the Divine Being is almighty and omniscient. In short, by adding infinity to any kind of perfection we enjoy, and by joining all these different kinds of perfection in one being, we form our idea of the great Sovereign of nature.

Though every one who thinks must have made this observation, I shall produce Mr Locke's authority to the same purpose, out of his Essay on Human Understanding: "If we examine the idea we have of the incomprehensible Supreme Being, we shall find that we come by it the same way; and that the complex ideas we have both of God and separate spirits, are made up of the simple ideas we receive from reflection; v. g. having, from what we experience in ourselves, got the ideas of existence and duration, of knowledge and power, of pleasure and happiness, and of several other qualities and powers, which it is better to have than to be without; when we would frame an idea the most suitable we can to the Supreme Being, we enlarge every one of these with our own idea of infinity; and so putting them together make our complex idea of God.”

It is not impossible that there may be many kinds of spiritual perfection besides those which are lodged in a human soul; but it is impossible that we should have ideas of any kinds of perfection except those of which we have some small rays and short imperfect strokes in ourselves. It would therefore be a very high presumption to determine whether the Supreme Being has not many more attributes than those which enter into our conceptions of Him. This is certain, that if there be any kind of spiritual perfection which is not marked out in the human soul, it belongs in its fulness to the divine nature.

Several eminent philosophers have imagined that the soul, in her separate state, may have new faculties springing

up in her, which she is not capable of exerting during her present union with the body; and whether these faculties may not correspond with other attributes in the divine. nature, and open to us hereafter new matter of wonder and adoration, we are altogether ignorant. This, as I have said before, we ought to acquiesce in, that the Sovereign Being, the great Author of Nature, has in Him all possible perfections, as well in kind as in degree: to speak according to our methods of conceiving, I shall only add under this head, that when we have raised our notion of this infinite Being as high as it is possible for the mind of man to go, it will fall infinitely short of what He really is. "There is no end of His greatness." The most exalted creature He has made is only capable of adoring it; none but Himself can comprehend it.

The advice of the son of Sirach is very just and sublime in this light. "By His word all things consist. We may speak much, and yet come short: wherefore in sum He is all. How shall we be able to magnify Him? for He is great above all His works. The Lord is terrible and very great; and marvellous is His power. When you glorify the Lord, exalt Him as much as you can: for even yet will He far exceed. And when you exalt Him, put forth all your strength, and be not weary; for you can never go far enough. Who hath seen Him, that he might tell us? and who can magnify Him as He is? things than these be, for we have seen but a few of His works."

There are yet hid greater

I have here only considered the Supreme Being by the light of reason and philosophy. If we would see Him in all the wonders of His mercy, we must have recourse to revelation, which represents Him to us not only as infinitely

great and glorious, but as infinitely good and just in His dispensations towards man. But as this is a theory which falls under every one's consideration, though indeed it can never be sufficiently considered, I shall here only take notice of that habitual worship and veneration which we ought to pay to this Almighty Being. We should often refresh our minds with the thought of Him, and annihilate ourselves before Him, in the contemplation of our own worthlessness, and of His transcendent excellency and perfection. This would imprint in our minds such a constant and uninterrupted awe and veneration as that which I am here recommending, and which is, in reality, a kind of incessant prayer, and reasonable humiliation of the soul before Him who made it.

This would effectually kill in us all the little seeds of pride, vanity, and self-conceit, which are apt to shoot up in the minds of such whose thoughts turn more on those comparative advantages which they enjoy over some of their fellow-creatures, than on that infinite distance which is placed between them and the supreme model of all perfection. It would likewise quicken our desires and endeavours of uniting ourselves to Him by all the acts of religion and virtue.

Such an habitual homage to the Supreme Being would, in a particular manner, banish from among us that prevailing impiety of using His name on the most trivial occasions.

I find the following passage in an excellent sermon, preached at the funeral of a gentleman,* who was an honour to his country, and a more diligent as well as successful

* See Bishop Burnett's sermon, preached at the funeral of the Honourable Robert Boyle.

inquirer into the works of nature than any other our nation has ever produced. "He had the profoundest veneration. for the great God of heaven and earth that I have ever observed in any person. The very name of God was never mentioned by him without a pause and a visible stop in his discourse; in which one, that knew him most particularly above twenty years, has told me that he was so exact, that he does not remember to have observed him once to fail in it."

Every one knows the veneration which was paid by the Jews to a name so great, wonderful, and holy. They would not let it enter even into their religious discourses. What can we then think of those who make use of so tremendous a name in the ordinary expressions of their anger, mirth, and most impertinent passions? of those who admit it into the most familiar questions and assertions, ludicrous phrases, and works of humour? not to mention those who violate it by solemn perjuries! It would be an affront to reason to endeavour to set forth the horror and profaneness of such a practice. The very mention of it exposes it sufficiently to those in whom the light of nature, not to say religion, is not utterly extinguished.

THE DIGNITY OF HUMAN NATURE.

T has been usual to remind persons of rank, on great occasions in life, of their race and quality, and to what expectations they were born; that

by considering what is worthy of them, they may be withdrawn from mean pursuits, and encouraged to laudable undertakings. This is turning nobility into a principle of virtue, and making it productive of merit, as it is understood to have been originally a reward of it.

It is for the like reason, I imagine, that you have, in some of your speculations, asserted to your readers the dignity of human nature. But you cannot be insensible that this is a controverted doctrine. There are authors who consider humån nature in a very different view, and books of maxims have been written to shew the falsity of all human virtues. The reflections which are made on "the subject usually take some tincture from the tempers and characters of those that make them. Politicians can resolve the most shining actions among men into artifice and design. Others who are soured by discontent, repulses, or ill-usage, are apt to mistake their spleen for philosophy; men of profligate lives, and such as find themselves incapable of rising to any distinction among their fellow-creatures, are for pulling down all appearances of merit which seem to upbraid them; and satirists describe nothing but deformity. From all these hands we have such draughts of mankind as are re