On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    No . 36 , Philip a Limborch to John Locke . I No Date . } ' My worthy Friend , I DULY received your very acceptable letter of 29 th October , and read it to that eminent person whose

    request I communicated to you . The subject on which he proposed the inquiry seems scarcely possible to be questioned by any sound mind , for the notion of I > eity involves unity , nor allows us to imagine it communicable to several . Wherefore , in my judgment , no one who attentively

    considers what we mean by the term God , can possibly maintain the notion of a plurality of Gods . Yet as we see it : maintained by the Heathens , with whom we cannot argue from the authority of Scripture , they must be convinced by considerations deduced ffonr nature . Wherefore that eminent

    person wishes to see arguments of that description , by which it may be clearly demonstrated that a Being , independent and perfect , can be but one . The Unity of the Divine Essence being once firmly established ,

    it becomes an easy task thence to deduce all the Divine attributes , and our duty towards God and our neighbour . He says that Descartes has not proved the Unity , but assumed it . tie once drew up a demonstration for himself , bfct says it was too subtle ;

    and because he defers much to your judgment , he earnestly desires to see your arguments . When I read your letter to him he rejoiced , because you say that you can do what he requires , and now he is more importunate than

    evef to have your thoughts on the subject . He is sorry to find you dragged into a controversy , and suspects that you may be averse to publish your opinions , lest undesignedly you should afford an occasion for new debates and

    insinuations . He requests that you would write to me privately , under the assurance of secrecy ; as he has no wi $ h to divulge your sentiments , but only asks them for his own instruction ana Confirmation in the truth ,

    Besides himself and two intimate friends of rii ' ine , who took part in our first conversation , ikT . de Haytage , Advocate of the Dutch \ Pj ^ ie < 5 ( uer , ahd Mr . Advocate Van den EWdb—hesifes these 1 shall coriamnnteate what you

    Untitled Article

    write to no human being , unless , perhaps , you will allow me to read it to * Mr , Le Clercv which may be as ? you please , for he is at present quite ignorant of my correspondence with you on these subjects . By coru g liance with the request of that eminent

    persou , you will highly gratify him , and as your paper will be communicated only to a very few confidential friends , to none of whom I shall give a copy , * it cannot come abroad . That I may more peremptorily deny a copy , I wish you would lay that restraint upon me , strictly , in your letter . I am

    unwilling that you should become still more suspected by the gownsmen ( yenti togatce ) of encouraging scepticism . Many of these , I have no doubt > are ready , eagerly , to bestow applause or cerjsure , however " undeserved , under the guidance of another ' s judgment , just as a log is moved by

    powers not its own . When I read your letter , a pleasant story of Thomas More , in his Utopia , occurred to me . He says , that when Raphael Hythloday learnedly

    discoursed concerning the Republic , * before the Cardinal [ Mortoa ] Arch * bishop of Canterbury , a certain learned lawyer , by shaking his head and distorting his countenance * expressed an entire disapprobation of all he said .

    Ihe whole company , treading in the steps of the learned lawyer , presently avowed the same opinion . But when the Cardinal declared his concurrence with Hythloday ' s opinion , immediately they who had despised it 9 wlwtt uttered by htm , now bestowed on it their highest commendations , f Such

    has been the fate of your Essay . It was received for six years with general approbation , till a bishop of great name appeared against it , when it was discovered to abound in errors , and to contain the secret springs of scepticism . Thus the common herd of theolomies rely not on their own ,

    * It is the passage in which Sir Tftomas More , under the disguise of his Utopia ^ declared against the sanguinary complexion of his country ' s criminal lavy , which three centuries of civilization have only sew&k

    to aggravate . More is supposed to ft&ve written the Utopia about 1516 , vvhHt * he was , under-sheriff of I ^ ftdoa . See Dr » Warner * * edition * 1758 $ Adver . and p . 2 ^ . f I&te . p . Gtl * ! ¦ ¦¦

    Untitled Article

    12 The Correspondence between Locke and Umborch , translated .

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Jan. 2, 1819, page 12, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1768/page/12/