Page images
PDF
EPUB

Man ought not

to be punished

for fpeculative

opinion of religion.

The community will not judge any action that tends

In the English, as well as every other.community, each individual member of it has the fame right, duty, and obligation to follow the dictates of a fincere confcience. As long, therefore, as in this he does nothing to injure nor offend the community, fo long ought he not in any manner to be punished or chastised for differing either in doctrine or difcipline from that religious fociety, which has received the civil fanction of the ftate. "Therefore, fays Dr. Priestley, in his Effay on the First Principles of Government, *" as a being capable of immortal life (which is a thing of infinitely more confequence to me, than all the political confiderations of this world) I must endeavour to render myself acceptable to God, by fuch difpofitions and fuch conduct as he has required, in order to fit me for future happiness. For this purpose, it is evidently requifite, that I diligently use my reafon, in order to make myself acquainted with the will of God; and alfo, that I have liberty to do whatever I believe he requires, provided I do not moleft my fellow creatures by fuch affumed liberty."

any

In vain will individual attempt to palliate or juftify an action, that is offenfive or injurious to the community, by the plea or vernment to be defence of its being directed or enjoined by

to fubvert go

dictated by re

ligion

[blocks in formation]

his religion; for as it is by the particular or dination of Almighty God, that fociety is neceffary for man, and fociety cannot fubfift without government; and as Almighty God left the particular form of goverment to the option of each community, and has in the most express manner enjoined and commanded the individuals of every community to fubmit to, and obey that government, which in exercife of the liberty, which he had granted them, they have formed for themselves, it is evident, that the community is fully warranted in judging, that no action, which tends to difturb or fubvert the end or prefervation of the government, can have been directed or enjoined by that deity, whose juftice and confiftency are equal with all his other infinite perfections. These falfe pretences or calls of confcience to disapprove, refist, or oppose the religion fanctioned or established by the state, are more pointedly reprobated by the learned divine, whom I have fo often quoted. *« A pretence of confcience for oppofing the right of the magiftrate (or fupreme fovereign power) to

eftablish

any religion at all, cannot be fupported by the plea of a fpecial miffion from

[blocks in formation]

God; because a doctrine fo abfurd and deftructive to human fociety, reafon cannot admit to be from God: and he, who pretends to come from God with fuch a meffage, brings with him fuch an internal difproof of his miffion, as would overrule any outward proofs of it; and he may as well pretend a revelation, requiring him to tell us, there is no God."

Every man is prefumed to be affected towards his religion, in proportion as he thinks, and feels, that it is the pure effect of his own voluntary choice. From hence arife the love and reverence, which the majority of the English nation bear to their church; and from hence alfo is redoubled the obligation. upon all diffenters from that church, to fubmit unto, because they are fuppofed to join and concur in all the acts of the legislature, by which the church receives the civil fancThe confciences tion of the state. Nor can their confciences not concerned be in any manner affected by fuch concur

of individuals

in the truth of

the religion which receives the civil eftablishment.

Mr. Burke, a profeffed member of the national church, fpeaks, as all other fuch members feel about it. "First, I beg leave to speak of our church establishment, which is the firft of our prejudices; not a prejudice destitute of reason, but involving in it profound and extenfive wisdom. I fpeak of it first. It is the first, and laft, and midst in our minds." Reflections on the Revolu- . tion in France, p. 136.

rence,

'rence, although they should difapprove of, or condemn the tenets of that church; fince, as Dr. Rogers obferves, a religion becomes not one jot the more true for being established. The difference, therefore, is great between the fubmiffion, which, upon the principles of all civil government, we are bound to fhew generally to the civil fanction or establishment, which the ftate gives to any religious fyftem, and the intellectual adoption of the peculiar tenets and doctrines, which diftinguish that particular fociety from any other. The toleration, which the legislature grants to thofe, who differ from the established religion, is the only proof that needs be alledged, that they do not mean to force or impofe the belief of their religious tenets upon the confciences of any member of the fociety. For what can be more just and equitable, than to leave every person at full liberty to act according to his own underflanding, in matters which regard none but himself?"

Before I leave this subject, it will be proper to fay fomething upon the nature of church lands, or ecclefiaftical property, concerning which many erroneous notions are

• Noodt's Difcourfe on Liberty of Confcience, P. 97, 98.

[blocks in formation]

conceived and propagated, from inattention to their origin or fource. When the ftate establifhes a religion, it clothes or invests the clergy of that religion with certain political qualities; one of which is a corporate capacity, by which they are made perpetual bodies, always reprefented by fucceffors. By this quality of perpetuity, whatever property is once acquired by a clergyman in his corporate capacity, it is rendered unalienable for ever, and was therefore formerly expreffed by our ancestors, by the term Mortmain; which imported, that the hands, into which the property had paffed, poffeffed no active power nor capacity of transferring it to others. Now the right of holding, modelling, and transferring property, is given and regulated by the fovereign power of every state; and therefore the civil power alone could enable individuals to veft the land, which by the state they were permitted to enjoy to the exclufion of others, in these corporations; or, to use the words of the ftatute (7 Ed. I.) per quod in manum mortuam devenerint. Whatever land was given by the ftate, or by the municipal law was permitted to be given by individuals to the church, was to moft purpofes divested of thofe transferable and defcendible, or inheritable qualities, with which

the

« PreviousContinue »