where it is pretended that the variety of fects live fo amicably together, and in fuch perfect obedience to the magiftrate, it is notorious, how a turbulent party joining with the Arminians, did, in the memory of our fathers, attempt to destroy the liberty of that republic. So that, upon the whole, where fects are tolerated in a ftate, it is fit they should enjoy a full liberty of confcience, and every other privilege of free-born subjects, to which no power is annexed. And to preferve their obedience upon all emergencies, a government cannot give them too much ease, nor truft them with too little power.

THE clergy are ufually charged with a perfecuting fpirit, which they are faid to discover by an implacable hatred to all diffenters: and this appears to be more unreasonable, because they suffer lefs in their interests by a toleration, than any of the conforming laity; for while the church remains in its prefent form, no diffenter can poffibly have any share in its dignities, revenues, or power; whereas, by once receiving the facrament, he is rendered capable of the highest employments in the ftate. And it is very poffible, that a narrow education, together with a mixture of human infirmity, may help to beget among fome of the clergy in poffeffion fuch an averfion and contempt for all innovators, as physicians are apt to have for empirics; or lawyers for pettifoggers, or merchants for pedlars but fince the number of fectaries doth not concern the clergy, either in point of intereft or confcience, (it being an evil not in their power to remedy), it is more fair and reasonable to suppose their dislike proceeds from the dangers they apprehend to the peace of the commonwealth, in the ruin whereof they muft expect to be the first and greateft fufferers.

To conclude this fection, it must be obferved, that there is a very good word, which hath of late fuffered much by both parties; I mean moderation; which the one fide very juftly difowns, and the other as unjustly pretends to. Befide what paffes every day in conversation, any man who reads the papers published by Mr. Lefley, and others of his ftamp, muft needs conclude, that if this author could make the nation fee his adverfaries under the colours he paints them in, we have nothing else

to

to do, but rife as one man, and destroy fuch wretches from the face of the earth. On the other fide, how fhall we excufe the advocates for moderation? among whom I could appeal to a hundred papers of univerfal approbation, by the cause they were writ for, which lay fuch principles to the whole body of the Tories, as, if they were true, and believed, our next bufinefs fhould, in prudence, be, to erect gibbets in every parish, and hang them out of the way. But I fuppofe it is prefumed, the common people understand raillery, or at least rhetoric; and will not take hyperboles in too literal a fense; which however in fome junctures might prove a defperate experiment. And this is moderation, in the: modern fenfe of the word; to which, fpeaking impartially, the biggots of both parties are equally intitled.

SECT. II.

The fentiments of a church-of-England man, with reSpect to government.

We cannot agree where to fix it, that there should

WE look upon it as a very juft reproach, tho' we

be fo much violence and hatred in religious matters among men who agree in all fundamentals, and only differ in fome ceremonies, or, at most, mere fpeculative points. Yet is not this frequently the cafe between contending parties in a ftate? For inftance, do not the generality of Whigs and Tories among us profess to agree in the fame fundamentals, their loyalty to the Queen, their abjuration of the pretender, the fettlement of the crown in the Proteftant line, and a revolutionprinciple their affection to the church established, with toleration of diffenters? Nay, fometimes they go farther, and pass over into each other's principles; the Whigs become great afferters of the prerogative, and the Tories of the people's liberty; these crying down almoft the whole fet of bifhops, and thofe defending them: fo that the differences fairly ftated, would be much of a fort with those in religion among us, and amount to little more than, who should take place, or go

in and out firft, or kifs the Queen's hand; and what are thefe but a few court-ceremonies? or, who should be in the miniftry; and what is that to the body of the nation, but a mere fpeculative point? Yet I think it must be allowed, that no religious fects ever carried their mutual averfions to greater heights than our state-parties have done, who, the more to inflame their paffions, have mixed religious and civil animofities together; borrowing one of their appellations from the church, with the addition of high and low, how little foever their disputes relate to the term, as it is generally understood.

I now proceed to deliver the fentiments of a churchof-England man, with refpect to government.

He doth not think the church of England fo narrowly calculated, that it cannot fall in with any regular fpecies of government; nor doth he think any one regular fpecies of government more acceptable to God than another. The three generally received in the Schools have, all of them, their feveral perfections, and are fubject to their several depravations. However, few ftates are ruined by any defect in their inftitution, but generally by the corruption of manners, againft which the beft inftitution is no longer a fecurity, and without which a very ill one may fubfift and flourish; whereof there are two pregnant instances now in Europe. The firft is, the aristocracy of Venice; which, founded upon the wifeft maxims, and digefted by a great length of time, hath in our age admitted fo many abuses, through the degeneracy of the nobles, that the period of its duration feems to approach. The other is the united republics of the States-General, where a vein of temperance, industry, parfimony, and a public fpirit, running through the whole body of the people, hath preferved an infant commonwealth, of an untimely birth and fickly conftitution, for above an hundred years, through fo many dangers and difficulties, as a much more healthy one could never have Aruggled against without thofe advantages.

WHERE fecurity of person and property are preserved by laws, which none but the whole can repeal, there the great ends of government are provided for, whether the administration be in the hands of one or of many. Where

any

any one perfon or body of men, who do not represent the aubole, feize into their hands the power in the last resort, there is properly no longer a government, but what Ariftotle and his followers call the abuse and corruption of one. This diftinction excludes arbitrary power, in whatever numbers; which, notwithstanding all that Hobbes, Filmer, and others, have faid to its advantage, I look upon as a greater evil than anarchy itself; as much as a favage is in a happier state of life, than a flave at the oar.

Ir is reckoned ill manners, as well as unreasonable, for men to quarrel upon difference in opinion; because that is ufually fuppofed to be a thing which no man can help in himself. But this I do not conceive to be an univerfal infallible maxim, except in thofe cafes where the question is pretty equally difputed among the learned and the wife. Where it is otherwife, a man of tolerable reafon, fome experience, and willing to be inftructed, may apprehend he has got into a wrong opi nion, tho' the whole courfe of his mind and inclination would perfuade him to believe it true: he may be convinced that he is in an error, tho' he does not fee where it lies, by the bad effects of it in the common conduct of his life, and by obferving thofe perfons, for whofe wifdom and goodnefs he hath the greatest deference, to be of a contrary fentiment. According to Hobbes's comparison of reafoning with cafling up accounts, whoever finds a mistake in the fum total, must allow himself out, tho', after repeated trials, he may not fee in which article he has mifreckoned. I will instance in one opinion, which I look upon every man obliged in confcience to quit, or in prudence to conceal; I mean, that whoever argues in defence of abfolute power in a fingle perfon, tho' he offers the old plaufible plea, that it is his opinion, which he cannot help, unlefs be be convinced, ought in all free states to be treated as the common enemy of mankind. Yet this is laid as a heavy charge upon the clergy of the two reigns before the revolution, who, under the terms of paffive obedience and non-refftance, are faid to have preached up the unlimited power of the prince, because they found it a doctrine that pleased the court, and made way for their preferment.

Y 30

preferment. And I believe, there may be truth enough in this accufation to convince us, that human frailty will too often interpofe itself among perfons of the holieft function. However, it may be offered in excufe for the clergy, that in the best focieties there are fome il members, which a corrupted court and miniftry will induftrioufly find out and introduce. Befides, it is manifeft, that the greater number of those who held and preached this doctrine, were mifguided by equivocal terms, and by perfect ignorance in the principles of government, which they had not made any part of their ftudy. The queftion originally put, and as I remember to have heard it difputed in public fchools, was this, Whether, under any pretence whatfoever, it may be lawful to refift the fupreme magifirate? which was held in the negative; and this is certainly the right opinion. But many of the clergy, and other learned men, deceived by a dubious expreffion, mistook the object to which paffive obedience was due. By the fupreme magiftrate is properly understood the legislative power, which in all governments must be abfolute and unlimited. But the word magiftrate feeming to denote a fingle perfon, and to exprefs the executive power, it came to pass, that the obedience due to the legislature was, for want of knowing or confidering this eafy diftinction, mifapplied to the adminiftration. Neither is it any wonder, that the clergy, or other well-meaning people, fhould fall into this error, which deceived Hobbes himfelf fo far, as to be the foundation of all the political miftakes in his books; where he perpetually confounds the executive with the legislative power; tho' all wellinstituted states have ever placed them in different hands; as may be obvious to those who know any thing of Athens, Sparta, Thebes, and other republics of Greece, as well as the greater ones of Carthage and Rome.

BESIDES, it is to be confidered, that when thefe doctrines began to be preached among us, the kingdom had not quite worn out the memory of that horrid rebellion, under the confequences of which it had groaned almost twenty years. And a weak prince, in conjunction with a fucceffion of moft proftitute minifters, began again to difpofe the people to new attempts, which