Whatever our zealous _Clergy_ may think, one Persecution of an _Infidel_ does more Harm to Religion, than the Publication of the worst _Book_ against it.
Liberty is so essential, _My Lord_, to the Enquiry after Truth, that where It is wanted, Truth will want that Splendor, which it receives from Disputation: And Christianity would be the more tryumphant over its Enemies, for that unbounded Liberty, they may enjoy to contest it from the _Press_. I say this, not for the Security of my self; against future Prosecutions but, from a Heart, full of Zeal for the Religion of the Holy _Jesus_.
Ever since the _Reformation_, which was founded on our Natural and Christian Rights to Liberty of Conscience, has this great Blessing of Liberty, at Times, been interrupted by Persecutions: But whether any of them hitherto have done any Service to _Church_ or _State_, your _Lordship_ is a good Judge.
However, tho" the Prosecution of my self, which was founded on a grand Mistake, is attended with no ill Consequence; yet I hope our _Ecclesiasticks_ will grow cautious by it, and no more sollicit the most indulgent Civil Magistracy of this Kingdom to the Persecution of any other, much less of,
[Sidenote: London May 25. 1730.]
_My Lord_, _Your Lordship"s_ _Most Obedient and_ _Humble Servant_, Tho. Woolston.
[Ill.u.s.tration]
A
SECOND PART
OF THE
DEFENCE, _&c._
It"s Time now to publish another _Part_ of my _Defence_, which, in my former, I gave my _Readers_ some Reason to expect from me. If I should keep Silence much longer, my _Adversaries_ will be ready to charge me with Cowardice, or Insufficiency; and say, that I"m either absolutely confuted by the _Writers_ against me, or so terrified by the Civil Magistrate"s Authority, that I either can"t, or dare not, engage afresh in the same Cause. And I must confess, that if I was not convinced of the Goodness of my Cause, which is no other than G.o.d"s, and of my Ability to defend it, I should chuse to hold my Peace, and be glad that it has fared no worse with me.
One Reason indeed why I have been so long ere I publish"d _this_, is pure Respect to the Civil Powers, whom I am oblig"d, as a Christian, to honour and reverence, so far as may be, without Disobedience to G.o.d. Had I hastily, and as soon almost as _Sentence_ was pa.s.s"d on me, publish"d _this_, some might have interpreted it, as an Act of Defiance and Contempt of the Civil Authority, (for there are not wanting those who will put the worst Construction they can on my Conduct;) therefore I forbore for a while: And now that I appear again from the _Press_, it is not without professing a profound Veneration for our Civil Magistracy, who, I am sure, will never think the worse of a Man for vindicating his own Innocency, or for writing in a Cause that, in his Conscience, he is persuaded is most just and good.
Another Reason why I committed this no sooner to the Press, was to wait the Publication of the _Bishop_ of _St. David_"s his _Second Volume_, which he promised us last Winter. I was almost of Opinion, that, in my former _Defence_, I gave the _Bishop_ such Intimations of my sincere Belief of Christianity, notwithstanding my _Discourses_ on _Miracles_, and of the Falseness of his repeated Charge against me for Infidelity, that I question"d whether he would write again in the same Strain. If the _Bishop_ is convinced of this his grand Mistake about me, then the very Foundation of his past and future Work is shaken, and I shall hear no more of him. But whether he is certainly convinc"d of his Mistake or not, I am concern"d to go on with these _Defences_ of my self, and to vindicate the Goodness and Usefulness of the Design of my _Discourses_ on _Miracles_, against what the _Bishops_ of _London_ and _St. David_"s, and other _Adversaries_ have written to the contrary.
But, before I enter upon such a _Defence_ of my self and my _Discourses_, I must make, what is proper here, a short Preface. It is well known, that I am for Liberty of Debate, and against all Persecution or Force, or Impositions on the Consciences of Mankind.
But for all that, there are some _Rules_ in Controversy that we polemical _Writers_ should observe, and be oblig"d to; or, instead of discovering and ill.u.s.trating the Truth we pretend to search for, we shall but the more darken, obstruct and perplex it. As,
_First_, We should endeavour to write as plainly and intelligibly as we can, and never amuse our _Readers_ with Expressions void of Sense, or with false Reasoning against our _Adversaries_, where we want what"s good and solid. This _Rule_ none can except against: Whether I am an Observer of this _Rule_, my Readers are to be Judges. As I am to answer it to G.o.d and a good Conscience, I endeavour to observe it; but much question, whether some of my _Adversaries_ can say so too, or they would never vent such dark, impertinent and unintelligible Stuff, if it was not, because they are at a Loss for what"s clear and shining. There"s no End of giving Instances out of their Writings to this Purpose. I shall only mention one, that"s repeated amongst them, and that is, of their pretended Distinction between Popish _Persecution_ and Protestant _Prosecution_ for Opinions, wherewith they have amused weak and injudicious Heads. The Wife, I am sure, can discern no more Difference here, than between a _Rope_ and a _Halter_ to hang an innocent Man, in which Case too there is a _nominal_ Distinction without a _real_ Difference.
_Secondly_, We should be open and sincere in our Opinions, and not profess with our Mouths to believe, what we disown in our Hearts; nor, like _Watermen_, that look one way and row another, should we pretend to have one Design in View, when we are pursuing the quite contrary.
This is a reasonable _Rule_, and ought to be observ"d, or we shall confound the Understandings of our _Readers_, who will soon lose Sight of our Arguments, if they apprehend not their Aim and Drift. This _Rule_, my Adversaries will say, is levell"d at my self, than whom no body has more dissembled and prevaricated in his Opinions. Have not you, will they say to me, frequently declared, that your Design in your _Discourses_ is to make way for the Proof of the Truth of Christianity, and of the Messiahship of the Holy _Jesus_, when you mean and intend the Subversion of both? And is not here grand Hypocrisy, and a Transgression of this Rule? Yes, if I intend the Subversion of Christ"s Religion and Messiahship, here is grand Hypocrisy, and a Transgression of this _Rule_; and I can"t think of such a Piece of Prevarication without Horror. The Bishop of _St.
David_"s[357] and Mr. _Stackhouse_,[358] in particular, have animadverted upon me for such Hypocrisy; and if I was guilty of it, in much gentler Terms than I deserv"d. This Hypocrisy, which they falsely charge me with, is as heinous a Sin as I can think of; it is as bad as wilful _Perjury_, as bad as a _Clergyman_"s taking the Abjuration Oath, with his Heart full of Zeal and Affection for the Pretender, and worse than his giving his solemn a.s.sent and Consent to Articles of Religion he believes little or nothing of. I should hardly have mention"d this _Rule_ to be observ"d in Controversy, if I had been guilty of the Breach of it. It is somewhat excusable in _Infidels_ a little to disguise their real Sentiments, for fear of the Danger they may incur by an open Profession of them: But such a gross and foul Mask of Hypocrisy, as some think I have here put on, is intolerable, and must be hateful to _Infidels_ as well as _Christians_, being obstructive to Truth, which, in all Inquirers after her, loves Sincerity and Simplicity. No doubt, but my _Adversaries_, some of them, will still think me a Transgressor of this _Rule_; but my present and following _Defences_ will absolutely clear me. And if none of my _Adversaries_ are more guilty of the Transgression of it than my self, we are all entirely innocent.
_Thirdly_, In Controversy we should avoid all wilful Misrepresentation of the Sense of our _Adversaries_, and of the _Authors_ we pretend to cite. Mistakes and Misapprehensions of one another will sometimes unavoidably happen, and are then as innocent things as involuntary Errors. But wilful Perversion and Falsification of another Author"s Words, to the Service of our selves, or to the Prejudice of our _Adversaries_, is most blameable, and of that ill Consequence to the Search after Truth, that it will keep us always at a Distance from her.
This then is another good _Rule_ to be observed in Controversy, which some may wonder I have mention"d, because of that Misrepresentation and Falsification of Authorities I am charg"d with. And I must confess, my _Adversaries_ have here made an hideous Outcry against me; which if I can"t acquit my self of, I am the foulest Controvertist that ever appear"d in Print. The Bishop of _St. David_"s[359] calls my _Falsification_ of Authorities, an _Immorality_, and speculative _Forgery_; but if I was so guilty as he would have me thought, he speaks too favourably of it. He should have deem"d it as great a Crime as practical _Forgery_ by the Law; and all Philosophers and Lovers of Truth should wish it might be likewise punish"d.
But, good Christian Reader, don"t too hastily pa.s.s thy Judgment on me.
Suspend awhile; it may be, that I may unexpectedly vindicate my self.
The Matter as yet is under Debate, whether my _Adversaries_ or I are the grand Misrepresenters and Falsifiers of Authorities. One would think, that my Adversaries, who were bent on the Accusation of me for the foresaid Crime, should have kept themselves clear of it: But the _Bishop_ of _St. David_"s[360] is such a resolute _Misrepresenter_, that he could not find in his Heart faithfully to transcribe the _Three Heads_ of my _Discourses_; but by a Suppression of some Words, and the Change of others, has given them an odious and invidious Turn to my Disadvantage: And he has studied so hard to pervert the Sense of the Fathers against me, and so tortured his Brain to make me a Misrepresenter of them, that I should not wonder, if he had labour"d under a Pain in his Head ever since, and is unable to write more. Tho"
my Word should not be taken for all this at present; yet in the Sequel of these _Defences_, it will be made manifest.
It is a great Temptation to our _Bishops_ falsely to accuse and misrepresent their Adversaries; because they know their Writings don"t equally spread and go together among all their Readers. A _Bishop_"s Writing going more by itself amongst the _Clergy_, and other Friends to his Side of the Question, he is tempted to misrepresent his Adversaries, knowing his prejudiced Readers will take his Report of them, and credit it. For this Reason, and no other, did the _Bishop_ of _Litchfield_[361] falsely charge the _Author_ of the _Grounds_ with odious a.s.sertions, to which there is nothing akin in the Places seemingly referr"d to, nor in all that Author"s Work.
However, the _Rule_ in Controversy before laid down is a good, useful and necessary one. I pray G.o.d we may all be religious and conscientious Observers of it, or we shall r.e.t.a.r.d the Discovery of Truth, and render our Attainment of it difficult, if not impossible.
_Fourthly_, We should think our selves oblig"d to set our Names to our Writings in Controversy, especially where it is such a _warm_ one as is ours at present. The Observation of this _Rule_ would not only prevent much of the Violation of the _two_ former; but would hinder abundance of the Dirt of Scandal, Lies and Defamations, that we too often throw at each other. For what Reason some of the _Writers_[362]
against me have industriously conceal"d their Names, I know full well.
They perhaps would have it thought Modesty, and that they are not ambitious of the publick Praises they may deserve for their learned and elaborate Performances. And possibly it may be Modesty in some Theological Authors to conceal themselves: But where Men have the Impudence to defame, it"s in vain to pretend to the Cloak of Modesty to cover themselves under. Wherefore then do they sometimes who write on the establish"d Side of the Question, on which Honour and Preferment goes, thus conceal themselves? Why, that they might belie and slander their Adversaries the more securely, without being expostulated with for their Impudence. It"s to no Purpose, they know, to upbraid an anonymous Author with his Scandal, because he can"t be put to the Blush for it. And a wise Man will not lose his Labour to expose and confute a libellous Writing, unless he knew whom to charge with the Guilt of it. It is my Resolution to take no Notice of any nameless Authors against me, because I, being as it were blindfolded, engage them at a Disadvantage, whilst they have a full View of me. For this Reason the _Tryal of the Witnesses_ was pa.s.s"d by, or I should have been tempted to have made some Remarks on it. Let such _Authors_ come forth into the Light, and it may be, they"ll meet with the same Favour I have done the _Bishop_ of _St. David_"s. In the mean time, I declare my Abhorrence of Authors their Concealment of their Names, and I hope all ingenuous _Writers_ in Controversy will do so too; tho" for no other Reason, than to prevent Misrepresentations, Defamations, and personal Reflections, which nameless Authors are too often guilty of.
_Fifthly_, and _lastly_, Others make it a common _Rule_ to be observ"d in Controversy, that the _Disputants_ should consider each other"s Arguments impartially, without the Bya.s.s of Prejudice and Interest.
And a very good _Rule_ this is, if Men would but put it into Practice.
But I shall long despair of such Impartiality in Controversy. Such is the Power of Prejudice and Interest, that they will influence Men to believe against the most apparent Reason and Truth. Even Prejudice will much darken the Eyes of Mens Understandings, but Interest will put them quite out. O what a horrible Obstacle to the free Enquiry after Truth, is Interest! Against Demonstration itself will Men contend for Interest. Interest, upon Occasion, will induce them to desert the best Opinions, and keep them tight to the worst. This Experience proves true, and the various Faces of the Church, and Changes of the _Clergy_ (all for Interest) is a Witness of it. G.o.d forbid that I should judge uncharitably of the Corruption of human Nature under the Power of Interest; but I believe, that was our _Legislature_ to do, what they never will, that is, set up the Figure of a _Calf_ in our Churches, there would be no want of Priests to worship him, if they were well paid for it; nor of Academical _Students_ to prove his divine Power and G.o.dship, if the Road to Preferment lay that Way. For this Reason, among many others, I am for the Abolition of an hired and establish"d Priesthood, that this grand Bar of Interest may be removed out of our Way to Truth. And the _Bishop_ of _London_, that excellent Prelate, as _Bishop Smalbroke_ calls him (for so do we, like other Creatures, knab one another where it itches) should by rights be of my Mind, saying,[363] "Where there is an Unwillingness to part with worldly Interests, there must of Course be a _Desire_ that the Christian Religion should not be true; and a _Willingness_ to favour and embrace any Argument that is brought against it, and to cherish any Doubts and Scruples that shall be rais"d concerning it." So feelingly does this _Bishop_ speak of the Power of Interest, by which, as I would conceive, he honestly hints to the Inhabitants of _London_ and _Westminster_, that the _Bishop_ of their Diocese, and the _Parson_ of their Parish, are most unfit Guides in Religion, because of the worldly Interests they may have to deceive them, and keep them in Ignorance and Error.
Thus by way of Preface having spoken to the foregoing _Rules_ to be observed in this Controversy, I come to a close. _Defence_ of myself against the Charge of Infidelity, and to vindicate the Usefulness of my _Discourses on Miracles_ for the Proof of the Truth of Christianity, and of the Messiahship of the Holy _Jesus_, against all my Adversaries. And the Method I shall take to this Purpose, is this following.
I. To show the Weakness, Childishness, and Insufficiency of the Arguments of my _Adversaries_, for the _Letter_ of the Stories of _Jesus_"s Miracles; and further to prove both _ludicrously_ and _seriously_ the Absurdities, Incredibilities, and Improbabilities, that their literal Stories labour under.
II. To prove, that whether there be any Sense, Truth and Fact, or not, in the Letter of _Jesus_"s Miracles; yet they are Typical Things, and ought to be allegorically interpreted, and will receive a mysterious and more wonderful Accomplishment, after the manner, and to the same Purpose, that the Fathers and I do apply them, being no other (whether actually wrought or not) than Figures, Signs and Emblems of his future and mysterious Operations.
III. To show that the mysterious and future Accomplishment of these supposed Works and Miracles of _Jesus_ alone can and will be the Proof of his Messiahship.
If I perform well upon these Heads, which are deserving of my _Reader_"s Review, because of their Pertinency to the Cause in Hand, I shall not only vindicate myself from the Charge of Infidelity, but justify the Goodness and Usefulness of my _Discourses_, in order to the Demonstration of _Jesus_"s Messiahship. And in the midst of my handling of them, without going out of my Way, I shall, as Occasion offers itself, take Notice of particular Misrepresentations of the Fathers, and false Citations out of them, that my Adversaries charge me with: And Bishop _Smalbroke_ and others had best to look to it, or their Accusations against me will recoil and return home to them. Then
I. I should show the Weakness, Childishness and Insufficiency of the Arguments of my _Adversaries_ for the _Letter_ of _Jesus_"s Miracles; and further argue both _ludicrously_ and _seriously_ the Absurdities, Incredibilities and Improbabilities, that their literal Stories labour under.
I should, I say, first treat on this Head, which naturally precedes the two following; but in as much as to handle it to Perfection, I should write as I did before, and shall run in Danger of Prosecution for Blasphemy and Infidelity; I must of Necessity wave and postpone it, unless I could more than dispatch it in the Compa.s.s of this _Part_ of my _Defence_.
I have heretofore made solemn Professions of my Belief of Christianity, and most seriously declared in the plainest Terms, that my Design was not to do Service to Infidelity, but to make way for the Proof of Christ"s Religion and Messiahship; but my Word was not taken, being look"d upon as a Dissembler, an Hypocrite, and Prevaricator, for all that. And should I now ever so gravely repeat the like a.s.severations of the Integrity and Sincerity of my Heart, that my Objections against the Letter of _Jesus_"s Miracles are none against his Religion, but only intended to turn Mens Heads to the mystical Interpretations of them; I question much whether I should be believed, and whether _Bishop Smalbroke_[364] would not say again, _that this is too thin a Disguise of what seems to be my great and worse Design_.
What then in Prudence must I do in this Case? Why, I must let _This Head_, which reasonably should precede, rest for a while; and by treating on the _Second_, tho" out of Place, I must first effectually convince my Adversaries, that I am no _Infidel_ of wicked Designs to subvert Christianity, but only the _Ministry of the Letter_; and then, I conceive, I may safely resume the Consideration of this _First Head_, and without the Imputations of Infidelity and Blasphemy, write as _merrily_ or _gravely_ as I please against the Letter.
Should any say, that this pretended Reason for waving this _First Head_ for the present, is nothing but Cowardice and Inability to write more on it, I can"t help it. _Ictus Piscator sapit_; I have already suffer"d much for the ludicrous Treatment of the _Letter_, and it is Wisdom to keep, if I can, out of the like Danger; neither will I do any thing, that in Conscience I can forbear, to incur the Displeasure of the Civil Magistrate. But however, if the _Bishop_ of _London_ would ensure me against, what the _Bishop_ of _St. David_"s calls, the[365] _Nominal_ Persecutions of _Protestants_, which I am more afraid of, than of the _real_ Persecutions of _Papists_, I will soon enter upon this Head; otherwise for Self-Preservation against the _nominal_ Sufferings of Fines and Imprisonment, _&c._ I will forbear, promising my Readers, that in due Time, and on a more proper Occasion, I will resume the _merry Subject_ of the _Letter_, and handle it to their entire Satisfaction.
And when I resume _this Head_, I will begin where I before left off in my _Discourses_ on _Miracles_; that is, with the Resurrection of _Jesus_, which tho" I believe to have been a miraculous Fact, that happen"d, yet it was by no means timed and circ.u.mstanced, so as easily and readily to conciliate the Belief of Posterity. G.o.d has given to Man Reason to judge of the Credibility of Events, and the Certainty of Miracles: And if the Reason of every Man does not disapprove of the Management of that Event, (supposing it has no figurative Meaning in it) I am much mistaken, when we come to state a Case, how such a Miracle ought to be wrought and conducted, to get and preserve the Credit of it.
Thus having told my Readers, why I postpone my _First Head_, I now enter upon the _Second_, which is
II. To shew, that whether there be any Sense, Truth and Fact, or not, in the literal Stories of _Jesus_"s Miracles, yet they are all certainly typical Facts, and ought to be allegorically interpreted, and will receive a mysterious and more wonderful Accomplishment after the Manner, and to the same Purpose, that the Fathers and I do apply them, being no other (whether actually wrought or not) than Figures, Signs and Emblems of his future and mysterious Operations.
If the Authority of the Fathers would be admitted of, as decisive on _this Head_, there would soon be an End of all Controversy upon it.
Give me Leave to recite some of their Testimonies to this Purpose, which I have heretofore urg"d in my _Discourses_. _Origen_ says[366]
That _Jesus_"s Works were _Symbols_ of other Things to be done by his Power. St. _Hilary_[367] says, That _Jesus_"s Actions bore a Resemblance of what he would do hereafter. St. _Augustin_[368] says, That the Facts of _Jesus_ are Signs of somewhat else to be done by him. And _Eusebius Gallica.n.u.s_[369] says, That our Saviour manifestly shews, that his Miracles are of a spiritual Signification, or in the Work of them he would not have done somewhat or other, that seems to want Sense and Reason. These few, out of a Mult.i.tude of Citations from the Fathers that might be produced, are sufficient to the Proof of the present Proposition, if their Authority might determine our Dispute.
And most pertinent Citations they are too, tho" _Bishop Smalbroke_[370] says, _that even the Pa.s.sages cited by me from the Fathers, that are not falsified, are impertinent_; which is such an extravagant Stretch against the most glaring Truth, that (to use the Bishop"s[371] own Words against himself) _it betrays a Mind lost to all Sense of Modesty and Religion_, or he could not have utter"d it.
And not only the Miracles of _Jesus_ were Signs and Figures of future Events; but, according to _Origen_,[372] _every thing else that he did_: From whence we may gather what was _Origen_"s Meaning, when he said[373]
_Christ"s first_ Advent in the Flesh is all Type and Shadow of his _second_, spiritual, and glorious Coming; which being an _Opinion_ that our _Clergy_ are Strangers to, I desire them to consider of it, and whether there is any Possibility of Truth in it, because it is contrary to modern Conceptions about _Christ"s second_ Advent.
Nay further, according to the Fathers,[374] the very Life and Ministry of _John_ the _Baptist_, so far as it is recorded by the _Evangelists_, is Type and Figure of another"s Ministry before Christ"s spiritual Advent; and I am almost, if not altogether of the same Mind with them. It is beside my present Business, to insert here many of their Testimonies to this Purpose: But if the _Bishop_ of _St.
David_"s would spare a little Time, which can"t be better employ"d, and make a Collection of the Opinions of the Fathers about the _Baptist_"s Ministry, and print it, I dare say he"ll thereupon present the learned World with the most surprizing Curiosity they ever were entertain"d with. Tho" it is improper for me to do such a Work; yet I will here tell my _Readers_ what will be the true Meaning of _John"s Preaching Repentance, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at Hand_, when his Ministry revives, _viz._ "It will be an Exhortation to Ministers of the Letter, eta??e??, to reconsider the Matter and Error of their literal Expositions, and to betake themselves to spiritual and allegorical Interpretations of the Scriptures, in which allegorical and spiritual Senses of them consists the _Kingdom of Heaven_." This I a.s.sert upon the Authority of _Origen_,[375] and if the _Clergy_ please to consult St. _Austin_ and others, they"ll find them of the same Mind. But, this by the by, having no more to say to the Typicalness of _John_"s Ministry, than whenever his foresaid mystical Preaching of Repentance shall revive, it can hardly be to a more viperous Generation of Ecclesiastical _Scribes_ and _Pharisees_, than are the _Ministers_ of the _Letter_ at this present.
But against all these, and Ten Thousand more Testimonies of the Fathers for the allegorical Interpretation of the Writings of the _Evangelists_, and of _Jesus_"s Miracles in particular, the _Bishop_ of _St. David_"s says, the Fathers are not of good Authority in this Case, but, for all them, who were Men of whimsical and volatile Fancies, we ought to adhere to the _Letter_ of the Story of _Christ_"s Life and Miracles. This the _Bishop_ a.s.serts roundly and frequently in express or implicit Terms, as his Readers may observe; and I dare say, the _Bishop_ himself will not here charge me with a Misrepresentation of his Opinion, tho", to spare Time and Paper, I quote not his own Words and large Pa.s.sages.
What Reason does the _Bishop_ give, why the Authority of the Fathers for the allegorical Interpretation of the Evangelical Writings, and of _Jesus_"s Miracles, in particular, is not to be allow"d of? None at all.