صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

requires? That you tell us in these words, "If the magistrate provides sufficiently for the instruction of all his subjects in the true religion, and then requires them all, under convenient penalties, to hearken to the teachers and ministers of it, and to profess and exercise it with one accord under their direction in public assemblies:" which in other words is but conformity; which here you express a little plainer in these words: "But as to those magistrates who, having provided sufficiently for the instruction of all under their care in the true religion, do make laws, and use moderate penalties to bring men to the communion of the church of God, and to conform to the rules and orders of it." You add, "Is there any pretence to say that in so doing, he [the magistrate] applies force only to a part of his subjects, when the law is general, and excepts none?" There is no pretence, I confess, to say that in so doing he applies force only to a part of his subjects, to make them conformists; from that it is plain the law excepts none. But if conformists may be ignorant, grossly ignorant of the principles and doctrines of Christianity; if there be no penalties used to make them consider as they ought, so as to understand, be convinced of, believe and obey the truths of the Gospel; are not they exempt from that force which you say "is to make men consider and examine matters of religion as they ought to do?" Force is applied to all indeed to make them conformists; but if being conformists once, and frequenting the places of public worship, and there showing an outward compliance with the ceremonies prescribed (for that is all the law requires of all, call it how you please), they are exempt from all force and penalties, though they are ever so ignorant, ever so far from understanding, believing, receiving the truth of the Gospel; I think it is evident that then force is not applied to all "to procure the conviction of the understanding. To bring men to consider those reasons and arguments which are proper to convince the mind, and which, without being forced, they would not consider. -To bring men to that consideration, which nothing

else but force (besides the extraordinary grace of God) would bring them to. To make men good Christians. -To make men receive instruction. To cure their aversion to the true religion.-To bring men to consider and examine the controversies which they are bound to consider and examine, i. e. those wherein they cannot err without dishonouring God, and endanger ing their own and other men's eternal salvation.-To weigh matters of religion carefully and impartially. To bring men to the true religion and to salvation.", That then force is not applied to all the subjects for these ends, I think you will not deny. These are the ends for which you tell us, in the places quoted, that force is to be used in matters of religion: it is by its usefulness and necessity to these ends, that you tell us the magistrate is authorized and obliged to use force in matters of religion. Now if all these ends be not attained by a bare conformity, and yet if by a bare conformity men are wholly exempt from all force and penalties in matters of religion; will you say that for these ends force is applied to all the magistrate's subjects? If you will, I must send you to my pagans and Mahometans for a little conscience and modesty. If you confess force is not applied to all for these ends, notwithstanding any laws obliging all to conformity; you must also confess, that what you say concerning the laws being general, is nothing to the purpose; since all that are under penalties for not conforming, are not under any penalties for ignorance, irreligion, or the want of those ends for which you say penalties are useful and necessary.

You go on," And therefore if such persons profane the sacrament to keep their places, or to obtain licences to sell ale, this is a horrible wickedness." I excuse them not. "But it is their own, and they alone must answer for it." Yes, and those who threatened poor ignorant and irreligious ale-sellers, whose livelihood it was, to take away their licences, if they did not conform and receive the sacrament, may be thought, perhaps, to have something to answer for. You add, "But

it is very unjust to impute it to those who make such laws, and use such force, or to say that they prostitute holy things, and drive men to profane them." Nor is it just to insinuate in your answer, as if that had been said which was not. But if it be true, that a poor, ignorant, loose, irreligious wretch should be threatened to be turned out of his calling and livelihood, if he would not take the sacrament: may it not be said these holy things have been so low prostituted? And if this be not profaning them, pray tell me what is?

This I think may be said without injustice to any body, that it does not appear that those who make strict laws for conformity, and take no care to have it examined upon what grounds men conform, are not very much concerned, that men's understandings should be convinced: and though you go on to say, that "they design by their laws to do what lies in them to make men good Christians;" that will scarce be believed, if what you say be true, that force is necessary to bring "those who cannot be otherwise brought to it, to study the true religion, with such care and diligence as they might and ought to use, and with an honest mind." And yet we see a great part, or any of those who are ignorant in the true religion, have no such force applied to them; especially since you tell us, in the same place, that "no man ever studied the true religion with such care and diligence as he might and ought to use, and with an honest mind, but he was convinced of the truth of it." If then force and penalties can produce that study, care, diligence, and honest mind, which will produce knowledge and conviction; and that (as you say in the following words) make good men; I ask you, if there be found in the communion of the church, exempt from force upon the account of religion, ignorant, irreligious, ill men; and that, to speak moderately, not in great disproportion fewer than amongst the nonconformists; will you believe yourself when you say "the magistrates do, by their laws, all that in them lies to make them good Christians;" when they use not that force to them which you, not I, say is necessary; and that they are, where it is necessary, obliged to use?

And therefore I give you leave to repeat again the words you subjoin here, "But if after all they (i. c. the magistrates) can do, wicked and godless men will still resolve to be so; they will be so, and I know not who but God Almighty can help it." But this being spoken of conformists, on whom the magistrates lay no penalties, use no force for religion, give me leave to mind you of the ingenuity of one of my pagans or Mahometans. You tell us, That the usefulness of force to make scholars learn, authorizes schoolmasters to use it. And would you not think a schoolmaster discharged his duty well, and had a great care of their learning, who used his rod only to bring boys to school; but if they come there once a week, whether they slept or only minded their play, never examined what proficiency they made, or used the rod to make them study and learn, though they would not apply themselves without it?

But to show you how much you yourself are in earnest for the salvation of souls in this your method, I shall set down what I said, p. 129, of my letter on that subject, and what you answer, p. 68, of yours.

L. II. p. 129. "You speak of it here as the most deplorable condition imaginable, that men should be left to themselves, and not be forced to consider and examine the grounds of their religion, and search impartially and diligently after the truth.' This you make the great miscarriage of mankind and for this you seem solicitous, all through your treatise, to find out a remedy; and there is scarce a leaf wherein you do not offer yours. But what if, after all now, you should be found to prevaricate? Men have contrived to themselves,' say you, a great variety of religions: it is granted. They seek not the

L. III. p. 68. Your next paragraph runs high, and charges me with nothing less than prevarication. For whereas, as you tell me, I speak of it here as the most deplorable condition imaginable, that men should be left to themselves, and not be forced to consider and examine the grounds of their religion, and search impartially and diligently after the truth, &c. It seems

truth in this matter with that application of mind and freedom of judgment which is requisite:' it is confessed. All the false religions now on foot in the world have taken their rise from the slight and partial consideration, which men have contented themselves with, in searching after the true; and men take them up, and persist in them, for want of due examination:' be it so. There is need of a remedy for this; and I have found one whose success cannot be questioned:' very well. What is it? Let us hear it. Why, dissenters must be punished.' Can any body that hears you say so, believe you in earnest; and that want of examination is the thing you would have amended, when want of examination is not the thing you would have punished? If want of examination be the fault, want of examination must be punished; if you are, as you pretend, fully satisfied that punishment is the proper and only means to remedy it. But if, in all your treatise, you can show me one place where you say that the ignorant, the careless, the inconsiderate, the negligent in examining thoroughly the truth of their own and others' religion, &c. are to be punished, I will allow your remedy for a good one. But you have not said any thing like this; and which is more, I tell you beforehand, you dare not say it. And whilst you

[blocks in formation]

"Dissenters

must be punished." Upon which thus you insult:

"Can

any body that hears you say so, believe you in earnest," &c. Now here I acknowledge, that though want or neglect of examination be a general fault, yet the method I propose for curing it does not reach to all that are guilty of it, but is limited to those who reject the true religion, proposed to them with sufficient evidence. But then, to let you see how little ground you have to say that I prevaricate in this matter, I shall only desire you to consider what it is that the author and myself were inquiring after: for it is not, what course is to be taken to confirm and establish those in the truth, who have already embraced it : nor, how they may be enabled to propagate it to others (for

« السابقةمتابعة »