SECTION IV.

Of Good and Evil, Virtue and Vice.

The writings of the Pythagoreans contain numberless excellent moral maxims and precepts, expressed in the most forcible language, and their account of what is good is agreeable to common sense, which we shall see was not the case with many of the philosophers who came after them.

"Some goods," says Archytas, "are desired 62 on their own account, some on the account of o"ther things, and a third both for their own sake, "and that of other things. What then is that good which is desired on its own account, and "not for the sake of any thing else? It is happiFor the sake of this we desire every thing "else, but this for the sake of nothing farther. "(Gale's, Op. Myth. p. 674.) A good man is not "immediately and necessarily happy, but a happy

❝ness.

man must be good. You must not," says Demophilus, "hastily pronounce that man happy "who depends upon any thing that is liable to change and decay, but on himself, and on God. "This only is firm and stable." (Ib. p. 624.)

There

There was a great degree of austerity in the discipline, and general maxims of the Pythagoreans, which forbade all unnecessary gratifications. With respect to the commerce of the sexes, Ocellus Lucanus, (Ch. 4. Gale's Op. Myth. 531.) says, "God 66 gave proper instruments, and appetites, to men "not for the sake of pleasure, but for the propagation "of the species. If there be any commerce with 66 women with any other view, the offspring will be "the bane of society. They will be wicked and "miserable, hateful to God, to demons, and to "men, and also to families and states. For this "reason," he adds, " he adds," laws were made in Greece "that men should have no commerce with their ❝own mothers, daughters, or sisters, nor in any "sacred place, or in public." He also says that "all commerce contrary to nature" by which he no doubt meant sodomy, "must be prevented."

Many of the sentences of Demophilus breathe such a spirit of devotion, that they are justly suspected of a purer source than any heathen philosophy. On this account I shall quote but few of them. "Do not ask of God what you cannot "keep; for no gift of God can be taken from you. He, therefore, will not give what you cannot.

"keep.

"keep... No gift of God is greater than vir"tue........ A frugal and poor philosopher lives a "life like to that of God, and he considers it as the greatest wealth, that he possesses nothing exter"nal (that is out of his control) nothing unneces sary. For the acquisition of riches inflames covetousness, but to live well and happily nothing "is requisite but to act justly........ Being born ❝ of God, and having our root in him, we should "adhere to it. For springs of water, and the pro"ductions of the earth, dry up, or putrefy, when "cut off from their respective sources........ "It is impossible that the same person should be "addicted to pleasure, or the acquisition of riches, "and be devoted to God. And though he should

sacrifice hecatombs, he is the more impious, and "farther removed from religion and God.” (Gale's, Op. Myth. p. 620, 625.)

But what are the best maxims, precepts, or even laws, without proper sanctions? They will be admired, and respected, by those who are previously disposed to observe them; but on others, which is the thing principally to be aimed at, they will have no effect whatever; but may even be ridiculed, and openly disregarded. And what are the proper sanctions of virtue and piety, which evidently

not always any reward in this life, but that providence of God which extends to another, and with this the Pythagorean philosophy was not pro

vided.

SOCRATES

SOCRATES AND JESUS

COMPARED.

47

14

INTRODUCTION.

THE history of Socrates is so singular a phenomenon in the heathen world, and his general behaiour, and the manner of life to which he devoted himself, have in them so much that resemble those of the ancient prophets, and even of our Saviour, that they have always drawn the particular attention of the friends of divine revelation, though these have formed very different opinions on the subject.

If we look into any account of the Grecian philosophers who preceded Socrates, or who followed him fand some of the most eminent of the latter were his professed disciples) we shall find none of them to resemble him, even in the general features of his conduct, though his education as a philosopher was in all respects the same with theirs; and they all fell far short of him with respect to purity of moral character.

If we may depend upon what is transmitted to

us