-It might have occurred to him, that as the filence of the writers of the New Teftament is no proof that the worship of dead men had not obtained in their time; fo the filence of the writers of the Old Teftament is no proof that that kind of idolatry was not practifed in the age in which they lived. He tells us, indeed, that there were no facrifices offered to dead men in the days of Mofes; for the Grecian heroes, the firft deified human fpirits, were not then even born: nor was that superstition ever practifed among the nations round Judea, during the time of any of the prophets;' But for these things we have only his word: he has not vouch fafed to offer any proof of his affertions.

In the two next chapters, Mr. Fell propofes to confider the various application of the term, Damons, among the ancient Greeks, and by the facred penmen.' Thefe chapters are principally employed in combating Mr. Farmer's ideas and reafoning on the fubject. Mr. Fell's inquiry into the meaning of the term, as ufed by the ancient Greeks, is very fhort and indecifive: and we have not the fhadow of an argument to prove, that poffeffing demons were not confidered by them as human spirits converted into dæmons after death. With respect to the facred writers, it is Mr. Fell's opinion, that the apoftles,' agreeably with the eftablished and common ufe of the word, as fignifying, intelligent natures in general, and more especially, beings fuperior to men, have applied it to fuch intelligent natures as are fuperior to mankind,' and particularly, to thofe malignant fpirits, the head of which is "Satan," &c.' that is, to the devil and his angels. With these two chapters the Inquiry properly ends.

¢

The reft of the publication, which is by far the greater part of it, comprehending fix chapters, is taken up in answering the objections that have been alleged against the doctrine of poffeffions, and afferting the common notions of the agency and influence of angels both good and evil,' in the natural and moral world. Through the whole, we meet with more railing than reafoning: Mr. Farmer, his opinions and arguments, are treated with much fcorn and abufe; and the most unworthy practices and defigns are charged upon him, and other oppofers of dæmoniacal poffeffions. Mr. Fell (as well as his predeceffor, Dr. Worthington) feems to forget that all Chriftians are agreed, that the facts contained in the evangelical history are true. The matter in debate refpecting the prefent fubject is, .what the facts were, or what is the fenfe and meaning of the language in which they are recorded. It is in vain, therefore, to quote text after text, in which dæmons are faid to be caft out, &c. The fame principles upon which we reject the literal fenfe of the phrafe, this is my body, will juftify us in rejecting the

N 3

literal fenfe of, the devils, or dæmons, went into the herd of fwine. Mr. Fell thinks otherwife. He understands the Mofaic account of the fall literally, the angels of God afcending and defcending upon the Son of Man literally, and poffeffions by evil spirits, that is fallen angels, literally. And with the fame reason, he may believe, that Jacob wrestled with an angel literally, that God held two converfations with the Devil upon the character of Job, that Michael and his angels fought in heaven with the Dragon and his angels, or any other abfurdity that is founded upon a lite. ral expofition of figurative expreffions, fcenical reprefentations, or popular phrafeology. But his belief is to himfelf, and he has an equal right with every other man to ftate and defend it. It is the manner in which he writes to which we object, and which must be condemned by every one who reckons gentleness and meekness among the virtues. Mr. Farmer is injuriously ranked with Bolingbroke, Hume, and Dodwell; if he makes use of con ditional expreffions, he is charged with drawing inferences from fuppofitions and conjectures; if he omits them, he is a dogmatist, They who reject Mr. Fell's ideas of angelical and diabolical agency, are pofitively afferted to contradict the Scriptures; and, ftrange as it may appear, are fufpected of a defign to overthrow men's faith in the wifdom and ftability of divine providence.' Mr. Fell, like other writers on the fame fide of the queftion, does not perceive, or will not acknowledge, any dif ference with refpect to the wisdom and goodness of the Supreme Governor, between admitting the power and influence of vifible, and those of invifible beings, over our bodies and minds: he even afferts, that it is more confiftent with thofe perfections to ascribe the entrance and continuance of fin and mifery in the world to fuperior wicked fpirits, than to any original imperfection in human nature, or the influence of bad men in corrupting and oppreffing others. We fhall give our readers a paffage or two upon this head, as a very favourable fpecimen of the Author's manner of writing and reafoning.

In oppofition,' fays he, to that account, which hath been fo often justly urged from the Holy Scriptures, concerning the entrance of fin into this world, and the rife of human calamities, the following objections may, perhaps, have been alleged, "That the origin of evil, both natural and moral, is a fubject which hath employed, and hitherto perplexed, the greatest philofophers and divines in every age; and that fome judicious perfons will probably be of opinion, that the Mofaic history of the fall, however explained, is not a complete folution of it, or that, if it hath removed fome difficulties, there are others remaining." To this, or to any thing of the like import, if it hould be pleaded, the following brief anfwer may be given, That the Mofaic hiftory of the fall was never intended as a

folution

folution of the origin of evil, far lefs as a complete one, nor was it ever fo urged, that we know of, by any Christian divine; none, therefore, but either injudicious or uncandid perfons will reprefent the fubject in this light." Our bufinefs, at prefent, is with the following question, "Will any Christian divine take upon him to fay, that the account which is delivered to us by the facred penmen, concerning the introduction of natural and moral evil into this world, is not a just one?" According to the Holy Scriptures, neither human calamities, nor death, nor the evil paffions of men, are from the original conftitution of nature, but were brought into the world by that fin to which the Devil first feduced man. The hiftory of the fall, the previous threatening of God in cafe of difobedience, and the fentence pronounced on Adam's tranfgreffion, together with the confequent alteration in the ftate of the world, and in the condition of mankind, do all naturally lead us to a fource of human calamities very different from the original conftitution of nature. That account which is given us in the Bible, concerning the introduction of natural and moral evil among men, hath hitherto been received by Chriftians in general, as authentic; the principles and defign of the Gospel everywhere fuppofe its truth; there is nothing in it contradictory to human reaton, or inconfiftent with our natural ideas of the divine perfections, for nothing injurious throughout the whole affair is attributed to the agency of God. The origin of evil is a fubject not within the comprehenfion of the human mind, because we are, at prefent, deftitute of thofe common principles without which a clear knowledge of the matter cannot be conveyed to us if there were a proper medium through which fuch information could be given, we should undoubtedly perceive, that God was no more the contriver and agent in the first rife of moral evil, than he was, according to the Scriptures, in the entrance of fin into this world.'

In the next paffage that we shall quote, Mr. Fell, after the load of abufe that he has thrown upon Mr. Farmer, in the preceding three hundred pages, and the many pernicious views and fentiments he has afcribed to him, many of which are afterwards repeated, generously acquits him of all bad intentions.

Far be it from us,' fays he, to impute any evil defign to this writer; we doubt not, he really meant to ferve the caule of virtue, which he thought could not be more effectually done, than by removing every thing which appeared to him in the light of fuperftition. But we have a right to affirm, that in fupporting his hypothefis concerning Dæmoniacs, and in pointing out what he apprehends to be the true fource of human calamities, he urges thofe very arguments that have been so often alleged both against the truth and neceffity of a revelation. In

N 4

deed,

He

deed, it appears to us, that either his fcheme or the Gospel of Christ muft fall to the ground; there feems no alternative. denies the power of all fuperior beings, God excepted, to do either good or evil to mankind, and on this principle rejects the influence of evil fpirits from every caule of human mifery. But the Holy Scriptures conftantly affirm, that the Devil beguiled man from his allegiance to God, and feduced him into fin; they reprefent this prince of wicked fpirits as the immediate author of all mischief, and therefore call him " an homicide from the beginning." Mr. Farmer confiders all the calamities and advantages of human nature as immediately determined and fixed in the original conftitution of things, and hence maintains, that the human fyftem is governed by the very fame invariable laws with the natural world. But the Holy Scriptures affure us, that the present state of human nature is not that in which it was originally created: they attribute all the evils of mankind to fin: they will neither allow, that God is the author of death, nor that human miferies arife from the original conftitution of things: but they attribute every bleffing to the imme diate and conftant agency of the divine Being, and his unmerited goodness. This is the grand hinge on which, not only the whole controverfy between Chriftians and the oppofers of a divine revelation, but the very being of religion and virtue, turns. If the prefent state of human nature arofe from the original conftitution of things, and man be just fuch as he came at first from the hands of his Maker, we muft conclude with Lord Bolingbroke, that neither the goodness nor the juftice of God ever required, that we should be better or happier than we are, at least in the prefent world; and that no fufficient reafon can be affigned for an extraordinary revelation. If the settled order of caufes and effects in the moral world, together with the regularity and uniformity of the natural world, are all to be afcribed to the operation of the very fame laws, we can by no means avoid that conclufion which Mr. Hume feems to have intended in his "Effay on Liberty and Neceffity," That it is impoffible for reason to fhew how human actions can have any moral turpitude at all, without involving our Creator in the fame guilt. We have never yet feen any objections raised against those principles on which the Gofpel is refted, which do not ftrike as much at the ground of natural religion as at the foundation of the Chriftian fcheme. The prefent intereft of fociety in general, as well as the future happiness of mankind, is infeparably connected with the truth and reality of thofe doctrines, which are delivered in the Scriptures, concerning the ruin of human nature by the malice and wickednefs of the Devil, and its recovery from fin and wretchedness by the Son of God. The principles of the Chriftian religion can never be overthrown without the lofs

of

of morality; and, while a real difference is maintained in the world between virtue and vice, and man is confidered as a moral agent, it seems clear to us, Mr. Farmer's account of the origin of human calamities must be rejected.

Our Readers cannot but notice the confequential ftyle, we and us, which Mr. Fell adopts. They ought alfo to be apprifed, that he reckons, original fin, and the renewal of our nature by an immediate divine agency,' among those doctrines of Chriftianity, which, according to his reprefentation in the paragraph juft quoted, are connected with the prefent intereft of fociety, and with the future happiness of mankind, and which ⚫ can never be overthrown without the lofs of morality.'

Mr. Fell, in another chapter, seems willing to believe, that madness is sometimes, at least, owing to poffeffion by evil spirits, though he acknowledges, that it would be highly prefumptuous in any one in the prefent day to determine what particular inftances of madness are to be ascribed to this caufe. His reafons are, that some of the phenomena of madness are not to be accounted for, and that fome particular kinds of madness are incurable. The fame reasons led the ancients to afcribe the epilepfy, madness, and every other diforder, and every other phenomenon, with the nature of which they were unacquainted, to the fupernatural agency and influence of fuperior evil beings.

If Mr. Farmer fhould think it proper to take any public notice of this opponent, he will, in our opinion, obtain an easy victory. We can only wish for his own reputation, and for the credit of his profeffion, that Mr. Fell had proved himself a more rational, modeft, and generous adverfary. Em.

ART. II. Zoraida; a Tragedy. As it is acted at the TheatreRoyal in Drury-Lane.To which is added a Poftfcript, containing Obfervations on Tragedy. 8vo. 1 s. 6d. Kearly. 1780.

A

DDISON was accused by Dennis of poisoning the town with falfe criticifm in the Spectator, in order to prejudice their minds in favour of Cato. Critics as we are, we believe this cenfure of Addifon, by our predeceffor, to have been malevolent and ill-founded; and that the Spectators on Tragedy, however they might occafionally coincide with the practice of the author, were dictated by the spirit of taste and candour. The Writer of Zoraida has, however, fubjoined to his piece fome "Observations on Tragedy," profeffedly written in vindication of the principles on which his drama is conftructed. It will not be improper, therefore, to blend an inveftigation of thefe principles with an examination of the tragedy; both of which the Author has, with much fairness, fubmitted to critical decifion.

Thefe

× Written by a M. Hodson