So that one would think him an Angel in flesh, conversing below to instruct the world how to be happy: yet the Historians of those times tax him for insatiable Avarice, that in a little time by unworthy arts he raked up an incredible Sum of Money. Supposing it a Calumny that he forged many Wills to seize upon the Inheritance belonging to others, what excuse can there be for his excessive Usury, his forcing the Britons to borrow a Million of Sesterces, and ⟨p. 378⟩calling for it in, so much to their prejudice, as was likely to have caused their Rebellion? What for his sumptuous Palaces, and Gardens of Pleasure, exceeding the Luxury of Nero? And all these possest by a man who had no Son to inherit, a Philosopher, a Stoic, the great commender of blessed Poverty. All the Apology he makes, is, that a Wise man that is himself, Non amat Divitias sed mavult, non in animum illas sed in domum inducit, non respicit possessas sed continet. Agreeing with Aristippus a Philosophizing Animal, who being reproved for his entanglement in brutish love with a famous Harlot, replied; I possess her, 1not she me. The only difference is in the matter of their Affections, the one was Riches, the other Pleasure. By these instances we may judg of the rest of the Philosophers: Although a Vein of Gold appear in their Writings, yet their Lives were full of Dross. The best of them are charged to have practised vice with those,2 to whom they commended the Precepts of Virtue. The foulest Actions were approved by some, and the most excellent condemned by others that pretended to Philosophical Perfection. Unnatural Lust was allowed as indifferent by Zeno and Chrysippus: And the noblest Love in giving Life it self for the Glory of God in Martyrdom is censured by Epictetus and Antoninus, as the effect of foolish and incurable Melancholy in Christians, who were disgusted with the World, and devoted themselves to Death. The ⟨p. 379⟩Spirit of Holiness who forms the powerful and lasting habits of true Virtue in the Soul; that effectually inclines from the Love of God, and with an intention for his Glory, to obey his Will, as it was purchased by Jesus Christ, so it is peculiar to the Dispensation of the Gospel that reveals Him. The Doctrine of it is not delivered with so much Pomp, but with infinite more efficacy than the most eloquent Instructions of Philosophers:
So that one would think him an Angel in flesh, conversing below to instruct the world how to be happy: yet the Historians of those times tax him for insatiable Avarice, that in a little time by unworthy arts he rak'd up an incredible Sum of Money. Supposing it a Calumny that he forged many Wills to seize upon the Inheritance belonging to others, what excuse can there be for his excessive Usury, his forcing the Britains to borrow a Million of Sesterces, and ⟨p. 378⟩calling for it in, so much to their prejudice, as was likely to have caused their Rebellion? What for his sumptuous Palaces, and Gardens of Pleasure, exceeding the Luxury of Nero? And all these possest by a man who had no Son to inherit, a Philosopher, a Stoick, the great commender of blessed Poverty. All the Apology he makes, is, that a Wise man that is himself, Non amat Divitias sed mavult, non in animum illas sed in domum inducit, non respicit possessas sed continet. Agreeing with Aristippus a Philosophizing Animal, who being reproved for his intanglement in bruitish love with a famous Harlot, replyed; I possess her, 1not she me. The only difference is in the matter of their Affections, the one was Riches, the other Pleasure. By these instances we may judg of the rest of the Philosophers: Although a Vein of Gold appear in their Writings, yet their Lives were full of Dross. The best of them are charged to have practised vice with those,2 to whom they commended the Precepts of Vertue. The foulest Actions were approv'd by some, and the most excellent condemned by others that pretended to Philosophical Perfection. Unnatural Lust was allowed as indifferent by Zeno and Chrysippus: And the noblest Love in giving Life it self for the Glory of God in Martyrdom is censured by Epictetus and Antoninus, as the effect of foolish and incurable Melancholy in Christians, who were disgusted with the World, and devoted themselves to Death. The ⟨p. 379⟩Spirit of Holiness who formes the powerful and lasting habits of true Vertue in the Soul; that effectually enclines from the Love of God, and with an intention for his Glory, to obey his Will, as it was purchas'd by Jesus Christ, so it is peculiar to the Dispensation of the Gospel that reveals Him. The Doctrine of it is not delivered with so much Pomp, but with infinite more efficacy than the most eloquent Instructions of Philosophers:
- 1Diog. Laert.
- 2Vid. Philonis judicium de Platonico convivio, in Lib. de vitae Contempt. Quanquam illorum see ingenia amare dicebant ea fere potissimum amabant quae bene habitabant. Quis est enim iste amor amicitiae? cur neque deformem Adolescentem quisquam amat, nec formosum senem? Cicer. Venerem nefandam & quosvis Incestus esse adiaphora dicebant non s• lum Epicurei, sed severi illi Stoici, quod Sextus Empiricus nos docet ex Zenone, & Chrysippo.Vid. Philonis judicium de Platonico convivio, in Lib. de vitae Contempt. Quanquam illorum se ingenia amare dicebant ea fere potissimum amabant quae bene habitabant. Quis est enim iste amor amicitiae? cur neque deformem Adolescentem quisquam amat, nec formosum senem? Cicer. Venerem nefandam & quosvis Incestus esse adiaphora dicebant non s• lum Epicurei, sed severi illi Stoici, quod Sextus Empiricus nos docet ex Zenone, & Chrysippo.
