Free Humphry Clinker by Tobias Smollett

admission into the mind of man?
    And here we may observe, continued he, turning himself towards
Demea
, a pretty curious circumstance in the history of the sciences. After the union of philosophy with the popular religion, upon the first establishment of Christianity, nothing was more usual, among all religious teachers, than declamations against reason, against the senses, against every principle derived merely from human research and inquiry. All topics of the ancient Academics were adopted by the Fathers; and thence propagated for several ages in every school and pulpit throughout Christendom. The Reformers embraced the same principles of reasoning, or rather declamation; and all panegyrics on the excellence of faith were sure to be interlarded with some severe strokes of satire against natural reason. A celebrated prelate * too, of the Romish communion, a man of the most extensive learning, who wrote a demonstration of Christianity, has also composed a treatise, which contains all the cavils of the boldest and most determined
Pyrrhonism. Locke
seems to have been the first Christian, who ventured openly to assert, that
faith
was nothing but a species of
reason
, that religion was only a branch of philosophy, and that a chain of arguments, similar to that which established any truth in morals, politics, or physics, was always employed in discoveringall the principles of theology, natural and revealed. 13 The ill use, which
Bayle
14 and other libertines made of the philosophical scepticism of the Fathers and first Reformers, still further propagated the judicious sentiment of
Mr Locke:
And it is now in a manner avowed, by all pretenders to reasoning and philosophy, that atheist and sceptic are almost synonymous. And as it is certain, that no man is in earnest, when he professes the latter principle; I would fain hope that there are as few, who seriously maintain the former.
    Don’t you remember, said
Philo
, the excellent saying of
Lord Bacon
15 on this head. That a little philosophy, replied
Cleanthes
, makes a man an atheist: A great deal converts him to religion. That is a very judicious remark too, said
Philo.
But what I have in my eye is another passage, where, having mentioned
David’s
fool, who said in his heart there is no God, 16 this great philosopher observes, that the atheists nowadays have a double share of folly: For they are not contented to say in their hearts there is no God, but they also utter that impiety with their lips, and are thereby guilty of multiplied indiscretion and imprudence. Such people, though they were ever so much in earnest, cannot, methinks, be very formidable.
    But though you should rank me in this class of fools, I cannot forbear communicating a remark, that occurs to me from the history of the religious and irreligious scepticism, with which you have entertained us. It appears to me, that there are strong symptoms of priestcraft in the whole progress of this affair. During ignorant ages, such as those which followed the dissolution of the ancient schools, the priests perceived, that atheism, deism, or heresy of any kind could only proceed from the presumptuous questioning of received opinions, and from a belief, that human reason was equal to everything. Education had then a mighty influence over the minds of men, and was almost equal in force to those suggestions of the senses and common understanding, by which the most determined sceptic must allow himself to be governed. But at present, when the influence of education is much diminished, and men, from a more open commerce of the world, have learned to compare the popular principles of differentnations and ages, our sagacious divines have changed their whole system of philosophy, and talk the language of
Stoics, Platonists
, and
Peripatetics
, 17 not that of
Pyrrhonians
and
Academics.
If we distrust human reason, we have now no other principle to lead us into religion. Thus, sceptics in one age, dogmatists in another;