"the moral law," nothing, sure, could be of greater use in securing that obedience than the practice here enjoined. Our Inquirer, however, is of a different opinion, and " very "much questions whether his Lordship could have fallen 66 upon any passage in the Old Testament, which relates "at all to his subject, that would have been less favour"able to his argument." Who shall decide, &c.?-The Bishop goes on, "As they (the Jews) were commanded "this, so it is obvious how much the constitution of their "law was adapted to effect it, and keep religion ever in "view." Upon which the Inquirer remarks, "It was then "very ill, or at least very unwisely done, to abrogate that "law, whose constitution was adapted to so excellent a 66 purpose." Let us first see what may be offered in defence of the Bishop, and then consider what is to be said in answer to his opponent. The purpose for which the Mosaic constitution was established was this: to preserve, amidst a world universally addicted to polytheism and idolatry, the great doctrine of the Unity of the Divine Nature, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made. As a means to this end, the Israelites were not only to be kept separate from every other nation; but, the better to ensure such separation, they were to be constantly employed in a multifarious ritual, which left them neither time nor opportunity for deviating into the superstitious observances of their Pagan neighbours. And this, I suppose, may suffice for vindicating the Bishop's assertion, that "the con"stitution of the Jewish law was adapted to keep religion "ever in view." But the Jewish law was not only adapted to this end; we are next to observe, that the end itself was actually gained. For though it be too notorious to be denied, that the Jews did not always confine their religious homage to the God of Israel, but polluted the service, due to him alone, with foreign worship; yet, even in their worst defection, it should be remembered, they never totally rejected the true Jehovah; and after their return from captivity, they were so thoroughly cured of all remaining propensity to the idolatrous rites of heathenism, as never again to violate their allegiance to the God of their fathers. It appears then, that, in consequence of the Jewish separation, the principle of the Unity was in fact preserved inviolate among that people till the coming of Christ. When the Mosaic constitution had thus attained its end, and mankind were now prepared for the reception of a better covenant, the law expired of course; the partition wall that had divided the Jew from the Gentile was taken down, and all distinction between them lost, under the common name of Christians. And this may suffice to shew, in opposition to our Inquirer, that it was both very well and very wisely done to abrogate a law, when the purpose for which the law had been enacted was accomplished. Page 444. 1. penult. Were religious reflections forced oftener upon their minds.] "According to the Bishop's doctrine," then, says the Inquirer," it should be not only good policy, but wholesome 66 discipline, to force men in England to come to church, " and in France to go to mass." And again, "If externals "have this virtue to enforce religious reflections, it must "be right to compel those who are indisposed to such re"flections, to attend these memorials." Yes; granting that the sense of the passage in the Charge is not shamefully perverted, and that we are to understand the Bishop here to speak of external force and compulsion. Whereas, by "religious reflections forced," is plainly meant no more than religious reflections oftener thrown in men's way, brought more frequently into their thoughts, so as to produce an habitual recollection that they are always in the Divine presence. Page 445. 1. 11. To instruct the people in the importance of external religion.] "The importance of external religion," the Inquirer remarks, "is the grand engine of the Papists, which "they play with the greatest effect upon our common people, 66 "people, who are always soonest taken and ensnared by "form and show; and, so far as we concur with them in "the principle, we are doing their work; since, if exter"nals, as such, are important, the plain natural consequence is, the more of them the better." He had the same reflection once before: "If true religion cannot be "preserved among men without forms, the consequence "must be, that the Romish religion, having—more fre66 quent occurrences of forms, is better than other reli"gions, which have fewer of these occurrences." To this argument I reply, Nego consequentiam. There may be too much of form in religion, as well as too little: the one leads to enthusiasm, the other degenerates into superstition; one is Puritanism, the other Popery; whereas the rational worship of God is equally removed from either extreme. Did the Inquirer never hear of the possibility of having too much of a good thing? Or does he suppose, with the late historian of Great Britain, that all religion is divided into two species, the superstitious and the fanatical; and that whatever is not one of these, must of necessity be the other? |