tions, differences, and fluctuations, which we find so common, not only in the walks of society, but in the mind even of the self-same reasoning individual.'

Trace, next, the effects, which reason has produced in the minds, and on the conduct, of the men, who adopted its judgment, as the rule of their belief. No sooner had the reformers proclaimed what they called the "glorious charter of Christian liberty," than, straight every form of error sprang up under its captivating influence; and multitudes,—even many of the reformers themselves,-became infected with the poison of infidelity ;-insomuch that Melancthon, contemplating the awful scene, and considering the bearings of the licentious principle, exclaimed emphatically, “Great God ! what a tragedy have we not been preparing for posterity!"

1 Both the ancient and modern schools, of what we call "Philosophy," attest frequently the weakness, and imperfections, of human reason. Thus, for example, Plato says, "The plenitude of knowledge is found only in God. Man possesses merely a trifling fragment of it." But, it is asked-"Could not man, then, with this trifling fragment, contemplate steadfastly, and firmly seize, some truth or other?" "No," replies Aristotle; "just as certain birds cannot bear the brilliancy of the sun, so neither can man's reason support, without being dazzled, the bright beams of truth." (Met. L. 2.) "The only thing," says Pliny, "which is certain, is this,that nothing is certain; and that nothing is more wretched, or more proud, than man. Solum certum, nihil esse certi; et homine nihil esse miserius, aut superbius."

"Human reason," says Bayle, "is too weak to conduct man to any certain knowledge of the truth. It is a principle of destruction, not of edification. Its great property is to create incertitude, and to turn about incessantly from right to left, in order to perpetuate doubts." (Art. Manich.) "Every thing," says Voltaire, "within the circle of human things, and human sciences, only forms one empire of uncertainty, and doubt." (Let. à D'Alembert.) Whence, also, it is, that we find the schools of our philosophists doubting, contesting, or denying, every truth.

"In the catalogue of human errors, there is not, perhaps, one more glaringly absurd, than that, which substitutes the private judgment of the, every individual Christian for the authority of the church, in deciding religious controversies. It has no warrant in Scripture:-it is opposed to the plainest maxims of reason, and to the legal institutions of every civilised society. It is, itself, the very essence of all division, and separation: and as far as it extends, produces the same disorganisation in the church of

1

He tells us, that he traced its effects with horror, and trepidation; foretelling, at the same time, that no mounds, or barriers, would ever arrest the torrent of its devastations. (Ep. xiv. L. 4.) Ere long, appeared Socinus; when the virus of deism was found to circulate through every vein of the reformation. It is true, many rigid theologians expressed very feelingly their reprobation of the distressing evil. They deplored it sincerely. But, then, the misfortune was,-there existed no remedy for its correction. The tree bore its fruits; and though bad, and bitter, yet there were no means in Protestantism to hinder them from ripening. Thus, Germany, and Holland, became crowded with hosts of freethinkers. In France, Jurieu informs us, the Protestant ministers had long aimed at the destruction of Christianity itself: "Ils formoient,' he says, "dans les églises reformées de France ce malheureux parti, qui conjuroit contre le Christianisme." In this country, the case was perhaps equally deplorable. Indeed, it is a fact, that Voltaire, and the general body of our modern philosophists, very frequently acknowledge, that they have borrowed their chief doctrines of infidelity from the schools of Protestant England.'

But, let us, too, once again, cast our eyes upon the general state of the Protestant churches, at the present period,regulated, as they profess to be, by the genuine rule of the Reformation, the pure dictates, and suggestions, of enlightened reason. Why, what a spectacle do they not, all of them, every where, exhibit,-what a scene of confusion, anarchy, and disbelief! In this wise nation, for example, we God, as a revolution does in a commonwealth."-Dr. Doyle, Reply to Magee.

1 Voltaire frequently asserts, that the philosophy of the French was brought to them from England. "It is true," he remarks, "philosophy is greatly perfected in France; but still we owe it to the English, who have taught us to reason boldly."-Let. à Mad. du Deffand.

Madame De Stael makes nearly the same observations. "The abstract theory of impiety," she says, "was born in England, although the English are unwilling to admit its consequences. The French writers were not its discoverers: but they had the courage to make its application."-She elsewhere remarks, that " Locke's principles have been the chief cause of our modern infidelity."

possess above a hundred organised religions; whilst, perhaps, in each religion, no two individuals exactly believe alike.— In Germany, Baron Starke, Muller, and a multitude of other writers, inform us, there is not so much as one single Christian dogma, but what is publicly, and systematically, denied by the pastors of the Protestant churches.' In Geneva, it is positively forbidden to speak in the pulpit, or in the schools, of the Divinity of Christ, or of the Trinity, and original sin :— which, in other words, is forbidding the defence of Christianity itself. In France, the case is similar. There, with perhaps hardly an exception, the reformed pastors are acknowledgedly Socinians. But, in short, no where,-in no one Protestant church, is there so much as the slenderest shadow of Christian unity. No where,-in no part of Europe, does there remain little more than a mere remnant of the original tenets of the first apostles of the Reformation. There is no where a

"Protestantism is so degenerated, that little more than its mere name subsists, at the present day. At all events, it must be owned, that it has undergone so many changes, that, if Luther, and Melancthon, were to rise again, they would not know the church, which was the work of their industry. And this opinion of mine is conformable to that, which all those entertain, who are acquainted with the ancient doctrines of Protestantism, and with the actual state of its belief at the present day."— Starke, Entretiens.

2 Speaking of Geneva, Grenus, another Protestant, writes thus: "Les ministres de Genève ont déjà franchi la borne immuable. Ils ont donné la main aux Déistes, et aux ennemis de la foi. Ils rougissent dans leurs catéchismes de faire mention du péché originel, sans lequel l'incarnation du Verbe éternel n'est plus nécessaire. Ils attenuent tout ce qui, dans nos livres sacrés, tient, ou du mystère, ou du miracle. On donne à cette conduite le nom de système libéral. Cela s'appelle marcher avec le siècle."- Correspondence.

Thus, its present professor of theology attests, that "the Genevan confessions of faith have all died away, of illness, and old age.”—Idem.

It is in consequence of these innovations, the same writer observes, that, whilst multitudes of the Genevans are sinking into infidelity, multitudes also are returning to the pale of the ancient church. "You delight," he says, addressing the pastors of Geneva,-" you delight the Catholic clergy, who had long since foretold you, that the Reformation would lead to Deism. Certain it is, that these men have converted great numbers to Catholicity. And I know, that a still greater number are on the point of re-entering that church."-Idem.

minister, so unenlightened, or so bold, as now confidently to come forward, and preach the antiquated doctrines of a Luther, a Zuinglius, a Muncer, &c. It is their general boast, that better instructed now, and more liberal than formerly, they have cast away the absurd prejudices, and ignorances, of their early predecessors. Not, however, that these men are not equally real Protestants as were their predecessors. They are precisely as much so; be their belief, or even their unbelief, what they may: because Protestantism, according to that accurate definition of Dr. Burgess with which I have ushered in this treatise,-consists simply in the abjuration of Popery. [See Illustration, D.]

Wherefore, contemplating the effects, which the alleged rights of reason every where produce;-beholding the errors, the confusion, and infidelity, which it generates,-it becomes difficult to imagine, how such a principle can really have been instituted by the divine wisdom, to be the foundation of the Christian's faith. If, indeed, such is the fact, then also it is just equally certain, that the principle of religion is, at the same time, the very principle of anarchy, and falsehood; of doubt, and incredulity;-a proposition, surely, which is just as palpably absurd, as it is evidently false.'

1 What constitutes an awful circumstance in the erection of human reason into the tribunal of belief, is this,-that it thus becomes, not only the source of endless errors, but, moreover, their justification. For, if each one is the judge, and arbiter, of his own opinions,-if men are under no obligation of believing any doctrines, save such as are satisfactory to their own understandings,-then, also, it is impossible, with any consistency, to condemn them, either for the rejection of any truths, which to them appear absurd; or for the admission of any falsehoods, which, to their apprehensions, seem divine. The Protestant, who, in either case, condemns them, violates his own principles. He may say, indeed, to one of these unfortunate beings,-"The truths, which you reject, are, in my eyes, quite manifest, and certain." The man, at once, replies,-" It may, no doubt, be so: and the thing is very possible. You, therefore, do right to believe them. But, they do not appear so to me. To me, they appear, on the contrary, completely contradictory, and absurd: and as your reason says 'Yes,' so mine says 'No.' Now, reason for reason, and conviction for conviction, why is not my reason, and my conviction, as good as yours? But, at all events, if it be the fact,-as you allow it is,-that the judgment of each individual is the appointed guide, and arbiter, of

VII. The next principle that is cited, as another means of ascertaining the truth; and as the foundation of security,is sentiment,—that is, the feelings, and convictions, of a mind, satisfied with the supposed certitude of its own belief; and of the divinity of the sect, it follows. This too, is an argument, which, amongst multitudes of well-disposed individuals,— the ardent, above all, the simple, and illiterate,-is used incessantly; and used always with an expression of peculiar satisfaction, both as the proof, and confirmation, of their respective tenets, or religions, whatsoever these chance to be.

his belief, if this be so, why then allow me to follow mine, as you very properly think it right to follow yours."

"Let us suppose," says an elegant writer, "the Lutheran, the Calvinist, and the Socinian, met together in serious consultation,—each, reasoning, and deducing his inferences, from the same, favourite maxim,'the glorious light of human reason.' The Lutheran begins thus: 'I see very clearly, and my best judgment sanctions my conviction, that the Bible is a work dictated by the Holy Ghost,-except, indeed, certain books, which my understanding forbids me to admit. In like manner, I see also with equal certitude, that Jesus Christ is really present in the Eucharist;-not, however, as the Catholic is pleased to explain his presence; but as I understand it, myself.'-' How grossly,' exclaims the Calvinist, are you mistaken! for, I discover very plainly in the sacred volume, and my reason, my feelings, my best convictions, confirm me in the opinion, that Christ is not present at all in the Eucharist, either after the manner in which you explain the mystery, or in the way in which the Catholics understand it. I see manifestly, that He is not there in any way; and that the bread and wine are neither more nor less than the bare figure of his body and blood.'—' Well,' replies the Socinian to both of these believers, 'you are, both of you, pitiful blunderers ;both of you, alike unreasonable, and alike deceived. You, neither of you, understand the Bible. For, I discover evidently by the dictates of my reason, and by the strongest suggestions of my feelings, not only that Christ is not present in the Eucharist, after any manner whatsoever, but even that there does not exist any revealed mystery whatsoever,- neither Eucharist, nor Trinity, nor Incarnation; and that Jesus Christ is at most a great, and important Prophet.""

Thus it is, that, adopting the rule of Protestantism, and following exactly its directions, men deduce from it the most opposite, and contradictory conclusions; making it serve, as it equally does serve,-to sanction any error, or to set aside any truth. For, if men are allowed to judge as they please, they must also, of course, be allowed to believe as they please.

C