Page images

The answers to the Profeffor are on inferior points.

In the following chapter are introduced upon the ftage ARISTOTLE, CICERO, GROTIUS, and HOOKER, as Authorities against Mr. LoCKE,' and being oppofite to the Lockian fyftem of government.' His principal view in this, it feems, is to contradict what he calls an affertion of Mr. Locke, that mankind are driven into fociety, and to fhew, that thefe great men thought fociety was natural to men. And this, he is conftantly remarking to us, is a difference between the Lockians and himfelf of the highest importance. Nay, he every where speaks of this fuppofed idea of Mr. Locke, as a fundamental of his fyftem, without which it is annihilated; and includes all his difciples, without exception, as maintaining the fame pofition. The Lockians, fays he, p. 124, maintain, that mankind, have a capacity for becoming members of a civil fociety;-but no natural dere or inclination for entering into fuch a ftate of life.' And again, p. 378, The difciples of Mr. Locke,' fays he, differ from the reit of mankind, ancient and modern, in two effential points. I. They often maintain, in exprefs terms, and the tenor of their argument always doth, that mankind have no natural bias, no innate instinct or propecfity towards civil fociety, as an end or object.' — --- Mr. Locke's own expreffion is, that men are DRIVEN into fociety.But why driven? And who drives them? Their own wants and fears, he tells us. For, it seems, that after having deliberated on the matter, pro and con, men at laft refolved to abandon the charms of native liberty, in order to guard against thofe dangers and inconveniencies, which they found to be unavoidable in their natural and folitary ftate. Hence, therefore, it neceffarily follows, according to the Lockian idea, that government itself, even in its beft eftate, and when beft adminiftered, is no other than a neceffary evil, which muft be endured, for the fake of efcaping from fuch other evils as are still more intolerable.'



[ocr errors]

This is the Dean's affertion. We have already noticed how true it appears to be, with regard to Dr. Priestley and Major Cartwright. We will now examine its veracity in respect of Dr. Price. In his Difcourfe addreffed to a Congregation at Hackney, Feb. 21, 1781, p. 9, he delivers himself thus; "We find ourfelves," fays the Doctor, "fo made, that we neceffarily feek fociety, and cannot exift happily out of it. There is reafon to think this must be the cafe with all intelligent creatures; for it is not to be conceived that any of them can want focial affections, or be entirely indifferent to all focial connections and intercourfe. An existence abfolutely folitary muft, one would think, be dreary and melancholy. But whatever in this refpect may be true of intelligent creatures in general, we know, that what I am obferving is true of ourselves. The principles of our_natures lead us to unite, and to form ourselves into focieties. In confequence of this, we gain many pleasures and advantages which we could not otherwife enjoy. Some of our nobleft affections,

[ocr errors]

which would otherwife lie dormant, are drawn forth into exercife; and the ftrength of a whole community is employed in the defence and protection of every particular member of it.". Can words be ftronger? And might not our Author have known, that so strongly did the Doctor feel this social paffion in his own breaft, that he publifhed fome years ago an exprefs difcourse, to fhew the probability of its remaining with mankind beyond the grave. Thus far, it feems, our Author is very unfortunate; for unfortunate, indeed, it is, to be convicted of palpable mifreprefentations. Let us now fee, whether it be really TRUE, that Mr. Locke himfelf, denied this natural propensity to fociety fo ftrongly afferted by his difciple Dr. Price?

In the 15th Section of his 1ft Book, he fays, "To those that fay, there were never any men in the ftate of nature, I WILL NOT ONLY OPPOSE THE AUTHORITY of the judicious Hooker Eccl. Pol. lib. 1. § 10. where he fays, The laws which have been hitherto mentioned, i. e. the laws of nature, do bind men abfolutely, &c. therefore to supply thofe defects and imperfections which are in us, as living fingle and folely by ourselves, WE ARE


LOWSHIP WITH OTHERS: this was the CAUSE of men's uniting themselves at first in politic focieties: but 1, moreover, affirm, &c."- Again, Sect. 77. "GOD having made man fuch a creature, that in his own judgment it was not good for him to be alone, put him under ftrong obligations of neceffity, convenience, and INCLINATION to drive + him into fociety [diftinguished by Italics in the original], as well as fitted him with understanding and language to continue and enjoy it. The first fociety [again printed in Italics] was between man and wife, which gave beginning, &c." And lastly, Sect. 101. after flating the two objections made to the doctrine of an implied Original compact, he proceeds thus, "To the first there is this to

See p. 402, where Hocker is quoted as an authority against Locke. delivering these words, "Two foundations there are which bear up public focieties; the one, a natural inclination, whereby all men defire fociable life and fellowthip; the other, an order expressly or fecretly agreed upon, touching the manner of their union in living together." Mr. Locke himfelf could not furely have wished for a tronger fupport!

But this is not the paffage alluded to, when our Author, as above, tells us, that Mr. Locke's own expreffion is, that men are DRIVEN into fociety. For that, as quoted p. 9, is from the 127th Section, and runs as follows: "Thus mankind, notwithstanding all the privileges of the fate of nature, being but in an ill condition while they remain in it, are quickly driven into fociety." Who could not confute either Locke, or Newton, or Euclid, or the four Evangelifts themfelves at this rate?


anfwer, That it is not at all to be wondered, that history gives us but a very little account of men, that lived together in the ftate of nature. The inconveniences of that condition, and THE LOVE AND WANT OF SOCIETY, no fooner brought any number of them together, but they prefently united and incorporated, if they defigned to continue together."

Is not a love of fociety a natural bias, inftinct, or propenfity? And does not this want of fociety, evidently fignify a natural want, alias a natural bias, inftinct, or propenfity?'-if the Dean likes thofe words better than Locke's own. Are these the premises from whence, as the Dean fays, it neceffarily follows, according to the Lockian idea, that government itself, even in its beft eftate, and when beft adminiftered, is no other than a neceffary evil?' p. 25. 41. 379. But this false and malignant conclufion was, it should feem, neceffary to be drawn at all events; in order to ferve that caufe in which the reverend Author has thought fit to embark.

We fhall now leave our Readers to judge, whether the Dean of Glocefter, after all his arrogant boaftings, has confuted the Lockians, or himself; and to thofe who may propofe to read his curious performance, we fhall only recommend, that they allo examine, FOR THEMSELVES, thofe particular treatifes of the Lockians which he refers to; as the above fpecimens of his candour and fidelity to the truth, may poffibly convince them that it is abfolutely neceffary; efpecially when they take notice, that the words laft quoted from Mr. Locke are to be found in the very fame chapter with the first feven quotations made by himself in the opening of the work,-which we now difmifs.


M. C.

ART. II. Conclufion of the Account of the Bishop of Worcefler's


Nour Review for Auguft, we gave an account of the fecond volume of these Sermons, and now proceed to the third; in the firft fermon of which, his Lordship difcourfes from Ifa. 1. 11. Behold, all ye that kindle a fire, that compass yourselves about with parks; walk in the light of your fire, and in the sparks which ye have kindled: this fhall ye have of my band, ye shall lie down in forrow. The Prophet's purpofe in the text, we are told, is to inculcate this great truth, that Revelation is the only fure and comfortable guide in matters of religion. To fecond this purpose, fo energetically expreffed by the Prophet, his Lordship endeavours to fhew, that all the sparks of human knowledge, on this important fubject, are but imoke; and all the fire, which human genius and induftry can kindle at the altar of human reafon, ice itfelf; when compared with the light and heat of Divine Revelation.

The fecond fermon well deferves the attentive perufal of unbelievers. The Preacher fhews, that an inquirer into the truth of the most rational, and the pureft of all religions may be prejudiced against it by a double pride, by the PRIDE OF REASON, and the PRIDE OF VIRTUE. The words of the text are- If the Gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are left. If what Dr. Hurd advances in this fermon be true (and we fee no reafon to doubt it), the man who rejects the Gofpel may tremble for himself, when he confiders that his REASON, nay his VIRTUE, may be the inftrument of his ruin, and may learn to fufpect the power and influence of his groffer paffions, when he fees that even his more refined ones may corrupt his judgment, and betray him into infidelity.

In the third fermon, his Lordship explains and illuftrates those words-Be ready always to give an answer to every man that afketh you a reafon of the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear; and, in the fourth, he inquires into thofe circumflances, in the difcourfes of our Saviour, which give real weight and dignity to the obfervation in the text-that never man spake like this man.

In the fifth and fixth fermons, the Preacher confiders two very remarkable circumftances in the conduct of our Saviour towards the Jews. He came to inflruct them in the principles of a new religion, and to convince them of its divine authority. Yet, to fuch of them as were leaft enlightened by his doctrine, he generally addreffed himself in parables; and before fuch as were backward to admit his pretenfions, he was fparing of his miracles. Now the contrary of this conduct, it is faid, might be expected; that he fhould have explained himself in the clearest manner to the uninformed Jews; and fhould have multiplied his miracles for the conviction of the unbelieving. His Lordfhip fhews, in a very clear, diftinct, and fatisfactory manner, that our Saviour's conduct, in either cafe, was fuitable to his character and miffion.

The fubject of the feventh fermon is, one fingle inflance of that indifference which the Apoftles fhewed to their own interefts, viz. Their total difregard of human applause in preaching the Gofpel. The words of the text are, we preach not ourselves, but Chrift Jefus the Lord. Men, we are told, may be faid to preach themselves, in two refpects: when they fhew a folicitude to fet themselves forth with advantage; first, as to their moral character: and fecondly, as to their intellectual. When men would give an advantageous idea of their moral character, they ufually exprefs this defign, either, 1. By reprefenting or infinuating their Superior worth and virtue: or, 2. By fuppreffing or palliating what may render it fufpected: or, lailly, By dwelling on fuch topics, and jn fuch a manner, as may give occpfion to others to think well of their


moral qualities. His Lordship tries the Apoftolic writings by each of these marks.

Confider, fays he, thofe apologifts for themfelves, who have left us memoirs of their own lives. You will find, in most of thefe, an ambitious difplay of thofe moral virtues, by which they defire to be diftinguished. They lofe no opportunity of fetting forth the purity of their defigns, and the integrity of their practice. The rett may do this with lefs pomp and ollentation; they may preserve a modesty in the language, and a decent referve in the air and caft of their narration. Still the fame purpose is difcoverable in all these writers, whether they openly proclaim, or nicely fuggeft and infinuate their own importance. When men are actuated with a ftrong defire of appearing in the faireft light to others, it unavoidably breaks out in fome fhape or other, and all the indirect ways of address cannot conceal it from the intelligent obferver.

We have a great example in two, the most extraordinary persons of the Pagan' world, I mean, XENOPHON, and JULIUS CAESAR. Thefe admired men thought fit to record their own acts and atchievements; and have done it with that air of neglect and unpretending fimplicity, which has been the wonder of mankind. Yet, through all this apparent indifference, every one fees the real drift of thefe elaborate volumes: every one fees, that they are compofed in fuch a way as to excite the highest opinion, not of their ability in the art of war only, but of the juftice, generofity, benevolence, in short, the moral qualities of their refpective authors. It evidently appears, that they defigned to be their own panegyrifls; though none but fuch men could have executed that defign in fo inoffenfive and fuccefsful

a manner.

But now, if we turn to the facred writers, we fhall find no traces of their preaching themselves, in this respect. These plain fifhermen tell their fory unambitiously, and without art; or, if we call it art, it is fuch an one as Greece and Rome had never been able to put in practice. No exaggerations of what may be thought praife-worthy in themselves: no oblique encomiums on their own best qualities or actions: no complacent airs in the recital of what may reflect honour on their own characters: no ftudied referve and refinement in the turn and language of their history.

If there be any virtue, which we may fuppofe them more than commonly anxious to arrogate to themselves, any moral quality in which they would thine out to the obfervation of others, what more likely than an unfhaken fidelity to their Mafter, that Mafter, whom they made it their glory, their fole glory, as the Text fpeaks, to preach? Yet they are fo far from refpecting their own credit in this particular, that they relate their own infirmities and miscarriages; they acknowledge how wavering and precarious their faith was; nay, they tell us, that, in his laft diflreffes, they all forfook him, and fled.

This laft circumftance reminds us of the next artifice which men employ to fet off their moral character, that of suppressing or palliating whatever may render it fufpeded.

As accomplished perfons, as the great men before mentioned, were, can we doubt that many exceptionable steps were taken by


« PreviousContinue »