A very wrong deduction of paternal government; but that is nothing to the dispute, &c.
Page 12. "And as such might justly be punished by every one in the state of nature." False; he does not seem to understand the state of nature, although he has borrowed it from Hobbes, &c.
Page 14. "Merely speculative points, and other indifferent things, &c." And why are speculative opinions so insignificant? do not men proceed in their practice according to their speculations? so, if the author were a chancellor, and one of his speculations were, that the poorer the clergy the better; would not that be of great use, if a cause came before him of tithes or church-lands?
Ibid. "Which can only be known by examining whether men had any power in the state of nature over their own, or others actions, in these matters." No, that is a wrong method, unless where religion has not been revealed; in natural religion, &c.
Ibid. "Nothing at first sight can be more obvious, than that in all religious matters, none could make over the right of judging for himself, since that would cause his religion to be absolutely at the disposal of another." At his rate of arguing (I think I do not misrepresent him, and I believe he will not deny the consequence) a man may profess heathenism, mahometanism, &c. gain as many proselytes as he can; and they may have their assemblies, and the magistrate ought to protect them, provided they do not disturb the state: and they may enjoy all secular preferments, be lords chancellors, judges, &c. But there are some opinions in several religions, which, although they do not directly make men rebel, yet lead to it. Nay we might have
temples
