ftems, totally abhorrent from its real nature and prevailing genius.

It is with a more fpecious appearance both of fairnefs and of penetration, that they have attempted to infer its falfehood from the very existence of these corruptions; arguing, that, if God really gave the gofpel as his best gift to mankind, his providence would have certainly preserved its purity, and prevented its being vitiated, fo as to become unfit for anfwering its important end, or even in some respects fubverfive of it.

INSTEAD of enlarging on the feveral topics from which it might be evinced that this argument is wholly inconclufive, let us remark, what is more extraordinary, That the very corruptions from which it is deduced, afford evidence of the truth of Christianity. Unfavourable to the defence of this religion as, in one light, they feem to be, yet, viewed in other lights, they are a real proof of its divinity.

That corruption which has taken place, was forefeen and foretold by the first publishers of the Gofpel; and is therefore an irrefragable demonftration of their divine infpiration. It was

in the very beginning of Christianity, while, as as far as human eye could fee, it yet remained untainted, that the Apostle of the Gentiles faid, in my text, "Now the Spirit fpeaketh express

66

ly, that in the latter times fome shall depart "from the faith." In the context, and the other paffages which relate to this subject*, he defcribes, as has been often inconteftibly proved, even in its moft fingular, unprecedented, and characteristical features, that grand apostasy in the church, which did already work, though fo covertly as to be decernible only by a divinely illuminated eye; but which early displayed itself in the fubtilizing and impofing spirit of Christians, and was completed in the abfurd theology, the fuperftitious and idolatrous worship, the impure morality, the domination, the infolence, and the cruelty of the papal church. He defcribes it with fuch accuracy and precifion, as could proceed only from the infpiration of the Omniscient, and therefore demonftrates, that HE is the Author of that religion. which the Apostles taught, as revealed by him.

2 Tim. iii. 1, &c. 2 Theff. ii. 3,-12,

IT is, I think, equally true, though not fo obvious, that the "departure of fome from "the faith," the corruption of Christianity which has prevailed, confidered in itself, without regard to its having been predicted, far from indicating the fallity of this religion, is a strong prefumption of its being a true religion. For it will appear, on examination, to be one mark of distinction between true and falfe religions, That always the former are corrupted, and the latter improved, by length of time. Both the parts of this propofition are fufceptible of the fullest evidence: And, in purfuing the argument, I fhall flate the evidence of both, and then deduce the conclufions which they war

rant.

I. FIRST, I fhall fhew, that univerfally and invariably true religions have, in course of time, degenerated and been corrupted. They are only three, the primeval religion of mankind, the Jewish, and the Chriftian.

1. I BEGIN with the primeval religion of mankind. But what was this? The generality of infidels will eagerly anfwer, Pure natural

religion. If it was, they will certainly acknowledge that this was a true religion and that it was early and univerfally corrupted in a miferable manner, they cannot deny.

One of them, however, far fuperior in penetration to the reft, is fingular in afferting, that polytheism or idolatry was, and neceffarily "must have been, the first and most ancient

66

religion of mankind *;" and he endeavours to fupport the affertion both by reasonings, and from history.-On supposition, that the first men were left to fearch out their religion by the powers of unaffifted Nature, his reasonings would perhaps be folid: and, by producing them, he has exploded the favourite pofitions of his more referved brethren, concerning the sufficiency of reafon, the plainnefs and perfection of the law of Nature, and the inutility of revelation. Indeed, conclufively as the whole of natural religion may be proved by reafon, yet natural religion, difcovered by reafon, was never in fact the religion of any age or nation.-In proving his af fertion from history, he has carefully omitted the express testimony of the hiftory unquef tionably the moft ancient in the world. How

*Hume, Differt. i. § 1.

ever fair, it was doubtlefs prudent. For, in contradiction to the far later hiftories which alone he chooses to quote, the Bible clearly teftifies, that the first and most ancient religion of mankind was, not polytheifm or idolatry, but the worship of the one true God.-At the fame time, it invalidates all the reasonings by which he would prove that it must have been otherwise for it fuppofes not that circumstance, on the reality of which their whole force depends; but establishes quite the reverse. It fuppofes not, that the first rude and ignorant generation of men difcovered this pure religion. by the force of reafon; and therefore is not affected by any of the improbabilities of this having happened, which he fo anxiously enumerates. On the contrary, it accounts for this: It affirms that they were not left to themselves; that they were taught by God; that, from the very beginning, he inftructed them by revelation; and that revelation was not only the mode of conveying to them all their religious principles, but the fole foundation of fome of them.

It is not neceffary for our prefent purpose, to describe the religion of the state of inno