implanted this capacity and these propenfions in the very frame of his nature.

AND if we ftill extend this enquiry, we will find that religion is not more natural to man, than it is neceffary, perhaps to the being, at leaft to the good and well-being of fociety. It is evident, at least, that the wifest and best of men have been of this opinion in all ages. Hence, we find, that it has been the principal concern of law-givers and philofophers, to eftablish some form or other of religion in their respective kingdoms and common-wealths. They faw the neceffity of virtue and public fa.. to the very being of fociety, and could not help feeing that these never could be fecured without the aids of religion: For indeed, fet afide religion, fet afide the belief of an invifible power, who is the moral governor of the world, the witnefs and judge, the rewarder and punisher of men's actions, and what is there left to bind men's confciences, to restrain their paffions and appetites, and to oblige them to a rational and virtuous conduct? What can the wifeft and beft human laws effect, where there is no reverence of an oath, and what but religion, a fenfe of a ruling providence, and a firm perfuafion of a future state of rewards and punishments can give validity to an oath, which is the greateft engine of human government, and the very hinge on which it turns? For upon what is the folemnity of an oath founded, if it be not upon the firm belief of a fovereign invifible power, which is the present witness of all our actions, and who can and will reward veracity, and punish falfehood? And what fecurity could society have

for

L

for its best interefts, nay, how can we fuppofe it to fubfift or hang together, without the religion of an oath.

IF therefore it be evident to a demonftration, that the Christian religion, of all others, is the moft friendly to the interefts of society and human government; not only as it fixes the folemnity of an oath, upon the firmeft bottom, the firm belief of an invifible, omniprefent, omnifcient, moral governor of the world, the the accountableness of moral actions, a final impartial judgment, and an endless state of retribution according to the deeds done in the body; but also as it inculcates universal benevolence, purity, honesty and integrity of character and conduct, under the fevereft penalties, and by the prospect of the highest rewards; and recommends, in a particular manner, all due honour, fubmiffion and obedience to the lawful ruling powers of this world: I say, if it be evident to a demonftration, as doubtlefs it is, that this is the peculiar genius, tendency, and defign of the Chriftian religion, then it will follow, that those who wantonly endeavour to unfettle mens minds in the belief of this religion, to ridicule its doctrines, weaken its obligations, enervate its penalties and fanctions, and bring its authority into contempt and difcredit in the world, are in reality, how little foever they may defign it, enemies to civil fociety. I do indeed charitably believe that the generality of our deifts are not apprehenfive of this, and that they intend no fuch thing, and yet I think it manifeft that their principles and conduct have a direct tendency to this end.

FOR,

FOR, to be ferious, what can unbelievers defign by their writings and arguments against Christianity, but its utter extirpation out of the world? And fuppofing their arguments and raillery had their defired effect; fuppofe they could profelyte all Chriftendom to the principles of fcepticism and infidelity in one day, what would be the probable confequence? Do you really believe in your confciences, that the inhabitants of Christendom would be better men, better fubjects, better members of fociety; that they would be more pure, peaceable, chafte, honeft, virtuous and induftrious, if they were all infidels; or, that in this case, the interests of fociety would be more promoted; public peace and order better maintained; trade, commerce, arts, fciences and manufactures flourish more than they do at prefent? Are you really perfuaded in your own minds, that, if the Chriftian Bible were discarded, and Mr. Hobbes'i principles, or those of the first philosophy, adapted in its place, the Chriftian world would be the better for the change? I believe that you are not, and if fo, you act as the intentional enemies of human fociety, by endea. vouring to fink the credit and invalidate the authority of the Christian religion.

BUT that I may a little farther trace the probable confequences of fuch an innovation as you propofe! What, if by endeavouring to bring back the Chriftian world to the religion. of nature, you should reduce the greatest number of them to univerfal fcepticism, or abfolute atheism, and by bringing off their minds from the principles of Christianity, you fhould leave them without any kind of reli

gious

gious principle at all? This confequence must furely be extremely fhocking to every fober mind, and yet is it not to be apprehended? Is it not to be feared? When thinking men come once to be perfuaded of the falsehood and impofture of religion, which has been held facred and divine, not only by the multitude, but by the wifeft and best men of all ages, the truth and divinity of which is fo plaufibly recommended, not to fay powerfully demontrated, by a multitude both of external and internal proofs, fupported by the current of antiquity, hated by the vicious and profane, and loved and approved by the wise, the virtuous, and the good. I fay, when thinking nen are once brought to regard fuch a religion is an impofture, are they not like to doubt the truth of religion in general, and either ftick in the mud of univerfal fcepticifm, or fall into the ink of atheifm itfelf? I could with that experience itself did not come in to the aid of this fufpicion, and that there were not too many living examples of men, who having abandoned the principles of Chriftianity, have alfo with them loft all fenfe of moral obligation, and renounced almost every principle of natural religion! But there is ftill a farther confequence to be apprehended from fuch an innovation. As the more thinking part of men would be in danger of falling into univerfal fcepticism; or, which is but a step lower, into Epicurean atheism, the more vulgar and ignorant herd of mankind would be in equal danger of falling gradually into the groffeft idolatry and fuperftition. It has been before obferved, that mankind are naturally

I

prone

prone to religion, and it may here be added, that none are more liable to its impreffions than the more plain and fimple part of the species, who lead a country life, follow ruftic employments, and have the grand and majestic scenes of nature continually before them: These having the great machinery of the universe always under their eye, and having but few avocations from the contemplation of it, by the giddy pleasures, hurry and intrigue of active life, and having their minds thereby filled with folemn thoughts of that great and invifible power which actuates the whole, form the most religious and devout, although perhaps the moft fuperftitious part of every nation. Now let us fuppofe, for once, that the light of Christianity was wholly extinct in Chriftendom, and what would be the probable consequence with regard to this party of men? It is evident, that their natural propenfity to religion would still remain. The pure religion

of nature would be found too fubtile and abstracted for their groffer minds, and therefore, having no fure guide to their thoughts, no leader of their devotions, no stated folemn worship for their religious inftruction, and to keep alive the principles of monotheism, and of a fpiritual service in their fouls, they must of courfe gradually fink into the groffeft ignorance, fuperftition and idolatry, and return to the deteftible and ridiculous polytheism of ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome; and the fabulous age of nymphs, fatyrs, genii, heroes, idolatrous priefts and inhuman facrifices, would in all probability return again.

AND