land, for any plunder that they might grafting these notions upon the very make in France, after the Israelitish first buddings of the mind, not exfashion. But, says he, though I do cepting the children in the navy and not deny that plunder fis the soldier's the army, with respect to the latter of legitimate harvest, I deny that you whom, the Duke of York, as Comcan justify French plunder from any mander in Chief, has piously lent the example of plunder raised by the Jew- aid, of his great authority in the furish soldiers; and this is the curious therance of the holy work. Nay, it ground upon which he founds his de- is come to that at last, that in London, nial. He says, that "the form of which takes the lead in every thing, "the Jewish government, was that of good as well as bad, and whose ex66 a real Theocracy, that is, a govern- ample in this respect we may expect to "ment under the immediate superin- see followed, subscriptions are open"tendence of God himself, who was ed, for the purpose of causing Bibles "the ruler of the Jews, not under to be printed and circulated, where "the simple title of governor of the people may subscribe any sum, even "universe, but was, strictly speak- so low as one penny.-And, yet, in "ing, the temporal sovereign, who the midst of all this, directly in the gave them a code of laws, which teeth of all this, after all the soldiers 66 was the sole direction of their poli- have had Bibles put into their hands, 66 tical conduct, and every authority, and have, doubtless, in obedience to 66 whether ordinary, or extraordinary, the wishes of their commander, car"received its delegation immediately ried them in their knapsacks on fo66 from him." Therefore, says he, raging as well as other expeditions, up there can be no similarity in the cases starts my correspondent, and with on which to ground a parity of reason- front of ten-fold brass, tells me, and ing. If this be the case, away goes tells the public through me, that we at once all the Old Testament, at any are not, as to cases of plunder, to rate; and all these copies of the Bible take the Bible for our guide, because, that are circulated about, and all the forsooth, the government of the Jews searchings into them, which poor boys was a government by God himself!— and girls are desired to be incessantly If this be the case, if we are not to making, must tend to the producing look upon the Bible as a sure guide in of great and general mischief. The this respect, why are we to look upon people constantly hear sermons, found-it as a sure guide in any respect; why ed on texts of this book. They are constantly exhorted to look on it as their guide; to resort to it, in short, as the means of procuring to themselves everlasting salvation; they are told that it is the word of God; they are told, that if they diligently read it, they can scarcely fail to do well in every act of life. What incredible pains have been taken to inculcate these notions; to fasten them in the minds of the people; to make them the notions prevalent over all others. How many hundreds of meetings of the nobility, of the gentlemen, of the clergy, of all ranks and descriptions of people, who have a shilling in their pockets, have there been and are there yet daily held for the sole purpose of

are we to consider it as any guide at all?My correspondent very slily observes, that he believes me to assent to the inspiration of the scriptures; and that he hopes that I am acquainted with the history of the Jewish people. To be sure I assent to the inspiration of the scriptures; and to the inspiration of the whole of them too, and not to that of bits and pieces of them. I take them all together, and I take them, too, in the fair meaning of the words that are made use of.— And, now, that I have made this avowal, let me ask my correspondent, why I am to look upon the ten commandments as any rule of conduct for me, unless the soldier is to be guided by the example of plunder in the case

respondent, whose talents I am by no means inclined to underrate, but which talents I should like to see exerted in a very different way. I will engage for him, that he has never given subjects of this sort that consideration of which his mind is capable. He has taken things upon trust; he has adopt ed notions, in early life, which he has never had the leisure or the resolution

of the Midianites? I may, indeed, find that the Commandments are more consonant to the present practice of the world; but, as far as they have any authority from the book I find them in, they are exactly upon a level with the rest of that book, and, of course, when the book tells me, that God commanded his chosen people to do this or that, I look upon it that I ought to pay strict attention to the ex-critically to canvass. Prejudice has ample. If this be not the case, how dangerous must it be so widely to promulgate the Bible, and, indeed, how wicked must it be, to put it into the hands of ignorant people and of children, and that, too, observe, without any commentary; without any explanation; without any thing to guide them in selection. It is well known, that one of the heaviest charges brought against the Romish church, was that of keeping the Bible out of the hands of the people, and of performing divine service in a language which the people could not understand. That church was accused of a desire to keep the mass of the people in ignorance; but, if the doctrine of my correspon dent be sound, that church acted not only wisely, but charitably; for, how are the common people; how are the sailors and soldiers; how are the little girls and boys to distinguish between those parts of the Bible which they are to look upon as rules of conduct, and which parts they are to look upon in a different light? If it be true, that these exceptions and distinctions of my correspondent ought to be made, selections from the Bible ought to be published, and not the whole of the book. Some Synod, some Chapter, some Council, ought to be held, in order to determine what parts of the Bible should be selected for general circulation. To put the whole into the hands of the people, and then to tell them that only a part is to be attended to by them, is certainly, the most ridiculous, or at least, one of the most ridiculous, proceedings that ever was heard of. I have now, I think, answered the letter of my cor

had too much power in his mind to suffer him to give to truth a fair chance of success. If this were not the case, it is impossible that he should not perceive, that if Napoleon has been an instrument in the hands of God, and that, too, to punish a guilty people, Napoleon himself must be innocent of all the sufferings of those people.— The misfortune is, that men cannot find means sufficient to answer their wishes in reviling each other, without resorting to supernatural support.They must bring God or the devil everlastingly into their quarrels. The complainant has always God on his side, and his adversary the devil on his side. This it is which involves them in intricacies and inconsistencies without end. If they would be con, tent to judge of men's actions upon principles immoveable in nature, and upon those rules of morality which are universally recognised, they would expose themselves to no danger of being ridiculed, or of being defeated in argument, unless their premises or their conclusions were false. If the petulant scribes, to whom my corre spondent refers, had been content with censuring Buonaparte merely as an invader and a conqueror, they would have had much stronger ground against him, than they could possibly have after they dragged the Almighty into the quarrel. When once they did that, they drew round the person they attacked, a wall of brass, and, accordingly, they have retired defeated from the fortress.-One more obser vation I will add, and that is, that it always appears very surprising to me, that those, who have been, and who

must, if they be not sheer hypocrites, must have been guiltless in the case; be such decided enemies to the Church because God being Almighty, comof Rome, and such friends to religiouspelled him as well as employed him. liberty, should be so bitterly bent And that if, in speaking of God, we against Napoleon, who has done more understand a Being all-powerful, allfor religious freedom than was ever seeing, and ever-present, what such a done before in the world. He has, in Being permits, he must will.. a great part of Europe, in the fairest and most populous part of it, given men liberty to be of what religion they please. He has put down persecution; he has, in short, ás to religion, emancipated half Europe, if we estimate Europe by the worth of the climate and the products of the earth. And yet, the most zealous Protestants, who so loudly complained of the Catholics, would murder him if they could.

THE ANSWER,

NOT PUBLISHED BY MR. COBBETT.

Yet as

This, with the exception of one ver bal inaccuracy, which really was not worth noticing, is, to the best of my judgment, the amount of your argu ment on the first topic. With the lat ter part I shall begin, because the first in connexion: but before I meet the point of the objection, allow me to make a few preliminary remarks.

1st. When we speak of God, we understand a Being all-powerful, allseeing, ever-present, and infinitely holy. These attributes are as essentially involved in the idea of a God as rotundity is in that of a circle.

2dly. When we speak of man, we understand a free agent; that is, a creature possessing the power of choosing or rejecting, of acting or not act ing.

3dly. When we speak of certain human actions, we distinguish two things: the morality of the action, which is its conformity, or disagree

effect of the action, as it respects the happiness or misery of others.

SIR, After having dedicated so considerable a portion of your Register to my first letter, I can scarcely expect the insertion of a second, both because the times, as you intimate, seem to thicken on your attention, and because the subject is one that I am sensible can be interesting to but few of your readers, and must be tedious to most. But as I have advancement with the law of God; and the ed an opinion, I am bound in consist ency to support it, and to give it pub. licity too, as far as I am able. publicity must, in the present case, depend upon the discretion and convenience of my opponent, I am quite content that the few observations I may have occasion to make, in reply to your remarks, shall not appear until you have nothing better to substitute. To be as brief and as clear as I possibly can, I shall throw your remarks as they lie scattered about into the form of objections, and examine the propriety of your illustrations, after having discussed the accuracy of your principles.

4thly. When we speak of the will of Go, we distinguish a positive will and a negative will. The first only is accurately termed will, the second is more properly denominated permission. Thus God positively wills that man should be free; but as it is necessary for this purpose that man should have the power of committing sin, in this view God positively wills the possibility of sin, but only negatively wills or permits the sin itself. Yet no one will say that this negative will or per mission does away the guilt of the sin committed by the free agent.

Having thus cleared the way before us, I come straight to the solution of your objection; and bearing in mind that God is a Being infinite in all perfections, and man a free agent, Lun

1

|

equivocally deny that what God per- | his fellow-creatures, he only sees a mits he must positively will. For if natural consequence flowing from a God be all-seeing, he cannot but fore- | natural cause : free will abused ----pasknow even the future free actions of sion indulged guilt incurred; but men; if God be all-holy, he cannot while man proposes, God disposes: positively will (or wish, which is the and surely you will not pronounce it same thing) that sin should actually unbecoming the dignity of a wise Proexist, for that would be repugnant: vidence to render even the sinful acif he be all-powerful, he is able to pre- tions of men subservient, in their ef vent the existence of sin : but if, not- fects, to his views of mercy or of jus withstanding his foreseeing, that sin tice of mercy, in bringing some to a will exist; notwithstanding his posi- sense of their duty, by the application tive will that sin should not exist, con- of a wholesome severity; of justice, sistently with the free agency of man; by chastising others who have richly notwithstanding his power of prevent- merited the scourging. In this limited ing its existence, by destroying that sense may God be said to employ such free agency, it nevertheless does exist, people for his own particular purposes; --what follows, but that God permits not that he compels them to acts of it to exist, and permits it in order that violence, for that would instantly deman may be, strictly speaking, a free | stroy the free agency of man, but that agent. But now, as nothing more is finding them pre-disposed to gratify requisite to constitute man a free their own views of vengeance or ambi agent, than the power of committing tion, he suffers them silently or imper. sin, and not the actual commission of ceptibly to enter into his own grand it, hence God can only be said to wish designs, and thus become the uncon the possible existence of sin, not its scious instruments of his divine Provi actual existence, and hence also what- dence. You planned evil against me, ever he permits he does not positively says Joseph to his brothers, but G will. This, I think, is clear, and no planned it unto good. (Gen. L. 20. other hypothesis will supply an intel- Sept.) But now for your comments ligible mode of reconciling the free upon my illustrations. I had stated a will of man with the attributes of God. case of A, B, and C employing letters I now proceed to the second part of in preference to human personages, your objection.-If Nebuchodonosor fully aware that no parallel could be was employed by God to chastise the instituted between the relation in Jews, he must have been guiltless in which God stands to man, and the re the case, because God being Almighty, lation one man bears to another. You, compelled him as well as employed however, have characterized these let ters, and that, too, in a very curious manner. I make use of no harsher term, because being an anonymous cor respondent, I do not think myself au thorized to animadvert on your remarks, with that freedom with which you have animadverted upon mine. However, your application is curious.

him.

But here, Sir, let me advert to a principle that I laid down in the outset-The morality of an action, as there stated, is totally distinct from the effect of that action. The guilt of a sinful action attaches solely to him that commits it, because it proceeds from an abuse of his free will; but-Let A stand for a government, you the effects of that sinful action may say, B for a jailer, and C for a conextend to others. If God foresees demned felon." And so, if a jailer that a tyrant, from the impulse of a vicious disposition, will give loose to the lawless passions of his breast, will gratify his pride, his ambition, and revenge, at the expence of millions of

،،

،،

were to murder a condemned felon, he might be called, might he, the in. "strument of the government, and

66

yet be hanged himself for the of "fence? And the government might,