mmon between the heterogeneous body of writers
who passed under the vague name of Deists. To complicate matters still
further, the name 'Deist' was loosely applied as a name of reproach to
men who, in the widest sense of the term, do not come within its
meaning. Thus Cudworth, Tillotson, Locke, and Samuel Clarke were
stigmatised as Deists by their enemies. On the other hand, men were
grouped under the category whose faith did not rise to the level of
Deism. Thus Hume is classified among the Deists. Yet if the term 'Deism'
is allowed to have any definite meaning at all, it implies the certainty
and obligation of natural religion. It is of its very essence that God
has revealed himself so plainly to mankind that there is no necessity,
as there is no sufficient evidence, for a better revelation. But Hume's
scepticism embraced natural as well as revealed religion. Hobbes, again,
occupies a prominent place among the Deists of the seventeenth century,
although the whole nature of his argument in 'The Leviathan' is alien to
the central thought of Deism. Add to all this, that the Deists proper
were constantly accused of holding views which they never held, and that
conclusions were drawn from their premisses which those premisses did
not warrant, and the difficulty of treating the subject as a whole will
be readily perceived. And yet treated it must be; the most superficial
sketch of English Church History during the eighteenth century would be
almost imperfect if it did not give a prominent place to this topic, for
it was the all-absorbing topic of a considerable portion of the period.

The Deistical writers attracted attention out of all proportion to their
literary merit. The pulpit rang with denunciations of their doctrines.
The press teemed with answers to their arguments. It may seem strange
that a mere handful of not very voluminous writers, not one of whom can
be said to have attained to the eminence of an English classic,[147]
should have created such a vast amount of excitement. But the excitement
was really caused by the subject itself, not by the method in which it
was handled. The Deists only gave expression--often a very coarse and
inadequate expression--to thoughts which the circumstances of the times
could scarcely fail to suggest.

The Scriptures had for many years been used to sanction the most
diametrically opposite views. They had been the watchword of each party
in turn whose extravagances had been the caus