,*i' i. *'> m& tl|e Htbrarii nf Prinrrtan Sl^riilngiral S^^mtnarQ -». ' a. Jsii^^^i^ 1 THE MISCELLANEOUS WORKS Of chelate Reverend and Learned CONYERS MIDDLETON, D.D. Principal Librarian of the Univerfity of Cambridge* In FIVE VOLUMES. VOL. III. THE SECOND EDITION. LONDON, Printed for R. Man by in the Old Bailey ^ near Ltidgat^' hilly and H. S. Cox in Pater-nofierRow, MDCCLV. THE CONTENTS O F T H E Third Volume. I. A Letter to Br, IVaterland. page ^ ^ II. A Defence of the Letter to Dr. J^Va- terlandy i^c, p. 6<^ III. Some Remarks on a Reply to the Defence of the Letter to Dr. Waterland. p. 167 IV. Remarks on fome Ohfervations, &c. p. 251 V. Remarks^ Paragraph by Paragraph, upon the Prcpofals lately publijhed by Richard Bentley^ ^c. p. 281 VI. Some farther Remarks, Paragraph by Pa- ragraph, upon Propofals, &c. p. 337 VII. A P able of fome of our Editor^ s apparent Contradictions and falfe Affertiuns obfo ved in the foregoing Remarks, p. 461 A LET. A LETTER T O Dr. JVATERLJND; Containing fome Remarks on his Vindication of Scripture : In Anfwer to a Book, intituled, Chrijli unity as old as the Creation^ Together with The SKETCH or PLAN O F Another Anfwer to the faid Book. Vol. III. LETTER T O Dn TV A r E R L A N D. SIR, I HAVE lately read a Piece of yours^ called. Scripture Vindicated^ in anfwer to a Book, intituledy Chriftianity as old as the Creation^ I fat down to it, I confefs, with fome kind of eagernefs •, expe6bing from the great reputation of your name, as well as the great importance of the fubjed, to find in it fomething folid and convincing, anfwerable to the difficulty of the tafk you had undertaken, of reconciling all the exceptionable pajfages of Scripture to reafon and morality, But I had not entered far, before I perceived the vanity of my expedation, and forefaw thq difappointment I was like to fuffer in my hopes of entertainment and fatisfa6lion from a work, which partly from its own nature, but efpe- cially from your method of handling it, feems calculated rather to raife new fcruples^ than to quiet old ones \ and to expofe the Scripture you A 2 ^'^^ A Letter to Dr, Waterland, containing are vindicating to frefh ridicule and contempt, than to convince either the Author you have to deal with, or any others of fceptical and unfettled minds : the reafons of which opinion I fhall without further preface or ceremony proceed tq explain to you very freely. Your Introduction begins by opening to us the defign of the Author you are confuting ; telling us, that his book is a declamatory libel againft revealed Religion^ under colour of Jetting up natural Religion in its place -, that he difco- vers in it two principal ends ; the one, to vilify the holy Scripture ; the other^ to magnify the law cf Nature : In the firfl, you own he deals frank- ly and from his h^art ; in the latter, you charge him with hypocrify and diflimulation ; aflur- ing us, that all he fays is but flam, and that in reality he is no more a friend to natural Religion than he is to revealed. This you fupport by declaring that Natural Religion is fo bound up in Revealed, that they cannot fuhfjji feparately -, muft ftand or fall toge- ther \ and confequently, if he had been a friend to one, it is not conceivable how he could be an adverfary to the other. But this, Sir, I'm afraid, will make but little imprefTion on your adverfary \ will pafs with him for mcer begging the queftion ; meer words without weight or confequence -, or what's ftill worfe. fomt Remarks on his Vindication of Scripture, Worfe, will, when examined, be found to be falfe : for had not Natural Religion a fubfift- ence before Chriftianity was ever known to tlie World ? and did not many by its fole influence attain to fuch an exalted degree of virtue, as few or none have ever fince arrived at ? and at this very day in Mahometan and Idolatrous Na- tions, where Chrijiianity has no influence, is it not neceffary to imagine, that there are many, who by the meer light of Reafon fee through the cheat of the popular Religion, and by ita help form to themfelves fome other more ra- tional rule of life and manners ; and lallly, in our own as well as other Chriflian countries, however inconceivable it may be to you, yet all who know any thing of the world, will eafily conceive, and actually find it a very commoa cafe, to meet with men who with little or no regard for Revealed Religion, yet exprefs both by words and adions a great reverence for Natural •, of which number your Author, for any thing I know, or you have faid to the contrary, may pofllbly be one : for fince in every part of his work he proiefi[es a very high notion of the excellency of Reafcn, Truth and Virtue •, profelTes to believe a God, a Rr evidence, a future ft ate ; both reafon and charity oblige us to look upon him as fincere, till we are forced to think otherwife by fome particular know- ledge or information of his real life and eha- tadler. A 3 But A Letter to Dr. Waterland, containing But no thanks, you tell us, are due, to per- fons for commending Virtue^ which all the world admires^ and envy itfelf mujl praife^ and which even its enemies are forced to pay a reverence and veneration to. Now is not this a little incon- fiftent, to charge men with a defign to over- throw what themfelves, and all the world be- fides, mufl neceflarily admire and pay a vene- ration to ? and though their reverence, as you fay, is but an aukward one., and what they are forced to againft their wills ; yet is it polTible to entertain a thought of deftroying what the nature and necejfity of things force them to reve- rence ? What you mean by an aukward reve- rence., I don't well underlland •, but am certain, that if aukwardnefs be a mark of infmcerity, then Orthodoxy mufl: needs be undone, fince I know none who pay their reverence fo aukward- ly as fome of its principal champions. You next explain the purpofe of your own work ; defigned, you fay, to refcue the word of God from mifreprefentation and cenfiire^ from the reproaches and hlafphemies of fooliflj men : and 'tis matter of melancholy conjideration to You, that there fjjould be found men fo abando7ted and profti- gate^ as to fJmt their eyes againfl light ; affront God to his face ; take a pride in throwing him hack his favours. But how melancholy foever this confideration may be, we ought not ftill, it feems, to be fhocked or fcandalized at it, for two rcafons. Firil, becaufe it was prophefied, that fo>ne Remarks on his Vindication of Scripture. that there Jhotdd come /coffers in the laft days ; yet all the inftances you give are of fuch as came in the jirfi days. Secondly, becaufe // is certainly known with what views., and upon what motives they do it., being all an abandoned and profligate fet of men \ taking a pride in affronting God to his face \ whofe affe^ions are corrupt., whofe deeds evil •, the fecret of whofe counfels is to ficel mens hearts againfl a judgment to come., and lead them blindfold into Hell ♦, whofe real and onely aim is to reduce the laws of God to the lufis and paf- ftons of men •, to fJoake off all religious reflraints^ that they may h -at liberty to follow thdr plea- fur es.^ &c. But this, good Dodlor, to fpeak freely, is not reafoning but ratling ; or, to ufe your own words [^], ftjews more of a difpofition to revile^ than to mgue and debate ; and till 'tis fupported by fads aiid proofs fufficient to convince men of fenfe, will always pafs with fuch for the crude and fenfelefs cant of Bigots, the common-place fluff of declamatory Preachers : for every man, who has pradlifed the world, and ufed the con- verfation of men of letters, mull needs have met with many perfons of much feeming honor, virtue, and fobriety of life, who ^2iVtXy profefs to have fcruples., partly an entire difhelief of- all Re- velation : and what way, think you, is the moft likely to convince men of this charader,? Is it poflible to work any good upon them by the ^ A method A Letter to Dr. Waterland, containing method you here take ^ by telling them that they are profligate and abandoned^ contemners of Gody and enemies to Man ? Is not fuch treatment iure to have a contrary efFedl I and being confcious to themfelves, that your charge upon them is both falfe and malicious, inftead of confidering your book, as a charitable attempt to recover a foul from ruin, they will rejed it with fcorn, as an infamous and fcandalous libel. After this general charge on all who cavil at Scripture, you defcend to fix it more particu- larly on the Author you have to do with : this you do, firfl, by citing two paffages from fome private letters, as you call them •, fignifying that the intention of the writer of them was to fave a foul from the difmal apprehenfions of eternal dam- nation \ or from the uneafinefs of min4 which he is often under when pkafure and Chriftianity come in competition. What Letters thefe are I know not, but prefume, that you have reafon to know the Author of them to be the Author like wife of the hook you are confuting •, or elfe with what fenfe or juftice can you impute to one man what another has faid or written ? but you add im- mediately, this is the noble and generous aim which the Writer I am concerned with boafts of in his Preface. This indeed is charging him home with the fame fentiments ; if he not onely avows them, but boafls of them: for who could colled or imagine any thing lefs from your words ? but I was much furprized, when confulting his Preface fome Remarks on his Vindication of Scripture. Preface on the occafion, I could not find a fyl- lable of the letters or paffages juft mentioned, nor any fentiments at all like them, but the mention onely of a noble and generous defign^ in having, as he imagined, contrived rules tp diftinguifh between Religion and Superftition. Such a difingenuous way of forming an indict- ment mud needs appear odious not onely to the enemiesy but much more to the friends of a Religion, which prohibits fo feverely all rajb cenfure i prefcribes the utmofi candour and charitj towards all men, and will not bear a railing ac- cufation even againft the Devil himfelf. From charging him with other peoples fenti- ments, you come at laft to convidt him by his own ; telling us, that he gives broad hints in one place ^ that he looks upon incontinence in fingle per- fons hs one of the rights allowed by the Law of Nature^ If by incontinence he means, what you feem to fuppofe, the cohabiting of fingle perfons of each fex for the propagation of the fpecieSy ^without the intervention of a Rriefl^ or any other formality hut mutual confent \ had his hints been ftill broader'^ they are but agreeable to the prin- ciples he maintains ; nor will he find much difficulty in defending them by the Laws of Reafon and Nature -, and I wonder how from fuch hiyits you can ground any imputation of immorality upon one, who is reafoning from thofe principles, from which your felf mull he forced to allow ilill a greater licence j not onely 9 10 A Letter to Dr. Waterland, containing onely a plurality of wives^ but a number of con- cubines into the bargain \ unlefs you will give up fome part at leaft of the Scripture you are vindicating, and condemn the holy Patriarchs^ Abraham^ Ifaac and Ja^ob ^ and above all, David, the man after God's own heart ; who had at leafl feven wives, and ten concubines, , without ever being admonifhed for it by any of the Prophets, or cenfured by any of the facred Writers, So that here he will probably turn voiir own reafoning upon you *, that it is a ^weak thing of you, to charge the Law of Nature as not ftrili enough, when your own Scripture ap- pears to be loofer \^a\ Again •, you charge him with declaring flatly und plainly againft our Lord's doctrine of loving thofe that hate us : Yet in the place you refer to, I find him arguing onely ^ that thofe words are not to be taken in their flri^ and literal fenfe, but like many other texts of the fame nature, which he there enumerates, viz. he that takes away thy coat, let him ha^ve thy cloak alfo : cf him who takes thy goods, afk them not again : whoever fh all fmite thee on the right cheek, turn to him the other alfo, &c. muft be interpreted agreeably to the reafon and nature of things, and the common good of fociety •, and that to pradife them in their obvious and grammatical fenfe would occafion much mifchief to the public, much injuftice to particular men : In all which, [«] P. 90. as fojne Remarks on his Vindication of Scripture. as he fays nothing more than what all Commen- tators and all rational Chrijlians allow, I cannot think it reafonable, trom this inftance, to charge him with feeking to relax the Laws of Chrijl^ to make them fuit the better with corrupt Nature. But had he furnifhed no dired proofs of the malice you impute to him, yet your penetration, it feems, is fuch, as can fee to the very bottom of him *, for though he Jludioujly^ as you fay, difguifes himfelf and takes great pains to put fair gloffes on what he is doings yet fometimes he dif- covers the very fecrets of his heart : and though in the fame page you allow, that he himfelf befl knows how far he is influenced by luft and malice ; yet in the very next words you recolledl: your felf, and fignify, that you know as well as him- felf, and that V/'j eafy to perceive how much the black pajfions have got the afcenda?it over him. The cqpclufion of your IntroduBion is of a piece with the reft : for after declaiming againfl his wickednefs, you conclude by contemning his learning and abilities. His attacks^ you fay, are feeble^ his artillery contemptible : he has no genius or tafte for literature ; no acquaintance with the original languages ; nor fo much as zvith common Criticks and Commentators : fever al of his objections are pure Englilh obje^ions ; fuch as cffe5i onely our tranflation : the reft are of the loweft and moft trifling fort^ &:c. And in the body ir xa ji Letter to Dr. Waterland, containing body of your book you go ftill farther, and treat him with the plain terms of Fool and Idiot •, as having neither wit^ judgment^ learnings er any thing hut dull malice [a]. If this be really the cafe, what is all this huftk about ? Why all this apparatus to foil fo feeble^ fo contemptible an adverfary ? Why mufl you be called off from the great work of de- fending Creeds and Pofitive Precepts^ to contend with fuch a trifier? Why mufl two eminent fcholars be picked out from Oxford and Cam- bridge^ to divide the tafk between them, and repel with united force the defpicable attacks of a pure Englifh blunderer ? All this apparatus^ I fay, muft needs perfuade us, that you have a different notion of his ability^ from what you think proper to declare : and, in fa6t, as all who talk extravagantly or infincerely are apt to betray themfelves, fo you in many places con- fute your felf, and fliew that thefe pure Englifh ohje^ions^ which owe their rife, as you would infinuate, to the blunders of our Trayiflation^ de- ierve to be confidered in another light ; fince at fome times you exclaim againfl them as being fiale^ er borrowed from Antiquity -, from the an- cient enemies of Religion, Celfus and Julian ; at other times, from our learned moderns, Marfhaju and Burnet^ freferve him in perpetual health ayid vigour^ and prevent all the evils and infirmities of age^ laid it on an Afs to carry for him \ but the Afs being very dry and wanting to drink^ was cheated of it by a Serpent^ guardian of the fpring •, who per- fuaded him to exchange his load for a draught of water : and fo the Serpent has ever fine e enjoyed the benefit of it^ renewing its youth and vigour every year^ whilft man is left to languifh by difi tafes and devay [^]. Mofes^ we read, was learned in all the wifdcm ' of the Mgjptians \c\ •, and their learning, efpa- cially in things f acred and divine^ was wholly myfiical and fymbolical ; propofed always under the figures of men^ beafis and birds^ which were called Hieroglyphicks^ or facred characters j ia- [ff] Si autem nuUus exitus datur, ut pie & digne- Deo qusE fcripta funt intelligantur, nift iigurate atque in a:ni- gmatlj. propofita ifla credamus, babentes Audoritateiu Aporiolicaro, modum quern intcndimus teneanius — ut omnes iftas figuras renim fecundum Catholicam ^idem — explicemas &c. Ibid. c. '^. IL] NicaiKlii Theriac. Edit. Aid. p. 17. §. 7. Sc Scholia ibid [tj AiTt,* vii. 22. vented fome Remarks on his Vindication of Scripture, 25 vented and ufed by them, as Kircher [a'] has fhewn, before Mofes's time : amongfl: thefc, the Serpent^ as all Authors inform us, was of more common ufe with them, than any other animal ; whofe nature they imagined to have fomething very excellent and divine in it {b\ So that it fupplied the place of two letters of their fy mho- lical Alphabet ; and ferved them as an Htero- glyphick of various fignification •, more particu- larly as an emblem of fubtlety and cunnings as well as of lufi and fenfual pleafure [r]. Whence it cannot feem improbable, that Mofes*s account of the fall might be drawn from principles and notions imbibed in his youth in the Schools of the ^Egyptians. Dr. Spencer^ explaining this cuftom of the Mgyptians^ of delivering all the fublimer parts ^ of knowledge under the cover of Symbols ^ Types and Emblems^ obferves, that when God called out Mofes to his Prophetick Office^ he conftdered him {al Vid. Kircher. Obelifc. Pamphil. 1. 2. de inftitu- tione & fabrica Hieroglyphicor. c. 2. p. 102, &c. Primi per figuras animalium iEgyptii fenfas mentis effingebant. Tacit. Annal. 1. 11. c. 14. [^] Nihil inter Hieroglyphica Symbola Serpents frc- qucntius — cum enim viderent Serpentem animal igneo Spiritu plenum, vivax, &c. fieri non poiTe crediderunt, quin aliquid magnum, excellens & prorfus divinum fub lis lateret. Ibid. 1. 4. Ideae Hieroglyph, p. 347. [f] lb. 1. 2. c. 6. p. 131. It. Pierii Valerian. Hiero- glyph. 1. 14. l6 [a Lei f^r to Dv. Wat EKt Ann, con farnwg as one who had been trained up in that kind of learning ♦, and that 'tis confonant therefore to the character and hiftory of Mofes, to imagine that God dejigned^ that he fhould write and treat of all thefublime things committed to him^ in that myfti- cal and hieroglyphic al way of literature in which he had been educated [^]. The mention of Egyptian learning leads me naturally to confider, in the next place, your anfwer to this Author^ cavil againit the divine inftitution of Circumci/ion-y which he would in- finuate to have been borrowed onely from jEgypt, This objedlion you mzkt flight tiplying apace upon them, had not God mi- raculoufly interpoled to prevent it. 'Tis well however for the Scripture you are vindicating^ that it furnifhes no ground for fuch a vindica- tion ; but that all this nonfenfe is purely your own. For from the Chapter you refer to [^], 'tis evident, that the Sons of Noah were fo far from any fuch refolution of not difperfing themfelves^ that they had already begun to difperfe ; had adually fent off a Colony from the Eaft to the Flains of Shinar. About an hundred years after the floods fays Calmet^ when mankind found them- felves too numerous^ to be able to continue any longer together^ they refolvedto difperfe themfelvcs and fend out colonies into different countries [^]. For this is not to be underftood, fiys Bifliop Patrick [c], of all the Pofterity of Noah \ much lefs of Noah himfelf\ but of a great colony of them-, who when the Eafi was much peopled^ chofe to go [a] Genef. c xi. r^] Calmet Difi'ert. far la premiere langue, p. 3. \c\ Comm. on Gen. xi. 2. fome Remarks on his Vindication of Scripture. 43 Weftward. And again ; they continued^ fays he, in the mountainous Countries of the Eafi^ till they grew very numerous and zvanted room ; and then defcended into the Plain, and fome of them went weflwardly. And even thofe, who had march- ed into this Plain, were fo far dill from any thought of hanging together in clufters, that they knew and clearly faw that it would foon be ne- ceflary for them to difperfe ftill further into other parts of the Earth, but had a mind, be- fore fuch difperfion, to eredl fome publick monu- ment of their common origin, by building a City and a 'Tower that fhould reach as high as Heaven ; and it was the prefumption and arrogance of this defign, that induced God to baffle it by confounding their language \a\ and to difperfe from that place, without fuffering them to finifh what they had projedled. This is all that can be colledled from this ftory, by any rational method of interpretation : and the ftory itfelf feems introduced for no other purpofe but to account for the origin of the diferent languages that obtain in the world : nor is there the leail ground for^he notion of their hanging together in clufters, and refolving neither to yt^p^^r^/^/^.?;?;- felves, nor cultivate the ground: a notion wholly extravagant and contradidory to fenfe and reafon : for were it pofTible for them to form fuch a defign, it could not be pofTible to exe- [a] Quoniam de poena venit multiplicatio, mutatione linguarum. Auguft. de Civ. Dei, 1. 16. c. 12. ..... cute 44 -^ Letter tc Dr. Waterlaxd, containing cute it : a multitude daily growing cannot hang together in chtfters ; muft of necefTity differ je^ in proportion to the encreafe of their numbers •, want of room will force them to feek new quar- ters •, ivant of food to cultivate the earth : and you may as well tell us of waters gathering to- gether on heaps ^ as o^ multitudes gathering in cluf- ters to prevent their oWn difperfion. I know no animals, that hang fo much in duflers as BeeSy yet even thefe difperfe themfelves every year, and fend out colonies^ as oft as the old Hive becomes too narrow for the entertain- ment of their encreafed family : the fame nature, that pufties the infant forward from the narrow womb into the wide worlds and from childhood flrctches him out to man^ will always oblige a growing people to fpread and enlarge them- felves as foon as their clujlering together be- comes uneafy and inconvenient. I cannot imagine then whence you took this filly notion, unlefs from the picture of Hohhes^s Leviathan^ where we fee juft fuch a refra^ory multitude as you defcribe, all clufiered up toge- ther into one gigantick Figure^ as if refolved and prepared in that collected form to combat hea- ven itfelf. After allj you conclude this article with great feeming complacency and fatisfadlion in the clearnefs of your folution •, wondering what pojfiblc Offence your adverfary can take at it, and fome Remarks on his Vindication of Scripture. 45 and defying him to furnifh a better^ rationale of it than you have given. But, pray Sir, what has he to do to give ayiy rationale at all of a ftory, which he does not believe ? Or fliouldjie frankly confefs that he cannot find a better^ yet I would not advife you to triumph too foon left he fliould reply, that 'tis for that very reafon he rejeds the whole ftory, becaufe there's no better folution of it than yours to be had -, and he cannot take up with a rationale^ that has not a f crap of reafon or fenfe in it. I ftiall not trouble myfelf with following you any further through your Anfwers to the Oh- je^ions of this Author : I have already faid enough to ftiew the Truth of what is above hinted, that the tafk you have undertaken of vindicating the particular text of Scripture from cavil and exception-, or refcuiiig^ as you fay, the Word of God from reproach and blafyhemyy is much more likely to furnifti matter for ne'-jj Scandal^ than extinguifti the old: for this, as far as my experience has reached, has always been, and will for ever be the confequence of this method of defending Religion: fince 'tis built upon a wrong principle^ and proceeds upon a fyflem^ that cannot be maintained, viz. that every fingle paffage of the Scriptures .^ we call Cano- nical^ muft yieeds be received., as the very ixjord and as the voice of God himfclf This notion, which you every where inculcate, as 'tis talfe in itfelf, fo muft necelTarily lead you into error ' o and 4^ A Letter to Dr. Waterland, containing and abfiirdity, and expofe you to the contempt and ridicule of all rational men, who can never einbrace an Hypothejis^ however confidently af- ferted, which they fee contrary to fa^l and the' plain convi^non of their fenfes, *Tis the Obfzrvation of a late grave Author, much verfed in reflexions of this kind, that there's no greater caufe of modern infidelity ^ than that fome opinions and rites are carried to fuch an immoderate height^ as expcfes the ahfurdity of them to oilmen of common fenfe^ who out of indigiiati- on and an exceffive renitence^ not feparating that which is true^ from that which is falfe, are apt to fall into the contrary extreme^ a contempt of all Religion [^]. And what better effed can we expert from your prefent vindication of Scripture^ at every objection, you give the alarm ; of affronting God to his face-, bidding defiance to the undoubted truths of God \ rwiing into downright blajphemy^ /hooting up arrows againft Heaven^ &c. ? Your Adverfary cavils at Circumcifion-^ it is fa5f^ you fay, that God did require Circumcifion, and who art thou that repliefi againfl God? You tell us, that the modeft way of oppofing ?. Revelation^ pretended to be divine^ is not to examine the internal merit of its dovflrines, but the external evidence of thcfadt [b] : but this is certainly lof- [a] Religion of Nature Jelineated, P. 60. 2 ing fome Remarks on his Vindication of Scripture, 47 ing time, and beginning at the wrong end; fmce 'tis allowed on all hands, that if any nar- ration can be fhewn to b^ falfe\ any do^rine irrational or immoral-, 'tis not all the external evidence in the world that can or ought to con- vince us J th'dtfucb a dextrine comes from God. For my own part, as I have no kind of intereH to ferve by the belief or eftablifhment of any opinion, befides my private ihare in the good it may do to the Publick, fo it is the ftudy and bufinefs of my life in every enquiry, whether Civile Natural^ or Religious^ to fearch for and embrace the T^ruth\ or, where that is not cer- tainly to be had, what comes the next to it, probability. And as in the prefent quercion, 'tis my perfuafion, that this way of vindicating. Scripture cannot pofTibly do any fervice, but probably much harm to the Caufe you are defending-, fo I thought myfelf obliged by a regard to 'Truth and the common Religion we profefs -, to difcourage, as far as I am able, the progrefs of a work, v/hich is likely to be attended with fuch ill confequences : and if in thefe Remarks., (where I have en- deavoured rather to fhew the weaknefs of your reafoning, than declare any fen*:iments of my ownj I have ufed any exprefiions of fliarpnefs or feverity, more than the nature of the fubjecl required, they are not to be charged on any envy to your merit, or fpleen to your Perfon, but to an indignation raifed in me, to lee • 48 A Letter to Dr. Waterland, containing fee you dictate fo arhitarily^ and decide fo dogma- tically in points of the utmoft difficulty and un- certainty; and in queftions where hardly two Commentators have ever agreed in the fame folu- tion^ contemn all objedlions 2ls Jlight trival-, as the meer effedls of ignorance or malice -, and be- llow the titles of Fool^ and Idiot^ on fuch as differ from you in opinion, either of the Ju- thority or Interpretation of the texts you arc handling. Yet after all, wliat wonderful convi^ion have you wrought-, what feats have you done, to- wards refcuing the word of God from cavil and reproach? In the hifiory of man^s falU you have fixed an interpretation upon it, which Bilhop Patrick declares to be both ftmple and incredible. In the cafe of Circurncifton ; inftead of fhewing your Adverfarfs ignorance^ you have betrayed your own \ by denying that to be painful or ha - zardous, which for the pain of it was often. mortal \ nor allowing the leaft colour of reafon to an objection grounded in probability^ and contirmed by exprefs tejiimony. Laftly, in the ftory of Babel^ all that you have faid is little better than jargon \ unfupported by Scripture \ contrary to reafon \ and mull needs appear ri- diculous to all men of underllanding. And now. Sir, I leave you to contemplate the merit of your great atchievements ; a plea- fure which has, I'm afraid, been fomewhat in- terrupted jhme Remarks on his Vindicaticn of Scripture, 4*) terrupted by the roughnefs of this Addrefs; and to fhew my own impartiality, and that I am drawn into this controverfy by no other motive but a fincere love to truth, and a fin* cere refolution to embrace it wiiere-ever it is to be found; I fhall proceed to ufc the fame free- dom with your Adverfary^ by fketching out a Flan or rough Draught offuch an Anfiver to him as would in my judgment be the moft effedVual to confute and overthrow his whole Hypo- thefis. The Defign of this Author is to fliew, that the Chriftian Religion^ as 'tis now pradtifed a- mongft us, is not onely ufelefs^ but mifchievous \ that the Light of Reafon^ or Religion of Nature^ is the onely Guide we ought to trull to ; being a perfect and complete rule of duty in all cafeSy both towards God and Man •, and confequcntly, that Chrijiianity ought to be aholifhed^ and Rea- fon advanced in its place as the Publick and Na- tional Religion. That this is the main defign of his Sook, there heeds no pains to prove -, 'tis evident to all who read it ; and the Author himfelf^ I dare fay, will not deny it. On this foundation then, his "^ whole fcheme may eafily be ihewn, even upon his own principles^ to be both irrational and immoral: irrational^ becaufe impoffihle to he re- duced to practice \ immoraU becaufe, if poffihle^ yet pernicious and hurtful to the Publick. Vol. ITL D The 50 A Letter to Dr. Waterland, containing The firft may be proved, by the teftimony of all ages; which teaches us, that Reafon^ whatever force and ftrength it might have in particular men, yet never had credit or authori- ty enough in the world to be received as a pub- lick and authentick Rule either of Religious or . Civil Life : this is allowed by all the great Rea- /oners of the Heathen Worlds and the experience of its infuificiency as a Guide of Life^ is given by many of them as the very caufe of the in- vention and eftablifliment of Religion : that the authority of the latter [<^], might refirain thofe whom the former had been found too weak to keep in order, ne life of man^ according to Euri- pides [^J, was once like that of heafts^ governed hy force and violence ; laws were then contrived to repel injuflice ; hut when thefe proved ftill infuffici- ent^ Religion was at ^ laft invented. By whofe my fl cries ^ as Tully obferves \c\ men from a fa- ^age life became formed and cultivated^ as it were ^ to humanity, 'Tis then a confefled maxim of the Antients^ th^t Reafon had not light or force enough to guide mankind in a courfe of Virtue and Morality : in confequence of which we find in fad, from the [«] Ut, quos ratio non pofTet eos ad officium Religio duceret. Cic. Nat. Deor. 1. i. 42. [^] Vid. Plutarch, de Placitis Philofophor. 1. i. c. 7. [f] Quibus ex agrefti immanique vita exculti ad huma- nitatem & mitigati fumus. Cic. de Legib. 2. 14. records fame Remarh on his Vindication of Scripture, 5 1 records of all Hiftory, that there never was a nation in the world, whofe publick Religion was formed upon the plan of Nature^ and inftituted on the principles of 7neer Reafon : but that all Religions have ever derived their Authority from the pretence of a Bivine Original^ and a Reve- lation from Heaven, This our Author himfelf in many places acknowledges, declaring, that there never was a time or place without fome tra- ditional Religion or pretended Revelation [a]. Such an univerfal confent muft needs be owing to an univerfal conviction and experience of the in- fufficiency of Reafon ; and feems to be the voice of Nature diiciaiming it as a Guide in the cafe of Religion : and thus our Author"* s Scheme^ by the confeflion of all Antiquity^ and even by his own^ muft appear foolifh and irrational^ in attempt- ing to fet up that for a perfcul rule of life^ which from the nature of things never was or could be received as fuch in any age or coun- try whatfoever. Should he then gain his end, and actually demqlifh Chrijlianity, what would be the confe- quence •, what the fruit of his labours^ but con- fufion and diforder i till fome ozhtr traditional Religion could be fettled in its place -, till we had agreed to recall either the Gods of the old Worlds Jupiter^ Minerva^ Venus^ &c. or with [a] P. 184. 229. Chriftian. as old, &c. D 2 the 52 A Letter to Dr. W a t e r l an d , containing the Idolaters of the new^ to worlhip Sun^ Moon and Stars ; or inilead of Jefiis^ take Mahomet or Confucius for the Author of our Faith ? And hence may be demonftrated the immorality alfo of bis Scheme^ even upon his own principles. For fhould we allow Chriflianity to be a meer Impoflure, on a level onely with all the other Impoflures that have obtained in the world-, it would not be difficult to fhew from the dictates of Reafon^ that an attempt to overturn it, as 'tis now ejlahlifhed by Law^ derived from our Anceftors^ confirmed by the belief and pradlice of y^ many ages^ muil be criminal and immoral. The Moralifls of the Heathen Worlds tho' they clearly faw the cheat and forgery of the efta- hlifJoed Religion^ yet always perfuade and recom- mend a fubmiffion to it; well knowing what mifchief muft needs befal the State by the fub- verfion of conflitutions fo greatly reverenced by the people. Socrates^ when condemned to die on pretence of fuhverting the Religion of his Country^ denies the charge, and appeals to all who knew him, whether he did not conftantly comply with the Puhlick Worfhip [^]. And Cicero^ as our Author himfelf allows, often pref- fes upon his countrymen a firi5i obfervance of all the 7'eligious Rites eflablifhed by Authority^ and declares all thofe worthy of the lafi punifhment^ [rf] Xenophon. Apolog. pro Socrate. who fome Remarks on his Vindication of Scripture. r 9 who ffjotdd attempt to difiurb them. And tho' he was himfelf an Augur., yet he is fo far from dijfembling on that account, as this man foolifh- ly infinuates [13], that he declares the whole hiifinefs of Augury to be a meer lidlion •, and tho' it might have been received at firft on an opinion of its real ufe in Divination^ yet when that opinion was worn off., it was wifely retained for the fake of Gover7iment., and the influence it had on the peace of the -Republick \b\ The Athenians.^ upon rebuilding their City deftroyed by Xerxes^ enquiring of the Oracle., what religious Rites they fhould revive ., were an- fwered, fuch as the cuftom and laws of their Coun- try had cofifecrated [c]. The Philofopher Protagoras having declared in a book of his, that as to the Gods^ whether [^] Non fumes ii nos Augures, qui avium reliquorumve fignorum obfervatione futura dicamus. De Div. 2. 33. Nee vero non omni fupplicio digni P. Clodius, & L. Junius, qui contra Aufpicia navigaverunt — parendum cnim fuit religioni, nee patrius mos repudiandus, &c. Ibid. Exiftimo jus Augurum, etfi divinationis opinione prin- cipio conftitutum fit, tamen poflea Reipublic^ caufa con- fervatum. Ibid. 35. Ordiar ab Harufpicina, quam ego reipublicse caufa, communifque Religionis colendam cenfeo. Ibid. 12. [c] Cic. de Legib. L 2. 16. D 3 ^^^ 54 ^ Letter to Dr. Waterland, containing they really exifted or not exifted^ he had nothing to fay ; the Athenians banijhed him their territories, and ordered his book to he burnt [a]. And 'twas the fear of the fame 'punifhment^ that re- {trained Epicurus from fpeaking his mind freely on the fame fubje5t \ and tho' he believed no- thing of the Gods^ yet obliged him in words at leafi to allow their exigence [b], Euripides too, as Plutarch informs us [f], when for fear of the Court of Areopagus he durft not openly ridicule the Religion of his Country^ contrived to do it co- vertly under the feigned characters of perfons in- iroduced in his Plays, And when Diagoras went fo far as openly to deride their myfteries^ they proclaimed a great reward to any one, who Jhould kill him [ij. Thefe were the maxims, thefe the principles, which the light of Nature fuggefted, which Reafon dictated ; and from thefe inftances our ft Author may fee how his Attempt would have been treated by a people the moft famed for [tf] Cic. de Nat. Deor. i. 23. Protagoras, cum in principio libri fui fic poluifTet •, de Divis, neque ut fint, nequeut non fint, habeo dicere; Athenienfium juflu, urbc atque agro eft exterminatus, librique ejus in condone ppmbufti. De Nat. Deor. 1. i. 23. [b'\ Video nonnullis videri, Epicurum, ne in offen- fionem Athenienfium caderet, verbis reliquifTe Deos, &c. Jb. 30. [c] Plutarch de Placitis Philofoph. 1. i.e. 7. [d] ^ioi,yofoc rocXocvTov ETrfH^'^u^av £» Ti? durov ocviXoh Sec. Jofeph. contr. Ap. 1. 2. 37. it. Suid. in Diagor. learning fotne Remarks on his Vindication of Scripture. 55 learning and politenefs of any of the Heathen World: It would have been thought worthy of the laji punijljment\ his book burnt -^ himfelf hanifhed. And this may fervc withal to fliew his igno- rance ot Antiquity, in magnifying, as he does on all occafions, the moderation of Pagan Go- vernments, in oppofition to Chrijlian ; that they indulged an univerfal liberty^ 7?ever perfecuted for Religion, never quarrelled about their Gods [^] ; for he quite miitakes the matter-, 'tis not the Believers of Religion, but Infidels and Atheifis^ who in every country have always been the fe- ver ejl perfecutors, ^v\^..cruellefi oppreffors of all Civil as well as Religious Liberty, For as this life is their all, they are the more jealous in guarding it-, the more fevere in fupprefiing every innovation in pradlice or opinion which might tend pofTibly to diflurb their repofe; this is the conflant obfervation of all who are verfed in hiftory, efpecially in that of the Jew's \ where the Pharifees, however flri5f in the Ob- fervance of their Religion, were always mild and gentle in the Seat of Judgment -, whereas the Sad- ducees, tho' little concerned for Religion, were moft implacable and rigorous animadverters on every flight tranfgreffion of the Law [h\ M P. loi. [b'\ Jofeph. Antiq. 1. 13. 10. it. 20. 8. it. de Bell. Jud. ?. 8. P 4 Were ^6 A Letter to Dr. Watep.land, containing Were Chriflianity then to be treated as a mere Impofture -y on a level onely with the other Im- fofturesy that have been received in the world; yet in this view we fee plainly from the dictates of Reafon and our Author'* s own principles^ that an attempt to fubvert it is both irrational and im^ moral : but fhould we confider it as the beji of all ether Religions ; the beft contrived to promote puhlick peace and the good of Society \ and what our Author in his own book has demonftrated, as coming the neareft of all others to his perfe3 ' law of Reafon and Nature -, Then his crime will be aggravated in proportion, as he feeks to de- llroy a better fyftem of Religion^ in order to in- troduce a worfe ; fince, as is faid above, fome traditional Religion or other mufl always take place, as necelTary to keep the world in order. 'TVj the tendency of aEfions^ fays he [^], which wakes them either good or had \ thofe^ that tend to promote human happinefs are always good ; thofe^ that have a contrary tendency^ always bad: and this he declares to be a never failing rule, to judge of anions by their tendency [^] ; let's judge him then by his own rule. The tendency of his book is to abolifh Chrif- iianity, and fet up Reafon'm its place-, the thing }t felf is impra^icable, the attempt therefore foolifj and irrational, [^] P. 350-. The fome Remarks on his Vindication of Scripture. 57 The tendency of it is to diflurb the puhlick peace^ by overturning a Religion derived from our Anceflors; eftabliflied by publick Authori- ty •, reverenced by the people •, 'tis mifchievous. therefore, and dangerous to the Society, The tendency of it is to abolifh a rational and well formed fyjiem of Morality^ to eftablifli a / 303.' Eufebius to Dr. Waterland, i£c. Eufehius fiiews, tliat Mojh's Hiftory of the Creation^ of Paradife and the Fall of Man ^ was delivered by him in this recondite and fymholical way ^ of learning •, and that Plato^ (changing onely the names, as of Paradife into the Garden of Jupiter^ &c.) has copied the whole Story, and allegorifed it jufc as Alofes had done before him [_a] ; of which he gives likewife fonie other examples. And that the Primitive JVr iters in general efbeemed the fymholical or figurative interpretation of Scripture^ to be on many occafions the onely method of vindicating it, is very certain and undeniable: for inflance, the Mofaic Laws about Animals clean and unclean were confidered by them as wholly allegorical, full of a hidden and myftical meaning : ^The Law, fays Philo, ac- counts the Camel an unclean beaft, hecaufe tho^ he chews the cud, he does not divide the hoof \ now if we confider this according to the outward Letter, His hard to fay, what fenfe there is in it, but if according to the inward meaning, there is a moft clear and neceffary one, ^c. which he goes on to explain [f?\ When Mofes told the People, fays Barnabas, that they were to abfiain from fuch and fuch Animals •, the Command of God does not import a \a\ Praepar. Evang. p. 34.3. Edit. R.Steph. \h\ De Agricult. p. 206. F 3 ^^^ t6 A Defence of the Letter real Prohibition to eat -, hut Mofes fpoke fpritu-^ ally, and by prohibiting Swine's fiefh meant onely to fay, thou fhalt not keep company^ or join thy felf to fuch Men, as in their manners are like to Swine, &c. \a'\ Clemens of Alexandria, Eufebius^ La5iantius, See. follow Barnabas' s interpretation : 'Tertullian goes further, and fays, that nothing is fo con- temptible as the Mofaic Laws about the diflin5lion and prohibition of animal food : and Origen Hill more freely -, that if we take them literally^ they are unworthy of God^ and lefs rational than the Laws of Men, as of the Romans, Athenians, Lacedemonians ; nay^ that fome of them are con- trary to reafon and impoffihle to he obferved\h\ Thus far then you muft needs allow me to be orthodox ; clear of any attempt either againft the Authority of Mofes, or in favour of Infide- lity ; unlefs you will involve in the fame crime with me the moll pious and learned Fathers of the Churchy and the ableft Defenders of Chrilli- anity in all Ages : Let us fee how jufb your charge upon me is in the following Articles ; particularly that of the Jewifh Circumcifion ; where you next examine what I have advanced in relation to its divine Origin. [a] S. Barnab. Epift. c. x. p. 30. Edit. Coteler. [If] Vid. ibid. Cotelerii Not. 42. you to Dr. Waterland, ^f. %^ You affirm in the firft place, that / think with the Author of Chriftianity as old^ i^c. that Circumcifion was borrowed from ^gypt [/z]. But, pray Sir, where have I declared that I think fo ? All that I endeavour or intended to fhew, was the rafhnefs and unreafonablenefs of thofe Di- vines, who aflert its di^cine Origin in a ftile fo dogmatical and overhearing as cannot fail of giving difguft to Men of candour and learn- ing \ not allowing the leafl colour of reafon to the contrary opinion, but treating it as the meer effedl of malice and ignorance \ a way of defence fo contrary to good fenfe and good manners, that the caufe of Religion mufl needs fuffer by it. However, Sir, had I really thought, what you impute to me, 'tis not at leafl in your power to convince me of an error, as we fhall foon fee by the weak attempt you make to- wards it. For in confidering a Quotation of mine from Jofephus^ you fay, ^%is plain that Jofephus does not fpeak there of any Egyptians circumcifed^ but Priefls onely \ and that if I had tranflated him rights my Argument would have been fpoiled \ and that for your part, you gather from what Jofephus fays of Herodotus^ that he underftood Herodotus to mean that the ^Egyptian Priefis onely were circumcifed : whence you torm la] Reply, p. 13, F 4 imme- 8S A Defence of the Letter immediately an Hypothefis out of your own brain -, that thefe Priefls cf ^gypt taitght the Priefn of other Nations to be circitmcifed^ on pre- tence that it was 7iecej]'ary in fuch onely for the fake^ not of Cleanlinefs^ as 1 render the word Kit6cLpuTr}](^^ but of Purity^ or internal Holinefs^ jufl as it was among the Jews [a']. But now, Sir, if the contrary to this be true in every particular •, if the ^Egyptian People in general^ and not the Priefls onely were circum- cifed •, if Jofephus miderftood Herodotus in that very fenfe^ and laftly, if C/m/;;^^//?^;/ was ufed by tliem juft as I have faid, /cr the fake of outward Cleardinefs^ and not as your Criticifm imports, inward Purity -, what will you fay for yourfelf ; what excufe will you make for giving me fo much trouble ? Will not the Reader begin to fufpe(5t that with all this Gravity you are but a Pretender to Learning, without any found fhare of it ; that the Knowledge you are mafter of, is fupplied from Scraps and marginal Citations, without any thorough acquaintance with Anti- quity, or the Authors you refer to ? and as oft therefore as you are engaged to treat a queftion to the bottom, like a Man fighting in the dark, inftead of beating your Adverfary, v/ill oftner be found beating the Air and bruifing your own Knuckles againfl Pofls or Walls ? of which we fliall fee many an inftancc before I've done with you. M Reply, p. 15, &c. F6r to Dr. Waterland, i^c. 2^ For fuppofe tliat I had allowed tlie very thing that you contend for ; that the Pr lefts onely were circimcifcd in yEgypt ; how would my Argument have been ipoiled by it ? Was it impoflible for Mofes, who was bred up among thofe very Priefts^ and infbru&d in all their Learnings to have copied Circumcifion from them, and yet extend it further afterwards by impofing it on the People too ? but not to dwell on Hypothecs, let us enquire into the Fad. The Authors I have quoted, the oldeft, who give any account of Circumcifion [^], Herodotus^ Dicdortis Sicuhts^ Strabo, mention it always as a cufcom common to the whole Nation, without giving the leaft hint or reafon to beheve that it was confin'd to Priefts alone. Agatharcides^ as quoted by Photius^ fays exprefly that all the ^Egyptians were circiimcifed [^] : and Suidas hints the fame in the word ipaJ^^f^. Strabo indeed adds, what is confirmed likewife by other Writers, that the Women were alfo circum- cifed [r] ; which fully confutes your Notion, and Ihews the Pradice to have been general. A queftion indeed may arife about the obli- gation to it •, whether it was of abfolute necefTity [«] Jerem. ix. 25. neque ^gyptiis utilis eft, &c. Jaft. Mart. Dial. 192. [hi Photii Biblioth. p, 1358. cx Agatharcide, c. 30. W L. .7. or 90 A Defence of the Letter or not to all ; and there may pofTibly havc been fome diftindion between Priefts and People on this account : but that it was commonly and generally pradlifed by all, can admit of no doubt from the concurrent Teflimony of all Authors : and 'tis certain that as all the Jews would receive none to the Pafover, but the cir - cumcifed \ fo the Mgyptians admitted none elfc to their religious Myfteries \_a\ -, fo that Pytha- goras was forced to be circumcifed^ to procure admittance to their recondite and fymholical Learning : whence 'tis probable, that it was confidered as a kind of religious Tejl, which the Priefts and all who expedted any benefit from Religion or Office in the State were obliged -more peculiarly to comply with. The next point is, whether Jofephus under- ftood Herodotus to mean that Circumcifion was peculiar to the Priefts, And if it be true in fad:, as is ihewn above, that it was not confined to Priefts^ and that Herodotus has given no ground for fuch a diftindion ; your notion muft fall of itfelf. Jofephus indeed, in the place referred to, may be underftood of a pe- culiar obligation or abfolute neceflity which the .Priefts were under to be cir cumcifed above all -other Men -, but on another occafion, where he appeals to Herodotus^ for afHrming the Egyp- tians to he the Authors of Circumcifion to all other [^] Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. i. p. 354. c 15. Edit. Potter. Vid. it. Cotelerii Not. in Barnab. Epill. c. 9. . -^ People^ to Dr. Waterland, i^c. 91 People^ and even to the Jews^ he makes no other refledtion upon it, than that o^ fuch things every one may fay what he thinks fit [^?]. A modern Author, of more zeal than judgment, fays on the occafion •, Jofephm has taken notice of the words of Herodotus^ hat I could have wifhed^ that he had called him to account for ^heni^ and not paffed them over fo coldly — This did not become Jofephus^ on other occafions fo flout an Advocate of the Honour of his Nation \}?\ Again, You fay, the ^Egyptians did not ufc Circumcifion^ for the fake of Cleanlinefs^ as I ren- der the word ycct^doc^i^Tifl^^^ but of Purity : an Obfervation wholly groundlefs ; it being cer- tain, that the main intent of the cuftom was, not to make them more holy or pure^ but more fweet and clean •, in order to prevent fome bo- dily diflemper or inconvenience frequent in thofe warm Climates •, which is alledged by Writers as the caufe and natural reafon of the fame pra6ticc in all the neighbouring coun- tries \c\ But befides \ the PalTage itfelf, as it flands, [«J Ilf^t [Ay tirfj^y saocs-oi XiyhocroLV on uv ocvroTg ' ^oxr,. Antiq. 1. 8. c. x. §. 3. [^] De Repub. Hebrseor. 1. 2. c. 4. p. jo. [r] ^gypcii, ^thiopes, aliique ex oiiente populi ratio- nes regioni vel religion! fuoe proprias habucrunt, quibus \ diu ante tempora Abrahami ad virilium pelliculas praeci- dendas indudi cenfeantur. Nam Philo & alii circumcifi- onem inter gentes aliquas coufilio primum introduftam putant. ^z A Defence of the Letter Hands in Herodotus^ can fuggefl no other no- tion •, and all others, who have ever quoted it, have taken it in the fame fenfe that I do ; for 'tis ranked in company with fuch Cuftoms as relate folely to external Neatnefs or Ckanlinefs \a'] ; viz. the wafhing themfelves twice each day\ and as oft each night in cold water •, the conjiant wafh- ing their Cups •, their Veftments •, and the fhaving their Bodies to keep them clear of Lice and other Vermin^ &c. But you ftill blunder on and tell us, that the notion of the Egyptians was juft the fame with that of the Jews^ amongft whom it was confidered as an Emblem of Purity [b']: in which you fhew as little acquaintance with Scrip- tural or Jewifh Hifloryy as you do with the jE- gyptian: For 'tis clear from Scripture that Cir- cumcifion was not given for the fake of Purity^ but as a Sign and Seal of a Covenant between God and his People ; as an outward Mark to diftin- guifh thofe who were under that Covenant, from all other Nations whatfoever. This is the account we have of its Infbitution as well from Scripture as the Primitive Fathers. Tou Jhall circumcife^ fays God to Abraham., the fiefh putant, ad praecavendam fcilicet lepram aut carbunculum, e fordibus fub praeputio latentibus oririfolitum, &c. Spen- cer de Leg. Heb. 1, i.e. 5. §. 4. p. 58. [a] Vid. Herod. 1. 2. 37. \h'\ Reply, p. 16. to Dr. Waterland, i^c, 93 ef your forejkin^ and it fhall be a token of the Co- venant between me and you \a'\ Abraham^ fays Juftin Martyr^ received Cir- cumcifion as a Mark or Sign^ and not as of any ejficacy towards Righteoufnefs or Holinefs as both Scripture and FaEl it f elf oblige us to allow \b\ And Iren^us^ ^hat God gave it not as of any fervice to Juftice or Righteoufnefs^ but for a Mark to diflinguifb Abraham^ s Pofterity [<:]. The Rea- der will make a proper Refledlion on a Criti- cilm grounded in meer miflake both of Jewifh and jEgypian Antiquity. But the Sting is, that 1 think with the Author cf Chriftianity as old &c. which is fo far from being a Reproach whenever he thinks right, as he certainly does in fome things ; that it would be much more for your credit to do fo too, than to fpend your time and pains in maintain- ing vulgar Errors and pious Prejudices againfl plain Fad: and Pliftory : but if you would do me right, you fhould reprefent me, as think- ing with Herodotus^ Diodorus Siculus, Strabo, Pbilo^ Jofephus^ Photius^ Sir Jo. Marfham^ Dr. Spencer^ and even Calmet too, whom you re- commend to my perufal ; who, tho' he labours like yourfelf to fupport the common Hypothefis [«] Gen. xvii. ii. \b^ Dialog, cum Tryph. Par. i. p. 184. Edit. Thurlb. [r] Quoniam autem circumcifionem non quafi con- fummatricem juditiae, fed in Tigno earn dedit Deus, ut cognoicibile peifcveret genus Abraham, &c. Adv. Hsr. 1» 4, c. 30. againft o^ A 'Defence of the Letter againft Fa6t and Teflimony, yet is fo fair at the fame time as to allow a ^rtai TO TrXri^og otv iTrsXi^ocTO^ rrj? l^ovorioi^ Iw auTw ysvoy.iVT^i;. Antiq. 1. 3. c. 6. ' I but to Dr. Waterland, ^c. 107 but by divine Infpiration^ and after a Model given by God: But you mufl not expcd to per- fuade us, that Jofephus believed fo too : fince the contrary is very evident ■, and that he had ;a mind at leaft to leave a liberty and latitude in ^explaining the manner of this theocracy. Upon the whole; had you known how to expound a Paragraph rationally, by confider- ing the general Senfe of the whole, arid then connecting one part with the other; you might have faved me much Trouble and yourfelf the 5hame of expofing your v/ant of Judgment by fuch fenfelefs Cavils : and inftcad of this Outcry againft me, miift have praifed rather the Tem- per and Modefly of the Inference I draw, in recommending onely more moderate and qualified Sentiments of the divine Infpiration of Mofes^ than what are vulgarly received: for according even to your own Interpretation, does not Jofephus^ in the PafTage juft recited, ufe much more Refervc and Caution in afTerting the marvellous andfuper- natural part of Mofes^s Character ^ than what his li- teral Hijiory does ? And if fo ; the Inference is certainly juft, that it might be a hint to us, to ufe the fame Referve and Moderation too in thinking and fpeaking on the fame Subjed. But you fay, that Jofephus in this place was as far from the thought of any fuch Inference as 1 make^ as Attention or Sincerity was from me when 1 read it ; and if ever 1 had read his Je^vifh Antiquities^ Imuft know that he never repefents th^ io8 A Defence of the Letter the Law hut as given to the Jews by God himfelf^ thro* the hand of Mofes [a\ I have read his Jewifh Jntiquities •, and from that very reading have colledled the contrary ^ that his real Sen- timents of the divine Infpiratien of Mofes were very little different from what is reprefented above. For tho' he undertakes in that Work to deduce and conne6b a perpetual Hiflory of the Jews from the beginning of the World, as 'tis found in the f acred Records of the Old Tejlament ; yet he takes fuch liberty with many of the fads there recorded, by fuppreffmg fome, altering and accommodating others to the ordinary Tafle and common Senfe of Mankind, as he neither could or durft have done, had he believed them to have been really and ftri5ily effeSled by God in the very manner as the literal 'Text imports : to give one Inilance out of many. After his account of the Paffage of the Ifraelites thro^ the Red Sea, he fubjoins this Refledtion : I have given every particular of this Storyjuft as 1 found it in the Sacred Books : but let no Man ^ be furpized at the ftrangenefs of it, that fuch an ancient and innocent People fhould find a way open- ed for their efcape thro'' the Sea, either by the fpecial Will and Interpofition of God, or the ac- cidental Concurrence of Natural Caufes. Since in a like cafe as it were of yefierday the Pamphylian Sea retired before Alexander of Macedon, and open- [a] Reply, p. 22. to Dr. Waterland, iSc. 109 ed him a Pajfuge^ where there was no other way for him^ when God had a jnind to put an end to the Perfian Empire, And this is affirmed by all who have written of his Anions. But for thefe things^ let every Man take them in what Senfe he bejt likes [a]. Now 'tis impofTible that he could have left it in doubt, whether this Fad had any thing mira- culous in it or not, had he entertained any firm and certain belief of the abfolute and univerfal Infpiration of the facred Writings^ which repre- fent it as one of the moil ftgnal and illuftrious Miracles that God ever wrought by the hand of Mofes. To the Authority of Jofephus I fhall juft add that of Philo \ whofe Words, as quoted by Eu- febius^ may be rendered thus : As for the Man, whoever he was^ who gave them their Laws^ they had him in fo great Admiration, that whatfoever he approved, they approved too. Whatever there- fore he dilated to them, whether he had contrived and invented it himfelf, or had received it from the Deity, they imputed it all to God \b\ I Ihall [«] — 'EiT£ xara |3o'jA>](ny 9'fK firs v.o'.r u-jToy-xroVf Sec. ZJtc] iJ.iU rOVTOV ug iKXfUi SoKiT J'jJtACCjtX^aVfTCO. Antiq. lib. 2. c. 16. Ed. Hudfon. [^] AAA(X rov i^h u'jSpx ikeTvov o; tk '^ote r,v Q T»V vofxv^ >cai auloK 3'«Uj o'Jtu) cripo^cx E^a-j^ao-AV, w> QTi HttqIi 'i^Q^iV txc/vw x«i ^tUTer?* fciTf kv 7.iKoyi' no -^^ Defence of the Letter I jfhall make no Reflection on this PafTage, but leave it to the Reader to confider, whether it is not more reafonable, with thefe primitive and judicious Apologifts of the Jewifh Religion ^ to allow fome liberty of thinking, as to the Divi- nity of their facred BookSy than with our mo- dern Zealots to calumniate and perfecute for ever all who differ from them in Opinion about Queftions of fuch DifHculty and Uncertainty ; yet no fooner does a Man enquire with Freedom into the true State of any Scriptural Fa5f^ but. the Alarm Bell is founded, and the Clergy ad- monilhed of a dangerous Attempt againft the Authority of Mofes. But confider. Sir, that the effe6bual way of ruining a Fabrick, is to charge it with a greater Load than it was made to bear -, and the furefl Method of weakening any thing is not by reflraining it within its due Bounds, but by forcing and flretching it be-- yond what Nature and Reafon defigned it for. Now becaufe this is a Queftion of great Nice- ty and Im.portance, which you feem not much acquainted with, it may be worth while to open it a little further, and add a Word or two more before I difmils it. 'Tis the common Notion of all the Greek Fathers^ that the divine Plato had greatly ftu- toJto aTTOcv £K Tci; S'fov MccyEiv. Eufeb. Fra^par/Evang. 1. 8. ex Philone de cxitu ab >Egypto. died to Dr. Waterland, (^c, hi died the Books of Mofes^ and made much ufc of them in his own : So that Clemens of Alexan- dria and others call him the Aitick Mofes \a\ : and both Clemens and Eufebius take much pains in pointing out the particular Notions and Sen- timents which he had borrowed from Mofes \I?\. As we have feen then already from fuch Paf- fages above what is delivered of the Charader and Abilities of the firft Mofes j fo let us fee likewife what this Attick Mofes fays of the proper Qualifications and Perfe(5lions of fiich a Lawgiver. Why he fays, that he ought to con- fider and contrive nothing elfe fo much^ as to inftil fuch Notions into the People as are likely to do them the greateft good \c\ And this is exadly agreeable to the Charadler of Mofes^ as 'tis given almoft in the very Words o^ Plato by the Jewifh Writers as well as Primitive Fathers, But in order to execute his good Intentions to- wards the People, the Magiftrate or Legiflator will often find it neceffary^ according to Plato^ for the good of his Subje^ls^ to invent certain FahleSy FiElions^ or political Lies, to he propa- gated among them, as Medicine or Phyfick to oh- \ci\ No'j,a7iv;^ ^£ IIuQa yo^ii<^, avrw^u? yooi^n, Ti Efi nXarwu, y\ Ma;(r>i? arli/ti'^iov. Strom. 1. i. c. 22. Edit. Potter. [<^] Vide Clemen. Alex. ibid. c. xxv. &c. It. Prsepat. Evang. Eufeb. 1. 12. &c. \}\ iZf£ »o&u aAAo auTov dfi P- «5- as to Dr. Waterland, i£c, 119 as the Jews had, one over the whole Nation, hut one over each Province. Yet all the ill luck, I doubt, will be found at laft on your fide ; who taking your Notions from feparate PafTages of Authors, which you interpret prefently accord- ing to your own Prejudices, have happened in this Place, as in many others, to guefs quite wrong. For tho' Herodotus tells us here {_a\ that there were many Priejis to each Gody and confequently a great Number of them in the whole ; yet he muft be underftood to mean, that there was one High Prieft over thofe many or the whole Number. This is very clear from other PafTages of his Pliflory, where he plainly intimates that there was but one High Prieft ever the whole Nation, juft as there was but one King : That the Number of their High Priefts and their Kings, in a Succejfion of 341' Genera- tions, happened to be exactly equal: That each High Prieft provided a Statue of himfelf to perpe- tuate his Memory to Pofterity : And that he him^ felf was introduced by the Priefts into a large Room or l^emple, where thefe Statues were depo/ited^ and f aw 341 of Colojfean Size, the Images of fo many High Priefts in lineal Def cent from Father to Son [b]. Which cannot, I think, be appli- cable to any other High Prieft, but ]u^tfuch an one as the Jews had^ One over the whole Nation^ [a\ Herod. 1. 2. c, 37. [^J Herod. 1. 2. c. 143. H 4 Fourthly, I2P A Defence of the Letter Fourthly, the JEgyptians^ I fay, abhorred Swine's FleJJj as impure and abominable. And here indeed you own, that I deliver the true Senfe of Herodotus j to which I had added an Authority of Jcfephus to the very fame Pur- pofe. As the Fa(5t then is certain and agreed, that the jEgyptians generally abhorred Swine's Flefh^ and abjiained from it fuperftitioufly •, how can this be made an inftance of my falfifying or mifquoting Herodotus ? Why, becaufe there are three CircumJlanceSy as you obferve with your ufual Acutenefs, in which the behaviour of the Jews and ^Egyptians with regard to Swine were not alike \a\ But if there had been threefcore inflead of three^ it had been nothing at all to the purpofe, fince the Fad I contend for is allowed : All that I pretend to intimate, is, from the near Refemblance of many Cuftoms, that the Jews might probably have borrowed them from Mgjpt : You cry out on the other hand, that the Inference is U7ijujl, partial^ and contrived to deceive^ becaufe I do not fhew in all points an Identity of Cujlom. All which Cla- mour proves juft nothing but your own want of Judgment, in not refled"ing, that a Cuilom may be borrowed, and yet altered, enlarged or reftrained as the Borrower fhall afterwards find convenient. [a] Reply, p. 27. But to Dr. Waterland, tfc. izi But there is one obfervation of yours, which I can't help taking notice of here -, that fince the Cufloms which die Jews had in common with the jEgyptians^ were in ufe likewife in feveral other Countries ; why, fay you, mufi they needs have been borrowed from jEgypt rather than from any other Country \a\ ? This you repeat, and infift on again in another place [^] •, nay, you go fo far in one Inflance as to declare, that of all Countries under Heaven Mgypt was the mofl un- likely to derive the Cuftomfrom \_c\ Now I can- not for my life conceive, how 'tis pofTible for one, who knows any thing of the Jewifh Hif- toryy and has the leafl grain of Judgment, to put fo filly a Qiieftion. The Jewifh Nation was nurfed up in Mgyp from its very infancy, and during a Refidence there of above 200 Years grew up from one fingle Family into a mighty People : In all which Time, as is abovemen- tioned, they were trained in all the Cufloms^ and complied even with the Religion and Idolatry of the Country : and even after they had quitted it, they retained ftill, we find, the old fondnefs for the Cujloms, Ceremonies and TVorfhip they had been ufed to : and this not onely on their Journey, when the ImprcfTion and Memory of thofe Cufloms were ftrong on their Minds, but when they were fettled in quiet PofTeflion of the promifed Land, and formed into a regular [al Reply, p. 25. [^] Ibid. p. 42. [c] Ibid. p. 25. State ; 122 -^ Defence of the Letter State ; where they continued remarkable for nothing fo much as their Averfion to Strangers, and their Care to preferve themfelvcs feparate and clear of any Mixture with all other Nations. If this be true, as it certainly is, what ground can there pofTibly be for what you fo oft inculcate ; that they might have borrowed their Cujioms from any other Country as probably as from J^gypt ? Every Man of Senfe muft needs laugh at you for entertaining the leaft thought of its Proba- bility ; which you might however have enter- tained as long as you pleafe, had you but ex- cufed me from thinking it probable too, and not made this very Inftance, in which 1 follow Reafon^ Fa5f and Hiftory^ a Proof of my Par- tiality and Prejudice againft Mofes. Fifthly, I have pafTed over one of your Ob- fervations in my way, about the Treatment of Leprous Perfons, on purpofe to give it a parti- cular anfwer ; as it is the onely one in your Book, where your Charge upon me of mifquot- ing is fupported with any Truth or Reafon. The PafTage however is found in Herodotus^ in the very Senfe I had given to it, tho' not, it feems, among the Cufioms of Mgypt^ where I had ranged it, but of Perjia [^]. But tho' it would not perhaps be difficult to fhew, that the fame Treatment of Leprofy was pradlifed alfo jn ^gypt j yet, as the Quotation Hands, I can- [«] Reply, p. 26. not to Dr. Waterland, ^c, 123 not but own it to be the efFe6i: of Negligence, and want of Attention in me : 1 took it from my Papers, whither I had tranfcribed it, and not having the Original near me, or being in hafte to finilh what was before me, I truiled to Memory and the Perfuafion I was under, that the Fade was related of yEgypt : Which I allow to be a Fault that deferves Animadverfion, as I Ihould as frankly have done in any other Ar- ticle you charge me with, had there appeared any jufl Ground or Reafon for fuch Charge. But fmce you have taken from me one Mgyp- tian Cuftom^ I think myfelf obliged to replace it with another, viz. the Laws about Animals clean and unclean -, which the learned Cotelerius allows to have been taken probably from the Praclice of Mgypt •, to which the Hebrew Nation^ he fays, were too much addicted [^] ; and gives us a Quotation of Porphyry^ from Ch^eremon the Egyptian Hiftorian^ importing, that the Priefts of Mgypt abfiained from Ftjh^ and all four footed Beafls^ whofe Hoofs either were not cloven at all^ or cloven into many Divi/ions^ or fuch as had not Horns (or, what comes to the fame, did not chew the Cud) and all carnivorous Birds [b]. It would be endlefs to run thro' all the Jew- i[h Cufloms^ which Men of the greatell Learn- . [*i] Vid. Barnabae Epift. ex Editionc Cotelerii c. x. Not. 42. p. 30. [f] Ibid p. 36. Not; 78. i2i4 J Defence of the Letter ing and Experience in thefe ftudies have de- duced from the Pradice of Mgypt, There's fuch an Affinity^ fays Kircher^ between the Jew- ijh and Egyptian Rites, Sacrifices^ Ceremonies ; that either the Egyptians muft have Hehraifed, or the Hchrcvjs Mgyptifed [^] : But which of them followed the other in thefe Rites, is fo clearly decided by the learned Spencer^ that no Man^ mlefs fiipinely credulous^ as he fays, can believe it to have been the ^Egyptians \b\ And indeed both he and Marfham derive in a manner the "u/hole ritual Law from this very Source of Mgypt : The moveable Tabernacle^ Ark of the Covenant, Cherubims, Altar, Sacrifices, Prieftly Veftrnenis, the Sabbath, Feflivals, Wafhings, Pu- rifcations^ Oracles, Prophecy, Divination, &c [c]. You go on to obferve, that I fhew my Skill cr great Negligence of quoting, in falfly rendering into Englijlj the Latin Tranflation of Maimonides'* s Words [d]. Hard indeed, not to allow me capable of tranflating even Latin : But what- ever you pleafe to allow, I pretend to a Skill which you are not yet Mafter of, of rendering the true Meaning of a PafTage agreeable to the [a] Propyl. Agonift, c. 2. apud Oedip. uEgypt. T. i. [/i] Nemo veio nifi fupine credulus, opinari poteft iEgyptios, &c. de Leg. Hebraeor. 1. 3. c. 2. Sec. 2. p. 650. . [f] Ibid. 1. 3. c, 3. p. 663, &c. — It. Marfh. Can. Chron. [d] Reply, p. 29, general to Dr. Waterland, i^c, 12^ general Notion conveyed by it, without trifling and dwelling on the lefs fignificant words, fo as to hurt the main and obvious Senfe of the whole. Let us try your Criticifm by this Rule. Spencer fpeaking of Circumcifion in the Words of Maimo7iides [t^], calls it res duriffimd ^ difficillima •, here we have its Chara6ler and Defcription •, and the main Notion of the Paffage is, that it was a mojl hm-Jh and mofi hazardous thing : Now is it pofTibie that a thing in its Nature the mojl dangerous^ could ever be performed without fome Danger ? But / change^ you fay, the rejlraining Word^ fome- times with Hazard^ into fome Hazard : Where every body but yourfelf will fee the propriety of it, in order to make the Sentence confiftent with itfelf : for as foon as I difcover the true Sentiment of an Author, 'tis enough for me to catch hold of that, and not like your folemn Pedants think myfelf obliged to fol- low the very Inaccuracies and Perplexities of the Original. But you urge me ftill and fay, that I fhew my ufual Dexterity in the ufe of a Palfage taken from Light foot \h\^ on whofe Authority I afTert, that the frequent Mortality occafioned by Cir- cumcifton produced aftanding Law^ that when any [^] Res duriffima & difficillima, nee fine vit» difcri' «r/?ne quandoque fubeunda. [i] Reply, p. 3<5. Perfon 126 A Defence of the Letter Perfon had lofi three Children fuccejfvuely by it, he was to be excufed from circumcifing the refi, in confequence of which there were actually many un- circumcifed among them, &c. Where Light foot^ you obferve, fpeaks not a word either of ajland^- ing Law, or the frequent Mortality of Circumcifion, But does not the Cafe itfelf fpeak neceflarily of both ? And can any Man be fo filly as to think, that by a flanding Law I could mean a Law of Mofis ? No, the frequent Mortality oc- cafioned by Circumcifion produced a Judgment or Decifion, as you own, of the Rabbins or Jewifh Dolors, who were both Interpreters of the Law and Guides of Confcience, that when a Man had lofi three Children fuccejfvuely by Cir- cumcifion, he fhould be excufed from circumcifing the reft. This I call a flanding Law^ or PraBice or Cujiom ; grounded on a Decree of the proper Judges in the Cafe. But Lightfoot, you fay, does not fpeak a Word of the frequent Mortality of it. But does not the Fadl he mentions as fomctimes happening of three Children dying of it fucceffivly neceffarily imply and infer it ? Al- low the Cafe to have happened, tho' but fel- dom, and the other will follow of courfe : And here you fhew, what you do indeed in every other Place, that your Cavils are founded one- ly in your own Miflake of the very thing yoi; cavil at : For you charge me as producing this Paflage to prove, that the Cafe of three ChiU dren's dying fuccejfively by Circumcifion in'as fre^ quffit to Dr. Waterland, ^c. 127 q^uent with them [a] : Whereas all I endeavour to fhew, is, that the Mortality of Circiimcifion fnufi needs be frequent^ becaufe that Cafe did fome- times happen : No body can imagine the Cafe itfelf to be very common, tho' you allow five or fix inftances of it on Record ; and if no moi?c had ever happened, they are more than fuffici- ent to fliew, that Circumcifion was ordinarily dangerous and often mortal: You will hardly deny the Sinall Pox to hz frequently mortal^ yet few or none perhaps know live or fix Cafes of three ■Children dying fuccefft-vely of it in the fame Fami- ly : which yet happened fo often, according to Lightfoot^ thro' the danger of Circumcifion^ that there were many uncircumcifed on that account both of the Friefis and People. And thus the Words of Maimonides and PalTage of Lightfoot, in fpite of your Cavils, demonilrably prove all I contend for, the frequent Mortality of Circum- cifion, I have now gone thro' your Criticifms on yny §uotations^ and have Ihewn them to be both falfe and trifling, void both of Learning and Judgment : But this. Sir, ought not to refle6l •>fo much Shame on you, as the want of Can- dour and Truth, and the love of Calumny you betray in the Management of them. At fet- mg out you would perfuade your Reader, that there's fcarce one ^otation^ which 1 have not; {a] Reply, p. 31. abufed 128 ^ Defence of the Letter abufed and mifreprefented ^ yet out o^ four f core you attempt onely fome flight Objedions to fifteen^ as you reckon, but as every body elfe will count, thirteen onely; the two laft, as we fliall prefently fee, being not exceptions to my Rotations, (as to enhance the Number, you ablurdly call them) but to my Realbnings : And of thefe thirteen^ there's but 2ipoor fingle one left you, in which you have fliewn indeed fome want of attention or too much hafte in me, but no poffible fufpicion of any wilful Mifreprefen- tation. Is this then the part of a Man of Honour or Integrity to calumniate fo ftrongly on a Foundation fo weak ? Is this fuitable to the Gravity of the Perfon you aflume, and your conjuring me fo folemnly in God's Name^ and for the fake of Sincerity^ to weigh things better^ and report Fa5fs more fairly \a\ ? Will not the Reader be apt to entertain the fame Sufpicion of your Religion, as he mufl before have done of your Learning, that with all this Outcry about it, you have no real Efleem or Concern' for it \ for which Refledion he will find ftill but too much Reafon in what follows ? You proceed to call over again the Story of Babel^ and declare my account of that Confufwn to be truly a confufed one [li] : where for the fakp of a flupid Jefl:, you put your Judgment to Tome rifk with the Reader; who may not per- [a] Reply, P. 40, 41- [^] Reply, P. 31. haps to Dr. Waterlanp, &c. 129 haps be of Opinion, that my way of writing is fo confufed as you would intimate : But to come to the Point. I fhall firft confider what you objed: to my Account of this Fa6l, and then examine the Merit of your own Expofition of it. I have faid in my Letter^ that the Sons of Noah were fo far from any Refolution of not difperjing themfelves^ that before the Confufion of Babel they had already begun to difperfe^ and aEiually fent off a great Colony from the Eafi to the Land of Shinaar [(^]. For this I produced the concur- rent Teftimony both of Proteftant and Papifi, both Patrick and Calmet\ and thought myfelf very orthodox and fafe under the Shelter of fuch Authority; but all, it feems, in vain; fince the ^efiion^ you fay [^], is not what any Com" mentator has fancied^ but what the Scripture has taught about the Matter. How hard is it to deal with fuch thorough- paced Divines ? Com- mentators are at fome times every thing-, ac others nothing with them. Do6lor Waterlani Contemns his Adverfary for having no Acquaint^ ance with them [c] ; and you contemn me for being acquainted v/ith them : The Dodtor fays, that there^s not one Commentator of Note., but would have fet his Antagonifi right [i] •, you pretend to fliew, that 1'wo of the beji Note have [fl] Letter to Dr. Waterland, P. 41. [^] Pvcply, p. 32.[<:] Script. Vind. Par. !. p. S. [\ T»5? TTf^l TO if^ov OLyi^i[x<; xa» pu^iw* a,i KccSciPov^ ciTrodil^cii [^]. Hen, Stephens's Thefaurus furnifhes feveral inftances from Plato^ Xenophon^ &c. where he renders the word by facio^ efficioy reddo, creo, conjli- tuo : that is, to make^ effe^, create, conftitute : I ihall juft mention one, where Xenophon fpeak- ing of the proper choice of Maflers for the Youth, fays, that fuch of the older fort ufed to he chofen, who were the moft likely to make their children the beft men : T^g Txrai^ug (SeAji^ag cc\f ccTToSuKvvveti [c]. And a little after, for the fame thing, he ufes, /3gA7*V^? -araf g;^giy. . [«] Antiq. 1. 3, 4. [il Plut. in Vit*. Lycurg. p. 41. [cj Inftitut. Cyri. 1. i . But 2oS Some Remarks on a Reply to the "Defence, But you tell us withal, that the old Interpre- ter had rendered this place, by declaring his Government a neocracy : an Authority I doubt, that will add very little weight to your caufe ; Scaliger declares your old Interpreter to have been a great blunderer [^j. And for what reafon have the Critics difcarded him, but that they found him to be fo j and his verfion here con- trary to fenfe, and contrived onely to ferve an Hyfothefts ; which however true, cannot derive any additional credit from a falfe tranflation ? Have not Hudfon and Havercamp^ the learned Editors of Jofephus^ tranflated the word, as I have given it ? And did they not underftand Greeks and the Author they have publifhed ? You mufl reply diftindtly to all this, before you can make any imprefTion in favour of what you advance. You mufl Ihew the contei^t to give no colour to my expofition : you mufl fhew the word it f elf to bear no fuch meaning : you mufl fhew that men of the firfl name in learning not to have under flood Greek : and when you have done this, you may then claim the credit of re- floring your old Interpreter to his old Honours, In the mean while, Ihould the reader allow my traflation to be jufl, he mufl allow withal, what you feem to do too, that it clinches the whok fara^rapb to the fenfe 1 have given of it. \d\ IStMii. Hudf. Edit. Jofcph. Ilhall of the Letter io Dr. Waterland7 209 I fiiall now follow you through the examina- tion of what you call the moft important part of my Defence \ in which you charge me with at- tempting more openly to weaken the authority of Mofes [^] : where after you have colledled in- to one view, what you call my fcattered Senti- ments, you draw up the ftate of the controverfy into two points [b]. i. Whether Mofes'j account of the Creation and Fall of Man is to be underftood literally or no. 2 . Whether the Religion and Lawi which Mofes delivered to the Jews had a divine Origin and Authority. To thefe two points 1 fhali anfwer diftindtly \ and to fhew how ready I am to humour you, as far as I am able, will give what you require, a full and explicit account of my thoughts upon them* But in order to clear my way to them, it will be neceflary to confider what you have objedt- ed, as ufual, to two quotations of mine that re- late to the fame fubjedt* In fupport of my expofition of the paragraph^ we have been examining, and to fhew, that Jofephus had put Mofes on the fame foot with Minos and the other old Lawgivers \ I took oc- cafion to obferve, that this was fo far from weakening Mofes'j Authority^ that it tended to firengthen it with thofe, to whom it was ad- drefled j who had the highefl efteem and opi- [a] Reply to Defence^ p. 46. [}'] Ibid. p. 48* . Vol. III. O nioa 2IO So7ne Remarks ^;/ ^ Reply to the Defence nion of thofe very Lawgivers, and were fo far from being fcandalized at the fi^ions contrived by them for the good of the people \ that they bragged of them the more for that very reafon, as the greatefl henefaulors of mankind. This I con- firmed from Biodcnis Siculus, Plutarch, Plato. But to thefe, you fay [a], 'tis not worth while to anfwer •, they are Heathen authorities, and I am welcome to them : and as much Heathens as they are, they are welcome, I allure you, to me : I am proud of their acquaintance ; and though I do not intend to die in their faith, yet refolve to live in their friendlhip. Of thefe Plato particularly, who has written en Government more fully than any of the An- tients, affirms it to be the chief duty of a Magi- Jlrate, to contrive fuch Fables, Pinions or Political Lies, as he thinks the moft efFedual to inftil into the people a reverence for the Laws, and difpofe them to a willing obedience to them. Now the Greek Fathers I obferved, were pof- fefled likewife with a common opinion, that Plato had diligently ftudied the Books of Mofes, and copied fo m.any of his notions from them, that he was called by fome the Attick Mcfes : and that Clemens of Alexandria and Eufebius do in a manner afTert, ov fay at leafi much the fame thing, that Plato" s notion of the ufe of thofe Fa- bles and Pinions was borrowed from the Mofaic [rt] Reply to Defence, p. 6i. Writ- o//^] Reply to Def. p. S^- 55« [r] Dcf. p. 17, 18. y] Reply to Def. p. 55. fhould of the hLTTEK /itraor dinar y mid miraculous manner was favoured^ afjified^ and infpired by God in the infiitution of his Laws and Religion^ and confequcntly had a Divine Authority^ which is frequently appealed to and confirmed in the New Tejiament, But as- 'tis neceflary to believe of the Scri- ptures in general^ that they are divinely infpired ; fo 'tis as necefiary, from the evidence of plain facts and declarations in thofe very Scriptures^ to allow fome exception to the general rule ; nor to infift, as fome do, that every word^ fentence^ narration^ hiftory -, or indeed every Booky we call canonical^ was dicfated by God. This is the onely notion exprefly affirm.ed by me, that can be thought to weaken in any man- ner the Divine Authority of the Chriftian Reli- gion : and 'tis indeed the onely one I ever in- tended to affirm on the fubjedt : and if any thing be faid or pulhed further by me in either of my Pieces, than what the confequences of this pofition will fairly juftify, I retract and dif- claim it. Here ef the Letter to Dr. W.aterlafd. 235 Here then I fix my foot -, and take upon me to aflert, that we are under no obligation of Reafon or Religion to beHcve, that the Scri- ptures are of ahfoliite and univerfal Infpiration ; or that every pajfage in them was didtated by a Di- vine Spirit : and this I do from no other mo- tive or view in the world, but a firm perfuafion of the truth of it ; and a perfuafion likewifc, that the allowance and declaration of that truth is not onely ufeful, but necefTary to a rational De- fence of Religion, Now as this, I fay, is the onely opinion, that I have diredly aHerted in this Controverfy, without the leafl notice taken of it by you in either of your Replies -, fo did I not fee you dif- pofed rather to cavil at trifles than to join ijfue on any queftion of importance, I might rea- fonabjy take it for a proof, that you look upon it as orthodox and inoffenjive. However, fince . pafTion and prejudice have fo great a power in the world ; and the feeds of rage may be alrea- dy at work in the breafls of fome readers on the bare mention of fuch a proportion j I cannot but think it prudent, before I enter on any ex- plication of it, to place in front before me an authority or two of great name, in order to break the force of the ftorm, which, by what I have already experienced, I have too much reafon to be apprehenfive of. The ^3^ ^ome Remarks on a Reply to the Defence The firfl authority I fhall produce is of Arch- billiop 'Jillotfon -, whofe words, in a Sermon on this very-Subjed:, are as follow. 1 ftjall onely fay this in general \ that confidering the end of this Inffiration^ which was to inform the world certainly of the mind and will of God, it is yieceffary for every Alan to believe^ that the in- fpired Penmen of Scripture were fo far ajfified as was neceffary to this end : and he that thinks up- on good grounds y that this end cannot be fecuredy unUfs every word and fyllable were immediately dilated, he had reafon to believe it was fo : but if any Man upon good grounds thinks the end of writing the Scripture may be fufficiently fecured without that, he hath no reafon to conclude, that God, who is not wanting in what is neceffary, is guilty of doing what is fuperfluous. And if any Man is of opinion, that Mofe? might write the Hifiory of thofe a^fions, which he himfelf did or was prefent at, without an immediate Revelation of them \ or that Solomon, by his natural and acquired IVifdom might fpeak thcfe wife fayings which are . in his Proverbs ; or the Evangelifis might write what they heard and faw, or what they had good affurances from others -, as St, Luke tells he did : or that St. Paul might write for his Cloak and Parchtnents at Troas, and falute by name his friends and brethren -, or that he might advife Timothy to drink a little wine, &c. with- out the immediate dilate of the Spirit of God, he feems plain fa5i ^ that [a\ Exod. xvHl. 24. [^] Deut. i. 13. [c] Antiq. 1. 3. c. 4. Mofes of the Letter to Dr. Waterland; 241 Mofes in the cafe of an Inftitution of great im- portance to the zvhole body of his people, and to the good order and government of the Community^ had not the afliftance of any divine Infpiration^ but derived the whole thought and defign of it^ from the advice and counfel of a wife and pru- dent man, of whom all that we know is, that he was Frieft of Midian. If then there was no Infpiration in the thing itfelf, there could be no bccafion for any in the narration of it •, and confequently Mofes was not conflantly and uni- formly infpired by God^ either in what he infti- tuted, or what he has related. As to what Bilhop 'Tillotfon has fiiggefted in the other cafe of the Evangelifts ; and Grotius more particularly in that of St. Luke 5 'tis cer- tain, that there is in xhtfeveral Gofpels fueh a dif- agreement and variation in the accounts of the fame faEls^ as cannot by any wit of man be cleared from the charge of Inconjiftency, As in the Ge- nealogy of Chrifl [^] j in the account of the wo- man who poured a box of ointment \b\ \ of two men pojfeffed with Devils [c ] -, of two blind by the way fide [^] ^ of the thieves on the Crofs [e'] ; of the time and hour of ottr Saviour^s cruci" [a] Matth. i. i. Luke iii. 24. Ih] Match, xxvi. 6. Mar. xiv. 3. Luke vii. 38. John xii. 1. [c] Match, viii. 28. Luke vHi. 26. [J] Matth. XX. 30. Mar. x. 46. Luke xviii. 35. ^e] Matth. xxvii. 44. Mar. xv. 32. Luke xxiii. 39. Vol. III. Q^ fixion -, 242 Some Retnarks on a Reply to the Defence fixion \a\ ; of the circumftances of what faffed at his Septilchre \b\ &c. The Commentators^ I know, have with fruit- lefs pains ftrained hard to reconcile thefe diffe- rences ; and work them all up into one uniform and conjiflent narration : but it had been, in my opinion, of more ferviee to Religion^ had they been content rather to acknowledge fairly, what cannot be denied honeftly, than labour as they do to fupport notions in oppofition to things \ fyjiems in contradidion to fa5fs. For all thefe variations, as they afFe6t onely the cir- cumftances^ and not the reality of the fa5ls them- f elves ; fo they are fo far from hurting the caufe cf Chriflianityy or calling any hlemifh on the vera- city of the Evangelifls^ that they the more ef- fedlually confirm it. I'his very things fays The- cphyla^^ gives the ftronger proof of their integri- ty^ that they have not agreed in all points ; for ctherwife they might be fufpe5fed to have written by compact \c\ Mark is obferved by all Expojitors to tread fo clofely on the fleps of Matthew, and to agree fo minutely with him in the circumftances and even words of many of his narrations j that {«] Mar. XV. 25. John xix. 14. [^] Matth. xxviii. 2. Luke xxiv. 4. John xx. 11. T« TrdvTX w/Ac(f>«v)j(rctv, &c. Theophyl, Prooem. in Matt. fome ^//i?^ Letter /^ Dr. Waterland. 243' fome believe him to have had the ufe of Mac- thew'j Gofpel towards the forming his own : and what does Religion gain by the bargain ? What fruit does it reap from this great harmony ? Why, to find Mark's authority dimimjhin^ in propor- tion to his exaB agreement with Matthew, and the character of an Evangelifi dvv^indling into that of a 'Tranfcriber •, which the Criticks gene- rally impute to him [<^]. The cafe would be ftill worfc, were the fame minute agreement ob- ferved in the other G off els ; and the ftrong foundation of a Quadru-ple 'Teflimony would by that means be reduced to the queftionable cre- dit of a fingle Evidence •, fo that as Dr. Ham^ mond has judicioufly remarked -, thefe variatioits in the Evangelifis'- were neceffary to make their teflimonies fever al^ and fo to give them the greatef authority by the number of them [b]. But tho' thefe little inconfiflencies in the Gofpels cannot be of any dillervice, but of real ufe to Religion •, yet they effedlually confute the com- [a\ Marcus pedifTequus & breviator ejus videtur, Au- guji. de Conf, E'van. I. lip. 3. Marci Evangelium ejus, quod a Matthtco proditum eft, Tideri potell Epitome. Erafm. in Luc. i. i . Marcus autem Graece compendium magig hiftoriae, quam hiftoriam fcripferat. Grot. Ibid. Ufum efle Marcum Matthaei Evangelic, apertum facit collatio. Grot, in Mar. i. [^] Hammond^ Prsef. to Annotat. on TV/. Gofpei, p. (i 2 mon 244- ^ome Remarks on a Kl?ly io the Defence mon notion and hypothefiSy that the Evangelifii in compofing them were under the perpetual influence of a Divine^ unerring Spirit. For as Bifliop Tillotfon reafons above, if they had been dbfclutely infpired^ they miift neceiiarily have agreed as ahfolutely in their feveral Stories : but fince they ^rt very far from agreeing in their ac- counts of v:hat our Saviour faid, 'tis impolTible that thcyfJjculd all be infpircd^ as 'tis impofTible that they fhould all be in the right. This con- ckifion is clear and evident to every Man's fenfe and rcaibn \ as certain, as the fads, 'tis grounded on, are certain : allow but the fa6ts, and you of courfe eilablifh this confequence. And in truth, whatever any Divines think fit to impute to the Evangelifisy the Evangelifis them- felves are fo far from pretending to this privi- lege, of univerfal Infpiration or ahfolute Infalli- hility., that they in effed difclaim it •, and put their whole credit on a foundadon meerly hu- man, and common to all other Writers •, viz. their capacity or ability to know the truth of what they deliver., and their integrity in delivering it to the beji of their knovAedge [ct\ St. PiPJily we know, declares himfclf on f.'- veral occafions dcflituie of divine Infpiration. In the Epiflle to the Galatiansy Ifpeak, fays he, /ifter the manner of men \_b\ Where Jerom ob- ferves, that he makes good what he fays., and by [tf] Luke i. 1,2. Jo. xix. 35. it. xxi. 24.. it. i Ep. Jo. i. I, 2, 3. [^] Gal. iii. 15. his of the Letter to Dr. Waterland. 245 his low and vulgar reafoning^ and the ijirpropsr application of certain words, might have given offence to prudent men^ had not he prefaced^ as he doeSy hy difavowing all pretence to JDivine Infpira^ ticn [/']. Mzny fa^s and paffages might be produced from the Old and New TeJ{ar,ient^ to fhcw, that the Sacred PVriters could not be iiniverfally in- fpired : but I have faid enough to declare my own opinion, as well as to give a fhort view of ^he grounds on which 'tis built, v/hich I fhall always be ready to explain more at large, if ever I am challenged to it by any Writer worth my notice. I have now gone through all, that I found BecefTary to remark on your fecond Reply, What I have omitted to take notice of, was not for want of a proper anfwer, but that I thought it either too trifling to deferve any •, or that it had been fufficiently anfwered before. And after 4II this fquabbling, the ftate of the que- f];ion8 affirmed by me in the Difpute ftands thus : [a] Unde manifeflum eft, id fecifle Apoftolum quod promifit : nee reconditis ad Galatas ufum efTe fenfibus, fed quotidianis & vilibus, & quae poflent, nifi praemififlet, fecundum hominem dicoy prudentibus difplicere, Hier. Comm. in Gal. 3. Op. T. 4. Q 3 I. That 2^6 Seme Remarks on ^ Reply to the Defence 1. That the Jews borrowed fome of their Cere- monies and Ciijioms from ^gypt. 2. That the Egyptians were in pojfejfwn of Arts and Learning in Mofes'j time. 3. That the Primitive Writers., in order to vindicate Scripture., thought it necefj'ary in fome cafes to recur to Allegory. 4. That the Scriptures are not of ahfolute and univerfal Infpiration. Thefe are the chief if not the onely fa^s, that I have in any manner declared for in my 'Two Pieces : and after all that has been faid, I do not find the leaft reafon to change my opinion in any of them : they all fband in the end of the Controverfy, as firm as they did in the be- ginning ; as every reader will obferve : and what greater proof can be given of the imperti- nence of Two Replies., than that they have left the principal Fa^s., in difpute, in the fame ft ate as they found them ? If therefore. Sir, you ever attempt a third., it will be expeded, that you exprcdy and diredly attack thefe very Fa^s., or elfe your attempt will be nothing at all to the purpofe. I muft obferve likewife, that, after all this clamour and fenfelefs charge of Infidelity., I have fhewn my Sentiments to be entirely agreeable, to v/hat the zealous and learned Advocates of Chri-- flianity have clearly aflcrted in all ages, as ne- ceflary of the Letter to Dr. Waterland. 247 ceflary to a rational defence of it. If Religion indeed confifts in what our modern Apologifis feem to place it, the depretiating moral Duties^ and the depreffing natural Reafon •, if the duty of it be, what their pra6lice feems to intimate, to hate and perfecute for a different way of thinking in points, where the beft and wifeft have never agreed ; then I declare my felf an Infidel^ and to have no fhare of that Religion. But if to live flri^ly and think freely -, to pra6tife what is morale and to believe what is rational^ be con- fiftent with the fincere profeffion of Chrifiianity ; then I fhall always acquit myfelf like one of its trueft Profeffors, 0.4 RE- REMARKS ON SOME OBSERVATIONS, Addrefled to the Author o F T H E LETTER T O Dr. TTjrERLJND. By the Author of the Letter, REMARKS ON SOME OBSERVATIONS, &c TFIE Letter to Dr. W, had been pub- lifhed near three years, and the Con- troverfy, that followed it, quite over and almofl forgotten, when thefe Ohfervations upon it appeared in print : and as there feem'd to be very Uttle prudence in reviving a debate that had been managed with fo much heat •, fo it was reafonable, after fo long an interval, to expedl at lead a calm and difinterefted enquiry into the Hate of it, and the moments of truth produced on either fide. But inftead of this, I was furprized to find no argument of Learning, no point of Religion treated in them •, nothing by which the pub- lick could either be entertain'd or edified ; no- thing but a virulent, malicious invedlive •, to prove the purpofe of my writings, and even my heart to he intirely infidel, [p. lo.] As to the merit of the performance, 'tis much below my notice % nor fhould I have taken the trouble of animadverting upon it, but §5^ R^niarks on feme Ohfervations^ addrejfed to the but for the occafion of opening my mind more clearly in fome points wherein I find my felf xnifreprefented •, as well as to expofe more diftindly to publick view, that genuine Spirit of Modern Orthodoxy and its Advocates, which I have declared againft fo freely, as per- nicious to publick peace and liberty : for had this Author written on purpofe to confirm the charadler I have given of it, he could not have done it more efie6lually, than by producing this original to confront with my pidure. He fets out by declaring, that the profefTion I make of an impartial love for truths encouraged him to make this addrefs to me, in hopes of drawing from me an ingenuous confefiion of my errors ^ and he opens his fecond paragraph by obferving, that / can tetrad an error of in- advertence with a tolerable good grace : this had, fbmc appearance of candour \ and flattered flill the hopes I had entertain'd of a temperate re- view of the controverfy ♦, but he fcarce pro- ceeds a line farther, before his Orthodox Spirit begins to work ; and the encouraging hopes conceived of me in the firll paragraph, become improbable in the fecond, quite defperate in the third, where I am declared the lafi man,, who will own the force of any conviBion •, who would fooner give up every article of faiths than fart with one doit of admiration. [2] And as the Spiritual Thermometer rifes, with the increaf- ing heat of his zeal, fo my charadlcr gradually finks. Author of the Letter to Br. WaterlaMd. 25 J finks, from rude to prophane ; [9] from profane to infidel •, [10] nay much worfe than infidel ; [3 9, 40] fo profligate, that the meekeft man alive can*t help being provok'd at me -, [9] that charity it- felf can make no excufe for me ; [11] and fo abandoned at lafl, that 'tis not pofTible for me to believe a Gcd. [23, ^(^.^ He allows, that I have argued againft the Infidel plan in a manner firiUly concliifive \ [5] that I declare fnyfelf a Chriftian -, am angry for being barely fufpe5fed of the contrary \ [4] that / difavow all notions derogatory to the true honour of Mofes : [21] and where my words and adions fo well agree, there was fome room furely for a charitable thought of me ; fome ground to think that I could not be in the fame fentiments with the man I was confuting,; yet he makes no fcruple to affirm, that Charity itfelf cannot excufe me j that "'tis no breach of it to believe me an infidel. 'Tis plain that his cha- rity muft be of a quite different kind from that which St, Faul recommends, that which fuffer- eth long^ and is kind -, that thinketh no evil -, that believeth all things \ hopeth all things. [i Cor. xiii.^ But how is it after all that he proves mc to be an Infidel ? becaufe I differ from thofe, who affume to themfelves the title of Orthodox, in my notions of Infpiration and the necejfity of it \ in which the writers of all ages have differed from 254 Remarks on fome Ohfervations^ addrejfed to the from each other, without any fuch imputation ; and the Divines are fo divided at this day, that many will think me the founder Chriftian, for the very fame caufe that he excludes me from the number of them. Were it worth while to retort the charge on himfelf, I could do it with much more reafon, not by any cavils, or di- llindions, which few people underftand -, but from plain and evident principles in which all Chriftians agree ; or to ufe his own words, from every dajh of his pen -y his envenomed pages ; [2, 40] inveterate fpite, malice, and the want of every Chriflian grace, fupplied onely by a bi- gotted Jewijh zeal^ and the pretext of an Ortho- dox Faith, The caufe of all this rage againil me is my treating Dr. fV. it feems, in fo rude and con- temptuous a manner •, [p. 4] and with fuch ungen- teel language as eyes were never furfeited with. [7] Yet this rudenefs and ftrange language of mine amount to nothing more than to diill^ dogmatic^ pedantic^ ^/^^//^i [2 J names, not applied to Dr. IV. but in general onely, to certain Divines, who by their method of vindicating Religion, feem to have a jufh title to them. So weak and bkint is my poor fplcen, for want of an Ortho- dox edge ; for want of being temper'd in that holy fire! but I muft needs be an unequal - ^ match for writers, trained and difciplin'd in all the arts ot fcolding : as in a fam'd Archdeacon's late charge to his Clergy : where inftead of in- ftrudting Author of the Letter to Br, Waterland. 255 llruding them in Chriftian principles •, how to overcome evil with good ; to recommend Re- ligion by their pradlice •, and conquer the pre- judices of its enemies by the innocence of their lives ; to excell in virtue and learning -, ^c, inftead of this, I fay, the whole purpofe of his harangue is to exhort them to call names ftoiitly^ and to fcold manfully : wherever they find a Deifi to call him roundly an Atheifl -, and a man who believes mthing^ more credulous^ than if he be- lieved every thing, [Dr. W.\ fecond Charge, p. 7, 21.] But whatever harm my malice defign'd to Dr. W, it has quite defeated itfelf, by giving the alarm to fuch able fens and learned hands to come in to his ajfifiance ; [p. 6] and to this Great Orator of ours to celebrate his praifes with fo much eloquence. An excellent perfon ; un- wearied in his refearches of ufeful fcience •, a fuccefs- ful defender of one important Article \ and a feafo- nable Vindicator of the Scriptures in general, [4] Of learnings indufiry^ exa5lnefs of judgment re- markably great and extenjive, [6] one of the great-, efi fcholars and Divines of the age, [7] &e. but the peculiar merit of the Dodor, for which all the world, he tells us, has reafon to thank him, is his wonderful art of inventing fo many different folutions to the fame difficulties \ and diverfifying his arguments, fo that fome or other may hit and affect men of all tempers and difpofitions, [6] As if the Advocates of Religion were to confider onely 256 Remarks on fome Ohfervations^ addrejfed to the onely what is palatable •, not what is true ^ and to apply to the afFedtions, not to the reafon of men : for let his folutions be never fo many ; his arguments never fo diverjified 5 ^tis pbflible, that they all may be falfe \ and almofl certain, that no more than one of them can be true : but no matter for that, if they hit merCs tempers and juit their apprehenjionsy 'tis juit the fame, we fee, to this pious Obfervator. But though Dr. JV, with all his (kill can fur- nifh nothing to pleafe my palate : yet he has the happinefsy it feems, to fee all his Explications of Scripture confirmed by able pens and learned hafids : [6] and for this we are referred to tht AuthoC of Revelation examined with candour. A fingle Author indeed, but of weight enough to fup- ply the place of many. For whatever he may fay of Dr. JV. *tis this Author, I know, who pafTes with our Obfervator and all others of his principles, for the very Hero of modern Ortho- doxy ; the fcourge of Infidels \ allowed to have a far better fancy fur ingenious folutions than all thd other vindicators put together. I am angry, he fays, with Dr. JV, becaufe he excels in his profeffwn^ writes with fuperiot lea7'ningy and what is more unpardonable ^ believes what he writes, [8] As to his fuperior learnings I have no intention to difpute it with him ; ef- pecially if 'tis to be meafured by a fuperiority of his Faith, My Faith is of an humble kind i claims Author of the Letter to Dr, Waterland. 257 claims no other merit, than of being a flave to my reafofi •, to whofe didlates it pays an abfolute fubmifllon : whatever my reafon declares to be true, I cannot help believing ; what it declares to be othervvife, 'tis not in my power to be- lieve, though all the rewards in the world wxre offer' d me. If Dr. W.'s Faith be of the fame kind with mine ; a principle grounded on the perception of truth •, it might be reafonable to allow from a fuperiority of his Faith ^ a fiiperiority of Know- ledge % and whenever I fail fhort of him, I could onely fay, what was faid to one, who was affirming a ilrange flory •, you^ who know the fa£l to be true, have more reafon to believe it^ than /, who do not : in the mean while, all that I can fay, is, that if it be not in our power to believe what we pleafe, and if all rational faith muft be the effed of rational convidtion, then to believe or not to believe, as 'tis a thing indifferent and no way criminal, fo ought to make no difference of character among: reafonable men : whoever takes pains to in- form himfelf, and believes on the bed informa- tion, whatever be the fum of his faith, is cer- tainly the foundefl believer •, and generally fpeaking, it feems to be in minds, as 'tis in bodies, a fure proof of foftnefs, v/here every thing that ftrikes them, is apt to make an im- prefTion. Vol. Ill: R Were 258 Rem.v'ks on fame Ohfervatlons^ addrejfed to the Were I to guefs at the chara6ler of our Oh- fervator^ by the charader of his writing ; I fliould take him for fome young, academical Adventurer ♦, who had been drawing out the flowers of his rhetorick, and emptying his Common-place- book againfl me: Procruftes \ Salmoneus -, flaynmas Jovis^ fonitus olympi ; 72ec lex juftior ulla^ &c. [p. 3, 21, 40] ; the trite examples of every boy's declamation, are the onely inftances he has given of his great eru- dition. His foloecifms and blunders in language, and in fenfe, when he labours moft to raife his ftyle, confirm the fame conjedlure. He talks [39] of eyes furfeiting with language -, [7] of dirt recoiling without reaching the mark^ [8] of fire a refervoir to lodge infe5lion in^ [40] &:c. re- fervoirs of water we often hear of ; but this of fire is an invention of his own •, and the reft of the paragraph is a piece of nonfenfe fo fublime, that without attempting any explica- tion of it, I fhall lay it before the reader juft as I find it. 'The waters^ earth and heavens have been fujficiently polluted already \ and this element onely remains to purify the reft^ and dif- perfe the pejiilential vapours^ which your enve- nomed pages have fcattered in the world. [40] Thefe abfurdities in ftyle and fenfe naturally lead me to think of fgme forward youthful writer j •Author of the Letter to Br. Waterland. 259 writer ; but when I confider his high opinion and great conceit of his own underilanding ; [10, 22, 34^ his progrefs in Orthodoxy, his fiaming zeal and holy fury that animate every page ; things unknown and unnatural to a boy •, I am forced to turn my thoughts to one of more years and experience : and fliould be much concerned for the fake of the Uni- verfity which I love ; if any member of it, who fupports any charadler, or enjoys any honours there, fhould be found capable of fo wretched and contemptible, as well as fo malicious and wicked a performance. But 'tis time to leave what is perfonal, and examine the little of reafoning and argument he pretends to ; which confifts of two points. 1. That I am an Infidel ; labouring to weaken the authority of Scripture, and by confequence the foundation of Chri- ftianity. 2. That my book therefore ought to be burnt and myfelf baniih'd, agreeably to my own reafoning againft the Author of Chriftianity as old^ &c. For the proof of my infidelity he appeals to a palTage of the Letter to Dr. F/, wherein 'tis faid, that the example of Jofephus^ a learned and zealous Jew, anight teach us to entertain more moderate and qiialified fentimenis of the divine origin of the Law^ and the divine Infpiration of R 2 Mof^s. 5^o Remarks on feme Ohfervations^ addrejfed to the Mofes. Upon which he begs leave to ajk this 'plain queftion^ fufficient, he thinks, to confound me. What can you mean by more moderate and qualified fentimentSy but that the Law had no divine origin^ its Founder no divine infpiration ; fince there can be no medium between divine and not di^ vine? [p. 15] I have already explain'd my meaning very fully and clearly on this head \a\ \ but fmcc he either cannot or will not comprehend me, I am content to declare it once more : That whereas the modern Advocates of Chrifti- anity infift, that every word of the Mofaic writings mufi be received as divinely infpired -, every a5l of Mofes as miraculoujly directed from heaven ; my opinion is, that with the notion of general Infpiration^ which I readily allow, we are obliged by fad and the hiftory itfelf, to admit a diflindlion and exception in fome . particular paffages of the Law j fome particular a5is of its Founder. But the greateft fcandal I have given, is by imputing, as he urges, fome kind of fi5iion to Mofes. [22] I have indeed propofed it as a problem, but with all the diffidence and cau- tion imaginable \b\ Whether fome degree of \a\ See Remarks on a Reply to the Defence of the Letter, p. 68, l^c. [^] See Defence of a Ittttr to Dr. W. f. 4^. It. Re- fHarks on a Reply i p. 50, 51. fi^lion Author of the Letter to Br, Waterland. 261 fi^ion may not pojfihly he allowed in certain cafes^ to folve the difficulties of the Mofaic writings, without any hurt to their authority. This our Oblervator treats as downright Biafphemy and Atheifm iifelf -, [23] declares all fitiion incon- ftfient with any degree of Infpiration, [21] «»- "Worthy of a man divinely infpired : [31] and reproaches me for defending political lying, for ■ the good of the people *, and being the firft Chriftian writer that ever maintained fo jlrange doctrine. [20 J I do not take notice of this to defend PoHti- cal Lying, or to confirm my own reafoning, but to expofe the folly and rafhnefs of his. "What I mentioned on that fubjed, I drew from the hcfi Moralifts of the Heathen world-, and fliewed withal, by the teftimony of fome of the Primitive Fathers, that the notion was fup- pos'd to be borrowed from Mofes himfelf : and it were as eafy to ihew, what he fo rafhly de- nies, that almoft all the Chriftian Writers, from the earlieft Ages, and very beft Authors of Morality in thefe later times, Grotius, Tugendorf, &c. hold it to be as innocent in fome cafes, to deceive the people for their good, as for Parents to deceive their Children, Phyfi- cians their Patients -, which is all the length that I have ever gone or ever meant to go in tavour of any deceit or Jidion whatfoever. l^ut this, he tells us, is giving a greater power 262 RerMrks on fojne Ohfervations^ addrejfed to the to Govcrnours, than God himfelf claims •, of difpenfing with the facred^ and inviolable laws of truth. [20] Strange how he chanced to ftumblc on the f acred and inviolable laws of truth : wri- ters of his clafs never raife their thoughts fo high ; or venture fo far from fhore -, but ftick clofe to the infallible wordy and univerfal Infpira- tion of the Bible. If there be any fuch laws, as without all doubt there are, 'tis certain that the Bible itfelf muil be tried by them. And if they can't be difpens'd with by God, there feems to be little fenfe in what Dr. TF. often alledges in his vindications of Scripture ; that the command of God alters the nature of the thing : for is not that to difpenfe with his facred and in- violable laws ? But our Obfervator, having over-fhot himfelf here, before he was aware, makes a quick retreat into his old trenches of abfolute Infpiration., and leaves the laws of truth and reafon to fhift for themfelves. He affirms all degrees of fiBion to be in con- Jiftent with any degree of Infpiration. Yet it would not be difficult to give inflances of fome degree of it^ through all the infpired Writers both of the Old and New Teftament. Pray what was St. Taul doing, when he be- came all things to all men ? Was he not em- ploying fome little degree of fiction '^. When our Saviour appeared to the Difciples going to Emmaus •, the very purpofe of his appearing was, to tarry with them a while in the inn ; yet he Author of the Letter to Br. Waterland. 26^ he made as if he would go fnrther^ till they con- Jlraind him. (Luke xxivj Is not this likewife fome fmall decree of it ? how rafh then is his Aflertion ; that the leaft degree of fi^icn is in- covfiflent with his nature., whofe Law is the truth ? [23] But I take fhelter^ it fecms, in partial Infpir a- tion, and hrin'i the great names of Grotius and ^illotfon to protect me in it. Upon which he obferves, that had I done as much for Chriftiani^ ty as they., I might have had fome plea to he in- dulg^d in the like particularities. [33] A fine obfervation truly ! as if a greater merit gave a greater right to deliver what was falfe or hurtful to Chriflianity : no, the greater their fervices, the greater is the prefumption, that they were ftill carrying them on, perfedling their work : and in my opinion, they could not have done greater, than by beating down the fyilems and prejudices of zealots, and iairly owning fa6ts that lie open and vifible to every rational Chriflian. But they, it leems, cnely modeftly fuggeft^ that in a few infiances of no moment., the fuperintendence of the Holy Spirit, might be fufpended. Yet their few and modeft fuggeftions reach fo far as to intimate •, that in the hiftorical, and even the moral books of Scri^ " pture there is no neceiTity for Infpiration •, fmce natural Talents are fufficient to difcover and. evince the truth : contrary to our Obiervator's aflertion, that all the influence and truth of Scri- R 4 ptmt 264 ^Remarks en feme OhfervfJions^ addrejfed to the pure defend on its Infpi'ration. [31] As if no- thing could be true, or deferve to be coniider'd as fuch, unlefs divinely infpired. 'Tis the reafoning of all divines, that the truth of the Gofpels ilands on the fame bottom with every other hiftorical truth in the world : and confequently, to deny their authority, is to deny the faith and truth of all hiflory, and to deftroy at once the credit of all antiquity. This reafoning is juft and flrong, if the Gofpels be of the fame clafs and fpecies with other hiflories ; a narration of fa(5ls by credible perfons, who knew them to be true, and related what they knew of them : but 'tis of very little force, if they muft needs be received as univ erf ally and ahfolutely infpired by God : for in this view they have no relation to other hiflories ; ftand on a quite different bottom ; and their credit may be difputed, without hurting common faith or common hiftory. To give aflent to fadls affirmed by proper witnefies, as *tis an adl highly rational, fo 'tis all that is wanted to give them a reception in the world. The character of Infpiration fuperadded ferves onely to introduce difficulties and doubts, where all was clear before, and call an air of impoflure over the whole. In the cafe there- fore of the Gofpels, where, according to Gro- tius and 'Tillotfon^ there is no want of fuch In- fpiration, and where we find no claim or pre- tence Authcr sf the Letter to Dr. Waterland. 2% tence to it •, the afTerting it to be neceflary feems dangerous to Chriftianity itfelf, by un- hinging and perplexing its proper and natural evidence. But befides the great names of Grotius and Tillotfon^ I brought a greater ftill for my opi- nion, that of St, Faul -, who owns himfelf on Ibme occafions deftitute of divine Infpiration, This our Obfervator grants in two places •, but for a third, where the Apoftle declares, that he fpeaks after the manner of men \a\ he affirms it to be nothing to the purpofe : [25] for if he did not fpeak after the manner of men^ fays he, how would it he poffihle for men to underfland him ? But if thofe words of St. Paul relate to the manner of fpeaking onely, what occafion for a dillindlion, where there can be no diffe- rence, whether infpired or not ? for in both cafes he mufl fpeak to the fenfes, and draw his arguments from the notions of men^ or they could be no argments at all to mankind. No, he feems to me to fignify here what he does in the other places, that he is not delivering the didates of God, but his own natural fenti- ments, as other men ordinarily do. St. Jerom confirms this opinion, as our Ob- fervator allows, but whilft he allows the thing, y/ith the ufual arc of thefe writers, he cavils [a] Gal. iii. 55. at 266 Remarks on foine OhfervationSy addrejfed to the at my words ; and exclaims, that Jerom does 710 1 fay^ what 1 make him to fay^ that St. Paul difavows all pretence to divine Infpiration. [26] And yet, 'tis the whole purpofe of Jeronis ar- gument to aflert and prove the very thing. But to fhcw the contrary, he gives us, what he calls zjujler tranjlation than mine, and nearer the original of Jero^m's words. The old method - of blowing up envy againil me-, by calling that a tranjlation, which I never defign'd for fuch ', but for an extradt onely of an Author's fentiments ; which is the cafe at prefent : for does not Jerom, in the place I refer to, affirm, that St. Paul has miftaken the fenfe, and made an improper application of a certain word, on which his argument turns ? This, though intimated by me [^], is not found in the words I produce, but is found however in the con- text, v/hich our Obfervator could not be igno- rant of. With what face then does he call that a tranjlation, and arraign it as imperfe6t, which he knows could never be meant for one I 'tis onely to raife a clamour and fupport the falfe charge he revives againft me, of pervert- ing and mifapplying my principal tejlimonies. [43] To return to the cafe of Infpiration, he al- lows, that St. Paul on fome occafions declares himfelf deflitute of it; [25] Yet in fpite of St. Paul's conceflion and his own, he perfills [a] See Remarks on a Reply, 78. ftoutly Author of the Letter to Br. Waterland. 2^7 ftoutly to maintain the ahfolute and unlimited Infpiration of all the Sc7'iptures -, that their in- fluence and truth depend upon it. [31] That there'' s a neceffity to admit or reje^ the whole. [34] That the onely hafts of Chrifiianity is the infallible truths and univerfal Infpiration of the f acred Books. [43] What pure and genuine Or- thodoxy is this ? to beheve againft the convic- tion even of fenfe •, againft the evidence of plain fad ; to fubdue reafon, judgment, and every faculty to Faith. As for the reafon of his Faith, he tells us gravely, that partial Infpiration will in the end be no Infpiration at all. [34] For, when every man has picked and culfd out of his Bible what he does not likey very little of genuine Infpiration will be left behind. But muft we then rejed: a fad becaufe of its confequences ? and muft we not be content with our Religion, juft as God has given it us ? To ftrengthen what is from God, by adding to it, i§ juft as impious as to weaken it by detrading from it. Partial Infpiration is a fad, which the hiftory and teftimony of the Scriptures themfelves demonftrate : whatever be the effeds of it, 'tis neceflary to fubmit to ' them. It may probably overthrow the Syftems of antient or modern Divines ; but cannot pofTibly hurt any truth or article of Faith, that is neceflary to be believ'd. 2. 1 proceed now to the other part of our Ob^ 268 Remarks on fame Ohfervations^ addrejfed to the Obfervator's argument, or the fentence he jias pronounced againft me -, that my book ought to he burnt ^ and my felf banijh'd. This he pretends to ground on my own reafoning againft the Author of Gmjlianity as old^ &c. that fince I have fuggefted this as a jujl punijhment of an Au- thor^ in many refpe^fs lefs criminal than my felfy and thought him worthy of fo rigorous a treatment^ fny punifhment ought to be the more remarkably fe- ver e. [40, 41] But here again, as in moft other places, he miftakes and mifreprefents me. I have declared no opinion -, fuggeftcd nothing about it of my own : my meaning was to ftate a mere fad:, as it flood am.ong the antients -, and to wipe off a fcandal imputed to Chriftia- nity, of having introduced into fociety a fpirit of perfecution unknov/n to the Heathens ; by lliewing, in contradiftion to the Author of Chri- ftianity as old, &c. that the Pagans punifh'd men for opinions -, had their Holy JVars and Religious Tejls as well as we. I am far from affirming with our Ohfervator, that thefe prin- ciples are right, agreeable to Chrijlianity, the maxims of Reafon, and the laws of Society : [40] no 'y my opinion is jufl contrary ; that Rcafon was as much abufed then, as Chri- flianity is now, whenever any free debate or inquiry after Truth is made punifhable for the fake of it •, or indeed for any other caufe, than as it adtually difcurbs the quiet of the State. My reafoning agrinft the Author of Chrifiianity as old^ 6cc. is a mere argument ad hominm ; to Author of the Letter to Dr. Waterlano. 26( to prove that an attempt to aboliHi Chriitianity is contrary to the very maxims of Reafon and Morahty, that he himfcif lays down. If I do not miftake his purpofe •, I take my reafoning to be juft : if I do i my argument is fo far weaken'd by it, as 'tis pointed fmgly againfl a defign to fubvert the eflabhfh'd Rehgion, in order to advance Reafon in its place, as a more perfedl guide to the people. If the Religion of a country was to be con- fider'd onely as an Impoflure ; an engine of government to keep the people in order •, even there an endeavour to unhinge it, unlefs with a defign to fubfbitute a better in its fcead, would in miy opinion be highly unreafonable. But fhould the Prieils of fuch a Religion, for the fake of their authority and power, labour to impofe their own fidtions for divine truths •, to poffefs the people with an enthufiaftic zeal for them •, manageable onely by thernfelves, and to be played even againfl the government, as oft as it ferved their feparate intereils ; in fuch a cafe, 'tis the duty of every man, who loves his country, and his fellow creatures, to oppofe all fuch attempts ; to confine Religion to its proper bounds ; to the ufe for which it was inllituted •, of infpiring benevolence, modelly, fubmiflion into the people : nor fuffer the cre- dit of it to grow too flrong for that of the State -, the authority of the Priefl, for that of the Magiftrate. Was 270 Remarks on fime Ohfervations^ addrejfed to the Was Religion, I fay, to be confider'd as an impoflure, all men would think this conduct reafonable : and where it is in reality a Reve- lation from Heaven^ the cafe is not altered, as far as the end of that Revelation is per- verted and abufed by the arts or the folly of men : as the Jewijh was by the Pharifees ; the Chrijiian by fome of its modern Advocates, In fuch circumflances, in proportion as a man values his Religion, and believes it to be of God, he will exert himfelf to clear it from all human impofitions ; which render it either of no effedt, or of a mifchievous one to fociety •, propagating rage andftrife and every evil work^ inflead of the peace and happinefs 'twas de- fign'd to introduce. And if the end of all Revelation be to enforce with greater vigour, and by means more affedling to fenfe, the obli- gations of the natural Law ; thofe Priefbs are the trueft: friends to God and man, who labour to adapt it the mofl effedually to that end ; to expound it by the known principles of reafon and morality, and to make it amiable, by making it plain, rational, intelligible to com- mon underftandings. As for thofe, who take the contrary way ; who either deny all natural law, or make it bend as they pleafe, to their ov/n comments on Scripture ; who build Religion on a princi- ple of faith, diitindt from reafon j look on the latter Author of the Letter to Dr, Waterland. 271 latter with a jealous eye, as an inflrument and engine of Satan ; who meafure all truth by- authority ; all credibility by teflimony ; by which authority ftill and teflimony they mean little more than their own, and to draw the greater dependance on themfelves ; for thefe writers, I fay, 'tis the duty of every rational Chriflian, to expofe their principles, as flavifh and fuperftitious ; deftru6live of that good, for which all Religion was given ; turning the befl thing in the world into the worft ; a Reve- lation from heaven, into a dodtrine hurtful and pernicious to mankind. And ; where Religion, as with us, is re- ceived as of divine Authority, and on the bed grounds and reafons embraced as fuch ; though I greatly condemn the perverfenefs of contefting truths fo ilrongly efbablifhed, yet I cannot think it agreeable either to Reafon or Religion, to punifh even fuch, as are hardy enough to call in qucftion the reality of Revelation itfelf : for 'tis the greateft weaknefs and abfurdity to think, that truth can ever be hurt by any exa- mination whatfoever : it may be oppreiTed a while by fadion, ilifled by power -, but in a free de- bate, as in free air and exercife, it always regains its flrength and vigour : controverfy to truth, is like a gentle wind to trees -, it fliakes the head, but faftens the root. Truth is naturally fo amiable, that wherever 'tis expos'd to view, it neceflarily draws all to admire it y and the more 272 Remarks on fome Obfervations^ addrejfed to the more 'tis expos'd, the more llrongiy it attrads. Where artifice indeed and fraud prevail in the Head of it, there all inquiry mull induilrioufly be difcouraged, as a dangerous and fatal ene- my \ fure to detedt and expofe the cheat : and wherever 'tis difcourag'd, there's always reafon to fufpedb fome latent impofture : now as fure as Truth and Falihood are contrary to each other ; fo fure it is, that the fame method of treating them cannot poffibly be of fervice to both. As far as my experience has reached, either in ancient or modern Hillory, there's not an inftance on record, where a fair examination has ever done harm to a good caufe. The at- tacks on Chriftianity, urged on by its warm eft enemies, always turn to its advantage : they engage the Clergy to ftudy and fearch into the true grounds of it ; keep them in breath and exercife ; and train them by conftant dif- cipline, to be able champions and defenders of it : they clear Religion it felf of all the ruft and rubbifh, which by the negligence or the art of its managers, it may have contracted : and above all, they enforce and lay open the ge- nuine proofs of it ; which by time itfelf natu- rally grow languid and ineffedual ; till a new debate, like a new publication, fends them frefh again into the world, in their original force and luftre. 'Tis Author of the Letter to Dr. WaterlAn^d.' Clj% 'Tis then my firm principle and perfuafion, that a free inquiry into all points of Religion, is always ufeful and beneficial ; and for that reafon never to be punifli'd or prohibited. It Opens the minds and reforms the manners of the people *, makes them reafonable, fociabie, governable ; eafy to fuch as differ from them, and as little fcandaliz'd at the different opinion, as the different complexion of their neighbour : whereas the reflraint of this liberty, and the impofition of fyflems and articles, that mufl not be call'd in queflion, nourifhes a churlifh fpirit of bigotry, uncharitablcnefs, enthufiafm, which no Civil Power can moderate ; a fpirit that has fo oft involv'd mankind in wars and bloodfhed ; and by turns endangef'd the ruin of every Chriflian Country in the World. If therefore in my argument agalnfl Chrijlia- nity as old., &c. I am underflood to recommend or fuggeft in any manner the reafonablenefs of punilliing the Author ; I difclaim and difa- vow it, as contrary to my intention and my principles : all fuch punifhment is againfl the intereft of fociety ; the intereit of truth ; the intereft of Religion itfelf: which, as it could not have been propagated at firfl, but by a liberty of thinking, writing, preaching j fo cannot be preferv'd in its purity, but by the very fame means. To return then to our Obfervator's kvi- VoL. ILL S tencei t74 Remarks on fome Obfervations^ addrejfed to the tence -, that my booh ought to he burnt and my felf hanijh^d. As for my books, there's no faving them from the flames : but for my perfon^ he is willing to commute the punijhmenty from exile abroad^ to confinement at home. [41] But left we fhould fufped him of any humanity or companion in the propofal, he foon gives us to undcrftand, that 'tis but to harafs and plague me the more by it : the commutations of thefe men are not to mitigate, but enhance the rigour of punilhment. I am to be kept at home, that he and all others of the fame ftamp may rail, preach, and pray over me, till I become a ftanding fpe^acle [41] of terror and example to all who dare to expofe their Schemes. This puts me in mind of the poor Jews at Rome ; who every week in Lent are oblig'd to attend a fermon, and hear an angry Monk preach at them, and call them names by the hour, out of the fame Chriftian principle, that our Ob- fervator profefles, the fame honeft intention of convincing them. [12] But I have already undergone, he fays, the worfi fort of banifjment a liberal mind can fuffer -, a total one^ from the hearts and ajfe^ions of all good men : [42] that the cordial friendfhip, the love and real efieem, with which lufed to be treat - edy is now dwindled into cold refpe^l and a diftant complaifance. He does me the honour then to allow, that I was once a favourite, cordially efteem'd and belov'd by all, till an averfion to my 3 Author of the Letter to Dr. M^aterland. 27^ my opinions created an averfion to my perfon. As if a man were the lefs amiable for fome particular fentiments, or the lefs fmcere for de- claring them : llrange charadter of friends ! whom neither old acquaintance, nor efleem, nor a long intercourfe of friendly offices could reftrain from difcarding me, when difcovered to think differently from them. Would not the fame men who banilh me thus from their affections, as readily banifh me from all focie- ty ? Nay, have they not attempted to do it, as far as it was in their power ? and will fuch a condu6l do credit to any fet of men, in a coun- try where reafon and liberty have any influ- ence ? Can thefe good men., who difcard me, charge me with any falfliood or treachery in friendfhip ? with the refufal of any good office in my power -, any a6t of humanity or courtefy to any of them ? No, as they cannot charge me, I'm fure, with any offence in pra6tice, fo I am the eafier under the difgrace I fuffer for what is merely fpeculative. But whatever I have loft with our Ohferva-' tor's good men., I have the comfort to find with others •, good enough for me ♦, who admit me to their company, and honour me with their friendfliip. Men of enlarged Minds and ge- nerous fentiments ; who make true religion the rule, and virtue the end of their living •, who take immorality to be the greateft herefy ; and meafure the merit of th^ir friends, not by S 2 their 27^ Remarks on fome Ohfervations^ addrejfed to the their faith, but by a nobler principle, their charity j who reckon it no breach of friendfhip to differ in opinion •, and even value me per- haps the more, for what the others perfecute me. With men of this turn I fhall breathe at leaft frelli air ; and have more pleafure in the eafe of one hour's converfation, than in years fpent with the morofe and the captious •, under the flavifh fear of offending, by ftarting any thing out of the road and train of popular thinking. I have now followed our Obfervator thro' alt his chain of rcafoning •, which I could not have fubmitted to, but to relieve fome fhort inter- vals of leifure in an abfence from books : and the' I think him very injudicious in the choice and ufe of his materials, yet I muft allow him to have fhewn fome art in the difpofition of them. For having obferv'd in what vogue the SefTions Paper has been in of late, and what demand for that kind of reading •, he has con- triv'd, we fee, to throw his own papers into that form : the l^rial and Con'vi5lion of a yioto- rioiis Infidel \ the Sentence pronounced againfi him \ his Confeffwn^ and Recantation •, with the Ordinary's Sermon and loyig Prayer at his Execution. What jullice has been done me in the trial, I mull leave to the judgment of others ; but for the Confeffion here drawn up for me, 1 de- clare it to be falfe and fpurious •, fuch as I never did, nor ever will fublcribe. Strange, that a man Author of the Letter to Dr. Water land. 277 a man can be fo filly as to imagine, that were I difpofed to recant, I iliould not do it in my own words, rather than his ! but I have no- thing to recant on the occafion ; nothing to confels, but the fame four Articles^ that IVe already confefs'd. 1 . 'That the Jews horrozved fome of their cu- Jloms from ^gypt. 2. 'That the ^Egyptians were pojfefs'd of arts and learning in Mofes's time. 3. That the primitive Writers., in vindicating Scripture^ found it neceffary fometimes to re- cur to Allegory. 4. That the Scriptures are not of ahfolute and univerfal Infpiration [^]. Thefe are the onely crimes that I hare been guilty of againfl Religion : and by reducing the Controverfy' to thefe four heads ; and de- claring my whole meaning to be compriz'd in them, I did in reality recant every thing elfe, that thro' heat or inadvertency had dropt from me -, every thing that could be conftrued to a fenfe hurtful to Chriftianity. But this is a Recantation that does not pleafe our Ohferva- tor j thefe four heads ^ he fays, may be debated innocently: [2^^ diud. no recantation will fatisfy him, but what carries crime and guilt along with it. What pity it is that thefe inquifitors of [«] See Remarks on a Reply, ^c, S 3 ours 278 Remarks on fome Ohfervations^ &c. curs have not the power of the rack to extort what confeiTions they pleafe ? All that this good man aims at, is to make me odious and deteilable to every body •, with a true Popijh Spirit^ he would draw me in to recant, and then proceed to burn •, or with the old revenge of an Italian \ firfl make me blafpheme, and then flab me. But after fo much bitternefs of fpirit, fo much malice and rancour difcharg'd againfl: me, 'tis iiirprizing at lafl to fee with what gravity he clofes the whole, with a long formal Prayer for my converfion. He talks of fome wretches who fay the LorcTs Prayer backwards. [19] What he means by it I cannot tell : but if to pray backwards., be to invert the intent and ule of Prayer •, to mak-e it abominable to God, ridiculous to man -, he muft needs be the great- eft Mafter of it, who thinks forty pages of rail- ing 2L proper preface to four of praying [^]. This it is, after all, that does the greateft hurt, and gives the greateft fcandal in Religion, to fee fuch deadly venom and mifchief cover'd by a malk of ' Piety. It was the charaderiftick, we know, of the old Pharifees^ to make long prayers and to de- I'our Widow's houfes : our modern ones come not a jot behind them : we here fee the length of this Pharifee's Prayer ; and as far as I can judge by what I have fuffer'd my felf, his mouth is not more open to pray than 'tis to devour. [a\ See his prayer for me, p. 42, ^c, R E. REMARKS, Paragraph by Paragraph, UPON THE PROPOSALS Lately publilhed by RICHARD BENTLET, FOR A New EDITION OF THE Greek Teftament and Latin Vcrfion. Do3us criticus tsf adfuetus urere, fecare, inclemenier omnis generis libros trailare, apices, Jyllabas, 'voces, diaiones confodere, ^ ftilo exigere, continebitne ille ah integro ^ intaminato Di'vifne Sapientia monumento crudeles ungues ? Petri Burmanni Orat. Lugd, Bat, 1720. S4 Cambridge, Jan. 20, lyzi* T~^ hiding inypif to he treated after a n.oft barbarous JP manner in a virulent Libel, which bears the Title of Dr. Bentley's Propofals, with a full Anfwer, &c, upon Pretence of my being the Author of The Remarks upon thePropoials lately publi(hed by "Richard Bentley, ^'c, J think it ncccfjary upon fever al Accounti io declare as fol- lowsy viz. That I am not the Author of thofe Remarks, nor any part of them^ and that they were undertaken and written without my Affiflance or Knowledge. That R. B. certainly knew ^ or eafily might have knowny that they were written by the Reverend and Learned Dr. MiDDLETON, tvho had own'd them to fever al of his Fric7ids^ by ivhofe means he verily believes^ that R. B. was hfcrmd that he alone was the Author. For my own party prefently after the Remarks zvere publijh'dy I took all Oc- cafions to declare as above, being obliged in fujlice fo to doy lefi my Silence might in fome meafure contribute to deprive my worthy Friend of the Honour due for fo excellent a Per- formance : nor do I quejlion but that R. B. before he began io write his Libel, had been acquainted with what Ifaid on thcfe Occafions, That thofe foul AfperfionSy which are caji upon me in al- moji every Page, are as falfe in Fa£iy as they are appa- rently tnalicious ; which is notcrious io all who know me^ and to none more than R. B. Ifunfelf. That I never wrote any Libels againjl the Governynent, the College, or the Maflcr, as he falfly afferts. I never wrote any thing at all relating to the Government y or publifid any thing coyicerjiing the College, or the Ma- Jler, except a Commenioration Sermon in Dec. 17 17, which the Majler pretended to approve ofy giving it under his Hand that he would fub f crib e to every word of it. As to other matters relating to either y I have hitherto thought them fit onely for the Cognizance of a Vifitor. John Colb a tch, D. D. Senior Fellow of Tri- nity College, and Cafuiftical Profeflbr of Di- vinity in the Univerfity of Cambridge, REMARKS, Paragraph by Paragraph UPON THE PROPOSALS Lately Publinied By Richard Bent ley ^ Slq. I Shall not trouble myfelf with making any Apology for the following Remarks •, but fhall onely defirc the Reader to believe, that (whatever Prejudices may lie againft them) they were not drawn from mthy Perfonal Spketiy or Envy to the Author of the Propofals, but by a Serious ConviBion that he has neither Ta- lents nor Materials proper for the Work he has undertaken, and that Religion is much more likely to receive Detriment than Service from it : The l^ime^ Manner^ and other Circum- ftances oifuhlijhing thefe Propofals^ make it but too evident, that they were haftned out to ferve quite different Ends^ than thofe of Com- mon Chrijiianity ; and I think it my Duty to obviate, as far as I am able, the Influence they might have on fome whom big Words and bold 4t tempts 228 R E M A R K s on ^^e Propo/als, Jttempts are apt to lead implicitely into an high Opinion and Admiration of the Merit and A^ bilities of the Undertaker. The Title runs thus : H KATNH AIA0HKH GRJSCjE. Novum Tejimnentum Ve?'Jioms Vulgata^ per San£ium Hie- ronymum ad njetujla Exemplar! a Graca cafti- gat a ^ exa^£. Utrumque ex antiquijfmis Codd, MSS. cum Greets turn Latinis^ edidit Richardua Bentleius. - Remarks. Some people are puzzled to find out the meaning of the word GRjEC/E, unlefs it be placed there exegetically^ to let us know what Language AIA0HKH is of-, but our Editor ought then to have gone on, and after Novum Teftamentum have added likewife in Latin, which is jufl as Critical and Elegant as the other. The very next Words feem to be little better than a Barbarifm, Novum Teflamentum Verfionis Vulgate ', if he had quite inverted the Order and Confl:ru6tion of them, all had been clear and intelHgible, viz. Verfio Vulgata Novi Tefia- menti •, but the other is hardly juftifiable by any Rules of Grammar. And tho' it may have been the Stile of fome other Editions, or might be allowed in a Commentator, yet is not fuch Latin as we expedt from a Critick. It puhlijhed hy Richard Bentley. 28j It is obferved likewife, that he does not deal quite fo honourably as he fhould with his Partner Mr. John JValker ; for tho' in the clofe of the Propolals he allows him half the Profit., and alnioft all the trouble of this Work, yet he here referves the whole Reputation of it to himfelf with an Edidit Richardus Bentleius, y Paragraph the Firft. ne Author of this Edition., ohferving that the Printed Copies of the New 'Tefiament^ both of the Original Greek and Antient vulgar Latin., were taken from Manufcripts of no great Aniiquity, fuch as the firjl Editors could then procure , and that now hy God^s Providence there are MSS. in Europe, (accefftble, though with great Charge) above a T^houfand Tears old in both Languages ; believes he may do good Service to common Chri- Jtianity., if he publifhes a New Edition of the Greek ei.nd Latin, not according to the recent and inter- polated Copies, but as 7'eprefented in the mofi antient and venerable MSSy in Greek and Roman Capital Letters. Remarks. Our Author, we fee, with all his Zeal for Common Chriflianity., makes no Scruple to dcftroy here at once the Authority of all our publifhed Scriptures^ and by a kind of Pa- pal 284 R E M A R K s on the Propofals, pal Edt5i cries down all our current Editions as corrupt and adulterate, 'till coined and ftamped anew by his Authority. But the Injuftice and Barbarity of this Cen- fure on all former Editors of the New Teflament, will eafily appear by the fhort Account I fhall give of two or three of the principal Editions ♦, and 'tis fuch an Infult upon the Senfe and Judgment of the Learned World, which has always fet the higheil Value upon many of them, that it cannot but raife an univerfal Re- fentment and Indignation. The Editors of the CeleBruted Complutenfian Edition^ printed 1515, were furniihed by P^/>ff Leo the Tenth with all the Manufcripts of the Vatican •, befides many others of the greatef^ Antiquity J procured from diftant parts of Eu- rope by the Power and Intereft of Cardinal Xi- menes^ the Patron and Promoter of the Work :A, Many of thefe we find defcribed under the Charad:ers of Veneranda vetujiatis^ Spe^at^que fidei^ and fome are faid to be above twelve hundred Tears old : The Cardinal, in his Prefa* tory Epiftle to the Pope, fays thus •, Et Cafli- gatijfima omni ex parte vetufliffimaque Exemplaria pro Archetypis haberemus^ quorum quidern tarn Hehraorum quam Gr^corum ^ Latinorum multi- plicem Copiam non fine fummo lahore conquife- 'vimus, hxA publi[hed by Richard Bentley. 285 And the Editors in their Prologue fay like- wife ; Non qu^vis Exemplaria Editioni huic Ar- chetypa ftiijfe^ fed Antiquijfima Emendatijfimaque i^ tanta pr^terea vetufiatis^ ut fidem eis abrogare Nefas videatur. Gomefius, De rebus gejiis Ximenii, lib. 2. tells us, what great Pains and Expence the Car- dinal was at in procuring Manufcripts from Rome, and other foreign PartSy as zvell as all the Li- braries of Spain ^ and fays, that feven onely of his Copies fetched from' different Countries^ cofi him four thoufand Aurei, Dr. Mills fays, that thefe Editors had col- ledted Lautam plane Codicum Manufcriptorum fupelle^ilem \ and ftiles the Edition Primam ^ Nobiliffimam^ and, Opus nunquam fatis Celebran- dum. And our very Edit or ^ if we may judge of his Opinion of this Edition by his Ufe of it, has fairly convidled himfelf, and may be brought as an Evidence for its Authority, having cited it near as often in his Specimen as any Father or Manufcript of them all. Erafmus formed his Edition by Collating and Comparing a great many of the mod correal and ancient Manufcripts^ both Greek and Latin ; bis Words are, Univerfum ad Gr^eca Originis fi- dem recognovimuSy idque non temere ?ieque levi Operdy fed adhibitis in confilium compluribus utriiif- 286 Remarks on the Propofals^ titriufyue Lingua codicibus^ nee Us fane quibujtibet fed Vetuftijfimis fimul i^ Emendatiffimis, Praf. ad Leon, X. And in another Place, Ad Gracce Originis Jidem examinatis codicibus Latinis neque tamen fidentes paucis aut quibuflibet. Dr. Mills compares one of Erafmus'j Greek Manufcripts to the Alexandrian itfelf^ which is fuppofed to be above twelve hundred Tears old. Rob. Stevens collecl^ed the Text of his Edi- tion from no fewer than Sixteen of the beft and moft antient Manufcripts., fome of which are defcribed by him to ^ be Ipfd vetuftatis Specie p.ene adorandos j and our Editor himfelf, in his Remarks upon the Freethinkers, owns this Edition., generally fpeaking^ to be an accurate cnCy which from him is a very extraordinary Charader. I need not mention the many other Editions we have of good Note ; but fhall leave it to the Reader to determine from thefe I have named, how juft and modeft our Author has been in this Paragraph ; and whether Manu- fcripts of fto great Antiquity, recent and interpo- lated, be the proper Trandation of Antiquiffima Emendatiffimaque Veneranda Vetujlatis Speotatie- quefidei. But however barbarous this Treathient of our firft Editors may feem, it is ftill much more unpardonable in refpe6l to one of our laft ; I mean the Learned Br, Mills, who with incre< piibUJhed hy Richard Bentley. 287 incredible Pains and Induflry for thirty Years together, has drawn together, in his elaborate £- dition of the Nem ^eftamenty not onely whatever had been colle6led by all other Authors and Editors before him, but the Collations likewife of all the Manufcripts whatfoever which he had heard of or were at all famous in any part of Europe, There are many in his Collections above a thoufand Tears old^ and in Capital Letters too \ fome of which our Author himfelf will allow to be the mofl antient and valuable in tlie World •, and it is from this Magazine that our Propofer fas ungrateful as unjufl) has upon the Matter borrowed all his Materials ; and as far as we may judge from thefe Propofals, feems rather to copy and tranfcribe onely this Edition^ than to defign a new one. I may juftly therefore turn upon him his own Words, which were applied by himfelf in Defence of Dr. Mills againft the Cavils of the Free-thinkers. Our learned Countryman Dr. Mills, whofe Friendjhip and Memory will ever he dear to me^ meets with a forry Recompenfe for his long Labour of thirty Tears. But he tells us, that now^ by God's Provi- dence^ there are Manufcripts in Europe acceffible^ Sec. as if they *had never been in Europe till now ♦, but were jujl now dug out of the Ground like Medals, or imported lately from the Eaft or ?Feft Indies for the Service of his Edition : But 288 R E M A VL K s on t^e Propofals^ But if they are fo acceffihle as he fays, it is very certain that Library -keepers abroad have more Humanity^ and lefs Envy^ than fome I could name at home. Paragraph the Second. ^he Author^ revolving in his Mind fome Paf- fages of St. Hierom •, where he declares^ that (without making a New Verfion) he adjufted and reforni'd the whole Latin Vulgate to the befl Greek Exemplars, that is^ to thofe of the famous Origen •, and another Pajfage, where he fays^ that a Verbal or Lite^'al Interpretation out of Greek into Latin is not necejjary. Except in the Holy Scriptures, Ubi ipfe verborwn ordo myfie- rium ejl^ Where the very Order of the Words is a Myflery -, took thence the Hint, that if the Oldefi Copies of the Original Greek aiid Hierom's Latin were examined and compared together, per- haps they would be fill found to agree both in Words and Order of Words, And upon snaking the Ejfay -, he has fucceeded in his Conje^lure^ beyond his Expectation or even his Hopes. Re mark s. Here we are entertained with a fliort Hiflory of our Editor's great Defign, and what an odd i\ccident, what a fortuitous Concourfe of Atoms gave Birth to this mighty Work ; ihinkin^^ it feems, Ufon fome Pajfages of St. Hie- rom^ puhlijhed hy Richard Bentlev. 289 rom^ he firft took a Hint^ which being im- proved prefently into a Conje5fure^ turned it felf foon afterwards into a Clue, which extricated him out of the Labyrinth, and fo the Bufinefs was done : This being therefore the applauded momentous Paragraph, on which the Reafon and NecefTity of this new Edition, and the whole Merit of thefe Propofals are entirely- built, it will deferve a very particular Ex- amination. As for the firfl of thefe Fafiaoies referred to here by our Author, I much queflion whether it is to be found in direct and exprefs Terms in any part of St. Hierom's Works : It is however pretty certain that St. Hierom did at firil de- fign to new model and reform the Latin Vid- gate of the New ^ejlament, according to the be ft Greek Copies of his time \ but finding what an Offence he was like to give by fo great an Alteration of a Verfion which the People were fond of, and had fo long been ufed to, he changed his Mind, and was content onely to touch over and correct fuch PafTages where the Senfe feemed to have been miftaken, leaving the reft as he found it : This is the Account he himfelf gives us in his Prefatory Epijlle to Pope Damafus prefixed to the Gofpels : ^^^e ne multicm a Le5iionis Latins confuetudine difcre- -parent, ita Calamo temperavimus ut his tantum^ qua fenfum videbantur mutare, corre5fis, reliqua manere pateremur ut fuerant. Dr. Mills fpeak- VoL. in. T ing t^O R E M A R K. 5 on the Propofah^ ing of St. Jerom^ in relation to this very Sub- ject, fays, Gaudemus quod in hdc re parum fibi fermiferit ac pauca duntaxat immutarit. Vid, Pro^ legom. In fo fmall an Altera iion therefore as St. Jercm made, it is probable, that the Order of V/ords ftood much the fame both before aiid after his Reformation \ and fo leaving our Author to make what Ufe he can cl this part of his Difcovery, and to revolve it in his Mind as long as he piealco, 1 inali proceed to confider, The fecond Pafiage above cited, which is taken from the Epiftle to Pammachius^ Be opti-. mo genere Interpretandi ; where St. Hierom'^s Words are, Sed libera voce profJeor^ me in in- terpretatione Gr^ccj'um^ abfque Scripturis fan^is^ ubi ^ Verborum Or do' ^ Myfterium eft^ non ver- huni ex verbo^ fed fenfum exprimere de fenfu. Here we fee that Ordo Verborum and Myfterium are plainly disjoined and dijiinguifjed from each other, and that our Editor has thought it con- venient to throw out the Disjun^ives^ and clap in an Jpfe to make the Words exprefs more roundly the Senfe he wouki put upon them. I will not difpute with him about the diffe- rent Significations, which this Pafllige and his Citation of it might bear, but will allow him for once that both exprefs tie fame thing ; . yet it is very eafie to fhew, that he has widely miflaken the true Senfe and Meaning of them. The /«^/^^i^_>' Richard Bentley. 291 The whole Subject of this Epiftk to Pamma- chius is the Defence of a Tranflation he had made, (not verbally, but according to the Senfe) of a Greek Letter fent from one Bifhop to another -, where, befides alledging the Prac- tice of profamxC Authors, he Ihews that the heft Interpreters even of Scripture had no regard in their Tranflations to the JVords or Order of Words^ but to the Senfe onely ; which he proves by feveral Inftances from the Septtiagint^ the Evangelifts^ the Apoftles^ the Vulgate Edition it felf and the Fathers -, and concludes, Ut Re- prehenfores meos arguam imperiti^^ & impetrem ah eis veniam, ut concedant mihi in ftmplici Epi- ft old quod in Scripturis fauBis^ vclint nolint^ Apo- ftolis concejfuri funt -, and again. Ex quihus iini- verfis perfpicmm eft, Jpoftclos & Evangeliftas in Interpretatione veterum Scripturnrum fenfum qua» ftffe, non verha, nee magnopere de ordine fermoni- hufque curdffe dim intelle^ui res pateret. It is certain therefore, that this famous PafTage can onely be rendred thus, vix. That ^t. Hie- rom in tranflating Greek, did not endeavour to render Word by Word, but to exprefs the Senfe onely, except in fuch particular Places of the holy Scriptures^ where (^ Verhorum Ordo &' My- * fterium eft for the Word Wi muft either have this reftrained and particular Senfe, or this Paf- fage flands a dired Contradidion to the whole Reafoning and Tenor of the.Epiftle. T 2 And %^z Remarks on the Propofals, And fuch particular places of Scripture as are here meant, muft certainly be looked for onely in the Old 'Teftament^ which St. Hierom likewife tranjlated into Latin from the Greek of the Sep- tuagint, and where the Jewijh Bo 51 or s and Rah- bins^ and all the Writers infeded with their Notions, are full of fuperftitious Whims about Myfteries in the Order and Difpofition not onely of TVords^ but of Syllables and Letters. And St. Hierom himfelf, after he began to grow fond of Hebrew, might probably be a little touched with thefe kind of Fancies : but no pne Writer that I have yet heard of has ever affirmed, that the Order of Words in the New Teflament is myflerious. I could fhew from twenty Places of St. Hie- rom^ that he never in the leaft dreamt of con- fining himfelf to the Order of Words in any of his Verfions. In a Letter to St. Auftin^ fpeaking of his Tranflations of the Old Teflament, he fays, Et ibi Graca tranflulimus •, Ftc de ipfo Hebraico^ quod intelligebamus., exprejfimus^ fenfuum potius verita- tern., quam verborum ordinem interdum confervantes. And again, ^od aiitem genus interpretationis in Scripturis fan5iis fequendum fit^ liber quern fcripfi de Optimo genere interpretandi^ i^ omnes prcefa- tiunculie divinorum voluminum, quas Edilioni no- fir oC pr^pofuimuSy explicant. And thefe Places he puhlifhed by Richard Sentley. 293 he here refers us to, are full of nothing but Rules^ and Reafons^ and Injlances of interpreting Scri- pture, not according to the JVords but the fe)ife onely. But I need not trouble myfelf any farther ill a Cafe fo clear and undeniable ; the Notion advanced here by our Editor, is in it felf ab- furd and impofTible ; Erafmus fpeaking on this Subjedl fays. Si minus verbum verbo refpondeat, id quod ut jnaxime coneris^ ne fieri quidem poteft, Apolog. which we find confirmed by Fa6l and Experiment *, for he fays again in relation to this very Verfion^ Si Jtefas ejfe ducunt ufqmm a li- teris ac fyllabis difcedere^ cur hie Interpres pajfim id aufus eft, aliquoties nulla ada^lus necejfitate t i^c. And Arias Mont, in his Preface fays, Ita ut f^pius ejus interpret atio non ad verbum^ fed ad fententiam accipiendo Jit. And Beza likewife ; Hoc quidem conftat fape illam a Gr^cis difcedere. But we need go no farther for Proofs of all this than our Autbor^s own Specimen., where in the Latin 'Text^ as it fbands drefs'd up by himfelf, we fee many confiderable Variations in the Or- der of Words from the Greek, viz. f. 2, 5, 8, 9, 12, 14, &Ci Allowing then that St. Hiercm did believe the Order of IVords to be myfterious in a few par- ticular places of holy Scripture, which neither our Editor nor any Man elfe knows where to find : What can all this fignify towards proving T 3 the 294 . R E M A K K z on ihe Propofals, die Necefiity of a new Edition, or of what great Ufe and Service can it pofTibly be to any Editor in fuch a Defign ? Yet this is the fole Foundation upon which every thing that is new Qv can be tifeful in our Author's Performance is entirely built ; for excepting this filly Fancy about the Order of PFcrds^ he cannot do any thing more with his old Verfion and old Latin Manufcripts, than what has been fully and effeclually done before him by many other Editors. Erafmus fpeaking of his own Edition fays, I'ejiamentum Novum oinni qua licuit diligentid qud- que decuit fide recognovimus^ idqiie primum ad Gra- cam veritateniy delude ad fidem vet ufiiffimorum La- tins Lingua Codicum. Praef. annot. N. T, And Dr. Mills fays, Erafmus inftitutd femel atque iterum Excmplarium Gracorum inter fe ^ cum Manu- fcriptis Codicibus Verfionis Vulgate Collatione, ad Editionem ?wvi Fcederis fe accinxit. Vid. Pro- legom.. Rob. Stephens^ in the Preface of his Edition, Anno 1 551, fays, PorroVeterem Verftonem negli- gendam non exiftimavi idque tribus potiffimum de Caufis^ primum, quia earn multis in locis Vetufliffi' m Exenrplaris Graci loco effe videbam, Mr. Toinard has alfo in a manner executed our Editor's very Scheme in his Harmony of the Cofpels^ printed at Paris 1709. and owns that I he publijhed by Richard Bentlev. 295 he borrowed the Hint from the PafTage juft cited of Robert Stephens \ his Words are, Ex ^ua Roberti Stepbani de Veteri Interprete fententid Vulgatunt T^extum Gr cecum caftigandum putavi ex Vatic anarum illarum Le^Honum ^ Veteris Verfio- his muttio Confenfu. Dr. Mills^ in his Prolegomena, fays, Vete- rem Novi 'J'ejlamenti Italicam^ ceu ad Exemplar via primi^va compofitum Summd veneratione profe- quimur ; and there is not one Citation of it in any of the Latin Fathers, nor any Emendation that St. Hierom afterwards made in it, which the Do6tor has not a6lually exhibited and ap- pHed with great Judgment to the clearing up the genuiue Greek Text ; and from thefe Ci- tations, with the help of old Manufcripts, t^c, he believes that he has retrieved^ in mofi farts of the New Teftament, the true Readings of the old Vulgate^ with the very Greek from whence they were taken^ which was probably that of the Age next to the Apoflles. All therefore that we can exped new from our Editor is, that having formed his Defign upon a Notion which is not true, like all other Authors of Syftenis, he will be apt to wreft and force both the Greek and Latin Texts, to make them anfwer, as well as he can, to his Hypo thefts. In his Sermon upon Popery, preached at Cam* T 4 hidge^ 296 Remarks^;/ the Propofals^ bridge^ and fince printed, he fpcaks with fome Contempt of the Vulgar Latins as a Tranflation made by a private and unknown Perfon, which muft have feveral Defers and Ambiguities from the Nature of Language^ thd* the Author of it were infpired \ that there are fewer antient Ma- nufcripts preferved of it, than of the Greeks and that it has been more injured under the Hands of Tranfcribers, and expofes the Church of Rome for enhancing (as he fays) the Authority of it above that of the Infpired Greek \ where, by the by, he feems to know but httle of the true State of the Queftion, but with the com- mon Herd of Writers, charges upon the Pa- pifts a good deal more than is true of them in this Cafe : The Canon of the Council of I^rent^ in relation to this Verfion^ runs thus : Statuit ^ dedarat ut h^c vetus IS vulgata Editio, qu^ longo tot faculorum ufu in ipfd Ecclefid probata efl^ in publicis le5iionibus^ difputationibus^ pradica- tionibus^ & expofitionibus pro Autheyitica habea^ tur : Here we fee no mention at all of the In- fpired Greeks no comparing or enhancing the tranflation above the Original^ the Stream above the Fountain, Vid. Bent. Serm. on Popery. Bel- larmine's account of this Matter is •, Nee enim Patres Fontium ullam mentionem fecerunt^ fed fo- lum ex tot Latinis Verftonibus^ qua nunc circum- feruntin\ unam delegerunt quam ceteris antepone- rent^ lib. 2. c. 10. De Verbo Dei. deterisy qu^e hodierno die extant^ omnibus anteponendam duximus. Arias Mont. The puMiJhed by Richard Bentley. 297 The Popifli Writers indeed fay in Defence of this Verfion, that being made in the earhell Ages of Chriftianity, from the pure Exemplars of thofe Times, and having continued ever fince in the conllant Ufe and Service of the La- tin Church, it muft needs be of equal Autho- rity to any Greek Copies now extant : And is not our Author here faying and doing much the fame thing which we juflly condemn in the Church of Rome ; undervaluing the Credit of all the Greek Copies ; advancing and authorizing the Vulgar La- tin, and proving it to be the bell means we can ufe of finding out xhttrue Exemplars of the An- tients ? Paragraph the Third. ^he Author believes, that he has retrieved (except in very few Places) the true Exemplar of Origen, which was the Standard to the mofi Learned of the Fathers at the time of the Council of Nice and two Centuries after. And he is fur e, "That the Greek and Latin MSS, by their mutual AJJiflance, do fo fettle the Original Text to the fmallefi Nicety \ as cannot be perform'' d now in any Clafiic Author whatever : and that out of a Labyrinth of Thirty Thoufand Various Readings, that croud the Pages of our prefent beft Editions, all put upon equal Credit to the offence of many good Perfons ; this Clue fo leads and extricates us, that there will fcarce be two Hund'red out of fo many Thoufands that can deferve the leaft Confe- deration, Re- ^ng Remarks on the Propofals^ Remarks. I have not been able to find, in any Author I have yet confulted on this Occafion, that Ongen^s Exemplars of the New Tejlament were fo very famous for their particular Accuracy, as to be a Standard to the moft Learned Fathers, or indeed to any Body befides himfelf : Moft Churches in that early Age were probably fur- nifhed with Copies as corre6t as his : He was acaifed of many Errors -, excommunicated for them by the Churches of Alexandria and Rome •, was fufpe5ied of doing Injury to fome texts % doubted of the Canonicalnefs of fome Books of the New ^eftameut •, Received and made ufe of others which were Apocryphal. And tho' St. Hierom in his Youth was a g-reat Admirer of him, and owns that he copied after him in his Commentaries^ yet he had afterwards no great Opinion of his Fi- delity or ExoMnefs in handling the Scriptures^ but fays in a Letter to St. Auftin, that the Text was rather Corrupted than Mended by him. Huetius fpeaking of Origenh interpreting the Scriptures, fays •, Non eddem Editione in iis in- terpretandis ufus eft., in Homiliis Editionem feque- hatur Communem^ in Tomis alias Editiones confu- lehat ', and he accounts for the great Difference there is between Origen's Readings of the Text, and thofe of the common Editions, by the great Ufe he made of the Apocryphal Gofpcl to the pnhlijhed by Richard Bently: 299 the Hebrews •, Uiebatur fapenumero Adamantius Evangelio fecundum Hehr^eos {ut tradit Plierony- mus, lib. de Script. Ecclef. c. 4 J at^ue inde dif- crepantiam illam extitijfe conjicio, Hiietii Origq- niana, lib. 3. c. i. Dr. Mills fays in his Prolegom. nat Origen, in Reading and Citing the New ^eftament did not Jiick to any certain Copy^ but made ufe of differatt ones, and all of them in fome places Corrupt, Indeed, Origen's celebrated Work, called Hexaflay and afterwards 0£lapla^ (" which was an Edition of the Hebrew Text of the Old Teilament, with the feveral Greek Verfions of it in different ColumnsJ was a Standard to the Fathers for the Text of the Old Scriptures^ who (excepting one or two of them^ underftood very little of Hebrew y but that his Authority was not near fo great in the New^ as in the Old 'Tejlament^ we learn from Ambrofe^ lib. 5. Epift. 43. Etfi fciam quod nihil difficilius fit ^ qudm de Apojioli k^iione dijferere^ cum ipfe Origines longe 7ninor ftt in Novo quam in Veteri 'Tejlamento. That his Exemplar therefore was received as a Stand- ard of the Genuine ^ext of the New Tejlamenty feems to be a groundlefs Fancy or Mifbake of our Editor. But let this be as it will, he believes, it feems, that he has retrieved the true Exemplar of Origen -, and WT are confequently to imagine, that in the Chapter ^oo Ke M ARKS on ihe Propofals, Chapter of his Specimen, the Text ftands exadlly the fame, as it was read by that greaS Man : Yet upon examining his Notes I find, that in the whole he gives us but three various Readings from Origen^ and in (lead oi retrieving^ reje5ls them all zsfalfe^ f.ii^ 13* But one main Defign of this Edition, is, we fee, to reduce the exorbitant Number of various Readings^ which crowd the Pages of our befi Edi- tions^ to the Offence of many good Per fons -, which is fuch a piece of Grimace^ as will hardly pafs upon the World -, by over a6ting his part he betrays his Infmcerity and Defign of impofing upon the Senfes of Mankind. In his Remarks on Free-thinkers, for many Pages together, he rallies and expofes, as weak and ridiculous, the Offence which Br. Whitby, and others^ had taken at the great Number of va- rious Readings which crowd the Pages of Dr. Mills'j Greek Tejlament\ he wifhes that their Number were fl ill greater, and proves, that the more they are, the better they clear and afcertain the genuine l^ext. If I may advife you, fays he, when you hear more of this Scarecrow of Thirty Thoufandy be neither afionifhed at the Sum, nor in any pain for the 'Text. Pag. 68. But now tofervehis prefent Turn, in contra- diction to himfelf, and to common Senfe, they mull once more be made an Objedlion to poor Br. puMiJhed hyRicnARD BentleyI] 301 Dr. Mils ; and all of them, except a few fa- vourite ones, are now to be difcarded, ferving onely to offend and perplex the pious Rea- der. But he will fay, perhaps, that it is not tbeir Number which gives fo much Offence ; but that they are all put, as he tells us, upon equal Credit by our Editors •, the contrary of which is fo diredlly and evidently true, that one would wonder what he could mean by fuch an AfTer- tion. For do not our Editors, efpecially Dr. M/7/j, give a particular and diftind Account of the different Antiquity^ Authority^ and Correal- nefs of the feveral Manufcripts they make ufe of : And do not they cite each Manufcript by its diftindl and proper Title ? How then can the z-arious Readings be all put upon thcfajne De- gree of Credit^ whilfl the Copies, from whence they are taken, are all put upon fo different ones ? Indeed, if * other Authors had contented themfelves with the flovenly and fufpicious Way of quotmg Manufcripts, which we find in this Specimen, viz. Codd. plerique omnes Gallici qua- titer., AngUci tres. Germ, unus., &c. there might have been a good deal of Reafon for a Charge of this Nature, which, by what is already hinted, appears in the prefent Cafe to be entirely groundiefs. But go^ Remarks en the Propofals, But after all, we find the Various Readings of the Greek onely near as numerous and bulky in this Specimen of his own, as in anv of the fcrnier Editicns he complains of; r.r.d if we may argue from the Proportion of them in this Chapter to the reft of his Work, his own Pages are ftill like to be crowded with the old round Number of Thirty Tboufcnd. ■ Paragraph die Fourth. 5"^ confirm the Le 51 ions which the Author places in the Text^ he makes ufe of the old Verjions^ Sy- riac, Coptic, Gothic and ^^thiopic, and of all the Fathers^ Greeks and Latins, within the firjl Five Centuries -, and he gives in his Notes all the Various Readings {now known) within the faid Five Centuries, So that the Reader has under one View what thefirfi Ages of the Church knew of the Text •, and what has crept into any Copies fine e^ is of no Value or Authority. Remarks. In this Paragraph, however Pompous and Learned it feems, our Author will be found, even by his ow;i Confeflion, to fall very ihort of what has adtually been executed by other Editors before him \ for Proof of which, I need oncly produce his own Wcrds from his Remarks upon the Free-thinkers^ Fart I. p, 64. where fpeaking puhlijhed hy Richard Bentley^ 303 fpeaking of what had been done in former Editions^ long before he dreamt of publifhing one of his own, he fiys, Nor has the Texts onely been ranfacked, but all the ancient Verfions \ the Latin Vulgate^ Italic^ Syriac, yEthiopic^ Arabic^ Coptic, Armenian, Gothic, and Saxon, nor thefe onely, but all the difperfed Citations of the Greek and Latin Fathers, in a Courfe of five hundred Tears : All which is even lefs than what we find per- formed in the ftngle Edition of Dr. Mills, which is particularly referred to in this Pafiage : For befides an Account and Examination of every me of thofe Verfions, we have in the Do6lor's Prolegomena, not onely the difperfed Citations of the Fathers of the five firfi Centuries, but of all other Ecclefiafiical Writers of any Note, and what Age foever : However, I cannot help agreeing with our Editor, that as it is certain he does not underiland a tittle of any one of the Verfions here mentioned, he may do his bufinefs full as well with ^iny four, as with them all. How well he has kept up to this Propofal of giving us all the Readings now hiown within the five fi'.'fi Centuries, and fighting all the reft, may be {tzxi in his Specimen, where he has omitted fame Authorities that Dr. Mills had given, which come within his Period, f, 1, 5, 7. and has made more ufe of others which fall below it, than almoil all his Fathers . put together ; and condefcends even to take notice of printed Editions. Paragraph 204 Remarks on the Propofats, Paragraph the Fifth. ^he Author is very fenfible^ that in the Sacred Writings there^s no place for Conj enures or Emen- dations. Diligence and Fidelity^ with fome Judg- ment and Experience^ are the Characters here requi- file. He declares therefore^ that he does not alter one Letter in the Text without the Authorities fubjoind in the Notes. And to leave the free Choice to every Reader y he places under each Co- lumn the fmalleft Variations of this Edition^ either in Words or Order^ from the received Greek of Stephaniis, and the Latin of the two Popes Six- tus V. and Clemens VIII. So that this Edition exhibits both it Self and the Common ones. Remarks. The Reader by this time will be pretty well able to judge how far the Chara6ter here given of a Scripture- Editor may be allowed to our Pro- pofer •, for his Citations from St. Hierom may ferve as an Inftance of his Fidelity •, and the Condu6l and Matter of thefe Propofals be a Proof of his Judgment \ and his great Experience in Theological Studies may eafily be computed from his whole Life fpent in critical Niceties^ and Obfervations on Claffical Authors. But he is very fenfible, we fee, what a No- tion the World has entertained of his critical Faculty^ puhlijhed hy Richard Bentley. 30^ Faculty^ and to quiet the Apprehenfions People are under, led he rtiould treat the Sacred IFritcrs with as little Ceremony as he has done the Pro^ fane^ mangle and alter them at pleafure, agree- ably to his own Tafte and Judgment^ without re- gard to the Authority of Manufcripts : He here declares, that he will not alter one Letter in the Greek of Stephanus^ and Latin of the tii.0 Popes, without Authorities fubjoined. But the Dutch Orator and old Friend of his Peter Burman, whom I have quoted in the Ti- tle Page, has told us already what we are to expedl •, and it happens very unluckily for him, that he has not the Command of himfelf to keep his Refolution through one /ingle Chap- ter ; for befides fome literal Alterations in the Greek, without any Authority fuhjoined^ he has made an Emendation in the third Verfe of the Latin •, which he owns to be contrary to all the Manufcripts he ever f aw. Paragraph the Sixth. If the Author has any thing to fuggefi to-j^ards a Change of the I'ext^ not fupported by any Copies now extant', he will offer it feparate in bis Pro- legomena •, in which, will be a large Accowit of the feveral MSS. here ufed, and of the other Matters which contribute to make this Edition ufefuL In this Work he is of no SeB or Party •, his Deftgn is toferve the whole Chrijlian Name. He draws Vol. IV. U m [o6 Remarks on the PropofaJs^ no Confequences in hts Notes ; snakes no oblique Glances upon a)7y difputed Points^ old or new. He confecrates this Work., as a-yciifjiviXiof, a -itrii' fjLx Icuely a Charter, a Magna Charta, to the whole Chriftian Church., to lafi when all the An- tient MSS. here quoted fnay be loft and extinguijh'd. Re marks. Our Author in this Paragraph, raviihed with the great Succefs of his Labours, and the Pro- fpedl of his immortal Fame, cannot forbear antedating his future Glory, and figning his Exegi monumentum at the wrong end of his Work ; but his Vanity feems full as ill natur'd as extravagant : for a fimple Immortality will not, we fee, content him, he muft have no Rival : It is not onouc-h that his Works live for ever, unlefs all others die, and his Edition muft needs laft, when all the antient Manufcripts are not onely loft^ but (in a Phrafe as barba- rous as the Thought^ extinguijhed too. He has been ranfacking, we find, all the Languages he is Mailer of, for proper Enco- miums to bellow upon this Work of his ; and one would think, that in torturing the Scriptures y he thought it neceflary like Pilate., to fet up an Infcripiion in three different To;igues. KziuTiXioVy Charter., Magna Charta. KitfXYfXiov fignifies fome Rarity or choice piece of Furniture, not ufed^ but always laid up and kept publijhed byKiQU AKT> Bentley, 307 kept clofe with great care by the Owner. Virgil exprelTes the force of it by condita fervoy and Dr. Mills very properly calls the Alexandrian Ma- nufcript a YizLy.Yihicv ; but to apply it to any printed Edition defign'd for common ufe^ and to be in every Bodies Hands ^ is a manifeft irapro- priety and Contradiction in Therms ; but fiace the Alexandrian Manufcript is, we find, to be ex- tinguijhed^ and this Edition to take its place, it may very well by a Prolepfis take its Title too, and fo the Objedlion is folved. But he will find it more difficult, I doubt, to account for the Authority he here alTumes, of granting Charters and Magna Charta^s to the Chriftian Church : The Scriptures, I know, have fometimes been called the Church's Char- ter, and Dr. Trot, in the Preface to his Clavis Lingua [an5lc€, calls them magnayn Char tarn non Regis terreftris fed cceleftis fubditis fuis conceffam \ which is at beft but a coarfe kind of Metaphor, and a Diminution to the facred Writings : But to faften this and tlie other Titles here given upon any particular unauthorized Edition, is an Infolence more than Popijh, and altogether new and unheard of among Proteftants, and is fo far from becoming any private Regulator of the Text, that it is more than any National Church could jujRiifie to its Members : But after all his meaning niay perhaps be very harmlefs, and his Charter and Magna Charta may fignity nothing more than his fmall dind \\\s great Paper defcrib- ed in the next Paragraph, Para- 30 8 Rem ARKS en tbe Propofals, ' Paragraphs the Seventh and Eighth. "To fublijh this TVork^ according to its Ufe and Importance^ a great Expence is requifite : It^s de- fign^d to he Printed^ not on the Paper or with the Letter of this Specimen, hut with the beft Letter^ Papery and Ink that Europe affords. It muft therefore he done hy Suhfcription or Contribution, As it will make two Tomes in Folio, the Loweft Suhfcription for Smaller Paper mufi he Three Guineas, one advanced in prefent •, and for the Great Paper Five Guineas, two advanced. The JVork will be put to the Prefs, as foon as Money is contributed to fupport the Charge of the Impreffion ; ay^d no more Copies will he Printed than are fubfcribed for. The Overfeer and Cor- reElor of the Prefs will he the Learned Mr. John Walker of Tnmty -College in Cambridge ; who with great Accuratenefs has collated many MSS at Paris for the prefent edition. And the Iffue of it, whether Gain or Lofs, is equally to fall on Him and the Attthor, Remarks. In a Defign hke this, pretended to be under^ taken for the Service of the Chriflian World, any other Man would have contrived as well as he could to have kept out of fight all fclfiflo Views and Motives^ all Regards to Gain and filthy Lu- cre t ptihJifhed hy Richard Bentley; €re : But we find in thefc two Paragraphs fucli fordid InfinuationSy fuch low and paultry higgling- to fquccze our Money froin us, vix. great Ex- penfe reqidfite •, jhall he pit to the Prefs as fcon as Money is contributed •, 7io more printed than fub- fcribed for ; the heft Letter^ Paper and Ink in Europe •, the loweft Price muft be^ i^c. that it puts me in mind of thofe Mendicants in the Streets, who beg our Charity with a half Sheet of Propofals pinn*d upon their Breads : To what purpofe is it to tell us that Mr. John Walker is to go halves with him in the Gain or Lofs ot this Work, except to move the Compaffion of good Chriftian People^ and to beg of us, however un- kind we may be to himfelf, yet not to fee a poor young Critick undone for want of charitable Contributions ? But indeed moil People are agreed in Opi- nion, that he has borrowed his Scheme from Change- Alley^ and in this Age of Bubbles took the hint to fet up one of his own : For having in- vented a rare Secret to make Paper more durable than Parchment^ and a printed Book, however ufed and tumbled about, to out-laft any Manu- fcript preferved vvith the utmoil Care, he pre- fently takes in a Partner^ opens Books for Sub- fcriptions, and does not in the leail queftion but that BentUy\ Btibble will be as famous and profitable as the bell of them ; and fo leaving him to carry on his Trade, I iliall pafs on to an Qbfervation or two upon his Specimen. U ^ The 3IO Remarks on the Propofals, The Specimen. AnOKAATTEnS KEO. x,l3\ APOCALYPSEOS Cap. XXII. ipT oftendit mihi TociA.oyvSocj(B^^co- •*— ^ fluvium aquae fjg, Xoc(jL7r^ov cog k^vj^uX- vitae, fplendidum tarn- XoVy lycTTogsvof^svov tn. t5 quam Cryftallum, pro- I T^ A I eSei^ev fJLoi iro- via. 2 'EfJifJt'^(Tca Trig 'rrXoc- TSiocg otVTrjg^ >c, ri tto- cedentem de fede Dei & agni. 2 In medio plateae ejus, & ex utraque parte fluminis, lignum Sai/j '^vXov ^ojyjg ttoiSv vitae adferens frudlus KccoTTovg SciSsKXj Kccjoc duodecim, per men- fjLyjvcx. evoc sKocg-ov uttoSi- fes fingulos reddens Siv Tcv Tcu^TTOv uvtS ^ frudlum fuum, & fo- Toc CpixXoc tS ^vXh elg lia ligni ad fanitatem BepociTsicx.v Tuv e^vcov, gentium. 3 Kat TToiv KocrdSfi- 3 Et omne male- dictum non erit am- /E/tOS UK, tS'OCt BTly ^ ^ plius. 1 [Aoi KxB'oc^ov zrorccy.ov: 2 IvTfuS'fl/ xj £VTfU0£V. 3 I. Kx^apQv TrorotfAOv] Deefl xaSa^o^ Alex. Codd, Anglici duo, Gallic! tres ; Verf. Copt. Syr. Aeth. Hilarius ; Codd. Latini omnes. fed Andreas & Arethas zrorafjiov kcc^mpov. Gall, unus, Trora-fAov vSccl(^ C^^'! ^^'' S"apov. II. K«» £i/Tfu3-£v] Alex. Codd. Angl. duo, Gall. quatuor. Germ, unus, Arethas, jcj UsT^iv. III. Kara- voi^tixoc^ Alex. Arethas, Andreas, Codd. pleriqwe om- nes. ■puhlijhed ^_y Richard Bentley. ^^oy^Tki^vkyL^Td CLO- plius, & fedes Dei & 311 4 Kai o^yovroct to nr^ocTcaTrov ccvtS^ j^ to OVOfJLOt OiUTOV STTt TCOV ^6- TCOTTCOV aVTUV. (puTog Xu^vn x^ (pcoTog '^Xt'dy on x.VQi<^ Seog (puTiTBi STT avT^c, r^ dominus Deus inlumi- fSoiCiXeva-aa-iv elg rifV nabitillos^&rcgnabunt agni in ilia erit, & fervi ejus fervient illi. 4 Et vidcbunt fa- ciem ejus, & nomen ejus in frontibus eo- rum. 5 Et nox ultra non erit, & non egebunt lumine lucernae, neque lumine foHs, quoniam 0!,icavQLg TCOV aiui'cav. 6 Ka* etTTBv f^oi, ov^ TQl ol XoyOl TTl^Oi }^ in faecula faeculorum. 6 Et dixit mihi, Hacc verba .fidelifTima u 4 & vc- 5 «>c 'if Oil I'diT. /t, y^^zlxy 3 fed fcdcs dei. in ilia erunt 6 iideliffima fuut & vera. ru)V ccyiuiv ur^o^rjTwy. nes, Editio Coraplut. ytocru^Ey.cc. Sed fedes dei] Codd. Lat. plcrique onines Et fedes, 'ut Graeci omnes ic, Erunt] Ita Codd. quo3 adhuc vidi ; Legendum Erit -, nam Graeci univerfi ^^ov<^. V. Nug «')c sro'.i £H£r] Alex, ifxihi^. Syr. Latini omnes. In Graecis plerifque deell^ h^:. X^eIocv '/;ya(r» Xu^va] Alex, sgao-iu X^i^^-''' ?wto\' Au^v^ i & ficGregorius Pdamas, & Codd. Latini omnes. Syrus. Copt. Aethiop. ^'^rog 7iAi«] Aleji. (pwc 'W«. *^u:Ti'^a au- T«\] Latini pleriqus lUurnlnat, Sed Alex. Greg. Palamas, 12 Remarks Becg rm TtvEUfJiccTUv tcov uyfeXov ccuth, Sfi^oti ro7g oaXoiq avrS a. obT yeveirdoit ev rocx^t. 7 Kat ion eo^ofj^oci Ta%u. fJiwaocDi^ o ttj- ^Zv rig Xcyag rvig Tir^o- (prjTiiocg t£ l3i(2Xifi Tig- ris. 8 Kdfco IccavvTjg o tCTtitOV 1^ (iXtTTCaV TOCU- rot, Ken ore yix.'na'a, IZ\ BTToVy e7rB(ra, 'sr^o- en the Propofahi & vera funt & domi- nus Deus fpirituum prophetarum mifit an- gelum fuum, oilen- dere fervis fuis quae o^ portet fieri cito. 7 Et ecce venio ve- lociter. beatus qui cu- flodit verba prophetiae libri hujus. 8 Et ego Johannes, qui audivi & vidi haec. Et poftquam audiflem & vidifTem, cecidi ut adorarem ante pedes angeli qui mihi haec ollendebat. CKUvrjCoct woo uroSodv ra ciyyeXn rS Ssiyvvovrog fjLOi ravTx. 7 I^a, dceft i^. 8 Kal 'O 0fo\ Twv a^i'wu ■sy^o(pYirZv] Sic edidit Erafmus. Sed Complut. Alex. Arethas, Graeci Codd. fere omnes, La- tini omnes, S}r. Copt. A«thiop. twv 'srvfUju.aTwv twv "SDrpoip,. Fideliffima funt & vera] Codd. veteres, fid. & vera funt. VII. l$i] Kal tX Alex. Andreas, Arethas, Syrus, Codd. Graeci pleriquc omnes, Latini ad unum omnes. VIII. Kai iy'j> Ico. PAettwv r&Zra. x^ axt^ (Baettwv rocZra. Dionyfius Alexandrinus bis, Kccy'j) pXiir'jov xj aKiicav tocvtcc. Efj.7roG(r^£u ruv weivvj Alex, tzco •sro^cev-. 9 Et puhlifhed hy Richard Bentley. 9 K«i xiyu i^ot, 9 Et dicit mihi, Vi- Ofa f^rj, (fvvSifXog (ra de ne feceris : confcr- 6<^«, j^ Tcov ccSsX(puv viis tuus fum, & fra- o-jf Tzwv 'Z!r^o(p7}Tuv, TLj trum tuorum prophe- ruvTTj^iivjcov T^g Xoyag tarum, & eorum qui r5 (ii^xia T^Tis. Tu fcrvant verba libri hu- Bsu w^oa-auyyia-ov, jus : Deum adora. 10 Kai xiyu jW,o/, 10 Et dieit mihi, M'/j (r(p^(xyi(ry}g mg Xo- Ne fignaveris verba yag TTjg Tir^oCpTjTBiug tS prophetiae libri hujus : fiifiXiis tJth' KociDog tempus enim propc 1 1 *0 d^izcov doiKT]' ^ ' " \ « * N (TdTCO BTiy Kp gVTTUpOg PVTTUDBvByITCO BTi^ >Cf Sl- 3^2. 9 1 1 Kat pvTTU)]) pu7rwo"aTaj */ eft. 1 1 Qiii nocet noceat adhuc, & qui in Ibr- dibus eft fordefcat ad- huc. 9 Et ^ixit mihi. Con- fervas efii/n tuus. verba prophctiae libri. 1 1 Et ^«/ juftus efl jxifll ficetur adhp.c. IX. E^t dixit mihi] Codd. veteres con{l:inter, Dicit ; wt Gr. A£^f«. 2uv<^8Ao? (r« O'osp fi^ai. & Valg. Confer- vas fz/m tuus fum] Atqui Alex. Arethas, Andreas, A- thanafius, Copt. Syr. Graeci Codd. omnes tollunt yxp \ & Latini itidem omnes & Cyprianus tollunt enim. Verba propbetiae libri] Latini veteres omnes tollunt priphetiae. X.'Oti I xocioog ify'u; W^v.^ Sic Andreas, Sc Cyprianus bis, ^iajam tempus in proximo ejl. Sed Alex, Codices Gr. plures, Syr. Copt. Latini omnes, O xaipoV yxo i^yic; «fi' . Graeci ceteri o naj^c? ify^g eV»v. defunt on & yxo. XI. Kal pUTTwv pu7rw(raTw £ti.] Deeft hoc Comma in Alex, k duobus Gallicis errors Librariorum ob repetitfo- ncm 14- Remarks on SiKcci^SiKOiioarvvriv wot- dytuo'^riTu BTl, 12 iS^ eox^fjcoci TX- xocg-io cog to e^yov es'iv 13 "Eyca TO ' AXCpoc y^ TO XI, 'sr^uT^ y^ e- 12 Ka* i^«. 'i^yov Gcv- tS tfOCh 13 Eyu ft/^i TO >C; TO i2, a^X*' ^ '^^' rog. the Propofalsy hue, & juftus jufli- tiam faciat adhuc^. ^ fandlus fandificetur ad- huc. 1 2 Ecce venio cjto : & merces mea mecuip eft, reddere unicuique fecundum opera Jfua. 13 Ego A & jm^ primus & noviflimus, prin- 13 Ego fuffi A «i: X2. nem t» m. At ceteri fere omnes, Andreas, Aretkas, Com- plut. e pvTTcc^oq p'jTTCc^vj^'nTcoiTi. Origenes ad Johannem bis, p'jTTococi; py7rav3'>fTw 'iri. Idem ibid, aliud mem- brum addit, H; Iwavi/r? (prtrt, xat K^iS^acof nu^oc- pi(r3">iTw £Tt (MS. Oxon. kocB'cco^ttu)] xa) aj/. ai^ta- fl-GriTw. Kai ^Uock(^ J^ixatwS-'/iTa;] Alex. & Codd. ceteri omnes, Andreas, Arethas, Complut. Latin. Syr. Copt. ^ixocica-'j'JYiV zjoiY,(rxrci}. Cypriaiius bis ; ]\iQ.\is JuJIiora /tf- a'at adhuc. Et qui jullus eft juftificetur adhuc, veteres Codd. fere omnes, Et Juftus juftitiam faciat adhuc. XII. Kal I^h] Delent «) Alex. Codd. pleriquc omnes A- rethas Complut. Syr. Copt. Latini Codd omnes. Cypria- nui bis. "E^yov ccvt"^ £r«*] Alex. Gallicus unus, Syr. gflu «UTK. XIII. Eyu u'fAi] Deeft cIia) Alex. Athanafms, Codd. fere omnes, Andreas, Arethas. Sed Origenes liabet ilfxi bis. Ego fum] Deeft /u;;:. Codex Sanfti Cermani vetcrrimus. 'A^^ri ^ TiKo;^ zs^uTog xj e- publijhed by Richard Bentliv. (r%aT!^, i oc^x^ y^ to principium & Enis. i^MoiKot^ioiolTU-Xv' 14 Beati qui lavant vovTBg Tocg g-oxdg uv- flolas ilias, ut fit po- T^v, ivcx, Ig-oci V e^^o-ioc teftas eorum in ligno auTuv btt) to IxiXov T^g vitae,^ & portis intrent ^c^Tig, }c, To7g -wuXua-iv in civitatem. Bl(reX6ci)(riv Btg tovsjoXiv. is'l^loi ol %Ug^ 15 Foris canes & m (pa^^oL%o\ yc, ol -sro^- veneiki & impudici be vol y^ ot (pouTg y^ ol el- homicidae & idolis fer- vientesl 3^5 Egw ^\ ol x'jvf?, •crag $5»- Awy. ' frx«1o?] Sic Andreas, Arethas, h Codd. quldam. Sed Alex. Athanaf. Codd. Angllci tres. Gall, duo,^ Syr. Latini omnes, Cyprianus, alio ordine, TZ^Zro; xj fV;^a-- TO? tI aox^' xa) To^ teXo?. Orlgineibis habet r ^ >^ TO riXoq' led ordine, ut Andreas. XiV. Ol •croi^v'JE? T«g h^oXuc; auV«] Ita Codd. Graeci plerique" omnes, Copt. Syr. TertuU. Cypr. Sed Alex. AnglicuB uniis,^Aeth. Latini Codd. omnes ol -ctXui/ovIk ra? roXa\ ccjrm. A- thanaf. ol T^AoHuvovlf? TroiSvle; t^^ roAa? aJrwv, er^rore Librarii pro tttAuvovIe?. Arethas, -moik^^H TaV EvloXa? fc- u«- ut fententia ilia poftulare videtur. In fangnme agnij Defunt in veteribus Codd. omnibus. Per poitas). Tres Codd. veterrimi portis, ut Graeci omnes tok ^u^oxriv. XV. E^co ^\ ol xuvfO Deeft ^e Alex, ceteri fere omnes, Athanafius, Hippolytus, Andreas, Arethas, Complut; Latini omnes, Cyprianus. n«; (p»A^vJ Deeft articulus «; Alex. oi6 R EM ARKS on the Propofats^ SuXoXuT^oct, j^ wag vientes, & omnis qui cpiXuv 3^ TiToicov i^5uJ©j. aiTiat & facit menda- cium. 1 6 Eyco liii(rSg *e7refjL- 1 6 Ego Jefus mifi J/a Tov ciyyixiv fJu^Sy angelum meum, tefti- f^oc^v^rjo-oci vf^Tv toajtcc ficari vobis haec in ev TccTg lyt^Xvia-luig. E- Ecclefiis. ego fum ra- yca Bifzi »7 ^/^a tl^ to dix & genus David, ylv^ Accvliiy ccg-rjp o ftella fplendida & ma- Xotfjiisr^og y^ o •zsr^oivog. tutina. 17 Ka* TOTsrygLi^aj^ I J Et fpiritus & '!lvifjL':^flXey\S(Tiv"E^X^* fponfa dicunt, Veni : 7^ dyciiajv giVar^/'Ef- &: qui fitit veniat : qui %»• iCf SiT^/cav ?^x^(r6ca' vult accipiat aquani 6 SeXuv XocQ>iTco i/Xj vitae gratis. 16 toZtx Itt] roe.T(;. yi- no? T« AafiiJ'. AajtATrpo? kJ of^^mq, 17 AfV«o"*»'> 17 £/ qui vult. EaGe. CiVarw, Ea3-£. $1- Alex, alii multi. Sed Athanafius, Hippolytus, cum Codd. quibufdam irxq Tiroim y^ (pi?vwv. XVI. EttI riMi sxJcXro-i'at?] '£v roug Alex Codd. 2 Gallici. Athanafius. Deeft prjepofitio in Codd. multis. T« AaSlc^] Decll toU Alex. Codd. multi. Athanafias, Andreas, Arethas. Porro omnes Graeci AaulcJ", vel compcndiofc $01.$ \ nufquam in- vcnitur Aa^j^y. Aa^Trpofxal « opOptvoV] Alex. kJ -usooivf^. Sed ceteri Cod. cum Athanafio, Andrea, Aretka, Complut. v^mMot;. XVII. EaGe eaGe — eaG^tw] Alex. & ceteri om- nes, Achanaf. And. Arethas,' Complut. toyji — foyy — . |p^c(r0£o. Kat S-^Acov X(X[ji.^czviTu to ut^wp] Deeft >c) Sc poftea S-fAwv Aa^jrw utTwp. Alex. Codd. fere omnes, Athanafius, Andreas, Complut. Et qui vult] Codd. Latini vcteres tollunt £/. ig Con- puhlijfjed by Rich 1 8 Map^ff^ gyw Tig e-^iijYi STT avToCy e- 'TTiBrja'Bi Q£og btt aJ- Tov Tccg 'mXvjyocg rotg yiy^xfjLfjLivocg Iv ru fii" GXict) Turct), 19 Koci €0(,v rig a- (peXyj otTTO ruv Xofcav tS fii&Xiis Tv\g 'srpo(p7i' Tw TO uJ^wp. 18 XUjWjUap- Tvoa^oci yoco zsxm ecK^. locv rn; £7rilt-9">7 "srpo^ raura. Iv (^i^AiW^eeft Tuj. 19 tay T(j cl(pxiPYi — XoyodV |3iSak. XVIII. 2u^ajua^1upa/xai ^a^] Ale:<| & alii Codd. pic- rique & Complut, & Andreas [ax^'j^cc e^w : pauci cum Aretha jixaplupo/xai £)/co : nullus, quod Iciam, cvixixoc^' TUp»/Aai, neque yocp. Contcftor fnim omni] Codd. vctcr- rimi quicunique, Contcftor f^o omni. Ilavll ocu-^ovli] Alex. Andreas. Arethas, Codices plures, -crccvl] ria a>c. Ettj- rM -ar^og raura] Alex. Codd. plerique omnes Andreas, Arethas, Complut. £7ri0>! itt aura. Ett' auVov] Deell Alex, fed ce^eri Graeci & Latjni omnes cum Andrea & Aretha habent, Eu ^i^X^oc,] Alex. Arethas, Andreas. Codd. plurimi Iv tu> (BjS. XIX. Apxi^r, — scpon^YiO-n] Alex. Codd. plerique, Andreas, Arethas, Complut dpi- A',;, & deinde pro a(f)atp>iV£i. Alex. Arethas cum Codd. piuribus h^bent d(piXi7 : alii cum Andrea & Complut. ii(piX ci'piXoi ; & hi fupra pro tTriS'JiVfi habent liri^Yi. Aoycov Pi^Aa] Ta (SiSxj'ii Alex. Godd. fere omncs, Andreas, A- rcthas. Atto (^iQxa tJi? l^m;] Alex. Codd. Graeci fere omncs •, Andreas, Complut. Syr. Aeth. a,7ro toZ ^uAk rf)^ ^wrij. De /ilf'ro vitae] Latini quique vetuftiflimi j de //g-;7(9 vitae. Koc) twv ysypocixy.ivoov] Deed > 22, 27, 30. An ignorant Thief ; a V/retch of native Stupi- dity ;. of low Talents and vicious Tafle \ fuperci- lions Pedant -, cafuiftick Drudge -, plodding Pupil of Efcobar ; of fuperfcial Learning and profound Ignorance \ a Fool labouring to be witty ; of Fog and Didnefs -, of fiibflantial Stupidity ; of Stupour and Infenfibility beyond the famous Tom Coryar, P- 30, 25, 31, 42, 22, 29, 13, 'ly 23, o^z^ 36. A Moun- The PREFACE. s^^ A Mountehank of habitual Grimace^ who for many Tears has daily a5ied a Grimace ; aiming at aukward Ridicule •, with Eyes^ Mufcles and Shoulders, wrought into a folemn Pojlure of Gra- x;//y,p.43, 31,10, 37, 10. Of mofl tenacious and fordid Avarice^ P* 3^- Lunatick Timon ♦, crazy-headed Cenfor ; in a dark Room •, under the Repute of Crazinefs and Madnefs^ •, falling into raving Fits and fudden Ex- travagance under the Influence of the Moon \ a Scribbler out of the dark ; mad at the great En- couragement of the Propofals^ he raged^ flormed^ and took his deadly Fen in Hand^ p. 34, 10, '^^^ 32, 38, 24, Q,g. Of Rancour and Malice implacable ; of Spleen and Envy a fpightful Examiner •, whofe Life and Studies have been fpent in libelling and defaming ; fquabbling in the College to keep up his Spirits •, a Libeller of the Government j guilty of Scandalum Magnatum ; old Confcience^ good Affidavit- Man^ yet left his Friend Conyers in peril of the Pillo- ry ; broaching always mere Knavery^ with a- Pre- face about his Co?ifcience , a mofi impudent Liar ♦, a pious Calumniator \ ungrateful -, malignant •, vi- rulent j detejlable.'p. 43, 39, 31? 3^3 39? 1 15 i4> 35, 10, 21, 29, 14. Legion^ extending his wide Jaws^ and fmiling horrible like Sat an ^ p. ^. 40. ^^^^ 334 The PREFACE. And yet it is notorious to the whole Univerftty^ that the Gentleman, whofe Piulure is here dejigned by our Editor, is as unlike and contrary to it in eve- ry Circumftance of his Chara6ler, as any Man living i heing a P erf on of a ftudious, retired and exemplary Life •, of a Virtue never reproached, except with too great a Severity -, and of [ingular Talents and Abilities to adorn the honourable Poft, he now Jills amongjl us j the Profeflbrlhip of Cafuillical Divinity. Finding Cambridge, Jan. 20, 1721. FIndlvg niyfelf to he treated after a rnoji barbarous mamur in a virulent L'lhel^ which bears the Title of Dr. Bentley's Propofals, with a full Anfwer, &c. upon Pretence of my being the Author of The Remarks upon the Propofals lately publllhed by Richard Bentley, ^r. I think it necejfary upon fever al Accounts to declare asfol- /owSf viz, That I am not the Author of thofe Remarks, nor any part of them^ and that they were undertaken and written without my Afftjlance or Knowledge. That R. B. certainly knew, or eafily might have known^ that they were written by the Reverend and Learned Dr, MiDDLETON, who had own^d them to fever a I of his Friends^ by whofe means he verily believes^ that R. B. was informed that he alone was the Author. For my own party prefently after the Remarks were publifitd, I took all Oc- cafions to declare as above .^ being obliged in Juflice foto doy lefi my Silence might in fome meafure contribute to deprive my worthy Friend of the Honour due for fo excellent a Per^ formance : nor do 1 quejiion but that R. B. before he began to write his Libel, had been acquainted with what Ifaid on thofe Oc caftans. That thofe foul Afperfions, which are caji upon me in al- mojl every Page, are as falfe in Fa£l, as they are appa- rently malicious \ which is notorious to all who know me^ and to none more than R. B. himfelf. That I never wrote any Libels againji the Governmenty the College i or the Mofler, as he faljly afferts. I never wrote any thing nt all relating to the Government y or publijh'd an]/ thing concerning the College, or the Ma- Jler, except a Commemoration Sermon in Dec. lyi/j which the Majier pretended to approve of, giving it wider his Hand that he would fubfcribe to every word of it. As to other matters relating to either, I have hitherto thought them fit onely for the Cognizance of a Viftor. John Colb a tch, D. D. Senior Fellow o^ Tri- nity College, and Cafuiftical Profefibi of Di- vinity in the Univerfity of Cambridge. : CAM- CAMBRIDGE. At a Mdctlng of the Vice-Chancellor and Head?, Feb, 27, 1720-21. WHereas the Reverend John Colbatch, D. D. and Cafuijikal Profejfor of this Umverfity^ hath fnade Complaint to us of a Book lately piihlifoed^ an- nexed to Propofals for printing a new Edition of the Greek Teftament ^c. and caWd, A full Anfwer to all the Remarks of a late Pampleteer, hy a Member of Trinity College, fubfcribed ]. E. wherein the faid ]ohn Colbatch conceives himfelfto be highly injured^ as being reprefented under the mofi reproachful and infamous Cha- ra5ler^ and hath therefore applied to us for Redrefs. JVe the Vice-Chancellor ^«^ Heads of Colleges, whofe Names are underwritten, having perufed the faid Book, do find that the faid Dr. Colbatch had juji Ground of CompWuit, It appearing to us, that he is therein defcribed under very odious and ignominious Chara^ers, and do declare and pro- nounce the faid Book to he a mojl virulent and fcandalous Libel ; highly injurious to the faid Dr. Colbatch, contrary io good Manners, and a notorious Violation of the Statutes and DifcipUne of this Unlverftty. And asfoon as the Au- thor of the faid Libel can he difcovered, we refolve to do Jujlice to the faid Dr. Colbatch, by infixing fuch Cenfure upon the Offender .^ as the Statutes of this Univerfity in that Cafe da appoint. The. CrofTe, Vice-Chancdlor. R. Jenkln. John Covel. Wm. Grig. C. Afliton. D. WaterJand. Bardfey Fifhcr, Wm. Savage. Edw. Lany. SOME SOMEFARTHER REMARKS, Paragraph by Paragraph, UPON PROPOSALS, ^c. OUR Editor begins his difntal Story^ by acquainting us, that the Author of the Remarks^ at the fir Jl pihlijhing^ might have been called Legion * ; this wc muft own to * p. 9, be fetting out like a7i Editor of the New Tefta- menty with a Scripture Simile in his Mouth ; but how does he make it out ? Why, becaufe every one, he fays, of the Univerfity that iioas thought to have Conceit ednefs and Malice enough to write ity was fufpe5fed to he the Author. The Truth is, that he and his Friends did me and my Re- marks the Honour to impute them to many Perfons of allowed Learning and Abilities ; and tho* it foon appeared, that not one of thofe, they were pleafed to fufpe6b, had the Icafl: Hand or Share in the Guilty yet the very fufpicion^ it leems, was enough to make them odious ; they were capable of doing it, and therefore our E- ditor hates them, and the Opportunity muft not be loft of branding them here with the Charadlers of conceited and malicious. Vol. IV. Y But JjS Some farther Remarks on the Propofaisi But the Author's Party is difcovered, he telb us, /;/ his T^itle-page^ where our Mafter is named plain Richard Bentley, without the Honour of * p* 9- his Degree *. This indeed is a Charge which I cannot deny to be true ; my very 'Title-page difcovers that I belong to an Univerftty^ which has deprived him of his Degrees -, and might very juftly have deprived me too^ if I ihould pretend to beflow Titles^ which fhe has thought fit to take away ♦, but our Editor knows full well that he has no Right or Claim to the Stile of Do5lor ; and whenever he fpeaks or a£ls in his own Perfon, dare not fo much as aflume it himfelf ; in the Title of his own Propofalsj we have no more than Edidit Richardus Bentleius ; and I, who am onely tranflating him, fay, puhlifhed by Richard Bentley •, pray where's the Difference ? In an Jnforfiiation drawn up and profecuted by himfelf, for a late Pamphlet againft him, the Charge is for vilifying the Reputation of one Richard Bentley ; the calling himfelf Dodor, might, he knows, have been fatal to his Caufe, and have endangered a Nonfuit ^ therefore. Good Mafler Richard^ be not for once fo cere- monious, nor iland fo much upon Com'pli- ments with your old Friend Conyers-\'. But what is the mofl provoking to him is, that I will not allow him to have either Talents or Mate- rials adequate to the Work he has undertaken ; this 1 muil declare to be my Opinion, and as I am well convinc'd of it my felf, do not quc- ftion^ puhltjhed ^^ Richard Bentley. '^^a (lion, before I have done with him, but to convince the World of it too ; but if this be poflible, what an unhappy Confequence does he neceffarily fallen upon it ? P'or then, fays he, * No body muft any longer confide or he fecure in* p jo, his good Name ; a Worm^ a Maggot can demolijh it in a trice^ and the higheft Reputation in Letters acquired by repeated Proofs^ for the fpace of ahov^ thirty Tears, is in one Day to be blajied by an Infe5f, Here we fee what it was that made him fo confident^ ^o fecure of impofnig upon the World, viz. his high Reputation in Letters ; this, he imagined, would have made us receive, with a flaviHi implicit Applaufe, whatever he had pleafed to propound to us •, he did not doubt, but his over-bearing Name would oblige us to Charge rather upon our own Ignorance, than that of fo learned an Editor •, or would have ter- rified us at leafl, from entring the Lifts with fo renowned and formidahk a Champion \ it is this AfTurance, we fee, that a great part of his Rea- foning chiefly turns upon \ Have not I had the higheft Reputation in Letters ? How then can I want Talents or Materials ? Has not my Life been fpent in Critical Ohfervations ? How then cad a crazy-headed Cenfor f pretend to teach me La- \ p. lo; tin ? This he reckons fo conclufive, that it is the onely Anfwer he has given to the Charge ot Impropriety and falfe Latin^ which I had made to his Title-page -, but he is no: the onely Man Y 2 I could 340 Some farther Remarks on the Propofdts^ I could name, who has acquired a Reputation in Learning much fuperior to his Merits and has palled for a wondrous Critick in all the Lan- guages, without being able to write any one of them with Tafte or Corrcdlnefs. In the Clofe of his Introdudion he charges me with having been the Publijher of feveral Libels written by Dr. Colbatch againfi the Ma- * p. 11. fier *, the College^ and the very Government % and yet I declare, that I never yet publifhed any thing in my Life that was not ftridly and entirely of my own compofing, nor any thing at all, that ever related to, or refie5ted in any Manner upon the Government ; I did indeed in a late Pamphlet reprefent xhtjujl Complaints of the Fellows of his College^ (my old Friends and Fel- low- Suferers) againfi his opprejfwe Government v for which he is now profecuting me by way of Information in the King^s Bench \ but tho* he flies to the Law himfelf, as an injured, libeWd Perfon, yet he makes no Scruple, we fee, to libel me and others too as much as he pleafes, and with a Modelly peculiar to himfelf pre- judges the very Caufe now depending, and con- \ p. 35. demns me even -f to the Pillory, And tho' he is plcafed to refle6l upon Dr. X ibid. Colbatch^ for having left me J in the Lurch ; I have yet the Satisfaction to aiTure him, that I am provided with fuch Affidavits both from the Do^or and feveral others^ as will be fufficicnt. puhlijhed hy Richard Bentlev. 341^" tho* not perhaps tojuftify me to the Law (which I did not at all underftandy nor ever defigned to offend) yet tojuftify me however to the World from the leaft Sufficion of my having done him any Injury. Paragraph the Firfl. 'The Author of this Edition^ ohfciving that the Printed Copies of the New Tejtament^ both of the Original Greek and Antient vulgar Latin^ were taken from Manufcripts of no great Antiquity, fuch as the firft Editors could then procure •, a7td that now by God's Providence there are MSS. in Europe, (accefftble^ tho" with great Charge) above a thoufand Tears old in both Languages \ believes he may do good Service to common Chrifiia^ nity, if he piblifloes a New Edition of the Greek and Latin, not according to the recent and inter- polated Copies^ but as refrefented in the moft an- tient and venerabk MSS. in Greek and Roman Ca- pital Letters, Remarks, I fhall not trouble the Reader with a long Repetition of what I have offered in my Re- marks in Anfwer to this Paragraph i it will be fufficient to inform him, that thinking it my Duty to vindicate in fome Meafure the Autho- rity of our printed Scripture^ fo roundly firuck at hy our Editor, and to defend the Cli.araders of Y 3 cu; 242 Some farther Remarks on the Propofahy our fcrmer Edit or Sy from the vile Infinuations^ here tlirown out upon them, I have fhewn that feveral of them were Men of the greatefi Learn- ing and Abilities for a Work of this Nature, that all the Countries of Chriftendom could furnifh; and that they had all the Affiftance and Encou- ragement in the Execution of it, which the Power and Munificence o^ Princes ^ Popes and Cardinals could fupply them with ; that they were fo far from taking up, or being content with fuch Maniifcripts as they happened to have at handy or had pick'd up by chance^ or fuch as they could eafily and haflily get together ♦, that it was the Bufmefs and Labour of their Lives to fearch out every thing that wzs curious and rare in that Kind, or could be ufeful to their Pur- pofe in any Part of the World -, that we have Accounts of many Manufcripts procured for their Service with great Difficulty and Expence irom different Regions, difiant Countries, remote Iflands ', that in Fac^'t, feveral of the Manufcripts they made ufc of, are allowed by all Judges to be as antient and correal as any now known in the World ; that their Editions formed upon thefe Manufcripts have, ever fmce their Publi- cation, been highly valued and cfteemed by all Men of Senfe and Learning, as generally accurate and ccrre^, and by none more than cur Editor hiinfclf, when he had no private Views Or Inter efts to ferve by decrying them. And now, can any thing be a more full or dired puhltjhed by Richard Bentley. 343 dlred Anfwer than this ? He alTures us, that the Manufcripts of our printed Copies of the New Tejlament are of no great Antiquity j I have prov- ed them to he of the great eft ; he fays, that there are now MSS. in Europe, acccffible^ tho" with great Charge^ above a thoufand I'ears old ; and I have fhewn, that our Editors had aBuaJly Accefs to feveral of that Age ; and that no longer ago than fourteen Years, all the Copies known and famous in Europe were collated for the Ufe of Dr, Mill •, he fays, that his MSS. are written in Greek and Roman Capital Letters \ a certain Characteriftic of true Antiquity -, and juft fo, fay I, are federal of the Copies of every other Editor I have mentioned. This, I thought, was fufficient to prove the Injuftice and Barbarity of his Treatment of all former Editors ; Perfons to whom the Chriftian World will always have the higheft Obligation, and to whom no Man \a it can be more particu- larly obliged than himfelf, if he is Jincerc and in earneft in the defign of his Edition. I Iliall proceed therefore to confider what he has to fay in Juftification of himfelf, 2n this Anfwer of his, which I am now examining ; all which when laid together is in Suhftance and Ef- /^<^ juft what follows, viz. That let us fay what we will of our prior Edi^ iors^ they are not however to be named with Y 4 ^^^ 544. ^(^^^^ farther Re-marks on the Propofals^ the mighty Bentley ; the Men might he pafTablc enough for the Jge they lived ift^ but we mufl not think to compare them to the enlightened Criticks of thefe Times, to the 'cuot vvv fSpolet iiOTiv. For the World is now grown older and * P- '^Z* wifer^ * has now advanced two whole Centuries in Age^ Jince the Date of the Complutenfian and Erafmus'j Edition^ and as much within thirty Tears Jince that of Rob. Stephens, that they, + p. j6. poor Men, -f- did not know how to ufe th^very Manufcripts they had in their Hands -^ for Ste^ tp. iz. fhens was a meer % Printer •, Mill an ignorant § p. 1 8, § Blund&er ; and for Cardinal Ximenes'j Purfi, 26, 33. \\ what's that to our Mafter? Four Millions of II P- '5- Crowns would not buy the MSS, that he has col- lated for his Edition, And as for the Manufcripts themfelves, which they made ufe of, Ke tells us, the plaifi * p. 12. pa0 ; * that older and better are now to'hfi had^ than former Editors could come at \ that in thofh t p. 13. Daysy f when no better were feen^ they gave the titles of Antient and Venerable to fuch as are now fcarce reckoned in the fecond or third Rate -, that t p. 33' the befl Editor of them all J mad^ ufe of fuch 54' fcrubb MSS, fuch fcoundril Copies^ as our Majler would f corn even to look into •, and that therefore upon the whole, confidering the great Abilities and Advantages he is poflcfled of, above all who went before him -^ we muft be forced to own ^ p. II. ^^^^ § ^^ ^^^ expreffed himfelfin the modejlefl^ tenderefl^ and moji innocent fVords in the Worlds with-^ fuhli[hc.d hy Richard Bentley..^ 34^ mthout the fmalkft Reproach or Reflexion upon the prior Editors. This is the Sum and Subflance of our Ma- iler's Apology, and the Reader will excufe mc, I dare fay, from giving him or my felf the Trouble of a ferious Anfwer to it, or of adding any thing more to what I have faid fo fully on this occafion in my Remarks \ however, fince tie infills, flill upon his Privilege, of trampling at pleafure upon the great and learned Men of all Ages, he muft excufe me, if I examine like- wife, with no fmall Freedom^ what Right and Title he has to afTunrie fuch a Power to himfelf, and what Truth and Reality there is in this Pretence of his to fuch Superior Talents and Materials: But becaufe the Confideration of his Talents may fall more properly under our IS'otice in fome other Parts of thefe Remarksy I fhall at prefent onely enquire into the true flate of bis Materials j his older and better ManufcriptSy which he makes fuch a Noife about. The firft Account I have met with of his Manufcripts is in a printed Letter of his, upon the Subjcdl of his Edition, dated Trin, Coll. Jan, I. 1 7 16- 1 7, where we are informed by him, that he makes ufe of no Manufcripts, hut thofe of a thoufand Tears old, or above •, of which fort he had gat at that Time twenty together in 246 Somt farther Remarks on the Fropofahy in his Study ^ which made upy one with another^ twenty thoufand Tears [^]. Now before we go any farther, if he will but condefcend to prove the Truth of this ftngle FaB-, and make it fairly appear to the World, that he ever was in Pofleflion of fuch a Number ef Manufcripts at once^ and of fuch Jntiquity as is here pretended, I promife to give up the Caufe, and to own him as accomplijhed an Editor as he pleafes : but I have ^^^n fo much of the Hiftory and prefent State of the Manufcripts of the New "Teftament^ as to know it to be impofll- ble for any Man or any Library to Ihew fo great a Number of fuch old ones^ 2X any one time in their PofTeflion. Mr. Martin of Utrecht, [^] fpeaking upoa the Subjecfl of this very Letter^ fays, that our Editor is not a little indebted to his good Fortune for having found twenty Manufcripts well told^ which are of a thoufand Tears ago^ or above ; it being one of the mofl extraordinary Difcoveries in this kind of Literature^ that has been made in eur Days. And in another Place, The Point will be, fays he, whether thefe Manufcripts lately difcovered be really as old as Dr. Bentley takes la] Vid, Two Letters to Dr. Bmtlej, and the Doftor's . Anfwer, Lond. 1717. [h] Martina Defence of his DilTertation in Englljh, p. 13. it. p. 16. them puhlijhed by Richard BENtLtV. 347 them to be ; for we are not ignorant how diffi- cult it is, not to fay impoffible, to pafs always in thefe Cafes a certain Judgment and fecure from all Doubt. Monfieur Simon in his Critical Hiftory of the New ^ejlament [^a\ gives us a plcafant Account of jufi fuch an Editor as this of ours. Father Ame- lote •, who, in the Preface of his French 'Tranfla- tion of the New ^efiament, informs the World, that he made an exa5f Search for all the Manu^ fcripts of Chrijlendom, of above a thoufand Tears did, and had procured Collations of them all i that he had got above twenty out of France ; all thofe of the Vatican, and the famous Libraries of Italy •, ftxteenfrom Spain, without reckoning thofe of Cardinal Ximenes \ all thofe of England and the Northern Countries •, many from the heart of Greece •, with thofe that the Ant lent Fathers made ufe of One would imagine, fays Monfieur Simcn, up- m reading this Paffage, that this Father had at this T'ime in his Hands, all the Copies he fpeaks of, or at leafi the Collations of them ; yet all this long Difcourfe, fays he, is but a mere flourifJj of Rhetorick, \a\ to raife and ennoble the StibjcLi he is l^a] Tom. I. p. 346. [^] Mais tout ce long Difcours n'efl qu'une figure de Rhetorique, dont il fe fert pour, ^c, II ne fit point d'a^tre reponfe la deffus a Ton Confrere, qui luy montra en 34^ [Som farther Remarks on the Propdfalsy is treating of j for being advifed by a Friend (who fhewed him at the fame time all his various Read^ ings in Print) to leave cut of his Preface^ this ftrange Rant about his Manufcripts^ he made na ether Anfwery than that the Argument he was handlings made it necejfary for him to exprefs him- felf after a noble fublime manner ^ to make the fironger Imprejpon upon the Minds of his Readers o And having Occafion to mention this fame Editor again in another Place, \a] he tells us, that the great Number- of Manufcripts of twelve end thirteen hundred Tears ^ which be pretended to have colle^ed^ exifted onely in his Imagination^ and that he could not be fincere^ becaufe he had not produced one Jingle various Readings which had not been known and prittted before in ether Editions. The Cafe is juft the fame with our Englifh A- melote, for when we come a little clofer to him, the twenty old Manufcripts, which he has jufl * p. 13. before given us an Account of, Jhrink at once*". en mcpic terns ccs diverfes lc9ons imprimces, fi non que la maticre, dont il parlpit, demandoit qu'il s'expUcat d*unc maniere noble, pour faire plus d'impreffion dans Tcfprit, Uc. thid. [/z] Tom. 2. p. 370. Ce grand nombre de MSS. qu'il alTure avoir douzc & treize cens ans, n'ont cte que dans Ton imagination. II nc nous a donnc aucuncs divcrfites dc le^on, qui ne fuiTcntdejaimprimees. ihid. into. puhlijhed by Richard Bentvlev. 34^ into Eight ; and follow him ftill a little far- ther, and he is forced again to own, that even of thefe eighty there are cndy four^ which -f had\ p. 14. not been collated and made ufe of by Dr. Mill. And now we are come to a full Difcovtry of the whole Strength of our Editor, viz, four Manufcripts •, thefe are all the Forces he is Ma- iler of, to maintain the War he has declared againft all former Editors ; with thefe four it is, that he has promifed to work fuch Wonders ; to produce the very Teftament read at the Court- €il \a\ of Nice, and even to go a Century higher and 7'etrieve the very Exemplar of Origen. The whole Number of Greek Manufcripts of the Old and New Teftament^ now known in Eu- rope^ amounts, as 'tis fuppofed, [b] to about four hundred •, and there's hardly one amongll them ail, which has not been collated and made ufe of in fome or other of our printed Editions ; and yet by our Mafier*s bhflering one would imagine the Cafe to ht juft the Reverfe between him and the former Editors \ and that all of them together had never feen 7nore than his four i whilft he was in PolTellion of their foiiv hundred. Dr. Kufler by a very diligent Search found out twelve Manufcripts.^ which had efcaped Dr. {a] Vid. the two printed Letters, ^c. [h\ Vid. Le Long Bibliotheca facra, Par'n. Mill's 350 ^ome farther Remarks on the Propofalsj Mill's Enqtciry ; and tho' he was willing enough to make the heft Penny he could of them, yet all he could do, was to publifh again Dr. Mill's Teftament in Holland^ with the Additional Read- ings he had gather'd ; and he thought, I dare fay, that he had difpofed of them to good Advantage. But our Editor with no more than his four Copies^ will be content with nothing lefs than a new Original Edition of his ewn^ and fuch an one too, as is to make all others whatfoever ufclefs and contemptible ; he ought however, methinks, to oblige his Suhfcribers with a more particular and fatisfa5iory Account of the four Manufcripts he pretends to ; whether, thd* never ufed by Br. Mill, they were not Hill collated by Br. Kuiler ; whether any one of them^ or all together^ make out the whole New T^eftament : 'Tis a great Rarity to find any one of Value which contains above a * p. 34. Part of it, and our Editor tells us himfelf, * thai there are very few good ones^ nay not fo much as t p. 42* one of any -f Antiquity, beftdes the Alexandrine, which comprehends the whole *, fo that whenever he thinks fit to anfwer thefe ^eries, his little Stock will probably once more be reduced to half nay, he will be left, I am almoft confident, with nothing more than fome piece onely of the New Teftameyit in Manufcript, But his Copies, I know, are like the Syhii^s Books, while we lejfen their Number^ we flill enhance puhtijhed by Richard Bentlev." ^5t enhance their Value •, and if we leave him but one^ he will foon make it as valuable as aJl the reft ; leave him, I fay, but one^ to j^t his Foot upofty and like another Archimedes, he will (hake the Chrijlian IVorld. And thus we have fcen a fair Account and true Hiftory of his Manufcripts \ how from twenty^ they dwindled to eight -, from eight to four 'y from four to And is not this Father Amelote all over ? and muft not Envy itfelf con- fefs, that our Editor'' s Imaginatioyi is full as live- ly •, his Rhetorick as flrong as that of his Reve- rend Brother. But he thinks ft, we find, wondrous hard^ that Br. Mill Jhouldfo oft be cafl in his "Teeth *, * p. 41, and that he fhould be charged with refledingiA. upon a Perfon whom he had not fo much as named in his Propofals : What jufl and critical Reafon> ing is this ? He has not abufed Dr. Mill in his Propofals, nor Dr. Colbatch, I warrant ye, in this his Defence of them, becaufe he has not mentioned fo much as the Name of either. But is not the DoUor's Edition included in the ge- neral Cenfure, he has pafTed upon all^ without Exception or Referve ? Nay, is it not particu- larly levelled at and defcribed, by that-, which gives fiich Offence to good -{- Perfons, that, whofej- par, 5. Pages are crowded with fuch Numbers of various Readings ? However, he is very confident, that there can be no Comparifon between the Do^or*s fFork 3$i Some farther R£Mar:^s oh the Propofalsj fVork and his, they being differed toto gendre • p. 14. from each other *, the Dodtor*s Ambition reach- ed no Higher than to give the Text of Printer Stephens ; but he refolves to prefent the World with that of the famous Origen •, the Dodor's View was no more than to provide a Promptu- cry for the Judicious ; but it is he who muft ^p- ply this Promptuary to Ulb and Pradticc* Thus the one is but a mere Collater ; the other the Critic, the one furnilhes Tools^ but the ether muft find the Ufe of them. But we need not wonder at his taking fo much Liberty with the Deadj when 'tis com- mon with him to make full as free with the Liv- ing ; even Sir Ifaac Newton himfelf ; whofc great and adthirable Difcovcries in Mathematicks and Natural Philofophy were, according to him, but ufekfsy empty Speculations, of no Benefit or Service to Mankind, till he was pleafed, as he has told us in Print, [j] to difccver to the World the unknown Ufe of them^ and to apply them, as he defigns to do with Dr. M//'s Promptuary, to the filencing oi Atheifts. We have brought him, however, to fjpeak, with fomewhat more Modejly than before, of his + p. 14. intended Edition -, for he condefcends f to own, that he will do Dr. Mill the Honour to make ufe of bis Colle^ion ; and becaufe his main Ob- W yid. Dr. Bentltf% Letter t« the Biftiop of tly. jcdion puhlijijed hy Richard Bentley. '^c^'^ je6lion to the Do6lor*s Edition feems now to be chiefly from the Form and Manner of it, from the Management and Bifpofition of the Materials^ I fhall endeavour to fet the Matter in fuch a Light, as will make it eafie for the Reader to determine the Controverfy j in oid^ir to which I fhall defire him to anfwer mc two or three plain Queflions. Whether all the various Readings of the New J'eftament arc not rather curious and nice Obrei*va- tions, than Difcoveries of any real Service to Cbriftianity ; and ufcful rather to the Learned^ than the Chriftian Reader ? Whether all of them together affe5i or alter in any Manner any Article of Faith, or even Moral Precept ? Whe- ther in Stephens's Edition we have not the full and adequate Senfe of the facred Text in all Points even of the kaji Importance ? Whether a corred and juft Tranflation of that Edition would not be fufHcient for the People to all hi- tents and Purpofes of Religion ? If thefe ^eries be anfwered in the Affirmative^ as I am certain they muft, and 2ishe himfelf has already done \ I Ihall take the Liberty to aflert and maintain that Dr. M//'s Edition (as it ex- hibits Stephens's Text, with all the known various Readings under it) is for the very Form and M^^w^^of it more ufefully 2indjudiciouJly contriv- ed for the Service of the Leariied or even Chri- Vol. III. Z Jfian 354 •S'iJw^ farther Remarks en the Propofals^ fiian World, than any other which our Editor can pretend to give us. Is it not the fame thing to the Reader, con- fidered as a Scholar^ whether he finds the true Readings with their Authorities at the ^op or Bottom of the Page ? inferted in the TVaY, or placed in the M'^rgin ? Cannot he aflert and apply them with the fame Force in all Critical Controverjies ? Is not the 'Text made as clear and certain by them, in the one way as the other ? Dr. Mill believed, that [^] he had mended Stephens^ s 'Text in two thoufand Places ; he be- lieved iikewife, that he had retrieved mofi of the true "Readings of the Old Vulgate^ with the very Greek from whence they were taken -, yet he never imagined, that his Emendations would lofe any of their Force or Merit by being placed with his Notes at the Bottom of the Page : He knew, that however probable any Readings might ap-^ pear to him, they were not hov/ever demonjlra- hle^ and what one Man might look upon to be Genuine^ another would flill argue to be Spu- rious •, and that the making fo many Alterations In the Text would give Offence to many, do Ser- vice to none, and occafion onely perpetual Dif- putes about Trifles. [a\ rid. Mill. Prolegora, it. vid. p. 41. Thus puhlijhed by Richard Bentley. ZSi . Thus for inflance, if Dr. Mill had infcrted his two thoufand Alterations into the Text^ we Ihall find prefently that our Editor was adlually prepared and refolved to have /^/<:/y^/y?>m^6'-:e;«** p. 33. again^ and reftored them to the Place from whence they were taken ; and what would have been the Confequence ? Why, his own Emenda- tions^ when advanced in their (lead, would have found no better Fate j for as little as 1 pretend to Criticifm, I would undertake to throw out a great Part of them my felf, as we fhall fee by and by, when we come to his Specimen •, and thus after much Squabble and Wrangling, we ihould find our felves at laft juil where we firfl: itt out, fettling again perhaps in the old 'Text of ■Stephens. But Dr. M7/, he tells us, ■\ follows this fame \ p. 14, ^ext of Stephens to a Letter^ even where he de- cides againfi it ; what, decide for and againfl it at the fame time ? This, he thought, muft needs make the Reader exclaim at the Dolors great Stupidity ; and yet the cafe is no more than this : The Bo5lor's Beftgn in his Edition was to exhibit Stephens's very Text moft punctually, without any the teafi Variation from it ♦, to this he fubjoins all the various Readings^ with fome Critical Notes occafionally giving us his Judg- ment upon the faid Text. In many Places, it feems, he decides againfl it •, but how then does h^ follow it at the fame time ? Or how is it pofTi- Z % ble 346 Sottic farther Remarks on the Propinfals, ble to do hth in the fame inftance ? So that this Jumhle of JVords^ defigned as a Refle6lion on the Dodior, proves to be a meer Piece of JargoHy and Nonfenfe of our Editor^ own. I am far from believing Dr. Mill to have been infallible, or his Edition without Faults •, being perfuaded, that no Man in the World ever yet executed a Defign fo laborious and ex- tenftve without committing many ; but as they bear no Proportion to the juji Merit of his Performance, they may and ought to be for- given. If the Dodlor indeed, in his large Pro- legomena^ had given as many folid Proofs of Ignorance^ as our Editor in the Half-fheet of his Propofals ; or if, in any whole Book of the New Tejlament^ he had made as many Blunders^ and fuffered as much Incorre^nefs^ as our Editor has in xht fingle Chapter of his Specimen^ I am fatisfied, that Men of Letters would never have endured his Edition. Since I have had Occafion to fay fo much here of Dr. M/7/, it may be proper to bring together, under one View, whatever relates to him in the prefent Controverfy -, and to take notice once for all of the fcurrilous and inhuman Treatment which our Editor has thought fit to Ihew to his worthy deceafed Friend. He had formerly much courted and careffed this Centlemany and for the Credit of his Friend- Jhip puhlijhed hy Richard Bentlev. ^^7. fioip and his Countenance^ had paid him very ex- traordinary Compliments in his Life-time : In a printed Letter to him, he fays, [a] That he was the mojl experienced of all Men living in the Know-^ ledge and Study of Manufcripts •, that in col telling Materials for his Edition, he had nicely and cu- rioufly examined all the Writings of the Fathers, all the antient Verfions, and an infinite 'Number of Manufcripts \ that his Edition would be an Orna-^ ment to his Country, and a Safeguard to the Church ', and that whoever pur chafed it might fancy himfelf in a manner turning ov^r and read- ing the very Originals ; nay, fince his Death, before he had any particular Inter efi in under- valuing him, he has done him the Juftice to fpeak of him in much the fame flrain, and de- clared [F] that his Friendfhip and Memory would ever be dear to him. Yet now there is hardly a Paragraph in this Book of his, without fome fpiteful, fevere Re- [^a\ Tu vcro, Milli doftiflimc, qui omnium mortaliura maxime ia eo ftudlo verfatus es. Quippe etenim ad cam copiam comparandum omnia S. P^trum fcripta, omnes antiquas veifiones, & infinitarn vim Codd. MSS. curiose excuffiili. E3.. res Britannix noftrae fplendori erit & Ecdefise prarfidio. Adeo ut qui tuam Editionem fibi comparaverit, ipfi ilia propemodum Archetypa ve fare manibus, atque ocu- iis uiurpare videatur. Vid. Jo. Malals? Hill, per Jo. ^illium, una cum Epift. Rich. Bentleii. [f] Remarks on Freethink, part 1. p. 61. Z 3 fie^icK J5^ ^ome farther Remarks on the PropofaL\ Jie^fion upon his Merit and Character \ but in his thirty-third Page he labours more efpecially to overthrow all his Credit^ with three particular Inllances of his great Weaknefs and want of Judgment, The firfl is from the Ufe he makes of fcrub Manufcripts and fcoundrel Copies ; for having defcribed a Manufcript^ fays he, to be^ not Vellum^ hut Paper ^ and of a recent Hand^ yet this worthy ' one has eleven of his true Readings ^ andfo he deals with the reft. But let us here alk our Editor^ whether all Criticks are not agreed, that recent Manufcripts are not to be neglected in a Work of this Na- ture, and that they may fometimes afford pro- bable or genuine Readings which have not been met with before, as well as give farther Light and Confirmation to thofe that have. This he himfelf has declared to be true in Fa6t as to the Manufcripts of Terence ; the oldeft and befl Copy of him, fays he, [^] is now in the Vatican Libra- ry^ which comes neareft to the Poet^s own Hand^ but even that has hundreds of Errors., moft of which may be mended out of other Exemplars, which are otherwife more recent, and of inferior Value, It is very poITible, and certainly true in fome \a\ Ibid. p. 64. ; Inftances, publi/ljed by Richard Bentley. 359 Inilances, that Manufcripts of Modern Bate may have been copied from others very antient and cor- re£l^ which have afterwards been loll j the Doc- tor's Defign led him to examine all the Manu- fcripts he could come at, both Old and Nezv, he gave their due Weight and Preference to the older and better^ and has in Fact collcc^Aed the Readings of all the mofl antient and valuable ones then known in the World. How filly is then the Objection that out of two thoufand Readings which he preferred to the common ones, he has pick'd eleven out of a recent Manufcript ? It can deferve onely to be laughed at, and difcovers much more the Malice of our Editor^ than any Ignorance in the 'Do5lor, The other two Inflances of the Dolor's want of Judgment I fhall give likewife in his own Words : He has, fays he, f ^"^^ Chara^eriftics to f p. ^^^ judge by (as any one that will perufe his Prolego- 34. mena will fee) Omiffioyis and Solecifms, If a Word or Words are omitted in any Copies, out they muft gOy as Interpolations -, thefe make fifteen hun- dred at leajl out of hi^ two thoufand. And what is very extraordinary, the more Significancy,- the more JmpoYiance the omitted Words have, the more confident he is, that they are fpuricus and inter- polated; and for this fpecious Reafon, Quis fmus tarn infigne verbum omiferit, prfeterierit, ex- punxerit ? What Copyift: in his Wits would leave out fo ccnfiderabk a Word, if he found it in the ^^emplar that he tranfcribed? One may fay, Quis 360 Some farther RemaPvKS on the Propofahy fanus cotdd argue at this Rate ? Is a IVord fi conducing to the Clearnefs^ Grace, and Beauty of the Sentefice (as the Bo5for often allows) and con- firmed by the oldefl Copies and, Verfions to he cafi out of the 1'ext, becaufe one drunken or drowfy Sta- tioner^ s Boy happened to omit it ? God forbid -, and yet this is his perpetual Manner, ^he other is Solecifm, which decides the Remainder of his Ge- nuine Readings : If in a few, or in one Manu- fcripi, there's a Reading that makes an uvockoXh^ Bov, an Ahfurdity, a Barbarifm, he feldom fails to warrant it for true. In (hort, in his Scheme, whatever appears bright and elegant^ (if one Co- py does hut fail in it) is an Emendation of fome Copyiji : whatever appears impolite, idiotic, abfurd, (if the mofl fcoundrel Copy countenances it) is ma- nus Apofloli. This is the Charge which lie has brought a- gainfl Dr. Mill ; and if we allow for the Ex- travagance^ the Partiality and the falfe Colours with which it is drawn, every Body will eafily fee, that the T)o5lor is much in the right, and that his Notions, tho' capable of being (trained and carried too far, are in general jujl and true -, and thefe very Rules, tho' like all others, not without Exception, are certainly good and proper to be obferved by an Editor of the New Tefla- went. Let us confider then the firjl of thefe Cha- ra^erijiics -, and fince our Editor has not thought fit puhlifhed hy Richard Bentley, 361 fit to try the Merit of it by 2iny particular In- ftances or Examples of falfe Readings^ which have been put upon us by it, we can onely con- fider it ahftrauledly and in general^ without tak- ing in the Circumflances of older or better Ma- nufcripts on one fide or the other. Suppofc then that fome Copies exhibit a Word of great Significancyy to clear and determine the Senfe of a PalTage, otherwife dark and ohfcure -, and that other Copies are flill found to be without this V/ord \ the Queflion is, how we are to deter- mine the genuine Reading ? Dr. Mill fays, that the Word is fpurious^ and does not belong to the 'Text •, our Editor affirms the contrary, and rea- fons thus ; Is a Word fo conducing to the Clear- nefs^ Grace and Beauty of the Sentence {as the Potior often allows) to he cafi out of the Text^ be- caufe a drunken^ drowzy Stationer's Boy happened to omit it ? God forbid. But will not this Reafoning ferve to defend al- moft all Interpolations whatfoever ? And yet is it not allowed, that there are a great many of them in the Scriptures, and that they are much more numerous than the Omiffions ? Our Editor fays, that in the Chapter of his Specimen^ he has made fifty-two Emendations -, that is, he has taken fifty-two various Readings from the Bottom of Dr. MiWs Page^ and removed them into the Text ; yet of thefe fifty-tzvo Alterations^ a great Part are made according to this very Rule of pmijfwnsy feveral of them fupported by the Au- thority 3 62 Some farther Remarks on the Propofals^ thorlty onely of a fingle Manufcript •, for Ex- ample, KaflapoV TTojaf^oVy ver. I.] omittunt jea- Gocpovy Alex. Codd. Anglici duo Galltci tres., &c. 'Eyu el [A TO AK(poiy ver. 13.] omittunt hfjcty Alex, Athanafius Codd. fere omnes -, Andreas., A- rethas, Sed Origines hahet nfjui bis. 'ivja-i X^igr^^ *ver. 21.] omittit Alex. And again in the fame Verfe, M^loi 'srsHvlcov '^[^iav 'AfJtrjv] omittit vi^m ^AfJiiiv Alex. He has already, we know, deter- mined againft the Genuinenefs of the famous pnffage of St. John I Epifb. v. 7. a Reading., by far the moft important of all the thirty thoufand; fupported by good Authorities., and confonant and agreeable to the Do£frine of the Apoftle : For what Reafon then has he condemned it as fpu- rious ? Why becaufe fome Manufcripts and fome Fathers have ojnittcd it. And this fure is car- rying the Rule of Omijfwns much farther than f p. 42. Dr. Mill himfelf^ tho' it was, he tells us, f his peculiar Foible : For the Doctor happens here to be on the other fide of the Queftion, and in this Inftance has declared, even againft his favourite .Rule., for the common Reading of our printed Copies. And now will not his own Argument tura much more forcibly againft himfelf ? Are Words fo fignifcant., fo important^ fo conducing to the Ckarnefs and Beauty of the Sentence to be caft out of the T^ext., becaufe a drunken or drowzy Sta- tioncr^s Boy happened to omit !hem? God forbid -y and yet this is his perpetual Manner, But puhlijhed hy Richard Bentlev. 3^ But let us now hear a little on the other hand, what the Do^or has to alledge in defence of his Rule. Why he fays, that it is more probable, that a T^ranfcriher would chufe rather to clear up an ohfcure Paffage^ by the infertion of an explanatory^ fignificant Word, than to darken and confound a clear one^ by omitting or expung- ing fuch a Word \ and he would defend himfelf by fhewing, that it is in the perplexed and du- bious Pajfages of Scripture, that Interpolations are generally found ; that mofl Interpolations of the 'Text were derived originally from the Margin, where it was ufual to place Words or Sentences of plain and obvious Senfe, to explain fuch as were more difficult in the Text ; that thefe by degrees crept into the Text itfelf ♦, the Tranfcrihers thinking they did no harm, by making it more intelligible ^ and that this was the common Pradice of the Copyers of St. JeronCs Days, wha fays, [<3] that they were ufed to write, not what they found, but what they underjlood-, and that this is rot meer Conje5lure or Speculation, but what all, who are converfant in Majtufcripts, will find confirmed and demonllrated by Fad and Experiment •, and this I take to be a fuf- ficient Juftification in general of Dr. Miirsfirft Rule of Criticifm, viz. that of Omiffi.ons, \a\ Librariorumque incuria, qui fcribunt non quod inveniunt, fed quod intelligunt ; & dum alienos errores emendare nituntur, oftendunt fuos, Hier. ad Lucin. Tom. 4. p. 578. Let 364 Some farther Remakk% on the Propofals^ Let us now proceed to examine the fecand-, which our Editor calls that of Solectfm ; and here . he thinks he has done the Bo5for''s Bufinefs -, has painted him to the Life^ and has faid enough to make him juftly odious to all good Chriftians. What is the Style of Scripture fo hafe^ vulgar^ idiotic^ fo full of Barbarifms^ Solecifms, and Ab- furdities^ as Dr. Mill pretends ? God forbid. Nothing fure but what is bright^ elegant and, polite^ could come from the Hand of an Apoflle. Here we fee two contrary Judgments pafTed up- on the Style and Language of the facred Penmeny hy Dr. Mill, and our Editor ; and the Reader by determining which of them is the true one, may in feme Meafure decide at the fame time the main Point in Queftion, about our Editor's Talents for the Work he has undertaken, and how far he is qualified to give us an Edition of the New Testament » St. Paul tells us, that he was fent by Chriff to preach the Gofpel, [a] not with IVifdom of Words ; nor with Excellency of Speech \ nor with enticing Words of Man's Wifdom : And left our Editor fhould fay, that thefe difabling ExprefTions are but Strains of Humility^ ufual with and becoming the Aponle \ his Friend St. Jercm has told us [^] [«] I Cor. i. 17. ii. I, 4. [^J Nequaquam Paulum de humilltate, fed de con- fcientiae veritate dixiflc, etiam nnnc approbamus. Hier, ad Algas. quite puhlijhed ^_y Richard Bentley^ ^S^ quite the contrary ; that it was not any Humility in St. Paul, hut a Cenfcientioufnefs of the Truth^ which drew from him thefe Declarations -, and he Jhews {/i] it to have been with the Apojiles^ in this Cafe, juft as with all other Men, and that they difcover in their TVritings the Idioms and Phrafes peculiar to their native Country and Language : He warns us often [b] not to he offended at the Simplicity or Lownefs of the Scripture- Style ; for he tells us, [c] that the want of Elegance in the Words of the f acred Writers was fufficiently made up hy the forcible Eloquence of their Sanctity, and the Loftinefs of their noughts and Sentiments, The Antient Greek Fathers, who are certainly the beft Judges of the Greek Style of the Scri- ptures, are intirely of the fame Opinion. The Jirft Chriftian Critick, Origen, makes no Scruple to declare his Judgment on this Occafion with ^s much Freedom, and in much the fame Terms with Dr. Mill himfelf The Difciples of Chrifi, fays he, \d\ renounced all artful Compofition of [«] Multa Tunt verba, quibus juxta moreni urbis & provinciae fuae familiarius Apoftolus utitur — Nee h'^c mi- remur in Apoftolo, fi utatur ejus linguai confuecudine, ia qua natus eft & nutiitus. Ibid. [^] Nolo ofFendaris in fcripturis fanflis fimplicitate & quafi vilitate verborum, l^fc. Hier. Epift. 2. ad Paulum. [r] Loquendi fimplicitatem excufabat fan^monise mag- nitudo. Mier, ad Pamm. de opt. [•/) Q\ t» InTa jW,aOr)7a» Jt ^ot.y.^x)t yjxioii)) il-rroi^U^ rr, a-9(pU avO^wVwv. Orig. contr. Celf. Wordsy ^66 Some farther Remarks on the Propofalsy JVordsy and what the Scripture calls the Wifdom of Men : And Divine Providence accommodated [a'] the Language of Scripture^ not to the Learned among the Greeks, hut to the Idietifm of the Mul- titude. And again, [^] the Apoftles^ being con- fcious of their Lnperfe5iion this Way^ called them- felves Idiots in Speech^ but not in Knowledge, St. Chryfyflom ftill goes farther, and fpeaks more freely upon this Subjedl ; When the Greeks, fays he, [r] accufe the Difciples (as Idiots) that is, illiterate.^ let us join with them, and accufe them en this account more freely even than they \ and he laughs at the [^] Simplicity of a zealous Chrifiian\ who, in a Difpute with a Greek, laboured to prove St. Paul to be inore eloquent than Plato ; and lefl we fhould make our felves ridiculous in fuch Difputes, he bids us \e'\ freely own the Apofiles to vo/w,i^o^£vwi/ fj.ovo\) ra EAAt^vwi/ aAAa Xy rooii Xoiiroov Ea- X>7voov, 7 yvt^a-Ei. Orig. Philoc. c. 4. ^i'JluVy zrXiQV Yifxiii; ly(.e(vu)U KOiliyo^xiASV aulwi/. Chryf, Horn. 3. in I Cor. i. [<^] -cj-fpi n«uA8 >^. IlAaTOV^ ^»jlro-£a;? 8(r>i ^l TlXccTov'^ XoyiUTB^^ y,v Yiadx^. Ibid. [^] 'Iv' av /x>i KccloiyiXufAiijoc, ycoclvyo^ufAev ocirofoXcov ug UfAX^uv, 71 yoi^ xoilvyo^ioif avW iyyf.oo(j.iov. Ibid. puhlijhed by Richard Bentley; 3^7 h ignorant and unlearned^ fiich an Accufation being not any Reflexion upon thevi^ hut their Praife and Glory, After thefe Authorities, I need not trouble myfelf with producing any Opinions of the Mo- derjis ; but whenever our Editor thinks fit to difpute this Point more fully or particularly, I will undertake to defend the Judgment of thefe Fathers and Dr. Mill by undeniable Inftances, and fhew the Style of Scripture to be fo little agreeable to the Purity of the Greek Language^ that whenever the Dolor's Solecifms^ HebraifmSy or Idiotic Phrafes Hand in Competition for a Place in the T^ext^ with our Editor'' s bright^ ek^ gant^ polite Expreffions ; every judicious Reader will think it wifell and fafell to agree with the Do£for^ in giving a general Preference to the former. After all this Scurrility and Contempt thrown out fo plentifully upon the Do£ior^ he comes off very calmly and fmoothly at laft, by charging tne with being the Occafion of it ; declaring, * that* p. 34. I made it neceffary for him^ againft his own Incli- nation^ to deal fo freely with the Do5ior^ which is fuch a Reflexion upon me, as I cannot help clearing my felf of, before I difmifs this Sub- jeft. I have always had a very great Honour and Refpedt for Dr. Mill's Memory^ and was fo far from '^6i Some farther Remarks on the Propofals^ from defigning to force our Editor to ufe him ill, that I was taking all the Pains I could, to make it necejfary for him to commend him. I put him in mind of the old Friendfljip and Inti- macy that had been between them •, and did not this make it necejfary to commend him when dead^ whom he had profefled fuch a Love and Value for when living ? I Ihewed how much he muft needs be obliged to him in the fFork, he had un- dertaken ; and did not this make it necejfary to own the Obligation, and commend his Benefa^or ? I fhew'd the Do5for to be a moft induJiricuSy learned and judicious Editor of the New 'Tejlarnent ; and did not this make it necejfary for a Scholar^ a Chrijiian, a Clergyman to commend him ? Flo ,v then could I make it necejfary to treat him y?^r- riloujly in any other pofTible Senfe, than as it is necejfary for an envious Critick to rail at all who are commended ; for a proud Man to injult tliofe whom he is moji obliged to ; for a Mercenary Writer to undervalue every thing, that (lands in Uie Way of his Gain and his Intereji ? Paragraph the Second. The Author^ revolving in his Mindfome Pajfages of St. Hierom •, where he declares, that (with-^ cut making a New Verfton) he adjufied and re- formed the whole Latin Vulgate to the beft Greek Exemplars, that is, to thofe of the famous Origen •, and another Pajfage, where he fays, that a Verbal or Literal Interpretation out of Greek into Latia puhli/hed hy Richard Bextlev. 3^)9 Latin is not 7ieLejJar)\ Except in the Holy Scri- ptures, Ubi i-pfe "ccrborum crdo 7nyjtcrhan eft^ Where the very Order of the Words is a My- ftery •, took thence the Hint^ that if the Oldeft Copies of the Original Greek and Hierom's Latin iven examind and compared together^ perhaps they would he fiill found to agree both in Words and Order of JVords. And upon making the Effay^ he has fuccecded in his Conje5lure^ beyond his Ex- fe Elation or even his Hopes. Remarks. In my Remarks on this Paragraph^ I had ob- ferved, that of the two Pajfages produced here from St. Jerom^ as the Reafon and Foundation of this intended Edition^ the firfl was not to be found in any Part of that Father* s Writings^ in dire^ and exprefs Terms, and that the fecond had been altered and mifreprefented by our Editor y to make it more applicable andftdl to his Purpofe. In Anfwer to my fii'fl Obfervation, he has by a Number o{ Citations^ and a Differ tation upon the Word Evangelia, * (proving what every body* p. j-, knew before) fhewn at lafl that he did not at all apprehend the S^uefiion I propofed to him. I faid that St. Jerorn had not in any one fingle Fafjage^ as he would make us believe, aflerted, that he reformed the whole Latin Vulgate : and now how does he fhew the contrary ? Why, by labouring to prove, confequentially and by Infe- rence ^Yom feat ter^d Paf/ages, what I denied one- VoL. III. A a ly 370 Some farther Remarks on the Propofal:^ ly to be found dire^lly in any fingle one \ and yec . all that he has colleded amounts to no more than what I have already owned \ that St„ Je- • p. 1 6. ^^'^^ reformed * the Latin Vulgate of the I^ew I'ejtament *, but there was likewife a Vulgate ^ranjlation of the Old Tejiament as well as the Ne%v^ and the whole Latin .Vulgate^ which he talks of, mufb needs be underflood to compre- hend the?n both. He might therefore full as well have been contented with my having al- + p- 19' lowed him, as he fays, '\ all that he wanted or expected ; rather than to have ufher'd in the moil important Argum^ent of the Controverfy, with an Introdudion fo little to the purpofe ; but he will not, it feems, accept any Concefllon from io filly an Adversary \ for when I thought to have pleas'd him, by owning, that St. Je- rom had reformed the Vulgate Latin according to the heji Greek Copes of his Time \ he proves, 1 P' '/• ^^^^^ ^^^^y ^^^^ ^^^ ^^ ^^fi Copies of his Time ^ J but old oneSy and confequently before bis 'Time ; as if the befl at any time were not always the oldeft then known -, this, to ufe a Phrafe of his own^ is fuch capital^ tranfcendent Reafoning, as I muft own my felf at a lofs how to anfwer. But he will needs force me into a Confpiracy ^ p. i8. with Dr. Mill in order to abufe § poor St. Je- rom, becaufe I have faid of him, that he made no ve?j great Alteration in his Reform of the Vul- gate ; and yet I faid no more than what I proved from his own Words. But if this be a Reflection, pulU/Jjcd hy Richard Bentlew 371 RcRedion, what will he fay to me, if I under- take to fhew, that o^ the Alterations^ which he • actually made, fome might much better Iiave been fpared •, the old Tranjlation being jnfter and truer in feveral Places than his Correc* tions ? But after all this Noife about the old Vulgate^ or, as many have called it, the Italick Verfion\ the World, it feems, is yet entirely in the dark about it •, for when ourMafter's Edition comes out, it will fhew that there never was any fuch Verfion in Beings as the * Learned^ and Dr. Mill efpe- 1^ p^ ,g^ daily ^ have fo long been hlunderi7tg about ; and 26. that the Notion was faljly grounded upon an t f p. 43, abufed and miftaken Pajfage of St. Auflin ; which our Editor will fet in a true and new Light : But we muil not expe6l fo great a Difcovcry in hade -, for till he has made all the Ufe he can of St. Jeromes reforming the old Vulgate^ it will hardly be worth while to prove that there nevej? was any old Vulgate at all \ but for all the neiv and true Light he has got in this Matter, I will promife to fhew whenever he calls upon me, that among thofe innumerable Verftons^ he fpeaks of, which X appeared in the Wcfiern World^ \ p. 26. before St. Jerom'^ T/w^, there was however a particular and principal one^ diftinguiflied from the reft by its Ufe and Credit in the Church., un- der the Name of the 0/i, the Comr,:m, the Vul" gatOy or, as he himfelf [a] h^is called it, the [a] Rem, of Freethink, p. 81. A a 2 //^//V. ^yi Some farther Remarks en the Propofalsy Italic* He may now perhaps be out of hu- mour "ii'itb fome one of thefe Names, and dif- pute, if he pleafes, about Words^ but I defie him to prove, that there was not fuch a parti- cular VerfwHy as I have here defcribed. We are now come once more to the Exa- mination of hisfecond Pajfage^ viz. Ubi ipfe ver- ier urn or do Myjleriura eft^ on which he fays, I • p. 1 8. have fweated and laboured ^ fo hard in my Re- marks, for three whole Pages together -, but he gives me however the Pleafure of finding, that it was not Labour in vain \ fince my three Pages have coil him above twice the Number to contrive an Anfxer to them. My Jirji Remark here was, that he had not dealt fairly either with us or St. Jerom, in his Rotation of this Sentence -, which 1 found in the IFords of the Author to be thus : Ubi &" verb or urn or do ^ Myfterium eft. In a PafTage of fuch Moment., on which fo much Strefs was laid, and fo great a Defign was built, the World had a Right to exped the utmoff Exatlnefs of Citation, and the very Words of the Original. There can be no other Reafon for mfquoting a7iy Author, but either too much Arty or too much Negligence -, either of which will make but a wretched Apology for an Editor of the New Testament ; where Diligence and Fidelity arc Qiialifications of fuch abfolute NecefTity. A Critick who can allow himfelf in fuch E- rnendations as thefe may well defpife an Adver- t P- 1 9- fary who i" never made one in his Life j for he is puhlijhed by Richard Bentley: ^^'^ is fare enough to have an Advantage over him : But as our Editor has always been verjr notable at an Excufe, from the great Ufe and Exercife of his Invention that Way •, he is plealed here to give us t-ive Reafons for this In- accuracy, viz. great Hafie and Candle - lighi ^.'^ ^. 19. ne Propofals^ it feems, were drawn up in fuch a Hurry., and the Publication of them required fuch Difpatch^ that he had not fo much Time as even to confidt his Bocks^ or correal the Prefs i but being forced to trujl his Memory for the Ci- tation^ chanced to make the little Jlip we com- plain of. But is it not ftrange, that after hav- ing been revolving and tumbling about in his Mind 07ie poor Sentence for above four Tears to- gether, his Memory fliould happen to fail him juft in the Nick., when he came to the very Ufe and Application of what he had fo long been thinking of ? but is it not flill ftranger, that af- ter having been writing and talking fo long., with fuch Calnmefs and Deliberation on this Sub- jedl, he fhould be on a fudden in fuch a Hurry about it, as if no Time, but one critical Mo- ment., could pofTibly ferve for the printing his Propofals ? He, good Man., was all on fire and impatient to do this publick Service to his Coun- try, and had made a Vow perhaps never to clofe his Eyes till he had made fome Progrefs in fo pious a Beftgn •, but the World happens to know him too well, to be fo eafily impofed upon ; if his Motives had been really fuch as he pretends, there could not have been any Occafion for an A a 2 Excufe 374 ^^^^^ farther Remarks on the Prepofalsy Excufe of this Kind : A true Reverence for Chri^ Jiianity^ a Zed fcr the Interejls of Religion J "would necefTarily have forbid all hafle ; would not have fuiTered the leaft Hurry ; would have obliged him to the titrnojl Caution^ in a Work fo ferious and important. He here plainly dif- covers what I hinted at in my Remarks^ that his Prcpofals ivere hafiened cut to ferve quite different Eitds^ than thofe of cormnon Chriflianity. It was neceflary for his Circumilances, that feme Noife flicidd be made in the World in his Favour ; fomething muft needs be done to fupport a de- dining Chara5fer ; fomething great and popular muft, in Appearance at leaft, be undertaken, to YtcoYcv Efleem and Jpplaufe to himfelf, and caft an Odium and Contempt upon his Profecutors •, and withal perhaps to demolifti me the more effedu^ ally for having libeWd a Perfon fo highly deferv- ing of the Publick -, fo greatly and ufefully em- j^loyed in the Service of Chrifiendom, As for his Candle-light ; I am not fubtle enough to find out what Ufe he can poflibly make of ir. Among the Greeks and Romans it was fo far from being an Excufe for the Blunders, or Inaccuracy of a Compofition, that to fmell of the Lamp or Candle was their common Phrafe, to ex- prefs an over-laboured, affected CorreBnefs \ but cur Critick^s Lucubrations are the Reverfe, we fee, to thofe of all other Authors •, and his ill- fated Lamp, like fome malignant Planet, fpreads Drowzinefsy Ofcitancy, and Stupour around it. PiB' puhliped by Richard Bentley. 375 Pinguem nehiilam vomuereJucern<€y Juv. The befh Anfwer I can give him, is to return upon him his own Words^ * 7'bat no Scribler even * p. 24. otit of the dark ever committed fuch Stuff to Paper, But this, he will fay perhaps, was propofed chiefly as an Excufe for the falfe Pointings Ac- centing^ and other fmall Miftakes of his Speci- men \ and fhould we allow it, yet even this will not much mend the Matter -, for Blunders^ like Sins^ are fome of Ignorance^ and fome of 0- miffion ; and tho' Hafte or Candle-light may in fome Meafure excitfe the latter -y yet both toge- ther cannot in any Manner apologize for the former \ it is not for Points and Accents left out, or little Omijfions in his Notes^ that we complain of his Specimen -, but that all the Rules of Accents are diredlly violated by a contrary Application of them ; and there are fuch Solecifms and Bar- barifms of Style ^ as are offenfi ve to every Reader ; and thefe will appear juft the fame what Light foever we write or read them by •, Errors of Judgment having no more Relation to Caiidle- light^ than thofe of the Memory. But IKould this ferve even as an Excufe for the/r/? Edition of his Propofals, yet how is it at all applicable to his fecond? Was this likewife drawn up \nfuch hajfe, and prepared by Candle- A a 4 %^-^^ ^ ^ 7 6 Seme farther Remarks on the Propofals^ light ? Yet it was in all Points jufl: xht very fame with the other, except in the Change of cne of his Emendations^ by refloring [ctt' osJ^oVj to the Text [y, 1 8.] which he had thrown out before, upon the Credit of a ftngle Manufcript. In his third Edition indeed, upon the Notice I had taken of his tnany Blunders^ hs has thought fit to alter his Style^ and to change the many Bar- harifms of his Notes^ into a Language more re- gular and intelligible, viz. inftead of his deeft cs Alex. c£teri fere omnes : [y. 15.] dee§f Articu- lus Alex, alii multi : [ibid.] deesl yif Alex. Codd. fere omnes : crdine ut Andreas : [y. 13.] he has now put omittunt Codices^ or dec^ in Codicibus j and ordine ^uo Andreas. But the Reader will think it high time for me to come to the Point in ^elfion^ an Examina- tion of this Paffage of St. Jerom. As for our E- * p. iS. ditor'^s Emendation of it., * (which Fll afTure him was not new to me) it has no manner of Influ- tiij/?(ra/, v, 8.] mufl: Hkewifc have been rendred, cecidi adorare ; and not, ut adorarem ; for there are Inftances in this very Chapter of both thefe kinds of Tranfla- tion. And now we fee the Truth of Dr. MiWs Ohfervation, and the Extravagance of our Edi- tor J ; the Verfion keeps accurately to the Senfe ; almoft every where clofely to the fVords ; and yet changes fometimes the Moods and Tenfes of Verhsy but yet departs both from TVords and Order of Words often enough to convince us, that the 'Tranflator never dreamt of any Myftery lodged in either. But the Truth and Merit of this new and fiohle Thought may eafily be brought to a Trial and Experiment by the Reader ^ for let him take the Scraps of Greek here produced, and with our Editor'' s Notion fixt in his Head, let him fit down to tranflate them anew, as exa5lly and agreeably to it as poflible \ and he will foon ^nd it neceffary in every fingle Inflance to give us other Latin^ than we now fee in the Specimen, Or on the other hand, let him throw afide the Greeks and endeavour to tranflate the Latin back again with the Notion of its agreeing mfi publijhed ^^ Richard Be:^tley, 407 moji religioujly and minutely with the Orfginal both in the Hoards and the Order of them \ and he would foon find his Greek likewife appear very different from that of the prefent Text \ he would foon find, I fay, in both thefe Cafes, that our Editor s Notion^ if purfued exa6tly, and with fo 7nuch Strefs^ as is laid upon it, would, inftead of mending both TextSy make them both inllrumental to the corrupting each other. I had before obferved in my Remarks, how our Editor s Notion would naturally lead him to wreft and force both Texts^ to accommodate them the better to his Hypothefts, This he will needs have to be difiupid and fenfelefs Calumny -, confuted even by my felf \ for if he had been dif- pofed^ he fays, * to warp his T^exts ; he could* p. 2. eafijy hsiVQ Jet all the Variations I have been ob- jedling to him, in their right Order^ and have kept his own CounfeL We fee what an Opinion he has of the Senfe and Abilities of Mankind ; there's no Sagacity, no Judgment^ no Obfervation in any Man but himfelf \ we have nothing but his great Integrity to truft to for the Genuinenefs of our Scriptures, *Tis but keeping his own Counfel, and he could put upon us what Text he pleafes, and the Chriftian World be never the wilcr. But for all the Appeal he here makes to his great Fidelity^ the Reader may eafily ob- ferve in his Specimen^ what a Byafs and Preju^ ^;V^ there is upon him from the InMuence of this C c 4. JNotion 4oS Some farther Remarks on the Propofals, Notion of his ; for as to the Greek Text, he docs not fcruple to make it bend to the Latin upon the Credit of ^ftngle Mannfcrip ; and of- ten changes it, where his main Authority is fetch'd from the Confent of the Latin Copies, v. 5, &c. And for the Latin, he is ftiU lefs fcru- pulous ; making it comply with the Greek, fome- times, as he owns, contrary to the greatefl Fan cf the Manufcript, v. 5. fometimes contrary to all the Manufcripts he ever faw, v. 3. This A- • p. 37. greement of the two Texts, he calls, * as plain and cogent a Reafon for altering them, as any Autho- rity. And it is not enough for him, we find, ,t P- 32. t to refiore the Text to Truth and Certainty, ex- cept it be refiored to Order too. And what t\{z is this hm putting a Force, as I faid, upon both Texts, the better to make good his own Hypoihefis ? In the Clofe of my Remarks on thisfecond Fa. ragraph, I had obferved, that cur Editor in a Sermon preached fom.e time ago at Cambridge, and fmce printed, had fpoken of the vulgar La- tin m a Style very different from what he ufes at prefent; and I took Occafion there to Ihew, as an Inftance of hb great Skill and Knowledge in the Controverfy he was then handling ; how in the Face of an Univerftty, and in v. ftudied, la- boured Difcourfe upon the Errors cf Fopery, he betrayed a profound Ignorance of what the Church of Rome maintained, or the Council of Trent had decreed in refpe^ to the Vulgate Verfion -, and blunder' d along with the common Herd of Writers, about puhli/hed by Richard Bentley. 409 about their enhancivg the Stream above the Foun- tain ; the Tranflatim above the Original j the corrupt Latin of an unknown. Author, above the infpired Greek. All which Stuff can ferve for nothing clfe, but to make us contemptible to the Papifts •, having been fo often confuted^ and fo conflantly difclaimed by all their beft Writers. Rut he has thought fie to take no other Notice of this Charge, than by repaying my Compli- ment in kind, and anfwering me* with a Blunder * p. 17. of my own ; for having told us, in this Sermon of his, that more Antient Manufcripts are pre- ferved of the Greek than of the Latin. I was filly enough, it feems, to miftake it for more in Number ; whereas he meant onely more in Be- gree •, that is, antienter. For tho', fays he, + there are four or five Greek Manufcripts^ older ^ ibid. than any Latin one ; yet for thofe of a thoufand Tears old, there are twenty Latin ones preferved for one Greek. We fee here, that Manufcripts of a thoufand Tears old are nothing at all with him ; he talks as familiarly of them, as if they were to be found in every Bookfeller's Shop. He told us not long ago § of eight Greek Manufcripts, he ^ p ,.. had by him, of above a thoufand Tears old \ and if there was not one more in Being than thefe eight, yet that would raife the Number of his Latin ones to eight Score, which I am fure, mo- deftly fpsaking, is at leaft ten times more than are now known to be extant in all the U^orld. Jac. U Long, a learned Father of the Oratory, and Library 10 Sovje farther Remarks on the Propofals, Library- keeper at Paris, after a moji curious and diligent Enquiry among the bejl Authors^ and Libraries of Europe^ could not find fo much as 07te Manufcript of St. Jerom'j vulgar Latin^ which appeared certainly and undoubtedly to be a thoufand Tears old \ as we fee in the Catalogue^ he has printed, of an hundred of the beft andoldejl of them J now known in the World, with Critical and Hijlorical Notes upon each. He tells us, as I find him quoted alfo by Mr. Martin^ Cp. 14.) that he found none older than Theodulphus, who was an Abbot, and Bifbop of Orleans about A. D. 790. He mentions another of the Tear 795. and a 'Third of which he doubts a little^ in a Mona- fiery of the Ciftercians, which is reputed to be a thoufand Tears old. But this is another Inftance of the Livelinefs of our Editor^ s Imagination -, and fhews that Father Amelote was really but a Novice to him. Paragraph the Third. The Author believes, that he has retrieved (ex- cept in very few Places) the true Exemplar of O- rigen, which was the Standard to the moft Learn- ed of the Fathers, at the time of the Council of Nice and two Centuries after. And he is fure^ That the Greek and LsZt'm Manufcripts, by their mutual Affiftance, do fo fettle the Original Text to the fmalleft Nicety, as cannot be perfonned now hi any ClafTic Author whatever : and that out of a Labyrinth of Thirty Thoufand Various Readings ^ that crowd the Pages of our prefent beft Editions^ all fuhlijhed by Richard Bentley. 4H fill put upon equal Credit to the Offence of many good Perfons ; this Clue fo leads and extricates us, that there will fcarce be two Hundred out of fo ptany Thoufands that can deferve the leafi Confh deration. Remarks. In my former Remarks on this Paragraph, I had faid, that the Account, our Editor here gives of OrigenV Exemplar, which he pretends to have retrieved, feemed to be a groundlefs Fancy, or Mifiake of his own % and I fupported my Opinion with many good Reafons and Au- thorities, which I need not now repeat. Our Editor however is refolved, we fee, at all Adven- tures to ftick to his Point ; and growing onely more defpcrate by Oppofition, advances flill and rifes in his Afiertion, ut ex frontls duritid fidem leSfori faceret, i^ quod imfudenter fcriberet, ve^ re fcribere judicaretur, Hicr. For Origen's Exemplar, which was before a Standard onely to the mofl Learned of the Fathers, is now declared to have been received as fuch * by both Eaflern* p. 30. and Wefiern Churches, Nay, he now tells us the very Circumftances and Manner of Origen's (ompofing it, as if he had ftood all the while at his Elbow, or had been as intimate with him as once with Dr. Mill ; for he gathered, he allures us -f* from all Parts the Exemplars of the befi^ ibid. Note ', examined and collated than -, and ^^ thofe flelps fettled the genuine Texty juft as he himfelf and 412 Some farther Remarks en the Propofah^ and other good Critics would do, even at this Bay. Yet all this formal Story^ will be found at lad to be pure Invention of his own, without any Reality or Foundation in 'Truth or Hijiory ; and I may venture without any Scruple to affirm, that there is not the lea§f Ground or Authority for it in ^// Antiquity, The firft Argument I ffiall produce for this Opinion of mine f which I take to be a very con- clufive one) is what I have met with and bor- rowed from Origen himfelf, who tells us in his Commentaries upon Matthew (c. xix. v. 19.) that he believes this Sentence^ M. Simon [a] indeed fpeaks very roundly to the prefent Suhje5t^ and affirms dtre6lly that Origen 7iever did what our Editor here declares him to have done ; that is, leave any Exemplar of the New ^efiament as a Standard of the Genuine ^ext to the Church. He correal ed^ he telis us, the Edition of the Septuagint, according to the common Rules of Criticifm •, hut did nothing like it in the New Tejlament : For the Ecclefiaftical Writers^ fays he, \b^ who lived after him, never take the leafi Notice of two Sorts of Editions of the New Tejiament^ as they do always of the Old, viz. the common one, and the other correct- ed hy Origen. He owns indeed, that he colleCf- ed with Care the heft Copies of his 'Time, and made feme Critical Refle5iions upon fever al Places of them as Occafion offered \ yet it does not at all appear y he fays \c\ that what he did of this Kind ever ferved as a Law or Standard in re- gard to the New 'Teifament, as it did in refpe5i {a\ Vid. Crit. Hift. of the N. T. v. i. p. 337. [^] Mais il n'a rien fait de femblable fur le livre de Nouveau Tellament aufii ne voyons nous point, que les Ecrivains Ecclefiaftiques, qui ont vecu aprus Origene, ayent diftingue deux fortes d'Editions du Nouveau Tella- ment, comme ils ont diftingue deux Editions de la Verfion des feptante. Ibid. [^' eiccept Stephe^is^ iays he, ■ w&re ^drrifiwt Friers, thsLt is, as profound, true Th-eokgues as ever were. But wc. fee how defirous he is to make up Ma;ttefs -wkli thefe Fr£ethinkers, and for the civil things hit once faid of the PriejlSj refolvfs to make them Amends by paying cjf the poor Theologues. • But he checks * me here very properly with* p. 36. having forgot that he had preached eight Sermons about thirty Tears ago At Mr, BoyleV Leoinrts \ and' be might have ad.ded /-rc'i? more iince that time, one- at Cowt^ the other at the Umiier/tty, How therefore could his whole Life be fpent in Critical Niceties ? The Reflexion I own .to be juft, thd Sermons were quite out of .my Head ; but fince he has put me in mind of them, I muft do him the Juftice to confefs, that they are un- deniable Proofs of his. profound Skill and gi^eat Experience in theological Learning \ and it is well for him he went no farther ; for he m»glit [rt] Pan. I. p. 74. E e 2 Oliver- 436 ^0^^ farther Remarks on the Propofalsy otherwife have been in danger of pafling for as meer a Theologue as his two Predecejfors Barrow and Pearfon. And now he is very fevere upon me for the * p. 36- Choice of * my Motto in the 'Title-page of my Re- , marks : For whilil I thought to have given a • Hint ly ity how our Critic was like to lay about « himy in mangling the fdcred Text, Peter Burman, it feeras, from whofe Oration it was taken, was ' all the while onely in Jeft \ but what*s that to the Purpofe, except he could prove-;^^ to have been in J eft too? If a Dutch Orator will needs be talking Senfe the wrong Way, why may not I take the Liberty of turning it to the Right ? The Senfe of a Motto is not, I prefume, to be looked for onely in the Author from whom it was borrowed, but in the Application of the Bor^ t ibid, rower. But he thanks me kindly f for my men- tion of Peter Burman^ and takes the Opportuni- ty of paying his Compliments upon this Oration of hiSy which, he fays, is a. very fine one in its Way^ all writ in Lucian'j Manner, a thorough -Irony and Jeer, And it is indeed as thorough a Jeer as ever yet appeared, and as dull an one tooy -Upon the Church, the Clergy, and every thing ferious and facred in the Practice and Principles X)f both ; it is juft, as he tells us, to let his Au- dience know, that to make a profound Theologue there's no need of any Skill at all, either in Lan- guages, or Hiftoryy or Eloquence, or Critic* Wc puhlijhed ^^'RichardBentley, 437. We have one feeble Fling more^ fays he, * and"* P- 37* this Paragraph is done ; and yet this feeble Flings which he makes fo light of^ is nothing lefs than a glaring Contradiction between his Specimen and Propofals. He declares that he will not alter one Letter in the Text^ without Authorities fubjoined in the Notes ; and yet I have fhewn that he has altered many Letters in the Greeks vjithout fuh- joining any Authorities •, and made a verbal E- mendation in the third Verfe of the Latin^ even contrary to all the Authorities he ever faw. As to the firfi^ he fays, f that the Reafon of Lite- i Ibid. ral Emendations could^ not be made appear in this Jhort Specimen ; as if his Specimen^ let it ht as Jhort as he pleafes, had not as much Room m Proportion, as any other Part, or the whole of his Edition. But obferve a Httle, how acute- ly he defends himfelf. He had undertaken to fubjoin the Reafon of every literal Alteration ; but now he fays, 'twas not to be done ; the Rea- fon of fuch Alterations could not be made appear, that is, I had charged him with a Contradi^iony and he owns that he had promifed an Impoffi- hility. As to the verbal Emendation, tho' he had^ he fays, 710 Manufcript forit^yet he had fuch cogent Reafon as is equal to Authority. But to (hew him, that I have no Mind to quarrel with him merely for Letters^ or an Alteration or two of the Latin 'Text^ I will produce ^/ Greek Emendation he has made, [x;. 8.] i^/z. sSAeiJ^a changed by him into fSXgTToi/, in all the three Editions of his Propofals^ without thekafi Syllable fubjoined in theNotes^Qithtr oiany Authorities y or any of his cogent Rcafons. But E e 3 ther? 438 So::i? farther RIemablks .07^ the Propofals^ there might noc perhaps fe room enough for this neicher wkJiinjhe Compafsof-foy^i^r/ a Specimen ; ani this: indeed • miifli^ be faid for him, that no Editor ever contrived- 60* hufband his lit tie Room- more dextrouOy ; for many of his Emendations appear with no longer Train or Attendance after them, than that onely of difingk Manufcritt. Paragraph the Sixth. If the Author has any thing to ficggeft towards a Change of the Text, not fupp or ted by any Copes now. extant , he will offer, it feparate in his Pro- legonnena ; in which will he a large Account of the federal MSS. here ufed^ and of the other Matters, 'which contribute to make this Edition tifeful. hi this Work he is of no SeB' or Party ; his Befigft'.is to feiv£ihe whole Chriftian Name, He draws, no Confeqtie}zces-:ini his Notes •, makes no oblique Glances upon. any- dtfputed Points^ old or new. He CGnfecrfJts: this.JVork as a }cei(A.7}XtoVy ■ a '£\^itx.\ £^/j Englifh : For in this Paragraph^ having promifed Immortality to his Labours, he tells us, that his Edition is to lafi^ when all the antient MSS, are to he extinguifhed. This Ex- tin^ion of Manufcripts I hcive, it feems, cavilled at in my Remarks, as a barbarous Phrafe, But I cannot make our Critic apprehend, that I mean any Solecifm or Abfurdity in the Exprejfton, but a Cruelty onely and Barbarity in the bought cf extinguifhing Manufcripts •, it cannot enter in- to his Head, that to extinguifh, is properly ap- plicable onely to Fire, either real or metaphori- cal ', cither the thing it felf, or fomething analo- gous to it J but he ftill blunders along for a whole Paragraph together, to prove by many /»- fiances of Hiftory^ that as cruel as the Thought " • • ■ ' is, puhlijhed by Richard Bentley; 4^ is, it is however a true one ; and that Manu- fcripts have really been extinguiJJjed in feveral Ages and Countries by Jews^ I'urks^ Infidels and Hereticks. Some of his Inftances are plea^ fantly ridiculous ; the Library of Alexandriay fays he, * confifted of nothing elfe but Manu- * p^ ,g^ fcripts ? and were not the Manu fcripts extin* guifhed when the Library was burnt ? Again^ whence have we our famous Manufcript at Cambridge ? W^as it not from a Monafiery in Lions ? And how could ours have been prefervedy when the Monafiery was plunder ed^ if its Manu- fcripts had not been extinguifhed ? From thefe PremifTes he concludes, that our Mafier^s 'Thought is not fo barbarous^ as our Cenfor'^s Cavil is ig- nor ant and filly. The Reader mud needs think him ftrangely defiitute of Friends, that he had no body near to advife him on this Occafion ; to hinder his expofing himfelf at this Rate. Where was bis Overfeer and CorreBor Mr, John Walker ? Why could not he let him know, that the World would never endure fuch Trumpery ? Some body fliould indeed be fo free, as to tell him that he is 710W grown old ; that his Parts and Learning are plainly running upon the Dregs j that 'tis time for him to have done, and think of quitting the Stage, before he be quite hiffed off. Paragraphs Some farther Remarks on the Prcpofals^ Paragraphs the Sev^enth and Eighth. To piUiJh this JVork^ according to its Ufe and Importance^ a great Expence is requifite : It's defignd to be Printed, not on the Paper or zvith the Letter of this Specimen, but with the hejl Letter, Paper^ and Ink that Europe affords. It niuft therefore be done by Subfcription or Contri- bution. As it w ill make 'Two hordes in Folio ^ the Lowefl Subfcription for Smaller Paper mufi be Three Guineas^ one advanced in prefent ♦, and for the Great Paper Five Guineas^ two advanced. The Work will be put to the Prefs, as foon as Money is contributed to fupport the Charge of the Impreffion •, and no more Copies will be Printed than are fubfcribed for. The Overfeer and Cor- rector of the Prefs will he the Learned, Mr. John Walker of Timivj' College in Cambridge •, who with great Acctiratenefs has collated many MSS, at Paris for the prefent Edition, And the Ijfue of it, whether Gain or Lofs^ is equally to fall on Him and the Author, Remarks. From thefe two Paragraphs I have obferved, how this great and glorious Defign^ under Pre- tence of doing Service to common Chriflianiiy^ dwindled Iktc at lafl: into a mere Money-Proje^^ contrived and purfued onely for Gain zx\^ filthy Lucre. pu}ii/hed by Richard Bentley. 443 Lucre. Our Editor^ in his Anfwer, laughs onely at my S'mplicity^ for being fuly enough to ima- gine, that there could be any thing elfe in it : For without that indeed^ fays he, -[' what Senfe, f p. 38. what Ufe in Propofah ? We would have had him publiflied, I warrant ye, foine whining^ canting Advert ifement^ to leg the Advice onely and AJfifiance of the Learned ; to defire 7to other Contributions than of Manuscripts and Materials ^ proper ior fo great a,nd pious a De/ign, No, no ; he knows too well the Senfe and Ufe of Propofals ; and it cannot be denied but that thofe now before us are the mofi ccmpleat in their Kind, the mofi effe^ual for carrying on the Learned and Lauda^ ble Trade of beggings that ever before appeared. How artfully does he barter and higgle with us here, to quicken the Market., and gain his Price upon us ? But of this I have already faid enough 'Vitm'j former Remarks, However, fince he has been fo kind, as to let us into the Secret of the true Ufe and Senfe of Propofals^ viz. the begging Sulfcriptions^ I fliall in return give him a piece of Advice^ which he may probably find Reafon to thank me for ; that is, to get his Propofals read in Churches by way of Brief on Sundays, This, I am confident, muft be the ready Way of making the befl Penny of them ; he may eafily try the Experiment in his own Archdeaconry ; and in making the Effay^ * mufi needs reap glorious Fruits of his Sagacity » p. 20. and his Labour j for twenty Churches burnt to the Ground 4-44 Some farther Remarks on the Propofals, Ground can never draw our Money from us fo freely, as the doing fo fignal a -piece of Service to the whole Chriflian Name^ Specimen. See the Specimen in my former Remarks, Re marks. We are now come to a Review of his Specimen ; where our Editor makes himfelf very merry with what I have faid about his borrowing all his Ma- t p. 40, terials from Dr. Mill : For he demonftrates -f *^c. by a nice and curious Calculation^ that of Jixty Emendations, which he has made in the ^exty the Do^or agrees with him onely in four 5 diffents from him in three ; flarts one contemned by our Mafier ; who has fifty- two yet remaining en^ tire to himfelfy his own proper Goods and Chattels. Vide quantum timeam cachinnos tuos ut ctiam nunc eadem ingeram. Hieron, But he may laugh as much as he thinks fit, I fhall however flick to my Pointy and give him the Pleafure of affirming once more^ that all his Materials are borrowed, or flolen^ or plunder^ dy call it which he pleafes, from Br, Mill's Ma- gazine, Thq Dolors Bejign in his Editioni was, as I have puhHJhed by Richard Bentley. 44^ have before obferved, to fubjoin to Stephens^ s 'Text all the various Readings now known, with their diftin^l Authorities. This our Editor calls a Promptuary to the Judicious and Critical Read- er •, and from this Promptuary has taken every Jingle Readings without one Exception^ of all thofe fifty-two which he fo confidently calls his own. And what is this, I would fain know, but ftealing from Br. Mill? Was ever any neft more evident, or more fully proved than this ? 'The Goods are found upon him ; are known to be Dr, Mill's ; and he himfelf has owned the FaSf. There*s another of fiis Remarkable Contra- -di^ions very proper to be taken notice of here. He told us, we know, and took a great deal of Pains to prove it, that Dr. Mill had put all his various Readings upon equal Credit to the great Offence of many good Per fans ; yet now he has been labouring for a whole Page together*, to* p. 41. prove ju ft the contrary ; that he was fo far from putting all his Readings upon equal Credit^ that in this fingle Chapter of the Specimen., he had di- ftinguifhed four of them as true •, three others as falfe 5 and one as dubious. But our Editor informs -f us here, that his\ p. 40. Defign in this Edition, is no more than to give us an accurate or authentic Greek Text, or as he explains it in another Place, § to rcflore the^p-sz. Text to Truthy Certainty and Order ; a Defign truly 44^ ^^^^^^ /r/r/i?^r Remarks on the Frcpofah^ truly modeft and worthy of himfelf. He defigns onely to do that, in relation to the Greek -^ which he had charged as a kind of Impiety up- t p. 26. on the t Papiffs, for executing (jw^'/y n/ /i?^ La^ tin, viz. Z/:?^ authorizing and authenticating a particular Edition, Out of the Plenitude of hU Po'uoer, and by Kisfingle Authority he declares his own Greek "Te^^t Authentic ; yet will not allow to two fucceffivc Popes \a\ affified by the mofi Learned Men of Europe, and backed by a Councily to declare the fame of a poor Latin one. Nay, he goes much farther than the Church of Rome j for his Edition mud not onely be authentic^ but ac- curate too ; whereas the Council of Trent con- tented themfelves with making the Vulgate Ver- fion authentic to the People, but did not pretend to call it accurate or without Faults, but ojiite the contrary, Rob. Stephens* s Edition of the New 'Tefiament has been univerfally received and acquiefced in by all People, Protefla?tts as well as Papifis ; tho* not as the very Original Infallible Text^ yet as in the main a very correal one, or at lead not grofly corrupt and imperfe5l. Nay, our Editor himfelf has formerly given it the high Charader of a beautiful and generally fpeaking accurate Edition.^ which ^ as he fays \]y\ has ever fince been counted a Standard^ and followed by all the reft* {^a\ ViJ. Serm. on Popery. \Jj'\ Rem. on Fieethink. part i. p. 6S, Yet piihUpjcd by Richard Bentley. 447 Yet afcer all, he now pretends to have dlfco- vcred in this very 'Text of Stephens * above fixty* p. 42. Faults, within the Compafs of one and twenty Verfes. M this Proportion be oblerved through the whole ^ what a tnonftrous 'Number mull the Corruptions amount to ? They muft make ac lead, I dare fay, twenty thoufand. And is not this abfurd and incredible a priori^ as he calls it ? Is it not a dire£i Contradi^ion in Terms, that an Edition fhould be generally accurate, and yet fo fcandaloufly faulty ? Mull not the Chrifllan World have been infatuated and hirafclf too, for admiring fo long an Edition as correal, which appears at laft, to be more corrupt and interpo^ lated, than even the very vilefi of all the re- cent, '\ fcrub, 2,]\di fcoundrel Manufcripts\i't talks f p. 33. of? 34- But we fhall foon fee a good Account of this Difficulty, and how eafy it is to ^wdi fuch Faults as he does, with Stephens, or any other Editor whatfoever, by examining fome of his principal Emendations, that are to make this Text of his fo accurate and authentic, I had taken notice of one of them, in my Remarks, as a Tafie of his great Sagacity and Judgment -, but this he is pleafe 1 to call \ a naufeous Tafte of my own Ar-x p. 42. rogance and Pedantry. In the fecon 1 Verfc of his Specimen he has put ey]vjdev yc, ezu:Bv] into the Text, inftead of Ivjsvdsv r^ tv\iu9iv'] which all other Editors but him f elf had preferred as the genuine Reading. Now this Alteration of his is 448 Some farther Remarks on the Propofah^ is fo far from adding any Accuracy or ConreS^^ nefs to the "Text^ that I will maintain it to be a downright Corruption of it'; a meer Blunder of his own, for want of his Characters reauiftte 5 p. 31. * Judgment and Experience in the Style and Writings of the Apoiile, I have obferved, that the Phrafe is a pure Hehraifm, and that the Hebrews have no other Way of exprelling them- feJves on the Occafion, but by a Repetition of the fame Word 5 of which I gave a few Inllances. Smartnefs^ that my //&r^^ Hebrew Particles^ when flript of their Garby are no more, than Mizzeh umizzeh ; Mippo umippo ; Hennah ve- bennah ; and I fhould have wondered indeed very much, if they had proved to be any thing elfe ; it is juft as witty ^ as to fay, that his hoafi- ed Criticifmy when flript of its Grecian Drefs^ IS no more at laft, than enteuthen kai ekeithen. But let them look as fimple and naked as he pleafes ; I am however content with finding them to be ju§f what I could wifJo them ; jufi what I deigned them ; and juft enough for my Purpofe, It being allowed then, that the Hebrews al- ways exprefs this Phrafe in the Old Teflamentj by repeating the fame Word ; I obferved next, that the Septuagint likewife in their Tranflation follow the fame Manner /;/ Creek, rendring it by €v9oc ycjivQoc', 6vjeu9£v >^ bvJ£\j9bv. It is therefore highly probable, that St. John, who Was a He- brew, puhlijhed ^j Richard Bentlev. 44p h'eWy fliould preferve the conftant Idiom of his Native Language^ and wiien writing Greeks ihoLild (as all the other Apoftks generally do) copy after the Stile of the Septuagint. The Cri- tics tell us [^a] befides, that St. John of all the other Sacred Writers ^ abounds more particularly in Hebrew Phrafes^ and that to underjland the Senfe of his Writings, it is as neceffary to know Hebrew as Greek it felf ; which gave me Occa- fion to fay; that.it is not poffihle to imagine , that he could life any other Phrafe in this Place^ than the old Reading which our Critic has re- je^ed. But to make this Point (till plainer, I will prove it to him for once in his own Way of Reafoning, which he is every where fo fond of ; and Ihew him, that befides thefe Arguments a priori, which are as flrong and convincing as the Nature of fuch Proof will admit, we have Fa^ and Detnonftration a pojieriori to prove the Truth of what 1 am afTerting : For in the onsly ether Place of this Apofiles Writings, where he has Occafion to ufe this Phrafe, he ufes like- wife the very fame Words lv\iZBiv y^ evlsv^ev^ John xix. 1 8.] without any difputed or various Reading at all upon it. But this our Editor takes not the leafi notice of, thinking it either {a\ Minus quam csteri Evangeliftae Grzece locUtus efl: ; Hebraicis phrafibus abundat, ut Hcbraici Sermonis pe- ritia, non minus quam Graeci, ad fenfum fententiarum affequendum fit neieflaria. Cardinal. Tolct Argum, Comm. in Joan. Vol. III. Ff of 450 Some farther Remarks en the Propofah^ of too little Moment to be anfwered by him, or of too much ; the Reader may judge which. And now let us confider, what he has to fay in Defence of his Reading. He firft tells us, ? p. 42. * that the Senfe of either does not differ in a Tittle, which is fo far from being an Excufe for him, that it is even quite the contrary : For what Occafion had he then to change a Paffage, which all the Editors before him had allowed to be genuine ; and which is the confiant Phrafe of the facred Writers \ in order to foifi in a new Expreffion of his own, which is not fo much as once to be found in all the Scriptures, either of the Old or New Teftament ? He tells us be- t Ibid, fides, -f that St. Jerom in his Latin Verfion of the Hebrew, varied the Phrafe, and tranflated [mippo umippo] ten times [hinc & inde] for once [hinc & hinc]. And what does he get by this, but to prove onely that this Father^ in his Tranflation, did not in Yd^Qijlick fo clofe- ly to the very ¥/ords, as he would make us be- lieve \ and that if we v/ere to follow his Latin fo fcrupuloujly, as he would perfuade us, it would, as I have faid, lead us onely to corrupt^ inftead of corre^fing the "Text ? But his main Ex- cufe is, that he was governed here by Authority^ in the making the Alteration ; that is, he found eight ManufcriptSy as he fhews in his Notes, which declared /?r // *, and yet he might find without doubr, if he pleafes, at leaft twice the Number declaring againft it. But fuppofing ftill. puhlijhed hy Richard Bentley* 45I ftill, that all the Copies were agreed in his Fa- vour, yet in the third Verfe of the Latin, we find him over- ruling the united 'Teftivwiy of all the Mantifcripts in th-: fFcrld, for Rcafons which he calls as convincing * and cogent as any Atitho-* p. 37, rity \ and yet he will not pretend that thofe Reafonsare half fo cogent^ as what I have produced in this very Inftancc dire(ftly againfi him. But he has had an Opportunity, he tells us, -j- ^^-{-p. -loi hear one of the heft Judges in England /^jv, after he had carefully read over his Specimen, that of his fixty Changes of the 'Text, there was not one hut what floould be there ^ as every knowing Man would allow. And yet here I will ^x^\\\ join iffue with him *, and if he can produce one Man {ex^ cepting two or three of Trinity College) that pafTes either for a wife or learned one, who will declare this very Emendation to htjuft^ and pre^ ferable to the old Reading -, nay, v/ho will noE own it to be fpurious and corrupt •, I promife not to fay one Word more againft his Edition^ nay to be content even to fuhfcrihe for it my felf. In the 8th Verfe, we find In Stephens s Text^ TCf ore riJCii(roi j^ g^Aeipoj B7rB(rcc 'ur^oa-^'jyY^(Tcci iit^ 'ttpoo-Bbv tuv ts-oScou 7\i dyyeXa] where, as I have already obferved, he has changed [ebAeiJ'^ into eQXsTTov] contrary, we fee, to the Con- ftruclion of the two other Verbs, to which it is joined in the fame Sentence, immediately before and after it, and yet without affigning the kaft F f 2 i^^^- ij.^-2 Some farther Remarks on the Propofals^ Reafon^ or producing fo much as a fingle Au- thority for it ; but whilft he is altering here fo arbitrarily^ it is firange that he fhould take no notice of the very next Word [gVea-c^] a Wordy fo far from being one of his polite and elegant cnesy that it can hardly be counted Greek \ and tho* we find it fometimes in the Scripture^ yec never, I believe, without a various Legion , and in this very Place the Complutenfian Edi- tion and fome Manufcripts have inftead of it But the chief Emendation v^e find here is {llll the mofl unaccountable ; being evidently falfg and ridiculous^ viz, 'nr^c is-qScov inflead of £^- Tf^oarBsv Tcov tfoScov] the Hebrew Phrafe on this Occafion is, before the Face of his Feet, St, John fometimes ufes the very Hebraifm ; as Rev. iii. 9. 'nr^o(r}cvv7J(7ufcure Meaning as [l>cMu3ri- . rw] could ever juftle out of its Place, one that was clear and oMous, and which no Tranfcriber could boggle at ; but the contrary is very pro- bable, and very common, in all fuch Cafes, throughout the Scriptures. The Latin Tran- Jlator, whofe Bufinefs was to regard the Senfe, would naturally give us what he found m the Margin, or what occurred perhaps to himfelf as the onely Meaning of the Paffage; and fo might prove afterwards the main Authority for taking into the Text, what at firft was but a Paraphrafe upon it. But what above all con- firms me in this Opinion, is the very Jutbority of St. Cyprian, which our Editor h^ih produced to confirm the contrary. He tells us, that 6/. Cyprian interprets this Paffage by \jujlus jufttora faciat adhuc] But he either does not know or is pleafed to conceal, how the lafi Part of the Sentence is likewife rendred by him, vtz. \fimt- liter ^ aui fanBus ejl fanSliora] M makes it evident and certain that both the Branches of this Sentence ftood in the fame F.m and Conftruaion with each other in Sz^Cypnans Copy ; and that [o SUcc,^ ^.^a.^^ir^J /'^^ read as undoubtedly by him, as [o uy^®^ «7"»- ffBnri^} which laa no body difpuces. F f 4 ^"* ^6 Some farther Remarks on the Propofalsy But what is moj} remarkable in this Place, isi to find him once more faljly producing the Autho- rity of the Coptic Verfion^ in Confirmation of this Reading -, when it Is in Fad dire£tly contra- ry to it ; agreeing altogether with that of Ste^t phens^ as tranflated by the Geniutnan above- mentioned, viz. [jufiusjufiificetfe.fan^usfanc^ tificet fe'\ thus like an experienced Oficer^ by a falfe Mufier-roll of Authorities, he gains the Pay and Credit of Forces, he cannot produce ; but he was confident here, again, I warrant ye, that hy keeping his own Counfel^ he (hould have rendred all Difcovery impradicable, yet the Obfervation was ma-e and communicated tq his Friends, (as I was accidentally informed) by a Learned Foreigner refiding at Oxford^ who was without doubt not a little furprized tq catch an Editor of the JSJew T'eftament ("if we could believe it to have been wilful or defigncd) in fuch a Fad and Inftance of fo plain a Falfifi- cation. 'Tis fuch a fcandalous Impofition upon the World, as every ingenuous Perfon mud needs abhor : if other Writers were to allow thenrifelves fuch Liberties, what Faith^ what Credit could there be among ^en of Letters ? But if any one will chufe rather to look upon it as a pure M-fiake^ and (what our Editor wil} hardly thank him fur) to have been done igno- rantly •, 'tis however fuch a grofs Infiance of Negligence^ as could not be excufed in the Edition of a profane Author \ much lefs in a Defigii puhlifhed by Richard Bentley. ap^ Defign fo important as this, where the Blunder muft be perpetrated to lateft Pofterity, in a IVork already confecrated by its Author^ as a Char^ ter^ and Magna Cbarta to the whole Chrijlian Church, When our Editor fliall find himfclf able to anfwer thcfe further Remarks upon his Specimen and Propofalsy I fhall endeavour to exercife him dill, with a few more of the fame Kind. In the mean while, the Reader cannot help fee- ing through the fid allow Artifice of his taking the lafi Chapter of the Revelations y for the Specimen of his Edition ; to perfuade us, that the whole Work is already done, and nothing wanting but the Encouragement of Contributions for the fend^ ing of it to the Prefs. This, he imagined, would make the World crowd in upon him with their Subfcriptions ^ to fecure to themfelves as early as polTible a Treafure fo valuable. Yet it is more than probable, that this is the onely Chapter of the Book, which he has fo much as attempted : For we may gather from an unwary Confeffion he made, when * excufing the Blunders* p. 15^ of his Specimen ; that he has not yet wrote out the firfi foul Draught of his Defign. But as he Jearnedly expreffes hinifelf, f Res ipfa loquetur^i p. 14. fhe Work will fiew it felf : For if he had got thro' the refi of the New Teflament, or had but read it over^ with common Care and Obferva- tion, he could not have acquitted himfelf herefo blunderingly ; or if he had examined onely the j^^S Some farther Remarks on the Propofals, wry Writings of St. John^ he could not pofli- bly have niiftaken svjeiBsv 5^ eK£7^£v* ^oPiiG-et Itt* dujig' 'Z!ir^oj-icv]fYi