quisitive men will be apt to draw from such premises, we do not strike at the root of the evil, though we should ever so effectually annihilate the present scheme of the Gospel: for, of what use is freedom of thought, if it will not produce freedom of action? which is the sole end, how remote soever in appearance, of all objections against christianity; and therefore, the freethinkers consider it as a sort of edifice, wherein all the parts have such a mutual dependance on each other, that if you happen to pull out one single nail, the whole fabrick must fall to the ground. This was happily expressed by him, who had heard of a text brought for proof of the trinity, which in an ancient manuscript was differently read; he thereupon immediately took the hint, and by a sudden deduction of a long sorites, most logically concluded; why, if it be as you say, I may safely whore and drink on, and defy the parson. From which, and many the like instances easy to be produced, I think nothing can be more manifest, than that the quarrel is not against any particular points of hard digestion in the christian system, but against religion in general; which, by laying restraints on human nature, is supposed the great enemy to the freedom of thought and action.
Upon the whole, if it shall still be thought for the benefit of church and state, that christianity be abolished, I conceive however, it may be more convenient to defer the execution to a time of peace; and not venture, in this conjuncture, to disoblige our allies, who, as it falls out, are all christians, and many of them, by the prejudices of their education, so bigotted, as to place a sort of pride in the appellation. If upon being rejected by them, we
