Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

occafions, am ready moft unequivocally to avow; a preference, not founded on the delufive ground of prejudice, but on the solid bafis of conviction. The preference which I feel for the church of England is derived from a conviction of its fuperiority over every other exifting church, in the following important points, viz. Its purity in doctrine, difcipline, and worship; its venerable fimplicity in habits, rites, and ceremonies; its apoftolical fucceffion, orders, and fubordination; its provifion for its ministers coeval with the origin of property; its firm, but temperate, refiftance of popery, heterodoxy, innovation, and fchifm; and its friendly and faithful alliance with the ftate. In this age of apoftacy and anarchy no friend to the civil and religious conftitution of his country fhould fubmit to any imputation of lukewarmness or indifference. The time may arrive when every one's attachment to the religion of his country may be put to the teft. On the bare poffibility of fuch an event (which one of our most eminent prelates thinks not far diftant*) it becomes every man to be prepared. For my own part, not like a certain arrogant deferter from the ftandard of orthodoxy, I cordially adopt the language of the Pythagorean fchool of ancient politics, and declare,

Αμυνω δε ύπερ Ιερων, και υπερ ὁσιων, και μόνος, και μετα πολλῶν "I will defend and protect my country and my religion, whether alone, or in conjunction with others."

Conceiving these fentiments to be perfectly conformable to your own, I fubfcribe myfelf, with every good wish for the fuccefs of your laudable and manly exertions in the cause of your country,

Sir,

Your faithful and obedient servant,
G. A. THOMAS.

[ocr errors]

Feb. 21, 1799. [We are happy, by the infertion of Mr. Thomas's letter, to give publicity to a valuable writer's correction of what he conceives to be our misapprehenfion of a paffage in his fermon, (noticed in our Review for December, p. 672, Vol. I.) for tho' we could ftill have wifhed that the fentence had been more guarded in its construction, and the due diftinction between religion and government more clearly marked, (because the leaft confufion opens a door to dangerous errors,) yet we are bound, in every inftance, to admit an author's explanation of his own meaning, and we receive it with greater pleasure on the present occafion, as it deprives thofe, who might be difpofed to pervert it to their own purposes, of the weight of fuch refpectable authority.]

*Bishop of Rochefter. See his Lordship's Charge, 1796, P. 21. + Gilbert Wakefield, formerly a Fellow of Jefus College, Cambridge.

1608.

Joan. Stobaei de Repub. Serm, XLI. P. 243. Edit. Lugdun,

MISCELLANIES.

331

THE

MISCELLANIES.

THE WRANGLING PHILOSOPHERS.

HE year before laft Dr. PRIESTLEY, in his American retreat, publifhed a pamphlet entitled, "Obfervations upon the Increate of Infidelity, with Animadverfions upon the Writings of feveral Modern Unbelievers, and especially the Ruins of Mr. Volney." The motto to this tract was "Minds of little penetration reft natu rally on the furface of things. They do not like to pierce deep into them, for fear of labour and trouble; fometimes ftill more for fear of truth".

Mr. VOLNEY, who has also established his refidence in America, was, as might be fuppofed, extremely offended at this attack from a man with whom he was perfonally acquainted; and the more fo, probably, from a confcioufnefs which he could not but feel, in a certain degree, that the Doctor's publication contained many strong truths and much wholefome doctrine. However that might be, he refolved not to fuffer his adverfary to efcape with impunity, and, accordingly, wrote an anfwer, which has been tranfmitted to us by a correfpondent, and which we now prefent to our readers, not from any peculiar merit which it poffefes, not from any concurrence with the opinions which it contain, but from the confideration that a controverfy between an infidel philofophift, and an Unitarian philofopher, has fomething novel and curious in it, and that the names of the combatants are fufficient, of themselves, to render the combat itself not uninterefting.

VOLNEY's ANSWER TO DR. PRIESTLEY.

SIR,

I received in due time your pamphlet on the increase of infi delity, together with the note without date which accompanied it.* My answer has been delayed by the incidents of business, and even by ill health, which you will furely excufe: this delay has, befides, no inconvenience in it. The queftion between us is not of a very urgent nature the world would not go on lefs well with or without my antwer as with or without your book. I might, indeed, have difpenfed with returning you any answer at all; and I should have been warranted in fo doing, by the manner in which you have stated the debate, and by the opinion pretty generally received that, on certain occafions, and with certain perfons, the most noble reply is filence. You seem even to have been aware of this yourself,

* Dr. Priestley fent his pamphlet to Volney, defiring his answer to the ftrictures on his opinions in his "Ruins of Empires."See P. S.-Editor.

[blocks in formation]

confidering the extreme precautions you have taken to deprive me of this refource; but as, according to our French customs, any anfwer is an act of civility, I am not willing to concede the advantage of politeness-befides, although filence is fometimes very fignificant, its eloquence is not understood by every one, and the public which has not the leifure to analyze difputes (often of little intereft) has a reasonable right to require at leaft fome preliminary explanations; referving to itself, fhould the difcuffion degenerate into the recriminative clamours of an irritated felf-love, to allow the right of filence to him in whom it becomes the virtue of moderation.

I have read, therefore, your animadverfions on my Ruins, which you are pleafed to clafs among the writings of modern unbelievers; and fince you abfolutely inlift on my expreffing my opinion before the public, I fhall now fulfil this rather difagreeable task, with all poffible brevity, for the fake of economizing the

time of our readers.

In the first place, Sir, it appears evidently, from your pamphlet, that your defign is lefs to attack my book than my personal and moral character; and in order that the public may pronounce with accuracy on this point, I fubmit feveral paffages fitted to throw light upon the fubject.

You fay, in the preface of your difcourfes, P. xii, there are, however, unbelievers more ignorant than Mr. Paine; Mr. Volney, Lequinio, and others in France fay,' &c.

Alfo in the preface of your prefent obfervations, P. xx. I can truly fay that in the writings of Hume, Mr. Gibbon, Voltaire, Mr. Volney-there is nothing of folid argument: all abound in grofs mistakes and mifreprefentations.'

Idem, P. 38- Whereas had he (Mr. Volney) given attention to the history of the times in which Chriftianity was promulgated .... he could have no more doubt... &c. .. it is as much in vain to argue with fuch a person as this, as with a Chinese or even a Hottentot.'

Idem, P. 119- Mr. Volney, if we may judge from his numerous quotations of ancient writers in all the learned languages, oriental as well as occidental, must be acquainted with all; for he makes no mention of any tranflation, and yet if we judge from this fpecimen of his knowledge of them, he cannot have the smallest tincture of that of the Hebrew, or even of the Greek.'

And, at laft, after having publifhed and pofted me in your very title-page, as an unbeliever and an infidel; after having pointed me out in your motto as one of those fuperficial spirits who know not how to find out, and are unwilling to encounter, truth; you add, P. 124, immediately after an article in which you speak of me under all these denominations

"The progrefs of infidelity, in the prefent age, is attended with a circumftance which did not fo frequently accompany it in any former period, at least, in England; which is, that unbelievers in revelation generally proceed to the disbelief of the being and the providence of God fo as to become properly atheifts." P. 125.

Sa

So that, according to you, I am a Chinese, a Hottentot, an unbeliever, an atheist, an ignoramus, a man of no fincerity; whose writings are full of nothing but grofs mistakes and mifreprefentations.

Now I ask you, Sir, what has all this to do with the main question? What has my book in common with my perfon? And how can you hold any converse with a man of such bad connections?

In the second place, your invitation or, rather, your fummons to me, to point out to the public the mistakes which, I THINK, you have made with refpect to my opinions, fuggeft to me feveral obfervations.

ift. You fuppofe that the public attaches a high importance to your mistakes and to my opinions: but I cannot act upon a fuppofition. Am I not an unbeliever?

2d. You fay, P. 18, that the public will expect it from me: Where are the powers by which you make the public (peak and act: Is this also a revelation?

3d. You require me to point out your mistakes. I do not know that I am under any fuch obligation: I have not reproached you with them it is not, indeed, very correct to afcribe to me, by felection or indifcriminately, as you have done, all the opinions fcattered through my book, fince, having introduced many dif ferent perfons, I was under the neceffity of making them deliver different fentiments, according to their different characters. The part which belongs to me is that of a traveller refting upon the ruins and meditating on the causes of the misfortunes of the human race. To be confiftent with yourself you ought to have affigned to me that of the Hottentot or Samoyde favage, who argues with the doctors, c. xxiii. and I fhould have accepted it; you have preferred that of the erudite hiftorian, c. xxii. Nor do I look upon this as a mistake; I discover, on the contrary, an infidious defign to engage me in a duel of felf-love before the public, wherein you would excite the exclufive intereft of the spectators by fupporting the caufe which they approve; while the task which you impofe on me, would only, in the event of fuccefs, be attended with fentiments of difapprobation. Such is your artful purpose, that, in attacking me as doubting the exiftence of Jefus, you might fecure to yourself, by furprize, the favour of every Chriftian fect; although your own incredulity in his divine nature is not lefs fubverfive of Chriftianity than the profane opinion, which does not find in history the proof required by the English law to establish a fact: to fay nothing of the extraordinary kind of pride affumed in the filent, but palpable, comparison of yourself to Paul and to Chrift, by likening your labours to theirs as tending to the fame object, P. x. preface.

Nevertheless, as the first impreffion of an attack always confers an advantage, you have fome ground for expecting that you may obtain the apoftolic crown; unfortunately for your purpose I entertain no difpofition to that of martyrdom: and however glorious to me it might be to fall under the arm of him who has overcome Hume,

003

Gibbon,

Gibbon, Voltaire, and even Frederick II. I find myself under the neceffity of declining your theological challenge for a number of fubftantial reafons.

ift. Because, to religious quarrels there is no end, fince the prejudices of infancy and education almoft unavoidably exclude impartial reafoning, and, befides, the vanity of the champions becomes committed by the very publicity of the conteft, never to give up a first affertion, whence refult a spirit of fectarism and faction,

2d. Because no one has a right to afk of me an account of my religious opinions: every inquifition of this kind is a pretenfion to fovereignty, a firft ftep towards perfecution; and the tolerant fpirit of this country, which you invoke, has much less in view to engage men to fpeak, than to invite them to be filent.

3d. Becaule fuppofing I do hold the opinions you attribute to me, I wish not to engage my vanity fo as never to retract, nor to deprive myfelf of the refource of a converfion on fome future day after more ample information.

4th. And because, reverend Sir, if, in the support of your own thefis, you fhould happen to be difcomfited before the Chriftian audience, it would be a dreadful scandal; and I will not be a cause of fcandal, even for the lake of good.

5th. Because in this metaphyfical conteft our arms are too unequal; you fpeaking in your mother tongue, which I fcarcely lifp, might bring forward huge volumes, whilft I could hardly oppole pages; and the public, who would read neither production, might take the weight of books for that of reasonings.

6th. And because being endowed with the gift of faith, in a pretty fufficient quantity, you might fwallow in a quarter of an hour more articles than my logic would digeft in a week.

7th. Because again, if you were to oblige me to attend your fermons, as you have compelled me to read your pamphlet, the congregation would never believe that a man powdered and adorned like any other worldling, could be in the right against a man dreffed out in a large hat, with ftrait hair, and a mortified countenance, although the gofpel, fpeaking of the Pharifces of other times, who were unpowdered, fays, that when one fafts he must anoint his head and wash his face.t

8th. Because, finally, a dispute to one having nothing else to do, would be a gratification, while to me, who can employ my time better, it would be an abfolute lofs."

(To be continued.)

* Dr. Priestley has difcarded his wig, fince he went to America, and wears his own hair.-Editor.

"Moreover when ye faft, be not as the hypocrites of afad countenance for they disfigure their faces that they may appear unto men to faft; but thou when thou fafteft anoint thine head and wash thy face."-St. Matt, ch. vi. ver. 16 & 17.

DEFENCE

« AnteriorContinuar »