Education for Life. George Turnbull

coessentialities & the Lord knows what? If it is so we are most exceedingly beholden for this extroardinary & dissenterested charity for our souls. But we wou’d be much more so if our reverend tutors could let us see, if it be not among the things inuterable & that cannot yet be understood, how such a discipline can make us more ready for heaven & a state of happyness & perfection: Whither at our first entrance upon that hereafter life we are to be catechised by rott & to get our eternal assig<n>ments according to the strength of our memories & the darkness of our understandings; or if we are to have our chance as we have lucked upon the scheme of favourite or odious terms. Or what indeed is the rule by which we are to be tried & what connection there is between this parrot tutorage & the favour of a wise being; or happiness in a thinking or rational state. If they would but condescend thus far to <7> instruct us in the reasonableness of their soul:policy; we might all perhaps rest satisfied with their authority and become most humble & submissive pupills. But

      [print edition page 82]

      as for those whose misfortune it has been once to have begun to think a litle for themselves they must till these knotty questions are solved remain in a very indifferent opinion either of their design or of the heaven & Diety they have in wiew. For how any sort of constitution that never makes men the more wiser or the more knowing should be of use to recomend us to the favour & approbation of the best & wisest beings hereafter: Or why in any good and reasonable goverment persons shou’d be preferred honoured or rewarded according to any other rule than their temper disposition or ability to serve & to do good are things those will never be able to digest who have ever exercised their reasons so far as to have formed just notions of goodness & wisdom just & unjust.

      Thus, my Freind, it is pretty evident that the attempting to instruct the lower herd of mankind which ever will be the greater part in dark & intricate systems of atributes, predestinations, imputations, & satisfactions is of no use either with regard to this present or any future life. And for this reason the bussiness of goverment is not to provide for that sort of catechetick and instruction: but to encourage learning & true philosophy by all proper methods & constitutions that so there may be the best means of adwancing all the fine arts & sciences, & of educating such a convenient number in all the useful parts of knowledge as may be fit to serve the publick in these spheres <8> of life which require such a preparatory institution.

      It is indeed necessary to the publick happiness to have a sort of publick instructers: but then their business must be not to explain upon any particular system of speculations; but to instruct in the principles & offices of honesty & vertue. That lectures of this moral sort may be adjusted to all capacities is plain from experience which afoords many instances of a much better understanding in morals among the illiterate part of mankind than those who of late years have been tutored in universities & instructed in school philosophy as it is called. And that these lectures would be of publick use is very evident; good morals being the only necessary basis of society & the publick happiness. but as for schemes of divinity or philosophy different creeds and persuasions the nature of society does not require that the publick instructers should have any further medling with them than to recomend peace & love to all sectories, as the cheif & only thing necessary; as that which is agreeable above all things to the supreme being & that alone

      [print edition page 83]

      can entitle to his favour either here or hereafter. And if this was the publick religion to enculcate universal love and charity it would be the Protectrix of Philosophy liberty politeness & honest morals. Nor would any freedom that cou’d in the least promote the happiness of society or the entrests of vertue and reason be in the least restrained by it. <9>

      ’Tis true the beleif of a God cou’d not according to this scheme be publickly impugned & so far some may think the Philosophical licence wou’d be cramped. But what harm this confinement wou’d do I cannot see as much a lover of the reasoning liberty as I am. For if there were no other publick fetters upon philosophy than this there wou’d be sufficient place for free disquisitions of that sort in private closets. And in the mean time the belief of a principle the most reasonable as well as confortable in it self wou’d be applyed not as a meer political tool to base and mean ends; but to purposes truly worthy of it the encouragment of vertue & philosophick liberty & the repressing of a malign unsocial persecuting spirit. And thus the best of principles would be made the Patroness of the best of constitutions; & produce the most happy & beneficial fruits. But while other religious tests are framed, particular creeds pick’d out, and all nonconforming schemes marked with odium, & given over by publick authority to holy violence & fury it is impossible that ever <10> true piety or real religion can be promoted. But on the contrary a false superstitious zeal must do more mischeif to mankind than can possibly arise from any other cause.

      It is needless to insist upon the horrible ravage & havock that false religion has in all ages produced. For it is plain from the nature of things<.> suppose we had no histories to look into that while the belief of Deity is not applyed to the encouragment of mercy justice gratitude love & all that is good & social; but on the contrary to inflame men’s mind<s> with a false mischevous fancy of a divine regard for whims & sounds about which men while they are men will ever differ<.> it were much better for society that there were no knowledge of Diety at all in it; but men were left to the simple workings of these natural affections with which wise providence has very aptly fur<n>ished us. Sure I am if we can have any just notions of goodness or true majesty the Diety would much rather that they never thought of him than that they should by false & corrupt conce<i>ts concerning <11> his glory or honour be made to imagine that they can please & gratify him

      [print edition page 84]

      in contending with violence & rage over the bowels of all that is benign or social in his nature for any speculations whatsoever. What can it be to a good & wise diety if a man cultivates the social & generous affections which make him a natural & useful member of his kind; whither he prefers the blue or the green colour; or whither he likes a flute or an organ best. And what, Prythee My Freind, are the notions miscalled religious about which sectaries have hated & persecuted one another in all ages; but meer speculations that have as litle connection with vertue & sociality. Wou’d any man that merits the caracter of wise and good put the happiness of humane society in competition with empty insignificant trifles or even with his own favourite taste and fancy?

      Heus age responde, minimum est, quod scire laboro:

      De Jove quid sentis? Estne ut praeponere cures

      Hunc cuiquam? Cuinam? Vis Staio? An scilicet haeres?

      Quis potior Judex, pueris quis aptior orbis?

      Per: sat 2d¹ <12>

      A just conception of the Deity is certainly the most strong incitement to great & good actions: & <a> never failing source of rational comfort to an honest generous mind conscious of its own worth and integrity. And therefore it is a great pity that due care shou’d not be taken to make this motive as universal as possible in its influence. It is plain from the history of mankind that they will alwise be influenced by some religious beleif. And it is as true that this cheifly depends upon the publick leading. And for this reason the principle art in the modelling of society is to make this beleif of the best & most beneficial sort. And how ever difficult it may be to root out any religion when it is become old and has been long established & revered: And indeed I beleive nothing is more so: Yet I cannot see why in the original forming of things a good beleif might not be as easily planted & made as universal in its influence by the publick authority as a bad one. And my enquiry with you, My Freind, is about the religion of the state.

      [print edition page 85]

      Or what shou’d be the religious part of the constitution in a <13> weel constructed policy. A great deal of mecanical zeal there must be in every society and that just of the complexion of the publick faith whatever it be. And if the publick faith were good this mecanical zeal wou’d do as much good as now for the most part it does harm. If the beleif of the state were “That there is a God of infinite goodness who loves