done with a view to the general instruction and interests of mankind. Agreeably to this view, he appears to be correctly described in the Book of Ecclesiasticus, as "an example of repentance to all "generations*." His case, and that of the martyr, are alike the appointments of a wise and merciful Providence, and may be reasonably considered as having been ordained with the same design; namely, that of promoting the reign of godliness upon earth and of furthering the salvation of men. The one is chosen as a signal instance, for the general instruction and encouragement, of the divine approbation afforded to a virtuous life: the other is appointed, by the sufferance of death and torture, to yield an attestation to the truth of that faith which is the way of sanctification and eternal bliss. Both, we conceive, are properly to be viewed in connexion with the provisions of Divine Wisdom for the general welfare of the human race, and not with any restricted application to the qualities of individuals.

The present life is not the appointed season for the reward of virtue. Hence then we have reason to believe, that, had the design of Providence in the translation of Enoch been limited to his individual case, he, after the manner of other men, would have been admitted to his reward after his day of trial had been terminated by death. This, indeed, generally speaking, seems almost necessary in order to complete and perfect the appointed warfare of faith since the approach of death is the severest trial which humanity has to sustain; an hour which

x Ecclus. xliv. 16.

calls forth the utmost exertion of our virtues, and puts most fully to the test our love of God and resignation to his will. "Virtus nunquam nisi morte "finitur," says Lactantius, "quoniam et in morte "suscipienda summum ejus officium esty."

We therefore conclude, that the translation of Enoch was intended to afford to mankind a conviction that there is another world after this, and to strengthen the belief in a future retribution, at a time when religion stood in need of every support which it could obtain.

This conviction it was well adapted to establish. For, on the one hand, low as mankind may have been sunk in folly and depravity, they could never entertain so absurd a notion of the retributive justice of God, as to suppose, that it would be limited in its operation to a solitary case. And again, with regard to the mode of its operation, they could not find, either in those principles of true religion which still lingered among them, or in their own experience and observation, any sanction for believing, that the divine justice would manifest itself in rewarding the piety of all good men after the manner of Enoch's reward. The only justifiable inference then would be, that man was destined for another life; and that an exception had been made from the general law for the sake of giving to the world a manifest ground of conviction that he was so.

Such are the arguments in favour of a future state arising from the scriptural records of the ante

y Div. Inst. vii. 10.

diluvian world. Hence we would infer, that this doctrine must have been the general belief of mankind before the flood. If the doctrine itself were not gathered from the transactions which have been brought under consideration, it must at least be allowed, that the views of those transactions which must necessarily have occurred to the minds of men, could never, on the supposition of any religion whatever existing among them, be reconciled with a disbelief of it. The belief is therefore implied in these transactions, if the doctrine itself be not proved by them. The doctrine thus entertained would be conveyed to Noah, the second father of mankind, and by him would be handed down to his posterity. Hence, we conceive, originated the wide diffusion of a doctrine, which in later ages spread itself so extensively among the various families of mankind, that scarcely a nation can be found among whom it was not entertained.

It must not however be forgotten, as we have already hinted, that in order to the propagation of this important truth, peculiar methods may have been employed by the Supreme Wisdom, of which no information has been conveyed to us. Of such possible methods there is one which, with a view to the general illustration of this remark, we will briefly notice.

That the dead have sometimes been restored to life, is an undoubted truth of revelation. While we acknowledge the purposes contemplated in these supernatural acts of divine power to be agreeable to that supreme and perfect wisdom by which they were ordained, why should it be thought unworthy

of the same wisdom, to permit that the departed soul, after quitting its fleshly tabernacle, should occasionally hold communication with men? Thus may have been afforded a sensible proof of future existence, together with an instruction, founded on experience, respecting the final issue attendant upon the conduct of men in their probationary state.

Reflect on the general belief in such communications which has pervaded every region of the inhabited world: and surely we may, without indulging an unreasonable credulity, allow it to be possible, that even the vulgar tales of popular superstition may have had their first foundation in reality and fact. Without such an admission, the existence of fiction and imposture with relation to such narratives is hardly capable of a rational explanation. It is thus we argue with regard to other instances of forgery. Pretended miracles and pretended prophecies are justly regarded as affording their evidence, that some miracles have been actually performed, and that some prophecies are authentic and divine. Impostures and cheats are commonly considered as imitations of something real". And with

:

* Και τουτο δε δοκεί μοι ώσπερ επι παντων δειν παρατιθεναι, ὅτι ὁπου τι χειρον προσποιουμενον ειναι ὁμογενες τῷ κρειττονι, εκεί παντως εκ του εναντιού εστι τι κρειττον· οὕτω και επι των κατα γοητειαν επιτελούντων, ότι παντως αναγκη είναι και απο θειας ενέργειας εν τῷ βίῳ γινόμενα. Origenes contra Celsum, ii. 51. So also the general principle is laid down by bishop Law though the particular application of it to this subject militates against the peculiar doctrine maintained by that prelate respecting the soul. "Not to insist upon the numberless "traditions of supernatural appearances, and the common belief "of them all over the world; which notion can hardly be sup"posed to have arisen at first without foundation, though num

good reason: because we cannot conceive, by what inlet the very notion on which the imposture is founded can have gained its first admission into the mind, unless it had been introduced by an antecedent reality. The pretensions of the necromantic art are of very ancient date, and yield a strong presumption of such reality: for on what ground can we imagine those pretensions to have been established, unless the minds of men had been previously familiarized to the conception of an intercourse with departed spirits? And again, how could the conception itself have existed in the mind, unless it had been primarily derived from reality and truth? It deserves consideration whether the petition of the rich man in the parable may not be considered as indicating a traditionary evidence of that, for the possibility of which we contend. "I pray thee therefore, father, "that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: "for I have five brethren; that he may testify unto "them, lest they also come into this place of tor"menta." Now if we suppose such an intercourse to have been afforded by Providence to the earlier generations of mankind, this of itself will go far towards explaining the universality of that belief of which we are investigating the origin.

To have passed over this topic in silence would

"berless impostures (which yet are ever imitations of something "real, and almost a natural consequence of it) have indeed ren"dered all reports of that kind, for these many ages, very suspi"cious." Considerations on the Theory of Religion, p. 76. ed. 1765. See also Gray's Key to the Old Testament and Apocrypha on 2 Macc. p. 680. ed. 1822.

a Luke xvi. 27, 28.