consequences it endangered the faith itself, and inimical to the righteousness of God? How can we then, as their professed followers, give you the support you ask without belying our convictions and proving ourselves traitors to our own principles? These sentiments, Sir, I am more than fearful will not be acceptable to you. But I have felt myself called thus publicly to express them from finding you engaged in an extensive and apparently not unsuccessful attempt to attach to your cause those for whose souls I am to watch as one that must give an account. Neither is it on the exclusive behalf of the Protestant Faith that I write; but under a sense of anxiety for the general interests of religion. So long as men are earnest and sincere, even in erroneous views with respect to Christ, there may be in them a feeling of real piety; and those efforts will at least be honest which they make for the extension of their own opinions. But we have now to speak of the system of giving countenance and support to religious opinions which are diametrically opposed to our own. Its adoption here may for a time promote the apparent interests of your Church; but I warn you of the injury which religion must sustain from the example of such an alliance. You will do no good, even according to your own understanding of the term, to those with whom you are united; and they will do you much harm. You will not bring them over to your Church; but what if they should carry into its bosom the spirit of their own indifference! In availing yourself of their assistance, you recognize a principle which, carried to its full extent, would authorise all men to encourage all sorts of opinions, without consideration of their truth or falsehood. I do not perceive where the limit is to be fixed; for if any of us may in one instance support that which we do not believe, why not in all? It is a very different case from that of forsaking one form of Christianity for the purpose of em bracing another under a conviction of its superior truth and sanctity. There is at least consistency in such a proceeding; but we are required to abandon consistency, and to admit that all zeal and earnestness are out of place with regard to questions which involve the essentials of religious truth. Whenever we are brought to a general persuasion that so much laxity upon the subject of religious engagements is admissible, we cannot be far from thinking that religion itself is an affair of very little moment. For let your judgment of men in this behalf be formed upon observation of their conduct in other instances. If in the common affairs of life they ever display such unconcern about their own way of thinking, and such readiness to exert themselves in favour of an opposite persuasion, you conclude at once that they have no strong feeling of the importance of the subject either to themselves or others.You, Sir, I am painfully sensible, are sanctioning an awful precedent in favour of religious indifference under the pretext of toleration. The enemies of religion itself, under each and all of its forms, will quickly make you perceive its force when applied to their own purposes. You may accomplish what appears to you a great object for your Church, but you will discover, when it is too late, that the effect of that very success has been to eat out the entire heart of religion, and to leave nothing remaining but its outward form. I do not expect to be immediately or generally believed, but time will prove that I am right. To its decision I appeal; and earnestly desiring that all men may know and embrace the truth. I remain, Sir, Your very obedient humble servant, STEPHENS AND STOKES, PRINTERS, SYDNEY. |