AGAINST THE MODERN FREETHINKERS. 195 SECTION IX. AGAINST THE MODERN FREETHINKERS. SIR, 'THERE arrived in this neighbourhood two days ago one of your gay gentlemen of the town, who being attended at his entry with a servant of his own, besides a countryman he had taken up for a guide, excited the curiosity of the village to learn whence and what he might be. The countryman (to whom they applied as the most easy of access) knew little more than that the gentleman came from London to travel and see fashions, and was, as he heard say, a Freethinker: what religion that might. be, he could not tell; and for his own part, if they had not told him the man was a Freethinker, he should have guessed, by his way of talking, he was little better than a heathen; excepting only that he had been a good gentleman to him, and made him drunk twice in one day, over and above what they had bargained for. 'I do not look upon the simplicity of this, and several odd inquiries, with which I shall trouble you, to be wondered at; much less can I think that our youths of fine wit, and enlarged understandings, have any reason to laugh. There is no necessity that every squire in Great Britain should know what the word Freethinker stands for: but it were much to be wished, that they, who valued themselves upon that conceited title, were a little better instructed in what it ought to stand for; and that they would not persuade themselves a man is really and truly a Freethinker in any tolerable sense, merely by virtue of his being an Atheist, or an Infidel of any other distinction. It may be doubted with good reason, whether there ever was in nature a more abject, slavish, and bigoted generation than the tribe of Beaux Esprits, at present so prevailing in this island. Their pretension to be Freethinkers is no other than rakes have to be free-livers, and savages to be free-men; that is, they can think whatever they have a mind to, and give themselves up to whatever conceit the extravagancy of their inclination, or their fancy, shall suggest; they can think as wildly as talk and act, and will not endure that their wit should be controlled by such formal things as decency and common sense: deduction, -coherence, consistency, and all the rules of reason, they accordingly disdain, as too precise and mechanical for men of a liberal education. This, as far as I could ever learn from their writings, or my own observation, is a true account of the British Freethinker. Our visitant here, who gave occasion to this paper, has brought with him a new system of common sense, the particulars of which I am not yet acquainted with, but will lose no opportunity of informing myself whether it contain any thing worth Mr. Spectator's notice. In the mean time, Sir, I cannot but think it would be for the good of mankind, if you would take this subject into your own consideration, and convince the hopeful youth of our nation, that licentiousness is not freedom; or, if such a paradox will not be understood, that a prejudice towards Atheism is not impartiality.' T. I am, Sir, your most humble Servant, Quicquid est illud, quod sentit, quod sapit, quod vult, quod viget, cœleste et divinum est, ob eamque rem æternum sit necesse est. TULL. I AM diverted from the account I was giving the town of my particular concerns, by casting my eye upon a treatise, which I could not overlook without an inexcusable negligence, and want of concern for all the civil as well as religious interests of mankind. This piece has for its title, A Discourse of Freethinking, occasioned by the Rise and Growth of a Sect called Freethinkers.' The author very metho dically enters upon his argument, and says, By freethinking, I mean the use of the un derstanding, in endeavouring to find out the meaning of any proposition whatsoever, in considering the nature of the evidence for or against, and in judging of it according to the seeming force or weakness of the evidence.' As soon as he has delivered this definition, from which one would expect he did not design to show a particular inclination for or against any thing before he had considered it, he gives up all title to the character of a Freethinker, with the most apparent prejudice against a body of men, whom of all other a good man would be most careful not to violate; I mean men in holy orders. Persons, who have devoted themselves to the service of God, are venerable to all who fear him; and it is a certain characteristic of a dissolute and ungoverned mind, to rail and speak disrespectfully of them in general. It is certain, that in so great a crowd of men some will intrude, who are of tempers very unbecoming their function: but because ambition and avarice are sometimes lodged in that bosom, which ought to be the dwelling of sanctity and devotion, must this unreasonable author vilify the whole order? He has not taken the least care to disguise his being an enemy to the persons against whom he writes, nor any where granted that the institution of religious men to serve at the altar, and instruct such who are not as wise as himself, is at all necessary or desirable; but proceeds, without the least apology, to undermine their credit, and frustrate their labours. Whatever clergymen, in disputes against each other, have unguardedly uttered, is here recorded in such a manner as to affect religion itself, by wresting concessions to its disadvantage from its own teachers. If this be a truth, as sure any man that reads the discourse must allow it is; and if religion is the strongest tie of human society; in what manner are we to treat this our common enemy, who promotes the growth of such a sect as he calls Freethinkers? He that should burn a house, and justify the action by asserting he is a free agent, would be more excusable than this author in uttering what he has from the right of a Freethinker. But they are a set of dry, joyless, dull fellows, who want capacities and talents to make a figure amongst mankind upon benevolent and generous principles, that think to surmount their own natural meanness, by laying offences in the way of such as make it their endeavour to excel upon the received maxims and honest arts of life. If it were possible to laugh at so melancholy an affair as what hazards salvation, it would be no unpleasant inquiry to ask, what satisfaction they reap, what extraordinary gratification of sense, or what delicious libertinism this sect of Freethinkers enjoy, after getting loose of the laws, which confine the passions of other men? Would it not be a matter of mirth to find, |