: infinitesimal; determines the organization of a future body does no less than fix, whether that which is about to be produced, shall be a vegetable, a merely sentient, or a rational being; an oak, a frog, or a philospher; makes all these differences; gives to the future body its qualities, and nature and species. And this particle, from which springs, and by which is determined, a whole future nature, itself proceeds from, and owes its constitution to, a prior body: nevertheless, which is seen in plants most decisively, the incepted organization, though formed within, and through, and by, a preceding organization, is not corrupted by its corruption, or destroyed by its dissolution: but on the contrary, is sometimes extricated and developed by those very causes; survives and comes into action, when the purpose, for which it was prepared, requires its use. Now an economy which nature has adopted, when the purpose was to transfer an organization from one individual to another, may have something analogous to it, when the purpose is to transmit an organization from one state of being to another state: and they who found thought in organization, may see something in this analogy applicable to their difficulties; for whatever can transmit a similarity of organization will answer their purpose, because, according even to their own theory, it may be the vehicle of consciousness; and because consciousness carries identity and individuality along with it through all changes of form or of visible qualities. In the most general case, that, as we have said, of the derivation of plants and animals from one another, the latent organization is either itself similar to the old organization, or has the power of communicating to new matter the old organic form. But it is not restricted to this rule. There are other cases, especially in the progress of insect life, in which the dormant organization does not much resemble that which encloses it, and still less suits with the situation in which the enclosing body is placed, but suits with a different situation to which it is destined. In the larva of the libellula, which lives constantly, and has still long to live under water, are descried the wings of a fly which two years afterward is to mount into the air. Is there no thing in this analogy? It serves at least to show that even in the observable course of nature, organizations are formed one beneath another; and, amongst a thousand other instances, it shows completely, that the Deity can mould and fashion the parts of material nature, so as to fulfil any purpose whatever which he is pleased to appoint. They who refer the operations of mind to a sub stance totally and essentially different from matter, (as most certainly these operations, though effected by material causes, hold very little affinity to any properties of matter with which we are acquainted,) adopt perhaps a juster reasoning and a better philosophy and by these the considerations above suggested are not wanted, at least in the same degree. But to such as find, which some persons do find, an insuperable difficulty in shaking off an adherence to those analogies, which the corporeal world is continually suggesting to their thoughts; to such, I say, every consideration will be a relief, which manifests the extent of that intelligent power which is acting in nature, the fruitfulness of its resources, the variety, and aptness, and success of its means; most especially every consideration, which tends to show that, in the translation of a conscious existence, there is not, even in their own way of regarding it, any thing greatly beyond, or totally unlike, what takes place in such parts (probably small parts) of the order of nature, as are accessible to our observation. Again; if there be those who think, that the contractedness and debility of the human faculties in our present state, seem ill to accord with the high destinies which the expectations of religion point out to us; I would only ask them, whether any one, who saw a child two hours after its birth, could suppose that it would ever come to understand fluxions; or who then shall say, what farther amplification of intellectual powers, what accession of knowledge, what advance and improvement, the rational faculty, be its constitution what it will, may not admit of, when placed amidst new objects, and endowed with a sensorium adapted, as it undoubtedly will be, and as our present senses are, to the perception of those substances, and of those properties of things, with which our concern may lie. Upon the whole; in every thing which respects this awful, but, as we trust, glorious change, we have a wise and powerful Being (the author, in nature, of infinitely various expedients for infinitely various ends,) upon whom to rely for the choice and appointment of means adequate to the execution of any plan which his goodness or his justice may have formed for the moral and accountable part of his terrestrial creation. That great office rests with him; be it ours to hope and to prepare, under a firm and settled persuasion, that, living and dying, we are his: that life is passed in his constant presence, that death resigns us to his merciful disposal. *See Search's Light of Nature, passim. A DEFENCE OF THE CONSIDERATIONS ON THE PROPRIETY OF REQUIRING A SUBSCRIPTION TO ARTICLES OF FAITH. IN REPLY TO A LATE ANSWER FROM THE CLARENDON PRESS. THE fair way of conducting a dispute, is to exhibit one by one the arguments of your opponent, and with each argument the precise and specific answer you are able to give it. If this method be not so common, nor found so convenient, as might be expected, the reason is, because it suits not always with the designs of a writer, which are no more perhaps than to make a book; to confound some arguments, and to keep others out of sight; to leave what is called an impression upon the reader, without any care to inform him of the proofs or principles by which his opinion should be governed. With such views it may be consistent to despatch objections, by observing of some "that they are old," and therefore, like certain drugs, have lost, we may suppose, their strength; of others, that "they have long since received an answer;" which implies, to be sure, a confutation: to attack straggling remarks, and decline the main reasoning, as mere declamation;" to pass by one passage because it is "long winded," another because the answerer "has neither leisure nor inclination to enter into the discussion of it;" to produce extracts and quotations, which, taken alone, imperfectly, if at all, express their author's meaning; to dismiss a stubborn difficulty with a "reference," which ten to one the reader never looks at; and, lastly, in order to give the whole a certain fashionable air of candour and moderation, to make a concession* or two which nobody thanks him for, or yield up a few points which it is no longer any credit to maintain. How far the writer with whom we have to do is concerned in this description, his readers will judge: he shall receive, however, from us, that justice which he has not shown the author of the "Considerations," to have his arguments fully and distinctly stated and examined. After complaining, as is usual on these occasions, of disappointment and dissatisfaction; the answerer sets out with an argument which comprises, we are told, in a "narrow compass," the whole merits of the question betwixt us; and which is neither more nor less than this, that "it Such as, that "if people keep their opinions to them. selves, no man will hurt them," and the like.-Answer, p. 45. is necessary that those who are to be ordained teachers in the church should be sound in the faith, and consequently that they should give to those who ordain them some proof and assurance that they are so, and that the method of this proof should be settled by public authority." Now the perfection of this sort of reasoning is, that it comes as well from the mouth of the pope's professor of divinity in the university of Bologna, as from the Clarendon press. A church has only, with our author, to call her creed the "faithful word," and it follows from Scripture that "we must hold it fast." Her dissatisfied sons, let her only denominate as he does,* "vain talkers and deceivers,” and St. Paul himself commands us to "stop their mouths." Every one that questions or opposes her decisions she pronounces, with him, a heretic, and "a man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject." In like manner, calling her tenets "sound doctrine," or taking it for granted that they are so, (which the conclave at Rome can do as well as the convocation at London,) and "soundness in the faith being a necessary qualification in a Christian teacher," there is no avoiding the conclusion, that every "Christian teacher" (in, and out of the church too, if you can catch him, "soundness in the faith" being alike 'necessary" in all) must have these tenets strapped about his neck by oaths and subscriptions. An argument which thus fights in any cause, or on either side, deserves no quarter. I have said, that this reasoning, and these applications of Scripture, are equally competent to the defenders of popery they are more so. The popes, when they assumed the power of the apostles, laid claim also to their infallibility; and in this they were consistent. Protestant churches renounce with all their might this infallibility, whilst they apply to themselves every expression that describes it, and will not part with a jot of the authority which is built upon it. But to return to the terms of the argument. "Is it necessary that a Christian teacher should be sound in the faith?" 1. Not in nine instances out of ten to which the test is now extended. Nor, 2. If it were, is this the way to make him so; there being as little probability that the determinations of a set of men whose good fortune had advanced them to high stations in the church should be right, as the conclusions of private inquirers. Nor, 3. Were they actually right, is it possible to conceive how they can, upon this author's principles, produce the effect contended for, since "we set them not up as a rule of faith;"* since "they do not decide matters for us, nor bind them upon us;" since "they tie no man up from altering his opinion," are no ways inconsistent with the right of private judgment," are, in a word, of no more authority than an old sermon; nor, consequently, much more effectual, either for the producing or securing of "soundness in the faith." 66 that had been cast upon ple,other protestant church- and popish emissaries on The answerer, not trusting altogether to the strength of his "argument," endeavours next to avail himself of a concession" which he has gained, he imagines, from his adversary, and which he is pleased to look upon "as in a manner giving up the main point." Our business, therefore, will be to show what this concession, as he calls it, amounts to, and wherein it differs from the "main point," the requisition of subscription to established formularies. It is objected to the Articles of the Church of England, that they are at variance with the actual opinions both of the governors and members of that church; so much so, that the men who most faithfully and expli- ness" it sprung, has been one of the chief causes, But this practice, from whatever "root of bittercitly maintain these articles, get persecuted for we assert, of the divisions and distresses which their singularity, excluded from orders, driven we read of in ecclesiastical history. The matter from universities, and are compelled to preach the of fact our author does not, because he cannot, established religion in fields and conventicles. deny. He rather chooses to insinuate that "such Now this objection, which must cleave to every divisions and disturbances were not owing to the fired formulary, might, we conceive, be removed governors of the church, but to the perverse disif a test was substituted, supposing any test to be putings of heretics and schismatics." He must insisted upon, which could adapt itself to the know that there is oppression as well as resistance, opinions, and keep pace with the improvements, provocation as well as resentment, abuse of power of each succeeding age. This, in some measure, would be the case, if the governors of the church take for granted, without one syllable of proof, as well as opposition to it: and it is too much to for the time being, were authorized to receive that those in possession of power have been from candidates for orders declarations of their re- always in the right, and those who withstood ligious principles in their own words, and allowed, them in the wrong. "Divisions" and "disturbat their discretion, to admit them into the minis-ances" have in fact, and in all ages, arisen on this try. Bishops being taken out of the lump of the community will generally be of the same leaven, and partake both of the opinions and moderation of the times they live in. This is the most that can be made of the concession; and how this gives up the "main point," or indeed any thing, it is not easy to discover. The next paragraph of the Answer attacks the account which the Considerations have given of the "rise" and "progress" of the custom in question; "the reverse of which," the answerer tells us, "is the truth," and by way of proof gives his own account of the matter, which, so far from being the "reverse," is in effect, or very nearly, the same. The reader shall see the two accounts side by side, and is desired to judge whether the author of the Considerations, so far from being confuted in this point, is even contradicted. "The protestants, aware] "As some who set up for how greatly they were mis- reformers had broached marepresented and abused, beny erroneous and pestilent gan to think it necessary to doctrines; the Lutherans, repel the various calumnies first, and, after their exam Pages 11. 13. 19, 29. account, and it is a poor shift to say, because it may always be said, that such only are chargeable with these mischiefs as refused to submit * Page 19. † How a creed is to be made, as the Considerations recommend, in which all parties shall agree, our author cannot understand. I will tell him how; by adhering to Scripture terms: and this will suit the best idea of a and the only fair purpose of one, instruction. Creed (a summary or compendium of a larger volume,) It is observed in the Considerations, that the multiplicity of the propositions contained in the thirty-nine Articles is alone sufficient to show the impossibility of that consent which the Church imposes and requires.Now, what would any man guess is the answer to this? Why, "that there are no less than three propositions in the very first verse of St. John's Gospel." Had there been" three thousand" it would have been nothing to the purpose: where propositions are received upon the authority of the proposer, it matters not how many of them there are; the doubt is not increased with the number; the same reason which establishes one establishes all. But is this the case with a system of proposi tions which derives no evidence from the proposer? which must each stand upon its own separate and intrinsic proof?-We thought it necessary to oppose note to note in the place in which we found it; though neither here nor in the Answer is it much connected with the text. to whatever their superiors thought proper to impose.* all who continue in the church whilst they dissent from her Articles, one would not suppose there was a pardon left for those, who "keep even to themselves an opinion" inconsistent with any one proposition they have subscribed. The fact is, the gentleman has either shifted his opinion in the course of writing the Answer, or had put down these assertions, not expecting that he should have occasion afterwards to contradict them. Nor is it much better when he tells us, "that these subtleties of metaphysical debate, which we complain of in our Articles, were introduced by the several heretics of those times;" especially as it is evident that whoever first introduced, it is the governors of the church who still continue them. But our author cannot conceive what all this, as relating to "creeds" only and "confessions," to the "terms of communion" rather than of admission into the ministry, is to the purpose. Will he then give up "creeds" and "confessions?" or will his church thank him for it if he does? a church which, by transfusing the substance of her Articles into the form of her public worship, has in effect made the "terms of communion" and of admission into the ministry the same. This ques-thinking wrong. tion, like every other, however naked you may strip it by abstraction, must always be considered with a reference to the practice you wish to reform. The author of the Considerations contends very properly, that it is one of the first duties a Christian owes to his Master, "to keep his mind open and unbiassed" in religious inquiries. Can a man be said to do this, who must bring himself to assent to opinions proposed by another? who enters into a profession where both his subsistence and success depend upon his continuance in a particular persuasion? In answer to this we are informed, that these Articles are no "rule of faith;" (what! not to those who subscribe them?) that "the church deprives no man of his right of private judgment;"(she cannot-she hangs, however, a dead weight upon it;) that it is a "very unfair state of the case, to call subscription a declaration of our full and final persuasion in matters of faith;" though if it be not a "full" persuasion, what is it? and ten to one it will be "final," when such consequences attend a change. That "no man is hereby tied up from impartially examining the word of God," i. e. with the " impartiality" of a man who must "eat" or "starve" according as the examination turns out; an "impartiality" so suspected, that a court of justice would not receive his evidence under half of the same influence: nor from altering his opinion if he finds reason so to do, which few, I conceive, will "find," when the alteration must cost them so dear. If one could give credit to our author in what he says here, and in some other passages of his Answer, one would suppose that, in his judgment at least, subscription restrained no man from adopting what opinion he pleased, provided "he does not think himself bound openly to maintain it:" that "men may retain their preferments, if they will but keep their opinions to themselves." If this be what the church of England means, let her say so. This is indeed what our author admits here, and yet, from the outcry he has afterwards raised against The following sentiment of our author is too curious to be omitted: "Possibly too he (the author of the Considerations) may think that insurrections and rebellions in the state are not owing to the unruliness of factious subjects, but to kings and rulers; but most reasonable men, I believe, will think otherwise."-A common reader may think this observation of the answerer a little beside the question.-But the answerer may say, with Cicero and Dr. King, "Suscepto negotio majus mihi quiddam proposui, in quo meam in Rempublicam voluntatem populus perspiceri posset."-Motto to Dr. K.'s Oration in 1749. It seemed to add strength to this objection, that the judgment of most thinking men being in a progressive state, their opinions of course must many of them change; the evil and iniquity of which the answerer sets forth with great pleasantry, but has forgot at the same time to give us any remedy for the misfortune, except the old woman's receipt, to leave off thinking for fear of "no But our church "preaches," it seems, other Gospel than that which she received," nor propounds any other Articles for Gospel," nor "fixes any standards or criterions of faith, separate from this Gospel: and so she herself fully declares;"and we are to take her "word" for it, when the very complaint is, that she has never "acted" up to this declaration, but in direct contradiction to it. When she puts forth a system of propositions conceived in a new dialect, and in unscriptural terms; when she ascribes to these the same evidence and certainty as to Scripture itself, or decrees and acts as if they were equally evident and certain; she incurs, we apprehend, the charge which these expressions imply. She claims indeed "authority in controversies of faith," but "only so far," says her apologist, as "to judge for herself what should be her own terms of communion, and what qualifications, she shall require in her own ministers." All which, in plainer English, comes to this; that two or three men, betwixt two and three centuries ago, fixed a multitude of obscure and dubious propositions, which many millions after must bring themselves to believe, before they be permitted to share in the provision which the state has made (and to which all of every sect contribute) for regular opportunities of public worship, and the giving and receiving of public instruction. And this our author calls the magistrate's "judging for himself," and exercising the "same right as all other persons have to judge for themselves." For the reasonableness of it, however, he has nothing to offer, but that it "is no more than what other churches, popish" too, to strengthen the argument, "as well as protestant," have done before. He might have added, seeing "custom" is to determine the matter, that it had been "customary" too from early ages for Christians to anathematize and burn each other for difference of opinion in some points of faith, and for difference of practice in some points of ceremony. We now accompany the learned answerer to what he is pleased to call the "main question," and which he is so much "puzzled to keep in sight." The argumentt in favour of subscription and the arbitrary exclusion of men from the church or ministry, drawn from the nature of a society and the rights incidental to society, our author resigns to its fate, and to the answer which has been given it in the Considerations. He contends only, that the conduct of the apostles in admitting the eunuch and the centurion upon a general profession of their faith in Christ, "has nothing to do with the case of subscription," as they were admitted, not into the ministry, but only the communion of the church. Now, in the first place, suppose the eunuch or centurion had taken upon them, as probably they did, to teach Christianity, would they have been inhibited by the apostles as not having given sufficient "proof or assurance of their soundness in the faith?" And if not, what becomes of the necessity of such "assurances from a Christian teacher?" In the second place, suppose you consider the church as one society, and its teachers as another, is it probable that those who were so tender in keeping any one out of the first, would have thought the argument we were encountering, or any thing else, a pretence for a right of arbitrary exclusion from the latter? The case of Cornelius, says our author, is "extraordinary; while St. Peter was preaching to him, the Holy Ghost fell upon all them which heard the word." And is not this author ashamed to own, that any are excluded from the communion, or even ministry of the church, who would have been entitled by their faith "to the gifts of the Holy Ghost?" Why, it is the very question, Whether the magistrate ought to confine the provision he makes for religion to those who assent, or declare their assent, to a particular system of controverted divinity: and this is one direct objection against it. But "must the magistrate then," exclaims our alarmed adversary, "establish no tithes, no rich benefices, no dignities, or bishoprics?" As many as he pleases, only let him not convert them into snares and traps by idle and unnecessary conditions. "But must he admit all persons indiscriminately to these advantages?" The author of the Considerations has told him, that he may require conformity to the liturgy, rites, and offices he shall prescribe; he may trust his officers with a discretion as to the religious principles of candidates for orders, similar to what they now exercise with regard to their qualifications; he may censure extravagant preaching when it appears;" precautions surely sufficient either to keep the wildest sectaries" out of the church, or prevent their doing any mischief if they get in. The exclusion of papists is a separate consideration. The laws against popery, as far as they are justifiable, proceed upon principles with which the author of the Considerations has nothing to do. Where, from the particular circumstances of a country, attachments and dispositions hostile and dangerous to the state, are accidentally or otherwise connected with certain opinions in reliThe answerer in the next paragraph acknow-gion, it may be necessary to lay encumbrances ledges, that to admit converts into the church and restraints upon the profession or propagation upon this one article of faith, that Jesus is the of such opinions. Where a great part of any Messiah, was indeed the practice of the apostles;* sect or religious order of men are enemies to the but then he tells us, what must sound a little odd constitution, and you have no way of distinguishto a Christian ear, and comes the more awkward- ing those who are not so, it is right perhaps to ly from this author, whom, if you turn over a fence the whole order out of your civil and relipage, you will find quoting the "practice of the gious establishment: it is the right at least of apostles" with a vengeance; he tells us, I say, self-defence, and of extreme necessity. But even "that no argument can be drawn from the prac- this is not on account of the religious opinions tice of the apostles." Now, with regard to the themselves, but as they are probable marks, and "practice of the apostles," and the application of the only marks you have, of designs and princiit to ourselves, the case seems to be this (the very ples which it is necessary to disarm. I would reverse, observe, of our author's rule,) that we observe, however, that in proportion as this conare always bound not "to go beyond" the pre-nexion between the civil and religious principles cedent, though, for want of the same authority, of the papists is dissolved, in the same proportion we may not always "advance up to it." It surely ought the state to mitigate the hardships and at least becomes us to be cautious of "proceed- relax the restraints to which they are made subing," where they, in the plenitude of their com-ject. mission, thought proper "to stop." It is alleged in the Considerations, that annexing emoluments to the profession of particular opinions, is a strong and dangerous inducement to prevarication; and the danger is the greater, as prevarication in one instance has a tendency to relax the most sacred obligations, and make way for perfidy in every other. But "this," it seems, "has nothing to do with the question." Although the question, whether to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, be not the only necessary article of faith, is a question in which we have no concern; our author, with the best inclination in the world, not be If we complain of severities, of pains and penalties, the answerer cannot discover "whom or what we mean:" and lest his reader should, by a figure extremely well known in the craft of controversy, he proposes a string of questions in the person of his adversary, to which he gives his own peremptory and definitive No. We will take a method, not altogether so compendious, but, we trust, somewhat more satisfactory. We will repeat the same questions, and let the church and state answer for themselves. First, then, "Does our church or our government inflict any corporal punishment, or levy any fines or penalties on those who will not comply with the terms of her communion ?"-" Be it enacted, that all and every person or persons that shall neglect or refuse to receive the sacrament of the Lord's Supper according to the usage of the Church of England, and yet, after such neglect or refusal shall execute any office or offices, civil or military, after the times be expired wherein he or they Page 21. |