The most ancient Greeks had no temples, but worshipped in the open air. It is said that Cecrops, who came from Egypt, first taught them to erect temples, and brought in the worship of hero gods and images: and in this he was followed by others of their ancient kings and legislators; and the number of their gods and goddesses, as well as the rites of their worship, were continually increasing, and received constant additions from the fables of their poets and mythologists. As to Italy, the best writers of their antiquities agree that the religion of the inhabitants in the most ancient times was different in several respects from that which prevailed in Greece in the latter ages. And it is particularly observed by Varro, concerning the ancient Romans, that they worshipped the gods without an image for more than one hundred and seventy years. And he adds, that if this had still continued, the gods would have been worshipped more purely. “Quod si "adhuc mansisset, castiùs dii observentur;" of which he mentions the Jews as an example. Yea, he sticks not to declare civitatibus suis et To the same pur that "they who first instituted images of the gods for the "people, both took away from the cities the reverence of the "gods, and added to the popular error.” "Qui primi si❝mulacra deorum populis posuerunt, eos "metum demsisse, et errorem addidisse."* pose Plutarch, in his life of Numa, observes, that "he for"bade the Romans to represent God under the form of man " or beast; nor was there any graven or painted image ad"mitted among them formerly. But for the space of the "first one hundred and sixty years they built temples, but "made no statue or image, as thinking it an impiety to liken "the most excellent things to those that are mean and base; "it being not possible to apprehend or approach God, "¿parтíleoJaι Jeoû, but by the understanding."+ But after * Apud Augustin. de Civ. Dei, lib. iv. cap. 31. p. 87. + Macrobius, speaking of him whom he calls the highest God, affirms that antiquity formed no image of him. "Nullum ejus simulacrum finxit antiquitas." In Somn. Scip. lib. i. cap. 2. wards images were multiplied among them, as well as among the Greeks, and grew more and more in use in those ages when learning and the arts flourished. Their wise men and philosophers pleaded for images as necessary helps to human infirmity; and the people carried it so far as to think that there could be no religion without images. Hence they looked upon those nations which had no images as having no religion at all.* And this was one of their principal objections against the primitive Christians, who were all zealous enemies to image worship, that they had no altars or images: ❝nullas aras, nulla nota simulacra." Thus the learned and polite nations fell short of some of the people whom they called barbarous, who, in this and some other instances, adhered more closely to the tradition of the first ages, and were strangers to the refinements of human learning and philosophy. I had occasion to take notice before of the praises bestowed by Dionysius Halicarnasseus upon the religion of the first Romans. It appears from his account, that, in the most ancient times of the Roman state, when the people were esteemed rude and illiterate, their religion had more of simplicity, and less absurdity in it than afterwards, when they had commerce with the learned Greeks, and philosophy and the sciences had made a great progress among them. Hence the satirist, comparing the ancient with the latter times, observes that they had not then such a crowd of gods as they worshipped afterwards. "Nec turba deorum "Talis ut est hodie, contentaque sidera paucis Juven. Sat. xiii. v. 46, 47. They incorporated more of the poetic fabulous theology into the civil or public religion than they had formerly done. It Lactantius, speaking of the fondness of the heathens for images, especially those that were adorned with gold and jewels, observes, "nec ullam religionem “putant, ubi illa non fulserint," lib. ii. cap. 6. appears, from the writings of the learned Varro, who flourished in the latter times of the Roman republic, not long before the coming of our Saviour, that in his days their deities and sacred ceremonies were multiplied to an amazing degree. So far is it from being true, that they grew in the knowledge of religion, and in the pure worship of the true God, as they grew in literature, that on the contrary they were still more deeply immersed in idolatry and polytheism. Rome became at length the receptacle of all kinds of idolatry, even of the Egyptian rites. Thus, Lucan, "Nos in templa tuam Romana recepimus Isin "6 Semideosque canes." Hence Tertullian upbraids the Romans, that, notwithstanding the high regard they professed to have for their ancestors, they had fallen off from those of their institutions, which had been rightly ordered. They restored the mysteries of Bacchus, which, by a decree of the senate, had been exterminated out of Rome and all Italy. The Egyptian deities, particularly Serapis, Isis, Harpocrates, Cynocephalus, or Anubis, which had been expelled the capital by the consuls, and their altars overturned, were again admitted, and the highest honours paid them.* Thus it appears that the illiterate ages, by keeping more closely to the traditions derived to them from the most ancient times, were free from some of those corruptions which were introduced in the politer ages. Idolatry and polytheism continued to gather strength in the midst of learning and philosophy. Not only the poets and priests, but the legislators and civil magistrates, many of whom were accounted wise men and philosophers, had a great hand in this. Aristotle, in a passage above quoted from him, after having observed that it had been delivered down from those of the most ancient times, both that the stars are gods, and that the divinity Tertul. Apol. cap. 6. Opera, p. 7. B. C. Paris, 1672. containeth whole or universal nature, adds that all the other things were fabulously introduced for the persuasion of the multitude, and for procuring obedience to the laws, and promoting the public utility: such as the representing the gods to be of human form, or like to some other animals, with other things of that nature, and which are consequent upon these.* * Metaphys. lib. xiv. cap. 8. Oper. tom. II. p. 1005. Paris, 1629. CHAP. XXI. A fourth general reflection. Human wisdom and philosophy, without a higher assistance, insufficient for recovering mankind from their idolatry and polytheism, and for leading them into the right knowledge of God and religion, and the worship due to him. No remedy was to be expected in an ordinary way, either from the philosophers or from the priests, or from the civil magistrates. Nothing less than an extraordinary revelation from God could, as things were circumstanced, prove an effectual remedy. The wisest men in the heathen world were sensible of their own darkness and ignorance in the things of God, and of their need of Divine revelation. THE several considerations which have been offered make it sufficiently evident how little was to be expected from human learning and philosophy, for instructing mankind in the right knowledge and worship of the only true God, and for recovering them from the gross idolatry and polytheism in which they were generally involved. What the apostle hath observed, now appears to be undeniably true by fact and experience, "the world by wisdom knew not God." 1 Cor. i. 21. If there had been no other remedy, we must have continued under the Pagan idolatry and polytheism unto this day. It is an easy thing to speak in high terms of what the light of nature and reason can lead men to, now that it has been so greatly refined and assisted by the light communicated from the Christian revelation. Men that have been educated under the gospel, and who have access to the discoveries there made, may pursue and improve those discoveries, and then securely boast of what mighty things they can do by the strength of their own reason and penetration. But the proper way to know the true force of natural reason, and what may be expected from it when left to itself, in the present state of mankind, is to consider what was done in matters of religion under the mere guidance of human reason, in those nations and ages in which it was diligently cultivated, and when polite literature and the liberal arts were in their highest elevation. It would argue great arrogance in us, to suppose that |