they had no such thing as is called natural religion. But we rest not here. It may be thought that we demand too much when we call for a nation possessing this knowledge. Be it so; we are well aware that such a nation cannot be found. But let us waive our demand. I ask, then, when, where, and by whom, were these discoveries made? I do not mean by the vulgar, but by philosophers, who professedly sought after the truth; and some of whom were as close thinkers, as accurate reasoners, as patient and candid investigators, as the world ever saw. Bacon himself did not surpass Aristotle in natural sagacity, in strength of mind, in acuteness, in comprehension. Yet upon the simplest article of natural religion, the very being of a God, there were the most strange varieties of sentiment among them. Let Cicero save us the trouble of further detail: "Qui vero," says he, in his treatise De Natura Deorum, "Qui vero Deos esse dixerunt, tanta sunt in varietate ac dissentione, ut eorum molestum sit dinumerare sententias." (De Nat. Deor. page 6, Dav. 1744.) And, indeed, whoever shall be at the trouble of reading the treatise now quoted, will meet with such confusion, conjectures, contradiction-such a chaos of absurdities and nonsense on points of primary importance, as will sicken him to ulterior pursuit, and fill his heart with sadness and sorrow.

Now these were not the whims and guesses of the illiterate among the heathen, but the

grave conclusions of their wisest men; and well justifies the declaration of Paul, that professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.

It must be granted, however, that occasionally they dropped great expressions when speaking of the Divinity and of virtue. But here we must be on our guard against a very natural and dangerous illusion.

We, who have been brought up and educated in a Christian land, have imbibed all our ideas from the Bible, or those who have read and studied it. Those ideas are so familiar to our minds, and so deeply impressed upon them, that no art nor industry could make us for a moment, even when children, believe in the truth, for example, of Ovid's Metamorphoses, or in the existence of Homer's gods. Now, when we fall in with noble and lofty expressions of divine things among the Pagan writers, or with the same terms concerning the moral virtues as are in use among ourselves, we insensibly carry our own thoughts with us, and attribute them to the heathen, supposing that they meant the same thing with ourselves, whereas nothing can be farther from the fact. A little explanation, were it possible, would convince us that we had scarcely an idea in common with them.

Such, then, was the state of their theology among their best informed and most virtuous teachers. There was not a man among them,

no, not one man, who had any correct or consistent opinions, far less principles, upon those things which concern our most serious duties, our eternal blessedness.

The conclusion is plain. It is absurd to maintain that every man, in all ages and circumstances, can do, what no man, in any age or circumstances, has actually done. Revelation, therefore, is simply necessary, not for the vulgar, the illiterate mass only, but also for the wise, the cultivated, the most advanced philosophers, the greatest proficients in human knowledge.

Having seen that the powers of human reason never did, in fact, make the least progress in the discovery of the most necessary truths-that the world by wisdom never knew God-let us now proceed,

II. To inquire, à priori, from the nature of the human faculties, what they can do in this

matter.

It is no doubt very easy for those, who have all their lives breathed the atmosphere of revelation, to demonstrate the being and many glorious excellencies of the First Cause, and to discourse learnedly and convincingly of his providence, of the dependence of all things upon him, upon the duty of worshiping him, the happiness of enjoying his favor, &c., from merely rational principles. All this appears to them quite plain, and whoever shall dispute it to be

hardly in the sober exercise of his reason. Well, we have no question but that these truths are perfectly reasonable, as all truth must be in the nature of things. But how, we may ask, did they come by their means of demonstration? and how has it happened that all these vigorous demonstrators have flourished in Christian lands, and not a single one of them where Christianity is unknown? It is the light of divine revelation that has shone upon their darkness, and caused them to see clearly where all was once the blackest midnight; and they have, with true philosophical gratitude, bedecked their reason with garlands stolen from the tree of life, and given themselves credit for the gift of God. This plagiarism runs manifestly through a Deistical book, formerly of some noise and note, though now nearly forgotten, (as all such books will be sooner or later,) entitled, "Christianity as old as the creation." Many things are perfectly evident to our understanding when once they are pointed out, which, if left to ourselves, would never have come into our minds.

Let us begin with interrogating reason concerning God and his attributes; though here we must be somewhat at a loss; for really, human reason is so much improved by the light of the gospel, that it is very difficult to distinguish her answers from those of the superior power speaking in her and through her. But if, with all this

1

high advantage, she be caught tripping, we may easily conceive how completely her mouth would be stopped in the deprivation of all supernatural aid.

It is supposed to be one of the simplest and most obvious truths of natural religion, that there is but one God, the Creator and Governor of all things. If you demand of her advocate how he came by this knowledge, he will reply, that from the unity of design in the works of creation, common sense will of itself infer the unity of their Author. But I am not to be so easily satisfied. I ask farther, how do you know this unity of design? Is it not strange that a thing so very obvious should have escaped the notice of the most acute observers for four thousand years? Was there no common sense in the world during all that time? But it must be left for men since the Christian era to perceive this unity? Evident to you it may be; but why was it not evident to Zoroaster, to Thales, to Socrates, to Aristotle, to Plato? They certainly either did not perceive it, or at least did not make this deduction of common sense from it.

Let us, however, consider whether, granting the premises, the inference follows as a matter of course. Does common sense tell me, or any one else, that several deities may not with perfect harmony concur in one and the same design, VOL. III. 53