Page images
PDF
EPUB

THE

MONTHLY REVIEW,

For JANUARY, 1780.

Art. I. Lectures on the universal Principles and Duties of Religion and Morality, as they have been read in Margaret-Street, CavendishSquare, in the Years 1776 and 1777. By the Rev. David Williams. Printed for the Author, and fold by Dodfley, &c. 2 vols. 4to. Subfcription 11. 1 s. 1779.

R. Williams is a gentleman of fo fingular a cast of cha

MR racter and principles, that we fhould be tempted to pay a

particular attention to him on that account; fuppofing he were even more deficient, than we imagine him to be, in qualities of higher importance and eftimation.

The introduction to this curious performance opens with a definition of infanity. We did not immediately perceive the Author's defign in fetting off fo oddly. We doubted not, however, of fome defign, at the bottom: Mr. Williams feldom fays or does any thing, even in the moments of the pureft fimplicity, without fome reafon.

It appears then, that Mr. Williams gives his Readers a definition of infanity, for the fole purpofe of convincing them that he himself, however extraordinary, is not mad. The inftitution of a form of public worship (fays he) on those principles which arife immediately from nature, in a community where almost every thing in morals, religion and polity, are decided upon by authority:the fcfolution of a man to be the author of it, who doth not covet fufferings, and has not the difpofitions of a martyr:-the idea of leaving the plan to fucceed by its merits in a country where every thing is rendered fuccessful by money or protection:-thefe have been urged as proofs of infanity: and perhaps they may be. But the application of them to me hath been owing to an unacquaintance with the following facts, which imply the hiftory of an inftitution of public worship on the univerfal principles of morals. · ́ VOL. LXII.

B

• I quitted

I quitted the customary offices of the profeffion to which I was educated, for reafons which have been already affigned [viz. in the Appendix to the fecond edition of Eflays on public Worship]. But either becaufe religion is effential to the human mind; or because the habits of a profeffion are, like all others, very difficult to be fufpended-I could not reft fatisfied out of my employment. On intimating my fituation, I had hopes given me of the moft flattering encouragement. But on feeing my plan extended beyond the limits of the Chriftian church [i. e. feeing the plan was purely a deiflical one-as the Author fhould have faid in plain language], they were withdrawn, and my papers were put up: for I had none of the views of Reformers and Apostles: and it was my intention not to engage, until it appeared to be for the fervice and pleasure of others, as well as my own.'

This confeffion is a very frank one: and we give him full and unreserved credit for the truth of it. The children of light are not always wife in their generation. But Mr. Williams, who had renounced all pretenfions to their character, was refolved not to act on their plan. The heroic paffion of foulfaving (as Lord Shaftesbury ironically termed it) mingled not with his principles, and had no fhare at all in the inftitution in Margaret-Street.' Aos T8 5w- Give me where to ftand (as Mr. Williams might be fuppofed to fay)- But I will have folid ground or I will lock up all my intruments. I have not the wings of the Apoftles. I cannot work by their faith; nor live on their hopes.'

But though Mr. Williams did not chufe to venture his bottom on the fanciful flocks of reformation, nor to launch his veffel, like a visionary Apostle, into the air;-though he wished like a prudent man of this generation, to ferve and please himfelf as well as other people; yet he recoils at the idea of having his plan injuriously degraded,' by feeing it claffed amongit the unadvised projects of an individual for his own emolument and advantage.'

6

After reprobating the defigns of fanatics and miffionaries, in their attempts to reform churches and kingdoms, he tells his Readers, that his business hath not any thing in common with fuch defigns. The liturgy on the univerfal Principles of Religion and Morality, was firft intended as a gratification and pleasure to a small number of perfons who could worship on no other; to be publicly used, on the fuppofition that it would afford the fame gratification and pleafure to great numbers in the fame circumftances, and bring me fome recompenfe for my trouble in ufing it.

When the defign was made public, the expectations entertained by fome, and the apprehenfions of others, were equally

ill-founded and extravagant. Nay, the opinions formed on the fteps which have been hitherto taken, are not the moft judicious. Experiments may be to the public as fallacious as fables: they often occafion as many errors, and are always expected to prove too much. If the Inftitution in Margaret-Street were only to prove, that a liturgy may be drawn up, on principles which all mankind acknowledge, and may be ufed without offence, even to fectaries and bigots, it would deferve confideration and refpect. A bishop quitting his diocefe, and attended by both Houfes of Parliament, in the fame experiment, might have given it more eclat, but not more certainty. In the prefent cafe, it is a difcovery made by a private man, at fome rifque, and at fome expence. It holds up to the world a fact which hath at all times been deemed incredible; the importance of which to morals and policy may be understood, when men raise their thoughts from the elementary to the intellectual world; and the benefits which may be enjoyed in future by perfons who might not have undergone the apprehenfions, anxieties, and inconveniencies by which it hath been afcertained.

That good men of all nations and all religions:-that believers in Mofes, Chrift, and Mahomet, Free-thinkers, Deifts, and even Atheists, who acknowledge beneficent principles in nature, may unite in a form of public worship, on all the great and most important truths of piety and morality, can no more be a queftion: for it is demonftrated; not by the arts of logic, or the declamations of oratory in books, but by a ftated, public fervice, to which any man may have recourfe for fatisfaction.'

Mr. Williams proceeds to ftate the use of his discovery for the benefit of preachers and politicians. The principal ufe arifes from the freedom of communication, which, as he observes, conftitutes the bonds by which all affociations, all clubs, and all parties, are held together.' In the illuftration of this profound remark, the Author hath thrown out hints which feem to mean fomething; but we acknowledge ourselves unable to get to the bottom of them. And in truth they must be very deep!-quite out of common reach, fince feveral perfons,' he informs us, eminent for their knowledge in the present science of politics, have not understood him.'

For our parts, we fee nothing very extraordinary in this Gentleman's experiments or difcoveries. Whether it be, that our thoughts are not yet raised from the elementary to the intellectual world,' or that we have yet fome little predilection remaining for Chriftianity, or from whatever caufe it may arife, we prefume not to determine; but we muft acknowledge, that we cannot see the great utility of this project (confeffedly a Utopian one) of uniting the most heterogenous parties, from the orthodox believer down to the fpeculative Atheift. No plan of

[blocks in formation]

!

at least

worship, however vague, equivocal, or comprehenfive, can afford a link to join fuch hoftile extremes: or provide them with

a loop or hinge to hang their doubts on,' while they repair, in all the naked nefs of pure nature, to offer their united facrifices at the fame altar, and make their refponfes to the fame priest. It is contrary to the nature of man-it is contrary to the express defignation both of the Jewish and Christian religion and notwithstanding our Author's experiments and difcoveries, we are at length fully convinced, after mature obfervation, that his project is a trial of mere curiofity, and chiefly affects as a novelty.

Mr. Williams's capital miftake lies in fuppofing, that what holds good in fociety at large, holds equally good in a religious community; and that nothing ought to bound the one which doth not limit the other: but he concludes too haftily, from premifes that will be granted by very few, whether believers or infidels.

In the fupport of civil life, the moft oppofite profeffions of religion may be united for the common good by univerfal principles. Here, even the Atheist may be a ufeful member. He may be fuch on the ground of felf-love. Society hath no farther. claims on him, than it may poffibly be for his own intereft to obey. The laws of civil life ought then to be as comprehenfive as the good of fociety will admit: and Government acts a wife, as well as a benevolent part, when it applies all its members to the beft ufe, and makes even the most diffimilar profeffions adminifter to the general welfare and peace of the community. These maxims of policy were unknown to, or even unheeded by our forefathers. They imagined, that toleration, inftead of lefening, would encrease diffentions in the ftate:-that good fubjects, and good churchmen meant the fame thing, and could not be disunited without the ruin of both characters. To preferve their alliance, the Act of Uniformity was paffed. A fair trial was made of this project. We know how it fucceeded.

As to Mr. Williams's project-which he hath now extended, by a fingular act of grace, to the utmoft extreme of infidelity, we do not, on the most ferious reflection we can form of it, fee its abfolute neceffity, or even its fingular utility, on the broad ground of civil polity. The ftate hath faved all the trouble and by mutual indulgence, dependence, and obligation, allowed and ftrengthened by Government, all the ends of political life are fufficiently fecured and provided for: Now thefe, we apprehend, are Mr. Williams's fole objects.

e;

Religion, that derives its capital motives from the Omnifcience of the Deity, and ends not in a momentary glow of admiration, excited by a view of the works of nature, but looks

forwards

forwards to a future ftate, can be no part of an inftitution which includes Atheists in the number of its votaries.

Mr. Williams acknowledges, that it is not material to his purpose, whether the Atheist exclude the word, God, from his religious dialect, and afcribe all we fee to nature, neceflity, or chance it is the character only of neceflity, of chance, or of the deified forms of human imagination, which can affect us.'

[ocr errors]

Undoubtedly words, in themselves, are of little confequence. It is the ideas they excite that are principally to be attended to. Now, we afk, What idea the moft fpeculative and metaphyfical Atheist can be fuppofed to aflociate with the word, CHANCE? Or on what ground it can be imagined he should pay any adoration to the character of Chance? Or what effect the contemplation of it can poffibly have in improving his mind and morals? How, we afk, can the Atheist, who afcribes the productions of the universe, and all the operations of nature, to Chance, regard this original caufe, as an object of delight, gratitude, and virtuous refolutions,' (as Mr. Williams expreffes himfelt) or with any intention to act, in his little fphere, in fome degree, according to the great principle he hath been contemplating -To adore Chance-to be grateful to Chance, are folecifins thocking to common sense, and which cannot be reconciled, even by the ingenuity of Mr. Williams. Perhaps he may tell us, that we do not understand him: but, in our view, nothing can throw a ftronger ridicule on his all-comprehenfive inftitution, than by fuppofing a number of perions allembled in Margaret Street, to join in devotion and thanksgiving-fome to God-fome to Nature-a third clafs to Neceffity, and a fourth to Chance :--fome to a Principle allperfect and all-wife: and others, to a Being whofe works they imagine are not always as they might be: and are not ordered according to their ideas of perfect wifdorn and goodness.' Yet Mr. Williams is ready to accommodate them all and does not fee any good reason why thofe fceptics, who are ready to find fault with the ways of God, fhould not yet adore him: for, putting himself in their fituation, and fuppofing that he had inbibed their principles, yet (fays he) as it is wonderful that things fhould be as well as they are, and that in the fum of existence, there fhould be so much happiness as to make it defirable this would claim my relpectful attention-and this attention would be all the religion of which I fhould be capable. "Now this is worfhipiul fociety,"-as Shakespeare, the true "pricft of nature," humorously fings:- where folks may adore God, or adore without a God: where they may afcend on Platomic pinions to the * το καλον

[ocr errors]

"The firit good, firit perfect, and first fair:”.

* See Williams's Motto.

B 3

or

« EelmineJätka »