of anger, of jealousy, and of a juft regard to our own honour. Lord Shaftesbury himself would have ridiculed the man, and ftill more the magistrate that should have been incapable of these properties on certain occafions. They are planted in our nature by the Divine Being, and are adapted to anfwer valuable purpofes. If they be perverted and abused to fordid ends, which is too frequently the cafe, this does not alter their nature or leffen their utility. What would Lord Shaftesbury have thought of a magistrate, who should have witnessed a train of affaffinations and murders without being in the leaft offended at them, or angry with the perpetrators, or inclined to take vengeance on them for the public good? What would he think of a British House of Commons, who should exercise no jealouSy over the encroachments of a minister, or of a king of Great Britain who should fuffer, with perfect indifference, his just authority to be treated with contempt?

But we are limited beings, and are therefore in danger of having our juft rights invaded. True; and though God be unlimited, and fo in no danger of being deprived of his effential glory, yet he may lofe his juft authority in the esteem of creatures; and were this to take place univerfally, the whole creation would be a fcene of anarchy and mifery. But we understand Lord Shaftesbury. He wishes to compliment his Maker out of all his moral excellencies. He has no objection to a God, provided he be one after his own heart, one who fhall pay no fuch regard to human affairs as to call men to account for their ungodly deeds. If he thought the Creator of the world to bear fuch a character, it is no wonder that he fhould fpeak of him with what he calls

"good humour, or pleafantry."* In fpeaking of fuch a God, he can, as Mr. Hume expreffes it, "feel more at eafe" than if he conceived of him as he is characterized in the Holy Scriptures. But let men beware how they play with fuch fubjects. Their conceptions do not alter the nature of God: and however they fuffer themselves to trifle now, they may find in the end that there is not only a GOD, but a God that judgeth in the earth.

Christianity teaches us to acknowledge God, and to devote ourselves to his fervice: but Deifm, though it confeffes One Supreme Being, yet refuses to worship bim.

F there be a God, he ought to be worship-ped. This is a principle which no man will be able to eradicate from his bofom; or even to fupprefs, but at great labour and expence. The Scriptures, it is well known, both inculcate and inspire the worfhip of God. Their language is, Ọ, come let us. fing unto the Lord: let us make a joyful noife to the Rock of our falvation. Let us come before his prefence with thanksgiving, and make a joyful noife unto hiin with pfalms-O come, let us worship and bow down : let us kneel before the Lord our maker-Give unto the Lord glory and frength: give unto the Lord the glory due to his Name. Bring an offering, and come into· bis courts-O worship the Lord in the beauty of holinefs: fear before him all the earth-Give thanks unto

Characteristics, Vol. I. § III

the Lord, call upon his Name: make known his deeds among the people-glory ye in his holy Name; let the heart of them rejoice that feek the Lord. Seek the Lord, and his frength; feek his face continually.

The spirit alfo which the Scriptures infpire is favourable to divine worship. The grand leffon which they teach is love; and love to God delights to exprefs itself in acts of obedience, adoration, fupplication, and praife. The natural language of a heart -well affected to God, is, I will call upon him as long as I live-Blefs the Lord, O my foul; and all that is within me bless his holy Name-Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer, and fupplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known unto God.

Is it thus with our adversaries? They fpeak indeed of "true and fabulous theology," and of " true and falfe religion;" and often talk of " adoring" the Supreme Being. But if there be no true religion amongst Christians, where are we to look for it? Surely not amongst deists. Their "adorations" feem to be a kind of exercises much resembling the benevolent acts of certain persons, who are fo extremely averfe to oftentation, that nobody knows of their being charitable but themselves.

Mr. Paine profeffes to "believe in the equality of man, and that religious duties confift in doing juftice, loving mercy, and"and what? I thought to be sure he had been going to add, walking humbly with God. But I was mistaken. Mr. Paine fupplies the place of walking humbly with God, by adding, "and endeavouring to make our fellowcreatures happy."* Some people would have thought that this was included in doing juftice, and loving mer¬

Age of Reafon, Part I, p. 2.

:

ey but Mr. Paine had rather use words without meaning than write in favour of godlinefs. Walking humbly with God is not comprehended in the lift of his "religious duties." The very phrase offends him. It is that to him, in quoting scripture, which a nonconductor is to the electrical fluid: it causes him to fly off in an oblique direction; and, rather than fay any thing on fo offensive a fubject, to deal in unmeaning tautology.

Mr. Paine not only avoids the mention of walking humbly with God, but attempts to load the practice itself with the fouleft abufe.* He does not confider himself as "an out-caft, a beggar, or a worm;" he does not approach his Maker through a Mediator; he confiders "Redemption as a fable," and himfelf as ftanding in an honourable fituation with regard to his relation to the Deity. Some of this may be true; but not the whole. The latter part is only a piece of religious gafconade. If Mr. Paine really think fo well of his fituation as he pretends, the belief of a hereafter would not render him "the flave of terror." But allowing the whole to be true, it proves nothing. A high conceit of one's felf is no proof of excellence. If he chufe to reft upon this foundation, he must abide the confequence: but he had better have forborne to calumniate others. What is it that has tranfported this child of reafon into a paroxifm of fury against devout people? By what fpirit is he inspired in pouring forth fuch a torrent of flander? Why is it that he must accufe their humility of "ingratitude,” their grief of " affectation,” and their prayers of being "dictatorial" to the al

Age of Reafon, Part I. p. 21. † Part II. near the end..

mighty? Cain hated his brother; and wherefore hated he him? because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous. Prayer and devotion are things that Mr. Paine fhould have let alone, as being out of his province. By attempting however to run them down, he has borne witness to the devotion of Chriftians, and fulfilled what is written in a book which he affects to defpife, Speaking evil of the things which he understands not.

To admit a God, and yet refufe to worship him, is a modern and inconfiftent practice. It is a dictate of reafon as well as of Revelation, If the Lord be God, worship him; and if Baal, worship him. It never was made a question whether the God in whom we believe fhould receive our adorations. All nations in all ages paid religious homage to the refpective deities or fuppofed deities, in which they believed. Modern unbelievers are the only men who have deviated from this practice. How this is to be accounted for is a fubject worthy of enquiry. To me it appears as follows—

In former times, when men were weary of the worship of the true God, they exchanged it for that of idols. I know of no account of the origin of idolatry fo rational as that which is given by Revelation. Men did not like to retain God in their knowledge therefore they were given up to a mind void of judgment; to change the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beafts, and creeping things and to defile their bodies by every fpecies of lewdnefs, and wickednefs.* It was thus with the people who came to inhabit the country of Samaria af

* Rom. i.