Socrates, who came the nearest to the knowledge of the true God, is faid to have suffered on that account, and died a martyr to the Deity; he was the only one whom the Greeks ever put to death on account of opinion. If this was really the cause of his being condemned, it does very little honour to perfecution, fince he was put to death for being the only one who gave true glory to God, whilst those who taught notions the most unworthy of the Deity were held in high honour: therefore, I think, the enemies of toleration fhould be cautious how they lay a stress upon the infamous example of his judges.

Moreover, it is evident from hiftory, that he fell a victim to the revenge of an enraged party. He had made himself many inveterate enemies of the fophifts, orators, and poets, who taught in the public schools, and even of all the preceptors who had the care of the children of diftinction. He himself acknowledges in his difcourfe handed down to us by Plato, that he went from houfe to houfe, to convince thefe preceptors, that they were a fet of ignorant fellows; a conduct certainly unworthy of one who had been declared by an oracle the wifeft

of

of mankind. A prieft, and one of the members of the Areopagus, were let loose upon him, who accufed him I cannot precifely fay of what, as his apology to me seems very vague; from which however we learn in general, that he was charged with infpiring the youth of the nation with notions contrary to the religion and government of the country: an accufation which the flanderers of all times and places have conftantly made ufe of; but a court of justice requires pofitive facts, and that the charge fhould be circumftantial and well fupported, none of which are to be found in the proceedings againft Socrates. All we know is, that he had at first two hundred and twenty voices for him; therefore, there must have been two hundred and twenty out of the five hundred judges, who were philofophers; a great many more, I believe, than are to be found any where else. At length, however, the majority were for the hemlock potion. But here let us not forget, that when the Athenians came to their reafon, they held both his accufers and judges in deteftation; made Melitus, who had been the principal author of the fentence pronounced against him, pay for that act of injuftice with his life; banished all the others that were concerned in it, and erected a temple to Socrates. Never

was

was philofophy so nobly revenged, so highly honoured. This affair of Socrates then is, in fact, the most powerful argument that can be alledged against perfecution. The Athenians had an altar dedicated to the ftrange gods, gods they could never know. What stronger proof then can there be, not only of their extreme indulgence towards all nations, but even for their respect for the religion of those nations?

A very worthy perfon, who is neither an enemy to reason, learning, or probity, nor to his country, in undertaking to justify the affair of the maffacre of St. Bartholomew, quotes the war of the Phocians, by them called the facred war, as if that war had been entered into on the fcore of religion, or a particular point in divinity; whereas it is well known, that it was caused by a difpute about a particular spot of ground, the conftant caufe of all wars. Α few corn-grounds can certainly never be a fymbol of belief; it is as certain, that none of the Greek cities ever made war upon each other for the fake of opinion. After all, what would this modeft and humane writer drive. at? Would he have us undertake a facred war?

CHAP.

CHA P. VIII.

Whether the ROMANS encouraged TOLERA

TION.

A

MONG the antient Romans, from the days of Romulus to thofe in which the Chriftians began to difpute with the priests of the empire, we do not find a single instance of any person being perfecuted on account of his fentiments. Cicero doubted every thing; Lucretius denied every thing; and yet, neither one nor the other, underwent the leaft reproach from their fellow citizens: nay, fo far did this. licence go, that Pliny the naturalist begins his book by denying the exiftence of a God, and faying, That if there is one, it must be the fun. Cicero, in speaking of hell, fays, Non eft unus tam excors quæ credat. "There is not even an old "woman fo filly as to believe it." Juvenal fays, Nec pueri credunt: "Even our children laugh. "at it." And the following maxim was publicly repeated on the Roman theatre: Poft mortem nihil eft, ipfaque mors nihil: “ nought after death, even "death itself is nought." While we abhor these maxims, let us pardon them in a people, who

were

were never enlightened by the holy truths of the gofpel; and, while we own them to be falfe and impious, let us however confefs, that the Romans were great friends to toleration, feeing that fuch tenets never excited any com

motions.

Deorum offenfa diis cura, was the grand principle of the fenate and people of Rome; that illustrious nation employing their attention. wholly to conquer, govern, and civilize the univerfe. They were our legiflators as well as our conquerors; and even Cæfar, who reduced us to his fubjection, and gave us laws and games, never attempted to compel us to quit our Druids for him, though fupreme pontiff of a nation, whose subjects we were now become.

The Romans themfelves did not profess all kinds of religion, therefore they did not give public fanction to all, but they permitted them. Under Numa, nothing material was the object of their worship. They had neither statues nor pictures; in process of time, however, fome were erected to the Dii Majorum Gentium, with which the Greeks brought them acquainted. That law in the twelve tables, Deos peregrinos ne colunto, was confined to the allowing

no