Reli and displayed the various, and fometimes contradictory arguments of thefe opponents, in a light fuited to the design of proving Chriftianity itself vague and uncertain, both in its principles and its evidences. Morality was decked in her moft bewitching attire (for Revelation had furnished her with ornaments which ancient Philosophy could never procure), and held up to the world as the fole object worth attention, while Religion was represented as Bigotry, Intolerance, Prieftcraft, Ignorance, or any hideous form their forcery could conjure up. And thus Morality became the theme of every tongue. gion was fuppofed to confift of doctrines too abftrufe, and ceremonies too unimportant to be understood or obferved by mankind in general. Faith was ridiculed, and compliance with the inftitutions of the church (except from political motives) was deemed fuperftition. Even many of the appointed preachers of the Gofpel, forgetting that what" God hath joined together no man can put asunder" with impunity, were betrayed by the terms practical religion, liberality of opinion, and general philanthropy, to deliver moral essays from the pulpit, instead of "preaching Christ and him him crucified." The fublime doctrines of religion were feldom taught, left they fhould" offend a brother" who differed from their creed; or, left they should be fufpected of a dogmatical fpirit. Alas! What is the wifdom of man but foolishnefs with God? What have been the confequences of thefe temporizing measures? What! but the common fate of a building whose foundation is neglected! It has been justly obferved, that "we cannot exceed the limits prefcribed for human knowledge, without involving ourfelves in contradictions and abfurdity h;" and that nothing has produced more pernicious mifchief to fociety, than the pursuit of principles in themselves good, far beyond the bounds in which they are good." Examined by the light of these obfervations, and the teftimony of experience, it will appear that "the writings of Locke, though himself a worthy and religious man, led to a fcepticism eventually hurtful to religion; and though a loyal fubject, that his political writings ge h Warburton. i Mackintosh. * Gillies's Pref. to his Tranflation of Ariftotle. 1 nerated doctrines hurtful to monarchical government, and indeed to all civil fociety." "The Effay on the Human Understanding, in itfelf fo profound and fo ufeful, with a confiderable degree of erroneous theory, as might be expected from a man even of the greateft genius exploring untrodden, intricate, and arduous paths, brought a greater acceffion to men of knowledge of those powers by which he is peculiarly distinguished, than any book that had ever been written. It tended alfo to fharpen and invigorate the faculties. But the caution with which it examined different fpecies and degrees of evidence, a caution right as far as it merely prevented error, fometimes refufed to admit truth ; fought proof of a different kind from that which the nature of the subject required; doubted', where, in the plain judgment of common fenfe, no doubt could exist, and afforded fuppofed data from whence ingenious men might form the most visionary theories m Thus He denied that we had any certain evidence for the exiftence of any objects but ourselves individually, and of the Deity. ת m Berkeley and Hume, purfuing Locke's principles, Thus the prevalence of metaphyfical difquifitions powerfully affifted the growth of Infidelity in thofe countries where the liberal fpirit of the reformation tolerated difcuffion upon religious and political subjects. Confidered as matters of mere fpeculation, and admired as enlarging the sphere of knowledge, the tendency of these writings was not always perceived by minds which Religion guarded from the mischief. They faw the dazzling meteors fhoot harmlefs into space. But Infidelity faw clearly how their courfe might be directed to guide mankind to her dominions; and the diffenfions that prevailed among the numerous fects which fprung from the doc denied the existence of external objects. His hypothefis respecting governments being founded on a fiction, is neceffarily inconclufive in point of reafoning. But the writings of the Whigs during the reigns of George I and II. affumed the exiftence of the fuppofed original. compact, as an axiom as indifputable as any of Euclid's; and while practically wifely and vigoroufly fupporting our excellent Conftitution, theoretically defended principles, according to which all exifting governments might be fubverted; and upon which the French Philofophifts have founded their fyftem of anarchy and mifery. I am indebted for thefe excellent remarks to a very able writer in a periodical publication. See the Anti-Jacobin Mag. No. II. trines of Luther and Calvin, unhappily affifted the execution of this defign. It is faid, with a defign of difgracing our country, that the doctrines of the Englifh Infidels, Toland, Tindal, Hobbes, Collins, and Bolingbroke, inspired the first idea of abolishing Christianity and diforganizing fociety; and that it was in England Voltaire conceived the hope of being able to extirpate religion. But do we, as a nation, deserve this opprobrium? To fay nothing of the Manichean origin of this idea, we have only to look at the impiety and licentioufnefs which had uninterruptedly reigned in the courts of Rome and Italy, from a much earlier period than the age of Voltaire, and to recollect the names of Aretin, Spinoza, Leibnitz, and Defcartes, and above all, perhaps, of Bayle, to trace the fource from whence our English Infidels derived their opinions. It is certain that in the fixteenth century there lay concealed in different parts of Europe, feveral perfons who entertained a virulent enmity against religion in general, and in a more efpecial manner against the religion of the Gofpel; and who, both in their writings and in their private converfation, fowed the feeds |