Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

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 feems 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 juftice requires pofitive facts, and that the charge fhould be circumftantial and well fupported, none of which are to be found in the proceedings against 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 reason, 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 fo nobly revenged, fo highly honoured. This affair of Socrates then is, in fact, the most powerful argument that can be alledged againft 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 thofe na

tions?

A very worthy perfon, who is neither an enemy to reason, learning, or probity, nor to his country, in undertaking to juftify 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. A 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 modest and humane writer drive at? Would he have us undertake a facred war?

СНАР.

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 fingle 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, fso far did this licence go, that Pliny the naturalift begins his book by denying the existence 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, seeing that such tenets never excited any commotions.

Deorum offenfa diis cura, was the grand principle of the fenate and people of Rome; that illuftrious nation employing their attention wholly to conquer, govern, and civilize the universe. 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, whofe fubjects 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 ftatues nor pictures; in procefs 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

no public worship to be paid, except to the fuperior and inferior deities, approved by the fe

nate.

The Egyptian goddess Ifis had a temple in Rome to the time of Tiberius, who demolished it, because its priests, having been bribed by Mundus, fuffered him to lie with a lady called Paulina in the temple itfelf, under the name and form of the god Anubis. Indeed this story is to be found only in Jofephus, who did not live at that time; and was moreover a credulous and exaggerating writer: and there is very little probability, that, in fo enlightened an age as that of Tiberius, a lady of the first dif tinction in Rome, could be fo weak to believe that a god cohabited with her.

But whether this anecdote be true or falfe, this one thing is certain, that the Egyptian idolatry was in the poffeffion of a temple at Rome with the public confent. The Jews had alfo lived as traders in that city ever fince the Punic war; they had their fynagogues there in the time of Auguftus, and almoft always continued to have them in the fame manner as they now have in modern Rome. Can we defire a stronger inftance, that the Romans looked upon tolera

tion

« AnteriorContinuar »