penances not less tremendous, which Mr. Maurice has fully detailed in the last vol. of his Indian Antiquities, are the means whereby the infatuated worshippers of Brahma hope to conciliate the Deity, and to obtain the blessings of immortality and by these, all hope to attain those blessings, except only the wretched race of the Chandalahs, whom, by the unalterable laws of Brahma, no repentance, no mortification can rescue from the doom of eternal misery; and against whom the gates of happiness are for ever closed.-See Maur. Ind. Ant. pp. 960, 961. Now, from this enumeration of facts, it seems not difficult to decide, whether the dictate of untutored reason be the conviction of the DIVINE BENEVOLENCE, and the persuasion that the Supreme Being is to be conciliated by good and virtuous conduct alone: and from this also we shall be enabled to judge what degree of credit is due to the assertions of those who pronounce, that "all men naturally apprehend the Deity to be propitious:" that "no nation whatever, either Jew or Heathen, ancient or modern, appears to have had the least knowledge, or to betray the least sense of their want, of any expedient of satisfaction for sin, besides repentance and a good life: and that "from a full review of the religions of all ancient and modern nations, they appear to be utterly destitute of any thing like a doctrine of proper atonement." These assertions Doctor Priestley has not scrupled to make; (Theol. Rep. v. i. pp. 401, 411, 416, and 421.) and boldly offers "the range of the whole Jewish and Heathen world," to supply a single fact in contradiction. He professes also to survey this wide-extended range himself; and for this purpose begins with adducing a single passage from Virgil, whence he says, it appears that "even the implacable hatred of Juno could be appeased;" and an instance from the Phædon of Plato, from which he concludes that Socrates, although "the farthest possible from the notion of appeasing the anger of the gods by any external services, yet died without the least doubt of an happy immortality :" notwithstanding that in page 31, when treating of another subject, he had found it convenient to represent this philoso pher as utterly disbelieving a future state; and even here, he adds, what renders his whole argument a nullity, provided there were any such state for man. Having by the former of these established his position, as to the religion of the vulgar among the Greeks and Romans; and by the latter, as to the religion of the philosophers: he yet farther endeavours to fortify his conclusion by the assertion, that no facts have been furnished either by Gale or Clarke, to justify the opin ion, that the ancients were at a loss as to the terms of divine acceptance; notwithstanding that not only Clarke, (Evidences, v. ii. p. 662-670. fol. 1733.) but Leland; (Christ. Rev. vol. i. pp. 259, 270, 473. 4to. 1764.) and various other writers have collected numerous authorities on this head, and that the whole mass of heathen superstitions speaks no other language, insomuch that Bolingbroke himself (vol. v. pp. 214, 215. 4to.) admits the point in its fullest extent. He next proceeds to examine the religion of the ancient Persians, and modern Parsis: and to prove this people to have been free from any idea of atonement or sacrifice, he quotes a prayer from Dr. Hyde, and a description of their notion of future punishments from Mr. Grose: and though these can at the utmost apply only to the present state of the people, (and whoever will consult Dr. Hyde's history, pp. 570, 574. on the account given by Tavernier, of their notion of absolution; and on that given by himself, of their ceremony of the scape-dog, will see good reason to deny the justness even of this application) yet Dr. P. has not scrupled to extend the conclusion derived from them to the ancient Persians, in defiance of the numerous authorities referred to in this number, and notwithstanding that, as Mr. Richardson asserts, (Dissert. pp. 25, 26. 8vo. 1778.) the Parsis acknowledge the original works of their ancient lawgiver to have been long lost; and that, consequently, the ceremonials of the modern Guebres, preserve little or no resemblance to the ancient worship of Persia. See also Hyde, Rel. Vet. Pers. p. 574. ed. Oxon. 1760. Our author, last of all, cites the testimonies of Mr. Dow and Mr. Grose, to establish the same point concerning the religion of the Hindoos; and particularly to show that it was "a maxim with the Brahmans, never to defile their sacrifices with blood." The value to be attached to these testimonies, may be estimated from what has been already advanced concerning these writers; from the terrific representations of the gods of Hindostan; the cruel austerities with which they were worshipped; and the positive declarations of the most authentic and recent writers on the history of the Hindoos. Thus, not a single authority of those adduced by Dr. Priestley, is found to justify his position. But admitting their fullest application, to what do they amount?-to an instance of relenting hatred in Juno, as described by Virgil; an example of perfect freedom from all apprehension of divine displeasure, in the case of Socrates; and a quotation or two from Mr. Dow and Mr. Grose, with a prayer from Dr. Hyde, to ascertain the religious notions of the Parsis and the Hindoos. These, with a few yague observations on the tenets of certain atheists of ancient and modern times; the tendency of which is to show, that men who did not believe in a moral Governor of the universe, did not fear one; complete his survey of the religious history of the Heathen world:and in the conclusion, derived from this very copious induction, he satisfactorily acquiesces, and boldly defies his opponents to produce a single contradictory_instance.—(N. B. His abstract of the Jewish testimonies, I reserve for a distinct discussion in another place: see No. XXXIII.) When Dr. Priestley thus gravely asserts, that by this extensive review of facts, he has completely established the position, that natural religion impresses no fears of divine displeasure, and prescribes no satisfaction for offended justice beyond repentance; it seems not difficult to determine how far he relies upon the ignorance of his readers, and upon the force of a bold assertion. As to the position itself, it is clear, that never was an autos pa, more directly opposed to the voice of history, and to notoriety of fact. Parkhurst, in his Hebrew Lexicon, on the word Ox, says, "it is known to every one, who is acquainted with the mythology of the heathens, how strongly and generally they retained the tradition of an atonement or expiation for sin." What has been already offered in this number, may perhaps appear sufficient to justify this affirmation. But, indeed, independent of all historical research, a very slight glance at the Greek and Roman Classics, especially the poets, the popular divines of the ancients can leave little doubt upon this head. So clearly does their language announce the notion of a propitiatory atonement, that if we would avoid an imputation on Dr. Priestley's fairness, we are driven of necessity to question the extent of his acquaintance with those writers. Thus in Homer, (Il. i. 386.) we find the expression Osov arxeolas 80 used, as necessarily to imply the appeasing the anger of the god and again, (Il. ii. 550.) the same expression is employed, to denote the propitiation of Minerva by sacrifice, Ενθάδε μιν ταυροισι και αργείοις ιλαονται. Hesiod, in like manner, (Egy. xai Hu. 338.) applies the term in such a sense as cannot be misunderstood. Having declared the certainty that the wicked would be visited by the divine vengeance; he proceeds to recommend sacrifice, as amongst the means of rendering the deity propitious-Αλλοτε δη σπονδησι θυεσσιτε ιλάσκεσθαι, Plutarch makes use of the word, expressly in reference to the anger of the gods, εξιλάσασθαι το μήνυμα της θεό. That the words ελάσκεσθαι, ιλασμος, &c. carry with them the force of rendering propitious an offended deity, might be proved by various other instances from the writers of antiquity: and that in the use of the terms αποτροπίασμα οι αποτροπιασμός, K καθαρμα, περίψημα, and φαρμακος, the ancients meant to convey the idea of a piacular sacrifice averting the anger of the gods, he who is at all conversant with their writings needs not to be informed. The word wg particularly, Hesychius explains by the synonymous terms, αντίλυτρον, αντιψυχον: and Suidas describes its meaning in this remarkable manner, Ουτως επέλεγον (Αθηναίοι) τω κατ' ενιαυτον συνεχοντι παντων (this Schleusner affirms to be the true reading)-segituanan γενά, ήτοι σωτηρια και απολύτρωσις. Και ουτως ενεβαλλον τη θαλασση, ωσάνει τω Ποσειδωνι θυσίαν αποτιννύντες. κακαι Nor is the idea of propitiatory atonement more clearly expressed by the Greek, than it is by the Latin, writers of antiquity. The words placare, propitiare, expiare, litare, placamen, piaculum, and such like, occur so frequently, and with such clearness of application, that their force cannot be easily misapprehended or evaded. Thus Horace, (lib. ii. sat. 3.) Prudens placavi sanguine Divos; and (lib. i. Ode 28.) Teque piacula nulla resolvent: and in his second Ode, he proposes the question, cui dabit partes scelus expiandi Jupiter? (" to which," says Parkhurst whimsically enough, "the answer in the poet is, Apollo-the second person in the heathen trinity.") Cæsar likewise, speaking of the Gauls, says, as has been already noticed, Pro vita hominis nisi vita hominis reddatur, non posse deorum immortalium numen placari arbitrantur. Cicero, (pro Fonteio. x.) speaking of the same people, says, Si quando aliquo metu adducti, deos placandos esse arbitrantur, humanis hostiis eorum aras ac templa funestant. The same writer (De Nat. Deor. lib. iii. cap. 6.) says, Tu autem etiam Deciorum devotionibus placatos Deos esse censes. From Silius Italicus and Justin, we have the most explicit declarations that the object of the unnatural sacrifices of the Carthaginians, was to obtain pardon from the gods. Thus the former, (lib. 4. lin. 767, &c.) Mos fuit in populis, quos condidit advena Dido And in like manner the latter, (lib. xviii. cap. 6.) expresses himself: Homines ut victimas immolabant: et impuberes aris admovebant; pacem sanguine eorum exposcentes, pro quorum vitâ Dii rogari maxime solent. Lucan also, referring to the same bloody rites, usual in the worship of the cruel gods of the Saxons, thus speaks of them, (Pharsal. lib. i. lin. 443, &c.) Et quibus immitis placatur sanguine diro Virgil likewise, (Æn. ii. lin. 116.) Sanguine placastis ventos, et virgine cæsâ, Sanguine quærendi reditus, animâque litandum Suetonius relates of Otho, (cap. 7.) Per omnia piaculorum genera, manes Galba propitiare tentasse. And Livy (lib. vii. cap. ii.) says, Cum vis morbi nec humanis consiliis, nec ope divinâ levaretur, ludi quoque scenici, inter alia cœlestis iræ placamina institui dicunter: and the same writer, in another place, directly explains the object of animal sacrifice; Per dies aliquot, hostiæ majores sine litatione cæsa, diuque non impetrata pax Deum. The word litare is applied in the same manner by Pliny, (De Viris Illust. Tull. Host.) Dum Numam sacrificiis imitatur, Jovi Elicio litare non potuit; fulmine ictus cum regiâ conflagravit. This sense of the word might be confirmed by numerous instances. Servius, (En. iv. lin. 50.) and Macrobius, (lib. iii. cap. 5.) inform us, tha it implies," facto sacrificio placare numen:" and Stephanus says from Nonius, that it differs from sacrificare in this, that the signification of the latter is, veniam petere, but that of the former, veniam impetrare. But to produce all the authorities on this head were endless labour: and indeed to have produced so many might seem to be an useless one, were it not of importance to enable us to appreciate with exactness the claims to literary preeminence, set up by a writer, who on all occasions pronounces ex cathedra; and on whose dicta, advanced with an authori tative and imposing confidence, and received by his followers with implicit reliance, has been erected a system, embracing the most daring impieties that have ever disgraced the name of Christianity. If the observations in this number, of the length of which I am almost ashamed, have the effect of proving to any of his admirers, the incompetency of the guide whom they have hitherto followed with unsuspecting acquiescence, I shall so far have served the cause of truth and of Christianity, and shall have less reason to regret the trouble occasioned both to the reader and to myself, by this prolix detail. No. VI. ON THE MULTIPLIED OPERATION OF THE DIVINE ACTS. PAGE 21. (f)-This thought we find happily conveyed by Mr. Pope, in his Essay on Man: "In human works, tho' laboured on with pain, "A thousand movements scarce one purpose gain; "In God's one single does its end produce; "Yet serves to second too, some other use." |