Of both Milton and Locke, however, it may be justly observed, that apart from their great productions, on which their everlasting reputation is built, they each wrote enough to immortalize the names of any other men. The prose works of Milton, and the writings of Locke on education, on religious toleration and civil government, on almost every subject connected with the improvement and happiness of mankind, are amongst the most admirable productions in our language they would alone have entitled their authors to the character of great men. Both lived in critical times for the safety and freedom of their native land: and setting Paradise Lost,' and the Essay concerning Human Understanding,' entirely out of view, both would be men ever to be revered, for the zeal with which they devoted their stupendous abilities to the defence of those principles of civil and religious liberty, for which their country has long been distinguished.

With respect to Newton, perhaps the results though not the process, of his researches, are still more familiar to the popular mind. By his sublime discoveries, concerning the laws and phenomena of the material universe, he opened a way for the ascent of physical science to the loftiest and clearest regions of demonstration; from which it never can sink again into the cloudy atmosphere of conjecture. Rising on the wings of his eagle-like genius to almost superhuman heights of observation, he fixed his steady, unblenching gaze, on the great orbs of light that shine so gloriously above us. Then, descending again to earth, he was able to teach us ordinary mortals, how God directs the sun and

moon in their courses

by what methods He marshals

the stars of heaven in order.

In strict propriety, I have no concern at present with the labors and characters of these great men, otherwise than as they relate to the important subject of religion. But I thought I should be pardoned for this brief allusion to their notorious merits, previous to the observations I am now about to make on their religious opinions and example. I hope to shew there is much which is common to all three, and which is highly interesting and edifying, in the characters of Milton, Locke, and Newton, regarded in this particular point. of view. It is remarkable, indeed, that, notwithstanding the diversity in their circumstances, and in their natural genius, there was great similarity both in their sentiments and conduct with respect to the Christian religion. This will appear as I proceed.

I. Let me first call your attention, then, to the general consideration, that Milton, Locke, and Newton, were Christians. They were decided believers in the truth of the Christian religion; and that, not from mere prejudice of education, but on due reflection, with an extensive knowledge of the subject, from rational and deliberate conviction. They had seriously thought of, they had closely examined, the pretensions of the gospel, as a system of divine revelation; and the result to their minds was a settled persuasion of its heavenly origin and authority. Is not this something, in favor of the religion itself which they thus embraced?

There is an impression on some people's minds, that men of genius since the revival of letters, men of sur

passing talents and vast attainments, have in general been secret or avowed unbelievers in Christianity. This has been sometimes presumptuously affirmed by sceptical writers, as though it were an almost universal truth. It is still oftener covertly assumed, or insinuated, by the enemies of the gospel, as a fact not to be doubted indeed, but to be hinted at rather than told. But though the instances of this may be many, sufficiently numerous to be the subject of sincere regret to every enlightened Christian, there is yet no truth in the assumption, that men eminent for their talents have, in general, been unbelievers in the divinity of the Christian faith. The contrary is the truth; it has been so in all ages of the Church, and it is so now. Although, doubtless, from a very early period, down to some notorious late examples, there have been men holding a high rank in the world of letters, who have utterly disbelieved, or partially assailed, (for they are not the same thing,) the truth of our most excellent religion; yet the sanction of the majority of great characters is unquestionably and largely on the side of belief. Every person may be convinced of this, by a careful inspection of any good list of illustrious names, especially as far as relates to our own country. And even in regard to the too numerous instances of learned and philosophic sceptics, I cannot but think there have long been so many circumstances in the corrupt state of the Christian church and doctrine, peculiarly adapted to disgust their minds with a religion which they viewed in such a false light, that their unbelief is not to be very seriously thought of. It is too easily accounted for, on these and other equally obvious grounds,

to be of any authority as against the pure gospel. In many cases, it has not been properly the Christian religion which they have rejected. I judge this to be so, because it has certainly not been the Christian religion which they have attacked; but only the gross errors which deluded men have mingled with that religion. Even lettered unbelievers have not often assailed the evidences, but usually the supposed doctrines, of Christianity and it is a speaking fact, that they have always shown an inclination to assume the correctness of the worst, out of the many forms, in which Christianity has been held. In this they have displayed a lamentable want of candor; for surely, in attempting. to prove the falsehood of a religion claiming to be divine, it was binding on them to ascertain what the real principles of that religion are, by a careful study of its original records. Had learned sceptics taken this course, qualified as many of them were for the task by their abilities and attainments, the consequences might often have been most happy. Like him who entered the temple of God to blaspheme, but remained to praise, they might have become the ablest champions of the very faith which they thought to overthrow. Besides, even when unbelievers have made the evidence of Christianity at all the object of their attack, they have never, to the best of my knowledge, fairly grappled with that evidence as a body; but have only exercised their ingenuity in weakening certain parts of it; apparently assuming, that if each part be not of itself entirely free from objection, the whole must be given up as indefensible; which is by no means a sound conclusion. For, however paradoxical it may seem, it is true, that in mor

al inquiries the whole is often greater than all its parts; the very concentration of so many distinct arguments upon one point being, in itself, a new and most forcible kind of evidence. The combination binds, as it were, the numerous and various probabilities together, and, united in one mass, they become demonstration. What would be thought of the Judge who, in summing up the evidence on a trial, should, in order to favor one side, employ his utmost skill in raising objections to one or two of the principal or even subordinate points, leaving all the others untouched, and especially taking no notice of the distinct and important consideration, that so many things should appear to have one bearing? I suppose he would not be greatly admired, either for his impartiality or his acuteness. Another circumstance is, that learned unbelievers, in rejecting the commonly received hypothesis of the divine origin of Christianity, have seldom or never thought themselves called on to show the reasonableness of any other positive and complete view of the subject. Yet, as philosophers they ought to know, that in this case, as in every other, something must be true; the phenomena must have a cause; and the thinking portion of mankind will feel but little obliged to them, for unsettling their actual views of so important a matter, without giving them any other views which can satisfy a clear and sound judgment. To raise objections against any, even the strongest, moral evidence, is a very easy task indeed. But the business of an accomplished inquirer is, to weigh the objections and probabilities on both sides; and then carefully to mark and firmly to abide by the result. For these and similar reasons; on account of