« ElőzőTovább »
Unitarianism, and leaves the task of summing up and counting votes to the reader. This book drew a variety of attacks upon the doctor; but it would not have prevented him from being archbishop of Canterbury, had not a doctor named Gibson, who doubtless had his reasons, said to the queen his patroness“ Madam, doctor Clarke is the most learned and
honest man in the kingdom, and wants but one qualifi| cation.” - What is that?” said the queen.
“ That of being a christian," replied the benevolent doctor. For my own part, I believe that Clarke was deceived in his calculations, and that it is better to be an orthodox primate than an Arian rector.
We witness the same revolutions in opinions as in empires. This party, after three centuries of triumph and twelve of oblivion, has sprung again from its ashes; but it has chosen its time amiss, when all the world is satiated with controversy and with the dispu. tation of opposing sects. It is yet too small to obtain permission for public worship, which it will obtain without doubt, when it becomes sufficiently numerous; but society is at present lukewarm on all this, and there are few fortunes to be made, either by new or
revived religions. It is not, in the mean time, a plea| sant fact, that Luther, Calvin, and Zuinglius, all wri
ters who at present cannot be read, have founded sects which divide Europe; that the ignorant Mahomet has given a religion to Asia and Africa; and that Messrs. Newton, Clarke, Locke, Le Clerc, &c. the greatest philosophers and the best writers of their
age, have scarcely been able to establish a petty flock. This it is to come into the world at a proper time. dinal de Retz lived at present, he would not operate upon ten women in Paris. If Cromwell rose again, who cut off a king's head, and made himself sovereign, he would be nothing beyond a simple citizen of London.
* The fulfilment of this anticipation has become recently very obvious.-T.
Is the mould broken of those who loved virtue for itself, of a Confucius, a Pythagoras, a Thales, a Socrates? In their time, there were crowds of devotees to their pagods and divinities ; minds struck with fear of Cerberus and of the Furies, who underwent initiations, pilgrimages, and mysteries, who ruined themselves in Offerings of black sheep. All times have seen those unfortunates of whom Lucretius speaks :
Qui quocumque tamen miseri venêre parentant,
LUCRETIUS, book iii. 51, 54.
CREECH. Mortifications were in use; the priests of Cybele castrated themselves to preserve continence. How comes it, that among all the martyrs of superstition, antiquity reckons not a single great man—a sage? It is, that fear could never make virtue, and that great men have been enthusiasts in moral good. Wisdom was their predominant passion; they were sages as Alexander was a warrior, as Homer was a poet, and Apelles a painter-by a superior energy and nature; which is all that is meant by the demon of Socrates.
One day, two citizens of Athens, returning from the temple of Mercury, perceived Socrates in the public place. One said to the other-Is not that the rascal who says that one can be virtuous without going every day to offer up sheep and geese? Yes, said the other, that is the sage who has no religion; that is the atheist who says there is only one God. Socrates approached them with his simple air, his demon, and his irony, which madame Dacier has so highly exalted. My friends, said he to them, one word, if you please: a man who prays to God, who adores him, who seeks to resemble him as much as human weakness can do,
and who does all the good which lies in his power, what would you call him? A very religious soul, said they.. Very well; we may therefore adore the Supreme Being, and have a great deal of religion? Granted, said the two Athenians. But do you believe, pursued Socrates, that when the Divine Architect of the world arranged all the globes which roll over your heads, when he gave motion and life to so many,
different beings, he made use of the arm of Hercules, the lyre of Apollo, or the flute of Pan? It is not probable, said they. But if it is not likely that he called in the aid of others to construct that which we see, it is not probable that he preserves it through others rather than through himself. If Neptune was the absolute master of the sea, Juno of the air, Eolus of the winds, Ceres of harvestsand one would have a calm, when the other would have rain-you feel clearly, that the order of nature could not exist as it is. You will confess, that all depends upon him who has made all. You give four white horses to the sun, and four black ones to the moon; but is it not more likely, that day and night are the effect of the motion given to the stars by their master, than that they were produced by eight horses? The two citizens looked at him, but answered nothing. In short, Socrates concluded by proving to them, that they might have harvests without giving money to the priests of Ceres ; go to the chase without offering little silver statues to the temple of Diana; that Pomona gave not fruits; that Neptune gave not horses; and that they should thank the Sovereign who had made all.
His discourse was most exactly logical. Xenophon his disciple, a man who knew the world, and who afterwards sacrificed to the wind, in the retreat of the ten thousand, took Socrates by the sleeve, and said to him-Your discourse is admirable ; you have spoken better than an oracle; you are lost; one of these honest people to whom you speak is a butcher, who sells sheep and geese for sacrifices; and the other a goldsmith, who gains much by making little gods of silver and brass for women. They will accuse you of
being a blasphemer, who would diminish their trade; they will depose against you to Melitus and Anitus your enemies, who have resolved upon your ruin: have à care of hemlock; your familiar spirit should have warned you not to say to a butcher and a goldsmith what you should only say to Plato and Xenophon.
Some time after, the enemies of Socrates caused him to be condemned by the council of five hundred. He had two hundred and twenty voices in his favour, which may cause it to be presumed, that there were two hundred and twenty philosophers in this tribunal ; but it shows, that in all companies the number of philosophers is always the minority.
Socrates therefore drank hemlock, for having spoken in favour of the unity of God; and the Athenians afterwards consecrated a temple to Socrates to him who disputed against all temples dedicated to inferior beings!
SEVERAL kings have been good scholars, and have written good books. The king of Prussia, Frederic the Great, is the latest example we have had of it: he will be little imitated. We presume, that not many German monarchs will be found who
French verses, and who write the history of their countries. James I. in England, and even Henry VIII. have written. In Spain, we must go back as far as Alphonso X. Still it is doubtful whether he put his hand to the Alphonsine Tables.
France cannot boast of having had an author king.* The empire of Germany has no book from the pen of
* It is pretended, that Charles IX. was the author of a book on hunting. 'It is very likely, that if this prince had cultivated the art of killing beasts less, and had not accustomed himself to see blood flow in the forests, there would have been more difficulty in tearing from him the order for the massacre of St. Bartholomew. Hunting is one of the surest methods of stifling in men the sentiment of pity for their fellow creatures; and a still more melancholy consequence is, that those who experience it, placed in a more elevated rank, have more need of the curb.-French Ed.
its emperors; but Rome was glorified in Cæsar, Marcus Aurelius, and Julian. In Asia, several writers are reckoned among the kings. The present emperor of China, Kien Long, particularly, is considered a great poet; but Solomon, or Solyman, the Hebrew, has still more reputation than Kien Long the Chinese.
The name of Solomon has always been revered in the east. The works believed to be his, the annals of the Jews, and the fables of the Arabs, have carried his renown as far as the Indies. His reign is the great epoch of the Hebrews.
He was the third king of Palestine. The first book of Kings says, that his mother Bathsheba obtained from David, that he should crown Solomon her son, instead of Adonijah his eldest. It is not surprising that a woman, an accomplice in the death of her first husband, should have had artifice enough to cause the inheritance to be given to the fruit of her adultery, and to cause the legitimate son to be disinherited, who was also the eldest.
It is a very remarkable fact, that the prophet Nathan, who reproached David with his adultery, the murder of Uriah, and the marriage which followed this murder, was the same who afterwards seconded Bathsheba in placing that Solomon on the throne, who was born of this sanguinary and infamous marriage. This conduct, reasoning according to the flesh, would
prove, that the prophet Nathan had, according to circumstances, two weights and two measures. The book even says not, that Nathan received a particular mission from God to disinherit Adonijah. If he had one, we must respect it; but we cannot admit that we find it written,
It is a great question in theology, whether Solomon is most renowned for his ready money, his wives, or his books. I am sorry that he commenced his reign in the Turkish style, by murdering his brother.
Adonijah, excluded from the throne by Solomon, asked him, as an only favour, permission to espouse Abishag, the young girl who had been given to David to warm him in his old age. Scripture says not, whe