Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

fuaded he means not to mislead; but univerfal, or even complete, toleration, feems to be fhort of what the Diffenters with: for, to remove every barrier, would be levelling all diftinctions; and if one was not fuperior, it could no longer to lerate. Let us attend, however, to the author's reafoning.

A queftion, however, here arifes-Whether it be the duty of the magiftrate to provide, at the public expence, teachers of one fect of Chriftians (for I speak not now of Pagan or Mahometan magiftrates, but confine my confideration to a Chriftian magiftrate), or teachers of every fect into which his fociety may happen to be divided. This is a question which cannot perhaps be eafily decided by those who seriously confider it: I must not, on this occafion, undertake to difcufs it; I will rather affume as a principle to be admitted, that the morals of the community will be better fecured by an exclusive establishment at the public expence of the teachers of one fect, than by a co-establishment of the teachers of different fects of Chriftians. Yet I can never admit that it is agreeable either to the principle on which civil fociety is formed, or ufeful to the attainment of the ends men have in view in forming fuch fociety, that thofe who differ from the religion of the magiftrate should, on account of that difference alone, be fubject to perfecution; and an exclufion from civil offices is perfecution it is not indeed the perfecution of the Inquifition or of Smithfield; it differs from them in degree, but it resembles them in kind. I have argued myself into this opinion in the following manner:--Punishment for religious opinions is perfecution, and evil of any kind, inflicted by the authority of the civil magiftrate, is punishment. This evil may refpect a man's perfon, or liberty, or property, or character. Civil incapacity, brought upon men by law, is an evil affecting their property and thei character: their character, as it expofes them to the imputation of being bad citizens; their property, as it takes from them the poffibility of acquiring advantages attendant on certain civil offices. Thele advantages, whether they confit of wealth, power, influence, or honour, are worth fomething; their value may be variously appreciated; yet being worth fomething, the poffibility of acquiring them is worth fomething, and the taking away from any man that poffibility on account of his religion, is perfecution . The law indeed does not permit every man to be a clergyman, a lawyer, or a phyfician; but the ground of this prohi bition

An objection to this manner of arguing has occurred to me, and I have no inclination to conceal it. The fupreme magiftrate in every civil commu nity has a right to take from the individuals composing that community, any portion of their atual property which he may judge requifite for promoting the public good, for fecuring the public fai ty. This principle, I believe, i

G 2

[ocr errors]

bition is quite different from that by which men of integrity and ability, and every way qualified for the difcharge of their duties, are hindered from executing civil offices' on account of their religious opinions.'

On this fubject we need only remark, that the alliance between church and ftate, generally confidered, is a jargon. It has only a meaning, when the principles of any particular church are inimical to thofe of the ftate: this has been the cafe with the Papifts, and is at prefent with the Diffenters, who are generally attached to republican doctrines, as they feem to have fhown in their refolutions, and late publications. In a political view, an obfervation of Dr. Watfon is certainly of importance. The Diffenters are now united by a common caufe: if this caufe of union were removed, their real differences of opinion would be fufficiently powerful to prevent any danger from their union. We know not, however, whether a fufficient bond might not remain, at least to occafion anarchy and disturbances.-We shall conclude our account of this very candid addrefs by the following paffages, in the close of the Charge: we must leave the comment to our readers.

:

The gospel of Chrift has been poluted by the craft of men; it has fuffered this pollution from the earliest ages of the church to the present times; and nothing, under God's providence, feems more fitted to restore it to its original purity than the fober zeal of learned and unprejudiced inquiries after truth. Statesmen in general, and, I am forry to add, too many churchmen, are enemies to free inquiry. It is a maxim with many of both denominations, that the religion which is established in a country muft be maintained; and they are difpofed to calumniate and to punish those who would call in queftion any of its doctrines. This principle originates, probably, in the churchman, from an apprehenfion of the mischief which may attend innovation and it origi nates, probably, in the ftatefman, either from a confined knowledge not univerfally admitted; it appears, however, to me to be jut, and this principle being admitted, does it not follow that the magiftrate has at leaft an equal right to ule, for the fame ends, the contingent property of individuals, attendant on their eligibility to certain offices? May he not justly fay to fuch individuals,―The majority of the perfons conftituting the civil fociety of which you a e members, is of opinion, that the public fafety will be better fecured by your being deprived of he property appertaining to certain offices, than by your being poffeffed of it. You, the minority, are of a different opinion; and there is no common judge to determine which is in the right. You are at liberty to form another civil society; but whilst you continue members of this, you ought to acquiefce in the judgment of the majority.-This objec tion is not fo strong as that nothing can be faid to invalidate it; nor is it fò weak as that nothing can be urged in its fupport: 1 am fatisfied with having impartially, itated it."

of

of the Christian system, or from a belief that one mode of religion may anfwer the purpofe of government as well as another, and that all religions are but state contrivances, to affift the impotency, and to enlarge the extent of human laws. Whilft this principle remains in the heart of any man, free inquiry in religious concerns will, as far as his influence reaches, be checked; and if the temper of the times does not control the temper of the man, pains and penalties will be inflicted on all thofe, who, in confcience, differ from the doctrines of the state.

The divine doctrines of our holy religion want not the aid of human laws for their fupport. When Christian magiftrates affume to themselves the right of interpreting doubtful paffages of fcrip ture in a definite fenfe, they pollute the altar of the Lord, though with a view, perhaps, of adorning and defending it, and often fanctify error by the authority of civil laws. The history of the church, from the time of its civil establishment, affords a thoufand proofs of the truth of this remark. Examine the acts of the councils, convened by imperial or royal authority in different parts of the Christian world, from the council of Nice to the council of Trent, and you will find, that in many of them fuch doctrines were established as we proteftants believe to be abfolute errors. Examine the confeffions of faith of the different proteftant churches now fubfifting in Europe, and you will obferve in many of them fuch a diverfity of doctrine as will make you with that none of them had affumed any portion of that infallibility which they properly denied to the church of Rome.

In fine, my brethren, you, perhaps, will think it to be your duty, and I am convinced that it is mine, to endeavour to fecure the protection of God in another world, by propagating the pure gofpel of his fon in this: and the purity of that gospel can by no mean be fo well ascertained as by a modest and fincere inquiry into what has been written by the evangelifts and apoftles, rather than into what has been delivered by Calvin or Arminius, by Sabeliius or Socinus.'

The Nature, Extent, and Province of Human Reafon confidered. 12mo. 3s. Boards. Edwards. 1791.

THE

great fundamental argument of the modern refining theologians is, that reasonable and accountable creatures cannot be expected to believe what is contrary to reafon; for, if they are accountable because they are rational beings, their reafon must be defigned to affift their comprehenfion and belief. This argument, fpecious and plaufible as it is, cannot be admitted without fome difcuffion. The terms are not pro

[blocks in formation]

perly limited, and the province of reafon is mistaken. Perhaps reafon is folely and exclufively employed in eftimating and afcertaining the relation of material objects, or the ideas derived from them: it appears capable of doing no more, and is, in general, limited in its excurfions, by our comprehenfion. The mathematician compares length, extent, and folidity; and, from the relation, draws his conclufions: but he evolves rather than difcovers, and only fees with more clearness, in his conclufion, what was more involved in his theorem. The moral philofopher argues on virtue, and fhows its relation to human happiness, by pointing out its expedience, and its utility in promoting the good of the whole. But his argument, in an abftract form, is fcarcely lefs fenfible. He generalises only the idea of the virtuous man, and of a happy community, in confequence of the benefits arifing, by his conduct and example, to the group of individuals. Nor does he more than the mathematician add to our knowledge, or introduce ideas not involved in his principles. He only analyfes the happiness, fhewing its fource and its confequences. When we go beyond the province of reafon, we are foon loft in confufion, or our conclufion terminates in an abfurdity; and this is ufually the cafe, when we depart from a foundation laid on the ideas borrowed from our fenfes. The principle or the reasoning is confequently wrong, and it is of confequence to enquire in what particular we first deviate from our ftable ground. If we examine the reafoning of those who contend that every thing in the word is material, or of those who are equally confident that we have no evidence of matter exifting, we fhall find that the error, in the first step, has produced the uncertainty. Berkley's first principle led him aftray, for he faw ac tion without a material caufe; and believing that it may in any cafe be produced without a material agent, none was, in any cafe, required. The oppofite fect was equally in error: they found the ideas of refiftance fallacious in fome cases, and concluded that it probably was fo in every other.

If then the province of reafon is only to examine the relations of material objects, and when we ftep beyond this, we are left in confufion and error, is it to be expected that we can fathom the councils of the Almighty, or ellimate the propriety and the judgments of his works? Even in thofe of his works, which are more purely material, our investigation goes but a little way, and we foon find ourfelves perplexed. When we afcend to a fuperior fcale of beings, and attempt to inves tigate the extent of fuperior intelligence, our enquiry ends in words only. Are we then to fuppofe, that, while in fucceffive gradations, we fee animal life defcending to bodies inanimate and inorganic, that there are no gradations above us? Is the power

power of the Almighty limited by the human race? and are we his chiefeft works? Yet we must believe, if reafon is our only guide; for we have no ideas of any thing beyond the talents and qualifications of humanity.

After having thus very briefly stated the question in a way, that we think unprejudiced and difpaffionate, let us attend to the authors before us, for they are many. The late bishop of St. David's Charge, in which he recommends to the preachers the choice not only of moral fubjects, but thofe of divinity alfo; not the doctrines of the fecond table exclufively, but fome of the peculiar tenets of chriftianity, occafioned a converfation between fome clergymen of his diocefe, the refult of which is now before us; and, without engaging to defend every paffage, or to approve of every kind of argument, we may add, that we think this Confideration' able and judicious.

In the first chapter, the authors enquire whether there be any thing in the nature and condition of man, to oblige him to think that his own reafon is to be the judge of doctrines reyealed from God. If we admit the principles juft stated, it will appear, that man is fo far from being obliged to entertain this opinion, that he is wholly incapable of it; and to exact this duty would be nearly as unreasonable as to require of a blind man to affert, in their varying fucceffive fhades, different coloured cloths. But, in all this enquiry, we should perhaps fubftitute comprehenfion for reafon. We think, for inftance, that the divinity of Chrift is exprefsly pointed out in the gofpel. How can we conceive, objects an unitarian, that the Divine Being put on humanity, and become a man? It is contrary to reafon. This is incorrect language: we cannot conceive it; and therefore it is not an object of our reafon. It relates to principles different from matter, which we are totally unacquainted with, and of courfe whofe relations. we cannot know. Those who think the trinity is with equal certainty taught by the Evangelifts, may make the fame reply: the doctrine is in no refpect the object of our reafoning faculty, and cannot therefore be ftyled reasonable or unreasonable. Our authors pursue the fubject in a different train of reafoning, and prove their pofition very fatisfactorily.

[ocr errors]

Every other inftance of vanity, every degree of perfonal pride, and felf-esteem, may be a pardonable weaknefs in comparifon of this. For, how fmall is that pride, which only makes us prefer our perfonal beauty or merit to that of our fellowcreatures, when compared with a felf-confiding reafon, which is too haughty to adore any thing in the divine counfels, which it cannot fully comprehend; or to fubmit to any directions from God, but fuch as its own wifdom could prefcribe, or approve?

G 4

Thus

« AnteriorContinua »