[ Yr] . 
his conceptions of the divine will, muft materially influence his 
moral conduct. And hence we may draw this general conclu- 
fion, that falfe notions of the Deity muft ever produce more 
or lefs immorality in our lives. This conclufion we fhall proceed 
to confirm, by a particular confideration of the moral effects 
which the popular theology of the heathens was calculated to 
produce. And if all thofe effe&s were not atually produced, we 
muft look for their prevention to the operation of other caufes. 
Nor does it concern our prefent fubjea to confider what were the - 
opinions of fome more enlightened philofophers about the divine 
being and attributes ; for the opinions of philofophers have fcarcely 
any influence upon the practice of the multitude. 
Anp here poltheifm firft offers itfelf to our view, as the fun- 
damental dorine of every pagan fyftem ; and polytheifm is a 
do&rine which ftrikes at the very ground-work of all morality. 
With the wnzty of God, the immutability and permanence of 
moral rectitude is immediately conne&ted. Where is the perma- 
nence or immutability of virtue, if the divine will be not immu- 
table and permanent? And how can the divine will be immutable 
or permanent, if there be a plurality of Gods? Admit a plurality 
of wills, and a contrariety is poffible: but if there be a contrariety, 
not only the uniformity of virtue is deftroyed, but the fame 
action may become at once virtuous and vicious, as that aion 
may to one divinity be agreeable which is difpleafing to another. 
The impure fenfualift, the violent oppreffor, the fraudulent, the 
revengeful—will find fome tutelary gods to fanction their moft 
criminal exceffes—gods to whom their moft criminal exceffes will 
be but grateful facrifices ; while the man of ftri@eft virtue muft 
fee 
