it-r -ii--. -^-c-^ i^ ? i. YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRAEY ^Ae ^^^^HActe^^c^leclwn ^^^pte. ^ ^^^® ill H W fl ¦ FORMED BY James Abraham Hillhouse,, B.A. 1749 James Hillhouse, B.A. 1773 James Abraham Hillhouse, B.A. 1808 James Hillhouse, B.A. 1875 Memoved 1942 from the Manor Mouse in Sachem's 'Wood GIFT OF GEOBGE DUDLEY SEYMOUB, T O T H E TWO UNIVERSITIES O F Cambridge and Oxford^ THIS DISCOURSE, WRITTEN IN DEFENCE OF THE Established Church of ENGLAND^ IS, WITH ALL HUMILITY, INSCRIBED AND DEDICATED BYTHE AUTHOR, AS A MONUMENT O F HIS SINGULAR VENERATION FOR, AND DEVOTION TO THOSE MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SEMINARIES OF ALL LEARNING AND VIRTUE. William WARBttRToN. The AlTtance between Church and State : OR. THE NECESSITY and EQUITY O F AN Eftabli/hed Religion ANDA TEST-LAW DEMONSTRATED, From the Eflence and End of Civil Society, upon the fundamental Principles of the Law . of Nature and Nations. In Three BOOKS. The Firft, treating of a Civil andRELiciot/s Society. The Second, of an Established Church; and The Third, of a Test-Law. The Second Edition Corrected and Improved. By William V^arburton A. M. Chaplain to His Royal Highnefs the Prince of Wales. . Res antiquae laodis & artis Ingredior; fanftos aufns recludere fontes. ViRO. Judicioperpende: i^ , Ji tibi vera videtttr, Dede Manas: aut, fifalfa efi, accingen contra. LucR. to l^HQ N, printed for Fletcher Gyles, againft Qrap'l»n in HoWorn. mdccxli. ??+Jti++v|t4i***4*******M4***+**t*4'******f+*! Itaque mn abs re mihi prafatus eJfe videor, iis hominibus cumulati/Jimasiaudes deheri afro- bis cordafifque viris & pacis Ecclejiafiica amantibusj qui in id unum otnfiem labdreiii fuum & diligentiam impen-dttnt, ut fifies utriufque yurifdiSiionis, EcclefiaflicdeW -Re gia, ex mutud utriufque poffefjione conjiitu- ant. Petr. De Marca de Concordia Sfl€@rcli & Impr. L. I. C. 2. i****+*i**H******M***********iHf***Hi!i [ ^ ] THE NECESSITY and EQUITY O F AN Eftabli/hed Religion AND A T E S T-L A W DEMONSTRATED. BOOK I. Of the Nature and End of Civil and of Religious Society. SECT. I. AN Established Religion and a Test?* Law, the two great Solecifms, as we are made to believe, in modern Politics, are the Subjedt of the following Difcourfe. A Subjeft that has not only, in common with moft other of Importance, been much perplexed by the Defenders and Oppofers bringing into the Qje- ftion their Civil and' Religious Interefts and Preju dices j but likewife, which is pecuhar to this Con- B troverfy. 2 Of a Civil and Book I. troverfy, by their concurring in one and the fame erroneous Principle. For where two Parties go upon different, they naturally begin with examin ing one another's, whereby the true one being at length fettled or difcover'd, by It's Aid the Con troverfy is timely determined ; but where a falfe Principle has the luck to be embraced by both Sides, they may wrangle for ever, and be, after all, but further from the Truth. Thus of the two Parties in this Queftion, while the Arguments of both are bottomed upon the fame miftaken Foundation, the one defends a Teft on fuch Rea- fonings as deftroy a Toleration, and the other op- pofes it on ilich as conclude equally againft the ve ry Effence and Being of a national Religion. Inveterate Miftakes, therefore, upon, a Subjeft of fuch Importance would be a fufficient Apology for the Expediency of this Difcourfe at any time, altho' fome late Occurrences had not made it par ticularly feafonable at the prefent. Our unhappy Divifions in the State, have, it feems, amongft the various Intrigues of Parties, afforded Oppor tunity and Encouragement to the Proteftant Dif- fenters to enter upon Meafures for the Repeal of the Tefi-Law, that is, as we fliall prove, for throw ing the State into Convulfions, by a Diffolution of the original Union between the two Societies, In the mean time it hath unhappily befallen, that fome to whom this Kingdom is chiefty indebted for the profoundeft Enquiries into Truth, and'^he ftrongeft Defences of public Liberty, have thought hardly of a i eft-haw and of ai?i EftakHJhed Religion fo fecured. From v/hence their Miftake arofe will be ftiewn in its Place. However, the Authority of thefe great Names hath induced maiiy unpreju:- diced Perfons to fliew too much Countenance to this, deftrudtive Projedt; and has emboldened the Promoters SeS. I. Religious Society. 3 Promoters of it to appeal to the abfttadt Principle of Right. I have therefore ventured to accept the Challenge, and will undertake to ihew the Ne- ceffiiy and Equity of an Efiahl-CioeA RfA^jon and a feft-Law from the Effence and End of Ct'vil S:-:iety, upon the fundamental Principles of tbe La-w of Na ture and Nations. This then being our Subjedt, we fliall not la bour to defend an Efiablifhed Religion and a Tej}, by the I.aws of this or that State, or on the Prin ciples of this or that Scheme of Religionj but on the great and unerring Maxims of the Law of Nature and Nations : And when, 00 occafion, we happen to apply the Reafoning here inforced to this or that Church or State, it will be only fo far forth as they are conformable to that Law. And this is all that is now wanting to determine this long Controverfy. For our Adverfaries hav ing been totally repulfed fr6m their Attack of the ^eft-Law, on the Frame and Principles of our own Conftitution, hy that excellent Defence called the Vindication of the Corporation and Tefi-ASfs^ have quite left the particular Controverfy and ap pealed to the Law of Nature and Nations. To that Tribunal we fhall now follow them. And the Principles of Society, Crvil and Reli gious, here delivered, will, without any particular Application, clearly lay open the abfurd and ini quitous Reafonings of thofe, who, thinking an Efra- MiJhiMnt of Divine Right, defend it on the Do- dtrine df Intolerance ; and fhe neceffary Confe quences deduced from thofe Principles will as plain ly expole the extravagant and mifchievous Reafon ings of thofe, who, hcdding a I'eft to be the Vio lation of all human Rights, oppofe it on Princi ples that deftroy the very Being and Eflence of a Church. Having done this, from thofe clear Prin- B 2 ciples. 4 0/<3 Civil and Book I. ciples, and neceflliry Confequences, we fliall efta blifli the perfea Concord and Agreement between Religious Liberty and a Tefi-Law ; and in the laft Place detedt the delufive Principle above mentio ned, upon which both Parties have gone, and fhew how it hath led both, as extraordinary as it may feem, to quite contrary Conclufions. From all this it will appear, which is one of the principal Purpofes of this Difcourfe^ that our prefent happy Conftitution both of Church and State, is eredte^ on true, folid, and lafting Foundations. SECT. II. To lay our Foundation therefore with fufficient Strength, it will be neceffu-y, tho' in the moft conclfe manner, to confider the Nature of Man in general, and of that Civil Community which he invented with fo much Benefit to his Kind : that feeing his Wants, and the Remedies he applied to them, we may better judge of their Fitnefs to, and Operations on each other. The Appetite of Self-prefervatlon being moft indifpenfably neceffary to every Animal^ Nature has made It the ftrongeft of all. And tho', in ra tional Animals, Reafon alone might be fuppofed fufficient to anfwer the End for which this Appe tite is beftowed on others, yet, the better to fecure that End, Nature has given Man likewife, a very confiderable Share of the fame Inftindt with which. fhe has endowed Brutes fo admirably to provide for their Prefervation. Now, whether it was fome plqftic Nature that was here In Fault, which the great Bacon fays, knows not how to keep a mean ^ or that it was all owing to the perverfe Ufe of " Modum tenere nefcia eft. human SeS. 2. Religious Society. 5 human Liberty, certain it is, that borne away with the Pleafure of gratifying this Appetite, Man in a State of Namre foon ran into very violent Excef fes ; and never thought he had fufficlently provi ded for his own B^ing, 'till he had deprived his Fellows of the free Enjoyment of dielrs. Hence all thofe Evils of mutual "^'iolence. Rapine, and Slaughter, th^t, in a State of Nature, muft needs abound amongft Equals. Becaufe, tho' Man, in this State, was not without a Law, which exadted Punifhment on evil Doers, yet the Adminiftration of that Law not being in common Hands, but ei ther in the Perfon offended, who being a Party would be apt to inforce the Punifhment to Excefs ; or, elfe in the Hands of every one, as the Offence was againft Mankind in general, which affecting .the Good of Particulars not immediately or dlredt- ly, would be remifly executed. And very often, where both thefe Executors of the Law of Nature were difpofed to be impaptlal and exadt. In the Adminiftratlon of Juftice, they would yet v,'ant Power to Inforce it. Which altogether would fo much inflame the Evils above mentioned, that they would foon become as general and as Intolerable as the Hobbeifis reprefent them in that State to be, was it not for the reftraining Principle of Reli gion that kept Men from running, altogether. In to the Confufion neceffarily confequent on the Prin ciple of inordinate Self-Love. Bat yet Religion could not operate with fufficient Efficacy for want, as we obferved before, of a common Arbiter, who had Impardality enough fairly to apply the Rule of Right, and Power to inforce it's Operations : So that thefe two Principles were in endlefs Jar ; in which Juftice generally came by the worft. It was therefore found neceffary to call in the Civil B 3 Magistrate 6 Of a Civil and Book I, Magistrate, as the Ally of Religion, to turn the Ballance, Thus was Society invented for a Remedy againft Injuftice : And a Magiflrate by mutual Confent ap pointed to give a Sandtion to *' that common Mea- ." fure to which, Reafon teaches us, that Creatures " of the fame Rank and Species, promifcuoufly " born to the fame Advantages of Nature, and to " the Ufe of the fame Faculties, have all an equal " Right •>." Where it Is to be obferved, that tho' Society provides for all thofe Convenieneies and Accommodations of more elegant Life, which Man muft have been content to have been with out, in a State of Nature, yet it is more than pro bable that thefe v/ere never thought of when So ciety was firft inftituted : But that they were the mutual Violences and Injuflices, at length become intolerable, that fet Men upon contriving this Re medy. Becaufe Evil felt has a much ftronger In fluence on the Mind than Good imagined : And the Means of removing the one is much eafier dlfcoy vered than the way to propure the other : And this by the wife Difpofition of Nature ; the avoiding Evil being neceffary to our Exiftence, not fo, the procuring Plealiire, Befides, the Idea of thofe un experienced Convenieneies would be at beft yery obfcure £ And how unable Men would be, before Tryal, to judge that Society could beftow them, y/e may guefs by obfei-ving how little, even now, the Generality of Men, who enjoy thofe Bleffino-s, know or refledt that they are owing to Society, 'or how it procures them, becaufe it does it neither immediately nor diredtly. But they would have a iiyely Senfe of Evils felt; and would know that *> Locke, Society Se • - . 4- But Sed. 2. Reli.gious Society, 9 4. But further, befides thefe Duties both oF per fect and imperfect Obligation, for the encouraging and enforcing of which, Civil-Society 'was Inven ted, Society itfelf begot and produced a new Set of J)uties, which are, to fpeak in the Mode of the Legiflature, of imperfeS Obligation, unknown to the State of Nature ; The firft and principal of which is that antiquated forgotten Virtue called the Love of our Country. 5. But laftly. Society not only introduced a new Set of Duties, but likewife increafed and in flamed, to an infinite Degree, thofe inordinate Ap petites for whofe Corredtion it was invented and introduced; like fome kinds of powerfiil Medi cines that, at the very time they are working a Cure, heighten the Malignity of the DIfeafe. For the Appetites take their Birth fi'om our real or i- maglnary Wants. Our real Wants are neceflarily And unalterably the fame ; exceeding few, and ea fily relieved, and arife only from the natural Im- becIUIty of our Condition. Our fantaftic Wants are infinitely numerous, to be brought under no certain Meafure nor Standard, and increafe exadt ly in Proportion to our Improvements in the Arts of Life. But the Arts of Life owe their Original to Civil-Sofiety ; and the more perfedt the Policy is, the higher do thofe Improvements rife, and with them are our Wants, as we fay, proportlona bly increafed, and our Appetites inflamed: For the Violence of thofe Appetites that feek the Gra tification of our imaginary Wants is much ftronger than that raifed by our real Wants : Not only be caufe thofe are more numerous, which gives con ftant Exercife to the Appetites ; and more unrea fonable, which makes the Gratification more diffi cult ; and altogether unnatural, to which there is no Meafure ; but principally becaufe vicious Cuf tom IO Of a Civil and Book I. tom has affixed a kind of Reputation to the Gra tification of the fantaftic Wants, which it has not done to the Relief of the real ones. So that, on the whole, our Wants increafe in Proportion to the Advancement and Perfedting of the Arts of Life. But in Proportion to our Wants, fo is our Uneafinefs — to our Uneafinefs, fo our Endeavours to remove it — to our Endeavours, fo the Weak nefs of human Reftraint. Hence It is evident, that in a State of Nature where little is confulted but the Support of our Exiftence, our Wants muft be kw, and our Appetites in Proportion weak ; and that in Civil-Society where the Arts of Life are cultivated, our Wants muft be many, and our Ap petites in Proportion ftrong. Thus far concerning the Imperfedtlon of Civil- Society, with regard to the Adminiftration of that Power which it hath, namely of punifhing the Dill obedient. We fliall next confider its much greater Imperfedtlon with regard to that Power which it wanteth, namely of rewarding the Obedient. The tv/o great SandtiOns of all Law and Com mand are Reward for Obfer-\^rtce, and Punifhment for Tranfgreffion. Thefe are generally called the two Hinges, on which all kinds of Government turn. And fo far is certain and apparent to the common Senfe of Mankind, that whatever Laws are not enforced by both thefe Sandtions, will ne ver be obferved in any Degree fufficient to carry on the End of Civil-Society. Yet, I fhall now fhew, from the true and ori ginal Conftitution of Civil Government, and from the Nature of Society, that. Society neither had, nor could enforce the Sanction of Reward. But, for avoiding Miftakes, I defire it may be remarked, that, by Reward, muft needs here be meant, that which is conferred on eijefy one for ob ferving Seft. 3- Religious Society. u ferving the Laws of his Country ; not that which is beftowed on Particulars, for any eminent Service : as by Punifhment we underftand ibat which is in fixed on every one for tranfgreffing the Laws ; not that which is impofed on Particulars, for negledt- ing to do all the Service in their Power. I make no doubt but this will be looked upon as a violent Paradox ; nothing being more com mon in the Mouths of Men, than that the SanSions of Reward and Punifhment are the two Pillars of Civil Government ; all the Utopias, and fpeculative Syftems of Politics, both ancient and modern, de riving the whole Vigour of their Laws from thefe two Sources. I fhall therefore beg leave to be fomething particular in the Proof of the two fol lowing Propofitions : I. That, by the true and original Conftitution of Civil Government, the Sandtion of Rewards was not enforced. n. That the Sandtion of Rewards could not, from the Nature of Society, be enforced by it. I. That, by the true and original Conftitution of Civil Govemment, the Sanation of Rewards was not enforced, I thus prove. In entering into Society, it was ftipulated, between the Governor and Go verned, that Protection and Obedience fliould be the reciprocal Conditions of each other. When, therefore, a Citizen obeys the Laws, that Debt, on Society, is difcharged by the Protedtion it af fords him. But, in refpedt to Difobedience, the Proceeding Is not analogous; though Protedtion, as the Condition of Obedience, implies the with drawing of it, for Difobedience ; — and for thefe Reafons : The Effedt of withdrawing Protedtion muft be either Expulfion from the Society, or the expofing the Offender to all kind of Licence, frojrn others, in it. Society could not pradtife the ¦ firft. 12 Of a Civil and Book I. firft, without bringing the Body Politic into a Confumption ; nor the latter, without throwing it into Convulfions. Befides, the firft is no Punifli- ment at aU, but by Accident ; \t being only the leaving one Society to enter into another ; and the fecond is an inadequate Punifhment : for though all Obedience is the fame, and fo uniform Pro tedlion a proper Return for it ; yet Tranfgreffions being of various Kinds and Degrees, the thus with drawing Protedtion would be too great a Punifh ment for fome, and too fmall for others. This being fo, it was ftipulated that the Vio lator of the Laws of the Society fhould be fubjedt to pecuniary Muldts, Mutilation of Members, cor poral and capital Inflldtlons. Hence arofe the San^ dtion, and only Sandtion of Civil L3.WS, for that a Protedtion Is no Reward, in the Senfe that thefe are Punlffiments, Is plain from henccj that the one is of the Effence of Society Itfelf, the other an ad ventitious Adjundt. But this will farther appear by confidering the oppofite to Protedtion, Expul fion from the Society, or Banifhment; for this is the natural Confequence of withdrawing Protedtion, Now this, as we faid. Is no Punifhment but by Accident : and fo the State underftood the Mat ter ; as we may colledt, even from their Manner of employing it as a Punifhment on Offenders: For Banifliment is of univerfal Ufe, with other Punlfh- ments, in all Societies. Now where the thus with drawing Protedtion is inflidted as a Punifhment, all States have agreed. In Pradtice, to retain their Right to Obedience from the banifhed Member ; though, according to the JsTature of the Thin<^ confidered In itfelf, that Right be really difchar^ ged; Obedience and Protedtion, as we obferved, being the reciprocal Conditions of each pther. But it was neceffary all States fhould adt thus when they Sedt. 3. Religious Society. 13 they inflidted Exile as a Punifhment, it being no Punifhment but by Accident, when the Claim to Subjedtion was remitted with it. — They had a Right to aft thus ; becaufe, being inflidted on an Offender, ali Claim of Advantage from that reci procal Condition had been before forfeited =. II. Our fecond Propofition, which we have to prove is, that tbe Sanation of Rewards could not, from the Nature of Society, be- enforced by it : The Reafon of which is, becaufe Society could neither diftinguifh the Objedts of its Favour, nor reward them, though they were diftinguifhed. I . Firft, Society could not diftinguifh the ObjeSls of its Favour. To inflidt Punifhment, there is no need of knowing the Motives on which the Tranf^ greffor adted ; but judicially to confer Reward on the Obedient there is. All that Civil Judicatures do, in Condemnation to Punifhment, is to find out whether the Adt was voluntarily committed. They enquire not into the Intention or Motives, any farther, or otherwife than as they are the Indications of Volition : and ha ving found the Adt voluntary, they concern them felves no more with his Motives or Principles of adting ; but punifh, without feruple, in confidence of the Offender's Demerit. And this with very good Reafon ; becaufe no one, in his Senfes, can ' This will lead us to detennine an embarraiTed Queftion long agitated amongft the Difconrfers on the Law of Nature and Na tions; namely. Whether a laniflPd Man he a SuhjeS of the State that expelled him? Hobbes and Pufendorf holding the ne gative : and Tully, with that beft of Men and of Writers, the Lord Chancellor Hyde, the aiHrmative. The former give this in Support of their Opinion, that, by the very Adt of Expul- •fion, the State gives up and difclaims all Right of Subjeflion : the latter only appeal to the Praftice of Societies ; the Reafon of which Praftice as here given, abfolutely deiennines the Que zon in their favour. be 14 (>f ^ Civil and . Book I. be ignorant of the principal Tranfgreffions of Civil Laws, or of their Malignity, but by fome fottifli Negligence that has hindered his Information, or fome brutal Paffion that has prejudiced his Judg ment ; both which are highly faulty, and deferve Punifhment. It is otherwife in rewarding the abftaining from Tranfgreffion. Here the Motive muft be confider ed : becaufe as merely doing III deferves Punifhment, a Crime in the Cafe of wrong Judgment hieing ever neceffarlly inferred ; fo merely abftaining from 111 cannot for that very Reafon have any Merit. In judicially rewarding, therefore, the Motives muft be known : but human Judicatures can never come to the Knowledge of thefe, but by Accident : it is only that Tribunal, whieh fearches the Mind and the Heart, that can do this. Therefore we conclude, thai Reward cannot, properly, be the San- ^ion of hmnan Laws. If it fhould be faid, that though Rewards can not be equhaibly adminiftred, as Punifliments mayy yet, what hinders, but that, for the Good of So ciety, all who obferve the Laws fhould be reward^ ed, as all who tran%refs them are punifhed ? The Arifwer will lead us to the Proof of our fecond Point. 2. That Society could net reward^ tho^ it could difcover the Objects of its Favour ; the Reafon is, becaufe no Society can ever find a Fund fufficient for that Purpofe, without raifing, it on the People as a Tax^ to pay it back to them as a Reward. But the univerfal Pradtice of Society confirms our Reafoning, ancj is explained by it; the fole Sandtion of Pmiifiments having in all Ages and Places, been employed by the State to fecure the Obfervance of Civil Laws. This was fo remarka ble a Fadt, that it could not efcape the Notice of SeS. 3- Religious Society. 15 a certain incomparable Wit, and acute Obferver of Men and Manners ; who fpeaks of it as an uni verfal Defcft, in thefe Words, Athough ive ufually. call Reward aTid Pumfknnent the two Hinges, upon wbich all Government turns, yet I could never obferve this Maxim to be put in Pra£lice by any Nation ex^ cept that of LiUiput ^. Thus he introduces an Ac count of the Laws and Cirftoms of an Utopian Con ftitution of his own framing ; and, for that matter, perhaps, as good as any of the reft ; and, had he intended it as a Satire againft fuch chimerical Com mon-wealths, nothing could have been more juft. For all thefe political Romancers, from Plato to this Author, make Civil Rewards and Punifhments ibe twa Hinges of Government. I have often wondered what it was, that fhould kad them from Faft, and univerfal Pradtice, in fo fufldamental a Point. But doubtlefe it was diis — The Defign of fuch Sort of Writings is to give a perfedt Pattern of Civil Government ; and to fup ply the fancied Defects in adtual Societies. The End of Government coming firft under Confidera tion -, and the general Pradtice of Society feeming to declare this End to be only, what it really is. Security to the tewparal Liberty and Property of Man ; the Simplicity of it difpleafed, and the Plan ap peared defedtive. Thj?y imagined, that» by en larging the BiMtom, they fhould ennoble the Stru cture ; and, therefore, formed a romantic Prqjedl of making CivU Society ferve for all the good Purpofes it was even ^cidentally capable of pro- diieiag. And thus, inftead of ©ving us a true Pidture of Government, they jumbled together all Sorts of Societies ioto one ; and confounded the Religious, the Literary, the Mercantile, the Co/ivi- [ GuHfjiri Travels, vol, i. p 97. •-jiaL 1 6 Of a Civil dnd Book L vial, with the Civil. Whoever reads them carefully, if indeed they be worth reading carefully, will find that the Errors they abound in are all of this Na ture ; and that they arife from the lofing, or ne ver having had, a true Idea of the fimple Plan of Civil Society ; a Circumftance, which, as we fhall fhew prefently, hath occafioned many wrong Judg- fnents concerning it. No wonder then, that this Miftake, concerning the End of Civil Society, drew after it others, concerning the Means; and this, amongft the reft, that Reward was one of the SanEiions of human Laws. On the whole then, it appears, that Civil So ciety has not, in itfelf, the Sanation of Rewards, to fecure the Obfervance of its Laws. So true, in this Senfe, is it, what St. Paul divinely obferves, that THE Law was not made for the Righ teous, BUT FOR THE UnRULY AND DISOBE DIENT. But It being evident^ that the joint Sandtions of Rewards and Punifhments are but juft fufficient to fecure the tolerable Obfervance of Right (the common falfe Opinion that thefe are the two Hinges of Government arifing from that Evi dence) it follo^Sj that, AS Religion, only, can SUPPLY THE Sanction of Rewards, which Society wants, and ha^ not. Religion is absolutely necessary to civil govern MENT. Thus, on the whole, we fee, I. That Society, by its own proper Power, cannot provide for the Obfervance of above one third Part of moral Du ties ; and of that third, but imperfedtly. We fee likewife, how, by the peculiar Influence of its Na, ture, it ^enlarges the Duty of the Citizen, at the fame time that it leffens his natural Ability of performing. II. We Saft; 3" Religious Society, 17 II. We fee farther, which is a thing of far greater Importance, that Society totally wants one of thofe two Powers which are owned by all to be the ne ceffary Hinges on which Governmient turns, and without which it cannot be fupported. To fupply thefe Wants and Imperfedtions, fome other, coadtlve. Power muft be added, that hath its Influence on the Mind of Man ; to keep Society from running back into Confufi.on. But there is no other than the Power of Religion ; which teaching an over-ruling Providence, the Rewarder of good Men, and the Puniffier of ill, can oblige to the Duties of imperfeSl Obligation, which human Laws overlook ; and teaching, alfo, that this Pro vidence is omnifcient, that It fees the moft fecret Adtlons and Intentions of Men, and hath given Laws for the perfedting their Nature^ will oblige to thofe Duties oi perfe£i Obligation, which human Laws cannot reach, or fufficlently enforce. Thus we have explained, in general, the mutual Aid Religion and Civil Policy lend to one another, not unlike that which two Allies, in the fame Qyarrel, may reciprocally receive againft a com^- mon Enemy : While one Party is clofely preffed, the other comes up to its Relief; difengages the firft, gives it time to rally, and recruit its Powers : Sy this time the aflifting Party is pufhed in its turn, and needs the Aid of that which it relieved ; which is now at hand to repay the Obligation. From henceforth, the two Parties ever adt in Con- jundtlon ; and, by that means, keep the common Enemy at a ftand. This ufe of Religion to the State was feen by the Leamed, and Mt by all Men of every Age and Nation. The ancient World particularly was fo firmly convinced of this Truth, that the great eft Secret of the fublime Art of Legiflation con- C fifted i8 0/ ^ Civil and Book I. fifted In this, how beft. Religion might be ap plied to ferve Society. The particular Methods they employed, and the feveral artful Detours they ufed to arrive at this End, are in the fecond Book of the Divine Legation of Moses explained at large. Religion being thus proved neceffary to So ciety, that it fhould be fo ufed and applied, in the beft Way, and to moft Advantage, needs no Proof. For It Is as inftlndtive in our Nature to improve a Good, as to inveftigate and purfue It. And with regard to the particular Good in Que ftion, there is a fpecial Reafon why Man fhould ftudy its Promotion and Improvement. For the Experience of every Place and Age has informed us, that the Coadtivity of the joint Reftraints of Civil Laws and Religion Is little enough to keep Men from running into Diforder and mutual Vio- Idnce. But this Improvement Is the Effedt of hu man Art and Contrivance. For all natural Good, every Thing conftitutional ly beneficial to Man, needs Man's Induftry to make it better. We re ceive It all at the provident Hand of Heaven, ra ther with a Capacity of being applied to our Ufe, than immediately fit for Service. We receive it, indeed, in full Meafure, but rude and unprepared. The efficient Caufe of this, in natural Goods, is the Intradlablllty and innate Stubbornnefs of Mat- . fer ; and In moral Goods, the Malice and Perver- fity of Man. The final Caufe feems to be, that Man, the moft incapable of the whole Creation, of a State of Idlenefs and Inadtivity, may be fet to work, and by this means made to cultivate and improve the Faculties of his Mind and Body. Now concerning this technical Improvement of moral Good, it is, in artificial Bodies, as in na tural. Sedl. 4- Religious Society. 19 tural. f'joo may be fo effentially conftituted as to be greatly able to adorn and ftrengthen each o- ther. But then, as in the one Cafe a mere juxta- Pofition of the Parts is not fufficient, fo neither is it In the other ; fome Union, fome Coalition, fome artful Infertion into each other v/ill be ne ceffary. But now again, as in natural Bodies, the Artift knows not hov/ to fet about the proper Operation, ^tlll he has acquired a reafonable Knowledge of the Nafjre of thofe Bodies which are the Subjedt of his Skill, fo neither can we know after what manner Religion may be beft applied to the Ser vice of the State, 'cill we have learned the real and effential Natures both of a State and a Reli gion. We have indeed already faid enough of both in general, to fhew that they muft needs have a good Effedt on each other, when properly ap plied ; as our Artift by his Knowledge of the ob vious Qualities of two natural Bodies, we fuppofe, difcerns as much, though he has not yet got Ac quaintance enough with their Nature, to make a right Application. SECT. IV. WE muft therefore, in the next Place, examine the Nature of Civil Society and Reli gion, with more particular Exadunefs. Of whofe Natures truly to be informed, the only V/ay is ta find out their Ends. And this will be the more neceffary on Account of the ftrange Extravagan ces that the feveral Sedts amongft us have run into concerning one and the other Society; while fome ftrike at the Adminiftration, fome at the Na-' ture, and fome at the very Being of both. The Papift makes the State a Creature of the Church ; C2 the 20 Of a Civil arid Book I. the Eraftian makes the Church a Creature of the State : The Prefhyterian would regulate the Exer cife of the State's Power on Church Ideas ; the Hobbeift, the Church, by Reafons of State : And, to compleat the Farce, the ^aker abollfhes the very Being of a Church ; and the Mennonite fup- preffes the Office of the Civil Magiftrate. But to begin with Civil Society. It was inftitu ted either with the Purpofe of attaining all the Good of every Ivind, it was even accidentally ca pable of producing, or only of fome certain Good, which the Inftitutors aimed at, without Confidera tion had, in their Scheme, to other. To fuppofe its End the vague Purpofe of acquiring even all poffible accidental Good, Is, In Politics, the high eft Solecifm Imaginable : As has been fufficlently proved by the Writers e on this Queftion. And how untrue, in fadt, may be gather'd from what we have faid above, of the Origin of Society. Ci vil Society then, I fuppofe, will be allow'd to have been Inftituted for the Attainment of fome preclfe determined End or Ends. — If fo, then for fom.e without Confideration had to others. Which, a- galn, infers the Neceffity of diftingulfhlng this End from others. But the Diftindtion can arife only from the different Properties of the Things pretending. But, again, amongft all thofe Things which are apt to obtrude, or have in fadt obtruded, upon Men, as the Ends of Civil Society, there is but one Difference in their Properties, as Ends : Which Is this, — ^at one of thefe is attainable ly Civil Society only, and all the reft are, with equal s See Locke's Defences of his Letters of Toleration. This ap pears too to have been Jrijiatleh Opinion from thefe Words . (pi'o-H y. at hme/'T'" li d'ii'Kv, x) ti SSfiOv' b^iv yi ri (piatf wok? TciaTO]/, oiov pt^a^xoluVoi t [Ac^iifixw] (i,a,Xi»i^]i, wtHlfalf, »»" ci, «r^\ Ell. i3c. Polit lib. i. cap. i. Eafe Sect. 4. Religious Society. 21 Eafe, attainable without it. The Thing then, with the firft mentioned Property muft needs be that genuine, preclfe End of Civil Society. And this is no other than the Security of the temporal Liberty and Property of Man. For this End, as we have fhewn, Civil Society was inven ted, and this. Civil Society alone is able to pro cure. Its great, but fpurious Rival of this End, THE Salvation of Souls, or the Security of Man's future Happinefs, is therefore excluded from this Part of the Divifion. For this, not depend ing on outward Accidents, or on the Will or Pow er of another, as the Body and Goods do, may be as well attained in a State of Nature, as in Ci vil Society ; and therefore, on the Principles here delivered, cannot be one of the Caufes of the In ftitution of Civil Society, nor, confequently one of the Ends thereof. But if fo, the Promotion of it comes not within the peculiar Province of the Civil Magiftrate. If then, as a Magiftrate, he has nothing to do with this, as an End, it follows that the Means for the Attainment of that End are without his Jurifdidtion. Thefe Means are Doctrine and Morals, which eompofe what is called Reli gion in the largeft Senfe of the Word. — That Opinions are not in his Reffort, I again refer the Reader, (becaufe I would avoid what has been exa mined by others) to the Writers for Toleration. Where it may be feen how, from the Principles here laid down, the whole Dodtrine of Religious Liberty is impregnably eftablifhed, — And that e- ven Morals are not, fo far as they are confidered only as making Part of Religion, how ftrange fo ever this Affertion may appear, I doubt not but to be able to prove it, both from the Reafon of the C 3 Thing, 22 Of a Civil and Book L Thing, and from the fundamental Pradtice of all Civil Societies. We have fliewn, it was the Care of the Bodies, not the Souls of Men, that the Magiftrate under took to give Account of Whatfoever therefore refei-s to the Body and Its Appendices, is In his Ju rifdidtion ; whatfoever to the Soul, is not. But, and if there be a Thing which refers equally to both (as Morals plainly do) this Thing muft needs be partly within and partly without his Province, that is, it Is to be partially confidered by him ; his Care thereto extending but fo far as it affedts Society. The other Confideration of it, namely as It makes Part of Religion, being in the Hands of thofe who prefide in another kind of Society, of which more here hereafter. Our Proof of this, a pofteriori, we fetch from the fundamental Pradtice of all Civil States, Where if we caft our Eye on any T)igeft of Laws, we may fee that Adtlons have their annexed Punifhment denounced not as they are Vices, i. e. not in Pro portion to their Deviation from the eternal Rule of Right : Nor as they are Sins, i. e. not in Pro portion to their Deviation from the extraordinary revealed Will of God, which two things coincide, and come to one and the fame : But as they are Crimes, i. e. in Proportion to their malignant In fiuence on Civil Society. But the View in which the State regards the Pradtice of Morality is moft evidently feen in its Recognition of tJiat famous fundamental Maxim, by which penal Laws, In all Communities are fa- fliloned and diredted. That the Severity of THE Punishment must always rise in Pro portion TO THE Propensity to the Crime. A Maxim evidentiy unjuft, were Adtlons regarded by the State as they are in themfelves ; becaufe the Lav? Sedt. 4- Religious Society. 23 Law of Nature enjoins only in Proportion to the Ability of Performance ; and human Abilities a- bate In Proportion to the contrary human Propen fities : — evidently impious, were Adtions regarded by the State as they refer to the Will of God, becaufe that Meafure diredtly contradidts his Me thod and Rule of punifhing. But fuppofing the Magiftrate's Office to be what is here delivered, his Aim muft be only the Suppression of Crimes or of thofe Adtlons which malignantly affedt So ciety; and then nothing can be more reafonable than this Procedure. For then, his End muft be the good of the JVhole, not of Particulars, but as they come within that View. Bat the Good of the Whole being to be procured only by the Prevention of Crimes, and thofe to which there is the greateft Propenfity being of the moft difficult Prevention, the full Severity of his Laws muft of Neceffity be turned againft thefe. But now it is to be obferved, fin order to clear this Matter from the Confufion to which the Want of this Obfervatlon has fubjedted It,) that tho' Re ligion, or the Care of the Soul, be not within the Province of the Magiftrate, and confequently Mat ters of DoSlrine and Opinion hold not of his Jurif didtion ; yet this muft always be underftood with an Exception tb the three fundamental Principles of Natural Religion ; namely, — the Being of a God, — his Providence over human Affairs, — and the natural effential Difference of Moral Good and E- viL. Thefe Dodtrines it is directly of his Office to cherifh, protedt, and propagate ; and all Op- pugners of them it is as much his Right and Duty to reftrain as any the moft flagrant Offender agalnft Civil Peace. Nor does this at all contradldt our general Pofition, that the fole End of Civil Socie ty is the Confervation of Body and Goods. For C4 the 24 Of a Civil and Book I, the Magiftrate concerns himfelf in the Mainte nance of thefe THREE fundamental Articles, not as they promote our future Happinefs but our prefent : As they are the very Bond and Founda tion of Civil Policy. To underftand this, we muft remember what has been faid above of its Ori ginal. The Progrefs and Increafe of mutual Violence, in the State of Nature, 'till It became general and infupportable, were owing to the natural Equality of Power amongft Men. The Remedy of which was feen to be Civil Society. But that Equality of Power, which occafioned the Evil, prevented the Remedy, any otherwife than by the Will and free Confent of every one. The Entrance therefore in to Society was by free Convention and Stipulation. But then, that which made every Man's Confent neceffary, prevented his giving any other Security for the Performance of his Compadt than his mere V\'"ord: And how feeble a Security that is, is known to every one. Some Means therefore were to be contrived to ftrengthen the Obligation of his given Word. But nothing in the Cafe here ima gined of perfedt Equality, (and fuch was' the Cafe on entering into Society,) could give this Strength, except Religion. An Oath, then, made upon the three great Principles above mentioned, was that Sandtion to his Word which was univerfally em ployed in all Conventions. For that is an Invo cation to Heaven, whofe Providence is believed to regard Mens Adtlons ; that Good is the Objedt of his Delight, and 111 of his Difpleafure, and that he will punifh and reward accordingly ; which ne ceffarlly Implies an effential Difference between Good and Evil, prior to all human Decrees. Thus an old Grecian Sage, quoted by Clemens, fpeaking pf the Office of the ancient Lawgiver, fays ; " He " firft Sedt. 4- Relixjious Society. 25 " firft of all trained the Race of Mankind toju- " ftice by the Invention of an Oath ^." Again, when Society was once eftablifhed it was neceflary that human Laws fhould be inforced on a Principle of Right as well as Power ; that is, on a Principle which would make them obeyed for Confeience Sake. But the preferving thefe three great Articles of Natural Religion could alone fub fift that Principle. Therefore was the Magiftrate to provide for their Support. But thefe being all that were neceffary to this End, Religion, as fuch, was no farther under his Diredtion. The Confe quence is, that no particular Scheme or Mode of Religion was under his Care as a Magiftrate, 'till he had covenanted and compadted to that Pur pofe ; as we fhall fee hereafter. But for a fiill Vindication of the Neceffity of thefe three great Principles to a State, I refer the Reader to the firft Book of The Divine Legation of M o s e s ; where he will find the Cavils of Mr. Bayle againft that Neceffity fiilly confuted. Thus it is feen, that, tha' the Confervation of thefe Principles belongs to the Magiftrate, it is '' n^HT®- itoc, «'{ aiX-cuoa-uoriV -S^/j-ft' ¦yfv'^ ¦l.yx.yiii, Jf/|«; o^kcv. Strom, lib. i. — From hence v/e may colleft how pernicious it would be to Society to multiply the Ufe of Oaths to inferior Pur pofes : For if the Sanftion of an Oath fae the great fundamental Cement of Civil Society, and the multiplying them unavoidably diffolve, as it is clear it does, all their Force and EfEcacy, fuch miftaken Politics muft prove very fatal to Communities. Hence too we may fee, it would be as bad Policy, in a contrary Ex tream, to difpenfe with the Religion of an Oath in Matters of higheft Moment, out of Indulgence to tender Confciences. But that which fliews fuch Indulgence to be pernicious to Society, fliews the Claim to it to be vain and ill founded. For it is a Maxim in the Law of Nature and Nations, that no Claim of Exemption, on Pretence of Confeience, from the fundamental JJfages of Society, is valid, where the Difpenfation tends direftly and immediately to the Ruin of the Community. not 26 Of a Civil and Book I. not becaufe they are a Part of the beauteous Stru- dture of a Commonwealth, (for this would be vio lating the Unity of its End,) but as they are the Rock, the Foundation on which that Edifice is built. But It Is not the lefs, for that, within the Province of the Magiftrate ; as it was not the lefs within the Care of the ancient Mdiles at Rome to fee that the Foundations were not fapped or decay ed, than that the Public Buildings thereon eredted were not defaced or dilapidated. And it is not without Caufe that I labour to inculcate this Diftin dtion. For If the Care of thefe Principles was within the Magiftrate's Jurifdidtion, as making one Part ofthe Strudture, or, in other Words, as if Part of his Office was the Care of Souls, I can fee no Reafon but that more might, with equal Pretence, enter in, 'till the whole of Religion devolved upon him. And how mifchievous this would be to the State, and how much more mifchievous to Religion, the following Difcourfe will amply demonftrate. But if thefe Principles are within his Care only as they are the Rock on which Society is built, there is then abundant Reafon why it fhould not be en larged. And yet many Policies, both aScient and modern, by a prepofterous kind of Architedture, that enlarges the Foundation at the fame time that it narrows the Superftrudtute, have with this Rock fo furrounded the Commonwealth on all Sides, that it puts one in Mind of the old Punifhment of im muring Malefadtors within four Walls. For a pretended Regard to Virtue and Religion hath in all Ages difpofed the Magiftrate to deviate from what I have here fhewn to be his proper Office, and the legitimate End of Society ; 'till at length the Care of the Soul got the upper Hand of that of the Body, in his Adminiftration ; to the infinite Damage of Mankind in all his Interefts. Tho' Sedt. 4- Religious Society. 27 Tho' I can eafily conceive the Magiftrate indu- ftrioufiy propagating this flattering Delufion in or der to increafe the Power of his Office and ^'ene- ration to his Perfon, yet I am perfuaded, Miftake firft introduced the Mifchlef, tho' Fraud might, perhaps, contribute to fupport ir. Becaufe I find the Error to have fpread itfelf even into thofe Communities where public Liberty, and confe quently public Good, have been moft aimed at, and effedted. "Which has fo rivetted the Miftake, in the Minds of fome Men, concerning the Magi ftrate's real Office, that the wifeft Adminlftrations have becorne thereby obnoxious to moft unjuft Cen fure. For borne away with a Notion that his Of fice extended to the Care of Souls, and finding the beft Inftltutes of Civil Laws framed v/ith a mani feft Difregard thereto, they have rafhly adven tured to accufe them of Negledt, Carnality, and Irrellgion. Now in order to vindicate fuch Conftitutions, and to remove this only Objedtlon to the Princi ples here laid down, it may be proper ro trace up, from the Original, the feveral Caufes that have concurred to the Miftake of the Magiftrate's real Office. Whereby it will appear that that which makes moft in favour of it, namely the Antiquity, proves only the Inveteracy of the Error. I. The firft Caufe of this Error was the confu fed Mixture of Civil and Religious Interefts, to which the Magiftrate, In the Execution of his Of fice, had his Regard attached. This feveral Cau fes had in feveral Ages effedted. As firft. In the Infancy of Civil Society, Fathers of Families, who always executed the Office of Priefthood, when they advanced, or were called up, to the Adminiftration of public Affairs, car ried the facred Office with them into the Magi- ftracy : 28 Of a Civil and Book \. ftracy : And continued to execute both Fundtions in Perfon. So that the Care of Religion, which was thus by Accident attached to the Perfon of the Ma giftrate, would naturally in time be thought belong ing to his Office. Secondly, Moft of the ancient Lawgivers, and Inftitutors of Civil Policy, having found it necef fary, for the carrying on their Schemes, to pretend to Infplratlon and the extraordinary Affiftance of fome God ', it was natural for them, (as in Effedt they did,) to mingle and confound together Civil and Religious Confiderations : And fo to animad vert on Adtions not only as Crimes agalnft the State, but as Sins againft that God who patronized the Foundation, and confequently fometimes to make their Adjuftments and Proportions between the Adtion and the Punifhment rather according to the latter Confideration. Thirdly, Pagan Religion had for its Subject not only each Individual, the ftatural Man, but hke- wlfe the artificial Man, Society ; for whom, and by whom, all the public Rites and Ceremonies of it were Inftituted and performed''. The Confe quence of this was, that Religion held the Go vernment In Partnerfhip, and nothing was conful ted or executed without the Advice of the Oracle. Judgments, Prodigies, and Portents were as com mon as Civil Edidts ; and as conftantly bore their Share in the public Adminiftration. So that here the Magiftrate's Care of Religion became the Care of the Republic. Fourthly, In after Ages, when the Roman Em perors became Chriftian, agreeably to the Zeal of new Converts, they introduced into the Civil Infti- tutes Laws agalnft Sin ; in which they adted as they ' See The Divine Legation of Moses, Book ii. § i . ^ Jb'id. Book ii. § I , were Sedt..4. Religious Society. 29 were told by their Teachers, in Conformity to the Example and Precepts of Scripture, which they profeffed to believe : And in this manner contribu ted to confound the Diftindtion of the two Socie ties. But this falfe Judgment owed not its Birth to the Chriftian Religion ; for by that, fo exadt a Diftindtion between the two Societies is marked out and Inforced, that it is not eafy to miftake It ; but to the Jewifh, in which thofe Societies were confolidated, and, as it were^ Incorporated. For there. In a Civil Policy inftituted. Immediately, by God himfelf, and fo, to be efteemed moft perfedt, and, of courfe, worthy the Imitation of all Magi ftrates, who profeffed themfelves the Servants of that God, Sins and Crimes were feen to be equally within the Magiftrate's Jurifdidtion. They did not refledt that that Jurifdidtion was the neceflary Confequence of a Theocracy, a Form of Govern ment different in kind from all human Policies whatfoever. Fifthly, In thefe latter Times, when the great Separation was made from the Church of Rome, in the fifteenth and fixteenth Centuries, the Peo ple, in mott Places, except in England, led on by their Minifters, whofe Heads were full of the Jew ifh Difpenfation, ill underftood, procured their na tional Reformation. And, in fome Places, it be ing the Fortune of the State, as well as Church, to be new modeled, it was no Wonder that, un der fuch Artificers, a ridiculous Imitation of the Jewifh State fhould be affedted ; and, confequently, that fuch Magiftrates fhould fhew a greater Concern for reftraining Sins than Crimes. And here I can not but with much Grief obferve, that this wrong Judgment was not only pernicious to Civil Society, but highly injurious to the Interefts of Proteftan- tifm. It did indeed contribute more than any thing to 30 Of a Civil and Book I. to rivet Popery upon us, that was then fhaken to its loweft Foundations, v/hlle it put a Stop to the glorious Progrefs the reformed Religion was then making throughout Europe, from Eaft to Weft. For the well difpofed Princes, on the Continent, finding, in the reformed Minifters, a pragmatical Spirit that was for modeling the State as well as Church, on their own Theological Views, adhered, or fell back, to the Papal Power ; as preferring an Ecclefiaftic Tyranny they had been accuftomed to, before a new one whofe Principles threatened an entire Reverfement of the eftablifhed Policies. That I have given no injurious Account of the Condudt of the reformed Minifters I appeal to the great Grotius, who, in the Hiftory of his own Country, has exhibited to us a very lively Repre fentation of this whole Scene. Speaking of the Eftablifhment of the reformed Religion by the States, he fays : — " Recepta Publice difclpllna, quae " Geneva & in Palatinatu Germanise paffimque a- " llbi docebatur : hoc tamen intereft, quod ejuf- *' dem religlonis alii diverfas minus tolerant: " QuipPE non in hoc tantum ordinatas a " Deo civitates ac magistratus dict antes " UT A CORPORIBUS ET POSSESSIONIBUS INJU- " RI.ffi ABESSENT, SED UT, QUO MORE IPSE JUS- " SISSET, EO IN COMMUNE COLERETUR ; CUJUS " OFFICII NEGLIGENTES MULTOS POENAM, ALIO- " RUM IMPIETATI DEBITAM, IN SE ACCERSISSE. " Contra, Iftse natlones non modo, &c'." Nor was England altogether free from the Ef- fedts of this Diforder. For thofe amongft us who were called Puritans, having, during the diftreffed State of Religion at home, been obliged to refide amongft thofe foreign Reformers of Church and ' Annates de Rebus Belgicis, lib. ii. Anno 1572, State, Scdi. 4- Religious Society. 31 State, imbibed their ruinous Notions of Reforma tion ; and returning home, on the Approach of b)etter Times, began early to inforce their Whim- fies to the Difturbance of their own Country, 'till the great Hooker, in his immortal Book of Eccle- fiaftical Policy^, put a Stop to this epidemical E- vil. So that the Spirit of Purity feemed to be quite fubdued ; it never having appeared from that Time, 'till towards the Conciufion of our laft un happy Civil Wars ; when the famous Mr. Baxter took Advantage of- the Diffolution of the Confti tution to write his Book of the Chriftian Common wealth. II. A fecond Caufe of this Error arofe from what is called the Eftablifhment of Religion in a State. There never was any Civil Society, ancient or modern, but what had a Religion by Law ™ It is very true that the new modeling ecclefiaftical Govem ment was the precife Point agitated in that famous Difpute. But then the Puritans contended for that Reformation on Principles that equally concluded for a Reformation in the Civil likewife : And this, Mr. Hooker well underftood, when he toek fo much Pains to overthrow their fundamental Maxim, the Head Theo rem, as he calls it, of their Scheme : — That the Scripture of God is in fuch fort the Rule of human ABions that Jimply tnhat- foever "we do and are not by it direlled thereunto, the fame is Sin. Now vi-ho fees not that this Principle, purfued through its necef- fery DedudUons, brings on a Reformation of the Civil Govern ment upon feixijh Ideas ? The very Error of the reformed Mi nifters of that Time. This, as we fay, was not hid to the di vine Penetration oi Hooker: The Reafon, (fays he, in his Pre face,) nuhercwith you 'would perfuade that Scripture is the onlf Rule ta frame all our ASiions Jy, are in every RefpeB as effeBual for Proof, that the fame is the only Laiv •whereby to determine all our Civil Controverfies ; and therefore to root it out for ever was the main Reafon, I fuppofe, why in a particular Difpute he goes- fo far back as to give a long Account of the original of Laws in general, their feveral Kinds, and their diftiniS and con trary Natures. — But the beft Comment on this Puritan Principle are their AiSions, when in Power. TJiey once had that Power. — Their Ufe of it is well known. ESTA- 32 Of a Civil and Book I. established. Which Eftablifhment being found ed on a League or Union between the Civil and Religious Interefts, the State lends Part of its co adtlve Power to the Church fo united : which So ciety is but too apt to apply that delegated Power to the Support of Itfelf, (a full Explanation of which whole Matter will be given by and by.) Now as, from this Union, one Error which arofe was, that the Powers of a Civil kind, which the Religious Society, In fuch Circumftances ufed, were inherent in It : So thofe who fell not into this, but faw It was a Power borrowed from the State, ran into the oppofite ; namely that the reftraining of Sin, which was aimed at in the Application of the borrowed Yo-wtr, was one ofthe natural, effential Tendencies to which the Civil Magiftrate, as fuch, fhould himfelf diredt that Power. Whereas, in deed, fuch Application was only the refult of that Union between the Civil and Religious Interefts. III. A third Caufe of this Error was, That tho' in many Caufes the Effedts of the fame moral A- dtions have different Proportions as applied to Ci vil or Religious. Interefts, and that the Diredtions of Civil Laws are Indeed generally regulated on the proportioned Effedts of moral Adtions to the State ; yet in many Cafes too thofe Proportions are the fame. That is, the whole of the Malignity of an Adtion, both as a Sin and a Crime is oft equal. In fuch Cafe then it could not be feen, by thofe Laws alone, diredted againft fuch Adtlons, which was in the Legiflator's Intention to punifh j the Crime, or the Sin. And therefore the People con cluded both to be within it. Add to this, that the complex Ideas of Sins and Crimes being very ab^ ftradt, and made up of many fimple Ideas, com-- mon to both, they were not eafily diftinguifliable by the Generality to be, as they really are, two diftlndl Sedt. 4- Religious SocietV. 33 diftlndl complex Ideas, but fuppofed two Tei'ttiS only cf one and the fame ; and fo, of courfe, wci e perpetually confounded i Which would very much help forv/ard the Error whofe Original we are here deducing. IV. But the laft arid very general Caiifei vrhlch we fliall affignj of this Error, was the Magiftrate'-s exprefs and declared Adt of Punifhing, in his own Right, fome Immoral Adtions, as Sins. Nay he went further, even to reftrain fpeculative Opi nions : For we have fliewn above that the Sup port and Propagation of the Three great JPrincipks of Natural Religion • — the Being of a God — his Proijidence — and the natural effential Difference of Good and Evil, were In. his Care and Jurifdidtion. We have obferved it was in order to preferve a Sanation which was neceffary to make Civil Com- padts binding. — The very Foundation and Ce ment of Society. And Common Swearing tending, by diredt Influence, to deftroy the Veneration and Reverence for the Deity, (whofe Being and Pro vidence, on that Account; it was penal to con tradldt,) It was neceffary that Laws fhould be made and inforced againft that Sin. V/hich in effedt all States have done. Now the People feeing fpecu lative Opinions^ and moral Adtlons, as they regard the Deity, (which are the two Parts that make up Religion^ in the largeft Signification of the Word,) under the Magiftrate's Care, and not confidering the Reafon of this Matter, as above explained, concluded that Religion in the whole, and in ge neral, was under his Diredtion. D SECT 34 Of a Civil and Book I. SECT. V. 'AviNG thus explained the Nature and End of Civil-Society, together with the Original of thofe Errors that Men and even States, in every Age, have been apt to entertain concerning it, I come, as I propofed, In the next place, to treat concerning Religion ; whofe End Is firft, to pro cure the Favour of God ; and fecondly, to advance and improve our own intellectual Nature: As to the firft End, namely the Favour of God, this, coni- mon Senfe affures us, one Man cannot procure for another, nor hinder him from procuring ; but that as Sincerity; (rightly underftood) is v/hat alone re- corhrriends us to his Favour, every one hath full Power in himfelf to procure it, and the Hindrance thereof comes Only from himfelf. It is evident, that Man, as a religious Creature, had no Occa fion to conftitute a Society for fecuring to himfell the Favour of God ; as he had, as a focial Creature, to fecure to himfelf the Enjoyment of his Perfor and Poffeffions. If therefore as a Religlonlft he entered into Society, it was for a Reafon differeni from that for which, as a Civiiift, he Invented f ' Commonwealth, i. e. it was not to fecure himfel: againft the Malice of Man. And this leads us tc confider the fecond End of Religion, namely th Advancement and Improvement of the intellectual Na ture. — ¦ Now this, we can as eafily conceive hov a Number of Religious Creatures confoclated ma] advance, as we can how a Number of earthh Creatures confoclated may advance and improve thi animial Nature, the fecondary End of Civil Society. To fee the Neceffity of forming this Society, W' , are to confider how the intelkSiual Nature is Im proved by Religion. Religioi Sedt. 5. Religious Society. 35 Religion, in the ftrldt and proper Senfe of the Word, Is a Commerce and Intercourfe with the fupreme Caufe of ali Things. V/hich confifting, cur Parcs, in fuitable Sentiments raifed in uo by Contemplation on his Nature, and on the Relations we stand in towards him the pro per and adequate Object of all dependent Brings, muft needs ad-vance and improve our intelledtual Nature to the height of which It is capable. But now it may be afked, whether this Intercourfe, as it begins, fo likewife, it doth rot end in mental Exercife ; and, confequently, whether Religion be nor, what -.nany feem now difpofed to think it, but a kind of dlvlm Philofopby in the Mind ; that com- pofes only a fpiritual and wyftical Body of its Fol lowers. For if this be indeed the Cafe, there is an End of all Religious Society; fjch a Religion neither ftanding in need, nor being capable of a Community. To refolve this Qvieftion, we are to confider, that, as Religion is an Intercourfe with the univer fal Caufe, it is the Object of all rational dependent Beings. Now we can eafily conceive how a mere mental Religion may fi.t the Nature of pure imma terial Spirits, cf which doubtlefs there are innume rable Kinds within the vaft Limits ofthe Creation. But Man being compounded of tv/o contrary, tho' uniting Natures, Soul and Body, it feems neceffary, at firft Sight, that his Religion k:r^, fhould par take of the Character of its Subjedt, and be com pofed equally of i'nternal Meditations, and outward Acts and Offices. This vrill appear on confidering his Natute refulting from this Com.pofition, and the Circumftances in which he is placed. To fit lis to the Station here affig.ned uj, 1: was feen proper, as we find by Experience, that the Paffions of the Mind fhouid be greatly influei^ced by the Tem.per D 2 *of 3 6 0/<2 Civil and Book I. of the Body : In which likewife, the Intelledtual Eaculties fhould be fo inveloped as to render vain all Attempts of emancipating ourfelves from Mat ter, while our Bufinefs was in this grofs corporeal World. Now how unfit foch Beings are for a mere rr>ental Religion is very evident. Experience likewife hath conftantly confirmed It. For when ever Men, by a miftaken Aim at Perfedtlon, have endeavoured. In their religious Exercifes, to defe- c.'ite the Groffncfs of Senfe, and foar up into the Region of pure Ideas, it has been found that juft according to the Difference of the Conftitution has been the Confequence and Iffue : For If cold and phlegmatic, their Religion has funk into Indltferen- cy and Difguft ; or if bilious or fonguine, it has flown out into Fanatlcifm or Enthufiafm. But fur ther, our Station and Circumftances here, contri bute to render our natural Incapacity, for fuch men tal Religion, ftill more invincible. The Supply of the Neceffities and Convenieneies of Life, thro' all our Intercourfes for the Satlsfadtion of thofe Ncceff.ties and Convenieneies, fubjedts us to per petual Converfe with the molt fenfible and m.ate- rial Objedts. But this Converfe Induces Habits. And of what Force Habits are in keeping the Mind bent their Way, and how obftlnately they adhere when we endeavour to get free of them is known to every one. Now thefe Habits are fo oppofite, fo -averfe to, fo incompatible with men tal Contemplation ; and render us fo totally Inept for it, that, to do even fo much that Way, as the very Effence of Religion requires, we muft bribe Senfe and Matter, and draw them to affift us, in the Adls of Religion, againft themfelves. If we add to this that the common People, which eom pofe the grofs Body of Mankind, and for every one of which Religion is intended, are by their Station Sedt. 5. Religious Society. 37 Station and Employments, both by Nature and Converfe, moft Immerged in Matter, we fhall need no further Proof, that a mere mental Intercourfe with God, which makes Religion only a Divine^ Philofopby in the Mind, is altogether urifit for fuch a Creature as Man in his prefent Station upon Earth. But fuppofing all thefe Impedifhents to ideal Devotion away ; yet if Men be not fo far fpirl- Djallzed as to give and receive an intuitive Know ledge of one another's mental Adts of Religion, ftill fuch a Religion would not fit them. Be-^ caufe it is effential to the due Exercife of Religion, that open Profeffion of it be made fo as to be feen by others. For, the fame Reafon which tells us it is our Duty to acknowledge all the Relations we ftand in towards Gods, tells us it is equally our Duty to make thofe Acknowledgements public. Again, of the Bleflings Providence beftows uporr us, fome are to the Individual, and others to the Species in common. Now, as Return of Thanks is due from each Indlvld-aal for the Bleffings he has received in particular ; fo Reafon tells us, that fbr thofe beftowed on the Species in common, a joint Retur.n fhould be made, by as many of the Species together as can convenientiy affemible for Religious Worfhip. From v/hat h.as been laid then it follows, that fuch a Religion as is fuitable to the Nature of Man, here, muft have the Meditation on the Di- vi'ie Nature drawn out into Articles of Faith 5 and the Meditation on our ftveral Relations to him^ into fiiitable and correfpondent Acts of Ret.igi- ous Worship ; and both of them to be profeffed and performed in common. Which Things, as we fliall now fhew, require the Aid of a Societt to eftablifli, regulate, arid preferv-e. D a X. opi^ 38 Of a Civil and BookL I . Opinions concerning the Nature of the Deity fo entirely influence all Religious Pradtice that this invariably takes its Charadter from thofe ; and be comes more or lefs perfedt as thofe are nearer to, or further from the Truth". On which Account the greateft Care is to be taken in preferving thofe "Opinions pure and incorrupt. But this cannot be done but by a Society ; which will enough appear even by the mention of thofe two Ways that all flich Societies have ever put in Pradtice. i. By reducing their Belief Into one common Formulary. And 2. By making the Profeffion cf that Formu lary the Term of Communion. For by this means t.here is a Summary of Belief in Aid of the Ignorant ; ?tnd a com. mon Repofitory that Men may always have Recourfe to for Information. Where it is to be obferved, that the wider the Bottom, is made, and the more general the Terms of Communion, (confiftent with the v/ell being of a Society) the wifer and jufter is that Inftitution. ' 2 . The feveral Acts of Religious Worfhip are cor refpondent to the Sentiments arifing In us from iht Meditation on the feveial Relations we ftand. in towards God, with Defign to aid and improve thoTe Sentiments. Now, as Meditation, v/Ithout thefe outward Adts, Is apt, as v/:e have fhewn, to fly out into Enthufiafm ; fo outward Adls of Reii- gion not regulated by, nor adapted to thofe Senti ments, are as fubjedt to degenerate into a childifh unmeaning Superftition. Which,-^ how much it depraves all the Faculties of the Mind, as vrell as difhonours the Service of our Maker, is difputed by no one acquainted v/jth the Nature and Effedts. of this direfiil EyII. The greateft Care therefore is to be had that thefe Adts be preferved fimple, ¦> See ?lato\ Euthyjh. decent. Se£l. 5.. Religious Society. 39 decent, ssidfignifixative. But this can be done on ly by providing Perfons fet .apart for this Office ; whofe peculiar Employment it fhall be to prefide in, diredt and fuperintend the Adts and Oifices of Religion, left any thing childifh, profane, or fu perftitious fliould (as it certainly would, if left to every one's Fancy) obtrude thernfelves into them. Now public Officers and Minifters muft act by foine common Policy, which may regulate and fettle their feveral Employments, Powers, and Subordi nations. But that Policy is no other than the Laws of a Society properly fo called. What hath been here faid will abundantly ma nifeft the Divine Wifdom of the Author and Fi- nifhtr of our Faith, who, revealing the Will of his heavenly Father to Mankind, adtually formed our holy Religion into a Society, on a common Policy, y.'ith public Rites, proper Officers, and a Subordi- ration of the Miniftry. So that tho' we could not prc.ve that Rehgion forms a Society by Nature.^ which is neceflary to demonftrate the Equity of an Eftablifhed Religion at large ; yet we now find it does fo by Inftitution, which is fufficient to demon ftrate that Equity, wherever the Efiablifhed Reli gion Is the Chriftian. But we ftill think nothing can be ftronger than the Proofs here given of Re ligion's compofing a Society by Nature. And how little the pjaineft Truths are fecure from Contra diction we may fee in the Cafe of the ^-zkers. Thefe Men regard Chriftianity itfelf as only a kind of Divine Philofophy in the Confeience ; tho' e- very one that reads may fee it is a real Society by the molt exprefs Inftitution of its Founders. But Truth never fails of requiting its Oppofers. Thefe very Men, as great Enemies as they are to a Church or Ecclefiaftical Policy, have unawares gk ven tht ftrongeft Teftimony of the Neceflity of D 4 oae.. 4© Of a Civil and Book I. one. It is, as we have faid, a Principle of this. Sedt, That there is no other Reafon or Meafure of Compliance or Cofformity, in Matters relating to God, than the Conviction of the: Light and Spirit of Chrlft in every Confeience. A Principle that muft needs diffipate a Sedt like a Heap of Sand ; and in fadt it was running Into all the confequent Exl;raT vagances, when Pen and Barclay arofe to lick this Abortive Into Shape. Pen evidently perceived that no Sedt could fubfift on this. Principle ; and there fore fet upon convincing his Friends of the Necet fity of fome common Policy : But perceiving that if he fhould infift on that Neceffity for the Sake of Religion, he fhould too openly contradldt their darling Principle, or indeed perhaps putting the Clvange upon himfelf, he argues for this common Policy from the Benefits refulting from it to Civil Lfe : And thus, inftead of a Church, he hath helped to make of ^,akerifm, confidered in its DUcIplIne, a Crvil Ccmmunity cr Corporation : And fuch indeed It is at prefent in great Perfedtlon, I. Religion thus compofing a Society, we are now to confider what kind a one It is. Firft then thfs Society mtifi needs he Sovereign, and inde pendent ON THE Civil. Natural Dependency of one Society on another, muft arife either from the Law of Nature cr of Nations. Dependency by tiie Law of Nature is from Ef-. fcice, or Qener alien. Dependency from Effence there can be none. For this kind of Dependency being a Mode of natural Unity and Coalition ; and Coalition being only where there Is an Agreer ment in eodem tertio, and there being no fuch A- greemei-.t between tv/o Societies effeni;ially different as thefe are, there can poffibly be no Dependency : For that Civil ?ind Religious Societies are effentially diff^reftt is evident from their having different Ends end Sedt. 5. PvELiGious Society. 41 and Medns ; the ultimate End of one being the Care of Souls, and that of the other, of Bodies ; and the Means of the one being by external A- dtions, and t.hat of the other by internal. Depen dency that arifes from Generation, is where one Society fprings up from another, as Corporations, Colleges, Companies, and Chambers in a City. Thefe, as well by the Conformity of their Ends and Means, as by their Charters of Incorporation, betray their Original and Dependency. But Reli gious Society, by Ends and Means quite different, gives internal Proof of Its not arifing from the State, and, by external, we have fhcwn" that it exifted long before the State had any Being. Again, no Dependency can arife from the Law of Nations or the Civil Law. Dependency by this Law is, where one and the fame People com.po- fing two different Societies, the Imperium of the one clafhes with the Imperium of the other : For in fuch Cafe the leffer Society becomes, by that Law, dependent on the greater ; becaufe the being inde pendent on one another, which makes that great Abfurdity In Politics called Imperium in Imperio, Is immediately and furely deftrudtive to Society itfelf. But now Civil and Religious Society having, as has been fhewn. Ends and Means intirely different, and the Means of Civil Society being coercive Power, which Power, therefore, the Religious, confequently, hath not, it follows that the Admi niftration of each Society is exercifed In fo remote Spheres that they can never poffibly meet to clafh ; and thofe Societies which never clafh, Neceflity cf State can never bring into Dependency on one another, • See The T)ivi«e Legation 3;^ Moses, Book iii. ^6. Indeed 42 Of a Civil and BookL Indeed was the common Opinion true, which we have been at fome Pains In confuting. That the Magiftrate's Office extended to the Care of Souls, then it would follow, from what we have faid of Dijpendency from Effence and Generation, that the Religious Society v/as fubfervlenl to, and a Crea ture of, the State : For then It could not be rea fonably thought conftituted but by the Magiftrate ;. ^nd conftituted by him to ferve and help him out in the Difcharge of his Office -, who might have endowed his Church, In Its firft Conftitution, with what Powers he thought proper. Hobbes and his Followers pulhed this Matter home. They fup pofed that, if Indeed there was any Soul to be ta ken Care of, the Care naturally devolved upon the Civil Magiftrate ; who, by Delegation, might transfer It on proper Oflicers, commjillioned by him to model, and bear Rule in, a Church. And be caufe fomebody or other at that Time chanced ta tiiink that the People were the Keepers of the Khig's Confeience, he, who above all things loyed Contradidtlon, would needs have it that the King was the Keeper of the People's. On the other H,and, did the Care of the Religi-. CUS Society naturally extend to the Body and its Con cerns, then would the State run a great Rifque of becoming dependent, and a Creature of it. For Religious Society having the nobleft Province, the Care of Souls, and the moft extenfive when the Care of Bodies is joined to it, and pretending, for the moft part, and, foasetimes really having, ^. di vme Original, while the State has only a human one ; as much as the fpiritual excels the corporal, the Whole only a Part, and divine Authority hu-. man, fo high would .Men deem the Religious Society above the Civil: And that Superiority whicli the Church would, thus claim as of Right.^ flie Sedt. 5. Religious Society. 43 fhe would find within herfelf a Power to maintain. For the Care of Bodies neceffarlly implies an Inhe rent coercive Power in whatever Society that Care is found. And in effedt thefe Conclafions have been long ago reduced to Pradtice under the Chriftian Reli gion. For the Church of Rome having entertained this extenfive Idea of a Religious Society, fiie has, confentarieoufly thereto, exalted the Chair ApoftoUc^ far above the Thrones of earthly Potentates, of >^hom fhe has required and received Homage ; and Qflce bid fair for ir^aking that Homage univerfal. For fhe would perfuade us, as it fhould feem, that v/hen Jifus faid. His Kingdom, ivas not of this World, that he had before transferred it, with the Keys of the other, to St. Peter. But this however is worthy our Obfervatlon, that as different Ways as the Hobbeift afid Papift: look, in Speculation, they tend to one and the fame Point in Pradtice. For tho' the one v/ould haye the Magiftrate difcharge his Office only as Executioner of the Church, and the other author rizes. hirn to ufe his Pov/er as the Malcer and Creator of It ; yet they concur in teaching it ta be his Right and Office to domineer over Con feience. —What they differ in, is only a Point of Ceremony, II. We come now, in the fecond Place, to fliew that ihis independent Religious Society hath not, IN AND OF ITSELF, ANY COERCIVE PoWER OF THj: Civil Kind ; 'its. inherent Authority and Powers being in their Natiare and Ufe entirely dif ferent from thofe of the State. For if, as hath been proved. Civil Society was inftituted for the Attainment of one Species of Good, all other Good, requifite to hum.an Happinefs being to be attained v/ithou;? that Inftitution ; and tl^at Civil Society 44 Of a Civil and BookL Society attains the Good for which it was ordained by the fole Means of coercive Power, then it fol lows that the Good which any other Kind of So ciety feeks may be attained without that Power : Confequently, coercive Power is unneceffary to a Religious Society. But that Means, v/hich is unne ceffary for the Attainment of any End, is, likewife, unfit, in all Cafes, but in that where fuch Means are rendered unneceffary by the ufe of other Means of the fame Kind or Species. Bat Religious So ciety attains Its End by Means of a different Kind ; therefore coercive Power is not only unneceffary, but unfit. Again, Ends in their Nature different can never be attained by one and the fame Means. Thus in the Cafe before us, coercive Power can only influence to outward Pradtice; by outward Pradtice only Is the Good Civil Society aims at, im mediately eftedted, therefore is coercive Power pe culiarly fitted to Civil, Society. But the Good Re ligious Society aims at cannot he effedted by out ward Pradtice ; therefore coercive Power is altoge ther unfit for tbat Society. I . But here it may be objedted, that tho' indeed eutward Practice does not affedt Religion, as it is the Objedt of each Individual, yet it does affedt Religious Society ; Salvation of Souls being the End of Religion, but Purity of Worfhip the End of Re hgious Society. Now Purity of Worfliip Is affe- ^ed by outward Pradtice, and to outward Pradtice is coercive Power fitly applied. — To this we reply, that Purity of Worfhip is the immediate End of Religious Society, and Salvation- ef Souls the ultimate End thereof. Confider then Religious Society, v/Ith Regard to its ultimate End, and all we have fiid above of the Unfitnefs of co-, trcive Power holds good.' — ^ Confider it with re gard to its iiTim-ediate End, Purity of ^/"orfhlp •» and Sed. 5» Religious Society. 45 and then, indeed, there will appear no Unfitnefs in the Application of coercive Pov/er. Thus do we gain by the Objedtlon a Conceff.on that we muft otherwife have demanded as the Foundation of a Claim we always referved to ourfelves to make in Favour of Religious Society, which is, that it hath in itfelf the Power of expelling refradtory Mem bers from its Body, or in other V/ords, a Right of Excommunication. For this Exception we always had in Mind when we maintained that a Religious Society had no inherent coercive Power. It only therefore remains to prove that this coercive Power is ufefully and neceffarlly applied, — that it is all which Religious Society ftands in need of, — and thai more is utfit and unjuft. As the immediate End of Religious Society Is Purity of Worfliip, and as a neceflary Means of preferving that Purity is Uniformity of J-Vorfhip, which Uniformity cannot be m.aintained but by ex pelling from the Communiry all who refufe to comply with the public Worfhip, therefore is this Power of Expulfion in every Religious Society pwft fit and ufeful. But we will go further, and venture to affirm, that every Kind of Society, whatever be its End or Means, muft neceffarlly, as it is a So ciety, have this Power of Expulfion ; a Power in feparable from Its Effence ; which confifts in the Conformity, of the Will of each natural Member to the Will of that artificial Body which Society produces: Which Conformity deftroyed, as It muft be without the Expulfion of the Difturbers of it, the Society diffolves, and falls back again into no thing. Juft as would the natural Body, did not Nature, v/hofe Condudt Societies in this Cafe imi tate, evacuate noxious and malignant Himours. But then, fecondly, tliis fo ufeful and neceflary Power is all that a Religious Society ftands in need of. For 45 Of a Civil a7id BoOkf, For by the Exerciie of this Power, Confcrrtiity in Will and in Worfhip is preferved ; which fecuring its Effence and End is all that is neceffary to the well being of Society. In the Taft Place, riiore Power in Religious'- So ciety than this is both unfit and unjuft. That it is unfit we prove thus : The immediate Ehd of Reli gious Society being Purity of Worfhip, it required Outward Conformity thereto, and at the fame Tirtie its ultimate End being the Salvation of Souls, it requires like-wife that this outR^ard Conformity be accompanied with a fuitable internal Difpofition of Mind ; but any further Power than fimple Expul fion tends naturally ro make a Divorce betvveeh thefe two Things. Fcr fuch further Power forces m.ore or lefs to outward Compliance with the Com munity ; but as the Will cannot at the fame Time be thus foi'ced, here Is likely to be only outward Compliance without a foitable inv/ard Difpofition :¦ So that by this Means the ultimate End of Reli gious Society becomes defeated ; further Powei- therefore than fimple Expulfion is unfit. That further Power is imjufi- appears from hence : By the Law of Nature every Man has a Right Of wor- fhlpplng God according to his own Confeience. Nov/ when it happens that a Member of a Religi ous Society cannot confeientloudy join in the pu blic Worihip, and be on tiiat Account e:6 the Decorum of their Charafter, and fo, gaining Re- fpefl: a'lid Reverence by a more decent Exteriour, had it in their i'dw'er to excite the Pdpulace to Sedition. " See this Objcftion in the Paper call'd The Old TVhig, Mi^. 2-7, 1736. Church's ^- 6o OfiZ« Established Church, Book II. Church's ? If for it's own, is not that Civil Uti lity ? II. Secondly, The State was induced to feek this Alliance as the neceffary Means to improve the Ufe fulnefs, and to apply the Influence of Religion in the beft Manner. And this it does feveral Ways. I . By beftowing additional Reverence and Venera tion on the Perfon of the Civil Magiftrate, and on the Laws of the State. For in this Alliance, where the Religious Society Is taken under the Protedtion of the State, the fupreme Magiftrate, as will be fhewn hereafter, is acknowledged Head of the Re ligion. Now nothing can be imagined of greater Efficacy for fecuring the Obedience of the People. Thofe two confummate Mafters in Politics, Arifto- tle and Machiavel^, thought It of fo great, as to be' fufficient to gain Reverence and Security to a Tyrant. What then muft we fuppofe its Efficacy on a legitimate Magiftrate ? The fame Veneration will extend itfelf over the Laws likewife. For while fome of them are employed by the State to the Support of the Church, and others lent to the Church to be employed in the State's Service, and all of them enadted by a Legifiature in which Church-Men have a confiderable Share, (all thefe things, as we fliall fee prefently, being amongft the Conditions oi Alliance,) Laws under fuch Dire dtion muft needs be obeyed with greater Reve rence. 5riC«Xd(/a(7i» ii-t\oi, w? avfifji,a,x>i'; f%"'1i >t^ Tit? S-£»';. Polit. lib. V. c. xii. — Et non a cofa piii neceflaria a parere d'havere, che quefta ultima qualita [religione] perchegli huomini in univerfale giudicano piu a gli occhi che alle mani, perche tocca a vedere a ciafcuno aTentire a pochi. Del Principe cap. xviii. 2. By Sedt. 2, (y^w Established Church. 6i 2 . By lending to the Church a coercive Power. — It may be remembered, that in fpeaking of the in nate Defedts in the Plan of Civil Society, we ob ferved, that there were feveral Sorts of Duties that Civil Laws could not inforce : Such as the Duties of IMPERFECT OBLIGATION, whlch a RellgloUS Society, when endowed with coercive Power to in vigorate the Influence of Religion, is capable of ex- adting; and such likewife 0/ the Duties of per fect Obligation, whofe Breach Is owing to the Intemperance of the natural Paffions. The fevere Prohibition of which threatens greater and more enormous Evils. For while thefe violent Pafllons overflow, the flopping them in one Place is cau fing them to break out with greater Violence in another ; as the rigorous Punifhment of Fornica tion has been generally feen to give Birth to un natural Lufts : The effedtual Corredtion of fuch E- vlls muft be begun by moderating and fubduing the Paffions themfelves. But Civil Laws are not underftood to prefcribe, as punifhing thofe Paffions only, when they proceed to adt, and not reward ing the Attempts to fubdue them. It muft be a Tribunal regarding irregular Intentions as crimi nal, which can do this : And that is no other than the Tribunal of Religion. When this Is done, a coercive Power of the Civil Kind may have a good Effedt ; but not 'till then. And who fo fit to apply this coercive Power, in fuch Cafes, as that Society which fitted and prepared the Subjedt for its due Reception and Application ? A Jurli- didtlorir fomewhat refembling this we find In the famous Court oi Areopagus at Athens ; Which Ci ty was once the Model of Civil Prudence as well as Religion, to the improved Part of Mankind. Ifocrates fpeaking of this Branch of Jurifdidtion in ?he Areopagus fays, // was not occupied to punifh Crimes €z OfanEsTA-BLisuEDCnVRCH. Bookll. Crimes, but to prevent them."^. Again, We have obferved that the State punifhes Deviations from the Rule of Right, as Crimes only, and not as fiich Deviations, or as Sins ; and on that firft Idea pro portions its Punifhments : By which Means fome very enormous Deviations from the Rule of Right, which do not immediately affedt Civil Society, and fo are not confidered as Crimes, are overlooked by the Civil Tribunal. Yet thefe mediately being highly pernicious to the State, it is for its Interefts that they fhould be brought before fome Tribunal which can commodioufly take Cognizance of them. But befides the Civil there Is no other but the Ec clefiaftical endowed with coercive Power. Hence may be deduced the true and only End and Ufe ef Spiritual Courts. A Church Tribunal, then, with coercive Power, being neceffary in all thefe Cafes, and a Religious Society having in itfelf no fuch Power, it muft be borrowed from the State : But a State, as we fhall fee, cannot lend it, with out great Danger to itfelf, but on the Terms of an Alliance ; a State therefore will be induced to feek this Alliance, in order To improve the \ natural Ef ficacy of Religion. 3. By conferring on the State the Application of the Efficacy of Religion, and by putting it under the Magiftrate's Direction. There are peculiar Jun- dtures when the Influence of Religion is more than ordinaty ferviceable to the State ; and thefe the Ci vil Magiftrate only knows. Now while a Church is In Its natural State of Independency, it is not in his Power to improve thofe Conjundtures to the Advantage of the State, by a proper Application of Religion : But when the Alliance is made, and aSi' t'l a\i a,-' xalaa-noiia-THai y,r,Si\f auVa?. «|;oii ^r./Mai /SwAibES^ ujui^di/Ht. iyauo yi i5ro jOfj aurHv 'i^fcv 7t). APEIOfl. AOr. confe- See making itfelf, Inftead of a SubjeCl, a Slave to the State. Befides, without thefe Reprefentatives no Lav/s could be made in the Court of Legifla ture concerning the Church ; becaufe no free Man, or Body, can be bound by Laws to which they have not given their Confent, either in Perfon, or by Reprefentative. So that as the Church cannot juftly, we muft prefume flie did not willingly, when flie entered Into Alliance, give up her Independen cy, without referving this Privilege to herfelf. — This fhews the Neceffity of their fitting and adting' in the Legiflature, in all Ecclefiaftical Matters — That they fliould adt too, when they are there, like the 4 Sedt. 3- Qf^w Established Church. 79 the other Members, in Civil Affairs, is vety ufefiil to the State ; as giving additional Sandtion to its Laws, when the People fee that Church and State have concurred in theh enadting. From this Account of the Grounds and Original of this Privilege may be deduced the following Corollaries : I . Tbat Churchmen who fit in Parliament, in con fequence of tbe Alliance, are not there in their own Right for their Baronies, like tbe Lay Members. Becaufe this would deftroy the only neceffaty and ufefiil Ends of their fitting, which is the Reprefen- tation of the Church, in order to watch over its Interefts : One of the principal of which is, to take Care that that Protedtion which the State af fords it by a Teft-Law he not violated. 2. That, tho' they fit there as Reprefentatives of the Church, yet they do not eompofe any third or diftinCt Estate there ^. Becaufe this would make that Convention, between Church and State, which is only an Aliance, an Incorporation, refembling that in the Jewifto CEconomy ; would change that which, as we fhall fee hereafter, is a revocable, in to an irrevocable Union ; and, by confidering the Church as one of the effential Parts of which the State is compofed, confohdate them together, and run them down into one another : For evety Eftate of legiflative Power in a Civil Society, is effential to that Society ; but whatever is effential to it, can never be taken away without the Deftrudtlon of the Society, itfelf; confequently, if Churchmen make a diftindt Eftate, they cannot be taken away, but by the Deftrudtion of the Society itfelf; and ^ There is indeed the lefs Pretence to a diftinft Eftate, if their Baronies intituled them to their Seats ; tho' the common Syftem hath joined thefe two difcordant Parts together, and made the Bifhops, at once. Barons and a diftinft Eftate. So Of^^ Established Church. BookIL if fo, the Union becomes irrevocable, which we fliall fully fhew hereafter, is contrary to its Nature. So that we muft conclude. Churchmen make no di ftinCt Eftate in Parliafient. 3. A third Corollary is. That as the Bifhops Right of fitting in Parliament begun, fo it muft end with the Eftablifhment. We have fliewn that they fit there, ne quid Ecclefia detrimenti capiat ; for the Church, by this Alliance, having given up its Su premacy to the State, which therefore hath Op portunities of doing her much Injury by the Abufe of that Grant, Churchmen are placed in the Le giflature as Guards and Watchmen to prevent it ; and to give the Church's Confent to Lav/s Eccle fiaftical : But when the Alliance is broken, and the Eftablifhment diffolved, the Church recovers back its Supremacy : So that the State lofing that Means of injuring the Church, and having no lon- fer a Right of making Laws for it, the Church ath no more Pretence of Reprefentation in the Legiflature. Nor will their Baronies fave them : For if it fliould be granted that they fat in Parlia ment not as Reprefentatives of the Church, but as Barons, that Right will exift no longer than the Eftablifliment ; for thefe Baronies being Part ofthe public Maintenance- which the State afligns to the Clergy of an Eftablifhed Church, and that Main tenance having been granted only during an Efta blifliment, the Foundatloii of the Right utterly fails when the Eftabllfhmer^t is abollflied. III. The third and laft; Privilege the Church gains by this Alliance, is the being intrufted with a JurifdiCtion inforced by Civil coercive Power ; or an Ecclesiastical Court for Reformation OF Manners : For it being one of the preliminary Articles of this Alliance, that the Church fhould ap ply all its Inftuence in the Service , of the State, and its Sedt, 2, Qf^^ Established Church, 8i its Influence being beft and moft efficacioufly ap plied this Way, there was a Neceffity for the Eredtion of fuch a Court. For It hath been clear ly fhewri, by what has been faid (In the firft Book) of the natural Defedt In the Original Plan of Civil Power^ and (in this Book) of the Motives the State had to feek an Alliance, that there are a numerous Set of .Duties of imperfed Obligation which human Laws could not reach, and feveral of perfect Obligation which thofe Laws could not effedtually inforce, by reafon of the Violence of the natural Paffions from whence the Breach of thofe Duties proceeds ; the Subdual of which Paf fions can be effedted only by the Influence of Re ligion. Now the Good of Society requiring that thefe fhould be reached and inforced, and it ap pearing from the ineffectual endeavours both of Civil Courts and of peculiar Societies for the Re formation of Manners, that this can be only done by an Ecclefiaftical JurifdiCtion intrufted by the State with coercive Power, it was neceffary that, in an Eftablifhment, fuch a one fhould be eredted by the State for a Succedaneum to the Civil Judi catures. And indeed the fupplying that Defedt, which thefe Courts do fupply, was the original and fundamental Motive of the State's feeking this Alliance. So that the Abolition of thefe Courts would overturn the very Foundation on which the Eftablifhment is eredted. Again, it appears to be very fit the Church fhould be ftrengthened with this Authority, that it might not be left quite naked and defencelefs after having given up its Supremacy to the State. From hence we deduce thefe Corollaries, I . ¦ That no Matters of Opinion, nor any Civil Matters that the temporal Courts can conveniently G take 82 Of ^/zEsTABLisHfeD Church. Bookll, take Cognizance of, can poffibly come within the Ju rifdiCtion of Ecclefiaftical Courts. Not Matters of Opinion, i . Becaufe the Church cannot lawfully exercife coercive Power over fuch. Nor, 2. Becaufe, if it could, had the State any Right to beftow fuch Power. — We have proved in the former Book, that all coercive Power of the Civil Kind Is unfitly and unjuftly applied by the Church to its own Ufe and Service. But, punifh ing Opinions is applying coercive Power to its own Ufe and Service : And we have proved in this Book, that the State lent this coercive Power to the Church to be employed in the State's Ser vice: And therefore employing it in punifhing Opinions, which is employing It in its own Service, is perverting it from that End for which it was given. 2. The State had no Right to beflow fuch Power : For no one can give that to another which be hath not in himfelf. And that the State hath nothing to do with Matters of Opinion, we have fully proved. There Is indeed an Exception with regard to both thefe Cafes. For the Church hath an inherent Power of Expulfion, for not complying v/ith its Formulary of Communion: And the State the fame Power of Coercion for oppofing any of the Three great Principles of Na tural Religion, mentioned in the firft Book of this Difcourfe. But then we fay, that this Exception affedts not the Reality of our Pofition, namely, that an Ecclefiaftical Court endowed with coercive Power, hath nothing to do with Opinions. For as to the Church's inherent Power of Expulfion, it remains the fame it was before the Union ; fo far as refpedts its not being attended with Civil Da mage or Inconvenience : On other Accounts there is a Difference ; for fince the Union, no one can be expelled for not complying with its Formulaty of Sedt, 2, Of «« Established Church, 83 of Communion without the State's Confent, as will be fliewn in its Place. — As to thofe Opinions concerning the fundamental Principles of Natural Religion, which the State has an inherent Power to reftrain, the Exercife of that Power is of fo great Moment and Importance to the State, that it would not be fafe to Intruft it In any other Hands ; ef pecially as it is vety liable to be abufed In Eccle fiaftical Courts, and vety little in Civil: The for mer having m^any Temptations to confound thefe Principles with thofe of their own peculiar Modes of Religion; the latter none at all. Nor ought Ecclefiaftical Courts to expeCl it, becaufe it is a Power Civil Courts can commodioufly exercife. Which comes in with the other Part cf the Divi fion of Matters that belonged not to ecclefiaftical Jurifdidtion. To which Divifion we are now ar rived. — Nor Civil Matters, that temporal Courts can conveniently take Cognizance of. Thefe, we fay, cannot poffibly belong to an Ecclefiaftical Jurif didtion. We have proved that it v/as eredted as a Succedaneum to the Civil, to take Cognizance of fuch Adtlons as the Civil could not reach, or could not remedy. And we may be affured that nothing lefs could have perfuaded the State to eredt it. For the parting with a Share of its Jurifdidtion Is not a Matter of Indifference; It being liable to be abufed in other Hands. This then Is an Evil ; and before the State could be perfuaded to incur it, it muft be fatisfied a greater Evil would be a- voided by it. And the fuffering thofe Tranfgref-^ fions to go unpuniflied, v/hich itfelf could not conveniently and effedtually reftrain, was that greater Evil. A lefs therefore was providentially chofen. From hence it is moft evident, that the State could never intend to put thofe Things un- G 2 dtr 84 Of ^72 Established Church. BookIL der Ecclefiaftical Jurifdidtion, that fell moft con veniently under its own. Becaufe here was an Evil Incurred ; and no greater, yea none at all, avoided. Befides, for Ecclefiaft-ical Courts to en grofs Matters that belong to the Civil Jurifdidti on, as It can poffibly have no good Ufe, may very poffibly be attended with this further Evil of inviting and encouraging the Church to aim at more Power than is confiftent either with her own Good or the State's. But If criminal Caufes, as they are called, which Civil Courts can com modioufly take Notice of, belong not to the Church's Jurifdidtion ; what Pretence hath flie to Civil Caufes, or the Determination of private Property? The great Founder of her Religion faid, WHO made me a Judge or Divider be tween you ? And what he would not affume himfelf, he would fcarce beftow upon his Church. And that the State fhould ever Intend to give her what was the peculiar Right of temporal Courts, is as difficult to think. We muft conclude then, fuch Cuftom was derived, not from the reafona ble Lav/s of this Alliance, but from the Imita.tIon of old Papal Ufurpations. And in this Light they v/ere regarded by that great and wife Legif lature under Edward VI. when it took matri monial and testamentary Caufes from Ec clefiaftical Courts, and restored them to the Civil. How the Ufurpation of fo extenfive a Jurifdidtion firft began we fliall not be at a lofs to difcover, when we refledt upon what has been before faid concerning the Methods the State made ufe of, by the Aid of allied Religion, to add a Sandtion to its Civil Inftltutes. For thus- Marriage, tho' a Civil CompaCl, yet being of the higheft Importance to Society, was, in order to give it the greater Veneration and Reverence, made Sedt. 2. Of fl;z Established Church, 85 made a Religious one, by being confined to the Adminiftration of the Clerg)^ And fo far all was well. But from thence the Clergy took Oc cafion, by Degrees, to draw into the Church's Jurifdidtion evety thing that arofe from that Com pact between the two Sexes, the Rites of which they adminiftred. And from this Example may he feen, what bad Work Ecclefiaftical Courts cut out, when they ufurp the Determination of Ci'-jil Caufes. For here, notwithftanding the Voice of Nature, and of God, cried out for a Divorce of Marriage in certain Cafes ; yet, on the idle and fuperftitious Pretence, that that Rite v.as a Sacra ment, they boldly ventured to contradldt both, and to pronounce tlie Contract indiffoluble. Ecclefiaftical Jurifdiclion therefore, v/ith coer cive Power, neither extending to Matters of Opi nion, nor to mere Civil Matters, v/e muft conclude that it was given solely for Reformation of MannePvS. From hence it appears with what Juftice our Conftitution hath fubjedted all forts of Diffenters from the Eftablifhed Church, to this Jurifdidtion. The State's Care of Reformation of Manners extending to Men of all Sedts, and no Sedt can pretend Confeience for their Exemption. 2. Another Corollaty' is, that the EreCtion of thefe Courts do not exempt the Clergy from Civil JurifdiCtion. \^e have fliewn, that Ecclefiaftical Courts were not eredted for the fake of the Church, but for the fake of the State. They cannot therefore take Cognizance of the Affairs of the Clergy; becaufe that would be employing their Jurifdidtion to their own Purpofes. Becaufe we have fliewn they were eredted to take care of thofe things which Civil Courts were incapable of infpedtlng. But all Caufes that relate to the Cler gy, whether Criminal or Civil, they can infpedt. G 3 And 86 Of <3« Established Church, BookIL And not to bring thofe of the firft Kind before the Temporal Courts, but to allow them a Jurif didtion diftindt from the reft of their Fellow- Subjedts, would be the Occafion of much Damage to the State. And not to bring thofe of the lat ter Kind before the fame common Tribunal, the chief of which are concerning their Ecclefiaftical Revenues, would in time create Miftakes concern ing the Original of thofe Rights; which being derived from the State, there feems to be no other Way of perpetuating the Memory of, than by providing that all Difputes concerning them be determined by the Civil Judicature. 3. A third Corollaty Is, that all Forms of Pro cefs and judiciary Proceedifig in Ecclefiaftical Courts he borrowed from the Civil Courts of that State to which the Church is united, that they go invariably by the Rules and Maxims of the municipal Laws of that State ; and that Appeals from thefe be allowed in all Cafes to the Civil Courts. For the State muft needs be fuppofed to intend, when it pre fcribes and defines the Power it gives, that That Power fliould be exercifed according to the Rules and Maxims itfelf obferves in the Civil Courts. Becaufe thofe Rules and Maxims are there obferv ed, as the moft agreeable to Juftice, Equity, and the Eafe of the Subjedt. But this Care of its Subjedts in Civil Courts, It could never be fup pofed to throw off when it fent them to an Eccle fiaftical Jurifdidtion. It muft likewife be fuppofed to intend, that this Power fhould be exercifed by the fame Forms of Process and judiciary Pro ceeding that itfelf ufes in the Civil Courts: Be caufe this is the fecureft Way of perpetuating the Memory of the Original and Dependency of Ec clefiaftical Courts. On which account too, it is far from being Improper that the Judge of thefe. G 2 Courts Sedt. 2. Of tf;z Established Church. 87 Courts fhould be a Layman. If this be fo, how abfurd muft it be for Ecclefiaftical Courts to admi- nlfter their Power, and regulate their Proceedings on foreign Forms, Rules and Maxims, as if inde pendent, or under a foreign Jurisdiction ? That there fhould be Appeals from thefe Courts to the Civil, in all Cafes, is moft evident, i . Be caufe it is of the Namre and Condition of all in ferior Courts to be appealed from, to the fuperior. 2. Becaufe Ecclefiaftical Courts unappealed from, would effedt an Independency on the CivU Power. 3. Becaufe they would foon eredt themfelves into Tyrannies. Thus have we explained the Privileges the Church gained by this Alliance, thro' the Con ceffion of the State. Let us fee next, what Privi leges the State gained through the Conceffion of the Church. This, in a Word, is a Supremacy in Matters Ecclesiastical. The Church re- figning up ber Independency, and making the Magi ftrate her supRE.ME Head, without whofe Appro bation and Allowance fhe can direCl, order, and decree nothing. For the State having by this Alliance undertaken the Protedtion of the Church, and Pro tedtion not Being to be afforded to any Perfon or Body, without Power over that Perfon or Body, in tJie Perfon or Body protedting; it neceffarily follows, that the Civil Magiftrate muft be fupreme. Protedtion is a Kind of Guardianfhip : and Guar- dianfhip implies Obedience and Subjedtion in the Ward, towards him who is invefted with that Charadter. The Office therefore of Protedlion, without this Power in the Body protedting, is giving the State no better a Poft than that of public Executioner of the Decrees of the Church. In which high Station we find thofe G 4 States 88 Of <2« Established Church. BookIL States that are moft enflaved to the Papal Power s. ¦ — Befides, when the State by this Conventlop covenanted to afford the Church Protedtion, that Covenant was made to a particular Church of one Denomination of fuch. determined Dodtrine and Difcipline. But now, what might be advan tageous to a State in protedting fuch a Church, might be difadvantageous to It In protedting one of a different Dodtrine and Difcipline. Therefore when Protection is afforded, it muft be at the fame time provided, that no Alteration be made in it without the State's Allowance. Further, the State having endowed its Clergy, and beftowed upon them a JurifdiCtion with coercive Power, thefe Privileges might be perverted to the infinite Damage of the State, as making an Imperium in Imperio, had not the Civil Magiftrate, in return, the Supremacy of the Church. Therefore the Ne ceffity of the thing Invefts him with this Title. There are three Confequences .of this Supremacy, which becaufe they have been oft difputed, we fhall now endeavour to explain and fupport : The firft is, I. That no Ecclefiaftick of the eftablifhed Church can exercife his Function without the Magiftrate's Approbation and Allowance. Here we muft be careful how we think the Magiftrate, by virtue of this Branch of the Supremacy, can make ov con- S This abfurd and dangerous Popi.fh Principle, that the Church continues fovereign and independent on the State after it is become ejiablifhed, and invefted with Civil Powers, .in the fame man- jier that it was before the Alliance, hath infeifted fome Proteftant Churches. Our Jacobite Clergy, and the Miniflers of the Church of Scotland, as different as they are in other refpedls, are equally under this Delufion. The Ground of all the turbu lent, feditious Condudl of the latter : of which we have a late Jlagrant Inftance in a large Part of them refufing to read from ithe Pulpit a Law againft JMlurder and Rebellion. fir Sedt. 3. Of ^« Established Church. 89 fer tbe Character of Prieft or Minifter ; tho' the Flxercife of it be folely by his Allowance. For this could not be given him by the Convention. I . Becaufe it anfwers no End or Purpofe of Ser vice. All the poffible Advantages gained to the Magiftrate by the Supremacy over the Clergy, tieing fecured by the Exercife of their Fundtions being under his Diredtion. On this Account then, to interfere in making the Charadter, would be im pertinent. 2. Becaufe this Power diredtly tends to the Deflrudtion of a Church as a Society: The .Effence of which is, as we have fhewn, to have Officers and Minifters of its bwn Creation. So that the giving up this Right to the Magiftrate, would not be convening with the State, but dif folving herfelf into it ; the being loft, and ab- forbed in it. This Confequence the Enemies of a Church, as a Society, were fo well aware of, that in order to bring on its Diffolution, they principally labour and inforce this point, that the Magiftrate may confer the facred Function and Character. So that on this Account to interfere in making the Charadter would be unjuft. 3. Becaufe this Power would in thofe Religious Societies be thought to violate a divine Right; where the Founders have themfelves diredted the Manner of conferring the facred Charadter. So that in this Cafe, to interfere in making the Cha radter would he impious. On the whole therefore we muft conclude, that the Office and Charadter of the Clergy is confer red in the vety Manner it was before the Alliance ; whether the Method was of divine Appointment, or of human : The Exercife only of that Office and Charadter, being under the Magiftrate's Di redtion. II, The go Qf^« Established Church. Bookll. II. The fecond Confequence of this Supremacy is. That no Convocation, Synod, or Church Affem bly hath a Right to fit without the exprefs Permiffion cf the Magiftrate : Nor when they do fit, by virtue of that Permiffion, to aCt in a judiciary Manner, without a particular Licence for that Purpofe. Whether It be for decreeing Matters of Difcipline, or for condemning, by Expulfion for Matters of Dodtrine, or laftly, for corredting Manners. That the Church cannot affemble in Synod under the Magiftrate's Supremacy v/ithout his Permiffion, is evident. Becaufe, before the Alliance, the Power that follows the Supremacy and Indepen dency of the Church, was exercifed in thofe Af femblies. To fuffer fuch therefore to meet, after the Union, without Licence, would be virtually giving up his Supremacy, and acknowledging it to be now as before, in the Church. — That when affembled It cannot adt in a judiciary Man ner without exprefs and particular Licence for the Cafe in Hand, is plain from hence : i . Becaufe the* Church hath already one Court of Jurifdidtion granted to it, called the Bifhop's Court. To give it other fixed and ftanding Courts would be both unneceffaty and unfit, Unneceffary, becaufe the Bifhop's Courts are fufficient for the common Ufes of the State, and for rare and uncommon Cafes, an occasional Jurisdiction is fufficient. Unfit, becaufe the giving two fixed and perpetual Jurifdidtions with coercive Power, would be in frufting the Church with more temporal Autho rity than, even under the Magiftrate's Suprema cy, would be fafe for the State. 2. Becaufe de creeing Matters of Difcipline, and condemning by Expulfion for Matters of^ Dodtrine, cannot, in Al liance, be done without the Confent of the State. So Seft. 3- Of en Established Church, 91 So that the particular Licence of the Magiftrate, is neceffaty to authorife thofe Proceedings. But it appears on the other hand, a great Error to ims^Ine fuch Affemblies, when legally con vened, to t>e either ufelefs or mifchievous. For all Churches, except the Jewifh and Chriftian, t)eing human policied Societies, of the Nature of wtiich, even the Chriftian, in Part, partake ^, and all Societies without Exception, t)eing admi- nifter'd by human Means, it muft needs happen, that Religious Societies, as well as Civil, fhould have frequent Occafion to be new regulated, and put in Order. Now tho' by this Aliance of Church and State, no new Laws can he, made for Church Govemment, but by the State's Autho rity ; yet ftill there is Reafon that Propofitions for foch Laws fhould fometimes come from the Church ; which we muft foppofe well fkilled (as in her proper Bufinefs) to form and digeft foch new Regulations, before they come t)efore the CorJideration of the Legiflature. At leaft there feems to t>e as much Reafon why this Affembly, during the Sefljon of the Legiflature, fhould be confolted with in Points where ReUgion is con cemed, as that the Bench of Judges fhould be required to give their Attendance, for their Advice in Matters of Civil Juftice. And if not this, there is yet Reafon why they fliould be affembled. For to have Laws framed and modelled folely by the State, and (without previous Communication) impofed upon the Church, is making of it the meaneft and moft abjedt of the State's Creatures. Evety litde Company and Corporation hath the Ho nour to be confulted before any Law is enacted that may affedt its particular Interefts. If it be faid that >¦ See Hotier'% Eccl. Pol. Ecclefiaftics 92 Of^« Established Church, Bookll, Ecclefiaftics are placed In the Court of Legifla ture for that Purpofe, we reply, that it hath been fhewn the End of their fitting there was to watch over the Safety of the Church in general. Enough indeed for that Purpofe ; but evidently too few to deliver the Senfe of fo large a Society, when par ticular Cafes of Importance come under Deli beration. As for the Mifchiefs arifing from thefe Affem blies, by their Heats, Quarrels, and Divifions, we own them to be vety great. But then they have all proceeded from not having had their Original and End, under an Eftablifhment pre cifely determined. As is evident from the con ftant Subjedt of thefe Quarrels being about the Power and Extent of their Privileges and Jurif didtions. And we will venture to affirm, that Synods convened, and meeting, on the Principles here laid down, cannot poffibly prove pernicious to the State, or frultlefs to the Church. III. The third Confequence of ^thls Supremacy is. That no Member of the Eftablifhed Church can be excommunicated, or expelled the Society, without the Confent and Allowance of the Magiftrate. For Expulfion being an Adt of Supremacy and Inde pendency, muft neceffarlly be authorlfed by him, with whom the Supremacy is now lodged. Be fides, did the Church retain this Power under an Eftablifhment, nothing could hinder but that it might extend to the Supreme Magiftrate himfelf, the Head of the Church: And how abfurd that would be any one may judge. But then it Is to be obferved, that Excommunication for DoClrines and Matters of Opinion, even when authorlfed by the State, muft ftill (the State having nothing to do with the Care of Souls, nor the Church with the Care of Bodies) as before the Union, be un attended Sea. 3- Of ^« Established Church. 93 attended with Ci-.il Cmfures or Inconveniences, other than accidentally befal the expelled Perfon from a Teft-Law, in thofe States where the Pro tedtion of the Church, and the Peace of the State, require its Affiftance. Different in this, from Ex communication tor Immoralities ; which, under an Eftablifhment, hath reafonably and juftly Civil Ccnferes annexed to it. From this Account of the Supremacy may be deduced this Corollary, Ihat the conferring ou the fupreme Magiftrate the Title of Head of the Church, is by no Means inccififtent with the Nature cf our holy Re li giyr.. This Title hath been mifreprefented by the Enemies of our happy Eftablifhment, as the fet ting up a new LegiJDIator in Chrijfs Kingdom, in the Place of Chrift. But as it hath been fhewn, that no more Jurifdidtion is given by this Title to the Q^-il Magiftrate than the Church, as a mere pohtical Body ', exercifed before the Conven tion '^ ; it follows, that if the Magiflrate's Jurif didtion Ix; an Ufurpation of the Rights of Chrijfs Kir.gdom, fo was the Church's. That the Church's was no Ufurpation, but perfedlly confiftent with the Rights of Chriff^ Kingdom, if that Kingdom compofes a political Society here on Earth, I thus prove. The State of the Jews was in evety Senfe i See Hookjer\ Eccl. Pol . ^ This the femous Aft 26 Hen. Mil. c. 1 . declares '• The " King, his Heirs and Succeffors, ftiaU be taken and reputed *' the only supreme Head in Earth, of the Church of " Engi.ai;d. And fliall have fa!l Power from time to " time, to vifit, reform, correft, and amend all fuch Errors, " Herefia and Enorraitiei. whatfoever they be, which by any "Masker of spiritu.^l Authority or Jurudic- " TION ARE OR LAWFULLY MAY BE REFOR.V1ED, Ordered, " correfled or amended." ^That 5\, v/hich the Chnrch, as 2 Society or PoliticrJ Body, \V2; before empowered to do. as 94 Of^;? Established Church. Bookll. as ftridtly at leaft, and properly the Kingdom of, God, as the Chriftian Church is the Kingdom of Chrift : Yet that did not hinder, hut that there was, by his Approbation and Allowance, an Infe^ rior Jurifdidtion in the Jewifh State. What then fliall hinder an Inferior Jurifdidlion in the Chri ftian Church .'' This both had in common to be ar Political Society by divine Appointment, but dif-^ fered in this, that God for wife Ends minutely prefcrlbed the whole Mode of Jewifh Policy: And Chrift, on the contrary, for the fame wife Ends, only conftituted the Church a Policied So^ ciety in general; and left the Mode of it to hu man Difcretion ^ But I fufpedt the Matter fticks here ; thefe Men won't allow the Church, or Kingdom of Chrift, to be a Society in any pro^ per Senfe. This indeed is the darling Notion of the Enemies of Eftabhfhments. It Is certain, the Argument of ufurping in Chrift's Kingdom, hath no Force but on the Suppofition that the Church is no proper Society. However this Subterfuge we have totally overthrown ; having proved at largcy that the Church is a Society in a proper Senfe. Thus have we fhewn the mutual Privileges given and received by Church and State, in enter ing into this famous Convention. The Aim of the State being, agreeably to its Nature, Utility % and the Aim of the Church, agreeably to her's. Truth. From whence we may obferve, that as they all took their Rife, by neceffary Confequence, from the fundamental Article of the Convention, which was, that the Church fliould ferve the State, and the State protect the Church ; fo they receive all poffible Addition of Strength, from their mu- ' See Hooker'i Eccl. Pol. tual Sect. 3- Qf^zw Established Church. 95 tual Dependency on one another. This we have Reafon to defire may be underftood as a certain Mark that our Plan of Alliance bet«'een Church and State, is no precarious arbltraty Hypothefis, but a Theory founded in Reafon, and the unvari- able Nature of Things. For having, fi-om the real Effence of the two Societies, colledted the Neceffity of an Alliance, and the Freedom of it ; from the Neceffity, we have fairly introduced it ; and from its End and Freedom confequentially efta blifhed evety mutual Term and Condition of it. So that now if the Reader fhould afk. Where this Charter, cr Treaty of Coni-eniicn for the Union of tbe two Societies, on the Terms here delivered, is to be met with, we are enabled to anfwer him. We fay, it may be found in the fame Archive with the famous Original Compact between Magi ftrate and People, fo much infifted on, in Vindi cation of the common Rights of Subjedb. Now when a Sight of this CompaCt is required of the Defenders of Civil Liberty, they hold it fufficient to fay, that it is enough to all the Purpofes of Fact and Right, that fiich Origiruil CompaCt is the only legitimate Foundation of Civil Society; — that if there was no foch Thing formaUy executed, there was virtually ; — that all Differences between Magiftrate and People ought to be regulated on the Suppofition of fuch a CompaCt, and all Go vemment reduced to the Principles therein laid down, for that all the Happinefs of which Civil Society is productive, can only be attained by it, when formed on thofe Principles. Now, fome thing hke tbis, we fay of our Alliance between ChI'rch and State. But we fay more, for SECT. 96 Of^/z Established Church. Bookll, SECT. IV. WE have been the fuller In this Account irf order to fhew our Adverfaries, how unrea-' fonable, and even impolitic they are, when. In their ill Humour with Eftablifhments, they chufe to pick a Quarrel with their own-^ where the national Religion Is on a Footing exadtly agreeable to the Nature of a free Convention between Church and State, on the Principles of the Laws of Na ture and Nations. A Felicity, they fhould have known, fcarce any other People on the Face of the Earth can boaft of: For let them look around and tell us where they can find any other Place in which the State does not incroach on the Church, or, what Is indeed much the commoner, the Church on the State. In England, alone, the Original Terms of this Convention are kept up to fo exadtly, that this Account of the Alliance be tween church and State, feems rather a Copy of the Church and State of England, than a The ory, as indeed It was, formed folely on the Con templation of Nature, and the unvariable Reafon of Things : which had no further regard to our particular Eftablifhment, than as fome Part of it tended to Illuftrate thefe abftradt Reafonings. So that fortunately for the Motive I had in writing, our Adverfaries are cut off from all Subterfuge. For they can neither condemn my Theoty as a vifionary Utopia ; nor approve it as reafonable and fit for Pradtice, and yet think they may carty' on their Oppofition againft their own Country Efta blifhment : Becaufe thefe two prove to be one and the fame. If In a few minute Things they dif- agree, thofe Variations in our Efiablfioment, will perhaps. SedL 4- Qf^/z Established Church. 97 perhaps, by fome, be accounted the Irregularities of an excellent Model, which the Misfortunes of Ed ward VI. Reign prevented from being carried to Perfedtlon. For then it was that this AUiance be tween the Proteftant Church of England and the State, was made : On the natural Diffolution of that, between the Popifh Church and it. When, had not the Hjfpooify of fome complying Churchmen, the domeftic Quarrels in the Adminiftration, and the immamre Death of that hopefiil Prince intervened, we might have expected, they will fay, the com- pleateft Scheme of a Convention that humane Policy and pure Religion could have produced. Nor hath the fucceeding Ages l)een remifs or negligent, as fit Oj^rtuniries offered, to remedy thofe Irregularities. Of this Honour no fmall Share is due to the Clergy ; fo faffe are the Calumriies of their Enemies, that they are always backward in all Reformations. For it was the Clergy that, in the Reign of Charles the Second, freely' gave up to the Legiflature their an cient Righr of taxing themfelves. In which they adted with the greateft Juftice as well as Generofity. For the Cuftom of t^xijig themfelves arofe from the claiming their Revenues by divine Right : Where as they being indeed tjie State's Donation at the Time ofthe Alliaoce, it belonged to the State to tax them as it did its Lay-Fees. However this be, as there have been many and long, and, as it would feem, hitherto fruitlefs Debates, coAcerning Tythes, Bifhops Seats in Parliament, Spiritual Courts, Con vocations and Supremacy, in which Men have run in to the moft contraty Conclufions, I judged it not a- jjiiS to draw out Corollaries concerning each of them, a^Sl may poflibly contribute fomething towards the putting an End to thefe long Controverfies. Such then is the uncommon ExceUence of our happy Conftitution : And, ftruck with the Beauty of H fo 98 Of^?z Established Church. Bookll. fo juft and generous a Plan of Power, a late notable Writer thus forceably expreffes himfelf — " Some " Men there are, the Pests of Society I think " them, who pretend a great Regard to Religion in " general, but who take evety Opportunity of de- " claiming publickly agalnft tha.t Syftem of Religion, " or, at leaft, againft that Church Establish- " MENT which is received in Britain ¦" " — In Truth this Is bearing hard on our new Guardians of Civil and Religious Liberty ; who, when they have generoufly taken up an Office they were not caUed to, and afked no other Rev/ard than the modeft Title of Free-Thinkers, to be caUed Pefts of So ciety, and branded by the Clergy with the odious Names of Infidels, and Enemies to Chriftianity. 'Tis Well however we find the Author above quoted more equitable. He owns they pretend a great Regard to Religion in general: And this Juftice is indeed due to them, that they are no Enemies to the Name : For that, I fuppofe, he means by Religion in gene ral. Ideal Chriftianity they could well away with : Real Chriftianity fomewhat offends them ; it does more fo under the Form of a Society ; but moft of all when that Society becomes Eftablifhed. They could be well content to accept it under the fafhion able Notion of a divine Philofophy in the Mind; efpecially if that Philofophy was to be received in England on the Footing which Tully tells us the Greek Philofophy was received in Rome ; Dispu* TANDi CAtTSA, NON ITA VIVENDI •". But to re ceive it for Service, and with the Magiftrate's Stamp to make it current, revolts thefe great and free Spi rits. So that, even to thofe ingaged in the Caufe of a Miniftry, or intrufted in the Service of a Church ' =¦ Differt. on Parties, p. 148. •> Orat. pro Mur. ' See the Papers called The old Whig, they Sed, 4- Qf^ Established Church. 99 they rife up, one and all, againft fo intolerable an Impofition. However a Rehgion, bleffed be God, we yet have ; and even an Eftablifhed one. It en joys this Prerc^arive for the Service it does the State ; and that it may he no longer envied its Privities, we fhaU now beg Leave to fhew that the Chriftian is, of aU Religious Societies, the beft fitted to do tbis Service. I. Its fuperior ExceUence, in this Point, above the ancient Pagan Religion of Greece and Rome, is feen in its being infinitely better fitted than tbat to iaU into a firm and lafting Society. It is to be ob ferved that the Unity of the Objedl of Faith, and Conformity to a Formulaty of dogmatic Theology, as the Terms of Communion, is the great Founda tion and Bond of a Rehgious Society. Now this the feveral Societies of Pagan Religion wanted ; in which there was only a Conformity in national Ce remonies : But as to Points of C^inion and Behef, it was not judged to be of Moment to determine whether their Gods were real Perfons, or only the Symbols of natural Powers. Their Myfteries con fifted not fo much in abftrufe Points of Speculation, as in fecret Practices. Whence it happen'd, that thefe Societies being without their true Foundation and Support, when they became eftablifhed, were foon loft and abforbed in the State, or at leaft fell into the loweft Condition of Slavety and Dependence on it ^. n. As Chriftianity was fuperior to Pagan Reh gion, in its Capacity for forming a Society : So it is foperior to pure natural Religion, in tjeing a Society by divine Inftitution, which, natural ReUgion is, only by human. Was there no other Evidence that ^ SieeTbe Divine Legation cfMofes, B. II. Sedt. I . and Seft. 5. fish Jin. H 2 Chrifti- 100 Of «« Established Church. BookIL Chriftianity compofed a Society by divine Appoint ment than that, that the conftant Title given by Jefus to his Rule over the Faithful!, is thatof King dom, this alone would be fufficient to fatisfy aU who know the general Meaning of the Word, and the peculiar Ufe of It In the Jewifh CEconomy. But when in Confequence of his Right of Kingship, Jefus, and by his Subftitutlon, the Apoftks, go on to appoint Officers, Degrees of Subordination, and Exercife of Power in this Kingdom, one may judge of the Singularity of the Complexion that can ftand out againft fo ftrong Evidence. But fomething, you muft think there was which made it worth their while not to be convinced. They imagined that if they could but perfuade us, that Chriftianity made no Society of divine Appointment, it was no Soci ety at all, and confequently a Creature of the State. This was fo ravlfhing a Conciufion that they may wdl be excufed a little opiniatrete in the Road to it. But we have fully fliewn, that let the Matter of di vine Inftitution be as it will, yet Religion naturally and neceffarily compofes a Society, Sovereign, and independent of the Civil. Vety idly therefore had they employed their Pains, had they proved what they attempted. But doubly ridiculous muft their Obftinacy now appear, while, in Support of this Nothing, they perfift agalnit all Evidence and Rea fon. III. Again, as Chriftianity is fuperior to natural Religion in being a Society by divuie Appointment; fo it is fuperlor to the Jewiflj, in being perfedlly free, and independent of the Civil. The Jewifh Religion was (like the true natural, which it rati fied and confirmed) effentially fitted to eompofe & Society : and (like the Chriftian, of which it was the firft Rudiment) really Jiich, by divine Appoint ment. But then unlike the latter in this, that it was Sedl.4. Of ^;z Established Church, igi was not left independent of the Civil, to unite with it, at its own Pleafore, on Terms agreed upon, but was, for great and wife Reafons ^, aheady united to it by God himfelf. Which alfo he was pleafed to do, not by Way of AUiance, as between two Bodies that were to continue diftindt, from whence refolts an Eftablifhed Religion of the NaUire above explained, but by mutual Converfion into one ano ther, and perfedt Incorporation. By which both Church and State, under a diftindt Confideration, were loft, and a new Species of Govemment arofe from it that was both and neither. Yet this being juftly to be reckoned in the Genus of thofe Unions which we have fhewn Neceffity of State made of fo univerfal Pradtice, we may be allowed to draw an Argument from thence for the Juftice oifuch where by a Church becomes eftablijhed. For if Men with out the Imputation of Sophiftty or Superftition ^ may be permitted to bring the Example of God in the Horeb Contrast to juftify Men's common Right to eredt free Commonwealths ; there is no Reafon that the fame Example in the Union of the Jewifly Church and State fhould not be thought of equal Force to vindicate the Equity of thofe Unions be tween the two Societies that are made by Men, and are produdlive of an Eftablifhed Church. But the Chriftian Religion was not only left in dependent of the State, by not being united to it like the Jewifh, for being fo left, by the Law of Nature it muft needs be independent ; but its Inde pendency was likewife fecured by divine Inftitution, in that famous Declaration of the great Founder — MY Kingdom is not of this World. Which bears this plain and obvious Senfe—" that the King- = See The Divine Legation ofMafes, B. 4. ^ See Alger. Sidney's Dif courfes concerning Govemment, paflim. H \ ''dom 102 Of. Not refledling that without thefe, it could never have become national, and confer quentiy could not have done that Service to the State that It, of all Religions, is moft capable of performing. S. E C T. V, I sti OULD here conclude this fecond Book, but that it is reafonable firft of all to obviate an Ob jedlion which may feem to affedl the fiindamental Dodtrine of it, the reality of this free Convention. The Objedtlon is this. That as the two Societies ari fuppofed to be formed out of one and the fafne Number of Individuals, (that is, that thofe very Men who com'pofe the Stat&, irompofe the Church alfo ;) it is a C-onVention of thofe Indiv'iduals with themfelves under different Capacities. But all fuch Convention is as groundlefs and ineffectual as that vohich one Indfoi'duiil '' Bp. Burnet in his Hiftory of Charles II. p. 538. tellsTis, 'diat ^idn^s, Notion of Chriftianity Was, 'that it vjas li'ke eing arbitrary Conceffions, but following Tieceffarily from the Natures of the two foch Socie ties united, tliere was no need of Compadt to con fer them. 3. Our third Obfervatlon is ftill as important. That let this Objedtion to a real Convention, from the Want of diftindt Perfonalities and Wills in the two Societies, be as ftrong as we have fhewn it to be weak, yet it reaches only to thofe two Societies under a pure unmixed democratic Form ; in which the Sovereignty of the Society refides in the whole Number of the Individuals. When both, or ei ther Society is under any other Form, the Objedti on doth not hold. Becaufe then the Sovereignty oi, at leaft, one of the Societies refides not in the whole, but in part only of the Body aggregate. And all Conventions between Societies being made between the Sovereignties thereof, thefe Sovereignties muft needs have two Perfonalities and Wills, as being compofed not of the fame but of different Indivi duals. But few or no Religious or Civil Societies being under this pure unmixed democratic Form, the Objedtion holds not againft any adtual Union between the two Societies. If it be afked then, why it is taken Notice of .-* I anfwer, that having 4 ail IIO Of ^;^ Established Church. Bookll. all along, for the fake of Clearnefs, and Brevity, confidered the two Societies under this fimple and primitive democratic Form, I thought it proper to remove an Objedlion that lay againft it, tho' it lay againft It only ". " Of what Force it is we have feen above. To which we will here add this further Confideration. The Writers of the Laws of Nature and Nations allow, that the fecond Convention, (as it is called) in a pure democratical State is as real and binding as that in a State of any other Form. The fecond Convention is that whereby Proteftion and Allegiance are mutually promifed by Sovereign and People. Now in a pure Democracy the Sove-: reign is the whole People : So that the People contract with them felves. And yet is the Contraft adjudged moft real. This Con ciufion is founded on the very Principle I lay down to prove the Reality of the Convention between Church and State ; namely that in entering into Society afaSitious moral Perfon is created.—— In a Democracy, this Perfon, which is the Sovereign, is the whole, and with this Perfon, the natural Perfons of aU the Indi viduals convene. BOOK [ III ] p O O K III. Of a Test-Law. SECT. I, O Magna vis veritalis, quie contra Hominum in- genia, callidltatem, follertiam, contraque fi- dlas omnium infidias, facile fe, per fe, ipfa defendat ! " ^. Thus breaks out the Roman Orator, tranfported with a Fit of philofophical En thufiafm. — This Force of Truth never fhone with greater Luftre than on the prefent Subjedt ; where, by the Afliftance of a few plain and fimple Prin ciples, taken from the Nature of Man, and of Po litical Society, we have cleared up this Chaos of Controverfy, fhewn the Nature and Neceffity of the Alliance between Church and State, and deduced the mutual Conditions on which it was made, fo exadtly agreeable to our own happy Eftablifhment : And are now enabled, on the very Principles of our Adverfaries, to encounter the formidable Arguments they bring againft a Teft-Law. The Neceflaty of a national Religion was, till of late, one of the moft uncontefted Principles in Politics. The Pradtice of all Nations and the Opinions of all Writers concurred to give it Credit. To colledl what the beft and wifeft Authors of An- => Tully, Orat. pro Calio, c. z6. tlquity. 112 Of a Test-Law. Book IIL tlquity, where the Confent was univerfal, have faid in Favour of a National Religion, would be endlefs. We fliall content ourfelves with the Opinion of two modern Writers in its favour : Who being profef fed Advocates for the common Rights of Mankind, will, we fuppofe, be heard the more favourably. — - " This, (fays one of them) was ancient Policy [yiz. " the Union of the Civil and Religious Interefts] " and hence it Is neceffary that the People fliould " have a public leading In Religion, For to deny " the Magiftrate a Worfhip, or take away a nati- " ONAL Church, is as mere Enthufiafm as the " Notion v/hich fets up Perfecutlon " ''. " Toward " keeping Mankind in Order (fays the other) it is "NECESSARY thcrc fhould be iome Religion ^ro-^ " feffed and even Established " =. But indeed we do not even now find many that will direCtly de ny this Neceffity, tho', as we fliall fee hereafter, the moft forceable Arguments againft a Teft conclude as ftrongly againft an Eftabliflsment. It is that un avoidable Confequence of an Eftablifhed Church, ia evety Place where there are Diverfities of Religions, a Test-Law which makes the Judgments of fo many revolt ; and chufe rather to give up an Efta blifhment than recognize it with fo tyrannical an At tendant. Tho' it appears, at firft View, fo evident that, when a Church and State is in Union, he that cannot give Security for his Behaviour to both, may with as much Reafon be deprived of fome Civil Ad vantages, as he, who before the Union coidd not give Security to the State alone. The Matter therefore of greateft Concern remains to be enquired into ; namely, how the Equity of a Teft-Law can be deduced from thofe Principles of * Shaftfbury's Charafteriaics Vol. I. Tr. i . § 2. *= WoUafton Relig. of Nature delin. p. 12^. the Sedt. I. Of <2 Test- La Vn^. 113 the Law of Nature and Nations, by which we have fo clearly proved that of an Eftablifhed Religion. But here, as before in the Cafe of an Eftablifhment, it is not our Purpofe to defend this or that national Form ^ or Mode, but a Test in general. By which I underftand fome fufficient Security given to the State by thofe admitted into the Ad¬miniftration of public Affairs, that they are Members of the Religion Eftablifhed by Lav). And, in fhewing the Juftice, Equity, and Necef fity of a Teft-Law, we fhall proceed in the Manner in which we fet out, and have hitherto preferved, of deducing all our Conclufions, in a continued Chain of reafoning, from the fimple Principles at firft laid down. Hitherto we have confidered that Alliance, be tween Church and State, which produces an Efta blifliment, only under its moft fimple Form, i. e. where there is but one Religion in the State. But it may fo happen, that either at the Time of Con vention, or afterwards, there m.ay be more than pne. I. If there be more than one aJ the Time of Con^ vention, the Alliance Is made by the State v/Ith the largeft of the Religious Societies. It 'xs,fit It fhould be fo, becaufe the larger the Religious Society is, where there is an Equality in other Points, the bet ter enabled it will be to anfwer the Ends of the AU liance. As having the greateft Number under its Influence. It is fcarce poffible it fliould be other- wife, becaufe the two Societies being compofed of the fame Individuals, the greatly prevailing Reli- ^ Much lefs would we be thought to condemn that, inforced by the Laws of our own Country. On the contrary, I am per fuaded the Ufe of it may be well defended. To him that douLt? it, 1 would recommend that excellent Treatife intit. A Vindica tion, ofthe Corporation and Ttft-Jffs, I gio;i 114 Of a Test-L aw. Book ITI. gion muft have a Majority of its Members in the Affemblies of State : Who will naturally prefer their own Religion to all others. With this is the Alliance made. And a full Toleration given to all the reft. Yet under the Reftridlion of a Test-Law to keep them from in juring that which is eftablifhed. Hence we may fee, I. The Reafon and Equity of the Epifcopal Church's being the Eftablifhed Church, in England, and the Prefhyterian, the Eftablifhed Church in Scot-. land : An Abfurdity, in Point of Right, which our Adverfaries imagined the Friends of an Eftablifh ment could never get clear of. 2. Hence we may fee the Duration of this Alli ance. It is perpetual, but not irrevocable, i. e. It fubfifts fo long as the Church, thereby Eftablijhed, maintains Its Superiority of Extent ; which, when it lofes to any confiderable Degree, the Union is diffolved. For the united Church being then no longer able to perform its Part of the Convention, whicli is form.ed on reciprocal Conditions, the State becomes difengaged. And a new Alliance is, of Neceffity, entered into with the now prevaiUng Church, for the Reafons before given. Thus, of old, the Alliance between the Pagan Church and the Empire of Rome was diffolved, and the Chriftian united to the State in its Place : And again, in thefe later Times the Alliance between the Popijh Church and the Kingdom of England was broken, and ano ther made with the Proteftant Church in its ftead. II. If thefe different Religions arife after the Al liance hath been formed, whenever they become confiderable, then is a Teft-Law neceffary for the Security of the Eftablifhed Church. For when there are Diverfities of Religions in a State, each of which thinks itfelf the only true, or, at leaft, the moft pure. Sedt. 2. Of ff Test-Law, 115 pure, evety one aims at advancing itfelf on the Ru ins of the reft \, Which it calls, bringing into Con formity with itfelf; and, when Rcafor fliils, will attempt to do it by the Civil Aid. V/hich can be only brought about by the Attempter's getting i,i- to the public Adminiftration. But when it h?.p^icns that one of thefe Religions Is the Ejlablifhed, and all the reft under a Toleration, then It Is that thefe latter, ftill more inflamed, as ftimulated with Envy at the Advantages the Eftablifhed Church enjoys, adl in concert, and proceed with joint Attacks to difturb its C^iet. In this imminent Danger, the Eftablijhed Church demands the prom.Ifed Aid of the State; which gives her a Test-Law for her Secu rity. Whereby the Entrance into the Adminiftra tion, (the only Way, that Mifchlef to the Eftabli fhed Church is effedled) is fhut to all but the Mem bers of that Church. So when the Sectaries, in the Time of Charles the Firft, had, for want of this Law, deftroyed the Eftablijhed Church ; as foon as the Government of England was reftored on its old Foundations, the Legiflature thought flt to make a Teft-Law (tho' with the lateft) to prevent a Repe tition of the like DHafters. Thus a Teft-Law took its Birth ; whether at, or after the Time of Alliance. And from this Mo ment is the Juftice and Equity of an Eftablijhed Church called in queftion. But that the State is un der the higheft Obligations of Juftice to provide this Security, we fhall now fhew. SECT. II. WE have proved the Equity and Neceffity of the Alliance between Church and State. We fhall therefore make ufe of this as a Principle, not now to be difputed. I 2 I. Bv II 6 0/' ff T e s T^ L A w. Book lit I. By that Alliance, the State promifed to protedl the Church from all Injuries. It Is evident that an Attempt, in the Members of any other Church, to get into the Adminiftratlon, in order to deprive the Eftablifhed Church of the Rights It enjoys, either by fharing thofe Advantages with It, or by drawing all, from it, if it fucceeds. Is an Injury. And we have fliewn that where there are Diverfities of Re ligions, this Attempt will be always making : If therefore the State will perform its Promife of Pro-' tedtlon, it muft defeat that Attempt ; but there is no pther Way of defeating It, than by hindering its Enemies from entering Into the Adminiftration ; but they can be hindered only by a Teft-Law. II. Further, this Promife of Protedlion becomes abfolutely indlfpenfable. For, Protedlion was not only made, by the Church, a Condition of Alli ance, but the fole Condition of It. For we have fhewn that all other Benefits and Advantages are foreign tO' a Church, as fuch, and improper for it. Now the not performing the fole Condition of a Convention virtually deftroys and diffolves It. And this fole Condition can be neither unneceffary nor un juft. Not unneceffary, becaufe a free Convention muft have mufual Conditions ; and this being the fole Condition of one Party, it muft needs be ne ceffary. — Not unjuft, becaufe, having proved the Convention itfelf to be founded on the Laws of Nature and Nations, In which Convention mutual Conditions are neceffary ; and that no other Condi tions fuit the Nature of a Church ; it follows, that this \sjtft. III. But ftill further. The State's Obligation to perform Its Promife, Is vaftly inforced by this ad ditional Confideration. The Church, in order to enable the State to perform this fole Condition of Protedtion, confented to the giving up its Supre macy, §ed, 2. Qfff Test-Law. 117 macy, and Independency, to the State. Whence it follov/s, that whenever the Enemies of the Efta blifhed Church get into the Magiflrature, to which, as we faid, the Supremacy of the Church is tranf- ferred by the Alliance, fhe becomes a Prey to them, and lies entirely at their Mercy. Being now, by the Lofs of her Supremacy, in no Condition for De fence, as fhe was in her natural State, unprotedted and independent. So that the not fecuring her by a Teft-Law is betraying her, and the delivering her up bound to her Enemies. Thus have we fhewn the Obligation the State lies under, from Compadt, of providing a Teft-Law for the Security of the Eftablifhed Church. And by inforcing this Obli gation, from the laft Confideration, we have obvia ted the only Objedlion that could be made to our Account of this Condition of Protedtion. Name ly, — " That if an Union between Church and State *' be fo neceffaty for the well being of Civil Soci- *' ety, as we have reprefented It to be, how hap- " pen'd it, that that univerfal Charity- to Mankind, *' which is the great Charadleriftic of true Rellgi- ¦" on, could not engage the Church to enter Into " Union, without ftanding upon Terms of Advan- :" tage to itfelf: Efpecially fuch as neceffarlly in- " troduce a Teft-Law, fo full of Inconvenience to " the Subjedt ? This Objedlion, tho' already obviated, we fliall anfwer more particularly. 1. We fay, that Reli gion conftituting a Political Society, and it being of the Nature of Political Society to feek Support from Alliances, the Church was in a proper and reafonable Purfuit, when it aimed at Its own Advan tage in this Convenrion. 2. We fay, that as Man, when he entered Into Civil Society, neceffarily part- .ed with fome of his natural Rights, fo the Church, .when it entered into Union with the State, did the I 3 fame ii8 Of ff Test-Law. Book III. fame. The Right, fhe parted with, was her Inde pendency, which fhe transferred to the Civil Sove raign, For no Union can be made between two fuch independent Societies, till one has given up its Independency to the other ; and that which is to part with it muft be, according to the Law of Na tions, the lefs powerful Society : Which is the Church. Now as Man received an Equivalent for the natural Rights he gave up, fo, in all Reafon, fliould the Church. 3. But laftly, we fay, the Church could not enter into Union, and not ftipu^ late for this Condition, without concurring to its own Deftrudlion. — We have fhewn juft before, that the Dependency of the Church, on the State, ne ceffarily follows an Union ; and, in the preceding Paragraph, that where a Church, in this Condition, without Means of Defence in itfelf, hath Enemies in the Magiftrature, fhe muft expedt Deftrudtlon. Now the great Law of Self-Prefervatlon obliges her to provide agalnft it. But no other Provifion can be rnade than engaging the Protedlion of the State. Therefore we conclude that the Church's ftlpulating for that Protedlion, was, not only v/hat fhe in Ju ftice mighty but what in Duty fhe was obliged to do. Here we might have concluded our Inquiry ; ha ving, in a continued Chain of Reafoning, drawn from the moft fimple Principles, concerning the Original and the Nature of Civil and Religious So ciety, quite thro' an Eftabliflied Religion, arrived, at length, tp our main Conciufion, that a Teft-Law isjufl, and equitable. But that nothing may be wanting to put fo momentous a Matter out of Con troverfy, We proceed, in the next Place, to fhew that, had no promife of Protedtion been made the Church, yet that the State, for its own Security, would have Iain under the moft indifpenfable Neceflity of pro- Fiding a ^'^-^w. • - ' ' ' It Sedt, 2. Of ff Test-Law. 119 It has been obferved, that wherever there Is di- verfity of Religions, each Sedt, believing its own the trueft, ftrlves to advance It felf on the Ruins of the reft. If this doth not fucceed by force of Ar gument, the Partifans are vety apt to have Recourfe to the coercive Power of the State. Which is done by introducing a Party into the public Adminiftra tion. And they have always had Art and Addrefs enough to make the State believe that its Interefts were much concerned in the Succefs of their Reh gious Difputes. What Perfecutions, Rebellions, Revolutions, lofs of Civil and Religious Liberty, thefe inteftine Struggles between Sedts have pro duced, is well known to thofe acquainted with the Hiftoty of Mankind. To prevent thefe Mifchiefs was, as we have fhewn, one great Motive for the State's feeking Al liance with the Church. For the obvious Remedy was, the Eftablifhing one Church, and giving a gene ral Toleration to the re§l. But if, in adminiftring this Remedy, the State fhould ftop fhort, and not proceed to exclude the tolerated Religions from en tering into the publick Adminiftration, fuch imper fedl Application of it would infinitely heighten the Diftemper. For, before the Alliance, it was only a miftaken Aim in propagating Truth that occafi oned thefe Diforders : But now, the Zeal for Opi nions would he out of Meafure inflamed by Envy and Emulation ; which the temporal Advantages, enjoyed by the Eftablifhed Church, exclufive ofthe reft, always give Birth to. And what Confufion this would produce, had evety Sedl free Entty into the Adminiftration, is eafier conceived than expref fed. He who would fee a lively Image of the in tolerable Mifchiefs, that arife from thence to Civil Society, may read two Tradb wrote by a great Wit in Defence of the Irijh Teft ; and particularly that I 4 fine 120 O/" ff Test-Law. Book III. fine Difcourfe above referred to, intitled a Vindica tion of the Corporation and Teft-ACls. Now this being the inevitable Condition of every State with Diverfity of Sedts, where there is an Eftablifloed Religion ; unfupported by a Teft-Law, and an Eftablifhed Religion being proved indifpen fably neceffary to Civil Society ; we muft conclude, the State has the moft prefling Reafons to provide a Teft-Law, as well for its ov/n Security, as for the Church's. If it be faid, that would Men content themfelves with enjoying their own Opinions, without endea vouring to obtrude them upon others, as Reafon didtates they fhould, thefe Evils would never hap pen : And, confequently, there would be no Occa fion for a Te§f-Laiv : Right : And fo would Men but obferve the Rule of Juftice In general, there would be no need to have Recourfe to Civil Society to remedy the Negledl. SECT. III. Ou R Argument now leads us to give the Reader fome good Account of the principal Objecti ons made, by our Adverfaries, agalnft the Equity of a TeH-Law : The Way being cleared to a ready and fatlsfadtory Anfwer. I, Therciivii Objection, the Sheet- Anchor of their Caufe, Is this, That every qualified SubjeCl having a Right to a Share of the Honours and Profits in the Difpofal of the Magiftrate, to debar them from thofe Advantages, for Matters of Opinion, is a Violation cf the common Rights of SubjeSs, This, as we fay, is the Sheet- Anchor of the Caufe : Being the fole Argument, I know of, ever brought agalnft the Juftice and Equity of a Teft-Law ; their other Ob jedtions being only againft the Ufe and Expediency 9f Sedt. 3. Of ff Test-Law, 121 of It. If therefore we fhew they have here taken for granted a Thing, which, tho' by reafon of mif taken Notions of Government, was never in Dif pute, is yet utterly falfe ; we fliall quite overthrow all that oftentatious Declamation by which the Ene mies of our happy Eftablifhment have endeavoured to difcredit a TeSi-Law. Let it be remembered then, that In the third Se ction of the fir a Book, we have fhewn at large, that Reward is not one of the Sanctions of Ci vil Society: The only Claim Subjedts have on the Magiftrate, for Obedience, being Protection. Now the unavoidable Confequence of this is, that all Places of Honour and Profit, in the Magiftrate's Difpofal, are not there in the Nature of a Truft to be claimed, and equitably fhared by the Subjedt But of the Nature of a Property or Prerogative which he may difpofe of at Pleafure, without being forther accountable than for the having fuch Places capably fupplied. AH Right of Claim then being abfolutely at an End ; and confequently, all Injuftice In excluding at Pleafure ; we might here finifh our Difcourfe having taken from our Enemies the great Palladium of their Caufe. But to leave nothing unanfwered, let us, for a Moment, wave this Advantage, and, for Argument's fake, fuppofe this common Right of Subjeds. And fo examine the Propofition In the Abftradt, That to exclude a Citizen from his Civil Rights, for Matters of Opinion, is a Violation of the common Rights of Subjects. Now this Propofition being founded on thefe two others, i. That Opinions cannot be punifhed, becaufe Punifhment can be inflicted only for Matters in which the Will is concerned, and the Will is not concerned (n Matters of Opinion, 2 . If Opinions could be pu^ nifliedy 122 Of ff Test-Law. Book III. nijhed, they are not within the Civil Magiftrate's Ju rifdiCtion ; his Care extending only to Bodies : If we can make it appear that they give no Support to the Objection, we muft conclude it, even in this Senfe, falfe and groundlefs. We fay then, that as to the firft Propofition, it is indeed univerfally true : But that It is not at aU appUcable to the Cafe In Hand ; the Dlfqualificati- on, by a Teft-Law, being no Punifhment in the tme Senfe of the Word, which is that implyed In the Propofition. To the fecond we fay, — that it is not univerfally true : For that when Opinions do, diredtly and neceffarily, affedl the Peace of Society, they then come within the Magiftrate's Jurifdidtion ; and tliat this Exception takes Place in the Cafe be fore us ; the Opinions, which a Teft-Law makes Matter of DIfqualificatlon, diredtly and neceffarily affedling the Peace of Civil Society. I. Our firft Affertion we prove thus, — Evil of all Kinds, and whencefoever proceeding, Man, by Na ture, has a Right to repel. Evil that proceeds not from the Will is called a Mifchief; and may be fimply repelled, and this is called Reftraint : Evil that proceeds from the WiU is called a Crime ; and may, not only, be repeUed, but have additional Pain, more than fufficient for the Repulfion, in flidted on the Author ; and this is properly caUed Punifhment. That Punifhment fhould not be in flidted for a Mifchlef, that is, for an Evil in which the Will is not concerned, is plain from hence. — The End oi that additional Pain, more than Is fuf ficient for Reftraint, called Punifhment, being for Vengeance on the Offender, and for Example to deter others, it would be abfolutely unjuft to inflidt aven ging Pain for what was involuntarily committed ; and altogether impertinent to attempt to deter, by Example, from involuntaty Adlions. The utmoft therefore Sedt. 3- Of ff Test-Law. 123 therefore that can be inflidted for a Mifchief is Re ftraint, that is, juft fo much Pain, when the Mif chief proceeds from a rational Animal, as is necef faty to repel that Mifchief. Thus Is Reftraint pro perly annexed to Mifchief, and Punifhment to Crimes. Such diftindt and precife moral Modes, one would think, were not vety eafy to confound. And yet they have been confounded ; to the great Obfeurity of our Reafonings on thefe Subjedts. It is trae, while they are confidered in their Application to ir rational and rational Agents, the Diftindtion is fel dom miftaken ; but when they are both applied to rational Agents, then it is that Men begin to con found the Ideas, and negledt and lofe the Marks of Diftindtion. For i . Pain being an infeparable Idea in Punifhment, and evety Reftraint of a rational Agent having fome Degree of Pain attending it, this Idea common to both, led them to think the two Terms fynonymous. 2. — Reftraint of a ratio nal Agent being defined to be an Inffidtiort of juft fo much Pain as is neceffaty to repel the Evil, and Punifhment to be an Inflidlion of more than Is necef^ faty for that Purpofe, Men confidered the Difference as only from lefs to more : And applying this to Mifehiefs and Crimes fet together in Comparifon, inftead of applying it to Mifchiefs compared with Mifchiefs, and Crimes with Crimes, even this fmall Difference was loft and confounded. Becaufe where the Mifchief is vaftly more obftinate, and difficult to eradicate th^n the Crime, there the Pain attend ing the Mifchief muft be more than that attending the Crime. The Ufe and Solidity of] our Diftin dtion may be illuftrated by this Example. There are four Sedts, whofe Principles, our Adverfaries won't deny, ought to be reftralned. — The Atheist, the Engliffi Papift, the German Anabaptift, and the ^aker, all hold Opinions pernicious to Civil So ciety, 124 Of ff Test-Law. Book III. ciety. But thefe being of different Degrees of Ma- hgnity muft have different Degrees of Reftraint, The Atheift, who Is incapable of giving Security for his Behaviour in Community, and whofe Principles diredliy overthrow the very Foundation on which it is built, fliould certainly be banifhed- all Civil Soci ety : The Englifh Papift, who owns an Ecclefiafti cal Power fuperlor to all temporal Dominion, fliould not be tolerated In any Soveraign State : The Ger man Anabaptift, who holds all capital Punifhment to be finful, fhould be debarred the Magiftracy : Ai'td the ^aker, who beUeves all defenfive War to be unchriftian, fhould be excluded the common Li berty of refiding in frontier Places, in States on the Continent. Now thefe different Degrees of Pain do not make one a Puniffiment, and the other, a Re ftraint, but, being every one proportioned to the Malignity of their refpedlive Evils, and no more than what is juft neceffaty to repel them, they are all equally Reftraints only. But now extend thefe Pains and Penalties to the burning the Atheift ; to the banlfhing the Papift ; to the denying Civil Pro tedtion to the Anabaptift ; and Religious Toleration to the Quaker ; and then, notwithftanding the fame Diverfity of Degrees, they are all- Puniftoments, and none mere Reftraints. Becaufe more Pain, in evety Cafe, is inflidted than was neceffary to repel the re^ fpedllve Evils. We are next to fhew that the Pain inflidted by a Teft-Law, is no more than neceffary to repel the Evil of Diverfity of SeCls in the Adminiftration ; and, confequently, that it is a Reftraint only. To make this evident, let us fuppofe a Perfon able in one cer tain Place only to do Mifchief, and that he is dif pofed to do It : To repel this Evil, it is plain, there is no other Way, than by debarring his Entranpe in to that Place. This Means then is neceffaty, but what Sedt. 3- Of ff Test-Law. 125 what is neceflaty to repel an Evil is a Reftraint only. But was this Pain extended ; and, becaufe he can do Mifchief in one Place, he is debarred Entrance into ten, then the Pain becomes a Puniffiment, becaufe more than neceffaty for repelling the Evil. The Cafe in Hand is exadtly paraUqI. Diverfity of Sects can do Mifchief only by getting into the Admini ftration : To keep them out therefore, for the Rea fons above. Is only a Reftraint. But was their Ci vil Incapacity extended further, then it v/ould be come a Punifhment. But, by the Teft-Law, die Incapacity is not forther extended, therefore is it no Punifhment, but a Reftraint only. 2. We come now to our fecond Affertion, and fay, that it does not hold univerfaUy true that the Civil Magiftrate hath nothing to do with Opinions ; for that when they diredliy and neceffarily affedl the Peace of Civil Society the Coercion of them is in his Jurifdidtion, even by the Confeflion of our Ad verfaries themfelves. Which would they keep to, ingenuoufly. We fliould take on their Words, and proceed. But it is to be obferved, that tho' they allow this Maxim in Speculation, yet they can rare ly be brought to apply it in Pradtice. Which would tempt one to think, that the evident Mifchiefs from fome Opinions forced this general Confeffion from them ; but that a Belief that Reafon and Truth were violated by the Magiftrate's interfering in Opinions, was what withheld them, from owning the Fitoefs Ih any particular Inftance. I will in Charity rather fuppofe this the Cafe, than that a Spirit of Licen- tioufnefs makes them retract in Pradtice what they own in Speculation ; and fhaU therefore endeavour to convince them that this Coercion, which all Parties agree to be neceffaty, is likewife reafonable and fafe. Not at prefent then to infift on the Argument of Its Juftice, drawn from its Neceffity alone, we fay, that 126 Of ff Test-Law. Book IU. the End of every rational Creature is Happinefs : And tliat the then End of fuch rational Creatures, as are deftined to two feparate States of Exiftence, is the Happinefs of that State In which they are exi fting. Otherwife the good of the Creature in that Station was not confulted by its Creator. But as this cannot be faid, confequently whatever oppofes the Attainment of that Happinefs muft be repeUed, becaufe the Purpofe of the Creator would, otherwife, be defeated. — If thefe Creatures, (as Man) are not only deftined to two feparate States of Exiftence, but are compofed of two different Natures, one of which is folely adapted to his prefent Station, then the States muft not only be feparate, but different In Kind ; confequently, fo muft be the Happinefs at- t;endant on each State, But if the Happinefs, fa muft the Means of attaining each be likewife diffe rent. Thus the Means of attaining Man's Happi nefs here is Civil Society ; the Means of his Happi nefs hereafter. Contemplation. If then Opmions, the Refult of Contemplation, obftrudl the Effedls of Civil Society, it follows, that they muft be reftralned. Accordingly, the ancient Mafters of Wifdom, who, from thefe Conflderatlons, taught that Man was born- for Action, not for Contemplation,. univerfaUy con curred to eftablifli It as a Maxim founded in the Na ture of Things, that Opinions ffiould always give Way to Civil Peace. Again, if God deftined Man to two fuch States of Exiftence, in each of which the Happinefs of the - exifting State was to be his End, it is demonftrable, and almoft felf-evident, that he, at the fame Time, fo difpofed Things, that the Means of attaining the Happinefs of one State fliould not crofs or obftrudl the Means of attaining the Happinefs of the other. , From whence we muft conclude, that where the fup pofed Means of each, namely, Opinions and Civil Peace Sedt. 3- Of ff Test-Law. 127 Peace do clafh, there one of them is not the tme Means of Happinefs. But the Means of attaining the Happinefs peailiar to that State in which the Man at prefent exifts, being perfedlly and infallibly known by Man ; and the Means of the Happinefs of his future Exiftence, as far as relates to the Dlf- covety of Truth, but vety imperfedtly known by him ; it neceflarily foUows, that wherever Opinions clafh with CivU Peace, thofe Opinions are no Means of foture Happinefs : Or, in other Words are either no Truths, or Truths of no Importance. Thus have we proved, that the Magiftrate's Re ftraint of Opinions, which are mifchievous to Civil Society, is reafonable and fafe. Defiring to be un derftood, when we fpeak here of a rational Creature, to mean the Species ; and when we fpeak of a Civil Society, to mean fuch as is formed on the Principles of public Liberty and common Rights of Subjedts. For to unjuft and unnatural Governments, the moft momentous Truths wiU be mifchievous and deftru dtive ; their End being private, not public Utility. It Is never then, but where the Society Is on legiti mate Foundations, that Its Peace is to be preferred to Opinions ; and there that Preference wiU be al ways reafonable and juft ^. We fhaU now fhew, that what a Teft-Law re- ftralns doth diredliy and neceffarily affect the Peace of Civil Society. Where a Religious Principle of fome certain Sedt is particularly oppofed to fome one fundamental Maxim or Ufage of Civil Society, the Malignity of it is feen by evety one. Thus, in the Cafe of thofe Opinions refpedlively held by the Atheift, Papift, * See this further illuftrated in the Proof of the Propofition, that Truth and Utility do necejjarily coincide. Div. Leg. of Moies, p. 444. Ed. 2. I Anabaptift I2B Of ff Test-Law. Book lit Anabaptift and Quaker, mentioned above, there are few who fee not their pernicious Confequences, or will not own the Reftraint of them to be neceffary. But where a Religious Principle oppofes, not one certain Maxim or Ufage, but the general Nature and Conftitution of Civil Society, the Mifchief of it is not fo generally feen ; and if it oppofes not fo much the Nature of Civil Society, confidered alone, as when It Is in Union with the other, the Mifchief will be lefs obferved : But and If this Religious Prin ciple be not a Principle peculiar to one Sedl, but common to all, the Mifchief will be ftUl lefs ob ferved and feen. This is the Cafe with Regard to the pernicious Principle which a Teft-Law reftrains. It being, as we have obferved, what fets every SeCt on attempting to eftabliffi itfelf on the Ruin of all the reft. On thefe Accounts, our Adverfaries fee the Ne ceffity, and feem to applaud the Juftice of Reftraint, in the firft Cafe, and yet in the other, Cty out againft the unreafonable Tyranny of fubjedling feveral Sedts to Civil Incapacities which hold no peculiar Opini ons pernicious to the State. But they feem not to know, that the firft is not the only legitimate Rea fon that may be urged for the Equity of a Reftraint. For where Is the Difference, with Regard to the State, between the Principle's being peculiar to one Sedl, or common to all ; between its injurioufly af fedling one certain Maxim or Ufage, or the whole Frame and Compofure of a State in Union with a Church ; If fo be the Reftraint be common to aU as weU as the Principle .? Henceforth then we hope- to hear no more of the Injuftice of Civil Incapaci ties on a Sedt which holds nothing peculiar that can injurioufly affedt the State. Having now quite overturned the two Propofiti ons on which this famous Objedlion ftands, it will give Sedl. 3- Qfff Test-Law, 129 give us no fiirther Trouble, as leaving us at Liber ty to conclude. That to abridge a Citizen of his Civil Rights for Matters of Opinion, which affeCl Society, is no Violation of the Law of Nature. But if, after all, our Adverfaries will obftlnately perfift in maintaining a Tefl to be contraty to the Law of Nature ; we dare undertake to vindicate it, even on that Suppofition ; as having the univerfal Pradtice of Mankind on our Side, who, for the Sake of Civil Society, in their municipal Inftitati- ons, have ventured to deviate from the Law of Na ture ; and this, with as univerfal an Approbation. But, to avoid Obfeurity, it will be neceffaiy to tell the Reader in what Senfe we underftand the Law of Nature. For a certain Illiterate Species of Writers have, in this, as in moft other Matters which they have undertaken to handle, done their beft to confound all Ideas, and remove the Marks and Boundaries of Science : While they make the Law of Nature, as It refpedts Man alone, (for that, at prefent, we have only to do with) to fignify that which right Reafon, taking in all Circumftan-^ ces, didtates, in evety Cafe, to be done. Thus confounding the Law of Nature with Civil, and all other Laws. And in this Senfe, our Inquiry into the Conformablenefs of a Teft to the Law of Na ture, after a Teft has been proved juft and reafon able, would be vety impertinent. But we, by the Law of Nature, as it refpeCls Man only, follow that Signification in which it has been ufed by all the wife and learned Writers on Natural and Civil Laws, from Plato and Ariftotle down to Hooker znd Puffendorf ; and mean, what Reafon prefcribes under the fole Confideration of Men's Nature, and their mutual Relation to each other, whether in or out of Society, without any Regard had to the pecu liar Frame, Genius, and Confiitution of Civil Policy. K Which 130 0/' ff Test-Law. Book III. Which laft Confideration is peculiar to Civil Laws. And in this Senfe, an Inquiry concerning a Teft^ Law's Conformity to the Law of Nature is very pertinent. ' We fay then, that it is a Pradtice as approved as it is univerfal, for States, in Compliance to the Ne- cefliities of Society, to form many of their Munici pal Laws in diredl Oppofition to what the Law of T'lature prefcribes. The Writings of the Civil Lawyers, and of thofe who treat of the Laws of Nature and Nations, are full of thefe Cafes ; where the Laws of Civil Society in general, not of this or that particular State, are total Deviations from what the Law of Nature diredts to. It would be endlefs to enumerate thofe Cafes. I fhall content myfelf with one or two.. The Cafe of that Civil Acquifi tion called Prescription is vety famous. Pre fcription Is, when a Man, by enjoying for a certain Courfe of Time, without Oppofition, the Property of another, but poffeffed by him bona fide, and by a lawful Title, acquires in that other's Property, a full Right, In fuch fort, that the tme Proprietor has no longer any Claim to it, or Civil Adtion for "the Recovery of It. Now this, by the generality of Writers, Is agreed on to have its fole Founda tion In the Civil Law. The incomparable Cujas fays exprefly ^,—That the Law of Prefcription di reCtly contradicts the Law of Nature and Nations, becaufe the true Proprietor is difpoffeffed of his own, without his Confent. And indeed nothing can be more evident. For what I once had, I muft ever have, a Right to, till I refign, transfer, or forfeit it by a voluntaty Adl. What then was it that oc cafioned, in all States, this Deviation from the Law of Nature ? What elfe but public Good, the Peace I Cujacius ad 1. 1. Dig. de ufucapibn. of Sedt, 3. Of ff Test-Law. 131 of Society, avoiding Diforder, and ftlfllng the Sseds of Chicane and Procefs ? It is of the higheft Con cernment to the State that its Citizens be affured of their Poffeffions without Conteft. But hov/ can there be any Certitude, if the ancient Owner hath forever the Liberty of making out his Claim, and a Right to be reftored to it. This would entirely deftroy all Commerce and Intercourfe between Ci tizens. For who would purchafe any Thing, If at all Times after, old Claims might be revived ? In a Word, the Law of Prefcription Is fo vety evident ly againft the Law of Nature, that thofe who deny it are forced to have Recourfe to that ridiculous Signification of the Law of Nature above taken No tice of. For they fay, Prefcription is not againft the Law of Nature, becaufe that Law orders, in every Thing, what Reafon fays {all Circumftances taken in) is fit to be done. Now which Way foever this Law of Prefcription is defended, whether by owning It to be againft the Law of Nature, and juftifying the Deviation by public Utility, or by denying it to be againft that Law as here underftood, the Defence will ferve equally for a Teft-Law, tho' we fliould own it to be equally againft the Law of Nature, which we do not : Having largely proved that it is perfedlly agreeable to that Law, in its exadt and true Signification. I wUl beg leave to give another Inftance of this univerfal Pradtice, that fome, perhaps, may think comes more perfedlly up to the Cafe In Eland. When Man entered into Society, and Property, In Confequence thereof, was throughly regulated and eftabliflied, feveral Things were left out in the ge- nera,l Divifion ; and ftill continued to become, by Right, as in the State of Namre, the Acquifition of the firft Occupant. Amongft thefe were wild Creatures, called, by the Lawyers Fsr^e Nature, K 2 Not with- 132 Of ff Test-Law. Book III, Notwithftanding this, all States have concurred, againft the Law of Nature, to enadl Game Laws, whereby the Right of Capture is forbid to all not fo particularly qualified. And the Reafon of the Prohibition was, becaufe it was not at all for the public Good either to fuffer Peafants and Mechanicks to run up and down the Woods and Forefts armed; which not only brings them to negledt their proper Trades and Employments, to the Damage of the Public, and of their Families ; but, in Time, ine vitably drav/s them on to Robbery and Brigandage : Or to permit the Populace, in Towns and Cities, to have, and carry Arms at their Pleafure, which would give Birth and Opportunity to Commotions and Sedition. In this Inftance every one fees the Juftice and the Reafon of the Deviation from the Law of Nature. How happens it then, that thofe who fee it here, won't fee it In a Teft-Law ? Nothing but this. Re ligion Is mixed in this latter Affair, and the Jea loufy Men have been of late taught to entertain of Its Encroachments will give them no Room to judge impartially. Otherwife could one think it eafier for an honeft poor Man to qualify himfelf, as the Game-Law requires, for a Participation of thefe na tural Rights, than for a Diffenter to qualify him felf, as a Teft-Law requires, for a Place In the Go vernment ? Or could one be ignorant that all are juftly concluded by a Teft-Law, as well as by a Game-Law, by having given their Confent by them felves, or their Deputies, to its enadting. But the Truth is, Parties muft always have a Watch-word to carry on their Bufinefs. There was a Time, and that not long fince paft, when the Word was the Danger of the Church. This ferved tolera bly well, while it was feen Religion had any Influ ence on the Mind ; but fince a general Spirit of Licence Sedl. 3- Of ff Test-Law, 133 Licence has prevaUed, it lias been thought ne ceflaty to change the Cry, and we now hear of no thing but the Danger of our Civil Liber ties. This great Objedlion to a Teft from the Law of Nature, being the Bulwark of the Caufe, the Reader wiU excufe the Length we have been drawn into. But having now, as we prefume, entirely rafed it, I. By fhewing the Rights pretended to are mere ly imaginaty ; 2. That if there were any fuch. It were no Vio lation of the Law of Namre, to exclude a Ci tizen from them, on Account of Opinions ; 3. That tho' it were a Violation of that Law, yet ftiU the Exclufion might be well juftlfied. Having, I fay, done this, we fhall difpatch the remaining Objedtioris, which conclude only againft the Expediency of a Teft-Law, in fewer Words. II. The next is — That a Teft-Law is injurious to true Religion, by encouraging one Set of Opinions, and difcouraging the reft, which is clapping a falfe Bias 07i the Mind, that, in its Search after Truth, ought to be left entirely free and difengaged. — But we do not de- fpair of making it very evident, that a Teft is fb far from being injurious to true Religion, that it is, in the whole, highly ferviceable to it. Let us I . Then examine how the Difcouragement affedts it. Now admitting the Tolerated Religion to b)e the true ; and that feveral of Its Members, un der the Difcouragement of a Teft-Law, will, for the fake of Civil Advantages, leave it, and come over to the Eftablifhed Religion ; we muft yet con clude that, confidering the Smallnefs of the Difcou ragement, they who leave it on that Account, and knowingly embrace a falfe, muft be the moft un worthy, and moft abandoned of Men, Men that, K 3 while 134 Of ff Test-Law, Book III. while they continue of the true Religion, muft dif grace, and otherwife highly injure it. Unlefs it be fuppofed to be more for the Interefts of true Reli gion to have large Crouds, though of falfe and un worthy Members, than Numbers of fincere Profef fors. Which is fo monftrous a Suppofition, that even vulgar Notions feem not to countenance It. It being commonly underftood, that true Religion was in a more flourifhing Condition in the primitive Age of Chriftianity, when its Profeffors were few and fincere, than in any fince, tho' fince, it hath over- fpread the Univerfe. So that It appears from hence to be highly for the Interefts of true Religion to have fuch a Touch-Stone, or Criterion, as the Teft, to difcrlminate its fincere from Its corrupt Members. Which, on this Account, can be no more faid to be injurious to it than Fire is to Gold, when. In trying the Oar, it reduces its Bulk, but refines It from its Drofs. It is moft evident then, that this Objedtlon cannot, with any fhew of Reafon, be made by a Member of the Tolerated Religion. 2. Let us next fee hov/ the Encouragement affedts true Religion. Our Argument now leads us to fup pofe the Eftabliffied the true. But If, according to the Suppofition, it be the true, is it not for the Be nefit of Mankind in all his Interefts, that it fhould be fupported by Civil Power .? And can it be fup ported without a Teft ? But to wave that, at pre fent, we ingenuoufly own, that as the Effence of Religion confifts in the inward Impreffion it makes Upon the Mind, the bringing in Members, who make only an outward Profeffion, is injurious to Religion. However, we fee, no one has Reafon to make the Objedtlon, but thofe of the Eftablifhed Church. But confidering the Smallnefs of the En couragement, and the Probability ofthe Conformity's being on Conviction, for the Cafe fuppofes the Efta blifloed Sedl. 3- Of ff Tes T-L AW. 13^. bliffied Religion the true, we have no Reafon to think this Injuty can prove of Moment. Be this as it will, is it fit fo great a Benefit to Civil Society, as we have proved this to be, fhould be loft on Ac count of the Injuty it accidentally occafions ? It will be Time enough to hearken to what our Adverfa ries have to fay, for the Affirmative, when they bring us an Inftance of any one fignal Benefit to Mankind, in the Improvement of civil Life, that is not attended with fome Inconvenience. Till then, we fhall, perhaps, think ourfelves at Liberty to fupport an illuftrious Improvement of it, tho' it be not exempt from that common Lot to which aU humane Things are fubjedt. But, 3. Admit fome fmall cafoal Harm may be thus derived to Religion, it is not only abundandy compenfated by thofe vaft Advantages accruing to the State from thence, but likewife infinitely out weighed in the good done to Religion by an Efta- bliffiment, on which a Teft is ljuilt, and from which it neceffarUy flows. We have fhewn, and it can not be too much inculcated, that the State efpoufed, and entered into Alliance with the Church, for the fake of publick Utility : We have proved, and it cannot be too oft repeated, that public Utility and Truth do coincide. That they do fo, in general, is demonftrable from our Idea of the firft Caufe: That they do fo in particular, with Regard to Man, we have made appear above, in fpeaking of his two feparate States of Exiftence. If they do coincide^ then, Falfehood, the Reverfe of Truth, muft be deftrudtive of public Good. The Confequence is, that the State muft, for the fake of public Utility, feek Truth, and avoid Falfehood : And knowing perfedlly in what public Utility, which is a fure Rule and Meafure of Truth, confifb, fhe will be much better enabled to find out Truth than any fpe- K 4 culative 136 Of ff Test-Law. Book IIL culative Inquirer, with all the Aid of the Philofo phy of the Schools. From whence it appears, that while a State in Union v/ith the Church, hath fo great an Intereft and Concern with true Religion, and fo great a Capacity fpr dlfcoverlng what is true; Religion is hkely to thrive much better than when left to itfelf. Which we have fully fhewn in treat ing of the firft Motive the State had to feek an AU liance with the Church. If it fhould be ftill urged, that tho', indeed, true Religion be not Injured by a Teft, yet particular Men are, as having a falfe Bias clapped on their Minds, which draws them, by Hopes and Fears, from the true to the falfe Religion: — We reply, that- were the Rewards and Difcouragements of a Teft-Law fo great as to make thofe who complied not with their Threats and Invitations uneafy in Ci vil Life, and, confequently, thofe who did, to fuc- pumb thro' mere humane Frailty, the Obfervatlon would be fomewhat plaufible. But when thefe Re wards and Difcouragements are fo fmall as to tempt only the moft profligate and abandoned, no Injuty is done. For fuch Men have no Pretence of Right to be put under Cover from fo flight a Temptation, III. The third Objedtlon is — That a Tefi-Law may endanger Religious Liberty. For if, for the 'Good qf the State, all, but thofe of the Eftabliflied Religion, may be kept out of the Adminiftration ; then for the fame Good, if Reafons of State fo require, they may be reftraiped the Exercife of all but the Eftabli ffied Religion. And a Pretence will not be wanting ; for it is certain that Diverfity of SeCls oft produce the worft Confequences to a State. To this we reply, ^ . That tho' we have reafoned, frorn the Good of Society, to prove the Neceffity of a Teft, yet that was not till after we had fliewn the Juftice of it from the cleareft Principles of the Law of Nature and Sedl. 3- Of ff Test-Law. 137 and Nations. But thofe Laws oppofe the taking away Religious Liberty, that is. Freedom to wor fhip God according to one's own Confeience, on any Pretence whatfoever^ 2 . But we fay forther, that thofe vety Principles of the Law of Namre and Nations, which we have laid down, in the firft Part, to prove the Equity of an Eftablifhed Reli gion and a Teft-Law, and on which our whole The- oty depends, do, in an invincible Manner, eftablifli the divine Dodlrine of Toleration, or the Right of worfhipping God according to one's own Con feience. So that this Difcourfe is fo far from gi ving any Entty, as the Objedtlon fuppofes, to the Infringement of Religious Liberty, that it lays the Foundations of it on the only folid and impregnable Ground. For on thefe two cardinal Principles, on which, as on two Hinges, our Theoty is raifed and turns, namely — That the State hath only the Care of Bodies, and the Church only the Care of Souls — And that each Society is Sovereign, and independent of the other. Is demonftrably deduced the indefeafible Right of Religious Liberty. He who would fee the fe veral Parts of this Demonftratlon at large, and cleared from the plaufible Sophiftty of an able Adverfaty, may read the Letters concerning Tolera tion. 3. We fay, that now an eafy Anfwer is gi ven to the Argument of Neceffity of Conformity from the Danger of Diverfity of Religions to the State, hinted at in the Objedlion. For the Malignity of that Diverfity arifes folely from the Infringement of Religious Liberty, Do but once grant a Tolera tion, as the Law of Nature and Nations require, with the Eftablifhment of one, and an Exclufion of all the reft from the public Adminiftration, and the Evil vanifhes, and many Religions become as harni- lefs as one. It being only the tyrannical yforpatlon pf the State, upon the Rights of the Church, that made 138 0/ff Test-Law. Book IIL made Diverfity of Opinions mifchievous and malig nant, 4. But laftly, we fay, that, even on our Ad verfaries Suppofition, the Objedtion has no Force. For had we juftlfied a Teft-Law only by Arguments drawn from the Good of the State, yet this vety Principle, if purfued, would be fo far from endan gering Toleration, that it would perfedlly fecure it, .For to make Religion ferviceable to the State, which is the great End of an Eftabliffiment, it muft make a real Impreffion on the Mind ; this is evident from what we have obferved in the firft Book. Now Religion feldom or never makes a real Impreffion on the Mind of thofe who are forced into a Church ; all that forcing to outward Conformity can do, is to make Hypocrites and Atheifts. Therefore, for the fake of the State, the Profeffion of Religion fhould be free. Flence may be feen the ftrange Blindnefs of thofe Politicians who expedt to Benefit the State by forcing to outward Conformity : Which, making Men Irreligious, deftroys the fole Means a Church has of ferving the State. But here, by a common Fate of Politicians, they fell from one Blunder to another. For having firft, in a tyrannical Humour, or fuperftitious Fondnefs to their own Scheme of Worfhip, infringed upon Religious Liberty : And then beginning to find that Diverfity of Sedts was hurtful to the State, as it always wUl be, while the Rights of Religion are violated, inftead of repairing the Miftake, and reftoring Religious Liberty, which would have ftifled the pullulating Evil in the Seed, by affording it no further Nourifliment,, they took the other Courfe, and endeavoured, by a thorow Plfclpline of Conformity, violently to rend it away ; and, with it, they up-rooted and deftroyed aU that Good to Society which fo naturally fprings up from Religion. IV. The laft Objedlion \%—tr:r:1^hat a Teft-Law is the Sedt. 3. Of ff Test-Law. 139 the novel Invention of a barbarous and fiaviffi Gothic Policy: Unknown to the polite and happy Ages of Greece and Rome, when Civil and Religious Liberty flouriffied beyond Compare. So near as I am now to the Con ciufion of my Difcourfe, it would ftay me too long to detedt our Adverfaries grofs Errors concerning the Condition of Rehgious Liberty in the ancient World E : Upon which Errors this Objedtlon is built. It fliall fuffice, at prefent, to tell them they are mif taken In their Fadl. Thefe happy People had, like us, their Eftablijhments and T eft-Laws. — Tho' it may perhaps a little furprife them, we can't forbear telling them, that even Athens, their Athens, fo flourifhing and free, had, in its beft Times, a Teft- Law to fecure the Eftabliffied Religion. Which v/as exadted of aU their Youth. For, Athens being a Democracy, every Citizen had a conftant Share in the Adminiftratlon. And a Teft it was of the ftrong eft Kind, even by Oath. A Copy of which Is pre ferved by Stobaus ^, who tranfcribed this ineftimable Fragment from the Writings of the Pythagoreans, the great School of ancient Politics '. It is conceived in thefe Words : "I will not difhonour the facred " Arms, nor defert my Comrade in Battle : I will " defend and protect my Country and mV " Religion, whether alone, or in Conjundlion *' with others : I will not leave the Public in a worfe, E See The Div. Leg. ofMofes^ Book II. § i, 5, and 6. o?r» m iQiX^,au. AMHNfl AE TnEP lEPON, )^ VZirff oa-\m xj efjc^^vdji;, xJ Toii; B^a-f^oTq rolq l^^VfjiEi-oi^ ^Eia-uf/.ea, Xj if? rtvxt; ctv iiWUi TO whii^oi t^^va-ti^ ofio^g^voii, xJ at ti; diM^ii t4yith Rites, Ceremonies, and an Ecclefiaftical Policy, I o'^ • — r-His Religion fram'd to unite eafily with all the va rious Sorts of Civil Policies, Hid. — — more ufeful to Society than Paganifm, 59 or Natural Religion, ibid. or fudaifm, 100 r — - independent of the State, 1 02 Church not depend!ent on the State. See Dependency. r- hath no Civil coercive Power, 43 ~-. — vyapts ijo coercive Civil Povyer fof its true ultimate End the Salvation of Souls, 44 -— — has the Power of Expulfion of refraftqry Jlembers, ^jvhich is neceffary for ifs immedicite End, the Purity of Worfliip; more would be a»/& and a»/a/?. See Religion. 45, 46, 47 — — needs the Proteftion of the State, 67 Convocations in a State of Alliance or under an Eftabliih- ment can't meet or ci3 judicially withput ^& Permiffion of the fupreme Magiftrate, 9° — -r njay he very ufeful, ^ 91 Courts Ecclesia,stical have their coercive Powers from the State foi: Reformation of Manners, 80 — — ^ an Aid to the Defefts of the State. See State. 81 •^ — have no Cognizance of Opinions with coercive Ppwer j the State itfelf ha,ving no fuch Power, excepting in the Ar ticles of a God, a Providence, and a Futiye State, which it ftill referyes to itfelf, 8z, 8} judge not Matters c6gnlz;able by the Civil Courts, 83, 84 — fubjeft to the Laws of the State, and fliould proceed by its Forms, 86 ¦ fubjeft to Appeals to prevent Independency and Tyranny Etclefiaitical, ^7 ' CoufcTi INDEX. Courts Ecclesiastical have Power of Excommunication, Page 82 over Diflienters, 85 exempt not the Clergy from the Civil Courts, ibid. ' extend to fuch Caufes as the Civil Power caii't take No tice of, Hid. D. Dependencyof Soc I e t I e s i j either from the Laiu of Nature, and then it is effential, which can't be where Societies are eiTentially dififerent as Church and State are, or it is by Ge- -neration, where one arifes out of the other, as out of Cities arife Companies, Colleges, and Corporations, tfr. but the Church has its End and Means difierent from the State, and exifted before it, 40, 4 1 — — or it is from the Laiv of 'Nations to prevent Imperium in Imperio, which happens not betU'ixt Church and State, ib'id. E- Enemies to the Eftablifliment Friends tc nominal, not Xareal Chriftianity, 97, 98 Establishment to be defended on the Principles of the Law of Nature and Nations, avoiding on the one Hand a Claimi of Divine Right defended on the Dodlrine of Intolerance, and on the other a Condemnation of the Teft, which opens a Door to all loofe Principles deftruftive of the \ery Bang of a Church, 3 ' makes not Religion a Tool for Politicians, 152 ' • wants a Teft to keep Sefts out of Power to hurt it, 116 — — may demand one as the Condition of Alliance, ibid. as a Recompence for its Independency, 117 given up to the State. See Test-Law. ¦ founded not on Truth, but Civil and Religious Utility, «43 for the Support of Opinion is contrary to the Rights of Society, and would end in Perfecatipn and the Deftruftion of Religious Liberty, 145,146 fbr the Support of Civil Utuity clear of all thefe 'Mif chiefs and Abfurdiries, 147 ExcoMMUNic ATioN peccffitry fpr 9 Chnrch, 45 fufficient for it, 47 dqes not interfere with the State, 48 F. f'jiJTH, Formu-'arie: of it neceflary, S7j 38 Hossnxi INDEX. H. Hob BiSM'anJ Popery agree in domineering over Confeience, J P^ge 43 In D e p e N D e N T Whig, the Author's Charafter and Folly, j i L. Law of Natu^re, in che prefent Queftion, to be diftinguifli'd from all other Laws, and is what right Reafon prefcribes as fit to be done, whether in or out of Society, without a- ny Regard had to the peculiar frame of any particular State, 1 29 M. Ma cistrate Civil introdiic'd as a Remedy againft Injuftice,. not with a View to promote all the Advantages Men may or do receive from Society and Government, 6, 7 — — his Power is defeftive, and wants the Help of the Church or Religious Power to enforce the Laws of the State, 7 ¦ can fecure only againft open Force, which will improve bad Men in Craft to evade the Laws, ibid. dare not fufficlently reftrain fome Crimes, for Fear of encreafing others of a worfe Kind, 8 • can't fufficlently enforce the Duties of imperfeft Obliga tion, -vis. Gratitude, Charity, i^c. 9, 10 ¦ muft be fupreme in the Church in Alliance, or elfe he would be only, as amongft ihc Papifts, the Church's Exe cutioner, 87, 88 ¦ appointed for the Security of temporal Liberty ^ind Pro perty only, 21 — : — nothing to do with the Security of Mens Future Happi nefs or the Salvation of Souls, zi, 42 nor with the Means of Salvation as fuch, 2 1 punifhes Aftions as Crimes againft Society, not as Sins or Offences againft Religion, 22 • has a Right to fecure the three great Religious Supports of Society, the Belief of a God, a Proijidence, and the Dif ference of moral Good and E'vil, 23, 24 encroaches on the Religious Society, or the Church by extending his Power to the Care of* Souls, 26- ¦ his Office miftaken from the fame Mens having an ciently been Priefts and Magiftrates, 27. from a Zeal for the God to whom they afcrib'd their Laws, ihid. froB^ INDEX. froi» the political End of many Religious Rites among the Heathen, 28. fiomsLjetvift^ Zeal in Chriftian Emptton of punifhing Crimes as Sins ; from the firft R&rmers model ing Civil Govemments on Je-wifh Plans to the Hindrance of the ReforiQation^ Page 29 Magistrate enci'oach'esi on the Church by claiming the Powers he has in a Union or Eftablifhment as inherent in his Office,. 30.— 33- ¦ wants Power to reward; i. e. can't reward every one who obferves the Law, as he may punifti every one who tranfgreflTes it, 1 1 — !— rewards only by Profeffion, i z ¦ can't diftribute Rewards according to perfonal Defert, becaufe- he can't know Men's Intentions in their Obedience, in which confifts their real Merit, 1 3 ; and becaufe he has not a fufficient Fund for Rewards, if he did know it. See Rewards. 14 feeks an Alliance with the Religious Society or the Church to preferve a Senfe of Religion and its Purity, 56. to hinder Fanaticifm and its Mifchiefs, 57, 58, 59 Objections to our Eftablifhment ; (i.) As contrary to the common Rights of Subjefts, 120, is'c. (2.) As preju dicial to a free Search of Truth, 133, tsff. (3.) As dan gerous to Religious Liberty, 136, bfc. (4.) As a barba rous Invention of Gothic Policy, 138. fcrV. {;.) As par tial and imjuft, becaufe the Teachers of all tolerated Churches have an equal Right to the Advantages due to a Clergy, 141 ¦¦I to the Author's Theory : (i .) That it does not tally with Matter of Faft, 149 ; (2.) Makes Religion a Tool of Poli tics, 1 52 Opinions, which direSly afFeft the Peace of Society, punilhable, 12;, 126 rof the Deity influence Mens Praftice, and fhould be kept fure by being drawn into a Form, the Profeffion of which ihould be a Term of Communion, and as general as poffible. See Faith. 38 .. punilhable as Mifchiefs, not as Errors, 1 45 P. Pajists agree with Hobbifts'm domineering over Confeience, 45 Papists make the State the Creature ofthe Church, 20 — their Scheme more rational than the Jacobites, 49 M Punish- INDEX. Punishments, their Nature, how different from Reftraints', Page 12?, 123, 124 •——for Errors muft Introduce Perfecutlon, 146 Qy a K E R s againft all Church Society, 20 — make Chriftianity only a divine Philofophy in the Mind, 39 — — yet out of mere Neceffity, to fupport the Exiftence of their Seft, have form'd themfelves into a diftinft Cinjil Commu nity, having before unwarily declared againft all Religions, 40 — their Refufal to pay Tythes the groffeft Prevarication, 77 Religion, its End to obtain the Favour of God, and to ira. prove the Mind ; the former no Power on Earth can hin der, and for that therefore it wants not the Help of the Magiftrate for its Security, but for the latter it does, ' 34 t confifts in the Contemplation of God's Nature, and Man's Relation to him, with proper Sentiments and fuitable outward Afts, 35 merely mental improper for fuch Creatures as Men, 36, 37 — — fuch as is proper for the Bulk of Mankind muft have Contemplations of God drawn out into Articles of Faith, and on our Relations to him into Afts of Religious Worfliip to be profefs'd and perform'd in common, 37 its Afts pf Worfhip fhould be decent, fimple, and figni- ficative, which they will never be, unlefs regulated by com mon Policy, 39 ¦ obliges to the Duty of imperfeff, and enforces thofe of perfea Obligation to the great Aid of the State, 17, 18, 19 oan't have its full Effeft on Society, without a wife Coalition with the State, zo Religion hath not the Care of the Body npr fliould have it, ... 42. 43 !• without coercfve Po^jier, this being inconfiftent with every Man's Right of worfhipping God according to his own Confeience, 46, 47 . wants the Proteftion of the State, not to propagate Reli gious Sentiments, but to preferve it from Violence, 67, 68 wants nPt Riches, Honours, or Power, 69 . in a State of Alliance wants a public Endowment for its Minifters, to make it more firm and lafting, more fervice able to the State, and to hinder the Dependency between the Clergy and the People, 73 Religioh INDEX. Reliciom national univerfally approv'd. Page 112 Rewards can't be given to all that obey, as Punifliments are inilifted on all who tranfgrefs the Laws, becaufe the Objeft of Rewards, a txiell intentiori d Obedience, can't be known, and becaufe no Fund would be fufficient to reward all who inight claim, 13, 14 —— propos'd only in Speculation by "Utopian Writers, who confound the Litterary, Mercantile, and Convivial Socie ties with the Civil, 15,16 Restraints not ¦pro^perly Pu«ift>ments, 122, 123 when they would become fo, 145,146 Rights of Subjefts not broke in upon by a Teft, J2^ — — of the Church, the Book fo called, makes the Church a mere Creature of the State on Hobbs'' s Principles, 50 State. See Magistrate. Supremacy in the Civil Magiffaate reffaains Ecclefiaftics from exercifing their Funftion without his Permiffion, 88 . does not impower the Magiftrate to make Priefts, fffc. 89 —^ does impower him to call and direft Convocations, 90 — to reftrain Excommunications, 92 ¦ confiftent with Ch r i s i 's Headfhip in his Church, 93 Ty t h e s the true Notion of their Divine Right, 75 no Injury to the State, 76 . ought to be paid by Sefts dividuig fi-om the Church, ibid. dependent on the Eflablijhment of the Church, 77 . not juftly chargeable on Perfons of different Religious Sentiments, on any other Pretence than for the Good of that Civil Society, of which all its Sefts are Members, 78 Test Law neceffary topreferve an eftabliflied Church, 116, 119 neceffary for the Peace of the State, 119,122,127 confiftent with the Right of Subjefts, 1 20 is not a penal, but a- defenfive Reftraint, 122, 123, T24. — in ufe among the politeft and freeft States, 139 — contrary to the Law of Nature in the fame Senfe as only- many other Civil Laws are, viz. the known Law of Prefcri ption, £;ff. 130,131,132 . oppos'd not by Reafon, but Party Prejudices, ibid. . not injurious to true Religion, but an eafy Tryal of Mens Sincerity, as a Check to the Ambition of Sefts in an Efb- bliftiraent, ' 34- M z Test- INDEX. Te:ST-La w the accidental Evils of it amply recompenced,by the great Good it does to Civil and Religious Societies, Page 1 35 confiftent with a free Toleration and the true Influence of Religion on the Minds of Men, and fo encroaches not pn the Liberty of worfhipping Gpd according tp our Cpnfciences, 136, 137, 138 Removal of it would end in a total Spbverfipn of all E- ftablilh'd Religion, 1 40, 141 — — is founded not upon Truth as fuch, but on Utility, 148 makes not the Magiftrate Judge of Religion, 147 , Truth and general UtiUty coincide in all Governments form'd on the Principles of natural Liberty, 54 Truth is therefore promoted by an Efl;abliflimeiit, 143 W. Worship muft partake ofthe Charafter of its Subjeft, and can't therefore be ^v.re\y fpiritual for fuch Creatures as Men, 36, 39 Write RS of Name and Ability agreeing in one falfe Principle, viz. that Religion was eflablifli'd for the Sake of Truth, na turally run into oppofite Conclufions, one combating one and another another bad Confequence of the fame wrong Principle, 144, FINIS. E R R A T A. Page 21. Line %. f' Its read The ai. 16. dele here 35- 3- for confifting, confifting on 61. 20. But Civil Laws $ut this. Civil LaAs Il- 31. 3^- Profperity Property 712. 27. is are 121. 16. equitably equally 123. 7- to confound to be confounded 146. 6. proves prove Juft publifhed. Printed for Fletcher Gyles againft Gray's-Inn in Holcorn. I. ' I ¦¦ H E Alliance between Church and State, or, jthe Neceflity %_ and Ecjtiity of an Efiablijhed Religion, and a Teji-Lam de monftrated, e^c. Oftavo. II. A Vindication of the Author of the Divine Legation of Mofes, See. from the Afperfions of the Country Clergyman's Letter in the Weekly Mifcellany. III. 'Faith Working b) Charity to Chr'ifiian Edification. A Sermon preached at the kft Epifcopal Vifitation for Confirmation in the Diocefe of Lincoln, with a Preface fhewing the Reafons of its Publication. And a Poftfcript, occafioned by fome Letters lately publiflied in the Weekly Mifcellany. AllWritten by William Warburton, A. M. Author of The Divine Legation of Mofes, &.C. Iv. Concilia MAGN.ffi Britanni.s:, & HiBERiii.ffi;: A Synodo Verolamienfi, A.D. 446. ad Londinenfem, A. D. 1717. Accedunt Conftitutiones 8c alia ad Hiftoriam Ecclefis Anglicanae fpeftantia, a Davide Wilkins, ST. P. Arcliidiacono Suffol- cienfi Collefta, in quatuor Voluminibus. Folio. In this Work are included both the Volumes of Sir H.Spel- tnan\ Councils, which were fo fcarce, that thsy have been fold for Ten Guineas. V. Hijloria Placitorum Coron-i, The Hiftory of the 'Pleas of the Cro-rm, by Sir Mat. Hale, Kt. fomctime Lord Chief-Juftice of the Court of ICing's-Bench. Now firft publifhed from his Lordfhip's Original Manufcript, and the feveral References to the Records examined by the Originals; -m'lth large Notes, by Sollom Emlyn of Lincoln's -Inn Efq,- To which is added, a Table of the principal Matters, 2 vol. Folio. VI. Fleta, feu Commentarius juris Anglican!, parti m e Co- dice MS. Cottoniano, partim ex Rotulis Antiquis, 8c veter- rimis tam Hiftorise quam Legum Angliae Scriptoribus cmcndatus, illuftratus gi. in integrum reftitutus. Liber Primus Ant'iqua Placitu Corona Co'ittinens, Folio. VII. The Englifli Works of Sir Henry Spelman, relating to the La-ws and Antiquities of England, with a curious Ac- Count of his Life, by Edmund Lord Bifhop of London. Folio. VIII. In the Prefs, and will be fpeedily publiflied, A New Diftionary Spanifh and Englifi;, and Englijh and Spanifh. See Piopofals. THE DIVINE LEGATION O F MOSES DEMONSTRATED, O N T H E Principles of a Religious Deift^ From the Omiffion of the Dodtrine of a FUTURE STATE O F Reward and Punishment INTHE JEWISH DISPENSATION. In Six Books. The Second Edition Corredled and Enlarged B Y WILLIAM WARBURTON, A.M. AnOKAAT^ON TOTS CtSAAMOTS MOT KAI KATANOHEQ TA ©AYMASIA EK TOT NOMOT -ZOX. Ffal.^ LONDON: Priated for Fletcher Gyles, againft Grafs Injt^ in Holborn. mdccxsxviii.. (V) T O T H E FREE-THINKERS. GiENTLEMEN, AS the following Treatife was written for your Ufe, you have the beft Right to this Addrefs. I could never approvd the Cuftom of dedicating Books to Men, whofe Profeflions made them quite Strangers to the Sub jedt. To have a Difcourfe on the Ten Predica ments addrefled to a Leader of Armies, or a Syftem of Cdfuiftry to a Minifter of State, al- ways appeared to mea high Abfurdity. Another Advantage I have in this, is, that I fhall not lye under any Temptations of Flattery, v^^hich, at this time of Day, when every Topic of Adulation has been exhaufted, will be of equal Satisfadtion to us both. Not but I muft own you have beeti managed j even by fome of our Order, with very fingulat Coraplai/ance. Whether it was, that they af-* fedced the Fame of Moderation, or the highef Ambition of your good Word, I know not ; but I, who neither love your Caufe, nor fear the Abilities that fupport it, while I preferve for you that Juftice and Charity which my Profef- A 3 fioil vi DEDICJl'IOl^. fion teaches to be due to all, can never be brought to think otherwife of you, than as the Defpifets of the Mafter whom I ferve, and as the impla cable Enemies of that Order, to which I have the Honour to belong. And as fuch, I could glory in your Cenfures ; but would certainly re fufe your Commendations. Indeed was it my Defign, in the manner of modern Dedicators, to look out for powerful Prote(5tors ; I do not know where I could fooner find them, than amongft the Gentlemen of youf Denomination: For nothing, I believe, ftrikes the ferious Obferver with more Surprize, in this Age of Novelties, than that ftrange Propenfity to Infidelity, fo vifible in Men of almoft every Condition ; amongft whom the Advocates of Deifm ar? received wich all the Applaufes due to the Invencers of the Arts of Life, or the De liverers of opprefled and injured Nations. The glorious Liberty of the Gofpel is forgot amidft our Clamours againft a pretended Ecclefiaftic Tyranny ; and we flight the Fruits of the reftored Tree of Knowledge, for the fake of gathering the Barren Leaves of mifgrafted Free-thinking. But miftake me not, here are no InGnuations intended againft Liberty: For furely,- whatever be the Caufe, it would be unjuft to afcribe ic to the Freedom of the Prefs, which wife Men will ever efteem one of the moft precious Branches of Civil Liberty. What though it be the Midwife, as ic were, to thefe Monfters of the Brain ; yet, ac the fame Time that it facili tates the Birth, ic lends ^forming Hand to the Iffue: DEDICATION. vii Iflue : For, as in natural Bodies, become mif- fliapen by fuffering Violence in the Conception, or by too long Imprifonment in the Womb, a free unreftrained Expofition of the Parts may, in time, reftore them to their natural Redlitude; fo crude and rickety Notions, crampt by Re ftraint, when permitted to be drawn out and examined, may, by che Reduction of cheir Ob liquities, and che Corredtion of cheir Virulency, ac lengch acquire Screngch and Proporcion. Nor lefs friendly is chis Libercy to che ge nerous Advocace of Religion: For how could fuch a one, when in earneft convinced of che Screngch of Evidence in his Caufe, defire an Ad verfary, whom che Laws had before difarmed, or value a Victory, where che Magiftrace muft triumph with him ? Even I, the meaneft in this Controverfy, ftiould have been aftiamed of pro- je6ting the Defenfe of the great Jewijh Legi flator, did not I know, chac his Aflailancs and Defenders (kirmiftied under one equal Law of Liberty. And if my diflfencing, in the Courle of this Defenfe, from fome common Opinions needs an Apology, I fliotdd defire it may be thoughc, that I ventured into this Train with greater Confidence ; that I might fliew, by not intrenching myfelf in authorized Speculations, I put myfelf upon the fame footing with you, and would claim no Privilege that was not en joyed in common. This Liberty then may you long pofl!efs; Jcnow how to ufe ; and gratefully to acknow ledge ! I fay chis, becaufe one cannot, without A 4 Indigation, viii D E D I C Ar I 0 N. Indignation, obferve, that amidft che full Enjoy- menc of ic, you ftill concinue, wich the meaneft Affeftation, to fill your Prefaces with repeated Clamours againft the Difficulties and Difcourage ments attending the Exercife of Free-thinking, and, in a peculiar Strain of Modefty and Rea foning, make ufe of this very Liberty to perfuade the World you ftill want it. In extolling Li berty we can join with you ; in the Vanity of pretending to have contributed moft to its Efta- blifhmcnr, we .can bear with you; but, in the low Cunning of pretending ftill to lye under Re ftraints, we can neither join nor bear with you. There was indeed a Time, and that within eur own Memories, when fuch Complaints were feafonable and meritorious ; but, happy for you. Gentlemen, you have outlived it: All the reft is^ merely Sir Martin, 'tis continuing to fumble at the Lute, though the Mufic has been long over: For it is not a Thing to be difguifed, that all we hear from you, on this Head, is but an aukward, though envenomed Imitation of an Origina Work of one, whoever he was (for as I do not pretend to guefs, fo neither fhould you) who ap pears to have been among the greateft, and moft luccefsful of your Adverfaries. It was publiflied at an important Juncture, under the Title of, The Difficulties and Difcouragements which at tend the Study of the Scripture. But with all the Merit of this beautiful Satire, it has been its Fortune not only co be abufed by your bad Imicacions, buc co be cenfured by thofe, in whofe Caufe it was written j I mean the real Friends of Religion DEDICATION. Ik Religion and Liberty. An Author of Note thus expreffes himfelf: — " Nor was this the worjl : Men were not only difcouraged from Jiudying and revering the Scriptures by — '¦ but alfo by being told that this Study was difficult, fruitlejs, and dangerous ; and a public, an elaborate, an earnefi Diffiuafve from this Study, for the very Reafons now mentioned, inforced by two well known Ex amples, and believed from a T erf on of great E- minence in the Church, hath already paffed often enough through the Prefs, to reach the Hands of all the Clergymen in Great-Britain and Ireland : God in his great Mercy forgive the Author. Se- rioufly it is a lamentable Cafe 1 — That any well- meaning Man fliould fb widely miftake the End and Defign of another ; as not to fee, by the Turn and Caft of the Difficulties and Difcourage ments, that it is a thorough Irony, addreflTed to fome hoc Bigots then in Power, to fliew them what difmal Effedts that inquifitional Spirit, with which they were poflTefl^ed, would have on Lite rature in general, at a Time when publick Liber ty looked with a veryfickly Face! Not, I fay, to fee this, but to believe on the Contrary, that ic was really intended as a public, an elaborate, an earneflDiffiuafive from theStudy of the Scriptures ! But I have fo charitable an Opinion of the great Author, for a great Author without Doubt he was, as to believe that had he forefeen the Liberty, that animates this fine turned Piece of Raillery, would have given Scandal to any good Man, he would, fbr the Confolation of fuch, have made any reafon- » Revelatb'/i examined vitkCaidour, in the Preface. able X DEDICATION. able Abatement in the Vigour of his Wit and Argument. But you, Gentlemen, have a different Quarrel with him : You pretend he hath fince wrote on the other Side the Qiieftion. Now though the Word of his Accufers is not apt to go very far with me, yet I muft own, I could be eafily enough brought to believe, that of an Author of fuch Talents, Literature, Love of Truth, and ofthis Country, as this appears to have been, would as freely expofe the extreme of Folly at one End, as at the other ; without regarding what Party he oppofed or fa voured by ic. And ic is well known, that at the Time this is pretended tb have been done, ano ther Intereft being become uppermoft, ftrange Principles of Licence, which tended to fubvert all Order, and deftroy the very Eflence of a Church, ran now in the popular Stream. What then fliould hinder a Writer, who was of no Par ty but that of Truth, to oppofe this Extrava gance, as he had done its Oppofite? And if he pleafed neither Bigot nor Libertine by his Unifor mity of Conduct, ic was becaufe chey were fo. How rare, howexccllenr, how public a Blef fing, is fuch a Virtue ! chac dares equally oppofe the differenc Excremes of Parries ; and ftand, as the Poet fays, Unaw'd by Danger of Offence ^ The fatal Enemy of Senfe I But to return to our Subjedt: — The poor thread-bare Cant of che Want of Libercy, I fliould hope then you would be, ac length, per fuaded DEDICATION. xi fuaded to lay afide : But that I know fuch Infi- nuations are amongft your Arts of Controverfy ; and that fomething is to be allowed to a weak Caufe, and a Reputation that requires managing. We know what to underftand by ir, when after a fuccefslefs Infult on Religion, the Reader is en treated to believe that you have a ftrong Referve, which only waits the fetting open the larger Pore of Liberty, yet fliut againft you. Thus, at the very Entrance of your Works, you teach us what we are to expedt. But I muft beg your Patience, now I am got thus far, to lay be fore you your principal Abufes of that Libercy in dulged CO you fbr better Purpofes ; or co give them the fofceft Name I can, in an Addrefs of this Nature, your Arts of Controversy. By this, I fhall ac once pradife che Charicy I have profeflTed, and juftify che Opinion I have paffed upon you. Your Writers, I fpeak ic. Gentlemen, co your Honour, offer your Confideracions co che World, either under che Charadter of Pecicioners for op prefled and injured Truch ; or of Teachers co ig- noranc and erring Mankind. Thefe are Cha radters, fure, chac, if any, require Serioufnefs and Gravicy co fupporc chem. Buc fo greac a Scranger to Decorum, for che moft Pare, is Man, on his Encry on che Scage of Life, chac, like Bays's Ador in the Rehearfal, who was at a lofs to know whether he was to be ferious or merry, melan choly or in love, he runs on in a ftrange jumbled Charadter ; but has, moft an end, a ftrong Dif^ pcfition to make a Farce of it, and mingle Buf- foonry xii DEDICATION. foonry wich che moft ferious Scenes. Hence, in religious Concroverfy, even while che greac Caufe of ecernal Happinefs is crying, and Men, and Angels, as ic were, accending che Iflxie of the Conflra, we can find room for a merry Story; and receive the Advocate of Infidelity with much welcome, if he comes but with a Difpofition to make us laugh: Though he brings the Tidings of Death, and fcatters round him the Poifbn of our Hopes, yez, like the dying Affaffin^, we can laugh along with the Mob, though our own Defpair and Agonies concluded the Entertainment. This Quality in a Writer making him fo well received, yours have been tempted to difpenfe with the Sdlemnity of their Charadter ; as think ing it of much Importance to get the Laugh on their Side. Hence Ridicule is become your fa vourite Figure of Speech ; and your Writers have compofed diftindt Treatifes to vindicate its Ufe, and manifeft its Utility. But to be fair with you, it muft be owned, that this extravagant Difpofi tion in the Reader towards unfeafonable Mirth, drives ali Parries upon being witty where they can, as being confcious of its powerful Operation in Controverfy ; Ridicule having from the Hands of a flcilful Difputant, the fame Effedt in barba rous Minds, with the new invented Darts " of Marius, that, though fo weak as to break in the throw, and pierce no farther than the Outfide, yet flicking there, they more entangle and in- '' 'Balthazar Gerard, who murthered thcPrace »/ 0r«»^e. See his Story. <= Vid. Plut. Vit. Mur. commode DEDICATION. xiii commode the Combatant, than thofe Arms which fly ftronger, and ftrike deeper. However, an Abufe it is, and one of the moft Pernicious, of the Liberty of the Prefs. For what greater Af front to the Severity of Reafon, the Sublimity of Truth, and the Sandtity of Religion, than to fubjedt them to the impure Touch of every fcur- rilous Buffoon? The Politenefs oi Athens, which you pretend fo much to admire, fliould be here a Leflbn to you ; which committed all Queftions of this Nature, when they were to be examined, to their graveft and fevereft Court, the Areopa gus: Whofe Judges would not fuffer the Advo cates for either Party to apply to the Paffions, fo much as by the common Rules of the chaftefl Rhetoric^. But a prepofterous Love of Mirth has turned you all into Wits, quite down from the mercurial Writer of the Independent Whig, to the atrabilaire Blafphemer of the Miracles. Though it would be but Charity to tell you a plain Truth, that Tully told your illuftrious Predeceffors long ago, when infedted with the fa me Diftemper: It a falem iftum,quo caret veftra natio, in irridendis nobis nolitote confumere. Et mehercule, fi me audiatis, ne experiamini quidem : Nondecet-f non datum eft ; non potefiis. How ever, if you will needs be witty, take once more your Example from the great Author of The Dif ficulties ; and leatri from him, the Difference between the Attic Irony, and Elegance of Wit, and your intemperate Scurrility, and illiberal Banter. * See Luc'ian de Gmnafiis. What xiv DEDICATION. What a Noife, you will fay, for a little harm- lefs Mirth. — Ah Gentlemen ! if that were all, you had my leave to Laugh on : I would fay with the old Comic, TJtinam male qui mihi volunt, fc rideant. But low and mean as your Buffoonry is, it \% yet to the Level of the People : and by it you lead captive, ftlly Fellows, laden with Sins, led away with divers Lufts, who are as little folici- tous, as capable, of the Point of Argument, fo they can buc catch che Point of Wit. Amongft fuch, and to fuch, you write: and it is incon ceivable' what Havock falfe Wit makes in a foolifh Head : The Rabble of Mankind, as an excellent Writer well obferves, being very apt to think, that every thing which is laughed at, with any mix-^ ture of Wit, is ridiculous in itfelf^. Few refledt On what a great Wit ^ has fo ingenuoufly owned. That Wit is generally falfe Reafoning. But one, in whom your Party moft glories, has wrote in Defenfe of this abufive Way of Wit and Raillery, on ferious Subjeds. Let us hear him then § : Nothing is ridiculous, ex cept what is deformed; nor is any thing Proof againft Raillery, except what is handfome and juft: And therefore it is the har deft Thing in. the World to deny fair Honefty the Ufe ofthis Weapon ; which can never bear an Edge againft herfelf. One may defy the World to turn Bravery or Ge- « Mr. Addifon's Works, vol. 3'^. p. 293, Quarto. f Mr. Wycherley to Mr. Pope, Letter 1 6. £ CharaHerifticks, vol. i . Ejfay en the 'Ereedom ofWitand Humour. neroftty DEDICATION. xv neroftty into Ridicule: A Man muft be foundly ridiculous, who with all the Wit imaginable, would go about to ridicule Wifdom, or laugh at Honefiy or good Manners. — Yes, ridiculous in deed, to laugh at Bravery, Generofity, Wifdom, Honefty, or good Manners, as fuch: And I hardly chink. Gentlemen, as licentious as fome of you are, you will be ever broughc co accept of chis Defy. And why need you, when it is buc fliewing chem with over-charged, and diftorted Features, co laugh ac Leifure. Call chem but Temerity, Prodigality, Gravity, Simplicity, Fop pery, and as you have oft experienced, the Bu finefs is done. And what Security will this Wri ter give us that they fliall not be fo called ? I am perfuaded, if you are never ro be thoughc ri diculous, cill you become fo, in che Way chis Gencleman marks our, you may go fafely on in the Freedom of Wit and Honour, till there be never a Virtue left, to laugh out of Counte nance. But ^ he will fay, he means fuch clear Virtue as hath no equivocal Mark about her for a Prevaricacor co lay hold of : Admit it, he will then clap her on a Fool's Coat ; and when he cannot make her ridiculous in her Perfon, will make her fo by her Equipage. However, will he fay, this fliews ac leaft, that nothing can be done againft her till flie be difguifed. A mighty Confolation this to expiring Virtue, that flie cannot be deftroyed till you have put her on a Fool's Coat. As if it was as hard to get one o;z, as Herculeis off, though xvi DEDICATION. though in che Reverfe of chis chere is a greacer Likenefs ; and we have frequencly feen, chac when once on, ic fticks as clofe as that enve nomed one of old, and lafts her to her Fu neral. But if this noble Writer means that Truth cannot be obfcured, however attempted to be difguifed, nor confequently, become ridiculous, however reprefented ; this is a great Miftake. As I fliall fhew in two celebrated Inftances : In the firft it will be feen, that nothing could be ftronger than the Ridicule, nor, at the fame Time, more open and tranfparent than the Difguife; in the latter, nothing more obfcured than the Beauty of the Truth ridiculed, nor more out of Sight than the Fallacy in the Re prefentation ; which will both teach us, that any kind of Difguife will ferve the Turn, and, that witty Men will never be at a Lofs for one. Of all the Virtues that were fo much in this noble Writer's Heart, and in his Writings, there was not one he more adored than Love OF PUBLIC Liberty, or which he would lefs fufpedt liable to the Impreflions of Buftbonry. I think I hear him fay. One may defy the World to turn the Love of public Liberty into Ridicule : A Man muft be foundly ridiculous, tpho with all the Wit imaginable would ga about it. However, once on a Time, a certain great Wit fet upon this Task; and undercook to laugh at this very ViftuQ; and that too, fo fuceefsfully, DkDiCATlON. Xvii tuccefsfuUy, chat he fee the whole Nation a Laughing with him. What mighty Engine, you will ask, was emplbyed co puc in Motioft io large • a Body, and for fo exttdordinary a Caufe ? Why, in good faith, as the Clown in Shakefpear fays, bur a T'rifte neither, if the Ledt-ned Jh'ouli fpeak Truth of it: Ir is a Dif courfe, of which all the Wie confifts in the Tide, and chac fculking coo, as you will fee, under one unlucky Word. Mrs. B'ull'^ Vindi- taiibn of the indlfpenfable Diity of GtJCKOLDOM, incumbent upon Wives, in Cafe of tte Tyr ami f. Infidelity, or Infufficieiicy of Hujhands^. Nov^ had: .cbe Readet tet bethoiighc himfelf, chac Reafon was the trite Meafure of -Ridicule ; he would have feen to redtify the Propofition, and to ftate ic fairly thus: The indijpenfable Duty of Divorce, &c. And then the joke had been over, before the Laugh could have been begun. And now let this noble Writer tell us, as he does, that fair Honefty can niv^r bear an Edge againft herfelf fcr that nothitig is ridicu lous but -mhat is deformed; and a deal to the fame Purpofej which his Platonic Manners had fiipplied him with. But very often the Charig'e, puc upon us, is noe fo eafily difcernible. Sulpieius tells Ci cero, chac recurning by Sea li-om Afia, and feeing in his Courfe JEgina, Megara, the Pi- raeus; and Corinth in Ruins, he tell into this very natural ahd humanb Reflexion : Andftjall {¦ Hifiory of John Bull, firft Part, c. 13. a we xviii DEDICATION. we, Jhort lived Creatures as we. are, bear •with Impatience fhe Death of our Fellows., •when, in one fingle View, we behold the Car caf es of fo many lately fiourijhing Cities\ What could be jufter or wifer cban che Piecy of chis Reflexion? And yee ie could noe efcape che Ridicule of a celebraced French Buffoon? If neither, fays he"^ , tbe'\ Pyramids of Egypt, nor the Colofl~eum <2/ Rome, could withftand the Injury ef Time, why fhould I think much that my black Waiftcoat is out at Elbows'? Here indeed the firft thing remarkable, is the irre- fiftible Force of Truth. The Buffoon, before he could throw an Air of Ridicule on this admirable Sentiment,, was for- ' Ex Afia rediens, cum ab .ffigina Megaratn vetfiw nayiga- rem, coepi regioncs circumcirca profpicere. Poft me erat /Efi- Tia; ante Megara; dextra Pir&eus; flni-ftra Connthus: Qu» oppida quodam tempbre florentiflima fuerunt, nunc proftrata, &. diruta ante oculos jacent. Coepi egomet mecum fie cogitare: Hem ! nos homiinculi indignamur, fi qurs noftrum interiit, auc occifus eft, quorum vita brevior effe debet, ciim uno loco tot oppidum cadavcra projefta jaceant.'^ L. 4. Ep. 5. Sttl^iat-, M.T. Ciceroni: ^ Superbes monutnens de I'orgueil des humains, Piramidesj Tombeaux, dont la vaine Struilure. A temoigne que I'art, par I'adrefTe des mains Et 1' affidu travail, peut vaincre la Nature ! Vieux Palais ruinez, chef-d'oeuvres des Roniains^ Et les derniers efforts de leur Architefture, Collifee, ou fouvent ces peuples inhumains De s'entr'ajfaffinerfe donnaient tablaiure. Par I'injure des ans vous eftes abolis, Ou du moins la plus-part vous eftes demolis: n n'eft point de ciment que le temps ne diflbudei Si vos marbres fi durs ont fentis fon pouvoir, Dois-je trouver mauvais qu'un mefchant pour point noiir^ Qui m'a dure deux ans, foit perce p^ le.coude ? Scamn. ced DEDiCATiON. xix eed to change the Image; and in the Place of /Egina, Megara^ &c. to fubftitute the Pyramids and Coloflfeum. For thefe latter, as they were the Works of human Pride, and Folly, eafily fuffered a ridiculous Turn : But the former, as free Cities, and the Nurferies of Arts and Com merce, being the nobleft Efforts of human Wif^ dom and Virtue, could not be fet in any idle Light. But then, how few of his Readers could de tedt the Change put upon them, when it is high ly probable the Author himfelf did no& fee it? Who, perplexed ac che obftinace Refiftance of Truch, in che Concourfe of Ideas, imperc^epcibly turned che Edge of his Raillery againft che Phan- tafm of it, and was che firft chae fell ineo his own Deceie. Hence may be. feen whac the noble Wricer feems eo have fpoken at random, ac leaft noe ac all CO che Purpofe of che Queftion he vvas upon, thac fuch indeed is che inflexible Nacure of Truch. thac all the Wit iti the World can never render it ridiculous, till it be diftorted to fhew like Er ror, or difguifed to appear like Folly, A Circum ftance which, though it prodigidufly recommends the Majefty of Finue, yet, as it cannot fecure ic from Infulc, doth noe ae all fhew che Innocence of Ridicule; which was chePoinc he had eo prove. But eo fhew whac lictle Good is co be expedt ed in chis Way bf Wit and Humour, one may go furcher; and obferve, chae even che Ridicule di fafe Vircue, which furely deferves no Quar ter,- hath been fometimes attended with very mifehieYous Effeds. The Spaniards have- lamen- a z ted 3(x DEDICATION. fpd, and I believe truly, that Cervantes's jufl and inimitable Ridicule of Knight-Errantry rooted up, with thac Folly, a great deal of their true Honour. And it appears very evident, that Butler\ fine Satire on Fanaticifm contributed not a little to bring jhber Piety into Difqredic during the li-cenrious Times of Charles II. — The Reafon is, becaufe there are many Shadows o( Refemblance hetween Truth and its Pretenders. And it is the Province of Wit only to find out the LikenelT^. in Things ; and noe che Talent ot the common Rjcaders of it to difcover the Dif- icrences. But 3'^ci.i will fay perhaps, lec Truth, whfo tlius attacked, defend itfelf vvith the fame Arms. For why, as your Mafter afks, fliould jfiz^V Ho ne jly he d^nije4 -the Ufe ofthis Weapon? Be it fo: Come on th|ea, a,nd let us impartially attpid the iniie. We have, upon Record, the moft il|u- flrious Example of tliis Conflidt that ever was. The Difpute I mean, was between /Sofr^^fi^l and .drlftophanes. Here Truth had all the Advan tage of Pla,ce, of Weapons, and of Judges : The lirft employed his whole Life in the C^uf^ of Virtue; the other only a few Comic Scenes a- gaiijit w. But Heavens! againft what Virtue? A-> gaiuft; the pureft and brightefl: Portion of it thac ever enlightened the Gentile World. The Wit of Arift.opha.fUs is well known : That of Sc/cmtp was, in a fupreme Degree, juft, delicatej and; flropg ; aijid, fo continued,, that he wenc under the Name of che Attic Buffoon. The Piac^ was. the policgft State in the politeft Time ; A^hm in f •¦ " ^'' ¦ jfj DEDICATION. xxi its Glory : And the judges the gtave Senators of Ateopagus. For all this, the Comic Poet tri umphed: And With the coarfeft kind of Buf foonry, little fitted, one Would think, lo take fo polite a People, had che Arc to tarfiifh all this Virtue; and Avhat was more, to make the Owner refemble his diredt Oppofite, thac Cha radter he was moft unlike, th.ac Charader he moft hated, chac very Charadter he had employ ed al! his Wit ro lay open and confound ; in one Word, the Sophist. The Confequences are well known. Thus will Raillery, in Defence of Vice and Error, be ftill an Overmacch for that employed on the Side of Truth and Virtue. Becaufe fair Hme^^y ufes, though a fliarp, yet an unftained Weapon ; while Knavery ftrikes with one em- poifoned, tho' much duller. The honeft Man em ploys his Wit as corredtly as his Logic : whereals che very Definition of a Knave's Buftbonry is a Sophifm. I hope then. Gentlemen, you will be at lengch broughc CO own chis Mechod to be the moft Un fair and Pernicious, that a fincere Searcher af ter Trath can be betrayed into : That ics nacu- ral Effedt is co obfcure the Underftanding, and co make the Heart diflbliite. It is a fmall Matter the Seate requires of you. Sobriety, Decency, and good Manners, to qualify you for the noble Employment of thinking free ly, and at large, — We have been told this, you will &y, before. But when 'vi came to be ex- plaiaed, hyfobef Writing -^ds meant, writing in a 3 the xxii DEDICATION. the Language ofthe Magiftrate. This may be true, but chen, remember, ic was noe cill your? felves had led che Way to the Abufe of Words; and had called (palumny, Coniplaint; and a fcutr jil Licence, Urbanity. Happy for you thac you are in Times when Liberty is fo well underftood. Had you lived in the boafted D^ys of ancient Free dom, he amongft you that had efcaped beft, had been branded with a Charadter they efteemed moft infamous of all, an Enemy to ti^e Ret I- 1 GION OF HIS Country, An .excellent Per fon, and one of your moft formidable Adverfa ries, fpeaking of the ancient ReftTaints on Free- thinking, fays — Theje were the Maxims, thefe the Principles, which the Light of Nature fugr gefied, whifh Reafon diSlafed '. Nor has this fine Writer any Caufe to be afhamed of this Acknowledgment; nor his Adverfaries any Pre tence that he muft needs efteem it the Meafurp for the prefent Time$. For, as a great Ancient well obferves, khhug rig ¦s>%i dXrfiHag Myst, kX' ^ug VI dhviQ'^a. icwjriv i^f,u^v<^ei. ^Ic was Chriftian Truth and Charity, che Truch and Charity you fp much infult, wjiich only pould cake oS thofe Reftraincs; and require no more of yoi; |than to be fl; free, and not ufing you^ Liberty for a Cloak of Malicioufneft. I have now done with your Buffoonry ; which, like chewed Bullpts, is againft the Law of Arm^ ; and come next to your Scurrilities, thpfe Stipk- ppts pf ypuj: offenfive War. ' I,«;cr « Dj". Waterland. p. 52, andyej. ';- DEDICATION. xxiii The Clergy of the eftablifhed Church, being thofe, who amongft us have been principally watchful in tlie common Caufe of Chriftianity, and moft fuccefsful in repelling the Infults of its Enemies, have fallen under the heavieft Load of your Calumny and Slander. Wich unparallel'd Licence, you have gone on, reprefenting che whole Body as debauched, avaricious, proud, vindidtive, ambitious, deceitful, irreligious, and incorrigible. An order of Men profligate and a- bandoned to Wickednefs, inconfiftent with the Good of Society, irr econcile able Enemies to Reafon, and Confpirators againft the Liberty and Property of Mankind^. And fo low have you defcended in your Ribaldry, as eo defcane upon their very Hats and Habits ^. This is the Condudt of your Leaders. For I would not be fo hard upon you, as to expedt you fliould be anfwerable for the Diforders of the loofe undifciplined Rabble, the forlorn Hope, that roll rogether in the Old Whig, and follow the Camp only for Mifchief and Plunder. To fill up your common Place of Slander, the moft inconfiftent Qualities are raked together to adorn them : Qualities that could never ftand to gether but in Idea ; and in the Idea of a Free thinker too. The Order is now reprefented as the moft con temptible of Politicians, ever in the Wrong ; and under a Fatality of continued Blunders, attending ^ Biglit.t of the Chriftian Church, and Chriftianity as old as tht Creation, paffim. » Jife Independent WTng, paflim. a 4, (hem xxiv DEDICATION. them as a Curfe: — But anon, we are alarmed wich their deep laid Schemes of a feparate, Inte reft, fb wifely condudted, as co elude andbaffieall the Policy of Coprcs, and Wifdom of Lcgiflatures. Now th.ey are a Set of fuperftitious Bigots; Blind Leaders of the Blind; red hot Zealots, al ways pcompt to facrifice the Rights of Humani ty, to what they call the Caufe of God : But now again, they are a Cabal of mere PvUtiques-; Tartufes witheitt Religiev; Atheifts in Black Gowns ; Apofiates without Faith or Law. Now fo clofely united in one common Con federacy, thac they make their Caufe the Caufe of Religion ; rifing together like a Neft of Hor' nets, to revenge an Infult done to one of their Body, while ehey leave no Ways untried tofcrmi their offending Brethren from Punifliment: — But on a fudden, this wife and clofe Policy is diflTolved: The Church is become'a State of An archy; and^ the Clergy are perpetually tearing and worrying one another ; to the great Scandal of thar pious Chriftian, the Author of the Dif courfe of Free-thinking. But it is to be hoped, as the Evidence is fo ill packed, the whole Acccufation maybe groundlefs. You will fay, that in this you do but copy from our own Accounts; which being given of ourfelves, may furely be depended on.. Tknow in deed there has been a Hickeringall of old, aW.ool- fion of late, and perhaps, one.or.two more, hap pier in their Obfeurity °. Buc chefe are Monfters . ° See the Paper called the 0Wpr%. . ."f rarely DEDICATION. xxv rarely feen, and univerfally abhorred. I wonder our Anceftors could conceive this to be a Dege neracy likely for any Race of Animals to fall in to; as they feem to have done, by their coarfe Proverb of an III Bird. I, for my part, know pf none but the Jail Bird, and one or two of thefe, that fpeak Evil of the Places to which they belong: And both for the fair.e Reafon, becaufe they had been brought eo [uilice chere. Buc if che whole Body cannoc efcape you, whac muft che Pareiculars of ic expeft ac your Hands ? And where muft we believe you would drop your Virulence, buc on chofe, whofe Emi nence expofes chem eo the Blafts of Calumny ? Is there a Prelate, who has been more than ordinary fuccefsful in the Caufe of common Chti- ftianity ? He is fure to be ftigmatized for a fa- eobite, and an Enemy to his Country p. Bs there another, who.fe Vigilance and Firm- nefs fecures the juft Rights and Immunities of the eftablifhed Church ? Such a one is the ex prefs Image of Prieftcraft, with infolent Gri mace, and powerlefs Formality \ But what talk I of the Clergy, when there is not one, however otherwife efteemed by, or re lated to you, that can efcape your Slander, if he happens to difcover any kind of Inclination foe that Caufe, againft which you are fo virulently bent? Mx. Locke, the Glory of this Age, and the "' " of Futurity, fhews us, in the Treat ment p See Tiie Anfaer to the Country Parforis Plea, p. lOl . •i Seep. lOO. of the fame Trail:. xxvi DEDICATION. ment he received from his Friend and his Pu pil, what a Believer is to expedt ftom you. I^ was enough to provoke their Spleen, that he had fliewn the Reafonablenefs of Chriftianity, and had placed all his Hopes of Happinefs in another Life. The Intimacy between him and Mr. Col lins is well known. Mr. Collins appears to have idplized Mr. Locke while living, and Mr, Locke was confident Mr. Collins would preferve his Me mory when dead^. But no fooner was he gone, than Mr. Collins publickly ^ infults a Notion of his concerning the Poffibility of conceiving how Mat-^ ter might firfi be made and begin to be: And goes affedtedly out of his Way to do it. The noble Author of the CharaSlerifiics had received ' Part of his Education from this great Philofor, phcr: And it muft be owned, that this Lord had many excellent Qiialities, both as a Man, and a Writer. He was temperate, chafte, ho neft, and a Lovet of his Country. In his Wri tings he has fliewn how largely he had imbibed. the deep Senfe, and how naturally he could co py the gracious Manner of Plato. How far Mr. Locke contributed co thp cultivating thefe Qualities, I wiU not enquire : But that invete rate Rancour he indulged againft Chriftianity, it is certain, he had not from him. It was Mr. Xiocke's Lovp of ic that feems principally to have "¦ I knoio you loved me living, and mil preferve my Memory, note I am dead, fays he in the Letter to be delivered to Mr," Collins at his Death . '" Anfwer tg Dr. Clarke'j ^d Pefence of his Letter to ^r. Po^i well, at the End. ' 17o{eTf'§ib,Choifte, tom. 6, p. 345, DEDICATION, xxvi^ expofed him to his Pupil's bittereft Infults. One of the moft precious Remains of the true Piety of this incomparable Man, are his laft Words to Mr. Collins : " May you live long and happy, " &c. all che Ufe eo be made of ic is, that this fi World is a Scene of Vanity, that foon paffes *' away, and affords no folid SatisfaSiion, but -' ehe Confcioufnefs of well doing, and che Hopes " OF another Life. This is whac I can fay •" by Experience, and whac you will find when " you come Co make up your Aecounc." One would imagine, chac if ever ehe parting Breach of pious Men, or che laft Precepes of dying Phi- lofophers, could claim Reverence of cheir Survi vors, chis ineftimable Monumene of Friendfhip, and Religion, had been fecure from Oucrage. Yee hear, in how unworchy, how cruel a Maur ner, his noble Difeiple apoftrophizes him on chis Occafion : " Philofopher I lec me hear concern- *' ing Life, whac che righc Notion is, and what ^' I am CO ftand co upon Occafion; chac I may *' noe, when Life feems retiring, or has run it- ^^ felf out to the very Dregs ", cry Vani ty i con- " demn the World, and at the fame Time " complain that Life is short and passing. " For v/hy Co fhort indeed, if not found Jweet? " Why do I complain both Ways? Is Vanity, mere " Vanity, a Happinefs ; or can Mifery pafs away *' too foon"^?" Iwill leave the ftrange Reflexions, fhac naturally arife froni hence, tP the Reader; >• Mr. Locke was then in his 73"^ Year. ^ Chftra0erifi^c^, vol, i. p. 30Z, jd Ed, xxviii DEDICATION. who, I am fure, will be beforehand with me vn judging, that Mr. Locke had Reafon to condemn a World that afforded fuch a Friend znd Pupil \ But to return. Gentlemen, to your Abufe of the Clergy : This is not only an Infult on Reli gion, which you feem by yoitr Pradtice, to re- ^ The Spite he bore his Mafter, is inconceivable : He did not difdain to take up with thofe vulgar Calumnies that Mr. Lo.ke had again and again confuted. Some even (iays he, Chara^. vol. i. p. So-. 3'^ Ed.) could ever believe you had any thing of this in View, by the Spirit of Levity, that animates yolit Writings? That you may hot fay I flander you, I will produce thofe Marks in your Writings, on which I have formed my Accufation, of this abandoned Difpofition. I. The firft is an ilHmited Buffoonry; which fufferS no Teft or Criterion to your Ridicule, that may fliew, when you are in jeft, and wheh in earneft, ^. An induftridus Affedatiort to keep your true Perfonage out of Sight ; and the perpetttaU ly affuming fome new fiditious Charader. 3, A Love of Chicane and Contradidion ; fupported by a monftrous Mixture of Sceptieifni and. Dogmatizing, And here, Gentlemen, in illuftrating thefe three Charaders of your Guilt, I could deted all the Arts of Controverfy in ufe amongft you ; and difplay the whole Myftery of modern Free- thinking. But the Limits of this Addtefs will only permit me to defcribe in a few Words, the Na ture of each of them, in order to fliew how certain Notes they are of the Temper of Mind I charge upon you. I. The illimited undiftinguiflied Irony, that leaves no Marks of Infight into the Author's i Meaning,, or room fo much- as to guefs what he would be at, is our firft Note. This, which is your favourite Extravagance, the noble Au*- thorj DEDICATION, xxxiii thor; who was fo much your Friend, calls ^ a dull fori (f Wit which amufes all alike. Nay, :he £ven venrurps to pronounce ic n grofs, im moral, and illiheral Way of Abufe, foreign to the C'haraBer fif a good Writer, a Gentleman, fif Man of Worth^. 'Tis picy he himfelf fhould fall under his own Genfiare: Buc ^this is cer tain, chore is no Way of efcapin^ his Admic- frs, uncharged of Credulicy,or Uncharicable- nefs; which way foever we determine of his real Sentimfints. Hp^ivever lie has noe overloaded the Extravagance, jn the Charader he has givpn of ie: For here, .quice i forgetful of yoyr own Precepes .'(which is your Cpmmon-place Ifapic againft |)ublic inflrudors) while you prefcdbe iUdicule to be fo managed, as to fhew it itends id a ferious Iffie-, yoii pradtife ic on ^11 Subjeds fo indifcriminacely, as co make one think you all the while in jeft. While you. dired k to unm^ formal Hypocrify, ypu fiiffer ie to put fober Truch out of Coun tenance; ^nd while you claim ics Aid, to find- out wifat is to ie laughed at in every Thing; you employ ic to . bring in every thing co be laughed at. That a Reftraint-pnfree Enquiry, will .force Writers into this vicious manner, we readily allow. Under thofe -Circumftances, fuch a ..Key to Ridicule as juft Writi,ng demands, i>e- ing unfafej and the only Way co efcape Pet- > QhnraH.yyA. i. Traift.a. pt.i.. § z. - y<>\. 3. JdJ^el.,.4. e..2. h fecution xxxiv D p. D I C A T I O N: 'fecution, to cover and intrench themfelves iil Obfeurity ; it is no Wonder that Ridicuk fhould degenerate into the Buffoonry that amufes all alike: As in Italy, which gave Birth to this Species of Writing, it is the only Way, in which the poor crampt thinking Wretches can difcharge a free Thought. But happily for Truth, in Great Britain, you, the Genii of the Times, are free; and may philofophize ae your Eafe, chrough all the Modes of doubting, objedting, and confuting. Much lefs Reafon have you to fufped your good Reception in the World, if you fpeak without Difguife. You have'a Caufe that will bear you out, and fupply all your Deficiencies: A Caufe which now-a-days fo fandifies the Charader of the Advocate, that we have feen Writers of each of the learned Profeffibris, who, while they confined their Pens to their proper Sciences, with Difficulty made them felves fo far known as to be defpifed ; but have no fooner ftruck into this high Road to. Fame, and wrote againft the Religion of their Country, than become gteae and cerrible Authors ; and even recovered, in a good Mea fure, from che Concempc of cheir own Fa culties. For Infidelicy hach the Virtues of Lord Peter's brown Loaf, and contains inclu- fkely the Sluinteffence of Learning, Wit, and Argument. It is noe poffible for us chen, co affign any ocheif reafonable Caufe of che Excravagance, than thac vicious Levity of Spirit we complain of DEDICATION. XXXV of. For as Man is formed by Natute with an incredible Appetite for the Purfuit of Truth; fo his ftrongeft Pleafure, in the Poflfeffion of ir, arifes from the adual Communication of it to others. Without this, it would be a cold Pur chafe, would abftrad, ideal, folitary Truth; and poorly repay the Labour and Fatigue of the Search. Amongft the Ancients, who, ic muft be owned, had high Notions of this focial Senfe, ic was a Saying recorded by Cicero wich Approbation^, that even Heaven would be no Happiheft, without fome Companion to fhare with him in the great Truths there to be dif- covered. Si quis in Ccelum afcendiffet, natu- ramque mundi, ^ pule hritudinem fider um per- fpexiffeti infuayem illam admirationem ei fore ; qua jucundiffima fuiffet, fi aliquem, cui nar- raret, habuijfet. Seneca goes yee further^: Nee me ulla res deleBabit, licet eximia fit & falutaris, quam mihi uni fciturus fim. Si cum hac exceptione detur Sapientia, ut illam inclur fam teneam, nee enunciem, rejiciam: Nulliui boni, fine focio, jucunda poffeffio efti Ie was, this Paffion that gave birth to Writing, and formed literary Compofition into an Art; in order to perpetuate thofe Difcbveries in the. Sciences, which Particulars had, with fo mucii toil and labour, fitted up for public Enter tainments. The principal Concern therefore . of the Writer, while his Paffions are in their natural State, muft needs be to deliver and f De Amicitia. e Ep 6. b a explalii xxxvi DED t Cation. explain' his Sentiments and Opinions With alf pebble Pdrfpicility. Sp as fiP particular Ca'ft of Oompofitidn, Pt Turn of E^fpreffion, Which hfe judgfed conducive tp the Embelliiiim'ent of his Wptk, may be able to throw any Am^goi- ty over it, that fliall tend to miflead his Reader cbhcerhihg his teal Sentiments. To fuch a one nPthing can be a more mortifying Refledtion, than t& find this, his chief Defign become de- ffested. Buc ivheft, on the cpntrary, we fee a Wj:i- ter fo fkr ftpm difcoveting any thing of this Paffioh, that an Air of iSjegligeftte appears in every thittg be deli Vets ; a vifible Conternpt c^ his Reader^s Judgment, to whofe Satis- fe^ioh 'he ]pf(ifers a malicious kind df Plea- fiii'e, atifihg ftPmihp Obfeurity of an illimited Ridicule ; We cannot poflibly avoid conclud ing him 'fee gPlie tn this wretched Depravi ty of Heaft. 2, Xnbt'hter Matk, is your perpetually af- filftltttg TortiP '^petfbhated Charadter, as the Exi- ^Mfces of Chicane require. For the Difpute is to be kej5t on 'foot; and therefore, when the Matter is in danger of coming to an tfTue, a tieW Petfpnage is to be affiamed, that tbe CdiltelJ ttiay be fought over again with diilfe- feht Weapons, ^o that the modern Free thinker, as'itia;j' be feen by the Coryplmus ^ of yout'ChoiV, is a peikGt Proteus. He is now; a Diffefttet, tioW a Papift, now ^again a Jewj ^ Mi, Collins. «nd dedication, xxxvii and now a Mahometan ; and, when clofely preffed and hunted through all chefe Shapes, ^ length ftarcs up in his genuine Fqcnv an fiifidgl cwifefs'd. Indeed where the Magiftrace has confined the Liberty of free Debate, to one or two Profeffions, there a Writer, differing fix)m chefe, has no way of publifliing his Speculations, buc under the Cover of one di thefe authorized Profeffors. But to affed this Manner after the Necefl[icy is over, is licentious and imma- ral. For the perfonattd Charadter, only argu ing ad hominem, embroils, racher than direi^ us, in the Search of Truth; has a nactirjil Tendency co promote Scepcicifiji ; and if not this, yet keeps the Difpute from coming to an lifue ; which is attended with greac lecon- •veniencies. For though the Di&overy of fpe culative Truth be of much Importance to the Perfedtions oi Man's Nature, yet the ^Sed lengthening out licerary Debaces, is greacly pre- uididal to Society, as Societies are generally formed. Therefore, though the good of Man-. kind would fet an honeft Man upon publifhir^ what he takes to be Difcoveries in Truth ; yet the fame Motive would oblige him to take the faireft, and moft t^rx&St Road to their Recepr tion. Bee I would not, by this, have it thought, that I condemn che afluming a petfonated Cha- ra(Ser oa any occafion whatfoever. There are Seafons wl>en ic is fair and expedienr, b 3 Then, xxxvlii dedication. Then, when the Difpute is about the pradi.- cal Application of fome Truth to the good of a particular Society; there ic is fair to take up a fiiitable Charader, and argue ad hominem. For there, the End is a Benefit to be gained for thac Sociecy ; and, ic is noe of fo greac Moment on whac Principles the Majority is prevailed with to make the Society happy, as it is, that ¦ it fliould fpeedily become fo. But in the Dif covery of abftcad fpeculative Truth, the Af fair goes quire otherwife. The Bufinefs here is Demonfir ation, not Perfuafion. And it is of the Effence of Truth, to be made to ap pear and ftiine out only by Truths drawn ft'om itfelf, as the Dufi only can polifli the Dia- ¦- mond. A famous Example will illuftrate this Ob fervation. Our great Britifh Philofopher, writ ing for Religious Liberty, combats his inta- lerant Adverfary, quite through the Contro verfy, With his own Principles; well forefeeing that, in fuch a Time of Prejudices, Argu- • ments built on received Opinions, would have greateft Wcighr, and make quickeft Impref fion on the Body of the People, whom it was his Bufinefs to gain. But fee now the diffe rent Mechod this excellent Perfon employed when defending a mere fpeculative Truth. ' A Prelace of greac Name, was pleafed co- attack his Effay concerning human Underfianding ;. who, though confummate in the Learning of the Schools, yet applied his Principles fp ve- ' 1 dedication. xxdc ry aukwardly, as gave our Philofopher the moft inviting Opportunity of retorting tl.em upon him. A Triumph moft to the Tafte of him who contends only for Vidory : But he contended for Truth ; and was tpo wife to think of eftablifhing it on Falfliood ; and too honeft to affed triumphing over Error by any thing but by its Oppofite. You fee then. Gentlemen, you cannot efcape by this Diflindion : The Difpute with you is about fpeculative Truth : Yourfelves take Care to give the World repeated Information of ir, as often as you think fit to feign an Appre henfion of the Magiftrate's Refentment. But of as little Ufe as this Method, of the perfotiated Charadler, is, in itfelf^ to the juft End of Controverfy, you generally add a dou ble Share of Difingenuity in conduding '\t. Common Senfe, as well as common Honefty^ requires, that he who aflTumes a perfonated Cha- raSler, fhould fairly ftick by ir, for that Turn at leaft. But we fhall be greatly de*- ceived, if we prefume on fo much Condefcen- fion : The late famous Author of The Grounds and Reafons of the Chrifiian Religion, took ic ineo his Head to perfoliate a few, in che Incer- precation of fome Prophefies which he woulcf perfuade us are noe applicable to fefus. The illuftrious Prelate, who fo folidly confuted him, having fhewn that thofe Prophefies had no Completion under the Jewifli Difpenfation, concludes with ajl the Advantage of a full An- b 4 fwer^ xl DEDICATION. fwer, thdi therefore if thiy did Adt Mtri^ to, Jdfus, they BeMgeito ri'6'one. WKMt fays our Inipofter Jew to this ? Grid; would be afhSi- niflied at the Infidel's Reply: Sitppfe ihiy d6 nW, fays he, / hift hot dnfwer^bte fof' iheiit Completion. What \ noe afe a "Jew ? whipfi Perfoti he aflumcs,' arid whpfe Argufeene.he borrows: Which Argument is Aot founded o;i this, -— That the Charadters of Gdn^'pldtipn, aecoirding^ to the Clorifiian Schetrife, dp not coincide and quadtate : -^^ to vv'hich, inddfcd,- bis Anfwer vvould be pcrtincih'^; but on chis: — Thai:- there afc compleat Charaders of thfe Completiprt of the Prophefies, uhddt the Jewifh O'economy, ai$d therrfo^rc, fays . the Jew, ytxi are not to look fot thofe M^rks ui'^- dcr the Chriftian: The only re'afoWable Way th'hi of replying to this Argument, M to deny the Minor, that thtre are fitch Marks under the Jewifh Occoliomy ; v/hich' if tK6 J eth fcatiiridt prove, his Objedtion foifnded on a prior Coth' piefion, is entirely Overthrown; Iriftead bf re plying to this. We are p'tft off with the c61d SufFo'briry Pf^ / am nbt cbHged to find h MekH- ing for your Prophefies. 5. The fhird Mark of this abandoned Spi rit, is that monftrous Mixttu'C of" Scepticifm, arid Dogmatizing, Which deforms all yout Writings. I do ndt mean by it, that liriida- fbnotble Tempet of Mind, which diftihguifhes the Whole Clafs bf Free-thinkets ; ahd ftiffer§ you ac the fdme Tiiiie, tHatr you dftedt much Scepticifm, DEIFICATION. idt Se^l^icifmy in rejcdifig RevektiP«i to dognsa- tize Vdry ^firively Pn fjwtie fevParire PoftttS of BeUeC TfcfP fiofele Author, fo oft befet6 q^ed, cPaid ndt himfelf f^hUM to ridicUlg iSSPafty for this Foifeld'. // mift certainly^ fays he, 6e JbrfiifMfi^ elfe tbdH Mcrtdulity which fajkim the Tdftd dMJudgmnt tf ma-r ^ Gentlemen, whom we hMi* cinfutid as A- theifi's.-^W^o if th^y ^ant a true Iftaelicifli Faith, can make amends by a Chinefe or In dian one. — Though Chriftian Miracles may not fo well fdf tify thiM, they dwell with the higheft Contentment on the Prodigiei tf ^fcofifli and Pagan Countries. This is ill ehcftigh, but the Pi^rverfiiy t mian, is infinitely worfe : Arid that is whetl the faitie WrRdr, on different Cecafjpns afliiities the Db^atift ahd Sceptic oft the Very Arhe QUEt ftitrti; and fo abufes bdth GhatiderSj by tbp iTioft perverfe Self-cohtradididiis. For inftance, how eommSh iS it fbr on6 of your \^ricetsi When he brilS|S PdgaH Aflti- 'qliicy td tOHtrddid and difciiedit the J^ifh^ to cry lip a Greek Hiftorian as an Eviidfnee, to vrhith nothing caii be repfed ? Aft im- petBd Hint from Hef&dsfal, of DiddofUs, though orie lived a Tltblifaiid, afid the Pther fifteeti Hundred Y^rs after the Poiflt itt Que ftion, picked Up from an"y lyifi^ Vagdbofid thfey rnet in their Travels, ffiall hoW dUtWeigll ' Vol.1, p. 345, ehaHia. 5'lEd. the xiii DED I C AT I O N. the citcumftantial Hiftory of Mofes -, who wrote of his own People, and lived in the Times he wrote of. But now turn the Tables, and apply the Teftimony of thefe Writers, and of others of the beft Credit of che fame Nation, to the Confirmation of Jewifh Hi fiory, and then nothing is more uncertain and fallacious than ancient Records. All Anciquicy is Darknefs and Confufion; Then we are fure co heat of, ^icquid Gracia mendan Audet in hifiofia. Then Herodotus is a lying Traveller, and Dio- dorus Siculus a Iiafty Colledor. Again, when ehe Choice and Separation of the Ifraelites for God's peculiar People, is co be broughc in Queftion, and rendered ridicur lous, chen are chey co be reprefenced as th? vileft, moft profligate, and perverfe Race of Men. Then every indifcreet Paflage of a de-^ clamatory Divine is raked up with Care to make them odious ; and even the hard Fate of the great Hiftorian Jofephus pitied, that he had no better a SubjeSl than fuch an illiterate, barbarous and ridiculous People k. But when the Evangelical Account of ehe Treatment, the Holy Jefus met with from thefe People, i? thoughc fit to be difputed,' tljefe Jews are •? Difcourfe of 'Bne thinking, p. 157. become DEDICATION. xliii become an humane and wife Nation; which interfered not with the Teachings of Sedts, or the Propagation of Opinions, but where the public Safety was thought in Danger by fedi tious Dodrines. But fo it is, even with the Bible itfelf, and its Interpreter, human Reafon. It is generally allowed that the Author of The Dilcourfe of Free-thinking, and of The Grounds and Rea fons of the Chrifiian Religion, was one and the fame Perfon. Now ic being his De fign in the firft Pamphlet, to blaft the Cre dit of the Book in general, as a Rule of Faith, the Bible is there reprefented as a moft obfcure, dark, ineomprehenfible Collcdion cf multifa rious Trads. But in his Difcourfe of Tlse Grounds, &c. where ' he is to obviate the Reafon we draw, of the Difficulty in ex plaining ancient Prophefies, from the Geniirs of the Eaftern Style and Sentiment, on a fud den, this very Book is become fo eafy, plain, and intelbgible, that none can poflibly miftake it. Again, the fame Writer, where in his Eftay concerning the Ufe of Reafon, he is upon Dif- crediting the Dodrine of the ever bleffed Tri nity, and other Myllcrics of the Chriftian Faith, reprefents human Reafon as omnifcient, and the full Meafure of all Things : But when the Proof of the Immateriality of the Soul, from ' Difcourfe of Free tl/ink'.n^.^ p. 68, che xliv DEDICATION. j;he Qualities of Matter and Spirit, is to be ob ftlnately oppofed, che Scene is fhifted; and we are prefenced wich a new Face of things : Rea fon is then become weak, ftaggering, and im- poeent : Then «> v/e know noe buc one Qualicy may be anocher Qiialicy ; one Mode anocher Mode: Then may Motion be Confcioufnefs; and Maceer Senciene. Thefe, Gentlemen, are the feveral Ways, in which you have abufed the Liberty of the Prefs, One might defy you, with all your good Will, to find out a new one, or to go fatther in the old : So having done your worft, ic is time you fhould think of doing better. This is the only Concbfion I would draw ftom your ill Condud ; So far am I from thinking with thofe, who fay you ought to be disfranchized of the Rights you have fo wan tonly and wickedly abufed. For could the fimple Abufe fo eafily incur a Forfeiture, na tural Rights would be ftrangely hazardous. Ad ventitious Rights, are, 'tis true, frequently be ftowed on this Condition. And the Dift'erenoe •jn point of Security, is founded in the plaineft Reafon. N^^«r^/ Rights are fo neceflTary K) Our Being, that, without them. Life becomes miferable ; but the Civil only contributing to our eafier Accommodation in fome circumftaa- tial Matters, may be loft without injury to our co|.timPn Nature. The not diftinguiftiing be- '¦^- Sec his Anfwers to Dr.Ci/trJfcf. tween D E D I C AT t ON. xlv tween them, may have occafioned the Miftake ; For the common Lawyers htm^ folely conver- fanc in thefe latter, and having judged that the Abufe of thefe incurs a Forfeiture ; have fome times rafhly adventured to decide the Rights of Nature by the fame Standard. But thefe Rights were beftowed on no fuch precarious Conditions : Nay, which defeives the moft fe rious Refledion of all Men in Power, fo far was God from exading this Penalty, at thac Period ", when thefe Rights were moft outrage- oufly abufed, that be not only continued, buc enlarged and extended them : While on the contrary, Man, proud Man, Dreft in a little, brief Authority, Mofi ignorant of what he's moft affured. Plays fuch fantaftic Tricks before high Heaven, As make the A^els weep. But it will be (aid, the parricular Authors however of thefe Abufes fliould be perfonally puniftied. I will here again. Gentlemen, be come your Advocate ; not for your own Sakes, who furely deferve Punifljmene ; but for the Public's, which cafinoc, I chink, inflid ic, wieh- ouc gre^t Mifchief to literary and religious - Li- foefty. • The general Deluge. Abufei. jclvi DEDICATION, Abufes of natural Rights are of twP kinds ; which We fhould always carefully diftinguifli: The fiift is of fuch Malignity, as to invalidate, 3hd £!ven deftroy the Ufe; and being of the Nactire of a fimple Fad, leaves no rPom fbr tecurring to a venal Judge's Interpretation : Thefe Properties demand Puniflimenr, as ma king ic boch necefifary and fafe, Buc there is another kind of Abufe that deftroys not, hue only difcredits the Ufe ; and in Vi^hich the Mat ter of Right being intricately involved in the Matter of Fad, a Magiftrate has the largeft Latitude of Interpretation : Here Punifhment, for very obvious Reafons, is neither neceffary nor fafe. That the Abufe of Ridicule is of this latter kind, is evident. But befides thefe two kinds oi Abufe, which we may call Ori ginal, there are two others, derivative from thefe, and compounded of them: Ks firft, an Abufe that only difcredits the Ufe-, though ie be of the Nature of a fimple Fad: And of this kind 'is that, which 'vs the Subjed of the fecond Head of this Difcourfe ; namely, the Defama tion of the Miniftry of the eftablifhed Worfhip. Secondly, an Abufe thac deftroys the Ufe; buc where yet the Matter of Fad is intricately in volved in the Matter of Right: Of which kind is the Subjed of our third Head ; namely, a vicious difregard to Truth and Falfhood. Now in neither of chefe Cafes, fliould I think ic righc for the State to intetfere : In the firft it is not neceffary, in the fecond ic is not fafe : And D E D I CAT I ON. xlvii And I prefume ic to be a Maxim in Politics^ not tP punifli, but where thefe two ^alitiesi of Neceffity and Safety concur. In a Word then, all that we defire, is your Amendment ; wichouc any finifter Aim of calling upon the Magiftrate to quicken you. So I leave you, as I dare fay will he, co your felves : Mend when you can, grow better at yout Leifure. Nor lec any good Man be fcandalized above Meafure for your Faulcs; or be more impa tient for your Reformation, than mere Chari ty requires. I don't know what Panic the prefent monftrous Growth of Infidelity may have thrown fome of us into. I, for my part, confide fo much in the Goodnefs of our Caufe, that I too could be tempted to laugh in my Turn, while I think of an old Story told us by Herodotus, of your favourite Egyptians; of whom you are like to hear a great deal in the following Work With this Tale I fhall beg Leave to conclude my long Addrefs to you. He tells us then, that ae whac Time cheir Deity, the Nile, returns into his ancient Chan nel, and the Huibandman hath committed the good Seed to the opening Glebe, it was their Cuftom to turn in whole Droves of Swine ; £0 range, to trample, root up, and deftroy ac DEDtCATlOU. at Pleafure. And now noching app^red buj. Defolation, while che Ravages ai the obfeene Herd had killed every chearful Hope of fucure Plency. When on the iCue, ic was feen, chac all cheir Malice and Greedioefs Iiad effedted, was orily chis ; that the Seed took better Root, incorporated more kindly with ;the Soil, and at length fliot up in a more luxuriant and abundant Harveft. laiti, Ge-ntlemen, &c. A SUM- A SUMMARY OFTHE CONTENTS. Vol. L In three Books: Proves the Truth of Religion in general, and confequently the Neeeffty of the DoBirine of a future St ate in particular to Civil Society^ from the Nature of Things, and the uni'^ verfal Confent of Mankind. RsanvF^aw«i«9«i* BOOK I. PR O V E S //& line 4. for l» read fo . 1 P-3i' !• 17- for refrefentt.prejent, tage 71. line 35. dele /f. p. 87. 1, z- fot of DoSritie r< of thac Doltrine. p. 94, 1. 10. for Immorality t. Immor tality. p. 94. note ("") 1. 2. for lihentibus r, libentius. p. 99. 1. 17, for titular t. tutelary. f, loi.l' 6. fot Method t. Methods. p, 103, 1, !¦ fot Re-velatiott t.Revela- tiotis, ' p, 104. n. (^) 1. 1, for Jiaasgp'vJws r. p. Ill, 1- II, for CharaSlers t. C6a- p. 117. 1. z8. tot Doric r. the Doric. ji. 122. 1. penul. for Demons x. Demon. p. iz6, ri< (f) 1. 3' for tiv teXc; r. p. 128. 1, 10. for or r. of, n. if) 1. ult, for i:o|;m r, cojew. p. rji. n. ("JI.4, fot .^Jculapiam r. ^fculapium. p. 152, n. (P) ad iin. qdd, De Nat. Dear. 1. 1. c. 42. p. ijS. 1, 6. for and indifcreet t. an indifcreet. p. 164. 1. 4- for Sacrifices t. Sacrif ce. p. i6j, n. (*) 1. antepen- for;Kj>r. «^, p. 174, n.(') 1,2. for ayvsvls; r, ttv- wsvlsj. p,i75, n,(t)l. ig, for «£js»Ia[T£ r. p. 175. n. (t) 1. 24. for oporlaneis t. opertaneis. p. 176. n. ead. 1.4, for praconiot. praconia. 1,13. fotnefcist.nefcit, p. 177. n,(') 1. 3. f ot lumml) t. mi- p. 198. n. (g) 1. io> for 0ESMO- «OPON r. eE2MO*OPOr. p. 217. n. (¦>) 1. 4. for ivbo r. •would, p. 218. n. (P) 1. pen. fot give t. gives. p. 223. n. (q) 1. 4. for cragimtib'ara r, >) I, 30, for the t. tbis, ft 421, n. (w) 1, g, for magis. r. magis, p, 433, 1. 30. for any t. many. p, 456. 1. 8, for juafdam t.juofdaa, p. 460. 1< aS. for of things, r. oftiifi things. THE DIVINE LEGATION O F MOSES DEMONSTRATED. BOOK I. ¦ ¦ — ¦¦-¦, ¦ , I. ¦ ¦ _ ¦ - I ¦ ¦¦¦¦III, ii^ Sect. I. TH E Writers, in Defence of Revealed Re ligion, diftinguifli their Arguments into two Sorts: The one they call the internal ^ and the other the external Evidence. Of theft, the firft is, in its Nature^ more fimple and perfedt; and even capable of Demonftra tion: while the other, made up bf very dilBmilar Materials, and borrowing Aid from without, muft needs have fome Parts of unecjual Strength with the reft ; and, con fequently, lye open to the Attacks of a willing Ad verfary. BefideS, the internal Evidence is, by its Nature, perpetuated ; and fo fitted for all Times and Periods: while the external^ by Length of Time, weakens and decays. For fhe Nature and Genius of the Religion defended affording the Proofs Vol, lb of 2 The Divine Legation Book I. of the firft Kind, thefe Materials of Defence are infeparable from its Exiftence ; and fo always at hand, and the fame: But Time may, and doth efface Memorials independent of that Exiftence ; cut of which the external Evidence is compofed. Which Evidence muft therefore become more and ntiore imperfeft, without being affefted by that whimfical and partial Calculation, to which a cer tain Scotfman " would fubjedt it "", Nay, fo neceffa ry is the i^/d'r;?^/ Evidence, that, even the very beft of the external Kind cannot fupport itfelf without it : As may be feen from hence, that when the Miracles, performed by the Founders of our holy Faith, are unqueftionably verified, by human Te ftimony, the Confequence, that therefore they were wrought by divine Power, cannot be deduced 'till the Nature of that Do6trine be examined, for whofe Eftablifhment they were performed. But was there no other Benefit accruing from the Cultivation of the internal Evidence than the gaining, by it, a more perfedt Knowledge of revealed Religion, this, furely, would fully recompenfe the Pains. That this is one of its Fruits I need not tell fuch as are " Craig. Theologiae Chrift. Principia Mathematica, London 1699. 4'°, ** This gradual weakening of the external Evidence hath in faft adtually happened : and was occafioned by the Lofs of feveral ancient Teftimonies both Pagan and Chiiftian, for the Truth of Revelation; which learned Men, on feveral Occafions, have fre quently lamented. This is the only way, I fuppofe, the exter- nal Evidence can weaken. And therefore, I fay, it is not affed- ed by the Saotfman's whimfical Calculation. I call it -ahimftcd, becaufe the Calculation-, tho' mathematically juft, is founded on a falfe FoftuUtu-m, namely, the Decreafe of the Credibility of a Fa . ^ ¦¦¦ ¦¦ « Sed. 2 . of M o s E s demonftrated. i % it was always found, that a fevere Reftraint of this, opened the Way to unnatural Lufts. 3. But this was not all, there was a farther In- efficacy in human Laws : The Legiflature, in en quiring into the mutual Duties of Citizens, arifing from their Equality of Condition, found thofe Du ties to be of two Sorts : The firft, they intituled the Duties of Perfect Obligation ; becaufe Civil Laws could readily, and commodioufly, and were, of neceffity, required to enforce their Obfervation : The other they called the Duties of Imperfect Obligation ; not, that Morality does not as ftrongly exadt them, but becaufe Civil Laws could not conveniently take Cognizance of them ; and, that they were fuppofed not fo immediately and vitally to affedt the Being of Society. Of this latter Kind are Gratitude, Hofpitdity, Charity, &c. Concerning fuch. Civil Laws, for thefe Reafons, are generally filent. And yet, though it may be true, that thefe Duties, which human Laws thus overlook, may not fo diredtly affedt Society, it is very certain, that their Violation brings as fatal, though not fo fwift Deftrudtion upon it, as that of the Duties of perfeft Obligation. A very compe tent Judge, and who too fpeaks the Sentiment of Antiquity in this Matter, hath not fcrupled to fay: — " Ut fcias per fe expetendam efle grati Animi *' Adfedtionem, per fe fugienda res eft ingratum *' effe : quoniam nihil asque concordiam humani ge- *' neris diffociat ac diftrahit quam hoc vitium '." 4. But farther, befides thefe Duties both of per- fe£i and imperfedt Obligation, for the encouraging and enforcing of which. Civil Society was invent ed. Society itfelf begot and produced a new Set of Duties, which are, to fpeak in the Mode of the I Sfneca de Benef, lib. iv. cap. 1 8. Legi- 14 The Divine Legation Book f. Legiflature, of imperfeft Obligation, unknown to the State of Nature: the firft and principal of which is that antiquated forgotten Virtue called the Love OF OUR Country. 5, But laftly. Society not only introduced a new Stt of Duties, but likewife increafed and inflamed, to an infinite Degree, thofe inordinate Appetites, for whofe Corredtion it was invented and intro duced: like fome kind of powerful Medicines, that, at the very Time they are working a Cure, heighten the Malignity of the Difeafe. For our Wants increafe, in proportion as the Arts of Life advance and grow perfedt. But in proportion to our Wants, fo is our Uneafinefs ; to our Un eafinefs, fo our Endeavours to remove it to our Endeavours, fo the Weaknefs of human Re ftraint. Hence it is evident, that in a State of Nature, where little is confulted but the Support of our Exiftence, our Wants muft be few, and our Appetites, in proportion, weak ; and that in Civil Society, where the Arts of Life are cultivated, our Wants muft be many, and our Appetites, in Pro portion ftrong. II, Thus far concerning the Imperfedtlon of Ci vil Society, with regard to the Adminiftration of that Power which it hath, namely of punifhing the Difobedient. We ffiall next confider its much greater Imperfedtlon with regard to that Power which it wanteth, namely of rewarding the ObediT ent. The two great Sandtions of all Law and Com mand are Reward for Obfervance, and Puniffi ment for Tranfgreffion. Thefe are generally call ed the two Hinges, on which all Kinds of Go vernment turn. And fo far is certain and appa rent to the common Senfe of Mankind, that what ever Laws are not enforced by both thefe Sandtions, will Se£t. 2. o/* Mo SES demonftrated. 15 will never be obferved in any degree fufficient to carry on the End of civil Society. Yet, I ffiall now ffiew, from the true and ori ginal Conftitution of Civil Government, and from the Nature of Society, that. Society neither had, nor could enforce the Sanction of Reward. But, for avoiding Miftakes, I defire it may be reittarked, that, by Reward, muft needs here be meant, that which is conferred on every one for ob ferving the Laws of his Country ; not that which is beftowed on particulars, for any eminent Service : as by Punifhment we underftand that which is in- fli£led on every one for tranfgreffing the Latvs ; not that which is impofed on particulars, for, negledting to do all the Service in their Power. I make no doubt but this will be looked upon as a violent Paradox; nothing being more com mon in the Mouths of Men, than that the San5iions of Reward and Punifhment are the two Pillars of Civil Government ; all the Utopias, and fpeculative Syftems of Politics, both ancient and modern, deriving the whole Vigour of their Laws from thefe two Sources, I ffiall therefore beg Leave to be fomething particular in the Proof of the two following Propofitions: I. That, by the true and original Conftitution of civil Government, the Sandtion of Rewards was not enforced. II. That the Sanction of Rewards could not, from the Nature of Society, be enforced by it. I. That, hy the true and original Conftitution of Civil Government the Sanftion of Rewards was not enforced, I thus prove. In entering into Society, \t was ftipulated, between the Governor and Go verned, that Protetlion and Obedience ffiould be the reciprocal Condiuons of each other. When, therefore, a Citizen obeys the Laws, that Debt, on J 6 The Divine Legation Book. I. on Society, is difcharged by the Protedtion it af fords him. But, in refpedt to Difobedience, the Proceeding is not analogous ; though Protedtion, as the Condition of Obedience, implies the with drawing of it, for Difobedience ; — and for thefe Reafons : The Effedl of withdrawing Protedtion liiuft be either Expulfion from the Society, or the expofing the Offender to all kind of Licence, from others, in it. Society could riot pradtife the firft, without bringing the Body Politic into a Confumption ; nor the latter, without throwing it into Convulfions, fiefides, the firft is no Punifh ment at all, b'lt by Accident ; it being only the leaving one Society to enter into another; and the fecond is an inadequate I*uniffiri1ent: for though all Obedience is the fame, and fo uniform Pro- teSlion a proper Return for it ; yet Tranfgreffions being of various Kinds and Degrees j the thus withdrawing Protedtion would be too great a Pu niffiment for fome, and too fmall for others. This being fo, it was ftipulated that the Vio lator of the Laws of the Society ffiould be fubjedt to pecuniary Muldts, Mutilation of Members, cor poral and capital Inflidtions. Hence arofe the San dtion, and only Sandtion of Civil Laws, for that a Protedtion is no Reward, in the Senfe that thefe are Punlffiments, is plain from hence, that the one is of the Eflence of Society itfelf, the other an ad ventitious Adjundt. But this will farther appear by confidering the oppofite to Protedtion, Expul fion from the Society, or Baniffiment : for this Is the natural Confequence of withdrawing Protection. Now this, as we faid, is no Puniffiment but by Accident: and fo the State underftood the Mat ter ; as we may colledt, even from their Manner of employing it as a Punifhment on Offenders: For Baniffiment is of univerfal Ufe, with other Punifh ments Sedt 2. of yios^ 5 demonflrated. ly ments, in all Societies. Now where the thus with drawing Protedtion is inflidted as a Puniffiment, all States have agreed, in Pradtice, to retain their Right to Obedience from the baniffied Member j though, according to the Nature of the Thing confidered in itfelf, that Right he. really dif charged; Obedience and Protedtion, as we ob ferved, being the reciprocal Conditions of each other. But it was neceffary all States ffiould adt thus when they inflidted Exile as a Puniffiment, it being no Puniffiment but by Accident, when the Claim to Subjedtion was remitted with it.— They had a right to adt thus ; becaufe, being inflidt ed on an Offender, all Claim of Advantage from that reciprocal Condition had been before forfeited". II. Our fecond Propofition, which we have to prove is, that the San8ion of Rewards could not, from the Nature of Society, he enforced hy it: The Reafon of which is, becaufe Society could neither diftinguiffi the Objedts of its Favour, nor reward them, though they were diftinguiffied. I. Firft, Society could not diftinguifh the Objects of its Favour. To inflidt Puniffiment, there is no need of knowing the Motives on which the Tranf- greffor adted; but judicially to confer Reward on the obedient there is. ^ This will lead us to determine an embarraffed Queftion long agitated amongft the Difcourfers on the Law of Nature and Na tions; namely, whether a iaaijh'd Man be a SuijeS ofthe State that expelled him ? Hobbes and Pufendorf holding the negative i and T»//y, with that beft of Men, and of Writers, the Lord Chancellor Hyde, the afBrmative. The former give this in Sup port of their Opinion, that, by the very aft of Expulfion, the State gives up and difclaims all Right of Subjeftion : the lat ter only appeal to the Praftice of Societies ; the Reafon of which Praftice as here given, abfolately determines the Queftion ia their Favour. All 1 8 The Divine Legation Book L All that Civil Judicatures do, in Condemnation to Puniffiment, is to find out whether the Adt was voluntarily committed. They enquire not into the Intention or Motives, any farthet, or otherwife than as they are the Indications of Volition: and having found the Adt voluntary, they concern, them felves no more with his Motives or Principles of adting ; but puniffi, without feruple, in confidence of the Offender's Demerit. And this with very good Reafon ; becaufe no one, in his Senfes, can be ignorant ofthe principal Tranfgreffions of Civil Laws, or of their Malignity, but by fome fottifli Negligence that has hindered his Information, or fome brutal Paffion that has prejudiced his Judg ment ; both which are highly faulty, and deferve Puniffiment. It is otherwife, in rewarding the abftaining from Tranfgreffion. Here the Motive muft be confide red : becaufe as merely doing III deferves Puniffiment, a Crime in the Cafe of wrong Judgment being ever neceffarily inferred ; fo merely abftaining from 111 cannot for that very Reafon have any Merit. In judicially rewarding, therefore, the Motives muft be known : but human Judicatures can never come to the Knowledge of thefe, but by accident: it is only that Tribunal, which fearches the Mind and the Heart, that can do this. Therefore we conclude, that Reward cannot, properly, he the San- &ion of human Laws. If it ffiould be faid, that though Rewards can not be equitably adminiftred, as Punlffiments may, yet, what hinders, but that, for the Good of So ciety, all who obferve the Laws ffiould be reward ed, as all who tranfgrefs them are puniffied? The Anfwer will lead us to the Proof of our fecond Point. / 2, That Society could not reward^ tho' it could difcover Sed, 2. of Mo s^s demonflrated. 19 ^ifcover the Objefts of its Favour ; the Reafon is, becaufe no Society can ever find a Fund fufficient for that purpofe, without raifing it on the People as a Tax, to pay it back to them as a Reward. But the univerfal Pradtice of Society confirms our Reafoning, and is explained by it ; the fole Sandtion of Punifhments having in all Ages and Places, been employed by the State to fecure the Obfervance of Civil Laws. This was fo remarka ble a Fadt, that it could not efcape the Notice of a certain incomparable Wit, and acute Obferver of Men and Manners: who, fpeaks of it as an uni verfal Defect, in thefe Words, Although we ufually call Reward and Punifhment the two Hinges, upon which all Government turns, yet I could never obferve this Maxim to he put in Practice hy any Nation ex cept that of Lilliput '. Thus he introduces an Ac count of the Laws and Cuftoms of an i7/opi«« Con ftitution of his own framing ; and, for that matter, perhaps, as good as any of the reft : and, had he intended it as a Satire againft fuch chimerical Com mon-wealths, nothing could have been more juft. For all thefe political Romancers, from Plato to this Author, make Civil Rewards and Punlffi ments the two Hinges of Government. I have often wondered what it was, that ffiould lead them from Fadt, and univerfal Pradtice, in fo fundamental a Point. But doubtlefs it was this — The Defign of fuch Sort of Writings is to give a perfedt Pattern of Civil Government ; and to fup ply the fancied Defedts in adtual Societies. The End of Government coming firft under confidera tion ; and the general Pradtice of Society feeming to declare this End to be only, what it really is. Security to the temporal Liberty and Property of Man i ' Gullivei^s Travels, vol, I. p. 97. C 2 the 20 The Divine Legation Book I. the Simplicity of it difpleafed, and the Plan ap peared defedllve. They imagined, that, by en larging the Bottom, they ffiould ennoble the Strudture; and, therefore, formed a romantick Projedt of making Civil Society ferve for all the good Purpofes it was even accidentally capable of producing. And thus, inftead of giving us a true Pidture of Government, they jumbled together all Sorts of Societies into one ; and confounded the i?^/2- gious, the Literary, theMercantile, the Convivial, with the Civil. Whoever reads them carefully, if indeed they be worth reading carefully, will find that the Errors they abound in are all of this Nature; and that they arife from the lofing, or never having had, a true Idea ofthe fimple Plan of Civil Society: a Circumftance, which, as we have ffiewn elfewhere, hath occafioned many wrong Judgments concerning it. No wonder, then, that this Miftake, concerning the End of Civil Society, drew after it others, con cerning the Means ; and this, amongft the reft, that Reward was one of the Sanations of human Laws. On the whole then, it appears, that Civil So ciety has not, in itfelf, the Sanation of Rewards, to fecure the Obfervance of its Laws, So true, in this Senfe, is it, what St. Paul divinely obferves, that THE Law was not made for the Righ teous, BUT FOR the Unruly and Disobe dient. But it being evident, that the joint Sandtions of Rewards and Puniffiments are but juft fufficient to fecure the tolerable Obfervance of Right (the common falfe Opinion that thefe are the two Hinges of Government arifing from that Evi dence) it follows, that, as Religion, oNiy, can supply the Sanction of Rewards, WHICH Society wants, and has not. Re ligion is absolutely necessary to Civil' Government, Thus Sedt. 2. of Moses demonflrated. 21 Thus, on the whole, we fee, I. That Society, by its own proper Power, cannot provide for the Ob fervance of above one third Part of moral Duties ; and of that third, but imperfedtly. We fee likewife, how, by the peculiar Influence of its Nature, it enlarges the Duty of the Citizen, at the fame time that it leffens his natural Ability of performing. II. We fee further, which is a thing of far greater Importance, that Society totally wants one of thofe two Powers which are owned by all to be the ne ceflary Hinges on which Government turns, and, without which, it cannot be fupported. To fupply thefe Wants and Imperfedlions, fome other, coadtive. Power muft be added, that hath its Influence on the Mind of Man ; to keep Society from running back into Confufion, But there is no- other than the Power of Religion; which teaching an over-ruling Providence, the Rewarder of good Men and the Puniffier of ill, can oblige to the Duties of imperfeft Obligation, which human Laws overlook ; and teaching, alfo, that this Pro vidence is omnifcient, that it fees the moft fecret Adtions and Intentions of Men, and hath given Laws for the perfedting their Nature, will oblige to thofe Duties of perfeSl Ohligation, which human Laws cannot reach, or fufficlently enforce. Thus we have explained, in general, rhe mutual Aid Religion and Civil Policy lend to one another : not unlike that which two Allies, in the fame Quarrel, may reciprocally receive againft a com mon Enemy : While one Party is clofely preffed, the other comes up to its Relief; difengages the firft ; gives it time to rally, and recruit its Powers : By this time the affifting Party is puffied in its turn, and needs the Aid of that which it relieved ; which is now at hand to repay the Obligation. From henceforth, the two Parties ever adl in Con- C 3 jundlion ; 22 The Divine Legation Book I. jundlion ; and, by that means, keep the common Enemy at a ftand. Having thus proved the Service of Religion in genera], to Society; and ffiewn by what Influence it is that this Service is performed, we are enabled to proceed to the Proof of the particular Propofi tion in queftion : For by what hath been faid, it appears that this Service Is performed by Religion, folely, as it teaches a Providence, the Rewarder of good Men, and the Punifher of ill : So that, though it were poffible, as I think it is not ", that there could be any fuch Thing as a Religion not founded on the Dodtrine of a Providence ; yet, it is evi dent, fuch a Religion could be of no manner of Service to Society. Whatfoever therefore is ne ceffary for the Support of this Dodlrine is mediate ly neceffary for the well-being of Society, That the Dodlrine of a future State of Rewards and Pu niffiments is abfolutely and indifpenfably neceffary for the fiipport of the general Dodlrine of Provi dence, under its prefent Difpenfations in this Life, we ffiall now ffiew. Religion eftabliffiing a Providence, the Rewarder of Virtue, and the Puniffier of Vice, Men natural ly expedt to find the conftant and invariable Marks of its Superintendency. But the Hiftory of Man kind, nay even of every one's own Neighbourhood, would foon inform the moft indiligent Obferver, that the Affairs of Men wear a Form of great Ir regularity : the Scene, that ever and anon prefents itfelf, being of diftreffed Virtue and profperous Wickednefs ; which unavoidably brings the em barraffed Religionift to the neceffity of giving up " St. P««r fuppofes there can no more be a Religion without a Providence, than without a God He (laith he) thM tometh to God, mufi believe that he is, and that he is a 'Rewarder «/ tpem tbat diligently feek him, hi5 Se(ft. 2. of Mos-ES demonflrated. 23 his Belief, or finding out the Solution of thefe un toward Appearances. His firft Reflexion may per haps be with the Poet ° : Omnia rehar Confilio firmata Dei ; qui lege moveri Sidera, quifruges diverfo tempore nafci, — '¦ Sed cum res hominum tanta caligine volvi Adfpicerem, lietofque diu ftorere nocentes, Vexarique pios ; rurfus labefafia cadebat Relligio. But on fecond Thoughts, Reafon, that taught him, from the admirable Frame and Harmony of the material Univerfe, that there muft needs be a fu- perintending Providence, to influence that Order which all its Parts preferve in their continued Re volutions, would foon inftrudt him in the Abfurdi ty of fuppofing the fame Care did not extend to Man, a Creature of a far nobler Nature than the moft confiderable of inanimate Beings, And there fore human Affairs not being difpenfed, at prefent, agreeably to that Superintendence, he muft con clude, that Man ffiall exift after Death, to be brought to a future Reckoning in another Life, where all Accounts will be fet even, and all the prefent Obfcurities and Perplexities in the Ways of Providence unfolded and explained. From hence Religion acquires irrefiftible Force and Splendor ; and rifes on a folid and unffiaken Bafis. Hear an unexceptionable Evidence to this whole Matter. Et quidem (fays the Free-thinking Lord Herbert) prcemium bonis, ^ fupplicium malis, vel hac in vita, vel poft banc vitam dari, ftatuebant Gentiles NiUl mage congruum Nature divinm effe docuerant, tum Philofaphorum, tum Theologorum Gentilium prcecipuo- o Claud, C 4 rum '24 '^he Divine Legation Book I. rum S choice, quam ut bona bonis., mala malis remetire- tur Deus. Cceterum quum id quoque cernerent, quem- admodum viri boni calamitatibus miferiifque opprefft heic jacerent ; mali improbique e contra lauliliis omni bus affluerent ; certifftmis ex juftitia bonitateque divina argumenfts deduflis, bonis poft hanc vitam prcemium condignum, malis pcenam dari credebant : secus INIM SI ESSET, NULLAM NEQUE JUSTITliE NEQUE BONITATIS DIVINiE RATIONEM CON- STARE possep. Now this Dodtrine of a future State being the only Support of Religion, under the prefent and ordinary Difpenfations of Providence, we conclude, which was what we had to prove, that the incuh eating it is neceffary to the well being of Society, That this was the general Sentiment of Manr kind, we ffiall fee hereafter ; when it will be ffiewn, that, throughout the whole World there never was known, at any time, a civilized People (except the Jewifh) who did not found their Religion on this Dodtrine, as being confcious it could not be fu- ftained without it. And, as for the Neceffity of Religion itfelf to Society, the very Enemies of all Religion are the loudeft to confefs it : For, from this moft apparent Truth, the Atheift of old form ed his famous Argument agalnft the divine Ori-- ginal of Religion ; which makes fo great a Figure in the common Syftems of Infidelity. Here then we might reft our Caufe, on the Support of our Adverfary's Confeffion ; but that we find, fo in- conftant and perverfe is Irrellgion, that fome mo dern Apologifts for Atheifm have abandoned the Syftem of their Predeceffors, and chofe rather to give up an Argument againft the divine Original of Religion, than acknowledge the human Ufe of P De Religione Gentilium, cap. Fnmium vel Poena. it. Se(3:. 2. of Mos-s-s demonftrated. 25 it. Which with much Franknefs and Confidence they have thought fit to deny. \ Now as Thefe endeavour to overthrow the very Foundation of our Proof of the Propofition in que ftion, it will be proper to examine their Pretences. Sect. IIL TH E three great Advocates for this Paradox are commonly reckoned Pomponatius, Cardan, a,nd Bayle; who are put together, without diftindtion, as the equal Maintainers of ir : Whereas nothing is more certain than that, although Cardan and Bayle indeed defended it, Pomponatius was of a quite different Opinion : but Bayle had entered him into thb Service ; and fo great isBayle's Authority, that no body perceived he was preffed into it. It will be but Juftice then to give Pomponatius a fair hearing, and let him fpeak for himfelf This learned Italian, a famous Peripatetic of the XV"" Century, wrote a Treatife ' to prove that, on the Principles of Ariftotle, it could not be de monftrated that the Soul was immortal : But the Dodtrine of the Mortality ofthe Soul being general ly thought to be attended with very pernicious Con fequences, he conceived it lay upon him to fay fomething to that Objedtion. In his ig"" Chapter, therefore, he enumerates thofe Confequences ; and in the 14'% gives diftindt Anfwers to each of them. That which fuppofeth his Dodtrine to af fedt Society, is expreffed in thefe Words: *« Obj.z. In the fecond Place, a Man perfuaded of *' the Mortality of the Soul ought in no cafe, even *' in the moft urgent, to prefer Death to Life : *' And fo. Fortitude, which teaches us to defpife *' Death, and, when our Country, or the Public 9 Oelmmortalitate Ar.imi, printed in 12"° Ac- i;34- " Good 26 The Divine Legation Book I. " Good requires, even to chufe it, would be no *' more. Nor on fuch Principles ffiould we ha^. *' zard Life for a Friend : on the contrary, we *' ffiould commit any Wickednefs rather than un- " dergo the Lofs of it : which is contrary to what *' Ariftotle teaches in his Ethics '." His Reply to this, in the following Chapter, is that Virtue re quires we fhould dye for our Country or our Friends ; and that Virtue is never fo perfefi as when it brings no Dower with it : But then fubjoins, " Phllofo- *' phers, and the Learned, only know what Plea- *' fures the Pradtice of Virtue can procure ; and " what Mifery attends Ignorance and Vice: — but " Men not underftanding the Excellence of Virtue, " and Deformity of Vice, would commit any Wick- " ednefs rather than fubmit to Death : to bridle " therefore their unruly Appetites, they were *' taught to be influenced by Hope of Reward, and *' Fear of Puniffiment ^" This is enough to ffiew what Pomponatius thought of the Neceffity of Reli gion to the State. He gives up fo much of the Objedtion as urges the ill Confequence, of the Dor dtrine of the Mortality, on Mankind in general; but in fo doing doth not betray the Caufe he un dertakes : which is, to prove that the Belief of the Mortality of the Soul would have no ill In- "¦ Secundo, quia ftante animi humani mortalitate, homo innullo. cafu, quantumcunque urgentiflimo, deberet eltgere mortem : & fie removeretur fortitudo, quae prsccipit contemnere mortem, & quod pro patria 8c bono publico debemus mortem eligere : neque proamico deberemusexponere animam noftram ; imo quodcun que fcelus 8c nefas perpetrare magis quam mortemTubire : quod eft contra Arift. 3 Ethic. 8c gejufdem, p. 99. f Soli enim philofophi 8c ftudiofi, ut dicit Arift. 6 Ethic, fciunt quantam delcftationem generent virtutes, 8c quantam miferiam ignorantia 8c vitia.— — Sed quod homines non cognofcentesexcel- jentiam virtutis 8c foeditatem vitii, omne fcelus perpetrarent, pri- ufquam mori : quare ad refrajnandum diras hominum cupiditates, data eil fpcs prxmiific timor punitionis, />. 1 1 9, fluence Sed. 3* cf Mo s-ES demonflrated 27 fluence on the Pradtice of a learned Peripatetic : not that it would not have it, on the grofs body of Mankind, to the Prejudice of Society. This ap pears from the Nature and Defign of the Treatife ; wrote entirely on Peripatetic Principles, to explain a Point in that Philofophy : by which Explanation, whoever was perfuaded of the Mortality of the Soul, muft give his Affent on thofe Principles ; but thofe were only fitted for learned Men, It was his Bufinefs therefore to examine, what Effedls this Be lief would have on fuch, and on fuch only. And this, it muft be owned, he hath done with Dexte rity enough. But that this Belief would be moft pernicious, to the Body of Mankind In general, he confeffes with the utmoft Ingenuity. And as his own Words are the fulleft Proof imaginable that he thought with the reft of the World, con cerning the Influence of Religion, and particularly of the Dodtrine of a future State of Rewards and Puniffiments, on Society, I ffiall beg Leave to tranfcribe them at length " There are fome *' Men of fo ingenuous and well framed a Nature, *' that they are brought to the Pradtice of Virtue^ " from the fole Confideration of its Dignity ; and " are kept from Vice on the bare Profpedl of its *' Bafenefs : but fuch excellent Perfons are very " rare. Others there are of a fomewhat lefs heroic " Turn of Mind; and thefe, befides the Dignity " of Virtue, and Bafenefs of Vice, are worked *' upon by Fame and Honours, by Infamy and " Difgrace, to ffiun Evil and perfevere in Good : *' Thefe are ofthe fecond Clafs of Men. Others " again are kept in order by the Hope of fome *' real Benefit, or the Dread of corporal Puniffi- " ment; wherefore that fuch may follow Virtue, *' the Politician hath allured them by Dignities, " Poffeffions, and Things of the like Nature ; and "hath 28 The Divine Legation Book I. " hath inflidted Muldts, Degradations, Mutilations, *' and Capital Puniffiments, to deter them from ** Wickednefs. There are yet others of fo intradt- *' able and perverfe a Spirit, that nothing of this *' can move them, as daily Experience ffiews us ; *' for thefe, therefore, it was, that the Politician *' contrived the Doltrine of a future State ; where e- *' ternai Rewards are referved for the Virtuous, *' and eternal Puniffiments, which have the more " powerful Influence of the two, for the Wicked. *' For the greater part of thofe who live well, do *' fo, rather for Fear of the Puniffiment, than out " of Appetite to the Reward ; for Mifery is better " known to Man, than that immeafurable Good *' which Religion promifes : And therefore as this *' laft Contrivance may be diredted to promote " the Welfare of Men of all Conditions and De- " grees, the Legiflator, intent upon public Good, •' and feeing a general propenfity to Evil, efla- " bliffied the Dodlrine of the Immortality of the " Soul. Little folicitous for Truth, in all this, *' but intent only on Utility, that he might d^aw *' Mankind to Virtue. Nor is he to be blamed : *' for as the Phyfician deludes his Patient in order " to reftore his Health, fo the Lawgiver invents *' Apologues to form the Manners of his People. *' Indeed were all of that noble turn of Mind with " thofe enumerated under the firft Clafs, then would " they all, even on the Suppofition of the Soul's *' Mortality, exadtly perform to one another the *' Devoirs of Citizens, But as there are, upon the *' matter, none of this Difpofition, he muft, of neceffi- *' ty, have recourfe to other Arts'." ' Aliqui funt homines ingenui, 8c bene inftitutx naturae, adeo quod ad virtutem inducuntur ex fola virtutis nobilitate, 8c a vitio retrahuntur ex fola ejus fceditate : 8c hi optime difpofiti funt, li cet perpauci funt, Aliqui vero funt minus bene diipofiti j 8£ hi After Se »^« fVai yiT'tui S-ioJig. T Sivl» sr^uTov, dx^d T«^«gj» dtutit 7v'\x'tfii^ dyriK(i,u1» 1^ ms<5 S^z'ial iinfSficu QpitK w^m'tk?. Herid. Eteterpe, c. 4. nfwzoi 5 >^TOiJkTAa/o»°Aifi'' ^r^lcl HO'/ 01 ti-TTovlei ui av9§Mx» -^v^ti didvcirof Iri. Id. ib. C. 1 23- ^ n^a.oi ft, dj&^cairut 'AtyvTrltot ^ifotlM Bsuit re 'iftoluv TtoJoHv. De Dea Syria, initio. tion Bedt. I. of Moses demonftrated. 91 tion was ever without a Religion in general, and this Dodlrine in particular ; and though it was of general Belief even before Civil Policy was infti tuted amongft Mankind ; yet were there formerly, and now are, many Savage Nations, that, when difcovered, appeared to have long loft all Traces of Religion: A Fadl which implies fome extraor dinary Care in the Magiftrate for its Support and Prefervation. For if Religion hath been fupported in all Places, at all Times, and under all Circum ftances, where there was a Magiftrate and Civil Policy ; and fcarce in any Place, or under any Cir cumftance, where thefe were wanting ; what other ¦Caufe than the Magiftrate's Management can be affigned for fuch Support ? This, to confidering Men, will be of Weight. If it ffiould be faid, which, I think, is the only plaufible Thing can be faid, that the Reafon why the Citizen had Religion, and the Savage none, might be. That, amongft the Advantages of Civil Life, the Improvement and Cultivation of the Mind is one ; which neceffarily bring in the Knowledge of God and Religious Obfervance : To this, we think it fufficient to reply. That all the national Religions of the ancient and modern Gentile World are fo grofs and irrational, that they could not be the Refult of the Difcoveries of improved Reafon ; but were plainly fitted to the Capacity of Minds yet rude and uncultivated ; with a Mixture of Im pofitions of the Magiftrate's tempering, regarding the Genius of the People, and the Nature of each particular Conftitution, To give a modern Inftance of what we have been faying : r-T?The Mexicans and Peruvians in the South, and the People of Canada in North America, were on a Level with regard to fpeculative Improve- pjent ; or, jf there was any Advantage, the Cana dians 92 The Divine Legation Book II. dians had it. The two firft, when difcovered, had a Religion formed and fettled ; the other not fo much gs the very Rudiments of one : but that, fuch a Religion, as difcovered fomething worfe than mere Ignorance, but never could be the Refult of fpecu lative Thinking : However a Religion it was that taught the great Articles of the Worffiip of a God, a Providence, and a future State. Now how hap pened it that thefe two great Empires had a Re ligion, and the Canadians none, but that their Lawgivers faw it neceffary to eftabliffi and perpetu ate that they found *, for the Benefit of the State? Which Advantage the Canadians not having had, they loft in Courfe of Time all Footiteps of Reli gion, If this will not be allowed theJleafon, It will be difficult to affign one. Let us fuppofe, ac cording to the Objedlion, that Gentile Religion owes its Being to the improved and cultivated Mind. Now, if we make Colledtions from Fadt, it will be, found more likely that thefe. Northern Savages ffiould longer preferve the Notions of God, and the Pradtices of Religion, than the Southern Citi zens, uninfluenced by their Magiftrates. The Way of Reafon, adapted to the common Capacities of Mankind, to come to the Knowledge of a fuperior Being, is that very eafy one, the Con templation of the Works of Nature : For thisEm- ployment, the Savage would have fitter Opportu nities by far, afforded by his vacant fedentary ^.ife ; and by his conftant View of Nature, in every Part naked and unfophifticated ; which all his Travail and Amufements perpetually prefented to him. The Cos^te de Boulainvilliers, a Writer by no means prejqdiced in favour of Religion, gives this very Reafon why the Arabians preferved fo long, and * S£;e Book III. Seift, 6. II. i. and ing. antepenult. with Se<3:. I. of Moses demonftrated. 93 with fo much Purity, their Notions ofthe Divinity '. On the other hand, every Thing of Nature, by which we come to the Knowledge of a firft Caufe, would be quite hid from the Southern Citizen, bu lled in the Works of barbarous Arts, and inhuman Inventions ; and taken up with the flaviffi Attend ance on a Cruel Tyrant. Nor, if we may credit the Relations of Travel lers, do the Northern People any more negledl to exercife their rational Faculties than the Southern: It is conftant, they are obferved to have better In- telledls than thofe nearer the Sun : which, being owing to the Influence of Climes, is experienced to hold all the World over. Notwithflanding this, the Iffue proved jaft the contrary ; and, as we faid the Peruvians and Mexicans had a Religion, the Canadians none at all. Who then can any longer doubt that this was owing to the Care and Contrivance of the Magi ftrate? But indeed (which was the Reafon why I preferred this Inftance) Matter of Fadt confirms our Reafoning. The Founders of thefe two Mo narchies pretended to be the Meffengers and Off- fpring of the Gods ; and, in the manner of the Grecian, and other Legiflators, of whom more pre fently, prerended to Infpiration, eftabliffied Reli- gbn, and conftituted a Form of Worffiip. II. But not only the Exiftence, but the Genius too of Religion, as to Firft, The Nature of their Gods. Secondly, The Attributes affigned to them, and Thirdly, The Mode of Worjhip in civil Ufe, fhews the Magiftrare's Hand in its Support. ' t» Vie de Mohamed, p. 147. £ eViow? »gif ;8«o¦l^«; yiyovisM xard -r^v "Aiyv^ov. Viod. Sic. I. 1 . p. 8. Steph. Ed. Voiez, aujji lettres a Mr. H. fur les premiers DieuxouRois d'Egypte. Par. 1733. jTEgoi "Eai-/,»£;, elviw. Clio, c. 131. Valla e'K'pMns the Word dvi^avo- 0a£«; by ex hominibus ortos ; and, I thmk, rightly. But our learned Stanley, in his Notes to the Perfians of Mfchylus, thinks otherwife : and that it rather fignifies humana forma ptditos. I fuppofe it appeared harlh to him, that any one could imagine the Gods had human Natures ; but the meaning is explained above. That Statues of the Gods in human form were a plain Indication of their Original from Mortality, is fo evident in the Opinion of Eufebius, that he fays, 0 ye 70; dh-nS-rt; T^of^ find «^ xix^Ft, fMtiQiux^i (patyit dfifii, .&nil»{ wogjej ^t»f Iwgav yi^oti-jen rbi " began g6 The Divine Legation Book II. ** began in Chaldcea and Egypt. — The Countries *' upon the Tigris and the Nile being exceeding ** fertile, were firft frequented by Mankind, and ** grew firft into Kingdoms ; and therefore be- ** gan firft to adore their dead Kings and Queens: *' — Every City fet up the Worffiip of its own *' Founder and Kings, and by Alliances and Con- *' quefts they fpread this Worffiip, and at length *' the Phoenicians and Egyptians brought into Eu- *' rope the Pradtice of deifying the Dead''." 2. As to tbe Attributes and ^alities affgnedto their Gods : Thefe always correfponded with the Nature and Genius of the Civil Government: If this was gentle, benign, compaffionate, and forgiving j Goodnefs and Mercy made up the Effence of the Deity : But if fevere, inexorable, captious, or un equal ; the very Gods were Tyrants, and Expia tions, Attonements, Luftrations, and bloody Sacri fices compofed the Syftem of religious Worffiip, This I have obferved to hold fo univerfally through out Antiquity, that by the Rule here delivered i Man might, on being told the Genius of any par ticular Government, rightly pronounce on the Na^ ture of their Gods. 3. As to the Mode of Worfhip in Civil Ufe : The Ohje£l of that we call Religion being God, confi dered as the Creator and Preferver of Mankind, a Species of rational Beings ; it is evident, the Sub jeSl of it is each individual of that Species. This is the true Idea of Religion, which common Senfe difcovers to us. But now, in ancient Paganifm, Religion was a very different Thing : It had for its SubjeSl not only each individual, the natural Man, but likewife the artificial Man, Society ; from whom, and by whom, all the public Rites and Ceremonies p Pag. 161. of Sedt. i. bf Mos E's demonftrated. 97 of it were inftituted and performed. And while that Part of Pagan Religion, whofe SubjeSl was Individuals, bore an inferior Part, and was confef fed to be under an unequal Providence, whieh brought in the Dodtrine of a future State for its Sup port ; the other, whofe Subjedt was the Society, taught an equal Providence, exadtly adminiftred to the artificial Man. The Confequence of this was. Religion held the Government in Partnerffiip ; and nothing was confulted or executed without Ad vice of the Oracle, judgments. Prodigies, and Portents were as common as Civil Edidls; and as conftantly bore their Share in the public Admini ftration : For thefe were always underftood to ba national Diredlions ; cither Declarations of divine Favour, or Denunciations of impending Puniffi ment; in which Particulars, as fuch, were not ali all concerned : As is evident from hence, that to accept or avert the Omen ; to gratulate the Mer cy, or deprecate the Judgment, the conftant Me thod was the Revival of old Rites, or the Inftitu tion of new ones. A Regulation of Manners, or the Eftabliffiment of ffimptuary Laws never made Part of the State's Attonement to the Gods, The Singularity and Notoriety ofthis Fadt ftruck the great Mn Bayle fo forceably, that imagining this more public Part to be the whole of Paganifm^ he too haftily concluded, th3.t tbe Worfhip cf falfe Gods in the ancient World, did not at all. infiuence Morals'^: Ahd frOm thence formed an Argument to fupport his favourite Qyeftion In behalf of A« theifm. This was a ftrange Extream, and unwor thy his Charadler in the Knowledge of Antiquity : For though it be plain, indeed, that this Part of q Penfees diverfes fur ime Comete, fe:c. And Uefponfe aux ^«e- fiions d'un Provincial. And Continuation des Penfees diverfes, gcc. H Pagan 98 The Divine Legation Book. II. Pagan Religion had no Influence on Morals, it is utterly falfe that the other Part of it, whofe Sub jedt was Individuals, had not : For in the Dodlrine of the future State of Revi'ards and Puniffiments, which was the Foundation of, and infeparable from this founder Part of Pagan Religion, the Merit and Demerit, to which they were annexed, were Virtue and Vice only ; to which, indeed, was ad ded Contempt of the Gods : But by that, was not meant any Negledl in particular Modes of Wor ffiip, but rank Atheifm, they fuppofing all Mo rality to be delfroyed by it. This we ffiall prove at large in the fourth Sedtion of the prefent Book : Though I am far from denying, that the Nature of the public Part of Pagan Religion did lead In dividuals, in the private Part of it, into many wrong Conclufions, concerning the Efficacy of ex terior Adls of Religion in particular Cafes, But what feems to have occafioned Mr, Bayle'i Miftake in this Point (befides his following the Fathers, who in their Declatnations agalnft Pagan ifm have faid a great deal to the fame Purpofe) was his not refledling that ancient Pliftory ', the Repo fitory of all that concerns the public Part of Pagan ' What we have faid above of the Genius of Paganifm well accounts for a Circumftance in ancient Hiftory, that very mUch embarrafles the Critics. They cannot conceive how it happened, that the beft ancient Hiftorians, who underftood fo well what belonged to the Nature of each Compofition, and how to give every Sort of Work its due Form , and were befides fo free ftom all Vulgar Superftition, ftiould fo much abound in Defcriptions of Religious Ritcsand Ceremonies ; and in Relations of Omens, Prodigies, and Portents. Many a ridiculous Hypothefis has been framed to give a Solution of this Difficulty : And many a tedious Work been compiled to juftify thefe ancient Hiftorians, upon mere Modern Ideas. — — But now a plain and eafy Anfwer may be given to tliis Difficulty. — This Part of Pagan Religion was fo interwove with public Tranfaftions, that it became ejfenml to Civil Hiftory. . Religion, Sedt. I, of Mo s^s demonftrated. 99 Religion, only reprefents one Part of the Influence of Paganifm, that which it had on the Public as a Body, The other Part, the Influence it had on In dividuals, it paffes over in Silence as not its Pro vince. — But to return. Whoever now confiders the Genius of Paganifm in this View, and whoever hath confidered it at all, muft be ftruck with this View, can no longer doubt that the Civil Magiftate had a great Hand in fram ing and modeling Religion. What it was that en abled him to give this very extraordinary Caft to Paganifm, is not hard to difcover. It was indeed the popular Difpofition arifing from, and the ne- ceffiry Confequence of thofe general Notions, which, by his Invention and Encouragement, had over- fpread the Heathen World, i. That there were local titular Deities, who had taken upon them felves, or to whom was committed, the Care and Protedlion of particular Nations and People : Of which, more hereafter. 2, That thofe great Bene fadlors of Mankind, who had reduced the fcattered Tribes and Clans into Civil Society, were become Gods. 3. A.ndlaftly, That their Syftems of Laws and Civil Inftltutes were planned and digefted bythe Diredtion of the Legiflator's Patron Deity ^. On the whole then, thefe Co.nfiderations, — of the Prefervation of Religion in general, — ofthe Na ture and Attributes of the Gods, — and the Mode of public Worftip, will, I am perfuaded. Incline my Reader to believe that, for the Univerfality of Reli gion, the World was much indebted to the Civil Magiftrate ; how much foever the illegitimate or un natural Conftitution of particular States, or the de fedllve Views of particular Legiflators, may have contributed to deprave the true Religion of Nature; '' Sec the Beginning of the next Section. H 2 Or loo The Divijie Legation Book IT, or, if you will, the Patriarchal. The learned St. Auftin, whofe Mafter-piece was his great Know ledge of Antiquity, feems to have been influenced by fuch like Confiderations, when he gives it, as the Refult of his Enquiries ; that the Civil Magi-' ftrate had a large Share in the Pagan Superftition, His Words are% "—Which indeed feems to have " been done on no other Account but as it was the " Bufinefs of Princes, out of their Wifdorn and ci- " vil Prudehce, to deceive the People in their Re- " ligion — Princes peflfuaded the People, under " Pretence of Religion, to believe thofe diings to " be true which they themfelves knew to be idle " Fables. Tying them by this Means, more clofe- " ly to Civil Society, that they might be the more " eafily governed." But if flow it ffiould be objedted againft all we have faid above, that it was natural for the People, left to themfelves, to run into any of thefe Errors of Silperftition , we may well allow it, without Prejudice to our Argument : For they are always Notions apt to be entertained and cheriffied by vul gar Mli>ds, whofe Current the Wife Magiftrate is accuftomed and pradtifed to turn to his Advan tage. For to think him capable of new modelling the human Mind, by making Men religious whom he did not find fo, is, as ffiall be ffiewn hereafter, a fenfelefs Whimfy, whereby the Atheifts would account for the Origin of Religion, — And, when it appears that all thefe various Modes of Saperfti- tion concur to promote the Magiftrate's End aftd ' Quod utique non aliam ob caufam faftUm videtur, nifi quia hominum Principum velut prudeiitium 8c fipientiura negotiuni fuit populum in Religionibus fallere — Homines principes "ea, qua: . vana effe noverant, Religionis nomine populis tanc]uam verafua- debant : Hoc modo eos civili Societati velut arftius alligantes, quo fubditos poffiderent. De Civit. Dei, 1, 4. c. 32, Purpofe Sedt. 2. of M OSES demonftrated. loi Purpofe, it can be no longer doubted that he gave them that general Diredtion. — But the particular Parts of Gentile Religion, which firther ftrengthen and confirm this Reafoning, we ffiall not infift on here. Their Original will be clearly difcovered, when we come to ffiew the particular Method em ployed by the Magiftrate for this great Purpofe, What thofe Methods were, the Courfe of our Ar gument now leads us to confider. Sect. II, WE have ffiewn In general, from the Effect, that Law-givers and Founders of Civil Po licy riid indeed iife much Art and Induftry in the Propagation and Maintenance of Religion. We ffiall now endeavour to explain the Caufes of that Effedt, in a particular Enumeration ofthe feveral Arts therein employed. I. The firft Step the Legiflator took, was to proclaim an extraordinary Revelation from fome God ; by whofe Command and Diredtion he pre tended to have inftituted the Policy he would re commend to the People. Thus Amafis and Mne- ves. Lawgivers of the Egyptians (from whence this Cuftom, as all other fundamental ones of Civil Policy and Religion, firft arofe) pretended to have received their Laws from Mercury; Zoroafter the Ljiiw-giver of the BaSirians, and Zamolxis Law-giv er of the Getes, from Vefta ; Zathrauftes the Lav/- giver of the Arimafpi, from a good Spirit or Geni us ; and all thefe moft induftrioufly and profeffedly inculcated the Dodtrine of a future State of Rewards and Puniffiments. So Rhadamanthus and Minos Lawgivers of Crete, and Lycaon Law-giver of Ar cadia, pretended tp an Intercourfe with Jupiter; H 3 Triptolemus 102 The Divine Legation Book II. Triptolemus Lawgiver of the Athenians, affedled to be infpired by Ceres ; Pythagoras Law-giver of the Crotoniates, and Zaleucus of the Locrians, afcrlb- ed their Laws to Minerva ; Lycurgus of Sparta, to Apollo ; and Romulus and Numa of Rome, the one to Confus, and the other to the Goddefs Egeria ". In a Word, there is fcarce a Legiflator, recorded in ancient Hiftory, but what thus pretended to Re velation, and divine Affiftance in forming his In ftitutions. But had we the loft Books of Legiftators wrote by Hermippus, Theophraftus, and Apollcdorus'", we ffiould doubtlefs have received greac Lights on this Subjedt, as well as a much fuller Lift of thefe infpired Statefmen, The fame Method 'was pra- dlifed by the Founders of the great outlying Empires, as Sir William Temple calls them. Thus He of the Chinefe Monarchy was called Fagfour or Fanfur, the Son of Heaven, as we are told by the Jefuits, from his Pretenfions to that Relation. The royal Commentaries of Peru inform us, that the Found ers of that Empire were Mango Copac, and hisWife and Sifter Coya Mama, who proclaimed themfelves the Son and Daughfer ofthe Sun, and fent from their Father to reduce MaTikiNd from their Savage'^t'^x- al Life to one of Order and Society. Thor and 0- din the Law-givers of the Weftern Goths, pretend ed likev/ife tO Infpiration, and even Divinity \ " Died. Sic. 1. i. 3c 5. Ephorus apud Strabonem, 1. io. • Tefte vstcri Scriptore apud i'aii-faw in [Ayaai^j] Ar'ifi. apud Schol. Pind. ad 10. Olymp. '" Athen. \. I /^. D. Laertius. '- Olim quidam magicx artis imbuti, Thor videlicet & Othi- nas, obtentis fimplicium animis, diviniratis fibifaftigium arroga- rc coeperunt. Adeo namque fallacix eorum effeftusper- crebuit, utin ipfis csteri quandam numinum potentiam veneran- tes, eofque deos, vel deorum complices autumantes veneficiorum auftoribus foleunia vota dependerent, & errori facrilego refpcft- 'im facris debitum c.\hibcrent. Sct.xo-Gntm . 1. 6. Hlftor. The Sedt. 2. of Moses demonftrated. 103 The Revelation of Mahomet the Leader of the Ara bians, are too well known to be infifted o.n. But the Race of thefe infpired Lawgivers feems to have ended in Genghizcan the Great Founder of the Empire ofthe Moguls''. Such was the univerfal Cuftom of the ancient World, to make their firft Kings and Law-givers Gods or Prophets. And this I cake to be the true Reafon why we find in Homer, the conftant Epi thets to Kings are AIOTENEIS born ofthe Gods, and AIOTPE^EIS bred, or tutored hy the Gods. From this general Pretence to Revelation we have enough to conclude of the Sentiments of the anci ent Legiflators concerning the Ufe of Religion to the State. For we muft always have in Mind what Diodorus Siculus fo truly obferves. That they did this, not only to beget a Veneration to tbeir Laws, but likewife to eftablifh the Opinion of ihe Superintendency of the Gods over human Affairs ^. Nay we ffiall ven ture to go farther, and endeavour to ffiew that this latter was their principal and diredl Aim, in all their Pretenfions to Infpiration, y lis ont attribue des Revelations a Genghizcan ; & pour portel la veneration des peuples auffi loin qu'elle pouvoit aller, iis lui ont donne de la divinite. C(!uxqui s'intereffoient a Ion elevation eurent meme I'infolence de le faire paffer pour fiis de Dieu. Sa mere plus modefte, dit feulement qu'il etoit fiis du Soleil. Mr. Petis de la Croix le pere Hiftoire du Genghiz,carf^ c. i. ^ Mild yi ¦# 'srx^.Mdi ? xoix Aiyv-afffi &in xaldraa-it, rtai fAv&oXo- yn^jiluj ysyoiifiu ini -rs -W &ius t^ r^ ijouuv, -sriiff-M ^aa-'t srpii'^t dypcf.-ir'iQu; fifioit; X^i'^"-'^ ''"- ¦B''A'')9'! A'»» r tAtiulu/, xsS^ i^ ir, -.pv- XTi t^jy-' •^ ¦^ /Sim Kono-rsc'iai 7^ fciri^ni^o^m. -m a^ajroi-ij^LZ m ^ 3£a9a3-E« •ZB-a^" E»ii(n «70(Ji7»< ^ciirh c* j£ rj) K.^ir-/i MiJaa, it-?)*' j AxxiSanfto-Aotf AvxSi^yo-j' m ^ 5!-^^ Ai"?, r j 'ax^ AtiliTO^-^-i:^ q:-r,Tx{]a, TSTKS «A«Ji£?a<. >^ •sra^' £t%i5 5 crTif/oo-o c^-na-i a>^(J£^a- TOA tSto 71 yfv^ '? i-!Ti-jOM; vitd^^oi, KM 'SteXt.^if dyaAZ'i cu-tiw ^Ji^ T0(5 'BJH&fici. ¦ ¦ ftrt 1^ argj; rtu) i-i:t^-)(Jw km Savxiiin "rpS .iC'iisi ?.fa- S6t]ai. L. I. H 4 The 104 The Divine Legation Book II, The Reader may obferve, that Diodorus does not fo much as fijfpedt that they might have a third: End, diftindt from thefe two ; namely, the Ad vancement of their own private Intereft, And diis with great Judgment. He knew well the Diffe rence between NOM O0ETH 2 andTTP ANNO 2, betv/een a Legiflator and a Tyrant. Such Views became not the former ; they deftroyed his Cha racter, and converted him into his diredl Oppofite; who applied every Thing to his own particular In tereft, and this Method amongft the reft. Ariftotle, in his Maxims for fetting up, and eftabliffiingsa Tyranny, lays this down for one. To appear to \e always extremely attached to the Worftip of the Gods, for that Men have tbe leaft Sufpicion of fuffering In juftice from fuch whom they take to be religious, and believe to have a high Senfe of Providence. Nor will the People be apt to run into Plots and Confpiracies againft thofe, whom theyfufpeSt the Gods will, in their turn, fight for, and fupport '^ . And here it is worth obferving, that, anciently, Tyrants, as well as Legiflators, gave all Encouragement to Religion-, and endeavoured to eftabliffi their Irregular Will, not by perfuading Men that there was no Juft nor Unjuft ; but that the Tyrant's Quality exempted' him from the Obfervance of them. Hence may be feen how ridiculous a Scheme of Politics Hobhes had projedted, who, for the very Sake ofthe Magiftrate, was for deftroying all Religion. But the Ancients knew better ; and fo too, did fome of theModerns\ " "Eti 5 '"'¦ ^£9? 't'''^! ^^^'i , s usffiv i-clw, di e-uftfU.d'CVi 'ixm]i km t«s ^sx^. Pollt. !.y. c. u. ^ Er non e cofa piii neceffaria a parere d' havere che quella ultima qualita [religione] perche gli huomini in univerfale giu dicano piu a gli oGchi che alle mani, perche tocca a vedere a ci afcuno a fentire a pochi. Machiaval del Principe, c. 1 8. ¦ The Se<9:..2, of Mo ^ES defmnftrated. 10-5 The Qtieition thrn is, whether thefe Pretenfions of the ancient Legiflators were rnade for the Sake of the civil Policy im:-mdi.Uei\<, or for the Sake of Religion ; and fo mediatciy only fur the State? For it is carefully to be obferved, that all that is re^ prefented in this Difcourfe, as contrived and done by the Magiftrates in Beha-lf of Religion, was not done ultimately for its own Sake, butfor theSakeof the Government. The Queftion, I fay, then is. Whether this Pretence to Infpiration was made to introduce a Civil or Religious Society? If a Civil, the Effedts he would aim at muft be to gain Recep tion for his PoUcy and La-ws, or Secondly, to fecure their Immutability. I fpeak not here of that third Effedl, the procuring a Veneration, and ftriSler Ob fervance of them from Iv.div'uluaU, during the Courfe of their Eftahliftment : A nd this for very good Rea fon, becaufe that is the very Thing I contend for, fuch Veneration and Obfervance being only to be pro cured by the Influence of Religion, which the pre tended Infpiration introduces. The Effedls then in Queftion, are Reception for the Policy a>:d Laws, or fecuring their Immutability. I. To their IntroduSlicn and Recepion there could be fmall Occafion for this Expedient, i. Civil Laws are feen by every one to be fo neceffary for the well being of each Individual, that one can hardly conceive any need of the Belief of divine Command or Affiftance to bring Men to embrace a Scheme for aflbciating, or to eftabliffi the Right they have of fo doing. For (as the great Geogra pher fays) Man was born with this Inclination to affor date. It is an Appetite common both to Greeks and Barbarians : for being hy Nature a Chil Animal, be lives readily under one common Policy or Law ". ' Xlipvr.t -^ »T«(i Kea xmiov Ij-i rilg km ro7; ESuisri xo." to"{ Vxc^d^i^. ffoAiliKO* jS o»les, iin ^H<; ciltti Tif? anOgJs-s?, & Sn efiij, iVs >ofiS5 ¦ Heraelit. de Incred, c. 23. " Xviiievcu, ri [i li J«Q ttbji.l.^. §.22. According to theEnien- dations of Petit and Vdentinus. — The Law is thus introduced ©;i7"fA05 a;yyl'f To7,- ATOtooc vSjiAOKEl'Otr, K^e,ifif 7- CiTTcivlct xPQVd;'. I have tnnflated ffare^'oi-:, ejiablijjjed, and I think rightly. Ia a Paflage of Ifocrates it can hardly be underftood in any other Senfe ; in his Encomium on Hellen he fpeaks thus of her ar.d Menelaus, 'E» ©eocsttvok; •? Aazaiyixii dvc-iai dvT-ii^ dyibi apud Decern Orat. ridiculous io8 The Divine Legation Book. II. ridiculous a Defign, Befides, the Egyptian Le giflation, from which they borrowed all their Wif dom of this kind, went upon quite contrary Prin ciples. It diredted public Laws to be occafionally accommodated to the Variety of Times, Places, and Manners, But had Perpetuity been their Aim, the Belief of a divine Impofition would not have ferved their Purpofe, For it never entered the Heads of the People of Antiquity, that Civil Infti tutions became irrevocable by iffuing from the Mouth of a God : or that the Divinity of the Sandtion altered the Mutability of their Nature. The Honour of this Difcovery is due to certain Moderns, who have found out that divine Autho rity reduces all its Commands to one and the fame Species, A notable Example we have of this in the Condudt of Lycurgus. He was the only Ex ception to this Method of Grecian Legiflation, and fingle in the ridiculous Attempt of making his Laws perpetual. For his whole Syftem of Politics being forced and unnatural'', the Senfe of fuch Im perfedtlon probably, put him upon this Expedient, to tie them on an unwilling People. But did he em ploy divine Authority to this Purpofe ? Not in the leaft : For though he pretended to it, like the reft, and had his Revelations from Apollo, yet he well knew that that would not be thought fufficient to change the Nature of pofitive human Laws, And therefore he bound the People by an Oath to obferve his Policy, till his return from a Voyage, which he had determined beforehand never to accompliffi. ¦' II me parSit que tycurgue fe ecarte toujours un peu trop de la nature dans toutes fes loix — Il faut, ce me femble, crain- dre les etabUffemens qui detruifent la nature, fous pretexts de vouloir la perfedtionner, Jays the fine Writer of the Voyages of Cyrus, 1, 4. Having Sedt, 3- of Moses demonftrated. log Having ffiewn that there was no need of the Pretence to Revelation, for the Eftabliffiment of Civil Policy, it follows, that it was made for the Sake of Religion. Sect. IH. TH E fecond Step the Legiflators took to in culcate Religion, was by making the Dodtrine of a Providence in its full Extent, the grand San dtion of their Laws, with which their Syftems of Inftltutes were prefaced and introduced. To this Cuftom Plutarch, in his Tract againft Colotes the Epicurean, refers, where he fays, that Colotes him felf praifes it ; tbat, in civil Conftitutions, tbe firft and moft momentous Article is the Belief of the Gods. And fo it was that, with Vows, Oaths, Divinations, and Omens, Lycurgus fanSlified tbe Lacedemoni ans, Numa the Romans, ancient Ion the Athenians, and Deucalion all tbe Greeks in general : And hy Hopes and Fears, kept up in them the Awe and Re verence of Religion ^. On this Pradtice was formed the Precept of the celebrared Arcbytas the Pythago rean^. Which Sedt, as we ffiall ffiew hereafter, gave itfelf up more particularly to Legiflation: and from whence proceeded the moft famous Founders of Civil Policy, He in the Fragments of his V^ Avr-5^y'.; AaKsiiu- l/Min;, >^N«fi»; PaiLniiK,, n^ "Iaw 5 'aaXccoi 'Abyitcdsc,, «,' Aivxci\iij.t y^ (pi-j.cui, ifi.'jioiiiii; la^ai ia, BSa, ji' i/^-iri^ut djjicc t^ tpiSa-j xaisi- } LegiQator to the Tarentines. Elian, var. Bijt.l. 3 . c 17. be no The Divine Legation Book II,- he for the Support of what relates to the Gods, the Dcemons, and our Parents, and, in general, of what foever is good and venerable ". And in this Manner, if we may credit Antiquity, all their Civil Confti tutions were prefaced. Its conftant Phrafe being, when fpeaking of a Legiflator, Shwchm r uu?^t- The only Things of this Kind now remaining, are the Prefaces to the Laws of Zaleucus and Chp.- rondas. Law-givers of the Locrians, and of the Chalcidic Cities of ftaly and Sicily, Contempora ries with Lycurgus ". Thefe, by good Fortune, are preferved by Diodorus and Stobceus. A great Critic has indeed fometimeago called their Authori ty in Queftion ; declared them fpurious; and adjudg ed them to be an Impofture of the Ptolemaic Age", Was it as he fuppofes, thefe Fragments would be, then, rather ftronger for our Purpofe. For, in fuch Cafe, we muft needs fuppofe the very learned So phifts, who forged them, copied from the general Pradlice of Antiquity : And very learned they were, is plain, both from the Excellence of the Compo fition, and the Age of the pretended Compofers. Whereas, if the Fragments be genuine, they do not fo directly prove the Univeifality of the Pra dlice, as the Antiquity of it : But, as Truth is what we feek throughout this Work, and that feeming to bear hard againft this learned Critic's Determina tion, we muft ftick by the common Opinion, and examine what hath been offered in Difcredit of it. ""Aw r nofur T« "ZsSx Sea; >^ o»ffio?«; i^ ywf'ae, »^ o^as T« x.x7-.d 1^ -rl/Liir/. ¦s-ja/a Ti'fieo^. Stob. de Rep. Serm. 41 . ^ Ariftot. Pol. 12. 0 Differt. on the Efijlles cf Phalaris, nfith an Anfwer to the- OljeiHons cf Mr, Boyle. The Sedt. 3 . o/' M o s E s demonftrated. ill The univerfal Current of Antiquity holds for the Genuinenefs of thefe Remains, and for the Reality of their Author's legiflative Quality : Ariftotle, Theo phraftus, Tully, Diodorus Siculus, and Plutarch , the moft learned andinquifitlve Writers of their feveral Ages, go quite along with the general Opinion. At length Timcsus thought fit to deny that Zaleu cus had given Laws to the Locrians ; nay, that there ever was fuch an one in Being. We ffiall be the lefs furprizSd at this Paradox when we come to know the Charadters and Studies of the Man : He was by Profeffion an Hiftorian, but fpent his Time in inventing, improving, and publiffiing the Faults and Errors of all preceding Writers of Name and Reputation. Polybius, Strabo, and Diodorus Siculus, three of the wifeft and moft candid Hi ftorians of Greece, have concurred to draw him in the moft odious Colours, The firft fpeaks of him in this Manner : How be came to he placed amongft the principal Writers of Hiftory, I know not. lie deferves neither Credit nor Pardon of any one ; having fo manifeftly tranfgreffed all the Rules of Decency and Decorum in bis exceffive Calumnies, through an innate Malignity of Heart °, This envious, rapid Temper, and perverfe turn of Mind, joined to his perpetual Delight in Contradidlion, gained him the great Titfeof EPI TIMMUS, the Calumniator. And, which is a certain Mark of a bafe and ab jedt Mind, he was as exceffive in his Flattery ; as where he fays, Timoleon was greater than the greateft Gods^. He took fo m.uch Pleafure in con- ° Ovx, 01^ o-raq dutp'^ileu ^ofa», a; 'i^x-uv ~-r' W o-ay/gw^Ewf 'BT^o^aa-'.ay. — ''Ekhvoi; a af Ctnc f^KOTio; TvyxdiOi (7-jynufArtq boe KuP-^xcloi, ^la, f 'ij/.^vl-.t 'si-.K^.xw, Excerp. e.v 1. 12. HiJ. P Suidas in Tirrno. T')*«4o{ j AtwC" "woiftj T(f*cA£o>la t i^n- tradidtina 112 The Divine Legation BookIL tradidling the moft received Truths, that he wrote a long Treatife, with great Fury and illLanguagei tOi prove that the Bull of Phalaris v^z,^ a mere Fable. And yet Diodorus and Polybius, who tell us this, tell U3 likewife, that the very Bull itfelf was exift ing In their Time : To all v/hich, he was fo httle folicitous about Truth, thd^t Suidas teWs ns, hewas nicknamed rPA02TA AEKTPl A, a Compofer-of old Wives Fables. Polybius ffiews us with what Ju ftice it was given him «/« cenfuring the Faults of others, be puts on fuch an Air of Severity and Confi dence, as if- be himfelf was exempt from Failings, and ftood in no need fif Indulgence. Tet are his -own Hifto ries fluffed with Dreams arid Prodigies, with the moft wild and improbaUe Fables. In fhort, full of old Wives Wonders, and ofthe loweft and bafeft Superftitiofi'^. .Agreeable to this, Clemens Alex andrinus gives him as the very Pattern of a fabulous and fatyric Wri ter. And he appeared in every Refpedt of ib ill a Charadler to Mr. Bayle, that that great Critic did ¦not feruple to fay — "And in all appearance, he' " had no better-Authority when he denied that Za- " leucus had -given' Laws to the Locrians'". Ta fay all in a Word, he was the Critical Histo rian ofthe Greeks; and yet this is theMan, wha is thought fit to be oppofed to all Antiquity with Regard to Zeleucus's Legiflation arid Exiftence. It appears the more Extraordinary, becaufe the learned Critic has himfelf furniffied his Reader with a violent Prefumption againft 7/»/^«j's Autho rity, where he fays^, that Polybius charges him with 1 Oila: y> Ik ja, tjM! 'nriXii; xal'/iya^ati; laoXXriV ii!i(pcusH ifiriSar,v ^MniaiwAai; dytnVi xid Tsgi- teiai 7vvaiKwi'»5 hi -mki^rii. Excerpt, de Virt. ^ Vit. ex 1. 12. ¦¦ Et aparcmment il, ne fut pas mieux fonde quand il nia que' Zaleucus cut donne des Loix a ce Peuple ; [les Locriensl. ^ Differt.jipo»?hd.\ms, p. 337. falfe Sedt. 3- of Moses demonflrated. 113 falfe Reprefentations relating to the Locrians. He adds indeed, that nothing is now extant that fhews Poly bius thought Timseus miftaken concerning Zaleucus. But as Polybius quotes a Law as of Zaleucus, it feems, in fo exaft a Writer, a Proof of his being well fatisfied , that amongft Timceus's Falffioods con cerning the Locrians, one was his denying Zaleucus to be their Law-givfer. Timceus's Reafon': Antiquity has not brought down to us : But the Fragments of Polybius\ pre ferving an account of his outrageous Treatm.ent of Ariftotle concerning the Origin of the Locrians, make mention of one Echecrates a Lorrian, from whom Timceus boafted he had received Information on certain Points in Queftion, Hence the learned Critic, as it would feem, concludes, that, amongft the Locrian's Intelligence, this bore a Share, that there v/as no fuch Man as Zaleucus ". As if, becaufe Timceus relied on Echecrates'' slnformztxon in the Mat ters in difpute between him and Ariftotle, therefore Echecrates muft, of Neceffity, fupport all his Para doxes concerning that People. But admit it, tho* without Proof, that Echecrates was of the fame Opi nion with Timceus in this Matter, is he, who, tor ought we know, might be as fingular and as whim fical in Fadt of Contradidtion, as Timceus himfelf, an Evidence to be oppofed to TuUy's, 3 who tells us, that his Clients the Locrians had, in his Ti.me, a Tradition of Zaleucus' % Legiflation*'? And we may well prefume ^¦BxTully, fo inquifitive in Mat ters of Antiquity, as he appears to have been from the curious Srory he tells of his Difcovery of the Tomb of Archimedes, would examine this Matter to the -Bottom, And had their Archives contra- ' Excerpta ex Polybio de Virt. ^ Vitiis, ex\. 12. » P. 336. Di^e«. »^tf» Phalaris. * De Ugwus, 1. 2. cd. ' Vol. L I didted 114 The Di'Oine Legation BookII. d Idled the Tradition, he had affuredly never brought it in Evidence : But, fays the learned Cri tic, if Echecrates, in that Age, did not believe there was any Zaleucus -, he is certainly as credible as Cicero'.^ Locrians, who came fo many Generations afterwards, after fo many Revolutions and Changes in their Govern ment ". This has no force, becaufe- juft the con trary may be concluded from it, that if the Tradi tion kept its Ground through all thofe Changes and Revolutions of State, it would feem to have had a very ftrong Foundation. The Authority then of Timceus againft the Exi ftence and Legiflation of Zaleucus In general is of no weight. Let us next examine what the great Critic has to urge againft the Genuinenefs of thofe Laws that go under Zaleucus's Name. His Argu ments are of two Kinds : the one drawn from the DIaledt, and from the Ufe of feveral Words, which are indeed, later than his Time •, the otlier from Zaleucus'^ being no Pythagorean. I. The Words objedted to are thefe, As7r1»f yuSlcu;. This, and the Fragments being written in the common DIaledt, Inftead of the Doric, are, in the learned Critic's Opinion, fufficient Evidence of the Forgery. He has employed a deal of exquifite '' Learning, to prove the Words to be all later than the Time of Zaleucus. Let us fee then the moft that can be made of this Argument. And becaufe it is the beft approved, and readieft in all Criticifm, for the Detedlion of Forgery, and imagined not a little to affedl the facred Writings themfelves, we will enquire into its Force in general. " P. 356. Differt. uf on Vh-!!a.th. y From p. 346, to 356, of the Differt. Sedt. 3 i o/" M o s E 8 demonftrated. 1 1^ It muft be owned, that any Thing delivered as the identical Writing of a certain Perfori, or Age, and having Words or Phrafes pofterior to its Date, carries along with it the infallible Marks of Forge-^ ry. A public Inftrument, or Diploma, fo dif- credited, is eternally funk ; zndto fuch, with, great Succefs was this Canon of Criticifm firft applied. This encouraged following Critics to try it on Writings of another Kind ; and then, for want of a reafonable Diftindtion, they began to make very wild Work indeed. For though in Writings of abftraSl Speculation, or of mere Amufement and Entertainment, this Touch might be applied with tolerable Security and Succefs, there being, for the general, no Occafion, or Temptation tO alter the Didtion of fuch, efpecially in the ancient Lan guages, that fuffered fmall and flovi^ Change, be caufe one Sort of thefe Writings was only for tkvt Ufe of a few learned Men, and, of the other, a great Part of their Curiofity confifted in the ori ginal Phrafe ; yet in praSlical and public Writings of Law and Religion, this would prove a very falla cious Criterion : it was the Matter only that was regarded here. And, as this Matter refpedted the Whole Body of the People, it was of the higheft Importance that the Words and Phrafes ffiould not be obfcure, ambiguous, or equivocal ; Which would neceffitate Alterations in them. On this account, it appears to me, that the Solution the Commentators give to feveral Difficulties of this Nature occuring in the Pentateuch, is founded in good Senfe, and fully juftlfied by the Obfervation here given. The Religion, Law, and Hiftory of the Jews were incorporared J and it was^ in Cori- fequence, the Concern of every one to underftand the Scriptures. Nor does that fuperftitious Regard, Well known to have trcen long paid to the WordJ, I % ^nd II 6 The Divine Legation Book II. and even Letters of Scripture, at all weaken the Force of this Argument : for that Cuftom arofe only from the Time that the Maforet Dodlors fixed the Reading, and added the Vowel Points. Hear a confummate Mafter in thefe Matters — Graviter falluntur qui cenfent veteres Hebrcsos femper eandem diligentiam in facro Codice confervando adhibuiffe, aut femper linguce fum ftudio follicite incubuiffe. Hoc teme re nimis a multis retro feculis creditum'^. I have taken the Advantage the Subjedt afforded me to touch upon this Matter, becaufe it is the only Argument, of any Kind of Moment, againft the Antiquity of the Pentateuch, which I am much concerned in this Treatife to eftabliffi. The Application of all this is very eafy to the Cafe in hand : This Fragment was part of a Body of Laws neceflary to be clearly underftood by the People ; which it could not be, without the Change of Words and Phrafes : and to make thefe an Ar gument againft the Genuinenefs of the Fragments, would be the fame as to contend that the firft Laws in our vulgar Statute Books, are the Forge ries of later Times, becaufe full of Words unknown to the Ages in which thofe Laws are pretended to have been enadted. As to the Change of Dialedt, the great Critic thus expreffes himfelf: — Tbe laft Argument I fhct,ll offer againft the Laws of Zaleucus, is this, that the Preface of them which Stoh^em has produced, is "writ ten in the common DialeSl., whereas, it ought to he in the Doric, for that was the Language of the Locri.— The Laws of Zaleucus therefore are commentitious, becaufe they are not in Doric *. ¦^ SeethetordBi/hop of Chkhe&ev's Preface to the V-gader befm his Edition of the Pfalms. a P. 135 and 358. What Sedt, 3- of Moses demonftrated. iiy What has been faid above ffiews this Argument to have little Force : But it is urged with a particu lar ill Grace by the learned Dodtor, who in his Differt ation upon Phalaris, hath difcovered, that Ocellus Lucanus wrote the Treatife of tbe Nature of the Univerfe in Doric ^ : And from thence rightly concludes, it ought to be acknowledged for a genuine Work, which hitherto learned Men have doubted of from this very Bufinefs of its be ing writ in tbe common DialeSl. For we now fee that every Word of the true Book is faithfully pre ferved ; the Doric being only changed into the ordi nary Language, at tbe Fancy of fome Copier" . Now ffiould he not have feen, by the raffi Sufpicions of thofe learned Men in the Cafe of Ocellus Lucanus-^ that this is a very fallacious Ground of Criticifm ? Should he not have concluded if this was done in Books of mere Speculation, it was more likely to have been done in Works fo neceffary to be well underftood as Books of Laws ; efpecially when he had obferved, after Porphyry, tbat the Doric is al ways clouded with Obfeurity^? And on this Account doubtlefs it was, that tranf- dialedting was no rare Pradlice. For, befides this Inftance of Ocellus Lucanus, we have one in Orphe us. Jamblicus tells us, that the old Poems which went under the Name of Orpheus, were written in Doric Dialedt. But now the Fragments, which thofe Ancients, who did not write in Doric, have preferved to us, are in the common Dialedt. It is very evident then, that they have been tranfdia- ledled. 2. We come now to the learned Critic's other Argument for the Impofture, which runs thus : — • The Report of 7.^\encws being a Pythagorean, wasga- ^ P. 47. f P,49. ^ P.3'7- I 3 thered il8 The Divine Legation Book II, thered from feme Paffages in the Syftem of Laws a- fcribed to him, for where elfe could they meet with it ? So that if it can be proved be was more ancient than Pythagoras, this falfe Story of bis being a Pythago rean being taken from that Syftem, muft conviSl it of a Cheat '. He then proceeds to prove him more ancient than Pythagoras ; which he does with great Force of Learning and Reafoning, though his Ar guments are not all equally well chofen, For in ftance, where he brings this as a Proof that Za leucus was no Scholar of Pythagoras, " Becaufe he " afcribed all his Laws to Minerva, from whom ^f he pretended to receive them in Dreams : which ^' (in the learned Critic's Opinion) has nothing of a *' Pythagorean in it. For Pythagoras's Scholars ^' afcribed every thing to their Mafter : it was al- ^' ways oluti; itfoi with them, he faid it. There- ^' fore if Zaleucus had been of that Society, he " would certainly have honoured his Mafter, by *' imputing his Laws to his Inftrudlions ^" But this Argument is of no Weight: For, i. From what has been faid above of the Genius of ancient Legiflation, it appears, that univerfal Pradlice re quired, and the Nature of the Thing difpofed the Law-giver to afcribe his Laws to the Infpiration of fome God, 2, As to the famous t^vtog i^a, and it? Ufe, in the Schools of Philofophy; it was not pe culiar to the Pythagoreans, but commpn to all the Sedts of Greece, jurare in verba Magiftri. A Device ;o keep thcrq diftlndl and feparate from each other ; and a compendious way of arguing, amongft thofe of the fame School. It would then have been ridi culous to have urged its Authority to any out pf the Sedl ; more fo, to the common People ^ an^ moft of all, to them, upon publick and pradliciil * P-337- ^P- 338. Matters } Sedt, 6. o/" Mo s E s demonftrated. 1 19 Matters -, the auTnV E(p« being, urged only in Points of Speculation and Philofophy. Indeed fo un lucky an Argument it is, that, on the contrary, the Reader will, 1 believe, be apt to conclude, this very Circumftance of Zaleucus's afcribing his Laws to Minerva, was one of the Things that gave Birth to the Report of his being a Pythagorean. And doubtlefs, it would have much Weight with thofe who did not carefully enough attend to Chronology, For in this, Zaleucus might be fuppofed to follow both the Precept and Example of Pythagoras ; he himfelf pretending to be Infpired by Minerva : and teaching it as the moft efficacious way of efta bliffiing Civil Juftice, to propagate the Opinion of the Gods having an intimate Intercourfe with Mankind ^ But notwithftanding the badnefs of this Argu ment, the learned Critic, as v/e faid, proves his Point with great Clearnefs, tha.t Zaleucus was earlier than Pythagoras. And in Conciufion draws the In ference abovementioned, in thefe Terms : It was generally reported Zaleucus was a Pythagorean ; it is proved be was not. Tbis will refute the Book itfelf. For if any Intimation was given in tbe Book that the Author was a Pythagorean ; tbe Impofture is evident. " And yet it is hard to give any other Reafon that fhould " induce the later Writers to call him a Pythagorean." Some Impofter therefore made a Syftem of Laws under the Name of Zaleucus, and in it gave a broad Hint that he was & Scholar of Pythagoras. Here he refts his Caufe. If then it be not hard to give another Reafon, that fhould induce tbe later Wri ters to call him a Pythagorean, his long Diflerta tion to prove Zaleucus the earlier of the two, is of SO manner of Ufe, ;o the Proof of the Impofture. ? Jw JamhlicusV£iff«f Pythagoras, I 4 I have 120 The Divine Legation Book II. I have already hinted ata very probable one, which was his having the fame iniplring Goddefs with Pythagoras. And this will, be much ftrengthened by this farther remarkable Confideration, that Mi nerva became the peculiar Patrqnefs of the Pytha gorean Legiflators, on Account of the Affiftance ffie had given to their Mafter. To which, we may add, the Circumftance of the Laws being in Doric (and fuppofing them genuine, they certainly were fo) for this Idiom was peculiar to the Pythagoric School ". And farther, that of the whole Proem of Zaleucus's Laws being formed agreeably to the Precepts of Pythagoras in this Matter ; who di redts, that, next after the Worffiip of the Gods, ^ This we are told by Jamblicus, His Words are, >^yila,t -ntm, »"? (pwri x?'''^ '^? -mxl^aiz t'.dfoi; srct^iyUj^^in. Vit.Pph. 194- Kufl. Ed. Dr. Bentley underftands them to fignify that every om f}}Ould ufe his o-wn Mother Tongue. And indeed, without read ing the Context one could fcarce avoid giving this Senfe to them. Viz,zamus, — that every one fliould ufe the Mother Tongue «/Crotona; which was the Dmf. Of thefe, the- learned Critic fays, . irhich is the true, perhaps all competent Readers mil not he ef one Mind, p. 386. But I believe there will be no great Diverfity of Opinions amongft thofe who weigh the following Reafons: I . yamblicus adds, -ri -^ ^m^nv sz £^ox'ii/,ct^ov ; by which I un derftand him to mean that the Pythagoric SeU did not approve of a foreign DialeB. For if it was meant of the particular Greeks that entered into it, it has no Senfe or Meaning in this Place. But now a Seft's not approving of a foreign Dialeft, muft fup pofe they had one natural and peculiar to it. 2. Jamb\icus in the fame Place tells us that Pythagoras valued the Doric abo.ve the other Greek Dialefts, as the moft agreeable to the Laws of Harmony. Tw I) Awg/iai/ ^iii>.iyJJsi im^iJi't-yiay that. Now he having made the Eflence of the Soul Harmony, it was no Wonder he fhould chufe a Dialeil, which he fuppofed approached neareft to its Nature; thatthe Mind and Tongue might go together. 3- ^f thagoras feems here to have affedled imitating his Mafter Or- fheus, from whom, as we ftiall fce hereafter, he borrowed much of his P.hilofophy. For ^»w^ijc«i tells us, that the old Writings that went under the Name of Orpheus, were compofed in Doric. 4. But, Laftly, a Paflage in Pfl>']i^')ys tifs of Pythagoras, feems Dcemon Se£t. 3- of Moses demonftrated. 121 Dtzmon, and Parent- worffiip ffiould be enjoined'. And later Writers, feeing thefe two vifible Marks of a Pythagorean, might, without farther Confi deration, reafonably be difpofed to think Zcdeucus of that Sedt. But as the learned Critic has m_ade out from fure Chronological Evidence, that this was a Miftake, we muft feek fome other Caufe of the Uniformity : Which I take to be this : Zaleucus was in the higheft Repute in Greece for Legiflation in the Time of Pythagoras ; which might incline that Philofopher to imitate him, both in his infpi- ring Goddefs, and the Proem of his Laws. So that Pofterity was only miftaken in judging which was the Copy, and which the Original. This they might very well be ; for Pythagoras, and his Sedl, had engrofled all the Fame in the Fadt of Legi flation : Which leads me to another probable Caufe of the common Opinion of Zaleucus's being a Pythagorean. The Charadler of this Sedt we fay, and ffiall prove hereafter, was fo great for Law giving, that after Ages thought nothing coiUd be done to Purpofe, in thar Way, which had not a Pythagorean for its Author. So, befides Zaleucus, the Ancients fuppofed Charondas, Numa "", Za molxis^, Phytius, Tbeocles, Elicaon, Ariftocrates, nay the very Druids'^, Legiflators of Gaul, and in alone fufficient to determine this Matter: Forphyry giving the Caufes of the Decay of the Pythagoric Philofophy, affigns this for one, that their Commentaries -mere -written va Doric. "Es-wTa ^id -n JcJ -td yiy^fiui-io, A»0*Ji yiygel(f6cii, p 49, Kttfl. Ed. than which nothing can be a clearer Comment on the Words in Que ftion, to determine them to the Senfe we contend for. ' Melct 3 -TS 5«i!y Te xJ -ri ScUfiiiiict , is^ii^ot ¦e?oi«o^ t^iym yat'eav. Jamb. Vit. Pyth. c. 30. ^ Quinetiam arbitror propter tythagoreornm admirationem. Numam quoque Regem Vythfigoreum^^tcaioxibMS exiftimatum, J«/. Tufc.difp. 1.4. c. I. 1 Herod. 1. 4. ^ Ammian. Marcell, ]. 15. c. 9. a Word 122 The Divine Legation Book II. a Word all the eminent Legiflators that lived any thing near the Time of Pythagoras, to be in- ftrudled by him. But will the learned Critic fay that, therefore, all thefe Legiflators were imagina ry Perfons, and did not give Laws to their feveral Cities, This Notion not only fprung from Pythago ras's great Charadter and Reputation, but was like- wife nurfed up and improved by his Followers them felves, to beget Honour to their Mafter ; as we may fee in Jamblicus'^ Life of that Philofopher. So that was there no more in it than this, as Za leucus's Inftltutions were in great Repute, we might very naturally account for the Miftake. But laftly, it is indeed very true, that, as the learned Critic fufpedted, the principal Ground of the Report ef Zaleucus being a Pythagorean, ivas gathered from fome Paffages in the Syftem of Laws afcribed to him. He is only too hafty in his Con ciufion that therefore this muft conviSl tbe Syftem of a Cheat. What led him to it is his fuppofing that no fuch Report could he gathered from Paffages in the Syftem, but fuch as muft be an Intimation that tbe Author was a Pythagorean : And that there is no Difference between giving and taking an Intimation, If then this Report might be gathered from Paffages that contained no Intimation, and if the Reader may underftand that to be an Intimation which the Writer never intended for one -, then will the Cre dit of thefe Remains continue unffiaken, though we grant the learned Critic his whole Premiffes, and all the Fadls he contends for, • It is certain then, a principal Ground of the Re port was gathered frorn a Paffage in his Syftem of Laws, And I believe I can tell what that was. Zaleucus in his Preface fpeaks of an evil Genius or Demons, AAIMXIN KAKOZ, as influencing Men to Wickednefs. This, though a Notion of the high eft Se£t. 3- of Moses demonftrated. 123 eft " Antiquity, whofe Origin and Author are much difputed of, yet was the diftinguiffiing Do ctrine of the Pythagoreans. Plutarch fpeaking of Pythagoras's Opinion of the firft Principle, fays, that that Philofopher called, T^v f*ovocix ©eo\- t 3 SviSa,, ioiif*ovot. Which Aua? the Pythagoreans ufed extremely to vilify and revile as the Caufe of all Evil. The Application of this Dodtrine I fup pofe Pythagoras might borrow from Zaleucus, and here again Pofterity be miftaken as to the original Author. But we may colledt from the fame Plu tarch, that this Opinion was cultivated by all the ancient Legiflators. For he who favoured the No tion of two Principles, the one Good, and the other Evil, affedts, I obferve, to draw every anci ent Writer, that but mentions an evil Daemon, into his Sedt. In his Treatife of Ifis and Oftris, he fpeaks to this Purpofe, — "• That it was a moft ancient " Opinion, delivered as well by Legislators as " Divines, that the World was neither made by " Chance, neither did one Caufe govern all things, " without Oppofition"." This Notion therefore, delivered in the Proem of Zaleucus's Laws, might very well be underftood as an Intimation of the Author's being a Pythagorean, ° 'Ae/(roTe>)j5 cl' c* •ETgarai irig^ (p^'Koao'Pia.q, j^ ¦Jff^Eo-f ulegju? «»«< [Maya;] T Aiy»^7""». >C. iva jcser' avrat; eitcu ««;j;«5> oiyxliit SaijA--vx, >^ KocKot ^aiftova. Diog. Laer. Vit. Fhil. Froem. Seg. 8. 'OvK oTJa fi))¥nANT nA.AAinN T ci-ro-jraralov avufx.-..S-ii- f^ev TS-^oa-OE^iS-B-cu ?^oyov w? rec (pcciXx ieMyiona j^ ^x.a-x.ciV!X,, -zs-p%a- tphSflx -zolf dya.^oli dvi^nt >£, raT? 'Zr^a;£cri» dnfd/naiu, Tupx^ag >^ ipofs? iitd.y4, Qeio'i^ >^ Qpd)i^ot^ t "ifiltto" ai? f/.^ :^[i.firxv'lig d-rrlaiK; ci tu x.u7\a> >^ axc^ioi, /SeAtIoh^ (Keituv /.lol^a; fitT* t «- ^evtlw tixaci'. Flutarch. vita Dinois. ° Aio t^ 'att^itoKM'^ 00/ Ti) xa-reitrii cm Otohoyoiv "^ N O M O- ©ETJiN— — a; Sr cmav >^ cb^oyof i^ dy-vSi^tr^oa cuii^Hiat tti cuiltfuirai ii 'Urdu, ste «« eV/» o xgjuW »^ xxlilCiSiiiim, aareg fia^iv 'i Tl(rl itmirn'.oii; p^a^dioTf ^oyo;. and 1 24 The Divine Legation Book II, ., and yet, not being fo defigned by the Author, It tends not, in the leaft, to refute t,he Book itfelf. On the whole then, I prefume, it appears that the Credit of thefe Remains ftands unffiaken for any thing the learned Critic has advanced to the contrary, and that we may fafely urge them as of the Antiquity they pretend to. Thus Zaleucus begins his Preface : — " Every *' Inhabitant, whether of Town or Country, ffiould *' firft of all be firmly perfuaded of the Being and *' Exiftence of the Gods: which Belief he will be " readily induced to entertain, when he contem- " plates the Pleavens, regards the World, and ob- *' ferves the Difpofition, Order, and Harmony of *' the Univerfe; which can neither be the Work " of blind Chance, nor of .Man, Thefe Gods are *' to be worffilpped as the Caufe of all the real *' Good we enjoy. Every one therefore ffiould fo *' prepare, and poffefs his Mind, as to have it clear " of every Kind of Pollution ; being perfuaded " that God is not honoured by a wicked Perfon, " nor acceptably ferved with fumptuous Ceremo- *' nies, or taken with coftly Sacrifices, like a ml- " ferable Man; but with Virtue only, and a con- " ftand Difpofition to good and juft Adtions. On I. " which Account, Every one ought to labour all " he can to become good, both in Pradtice and " Principle, whereby he will render himfelf dear 2. " and acceptable to God: Ought to fear more " what leads to Ignominy and Diffionour, than to " Lofs of Wealth and Fortune ; and to efteem hitn " the worthieft Citizen, who gives up his world- " ly Goods, rather than renounce his Honefty 3- " and Love of Juftice: But thofe whofe Ap- " petites are fo headftrong as not to fuffer them " to be perfuaded to thefe Things, and whofe " Minds are turned with a natural Bias towards " Evil Seft. 3- of Moses demonftrated. 125 " Evil, whether they be Men or Women, Citizens *' or Sojourners, ffiould remember the Gods ; and " think upon their Nature, and of the Judgments *' they have always in Store, to inflidt upon wicked *' Men : They ffiould fet before themfelves the dread- " ful Hour of Death, a Period they muft all arrive " at ; when the Memory of evil ASlions paft will " feize every Sinner with Remorfe, accompanied with " tbe fruitlefs Wift that he had fubmitted bis ASlions to " the Rules of Juftice. Every one therefore ffiould " fo watch over his Behaviour, as if tbat Hour was '¦'¦ ftill prefent with him, and attended all his Mo- " tions : which is the way to keep up in himfelf " an exadt regard to Right and Juftice. But if " THE WICKED DeMON IS InSTANT TO IKFLU- *' ence him to Evil, let him fly to the Altars " and Temples of the Gods, as the fureft Afylum " from Evil: whom he ffiould regard as the cruel- " eft and wickedeftof Tyrants; and implore their " Affiftance to drive her far from him. To this " end, let him alfo have recourfe to thofe, whofe " Reputations are high for Probity and Virtue; " whom he may hear difcourfe of the Happinefs of *' Good , and the Vengeance attending Evil " Men ^" P Ti^; xa.loix.St'lccf t ¦tztoAiv »^ t -/ili^i, -advlcii m^aToi 'mz-TrS^ X^vi, 1^ vOjjLi^&m .&£«; fT), iCi dv*Sxs-ffm]a.i U bgcfitav, >^ vjv xiaiA,e;, >^ -? £v etvTjiq 2^^it6t7f>t-f,a-iv, y^ Tfit|n>" ti y> tv%^, i^o' dv^^wTruv il) JijjMiafyj),^.*?*' Qi^BA^ 3 -ttiTiK; t^ nfiav, iJ; cu-rmt; ov7«« a^dvlus 7]{U-/ dyx&uiif, T y^ \oyo-t y.hofO^ju-j. E«5irov ^-t e;^^*? t^^ef.a-XEvd^a9 OH T cvj-;^ -^v^YtV, -nydv^uv T zuxiHv xx^aQ^v' a<; H Ttfidj ^£«s liar' d>6^avu (pa/Jhn, liie Ss^TTiiCi^ S'ccjrdvM?, liSe Tgjt/ai^io*? T dj^ia-- xofOfiws, Xijfia/TEJ jiO;j;6))gj5 d-jS^UT:©-', dXi' d^ETri «^ -B^cu^iaH T Ka'Kai s^fiv ^ Smaimi. J'i» i'lcx^m J« h; SuiJctiAit dyx&iv I4) ifjif ¦ffirg5i|« ^ -BT^m^iaei r fiiSiovSi 'e-5^ T ^aoQa^m eV(, ¦» lAsf, T«? '3 X"i'''' 'i ^"''' f- f'E''* fJi-ua-ixvi, Tos; 3 /kd" KAl TAS MEN MTSTIICnS, TAS AE EN OANEPO.' >g -rSi' )) ipiVi! i'm ¦ilsr xyo^^ei. And for this fecret Worfhip he gives the following Reafon. — v'te x^n'if-i! « ftiTinv t h^ai aiiMo-TSOiii n 5bo», ft'f*!*- ft£t)j 'i (puViv dvli 'tx(^ivyii(rttv iiVfS ¥ MS->i'a- 1. always Sed:. 4- ^ ^ 'Ey^^.javiiiit Ta%Tth{a;'0^(p^i;, «vrg OJgfV/fr, «'; ra; 'aGup*? IxiiMCTiv, € b's AirrnxoN «Vixo/4»®-, »« -^ 'lo-iJ®- i § 'Oa-ie/.S^ «5 Toi ^ ^j wf<. j^ *ciin|<, Ka/^EaCi,AOTio;5, xazi^; iTTiraierjfSfia, ftE7EvEj;^s'v1ai te W? "E^Arjn*? i-ws ¦? T A 1 T T IT- TlijN X^'S?* ""^ K»J(*» X21 aw'ra ? 'I"<^%«- A.tiJj; argjTEjjy xXi^fi'&f, K«' olKi>So-^y.<^a!l®- V M!V?.». Epiphan. adv. Hdr. lib. i . K 3 f«». 134 The Divine Legation BookII, can: and fo to others, in other Places, to an in credible Number. '' The Nature and End of thefe were all the fame, to teach the Dodtrine of a future State, In this, both Origen and Celfus, the two moft learned Wri ters of their feveral Parties, do agree: The firft, minding his Adverfary of the Difference between the future Life promifed by Chriftianity, and that taught in Paganifm , bids him compare the Chri ftian with what all the Sedts of Philofophy, and all the Myfteries, amongft Greeks and Barbarians, taught concerning it'': And Celfus, in his turn, endeavour! g to ffi v/ that Chriftianity had no Advantagfr over Paganifm, by the Efficacy of ftronger SLindtions, addrefles thofe he writes agalnft in this manner : But now, after all, juft as you be lieve eternal Punifhments, fo do the Minifters of tke facred Rites, and thofe who initiate into, and prefide in the Myfteries'^. They continued long in Reli gious Obfervance : fome- were more celebrated and extenfive, and others lefs; to which many acci dental Caufes contributed : The rnqft noted were ^ Poftulat quidem magnitudo raaterise, atque ipfius defenfionis officium, ut ilmiliter cseteras turpitudinuni fpecies pevfcquamur; vcl quas produnt antiquitatis Hiftorix, vel myfteria ilia continent fiicra, quibus initiis nonien eft, & qua non omnibus vulgo, fed paucorum taciturnitatibus tiadi licet. Sed Sacrorum inmmeri ritus, atque affi-"^.! deforrnitas fiiigulis, corporaliter prohibet uni- vcrfa nos exequi A-ngb. adv. Gentes, \. ^.' p. i68. MTSTHPIIIAH. C;-.y . csni. Celfum, 1. 3 . p: 1 60. Sp. Ed. x^i 01 T iE^^y Q4iH-i{,jv lii-/][-fp,^ -re?.i^su te Jta/ ^v^a.y(ii[oi. 1. 8. p. 4^0. And th:;t nothing abfurd was taiight in the' Myfteries concerning a furureState,! collciSt from the ka^-w-eix Origen makes to Celfus, who had preferred what wa.s taught in the Myfteries of BacchiiSj on that Point, to what the Chriftian Religion revealed concerning it. — '&< fi »v T ^rxxx^xiji TiX;-!^' Hrt Ttj eV* -sriiiuiif Ao/®-, «" ^>l5«J TO!iiT(^ — " 1. 4. p. 167, the SE£t4' of Moses demonftrated. 135 the Orphic, the Bacchic, the Eleuftnian, the Samo- thracian, the Cahiric, and the Mitbriac. Euripides makes Bacchus fay in his Tragedy of that Name % tkzttheOrgies were celebrated byall Nations, and that he came to introduce them a- Hiongft the Greeks. And it is not improbable that feveral barbarous Nations had learnt them of the jE|;)|p/w» J long before they came mto 'Greece. The Druids of Britain, who had, as well as the Brach- mans of India, their Religion from thence, cele brated the Orgies of Bacchus, .as we learn from Dio- nyfius the African. And Strabo having quoted Ar- temidorus for a fabulous St^ry, fubjoins, " But ^' what he fays of Ceres and Proferpine is more *' credible, namely that there is an Ifland near *' Britain where they perform the fame Rites to " thc^e-two Goddefles as are in ufe in Samcthrace ^ But, of ail the Myfteries, thofe which bore that Name by way of Eminence, the Eleus-inian, celebrated at Athens in Honour of Ceres, were by far the moft famed ; and in procefs of time abforb ed, and as it were fwallowed up all the reft. Their Neighbours all around them very early pradtifed thefe Myfteries to a Negledt of their own: In a little Time 2i\\ Greece a,nd Afta Minor 'were initiated into them : And at length they fpread over the whole Roman Empire, and even beyond the Limits of it. So Tully: Omitto Eleu- finam fanSlam illam tf auguftam ; ubi initiantur gentes orarum ultimce ^. And we are told in Zoft- mus, that 4hefe moft holy Rites were then fo extenfive, * Aft. z. ¦' n£g« j-^A^flgy; »a.i ¦^K»ji!; ntfire^' '(iriipr,a)t u) ttcor la^i Tl) Bpirtceiix^, ««6' if sf/.iHX roi? iv 'ZajU&^^zs/i stgji ^ ^rifinrr^i xai V Ko^jjn te^victiSTou. Strabonis Geogr. I. 4. the Nature ot thefe Samothracian Rites may be feen p. 151. gN«. Cwr. lib. -i. K 4 as 136 The Divine Legatibn Bo6k II. as to take in the whole Race of Mankind * ; A nd -Ari- ftides calls it the common Temple of the Earth \ How this happened. Is to be accounted for from the Nature of the State, which gave Birth to thefe Myfteries. Athens was a City the moft de voted to Religion of any upon the Face of the Earth, On this Account, thejr Poet Sophocles calls it the facred BuilJiug of the Gods '', in an Allu- fion to its Foundation. Nor was it a lefs Com^ pliment St. Paul intended to pay the Athenians, when he faid, ''AvfJ^e? 'Ahnvouoi, ^ zfdvla co( Seiadoitni- ves-s^af vju*? bw^iaK And Jofephus tells us, that they were univerfally efteemed the moft religious Peo ple cf Greece". Hence Athens became the Standard in Matters of Religion to the reft of the World. In difcourfing then of the Myfteries in general, we muft be forced to take our Ideas of dieni, chiefiy from what we find pradtifed in thefe. Nor need we fear to be miftaken, the End of all being the fame), and all having one common Original, name ly Egypt. • ' _ To begin then with the Purpofe and Defign of their Inftitution. This will be feen, by ffiewing what vvas taught in the Myfteries promifcuoufly to .ill. ¦ " ' ' ^ To fupport the Dodlr|ne of a Providence, which they taught prefided Over the Univcrf^", they in culcated, by all kind of Methods, as we ffiall lee ''Tac-i;»E%oii© Tt avflgjiTT-aoy ve'm; jsyiwrik^! (itij-u'e^a. I..4. ' /Ofi{ « itonct it ' '4 yr.i rc/ttv®^ t 'Ex jOctT'v* iyH-ro. Arijlihs EleufmiA. ' ' ' , '' '^ EleSra, M. 2. §1. AGHNJiN TQN ©EOAMH- T^N.— ' ' "¦ • ^ASl.Apofl. c. xvii. 3^22. ™ — sv'criSisdrnt r EaJiiW wVanE; >,iyycr:y. Cont Apion,\.Z, * Flutarch de' If, ^Ojlr. " '' > ' . ¦:., >'.. ... '. r . hereafter, Sedt. 4. of Moses demonftrated. 137 hereafter, the Belief of a future State of Rewards and Puniffiments". But as this did not quite clear up the myfterious Ways of Providence, they added to it, the Dodt.rine of the Metempfychofis, or the Belief of z. prior State : As we learn from Tully, and Porphyry^, who informs us that it was taught in the Myfteries of the Perftan Mythras, This was an ingenipus Solution, invented by the Egyptian Legiflators, to remove all Doubts concerning the moral Attributes of God"*; and fo confequently, firmly to eftabliffi the Belief of his Providence from a future State. For the Legiflator well knew how precarious that Belief was, while the moral Attri butes of God were doubted of. In inculcating the Dodtrine of a future State, it was taught, that the Initiated ffiould be hippier therein, than all other Mortals : That while the Souls of the Profane, at their leaving the Body, ftuck faft in Mire and Filth, and remained in Darknefs, the Souls of the Initiated winged their Flight diredtly to the happy Iflands, and the Ha bitations of theGods'. This Promife was necef fary for the Support of the Myfteries, as the Myfte ries were for the Support of the Dodtrine, But now left it flaould be miftaken, that Initiation alone, or any other Means than a virtuous Life, intitled %q " [Myfteriis] neque folum, c^f . — - Sed etiam cum fpe me- liore moriendi. Tul. de Leg. 1. 2. c. 14. . P KaM yi ^iyftit -Tz-dvlnv ,«>/ T s-^uTati, '-f M E T E M i' T X i2- S I N f/). b xcu i^ipeuiat Uixcuriii v» 70(5 S^ Miioa fturjigio.j. De Abfl. 1.4. §lC. 'i So Tully. Ex quibus human^cvitx erroribus gc serumnis fit, ut interdum veteres illi five vates, five in facris Initiisque tra- dendis divinse mentis interpretes, qui nos ob aliqua fcelera fuf- cepta in vita fuperiorc, posnamm luendarum caufla, natos efte dixerunt, aliquid vidiffe videantur. Sragm. ex lib. de Fhilofophia. ^ Flato Fhidone Jrijiides tleufinia- (^ apud Stohmm, Serm. 119, O'f- Schol. Arijt. Vanis. Diog. Laert. in -vita Cog. Cjnicf this J38 The Divine Legation Book. II. this future Happinefs ; they perpetually inculcated, that it was the cliief Bufinefs of the Myfteries to reftore the Soul to its original Purity. So Plato: It was the End and Drift f Initiation to reftore the Soul to that State, from whence it fell as from its native Seat of PerfeStion '. They made every thing tend to ffiew the Neceffity of Virtue, as appears from EpiSletus. Thus, fays he, the Myfteries become ufe ful ; thus wefeixe the true Spirit of them ; that every thing therein was inftituted hy the Ancients, for In- ftruSlion and Amendment of Life \ Porphyry gives us fome of thofe moral Precepts that were inculcated in the Myfteries, as, to honour their Parents, to offer lip Fruits to the Gods, and to forbear Cruelty towards Animals ". In purfuance of this Scheme, it was re quired in the Afpirant to the Myfteries that he ffiould be of an unblemiffied and virtuous Charadler, and free even from the Sufpicion of any notorious Crime"". For the Difcovery of which he was fe verely interrogated hy the Myftagogue". On this Account Suetonius tells us, that when Nero, after the Murderof his Mother, took a Journey into Greece, and had a Mind to be prefent at the Celebration of the Eleuftnian Myfteries, the Confeience of his *" SxojroiT T rihs\5]i eV"", «'; teXo; dvceray^i »«; ifjij;*? a«HH df'ii T^ -jr^arr,]! eVohVosh^ xd^tSm, ai du' af%?5. FhudoYte. ' "Oy7ii'; iJ^sX(/«» y'.Vi^i id lAv^n^a: iVa? «5 ^mlxa-im £fX»- fK^et' oTt eV) -BM^eia 1^ iircao^^uertt S /3is xxri^-d^yi-'O'ds'la, raulx W T OTaXMaii. Apud Arrian Differt. l.g. c. 2r. The Reafon of my tranflating h5 x)i^ita-\xv, in the Manner! have done, was, becaufe I imagined -the Author in this obfcure Expreffion, allu ded to the Cuftom, in the Myfteries, of calling thofe who were initiated only in the leffer Mt-Vai ; but thofe, in the greater, '£7ro7r7««. " ri)v«; Tiftav, ©£t({ xagTroij dyaH-Hv, ZSet fti (rmrtM. Dt Abfl. 1. 4. § 22. * OtToi y> TOS t' '«»« xa,6se.^i; Vt) to"{ jiiieui; as xtlvai f^^t- a/ojdC/Kcrit, oiou t«? ;k"?j'5j "t "^vx^' W- Libftttius Decl. 19. " Flutarch. ii Apophth. & Laconicis, Parricid? Sedt. 4, 0/" M o s E s demonftrated. 139 Parricide deterred him from it''. So the good Emperor M, Antoninus, when he would purge him felf to the World of the Death of Avidius Caffius, chofe to be initiated Into the Eleuftnian Myfteries'' ; it being notorious to aU, that none were admitted to their Participation, who laboured under the juft Sufpicion of any heinous Immorality. The Initi ated were enjoined, during the Celebration of the Myfteries, the greateft Purity, and higheft Eleva tion of Mind, When you facrifice or pray, fays EpiSletus in Arrian, go with a prepared Purity of A find, and with Difpofitions fo previoufty difpofed, as are required of you when you approach tbe ancient Rites and Myfteries '". // was not lawful, fays Tully, fo much as to indulge the fmprudence of tbe Eye in thefe Myfteries ". And Proclus tells us that the My fteries and Initiations drew the Souls of Men from a material, fenfual, and merely human Life, and join ed them in Communion with the Gods". Nor was a lefs Degree of Exadlnefs required in the future Con dudl of the Initiated"'. They were obliged by fo lemn Engagements to commence a new Life of ftridteft Purity and Virtue. The Confideration of all this made Tertullian fay, that in the Myfteries, omnia adverfus ver-itatem, de ipfa veritate conftruSla y Peregrinatione quidem, Gracia, Eleufiniis facris, quorum initiatione impii 8c fcelerati voce przconis fubmoverentur, in- tcreffe non aufus eft. Vita Neren. c. 34. ^ Jul. Capit. vita Ant. Fhil. and Dion. Cuff. ^lecx^fSfloi -tii y"^H-Vt <>'^' "2J~5 i^^oai>i'iVcn-rM xJ .h^7i 'HSx'Kcuniq. Arrian Differt. 1. 3 . c. 2 1 . •' Quo ne imprudentiam quidem oculorum adjici fas eft. De Leg. 1. z. c 14. '^ Td T£ /MrcDg/foc )^ tdi iiK{\dii caidym p ^ot "^ e»»'^w 1^ 3-nr to«i5k? ^uk t«5 '^»X'*'-' "S? B-md-jt\6iv rfli; Btoii;. In Remp. Flat. I I. ^ ^ ¦ _ ' d K.!i^ T ft,v^r.Q/,ci\i d^m&eiq Ihi/ilu/ «J "? •Jirag' vftoi* de/irr,q 'a-;iiiivoei)c. Quidam apud Sopatrum in div. qujeft. elfe. 140 The Divine Legation BookII. effe ". And Auftin, Diabolum animas deceptas illu- fafque prcBcipitaffe, quum poUieeretur purgationem ani mce per eas, quas T E A E T A S appellant ^. The Initiated under this Difcipline, and vi«lth thefe Promifes, were efteemed the only happy Men. Ariftophanes, who fpeaks the Senfe of the People, makes them exult after this Manner: On us only does the Orb of Day ftine benignant, wa only receive Pleafure from its Beams : we, who are initiated, and perform towards Citizens and Strangers all ASls of Piety and Juftice^. . And the longer any one had been initiated, the rnore honourable he was held *. It was even efteemed fcandalous not to be fo : and how virtuous foever the Perfon otherwife appeared, he became Sufpicions to the People : As did So crates ; and, in after Times, Demonax, as we fee in Lucian's Life of his Friend, No wonder then, if the fuperior Advantages of the Initiated, both here and hereafter, ffiould make the Myfteries uni verfally afpired to. And this was indeed the Fadl: For they foon grew as extenfive in the Numbers of all Ranks and Conditions they embraced, as in the Regions and Countries to which they penetrated: Men, Women, and Children were initiated there-. in. Thus Apuleius ' defcribes the State of the Myfteries in his Time : Inftuunt turbce, facris divinis initiates, viri fceminaque, omnis cetatis fcf omnis dignitatis. The Pagans would feem, in- * Apol. c. 47. f De Trinitate, l.g. c. 10. KflM tpiyfoq i?.a^v Irti', '^OaOl fA£UUi?ME6',