a

cord. The fanaticism and horrid austerity of the Jansenists are equally so; not to mention many other fanatical sects and opinions which have arisen in different periods, and still continue to arise. Johanna Southcote was not without followers even of no vulgar station.

I shall here offer one observation, which I deem to be of considerable importance. We have always reason to expect some species of abuse, as nearly connected with every thing useful. In periods when men's minds are much occupied with religious concerns, still more in those when they are entirely engrossed by them, they will be apt to be carried to some species or other of religious extravagance. During those gloomy centuries that preceded the Reformation, the Christian world was sunk in the deepest ignorance, and enslaved by the grossest superstition. Hence, pilgrimages, penances, munificent donations to the church, and the erection of those venerable piles for divine worship which were reared in every Christian country. However absurd were the notions of religion then entertained, the sincerity of the generality of its votaries was evinced. For, it cannot be supposed that such expense and labour would have been incurred for an object which was supposed to be merely ideal. That imposture was practised

a Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, Cent. XVII. ch. iv. sect. 2. Idem, Cent. XVII. ch. i. sect. 46, particularly in the note.

cannot be doubted; but imposture implies dupes who are deceived by it, otherwise its operations would cease. Profligate priests were the deceivers ; but till the people were more enlighten-. ed, they sincerely believed the religion that was taught them.

On the other hand, when the glorious Reformation shed its salutary light on a benighted world, it dazzled weak but ardent minds by its effulgence. The yoke of spiritual tyranny being broken, and freedom in religious matters restored, many supposed that this freedom could not be asserted and maintained but by rushing into all the licentiousness of fanatical extravagance. While religious freedom operated in this manner in one direction, it produced in another consequences still more fatal. For, as the absurdities and deceptions of popish superstition had been fully detected, some, who pretended to extraordinary enlargement of mind, were led to believe, or at least to assume, that every species of religion was founded either on delusion or imposture, to reject Christianity, and even to adopt atheistical principles. Hence it is evident, however paradoxical it may appear to be, that absolute scepticism and fanaticism are derived from the same source; an incapacity to discriminate between truth and falsehood, weakness of judgment, and boldness of presumption.

As Plato, or rather Chrysippus, maintained

that good and evil were tied together by the head, and that where the former was found, the other would also make its appearance; so, with every thing excellent, some excess will infallibly be joined by the folly or the corruption of mankind, and this excess,

Like the shadow, proves the substance true.-POPE.

The excesses of religion, therefore, are no more to be imputed to religion itself than licentiousness to rational liberty, or tumult to well-balanced government. As, to avoid the evils last mentioned, it is egregious folly to take refuge under civil despotism; so it is no less absurd and pernicious to seek deliverance from fanatical extravagance, or superstition, by discarding religion altogether. Who thinks of rejecting science or literature, or any of the fine arts, because egregious folly or extravagance has been exhibited in those who devoted themselves to the cultivation of them? Yet even such absurdity of procedure I have heard justified by men of ignorant and illiberal minds. The wise maxim in this, as in every other case, is, "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

III. Bigotry exhibits another form of corrupt and perverted religion, differing in some respects

a 1 Thess. v. 21.

from the two already considered. A bigot is he who is so devoted to any opinion or party which he has embraced, so blindly attached to either, and so violently desirous of their predominance, that he cannot endure the smallest opposition to. the one, or contradiction of the other, and regards it as a crime to entertain the slightest difference of sentiment on the subject in question. A bigot in philosophy proscribes all further inquiry and improvement in knowledge. He supposes that his theory comprehends the whole compass of attainable science, and never reflects that some obscurities shade every discovery of man, and that investigation and experiment are the only sources of solid information, and are daily adding to what has been already attained.

The political bigot is completely subdued by a spirit of party, ascribes all wisdom to that to which he has devoted himself, regards those who belong to another as the enemies of the state, brands them as such with the most opprobrious epithets; and if his personal interest concur in the support of his own faction, will persecute his opponents by every means in his power. It is this very spirit which has been the prime mover of all the religious persecutions that have ever existed in the world.

When the principle, however, is chiefly religious, it assumes an aspect of peculiar ferocity. A person may not be addicted to superstition,

nor inflamed with a fanatical spirit, nay, may believe and profess the doctrines of true religion, and yet be a complete bigot. It is peculiar to this character to assume that the opinions adopted by the person to whom it belongs are exclusively true, and, as such, must be maintained by every possible means, and without toleration of others of a different complexion. No person should, or, if he is sincere, can embrace any opinion without an adequate conception of its truth, and, if it relates to the fundamentals of religion, without the deepest sense of its importance. What is more, every sincere professor of religious principles will be zealous for their diffusion by every means consistent with their na

ture.

But the bigot never reflects on three most important considerations ;-that different minds may view the same objects in very different lights; that every human being has an undisputed and unalienable right to the free exercise of his judgment, in religious matters; and that religion can operate on the mind alone, which may be convinced, and moved, but never can be compelled to believe. So far, then, he is ignorant of the very essence of that which kindles his zeal, and prompts his conduct; and his zeal, in his own particular manner, must always keep pace with his ignorance of this highly important point. Whatever knowledge, therefore, he may