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

by Thomas Woolston

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 Passions 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 God'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 Assaults 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 Assistance 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 Assistance. 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 God, 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 Passion got the better of his Reason, or he had been certainly quiescent: And the Violence of his Passion is so visible thro' his whole Book, that it's God'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, assur'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 God 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 intitled, 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. Pearse, 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, God 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 nobis profuit hæc 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 Advertisement 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.