§. IV.
[157] This History is reported by Casaubonus, in his Book of Manners and Customs, P. 160. “In this last Age he is esteemed an uncivil Man, who will not either to his Inferior or Equal subscribe himself Servant. But Sulpitius Severus was heretofore sharply reproved by Paulinus, Bishop of Nola, because in his Epistle he had subscribed himself his Servant, saying, Beware thou subscribe not thyself his Servant, who is thy Brother; for Flattery is sinful, not a Testimony of Humility to give these Honours to Men, which are only due to the One Lord, Master, and GOD.”
But they usually object, to defend themselves, That Luke saith, Most Excellent Theophilus; and Paul, Most Noble Festus.
I answer, Since Luke wrote that by the Dictates of the Infallible Spirit of God, I think it will not be doubted but Theophilus did deserve it, as being really endued with that Virtue: In which Case we shall not condemn those that do it by the same Rule. But it is not proved that Luke gave Theophilus this Title, as that which was derived to him, either from his Father, or by any Patent Theophilus had obtained from any of the Princes of the Earth? or that he would have given it him, in Case he had not been truly excellent: And unless this be proved (which never can) there can nothing hence be deduced against us. Concerning the Title Paul gave to Festus.The like may be said of that of Paul to Festus, whom he would not have called such, if he had not been truly noble; as indeed he was, in that he suffered him to be heard in his own Cause, and would not give Way to the Fury of the Jews against him; it was not because of any outward Title bestowed upon Festus, that he so called him, else he would have given the same Appellation to his Predecessor Felix, who had the same Office; but being a covetous Man, we find he gives him no such Stile.
§. V.
The same is witnessed by John Maresius, of the French Academy; in the Preface of his Clovis: “Let none wonder (saith he) that the Word [Thou] is used in this Work to Princes and Princesses; for we use the same to God: And of old the same was used to Alexanders, Cæsars, Queens and Empresses. The Use of the Word [You,] when one Person is spoken to, was only introduced by these base Flatteries of Men of latter Ages, to whom it seemed good to use the Plural Number to one Person, that he may imagine himself alone to be equal to many others in Dignity and Worth; from whence at last it came to Persons of lower Quality.”
To the same Purpose speaketh also M. Godeau, in his Preface to the New Testament Translation: “I had rather (saith he) faithfully keep to the express Words of Paul, than exactly follow the polished Stile of our Tongue; therefore I always use that Form of calling God in the Singular Number, not in the Plural; and therefore I say rather [Thou] than [You.] I confess indeed, That the Civility and Custom of this World requires him to be honoured after that Manner; but it is likewise on the contrary true, that the original Tongue of the New Testament hath nothing common with such Manners and Civility; so that not one of these many old Versions we have doth observe it. Let not Men believe, That we give not Respect enough to God, in that we call him by the Word [Thou] which is nevertheless far otherwise; The Word Thou, a greater Honour to One than You.for I seem to myself (may be by the Effect of Custom) more to honour his Divine Majesty, in calling him after this Manner, than if I should call him after the Manner of Men, who are so delicate in their Forms of Speech.”
See how clearly and evidently these Men witness, That this Form of Speaking, and these profane Titles, derive their Origin from the base Flattery of these last Ages, and from the delicate Haughtiness of worldly Men, who have invented these Novelties, that thereby they might honour one another, under I know not what Pretence of Civility and Respect. From whence many of the present Christians (so accounted) are become so perverse, in commending most wicked Men, and wicked Customs, that the Simplicity of the Gospel is wholly lost; so that the giving of Men and Things their own Names is not only worn out of Custom, but the doing thereof is accounted absurd and rude by such Kind of delicate Parasites, who desire to ascribe to this Flattery, and abuse the Name of Civility. Moreover, that this Way of speaking proceeds from an high and proud Mind, hence appears, because that Men commonly use the Singular Number to Beggars, and to their Servants; yea, and in their Prayers to God. Thus the Superior will speak to his Inferior, who yet will not bear that the Inferior so speak to him, as judging it a Kind of Reproach unto him. So hath the Pride of Men placed God and the Beggar in the same Category. I think I need not use Arguments to prove to such as know congruous Language, That we ought to use the Singular Number speaking to one; which is the common Dialect of the whole Scripture, as also the most Interpreters do translate it. Seeing therefore it is manifest to us, that this Form of speaking to Men in the Plural Number doth proceed from Pride, as well as that it is in itself a Lie, we found a Necessity upon us to testify against this Corruption, by using the Singular equally unto all. And although no Reason can be given why we should be persecuted upon this Account, especially by Christians, who profess to follow the Rule of Scripture, whose Dialect this is; Scripture Dialect the plain Language.yet it would perhaps seem incredible if I should relate how much we have suffered for this Thing, and how these proud Ones have fumed, fretted, and gnashed their Teeth, frequently beating and striking us, when we have spoken to them thus in the Singular Number: Whereby we are the more confirmed in our Judgment, as seeing that this Testimony of Truth, which God hath given us to bear in all Things, doth so vex the serpentine Nature in the Children of Darkness.