chiefs arise, they are to be restrained, and repelled. -Error is certainly not to be punished, but the mischief arising from any erroneous opinion may be restrained.

But Dr. Balguy's explanation of tests seems well worthy of attention: they are only evidence to shew whether a person is qualified or disqualified for an office; capable of doing the duties of it, or incapable. A Quaker is disqualified from being a General; by his religious principles he is incapable of doing military duty; before therefore he is admitted to that office, he is asked to declare, by words or by actions, whether he is qualified or not. It is no punishment to exclude a man from an office, for which he is not qualified :-any more than to exclude a man from preaching to a very large congregation, because his voice is so weak, that he cannot be heard; or because he cannot speak the only language, which the congregation understands: or to exclude a blind man from being a guide.

The only difficulty here is, to see how every one, who is not of the established Church, should be disqualified for every office. Whoever by his principles would, in all probability, exercise a considerable part of his authority, otherwise than in enforcing the Laws of the State, is unfit to hold that authority; more especially if he exerts it against the views of the State :-besides, in the case supposed, a man

not

Leaving churches where they were (Sect. 4.) cannot be punishing. It may be said, indeed, it is not punishing them as religious, but it is as politic persons, as citizens: this is as it happens exclusion from offices is often a great privilege; heavy fines are paid to avoid offices; and dissenters should have all advantages as well as disadvantages, of freedom from state-authority: one might conceive a rational dissenter to make an handsome speech; as we are more at leisure, we will help the general cause of Religion,' &c. &c.

f Charge 3d. p. 214.

not only disqualifies himself by his principles, but also others, whom he in a manner obliges to exert power, given for the public good, in opposition to him.

11. If difficulty should arise from the same persons composing two societies, it must be recollected, that there is no man, who has not very frequently occasion to act in different capacities: the Father may be a General, and the Son an inferior officer; nay, the Son might be the commander, and the Father the subaltern.-A son may be a judge, or a spiritual pastor, and his father a criminal, or a plaintiff, or a parishioner:-and a number of men acting socially may likewise act in two different capacities as a family, the members of which are partners in commerce.

Bishop Warburton shews, more regularly, that two such Societies as Church and State have really two wills, and can contract with each other; this is easy to be conceived, when each is represented by a few; as Parliament and Convocation (if we may use those terms as general) are never likely to be the same persons:-and it is very improbable, that either Church or State should act otherwise than by Representation.

12. I will not pursue this subject farther; only I will observe, that, in reading controversy on it, some specious arguments will be met with, wearing a general form, which are inapplicable to practice in any known state of things: so clearly impracticable,

a Warb. All. B. ii. Chap. v. The Illustration of Lord and Rector of a Parish, might shew how naturally temporal and spiritual power might combine in reforming men and keeping them in order; this combination may be in one person; but, if the alliance be made by two distinct persons, it is one which seldom fails, when it takes place, to effect a great improvement in manners; improvement continuing for several generations.—And it is almost the only method of reforming a country Parish.

cable, that those, who use them, would not think of practising them: I mean, not universally; but only just so far as their particular views or prejudices required. Dr. Balguy has exposed this inconsistency with great success" :-and it is apparent in the determinations of those, who had overturned our established Church, on principles destructive of all establishments, in order to establish their own.

I do not mean to accuse any one of wilful inconsistency many religious persons and parties deceive themselves; and some allow, and some half allow, of pushing a weak argument as far as it will go: but it is proper we should be aware of the fact, because it will let us into the particular extent and meaning of many general expressions and arguments. The affectation of being free from Government and Laws, in some religious societies and assemblies, is one thing, which shews the inconsistency I speak of. Quakers are supposed (as I have been told) to speak without order or rule, though the speakers sit upon a distinguished bench. An eminent preacher tells his hearers, "your congregations have order, but no authority. I fancy, if he was to harangue them from the pulpit in the dress of a Newmarket Jockey, they would find some authority to turn him out of the ministry. The mode of governing need not be written on tables, while the effects of it are unquestionable. If people

are

See p. 221. 273. 277, 278. Blackstone, 4to. vol. IV. p. 53. See Warb. Alliance, Postscript, p. 6. and Alliance, p. 288. d Mr. Robinson on Tests, Oct. 30, 1788, at Cambridge, p. 12. top.

e At a town, near which I have resided, Mr. T. a dissenting Minister, as I have been credibly informed, was in some way punished for burning a cat to death in an oven, to satisfy his wife, who fancied herself bewitched by Mrs. G. cf the same town, and thought nothing but such a sacrifice of a Cat could dispel the charm.-I think Mr. T. was of the same class of Dissenters with Mr. Robinson.

are orderly without authority, the end of authority is answered: but such people are unlike what we have met with; and, as reasoning, such as the present, is built upon experience, we cannot reason about them: we have seen children obey Parents in a free and unconstrained manner; but this implies very great authority, instead of none at all.

13. Permit me, by way of clearing up what I have delivered, (perhaps with some degree of embarrassment,) to read to you Bishop Warburton's own account of the contents of his alliance; and that part of Dr. Balguy's 6th Sermon, which treats of the effect of the intervention of the Magistrate on religious society; as also that part of his third Charge, which relates to freedom of opinion and freedom of worship.

14. We will close the subject by a few remarks on Mr. Robinson's "Discourse on Sacramental Tests, delivered at Cambridge, Thursday, October 30th, 1788, at a general meeting of Deputies of the Congregations of Protestant Dissenters in the County of Cambridge."d

15. It may not be improper here, to take a short review of the manner, in which the theory here described has been observed in practice, in our own country.

Heresy was once considered as a crime worthy of death; the writ de hæretico comburendo, has been frequently

2 Postscript to Alliance, p. 8, 9.

P. 212-222.

b P. 100-105.

d This Section consisted of an Examination of Mr. Robinson's Discourse, and of the authorities to which he referred, particularly Scripture and the works of Augustin: no part of this examination had been written, except some short notes on the margin of the discourse. The Examination took up at least two Lectures, of an hour each: I had the satisfaction to be afterwards informed, that it had answered its purpose. Mr. Davy of Caius College was so obliging, as to give me his approbation in writing.

frequently carried into execution, against Papists by Protestants, against Protestants by Papists, and by Protestants against each other: two Arians suffered under it in the time of James 1st, and the laws authorizing it were not finally repealed till the 29th of Charles the 2d.—the idea had probably been taken from the Jewish Law, without allowance for difference of circumstances: and, considering how indefinite the notion of Heresy was left, the cruelty of the punishment was great: under the Mosaic Law, blasphemy, &c. were definite; under the English, any thing might be Heresy as parties changed:severe punishment was necessary amongst Idolaters, &c.-not now.

From the Reformation to the Revolution, there seems to have been no such principle as letting every man enjoy his own opinions, and worship his Maker according to the dictates of his own judgment and conscience. The whole design was, to make Englishmen of one Religion; but, to say nothing of illiterate sects, two powerful Parties counteracted, as far as they were able, this design; the Papists and the Puritans: the Papists were discontented at the Reformation's going so far; the Puritans were very zealous to carry it farther.-Yet these two parties were not exactly upon the same footing: the Papists owned a foreign power superior to their own King; the Puritans were real English subjects, and beneficed English Protestant Clergy, though they held, that the King ought not to be reckoned the Head of the Church: they were therefore to be treated in a different manand the difference between them is still more striking

ner;

e of this, Book i. Chap. xi.

f I suppose, all Englishmen had been of one Religion; and probably some became Protestants in such a manner, as to raise expectations, that all would become so, if the Protestant religion once prevailed.