The diffent of fome invali.

dates not the act

nature and ends of fociety do not acquire affent to his judgment: and my denying to private fubjects a right publicly to oppofe his laws, does not in the least imply an obligation to affent to his judgment in the matter of them." When, therefore, the community or legislature paffes a new law, the freedom of my thoughts upon the fubject of it, is in no of the majority. manner impaired nor affected by the enacting of it; but my internal or intellectual disapprobation or diffent, can never warrant any pofitive or external contempt of, or refiftance to the law. If fuch refiftance were permitted, no law could acquire a binding force without the univerfal confent of every individual member of the legislature. It is an univerfal maxim of legislation, that when a law has once been enacted by the majority of the legislature, it is as binding upon those, who oppofed, as upon thofe, who confented to the paffing of it. When, therefore, the legislature enacts, that a certain religious worfhip fhall be fanctioned and fupported by the state, * "the conclufion afferted by the law is not, This is a true religion; much lefs, this is the only true religion (for he may believe feveral other fchemes of religion

• Rogers's Vindication, p. 207.

equally

Laws refpect tablishment of ing as other

ing the civil ef

religion as bind

laws.

equally true, and yet be determined by very good reasons to establish that); but the conclufion of the laws is precifely this: this is the religion fhall be favoured with a civil eftablifhment in this community. This conclufion is a civil law of that community, ftands upon the fame foot, and is equally protected from the public oppofition of private fubjects, with any other law of the fame importance." And when this particular religious cult or worship shall have once received the civil fanction of the state, it is certainly equally binding and coercive upon the community to fupport it in an external civil way, as any other civil fanction whatever. So, when the fupreme authority has debated and deter- an obligation in mined a conclufion of law, a private fubject may not, confiftently with the peace of the fociety, and the common duty of fubjection, be permitted to continue on the debate, or revive it as often as he pleafe in a public way, (i. e.) print and publish books and arguments against the justice or expediency of the law. The intention, or at least the confequence of fuch actions must be disparaging the wisdom or juftice of the legislature, taking from them the esteem and confidence of

• Rogers's Vindication, p. 224.

The paffing of

a law induces

all to fubmit to,

and not to op

pofe it.

The civil effects of religion upon

their fubjects, difquieting the minds of thofe, who are fatisfied with the law, and raifing up parties in oppofition to it. The laws establifhing religion ftand, as laws, on the fame foot with all others; and if fuch acts of oppofition to other laws would juftly be esteemed mutiny and fedition, they will have the fame characters, when done in oppofition to the laws establishing religion."

It is the general opinion of the most apa community. proved writers upon political and civil liberty, that all the lawful acts of the community muft neceffarily tend to the peace, welfare, and prefervation of the community; and it is alfo their general opinion, that religion tends mainly to thofe ends. * «To fay that religion is not a restraining motive, because it does not always reftrain, is equally abfurd as to fay, that the civil laws are not a reftraining motive. It is a falfe way of reasoning against religion, to collect in a large work a long detail of the evils it has produced, if we do not give at the fame time an enumeration of the advantages, which have flowed from it. Were I to relate all the evils, that have arisen in the world from civil laws, from monarchy and from republican government,

• Montefquicu's Spirit of Laws, b. xiv. x. c. fi.

I might

I might tell of frightful things. Was it of
no advantage for fubjects to have religion,
it would still be of fome, if princes had it,
and if they whitened with foam the only rein,
which can retain thofe, who fear not human
laws. A prince, who loves and fears religion,
is a lion, who stoops to the hand, that strokes,
or to the voice that appeafes him. He who
fears and hates religion, is like the favage
beaft, that growls and bites the chain, which
prevents his flying on the paffenger. He,
who has no religion at all, is that terrible
animal, who perceives his liberty only, when
he tears in pieces, and when he devours.
*« The general confent of mankind in
one conclufion, though it be not, in ftrictness,
a proof of truth or justice, yet it is a fair pre-
fumption of it. In all civilized nations, of
whom we have any account paft or prefent,
we find fome eftablished religion. Hence
I take leave to conclude, that the wifeft men

any

in all ages (for fuch the founders and governors of focieties may equitably be prefumed) have judged it their right and duty to establifh fome religion, and that the peace and interests of fociety required, that fome should

Rogers's Vindication of the Civil Establishment of Religion, p. 21, and 22.

be

The duty of a

community to have a civil

establishmen

of religion

So

be established. All the difputes and contentions, which have happened on this fubject, have related to the choice of the religion; but in this conclufion, that fome should be established, the wifdom of all ages and countries has concurred; and this concurrence I infift on, as a full reply to all thofe authorities. of private writers, which are or can be cited, as favouring a contrary judgment. faid the elegant and learned author of Principles of Penal Law*. "Religion hath been wifely established by law, as ufeful and neceffary to fociety; and is fo wrought into the very frame of our government, as to become a main part of the conftitution. The magiftrate, therefore, though the well being of the state be his peculiar object, is by no means exempted from a due concern for the religion of his country. But it is no confequence from thefe premifes, that men should be debarred liberty of confcience, and the free use of reafon and enquiry; much lefs can any argument be drawn from them in favour of perfecution. Freedom of thought is the prerogative of human kind; a quality inherent in the very nature of a thinking being; a pri

* By Mr. Eden, now Lord Auckland, p. 91.

vilege,