Six Discourses on the Miracles of Our Saviour, and Defences of His Discourses

by Thomas Woolston

Mr. Atkinson, a little Writer against me, says,[341] "That I call the pretended Divines of the Church my Prosecutors, when they were not my Prosecutors. And again, That there was no need of my Supposition, that the Clergy would have more Wit than to prosecute me again for this Discourse; for he did not know that they had been concern'd in any Prosecution of me." And again he says, "If the Civil Magistrate thinks it his Duty to chastise me for my Sin and Folly, I am to blame my self, and not the Clergy, till I can prove the Zeal of our Christian Government to be excited by the malign Influence of the Clergy." Mr. Atkinson is thus far certainly in the right on't, that, strictly speaking, the Clergy are not my Prosecutors, but the King, who, in all probability, knows no more of my Books than the Man in the Moon. But whether Mr. Atkinson could be so ignorant, as not to know the Clergy were the grand Instigators to Prosecution, let others judge. If he really was such a poor Ignoramus, I have no more to say: Otherwise, his Expressions above, will be look'd upon as the vilest Piece of Hypocrisy and Prevarication that can be, purposely utter'd to take off the Odium of the Prosecution from the Clergy, and to cast it upon the Civil Government; which, whether Mr. Atkinson believes it or not, had never, but for the Solicitations of the Bishops, given me any Trouble. Mr. Atkinson above, acts the Part of the Popish Clergy of France, upon the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. After that the King, upon the urgent Importunities of the Clergy, had resolv'd to revoke that Edict; the Clergy were for excusing themselves to the Protestants, and laying the Blame only on the King, saying, The King was bent and resolv'd on't, and they could not help it; which was such Jesuitical Prevarication in the Popish Clergy, that the Protestants could not forbear roguing them for it. Mr. Atkinson knows how to apply this Story; which I had not told, but for the Use of the Bishop of L. who, upon a certain Occasion could say, that it was not He, but the Government that prosecuted Mr. Woolston. If Mr. Atkinson was really so ignorant as he seems to be, I suppose he is now of another Mind, upon reading the Bishop of St. David's Dedication; and convinced that the Prosecution against me was began and carried on at the malign influence, as he calls it, of the Clergy.

I will here use no Arguments for Liberty of Debate, which Subject has already been copiously handled, and wants nothing, that I can add unto it. But before I enter into the Body of the Bishop's Book, and upon a profess'd Defence of my Discourses against him, let us consider the manifest Lies, Prevarications, and wicked Insinuations in his Dedication, whereby he would move the Secular Powers to a severe Punishment of me. I will pass by the Motto of his Book, viz. But Jesus said unto him, Judas, betrayest thou the Son of Man with a Kiss; Whereby he would signify and intimate, not to Scholars (for they have more Wit than to think the worse of me for his Abuse of Scripture) but to the ignorant Multitude, that I am another Judas, a Traitor and Rebel to Jesus. Commonly Mottos of Books are suited to their Authors, and the Design of them; whether the Bishop will be willing to take this Motto to himself or not, I will upon another Occasion give it a pleasant and pertinent Turn upon him. At present I shall only say, what the Learned will observe, that this is of a wicked and malicious Use and Intention, of no less, than to create in the Minds of the People an Hatred and Detestation of me; of no other, than by dressing me up, as it were, in a Bear's Skin, to excite the Ecclesiastical and merciless Mob to worry and destroy me. Such has been the roguish Artifice of priests of all Ages, to represent their Adversaries, whom they would destroy, under odious and borrow'd Names, that their Persecutions of them might be thought the less cruel. But passing this by for the present, the

I. First wicked and wilful Misrepresentation that the Bishop, in his Dedication, has made of me, is that of being an Infidel, and an Apostate Clergyman. Wherefore else does he say thus to the Queen: "What is now presented to your Royal View, is an Apologetical Defence of our holy Religion, against one of the most virulent Libels on it, by an Apostate Clergyman, that has appear'd in any Christian Country; and in Comparison of which, other Infidels have acted a modest Part." And again he calls my Discourses, "A flagrant Sort of Profaneness, that tramples with Indignity on the Grounds of the Christian Faith." And again he signifies, "That I am warmly engaged in subverting the Christian Religion, and active in propagating Infidelity." This is all wilful and downright Calumny, to incense the Queen and the Government against me. The Bishop knows in his Heart that I am no Infidel, but a Believer of Christianity, notwithstanding my Discourses on Miracles, that have occasion'd such a Clamour against me. In my Discourses, I have repeatedly and most solemnly declared, that my Designs are not to do Service to Infidelity, but to advance the Glory of God, the Truth of Christianity, and to demonstrate the Messiahship of the holy Jesus. If I have sometimes ridiculed the litteral Story of our Saviour's Miracles, I have profess'd as often that it was with Design to turn Men's Hearts to the mystical Interpretation of them, on which alone Jesus's Authority and Messiahship is founded. I could collect a great Number of Passages out of my Discourses to this Purpose, if it would not be wasting of Time and Paper. And do all these solemn Declarations of my Faith, and of the Integrity of my Heart, and of the Sincerity of my Intentions, stand for nothing? Why should not my Word here be taken? I can think of no other Reason, than because some other Folks are accustom'd to dissemble and prevaricate with God and Man in their Oaths and Subscriptions, therefore I may be suspected here of Hypocrisy, notwithstanding my Professions to the contrary.

Besides, the Bishop knows by my other Writings, that I am certainly a Christian, and a true Believer of the Religion of Christ, though I may have some different Conceptions from other Men about it. It has been my good Luck before, not only to publish more Treatises purposely and professedly in Defence of Christianity, than any Bishop in England; but some of them are of such a Nature, as it's impossible for a Man to write without being a Christian, and impossible for him to depart from the Principles of them. This is my good Fortune and Happiness at this Juncture. The Bishop has perused, I see, some of my other Writings, and particularly, my Old Apology for the Truth of Christianity revived; and to his Praise, as well as my Comfort be it spoken, he apprehends and rightly relishes it. And as I was well pleased with his Representation of the Design of that Book, from the Principles and allegorical Scheme of which, he says (in Twenty-four Years since) I am not departed; so I would appeal to his Conscience, Whether a Man, who wrote, as I did then, of the Typical and Antitupal Deliverance of the Jewish and Christian Church, can possibly be an Infidel, or ever depart from the Christian Faith? If the Bishop has Ingenuity equal to his Penetration into that Book, he must own and confess to the World, that I was then, and am still a Christian, a Man of fix'd and unalterable Principles from that Day to this.

The Bishop would be thought in his Preface to enumerate all my Writings; but there are three others, whether wilfully or negligently omitted by him, I know not, that are direct Defences of the Truth of Christianity; and there is not a learned Clergy-man in England (I humbly presume to say it) who can read them, and not applaud them. If the Bishop will be pleas'd to read one of them, viz. The Defence of the Miracle of the Thundering Legion, and say it from his Heart, that I might write that Book, and believe the Ecclesiastical Story of that Miracle, and yet be no Christian, then I will yield to his Accusation against me for Infidelity.

But why do I trouble my self thus to assert and vindicate my Belief of Christianity? The Bishop would readily come into the Acknowledgment of my being a sincere Christian, but for his Interests and Prejudices, and other political Considerations, which influence him and the Clergy so to decry and defame me, that, if possible, I must be destroy'd, or at least have my Mouth stopp'd.

In short then, it is not because I am an Infidel, that the Clergy so exclaim against me and my Discourses; but because, as a Christian, I have particular Designs in view, which, if I can compass, will tend to their Dishonour, and the Ruin of their Interests; and therefore, by Defamations and Prosecutions, they will, if they can, in time put a stop to them. The Designs that, for the Truth of Religion, and Good of Mankind, I have in view, and which, maugre all Opposition, Terrors, and Sufferings, I will pursue to the utmost of my Power, are these three.

1. To restore the Allegorical Interpretation of the Old and New Testament, that is call'd, say the Fathers, the sublime Mountain of Vision, on which we shall contemplate the Wisdom and Beauty of the Providence of God; and behold the glorious Transfiguration of Jesus with Moses and Elias, that is, the Harmony between the Gospel and the Law and the Prophets, agreeably to Jesus's typical Transfiguration. And this is such a glorious and beatifick Vision, that it's enough to ravish our Hearts with the Hopes and Desires of attaining to it. The old Jews say, that the allegorical Interpretation of the Scriptures will lead us to the sight of God and convert even Atheists. The Fathers say, that the allegorical Interpretation will be the Conversion of the Jews in the Perfection of Time; and St. Augustin speaks of a great allegorical Genius,[342] that will be sent to that Purpose. I believe all this, and being convinced of the Truth of it, I am much addicted to Allegories. And it is plain enough, and wants no Proof, that the Revival of the allegorical Scheme, which I am fond of, portends Ruin to the Ministry of the Letter; and will be such an Argument of the Ignorance and Apostacy of our Clergy, that it's no wonder they defame, calumniate, and persecute me for my Attempts towards it.

Origen says,[343] that litteral Interpreters will run into Infidelity, which is a Saying I am well pleased with, and thereupon will try if I can't turn the Tables upon our Clergy; I'll try if I can't shift from my self the present Load of Reproaches for Infidelity, and lay it upon them. What would the Wife and the Learned then say? That the great Bishops of London and St. David's had caught a Tartar.

I have indeed ludicrously treated the Letter of the Scriptures (in my Discourses) which by the said Bishops is falsly called Blasphemy: But should they either ludicrously or sedately write against the allegorical Sense of them, I could prove that to be real Blasphemy. However, I would not complain to the Civil Powers against them; no, it's God's peculiar Prerogative to punish that Sin, which ought not to be committed to the Care of the Civil Magistrate.