philosophy, whose end is to free and vindicate the "soul from those chains and confinements, to which "its abode with us hath made it subject*." 2. That the Schools and Mysteries had each their hidden doctrines, which went under the common name of AПOPPHТA; and that, which had a common name, was understood to have a common nature. 3. And chiefly, that the Philosopher and Lawgiver, being frequently in one and the same person, and, consequently, the Institutions of the Mysteries and the Schools established by the same hand, it appeared reasonable to think, that the aópinla, in both, were the same; they not distinguishing the twofold character of the ancient Sage, which shall be explained hereafter t.

II. Having, from the discovery of the general end and purpose of these SECRETS, seen what they could not be, we shall now be enabled to find what, in fact, they were.

To begin with a passage of Clemens Alexandrinus. "After these (namely, lustrations) are the LESSER "Mysteries, in which is laid the FOUNDATION of the "hidden doctrines, and preparations for what is to

come afterwards." From a knowledge of the foundation, we may be able to form an idea of the

* φιλοσοφίαν δ ̓ ἐφιλοσόφησεν, ἧς ὁ σκοπός, ῥύσασθαι καὶ διελευθερώσαι τῶν τοιύτων εἰς[μῶν τε καὶ συνδέσμων τὸν κατακεχωρισμένον ἡμῖν νῦν. De Vita Pythag. Edit. Cantabr. 1655, 8vo. pag. 201.

+ See B. III. Sect. 2.

† Μελὰ ταῦτα δέ ἐσι τὰ μικρὰ μυσήρια, διδασκαλίας τινὰ ὑπόθεσιν ἔχοντα, καὶ προπαρασκευῆς τῶν μελλόντων. Strom. v. pag. 424. ̓Αγών γὰρ καὶ ὁ προάγων, καὶ μυσήρια τὰ πρὸ μυτηρίων. Strom. i. pag. 203. lin. 7. Edit. Sylburgh.

superstructure.

superstructure. This foundation (as hath been shewn) was the belief of a Providence, and future state; and, its consequence on practice, inducement to a virtuous life. But there was one insuperable obstacle to a life of purity and holiness, the vicious examples of their Gods. EGO HOMUNCIO HOC NON FACEREM*? was the absolving Formula, whenever any one was resolved to give a loose to his appetites †. But the mischief went still farther; They not only thought themselves excused by the example, but even drawn, by a divine impulse of their Gods. When the young man in the Aulularia of Plautus apologises to Euclio for having debauched his Daughter, he says,

"Deus mihi IMPULSOR fuit, Is me ad illam ILLEXIT." And by a passage in his Amphitruo, where he makes Mercury joke upon the office of a Parasite in the

Terence, Eun. act. iii. sc. vi.-Euripides puts this argument into the mouth of several of his speakers, up and down his tragedies. Helen, in the fourth act of the Trojan Dames, says, "How could I resist a Goddess, whom Jupiter himself obeys?" Ion, in his play of that name, in the latter end of the first act, speaks to the same purpose: and in the fifth act of Hercules Furens, Theseus comforts his friend by the examples of the crimes of the Gods. See likewise his Hippolytus, act ii. sc. ii. The learned and ingenious Mr. Seward, in his tract of the Conformity between Popery and Paganism, has taken notice of a difficult passage in this tragedy, which he has very ably explained, on the system here delivered of the detection of Polytheism in the sacred Mysteries.

+

· ὁ δὲ πολὺς καὶ ἀφιλοσόφημα ὄχλῳ ἐπὶ τὰ χείρω λαμβάνειν φιλεῖ τὰς περὶ αὑτῶν λόγος, καὶ πάσχει θάτερον, ἢ καταφρονεῖν τῶν θεῶν, ὡς ἐν 分

πολλῇ κακοδαιμονίᾳ κυλινδεμένων· ἢ τῶν αἰσχίνων τε καὶ παρανομωμάτων ἐδενὸς ἀπέχεται, θεοῖς ὁρῶν αὐτὰ προσκείμενα. Dion. Halicar. apud Euseb. Præp. Evang. lib. ii. cap. 8.

Act. 4. Sc. 10.

C 3

description

description he gives of his own obsequiousness to his father Jupiter, we see it was grown up into an avowed Principle:

"Amanti [patri] supparasitor, hortor, asto, admoneo, "gaudeo.

Siquid patri volup' est, voluptas ea mihi multo "maxima est.

"Amat, sapit: recte facit, animo quando obsequitur suo*.

He then addresses himself to the audience, and tells them gravely, that men, in like manner, after the example of Jupiter, should indulge their passions, where they can do it decently.

<6 Quod omnes homines facere OPORTET, dum id 66 modo fiat bono.”

And the licentious rites, in the OPEN Worship of their Gods, gave still greater encouragement to these conclusions. Plato, in his book Of Laws, forbids drinking to excess; unless, says he, during the feasts of Bacchus, and in honour of that God †. And Aristotle, in his Politics, having blamed all lewd and obscene images and pictures, excepts those of the Gods, which Religion had sanctified. When St. Austin ‡ had quoted the Ego homuncio hoc non facerem, to shew his adversaries what mischief these stories did to the morals of the people; he makes the defenders of Paganism reply, that it was true; but then (say they) these things were only taught in the Fables of the poets, which, an attention to the MYSTERIES would rectify: "At enim

For the Mysteries professed to exact nothing difficult, of the initiated †, which they would not assist him to perform. It was necessary, then, to remedy this evil; which they did, by striking at the root of it.: So that, such of the Initiated as were judged capable, were made acquainted with the whole delusion. The MYSTAGOGUE taught them, that Jupiter, Mercury, Bacchus, Venus, Mars, and the whole rabble of licentious Deities, were only DEAD MORTALS; subject, in life, to the same passions and infirmities with themselves; but having been, on other accounts, Benefactors to mankind, grateful Posterity had deified them; and, with their virtues, had indiscreetly canonized their vices. The fabulous Gods being thus routed, the supreme cause of all things naturally took their place. HIM they were taught to consider as the Creator of the Universe, who pervaded all things by his virtue, and governed all by his power. But here it must be observed, that the discovery of this supreme Cause they made to be consistent with the notion of local tutelary Deities, Beings superior to men, and inferior to God, and by him set over the several parts of his creation. This was an opinion universally holden by learned Antiquity, and never brought into question by any Theist.

* This the Father could not deny; but observes, however, that in the THEN corrupt state of the Mysteries the remedy was become part of the disease: "Nolo dicere ILLA MYSTICA quam ista thea❝trica esse turpiora."

† Αλλ' ἔσομαι διὰ τὴν τελετὴν πρὸς πᾶσαν ἀρετὴν ἑτοιμότα• Sopat. in Div. Quæst. Καθάπερ ἄλλῳ μυτηρίῳ προβελεσθεὶς τῇ σιωπῇ, τῶν ἄλλων ἁμαρτημάτων λοιπὸν τὸν ἐμαυῦ βίον ἐκάθαιρον, καὶ πρὸς τὴν θείαν τῶν θεῶν τελεῖὴν ἐπειγόμενα, ἐκκλίνειν τῶν ἁμαρτημάτων ἐσπέδαζον, Sopat. ibidem.

C 4

What

What the apple overthrew in their reformed theology, was the vulgar Polytheism, the worship of dead men. From this time, the initiated had the title of EПONTHE, by which was meant one that sees things as they are, and without disguise; whereas, before, he was called MYETHE, which has a contrary signification.

But, besides the prevention of vice, their bringing the Initiated acquainted with the national Gods had another important use, which was to excite them to HEROIC VIRTUE, by shewing them what honours the benefactors of nations had acquired, by the free exercise of it. And this (as will be shewn hereafter) was the chief reason why Princes, Statesmen, and Leaders of colonies and armies, all aspired to be partakers of the GREATER MYSTERIES.

Thus we see, how what was taught and required in the lesser Mysteries, became the foundation of instruction in the GREATER: the obligation to a good life there, made it necessary to remove the errors of vulgar polytheism here; and the doctrine of a Providence taught previously in those, facilitated the reception of the sole cause of all things, when finally revealed in these.

Such were the TRUTHS which Varro, as quoted above, tells us it was inexpedient for the People to know for indeed he supposed, the error of vulgar Polytheism to be so inveterate, that it was not to be expelled without throwing Society into convulsions, But Plato spoke out: he owned it to be "difficult "to find the Father and Creator of the universe: and, "when found, impossible to discover him to all the "world *."

* Τὸν μὲν ἦν ποιητὴν καὶ πατέρα τέδε τὸ παντὸς εὑρεῖν τε ἔξ[ον, καὶ εὑρόνια εἰς πάντας ἀδύνατον λέγειν. In Timo,

Besides,