ceptation they are equal to the purpofe, but for the fake of meeting unbelievers upon their own ground. I have a right however to understand by them, thofe difpofitions of the mind, whatever they be, which are right, fit, or amiable; and fo explained, I undertake to prove that the morality and virtue inculcated by the gospel, is enlarged, and free from impurity, while that which is taught by its adver faries is the reverfe.

It is a diftinguishing property of the Bible that all its precepts aim directly at the heart. It never goes about to form the mere exterior of man. Το merely external duties it is a ftranger. It forms the lives of men no otherwife than by forming their difpofitions. It never addreffes itself to their vanity, felfishness, or any other corrupt propenfity. You are not pressed to consider what men will think of you, or how it will affect your temporal intereft; but what is right, and what is neceffary to your eternal well-being. If you comply with its precepts, you must be, and not merely feem to be. It is the heart that is required; and all the different prescribed forms of worship and obedience, are but fo many modifications, or varied expreffions of it.

Is any thing like this to be found in the writings of deifts? No. Their deity does not feem to take cognizance of the heart. According to them "There is no merit or crime in intention."* Their morality only goes to form the exterior of man. It allows the utmost scope for wicked defires, provided they be not carried into execution to the injury of fociety. The morality which the Scriptures inculcate is

* Volney's Law of Nature, p. 18.

Thou shalt lovs with all thy foul,

fummed up in these few words, the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy mind, with all thy frength; and thy neighbour as thy felf. This fingle principle is competent to the government of all intelligent nature, It is a band that would hold together the whole rational creation; and diffufe peace, order, and happinefs wherever it existed.

If mankind loved God fupremely, there would be no idolatry upon earth, nor any of its attendant abominations; no profaning the name of God, nor making a gain of godliness; no oppofing, corrupting, perverting, nor abufing the truth; no perjuries, nor hypocrifies; no defpifing of thofe that are good; no arrogance, ingratitude, pride, nor felf-complacency under the fimiles of providence; and no murmuring, heart-rifing, fullennefs, nor fuicide under its frowns. Love would render it their meat and drink to fear, honour, and obey him, and induce them to take every thing well at his hands.—

And if they loved their fellow-creatures as themfelves, for his fake, there would be no wars, rivalfhips, antipathies, nor breach of treaties between nations; no envyings, ftrifes, wrongs, flanders, duels, litigations, nor intrigues between neighbours; no flattering complaifance, nor perfecuting bitterness in religion; no deceit, fraud, nor over-reaching in trade; no tyranny, venality, haughtiness, nor op. preffion amongst the great; no envy, difcontent, difaffection, cabals, nor evil-devifings among common people; no murders, robberies, thefts, burglarics, nor brothels, in city or country; no cruelty in parents or mafters; no ingratitude nor difobedience in children or fervants; no unkindness, treahery, nor implacable refentments between friends;

no illicit connexions between the sexes; no infidelities, jealoufies, nor bitter contentions in fami lies; in fhort, none of thofe ftreams of death, one or more of which flow through every vein of fociety, and poifon its enjoyments.

Such is the principle and rule of Christian morality; and what has deism to substitute in its place? Can it find a fuccedaneum for love? No, but it propofes the love of ourselves instead of the love of God. Lord Bolingbroke refolves all morality into felf-love as its first principle. "We love ourselves," he fays,

we love our families, we love the particular fo"cieties to which we belong; and our benevolence "extends at laft to the whole race of mankind. "Like fo many different vortices, the centre of all " is felf-love."* Such alfo are the principles of Vol

ney.

Could this difpofition be admitted as a proper fource of moral action, the world, would certainly not be wanting in morality. All men poffefs at leaft the principle of it, whether they carry it to the extent which Lord Bolingbroke proposes, or not : for though fome may err in the choice of their end, and others in the means of obtaining it; yet no man was ever fo wanting in regard to himself as intentionally to purfue his own injury. But if it fhould prove that to render felf-love the fource of moral action is the fame thing as for every indivi dual to treat himself as the Supreme Being; and therefore that this faid felf-love, inftead of being a fource of virtue, is of the very effence of vice, and the fource of all the mischief in the universe, confe quences may follow of a very different complexion

To fubordinate felf-love I have no objection. It occupies a place in the Chriftian standard of mora lity, being the measure of that love which we owe to our fellow-creatures. which we owe to them fome of them, by reafon culiar relation to us, may require a larger portion of our regard than others, it is the fame with ref pect to ourselves. Our own concerns are our own immediate charge; and those which are of the greatest importance, such as the concerns of our fouls, undoubtedly require a proportionate degree of attention.

And as the univerfal love does not hinder but that of their fituation, or pe

But all this does not affect the prefent fubject of inquiry. It is our fupreme, and not our fubordinate regard, that will ever be the fource of action.

I take it for granted that it is the intention of every good government, human or divine, to unite its fubjects, and not to fet them at variance. But there can be no union without a common object of regard. Either a character whom all love and venerate, or an end which all purfue, or both, is that to a community which a head ftone is to an arch; nor can they keep together without it. It is thus that the love of God holds creation together: He is that lovely character to whom all holy intelligences bear fupreme affection; and the difplay of his glory, in the univerfal triumph of truth and righteoufnefs, is that end which they all purfue. Thus united in their grand object, they cannot but feel a union of heart with one another, arifing from, what is common to every other voluntary union, a congeniality of fentiments and purfuits.

But if our fupreme affection terminate on ourfelves, and no being, created or uncreated, be re

garded but for our own fakes, it is manifeft there can be no union beyond the fphere in which other beings become voluntarily fubfervient to our wifhes. The Supreme Being, if our plan do not comport with his, will be continually thwarting us; and fa we shall be always at variance with him. And as to created beings, thofe individuals whom we defire to be fubfervient to our wifhes, having the fame right, and the fame inclination to require that we should be fubfervient to theirs, will alfo be continually thwarting us; and fo we fhall always be at variance with them. In fhort, nothing but an endless fucceffion of difcord and confufion can be the confequence. Every one fetting up for pre-eminence, every one muft of courfe contribute to the general state of anarchy and mifery which will pervade the community. Such is in fact the state of this apoftate world; and, but for divine providence, which for wife ends balances all human affairs, by caufing one fet of evils to counteract the influence of another, it must be overset by its own disorders.

To regard every other being, created or uncreated, only for our own fakes, is fupreme self-love; and instead of being a fource of virtue, is itself abominable, and the fource of all the mifchief and mifery in the universe. All the evils just enumerated are to be traced to this principle as their common parent: nor is there any ground of hope that it will ever produce effects of a different nature. Some perfons have talked much of " felf-love ripening into benevolence." Had it been faid malevolence it had been nearer the truth: for it is contrary to all experience that any thing fhould change its nature by becoming more mature. No, a child in knowledge may difcern, that if ever genuine benevolence