The sagacious Kepler, for so he is called even by the most modem writers/ appears to have had a conception (tf this great truth; but as he was more an astronomer than a philosopher, he saw this truth only partially, 4Uid he rather embraced it as subservient to his own astronomical opinions, than as formii^ an essential part of the true Aeory of the universe. But from what 1 have seen of the writings of Kepler, I have no doubt, if he had lived in the time of the Greeks, or if he had made the study of the works of Plato and Aristotle tiie business of his life, he would have become an adept in, and an illustrious and zealous champion of their philosophy. Kepler then (in Harmo- nices Mundi, lib. 4, p. 158) says, ^ That he does not oppose the dogma, that there is a soul of the universe, > though he shall say nothing about it in that book, He adds, that if titers is such a soul, it must reside in the centre of the world, which, according to him, b the sun, and from thence by the communication of the rays of l^ht, which are in the place of spirits in an animated body, is propagated into all the amplitude of the world.''* In the following passages also he confidently asserts that the earth has a soul. For he says, ^^ That the globe of the earth is a body such as is that of some animal; and that what its own soul is to an animal, that Ae sublunary nature which he investigates will be to the earth.*" He adds, ** That he sees for the most part eveiy thing which proceediiq; from Ae body of an animal testifies that diere is a soul in i^ proceeds also frmn the body of the earth. For as the animated body produces in the super- ficies of the skin hairs, thus also the earth produces [on its sur&ce] plants and trees; and as in the former lice are generated, so in the latter die worms called erucae, grasshoppers, and various insects and marine monsters are produced. As the animated body likewise produces tears, mucus, and the recrement of the ears, and sometimes gum from the pustules of the face^ thus also the earth pro- > Dr. Gregory, in the 70th piopoiitioii of.the first book of bit Elements of Aitronomy, ai^ of Kepler, ^ That hit archetypal ratioe, geometrical concfamitifi, and hamoidc proportioBt, show focfa a force of genns as is not to be foond in any of the writers of physical astronomy bclors Urn. So that Jeremiah Honroz, a fery competent Jndge of Uicse mat. ters,thooi^a Uttie averse to Kepkr, in tfaeb^gfamh^ of his astronomical studies, after having hi ^ain tried othen, entirely falling in with Kepler's doctrine and physical reasons, thus addremes his reader: KefUr i» « pcrton whum /mey JfuHifmimin ^boMott mmUU hmUet lmm§ sell M»igf«a»>dh^«rsimsMMlikMf siire; «hM£i3ilir& SsSeeehiitf e6«M<Jbe«A0(«lri6e^pM<oM!|iA«ni flimelwK li»<»sterdis<iy ^.— lijhi etoa<fe<l*€ pJfci/wiyihmreeii; M^mlAi^ I quote this paMage, not from ^e Jnstnem of the encomium it contains; An' it is eztraTagaat, and by no means true * but that the reader may see what an exalted opinion some of the greatest of the modems hsTo had of the genius of Kepler.
**^£tprimnmqttidemdeanhnatotiusnniTersi etsinonrepngnoynidltamenhoclihrolV.dicam. Videtnr enna (li est talis aliqna) in centre nrondl, quod mihi sol est, residere, indeqne in omnem ^fus amplitndinem commerdo radiomm locis, qni sint loco spiritnum in corpore animaD propagari."
3 <'Deaiqaeterr«gto|M» tale corpus eri^ quale est alic4usanimalis:^|nodq«eaai^ hSBC, quam quwnmus, natarasabhrnaris.* X» INTMOftVGTION.
duces amber and bitumen. As the bladder too produces urhie^ thus likewise mountams pour forth rivers. And as the body produces excrement of a sulphureous odour^ and crepitus which may also be inflamed^ so the earth produces sulphur, subterranean fires, thunder, and lightning. And as in the terns of an animal blood is generated, and together with it sweat whidi is cjcded o«t of the body, so in the veins of the earth, metals, and foss&s, and a raiaiy vapour an geoenited." ' AmI in cap. 7, p. 162, after having shown that there is in the ear& die aense of towchmg, that it reqpam, md is subject in certain parts to languors, and internal vicisntucfes of the viscera, and that aubCamneMi hesat proceeds from the soul of the earth, he i^ds, ** That a <:ertain image of die zodiac ii resphwid ent in this soul, and therefore of the whole finnament, mi m the bond of the sympadiy of tbi^p celestial and terrestrial.*'* Bishop Berkeley abo was by no means hostile to "diis ffpinion, that Ae wodd it ooe gra«t ttiimsl, as is evident flrom die following extract from his Siris, (p. 131).
^ BKnd Ute and Uind chance are at bottom mtidi die same (hmg, aiid one no more tnteUigible dian the oiher. Sudi is 'the mutihd relation, comiection, motion, and aympathy of the parts of tUi world, thatihey ^eem, a» it wete, animated and held together by one soul: and such is their>harmony, order, and reguliir course, as shows the soul to be governed and'direded by a mind. It was an qmm of Yemote UntiquHy Ait the worid was va animal. If we may trust Ihe Hermaie writings, the .Sgjrptians diought all diings did partake of life. This opinion was abo so general and ounent among the Greeks, that Plutarch asserts aB others held the worid to be an animal, and govtmcd by providence, except Leucippus, Democritns, and Epicurus. And although an animal oontaining all bodies withm itself, could not be touched or sensibly afiected from without; yet it is pkin they attributed to it an inward sense and feeling, as well as appetites and avisrsioiis; and that ftom aM the various tones, actions, and passions of the universe, they supposed one symphony, one animal %ct and life to result.
** lambliehus declares the world to be one animal, in vrhich the parts, however distant each from other, are nevertheless rdated and connected by one common nature. And he teaches, what is ■ ** Videbam pleraqne omnia, que ex corpora aaimantit pro? eoientia, testaatar auimam io iUo inesse, proveaire •tiam cz telloris corpore. Ut enim eorpat in cotit svperficie pilot, tic terra plantas arboretqoe profert; inque iii ibi pedicali, bic enic», cicadai, variaqae imocta et monttra mari^iiascantar: et ut corpus lachrymas, blenuami anriomqac rtcremeata, eat nbi et ganuni ex fiiciei pastoUfl, sic telhis eleetmiB, bitomen: atqae vesica arioam, sic montes flumiaa Audoat; et at corpus excrcmeatam solpbarei odoris, crepitnaqoe, qui etiam iaflammari possant, sic terra solphor, igaet sabtcnraaeas, toaitraa, lalgara: ntqoe in veais aaimantis geoerator saofais, et com co sudor, extra corpus ejectns; sic IB veais terrs, aietalla et lossilia, vaporqne pluvias."
* ** Rebioet igitar ia aaiasa tcUoris imaio qaasdam circoli sodiaci sensibilii, totieique adee firmanieati, vinculum «ympatbiae reraa c«lestiam at terrestrium.* •be n recwttd Bff^m of th^ Pj^tb^gorefMos a«d Plutaii^ 4»l tiMra is «o chasm in ittture, but a ckam or feal* ^ Maga mug l^j gentk uMiirrupted gradAliiMia fmn 4^ kwesi ta Ifaa lughtat, each mtm^ hmg »f€»w«d avd pctrfected by tb« partibciiMitiaii of a higher. As air beoomea ij^ieouaf ae lh# puraMit jte beconiea ai^i^ andlbeaoiiMlapiilbeconieaiQleUeobial, vhidi ia to be widfvrtpod, wt^Hm chMge of ^we nalwre ktp aoQllMr» but of the connection of different natures, eaeblAwer tvOure beiaf^ aceondiag to those phflos^era, as it weee, a seceptacle or aut^ect for the •extaboipe it lo reside and act w* ^ It is ab» the docteioe of Ptoaiac phitoso|ibew, tb^t intdUect is the vary bfe of living things, the ftrsi principle and esenplftr of all, from whence, bjr diffeiient degrees, are derived the inferior rlamnn ^ life; first die rational, then the sensitive, afiler that the veg^tMe, but so as in die rational nmmid Ibcre is stiU sopiewbat inteUodual^ again in the sensitive there is some^at rational, and in the vegetable somewhat sensitive, and lastly in mixed bodies, as m^als and minerals, somewhat of vegetation. By which means the whole b thou^t to be more perfectly connected. Which doc- trine in^plies thnt all die fiseubies, inatinots, and motions <tf inferior beings, in their several nama^tiirr aobordinatioiMi, are derived from, and depend upon int;frilect '^ Both Stoics and Platonics Md the world to be alive, thou|^ sometimes it be mentioned as a gfntjflnt animaly aometinMS as a plant or vegetable. Bui im iUi, notwiihsiariding what ha» been immitid iff mm€ kttmed mem, ihere 9eem$ to he no atheUm. For so Umg us the world is sup- posed jSo be fuickemed by eiemeatary fire or apisrit, which (s itself animated by soul, and directed by MmdentemdiiHg, ii foSows that all parts thereof originally depend upon, and may be reduced unto, the same indivisible stem or principle, to wit, a supreme mind; which is the concurrent doatrime af Pythagoeeaps, Platomcs, and Stoics."
Compare now the Newtonian with this theory, ttiat the heavenly bodies are vitalized by their informing souls, that their orderly motion is the result of this viHdity, and that the planets move harmonically roimd the sun, not as^ if urged by a centripetal force, but from an animated tendency to die principle and fountain of their light, and from a desire of partaking as largely as possible of his influence and power. In.the former theory all the celestial motions are the effect of violence, in ithe latter diey are all natural. The former is attended with insupenlble difficulties, the latl^, when the principle on which it is founded is adnutted, widi none. And the former is unscientific and merely hypothetical; but the latter is the progeny of the most accurate science, and is fotmded op the ipoattgeni|ine;aod<uqper verted ceneeptions of *the huoMnmind.
XXli INTEODUCTIOK.
XXli INTEODUCTIOK.
I have said that I should prove from the testimony of the Apostle Paul, that the Jews were not coasistent in confoundiiq; angeb properlj so called with Gods. And this appears to me to be evident in the first place from the following passage in Hebrews ii. v. 3. iriorfi voov/tuv xemifTi^cu tw^ m$^af gmutr^ twOf fi; TO /UM} ffx ^yo/xffMpy ra fi\ewoiu¥a ytyoyffvtfi. Hiis in the English version is erro- neously rendered; '^ Throi^ faith we understand, diat the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen, were not made of diings which do appear." I say this is erro- neously translated, because in the first place, iht worlds is evidently a forced iiterpretation of mma§; and even admitdi^ it is not, leaves the passage very ambiguous, from the uncertainty to what woild^ Paul aHudes. If we adopt ages, wfaidi is the general sense of the word in the New Testament, we shall indeed avoid a forced and ambiguous interpretation, but we shall render the meaning of the Aposde trifling in the extreme. For as he has elsewhere said, '^ that all things were framed by the word of God,'' what particular £dth does it require to believe, that by the same word he framed die ages?
In the second place, from the definition of fsutb, given in the first verse of this chapter, Aat it is *^ the evidence of ihingi not seen/* it is clear, that Paul is speaking in this passage of somedang invisible. Since then euowas is neither fooorlds nor ages, what shall we say it is? I answer, the (tones of the Valentinians. And agreeably to this, the whole passage should be translated as follows: '^ By faith we understand, that the aones were framed by die word of God, in order that things which are seen, might be generated from such as do. not appear (i. e. from things invisible)" Every one who is much conversant with Greek audiors, must certainly be convinced that m; to means in order that; and Bishop Pearson translates as I have done the latter part of this vefae.
Now we learn from the second book of Irenaeus against die heretics, that accordhig to the Valentinians, all created diings are the images of the aones, resident in the pleroma, or fulness of deity. And does it not clearly follow from the above version, that according to Paul too, the asones are the exemplars of visible or created things i To vrfiich we may add, that this sense of the passage clearly accords with the assertion that '' faidi is the evidence of things not seen." For here the thmgs which do not appear are the €Bones; these, according to the Valentinians, subsisting in 'city. So that from our version, Paul m^ht say with great propriety, that '* we understand by faith, that the itones were fiamed by the word of God, in order diat things which are seen, might be generated from such as do not appear," for this naturally follows from his definition of faith.
I farther add, that among these aones of the Valentinians were vov^p /Sutfo;, 0-17^, aki/itna, o^fM, INTRODUCTION. XXIU <% e. inielUei, u profundity, 9ile$u>e, tnah, and wisdom, whidi as Gale well observes io his noteti oo lamblicbus de Mysterib^ &ۥ prove dieir dogmas to be of Chaldaic or^D. For these words per- petoally occur in the fragments of die Chaldaic oracles. And the middle of the Chaldean btelU- giUe triad is denominated eum aon,^ i. e. etemUy, and is also perfecdy conformable to the theology of Plato, as is very satisfactorily shown by Proclus in the third book of the foUowii^ woik. According to die Chaldeans therefore, the seones are Gods; and considered as &e exem- plars of die visible universe, diey are analogous to die ideas of Plato, which also are Gods, as is evident from the Parmenides of dwt philosopher.* Accordmg to Paul too, as the itones are die fabricators of the visible world, they must be beuigs of a much higher order dum angels, and con- sequendy must be Gods; productive power bein|^ one of the great characteristics of a divine nature.
Again, in the Episde to die £phesians, chap. i. v. 21. Paul sajrs diat God has exalted Cbrisit ^' far above every principality, and power, and might, and dominion," vmgavm «W0^ ^SXV ^^^ ^vcuif, KM iupctiiMOf Km xogiovifrog. And in the 6di chapter and It2di verse he conjoins with princi- palities and powers, the ruUn cf the world, L e. die seven planets, v^ ras cifxp^g, rgog rotg t^oo- o-MCf, wfo$ ro/s Mo-piMtfctrogeif. Aiq^tin' confesses diat he is ignorant what the difference is between those four words, (principality, power, might, and dominion,) in which die Aposde Paul seems to comprehend all the celestial society. *' Quid inter se distent quatuor iOa vocabula, quibus nniversam ipsam coelestem societatem videtur Apostolus esse complexus, dicant qui possunt, si tamen possnnt probare quod dicunt; ego me ista ignorare fateor." Ignatius also (in Epist ad TraUianos) speaks of die angelic orders^ the diversities of archangels and armies, the diff^ences of the orders characterised by might and dominion^ of thrones and powers, the magnificence of the atones f and tb^ transcendency of Cherubim and Seraphim," km yaq tym w Koff o, n MtfiM, km twnimi f99i¥ r« twovfemoL, km t»$ it/yt>aKets tm^ tif, km ras rw aj%Myyf Acov km argetrtw sf 0(AA«y«^, * Prochw begiBt te lixtii book of the foUowing woric with observng that he has celebrated in the preceding book the liebdomadic mtm of the int^ectaal Gods. The mMm therefore, though the cause of tiiem exists in the intelligible, pro- periy UtoDf to the fnteUectual order; and the Demhu-gns or artificer of Uie nnivene subsists at the extremity of that order. But the demiurgus according to Orpheus, prior to the fobrication of the world absorbed in himself Phanes the exemplar of the universe. Hence he became fuH of ideas of which Uie forms in the sensible uniTerse are the images. And as all intettectual natures are in each, it is evident that ihing$wkkhan $em were geur^ied fiom the invmbk it<me$, conformably to the assertion of Paul.
» I refer the reader who is desirous of bdng fullj convinced of Uiis to the notes accompanying my tianslation of that 'dialogue, in vol. S of my Plato. ^ Ad Lanrentium, c 58.
♦ Here we see the tfwifs arc acknowledged by Ircnwus to be beings of an order superior to angels.
^jiy iMTBODtfCTIOK.
The opiaioa of Grotius' therefore, is highly probable, that Ae Jews obtamed the names of Powers, Dominations, and PrincipfcUties, from their Babjflonic captivity; and Gale in his notes on lambUchus' says, that cfertain passages of Zoroaster and Ortanes cited by the author of Arithm. Theolog. tonfirm this opinion of Grotius. Indeed, the appeBation of «5X« principUt, which are the first of the four powfers mentioned by Paul, was given by the Chaldeans to fhat order of Gods called by the Grecian theologists tupermundane and ««/mifcitrw, Ae natore of which is unfolded by Proclus b the sixth book of the following woA; and Proclus in the fourth book of Ws MS. Commentary On ihe Parmenides of Plato shows that the order of Gods denominated »«r«J «« inteUigibU and at the same time intelleetual, is according to the Chaldean oracles^ princi- pdly characterized by dominatum.^ In proof of thb, the two following orades are cited by him. the first, concerning the empyrean, and the second tconcenang the mterial Synoches.* i. e. " AU things yield minutrant to the JnteDectoal prerters of ioteUectuKl fire, through the per- suasive witt of the fiiAer." And «XX« MU t»X«uoif o<r« JwXwM Xwoxiwi.
i. e. « But likewise such as are b subjection to the material Synoches."
Farther stiD, Paul in the EpisUe to the Romans, chap. vui. v. S8,.^ys, - For 1 «n persu^^ed that neither death nor life, nor angeb, nor prindpalitie,, nor pawen. nor tUng. p«««t, «ar *«gs to come, nor luigK nor deptk, nor any other creature, shaU be able to separate us fiom the love of God, &c.» From this arr-Hjement therefore, it i- evid«.t that pri.cipd.t« ««1 pow«.« not the same with angel.; ^ as according to Paul they are betogs so exalted, that m b. l^-uUe > Ad Cap. 18. liatthsei.
* DeMytt.p.«M?
INTEODOCTIOlf. \r¥ to die Epkeikmi, he could not find aoy thing more magnificent to say of Cbrist, than that he is raised even above tbem^ it follows that they must be Gods^ since they are superior to the angelic order. It is remarkable too^ that he coarranges height and depth (y^aofiM xai |3a$o$) widl prindpali-' ties and powers; and jSudo^ is one of the aones according to the Valentinians.
•In the 6r3t Epistle to the Corinthians likewise, chap. viii. v. 5. Paul expressly asserts tfiat there is a divine multitude. For he says^ ^' Though there be that are called Gods, whether in heaven or in eartbi (as there he Gods many and Lords many;)" in the parenthesis of which verse^ it isincon- trovertibly evident that he admits the existence of a plurality of Gods, though as well as the he^ens he believed that one God only was supreme and the fether of all things. Nor am I singu- lar in asserting that this was admitted by Paul. For the Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite in the second chapter of hb treatise On the Divine Names observes concerning what is here said by Paul as follows: " Again, from* the deific energy of God, by which every tljing according to its ability becomes deiform, muiy Gods are generated; in consequence of which there appears and is said to be a separation and multiplication of the one [supreme] God. Nevertheless, God hiqgtself, who is the chief deity, and is superessentially the supreme, is still, one God, remaining impartible in the Gods distributed from him, united to himself, immingled with the many, and void of multitude.'^ And he afterwards adds, '^ that this was in a transcendent manner understood by Paul, who was the leader both of him and his preceptoj, to divine illumination,^ in the above cited verse. And, ^' that in divine natures, unions vanquish and precede separations, and yet nevertheless they are urated, after the separation which doesnot in proceeding depart fixim the one, and is unical.'^' Paul therefore, according to this Dionynus, considered the Gods^ conformably to Plato and the best of his disciples, as deiform processions from the one, and which at the same time that they have a dis- tinct subsistence firom, are profoundly united to their great producing cause. Dionysius also employs the very same expression which Proclus continually nses when speaking of the separation of the Gods firom their source; for he says that the divine multitude avixpomtrog rov svoi, i. e. does not depart firom, but abides in ihe one. Hence Proclus in the fifth book of his MS. Commentary On' the Parmenides of Plato, speaking of the divine unities says, '' Whichever among these yoa assume, it is the same with the others, because all of them are in each other, and are rooted in the tifwfxtm, nat fMT« tip rsv tff tntHftrnrw n^i iti«i»v ^iMif i#iv« Proc. Vol. L d Qn0, For at lre«i by 4beif summiu (i. c* their roots) are €xtd m the «irtli> and di#Ottgh diese arc earthijiy afttr lbs garnet mattner also dWnie natnrea are rooted by their sammits in theone^ «Bd«acb of -thenvft t unity 'and ^ne/ through unconfiised uni^n mik^he one itsei/^* Hfyof «v irotncov Xa^ yetf ra lnHpot Tm§ tctfrroov Mgt/^oit§ evilgvvrai rp yv^, xeu arri yijtva xar* txuva^, rov axjtov rpoiroy xeu ra tvx TTiia 'Diouyiiits, who certamly lived posterior to Produs^ because he continually borrows from his^ works,* barbarously confounding that scientific arrangement of these deifofm piocession» frony ihe'0ne^ which is so admirably unfolded by Proclus in the following work, classes diem as fdttows. The first order, according to him, consists of Seraphim, Cherubim, and Thi^onet. The second of the cMvine essences characterized by dominion, might, and power. Abi the third of Principalities, Archangels, and Angels. Hence he has tramftnred the character- istics of the intelKgible triad of Gods to Seraphim, Cherubim, and Thrones*. For symmetry, tmth^ and beauty, which characterize this trim), are said by Plato in ihe Philebus to subsist in the vestibule of the good; («ri |mv to*^ rov myotim wv ijSij irgotvpo^s 9fwru9ai) and Dionysius says* of his first order that *^it is as it were arranged in the vestibules of deity J' Goodness, wisdom,- and beauty also, are shown by Produs in the third book of the ibllowing^ work to belong to tbe^ kitelligible triad; gooduesi to ita summit, wisdom to the middle of it, and beauty to its eitremityw And Dionyskis says, that according to the Hebrcfwsr, the word Cherobim ^gnifies a multitude ^ knowledge f or an efasion of wisdom, ti)v *i x^S^^fi^t^ tfk^amw, ^XijJoj yvaaiws, n x^"^ <^o<pltt^' Th^ characteristics of the Gods called wn^rofxeu votpot intelligible and at the same timeinteUtctualy and of the Gods that are votpat intellectual vStont, he appears to have transferred to his nuddJe triad which is characterized by dominion, might, and power. And he haq adapted his third triad consist-^ ing of Principalities, Archangels, and Angeis, to the supermundane, liberated, and mundane orders of Gods. For the supermundane Gods are called by Proclus in the sixth book of the fol- lowing work apxM Principalities, or rulers, which is the word employed by Dionysius and Paul. And the mundane Gods are said by Proclus (in Parmenid.) to be the sources of a winged life> and angels are celebrated by Dionysius as haviug.^wngs. Hence it is evident tliat Dionysius has accom- modated the peculiarities of the different orders of Gods to the nine orders which he denominates^. celestial powers; and hi^ arrangement has been adopted by all succeeding Christian tfaeologists.
pointed out, and its universality be clearly demonstrated. Omitting however, a <liscussion of this kiiH} far ibe.pcesent, I shall &rther observe respecting Ak tfieology, ^ the deification of dead men, anditbe womhipptiq; mea a» Gods form noipart of it whenitis considefed acoordioglorits • '^eouina purity. NmDoroaa instances ol tbe troth of ihistmight be adduced, Jmt lAalltmentiooiar .tfaisiiwrposa^ as uiMReptionable vrknesses, tfae^wrilrogs of Phto, the Golden Pytfaagoric vmes/ «and. tha treatise of Pluterck On Isis and Osiris. ^AU.the* wfiorks of Plato indeed, evinoe the tsuth ' of Ifaisiposition,.but thiaia particularly manifest fro9»i«« Laws. The GoIde» verses orderi tbat^e mmortal Gods be faonoived first, as they are o^^sed by law; aflerwardr the illaatrionst UerQe«i under which appellation, the author ofihe verses eonspnhends' also. angelsi end deemons, properly . so eaUed: and in tbe last place the terrestrialfdeaaMis,ia«^suiclk good men as Uraoseend iuiiriftM the . isest of mankind. But to honour the Gods as they afeahspoaedby. law, isy aa H leroclea obseif«e9x to revereoce them as they are arranged by. their fabricator and fathei-; and thia is.to honour ibeMraa beings superior to man. Hence, to. benourmeny howevea excellent they may b^^as Giod^ iatnol' to honour die Gods according to the rank in which th^y are placed by their Creat9r, for it is con- founding the divine with the human nature, and is thus - acting tlirectiy contrai^^ loathe ^Vtytbagoric * '^Diogenes Laertiussays of Pythagoras, That he charged hU ditcipUt not to give equal degrees ^h&mmr U tka G9di and heroes. Herodotus (in Euterpe) says of the Greeks, That they worshipped Hercules two maye^ one as em immortal deity and so they ssterifieed to him: and another as s Hero^andso they cdebraiedf Mo memory. »lsaefates (Encom. Helen.) distinguishes between the honours pf heroes and Gods, when he speaks of Menelaus and Helena. But the distinction is no -where more fiilly expressed than in the Greek inscription ufKMS the statue of EegiUa, wife to Herodes Atticus^ as ISahnasms thinks, which was set up in his teazle at Triopium, and taken from the statue itself by Sirmondus; where it is said^ That she had nsitkew Jk0 honour of a mortal, nor yet that which was proper to the Gods: ^vlf ttfa ^vnroi;, araf cvit 9totJiy •^xomi. It seems by tke inscription of Heroder, and by the testament of Epicteta extant in Greek in ihe Coilection of Inscriptions, that it was in the power of particular families to keep festival day^ in honour of some of their own iamily^ and to give heroical honours to them* In that noble inscription at Venice, we find three days appointed every year to be kept, and a confraternity established for that purpose with the laws of it The first day to be observed in honour of the Muses/and sacrifices to be sfiered to them as deities. The second and tliird days in honour of »the heroes of the family; between which honour and that of deitic% they shewed the difference by the distance of time between them, and the preference given to the other. But wherein soever the difference lay, that there was a dutinction acknowledged among t^iem appears by this- passage' of Valerius in his excellent oration- txtatst in pionysius Halicamass.Antiq. Rom. lib. 11. p. £96. J call, &ays he,the.Gods to wiiness^whose temples and aliartour family has worshipped with common sacrifices; and nest after them, I call the Genii cf our anctstors, to wkom we give ht^'ffH «'<pKy the second honours next to the Gods,^% «Celsus caJIs those ws vfo^nMoy^kt^ rt^AAf the dua honours that belong to the lower demons. From which we take notice, that the Heathens did not confound all degrees of divine worship, giving toihe lowest object the tame which they supposed to.be due to the celestial deities, oc.th^ supreme God. So that if the distinction of divine worship will excuse from idolatr}^ tha^Heatkens were not to blame for it.*' See Sti!lingfieet*s answer to a book entitled Catholics no Idolatcia» pi 510, 51S,^.
XXVai INTKODUCTIOM.
precept. Plotarch too io his above-mentioned trefldte moit forciUj and clear]; ahowt the impiety of worshipping men as Gods^ as is evident from the following exttact: