As I have extended this preface thus far, I fhall extend it a little farther, in order to anfwer an objection that may be made to religion, natural or revealed, from the very great differences of opinion among the profeffors of it, on such subjects as are here difcuffed, and from the animofity with which we may happen to debate about them. Now this does not at all arife from the nature of the fubject, any farther. than its greater importance neceffarily, and juftly, makes it more interefting, but from the nature of man, the fame principles operating in a fimilar manner on fimilar occafions.

Men do not differ more, or difpute with more warmth, on fubjects of religion, or meta phyfics, than they do on thofe of civil government, philology or even philofophy, which, one would imagine, a priori, must always be the calmest thing in the world, and could never occafion an angry debate. But by giving much attention to any thing, we may interest ourselves in any thing, and wherever that is the cafe, an intemperate warmth is the inevitable confequence. Befides, it is not in human nature not to feel one's felf more or lefs interested in the support of an opinion which we have once advanced as our own. And whenever

any

any thing perfonal mixes in a debate (and it is barely poffible that it should not do fo) it is, in fact, a regard for our reputation and character that is the ftimulus, and Lothing neceffarily belonging to the fubject.

But the circumflance that chiefly interests the paffions, and inflames the animosity of those who dispute on the fubject of religion, is the worldly emolument annexed to the profeffion of particular tenets, in the civil eftablishments of christianity. Did the civil magiftrate fhew no preference to one mode of religion more than to another, and was there no other motive concealed under the mafk of zeal for religion, there would be no great reafon to complain of its intemperance.

Few perfons are, from their fituation and experience, better qualified to fpeak on this fùbject than myself, few perfons having been engaged in a greater variety of purfuits, or in a scene of more various controversy; and I fee no reason whatever for accufing religion, more than any thing elfe, of exciting jealoufy, hatred, or any other immediate caufe of animofity and angry debate.

Many of

my friends are frequently expreffing their wishes, that I had nothing to do with

1

theology, or metaphyfics, flattering me with the profpect of a confiderable degree of unenvied reputation as a philofopher. But the most rancorous oppofition, and the most unprovoked abuse that I have met with, has been from perfons who never knew any thing of me but in the character of a philofopher. And, though I will venture to fay, that it is not poffible to write with more franknefs than I have always done; defcribing, in the most natural manner, the very progrefs of my thoughts with respect to every discovery of confequence, and, upon all occafions giving rather too much, than too little, to any person who has favoured me with the least affistance, as all my philofophical writings evidence, I have been treated as a notorious plagiary*. There are even many persons, not deftitute of name and character themselves, who cannot bear to hear me spoken of, as having any pretenfions to philo¬ sophy, without a fneer; and who think my publications on the subject a disgrace to philofophy, and to my country.

Can, I, then, have a more ungracious reception among divines, metaphyficians, or philo

*See my Pamphlet intitled Philofophical Empiricifm. logifts,

logifts? In fhort, having no better treatment to expect in any walk of literature, I fhall, without diftinction, apply myself to any purfuit to which my attention shall be more par◄ licularly drawn. I have friends, and I have enemies, in every clafs of men to whom I have been introduced. All the former I fhall be happy to oblige in their turn, but I cannot be with any of them always. The latter I neither abfolutely despise, nor greatly dread, Those of them who are difpofed to be civil to me shall meet with civility from me in return, and as to those of them who are otherwise difpofed, I fhall behave to them as I may happen to be affected at the time,

But, mindful of the motto which I have chofen for my coat of arms, Ars longa, vita brevis, I fhall devote as much of my time as poffible to the pursuit of truth, and as little as I can help to the mere defence of it, or of myfelf. The former is a noble and fublime exercife of the mind, exalting the foul, and improving the temper; whereas in the latter, though conducted with the greatest caution, there is a risk of debafing the mind, hurting the temper, and facrificing our peace. For, controversy is, at best, a state of war.

THE

THE hiftorical account of the fyftem of heathenifm concerning the pre-existence of fouls in general, and of the pre-existence of the foul of Chrift in particular, which was derived from it, I had once thought of referving for my Hiftorical View of the Corruptions of Christianity, which will be the last part of my Inftitutes of Natural and Revealed Religion. But as it was actually compofed during my inveftigation of this fubject, as it rose out of it, and is ftrictly connected with it, I have thought proper to fubjoin it, by way of Sequel.

Both the parts of this work, taken together, will fhew, in a ftriking light, the very extensive mischief that has been done to revealed religion by the introduction of this part of the fyftem of heathenifm, concerning the foul. And when the proper extent of this foreign fyftem is feen, it may be hoped, that many persons who have rejected a part of it, will fee equal reason to reject the whole. And, for my own part, I am fatisfied that it is only by purging away the whole of this corrupt