« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
being a law to the vanquished, they were first to be conquered before they were sollicited on this head. So far were men from fighting for the Gods, that the Gods combatted, as they do in Homer, for mankind. Each people demanded the victory from its respective Deity, and repaid the service by the erection of new altars.
“ The Romans, before they besieged any fortress, fummoned its Gods to give it up; and tho' it be true, they left the Tarentines in possession of their angry Deities, it is plain they looked upon those Gods as subjected, and obliged to do homage to their own : they fometimes left the vanquished in poffeffion of their religion, as they did of their laws. A wreathe for Jupiter in the Capitol, being often the only tribute they exaded.
" At length the Romans, having extended their religion with their empire, and fometimes even adopted the Deities of the conquered, the people of this vaft empire found themselves in poffeffion of a multitude of Gods and religions ; which not differing very effentially from each other, Paganism became infenfibly one and the fame religion, throughout the known world.
“ Things were in this state when Jesus came to establish his fpiritual kingdom; which necessarily dividing the theological from the political system, gave rise to those intestine divisions which have ever since continued to embroil the profelfors of Christianity.
“ Now this new idea of a kingdom in the other world, having never entered into the heads of the Pagans, they always regarded the Christians as actual rebels, who, under a hypocritical fhew of Cubmission, waited only a proper opportunity to render themselves independent, and artfully to usurp that authority, which, in their weak and rising state, they pretended to respect: and this was undoubtedly the cause of their being perfecuted.
" What the Pagans had feared, in process of time, alío came really to pass. Things put on a new face, and the humble Christians, as their number increased, changed their tone and language; while their pretended kingdom in the other world becaine, under a visible head, the most despotic and tyrannical, in this.
“ As in all countries, however, there were civil Governors, and lans, there resulted from this twofold power a perpetual
struggle for jurisdiction, which renders a perfect system of domestic policy almost impossible in Christian States; and prevents us from ever coming to a determination, whether it be the Prince or the Priest we are bound to obey.
“ In England, as well as in Russia, the Monarch, as head of the State is also head of the Church; but by this title they are less Masters than Ministers of the religion ; they are not possessed of the right to change it, but only to maintain it in its present form. Wherever the Clergy constitute a political body, they will be both the Master and Legislator in its own cause. There are, therefore, two Sovereigns in England and Ruffia, as well as elsewhere."
Our Author conceives that, by a proper examination of historical fa&ts in this view, it would be easy to refute both the sentiments of Bayle and Warburton; the former of whom pretends, that no religion is of use to the body politic; and the other, that Christianity is its .best and firmest support. He endeavours next to show the incompatibility of the characters of the true Christian and the Patriot; tho', we think, with more speciousness than solidity. There is much propriety, however, in what he advances concerning that political creed which the Sovereign hath a right to impose on the subject.
« The right which the social pact confirms on the Sovereign, extending no farther than to public utility, the subject is not accountable to him for any opinions he may entertain that have nothing to do with the community. Now, it is of great importance to a State, that every Citizen Mhould be of a religion that may inspire him with a love for his duty: but the tenets of that religion are no farther interesting to the con:munity than as they relate to morals, and to the discharge of those obligations which the professor of them lies under to his fellow-citizens. If we except these, the subject may profefs as many others as he pleases, without the Sovereign having any right to interfere ; for as the latter has no jurisdiction in the other world, it is no business of his, what becomes of his subjects in a future life, provided they behave as good Citizens in the present.
- There is a profeffion of Faith, therefore, purely political, the articles of which, it is the business of the Sovereign to ascertain, not precisely as articles of religion, but as the sentiments due to fociety, without wiich it is impossible to be a good citizen, or à faithful subject. Without obliging
any one to adopt these sentiments, he may also equitably banish them the society; not, indeed, as impious, but as unfociable, as incapable of having a fincere regard to justice, and of facrificing his life, if required, to his duty. Again, should any one after having made a public profession of such sentiments, betray his disbelief of them by his misconduct, he may equitably be punished with death; having committed the greatest of all crimes, in violating the laws by his fallhood.
“ The tenets of political religion should be few and fimple: they should be laid down also with precision, without explication or comment. The existence of a powerful, intelligent, beneficent, prefcient, and provident Deity, a Future State, the Reward of the Virtuous, and the Punishment of the Wicked, the sacred nature of the social Compact, and of the Laws; these should be the positive tenets. As to those of a negative kind, I should confine myself solely to one, that of Intoleration.
“ Those who affect a distinction between civil and religious Toleration, are, in my opinion, mistaken. It is imporsible to live cordially at peace with persons whom we believe devoted to damnation : to love them would be to hate the Deity for punishing them; it is absolutely necessary for us either to convert or persecute them. Wherever religious Intoleration subfifts, it is impoflible it should not have some effect on the civil police; in which case the Sovereign is no longer Sovereign, even in a secular view: the Priests become the real Masters, and Kings only their Officers.
•« In modern Governments, where it is impossible to support an exclusive national religion, it is requifite to tolerate all such as tolerate others, provided their tenets are not contrary to the duty of a good citizen. But whoever shall dare to say, there is no salvation out of the pale of our church, ought to be banished the State : unless, indeed, the State be an ecclefiaftical one, and the Sovereign a Pontiff.”
But we must here take leave of this ingenious little tract, from which we will venture to say, an attentive Reader will deduce a more clear and precise idea of the fundamental principles of civil society, and the grounds of politic law, than from large volumes that have been written on this nice and perplexing subject.
For DECEMBER, 1762, Continued.
Art. 1. Samuel Roe's Observations on the great Doctrine of Tythes
Considered. 8vo. Is. Nicoll. W
E are surprized that a man of some life and spirit, as the Au
thor of this little tract appears to be, could throw away so much time and paper upon such an inconsiderable object; for he himself deems the work of his Opponent to be only the over-flowing of an heated imagination, or the effect of an irregular and disordered brain: manifelting itself in slanderous reports, repro. Chful falsehoods, and ecclefiaffical Billing /gate :—all to blacken and misrepresent the Quakers. In defence of this sect, and also to give a mortal stab to the churchdoctrine of Tithes, and even, if posible, to overthrow the Church itself, our Author atands forth ;-and, (though fighting be a very unquakerly principle) many a smart stroke has he aimed at the eltablished Clergy in general, as well as at poor Mr. Roe in particular, whom he unmercifully bruises and batters from head to foot : here a Nap in the chaps, there a black eye, now a punch in the stomach, and then a kick on the breechi Nor is he too, any more than the Parson, wanting in reproachful language, as fcurrilous even as the ecclefiafli. cal Billingsgate, which he lo juilly condemns in his reverend Antágonist; biind Priefl, low-lived and groveling Divine, being some of the foftest names by which he vouchsafes to distinguish him. This brings to mind a late altercation, which the Writer of the present article overheard, between two ragged Bailiff's Followers, as they fat wrangling on a bench under his window, in one of the Inns if Court. As the warm dialogue grew rich, one of the enraged Bla:k. guards starting from his feat, and calling a fide-glance of ineftaise disdain at the other, vehemently exclaimed, “ See what a man gets by keeping fuch da---d low-life company!"
POLITICA L. Art. 2. An Epistle to his Excellency the Duke Nivernois. In
which a new Light is cast upon some Transactions of the highest Importance to the Honour of Great Britain as well as to that of France. To which is added, an humble Address to the greatest Allembly in England. By (unfashionable as the Term may appear) a real Lover of his Country: 4to. Wilson and Fell.
This real Lover of his country is evidently fome young Politician, whose wit by far outitrips his judgment. It had not been amiss, kowever, had he taken time to learn the name of the respectable
IS, 6 d.
personage whom he hath here addressed. How far his Excellency may edify by this crude performance, if he should condescend to read it, we do not pretend to fay; but, for our own part, we must confefs ourselves as much in the dark as before, with regard to any of those important transactions, on which this Writer pretends to throw a new light. He makes one observation, nevertheless, of the truth of which his Epistle is an eminent proof, viz. that“ in England we take unaccountable liberties, and have a strange method of speaking about men and measures."
As to the humble Address annexed, it is nothing more than a pert and flippant repetition of some trite and captious obje&tions to the preliminaries of peace. Art. 3. A Letter from a Member of Parliament in Town, to his
Friend in the Country, upon the three great Objećts of present Attention, Peace, Parties, and Resignations. 8vo.
Burnet. . Moderately, and not altogether injudiciously, investigates the Preliminaries ; which, upon the whole, the Author approves : tho' he thinks, that the limits of Canada should be more clearly and accurately ascertained in the definitive Treaty. He also takes notice of
a very material omillion in these articles, which is, not mentioning that great and extensive country Labrador, which reaches from the N. E, of the Gulph of St. Lawrence as far as Hudson's Bayi as we may doubtless suppose the French will avail themi:ives of this great tract of land, as yet uninhabited by Europeans, to form a fertlement upon the Atlantic Ocean.-If, therefore, we would prevent the French re-eltablishing their empire in North-America, it will be neceffary to fipalate, in the frongest and most express terms, that they thall not fettle upon, or fortify, any part of the country of Labrador.”
In what this Member of Parliament (for St. Kilda, perhaps, or the Bass in the Firth of Forth) has said in relation to the State of Parties among us, at this critical junciure, and concerning the lite resignations, he more openly shews himfe If an Adrocate for the diniltry ; he sneers at the Gentlemen supposed to have taken the lead in the ne:v opposition ; works Mr. Pili's patriotism and guut; and concludes with some compiments to the Earl of Bute.
Art. 4. The comparative Importance of our Acquisitions from
France in America. With Remarks on a Pamphlet entitled, An Examination of the commercial Principles of the laie. Negociation in 3761. 8vo. Is.
Hinxman. “ This pamphlet was writ before the preliminary articles of peace were figned, which have since been ratified, and communicated to Parliament. They are conformable to the main scope of the Author's argument, although in some very important particulars they exceed his most fanguine hopes; and he is happy in finding, that his