and worthy of all acceptation so far as it goes. Natural religion and modern Deism are not the same thing, but widely different. It were much to be wished, that Deists were sincerely in the interests of natural religion: they could not long be Deists, if they were. For, not to mention several other considerations, I shall only observe here, that it is a clear and self-evident dictate of natural religion, to believe and embrace whatever God has revealed or shall reveal, as soon as sufficient proof shall be made of its being so. "Whatever is immediately revealed from God, "must, as well as any thing else, be treated as what it is; which "it cannot be, if it is not treated with the highest regard, believed, "and obeyed."

I have now, my Reverend Brethren, run through the several opprobrious aspersions and odious imputations cast upon Christianity, endeavouring all the way to shew, not only that they are

One might be apt to expect, since the Deists talk so much of the perfection of natural religion, that they should be willing at least to adopt the most perfect systems of it, such as I have mentioned; rather than leave it to every day-labourer to draw one out for himself. But they have reasons perhaps for not doing it. For,

1. The morality in those systems is so extensive, strict, and pure, that they might almost as well be Christians, (in point of restraint,) as be obliged to submit to all the rules there prescribed.

2. If they were once to admit such a thread of clear and close reasoning, and resolve to pursue it as far as it would carry them, they could not avoid being Christians. For the proofs of Christianity stand upon as clear a foot as natural religion itself does, especially in its remoter branches: besides that, the law of nature, or reason, will now of course take in revelation, and make it one of its own dictates.

3. The principal aim and design of the Deists would be defeated and frustrated, as it seems, were they to espouse any such certain scheme, that should be admitted, as a common rule for all men. The three excellent writers before named, intended one common invariable rule, such as none should swerve from; but infidelity appears to admit of no common and invariable system, but to affect an independent, personal, various religion, according as every man may fancy : [see Literal Scheme, p. 435.] and the result will be, that every one shall be left to do what seemeth him good in his own eyes. Which, perhaps, is the true reason, why every man is to have the forming of the rule to himself, by his own internal light, without the help of external revelation from God, or instruction from men. See Christianity as Old &c. p. 277, 279, 280, 281, 295, 296, 305, 309, 379.

Upon the whole, Deists are neither for a revealed religion, nor for a natural one, justly so called, but for as many natural religions, as there are men of different circumstances and abilities. They are for a personal religion of their own carving, or none: which is not espousing natural religion, in any proper sense, but libertinism only and irreligion, under the name of the religion of nature.

e Wollaston, p. 211.

wrongfully charged upon Christians, but that they are, for the most part, justly chargeable upon the accusers themselves; who have been sending their readers upon a false pursuit after credulity, bigotry, &c. where they are not, only to turn their eyes off from observing where they really are. True religion will ever shine, whether considered in itself, or compared with the misshapen schemes set up against it: and those who are not yet duly apprised of its absolute value may yet perceive enough of its comparative excellency over infidelity; as a man that doubts even of true coin may know a plain counterfeit when he sees it, and may be certain of thus much at least, that one is no way comparable to the other.

I shall only add, that if we take a survey of mankind in former ages, we shall find, that though they had the same inclinations to ease and pleasure as we may now have, and the same aversion to restraints; and though they were as willing to get rid of the terrible apprehensions of God and a world to come, as any of us now can be; yet so strong were the impressions of religion every where, that infidelity could not maintain its ground, even in the darkest times of Paganism; much less can it be able to do it now. Or supposing it might, yet what could its patrons expect to gain by it in conclusion, after once the wanton humour should go round, but to fall, with others, in the universal ruin? In the mean while, it is observable, that they are themselves, in some measure, sensible of the use of religion, as often as their own liberty, property, or reputation is concerned, and they then claim with some earnestness the benefits of it; condemning others as profane, wicked, or impious, (words without sense, or however without force, upon their principles,) who are but suspected to treat them wrongfully. It is only when they consider themselves as actors, that religion appears so grievous a restraint; for when they look upon themselves as sufferers, it is as great a relief: and then that religion, which at other times is ill thought of, as an enemy to liberty, is found to be the best and surest friend to it. To conclude, since their licentious principles are condemned absolutely by all mankind but themselves, and by themselves also at times, and in particular circumstances; more needs not be said to shew how erroneous and pernicious they are, and how justly odious in the sight both of God and man.

Α

DISCOURSE

OF

FUNDAMENTALS,

BEING THE SUBSTANCE OF

TWO CHARGES

DELIVERED TO THE

MIDDLESEX CLERGY,

AT THE EASTER VISITATIONS OF 1734 AND 1735.