In this case, the having performed the prior act is said to be a qualification for the being permitted to perform the posterior.The emolument annexed to the act professedly rewarded, is therefore, in this case as much a reward for assuming the qualificat;on, as a reward for performing the act, for the performance of which a man is required to qualify himself by the performance of the other.
In England (for I will go no farther) the subscribing a declaration of this sort is made a qualification for many of the principal emoluments to which a man can aspire: for every preferment in the church---for the liberty of engaging in the instruction of youth---for admission to the benefits of that mode of education which is looked upon as most liberal and advantageous, and thereby to the enjoyment, or the chance of the enjoyment of any one of that ample stock of emoluments which have been provided in the view of inducing young persons to put themselves in the way of that favourite mode of education.The articles, or propositions, to which this subscription is required, are termed Articles of Religion.By subscribing to these articles, a man declares that he believes the truth of certain facts which they aver.Among these facts there are many, which, whether true or not (a point which is nothing to the present purpose) are plainly, in a political view, of no sort of importance whatsoever.I say of no importance;since they contribute nothing to the furnishing either of any motive to prompt to action, or of any rule or precept to direct it.Be they true, or be they false---nothing is to be done in consequence---nothing to be abstained from.
The mischievous tendency, which the giving a reward has in this case, is much more palpable than what it has in the other because the probability of its giving birth to falsehood is the greater.
1.In the case of demonstrative lectures, all that it is absolutely necessary a man should do is---simply to state the arguments in favour of the proposition in question: he does not necessarily assert his own belief of the truth of it.``Such are the reasons'', he may say, ``which induce other people, and which if attended to, may perhaps induce you to believe it: whether they are conclusive or not, it lies upon you to judge: as to myself whether I myself believe it or no, is another matter.
I do not tell you---I am not bound to tell you.'' In the case of subscription he directly, plainly, and solemnly says---I believe it.
2.In the next place, the probability of falsehood is much greater in this case than in the other.In the case of demonstrative lectures, men are reasoned with, lest otherwise they should not believe: in the case of subscriptions, men are rewarded for subscribing because it is known many do not believe.Had men never disbelieved or doubted, they never would have been called upon to subscribe: it would have been useless and needless; nor would any one have thought of it.
Those who are inclined to place in the most favourable point of view the political efficacy of subscriptions to such articles, have called them articles of peace , as if there were nothing more in saying, I believe this proposition, than in saying, I engage not to say anything that tends to express a disbelief of it.
They would have been much better named had they been termed articles of war.
In regard to speculative opinions, there are but two cases in which men can be said to be at peace: when they think about it, and are of the same opinion, and when they think nothing about the matter: unless we reckon as a third that of their thinking about it, and differing about it, and not caring about the difference.That the expedient in question has no tendency to promote peace of the first kind, has been already been shown: it is equally clear, that it has none to produce peace of either of the two other kinds.The tendency of it is just the contrary.
If left to himself there is not one person in a hundred who would ever trouble himself about the matter.Of this we may be pretty certain.What motive should he have?---what should lead him to it?---what pleasure or what profit is there to be got by it? If left, then, to themselves, the bulk of mankind,---or, to speak more properly, the bulk of those whom it is proposed thus to discipline,---would think nothing about the matter.
They would therefore be in a state of the profoundest and most lasting peace.If this should not be granted, at least it will be granted, that it would be possible for them to be so.Subscriptions render it impossible.
For making peace between men, subscriptions are just the same sort of recipe that it would be for making peace between two mastiffs, to set a bone before them, and then tie them to the same stake.
When both parties are at liberty, both parties are at their ease, and there is peace between them.But when the stronger party says to the weaker,---``Stand forth and lie in the sight of God, or give up the choicest advantages of society, that we may engross them to ourselves'', what sort of peace is it that can subsist between them?
