[137] are not atheists, and that most of the atheists whose names are recorded have been honest men?  By this arrangement Providence sets bounds to the corruption of man; for if atheism and moral wickedness were united in the same persons, the societies of earth would be exposed to a fatal inundation of sin.

There was much more in the same vein; and the upshot was, under the thin veil of serving faith, to show that the Christian dogmas were essentially unreasonable.

Bayle’s work, marked by scholarship and extraordinary learning, had a great influence in England as well as in France.  It supplied weapons to assailants of Christianity in both countries.  At first the assault was carried on with most vigour and ability by the English deists, who, though their writings are little read now, did memorable work by their polemic against the authority of revealed religion.

The controversy between the deists and their orthodox opponents turned on the question whether the Deity of natural religion —­the God whose existence, as was thought, could be proved by reason—­can be identified with the author of the Christian revelation.  To the deists this seemed impossible.  The nature of the alleged revelation seemed inconsistent with the character

[138] of the God to whom reason pointed.  The defenders of revelation, at least all the most competent, agreed with the deists in making reason supreme, and through this reliance on reason some of them fell into heresies.  Clarke, for instance, one of the ablest, was very unsound on the dogma of the Trinity.  It is also to be noticed that with both sections the interest of morality was the principal motive.  The orthodox held that the revealed doctrine of future rewards and punishments is necessary for morality; the deists, that morality depends on reason alone, and that revelation contains a great deal that is repugnant to moral ideals.  Throughout the eighteenth century morality was the guiding consideration with Anglican Churchmen, and religious emotion, finding no satisfaction within the Church, was driven, as it were, outside, and sought an outlet in the Methodism of Wesley and Whitefield.

Spinoza had laid down the principle that Scripture must be interpreted like any other book (1670), [2] and with the deists this principle was fundamental.  In order to avoid persecution they generally veiled their conclusions

[139] under sufficiently thin disguises.  Hitherto the Press Licensing Act (1662) had very effectually prevented the publication of heterodox works, and it is from orthodox works denouncing infidel opinions that we know how rationalism was spreading.  But in 1695, the Press Law was allowed to drop, and immediately deistic literature began to appear.  There was, however, the danger of prosecution under the Blasphemy laws.  There were three legal weapons for coercing those who attacked Christianity:  (1) The Ecclesiastical Courts had and have the power of imprisoning for a