make the best selection we can. Wherefore, in pushing our inquiries into religion, our doubt can only be, "what is the true religion," not, "whether there is truth in religion:" and, accordingly, we must receive that particular system which appears to be best suited to our nature, to the wants, and passions of mankind; regarding the evidences of its authenticity, not so much according to their absolute strength, as comparatively with those by which other religions are supported. Even supposing, that, for no one of the many systems that profess to be revealed, there can be adduced any evidence from the testimony of witnesses, nay, even, were we obliged to admit that there exists a degree of presumption against each of them individually examined, still, it seems, we must embrace that one to which (although, so far as we can judge, it may seem neither rational, nor useful) there is yet the least exception. For, the necessity of a revelation, not merely to benefit mankind, but to render our nature complete, and that plan of the Creator not inconsistent which anticipates its coming, is as sound and as substantial a proof, that a revelation was designed from the creation of the human species, as the existence of hunger, of the passion of love, of the disposition to mix with our fellow-creatures, of any of the carnal appetites, of the social affections, or of the external senses, is an undoubted sign, that there are occasions on which they were intended to operate, and that there are proper objects for them.

An objection here arises with a very imposing as

pect, which, as it radically effects my argument, I will not refer to the notes for the examination of it, but will examine it in this part of the present Essay, upon the strength of which the reasoning attempted to be established, chiefly rests. I may be called upon to answer" if the best system which could be discovered before Christianity was known, must have been true, nay more, the best which each nation could arrive at?" I may be reminded, that, "the arguments which I have advanced do not, alone, and of themselves, furnish a demonstration that the expected system has yet been found." This objection, so stated, seems vitally to affect my inferences, from which an absurdity is represented to be deducible; it is the only objection that can be at all pertinently opposed to them; but I trust that the remark, however true as a mere criticism, and however threatening at a first glance, will not, upon a more mature survey, offer any serious obstruction to the progress of my argument.

That men should, at all times, receive as true the best religion which they can find, does certainly follow from the reasonings already before the reader. This, whether it be a revolting absurdity, or a truth the most easily credible that can be imagined, has been established; and we can scarcely be expected in reason, to deny a conclusion, after having admitted the premises."

a«Objections against a proof, and objections against what is said to be proved, the reader will observe, are different things." (BUTLER'S Analogy, Introduction.) They certainly are different, al

a

But, in what does this revolting absurdity consist? For, (not to mention, that, according to the opinions which Christians entertain, God was not left ever without a witness; not to allude to the existence of a genuine revelation, and a sect of true believers from the earliest ages, not to mention Moses, Abraham, or Abel, or our first parents); is there, I ask, any absurdity in suggesting, that men should act and judge according to probability, and to the best suggestions of reason, because even such suggestions may be erroneous ? Are circumstantial proofs to be nugatory, because they have sometimes led, or may lead, to errors? And, with respect to particular nations, who, in this age, have not heard of the Gospel, or, with respect to those who died before the time of Christ,-I can perceive no absurdity in asserting it to be reasonable, that persons so circumstanced, (totally out of the way of hearing of the true revelation, if such there be, or even was,) should adopt the most plausible system which they may be able to discover, although this Christian country, and the present generation, can affirm that they must be mistaken. And even now, perhaps, "the expected system has not arrived." I admit that "the arguments above proposed, do not of themselves, and from their intrinsic nature cannot,

though objections against a thing proved, generally lie against the proof also. See note 17.

a The reader will observe, that I have never denied the existence of an original revelation, but only that the rites of sacrifice have prevailed solely from that source.

b Note (18.)

furnish any proof that it has." They remain, however, such as they are, uncontradicted; and, whether there does, or does not, at present exist any true religion, the efficacy of the reasoning delivered above, is untouched by that circumstance, except so far as it may receive a new direction; and, supposing it to be rebutted from each particular creed, by a manifest repugnance in its doctrines, or by a vast accumulation of evidence against it, (for there must be sufficient evidence to establish a great improbability,) the unavoidable inference in that case must be, that we are to expect some future revelation. This, being once for all settled, will, it is hoped, remove every candid doubt of the incredulous.

No one who reflects that he must either admit the truth of the Christian doctrines, or look out for some better system yet to appear, will for an instant hesitate upon what should be his final decision. All rational sceptics admit, that the evidence of the inspiration of those books that form the New Testament, at least, that the evidence of the truth of the history and of the facts therein narrated, would be sufficiently efficacious to establish the credibility of common ordinary occurrences; and that those writings are incredible on account only of the miraculous performances which they relate, and of the high pretensions to which, for his doctrine rather than for himself, the chief Person makes claim. But mark what becomes of those capital arguments, of modern date, which lie against a revelation as miraculous, and, of course, against the particular miracles by which

it must be sustained. They do not here vanish, but they are repelled with superior force against those who have employed them; since nothing is more opposed to general experience, nothing a greater exception to the usual course of nature; since there can be no more violent infraction of all the laws of every mode of being which we have ever known; since, in short, there is no instance in all history, sacred or profane, of a miracle more incredible than the want of a revelation."

During the visit of St. Paul among the Athenians, he found an altar inscribed" to the unknown God.” These people were employed in performing the rites and offices of their religion; and that learned apostle seems to have argued with them in a manner conformable to the reasoning here delivered. Being taken before the Areopagus, to answer for himself respecting certain "strange things" which he was reported to have uttered, he commenced his address by observing, that the men of Athens were "too superstitious. For," says he, addressing them, "as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, To THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom, therefore, ye ignorantly worship, Him declare I unto you." He proceeds;-" God that made the world, &c. *** hath made all nations of men, &c. *** that they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, though

a The reader will find this objection further considered in 'note 25, post.

b The original Greek nanosay is very expressive, and signifies to grope about in the dark.