The hiftorical view of this controverfy, which our author has laid before his readers, is fufficient, he thinks, to authorize the following conclufions: First, That the notion of the foul's immortality as a truth' independent on the chriftian revelation, was bred and nourished among the schoolmen of the twelfth, thirteen, and a great part of the two following centuries, when fenfelefs quibbles paft for the productions of genius, and unmeaning jargon for profound erudition. It would probably be faid, that the fame conclufions have, since the revival of letters, and the cultivation of found philofophy, been drawn from rational premiffes, Concerning this, every man may judge as he fees caufe. I am unhappy enough to find no more demonftration in the reafonings of Clarke and Baxter for the natural immortality of the foul, than in the fyllogifms of Lombard and Aquinas. Secondly, That these fcholaftic fubtilties were adopted by the popish divines, as the ground-work of the fable of purgatory, and the idolatrous invocation of faints. Hence the fcholaftic immortality was incorporated, or rather confounded with the immortality brought to light by the gofpel; and both reprefented as affording mutual light and fupport to each other, and equally fan&tified by the canons and decrees of the church, in order to deter thofe who were difpofed and qualified to philofophize, upon better principles, from pursuing their difquifitions to a fatal detection of these and other absurdities, which could not have kept their ground otherwife than by retreating under the artillery of the Vatican. Thirdly, That though the proteftants, on all other fubjes, rejected all doctrines which were not built on a scripture foundation, they unhappily contented themselves on this, with the teftimony of popifh and pagan tradition, and being either unable or unwilling to inveftigate the real meaning of certain terms used in the fcriptures, weakly concluded from the mere found of them, that the doctrine of the fcriptures, and of the reigning philofophy concerning the immortality or feparate exiftence of the foul, was one and the fame. Hence, Fourthly, In all their disputes with the papifts concerning the fuperftitions grounded on purgatory and faint worship, they directed their arguments to the wrong object; and instead of infifting that the immortality fubfequent to the general refurrection, was the only confcious future ftate allotted in fcripture, either for faints or finners, they embarraffed themselves with an hypothefis of departed fouls taken either immediately into heaven, or immediately thrust into a place of final torment, which it was not only impoffible for them to verify, but expofed them to the reproach of deferting the most orthodox of the chriftian chriftian fathers, who had provided hidden receptacles and intermediate limbufes, for different claffes of human fouls, according to their defervings, till all fhould be finally fet right at a general judgment.' This performance is the work of a mafterly hand; fhews, in a clear and comprehensive view, the rife and progress of the controverfy concerning an intermediate ftate; exhibits an account of fome of the principal writers who have engaged in this difpute, and abounds with many learned and acute remarks. The author treats the metaphyfical arguments of Clarke and Baxter with contempt. These fine-fpun notions of the immateriality of the foul, and all the artificial deductions from that principle, teach nothing, he fays, but the art of blowing fcholaftic bubbles, which, when they have had their run of fashion, will as certainly go peaceably to their reft, as the old fubftantial forms have done, without the leaft detriment either. to found learning or true religion.What moral purposes, continues he, can it anfwer, or indeed what purpofe at all, to prove the immateriality of a foul whofe confcioufnefs, for aught that appears to the contrary, may be fufpended for an indefinite number of ages. In defence of thefe writers, it may be faid, that they laudably endeavoured to difcover the will of the Creator, with refpect to our future exiftence, by examining the apparent conftitution of our natural powers; and that this was the only method they had to pursue, in oppofition to those who queftioned the authority of revelation, and the reality of another life. It may likewise be urged, that there are expreffions in fcripture which are more favourable to the notions of Clarke and Baxter than their adversaries have been willing to allow. Fear not them who kill the body, but are not able to kill the foul, Mat. x. 28. Does not our Savour, in this paffage, affert the existence of the foul in a separate ftate, and its different nature from the body? The body, he says, may be killed, but the foul cannot. Whereas if our author's fuppofition is admitted, both of them are equally killed. If it should be faid that ux means the animating foul of the human body, the af fertion of our Saviour is falfe: the principle of life is indifpu tably destroyed with the body. The fame word indeed, ver. 39, fignifies the life; but the meaning of that word, in other places, cannot determine its meaning here. The ambiguous afe of this, and fome other expreffions of the fame nature, arifes from the following caufe, affigned by Le Clerc. Ad res ad animum pertinentes exprimendas, pauciffimæ funt voces, nativâ figVOL. XX. July, 1765. nificatione C nificatione adhibendæ ; quia populus, à quo potiffimùm paulatìm linguæ auɛtæ & ornata, de rebus fpiritualibus perúmque fecurus, de corporibus tantùm fermones ferit, aut fpiritus corporibus fimiles putat. Hinc qui de rebus incorporeis verba faciunt, è corporeis petitas voces pajsim ufurpare coguntur. Ar. Crit. P. ii. c. xvi. The appearance of Mofes and Elias on the mount has been thought to corroborate the opinion of those who maintain the doctrine of an intermediate state. It is not to be fupposed that this was a vifion; for though it is called, Mat, xvii. 9. To opaa, the fame word is applied, Acts vii. 31. to a real object of fight, and St. Mark's expreffion, a idov, what things they had feen, is clear and precife; Mofes and Elias actually discourse with Jefus concerning his decease; his disciples, when they were awake, faw his glory, and the two men who flood with him; and we cannot imagine that either of them was raised out of a state of infenfibility for the fake of this momentary interview with our Saviour. Thefe texts, and others which have been introduced on the fame fide of the question, have been explained by the learned Dr. Law*, on the principles which our author has adopted. Yet, after all, not many readers perhaps will allow that every objection has been fufficiently answered, or that 'the whole fubject is exhaufted † in his hiftorical view.' H. Sermons on the Relative Duties. Preached at Queen Street HERE are not, perhaps, in the whole circle of litera TH ture, two more worn out paths than those of ethics and divinity fo many excellent writers have already distinguished themfelves by enforcing every branch of our moral and religious duties, as to leave very little bufinefs for, and confequently to give very little encouragement to, those who come after them: modern fermons therefore are feldom much read or enquired after, and, however well penned they may be, generally prove a dead weight on the bookseller's hands, and after a month's popularity (if fortune is very propitious) are thrown into the lumber-room amongst wafte paper and pamphlets, till they are fold by the pound, and See the Appendix to a difcourfe on the nature and end of death, by Dr. Law. ↑ Ibid. Flut Flutt'ring in a row, Befringe the rails of Bedlam or Sobo. The difcourfes now before us certainly deferve, and we hope will meet with, a better fate: the fubject, as the author obferves, are of univerfal concern, and therefore have a claim to univerfal attention; an attention, notwithstanding, which it must be very difficult to command, where the matter has been fo often and fo amply treated by others. True genius, however, will always ftrike out fomething new, even on the most beaten topics, and, like the fun, throws light and luftre on every object. Our readers will probably remember to have seen or heard of fermons on the Relative Duties, by bishop Stillingfleet, the celebrated Mr. Fofter, Dr. Delany, and fome other writers of lefs note; Mr. Francklin's are, in our opinion, equal to any of them, both in fentiment and ftile: there is indeed in these fermons fuch an eafy flow of language without affectation, fuch a terfenefs and brevity, with fuch an agreeable harmony in the periods as cannot be fufficiently admired; which joined to that dignity of fentiment, and knowledge of human nature that runs through them, cannot fail to engage the attention of every reader of tafte and judgment. We cannot but wish, at the fame time, that the ingenious author had entered into a minuter difcuffion of the feveral duties, and given us his opinion with regard to thofe inferior branches which he has either flightly mentioned, or intirely paffed over. The pictures which he has drawn are beautiful miniatures ; we should have been glad to fee a few whole lengths by the fame pencil. The fix difcourfes on the Relative Duties are very properly introduced by an excellent fermon on domeftic happiness, wherein the author endeavours to recommend and enforce that love and union, that peace and quietness, on which all our private happiness doth more immediately depend. The advantages of harmony and concord, and the miferies attendant on domeftic feuds and contentions, are well defcribed in the fallowing contraft. To a mind that has the leaft tincture of humanity, the leaft feeling for the fufferings of our fellow-creatures, there cannot be a spectacle more fhocking and difagreeable, than to fee thofe, whofe blood, fame, fortunes, and interefts are united, and whose good offices fhould be mutual, torn to pieces by jealoufies, hatred, and divifion; to fee them harraffing and oppreffing, who fhould be employed in ferving and obliging each other; fuch fcenes make us afhamed of our nature, and out of love with our very being; they give us the idea of a rude and uninformed world, the ancient chaos of matter, where all the elements were met together, and nothing reigned but difcord, darknefs, and confufion. On the other hand, a well-regulated and happy family, where order and harmony are preferved, where peace, tendernefs, love and affection reign, untainted with difcord, unembittered by ftrife or animofities, where there is a conftant, unwearied endeavour to ferve and oblige each other; such a family is doubtlefs a fight well-pleafing in the eyes of that God, who formed the members of it: it is an emblem (though an imperfect one) of the whole frame of nature, the glorious fabric of the univerfe, built by the divine architect, whofe wifdom ordained its fymmetry and proportions, where each part is perfect in itself, and contributes at the fame time to the beauty, magnificence, and duration of the whole.' In the difcourfe on the first relative duty, of children to parents, we were greatly pleafed with Mr. Francklin's illuftration of the latter part of his text. Honour thy father and mother, that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayeft live long on the earth. It is obfervable, that the command to honour our parents is, as St. Paul remarked, the first commandment with promife: thus doth religion, which in the language of holy writ, is always ftiled wisdom, provide for thofe who walk in her ways; length of days is in her right hand, and in her left riches and honours. Honour thy father, and thy mother, that thou mayeft live long on the earth: that is, if by an obedient and dutiful behaviour to thy parents, thou doft prolong their life, and contribute to their health and happiness, thou fhalt thyfelf be rewarded with the fame blefings. God, we fee, doth fo peculiarly delight in the execution of this duty, that he hath promifed even to fufpend, for a time, the laws of nature in favour of those who comply with it; as if the Divine Being were himself unwil ling to interrupt us in the performance of an office fo grateful to him. 6 If, then, we expect to live a long and happy life, let us be careful, as many of us are able, to deserve it. Not all, indeed, have it in their power. Death fometimes cancels the debt, before those who have contracted can poffibly discharge it; in the first dawn of life, in that part of our existence when we first receive the benefit, we are not fufficiently fenfible of it; and when we become fo, it frequently happens, that it is too late to fhew our acknowledgments of it. As foon as men, therefore, arrive at an age, when they can thoroughly feel the good effects of their parents care; and can reflect, as they ought, on all their paft acts of goodness and tenderness towards them, then, and then alone, they have it in their power |