Education for Life. George Turnbull

whose favour is only to be gained by loving mankind justice and liberty” and this was duly inculcated upon us by dignities that wou’d indeed be venerable if this was their office & that with all the solemnities which now gain reverence & promote zeal for things of a very different nature. Then wou’d the publick beleif concenter with the very design of society; & all the zeal or warmth it coud produce wou’d be zeal & warmth for society & its happiness. Then wou’d the publick religion be the guardian of all the common entrests of mankind and our publick instructers faithful defenders of mankind’s best & most valuable priviledges. And this, My Freind, is the established religion I am pleading for. The only <14> useful publick leading either to religion or mankind.

      But to discuss this question about the state religion a litle more formally allow me to enquire whither it be practicable to alter a constetution so far as to introduce this happy nay only happy publick religion. And then for a further illustration of our argument to glan<c>e a litle more particularly at the bad effects that flow from other establis<h>ed creeds.

      “Machiavel that admirable Politician observes that even when one wou’d change the constitution of a state to bring the alteration into a likeing & the better with every ones satisfaction to maintain it he must keep the form or shaddow of the ancient customs. For thus the people who are not able to look further than the outward appearances of things seing the same officers, the same courts of justice, and other external formalities, are insensible of any innovation, and beleive themselves in possession of their old goverment tho indeed it be quite changed. The Romans knowing this necessity when first they lived free, having in place of one King created two consuls wou’d not suffer them to have more then twelve Lectors, because this was the number that attended the King. And when <15> the yearly sacrifice was made in Rome which cou’d not be done without the presence of the King that the people by the absence of a King might not find any

      [print edition page 86]

      deficiency in the old ceremonies; they created a head of that sacrifice whom they called the King Preist, who yet was in <a> lower degree than the high Preist. And thus the people was satisfied with that sacrifice and had no occasion by any default to miss their Kings; or wish them restored. And this rule says he they ought all to observe that wou’d cancell the old manner of living in a city and reduce it to a new & free course. All novalties some what move mens minds & therefore all reformers shou’d Endeavour to work their designed alterations as much as may be into the old mould & shape. Thus if the magistrates both in number durance & authority differ from the ancient at least they shou’d retain the same name.”²

      And certainly this policy is good whither the changes be designed in the civil or the sacred constitutions of a state. And when I have reflected upon this political observation; I have frequently been tempted to think that it wou’d not be altogether impossible to make considerable changes in a publick religion, as difficult as innovations of this sort are commonly accounted, if the thing was but managed with suitable wisdom & policy. Thus let us have reverent garbs, holy places, orders, times, and all the other external forms of a Mother Church; & I cou’d almost beleive, her doctrines instead of metaphysical unintelligible cant, or pernicious inflammatory po<i>son <16> might be most agreeably metamorphosed into good plain wholesome food & the greater bulk of her zealous votaries not perceive the change. And sure I am if the disguise of the vehicle took, & it got leave to ly in the Stomach till it was weel concocted & had but once mixed with the blood, it wou’d quickly make such a sweet alteration on the temper & constitution as wou’d sufficiently recomend it afterwards; & discard for ever all the former sour corrupting stuff which they wou’d then find to have been of the most noxious & disturbing quality; and to have produced the most distructive plagues and convulsions with which their body politick has ever been tormented.

      But oh! My Freind, in order to carry on this happy change how many things are necessary what a spirit of liberty & true philosophy what love

      [print edition page 87]

      of God & mankind what disenterestedness & publick affection must first possess & actuate the souls of those who move in the higher orbits of life! The secondary sort of mortals are but attendants to the first & higher orders and are intirely guided & influenced by their movements. Or at least they might easily be deceived by proper policy as children are by flattery & sweet meats to go to school or do any other thing their Parents and tutors think good for them. But who shall give generosity and honest boldness to those who must begin & carry on this blessed change. All I fear is reavery, My Freind. <17>

      Postscript

      The worthy & ingenious Mr Harrington in the second chapter of his third book of the art of law giving where he proposes prac<ti>cably the religious part of his model of goverment reasons thus for the necessity of a national religion.

      “There is nothing (says he) more certain or demonstra<ble> to common sense than that the far greater part of mankind in matters of religion give themselves up to the publick leading. Now a national religion rightly established or not coercive is not any publick driveing b<ut> only the publick leading. If the publick in this case not lead such as desire to be led by a party whe<re> would be the liberty of conscience as to the state? W<hich> certainly in a well ordered common weal<t>h being the p<ublic> reason must be the publick conscience. Nay where <would> be the liberty of conscience in respect of any party wh<ich> should so proceed as to shew that without taking their libe<rty> of conscience from others they cannot have it themse<lves?> If the publick refusing liberty of conscience to a party wou’d be the cause of tumult how much more a par<ty> refusing it to the publick? And how in case of such a tumult shou’d a party defend their liberty of conscience or indeed their throats from the whole or far greater par<ty> without keeping down or tyrranizing over the whole or greater party by force of arms? These things being now understood it is no wonder that men living like men have not been found without a government or that any government has not been found without a national religion. That

      [print edition page 88]

      is some orderly or known way or publick leading <18> in divine things & the worship of God.<”>³ And having thus proved a national religion to be necessary he proposes. “That the national religion be excercised according to a directory in that case to be made & published by act of parliament. That the national minestry be permitted to have no other publick preferment or office in the common wealth. And that no religion being contrary to or destructive of Christianity be protected by or tolerated in the state but that all other religions be tolerated & protected by the council of religion. And that all professors of any such religion be equaly capable of all elections magistracys preferments & offices in the common wealth according to the orders of the same.”⁴

      Mr Harrington very justly observes that in every state the greater part will always follow the publick leading in religion. And for this very reason nothing concerns the happiness of a government more than a right publick leading in religion. A publick leading there must be but then it ought to be of such a nature as is werth the following and by being followed wou’d be realy useful to the publick. And the question in politicks is to find out the publick leading in religion that would be the most advantageous and beneficial to the publick. Whatever establishments the majority are for the lesser party must needs submit

      But the question about the religion of the state is, what should be the publick concience or reason. Or what publick leading in religion is wisest & fitest. Whither upon ballance of all consequences conveniencies & unconveniencies considering the nature of religion liberty truth error <tra?>de science & every thing that ought to be the care of <the> publick governours it be not the best part the state <19> can act to make liberty of examination & honest morals the only publick leading. If the goverment should endeavour after a publick following in any particular articles of faith or if it be not rather their business to promote charity and universal benevolence and for this effect to ma<i>ntain a national ministry whose work it shall be to enstruct in wholesome morals leaving it to such as have opportunity & capacity to examine into matters of faith & speculation & to

      [print