scene of cruelty, cold-blooded malignity, beastly impurity, heaven daring impiety, and insatiable rapaciousness, the world never witnessed before, and, I trust in God, will never witness again. The only ray of hope which brightened the dismal prospect was, that this horrible system contained in itself the principles of its own speedy downfall. Atheism has no bond of union for its professors, no basis of mutual confidence. It breeds suspicion, and consequently hatred in every breast; and it is actuated by a selfishness which utterly disregards all the bonds of nature, of gratitude, and of friendship. To an atheist fear becomes the ruling passion. Conscious of his own want of virtue, honour, and humanity, he naturally views his fellows in the same light, and is ready to put them out of the way as soon as they appear to become obstacles to the accomplishment of his plans. Hence the bloody actors in this tragedy, after glutting their revenge, by shedding the blood of innocent Christians and unoffending priests, turned their murderous weapons against each other. Not satisfied with inflicting death on the objects of their suspicion or envy, they actually feasted their eyes daily, with the streams of blood which incessantly flowed from the guillotine. Never was the justice of heaven against impious and cruel men more signally displayed, than in making these miscreants the instruments of vengeance upon each other. The general state of morals in France, during the period in which Christianity was proscribed, and atheism reigned, was such as almost exceeds belief. An eye-witness of the whole scene, and an actor in some parts of it, has drawn the following sketch:"Multiplied cases of suicide; prisons crowded with innocent persons; permanent guillotines; perjuries of all classes; parental authority set at naught; debauchery encouraged by an allowance to those called unmarried mothers: nearly six thousand divorces within the single city of Paris, within a little more than two years after the law authorized

them;-in a word, whatever is most obscene in vice, and most dreadful in ferocity!"* If these be the genuine fruits of atheism, then let us rather have superstition in its most appalling form. Between atheism and superstition there is this great difference; the latter may authorize some crimes, the former opens the flood-gates to all. The one restrains partially, the other removes all restraint from vice. Every kind of religion presents some terrors to evil doers; atheism promises complete immunity, and stamps virtue itself with the character of folly.

But we must not suppose that the whole mass of the French people became atheists during this period. Far from it. A large majority viewed the whole scene with horror and detestation; but the atheistical philosophers had the power in their hands; and, though a small minority of the nation, were able to effect so much mischief. But from this example we may conjecture what must be the state of things, if the whole mass of people in a nation should become atheists, or be freed from all the restraints of conscience and religion. Such an event will never occur, but if it should, all must acknowledge that no greater calamity could be imagined. It would be a lively picture of hell upon earth; for what is there in the idea of hell more horrible than the absence of all restraint and all hope, and the uncontrolled dominion of the most malignant passions? But there would be one remarkable point of difference, for while atheists deny the God that made them, the inhabitants of hell BELIEVE AND TREMBLE.

* Gregoire.

CHAPTER III.

IF CHRISTIANITY BE REJECTED, THERE IS NO OTHER RELIGION WHICH CAN BE SUBSTITUTED IN ITS PLACE; AT LEAST NO OTHER WHICH WILL AT ALL ANSWER THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH RELIGION IS DESIRABLE.

IT has been proved in the former section, that it is necessary to have some religion. We are already in possession of Christianity, which, by the confession of deists themselves, answers many valuable purposes. It behoves us, therefore, to consider well what we are likely to obtain by the exchange, if we should relinquish it. If any man can show us a better religion, and founded on better evidences, we ought to give it up willingly; but if this cannot be done, then surely it is not reasonable to part with a certain good, without receiving an equivalent. This would be, as if some persons sailing on the ocean in a vessel which carried them prosperously, should determine to abandon it without knowing that there was any other to receive them, merely because some of the passengers, pretending to skill, suggested that it was leaky, and would sooner or later founder.

Let the enemies of Christianity tell us plainly what their aim is, and what they design to substitute in the place of the Bible. This, however, they are unable to perform: and yet they would have us to consent to give up our dearest hopes without knowing what we are to receive, or whether we are to receive any thing to compensate for the loss.

This is a point of vital importance, and demands our most serious attention. If it is really intended to substitute some other religion in the place of Christianity, we ought certainly, before we make the exchange, to have the opportunity of examining its claims, that we may know whether it will be likely to answer the purposes for which religion is wanted. To bring this subject fairly into view, let us take a

survey of the world, and inquire, what it has to propose for our selection, if we should renounce Christianity

There are only three things, in that event, among which we must choose. The first, to adopt some of the existing or some of the exploded systems of Paganism; the second, to accept the Koran instead of the Bible; and the third, to embrace Natural Religion or pure deism.

Few men have had the effrontery to propose a return to Paganism; yet even this has not been too extravagant for some whose names stand high as men of literature. The learned Gibbon has not, that I recollect, expressed his opinion on this subject explicitly; but it may be fairly inferred, from many things in his History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman empire, that he deeply regretted the subversion of the old Pagan systems, and that the progress of Christianity was far from affording him any plea

sure.

But although he makes it sufficiently manifest that, could his wishes have governed past events, the old systems would never have been disturbed, and Christianity never have had a footing; yet we cannot say whether he would have given his vote to have the temples rebuilt and the Pagan rites restored. It is difficult to tell what he wished to accomplish by his opposition to Christianity; or whether he had any definite view, except to manifest his hatred to the gospel and its Author.

Taylor, the learned translator of Plato, openly avowed his predilection for the religion of the Athenian philosopher, and his wish that it might be revived; and speaks in contemptuous terms of Christianity, in comparison with Platonism; but he never could have supposed that to be a suitable religion for the bulk of men, which had not the least influence upon them while the philosoper lived. This, then, would be no substitute for Christianity; for under its benign influence, even THE POOR HAVE THE GOSPEL PREACHED UNTO THEM. But I have no doubt

that, if the truth could be ascertained, we should find that this sublime genius derived some of his best ideas directly or indirectly from the Scriptures; and that if he had lived under the light of the gospel, he would never have spoken of it as his translator has done.

In the time of the revolution in France, after some trial had been made of having no religion, D'Aubermenial proposed a new religion, in imitation of the ancient Persians. His plan was to have the Deity represented by a perpetual fire and offerings made to him of fruits, oil, and salt; and libations poured out to the four elements. It was prescribed, that worship should be celebrated daily in the temple, that every ninth day should be a Sabbath, and that on certain festivals all ages should unite in dances. A few fanatics in Paris and elsewhere, actually adopted the new religion, but they were unable to attract any notice, and in a little time it sunk into merited oblivion.

It has been common enough to set up the Mohammedan religion in a sort of rival comparison with Christianity, but I do not know that any have gone so far as to prefer the Koran to the Bible, except those few miserable apostates, who, after being long "tossed about with every wind of doctrine," at length threw themselves into the arms of the Arabian impostor. How far this religion can bear a com parison with Christianity, will be seen in the sequel.

Deism, then, or Natural Religion, is the only hope of the world, if the Christian Religion be rejected. The first English deists extolled Natural Religion to the skies, as a system which contained all that man needed to know; and as being simple and intelligible to the meanest capacity. But strange to tell, scarcely any two of them are agreed what Natural Reli gion is; and the same discordance has existed among their successors. They are not agreed even in those points which are most essential in religion, and most necessary to be settled before any religious worship can be instituted. They differ on such points as