Overview (Masterplots II: Christian Literature)
The Argument Against Abolishing Christianity by the Irish clergyman and satirist Jonathan Swift presents itself as a case for maintaining Christianity as the official religion of England. The author undertakes this task hesitantly, acknowledging that he is going against popular opinion and the wisdom of the age. Early in the work, however, he makes it clear that he is defending only nominal Christianity; to try to restore real Christianity would be a “wild project” that would destroy wit and learning, ruin trade, and disrupt the entire frame of society.
Having thus limited the scope of his argument, the author describes and dismisses eight proposed advantages of abolishing Christianity. First, it would considerably “enlarge and establish liberty of conscience.” His reply is that nominal Christianity is useful as a subject of mockery for “great wits” who would otherwise target an important institution such as the government. A second supposed advantage is that freethinkers would no longer be required to believe things they find difficult. The response is that the English can already believe and publish whatever they please without endangering their careers or being prosecuted for blasphemy.
The third and fourth points are more pragmatic. Abolishing Christianity would free up the funds devoted to supporting ten thousand parsons plus the bishops; it would also gain another usable day in the week. The rebuttals are equally...
(The entire section is 854 words.)
Want to Read More?
Subscribe now to read the rest of Argument Against Abolishing Christianity Summary. Plus get complete access to 30,000+ study guides!