| Rise and Fall of English DeismWelcome to ON TRUTHA ministry of Dr. Cky J. Carrigandevoted to Apologetic Evangelism which seeks to equip the saints forthe work of evangelism through a rigorous pursuit of TRUTH motivated by LOVE. HOME BACK TO INDEXHOWTO BECOME A CHRISTIAN? THE RISE AND FALL OF ENGLISH DESIMBy Cky J. Carrigan, Ph.D. (Fall 1995)INTRODUCTIONThis paper will demonstrate the following:1. English Deism began with the ideas of Edward Lord Herbert of Cherburyin 1624, as a consequence of several ancient and immediate influences;2. It flourished after the turn of the century chiefly because of John Locke'snew epistemology, John Toland's revision of Locke, and Matthew Tindal's summarydefense;3. And it declined rapidly in the middle 1700's mainly because of David Hume'sextreme skepticism.This demonstration will begin with a survey of the ideas, characteristics,and historical developments of Deism, followed by a treatment of the majorbackground influences that produced it. Then, the paper will undertake tostudy the people and ideas of three distinct periods of English Deism: Herbertto Blount (1624-1695), Toland to Tindal (1696-1741), and Annet to Bolingbroke(1742-1770).Finally, the paper will present several concluding observations about thehistorical development and chief characteristics of English Deism togetherwith some evaluations about the movement as a whole.OVERVIEW OF DEISMDefinitionDeism is the term customarily employed to describe the unorthodox religiousviews associated with several seventeenth and eighteenth century Englishwriters beginning with Lord Herbert of Cherbury and continuing with CharlesBlount, John Toland, Anthony Collins, and Matthew Tindal.1 Deism is a movementor system of thought advocating natural religion, emphasizing morality, anddenying the interference of the Creator with the laws of the universe.A. H. Strong defines Deism as, "the view that represents the universe asa self-sustained mechanism from which God withdrew as soon as he had createdit."2Etymology and Early Use of TermPrior to the seventeenth century, the words "theism" and "deism" were usedinterchangeably. The English word "theism" was formed on theos, the Greekword for God. ""Deism" was formed on deus, the Latin word for God. Philosophers and theologiansbegan routinely to discriminate between these two terms in the late seventeenthcentury.3Scholars are not in complete agreement concerning the first use of the word"Deism" in England to denote distinctive English Deism as opposed to Frenchphilosophical naturalism, but there is general agreement that "Deism" wascertainly used in the former manner by the year 1682.4The first known use of the term "Deist" to describe an advocate of unorthodoxreligion is found on the continent in the dedicatory epistle by the SwissReformed theologian, Viret, dated December 12, 1563.5 Viret, who had beenin Lyon, France wrote:There are many who confess that while they believe like the Turks and theJews that there is some sort of God and some sort of deity, yet with regardto Jesus Christ and to all that to which the doctrine of the Evangelistsand the Apostles testify, they take all that to be fables and dreams. . .. There is much more difficulty with these than there is even with the Turks,or at least as much. For they hold opinions with regard to religion thatare just as or more strange than the Turks and all other miscreants. I haveheard that there are of this band those who call themselves Deists, and entirelynew word, which they want to oppose to Atheist. For in that atheist signifiesa person who is without God, they want to make it understood that they arenot at all without God, since they certainly believe there is some sort ofGod, whom they even recognize as creator of heaven and earth, as do the Turks;but as for Jesus Christ, they only know that he is and hold nothing concerninghim nor his doctrine.6Chief CharacteristicsDeism is similar to theism, pantheism, and polytheism in that it advocatesa belief in a god or gods, as opposed to atheism which posits no god of anykind. Deism is dissimilar as well. It is not a well defined religious beliefsystem but Deism generally can be called a natural religion which acceptsa body of religious knowledge acquired solely by the use of reason as opposedto revelation or dogmatic instruction. Another general characteristic ofDeism is the reduction of God's function in creation to that of first causeonly, with no further involvement. Deists generally reject the Trinity, theincarnation, the divine origin and authority of the Bible, the atonement,miracles, particular elect people such as Israel, and supernatural redemptiveacts in history. 7Scholars generally agree that there are five basic doctrines of Deism: Godexists, God ought to be worshipped, the practice of virtue is the chief partof the worship of God, men have always had an abhorrence of crime and areunder the obligation to repent of their sins, and there will be rewards andpunishments after death.8 Charles Hodge called these five doctrines "theconfession of Faith of all Deists."9Deism was largely a negative movement. John Orr distinguished Deists fromTheists by observing the positivism and negativism of Deism juxtaposed againstTheism. The Deists positively advocated their concept of God and his relationshipto the world and they championed ideas of their rational and natural approachto religion. While it was the positive aspects of Deism that made it unique,the negative work of Deists was more prominent. On the negative side, Deistsset themselves against positive religions like Judaism, Christianity, andIslam. Generally, it could be said that the Deists were more against establishedreligions than for their own. If they did not destroy the positions of theiropponents, they could not hope to maintain their own postitions.10 In thisvein, Orr observed:If the Bible were indeed a special revelation from God, if miracles wereactually wrought, and prophecies requiring supernatural inspiration wereactually spoken, if Jesus Christ was indeed the incarnate Son of God, virginbornand raised from the dead, if the institutions, ordinances, rites and doctrinesof the Christian church were God-given through inspired men, then the mainposition of the deists that God did not interfere with the world which hehad made or interrupt the operation of those natural laws which were givenat the creation would be untenable. Since belief in at least the greaternumber of these things was taught by most branches of the contemporary Christianchurch, the deist could hardly hope to win men from these churches to hisown viewpoint without first destroying their faith in these beliefs. . .. Faith in its [the Bible] trustworthiness must be broken down if its teachingswere to be rejected.11Another chief characteristic of Deism was anti-clericalism. While othernon-Deists loathed the clergy as well, the Deists may have had a greaterstake in their disdain of clergy. Orr drew the following conclusion on thismatter:The setting of one part of Scripture against another, the attacks upon thecanon of Scripture and the attacks upon the character of the clergy werewith the deists all part of an effort to get rid of an authority that taughtpositions inconsistent with deism.12Brief Account of Rise and Fall of English Deism13Early Influence (pre-1624)The ideas of early Deism were probably born in France as evidenced by the1563 reference to Deists by Viret.14 Viret's encounter was supported by asimilar reference to Deists by another Frenchman named Philippe de Mornayin his Verite of 1581.Rise (1624-1695)The first major Deistic work, De Veritate, was penned in 1624 by the Englishman,Herbert of Cherbury and published in France. In 1670, Benedict Spinoza thoughnot a Deist wrote Tractatus, a work that would heavily influence thepresuppositions of Deism. English Deism developed very slowly until Blountand his Religio Laici in 1693, ushered in the active period of English Deism.John Locke while not a Deist brought moderate empiricism and theologicalrationalism to the English milieu with his Essay in 1689, and Reasonablenessof Christianity in 1695.Peak (1696-1741)15Locke's influence upon English Deists in the late seventeenth century wasimportant. Deists, their ideas and their works flourished after Locke dueto an increased tolerance of free thinking and a relaxation of the presslaws. The major deistic works of this period were Toland's, ChristianityNot Mysterious (1696) which invoked Locke's rationalism in religious matters;Collins' Discourse on Free Thinking (1713) which adopted many of Locke'sarguments and Ground and Reason (1724) which attacked the validity of fulfilledbiblical prophecy; Thomas Woolston's Six Discourses (1729) which ridiculedmiracles, especially the resurrection of Jesus; and finally, Tindal'sChristianity as Old as the Creation (1730) which appealed to a natural religionand marked the high point of English Deism.Decline (1742-1770)English Deism began to lose its appeal when extreme skepticism arose in HenryDodwell's Christianity Not Founded on Argument (1742). This work abandonedtheological rationalism altogether in favor of mysticism or skepticism. DavidHume's "Essay of Miracles" (1748) and Natural History of Religion (1757)rejected revealed religion but also helped dissolve Deism. Hume underminedthe self-sufficiency of reason and therefore the possibility of a naturalreligion. The last principle Deist was the Lord Bolingbroke, but his Worksin five volumes (1754) failed to reignite the dying flame of English Deism.MAJOR BACKGROUND INFLUENCES (pre-1624)16William Lane Craig identified several major factors which contributed tothe rise of English Deism. They were the geographical expansion of Europe,scientific revolutions, incipient biblical criticism, and the religio-socialeffects of the Reformation.17Geographic ExpansionThe geographic expansion of Europe in the three centuries prior to 1750,helped set the stage for the rise and spread of Deism. The travel literatureabout the New World of Columbus, the voyages of Magellan, and the colonizationof Virginia to the west, together with the interest in India, Persia, andMuslim culture to the east served to challenge belief in traditional Christianorthodoxy. Increasing familiarity with foreign lands and their religionspromoted Deism in two ways. First, it advanced relativistic understandingsof worldwide religious beliefs. Second, it tended to make Christianity'sexclusive claims about itself seem unjustly narrow and cruel.18Scientific RevolutionsSeventeenth century advancements in three scientific areas promoted the riseof Deism. New findings in astronomy, geology, and physics radically changedthe typical view of the world. In astronomy, Copernicus revived the heliocentrichypothesis in his De Revolutionibus in 1543, Kepler offered the three lawsof planetary motion in 1609, and Galileo published his works on sunspotsin 1613. This revolution in astronomy served to discredit the Church andthe Scriptures which rejected, or appeared to reject, these scientific findings.More importantly, the shift in the relationship between God and man promotedDeism.19 Craig observed, "The utter insignificance of man in an obliviousuniverse governed by purely physical forces promoted belief in a Deity whomaster-minded the great creation but who took no personal interest in thepetty affairs of men."20New theories about fossils and the geological evidence suggested an old earthwhile Bishop Ussher and the Church's interpretation of Genesis suggesteda young earth (4004 B.C.). Craig posited,The increasing evidence for the antiquity of the earth and against the literalinterpretation of Genesis promoted Deism not only in casting doubt on thereliability of the Bible, but also in disclosing the relative newness ofthe Judeo-Christian religion. If the earth and mankind existed long beforethe origin of these revealed religions, then, if Christianity be true, millionsof people in the past must have been passed over by God in silence. . .21The third kind of scientific revolution that gave rise to Deism was Newtonianphysics. Isaac Newton's Principia in 1687, offered three laws of motion thatconstituted the Newtonian world machine. Deism was encouraged by this scientificfinding because it suggested a world machine governed by inexorable lawsset forth by the Creator which permitted no miracles, or violations of thelaws of nature.22Incipient Biblical Criticism23Attacks on the reliability of the Scriptures gave rise to Deism as well.Hugo Grotius initiated the method of handling the Bible as ordinary historicaldocuments rather than inspired writings in his works of the 1640's. Otherworks critical of inspired Scripture like Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan (1651)and Spinoza's Tractactus (1670), together with the aggressive debate betweenSimon and Le Clerc about issues of biblical inspiration served to createdoubts about the reliability of Scripture and thus fueled the fire of earlyDeism.24The ReformationThe beliefs and events of the Protestant Reformation also served to advanceDeism. Craig identified seven religio-social effects of the Reformation whichcontributed to the rise and spread of Deism. The Reformation diminished theimportance of ecclesiastical additions and the miraculous content of religion,while it increased the role of reason in religion. The Reformation also promptedanti-clericalism, the proliferation of sects, religious wars, and policiesof intolerance. The consequences of the Reformation became fertile soil forideas that tended to promote Deism.25Other Influences26There were other influences which gave rise to English Deism. Among themwere the invention of the printing press in Gutenberg (1450); theologicalcontroversies including Gnosticism, Origen's allegorical method,anti-Trinitarianism, unorthodox Christologies, and Pelagianism-Arminianism.Other influences included the philosophies of Socrates, Plato, Democritus,Leucippus, Epicurus, Cicero, Plutarch, Celsus, Porphyry, and Philostratus;and Protestant Scholasticism.27THE RISE: HERBERT TO BLOUNT (1624-1695)28English Deism rather than a totally new idea had its roots in immediate andancient ideas. Many deistic characteristics especially its negative aspects29evolved from prior periods. While certainly not the first Deist, most agreethat Herbert of Cherbury was the first prominent writer who integrated manyof the deistic ideas into his writings. This fact earned him the title "Fatherof English Deism."30The early period of English Deism began with Herbert's De Veritate (1624)and concluded with the publication of Blount's Works (1695). Other primarycontributors to the ideas of this period were Thomas Hobbes, Thomas Browne,John Tillotson, and John Locke. Scholars disagree about the extent to whichHobbes, Browne, Tillotson, and Locke were actually Deists. While notthoroughgoing self-proclaimed Deists, they each tended toward a rationaltheology which influenced those who would be Deists.Beginnings: HerbertEdward Lord Herbert of Cherbury (1583-1648) was a soldier, diplomat to France,knight, and philosopher. He wrote De Veritate31 in England and anxiouslypublished it in France in 1624. About this work, Herbert said,My book. . . having begun by me in England, and formed there in all its principleparts, was about this time finished. . . I communicated it to Hugo Grotius.. . and Monsieur Tielenus. . . and after they had perused it. . . exhortedme earnestly to print and publish it; howbeit, as the frame of my whole bookwas so different from any thing which had been written heretofore, I foundI must either renounce the authority of all that had written formerly concerningthe method of finding out truth, and consequently insist upon my own way,or hazard myself to a general censure, concerning the whole argument of mybook. . . I did consider whether it was not better for me a while to suppressit.32Herbert, having second thoughts about publishing his book, prayed to God,asked Him for a sign constituting permission to print it, and recorded thathe received such a sign at that very moment.33De Veritate was basically an epistemology. It distinguished between truththat can be known through experience by reason and innate truths which arecommon to all men. This work set forth five innate truths that became thehallmarks of Deism.34 De Veritate was so influential that John Locke devotedpart of his Essay to a refutation of Herbert's innate truths.35According to Orr, "The whole tenor of Herbert's writings is to the effectthat underneath the rubbish of all particular religions are the innate principlesof natural religions which are quite sufficient and that therefore specialrevelations have neither been needed nor given."36 John Leland said, "Hislordship [Herbert] seems to have been one of the first that formed Deisminto a System, and asserted the sufficiency, universality, and absoluteperfection of natural religion, with a view to discard all extraordinaryrevelation, as useless and needless."37Non-Deist Contributors: Hobbes, Browne, Tillotson and LockeThomas Hobbes (1588-1679) was a prolific writer, and political and religiousphilosopher. He was an admirer of Galileo and served as an amanuenses ofFrancis Bacon.38 While not clearly a Deist, more likely a materialist-atheist,39Hobbes sensationalist epistemology certainly influenced the rise of EnglishDeism. In Leviathan (1651) he remarked, ". . . there is no conception ina man's mind, which hath not at first, totally, or by parts, been begottenupon the organs of sense."40 His epistemology was foundational for his biblicalcriticism. In this vein, Orr remarked, "Hobbes' most important contributionto deistic thought was in his Bible criticism and his teachings concerningthe canon of Scripture, inspiration and miracles."41Sir Thomas Browne's (1605-1682) chief influence on Deism was his open questionsabout the mysterious elements of religion. In his main work, Religio Medici(1642) he remarked,As for those wingy Mysteries in Divinity, and airy subtleties in Religion,which have unhing'd the brains of better heads, they never stretched thePia Mater [membrane surrounding the brain] of mine. . . . I bless myselfand am thankful that I lived not in the days of Miracles, that I never sawCHRIST nor His Disciples. I would not have been one of. . . CHRIST'S patientson whom He wrought His wonders. . . nor should I enjoy that greater blessingpronounced to all that believed and saw not.42Browne's open inquiries about the mysteries of religion, especially Christianity,provided a friendly context in which Deism would gain momentum.John Tillotson (1630-1694), Archbishop of Canterbury, while not a Deist,had a considerable influence upon Deism. His high standing in the churchof England coupled with his advocacy of rational supernaturalism tended topromote some aspects of Deism. Tillotson reduced religion to three principlesof natural religion similar to Herbert's five innate truths. Additionally,he suggested that revelation clarified the truths discerned by natural reason43saying, "Natural religion is the foundation of all revealed religion andrevelation is designed simply to establish its duties."44John Locke (1632-1704) was a very influential English philosopher whose beliefsweighed heavily upon the rise of English Deism. So important was the influenceof Locke upon the entire deistic movement that Orr divided the periods ofDeism into Pre-Lockean and Post-Lockean Deism. Orr further suggested, "Locke,though not himself a Deist,45 undoubtedly exercised a greater influence uponthe deistic movement subsequent to his time than any other writer with thepossible exception of Herbert of Cherbury."46Locke's two works that cut across Deism most were, Essays in Human Understanding(1689) and The Reasonableness of Christianity (1695). Locke led Deists tobuild an epistemology upon empirical foundations rather than upon Herbert'sinnate ideas.47 Locke proffered several other ideas that appealed to andgrounded Deism though Deists usually developed these ideas more extremelythan Locke. He advocated toleration, anti-clericalism, the reasonable evaluationof the mysterious elements of religion, the reinterpretation of the natureof miracles, an ethical rather than ritualistic approach to religion, anda weaker dependance upon traditional revelation and greater dependance uponnatural religion. Together with the above influences, Locke's Arian-unitarianChristology and his acceptance of the possibility of a material soul laidthe egg that John Toland and others would hatch.48Herbert Revisited: Charles BlountCharles Blount (1654-1693) may be credited with reviving the ideas of Herbertand "gathering up the deistic notions that were in the air and. . . makingthem known."49 His two main works were, Religio Laici (1683) and Works (1695).Religio set forth to identify what was good in non-Christian faiths and badin Christian faiths. The positive elements of Blount's writings were notas prominent as the negative ones. His negative contributions centered aroundthe criticism of biblical veracity.50 Blount's two other contributions tothe evolving deistic movement were his opposition to Christianity by parallelingfeatures of it with pagan legends, and his widespread communication of Copernicanastronomy.51THE PEAK: TOLAND TO TINDAL (1696-1741)English Deism though relatively short lived flourished after Locke's influence.Deism also flourished in this period because of a slightly more free press52and tolerant atmosphere. Four Deists were the principle contributors to thispeak period of English Deism. They were Toland, Collins, Woolston, and Tindal.53John TolandJohn Toland (1670-1722) was an Irish Roman Catholic who became a liberalprotestant, a latitudarian, a Deist, then finally a pantheist.54 His chiefwork, Christianity Not Mysterious was instrumental in ushering in the peakperiod of English Deism. Not Mysterious was basically an argument againstmystery and supernaturalism in Christianity based on a modification of Locke'stheory of knowledge. Toland rejected Locke's distinction between revelationthat was above reason, and therefore true, and revelation that was contraryto reason and therefore false.55In 1698, Toland published Amyntor which severely questioned the canon ofScripture and therefore undermined the authority of revelation in favor ofa natural-rational religion.56Toland contributed to Deism in two chief ways. He helped build Deism uponLocke's epistemology and he was critical of the canon of Scripture. Thus,Toland made Deism clearly and openly an anti-mystery and anti-supernaturalcult.57Anthony CollinsAnthony Collins (1676-1729), a close friend of Locke, did not contributeany new big ideas to Deism but his two main works served effectively to increasethe intensity of the deistic debate with orthodoxy and incite replies. HisDiscourse of Free-Thinking (1713) was an argument for religious tolerationand freethinking as the title implies. The first part of Free-Thinkingconstituted a summary of Locke's Letters on Toleration and the second partrepresents a list of free thinkers and their virtues.58 Sown through thiswork were many arguments against the reliability of the Bible59 andsupernaturalistic Christianity60.Collins' second work, The Ground and Reason of the Christian Religion (1724),is similar to the first. It set forth to decrease the credibility of Scriptureby appealing to, among other things, an argument against fulfilled prophecyas the grounds for believing in orthodox Christianity's claims.61 This argumentagainst Scripture on the basis of prophecy may have been Collins' primarycontribution of content to Deism.There was little positive definition of Deism in Collins' works. Primarily,he was dedicated to arguing against the Bible, its prophecies, Christianityin general, and the clergy. These arguments were so provocative they generatedfifty-five written replies.62 This heightened debate may have been Collins'other major contribution to Deism.Thomas Woolston63Thomas Woolston (1669-1731) was a prolific writer and "the most vitriolicof the Deists."64 His main work, Discourses on Miracles, in six volumes,was an attack on a large number of individual miracles in Scripture ratherthan a philosophical treatise against miracles in general. He applied theallegorical method refined by Collins to a treatment against miracles, especiallythe resurrection of Jesus. His characteristic argument attempted to demonstratethat the church fathers believed the miracles to be allegorical. Like Collins,Woolston proffered no essentially new ideas or positive definitions of Deism,but his works generated sixty written replies.65Matthew TindalIf Toland initiated the peak period of English Deism, then Matthew Tindal(1655-1733) represented "the culmination of the constructive phase of EnglishDeism."66 His main work, Christianity as Old as the Creation (1730) was calledby Lucius Noack, "The Deist Bible," because it so completely captured theviews held in common by most Deists.67 In this work Tindal wrote,. . . no Religion can come from a Being of infinite Wisdom and Perfection,but what is absolutely perfect. Can, therefore, a Religion absolutely perfect,admit of any Alteration; or be capable of Addition, or Diminution; and notbe as immutable as the Author of it? Can Revelation, I say, add any Thingto a Religion thus absolutely perfect, universal, and immutable?68Livingston made the following observation concerning the premises of Oldas the Creation,Tindal's book begins with two a priori principles on which his whole caseis built. First, God is eternally the same, infinitely wise and good. Whatoriginates with a perfect, all-wise God must itself be perfect. Thus anabsolutely perfect religion cannot be altered or increased or decreased.Secondly, human nature is always the same and unalterable in itself. Hence,God's perfect religion must dispense its truth equally to all men at alltimes. Historical revelation can add nothing to a religion that is absolutelyperfect, universal, and unchanging.69Tindal integrated several elements of previous deistic writings in one work.He became the representative Deist. He advocated Herbert's positive naturalreligion, Locke's reason, and the several attacks on the canon. He used Blount'sparallels between Christianity and pagan stories, and he aped Shaftesbury'sstress on ethics over ritualism. He affirmed Collins' allegorical interpretationof prophecy and Woolston's similar arguments against miracles. He espousedtoleration and anti-clericalism. And he viewed himself with most Deists asa reformer rather than an enemy of Christianity.70The chief hallmark of Deism may have been its attack on Scripture as a reliablesource for knowledge. In this regard, Tindal may have been Deism's greatestchampion. Because of the obvious consequences of Tindal's views on orthodoxy,Old as the Creation may have been the most important document of the movement.It was so dangerous to orthodoxy that it generated one hundred and fiftyresponses71THE DECLINE: ANNET TO BOLINGBROKE (1742-1770)There were several factors which contributed to the rapid decline of EnglishDeism after Tindal's Old as the Creation. After a slow growth from Herbertto Toland and the flourishing of Deism from Toland to Tindal, there was astate of general exhaustion of ideas needed to fuel such a thought movement.There were no new ideas or approaches coming from deistic writers, onlyrestatements of the same ideas. Division among the Deists and the mightydefense of learned orthodox opponents stalled the movement as well. Dodwell'sand Hume's radical skepticism undermined Deism with free thinkers, and thepublic at large saw Deism as responsible for the rise of immorality. Thespiritual awakening of the Wesley's together with a general preoccupationwith political and military matters related to the Colonies and France alsohelped begin the rapid decline and almost complete extinction of Deism inEngland.72There were four prominent Deist's writing in this period: Peter Annet, ThomasChubb, Conyers Middleton, and Henry Bolingbroke. More significant than theseDeists to the fate of the movement were the works of two non-Deists. HenryDodwell Jr. and David Hume put forth ideas that severely undermined Deismwith free thinkers. Their positions served to take reason out of rationalreligion which left essentially no religion at all.The Deists: Annet to BolingbrokePeter Annet (1693-1769) was very hostile to the clergy and to Scripture.He was a thoroughgoing Deist in every way. He distinguished himself by beingextremely critical of the character and reputation of King David and theApostle Paul.73Thomas Chubb (1679-1747), one of the more radical Deists, distinguished himselfin the propagation of Deism to the lower classes through his widely circulatedwritings, and in his assertion that Jesus was a Deist.74Conyers Middleton (1683-1750), a clergyman, took the deistic epistemologyand applied it chiefly to an investigation into the post-biblical miraclesin his Free Inquiry in the Miraculous Powers, Which Are Supposed to HaveSubsisted in the Christian Church (1749). Strangely, he did not however applythis epistemology to the miracles of Christ and the Apostles when he wrote,The History of the Gospel, I hope may be true, though the History of theChurch be fabulous. And if the ecclesiastic Historians have recorded manysilly fictions, under the name of miracles, as they undoubtedly have, theblame must be charged to the writers, not to their religion.75Henry Bolingbroke (1672-1751) did not wish to have his generally unfriendlyWorks in five volumes published until after his death. He was of high rankin society and a very able writer, but his writings appeared too late toinfluence the course of the deistic movement in a major way. Bolingbrokewas a rationalistic believer in God76 who expressed his Deism in a very negativeway.The Non-Deists: Dodwell, Jr. and HumeDodwell, Jr.Henry Dodwell, Jr. (d. 1784) asserted in his short booklet, ChristianityNot Founded on Argument (1742) that religion was something absolutely outof the proper jurisdiction of reason. This important work, unfriendly toDeism and orthodox Christianity alike, served to point out the tendency ofDeism to lead to skepticism. It is arguable whether Dodwell was indeed anabsolute mystic or a rationalist poking fun at irrational Christianity. However,it is rather likely that his argument moved more Deists into the ranks ofskepticism than it moved orthodox Christians into the ranks of skepticismor mysticism. In this regard, Dodwell's arguments were the beginning of awatershed that Hume would reenforce.77Dodwell proffered three arguments. He argued first, "it is evident from thenature of reason and the nature of religion that God never intended reasoningto be the method by which men should be led to a true faith."78 He arguedsecond, "the Bible itself does not teach that the appeal to reason is theway to faith or right religion."79 And he argued third, "the Scripturesthemselves say faith comes only by the Holy Spirit."80Thus, with these arguments Dodwell together with Joseph Butler and WilliamLaw "served as significant links between the Deism of Tindal and its downfallat the hands of Hume."81HumeThe beliefs of David Hume (1711-1776) can not be easily defined because hewas not a particularly consistent writer.82 He was further from orthodoxChristianity then the regular Deists83 though he was equally as anti-clerical,anti-miracle, anti-Bible, and anti-Christianity as any Deist. His main worksthat influenced Deism were "Essays of Miracles" (1748), and "Of the Ideaof Necessary Connexion" both compiled in An Enquiry Concerning HumanUnderstanding, and Natural History of Religion (1757). Hume was like theDeists in some regards but unlike them in others. He was in agreement withthe negative expressions of Deism which undermined orthodoxy. More importantly,he was in sharp disagreement with the chief positive assertions of Deism.84He rejected Herbert's innate ideas which were the grounds for natural religion,and he rejected the whole idea of causation which ultimately undermined thegrounds for the Creator, First Cause, kind of Deism. On the latter subjectHume wrote,Here, then, many philosophers think themselves obliged by reason to haverecourse, on all occasions, to the same principle, which the vulgar neverappeal to but in cases that appear miraculous and supernatural. They acknowledgemind and intelligence to be, not only the ultimate and original cause ofall things, but the immediate and sole cause of every event which appearsin nature. They pretend that those objects which are commonly denominatedcauses, are in reality nothing but occasions; and that the true and directprinciple of every effect is not any power or force in nature, but a volitionof the Supreme Being, who wills that such particular objects should for everbe conjoined with each other. Instead of saying that one billiard ball movesanother by a force which it has derived from the author of nature, it isthe Deity himself, they say, who, by a particular volition, moves the secondball. . .85In sum, Hume's rejection of causality or necessary connection, so severelywounded Deism that it would not recover in England.CONCLUSIONHistorical DevelopmentEnglish Deism began with the ideas of Edward Lord Herbert of Cherbury in1624. These ideas were recaptured and recommunicated by Charles Blount in1683 and 1695. Herbert's natural religion and innate truths, though redefined,served as the grounds for English Deism until its decline in the middle ofthe eighteenth century. John Locke provided a new epistemology for Deismin 1689 and 1695, based on empirical foundations while keeping an open mindto matters above reason.John Toland modified Herbert and Locke, arguing absolutely against thesupernatural and ushered in the peak period of English Deism. Then, MatthewTindal brought Deism's ideas to their highest point with his restatementof Toland and others in 1730. Tindal was the most severe and comprehensiveopponent of Scripture.Deism ran out of steam in the 1740's and beyond because it could not standagainst the orthodox's rebuttal or the skeptic's inquiry. Joseph Butler andother orthodox Christians argued effectively against Deism in 1736. Moreimportantly however, Henry Dodwell's argument against faith on the basisof reason in 1742, together with David Hume's argument against causalityc. 1750, struck the death blow to English Deism. The ideas of Deism, bornin the minds of moderately skeptic people could not be held in the face ofextreme skepticism.Definition and Chief CharacteristicsDeism was a natural religion which accepted a body of religious knowledgeacquired solely by the use of reason as opposed to revelation or dogmaticinstruction. Deism was the religion of an Absentee-Creator God. It affirmedthe existence of a God who ought to be worshipped by virtuous living. Italso proffered an innate awareness of evil and need for repentance togetherwith an innate awareness of next-life consequences for this-life conduct.Though most Deists called themselves Christians, Deism was generally againstevery distinctively Christian religious belief. Deism was especially againstthe fundamental doctrines of substitutionary atonement, virgin conception,incarnation, and bodily resurrection. It was against any authority that wouldseek to shape its beliefs or behavior including the reliability of Scriptureand the clergy who communicated it. Deism was not against everything however.It was for religious toleration of dissenters, free-thinkers, and non-Christians,though Deism was not usually tolerant of orthodox Christians.ObservationsConsidering the roots and beliefs of English Deism, one might conclude thatit was the likely and logical consequence of a theology or philosophy whichrejects or undermines revelation. It began with a priori premises that itcould not hold forever. Deism was both ushered in and ushered out by varyingdegrees of skepticism. It was a relatively brief and relatively confinedmovement that attempted to make sense of a world that makes no sense apartfrom an unwavering confidence in biblical revelation and the affirmationthat Jesus is Lord. English Deism rose, flourished, and fell because of TheSkeptic's query, "Hath God said?"________________1Colin Brown, Christianity and Western Thought, Vol. 1 (Downers Grove;InterVarsity Press, 1990), 197-214; and Walter Elwell, ed. Evangelical Dictionaryof Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984), s.v. "Deism," by M. H. MacDonald,304.2A. A. Strong, Systematic Theology (Old Tappan: New Jersey: Judson Press),414.3John Orr, English Deism: Its Roots and Its Fruits (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,1934), 13.4Webster's Ninth, 335 (1682).See also Walsh's article for an important treatment on the use, meaning,and development of the term "Deism" in English writings. Walsh concludesthat before 1670, "Deism" was a foreign loan word from France and its useas early as 1621 in England referred to the French movement of free thinkingand not English, Herbert of Cherbury, kind of Deism. Clement Walsh, "A Noteon the Meaning of "Deism,"" Anglican Theological Review 38 (1956): 160-165.5William Lane Craig, The Historical Argument for the Resurrection of JesusDuring the Deist Controversy (Lewiston, England: Edwin Mellen Press, 1985),72.6Viret, L'instruction chretienne; quoted in Craig, 73.7Elwell, 304.8These doctrines are based on Herbert's five truths in De Vertitate.This list is from James Livingston, Modern Christian Thought from theEnlightenment to Vatican II (New York: Macmillan, 1971), 14.See Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 42."1. The existence of God. 2. The dependence of man on God, and his obligationto reverence him. 3 Piety consists in the harmony of the human faculties.4. The essential difference between good and evil. 5. A future state of rewardsand punishment."See also Orr, 62. "I That there is one Supreme God. II That he ought to beworshipped. III That Virtue and Piety are the chief parts of Divine Worship.IV That we ought to be sorry for our sins and repent of them. V That Divinegoodness doth dispense rewards and punishments both in this life and afterit."This list may be directly referenced in the English translation by Herbertof Cherbury entitled, The Ancient Religion.9Hodge, 42.10Orr, 15-16.11Ibid., 16.12Ibid., 17.13This brief account is a compilation of the summary treatments by Craig,252-268; Orr, 18-19; and C. Brown, 203-214.14See p. 3, this paper.15For an exhaustive chronological list of the works of English Deists from1696 to 1761, see Norman L. Torrey, Voltaire and the English Deists (NewHaven: Yale University Press, 1930; reprint, Archon Books, 1967), 207-210.16Craig, 82-175; See also Orr, 20-58.17Craig, 82-175.18Ibid., 82-92.19Ibid., 92-95.20Ibid., 95.21Ibid., 99.22Ibid., 99-101.23This treatment of the influence of biblical criticism on English Deismdoes not fit the given chronology of this chapter (pre-1624), rather it fitsinto the chronology of next chapter, but it is included here for the sakeof continuity.24Craig, 101-123.25For an in depth defense of these assertions see Craig, 124-175.26Orr, 20-58.27Livingston observed two particular aspects of seventeenth century ProtestantScholasticism which he believes helped produce the religion of reason inthe eighteenth century: the highly rationalistic spirit and practice, andthe general divisiveness of the period. Livingston, 13.28Unless otherwise noted, the general historical assertions in this chapterrepresent a summary of Orr, 59-113.29See pp. 4-5, this paper.30 Thomas Halyburton pronounced this title upon Herbert in his Natural ReligionInsufficient (London: 1714), n.p.; quoted in William Lane Craig, The HistoricalArgument for the Resurrection of Jesus During the Deist Controversy (Lewiston,England: Edwin Mellen Press, 1985), 72.31This primary work for the study of Deism is not available in its English,French, or Latin edition in the library holdings of Southeastern BaptistTheological Seminary. Therefore assertions herein are based on secondaryworks.32Herbert, Edward Herbert, Autobiography, ed. Sidney Lee (London: GeorgeRoutledge and Sons, 1886), 132-133.33Ibid., 133-134.34See p. 4 this paper and footnote 11 for a list of these five innate truths.35John Locke, Essays in Human Understanding, ed. P. H. Nidditch (Oxford:Oxford Press, 1975), vol. 1:iii, 15-19.36Orr, 71.37John Leland, A View of the Principle Deistical Writers, Vol. 1 (London:for B. Dod, 1756-1757; reprint, New York: Garland Publishing, 1977), 3.38Kenneth Scott Latourette, A History of Christianity, Vol. 2 (New York:Harper & Row, 1975), 69239For an evaluation of Hobbes' atheism, see David Berman, A History of Atheismin Britain: From Hobbes to Russell (London: Croom Helm, 1988), 57-67.40Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan (original publisher and date unknown; reprint,Oxford: Basil Blackwell, n. d.), 7.41Orr, 79.42Thomas Browne, Religio Medici (1642; reprint, New York: P. F. Collier &Son, 1909), 272.43Livingston, 15.44John Tillotson, Works (London: 1857), vol. 2, 333; quoted in Livingston,15.45Orr defended this assertion by listing the similarities and dissimilaritiesbetween Locke and Deism on p. 108.Richard Westfall took a slightly different view of Locke's standing as aDeist saying, "Although he [Locke] still used the name "Christianity," thedifferences separating his religion from Deism were essentially semantic.Natural religion had displaced Christianity almost completely in his thought."See Richard Westfall, Science and Religion in Seventeenth Century England(New Haven: Yale University Press, 1958), 138.For a detailed treatment of the charge of Deism leveled against Locke, seeJohn Yolton, John Locke and the Way of Ideas (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968),169-208.46Orr, 115.47Ibid., 108, 115.48Locke's contributions stated here are a compilation of Orr, 83-109, 114-116.49Orr, 110.50Charles Blount, Miscellaneous Works: Great is Diana of the Ephesians (London:1695; reprint, New York: Garland, 1979), 8. ". . . in relation to DivineMiracles, there is often times great Errors committed in the manner of readingScripture; . . . As that of Adam, whom Moses made only to be the first Fatherof the Jews, whilst others Hyperbolically make him to be the fist Fatherof all Men."51Orr, 113.52Craig, 75, 254. The Licensing Act of 1662 which required all works to beapproved by a censor was allowed to lapse in 1679, reinstated in 1693, andlapsed again for good in 1695. But the Blasphemy Law of 1696 served to makeDeists very cautious.53The limited scope of this paper demands restraint, therefore only thesefour representative Deists will be evaluated. The following is a list offour other Deists of this period together with the titles and publicationdates of their chief works: Anthony Cooper,Characteristics of Men, Manners,Opinions, Times, etc. (1711); Bernard de Mandeville, The Fable of the Bees(1714); William Wollastson, Religion of Nature Delineated (1722); and ThomasMorgan, The Moral Philosopher, 3 vols. (1737).54Orr, 116.In an early defense of his own Christianity Toland exclaimed, "I must takenotice of those Gentlemen who love to call Names in religion; for what areall Party-Distinctions, but, according to them, so many sorts of Hereticks,or Schismaticks, or worse? But I assure them, that I am neither of Paul,nor of Cephas, nor of Apollos, but of the Lord Jesus Christ, who alone isthe Author and Finisher of my Faith. . . . The only religious Title thereforethat I shall ever own, for my part, is that most glorious one of being aChristian." John Toland, Christianity Not Mysterious (London: 1696; reprint;New York: Garland, 1984), xviii-xx.55Toland, Not Mysterious, 6. ". . . we hold that Reason is the only Foundationof all Certitude; and that nothing reveal'd, whether as to its Manner ofExistence, is more exempted from is Disquisitions, than the ordinary Phenomenaof Nature. Wherefore, we likewise maintain, according to the Title of thisDiscourse, that there is nothing in the Gospel contrary to Reason, nor aboveit; and that no Christian Doctrine can be properly call'd a Mystery."See also, "It is improper therefore to say a thing is above our Reason. .." Toland, Not Mysterious, 8.56Amyntor was not in the holdings of SEBTS library. This observation is basedon Orr, 118.57Orr, 121.58Anthony Collins, A Discourse in Free-Thinking (London: for J. Morphew,1713; reprint, New York: Garland, 1978), 123f. ". . . they who have beenmost distinguished in all Ages for their Understanding and Virtue, have beenFree-Thinkers." The listing begins with Socrates and includes Plato, Aristotle,Origen, Cicero, Bacon, and Hobbes.59See the argument about the lost books of Scripture, p. 54.60See the argument about pagan parallel narratives to undermine Jesus' virginconception, pp. 52-53.61For example, see p. 37. ". . . the miracles wrought by Jesus are, accordingto the gospel-scheme, no absolute proofs of his being the MESSIAS, or ofthe truth of christianity."62Orr, 133-134. The chief reply was Thomas Sherlock, The Use and Intent ofProphecy.63The works of Woolston were not in the holdings of the SEBTS library, thereforethis evaluation of Woolston is based on Craig 255-260, and Orr 138-140.64Craig, 255.65Among the chief replies was Thomas Sherlock, Tryal of the Witnesses.66Livingston, 22.67Lucius Noack, Dei Freidenker in der Religion, b. 1, s. 272; as quoted inOrr, 140.68Matthew Tindal, Christianity as Old as the Creation (London: 1730; reprint,New York: Garland, 1978), 3-4.69Livingston, 22.70Orr, 140-141.71The chief orthodox response was Joseph Butler, Analogy of Religion (1736).For an analysis of Butler's argument against Deism, which Livingston suggestedwas an important cause of the decline of English Deism, see Livingston, 47-52.72Orr, 171-176.73Ibid., 150-152. Annet's works were not in the holdings of the SEBTS libraryfor primary evaluation.74Ibid., 152-155. Chubb's Works were not in the holdings of the SEBTS libraryfor a primary evaluation.75Conyers Middleton, A Free Inquiry into the Miraculous Powers (London: forR. Mamby and H. S. Cox, 1749; reprint, New York: Garland, 1976), 162.76Henry Bolingbroke, Philosophical Works, vol. 1 (London: 1754-1777; reprint,New York: Garland, 1976), 9. Bolingbroke posited the existence of God onthe basis of the existence of "something" and "intelligence" concluding,"Thus the existence of God is demonstrated."77Orr, 160-165.78Ibid., 161. Orr presents Dodwell's arguments more concisely than Dodwell.79Ibid., 162.80Ibid., 163.81Livingston, 52.82Orr, 165.83For an essay which demonstrates Hume's disavowal of the title, atheist,see Berman, 101-105.84Orr, 165-171.85David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, in English Philosophers,The Harvard Classic Series, Vol. 37 (New York; Collier & Son, 1910),362.Copyright 1999 by Cky J. Carrigan. All RightsReserved. |
|
