has a good degree of Charity to the Poor and as great of the Vertue of Liberality to the Learned I can inform him of your Compositions to the Theater which made your younger Years so famous and of the unanswerable Defences you have since made for the Nation 's Rights against Arbitrary Power and Tyranny I dare not I confess tell him of your Posts of Trust and Honour for he will be unreconcileably alienated when he knows that to all your other Naughtiness you are a Williamite too He takes for his Text the words of Solomon Prov. 14.6 A Scorner seeketh Wisdom and findeth it not From hence he would raise an Invective a Sermon he calls it against you and the History of Religion A Man would wonder how this Text should make for Popery and Persecution or against the Patrons of Sincerity and Liberty in Religion But what is there so remote or hid from others that a Student cannot discover it Father Atterbury is able I doubt not to prove from this Text or to disprove any Proposition in Euclid For Students do not hold themselves obliged to reason accurately and closely as other common Men must but by leaping over some intervening unsutable Propositions may skip from Tumult to King Pipin or what is as good from Historian to Scorner Yet methinks since this Gentleman had a mind to declaim before the Queen against the History of Popish Jugglers and Cheats he should have shown his Zeal in some other way rather than in a Sermon or from a Text of Holy Scripture for of all Abominations there is none so detestable as to wire-draw wind and bow the sacred Text to argue against it self that is to patronize Impostures and Deceits In the Prosecution of his Text so pat as every one sees to his purpose he falls to considering what may be the Reasons why the Scorner seeketh Wisdom and findeth it not One of the Reasons he offers is very marvellous it is this because the Scorner saith he pag. 12. is a Man of quick and lively Parts Such Men saith he further there are apt to give themselves a Loose beyond plain Reason and common Sense I know not I confess what he means nor I believe can all the Students of Christ-Church interpret it to me But be that as it will the thing he aims at in that whole Page is that quick and lively Parts are marvellous Hinderances in the Quest of Wisdom and Truth according to him the only hopeful Candidate of Wisdom is a Sancho Pancha But it will not yet go out of my Mind nor can I keep my Eye off it that a Court-Chaplain should have so little Government with him that so soon as he had read a Book against Popery and Persecution he should from the Pulpit and in the Royal Presence attack the Author in such Terms as these He has written the History of Religion and were I not withheld by Religion I would write his History What! is it such an Offence at this time of day to write a few Sheets against Popery that no Person of Honour must put Pen to Paper on that Subject on pain of being libelled by her Majesty's Chaplain for that 's the unquestionable Meaning of writing his Life But he is withheld he says from writing this Life by Religion By what Religion Sir Would you have us to think after you have defamed him in such Language as this and to such an Auditory 't is from Conscience and Love of your Brother that you do not libel him to the unsignificant Rabble It is evident then that you have hypocritically feigned a religious Tenderness to which you are an utter Stranger must we be obliged to call it your Religion your Charity and Tenderness that you are content not to write his Life to the common Herd when you have actually pointed at him in a sacred Place and Exercise in the Presence of the Prince and most illustrious Personages of the Kingdom And for whom is it that you counterfeit this pious Tenderness For an Anonymous Writer for one you do not know For as to Report and the Whispers of those sagacious Men who so certainly know all Authors they are so oft mistaken that except it be here and there a Student no body heeds them or rather every Body abhors them I am amazed that any Man especially a Man of Learning and Wit should utter so many Follies and Contradictions in a Pulpit and also oversee them all again when he prepared his Notes for the Press For Instance He asperses an honourable Person in the very highest degree in the Royal Presence and yet 't is meer Religion he says that withholds him from writing his Life to the common People That is he has swallowed the Camel and is now grievously straining at the Gnat. Again He has an Inclination to libel or as he calls it write the Life of the Author of the History of Religion and yet this Author is nameless that is utterly unknown to Father Atterbury and his whole Fraternity Again He saith this Book is directed against all Religion and every thing in Religion and yet the very design of the Book is this that ' t is a shame that so many have had no Religion but their Belly and their Profit and a Pity that others are persecuted only for Religion and Conscience towards God Once more He saith that the thing which the Scorner seeketh for is Wisdom and yet he adds he finds it not because he has quick and lively Parts That is according to this Student the Scorner seeks for what he has and he misses it because he possesses it It is well that the Student's Sermons are so short as they always I observe are for these are such flat and direct Contradictions that if there were many of them they would too much expose the Preacher to the Contempt of his very meanest Hearers I have done with Father Francis for the present only this Sir I shall promise you that when he is disposed to try his Hand in writing Lives he shall have the Satisfaction to see his own Picture drawn in such lively Colours as Time shall not easily deface Sir I think I shall not need to mind you that you ought not to be in the least disturbed at the Sawciness of an obscure Academick For being bred as they are among mean Companions and comparing themselves only with Under-graduates Servitors and Gippoes when they first appear abroad in the World the poor Wretches always make themselves ridiculous by not knowing themselves and their Rank in the World They think that all Mankind has that Reverence for them which their Sizers and College-Servants are forced to show them and from hence when they get into the wooden Box instead of the Apostolical Reprove and Exhort they fall to Porterly Reproach and Scandalize On the contrary I doubt not you will always be pleased and happy in the Recollection of the immortal Services which you have done the Royal
Vertue as that excellent Prelate of whose Sermons he makes honourable mention in his Preface and but with the last necessity was consenting to retire from that impatient Tyranny which for a while bore down all our Rights Religious and Civil before it But see the Craft of some Men they flatter Kings not for any love they bear to a Crown more than to the Rods and Axes of a Republick but that Kings rais'd to Heaven by them may draw them up after they make all to be Law which comes from the Mouth of Kings that Kings may make all that to be Gospel which comes from the Mouth of Priests Let the Name of Kings in God's Name be for ever honour'd but let Priests that is if they would deserve Esteem know their Distance and their Duty there 's designing Sawciness in them when they join their Honour so nearly to that of Kings from writing Kings and Priests they 'll rise to the vain Stile of the Butcher's Son Ego Rex meus Crafty Priests like Ivy twist their clinging Arms around the Royal Oak tenaciously adhere rob the Root of its nutritive Moisture and if not timely torn away o're-top the tallest Branches nay tear it all to pieces every adhering part still lives and every creeping Fibre plots to steal into the decays of the poor dying Trunk and there a new Root infix for it is all one to the Ivy so it have but a Supporter whether 't is a vigorous living or a dull dead one Reflecting on Sir R. H. and others the Libeller says They make Religion to be State-craft or Priest-craft as it serves their Purpose I answer for Sir R. H. that he has sufficiently declar'd how true a sense he has of Religion in that just and noble Character which he has given of the Arch-bishop's Sermons But if this Libeller would fain know distinctly what is State-craft and what Priest-craft neither confounding the Terms nor uniting the Sense I will tell him When Kings make use of the learned Sophistry of obsequious Priests to support their illegal Arbitrary Power that Design in Kings is properly call'd State-craft or King-craft bur when Priests preach up Passive Obedience and Non-resistance their so doing is Priest-craft for such crafty Priests as those would not lavish a poor Prayer for ever a King of 'em all if it was not in prospect of a mighty Protection to bear them out in all their unwarrantable Clerocatacurieuontisms if this cramp word be too hard for the Reader he may pick the sense of it out of 1 Pet. 5.3 The next Charge against Sir R. H. is this He makes use of the Errors of the Church of Rome to undermine Christianity But sure a Man may reprove the Errors of the Church of Rome without undermining Christianity unless those Errors belong to the Foundation which God forbid it should be said this I am sure Sir R. H. has not utter'd nor does the Libeller charge him to have utter'd the least word against Faith in Christ Repentance and good Works It is usual with Men to be fond of their own Conceptions and confident that every beloved Error of theirs belongs to the Foundation of Faith but for one that calls himself a true Son of the Church to be so much concern'd at the Reproof of Romish Errors argues that there 's false fire in his Zeal or but a cold Indifference in his Protestant Profession and that for his particular tho Priest-craft be the thing he chiefly studies yet he is not his Craft's-Master But further says the Libeller Sir R. H. spits his Venom against the Mosaical Institution and to prove this Charge he cites Hist. of Relig. p. 58. where Sir R. H. has these words Christ came to redeem us from the darkness of that Condition we were in by strange and puzzling Methods of Religious Ceremonies and Mysteries various Rites of sacrificing good for nothing but to confound and distract the Minds of Men. Now if this be to spit Venom at the Mosaical Institution then the Pen-men of the New Testament spit Venom at it most outragiously for they frequently speak of it in their Epistles after the same manner as Sir R. H. in his History Nay St. Paul in one place says all our Fathers were under a Cloud under a Vail and if I be not much mistaken he calls their mysterious Rites and Ceremonies beggarly Elements But setting aside the Authority of the sacred Pen-men have not all the Doctors which have labour'd in expounding the Mosaical Ceremonies acknowledg'd them to be very puzzling The Calvinists are generally perswaded that God instituted the Ceremonial Digest purely because he would do it for no other reason but to prove his People whether they would obey his Laws which had no other Goodness in them but what his Arbitrary Sanction gave them but the learned Spencer hath satisfied me that God design'd in all those Laws to distinguish his People from the Heathen and wean them from Idolatry but yet as Dr. Spencer confesses it is not so very plain of every Ceremony what was the natural Tendency thereof to such good End But as for Mens learning the Duties of Morality from the Ceremonial Law it was certainly dark as for inclining them to Vertue it was without Contradiction weak and it were a wonder if the Minds of Men should not be confounded and distracted by such Methods But now for a dismal Charge This Sir R. H. like a meer Infidel not having the Fear of God before his Eyes borrows the Socinian Arms against Christianity To this I answer 1. It is a silly Cavil Such a one borrows Arms or Arguments against this or that whereas the only thing worth noting is whether the Borrower understands and uses them with Skill 2. Let it be examin'd whether the Libeller does not borrow his Reproaches indeed they are so gross and impudent they should be his own yet were it worth the while I could show how he runs in debt for them to some of his craftier Brethren who have rais'd Slander to such a height that it is not safe no not for a Man of the greatest Integrity to reprove any the most odious Instances of Priest-craft 3. But has Socinus wrote against Christianity The Downfal in Black-fryars upon Father Drury and his Popish Conventicle was impudently publish'd beyond Sea by a bold turn of lying Priest-craft as a sad Judgment upon an Assembly of Hereticks this is the very Picture of the Libeller's Charge For not to recount the Books which Socinus has wrote in Confirmation of the Christian Religion not to mention the honourable Testimony which the Polonian Knight has bore to his Memory even the Adversaries of that famous Man will vindicate him from the Libeller's base Reproach Mr. How as firm a Trinitarian as any Non-jurant Jacobite of 'em all and much an honester Man fairly confesses concerning Socinus's Book de Deo that it is wrote not without Nerves i. e. in plain English it was wrote strongly
guess at But had his Majesty been as bountiful as the Libeller supposed Why might not our Friend have taken those Favours either as part of the Reward due to his Services or as His Majesty's Royal Munificence to Wit and distinguishing Abilities Why was he obliged to understand them as Bribes and Corruptions as the Libeller would have them interpreted This Ungrateful Man says our Popish Accuser forgot all the King's Bounties to him and was with the most forward in turning him out Let us grant to a Fool both his Lies yet where however is the Ungratitude when never any thing was given to our Friend by the Royal Family which he might not most justly put to the account either of his Services or his Abilities But King James Father Petre and the Nuncio knew better things than to fling away their Money on a Person whom his Vertue more than his Fortunes had set so much above the reach of Bribes they were for a contrary method to Brow-beat and Mortify him by Oppositions But neither would this do he remained the same to his Religion and Country as he was to the Crown and Royal Family when they were attacked by the Republican Faction that is he was Heroically firm to both while they were the weaker side without seeking afterwards from either the Rewards of his Merit to them You and I Sir have nothing so much valued by us as the Friendship and Esteem of a Fortitude Constancy and Vertue so extraordinary nor any thing that we desire so much as the long Life and Prosperity of a Friend whom with so much reason we value and love This is all that I need now to say saving that I am with the greatest Respect Your most Obliged and Assured Friend N. S. The First LETTER Being Reflections on a Sermon preach'd before her late most Excellent Majesty on these words of Solomon The Scorner seeketh Wisdom and findeth it not By Francis Atterbury Student in Christ-Church Oxford To the Honourable and Learned Author of The History of Religion SIR AS I had the Honour to see The History of Religion before you gave way that it should go to the Press So I cannot but wonder that any should be so rouzed and even affrighted and scared by a Book which seemed to me not only true and useful happily thought and as well exprest but also altogether inoffensive to every true Lover of a sincere undisguised Piety and Morality I deny not that when I began to read the Book the Term Priest-Craft there often used and the Instances you give of it made me a while doubtful what might be the Author's Aim whether he might not at length stretch his Notion of Priest-Craft not only to the impious Frauds of Pagan Priests and the pious Frauds as you civilly call them of some Christian Priests but even to all Revealed Religion as if it were an Imposture that has depraved rather than explained and inforced Natural Religion that new Mistress of many of our Modern Wits But when I had gone over the whole with such an Attention as I thought was due to the Subject treated of and of the Conceptions and Observations of an Author whose Pen had always hitherto been successful I perceived to my great Satisfaction that the Thoughts in the Book had been conceived in the last Reign and by occasion of the danger we were in from Popery You draw a Parallel between the Pagan and the Romish-Priests you are so impious as to think nay to say and publish it to the World that a Popish Priest is as errant a Knave as Cato thought the old Roman Augurs you even dare to add that their Sin and Guilt is greater because the latter had not a Rule to direct them but the other act against a most plain Rule a directing Gospel as you speak meerly for Profit You give so many and so pertinent Instances of this that had you published your Book in the last Reigns when it was thought and written you had been inrolled among our Confessors but now that the Danger is past and the Church's turn is served by you and the few such as you are Mr. Atterbury is for putting you into the Seat of Scorners After you had finished the Scenes in which you expose first Rome-Pagan then Rome-Antichristan you are so unlucky as to drop some words against Persecution and also to advise the contending Parties of Christians that Setting aside their Wranglings about obscure and undecidable Questions and Mysteries they would consider the Gospel as a Doctrine chiefly of Love Mercy and Charity and behave themselves accordingly towards one another Haec tetigit Gradive tous urtica Nepotes this invenom'd Sting in the Tail of your Book has so wounded Mr. Atterbury that he could not forbear running up immediately into his Pulpit to tell no less Persons than the Queen of England and her whole Court what kind of Man you are See here what Characters he has given you He is so possessed with the Notion of pious Frauds and Priest-Craft as to apply it indifferently to all Religions and to every thing in Religion Bless me and deliver me from the Malevolence of a Student as he writes himself But cholerick and revengeful Men commonly wound themselves most when they are endeavouring to wound others here is a Book written against Popery and Persecution Mr. Atterbury is so angry at it that he cries out Men of Israel help here is a damnable Book written against all Religion and every thing in Religion That is he owns no Religion nor any thing as part of Religion but only Popery and Persecution Truly he has been a Student at Christ-Church so long to good purpose but was it necessary he should vomit up such a secret before the Queen and the Court of England might it not have been better whisper'd among his Jacobite Friends But her Majesty was pester'd with too many such Chaplains Men that cannot abide to hear I do not say our holy Father the Pope or the sacred College but not a Romish Priest spoken disrespectfully of At Pag. 16. he suggests the writing the History of your Life in revenge for your History of Religion He is surely a pleasant Man he would write the History of an Anonymous or nameless Author that is of one he does not know But as before he told us his Religion Persecution and Popery so here he lets us know his Wit and Honesty he would write he says of he knows not whom and he cares not what provided it be black enough For that 's the only possible meaning of writing a Life in Revenge But if his blind Rage will permit a third Person to interpose between him and the Author of the History of Religion I intreat him that when he writes I may furnish him with some Memorials better I assure him than Malice and Ignorance of his Adversary will ever minister to him I can tell him that the sad Man the Author of the History of Religion
Family the Monarchy the Liberties of the Nation the Common-wealth of Learning particularly Learned Men and that nothing may escape your Influences to the calamitous and poor I promise my self that you will not lay Father Atterbury's want of Honesty good Sense and Government against such Advantages as these but rather you will be mindful to give Thanks to God who has lifted you by favourable Providences so much above the unheeded Reproaches of an unfinish'd Pulpiteer Sir I am your most obliged most assured and most humble Servant N. S. April 3. 95. The Second LETTER In Answer to The Charge of Socinianism against Dr. Tillotson considered and to the Appendix concerning the History of Religion SIR SInce my last here is another weak Brother that has taken Offence at The History of Religion I confess I wish the History had gone to the Press with that Title which your self in the Manuscript Copy gave it The History of Religion as it has been abused by Priest-Craft The words as it has been abused by Priest-Craft might have prevented some Peoples Mistakes who now seeing in the Title Page The History of Religion and meeting with little in the Book it self but an Account of the various Perversions of Religion by Pagan and Popish Priest-Craft they infer that by Religion the Author means even all Religion The Publishers of your Book feared it should seem that if Priest-Craft were not left out of the Title of your Book it would raise such a Jealousy in those for whose Use and Good the Book is design'd that they would never suffer themselves to be undeceived that is they would never read it and thereby be informed of the Abuses put on them by Impostors pretending to Religion Either way the Book was like to be mistaken but the Publishers who put it forth I may add that also against your Inclination because you thought it now not so necessary or seasonable judged it not advisable to give occasion of Offence in the very Title But as I said it appears by the Event that it had been better to keep the Title given to his Book by the Author himself for all your Maligners that have hitherto appeared seem to be misled by the present Title Because the Title is The History of Religion and the Book is only an Exemplification of the Corruptions and Abuses thereof by some wicked Priests therefore they cry out 't is written against Religion and the Sacerdotal Function But jacta est alea 't is now too late to recal the oversight of the Title we must be content to examine what your Opposers have to object to the Book Enough I think has been said to Mr. Atterbury you are now attacked by one who does not put his Name to his Book but the Title of it is this The Charge of Socinianism against Dr. Tillotson considered with a Supplement by occasion of an History of Religion In the former Part that against Dr. Tillotson late Arch-bishop of Canterbury our Author pretends at p. 10. that the Arch-bishop's Design in publishing his four Sermons against the Socinians was only that he might be soundly answered by them and further that they and the Arch-bishop play booty into one anothers hands Pag. 9. He adds The Arch-bishop printed his Sermons and procured the Recommendation of them by the Court that he might serve the Socinians and more reconcile Men to their Principles But lest the Confederacy between him and the Socinians should be discovered they agree saith our Author like Counsel at the Bar to fall foul sometimes on one another and even to scold and call hard Names which to wise Observers says he again serves only to discover so much the more their Hypocrisy and Deceit But it is the least part of his Charge against the Arch-bishop that he is a Socinian and wrote only to oblige them and to betray the Cause into their hands for he says pag. 13. Dr. Tillotson is owned by all the Atheistical Wits of England as their true Primate and Apostle in him they glory and rejoice and make their Boasts of him He leads them not only the whole length of Socinianism they are slender Beaux who have got no further but to call in question all Revelation He sums up almost his whole Charge against the Arch-bishop at pag. 32 and 33. in these words He exceeds the Theistical Juncto in the Barbarous Accounts he gives of the Rise of Christian Religion for they make it to be only the Invention of wicked Men and of Devils he makes it to be a mean Compliance with those Inventions of Devils and wicked Men. He contends that all Revealed Religion is good for nothing but only to preserve outward Peace in this World 'T is a Maxim with him that a Mother's suckling her own Children is of more necessary and indispensible Obligation than to believe in Christ. He disputes openly and professedly against the Satisfaction by Christ and according to him not only the Eternity but the Being of Hell is a precarious Supposition To add now no more he he says at p. 16. that a plain and downright Hobbism appears in the Arch-bishop's Sermons and that the same Thread runs thorow all his Works Besides these as every one knows most false Imputations on the Arch-bishop's Books and Doctrine our Author speaks of his Person with like Malevolence and Contempt he never calls him Arch-bishop but Dr. Till or Jo. Cant or such like And he concludes his whole Performance with an Address to the Clergy and People to separate from this and some other Heretical and Impious Bishops He assures them that by the Canons of the Catholick Church they not may but ought to separate and that it is not Schism to depart from those Guides who corrupt Religion by their Heresies After these Compliments to the Arch-bishop our famous Author for his Book will certainly make him so proceeds to sprinkle his Flowers upon you At first he is much in doubt whether the Arch-bishop was not Author of The History of Religion but that Doubt he soon dismisses and he resolves that it is written by Sir R. H d. I suppose for no other reason but that he thought fit to divide the nauseous Load of his Stomach between two it would have seemed too malevolent and implacable to discharge it all upon one Man Besides as 't is one of the Delights as well as Undecencies of excessive Anger and Malice to repeat the same Charges and Reproaches over and over if our Author had wrote but against one he had missed the Satisfaction of easing his Mind by re-iterating his Scandals and saying again and again the same lewd and mad things When the most learned Writer had fixed in his Mind upon an Author for the History of Religion tho he is content it should not be the Arch-bishop himself yet of necessity it must be one of his Grace's Disciples and Proselytes And for this most dangerous Charge I confess Sir your self gave occasion enough
own Party who deny that Divine Worship is to be paid to the Lord Christ. I am certainly informed that the Vnitarians in England have no Ministry at all they do not separate from the Church on the account of their different Opinion from the Church they never separated in England from the common Assemblies to worship which in my Opinion is pious charitable and prudent for it is the Separation not the difference of Opinion that begets the Heats among contending Parties But the occasion of these Mistakes of our worthy Author is that tho it should seem he hath read the Brief History of the Vnitarians his Northern frozen Head perceives not the Subtleties of this Mercurial Tribe he knows neither their Discipline nor Doctrine and is of their mind without being aware of it I know Sir you are weary of these Follies I will therefore draw our Author in little and having so presented him to you leave him to your Pity and Prayers He was a Bishop Elect in that Juncture when only such were chosen by the King and the Nuntio to the Episcopal Chairs of England and Scotland as would not fail to make those Churches contemptible and ridiculous by their notorious Unsufficiency and Incompetency He is a Jacobite but made so by nothing but his too certain Fears that the Presbytery would never indure a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Theological Chair With him the Arch-bishop the Bishop of Sarum and the Author of the History of Religion are most blasphemous Socinians because our Professor mistakes the Doctrine of the Church and the Arguments she useth for the Socinian Doctrine and Reasons He is an Anti-Socinian who believes that God the Father could not bestow true and real Divinity on another Person from all Eternity and that 't is foolish and contradictory to say that what God might do to day he'might do yesterday and backwards for ever An Antiquarian he is who has discovered in antient History such an only Shibboleth of Orthodoxy in the Trinitarian Questions as was first advanced by one of the Socinians Patriarchs and rejected by a Council of 72 Catholick Bishops He is a Christian who is not content to think it but publishes it in Print to all the World that Jesus Christ is an accursed and devoted Head This is your Man Sir the Critick Wit Historian Divine who resolves to make an Example of all Latitudinarian Archbishops and Bishops and all their Disciples and Seconds of which number he saith you are the first and most considerable and as such 't is but just and fit that you should be treated accordingly What he objects is partly against your self and partly against your History of Religion As to your self he saith You are a Disciple of that late execrable Jo. Cant or as he otherwise call him John Till You have copied he saith after him very exactly insomuch that this Critick himself is sometimes in doubt whether The History of Religion were written by you or by the Archbishop Elsewhere he saith your History doth square most exactly with the Archbishop's Notions and Scheme of Religion Yet he owns that you are not altogether so profligate or have more of Art and Address than that Archbishop of Theists and Hobbists you are more modest or more cunning those are his words than the other you do not attack Religion in such broad words as he But 't is the endeavour of both of you of him more openly of you more secretly to ridicule all Religion and to resolve it wholly into Priest-Craft And I must confess Sir that your History and the Archbishop's Sermons have a like Thread He in most of his Sermons combats the seven-headed Beast as a Divine by Argument you as a Gentleman in the Historical Way he shows how defenceless and weak Popery is you how ridiculous and foppish it is And the learned Professor by exclaiming thereupon against both of you as designing to ridicule all Religion abundantly intimates that to him there is no other Religion but Popery He has an obscure Period at p. 31. that you assisted in turning a certain Neighbour out of House and Home who had not only never injur'd you but had done more for you than all your Relations and other Friends ever did The meaning is you had a share in effecting the late Revolution or as our Author elsewhere speaks concerning some others in deserting betraying and excluding King James who as this Man says did more for you than all your Friends or Relations ever have done I am wholly a Stranger to the Particulars of this Charge therefore I can only say either 't is true or 't is false If 't is false his Lordship Elect is a great Rascal saving the Reverence belonging to his Coat and Profession to devise and publish to the World a Tale that in his opinion implies the very foulest and blackest of Crimes and Scandals But if it is true that when King James had done a great deal for you after all you concurred with nay you highly promoted the Revolution the Charge here brought against you will amount to thus much That whereas 't is too well known that his late Majesty's Favours to any of his Protestant Subjects were designed only to gain them to the Popish and Arbitrary Interest you could not be bought no not by more than all your Friends and Relations ever did for you to side against the Interests of your Religion and Country No Money no Preferments no Favours it should seem could bribe you to give up the Protestant Religion or the Freedom and Properties of the Nation A most terrible Accusation and on your part a Treachery not to be purged with Sacrifice or Offering for ever But then after all this to write a History too against the holy Cheats of your King's and Friend's Religion this is such an Aggravation of your former Fault that our Author will not say the Lord have Mercy on you but in the Highland Phrase It makes his Flesh to creep I am of opinion that an Highlander's Flesh naturally creeps for our Beggars say that set a on a Board or Table with the Head West or East or South the will not fail to turn it self and creep Northward As to your Book his general Charge against it is that 't is designed against all Religion and especially all Positive or revealed Religion from whence he takes occasion to Nick-name you Sir Positive or as he writes according to the High-land Orthography Sir Possitive If you say but what Instances can he give out of your History from whence any sober Man would infer that you meant to expose Religion in general and not only the pious Frauds of Modern Rome and the Tricks of Rome Pagan I can only answer that what Collections out of the History he may have by him I know not but the Particulars which he mentions are these P. 27. You set up he saith unreconcileable War against all Mystery How so have you dropt the least
would not have the Professor mistake again for Innocence tho it also implies and supposes Innocence I cannot see any thing more Sir in this Libel that concerns you or The History of Religion I will conclude therefore with only saying that as you were somewhat concerned that Mr. Atterbury a Man of Learning and Wit O how unlike to this other he should first mistake the Design of your Book and then make such haste to scandalize you for it in the very Royal Presence so without doubt you will smile at it that all the Irreligion Profaneness and Socinianism charged upon it is resolved at last into only this and by Malice it self that 't is a perfect copying after the Sermons and Opinions of Archbishop Tillotson This is the utmost we see that your's and the Government 's worst Adversary could make of it Sir I am your most assured most obliged and most affectionate Friend N. S. July 17 1695. THE AUTHOR OF The History of Religion VINDICATED From the Scandalous and Unchristian INVECTIVES of Mr. F. A. IN A SERMON At WHITE-HALL On Proverbs xiv 6 Buchanan Franciscanus Fratres In sanctos quicquam cave dicere fratres Printed in the Year 1696. KING Charles the Second and James the Just that waited for the Divine Right as long as waiting was good were often nick'd with punishing Texts which by being maliciously tim'd were in meer reading turn'd into downright Satyr but our Preacher is not for a dry Bob and away he will serve himself of his Text before he and that Part and the words are these Prov. 14.6 A Scorner seeketh Wisdom and findeth it not The first thing Mr. Fr. Att. propounds for his Inquiry is who is the Person represented under the Character of the Scorner Solomon no doubt design'd a general Reproof but our Preacher's whole Sermon is levell'd at a particular and honourable Person Sir R. H. the Author of the History of Religion him he would have us to understand by the Scorner let Solomon intend whom he will Here let me borrow an Allusion from Mr. Bayes in the Rehearsal much such a Poet as Mr. F. A. is a Preacher As dull Mortals fear The Event of such things as shall never appear So tho it be hard To find in the Word What was never at first by the Writer put there Yet a Preacher acute By the help of his Priestcraft-Resentment can do 't Of the Jewish Scorner in his Text typical of our English Gentleman as he would have us conceive he says The frequent Revolutions in the Jewish State contributed mightily to unsettle the Scorner's Thoughts and create in him a slight opinion of the eternal Differences of Right and Wrong Good and Evil but our Gentleman was in the Revolutions intimated fix'd and settled in his Thoughts on the loyal suffering Side and his unshaken Vertue held out till it happily reach'd its merited Reward But there were a sort of zealous Pretenders to Religion among the Jews tho whether typical of any such among us I know not that were never loyal but when they were caress'd After the Character of the Scorner it had been proper for Mr. Att. to have defin'd and explain'd what was the Wisdom which he sought and found not but that he declin'd and he had reason for had he determin'd the Wisdom mention'd in his Text to have been true Religious Wisdom he had been prevented of much of his Malice and must have been forc'd to allow'd Sir R. H. the Praise of having sought true Religious Wisdom and had he call'd it profane worldly Wisdom then his angry Libel had ran into ridiculous Jest For what strange thing is it that a Man who seeks Worldly Wisdom should not find Spiritual it's as if I should say Mr. Att. seeks a Prebendary's Place and cannot find a Captain's It 's not to be expected that a Man should find what he does not seek But tho he will not explain the nature of the Wisdom in his Text yet he will tell us what is meant by seeking it i. e. he will tell us what is meant by seeking the Lord knows what And he makes nothing of broad undisguis'd Contradictions now affirming that The Scorner makes freer Inquiries after Truth shakes off the Prejudices of Education more thorowly than the rest of Mankind and presently after saying of this self-same Scorner that he is unconcern'd what God and wise Men in all Ages and Countries have said But great Men can contradict themselves as well as Mr. Att. tho perhaps not reach the just height of such a particular Atterburianism as this He sets down as a Note of Infamy that which adorns the Character of a wise Man above any thing else viz. his examining things to the bottom taking nothing upon trust not relying on the Authority of Man Well Sir Robert if these be the Sins you have to answer for you have the noble Beraeans to keep you company and at the day of Judgment St. Paul shall speak a word for you both But it must be confess'd that a Church-Pharisee is ten times more civil than a Heathenish Knight for he takes all upon trust all he hears from his Superiors is Gospel out of Reverence to Authority he examines nothing to the bottom Thus far I have consider'd Mr. Att 's Preface and the opening of the Text as he calls it and now I come to his Observation which what it is we are to seek for he has not set it down but as when he did not define Wisdom he explain'd the meaning of seeking it so now an Observation which he never made he will justify and he justifies it by as extraordinary a method as ever ill made or unmade Observation was justified For he wisely shows how it comes to pass that Men who set up for a more than ordinary Fame in Wisdom and Goodness by contemning Religion and Religious Men do and must fail of the End they propose because as wise as they are in other things they are uncapable of impartial Inquiries after Divine Truth in plain English they fail of the End which they propose because they do not propose the End which they fail of Well! go thy ways honest Fr. Att. thou art a shrewd Fellow I 'll say that for thee and hast Logick and Wit enough to write against the Socinians Mr. Att. assigns four things which render a Man incapable to search successfully after Truth especially Divine Truth The first is Pride this he defines to be an undue value which a Man has for himself and his own Opinion with a Disregard for every thing beside Having thus defin'd immediately he starts an Abuse upon old Hobbs whose Leviathan tho I hold to be an ill Book a very ill Book more impious tho not more malicious than the Sermon about the Scorner yet the Passage cited from his Epistle by way of Reproach is ingenious and honest I will set it in its proper Light not that Mr. Att. may be asham'd of his
Deception that is his word of the Scorner to his Sensuality Now I can hardly believe but that the Translation of Absalom and Achitophel was done by another hand tho it goes under Att 's Name who perhaps might be hir'd to father it because he seems not to have Learning enough to be so wicked for here he imagines the word Deception to be synonimous with Error or Ignorance whereas it signifies Deceit or Cozenage Sensuality indeed is likely to prevent a Man from Knowledg but poor Mr. Att. by his Ignorance of Grammar is fall'n into another Doctrine viz. that Sensuality is the cause of the Scorner's Deceptions i. e. Sensuality helps him to deceive others Nec te vox barbara turbet Aut temere erumpens linguâ titubante Solacus Tot sanctos oppone Patres Mysteria sacra Turpe est grammaticis submittere colla capistris Buch. Fran. But that which Mr. Att. would have said had he had Skill to express it is that Sensuality does discourage the Scorner from inquiring after and fatally prevent him from finding Wisdom Very true But what will he hence prove I know what naturally follows viz. that Sir R. H. whose Knowledg whose Observations and Experience through all the most useful Parts of Learning are so very considerable has led a studious Philosophical Life and that Mr. Att. who does not understand Grammar has spent his time in Sensuality when he should have pli'd his Book But of all the Lines in Mr. Att 's holy Invective Sir R. ought to forgive him two or three p. 14. where telling his Reader in what Age of Life the Humour of scorning is most prevalent he pertinently observes it is commonly incident to Men at that time of their Lives when their Lusts are most ungovern'd and their Blood boils hottest it is chiefly the young robust Sinner that indulges himself in it while he is in the midst of his Enjoyments That is as much as to say that old Age has banish'd from Sir R's Breast or at least abated the Humour while young and robust Mr. Att. But this Humour of the Scorner will in time wear off with him also But pray how has Sir R. set his Face directly against the Doctrines of Religion it does not appear from his late History unless his Accuser means the false Doctrines of Religion and let him set his Face and his Heart as directly and strongly against them as he pleases I am afraid he will be able to do little more than save his own Soul But in truth Sir R. has dealt very sparingly on this Argument and has chose such particular inoffensive Instances of Priest-Craft that none but Pagan and Popish Priests have the least reason to be angry I am sure no Presbyters of the Church of England are concern'd unless those few who make it their business to have the Belief of unintelligible an unexplicable Mysteries enforc'd by cruel and unchristian Penalties Let our Preachers be but content that the People own the Authority of the Sacred Book particularly that they agree to those Texts whose Sense is so much controverted as true in that sense which the Writer design'd tho what that is is not certain and not compel them to confess something more something against their Consciences till a Majority of Convocation-men who only pretend to make I should say declare Articles of Faith shall determine what is the true sense of the controverted Texts and their Credit shall stand fair with the Ages to come for all that Sir R. has said in his History of Religion P. 16. l. 1. Mr. Att. has these remarkable words Some Men who write pretended Histories of Religion are beholding to the real Religion of others that their Histories are not written Here we are first to inquire how Sir R. H. has provok'd Mr. Att. that he threatens to write his History 2. How dangerous it is to provoke a Priest to write one's History 3. Whom is Sir R. H. beholding to that his History is not written Of these in their order 1. How Sir R. H. has provok'd c. Has Sir R. H. question'd the Existence of a Deity or deny'd the Truth of Revealed Religion this were to provoke the generality of Mankind but by good luck no such thing is laid to his Charge tho if it were it might be easily disprov'd from his Writings What then has he slurr'd the Divine Right of Episcopacy and given the Prelates but a Parliamentary Right in the room has he dress'd up the grave Doctrines of Non-Resistance and Passive Obedience in an odd Disguise which were ugly enough in their own true Shape that so they may be laugh'd at as well as hated by the People Has he confounded Arbitrary Power that had well nigh confounded the Nation for ought I know something of this nature he may have done but it 's no matter Mr. Att. has swallow'd all this that which sticks and will not down is a pretended History of Religion Well then what 's the fault of that History what Injury is it to Mr. Att. if the World be made acquainted how the Heathen Priests topp'd false Doctrines upon the People and by cunning wicked Arts made a Gain of them how they puzled their Understandings and stole their Wills and Affections how they cherish'd their Ignorance and scar'd 'em from the free use of their Reason What hainous Provocation is it against a Priest of the Church of England if the Nation be told how the Priests of the Roman Communion imitate the Religious Frauds of the Priests of the Heathens If Mr. Att. will be concern'd at this he will tempt Men to believe that our Religious Guides pursue the same Methods of Priest-craft as the other but then 't is Att. that libels the Church and not Sir R. H. for he only in general Terms and very modestly wishes that Reformed Churches did not violently pursue the same nay in his Preface he gladly takes occasion so studious is he to make his Court to our Church to commend the excellent Spirit and useful Teaching of the late Arch-bishop whose Life and Learning whose honest wise and useful way of plain teaching sets his Honour far above the most venerable Names in all Antiquity 2. How dangerous it is to provoke a Priest to write one's History that 's next to be inquir'd Luther and Calvin wrote tho not under that very Name Histories of Religion widely different from what the Romanists write insomuch that the incens'd Jesuits have wrote their History and never did the famous Society themselves practise more enormous Villanies than they laid to the Charge of those two famous Reformers Now if Mr. Att. should look back on his own Life and charge Sir R. with all the vile Deeds whereof he himself has ever been guilty in troth he would make a fine Picture of the old Gentleman and be fully even with him for his History It were a good Motto for a Clerical Historiographer Nemo me impune lacesset for I don't
and well that and his other Books have been well worn by the best of our Preachers and they have mended their preaching by it But perhaps they read with Judgment and left all the Antichristian Stuff to Sir R. H. no such matter for they fought against Christianity too with Socinian Arms if the Libeller's word may be taken Time was he says in his Postscript pag. 24. that Dr. Sherlock was a rank Socinian in the Doctrine of Satisfaction tho he grants that that Doctor has since made some Amends and I think he is something alter'd but whether for the better or the worse I will not take upon me to determine But Sir R. H. may comfort his Heart for the better part of the Church-of England-Clergy and some of the Dissenting Ministers as appears by their Prints are of the Arminian Perswasion in the Quinquarticular Controversy and he may well remember how bitterly all those Doctrines were inveigh'd against under the Name of Socinianism Now who knows but that Sir R. H's Socinianism may in time come to be good Orthodox Doctrine 't is honest and plain as much of it as he is concern'd in already And now I expect to be call'd rank Socinian perhaps Atheist meer Atheist at least but that from the Libeller will be no Disgrace yet not to create needless Envy to my self nor bring unjust Suspicion on Sir R. H. I solemnly profess that I know no more of his Mind in these matters than from his History and that I my self agree with Socinus no farther than he agrees with the plain and sound Doctrine of the Gospel which I think he does not in some Points particularly in that Doctrine that a Dignified and Creature-God is capable of Divine Worship The Trinitarians have undoubtedly the better of the Socinians here but then to deal ingenuously on all Hands the present Unitarian Writers do not espouse that Error of Socinus 4. What are the Doctrines of Christianity against which Sir R. H. has fought with borrow'd Socinian Arms they are reckon'd up thus the Trinity Incarnation Divinity and Satisfaction of Christ and every thing in which is the least pretence of Mystery But what says Sir R. H. why he allows the Gospel to be a Mystery a Mystery reveal'd i. e. the way of Salvation declar'd by Jesus Christ still retains the Name of Mystery just as Men who had receiv'd their sight are call'd blind in that Expression of the Gospel The blind see The reveal'd Mystery of the Gospel Sir R. H. believes and reverences then for unreveal'd Mysteries he is not such an Enemy to them as the Libeller would perswade for tho perhaps he does not believe them because he has no Idea of them yet neither does he disbelieve them Of things whereof he has no Idea neither does he affirm or deny any thing If any one shall object that he declares against Transubstantiation I grant it but then that and some Doctrines akin to it are falsly call'd unreveal'd or not fully reveal'd Mysteries for they are plain and manifest Contradictions But I suspect that the Reader may desire I should speak home what says Sir R. H. to the Mysteries of the Trinity Incarnation Divinity and Satisfaction of Christ Why he says nothing at all to them he does not trouble his Head about them yet he may believe more of them than every body is aware on for all him the Libeller and every one else may believe as much of them as they can only he would not have them who are good at believing force others to believe more than they can in spite of their Senses The Imposition of difficult Speculations Sir R. H. has happen'd to censure perhaps when he was pleas'd with the Consideration of the plainness of our Saviour's Sermons but he may defend himself with a Golden Axiom of Dr. Sherlock's Nothing can be a greater Injury to the Christian Religion than to render it obscure and difficult If that Doctor be not of the same Mind still Sir R. H. can 't help that I know not how it came to pass but so it is he has asserted that Crafty Heathenish and Romish Priests do not believe the ridiculous things which they impose But I hope that the Libeller will not make Mysteries of ridiculous things to prove that Sir R. H. ridicules Mysteries for ridiculous things will be ridiculous let Sir R. H. or the Libeller either do what he can Sir R. H. also seems to hint that knowing Men may sometimes submit their Practice to crafty Priests tho they can't their Understanding The Morocco Embassador was contented to wear a wide Sleeve tho he never expected to catch the Moon in it and some say King Charles the Second was a Votary of our Lady but he had not a word to say to that Embassador to save the Honour of her flying Chappel now happily resting blessed be the Angel-Carriers for it at Loretto 5. What mean these words Sir R. H. levels directly at the Trinity Incarnation Divinity and Satisfaction of Christ I have heard much of the Divinity Incarnation and Satisfaction of Christ but of the Trinity of Christ I never heard before I believe nor Sir R. H. neither What new great Mystery's this that 's come to Town So long kept silent and so lately known I always thought there was an exuberant Foecundity in Mystery but never dream'd of such monstrous Superfoetations P. 28. l. 1. The Libeller would prove that Religion ought to be mysterious because God is Incomprehensible As if he should say because God has not fully reveal'd his own Nature or because we are not capable fully to understand his Nature therefore we are not capable to understand those things which he fully reveals and which most concern us Dîiâ—te Damasippe Deaeque Insanam ob sophiam donent tonsore Whether the Nature of God may be fully understood or not affects not the Question concerning the Nature of Religion thus much we do know of God that he is Almighty and All-wise and from these two certain Notions we learn that his Dominion over us is absolute and exercis'd in ways most agreeable to Reason 'T is dishonourable to God to assert that he proposes to our Belief what we cannot understand and it is impossible for Man to obey God by believing what he cannot understand if there be any thing in Religion which is contrary to or above our Reason we may be content to be ignonorant of it for it does not concern us But I will set down an entire Period of the Libeller in answering of which I shall answer the Substance of his reasoning for Mystery Pag. 28. l. 3. There are Mysteries irreconcileable to them in their own Natures and in the Natures of every thing they see before them yet they would have every thing in a supernatural Religion reveal'd from Heaven to be so plain that their Reason should be able to dive to the very bottom of it which if it were it would be no Revelation or