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-Bishoprick, 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 passes 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 Antitype, 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 assert, 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 Ass, 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 God, and Permission of the Civil Authority, shall be likewise publish'd.