which hath lately stept in; which daily, I may say, thunders even in the writings of our historians; and which, by encouraging, among other unworthy licences, an indifference concerning character and conduct, levels all moral distinctions, unnerves the indignation of the mind against vice, and damps the enthusiasm of its reverence for virtue. History ought always, surely, to assume the tone of exulting justice, especially, when she immolates, at the shrine of oppressed virtue, and violated right, a wretched offering, the memory of towering wickedness.*

Directed to good ends, brilliant writings are like the lights hung in a pharos, to guide poor mariners safe through a tempestuous sea. But, directed to impiety, and consequent immorality, they shine only to betray, and lead men unsuspectingly to destruction. By arguments, indeed, really strong against superstition, enthusiasm, and priestcraft, freethinkers recommend themselves to ingenuous minds, by whom imposition is held in abhorrence. And here it would be an honour to themselves, and a service to mankind, were they to stop. But an unbridled love of singularity, pushes them on; and they fatally never advert to the mischiefs they occasion, while they impose upon

* Eng. Rev.

upon incapacity, and give a sanction to licentiousness in minds ungoverned by reflection,unguided by reason and experience.

But, it is asked, if the religion of Christ had been literally dictated by the spirit of God, and supported by miracles, why is it not still proved to us by a like spirit of God, and reconfirmed to us by a repetition of miracles? And why are not its mysteries made as clear to our conviction, as they were to the conviction of the Apostles? To such questions, as I am but a common man, I can give but a common answer. The God of nature, acts without either iny privity or concurrence, and as to him seemeth best. But at the same time, it does not appear to me at all more extraordinary, that the Creator of all things should conceal from me, who am ignorant of causation in every thing, those supernatural proofs of Christianity which are demanded, than it is that he should withhold from me the manifestation of those proofs, by which the various parts of terrestrial nature are attracted and linked together. The fruits of the earth, are wholesome and necessary to our being. Yet, I am ignorant of what they were in the beginning. With their beauty and their salubrious properties, I am, indeed, acquainted. But, God D 3 would

would be under the necessity of working miracles, to make fully known to me their prin

ciples and their causes. I see in them effects, but I see nothing else; yet such effects as even Hume would not venture to deny, though his experience could not carry him to their causes. May it not, therefore, be sufficient for us to have the blessings of Christianity, as we have many other blessings, by transmission. Once planted and flourishing, what need of fruitlessly recurring to the original germ? Speaking even from analogy, may not the spirit be as incomprehensibly nourished as the body? When effects are good, when they have stood the test of ages, and baffled even the rancour of persecution; when they have diffused universal and unequivocal happiness, even in defiance of all the malice of infidelity, why should we not be satisfied, and rest our comfort and our belief, in the grateful acknowledgment of an heavenly descent and a divine original?

It is not my design here to enter into an examination of miracles, as relative to Christianity, or of such other matters as have, do, and most probably will continue to cause differences of opinion. For instance, whether the Son was çonsubstantial, oμosios or of the same nature with the Father; or whether he was, oμs, of a similar nature to the Father. Some

have

have considered Christ, you will remember, simply as a man, the son of Joseph and Mary, the Messiah of the Jews; others as a super-angelic spirit, either superadded to the miraculously incarnate man, or assuming only the appearance of one; and others, that he consisted of a body and soul, like other men, but had superadded the very Logos of the Supreme Being, a principle, uncreated, and properly divine. My presumption, however, does not lead me so far as to determine on such questions, or to hazard an opinion of what specific nature, or natures, Christ was. It is my best interest, I conceive, to aim only at the comprehension of what he did, and what he taught, either as the Son, the Prophet, or the Messenger from God.

The most sagacious of the first Christian theologians, the learned Athanasius himself, has candidly confessed, whenever he forced his understanding to meditate on the divinity of the Logos, his toilsome and unavailing efforts recoiled on themselves; that the more he thought, the less he comprehended; and the more he wrote, the less capable was he of expressing his thoughts. The controversy about the consubstantiality of the Father and the Son was of the same incomprehensible nature. Yet, this doctrine,

D4

doctrine, though established by the council of Nice, was dissented from, and much rigour was used against those who were in consequence of it denominated Heretics.

$

Thus, while they were contented, says a learned writer, with the words of Scripture, that Christ was of God, or from God, ex Oɛ, there was no division on the question; but when they added to this, by way of explanation, and required it to be believed, that he was en Tys is 78 Oɛ8, of or from the substance of God, they divided into sects, and murdered one another. When they attempted to explain what they meant by the words, out of the substance of God, they subdivided. And this must always be inevitably the effect of the imposition of human comments, on disputed texts. How absurd is it, indeed, to expect an union of opinion upon every passage, or upon every letter! When Christ preached to the common people, does he appear to have expected them to have had clear conceptions on metaphysical subjects, or only to be equal to the understanding of plain practical truths ?*

1

It is not the privilege of the human intellect, to be the judge of the causes, or the effects of

Taylor's Apology of Ben. Mordecai,

the