confidered as a mafs of malignant matter, and as the prison of the immortal fpirit.

The opinion that matter is the fource of all evil, and the contempt that, in confequence of it, was entertained for the body, was capable of two oppofite applications, one in favour of fenfuality, as a thing that did not affect the mind, and the other of the mortification of the body; and we find that, in fact, this double ufe was made of thofe principles, according as the perfons who adopted them were inclined.

The Gnoftics, fays Mofheim (Differtations, p. 243) were always talking of the contemplation of things invifible, and of the Deity, and thought all things lawful to them that agreeably affected the body. He also fays (Ecclef. Hift. vol. i. p. 14) that those of the Oriental fects, who were of a voluptuous turn, might confider the actions of the body as having no relation to the ftate of a foul in communion with God. Some of them even maintained that the fouls were fent into the body that they might indulge in all fenfual pleasure, and that they could not arrive at perfection till they had performed their task. They acknowledged that Christ taught purity, but not to all; that it was proper for the carnal, but not the Spiritual and perfect. Mofheim's Differtations, p. 247, 248. It is not improbable that the heretics, against whom the apostles, and our Saviour, in the book of Revelation, inveigh fo much, were Gnostics of

this kind; and that afterwards the fame philofophical principles took an oppofite turn, and led to mortifications and aufterities *.

In various other refpects, alfo, the doctrine of matter being the fource of evil, and a clog upon the immaterial foul, has had moft pernicious confequences; having introduced max

* Another vice, of moft pernicious confequence, the chriftians of the fecond and third centuries feem to have derived from the maxims of the philofophers, but because it does not relate to the subject of this work, except fo far as it fhews, in general, the hurtful connection of chriftianity and philosophy, I fhall infert in a note. It is the lawfulnefs of lying to promote a good caufe.

Timæus Locrus, the mafter of Pythagoras, fays that as we use poisons to cure mens' bodies, if wholesome remedies will not do, so we refrain mens' minds by falfehoods, if they will not be led with truth. Mofheim's Differt. p. 195. Plato gave into the fame vice. ib. p. 156, and in his book, De Republica, he fays, the chiefs of a city may deceive the reft for their good, but that others ought to abstain from lying, p. 199.

On this account, when chriftianity prevailed, the Platonic philofophers endeavoured, by feigned accounts of Pythagoras, and other early philofophers, to eclipfe chriftianity, fetting up their characters and actions, as if they had been fuperior to Chrift. Hence the writings, afcribed to Hermes and Zoroafter, and hence, fome think, thofe of Sanchoniatho, to difcredit those of Mofes. ib. p. 199.

But the greatest misfortune was, that thofe chriftians, who embraced the Platonic principles in other respects, received this alfo, and thought it innocent and commendable to lie for the fake of truth; and hence came fo many forged gofpels, and other writings of a fimilar nature, which did not appear till after the æra of the incorporation of philofophy with christianity. ib. p. 200. Origen, in particular, avowed this principle, p. 203, and also Chryfo stom, p. 205.

ims and cuftoms contrary to all common fenfe, the very reverse of the doctrines of the gofpel, and that have actually done much mifchief in fociety. Such, more especially, is the influence it has had with refpect to the prevailing notions concerning marriage, continence, fafting, &c.; fome particulars relating to which, being curious, I fhall recite.

That the opinion of the great value and importance of bodily aufterities came from the heathen philofophy, is evident from the known fentiments and practices of the philofophers on the fubject.

The cuftom of fafting, fays Mofheim (Disfert. p. 177) is chiefly to be ascribed to the Platonifts. Pythagoras forbad his difciples the use of flesh, and Porphyry imitated him in a book written for that purpose. The Platonic school, he fays, ib. p. 177, thought it was better to abftain from flesh, efpecially if perfons gave themfelves to meditation, and the contemplation of divine things.

"Some of the philofophers," fays Jortin (Remarks on Ecclefiaftical Hiftory, vol. iii. p. 23) "exercifed frange feverities upon them"felves, and upon their disciples, from the "days of Pythagoras to the time of Lucian, "who introduces the philofopher Nigrinus as condemning fuch practices, and obferv

66

ing that they had occafioned the deaths of "feveral perfons. The Greek philofophers," he fays, ib. p. 26, " had a particular drefs, "and affected to appear rough, mean, and

"dirty;

dirty; for which they were fometimes in"fulted in the streets by boys, and by the "populace; and the Cynics very prudently "were armed with a ftaff to defend them"felves from dogs and from the rabble. The "christian monks," he adds, "imitated the 66 old philofophers in their rags and appear66 ance, and many of them feemed, in the "opinion of those who loved them, to have "inherited the rags, the pride, and contentious fpirit of the former.”

According to Ammonius, the wife were to raise above all terreftrial things, by the towering efforts of holy contemplation, thofe fouls whofe origin was celeftial and divine. They were ordered to extenuate by hunger, thirst, and other mortifications, the fluggish body, which confines the activity, and restrains the liberty of the immortal fpirit; that thus, in this life, they might enjoy communion with the Supreme Being, and afcend after death, active and unencumbered, to the universal parent, to live in his prefence for ever, Mofheim's Ecclef. Hift. vol. i. p. 141.

A very peculiar notion that the philofophers entertained concerning dæmons was the caufe of much of their doctrine of the mortification of the body. They taught, fays Mofheim (Differt. p. 213) that the dæmons, being furnished with subtle bodies, were very greedy of carnal pleasures, and poffeffed men for the fake of enjoying them; and therefore that he who would drive away dæmons, muft

Z 4

fast,

faft, and mortify himself, and that those who were married would do well to abftain from their wives as much as poffible. On this account many lived with their wives as with fifters, and called them by that name.

The Docete in general condemned marriage' altogether, but others fpake of it as an imperfection only. This, Beaufobre fays, vol. i. p. 360, was a confequence of the opinion of matter being the fource of all evil. Marcion alfo difapproved of marriage, and his difciples were alfo great fafters. ib. p. 126. Manes faid that concupifcence in general, or the love of the fexes, came from matter, was derived from the bad principle, and was therefore vicious in itself. vol. i. p. 463.

It was the opinion of Bardefanes, that Adam at first had no body, but what was subtle, and agreeable to his nature, and that he had a carnal body given him after his fall. ib. p. 235. According to Manes, marriage was the fin of Adam and Eve, p. 459. That the woman was the tree of knowledge, was the opinion of many of the Rabbins, p. 461. And Clemens Alexandrinus fays, that the fin of Adam was his anticipating his commerce with Eve, p. 463. Marriage, however, was not abfolutely forbidden by the Manicheans; but only to the elect, while it was permitted to thofe they called auditors, p. 474.

In the very early times of chriftianity, the bishops and doctors, notwithstanding the warnings of the apoftles on this very head, mag