t'H£ PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 DICTIONARY 
 
 FOR THE POCKET. 
 
 Written in French by 
 
 A SOCIETY of MEN of LETTER S* 
 
 Afd Trinflsted into English from 
 
 The laft Geneva Edition, corre&ed by the Authors. 
 
 WITH NOTES. 
 
 containing 
 
 A Refut Ation of fuch Pafiages as are any way 
 exceptionable in regard to Religion. 
 
 & * & 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 Printed for T h o m a s B i o w tr> 
 M.DCC.LXV. 
 
— _ 
 
advertisement, 
 
 CT* H E great noife 'which the following work 
 has made in foreign parts, on account of the 
 author s freedom in regard to matters of religion , 
 may probably occafion fome people to be offended 
 with the publication of it in Englijh. But an 
 exception of this kind muff furely be the effect of 
 prejudice, and is impoffible to be defended upon 
 the principles of reafon and philofophy. True 
 religion is not afraid oj bearing the JlnBeff exa- 
 mination ; the attacks of inf dels, tnffead oj 
 weakening her authority , rather contribute to 
 her triumphs. She is ever ready to hear what 
 her adverfaries have to oppofe ; and calmly en- 
 deavours to refute their errors. This is a 
 maxim agreeable to found fenfe, and the contrary 
 doBrine is calculated only for the meridian of the 
 inquifftion. 
 
 It muff be acknowledged, however, that in 
 writings of this fort, fome regard ought to be 
 Jhewn to the illiterate and the vulgar ; neither is 
 it fit that their minds Jhould be unhinged in their 
 ajfent to the true religion. This indulgence to the 
 Public is Jhewn in the following tranfiation, which 
 has been undertaken chiefly to prevent the work 
 from being rendered into Englijh by fome other 
 hand, who would perhaps have been glad of the 
 opportunity of fpreading its errors. Care has 
 therefore been taken to make proper flriffiures on 
 

 I 
 
 Advertisement. 
 fuch pafages as are moji exceptionable , and even 
 to refute at large fome articles which may he 
 fufpeBed to have a dangerous tendency . . • _ 
 
 Thefe are blemijhes , which, as a judicious cri- 
 tic obferves * are capable of disfiguring, but nottf 
 intirely defraying the merit oj this work. Tho 
 cur author is no divine y he is a poet, an hiftorian , 
 a philofopher, and in many refpeBs a moji agree- 
 able writer. In fuels a multiplicity oj articles 
 he has an opportunity of difplaying not only his 
 wit and humour, but likewife a great jund of 
 erudition. Where he does not intermeddle with 
 religion, he is very entertaining , and oftentimes 
 infiruBive. Even when writing on religious 
 rnatters, he is not always deferving of cenfure ; 
 for infiance, his article of toleration contains ex- 
 cellent doBrine, and Jhews him to be endowed 
 with good-nature and humanity. ‘This appears 
 even in the fingularity of many of his notions, 
 which were owing to the favourable opinion hi 
 entertains of mankind. lie thinks that we are 
 not naturally prone to vice', that virtue confifis 
 only in doing good to our neighbour ; that neither 
 the Greeks nor Romans were idolaters ; opinions, 
 which, however erroneous, are an indication oj 
 his benevolent difpofition. 
 
 * See Critical Review, December 1764, 
 
A PHI L OSO P HI C A L 
 
 DICTIONARY. 
 
 ABRAHAM. 
 
 A BRAHAM is a name famous in Afia Minor 
 and Arabia, like Thaut among the Egyp- 
 tians, the firft Zoroafter in Perlia, Hercules 
 in Greece, Orpheus in Thracia, Odin among the 
 Northern Nations, and many others, known rather 
 by their celebrity than by any authentic hiftory. 
 — Here I fpeak only of prophane hiftory ; for as 
 to that of the Jews, our teachers and our ene- 
 mies, whom we believe and deteft at the fame 
 time, the hiftory of this people having manifeftly 
 been written by the Holy Ghoft, we have for it 
 all the fentiments we ought. We here addrefs 
 ourfelves only to the Arabs, who boaft of being 
 defcended from Abraham by llhmael, and believe 
 that this patriarch built Mecca, and that he died in 
 this city. The truth is, that llhmael’s progeny 
 has been favoured by God infinitely more than 
 that of Jacob. Both races, indeed, have pro- 
 duced robbers, but the Arabian robbers have pro- 
 digioufiy furpafted the Jewifli. Jacob’s defcend- 
 
 B ants 
 
2 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 ants conquered only a very {mall country, and thaf 
 they afterwards loft •, whereas the defendants of 
 Ifhmael have extended their conquefts ova a part 
 of Europe, Afia, and Africa, have founded^ em- 
 pire greater than the Romans, and have driven 
 Jews from thofc holes of theirs, which they calle 
 
 the Land of Promife. f 
 
 To judge of things only by the inftanccs of 
 modern hiftories, it is not likely that Abraham 
 fhould have been the father of two nations o very 
 different : we are told that he was born in Chaldea, 
 the fon of a poor pottery who iubfifted by making 
 little earthen idols. Now how fhould this potter » 
 fon go and found Mecca, at the diftance of ‘three 
 hundred leagues, and over impracticable defarts - 
 If he was a conqueror, he certainly would have 
 bent his arms againfi: the fine country of A - 
 Aria . and if only a poor man, as reprelented to 
 us, he could hardly found kingdoms in foreign 
 parts, his only monarchy muff: have been his 
 
 home. „ c 
 
 Genefis makes him feventy-five years of age 
 when he left the country of Haran, after the 
 death of his father Terah the potter. But the 
 fame book fays, that Terah having begotten Abra- 
 ham in his feventieth year, he lived to the age or 
 two hundred and five years (A), and that Abraham 
 
 did 
 
 (A) M. Voltaire is ready to ftart objections, but never of- 
 fers to give any lolution. The fcripture lays, Gen. xi. that 
 «« Terah, after having lived feventy years, begot Abraham r 
 « Nachor, and Haran.” Now though Abraham be named 
 firft, it is not certain that he was the eldefl of the three : on 
 the contrary, it feems probable, that he was not born in the 
 feventieth year of Terah ; becaufe it is exprefsly faid, in the 
 following chapter, that Abraham going from Haran imme- 
 diately after the death of his father, who departed this life a t 
 
 the 
 
DICTIONARY. 3 
 
 did not leave Haran till after his father’s deceafe : 
 thus from Genefis itfelf it is clear, that Abraham, 
 when he left Mefopotamia, was an hundred and 
 thirty five years of age •, and he only went from 
 one idolatrous country to another, called Sichem 
 in Paleftine. And wherefore did he go thither ? 
 why leave Euphrates’ fertile banks for fo rocky, 
 fo barren (B) a country, as that of Sichem, and 
 withal fo remote ? The Chaldean tongue muft 
 have been very different from that of Sichem, nei- 
 ther was it a trading place. Sichem is above an 
 hundred leagues from Chaldea, and with many de- 
 farts to pafs through : but God ordered him on 
 % this journey, intending to fhew him the country 
 
 the age of 205 years, was then only feventy-five years old. 
 The confequence is, that Abraham was bom in the 130th 
 year of the life of Terah, and not in the feventieth : fo that 
 Terah having begun to have children in the feventieth year of 
 his life, Haran and Nachor muft neceflarily have been born 
 before Abraham : therefore Abraham departed from Karari 
 in Mefopotamia, not in the 135th, but in the 75th year of 
 his age. 
 
 (B) The author, upon all occafions, reprefents the country 
 of Paleftine as a barren difagreeable fpot, and not at all an- 
 fwering the defcription in Holy Writ, where it is called a 
 Land tlowing with Milk and Honey. But we may obferve, with 
 the learned Dr. Shaw, that, were the Holy Land fo well peopled 
 and cultivated at prefent as in former times, it would ftill be 
 more fruitful than the very beft part of Syria and Phoenice. 
 The barrennefs or fcarcity, which fome authors, either ig- 
 norantly or malicioufly, complain of, does not proceed front 
 the incapacity or natural unfruitful nefs of the country, but 
 from the want of inhabitants, and the great averfion there is 
 to labour and induftry in thofe few who poflefs it: otherwife 
 the land is ftill capable of affording its neighbours the like 
 fuppliesof corn and oil* which it is known to have done in the 
 time of Solomon. Thus there is no forming an idea of its 
 antient flourifhing ftate from its prefent barren condition, 
 which is entirely owing to the want of culture* 
 
 B 2 
 
 which 4 
 
4 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 which his iflue were to pofiefs many centuries after 
 him. The reafons of fuch a journey are what the 
 human mind can never conceive (C). 
 
 No fooner has he reached the little rocky coun- 
 try of Sichem, than a famine obliges him as halti- 
 ly to decamp, and he goes away to Egypt, in queft 
 of afubfiftence. Memphis lies two hundred leagues 
 from Sichem •, now is it natural to go for corn io 
 very far, and where one knows nothing of the 
 tongue ? Thefe are odd peregrinations for a man 
 
 near an hundred and forty years old. 
 
 With him he brings to Memphis his wife Sarah, 
 who, in age, was little more than a child to him, 
 being only in her fixty-fifth year. As lhe had a 
 great fhare of beauty, he was for turning it to ac- 
 count : make as if you were only my lifter, faid 
 he to her, that I may have kindnefs (hewn to me 
 for your fake. He rather ihould have faid to her. 
 Make as if you were my daughter. — The king be- 
 came fmitten with young Sarah, and gave her 
 fham brother abundance of fheep, oxen, he afles, 
 fhe afles, camels, and man fervants* and maid fer- 
 vants ; a proof that Egypt, even then, was a very 
 powerful and well policed, and confequently a ve- 
 ry antient kingdom •, and that brothers coming to 
 make a tendre of their filter to the kings of Mem- 
 phis were magnificently rewarded. 
 
 Young Sarah had, according to fcripture, reach- 
 ed her ninetieth year, when God promifed her that 
 Abraham, then full an hundred and fixty, Ihould 
 get her with child within the twelvemonth. 
 
 - — (C) One would imagine our author had never heard of 
 fuch a memorable nera as “ The Call of Abraham,” when 
 this holy man was made choice of to be the Hock and father 
 of all believers- 
 
 Abraham, 
 
DICTIONARY. 5 
 
 Abraham, being fond of travelling, went into 
 the frightful wildernefs of Kadefh, with his preg- 
 nant wife, who, it ieems, was ftill fo young and 
 pretty, as to kindle in a king of this wildernefs the 
 like palTion which the Egyptian monarch had felt 
 for her. The Father of the Faithful here enjoined 
 her the fame lie as in Egypt : and thus his wife, 
 palling for his filler, got more cattle and fervants ; 
 fo thatSarah turned out noinconfiderable fortune to 
 him. Commentators having written a prodigious 
 number of volumes to jullify Abraham’s con- 
 duct (D), and reconcile chronology, to thole com- 
 mentaries we mull refer the reader, d hey are 
 all the works of men of great parts and fagacity, 
 confummate metaphyficians, void of all prepoflet- 
 fion, and the fartheft in the world from any thing 
 of pedantry. 
 
 ANGEL. 
 
 A NGEL, in Greek a Messenger ; it matters 
 little to be informed that the Perfians had 
 their Peries, the Hebrews their Malacs, and the 
 Greeks their Demonoi'. 
 
 But what may, perhaps, be more interefting to 
 know is, that the fuppolition of intermediate be- 
 ings between the Deity and us, prevailed among 
 the firft men •, thefe are the demons and genii 
 feigned by antiquity ; man has always made the 
 
 (D) There is no neceflity for juftifying Abraham’s conduct: 
 though Sarah might have been Abraham’s filter by the father's 
 fide, and confequently the exprefiion be true ; yet it was am- 
 biguous, and calculated for deception, and therefore cannot 
 be juftified. Abraham, though father of the faithful, was 
 fubjedt to human infirmities, and here, in particular, he be- 
 trayed his diftrult of God’s providence. 
 
 B 3 gods 
 
6 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 cods in his own likenefs. As princes were feen 
 to fignify their orders by mefifengers, the Deity of 
 courle alfo difpatches couriers. Mercury and 
 Iris were celeftial couriers and mefiengers. 
 
 The Hebrews, that choien people, under the 
 immediate guidance of the Deity itfelf, at firfl gave 
 no names to the angels whom God, after lbme 
 time, was pleafed to fend to them *, but, during 
 their captivity in Babylon, they borrowed the 
 names ufed by the Chaldeans. The firft word 
 we hear of Michael and Gabriel is in Daniel, then 
 a Have among thofe people. Tobias, a Jew, who 
 lived at Nineveh, knew the Angel Raphael, who 
 took a journey with his fon, to help him in getting 
 a fum of money due to him by Gabel, likewife a 
 Jew. 
 
 In the Jewifh laws, i. e. in Leviticus and Deu- 
 teronomy, not the leaft mention is made of the ex- 
 igence of angels, much lefs of worfhipping them ; 
 accordingly the Sadducees believed no fuch thing. 
 
 But in the hiftories of the Jews they frequently 
 occur; thefe angels were corporeal, and with wings 
 at their back, as the Mercury of the Pagans had 
 at his heels. Sometimes they concealed their 
 wings under their apparel. Bodies they furely 
 had, for they ate and drank; and the inhabitants of 
 Sodom were for abufing the angels who had come 
 on a viiit to Lot. 
 
 The antient Jewifh tradition, according to Ben 
 Maimon, makes ten degrees or orders of angels, 
 i. The Chaios Acodefh, pure, holy. 2. The Ofa- 
 mins, rapid. 3. The Oralim, the ftrong. 4. The 
 Chafmalim, the flames. 5. The Seraphim, fparks. 
 
 6. The Malachim, angels, mefiengers, deputies. 
 
 7. The Eloim, the. gods, or judges. 8. The 
 Ben Eloim, children of the gods. 9. Cherubim, 
 images. 10; Ychim, the animated. 
 
 The 
 
DICTIONARY. 7 
 
 The hiftory of the fall of the angels is not to be 
 met with in the books of Mofes •, the firft word of 
 it is in the prophet Ifaiah, who, in a divine rapture, 
 calls out to the king of Babylon, “ What is become 
 of the exafter of tributes ? the fir-trees and cedars 
 rejoice at thy overthrow : how art thou fallen from 
 heaven, O Helel, thou morning ftar?” ThisHE- 
 lel has been rendered by the Latin word Lucifer; 
 the appellation of Lucifer has afterwards been al- 
 legorically transferred to the prince of the angels 
 who dared to make war in heaven. And laftly, 
 this name, originally fignifying Phofphorus, and 
 the dawn of day, is come to denote the devil. 
 
 The Chriftian religion is founded on the fall of 
 the angels : the rebels were tumbled down from 
 the lpheres of blifs into hell, in the center of the 
 earth, and became devils. A devil tempted Eve 
 under the figure of a ferpent, and brought damna- 
 tion upon mankind, till Jefus came to deliver 
 them, triumphing over the devil, who, however, 
 ftill tempts us. Yet is this fundamental tradition 
 to be found only in the apocryphal book of 
 Noah (E), and there quite differently from the re- 
 ceived traditions. 
 
 St. Auftin, in his hundred and ninth letter, ex- 
 prefsly attributes ethereal or very thin bodies both 
 
 (E) If our author means by fundamental tradition the 
 ** Fall of the angels,” as he teems to do, he is certainly mis- 
 taken when he fay sit is to be found only in the apocryphal book 
 of Noah : for in the 2d of St.Peter, c. ii. ver. 4. it is exprefs- 
 ly faid, “ For if God ipared not the angels that finned, but 
 « caft them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of 
 “ darknefs.” The like we find in the epiftle of St. Jude, ver. 
 6. “ And the angels, which kept not their firft eftate, but left 
 “ their own habitation, he hath referved in everlafting chains 
 " under darknefs.” 
 
 B 4 
 
 to 
 
S A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 to good and bad angels. Pope Gregory II. has re- 
 duced the ten degrees of Jewiffi angels to nine 
 choirs, to nine hierarchies or orders. T. hefe are 
 the Seraphim, the Cherubim, Thrones, Domini- 
 ons, Virtues, Powers, Archangels, and laftly, the 
 Angels, from whom the other eight hierarchies 
 receive their appellation. 
 
 The Jews had in the temple two cherubim, each 
 with two heads, one of an ox, the other of an ea- 
 gle, with fix wings : but for fome time pad they 
 have been painted as a flying head, with two little 
 wings under the ears, as angels and archangels are 
 tinder the figure of young perlons, with two wings 
 at their back. As to the thrones and dominions, 
 the pencil has not yet prefumed to meddle with 
 them. 
 
 St. Thomas, queftion 1 1 8, article 2, fays, 1 hat 
 the thrones are as near to God as the cherubim and 
 ieraphim, becaufe it is on them that God fits. Sco- 
 tus has computed the angels to amount to a thou- 
 iand millions. The antient mythology of good 
 and bad genii having fpread itfelf into Greece, and 
 I'o on to Rome, it has there been fanftified, and to 
 every man has been affigned a good and evil an- 
 gel ; 'one afllfting him, and the other annoying 
 him, from his cradle to his coffin : but, whether 
 thefe good and evil angels continually ffiift ftations 
 from one to another, or whether they are relieved 
 by others of their order, is not yet known. Here- 
 upon St. Thomas’s Summary of Divinity may be 
 con ful ted. 
 
 Neither is it exactly known, where the angels 
 keep themfelves, whether in the air, the void, or 
 the planets j this God has thought fit to conceal 
 from us. 
 
 ANTHRQ- 
 
T HAT there have been Anthropophagi, or 
 man-eaters, is but too true •, fuch were found in 
 America, and there may be fomedi l; and injantient 
 time it was not the Cyclops alone who fometimes fed 
 upon human flefli. Juvenal relates, that among 
 the Egyptians, that people fo famous for its laws, 
 fo wile, and fo very devout as to worlhip crocodiles 
 and onions, the Tintirites ate one of their enemies 
 who had fallen into their hands. A nd this is not a 
 tale on hear-fay : this inhuman aft was committed 
 almoft under his eyes, he being then in Egypt, 
 and but & little way from Tintira. He farther 
 quotes the Gafcons and the Sagontines, who ufed to 
 eat their countrymen. 
 
 In 1725, four Miffiffippi favages were brought 
 to Fontainbleau, where I had the honour of con- 
 verfing with them. One being a lady of the coun- 
 try,' I took the liberty to afk her, whether Ihe had 
 ever eaten men, to which, with an unconcerned 
 franknefs, die anfwered in the affirmative. On my 
 appearing fomething ffiocked, fhe exculed herfelf, 
 faying, that it was better, after killing an enemy, 
 to eat him, than to leave him to be devoured by 
 beads, and that conquerors deferved the preference. 
 We in pitched battles or encounters kill our neigh- 
 bours, and, for a mod fcanty hire, prepare a mod 
 plentiful meal for ravens and worms. Herein it is 
 that lies the horror, here is the guilt : what fignifies 
 it to a dead man being eaten by a foldier,or a crow, 
 or a dog ? 
 
 We drew a greater refpeft to the dead than the 
 living j but both claim our regard. The policed 
 
,o A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 nations, as they are called, were in the right not to 
 fpit their enemies, as from eating neighbours they 
 would foon come to eat countrymen, by which the 
 focial virtues would be reduced to alow ebb. But 
 the policed nations, far from having been always 
 fo, were, for a long time, wild and favage, and 
 amidft the multitude of revolutions in this globe, 
 the human race has been fometimes very numerous, 
 fometimes very thin. The prefent cafe of the ele- 
 phants, lions, and tygers, whofe fpecies are very 
 much decrealed, has been that of man. In times, 
 when a country was bare of inhabitants, they lived 
 chiefly by hunting -, fcarce any other arts or trades 
 were known among them j and the cuftom of feed- 
 ing on what they had killed, almoft naturally led 
 them to treat their enemies like their deer and 
 boars. The facrifice of human vi&ims was the 
 effect of fuperrtition, the eating them was owing 
 to necefiity. 
 
 Which is the greater crime, to hold a folemn af- 
 fembly, in order to plunge a knife, by way of ho- 
 nouring the Deity, into the heart of a beautiful 
 o-iri, adorned with fillets and ribbons ; or to pick 
 the bones of an ugly fellow, whom we have killed, 
 in our own defence ? 
 
 Yet we have more ir.flances of facrificing girls 
 and boys, than of eating them -, there is fcarce a 
 known nation where fuch facrifices have not ob- 
 tained. Among the Jews it was called the Ana- 
 thema this was a real facrifice, and the 27th chap- 
 ter of Leviticus enjoins not to i'pare the fouls which 
 have been devoted : but in no place are they or- 
 dered to eat them -, they are only threatened with 
 it -, and Mofes, as we have feen, fays to the Jews, 
 that if they fail in obferving his ceremonies, they 
 fhall not only be plagued with the itch, but that 
 
 mothers 
 
II 
 
 DICTIONARY. 
 
 mothers (hall eat their children (F). In Ezekiel’* 
 time, indeed, the eating of human flefti muft have 
 been common among the Jews, as he foretels 
 them in chap, xxxix. That God will give them not 
 only to eat the horfes of their enemies, but even 
 the riders, and the other great warriors. This is 
 clear and pofitive (G) •, and indeed why might not 
 the Jews have been man-eaters, fince this only was 
 wanting to render the chofen people of God the 
 moft abominable upon earth. 
 
 I have read, in the anecdotes of the hiftory ofEng- 
 land, in Cromwell’s time, of a woman who kept a 
 tallow-chandler’s Ihop at Dublin, whofe candles were 
 remarkably good, and made of the fat ofEnglifhmen. 
 Some time after one of her cuftomers complaining 
 that her candles were not fo good as ufual, why, faid 
 fhe, for this month paft I have had few or no Eng- 
 lifhmen. I would fain know who was moft guilty, 
 they who murdered the Englifh, or this woman 
 who made fuch good candles of their tallow ? 
 
 (F) This is clonounced as a curfe, that the mothers (hall 
 eat their children through extreme hunger. 
 
 (G) This is a ftrange perverfion of Ezekiel : the chapter 
 
 above-mentioned contains God’s judgment upon Gog, Ifrael’s 
 vi&ory, and the feaft of the fowls. The prophet foretels a 
 complete victory over Gog, his princes, and his army. The 
 field where they are (lain is compared to a table of entertain- 
 ment, and the feathered fowls and beafts of the field are in- 
 vited to partake of it. “ Come and gather yourfelves to my 
 facrifice, ye fhall eat the ftefh of the mighty, and drink the 
 blood of the princes of the earth ; ye fhall be filled at my ta- 
 ble with horfes and chariots,” that is, with horfemeji and thofe 
 who ride in chariots. Is this a proof, that the eating of hu- 
 man flefh was common among the Jews, becaufe, after the 
 Daughter of an enemy, their dead bodies were expoled to the 
 feathered fowls and beafts of the field? 
 
 APIS. 
 
12 
 
 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 APIS. 
 
 W AS it as a god, as a fymbol, or as an ox, that 
 Apis was worshipped at Memphis ? I am 
 inclined to think that it was as a god by the fanatics, 
 and only as a mere fymbol by the wife, whilft the 
 Stupid people worfhipped the ox. Was it well in 
 Cambyles, when he had conquered Egypt, to kill 
 this ox with his own hands ? why not ? He gave 
 the weak to fee, that their god might be roafted, 
 and nature not ftir a finger to revenge fuch a facri- 
 lege. The Egyptians have been greatly cried up j 
 but I, for my part, Scarce know a more contempti- 
 ble people. There muft ever have been both in 
 their temper and government, fome radical vice, 
 by which they have been kept in a perpetual fervi- 
 tude. I allow that in thofe times of which we have 
 Scarce any knowledge, they over-ran the earth, but 
 fince the hiftorical ages, they have been, Subdued 
 by all who thought it worth their while •, by the 
 Afiyrians, the Perfians, the Greeks, the Romans, 
 the Arabians, the Mamelucs, the Turks j in fhort, 
 by every body except our Croises, thefe being 
 more imprudent than the Egyptians were coward- 
 ly. It was the corps of Mamelucs which defeated 
 the French. Perhaps there are but two tolerable 
 things in this nation •, the firft, a freedom of con- 
 science ; they who worfhipped an ox never com- 
 pelling thofe who worfhipped a monkey to change 
 their religion ; the fecond, the hatching of chick- 
 ens in ovens. 
 
 We have many pompous accounts of their py- 
 ramids ; but thefe very pyramids are monuments 
 of their Slavery, for the whole nation muft have 
 been made to work on them, otherwife fuch 
 
 unwieldy 
 
DICTIONARY. 13 
 
 unwieldy maffes could never have been finilhed. 
 And what is the ufe of them ? Why, forfooth, 
 in a little room within them is kept the mummy 
 of fome prince or governor, which his foul is, 
 at the term of a thoufand years, to reanimate. 
 But if they expected this refurre&ion of the bo- 
 dies, why take out the brain before embalming 
 them ? Were the Egyptians to rife again without 
 brains ? 
 
 The A P O C A L Y P S E. 
 
 J USTIN MARTYR, who wrote in the year 
 170 of our fera, is the firft that mentions the 
 Apocalypfe, attributing it, in his Dialogue with 
 Tryphon, to the apoftle John the Evangelift. 
 This Jew alks him, whether he does not believe 
 that Jerufalem is one day to be reftored in all its 
 former fplendor ? Juftin anfwers him that it is the 
 belief of all Chriftians who have a right way of 
 thinking. “ There was,” fays he, “ among us a 
 “ refpedtable perfon named John, one of Jefus’s 
 “ twelve apoftjes 5 he has foretold that the faith- 
 “ ful lhall dwell a thoufand years in Jerufalem.” 
 The thoufand years reign went current a long 
 time among the Chriftians, and this period was 
 in great repute among the Gentiles. At the end 
 of a thoufand years the fouls of the Egyptians re- 
 turned into their bodies •, the fouls in V irgil’s pur- 
 gatory underwent a purification for the fame fpace 
 of time, et mille per annos. The Millenarian 
 new Jerufalem was to have twelve gates, in remem- 
 brance of the twelve apoftles, the form fquare, the 
 length, breadth, and heighth, twelve thoufand 
 ftades, that -is five hundred leagues ; l'o that the 
 houfes muft have been five hundred leagues 
 high : this could not but make it to thofe living 
 
14 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 in the upper ftory fomething troublefome : but 
 however, this is what the Apocalypfe fays (L), 
 
 chap. xxi. , , 
 
 Though Juftin be the firft who attributes the 
 Apocalypfe to St. John, fome perfons difallow his 
 teftimony, feeing, in the fame Dialogue with the 
 Jew Tryphon, he fays that, according to the apof- 
 tle’s narrative, at Jefus Chrift’s going down into 
 Jordan, the waters of that river boiled, and were 
 all in a flame •, yet not a jot of this is to be found 
 in the apoftolic writings. 
 
 The fame St. Juftin confidently cites the oracles 
 of the Sybils, and farther pretends to have feen 
 the remains of the little houfes in the Pharos of 
 Egypt, where the feventy-two interpreters were 
 fhut up in Herod’s time. For fuch an aflertion 
 the author feems to have been himfelf a proper 
 l'ubjeft for confinement. 
 
 St. Irenaeus, next in fuccefilon, and who alio 
 held the Millennium, fays, that he was informed by 
 an old man, that St. John compofed the Apoca- 
 lypfe : but it has been objefted to St. Irenaeus, that 
 he has written, there can be but four goipels, as 
 there are but four parts of the world, and four car- 
 dinal winds, and that Ezekiel faw only four beads. 
 This reafoning he calls a demonftration and it 
 muft be owned, that Irenaeus’ demonftrating car- 
 ries as much weight as Judin’s feeing. 
 
 (G) The defcription of the new Jerufalem is entirely fig- 
 urative ; (o that to take each metaphor in a literal fenie 
 is ridiculous. The length, and the breadth, and the height 
 of it are reprefented equal, to denote that in the new city 
 all parts fhall be equal in perfe&ion. The defign of the 
 whole is only to fhew, that the manfions of the blefied will 
 be mod glorious places. 
 
 Clement 
 
DICTIONARY. *5 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, in his Electa, menti- 
 ons only an Apocalypfe of St. Peter’s, which was 
 highly refpedted. Tertullian, a warm fhcklerfor 
 the Millennium, not only affirms that St. John has 
 predicted this refurreftion, and reign in the city of 
 Jerufalem, but that this Jerufalem was then form- 
 ino- in the air ; that all the Chriftians in Palefhne, 
 and the very Pagans, had feen it forty nights fuc- 
 ceffively, but unluckily this city difappeared at 
 day-light. 
 
 Origen,in his preface to St. John’s Gofpel, quotes 
 the oraclesof the Apocalypfe, but helikewife quotes 
 the oracles of the Sybils : yet St. Dionyfius of Alex- 
 andria, who wrote about the middle of the third 
 century, fays in one of his fragments, prefervec. 
 by Eufebius, that almoft all the doftors rejected 
 the Apocalypfe, as a fenfelefs book, that, infix ad 
 of being written by St. John, the author of it was 
 one Cerinthus, who borrowed a refpeftable name, 
 to <dve the greater weight to his chimeras. 
 
 The council of Laodicea, held in 360, did not 
 admit the Apocalypfe among the canonical books t 
 and it was fomething odd, that Laodicea, a church 
 to which the Apocalypfe was direfted, fhould re- 
 ject a treafure particularly appointed for it ; and 
 even the biffiop of Ephefus, a member of the 
 council, ffiould alfo rejeft this book of St. John, 
 though buried in his metropolis. 
 
 It was vifible to all that St. John kept flirting 
 in his grave, the earth continually heaving and 
 falling ; yet the fame perfons who were fare 
 that St. John was not actually dead, were alfo 
 fure that he did not write the Apocalypfe. But 
 the Millenarians tenacioufly perfifted in their 
 opinions. Sulpicius Severus, in his Sacred Hif- 
 tory. Book IX. calls thofe who did not hold 
 the Apocalypfe, mad and impious. At length, a.- 
 2 
 
1 6 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 ter many doubts and controverftes, and council 
 clalbing with council, Sulpicius’s opinion prevail- 
 ed ; and the point having undergone a thorough 
 difcuffion, the church (from whofe judgment there 
 lies no appeal) has decided the Apocalypfe to have 
 been indisputably written by St. John. 
 
 Every Chriftian fed has attributed to itfelf the 
 prophecies contained in this book. The Englilh 
 have found in it the revolutions of Great Britain ; 
 the Lutherans the difturbances in Germany ; the 
 French Reformed the reign of Charles IX. and the 
 regency of Catherine de Medicis ; and they are all 
 equally in the right. Bofluet and Newton have 
 both commented on the Apocalypfe : but, after 
 all, the eloquent declamations of the former, and 
 the fublime difcoveries of the latter, have done 
 them much greater honour than their comments. 
 
 ATHEIST, ATHEISM. 
 
 F ORMERLY he who was poirefled of any fe- 
 cret in an art, ran great rifque of being looked 
 upon as a forcerer ; every new fe£t was accufed of 
 murdering infants in the celebration of its myfte- 
 ries ; and every philofopher who departed from 
 thefiargon of fchools, fanatics and cheats never fail- 
 ed/uT charge with atheifm, and ignorant and weak 
 judges fo furely palled fentence on them. 
 
 Anaxagoras took upon him to affirm, that the 
 fun is not guided by Apollo, fitting in a car drawn 
 by four mettlefome fteeds-, on this he is exclaimed 
 againft as an atheift, and obliged to fly his coun- 
 try. 
 
 Ariftotle being accufed of atheifm by a priefl, 
 and not able to procure juftice againft his accufer, 
 withdraws to Chalcis. But in all the hiftory of 
 
 Greece 
 
DICTIONARY. 17 
 
 Greece there is not a more heinous tranfadion than 
 the death of Socrates. 
 
 Ariftophanes (he whom commentators admire 
 becaufe he was aGreek, not coniidering that Socrates 
 was alfo a Greek) Ariftophanes was the firft who 
 broughtthe Athenians to accountSocrates an atheift. 
 
 This comic poet, who is neither comic nor a 
 poet, would not have been allowed among us to 
 have exhibited farces at St, Laurence’s fair. To 
 me he feems more contemptible, more low-lived, 
 and fcurrilous than Plutarch makes him, who 
 fpeaks of him in this manner : “ Ariftophanes’s 
 
 “ language is, indeed, that of a wretched quack, 
 “ full of the loweft and moil difagreeable points, and 
 “ quirks 5 he cannot rail'e a laugh among the very 
 “ vulgar, and to perfons of judgment and honour 
 “ he is quite infupportable •, his arrogance is be- 
 “ yond all bearing, and all good people deteft his 
 “ malignity.” 
 
 So this, by the bye, is the buffoon whom Madam 
 Dacier, amidft all her admiration of Socrates, can 
 find in her heart to admire. This is the man who 
 remotely prepared the poil'on by which infamous 
 judges put an end to the exiftence of the moil vir- 
 tuous man then living in Greece. 
 
 The tanners, the lhoe- makers, and fempftrefies 
 of Athens were hugely diverted with a farce, where 
 Socrates being haled up into the air in a bafket, 
 proclaims that there is no god, and makes his boaft, 
 that he had ftole a cloak, whillt he was teaching 
 philofophy. Such a people, and whofe bad govern- 
 inent could countenance fuch fcandalous licenti 
 oufnefs, well deferved what has happened to them, 
 to be brought under fubjeftion to the Romans, 
 and to be at prefent flaves to the Turks. 
 
 We fliall pafsover the common fpaceof time be- 
 tween the Roman commonwealth and our days ; 
 
 C obfervipg 
 
l 8 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 obferving only, that the Romans who were much 
 wifer than the Greeks, never molefted any philo- 
 fopher for his opinion. It was not fo among the 
 barbarous nations who feated themielves m the Ro- 
 man empire. The emperor Frederic II. having 
 tome difference with the popes, was immediately 
 arraigned of atheifm, and reported to have been, 
 jointly with his chancellor deVineis, the author ot 
 the book intitled The Three Impostors. 
 
 Our chancellor de l’Hopital, that excellent man,, 
 was branded as an Atheift, becaufe he oppofed per- 
 fecutions, “ Homo dodtus fed verus atheos * ” A 
 Jefuit, Garaffe, as much below Ariftophanes as the 
 latter was below Homer •, a wretch whole name is 
 become ridiculous among the very fanatics, makes 
 eyery body atheifts } at leaf! this is the appellation 
 he gives to. all who have incurred his dil'pleafure. 
 “With him Theodore de Beze is an atheift, and he 
 it is who led the people into an error concerning 
 
 Vanini. . 
 
 Vanini’s wretched end raifes no indignation or 
 pity like that of Socrates. This Italian was only an 
 infignifkant pedant : yet was he no atheift, for 
 which he fullered, but as far from it as man 
 could be. 
 
 He was a poor Neapolitan churchman, a kind 
 of preacher and profeffor of divinity, a vehement 
 diiputer in quiddities and univerfals ; “ et utrum 
 chimera bombinans in vacuo poffit comedere fe- 
 cundas intentiones.” There was nothing in him 
 which looked toward atheifm •, and his ideas of God 
 are perfectly agreeable to the moft found and moft 
 approved theology. “ God is his beginning and 
 “ end, the Father of both, in no need of either ; 
 
 * Commentarium Rerum Gallicarum. L. XXVIII. 
 
 “ eternal 
 
DICTIONARY. t§ 
 11 eternal without exifting in time, every-where 
 “ prefent without being in any place. To him there 
 “ is neither paft nor future, fpace nor time •, the 
 “ Creator and Governor of all things •, immutable, 
 “ infinite without parts-, his power is his will, &c.” 
 
 Vanini was for reviving the fine thought of Plato, 
 efpoufed by Averroes, that God had created a chain 
 of beings from the molt minute to the largeft, and 
 the laft link of which is faftened to his eternal 
 throne ; a notion which, though it has more of 
 fublimity than truth, is as far from atheifm as 
 l'omethino; from nothing. 
 
 He travelled to difpute and make his fortune ; 
 but unluckily, difputing is the very oppofite road to 
 fortune, every perlon againft whom one enters the 
 lift being thus made a rancorous and irreconcileable 
 enemy. Hence Vanini’s misfortunes; his heat and 
 rudenefs in difputing brought on him the hatred 
 of fome divines ; and having a quarrel with one 
 Francon, or Franconi, this man, being connected 
 with his enemies, charged him with being an 
 atheift, and teaching atheifm. 
 
 This Francon, or Franconi, fupported by fome 
 witneffes, had the barbarity, when confronted with 
 Vanini, to maintain, with aggravations, the whole 
 of what he had advanced ; whereas Vanini being 
 interrogated, what he thought of the exiftence of 
 God, made anfwer. That, agreeably to the ch«rch^ 
 he worfhipped one God in three Perfons ; and tak- 
 ing up a ftraw, which lay on the ground, “ This,’* 
 fays he, “ fufficiently proves that there is a Creator;” 
 then made a very fine fpeech on vegetation and 
 motion, and the neceflity of a .Supreme Being, 
 without whom there could be neither motion or 
 vegetation. 
 
 The Prefident Gramont gives us an account of 
 this fpeech in his hiftory of France, now fcarqe 
 
 C 2 known ^ 
 
20 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 known ; and this hiflorian, from an inconceivable 
 prepoffeffion, will have it that Vamni fpoke only 
 out of “ vanity or fear, and not from a fincere per- 
 luafion 
 
 What grounds could the Prefident Gramont have 
 for fuch a raffi and fanguinary judgment ? It is 
 manifeft, that, on Vanini’s anfwer, he ought to 
 have been cleared of the charge of atheilm. But 
 what was the iflue ? This unhappy foreign pneft 
 dabbled likewifeinphyfic: a large living toad, which 
 he kept in a veffel of water, being found at his houfe, 
 was made ufe of to charge him with forcery, and 
 the toad was faid to be the only deity he worfhipped. 
 Several paffages of his books were wrefted to an 
 impious meaning, than which nothing is more ea- 
 fy and more common, taking the objections for 
 anfwers, putting a malicious conftruCtion on every 
 ambiguous phrafe, and mifreprefenting innocent 
 exprefiions. At length his enemies extorted from 
 the judges a capital i'entence againft him. 
 
 This dea.h could not be juftified without accuf- 
 j n rr this unfortunate creature of moft horrid crimes j 
 and one Merfenne, a Minim, a name quite iuitable 
 tc his character, has been fo mad as to affirm in 
 print, that Vanini fet out from Naples with ten of 
 his apoftles, to go and convert all nations to athe- 
 ifm. Such incongruity ! How could a poor prieft 
 have twelve men in his pay ? how ffiould he have 
 prevailed with twelve Neapolitans to undertake an 
 expenfive journey, and at the hazard of their lives, 
 for the fake of diffeminating this abominable doc- 
 trine ? Could a king afford to hire twelve preach- 
 ers of atheifm ? This is fuch an abfurdity as never 
 came into any one’s mind but Father Merfenne. 
 But from him the tale has been repeated over and 
 over ; the journals and hiftorical dictionaries have 
 been ftained and fullied with it *, and the public, 
 
 who 
 
DICTIONARY. 21 
 
 who are fond of extraordinary things, have greedily 
 fwallowed it. 
 
 Bayle himfelf, in his Mifcellaneous Thoughts, 
 fpeaks of Vanini as an atheift, making ufe of him 
 in fupport of his paradox, “ That a fociety of 
 “ atheifts can fubfift.” He affirms that Vanini 
 was a man of very regular morals, and died a mar- 
 tyr to his philofophical opinions. Now, in both, 
 is he miftaken ; Vanini, though a prieft,in his dia- 
 logue written in imitation ot Erafmus, does not 
 hide from us that he had a miftrefs, named Ifabella; 
 he was both a free liver and a free writer, but he 
 was no atheift. 
 
 A century after his death, the learned La Croze, 
 and another under the name of Philalethes, wrote 
 a vindication of him ; but the memory of a poor 
 Neapolitan being what few give themfelves any 
 concern about, thefe ingenious perfons might have 
 faved themfelves that trouble. 
 
 The Jefuit Hardouin, with all Garafle’s raffinefs, 
 but much more learning, in his Athei detecti, 
 accufes the Defcartes, the Arnaulds, the Pafchals, 
 the Nicolas, the Malbranches, of atheifm •, but it 
 was their good fortune to come to a better end 
 than poor Vanini. 
 
 From all thefe fads, I now proceed to Bayle’s 
 moral queftion, “Whether a fociety of atheifts 
 could fubfift ?” And here let us previoufly ob- 
 ferve, the enormous contradidion of men in dis- 
 putes i they who moft furioufly inveighed againft 
 Bayle’s opinion, they who have with the greateft 
 rancour denied the poffibility of a fociety of atheifts, 
 have fince as confidently maintained, that atheifm 
 is the eftabliffied religion in China. 
 
 They are certainly very little acquainted with 
 China •, for had they only read an edid of the em- 
 perors of that vaft country, they would have fecn 
 r C 3 that 
 
22 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 that thefe edifts are like lermons, frequently mak- 
 ing mention of the Supreme Being, as governing, 
 punilhing, ind rewarding. 
 
 At the lame time they are not lefs miftaken con- 
 cerning the impoffibility oi a fociety of atheifts i 
 and I wonder how Mr. Bayle came to overlook a 
 ftriking example, .which would have given a deci- 
 five vidlory to his caufe. 
 
 Why is a lociety of atheifts thought impofiible ? 
 Becauie it is thought that men under no reftraint 
 could never live together ; that laws avail nothing 
 againft fecret crimes •, and that there muft be an 
 avenging God, punilhing in this world or the other 
 ^hofe delinquents who have efcaped human juftice. 
 
 Though Mofes’s laws did not teach a life to 
 come, did not threaten any punifhments after death, 
 and did not give the primitive Jews the leaft in- 
 fight into the immortality of the loul ; ftill the 
 Jews, fo far from being atheifts, fo far from deny- 
 ing a divine vengeance againft wickednefs, were 
 the moft religious men on the face of the earth. 
 They not only believed the exiftence of an eternal 
 God, but they believed him to be ever prefent 
 among them ; they dreaded being puniihed in 
 themfelves, in their wives, in their children, in their 
 pofterity to the fourth generation ; and this was a 
 very powerful reftraint. 
 
 But, among the Gentiles, feveral fe<5ts had no 
 curb ; the Sceptics doubted of every thing ; the 
 Academics fuipended their judgment concerning 
 every thing ; the Epicureans held that the Deity 
 could not concern itfelf about human affairs, and, 
 in reality, they did not allow of any Deity -, they 
 we r e periuaded that the foul is not a fubftance, but 
 a faculty born and perilhing with the body •, con- 
 fequently their only check was morality and honour. 
 1 he Roman fenators and knights were downright 
 
 atheifts, 
 
DICTIONARY. 25 
 
 atheifts, as neither to fear or expedt any thing 
 from the gods amounts to a denial of their exift- 
 ence •, fo that the Roman fenate, in Caefar and Ci- 
 cero’s time, was, in faft, an aflembly of atheifts. 
 
 That great orator, in his fpeech for Cluentius, 
 fays to a full fenate, “ What hurt docs death do 
 “ to him ? All the idle tales about hell none of us 
 “ give the leaft credit to •, then what has death de- 
 “fprived him of? Nothing but the feeling of 
 “ pain.” 
 
 Does not Csfar, Cataline’s friend, in order to fave 
 that wretch from an indiftment brought againft him 
 by the fame Cicero, objedt, that to put a criminal 
 to death is not puniftiing him •, that death is no- 
 thing, that it is only the end of our fufferings, that 
 it is rather a happy than a fatal moment ? And 
 did not Cicero and the whole fenate yield to thefe 
 arguments ? fo that the conquerors and legislators 
 of the known univerfe were evidently a fociety 
 of men without any fear of God , and thus were 
 real atheifts, 
 
 Bayle afterwards examines whether idolatry be 
 more dangerous than atheifm •, whether the difbe- 
 lief of a deity be more criminal than the having 
 unworthy opinions of him ? and herein he is of Plu- 
 tarch’s mind, thinking a dilbelief preferable to an 
 ill opinion. But, with fubmiftion to Plutarch, no- 
 thing can be more evident than that it was infi- 
 nitely better for the Greeks to ftand in awe of Ce- 
 res, Neptune, and Jupiter, than to be under no 
 manner of awe ; the facrednefs of oaths is manifeft 
 and necefiary, and they who hold that perjury will 
 be punilhed, are certainly more to be trufted than 
 thofe who think that a falfe oath will be attended 
 with no ill confequence. It is beyond all queftion, 
 that in a policed city, even a bad religion is better 
 than none. 
 
 C 4 Bayle, 
 
a 4 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 Bayle, therefore, ffiould rather have examined 
 which is the more dangerous, fanaticifm or athe- 
 jfm ? Now fanaticifm is certainly a thoufand times 
 more mifchievous ; for atheifm ftimulates to none 
 of thole fanguinary procedures for which fanaticifm 
 is notorious •, if atheilm does not fupprefs crimes, 
 fanaticifm incites to the commiffion of them. Al- 
 lowing the authorofCoMMENTARiuM Rerum Gal- 
 licarum, that chancellor de THopital was an 
 atheift, ftill the laws he made are wife and good, 
 and all his counfels tended to moderation and con- 
 cord. The fanatics committed the maflacre of St. 
 Bartholomew. Hobbs was accounted an atheift, 
 yet he led a quiet harmlefs life, whilft the fanatics 
 were deluging England, Scotland, and Ireland with 
 blood. Spinoia was not only an atheift, but taught 
 atheifm •, yet who can fay he had any hand in the 
 juridical murder of Barneweldt ? It was not he 
 who tore the two De Wits to pieces, and broiled 
 and ate their flelh. 
 
 Atheifts, for the mod part, are men of ftudy, 
 but bold and erroneous in their reafo.nings, and not 
 comprehending the creation, the original of evil, 
 and other difficulties, have recourfe to the hypo- 
 thefis of the eternity of things, and of neceffity. 
 
 The fenfualift and the ambitious have little 
 time for lpeculation, or to embrace a bad fyftem ; 
 to compare Lucretius with Socrates is quite out of 
 their way. Such is the prefentftate of things among 
 ois ! 
 
 It was otherwife with the fenate of Rome, which 
 almcft totally confifted of atheifts both in theory 
 and practice, believing neither in Providence nor a 
 future ftate. It was a meeting of philofophers, of 
 votaries to pleafure and ambition ; all very danger- 
 ous fets of men, and who, accordingly, overturned 
 the republic. 
 
 I would 
 
DICTIONARY. 25 
 
 I would not willingly lie at the mercy of an athe- 
 iftical prince, who might think it his intereft to 
 have me pounded in a mortar : I am very certain 
 that would be my fate. And, were I a fovereign, I 
 would not have about me any atheiftical courtiers, 
 whofe intereft it might be to poifon me, as then I 
 muft every day be taking alexipharmics ; fo necef- 
 fary is it both for princes and people, that the 
 minds be thoroughly imbibed with an idea of a 
 Supreme Being, the Creator, Avenger, and Re- 
 warder. 
 
 There are atheiftical nations, fays Bayle, in his 
 Thoughts on Comets. The Caffres, the Hot- 
 tentots, the Topinamboux, and many other petty 
 nations, have no god : that may be ; but it does not 
 imply that they deny the exiftence of a Deity ; they 
 neither deny nor affirm ; they have never heard a 
 word about him ; tell them there is a God, they 
 will readily believe it ; tell them that every thing 
 is the work of nature, and they will as cordially be- 
 lieve it : you may as well fay, that they are Anti- 
 Cartefians as to call them atheifts. They are 
 mere children, and a child is neither atheift nor 
 theift •, he is nothing. 
 
 What are the inferences from all this ? That 
 atheifm is a moft pernicious monfter in fovereign 
 princes, and likewife in ftatefmen, however harm- 
 lefs their life be, becaufe from their cabinet 
 they can make their way to the former ; that if 
 it be not fo mifchievous as fanaticifm, it is al- 
 rnoft ever deftruCtive of virtue. 1 congratulate 
 the prefent age, on there being fewer atheifts now 
 than ever •, philofophers having difcovered that 
 there is no vegetable without a germ, no germ 
 without defign, &c. and that corn is not produced 
 by putrefa&ion. 
 
 Some 
 
26 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 Some unphilofophical geometricians have reject- 
 ed final caufes, but they are admitted by all real 
 philofophers ; and, to ufe the expreflion of a 
 known author, “ A catechill makes God known to 
 « children, and Newton demonftrates him to the 
 .♦* learned.” 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 B APTISM, a Greek word, fignifying immerfi- 
 on : men being ever led by their fenfes, eafily 
 came to fancy that what walhed the body likewiie 
 cleanfed the foul. In the vaults under the Egyp- 
 tian temples were large tubs for the ablutions of 
 the priefts and the initiated. The Indians, from 
 time immemorial, purified themfelves in the 
 Ganges, and the ceremony ftill fubfifts among 
 them. The Hebrews adopted it, baptizing all 
 profelytes who would not fubmit to be circumcifed ; 
 efpecially the women, as exempt from that opera- 
 tion, except in Ethiopia only, were baptized ; it 
 was as regeneration ; it imparted a new foul, 
 among them, as in Egypt. Concerning this, fee 
 Epiphanius, Maimonides, and the Gemara. 
 
 John baptized in the Jordan ; he baptized even 
 Jefus Chrift himfelf, who, however, never baptiz- 
 ed any one, yet was pleafed to confecrate this an- 
 tient ceremony. All figns are of themfelves indif- 
 ferent, and God annexes his grace to fuch as he 
 thinks fit to chufe. Baptifm foon became the prin- 
 cipal rite, and the feal of Chriftianity. The firft 
 fifteen bilhops of Jerufalem were all circumcifed, 
 and there is no certainty of their having ever been 
 baptized. 
 
 [n the firft ages of Chriftianity this facrament 
 was abufed, nothing being more common than to 
 3 delay 
 
DICTIONARY. 27 
 
 delay baptifm till the agony of death ; of this the 
 emperor Conftantine is no flight proof. This was 
 his way of reafoning : Baptifm wafhes away all fin, 
 fo that I may kill my wife, my fon, and all my re- 
 lations, then I’ll get myfelf baptized, and fo go to 
 heaven; and he afted accordingly. Such an inftance 
 carried danger with it, and, by degrees, the cuftom 
 of delaying thefacred laver till death, wore oft'. 
 
 The Greeks always adhered to baptifm by im- 
 merfion ; but the Latins, towards the end of the 
 eighth century, having extended their religion over 
 Gaul and Germany, and feeing that immerfidn in cold 
 countries did not agree with children, fubftituted 
 in its ftead afperfion, or fprinkling, for which they 
 were often anathematized by the Greek church. 
 
 St. Cyprian, bifhop of Carthage, being aflced 
 whether they whofe bodies had been onlylprinkled 
 were really baptized ; he anfwers, in his 70th let- 
 ter, that feveral churches did not hold them to be 
 Chriftians ; that he does, but withal, what grace 
 they have, is infinitely lefs than that of thofe who, 
 according to the primitive rite, had been dipped 
 three times. 
 
 After immerfion a Chriftian became initiated ; 
 whereas before he was only a catechumen ; but 
 initiation required fecurities and fponfors, who were 
 called by a name anfwerable to that of godfathers, 
 that the church might be fure of the fidelity ol ihe 
 new Chriftians, and the facred myfteries be not dL 
 vulged. Wherefore during the firft centuries, the 
 Pagans, in general, knew as little of the Chriftian 
 myfteries, as the Chriftians did of the myfteries of 
 Ifis and Eleufis. 
 
 Cyril of Alexandria, in a writing of his againft 
 the emperor Julian, delivers himfelf thus* “I 
 « would fpeak a word of baptifm, did I not fear, 
 
 “ that 
 
28 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 « that what I fay might come to thofewho are not 
 
 Children were baptized fo early as the fecond 
 century, it being, indeed, very natural that Chri - 
 tians fhould be folicitous for this facrament to be 
 adminiftered to their children, as without it they 
 would be damned ; and, at length, it was conclud- 
 ed that the time of adminiftration fhould be at the 
 end of eight days, in imitation of the Jews ad mi- 
 niftring circurncifion. T he Greek church (till re- 
 tains this cuftom. However, in the third century 
 the cuftom prevailed of not being baptized till 
 
 near death. . ... 
 
 Thofe who died in the firft week, fome rigid fa- 
 thers of the church held to be damned ; but Pe- 
 t^r Chryfologus, in the fifth century, found out 
 Limbo, a kind of mitigated hell, or, properly, the 
 borders, or fuburbs, of hell, whither unbaptized 
 children go ; and the abode of the patriarchs be- 
 fore Jefus Chrift defcended into hell. And ever 
 fince it has been the current opinion, that Jefus 
 Chrift defcended into Limbo, and not into hell 
 
 It has been debated whether a Chriftian could, 
 in the deferts of Arabia, be baptized with fand ; 
 but carried in the negative : whether rofe-water 
 might be ufed for baptifm; it was decided that 
 it muft be pure water, yet muddy water would 
 do on an emergency. Thus the whole of this 
 difcipline appears to depend on the prudence 
 of the primitive paftors, by whom it was in- 
 ftituted. 
 
 BEASTS. 
 
DICTIONARY. 
 
 29 
 
 BEASTS. 
 
 I S it poflible any one Ihould fay, or affirm in 
 writing, that beafts are machines, void of 
 knowledge and fenfe, have a famenefs in all their 
 operations, neither learning nor perfedling any 
 thing, &c. 
 
 How ! this bird which makes a femicircular 
 neft when he fixes it againft a wall, who, when in 
 an angle, ffiapes it like a quadrant, and circular 
 when he builds it in a tree ; is this having a fame- 
 nefs in its operations ? Does this hound, after 
 three months teaching, know no more than 
 when you firft took him in hand ? Your canary- 
 bird, does he repeat a tune at firft hearing, or ra- 
 ther is it not fome time before you can bring him 
 to it ? is he not often out, and does he not im- 
 prove by praftice ? 
 
 Is it from my fpeaking that you allow me fenfe, 
 mem'ory, and ideas ? Wellj I am filent; but you 
 fee me come home very melancholy, and with ea- 
 ger anxiety look for a paper, open the bureau 
 where I remember to have put it, take it up and 
 read it with apparent joy. You hence infer, that I 
 have felt pain and plealure, and that 1 have me- 
 mory and knowledge. 
 
 Make then the like inference concerning this 
 dog, who, having loft his mafter, runs about every 
 where with melancholy yellings, comes home all in 
 a ferment, runs up and down, roves from room to 
 room, till at length he finds his beloved mafter in 
 his clofet, and then exprefles his joy in fofter cries, 
 gefticulations, and fawnings. 
 
 This dog, fo very fuperior to man in affe&ion, is 
 feized by fome barbarian virtuofos, who nail him 
 
 c down 
 
30 A PHILOSOPMlCAL 
 down on a table, and difiedt him while living* thd 
 [better to fhew you the meferaic veins. All the 
 lame organs of fenfation which are in yourfelf you 
 perceive in him. Now, Machinift, what fay you ? 
 anfwer me, has nature created all the fprings of 
 feeling in this animal, that it may not feel r Has 
 it nerves to be impafiible ? For lhame ! charge 
 not nature with fuch weaknefs and inconfiftency. 
 
 But the fcholaftic do&ors afk ^hat the foul of' 
 beafts is ? This is a queftion I don’t underftand. 
 A tree has the faculty of receiving fap into its 
 fibres, of circulating it, of unfolding the buds of 
 . its leaves and fruits. Do you now alk. me what the 
 foul of a tree is ? It has received thefe properties 
 as the animal above has received thofeof fenfation, 
 memory, and a certain number of ideas. Who 
 formed all thofe properties, who has imparted all 
 thefe faculties ? He who caufes the grafs of the 
 field to grow, and the earth to gravitate towards 
 the fun. 
 
 The fouls of beafts are fubftantial forms, fays 
 Ariftotle, who has been followed by the Arabian 
 fchool, and this by the Angelic fchool, and the 
 Angelic fchool by the Sorbonne, and the Sorbonne 
 by no body in the world. 
 
 The fouls of beafts are material, is the cry of 
 other philofophers, but as little to the purpofe as 
 the former ; when called upon to define a material 
 foul, they only perplex the caufe : they muft ne- 
 cefiarily allow it to be fenfitive matter. But whence 
 does it derive this fenfation ? From a material foul, 
 which muft mean, that it is matter giving fenfation 
 to matter j beyond this circle they have nothing to 
 fay. 
 
 According to others, equally wife, the foul of 
 beafts is a fpiritual efience, dying with the body * 
 but where are your proofs ? W hat idea have you of 
 
 this 
 
 
 
DICTIONARY. 31 
 
 this fpiritual being ? which with its fenfation, me- 
 mory, and its ffiare of ideas and combinations, 
 will never be able to know fo much as a child of 
 fix years. What grounds have you to think, that 
 this incorporeal being dies with the body ? But 
 ftill more ftupid are they who affirm this foul to be 
 neither body nor fpirit. A fine fyftem truly ! By 
 fpirit we can mean onlyfomething unknown, which 
 is not body ; fo that the upfhot of this wife fyftem 
 is, that the foul of beafts is a fubftance, which is nei- 
 ther body, nor fomething which is not body. 
 
 Whence can fo many contradictory errors arife ? 
 From a cuftom which has always prevailed among 
 men, of inveftigating the nature of a thing before 
 they knew whether any fuch thing exifted. The 
 fucker, or clapper, of a bellows is likewife called 
 the foul of the bellows. Well, what is this foul ? 
 it is only a name I have given to that fucker, or 
 clapper, which falls down, lets in the air, and riling 
 again, propels it through a pipe on my working 
 the bellows. 
 
 Here is no foul diftinft from the machine itfelf ; 
 but who puts the bellows of animals in motion ? 
 1 have already told you : he who puts the heavenly 
 bodies in motion. The philofopher who faid 
 “ Deus eft anima brutorum,” was in the right : 
 but he Ihould have gone farther *. 
 
 BEAUTY, BEAUTIFUL. 
 
 A SK a toad what is beauty, the fupremely beau- 
 tiful, the TO-K.ALON, he will anfwer you, 
 that it is his female, with two large round eyes 
 
 * This is the Pythagorean fyftem, “ Quod Deus fit anima 
 niundi.” See Ruxus #n Virg. /En. lib. vi. ver. 726. 
 
 pro- 
 
32 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 projecting out of its little head ; a broad and flat 
 neck, yellow belly, and dark brown back. Aik a 
 Guinea Negro ; and with him beauty is a greaiy 
 black ikin, hollow eyes, and a flat nofe. 
 
 Put the queftion to the devil, and he will tell 
 you, that beauty is a pair of horns, four claws* 
 and a tail. Confultthe philofophers likewile, they 
 will give you fome unintelligible jargon for anfwer, 
 they muft have fomething correfpondent to beau- 
 ty IN THE ABSTRACT, tO the TO-KALON. 
 
 I once fat next to a philofopher at a tragedy 
 that’s beautiful, faid he ! How beautiful ? faid I ! 
 becaufe the author has attained his end. The 
 next day he took a dofe of phyfic, which had a 
 very good effeCt * that’s a beautiful phyfic, faid I, 
 it has°attained its end : he perceived that a medi- 
 cine is not to be called beautiful, and that the word 
 beauty is applicable only to thofe things which give 
 a pleafure accompanied with admiration ; that tra- 
 gedy, he faid, had excited thefe two fenl'atiqns in 
 him, and that was the to-kalon, the beautiful. 
 
 We went to England together, and happened to 
 beat the fame play, perfectly well tranflated •, but 
 the fpeCtators, one and all, yawned. Oh-ho ! faid 
 he, the to-kalon, 1 find, is not the fame in Eng- 
 land as in France ; and, after feveral pertinent re- 
 flections, he concluded that beauty is very rela- 
 tive ; that what is decent at Japan is indecent at 
 Rome, and what is falhionable at Paris isotherwife 
 at Pekin ; and thus he faved himfelf the trouble 
 of compofing a long treatife on the beautiful. 
 
 BODY. 
 
dictionary. 
 
 23 
 
 BODY. 
 
 A S we know nothing of fpirit, fo are we alike 
 ignorant of body : we perceive fome pro- 
 perties-, but what is this fubjedt in which thefe pro- 
 perties refide ? All is body, faid Democritus and 
 Epicurus -, there is no body at all, laid the dilci- 
 ples of Zeno the Elaean. 
 
 Berkeley, bifhop of Cloyne, is the laft who has 
 gone about to prove th<! non-exiitcnce of bodies ; 
 and he deals chiefly in captious fophifms : there is, 
 fays he, neither colour, imell, nor heat, in them ; 
 thefe modalities are in your fenfations and not in 
 the objedts-, a truth, which being before fufficiently 
 known, he needed not to have taken the trouble 
 of proving. But from thence he proceeds to exten- 
 fion and folidity, which are eflential to body, and 
 is for proving that there is no extenfion in a piece 
 of green cloth, becaufe this cloth, in reality, is not 
 oreen ; this fenfation of green is only in you, therefore 
 the fenfation of extenfion is likewifeonly in you: and 
 having overthrown extenfion, he concludes, that 
 folidity being annexed to it, falls of itfelf, and thus 
 there is nothing in the world but our ideas, bo 
 that, according to this philofopher, ten thoufand 
 men killed by as many cannon (hot, are, in reality, 
 only ten thoufand conceptions of our minds. 
 
 My lord of Cloyne might have avoided expofing 
 himfelf to fuch ridicule -, he fancies that he proves 
 that there is no fuch thing as extenfion, becaufe a 
 body through a glafs appeared to him four times 
 larger than to his naked eye, and four times imallci 
 through another glafs : thence he concludes, that 
 as the extenfion of a body cannot, at the fame time, 
 be four feet, fix feet, and only one foot, luch ex- 
 
 D tenfion 
 

 34 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 tenfion exifts not; then there is nothing. e 
 needed only to have taken a meafure, and fay how- 
 ever extended a body may appear to me, aft - 
 extenfion is fo many of thefe mealures. _ 
 
 He might eafily have feen that extenfion and f - 
 lidity are very different from founds, colours, 
 taftes, and fmells, &c. Thefe are mamfeftly fen- 
 fations excited by the configuration of the parts. 
 But extenfion is not a feniation : though on the 
 going out of a fire I no longer feel heat; on the 
 agitation of the air ceafing 1 hear nothing ; and 
 from a withered rofe I fmell nothing ; yet the hie, 
 the air, and the rofe, have all their extenfion, with- 
 out any relation to me. Berkeley’s paradox really 
 
 does not deferve a formal refutation. 
 
 But the cream of the jeft is to know what led 
 him into this paradox. A long time ago I had 
 fome talk with him, when he told me, that his opi- 
 nionorimnallyproceeded from the mconceivableneis 
 of what'the fubjedt of extenfion is; and indeed he ^ 
 tri-imphsinthat part of his book, where he afkslii las 
 what this fame fubjeft, this substratum, this fub- 
 ftance, is ? It is, anfwers Hilas, the body extend- 
 ed ; then the bifhop, under the name of Phi- 
 lonoiis, laughs at him ; and poor Hilas, perceiv- 
 inor that he had faid extenfion was the fubjecl of 
 extenfion, and thus had talked fillily, is quite 
 abafhed, and owns that it is utterly inconceivable 
 to him ; that there is no fuch thing as body ; that 
 the world, inftead of being material, as commonly 
 thought, is intelleftual. 
 
 It would have become Philonoiis only to have 
 faid to Hilas, 'we know nothing concerning the 
 conflitution of this fubjeft, of this extended, folid, 
 divifible, moveable, figured, fubftance, &c. Weknow 
 no more of it than of the thinking, feeling, and wil- 
 ling fubje£t ; llill this fubjedl certainly exifts, fince 
 
DICTIONARY. 35 
 
 it has eflential properties from which it cannot be 
 l'eparated. 
 
 We are all, like the Paris ladies ; they live high 
 without knowing the ingredients in ragouts •, fo we 
 makeufeof bodies without knowing the cornpo- 
 fition of them. What is body made of? of parts, 
 and thefe parts are reducible to other parts. What 
 are thofe laft parts ? ftill bodies ; fo you go on di- 
 viding, and are never nearer the mark. 
 
 At length, a fubtile philofopher, obferving that 
 a pifture is made of ingredients, none of which is 
 a pifture, and a houfe of materials of which none is 
 a houfe, fancied bodies to be conftrufted of innu- 
 merable little beings, which are not bodies, and 
 thefe are. the monades fo much talked of. This 
 fyftem, however, has its fair fide, and, had it been 
 confirmed by Revelation, I Ihould think it very 
 pofiible. All thefe minute beings would be mathe- 
 matical points, fpecies of fouls waiting only for a 
 tegument to put themfelves into it; this would 
 make a continual metempfychofis, a monade enter- 
 ing fometimes nto a whale, fometimes into a tree, 
 and fometimes into a juggler. This fyftem is full 
 as good as another ; I can relilh it full as well as the 
 declenlion of atoms, the fubftantial forms, verfatile 
 grace, and Don Calmet’s vampires. 
 
 D 2 
 
 CHINESE 
 
36 
 
 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 CHINESE CATECHISM; 
 
 Or Dialogues between Cu-su, adifc.pleof Con- 
 pic, us, and Prince Kou, Ion co the King of 
 Lou tributary to the Chinese emperor Gnen- 
 van,’ four hundred and feventeen years before 
 our common ssra. 
 
 Trannated into Latip. by Fatlier Fouo.uet, for- 
 merly a Jefuit. The manufcnpt is in the Vati- 
 can library, Number 4*759' 
 
 Kou. 
 
 W HAT is meant by my duty to worfhip hea- 
 ven (Chang-ti) ? . , r 
 
 Cu-su. Not the material heaven, which we fee 
 with our eyes ; for this heaven is nothing but the 
 air and the air is compofed of every kind of 
 earthly exhalations. Now what a folly would it be 
 
 1 «■"*» «* 
 
 wonder at; men, in my opinion, have given into 
 
 gF C u-sij 011 1 Very true ; but you being born to rule 
 
 over others, it becomes you to be wife. 
 
 Kou. There are whole nations wxio worihip 
 
 heaven and the planets. , 
 
 Cu-su The planets are only fo many earths 
 like ours; the moon, for inftance, might as well 
 wotfhip our fandand dirt, as we proftrate ourfelves 
 before the moon’s fand and dirt. 
 
 Kou. ‘What is the meaning of what we io of- 
 ten hear; heaven and earth, to go up to heaven, to 
 be deferving of heaven ? 
 
 Cu- 
 
DICTIONARY. 37 
 
 Cu-su. It is talking very fillily *, there is no 
 fuch thing as heaven * *, every planet is environed 
 with its atmofphere as with a (hell, and rolls in the 
 fpace round its fun ; every fun is the center of fe- 
 veral planets, which are continually going their 
 rounds ; there is neither high nor low, up nor 
 down. Should the inhabitants of the moon talk 
 of going up to the earth, of making one s fell de- 
 fending of the earth, it would be talking madly ; 
 and we are little wifer in talking of deferving hea- 
 ven. We might as well fay a man muft make him- 
 felf deferving of the air, deferving of the conftella- 
 tion of the dragon, deferving of fpace. 
 
 Kou. I believe I underftandyou * we are only 
 to worfhip God who made heaven and earth. 
 
 Cu-su. To be fure, we are to worlhip God 
 alone. But in faying that he made heaven and 
 earth, however devout our meaning may be, it is 
 talking very fillily. For if by heaven we mean 
 the prodigious fpace in which God kindled fo ma- 
 ny funs, and fet fo many worlds in motion, it is^much 
 more ridiculous to fay, “ Heaven and earthy than 
 to fay, “ the mountains and a grain of fand.” Our 
 globe is infinitely lefs than a grain of fand, in coni- 
 parifon of thofe millions of ten thoufands of milli- 
 ons of worlds, among the infinitude of which we 
 are loft. All that we can do, is to join our feeble 
 voice to that of the innumerable beings, which, 
 throughout the abyfs of expanfion, alcribe homage 
 and glory to their adorable Creator. 
 
 Kou. It was, then, a great impofition to tell 
 us, that Fo came down among us from the fourth 
 heaven, afiuming the form of a white elephant. 
 
 # This is only difputing about words ; a place of future re- 
 wards, which the Chiaefe philofopher feems to allow, is Hea- 
 wai, wherever it be. r 
 
 D 3 Cu - 
 
38 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 Cu-su. Thefe are tales which the bonzes tell 
 to old women and children. 1 he eternal Author 
 of all beings is alone to be worfhipped. 
 
 Kou. But how can one being make the other 
 
 beings ? . . . 
 
 Cu-su. You fee yonder ftar : it is fifteen hun- 
 dred thoufand millions of Lis from our globe, and 
 emits rays which on your eyes form two angles 
 equal at the top •, and the like angles they form 
 on the eyes of all animals •, is not this manifeft de- 
 fign ? Is not this an admirable law ? and is it not 
 the workman who makes a work f and who frames 
 laws but a legillator ?. Therefore there is an eter- 
 nal Artift, an eternal Legiflator. 
 
 Kou. But who made this Artift, and what is he 
 like ? 
 
 Cu-su. My dear prince, as I was yefterday 
 walking near the vaft Palace, lately built by the 
 king your father, I over-heard two crickets •, one 
 faid to the other. What a ftupendous fabric is here ! 
 Yes, faid the other ; and though 1 am not a little 
 proud of my fpecies, he who has made this prodi- 
 gy. muft be fomething above a cricket ; but 1 have 
 no idea of that being •, fuch a one I fee there muft 
 be, but what he is I know not. 
 
 Kou. You are a cricket of infinitely more 
 knowledge than I ; and what I particularly like 
 in you, is your not pretending to know what you 
 really do not know. 
 
 Second Dialogue. 
 
 Cu-su. You allow, then, that there is an Al- 
 mighty Being, felf-exiftent, fupreme Creator, and 
 Maker ofi all nature. 
 
 Kou. Yes •, but if he be felf-exiftent he is illi- 
 mited, confequently he is every-where, he exifts 
 throughout all matter, and in every part of myfelf. 
 
 Cu-su. Why not ? Kou. 
 
39 
 
 DICTIONARY. 
 
 Kou. I Ihould then be a part of the Deity. 
 
 Gu-su. Perhaps that may not be the confe- 
 quence •, behold this piece of glafs, you fee the 
 light penetrates it eyery-where, yet will you fay it 
 is light ? It is mere fand, and nothing more : un- 
 queftianably every thing is in God ; that by which 
 every thing is animated muft be every-where. God 
 is not like the emperor of China, who dwells in 
 his palace, and fends his orders by kolaos. As 
 exifting he muft neceflarily fill the whole of fpace, 
 and all his works ; and fince he is in you, this is a 
 continual document never to do any thing to raife 
 lhame or remorfe. 
 
 Kou. But for a perfon ferenely to confider him- 
 felf before the Supreme Being without ftiame o,r 
 , difguft, what muft he do ? 
 
 Cu-su. Be juft. 
 
 Kou. And what further? 
 
 Cu-su. Be juft. 
 
 Kou. But Laokium’s fed fays, there is no fudi 
 thing as juft or unjuft, vice or virtue. 
 
 Cu-su. And does Laokium’s left fay there is 
 no fuch thing as health nor ficknefs ? 
 
 Kou. No, to be fure ■, what egregious nonfenfc 
 that would be ! 
 
 Cu-su. And let me tell you, that to think 
 there is neither health nor ficknefs of foul, nor vir- 
 tue nor vice, is as egregious an error, and much 
 more mifchievous. They who have advanced that 
 every thing is alike, are monfters : is it alike, 
 carefully to bring up a fon, or, at his birth, to dafti 
 him againft the ftones •, to relieve a mother, or to 
 plunge a dagger into her heart ? 
 
 Kou. That is horrible ! I deteft Laokium’s 
 feft •, but juft and unjuft are oftentimes fo inter- 
 woven, that one is at a lofs. Who can be faid pre- 
 cifely to know what is forbidden and what is a- 
 
 D 4 lowed? 
 
4 o A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 lowed ? Who can fafely fet limits to good and evil ? 
 
 I wifli you would give me a fure rule tor this ini- 
 
 portantdiftin&ion. 
 
 Cu-su There can be no better than that ot 
 Confutzee, my matter, “ Live as thou wouldft 
 
 have lived when thou comeft to die •, ufe thy 
 *t neighbour as thou wouldft have him ufe thee. 
 
 Kou. Thofe maxims, I own, Ihould be man- 
 kind’s (landing, law. But what am I the better for 
 my good life, when I come to die ? What mighty 
 advantage (hall I get by my virtue ? That clock 
 goes as well as evef clock did; but when it comes 
 to be worn out, or (hould it be deftroyed by acci- 
 dent, will it be happy for having (truck the hours 
 regularly ? 
 
 Cu-su. That clock is without thought or feel- 
 ing, and incapable of remorfe, which you ftiarply 
 feel on the commifllon of any crime. 
 
 Kou. But what if by frequent crimes I come to 
 be no longer fenfible of remorfe. 
 
 Cu-su. Then it is high time an end (hould be 
 put to your being ; and take my word for it, that, 
 as men do not .love to be opprefled, (hould that be 
 the cafe, one or another would ftop you in your 
 career, and fave you the committing any more 
 crimes. 
 
 Kou. At that rate God, who is in them, after 
 allowing me to be wicked, would allow them like- 
 wife to be fo. 
 
 Cu-su. God has endued you with reafon, nei- 
 ther you nor they are to make a wrong ufe of it ; 
 as otherwife you will not only be unhappy in this 
 life, but how do you know but you may likewife 
 be fo in another ? 
 
 Kou. Arid who told you there is another life ? 
 
 Cu-su. The bare uncertainty of it (hould make 
 you behave as if it was an undoubted certainty. 
 
 Kou. 
 
DICTIONARY. 41 
 
 Kou. But what if I am fure there is nofuch thing? 
 Cu-su. That I defy you to make good. 
 
 Third Dialogue. 
 
 Kou. You urge me home, Cu-fu ; my being re- 
 warded or punifhed after death, requires that fome- 
 thing which feels and thinks in me,muft continue to 
 fubfift after me ; now as no part in me had any thought 
 or fenfe before my birth, why fliould it after my 
 death ? What can this incomprehenfible part of 
 myfelf be ? Will the humming of that bee continue 
 after the end of its exiftence ? or the vegetation of 
 this plant, when plucked up by the roots ? . Is 
 not vegetation a word made ufe ot to exprefs the in- 
 explicable mode appointed by the Supreme Being, 
 for the plants imbibing the juices of the earth ? 
 So the foul is an invented word, faintly and obfcure- 
 ly denoting the fpring of human life.. All animals 
 have a motion, and this ability to move is called ac- 
 tive force ; but this force is no diftin£t being 
 whatever. We have paffions, memory, and rea- 
 fon •, but thefe paffions, this memory, and reafon, 
 are furely not feparate things, they are not beings 
 exifting in us, they are not diminutive perfons of a 
 particular exiftence, they are generical words in- 
 vented to fix our ideas, i hus the foul itfelf, which 
 fignifies our memory, our reafon, our paffions, 
 is only a bare word. Whence then motion^ in na- 
 ture ? from God. Whence vegetation in the 
 plant ? from God. Whence motion in animals ? 
 from God. Whence cogitation in man ? from Gad*. 
 
 Were the human foul a diminutive perfon, in- 
 cloled within our body, to direft its motions and 
 
 , * This opinion of the Chinefe is the Pythagorean dogma 
 
 of the “ Anima Mundi,” which has been fully refuted by 
 Cudworth, Dr, Clarke, and feveral other learned divines. 
 
 ideas, 
 
42 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 ideas, wou’d not that betray in the eternal Maker 
 of the world an impotence and an artifice quite un- 
 worthy of him ? He then muft have been incapable 
 of making automata, which fhall have the gilt of 
 motion and thought in themfelves. When I learned 
 Greek under you, you made me read Homer, where 
 Vulcan appears to me an excellent fmith, when he 
 makes golden tripods, going of themfelves to the 
 council of the gods •, but had this fame Vulcan 
 concealed within thofe tripods one of his boys, to 
 make them move without being perceived, 1 mould 
 think him but a bungling cheat. 
 
 Some low-thoughted dreamers have been charm- 
 ed with the. fancy of the planets being rolled along 
 by genii, as fomethiag very grand and fublime ; 
 but God has' not been reduced to fuch a paltry 
 lhift : in a word, wherefore put two fprings to a 
 work when one will do ? I hat God can animate 
 that fo little known being which we call matter, 
 you dare not deny ; why then fhould he make ufe 
 of another agent to animate it ? 
 
 Farther ; what may that foul be which you are 
 pleafed to give to our body ? From whence did 
 it come ? \Vhen did it come ? Muft the Creator 
 of the univerfe be continually watching the co- 
 pulation of men and women ■ clofely obferve the 
 moment when a germ i flues from a man’s body 
 and pafles into that of a woman, and then quickly 
 injeCt a foul into this germ ? And if this germ dies, 
 what becomes of its foul ? either it muft have been 
 created ineffectually, or muft wait another oppor- 
 
 tunity. 
 
 This is really a ftrange employment for the Sove- 
 reign of the world ; and it is not only on the copu- 
 lation of the human fpecies, that he muft be con- 
 tinually intent, but muft obferve the like vigilance 
 and celerity with all animals whatever ; for, like us, 
 
 they 
 
DICTIONARY. 43 
 
 they have memory, ideas, and paffions ; and if a 
 foul be necefiary for the formation of thefe fenti- 
 ments, thefe ideas, thefe paffions, and this memo- 
 ry, God mult be perpetually at work about fouls 
 for elephants and fleas, for filh and for bonzes. 
 
 What idea does fuch a notion give of the Archi- 
 teft offo many millions of worlds, thus obliged to 
 be continually making invifible props for perpetu- 
 ating his work ? 
 
 Thefe are fomc, though a very fmall fample, of 
 the reafons for queftiomng the foul’s exiftence. 
 
 Cu-su. You reafon candidly, and fuch a vir- 
 tuous turn of mind, even if miftaken, cannot but be 
 agreeable to the Supreme Being. You may be in 
 an error, but as you do not endeavour to deceive 
 yourlelf, your error is excnfable. But confider 
 what you have propofed to me are only doubts, and 
 melancholy doubts •, liften to probabilities of a io- 
 lacing nature: to be annihilated is difmal •, hope then 
 for life. A thought you know is not matter, nor has 
 /"any affinity with it. Why then do you make fuch 
 a difficulty of believing that God has put a divine 
 principle into you, which being indifloluble, can- 
 not be fubjedt to death ? Can ycni fay that it is im- 
 poffible that you ffiould have a foul ? No, certain- 
 ly : and if it be poffible that you have one, is it 
 not alfo very probable ? How can you rejedt lb 
 noble a fyftem, and fo necefiary to mankind ? Shall 
 a few (lender objedtions with-hold your afient ? 
 
 Kou. 1 would embrace this fyftem with all mv 
 heart, on its being proved to me •, but it is not in 
 my power to believe without evidence. I am al- 
 ways ftruck with this grand idea, that God has 
 made every thing, that he is every-where, that he 
 penetrates aii things, and gives life and motion to 
 all things ; and if he is in ail the parts of my be- 
 ing, as he is in ail the parts of nature, 1 do not fee 
 
44 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 any need I have of a foul. Where is the ufe or im- 
 portance of this little fubaltern being to me who 
 am animated by God himfelf ? of what improve- 
 ment can it be ? It is not from ourfelves that we 
 derive our ideas, they generally obtrude themfelves 
 on us againft our wills ; we have them when locked 
 in fleep j every thing pafies in us without-our in- 
 tervention. What would it fignify to the foul, were 
 it to fay to the blood and animal fpirits, be fo kind 
 as to gratify me in running this way, they will ftill 
 circulate in their natural courfe. Let me be the ma- 
 chine of a God whofe exiftence all things proclaim 
 aloud, rather than of a foul whofe exiftence is a ve- 
 ry great uncertainty. 
 
 Cu-su. Well, if God himfelf animates you, be 
 very careful of committing any crime as defiling 
 that God, who is within you ; and if he has given 
 you a foul, never let it offend him. In both fyf- 
 tems you have a volition, you are free, that is, you 
 h^ve a power of doing what you will ; make ufe 
 of this power in ferving that God who gave it you. 
 If you are a philolopher, fo much the better, but 
 it is neceffary for you to be juft ; and you will b^ 
 more fo when you come to believe that you have 
 an immortal foul. 
 
 Be pleafed to anfwer me. Is not God fovereign 
 and perfect juftice ? 
 
 Kou. Doubtlefs j and could he ceafe to be fo 
 (which is blafphemy to think) I would myfelf a£t 
 equitably. 
 
 Cu-su. Will it not be your duty, when on the 
 throne, to reward virtue and punifh vice ? and can 
 you think of God’s not doing what is incumbent 
 on yourfelf to do ? You know that there are, and 
 ever will be, in this life, good men diftreffed, whilft 
 wicked men profper : therefore good and evil 
 
 muft be finally judged in another life. It is this 
 
 fo 
 
DICTIONARY. 4 5 
 
 fo fimple, fo general, and fo natural, opinion which 
 has introduced and fixed among fo many nations 
 the belief of the immortality of our fouls, and their 
 being judged by divine juftice, on their quitting 
 this mortal tenement. Is there, can there be, a 
 fyftem more rational, more fuitable to the Deity, 
 and more beneficial to mankind * ? 
 
 Kou. Why then have fo many nations rejetted 
 this fyftem ? You know, that in our province we 
 have about two hundred families of the old Sinous, 
 who formerly dwelt in part of Arabia Petrea ; and 
 neither they nor their anceftors ever believed any 
 thing of the immortality of the foul : they have 
 their five books as we have our five King ; I have 
 read a tranfiation of them ; their laws, which ne- 
 ceffarily correfpond with (hofe of all other nations, 
 enjoin them to refpett their parents, not to fteal 
 nor lye, to abftain from adultery and bloodlhed •, 
 yet thefe laws are wholly filent as to rewards and 
 punilhments in another life. j 
 
 Cu-su. If this truth has not yet been made 
 known to thofe poor people, unqueftionably their 
 eyes will one day be opened. But what fignifies a 
 {mall obfeure tribe, when the Babylonians, the 
 Egyptians, the Indians, and all policed nations, 
 have fubfcribed to this falutary doctrine? If you 
 were fick, would you decline making ufe of a reme- 
 dy approved by all the Chinefe, becaufe fome bar- 
 barous mountaineers had exprefied a difiike of it ? 
 God has endued you with reafon, and this reafon 
 tells you that the l'oui muft be immortal, therefore 
 it is God himfelf who tells you fo. 
 
 Kou. But how can I be rewarded or punifhed, 
 when I fhall ceafe t o be myfelf, when nothing 
 
 — * Our author has omitted the natural proofs of the immor- 
 
 tality of the foul, which the reader may fee in Dr. Clarke’s 
 Evidences of Natural and Revealed Religion, p. 265. See 
 alfb our remarks on the word SOUL. 
 
 5 
 
 which 
 
4 6 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 which had conftituted my perfon will be remaining; 
 it is only by my memory that I am always myfelf : 
 now my memory 1 lofe in my lafl illnefs ; fo that, 
 after my death, nothing under a miracle can reftore 
 it tome, and thus replace me in my former exiftence. 
 
 Cu-su. That is as much as to fay, fhould a 
 prince, after making his way to the throne by the 
 murder of all his relations, play the tyrant over his 
 fubjedts, he need only fay to God, It is not 1 •, I 
 have totally loft my memory ; you miftake, I am 
 no longer the fame perfon. Think you God would 
 be very well pleafed with fuch a fophifm ? 
 
 Kou. Well, I acquiefce •, I was for living ir- 
 reproachable for my own fake, now I will do fo to 
 pleafe the Supreme Being. I* thought the whole 
 matter was for my foul to be juft and virtuous in 
 this life ; but I will now hope that it will be hap- 
 py in another : this opinion, I do perceive, makes 
 for che good both of fubjedts and fovereigns ; ftill 
 the worlhip of the Deity perplexes me. 
 
 Fourth Dialogue. 
 
 Cu-su. Why, what is there that can offend 
 you in our Chu-king, the firft canonical book, 
 and which all the Chinefe emperors have fo great- 
 ly refpedted. You plough a field with your own 
 royal hands, by way of letting an example to the 
 people, and the firft fruits of it you offer to the 
 Chang-ti, to the Tien, to the Supreme Being, and 
 facrifice to him four times every year. You are 
 king and high-prieft, you promile God to do all 
 the good which fhall be in your power; is there 
 any thing in this which you cannot digeft ? 
 
 Kou. 1 am very far from making any excep- 
 tions ; I know thatGod has no need either of our la- 
 crifices or prayers, but the offering them to him is 
 very needful for us ; his worfhip was nctinftituted 
 
 for 
 
DICTIONARY. 47 
 
 for himfelf but on our account. I am very much 
 delighted with praying, and am particularly care- 
 ful "that there ihall be nothing ridiculous in my 
 prayers •, for were 1 to cry out till my throat is 
 Head, “ That the mountain of the Chang-ti is a 
 “ fat mountain, and that fat mountains are not to 
 “ be looked on though I Ihould have put the 
 fun to flight, and dried up the moon, will this 
 rant be acceptable to the Supreme Being, orof any 
 benefit to my fubjeds or myfelf ? 
 
 Efpecially, I cannot bear with the fillinefs of the 
 feds about us -, on one fide is Laotze, whom his 
 mother conceived by the jimdion of heaven and 
 earth, and was fourfeore years pregnant with him. 
 
 I as little believe his dodrine of univerfal depriva- 
 tion and annihilation, as his being born with 
 white hair, or his going to promulgate his doc- 
 trine on a black cow. 
 
 The god Fo I put on the fame footing, notwith- 
 ftanding he had a white elephant for his father, and 
 promifes immortal life. 
 
 One thing, at which I cannot forbear taking 
 great offence, is the bonzes continually preaching 
 luch chimeras, thus deceiving the people in order 
 the better to fway them •, they gain to themfelves 
 refped by mortifications, at which indeed nature 
 fh udders. Some deny themfelves, during their 
 whole lives, the moft ialutary foods, as if there was 
 no way of pleafing God but by a bad diet. Others 
 carry a pillory about their necks, and fometimes 
 they richly deferve it •, they drive nails into their 
 thighs as into boards •, and for thefe things the 
 people follow them in crowds. On the king’s if- 
 fuing any edid which does not fuit their humour, 
 they coolly tell their auditors that this edid is not 
 to be found in the commentary of the god Fo, and 
 that god is to be obeyed preferably to men. Now, 
 
 how 
 
48 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 howto remedy this popular diftemper, which its 
 extravagant to the higheft degree, and not lefs dan- 
 gerous ? Toleration, you know, is the principle 
 of the Chinefe, and indeed of all Afiatic govern- 
 ments; butfuch an indulgence muft beowned high- 
 ly mifchievous, as expofing an empire to be over- 
 thrown on account of fome fanatical notions. 
 
 Cu-su. God forbid that l fhould go about to 
 extinguifh in you the fpirit of toleration, that qua- 
 lity io eminently refpe&able, and which to fouls is 
 what the permiflion of eating is to bodies. By the 
 law of nature, every one may believe what he will, 
 as well as eat what he will. A phyfician is not to 
 kill his patients for not obferving the diet which he 
 had prefcYibed to them ; neither has a fovereign a 
 right to hang his fubjedts for not thinking as he 
 thinks -, but he has a right to prevent difturbances, 
 and with prudent meafures he will very eafily root 
 out fuperftitions of all kinds. You know what hap- 
 pened to Daon, the fixth king of Chaldea, about 
 four thoufand years ago. 
 
 Kou. No. I pray oblige me with an accountof it. 
 
 Cu-su. The Chaldean priefts had taken it into 
 their heads to worfhip the pikes of the Euphrates, pre- 
 tending that a famous pike called Oannes, had for- 
 merly taught them divinity ; that this pike was 
 immortal, three feet in length, and a fmall crefcent 
 on the tail. In veneration to this Oannes, no pikes 
 were to be eaten. A mighty difpute arofe among 
 the divines, whether the pike Oannes had a foft or 
 hard roe. Both parties not only fulminated ex- 
 communications, but they feveral times came to 
 blows. To put an end to fuch difturbances, king 
 Daon made ule of this expedient. 
 
 He ordered a ftridt faft for three days to both 
 parties ; and at the expiration of it, fent for the 
 fticklers for the hard roed pike, who accordingly 
 
 went 
 
DICTIONARY. 49 
 
 ■were prefent at his dinner ; a pike was brought to 
 iiim three feet in length, and on the tail a fmall 
 crefcent had been put. Is this your god, faid he 
 to the doctors ? Yes, Sir, anfwered they •, we know 
 him by the crefcent on the tail, and make no quef- 
 tion but he is hard-roed. On this the king order- 
 ing. the pike to be opened, it was found to have the 
 fined: melt that could be. Now, faid the king, you 
 fee this is not your god, it being foft- roed ; and the 
 king and his nobles ate the pike, and the hard- 
 roed divines were not a little pleafed that the god 
 of their adverl'aries had been fried. 
 
 Immediately after the doctors of the oppofite 
 fide were fent for, and a pike of three feet, with a 
 crefcent on his tail, being fhewn to them, they, 
 with great juy, allured his majefty, that it was the 
 god Oannes, and that he had a foft roe; but behold ! 
 on being opened, it was found hard-roed. At this 
 the two parties, equally out of countenance, and ftiil 
 falling, the good-natured king told them that he 
 could only give them a dinner of pikes, and they 
 greedily fell to eating both hard and foft-roed with- 
 out dillinftion. This clofed the civil war, with 
 great applaufes of king Daon’s wifdom and good- 
 nefs ; and fince that time the people have been al- 
 lowed to eat pikes as often as they pleafed. 
 
 Kou. Well done, king Daon ! and I give you 
 my word I will follow his example on every oc - 
 cafion, and as far as I can, without injuring any 
 one ; there fhall be no worlhipping of Fo’s and 
 pikes. 
 
 I know that in the countries of Pegu and Ton- 
 ijuin, there are little gods and little Talapotns which 
 bring down the moon, when in the wane, and clear- 
 ly foretel Vvhat is to come, that is, they clearly fee 
 what is not, for futurity is not. I will take care 
 that the Talapoins fhall not come within my reach, 
 
 E to 
 
5 o A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 to make futurity prefent, and bring down the 
 
 1110011 . - 
 
 It is a Ihame that there Ihould be lefts rambling 
 ffrom town to town, propagating their delufions, as ' 
 ‘quacks their medicaments. V\ hat a difgra.ce is it 
 to the human mind, for petty nations to drink that 
 truth belongs to them alone, and that the vaft em- 
 pire of China is given up to error? Is then the 
 Eternal Being only the god of the Hand of Formo- 
 fa or Borneo ? Has he no concern for the other 
 parts of the u ri iverfe ? My dear Cu-fu, he is a 
 father to all men, he allows every one to eat pike : 
 the moil acceptable homage which can be paid to 
 him is being virtuous •, the fincft of all his temples, 
 as the great emperor Hiao ufed to fay, is a pure 
 heart. 
 
 Fifth Dialogue. 
 
 Cu-su. Since you love virtue, in what manner 
 do you propcfe to pradtife it when you come to be 
 king • . . . 
 
 Kou. In not being unjuft to my neighbours or 
 my fubjedts. 
 
 Cu-su. To do no harm does not come up to 
 virtue. I hope my prince will do good, will feed 
 the poor by employing them in ufeful labour, and 
 not endow floth •, mend and embellifh the high- 
 ways, dig canals, build public edifices, encourage 
 arts, reward merit of every kind, and pardon in- 
 voluntary faults. 
 
 Kou. This I call not being unjuft ; thofe things 
 arc plain duties. 
 
 Cu-su. Your way of thinking becomes a king; 
 but there is the king and the man; the public life 
 and private life. You will be married ; how many 
 wives do you think of having ? 
 
 Kou.' 
 
DICTIONARY. §t 
 
 Kou. Why, a dozen, I think, will do: a greater 
 humber might be an avocation from bufinefs ; I 
 don’t approve of kings with their three hundred 
 wives and feven hundred concubines, and thou- 
 fands of eunuchs to wait 0V1 them. This humour 
 of having eunuchs, efpecially, appears to me a mod 
 execrable infult and Outrage to human nature. The 
 caftrating of cocks I can forgive, as eating the bet- 
 ter for it ; but I never have heard of eunuchs being 
 roafted. . What is the ufe of their being thus mu- 
 tilated ? It improves their voices ; the Dala-i La- 
 ma has fifty of them purely to ling in his pagod. 
 Let him tell me whether the Chang-ti is much de- 
 lighted with the clear pipes of thele fifty geldings. 
 
 Another mod ridiculous thing is the bonzes not 
 marrying. They boad of being wifer than the 
 other Chirtefe; well then, let themfhew their wif- 
 dom in getting wife children. An odd manner of 
 wordlipping the Chang-ti, to deprive him of wor- 
 fhippers *, and, to be lure, they mud have a great 
 afteftion for mankind, who go the way to extinguifh 
 the lpecies! The good little Lama called Stelca 
 isant Erepi, ufed to fay, “That every pried 
 ought to get as many children as he could 
 what he preached he pra&ifed, and was very ufeful 
 in his generation. For my part, I diall marry all 
 the lamas and bonzes, and lamafies and bohzefles, 
 who (hall appear to have a call to this holy work ; 
 befides making them better patriots, I Ihall think it 
 no fmall lervice to my dominions. 
 
 Cu-su. What an excellent prince diall we have 
 in you ! I cannot forbear weeping for joy. But 
 you will not be fatisfied with having wives and 
 fubje&s, for, after all, one cannot be perpetually 
 drawing up edicts, and getting children j you will 
 likewife make yourfelf fome friends, 
 
 E 3 ~~ 
 
 Kou; 
 
3* A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 Kou. I am not without feme already and thole 
 good ones, putting me in mind of my faults, and 
 I allow myfelf the liberty of reproving theirs-, we 
 likewife mutually comfort and encourage one ano- 
 ther -, friendihip is the balm of life, it excels that 
 of the chemift Eruil, and even all the noftrums of 
 the great Ranoud are not comparable to it. 1 
 think friendihip Ihould have been made a religious 
 precept. I have a good mind to infert it in our 
 
 lU Cu-su. By no means -, friendihip is fufficiently 
 facred ofitfelf. Never enjoin it -, the heart muft 
 be free: bolides, were you to make a precept, a 
 myftery, a rite, a ceremony,, of friendihip, it would 
 foon become ridiculous through the fantaftical 
 preachings and writings of the bonzes : let it no> 
 be expoied to fuch profanation. _ 
 
 But how will you deal with your enemies ? Con- 
 futzee, I believe, in not lefs than twenty places, di- 
 lefts us to love them : does not this appear forne- 
 thing difficult to you ? , 
 
 Kou. Love one’s enemies ! Oh, dear dofxor ■ 
 nothing is fo common. 
 
 Cu-su. But what do you mean by love ? 
 
 Kou. Mean by it what it really is. I was a 
 volunteer under the prince of Decon againlt the 
 prince ofVis-brunk ; when a wounded enemy fell 
 into our hands we took as much care of him as 
 if he had been our brother : we have often parted 
 with our beds to them, and we lay by them on ty- 
 gers Ikins fpread on the bare ground -, we have 
 • tended and nurfed them ourfelves : Is not this 
 loving our enemies ? Hou would not have us love 
 them as a man loves his miftrefs ? 
 
 Cu-su. I am exceedingly pleafed with your 
 talk, and with that all nations could hear you, for 
 
DICTIONARY. 53 
 
 I have been informed offorne fo very' conceited and 
 impertinent as to fay that we know nothing of true 
 virtue ; that our good adtions are only fpecious fins ; 
 that we fland in need of their Talapoins to inftrudt 
 us in right principles. Poor creatures ! A few 
 years ago there was no fuch thing as reading or 
 writing among them, and now they are for teach- 
 ing their matters. 
 
 Sixth Dialogue. 
 
 Cu-su. I fhall not repeat to you the common- 
 places, which for thefe five or fix thou&nd years 
 paft, have been retailed among us, relating to all 
 the feveral virtues. Some there are which only 
 concern ourfclves, as prudence in the guidance of 
 our foul, temperance in the government of our 
 bodies ; but thefe are rather dictates of policy, and 
 care of health : the real virtues are thofe which pro- 
 mote tire welfare of fociety, as fidelity, magnanimi- 
 ty, beneficence, toleration, &c. and, thank heaven, 
 thefe are the firfl things which every woman, 
 among us, teaches her children ; they are the ru- 
 diments of the rifing generation, both in town 
 and country •, but I am lorry to fay it, there is a 
 great virtue which is fadly on the decline among 
 us. 
 
 Kou. Quickly name it, and no endeavour of 
 mine fhall be wanting to revive it. 
 
 Cu-su. It is hoipitality ; for fince inns have 
 got footing among us, this fo focial virtue, this fa- 
 cred tie of mankind, becomes more and more relax- 
 ed: that pernicious inftitution, I am told, we have 
 borrowed from fome weftern favages ; who, proba- 
 bly, have no houfes to entertain travellers. My 
 heart melts with delight when I have the happinels 
 of entertaining, in the vaft city of Lou, in Hon- 
 
 E 3 cham. 
 
■ 5+ A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 cham, that fuperb fquare, or my delicious feat of 
 Ki, fome generous ftranger come from Samarcande, 
 to whom, from that moment, I become iacred, 
 and who, by Jill laws human and divine, is bound 
 to entertain me, on any call I may have into 1 ar- 
 tary, and to be my cordial friend. 
 
 The lavages 1 am fpeaking of do not admit 
 Grangers into their huts, filthy as they are, with- 
 out their paying, and dearly too, for luch fordid 
 reception ; and yet thofe wretches, I hear, think 
 themfelves above us, and that our morality is no- 
 thing, in comparifon of theirs. Their preachers 
 excel' Confutzee himfelf in a word, they alone 
 know what truejuftice is, and a fignof it is, they 
 fell on the roads fome fophifticated fluff for wine, 
 and their women, as if mad, rove about the ftreets, 
 and dance, whilft ours are breeding filk-worms. 
 
 Kou. I very much approve of hofpitality, and 
 the practice of it gives me pleafure ; but I am 
 afraid it will be much abufed. Near Thibet dwells 
 a people, who, befides the badnefs of their habita- 
 tions, being of a roving.difpofition, will, on any 
 trifle, go from one end of the world to the other ; 
 and, on your having occafion to go to Thibet, fo 
 far from returning your hofpitality, they have no- 
 thing to fet before you, nor fo much as a bed-for 
 you to lie on •, this is enough to put one out of 
 conceit with courtefy. 
 
 Cu-su. Thefe difappointments- may eafiiy be 
 remedied, by entertaining luch perfens only as come 
 well recommended. Kvery virtue has its difficul- 
 ties and dangers, and without them the practice of 
 virtue would want much of its glory and excellence. 
 How w.iie and holy is our Confutzee ? There is 
 not a .virtue which he dees not inculcate ; every 
 fentence of his 'is pregnant with the happinefs of 
 
 mankind: 
 
 4 
 
DICTIONARY. 55 
 
 mankind : one, at prefent, recurs to me, I think it 
 is the fifty-third : 
 
 “ Kindnefies acknowledge with kindnefs, and 
 never revenge injuries.” 
 
 What maxim, what law, can the weftern people 
 brin" in competition with fuch exalted morality ? 
 Then in how many places, and how ftrongiy, does 
 lie recommend humility ? Did this amiable virtue 
 prevail among men, there would be a total end of 
 all quarrels and broils. 
 
 Kou, I have read all that Confutzee, and the 
 fages before him, have faid about humility ; but 
 none of them, I think, have been lufiiciently accu- 
 rate in their definition of it. There may, perhaps, be 
 but little humility in taking on one to ccnfure them j 
 but, with all due humility, I own that they are be- 
 yond my .comprehenfion. What is your idea 01 
 humility ? 
 
 Cu-su. Humility I take to be mental modefty; 
 for as to external modefty, it is no more than civi- 
 lity. Humility cannot confift in denying to one’s 
 felf that fuperiority which we may have acquired 
 above another. An able phyfician cannot but be 
 fenfible that he is pofiefted of a knowledge infinite- 
 ly beyond his delirious patient. The teacher of 
 aftronomy mull neceflarily think himfelf more 
 learned than his fcholar ; but they muft not pride 
 themfelves in their fuperior talents. Humility is 
 not debafement, but a corrective to felf-love, as 
 modefty is the temperament to pride. 
 
 Kou. Well, it is in the practice of all thcfe 
 virtues, and the worlhip of one firnple and univer- 
 fal God, that I propofe to live, far from the chi- 
 meras of fophifts, and the illufion of falfe prophets. 
 The love of mankind fliall be my virtue, and the 
 Jove of God my religion. As to the god Fo, and 
 
 E 4 Laotzee, 
 
56 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 Laotzee and Vitfnou, who has fo often become in-* 
 carnate among the Indians, and Sammonocodom, 
 who came down from heaven to fly a kite among 
 the Siamefe, together with the Camis, who went 
 from the moon to vifit Japan; I cannot endure 
 fuch impious fooleries. 
 
 How weak, and at the fame time how cruel, is 
 it for a people to conceit that there is no god but 
 with them only ! it is downright blafphemy. The 
 light of the fun irradiates all nations, and the light 
 of God fhines only in a little infignificant tribe in 
 a corner of this globe. That ever fuch a thought 
 could enter the mind of man ! The Deity fpeaks 
 to the heart of all men of all nations, and they 
 Ihould, from one end of the univerfe to the other, 
 be linked together in the bonds of charity. 
 
 Cu-su. O wife Kou ! you have fpoke like one 
 infpired by the Chang-ti himfelf ; you will make a 
 worthy prince. From being my pupil you are be- 
 come my teacher. 
 
 The JAPANESE CATECHISM. 
 
 The Indian. 
 
 I S itfo, that formerly the Japanefe knew nothi-g 
 of cookery ; that they had fubmitted their king- 
 dom to the great Lama ; that this great Lama ar- 
 bitrarily prtfcribed what they fhould eat and drink; 
 that he ufed, at times, to fend to you an inferior 
 Lama for receiving the tributes, who, in return, 
 gave you a fign of proteftion, which he made wjth 
 his two fore-fingers and thumb ? 
 
 The Japanese. 
 
 Alas ! it is but too true ; nay, all the places of 
 the Canufi, or the chief cooks of our ifland, were 
 
 diipofed 
 
DICTIONARY. '57 
 
 difpofed of by the Lama, and the love of God was 
 quite out of the queftion. Farther, every houfe of 
 our feculars pa ; d annually an ounce of filver to this 
 head-cook of Thibet, whilft all the amends we 
 had was fome fmall plates of relicks, and thefe 
 none of the belt tailed ; and on every new whim 
 of his, as making war againft the people of Tan- 
 gut, we were faddled with frelh lubfidies. Our 
 nation frequently complained, but all we got by 
 it was to pay the more for preluming to complain. 
 At length love, which does every thing for the 
 bell, freed us from this galling thraldom. One of 
 our emperors quarrelled with the great Lama about 
 a woman ; but it mull be owned that they who in 
 this affair did us the bell turn, were our Canufi, or 
 Pauxcofpies ; it is to them that, in fa£t, we owe our 
 deliverance, and it happened in this manner : 
 
 The great Lama, forfooth, infilled on being al- 
 ways in the right •, our Dairi and Canufi would 
 have it that fometimes, at leall, they might be in 
 the right. This claim the great Lama derided, 
 as an abfurdity •, on which our gentry, being as 
 ftiff as he was haughty, broke with him for ever. 
 
 Ind. Well, ever fince you have had golden 
 days, I fuppofe ? 
 
 Jap. far from it •, for near two hundred years 
 there was nothing but perfecutions, violences, and 
 bloodlhed among us. After all our Canufis pre- 
 tending to be in the right, it is but an hundred 
 years lince they have had their right reafon ; but 
 fince this time, we may boldly elleem ourfelves one 
 of the happiell nations on the earth. 
 
 Ind. How can that be, if, as reported, you 
 have no lefs than twelve different fedls of cookery 
 among you ? Why you mull always be at daggers 
 drawing. 
 
 Jap, 
 
5 s A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 Jap. Why fo ? If there are twelve cooks, and 
 each has a different receipt, fhall we,inftead of din- 
 ing, cut each other’s throats ? No : every one may 
 regale himfelf at that cook’s whofe manner of 
 dreffing vidtuals he likes beft. 
 
 Ind. True; tallies are not to be difputed 
 about : yet people will make them a matter of 
 contention, and all Tides grow hot. 
 
 Jap. After long difputing, men come to fee 
 the mifchiefs of thefe jarrings, and at length agree 
 on a reciprocal toleration ; and certainly they can 
 do nothing better. 
 
 Ind. And pray what are thefe cooks who 
 make fuch a ftir in your nation about the art of 
 eating and drinking ? 
 
 Jap. Firft, there’s the Breuxehs, who never al- 
 low any pork or pudding ; they hold with the old- 
 fafliioned cookery ; they would as foon die, as 
 lard a fowl ; then they deal much in numbers, 
 and if an ounce of filver be to be divided between 
 them and the eleven other cooks, they inftantly fe- 
 cure one-half to themfelves, and the remainder 
 take who will. 
 
 Ind. I fancy you do not often foul a plate with 
 thefe folks. 
 
 Jap. Never. Then there’s the Pifpatcs, who, 
 on fome days of the week, and even for a confi- 
 derable time of the year, will gormandize on tur- 
 bot, trouts, foals, falmon, fturgeon, be they ever 
 fo dear, and would not for the world touch a 
 fweetbread of veal, which may be had for a groat, 
 
 As for us Canufi, we are very fond of beef and 
 a kind of paltry ware, in Japanefe called pudding. 
 Now all the world allows our cooks to be infinite- 
 ly more knowing than thofe of the Pifpates : no- 
 body has gone farther than we in finding out what 
 * was 
 
DICTIONARY. 5* 
 
 was the garum of the Romans ; we furpafs alt 
 others in our knowledge of the onions of antient 
 Egypt, the locufl pafte of the primitive Arabs, the 
 Tartarian horfe-flefh •, and there is always fome- 
 thing to be learned in the books of thofe Canufi 
 commonly known by the name of Pauxcolpies. 
 
 I fhall omit thofe who eat only in Tarluh, thofe 
 who obferve the vincal diet, the Batiftans, and 
 others •, but the Quekars defervc particular notice. 
 Though I have very often been at table with them,. 
 
 I never law one get drunk, or fwear an oath. It is 
 a hard matter to cheat them, but tlien they never 
 cheat you. The law of loving one’s neighbour as 
 one’s felf feems really peculiar to then? •, for, in 
 good truth, how can an honeft Japanele talk of lov- 
 ing his neighbour as himfelf, when, for a little pay, 
 he go°s as a hireling, to blow his brains out, and 
 hew him with a four inch broad fabre, and all this 
 in form ; then he, at the fame time, expofts him- 
 felf to the like fate, tq be Ihot or fabred : fo he 
 may with more truth be faid to hate his neigh- 
 bour as himfelf. This is a phrenzy the Quekars 
 were never pofiefiec!. with. They fay, and very 
 juftly, that poor mortals are earthen veffels, made 
 to laft but a very Ihon time, and that they fhould 
 not wantonly go and break themfelves 'to pieces 
 one againft another. 
 
 I own, that were I not a Canufi, I fhould take 
 part with the Quekars •, foi you fee, that there can 
 be no wranglings nor blows with fuch peaceable 
 cooks. There is another ;nd very numerous 
 branch of cooks called Diefla •, with th'efe every 
 one, without diftin&ion, is welcome to their table, 
 and you are at full liberty to eat as wou like •, you 
 have larded or barded fowls, or ndtWr larded nor 
 barded, egg fauce, or oil ; partridge, himon, white 
 or red wines ; thefe things they hold as natters of 
 
 indiference. 
 
6o A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 indifference, provided you fay a Ihort prayer before 
 and after dinner, and even without this ceremony 
 before breakfaft •, and with good-natured worthy 
 men they will banter about the great Lama, the 
 Turlah, Vincal, and Memnon, &c. only thefe 
 Dieftos mull acknowledge our Canufi to be very 
 profound cooks-, and efpecially let them never talk 
 of curtailing our incomes ; then we fhall live very 
 eafily together. 
 
 Ind. But ftill there muff be cookery by law 
 eftablilhed, or the king’s cookery. 
 
 Jap. There mud fo ; but when the king of 
 Japan has regaled himfelf plentifully, he Ihould be 
 chearful and indulgent, and not hinder his good 
 fubjefts from having their repafts. 
 
 Ind. But Ihould fome hot-headed people take 
 on themfelves to eat faufages clofe to the king’s 
 nofe, when the king is known to have an averfion 
 to that food ; Ihould a mob of four 6r five thoufand 
 of them get together, each with his gridiron, to 
 broil their faufages, and infult thafe who are againft 
 eating them — v / 
 
 Jap. In fuch a cafe they oaght to be punifhed 
 as turbulent drunkards. But<*ve have obviated this 
 danger ; none but thofe Mho follow the royal 
 cookery are capable of homing any employment ; 
 all others may, indeed, e?t as they pleafe, but this 
 humour excludes thenffrom fome emoluments. 
 Tumults are ftri&ly forbidden, and inftantly pu- 
 nched without merct/or mitigation ; all quarrels 
 at table are carefully /eftrained by a precept of our 
 great Japanefe cook who has written in the facred 
 language, “ Suti r*ho, cus flat, natis in ufum lseti- 
 « tiae fcyphis pu^nare tracum eft:*’ that is, “ the 
 " intent of Staffing is a fober and decent mirth ; 
 f but tojhrow glaffes atone another is favage.” 
 
 . / Under 
 
DICTIONARY. 
 
 Under thefe maxims we live very happily •, our 
 liberty is fecured by our Taicofemas we are every 
 day ^rowing more and more opulent ; we have 
 two hundred junks of the line, and are dreaded 
 
 by our neighbours. . 
 
 Ind. Why then has the pious rhymer Recna 
 (fon to the fo juftly celebrated Indian poet Recna) 
 faid in a didattic work of his, intitled Grace, and 
 not the Graces, 
 
 Le Japon oil jadis bvilla tant de lumiere, 
 
 Ne’eft plus qu’un trifle amas de folles vifions.' 
 
 <l Japan, once famed for intellectual light, 
 
 ‘ c lies now involved in error and chimerical 
 “ vifion.” 
 
 Jap. That’Recna is himfelf an arrant vifiona- 
 ry. Does not that weak Indian know, that it is 
 we who have taught his countrymen what light is ? 
 That it is to us India owes its knowing the 
 courfe of the planets ; that it is we who have made 
 known to man the primitive laws of nature, and 
 the doCtrine of fluxions ? To defcend to things 
 of more common ufe •, by us his countrymen 
 were taught to build junks in mathematical pro- 
 portions they are beholden to us for thole co- 
 verings of their legs which they call wove ftock- 
 ino-s. Now is it poflible that, after fuch admirable 
 and ufeful inventions, we fhould be madmen ? 
 And if he has rhimed on the follies of others, docs 
 that make him the only wife man ? Let him leave 
 us to our own cookery, and, if he muft be verfify- 
 ; n o- 1 would advife him to chufe more poetical fub- 
 
 C< This Recna, trufting to the vifionaries of his 
 cpuntry, has advanced, u That no good iauces were 
 
Cl A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 “ to be made unlefs Brama himfelf, out of his par- 
 “ ticular favour, taught his favourites to make the 
 * c fauce •, that there was an infinite number of 
 “ cooks, who, with the bell intentions andmoft 
 ee earneft endeavours, were under ?„n impofiibility 
 tc of making a ragout •, Brama, from mere ill will, 
 ** difabling them.” Such ftuff will not go dov/n 
 in Japan, where the following fentence is efteemed 
 an indifputable truth : 
 
 “ God never adts by partial will, but by general 
 laws.” 
 
 Ind. What can be faid ! He is full of his 
 Country’s prejudices, thole of his party, and his 
 own. 
 
 Jap. A world of prejudices indeed ! 
 
 The COUNTRY PRIEST’s CATECHISM. 
 
 Aristds. 
 
 S O, my dear Thectimus, you are going to be s 
 country parfon. 
 
 Theotimu s. 
 
 Yes, l have had a fmall pariili conferred on me,* 
 iinu I like it better than a larger ; it is more fuited 
 both to my parts and my activity ; having but one 
 foul.myfelf, the i'uperintendance and direction of fe- 
 venty thoufand would certainly be too much for 
 me; and I have ever wondered at the daringnefs of 
 thofe who have taken on them the care of thofe 
 lmmenlS diftridts. I cannot, in any tolerable mea- 
 lure, hnd myfelf equal to fuch a charge ; a larse 
 floc.c really frightens me, but with a fmall onel 
 may perhaps do fome good. I have a fmattering 
 of toe law, enough, with my careful endeavours. 
 
DICTIONARY. 6 $ 
 
 to prevent my poor parifiiioners frem ruining one 
 another by litigations i I am fo far a phyfician as 
 to prelcribe to them in common cafes ; and 1 have 
 fo far looked into our beft treadles on agriculture, 
 that my advice may fometimes be of lervice • to 
 them. The lord of the manor and his lady are 
 mighty good fort of people, and no devotees ; they 
 will fecond my endeavours to do good, fo that I 
 promife mylell a very happy time of it, and that 
 thofe among whom 1 am to live will not be the 
 wo lie for my company. 
 
 Arist. But could you not like to have a wife ? 
 It w'ould be a great comfort after preaching, Ting- 
 ing, confeffing, communicating, baptizing, and bu- 
 rying, to be welcomed at your return home by an 
 affectionate, cleanly, and virtuous wife •, Ihe would 
 fi^ke care of your linen and perfoti, divert you when 
 in health, tend you in licknefs, and make you 
 the father of pretty children, the good education ot 
 whom would be of public advantage. I really pity 
 your order, whofe whole time is (pent in the molt 
 valuable fervice of mankind, yet are debarred of a 
 comfort and folacement fo deledtable, and withal 
 fo neceflary. _ . 
 
 Tueot. The Greek church makes a point of 
 encouraging marriage in their priefts ; the- church 
 of England and the Protsftants univerfally adt with 
 the like wifdom •, but the policy of the Latin 
 church is quite oppofite, and I mull fubmit to it. 
 Perhaps in the prefent prevalence of a philofophi- 
 cal fpirit, were a council convened, its decrees 
 would be more favourable to human nature than 
 thofe of the council of Trent •, but till that happy 
 time, I mull: conform to the prefent laws ; I am 
 no (tranger to its difficulties, but fo many of my 
 betters having taken the yoke on them, it is not 
 for me to murmur. 
 
 Arist. 
 
*4 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 Arist. You have a great lhare of learning, and 
 are likewife mailer of a nervous eloquence ■, how 
 do you intend to preach before a congregation of 
 villagers ? 
 
 Theoti As I would before kings. I will infill 1 
 on morality, and never meddle with controverfy. 
 God forbid that I Ihould go about diving into con- 
 comitant grace, effectual grace which may be re- 
 filled, l'ulficient grace which does not fuffice -, or 
 examining whether the angels who came to Lot 
 had a body, or only feigned to eat. A thoufand 
 things there are, which my congregation would 
 not underlland, nor I neither : my endeavour Ihall 
 be to make them good, and to be fo myfelf ; but 
 I Ihall make no divines, nor be fo myfelf, no more 
 than Ihall be abfolutely neceflary. 
 
 Arist. You will make a good priell, indeed ! 
 I think I mull purchafe a country-houfe in your 
 parifh. But be fo kind as to tell me how you will 
 manage confelfion. 
 
 Theot. Confeffiofi is highly beneficial, a llrong 
 curb to vice, and a very early inllitution. It was 
 antiently pradlifed at the celebration of all the myf- 
 teries of the church ; and we have imitated and 
 fandtified fo devout an obfervance : it avails great- 
 ly, turning refentment and hatred into forgivenefs 
 and friendlhip-, by it the petty rogues are induced 
 to rellore what they had ilolen. I own it has alfo 
 its inconveniences. There are too many indifcreet 
 confelfors, chiefly among the monks, who fometimes 
 teach girls more fooleries than they learn among 
 the young men. In confeffion there fhould be no 
 particulars; it is no juridical interrogatory, but on- 
 ly a finner’s acknowledgment of his faults to the 
 Supreme Being, before another finner, who is foon 
 to make the like acknowledgment. This falutary 
 avowal is not made to gratify a frivolous curiofity. 
 
 Arist, 
 
DICTIONARY. 6- 
 
 Arjst. And excommunications ; will you ever 
 proceed to iuch extremities ? 
 
 Theot. No; fome rituals excommunicate 
 grafhoppers, forcerers, and ftage-players. Graf- 
 hoppers I fhall never exclude from my church, for 
 they never come there; as little rtrall I excommu- 
 nicate forcerers, feeing there are none ; and ftage- 
 players being authorized by the magiftrates, and 
 penfioned by his majefty, it would ill become me 
 to brand them with infamy: and, to be in- 
 genuous, I can with pleafure read a play, when 
 kept within the limits of decency ; fuch, for in- 
 ftance, as Athaliah and the Mifanthrope, which 
 contain a great deal of moral inftrudbion. The lord 
 of our manor has fome fuch pieces acted at his feat 
 by young people of a theatrical turn ; thefe exhi- 
 bitions lead to virtue through the attraftive of plea- 
 fure, form the tafte, and greatly contribute to 
 a juft elocution. Now, for my part, in all this 
 I fee nothing but what is very, innocent, and even 
 very ufeful ; fo that I intend, purely for my in- 
 ftrudtion, to be fometimes a lpedtacor, but in a 
 latticed box, to avoid giving offence to the 
 weak. 
 
 Arist. The more you let me into your way 
 of thinking, the more delirous am I of becoming 
 your parifhioner ; but one point remains, which I 
 think of very great importance. How will you do 
 to hinder the peafants from fuddling on the holi- 
 days, which, you know, is their chief way of keep- 
 ing feftivals ? borne, overcome by a liquid poifon, 
 are feen with their heads drooping almoft to their 
 knees, their hands dangling, their fight and hear- 
 ing loft, in a condition very much beneath beafts ; 
 led home reeling by their lamenting wives, incapa- 
 ble of going to work the next day, often fick, and 
 fometimes. irrecoverably befotted. Others, inf am* 
 
 'F ed 
 
66 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 ed by wine, raife quarrels, which ioon come to fir-' 
 rious blows ; and thefe brutal fcenes, a difgrace to 
 human nature, have not feldom been known £ 
 end in a murder. It is a known truth, that the 
 ftate lofes more fubjedts by holidays than by wars ; 
 now how will you, if not eradicate this execrable 
 •euftom out of your parilh, at leaf! bring it under 
 
 fome regulation ? T n,„ii 
 
 Theot I have a remedy at hand-, I mall not 
 
 only give’ them leave, but exhort them to follow 
 their occupations after divine fervice; and that I 
 will take care to begin very early, for it is their be- 
 ing unemployed on fuch days which fends them to 
 public-houfes ; on the working days we hear of no 
 riot or bloodfhed. Moderate labour is good both 
 for foul and body : befides, the ftate wants then- 
 labour. Let us fuppoie, and the luppofmon is 
 within bounds, five millions of men, one with an- 
 other, doing tenpennyworth of work, and that theie 
 five millions of men are, by fuch a cuftom, ren- 
 dered quite ufelefs no lefs than thirty days m the 
 year; confequently the ftate is deprived of work to 
 the value of thirty times five millions ot tenpences ; 
 
 • now God never enjoined drunkenr.efs, nor fuch 
 detrimental oblervance of feftivals. 
 
 Arist. This will be reconciling devotion and 
 bufinefs, and both are of God’s appointment; 
 •thus you ferve God, and do good to your neigh- 
 bour. But amidft our ecclefiaftical feuds, with 
 
 which party will you fide ? 
 
 Treot. With none. Virtue never occa.ions 
 any difputes, becaufe it comes from God; all theie 
 ■heart-burnings are about opinions, which aie the 
 .inventions of men. 
 
 Arist. Excellent ! I wifh all pric-fts were like 
 
 you. 
 
 
DICTIONARY. 
 
 *7 
 
 CERTAIN, CERTAINTY. 
 
 H OW old may your friend Chriflopher be ? 
 
 Twenty-eight. 1 have feen both his contract 
 of marriage, and the regifter of his birth : I have 
 known him from a child ; twenty-eight is his age. 
 I am as certain of it as certain can be. 
 
 Soon after this man’s anfwer, who was fo fare of 
 what he faid, and of twenty others, in confirmation 
 of the fame thing, I happened to be informed that, 
 for private reafons, and by an odd contrivance, the 
 regifter of Chriftopher’s birth was antedated. They 
 to whom 1 had fpoken, knowing nothing of this, 
 are ftill in the greateft certainty of what is not. 
 
 Had you, in Copernicus’s time, afked all the 
 world. Did the fun rife, did the fun fet, to-day ? 
 they would, one and all, have anfwered. That’s a 
 certainty ; we are fully certain of it : thus they 
 were certain, and yet miftaken. 
 
 Witchcraft, divinations, and pofiefiions, were, for 
 along time, univerfally accounted the moft certain 
 things in the world. What numberlefs crowds 
 have feen all thofe fine things, and have been cer- 
 tain of them ! but at prefent, fuch certainty begins 
 to lofe its credit. 
 
 A young man, juft entered on geometry, and 
 gone no farther than the definition of triangles, 
 calls on me : Are not you certain, faid I to him, 
 that the three angles of a triangle are equal to two 
 right angles? lie anfwers me, that, fo far from 
 being certain, he has not a clear idea of the pro- 
 pofition ; on which I demonftrate it to him ; this, 
 indeed, makes him very certain of it, and he will 
 be fo as long as he lives. 
 
 F 2 Here 
 
 
M fiSS 
 
 ?! K fc g tr°mS"S proved by the fame principle, that 
 a rhin cr cannot, at the fame time, be and not be. 
 
 I cannot, 'at one and the fame time, exift and not 
 Lift feel and not feel. A triangle cannot have 
 and not have a hundred and eighty degrees, 
 
 1U1 T^s'thephyficS certainty of my exiftence and 
 my ienfation, and mathematical certainty, are of a 
 like validity, though differing in kind 
 
 But this is by no means applicable to the cer 
 tainty founded on appearances, or the unanimous. 
 
 ^ How fay you, are not you certain that there is- 
 fuch a city as Pekin ? Have you not iome Pekin- 
 manufadlurcs ? Arc you not 
 
 of Pekin from the accounts of perfons of different 
 nations and different opinions, and wnting violently 
 againft each other, when preaching the truth m 
 that city. I anfwer, that it is highly piobabc 
 there was fuch a city at that time , but I would 
 not lay my life on its exiftence •, whereas at any 
 time will I ftake my life that the three angles of a 
 triangle are equal to two right angles. 
 
 The DictionaireEncyclopedioue has a very 
 
 droll affertion, that ihould all Paris lay that mar- 
 lhal Saxe is rifen from the dead, a. man ought to 
 be as lure and certain of it, as he is that tne mar 
 lhal o-ained the battle of tontenoy, on hearing a 
 Pari? fay lo. Excellent reafoning ' I believe all 
 
 Paris when it tells me a thing morally poffible; 
 
 mult 
 
 
DICTIONARY. 69 
 
 muft I therefore believe all Paris when it tells me a 
 tiling which is both morally and naturally impof- 
 ffble ? 
 
 The author of this article, I fuppofe, was in a 
 bantering ftrain, and the other author againft 
 whom it was written, probably means no more by 
 ■his extatic applaufes at the end of it. 
 
 CHAIN of EVENTS. 
 
 I T is an old fuppofition, that all events are link- 
 ed together by an invincihle fatality : this is de- 
 ltiny, which Homer makes fuperior to Jupiter 
 himfelf. This fovereignof gods and men frankly 
 declares that he cannot lave his fon Sarpedon from 
 dying at the time appointed. Sarpedon was born at 
 the very inftant that he was to be born, at any other 
 he could not be born ± fo he could not die any 
 where but before Troy j he could be buried no 
 .where but in Lycia his body was at the dellined 
 .time to produce herbs and pulfe, which were to be 
 changed into the fubftance of fome Lycians. H :s 
 heirs were to inftitute a new form of government 
 in his dominions ; this new form was to affect the 
 neighbouring kingdoms, and this put thofe who 
 bordered on thefe neighbouring kingdoms on new 
 meafures of peace or war : thus the fate of the 
 whole earth came gradually to be determined by 
 that of Sarpedon, which depended on another event, 
 and this by a chain of other events, was connedted 
 with the origin of things. 
 
 Had only one of theie tranfadlions been differ- 
 ently difpofed, it would have cauled a different 
 univerfe ; and that the prefent universe Ihould 
 £xift and not exift is an impoffibility, therefore it 
 
jo A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 was not pofiible for Jupiter, with all his omnipo" 
 tence, to fave his Ton’s life. 
 
 This fyftem of neceflity and fatality has, accord- 
 ing to Leibnitz, been flruck out by himfelf, under 
 the appellation of sufficient reason, but it is in 
 reality' of very antient date •, that no effedt is with- 
 out a caufe, and that, often, the leaft caufe produces 
 the greateft efiedts, is what the world is not to be 
 aught at this time of day. 
 
 My lord Eoli'ngbroke owns, that the trivial quar- 
 rel between the duchcfs of Marlborough and Mrs. 
 Maftiam put him upon making the leparate treaty 
 between queen Anne and Lewis XIV. This trea- 
 ty brought on the peace of Utrecht. This peace 
 fettled Philip V. on the Spanifh throne. Philip V. 
 difpofieffed the houfe of Auftria of Naples and Si- 
 cily ; thus the Spanifh prince, who is now king of 
 Naples, evidently owes his fcvereignty to Mrs. 
 Mafham : he would not have had it, perhaps he 
 would not fo much as have been born, had the du- 
 chefs of Marlborough behaved with due complai- 
 fance towards the queen of England ; his exiftence 
 at Naples depended on a few follies committed at 
 the court of London. Enquire into the fituation 
 of all the nations on the globe, and they all derive 
 from a chain of events, apparently quite uncon- 
 pedled with any one thing, and connedted with 
 pvery thing. In this immerife machine all is wheel- 
 work, pully, cords, and fpring. 
 
 It is the fame in the phyfical fyftem : a wind blow- 
 ing from the fouth of Africa and the auftral Teas, 
 brings with it part of the African atmofphere, which 
 falls down again in rain among the vallies of the 
 Alps, and thefe rains frudtify our lands. Again our 
 porthern wind wafts our vapours among the Ne- 
 groes : thus we benefit Guinea, and are benefited 
 
DICTIONARY. 7* 
 
 % it ; and this chain reaches from one end of the 
 univerfe to the other. 
 
 But the truth of this principle, I think, has been 
 ftretched to a ftrange excels. Some will nave it, 
 that there is no atom ever fo minute but its mo- 
 tion contributed to the prefent diipofition ol the 
 whole world •, and that every petty incident, whe- 
 ther among men or brutes, is an effential link in 
 the great chain of fatality. 
 
 Let us underftand one another : every effeft has 
 evidently its caufe, recurring from caufe to caufe, 
 ‘up to the abyfs of eternity •, but every caufe has 
 not its effeft traced forward to the end of time. 
 That all events proceed from others I own •, as the 
 paft has broyg it forth the prefent, the prefent 
 produces the future,-, every thing has fathers, but 
 every thing has not -always children. This can- 
 not be better elucidated than by a genealogical 
 tree ; every family is deduced from Adam, but 
 many of its branches die without iflue. 
 
 The events of this world are not without their 
 genealogical tree : the inhabitants of Gaul and 
 Spain are indifputably delcended from Gomer, 
 and the Ruffians from Magog, his younger brother, 
 for fo it is laid in many huge books then we are 
 of courfe indebted to Magog for the fixty thoufand 
 Ruffians now in arms towards the confines of i J o- 
 merania, and the fixty thoufand French in the 
 neighbourhood of Franckfort. But I do not fee 
 how Magog’s fpitting to the right or left near 
 Mount Caucafus, or his making two or three 
 arches on the inlide of a well, or his lying on his 
 right or his left fide, could have any confiderable 
 influence in the czarina Elizabeth’s refolution of 
 fending an army to the affiftanceof Mary Therefa, 
 
 emprcfs of the Romans. That my dog dreamed or 
 1 V „ did 
 
72 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 did not dream in its deep has aay relation to the 
 grand mogul’s concerns, is what I cannot lee 
 into. 
 
 It muft be confidered, that all things are not 
 full in nature ; and that every motion is hot com- 
 municated fuccefiively, fo as to be continued 
 round the world. On throwing into water a body 
 of equal denfity, you eafily conceive that in fome 
 fhort time the motion of fuch body, and that 
 which it has caufed in the water, will ceafe ; moti- 
 on is loft and recovered : thus the motion which 
 might have been produced by Magog’s fpitting in 
 a well, can have no affinity with what is now do- 
 ing in Ruffia and Pruffia ; thus the prefer.t events 
 are not iffued from all the former events •, they 
 have their dired lines •, but a thoufand petty col- 
 lateral lines do not in the leaft conduce to them: 
 I fay it again, every being has its fathers, but every, 
 being has not children. 1 may poffibly enlarge on 
 this head, when I come tofpeak of DESTINY. 
 
 CHAIN of CREATED BEINGS. 
 
 A T my firft reading Plato, I was charmed 
 with his gradation of beings, rifing from the 
 ilighteft atom to the fupreme efience. Such a 
 fcale ftruck me with admiration ; but, on a clofer 
 furvey of it, this auguft phantom difappeared, as 
 formerly ghofts uled to hie away at the crowing 
 of the cock. 
 
 Fancy is, at firft, raviflied in beholding the im- 
 perceptible al'cent from fenfelefs matter to organized 
 bodies, from plants to zoophytes, from zoophytes 
 to animals, from thefe to men, from men to ge- 
 nii, from thele aetheral genii to Immaterial efience, 
 and laftly numberlefs different orders of thefe ef- 
 
 fences. 
 
DICTIONARY. 73 
 
 fences, afce.oding through a fucceffion of increafing 
 beauties and perfections, to God himfelf. The 
 devout are mightily taken with this hierarchy, as 
 reprefenting the pope and his cardinals, followed 
 by the archbilhops and bifhops, and then by the 
 reverend train of reftors, vicars, unbeneficed priefts, 
 deacons, and fubdeacons •, then come the Regulars, 
 and the Capuchins bring up the rear. 
 
 But from God to his moll perfedt creatures the 
 diftance is fomething greater than between the pope 
 and the dean of the la'cred college ; this dean may 
 come to be pope, whereas the moil perfedt the 
 genii never can be God. Infinitude lies between 
 God and him. 
 
 Neither does this chain, this pretended gra- 
 dation, exift any longer in vegetables and animals, 
 fome fpecies of plants and animals being totally ex- 
 tinguifhed. The murex is not to be found ; it 
 was forbidden to eat the griffin and ixion, which, 
 whatever Bochart may fay, have, for ages pad, noj, 
 been in nature*! where then is the chain ? 
 
 If no fpecies have been loft, yet it is manifeft they 
 may be deftroyed, for lions and rhinocerofes are 
 growing very icarce. 
 
 It is far from being improbable that there 
 have been breeds of men now no longer exifting ; 
 butlgrant that they all have been preferved, as truly 
 as the whites, the blacks, the Caffres, to whom 
 nature has given a membraneous apron hanging 
 from their belly hall down their thighs 5 the 
 Samoiedes, where one of the nipples of the wo- 
 men’s breads is of a fine ebony, &c. 
 
 Isthere not a manifeft chafm between the monkey 
 add man ? Is it not eafy to conceive a two-legged 
 animal without feathers, endowed with underftand- 
 ing, but without fpeech or our fhape, which we 
 jnight tame and inftrud, fo that it fhould anfwer 
 
74 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 to our figns, and fervc us to many purpofes •, and 
 between this new fpecies and that of man, might 
 not others be contrived ? 
 
 Farther, divine Plato, you quarter in the firma- 
 ment a feries of coeleftial fubftances. As for us, we 
 believe the exiftence of fome of theie fubftances, 
 being taught lb by our faith. But what grounds 
 can you have for luch a belief? It is to be fup- 
 pofed, that you never converfed with Socrates’s 
 genius •, at)d the good man Heres, who kindly 
 role from the dead, purely to communicate to you 
 the u yfteries of the other world, did not fay a 
 word to you about luch fubftances. 
 
 This luppofed chain is not lefs imperfect in the 
 fenfible univerfe. 
 
 What gradation, pray, is there between thofe 
 planets of yours ? The moon is forty times fmaller 
 than our globe. In your journey from the moon 
 through the ether you meet with Venus, which is 
 nearly as big as the earth. Whence you come to 
 Mercury turning in an ellipfis, which is very differ- 
 ent from Venus’ orbits •, he is twenty-feven times 
 fmaller than our planet, and the fun is a million 
 times larger. Mars is five times fmaller-, the former 
 performs his orbit in two years, Jupiter its neigh- 
 bour in twelve, Saturn takes up thirty, and yet 
 Saturn, the meft diftant of any, is not fo large as 
 Jupiter. Amidft thefe difproportions what becomes 
 of the gradation ? 
 
 And then, how can you think that, in fuch im- 
 menfe voids, there can be a chain whereby every 
 thing is connefted -, if fuch a chain there be, it is 
 certainly that dil'covered by Newton, and by which 
 all the globes of the planetary world gravitate 
 towards each other, throughout thefe immenfe 
 (paces. 
 
 Oh ! 
 
DICTIONARY. 75 
 
 Oil ! Plato, though ib much admired, your 
 .writings fwarm with fables and fictions ; and the 
 Calfiterides, where, in your time, men went quite 
 naked, has produced a philofopher, who have taught 
 the world truths as great and fublime as your no- 
 tions were erroneous and puerile. 
 
 CHARACTER 
 
 C OMES from a Greek word, fignifying Im- 
 preffion and Graving ; it is what nature has 
 engraven in us •, then can we efface it ? This is a 
 weighty queltion. A mifhapen nole, cats eyes, or 
 any deformity in the features, may be hidden with 
 a mafque, and can I do more with the character 
 which nature has given me ? A man naturally 
 impetuous and paffionate comes before Francis I. 
 king of France, to complain of an outrage : the 
 prince’s afpeft, the refpe&ful behaviour of the 
 courtiers, the very place, make a powerful impref- 
 fion on him. With eyes call down, a loft voice, 
 and every fign of humility, he prefents his pe- 
 tition, fo that one would think he was naturally as 
 mild and polite, as are (at leaft at that time) the 
 courtiers, among whom he is even out of counte- 
 nance •, but if Francis I. be a phyfiognomift, he 
 will ealily difcover by the fullen fire in his eyes, 
 by the draining of the mulcles in his face, 
 and the comprellion of his lips, that this man is not 
 really fo mild as he is obliged to appear. The fame 
 man follows him to Pavia, is taken with him, and 
 confined in thefame prifon atMadrid; here the im- 
 preffion made on him by Francis’s afpeft and gran- 
 deur ceales ; he grows familiar with the objeft of 
 his relpect. One day drawing on the king’s boots, 
 and doing it wrong, 'the king, foured by his m f- 
 > - fortune. 
 
7 6 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 fortune, takes pet-, on this my gentleman, making 
 off all refped to his majefty, throws the boots out 
 of the window. 
 
 Sixtus Quintus was naturally petulant, obui- 
 nate, haughty, violent, revengeful, and arrogant , 
 this character, however,feems quite mollified amidff 
 the trials.of his noviciate. But no fooper has he at- 
 tained to lome confideration in his order, than he 
 flies into a paffion againft his fuperior, and feverely 
 belabours him with his fifts, till he lays him fprawl- 
 ing. On his being made inquifitor at Venice, his 
 inlolence became intolerable. On his promotion 
 to the purple, he was immediately feized with the 
 rabbia papale, which fo far got the better of his 
 natural character, that he aftefted obfcurity, mor- 
 tification, humility, and a very weak flate of health. 
 At length he is chofen pope, and now the fpring 
 recovers' its whole elafticity, which had been fo long 
 under reftraint : never was a more haughty anti 
 defpotic fovereign known. 
 
 « Naturam expellas furca tamen ipfa redibit.” 
 
 Religion and morality lay a check on the force 
 of the natural temper, but cannot extirpate it. A 
 fot, when in a convent, reduced to half a pint of 
 cyder at each meal, will no longer be feen drunk, 
 but his love of wine will ever be the fame. 
 
 Age weakens the natural character ; it is a tree 
 [which produces only l'ome degenerate fruits, ftili 
 are they of one and the fame nature. It grows 
 knotty, and over-run with mofs, and worm-eaten ; 
 but amidft all this, it continues what it was, whe- 
 ther oak or pear-tree. Could a man change his 
 character, he would give himfelf one ; he would be 
 fuperior to nature. Can we give ourfelves any 
 thing ? What have we that we have not received ? 
 6 Endea- 
 
 V' 
 
DICTIONARY. 77 
 
 Tndeavour to rouze the indolent to a conftant ac- 
 tiv'ity, to freeze the impetuous into an apathy, to 
 
 give a tafte for poetry and mufic to one who has 
 neither tafte or ears, you may as well go about 
 wa(hin<r the Blackmocr white, or giving light to 
 one born blind. We only improve, polilli, and con- 
 ceal, what nature has put into us ; we have no- 
 thing of our own putting. 
 
 A country gentleman is told, there are too many 
 fifh in that pond, they will never thrive; your 
 meadows are crowded with Iheep, they have not 
 grafs iufficient, they fall away to nothing. Some- 
 time after this advice, it fo fails out, that the pikes 
 devour half the carps, and the wolves thin his 
 meadows, fo that what ftieep are left, fatten apace. 
 Shall he pique himlelf on his management . W ell, 
 this country gentleman is no other than thyieU : 
 one of thy paflions has fwallowed up the reit, and 
 thou boaftcft of lelf-conqueft. How very few 
 among us, who may not be compared to that de- 
 crepit general, ninety years old, who meeting 
 lome young officers making a little fiee with gu s, 
 laid to them, quite in a paflion, by, gentlemen, 
 what do you mean ! do I let you any fuch exam- 
 ple ? 
 
 CHINA. 
 
 W F oo to fetch earth from China, as if wc 
 had none -, Huffs, as if we were without 
 ft ufts • a fmall herb to infufe into water, as if our 
 climates did not afford any fimples. In return, 
 which is a very commendable zeal, we are .or con- 
 verting the Chinete ; but we fhould not offer to 
 difnute their antiquity, and tell them that they are 
 *■ idolaters. 
 
78 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 idolaters : for, indeed, what would be thought; 
 of a capuchin who, after being kindly entertained 
 at a feat of the Montmorenci’s, fhould go about 
 to perfuade them that they were but new made no- 
 bles, like fecretaries of ftate, and accufe them of 
 being idolaters, having obferved in this feat two 
 or three of the conftable’s ftatues, which they 
 highly value. 
 
 The celebrated Wolff, mathematical profeffor in 
 the univerfity of Halle, once made a judicious ora- 
 tion on the Chinefe philofophers ; he praifed this 
 antient race of men, though different from us in 
 the beard, eyes, nofc, ears, and reafoning ; he 
 commended the Chinefe as adoring one Supreme 
 God, and chcrifhing virtue, thus doing juftice to 
 the emperors of China, to theKolaos, to the tribu- 
 nals, to the literati : the juftice, which the bonzes 
 deferve, is of a different kind. 
 
 This Wolff, you muft know, drew to Halle a 
 great refort of fcholars from all nations : there was 
 in the fame univerfity a profelfor of divinity nam- 
 ed Engel, who had fcarce a fingle fcholar ; this 
 man exafperated at ftarving with cold in his emp- 
 ty auditory, conceived a defign, and, to be fure 
 very juftly, to ruin the profeffor of mathematics, 
 and, as uiual with fuch men, he charged him with 
 not believing in God. 
 
 Some European writers, utter ftrangers to China, 
 had affirmed, that ail the men of any note or con- 
 fideraiion at Pekin were atheifts ; now Wolff had 
 commended the.Pekin philofophers ; Wolff there- 
 foie was an atheift ; envy and hatred never formed 
 better fyliogifms. Yet this argument, with the help 
 or a cabal and a prorcdtor, appeared fo conclufive to 
 the king of the country, that he fent the mathema- 
 tician a dilemma in form, the import of which was, 
 e ther .to leave Halle in twenty-four hours, or to 
 
DICTIONARY. 79 
 
 be handed. As Wolff always reat'oned very juftly, 
 he immediately left the city j but by his departure 
 the kino- loft two or three hundred thoul'and crowns 
 a year, which the great number ol that plulolb- 
 pher’s lcholars brought into the kingdom. 
 
 May this be a document to ibvereigns, not al- 
 ways to lend an ear to calumny, and lacrifice a 
 great man to the rancour of a blockhead. 
 
 Let us return to China. 
 
 What do we mean here, at the fartheft part 
 of the weft, thus virulently to difpute whether 
 Fohi, emperor of China, was the fourteenth em- 
 peror or not, and whether Fohi lived three thou- 
 sand, or two thoufand nine hundred years before 
 our common aera ? 1 fhould laugh at two Iriftimen 
 wrangling at Dublin about who, in the twelfth 
 century, was the owner of the eftate which I now 
 hold -, is it not clear that they fhould be deter- 
 mined by me, as having the writings in my hands ? 
 The cafe, I think, is fimilar with regard to the firft 
 emperors of China \ the tribunals of the country arc 
 the beft judges. 
 
 After all your important altercations aoout the 
 fourteen princes who reigned before tohi, the re- 
 fult will be, that China was then very well peo- 
 pled, and had laws and a political conlutution. 
 Now, let me afk you, whether a nation living in 
 towns, and having laws and fovereigns, does not 
 imply a prodigious antiquity ? Confider the time 
 that mull have palled, and the concurrence of cir- 
 cumftances, before iron could be found out in the 
 mines, and then fitted tor agriculture ; and like- 
 wile before the invention of the Auntie and all other 
 
 " trades. . 
 
 Some who play the fool with their pens have 
 
 contrived a whimAcal fort of calculation ; the Je- 
 fuit Petau, in his fagacious computation, at the 
 
 epocha 
 
 ,) 
 
So A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 cpocha of only two hundred and eighty-five years, 
 after the deluge, gives the earth a hundred times 
 more inhabitants than can be fuppofed in it at pre- 
 fent. Cumbeiland and Whifton are no lefs ridi- 
 culous in their calculations. Good men ! Had 
 they only confulted the regifters of our American 
 colonies, they would have been aftonifhech They 
 \Vould have feen how very flowly the human fpe- 
 cies multiplies, and very often, fo far from in- 
 creafing, diminilhes. 
 
 Let us, therefore, we who are but of yefterday, 
 delcendants from the Celts, who have but juft 
 cleared our wild countries from the forefts with 
 which they were over-run ; let us, I fay, leave the 
 Chinefe and the Indians in the quiet enjoyment of 
 their fine climate and their antiquity ; efpecially 
 let us forbear calling the emperor of China and 
 the foubab of Decan idolaters r neither are we to 
 be infatuated with Chinefe merit. The conftitu- 
 tion of their empire is, indeed, the beft in the 
 whole world, the only one which is intirely mo- 
 delled from paternal power (the mandarins, howe- 
 ver, chaftife their children very feverely) the on- 
 ly one where the governor of a province is puniffi- 
 ed, if, at the expiration of his office, the people do 
 not ffiew their approbation of his conduct by loud 
 acclamations ; the only one which has , inftituted 
 prizes for virtue, whillt every where elfe the laws 
 only puniffi vice ; the only one whofe laws have re- 
 commended themfelves to its conquerors, whilft 
 we are Hill fwayed by the cuftoms of our conque- 
 rors, the Burgundians, the Franks, and the Goths. 
 But it muft be owned, that the commonalty who 
 are bonze-ridden, are no lefs knaviffi than ours ^ 
 that foreigners are extremely impofed on, as 
 amongft us ; that in fciences the Chinefe are two 
 hundred years behind us ; that, like us, they have 
 
 • a thou- 
 
DICTIONARY. Sr 
 
 a thoufamd ridiculous notions, that they give credit 
 to talifmans and judicial altrology, which was alfo 
 our cafe for a long time. 
 
 It muft farther be owned, that they were amazed 
 at our thermometer, at our way of freezing liquors 
 by falt-petre,[and withTorricelli’s andOhtoGueric’s 
 experiments, juft as we ourfelves were at our firft 
 feeing thofe .phyfical exhibitions: farther, their 
 phyficians do not cure mortal diftempers any more 
 than ours •, and the (lighter dinettes nature alone 
 cures them, as here : notwithftanding all this, the 
 Chinefe, four thoufand years ago, when we did not 
 know our letters, were matters of all that is eflen- 
 tially ufeful in that knowledge which we fo much 
 value ourfelves on at prefent. 
 
 CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 Historical Dis q jj i s i t i o n s concerning 
 Christianity. 
 
 I N vain have feveral of the learned exprefied their 
 wonder, that in the hiftorian Jofephus (H) they 
 meet with no trace of Jefus Chrift, the little paf- 
 
 fage 
 
 (H) That the pafl’age concerning Chrift in Jofephus’s hiftory 
 is univerfally allowed to be interpolated, is not true ; very learn- 
 ed men have maintained the contrary. Befides, this is but a 
 negative argument, which can be of no manner of weight 
 againft the pofitive and undoubted authorities of Pagan writ- 
 ers, not one of whom is mentioned by our author. Nothing 
 can be more difrngenuous. The ftar that appeared at Chrift*s 
 birth, and the journey of the Chaldean wifemcn, are mentioned 
 by Chalcidius the Platonirt, “ Eft quoque alia lanctior & vc- 
 
 G “ nerabilior 
 
$2 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 fao-e relating to him in his hiftory being now uni- 
 verfally given up as interpolated. Yet Jofephus s 
 
 father 
 
 « nerabilior hiftoria, qux perhibet ortu ftellx cujufdam noi> 
 morbos mortefque denunciatas, fed defcenfum Dei vene- 
 « ra bilis ad human® confervarionis, rerumque mortalium 
 « gratiam : quam ftellam cum noaurno tempore infpexif- 
 « f ent Chaldxorum profe&o fapientes viri, & confideratione 
 « rerum cxleftium fatis exercitati, quaefiife dicuntur recentis 
 «« ortum Dei, repertaque iila majeftate puerili veneratos effe r 
 & vota Deo tanto convenientia nuncupate. In Commen- 
 
 «< tario ad Timxum.” The (laughter of the innocents by 
 
 Herod is related by Macrobius, who, at the fame time, has 
 given us a refleftion made on that occafion by the emperor 
 Auguftus : “ Cum audiflet inter pueros, quos in Syria Hero- 
 “ des rex Judxorum intra bimatum juflit interfici, filium quo- 
 « que ejus occifum, ait, “ Melius eft Herodis porcum efle quam 
 
 filium. ” Lib. ii> cap. 4. Chrift’s eruclftxion under 
 
 Pontius Pilate is related by Tacitus : “ Tiberio imperitante, 
 << per procuratorem Pontium Pilatum fupplicio affe&us erat.” 
 l ib. xv. The earthquake and miraculous darknefs attend- 
 
 ing it, are recorded by Phlegon, lib. xiii. Chronicorum five 
 Olympiadum. T u o y rm C. B. *ctof. z yevzTo EJiAsiiJ/ic 
 
 yfria (xtyirvi ruv eyvv£i<rptvcii]t ®^oT£^cy* y.olv vv% ugx tvs ifsJgus \ymr 0, 
 KCCl cc^ccq zv * b'£CtVU> (fdWXl, CEWjKOf T£ //.£?*? KXTCcBAvVM yZVOfl BtCf 
 
 wmT^aSutaun x«teV 4 « — Bcfides, thefe very circumftances 
 were mentioned in the public Roman records, to which the 
 early writers of Chriftianity ufed to appeal, as of undoubted 
 authority with their adverfaries. See Grotius de Ver. Rel. Chr. 
 lib. iii. Dr. Clarke on the Evidences of Natural and Revealed 
 Religion, jr. 357. And Mr. Addifon, in his little treatife on 
 the Chriftian Religion, fe£l. 2 . 
 
 The difficulties in the hiftory of the Evangelifts are fuefo 
 as may be eafily removed by confulting the annotations of 
 learned expofitors, or even by a diligent meditation of the 
 Scriptures. If the obicurity of a work were an argument 
 againft its authority, there would be an end of all hiftoricaV 
 credibility. We meet with difficulties in Polybius, Livy, Plu- 
 tarch, and yet wc doubt not of their veracity. 
 
 P>ut 
 
DICTIONARY. 8 ? 
 
 father muft have been an eye-witnefs of Jefus’s 
 miracles. This hiftorian was of the prieftly lineage, 
 and being related to queen Mariamne, Herod’s 
 wife, is minutely particular on all that prince’s 
 proceedings, yet wholly filent as to the life and 
 death of Chrift. Though neither concealing nor 
 palliating Herod’s cruelties, not a word does he 
 fay about his ordering the children to be malfacred. 
 
 But to come to the difficulties mentioned by our author : i . 
 The Zachariah mentioned by St. Matthew, is moft probably 
 concluded to be the Ton of Jehoiada, whom the Jews ftoned 
 to death in the very court of the temple, at the command of 
 Joafh (Chron. ii. 24.) And as for the father’s name not 
 agreeing, Jehoiada might have two names, which was not 
 an uncommon thing among the Jews. Befides, even if we 
 could not find fuch a Zachariah in the Jewifh hiftory, is it 
 a proof that he never exiffed ? Is it to be fuppofed the Scrip- 
 ture has given us every tranfa&ion of that nation, and that 
 nothing has been omitted by the facred hiftorian ? 
 
 2. The difficulties about the genealogy of Chrift have 
 at all times been made ufe of as an argument by the ad- 
 verfaries of our holy religion. St. Matthew and St. Luke 
 have given us two genealogies, which differ in appear- 
 ance, but agree in the main. The Jews were very exaCl in 
 their genealogies, and no doubt but the evangelifts took 
 that of our Saviour from the public records. But it is fup~ 
 pofed by very learned writers, and with the greateft probabi- 
 lity, that one of thefe genealogies is that of Mary, and the 
 other that of Jofeph. St. Matthew made the genealogy of 
 Jofeph, who was the laft male of David’s race defeended from 
 •Solomon ; and St. Luke that of the Virgin Mary, by Nathan 
 from David. There are other opinions in regard to the fo- 
 lution of this difficulty ; but this is fufficient to fhew that the 
 two genealogies may be reconciled. To conclude, we may 
 fafely affirm, with the learned Dr. Clarke, tha*: the evidence 
 which God has afforded for the truth of our religion is abun- 
 dantly fufficient ; and that the caufe of men’s infidelity L 
 not the want of better evidence, but the dominion of their 
 pafiions, which prevents them from hearkening to any reason- 
 able convi&ion. 
 
 G 2 
 
 on 
 
S4 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 ©n an information that a king of the Jews was juft, 
 born. According to the Greek calendar the num- 
 ber of children put to death on that occalion* 
 amounted to fourteen thoufand. 
 
 Of all the cruelties ever committed by all the 
 tyrants that ever lived, this was the moft horrible j 
 a like inftance is not -to be found in hiftory. 
 
 Yet the bell writer the Jews ever had, the only 
 one of any account with the Romans and Greeks, 
 makes no manner of mention of a tranfaffion fo 
 very extraordinary, and fo very dreadful. He fays 
 not a word of the new ftar which had appeared in 
 the eaft at the Saviour’s nativity •, and a phceno- 
 menon fo Angular could not efcape the knowledge 
 of fuch an accurate hiftorian as Jofephus: he is 
 Kkewife filent as to the darknefs, which, at noon- 
 day, covered the whole earth for the lpace oi three 
 hours, whilft the Saviour was on the crofs •, the 
 opening of the tombs at that awful time, and the 
 number of the juft, who role from the dead. 
 
 It is no lefs a matter of wonder to the learned 
 that theie prodigies are not taken notice of by any 
 Roman hiftorian, though they happened in the 
 reign of Tiberius, under the very eyes of a Roman 
 governor and garrifon, who naturally would have 
 tent the emperor and ienate a circumftantial account 
 of the moft miraculous event ever heard of. Rome 
 itfelf muft for three hours have been involved in 
 thick darknefs, and furely fuch a prodigy would 
 have been noted in the annals of Rome, and thofe 
 of all other nations. But God, I fuppofe, would 
 not allow that fuch divine dungs ftiould be com- 
 mitted to writing by prophane hands (I). 
 
 The fame learned perfons like wife meet with 
 feme difficulties in die evangelical hiftory. 1 hey 
 
 ■* (I) Jofeplius’s fitence is very well accounted for by tne bl- 
 
 (hop of Cloyne, in, his Minute Philosopher, p. 313* 
 
 obferve, 
 
•DICTIONARY. 8$ 
 
 obferve, that, in St. Matthew, Jefus Chrift fays to 
 the Scribes and Pharifees, that upon them mould 
 .come all the innocent blood filed on the earth, 
 from the blood of righteous Abel to that of Za- 
 chariah the fon of Barac, whom they flew between 
 the temple and the altar. 
 
 In all the hiftory of the Hebrews, fay they, we 
 meet with no fuch perfon as Zachariah killed in 
 the temple before the coming of the Meftiah, noi 
 in his time j but Jofephus, in his hiftory of the 
 fiege of Jcrufalem, (chap. xix. book iv.) mentions 
 a Zachariah the fon of Barachiah, who was killed 
 in the middle of the temple, by the faction of the 
 Zelotes. This has given rife to a fufpicion that St. 
 Matthew’s gofpel was not written till after the tak- 
 ing of Jerufalem by Titus. But if we confider the 
 infinite difference there muft be between books di- 
 vinely infpired and fuch as are merely human, all 
 thefe doubts, difficulties, and obje&ions, immedi- 
 ately vanifh. It was God’s pleafu re that his birth, 
 life, and death, ftiould be fhroudedin a cloud of re- 
 fpe&able darknefs. His ways in all things. are dif- 
 ferent from ours. 
 
 ~XThe learned- are alfo at a great lois to reconcile 
 the difference of the two genealogies of Chrift. In 
 St. Matthew, Jofeph’s father is Jacob, Jacob’s Mat- 
 .than, Matthan’s Eleazar ; whereas St. Luke fays 
 that Jofeph was the fon of Heli, I leli of Matthat, 
 Matthat of Levi, Levi of Janna, &c. They cannot 
 .reconcile the fifty-fix anceftors in Chrift’s genealo- 
 gy from Abraham, mentioned by Luke, to the 
 two and forty different anceftors in the genealogy 
 from the fame Abraham, given by St. Matthew j 
 and they are fhocked that Matthew, mentioning 
 forty-two generations, enumerates no more than 
 ibrty-one. 
 

 ills ■ 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 86 
 
 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 They likewife are at a ftand about Jefus not be- 
 ing the Ton of Jofeph but of Mary.' They farther 
 have their doubts concerning the miracles of our 
 Saviour, and quote St. Auftin, St. Hilary, and 
 others, who interpret the account of thefe miracles, 
 in a myftic and allegorical fenfe : as the curfing 
 and withering the fig-tree for not bearing figs when 
 it was not the time of figs * the fending the devils 
 into the fwine in a country where thole creatures 
 were not allowed of ; the turning the water into 
 wine towards the end of an entertainment, when 
 the guefts were already heated with liquor. But 
 all thefe cavils of the learned are put to filence by 
 faith, whole merit is enhanced by thefe difficulties. 
 The fcope of this article is purely to follow the hif- 
 torical clue, and give a juft and precife idea of 
 thofe fails which nobody offers to controvert. 
 
 Firft, Jefus was born under the Mofaic law; in 
 conformity to this law he was circumcifed ; he 
 conformed to all its precepts ; he Jcept all its feafts, 
 and preached only morality ; he made no revela- 
 tion of the myftery of his incarnation ; he never 
 told the Jews that he was born of a Virgin ; he re- 
 ceived John s benediction, being baptized by him 
 in the river Jordan, a ceremony to which great 
 numbers of Jews fubmitted ; he faid nothing about 
 the leven facraments, nor did he inftitute, in his 
 life-time the ecclefiaftical hierarchy. He conceal- 
 ed from his cotemporaries that he was the Son of 
 God, generated from all eternity, confubftantial 
 witn God, and that the Holy Ghoft proceeded 
 from the bather and the Son ; he did not inform 
 tnem that his perfon was compofed of two natures 
 an;, two -wills : thefe great myfteries were, in af- 
 ter-times to be declared to man by perfons illumi- 
 nated with the light of the Holy Ghoft. During 
 his whole life he did not in the leaft deviate from 
 ^ the 
 
DICTIONARY. 87 
 
 the law of his forefathers. He Slewed himfelf to 
 the world only as ajuft man, acceptable to God, 
 perlecuted by envious do&ors, and condemned to 
 die by prejudiced magiftrates. It was his plea- 
 fure that ail the reft ftiould be done by the holy 
 church which he eftablilhed. 
 
 Jofephua, in the 12th chapter of his hiftory, 
 mentions an auftere fe£t of Jews then recently 
 founded by one Judas Galileus, “ They make 
 “ light,” fays he, ** of all earthly evils. Such is 
 “ their refolution, that they brave tortures, and on 
 an honourable motive, prefer death to life. T hey 
 “ have chofe to be burnt, to be flain, and even 
 “ their bones to be broken, rather than utter the 
 “ leaft word againft their legifiator, or eat any for- 
 bidden food.” 
 
 This character Teems to belong to the Judaites 
 and not to the Efienes •, for Jofephus’s words are, 
 “ Judas was the author of a new fe£t totally dif- 
 “ ferent from the .other three, i. e. the Sadducees, 
 “ the Pharifees, and the Efienes.” And further 
 on, he fays ■, “ They are by nation Jews, they live 
 “ in a clofe union among themfclves, and hold 
 “ all fenfuality vicious and finful.” Now the natu- 
 ral import of this plirafe fhews the author to be 
 •fpeaking of the Judaites. 
 
 However it be, thefe Judaites were known be- 
 fore Chrift’s difciples began to make any confide- 
 rable figure in the world. 
 
 The Therapeutes were a fociety differing both 
 from the Eflenians and the Judaites, and had forhe 
 afiinity to the Indian Gymnofophifts and Bramins. 
 •“ They have,” fays Philo, “ impulles of heavenly 
 “ love, by which they kindle into all the enthufi- 
 “ afm of the Coribantes and the Bacchanalians, 
 and are raifed to that ftate of contemplation af- 
 ter which they al'pire. This feft had its rife in 
 jG 4 “ Alexan- 
 
88 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 “ Alexandria, where the Jews were very numer- 
 “ ous, and fpread exceedingly throughout Egypt.” 
 
 John the Baptift’s difciples likewise fpread a lit- 
 tle in Egypt, but efpecially in Syria and Arabia; 
 Afia-minor alfo was not without them. The Adis 
 of the Apoftles, ch. xix. fays that St. Paul met with 
 feveral at phefus ; and afking them, “ Have you 
 “ received the Holy Ghoft ?” They anfwered, 
 “ We have not fo much as heard that there is a 
 “ Holy Ghoft he faid to them, “ What bap- 
 “ tiftn, then, have you received ?” They anfwered 
 him, “ The baptifm of John.” For fome little 
 time after Jefus’s death, there were feveral differ- 
 ent fedls and focieties among the Jews ; the Pha- 
 rifees, the Sadducees, the Effenes, the Judaites, 
 the Therapeutes, the difciples of John, and the di- 
 fciples of Chrift, whofe little flock God led by 
 paths unknown to human wifdom. 
 
 Believers firft had the name of Chriftians at An- 
 tioch, about fhe fixtieth year of our common aera; 
 but, as we fhall lee in the fequel, they were known 
 in the Roman empire by other appellations. Before 
 that time they diftinguifhed themfelves only by the 
 name of Brothers, Saints, and Faithful. Thus 
 God, who had come down on earth to be a pat- 
 tern of meeknefs and felf-denial, founded his 
 church on very weak, and apparently mean begin- 
 nings, and kept it in the fame humble and mortifi- 
 ed condition in which it pleafed him to be born. 
 All the firft believers were of low parentage, ob- 
 fcure men, working with their own hands. The 
 ap file Paul intimates, that he fupported himfelf 
 by making of tents. St. Peter railed to life Dorcas 
 a fempftrels, who ufed to make garments for the 
 brethren •, and the believers of Joppa ufed to hold 
 their meetings in the houfe of one Simon a tanner, 
 
DICTIONARY. 89 
 as may be feen in chap. ix. of the Adds of the 
 Apoftles. 
 
 The faithful fecretly fpread themfelves in Greece, 
 and fome went from thence to Rome, mingling 
 with the Jews, to whom the Romans allowed a 
 fynagogue. At firft they continued with the Jews, 
 and l'o far praftifed circumcifion, that, as we have 
 elfewhere obferved, the fifteen firft bifhops of Je- 
 rufalem were every one circumciied. 
 
 The apoftle Paul, on taking with him Timothy, 
 whofe father was a Gentile, circumcifed him him- 
 felf, at the little town of Lyftra* but Titus, his 
 other difciple, would not fubmit to that ceremony. 
 The difciples of Jefus continued in unity with the 
 Jews, till Paul bringing ftrangers into the temple, 
 the Jews railed a perfecution againft him, and 
 charged him with an intent of fubverting the Mo- 
 faic law by the doftrine of Jefus Chrift. It was 
 in order to clear himfelf from this accufation, that 
 James propofed to Paul his having his head fhaved, 
 and purifying himfelf in the temple, along with 
 four Jews, who had made a vow to be dhaved : 
 Them take, and purify thyfelf with them,” fays 
 James to him (Aftsch. xxi.) “ that all may know, 
 ■“ that all things whereof they were informed con- 
 “ cerning thee are nothing, and that thou keepeft 
 “ the law of Mofes.” 
 
 This did not in the leaft abate the charge of im-.. 
 piety and herefy againft Paul, and his trial was of 
 dome continuance ; but the very articles for which 
 "fie'was Inc! iff ed evidently dhew, that he was come 
 to Jerufalem to obferve the Jewifn rites. 
 
 His own words to Titus (Adds chap, xxv.j are. 
 Neither againft the law of the Jews, nor againft 
 the temple, have I offended any tiling at-ail.” 
 The apoftles promulgated JcJus Chriitas a Jew, 
 ar. obferver of the Jewifh law, and fent by God to 
 
 inforcc 
 
9 c A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 inforce the obfervance of it. “ Circumcifion veri- 
 <( iy profiteth,” fays the apoftle Paul, (Rom. ii.) 
 « If thou keepeft the law ; but if thou be a break- 
 «■ e r of the law, thy circumcifion is made uncir- 
 “ cumcifion. If the uncircumcifion keep the ngh- 
 « teoufnefs of the law, fhall not his uncircumcifion 
 « be counted for circumcifion ? He is a Jew 
 .« who is one inwardly.” 
 
 When this apoftle fpeaks of Jefus Chrift in his 
 epiftles, he does not make known the ineffable 
 myftery of his confubftantiality with God. “ We 
 « are,” fays he, in the fifth chapter to the Romans, 
 “ delivered by him from the wrath of God ; the 
 “ gift of God is come to us through the grace im- 
 “ parted to one only man, Chrift Jefus •, Death has 
 « reigned by the fin of one man, and the juft fhall 
 « reign in life by one man, Jefus Chrift.” And 
 in chap. viii. “ We are heirs of God, and co-heirs 
 “ with Chrift and in chap. xvi. “ To God, wlip 
 «« alone is wife, be honour and glory through Jefus 
 
 « Chrift.” “ Ye are Chrift’s, and Chrift is 
 
 “God’s.” Cor. i. 3. And 1 Cor. xv. 27. “All 
 “ tilings are fubject to him, God certainly excepr- 
 “ ed who hath fubjected all things to him.” 
 
 Some difficulties have occurred in explaining 
 the following paflage in the epiftle to the Philip - 
 pians : “ Let nothing be done through vain glory*, 
 “ but in lowlinefs of mind let each efteem other 
 “ better than themfelves •, let this mind be in you 
 “ which was in Chrift Jefus, who, being in the 
 “ form of God, thought it not robbery to be 
 “ equal with God” (K). The fenfe of the paf- 
 lage 
 
 (IC) This paiTage has been greatly ft rained by the Socinians, 
 fro.n whom o r author feems to have borrowed his remark. 
 
 The 
 
DICTIONARY. gr 
 
 fage feems very well fet forth in a moft valuable 
 monument of antiquity, a letter from the churches 
 of Vienne and Lyon, written in the year 117; part 
 of it turns on the modefly of fome of the faithful : 
 “ They would not,” fays the letter, “ take on 
 “ themfelves the auguft title of martyrs (for a few 
 “ tribulations) imitating Jefus Chrift, who bear- 
 cc ing the likenefs or image of God, did not think 
 cc the title of God’s equal belonged to him.” Ori- 
 gen, likewife, in his commentary on John, fays, 
 “ Chrift’s greatnefs has appeared more refplendent 
 <c in his humiliation, than if he had thought it no 
 • c< robbery to be God’s equal.” And, in reality, the 
 contrary explication is a palpable inconfiflency. 
 What can be meant by “ believe others your bet- 
 “ ters, imitate' Jefus, who thought it no robbery, 
 * no ufurpation, to make himfelf God’s equal 
 
 The original is, r O< iv vorctpx&v iy Ap'&ciyfjLov 
 
 tiy))<7(L7o to iivAt'ijct Gico : which in our Englilh Teftament 
 is almoft literally rendered thus : “ Who being in the form 
 “ of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” 
 Now we grant it would be difficult to find the example of 
 modefty and humility meant by St. Paul, and alluded to by 
 the churches of Vienne and Lyon in the above lines alone ; 
 but we fhould take the whole pafTage together, and what fol- 
 lows will demonftrate the fenfe : “ but made himfelf of no 
 “ reputation, and took upon him the form of a fervant, 
 “ humbled himfelf, and became obedient unto death.” That 
 is, though in his divine form or nature-, he thought it not 
 robbery, or any ufurpation, to be equal with God ; yet con- 
 defeended to take the form of a fervant, that is, human na- 
 ture, and to leften himfelf for the falvation of his people. Is 
 not this an un parallelled example of humility and modefty ? 
 and is not this the plain obvious fenfe of the above paftage ? 
 And docs not this fhew how eafy it is to wreft the meaning of 
 any text of Scripture, as the Arians and Socinians have done 
 in the prefsnt cafe, in order to evade a very ftrong proof 
 of Chrift's divinity. 
 
 This 
 
A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 This would be a flat contradiftion, overthrowing 
 what precedes; it is giving an example of ambi- 
 tion for a pattern of meeknels; it is a trelpais againtt 
 common-fenfe. 
 
 Thus it was that the wifdom of the apoltles 
 founded the infant church, and this wifdom was 
 not difcompofed by the conteft between the apo- 
 ftles Peter, James, and John, on one fide, and 
 Paul on the other. It happened at Antioch : the 
 apoftle Peter, alias Cephas, alias Simon Barjona, 
 ufed to eat with the Gentile converts, overlooking 
 the ceremonies of the law, and the diftin&ions of 
 aliments : he and Barnabas, together with other 
 difciples, made no manner of fcruple to eat pork, 
 things ftrangled, or animals which divide the hoof, 
 but do not chew the cud ; but a number of Jewifh 
 Chriftians coming there, St. Peter aflociated with 
 them, returning to his former abftinence from for- 
 bidden meats, and the obfervance of the Molaic 
 
 ceremonies. . 
 
 This procedure has an air of difcretion ; he was 
 unwilling to give any offence to his Jewifh bre- 
 thren ; but St. Paul declared againft him with 
 fome harfhnefs : “ I withftood him,” fays he, “ to 
 « his face, for he was to blame.” Gal. ii. 
 
 This quarrel appears the more extraordinary in 
 St. Paul, who, as having at firft been a periecutor, 
 lhould have fhewn more temper ; befides, he him- 
 felf had gone into the temple at Jeruialem to ia- 
 crifice, had circumcifed his difciple Timothy, and 
 had performed thofe Jewifh rites for wnich he 
 now upbraids Cephas. St. Jerom will have it that 
 this bickering between Paul and Cephas was only 
 a feint. In his firft Homily, tome iii. he lays, that 
 they a£^d like two pleaders at the bar, who grow 
 warm, and ufe keen language, only that their cli- 
 ents may have the higher opinion of them ; that 
 
 Peter 
 
DICTIONARY. 93 
 
 Feter Cephas being appointed to preach to the 
 Jews, and the Gentiles being Paul’s department, 
 they affetted a quarrel j Paul to gain the Gentiles, 
 and Peter to gain the Jews. But St. Auftin can 
 by no means relifh this opinion. “ I am forry,” 
 fays he, in his epiftle to Jerom, “ that fo great a 
 « man fhould patronize a. falfny, patronum 
 
 “ MENDACII.” 
 
 Farther, if Peter was appointed apoftle to the 
 Jews, and Paul to the Gentiles, it is very probable 
 that Peter never came to Rome. The A<fts of the 
 Apoftles make no mention of Peter’s journey into 
 Italy. 
 
 However that be, about the year 60 of our sera, 
 the Chriftians began to feparate themfelves from 
 the Jewifh communion •, and this was what drew 
 on them fuch cenfures, inve&ives, and perfecti- 
 ons from the fynagogues of Rome, Greece, Egypt, 
 and Afia. Their Jewifh brethren not only charged 
 them with impiety and atheifm,but formally excom- 
 municated them three times in their fynagogues, 
 even on the fabbath-day : ftill God upheld them 
 amidft all their trials and fufferings. 
 
 Several churches were gradually formed, and 
 before the end of the firfl century, the feparation 
 between the Jews and Chriftians became total : 
 but the Roman government knew nothing of this 
 fchifm •, neither the fenate nor the emperors of 
 Rome concerning themfelves about the wranglings 
 of a little party, which, till then, God had conduct- 
 ed in oblcurity, and was raiftng by infenhble de- 
 grees. 
 
 Let us take a view of the ftatc of the religion 
 of the Roman empire at that time. Myfteries and 
 expiations were in vogue almoft all over the earth. 
 Though the emperors, the grandees, and philelo- 
 phers, fecretly made a jell of thofe myfteries, ftill 
 
94 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 5t behoved them outwardly to conform to the pub- 
 lic worlhip, left they fhould irritate the people, 
 who, in religious affairs, give law to their betters 
 or rather thefe, to chain them the falter, appear 
 to wear the fame chains. Cicero himfelf was 
 initiated into the Eleufinian myfteries. The prin- 
 cipal tenet fet forth in thefe myfteries and fplen- 
 did feftivals was the knowledge of one only God ; 
 and it mult be owned that Paganifm has nothing 
 more pious, and, in every refpect, more admira- 
 ble, than the prayers and hymns ufed in thofe myf- 
 teries, and of which fragments are ftill remain- 
 ing- 
 
 The Chriftians likewife, worfhipping only one 
 God, paved the way to their fuccefs in converting 
 Gentiles. Even fame philofophers of Plato’s fed 
 became Chriftians : hence it is, that the fathers of 
 the church, for the three firft centuries, were all 
 Platonics. 
 
 The inconfiderate zeal of fome did not affed 
 the fundamental truths. St. Juftin, one of the 
 firft fathers, is cenfured for faying, in his Commen- 
 tary on lfaiah, that the faints Ihould reign a rhou- 
 fand years on the earth, in full enjoyment of all 
 lenfual delights -, he has been blamed for a pofition 
 in his Apology for Chriftianity, that God, after 
 making the earth, left the care of it to 'angels, 
 that thefe fell in love with the women, and that the 
 iffue of this pallion are the devils. Ladantius and 
 other fathers have been condemned for inventing 
 Sybilline oracles ; he affirmed that the Sybilla 
 Erythrea made four Greek verfes, of which the 
 literal interpretation is, 
 
 “ With five loaves and two fifhes 
 
 He fhall feed five thoufand men in the defert. 
 
 And 
 
95 
 
 DICTIONARY. 
 
 And gathering up the remains. 
 
 With them fhall fill twelve bafkets.” 
 
 It has likewife been made a crime to the firft 
 Chriftians, that they were for palming on the 
 world fome acroftics, as written by an old Sybil, 
 all beginning with the initial letters of the name of 
 Jefus Chrift, each in its order. 
 
 But, notwithftanding this zeal of fome Chriftians, 
 which was not according to knowledge, the church, 
 under a divine fuperintendency, was daily increaf- 
 ing. At firft the Chriftians ufed to celebrate their 
 myfteries in lonely houfes and taverns, and in the 
 night time; from which pra&ice, according to. Mi- 
 nutius Felix, they got the appellation of Lucifu- 
 gaces *, Philo calls them Gefieans ; but, during 
 the four firft centuries, they were moft commonly 
 known to the Gentiles by the name of Galileans 
 and Nazarenes •, that of Chriftians has, however, 
 obtained beyond any other. 
 
 Neither the hierarchy, nor the rites and ufages, 
 were eftablilhed all at once ; the apoftolic times 
 were different from the fucceeding. St. Paul, in 
 his firft epiftle to the Corinthians, directs them, 
 that, in a public aflembly of the brethren, whe- 
 ther circumcifed or uncircumcifed, when feveral 
 prophets were for fpeaking, only two or three 
 lhould fpeak ; and in the mean time, if any one 
 had a revelation, the prophet who had begun to 
 fpeak was to be filent. 
 
 It is owing to this cuftom of the primitive 
 church that to this day, fome Chriftian fe&s hold 
 their aflfemblies without any hierarchy. Every 
 one was then allowed to lpeak in the church, wo- 
 men excepted -, what we call the facred mafs, 
 and celebrate in the morning, was the Lord’s 
 Supper, originally adminiftered in the evening *, 
 
 thefe 
 
p 6 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 thefe ufages altered as the church gathered ftrength. 
 A more extended fociety required more regula- 
 tions, and the prudent pallors conformed to times' 
 and places. 
 
 According to St. Jerom and Eufebius, when the 
 churches had received a form, they gradually came 
 to confift of five different clalfes. The luperin- 
 tendents, epifeopi, whence are derived the bilhops ; 
 the elders of the fociety, prelbyteroi, the priefts, 
 minifters, or deacons ; the Piltoi, believers, or 
 initiated, that is, the baptized, who were admitted 
 to the Agapaes, or fealls of charity •, and the Cate- 
 chumens and Energumenes, who were candidates for 
 baptifm. None of thefe five orders were diltinguilh- 
 ed by any particular vellure or garb, nor was any of 
 them bound to celibacy •, witnefs Tertuliian’s dedi- 
 cating a book to his wife ; witnefs the example of 
 the apollles. No painting or fculpture was feen in 
 their afiemblies during the firlt three centuries. 
 The Chrillians ufed carefully to conceal their books 
 from the Pagans, and trufted none with them ex- 
 cept the initiated the catechumens were not per- 
 mitted to fay the Lord’s Prayer. 
 
 But what moll diftinguifhed the Chrillians, and 
 continued down to our times, was the power 
 of driving out devils with the fign of the crofs. 
 Origen, in his treatife againlt Celfus, owns. 
 Numb. 133, that Antinous, who had been deified 
 by the emperor Adrian, wrought miracles in Egypt, 
 by charms and prelliges •, but the devils, fays he* 
 quit the body of the polfefied, on the bare pronun- 
 ciation of the name of Jefus. 
 
 Tertullian goes Hill farther, and from the re- 
 mote part of Africa where he was, fays, in chap. 
 33. ot h:s Apologeticon, “ If yonr gods do net, in 
 “ the prefence ot a true Chriltian, own themfelves 
 “ to be devils, we freely confent that you put 
 
 “ that 
 
DICTIONARY. 97 
 
 <c that Chriftian to death. Can there be a more 
 evident demonft fation r” 
 
 Jefus Chrift, indeed, lent his apoftles to drive 
 out devils. The Jews, likewife, in his time, had 
 this power ; for, when Jefus had relieved fome de- 
 moniacs, and feot the devils into the body of 
 a herd ot fwine, and performed many other l'uch 
 .cures, the Pharifees faid, It is by the power of Bel- 
 zebub he drives out devils : but Jefus anfwers, 
 “ II I drive them out by Belzebub, by whom do 
 “ y°ur fons drive them out ?”. That the Jews 
 boafted of fuch a power is indifputable ; they had 
 encore ids .and exorcifms. On thefe occafions they 
 called on the name of the God of Jacob and of 
 Abraham, and confecrated herbs were put up the 
 demoniac’s nofe (Jofephus gives fome account of 
 thefe ceremonies). This power over the devils 
 was taken away from the Jews, and transferred to 
 •the Chriftians, who, for fome timepaft, feem liker 
 wife to have loft it. 
 
 This exorcifing power comprehended that of 
 preventing or defeating magical operations ; for 
 qiagic was ever in repute among all nations. 
 All the fathers of the church bear witnefs to it. St. 
 Juftin owns, in his Apologetic, book iii. that the 
 fouls of the deceafed are often evoked, and from 
 thence draws an argument in favour of the foul's 
 immortality. Lacftantjus, book vii. of his Divine 
 Inftitution, fays, “ Should any one dare to deny 
 the exiftence of fouls after death, the magician 
 “ will foon convince him by making it appear." 
 Ireneus, Clement Alexandrinus, Tcrtullian, St. 
 Cyprian, all affirm the like. At prefent, indeed, 
 it is otherwife, and we hear no more of magief 
 ans or demoniacs ; yet fuch there will be, when it 
 fo pleales God. 
 
 H Wheiji 
 
S A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 When the congregations of Chriftians were become 
 confiderable, and feveral prefumed to infult the Ro- 
 man worfhip, the civil power exerted itfelf againft 
 them, and the commonalty, efpecially, were molt 
 violent in perfecuting this new religion. 1 he Jews, 
 who confined thcmielves to their fynagogues, fo 
 far from being perlecuted, had particular privi- 
 leges, and were allowed the exercife ot their reli- 
 gion at Rome, as they are at prefent j all the dif- 
 ferent worfhips in the feveral parts of the empire 
 were tolerated, though the lenate did not adopt 
 them : but the Chriftians making no lecret or their 
 deteftatlon of all thofe worfhips, and efpecially that 
 of the empire, were feveral times expofed to cruel 
 
 One of the firft and moft celebrated martyrs was 
 Ignatius bifhop of Antioch •, he was condemned 
 by the emperor Trajan himfclf, then m Alia, and, 
 by his order, fent to Rome to be expofed to beaits, 
 at a time when other Chriftians were under no 
 open moleftation in that city. His accufation is 
 not known ; but that emperor being otherwise 
 famous for clemency, St. Ignatius’s enemies mult 
 have been very violent in their profecution. 
 The hiftory of his martyrdom relates that the name 
 of Jefus Chrift was found engraven on his heart in 
 crolden characters •, and thence it is, that the Chri- 
 ftians, in fome places, took the name of the 1 hco- 
 phori, which Ignatius had given to himfclf. 
 
 We have ftill a letter of his, in which he intreats 
 the bifnops and Chriftians not to oppofe his mar- 
 tyrdom •, whether that, even then, the Chriftians 
 were ftrong enough to attempt a refeue, or that 
 fome of them might have intereft to obtain his par- 
 don. Another very remarkable circumftance is, 
 that the Chriftians of Rome were allowed, to go 
 a n d meet him, when he was brought thither ; 
 
 which 
 
DICTIONARY. 99 
 
 which evidently proves, that the man and not the 
 fed! was punilhed. 
 
 The persecutions were fo far from being continu- 
 ed, that Origen, in his third book againfl: Celfus, fays, 
 
 “It is eafy to compute what number of Chrillians 
 “ have died for their religion; few, and only from 
 “ time to time, and by intervals, having died on 
 “ that account.” 
 
 So careful was God of his church, that, in fpite 
 of all its enemies, five councils were held in the 
 firft century, fixteen in the fecond, and thirty in 
 the third ; all tolerated : though fometimes they 
 were forbidden, the magiftrates, in their mil- 
 taken timidity, fearing that they might produce 
 diflurbances. Few of the reports of the procon- 
 lu's and praetors who pronounced fentence on the 
 Chriftians are now remaining, and thofe are the 
 oily vouchers for afcertaining the accufations 
 brought againfl them, and their punifhments. 
 
 We have a fragment of Dionyfius of Alexan- 
 dria£ontaining an extra<5l of a pro-conful of Egypt, (]$• 
 under the emperor Valerian, which is as follows : 
 
 “ Dionyfius, Fauflus, Maximus, and Cheremon, ’ 
 “ being brought into court, the prefedt Emilian 
 “ thus addrefied them : From my difcourle with 
 “ you, and from the many particulars I wrote to 
 ** you, you mull have been fenfilile that our 
 “ princes have lhewn you great lenity and indul- 
 “ gence ; I again repeat it to you, they refer your 
 “ life and fatety to yourfelves, and put your fate 
 “ into your own hands : they require of you only 
 “ one thing, and that no more than what reafon 
 “ requires, which is to worfliip the patron gods 
 “ of their empire, and to forfake that other wor- 
 “ fliip, which is fo contrary to nature and good 
 “ fcnfe. 
 
 H 2 “ Dionyfius 
 
zoo A P HIL.OSO P 1-1 I c A L 
 
 “ Dionyfius anfwercd : Eve y one has^ not the 
 « f 3 me gods, and every one vvorfhips thole whom 
 “ he believes to be really fuch. 
 
 “ The prefed: Emilian replied ; I fee you are a 
 « f et of ungrateful people, obftinately flighting 
 “ the kindnefs which the emperors would fhew 
 “ you. Allure yourfelves, no longer (hall you Hay 
 “ here ; 1 will order you away to Cephro, in the 
 “ farther part of Lybia •, that, by the emperor’s 
 << command, is to be the place of your banifh- 
 “ ment : farther, do not imagine you Hull be al- 
 « lowed there to hold your meetings, or to go to 
 “ pray in thofe places, which you call Cemeteries ; 
 
 *> any fuch thing is abiolutely forbidden you, and 
 “ what I will not allow.” :: 
 
 Nothing bears more. evident marks of truth than 
 this trial, and it ihews that thefe meetings were 
 occafionally prohibited •, as with us, the Calvinifls 
 are not allowed to hold any meeting whatever in 
 Languedoc •, and minifters and preachers have 
 beenhanged, and even broke upon the wheel, for 
 their difobedience. Likewife in England and Ire- 
 land, the Roman Catholics lie under the fame pro- 
 hibition, and, on fome occafions, the delinquents 
 have been condemned to die. 
 
 Amidft all the feverity of die Roman laws, Gcd 
 infpired fever^l emperors with indulgence towards 
 the Chriftians. Dioclefian himfelf, whom ignorant 
 people reckon a perfecutor, and the firftyearof whofe 
 reign is kill the epccha of martyrdoms, for above 
 eighteen years openly countenanced Chriftianity, 
 and the moft important polls about his perfon 
 were filled by Chriftians. He even allowed a 
 ftately church to be built oppofite his palace at Ni- 
 comedia, where he frequently refided ; and, to 
 -rown all, lie married a Chriftian lady. 
 
 Galerius 
 
DICTIONARY. 10'r 
 
 Galerius Caefar, from fomc unhappy prejudices 
 againft the Chriftians, by whom he imagined 
 himfelf ill ufed, induced Dioclelian to dcmolidi 
 the cathedral at Nicomedia. A Chriftian of 
 more zeal than wifdom tore to pieces the empe- 
 ror’s edift, and, this gave rife to that fo famous 
 perl'ecution, in which, throughout the whole ex- 
 tent of the Roman empire, above two hundred 
 perfons were fentenced to die, exclufive of thofe 
 whom the populace, ever fanatic and inhuman, 
 might maffacre, without any form of law. 
 
 So great was the number of martyrs at different 
 times, that much circumfpeftion is requifite, to 
 avoid weakening the truth of the hiflory of the 
 real confdfors of our holy religion, by a dangerous 
 mixture of fables and falfe martyrs. 
 
 The Benedid'cine Don Ruinart, otherwife a per- 
 fon of learning equal to his zeal, fhould have cho- 
 len his authentic a£ts with more difcretion. A 
 manufcript for being taken from the abbey of 
 Sr. Benedifl on the Loire, or from a convent of 
 Creledines at Paris, and its agreement with a ma- 
 nulcriptof the Feuillans,.is not the more authentic ; 
 its antiquity mud be evident, it mult have been 
 written by perfons living at the time of the event,' 
 and farther mult bear all the marks of truth and 
 ge.nuinencfs. 
 
 He might very well have omitted the dory of 
 Romanus, which happened in 303. This young 
 man, it feems, had obtained Diocledan’s pardon at 
 Antioch ; yet, as he fays, the judge Alclepiades 
 condemned him to be burnt. The Jews, who had 
 flocked to the execution, mocked young St. Roma- 
 nus, and floutingly afked the Chriftians how their 
 God, who had delivered Shadrach, Mefhach,‘ancf 
 Abednego, fnould differ them to be burnt ; on 
 this, though the day was remarkably fine, fuch a 
 
 1 1 3 -temped: 
 
102 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 tempeft arofe as immediately quenched the fire: 
 then the judge ordered young Romanus’s tongue 
 to be cut out ; and the emperor’s firft phyliti- 
 an being prefent, officioufly performed the opera- 
 tion, cutting his tongue off at the root. 1 he 
 young man, who before ftammered, now fpoxe 
 very fluently. 1 he emperor was very much iur- 
 prized at any one’s fpeaking lo well without a 
 tongue ; and the phyfician, to repeat the experi- 
 ment, cut out the tongue of a man who happened 
 to be paffing by, but he died immediately after the 
 operation. 
 
 Eufebius, from whom the credulous Ruinart has 
 taken this tale, fhould have had fo much refpcfl 
 for the real miracles performed in the Old and New 
 Teftament, which no body will ever call in quefti- 
 pn, as not to foift among them fuch fufpicious fto- 
 ries, which may give offence to the weak. 
 
 This laft perfection did not fpread throughout 
 the whole empire. England had at that time fome 
 glimmerings of Chriftianity, which, however, foon 
 were fmothered, but appeared again under the 
 Saxon kings. The fouthern parts of Gaul and 
 Spain fwarmed with Chriftians. Caefar Conftan- 
 tius Chlorus fhewed them very great favour in all 
 thofe provinces. He had a concubine who W3S 
 a Chriffian, and this no lefs aperfon than Conftan- 
 tine’s mother, or St. Helena, for they were never 
 openly married * and he even difmifled her in 
 the year 292, on his marrying the daughter of 
 Maximian Hercules ; but fhe retained her afcen- 
 dency, and made u'e of it to infpire him with a 
 ftrong afte&ion for our holy religion. 
 
 Divine Providence, by means apparently human, 
 now brought about the eftablifhment and fuperio- 
 rity of this church. Conftantius Chlorus dying at 
 York in 306, and his children by the daughter of a 
 c. Ctcfar 
 
DICTIONARY.. i « 3 
 
 Cnefar not being of age to claim the empire, Con- 
 ftantine boldly got himfelf chofen at York by a 
 body of foldiers, moftly Germans, Gauls, and Bri- 
 tons. It was not likely that fuch an election, made 
 without the confent of the city of Rome, the fenate, 
 and the army could fubfift ; but God gave him a 
 complete victory over Maxentius, who had been 
 chofen at Rome, and at length rid him of all his 
 colleagues. It mull be owned that, at firft, he 
 rendered himfelf utterly unworthy of the Divine 
 favour, murdering his wife, his fon, and all his 
 near relations. 
 
 What Zozimus relates on this head may be 
 queftioned : he fays, that Conftantine, tortured with 
 remorfe, after fo many crimes, enquired of the 
 pontiffs of the empire, if they .had any expiations 
 for him * and their anfwer was, that they knew of 
 none. Indeed there had been none for Nero, for 
 in Greece he did not prefume to aflift at the facred 
 myfteries, Yet the Taurobolj were then in ufe, 
 and it is not eafy to believe, that a defpotic em- 
 peror fhould not have found or.e priefl to grant 
 him expiatory facrifices. Perhaps, it is ftili lefs 
 to be believed, that Conftantine, being taken up 
 with war, actuated by ambition, and furrounded 
 with flatterers, could be at leifure for remorfes. 
 Zozimus adds, that an Egyytian prieft, who came 
 from Spain, having gained admittance to him, af- 
 fured him of an expiation of all his crimes in the 
 Chriftian religion. Ofius, bifliop of Corduba, is 
 fufpected to have been this prieft. 
 
 However that be, Conftantine openly com- 
 municated with the Chriftians, though he ne- 
 ver was above a catechumen, deferring his bap- 
 tifm to the hour of death. He built the city 
 of Conftantinople, which became the center of 
 the empire, and of the Chriftian religion. Now 
 
 H 4 the 
 
ro 4 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 the church begins to aflume an auguft appear-* 
 ance. 
 
 It is to be obfcrved, that from the year 314, 
 before Conftantine refided in his new city, the 
 Chriftians frnartly revenged themfelves on their 
 perfecutors. They threw Maximian’s wife into 
 the Orontes, they murdered all his relations in 
 Egypt and Paleftine, they maflacred all the magif- 
 trates who had diftinguifhed themfelves by their 
 zeal againft Chriftianity. Dioclefian’s widow and 
 daughter, who had concealed themfelves at Theffa- 
 lonica, were difcovered, and their bodies thrown 
 into the'fea. It were to be wifhed that the Chri- 
 ftians had not given way fo much to the fpirit of 
 revenge ; but God, in his vindiftive juftice, was 
 pleafed that the hands of the Chriftians, as foon as 
 they were at liberty to aft, fnould be dyed with the 
 blood of their unjuft perfecutors. 
 
 Conftantine convened at Nicea, oppofite to 
 Conftantinople, the firft oecumenical council •, 
 and in which Ofius prefided. There was deter- 
 mined the great queftion, which difturbed the 
 church concerning Chrift’s divinity : one fide avail- 
 ing themfelves of the opinion of Origen, who, in 
 chap. 6. againft Celfus, fays, “ We offer up cur 
 “ prayers to God, through Jefus, who holds the 
 “ middle place between created natures and the 
 “ uncreated nature, who brings to us his Father’s 
 “ grace, and prefentsour prayers to the great God 
 “ as our high prieft.” They alfo pleaded feve- 
 ral pafiages of St. Paul, fome of which have 
 been mentioned •, but their capital foundation was 
 thefe words of Jefus Chrift himfelf : “ My Father 
 “ is greater than I and they held Jefus, as the 
 firft-born of creation, as the moft pure emanation 
 from the Supreme efience, but not precifely as 
 God. 
 
DICTIONARY. 105 
 
 The other fide, who were the orthodox, pro- 
 duced paffages more fuitable to the eternal deity of 
 Jefus, as this: “My Father and I are the fame 
 “ thing words which the adverfaries make to 
 mean no more than “ My Father and I have the 
 “ famedefign, the fame will; 1 have no other de- 
 “ fires than thofe of my Father.” Alexander bi- 
 Ihop of Alexandria, and after him Athanafius, 
 headed the orthodox : in the oppofite party were 
 Eufebius bifhop of Nicomedia, feventeen other 
 bifhops, the prieft Arius, and many other priefts. 
 The quarrel immediately was inflamed, St. Alexan- 
 der having called his adverfaries Antichrifts. 
 
 At length, after much difputing and wrang- 
 ling, the Holy Ghoft, by the mouths of two hun- 
 dred and ninety-nine bifhops againft eighteen, 
 gave the following decifiorr •, “ Jefus is the 
 “ only Son of God, begotten of the Father, 
 “ i. e. of the fubftance of the Father, God of God, 
 “ Light of Light, very God of very God,- of one 
 “ fubftance with the Father; welikewife believe in 
 “ the Holy Ghoft,&c.” Such was the form of words 
 in that council, and this inftance fliews the great fu- 
 periority of the bifhops above mere priefts ; for, ac- 
 cording to two patriarchs of Alexandria, who have 
 written the Chronicle of Alexandria in Arabic, two 
 thoufand perfons of the fecond order fided with 
 Arius. He was exiled by Conftantine, but foon 
 after the like punifhment fell on Athanafius, and 
 Arius was recalled to Conftantinople : with fuch 
 fervour, however, didSt. Macarius pray toGod that 
 he would deprive Arius of life before he came into 
 the cathedral, that God heard his prayer, and Arius 
 died in 330, in his way to the church. The em- 
 peror Conftantine departed this life in 337, deli- 
 vering his will into the hands of an Arian' prieft, 
 and expiring in the arms of the chief of the Arians, 
 
 Eufebius 
 
IO 6 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 Eufebius bifhop of Nicomedia : he was not bap- 
 tized till on his death-bed •, but he left the church 
 triumphant though divided. 
 
 The Athanafians and Eufebians made war on 
 {each other with the moll implacable animofity ; and 
 what is now called Arianifm was, for a long time, 
 the efiablifhed doftrine in all the provinces of the 
 empire. 
 
 Julian the Philofopher, nicknamed the Apoftate, 
 was for accommodating thele divifions, but failed 
 in his good endeavours. 
 
 The fecond general council was held in 381 at 
 Conftantinople. In it was explained what the 
 council of Nice had not thought fit to fay, con- 
 cerning the Holy Ghoft, adding to the Nicean 
 form, “ That the Holy Spirit is the vivifying 
 “ Lord, proceeding from the Father, and that 
 “ he is worfhipped and glorified with the Father 
 “ and the Son.” 
 
 It was not till towards the ninth century, that the 
 Latin Church gradually enafted, “ That the Holy 
 “ Ghoft proceeds from the Father and the Son.” 
 
 In 1431 the third general council, held at Ephe- 
 fus, determined that Mary was really the mother 
 of God, and that Jefus had two natures and one 
 perfon. Neftorius, bifhop of Conltantinople, for 
 moving that the Blefied Virgin Ihould be called the 
 mother of Chrift, was declared by the council a fe- 
 cond Judas ; and the two natures were farther con- 
 firmed by the council of Chalcedonia. 
 
 I fhall flightly pafs over the following ages as 
 pretty well known. Unfortunately every one of 
 thele difputes occafioned wars, and the church was 
 obliged to be continually in arms. God farther per- 
 mitted, to exercife the patience of the faithful, that 
 in the ninth century the Greeks and Latins fhould 
 come to an irreconcileable rupture j he farther per- 
 mitted 
 
 1 
 
DICTIONARY. 107 
 
 mltted that the Weft (hould be diftrafted with 
 twenty-nine bloody fchifms for the fee of Rome. 
 
 In the mean time, almoft the whole Grecian 
 church, and the whole of the African church,* 
 were en (laved by the Arabs, and afterwards fell 
 under the Turks, who erefted Mahomediim on 
 the ruins of Chriftianity. The Roman church fub- 
 fifted, but always defiled with blood, in the courfe 
 of above fix hundred years of difcord between the 
 Weftern empire and the priefthood : but thefe 
 very quarrels encreafed her power ; for the Ger- 
 man bifhops and abbots made themfelves princes, 
 and the popes, by degrees, acquired an abfolute 
 dominion in Rome, and a country of a hundred 
 leagues in extent. Thus God tried his church by 
 humiliations, diftur’oances, and by profperity and 
 magnificence. 
 
 This Latin church, in the fixteenth century, loft 
 half Germany, Denmark, Sweden, England, Scot- 
 land, Ireland, Switzerland, and Holland. It has, 
 indeed, by the Spanifh conquefts, gained more 
 ground in America than it has loft in Europe-, but 
 if its territories are enlarged, its fubjefls are much 
 decreafed. 
 
 Divine Providence feemed to defign that Ja- 
 pan, Siam, India, and China, (hould be brought 
 to acknowledge the pope’s fupremacy, as an equi- 
 valent for the lois of Afia-minor, Syria, Greece, 
 Egypt, Africa, Rufila, and the countries above- 
 mentioned. St. Francis Xavier, a Jefuit, who 
 carried the holy gofpel to the Eaft Indies and 
 Japan, when the Portuguefe went thither for colt- 
 ly merchandize, performed miracles in plenty, all 
 attefted by his reverend brethren : fome fay 
 that he raifed nine perfons from the dead 
 but father Ribadeneira, in his 1- lower of Saints, 
 reduces the number to four, and that’s full 
 
 enough. 
 
 o 
 
ioS A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 enough. Providence fo eminently prospered this 
 enterprizc, that, in lefs than an hundred years, 
 there were thoufands of Roman Catholics with- 
 in the Japanefe iflands. But the devil was net 
 wanting to low his tares among the good feed. 
 The Chriltians formed a deftrudtive plot, which 
 being followed by a cruel war, they were all ex- 
 terminated in the year 163K. Hereupon the na- 
 tives denied all Grangers admittance into their har- 
 bours, bxcept the Dutch, accounting them to be 
 mere merchants, and not Chriltians : they were 
 obliged to tread cn the crofs before they were 
 allowed to difpofe of their goods ; and t is was 
 done in a prifon. where they were confined imme- 
 diately on their arrival atNangazaki.’ 
 
 The Roman Catholic and Apofcolic religion was 
 not proferibed in China till of late, and with Id's 
 cruelty. The Jefuits, indeed, h.d not difphyed 
 their i'upcrnatiiral power at the court of Pekin, by 
 raifing the dead to life ; they had humbly limited 
 themielves to the teaching of aftrcnomyjjie calling 
 cf cannon, and being mandarins. Their unhappy de- 
 putes with fome Domieicans and others save fuch 
 offence to the great emperor Yontchin, that this 
 prince, though all equity and goednefs, W2S 1b 
 blind as to put a Hop to the teaching of our hoiy 
 religion, becaufe our milfionaries did not agree 
 among themielves. He ordered them to. depart the 
 empire, but itwas with all the tendernels cf a fa- 
 ther, fupplying them with carriages and every con- 
 veniency as far as the confines of his dominions. 
 
 All Alia, all Africa, half of Europe, the Dutch 
 and Englifii pofiefiions in A merica, with the fe- 
 veral unconquered parts of that vafl continent, 
 ail the auftral countries, which make a fifth part 
 of the globe, are left as a prey to the devil, in ve- 
 rification of that holy^ faying, “ Many are called 
 
 “ but 
 
DICTIONARY. icg 
 
 “ but few are chofen.” If, as fome learned per- 
 form fay, the number of all the inhabitants of the 
 feveral parts of the globe is about fixteen hundred 
 millions, the holy catholic univerful Roman church 
 has within its pale near fixty millions, which 
 amounts to more than the twenty-fixth part of the 
 inhabitants of the known world. 
 
 CIRCUMCISION. 
 
 H ERODOTUS, in relating what he had heard 
 from the Barbarians, among whom he travelled, 
 mentions fome fooleries, and mod of our modern 
 travellers do the like : he, indeed, docs not require 
 his readers to believe him, when he is giving an 
 account of Gyges and Candaule; of Arion’s being 
 faved by a dolphin •, of the confultation of the 
 oracle, to know what Craefus was doing, with its 
 ani'wer that he was then boiling a tortoife in a co- 
 vered pot j of Darius’s horfe neighing fir ft, which 
 gave his mafter the empire ; and of a hundred 
 other fables, which children are highly delighted 
 with, and rhetoricians infert in their collections : 
 but when he ipeaks of what he has feen, of cuftoms 
 which he has inquired into, of antiquities which 
 he has examined, he then fpeaks to men. 
 
 “ The inhabitants of Colchis,” fays he, in the 
 book Euterpe, “ appear to come originally from 
 « Egypt. This opinion I hold more from my 
 “ own obfervation than from aijy hear-fay •, for 
 “ I found that in Colchis the antient Egyptians 
 “ were remembered much more than the antient 
 “ cuftoms of Colchis in Egypt. 
 
 “ Thole people who dwell 2 len<* the Pontus 
 Euxi.nus laid they were a colony fettled there by 
 Selbltris i this 1 conjectured of myfelf, not only 
 
 “ from 
 
no A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 * 4 from their fwarthy complexion and frizzled hair, 
 “ but becaufe the people of Colchis, Egypt, and 
 “ Ethiopia are the only people on earth who have 
 “ praftiled circumcifion from time immemorial : 
 “ for the Phoenicians and the inhabitants of Pa- 
 “ leftine own that they adopted circumcifion from 
 “ the Egyptians. The Syrians, now feated on 
 “ the banks of the Thermodon and Pathenia, to- 
 “ gether with the Macrons their neighbours, ac- 
 “ knowlege, that it is not long fince they con- 
 “ formed to this Egyptian cuftom. It is chiefly 
 “ by this that they are perceived to be of Egyptian 
 “ original. 
 
 “ As to Ethiopia and Egypt, this ceremony be- 
 “ ing of a very antient date among bod} nations, 
 “ I cannot fay which was the original ; however, 
 “ it is probable that the Ethiopians took it from 
 “ the Egyptians ; as, on the other hand, the Phce- 
 “ nicians, by their traffic and intercourle with the 
 “ Greeks, have aboliffied the cuftom of circumcif- 
 “ ing new-born children.” 
 
 It is clear from this pafiage of Herodotus (L), 
 that feveral nations had taken circumcifion from 
 
 tgypt. 
 
 • * (L) Whether the ceremony of circumcifion was firfl intro- 
 
 duced into the world by the Jews or by the Egyptians, has 
 been much contefled, and is not very material to the caufe of 
 religion. It is fuflicient for us, to know that God inflituted 
 circumcifion as a covenant to Abraham and his feed, without 
 giving ourfelves the trouble of enquiring whether it had been 
 ever adopted by other nations. It feems, however, to be cer- 
 tain, that no nation except the Hebrews pra&ifcd it univer- 
 sity. The priefts, indeed, were obliged to be circumcifed, 
 but the reft of the people were left to their liberty. M. Vol- 
 taire has adopted the opinion of Le Clerc upon this fubjeft, 
 which makes the Hebrews to have derived this ceremony 
 id cm the Egyptians ; and he has alfo made ufe of the very 
 
 argument 
 
DICTIONARY. lit 
 
 Esypt ; but no nation has ever faid that they de- 
 rived it from the Jews. To which then mult the 
 origin of this cultom be attributed, to that nation 
 from whom five or fix others acknowledge they 
 hold it, or to another nation much inferior in 
 power, lefs commercial, lefs military, hidden in a 
 nook of Arabia Petrea, and which has never been 
 able to introduce the leaft of its cuftoms in any na- 
 tion ? . 
 
 The Jews fay that they were firft received into 
 Egypt by way of companion and charity ; now is 
 it not very probable, that the little people adopted 
 
 argument of that learned writer, viz. The improbability that 
 the Egyptians fhould borrow fuch a ceremony from lb con- 
 temptible a nation as the Hebrews. But 'were the Hebrews 
 fo contemptible in the time of Jofeph ? Or how could they be 
 fo contemptible after their departure from Egypt, when the 
 inhabitants of that country beheld the Deity operating mira- 
 cles in their favour ? Befides, our author k miftaken, when 
 he fays that the Jews were not circumcifed the whole time 
 they " relkied in Egypt, viz. 205 years. The Scripture tells 
 us, that thofe “ who came out of Egypt had been circumcil- 
 «c * but were dead j and ** thole who had been born in the 
 “ Defert, w'ere not circumcifed,” becaufe they were feparated 
 from other nations, and had no neceflity for any mark to dif- 
 tinguifh them, till they entered the Land of Canaan. Then 
 Jofhua circumcifed all the people, and the Lord faid unto 
 him, “ This day have I rolled away the reproach of Egypt 
 “ from you,” “ opprobrium Egypti the plain fenfe of 
 which is not, as our author fays, 1 have delivered you from 
 what was a reproach to you among the Egyptians ; but I have 
 delivered you from what rendered you like the Egyptians, and 
 redounded to your lhame and confufion, by cutting off a lit- 
 tle of the forefkin, which was not obferved by that unclean 
 and uncircumciled nation. Is not this a more natural con- 
 Itruftion than that of our author i Befides, what occafion was 
 there for delivering them from what had been a reproach to 
 them among the Egyptians, when they had quitted Egypt, and 
 were gone to relide in another country ? I hey had no need to 
 mind the reproach of the Egyptians in the land el Canaan. 
 
 a prac- 
 
112 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 a practice of the great people, and that the Jews 
 joined in fome of their matters cuftoms ? 
 
 Clement of Alexandria relates that Pythagoras, 
 when travelling in Egypt, could not gain admit- 
 tance to the myfteries till he was circumcifed ; 
 confequently there was no being an Egyptian 
 prieft without circumcifion. This priettly order 
 lubfiftcd when Jofeph came into Egypt •, the 
 government was of great antiquity, and the old 
 ceremonies of Egypt were obferved with the moft 
 fcrupulous precilenefs. 
 
 The Jews acknowledge that they continued in 
 Egypt two hundred and live years i they lay that 
 in all that time they were not circumcifed ; this 
 ihews that, during thofe two hundred and five years, 
 the Egyptians did not borrow circumcifion from 
 the Jews : is it then to be fuppofed that they bor- 
 rowed this cuftom, after the Jews, according to 
 , their own teftimony, run away .with all the veflels 
 which they had fo kindly lent them ? -Will a matter 
 adopt the principal mark of his Have’s religion, 
 after robbing him, and running away ? Human 
 nature is not of fuch a make. 
 
 The book of Jolhua fays, that the Jews were 
 circumcifed in the Defert : “ I have delivered you 
 “ from what was a reproach to you among the 
 “ Egyptians (Mj.” Now what eli'e could this re- 
 proach be to people hemmed in between the Phoe- 
 nicians, Arabians, and Egyptians, but' that for 
 which thofe three nations delpifed them ? How is 
 this reproach removed p by taking away from them 
 a little of the ‘forelkin. Is not this the natural 
 import of that paffage ? 
 
 - (M) Our tranllatlon lias it : “ I have rolled away there- 
 *“ Jtfeach .of Ejjypt .from off you.” Jolh. v, 9. 
 
 The 
 
 V> 
 
 * 
 
DICTIONARY. 1 13 
 The book of Genefis fays that Abraham had 
 been circumcifed before •, but Abraham having tra- 
 velled into Egypt, which had, for a long time, 
 been a flourilhing monarchy, governed by a pow- 
 erful king, circumcifion may not improbably be 
 fuppofed to have obtained in a kingdom of fuch 
 antiquity, before the Jewilh nation was formed. 
 Farther, the circumcifion of Abraham terminated 
 in himfelf -, it was not till Jolhua’s time his polle- 
 rity underwent that ceremony. g , 
 
 Now, before Jolhua, the Ifraelites, by their own 
 confefiion, came into many of the Egyptian cuf- 
 toms ; they imitated that nation in feveral facri- 
 fices and ceremonies, as in falling on the eve 
 oflfis’s fealts, in ablutions, in fhaving the priefts 
 heads, likewife the burning of incenfe, the branch- 
 ed chandelier, the facrifice of the red heifer, the 
 purifying with hyfop, the abftaining from pork, 
 the abomination of the kitchen utenfils offtrangers: 
 all thefe things bear witnefs, that the little Hebrew 
 people, whatever averlion they might have to the 
 great Egyptian nation, had retained a vail num- 
 ber of their old mailers culloms. The driving of the 
 goat Azazel into the defert, as laden with the fins 
 ot the people, is a plain imitation of an Egyptian 
 practice ; the very rabbins allow, that the word 
 Azazel is not Hebrew. Where, then, js the im- 
 probability of the Hebrews having imitated the 
 Egyptians in circumcifion ; it was no mere than 
 the Arabs their neighbours had done ? 
 
 It is not at all llrange that God, having fandtified 
 baptifm, which is of iuch an antient date among 
 the Afiatics, fhould likewile have fandlified^ircum^ 
 cifion, of no lefs antiquity among the Africans. 
 If has already been noticed, that it is in his power 
 to annex his graces to fuch ligns as he lhall pleafe to 
 chufe. 
 
 I 
 
 Again, 
 
?r 4 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 Again, the Jews, ever fince their circumcifion' 
 under Jolhua, have conftantly retained this cuftom 
 down to the prefent time. The Arabians have al- 
 fo adhered to it ; but the Egyptians, who, at firft, 
 circumcifed both male and female children, in pro- 
 cefs of time difcontinued this operation on the fe- 
 males, and, at length, limited it to pried s, aftro- 
 logers, and prophets. This we learn' from Cle- 
 ment of Alexandria and Origen. None of the 
 Ptolemies appear to have been circumcifed. 
 
 The Latin authors, who contemptuoufly call the 
 Jews “ Curtus apella ; credat Judseus apella, cur- 
 “ ti Judasi,” give no fuch epithets to the Egypti- 
 ans. At prefent the whole people of Egypt are 
 circumcifed, but from another reafon, becaufe 
 Mahometrfm borrowed the antient circumcifion 
 praftiled in Arabia. 
 
 It is this Arabian circumcifion which has been 
 introduced among the Ethiopians, where both fe- 
 males and males are ftill circumcifed. 
 
 It muftbe acknowledged that this ceremony of 
 circumcifion fcems, at firft, fomething odd ; but let 
 it be obferved, that the oriental priefts confecrated 
 themfelves to the deities by particular marks. An ; 
 ivy leaf was engraved with a bodkin on Bacchus’s 
 priefts. Lucian tells us, that the votaries of the 
 goddefs Ifis made certain characters on their wrifts 
 and necks the priefts of Cibele emakruiated them- 
 felves. 
 
 It is very likely that the Egyptians, who revered 
 t'he inftrument of generation, and carried the figure 
 of it in pompous procefiions, took it into their 
 heads to offer up to Ifis and Ofiris, by whom every 
 thing on earth was engendered, a fmall part of that 
 mfmber, by which thofe deities had appointed that 
 the human fpecies fliould be perpetuated. The 
 eafteri} cuftoms are fo extremely different from 
 

 DICTIONARY. 115 
 ours, that, to a man of ever fo little reading, no- 
 thing fhould appear ftrange. A Parilian, on being 
 told that the Hottentots cut out one of their male 
 childrens tefticles, is quite aftonilhed; and perhaps 
 a Hottentot is equally furprized that the Parifians 
 retain both. 
 
 CONVULSION FITS. 
 
 A BOUT the year 1724, dancings were feen in 
 r\ St. Medard’s church yard; many were the 
 ^miracles wrought there •, one the duchefsDu Maine 
 has immortalized in a long : 
 
 “ Un decroteur a la royale, 
 
 Du talon gauche ellropie, 
 
 Obtint pour grace l'peciale 
 D’etre boiteux de 1 ’autre pied.’’ 
 
 The fubftance of which is : that ‘ e a tip-top 
 “ lhoe japanner, lame in his left foot, obtained, as 
 “ a fpecial favour, that his right Ihould become as 
 « bad.” 
 
 The miraculous fits are known to have conti- 
 nued till a guard was placed at the church-yard. 
 
 “ De par le roi defenfe a Dieu 
 Deplus frequenter en ce lieu.” 
 
 “ God is hereby forb ! dden, in the king’s name, 
 “ ever more to come within this place.” ° 
 
 The Jefuits, as is likewife known, being unable 
 to perform anyfuch miracles, fince their Xavier had 
 ex hau (ted all the fociety’s gifts by raifing nine per- 
 fonsfrom thedcad, byway of coClriterpoifetothe cre- 
 
 I 2 dit 
 
n6 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 dit of the Janfenifts engraved a print of Chrift in a 
 Jefuit’s habit ; and it is farther known that a wag 
 of the Janfenift party put under the print, 
 
 “ Admirez l’artifice extreme 
 De ces moines ingenieux ; 
 
 Ils vous ont habille comme eux, 
 
 Mon Dieu, de peuf qu’on ne vous aime.” 
 
 “ The contrivance of thefe cunning monks > 
 “ That thou mayft not be loved, O God, they 
 “ have drafted thee up in their garb.” 
 
 The Janfenifts, the better to prove that Jefus 
 Chrift could never have put on the habit of a Je- 
 fuit, filled Paris with convulfions, and drew every 
 body to their party. Carre de Montgeron, a 
 counfellor of parliament, went and delivered to the 
 king a collection in quarto of all their miracles, at- 
 tefted by a thouland witnefles; for which, with very 
 o-ood reafon, he was put under confinement, and 
 obliged to go thro’ a regimen to bring him to his 
 fenfes : but truth is always too ftrong tor perfecuti- 
 on ; the miracles went on for thirty years fuccefiively, 
 without any intermillion. Sifter Rofe, filter Illumi- 
 nated, filter Promifed, filter Devout, were perpetu- 
 ally fent for to people’s houfes : they ufed to have 
 themfelves whipped, and no marks of it were to 
 be feen the next day. They could bear, without 
 any Ihew of pain, to be beaten on the brealts with 
 lticks (no wonder •, fince it had been well fenced 
 for the exhibition of fuch a farce) ; they were laid 
 before a great fire, with their faces copioully plaif- 
 tered over with pomatum, and did not burn. At 
 length, as time improves all arts, the fcenery ended 
 in fticking fwords into their flelliy parts, and cruci- 
 fying them ; even a celebrated divine had likewife 
 
DICTIONARY. 117 
 
 the honour of being extended on the crofs, and all 
 this to convince the world that a certain bull was 
 abfurd and ridiculous, which might have been done 
 at a much cheaper rate. Yet have both Janfenifts 
 and Jefuits, one and all, leagued together againft 
 
 the Spirit of Laws, and againft and againft 
 
 and againft and againft ; 
 
 and, after l'uch doings, we have the face to laugh 
 at the Laplanders, the Samoyedes, and the Ne- 
 groes ! 
 
 COUNTRY. 
 
 A Country is compofed of feveral families ; and 
 as felf-love generally leads us to ftand up for, 
 and l’upport our particular families, when a contrary 
 interdt does not intervene •, fo, from the like felf- 
 love, a man Hands up for his town or village, which 
 he calls his native home. 
 
 The more extended this native home is, the lefs 
 we love it, for divifion weakens love ; it js jmpof- 
 fible in nature to have a tender love for a family fo 
 numerous as lcarce to be known. 
 
 T he candidate, amidft his ambitious intrigues to 
 be chofen tedile, tribune, prsetor, conful, dictator, 
 makes a noife about his love for his country, where- 
 as it is only himfelf that he loves ; every one is for 
 fecuring to himfelf the freedom of lying at his own 
 home, and that it lhall be in no man’s power to 
 turn him out j every one is for being fure of hjs 
 life and fortune. Thus the whole fociety coincid- 
 ing in the like wifhes, private intereft becomes thac 
 of the public ; and an individual, in praying on- 
 ly for himfelf, prays in effed for the whole com- 
 munity. 
 
 I 3 Every 
 
uS A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 Every Hate on the whole earth indifp.utably 
 has originally been a republic ; it is the natural 
 progrefs of human nature ; a number of families 
 at firft entered into an alliance to fecure one an- 
 other againft bears and wolves and that which 
 had plenty of grain, bartered with another which 
 had nothing but wood. 
 
 On our difcovery of America, all the feveral 
 tribes throughout that vaft part of the world were 
 found divided into republics •, but there were only 
 two kingdoms. Of a thouland nations, only two 
 were fubdued. 
 
 It was anciently fo on our fide of the globe : be- 
 fore the petty kings of Etruria and Rome ftarted 
 up, Europe was full of republics. Africa has (till 
 its republics ; Tripoli, Tunis, Algiers, which lie fo 
 far north as, in fome meafure, to confine on Europe, 
 are commonwealths of robbers. The Hotten- 
 tots, a people on the fouth of Africa, ftill live, 
 as men are laid to have lived in the primitive ages 
 of the world, free, all equal, ho mailers, no fubjeft's, 
 no money, and few or no wants •, their Iheep fup- 
 ply them both with food and raiment, and their 
 manfions are huts of w-ood and earth : they are the 
 very filthieftof men, and with a moll rank fmell; 
 but this they are not fenfible of, and they both live 
 and die more quietly than we. 
 
 Europe has eight republics without monarchs ; 
 Venice, Holland, Switzerland, Genoa, Lucca, Ra- 
 gufa, Geneva-, St. Marino. Poland, Sweden, and 
 England, may be looked on as republics under a 
 king, but Poland alone calls itfelf fuch. 
 
 Now, which would you have your country to 
 be f a monarchy or a republic ? This is a quellion 
 which has been bandied to and fro thefie four 
 thouland years. Afk the rich which is bell, and 
 
DICTIONARY. 119 
 
 ■they will unanimoufly vote for an ariftocracy 3 
 enquire of the people and they will one and all cry 
 up a democracy : as for royalty, it is only kings 
 * who will prefer it. How then comes it to pafs 
 I. at almoft the whole earth is governed by mo- 
 narchs ? Aik the rats who propofed to hang a bell 
 about the cat’s neck. But the true reafon is, that 
 men very rarely deferve to be their own gover- 
 nors. 
 
 It is a fad cafe, that often there is no being -a 
 good patriot without being an enemy to other 
 men. The elder Cato, that worthy patriot, in 
 giving his vote in the fenate, ufed always to fay. 
 Such is my opinion * and down with Carthage. A 
 great part ot patriotifm is thought to conlift it? 
 wilhing one’s native couutry a flourilhing trade and 
 diftinguifhed fuccefles in war. Now it is mani- 
 feft, that for one country to gain, another mult 
 lofe, and its fuccefles in war muft of courfe fpread 
 calamity in other parts. Such, then, is the Hate 
 of human affairs,- that to wifh an increafe of 
 grandeur to one’s native country is wilhing harm 
 to its neighbours. He who is a citizen of the 
 univerfe would have his country neither greater 
 nor fmaller, richer nor poorer. 
 
 u 
 
 CRITICISM, 
 
X 20 
 
 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 CRITICISM. 
 
 I Do not here intend to fpeak of the criticifm of 
 fcholiafts, who pretend to reftore a word of an an- 
 tient author, very well underftood before : neither 
 fhall I meddle with thofe real critics, who, as far 
 as is poflible, have cleared up anticnt hiftory and 
 philofophy. The fatirical critics are the men I am 
 now to deal with. 
 
 A man of letters one day reading Taflo with me, 
 fell on this ftanza ; 
 
 Chiama gli habitator dell’ ombre eterne 
 II rauco fuon della Tartarea tromba, 
 
 Treman le fpaziofe atre caverne, 
 
 E l’aer cieco a quel rumor rimbombaj 
 Ne fi ftridendo mai dalle fuperne 
 Regioni del cielo il fulgor piomba. 
 
 Ne fi fcofia giammai trema la terra, 
 
 Quando i vapori in fen gravida ferra.” 
 
 He afterwards read, as they fell under his 
 eye, feveral ftanzas of the like force and harmo- 
 ny : how, cried he, is this what your Boileau is 
 pleafed to call tinfel ! Is it thus he drives to depre- 
 ciate a u reat man who Jived a hundred years before 
 him, the better to exalt another great man who 
 lived fixteen hundred years before him, and who 
 would not have failed to have done juftice toTaflo ? 
 
 Be eafy, faid 1 to him, let us look into Quinaut’s 
 operas : what we met with at the opening of the 
 book, could not but incenfe us againft the petu- 
 lancy of criticifm ; it was the following pafiagein 
 the admirable opera of Armida. 
 
 Sidonia. 
 
DICTIONARY. 
 
 121 
 
 SlDONIE. 
 
 « La haine eft affreufe et barbare, 
 L’amour contraint les coeurs dont il s’empare, 
 
 ' — “ATouffrir des tnaux rigoureux. 
 
 Si votre fort eft en votre puifiance, 
 Faiteschoix de l’indifference, 
 
 Elle allure un fort plus heureux. 
 
 Armide. 
 
 Non, non, il ne m’eft pas poflible 
 
 De paffer de mon trouble en unetat paifible; 
 
 Mon coeur ne fe peut plu^galmer ; 
 
 Renaud m’offenfe trop, il n’eft que trop aimable, 
 C’eft pour moi delormais un choix indilpenfable 
 De le hair ou de rainier.” 
 
 We went through the whole piece, and it muft 
 be owned that the beauty of Tafto’s genius is en- 
 hanced by Quinaut : Well, faid I to my friend, af- 
 ter this could you think that Boileau Ihould conti- 
 nually make it his bufinefs to expole Quinaut 
 as a wretched poetafter ? He even brqught Lewis 
 XIV. to believe, that this beautiful, loft, pa- 
 thetic, elegant writer owed all his merit to Lul- 
 ly’s mufic. That I can veryeafily account for, an- 
 fwered my friend ; it was not the muficiar. Boi- 
 leau was jealous of, but the poet : however, what 
 fignifies the faying of a man who, to tag a rhime 
 to a line ending in aut, fometimes fell foul of 
 Bourfaut, fometimes of Henaut, fometimes of 
 Quinaut, according to the terms on which he ftood 
 with thofe gentlemen ? But, that your warmth 
 againft injuftice may not cool, only go to the win- 
 dow, and view that grand front of the Louvre, by 
 which Perraut has gained immortal reputation : 
 
 this 
 
,22 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 this ingenious artift happened to be brother tQ 
 a very learned member of the academy, between 
 whom and Boileau there had been fome literary 
 wrangling, and for this, truly, Mr. Boileau trans- 
 mits this man to pofterity with the chara&er of a 
 paltry architect. 
 
 My friend, after a paufe, replied with a figh, this 
 is the temper of man. The duke de Sully, in his 
 Memoirs, fpeaks of the cardinal d’Offat and fecre- 
 tary Villeroy as bad minifters. Louvois ftrove to 
 fupprefs in himfelf any efteem for the great Col- 
 bert : they, faid 1 , did not print any thing againft 
 each other whilft living, that is a folly fcarce feen 
 in any but divines, fcliolars, and lawyers. 
 
 We had a man of merit, Lamotte, who has 
 written very fine ftanzas. 
 
 “ Quelquefois au feu qui la charme, 
 
 Refifte une jeune beaute, 
 ft contre elle meme elles’arme, 
 
 D’une penible fermete. 
 
 Helas cette contrainte extreme 
 La prive du vice qu’elle aime. 
 
 Pour fuir la honte qu’elle hait : 
 
 Sa feverite n’eft que fafte, 
 
 Et l’honneur dc pafler pour chafte 
 La refout a l’etre en effet.” 
 
 “ A blooming beauty fometimes withftands 
 e ‘ a pleafing paflion, and to prompting nature op- 
 “ pofes a painful firmnefs. This violent conftraint, 
 “ to avoid dreaded'fhame, preferves her from the 
 “ vice to which her heart is attached ; her purity 
 “ was pride and fhow ; and the reputation of chaf- 
 ‘‘ tity determined her againft the violation of it.” 
 
DICTIONARY. 1*3 
 
 ff En vain ce fevere ftoique 
 Suus mille defauts abattu, 
 
 Se vante d’une ame heroique, 
 
 Toute vouee a la vertu ; 
 
 Ce n’eft point la vertu qu’il aime, 
 
 Mais fon coeur yvre de lui meme 
 Voudroit ufurper les autels •, 
 
 Et par fa fagefie frivole 
 II ne veut que parer l’idole 
 Qu’il ofrrc au culte des mortels.” 
 
 “ This auftere Stoic, the Have of a multitude of 
 “ vices, boafts of heroifm, of afoul abfolutely con- 
 “ fecrated to virtue. Abfurd conceit ! Virtue has 
 “ none of his love •, but his inflated heart claims 
 “ altars j and the foie fcope of his varnilhed wif. 
 “ dom is to deck the idol for univerfal worfhip.” 
 
 “ Les champs de Pharfale & d’Arbelle 
 Ont vu triompher deux vainqueurs, 
 
 L’un et 1’autredigne modele 
 Que le propofent les grands coeurs, 
 
 Mais le fucces a fait leur gloire ; 
 
 Et fi le fceau de la vidloire 
 N’eut confacre ces demi-dieux, 
 
 Alexandre aux yeux du vulgaire 
 N’aurait ete qu’un Temeraire, 
 
 Et Cefar qu’un feditieux.” 
 
 “ Pharfalia and Arbella’s plains beheld the tri- 
 “ umph of two viftors, the model and admiration 
 “ of all martial fpirits ; but to fuccefs they owe 
 “ their whole glory ; for had not vidtory confe- 
 “ crated thefe demi-gods, Alexander would have 
 “ been accounted a Hotlpur, and Cad'ar an incen- 
 ‘‘ diary.” 
 
 This 
 
124 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 This amiable author, fays he, more than once 
 arrayed philofophy in the graceful attire of poefy. 
 Had he always written fuch ftanzas, he would have 
 been the chief lyric poet among us ; yet whilft 
 fuch beautiful pieces came from him, a cotempo- 
 rary of his could call him a Green Goofe, and in 
 another place fay, “ the tirefome beauty of his 
 “ propolitions and in another, “ they have but 
 « one fault, they fhould have been been written in 
 « profe •, one fees with half an eye they came from 
 «* Quinaut.” 
 
 He purfues him every where, every where 
 charges him with drinefs and want of harmony. 
 
 Perhaps you would be glad to fee the odes writ- 
 ten fome years after by this fame cenfor, who tried 
 La Motte in fo arbitrary a manner, and decried him 
 with fuch contempt. Here are fome fpecimens. 
 
 “ Cette influence fouveraine 
 N’eft pour lui qu’une illuftre chaine, 
 
 Qui l’attache au bonheur d’autrui ; 
 
 Tous les brillans qui l’embellifient, 
 
 Tous les talents qui l’annobliffent. 
 
 Sort en lui, mais non pas a lui.” 
 
 “ This fovereign power is but a glittering chain, 
 “ binding him to the happinel's of others •, all the 
 “ brilliant qualities which adorn him, all the ta- 
 « lents which ennoble him, though in him, are not 
 
 his.” 
 
 “ II n’ert: rien que le temps n’abforbe ne devore, 
 Et les faits qu’on ignore, 
 
 Sont bien peu differents des faits non avenus.” 
 
 “ Nothing efcapes the devouring jaws of time*, 
 “ and what is unknown differs very little from 
 “ what never happened.” 
 
 “ La 
 
» 2 £ 
 
 dictionary. 
 
 « La bonte qui brille en elle 
 De fes chanties les plus doux. 
 
 Eft une image de celle, 
 
 Qu’elle voit briller en vous. 
 
 Et par vous feule enrichie, 
 
 Sa politefie affranchie 
 Des moindres obfcurites. 
 
 Eft la lueur reflechie, 
 
 Des vos fublimes clartes.” 
 
 “ That goodnefs which in her difpjays its mod 
 “ engaging charms, is the image of that which, 
 “ admiring, Ihe beholds in you •, and by you alone 
 “ enrichecf: her politenefs, freed from rhe leaft 
 “ darkening fpot, is a light refledted from your 
 
 rei’plendcncy.” 
 
 « Ils ont vu par ta bonne foi 
 De leurs peuples troubles d’effroi 
 La crainte heureufement dejue. 
 
 Et deracinee a jamais 
 La haine ft fouvent refue, 
 
 En furvivance de la paix.” 
 
 “ Through thy probity they have feen the ter- 
 “ rors of their appaled people happily miftaken ■, 
 “ and hatred, often received in reverfion for peace, 
 “ for ever extirpated.” 
 
 “ Devoile 'i maviie emprellee 
 Ces deites d’ adoption, 
 
 Synonimes de la penfee, 
 bymboles de l’abftradtion.” 
 
 “ Unveil to my eager fight thofe adopted dei- 
 “ ties, fynonimous v/ith cogitation, emblems of 
 “ abftradlednefs.” 
 
 “ N’eft 
 
.'*2 6 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 * l N’eft ce pas une fortune, 
 
 Quand d’une charge commune, 
 
 Deux moities portent le faix ? 
 
 Que le moindre le reclame, 
 
 Et que du bonheur de l’ame 
 Le corps feul fafie les fraix.” 
 
 “ Is it not a rare happinefs, where, in a burthen 
 “ common to two, the leaft infifls on bearing the 
 “ whole load ?_ Thus the body lays itfelf out for 
 “ the gratifications of the foul.” 
 
 To be fure, faid my judicious philologift, this is 
 wretched trafii to be publiihed as models, after cri- 
 ticifing a writer with fo much fcurrility. The au- 
 thor had done much better to have left his adver- 
 fary in the quiet enjoyment of his merit, and have 
 retained his own fhare of it 5 but alas ! the “ genus 
 “ irritabile vatum,” is ftill as fick as ever with 
 the overflowings of an acrid bile. The public, its 
 views extending no farther than amufemer.t, over- 
 looks thefe trifles in men of talents. It fees, in 
 an allegory called Pluto, fome judges condemned 
 to be flead, and fitting in hell, on a feat covered 
 with their flcins, inftead of the lillies (N) : the reader 
 never troubles himfelf whether the judo-es de- 
 lerved it or not, or whether the plaintiff who had 
 fummoned them before Pluto be in the right 'or 
 wrong ; he reads thofe verfes purely for his plea- 
 fure, and if they give him pleafure that is all he 
 defires : if the allegory difgults him, he fhuts the 
 book, and would not ftir a foot to have the fen- 
 tence confirmed or annulled. 
 
 I he . arms of F r rance embroidered on the covering oj 
 the benches in courts of juftice. s 0J 
 
 Racine’s 
 
DICTIONARY. 
 
 Racine’s inimitable tragedies have been all criti- 
 cifed, and very badly, becaufe the critics were ri- 
 vals. The competent judges of an art are the 
 artifts ; true, but when is it the artifts are not cor- 
 rupted ? 
 
 An artift very fkilful, and, withal, a man of 
 tafte, without either prejudice or envy, would 
 make an excellent critic •, but a hard matter it is 
 to find fuch a man. 
 
 HAT ever the whole globe was at one time 
 
 totally overflowed with water, is phyfically 
 
 impoffible. The fea may have covered all parts 
 fucceflively, one after the other •, and this could be 
 only in a gradation fo very flow, as to take up a 
 prodigious number of ages. The fea, in the fpace 
 of five hundred years, has withdrawn from Aigues- 
 mortes, from Frejus, and from Ravenna, once large 
 ports, leaving about two leagues of land quite dry. 
 This progreflion fhews, that, to make the circuit of 
 the globe it would require two millions two hundred 
 and fifty thoufand years. A very remarkable circum- 
 ftance is, that this period comes very near to that 
 which the earth’s axis would take up in railing it- 
 felf again, and coinciding with the equator j a 
 motion fo far from improbable, that, for thefe fifty 
 years part, fome apprehenfion has been entertained 
 of it, but it cannot be accomplilhed under two 
 millions three hundred thoufand years. 
 
 The ftrata, or beds of fhclls, every where found, 
 fixty, eighty, and even a hundred leagues from the 
 fea, prove, beyond all difpute, that it has infenfibly 
 
 DELUGE. 
 
 (Hepofited thofe maritime produ&s on grounds 
 
 which 
 
128 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 which were once its fhores : but that the water, at 
 one and the fame time, covered the whole earth, is 
 a phyfical abfurdity, which the laws of gravitation, 
 as well as thofe of fluids, and the deficiency of the 
 quantity of water, demonftrate to be impoflible. 
 Not that any thing here is meant in the leaft to af- 
 fect the great truth of the univerfal deluge as re- 
 lated in the Pentateuch ; on the contrary, this is a 
 miracle, and therefore to be believed ; it is a mi- 
 racle, therefore could not be effected by phyfical 
 caufes. 
 
 The whole hiftory of the deluge is miraculous. 
 It is a miracle that forty days rain lhould have fub- 
 merged the four parts of the world ; that the wa- 
 ters rofe fifteen cubits above all the higheft moun- 
 tains : it is a miracle that there lhould have been 
 cataradls, doors, and apertures in heaven ; it is a 
 miracle that all animals lhould have repaired to 
 the ark, from the feveral parts of the world ; it is 
 a miracle that Noah lhould have found fodder for 
 them during ten months j it is a miracle that all 
 the creatures, with the provifions, could be con- 
 tained in the ark •, it is a miracle that moll of them 
 did not die there •, it is a miracle that, at going 
 out of the ark, fuftenance could be found for man 
 and beaft; it is likewife a miracle, that one Pelletier 
 lhould have conceited that he had explained how 
 all the feveral kinds of creatures might very natu- 
 rally be contained and fed in the ark. 
 
 Now, the hiftory of the deluge being the moll 
 miraculous thing ever heard of, it is idle (O) to go 
 
 about 
 
 (O) Our author is miftaken, when he fays it is idle to go 
 about elucidating the hiftory of the deluge, and that the 
 whole mud be relblved into a miracle. That the divine af- 
 fiftance mull be called in on this occafion may be allowed ; 
 
 but • 
 
about elucidating it ; there are myfteries which we 
 believe through faith ; and faith confifts in believ- 
 ing what realon does not believe : which again is 
 another miracle. 
 
 t * * 
 
 but that every part of the hiftory is miraculous we cannot af- 
 fent to. The difficulty of finding out fuch a prodigious quanti- 
 ty of water as was requifite tor covering all the globe to fifteen 
 cubits above the higheft mountains, has made fome modern 
 writers imagine, that this deluge overwhelmed only. one part 
 of the earth. But all antiquity believed that the deluge was 
 univcrfal, and the Scripture exprefles it in the ftrongeft terms. 
 Had not all the earth been covered with the waters of the de- 
 luge, the building of the ark would have been needlefs. It 
 would have been fufHcient for God to have warned Noah td 
 go to fome other country, which was not to have been over- 
 whelmed with water. Befides, it would have required no lef9 
 a miracle to keep up the waters in one part of the earth, than 
 to drown the whole. As to the difficulty of finding out wa- 
 ters fufficient to overflow the World, without having re- 
 courfe to a miracle, is it not very rational to make aniwer, 
 that as, in the beginning, the whole mafs of the earth 
 was covered with waters, which retired into the cavities 
 of the earth, or were drawn up in clouds; fo thofe ca- 
 vities having thrown out thofe waters by the motion of the 
 earth, and the clouds being diffolved into water, the fame 
 quantity of water meeting, might agair* o^^he globe of the 
 earth. This is what Mcfes meant, T faid, “ That 
 
 “ the fountains of the deep and the catararlrof heaven were 
 “ opened.” It mult be owned, indeed, that to draw this 
 quantity of water out of the abyfs on the furface of the earth 
 required the exertion of the Divine Power. The other diffi- 
 culties about Noah’s ark may be eafily folved. That the fpace 
 in fuch a veflel was abundantly fufficient to contain both 
 Noah and his family, as well as the animals, and all necefiary 
 provifions for them, appears moll evidently, whatever our au- 
 thor may pretend, from the geometrical calculations of learn- 
 ed men, as Bifliop Wilkins and others. See the Univ. Hift. 
 vol. i. p. 220. asalfo Wilkins’s EBay towards areal Character, 
 and Peletier DilTert. fur PArche dc Noe. 
 
 Thus 
 
r 3 o A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 T hus the (lory of the univerfal deluge is like 
 that of the tower of Babel, of Balaam’s afs. of the 
 fall of Jericho at the blowing of the trumpets, of 
 the waters turned into blood, the paflage of the Red 
 Sea, and all the miracles which God was pleaied 
 to perform in behalf of his chofen people. Thefe 
 are depths unfathomable by the line of human rta- 
 ion. 
 
 F all the books which have reached our times, 
 
 the moil antient is (1 J ) Homer : here we 
 
 become acquainted with the manners of pro- 
 fane antiquity, with heroes and gods, as rude 
 and unpolifhed as if made in the likenefs of man ; 
 but there, cn the other hand, we meet with the ele- 
 ments of philoiophy, and efpecially the notion of 
 Defliny, no lrfs lord of the gods, than the gods are 
 lords of the world. 
 
 Jupirer would fain fave I lecftor ; heconfults the 
 deftinies ; he weighs the fates of Heflor and 
 Achilles in feales, and finding that the Trojan 
 muft abfolutely be fiain by che Greek, he is fenfi- 
 ble all oppofition to it would be fruitlels : and 
 from that moment Apollo, Hedlor’s guardian ge- 
 nius, is obliged to forfake him (Iliad, lib. xxii.) 
 and though Homer, according to the privilege of 
 
 (P) This is amiiinke, the hiftory of Mofes is the moft anci- 
 ent book in the world : for whether' Mofes was co temporary 
 •with Inachns, thefuft king of Argos, who lived 6co years 
 he fore the Trojan v.ar; or whether he did not live till tite 
 cays of Cecrops, king o: Athens, who reigned 300 yeais fce- 
 f< re that war, it is certain he is much more ancient than Ho- 
 mer or Hefiod. 
 
 DESTINY 
 
 an- 
 
DICTIONARY. I 3 r 
 
 antiquity,- often interlards his poem with quite op- 
 poi'ue ideas, yet is he the fir£t in whom the notion 
 of deftiny occurs ; fo that it mull be fuppofed to 
 have been current in his time. 
 
 1 his notion of deftiny was not received by the 
 Jewifti Pharifees till feveral ages after; for the 
 Pharifees themfclves, who, among that infignificant 
 people, were the principal literati, were but of a 
 modern date. At Alexandria they adulterated the 
 ancient Jewifh opinions with many Stoic tenets. St. 
 Jerom even (ays, that their fed is but little prior 
 to our vulgar tsra. 
 
 Philosophers never flood in need of Homer, or 
 the Phaiifees, to be convinced that every thing is 
 done by immutable laws, that every thing is fettled, 
 and that every thing is a necelTary efted. 
 
 Either the world fubfifts by' its own nature, by 
 its phyfical laws, or a Supreme Being has formed 
 it by his primitive laws ; in either cafe, thefe laws 
 are immutable ; in either cafe every thing is necef- 
 fary : heavy bodies gravitate towards the center of 
 the earth, and cannot tend to remain in the air ; 
 pear-trees can never bear pine-apples; the inftind 
 of a fpaniel can never be the inftmd of an ollrich ; 
 every thing is arranged, fet in motion, and limited. 
 
 ftian can have but a certain number of teech, 
 hairs, and ideas ; and a time comes when he ne- 
 cefiarily iofes them : it is a contradidion that what 
 was yeiierday has not been, and what is to-day 
 (hoidd not be ; no lefs a contradidion is it that a 
 thing which is to be fliould not come to pafs. 
 
 Ir thou couldllgive a turn to the deftiny of a fly, 
 I lee no reafon why thou mighteft not as well de- 
 termine the deftiny of all other flics, of all ocher 
 animah, of all men, and of all nature •, fo that, at 
 laft, thou wouldft be more powerful than God him- 
 fclf. 
 
 K 2 
 
 It 
 
tp A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 It is common for weak people to fay, fuch a 
 phyfician has cured my aunt of a moll dangerous 
 illnefs ; he has made her live ten years longer than 
 Ihe would. Others as weak, but, in their own opi- 
 nion, very wife, fay, the prudent man owes his for- 
 tune to himfclf. 
 
 "'Nullum- numen abed, fi fit prudentia, fed ncs 
 
 Te facimus fortuna Deam coeloque locamus.” 
 
 But the prudent man oftentimes is crufhed by 
 his deftiny, inftead of making ic; it is their delti- 
 ny that renders men prudent. 
 
 Some profound politicians affirm, that, had 
 Cromwell, Ludlow, Ircton, and about a dozen more 
 parliamentarians, been made away with a week be- 
 fore the cutting off Charles the Firft’s head, tnat 
 king might have lived longer, and have died in 
 his bed. They are in the right, and may far- 
 ther add, that, had all England been iwallowed up 
 by the iea, that monarch would not have ended 
 his days on a fcaffoid at Whitehall, near the Ban*- 
 queting* houfe ; but bv the arrangement of occur- 
 rences Charles was to have his head cut off. 
 
 Cardinal a ? Offat was unquellionably a man of 
 more prudence than yon lunatic in Bedlam •, but is 
 it not manifeft that the wife d’Ofiat’s organs were 
 of another texrure than that madman’s ? So a foxs 
 organs differ from tr.oie of a crane or a lark. 
 
 The phyfician has faved thy aunt. Allowed ; 
 but herein he certainly did not reverie the order ot 
 nature; he conformed to it. It is evident that 
 thy aunt could not hinder her being born in iuch 
 a town, and having a certain illnefs at Inch a time; 
 that the phyfician could be no-where but in the 
 town where he was ; that thine aunt was to lend 
 foe him ; and that he was to preferibe for her thole 
 medicaments which haveeffe&ed her cure. 
 
 A pea- 
 
.DICTIONARY. 133 
 
 A peafant imagines that the hail which has 
 fallen in his ground is purely matter of chance ; 
 but the philofopher knows that there is no fuch 
 thing as chance •, and that by the conftitution of 
 the world, it mult neceffarily have hailed that day, 
 in that very place. 
 
 Some, alarmed at this truth, are for halving it, 
 as ftraitened debtors offer half to their creditors, 
 defiring fome forbearance for the remainder. There 
 are, fay they, neceffary events (Q^ ), and others 
 which are not fo : but it would be odd, indeed, that 
 one part of this world were fixed and not the other ; 
 that fome things which happen were to happen, 
 and that others which happen were not neceffa- 
 rily to happen. On a dole examination, the doc- 
 trine which oppofes that of deftiny, mull appear 
 loaded with abfurdities, and contrary to the idea 
 of an eternal providence : but many are deftined 
 to reafon wrongly, others not to realon at all, and 
 others to perfecute thofe who do realon. 
 
 You alk me what, then, becomes of liberty ? I 
 underftand you not. I know nothing of that li- 
 berty you fpeak of, nor yourfelf, indeed -, elfe you 
 would not be fo long controverting about its na- 
 ture. If you will, or, rather, if you can, calmly 
 examine with me what it is, turn to the letter L. 
 
 ’ (Qj The phyfical world is fubjeft to invariable laws ; 
 man, therefore, as a phyfical being, is, like other bodies, go- 
 verned by thofe invariable laws : but as an intelligent being, 
 his nature requires him to be a free agent. Our author has 
 taken his notions on this article, and on that of Liberty, from 
 .Mr. Locke, wjio denies that there is fuch a power in man as a 
 Liberty of Will ; which you may fee refuted by the ingenious 
 Dr. Clarke, on the Being and Attributes, p. 86. 
 
 £ 3 
 
 DREAMS. 
 
i 3 4 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 DREAMS. 
 
 “ Somnia quae ludunt animos volitantibus um- 
 bris, 
 
 Non delubra deum, nec ab asthere numina mit- 
 tunt, 
 
 Sed fua quifque facit.” 
 
 B UT how fo, when all the fenfes are deadened 
 in lleep, is there one within ftill alive and ac- 
 tive (R)? What l when your eyes have loft their 
 fight, and your ears their hearing, do you ftill fee 
 
 (R) M. Voltaire does not feem to be fufHciently acquaint- 
 ed with the caufe of dreams, or to have rightly examined that 
 part of natural philofophy. In order to dear up this matter, 
 we fhould previoufly inquire into the nature of waking and 
 fleeping. Waking confifls in this, that the animal fpirits be- 
 ing at that time in great plenty in the brain, and capable of 
 being eafdy determined to run from thence through all the 
 nerves, they fill them in fuch a manner as to keep all the ca- 
 pillamenrs of them ftretched and diitinft from each other. 
 Sleeping, on the contrary, is caufed by a fcarcity, or failure, 
 of fpirits ; fo that the pores of the brain, through which the 
 fpirits ufually run into the nerves, not being kept open by 
 the continual flowing of the fpirits, fhut up of themfelves. 
 The fpirits being dilfipated, and no new ones flowing in, 
 the capillaments of the nerves will become foft, and cleave to 
 each other ; and if, at that time, any objedl makes an im- 
 prefiion on any part of the body, thofe nerves cannot tranf- 
 mit it to the brain. And hence it follows, that there can be 
 no fenfation. But, it may happen that, while we are afleep, 
 fome of the ani al fpirits which are in the brain may fhake 
 fome of the parts of the brain, in the fame manner as they 
 would be fhaken by an external objedl atfeding the corporeal 
 fenfes ; then there will be a fenfation raifed in the foul, and 
 fuch a fort of perception , is called a dream. 
 
 and 
 
DICTIONARY. 135 
 .and hear in your dreams ? The dog hunts in his 
 •dreams barks, chafes his prey, and feafts on his 
 •reward. That the poet verfifies in his deep, the ma- 
 thematician views figures, the metaphyfician reafons 
 •right or wrong, we have many linking inftances. 
 
 Is this the adtion only of the body’s organs, or 
 is it merely the foul, which, now freed from the 
 power of the fenfes, adts in the full enjoyment of 
 its properties. 
 
 If the organs alone produce our dreams by 
 night, why not our ideas by day ? If it be merely 
 the foul, acting of itfelf, and quiet by the fufpen- 
 fion cf the fenles, which is the only caule and fubjedt 
 of all your deeping ideas, whence is it, that they 
 are almoft ever irrational, irregular, and incohe- 
 rent? Can it be, that, in the time of the foul’s 
 moft abftradt quietude, its imagination diould be 
 the molt confuted ? Is it fantaftical when free ? 
 Were it born with metaphyfical ideas, as fome 
 wiiters, who were troubled with waking dreams, 
 have affirmed, its pure and luminous ideas of be- 
 ing, of infinitude, and of all primary principles, 
 naturally fhould awake in her with the greateffc 
 energy when the body is deeping, and men diould 
 philofophife beft in their dreams. 
 
 Whatever fyltem you efpoufe, however you may 
 labour to prove that memory flirs the brain, and 
 your brain your foul, you muft allow that, in all 
 your ideas in deep, you are intirely padive *, your 
 will has no fnare in thofe images. 1 hus it is 
 clear, that you can think feven or eight hours on 
 a ftretch, without having the lead inclination to 
 think, and even without being certain that you do 
 think. Confider this, and tell me what is man’s 
 compound ? 
 
 Superdition has always dealt much in dreams; 
 nothing, indeed, was more natural. A man deep- 
 
 K 4 ty 
 
t 2 S A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 ly concerned about his miftrefs who lies ill, dreams 
 that he fees her dying ; and the next day fne actu- 
 ally dies : then, to be lure, God had given him 
 previous knowledge of his beloved’s death. 
 
 A commander of an army dreams of gaining a 
 battle gains it ; then the gods had intimated to 
 him that he fhould be conqueror. 
 
 It is only fuch dreams as meet with fome accom- 
 plifhment that are taken notice of, the others we 
 think not worth remembrance. Dreams make 
 full as great a part of antient hiftory as oracles. 
 
 The end of ver. 26. cap. xix. of Leviticus, the 
 Vulgate renders thus : “ Thou (halt not obferve 
 “ dreams (S) .” But the word dream is not in the 
 Hebrew ; and it would be fomething odd, that 
 the obfervance of dreams ftiould be forbidden in 
 the fame book, which tells us that Jofeph faved 
 Egypt, and brought his family to great profperity 
 by interpreting three dreams. 
 
 The interpretation of dreams and vifions was 
 fo common, that fomething beyond this know- 
 ledge was required ; the magician was fometimes 
 even to guefs what another had dreamed. Ne- 
 buchadnezzar forgetting a dream, ordered the ma- 
 gicians, on pain of death, to find it out ; Daniel the 
 Jew, who was of the fame fchool as the magici- 
 ans, faved their lives, jSoth finding out and inter- 
 preting the king’s dream. This and many other 
 accounts prove, that oneiromancy, or the intrepre- 
 tation of dreams, was net prohibited by the Jewilh 
 fnftitutes. 
 
 1 
 
 END, 
 
 (S) Moft tranflations have Times, 
 
DICTIONARY. 
 
 l 37 
 
 END, FINAL CAUSES. 
 
 A M A N, it feems, mud be dark mad to deny 
 that the domach is made for digeftion, the 
 eye to fee, and the ear to hear. 
 
 On the other hand, he mud be drangely attach- 
 ed to final caufes, to affirm, that done was made to 
 build houfes, and that China breeds filk-worms to 
 furnilh Europe with fattin. 
 
 But it is laid, if God has manifedly made' one 
 thing with defign, he had a defign in every thing. 
 To allow a Providence in one cafe, and deny it in 
 another, is ridiculous. Whatever is made was forefeen 
 and arranged ; now every arrangement has its ob- 
 ject, every effeft its caufe ; therefore every thing is 
 equally the refult, or the produdt, of a final caufe ; 
 therefore it is equally true to fay that nofes were 
 made to wear fpcdtacles, and fingers to be deco- 
 rated with diamonds, as it is true to fay, that the 
 ears have been made to hear founds, and the eyes to 
 receive light. 
 
 This difficulty, I apprehend, may be eafily clear- 
 ed up, when the effects are invariably the fame in 
 all times and places ; when fuch uniform effiedts 
 are independent of the beings they appertain to, 
 there is then evidently a final caufe. 
 
 All animals have eyes and they fee; all have ears 
 and they hear ; all a mouth with which they eat ; 
 a ftomach, or fomething fimilar, by which they 
 digeft ; all an orifice which voids the excrements ; 
 all an inftrument of generation, and thefe natural 
 gifts operate in them without the intervention of 
 any art. Here are clear demonftrations of final 
 caufes, and to gainfay fo univerfal a truth, would 
 jbe to pervert our faculty of thinking. 
 
 But 
 
, S 8 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 But it is not in all places, nor at all times, that 
 (tones form edifices ; all nofes do not wear ipedta- 
 cles •, all fingers have not a ring, nor are all legs 
 covered with filk do' kings : therefore a filk worm 
 is not made to cover my legs, as your mouth is 
 made to eat, and your backfide ior evacution. 
 Thus there are effe&s produced by final caufes, 
 but withal many which cannot come within that 
 appellation. 
 
 But both the one and the other are equally agree- 
 able to the plan of general Providence-, for certainly 
 nothing comes to pals in oppofiticn to it, or lb much 
 as without it. Every particular within the compafs 
 of nature is uniform, immutable, and the immediate 
 work of their Author. From him are derived the 
 laws by which the moon is three-fourths of the 
 caufe of tides, and the fun the other fourth ; it is 
 he who has given a rotary motion to the fun, by 
 which in five minutes and a half it emits rays of 
 light into the eyes of men, crocodiles, and cats. 
 
 But if, after many centuries, we have hit on the 
 invention of (hears and fpits, with the former 
 Ihearing the fheep of their wool, and with the lat- 
 ter reading them for food, w-hat can be inferred 
 from thence, but that God has fo made us, that, 
 ■one day we fhould neceffariiy grow ingenious and 
 carnivorous ? 
 
 Sheep, doubtlefs, were not abfolutely made to be 
 dreflfed and eaten fince feveral nations abfiain from 
 that fanguinary practice. Men were nc-c efientially 
 created 10 butcher one another, for the Bramins and 
 Quakers never kill any body ; but the competition 
 we are made of is frequently produd 1 :ve of mafla- 
 cres, as it produces calumnies, vanif.es, perfecti- 
 ons, and impertinencies : not that the formation of 
 man is precifely the final caufe of our follies and 
 brutalities, a final caufe'being univerfal and inva- 
 3 riable 
 
DICTIONARY. i 39 
 riable in ail places and at all times. The crimes 
 and abfurdities of the human mind are, neverthe- 
 leis, in the eternal order of things. In threfhing 
 corn, the flail is the final caufe of the grain’s repa- 
 ration •, but if the flail, in threfhing the corn, de- 
 stroys a thoufand infcdts, this is not from any de- 
 terminate will of mine, neither is it mere cbance : 
 thefe infe<5ts were at that time under my flail, and 
 it was determined they were to be there. 
 
 It isconfequential to the nature of things, that a 
 man is ambitious, forms other men into military 
 bodies, that he is beaten or gains a viftory ; but 
 never can it be faid that man was created by God 
 to be knocked on the head in battle. 
 
 The inftrumencs given to us by nature cannot 
 always be final caufes, ever in motion, and infalli- 
 ble in their effeft. The eyes, given us for fight, 
 are not always open ; every fenle has its its inter- 
 vals of reft : there are even fome fenfes we make 
 no ufe of ; for inftance, in the cafe of a poor girl of 
 fourteen, immured in a convent, that door, from 
 which was to proceed a new generation, is for ever 
 fhut up ; ftill the final caufe fubfifts, and as foon 
 as it is free will adl. 
 
 E Q_U A L I T Y. 
 
 W HAT does one dog owe to another, and one 
 horfe to another horfe ? Nothing. . No ani- 
 mal depends on its fellow ; but man, partaking of 
 that fpark of divinity called reafon, what advan- 
 tage accrues to him from this? To be a flave al- 
 moft every- where throughout the earth. 
 
 Were this earth what it apparently fhould be, 
 that is, did man every -where meet with an earl y, 
 
 certain, 
 
S 4 o A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 certain, and fafe fubfiftence, and a climate fuitablc 
 to his nature, it is manifeftlv impofiible that one 
 man could have enflaved another. When this 
 earth (hall every-where produce falubrious fruits; 
 when the air, which fliould contribute to our life, 
 fhall not bring us ficknefies and death : when man 
 fhall ftar.d in need of no other lodging and bed 
 than that of the deer and roebuck ; then the 
 Gengis- Khans and the Tamerlanes will have no 
 other domeftics than their children, and thefe will 
 have fo much natural affedion as to affift them in 
 their old age. 
 
 In this 16 natural Hate, which all quadrupeds, 
 birds, and reptiles enjoy, man would be as happy 
 as they ; dominion would then be a chimera, an 
 abfurdity, which no one would think of; tor who 
 would make a buftle to get fervants without any 
 want of their fervice ? 
 
 Should any individual, of a tyrannical difpofiti- 
 on, and extraordinary ftrength, take it into his 
 head to make a Have of his weaker neighbour, the 
 thing would be impradicable ; the party opprefled 
 would be an hundred leagues out of the oppreflor s 
 reach before he had taken his meafures. 
 
 Thus a freedom from wants would necefiarily 
 make all men equal. It is the diftrefs annexed to 
 our fpecies which fubje&s one man to another : 
 not that inequality is a real misfortune ; the griev- 
 ance lies in dependance. What fignifies one man 
 being {tiled his highnefs, another his holinefs? but 
 to ferve either is difagreeable. 
 
 A numerous family has fuccefsfully cultivated a 
 good foil, whilll two fmall neighbouring families 
 cannot bring their ftubborn grounds to produce 
 any thing ; the two poor families muft either be- 
 come fervants to the opulent family, or extirpate 
 it; this is felf-evident: one of the two indigent 
 
 families. 
 
DICTIONARY. r 4 * 
 
 families, for a fubfiftence, goes and offers its labour 
 to the rich •, the other goes to difpoflefs it by force 
 of arms, and is beaten. The former is the origin 
 of dometl'ics and labourers, and from the latter 
 flavery is derived. 
 
 In our calamitous globe, it is impoffible that men 
 living together in fociety, fhould not be divided 
 into two clafles, one the rich who command, the 
 other the poor who ferve or obey : thefe two are 
 l'ubdivided into a thoufand, and thefe thoufands 
 have their farther fubdivifions and gradations. 
 
 All the opprefled are not ablblutely unhappy. 
 Molt of them being born in a fervile ftate r continual 
 labour preferves them from too lenftble a feeling of 
 their flotation ; but whenever they feel it, wars are 
 the confequence, as at Rome between the plebeian 
 and patrician parties ; likewife thole or the peafants 
 in Germany, England, and France. All thefe wars 
 terminate, foon or late, in the fubjeftion of the peo- 
 ple, becaufe the great have money, and money does 
 every thing within a date ; I lay within a date ; 
 for between nation and nation it is otherwife. A 
 nation which handles iron bed, will ever be too 
 ltrong for that which, with its abundance of gold, 
 is deficient in (kill and courage. 
 
 Every man is born with no ftnall propenfuy to 
 power, riches, and pleafure, and has naturally a de- 
 light in indolence •, consequently every man is for 
 having the money, wives, or daughters of others * 
 would lubjed them to all his humours, and do no 
 work, at or lead what only pleafed himfelf. You 
 fee that, for men with fuch fine difpofitions to be 
 equal, is as impoffible as that two preachers, or 
 two profefibrs of divinity, Ihouldnot be jealous of 
 one another. 
 
 Mankind, in the prefect date, cannot fubfift, 
 unltfs an infinity of ufcfui men have the misfor- 
 tune 
 
i 4 2 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 tune of being without any pofielfion whatever : for, 
 to lie lure, no man in vafv circumftances will plough 
 your grounds •, and, if you are in want of a pair of 
 fhoes, you mult find fome other hand than aferjeant 
 at law to make them for you. Thus, inequality 
 is, at the fame time, both the mod natural and the 
 mod chimerical thing in the world. 
 
 Men beipg excefiive in every thing where they 
 can be fo, this inequality has been carried too far ; 
 in fevvral governments it is a {landing maxim, that 
 a citizen is not allowed to quit the country where he 
 happened to be born : the import of this law is 
 vifibly this : “ The country is fo bad and ill go- 
 “ verned, that we forbid any perfon whatever to 
 “ go our, left every body (hould leave it.” Now 
 adt more wifely, create in your fubje&s a delight to 
 flay in your country, and in foreigners a detire of 
 •coming thither. 
 
 Every man has a right to believe himfelr naturally 
 equal toother men : but it does not from hence fol- 
 low that a cardinal’s cook may order his eminence to 
 drefs his dinner ; the cook indeed may fay, I am as 
 much a man as my mailer ; like him I cried at my 
 birth, and he will cie in the fame agonies, and amidit 
 the fame ceremonies as I •, the animal fundlions are 
 alike in both ; if the Turks make themfelves maf- 
 ters of Rome, and I (hould then come to be a car- 
 dinal, and my mafter reduced to turn cook, I will 
 take him into my fervice. There is nothing in 
 this foliloquy but what is rational and juft ; yet till 
 the grand feignor makes himfelf mafter of Rome, 
 the cook is to do his duty, elie there’s an end of 
 human I'ociety. ■ 
 
 As to him who is neither cook to a cardinal nor 
 holds any (late employment, and who has no con- 
 nection or dependence, but who is chagrined at be- 
 ing every where received cither with an air of pro- 
 tection 
 
DICTIONARY. i 4? 
 tc&ion or contempt; who plainly fees, that many 
 Monlignors have neither more learning, more geni- 
 us, nor more virtue than himfclf, and to whom it is a 
 torment to be fometimes in thrir anti-chamber — 
 What wouid you have him do ? Take himfelf away. 
 
 EZEKIEL. 
 
 Of fome fingular Pafiages in that Prophet, and 
 fome antient Cuftoms. 
 
 I T is at prefent very well known, that we are not 
 to judge of antient cuftoms by modern times. 
 He who would go about to reform the court of Al- 
 cinoiis in the Odyflty, by that of the grand feig- 
 nor or of Lewis XIV. would be little applauded 
 by the learned •, and to find fault with Virgil for 
 having reprefented king Evander receiving ambaf- 
 fadorsfwith a bear fkin for his mande, and a dog 
 on each fide of him, would be very bad criticifm. 
 
 The manners of the antient Egyptians and Jews 
 vary from ours ftill more than thole of king Alci- 
 noiis, of Naufieae his daughter, and the good man 
 Evander. — Ezekiel, when a flave among the Chal- 
 deans, had a vilion near the little river of Chebar, 
 which runs into the Euphrates. 
 
 It is not to be thought ftrange that he flrould 
 have feen animals with four faces, and four wings, 
 and their feet like thole of calves •, nor that he faw 
 wheels fclf-moving, and having in them the fpiric 
 of life. I hefe fymbols are pleating to the very 
 imagination ; but feveral critics cannot be recon- 
 ciled (T) to the order given him by the Lord that, 
 
 during 
 
 ( I ) Our author acknowledges that the detcriptions which 
 he has extracted from this prophet, how ihocking (bever t icy 
 
 may 
 
144 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 during three hundred and ninety days he fhould eat; 
 barley, wheat, and millet bread, befmeartd with 
 
 man’s 
 
 may appear at firft fight, only denote the iniquities of Jerufa- 
 lem and Samaria ; yet as weak minds may be offended at his 
 picking out thefe palfages, without explaining them, we fhall 
 make a few remarks on that head. 
 
 The prophet Ezekiel is very obfeure, particularly towards 
 the beginning and end, for which reafon the Jews would not 
 permit their people to read him till the age of thirty. He 
 fdretels the captivity and deftru&ion of Jeiufaiem, the refto- 
 ration of the Jewifh people, and the rebuilding of the temple. 
 
 In the fourth chapter, under the type of a fiege, he fhews the 
 time from Jeroboam’s defe&ion to the captivity. Here he 
 enumerates the hardfliips of the bdieged, for want of provi- 
 lions. Their bread, he fays, is to be given them by weight, 
 becaufe of the fcarcity of grain. They fliall alfo drink their 
 water by idea fu re ; and there will be fo great a fcarcity of 
 fuel, that they will be obliged to bake their bread with dung 
 that cometh otit of man ; that is, they will be obliged to make 
 fire of man’s dung inftead of cow-dung, becaufe of the fcarcity 
 of cattle. This is very different from ordering the prophet to 
 befmear the bread with man’s dung, as M. Voltaire under- 
 flands it, according to the vulgar acceptation. The prophet 
 is ftill uneafy, and tells the Lord, he hath hitherto ahlfained 
 from every thing that the law deems polluted, and therefore 
 begs he may not be obliged to make ufe of what is naturally 
 polluted ; viz. man’s dung for the purpofe of baking. The 
 Lord is moved with his prayer, mitigates his fentence, and lays 
 he fhall have cow’s dung for man’s dung, to prepare his bread 
 therewith ; that is, to bake it, not, according to our author’s 
 comment, to knead it. The conclufion is, that, as cow’s 
 clung was alfo unclean, the Ifraelites fhould, in punilhment 
 for their iniquities be certainly polluted. 
 
 With regard to the contradiction mentioned by our author, 
 between the paifage in this prophet, chap, xviii. viz. That the 
 foil fhall not bear the iniquity of the father, and that in 
 Numbers chap.xxviii. vve are to obferve in the firil place, that 
 our author mil takes t he book of Numbers for that of Exodus, 
 where, chap, xx.ver. 5, the pall age referred to is to be found. 
 
DICTIONARY. , 4 $ 
 
 man’s dung. Then laid the prophet, “ Ah, Lord 
 God, behold, my foul hath not hitherto been pol- 
 luted. And the Lord anfwered, Well, inftead of 
 man’s excrements, 1 allow thee cow dung, and 
 thou fhalt prepare thy bread therewith.” 
 
 As it is not cuftomary with us to eat bread with 
 fuch marmalade, rhefe orders, to the generality of 
 men, appear unworthy of the Divine Majefty. It 
 muft, however, be owned, that cow dung and all the 
 diamonds of the mogul, are entirely alike, not only 
 in the eyes of a Divine Being, but in thofe of a ge- 
 
 Secondly, the contradi&ion is removed by a right confideration 
 of the whole paflage in Ezekiel: the jews complained that 
 they underwent great hardfliips in punilhment for the fins of 
 Manafleh, “ The fathers have eaten four grapes, and the 
 “ children’s teeth are fet on edge.” This has been the cafe 
 in all times, for people labouring under calamities to excul- 
 pate themfelves, and to blame their forefathers ; hence Ho- 
 race, “ DeliSa majorum immeritus lues, Romane.” The 
 prophet makes anfwer, that they are punifhed for their own 
 guilt, and not for that of their anceftors. See other explica- 
 tions in Pool’s Synopfis. 
 
 The obje&ion againft the 25 th verfe of the 20th chapter 
 of Ezekiel is eafily anfwered ; “ God gave the Jews flatutes 
 that were not good,” that is, unpleafant on account of the 
 multiplicity of ceremonial laws, which were troublefome in 
 praftice, yet neceflary to that ftiff- necked people, becaufe 
 of their pronenefs to idolatry. 
 
 Withrefpea to the other pafiages from chap. xvi. and xxiii. 
 they are certainly allegorical, and denote the wickednefs and 
 corruption of Jerufalem, which was grown worfe than Sodom. 
 And as the communication with the Deity is r£prefented fre- 
 quently in the Scriptures under the emblem or figure of nup- 
 tials, fo the eftrangement or wandering from the Deity is 
 deferibed as a fpiritual proftitution, or whoredom. But we 
 refer the reader to the different commentators for an applica- 
 tion of the allegory, and agree with our author, that the ex- 
 preflions which to us may appear indelicate, were not fo in 
 regard to the Jew r s. 
 
 L 
 
 nuine 
 
1 46 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 nuine philofopher ; and as to the reafons God might 
 have for ordering fuch repafts to his prophet, it is 
 not for us to be examiners. 
 
 It is fufficient to fhew, that thefe orders, howe- 
 ver odd and difguftful to us, did not feem fo to 
 the Jews. True it is, that in St. Jerom’s time, the 
 fynagogue did not allow the reading of Ezekiel 
 under thirty years of age-, but this was becaufe, in 
 chap, xviii. it is faid that “ the fon fhall no longer 
 bear the iniquity “ of the father,” and it fhall be 
 no more faid “ the fathers have eaten four grapes 
 “ and the children’s teeth have been fet on edge.” 
 
 This was exprefsly contradidling Mofes, who, in 
 the xxviii. chapter of Numbers, declares that the 
 children fhall bear the iniquity of their fathers to the 
 third and fourth generation. 
 
 Farther, Ezekiel in chap. xx. makes the Lord 
 to fay, that he gave to the Jews “ precepts which 
 “ were not good.” This was the principal reafon 
 of the fynagogue’s prohibiting young perfons from 
 reading Ezekiel, as it might bring them to doubt 
 of the irrefragability of the Moi’aie laws. 
 
 The cavillers of our times are ftill more aflonilhed 
 at the manner of the prophet’s defcribing the wick- 
 ednefs of Jeruialem, in chapter xvi. where he in- 
 troduces the Lord fpeaking to a girl : and the Lord 
 faid to the girl, “ In the day thou waft born, thy 
 navel-ftring was not cut, thou waft neither falted 
 nor fwaddled ; I pitied thee thou art grown up, 
 thy breads are fafhioned, and thine hair is grown ; 
 I pafied by thee, and looked upon thee, behold thy 
 time was the time of love. I fpread my fkirt over 
 thee, and covered thv nakedneis : thou becameft 
 mine, I walked thee with water, and anointed thee 
 with oil, I cloathed thee and fliod thee ; I girded 
 thee about with fine linen, and covered thee with 
 filks j I decked thee alfo with ornaments, and put 
 
 6 bracelets 
 
DICTIONARY. i 47 
 bracelets on thy hands, and a chain on thy neck ; 
 I put a jewel on thy forehead, and ear rings in thy 
 cars, and a crown on thy head, &c. But thou didlt 
 > truft in thy beauty, and playedft the hariot becaufe 
 of thy renown, and pouredft out thy fornications 
 on every one that pafied by : thou haft built an 
 eminent place, thou haft proftituted thyfelf in pub- 
 lic places, thou haft fpread thy legs to every one 
 that palled by ... . and thou haft lain with Egypti- 
 ans ... . and, laftly, thou haft paid thy lovers, and 
 haft made prefents to them to lie with thee, .... 
 and in paying inftead of being paid, thou haft done 
 the reverie of- other girls .... there is a proverb. 
 Like mother like daughter, and the like is faid of 
 thee.” 
 
 Still greater clamour is raifed againft chap, xxiii. 
 A mother had two daughters, who parted with 
 their virginity very early in life ; the name of the 
 elder was Aholah, and of the younger Aholibah : 
 ..... “ Aholah doated on ^roung lords, and cap- 
 “ tains, and rulers; fhe committed whoredom 
 “ with the Egyptians in her youth .... Aholibah 
 “ her filler was more corrupt in her whoredoms 
 “ than Ihe, with captains and rulers cloathed moll 
 “ gorgeoufiy, horfemen riding upon horfes, all of 
 “ them defirable young mgn ; fhe has difcovered 
 “ her nakednefs, fhe has increafed her whoredoms, 
 “ lhe has eagerly fought the embraces of thofe (U) 
 “ whofe flefh is as the flelh of afles, and whofe iffue 
 “ is like the iffue of horfes.” 
 
 Thefe defcriptions, which fcandalize fo many 
 weak minds, fignify no more than the fins of Jc- 
 
 — — (U) M. Voltaire tranllates the above pafiage thus : “ Whofe 
 
 “ member is like that of an afs, and who calf their feed like 
 “ horfes.” Whether that be more agreeable to the original 
 than ours, is not of great confequence ; the idea is the fame. 
 
 L 2 rui’alem 
 
j 4 8 a philosophical 
 
 rufalem and Samaria. Exprefiions to us indelicate 
 and obfcure, were r.oc fo at that time. The like 
 plainnefs openly fliews itfeif in other pafTages of 
 Scripture. It ofcen fpeaks of “ opening the 
 “ womb.” The terms in which are exprefled the 
 junftion of Boaz with Ruth, and of Judah with his 
 daughter in-law, in Hebrew, have nothing un- 
 feemly in them •, but would be very much io in 
 our language. 
 
 He who is not afliamed of being naked does not 
 cover himfelf : where was the fliame of naming the 
 genitals in thole times, when it was cuftomary, oa 
 any important promife, to touch the genitals of him 
 to whom the promife was made ? It was a mark 
 of refpedt, a fymbol of fidelity •, as formerly among 
 us, the feudal tenants put their hands between thofe 
 of their paramonnts. g 
 
 We have thought fit to render the genitals by 
 thigh j Lliezcr puts his hand under Abraham’s 
 thigh ; the like Joleph does to Jacob. This had 
 been a cuftom of very great antiquity in Egypt, and 
 fo far were that people from annexing fliame and 
 turpitude to what we dare neither expofe nor name, 
 that they carried in proceffiona large figure of the 
 virile member called Ph allum, in thankfgiving to 
 the gods for their goodnefs in making that mem- 
 ber the inftrument of human propagation. 
 
 All this fufficiently proves, that our ideas of de- 
 cency and purity do not correfpond with thofe 
 of other nations. At what period of time did 
 politenefs prevail among the Romans more than 
 in the Auguftan age ? Yet Horace, the ornamenc 
 of that age, and in a moral piece, roundly fays, 
 
 “ Nec metuo, ne dum futuo vir rure recurrat.” 
 
 Augufius makes vfe of the fame exprdfion in 
 an epigram againlt Fulvia. 
 
 v Ele 
 
DICTIONARY. 149 
 
 He who, among us, fliould openly pronounce 
 the word anfwering to futuo, would be looked on 
 with as much contempt as a drunken porter : this 
 word, and feveral others made ufe of by Horace and 
 other elegant authors, to us appear ftill more inde- 
 cent than Ezekiel’s expreflions. Whether we read 
 antient authors, or travel in diftant countries, let 
 os lay afide all our prejudices. Nature is every- 
 where the fame, and cuftoms every- where different. 
 
 FABLES. 
 
 A RE not the mod antient fables manifeftly al- 
 legorical ? The firft we know of, according 
 to our chronology, is it not that related in the 9th 
 chapter of the book of Judges? The trees were 
 about chufing a king ; the olive would not quit 
 the care of its oil, nor the fig-tree of its figs, nor 
 the vine-tree of its rich juice ; and all the other 
 trees had their fruit no lei's at heart •, fo that the 
 thiftle being good for nothing, and having prickles 
 which could do hurt, made itfelf king. 
 
 The pagan fable of Venus, as we have it in He- 
 fiod, is it not an allegory of all nature ? The gene- 
 rative parts fell from the fky on the fea-fhore •, Ve- 
 nus receives her being from this precious fpume : 
 her firft name fignifies ** Lover of generation can 
 there be a more fenfible image? This Venus is the 
 goddefs of beauty ; beauty is no longer amiable 
 than when accompanied by the graces ; beauty 
 gives rife to love, love has fhafts which every heart 
 has felt ; he is hoodwinked, to conceal the faults 
 of the objed beloved. 
 
 Wifdom is conceived in the brain of the fovereign 
 of the gods, under the name of Minerva ; the foul 
 of man is a divine fire, which Minerva fhews to 
 
 L 3 Pro- 
 
, 5 o A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 Prometheus, and he made ufe of this divine fire to 
 animate man. 
 
 Every body muft perceive in thefe fables a lively 
 portraiture of nature. Moll of the other fables 
 are either corruptions of antient hiftories, or the 
 chimeras of imagination. It is with ancient fables 
 as with modern tales ; fome are of the moral kind 
 and quite charming, and there are others as infipid, 
 
 FALSITY of HUMAN VIRTUES. 
 
 W HEN the duke de Rochefoucault had pub- 
 lifhed his Thoughts on Self-love, one M. 
 Efprit of the Oratory wrote a captious book, inti- 
 tled, The Falfity of Human Virtues. This genius 
 fays there is no fuch thing as virtue ; but, at the 
 clofe of every chapter, kindly refers his readers to 
 Chriftian charity : fo that, according to M. Efprit, 
 neither Cato, nor Ariftides, nor Marcus Aurelius, 
 nor Epi&etus, were good men •, and a good reafon 
 why, thefe are only to be found among Chriflians. 
 Again, among Chriflians the catholics are the only 
 virtuous •, and among the catholics the Jefuits, ene- 
 mies to the Oratorians, fhould have been excepted; 
 therefore there is fcarce any virtue on earth but 
 among the enemies of the Jefuics. 
 
 This Sieur. Efprit lets out with faying that pru- 
 dence is not a virtue ; and his reafon is, becaufe it 
 is often miftaken: which is as much as to fay, Caefar 
 was nothing of a foldier becaufe he had the worft of 
 it at Dyrachium. 
 
 Had this reverend gentleman been a philofo- 
 pher, he would net have treated of prudence as a 
 virtue, but as a talent, a happy and ufeful quality; 
 for a villain may be very prudent, and I have 
 
 known 
 
DICTIONARY. i 5 i 
 
 known fuch. The madnefs of pretending that vir- 
 tue is the portion only of us and our partifans ! 
 
 What is virtue, my friend? It is doing good. Do 
 me fome, and that is enough •, as for your motive, 
 that you may keep to yourfelf. How ! Accord- 
 ing to you, there is no difference between the pre- 
 fident de Thou and Ravaillac? between Cicero and 
 that wretch Popilius, whofe life he had faved, and 
 who yet hired himfeif to cut offhis head ? You will 
 pronounce Epiftetus and Porphyry to be rafcals, 
 becaufe they did not hold with our doflrines ? 
 Such infolence is quite fhocking j but I have done, 
 left I grow warm. 
 
 FANATICISM. 
 
 F ANATICISM is to fuperftition what a deli- 
 rium is to a fever, and fury to anger : he 
 who has extafies and vifions, who takes dreams for 
 realities, and his imaginations for prophecies, is an 
 enthufiaft •, and he who flicks not at fupporting his 
 folly by murder, is a fanatic. Bartholomew Diaz, 
 a fugitive at Nuremberg, who was firmly con- 
 vinced that the pope is the Anti Chrift in the 
 Revelations, and that he has the mark of the 
 bead, was only an enthufiaft ; whereas his bro- 
 ther, who fet out from Rome with the godly in- 
 tention of murdering him, and who actually did 
 murder him for God’s fake, was one of the moft 
 execrable fanatics that fuperftition could form. 
 
 Polieu&es, who, on a pagan feftival, went into 
 the temple, pulling down and breaking the images 
 and other ornaments, fhewed himfeif a fanatic, lefs 
 horrible, indeed, than Diaz, but equally rafti and 
 imprudent. The murderers of Francis duke of 
 
 L 4 Guife, 
 
152 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 'Guife, of William prince of Orange, of the kings 
 "henry HI. and Henry IV. and of lo many others, 
 were demoniacs, agitated by the fame evil fpirit as 
 Diaz. 
 
 The moll deteftable inflance of fanaticifm is that 
 of the citizens of Paris, who, on the feaft of St. 
 Bartholomew, could maflacre their fellow citizens, 
 
 for not going to mafs. 
 
 Some are fanatics in cool blood : thefe are the 
 judges who can fentence people to death without 
 any other guilt than for not being in their way of 
 thinking : thefe judges are the more guilty, and 
 the more deferving of univerfal execration, as not 
 being under a fit of rage like the Clements, the 
 Chatels, the Ravaillacs, the Gerards, the Damiens, 
 one would think they might iiften to reafon. 
 
 When once fanaticifm has touched the brain, the 
 diftemper is defperate. I have feen convulfionifts, 
 who, in fpeaking of the miracles of St. Paris, grew 
 hot involuntarily ; their eyes glared, they trembled 
 in all their limbs, their countenance was quite dif- 
 figured with rancour, and they unquestionably 
 would have killed any one who had contradicted 
 them. 
 
 The only remedy to this infectious difeafe is 
 a philofophical temper, which fpreading through 
 fociety, at length foftens manners, and obviates the 
 accedes of the diftemper ; for whenever it gets 
 ground, the belt way is ro fly from it, and ftay till 
 the air be purified. The laws and religion are no 
 prefervative againft this mental peftilence. Reli- 
 gion, fo far from being a falutary aliment in thefe 
 cafes, in infeCted brains becomes poifon. Thefe 
 unhappv creatures dwell continually on the .exam- 
 ple of Ehud, who afiaffinated king Eglon ; sO^ju- 
 dith, who cut off Holophernes’s head when lying 
 with him} and of Samuel hewing king Agag in 
 
 O O GO 
 
DICTIONARY. i 5$ 
 
 pieces. They are not aware that thefe inftances, 
 however refpe&able in antiquity, are abominable 
 in our times : they foment their phrenl'y with reli- 
 gion, which abfolutely' condemns it. 
 
 The laws, likewife, have proved very ineffeftual 
 againft this fpiritual rage ; it is, indeed, like read- 
 ing an order of council to a lunatic. Thefe crea- 
 tures are firmly perfuaded that the fpirit by which 
 they are aduated is above all laws, and that their 
 entinifiafm is the only law they are to regard. 
 
 What can be anfwered to a perfon who tells you 
 that he had rather obey God than men, and who, 
 in confequence of that choice, is certain of gaining 
 heaven by cutting your throat ? 
 
 The leaders of fanatics,, and who put the dagger 
 into their hands, are uiually defigning knaves ; 
 they are like the old man of the mountain, who, ac- 
 cording to hiftory, gave weak perfons a foretafte 
 of the joys of paradife, promifing them an eternity 
 of fuch enjoyments, provided they would go and 
 murder all thofe whom he Ihould name to them. 
 In the whole world, there has been but one religion 
 clear of fanaticifm, which is that of the Chinefe 
 literati. As to the feds of philofophers, inftead of 
 being infeded with this pellilence, they were a re- 
 dy and prefervative againfc it : for the effed of 
 philofophy is to compofe the foul, and. fanaticifm 
 is incompatible with tranquility. As to our holy 
 religion having been fo often corrupted by thefe 
 infernal impulfes, it is the folly of men that is to be 
 blamed. 
 
 FRAUD. 
 
154 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 FRAUD. 
 
 Whether pious Frauds are allowable ? 
 
 B AMBABEF, the Fakir, one day met a dif- 
 ciple of Cor.futfee, whom we call Confucius ; 
 and this difciple’s name was Ouang : Bambabef 
 maintained that it is proper fometimes to deceive 
 the people, and Ouang infilled that we are never 
 to deceive any one. The fubltance of their difpute 
 was as follows. 
 
 Bam. We are to imitate the Supreme Being, 
 who does not Ihew us things as they are ; he fhews 
 us the fun in a diameter of only two or three feet, 
 though that body be a million of times larger than 
 the earth ; he fhews us the moon and the liars as 
 fixed on one and the fame blue ground, though 
 they are at different and immenfe dillances ; he 
 would have a fquare tower appear round to us afar 
 off; he would have the fire feem hot to us, though 
 it be neither hot nor cold ; in a word, he encom- 
 palfes us with errors fuitable to our nature. 
 
 Ou. What you call error is nofuch thing. That 
 fun, which is placed millions of millions of lis * 
 from our globe, is not that fun we fee; we can- 
 not have any real fight but of the fun which reflefls 
 itfelf on our retina in a determinate angle. Our 
 eyes were not given us for the knowledge of di- 
 menfions and dillances ; this requires other inltru- 
 ments and operations. 
 
 Bambabef Hared at fuch language ; but Ouang, 
 being endued with an uncommon patience, ex- 
 plained to him the theory of optics ; and Bambabef, 
 
 * A lit fignifies 124 paces; 
 
 hav 
 
DICTIONARY. 155 
 
 having a clear head, acquiefced in the demon- 
 flrations produced by Confutfee’s difciple, and then 
 returned to the difpute in thefe terms. 
 
 Bam. If God does not deceive us by the medium 
 of our fenfes, as I thought; you muft own, however; 
 that phyficians always cheat children for their good; 
 they will tell them they are giving them iugar, 
 when, at the fame time, it is rhubarb, fo that I, 
 as a Fakir, may deceive the people, they having 
 no more knowledge or underftanding than children. 
 
 Ou. I have two fons, and never have I deceived 
 them. When they are lick, I fay to them this phy- 
 fic is very bitter, but you muff pluck up a good 
 heart and take it, the more bitter the more good 
 will it do you ; were it fweet it would hurt you : 
 I never allowed their governefies or preceptors to 
 frighten them with ghofts and apparitions, with 
 hobgoblins and wizards : and thus they are grown 
 up to be brave and fenfible young men. 
 
 Bam. The common people are not born with the 
 like happy talents and difpofitions as your family. 
 
 Ou. All men are alike, they are born with 
 the fame propenfities ; it is the Fakirs who vitiate 
 human nature. 
 
 Bam. We do teach them errors, I own, but it 
 is for their good ; we make them believe that, if 
 they do not buy f our confecrated nails, or expi- 
 ate their fins by giving us money, they will, in 
 the next world, be poft-horfes, dogs, or lizzards. 
 This terrifies them into goodnefs. 
 
 Ou. Are you not aware that this is perverting 
 the poor people ? Reafoning is not fo fcarce among 
 them as is imagined ; there are great numbers 
 who refledt ; who laugh at your nails, your mira- 
 cles, your fuperftitidns ; and who know better than 
 their being changed into lizzards or poft-horfes. 
 What is the confequence ? They have lenfe to fee 
 
 that 
 
i 5 6 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 that you preach up a fophifticated religion, but not 
 enough to raife themfelves to a pure religion, free 
 from fuperftition and folly fuch as ours. Their 
 paffions lead them to believe there is nothing in 
 religion *, the only religion taught them being 
 manifeftly ridiculous ; and thus you fhare in all 
 the guilt into which they plunge themfelves. 
 
 Bam. Not in the leaft ; for we only teach them 
 a good morality. 
 
 Ou. You would get yourfelf ftoned to death were 
 you to preach a falfe morality; men are of fuch a 
 make that amidft all their iniquity they will not bear 
 the preaching of it to them : but abfurd fables fhould 
 not be intermixed with good morality ; for thus, by 
 your impoftures, which might as well be fuppreff- 
 ed, you weaken that morality, which, for felf-pre- 
 fervation, you are obliged to teach. 
 
 Bam. How ! do you imagine there is any fuch 
 thing as teaching truth to the people without cal- 
 ling in fables ? 
 
 Ou. To be fure I do. Our literati are of the 
 fame texture as our taylors, weavers and farmers. 
 They worlhip one God, the creator of all things, 
 who rewards and punifhes; their religion is not 
 darkened with abfurd fytlems, nor disfigured 
 with fantaftical ceremonies ; and much lefs wick- 
 ednefs is there among the literati than among the 
 common people. Wherefore then do you not con- 
 defcend to inftrudt our artificers as we inftrudt our 
 literati ? 
 
 Bam. That would be idle indeed, as if they 
 were to have all the good breeding and knowledge 
 of a counfellor ; that is neither pofiible nor pro- 
 per. White bread for matters ; and brown bread 
 will go down with fervants. 
 
 Ou. All men, I own, fhould not have an equal 
 flock of knowledge; but fome points there are ne- 
 
 ceffkry 
 
DICTIONARY. 157 
 
 cefiary to all: it is neceffary that all men fliould 
 be jud-, and the fureft method to make men fo, 
 is to teach them pure religion, without any fuper- 
 ditions. 
 
 Bam. A fpecious fcheme, only ineradicable. 
 Think you that for men to believe a rewarding and 
 punilhing God, will do the bufinefs? You fay that 
 the fenfible part of the people are offended at my 
 fables-, and as little will they diged your bare truths; 
 they will fay, how am I certain that God punifhes 
 and rewards ? Your proofs? Where is your mif- 
 fion ? What miracles have you done for me to be- 
 lieve you ? It is you theyjwill flout at, and not me. 
 
 Ou. There lies your midake. Becaufe they 
 rejed dangerous abfurdities, and fidions fhocking 
 to common fenfe, you fancy they will not admit a 
 dodrine highly probable, conducive to virtue, pro- 
 dudive of the greated benefit to all mankind, 
 and perfedly conlonant with human reafon ? 
 
 The people are thoroughly inclined to refer to 
 their magidrates : when the belief recommended 
 by thefe is rational, they readily clofe with it. Mi- 
 racles are not neceffary to inforce a belief of a jud 
 God, to whom all hearts are open ; the idea is too 
 natural to be long oppofed. To tell precifely 
 how, and in what manner, God will punifh and re- 
 ward is out of the quedion. Believe him jud, and 
 that’s enough ; I affure you I have leen whole ci- 
 ties with fcarce any other tenet, and no where have 
 I obferved fo much virtue. 
 
 Bam. Fair and foftly : thofe fame cities fwarm 
 with philofophers, who deny both rewards and pu- 
 nifhments. 
 
 Ou. You mud withal own that thofe philofo- 
 phers will much more peremptorily deny your in- 
 ventions, fo that makes but little on your fide. 
 As for philofophers differing from my principles, 
 
 they 
 

 158 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 they may ftill be good men, {till as fedulous in 
 the cultivation of virtue, which is to be embraced 
 from love, and not out of fear. But I aver that no 
 philofopher can ever be allured that Providence has 
 not in ftore punilhments for the wicked, and re- 
 compences for the good : for fhould they alk me; 
 who told me that God puniffies ? my anfwer is, 
 who told them that God does not punilh ? In 
 fhort, the philofopher, I dare fay, inllead of op- 
 pofing me would fecond me. Are you inclined to 
 be a philofopher ? 
 
 Bam. Very much fo; but not a word of it to 
 the Faquirs. 
 
 FRIENDSHIP. 
 RIENDSHIP is a tacit contra# between 
 
 two fenfible and virtuous perfons, I fay sen- 
 sible ; for a monk, a hermit, may not be wicked, 
 yet Jive a ftranger to friendship. I add virtuous, 
 for the wicked have only accomplices, the voluptu- 
 ous have companions, the ddigning have alfociates, 
 the men of bufinefs have partners, the politicians 
 form a fadious band ; the bulk of idle men have 
 connections, princes have courtiers : but virtuous 
 men alone have friends. Cethegus was Cataline’s 
 accomplice, and/Mecenas was Octavius’s courtier ; 
 but Cicero was Atticus’s friend. 
 
 What is implied in this contra# between two 
 tender and ingenuous fouls ? Its obligations are 
 ltronger and weaker, according to their degree of 
 lenfibility, and the number or good offices per- 
 formed, &c. 
 
 ? I he enthufiafm of friendffiip was ltronger among 
 the Greeks and Arabs than among us. The tales 
 on hiendiliip compofed by thofe people are admira- 
 
 ' ble : 
 
 % 
 
DICTIONARY. i 59 
 
 ble : we have nothing like them ; in every thing 
 we are fomewhat dry and jejune. 
 
 Among the Greeks friendlhip was a point of re- 
 ligion, and an objeftofthe legiflation. The The- 
 bans had a regiment called the regiment of lovers, 
 and a fine regiment I dare fay it was ; fome have 
 miftaken it for a regiment of sodomites, but this 
 is a grofs error, taking an accefiory for the princi- 
 pal. Among the Greeks friendfhip was recom- 
 mended both by the law and religion. Unhappi- 
 ly their manners allowed of pederalty; buc the law 
 is not to be charged with any ftiameful abules. 
 
 GLORY. (X!) 
 
 B EN-AL-BETIF that worthy fuperior of the 
 Dervifes, one day faid to them : Brethren, 
 it is very fit, that you fhould often ufe that facred 
 form in our Koran, “ in the name of the moll merci- 
 ful God,” for God fheweth mercy, and you learn to 
 prattife it by the frequent repetition of words, re- 
 commending a virtue, without which there would 
 be few people remaining on earth: but, brethren, 
 far be it from you to imitate the prefumpuon of 
 thofe, who are continually boafting, that what they 
 do is for the glory of God. When a raw fcholar 
 
 — » — (X) There is a good deal of quibble in* this article. If by 
 
 Glory our author means addition of real power or greatnefs, 
 it is certain, that the creature can make no fuch addition to 
 the Creator. But this fhould not hinder us from exprefling 
 . our gratitude for the favours received of the Supreme. ,Tlifs 
 we are taught to do in fundry parts of fcripture : thus the 
 multitude of the heavenly hoft praifed God, faying. Glory 
 to God in the higheft. To deny the propriety of giving 
 glory to God in this fenle betrays an ingratitude in man, and 
 ftrikes at all external worfhip. 
 
 main 
 
160 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 maintains a thefis on the Categories before fome 
 furred ignoramus of a prefident, he is fure to 
 write in large characters at the head of his thefis: 
 Ek allha abron doxa, “ Ad majorem Dei gloriam.” 
 So a devout mufiulman, having caufed his faloon to 
 be white-walbed, muft have the like folly engraved 
 over his door-, a Saka likewife carries water to pro- 
 mote God’s glory. This is a devout practice of a 
 profane cuftom. What would you fay of a pitiful 
 Chiaoux, who, when emptying our Sultan’s dofe- 
 ftool fhould bawl out, T o the greater glory of our 
 invincible monarch? Now certainly the difference 
 is greater between the Sultan and God, than be- 
 tween the pitiful Chiaoux and the fublime Sultan. 
 
 Ye poor earth-worms, called men, what have you 
 in common with the glory of the infinite eflence ? 
 can he defire glory, can he receive any from you? 
 Can he enjoy it ? How long, ye two-legged fea- 
 therlefs animals, will you make God in your like- 
 nefs ! being your felves vain and fond of glo- 
 ry, God muft needs be fo too ! Were there feveral 
 Gods, each of them would be defirous of the ap- 
 plaufe of his equals, and in that would confift 
 the glory of a God. If infinite grandeur might be 
 brought into a comparifon with the extremity of 
 meannefs, fuch a God would be like king Alexan- 
 der or Scander, who would enter the lift agair.ft 
 kings only : but you, poor creatures, what glory 
 can you give to God ? Forbear any longer to pro- 
 fane his lacred name. An emperor, named OCta- 
 vius Augufttis, ordered no panegyrics to be made 
 on him in the fchoolsof Rome, that his name might 
 not be debafed. But you can neither debafe, nor 
 exalt the Supreme Being. Proftrate yourfelves, 
 and worfiiip in filence. 
 
 Thus (poke Ben-a!-betif, and the Dervifes fhout- 
 ed. Glory to God ! v/eil has Ben-al-betif fpoken. 
 
 G O D. 
 
dictionary. 
 
 toi' 
 
 j 
 
 
 god. 
 
 I N the reign ofArcadius, Logomacos, a tned- 
 logue of Conftantioople, went into Scythia, and 
 Mopped at the foot of mount Caucafus in the fer- 
 tile plains of Zephirim, bordering on Colchis. 
 I he good old man Dondindac was, afcer a li»hc 
 repaft kneeling in his large hall between his vaft 
 Iheepfqld and his ample barn, with his wife, his 
 hve Ions and five daughters, fome of his kin- 
 dred and his domeftics, all chanting the praifes of 
 the bounteous giver of all good things. Ho! whac 
 art thou about, idolater, faid Logomacos to him ? 
 J am no idolater, faid Dondindac. An idolater 
 thou mull: be, faid Logomatos, as being a Scy- 
 thian, or at leaft no Greek. Well, and what waft 
 thou gabbling in thy Scythian jargon ? All - lan- 
 guages are alike in God’s ear, anfwered the Scy- 
 thian ; we were finging his praifes. Very extraor- 
 dinary indeed, replied the theologue, a Scythian 
 family worfhippmg God without any previous in- 
 ftruction from us! He foon entered into a conver- 
 sation with Dondindac, for the theologue had a 
 fmattering of the Scythian, and the other under- 
 ftood a little Greek. This converfation is lately 
 come to light in a mar.ufcript kept in the Imperial 
 library at Conftantinople. 
 
 Log. I will fee whether thou knoweft thy cate- 
 chilm ; why prayeft thou to God ? 
 
 Don. Becaufe it is juft and proper to worfhip the 
 Supreme Being, as^f him we hold all we have. 
 
 Loo. Pretty well for a barbarian : and what alk- 
 eft thou of him ? 
 
 Don. I thank God for the good things he oives 
 nae, and even for the crcfle? with which he °tries 
 
 M. me. 
 
* *62 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 me. But as for afking him any thing, that’s whai 
 I never prefume to do -, he knows what we ftand 
 in need of better than ourfelves; befides, I Ihould 
 be afraid to aflc for fun-fhine, when rain would 
 better fuit my neighbour. 
 
 l.oc. Ah l I apprehended we fhould foon have 
 fome nonfenfe or other from him. Let us take a 
 retrofpeft of things: who told thee there is a 
 God ? 
 
 Don. All nature. 
 
 Log. That’s nothing ; what idea haft thou of 
 God ? 
 
 Don. That he is my creator, my matter, who 
 will reward me if I do well, and punifti me if I do 
 amifs. 
 
 Log. That is but trivial and low; let us come 
 to the effential. Is God infinite “ fecundum quid;” 
 or in his eftence ? 
 
 Don. I don’t underftand you. 
 
 Log. Stupid dolt! is God in a place, or out 
 of all place, or is he every where ? 
 
 Don. I know noching of that; it may be juft 
 as you pleafe. 
 
 Log. Ignorant wretch! Well; can he make 
 what has been not to have been, or that a ltick 
 fhall not have two ends ? Is futurity to him as fu- 
 ture or as prefent ? How doss he do to bring no- 
 thing into exiftence, and to annihilate exiftence ? 
 
 Don. I never beltow a thought on thofe things. 
 
 Log. What an oaf is this ! well, I mutt let my- 
 felf down, I muft fuit myfelf to the meannefs of 
 his intellects. Tell me, friend, believeft thou 
 that macter can be eternal ? 
 
 Don. What is it to me whether it exifts from 
 feternity or not ? I did not exift from eternity. God 
 is always my matter and inftructor. He has given 
 me the knowledge of juftice, and it is my duty to 
 
 aft 
 
DICTIONARY. i$2 
 
 ac rordingIy. I do not defire to be a philofo- 
 pher, let me be a man. pni • 
 
 r k 0 u- ,^ hat j a plague it is to have to do with 
 fuch thick-headed creatures. I muft proceed gra- 
 dually with him ? What is God? P S ' 
 Don. My fovereign, my judge, my father. 
 
 mLr°> " 0t What 1 alk y° u ‘ what is hi, 
 
 Don. To be powerful and good. 
 
 Don h! W 5r Ch u “ he ° ° rp0real or spiritual ? 
 U°N. How fhould I know. 
 
 Log. What ! not know what a fpirit is ? 
 
 Don. Not I in the lead, and what Ihould I be 
 
 morab^ Ch kn ° wlcd g e ? Will it mend my 
 morals, make me a better hulband, a better fa- 
 
 t er, better mafter, or better member of fociety ? 
 
 fnlrirT; f ^ be abfolu ^y ttught whai a 
 
 fpirit is, fince it is, it is, it is well we will 
 
 let rhat alone till another time. * 
 
 Don. I fancy, inftead of being able to tell me 
 what it .s, you will rather tell me what it is not 
 
 freedom* in* r Ch < ! Uel,ioni "8' ™y I «i« the 
 tedom ,o alk you a quell, on ? I was f ormerl 
 
 anU Gud 
 
 Log. 1 hat is a very abftrufe queftion, and the 
 foluuon of which would be above your comprehen- 
 lion, without lome preliminary inftruflions. F 
 UoN.Before you enter on your inftrutftions, I muft 
 
 re y °i hT C TJ an , CC ’ Which 1 ho P e never to for- 
 get. 1 had juft built a fummer-houfe at the end 
 
 or n.y garden •, and one day fitting in it, heard a 
 mole and a chafer defcanting on it : A fuperb edi- 
 fice it certainly is, laid the mole, and of very great 
 p-rts muft that mole have been who built itf A 
 mole or.ooch ! 1 fay a mole too! quoth the chaf- 
 er ; the architect at that pretty building could be 
 
 AI 2 
 
i6 4 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 ro ocher than fome chafer of an extraordinary ge- 
 nius This colloquy put me on a rcfolution never 
 to difpute. 
 
 • governments. 
 
 Which the belt ? 
 
 I Never yet knew any man who had not governed 
 fome (late or other. I do not fpeak of their 
 High Mightinefies the minifters, who govern in 
 reafity, fome two or three years, others fix months, 
 and others as many weeks I mean all other men, 
 who over a bottle, or in their dofet, difplay their 
 fyllem of government, and reform navy, army, 
 law, finances, and church. 
 
 Abbe Bourzeis took upon himfelf to govern 
 France about the year 1645 under the name ot car- 
 dinal Richelieu, and compofed that Political Will, 
 in which he is for having the nobility enrolled in the 
 cavalry for three years ; the land tax to be paid to 
 the chambers of accounts and the parliament, and 
 taking away from the king the produce of the falt- 
 tax: in order to take the field with 50,000 men, 
 he makes it a point of ceconomy to raife ioo.ooo. 
 He affirms, that “ Provence alone has many more 
 “ fine fea- ports than Spain and Italy put together.” 
 This ecclefiaftical fchemer had not travelled. Be- 
 fides, his work fwarms with anachronifms and er- 
 rors. As he makes cardinal Richelieu fpeak what he 
 never did fpeak, fo his fignature is no lefs different 
 from that of the cardinal. Farther, he fills a whole 
 chapter with faying, that “ reafon is to be the rule 
 “ of a Hate and in labouring to prove fuch a not- 
 able difcovery. This work of darknefs, this bantling 
 of the abbe Bourzeis paffed a long time for cardinal 
 Richelieu’s legitimate offspring, and all the acade- 
 micians 
 
 
DICTIONARY. 165 
 micians in their inauguration fpeeches never failed 
 to pour forth the moft excelfive elogiums on this 
 mafler-piece of policy. 
 
 One St. Gratien de Courtils, feeing the great 
 fuccefsof cardinal Richelieu’s Political Legacy, fell 
 to writing Colbert’s Legacy, with a fine letter to 
 the king: whereas had that minifter drawn up fuch 
 will, he ought to have been declared non compos ; 
 yet have fome authors thought fit to quote this 
 compofition. Another ftarveling, too mean to be 
 known, publilhed Louvois’s Will, which, if fuch a 
 thing could be, was ftill worfe than Colbert’s ; and 
 by the fertile brain of one abbe de Chevremont, 
 duke Charles of Lorrain likewife. had his Will. We 
 have alfo had the political teftaments of cardinal 
 Alberoni, mat (Hal Eelleiile, and laftly, that of Mar.- 
 drin. 
 
 M. de BoifguiL-bert, author of le Detail de 
 la France , printed in 1695, troubled the pub- 
 lic with the impracticable project of the tegal 
 tenths, under the name of marfhal Vauban. 
 
 One Jonchere, a crazy fellow who had noc bread 
 to eat, met with a bookfeller who publilhed a fcheme 
 of his on the finances in four volumes ; and fome 
 QJTockheads have quoted this production as a work of 
 the trcafurer-general, on a notion that a book of fi- 
 nances, written by acreafurer.muft be a choice piece. 
 
 It mull, however, be owned that very wife men, 
 and men perhaps every way qualified for govern- 
 ment, have in France, in Spain, and in England, 
 written on political adminiftration. And great good 
 have their books done •, not that they have amend- 
 ed the minifters who were in place when thofe 
 books came out ; for a minifter never amends, there 
 is no changing him ; he has taken his bent-, and for 
 informations and counfels, the ftream of bufinefs 
 carries him away fo as not leave leifure to liften to 
 
 M 3 them : 
 
1 66 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 them : but young perfons defigned for employ- 
 ments, and princes themfelves are inftru&ed by 
 thefe good books ; and thus the l'econd generation 
 reaps the benefit of them. 
 
 The advantages and difadvantages of all govern- 
 ments have of late been clofely canvafi'ed. Now you 
 who have travelled, and read, and feen a great deal, 
 pray, in which date, and under what form of go- 
 vernment would you chufe to be born ? I fancy 
 a French nobleman with a targe landed ellate 
 would not be forry to have been born in Germa- 
 ny, as there, inflead of being a iubjedt, he would 
 be a fovereign. A peer of France doub'tlefs would 
 be very glad to have the privileges of the Englifh 
 peerage, as raifing him to a fhare in the legiflature. 
 
 For the lawyer and the financier; France is the 
 country which of all others brings the moft grift 
 to their mill. 
 
 But what country would a wife man, of a free 
 turn of mind, unprejudiced, and of a middling 
 fortune, make choice of? 
 
 A member of the council of Pondicherry, a 
 gentleman of fome learning, was returning into 
 Europe over land, in company with a Bramin, who 
 knew more than moft of his brethren. How do 
 you like the Grand Mogul’s government, Paid the 
 counlellor? Nothing more abominable, anfwered 
 the Bramin ; but how can a flare be well govern- 
 ed by Tartars? If our Rayas, our Ornrahs, our 
 Nabobs, are entirely fatisfied and eafy ; ir is other- 
 wife with the people, and millions of people are 
 fomething. 
 
 The counfellorand the Bramin traverfed all Up- 
 per Afia, amidft political conventions. An ob- 
 fervation occurs to me, laid the Bramin, that all 
 this vaft part of the world does not afford one re- 
 public, Here was, antiently, that of Tyre, Paid 
 7 " ‘the 
 
dictionary. 167 
 
 the counfeHor, but it did net continue long : then 
 there was another towards Arabia Petrea, in a 
 fmall nook called Paleftine, if the honourable ap- 
 pellation pf republic may be given to a tribe of rob. 
 bers and ufurers, fometimes governed by judges, 
 fometimes by a fort of kings, fometimes by high - 
 priefts, fubdued and enflaved feven or eight times, 
 and, at laft, driven out of the country which it 
 h$d ufurped. 
 
 I apprehend, faid the Bramin, that republics are 
 very fcarce in all parts ; it is but feldom that men 
 delerve to govern themfelves. This happinefs mull 
 belong only to fmall nations, concealing themfelves 
 in i (lands, or amidfl: mountains, like rabbits (hun- 
 ning carnivorous beads, but at length difeovered 
 and devoured. 
 
 , The two travellers being come into Afia Minor, 
 tne counfellor (aid to the Bramin, Could you think 
 there had ever been a republic in a corner of Italy, 
 which fubfifted above five hundred years, and made 
 itfelf miftrefs of this Afia Minor, Afia, Africa, 
 Greece, the Gauls, Spain, and all Italy ? I dare’ 
 (ay, it foon became changed to a monarchy, faid 
 the Bramirj. Very right, faid the other ; but that 
 monarchy is long fince come to nothing, and every 
 day fine dilTertations are compofed to find out the 
 caufes of its declenfion and cataftrophe. You give 
 yourfelves a deal of needlefs trouble, faid the In- 
 dian; that empire fell becaufe it exifted: eve- 
 ry thing will fall ; I hope in God the empire of the 
 great mogul will one day have its fall. 
 
 Now we are upon this head, faid the European, 
 do you think honour is mod necefiaty in a monar- 
 chy, and virtue in a republic? The Indian, after 
 the meaning of the word honour had, at his de- 
 ^ ire , been explained to him, anfwered that honour 
 was of greater neceffity in a republic and virtue 
 
 M 4 in 
 
j68 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 in a monarchy : For, fays he, a man who lets up 
 to be chofen by the people will not be chofen, if he 
 be reputed a man of no honour ; whereas at courc 
 he may eafily infinuate himlelf into a poft, accord- 
 ing to the maxim of a great prince, that a courtier 
 to make his fortune fhould be without honour or 
 pride. As to virtue, an immenfe deal of it is requi- 
 fite to dare (peak truth at court j a virtuous man 
 is much more ateafe in a republic ; there’s nobody 
 
 to flatter. . . 
 
 Is it your opinion, faid the native of Eu- 
 rope, that the laws and religions are made for the 
 climates, as furs fuit Molcow, and gauze fluffs 
 Delly ? To be fure, faid the Bramin, all laws relative 
 to the human conftitution are calculated for the 
 climate where one lives ; one wife will do for a 
 German, a Perfian muft have three or four. 
 
 It is the fame with religious rites. Were I 
 a Chriftian, how could I fay mafs in my province, 
 ■which affords neither bread nor wine? As to 
 articles of faith, that’s another cafe ; in thefe the 
 climate is out of the queftion. Did not your re- 
 ligion commence in Afia, from whence it has 
 been expelled? and again, is it not eftablilhed 
 about the Baltic Sea,where it was once unknown? 
 
 In what ftate, under what government fhould 
 you like beft to live ? faid the counfellor. Any 
 where but in my own country, laid his companion ; 
 and many Siamefe,Tunquinefe, Perfians, and Turks 
 have I met with, who faid the very fame thing. But 
 tell me, in what particular ftate you would prefer- 
 ably like to fpend your days. The Bramin anfwer- 
 ed, In that where obedience is paid only to the 
 jaws. That’s an old anfwer, faid the counfellor. 
 And never the worfe for that, faid the Braohn. 
 But where is that country, laid the Pondicherrian ? 
 It muft be fought for, fa;d the Bramin. 
 
DICTIONARY. 
 
 GRACE. 
 
 E facred counfellors of modern Rome, ye 
 
 illuftrious and infallible theologifts, no per- 
 fon has more refpett for your decifions than 
 myfelf ; but were Paulus Emilius, Scipio, Cato, 
 Cicero, Ctefar, Titus, Trajan, and Marcus Au- 
 relius to revifit that Rome which they formerly 
 raifed to fome confideration, you molt own they 
 would be a little ftaggcred ar your determinations 
 concerning grace. What would they fay to your de- 
 bates on St. Thomas’s grace of health, on Cajetan’s 
 med.cinal grace, on external and internal grace, on 
 gratuitous, fanftifying, a&ual, habitual, co operat- 
 ing grace, on effectual grace which is fometimes in- 
 effectual, on fufncient grace often inefficient, on 
 verfatile and congruous grace ; fincerely, would 
 they undcrftand it more than yourfelves or I ? 
 
 Thole illuftrious perfonages would be quite at a 
 lofs without your fublime inftruftions : I think I 
 hear them fay. 
 
 Reverend fathers, you are ftupendous geniufes ; 
 we foolifnly conceived the eternal Being never to 
 be guided by particular laws like mean mortals, 
 but by his own general laws, eternal like himfelf. 
 It never came into any of our heads that God was 
 like a brain-fick mafter, giving a comfortable farm 
 to one Have, and denying neceffary food to ano- 
 ther ; ordering one Have without a hand to knead 
 dough, a dumb (lave to read to him, and a crip- 
 ple to be his courier. 
 
 Every thing from God is grace : by his grace 
 the globe which we dwell in was formed; by his 
 grace the trees grow, and animals are nourilhed: 
 but if a wolf finds a lamb in his way to make^a good 
 
 meal 
 
170 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 meal of, and another wplf is famifhing, will any 
 one fay that God has (hewn particular grace to the 
 former wolf? has he by a preventing grace been 
 bufied in caufing one oak to grow preferably to 
 another oak, which has withered for want of fap? 
 If all beings throughout all nature are fubjeft to 
 general laws, how can any fingle fpecies of crea- 
 tures be exempt from thofe laws? 
 
 Why fhould the abfolute matter of all have been 
 more intent on difpofing the infide of one man 
 alone (Y), than in conducing all the other parts 
 of nature ? From what humour or ficklenefs 
 
 (Y) Our author may be right in ridiculing the opinions of 
 fchoolmcn concerning grace, as they abound in fantaftical 
 niceties altogether unintelligible. * But whatever Marcus Au- 
 relius may fay, a Chriftian is bound to believe that without the 
 grace of God by Chrift, we have no power to do good 
 works, pleafant and acceptable to the Deity. As to the 
 above queftion, Why fhould the’ abfolute mafter of all have 
 been more intent on difpofing the infide of one man alone, 
 than in conducing all the other parts of nature ? it (hews our 
 author to be ignorant of the do£lrine of continual providence, 
 as he indeed is of many other found doctrines. The infinite- 
 ly wife Being cannot but know every thing that is done in 
 every part of the univerfe, and with equal eafe take notice of 
 the. minuteft things as of the greateft : but it is a miftake to 
 believe him more intent upon one thing than upon another; 
 and it is only according to our weak conceptions that we fay, • 
 God takes more particular notice of the moral a&ions of his 
 rational creatures. M. Voltaire labours very hard on all occa- 
 fions to reprefent man as a vile worm unworthy of the 
 care of the Deity, not reflecting that fuch a care is attended 
 with no difficulty in the fupreme creator of all things. Be- 
 fides, how inconfiderable foever man may be, yet he is the 
 chief, and indeed, the only inhabitant, for whofe fake our 
 earthly globe was formed into a habitable world ; and t! is 
 earth ol ours, as Dr. Clarke obferves, for aught we know, 
 is as confiderable, and worthy of the divine care, as any 
 other part of the fyftem, and this fyftem as confiderable as 
 any other fyftem in the univerfe. ' 
 
 fhould 
 
DICTIONARY. 171 
 
 fnould he make any alteration in the heart of a 
 Courlander or a Bifcayan, when he is feen not to 
 make the lcaft alteration in the laws, which he has 
 imprefied on all the heavenly bodies ? 
 
 How weak is it to fuppofe that he is continually 
 making, unmaking, and remaking fentiments in 
 us! and what prefumption is it to think ourfelves 
 privileged above all other beings ! farther, it is only 
 for thole who obferve ronfeffion that all thefe mu- 
 tations are invented. A Savoyard or native of Ber- 
 gamo fliall, on Monday, have the grace to befiow 
 twelve fous to have a mafs faid; on Tuefday grace 
 will fail him, and he will go to the tavern ; on 
 Wednefday he (hall have co-operating grace, which 
 will fend him away to confeffion, but without the 
 efficacious grace of perfeft contrition-, Thurfday it 
 will be a iufficient grace, which will prove ineffici- 
 ent. God ffiall be continually at work in the 
 head of this Savoyard, fometimes forcibly, other 
 times weakly, without minding any other thing 
 upon earth, without caring what becomes of the 
 inlide of the Indians and Chinefe. Really, my re- 
 verend fathers, if you have a fpark of reafon left, 
 does not this fyftem appear to you prodigioufly ri- 
 diculous ? 
 
 Wretches, behold that oak towering to the 
 clouds, look down on that rufh bending at its 
 feet; you will not fay that efficacious grace has 
 been given to the oak, and denied to the rufh. 
 Lift up your eyes to the heavens, fee the eternal 
 Demiurgus creating millions of worlds, all gravi- 
 tating towards each other by general and eternal 
 laws. Behold the fame light reflected from the 
 fun to Saturn, and from Saturn to us ; and amidft 
 this harmony of fo many luminous bodies in a 
 courfe amazingly rapid, amidft this general obedi- 
 ence of all nature, I defy you to believe that God 
 
 minds 
 
i 7 2 a philosophical 
 
 minds giving a verfatile grace to fitter Therefa, and 
 a concomitant grace to fitter Agnes. 
 
 Thou atom, to whom a ftupid atom has faid 
 that the Eternal has particular laws for fome atoms 
 in thy neighbourhood ; that he gives his grace to 
 this, and refufes it to that ; and that which has not 
 grace to day fhall have it to morrow ; never let 
 fuch impious folly come from thy lips. God has 
 created the univeri'e, and does not concern himfelf 
 about making new winds to (hake fome bits of 
 ftraw in a corner of that univerfe. Theologifts 
 are like Homer’s warriors, who thought that the 
 gods fometimes fought on their fide, and fome- 
 times againft them. Homer is to be confidered 
 as a poet, otherwife we make him a blafphemer. 
 
 1 hefe are Marcus Aurelius’s' words, not mine; 
 for God, who infpires you, has given me grace to 
 believe all you fay, all you have faid, and all you 
 fhall fay. 
 
 The HEAVENS (Z), 
 
 Or Sky, according to the Antients. 
 
 A Silk worm might as well give the name of 
 heaven to the little down which furrounds 
 its lhell, as the antients gave that appellation to 
 
 (Z) In this article our author dilplays fome erudition, 
 but he is very reprehenfible, when he fays, “ There is pro- 
 perly no heaven.” By heaven we mean not the air, nor the 
 flars nor planets, nor the vail expanfc in which thofe great orbs 
 perform their motions, but the feat or manfion of the clef- 
 led. Where that is we cannot pretend to determine, but we 
 are bound to believe there is fuch a place. In this fenfe we 
 
 lay, 
 
DICTIONARY. 173 
 the atmofphere, which, as M. Fontenelle in his 
 Plurality of Worlds, prettily fays, is the down of 
 our lhell. 
 
 The vapours which exhale from our feas and 
 land, and form clouds, meteors, and thunder, 
 13 -ere at firft taken for the refidence of the gods. 
 Homer always brings down the deities in golden 
 clouds •, and thence it is that our painters (till 
 reprefent them feated on a cloud : but it being 
 very proper that the mailer of the gods Ihould 
 live in greater ftate than the others, he was pro- 
 vided with an eagle to carry him, the eagle flying 
 higher than any other bird. 
 
 The antient Greeks feeing that princes liv- 
 ed in citadels built on the top of fome mountain, 
 conceived that the gods might likewife have their 
 citadel, and placed it in Theflaliaon mount Olym- 
 pus, the fummit of which is fometimes hid in 
 the clouds, fo that their palace was even with their 
 heaven. 
 
 Afterwards the liars and planets which feemed 
 fixed to the azure arch of our atmofphere, became 
 the manfion of deities ; feven of whom had their 
 refpedlive planet, the others taking up with what 
 quarter they could find ; the general council of the 
 gods was held in a large faloon, to which they 
 went by the milky way, for men having council- 
 chambers on earth, the gods, to be fure, Ihould 
 have one in the heavens. 
 
 fay, “ Our father, who art in heaven.” To fay abfolutely there 
 is no heaven, fubverts the notion of a future ftate, and the 
 confolation of the juft from the expectation of eternal happi- 
 nefs. This our author cannot Intend, as in more places 
 than one he acknowledges a place of future rewards and pu- 
 niihments. 
 
 8 
 
 When 
 
*7 4 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 When theTitans, a kind of creatures between the 
 gods and men, declared war, and noc without j'ome 
 grounds againft thofe deities/to recover part of their 
 inheritance, (being on the father’s fide the Tons of 
 <~celum and Terra,) they only heaped two or three 
 mountains one on the other, concluding, that 
 would be full enough for them to reduce the cita- 
 . del ot 0 ] ympus, together with the heavens, 
 
 terris fecurior arduus *ther, 
 Arrcctaue ferunt regnum ccelefte gigantes 
 Altaque congeftos ftruxifle adfidera montes. 
 
 This abfurd fyftem of phyfics was of prddigious 
 antiquity; yet certain it is, that the Chaldeans had 
 as juft ideas of what is called the heavens as we 
 ourfelves. They placed the fun in the centre of our 
 planetary world, and nearly at the fame diftance we 
 have found it to be ; and they held the revolution 
 of the earth, and of all the planets round that bo* 
 dy : this we are informed of by Ariftarchus of Sa- 
 mos ; and it is the true fyftem of the world, fines 
 revived by Copernicus. But the philolophers, to 
 be the more rrfpefted by fovereigns and people or 
 
 Selves! 0 g PCrfeCUted> kCpt thc 
 
 The language of error is fo familiar to men, that 
 we ft ill give the name of heavens to our vapours, 
 and to the fpace between the earth and moon : we 
 
 1“ 8° ' Up , t0 heaven > « we fay the fun turns 
 round though we know it does not; probably we 
 are the heaven to the moon, and every planet 
 S ake ! r ', he n«8hbouring planet its heaven. 1 Had 
 Homer been afked to which heaven the foul of Sar- 
 pedo went, and where that of Hercules was the 
 
 fhfcS d „ bvr be 'V ,ilI,e dtaw 
 
 tne queltion by fome harmonious verfes. 
 
 What 
 
DICTIONARY. 175 
 
 What certainty was there that the aerial foul of 
 Hercules would have had a better time of it in Ve- 
 nus, or Saturn, than on our globe ? it is not to be 
 l'uppofed that its refidence was appointed in the 
 fun ; the place would have been too hot. After all, 
 what did the antients mean by the heavens ? They 
 knew nothing of the matter j they were perpetually 
 bawling heaven and earth, which is juft as much 
 as to cry infinitude and an atom. Properly fpeak- 
 ing, there is no fuch thing as the heavens ; there is 
 a prodigious number of vaft globes rolling in the 
 void expanfe, and our globe rolls like the others. 
 
 The antients thought that the way to the hea- 
 Vens was by al'cent : no fuch thing •, the cdeftial 
 globes are fometimes above our horizon, and l'ome- 
 tiraes below : thus, fuppofing Venus was return- 
 ing from Paphos to her planet after its fetting, 
 the goddefs, relatively to our horizon, inftead of 
 going up wencdown and in fuch a cafe we ought 
 to fay to go down to heaven. But the antients were 
 not fonice; their notions in every thing relating to 
 natural philofophy were vague, uncertain, and 
 contradictory. Immenfe volumes have been writ- 
 ten to know what their opinion was on many fuch 
 queftions-, whereas five words would have done, 
 “ they never thought of it.” 
 
 Here, however, we muft except a few wife 
 men ; but they came late: few opened their minds 
 freely, and thofe who did, the empyrics .on earth 
 took care to difpatch them to heaven the fhorteft 
 way. 
 
 A writer, I think his name is Pluche, has pre- 
 tended to make Moles a great natural philolopher j 
 another before him, in a piece called Cartefius Mo- 
 zaizans had reconciled Moles with Defcartes. Ac- 
 cording to him. Moles firft found ouc the vor- 
 tices and the fubtile matter j but it is well known 
 
 that 
 
1/6 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 that God meant Mofes for a great legiflator and 3 
 great prophet, and not foj- a profefior of phyfics j 
 he inftru&ed the Jews in their duty, and not a 
 •word in philofophy. Calmet, who has compiled a 
 vaft 'deal, and never once reflected, talks of the 
 fyftem of the Hebrews ; but fo far was that rude 
 people from having a fyftem, that they had not 
 fo much as a geometry-fchool-, the bare name was 
 unknown to them, all they underftood was broker- 
 age and ufury. 
 
 In their books we meet with fome vague inco- 
 herent ideas on the ftru&ure of the heavens, and 
 &ich as fhew them to have been a dull illiterate 
 •people. Their firft heaven was the air, the fe- 
 cund the firmament, to which the ftars were fatten- 
 ed This firmament was folid and of ice, and fup- 
 ported the upper waters, which, at the time of the 
 •deluge, made their way out of this refervoir, thro’ 
 gates, fluices, and cataraifts. 
 
 Over this firmament, or thefe upper waters, was 
 the third heaven or the Empyreum, to which St. 
 Paul was caught up. The firmament was a kind 
 of demi-arch round the earth. They little thought 
 of the fun moving round a globe, whofe form 
 they were ignorant of. When it got to the weft, it 
 had fome unknown path for returning to the eaft; 
 and as to its noc being feen, baron Feriefte ac- 
 counts for that, by faying it came back in the 
 night. 
 
 Farther, thefe whimfical ideas the Hebrews 
 had borrowed from other nations, of whom, ex- 
 cept the Chaldean fchool, the greater part looked 
 on the heavens as folid ; the earth was fixed and 
 immoveable, and by a third longer from eaft to 
 weft than from fouth to north, whence are derived 
 our geographical terms longitude and latitude. 
 This opinion, ic is evident, admitced no antipodes ; 
 
 accord- 
 
dictionary. tn 
 
 Accordingly, St. Auftin calls the notion of anti* 
 podes an abfurdity jand Laftantius flatly fays, “Are 
 “ there any fo foolilh as to believe there are men 
 whofe head is lower than their feet ?” 
 
 St. Chryfoftom, in his fourteenth homily, calls 
 out, “ Where are they who fay the heavens are 
 " rnoveable, and their form round ?** 
 
 Ladtantius again fays, b. iii. of his Inftitutions, 
 “ I could prove to you by a multitude of argu- 
 ments, that it is impoffible the heavens fhould 
 “ encompafs the earth.” 
 
 The author of Spectacle de la Nature is vvelcome 
 to tell the chevalier over and over, that Ladtan- 
 tius and Chryfoftom were eminent philofophers j 
 ftill it will be anfwcred that they were great faints, 
 which they may be without any acquaintance with 
 aftronomy. We believe them to be in heaven, but 
 own that in what part of the heavens they are we 
 know not. 
 
 hell, 
 
 W HEN men came to live in fociety, they 
 could not but perceive, that many evil 
 doers eicaped the feverity of the laws : thefe could 
 afteft only open crimes ; fo that a curb was wanting 
 again ft clandeftine guile, and religion alone could 
 be iuch a curb. The Perfians, the Chaldeans, the 
 Egyptians, and the Greeks, introduced a belief of 
 punilhments after this life > and of all antient nati- 
 ons we are acquainted with, the Jew9 alone ad- 
 muted only temporal punilhments. It is ridicu- 
 lous to believe, or to pretend to believe from fome 
 very obfeure paffages, that the antient Jewish laws, 
 their Leviticus, and their Decalogues correfponc! 
 with the dodtrine of future punilhments } when the 
 
 N author 
 
, 7 3 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 author of thofe laws fays not a fingle word which, 
 bears any relation to that dodtrine. One might 
 juftly fay to the compiler of the Pentateuch : you 
 are inconfiftent with yourfelf; you have no more 
 judgment than probity •, you a legiflator, as you 
 ftile 5 yourfelf ! How ! you confcious of a tenet 
 fo coercive, fo powerful, fo neceffary to people 
 as that of hell, and yet not make it known expli- 
 citly, nor uigeit? and though received among all 
 the nations round about you, you leave fo moment 
 tous a do&rine to be gutfied at by fome commen- 
 tators, who are not to come into exiftence till four 
 thoufand years after your time, and will wreft and 
 diftortfome of your words to find in them what you 
 never faid ? Either you are an ignoramus, who 
 don’t know that this was the univerlal belief in E- 
 gypt, in Chaldea, and Perfia ; or a very weak man, 
 if being acquainted with this doflrine you did 
 not make it the bafis of your religion. 
 
 The very beftanfwcr the authors of the Jewifh laws 
 could make, is this: we ownourfelves extremely ig- 
 norant-, it was very iate before we learned to write -, 
 our people, a favage and barbarous tribe, which, 
 by our own accounts, wandered for near half a 
 century arnidft deferts, at length by the molt 
 heinous violences, and the moft deteliable cruel- 
 ties ever mentioned in hiftory, feized on a fmall 
 territory : we had no intercourfe with policed na- 
 tions -, then how could we (the moft earthly mind- 
 ed of all men) invent a fyltem entirely fpiritual ? 
 
 We ufed the word anfwering to soul only to 
 fignify life wfc thought God and his angels to 
 be corporeal beings : the diftinflion of foul and 
 body, the idea of a life after death, can be only the 
 refult of long meditation, and refined philofophy. 
 Afk the Hottentots and Negroes, whofe country is 
 a hundred times ia'rger than ours, whether they 
 . . & know 
 
DICTIONARY. 
 
 know any thing of a future life ? We thought we 
 had done wonders in perfuading our people that 
 God punilhed evil-doers to the fourth generation, 
 either by the leprofy, a fudden death, or the lofs of 
 what little fubftance a perfon might have poffefled. 
 To this apology, it may be replied : you have in- 
 vented a fyllem palpably ridiculous-, for the evil- 
 doer, who was in health* and whofe family pro- 
 fpered, muft necefiarily laugh at you. 
 
 , The apologifl of the Jewilh law would then re- 
 join : that is your miftake; for among us where 
 one delinquent reafoned rightly, a hundred did 
 not reafon at all. He who on the commiffion of 
 a crime, found no punilhment declaring itfelf 
 againft him nor his fon, (till feared for his grand- 
 fon. Farther, though to-day he had no putrid ulcer 
 on him, to which by the by we were very fub- 
 jedt, it was odds within fome years it happened not 
 to be his cafe ; no family is without misfortunes and 
 afflictions, and we brought the people to believe 
 that thefe misfortunes were fent by a divine hand, 
 punifhing fecret tranfgreflions. 
 
 This anfwer admits of an eafy reply : your ex- 
 cufe will not hold water ; for every day we fee 
 very good people feized with ficknefs, and by one 
 misfortune or other deprived of their fubftance i 
 now if there be no family totally free from all mis - 
 fortunes, and if thefe misfortunes are divine chaf- 
 tifements, all the individuals of your families were 
 then knaves and profligates. 
 
 The Jewifli prieft might farther reply, that 
 there are misfortunes annexed to human na- 
 ture, and others fent exprefsly by God. But this 
 reafoner’s mouth might foon be flopped, by (hew- 
 ing the extreme abfurdity of thinking, that fick- 
 nefs and hail are fometimes a divine punilhment, 
 and fometimes a natural effect. 
 
 N 2 
 
 At 
 
,8o A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 At length the Pharifees and the Effenes among 
 the Jews admitted the belief of a hell in their 
 way : This dogma the Greeks had already difie- 
 minated among the Romans, and the Chriftians 
 made it a capital article of faith. ! 
 
 Several fathers of the church did not hold the 
 eternity of hell torments-, they thought it very hard 
 that a poor man fhould be burning for ever and 
 ever only for dealing a goat. Virgil might as well 
 have held his tongue as to fay in his fixth canto in 
 the Eneid (A), 
 
 Sedet aeternumque fedebit infelix Thefeus. 
 
 His ipse fttxiT, that Thefeus is feated in a chair, 
 where he mud fit world without end, and that 
 this pofture is his punifhment:, is protefted againft 
 by many *, who farther think the poet to have 
 wronged him greatly, as rather deferving a place 
 in the Elyfian fields, than in Tartarus. 
 
 Not long fince an honeft well meaning hugue- 
 not minifter advanced in his fermons, and even 
 in print, that there would be a day of grace to the 
 damned that there muft be a proportion between 
 the trefpafs and the penalty j and that a momentary 
 fault could not deferve an everlafling punifhment. 
 This clement judge was depofed by a body of mi- 
 
 (A) The wifeft of the heathen philofophers, without the 
 help of revelation, did believe it agreeable to right reafon, that 
 the punifhment of the incorrigible fhould be ct'iuvtix, with- 
 out anydeterminate or known end. See Plato in Phaed. This 
 however, we may be certain of, fays the learned Dr. Clarke, that 
 the degrees or intenfenefs of the punifhment which fhall be 
 inflicted on the impenitent, will be exaftly proportionate to 
 their fins, as a recoin pence of their demerit, fo that no roan 
 Shall fuffer more than he has deferved. 
 
 sifters, 
 
DICTIONARY. 181 
 
 nifters, of whom one faid to him : Brother, I as 
 little believe the eternity of hell torments as your- 
 fclf ; but let me tell you it is very proper that your 
 fervant-maid, your taylor, and even your attorney 
 fliould believe fo. 
 
 HISTORY 
 
 Of the Kings of Judah and the Chronicles. 
 
 (B) A LL nations have written their hidory, as 
 XX, foon as they ever knew what writing was ; 
 the Jews have alfo written theirs. Before they had 
 kings they lived under a theocracy, and were re- 
 puted to be governed by God himielf. 
 
 When the Jews clamoured to have a king, like 
 the other neighbouring nations, the prophet Sa- 
 
 " (B) Under this article our author advances a very bold aflerti- 
 
 on, though with great appearance of diffidence, yiz. that the 
 books of Kings and the Chronicles, are not a part of Holy 
 Writ. He is certainly miftaken ; they' were always reckoned 
 both by Jews and Chriftians among the canonical books, 
 and therefore are of the fame weight as the other parts otr 
 Scripture, of whofe divine authority the church never enter- 
 tained any doubt. As for any contradictions between the 
 books of Kings and Chronicles, it: is a bare aflertion, unfup- 
 ported by proof. There may be difficulties in regard to chro- 
 nology, the folution of which the reader will find in the writ- 
 ings of our learned ejpofitors. His arguments are fo weak 
 as to deferve no ferious refutation ; for furely the divine autho- 
 rity of a hiftory does not fuppofe it to be a relation of divine 
 aClions, otherwife no hiftorical part of fcripture whatever would 
 be divine ; the actions of bad as well as good princes are re- 
 corded in Holy Writ, to the end that we make the former an 
 object of our abhorrence, the latter of our imitation. It is, 
 therefore, a mofl infolent conclufion to fay, that if the holy 
 fpirit dictated this hiftory, he did not chufe a very edifying 
 fbbjeCt. 
 
iSz A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 muel, whofe iutereft it was to exclude a regal go- 
 vernment, declared to them, in the name of God> 
 that it was God himfelf whom they were rejeft- 
 ing. Thus the beginning of monarchy among the 
 Jews was the period of their theocracy. 
 
 It may be therefore faid without blafphemy, that 
 the hiftory of the Jewifh kings was written like 
 that of other nations; and that God did not trou- 
 ble himfelf to dictate the hiftory of a people whom 
 he no longer governed. 
 
 This opinion, however, is advanced with all 
 poffible miftruft and deference. What may be 
 thought a confirmation of it is, that the Paralipo- 
 mena or Chronicles, very often contradict the book 
 of Kings both in the chronology and the events, 
 as profane hiftories are known to difagree. Farther, 
 if God continued to write the hiftory of the Jews, 
 we are of courfe to believe, that he ftill writes it; 
 the Jews being ftill his favourite people. They are 
 one day to be converted, and, apparently they may 
 as juftly look upon the hiftory of their dilperfion to 
 be of divine compolition, as to fay that God wrote 
 the hiftory of their kings. 
 
 Another remark like wife offers itfelf : if God, af- 
 ter having been their foie king for a very long time, 
 condefcended to be their hiftorian,it becomes us to 
 entertain the moft profound refpeCt for all Jews 
 yniverfally ; the very meaneft Jewifh pedlar is in- 
 finitely above Csefar and Alexander. Shall we not 
 proftrate ourfelves before an old cloath’s man, who 
 proves to you that his hiftory was written by the 
 deity himfelf, whilft all the Greek and Roman hif- 
 tories are but the productions of profane pagans ? 
 
 If the ftile of the hiftory of the book of Kings 
 and Chronicles be divine, it does not neceffarily 
 follow that the aftions related in thofe hiftories are 
 alfo divine. David murders Uriah ; Ifbofheth and 
 
 Me- 
 
DICTIONARY. 183 
 
 Mephibolheth are murdered; Abfalom murders 
 Ammon; Joab murders A bl'alom; Solomon mur- 
 ders Adonijah, his brother; Baza murders Nabab; 
 Zimri murders Ela; Hamri murders Zimri; Ahab 
 murders Naboth ; Jehu murders Ahab and Joram; 
 the inhabitants of Jerufalem murder Amaziah, Jo- 
 afh’s fon ; Selom the fon of Jabes murders Za- 
 chariah the fon of Jeroboam ; Manahaim mur- 
 ders Selom the fon of Jabes ; Phaceus the fon of 
 Romeli murders Phaceia the fon of Manahaim; 
 Hofhea the fon of Ela murders Phaceus the fon of 
 Romeli ; with a multitude of other murders of 
 lei's note.' Thus it muft be owned, if the holy fpi- 
 rit did write this hiltory, he has not chofen a very 
 edifying fubjett. 
 
 IDOL, IDOLATER, IDOLATRY (C). 
 
 I DOL comes from the Greek iiJ'ot, a figure, ei- 
 dolos, the reprelentation of a figure, Latreu- 
 ein, to lerve, to revere, to adore. The word 
 
 adore 
 
 (C) This article of idols is a ftrong attack againft the Ro- 
 man Catholic worfhip of images ; and the author feems to 
 juftify Dr. Middleton’s treatife upon the Romifh ceremo- 
 nies. He difplays his erudition in treating this fubjeA; but 
 furely he is fond of paradox, when he maintains that neither 
 the Greeks nor Romans, nor indeed no other nation, were 
 idolaters. The point is not to know what might be the pri- 
 vate opinion of a few philofophers, but what was the prac- 
 tice of thofe nations in their external forms of religious wor- 
 (hip. Now it muft be running counter to all antiquity, to af- 
 firm that the honours paid by thofe people to the rtatues and 
 images of their god, were not rank idolatry. To fay that 
 the Roman Catholics do the fame is not anfwering the quef- 
 tiou : he may reprcfent thofe of his own religion (jf he can be 
 
 N 4 faid 
 
184 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 adore is originally Latin, and has various meanings* 
 as to put the hand to the mouth in token of refpeft* 
 to bend the body, to kneel, to falute, and more 
 commonly to pay a fupreme worfhip. 
 
 It is proper to obferve here, that the Trevoux 
 di&ionary begins this article with faying that all 
 the Pagans were idolaters, and that the Indians are 
 ftill fo. Firft, no body was called Pagan before the 
 time of Theodofius the younger, when that appel- 
 lation was given to the inhabitants of the country- 
 towns of Italy, “ Pagorum incolae Pagani,” who 
 retained their antient religion. Secondly, Indo- 
 ltan is entirely Mahometan, and the Mahometans 
 are implacable enemies to images and idolatry. 
 Thirdly, many people of India, who are of the an- 
 tient religion of the Parfis, a certain tribe which 
 admit of no idols, cannot, with any propriety, be 
 termed idolaters. 
 
 (Whether Idolatry was ever the Profefled Reli- 
 gion of any Nation. 
 
 It appears that there never was any people on 
 the earth, who took to themfelves the name 
 of idolaters. It is rather an abufive word* a 
 term of deteftation ; as the Spaniards formerly 
 ufed to call the French Gavachos, which the 
 French returned by calling the Spaniards Mara- 
 nas. Had the fenate of Rome, the Areopagus 
 of Athens, the court of the kings of Perfia, been 
 afked, “ Are you idolaters ? They would hardly 
 have known what the queftion meant-, at lead not 
 one of them would have anl'wered, “ We worfhip 
 Ci idols or images. ’ The word idolater or idola- 
 try do not occur either in Homer, Hefiod, He- 
 
 faid to have any) as guilty of idolatry ; but this does not 
 prove that the others were not alfo idolaters. 
 
 rodotus, 
 
DICTIONARY. ,85 
 
 fodotus, or any gentile author. Never was there 
 any edidt or law, ordering idols to be worfliipped, to 
 be accounted as deities, or to be confidered as fiich: 
 The Roman and Carthaginian generals, at the 
 making of a treaty, called alt their gods to witnefs-, 
 it is in their prefence, fay they, that we fwear to 
 this peace. Now the ftatues of all thefe gods, their 
 number being none of the fmalleft, were not in 
 the general’s tent ; but they held the gods to be, 
 as it were, prefent at the adlions of men as wit- 
 nefles and as judges; and certainly it was not the 
 image which made the deity. 
 
 In what light did they then look on the ftatues 
 of their falfe deities, which ftood in the temples? 
 In the fame light, if I may be allowed the expref- 
 fion, as we view the images of the objedts of our 
 veneration. Their error was not the worlhipping 
 a piece of wood or marble, but the worlhipping a 
 falie deity, reprefented by the wood and marble. 
 The difference between them and us is not that 
 they had images and we have none; but that their 
 images reprefented imaginary beings, and in a falfe 
 religion ; whereas ours reprefent real beings, and in 
 a true religion. The Greeks had the ftatue of Her- 
 cules; and we that of St. Chriftopher ; they had 
 Efculapius and his goat, and we St. Roch and his 
 dog; they had Jupiter with his thunder-bolts, and 
 we St. Anthony of Padua, and St. James of Com- 
 poftella. 
 
 When the conful Pliny in the exordium of his 
 Panegyric on Trajan, addrelles his petitions to the 
 immortal cods, he cannot be thought to mean 
 the images, which were far from being immortal. 
 
 Neither in the later nor the moft remote times of 
 paganifm, one fingle fadt occurs to conclude that 
 they worfhipped idols. Homer mentions only ood s 
 dwelling in lofty Olympus. The palladium, "ho’ 
 A it 
 
18-6 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 it fell from heaven, was no more than a facred 
 pledge of Pallas’s protection ; it was the goddels 
 herfelf who was reverenced in the palladium. 
 
 But the Romans and Greeks kneeled down be- 
 fore ftatues, put crowns on them, decked them 
 with flowers, burnt incenfe to them, and carried 
 them in folemn ftate through public places. Thefe 
 ufages we have confecrated in our religion, and 
 yet we are not idolaters. 
 
 In times of drought the women, after keeping 
 a fall, carried forth the ftatues of the gods in pub- 
 lic, walking barefooted, with their hair loofe ; and 
 immediately, according to Petronius, the rain 
 would pour down by pales full, “ ftatim urceatim 
 “ pluebat.” Have we not adopted this rite which, 
 though an abomination among the Gentiles, is 
 doubtlefs genuine devotion with Catholics ? How 
 common is it among us to carry barefooted the 
 fhrines of faints, in order to obtain a blefling from 
 heaven by their interceflion ? A Turk, a lettered 
 Chinefe, at feeing thofe ceremonies, might, from 
 his ignorance, accufe us of placing our confidence 
 in the images which we thus carry about in pro- 
 ceflion; but a word or two would undeceive him. 
 
 We are furprifed at the prodigious number of 
 declamations thundered out in all ages again ft the 
 idolatry of the Romans and Greeks; and after- 
 wards, our furprize is ftill greater, at finding that 
 they were not idolaters. 
 
 Some temples were more privileged than others. 
 The great Diana of Ephelus flood in higher 
 fame than a village Diana; more miracles were per- 
 formed in the temple of Efculapius at Epidaurus 
 than in any other of his temples. More offerings 
 were made to the ftatue of Jupiter the Olympian, 
 than to that of the Paphlagonian Jupiter: but fince 
 it is proper always to contraft the ufages of a 
 
 true 
 
 3 
 
DICTIONARY. 187 
 
 true religion to thofe of a falfe worfhip ; have 
 not fome of our altars, for ages pad, been more 
 frequented than others ? what are the offerings to 
 our lady des Neiges in comparifon of thofe made 
 to our lady of Loretto ? It is our bufinefs to exa- 
 mine whether this affords a juft pretence for 
 charging us with idolatry. 
 
 The original invention was only one Diana, one 
 Apollo, and one Efculapius, not as many Dia- 
 nas, A polios, and Efculapius’s, as they had tem- 
 ples and ftatues. Thus it is evidenced, as far as 
 a point of hiftory can be, that the ancients did not 
 hold a ftatue to be a deity ; that the worfhip could 
 not relate to the ftatue or idol; and confequently 
 that the antients were not idolaters. 
 
 A rude fuperftitious populace incapable of re- 
 flection, either to doubt, to deny, or believe, who 
 flocked to the temples, as having nothing elfe to do, 
 and becaufe the little are there on a level with the 
 great, who carried their offerings merely out of 
 cuftom, who were continually talking of miracles 
 without having ever examined any one, and who 
 were very little above the victims they brought, fuch 
 a populace, I fay, might, at the fight of the great 
 Diana, and the thundering Jupiter, be ftruck with 
 a religious horror, and, without knowing it, wor- 
 fhip the ftatue itfelf. This is no more than what 
 has been the cafe of our ignorant peafants ; and care 
 is accordingly taken to give them to underftand, 
 that it is the bleffed in heaven they are to invoke 
 for their^hterceflion, and not figures of wood and 
 ftone, and that their worfhip is due to God only. 
 
 The Greeks and the Romans increafed the num- 
 ber of their deities by apotheol'es; the Greeks dei- 
 fied illuftrious conquerors, as Bacchus, Hercules, 
 and Perfeus ; Rome raifed altars to its emperors. 
 ,Of a very different kind are our apotheol'es ; if we 
 
 have 
 
1 88 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 have faints anfwerable to their demi-gods and fecon- 
 dary gods, it is without any regard to rank or con- 
 quefts. We have ere&ed temples to men, merely 
 tor their exemplary virtues, and mod of whom 
 would not have been known on earth, had they 
 not been placed in heaven. The apotheofes of 
 the antients were aids of adulation, ours of refpeft 
 to virtue. But thefe antient apotheofes are an- 
 other convincing proof that the Greeks and Ro- 
 mans cannot properly be called idolaters. It is 
 manifed that they no more held a divine virtue 
 refiding in the datues of Augudus and Claudius 
 than in their medals. 
 
 Cicero, in his philofophical works, does not leave 
 fo much as the lead lufpicion, that any midake 
 could be committed with regard to the datues of 
 the gods, fo as to confound them with the deities 
 themfelves. His fpeakers inveigh with great acri- 
 mony againd the edablilhed religion, but not one of 
 them dreams of charging the Romans with mif- 
 taking marble and brafs for deities. Lucretius, 
 who never gives any quarter to the fuperditious, 
 reproaches no body with this folly ; I mud, there- 
 fore, again fay it, this opinion never exided, never 
 was thought of; and never was there any fuch thing 
 as idolaters. 
 
 Horace introduces a datue of Priapus, faying : 
 
 Olim truncus eram ficulnus, inutile lignum, 
 Cumfaberincertusfcamnum,faceretnePriapum, 
 Maluit efie Deum. 
 
 Whatis tobeinferred from this pafiage? Priapus was 
 one ot thofe petty deities which were given up to 
 the farcafms of the jocular ; and this very joke is as 
 drong a proof as can be, that the figure of Priapus 
 was not greatly revered, being made a fcarecrow. 
 
 Dacier, 
 
DICTIONARY. i8g 
 
 Dacier, commentator like, has taken care to ob- 
 ferve that Baruch had foretold this bufinefs; faying, 
 they lhall be whatever the artift plcafes. But he 
 might withal have remarked, that the like might 
 be laid of all the ftatues that ever exifted. 
 
 A tub may be made out of a block of marble,' 
 as well as the ftatoe of Alexander or Jupiter, or 
 fomething ftill more refpe&able. The matter of 
 which were formed the cherubims of the holy of 
 holies, might have equally ferved for the meaneft 
 purpofes. A throne, or an altar, lofe nothing of 
 the reverence due to them, becaufe the artift might 
 have formed them into a kitchen table. 
 
 Dacier inftead of inferring that the Romans wor- 
 fhipped Priapus’s image, and that Baruch had pre- 
 dicted it, ought rather to have concluded that the 
 Romans made a jeft of it. Look into all the au- 
 thors who fpeak of the ftatues of their gods, not 
 one lhall you find mentioning idolatry ; but quite 
 the contrary. You read in Martial, 
 
 “ Qui finxit facros auro vel marmore vultus,' 
 
 Non facit ille Deos.” 
 
 In Ovid, 
 
 «* Colitur pro Jove forma Jovis.’* 
 
 In Statius, 
 
 “ Nulla autem effigies null! commifla matello; 
 
 Forma Dei mcntes habitare ac numina gaudet.” 
 
 In Lucan, 
 
 “ Eft ne Dei fedes, nifl terra et pontus et aer.’* 
 
 To enumerate all the paffages in confirmation 
 that images were accounted images would take up 
 a volume. 
 
 The 
 
*9° A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 The only cafe which could favour an opinion 
 that images had any thing divine in them, was the 
 oracular images. But certainly the current opinion 
 was, that the gods had chofen fome particular al- 
 tars, and particular ftatues, where they fome- 
 times condefcended to' refide, giving audience to 
 men, and anfwering them. In Homer, and the 
 chorufes of Greek tragedies, we only meet with 
 prayers addrefied to Apollo himfelf, as delivering * 
 his oracles on fuch a mount, in fuch a temple, or 
 fuch a city. All antiquity throughout has left no 
 veftige of fupplic 2 tions made to a ftatue.' 
 
 They who profeffed magic, who believed it to 
 be a fcience, or who feigned to believe it, pre- 
 tended to be pofTefTcd of the fecret of bringing 
 down the gods into ftatues ; but not the great 
 gods, only the fecondary, the genii. This Mer- 
 curius I rifinegiftus u fed to term making deities, 
 and it is refuted by St. Auftin in his City of God. 
 But this very thing evidently fhews the images to 
 have had nothing divine in them, as not animated 
 without the art of a magician. And I fancy few 
 magicians were found io dexterous as to animate 
 a ftatue fo as to make it fpeak. 
 
 In a word, the images of the gods were not 
 gods; it was Jupiter, and not his image which 
 hurled the thunderbolt ; it was not the ftatue of 
 Neptune which agitated the fea, nor that of Apollo 
 which diffufed light. T. he. Greek and Romans were 
 gentiles, politheifts, but by no means idolaters. 
 
 Whether the Perfians, the Sabeans, the Egyp- 
 tians, the Tartars, and Turks, have been ido- 
 laters ? JR ra of the origin of figures called idols. 
 
 Hi Rory of their worfhip. 
 
 To call thofe nations, who worfhippedthefun and 
 uars idolaters, is wronging them.' For a long 
 
 time 
 
DICTIONARY. 191 
 
 time neither images nor temples were known 
 among them : if they were miftaken, it was in 
 paying to the heavenly bodies the homage due 
 only to the Creator. Befides, the dodtrine of 
 Zoroafter or Zerduft, as preferved in the Sadder, 
 teaches the exiftence of a Supreme Being, who 
 punilheth and rewardeth. Now this is very far from 
 idolatry. The Chinefe government never admit- 
 ted idols, conftantly adhering to the fimple wor- 
 lhip of Kingtien, the matter of heaven. Gengis- 
 kan among the Tartars cannot be charged with ido- 
 latry, never having had any fuch thing as an image. 
 The Mufiulmen of Greece, Afia-minor, Syria, Per- 
 fia, India, and Africa, call the Chriftians idolaters. 
 Giaours, imagining that the Chriftians worfhip 
 images. Several images which they found at Con- 
 ftantinople in St. Sophia, and in the church of the 
 holy apoftles, and others, they broke to pieces, 
 converting the churches into moiques. Appear- 
 ance, as ufual, deceived them, and led them to 
 believe that the dedicating of temples to faints, who 
 had formerly been men, the worshipping of their 
 images with genuflection, and the performing of 
 miracles in thole temples, were undeniable proofs of 
 the mod arrant idolatry : yet, the fartheft from 
 it in the world. The Chriftians, in reality, wor- 
 fhip only one God, and in the blefled themlelves 
 revere only the virtue of God afting in his faints^ 
 The Iconoclafts and the proteftants have brought 
 the fame charge of idolatry againft the church of 
 Rome, and the fame anfwer has been given them. 
 
 Men having very feldom precife ideas, and ftill 
 more feldom exprefling their ideas in precife words, 
 clear of all ambiguity, the name of idolaters was 
 given to the Gentiles, and efpecially the Politheifts. 
 lmmenfe volumes have been written, according to 
 the multitude of varying fentiments on the origin 
 
1 9 2 a philosophical 
 
 of worfhipping God, or feveral gods, and undef 
 fenfible reprefentations : now this multitude of 
 books and opinions only proves the ignorance of 
 the authors. 
 
 We know not who invented any part of 
 our clothing, and yet we would fain know 
 who was the firft inventor of idols. What fig- 
 nifies a pafiage of Sanchoniathon, who lived be- 
 fore the Trojan war? What information does he 
 give us, in faying, that the cahos, the mind, that 
 is, the breath, being enamoured with its princi- 
 ples, extraded the mud from them ; that he made 
 the air luminous ; that the wind Colp and his wife 
 Bau, begot Eon, and he begot Genos ; that Cro- 
 nos, their defcendant, had two eyes behind as be- 
 fore ; that he came to be god, and gave Egypt to 
 his fon Jaut ? This is one of the moft refpec- 
 table monuments of antiquity. 
 
 Orpheus, who was prior to Sanchoniathon, gives 
 us juft as much light in his Theogonia, which Da- 
 mafcius has preferved. He reprefents the mun- 
 dane principle in the form of a dragon, with two 
 heads, one of a bull, and the other of a lion, with 
 a face in the middle, which he terms god fact, 
 and gilded wings to the Ihoulders. 
 
 Yet thefe ideas, fantaftica! as they are, give us 
 an infightinto two important truths, one that fenfi- 
 ble images and hieroglyphics are derived from the 
 moft remote antiquity ; the other that all ancient 
 philolophers acknowledged a primordial principle. 
 
 As to politheifm common fenfe will tell you, 
 that, at the commencement of mankind, that is, of 
 weak creatures fufceptible ofreafonand folly, fub- 
 jett to every accident, to ficknefs and death, they 
 loon came to a fenfe of their weaknefs and depen- 
 dence: they eafily conceived that there was fome- 
 thing fuperior to themfclves> they felt a power in 
 
 the 
 
DICTIONARY. i 93 
 
 the earth, which produced their food, another in the 
 air which often dedroyed them, and another in the 
 confuming fire and the fubmerging water. What 
 could be more natural in men, abfolutely io- n o- 
 rant, than to fancy that there were beings which 
 prefided over thefe elements ? What could^be more 
 natural than to revere the invifible power which 
 made the fun and the ftars to fhine ? And on pro- 
 ceeding to form an idea of thefe fuperior powers, 
 what was again more natural than to reprefent 
 them in a fenfitive way ? Or I may even fay, how 
 could they go about it otherwife ? Judaifm, ante- 
 rior to our religion, and prefcribed by God him- 
 felf, was full of thole images, under which the deity 
 is reprefented. He condefcends to fpeak the lan- 
 guage of men in a buflv, he makes his appearance 
 on a mountain-, the heavenly fpirits feht by him all 
 come in a human lhape -, in a word, the fandtuary 
 itfelf is filled with cherubims, human bodies, 
 and the wings and heads of beads. This led Plu- 
 tarch, Tacitus, Appian, and fo many others, into 
 the ridiculous midake of upbraiding the Jews with 
 worlhipping an afs’s head. Thus God, who had 
 forbidden the painting and carving of any figure, 
 has been pleafed neverthelefs to accommodate 
 himfelfto human weaknefs, which require the fcnfes 
 to be fpoken to by images, 
 jjdfaiallj'v chap vi. fees the Lord feated on a throne, 
 and his train fill the temple : in chap. i. of Jere- 
 miah, the Lord ftretches out his hand, and 
 touches the prophet’s mouth. Ezekiel, chap, 
 iii. fees a throne of faphire, and God appears to 
 him like a man feated on that throne. This ima- 
 gery does not in the lead defile the purity of the 
 Jewidi religion, which never made ufe of pi&ures, 
 ltatues, and idols as public reprefentations of the 
 deity. 
 
 * Q 
 
 The 
 
194 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 The lettered Chinefe, the Parlis, the antient 
 Egyptians, had no idols ^ but Ilis and Ofiris were 
 loon reprefented in figures ; Bel at Babylon was a 3 
 foon exhibited in a huge colofifus ; Brama was in 
 the Indian peninfula an hideous kind of monlter. 
 The Greeks above all multiplied/ the names of the 
 deities, and of courfe the ftatues and temples •, but 
 ever attributing the fupreme power to their Zeus, 
 by the Latins named Jupiter, the fovereign of gods 
 and men. The Romans imitated the Greeks; both 
 always placed their gods in heaven, without know- 
 ing v/hat they meant by heaven and their olympus : 
 thefe l’uperior beings could not be fuppofed to re- 
 fide in the clouds, which are only water. At firft 
 feven of them were placed in the feven planets, 
 among which was reckoned the fun ; but after- 
 wards the refidence of all the gods was extended 
 to the yvhole heavenly expanfe. 
 
 T he Romans h’ad twelve great deities, fix male 
 and fix female, whom they dillinguilhed by the 
 appellation of “ Dii majorum gentium,” Jupiter, 
 Neptune, Apollo, Vulcan, Mars, Mercury; Juno, 
 Vefta, Minerva, Ceres, Venus, Diana, Pluto was 
 then omitted, and Vefta took his place. 
 
 Next were the gods “ minorum gentium,” the 
 indigetes, or heroes, as Bacchus, Hercules, Ef- 
 ' culapius ; the infernal deities, Pluto, Proferpine; 
 the fea gods, as Thetis, Amphitrite, the Nereides 
 and Glaucus ; afterwards the Dryades, the Naiades ; 
 the gods of gardens; the paftoral deities; every profef- 
 lion, every a<5tion of life, children, maidens, wives, 
 wofrien in childbed, all had their deity: there was 
 even the god Fart ; laftly, emperors were deified: 
 ‘ not that thefe emperors, nor the god Farj, r.or the 
 goddefs Pertunda, nor Piiapus, nor Rumilia the 
 goddefs of bubbies, nor Steicutius the god of pri- 
 vies, were accounted the lords of heaven and earth. 
 
 4 Some 
 
DICTIONARY. t9$ 
 
 Some of the emperors indeed had temples ; the 
 petty hoii (hold gods went without them, but all 
 had their image, or their idol. 
 
 Thefe were little grotefque figures, fet up 
 m a clofet by way of ornament; old women 
 and children were highly delighted with them ; 
 but never were thele figures authorized by any 
 public worfhip ; every one was left to follow his 
 own private fuperftition. Thefe little idols are (till 
 round nj,the ruins of antient cities. 
 
 I hough we cannot fix the precife time when men 
 egan to make idols, they are, however, known 
 to belong to the molt remote antiquity. Thara, 
 Abrahams father, uied to make them at Ur in 
 Chaldea. Rachael purloined and carried oft' Laban’s 
 idols. I here is no going higher. 
 
 But what did the antient nations think of all 
 thele images ? what virtue, what power did they 
 attribute to them ? Was it thought that the Gods 
 quitted heaven to come down, and hide themfelves 
 in thele ftatues ? or that they imparted to them a 
 portion of the divine fpirit, or did not impart any 
 thing at- all to them ? a great deal of ufelefs 
 erudition has been thrown away on this point, 
 it oeing evident that every one’s notions of them 
 were proportioned to his reafon, his credulity, 
 or his fanaticifm. The priefts, we may be fare, 
 would not be wanting to annex to their ftatues all 
 the divinity they poflibly could, inordertodraw the 
 more offerings. The philofophers, it is well known, 
 
 cenfured thefe fuperftitions; .the military people 
 
 made a jeft of them; and the commonalty, ever 
 ignorant and filly, knew not what it was doino-. 
 
 his is, jn a few words, the hiftory of all the nations 
 to which God has not made himfclf known. 
 
 ine preinifes^ are applicable to -the worlhip 
 Umverfally paid m Egypt to an ox, and in feveral 
 
 O 2 cities 
 
i9 6 a philosophical 
 
 cities to a dog, a monkey, a cat, and onions. Ia 
 all appearance they were at firlt only emblems. 
 Afterwards a certain ox called Apis, a certain dog 
 named Anubis, were worftupped ; ftill the people 
 went on eating beef and onions ; but what the 
 Egyptian old women thought of facred onions and 
 oxen, is not cleared up. 
 
 It was not uncommon for idols to fpeak. On 
 the anniverfary of Cybele’s feftival, the city of 
 Rome commemorated the beautiful diftich ut- 
 tered by the ftatue on it’s removal from king At- 
 talus’s palace : 
 
 “ Ipfa pati volui, ne fit mora, mitte volentem, 
 
 Dignus Roma locus, quo Deus ompis eat.” 
 
 “ I allowed myfelf to be carried off; away with 
 «* me quickly; Rome is worthy to be the relidencs 
 
 “ of every deity.” , . . 
 
 The ftatue o? Fortune had fpoke : the Scipios, 
 the Ciceros, the Caefars, indeed believed nothing of 
 the matter ; but the old women, to whom Kncol- 
 pus gave a crown to buy geefe and gods, mi^ht 
 very well believe it. 
 
 The idols likewife pronounced^oracles, the priefts 
 concealed within the ftatues ipeaking in the name 
 of the deity. 
 
 Amidft fo many gods, fo many different theo- 
 gonies and feparate worfhips, whence is it, that no 
 l'uch thing as a religious war was ever known among 
 the people called idolaters ? This tranquility was a 
 good fpringing from an evil, from error itielf ; 
 for every nation owning leveral inferior gods, peace- 
 ably allowed its neigbours to have theirs likewiie. 
 Except Cambyfes’s killing the ox Apis, not one 
 inftance is to be found, in ail prophane hiftory, or 
 a conqueror offering any infult to the gods of a 
 
DICTIONARY. 197 
 
 vanquifhed nation. The Gentiles had no exclufive 
 religion j and all the priefts .minded was to mul- 
 tiply offerings and facrifices. 
 
 The firft offerings were the fruits of the earth. 
 But the priefts foon came to want animal food for 
 their table : with their own hands they flew the 
 vidims ; and as they made themfelves butchers, 
 they became fanguinary. At length they introduced 
 the horrible pradice of offering human vidims, 
 and efpecially comely boys and girls, abominations 
 never known among the Chinefe, theParfis, or the 
 Indians •, but at Hieropolis in Egypt, Porphyry 
 tellsus, itwas nothing extraordinary to facrifice men. 
 
 In Tauris ftrangers were facrificed; but this fa- 
 vage cuftom being known, the priefts of Tauris, it 
 is to be fuppofed, did not much bufinefs. This exe- 
 crable fuperftition prevailed among the moft ancient 
 Greeks, the Cypriots, the Phenicians, the Tyrians 
 and the Carthaginians. The Romans themfelves 
 gave into this religious guilt; and, according to 
 Plutarch, facrificed two Greeks and two Gauls, to 
 expiate the incontinency of three veftals. Procopius, 
 who was cotemporary with Theodobert,king of the 
 Francs, fays, that the Francs facrificed men on their 
 entrance into Italy under that prince. Thefe horrid 
 facrifices were common among the Gauls and Ger- 
 mans. There is no reading hiftory, without being 
 very much difpleafed with one’s own fpecies. 
 
 What if, among the Jews, Jephthah facrificed his 
 daughter, and Saul was going to flay his fon; what 
 if they, who were devoted to the lord by anathema, 
 could not be redeemed, as beads were redeemed, 
 but were indilpenfably put to death ; what though 
 Samuel, a Jewilh prieft, cut to pieces with a confe- 
 crated cleaver king Agag, prifoner of war, whom 
 Saul had fpared, and fharply reproved Saul for ha- 
 ving treated that king according to the laws of na- 
 
 O 3 tions j 
 
19S A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 tions what of all this ? God is the Sovereign of man,' 
 kind, and may take away their lives when he will, 
 as he will, and by whom he will ; but men are not 
 to put themfelves on a footing with the lord of life 
 and death, and ufurp the prerogatives of the Su- 
 preme Being. 
 
 Amidft luch deteftable proceedings, it is Come 
 relief to the feeling heart, to know that in al- 
 moft all thofe nations called idolatrous, there 
 was the facred theology and popular error, private 
 worfhip and public ceremonies, the religion of the 
 wife and that of the vulgar. To thofe who were 
 initiated in the myfteries, the exiftence of one 
 only God was preached. Of this a fufficient tefti- 
 mony is the hymn attributed to the elder 
 Orpheus, which was lung in the celebrated my- 
 fteries of Ceres Eleufina : “ Contemplate the dw 
 “ vine nature, illume thy mind, govern thy heart, 
 “ walk in the path of juft ice, take care that the 
 “ God of heaven be before thine eyes ; there is 
 “ none but him, he alone is felf-exiftent ; all be- 
 “ ings derive their exiftence from him 5 he up- 
 “ holds them all ; never has he been feen by mor, 
 <{ tais, and he fees all things.” 
 
 The following paffage of the philofopher Maxi- 
 mus of Madaura, in his letter to St. Auguftine, is 
 likewife worth attention, “ What man is lb dull, fo 
 “ ftupid, as to queftion the exiftence of an eternal, 
 “ a fupreme, infinite deity, who has created no- 
 “ thing like himfelf, and is the common father of 
 “ all things ?” 
 
 A thoufand monuments might be produced, 
 that wife men in all times abhorred both idolatry 
 and polytheifm. 
 
 Epibfetus, that pattern of refignation and pa- 
 tience, fo great in fu mean a condition, never l'peaks 
 but of one only God. One of his maxims is this, 
 
 “ God 
 
 * 
 
DICTIONARY. , 99 
 
 God has created me, God is within me, T carry 
 “ him about every where. Shall I defile him with 
 “ obfcene thoughts, unjufta&ions, or infamous de- 
 •“ fires ? My duty is to thank God for every thing, 
 “ to praife him for every thing; and to thank, 
 “ praife, and ferve him continually, whiut I have 
 “ life.” All EpiCtetus’s ideas turn on this principle. 
 
 Marcus Aurelius, who perhaps was on the throne 
 of the Roman empire not lefs great than EpiCtetus 
 in (ervitude, does indeed often mention gods, in 
 conformity to the current phrafeology, or roexprefs 
 intermediate beings, between the Supreme Effence 
 and men ; but in how many paffages does he fihew, 
 that in reality he acknowledges only one eternal 
 infinite God ? “ Our fouls, fays he, are an emana- 
 “ tion of the Deity; my body, my fpirits, proceed 
 “ from God.” 
 
 The Stoic?, the Platonics, held one divine and 
 univerfal nature ; the Epicureans denied it. The 
 priefts in their myfteries fpoke only of one God: 
 where then were the idolaters ? 
 
 Befides, it is one of the great miftakes in 
 Morerv’s Dictionary to fay, that in the time of* 
 Tneodofius the Younger, no idolaters remain* 
 ed but in the remote parts of Afia and Africa. 
 There was (till, and even down to the feventh 
 century, many Gentile nations in Italy. All Ger- 
 many north of the Wefer were ftrangers to Chri- 
 ftianity in Charlemain’s time; and, long after 
 him, Poland and the whole North continued in 
 what is called idolatry. Half Africa, all the realms 
 beyond the Ganges, Japan, the innumerable com- 
 monalty of China, a hundred Tartarian hords, re- 
 tain their antient worlhip; whereas in Europe, 
 this religion is to be found only among fome 
 Laplanders, Samoiedes, and Tartars. To con- 
 clude, in the time which we diftinguifh by the ap- 
 
 O 4 pella- 
 
200 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 pellation of the middle age, the Mahometans 
 were called Pagans : a people who execrate 
 
 images were branded as idolaters and image- wor- 
 Ihippers ; and it muft be frankly owned, that the 
 Turks, feeing our churches crowded with images 
 and ftatues, are more excufable in calling us ido- 
 laters. * 
 
 J E P H T H A H. 
 
 Or, Human Sacrifices. 
 
 I T is clear from the book of Judges, that Jeph- 
 thah did promife to facrifice the firftperfon who 
 came out of his houfe, in order to congratulate him 
 on his vi&ory againft the Ammonites : and who 
 fhould this prove to be but his onlydaughter ? Here- 
 upon he rent his garments for grief; and after per- 
 mitting her to go and lament among the hills her 
 misfortune in dying a maid, he actually lacrificed 
 her. The Jewifh maidens for a long timecomme- 
 morated this event, lamenting Jephthah’s daugh- 
 ter four days in a year. (See Judges, ch. xi.) 
 
 In whatever time this hiftory was written, whe- 
 ther it be an imitation or the original of the Gre- 
 cian ftory of Agamemnon and Iphigenia, be it prior 
 or pofterior to fome fimilar A {Tyrian tale, is what 
 I do not examine ; I abide by the text : Jephthah 
 vowed his daughter for a burnt- offering, and 
 performed his vow. 
 
 It was expreftly enjoined in the Jewifh law to 
 facrifice all who had been devoted to the Lord. No 
 man {hall be redeemed, but {hall be put to death, 
 without remiffion : (D) the Vulgate has it, “ Non 
 
 (D) Our tranflation is, “ None devoted, which {hall be de- 
 voted of men, lhall be redeemed, but {hall furely be put to 
 death.” ' r 
 
 . redi- 
 
 i 
 
DICTIONARY. 201 
 
 ✓ rejSimetur, fed morte morietur.” Lev. chap, xxvil. 
 
 ' ver. 29. 
 
 In confequence of this law it was, that Samuel 
 hewed king Agag in pieces, though Saul had 
 fpared him ; and for his improper clemency, Saul 
 was reproved by the Lord, and forfeited his king- 
 dom. & 
 
 Here is an evident proof of human facrifkes; no 
 point of hiftory can be more authentically verified ; 
 certainly a nation cannot be better known than by 
 records, and what it relates of its felf. 
 
 JOSEPH. 
 
 T HE hiftory of Jofeph, confidered only as an 
 object of curiofity and literature, is one of 
 the moll valuable monuments of antiquity which 
 have reached our times. It appears to have been 
 the model of all the oriental writers; it is more pa- 
 thetic than Homer’s OdylTy, as a forgiving hero is 
 more moving than he that gluts his vengeance. 
 
 We account the Arabs to have been the firfl: au- 
 thors of thole ingenious fi&ions, which have been 
 adopted in all other languages ; but for my part, 
 I meet with no tale among them comparable to that 
 of Jofeph : in almoft every part it is of admirable 
 beauty; and the conclufion draws forth tears of ten- 
 derneis. It exhibits a youth in his fixteenth year, 
 of whom his brothers are jealous. He is fold by 
 them to a caravan of llhmaelite merchants, carried 
 into Egypt, and bought by one of the king’s 
 eunuchs. This eunuch had a wife, at which we 
 are not to be ftartled, for the Kiflar-aga of Con- 
 ftantioople, who is an arch-eunuch, the whole of 
 his genital parts being abfcinded, has a feraglio : 
 his eyes and hands are left, and nature is ftill na- 
 ture 
 
102 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 ture in him. -The ocher eunuchs, having been de- 
 prived only of the two appendages of the genera- 
 tive organ, often make ule of it ; and Potiphar, 
 to whom Jofeph was fold, might very well be of 
 the latter clafs of eunuchs. 
 
 Potiphar’s wife becomes enamoured with young 
 Jofeph, who, faithful to his matter as a moft gracious 
 benefactor, rejeCts her follicitation?. Such behaviour 
 turns her love into rancour, and fhe charges Jo- 
 feph with an attempt to l'educe her. This is the 
 hiftory of Hippolitus and Phtedra, of Bellerophon 
 and Stenobtea, of Hebrus and Damafippe, of Ta- 
 nis and Peribea, of Marfiilus and Hipodamia, of 
 Peleus and Demenetta. 
 
 Which is the original of all thefe hiftories is not 
 eafily known ; but the ancient Arabian authors 
 have a palTage relating to the tranfaClion between 
 Jofeph and Pouphar’s wife, which is very inge- 
 nious. The author fuppofes that Potiphar, hefitat- 
 ing between his wife and Jofeph, did not look 
 upon his wife’s having torn a piece of Jofeph’s 
 robe, as any weighty proof of the young man’s 
 crime. There was at that time, in the wife’s 
 chamber, a child in a cradle. Jofeph faid that Ihe 
 had forcibly taken hold of his robe, and torn it in 
 the child’s prefence ; Potiphar afked the child,' 
 ■who it feems was of a very pregnant wit for his 
 age. The child faid to Potiphar, fee whether the 
 robe be torn before or behind ; if before, it fhews 
 that Jofeph was for laying hands on your wife, and 
 that Ihe flood on her defence; if behind, it is plain 
 your wife run after him. Thus did this child’s 
 genius clear up Jofeph’s innocence. This is the 
 account given in the Alcoran from an ancient Ara- 
 bian author, without informing us to whom this 
 witty child belonged. If it was a fon of damePoti- 
 * phar’s. 
 
DICTIONARY. *03 
 
 phar’s, Jofeph was not the firft with whom this wo- 
 man had defired an intimacy 
 
 However it be, Jofeph, according to the book 
 of Genefis, is clapped up in prifon, and happens 
 to be with the king’s cup-bearer and butler : both 
 thefe ftate prifoners had a dream the fame night, 
 which Jofeph explained to them ; he foretold that 
 within three days the cup-bearer fhould be reftored 
 to favour, and the butler hanged, which fell out 
 accordingly. 
 
 Two years after the king of Egypt had a very 
 perplexing dream, on which his cup-bearer ac- 
 quaints him, that there is in prifon a Jewifh young 
 man who had not his equal for explaining 
 dreams ; he is fent for, and predi&s the feven years 
 of plenty and the feven barren y-ars. 
 
 Here we muft make a fmall interruption in the 
 thread of the ftory, to obferve the prodigious an- 
 tiquity of the interpretation of dreams. Jacob had 
 feen in a dream the myfterious ladder, at the top 
 of which was God himfelf : in a dream he learned 
 the method of multiplying his flocks, a method 
 which has never fucceeded but with him. Jofeph 
 himfelf had been informed by a dream, that he 
 lht>uld one day be fuperior to his brothers. Abi- 
 melech, long before, had notice given him in a 
 dream, that Sarah was Abraham’s wife. See the 
 article Dream. We fhall now return to Jofeph. 
 
 On his having explained Pharaoh’s dream, he 
 was immediately created prime minifter. It is a 
 queftion whether now a-days any king, even in 
 Afia, would beftow a poft of that importance for 
 having explained a dream; Pharaoh made up a 
 match between Jofeph and a daughter of Poti- 
 phar’s. This Potiphar is faid to have been high 
 prieft of Heliopolis, fo that it could not be the 
 eunuch his firft mafter ; or if it was, he muft cer- 
 tainly 
 
204 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 tainly have had another title than that of high 
 prieft ; and his wife had been a mother more than 
 once. 
 
 In the mean time the famine came on, ac- 
 cording to Jofeph’s predidtion ; and this minifter, 
 to rivet himfelf into the royal favour, fo managed 
 matters, that all the people were under a neceflity 
 of felling their lands to Pharaoh ; and the whole 
 nation, to procure corn, became Haves to the 
 crown. This may probably be the origin of de- 
 fpotifm. It muft be owned that never king made 
 a better bargain ; but, on the other hand, the peo- 
 ple owed little gratitude and applaufe to the prime 
 minifter. 
 
 At length Jofeph’s father and brothers likewife 
 came to want corn, for the famine was lore in all 
 the land : as for Jofeph’s reception of his bre- 
 thren, his forgiving them, and loading them with 
 kindnefs, we fhall take the liberty to omit thofe 
 particulars, obferving only, that this hiftory has 
 every interefting part of an epic poem •, the fublime, 
 the marvellous, the expofition, connexion, difeo- 
 very, and reverfe of fortune. I know nothing 
 more ftrongly marked with oriental genius. 
 
 The anfwer of good Jacob, Jofeph’s hoary far- 
 ther, to Pharaoh, ought deeply to imprefs every 
 one who can read. What may your age be, faid 
 the king to him ? A hundred and thirty years, am 
 fwered the old man; and in this fhort pilgrimage, 
 I have not feen one happy day. 
 
 LAWS. 
 
 I N the time ofVefpafian and Titus, when the 
 Romans ufed to rip up and draw the Jews, a 
 very wealthy Ifraelite, to avoid that difagreeable 
 3 ( treatment. 
 
DICTIONARY. 205 
 
 treatment, moved off with all the fruits of his ufury, 
 carrying with him to Eziongaber all his family, 
 which confided of his aged wife, a fon, and a 
 daughter ; for retinue, he had two eunuchs, one a 
 cook, the other a kind of gardener and vine-dref- 
 fer : an honed Eflene, who knew the Pentateuch 
 by heart, officiated as his chaplain. All thefe going 
 aboard a vedel at Eziongaber, eroded the Red Sea, 
 as it is called, though it has nothing of that colour, 
 and entered the gulph of Perfia, in qued of the 
 country of Ophir, without knowing where it lay : 
 a dreadful dorm drove this Hebrew family towards 
 India, where the vedel was dranded on one of the 
 Maldivia iflands, then defert, but now called Pa- 
 drabranca. 
 
 The old hunks and his joan were drowned •, but 
 the fon and daughter, with the two eunuchs and 
 chaplain, got fale to land. They made (hift to 
 fave fome of the provifions ; and, having built huts 
 in the ifland, began to be fomething reconciled to 
 their dil'ader. The itland of Padrabranca, you 
 know, is five degrees from the line, and products 
 the larged cocoa-nuts and the bed pine-apples in 
 the whole world : ic was not uncomfortable living 
 there at a time when every where elle, the fa- 
 voured people were flaughtered as fad as they 
 could be found ; but the good Eflene frequently 
 wept at thinking, that they might be the only Jews 
 on earth, and that the feed of Abraham was draw- 
 ing to an end. 
 
 What fignify your tears, laid the young Jew: 
 it is in your power to prevent it’s ending ; marry 
 my fider. Very willingly, anfwered the chap- 
 lain •, but it is againd the law. I am an Eflene, 
 and have made a vow againd marriage ; and, by 
 the laws, vows are to be obferved : come of the 
 Tewifli race what will, never will l marry your 
 
 fider. 
 
20 6 A* PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 lifter, though Hie were ten times handfomer thart 
 fhe is. 
 
 My two eunuchs, anfwered the Jew, cannot raife 
 feed from her-, fo, with your Jeave, I will do the 
 bufinefs, and you (hall marry us. 
 
 Let me be ripped up and drawn over and over, 
 faid the chaplain, rather than have any hand in 
 making you commit inceft : were fhe your filler 
 only by the father’s fide, I would not hefitate fo 
 much about it, as not being dire<5Hy againft law ; 
 but fhe is^ your filler by the mother’s fide, fo that 
 it would Be quite abominable. 
 
 I am very well aware that it would be a crime 
 at Jerufalem, where I might have other young 
 women; but on the illand of Padrabranca, where I 
 lee only cocoa-nuts, ananas, and oylters, I hold i: 
 very allowable. Thus the Jew married his filler, 
 and, notwithllanding all the Ellene’s protellations, 
 had by her a daughter, who was the foie fruit of a 
 marriage, by one held legal, and by the other 
 abominable. 
 
 Fourteen years after the mother departed this 
 life : Well, laid the father to the chaplain, have 
 you got over your former prejudices ? Will you 
 marry my daughter ? God forbid l laid the Effene. 
 If you will not, I will, faid the father; the feed of 
 Abraham lhall not come to an end, if I can help 
 it. The Efiene, quite frightened at fuch horrible 
 words, would not live any' longer with one who 
 made fo light of the law, and fled. The bride- 
 groom called after him. Stop, honefl Ananeel, I ob- 
 ferve the law of nature, I am preferving the chofen 
 race, do not leave your friends; but the fcffene, 
 full of the Mofaic law, without fo much as looking 
 back, fwam over to the nearell illand. 
 
 This was Attola, a large illand, both populous 
 and thoroughly civilized ; at his landing he was 
 
 made 
 
DICTIONARY. 207 
 
 fhade a flave. When he had got a little of the Ac- 
 tola tongue, he complained very bitterly of his 
 being ul'ed fo inhofpitably ; but he was given 
 to understand, that fuch was their law, and that 
 fine the ifland fiad narrowly elcaped being fur- 
 prized by the inhabitants of Shot Ada, it had 
 been wifely provided, that all ftrangcrs coming to 
 Attola fhould be made flaves. A law it cannot 
 be, laid the EfTene, for no fuch thing is in the Pen- 
 tateuch : to which he had for anfwcr, that it was 
 in the country code, and a flave he remained ; but 
 with the good fortune of having an excellent maf- 
 ter, who was very rich, and ruled him in a manner 
 which much endeared him to the EfTene. 
 
 Some ruffians came one day to rob and kill the 
 mailer : they afked the flaves whether he was at 
 home and had a greac deal of money by him ? By 
 all the gods, laid the flaves, he has little or no 
 money at all, neither is he at home. But the Ef- 
 fenian laid, the law does not allow of lying ; and 
 I fwear to you that he is at home, and has a great 
 deal of money ; fo the mailer was robbed and mur- 
 dered : on this, the flaves had the EfTene before 
 the judges for betraying his mailer. The EfTene 
 own’d his words, faying, that he would not tell a 
 lye on any account ; and he was hanged. 
 
 This ftory, and many fuch, were told me in my 
 laft journey from the Indies to France. On my 
 lyS [arrival, fome bufinefs calling me to Verfailles, 
 here I law a very fine woman followed by feveral 
 other fine women : Who is that fine woman, faid 
 I to my lawyer, who was come with me ; for 
 having a procels in the parliament at Paris, on 
 account of cloaths made for me in the Indies, 
 I had my counfelior always' with me: It is 
 
 the king’s daughter, faid he ; and, befides her 
 beauty, flie is of a tnoft excellent temper ; it is a 
 
 pity 
 
2 c8 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 pity that Ihe can never be queen of France. 
 How ! faid I, if, which God forbid, all her 
 royal relations and the princes of the blood 
 were to die, could not Ihe inherit her father’s 
 kingdom ? No, faid the counfellor, the Salic law is 
 exprefsly againft it. And who made that Salic law, 
 faid I. That 1 know nothing of, anfwered he ; but 
 the tradition is, that an ancient people called the 
 Salians, who could neither read nor write, had a 
 Jaw, by which in the Salic country no female was 
 to inherit an hereditary fief; and this law has been 
 admitted in a country which is not Salic. Has it fo, 
 laid I, and I annul it : You allure me that, befides 
 this princefs’s beauty, Ihe is of an excellent temper; 
 lhe has therefore an indifputable right to the 
 crown, if unfortunately file Ihould furvive all the reft 
 of the royal family : my mother was heirefs to her 
 father, and this princefs (hall be heirefs to hers. 
 
 The next day my caufe came. on in one of the 
 courts of parliament, and they all gave it againft 
 me : my counfellor told me, that in another court 
 I Ihould have gained it unammoufly. Very odd, 
 indeed, faid I ; then fo many courts fo many 
 laws. Yes, faid he, there are no lefs than twenty- 
 five commentaries on the common law at Paris ; 
 that is, the Paris common law has been twenty- 
 five times proved to be ambiguous; and were there 
 twenty-five courts, there would be twenty-five dif- 
 ferent bodies of laws. We have, continued he, a 
 province called Normandy, about fifteen leagues 
 from Paris ; and there your caufe would have been 
 decided quite otherwife than here. This made me 
 defirous of feeing Normandy, and I went thither 
 with one of my brothers. At the firft inn we came 
 to, was a young man ftorming mod furioully. I 
 alked him what was the matter ? Matter enough 
 anlwered he ; I have an cider brother. Where is 
 
 the 
 
DICTIONARY. aoq 
 rhe mighty misfortune of having a brother, faid 1 
 to him ? my brother^ my elder, and yet we live 
 very eafy together. But here, Sir, faid he, the 
 damned law gives every thing to the elder, and the 
 younger may Ihift for themlelves. If that be the 
 cafe, laid I, well may you be angry ; 'with us, things 
 are equally divided, yet fometimes brothers do not 
 love one another the better for it. 
 
 T hele little adventures led me to lome very 
 profound refiedions on the laws, and I found 
 them to be like our garments; at Conftantinople ic 
 is proper to wear a doliman, and at Paris a coat. If 
 all human laws are by compad, faid I, the only poinc 
 is to make good bargains. The citizens of Leli 
 and Agra lay, that they made a very bad agree- 
 ment with Tamerlane: the citizens of London 
 again value themfelves for the good bargain they 
 made with king William III. One of that opu- 
 lent body was faying to me, it is neceflity which 
 makes laws, and force caufes them to be obferv- 
 ed. 1 aflced him whether force did not likewife 
 make laws, and whether William the conqueror, 
 had not prefcribed to England laws, without 
 any previous convention ? Yes, faid he, we were 
 then oxen, and William put a yoke upon us, and 
 goadtd us along. Since thofe times we are become 
 men ; but with our horns Hill remaining, we are 
 fure to gore any one that will make us plough for 
 him, and not for ourfelves. 
 
 Full of thefe refledions, I was pleafed to find 
 that there is a natural law independant of all hu- 
 man conventions; that the fruit of my labour Ihould 
 be my property ; that it is my duty to honour my 
 parents ; that I have no right to my neighbour’s 
 life, nor my neighbour to mine, &c. Bui when it 
 came into my mind that, from Cordolaomer down 
 to Mentzel, colonel of hufTars, it has been cufto- 
 * mary. 
 
210 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 fnary, to fhew one’s loyalty by eflfufion of human 
 blood, and to pillage one’s neighbour by patent, 
 
 I was touched to the heart. 
 
 I am told that robbers had their laws, and that 
 war had alfo its laws. On my afking what were 
 thofe laws of war, I was anfwered : It is to hang 
 up a brave officer for maintaining, again!! a royal 
 army, a bad poll and without cannon; it is to 
 hang up a pnfoner if one of your men has been 
 hanged ; it is to burn and dettroy thofe villages 
 which have not brought in their whole fubfiftence 
 at the day appointed by the gracious fovereign of 
 the neighbourhood. So that is the fpirit of laws, 
 laid 1, 
 
 By farther information I'heard of fome very wife 
 laws, condemning a ffiepherd to the galleys for 
 nine years, for giving a little foreign fait to his 
 ffieep.' A neighbour of mine has been ruined by 
 an indictment for cutting down two oaks in his 
 own wood, not obferving a formality which he 
 had not been able to know any thing of: his wife 
 died of grief in extreme di(lrefs,and his foh lives, if 
 it may be fo called, very wretchedly. I own that 
 thei'e laws arejuft, tho’ the execution of them is alit^ 
 tie hard ; but I cannot bear with thofe laws which 
 authorize a hundred thoufand men to go, under 
 the pretence of loyalty, and mafiacre as many 
 peaceable neighbours. The generality of mankind 
 a. pear to'be naturally endued with fenfe enough to 
 make laws ; but then it is not every one who has 
 virtue fufficient to enafl good laws. 
 
 Call together from all the ends of the earth, the 
 hufbandmen, a fimple quiet clals, they will, at once, 
 agree that the furplus of one’s corn fhould be al- 
 lowed to be lold to our neighbours ; and that a law 
 to the contrary is both abfurd and inhuman ; that 
 coin, as reprefentir.g provifions, fficuld be no more 
 
 adulte- 
 
DICTIONARY. 2 1 1 
 
 adulterated than the produfts of the earth ; that a 
 ther of a family Ihould be mailer within his own 
 walls; that religion ihould promote friendihip and 
 enevolence among men living in fociety, and not 
 inake them fanatics and perfecutors ; that the la- 
 bouring and buf y part of the world Ihould not de- 
 prive themfelves of the fruits of their induflry, to 
 
 beftow them on fuperftition and floih : this plain 
 
 aTembly would m an hour make thirty fuch laws, 
 3)1 beneficial to mankind. 
 
 But ihould Tamerlane come and fubdue In- 
 
 nJ iL h ^?I 0a W,U ree nothin g but arbitrary laws. 
 One fhaH iq ue e z e a province to enrich a publican 
 of Tamerlane s ; another ihall make it high-trea- 
 lon only for having dropped a free word con- 
 cerning the miftrefs of the raja’s firil valet de 
 
 C h1 7iv re I 3 th A rd 111311 take awa y from the farmer 
 half his harveil, and difpute the remainder with 
 
 him ; and, what is worfe than all this, there will 
 
 J 1 IT’ by Wh ' ch 3 Tartar me Tenger (hall come 
 nd take away your children in the cradle, making 
 
 hem fodiers or eunuchs according to their confti- 
 tutions, and leave the father and mother to wipe 
 &way each other’s tears. * 
 
 nr k °T-’ ' S i£ bdl t0 be Tamerlane’s dog 
 
 beft of h b ° ubtle ^ s ’ b ' s d°g has by much the 
 
 CIVIL and ECCLESIASTICAL LAWS. 
 
 T H E following minutes were found among 
 the papers of an eminent lawyer, and per- 
 haps delerve a little confutation. 1 
 
 h ecclefiailical Jaw Ihould ever be in force till 
 has formally received the exprefs fantfion of the 
 E t govern- 
 
3 
 
 2I2 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 government ; by this it was that Athens and Rome 
 never had any religious quarrels. 
 
 Thole quarrels appertain only to barbarous na- 
 
 tl °To permit or prohibit working on holidays, 
 ftiould only be in the magiftraws power ; it is not 
 the fit concern of priefts to hinder men from cul- 
 tivating their grounds. ' _ 
 
 Every thing relating to marriages fhould depend 
 folely on the magiftrate ; and let the priefts be li- 
 rnited to the auguft function of the folemnization. 
 
 Lending at intereft to be intirely within the 
 cognizance of the civil law, as by it, commercial 
 
 affairs are regulated. , . , 
 
 All ecclehaftics whatever fhould, as the hates 
 fubjeds in all cafes, be under the control and ani- 
 madverfion of the government. 
 
 Away with that difgraceful abfurdity of paying 
 to a foreign prieft the firft: year’s produce of an 
 effate, given to a prieft of our own country. _ 
 
 No prieft ftiould have it in his power to deprive 
 a member of fociety of the leaft privilege, on pre- 
 tence of his fins ; for a prieft being himlelt a 
 finrter, is to pray for Tinners : he has no bufinels 
 
 to try and condemn them. 
 
 Mamft rates, farmers, and priefts, are alike to 
 contribute to the expences of the ftaie, as alike 
 belonging to the ftate. 
 
 One weight, one meafure, one cuftom. 
 
 The punifhments of criminals fhould be of me-,- 
 when a man is hanged he is good for nothing, 
 whereas a man condemned to the public works 
 ftiil benefits bis country, and is a living admonr- 
 
 cion. . 
 
 Every law (hould be clear, uniform, and pre- 
 cife •, explanations are for the moft part coriup 
 
2X3 
 
 DICTIONARY. 
 
 The only infamy (hould be vice. 
 
 Taxes to be proportionate. 
 
 A law (hould never clafh with cuftcm, for if the 
 cuftom be good, the law mud be faulty. 
 
 liberty. 
 
 A. A Battery of cannon is playing clofe by 
 your ears ; are you at liberty to hear 
 or not to hear it ? 
 
 B. Unqueftionably I cannot but hear it. 
 
 A. Would you have thofe cannon carry off your 
 head, and your wife^s and daughter’s, who are 
 walking with you ? 
 
 B. What a queftion is that ? in my fober fenfes 
 it is impoflible, that 1 (hould w.ll any fuch thing. 
 It cannot be. 
 
 A. Well, you necffarily hear the explofion of 
 thofe cannon, and you neceffarily are againft you 
 and your family being cut off by a cannon (hot as 
 you are taking the air ; you have not the power 
 not to hear, nor the power of willing to remain here. 
 
 B. Nothing more evident. 
 
 A. Accordingly you have come thirty paces to 
 ■be out of the cannons way : thus you have had the 
 power of walking that little fpace with me. 
 
 B. That again is clear. 
 
 A. And if you had been paralytic you could not 
 have avoided being expofed to this battery ; you 
 would not have had the power of being where you 
 are ; you would, nectlfarily, not only have heard 
 the explofion, but received a cannon (hot; and 
 thus you would neceflarily have been killed. 
 
 B. Very true. 
 
 A. In what then confifts your liberty ? if not in 
 the power which your body has made ufe of to do, 
 
 B 3 what 
 
214 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 what your volition, by an abfolute neceffity, re- 
 quired. 
 
 B. You put me to a ftand; Liberty then is no- 
 thing but the power of doing what I will. 
 
 A. Think of it, and fee whether liberty can have 
 any other meaning. 
 
 B. At this rate my grey hound is as free as I 
 am : he has neceffarily a will to run at the light of 
 a hare, and likewife the power of running, if not 
 lame; fo that in nothing am I fuperior to my dog; 
 this is levelling me with the beads. 
 
 A. Such are the wretched fophifms of the 
 wretched fophifts who have tutored you, Wretch- 
 ed thing indeed, to be in the fame date of liberty 
 as your dog! And are not you like your dog in a 
 thoufand things ? in hunger, third, waking, deep- 
 ing •, andjyour five fenfes, are they not common to 
 him ? are you for duelling otherwile than through 
 the nofe ? why then are you for having liberty 
 in a manner different from him. 
 
 B. But I have a foul continually reafoning, 
 which my dog knows little of : fimple ideas are 
 very nearly all his portion, whereas 1 have a thou- 
 fand metaphyfical ideas. 
 
 A. Well, you are a thoufand times more free 
 than he ; that is, you have a thoufand times more 
 power of thinking than he : dill you ?re not free 
 in a manner different from him. 
 
 B. How ! am I not at liberty to will what I will ? 
 
 A'. Your meaning ? 
 
 B. I mean what all the world means ; is it not 
 a common faying, Will is free ? 
 
 A. A proverb is no reafon: pleafe to explain 
 yourfelf more clearly. 
 
 B. I mean that I have the liberty of willing as I 
 pleafe. 
 
 A. fly 
 
 
 
 
A. By your leave,- there is no fenfe in that '* 
 don’t you perceive that it is ridiculous to fay, I 
 will will ; you will necefiarily, in confequence o^ 
 the ideas occurring to you : Would you marrv> 
 yes, or no ? 
 
 B. But were I to fay, I neither will the one nor 
 the other ? 
 
 A. That would be anfwering like him who faid. 
 Tome think cardinal Mazarine dead, others believe 
 him ft ill living, and i believe neither one nor the 
 other. 
 
 B. Well, I have a mind to marry. 
 
 A. Good ! that is fomething of an anfwer ; and 
 why have you a mind to marry ? 
 
 B. Becaufe I am in love with a young gentle- 
 woman, who is handfome, of a fweet temper, well 
 bred, with a tolerable fortune, lings charmingly, 
 and her parents are perhaps of good credit : be 
 fides, I flatter myfelf, that my addrefles are very 
 acceptable both to her family and herfelf. 
 
 A. Why, there is a reafon : you fee you cannot 
 will without a reafon, and I declare you have the 
 liberty of marrying ; that is, you have the power 
 of figning the contratt. 
 
 B. How ! notwill without a reafon ! What then 
 becomes of another proverb ? “ Sit pro ratione vo- 
 “ Juntas my will is my reafon. I will becaufe 
 1 will. 
 
 A. My dear friend, under favour, that is an 
 ablurdity ; there would then be in you an effedt 
 without a caufe. 
 
 B. What ! when I am playing at even or odd, 
 is there a reafon for my choofing even rather than 
 odd ? 
 
 A. Yes, to be fure. 
 
 B. And pray let us hear that reafon ? 
 
 P 4 
 
 A. Be- 
 
21 6 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 A. Because the idea of odd prefented itfelf ta 
 your mind before the contrary notion. It would 
 be ftrange, indeed, that in fome cafes you will bei 
 caufe there is a caufe of volition ; and that in fome 
 cafes you will without any caufe. In your willing 
 to be married, you evidently perceive the deter- 
 mining reafon •, and in playing at even or odd, you 
 do not perceive it ; and yet one there muft be. 
 
 B. But again, am I not then free ? 
 
 A. Your will is not free, but your actions are; 
 you are free to aft when you have the power of 
 acting. 
 
 B. But all the books I have read on the liberty 
 
 of indifference 
 
 A. Are nonfertfe : there is no fuch thing as li- 
 berty of indifference; (E) it is a word void of 
 fenfe, and coined by thole who were not overloaded 
 vyith it. - ' 
 
 LIMITS of the human UNDERSTANDING. 
 
 » 1 • ' : ■ ^ '.i r , 
 
 P OOR doftor, thefe limits are every where. Art 
 thou for knowing how it comes to pafs, that 
 th.ne arm and thy leg obey thy will, and thy liver 
 does not ? Wouldft thou inveftigate how thought 
 is formed in thy minute underttanding, and the 
 c hild in that woman’s womb ? I give thee what 
 
 V ) ■ • ’ 1 ' • 
 
 (F.) Here our author has followed Mr. Locke, who fays, 
 " that liberty belongs not to the will ; and that it is as in- 
 “ fignificant to alk, whether a man’s will be free, as to alk, 
 “ whether his fleep be fwift, or his virtue fquare. For li- 
 “ berty being but a power belongs only to agents, and can- 
 “ not be an attribute of the will, which is allb but a power.” 
 §ee this notion refuted by Dr. Clarke in his Dcmonftratioij 
 of the Being and Attributes of a God. 
 
 time 
 
DICTIONARY. 21 ? 
 
 time thou wilt. Tell me alfo what is matter. 
 Thy equals have written ten thoufand volumes on 
 this article : fome qualities of this fubftance they 
 have found, and children know them as well as 
 thyfelf •, but what is that fubftance eflentially ? and 
 what is that to which thou haft given the appella- 
 tion of fpirit, from a Latin word fignifying breath, 
 in the want of a better, becaufe thou haft no 1 idea 
 of it ? 
 
 See this grain of corn which I throw into the 
 ground, and tell me how it riles again to fhoot 
 forth a ftem with an ear? Inform me how the 
 fame ground produces an apple on this tree, and 
 a chefnut in that next to it : I could fill a folio 
 with fuch queftions, to which thy anfwer ought to 
 be, I know not. 
 
 And yet thou hall taken thy degrees, and wearefl: 
 a furred gown and cap, and art called mafter; and 
 there is another fool, who, priding himfelf upon a 
 
 K employment in fome paltry town, conceits that 
 is likewife purchafed the privilege of judging, 
 and condemning what he does not underftand. 
 
 Montaigne’s motto was, “ What do I know ?” 
 (Que fai-je?) and thine is, “What do I not know?” 
 £Que ne fai-je pas ?) 
 
 LOVE. 
 
 A MOR omnibus idem. Here we muft call in 
 the conftitution •, the ground is natural, and 
 embroidered by imagination. Shall I give you an 
 idea of love ? View the fparrows in thy garden ; 
 view thy pidgeons ; behold the bull led to thy 
 heifer ; look on that fpirited horfe, which two of 
 thy fervants are bringing to thy mare, who quietly 
 Waits his coming, and turns afide her tail to admit 
 
 him j 
 
IS A PHILOSOPHIC AL 
 
 him ; how his eyes glare, how he neighs •, obferve 
 how he prances ; his eredt ears, his cormilfed 
 mouth, his lnorting, his turgid nottrils, his fiery 
 breath ifiuing from them ; the flutterings of his 
 mane ; the impetucfitv with which he rufhes on 
 the object that’ nature has appointed for him: 
 but forbear-all jealoufy, and confider the advan- 
 tages of the human fpecies ; in matters of love 
 they make up for thofe which nature has given to 
 beads, drength, beauty, activity, and velocity. 
 
 There are even creatures ftrangers to fruition. 
 It is a delight of which fhell-fifh are deprived •, the 
 female ejedts millions of eggs on the flirne and 
 mud; the male, in pafiing by fecunda’es them by 
 his fperm, without troubling himfejf what female 
 they belong to. 
 
 ' Mod creatures in copulation receive pleafure, 
 only from one fenfe, and that appetite fatuficd, 
 fink into infe'nfibility. Thou alone or all animals 
 art acquainted with the warn) endearments of em- 
 braces ; thy whole body glows with ecftatic lenfa- 
 tions ; thy lips efpecially enjoy a moft fweet de- 
 light, without fatiety or wearinefs, and this deligh? 
 is peculiar to thy fpecies. Laftly, thou canft at 
 all times give thy felf to love ; whereas other crea- 
 tures have only a dated fcafon. Refledl: on theie 
 pre-eminences, and thou wilt fay with the earl of 
 Rocheder, “ Love would caufe the deity to be 
 worfhipped in a land of atheids.” 
 
 As it has been imparted to mankind to improve 
 the feveral gifts of nature, they have made improve- 
 ments in love. Cleanlioefs, or the care of one’s per- 
 form rendering the fkin fofter, increafes the plealure 
 of touch ; and attention to health adds a more ex- 
 quifite fenfibility to the organs of voluptuoufnefs. 
 
 All other fentiments combine with that of love, 
 as metals amalgamate with gold : friendfhip and 
 
 edeem 
 
 3 
 
DICTIONARY. 219 
 cfteem join to fupport it ; and the talents, both of 
 the body and mind, are additional ties. 
 
 “ Nam facit ipfa fuis interdum fmmina fa<5lis» 
 Morigerifque modis et mundo corpori cultu, 
 
 Ut facile inluefcat.fecum vir degere vitam.”* 
 
 Self-love efpecially adds force to the feveral 
 ties. We are enraptured with our choice, and a 
 crowd of illufions decorate that work, of which the 
 foundation is laid in nature. 
 
 Such is thy pre-eminence above other animals; 
 but if thou enjoyed: fo many pleafures withheld from 
 them; how many vexations are thy portion of 
 which beads have no idea ! One dreadful circum- 
 ftance to thee is, that, in three-fourths of the earth, 
 nature has infe&ed the delights of love and the 
 fource of life with a horrible diftemper, to which 
 man alone is fubjett, and in him affe&ing only the 
 organs of generation. 
 
 This contagion is not like many other diftem- 
 pers, the confequence ofexcefles; neither was it de- 
 bauchery which brought it into the world. Phryne, 
 flora, and iVleflalina, knew nothing of 
 it. It received its birth in iflands, where mankind 
 lived in innocence ; and thence it has fpread itfelf 
 into the old world. 
 
 If ever nature could be arraigned of negle&ino- 
 its work, of thwarting its own plan, and counter^ 
 afting its own views, it is here. Is this the bell 
 of the pofiible worlds ? What ! has Ctefar, An- 
 tony, Ottavius never had this diftemper ; and was 
 it not poffible that it fhould not prove the death of 
 £'rancis I. ? No, it is faid r things were fo ordered 
 for the belt ; I will believe fo, but that’s very me- 
 lancholy for thofe to whom Rabelais dedicaoed his 
 book. 
 
 
2 zo A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 
 SOCRATIC LOVE; 
 
 As it is called (F). 
 
 H O W could it be, that a vice, which if ge- 
 neral, w'ould extinguifh the human fpecies, 
 an infamous crime againft nature, Ihould be- 
 come fo natural ? It appears to be the laft degree 
 
 (F) The very ingenious and learned critics, known by the 
 vulgar name of the Monthly Reviewers, have palled a moft 
 fevere cenlure upon this whole article. “ We conceive, fay 
 “ they, it could only come from the pen of one of the molt 
 44 inconfiderate, diffolute, and abandoned of mankind. No- 
 46 thing can be more infamous than what is there advanced, 
 44 in palliation of the molt deteftable of all crimes. ,, But 
 nothing can be more falfe, than that our author attempts to 
 palliate this crime. Does not he fet out with affirming it to 
 be definitive of the human race, a debafement and viola- 
 tion of nature, and the higheft degree of corruption ? Is this 
 a palliation f or is it not rather a reprefentation of that in- 
 famous vice in the light it deferves. Whether he be 
 mifiaken in tracing its fource, we cannot pretend to af- 
 firm, not being fo well acquainted as thofe learned critics 
 with the pratices of the courts of juftice, nor with the 
 arts of thofe hypocritical monfiers, hackneyed in the ways 
 .of iniquity. But after all, this is a mere point of fpecula- 
 tion, not at all tending to immorality. He may be mif- 
 taken again, when he fays, that the Greeks never autho- 
 rized this vice, and that the Socratic Love was not infamous! 
 But thefe are hiftorlcal matters, concerning which men of very 
 great learning have differed in opinion. Our author, how- 
 ever, thinks the crime fo horrid and unnatural, that it could 
 never be authorized by any government ; fo that, infiead of 
 looking on this article of Socratic Love with the fame horror 
 as the Icrupulous Reviewers, we rather apprehend it to be one 
 of the leaf! exceptionable parts of the whole work. But as 
 JVIr. Dryden well obferves, much of ill nature and a very lit- 
 tle judgment, go far in finding the mifiakes of writers* 
 
 of 
 
DICTIONARY. • zzt 
 of rtfledive corruption •, and yet it is ufually found 
 in thofe who have not had time to be corrupted. 
 Ic makes its way into novice hearts, who are 
 ftrangers to ambition, fraud and a thirft after 
 wealth; it is blind youth, which at the end of child- 
 hood, by an unaccountable inftind, plunges itfelf 
 into this enormity. 
 
 The inclination of the two fexes for each other 
 declares itfelf very early ; but after all that has 
 been faid of the African women, and thofe of the 
 fouthern part of Afia, this propenfuy is much 
 ftronger in man than in woman. Agreeably to 
 the univerfal law of nature in all creatures, it is 
 ever the male who makes the firft advances. The 
 young males of our fpecies brought up together, 
 coming to feel that play which nature begins to un- 
 fold to them, in the want of the natural objed of 
 their inftind, betake themfelves to a refemblance 
 of fuch objeds. 
 
 It is nothing uncommoh for a boy by the beau- 
 ty of his complexion, and the mild fparkle of his 
 eyes for two or three years, to have the look of a 
 pretty girl : now the love of fuch a boy ariles from 
 a miflake in nature ; the female fex is honoured in 
 our fondnels for what partakes of her beauties, 
 and when fuch refemblance is withered by age, the 
 miftake is at an end. 
 
 
 
 
 
 citraque juventam 
 
 fEtatis breve ver et priraos carpere flores, 
 
 This miftake in nature is known to be much more 
 common in mild climates than am;dft the northern 
 frofts, the blood being there more fervid and the 
 occafion more frequent : accordingly, what feems 
 only a weaknefs in young Alcibiades, is in a Dutch 
 failor or a Ruffian futler, a loathfome abomination. 
 
 ' I can- 
 
222 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 I cannot bear that the Greeks fhould be charged 
 with having authorized this licentioufnefs. The 
 iegiflator Solon is brought in becaufe he has faid. 
 
 “ Thou (halt carefs a beauteous boy, 
 
 Whilft no beard his fmooth chin deforms.” 
 
 But who will fay that Solon was a Iegiflator at 
 Ltne time of his making thofe two ridiculous lines ? 
 He was then young, and when the rake was grown 
 virtuous, it cannot be thought that he inferttd luch 
 an mfamy among the laws of his republic : it is 
 like acculing Theodore de Beza of having -Reached 
 up pederafty in his church, becaufe, in his youth, 
 he had made verfes on young Candidus, and fays : 
 
 “ Ampledlor hunc et illam.” 
 
 Plutarch likewife is mifunderftood, who, amon» 
 his rants in the dialogue on love, makes one of the 
 Jpeakers fay, that women are not worthy of a ge- 
 nuine love } but another fpeaker keenly takes the 
 women’s part. 
 
 It is as certain, as the knowledge of antiquity 
 can be, that Socratic love was not an infamous 
 pallion. It is the word love has occafioned the 
 miltake. The lovers of a youth were exadly what 
 among us are the minions of our princes, or, for- 
 merly the pages of honour ; young gentlemen 
 who had partaken of the education of a child of 
 ran.<, and accompanied him in his ftudies or in the 
 held : this was a martial and holy inftitution, but 
 
 u was ioon abufed, as were the nofturnal feafls 
 and orgies. 
 
 The ' r °° P of lo vers inftituted by Laius, was an 
 invincible corps of young warriors engaged by 
 oath, mutually to laydown their lives for one ano- 
 ther t 
 
 
DICTIONARY. ‘223 
 ther ; and, perhaps, never had antient difcipline 
 any thing more grand and ufeful. 
 
 Sextus Empiricus and others may talk as long 
 as they pleafe of pederafty being recommended 
 by the laws of Perfia Let them quote the text of 
 the law* and even fhew the Perfian code, yet will 
 I not believe it *, I will fay it is not true, by reafon 
 of its being irrpoflible. I do aver that it is not in 
 human nature to make a law contradidlory and in- 
 jurious to nature ; a law which, if literally kept 
 to, would put an end to the human fpecics. The 
 thing is, icandalous cultoms being connived at* are 
 often miftaken for the laws of a country. Sextus 
 Empiricus, doubting of every thing, might as 
 welljdoubt of this jurilprudence. If living in our 
 days he had l'een two or three young jefuits fond- 
 ling fome fcholars, could he from thence fay that 
 this fporc was permitted them by the conftitutions 
 of Ignatius Loyola ? 
 
 The love of boys was fo common at Rome, that 
 no punilhment was thought of for a foolery into 
 whiqh every body run headlong. Oftavius Au- 
 guftus, that fenfualift, that cowardly murderer, 
 dared to banith Ovid, at the fame time that he was 
 very well pleafed with Virgil’s finging the beauty 
 and flights of Alexis, and Horace’s making little 
 odes for Ligurinus. Still the old Scantinian law 
 againft pederafty was in force : the emperor Philip 
 revived it, and caufed the boys who followed that 
 trade to be driven out of Rome. In a word, I 
 cannot think that ever there was a policed nation, 
 where the laws were Contrary to morality. 
 
 SELF- 
 
224 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 SELF-LOVE. 
 
 A B E G G A R, about the fkirts of Madrid, 
 ufed to afk alms with great dignity : one 
 palling by faid to him. Are not you afhamed to 
 lollow this feanda’ous trade, you who are able to 
 work ? Sir, anfwered the beggar, I afk you for 
 money and not for advice ; then turned his back 
 upon him with all the ftatelinefs of a Caftihan. Don 
 was a lofty beggar indeed, his vanity loon took 
 pet. He could afk alms out of felf-love •, and from 
 another kind of fell- love, would not bare reproof 
 A miffio'nary in India met a facquier loaded with 
 chains, as bare as an ape, lying on his belly, while 
 his countryman, at his requeft, was whipping him 
 forhisfins, and at the fame time dropping him fome 
 farthings. What felf-denial is this, what abafement, 
 faid one of the fpedtators. Self-denial, abafement! 
 anfwered the facquier ; I would have you to know, 
 that 1 confent to be flogged in this world, only to 
 give it you home in the other, when you fhail be 
 horfes and I the rider. 
 
 Thus they who have affirmed felf-love to be the 
 bafis of all our fentiments and all our aftions, are 
 much in the right, in India, Spain, and all the ha- 
 bitable parts of the earth ; and as there is no occa- 
 fion to demonftrate that men have a face, as little 
 need there is of proving to them that they are a£lu- 
 ated by felf-love. This felf love is the means of 
 our prefervation ; and like the inftrument of the 
 perpetuation of the fpecies, it is neceflary, it is 
 dear to us, it gives us pleafure, but ftill is to be 
 concealed. 
 
 LUXURY. 
 

 
 dictionary, 
 
 ■ 2*5 
 
 LUXURY. 
 
 F O R thefe two thoufand years part luxury has 
 reclaimed againd, both in verfe and 
 prole ; and dill mankind has always delighted in it. 
 
 What encomiums have been bellowed on the 
 primitive Romans, when thole banditti ravaged 
 their neighbours fields !• when, to increafe their 
 poor village, they defiroyed the poor villages of 
 the.Vollci and Samnites. They werte, to be lure, 
 men of a gloriods difinterellednels, and elevated 
 virtue! gold, filver, and jewels they never had 
 ftolen, becaufe there were no fuch things in the 
 towns which they pillaged ; their woods and fens 
 afforded no partridges nor pheafants; and their tem- 
 perance is cried up. 
 
 When having gradually plundered people after 1 
 people, front the Adriatic to the Euphrates!/ they had 
 lenle enough to fit down in the quiet enjoyment of 
 their rapine for feven or eight hundred years •, when 
 they cultivated every art and lived in everv plea- 
 lure, and even introduced them among thofe whom 
 they had conquered} then they are faid to have lpffc 
 both tiieir prudence and virtue. 
 
 The iubllanee of all thefe r declamations is to 
 prove, that a robber ought never to eat the dinner 
 he has taken away, nor wear the cloaths or rin^ 
 which he has ilolcn. Thofe things, fay the dt> 
 claimers, to keep themfelves honeit, they Ihould 
 have thrown into the river. Rather fay,' gentle- 
 men that they ought not to have robbed! exe- 
 crate tobbers as much as you pleale, but do not 
 call them madmen, for quictlv enjoying whac 
 they have got. Are thofe Engl’ilh to be blamed, 
 who, after filling their purles at the taking of Pon- 
 dicherry and the Havamia, made them fomething 
 
 Q lighter 
 
226 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 lighter amidft the diverfions of London, in amends 
 for the, hardfliips they .had undergone in Afia and 
 America ? 
 
 Would thofe declaimers have a man hury the 
 riches which he may have acquired by war or agri- 
 ' culture, by trade and ingenuity ? They quote La- 
 cedemon, and why do they not alfo quote the re- 
 public of Sr. Marino? What good did Sparta ever 
 do to Greece ? Did it ever produce a Demofthe- 
 nes, a Sophocles, an Apelles, or a*Phidias ? 
 •whereas the luxury of Athens gave rile to great 
 men of every kind. Sparta had fome good com- 
 manders, and yet not fo many as the other cities. 
 But we will allow fo petty a republic as Lacede- 
 mon to retain its poverty. Whether we live in 
 fcarcity, or in the affluent fruition of whatever 
 make9 life pleafant, we fhall one day come to our 
 journey’s end. The Canadian lives, and lives to 
 old age, as well as the Englifhman who has fifty 
 thoufand pounds a year ; but who will compare the 
 country of the Iroquois to England ? 
 
 That the republic of Raguia and the Canton of 
 Zug, make fumptuary laws, is right; the poor man 
 is not to fpend beyond his ability ; and I have read 
 fomewhere, 
 
 “ Luxury enriches the ample ftate, 
 
 Whilft the lefs profp’rous finks beneath its 
 weight.” 
 
 If by luxury you mean excefs, excefs in every 
 thing is certainly pernicious : in abflinence as in 
 gluttony, in parfimony as in liberality. I don’t 
 know how it comes to pafs that, in my villages, 
 where the foil is very indifferent, the taxes heavy, 
 the prohibition againft the exportation of grain into- 
 kubi/ rigid ; yet is there lcarce a- farmer, who is 
 
 ilOC 
 
DICTIONARY. £ 2 j 
 
 Jot wdl Cloathed and fed. But Ihould this farmer 
 ii How his rural occupations in his beft cioaths 
 clean hnnen, and his hair curl'd and powdered a 
 t reater piece of luxury there could not be, befide* 
 the rKirculoufneis of it : but for a citizen of Paris 
 
 farmer ‘u" a mrft° T lhe -P la y /ppareU’d like this 
 ftinginefs. 1 C W " lffl 3nd lndecent P iece of 
 
 hnof T° dU - ln rebus ’ funt certi deni ‘que fines, 
 Quos ultra citraque nequit confifiere redum.” 
 
 On the invention of Sciflors, which certairlv 
 does not belong to the nioft remote antiquity 
 doubtlels fevere were the declamations againft the 
 firft who pared their nails, and cropped 8 off parr 
 t err hair, which hung down to their nofe. To 
 be fare they were called fops and fpendthrifts, lay- 
 ng out then money for an iriftrument of vanity 
 to mar the creator’s work. What an enormity Jo 
 cut off the horn which God has caufed to "row a- 
 our fingers ends f it is an infult to the Deify. But 
 much worfe was it on tire firff appearance of fhirS 
 
 Madges 
 
 s. 
 
 I AM not going about to revive Erafmus’d' 
 treat) (e. Which in our times would be but -f 
 common place- book, and that none of the moff 
 entertaining. )OU 
 
 . B / 7 a 1 dnc u rs is rreant that diftemper of the dr- 
 ^ 0f thc bra,n ’ whlch neceflafily hinders a man 
 
 Q 2 ffdntf 
 

 228 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 from thinking and adting like others ; if unable to 
 manage his fubftance, a commifiion is iffued out 
 againlt him; if incapable of ideas fuitable to fa- 
 ciety, he is excluded ; if he be dangerous, he is 
 fhut up; and, if frantic, he is bound. 
 
 , An important obfervation here is, that this man 
 Is not without ideas; he has them, whilft waking, 
 like all other men, and often in his fleep. It may 
 be afked how his foul, being fpiritual and immor- 
 tal, and refiding in his brain, whither all the ideas 
 are conveyed to it by the fenfes very plain and dif- 
 tindt, yet never forms a right judgment of them. 
 It fees objedts equally as the fouls of Ariftotle, 
 Plato, Locke, and Newton ; it hears the fame 
 founds, it has the fame fenfc of the touch ; how 
 happens it then, that with the fame perceptions as 
 the wifeft men, it makes a wild incoherent jum- 
 ble, without being able to help it felf ? If this 
 fimple and eternal fubftance has the fame inftru- 
 ments for adting as the fouls of the wifeft brains, 
 it fhould reafon like them ; what can hinder it ? If 
 this madman fees red and the fenfible man blue ; 
 if when this hears mufic, the madman hears the 
 braying of an afs ; if when they are at church, the 
 madman thinks himfelf at the play ; if when they 
 hear yes, he hears no, I muft of neceffity conclude 
 that his foul muft think differently from the others. 
 But this madman has the like perceptions as they; 
 and there is no apparent reafon why his foul, having 
 through the fenfes received all its tools, cannot 
 make ufe of them. It is laid to be pure, to be, of 
 itfelf, fubjedt to no infirmity, to be provided with 
 all neceffary helps ; and whatever happens in the 
 body, its effence remains unalterable ; yet it is 
 carried in its cafe to Bedlam. 
 
 This refledtion may give rife to an apprehen- 
 fion, that the faculty of thinking, with which man 
 
 is 
 

 dictionary. 229 
 is endued, is liable to be difordered like the other 
 lenfes. A madman is a patient, whofe brain fuf- 
 fers •, as a. gou y man is a patient whofe feet and 
 hands fuffer ; he thought by means of the brain, as 
 he walked with his feet, without knowing any 
 thrng of his incomprehenfible power to walk, nor 
 >- 7 v of his no lefsQp.comprehenfible power to think. 
 v The brain may have the gout as well as the feet : 
 after all, let us argue ever fo long, perhaps it is 
 faith, a'one, which can convince us, that a fimple 
 and immaterial fubftance can be fick (G). 
 
 Some Do&ors will fay to the madman, Friend, 
 Tho’ thou haft no longer common fenfe, thy foul is 
 no lefs pure, fpiritual, and immortal than ours ; 
 but our foul is in good quarters, and thine other- 
 wife. The windows of its apartment are flopped 
 up ; and it is fti9ed for want of air. The mad- 
 man, in his calm intervals, would give them this 
 anfwer: This is always your v/ay, you are begging 
 the queftion ; my windows are as much open as 
 yours, I fee the fame objedls and hear the fame 
 words : fo that my. foul muft neceffarily either 
 make a bad ufe of its fenfes, or itfelf be but a vi- 
 tiated fenfe, a depraved quality. In a word, either 
 my foul is naturally mad, or I have no foul. 
 
 ~~ (G) Our author is all of a fudden a great ftickler for faith ; 
 
 but we are afraid it proceeds from his ignorance in philofo- 
 phy. The foul has its perceptions, it is true, by means of 
 the fenfes. But thefe perceptions may be impeded by bo- 
 dily indifpofition, or by an irregular conftru&ion of the in- 
 ternal or external organs. In that cafe it does not fee the 
 objects in the fame manner as the foul of Plato and Ariftotle ; 
 that is, it does not receive the fame perceptions ; and there- 
 fore it may be»faid to be fick and difordered as to the exercife 
 of its faculties. See the article SOUL, where the reader will 
 find the proofs of its being an immaterial fubftance. 
 
 Q-3 
 
 Od® 
 
* 
 
 230 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 One of the doftors will anfwer, Brother, Go4 
 may perhaps have created mad as well as wife 
 fouls. The madman will reply, To believe what 
 you fay, I mud be madder than I am. For God’s 
 fake, you who are fo very knowing, tell me wherer 
 fore is it that I am mad ? 
 
 If the deftors have any fenfe remaining, their 
 anfwer will be: We know not. Why a brain has in- 
 coherent ideas is above their comprehenfion ; and 
 they as little comprehend why, in another brain, 
 the ideas are regular and conne&ed. They will 
 fancy themfelves wife, and they are no lefs mad 
 than he. 
 
 MATTER (H). 
 
 W I S E men, on being aft ed what the fouj 
 is, anfwer, they are entirely ignorant of it- 
 aria if aflted what matter is, they give the like an- 
 fwer. 
 
 - (H) M. Voltaire pretends to give under this arthle the 
 
 opinions of the ancient philofophers in regard to matter, 
 which he does not however attempt to refute. Jt is fufficient 
 for him to know by faith that God drew matter out of no- 
 thing. He therefore fuppofes that the non-eternity of mat- 
 ter, or the creation of the world in time, is not to be de- 
 monftrated ftri&ly by bare reafoning ; but the proof of it can 
 he taken only from revelation. And herein perhaps he is 
 right. But he is grofsly miftaken in feveral other points, as 
 that, according to the light of reafon only, motion muft be 
 eftential to matter, and matter itfelf neceiTarily exiting. 
 Were motion eftential to matter, it would imply a contra- 
 ction in terms to fuppofe matter at reft, which is highly 
 abfurd. Then that matter is not neceiTarily felf-exifting, 
 evidently appears from the doctrine of a vacuum. Jt has been 
 demonftrated that all (pace was not filled with matter ; con- 
 fequently there muft be a vacuum, if fo, it is evidently 
 
 more 
 
DICTIONARY, 231 
 
 fwer. Profefiors indeed, and efpecially fchool- 
 men, are perfe&ly verfed in thofe things ; and 
 when they fay as they have been taught, that 
 matter is extended and divifiblc, tiiey fancy 
 that is all ; but when defired to tell what this 
 extended thing is, then they are hard put to it. 
 It is compoled of parts, lay they. And thefe 
 parts, of what are they compofed ? Are the ele- 
 ments of thofe parts divilible ? Then they are {Irucic 
 dumb or talk without end, which is equally fuf- 
 picious. [ his almoft unknown being called mat- 
 ter, is it eternal ? So ail antiquity believed. Has 
 it, of it felf, an adtive force ? This is the opinion 
 ot leveral philofophers. Have they who deny it, anv 
 luperior reai’on for their opinion ? You do not con- 
 ceive that matter can, intrinfically, have any property j 
 but how can you affirm that it has not intrinfically 
 i'uch properties as are necefiary to ic ? You know- 
 nothing of its nature, and yet deny it to have 
 modes, which refide in its nature : for, after all, 
 as matter exifts, it mult have a form and figure • 
 and being necefiarily figured, is it impoffible that 
 there are other modes annexed to its configura- 
 tion ? Matter exifts, this you know; but you know 
 it no farther than by your fenfations. Alas ! what 
 avail all fubtilcies and fophifms, fince reaibning has 
 been in vogue ? Geometry has taught us many 
 truths, and metaphyfics very few. We weigh, we 
 
 more than poiiible for matter not to be; therefore it is not a 
 necefiary being. And fome may anfwer, that matter may be 
 necefiary, though not necefiary to be every where ; but this is 
 infinitely abfurd ; for if it be no impoflibility for matter to 
 be abfent from one place, it is no abfolute impoflibility, in the 
 nature of the thing, that matter fhould be abfent from any 
 other place, or from every place. See Dr. Clarke on the Be- 
 ing and Attributes of God, and WollafWs Religion of Na- 
 £ure Delineated. 
 
 Q. 4 meafure. 
 
23 ? A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 meafure, we analyfe, we decompound matter; but 
 on offering to go a flep beyond thefe rude opera- 
 tions, we find ourfelves bewildered, and an abyfs 
 opens before us 
 
 Forgive, I intreat you, the miflake of the whole 
 univerle, in believing matter feif-exiftent. How 
 could they do otherwife ? how could they conceive 
 that, what is without fucceffion has not always 
 been ? were the exigence of matter not neceffary, 
 why exifts it ? and if it was to cxift, why fhould it 
 not always have exifled ? never was axiom more 
 univerfally received than this : nothing produces 
 nothing. The contrary indeed is incomprehenfible: 
 all nations have held their chaos anterior to the 
 divine difjjiofitio'n of the world. The eternity of 
 matter never was known to do any hurt to the 
 woffhip of the Deity. Religion never took offence 
 at an eternal God’s being owned as the matter of 
 an eternal matter ; ic is the happinefs of our times 
 to know by faith, that God drew matter from no- 
 thing ; an article, which no nation had been in- 
 formed of: the very Jews know nothing of it. The 
 fidt verfe of Genefis lays, that the gods Elo'im, and 
 not Eloi, made heaven and earth ; it does not 
 fay that heaven and earth were created out of no- 
 thing. 
 
 Philo, who came at the only time when the 
 Jews had any erudition, fays, in his chapter of the 
 creation, “ God being naturally good, did not 
 “ envy fubftance or matter, which of itfelf had 
 “ nothing good, which naturally is nothing but 
 “ inertnefs, confufion, and diforder ; but from bad 
 
 as it was, he condelcended to make it good.” 
 
 The opinion of the chaos being arranged by a 
 deity is to be met with in all the ancient theogonies. 
 Hefiod, in faying, “ the chaos was firft in exiftence,” 
 delivered the thoughts of the whole eaft; and Ovid 
 
 declared 
 
DICTIONARY. ^ 
 
 declared the fentiments of the Roman empire in 
 the following verfe : 
 
 “ Sic ubi difpofitam quifquis fuit ille deorum 
 
 Congeriem fecuit.” 
 
 Matter therefore was looked on in the hands of 
 God as clay under the potter’s wheel; if fuch faint 
 images may be ufed to exprefs the divine power. 
 Matter being eternal ffiould have eternal proper- 
 ties, as configuration, the inert power, motion, and 
 divifibility. But this divifibility is no more than 
 the confequence of motion, as without motion 
 there can be no divifion, reparation, nor arrange- 
 ment •, therefore motion was looked on as efien- 
 tsal to matter. 1 he chaos had been a confufed mo- 
 tion ; and the arrangement of the univerle was a 
 regular motion, imprefied on all bodies by the 
 Sovereign of the world. But how fhould matter of 
 itfelf have motion ; as, according to all the an- 
 {ients, it has extenfion and impenetrability? 
 
 It cannot, however, be conceived without exten- 
 fion, and it may without motion. To this the anfwer 
 was, it is impoffible but matter muft be perme- 
 able ; and if permeable, fomething muft be con- 
 tinually palling into its pores ; where is the ufe of 
 palfages, if nothing pafies through them ? 
 
 I here would be no end of replying : the fyftem 
 of the eternity of matter has, like all other fyftems, 
 very great difficulties. That of matter formed out 
 of nothing is not lefs incomprehenfible. It mull 
 be admitted, without flattering ourfdves to ac- 
 count for it ; philofophy does not account for 
 every thing. How many incomprehenfible things 
 are admitted, even in geometry itfelf! can you 
 conceive two lines ever approaching to each other, 
 and never meeting ? 
 
 Geome- 
 
$34 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 Geometricians, indeed, will tell us, the proper- 
 ties of the afymptotes are demonftrated to you, 
 lo that you cannot but admit them ; the creation 
 is not, wherefore then do you admit it ? what diffi- 
 culty do you find to believe, with all antiquity, 
 the eternity of matter? On the other hand, the 
 divine pufiies you, and fays, that in believing the 
 eternity of matter, you make two principles, God 
 and matter, and fall into the error of Zoroafter 
 and Manes. 
 
 The Geometricians lhall go without an anfwer, 
 for they pay no regard to any thing but their lines’ 
 their furfaces, and their folids ; but to the divine 
 it may be faid, how am I a manichee ? There is 
 an heap of Hones which no architedf has made, 
 but with them he has built a vaft edifice. Here 
 I do not admit of two architects * only the rough 
 Itones have fubmitted to the operations of power 
 and genius. 
 
 Happily, which ever fyftem be efpoufed, mo- 
 rality is hurt by neither; for what fignifies ir, 
 whether matter be made or only arranged > God 
 is equally our abfolute mailer. Whether the 
 chaos was only put in order, or whether it was 
 created of nothing, ftill it behoves us to be vir-: 
 tucus : fcarce any of thefe metaphyfical quellions 
 have a relation to the condufl of life ; difputes 
 are like table-talk, every one forgets after dinner 
 what he has faid, and goes away where his intertft 
 and inclination lead him. 
 
 MESSIAH. 
 
 M ESSIAH or Mefhiah in Hebrew, Chrifi: 
 tos or Celomenos in Greek, UnClus in 
 Latin, fignifies anointed. 
 
 We 
 
dictionary. 23 * 
 
 We fee in the Old Teftament that the name of . 
 Meffiah was often given to idolatrous, or infidel 
 princes. God is laid to have fent a prophet to 
 anoint Jehu king of Ifrael ; he fignified the facred 
 unflion to Hazael king of Damafcus and Syria, 
 thofe two princes being the Meffiahs of the moft 
 high to pumfh the houfe of Ahab. 
 
 In the 45' h of Ilaiah, the name of Meffiah is ex- 
 prelsly given to Cyrus. “ Thus hath the Lord 
 laid to his anointed (his Meffiah) whofe right hand 
 I have holden to fubdue nations before him.” 
 
 Ezekiel, in the twenty-eighth chapter of his Re- 
 velations, gives the appellation ofMefliah to the king 
 ofTyrus, whom he alfo calls Cherubin. Son of man 
 
 lays the eternal to the prophet, lift up thy voice and 
 utter a lamentation concerning the king of Tyrps; 
 and fay unto him, thus faith the Lord, the eternal, 
 toon waft the feal of the likenefs of God, full of 
 wifdom, and perfect in beauty : thou waft the Lord’s 
 garden of Eden ; or, according to other verfions. 
 Thou waft the Lord’s whole delight. Thy var- 
 ments were of fardonix, topaz, jafper, chryfolite, 
 onyx, beryl, fapphire, carbuncle, emerald, and 
 §old. What thy tabrets and thy flutes could do 
 was within thee ; they were all ready on the day 
 thou waft created; thou haft a cherubim, a Meffiah. 
 
 This title of Meffiah, or Chrift, was given to 
 the kings, prophets, and high-priefts among the 
 Hebrews. The Lord and his Meffiah are witnefs, 
 
 1 Kings, chap. xii. ver. 3. that is, the Lord and 
 tne king whom he hath fet up; and elfewhere, 
 touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no 
 harm. David, who was divinely infpired, in more 
 tnan one place gives the title of Meffiah to Saul 
 his rejected father-in-law, who perfecuted him. 
 Lod forbid, fays he frequently, that I ftiould lay 
 my hand on the Lord’s anointed, the Meffiah of 
 P° d - The 
 

 236 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 AsthenameofMefiiah,oranointedof the Eternal, 
 has been given to idolatrous kings and reprobate 
 perfons, very often has it been ufed to indicate the 
 true anointed of the Lord ; the Mefiiah, by way of 
 excellence, the Chrift, the Son of God ; laftly, God 
 himfelf. 
 
 If all the oracles ufually applied to the Mefiiah, 
 were to be compared, it may give rife to fome 
 Teeming difficulties, and which the Jews have 
 made ule of to juftify their hardnefs of belief and 
 obftinacy, did it admit of an apology ? Several 
 eminent divines allow, that the Jews, groaning un- 
 der an oppreffive flavery, and having fo many re- 
 peated promifes from the Eternal, might well long 
 for the coming of a Mefiiah, who was to deliver 
 them and fubdue their enemies; and that they are 
 in fome meafure, excufabie for having not imme- 
 'diately perceived Jefus to be this deliverer and 
 conqueror. 
 
 It was agreeable to the plan of eternal wifdom, 
 that the fpiritual ideas of the real Mefiiah fhould 
 be unknown to the blind multitude ; arid fo far 
 were they unknown, that the Jewifh doctors have 
 denied that thofe pafiages which we produce, are fo 
 be underftood ,of the Mefiiah. Many affirm that 
 the Mefiiah is already come in the perfon of He- 
 zekiah ; and this was the famous Hillel’s opinion. 
 Others, and thefe are many, fay, that the belief 
 of the coming of a Mefiiah, fo far from being a 
 fundamental article of faith, was only a comfort- 
 able hope, noJTuch thing being mentioned in the 
 Decalogue, or in Leviticus. 
 
 Several Rabbins tell you, that they do not in 
 the lead quell ion the Meffiah’s being come at the 
 time decreed ; that he is not however growing old, 
 but remains in the world concealed, and waits till 
 Ifrael fhall have duly celebrated the Sabbath, to 
 reveal himfelf. The 
 
DICTIONARY. 237 
 
 The famous Rabbi, Solomon Jarchy or Rafchy, 
 who lived in the beginning of the twelfth century, 
 fays, in his Talmudics, that the antient Hebrews 
 believed the MelTiah to have been born on the very 
 day of the final deftruftion of Jerufalem by the 
 Romans. This anfvvers to the common faying, 
 of fending for the doctor when a man is 
 dead. 
 
 The rabbi Kimchy, who alfo lived in the twelfth 
 century, preached that the Mefiiah, whole coming 
 he imagined to be at hand, would drive the Chrif- 
 tians out of Judea, which was then in their pofieftion. 
 The Chriftians,' indeed, were difpoffeHed of the 
 Holy Land ; but this was done by Saladin ; and had 
 that conqueror taken the Jews under his protec- 
 tion, it is very probable thar, in their cnthufiafm, 
 they would have made him their Mefiiah. 
 
 The facred authors, and our Lord Jefus him- 
 felf, often compare the Mefiiah’s reign, and the 
 eternal beatitude, to a wedding and banquet •, but 
 thefe parables have been ftrangely wrefted by the 
 Talmudifts. According to them, the Mefiiah 
 will gather together all his people in the land of 
 Canaan, and give them an entertainment, where 
 the wine will be that which Adam himfetf made 
 in the earthly Paradife, and which he keeps in valt 
 cellars, dug by angels in the center of the earcH. 
 
 The firlt courle will be the famous fifh called 
 the great Leviathan, which at once fwallows 
 a filh, lefs than itfelf ; yet it is three hundred 
 leagues in length •, and the whole mafs of waters is 
 fupported on this Leviathan. God at firft created 
 a male and a female ; but, left they might overturn 
 the earth, or crowd the univerfe with their off- 
 fpring, he killed the female and faked it down 
 for the Mefiiah’s banquet. 
 
 The 
 

 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 The Rabbins add, that there will likewife be 
 killed the bull called Behemoth, of fuch a monf- 
 trous fize, that every day it ears the herbage of a 
 thoufand mountains. This bull’s female was flairi 
 at the beginning of the world, to prevent the mul- 
 tiplication of fuch prodigious fpecies, which mult 
 have been extremely detrimental to other crea- 
 tures but they fay, that the Eternal did not fait 
 if, cow’s flelh not being fo good faired as that of 
 the female Leviathan. So firmly do the Jews be- 
 lieve all thefe rabbinical chimeras, that it is com- 
 mon among them to fwear by their lhare of the 
 Behemoth. 
 
 With fuch coarfe ideas concerning the comin" 
 of theMefiiah and his reign, is it to be wondered at° 
 that the Jews, both ancient and modern, and feveraf 
 even of the firft Chriftians, unhappily prepofTeffed 
 wrth all thele reveries, could not raife their con- 
 ceptions to the idea of the divine nature of the 
 Lord’s anointed, or perceive God in the Mefiiah ? 
 See the lentiments of the Jews concerning this, in 
 a work, intitled, Judrei Lufitam queftiones ad 
 Chrittianos, Queft. i, 2, 4, 2j. “ To acknow- 
 ledge a man God, fay they, is impofing on one’s 
 ielf, it is forming a monfter, a centaur, the ftrange 
 compound 01 two natures incompatible with each : 
 other. Adding, that the prophets never taught 
 the Mefiiah s being Man-God ; that they exprelsly 
 uiftmguifii between God and David ; that they 
 plainly declare the former to be matter,' and the 
 latter lervant, &c. 
 
 It is iufficiently known that the Jews f rvilely 
 adhered to the letter of the fcriptures, never like 
 us, penetrating into the Ipirit. 
 
 When the Saviour appeared, the r rcjudicecf 
 Jews declared againft him. And Jems G.rift h:m- 
 «lf, that their blindnefs might not be too much 
 
 irritate § 
 
DICTIONARY. 2 & 
 
 irritated, Teems extremely referved in the article of 
 his divinity, meaning, fays St. Chrylbdom, inlen- 
 fibly to accuftom his hearers to believe a myftery To 
 very much above bare rcafon : his afiuming the di- 
 vine prerogative of pardoning fins, fhoeked all the 
 bye-danders •, his molt m an if e It miracles convinced 
 not even thofe for whofe relief they were operated, 
 that he was'Gotl. When with a rnoded circumlo- 
 cution, he owned himfelf theSon of God before the 
 high pried’s judgment feat ; the high pried, filled 
 with indignation, rent his cloaths, and cried out 
 Biafphemy ! Before the million of the Holy Ghod, 
 the apodles themfelves had not the lead apprehen- 
 sion of their mader’s divinity ; he afks them what 
 the people think of him ? and their anfwer is,- that 
 fame took himfor Elias, others for Jeremiah, or Tome 
 other prophet-, and it was by a particular revela- 
 tion that St. Peter knew Jefus to be the Chrid, 
 the Son of the living God. 
 
 The Jews being irreconcilably Vandalized at 
 the divinity cf Jeius, have lerc no done unturned 
 to explode it ; perverting the fenfe of their own 
 oracles, or - not applying them to the Meffiah. 
 They affirm that the name of God, Eloi, is not pe- 
 culiar to the Deity ; and that it is by facred au- 
 thors given to judges, to magidrates,' and in ge- 
 neral to all pedohs in authority: they do indeed 
 quote a great number of paflages, which counte- 
 nance this obfervation, but without in the lead in- 
 validating thofe drong and clear terms of the ancient 
 oracles, which manitedly relate to the Mefliah. 
 
 Ladly, fay they, if the Saviour, and after him, 
 the evangeiids, the apodles, and primitive Chrii- 
 tians did call Jefus, Son of God ; this augud term 
 in the gofpel-times imported no more than the 
 contrary to the fens of Belial, i. e. a good man, a 
 
 fervanc 
 
2 4 o A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 fervant of God, in oppofition to a wicked man, dt 
 to one who does not fear God. 
 
 The Jews, befides denying Chrifl: his quality of 
 Melliah, and his divinity, have omitted nothing 
 to render him contemptible, expofing his birth, 
 life, and death, with all the ridicule, virulence, 
 and contumely, which their guilty rancour could 
 fuggeft. 
 
 Of all the works which Jewilh blindnefs has 
 produced, none in extravagance and impiety ex- 
 ceed the antient book, intitled, Sepher Toldos 
 Jefchut, which has been refcued from the worms 
 by M. Vagenfeil, in vol. ii. of his work,’ called, 
 Tela Ignea. 
 
 This Sepher Toldos Jefchut has a moft fhocking 
 hiftory of the life of our Saviour, forged with the 
 utmoft falfity and malice : for inftance, they have 
 dared to write, that one Panther or Pandera, who 
 dwelt at Bethlehem, feduced a young woman 
 married to Jochaman ; and the fruit of this foul 
 commerce was a child, whom they named Jefus or 
 Jefu. The father being obliged to fly the place, 
 withdrew to Babylon. As for young Jefus, he 
 was fent to fchool •, but, adds the author, he had 
 the infolence to raife his head and uncover him- 
 felf before the priefts, contrary to the ufage, which 
 was to appear in their prefence with the head 
 hanging down and the face covered; a petulance 
 for which he received a fmart check : this occafion- 
 ing an enquiry into his birch, it was confequently 
 found to be impure, and he became expofed to 
 public ignominy. 
 
 That deteftable book, Sepher Toldos Jefchut, 
 was known fo early as the fecond century ; Celfus 
 cites it with exultation, and Origen in his ninth 
 chapter confutes it. 
 
 4 
 
 Jhere 
 
DICTIONARY. 2 *§ 
 
 . There is another book which likewife bears the 
 tide of Toledos Jefu, publiffied in 1705 by M. 
 Huldric, which is more confonant with the evan- 
 gelical hiftory of our Saviour’s birth, but fwarms 
 with the grofieft anachronifms and other errors. Ic 
 makes (Thrift to have been born and have died un- 
 der Herod the Great ; and affirms, that the com- 
 plaint of Panther’s adultery with Mary the mother 
 of Jefus, was brought before that prince. 
 
 The author, who calls himfelf Jonathan, and if 
 his word m^y be taken, was cotemporary with 
 thrift, and lived at Je.-ufalem, affirms that Herod, 
 relatively to Jefus thrift, confulted the fena- 
 tors of a city in the land of Ccfarea > but fach an 
 abfurd author, with all his contradidtions, we fhall 
 leave to himfelf. 
 
 Thefe calumnies, however, ferve to foment the 
 implacable hatred of the Jews againft the Chrif- 
 tians and the gofpel ; fo that they have ftuck at no- 
 thing to falfify the chronology of the Old Teftar- 
 ment, and to fpread doubts and difficulties abouc 
 the time of our Saviour’s coming. 
 
 Ahmed-ben Caflum-al Anacoufy, a Moor of 
 Grenada, who lived towards the dole cf the fix- 
 teenth century, quotes an ancient Arabic manU- 
 feript, found in a cave near Grenada, together 
 with fixteen fheets of lead, on which fome tales in 
 Arabic characters were engraved v Don Pedro y 
 Quinones, archbiftvp of Grenada, has certified this 
 fact. 7 he!e famous Grenadian fheets have been fince 
 carried to Rome, where, arctran examination offe* 
 veral years, they were at laft condemned as apo- 
 cryphal under the Pontificate of Alexander VII. 
 Their contents are only fome fabulous tales con- 
 cerning Mary and her Ion. 
 
 The name of Meffiah, joined to the epithet of 
 falfe, is likewife given to thofe impoftors, who, at 
 
 K fever*! 
 
226 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 fevsral times, have made it their buftnefs to cfe> 
 ceive the Jewilli natron. Some of thefe falle 
 Meffiahs fet up even before the coming of the true- 
 anointed of God. The wife Gamaliel, Ads chap, 
 v. ver. 34, &c. mentions one named Theudas, 
 whole hiliory is to be found in Jofephus’s Anti- 
 quities, b. 20. chap. 2. He boafted that he could 
 pal's the Jordan dry footed, and was joined by con- 
 liderable numbers-, but the Romans, coming to an 
 adion with his raw men, foon difperfed them-, and 
 taking the chief prifoner, fet up his head in Jeru- 
 fal^m. 
 
 • Gamaliel further fpeaks of Judas the Galilean, 
 dcubtlefs the fame whom Jofephus mentions in the 
 twelfth chapter of the fecond book of his Jewilh 
 wars. He fays that this falfe prophet had got to- 
 gether near 30,000 men but the Jewilh hitlorian 
 is noted for hyperboles. 
 
 So early as the apoftolic times, Simon, furnamed 
 the Magician, made his appearance -, and to luch 
 a degree had he feduced the people of Samaria, 
 that they accounted him the power of God ; Ads- 
 chap. viii. ver. 9. 
 
 In the year 178 and 179 of the Chriftian aera-, 
 Adrian being then emperor, the falfe Meffiah, 
 Barchochebas, afierted his pretenfions at the head of 
 an army. Julius Severus, being lent againft him, 
 hemmed in the infurgents at the city of Bither, 
 which after an obftinate fiege he carried -, and Bar- 
 chochebas being taken, was put to death. Adrian, 
 as the belt expedient for preventing the continual 
 revolts of the Jews, iflued an edit! againft their 
 going to Jerufalem -, and even guards were polled 
 at the city gates to ke-p them out. 
 
 Socrates, an ecclefiaftic hiftotian, book 2. ch. 
 38. relares, that in the year 434, a falfe Meffiah 
 ftaatd up in the ifland of Candia, under the name 
 
tjr 
 
 DICTIONARY. 22> 
 
 of Mofcs, and as the ancient deliverer of the He 
 
 taFaSr ,hc dcad to 
 
 M ?' h " al cn . m P’ 5JO. ftw in PaleBine a falfe 
 to rh ’ na 7' ed J uIian » he recommended himfelf 
 
 head “• a «: eat COn ‘l ,, " 0 ''> ^ « he 
 
 S °L h “ "TV deflroy all Chriftians 
 
 natever ; and the Jews were fo far feduced by his 
 
 promifes, that they ran' fo arms, and mafiacred 
 SsT berS ofChriftian ^ The emperor Juf- 
 
 Ssirfsssr 8 him * thc fa,fei chM ' «- 
 
 a SDan!£ b T eSin » nR /r the f iRh,h <*“«/. Serenus. 
 abpamft Jew flood for the Meffiahlhip, preached 
 
 ZtfT d followers ’ buc ^e upfliot was, that 
 both foHowers and leader came to a miferable end. 
 
 ? C '] tl,ry produced ^veral falfe 
 Memghs, particularly one in France under Lewis 
 the Younger ; but both he and his adherents were 
 hanged, without fo much as the names of matter or 
 difciplcs bemg known. 
 
 falllU ^^"th ^tury was ftill more fertile in 
 a.c Meffiahs; of thefe the more remarkable were 
 feven or eight who appeared in Arabia, in Perfia, 
 
 hinfnfn an ^ ^ ravia: one of them who ftiled 
 himfelf Dav,d el Re, is reckoned to have been a 
 
 very great magician ; his artifices fo far fucceeded 
 with the Jews, that he law himfelf at the head of 
 
 n a ^ r - d T b u ? arty * but Chis fair P r o f P^ termi- 
 nated in his being murdered. 
 
 3 Moravian > w ho lived in the 
 middle of the 1 6 th century, promulgated the ap- 
 proach of the Mefiiah’s manifeftation, alluring the 
 people that this Mefiiah had been born fourteen 
 
 Stra^n^ i!’ andt . hat he had feen him at 
 
 otrafbourgh } and he carefully kept a fword and a 
 
 ^ 2 feepter, 
 
$ 
 
 123 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 Icepter, to put into his hands when he Ihould be or 
 age to teach. 
 
 In the year 1624 another Zieglerne confirmed 
 
 the former prediction. c 
 
 In the year 1666 Zabathei Sevi, a native of 
 Aleppo, gave himfelf out to be the Meffiah, fore- 
 told by the Zieglernes. He began by preaching 
 in the highways and fields, and while his difciplts 
 admired him, 'the Turks laughed at him. It ap- 
 pears that at firft his preaching had no very ex- 
 traordinary fuccefs, for the chiefs of the Smyrna 
 fynagogue went fo far as to pronounce ientence of 
 death againft him ; but his punifiiment was miti- 
 gated to exile. . . 
 
 He contracted three marriages without contum- 
 mating any, faying it was beneath hinh. He took 
 a partner named Nathan Levi, who was to aCt the 
 part of Elias, as the Meffiah’s harbinger. 1 hey 
 repaired to Jerufalem, and Nathan there preached 
 up Zabathei-Sevi as the deliverer of the nations. 
 The Jewifh populace declared for him, whim they 
 who had any thing to lofe anathematized him. 
 
 Sevi, to fhun the fiorm, withdrew to Conltan- 
 tinople, and from thence to Smyrna : Nathan Levi 
 deputed to him four ambafiadors, who, befides ac- 
 knowledging his dignity, did him homage pub- 
 licly as Meffiah ; this embaffy dazzled the common- 
 alty and even fome doCtors, who declared Zaba- 
 thei-Sevi, Meffiah, and king of the Hebrews •, but 
 the Smyrna fynagogue condemned their king to be 
 
 impaled. , r c 
 
 Zabathei put hirpfdf under fne cadi of Smyr- 
 na’s protection, and loon had on his fide the who.e 
 Tewifh people ; he even had two thrones let up, 
 one for himfelf and the other for his favourite 
 fpoufe, affuming the title of king of kings : his 
 
 brother Sevi he created king of Jucah and to 1 ie 
 
 Jews 
 
 / 
 
dictionary. 229 
 
 Jews themfelveshe gave the moftpofitiveaffurances, 
 
 that the Ottoman empire fhould foon be their 
 own ; in the height of his infolence, he had the em- 
 peror’s name {truck out of the Jewifh Liturgy, 
 and his own fubftituted in its ftead. 
 
 He was confined in the cattle of the Dardanelles, 
 and the Jews gave out that his life was fpared, only 
 becaufe the Turks very well knew him to be im- 
 mortal. The governor of the Dardanelles made a 
 great fortune by the prefents which the Jews poured 
 on him for leave to vifit their king, their Mettiah, 
 who in his fetters maintained his dignity, and 
 even the ceremony of kitting his feet. 
 
 The Sultan, however, who then kept his court 
 at Adrianople, was for putting an end to this farce; 
 and fending for Sevi told him, that if he was the 
 Mettiah, he mutt be invulnerable. This Se\ i allow- 
 ed ; but on the grand feignior’s ordering him to be 
 placed as a mark for his icoglans or pages to dif- 
 charge their arrows at, the Mettiah owned that he 
 was not invulnerable, and protefted that God fent 
 him only to bear teftimony to the holy Maho- 
 metan religion. After undergoing a (evere flagel- 
 iacion by the minifters of the law, he turned Ma- 
 hometan, and lived and died defpifed both by 
 Jews and Muflulmen. This adventure has brought 
 the profettion of a falfe Mettiah into fuch diire- 
 pu:e, that fince Sevi nobody has taken it up. 
 
 metamorphosis. 
 
 Metempsychosis. 
 
 I S it not very natural that all the various meta- 
 morphofes with which the earth may be faid 
 to be covered, fhould have led the orientals, whole 
 imagination is lo luxuriant, to imagine that our 
 
 R 3 fouls 
 
230 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 fouls parted from one body to another ? An almoft 
 imperceptible point grows to be a worm, and this 
 worm becomes a butter-fly; an acorn changes to 
 an oak, an egg to a bird ; water becomes clouds 
 and thunder ; wood is turned into fire and alhes : 
 in a word, all nature is more or leis a metamor- 
 phofis. Souls being accounted tenuous forms, 
 were foon concluded to partake of that property, 
 which was fenfibly feen in more denfe and heavy 
 bodies. The metempfychofis is perhaps the moft 
 antient dodtrine in the known world, and ftill pre- 
 vails in a great part of India and China. 
 
 It is likewife very natural that thofe antient 
 fables, collected and embellilhed by Ovid in his 
 admirable work, took rife from the feveral meta- 
 morphofes with which our eyes are converfant. 
 The very Jews have not been without their meta- 
 morphofes. IfNiobewas changed into marble, 
 Hedith, Lot’s wife, was turned into fait. As Euri- 
 dice was detained in hell for looking back, a like 
 indifcretion coft Lot’s wife her human nature. The 
 country town in Phrygia where lived the hofpitable 
 Baucis andPhilemon, is changed intoa lake ; the fame 
 iubmerfion has befallen Sodom. Arius’s daughters 
 turned water into oil; the Scripture mentions a 
 change fomething fimilar, but more facred and real. 
 Cadmus was turned into a fcrpent, and the like was 
 * feen in Aaron’s rod. 
 
 The pagan deities very often artumed a human 
 difguife ; and when angels appeared to the Jews, it 
 was always as men ; with Abaham they partook 
 of a repaft. Sc. Paul, in his epiftle to the Corin- 
 thians, fays, that the meflenger of Satan cuffed 
 him : Ayyihos 'S.a.Ta.va. y.i 
 
 MIRACLE. 
 
I 
 
 dictionary. 
 
 231 
 
 MIRACLE (I). 
 
 A Miracle, in the energetic fenfe of the word, 
 means fomething wonderful; and thus 
 •every thing is a miracle. The order of nature, 
 
 the 
 
 (() As our author does not abfolutely deny the poflibility 
 of miracles, but acknowledges thole which have been ope- 
 rated in favour of our holy religion by Chrift and his apoftles ; 
 lie cannot be charged on that account with infidelity. But 
 viewing the matter in a philofophic light, and abftrad- 
 mg fiom faith, he ftarts feveral doubts, which had he dealt 
 wnh candour, he pught to have folved. Hefcems to have boi- 
 rowed great part of this article from the Eflayon Miracles 
 written by the learned hiftorianMr. Hume, whom he imitates 
 in his cant language of refting our holy religion on faith, and 
 not on reafon ; a tcft which he fays it is by no means fitted 
 to endure. 
 
 It has been the praaice of modern delfts to deny the pcf- 
 fibihty of miracles m general: obferving that the frame and 
 order of the world is preferved according to fixed laws or 
 rules in an uniform manner, they weakly conclude, that 
 there are in matter certain necefiary laws or powers, the refult 
 of which they call the courfe of nature ; this they think 
 ampoffible to be changed, and confequently that there can be 
 no miracle. But if they would confider things duly, they 
 would find that lifelefs matter is utterly incapable of obeying 
 any laws, or of being endued with any powers ; and there- 
 fore what they call the courfe of nature can be nothing 
 more than the arbitrary will and plsafure of God, attine 
 continually upon matter, according; to Certain rules of uni- 
 formity and proportion. Hence it follows, that it is alto^e- 
 ther as eafy to alter the courfe of nature, as to preferve it. 
 Thofe effefts which arc produced in the world regularly and 
 constantly, and which we call the works of nature, prove the 
 conftunt providence of the Deity: thofe which upon any ex- 
 traordinary occafion are produced in fuch a manner, as it is 
 immfeft they could neither have been done by any power or 
 prt of man, nor by what we call chance ; thefe undeniably 
 
 ^ 4 prove 
 
2 3 2 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 the rotation of a hundred millions of globes 
 round a million of fups, the aaivity of light, the 
 life of animals, are perpetual miracles. 
 
 According to the received notion, however, a 
 miracle is a violation of the divine and eternal 
 laws. An eclipfe of the fun and moon, a dead 
 man walking two leagues with his head in his 
 hands, are what we call a miracle. 
 
 Several naturalifts affirm that, in this fenfe, there 
 are no miracles \ and their arguments are thele : 
 
 A miracle is a breach of the mathematical, di- 
 vine, immutable, eternal laws ; now this definition 
 alone makes a miracle a contradi&ion in terms A 
 law cannot be both immutable and broken ; but it 
 is anlwered, Cannot a law of God’s making be fuf- 
 pended by its author? They boldly anlwer, no; and 
 it cannot be that the infinitely wife Being lhould 
 
 prove to us the immediate interpofition of the Peity, in order 
 to fignify his pleafure cn that particular occafion. The true 
 definition therefore of a miracle, as the learned Dr. Clarke 
 obferves, is ^ a work effected in a manner different from the 
 “ common method of Providence, by the interpofition of 
 “ the Deity, for the proof of fome particular doftrine, or in 
 €t atteftation to the authority of fome particular perron/' In 
 this fenfe the miracles which the difciples of Chrift faw him 
 perform, were a compleat demonftration to them, that he 
 had truly a divine commiflion, as it was certain that God would 
 not himfelf interpofe'in the ufual order of nature, to lead men 
 into a neceffary and invincible error. Thefe miracles were 
 worked to atteil a do&rine, that tended in the higheft degree 
 to promote the honour of God, and the general reformation 
 of mankind. This is an anfwcr to all the queries of the 
 philofophers in the following article, and is a fufficient rea- 
 fon for the miracles recorded in the Scriptures, in fupport of 
 the true religion. With regard to fuch as are faid to have 
 been performed fince the eftablifhment of Chriftianity, that 
 is another queftion, which we leave to the antagonifts of the 
 late Dr. Middleton to fettle. 
 
 have 
 
DICTIONARY. 2 3j 
 
 Iiave made Jaws, and afterwards break them. If, 
 £ay they, he made any alteration in his machine, ic 
 would be to make it go the better i now it is clear, 
 that God has framed this immenfe machine as 
 good as it poffibly could be ; if he faw that any 
 imperfection would hereafter be occafioned by the 
 nature of the materials, he at firft provided againft 
 any fuch future defeCt, fo that there would be no 
 caufe for any after-change. 
 
 Befides, Ood can do nothing without reafon ; 
 now what reafon fhould induce him to. disfigure his 
 own work for any time ? 
 
 It is for man’s fake, fay their opponents. It is to 
 be hoped then, anlwer they, that it is for the fake 
 of all men, it being impoffible to conceive that the 
 divine nature fhould work for lome particular men, 
 and not for all mankind : and even all mankind 
 is bur a very little thing ; lefs than an ant’s neft 
 in comparifon of ail the beings which fill the im- 
 menfity of fpace. Now what can be more low and 
 ablurd, than to imagine that the infinite Being 
 will, for the fake of three or four hundred ants on 
 that little clod of mud, fufpend or alter the eternal 
 play of thofe immenfe fprings on which depends 
 the motion of the univerfe. 
 
 But fuppofing that God had been pleafed to dif- 
 .tinguifh a fmall number of men by particular fa- 
 vours, mud he therefore alter what he has fettled 
 for all times and all places ? He certainly can fa- 
 vour his creatures without any fuch inconftancy 
 and change ; his favours are compriled in his very 
 laws; every thing has been wifely contrived and 
 arranged for their good ; and they all irrevocably 
 obey the force which he has originally implanted 
 in nature. 
 
 Wherefore is God to work a miracle ? to ac- 
 pomplifh a deiign he has for fome living beings l 
 
 that 
 
234 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 that is making God to fay, I have not been able* 
 by the fabric of the univerfe, by my divine decrees, 
 by my eternal laws, to compafs iuch adefign: I 
 fee I muft make an alteration in my eternal ideas, 
 my immutable laws, as what I intended cannot 
 be executed by thofe means. This would be an 
 acknowledgment of weaknefs, not a declaration of 
 power ; it would be the moll inconceivable con- 
 tradiction. So that to fuppofe God works any 
 miracles is, if men can infult God, a downright 
 infult to him ; it is no lefs than faying to him. You 
 are a weak and inconfiftent Being. Therefore to 
 believe miracf-s is an ablurdity; it is, in fome rnea- 
 fure, fcandalizing the Deity. 
 
 A farther reply to theie philofophers is. Your 
 crying up the immutability of the Supreme Being, 
 the eternity o: his laws, with the regularity of his 
 infinite worlds, fignifies nothing ; our fmall heap of 
 dirt has been covered with miracles-, in hiftory prodi- 
 gies are as frequent as natural events. The daugh- 
 ters of the high-prieft Anius changed whatever they 
 would into, wine or oil ; Athalida, daughter to 
 Mercury, rofe from the dead feveral times ; Efcu- 
 lapius-reftored Hypolitus ; Hercules delivered 
 Alceftes from death ; heroes returned upon earth 
 afcer flaying a fortnight in the infernal regions; 
 Romulus and Remus were the ilTue of a god and a 
 veftal ; the Palladium dropped from Heaven into 
 the city of Troy ; Berenice’s treffes became a con- 
 iteliation •, Baucis and Philemon’s hut was changed 
 to a {lately temple ; Orpheus’s head uttered oracles 
 after his death ; the walls of Thebes were formed 
 before numbers of Greeks, by (tones moving of 
 themlelves to the found of a flute ; innumerable* 
 cures were performed in Efculapius’s temple ; and 
 we have (till monuments with the names of ocular 
 yvitnefies to his miracles, 
 
 Name , 
 
DICTIONARY. z 35 
 
 Name me one nation where incredible prodigies 
 have not been performed, efpecially in times when 
 reading and writing were little known. 
 
 All the anfwer unbelieving philofophers give to 
 thefe objections is a Ineer and a Ihrug ; but thofe who 
 profefs Chriltianity lay. We make no doubt of the 
 miracles wrought within our holy religion ; yet it is 
 by faith we believe them, and not by reafon ; as for 
 the latter we turn the deaf ear to it; for we know 
 that when faith fpeaks, reafon is to be mute : the mi- 
 racles of Jefus Chrift and his apoftles we are fully 
 and firmly perfuaded of ; but allow us to doubt a 
 little of feveral others; indulge us, for inftance, 
 in fufpending our judgment concerning what is 
 related by a weak man (K), who yet has-been fur- 
 named the Great. He affirms that a Jittle monk 
 got fuch a cuftom of working miracles, that, at 
 kngtb, thefprior forbad him to exercife his fuper- 
 natural talent. The monk conformed to the or- 
 der, but one day feeing a bricklayer falling from 
 the roof of a houfe, he hefitated between monaf- 
 tjcal obedience and charity in laving the poor man’s 
 life, and only ordering him to remain in the air till 
 he got orders, he rap to acquaint the prior with 
 the cafe. The prior gave him abfolution for the 
 fin of beginning a miracle without leave, and al- 
 lowed him to go through with it, but -never to do 
 the like again. It is granted to philofophers that 
 this ftory may be a little, miftrufted. 
 
 But it is again faid to them, How will you dare 
 to deny that St. Gervafe and St. Protais appeared ip 
 a dream to St. Ambrofe, and informed him of the 
 place where their reliques lay; that St. Ambrofe 
 had them taken up; and that a blind man was 
 
 (K) Gregory the Great. 
 
 cured 
 

 i Z 6 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 cured by them ? St. Auftin was then at Milan, and 
 it is he who relates this miracle in Book XXII. of 
 his City of God, and that it was performed “ im- 
 menfo populo telle.” Here is a m racle with every 
 circumftance of proof. Philofophers, however, fay, 
 that they believe nothing at all ofGervale andPro- 
 tais appearing; that to know where the remains of 
 their carcafes lie, is a thing of no concern to man- 
 kind and that they give no more credit to 
 that blind man than toVefpafian’s ; that it is an ufe- 
 lefs miracle; that God does nothing ufelefs ; and 
 in a word, they abide immoveable by their prin- 
 ciples. My regard for St. Gervafe and Sc. Protais 
 will not allow me to fide with thole philolophers; 
 I only give an account of their incredulity. They 
 are vaflly fond of a paffage of Lucian in the death 
 ofPeregrinus, “ a dexterous juggler turning Chrif- 
 tian is lure of making his fortune but Lucian is 
 a profane author, and, of courfe, fhould be of no 
 weight among us. 
 
 Thefe philofophers cannot bring themfelves to 
 believe the miracles of the fecond century, though 
 eye-wirneffes have in writing declared, that the 
 bifhop of Smyrna, Sr. Policarpe, having, purfuant 
 to the fentence palled on him, been thrown into a 
 blazing fire, they heard a voice from heaven call- 
 ing out, “ Chear up, Policarpe, be ltrong in the 
 Lord, and (hew thy felf a man at which the flames 
 of the pile drawing back from his body, formed a 
 fiery canopy over his head, and out of the pile flew 
 a dove ; at laft they were obliged to cut off the good 
 bilhop’s head. To what purpofe was this miracle? 
 fay unbelievers ; how came it that the flames de- 
 viated from their nature, and the executioner’s ax 
 had the natural effedl ? how is it that fo many 
 martyrs, aftefToming fafe and found out of boil- 
 ing oil, have fallen under the edge of the fword ? 
 
DICTIONARY. 237 
 
 The ufual anfwer is, that J'uch was God’s will ; 
 fcut philofophers will believe no fuch thing, unlefs 
 they had feen it with their own eyes. 
 
 They who improve their reafonings by ftudy, 
 will tell you that the fathers of the church have 
 ihemiclves often owned that miracles were ceafed 
 in their time. St. Chryfoftpm fays exprefsly, 
 “ '1 he extraordinary gifts of the fpirit were 
 “ given even to the unworthy, becaufe the church 
 “ then flood in need of miracles ; but at prefenc 
 “ they are not fo much as given to the worthy, 
 “ the church no longer Handing in need of them.” 
 Afterwards he acknowledges that there was no- 
 body then who railed the dead, or fo much as cured 
 the Tick. 
 
 St, Auftin himfelf, as if he had forgot the mi- 
 racle of Gervafe and Protais, fays in his City of 
 God, “ Why are thofe miracles, which were per- 
 *' formed fome time ago, at prefent ceafed ?” 
 and he gives the fame reafon, “ Cur, inquiunt, 
 nunc ilia miracula quae praedicatis fafla efle, non 
 hunt? Pofiem quidem dicere, neceflaria priusfuifle, 
 quam crederet mundus, ad hoc ut crederet mun- 
 dus.” 
 
 It is dbjedlea' to the philofophers, that St. Au- 
 ftin, notwithftanding this avowal, fpeaks of an old 
 cobler at Hippo, who having loll his cloak, went 
 to pray for relief at the chapel of the Twenty 
 Martyrs, and in his return home found a fifii, in 
 the body of which was difcovered a gold ring; the 
 cook who d refled it giving it to the cobler, laid. 
 There is a prefent for you from the Twenty 
 Martyrs. 
 
 l'o this the philofophers anfwer, that in that 
 fiory there is nothing contrary to the laws of na- 
 ture; that a fifn may very naturally have fwallov. ed 
 
A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 a gold ring ; and that there is no miracle in tfi<5 
 cook’s giving that ring to the cobler. 
 
 . ^ ^ le philofophers are put in mind that, accord- 
 ing to St. Jerom, in his Life of the hermit Paul, 
 this devout perfon had feveral converfations with 
 fatyrs and fauns •„ that a raven for thirty years to- 
 gether daily brought him half a loaf for his din- 
 ner} and a whole loaf the day St. Anthony paid 
 him a vifit } they may (1:11 reply that nothing of all 
 this is abfolutrly contrary to nature ; that fatyrs 
 and fauns may have exifted; and that, after all, if 
 this ftory be a puerility, that does not in the lead 
 affed the real miracles of our Saviour and his apof- 
 tles. Several good Chriftians have rejebted the 
 ftory of St. Simeon Stilites, written by Theodoret : 
 many miracles accounted authentic in the Greek 
 church have been queftioned by Latin writers j 
 fo in return, Latin miracles have been fufpedted 
 by the Greeks ; in procefs'of time came the Pro- 
 teftants, who have made very free with the miracles 
 of both churches. 
 
 A learned Jefuit (L) who preached a long time 
 in the Indies, complains, that neither his' brethren-' 
 nor he could ever perform one Angle miracle. 
 Xavier, in feveral letters, laments bis not having 
 the gift of tongues : he. fays that he is but as a 
 dumb image among the Japonefe ; yet, according 
 to the narrative of the Jefuits, he reftored eight dead 
 peribns to life, and that is a great many •, but it 
 muft withal be confidered, that the feene of thofe 
 reiterations was fix thoufand leagues off. Some 
 perfons of later times make the fuppreflion of the 
 Jefuits in France a much greater miracle than all 
 thofe of Xavier and Ignatius put together. -Be 
 
 that 
 
 (L) Ofpinian, p 230, 
 
DICTIONARY. 239 
 
 that as it may, all Chriftians hold the miracles of 
 Jefus Chrift and his apoftles to be indifputably 
 true and real, but allow that fome miracles of our 
 modern times, and which are without any certain 
 authenticity, may very well be doubted of. 
 
 It were to be wifhed, that for the legal verifica- 
 tion of a miracle, it fhould be performed before 
 the Academy of Sciences at Paris, or the Royal 
 Society, and the College of Phyficians at London, 
 with a detachment of the guards to keep off the 
 people, whofe tumultuous indifcretion might hin- 
 der the performance of the miracle. 
 
 A philofopher was one day afked what he would 
 fay if the fun (hould (land ftill, that is, if the mo- 
 tion of the earth round that body ceafed; if all the 
 dead arofe ; and if all the mountains went and 
 threw themfelves into the fea-, and all this tb prove 
 fome important truth, we will fuppofeverfatile grace. 
 What I (hould fay, anfvvered the philofopher, I 
 would turn Manichee, and fay, that there is a prin- 
 ciple which undoes what the other has done. 
 
 MOSES. 
 
 I T (M) has been the groundlefs opinion of many 
 learned men that the f’entateuch cannot have 
 been written by Mofes. They fay that, according to 
 
 the 
 
 (M) So fond is our author of paradox, that in the follow- 
 ing article he fuppofcs Mofes not to have been the author of 
 the Pentateuch, or the five books commonly attributed to 
 that legiflator, viz. Genefis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, 
 and Deuteronomy. It is true, as he acknowledges thofc books 
 to have been written by an infpired writer, it is not efientiai 
 to religion, whether Moles was the author of them or not. 
 
 But 
 
c 4 0 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 the fcripture itfelf, the firft known copy was founc? 
 in the time of king Jofias, and that this only copy 
 
 But for the fake of hiftorical truth, we fhall give a few re- 
 marks on this fubjeft. The Pentateuch was called the law by 
 way of excellence, becaufe the principal part of it contained 
 the law which Mofes had received from God on Mount Si- 
 nai. Now it can hardly be queftioned but this legillator was 
 the’ author of the Pentateuch, if we attentively confider the 
 24th chapter of Exodus and the 31ft of Deuteronomy. In 
 the former, it is exprefsly faid, “ And Mofes wrote all the 
 “ words of the Lord;” in the latter, “ And Mofes wrote this 
 €C law, and delivered it unto the priefts, the fons of Levi 
 Again, “ And it came to pafs when Mofes had made an end 
 of writing the words of this law in a book until they were 
 “ finilhed Bcfides,.all antiquity, both lacred and profane,- 
 acknowledges Mofes to have been the legiflator of the Jews. 
 That whole nation has always carefdlly preferved his books, 
 and looked upon them as containing their law. When the 
 tribes were divided into two kingdoms, both of them prefei ved 
 the fame relpe£t for thofe books as being written by Mofes. 
 Prophane authors have fpoken of thofe books, as penned by 
 the fame legiflator. In fliort, it is as certam that the books 
 which go by the name of Moles are his own, as that thofe 
 aferibed to Thucydides and Livy, &c.mppertain to thofe whofe 
 names they bear. It is pollible there may have b^pp lome ad- 
 ditions and alterations made in them; but the oody of the 
 hiftory and the laws could not be altered, ^hus the death 
 of Moles is clearly mentioned in the laft chaptlto of Deuterc*'- 
 nomy ; whence it is* probable, that either Jofhua or Efdras 
 added the eight laft verfes of that book ; though Jofephus 
 pretends that Mofes, finding his diflolution approaching, wrote 
 thofe lines himfelf, in order to certify his death atj toMii d of 
 his books, left the Jews, from too great a regard mM me- 
 mory, fhould deny his death, ..and give out that he nau been 
 tranllated into Heaven. Notwithftanding this evidence of 
 Moles’s being the author of the Pentateuch, fome late wiiters,, 
 as Pere Simon and Le Clerc, have efpoufed the contrary opi- 
 nion of Hobbes 'and Spinofa, which feems alfo to be adopted 
 by M. Voltaire. The difficulties ftarted by thofe writers may 
 appear plaufible at firft fight, but are fully refuted by M. du 
 Pin, in his preliminary difiertation to the Bible, to which we 
 refer the reader* 
 
 
dictionary. 2 57 
 
 v/as brought to the king by Saphan the fcribe.; 
 Now the interval from Mofes to this circumftance 
 of Saphan the fcribe, according to the Hebrew 
 computation, makes a fpace of ii 6 y years; for 
 God appeared to Mofes in the burning-bufh in the 
 year of the world 2213, and Saphan the fcribe 
 blade public the book of the law in the year of the 
 world 33^°* This book, which had been found 
 tinder Jofias, was unknown till the return from 
 the captivity of Babylon ; and Efdra's is faid, by 
 divine infpiration, to have brought to light all the 
 facred writings. 
 
 But whether Efdras or any other was the com. 
 piler of this book, is abfoliitely a matter of indif- 
 ference, admitting its being infpired. The Pen-. 
 tateuch ; does not fay that Mofes was the author of 
 it ; fo that it might, without profanenefs, be at- 
 tributed to any other lacred penman, if the church 
 had not pofitively decided, that this book was writ- 
 ten by Mofes. 
 
 Some adverfaries add, that no prophet has quot- 
 ed any of the books of the Pentateuch ; that not 
 the leaft mention is made of it in the Pfalms; in' 
 the books, attributed to Solomon ; nor in Jeremiah, 
 nor in Ifaiah ; nor, in a word, in any canonical 
 book of the Jews. Then the words anfwering to 
 thofe of Genefis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, 
 Deuteronomy, are not to be found in any other 
 book received as authentic by that nation. 
 
 Others more fanguine have put the following 
 tjueftions : * 
 
 1. In what language could Mofes have written 
 in a wildernefs ? It could be only in the Egyp- 
 tian, for, from this vfery book it is clear, "that 
 Mofes and his whole people were born in Egypt, 
 and very probably acquainted with no other’lan- 
 
 S guage. 
 
2 5 8 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 guage. The Egyptians were yet ftrangers to the 
 ufe of the papyrus ; they had their hieroglyphics 
 cut in marble and wood *, the very tables of the 
 commandments are laid to have been engraved on 
 {tone : fo that here were five volumes to be engra- 
 ved on polifhed {tones j a work of prodigious time 
 and labour ! 
 
 2. Is it probable that in a wildernefs, where the 
 Jewifli people had neither (hoemaker nor taylor, and 
 where the God of the univerfe was obliged to work 
 a continual miracle to preferve their old cloaths 
 and fhoes, they fhould have among them perfons 
 of fuch {kill as to engrave the five books of the 
 Pentateuch on marble or wood ? It will be laid 
 that workmen were found among them who could 
 make a golden calf in one night, and afterwards 
 reduce the gold to duft; (an operation beyond the 
 {kill of common chemiftry, an art not yet invented) 
 who could build the tabernacle, adorn it with thirty- 
 four brafs pillars, with filver chapiters*, who wove 
 and embroidered linen veils with hyacinth, pur- 
 ple, and lcarlet : but this very thing {Lengthens 
 the advCrfaries opinion, and they rejoin that it is 
 not in nature that fuch curious works Ihould have 
 been made in a dcfert, and under the want of every 
 thing *, that {hoes and coats would have been the 
 things to have begun with*, that people wanting 
 neceffaries fcarce think of luxury ; and that to fay 
 they had founders, engravers, carvers, dyers, em- 
 broiderers, when they had not fo much as cloaths, 
 l'andals, nor bread, is grofs and palpable contra- 
 diction. 
 
 3. ff Mofes had written the firft chapter of Ge- 
 nefis, would the reading of that chapter have been 
 forbidden to all young people ? would the legi- 
 llator be treated with fuch difregara ? had it been 
 Mofes who faid that God punilhes the iniquities of 
 

 C‘ 
 
 T 
 
 
 dictionary. 2j5 
 
 •he fathers to the fourth generation, would Ezekiel 
 have prefumed to lay the contrary ? 
 
 con 4 r'rS L eviticus > ™u1d he have 
 
 fi? k ? d himfeIf m Deuteronomy ? Leviticus 
 
 r ryins a brother ’ s wi,e ’ 
 
 5 - Would Mofes have fpoken of towns which 
 were not known in , time ? Wou , d hfi have fajd 
 
 that towns which, relatively to him lay eaft of Tor- 
 dan, were weft of that river ? 7 J 
 
 6. Would he have aftigned to the Levites fortv- 
 £e lg ht towns in a country which never had ten 5 and 
 
 hnnr W i dCrnefs „ W i ,ere he had - never fo much as ‘a 
 noule during all his wanderings? 
 
 7- Would he have laid down rules for the Tewilli 
 
 b ,r S hk Whl ? *?" Pe ° ple n0t ° n) y had no kings, 
 but abhorred th em , and there was no probabili^ 
 
 that they would ever have any? How! would Mofes 
 have given precepts for the conduct of kings, who 
 did not come nil about five hundred years after him. 
 and fay nothing concerning the judges and high 
 Fiefts, his immediate fucceffors ? Does not this ' 
 reflection incline one to believe, that the Penta- 
 teuch was written in the time of the Kings ; and 
 
 tradirional" Cm0nieS mftkuted Mofes were only 
 
 8. Is it poffible that he*lhould fay to the Tews 
 ye were fix hundred thoufand men when I brought 
 you out of the land of Egypt under the protection 
 of your God ? Would not the Jews have anfwer- 
 ed ? Then you muft have been a faint-hearted 
 creature not have led us againft Pharoah ; he had 
 not an army of two hundred thoufand men to op- 
 
 &,/fA neVe J r 5 ad f ° man y men °n foou 
 
 we fhould eafily have defeated him, and made our- 
 leJves matters of his country, flow 1 the God, 
 who ipeaks to you, has, to pleafe us, killed all the 
 
 S 2 fir ft- 
 
 
 
 
 
a6o A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 firft-born in Egypt; and if that country contained 
 three hundred thoufand families, there’s three hun- 
 dred thoufand men carried off in one night to re- 
 venge us ; and you have not feconded your God. 
 You have not given us that fruitful country which 
 was likewife defencelefs. You made us come out 
 of Egypt like thieves and poltroons, that we might 
 perilh in wiidernefles among rocks and precipices : 
 you might at leaft have led us by the diredt way 
 into that land of Canaan, to which we have no 
 right (N), and which you promifed us, but have 
 not yet brought us thither. 
 
 It was natural that from the land of Golhen, we 
 fliould have taken the way towards Tyre and Si- 
 don along the Mediterranean; but you have made 
 us traverfe almqft the ifthmus of Suez,, have 
 brought us again into Egypt as far as beyond 
 Memphis, and behold we are now at Bel-Sephon 
 on the Red Sea, with the land of Canaan behind 
 us, after a march of fourfcore leagues in that very 
 country which we were for ftiunning; and, after all, 
 in imminent danger of perilhing either by the fea 
 or Pharoah’s army. 
 
 Had your intention been to deliver us up to our 
 enemies, what other meafures could you have 
 taken ? God, you fay, has faved us by a miracle, 
 the fea opened to let us pafs through ; but, after 
 fuch kindnefs, fhould you have brought us to die 
 with hunger and wearinefs, in the horrible defens 
 of Ethan, Kadefli-Barnea, Mara, Elim, Oreb, and 
 Sinai ? All our fathers perifhed in thofe dreadful 
 wiidernefles, and after forty fuch calamitous years. 
 
 . — (N) Mr. Bachiene, gographer to the prince of Orange, 
 
 has, in his Sacred Geography, proved the Ifraelites right to 
 the land of Canaan, 
 
 4 
 
 yot* 
 
dictionary. 2 6t 
 
 you come and tell us, that God took particular 
 care of our fathers. 
 
 This is what thofe murmuring Jews, thofe per- 
 verfe children of vagabond fathers, who died in the 
 delerts, might have faid toMofes, had he read Exo- 
 dus and Genefis to them : and what ought they 
 not to have laid, and even to have done, on account 
 of the golden calf ? How ! you dare tell us that 
 your brother made a golden calf for our fathers, 
 whilft you v/as with God on the mount ; you who 
 fome times fay, that you fpoke to God face to face, 
 and fometimes that you could only fee his hinder 
 parts. Well, but you was with God, and your 
 brother call a golden calf in one day, and fet it 
 up for us to worlhip •, but inftead of punifhing your 
 worthlefs brother, you make him our high prieft, 
 and order your Levites to Hay three-and-twenty 
 thoufand of your people. Would our fathers have 
 tamely luffered this ? Would they have let them- 
 lelves been knocked down by fanguinary priefts 
 like lb many vi&iins. You farther tell us, as if 
 this butchery was not fufficient, that another time 
 you ordered twenty-four thoufand of your poor 
 followers to be maffacred, becaufeone of them had 
 lain with a Midianite, and you yourfelf married a 
 Midianite •, and after this, you add, that you are 
 the meekeft of all men. A few more fuch meek 
 procedures would have made an end of man- 
 kind. 
 
 No, had you been capable of fuch cruelty, had 
 you beeji able to carry it into execution, you would 
 have been the moll barbarous of men it would 
 have been fo enormous a guilt, that no punilh- 
 ment could have been equal to it. 
 
 Thefe are pretty nearly the obje&ions made by 
 the learned to thofe who hold Mofes to have been 
 the author of the Pentateuch. But thefe rejoin, 
 
 S 3 that; 
 
262 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 that tbs ways of God are not like thofe of men ; 
 that God, by a vvifdom unknown to us, has tried 
 and alternately protected and forfaken his people •, 
 that the Jewsthemfelves, for above two thoufand 
 years, have univerfally believed Mofes to be the au- 
 thor of thofe books ; that the church, which has fuc- 
 ceeded to the fynagogue, and is endued with the 
 like infallibility, has decided this point of contro- 
 veriy ; and that the learned fhould keep filence, 
 when the church fpcalcs. 
 
 PETER 
 
 I N Italian Piero, or Pietro ; in Spanish Pe- 
 dro, in Latin Petrus, in Greek Petros, in 
 Hebrew Cepha. 
 
 How comes it that Peter’s fuccefiors have had 
 fo much power in the weft and none in the eaft ? 
 This is a {king why the bifhop of Wurtzburg and 
 Saltzburg have in troublefome times afltimed royal 
 prerogatives, whilft: the Greek bifhops have re- 
 mained fubjeds. Time, opportunity, and the am- 
 bition of fome, and the weaknefs of others, do 
 every thing in this world, and ever will. 
 
 To thele troubles was added opinion, and opi- 
 nion rules men ; not that they in reality have a very 
 determinate opinion, but they are ds tenacious of 
 words, 
 
 II is related in the Gofpel, tnat Jefus laid to 
 Peter, “ I will give thee the keys of the kingdorn 
 « of heaven.” The fticklers for the bifliop of 
 Rome maintained, about the eleventh century, 
 that he who gives the greater gives the lefs ; that 
 the heavens encompafied the earth; and that Peter, 
 having the keys of the containing, had alfo the 
 keys of the contents. If by the heavens we mean 
 gll the ftars and all the planets, then the keys given 
 
DICTIONARY. 263 
 
 to Simon Bar-jona, furnamed Peter, were a pajfe- 
 par-tcut. If by the heavens are meant the clouds 
 the atmofphere, the ether, the fpace in which the 
 planets roll, there are few iock-fmiths, fays Meur- 
 fins, who can make a key to luch doors. 
 
 In Paleftine, keys were a wooden peg fattened 
 with a leathern • thong Jefus fays to Bar-jona, 
 
 J Vhat tho11 ftalt bind on earth fhall he bound in 
 “ heaven.” From this the pope’s theologians 
 have inferred, that the popes are invelfed with a 
 power of binding and loofening fubjefts from the 
 oath of allegiance to their kings, and of difpofin^ 
 °t all kingdoms at their pleafure : a notable infe^ 
 rence indeed 1 The commons at a general attembly 
 of the Faces of b ranee in 1302, in their petition 
 to the king, fay, “ that Boniface VIII. was a 
 “ Scoundrel,” believing that God bound and im- 
 priloned in heaven all whom Boniface bound on 
 earth. A famous German Lutheran (I. think it 
 was Melancthon) could hardly believe that Jefus 
 Ihould have laid to Simon Bar-jona, Ceoha or Ce- 
 phas, “ Thou art Pete^ and on this rock, will I 
 “ build my church.” He could not conceive that 
 God had made ufe of fuch a play of words, fo very 
 extraordinary a pun, and that the pope’s power 
 was founded on a quibble. r 
 
 Peter.has been thought the firft bifhop of Rome- 
 but it is fufficiently known that then, and for a Ion? 
 time after, there was no particular tee. • It was not 
 till towards the end of the fecond century, that the 
 Chriftians were moulded into a regular body. 
 
 It is pofiible that St. Peter went to Rome; it is 
 even pofiible that <he was crucified with nis’head 
 downwards, though that was not cuttomary; but 
 of all this we have no proof. A letter, bearing 
 his name, is ftill extant? in which he favs that he is 
 at Babylon. Judicious canonifts will have this 
 Babylon to mean Rome; fo that had lie daced his 
 « S 4 letter 
 

 25 4 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 letter from Rome, it might have been inferred that 
 the letter had been written from Babylon : fuch 
 inferences are of a long Handing ; and thus it is 
 that the world has been governed. 
 
 A very pious man, who had been exorbitantly 
 Jmpofed on at Rome in relation to the purchafe of 
 a benefice, a practice, yvhich is called fimony, being 
 afked whether he thought that Simon Peter had 
 ever been in that country, anfwered, I fee no marks 
 of Peter’s having been there, but I am very cer- 
 tain Simon was. 
 
 As to Peter’s perfon, Paul is not the only one 
 who has taken offence at his behaviour : both he 
 and his fucceffors have often been withftood to 
 their face. St. Paul keenly reproached him for 
 eating prohibited meats, as pork, puddings, 
 hare, eels, &c. Peter, in juftification of himleif, 
 alledged that, about the fixth hour, he had fecn 
 the heavens opened, and a large table-cloth full of 
 eels, beafts, and birds defending from the four 
 quarters of the heavens ; and that the voice of an 
 angel called out, “ Kill and eat.” Probably, fays 
 Wolafton, it was ( the fame voice, which has called 
 to fo many popes, “ Kill every body, and eat up 
 the people’s lubftance.” 
 
 Cafaubon could not approve Peter’s beyaviour 
 to Ananias and his wife (O), who were a good 
 
 (O) The punifhment of Ananias and Sapphira might ap T 
 pear very fevere for a fault, which does not feem at firft fight 
 to be confiderable ; but the offence was grievous, fince they 
 made fo flight of lying to the Holy Ghoft. For it is thought 
 by fbme eminent writers, that they had taken an oath not to 
 referve any thing to themfelves ; but to devote their eftates 
 to the common ufe of the faithful. Their crime therefore 
 was a kind of perjury and facrilege : and it was feverely pu- 
 nched, becaufe it was requifile in the beginning to give fanc- 
 tion to the laws of Chriltianity. 
 
 fort 
 
DICTIONARY. 265 
 
 Sort of people: What right, fays he, had a Jew, 
 a flave under the Romans, to order or allow 
 all who believed in Jefus to fell their fubftance, 
 and lay the produce at his feet. Were an Ana- 
 baptift preacher at London to order his brethren 
 to bring him all their money, would he not be taken 
 up as a mover of fedition, a robber, and as fuch 
 fent to Tyburn ? Was it not a horrid thing to 
 flrike Ananias dead, only becaufe out of the 
 money for which he had fold his eftate, he fecret- 
 ly referved a few pounds againft a rainy day, bring- 
 ing the far greater part to Peter. Scarce was the 
 breath out of Ananias’s body, when in comes his 
 wife. Peter, inftead of kindly informing her that 
 he had juft killed her hulband for keeping a few 
 pence, and celling her to take care of what fhe had, 
 allures her into the fnare. He alks her whether her 
 Jiufband had brought in all his money for the 
 faints; the poor woman anfwers, yes, and inftantly 
 drops down dead. Something-hard this ! 
 
 Corringius afks why Peter, who thus demolifhes 
 thofe who brought him alms, did not rather go and 
 Jcill all the dodtors who had a hand in putting Jefus 
 to death, and had caufed himfelf to be fcourged 
 feveral times. Fie, Peter, to kill two Chriftians 
 who had brought you a good purfe of money ; and 
 they who crucified yourUod, you allow to live! 
 
 It is to be fuppofed that Corringius, when he 
 put forth thefe bold queftions, was not in a coun- 
 try lubjedt to the inquifttion. Erafmus has con- 
 cerning Peter a pretty fingular remark, that the 
 head of the Chriftian religion began his apoftle- 
 fhip by denying Jefus Chrift; and the high priefi: 
 of Judaifm began his miniftry by making a golden 
 calf, and worihipping it. 
 
 However it be, Peter is tranfmitted to us as 
 poqr, and humbly inftru&ing the poor ; he is like 
 
 thofe 
 
2 66 'A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 thofe founders of orders who lived in indigence, 
 but whofe fucceffors are become great men. 
 
 The pope, St. Peter’s fuc'ceffor, has both won 
 and loft : hovfever, he has ftill remaining, in the 
 feveral parts of the world, befides his immediate 
 fubjects, about fifty millions of people, who in 
 m any articl es acknowledge his laws. 
 
 To have a maftcr three or four hundred leagues 
 from one’s home-, to forbear thinking till that man 
 fhall have feemed to think ; not to dare to try defi- 
 nitively a procefs between our fellow-citizens, but 
 by commiflioners of this foreigner’s nomination; to 
 tranfgrefs the laws of one’s country, by which a 
 perfon is reftrained from marrying his niece, and 
 yet to render this a legitimate marriage, by giv- 
 ing a ftill more confiderable fum to that foreign 
 mafter •, not to dare take poffeffion of any 
 fields or vineyards-. conferred by one’s own fove- 
 reign, without paying a large fum to this foreign 
 mafter ; not to dare plough one’s grounds on a 
 day appointed by a foreigner for commemorating 
 an unknown perfon, whom he has placed in hea- 
 ven by his own private authority ; thefe are the 
 advantages of acknowledging a pope; thefe are the 
 liberties of the Gallican church. 
 
 Other nations there are who carry fubmifiion ftill 
 farther. "We have in our times feen a fovereign 
 aflc the pope leave to bring to a trial, in his royal 
 court of juftice, fome monks acculed of regicide, 
 fail in his follicitations for leave, and not dare to 
 try thofe wretches. 
 
 It is well known that, formerly, the popes 
 power was ftill of greater extent. They were much 
 fuperior to the gods of antiquity ; for thofe deities 
 were only imagined to difpofe of empires, but the 
 popes difpofed of them in reality. 
 
 Sturbinus' fays, that they who doubt of the 
 pope’s divinity and infallibility are excufable, when 
 8 it 
 
DICTIONARY. 267 
 
 it is confidered that St. Peter’s fee has been profaned 
 by forty fchifms, and twenty-feven of them have 
 been attended with murders, mafiacres, and wars. 
 
 That Stephen VII. a prieft’s fon, had his prede- 
 ceflbr, Formofus, dug up, and the corpfe’s head 
 cut off. 
 
 That Sergius III. was convifted of aflafllnations, 
 and had a fon by Marozia, who inherited the 
 papacy. 
 
 That John X. Theodoras’s gallant, was ftrangled 
 in his bed. 
 
 That John XI. fon of Sergius III. was known 
 only for his Eandalous intemperance. 
 
 That John XII. was murdered at his ftrumpet’s 
 houfe. 
 
 That Benedict IX. bought the pontificate, and 
 fold it again. 
 
 That Gregory VII. was the author of civil wars, 
 which were continually profecuted by his fuccef- 
 fors for the fpace of five hundred years. 
 
 That laftly, among fo many debauched, ambi- 
 tious, and fanguinary popes, there has been an 
 Alexander VI. whofe name always excites no lefs 
 horror and deteftation than thofe of Nero and Ca- 
 ligula. 
 
 This, it is faid, proves the divinity of their cha- 
 racter, that it fhould have fubfifted amidft fo many 
 crimes ; but had the behaviour of the califs been 
 ftill more flagitious and execrable, they would then 
 have been (till more divine. This is Dermius’s 
 argument •, but the Jefuits have anfwered him. 
 
 PREJUDICES. 
 
 T)Rejudice is an opinion void of judgment: thus 
 JL every where many opinions are inftilled into 
 children before they are able to judge. 
 
 There 
 
*68 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 There are univerfal and neceflary prejudices, 
 and fuch are eflential to virtue. In every coun- 
 try, children are taught to believe in a God, who 
 punilhes and rewards •, to refpeft and to leve their 
 father and mother ; to hold theft a crime ; a fel- 
 filh lye a vice, before they can fo much as guefs 
 what vice or virtue is. 
 
 Thus there are very good prejudices, and thefe 
 are fuch as on being brought to the teft, judg- 
 ment ratifies. 
 
 Sentiment is not mere prejudice-, it is much 
 ftronger. It is not becaule the mother has been 
 told that fhe rauft love her fon, that Ihe loves him; 
 fhe, happily, cannot help her fondnefs for him. It 
 is not from prejudice that a man runs ro afiifi: an 
 unknown child, whom, a bead is near devouring, 
 or who is in any other dariger. 
 
 But it is from mere prejudice that you refpeft a 
 man drefled in a particular manner, and grave in 
 his carriage and difcourfe. Your parents have told 
 you to bow to fuch a man ; thus you come to re- 
 fpe6t him, before you know whether he deferves 
 your refpedt. Being grown up, and your know- 
 ledge enlarged, you begin to fee that this man is a 
 hypocrite, eaten up with pride, felfifhnefs, and 
 craft ; hereupon you delpife what you venerated, 
 and prejudice is fuperfeded by judgment. You- 
 have, from prejudice, believed the fables with 
 which you was amufed. in your childhood; you 
 were told that the Titans waged war agarnft the 
 Gods ; and that Venus was in love with Adonis. 
 Thefe fables at twelve years of age go down with 
 you as realities; bur, at twenty, you perceive them 
 to be only ingenious allegories. 
 
 Let us briefly, for order lake, examine the dif- 
 ferent forts of prejudices; we may perhaps find 
 ourfelves like thole who perceived that at the time 
 of the Miflilfippi, they had been calculating in agi- 
 nary riches, Preju- 
 
’DICTIONARY. tfy 
 
 Prejudices of the Senses. 
 
 Is»it not very odd that our eyes always deceive 
 us, even when we fee very well ; whereas we are 
 never deceived by our ears ? If found ear hears 
 thefe words, You are handfome, I love you ; it 
 is very certain that the perfon fpeaking did not 
 fay, I hate you, you are ugly : but the apparent 
 fmoothnefs of a looking-glafs is a deception ; a 
 microfcope-lhews the furface to be in reality very 
 rugged. The fun feems to be about tvyo feet in 
 diameter •, whereas it is demonftrated to be a 
 mdlion of times larger than the earth. 
 
 God apparently has put truth in your ears, and 
 error in your eyes : but ftudy optics, and you will 
 find that God has not impofed on you ; and that 
 it is impofiible, in the prefent ftate of things, ob- 
 jects fhould appear otherwile than you lee them. 
 
 Physical Prejudices. 
 
 That the fun riles and fets, and the earth is im- 
 moveable, are prejudices naturally imbibed : but 
 that lobfters are good for the blood, becaufe in 
 boiling they turn red •, that eels cure the palfy, 
 becaule of their frifking that the moon has an 
 influence on difeafes, becaufe a ftronger fymptom 
 of a fever was obferved in a patient in the wane of 
 the moon : thefe notions, with a thoufand others, 
 were entertained by the empyrics of old, who 
 judged without reafoning, and led others into their 
 miltakes. 
 
 Historical Prejudices. 
 
 Moft ftories have been credited without exa- 
 mination, and fuch belief is a prejudice. Fabius 
 
 Pi&or 
 
27° A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 Pidor relates, that feveral ages before him, a 
 veftal virgin of the city of Alba, going with her 
 pitcher to draw water, was ravilhed and brought 
 into the world Romulus and Remus ; and that 
 thefe twins were fuckled by a fhe-wolf, &c. This 
 fable the Roman people greedily fwallowed, with- 
 out examining whether, at that time, veftal vir- 
 gins were known in Latium ; whether it was 
 likely that a king’s daughter fhould go out of her 
 convent with a pitcher in her hand •, and whether 
 it was agreeable to nature, that a Ihe-wolf, fo far 
 from eating two infants, ihould fuekle them. The 
 prejudice took root. 
 
 A monk wrote that Clovis, being in great dan- 
 ger at the battle of Tolbiac, made a vow, if he 
 efcaped fafe, to turn Chriftian ; but is it natural 
 in fuch an exigency to apply to a foreign deity ? Is 
 it not in extremities, that our native religion ads 
 with the greateft force ? What Chriftian in a bat- 
 tle againft the Turks would not call on the Blef- 
 fed Virgin, rather than on Mahomet ? It is add- 
 ed, that a dove brought a phial in its bill for 
 anointing Clovis; and that an angel brought the 
 oriflamme or banner to be carried before him. 
 All fuch little tales, prejudice readily credited ; 
 but they who are acquainted with human nature 
 very well know, that both the ufurper Clovis and 
 the ufurper Rollo, or Rolf, turned Chriftians, that 
 they might more fafely rule over Chriftians, as, the 
 Turks, on their becoming matters of the empire 
 of Conftantinople, turned Muflulmen, to ingratiate 
 themfelves with the Muflulmen. 
 
 Religious Pr e' j u d ices. 
 
 If your nurfe has told you that Ceres prefides 
 over grain ; or that Vifnou and Xaca have feveral 
 
 times 
 
 

 
 DICTIONARY. 2? t 
 
 times become men ; or that Sanmoncodom came 
 upon earth, and cut down aforeft; or that Odin ex- 
 perts you in his hall towards Jutland •, or that Ma- 
 homet, or fome other, has made a journey into 
 heaven ; laftly, if your governor afterwards in- 
 culcates into your brain the traces made in it by 
 your nurfe, you will never get rid of them during 
 your life. Should your judgment attempt to ef- 
 face thefe prejudices, your acquaintance, and es- 
 pecially your female acquaintance, will charge you 
 with impiety, and terrify you ; then your dervife, 
 left his income may fuffer fome curtailment, will 
 accufe you to the cadi; the cadi will do his beft 
 to have you impaled, for he would have all un- 
 der^ him blockheads, thinking that blockheads 
 make tamer fubjedts than others ; and thus things 
 will go on till your acquaintance, the dervife, and 
 the cadi fhall begin to perceive that folly does no 
 good, and that periecution is abominable, 
 
 RELIGION. 
 
 Question I. 
 
 D R. Warburton, bifhop of Gloucefter, author 
 of one of the molt learned pieces that ever 
 appeared, in vol. i. p. 8. exprefl'es himfelf to this 
 purpofe : “ A religion, or fociety, not founded on 
 “ the belief of a future ftate, ought to be fupported 
 “ by an extraordinary providence: the Jewilh reli- 
 “ gion was not founded on the belief of a future 
 “ ftate ; therefore it muft have been fupported by 
 “ an extraordinary providence.” 
 
 Several divines have declared againft him, and, 
 difputant like, have retorted his argument on 
 himfelf. 
 
 “ A re- 
 
 • • 
 
t 7 i A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 “ A religion not founded on the do&rine of the 
 “ foul’s immortality, and eternal rewards, muft be 
 “ falfe. Now Judaifm had no fuch tenets ; there- 
 “ fore Judaifm, fo far from being fupported by 
 “ providence, was, according to your principles, 
 ■“ a falfe and favage religion, which denied any 
 “ fuch thing as providence.” 
 
 Others of the bilhop’s adversaries maintained 
 that the immortality of the foul was known among 
 the Jews, even in Mofes’s time ; but he very evi- 
 dently proved againft them, that neither in the'De- 
 calogue, nor Leviticus, nor Deuteronomy, is one 
 fingle word faid of this belief ; and that it is ridi- 
 culous to go about wrefting and corrupting a few 
 paflages of the other books, in fupport of a ffuth 
 about which their book of laws is filent. 
 
 The biffiop, though he compofed four volumes 
 to demonftrate that the Jewifh law propofed nei- 
 ther punishments nor rewards after death, has not 
 been able to give his adverfaries any very fatisfac- 
 tory anfwer. They urged, “ either Mofes was 
 “ acquainted with this dodtrine, and then he de- 
 “ ceiVed the Jews in not making it public : or he 
 “ wasjignorant of it ; and if fo, he was incapable 
 “ of founding a good religion. Indeed, had the 
 “ religion been good, why was it aboliflied ? A 
 * c true religion Should Suit all times and places; it 
 tc ffiould be likerthe light of the fun, which Urines 
 ?* in all lands and throughout all generations.” 
 
 This prelate, with all his erudition and Sagacity, 
 has been hard put to it in making his way through 
 all thefe difficulties ; but what iyftem is without 
 difficulties ? 
 
 Question II. 
 
 Another learned perfon, a much greater philo- 
 fopher, and one of the moft profound metaphysi- 
 cians' 
 
dictionary. 25,3 
 
 clans of the times, produces ftrong reafons to prove, 
 that the fir-ft religion was Polytheifm j and that, be- 
 fore improved reafon came to fee there could be 
 only one Supreme Being, men began with be- 
 lieving feveral gods. 
 
 I, on the contrary, prefume to believe that they 
 began with worlhipping only one God, and that, 
 afterwards, human weaknefs adopted feveral 0- 
 thers •, and I conceive the thing to be thus. 
 
 It is not to be doubted but villages and country 
 towns were prior to large cities ; and that men were 
 divided into fmail republics before they were 
 united in large empires. It is very natural, that a 
 town, terrified at the thunder ; diftrefied by the 
 ruin of its harveft ; in fulted by a neighbouring 
 town ; daily feeling its weaknels, and every where 
 perceiving an invifible power, foon came to fay; 
 
 I here is lome being above us, which does us good 
 and hurt. 0 
 
 It feems to me impofiibie that they fhould have 
 laid: there are two powers 5 for wherefore feveral > 
 In every thing we begin with the fimple, theri 
 proceed to the compound, and often an improve- 
 ment of knowledge brings us back again to the 
 fimple: this is the procefs of the human mind. 
 
 VV hich being was firft worfhipped? was it the fun 
 was u the moon ? I can hardly believe it. Only let 
 us taite a view of children,' they are pretty nearly 
 pn a footing with ignorant men. The beauty and 
 benefit of that luminous body which animates na- 
 ture, make no imprefiion on them ; as infenfible 
 are they of the conveniences we derive from the 
 moon, or of the regular variations of its courl'e •> 
 they do not fo much as think of thefe things ; they 
 are accuftomed to them. What men do not fear ' 
 they never worfhip. Children, look up to the fky 
 with as much indifference as on the ground • but’ 
 
 T 5 m 
 
274 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 at a temped, the poor creatures tremble and run 
 and hide themfelves. I am inclined to think ic 
 was fo with primitive men. They who did ob- 
 ferved the courfe of the heavenly bodies, and 
 brought them to be objedfs of admiration and 
 worfhip, mud necefiarily have had a tindfure of 
 philofophy •, the error was too exalted for rude 
 illiterate hufbandmen. 
 
 Thus the cry of a village would have been no 
 more than this: There is a power which thunders, 
 which fends down hail on us, which caufcs our 
 children to di<*, let us, by all means, appeafe it •, 
 but which way ? Why, we fee, that little prefems 
 will footh angry people, let us try what little pre- 
 fents will do with this power. He mud alfo to 
 be fure have a name or title ; and that, which na- 
 turally prelents itielf fird, is chief, matter, lord : 
 thus is this power called my Lord. Hence it 
 probably was, that the fi d ./Egyptians called their 
 godKnef; the Syrians, Adoni ; the neighbouring 
 nations Baal or Bel, or Melch or Moloc ; the Scy- 
 thians Pape, all words dignifying Lord, Mader. 
 
 In like manner almod all America was found to 
 be divided into multitudes of little colonies, all 
 with their patron deity. The Mexicans and Peru- 
 vians themfelves, who were large nations, had but 
 one only Cod; the former worfhipping Mango 
 Kapack, the other the God of war, whom they 
 called Vilipudi, as the Hebrews had dilcd their 
 lord, Sabaoth. 
 
 It is not from any fuperiority or exercife of rea- 
 fon, that all nations began with worfhipping only 
 one Deity •, for had they been philofophers, they 
 would have the univerfal God of nature and 
 not the god of a village ; they would have exa- 
 mined the infinite tedimonies acknowledged of 
 a creating and preferving being > but they exa- 
 mined 
 
dictionary. 27 r 
 
 town perceived its weaknefc ° n 5 ^ 
 
 SSI terrib!e°be- 
 
 3£ f z c x? a f m ~ s 
 
 ^:d;SS^ 
 
 town had alfo its god . According y jephfha 6“vs» 
 :: “ sod Chao's ha S n,ade7iu LSr 
 
 « onH r 0Ught f ° let us quietly enjoy what ouJ 
 .f,. d h r S 8 ' Ven US by Dis victories (pi ” 
 
 . lh,s ’Peech from one foreigner L arirt ,i 
 >s very remarkable. The lews and V w'* 
 had outed the natives, with* no other riwh^rh^* 
 * orce ; and one fays to the other Thv *p- 0 d 
 
 ?St ft* thy urur P““"'b"ow .ny god 
 iiKewne to fupport me in mine. 1 
 
 Jeremiah and Amos both alk « Wh/»K»fnt.« i 
 
 “ ^e god Moloch feized on the coTnSSVi 
 
 in a Homer th,S the0, ° ey arC ,ikevvife t0 be with 
 
 It is very natural that, from the heat of fancv 
 and a vague increafe of knowledge, men foon mul- 
 
 elenTenr^r ^ afT ’S ned guardians to the 
 
 elements, Teas, forefts, fprfngs, and fields The 
 
 more they Purveyed the heavenly bodies, the greater 
 
 fO 7 h° fei ik ln ,7 Urverfion !s VC, Y different. Judges xi 2 1 
 (QJ Here the difference is Hill greater fer i; °, a 4 ‘ 
 Pays nothing like it, “ J er ’ XJ " J • Amos 
 
 T 2 n;uft 
 
TP 
 
 bus 
 
 afflg; 
 
 
 
 a7 6 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 n uft their aftonifhment have been. Well might 
 they who worfhipped the deny of a brook pay ^ 
 adorations to the iun : and, the fir It ftep 
 in" taken, the earth was foon covered with deit.es, 
 fo°that at length cats and onions came to be 
 
 W °However, time mud neceffarily i«np r °ve reafon : 
 accordingly it produced fome phiiotophers, w o 
 i'aw that neither onions nor cats, nor even the hea- 
 venly bodies, had any fliare in the difpofuion of na- 
 ture> All thole philolophers, Babylonians, ler- 
 fians Egyptians, Scythians, Greeks, and Romans, 
 acknowfedged only one Supreme God, rewarding 
 
 ^This they did not immediately make known to 
 the people, for a word againft onions and cats 
 fpoken btjfqre old women and pnefts, would have 
 coft a man his life •, thol'e good people would have 
 ftoned him. He who fhould have ridiculed tome 
 Egyptians for eating their gods, w° u ld have bee 
 eaten himfelf, fince Juvenal relates as feft, hat in a 
 controverfial difpute, an Egyptian was killed and 
 
 ^ Wellt wh^ was to be done ? Orpheus and 
 others inftitute myfteries, which the initiated bv ear 
 by execrable oaths never to reveal •, and of thefe 
 myfteries the principal is, the worfh.p of one only 
 God. This great truth ipreads over half the earth, 
 the number of the initiated fwells immenfelyv the 
 antient religion indeed {fill fubfifts, but not be.ng 
 contrary to the tenet of God’s unity it is connived 
 at The Romans had their Deus Optimus Maxi- 
 mus; the Greeks their Zeus, their Supreme God, 
 All the other deities are only intermediate bem , 
 heroes and emperors were clalTed among the go » 
 which meant no more than the blefted, for it is not 
 to be fuppofed, that Claudius, Ottavios, Tiberius, 
 
DICTIONARY. 277 
 
 and Caligula, were accounted the creators of hea- 
 ven and earth. 
 
 In a word, it feems demonftrated that, in Au- 
 guftus’s time, all who had any religion acknow- 
 ledged one fupreme eternal God, with feveral clafles 
 of fe condary deities; the worlhipping of whom has 
 fince been called idolatry. 
 
 The Jewifh laws never countenanced idolatry ; 
 for though they admitted Malachim, Angels, and 
 inferior orders of coeleftial beings ; their law ap- 
 pointed no manner of worlhip for thefe fecondary 
 deities. Indeed they adored angels, that is, when 
 they faw any, they proftrated themfelves before 
 them ; but as this was a very uncommon cafe, no 
 ceremonial, or legal worlhip, had been inftituted 
 for them; neither was any homage paid even to the 
 cherubim of the ark. It is manifelt that the Jews 
 worlhipped openly one fingle God, even as the in- 
 numerable crowds of the initiated worlhipped him 
 privately in their myfteries, 
 
 Question III. 
 
 At this time, when the worlhip of one Supreme 
 God univerfally prevailed in Afia, in Europe, and 
 Africa, among all who made a due ufe of their 
 reafon, it was that the chriftian religion received 
 its birth. 
 
 Platonifm greatly promoted the undemanding 
 of its dogmas. The Logos, which in Plato figni- 
 bes the wifdom, the reafon of the Supreme Being, 
 with us was made the word, and the fecond perfon 
 of the Deity. Thus religion was wrapped up in 
 metaphylics, to human reafon unfathomable. 
 
 How Mary was afterwards declared mother of 
 God i how the confubftantiality of the Father and 
 
 T 3 the 
 
2 7 S A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 the word were eftablilhed, together with the 
 procefiion of the Pneuma, the divine organ of the 
 divine Logos j two natures and two wills refulting 
 from the Hypoftafis ; and laftly, the fuperior man- 
 ducation, in which both foul and body are fed with 
 the members of the incarnate God, worfliipped 
 and eaten in the form of bread, prefent to the 
 fight, felt by the tafte, and yet annihilated : thefe 
 things we (hall not repeat here. All myfteries have 
 ever been fublime. 
 
 So early as the fecond century, the expulfion of 
 devils was performed, by pronouncing the name of 
 Jefus •, whereas before, the name of Jehovah, or 
 Yhaho, was made ufe of in fuch miracles: for St. 
 Matthew relates that Jefus’s enemies having fprsad 
 abroad, that it was by the name of the prince of 
 the devils that he call out the devils, he made 
 them this anfwer : “ If I caft out devils by Beelze- 
 “ bub, by whom do your children call them Out?” 
 
 At what time the Jews acknowledged Beelzebub, 
 a foreign deity, to be prince of the devils is not 
 known but we know, and learn it from Jofe- 
 phus, that at Jerufalem there were exorcifts, whofe 
 immediate province it was to difiodge the devils 
 from the bodies of the polTefied, that is men la- 
 bouring 'under uncommon diflempers ; which, in 
 thole times, a great part of the world attributed to 
 malignant genii. 
 
 Thus the demoniacs were relieved by the true 
 pronunciation of the word Jehovah ; now loft, to- 
 gether with other ceremonies at prefent buried in 
 oblivion. 
 
 Exorcifms by Jehovah, or other of God’s names, 
 continued to be p raft i fed even in the early ages of 
 the church. Origen againft Celfus, N°. 262, fays, 
 “ It when invoking God or fwearing by him, he 
 “ is termed the God of Abraham, Ifaac, and Ja- 
 
 “ cob. 
 
dictionary. 279 
 
 < t cob, certain things will be done by thofe names, 
 fuch being their nature and force, that devils 
 ‘‘ are fubjetft to thofe who utter them ; whereas if 
 called by any other appellation, as god of the 
 tumultuous fea, or the deftroyer, no eft'ed fol- 
 4 lows. The word Ifrael tranflated into Greek will 
 “ do nothing ; but on pronouncing it in Hebrew, 
 
 “ al ° n g w 'th the other requifite words, the mam- 
 “ cal operation will take place.” 
 
 The fame Origen, N°. 19, has thefe remark- 
 able words : “ There are names of a natural vir- 
 c * tue > as thofe ufed by the wife men in Egypt, 
 the Magi in Perfia, and the Brachmans in In- 
 dia. Magic, as it is called, is no vain and chi- 
 “ merical art, as the Stoics and Epicureans pretend; 
 
 “ neither^ere the names of Sabaoth or Adonai 
 “ t 03 .de for created beings, but appertain to a myfi- 
 “ terious theology concerning theCreator ; hence 
 “ comes the virtue of thefe names, when placed 
 “ in order, and pronounced according to the 
 “ rules, &c.” ° 
 
 Origen, in fpeaking thus, only relates what was 
 univerlally held, and does not delive r his own pri- 
 vate opinion. All the religions then known ad- 
 mitted a kind of magic, and with two diflin&ions, 
 the celeftial and infernal magic, necromancy and 
 theurgy every nation had its prodigies, divi- 
 nations, and oracles. The Perfians did not 
 deny the Egyptian miracles, nor the Egyptians 
 offer to difcredit the Perfiar. God was pleafed to 
 wink at the firft Chriftians efpoufing the Sybil- 
 line oracles, and fome other unconfequential er- 
 rors, as not corrupting the effentials of religion. 
 
 Another very remarkable circumftance is, that 
 the chriftians of the two firft centuries abhorred 
 temples, altars, and images. This Origen owns, 
 N°. 374, but on the church’s being modelled into 
 
 I 4 a fet- • 
 
i8o A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 a fettled form, its difcipline and every thing elfe 
 became altered. 
 
 Question IV. 
 
 When once a religion comes to be eflablifhed 
 by law, the magiftrates are very vigilant in fuppref- 
 fing molt of the things; which ufed to be done 
 by the profeflors of that religion before it was pub- 
 licly received. The founders held their private 
 meetings, though forbidden under penalties; now 
 none but public alfemblies held under the eye of 
 the law are permitted, and all clandeltine afl'ocia- 
 tions made punilhable. The old maxim was. It 
 is better to obey God .than man ; now the oppo- 
 fite maxim comes into vogue, To obey God is to 
 confo. m to the laws of the land. All places rung 
 with obfefiions and pofiefiions, the devil was let 
 loo e upon earth ; now the devil does not ftir out 
 of his den. Prodigies and predictions were necef- 
 fary then ; now a ltop is put to them, and they 
 are exploded : he who fhould openly take upon 
 him to foretel any public calamity, would foon be 
 fhewn the way to Bedlam. The founders took, 
 money underhand from the believers ; whereas a 
 man collecting money to dilpofe of it as he pleafes, 
 without any legal warrant, would be taken to talk. 
 Thus the whole of the fcaftolding ufed in the con- 
 struction of the building, is taken away. 
 
 Qj; ESTiOK V. 
 
 » Next to our holy religion, to be fure the only 
 good religion, which would be the lealt bad ? 
 
 Would it not be the molt fimple ? Would it not 
 be that which taught a great deal of morality and 
 few doCtrines i that which tended to make men 
 
 virtuou^ 
 
DICTIONARY. 281 
 
 virtuous without making them fools ? that which 
 did not impofe the belief of things impofiible, con- 
 tradictory, injurious to the Deity, and pernicious to 
 mankind ; and which did not take on itfelf to 
 threaten with eternal punifhments all who had 
 common fenfe ? Would it not be that which did 
 not fupport its articles by executioners, and deluge 
 the earth with blood for unintelligible fophifms ? 
 that in which a quibble, a pun, and two or three 
 luppofititious maps, would not fuffice to make a 
 prieft a foverrign and a God, though noted for the 
 moft profligate morals and execrable practices ? 
 that which did not make kings fubjeCt to this 
 prieft ? Would it not be that which taught only 
 the adoration of one God, juftice, forbearance, 
 and humanity ? 
 
 Question VI. 
 
 The religion of the Gentiles is faid to be abfurd 
 in feveral points, contradictory, and pernicious. 
 But have not its evils and follies been greatly ex- 
 aggerated ? Jupiter’s carrying on his amours in the 
 Ibape of a fwan, a bull, with other fuch doings 
 of the Pagan deities, is certainly the height of ridi- 
 cule ; but let any one, throughout all antiquity, 
 fhew me a temple dedicated to Leda lying with a 
 fwan or a bull. Did Athens or Rome ever hear a fer- 
 mon to encourage girls to copulate with the fwans 
 in their court-yards ? Did the collection of fables 
 fo beautifully embelliftied by Ovid, conftitute their 
 religion ? Are they not like our Golden Legend, 
 pr Flower of the Saints ? Should fome Bramin 
 or Dervife objeCt to us the ftory of St. Mary the 
 Egyptian, who not having wherewith to pay the 
 failors who had brought her into Egypt, volun- 
 tarily granted to each of them, in lieu of money, 
 
 what 
 
2 S2 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 what is called favours, we fhould immediately fay 
 to the Bramin, You are miflaken, father, the Gol- 
 den Legend is not our religion. 
 
 We taunt the antients with their prodigies 
 and oracles ; but could they return on earth, and 
 were the miracles of our lady of Loretto, and thofe 
 of our lady of Ephelus, to be numbered, in whole 
 favour would the ballance of the account be ? 
 
 Human facrifices have been introduced almoft 
 among all nations, but very rarely were they prac- 
 tifed. Jephtha’s daughter and king Agag are the 
 only two we meet with among the Jews, for Ifaac 
 and Jonathan were not facrificed. The Grecian 
 ftory of Iphigenia is not thoroughly verified : hu- 
 man facrifices ate very rarely heard of among the 
 antient Romans; in a word, very little blood has 
 the Pagan religion ihed, and ours has made the 
 earth an aceldama. Ours, to be fure, is the only 
 good, the only true religion; but by our abufe of 
 it, we have done fo much mifchief, that when we 
 fpeak of other religions, it fhould be with temper 
 and modefty. 
 
 Q_ue sticn VII. 
 
 If a man would recommend his religion to ftran- 
 gers or his countrymen, fhould he not go about it 
 with the nioft winning compofure, the moft infi- 
 nuating mildnefs ? If he fets out with faying that 
 what he declares is demonftrably true, he will meet 
 with flrong oppofition ; and if he takes upon him 
 to tell them that they rejedt his dodtrine, only be- 
 caufe it condemns their paffions ; that their heart 
 has corrupted their mind ; that they have only a 
 falfe and prefumptuous reafon, he excites their 
 contempt and refentment, and overthrows what 
 he was for building up. 
 
 If 
 
DICTIONARY. 283 
 If the religion which he preaches be true, will 
 paffion and infolence add to its truth ? Do you 
 ftorm and rage when you fay that men Ihould be 
 mild, patient, benevolent, juft, exadt in the dif- 
 charge of all the duties of fociety ? No; here 
 every body is of your mind ; why then fuch viru- 
 lent language to your brother when you are 
 preaching to him metaphyfical myfteries ? It is 
 becaufe his good fenfe irritates your felf-love. You 
 proudly require that your brother lbould fubmit 
 h.s undemanding to yours ; and pride dii'appoint- 
 ed 1 blazes into rage ; from hence, and hence only, 
 anies your paffion. A man who receives ever fo 
 many muflcet-fhot in a battle, is never leen to ex- 
 prefs any anger ; but a dodtor, at the denial of af- 
 lent, kindles into implacable fury. 
 
 resurrection (R). 
 
 T H E Egyptians are faid to have built their 
 fuperb pyramids only for tombs, where their 
 bodies being embalmed outwardly and inwardly, 
 lay till, at the expiration of a thoufand years, their 
 iouls returned into them. But if their bodies were ' 
 
 - (R) The doftrine of the refurreaion is one of the fundamen- 
 
 tal points of our holy religion. M. Voltaire does not attempt to 
 weaken ourbeliefofit, but to (hew his learning by enumerating: 
 the opinions of the Heathens, as well as of the primitive Ghrif- 
 tians relative to that article. We (hall only obferve that his ex- 
 plication of the famous paflage of Job, ch. xix. ver. 23, is taken 
 from t.ie very learned bi(hop ofGloucefter, who in his Divine 
 Legation, book vi. f e a. 2. p. 543, has given us a beautiful 
 account of this whole book, and cleared up all the difficulties 
 in It.; but particularly makes it appear, that the words in 
 queltion can relate only to a temporal deliverance. 
 
 to 
 
9HH8 
 
 J 
 
 *« 4 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 to come to life again, and it was their firft opera, 
 tion, why did the embalmers pierce the fcull with 
 a hook, and draw the brain out ? To think of a 
 man’s coming to life again without brains, inclines 
 one to apprehend that the Egyptians had little or 
 none when living; but it mult be confidered, that 
 molt of the antients believed the foul to refide in 
 the bread. And why in the bread fooner than any 
 other part ? becaufe it is well known that under 
 all our fenfations, if any thing violent, we feel a 
 dilatation or contraction about the region of the 
 heart ; and this produced the opinion, that there 
 was the foul’s refidence. This foul was fomething 
 aerial, a light figure roving about where if could, 
 till it had joined its body again. 
 
 The belief of the refurreftion is much more an- 
 tient than the hidorical times. Athaladas, Mer?‘ 
 cury’s fon, could die and come to life again at plea- 
 fure; Efculapius redored Hyppolitus to life ; Her- 
 cules conferred the like kindnefs on Alcedes ; and 
 Pelops, who had been cut into pieces by his fa- 
 ther, the gods made whole again : Plato relates 
 that Heres returned to life only for a fortnight. 
 
 It was not till a very long time after Plato, that 
 the Pharifees among the Jews adopted the tenet of 
 the refurreClion. 
 
 The ACts of the Apodles mention a very fingu- 
 lar tranfaCtion, and well worthy of notice. St. 
 James and feveral of his companions advifed St. 
 Paul, {though fo thorough a Chriftian, to go into 
 the temple of Jerufalem, and obferve all the cere-: 
 monies of the antient law, to the end all may know, 
 fay .they, that every thing which is faid of you is 
 falfe, and that you dill continue to obferve Mofes’s 
 law. 
 
 St. Paul accordingly went into the temple for 
 feven days ; but being known on the feventh, he 
 
 was 
 
1 
 
 DICTIONARY. 285 
 
 Was accufed of having brought ftrangers into it, 
 with a view of prophaning it. 
 
 Now Paul perceiving that fome of the crowd 
 were Sadducees and others Phariiees, he cried out 
 in the council, “ Brethren I am a Pharifee, the Ion 
 “ of a Pharifee •, it is for the hope of another life, 
 
 “ and the refurredion of the dead, that I am in , 
 “ danger of being condemned,” Ads xxiii. ver. 6. 
 
 In all this affair not a word had been faid about the 
 refurredion of the dead ; but Paul’s drift in men- 
 tioning ic was to raife a quarrel between the Pha- 
 ril'ees and Sadducees. 
 
 Ver. 7. “ And Paul having faid, there arofe a 
 ** diflenfion between the Pharifees and Sadducees, 
 
 “ and the multitude was divided.” 
 
 Ver. 8. “ For the Sadducees fay, there is no re- 
 “ furredion, neither angel nor fpirit j butthePha- 
 “ rifees confefs both, &c.” 
 
 It has been affirmed that Job, who doubtlefs is 
 of great antiquity, was acquainted with the doc- 
 trine of the refurredion ; and, in proof of it, the 
 following words are quoted : “ I know that my re- 
 “ deemer liveth, and that one day his redemption 
 “ will rife on me, or that I (hall rife again from the 
 “ duff; that my fkin will return ; and that 1 ffiall 
 “ again fee God in my fleffi.” 
 
 But feveral commentators underftand no more by 
 thefe words, than that Job hopes he ffiall foon get 
 over his diffemper, and ffiall not always be lying 
 in the ground as he then was : the fequel fuffici- 
 ently proves the truth of this explanation ; for the 
 moment he cries out to his falfe and harffi friends, 
 
 “ Why then fay you, let us perfecute him, or be- 
 “ caufe you ffiall fay, Becaufe we have perfecuted 
 “ him (S). Does not this evidently mean, you will 
 
 (S) See our tranflatien, chap. xix. ver. 25 and 28. 
 
 repent 
 
2 86 A THILOSOPHICAL 
 
 repent of having infulted me, when you (hall fee 
 me again in my former (late of health and opu- 
 lence ? A fick perfon fays, I (hall recover, not I 
 Jhall rife from the dead: to give forced meanings to 
 clear paflages, is the fure way never to understand 
 one another. 
 
 According to St. Jerome, the fed of the Pha- 
 rilees began but a very little time before Jefus 
 j rut. Rabbi Hillel is accounted its founder, and 
 
 he was cotemporary with Gamaliel, St. Paul’s 
 matter. 
 
 Many of thefe Pharifees believed that it was 
 only the Jews who were to fife again; and that as 
 to the reft of mankind, they were not worth 
 while. Others affirmed that the refurredtion would 
 be only Jin Paleftine, and that bodies buried in ( 
 other parts would be fecretly conveyed to the 
 neighbourhood of Jerufalem, there to be united to 
 their foul. St. Paul tells the inhabitants of Thef- 
 falonica, “ That the fecond coming of Jefus Chrift 
 “ is for them and for him ; and that they (hall be 
 witneffes of it.” 1 
 
 Ver. 1 6 . “ For on the fignal being given by the 
 “ archangel and the trumpet of God, the Lord 
 r.imfelt (hall defcend from heaven, and they who 
 “ ^ a11 have died in Jefus Chrill ffiall rife firit.” 
 
 Ver. 17. “ Then we who are alive, and who (hall 
 
 ave remained till then, (hall be caught up with 
 “ them in the clouds, to go and meet the Lord in the 
 “ air > ar, d thus we (hall live for ever withtheLord.” 
 
 1 Theflalonians, chap. iv. 
 
 Does not this important paffiage evidently prove, 
 t u t n C ^ ^hriftians made themfelves lure that 
 they lhould fee the end of the world; and St. Luke 
 actually foretels it, as what lhould happen in his 
 life- time ? rt 
 
 St. 
 
 3 
 
DICTIONARY. 287 
 St. Auftin thinks that children, and even ftill- 
 born infants, Hull rife at the age of maturity. Ori- 
 gen, Jerome, Athanaiius, Baiil, did not believe 
 that women were to riie again with the diftin&ions 
 of fex. 
 
 In a word, there have ever been dilputes about 
 what we were, what we are, and what we lhail be. 
 
 , t 
 
 SOLOMON (T). 
 
 S URELY Solomon could not be fo rich as 
 he is faid ? 
 
 The book of Chronicles tells us that Melk 
 David his father left him one hundred thoufand 
 
 talents 
 
 (T) This whole article is liable to great exceptions, and 
 betrays a fpirit of licrntioufnefs in the author. He takes up- 
 on hitnfelf to ftrike what books he pleafes out of the canon 
 of the fcripturcs, becaufe.they do not fuit his fancy, or be- 
 caufe he meets with a few difficulties, which are eafily 
 folved. We are forry to own that he (hews himfelf in this 
 article to have joined that clafs of Deifts, whom Dr. Clarke 
 mentions as not capabje of being argued with. Thefe are 
 they who endeavour to turn the moft lacred things into ri- 
 dicule; and fhew as great a difregard to common decency 
 as to religion. They pretend to expofe the abufes and 
 corruption of religion : but the profane and lewd images 
 with which they affedt to drefs up their difeourfe, demons- 
 trate that they do not intend to deride any vice or folly, 
 but rather to foment the vicious inclinations of others. By 
 turning every thing alike into ridicule, they plainly declare 
 that they have no regard for virtue or religion. Such men 
 are not to be argued with, till they learn to ufe arguments 
 inltead of drollery. For banter is not capable of being an- 
 fwered by reafon, not becaufe it has any ftrength in it ; but 
 becaufe it runs out of all the bounds of reafon and good fenfe, 
 by extravagantly joining together fuch images as have not in 
 
 them- 
 
2$8 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 talents of gold * and one thoufand talents of filvsr; 
 fo enormous a fum, that it is quite incredible. 
 
 There 
 
 themfelves any manner of fimilitude or connection ; * thus 
 all things are alike eafy to be rendered ridiculous, by being 
 reprefented only in an abfurd drefs. 
 
 This is what our author has unhappily done in regard to 
 the Song of Solomon. Whether this book, as well as thofe 
 of Proverbs and Ecclefiaftes, were written by that prince; 
 is not at all material to our religion ; but it is certain that 
 they belong to the canonical books, and their authority is the 
 fame as that of the other parts of the fcripture, of which there 
 never was any doubt in the church. 
 
 The Song of Songs is generally believed to have been writ- 
 ten by king Solomon. It contains an epithalamium, in 
 which the lover and his fpoufe are reprefented fpeaking their 
 parts. King Solomon is named feveral times in the body of 
 the work ; fo that there can be no doubt of its being written 
 in his time. In regard to the impropriety which fome imagine 
 of inferting a book of this kind among thofe of holy writ, it 
 muft be obferved, that there is a double meaning to be 
 underftood ; the hiftorical and the myftical. In the hifto- 
 rical fenfe, it is a fong for the nuptials of Solomon, and 
 the daughter of the king of Egypt, who is called Shulamite. 
 According to the myftical fenfe, of which the hiftorical is only 
 the foundation, it denotes the union between Chrift and his 
 church, which in the fcripture is compared to that between 
 man and wife. Such is the myftery reprefented by the nup- 
 tials of Solomon. But we are afraid our author is too carnally 
 minded, to attend to the myftical fenfe of this or any other 
 part of fcripture. . 
 
 Our author’s obje&ions againft the books of Proverbs and 
 Ecclefiaftes are puerile, and fcarce deferving of notice. 
 But it is very droll to fee him difplaying his erudition on the 
 French translation of the 3 ift verfe in the 23d chapter of Pro- 
 verbs : “ Ne regardez point le vin quand il paroit clair, et 
 “ que fa couleur brille dans le verre:” becaufe verre lignites* 
 glafs, which is a recent invention. But it is highly probable 
 the French tranflators meant no more than a cup, as the ori- 
 ginal implies, and as it is rendered in the Englifh verfionr 
 
 whejf 
 
 * A talent of gold is generally eftimated about 5075 1 , fterling, 
 
. DICTIONARY. it 9 
 1 here is not fo much cadi hi all the nations of the 
 whole 
 
 '* ' vh i f n if 8 iveth bis colour in the cup." The book of Ec- 
 clehaites was certainly written by Solomon, fince it is men*, 
 tinned to be the work of the ion of David, kina of lerufa- 
 lem, who ex-celled in- wifdom and magnificence.' It is a 
 difcourfc made .to a congregation, upon the vanity and emp- 
 anels of all worldly things. That the paflages which our au- 
 thor finds fault with, are^to be confidered as obje&ions which 
 Solomon makes to himfelf, appears from the whole tenour of 
 the book, and cannot bear any other conilruction. But does 
 not Solomon clearly explain his meaning in other paflages ? 
 as m this, “ Rejoice, oh ! young man, in thy youth, and let 
 
 y heart c l he f r tllee 111 the tia ys of thy youth, and walk in 
 the ways of thy heart, and in the fight of thine eyes: but 
 
 „ kn . ow > tilat for a!1 thefe tllin gs God will bring thee into 
 judgment.” Does this breathe the air of fibertinifm ! We 
 mcerely wifh our author had never been more licentious than 
 Solomon ihews himfelf in this book; the public then would 
 never had fo much reafon to complain of fome of his writings. 
 
 In regard to the objections our author ftarts at the en- 
 rance of this article againlt the opulence of Solomon, they 
 only diYcover his ignorance of the Jewifli hiftory. The ferio 
 ture fays, (i Chron. xxix. 4.) “ That David left behind him 
 ,j h e b,,lldln S' of the temple, three thoufand talents of 
 gold, of the gold of Ophir, and feven thoufand talents of 
 refined filver.” Now Dean Prideaux obferves (Conneft. 
 book I.) two things concerning this immertfe quantity of gold * 
 firft, that it was the gold of Ophir; from whence he con- 
 cludes that David muft have eftabltfhed a navigation to that 
 ()lace in his tune, by the afliftance of Hiram’s expert failors 
 Without which it cannot be conceived how he could have 
 amafled fo vaft a treafure. Thus Solomon did but improve 
 what his father had begun in regard to the cncoura element of 
 Commerce. Secondly, this fum, as he fays, is To prodigious- 
 as gives reafon to think, that the talents were 'another fort of 
 talents, of a far lefs value than the Mofaic talents. For what 
 is faid to be given by David, and contributed by his princes, 
 towards the building of the temple at Jerufalem, if valued by 
 the Mofaic talents, exceeded the value of eight hundred mil- 
 lions of our money, which was enough to have built all that 
 temple of folid filver. 
 
 ^ Sokw 
 
2 9 o A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 whole world j and it is not eal'y to conceive tfia.' 
 
 Davjd 
 
 Solomon was a far more powerful prince than many people 
 imagine : his dominions were not confined to the little coun- 
 try of Paleftine, as M. Voltaire is pleafed to call it; they 
 reached from the river Euphrates, or even beyond it, to the 
 Nile, or borders of Egypt ; and all the kings of thofe coun- 
 tries were tributaries to him (i Kings iv. 24.) What (land- 9 
 mg army he kept, the fcripture does not mention yet, beiides 
 his fourteen hundred chariots and horfes, the text fays he had 
 twelve thoufand horfemen, which fome take to have been ra- 
 ther faddle horfes ; and others, his life-guards. In regard to 
 the forty thoufand flails of horfes for his chariots, mentioned 
 in the firfl book of Kings, chap. iv. this paflage we mail 
 own has created fome difficulty, efpecially as in the fecond 
 book of Cfiron. chap. ix. it is faid, he had only four thoufand 
 flails. But we mull obferve that M. Voltaire very unfairly 
 magnifies the number of horfes in the firfl pa$age, by making 
 ufe of theword ecurie, liable ; whereas in the original it figjai- 
 fies only prafepe, a crib, that is a divifion of the liable, fo 
 many cribs to each liable. Hence Buxtorlf fuppofes that the 
 Book of Kings means the hor'es, that of Chronicles the flables, 
 viz. that there were forty thoufand horfes in four thoufand 
 flables. Recourfe mull be therefore had to an hyfpallage ; he 
 had forty thoufand Jiables , viz. forty thoujand horfes in his fads', 
 and the latter were four thoufand according, to the book of 
 Chronicles. Some interpreters think that the number in the* 
 book of Chronicles has been corrupted; but this is faid with- 
 out any authority ; therefore the plain and eafiefl way of 
 folving the whole difficulty is, that in the book of Kings the 
 word prafepium, or fable, is taken in its proper fenfe for a crib, 
 or divifion of the liable; in the book of Chronicles, it is»a- 
 fynecdoche, and fignifies a liable containing ten divifions, or 
 cribs for ten horfes : that is, , there were four thoufand equtha 
 major a, qua forty thoufand m'nora conjuubant . And this dif- 
 ference of fignification is pointed out by the very words in the 
 original, as may be feen in Pool’s Synoffis Critk^rum. 
 
 Be that as it may, Solomon was the. firfl who 'introduced the 
 uie of chariots and horfes in Ilrael, at kail to any degree of 
 magnificence. For it is certain that the multiplying c f chat lots 
 and hoiks, was exprcfsly forbidden by the Mofaic law. 
 
 he 
 
DICTIONARY. 
 
 Dkvid amaflcd fuch treafures in fo fmall 
 as Paleftne (U). 
 
 igi 
 
 a country 
 
 Solomon, 
 
 he fent for out of Egypt, not only for his own ufe, but for 
 that of feveral neighbouring kings, whom he obliged to pay 
 him fix hundred fhekels tor every chariot and four horfes, and 
 one hundred and fifty for every Angle horfe. He had likewife 
 abundance of yarn, linen, and other commodities, brought 
 to him out bf Egypt, which he fold to his fubje&s and mer- 
 chants at a certain price ( i Kings x.) ; all this produced an im- 
 menfe revenue. He did not keep all his horfes and chariots 
 at Jeruialem, but difpofed them in feveral of his ftrong cities, 
 referving only a convenient number about his perfon, either 
 for guards or grandeur (ibid.) but not quite fo many as four 
 hundred and twelve thoufand, as our facetious author pretends, 
 to efcort his concubines in taking the frelh air along the lake 
 of Genefaretli, or fhat of Sodom. 
 
 In order to fupply his vafl expences, Solomon built a navy 
 at Ezion-gcber, a fea-port near Eloth, in the land of Edom 
 upon the Red Sea, and put it under the care of fome Syrian 
 mariners, to whom many of his own people were joined. The 
 fleet failed to Ophir, and in about three years brought him 
 back an immenfe weight of gold and filvcr, befides feveral 
 kinds of precious Hones, fpices, ebony, and other curious 
 woods, ivory, peacocks, monkeys, and othef rarities (r 
 Kings ix.) The gold itfelf amounted to four hundred and 
 fifty talents yearly, befides the profit he made of all the other 
 commodities. Ophir not only afforded the greateH quantity 
 of gold, but exceeded all other gold in finenefs and value (i 
 Kings x.) Various are the opinions of the learned in regard 
 to the fituation of Ophir ; but the moH probable conjecture 
 places it in fome of thofc remote rich countries of India be- 
 yond the Ganges, and perhaps as far ds China or Japan. The 
 latter Hill abounds with the fmelb gold, and wkh leveral 
 other commodities imported by Solomon’s fleet; and by its 
 diflance befl anfwers to the length of the voyage. Thus by 
 encouraging navigation and commerce, Solomon became the 
 richefl prince of his time, and his kingdom the moH flourifh- 
 ing in the world. 
 
 (U) See Gentleman’s Magazine for November or De- 
 cember, 1764, U 2 
 
 i . .ju I 
 
m 
 
 2 9 2 A PHILOSOPHICAL. 
 
 Solomon, according to the fird book of dire*- 
 nicies, had forty choufand ftables for his chariot- 
 horfes. Each liable containing ten horfes, makes 
 four hundred thoufand, which, with his twelve 
 thoufand faddle horfes, amount to four hundred 
 and twelve thouiand good war horfes ; a great 
 many for a Jewilli melk who never was engaged in 
 a war. Never was the like magnificence ieen in a 
 country breeding only alTcs, and at prefer.t without 
 any other bead for the faddle. But probably times 
 are altered ; indeed fo wife a prince having a thou- 
 fand concubines, might very well have four hun- 
 dred and twelve thoufand horfes, were it only to 
 give his feraglio an airing along Genefareth lake, 
 or that of Sodom, or toward Cedron brook, one of 
 the moll delicious l'pots on earth, except that this 
 brook is dry nine months of the year, and the 
 ground a little doney. 
 
 But is this fame wife Solomon really author of the 
 works fathered on him ? is it likely, for infiance, 
 that the Jewifh eclogue called the Song of Songs 
 is of his writing ? 
 
 A monarch who had a thoufand midrefTes, may 
 have laid to one of thefe charmers, Kifs me with 
 the kiflfes of thy mouth, for thy breads are better 
 than wine. A king and a Ihepherd amidd fuch 
 amorous indearments may very naturally talk 
 alike : but it is fomething odd, that it is the girl 
 who is made to talk thus wantonly about kifies and 
 her fweetheart’s breads. 
 
 I likewife will not deny but a courtly prince may 
 make his midrefs fay. My hulband is like a ciuf- 
 ter of myrrh, he lhall lye all night betwixt my 
 breads. A clulter of myrrh is to me fomething 
 obfeure; but I very well underdand the charmer’s 
 meaning, when fhe bids her beloved lay his left 
 hand over her neck, and embrace her with his right. 
 
 There are fome exprclfions in which the au- 
 4 " thoi’i 
 
dictionary. z 9 $ 
 
 thorns elucidation is wanted, as when he fays, Your 
 fia*t! is like- a goblet in which there is always 
 fomething to drink ; your belly is like a bufhel of 
 wheat; your breads are like two young roes; your 
 nole is as the tower of Lebanon. ^ 
 
 , This I own is not the ltile of Virgil’s Eclogues ; 
 out all have not a like ftile, and a Jew is not obliged 
 to write like Virgil. 
 
 I luppoie it may l;kev/ife be another beautiful 
 drain of eaftern eloquence to fay. Our filter is 
 yet kjtle ; lhe has no breads; whatfhall we do for 
 our filter? It fhe be a wall, let us build on her ; 
 if a door, let us fhut her. 
 
 We wi!1 sllow that fuch words might have ef- 
 caped Solomon, though the wifed of men, in a 
 merry mcod; I his compofition is faid to be an 
 epithalamium on his marriage with Pharaoh’s 
 daughter : but is it natural that Pharaoh’s fon-in- 
 a ' v iuf) dld leave his beloved in the night, to go 
 a id hunter. in his walnut-yard; and that the queen 
 fhouid run after him bare-footed ? that the city 
 wat hlhould heather, and take her gown from her? 
 
 Could a king’s daughter have faid, I am brown, 
 yet am I beautiful like Solomon’s furrs (W).* Such 
 ,cxp, elk o ns might be overlooked in a home-fpun 
 iwain ; though, alter, all there can be little affinity 
 between furrs and a girl’s beauty. Well, but So- 
 lomon s furrs • might . be exceedingly admired in 
 then time ; and lor a low-lived Jew in a lay to his 
 iweetheart, to tell her in his Jewifh gibberilh, that, 
 never any Jewifh-king had fuch fine furred gowns 
 as her dear felf, was not at all out ofcharaaer; buc 
 Solomon mult have been ftrangely infatuated with 
 
 _ < W ' 1 , he Geneva and Dutch ^inflations fay, Curtains : 
 Beza has it, Similis Atm inhabitantibus aulxa Schelomonis. 
 ihe author feems diflngenuous in moft of his quotations. 
 
 his 
 

 
 mm r 
 
 
 ■mwv 1 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 mg 
 
 4 9+ A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 his forrs to compare them to his miftrefs. Were a 
 king in our times to write fuch an epithalamium 
 on his marriage with a neighbouring monarch’s 
 daughter, he would forfeit. all title to the laurel. 
 
 Several Rabbis have advanced that this iufcious 
 eclogue not only is not Solomon’s, but is not ft> 
 much as authentic. Theodore de Mopfuelte was 
 of the fame opinion ; and the celebrated Grotius 
 calls the Song of Songs a libidinous work, flagi- 
 tiofus *, yet is it received as canorfipal, and reputed 
 to be throughout an allegory of Chrift’s and his 
 church’s efpoufals. The allegory mud be owned 
 a little forced •, and what the church could mean 
 by its little filler having no bubbles, and that if a 
 wall, Ihe mull be built on, is impenetrably ob- 
 fcure (X). 
 
 Ecclefialles is of a more ferious turn, but no 
 more Solomon’s than the Song of Songs. The 
 author is commonly thought to be Jelus the fon of 
 Sirach, whilft others attribute it to Philo of Biblos ; 
 but whoever he was, the Pentateuch leems not to 
 have been known in his time, elle he would not 
 have faid that, at the time of the deluge Abraham 
 was going to facrifke Ifaac, or have fpoken of J 07 
 leph the patriarch as a king of Egypt. 
 
 The Proverbs have been attributed to Ifaiah, 
 Elziah, Sobna, Eliakim, Joake, and many others; 
 but to whomfoever we owe this colledlion of eal- 
 tern fentences, we may be lure it does not come 
 from a royal hand. Would a king have laid, 
 The wrath of a king is as the roaring of a lion ? 
 This is the language of a fubjedl or flave, who 
 trembles at a frown from his mailer. Would So- 
 
 (X) The Rabbis I think compare the book of Proverbs to 
 the outward court of the temple, Ecclefialles to the inward 
 court, and the Song of Songs to the fanftuary. 
 
 lomon 
 
DICTIONARY. 295 
 
 k)mon have harped fo much on a whorifh woman ? 
 would he have fa:d, Look not o 1 wine when it 
 appears bright in the glafs, and its colour fiiines? 
 
 I very much quedion whether drinking-glafies 
 were made in Solomon’s time •, the invention is 
 but modern : the antients drank cut of wooden or 
 metal cups; and this lingle pafiage betrays that 
 book to be the work of fome Alexandrine Jew, 
 and written long fince Alexander, 
 
 We now come to Ecclefiafl.es, which Grotius 
 affirms tq have been written in the time of Zoro- 
 babel. This author’s freedom is known to every 
 body ; he lays, “ That men are in nothing bet- 
 “ ter than beads ; that it is better never to have 
 “ been born than to exid ; that there is no other 
 “ hfe ; that the only good is to eat and drink, and 
 “ be merry with the woman one loves.” 
 
 Solomon perhaps might have talked in this man- 
 ner to fome of his women, and fome condrue thefe 
 fayings as objections which he makes to himfelf ; 
 but, befides the hbertinifm of which they drongly 
 favour, they have nothing of the appearance of 
 objections; and to make an author mean the con- 
 trary of what he fays, is an infult on the world. 
 
 However, fevsraj of the fathers tell us, that So- 
 lomon repented, and impofed on himfelf a fevere 
 penance : now this fliould filence all animadver- 
 fjons on his conduCt. 
 
 But though chefe books were written by a Jew, 
 what is that to us ? The Chridian religion is in- 
 deed founded on Judaifm, but not on all the 
 Jewidi books. Why fhould the Song of Songs be 
 held more facred among us than the fables of the 
 I almud ? The anfwer is, becaufe we have included 
 it in the Hebrew canon. And what is this fame 
 canon? It is a collection of authentic works. Well, 
 land mud a work of courfe be divine, for being au- 
 
 U 4 thentic ? 
 
2 96 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 thentic ? For inftance, a hiftory of the kings of 
 Juda and of Sichem, what is it but a hiftory ? A 
 Grange prepofieffion, indeed ! We defpife and ab- 
 hor the Jews-, and yet we infill, that all fuch of 
 their writings which we have collected, bear the 
 facred (lamp of V divinity. Never was fuch a con^ 
 tradidion heard of ! 
 
 SENSATION. 
 
 Yfters, we are told, have two fenfes, moles 
 
 four, and other animals, like men, have five. 
 Some are for admitting a fixth, but it is evident 
 that the voluptuous fenfalion, which is what they 
 mean, comes within the touch •, and that five fenfes 
 make up our whole portion. We cannot conceive 
 or defire any thing beyond. 
 
 The inhabitants of other globes may have fenfes 
 which we know nothing of: the number of the 
 fenfes may gradually increafe from globe to globe ; 
 and the being endued with innumerable fenies and 
 all perfed, may be the apex or period of all beings, ' 
 
 But ,we with our five organs, what power have 
 we over them ? It is always involuntarily that we 
 feel, and never from our own inclination •, in the 
 prefence of the objed it is impoffible not to have 
 the fenfation appointed by our nature. The fen- 
 fation, though in us, does not at all depend on us; 
 we receive it, and in what manner? Is there any 
 affinity between the vibrations of the air, the words 
 of a long, and the impreffion which thefe words 
 make on my brain ? 
 
 Thought Teems to us fomething flrange •, but 
 fenfation is no lefs wonderful : a divine power 
 equally ffiews itfelf in the fenfation of the meanefl: 
 inied, as in a Newton’s brain. Yet at feeing 
 thoufands of little animals deftroyed, you are not 
 
 in 
 
DICTIONARY. i 97 
 
 in the lead concerned what becomes of their fen- 
 fire faculty, though this faculty be the work of 
 the Being of beings. ou look on them as 
 machines in nature, born to periih and make room 
 for others. . 
 
 Wherefore and how flhould their fenfations fub- 
 fid, w nen they no longer exid ? ^’nat need is 
 there for the author of every thing that has being, 
 to prefervc properties of which the fub;ea is ex- 
 tina ? ]■: may as well be iaid, that 'the power of 
 the Ser.fitive Plant, to draw in its leaves towards 
 its twigs, fubfids when the plant is fathered. Here 
 undoubtedly it will be afked, how it is that the fen- 
 fation of animals p rifhing with them, man’s fa- 
 culty furvives him? That is a quedion beyond the 
 verge of my knowledge ; all I can fay to it is, the 
 eternal Author both of (eolation and thought, alone 
 knows how he imparts it, and how he preferves it. 
 
 Jt was the current opinion of all antiquity, that 
 nothing is in our underdanding, which was not be- 
 fore in our fenfes. Defcartes, in his Philofophical 
 3S? Kaman -es, advanced that we had metapbyficalOeas 
 before we fo much as knew our nurfe’s breadsT A 
 college of divines condemned this dogma, not be- 
 caufe it was an error, but a novelty : afterwards it 
 adopted this very error, becaufe it had been over- 
 thrown by Locke, an Englifh philofopher ; and an 
 Englifhman, to be lure, mud be in the wrong. After 
 fuch fliifts of opinion, it has again prolcribed that 
 antirnc truth, that the fenfes are the inlets to the 
 underdanding. It feems to have adted like govern- 
 ments loaded with debts, fometimes giving a cur- 
 rency to certain notes, and afterwards fuppreffing 
 them. But this college’s notes have quite loft 
 their currency for fome time pad. 
 
 In fpight of all the colleges of the world, pbilo- 
 fophers will dill fee that our fil'd knowledge we 
 
 receive 
 
298 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 receive from our fenfations; and that our memory 
 is no more than a continued fenfation : a man born 
 without any of his five fenfes would, could he 
 live, be totally void of any ideas. It is owing to 
 the fenfes that we even have our metaphyfical no- 
 tions : for how Ihould a circle or a triangle be 
 jmeafured, without having feen or felt a triangle ? 
 How can we form an idea, imperfedt as it is, of 
 infinitude, but by enlarging boundaries ? and how 
 can we throw down boundaries, without having 
 feen or felt them? 
 
 An eminent philofopher (Traite des Senfations, 
 tom. ii. p. 128) fays, Senfation includes ail our 
 faculties. 
 
 What muft be inferred from all this ? That I 
 leave to refledtive readers (X). 
 
 SOUL (Y ). 
 
 I T would be a fine thing to fee one’s foul. Know 
 thyfelf, is an excellent precept, which God alone 
 can pradtife. Who but he can know his elTence ? 
 
 We call foul, that which animates; and lb con* 
 traded is our undemanding, that we know little 
 
 more 
 
 (X) Mr. Voltaire does not tell us what inferences we are to 
 draw from the foregoing doctrine of fenfations ; bur we mult 
 contefs, the whole article contains the fubftance of the Lucre-, 
 tian arguments againft the immateriality of human fouls, 
 which is this ; that, fmce the five fenfes are the only means 
 we have of perception, and thefe depend upon the corporeal 
 organs, the foul without the body is incapable of perception, 
 and therefore is nothing. In anlwer to which we mull ob- 
 serve, firft, that though the fenfes or perceptions depend on 
 the corporeal organs, as to their prefent exercife, yet in their 
 nature they are really diftinft powers, and cannot arife from 
 any of the known properties or qualities of matter, as the 
 
 learned 
 
 1 
 
DICTIONARY. 299 
 more of it. Three-fourths of our fpecies do not 
 
 go 
 
 iearned Dr. Clarke hath fully demonftrated. Secondly, our 
 five fenfes cannot be laid to be the only pofiible ways of per- 
 ception, by an abfolute necefiity in the nature of the thing : 
 thefe are purely arbitrary ; and the fame power that gave us 
 thefe, may have given others to other beings : if they be pure- 
 ly arbitrary, the want of them does not imply a total want of 
 perception ; but the fame foijl which in the prefent ftate has 
 the powers of refledtion, reafon, and judgment, which are 
 faculties intirely different from fenfe, may as eafily in an- 
 other ftate have different ways of perception. To fay that the 
 lenfes are neceflarily the only ways of perception, is a mere 
 prejudice arifing from cuftom ; for fuppofing men had never 
 known the ufe of fight, would not they have the fame reafon 
 to conclude, there were but four pofiible ways of perception, 
 and that fight is an impofiible, imaginary power, as they now 
 prefume the faculties of immaterial beings to be fo? Men from 
 their own mere negative ignorance, fhould never difpute a- 
 gainft the pofiibility of things. See Dr, Clarke on the Being 
 and Attributes of God. 
 
 , (Y) This article abounds with metaphyfical queftions 
 
 concerning the immortality of the foul, which our au- 
 thor fays can be only made known to us by faith. We ap- 
 prehend he is much miftaken, and (hall therefore give the 
 reader the proofs of the immortality of the foul, or of a fu- 
 ture ftate of rewards and puniftiments. This we have at- 
 tempted the rather, as throughout his whole work he feems 
 inclined to diferedit this dodlrine, the bafis of all natu- 
 ral as well as of revealed religion. With regard to the no- 
 tions of fchoolmen, mentioned by M. Voltaire, they are a 
 matter of no confequence, a$ they do not affedl the dodlrine 
 itfelf, but are only defigned to amufe an idle curiofity. 
 
 I. In this prefent world the natural order of things is fo 
 perverted, that vice often flourifhes in great profperity, and 
 virtue falls under the heavieft calamities; whence we con- 
 clude, there muft be a future ftate of rewards and puniftiments. 
 For if there be a God, he is infinitely juft and good ; and it 
 muft needs be his will, that all rational creatures fhall imitate 
 his moral perfections ; he cannot therefore but be pleafed 
 yvith fuch as obey his will, and difpleafed with thole who dif- 
 
 obey 
 

 goo A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 go that length, and little concern themfelves about 
 
 tike 
 
 obey it; thence it follows, that in vindication of the honour 
 of his government, he muft fignify his approbation or dif- 
 pleafure fome time or other, by making finally a fuitable dif- 
 ference between thofe who obey him, and thofe who ad other- 
 wife; conlequently there muft be a ftate of rewards and pu- 
 nifhments after this life, wherein all the prefent difficulties of 
 providence fliall be cleared up by an exad adminiftration of 
 ' juftice. To fay, that virtue.is fufficient to its own happinefs, 
 is talking idly with the Stoics; fince in the prefent ftate of 
 things, virtue is not itfelf the chief good, but only the means 
 to obtain it ; and he who dies for the fake of virtue, is not really 
 more happy, rfbftraded from a regard to futurity, than he 
 who dies for any fond opinion or humour. 
 
 II. Confidering the nature and operations of the foul 
 Itfelf, none of the known qualities of matter can in any 
 poffible variation, divifion, or compofition, produce fenfe and 
 thought. The powers of the foul are the meft -remote from 
 the known properties of matter. It is abfurd to fuppofe the 
 foul made up of innumerable confcioufneffes, as matter of in- 
 numerable parts ; therefore the feat of thought muft be a 
 fimple fubftar.ee, fuc'n as cannot be divided into pieces like 
 mattery conlequently, the foul is not liable to be diflblved a- 
 Jong with the body; therefore it fill naturally be immortal. 
 
 HI. A third argument in favour of a future ftate, is 
 drawn from men’s natural defire of immortality. For it is 
 not at all probable, that God fhould have given men appe- 
 tites, which were never to be fatisfied ; defires, that bad no 
 objefts to anfwer them; and unavoidable apprehenfions of 
 what was never to happen. 
 
 IV. A fourth argument is drawn from men’s confciencc, 
 or judgment of their own conduct. Virtuous actions arc at- 
 tended with felf-applaufe and expedition of rewards; crimes, 
 on the other hand, are followed by remorfe, and dread of pu- 
 mfhment. Hence it is not therefore at ail likely, that the 
 Deity fhould have fo framed. the mind of man, as necefTarily 
 to pafs upon itfelf a judgment, which fliall never be verified ; 
 and ftand perpetually convifted by a fentence, which fliall 
 never be confirmed. 
 
 V. A 
 
DICTION AR Y. 2 o z 
 
 fhe thinking being •, the other fourth is feeking, 
 but nobody has found, nor ever will find. 
 
 Thou poor pedant feeft a vegetating plant, and 
 thou fayeft Vegetation, or even Vegetative foul. 
 'I hou obferveft bodies have and give motion, and 
 this with thee is ftrength. Thy hound’s aptnefs 
 in learning to hunt* under thy inftruttion, thou 
 called inftinff, fenfitivc foul ; and as thou haft com- 
 bined ideas, thou termeft lpirit. 
 
 But pray what do you mean by thefe words. 
 This flower vegetates ? But is there a real being 
 named Vegetation ? One body impels another, 
 but is there in it a diftinft being called Strength ? 
 This hound brings thee a partridge ; but is there a 
 being called Inftindl ? Wouldft thou not laugh 
 at a philofopher, had he even been Alexander’s- 
 preceptor, who fhouki tell thee : All animals live ; 
 therefore there is in them a being, a fubftantial 
 form, which is life ? 
 
 Could a tulip fpeak, and fliould it fay to thee. 
 We are evidently two beings united, wouldft thou 
 not contemptuoufly turn thy back on the tulip ? 
 
 Let us firil fee what fhou knoweft, and of what 
 
 V. A fifth and kft argument is drawn from man’s being 
 by nature an accountable creature, and capable of being 
 judged. Every moral aftion a- perfon performs proceeds 
 either from fome good, or bad motive ; is either conformable 
 or contrary to right reafon, and worthy of praife, or difpraife. 
 Therefore it is highly reafonable to fuppofe, that fince all the 
 moral difference of our actions confilts in the right ufe or 
 abufe of thofe faculties, which- we have received from a fuperior 
 being, there will at fome time or other be an inquiry made 
 into the grounds of our feveral actions, whether they have been 
 agreeable or difagreeable to the rule that was given us, and 
 a Suitable judgment be palled upon them. See further con- 
 cerning this fubjeft. Dr. Clarke on the Being and Attributes 
 of God, and Woolafton’s Religion of Nature delineated. 
 
 thou 
 
302 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 thou art certain : that thou walked with thy feet ~ 
 that thou digefteft by thy ftomach ; that thouf 
 feeleft all over thy body j arid that thou thinkeft 
 by thy head. Let us fee if thy reafon alone could 
 give thee fo much infight, as to conclude, withouc 
 any fupernatural help, that thoil halt a foul ? 
 
 The firft philofOphers, both Chaldeans and 
 Egyptians, faid : There muft be fomething in us that 
 produces our thoughts. This fomething muft be 
 very fubtile ; it is a breath ; it is fire it is tether; 
 it is a quinteflence ; it is a light form ; it is an 
 entelechia; it is a number;, it is a harmony. Ac- 
 cording to the divine Plato, it is a compound of 
 the fame and of the other; and Epicurus from De- 
 mocritus has faid, that it is thinking atoms in us 
 but, friend, how does an atom think ? Own youf 
 ignorance here. 
 
 The opinion which, unqueftionably we (hould 
 embrace, is that the foul is an immaterial being*, 
 but as certainly you do not conceive what this im- 
 material being is. No, anfwer the learned-, but we 
 know that its nature is to think. And how cofne 
 you to know that ? We know it, becaufe it does 
 think. O doctors! O fchoolmen! I am very much 
 afraid that you are as ignorant as Epicurus. The 
 nature of a ftone is to fall, becaufe it falls ; but I 
 afk you what makes it fall ? 
 
 We know, continue they, that a ftone has no foul. 
 Granted, I believe it as well as you. We know that 
 a negative and an affirmative are not diviftble, are 
 not parts of matter: I am of your opinion. But mat- 
 ter, otherwife unknown to us, has qualities that are 
 not divifible, as gravitation towards a center given 
 it by God. Now this gravitation has no parts, is 
 not divifible. The motory force of bodies is not 
 a being compofed of parts ; neither can it be 
 faid that the vegetation of all organized bodies, 
 
 their 
 
dictionary. ^ 
 
 ?Iicir life, their inftind, are diftindt, or divifible be- 
 ings. You can no more cut in two the vegetation 
 of a rofe, the life of a horfe, the inftindt of a dog, 
 than you can cut in two a fenfation, a negation, or 
 an affirmation. Thus your fine argument, taken 
 from the indivisibility of thought, proves nothing 
 at all. 
 
 What then do you call your foul ? what idea 
 have you of it ? All you can of yourfelf, without 
 a revelation, allow to be in yourfelf, is a power un- 
 known to you of feeling and thinking. 
 
 Now, honeflly tell me, is this power of feeling 
 and thinking, the fame as that by which you digell 
 and walk ? You tell me it is not : for it would*" be 
 in vain for your underftanding to fay to your 
 ltomach, digeft ; it will do no fuch thing if it be 
 out of order ; and to as little efTedt would your 
 immaterial being command your feet to walk j 
 they wil) nor budge, if the gout be in them. 
 
 The Greeks were well aware that thought often 
 had no concern with the play of our organs ; in- 
 stead of thofe organs, they lubftituted a fenfitive 
 foul, and for the thoughts, a more fine and more 
 Yubtile foul, a nous. 
 
 But let us come to this foul of thought, which on 
 a thouiand occafions has the fuperintendency over 
 the fenfitive foul. The thinking foul ordersits hands 
 to take, and they take ; but it never tells its heart 
 to beat, its blood to flow, or its chyle to form.itfelf; 
 all this is done without it. Thus are two fouls full of 
 bufinefs, and verylittle miftrefles in theirown home. 
 
 Now certainly that ftrft fenfitive foul does not 
 exift ; it is nothing but the motion of your organs. 
 Oblerve this, O man \ that thy weak reafon affords 
 thee no more proof that the other foul exifts. It 
 is only by faith that thou canft know it. Thou 
 art born, thou liveft j thou adlefij thou chinkeft; 
 
 thou 
 
3 04 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 hou fleepeft and waked: without knowing hOvtr. 
 God has given thee the Faculty of thinking, as he' 
 has given thee all thy other appurtenances; and had 
 he not come at the time appointed by his provi- 
 dence to inform thee, that thou hall an immaterial 
 and immortal foul, thou wouldft have been with- 
 out any proof of it. 
 
 Let us now take a view of the fine fyftems which 
 philofophy has ftruck out concerning the fouls. • 
 
 One fays that the foul of man is part of the fub- 
 ftance of God himfelf ; another, that it is part of 
 the greatr^tll; a third, that it has been created from 
 all eternity; a fourth, that it is made and not 
 created • others affirm, that God makes them as 
 they-are wanted •, and that they come at the in- 
 ftant of copulation : one cries they are lodged .in 
 the feminal animalcules: .not at all, fays another, 
 they take up their refidence in the Faiopian tub£s. 
 One coming in at the heat of the difpute, bawls,- 
 You are all out, the foul flays fix weeks till the 
 foetus be formed, and then pcffeffes itfelf of the 
 pineal gland; but if germ prove addle, it goes 
 away to whence it came, till a better opportu- 
 nity. The laft opinion makes its abode to be in 
 the callous body. This is the fituation affigned to 
 it by La Peirome. Indeed none under the king of 
 France’s firft furgeon could provide fuch an apart- 
 ment for the foul. However, the furgeon has got 
 into better vogue than his callous body... 
 
 St. Thomas, in his 75th queftion, &c. fays,, that 
 the foul is a form Subjijiens per fe ; that it is all 
 in all; that it’s efience differs from it’s power; that 
 there are thrgp t vegetative fouls, the nutritive, the 
 augmentative, and the generative; that the memory 
 of fpiritual things is fpiritual, and d. memory of 
 corporeal things is corporeal ; that the rational 
 foul is an immaterial form as to the operations ; 
 
 and 
 
DICTIONARY. 3bi 
 
 Snd material in effence. St. Thomas has written 
 two thoufand pages all of this force and perlpi- 
 pui'y. No wonder that fchools ftile him the ange- 
 lic doflor ! 
 
 As many fyftems have been invented on the 
 manner of this foul’s perceptions, when it fhall 
 have quitted this body by which it perceived, how 
 it wiil hear without ears,'fmell without a nofe, and 
 feel without hands ; what body it will afterwards 
 re-aflume, whether that which it had at the age of 
 two years, or of fourlcore? how the Me, the iden- 
 tity of the fame perfon, will fubfift ? how the foul 
 of a man, who was feized with ideotifm at the age 
 of fifteen, and died in that (late at feventy, will 
 recover the train of ideas which it had at its age 
 of puberty ? by what dexterity, a foul, one of 
 w'hofe legs was cut off in Europe, and which loft 
 an arm in America, will find this leg and arrti 
 again, after their feveral mutations into efcuient 
 herbs, and the blood of fome other animal ? There 
 would be no end of enumerating all the extrava- 
 gancies which this poor human loul has broached 
 Concerning it’s felf. 
 
 We live upon this earth in the fame manner as 
 the man with the iron mafic fpent his days in pri- 
 fon, without knowing his original, or the reafoti 
 6f his being confined, which excited a general cu* 
 riofity. 
 
 If any man has difcovered a ray of light in this 
 region of darknels, perhaps it is Mallebranche, 
 notwithstanding the general prejudices againft his 
 iyftem. It does not differ greatly from that of the 
 Stoics •, and who knows but thefe two opinions* 
 properly re&ified, come reared: the truth ? There 
 is, I think, fomething very fublime in that antieric 
 notion : “ We exift in God ; our thought, our 
 f‘ femiments, are derived from the Supreme Being. 4 * 
 
 X A mod 
 
 -V*' 
 
m 
 
 "c6 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 <v 
 
 A moft remarkable circumdance is, that in the 
 laws of God’s people, not a word is faid of the 
 foul’s fpirituality and immortality, nothing in the 
 Decalogue, nothing in Leviticus, nor in Deutero- 
 nomy. 
 
 It is very certain, it is manifeft, that Mofes no 
 where propofes to the Jews rewards and punifh- 
 ments in another date ; that he never mentions to 
 them the immortality of their fouls ; that he never 
 encourages them with the hopes of heaven, ncm 
 does he threaten them with heli; his promifes and 
 menaces are all temporal. 
 
 Before his death, he tells them in Deuteronomy : 
 
 “ If,- after having children and grand children, 
 «* you deal falfely, you fhall be cut off from the 
 “ land, and be made little among the nations. 
 
 “ I am a jealous God, punifhing the iniquity 
 “ of the fathers to the third and fourth generation, 
 
 “ Honour thy father and mother, that thy life 
 “ may be long. 
 
 “ You fhall never want food. 
 
 “ If you follow after ftrange gods, you fhall be 
 “ dedroyed 
 
 “ If you obey the' Lord, you fnall have rain in 
 “ fpring and autumn ■, corn, oil, wine, and fodder 
 “ for your beads, that you may eat and be fatisfied. 
 __ “ Put thefe words into your hearts, about your 
 lL‘ hands, between your eyes; write them on your 
 “ doors, that your days may be multiplied. 
 
 “ Do as I order you, without adding or taking 
 “ away any thing. 
 
 “ If a prophet arife among you, foretelling 
 “ ftrange things, and his prophecy is true, and 
 “ what he fays comes to pafs ; fhould he fay to 
 “ you, Come, let us follow drange gods, ye fhall 
 “ immediately kill him ; and all the people fmite 
 
 him after you. 
 
 “ When 
 
DICTIONARY. 3 o/ 
 
 When the Lord fhall have delivered the na- 
 tions into your hands, put them all to the fword* 
 “ without (paring one Angle man j thou (halt not 
 “ pity any one. 
 
 “ Eat no unclean birds, as the eagle, and the 
 “ offifrage, and the ofpray, &c. 
 
 “ Eat no creatures which chew the cud and are 
 not cloven footed, as the camel, the hare, and 
 “ the cony. 
 
 “ Whilft you obferve all thofe ordinances you 
 “ (hail be bleffed in your houfes and in your 
 “ fields ; the fruits of your body, 0 f your land, 
 “ of your cattle (hall be blefled. 
 
 “ If you fail to oblerve all thefe ordinances and 
 “ ceremonies, curfed iliall ye be in your houfes 
 
 “ and in your fields.- 
 
 “ Famine and poverty (hall come on you ; you 
 “ fhall die, diftreffed by cold, want, and fick- 
 “ ocls; you (hall have the itch, the fcabj you (hall 
 “ Have ulcers in your knees, and in your leo-s. 
 
 “ The ftrangers (hall lend to you on ufury 
 
 becaufe ye have not ferved the Lord. 
 
 And ye (hall tat the fruit of your bodies, and 
 “ the fielh of your Cons and of your daughters.” 
 
 Do not all thefe promifes and threatnir?gs relate 
 intirely to things of time and this world ? is there 
 a Angle word in them concerning the foul’s im- 
 mortality, and a future life ? 
 
 Several celebrated commentators have though^ 
 that thofe two capital doctrines were very well 
 known to Mofes, and in proof of it produce Ja- 
 cob’s words, who apprehending that his fon had 
 been devoured by wild hearts, fays in his grief, I 
 (hall go down with my fon to the grave, in infer- 
 ftum, into hell ■, that is to fay, as my Ion is dead, 
 let me die. 
 
 They farther prove it by pafiages from Ifaiah 
 
 X 2 and[ 
 
 < 
 
3 o8 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 and Ezekiel •, but the Hebrews, to whom Mofe3 
 was fpeaking, knew nothing of thofetwo prophets, 
 as not living till fome ages after. 
 
 To difpute about Moles’s private fentiments is 
 wafting words to no purpofe. T he certain fadt is, 
 that in° his public laws he had never fo much as 
 once made mention of a life to come, limiting all 
 punifhments and all rewards to the prefent ftate. 
 if he was acquainted with a future life, why did 
 he not exprefly fet forth fuch an important tenet ? 
 and if he was a ftranger to it, what was the fcope 
 of his million ? 
 
 This is a queftion advanced by feveral great 
 men : and in anfwer to it they lay, that Mofes’s 
 Lord, who is the lord of all men, referved to him- 
 felf the prerogative of explaining to the Jews in 
 his own time, a do&rine which they were not in a 
 condition to underftand, v/hen in the wildernefs. 
 
 Had Mofes taught the do&rine of the immor- 
 tality of the foul, a great fchool among the Jews 
 would not always have oppofed it. Nay, that great 
 fchool, the Sadducees, would not have been allowed 
 of in the ftate, much lefs would they have held 
 the chief employments*, and ftill much lefs 
 would high-priefts have been taken from fuch a 
 body. » 
 
 It appears that the Jews were not divided into' 
 three fedls, the Pharifees, the Sadducees, and the 
 Efienes, till after the foundation of Alexandria. 
 Jofephus the hiftorian, who was a Pharifee, fays in 
 book XIII. of his antiquities, that the Pharifees be- 
 lieved the metempfichofis. The Sadducees held that 
 the foul perilhed with the body. The opinion of 
 the Efienes was, that fouls were immortal and came 
 down into bodies from the upper regions of the air 
 in an aerial form ; that their return thither is by 
 a rapid attra&ion ; and, after death, thole which 
 a - belong- 
 
DICTIONARY. 3 o ? 
 
 belonged to good perfons have manfions aflig .e J 
 them beyond the ocean, in a country where there 
 is neither heat nor cold, wind nor rain, whi'd the 
 fouls of the wicked go to a quite contrary climate 
 fuch was' the theology of the Jews. 
 
 He who alone was to fet mankind right came 
 and overthrew thefe three fr£t« ; but without him 
 we nev-r fh old have been able to know any thing 
 of the foul : for philno hers never ha i any deter- 
 minate idea of it ; and Mofes, the only true legi- 
 flator of the world before our divine teacher ; 
 Mofes, who lpoke to God face to face, and who 
 faw only his hinder parts, has left mankind in their 
 natural ignorance of this momentous article : fo 
 that it is but Seventeen hundred years fince there 
 has been any certainty of the exidence and im- 
 mortality of the foul. 
 
 Cicero had only furmifes; his grand-fon and 
 grand-daughter might have learned farther from 
 the firft Galileans who came to Rome. 
 
 But before, and fince that time, in all the parts 
 of the earth, where the apoftles had not preached 
 the gofpel, every one might fay to his foul. Who arc 
 thou? whence comeft thou? what art thou do- 
 ing ? whither art thou going? 1'hou art, I know 
 not what ; thou thinkeft and perceived: j and were 
 thou to perceive and think a hundred thouland 
 millions of years, never wouldft thou, by thine 
 own faculties, without the affiftance of God, know 
 a jot more than thou knoweft now. 
 
 Know man, that God has given thee under- 
 ftanding to guide thy behaviour, and not to pe- 
 netrate into the elfence of the things which he has 
 pregted. 
 
 X 3 
 
 SUP- 
 
3 io A PHILOSOPHICAL* 
 
 SUPERSTITION (Y). 
 
 W PIatever goes beyond the adoration of ono 
 Supreme Being, and a fubmifiion of the 
 heart to his eternal orders, is generally lupeifti- 
 tion; and a mod dangerous fuperftition is the an- 
 nexing of the pardon of crimes to certain cere-r 
 monies, 
 
 “ Et nigras ma&ant pecudes et manibus divis 
 V Inferias mittunt. 
 
 cc O faciles nimium qui triftia crimina casdis 
 Fluminea tolli polle putatis aqua.’"' 
 
 You imagine that God will forget your having 
 Filled a man, only for your walhing yourfelf in 
 a river, facrificing a black (beep, and lome words 
 being faid over you. Of courie then a fecond 
 murder will be forgiven you at the fame eafy rate, 
 and fo a third * and a hundred murders will only 
 coft you a hundred black fheep, and a hundred 
 ablutions ! Poor mortals ! away with iuch con- 
 
 (Y) The do&rine contained in this article may come very 
 well from the mouth of Cicero, Seneca, or Plutarch ; but if 
 it intends to fupprefs all external ceremonies of religion, it 
 is not fuitable to a believer of Chriftiarity. We are taught 
 that every particular or national church hath authority to de- 
 cree and appoint ceremonies or religious rites, without be- 
 ing charged with fuperftition. And we believe that Bap- 
 tifm and the LordVPrayer, which- conftitute a part of 
 our external woifnip, were ordained by Chrift, and confe- 
 quently a divine inftitution. Superftition properly confifts in 
 the pradcice of fuch ceremonies as are repugnant to reafon, 
 or the word of God. 
 
 
 1 * 
 
 cats j 
 
dictionary. 3 ,t 
 
 c«its 5 the bed way is, commit no murder, and 
 fo iave your black (heep. 
 
 __ How fcandalous is it to imagine that a pried of 
 Ids and Cybele can reconcile you to the deity, by 
 playing on cymbals and caftanets ! And what is this 
 p i'ed of Cybele, this vagrant gelding, who lives 
 by your weaknefs, that he fliail fct up to be as a 
 mediator between heaven and you ? Has he any 
 commidion from God? He takes money from you 
 only for muttering fome drange words j and you 
 can think that the Being of Beings ratifies what 
 this hypocrite fays. 
 
 Some fuperditions are innocent ; you dance on 
 Diana or Pomona’s fedivals, or thofe of any of 
 the fecondary gods in your calendar: be it fo; 
 dancing is pleal'ant, healthy, and exhilarating-, it 
 hurts no body ; but do not take it into your head 
 that Pomona and Vertumnus are mightiiy pleafed 
 at your having frolicked in honour of them ; and 
 that fiiould you fail to do fo, they would make you 
 imart for it. The gardener’s fpade and hoe are the 
 only Pomona and Vertumnus. Don’t be fo weak 
 as to think that your garden will be dedroyed by 
 a temped, if you omit dancing the pyrrhic or 
 the cordax. 
 
 There is another fuperdition which perhaps is 
 excufabie, and even an incentive to virtue ; I mean 
 deifying great men who have been fignal benefac- 
 tors to their own fpecies. To be fure it would be 
 better only to look on them as venerable perfon- 
 ages, and efpecially to endeavour to imitate them : 
 therefore revere, without worfhipping, a Solon, a 
 Thales, a Pythagoras ; but by no means do not pay 
 thy adorations to Hercules for having cleanfed 
 Augeas’s dables, and lying with fifty girls in one 
 flight. 
 
 X 4 
 
 Efpe- 
 
31 2 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 Efpecially forbear fetting up a worfhip foe 
 wretches without any other merit than ignorance, 
 enthufiafm, and naftinefs •, who made a vow of 
 idlenefs and beggary, and gloried in fuch infamy : 
 fit fubjefts indeed for deification after their death ; 
 who were never known to do the leaft good when 
 living ! 
 
 Obferve that the rnoft fuperftitious times have 
 ever been noted for the greateff enormities. 
 
 TOLERATION. 
 
 W HAT is toleration ? It is a privilege to 
 which human nature is entitled : we are 
 all made up of weaknefs and errors ; it therefore 
 behoves us mutually to forgive another’s follies. 
 This is the very firft law of nature. 
 
 Though the Gueber, the Banian, the Jew, the 
 Mahometan, the lettered Chinefe, the Greek, the 
 Roman Catholic, the Quaker, traffic together on 
 the ’Charge of Amfterdam, London, Surat, or 
 Bafibra ; they will never offer to lilt up a poniard 
 againfl each other, to gain profelytes : wherefore 
 then, fmee the frft council of Nice, have we been 
 almoff continually cutting each other’s throats ? 
 
 Conftantine began with ifluing an edift, allow- 
 ing the exercife of all religions ; .and fome time 
 after turned perfecutor. Before him, all the fevere 
 treatment of the Chriftians proceeded purely from 
 their beginning to make a party in the ftate. The 
 Romans permitted every kind of worffiip, even of 
 the Jews and Egyptians, both which they fo very 
 much defpifed. How then came Rome to tolerate 
 thefe forms ? It was becaule neither tire Egyptians 
 nor the Jews themfelves went about to exterminate 
 the antient religion of the empire ; they did not 
 
 crofs 
 
DICTIONARY. 313 
 profs feas and lands to make profelytes; the getting 
 of money was all they minded ; whereas it is indil- 
 putable, that the Chriftiaris could not be eafy, 
 pnlefs their religion bore the fway. The Jews 
 were difgufted at the ftatue of Jupiter being let up 
 in Jerulalem ; but the Chriftians would not ib much 
 as allow it to be in the capitol of Rome. St. Thomas 
 candidly owns, that ic was on ly for want of power that 
 the Chriftians did not dethrone the emperors: they 
 held that all the world ought to embrace their re- 
 ligion ; this of courfe made them enemies to all the 
 world, till its happy converfion. 
 
 Their controverfial points likewife fet them at 
 enmity one againfl another concerning the divinity 
 of Chrift: they who denied it, were anathematized 
 as fcbionites v and thefe anathematized the wor- 
 fhippers of Jefus. 
 
 If fome would have all goods to be in common, as 
 they alledged was the cuftom in the Apoftles time; 
 their adverfaries call them Nicolaitans, and accwfe 
 them of the moft horrid crimes. If others fet up 
 for a myftical devotion, they are branded with the 
 appellation of Gnoltics, and oppofed with extreme 
 vehemence and feverity. Marcion, for difputing 
 on the Trinity, got the name of an idolater. 
 
 Tertullian, Praxeas, Origen, Novatus, Novatia- 
 nus, Sabellus, and Donatus, were all persecuted 
 by their brethren before Conftantine’s time : and 
 Q10 fooner had Conftantine eftablifhed the Chriftian 
 religion, than the Athanafians and Eufebians fell 
 foul of one another ; and ever fince, down to our 
 own times, the Chriftian church has been deluged 
 with blood. 
 
 The Jewifl^people were, I own, extremely bar- 
 , barous and mercilefs ; malfacring all the inhabi- 
 tants of a little wretched country, to which it had 
 
 no 
 
3 Ur A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 no more right ( Z ) than their vile defcendants hav<? 
 to Paris or London. However, when Naaman 
 is cured of his leprofy by dipping feven times 
 in the river Jordan, and by vyay of expreffing his 
 gratitude to Elijah, from whom he had the fecret of 
 that eafy cure, he tells him that he will worlhip the 
 God of the Jews j he yet refer ves to himfelf the liberty 
 to worlhip his fovereign’s God likewife ; 2 nd alks 
 Elifha’s leave, which the prophet readily grants (A). 
 The Jews worlhipped their God, but never were 
 offended at, or fo much as thought it flrange, that 
 every nation had its own Deity. They acquiefced 
 in Chamolh’s giving a trad of land to the Moa- 
 bites, provided they would let them quietly enjoy 
 what \they held from their God. Jacob made no 
 difficulty of marrying an idolater’s daughter ; for 
 Laban had another kind of god than he whom Jacob 
 worlhipped. Thefe are inftances of toleration a- 
 mong the moll haughty, moll: obllinate, and mod 
 cruel people of all antiquity-, and we, overlooking 
 what lit tie indulgence was among them, have 
 have imitated only their fanguinary rancour. 
 
 Every individual perfecuting another for not be- 
 ing of his opinion, is a monfttr ; this is evident be- 
 yond alldifpute: but the government! men in power. 
 
 (Z) This is amiftakc of M. Voltaire. 'J'he Ifraelie? treated 
 the Cananites with great leverity by the exprefs command of 
 God, who would have thefe nations extirpated becaufe of their 
 horrid impiety, which loon made them unworthy of the lands 
 they poflefled, and was the caufe of their being given away 
 *o the Ifraelites. 
 
 (A) This ftory of Naaman is not fairly reprefented. Naa- 
 man does not alk Elifha’s permiflion to worfhip his mafter’s 
 God, but to bow himfelf down along with his mafter, who 
 leaned upon his hand ; fo that it was not a religious, but a 
 civil ceremony, in thediicharge of his office. Thus Abraham, 
 Gerj. xxiii. 7. bowed himfelf to the people of the land. 
 
 princes \ 
 
DICTIONARY. 3 , 5 
 
 princes ! how are they to deal with thofe of a dif- 
 ferent worfhip from theirs ? If foreigners and 
 powerful, it is certain a prince will not dif'dain 
 entering into an alliance with them. Francis I. 
 though his mod Chriftian majefty, unites with 
 the Muflulmen againft Charles V. likewife a moft 
 Chriftian monarch. Francis fupplies the German 
 Lutherans with money to fupport their revolt 
 againft the emperor-, but, according to cuftom, 
 burns them in his own country: thus, from policy, 
 he pays them in Saxony ; and, from policy, makes 
 bonfiies of them at Paris. But what was the con- 
 fequence? Perfecution ever makes profelytes. France 
 came to fwarm with new Proteftants, who at firft 
 quietly fubmitted to be hanged, and afterwards 
 hung others-, civil wars came on -, and St. Bartho- 
 lomew’s day, or the maflacre of Paris, crowned all. 
 Thus this corner of the world became worfe than 
 all that ever the antients or moderns have faid of 
 hell. 
 
 Ye fools, never to pay a proper worftiip to the 
 God who made you ! wretches, on whom theexample 
 of the Noachids, the lettered Chinefe, the Perfees, 
 and all wife men have had no influence ! monfters, 
 to whom fuperftitions are neceflary as carrion to 
 crows ! You have been already told it, and I have 
 nothing elfe to tell you ; whilft you have but two 
 religions among you, they will be ever at daggers, 
 drawing ; if you have thirty they will live quietly. 
 Turn your eyes to the grand flgnior, he has among 
 his fubjefls Guebers, Banians, Greeks, Latins, 
 Chriftians, and Neftorians. Whoever goes about 
 to raife any difturbance is fu rely impaled •, and thus 
 all live in peace and quietnefs. 
 
 T Y R A N- 
 
$16 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 TYRANNY. 
 
 B Y a tyrant is meant a fovereign who makes 
 his humour the law, who feizes on his fub- 
 jccts fubftance, and afterwards inlifts them to go 
 and give his neighbours the like treatment. Thefe 
 tyrants are not known in Europe. 
 
 Tyranny is diftinguilhed into that of one perfon 
 and of many ; a body invading the rights of other 
 bodies, and corrupting the laws that it may ex- 
 ercife a defpotifm apparently legal, is the latter 
 tyranny ; but Europe likewiie has none of thefe 
 tyrants. 
 
 Under which tyranny would you chufe to live? 
 Under non. •, out had .( the opiiou, the tyranny of 
 one perfon app ;rs to me lei's od’ous and dreadful 
 than that of many. A defpot has always lome 
 intervals of good humour; which is never known in 
 an alfembly of defpots. If a tyrant has done me 
 an injury, there is his miftrefs, his conrefTor, or his 
 page, by means of whom I may appeal's him, and 
 obtain redrefs •, but a fet of fupercilious tyrants is 
 inacceflible to all applications. If they are not un- 
 juft, ftill they are auftere and harfli ; and no fa- 
 vours are ever known to come from them. 
 
 Under one defpot, I need only ftand up againft: 
 a wall when I fee him coming by, or proftrate my 
 felf, or knock my forehead againft the ground, ac- 
 cording to the cuftom of the country •, but under 
 a body of perhaps a hundred defpots, I may be 
 obliged to repeat this ceremony a hundred times a 
 day, which is not a little troublefome to thofe who 
 are not very nimble. Another difagreeable cir- 
 cumftance is, if my farm happens to be in the 
 neighbourhood of one of our great lords, it is 
 
 unknown 
 
DICTIONARY. 3 if 
 
 unknown what damages I am obliged to put up 
 with ; and if 1 have a law-fuit with a relation to a 
 relation of one of theif high-mightineffes, it will 
 infallibly go againft me, 1 am very much afraid 
 that in this world things will come to luch a pafs, 
 as to have no other option than being either ham- 
 mer or anvil. Happy he ! who gets clear of this 
 alternative. 
 
 VIRTUE (B). 
 
 H AT is virtue ? Doing good to others^ 
 
 How can I give the name of virtue to any 
 
 one but to him who does me good ? I am in want, 
 you relieve me •, I am in danger, you come to my 
 afiiftance •, I have been deceived, you tell me the 
 truth. 1 am ill ufed, you comfort me j I am igno- 
 rant, you inftruft me : I muft fay then you are vir- 
 tuous. But what will become of the cardinal and 
 theological virtues ? Let fome e’en remain in the 
 fchools. 
 
 (B) Our author may give feme offence to minute critics in 
 the following article, but upon confideration the reader will 
 find the whole to be a logomachia. By virtue he means charity 
 and beneficence. The cardinal and theological virtues he 
 calls excellent qualities, but does not allow them, to be vir- 
 tues in regard 'to our neighbour. No body pretends they are; 
 but they are virtues in regard to ourfelves, and to the Deity ; 
 or they are excellent qualities, for we fhall not difpute about 
 the wefrd. We do not perceive, neverthelefs, how M. Vol- 
 taire can be faid to give indirect encouragement in this ar- 
 ticle to private vices, for he acknowledges that gluttony, 
 . drunkennefs, &c. are blemifhes or defers in a hermit, tho’ 
 „ not pernicious to fociety, becaufe he does not live in a focial 
 itate. 
 
 What 
 
3iS A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 What is your temperance to me ? It is no more 
 than an obfervance of a rule of health ; you will be 
 the better for it ; and much good may it do you. If 
 you have faith and hope, better ftill; they will procure 
 you eternal life. Your theological virtues aie hea- 
 venly gifts, and thofe you call cardinal are excellent 
 qualities for your guidance in life ; but, relatively 
 to your neighbour, they are no virtues. The pru- 
 dent man does good to himfelf ; the virtuous to 
 men in general. Very well was it laid by St. Paul, 
 that charity is better than faith and hope. 
 
 But how ! are no virtues to be admitted but" 
 thofe by which others are benefited? No indeed. 
 We live in a fociety; confequently there is 
 nothing truly good to us, but what is for the 
 good of fuch fociety. If a hermit is fober and 
 devout, and among other mortifications wears a 
 fackcloth fhirt; fuch a one I let down as a faint; but 
 before l (hall ftyle him virtuous, let him do fome 
 adfc of virtue which will promote the well being of 
 his fellow creatures. Whilft he lives by himfelf, 
 to us he is neither good nor bad ; he is nothing. 
 If St. Bruno reconciled families, and relieved the 
 indigent, he was virtuous; if he prayed and faded 
 in the defert, he was a faint. Among men vir- 
 tue is a mutual exchange of kindnefies, and whoever 
 declines fuch exchanges, ought not to be reckoned 
 a member of fociety. Were that faint to live in the 
 world, probably he would do good in it; but whilft 
 he keeps out of it, the world will only do his fainc- 
 fhip juftice, in not allowing him to be virtuous. 
 He may be good to himfelf, but not to us. 
 
 But, fay you, if a hermit be given to drunken- 
 nefs, fenfuality, and private debauchery, he is a 
 vicious man ; confequently with the oppofite qua- 
 lities, he is virtuous. That is vhat I cannot come 
 into ; if he has thofe faults he is a very filthy man; 
 
 but 
 
DICTIONARY. 3 < g 
 
 but, with regard to fociety, as it is not hurt by 
 his infamies, he is not vicious, wicked, or delerv- 
 ingof punifhment. It is to be prefumed, that were 
 he to return into fociety, he would do much harm, 
 and prove a very bad man. Of this there is a 
 greater probability, than that the temperate and 
 chafte hermit will be a good man-, for in public 
 life, faults increafe, and good qualities diminilb. 
 
 A much ftronger obje&ion is, that Nero, pope 
 Alexander VI. and other fuch monfters did fome 
 good things. I take upon me to anfwer, that when 
 they did, they were virtuous.' 
 
 Some divines, fo far from allowing that excellent 
 emperor Antoninus to have been a good man, re- 
 prefent him as a conceited Stoic, who, befides rul- 
 ing over men, coveted theit elteem ; that in ail the 
 good he did to mankind, his own reputation was 
 the end ; that his jultice, application, and bene- 
 volence, proceeded purely from vanity ; and that 
 his virtues were a downright impofition on the 
 world. At this, I cannot forbear crying out, O! 
 my God, be pleafed in thy goodnefs, often to give 
 us fuch hypocrites. 
 
 W A R. 
 
 F 'Amine, t/ie plague, and war, are the three 
 moft famous ingredients in this lower world. 
 Under famine maybe clalTed all the noxious foods^ 
 which want obliges us to have recourfe to ; thus 
 fbortening our life, whilfl we hope to fupporc 
 it. 
 
 In the plague are included all contagious diftem- 
 pers ; and thele are not lefs than two or three 
 thoufand. I hele two gifts we hold from provi- 
 dence j but war, in which all thole gifts are con- 
 centered. 
 
S 20 a philosophical 
 
 centered, we owe to the fancy of three or four 
 hundred perfons fcattered over the furface of this 
 globe, under the name of princes and minifters % 
 and on this account it may be, that in feveral dedi- 
 cations, they are called the living images of the 
 Deity. 
 
 The mod hardened flatterer will allow, that war 
 is ever attended with plague and famine, efpecially 
 if he has feen the military- hofpitals in Germany,’ 
 or palled through any villages where fome notable 
 feat of arms has been performed. 
 
 It is unqueftionably a very noble art to ravage 
 countries, deftroy dwellings, and commuvibus annis; 
 out of a hundred thoufand men tp cut off forty 
 thoufand. This invention was originally cultivated 
 by nations, afiembled for their common good •, for 
 inftance, the diet of the Greeks fent word to the 
 diet of Phrygia and its neighbours, that they were 
 putting to lea in a thoufand fifhing-boats, in or- 
 der to do thelcbeft to cut them off root and branch. 
 
 The Roman people, in a general aflembly, re- 
 fglved that it was their intereft to go and fight the 
 Vejentes or the Volfcians before harveft j and fome 
 years after, all the Romans being angry with all the 
 Carthaginians, fought a long time both by fea and 
 land. It is otherwife in our time. 
 
 A genealogift fets forth to a prince that he is de- 
 fended in a diredl line from a count, whole kin- 
 dred, three or four hundred years ago, had made 
 a family-compaft with a houfe, the very memory 
 of which is extinguifhed. That houfe had fome 
 . diftant claim to a province, the laft proprietor of 
 which died of an apoplexy. The prince and his 
 council inftanriy refolve, that this province belongs 
 to him by divine right. The province, which is 
 fome hundred leagues from him, protefts that it is 
 dees not fo much as know him ; that it is not dif- 
 
 pofed 
 
— 
 
 
 
 
 DICTIONARY. 32 i 
 
 pofctl to be governed by him ; that before pre- 
 scribing laws to them, their confent, at leak, was 
 neceffary : theie allegations do not fo much as reach 
 the pi mce s ears ; it is infifteu on that his right is 
 incontc (fable. He inftantly picks up a multi- 
 tude of men, who have nothing to do, nor nothing 
 tolol'e; cloaths them with coarfe blue doth, one 
 fou to the ell ; puts them on hats bound with coarfe 
 white worfted makes them turn to the right and 
 leit ; and thus marches away with them to glory. 
 
 father princes, on rbis armament, take part in 
 it t To the bdt of their abili^v, and foon cover a final! 
 extent of country, with more hireling murderers 
 than Gengis-Kan, Tamerlane, and Bajazet had ac 
 their heels. 
 
 People, at no fmall diftartce, on hearing that 
 fighting is going forward, and that if they would 
 make one, there are fiveor fix fous a day for them, 
 immediately divide into two bands, like reapers* 
 and go and fell their Cervices to the firft bidder. 
 
 I hefe multitudes furioufly butcher one another* 
 not only without having any concern in the quar- 
 rel, but without lo' much as knowing what it is 
 about. 
 
 Sometimes five or fix powers are engap-ed, three 
 againft three, two againft four, fometimes even 
 one againft five, ail equally decefting one another % 
 and triends and foes, by turns, agreeing only in 
 one thing, to do all the’mifehief poflible. 
 
 An odd circumftance in this iniernal enterprise 
 is, that every chief of thefe ruffians has his colours 
 Confecraujd •, and folemnly prays to God before he 
 goes to deftroy his neighbour. If the flain in a 
 battle do not exceed two or three thouland, the for- 
 tunate commander does not think it worth thank- 
 ing God for ; but if, befides killing ten or twelve 
 thousand men, he has been lb far favoured by hea- 
 
 X ven* 
 
3 tz A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 ven, as totally to deftroy fome remarkable place, 
 then a verbofe hymn is fung in four parts, eom- 
 pofed in a language unknown to ali the com- 
 batants, and befides Huffed with barbarifms. The 
 fame fong does for marriages and births, as for 
 maffacres •, which is fcarce pardonable, efpecially 
 in a nation of all others the moft noted ior new 
 fongs. 
 
 All countries pay a certain number of orators 
 to celebrate thcle fanguinary adlions-, fome in a 
 long black coat, and over it a fhort docked cloak •, 
 others in a gown, with a kind of fhirt over it-, fome 
 again over their Hurts have two pieces of a motley- 
 coloured ftuff hanging down. They are all very 
 long-winded in their harangues, and to illuftrate a 
 battle fought in Weteravia, bring up what palled 
 thoufands of years ago in Paleftine. 
 
 At other times thefe gentry declaim againft 
 vice -, they prove by fyllogifms and antithefes, that 
 ladies, for (lightly heightening the hue of their 
 cheeks with a little carmine, will affuredly be the 
 eternal objeifks of eternal vengeance •, that Poly- 
 eu£le and Athalia (C) are the devil’s works that 
 he, whofe table on a day of abflinence, is loaded 
 with fifh to the amount of two hundred crowns, is 
 infallibly faved and that a poor man, for eating 
 two penny-worth of mutton, goes to the devil for 
 ever and ever. 
 
 Among five or fix thoufand fuch declamations, 
 there may be, and that is the tnoft, three or four, 
 written by a Gaul named Maffillon, which a gen- 
 tleman may bear to read ; hut in not one of all 
 thofe dilcourfcs has the orator the fpirit to animad- 
 vert on war, thac fcourge and crime which includes 
 
 (C) Two French Tragedies. 
 
 all 
 
DICTIONARY. 523 
 
 all others. Thefe groveling fpeakers are contine- 
 a.!y prating againft love, mankind’s only fblace, and 
 the only way of repairing it : not a word do they 
 lay of the deteftablc endeavours of the mighty for 
 its deftruftion. b ' 
 
 Bourdaloue, a very bad fermon have you made 
 againft impurity, but not one either bad or a 00 d 
 on thole various kinds of murders, on thofe'rob- 
 berics, on thofe violences, that univerfal raoe by 
 which the world is laid wafte ! Put together^]! the 
 vices of all ages and places, and never will they 
 come up to the mifchiefs and enormities of only one 
 campaign. 1 
 
 Ye bungling foul-phyficians, to bellow for an 
 hour and more againft a few flea-bites, and not fay 
 a word about that horrid biftemper, which tears us 
 to pieces. Burn your books, ye moralizing philo- 
 sophers ! Whilft the humour of a few (hall make 
 ic an aft of loyalty to butcher thoufands of our fel- 
 low-creatures, the part of mankind dedicated to 
 heroilm will benhe moft execrable and deftruftive 
 monfters in all nature. Of whac avail is humani- 
 ty, benevolence, modefly, temperance, mildnefs, 
 dilcretion, and piety; when half a pound of lead 
 dilcharged at the diftance of fix hundred paces 
 lhatters my body ; when I expire at the age of 
 twenty under pains unfpeakablc, and amidft thou- 
 fands in the fame miferable condition ; when my 
 eyes at their lalt opening fee my native town all in 
 a blaze ; and the Jail founds I hear are the fhrieks 
 and groans of women and children expiring among 
 the ruins, and all for the pretended intereft of a 
 marf who is a ftranger to us ! 
 
 The worft is, that war appears to be an unavoid- 
 able Icourge ; for if we obitrve it, the god Mars 
 was worfhipped in all nations; and among the 
 Jews, Sabaorh fignifies the gcd of armies : but in 
 
 Y 2 Homerj 
 
5 24 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 Homer, Minerva calls Mars a furious hare-brained 
 infernal deity. 
 
 WHATEVER IS IS RIGHT. 
 HAT a clamour was raifed in the fchcols. 
 
 and even among i'ober thinkers, when 
 Leibnitz, paraphrafingon Plato, built his ftru<5ture 
 of the belt of poffible worlds, affirming that all 
 things went in the belt manner, and that God 
 could make but one world. Now, Plaro had al- 
 lowed that God could make five, there being five 
 regular lolid bodies; the tetraedron or three-faced 
 pyramid, with the bdfe equal, the cube, theexaedron, 
 the dodecaedron, and-hcoaedron. But our world is 
 not of the form of any of Plato’s bodies, fo that he 
 (hould have allowed God a lixth manner. 
 
 So much for the divine Plato. Leibnitz, who 
 certainly was his fuperior both in metaphyfics and 
 geometry, in the tendernefs of philanthropy fnew- 
 cd mankind, that we ought to be very well fa- 
 tisfied, and that God had done all he could for us-, 
 that he had necefiarily, among all poffibilitcs, made 
 choice of what was indifputably the bell. 
 
 What becomes of original fin ? was the cry of 
 many. Let what will come of it, faid Leibnitz 
 and his friends ; but in his public writings he 
 makes original fin necefiarily a part cf the beft 
 world. 
 
 How ! our firft parents to be driven out of a de- 
 lightful abode, where they were to have lived for 
 ever, had they not eaten an apple ! How ! in 
 wretchednefs to beget children loaded with a va- 
 riety of wretchednefs, and making others as wretch- 
 ed as themfclvesl How! .to undergo fuch difeafes ; 
 to feel fuch vexations ; to expire in pain ; and by 
 
 way 
 
DICTIONARY. 3 2 * 
 way of refrcfhmenc to be burned tlirough alt the 
 ages of eternity ; was this the bell portion ? That 
 is not over good for us ; and in what can ic be <>ood 
 for God ? ° 
 
 Leibnitz was fcnpble this admitted of no an- 
 iwer •, accordingly he falls to making of large 
 books unintelligible to his very felf. 
 
 I o deny that there is any evil, may be faid as a 
 banter by a Lucullus full of health, and feafting in 
 his faloon with his miftrefs and jocund cronies ; 
 but only iet him look out at the window, and he 
 will fee fome unhappy people ; and a lever will 
 make the great man himfclf fo. 
 
 I am not fond of quoting; it is ufually a critical 
 t.tflc ; it is negleding both what precedes and fol- 
 lows the paflage quoted, and bringing on one’s felf 
 complaints and quarrels: yet I mud quote Lac- 
 tantius, a father of the church, who, in his thir- 
 teenth chapter on the Divine Anger, puts the fol- 
 lowing words into Epicurus’s mouth; “EitherGod 
 ** would remove evil out of this world, and cannot; 
 
 or he can or will not; or he has neither the 
 “ power nor will ; or laflly, he has both the power 
 “ and will. 11 he has the will and not the power, 
 “ t bis ffcews weaknefs, which is contrary to the 
 “ nature of God; if he has the power, and not 
 11 the wdl, it is malignity; and this is no lefs con- 
 “ trary to his nature. If he is neither able nor 
 “ willing, it is both weaknefs and malignity ; if 
 “ he be both willing and able (which alone is 
 “ confonant to the nature of God) how came it 
 “ that there is evil in the world ?” 
 
 I his is a home argunsent; and accordingly Lac- 
 tantius gives but a forry anfwer to it, in faying 
 that God wills evil, but that he has given us wii- 
 dom for acquiring good. This anfwer mult be al- 
 lowed to fall very fhorc of the objection ; as fup- 
 
 Y 3 pofing 
 
f<44^ 
 
 326 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 polirg that God, without producing evil, could not 
 havr given us wifdom •, if fo, our wifdom is a dear 
 bargain. 
 
 The origin of evil (D) has ever been an abyfs, 
 the bottom of which lies beyond the reach of hu- 
 man eye ; and many philofophers and legiflators, 
 in their perplexity, had recourfe to two principles, 
 one good and the other evil ; Tiphon was the evil 
 principle among the Egyptians, and Arimane among 
 the Perlians. This divinity is well known to have 
 been efpouled by the Manichees; but thefe wife 
 folks, having never converfed with either the good 
 
 (D) How difficult fcever this great queftion of the caufe and 
 original of evil may appear to our author, it has been adr 
 mirably well folved by the learned Dr. Clarke, in the infer 
 rence he draws from the proofs of the pofiibility and real ex- 
 iftence of liberty. For liberty implying a natural power of 
 doing evil as well as good, and the imperfedt nature of finite 
 beings making it pofiible for them to abufe their liberty 
 to an adtual commifllon of evil, and it being neceffary to the 
 order and beauty of the whole, there fhould be different de- 
 grees of creatures, fome lefs perfect than others ; hence there , t 
 neceffiarily arifeth a poffibility of evil, though the Creator is 
 infinitely good. Evil is either natural or moral. Moral evil 
 arifes wholly from the abufe of liberty, which God gave to his 
 creatures for other purpofes, and which it was reafonable and 
 fit to give them for the perfection and order of the whole crea- 
 tion : but they, contrary \o the divine intention and command, 
 have abufed what was neceffary for the perfection of the whole, 
 to the corruption and depravation of themfelves. Natural 
 f-vil is either counterpoifed in the whole, with as great or greater 
 good ; fuch are the affiidlions and fufferings of good men, 
 and then it is not properly an evil : or it is a punifhment, and 
 then it is a neceffary confequence of moral evil. As foj^death, 
 it is not a naturai evil, though generally counted fuch ; fince 
 it is only the want of immortality, a perfection which does 
 not belong to our nature, and fuch a want is not properly an 
 evil. See Dr. Clarke o;i the Being and Attributes of God. 
 
 or 
 
 
DICTIONARY. 327 
 
 or the evil principle, I think they are not to be be- 
 lieved on their bare word. 
 
 Amidft the ablurdities which fwarm in the 
 world, and may be claffed among its evils, it is no 
 flight error to have fuppoi'ed two Almighty Be- 
 ings ftruggling which Ihould bear the greater" iway 
 in the world, and making an agreement together, 
 like Moliere’s two phyficians. Allow me the puke, 
 and I will allow you the bleeding. 
 
 Bafilides, from the Platonics, affirmed, fo early 
 as the fir ft century of the church, that Gcd gave 
 our world to be made by his loweft angels; and 
 that by their aukwardnefs and ignorance things are 
 as they are. This theological fable falls to pieces 
 before the terrible objection, that it is not ’in the 
 nature of an infinitely wife and powerful God to 
 caufe a world to be conftruCkd by ignorant archi- 
 tects, who know not how to conduct fuch a talk. 
 
 Simon, aware of this objection, obviates it by lay- 
 ing, that the angel who acted as furveyor is 
 damned for his bungling; but this bungling of the 
 angel does not mend our cafe. 
 
 Neither does the Grecian ltory of Pandora folve 
 the objection any better. The box with all evils 
 in it, and hope remaining at the bottom, is indeed 
 a charming allegory ; but this Pandora Vulcan 
 made purely to be revenged of Prometheus, who 
 had formed a man of mud. 
 
 The Indians are not a whit nearer the mark : 
 God on creating man gave him a drug, by which 
 he was to ''njoy perpetual health; the man put his 
 drug on his afs *, the afs being thirfty, the lerpenc 
 fhewed it the way to a fpring, and whilft the afs 
 was drinking, the ferpent made off with the drug. 
 
 The Syrians had a conceit, that the man and the 
 woman having been created in the fourth heaven, 
 they took a fancy to eat a bit of cake inftead of 
 
 Y 4 ambrofia. 
 
3*8 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 ambrofia, their naural regale. Ambrofia perfpired 
 through the pores ; but after eating the cake they 
 had a motion to go to ftool, and afked an angel 
 the way to the privy. Do you fee, fard the angel, 
 yon little planet, fcarce vjfible, about fixry milli- 
 ons cf leagues off? that is the privy of the uni- 
 verfe ; make the bcffc of your way thither. They 
 marched, and there they were left to continue; and 
 ever fince this our world has been what it is. 
 
 But the Syrians are gravelled when afked, why 
 God permitted man to eat*of the cake, and why it 
 fho.uld be productive of fuch dreadful evils to us ? 
 
 To fhorcen my journey, I (hoot away from the 
 fourth heaven to lord Bohngbroke. This perfan-' 
 ag e, who ic mult be allowed had a great genius, 
 gave the famous Pope hisplan of whatever is is 
 right, which accordingly occurs word for word in 
 lord Bolingbroke’s poll humous works; and the fame 
 fentiment occurs before in lord Shaftefbury’ s E ha - 7 2 
 raclerifucs. In his treadle entitled the Morahft, 
 are tnefe words : 
 
 “ Much is aliedged in anfwer, to fhew why 
 <c nature errs, and how fat came thus impotent 
 «'• and erring from an unerring hand. But I deny 
 
 c - fhe errs ’Tis, on the contrary, from this or- 
 
 “ der of inferior and fuperior things, that we ad- 
 ** mire the; world’s beauty, founded thus on con- 
 “ trarieties ; whilft from fuch various and difagree- 
 4C ing principles, an univerfal concord is eftablifhed. 
 
 “ Thus in the feveral orders of terreftrial forms, 
 iC a refignation is' required* a facrifice and yielding 
 “ of natures one to another. The vegetables by 
 cc their death fuftain the animals ; and animal 
 c< bodies diffolved, enrich the earth, and raife again 
 ^ the vegetable work!. Numerous infefis are re- 
 duced again by the fuperior kinds of birds and 
 bealio ; .and thefe again are checked by man,* 
 
 \ who. 
 
DICTIONARY. 329 
 :** who in his turn fubmits to other natures, and 
 ■“ refigns his form a facrifice in common to the reft 
 “ of things. And if in natures fo little exalted, 
 “ and pre-eminent above each other, the facrifice 
 “ of intereft can appear fojuft; how much more 
 “ reafonably may all inferior natures be fubjedled 
 “ to the fuperior nature of the world ! — The 
 “ central powers, which hold the lading orbs in 
 “ their juft poife and movement, mutt not be 
 “ controuled to five a fleeting form, and refcue 
 “ from the precipice a puny animal, whofe brittle 
 “ frame, howe’er protected, muftof itfelf fo foon 
 diflolve. The ambient air, the inward vapours, 
 “ the impending meteors, or whatever elfe is nu- 
 “ trimental or prefervative of this earth, mutt ope- 
 “ rate in a natural courfe-, and other conftitutions 
 “ mull lubmit to the good habit and conftitution 
 “ of the all-fuftaining globe.” 
 
 Bolingbroke, Shaftetbury, and Pope their artift, 
 are not more fatisfadtory than the others ; their 
 whatever is is right, imports no more, than 
 that all is dire&ed by immutable laws ; and who 
 knows not that ? You tell us nothing in obferving 
 with every little child, that flies are born to be de- 
 voured by fpiders -, fpiders by fwallows •, fwallows 
 by magpies ; magpies by eagles; and eagles to be 
 Ihot at by men, and men to kill one another, and 
 to be eaten by worms ; and afterwards by devils, 
 at lead: a thoufand to one. 
 
 Thus we fee a clear and ftated order throughout 
 every fpecies of creatures : in (hort, there is order 
 in all things. The formation of a (tone in my blad- 
 der is a wonderful mechanifm : ftony particles in- 
 frnfibly get into my blood ; are filtrated in my 
 kidnies ; pafs through the urethra ; fettle in my 
 bladder ; and there, by an admirable Newtonian 
 attraction, concrete. The ftone forms and grows 
 
 bigger, 
 
33 o A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 bigger, and by the fineftdifpofitions in the world, 
 I undergo tortures worie than death : a furgeon, 
 having improved Tubal Cain’s invention, comes and 
 ftabs a (harp and edged fteel inftrument into my 
 
 , lays hold of my (lone with his forceps ; but 
 
 by a necefiary mechanifm it breaks as he is trying 
 to extract it, and by the fame mechanifm I expire 
 as on the rack. As what ever is is right, all this 
 mud be likewife right ; it is evidently a confe- 
 quence of the unalterable phyfical principles grant- 
 ' ed ; and I know ic as well as yourfelf. 
 
 Had we no feeling, no objection would lye a- 
 galnft fuch a fyftem : but that is not the point ; 
 what we a(k is, whether there are no fenfible evils, 
 and whence they are originated? Pope, in his fourth 
 epiftle on whatever is is rig-ht, fays, “ There 
 “ is no evil, or all partial evil is univerfal good.” 
 An odd general good, truly; compofed of the 
 gout, the (lone, pains, afflictions, crimes, fuffer- 
 ings, death, and damnation ! 
 
 The fall of man is the plaifter we lay on all 
 thefe partial difeafes of foul and body, which you 
 term general health; but with Shaftesbury and Bo- 
 lingbroke, original fin is a mere jeft, and Pope is 
 filent about it ; their fyftem manifeftly under- 
 mines Chriftianity, and explains nothing at all. 
 This fyftem, however, has lately been counte- 
 nanced by leveral divines, who make no difficulty 
 of contrarieties: well, let no body be grudged the 
 comfort of reafoning in his way on the deluge of 
 evil, with which the world is overwhelmed ; in- 
 curable patients (hould be allowed to gratify their 
 appetites in eating what they like ; fome have 
 even cried up this iyftem as confolatory. 
 
 A ftrange comfort I own ! And do not you find 
 great relief in Shaftesbury’s prefeription, who fays, 
 that God will not change his eternal laws for fo 
 
 paltry 
 
DICTIONARY. 3jI 
 
 paltry a creature as man ? It muft however be 
 owned, that this paltry animal has a right humbly to 
 lament, and, amidft his lamentations, to endeavour 
 at comprehending why thole eternal laws are not 
 adapted to the well-being of every individual. 
 
 This fyftem of whatever is is right, repre- 
 fents the Author of nature merely as a powerful 
 cruel king, who, if he does but compafs his de- 
 figns, is very eafy about the death, diftreffes, and 
 afflictions of his i'ubjedts. 
 
 So very far, then, is the opinion of the bed; 
 world pofflble from being conlolatory, that it 
 puzzles thofe philofophers who embrace it. The 
 queftion of good and evil remains an inexplicable 
 chaos to candid enquirers; cavillers may trifle 
 with it ; they are galley-flaves flaying with their 
 chains. As to the thoughtlefs commonalty, they 
 are not unlike fifhes taken out of a river and put 
 into a refervoir, little thinking they are to undergo 
 a fecond removal in Lent ; fo we of ourfelves are 
 totally ignorant of the caufes of our deftiny. 
 
 At the end of almoft every chapter of metaphy- 
 fics, \tfe fhould put the two letters ufed by the Ro- 
 man judges when a caule was obfcure, N. L. non 
 liqucty 1 don’t underfland it. 
 
 WICKED, WICKEDNESS (E). 
 
 'TTT’E are perpetually told that human nature is 
 \ V eflentially perverfe, that man is born a 
 child of the devil. Now nothing can be more im- 
 prudent, 
 
 (E) Our author talks very favourably of humanity under 
 this article, which is inconliftent with the horrid picture he 
 
 2 gives 
 
232 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 prudent i for, my friend, in preaching to me that 
 all the world is born in wickednefs, thou informed 
 trie that thou art born fo, and that behoves me to 
 beware of thee, as 1 would of a fox or crocodile, 
 t) ! not at all, fayed thou, I am regenerated, I am 
 no unbeliever or heretic, I may be trufted: fo then, 
 the remainder of mankind being either heretics, or 
 what thou called infidels, v\ ill be a mere herd of 
 monders •, and whenever thou art fpeaking to a 
 Lutheran or a Turk, thou Ihoulddl conclude that 
 they are for robbing and murdering thee, for they 
 are the devil’s ipawn ; one is not regenerated, and 
 the other is degenerated. Much more rational and 
 much more handfome would it be to fay to men, 
 “ You are all born good •, confider how dreadful it 
 “ would be to dtfiie the purity of your being.” 
 Mankind fhould be dealt with as individuals. 
 If a prebendary leads a fcandalous life, a friend 
 fays to him, Is it poffible that you can thus dip- 
 grace the dignity of a prebendary? A counfellor 
 or judge is reminded that he has the honour of be- 
 ing counfellor to the king; and that it is his duty 
 jto be an example of virtue. The encouragement 
 to a foldier is. Remember you belong to the regi- 
 ment of Champagne; and every individual fhould 
 be told. Remember your dignity as a man. 
 
 Say or do what you will, this muff at length 
 be the cafe : for what can mean this laying, fo 
 
 gives of it in his Univcrfal Hiftory. As he would infinuate, 
 however, that human nature is exempt from original fin, he 
 is guilty of a very great error ; for it is an eflential dogma of 
 Chriftianity, evidently laid down in feripture, that we have 
 all finned in Adam,.“ as by one man fin entered into the 
 “ world, and death by fin ; fo death palled upon all men, 
 “ tor that all have finned.” Front this, and in cenfequence 
 or original fin, it may be faid, that man is of his own nature 
 incited to evil. i 
 
 7 common 
 
' 3 
 
 DICTIONARY. 333 
 
 Common among all nations, Refled within thyfelf. 
 Now, were you born a child of the devil ; were your 
 origin criminal ; were your blood formed of an 
 infernal liquor ; to bid you refled within yourfelf 
 would import, Confult your diabolical nature, and 
 follow its fuggeftions ; cheat, rob, murder, it is 
 your father’s law. 
 
 Man is not born wicked ; he becomes fo, as he 
 falls lick. Should fome phyfidans come and tell 
 him you are born Tick, it is certain that thefe phy- 
 licians, 1 whatever they might fay or do, will not 
 cure him if his difeafe be inherent in his nature ; 
 and thefe reaioners are themfelves very fick. 
 
 Bring together all the children of the univerfe, 
 you will fee nothing in them but innocence, gen- 
 tlenefs, and fear; were they born wicked, fpight- 
 ful, and cruel, lome figns of it would come from 
 them, as little fnakes ftrive to bite, and little tygers 
 to tear. But nature having been as fparing of often- 
 five weapons to man as to pigeons and rabbits, it 
 cannot have given them an inltind to mifchief and 
 deflrudion. 
 
 So man is not born wicked : how comes it then 
 that fo many are infeded with the peftilence of 
 wickednefs ? It is becaufe they who, bear rule over 
 them, having caught the diftemper, communicate 
 it to others ; as a woman, having the diftemper 
 which Chriflopher Columbus brought from Ame- 
 rica, has fpread the venom all over Europe. By 
 the firlt ambitious man was the world corrupted. 
 
 \ou will fay that this firft monfter only fecun- 
 dated that germ of pride, rapine, fraud, and cruelty, 
 whicli is in all men. I own, that in general, the 
 greater part of our brethren eafily ccnrrad thefe 
 qualities : but has every body the putrid fever, 
 the (tone, and gravel, becaufe every body is liable 
 to thole diftempers ? 
 
 There 
 
33 4 A PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 There are whole nations which are not wicked * 
 the Philadelphians, the Banyans have never flied 
 human blood. The Chinefe, the people of Ton- 
 quin, Lao, Siam, and even of Japan, have lived in 
 the mod profound tranquility for thefe hundred 
 years paft. In the fpace of ten years fcarce any of 
 thofe enormities at which human nature ftands 
 aftonifhed, is heard of in the cities of Rome 
 Venice, Paris, London, and Amfterdam ; cities 
 where yet cupidity, the mother of all crimes, is 
 flagrant. 
 
 If men were effentially wicked, and all born 
 under the fway of a being as malignant as 
 wretched, who, in revenge for his punifhment, in- 
 fpired them with ail his rage, we fhould every 
 morning hear of hufbands being murdered by their 
 wives, and fathers by their children, juft as fowls 
 are found killed by a polecat, who came in the 
 night and fucked their blood. 
 
 If we fuppolt there are ten hundred millions of 
 men upon the earth, it is a great many ; and this 
 makes about fi»e hundred millions of women, who 
 lew and fpin, feed their little ones, keep the houfe 
 or hut clean, and backbite their neighbours a little. 
 
 1 do not fee any great harm thefe poor fimpletons 
 do on earth. Of this number of inhabitants on the 
 globe, there are at lealt two hundred millions of 
 children, who certainly neither kill nor plunder, and 
 about as many who, through age and ficknefs, are 
 not capable of thole crimes, i hus there remains, 
 at molt, but a hundred millions whom youth and 
 vigor qualify for the commiflion of crimes. Of 
 thele hundred millions we may fay, that ninety are 
 continually taken up with prodigious labour, in- 
 forcing the earth ro furnifh them with food and 
 raiment : now thefe have fcarce time to perpetrate 
 outrages. ' 
 
 In 
 
DICTIONARY. 325 
 
 In the remaining ten millions will be included 
 idlers and jocund companions, who love peace and 
 feftivity ; the men of talents, who are taken up with 
 their feveral profeflions ; magiftrates and priefts, 
 whom it manifefty behoves to lead an irreproachable 
 life, at leaft in appearance. So that the real wick- 
 ed men are reduced to fome few politicians, either 
 fecular or regular, who will always be for difturb- 
 ing the world ; and fome thoufands of vagrants, who 
 hire their fervices to thole politicians. Now never 
 is a million of thefe wild beafts employed at once, 
 and among thi^: I reckon highwaymen; fo that 
 at moft, and in the molt tempdtuous limes, there 
 is but one man of a thoufand who may be called 
 wicked, and he is not fo always. 
 
 Thus is wickednefs on earth infinitely lefs than 
 is talked of and believed. To be fure, there is 
 ftill too much misfortune, diftrefs, and horrible 
 crimes ; but the pleal'ure of complaining and mag- 
 nifying is fuch, that at the leaft fcratch you cry 
 out : the earth is deluged with blood. If you have 
 been cheated, then the world is full of perjury. 
 An atrabilarious mind, on having been wronged, 
 fees the univerfe covered with damned fouls ; Is a 
 young rake, feated at fupper with his doxy after 
 the opera, does not dfeam that there are any 
 diftrefled objects. 
 
: . v H ' 
 
 > • ‘ 
 
 < ;v : , : • > • ;! : . . ■ 
 
 . 
 
 ( v:ui } i >* 
 
 h • 
 
 • *- • • i ) ••••■••'*• -4 
 
 WS\ • f'S .% N - 
 
 M:: ■ 
 
 
 * . 
 
 : . . ' 
 
 t, 
 
 <r ■ rr ■*• ;: - . . | 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . * 
 
 
 
 
OLThVQ I&13