Chapter 5

Pecock or Sebonde.

368 In its mode of treatment it has been compared to Bacon’s _Wisdom of the Ancients_.

369 In the _De Veritate_.

_ 370 De Relig. Gentil._, 15. 199. App. to Relig. Laici, 2, 3.

371 There is a curious record in his journal (_Autobiography_, p. 171-3) of an earnest prayer for guidance on the subject of the publication of his first book _De Veritate_, which he no doubt saw was opposed to popular belief.

372 Lechler, _Geschichte des E. D._ p. 64.

373 Because they bear, as he thought, the great test of being self-evident. It will be remembered that the _clearness_ of an idea was the test of the innate character of it in Descartes’ system (_Principia Philosophiæ_, § 10). Such ideas are those which would be regarded in Kant’s system as necessary forms of thinking, and in Cousin’s as belonging to the impersonal reason.

374 Hobbes (1588-1679). The _Leviathan_ is a philosophy of society, studied as the development of the individual. He first treats of the individual, book i.; then the commonwealth, book ii.; then the Christian commonwealth, book iii.; and the kingdom of error, book iv.; borrowing the idea from Augustin’s _De Civ. Dei_. The brevity of the notice in the text prevents the possibility of doing justice to the grandeur and to the good sense shown in many respects in Hobbes’s works. He was answered by Cudworth (_Intellectual System_); Cumberland (_De Leg. Nat._); Dr. Seth Ward; Bramhall, (1658); Archbp. Tenison, 1760; and Lord Clarendon, in his _Survey of Leviathan_ (1676). For an explanation and criticism on his philosophical principles, see Ritter, ch. vi. 453 seq.; Tennemann, b. x. 53 seq.; Lewes’ _History of Philosophy_; Morell’s Id.; Hallam, b. ii. 463 seq.; and on his religious opinions, Leland (ch. iii.), and Lechler (p. 67-107).

375 Part i. c. 12.

376 Part iii. c. 39.

377 Part iii. c. 33.

378 Coward (1657-1724 circ.) was a physician, who wrote in 1702 _Second Thoughts on Human Souls_, apparently intended to disprove the existence of spirit and natural immortality, but not of immortality itself as a divine gift from God to man, though opponents disbelieved him in this assertion. The list of answers written is given in Chalmers’s _Biographical Dictionary_ under _Coward_. The house of commons in 1704 condemned the book, and caused it to be burned.

379 Spinoza’s view of religion is the part suggested by Herbert, and his view of the relation of the state to religion that suggested by Hobbes.

380 See Note 21 (p. 413).

381 C. Blount (1654-93) wrote the _Anima Mundi_, 1679; _Life of Apollonius Tyana_, 1680; _Oracles of Reason_, 1695. (See Macaulay, _History of England_, vol. iv. 352.) He was refuted by Nichols (1723) _Conference with a Theist_. See Lechler (114-124), and Leland, ch. iv.

382 The Licensing Act of 1662 concerning the press was allowed to expire in 1679. When James II. came to the throne (1685) the censorship was renewed for seven years; and again in 1693 was revived for two years, at which time it finally expired. See _North British Review_, No. 60, (May 1859.)

383 As proved by his work in 1705, _The Deist’s Manual_.

384 The _Oracles of Reason_ (1693) consists of sixteen papers in several letters to Mr. Hobbes and others, by Ch. Blount, Gildon, and others. Papers (No. 1-4) are a defence of T. Burnet’s archæology, or on subjects cognate to it. No. 5 is concerning the deist’s religion; 6 on immortality; 7 on Arians, Trinitarians, and Councils; 8 that felicity is pleasure; 9 of fate and fortune; 10 of the original of the Jews; 11 of the lawfulness of marrying two sisters successively; 12 of the subversion of Judaism, and the origin of the Millennium; 13 of the auguries of the ancients; 14 of natural religion; 15 that the soul is matter; 16 that the world is eternal.

385 No. 14.

386 No. 5.

387 Attention had been called a little earlier to the consideration of the first principles of religion, by the Platonizing Cambridge party of More and Cudworth, followers partly of Descartes. See Burnet’s _Mem. of his Times_, i. 187; and the Rev. A. Taylor’s able introduction to the edition of _Simon Patrick’s Works_, Oxford 1858, (p. 28-42).

388 On Locke’s philosophy see Ritter _Chr. Phil._ vii. 449-534; Cousin’s _Hist. de Philos. au 18e siècle_, ch. 15-25; Morell’s _Hist. of Phil._, vol. i. p. 100 seq.; Lewes _Id._: Lechler, 154-179. His work the _Reasonableness of Christianity_ typified the tone of the writers on the Christian evidences for the next half century.

389 For this and the next named controversy, see Lathbury’s _Non-Jurors_ (1845), ch. iv., and _History of Convocation_, ch. 12-14.

390 On the Bangorian controversy (1717, 18), see Hallam’s _Constitutional History_ (vol. ii. 408). A list of the pamphlets which were written during the controversy was made by the antiquarian Thomas Hearne, and is printed in Hoadley’s works (3 vols. fol. 1773). See vol. ii. 381, and the continuation in vol. i. 689.

391 Toland (1669-1722). He was born an Irish catholic, turned protestant, wrote his first deist book, 1696; fled for refuge to the court of Hanover, and found protection there; wrote political pamphlets, and lived abroad till near the close of his life. His chief theological writings are, _Christianity not Mysterious_, 1696; _Amyntor_, or Defence of the Life of Milton, 1699 (on the Canon); _Nazarenus_, 1718; _Tetradymus_, 1720; _Pantheisticon_, 1720, sive formula celebrandæ sodalitatis Socraticæ, 1720, a parody on the Christian service books. These are collected in his _Miscellaneous Works_ (1726). (Vol. i. contains his translation of the Spaccio of Bruno.) He was answered by John Norris, Archbp. Synge, and Dr. Peter Browne; by S. Clarke, and by Jones in his work on the Canon. Consult Leland’s _View of Deistical Writers_, Lett, iv.; Lechler (180-210), and (463-73), and note on p. 193.

392 In his _Christianity not Mysterious_.

393 In his _Amyntor_.

394 For these facts see the Memoir of Toland prefixed to his _Miscellaneous Works_, and also Chalmers’s _Biographical Dictionary_.

395 This opposition increased Toland’s bitterness, for, in the following year, 1698, in publishing a Life of Milton, and taking occasion to disprove that Charles I was the author of the Ikon Basilike, he threw out hints of similar forgeries in works attributed to the apostles. The hatred of churchmen was further increased by this work.

396 See Wilkins’s _Concilia_, vol. iv., 631; Burnet’s _History of his own Times_, vol. iv. 521; Lathbury’s _History of Convocation_ (1842), p. 288 seq.

397 Sect. i.

398 Sect. ii. ch. 1.

399 Id. ch. 4.

400 Ch. 1, 2.

401 Sect. iii. ch. 2.

402 Ch. 3.

403 Ch. 5.

404 Cfr. his _Apology for Christianity not Mysterious_ 1697, and also a letter from Mr. Molyneux to Locke (Locke’s Works, ed. 1723, vol. iii. p. 566), quoted in the memoir (p. 17) prefixed to Toland’s _Miscellaneous Works_.

405 In his Life of Milton (1698) pp. 91, 92, he had alluded to works falsely attributed to Christ and the apostles. This was attacked by Blackhall as if intended against the canonical scriptures, and was defended by Toland by the publication of the _Amyntor_, a catalogue of books mentioned by the fathers as truly or falsely ascribed to Jesus Christ, his apostles, &c. The learned Pfaff calls it “insignem Catalogum” (_Diss. Crit. Nov. Test._ ch. i. § 2).

406 A Memoir of Lord Shaftesbury (1671-1713), has been lately published (1860). His chief work was the _Characteristics_. On his religious views see Leland ch. 5 and 6; Lechler 243-265; and on his philosophical views, see Ritter vii. 535 seq.; Eichhorn, _Geschichte der Literatur_, vi. 424 seq.

407 On his moral system, see Mackintosh’s _Dissertation on Ethics_, p. 158-166; and on Butler’s ethical system, and its relation to Shaftesbury, see the same work, p. 171 seq.

408 Works, vol. ii. _Inquiry concerning Virtue. Charact._ ii. 272 etc.

409 The readings of the text had been disturbed by Courcelles (1658), and by Walton in his Polyglot, which caused an alarm, on which see Hody (_De Bibl. Text._ 563 seq.), but not widely till Mills, 1707. Mills’ readings were attacked by Whitby in 1710, and the arguments of the latter were afterwards turned by Collins against Revelation.

410 In 1699. Daillé’s criticism on the Ignatian Epistles (1666) had shown similar sagacity to that afterwards displayed by Bentley, and bore to his inquiries the same relation which those just named in the test bore to those of Mills.

411 Collins (1676-1729). His works were on _Immortality_ (1707, 8) in the Dodwell controversy; _Freethinking_, 1713, refuted entirely by Bentley in the _Phileleutherus Lipsiensis_. (See also Dr. Ibbot’s Boyle Lectures, 1713, where the general subject is treated.) On _Necessity_, 1715. The _Grounds of the Christian Religion_, 1724 (occasioned by Whiston’s work on Prophecy); answered by bishop Chandler, Samuel Chandler, T. Sherlock, and Moses Lowman; _Scheme of Literal Prophecy_, 1727, in answer to Chandler. See Leland, ch. vii., and Lechler, 217-240. Henke’s _Kirchengeschichte_, vi. s. 29.

412 In the two works named below in the text.

413 E.g. that of Buckle in _History of Civilization_.

414 P. 71.

415 P. 5-27.

416 P. 32, &c.

417 P. 56.

418 P. 86.

419 P. 92.

420 P. 100, &c.

421 Part i. § 1-5.

422 Id. § 6, 7.

423 Id. 11.

424 Id. (8-10.)

425 Two other writers, Mandeville and Lyons, have been omitted; Mandeville (_Fables of the Bees_, 1723), because his speculations did not bear directly on religion; Lyons, because his work is not important. In 1723 he published the _Infallibility of Human Judgment_, in which he analysed the mind, and applied the results of his analysis to the first principles of natural religion, and to discredit the evidences and doctrines of revealed. It bears more resemblance to Toland and Chubb than to any other writers, but is a feeble work, interesting only as showing the prevalence of psychological inquiries, and the tendency to examine psychologically the subject of religion.

426 E.g. Some of those in Germany, see Lect. VI and VII.

427 In the _Moderator_, or _controversy between the author of the Grounds, &c. and his reverend opponents_, 1727. (Woolston’s Works, vol. v.)

428 Woolston, 1669-1733. His works are collected in five volumes, with a life prefixed. His pamphlets on Miracles were refuted by bishops Pierce, 1729, Gibson, and Smabroke, by Lardner, and by Sherlock in the Trial of the Witnesses. On Woolston, see Leland (Let. 8), Lechler (289-311), Henke, vi. 49.

429 Sydney Sussex.

_ 430 A Free Gift to the Clergy, or the Hireling Priests challenged_, 1722, (_Works_, vol. iii.).

431 See Memoir prefixed to his Works, pp. 5 and 22.

432 In Discourse iii.

433 Disc. i. Div. i.

434 Strauss (_Leb. Jes._ Introd. § 6) thinks that his bitterness manifests that he did not.

435 Disc. iv, and _Defence_, sect. i.

436 Voltaire, _Œuvres Crit._ vol. xlvii. pp. 346-356.

437 Swift’s Poem on his Death, _Works_, vol. xiv. p. 359.

438 The latest Pastorals of Gibson are not only against Woolston, but other deists also, such as Tindal.

439 His friends would have found money for the fine; but Woolston could not find securities for his good behaviour if released.

440 Matthew Tindal, (1657-1733), a follow of All Souls’ college, wrote in 1706 _The Rights of the Christian Church asserted_, probably suggested by Spinoza’s writings, to show that the absolute subjection of the church to the state was the only safeguard for public happiness; and in 1730, _Christianity as old as the Creation_, which was answered by Conybeare 1732, Leland 1733, and by Waterland. The reply of the latter was attacked by Conyers Middleton. On Tindal, see Lechler, 326-341; Leland, Lett. 9; Henke, vi. 57.

441 Ch. i-vi.

442 Ch. iii.

443 Ch. iv.

444 Ch. v.

445 Ch. vi.

446 Ch. ix-xii.

447 Ch. xiii. p. 258 seq.

448 P. 272 seq.

449 Ch. xiv.

450 See the remarks in _Essays and Reviews_, 1860, p. 272.

451 Morgan died 1743. His chief work was the _Moral Philosopher_, 1737, with two volumes more in reply to opponents. It was refuted by Leland, and the controversy was carried forward in Tracts which are described in Leland’s _Deists_, vol. i. Lett. 11 and 12. See also Lechler, 370-390; Henke, vi. 70.

452 Vol. i. p. 86, 96. vol. ii. § 1.

453 P. 145 seq.

454 Vol. i.

455 Id. p. 272, &c. ii. § 6.

456 Id. § 7.

457 Id. § 10.

458 T. Chubb (1679-1747), of whom a brief memoir was published 1747. He was the author of various tracts, of which a list is given in Darling’s _Cyclopædia Bibliographica_, 1852. The account of Chubb’s views given in the text is brief, partly because of their similarity to others previously named, and partly because the author has been able to see only very few of Chubb’s works. But they are explained in Lechler, p. 343-356, and Leland, ch. 13. Chubb’s earlier writings seem to be Socinian, his later deistical. His best known works are, _A Discourse concerning Reason_, 1731; _the True Gospel of Jesus Christ_, 1739; and _Posthumous Works_, 2 vols. 1748.

_ 459 Posthumous Works_, i. 287.

460 Id. i. 292.

461 Id. ii. sect. 6.

_ 462 Posthumous Works_, ii. 152.

463 Id. 177, &c.

464 Id. i. 22.

465 Another work was published anonymously in 1742, entitled _Christianity not founded on Argument_, supposed to be written by the younger Dodwell, son of the learned nonjuror. Its aim is to show that Christianity never propagated itself by argument, but that the evidence of it depends upon a personal illumination of each person who believes it. The work was supposed to be a satire on Christianity. If earnest, it marked the truth that emotional causes are intertwined with intellectual in the formation of belief. See Lechler, pp. 411-421; Leland, Lett. xi. The book of Jasher, published in 1751, is a forgery, written probably by some deist (Horne’s _Introduction_, vol. ii. part ii. p. 142. ed. 8).

466 He was imprisoned in the King’s Bench, and kept from starvation by money from the benevolent archbishop Secker. He died in 1768. See Lechler, pp. 313-22; Leland, ch. x.

467 Bolingbroke (1678-1751). See Schlosser’s _History of the Eighteenth Century_, vol. i. ch. i. § 3 (transl.); Lechler, pp. 396-405; Leland, ch. 22-34.

468 On Pouilly, see Sir C. Lewis, _Inquiry into the Credibility of Roman History_, vol. i. ch. i. p. 5, note, Pouilly published in 1722 his _Dissertation sur l’Incertitude et l’Histoire des quatre premiers siècles de Rome_. (See _Mém. de l’Academ. des Inscr._, vol. ix.) Beaufort followed out the same line of inquiry in 1738. The two writers are considered to have laid the basis of the modern historical criticism of ancient history.

469 They are chiefly, _A Letter on one of Tillotson’s Sermons_ in vol. iii. of his works; the _Essays_, in vols. iii. and iv.; viz. Essay 1 on Human Knowledge, (2) on Philosophy, (3) on the rise of Monotheism, (4) on Authority in Religion; and Fragments in vol. v.

470 Vol. iii. _Letter on Tillotson_, also _Letter to Pouilly_.

471 Vol. v. No. 57, 58.

472 Cfr. _Remusat’s Angleterre au 18__e__ Siècle_ i. 22, for remarks on Bolingbroke’s influence on Pope. The following lines of Pope exactly express Bolingbroke’s philosophy:

“The universal Cause Acts not by partial, but by general laws, And makes what happiness we justly call, Subsist not in the good of one, but all.” (_Ep._ iv. 35.)

473 Instances are to be found in Leland, who discusses his opinions at great length. The reader who compares Leland’s quotations with Bolingbroke’s works will perhaps think that he has pressed their meaning rather far; but further consideration will show that he has correctly expressed Bolingbroke’s spirit and purpose.

474 Letter on _Tillotson_.

475 Ch. iv. 328.

476 Ch. iv. 227, 8.

477 Ch. iv. 405, 272.

478 The history of Apologetik passes through the same phases, and when it devotes itself to the later forms, becomes of less general interest, and is more simply literary; which illustrates the fact that the later doubts are of a much less practical and more recondite character than those hitherto named.

479 Hume (1711-1776). For his philosophy, see Tennemann, _Geschichte_, xi. 425; Ritter, _Christliche Philosophie_, viii. b. 7. ch. ii.; Cousin, _Histoire de la Philosophie Moderne_, _Leçon_ xi.; Morell, _History of Philosophy_, i. 338; Lord Brougham’s _Preliminary Discourse to Paley’s Natural Theology_, p. 248. For his religious opinions, see Leland, _Lett._ 16-21; Lechler pp. 425-34. His views on miracles were answered by Paley, Bp. John Douglas, Campbell, and Chalmers.

480 Works, vol. iv. _Inquiry Concerning the Human Understanding_; Essay xi. on Providence and Future Life; Essay x. on Miracles.

481 The miracles connected with the Abbé Paris were defended in _La Verité des Miracles de M. Paris_, by C. de Montgéron, 1745. See concerning them, C. Butler’s _Church of France_, (_Works_, v. pp. 135-142); Bp. John Douglas’s “Criterion by which the true miracles contained in the New Testament may be distinguished from those of Pagans and Papists;” Tholuck’s _Vermischte Schriften_, i. 183.

482 E.g. by Professor Powell, in _Essays and Reviews_.

483 This line of thought concerning the necessity of establishing the antecedent probability of the fact, in order that the evidence may be logically convincing, is adopted by two writers of very different opinions, by Mr. Mansel (Essay in the _Aids to Faith_, § 18-23), and Mr. J. S. Mill (_Logic_, vol. ii. b. iii. ch. 25. § 2). The distinction between wonder and miracle is allowed by Dean Lyall (_Propædia Prophetica_); and Mr. Penrose (_The use of Miracles in proving a Revelation_). Cfr. also Doederlin’s _Instit. Theol. Christ_, § 9, 10.

484 See _Aids to Faith_, Mansel’s Essay, § 22.

485 There follows hence another peculiarity in reference to miracles; viz., that we require an interpreting mind to explain them. This is the reason why so many thoughtful men believe that the outburst of fire when Julian tried to rebuild the Jewish temple, and the wonder of the thorn in the history of Port Royal, were nothing more than natural wonders. If the final cause be considered to have been sufficient in these cases to warrant divine interposition, at least there was no interpreter to explain them, nor any revealed message to be taught. It must be conceded that this trait is wanting in some miracles recorded in scripture, but not in those which are wrought to attest a revelation, those which we use in proof of a special message from the unseen world. Werenfels (_Opusc. Theol._ 1718, _Diss._ v.) has given tests for the discrimination of miracles which are quoted by Van Mildert (Boyle Lect. II. p. 584).

486 Cfr. Dean Trench’s remarks on the apologetic value of miracles, (_Notes on Miracles_, Introd. ch. vi). In the same work will be found an excellent and interesting account of the various assaults made on the argument from miracles. He classifies the assaults as follows: (1) the Jewish, (2) the heathen (Celsus, &c.), (3) the pantheistic (Spinoza), (4) the sceptical (Hume), (5) that which regards miracles as such only subjectively (Schleiermacher), (6) the rationalistic (Paulus), (7) the historico-critical (Woolston, Strauss). With Dean Trench’s remarks. Compare also Pascal, _Pensées_, part ii. art. 19. § 9; Lyall, _Prop. Proph._ p. 441; Dr. Arnold’s _Lectures on Modern History_, pp. 133, 137.

487 E.g. Lessing, &c. Reimarus, &c. See Lect. VI.

488 Butler (1692-1752). The Analogy was published in 1736. The reader’s attention is invited to the excellent edition of it by bishop Fitzgerald (1st ed. 1849), and the able memoir and criticism which precede. Mr. Bartlett has also written a memoir of Butler. Cfr. also Blunt’s Essays, p. 490 seq.

489 For example, some of the physical proofs of immortality in part i. ch. i. are weakened by the discoveries of physiology; and those in favour of the miraculous character of creation, in part ii. ch. ii. would be regarded as of small value by those who hold the hypothesis either of the transmutation of species, or of their occurrence according to a law of natural selection. Some things of a different kind in Butler, which need correction, are pointed out in Fitzgerald’s edition. See e.g. p. 184, note.

490 This is the objection taken by Tholuck (_Vermischt. Schrift._ p. 192, 3.) A somewhat similar objection is quoted by Fitzgerald from Mackintosh, Introd. p. 49, upon both of which he offers criticisms. A kindred objection has been stated (probably by Mr. Martineau) in the _National Review_, No. 15. Jan. 1859, (pp. 211-214,) and another by Miss S. Hennell in _the Sceptical Tendency of Butler’s Analogy_, 1857, in which she traces doubt in Butler’s life as well as teaching. Others may be found stated and examined in bishop Hampden’s _Philosophical Evidence of Christianity_, 1827. (pp. 229-291.)

491 This conjecture is given by Fitzgerald in the life prefixed to his edition of the Analogy (p. 36), where also two passages are quoted, one from Foster, and the other from Berkeley, which certain passages of Butler resemble. It would be interesting to know whether the work of Dr. Peter Browne on _Things Divine and Natural conceived of by Analogy_, 1733, had come under Butler’s notice. Many similar passages, as well as references to the sources of the difficulties which Butler answers, are given in the notes to Fitzgerald’s edition. Mr. Pattison also (_Essays and Reviews_, p. 286) has expressed an opinion that Butler was much assisted by the works of his predecessors. The probability is, that in all great works their authors assimilate an amount of information current in the age, as well as create new material. This was probably the case even in works like Euclid’s Geometry and Aristotle’s Natural History and Organum.

492 The value of Butler’s argument is fully discussed in the admirable work on Butler by bishop Hampden before quoted, which is the best existing commentary on the author: second to it are Chalmers’s _Natural Religion_ and _Bridgwater Treatise_.

493 Hampden’s _Phil. Evid._ (131-228.)

494 The revival in the early part of the century was due to the agency of Wesley and Whitfield outside the church; in the latter to those of such men as Romaine, Newton, and ultimately Simeon, within it.

495 E.g., W. Law’s _Serious Call_, and _Christian Perfection_.

496 Viz., by means of the Moravians of Herrnhut, whose founder, Zinzendorf, himself sprang from the pietist movement.

497 Zech. iv. 6.

498 The most effective sketch of the intellectual and social state of France in the last century is given in Buckle’s _History of Civilization_, vol. i.; especially in ch. 8, 11, 12, and 14. His narrative only sets forth the dark side of the picture, and the Christian reader frequently feels pained at some of his remarks; but it is generally correct so far as it goes, and the references are copious to the original sources which the author used. I have therefore frequently rested content with quoting this work without indicating further sources. An instructive account of the centralization under Louis XIV is given in Sir J. Stephens’s _Lectures on the History of France_, Lect. 21-23. The reign of Louis XV is treated in De Tocqueville’s _Histoire Philosophie du Règne de Louis XV_. A brief view of the history may be seen in the works of the liberal Roman catholic, C. Butler, vol. v. on _Church of France_.

499 The passages from Benoit’s _Histoire de l’Edict de Nantes_, vol. v. p. 887 seq., and Quick’s _Synodicon_, i. p. 130 seq., respecting the cruelties of the dragonnades, are quoted at length in Buckle, i. p. 624, note.

500 This occurred in the contest concerning the Gallican liberties, and the dispute about the Bull Unigenitus. Concerning the former see C. Butler’s _Church of France_ (Works, vol. v.) p. 34 seq., and Hase’s _Church History_, § 424; and, on the latter, Butler ut sup. 188-249, and Hase, § 420.

501 The nature of the literature of the reign of Louis XIV, and the alteration of position of authors in the new reign, are explained in Buckle, i. ch. 11 and 12.

502 1715-1723.

503 Literature really became a political power, and exercised a similar influence to that of the modern newspaper press.

504 Professor Webb of Dublin, in his work, _The Intellectualism of Locke_, has given evidence which establishes this point.

505 On Condillac see Cousin, _Cours de la Philosophie Morale_, leçon 3; Renouvier, _Philosophie Moderne_, v. 2. § 4 Villemain, _Cours de Literature_, ii. 20; Morell’s _History of Philosophy_, i. 148 seq.; Lewes’ _History of Philosophy_.

506 It may prevent ambiguity to state that the term _materialism_, when employed in these lectures, is not used in its modern popular sense of mere animalism, the obedience to the lower side of human nature; but in its technical sense, as the kind of philosophy which so regards spirit to be a property of matter as to produce inferences unfavourable to the belief in immortality or moral obligation.

507 On the scepticism of Montaigne (1532-1592) see Tennemann’s _Geschichte der Philosophie_, ix. 443; Vinet’s _Essai de Philosophie Morale_; Sainte-Beuve _Critiques et Portraits Littéraires_, vol. iv.; Hallam’s _History of Literature_, ii. 29; Emerson’s _Representative Men_; and R. W. Church in _Oxford Essays_, 1857.

508 On Charron (1541-1603) see Tennemann, Id. ix. 527. Sainte-Beuve, t. xi.; Hallam, i. 570, ii. 362, 511; and the article in the _Biogr. Univ._

509 On Bayle (1647-1706) see Tennemann, xi. 268 seq.; Renouvier, _Phil. Mod._ iii. 3. § 6; Sainte-Beuve, iii. 392.

510 On Fontenelle (1657-1757) see Sainte-Beuve, iii. and the _Biogr. Univ._ Another writer, Dolet (1509-1546), was also suspected, at an earlier period, not only of scepticism but of atheism. See his Life, by J. Boulmier, 1857.

511 On R. Simon see Lect. III. p. 83.

512 See Lechler’s _Gesch. des Eng. Deismus_, p. 445.

513 On the great eagerness for English literature in France at that time, see the facts collected by Buckle, i. (658-670).

514 A list of those that are said to have been translated is given by Lechler, Id. 446. On the comparison of English and French deism see Henke’s _Kirchengeschichte_, vi. s. 131.

515 1726-1729. Cfr. Villemain, _Cours de Litt._ i. (168-177). A letter of Fleury, quoted from Schlosser by Lechler (Id. 446), proves that his fears were excited by the influence which English literature was producing.

516 On this charge of attack about 1750 see Buckle, i. 716-718; and on the origin of the attack on the church, and the causes why it preceded that on the state, Id. 684 seq. Cfr. also De Tocqueville’s _Louis XV_, t. ii. ch. 10.

517 Voltaire lived 1694-1778. The Life by Lord Brougham, in _Lives of Men of Letters_, is not only very full of facts, but contains some very able criticism, especially on the dramatic works of Voltaire. More biographies have been given in this lecture than in others, in accordance with the reasons explained in Lec. I. p. 33, because in this period the infidel influence was the result of the teachers, as much as of the ideas taught. See concerning Voltaire, Henke’s _Kirchengesch._ vi. 166; Schlosser, _Hist. of Eighteenth Century_, i. 2. § 1, iv. § 1. Bartholmess, _Hist. Crit. des Doctr. Relig. de la Phil. Mod._ i. 211 seq.; Bungener’s _Voltaire_.

518 In 1726.

519 Sirven was condemned in 1762, on an unjust suspicion of causing his daughter’s death, to prevent her becoming a protestant.

520 La Barre was a youth of seventeen, who, on the suspicion of having injured a crucifix on the bridge of Abbeville, was condemned (1763) to be tortured on the rack, to have his tongue cut out, and to be put to death; which sentence was literally executed. See _Biographie Universelle_, sub _Voltaire_, vol. xix. p. 484, and Brougham’s Life of him (94-99).

521 The Calas were a family at Toulouse, the father of which was put to death (1762) by catholic fanaticism. Voltaire investigated the facts with care; and, by instituting legal proceedings at Paris, got the sentence of the Toulouse court reversed, and all the reparation that was possible made to the family. Money to defray the expenses was sent to him from all the reformed parts of Europe. The English queen (Charlotte) and the archbishop of Canterbury (Secker) headed the English subscription list. The facts have lately been reinvestigated by the accomplished A. Coquerel _fils._, _Jean Calas et sa Famille_, 1858. The narrative is told in the _Westminster Review_, No. 28, for Oct. 1858. See also Henke’s _Kirchengeschichte_, vi. 298 seq.

On the tomb of Voltaire, now a cenotaph, in the vaults of the Pantheon, is an inscription, “Il défendit Calas, Sirven, De la Barre, et Montbailly.” Since the Pantheon has been converted into a church, the side of the tomb which bears this inscription has been concealed by a screen, so that visitors are only permitted to view one of the other sides.

522 Carlyle’s _Miscellaneous Works_, vol. ii. It will be observed that many of the following remarks are abbreviated from this source.

523 Carlyle, Id. p. 113.

524 i.e. the age of Louis XV. See Id. pp. 180-185.

525 On Voltaire’s power of ridicule, see Id. 120, 167; and on his power of order, 163 seq.

526 Id. p. 161.

527 Id. p. 119.

528 The question of Voltaire’s blasphemy is treated by lord Brougham (_Life_, p. 7).

529 The four volumes are xxxii-xxxv of the _Œuvres Complètes_, 8vo. 1785. Vol. xxxii contains the philosophical works, of which ch. 2, 6, 7, 9, of the _Traité de Metaphysique_, relate to religion; also the _Profession de Foi des Théistes_; the _Homélies prononcées à Londres_. Vol. xxxiii contains the _Examen de Milord Bolingbroke_; and the _Epitre aux Romains_. Vol. xxxiv, _La Bible enfin Expliquée_, where the notes contain Voltaire’s views fully. Vol. xxiv, _Histoire de l’Etablissement du Christianisme_.

530 On the persecutions which fell on literary men, see Buckle, i. (672-684.)

531 The proof of this assertion is clear in his _Traité de Metaphysique_, c. 2. (_Œuvres_, vol. xxxii); in Letter iii of Memmius to Cicero; in the _Profess. de Foi des Théistes_; and is shown by the fact of his opposition to the Encyclopædists on the ground of their atheism; which is confirmed by the inscription on his tomb, “Il combattit les athées.” It is his blasphemous tone which has, not unnaturally, given rise to the idea of his atheism.

532 “Ecrasez l’infame” are the words, the initials of which, signed at the end of his letters to infidel friends, baffled the French police. Buckle considers them to have been designed against the French church, but offers no proof. It is to be feared that they were rather intended against the Christian religion, if not against the sacred person of our blessed Lord.

533 See his _Commentary_ (_Œuvres_, vol. xxxiv.), the _Homélies_ (vol. xxxii,), and the _Histoire_ (vol. xxxiv.).

534 On the contrast of his historic tone to that of Bossuet, see Buckle, i. 726, and Schlosser, _History of the Eighteenth Century_, (English translation), vol. i. ch. iv. § 2. p. 273.

535 Compare Carlyle’s remarks _ut sup._ p. 175.

536 Id. 105.

537 On Frederick’s entertainment of these French refugees, see Henke, _Kirchengesch_. vi. 180; Schlosser, vol. i. 2. § 3.

538 La Mettrie (1709-1751). His views are seen in the _Discours Préliminaire_ to his _Hist. Nat. del âme_, and in the _L’homme machiné_ (1748). See a criticism on him in Ph. Damiron’s _Memoires pour servir à l’Histoire de Philosophie au 18__e__ siècle_ (vol. i. pp. 1-49), reprinted from the Report of the _Académie des Sciences_; also Henke, vi, 13.

539 De Prades (1720-1782). See Henke, vi. 201; also the article in the _Biographie Universelle_.

540 D’Argens (1704-1771). See Damiron, Id. ii. 256-376.

541 On the old coteries of Rambouillet, &c., see Hallam’s _Hist. of Literature_, iii. 137.

542 D’Alembert (1717-83). For particulars of his life, see Brougham’s memoir in _Lives of Men of Letters_. For his philosophy, see Damiron, ii. 1-114; Henke, vi. 218; Schlosser, i. 4. § 7. His infidelity was known to friends, but not openly avowed.

543 Marmontel (1723-99). See Sainte-Beuve, _Portraits_, vol. iv.; Schlosser, ii. 2. § 1.

544 Grimm, 1723-1807. See Sainte-Beuve, vol. vii. The _Correspondance Litt. par le Baron Grimm et Diderot_ is the great source for the knowledge of his character.

545 St. Lambert (1717-1803). See Damiron, ii. 144-256.

546 Abbé Raynal (1711-96). See Schlosser, ii. 2. § 1. Henke, vol. vi. enumerates many more of the same class. Particulars of all are given in the _Biographie Universelle_.

547 The following refer to places where the tendency and spirit of this whole movement are described, as well as literary information supplied. Henke, vi. 208, &c.; Bartholmess, i. 117-210; Lerminier’s _Influence de la Phil. du 18__e__ siècle_ (1833); Morell’s _Hist. of Phil._ i. 158, &c.; Maurice, _Mod. Phil._ p. 527-59; H. Martin’s _Hist. de France_, vol. xv. and xvi. liv. 96, 99, 100, 101; Renouvier, _Mod. Phil._ b. v. ch. 2. § 6-8; also Kuno Fischer’s _Bacon_, p. 451, and the references above given to Schlosser and to Damiron; Tennemann (_Manual_, § 378, &c.) also gives many literary references.

548 Diderot (1713-84). His life and character have been sketched by Carlyle, (_Misc. Works_, vol. iv.); also by Damiron, ii. (227-324); St. Beuve, i. 355. Also see Villemain, _Tableau de la Litt. au 18__e__ siècle_, lec. xix. 20. His novels are the parent of the impure novel of modern times. See Schlosser, i. 4. § 5, ii 2. § 1.

549 In the _Essai sur le Mérite et la Vertu_, pp. 73, 87, he allows deism, the God of moral order. Similarly in the _Pensées Philos._ § 46, but it is the God of nature. But in the Dialogue with D’Alembert he teaches atheism. On his theological views see Damiron, ii. 261 seq.

550 § 25, &c.

551 See Carlyle, _Misc. Works_, iv. 322.

552 Helvetius (1715-1771). See C. Remusat in _Rev. des Deux Mondes_, Aug. 15, 1858. On the circle of Helvetius see Carlyle _ut sup._ 287 seq.; and on their atheism Buckle, i. 786 seq. Concerning Helvetius himself see Ritter’s _Christliche Philos._ viii. b. ix. ch. 2; Cousin’s _Hist. de Phil. Morale_, leçon 7; Schlosser, i. 4. § 6.

553 Viz., _De l’Esprit et de l’Homme_ (Œuvres compl. 1818, vol. i. and ii.). Both treatises are excellently analysed in the table of contents prefixed to the work. The allusions in the text here may be thought to fail from their brevity in showing that Helvetius’s opinions were a logical corollary from his principles; they cannot at least give any notion of the great power of analysis exhibited by him in expressing his own views.

554 In Discourse ii.

555 Id.

556 D’Holbach (1723-89). _The Système de la Nature_ bears the name of a Mirabaud, secretary to the Academy. Some have thought it to be written by Robinet, author of a similar work. (His works are discussed in Damiron, ii, 480 seq.) Concerning the work see Villemain, iii. leç. 38; Damiron, i. (93-177); Ritter, _Christ. Philos._ viii. b. 9. ch. 3; Schlosser, i. 4. § 1. On D’Holbach’s view of God see Damiron, Id. p. 155, &c.; Buckle, i. 787, note. The _Système de la Nature_ is partly analysed and criticised in Brougham’s _Discourse on Natural Theology_, pp. 232-47. It comprised two volumes, and is followed by a volume containing three small treatises relating to the natural principles of morals, and social philosophy. The work was refuted by Bergier (1771).

557 Partie 1ere ch. iii. and iv.

558 Part ii. ch. vii.

559 Part ii. ch. xi.

560 Part i. ch. xiii.

561 Part ii. ch. i.

562 Id. ch. iv. and v.

563 Damiron discuses, in addition to the writers already named, two or three others, viz., Naigeon, Sylv. Marechal, and De la Lande, whose names are not introduced here into the text.

564 On Rousseau see Villemain ii. leçon (23-24); Brougham’s life of him in _Men of Letters_; Bartholmess, i. 233-270; Henke, vi. 232, especially p. 253, which refers to his theology; Schlosser, i. 4. § 4, and ii. § 2; St. Marc Girardin on the Emile in _Rev. des Deux Mondes_, Dec. 1854; and an article, too favourably written, but full of information, in the _Westminster Review_, Oct. 1859, which has been of much use for this lecture.

565 The chief facts of Rousseau’s life are these:—Born 1712; came to Paris, 1741; wrote _Sur les Sciences et les Arts_, 1750; _L’inegalité parmi les hommes_, 1753; lived in the Paris coteries, 1754-60; wrote _Nouvelle Heloise_, 1760; _Le Contrat Social_, 1761, and _Emile_; an exile in Switzerland 1762, where he wrote _Lettres de la Montagne_; accompanied Hume to England 1776; wrote his _Confessions_; returned to the Continent 1767; died 1770.

566 There are some good remarks on this theory in the article in the _Westminster Review_ before quoted, the substance of which is to show that Rousseau’s doctrine was false in its method and in its tendencies. It marked the stage of inquiry, indicative of the last part of the last century, when men, ignoring the teaching of history, strove to solve problems by means of abstract speculations; the attempt to study the origin of phenomena instead of the facts of their progressive manifestation. The social contract is nothing but the description of the collective development to which society tends. The scheme was visionary: but, as a protest against unjust monopolies which existed in that age, it woke up a response in society (cfr. Mill on _Liberty_, p. 47-50); and in its tendency it made Rousseau the precursor of the French revolution; but in typifying that movement it represented only its transient aspect of subversive energy, not its work of political reformation.

_ 567 Emile_, b. iv. (See _Œuvres_, vol. iv. p. 14-119, ed. Paris, 1823, by Musset-Pathay.)

568 Id. p. 17-20.

569 Id. p. 22-30.

_ 570 Emile_, p. 33: “Si la matière mue me montre une volonté, la matière mue, selon de certaines lois me montre une intelligence. C’est mon second article de foi.”

571 P. 34, 36.

572 P. 40-49.

573 P. 50-53.

574 P. 57-75.

575 P. 83-86.

576 P. 75-119.

577 P. 86, &c.

578 P. 86.

_ 579 Emile_, pp. 105-107.

580 The comparison of the statements of the _Confessions_ with fragments of Rousseau lately published, shows that many statements which they contain in reference to other persons is false. The statement in the text is made in deference to the opinion latterly stated (e.g. in Heine’s _Allemagne_), that there is a general air of romance pervading the work. If the statements in reference to himself are untrue, the narrative is only a greater proof of the immorality of the author. The supposition however seems groundless. The defender of Rousseau, G. H. Morin (_Essai_, 1851), does not exculpate his author by impeaching the historical truthfulness of the Confessions.

581 The high moral standard is not of course seen in the _Confessions_, which show Rousseau to have been the incarnation of selfishness, and much worse than most of the other unbelievers, but is exhibited in the _Emile_. The fact that the author of the latter work could write the former is a sad example of a man knowing, like the ancient heathens, how to do good and doing it not.

582 Henke (vi. p. 267 seq.) draws out the comparison of Voltaire with Rousseau in an excellent manner. Coleridge (_Friend_, vol. i. 165-186) has given a comparison of Voltaire with Erasmus, and of Rousseau with Luther.

583 See Villemain, i. 14, 15., ii. 22; Schlosser, i. 2. § 2., 4. § 3, and ii. 2. § 2.

584 See Buckle, i. (772-783).

585 Compare Macaulay’s remarks in reference to the Revolution, _Essays_ (ed. 8vo. 1843), ii. 215, &c.

586 For the causes of the revolution compare the statements of Alison, _Hist. of Europe_, i. ch. ii. and iii., and Buckle, i. (836-850).

587 On the incipient hostility to religion in the National Assembly, see Alison, vol. ii. ch. v. § 46, Id. § 32-35. On the full development of it in the Convention, see Id. iv. ch. xiv. § (45-48).

588 Nov. 9.

589 Concerning this act of Robespierre, see Alison, iv. ch. xv. § 23, 24, 27.

590 On the state of religion under the Directory, see Alison, vol. v. ch. xix. § 41, and vol. vi, ch. xxiv. § 19.

591 See M. Gregoire’s _Histoire de la Théophilanthropie_, forming part of his _Histoire des Sectes Relig._, and the notice of it in the _Quarterly Review_, No. 56. Also the references in Alison, vi. ch. xxiv. § 19; Staüdlin, _Geschichte des Rationalismus und Supernat._ 1826, (44-54.)

592 On the state under Napoleon, see Alison, viii. ch. xxxv. § 1, and 30-40.

593 April 11, 1802.

594 See Morell, _Hist, of Phil._ vol. i. ch. iv. § 2.

_ 595 Les Ruines ou Meditations sur les Revolutions des Empires_ (1791.) A similar view of religion is taken in Dupuis, _Origine de tous les Cultes_, 1795.

596 Ch. ii.

597 Ch. iii.

598 Ch. v.

599 Ch. vii-xii.

600 Ch. xv.

601 Ch. xix.

602 Ch. xx. &c.

603 Ch. xxii. p. 218.

604 P. 226.

605 P. 232.

606 P. 238.

607 P. 255.

608 P. 262.

609 P. 268.

610 P. 274.

611 P. 277.

612 P. 285.

613 P. 286.

614 P. 287.

615 P. 288.

616 Ch. xxiv. p. 320.

617 Such as the idea of the plurality of worlds suggested by Fontenelle.

618 The apologetic literature of this period of the French church is not powerful. See Buckle, i. 692, note; and Alison, i. 2. § 62.

619 The influence on Germany will be seen in Lect. VI.

620 In Lect. IV.

621 Gibbon (1737-1794). See _Autobiography_ (Milman’s edition 1839), ch. iii. p. 73, &c.

622 Cfr. some remarks (p. 27, 28,) in an instructive paper on Gibbon in the _National Review_, No. 3, on the relation of his method and style to his age.

623 Milman and Guizot.

624 The first of these is explained by Dr. Milman, Preface to edition of Gibbon, p. 10, and the article in the _Quarterly Review_, No. 100.

625 Cfr. Mackintosh (_Life_, i. 244), quoted by Milman in his edition of Gibbon, c. xv. first note.

626 The remarks which follow are partly taken from the above-named article in the _National Review_ (pp. 33-36). Nearly the same thing is said by Miss Hennell in the fifth Baillie Prize Essay on the early Christian anticipation of the end of the world, 1860, a treatise which in other respects is very objectionable.

627 Bp. Watson’s _Apology for Christianity_ was a reply to Gibbon, 1776. Dean Milman’s notes to chapters xv. and xvi. of Gibbon are an excellent comment and criticism.

628 Byron, _Childe Harold_, iii. 105-108.

629 Paine (1737-1809), published _Rights of Man_, 1790; _Age of Reason_, 1794. See the life by Cheetham, 1809, and Chalmers’s _Biographical Dictionary_. Bp. Watson’s _Apology for the Bible_ was a reply to Paine (1796).

630 Anacharsis Clootz.

631 The danger arising from republican clubs is described in Alison, iv. ch. xvi. § 6; and in W. Hamilton Reed’s _Rise and Dissolution of Infidel Societies in the Metropolis_, 1800. See also the Report of the Committee of the House of Lords on them, 1801. The works of Godwin on _Political Justice_, 1793, and of Mary Woolstencraft on the _Rights of Women_, are generally adduced as illustrations of the prevalence of French political principles at that time in England.

632 Part i. pp. 3-19, and part ii. pp. 8-83.

633 Part i. pp. 3, 4; 21-50; part ii. pp. 83-93.

634 P. 44.

635 Part ii. pp. 10-83.

636 Part i. pp. 37-44. This difficulty, first suggested by Fontenelle, is met in the eloquent _Astronomical Discourses_ (1822) of Chalmers. The controversy has been newly opened by the brilliant essay on the _Plurality of Worlds_ (1853), supposed to be by Dr. Whewell, and pursued by Dr. Brewster (_More Worlds than One_), Professor Baden Powell (Essays on the _Order of Nature_), and by Professor H. S. Smith in the _Oxford Essays_, 1855.

637 Page 20.

638 Part i. pp. 3, 4; p. 50.

639 Robert Owen (1771-1858). About the year 1800 he became known in connexion with schemes of industrial reform at the Lanark mills; and from 1813-19 conducted them as a social experiment to carry out his views. He attempted also to spread his opinions in America. After his return to England, by means of lectures and his work, _The New Moral World_, he taught them in the manufacturing towns; and they were widely spread about the time of the Chartist movement (1839-41). His opinions may be learned from his _Essays on the Formation of Character_ (1818), which explain his Lanark system; and especially his _New Moral World_, published about 1839. His religious opinions may be gathered from the _Debate on the Evidences and on Society with A. Campbell_, 1839. His autobiography was published in 1857, and a review of his philosophy by W. L. Sargeant, 1860. An article also related to him in the _Westminster Review_ for Oct. 1860. See also Morell’s _History of Philosophy_, i. 386 seq. Mr. R. Dale Owen, son of the above, published several deist tracts in America, from about 1840-44.

640 It has been considered unnecessary to name three other unimportant writers, Burgh, Farmer, a writer on the subject of Demoniacs, and Carlisle, who was prosecuted in 1830.

641 Byron (1788-1824). The _Vision of Judgment_, written in 1821, has been already referred to in Lecture III. as a vehicle for sceptical banter. For a brief comparison between the scepticism of Byron and Shelley, see remarks in the _Westminster Review_, April 1841, by Mr. G. H. Lewes.

642 Bacon, _Nov. Org._ Aph. 52, 53.

643 Shelley (1792-1822). The materials are abundant for understanding the character and works of Shelley, in biographies both friendly and hostile. The second edition of the _Shelley Memorials_, by lady Shelley, 1859, contains an essay on Christianity by him. Several important articles in Reviews have been published in reference to him, among which it is desirable to call attention to the one in the _National Review_, No. 6, Oct. 1856, which contains a very instructive analysis of his mental and moral character. It has been used in the few remarks which follow.

644 The pamphlet appears to have been an anonymous statement of the weakness of the argument for the existence of deity; negative rather than positive. See the account of the transaction and its results in T. J. Hogg’s _Life of Shelley_, 1858, vol. i. pp. (269-286).

645 E.g. in the _Ode to Liberty_ (§ 15 and 16), written in 1820.

646 In the _Adonais_, § 49-51. For Shelley’s own cremation and burial, see the _Memorials_ by lady Shelley, p. 201.

647 This is well put in the Review above quoted, (p. 356).

648 The Reviewer thinks that the first stage was in tone like Lucretius, i.e. Epicureanism. The second and third are described here in the text. The Queen Mab (end of the first division) expressed the first stage; the first speech of Ahasuerus in the Hellas is a specimen of the second; and the Adonais (43 and 52) of the third.

649 This contrast however in the evidences, though true in a general way, must not be pressed so as to imply an absolutely defined line of chronological separation between the two classes of evidence.

650 Robert Boyle died in 1692, and founded the lecture by his last will. The lectures commenced in the same year. Bampton’s were founded in 1751; but none delivered till 1780. Hulse died in 1790; but the lectures did not commence till 1820. A list of the lectures delivered in each series may be found in Darling’s _Cyclopædia Bibliographica_.

651 The remarks on evidence in Nos. 73 and 84 of the _Tracts for the Times_, and the tone assumed by the ultramontane writers of France, are instances of the undervaluing evidences from the former causes. The deist literature of the last century, and the writings of Carlyle in the present, are instances of that which arises from the latter.

652 I.e. they belong essentially to the protestant stand-point in theology.

653 See above, p. 160. The view which Blunt took of the evidences is given in his _Essays_, p. 133, reprinted from the _Quarterly Review_, April 1828.

654 The controversy raised by the Tübingen school refers to the date of books of the New Testament which testify to facts and doctrines. Supposing this primary question settled in favour of our commonly received view, then the further question follows concerning the honesty and opportunity of information of the narrators; and it is here that the arguments of Lyttleton, Lardner, and Paley, in the last century, find their proper place. See below, Lect. VIII.

655 John iv. 37, 38, 36.

656 On Rationalism see Note 21 at the end of this volume.

657 The sources for the knowledge of this period are briefly stated in the Preface to these lectures.

658 See p. 9, 99. Hundeshagen (_Der Deutsche Prot._ § 13) insists on the prime importance of the spiritual element as the moving force in the Reformation.

659 Melancthon and Camerarius, Calvin and Beza, represent the union of learning with theology; the second Scaliger, the Stephenses, Casaubon, and others, are instances of the great lay scholars.

660 The date of the former is 1577; of the latter 1618. These are named as the events from which the theology in the Lutheran and Calvinistic churches respectively became fixed. Buddeus (_Isagoge_, p. 239) dates it rather from the confession of Ratisbon, 1601. On this dogmatic period see _Der Deutsche Prot._ § 9; Hagenbach’s _Dogmengesch._ § 216-18; Amand Saintes’ _Critical History of Rationalism_ (transl.) ch. v. and vi; Pusey’s _Historical Inquiry_,