formal reply made by Mr Home himself, under the title of Objections against the Essays on Morality and Natural Religion examined, (Edin. 1756 *). A motion, however, was made in the Committee for Overtures, of the General Assembly, that that body should take under their consideration, "How far it was proper for them to call before them, "and censure the authors of infidel books." This motion occasioned a very warm debate in the committee; but was finally thrown out, by a vote which negatived the transmission of the overture to the Assembly †. CHAP. V. The * The substance of this pamphlet was afterwards engrossed by Mr Home in the third edition of the Essays on Morality, &c. + Although the object of this motion was understood to be a general cen-. sure, which should comprehend not only the philosophical writings of Mr David Hume, but the doctrines of the Essays on Morality and Natural Religion, it is supposed that a motive of decorum felt by the members of Assembly, the respect due to the station which the author of the latter work now filled, that of a Judge of the Supreme Court, was the reason that the former of these writers alone was mentioned by name in the overture debated in the committee, which bore in substance, that "The General Assembly, judging "it their duty to do all in their power to check the growth and progress of "infidelity; and considering, that as infidel writings have begun of late years ❝to be published in this nation, so there is one person, styling himself David "Hume, Esq; who hath arrived at such a degree of boldness, as publicly to "avow himself the author of books containing the most rude and open at "tacks BOOK I. And Presbytery of Edinburgh. It is finally quashed. The zeal of Mr Anderson was not checked by this unsuc cessful experiment, but vented itself in a new endeavour to rouse the spirit of intolerance. He gave in a Petition and Complaint to the Presbytery of Edinburgh, in his own name, and in name of all who chose to adhere to him, against the printer and publishers of the Essays on the Principles of Morality 66 "tacks upon the glorious Gospel of Christ, and principles evidently subver- This motion was the subject of a very keen debate for two days in the committee. The argument which chiefly weighed for its rejection was, the danger of extending the influence of those very opinions which it was its object to repress; by exciting the public curiosity for the perusal of those writings, rendering them the subject of general discussion in conversation, and encouraging the publication of defences, explanations and commentaries, which would bring those topics to the level of common understandings, which at present, from the abstract and metaphysical garb in which they were clothed, were suited to the understanding only of a few philosophers. In conclusion, an opposite resolution was moved, "That although all the members have a just abhorrence of any principles tending to infidelity, or to the prejudice of "our holy religion; yet, on account of certain circumstances in this case, "they drop the overture, because it would not, in their judgment, serve the purpose of edification." The question being put, Transmit the overture to the Assembly, or Not? it passed in the negative, by a majority of fifty to seventeen votes. rality and Natural Religion *, requiring that the Presbytery should summon them to appear before them, and declare the name of the author of that work, in order that he might be censured," according to the law of the Gospel, and the "practice of this and all other well-governed Churches." The persons complained against appeared by their counsel, and gave in formal defences; to which the petitioner Mr Anderson obtained leave to reply; but he died before the next meeting of the Presbytery. The defendants, however, waving all objection that might be pleaded from the want of a prosecutor, consented to the Court giving judgment on the merits of the case; which, after undergoing a similar discussion to that which had taken place before the Committee of Assembly, terminated by a similar resolution rejecting the complaint. CHAP. V. retracts some opinions as er roneous. In the pamphlet before mentioned, entitled, Objections Mr Home against the Essays on Morality and Natural Religion examined, Mr Home entered at large into the defence of his opinions on the subject of Liberty and Necessity; and was at pains to shew, that, so far from meriting the imputation of maintaining heterodox tenets, his doctrine with respect to the immutable necessity of human actions was strictly con sonant *Messrs Fleming, printers, and Kincaid and Donaldson, booksellers in Edinburgh. BOOK 1. sonant to that of the first Reformers, and was warranted by the concurring sentiments of the most eminent of the Calvinistic Divines *. It is presumable, however, that he had all along entertained considerable doubt respecting that part of his doctrine, which attributed the sense of freedom of action to a delusion of the mind; and on carefully reviewing the subject, he found reason to alter that opinion, which had afforded the chief handle of censure to his antagonists, and candidly to acknowledge his error, in a subsequent edition of his work. It is not the province of the biographer to engage 66 *Calvin, Turrentine, Pictet, Edwards, &c. "I must acknowledge it," (says Mr Home), "to have been once my opinion, That there is in man a sense of being able to act against motives, or "against our inclination and choice, commonly termed liberty of indifference. "I was carried along in the current of popular opinion; and could not dream "but that this sense really existed, when I found it vouched by so many 66 grave writers. I had at the same time the clearest conviction, that man is a necessary agent; and therefore justly concluded, that this sense must be "delusive. I yielded to another popular opinion, That not only praise and "blame, merit and demerit, as attributed to human actions, but also contri❝tion and remorse, are inconsistent with necessity, and must be founded on "the same delusive sense of liberty of indifference. From these premises, I "was led, though reluctantly, to admit, that some of our moral feelings and "emotions must be founded on a delusion. I was sensible of the odium of a doctrine that rests virtue in any measure upon such a foundation; but so "firm is my reliance on Divine Wisdom in the formation of man, that I was 66 "not engage in a formal examination of all the doctrines of his author; nor, in this particular instance, do I feel myself callT2 ed CHAP. V. لسا "not apprehensive of harm in adhering to truth, however unpalatable it might be in some instances. Before a second edition was called for, I dis"covered fortunately that the feelings and emotions of the moral sense are "perfectly consistent with moral necessity; and I gladly laid hold of that opportunity to acknowledge my error. Having so far rescued the moral "system from this pretended delusive sense, I was strongly inclined to think, "that we had no notion of being able to act against motives; and in the se"cond edition I ventured to say so. But upon reviewing the subject for "the present edition, I clearly saw that we really have a notion of being "able to act against motives; which renewed my perplexity; till it occur"red to me, that that notion is suggested by the irregular influence of pas❝sion, and that we never have it in our cool moments; consequently that it " is not a delusion of nature, but of passion only. Candour I shall always esteem esential in addressing the public, no less than in private dealings; "and now I am happy in thinking, that morality rests on a foundation that "has no delusion in it.In the second edition, however, there is ano"ther error that I was not able to disentangle myself from. In the Essay of 1 Liberty and Necessity, our notions of chance and contingency are held to be "delusive; and consequently that so far we are led by our nature to deviate "from truth. It is a harsh doctrine, that we should be so led astray in any " instance. As that doctrine never sat easy upon me, I discovered it also to "be erroneous; and the error is corrected in the present edition, where I "hope it is made clearly out, that the notion we have of chance and contin66 gency, is entirely conformable to the necessary chain of causes and effects. "And now, rejoice with me, my good reader, in being at last relieved from "so many distressing errors." Preface to the third edition of Essays on the Principles of Morality and Natural Religion, &c. (Edinburgh, 1779). |