The duty of in dividuals to fol tians of God. human beings collectively or individually, who stand in the fame predicament of exclufive responsibility to their Creator. The right, therefore, which each individual poffeffes of this free and uninterrupted communication and intercourfe with his Creator, is effentially paramount to all human, civil, or political power whatever. * "Religion, gentlemen, appears to me to be a gift, which God bestows on every individual, fubject to his movements and inspirations, but in every other refpect entirely free, and beyond the reach of any human jurisdiction; therefore, no one ought to affociate against his will, or without fome reasonable cause or motive, with any religious fociety whatever." And the great Fenelon, archbishop of Cambray, a prelate of the estab-Givil controul. lifhed religion in a Roman Catholic country Liberty of thought in religious matters not fubject to under an abfolute monarchy, fpeaks the fame language. "Liberty of thought is an impregnable fortrefs, which no human power can force; therefore, kings fhould not take upon themselves to direct in matters of religion." Profeffor Noodt's Difcourfe upon Liberty of Con fcience, as tranflated by A. Macawlay, p. 27. Fenelon, as quoted by Dr. Rogers, Vindication of the Civil Establishment of Religion, p. 42. Every individual human being has not only a right, but is under an indifpenfible obligation to adopt that religious cult or mode of worship, which, after due deliberation, in the fincerity of his heart, he thinks his Creator requires of him; it follows of course, that a fociety compofed of fuch individuals muft, collectively taken, enjoy the fame right, and be under the fame duty and obligation. As, therefore, it is neither my intention nor purpofe to examine, or even confider the reasons, grounds, or merits of the religious perfuafion of any one individual, fo fhall I equally avoid the difcuffion or examination of the internal evidence of that religion, which the majority of this community has thought proper to countenance and fupport by civil fanctions. The civil establishment of a religion affects in no manner the truth or falfehood of the religion itself. * «The magistrate (or fupreme civil power) in Turkey has just the fame uncontrouled civil right to establish the religion he ap proves, as a Christian magistrate has to establifh his choice: christianity made no alteration in this cafe; but left civil power as is found it; and if it was before the judge, Changes in fucceffion of the country. what religion it fhould establish, it continues fo ftill." And the fame learned author, who is remarkable for perfpicuity and strength of argument, further fays; "Nothing, therefore, can be more unjust or impertinent, than thofe fuggeftions, that upon my principles, popery will be the true religion in Spain, prefbytery in Scotland, and Mahometifm in Turkey. Thefe are, indeed, the establifhed religions in thofe places; but not one jot the more true for being established. To the laws eftablishing religion, civil obedience is due, in the fame measures and under the fame referves in Spain, as in England; but affent of judgment against private convictions is no part of the obligations arifing from the establishment in either." Thus did our British ancestors adopt for religion in this fome centuries the Druidical inftitutions; after that, they embraced the Chriftian religion, under king Lucius, which was preached to them by St. Damianus, fent hither from Rome for that purpofe by St. Eleutherius; and when the Saxons conquered the island, a part of the community retired into the mountains of Wales, to preferve their liberties and religion from the innovations and en Rogers's Vindication, p. 208. croachments The croachments of their new masters. Saxons, however, continued for many years to keep up the religious establishment in the community, which they had brought with them out of Germany. About four hundred years after the preaching of St. Damianus, the English Saxons, who then properly were the community or political fociety of this country, were converted to chriftianity by St. Auguftine and his fellow preachers, fent alfo for this purpose from Rome by St. Gregory the Great. From this time then, until the reformation, the majority of this community adopted the Roman Catholic religion, and made it the established religion of the country. When I speak of the adoption of religion either by one or more individuals, I wish ever to be understood to speak of it, as of the free act of a free agent. True it is, that our bleffed Redeemer came upon earth to eftablifh the Christian religion; and his injunction to mankind to fubmit to and adopt it is mandatory and unexceptionable; but then it is equally true, that the act of fubmission to, and adoption of it, muft neceffarily be the free and voluntary act of the individual. It was by preaching, that our bleffed Lord himself and his apoftles and their fucceffors propagated G 3 Christianity e ftablished and propagated by preaching, and the adoption of it free and vo luntary. Original conftitutional con nection of church and State, gated and established the Christian religion: the effects of preaching are perfuafion and conviction; and thefe effentially prefuppofe the freedom of the perfon to be perfuaded and convinced. Perfuafion and conviction formally exclude every idea of neceffity and compulfion. From the firft formation of man to the present hour, the following faying of dean Tucker was equally true: "No human authority ought to compel man to furrender to any one his right of thinking and judging for himself in the affairs of religion, because this is a perfonal thing between God and his confcience, and he can neither be faved nor damned by proxy.' The very earliest traces of our conftitution befpeak its interwoven texture of church with ftate. Upon the avowed affumption, that religion generally promotes morality, our ancestors wifely determined, that a religious eftablishment fhould be fanctioned by the community, and the legal establishment of it fhould form an effential part of the English conftitution. Now although govern, ment, as we have before feen, be effential to * Vid. Religious Intolerance no part of the general plan, either of the Mosaic or Chriftian Dispensation, by Jof, Tucker, D. D. Dean of Glouc. 1774, fociety |