Six Discourses on the Miracles of our Saviour Part 26

But to humour the _Bishop_ in his fond _Dedication_, I will suppose my self to be, what I am the farthest of any Man living from being, an _Infidel_ and _Apostate_; yet

II. The _Bishop_ is a wilful Calumniator, or, at best, an unhappy Misrepresenter of me, and of other Infidels, saying in his _Dedication_, that our Design is _To sap the Foundation of all Government_, and----_That we were pursuing such Methods, as have a natural Tendency to introduce Confusion_. If this was true of us Infidels (for now I speak of my self as one of them) it behoves Civil Governors to look about them, and to punish and suppress us with all speed; and we should be the most unreasonable Men alive, if we complain'd of Persecution, or call'd it hard Usage. And the _Bishop_ of _London_, and other _Divines_ (like this _Bishop_) do commonly declaim on the Danger of Infidelity to Civil Society, but this is all Ecclesiastical Cant and Jargon. I thought I had given[349] the _Bishop_ of _London_ so much on this Head of Complaint against Infidelity, as I could not suppose the _Bishop_ of St. _David's_ would ever have repeated it. It is true, what the _Bishop_ says, that _Religion is the firmest Support of Government_, and _Christianity especially lays the greatest Obligations, on Men's Consciences, of Obedience to the Civil Powers_. I believe all this, and that the better Christians Men are, the more quiet, peaceable, and useful Subjects, and the greater Friends would they be to the Civil Authority. But does it follow from hence, that we _Infidels_, because we have rejected the Belief of some systematical Divinity, as the _Clergy_ are fond of, should consequently be Enemies to the Civil Government, and Foes to the Peace, Order, and Welfare of Society? O fie upon the Drawers of such Consequences! We are, I believe, a numerous and growing Sect in these Nations, though I am acquainted with none, no, not so much as with the Great Mr. _Grounds_: But I could never perceive that any of us, in Principle, were against Civil Government, and the Welfare of the Community; or were for _Confusion_, for setting the People together by the Ears, to the Disturbance of the publick Peace and Tranquillity. No, no, our Interests in the World, as well as other Men's, oblige us to consult the publick Welfare; and our Consciences, from the Religion of Nature, bind us to Obedience to Government; and, was it not agreeable to our Inclination, the Necessity of Affairs would force us to be as quiet and obedient as are any Christians: And I thank G.o.d, we have hitherto behaved our selves very peaceably, clear of all Suspicion of Treason and Rebellion to any Prince or State. The _Bishop_ hints at Experience to the contrary, but it will puzzle him to give an Instance. One would think, by this common Harangue, of _Ecclesiasticks_ against us _Infidels_, that Christians, especially the Priesthood, being, as the _Bishop_ says, both _under the Penalties of human Laws, and the stronger Impressions of a future State_, were of a Lamb-like Nature, and never given to disturb the Civil Authority: And I will own the Christian _Laity_ might be acquitted here, but for the _Clergy_, who have been repeatedly the _Pest_ and _Bane_ of human Society, the Trumpeters of Sedition and Rebellion, and mere Make-bates in Cities and Families.

And I dare say, that if the Civil Powers don't curb, and keep our _Priesthood_ in awe, they will upon this present Occasion be the Disturbers of the publick Peace. So little Sense and Truth is there in the _Bishop_'s present Invective against us Infidels! If he had not been infatuated to a Forgetfulness of the _Rogueries_ of Priests, in all Ages, against the Civil Powers, he could never have insinuated such a groundless and senseless Charge against us, to the Provocation of the Civil Magistrate to fall on us. But

III. The _Bishop_ calumniates us Infidels (for against his Conscience, whether I will or not, he will have me to be one of them) not only for being Enemies to Government in general, which he will have us to advance Principles destructive of; but insinuates and a.s.serts that we are disaffected to the particular and present Government of these Kingdoms, saying, that as "we are active in propagating Infidelity, we do in the last Resort, not only insult the t.i.tle of _Defender of the Faith_, but undermine the undoubted Right of his Majesty and his Royal Family to the Crown of these Realms, as it is founded on the Profession of _Christianity_, reform'd, and now legally settled among us; and therefore Persons of that Character may well be consider'd, as equally false to the Author of our Faith, and to the present Government.----Therefore in a just Sense of that Allegiance which is due to the King, and for the Security of your Majesties, and the Royal Family, and thereby of the Publick it self, as well as out of a deep Concern for the Honour and Preservation of our most holy Faith, the ensuing Treatise is now offer'd, under your Majesty's Protection, to the View of the Publick." This is all such foolish and manifest Slander, that I can't but think the _Bishop_ mad with Rage and Indignation at me, when he writ it. I dare say the _Queen_, who is firmly attach'd to the Interests of the Christian and Protestant Religion, did, when she read all this, almost grieve for the _Bishop_, and pity him for his Weakness and Ignorance. It is a _Maxim_ among all Parties, that _Infidels_ are heartily affected to the present Establishment of the State; yea, so far a _Maxim_, that _Jacobites_ and _High-Church-men_ are apt to accuse all the well-affected to the Government, of Infidelity. From none of the Writings or Practice of Infidels, much less of my self, could the _Bishop_ gather any of these his _childish_ Surmises. The Government, since the Succession of the Ill.u.s.trious House of _Hanover_, has been twice attempted to be disturb'd, and both times by profess'd Christians. The Rebellion at _Preston_ consisted of _Papists_ and _High-Church-men_, and tho'

there were but few _Clergy-men_ in Arms, yet they were join'd with the Prayers and Wishes of many Thousands of the _Clergy_, and even, as it was suspected, of some _Oxonian Bishops_. Bishop _Atterbury_'s Plot too consisted of Rebellious Christians, without the least intermixture of us _Infidels_, who are the more zealously affected to the Government, because of the Danger it is sometimes in from the _High-Church Clergy_. Away then with the _Bishop_'s Slander, which, for all we may be Unbelievers of Christianity, our Civil Magistrates will laugh at and deride him for. But,

IV. Another Misrepresentation, more foolish and absurd than the former, that the _Bishop_ has made of us _Infidels_, is, that we are making Way for Popery and Slavery: For thus he says of us, "Nothing is more demonstrable, than that those Adversaries (meaning us _Infidels_) of the Christian Religion, who are now so busily employ'd in infusing Doubts into some weak Minds, in giving an Indifference and Coldness to other well-meaning Persons, and in making others, that are viciously inclin'd, actual Proselites to Infidelity, are pursuing such Methods as have a natural Tendency to introduce Confusion, and thereby betray us into _Popery_." And again he says of Infidels, "That in Consequence of their own Infidelity, and their wicked Diligence in spreading that Infection, are bringing in upon us the real Persecutions of the Church of _Rome_; who likewise, whilst they rail so plentifully at the most rational Religion in the World as Superst.i.tion, give great Advantages towards restoring the insupportable _Superst.i.tions_ of that Communion. These are the Persons indeed that appear in favour of an unbounded Liberty, but G.o.d grant it may not terminate in an absolute _Slavery_." _Risum quis tenerat?_ Who in his Wits could write such Stuff? And who without Impatience can read it? I was going about a particular Dissection of these two Paragraphs, and to lay open the Wit, Sense, and Oratory of the _Bishop_, to the Contemplation of his Admirers; but I find it unnecessary, as well as tedious to do it: The very transcribing of them, and exposing them to View, is enough to render him ridiculous. If there be no more danger of Popery, Slavery, Superst.i.tion, Tyranny, and real Persecution from our _Clergy_, than from us _Infidels_, the Nation is safe. _Infidels_ find too much Inconvenience in the Power, Craft, and Follies of a Protestant _Clergy_, to make Way for _Popery_; which, as the _Bishop_ rightly says, is a _Complication_ of Errors. There are, what the _Bishop_ should have thought of, many Protestant Priests for an Accommodation with the Church of _Rome_; and, if I mistake not, upon such easy Terms as _this_, _viz._ If she'll but part with some of her Superst.i.tions that are of no Use to her; our _Clergy_ will admit of others as will be of Advantage to them. But _Infidels_ are irreconcilable Enemies to the Church of _Rome_, and so far from Wishes and Endeavours to restore Popery, that it is mere Nonsense to charge them with either direct or consequential Designs so to enslave Mankind.

But

V. The _Bishop_ says, that we Infidels (for I am one it seems) _labour industriously to root out all Sense of Virtue and Religion among us_.

This is sad indeed, if true; and very bad Men should we be, and deserving of the worst Punishment. But this wants Proof. How does he know that we are for rooting out all Sense of Virtue and Religion amongst Men? Does it appear so by our Writings or our Practices? Does he find in our Books any Exhortations to Looseness and Immorality? Nothing of this I am sure. Is he then so well acquainted with Infidels, as to know them to be of more depraved and debauch'd Lives than profess'd Christians? Nor this neither. I have not as yet heard that any of my Disciples have been hang'd, lamenting his Misfortune of reading my _Discourses_, as what encouraged him to Sin, and brought him to the Gallows. No, those unhappy People, hitherto, die in the Faith and Communion of the Church, either of _England_ or of _Rome_, and hope to be saved through the Merits of their Saviour, Neither do, I hear of any Gentleman, old or young, who has given a greater Loose to his l.u.s.ts and Pa.s.sions, since he read my Books. Such News would trouble me.

But because of this Out-cry of the _Bishop_, and of other Preachers against us, that we labour industriously to root out all Sense of Virtue and Religion amongst Men, I wish (for Proof) that _Infidels_ were distinguishable from Christians, that a Comparison might be made, and the Difference discern'd between them, as to true Religion and Virtue. Tho' I am one of little Acquaintance with Infidels, yet it is my Opinion that, on this Score, they may vie with, and, all things consider'd, do surpa.s.s Christians. One would think, by the _Bishop_'s Insinuation above, that none but _good_ People were of his Christian Faith; and that all Infidels were profligate Sinners; but he knows better, and what's more, he should have been more ingenuous than to charge _Infidels_ with _Labours to root out all Sense of Virtue and Religion amongst Men_, if it was but in Regard to that learned Gentleman who is supposed to be at the Head of Infidelity, and who, they say, is as exemplary for all social Virtues, as any _Bishop_; and dislikes Vice and Immorality as much as any Saint can do.

Whatever be the _Virtue_ and _Religion_ of _Infidels_, it is all genuine, natural, and sincere; and consequently more Praise-worthy than _that_ of hired Priests, who may be suspected of Hypocrisy, because of their Interests. I heard a wild Spark say, that he could be as grave as the _Bishop_ of _London_, if he was but as well paid for it. Whether he believ'd the _Bishop_ would have been as loose as himself, but for his _Hire_, I can't tell. But this is certain that, what can't be said of Infidels, there are Priests who put on the Face and Form of G.o.dliness, and want the Life and Power of it; who lift up their Hands and Eyes unto G.o.d, when their Hearts are far from him; and were not their Interests more than their Faith, a Restraint to their l.u.s.ts, it is commonly believ'd they would be a Company of loose _Blades_.

What a Pother is here of the Danger and Mischief of Infidelity to Church and State? Do but take away the Cause of Infidelity, and the Effect ceases. And what is the Cause of Infidelity? Why, what _Origen_ predicted, I experience to be true, that the _Ministry of the Letter_ is the Cause of it; and I appeal to Mr. _Grounds_, Whether litteral Expositions on the Scripture, and the absurd Doctrines which the _Clergy_ have built upon the _Letter_, have not been one Cause of his calling into Question, the Truth of Christianity, and the divine Inspiration of the holy Scriptures? But this is not the only Cause of Infidelity; there are other grand ones, which Dr. _Moore_ writes of, saying thus:[350] "That Men are exceedingly tempted to think the whole Business of Religion is at best but a Plot to enrich the Priests, and keep the People in awe, from observing that they, who make the greatest Noise about Religion, and are the most zealous therein, do neglect the Laws of Honesty and common Humanity; that they easily invade other Men's Rights; that they juggle, dissemble, and lye for Advantage; that they are proud, conceited, love the Applause of the People, are envious, fierce, and implacable, unclean and sensual, merciless and cruel; care not to have Kingdoms flow in Blood, for maintaining their Tyranny over the Consciences of poor deluded Souls."

If then there is any Danger of any kind in Infidelity, let the _Clergy_ take the Blame and Shame of it to themselves, and not lay that Fault, which is their own, upon other Men.

But observing that Dr. _Moore_ above speaks of Priests, their _neglecting the Laws of Honesty_ and _common Humanity_, as a Cause of Infidelity, I must here do a piece of Justice to Infidels, who place the very _Essence_ of all Religion (as I believe the Essence of Christianity consists) in _common Honesty_. If they keep to their Principles, and act agreeably, they will work such a Reformation in the World for the better, as the _Priests_ of all Ages have not been able to do. The _Clergy_ have made such a Noise in the World about _Faith_ and _Doctrine_, that the People hardly think they need be _Honest_ to be good Christians and even many _Clergy-men_ are conceited of their being _orthodox_ and _sound Divines_, though by their Dishonesty, Profuseness, and Neglect of a Provision for their Families, they have, in the Judgment of[351] St. _Paul_, deny'd the Faith, and are worse than Infidels.

And thus have I consider'd the Slanders and Misrepresentations of my self and Infidels, contain'd in the _Bishop_'s _Dedication_ to the _Queen_, which entirely is such a Piece of Fury, Railing, and Impertinence, as a Man shall hardly meet with. Surely he was not awake when he wrote his _Dedication_, it is so like the _Dream_ of a disorder'd Brain which consists of confused Notions, and scatter'd Ideas, that are never to be so compacted together, as to make tolerable Sense, Reason, and Truth. If I had not met with much such flaming Stuff in the Body of his Book, I should have suspected that some-body, more a Foe than a Friend to him, had palm'd it upon him, and over-persuaded him to print it, as what would recommend him to her Majesty's Favour.

Whether he'll merit a _Translation_ to an _Arch-Bishop.r.i.c.k_, for this Dedication, with me is no Question. For all he may take me for his Enemy, I wish him _translated_, as certainly as the Government has _transported_ some other Folks, who are no more the Bane of Society.

_Buggs_ in a House, and _Caterpillars_ in a Garden, are not a greater Grievance, than some sort of Ecclesiastical _Vermin_ in Christ's Church and Vineyard.

That the _Bishop_ himself admires his _Dedication_, and is pleas'd with it, I don't doubt. Like as _Bears_ are fond of their ill-favour'd _Cubbs_, so the Brats of some Men's Brains, as well as those of their Bodies, are pleasing to than; and however deform'd and irrational in themselves, are hugg'd by them as so many Wits and Beauties. But whether many, beside the _Bishop_ himself, will like his _Dedication_, is a great Question. I don't doubt, but there may be some for Persecution as well as the _Bishop_, and so far may approve of the _Dedication_: But whether there is any one that can think, he has not greatly injured _Infidels_, and made a false Representation of them, for being Enemies to our Civil Government, and to our present Establishment, can't surely be question'd. If he be not look'd upon here, by all Mankind, as a wilful and malicious Misrepresenter of them, I shall much wonder at it.

But what's the _Dedication_ to the Book it self, will some here say?

Tho' the _Bishop_ may have made some Slips in his _Dedication_ which betray Weakness and Ignorance; yet his following Performance may be Strenuous and Nervous, and a compleat Confutation of my _Discourses_. I answer, that such a Dedication bodes ill to the Book; and a Man may as well expect to find the inside of a House beautiful and richly adorn'd, when the Porch and Entrance into it is mean and nasty; as that an admirable Treatise for Wit, Reason, and Learning, should follow upon such a poor, simple, and insipid _Dedication_. Commonly Authors take more care in their _Dedications_, than in their following Treatise; that is, they see better to the Accuracy of their Expressions, the Exactness of their Stile, and Beauty of their Thoughts; and if they err at all in them, it is only in Flattery, and excess of Compliments on their Patrons. Such Care too, after the best manner he was able, has the _Bishop_ taken in his _Dedication_ above; and whatever his Readers and Admirers may think, the _Dedication_ is the best Part of the Book. The Exceptions I have taken at the _Dedication_ are but small, in Comparison of the Faults I shall find and expose in the _Book_ it self; which is such a Complication of Impertinence and Errors, of Rage and Confidence, and of Calumnies and Reproaches, as is not to be equall'd; and is so far from deserving the Character of a Confutation of my _Discourses_, that it has done them Service; and will be, after the Animadversions I shall make on it, a Confirmation of the Goodness, Usefulness, and Excellency of my Design in them.

I have not here room to make a compleat Dissection of the _Bishop_'s Work, and to display its Insufficiency, in answer to my _Discourses_; neither was it my Design in this _first Part_ of my _Defence_ to do it. But however, I will spare a Place here for a short Character and Representation of his Performance, which take as follows.

"The _Bishop_'s sole Aim and Design is to vindicate the _litteral Story_ of our Saviour's Miracles, against my rational and authoritative Objections to it. And to this Purpose he wrangles with me, where he can, about the Sense of this and that Citation out of the Fathers; and after he has forc'd another Sense on it, than the Words do naturally bear, then he insults me for a Misrepresentation.

And where he meets with a plain Testimony out of the Fathers, which he can't mangle nor strain to his Purpose, he fluently pa.s.ses by it; tho' he would have his _Readers_ to believe, he has vindicated the litteral Story against my Authorities, and shewn that the Fathers were all on his Side.

"He complains of my Mutilations of the Fathers, and of making too curt Citations out of them; which is true, but more to my own Disadvantage than to his. But, what is Matter of grand Triumph to the _Bishop_, is, that I have quoted _spurious_ Works of the Fathers for _genuine_ ones. And here he takes great Pains, and wastes Time and Paper, to prove that _this_ and _that_ Book does not belong to the Author under whose Name I cite it; and then has a Fling at me for want of Skill in _Criticism_. But can the _Bishop_ be so weak, as to think, I did not know when I quoted a _spurious_ Work? Supposing the _Book_ I quoted do not belong to the reputed Author, but to some other Writer, what's that to the Question between us? The Citation is no less the Testimony of Antiquity, and it's no matter whose Name it bears. If the _Bishop_ had thought a little on this, he might have spared some Sheets of Paper, which he has in vain wasted, to the Loss of his Readers Time and Money.

"Again, where my rational Arguments against the _Letter_ seem to the _Bishop_ to be weak and inconclusive; there, to do him Justice, he handsomly turns upon me with his Reasoning, and admonishes me of my Spitefulness against the _Letter_, or I would never use such a slight Argument. But where I pinch and bear hard upon the _Letter_, and the Jest is not to be digested, there, instead of Reasoning against me, he makes a hideous Out-cry of Buffoonery, Blasphemy, and Infidelity; and calls upon the Civil Magistrate for his Help, or their Religion, and their _All_ is in Danger, through the impious Writings of untoward Infidels.

"The _Bishop_ in some Cases gives up the Cause, and seems himself to be almost ashamed of the _Letter_; and for the Maintenance of the Honour of _Jesus_, and the Dignity of his miraculous Operation, flies to Allegory; allowing that _this_ and _that_ Miracle might be typical and figurative of somewhat else, as his Thoughts did suggest to him. But here he discovers his poor Talent at Allegories, making no more Resemblance between the _Type_ and _Ant.i.type_, than between an _Apple_ and an _Oyster_.

"I am repeatedly charg'd by the _Bishop_ with Infidelity, for writing against the _Letter_, tho' I am as grave as a Judge at the allegorical Interpretation; and he can't but know that Infidelity and Allegorism are incompatible in the same Person. To prove me an Infidel, he should have shewn that I meant to pour Contempt upon the allegorical, as well as litteral Sense of Jesus's Miracles; but he has not once hinted at this. A certain great Writer, call'd Mr.

_Grounds_, plays a double Game upon the _Clergy_, he laughs at the _allegorical_ as well as _litteral_ Scheme, and distresses the _Clergy_ with his Objections against both. But I have not done so; I really am, or seem to be, a sincere Contender for the allegorical Sense. And to make an _Infidel_ of an _Allegorist_, is more difficult and impossible than to make a _Monkey_ of a _Bishop_.

"The _Bishop_, as a _Minister of the Letter_, has spoken too favourably of the allegorical Scheme; he has treated it with too much Respect, both as to the Origin and Use of it, and done enough to sap the Foundation of his Church; for which, I am afraid, he'll meet with a Reprimand from his Episcopal Brethren. The _Bishop_ of _Lichfield_ is the Man for my Money, to write against the allegorical Scheme; he tells us, that[352] _St._ Paul _suffer'd in the Esteem of the Jewish Christians for his Neglect of Allegories; and seems to be brought into the Use of them against his own good liking_. And again,[353] _It seems to have been in compliance with Jewish Christians, who were affected with allegorick Interpretations, that St._ Paul _used that way_. Which is as much as to say, St. _Paul_ was more a _Minister of the Spirit_, than of Inclination he was disposed to be, or, in truth, ought to have been; and that, if he took upon him the Ministry of the Spirit for the present, it was only craftily and politically done of him, to catch the _Jews_ in their own Snare of Allegories. He was consenting that the Preachers of the Gospel, in future Times, should desert the _Ministry of the Spirit_, and betake themselves to the _Letter_ of the Scriptures, as what is more agreeable to Truth, and conducive to the Defence and Propagation of Christianity. Such a _Craftsman_ was the inspir'd St. _Paul_, in the Opinion of the _Bishop_ of _Lichfield_! However, the _Bishop_ of St. _David's_ ought to be of the same Mind; he should a.s.sert, that the _Ministry_ of the _Spirit_ was all apostolical Craft and antient Error; and that the present Generation of Priests, being wiser, more learned, and more sincere than the Primitive and Apostolical ones, do adhere to the _Ministry of the Letter_.

Because the _Bishop_ has not gone thus far by much, he leaves more room, than he should, for the Revival of the _Ministry of the Spirit_; that is, of the spiritual and allegorical Interpretation of the Scriptures.

"The _Bishop_ often reproves me for my primitive Interpretation of _this_ and _that_ Text of Scripture, and then palms his own forc'd Sense on us, for natural and genuine, contrary to the Judgment of all Antiquity.

"He is so _grave_, serious, and sedate at some simple Doctrines and Arguments, that his _Readers_ must of necessity laugh, if not scoff at him. Was I _ludicrously_ to handle the said Doctrines, my _Readers_ would hardly smile. Such a wide Difference is there between the _Levity_ of a Buffoon (as he is pleased to call me) and the _Gravity_ of an a.s.s, to the exposing of Religion to the Ridicule and Contempt of Mankind.

"Lastly, He entirely mistakes the Design of my _Discourses_; he knows not what I aim and drive at. There's one Paradox runs through his whole Book, _viz._ That the litteral Story of our Saviour's Miracles must of necessity be true, or I should have no Foundation to build Allegories upon; which is a gross Mistake of other Writers against me, as well as of himself. Who knows not that the profest Parables of _Jesus_ have nothing of _Letter_ in them, yet are a good Foundation for Allegory? And let me tell him here again, that whatever was true, more or less, in the litteral Story of _Jesus_'s Miracles, there is absolute Necessity, for the Honour and Credit of them, to have Recourse to the Mystery; or litterally they are, and shall be farther proved such----Stories, as I dare not at present call them."

Thus have I given a brief Account of the _Bishop_'s mighty and pompous Performance; like to which he has promis'd us another Volume, that I shall long for the publication of, next _Winter_. This my brief Account is but introductory to future and larger Defences of my _Discourses_ on Miracles; which, by the Help of G.o.d, and Permission of the Civil Authority, shall be likewise publish'd.

I have not, I say, room here so much as to defend my self on any one Miracle; and if I had, I would not do it. For as I can't do it without writing in the same Stile and Strain for which I am prosecuted, so I will do nothing that may be interpreted as an Act in Defiance and Contempt of the Power of the Civil Magistrate. I did indeed publish two _Discourses_ after the Commencement of the Prosecution, because I imagined that our _Bishops_ were more in Jest than in Earnest; or if their Pa.s.sions were raised for the present, I thought, that after a little Consideration of the unreasonableness of Persecution in general, they would cool upon it, and drop the Prosecution. But since they are in Earnest, and I must answer to the Civil Powers for some supposed Crimes in my _Discourses_, I'll not repeat here the like Acts, but be quiescent in respect to the said Powers, to whom Reverence and Obedience is justly due. For, tho' I look upon the Ecclesiastical Power as an Usurpation on the Consciences of Mankind, yet the _Civil_ is Sacred, is G.o.d's Ordinance, and ought to be regarded as such. But if I survive the Prosecution, and escape with my Life and Liberty, which I don't despair of, under so wise, just, and good a Magistracy as this Nation is bless'd with, the _Bishop_ may expect a strenuous Defence of my self against his weak a.s.saults on me.

If our _Bishops_ were any thing _Heroical_, they would stop the Prosecution, and let the Controversy take its free Course. If they had any Sense of Honour and Reputation, any Regard for their Learning, they would set any Adversary of their Church at Defiance, and disdain the a.s.sistance of the Civil Magistrate to punish him, whom they could not confute. It is the Office of the _Bishops_ and _Priests_ of the Church, or I know not what is, to convert _Infidels_, to refute _Hereticks_, and by Reason and Argument to put to Silence all _Gain-sayers_. Wherefore have they a liberal and academical Education, but to qualify them for this Work? Wherefore do they receive large Revenues of the Church, but to oblige and encourage them to it?

Nothing more unreasonable, than that Men should receive Wages, when they don't their Work. What will the People say hereupon less, than that an Army of at least Twenty thousand Blackguards of the Church are hired to little or no Purpose? The meanest of the People may as well be taken to Church Preferments, as our reputed learned Divines. They can discharge other Ecclesiastical Offices; and when they are distress'd with an Objection to their Religion, can do no worse than call upon the Civil Magistrate for his Aid and a.s.sistance. But after all, I am inclin'd to think our _Bishops_, in Honour, would forbear Persecution, but for their Interests, call'd their _All_, which depend on the Issue of this Controversy.

However, not to urge the Argument for Liberty of Debate any farther, which has been already by others treated on to Perfection, and will be again returned, I doubt not, by some body else, on occasion of this _Bishop_'s _Dedication_, I can't but take Notice here how unpolitick, as well as unchristian, some Dissenters are in this Controversy, being, such as Dr. _Harris_, and Mr. _Atkinson_, no less for Persecution than the _Clergy_. If they had a Regard to their own Interests and Liberties, they would be silent. Infidels (of whom I am none) should be consider'd as Dissenting Brethren, whom they should not be forward to oppress, for fear in time, and by degrees, it should come to their own Turn. Our _Dissenters_ indeed, collectively, are vastly numerous, and a potent Party, but may trust too much to their own Strength and Numbers. Taking them separately, they may possibly be Extinguish'd by Ecclesiastical Art and Craft. If Blasphemy is a just Pretence for the Prosecution of me, the _Clergy_, upon Occasion, can urge the same Crime against them. I'll tell them a Story. The _Calvinists_ and _Socinians_ were once equally tolerated in _Poland_, and if they had been fast Friends to each other, the _Papists_ could never have suppress'd them: But the _Calvinists_ joining with the _Papists_, and urging them to complain against the _Socinians_ for Blasphemy, in denying the Divinity of the Son of G.o.d, moved the Civil Authority to a Banishment of them; and the _Socinians_ had not been long suppress'd, before the _Papists_ accus'd the _Calvinists_ of no less Blasphemy, in denying Adoration to the Virgin _Mary_; and so they were sent packing too; otherwise they might both have enjoy'd their Liberty to this Day. The Application of the Story is easy. So if all we _Dissenters_ from the Church, whether we like one another's Principles or not, don't hold together for the Preservation of our Liberties, it's easy for Ecclesiasticks to feign an Accusation of _Blasphemy_ against any of us. We have no Security, but in the Wisdom and Goodness of an excellent Government, which, if the _Clergy_ should ever get on the Back of, its hardly a Question, whether they would not drive, _Jehu_ like, most furiously.

But to return to my _Bishop_. I once thought he would never have been drawn into this Controversy. Sometime after the Publication of my Third _Discourse_, which, for a visible Reason, I dedicated to him, and invited him to Battle, I ask'd a dignify'd _Clergy-man_, Whether the _Bishop_ would write against me? He answer'd, No: Whereupon I concluded, that he had a Scent of somewhat, not here to be mention'd.

But my repeated Provocations of him afterwards, have forc'd him, against Inclination, to engage me. His Pa.s.sion got the better of his Reason, or he had been certainly quiescent: And the Violence of his Pa.s.sion is so visible thro' his whole Book, that it's G.o.d's great Mercy it did not throw him into a Fever and Convulsions, to the Danger of his Life and Health.

I own here again, what I have done before, that I did lay a Trap for our _Clergy_; but little imagined that two such great _Bishops_, as of _London_ and St. _David's_, would, to my Pleasure and Satisfaction, have been caught in it. If I had not baited my Trap well with _Ridicule_, I dare say, they would have kept themselves clear of it.

But when I experienc'd the hard Usage the Bishops had given me upon my _Discourses_, and the Fury with which they attack'd me, it surprised me, and brought to my Mind _Origen_'s Prediction[354] of this _very_ War and Controversy of the _Spirit_ against the _Letter_ of the _Scriptures_, and of the Violence it would be carried on with. For all my Veneration for the Authority of the Fathers, I did here suspect the Truth of _Origen_'s Prediction, believing him to be mistaken, and that the Controversy would be manag'd in a _calm_, _decent_, and _sedate_ Manner; and so it had been, but for the Interests of the _Clergy_ that are at Stake in it, which I was not aware of. Finding then the Truth of _Origen_'s Prediction contrary to my Expectations, I had the Curiosity further to consult the Fathers about the Issue of this Controversy; and they presently, with their mystical Fingers, pointed to a Prophecy of it in the _Revelations_ of St. _John_; but, to say no more at present, a.s.sur'd me, that the _Spirit_ would get the Better of the _Letter_ in the Conclusion of it. Tho' I am accounted an Infidel, I am so easy and credulous a Christian as to believe all this; and I thank G.o.d have so much Courage in me, as to try the Truth of it.

But I must observe here, that besides my two _Bishops_, of _London_ and St. _David's_, (and some other inconsiderable _Triflers_) there are two _anonymous_ Authors against me, whose Works have acquir'd some Fame. The One is int.i.tled, _The Miracles of Jesus vindicated_, in _Three Parts_.

If I could have gotten to the certain Knowledge of the Author, I should have been tempted to have had a Bout with him; and to have expostulated with him, both with Regard to his Arguments and good Manners. I would have taught him a better Use, and a more proper Application of the Words _Dishonesty, and want of Honesty_, than to reproach me with them. Common Fame says, Dr. _Pea.r.s.e_, of St. _Martin's_, is the Author; but I am apt to think, the _King_'s Parish Priest, and other City _Divines_, have more Wit and Craft than to upbraid me as above, for fear a just Charge of _Dishonesty_, for their Extortions and Exactions on the People, should be retorted on them. Upon the Publication of the _First Part_ of the foresaid Treatise, my _Jewish Rabbi_ comes to me in all haste, saying to me, "Look you here, do you see how this Author has new vampt the old _mumpsimus_ Argument of _Jesus_'s Resurrection? Do you observe how imperfectly, here and there, he answers my Objections to it; and silently slips by some knotty Pieces of them, that were too hard for him to untie?" Yes, _Rabbi_, said I, I do observe all this; (and what I have observ'd since, he argues, awkwardly and backwardly, for the Certainty of _Jesus_'s other Miracles, from his Resurrection.) My _Rabbi_ presently re-inforc'd his Resurrection-Objection against this Author, and would have had me to print it. No, no, _Rabbi_, said I; you may print it your self, if you dare. I must wait to hear how Causes will go in _Westminster-Hall_, next Term, before I involve my self in another Law-Suit. Besides, _Rabbi_, they say, I don't really thus correspond with a _Jew_, but do only personate one; and the _Bishop_ of St.

_David's_ hints, that I am answerable to publick Justice for so doing.

Here my Rabbi stampt with Indignation; saying, What if you did personate a _Jew_? Is it not lawful, and in Use with your _Divines_, to write Conferences between a Christian and a _Jew_? And do you any more in this Case? Yes, _Rabbi_, said I, it is lawful to write such like Conferences, and to make _Jewish_ Objections to Christianity, when they are no stronger than may be easily dissipated: But when Men write from the Heart, as you do, and raise a D----l that our _Clergy_ can't easily lay, it is, they say, intolerable, and punishable; and either you or I, in the Opinion of the _Bishop_, ought to suffer for it.

The other considerable _Treatise_ against me, is that of _The Trial of the Witnesses of the Resurrection of Jesus_; which is an ingenious Piece, and I was well pleased with it. Some time after the Publication of this _Treatise_, I made my Jewish _Rabbi_ a Visit, when, drinking a _Dish_ of _Tea_ together, we talk'd it over; and my _Rabbi_ was pleas'd to deliver his Sentiments of it in this fashion: "Whoever was the Author of this Treatise, G.o.d knows, but he's certainly a Friend to my Objections against _Jesus_'s Resurrection, which he has fairly stated; but is so far from fully confuting all of them, that he discovers a Consciousness, here and there, that they are unanswerable.

It is commonly reported that Bishop _Sherlock_ is the Author of this _Treatise_, but this Report I look upon as an Artifice of the Booksellers, to make it sell well; or rather the Author's contrived _Banter_ upon the _Clergy_, and their weak Christian Brethren, to try how far they may be imposed on, and drawn into the Approbation and Admiration of a Treatise, that really makes against them. There is but very little in this Treatise, to make it reputed a sufficient Answer to my Objections, excepting the Verdict of the _Jury_, who brought in the Witnesses of the Resurrection, _Not Guilty_, of either Fraud or Mistake in it. _Bishop Sherlock_ can't be the Author of this Treatise, if for no other Reason than this, that _that_ Author is visibly against that Ecclesiastical Wealth and Power, which the _Bishop_ is possess'd of, and does think not disagreeable to the Mind of Christ and his poor Apostles. If any _Bishop_ is the concealed Author of this Treatise, he must secretly be of the Opinion of the atheistical Pope, who said, _quantum n.o.bis profuit haec de Christo Fabula_, what vast Advantage has the Story of Christ been to us Popes and Bishops." I readily gave into the Opinion of my _Rabbi_, and wonder'd, _Bishop Sherlock_ did not so much as by a publick Advertis.e.m.e.nt clear himself of being the Author of this Treatise, and so put a Stop to the Report. It may be the _Bishop_ is above the Scandal of it; but I was so concern'd for his Reputation, that I drew up a _Vindication_ of him from the Slander of it; which I had publish'd, but for my _Rabbi_'s farther Thoughts about the Resurrection of Jesus inserted in it, that our _Bishops_ might have possibly taken Offence at. So I dropp'd that Design at present, but hope still for an Opportunity to publish the said Vindication of the _Bishop_, by which, I don't doubt, but to merit his Friendship and Favour.

But whoever was the real Author of the foresaid Treatise, I humbly and heartily beg of him to publish, what in the Conclusion of it, he has given us some Hopes of, _The Trial of the Witnesses of the Resurrection of_ LAZARUS, because my _Rabbi_'s Objections to it are a Novelty and Curiosity, which, by way of such a Reply to them, I should be glad to see handled.

But having here by Chance mention'd my _Rabbi_'s Letter concerning _Lazarus_'s Resurrection, it brings to my Mind a Challenge I made to the _Bishop_ of _London_ upon it, _viz._[355] "If he would publish an Answer to that Letter, and vouchsafe me the Pleasure of a Reply to it; then (to save the _Civil Magistrates_ Trouble) I would suffer such Punishment that he in his Clemency should think fit to inflict on me, for what's past." An ingenuous _Clergy-man_, upon reading this, said, that the _Bishop_ was bound, in Honour, to accept of my Challenge, or, what was in his Power, in Generosity, to put a Stop to the Prosecution. But the _Bishop_ is not of his Mind. And for what Reason he does not accept of my Challenge, is best known to himself, and others will conjecture. If he had not condescended to write against me in his _Pastoral Letter_, I should have imagined, that he thought it beneath the Dignity of One of his exalted Station in the Church, to set his Wit (for dignified Priests, for the most part, think their Wit and Learning proportion'd to their Wealth and Power) against such a poor Author as I am. But this is not the Reason. It may be, he thinks his Reputation and Honour secure in the Height of his Grandeur, and that his Dependents will admire his Learning nothing the less for his Neglect of my Challenge. However it be, this I will say, that were we upon the Level in the World as to Fortune, as well as we are to Age and Education, the Learned would despise him for declining the reasonable Challenge of one, whom he has injuriously treated and persecuted. It's to no Purpose to challenge him here afresh; he, being purpos'd to carry the Matter with an high Hand, has taken other Measures, and is resolv'd to make use of his Power and Interest to suppress him, whom with Reason and Argument he can't convince.

However, I will here make another Proposal to the _Bishop_ of St.

_David's_. Because he thirsts after a very severe Punishment of me, or he would not be so warm in his Exhortations of the Government to that Purpose, I'll tell him how he may glut his Revenge, and inflict a greater Punishment on me, than, in all probability, the Civil Magistrate will humour him in. If he'll but put a Stop to the Prosecution at present (which is not out of the Power of our _Bishops_, whatever they may pretend) and let the Controversy go on, till I have finish'd my Reply to his _two Volumes_, which shall be done with all Expedition; then, if his Pa.s.sion is not allay'd, I will submit to any Punishment, he in his Wisdom and Justice, without Mercy, shall think fit to have laid on me, whether it be to Death or Imprisonment. And what would he, or any implacable Priest, desire more? This Proposal makes him my Judge as well as my Accuser, and if he be not the most unreasonable Man alive, he must accept of it. All my Hopes here are, that his Reason may recover its Dominion over his Pa.s.sion, against the Conclusion of my _Defence_, or it will go hard with me. If the _Bishop_ will not comply with this Proposal, I shall conclude, he's possess'd with the only certain and allegorical _Satan_, mention'd in my _Discourses_; and I shall be confirm'd in the Opinion of St. _Hilary_ (whose Testimonies about Devils, the _Bishop_ has silently pa.s.s'd by, without any Charge upon me for Misrepresentation) that there are no worse _Devils_ in the World, than the calumniating, furious, and persecuting Tempers of Mankind. The _Bishop_, by the by, has taken Pains to prove there are other _Devils_, of an infernal, frightful, and independent Nature, and of a more certain Existence than _Hobgoblins_; and he gravely a.s.serts, that three of those _Devils_ enter'd into each _Hog_, that ran violently down-hill; thereby making the little _Pigs_ to carry as great a Burden as the old _Boars_ and _Sows_, which should have been better thought of by him. The _Bishop_, perhaps, for these my Descants, will say I am an Infidel; but I a.s.sure him, it is one of the Articles of my Primitive and Christian Faith, that the old _Dragon_, _Satan_, the _Serpent_, or the _Devil_, mention'd in the _Revelations_, is no other than the furious, violent, and persecuting Spirit in Man; which, upon the World's getting Liberty of Religion, will be bound and chain'd. And it is the Opinion of Thousands, as well as of my self, that Mankind will never be Happy, nor at Rest, till this _Devil_ is exorcised out of the Priesthood, and so of consequence chain'd up. According to the primitive Way of interpreting the _Revelations_ of St. _John_, the Time is near at Hand for the _binding_ this Apocalyptical old _Dragon_ or _Satan_, that has pester'd the World through all Ages past. All the Honour that I desire, is, by my Studies and Endeavours to be contributing to so great a Work, for the Good and Happiness of Mankind.

To conclude. I have been the more expeditious in printing of this Discourse, not only for fear the _Bishop_'s _Vindication_ (as it is call'd) should have a _malign Influence_ upon some People, I don't mean our _Civil Magistrates_, who are wiser and more learned than to be guided by such outragious Stuff; but because he should not long triumph in a Conceit of the Potency and Excellency of his Performance, as if no Reply could or would be made to it. If I had at this Time enjoy'd free Liberty of Debate, I should not have thought it worth my while to meddle with his _Dedication_, which with a Scorn I should have pa.s.s'd by, and left to the Animadversions and Chastis.e.m.e.nt of other Enemies to Persecution; but would immediately have enter'd upon a Defence of my _Discourses_ against him. If I do retrieve my Liberty, and the free Use of my Pen, and should not publish Defences of my self, I should deserve (what _one_ said the _Bishop_ of _London_, for his declining my Challenge, deserv'd) to be p.i.s.s'd upon for a vain Pretender to Argument and Authority.

In the mean time, I have nothing to request of our _Clergy_, but that Liberty of Debate may be indulg'd us; _that_ Liberty of theological Disputation, which would be granted, if they did not industriously labour to obstruct it. When will they cease to disgrace Truth, to dishonour their Religion, and to disparage their own Education and Learning; and no longer envy Mankind the blessed Enjoyment of such a Liberty!

But their Religion, they say, would be in Danger upon such a Liberty.

How can that be? How can Christianity be in Danger, that has not only the Omnipotence of G.o.d on his Side, but a numerous standing Army of Priests, hired for the Defence of it? It is not then their Concern for Religion, that prompts them to so much Zeal here; but their Fears for their Interests, that depend on the Issue of this Controversy.

Was I to write against any other honest _Trade_, that is practised in this City, the Artificers of it, being sensible of the Usefulness of their Craft, would let me go on unmolested; and only pity and despise me for the Vanity of my Attempt to subvert them: But the _Clergy_, being p.r.i.c.k'd with a Consciousness of the Mischiefs and Inconveniencies of their Establishment, do therefore thus winch and kick.

And who, besides the _Clergy_, are at this time Enemies to Liberty? None hardly, but their immediate Dependents, whom they can easily infuse their fiery and furious Notions into. Was it to be voted this Day among the learned _Laity_, I dare say, the Friends of Persecution would be found vastly short of the Numbers of their Adversaries. And I hope to G.o.d, the Legislative Authority of these Nations will soon take the Matter into their Consideration; and either limit or enlarge the Bounds of Liberty, that honest and well-meaning Men may be no longer harra.s.s'd and molested, for their sincere Endeavours to serve the Publick.

No Body, I trust, can complain of any disrespectful Usage, I have here given the _Bishop_ of St. _David's_, that considers, how he has treated me in _his Sermon before the Societies for Reformation_; and _in his Charge to the Clergy of his Diocese_; as well as _in his Vindication_.

It would be sufficient, if I had no other Excuse for my self than _this_, That Controversy is like a _Game_ at _Foot ball_, in which, if a _Lord_ will engage with a _Plowman_, and should meet with a Kick on the Shins, he ought not to complain of the ill Manners of it: So if a _Bishop_ will dispute with one of lower Degree, he must look for a Rub on his Intellects, a Rap on his Pate, and if his Adversary cuts him on a soft Place, he should know how to bear it with Patience. But the _Bishop_, contrary to this _Game-Rule_ in Controversy, complains[356] of my _unmannerly_ Treatment of him, and cries out of the Sufferings and Reproaches he undergoes, as if he was already more than half a Martyr for Religion. I can't pretend to equal him in Reproaches and Sufferings, having not so quick a Sense of them; and therefore I am willing, that good Christian People should pity my poor _Bishop_, rather than me, in a persecuted and sorrowful Condition.