the Christian religion, but that the most sedu- | rusticity and uncouth turn of John Toland, a cing strokes of wit and raillery, the most en- native of Ireland, who, toward the conclusion chanting eloquence, and the charms of a genius, of this century, was rendered famous by sevein which amenity, elegance, copiousness, and ral injurious libels against Christianity, must elevation, were happily blended, rendered him naturally appear doubly disgusting, when comone of its most dangerous, though secret ene pared with the amiable elegance and specious mies; and so much the more dangerous, because refinement of the author now mentioned. his opposition was carried on under a mask. However, as those writers, who flatter the His works have been published in various passions by endeavouring to remove all the reforms, and have passed through many editions.straints that religion imposes upon their excesThey are remarkable for beauty of diction, and contain very noble and sublime sentiments; but they ought to be read with the utmost caution, as being extremely dangerous to inexperienced, youthful and unwary minds.* The brutal sive indulgence, will never want patrons among the licentious part of mankind; so this man, who was not destitute of learning, imposed upon, the ignorant and unwary; and, notwithstanding the excess of his arrogance and vanity, and the shocking rudeness and ferocity of his manners, acquired a certain measure of fame.* and good sense, that the being influenced by the hope of the reward promised in the Gospel, has nothing in it disingenuous and slavish, and is so far from being inconsistent with loving virtue for its own sake, that it tends, on the contrary, to heighten our esteem of its amiableness and worth. The triumphant manner in which the learned Dr. Warburton has refuted Shaftesbury's representation of raillery and ridicule as a test of truth, is too well known to be mentioned here. See also Dr. Brown's Three Essays on the Characteristics, in which that sensible author treats of ridiculé considered as a test of truth; of the obligations of men to virtue, and of the necessity of religious principle, and of revealed religion and Christianity. *His works were first collected and published under the title of Characteristics, in 1711, and, since that time, have passed through many editions. See Le Clerc's account of them in his Bibliotheque Choise, tom. xxiii. The critical reflections of the learned and ingenious Leibnitz on the philosophy of Lord Shaftesbury were published by Dez-Maizeaux, in the second volume of his Receuil de diverses Pieces sur la Philosophie, `p. 245.-There are some writers who maintain, that this noble philosopher has been unjustly charged, by the greatest part of the clergy, with a contempt for revealed religion; and it is to be wished, that the arguments they employ to vindicate him from this charge were more satisfactory and solid than they really are. But, if I do not greatly mistake, whoever peruses his writings, and more especially his famous letter concerning enthusiasm, will be inclined to adopt the judgment that Dr. Mosheim, in a short note, refers to an was formed of him by the ingenious Dr. Berkeley, account he had given of the Life and Writings of bishop of Cloyne, in his Alciphron, or the Minute Toland, prefixed to his confutation of the Nazarenus Philosopher, vol. i. p. 200.-Nothing is more easy of that contemptible author. He also quotes a life than to observe, in the writings of Lord Shaftesbury, of Toland, prefixed to his posthumous works by Desa spirit of raillery, mingling itself even with those Maizeaux. Dr. Mosheim says, that this man was of his reflections upon religious subjects that seem to not destitute of learning. Should that be granted, it be delivered with the greatest seriousness and gra- must, nevertheless, be acknowledged that this learnvity. But, at the same time, this unseemly mixture ing lay quite undigested in his head, and that the of the solemn and the ludicrous, renders it difficult use he made of it, in his works, was equally injudifor those who are not well acquainted with his man- cious and impudent. His conference with M. Beauner, to know whether he is in jest or in earnest. It sobre, concerning the authenticity of the Holy Scripmay also be added, that this author has perniciously tures, which was holden at Berlin in presence of the endeavoured to destroy the influence and efficacy of queen of Prussia, and in which he made such a dessome of the great motives that are proposed in the picable figure, is a proof of the former; and his wriScriptures to render men virtuous, by representing tings, to all but half-scholars and half-thinkers, will these motives as mercenary, and even turning them be a proof (as long as they endure,) of the latter.into ridicule. He substitutes, in their place, the in- It is remarkable that (according to the maxim of Jutrinsic excellence and beauty of virtue, as the great venal, Nemo repente fuit turpissimus,) Toland arrivsource of moral obligation, and the true incentive to ed only gradually, and by a progressive motion, at virtuous deeds. But, however alluring this sublime the summit of infidelity. His first step was Socischeme of morals may appear to certain minds of a nianism, which appeared in his book, entitled, Chrisrefined, elegant, and ingenious turn, it is certainly tianity not Mysterious. This book procured him little adapted to the taste, the comprehension, and hard treatment from the Irish parliament, and was the character of the multitude. Take away from the answered by Mr. Brown, afterwards bishop of Cork, lower orders of mankind the prospects of reward and || who, unhappily, did not think good arguments suffipunishment, that lead them to virtue and obedience,cient to maintain a good cause, unless they were seby the powerful suggestions of hope and fear; and the conded by the secular arm, whose ill-placed succours great supports of virtue, and the most effectual mo-he solicited with ardour. The second step that Totives to the pursuit of it will, with respect to them, be removed. land made in the devious fields of religion, was in the publication of his Amyntor, which, in appearance, was designed to vindicate what he advanced in his Life of Milton, to prove that king Charles I. was not the real author of the Eikon Basilike, but, in reality, was intended to invalidate the Canon of the New Testament, and to render it uncertain and precarious. This piece, as far as it attacked the authenticity of Scripture, was answered in a triumphant manner by Dr. Clarke, in his Reflections on that part of the Book called Amyntor, which relates to the Writings of the Primitive Fathers, and the Since Dr. Mosheim wrote this note, the very learned and judicious Dr. Leland published his View of the Principal Deistical Writers that have appeared in England during the last and present Century, &c. in which there is a full account of the free-thinkers and deists mentioned by our historian, with a review of the writings of the earl of Shaftesbury. This review merits a particular attention, as it contains an impartial account, an accurate examination, and a satisfactory refutation, of the erroneous principles of that great man. Like all other eminent innova-Canon of the New Testament; by Mr. Richardson, tors, the earl has been misrepresented both by his in his learned and judicious Vindication of the Ca friends and his enemies. Dr. Leland has steered a midnon of the New Testament; and by Mr. Jones, in his dle course between the blind enthusiasm of the former, new and full Method of settling the Canonical Auand the partial malignity of the latter. He points out, thority of the New Testament. These learned wriwith singular penetration and judgment, the errors, ters have exposed, in the most striking manner, the inconsistencies, and contradictions, of that illustri disingenuity, the blunders, the false quotations, the ous author; does justice to what is good in his inge-insidious fictions, and ridiculous mistakes of Toland, nious writings; separates carefully the wheat from the chaff; and neither approves nor condemns in the lump, as too many have done. In a more particular manner he has shown, with his usual perspicuity VOL. II.-22 who, on various accounts, may pass for one of the most harmless writers against the Christian religion. For an account of the Adeisidæmon, the Nazarenus. the Letters to Serena, the Pantheisticon, and the * XXIII. Infidelity, and even atheism, showed themselves also on the continent during this century. In France, Julius Cæsar Vanini, the author of two books, one entitled, the Amphitheatre of Providence, and the other, Dialogues concerning Nature, was publicly burned at Toulouse, in 1629, as an impious and obstinate atheist. It is nevertheless to be observed, that several learned and respectable writers consider this unhappy man rather as a victim to bigotry and envy, than as a martyr to impiety and atheism; and maintain, that neither his life nor his writings were so absurd or blasphemous as to entitle him to the character of a despiser of God and religion. But, if Vanini had his apologists, this was by no means the case of Cosmo Ruggieri, a native of Florence, whose atheism was as impudent as it perate sentiments of irreligion at Paris, in was impious, and who died in the most des1615, declaring that he looked upon all the accounts that had been given of the existence of a Supreme Being, and of evil spirits, as idle ii. p. 1083.-The peculiar tenets of this famous deist have been refuted by Musæus and Kortholt, two German divines of eminent learning and abilities. - Gassendi also composed an answer to lord Her bert's book de Veritate. In England it was refuted by Mr. Richard Baxter, in a treatise entitled, More Reasons for the Christian Religion, and no Reason against it. Mr. Locke, in his Essay on the Human Understanding, shows, with great perspicuity and force of evidence, that the five articles of natural re It is not necessary to mention other authors of this class, who appeared in England, during this century, but are long since consigned to oblivion. The reader may, however, add, to those who have been already named, lord Herbert of Cherbury, a philosopher of some note, who, if he did not absolutely deny the divine origin of the Gospel,* maintained, at least, that it was not essentially necessary to the salvation of mankind; and Charles Blount, who composed a book, entitled the Oracles of Reason, and, in 1693, died by his own hand.† other irreligious works of this author, and also of the excellent answers that have been made to them, see his Life in the General Dictionary, or rather in Chauffepied's Supplement to Bayle's Dictionary, entitled, Nouveau Dictionnaire Historique et Critique, as this author has not only translated the articles added to Bayle's Dictionary by the English editors of that work, but has augmented and improved them by several interesting anecdotes drawn from the literary history of the continent. Lord Herbert did not presume to deny the divinity of the Gospel; he even declared that he had no intention to attack Christianity. He expressly calls it the "best religion," and admits that it tends to establish the five great articles of that universal, sufficient, and absolutely perfect religion, which he pretends to deduce from reason and nature. But, notwithstanding these fair professions, his lordship loses no occasion of throwing. out insinuations against all revealed religion, as absolutely uncertain, and of little or no use. But this same deist, who was the first, and, indeed, the least contemptible of that tribe in England, has left upon record one of the strongest instances of fanaticism and absurdity, that perhaps ever were heard of, and of which he himself was guilty. This instance is pre-ligion, proposed by this noble author, are not, as he served in a manuscript life of lord Herbert, drawn up from memorials penned by himself, which is now in the possession of a gentleman of distinction,* and is as follows: that lord, having finished his book de Veritate, apprehended that he should meet with much opposition, and was, consequently, dubious for some time, whether it would not be prudent to suppress it. "Being thus doubtful (says his lordship,) in my chamber (at Paris, where he was ambassador, in 1624,) one fair day in the summer, my casement being open towards the south, the sun shining clear, and, no wind stirring, I took my book de Veritate in my hands, and, kneeling on my knees, devoutly said these words: O thou Eternal God, author of this light that now shines upon me, and giver of all inward illuminations, I do beseech thee, of thine inThis book was published at Lyons in 1615, finite goodness, to pardon a greater request than a was approved by the clergy and magistrates of that sinner ought to make; I am not satisfied enough city, and contains many things absolutely irreconwhether I shall publish this book; if it be for thy cilable with atheistical principles: its title is as folglory, I beseech thee, give me some sign from hea lows: Amphitheatrum Æternæ Providentiæ, Divinoven; if not, I shall suppress it." What does the rea- Magicum Christiano-Physicum Astrologico-Catholi der now think of this corner stone of deism, who cum, adversus Veteres Philosophos, Atheos, Epicudemands a supernatural revelation from heaven in reos, Peripateticos, Stoicos, &c. This book has been favour of a book that was designed to prove all redeemed innocent by several writers, impious by velation uncertain and useless? But the absurdity others; but, in our judgment, it would have escaped does not end here; for our deist not only sought for reproach, had Vanini published none of his other this revelation, but also obtained it, if we are to be-productions, since the impieties it may contain, aclieve him. "I had no sooner (says he,) spoken these words, but a loud though yet gentle noise came forth from the heavens, (for it was like nothing on earth,) which did so cheer, and comfort me, that I took my petition as granted." Rare credulity this in an unbeliever! but these gentlemen can believe even against reason, when it answers their purpose. His lordship continues, "This, however strange it may seem, I protest before the Eternal God, is true: neither am I superstitiously deceived herein," &c. See Leland's View of the Deistical Writers, vol. i. †This is sufficiently known to those who have perused lord Herbert's book de Causis Errorum, as also his celebrated work de Religione Gentilium. This author is generally considered as the chief and founder of the sect or society that are called Natu ralists, from their attachment to natural religion alone. See Arnoldi Historia Eccles. at Hæret. part || represents them, common notices, clearly inscribed by the hand of God in the minds of all men, and that a divine revelation is necessary to indicate, develope, and enforce them. Dr. Whitby has also treated the same matter amply in his learned work, entitled, The Necessity and Usefulness of the Christian Revelation, by reason of the Corruptions of the Principles of Natural Religion among the Jews and Heathens. * See the Nouveau Dictionnaire Historique et Critique of Chauffepied, who, however, has omitted the mention of this gentleman's unhappy fate, out of a regard, no doubt, to his illustrious family. Mr. Chauffepied only translated the article Charles Blount, from that of the English continuators of Bayle. cording to the intention of its author, are carefully concealed. This is by no means the case of the book mentioned in the following note. This book, concerning the Secrets of Queen Nature, the Goddess of Mortals, was published with this suspicious title at Paris, in 1616, and contains glaring marks of impiety and atheism; and yet it was published with the king's permission, and the approbation of the Faculty of Theology. This scandalous negligence or ignorance is unaccountable in such a reverend body. The Jesuit Garasse pretends that the Faculty was deceived by Vanini, who substituted another treatise in the place of that which had been approved. See a wretched book of Garasse, entitled, Doctrine Curieuse; as also Durand's Vie de Vanini. See Buddeus's Theses de Atheismo et Superstitione. The author of the Apologia pro Vanino, which appeared in Holland in 1712, was Peter Fre*The translator probably alludes to Horace Wal-deric Arp, a learned lawyer; and we may also place, pole, earl of Orford, who afterwards published it. --EDIT. among the defenders of Vanini, Elias Frederic Heister, author of the Apologia pro Medicis. dreams. Casimir Leszynski, a Polish knight, || dent that Spinosa was seduced into this monwas capitally punished at Warsaw, in 1689, for denying the Being and Providence of God; but whether this accusation was well founded, can only be known by reading his trial, and examining the nature and circumstances of the evidence adduced against him. In Germany, a senseless and frantic man, called Matthew Knutzen, a native of Holstein, attempted to found a new sect, whose members, laying aside all considerations of God and religion, were to follow the dictates of reason and conscience alone, and thence were to assume the title of Conscientiarians. But this wrong-headed sec-|| tary was easily obliged to abandon his extravagant undertakings; and thus his idle attempt proved abortive. XXIV. The most acute and eminent of the atheists of this century, whose system represented the Supreme Author of all things as a Being bound by the eternal and immutable laws of necessity or fate, was Benedict de Spinosa, a Portuguese Jew. This man, who died at the Hague in, 1677, observed in his conduct the rules of wisdom and probity, much better than many who profess themselves Christians; nor did he ever endeavour to pervert the sentiments or corrupt the morals of those with whom he lived, or to inspire, in his discourse, a contempt of religion or virtue.§ It is true, indeed, that in his writings, more especially in those which were published after his death, he maintains openly, that God and the universe are one and the same Being, and that all things happen by the eternal and immutable law of nature, i. e. of an all-comprehending and infinite Being, that exists and acts by an invincible necessity. This doctrine leads directly to consequences equally impious and absurd; for, if the principle now mentioned be true, each individual is his own God, or, at least, a part of the universal Deity, and is, therefore, impeccable and perfect. Be that as it may, it is evi *See Bayle's Dictionary. †See Arnold's History of the Church. The famous library of Offenbach formerly contained a complete collection of all the papers relating to the trial of Leszynski, and a full account of the proceedings against him. See Molleri Cimbria Literata, tom. i. p. 304; and Isagoge ad Historiam Chersonesi Cimbr. part ii. cap. vi. sect. viii.-La Croze, Entretiens sur divers sujets d'Histoire, p. 400. § The life of Spinosa was accurately written by Colerus, whose performance was published at the Hague in 1706. But a more ample and circumstantial account of this singular man was given by Lenglet du Fresnoy, and prefixed to Boulainvilliers' Exposition of the Doctrine of Spinosa. See Bayle's Dictionary. Lenglet du Fresnoy republished the work of Colerus, and added to it several anecdotes and circumstances, borrowed from a Life of Spinosa, written by an infamous profligate, whose name was Lucas, and who practised physic at the Hague. See the notes † & t, p. 172. The learned Fabricius, in his Bibliotheca Græca, and Jenichen, in his Historia Spinosismi Lehnhofiani, have given us an ample list of the writers who have refuted the system of Spinosa. The real opinion which this subtle sophist entertained concerning the Deity, is to be learned in his Ethics, that were published after his death, and not in his Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, which was printed during his life. In the latter treatise, he reasons like one who was persuaded that there exists an eternal Deity, distinct from matter and the universe, who has sent upon earth a religion designed to form men strous system by the Cartesian philosophy, of which he was a passionate admirer, and which was the perpetual subject of his meditation and study. When he had adopted the general principle (about which philosophers of all sects are agreed) that all realities are possessed by the Deity in the most eminent degree, and had annexed to this principle, as equally evident, the opinion of Des-Cartes, that there are only two realities in nature, thought and extension, one essential to spirit, and the other to matter,* the natural consequence was, that he should attribute to the Deity both these realities, even thought and extension, in an eminent degree, or, in other words, should represent them as infinite and immense in God. Hence the transition seemed easy to that enormous system, which confounds God with the universe, represents them as one and the samé Being, and supposes only one substance whence all things proceed, and into which they all return. It is natural to observe here, that even the friends of Spinosa are obliged to acknowledge, that this system is neither attended with that luminous perspicuity, nor with that force of evidence, which are proper to make proselytes. It is too dark, too intricate, to allure men from the belief of those truths relating to the Deity, which the works of nature, and the plainest dictates of reason, are perpetually enforcing upon the human mind. Accordingly, the followers of Spinosa tell us, without hesitation, that it is rather by the suggestions of a certain sense, than by the investigations of reason, that his doctrine is to be comprehended; and that it is of such a nature, as to be easily misunderstood even by persons of the greatest sagacity to the practice of benevolence and justice, and has confirmed that religion by events of a wonderful and astonishing, though not of a supernatural kind; but in his Ethics he throws off the mask, explains clearly his sentiments, and endeavours to demonstrate, that the Deity is nothing more than the universe, producing a series of necessary movements or acts, in consequence of its own intrinsic, immutable, and irresistible energy. This diversity of sentiment, that appears in the different productions of Spinosa, is a sufficient refutation of those who, forming the esti mate of his system from his Tractatus TheologicoPoliticus alone, pronounce it less pernicious, and its author less impious, than they are generally supposed to be. But, on the other hand, how shall this diversity be accounted for? Are we to suppose that Spinosa proceeded to atheism by gradual steps, or is it more probable, that, during his life, he prudently concealed his real sentiments? Whether the former, or the latter, be the real case, it is not easy to determine.. It appears, however, from testimonies, every way worthy of credit, that he never, during his whole life, either made, or attempted to make, converts to irreligion, and never said any thing in public that tended to encourage disrespectful sentiments of the Supreme Being, or of the worship that is due to him. It is well known, on the contrary, that, when subjects of a religious nature were incidentally treated in the course of conversation where he was present, he always expressed himself with the utmost decency on the occasion, and often with an air of piety and seriousness more adapted to edify than to give offence. *The hypothesis of Des-Cartes is not, perhaps, represented with sufficient accuracy and precision, by saying that he looked upon thought as essential to spirit, and extension as essential to matter, since it is well known that this philosopher considered thought as the very essence or substance of the soul, and extension as the very essence and substance of matter. and penetration.* His disciples assumed the || strange sect were a physician, whose name was denomination of Pantheists, choosing rather to Louis Meyer,* a person called Lucas,† count derive their distinctive title from the nature of Boulainvilliers, and some others, equally contheir doctrine, than from the name of their temptible on account of their sentiments and master. The most noted members of this morals. civil magistrate to prevent such licentious and tur- * There is certainly no man so little acquainted with the character of Bayle as to think him void of discernment and sagacity; and yet this most subtle metaphysician has been accused by the followers of Spinosa, of misunderstanding and misrepresenting the doctrine of that Pantheist, and consequently of answering it with very little solidity. This charge is brought against Bayle, with peculiar severity, by L. Meyer, in his preface to the posthumous works of Spinosa, in which, after complaining of the misrepresentations that have been given of the opinions of that writer, he pretends to maintain, that his system was, in every point, conformable to the doctrines of Christianity. Boulainvilliers also, another of Spinosa's commentators and advocates, declares, in his preface to a book, whose perfidious title is mentioned below in note, that all the antagonists of that famous Jew either ignorantly misunderstood, † Lucas was a physician at the Hague, and was or maliciously perverted, his true doctrine; his words as famous for what he called his Quintessences, as are: Les refutations de Spinosa m'ont induit a juger, || he was infamous on account of the profligacy of his ou que leurs auteurs n'avoient pas voulu mettre la morals. He left behind him a Life of Spinosa, from doctrine, qu'ils combattent, dans une evidence suffi- which Lenglet du Fresnoy took all the additions that sante, ou qu'ils l'avoient mal entendue. If this be he made to the life of that atheist written by Coletrue, if the doctrine of Spinosa be not only far be rus. He also composed a work which is still handed yond the comprehension of the vulgar, but also diffi- about, and bought at an extravagant price, by those cult to be understood, and liable to be mistaken and in whose judgment rarity and impiety are equivalent misrepresented by men of the most acute parts and to merit. This work is 'entitled, l'Esprit de Spinosa, the most eminent abilities, what is the most obvious and surpasses infinitely, in atheistical profaneness, conclusion deducible from this fact? It is plainly even those productions of Spinosa that are generally .his, that the greatest part of the Spinosists, whose looked upon as the most pernicious; so far has this sect is supposed by some to be very numerous in Eu- miserable writer lost sight of every dictate of prurope, have adopted the doctrine of that famous athe-dence, and triumphed even over the restraints of ist, not so much from a conviction of its truth, founded on an examination of its intricate contents, as This fertile and copious, but paradoxical and infrom the pleasure they take in a system that pro- considerate writer, is abundantly known by his vamises impunity to all transgressions that do not rious productions relating to the history and politicome within the cognisance of the law, and thus cal state of the French nation, by a certain prolix lets loose the reins to every irregular appetite and Fable, entitled, the Life of Mohammed, and by the passion; for it would be senseless, in the highest de adverse turns of fortune that pursued him. His chagree, to imagine, that the pretended multitude of racter was so made up of inconsistencies and conthe Spinosists, many of whom never once dreamedtradictions, that he is almost equally chargeable of exercising their minds in the pursuit of truth, or with superstition and atheism; for, though he acaccustoming them to philosophical discussion, should|| knowledged no other Deity than the universe, or all accurately comprehend a system, which, accord-nature, yet he looked upon Mohammed as authoriing to their own account, has escaped the penetra-zed, by a divine commission, to instruct mankind; tion and sagacity of the greatest geniuses. shame. and he was of opinion, that the fate of nations, and the destiny of individuals, could be foreknown, by an attentive observation of the stars. Thus the man was, at the same time, an atheist and an astrologer. Now this medley of a man was greatly concerned (in consequence, forsooth, of his ardent zeal for the public good) to see the admirable doctrine of Spinosa so generally misunderstood, and therefore he formed the laudable design of expounding, illustrating, and accommodating it, as is done with respect to the doctrines of the Gospel in books of piety, to ordinary capacities. This design, indeed, he executed, but not so fortunately for his master as he might fondly †Toland, unable to purchase a dinner, composed and published, in order to supply the sharp demands of hunger, an infamous and impious book under the following title: Pantheisticon, sive Formulæ celebrandæ Societatis Socraticæ, in tres Particulas divisæ, quæ Pantheistarum sive. Sodalium continent, I. Mores et Axiomata; II. Numen et Philosophiam; III. Libertatem et non fallentem Legem neque fallendam, &c. The design of this book, which was published at London in 1720, appears by the title. It was intended to draw a picture of the licentious morals and principles of his brethren the Pantheists under the fictitious description of a Socratical So-imagine, since it appeared most evidently from his ciety, which they are represented as holding in all the places where they are dispersed. In the Socrati cal, or rather Bacchanalian Society, described in this pernicious work, the president and members are said to converse freely on several subjects. There is also a Form or Liturgy read by the president, who officiates as priest, and is answered by the assembly in suitable responses. He recommends earnestly to the members of the Society the care of truth, liberty, and health; exhorts them to guard against superstition, that is, religion; and reads aloud to them, by way of lesson, certain select passages out of Cicero and Seneca, which seem to favour irreligion. His colleagues promise solemnly to conform themselves to his injunctions and exhortations. Sometimes all the members, animated with enthusiasm and joy, raise their voices together, and sing, out of the ancient Latin poets, certain verses which are suitable to the laws and principles of their sect. See DesMaizeaux, Life of John Toland, p. 77.-Bibliotheque Angloise, tom. viii. If the pantheistical community be really such as it is here represented, it is not so much the duty of wise and good men to dispute with or refute its members, as it is the business of the own account of the system of Spinosa, that Bayle and the other writers who had represented his doctrine as repugnant to the plainest dictates of reason, and destructive of all religion, had judged rightly, and were not misled by ignorance or by temerity. In short, the book of Boulainvilliers set the atheism and impiety of Spinosa in a much more clear and striking light than ever they had appeared before This infamous book, which was worthy of eterna oblivion, was published by Lenglet du Fresnoy, who, that it might be bought with avidity, and read without reluctance, prefixed to it the attractive but perfidious title of a Refutation of the Errors of Spinosa; adding to it, indeed, some separate pieces, to which this title may, in some measure, be thought applicable. The whole title runs thus: Refutation des Erreurs de Benoit de Spinosa, par M. de Fenelon, Archeveque de Cambray, par le Pere Lami Benedictin, et par M. le Comte de Boulainvilliers, avec la Vie de Spinosa, ecrite par Jean Colerus, Ministre de l'Eglise Lutherienne de la Haye, augmentee de beaucoup de Particularites tirees d'une Vie Manuscrite de ce Philosophe, faite par un de ses Amis (this friend was Lucas, the atheistical physician mentioned in the gions of nature, he opened scenes of instruction and science, which, although hitherto unknown or disregarded, were infinitely more noble and sublime, and much more productive of solid nourishment to the minds of the wise, than the learning that was cultivated before his time. XXV. The progressive and flourishing state || conjecture. He led them to Nature, that of the arts and sciences, in the seventeenth they might consult that oracle directly and century, is abundantly known; and we see the near at hand, and receive her answers; and, by effects, and enjoy the fruits, of the efforts then the introduction of experimental inquiry, he made for the advancement of learning. No placed philosophy upon a new and solid basis. branch of literature seemed to be neglected. It was thus undoubtedly that he removed the Logic, philosophy, history, poetry, and rheto- prejudices of former times, which led men to ric; in a word, all the sciences that belong to consider all human knowledge as circumscribthe respective provinces of reason, experience, ed within the bounds of Greek and Latin eruobservation, genius, memory, and imagination, dition, and an acquaintance with the more elewere cultivated and improved with remarkablegant and liberal arts; and thus, in the vast resuccess throughout the Christian world. While the learned men of this happy period discovered such zeal for the improvement of science, their zeal was both inflamed and directed by one of the greatest and rarest geniuses that ever arose for the instruction of mankind. This was Francis Bacon, lord Verulam, who, toward the commencement of this century, opened the paths that lead to true philosophy in his admirable works.* It must be acknowledged, indeed, that the rules he prescribes, to direct the researches of the studious, are not all practicable amidst the numerous prejudices and impediments to which the most zealous inquirers are exposed in the pursuit of truth; and it appears plainly that this great man, to whose elevated and comprehensive genius all things seemed easy, was at certain times so far carried away by the vastness of his conceptions, as to require, from the application and abilities of men, more than they were capable of performing, and to desire the end, without always examining whether the means of attaining it were possible. At the same time it must be confessed that a great part of the improvements in learning and science, which distinguished Europe during this century, arose from the counsels and directions of this extraordinary man. This is more particularly true of the progress then made in natural philosophy, to which noble science Bacon did such important service, as is alone sufficient to render his name immortal. He opened the eyes of those who had been led blindfold by the dubious authority of traditionary systems, and the uncertain directory of hypothesis and XXVI. It is remarkable, in general, that the sciences of natural philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy, were carried in this century, in all the nations of Europe, to such a high degree of perfection, that they seemed suddenly to rise from the puny weakness of infancy to a state of full maturity. There is certainly no sort of comparison between the philosophers, mathematicians, and astronomers, of the sixteenth and seventeeth centuries. The former look like pygmies, when compared with the gigantic stature of the latter. At the head of the latter appears Galileo, the ornament of natural science in Italy, who was encouraged, in his astronomical researches and discoveries, by the munificence and protection of the grand dukes of Tuscany.* In France appeared DesCartes and Gassendi, who left behind them a great number of eminent disciples; in Denmark Tycho Brahe; in England Boyle and Newton; in Germany Kepler, Hevelius, and Leibnitz; and in Switzerland the brothers, James and John Bernoulli. These philosophers of the first magnitude, if I may use that expression, excited such a spirit of emulation in Europe, and were followed by such a multitude of admirers and rivals, that, if we except those countries which had not yet emerged from a state of ignorance and barbarism, there was scarcely any nation that could not boast preceding note,) a Bruxelles, chez Francois Foppens, of possessing a profound mathematician, a fa1731. Here we see the poison and the antidote join-mous astronomer, or an eminent philosopher. ed, but the latter perfidiously distributed in a man- Nor were the dukes of Tuscany, however dis ner and measure every way insufficient to remove the noxious effects of the former: in a word, the wolf tinguished by their hereditary zeal for the sciis shut up with the sheep. The account and defence ences, and their liberality to the learned, the of the philosophy of Spinosa, given by Boulainvil only patrons of philosophy at this time, since liers under the insidious title of a Refutation, take it is well known that the monarchs of Greatup the greatest part of this book, and are placed first, and not the last in order, as the title would insinu Britain and France, Charles II. and Louis XIV., ate. Besides, the whole contents of this motley col- honoured the sciences, and those who cultivatlection are not enumerated in the title: for at the ed them, with their protection and encourageend of it we find a Latin treatise, entitled Certamen Philosophicum propugnatæ Veritatis divinæ et natu ment. It is to the munificence of those two ralis, adversus Jo. Bredenburgii Principia, in fine an- princes that the Royal Society of London, and nexa. This philosophical controversy contains a De- the Academy of Sciences at Paris, owe their fence of the Doctrine of Spinosa, by Bredenburg, and a Refutation of that Defence by Isaac Orobio, a origin and establishment, their privileges, holearned Jewish physician at Amsterdam, and was nours and endowments, and that we, in confirst published in 1703. sequence, are indebted for the interesting discoveries that have been made by these two learned bodies, the end of whose institution is the study and investigation of nature, and the culture of all those arts and sciences which lead *More especially in his treatise de Dignitate et Augmentis Scientiarum, and in his Novum Organum. See the life of that great man, prefixed to his works published in four volumes, in folio, 1740.-Bibliothe que Britannique, tom. xv.-In Mallet's Life of Bacon there is a particular and interesting account of his noble attempt to reform the miserable philosophy that prevailed before his time. See also Voltaire's Melanges de Literature et de Philosophie. * See Heuman's Acta Philosophorum, the xivth, xvth, and xviith parts. |