rational way of worship, than that which univerfally prevailed, and fet up fchools for the inftruction of others in thefe particulars, yet they wanted authority to enforce it, and fuitably to engage the attention and regard of mankind. The ancient lawgivers, who fettled the ritual of worship amongst their respective nations, either had a divine authority for their religious establishments, or pretended to one, and brought others to believe they had it. Mofes fettled the forms of religion and worship amongst the Jews, by immediate warrant from God. Ly. curgus amongst the Spartans, Solon at Athens, and Numa amongst the Romans, had each his oracle, or god, or goddefs, by whom their conftitutions were faid to be confirmed, or by whofe direction they acted in the establishment of them. But the philofophers, none of them, unless we except Socrates, ever pre

tended

tended to an immediate commiffion from God; or if they did, gave no authentick proofs of their having it. They had no credentials of miracles, no demonftration of any fpirit of power to establish their characters, and give force to their inftructions. They were but men, upon a level with others, and had none of them any thing fuperior to recommend them above others, who taught a quite different scheme from themselves, but the mere weight of their reasonings, and the ftrength of their proofs; efpecially above thofe illustrious and venerable fages, who were fupposed to have founded their whole plan of the publick religion by the authority and infpiration of the gods. And however just their reasonings on this fubject might have been, yet the bulk of mankind were incompetent judges of them, could not enter into deep and learned difquifitions, not take in a long train of laboured reafoning, nor eafily pass the proper judgment between the contending difputants, debating their differences, and each striving to perplex, confound, and confure his adverfary. The world was not thus to be converted to truth and piety by the difputers of the age, nor fuperftition, idolatry and vice, to be rooted out of the mind by fuch oppofitions of science, and the contests of men; who by fophiftry and plaufible colours, might render it extremely dubious where the victory fell, obfcure the most evident truths, and make it,

morally

morally fpeaking, impoffible for the generality to discover, or embrace them.

To all that hath been faid may be added; that as the common opinions and religious ufages had the prescription of venerable antiquity, and the high reputation of a divine original, were fupported by the general authority, the univerfal practice of nations, and the almost unanimous confent of mankind, fo they were confiftent with all their favourite paffions, interefts, taftes, purfuits, amusements, pleasures, and vices. The great things, by which they imagined their gods were honoured, were fplendid temples, coftly facrifices, pompous ceremonies, games and sports, wreftlings, racings, boxings, quoits, and fuch like bodily exercifes, and trials of manhood: not to mention fome more criminal cuftoms, which cannot be named without a blufh, nor practifed without infamy. The very deities they worfhipped were polluted with the worst of crimes, patrons of vice, and very religiously invocated by thofe, who intended the villainies they refpectively patronised; and nothing was to be feared from their resentment and vengeance, when their votaries only imitated their examples, and were guilty of nothing, but what they themselves had before committed with impunity. So that the very religion of the gentiles was in truth a religion fit for men of liberty, luxury, and pleasure; a religion without piety, virtue, or morals; that confecrated the very fports of men into

acts

t