1.92 An ARGUMENT to prove, that the ABO LISHING of CHRISTIANITY in ENG LAND, may, as things now ftand, be attended with fome inconveniencies, and perhaps not produce thofe many good effects proposed thereby *. I Written in the year 1708.. Am very fenfible, what a weaknefs and prefump-tion it is, to reafon against the general humour and difpofition of the world. I remember it was with great juftice, and a due regard to the freedom, both of the public and the prefs, forbidden, upon fevere penalties, to write, or difcourfe, or lay wagers against the union, even before it was confirmed by parliament; because that was looked upon as a defign to oppofe the current of the people; which, befides the folly of it, is a manifeft breach of the fundamental law, that makes this majority of opinion, the voice of God. In like manner, and for the very fame reasons, it may perhaps be neither fafe nor t *The argument against abolishing Christianity, is carried on with the highest wit and humour. Graver divines threaten< their readers with future punishments: Swift artfully exhibits a picture of prefent fhame. He judged rightly in imagining, that a small treatise written with a fpirit of mirth and freedom, must be more efficacious, than long fermons, or laborious leffons of morality. He endeavours to laugh us into religion; well knowing, that we are often laughed out of it. Orrery. The argument, &c. is the most delicate, refined, complete,. unvaried piece of irony, from the beginning to the end, that ever was written fince the creation of the world. And without difpute, if in the works of man there can be fuppofed any fuch thing as real perfection, we muft allow it to confist in thofe amazing productions of wit and humour, which in all probability can never be excelled by any effort of genius, and beyond which it is impoffible to frame any critical or diftin&t idea of the human faculties.-With what egregious contempt and ridicule doth he, in this piece, expose the abfurdity of thofe wretches, who are the patrons and abettors of vice and irreligion? Swift. prudent prudent to argue against the abolishing of Christianity, at a juncture when all parties appear fo unanimously determined upon the point; as we cannot but allow from their actions, their difcourfes, and their writings. However, I know not how, whether from the affectation of fingularity, or the perverfeness of human nature; but fo it unhappily falls out, that I cannot be entirely of this opinion. Nay, though I were fure an order were iffued for my immediate profecution by the Attorney-General, I fhould still confefs, that, in the prefent posture of our affairs at home or abroad, I do not yet fee the abfolute neceffity of extirpating the Christian religion from among us. This perhaps may appear too great a paradox, even for our wife and paradoxical age to endure therefore I shall handle it with all tenderness, and with the utmost deference to that great and profound majority, which is of another fentiment. And yet the curious may please to obferve, how much the genius of a nation is liable to alter in half an age. I have heard it affirmed for certain, by fome very old people, that the contrary opinion was, even in their memories, as much in vogue as the other is now; and that a project for the abolishing of Christianity, would then have appeared as fingular, and been thought as abfurd, as it would be at this time to write or discourse in its defence. me. Therefore I freely own, that all appearances are against The fyftem of the gospel, after the fate of other fyftems, is generally antiquated and exploded; and the mafs or body of the common people, among whom it feems to have had its latest credit, are now grown as much ashamed of it as their betters; opinions, like fashions, always descending from thofe of quality to the middle fort, and thence to the vulgar, where at length they are dropped, and vanish. But here I would not be mistaken; and must therefore be fo bold as to borrow a diftin&tion from the writers on the other fide, when they make a difference be tween nominal and real Trinitarians. I hope no reader imagines me fo weak to ftand up in the defence of real Christianity, fuch as used in primitive times (if we may believe the authors of thofe ages) to have an in fluence To offer at the fluence upon mens belief and actions. restoring of that, would indeed be a wild project: it would be to dig up foundations; to destroy at one blow all the wit, and half the learning of the kingdom; to break the entire frame and constitution of things; to ruin trade, extinguish arts and fciences, with the profeffors of them; in short, to turn our courts, exchanges, and shops into deferts: and would be full as abfurd as the propofal of Horace, where he advises the Romans, all in a body, to leave their city, and feek a new feat in fome remote part of the world, by way of cure for the corruption of their manners. Therefore, I think this caution was in itself altogether unneceffary, (which I have inferted only to prevent all poffibility of cavilling); fince every candid reader will cafily understand my difcourfe to be intended only in defence of nominal Chriftianity; the other having been for fome time wholly laid afide by general confent, as utterly inconsistent with our present schemes of wealth and power. But why we should therefore caft off the name and title of Chriftians, although the general opinion and refolution be fo violent for it, I confefs I cannot (with fubmiffion) apprehend, nor is the confequence neceffary. However, fince the undertakers propofe fuch wonderful advantages to the nation by this project, and advance many plaufible objections against the fyftem of Christianity; I fhall briefly confider the ftrength of both, fairly allow them their greatest weight, and offer fuch anfwers as I think most reasonable. After which I will beg leave to fhew, what inconveniencies may poffibly happen, by fuch an innovation, in the prefent pofture of our affairs. Firft, One great advantage propofed by the abolishing of Chriftianity is, That it would very much enlarge and eftablifh liberty of confcience, that great bulwark of our nation, and of the Proteftant religion; which is ftill too much limited by prieftcraft, notwithstanding all the good intentions of the legislature; as we have lately found by a fevere inftance. For it is confidently reported, that two young gentlemen, of real hopes, bright wit, and profound judgment, who, upon a tho rough rough examination of caufes and effects, and by the mere force of natural abilities, without the least tincture of learning, having made a discovery, that there was no God, and generously communicating their thoughts for the good of the public, were fome time ago, by an unparallelled feverity, and upon I know not what obfolete law, broke only for blafphemy. And, as it hath been wifely obferved, if perfecution once begins, no man alive knows how far it may reach, or where it will end. In answer to all which, with deference to wifer judgments, I think this rather fhews the neceflity of a nominal religion among us. Great wits love to be free with the highest objects; and, if they cannot be allowed a God to revile or renounce, they will speak evil of dignities, abuse the government, and reflect upon the ministry; which, I am fure, few will deny to be of much more pernicious confequence; according to the faying of Tiberius, Deorum offenfa diis cura. As to the particular fact related, I think it is not fair to argue from one inftance; perhaps another cannot be produced; yet (to the comfort of all thofe who may be apprehenfive of perfecution) blafphemy, we know, is freely spoken a million of times in every coffeehoufe and tavern, or wherever elfe good company meet. It must be allowed indeed, that to break an English free-born officer only for blafphemy, was, to fpeak the gentleft of fuch an action, a very high ftrain of abfolute power. Little can be faid in excufe for the General. Perhaps he was afraid it might give offence to the allies, among whom, for aught we know, it may be the custom of the country to believe a God. But if he argued, as fome have done, upon a mistaken principle, that an officer who is guilty of speaking blafphemy, may, fome time or other, proceed fo far as to raise a mutiny; the confequence is by no means to be admitted: for furely the commander of an English army is like to be but ill obeyed, whose foldiers fear and reverence him as little as they do ? Deity. It is further objected against the gofpel-fyftem, That it obliges men to the belief of things too difficult for freethinkers, and fuch who have fhaken off the preju VOL. I. dices that ufually cling to a confined education. To which I answer, That men fhould be cautious how they raife objections, which reflect upon the wisdom of the nation. Is not every body freely allowed to believe whatever he pleaseth, and to publifh his belief to the world whenever he thinks fit, especially if it ferves to ftrengthen the party which is in the right? Would any indifferent foreigner, who fhould read the trumpery lately written by Afgil, Tindal, Toland, Coward, and forty more, imagine the gospel to be our rule of faith, and confirmed by parliaments? Does any man either believe, or fay he believes, or defire to have it thought that he fays he believes, one fyllable of the matter? And is any man worfe received upon that score; or does he find his want of nominal faith a difadvantage to him, in the pursuit of any civil or military employment? What if there be an old dormant ftatute or two against him? Are they not now obfolete, to a degree, that Empfon and Dudley themselves, if they were now alive, would find it impoffible to put them in execution? It is likewife urged, That there are, by computation, in this kingdom, above ten thousand parfons; whole revenues, added to thofe of my Lords the Bishops, would fuffice to maintain, at least, two hundred young gentlemen of wit and pleasure, and free-thinking; enemies to prieftcraft, narrow principles, pedantry, and prejudices; who might be an ornament to the court and town: and then again, fo great a number of able [bodied] divines, might be a recruit to our fleet and armies. This, indeed, appears to be a confideration of fome weight. But then, on the other fide, feveral things deferve to be confidered likewife: As, firft, whether it may not be thought neceffary, that in certain tracts of country, like what we call parishes, there fhould be one man, at leaft, of abilities to read and write. Then it feems a wrong computation, that the revenues of the church * Afgil wrote an argument to prove, that man may be tranf. lated from hence into eternal life, without paffing thro' death. Toland published fome deiftical books. Tindal's writings were blafphemous and atheistical. Coward afferted the mortality of the foul, and alledged the feat of it to be in the blood. Hawkef throughout |