fect obligation, which human laws overlook: and teaching also, that this Providence is omniscient, that it sees the most secret actions and intentions of men, and hath given laws for the perfecting their nature, will oblige to those duties of perfect obligation, which human laws cannot reach, or sufficiently enforce. Thus have we explained in general the mutual aid, religion and civil policy lend to one another: not unlike that which two Allies, in the same quarrel, may reciprocally receive against a common enemy while one party is closely pressed, the other comes up to its relief; disengages the first; gives it time to rally and repair its force: by this time the assisting party is pushed in its turn, and needs the aid of that which it relieved; which is now at hand to repay the obligation. From henceforth the two parties act in conjunction, and, by that means, keep the common enemy at a stand. Having thus proved the service of Religion in general to Society; and shewn after what manner it is performed, we are enabled to proceed to the proof of the proposition in question: For by what hath been said, it appears that Religion doth this service solely, as it teacheth a Providence, the rewarder of good men, and the punisher of evil: so that although it were possible, as I think it is not, that there could be such a thing as a Religion not founded on the doctrine of a Providence; yet, it is evident, such a *St. Paul supposes there can no more be a Religion without a Providence, than without a God: He that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and that he is a re#arder of them that diligently seek him. Hebr. xi. 6. Religion Religion would be of no manner of use to Society. Whatsoever therefore is necessary for the support of this doctrine is immediately necessary for the wellbeing of Society. Now the doctrine of A FUTURE STATE of rewards and punishments is absolutely and indispensably necessary for the support of the general doctrine of providence, under its present dispensations in this life; as we shall now shew. Religion establishing a Providence, the rewarder of virtue, and the punisher of vice, men naturally expect to find the constant and univocal marks of such an administration. But the history of mankind, nay even of every one's own neighbourhood, would soon inform the most indiligent observer, that the affairs of men wear a face of great irregularity: the scene, that ever and anon presents itself, being of distressed virtue, and prosperous wickedness; which unavoidably brings the embarrassed Religionist to the necessity of giving up his belief, or finding out the solution of these untoward appearances. His first reflexion might perhaps be with the poet*: omnia rebar Consilio firmata Dei; qui lege moveri But, on second thoughts, Reason, that, from the admirable frame and harmony of the material universe, *Claud. taught taught him that there must needs be a superintending Providence, to influence that order which all its parts preserve, for the sake of the Whole, in their continued revolutions, would soon instruct him in the absurdity of supposing, that the same care did not extend to Man, a creature of a far nobler nature than the most considerable of inanimate beings. And therefore human affairs not being dispensed, at present, agreeably to that superintendence, he must conclude, that Man shall exist after death, and be brought to a future reckoning in another life, where all accounts will be set even, and all the present obscurities and perplexities in the ways of Providence unfolded and explained. From hence Religion acquires resistless force and splendor; and rises on a solid and unshaken basis*. Now this doctrine of a FUTURE STATE being the only support of Religion under the present and ordinary dispensations of Providence, we conclude (which was what we had to prove) that the inculcating * Hear an unexceptionable evidence to this whole matter: Et quidem (says the free-thinking Lord Herbert) præmium bonis, & supplicium malis, vel hac invita, vel post hanc vitam dari, statuebant Gentiles.-Nihil mage congruum naturæ divinæ esse docuerant, tum philosophorum, tum theologorum Gentilium præcipuorum scholæ, quam ut bona bonis, mala malis remetiretur Deus. Cæterum quum id quoque cernerent, quemadmodum viri boni calamitatibus miseriisque oppressi heic jacerent; mali improbique e contra lautitiis omnibus affluerent; certissimis ex justitia bonitateque divina argumentis deductis, bonis post hanc vitam præmium condignum, malis pœnam dari credebant: SECUS ENIM SI ESSET, NULLAM NEQUE JUSTITIÆ NEQUE BONITATIS DIVINE RATIONEM CONSTARE POSSE. De religione Gentilium, cap. Præmium vel pana. this doctrine is NECESSARY to the well-being of Society. That it was the general sentiment of mankind, we shall see hereafter; where it will be shewn, that there never was, in any time or place, a civilized People (the jewish only excepted) who did not found their Religion on this doctrine, as being conscious it could not be sustained without it. And as for the necessity of Religion itself to Society, the very enemies of all Religion are the loudest to confess it: for, from this apparent truth, the Atheist of old formed his famous argument against the divine origin of Religion; which makes so great a figure in the common systems of infidelity. Here then, even on our adversary's confession, we might rest our cause; but that we find (so inconstant and perverse is irreligion) some modern Apologists for Atheism have abandoned the system of their predecessors, and chosen rather to give up an argument against the divine original of religion, than acknowledge the civil use of it; which with much frankness and confidence they have adventured to deny. These therefore having endeavoured to cut away the very ground we stand upon, in proof of our preposition, it will be proper to examine their pretensions. SECT. III. THE three great Advocates for this paradox are commonly reckoned POMPONATIUS, CARDAN, and BAYLE; who are put together, without distinction: whereas nothing is more certain than that, although Cardan Cardan and Bayle indeed defended it, Pomponatius was of a very different opinion: but Bayle had entered him into this service; and so great is Bayle's authority, that nobody perceived the delusion. It will be but justice then to give Pomponatius a fair hearing, and let him speak for himself. This learned Italian, a famous Peripatetic of the fifteenth century, wrote a treatise to prove that, on the principles of Aristotle, it could not be proved that the soul was immortal: but the doctrine of the mortality of the soul being generally thought to have very pernicious consequences, he conceived it lay upon him to say something to that objection. In his xiiith chapter, therefore, he enumerates those consequences; and in the xivth, gives distinct answers to each of them. That which supposeth his doctrine to affect society, is expressed in these words: Obj. 2. "in the second place, a man persuaded of the mortality of the soul ought in no case, even in the most urgent, to prefer death to life: And so, fortitude, "which teaches us to despise death, and, when our country, or the public good requires, even to chuse 66 * De Immortalitate Animæ, printed in 12mo, An. 1534. It is of him chiefly that the celebrated Melchior Canus seems to speak, in the fallowing words: "Audivimus "Italos quosdam, qui suis & Aristoteli & Averroï tantum temporis dant, quantum sacris literis ii, qui maximè sacra "doctrina delectantur; tantum vero fidei, quantum Apos"tolis & Evangelistis ii qui maximè sunt in Christi doctri"nam religiosi. Ex quo nata sunt in Italia pestifera illa dogmata de mortalitate animi, & divina circa res humanas "improvidentia, si verum est quod dicitur." Opera, Lx, e. 5. p. 446. Colon, 1605, 8vo, |