person shall ever fail of attaining the knowledge of it'? What think you of St. Athanasius's creed? Is the sense of that so obvious and exposed to every one who seeks it which so many learned men have explained so different ways, and which yet a great many profess they cannot understand? Or is it necessary to your or my salvation that you or I should believe and pronounce all those damned who do not believe that creed, that is, every proposition in it? which I fear would extend to not a few of the church of England, unless we can think that people believe, that is, assent to the truth of propositions they do not at all understand. If ever you were acquainted with a country parish, you must needs have a strange opinion of them, if you think all the ploughmen and milkmaids at church understood all the propositions in Athanasius's creed; it is more, truly, than I should be apt to think of any one of them, and yet I cannot hence believe myself authorised to judge or pronounce them all damned. It is too bold an intrenching on the prerogative of the Almighty. To their own master they stand or fall. The doctrine of original sin is that which is professed and must be owned by the members of the church of England, as is evident from the thirty-nine articles and several passages in the liturgy; and yet I ask you whether this be 'so obvious and exposed to all that diligently and sincerely seek the truth,' that one who is in the communion of the church of England, sincerely seeking the truth, may not raise to himself such difficulties concerning the doctrine of original sin as may puzzle him, though he be a man of study, and whether he may not push his inquiries so far as to be staggered in his opinion? If you grant me this, as I am apt to think you will, then I inquire whether it be not true, notwithstanding what you say concerning the plainness and obviousness of truths necessary to salvation, that a great part of mankind may not be able to discern between truth and falsehood in several points which are thought so far to concern their salvation as to be made necessary parts of the national religion ? "1 The Third Letter for Toleration' was not published till after the period we are now considering; but there can be no doubt that the opinions there expressed by Locke, both on religious questions and on the relation of the state towards them, were held no less clearly and strongly during the previous year or two. 1 Four Letters on Toleration' (1870), pp. 282, 283. Not having the original editions of Locke's letters at hand, I have referred to this, the latest, cheapest and most complete reprint of them. . 57 Of the way in which he combined with these theoretical opinions a very practical expression of his religion, remarkable evidence appears in the following creed, or code of rules, or constitution, that he drew up for a small "society of Pacific Christians" which he and some of his principal friends are said to have formed in 1689 :— "1. We think nothing necessary to be known or believed for salvation, but what God hath revealed. "2. We therefore embrace all those who, in sincerity, receive the word of truth revealed in the Scripture, and obey the light which enlightens every man that comes into the world. "3. We judge no man in meats, or drinks, or habits, or days, or any other outward observances, but leave every one to his freedom in the use of those outward things which he thinks can most contribute to build up the inward man in righteousness, holiness, and the true love of God and his neighbour, in Christ Jesus. "4. If any one find any doctrinal parts of Scripture difficult to be understood, we recommend him,-1st, The study of the Scriptures in humility. and singleness of heart; 2nd, Prayer to the Father of lights to enlighten him; 3rd, Obedience to what is already revealed to him, remembering that the practice of what we do know is the surest way to more knowledge; our infallible guide having told us, 'If any man will do the will of him that sent me, he shall know of the doctrine.' 4th, We leave him to the advice and assistance of those whom he thinks best able to instruct him, no men or society of men having any authority to impose their opinions or interpretations on any other, the meanest Christian, since, in matters of religion, every man must know and believe and give an account for himself. "5. We hold it to be an indispensable duty for all Christians to maintain love and charity in the diversity of contrary opinions: by which charity we do not mean an empty sound, but an effectual forbearance and good-will, carrying men to a communion, friendship, and mutual assistance one of another, in outward as well as spiritual things; and by debarring all magistrates from making use of their authority, much less their sword (which was put into their hands only against evil-doers), in matters of faith or worship. "6. Since the Christian religion we profess is not a notional science, to furnish speculation to the brain or discourse to the tongue, but a rule of righteousness to influence our lives, Christ having given himself' to redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a people zealous of good works,' we profess the only business of our public assemblies to be to exhort, thereunto laying aside all controversy and speculative questions, instruct and encourage one another in the duties of a good life, which is acknowledged to be the great business of true religion, and to pray God for the assistance of his spirit for the enlightening our understanding and subduing our corruptions, that so we may return unto him a reasonable and acceptable service, and show our faith by our works, proposing to ourselves and others the example of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, as the great pattern for our imitation. "7. One alone being our Master, even Christ, we acknowledge no masters of our assembly; but, if any man in the spirit of love, peace, and meekness, has a word of exhortation, we hear him. "8. Nothing being so oppressive, or having proved so fatal to unity, love, and charity, the first great characteristical duties of Christianity, as men's fondness of their own opinions, and their endeavours to set them up, and have them followed, instead of the gospel of peace; to prevent those seeds of dissension and division, and maintain unity in the difference of opinions which we know cannot be avoided-if any one appear contentious, abounding in his own sense rather than in love, and desirous to draw followers after himself, with destruction or opposition to others, we judge him not to have learnt Christ as he ought, and therefore not fit to be a teacher of others. "9. Decency and order in our assemblies being directed, as they ought, to edification, can need but very few and plain rules. Time and place of meeting being settled, if anything else need regulation, the assembly itself, or four of the ancientest, soberest, and discreetest of the brethren, chosen for that occasion, shall regulate it. 66 10. From every brother that, after admonition, walketh disorderly, we withdraw ourselves. "11. We each of us think it our duty to propagate the doctrine and practice of universal good-will and obedience in all places, and on all occasions, as God shall give us opportunity."1 It is not at all likely that Locke's altogether unsectarian sect of Pacific Christians ever got to the holding of "public assemblies," and the constitution that he drew up for them may never even have been formally 1 Lord King, pp. 273–275. (276-778) . 57 · adopted by the few who agreed with him in his very liberal religious opinions. That document is of great interest, however, as showing, not only his ideal of a Christian community, but also the principles that actuated him and the few younger men, like Lord Pembroke and Lord Ashley, James Tyrrell, Edward Clarke, and, among some others, after he had introduced himself to Locke by his translation of the Letter concerning Toleration,' William Popple. Not the least, though almost the least recognised, of Locke's services in aid of good government and national prosperity under William the Third consisted in the publication of 'Some Considerations of the Consequences of the Lowering of Interest and Raising the Value of Money,' and in the persistent advocacy among men of influence of the opinions there expressed. This little book, published anonymously in 1692, took the shape of a letter, dated the 7th of November, 1691, addressed to an unnamed member of parliament, who, however, was doubtless Sir John Somers, Locke's friend and King William's solicitor general, one of the very few public men sufficiently patriotic and intelligent to understand and adopt its principles. Somers did that, at any rate, and as he was afterwards in close communication with Locke on the subject, we may infer that it was he who, as Locke said in his preface, "put him upon looking out his old papers concerning the reducing of interest to four per cent.," which had been written "near twenty years. since," and had "long lain by forgotten." "Near twenty years since," that is, in 1672, it will be remembered, the first Earl of Shaftesbury was lord chancellor, and Locke was his chief adviser on state affairs. Charles the Second's government was so embarrassed that the famous "stop on the exchequer" was resorted to, contrary to Shaftesbury's advice, and this royal theft, though the cause of much fresh commercial disaster, was only a notable indication of the false views and vicious customs that at that time, as well as in the times before and after, generally prevailed in the country, and did much to lessen the immense advantages that necessarily followed from the establishment of our colonies in America and the West Indies, and the opening up of new channels of commerce with the East Indies. Locke, himself a sharer in more than one important colonial and commercial adventure, the chief agent in the formation of the new colony of Virginia, and for some time the secretary of Charles the Second's council of trade and plantations, took a great interest in all the questions thus directly and indirectly brought before him, in a more philosophical, and not less practical, temper than appeared in the Brief Observations concerning Trade and the Interest of Money,' and the 'New Discourse of Trade,' both written by Sir Josiah Child, the foremost merchant of that day, and in the Discourses upon Trade' of Sir Dudley North, another great merchant. The first named of those treatises, published in 1665, must have the credit of doing more than any other single publication, by its own wise teaching on some points, joined with erroneous opinions on others, and yet more by the controversy that it provoked, to encourage those principles of free trade by which the material prosperity of England has been so mightily advanced. What Locke thought on at least one important branch of the subject as early as 1672 may be understood from |