Christianity not Mysterious:
Or, A Treatise Showing,
That there is nothing in the
Gospel Contrary to
REASON,
Nor Above it:
And that no Christian Doctrine
can be properly call'd
A MYSTERY.
By John Toland
The Preface.
I believe all men will readily allow,
that none should speak with
more Freedom and Assurance than he that defends or illustrates
the Truth. But if we credit the history of former time, or duly
consider what passes in the present, we shall find none more backward
to speak their minds in public than such as have right on their side.
Indeed the goodness of their cause and design
should fortify them, one would think, against the
attacks of their enemies:
nor are there wanting frequent examples of persons
who with unshaken constancy suffered the most disgraceful
and violent things for love of the Truth. — Yet
if we make a just computation, and take in the primitive
martyrs with the prophets and apostles themselves, the
professed defenders of Truth, only for Truth's sake,
will be found to be a small handful
with respect to the numerous
partisans of Error.
And such is the deplorable condition of our age, that a man dares
not openly and directly own what he
thinks of Divine Matters, though it be never so true and beneficial, if it
but very slightly differs from what is received by any party, or that is
established by Law; but he is either forced to keep perpetual silence, or
to propose his sentiments to the
world, by way of paradox, under a borrowed or fictitious name. To mention
the least part of the inconveniences they expose themselves to, who have the
courage to act more above-board, is too melancholy a theme, and
visible enough to be lamented by all that
are truly generous and virtuous.
The pravity of most men's dispositions,
and the ambition of particular persons makes this matter seem less strange in
politic and secular affairs; and yet a man may not only make new discoveries and
improvements in Law or Physick, and
in the other Arts and Sciences impunibly, but also for so doing be deservedly
encouraged and rewarded. But wonderful! That the sacred name of Religion
which sounds nothing but sanctity, peace, and integrity, should be so
universally abused to patronize ambition, impiety, and contention! And
that what is our highest interest perfectly to understand, should (for
reasons afterwards to be laid open) both be maintained to be obscure, and
very industriously made so! Nay, it is come to this, that Truth meets no
where with stronger opposition, than from many of those that raise the
loudest cry about it, and would be taken for no less than the only
dispensers of the favors and oracles of Heaven. If any has the firmness to
touch the minutest thing that brings them gain or credit, he's presently
pursued with the hue and cry of heresy: and, if he values their censures,
compelled to make honorable amends; or if he proves contumacious, he falls
a sacrifice, at least in his reputation, to their implacable hatred.
Nor is he like, we may be sure, to receive fairer quarter from the
declared antagonists of Religion, whose principles, as they trample upon
all equity and truth, so they oblige 'em to hate and molest the strenuous
assertors of these and all other virtues. But of such depressing
considerations enough! Notwithstanding which, I have ventured to publish
this discourse, designing thereby to rectify, as much as I'm able, the
narrow bigoted tenets of the one, and the most impious maxims of the
other.
No atheist or infidel of any kind can justly be angry with me for
measuring swords with them, and attacking them only with the weapons they
prescribe me. The true Christian can no more be offended, when he finds me
employ Reason, not to enervate or perplex, but to confirm and elucidate
Revelation; unless he is apprehensive I should render it too clear to my
self, or too familiar to others, which are absurdities no body will own. I
hope to make it appear, that the use of Reason is so dangerous in Religion
as it is commonly represented, and that too by such as mightily extol it,
when it seems to favor 'em, yet vouchsafe it not a hearing when it makes
against them, but oppose its own authority to it self. These are high
privileges indeed, and the surest means of having always the better of the
dispute that could possibly be devised.
That the mistaken unbeliever may not say I serve a hypothesis in the
defense of my Faith, like some who first imagine or receive an opinion, and
then study proofs to establish it, I solemnly declare the thing is much
otherwise; and that I hold nothing as an Article of my Religion, but what
the highest evidence forced me to embrace. For being educated, from my
cradle, in the grossest superstition and idolatry, God was pleased to make
my own Reason, and such as made use of theirs, the happy instruments of my
conversion. Thus I have been very early accustomed to examination and
enquiry, and taught not to captivate my understanding, no more than my
senses to any man or society whatsoever. Now the best method, I think, of
communicating to others the Truth, is that by which a Man has learnt it
himself.
That the well-meaning Christian may not suspect, as it falls out
very ordinarily, that I aim at more than I declare, and cunningly disguise
some bad principles under the fair pretense of defending the true
Religion; I assure him that I write with all the sincerity and simplicity
imaginable, being as thoroughly convinced of what I maintain, as I can be
of any thing. If any good man should after this protestation persist to
think hard of me, it must needs proceed from violent prepossessions: for
very few can be found that are not deeply engaged in some of one sort or
another, for which a due allowance must be made. How fond are we all apt
to be of what we learned in our youth, as the sight or remembrance of the
places where we passed that agreeable time,
does strangely affect us! A mother is more charmed with the lisping
half-formed words of her prattling infant, than with the best language,
and most solid discourses. That any upstart, but of yesterday, should
pretend to overthrow what cost the ancients so much time and breath to
establish, and themselves so great pains and charges to learn, is of hard
digestion to some. And when others are but prayed to explain their terms,
which commonly signify nothing, or what they must be ashamed to own that
would never be thought in an error, they are uneasy, as an extravagant
merchant to examine his accounts; and 'tis well if they can refrain their
passions. Not only a few men, but oftentimes whole societies, whilst they
consider things but very superficially, set such a value upon certain
sounds, as if they were the real essence of all Religion. To question or
reject any of these, though never so false and inconvenient, is dangerous
heterodoxy: and yet, as I hinted now, they either signify nothing, or have
been invented by some leading men to make plain tings obscure, and not
seldom to cover their own ignorance. What is unpardonable, the holy
Scripture is put to the torture to countenance this scholastic jargon, and
all the metaphysical chimeras of its authors. But the weakness of the
greatest part of these prejudices is so notorious, that to mention them
is sufficient confutation: nor shall I be otherwise moved with any thing
of this nature, than a prudent man would be at the declamations of such as
have recourse to railing when Reason fails them.
As for those Gentlemen who suggest that the credulity of Popery has
frighted me to an unwarrantable distance from it; I have nothing to
say for their satisfaction, but that
I don't envy them the cheap and commodious Mean they boast of, while
I think Truth and Error to be the
two extremes. Religion is not to
be modeled according to our fancies,
nor to be judged of as it relates to
our private designs; else there would
be full as many Creeds as persons: but how little soever our notions
agree, and let our worldly conveniences be what they will, Religion is
always the same, like God its Author, with whom there is no Variableness,
nor Shadow of changing.
If any should ask me whether I
have so good an opinion of my own abilities, as to imagine that I can prove a
rational account may be given of all those jarring doctrines, ambiguous
terms, and puzzling distinctions which have for so many centuries
sufficiently exercised the learned of all sorts: I answer, that I don't
pretend (as the Title-Page can testify) that we are able to explain the
terms or doctrines of this or that Age, Council, or Nation, (most of which
are impervious mysteries with a witness) but the terms and doctrines of
the Gospel. They are not the Articles of the East or West, Orthodox or
Arian, Protestant or Papist, considered as such, that I trouble my self
about, but those of Jesus Christ and his Apostles. And in managing this argument, with every other good
action, I don't merely rely upon my own poor attainments, but also upon the Grace of God, who, I hope, will enable me to vindicate his revealed Will from the most unjust
imputations of contradiction and obscurity.
I may probably differ in many things from persons deservedly eminent for their
learning, and piety; but that ought to be no advantage against me if Truth is evidently for me. Since Religion is calculated for reasonable
creatures, 'tis conviction and not authority that should bear weight with them. A wise and good
man will judge of the merits of a cause considered only in it self, without any regard to
times, places, or persons. No numbers, no examples, no interests can ever bias his solid
judgment, or corrupt his integrity. He knows no difference between Popish Infallibility, and being obliged blindly to acquiesce in the
decisions of fallible Protestants. And for my own part, as I would have none by false or unfair
consequences make me say what I never thought of; so I would not be told I contradict any thing but Scripture or Reason, which, I'm sure, agree very well together. Nor can it appear strange that I should insist upon these
terms, since I most readily submit my self to them, and give all the world the same
right over me. I am not therefore to be put out of countenance by venerable
names, and pompous citations, that have no value but such as an ugly rust and
color give ancient coins. God alone, and such as are inspired by him, can prescribe
injunctions relating to the world to come, whilst human powers regulate the
affairs of this. Now, to speak more particularly concerning the following performance, I don't expect any deference
should be paid me by the world, that spares no body; much less am I
desirous of abettors out of singularity: but rather if the reasons I offer
be not cogent, I shall take in good part a modest and pertinent
animadversion. And if I am not so happy in rendering things perspicuous to
others, as they seem to my self, yet I have fairly aimed at it, and spoke
what I think to be Truth without fear or favor; wherefore my good
intentions will need no other apology.
Some passages in the first section or preliminary dissertations of
Reason, which, in the former edition, I suspected would prove a little
obscure to ordinary readers, are now rendered more familiar: and though I
then declared that the understanding of those passages of no consequence
to any that would reason fairly, being only inserted to prevent the
foreseen wranglings of certain men, who study rather to protract and
perplex than to terminate a controversy; yet I could not but readily
comply at this time with the desires of those, who wished 'em more clearly
expressed, though it should cost me a few words more, whereof I shall
always be as sparing as I can. I have likewise every where else endeavored
to speak very intelligibly, and am not without hope that my assertions do
carry their own light along with them. I have in many places made
explanatory repetitions of difficult words, by synonymous terms of a more
general and known use. This labor, I grant, is of no benefit to
philosophers, but it is of considerable advantage to the vulgar, which I'm
far from neglecting, like those who in every preface tell us they neither
court nor care for them. I wonder how any can speak at this rate,
especially of those whose very business it is to serve the vulgar, and
spare them the labor of long and painful study, which their ordinary
occupations will not allow them. Lay-men pay for the books and maintenance
of church-men for this very end: but I'm afraid some of the latter will no
more believe this, than that magistrates too are made for the people.
Nor can any from this office of the clergy infer, that the vulgar are
implicitly to receive their arbitrary dictates, no more than I am to make
over my Reason to him I employ to read, transcribe, or collect for me. The
learned will not, contrary to the experience of their own taste, take the
brewer's or the baker's word for the goodness of bread or drink, though
ignorant of their craft. And why may not the vulgar likewise be judges of
the true sense of things, though they understand nothing of the tongues
from when they are translated for their use? Truth is always and every
where the same; and an unintelligible or absurd proposition is to be never the
more respected for being ancient or strange, for being originally written
in Latin, Greek, or Hebrew. Besides, a Divinity only intelligible to such
as live by it, is, in human language, a Trade; and I see not how they can
be angry at the name, that are so passionately in love with the thing. But
of this in due place.
The poor, who are not supposed to understand philosophical systems,
soon apprehended the difference between the plain convincing instructions
of Christ, and the intricate ineffectual declamations of the scribes. For
the Jewish Rabbis, divided at that time into Stoic, Platonic, and
Pythagorean Sects, &c. did by a mad liberty of allegory, accommodate the
scriptures to the wild speculations of their several masters. They made
the people, who comprehended nothing of their Cabalistic observations,
believe 'em to be all profound mysteries; and so taught 'em subjection to
heathenish rites, whilst they set the law of God at nought by their
traditions. No wonder then if the disinterested common sort, and the more
ingenuous among the rulers, did reject these nonsensical superstitions,
though impudently fathered upon Moses, for a Religion suited to the
capacities of all, delineated, and foretold by their own prophets.
I wish no application of this could be made, in the following
discourse, to the case of any Christians; much less to the purer and better
sort. Whoever considers with what eagerness and rigor some men press obedience to
their own constitutions and discipline, (conniving in the mean while at
all nonconformity to the Divine Law) how strictly they enjoin the
observation of unreasonable, unscriptural ceremonies, and the belief of
those unfathomable explanations of what they stiffly hold themselves to be
incomprehensible; I say, who considers all this, is vehemently tempted to
suspect they drive a more selfish design than that of instructing the
ignorant, or converting the sinner. That any should be hated, despised,
and molested; nay, sometimes be charitably burned and damned, for
rejecting those fooleries superadded, and in many cases substituted to the
most blessed, pure, and practicable Religion that men could wish or enjoy,
is matter of astonishment and grief to such as prefer the precepts of God
to the inventions of men, the plain paths of Reason to the insuperable
labyrinths of the Fathers, and true Christian liberty to diabolical and
Antichristian Tyranny.
But the common method of teaching and supporting this mystery of
iniquity is still more intolerable. How many voluminous systems,
infinitely more difficult than the scripture, must be read with great
attention by him that would be master of the present theology? What a
prodigious number of barbarous words, (mysterious no doubt) what tedious
and immethodical directions, what ridiculous and discrepant
interpretations must you patiently learn and observe, before you can begin
to understand a professor of that faculty? The last and easiest part of
your labor will be, to find his sentiments in the Bible, though the holy
penmen never thought of them, and you never read that sacred book since
you were a school-boy. But a distrust of your own Reason, a blind
veneration for those that lived before you, and a firm resolution of
adhering to all the expositions of your party, will do any thing. Believe
only, as a sure foundation for all your allegories, that the words of
scripture, though never so equivocal and ambiguous without the context,
may signify everywhere whatever they can signify: and, if this be no
enough, believe that every Truth is a true sense of every passage of
scripture; that is, that any thing may be made of every thing: and you'll
not only find all the New Testament in the Old, and all the Old in the
New; but, I promise you, there's no explication, though never so violent,
though never so contradictory or perplexed, but you may as easily
establish as admit.
But I will not repeat what I have expressly written of this matter in
an epistolary dissertation, now lying by me, entitled, Systems of Divinity
exploded. In the following discourse, which is the first of three, and
wherein I prove my subject in general, the divinity of the New Testament is
taken for granted; so that it regards only Christians immediately, and
others but remotely, who are prayed to weigh my arguments by the said
supposition. In the next discourse, equally concerning Christians and
others, I attempt a particular and rational explanation of the reputed
mysteries of the Gospel. And in the third, I demonstrate the verity of
divine revelation against Atheists, and all enemies of revealed Religion.
This seems to me to be the best method; for the order of nature is
in your systems of divinity quite inverted. They prove the authority and
perfection, before they teach the contents of scripture; whereas the first
is in great measure known by the last. How can any be sure that the
scripture contains all things necessary to salvation, till he first reads
it over? Nay, how can he conclude it to be scripture, or the Word of God,
till he exactly studies it, to speak now of no other means he must use?
This confusion then I have carefully avoided; for I prove first, that the
true Religion must necessarily be reasonable and intelligible. Next I
show, that these requisite conditions are found in Christianity. But
seeing a man of good parts and knowledge may easily frame a clear and
coherent system, I demonstrate, thirdly, that the Christian Religion was
not formed after such a manner, but was divinely revealed from Heaven.
These three subjects I handle in as many books, whereof, as I said before,
the following Discourse is the first.
Before I finish, I must take notice
of those gentlemen who love to call names in religion: for what are all
party-distinctions, but, according to them, so many sorts of heretics, or schismatics, or worse?. But I assure them, that I am neither of Paul, nor
of Cephas, nor of Apollos, but of the Lord Jesus Christ alone, who is the
author and finisher of my Faith. I have as much right to have others
called after my name as they to give me a denomination, and that is no
right at all. I say this not to prevent being invidiously represented,
according to a very common artifice, under the notion of any sect in the world that is justly or unjustly
hated by others. This would be a poor consideration indeed! but it is my
settled judgment, that the thing is unlawful in it self to a good
Christian. Leaving others nevertheless their liberty in this point, it
must, at least, be granted inconvenient: for if you go under the name of
a Lutheran, for instance, though you agree with those of your communion
but in the main Articles, yet their adversaries will not fail, upon
occasion, to charge you with those other matters wherein you differ: and
should you then declare your judgment, the rest of the Lutherans will not
only be much offended, but be apt also to call your sincerity in question
about everything besides; which is the known temper of most sects. The
only religious title therefore that I shall ever own, for my part, is that most glorious one of being a Christian.
A word or two more I must add in answer to the malice or mistake of
some, who will needs have it that I'm a declared enemy to all church-men,
and consequently (say they) to all Religion, because I make 'em the sole
contrivers of those inconceivable or mysterious doctrines, which I also
maintain are as advantageous to themselves, as they are prejudicial to the
laity. Indeed there are those, who, easily overlooking all contempt of the
true Religion, are very ready to treat 'em as pernicious heretics, or
unsufferable atheists, that show the least dislike of what are
acknowledged additions to Christianity, whatever convenience or necessity
may be pretended for their establishment. If any such understand by
Religion the mysterious part of it, then truly it will be no hard matter
to prove me as little favorable to this Religion, as I'm far from making
any apologies for myself to the professors of it.
As for charging
church-men with being the authors and introducers of the Christian
mysteries, they must be my enemies for telling the truth, who are
displeased at it: for there is no matter of faith more evident from every
page both of the civil and ecclesiastic histories. Nor had the laity
ever any hand in that business, otherwise than as confirming by legal
sanctions what they were first persuaded to by the preaching of their
priests; as they do now, sometimes, at their solicitation, imprison
excommunicated, and prosecute erroneous persons, after the excommunication
is first pronounced, and the heresy decreed or declared by the clergy. Now
as all church-men are not responsible in their opinions for these practices, so I see no better Reason
they have to be angry with any body for writing against them that are,
than a good prince can pretend for punishing the historian of a tyrant's
vices, only because the tyrant had been likewise a prince.
To all corrupt clergy-men therefore, who make a mere trade of
Religion, and build an unjust authority upon the abused consciences of the
laity, I'm a professed adversary; as I hope every good and wise man
already is, or will be. But as I shall always remain a hearty friend to
pure and genuine Religion, so I shall preserve the highest veneration for
the sincere teachers thereof, than whom there is not a more useful order
of men, and without whom there could not be any happy society or well
constituted government in this world, to speak nothing of their relation
to the world to come, nor of the double esteem which they deserve for
keeping proof against the general infection of their profession. But I
have no apprehensions from the sincere; and if the designing party
discover their concern by their displeasure, it may well serve for a mark
to distinguish them, but will not be thought an injury by me.
The CONTENTS.
The State of the Question.
Sect. 1. Of Reason.
Ch. 1. What Reason is not.
2. Wherein Reason consists.
3. Of the Means of Information.
4. Of the Ground of Persuasion.
Section. II. That the Doctrines of the Gospel are not contrary to Reason.
Ch. 1. The Absurdities and effects of admitting any real or seeming contradictions in Religion.
2. Of the authority of Revelation, as it regards this controversy
3. That by Christianity was intended a rational and intelligible Religion, proved from the miracles,
method and style of the New Testament.
Objections answered, drawn from the pravity of human Reason.
Section III. That there is nothing Mysterious, or above Reason in the Gospel.
Ch. 1. The History and Signification of Mystery, in the writings of the Gentiles.
2. That nothing ought to be called a Mystery, because we have not an adequate idea of all its properties, nor any at all of its essence.
3. The signification of the word Mystery, in the New Testament, and the writings of the most ancient Christians.
4. Objections brought from particular texts of Scripture, and from the Nature of Faith, answered.
5. Objections drawn from the consideration of MIRACLES, answered.
6. When, why, and by whom were Mysteries brought into Christianity.
The CONCLUSION.
The State of the Question.
No. 1. There is nothing that men make a greater noise about, in our time especially, than
what they generally profess least of
all to understand. It may be easily
concluded, I mean the Mysteries of
the Christian Religion. The Divines, whose peculiar province it is to explain
them to others, almost unanimously
own their ignorance concerning them.
They gravely tell us, we must adore
what we cannot comprehend: And yet
some of 'em press their dubious comments upon the rest of mankind with
more assurance and heat, than could
be tolerably justified, though we should
grant them to be absolutely infallible.
The worst on't is, they are not all of
a mind. If you be Orthodox to those,
you are a Heretic to these. He that
sides with a Party is adjudged to Hell
by the rest; and if he declares for
none, he receives no milder sentence
from all.
2. Some of 'em say the Mysteries of
the Gospel are to be understood only in
the sense of the Ancient Fathers. But
that is so multifarious, and inconsistent with it self, as to make it impossible for
any body to believe so many contradictions at once. They themselves did
caution their readers from leaning upon their authority, without the evidence of Reason:
and thought as little of becoming a Rule of Faith to
their posterity, as we do to ours.
Moreover, as all the Fathers were not authors, so we cannot properly be
said to have their genuine sense. The works of those that have written are
wonderfully corrupted and adulterated, or not entirely extant: and if
they were, their meaning is much more obscure, and subject to controversy, than
that of the Scripture.
3. Others tell us we must be of the mind of some particular Doctors, pronounced Orthodox by the
authority of
the Church. But as we are not a whit satisfied with any authority of that
nature, so we see these same particular Doctors could no more agree than the
whole herd of the Fathers; but tragically declaimed against one another's
practices and errors: that they were
as injudicious, violent, and factious as
other men: that they were for the greatest part very credulous and superstitious in Religion, as well as pitifully
ignorant and superficial in the minutest punctilios of literature. In a word,
that they were of the same nature and make with our selves; and that we
know of no privilege above us bestowed upon them by Heaven, except
priority of birth, if that be one, as it's
likely few will allow.
4. Some give a decisive voice in the unravelling of mysteries, and the
interpretation of Scripture, to a General
Council; and others to one Man whom
they hold to be the Head of the Church Universal upon Earth, and the infallible
judge of all controversies. But we
do not think such Councils possible, nor
(if they were) to be of more weight
than the Fathers; for they consist of such, and others as obnoxious altogether to
mistakes and passions: and besides, we cannot have recourse, as
to a standing rule, for the solution of our difficulties, to a wonder by God's
mercy now more rarely seen than the secular Games of old. As for the one Judge of all Controversies, we
suppose none but such as are strongly prepossessed by interest or education can
in good earnest digest those chimerical
supreme Headships, and Monsters of
Infallibility. We read no where in
the Bible of such delegate Judges appointed by Christ to supply his Office:
and Reason manifestly proclaims them
frontless usurpers. Nor is their power finally distinguished from that of Councils to this
hour, by the miserable
admirers of both.
5. They come nearest the thing
who affirm, that we are to keep to what the Scriptures determine about
these matters: and there is nothing more true, if rightly understood. But
ordinarily 'tis an equivocal way of speaking, and nothing less than the
proper meaning of it is intended by many of those that use it: for they
make the Scriptures speak either according to some spurious philosophy, or
they conform them right or wrong to
the bulky systems and formularies of their several communions.
6. Some will have us always believe what the literal sense imports, with
little or no consideration for Reason,
which they reject as not fit to be employed about the revealed part of Religion. Others assert, that we may use
Reason as the instrument, but not the
Rule of our Belief; The first contend, some Mysteries may be, or at
least seem to be contrary to Reason, and
yet be received by Faith. The second, that no Mystery is contrary to
Reason, but that all are above it. Both
of 'em from different principles agree,
that several doctrines of the New
Testament belong no farther to the
enquiries of Reason than to prove 'em
divinely revealed, and that they are
properly Mysteries still.
7. On the contrary, we hold that
Reason is the only foundation of all
certitude; and that nothing revealed,
whether as to its manner or existence,
is more exempted from its disquisitions, than the ordinary phenomena
of nature. Wherefore, we likewise
maintain, according to the title of
this Discourse, that there is nothing in
the Gospel contrary to Reason, nor above it; and that no Christian Doctrine
can be properly called a Mystery.
SECTION I.
Of REASON.
1. The state of the Question being thus fairly laid, our next business is to proceed
to the proof thereof. But as the distinct and brief explanation of the
terms is of indispensible use in discussing all controversies; so an easy
and natural method is not less pleasing
than profitable. It happily falls out
that the terms of the present question are disposed according to the order I
design to observe; which is, first, to show what is meant by Reason, and
its properties: then to prove there's
no doctrine of the Gospel contrary to Reason: after that, to evince that
neither is there any of them above Reason;
and by consequence, that none is a Mystery.
CHAP. I.
What REASON is not.
2. To begin with the first, viz. Reason. It appears to me
very odd, that men should need definitions and explanations of that whereby they define and explain all other
things: or that they cannot agree about what they all pretend, in some measure at least, to possess; and is the
only privilege they claim over brutes and inanimates. But we find by experience, that the word Reason is become as equivocal and ambiguous as
any other; though all that are not tickled with the vanity of singularity,
or itch of dispute, are at bottom agreed about the thing. I'll handle it
here with what brevity I can.
3. They are mistaken who take the
Soul, abstractedly considered, for Reason:
for as the general idea of gold is not
a Guinea, but a piece determined to a
particular stamp and value; so not the
Soul it self, but the Soul acting in a
certain and peculiar manner, is Reason. They err likewise, who affirm Reason to be that Order, Report, or Relation
which is naturally between all things: For
not this, but the thoughts which the
soul forms of things according to it,
may properly claim that title. They speed no better who call their own inclinations, or the
authority of others,
by that name. But it will better appear what it is from the following considerations.
4. Every one experiences in himself a power or faculty of forming
various ideas or perceptions of things:
of affirming or denying, according as
he sees them to agree or disagree: and so of loving and desiring what seems
good unto him; and of hating and
avoiding what he thinks evil. The
right use of all these faculties is what
we call common sense, or Reason in
general. But the bare act of receiving
ideas into the mind, whether by the
intromission of the senses, as colors,
figures, sounds, smells, &c. or whether those ideas be the simple operations
of the soul about what it thus gets from without, as mere consciousness for
example, knowing, affirming, or denying, without any farther considerations:
this bare act, I say, of receiving such ideas into the mind, is
not strictly Reason, because the soul herein is purely passive. When a proper
object is conveniently presented to
the eye, ear, or any other sense rightly disposed, it necessarily makes those
impressions which the mind at the
same time cannot refuse to lodge. And
we find it can as little forbear being conscious of its own thoughts or operations concerning this
object: thus when my eyes are sound and open, as
at this time, I have not only an idea
of the picture that is before me, but I
likewise know, I perceive, and affirm
that I see it, I consider it, it pleases me,
I wish it were mine. Arid thus I form,
or rather after this manner I have first
formed, the ideas of knowing, perceiving, affirming, denying, considering,
willing, desiring, and the ideas of all
the other operations of the mind,
which are thus occasioned by the antecedent impressions of sensible objects.
5. By the word IDEA which I make so much use of here, and shall more
frequently in the following Discourse,
I understand the immediate object of the
mind when it thinks, or any thought
that the mind employs about any thing,
whether such a thought be the image
or representation of a body, as is
the Idea of a tree; or whether it be
some sensation occasioned by any body, such as are the ideas of cold and
heat, of smells and tastes; or whether, lastly,
it be a merely intellectual or abstracted thought, such as are the
ideas of God
and created Spirits, of arguing, of suspension, of thinking in general, or
the like.
CHAP. II Wherein REASON consists.
6. But although these simple and distinct ideas, thus laid up in
the great repository of the understanding, be not, as was observed, what
we call strictly Reason, yet they are
the sole matter and foundation of all our Reasoning: for the mind does upon occasion compare them together, compound them into complex
ideas, and enlarge, contract, or separate them, as
it discovers their circumstances capable or not. So that all our knowledge is, in effect, nothing else but the
perception of the agreement or disagreement of our ideas in a greater or lesser
number, whereinsoever this agreement
or disagreement may consist. And because this perception is immediate or
mediate, our knowledge is twofold.
7. First, when the mind, without
the assistance of any other idea, immediately perceives the agreement or disagreement of two or more
ideas, as that Two and Two is Four, that Red is not
Blue; it cannot be called Reason, though
it be the highest degree of evidence:
For here's no need of discourse or
probation, self evidence excluding all
manner of doubt and darkness. Propositions so clear of themselves as to
want no proofs, their terms being once understood, are commonly known by
the names of axioms and maxims.
And it is visible that their number is
indefinite, and not confined only to two
or three abstracted propositions made (as all axioms are) from the observation of particular Instances; as, that
the Whole is greater than any Part, that
Nothing can have no properties.
8. But, secondly, when the Mind
cannot immediately perceive the agreement or disagreement of any ideas, because
they cannot be brought near enough together, and so compared, it applies one or
more intermediate ideas to discover it: as, when by the successive application
of a line to two distant houses, I
find how far they agree or disagree in
length, which I could not effect with
my eye. Thus from the force of the
air, and the room it takes up, I know
it has solidity and extension; and that
therefore it is as much a body (though
I cannot see it) as wood, or stone,
with which it agrees in the said properties. Here solidity and extension
are the line by which I find air and
body are equal, or that air is a body; because solidity and extension agree
to both. We prove the least imaginable particle of matter divisible, by
showing all bodies to be divisible; because every particle of matter is likewise
a body: and after the like manner, is the mortality of all living bodies inferred from their
divisibility.
This method of knowledge is properly
called Reason or demonstration, (as the
former Self-evidence or intuition); and
it may be defined, That faculty of the
Soul which discovers the certainty of any
thing dubious or obscure, by comparing it with something evidently known.
9. From this definition it is plain,
that the intermediate idea can be no proof
where its agreement with both the ideas
of the question is not evident; and that
if more than one idea be necessary to make it appear, the same evidence is required in each of them. For if the
connection of all the parts of a demonstration were not indubitable, we could
never be certain of the inference or
conclusion whereby we join the two
extremes: so though Self-evidence excludes Reason, yet all demonstration
becomes at length self-evident. It is
yet plainer, that when we have no notions or ideas of a thing, we cannot reason about it at all; and where we have
ideas, if intermediate ones, to show their
constant and necessary agreement or disagreement, fail us, we can never go
beyond probability. Though we have an idea of inhabited, and an Idea of
the Moon, yet we have no intermediate idea to
show such a necessary connection between them, as to make us certainly conclude
that this Planet is inhabited,
however likely it may seem. Now,
since PROBABILITY is not KNOWLEDGE, I banish all HYPOTHESES
from my PHILOSOPHY; because if
I admit never so many, yet my knowledge is not a jot increased: for no evident
connection appearing between
my Ideas, I may possibly take the
wrong side of the question to be the
right, which is equal to knowing nothing of the matter. When I have
arrived at knowledge, I enjoy all the satisfaction that attends it; where I have
only probability, there I suspend my
judgment, or, if it be worth the pains, I search after certainty.
CHAP. III.
Of the Means of lNFORMATION.
10. But besides these properties of Reason which we have explained, we are yet most carefully to
distinguish in it the means of information, from the ground of persuasion:
for the neglect of this easy distinction has thrown men into infinite mistakes, as I
shall prove before I have
done. The means of information I call those ways whereby any thing comes barely
to our knowledge, without necessarily commanding our assent. By the ground
of persuasion, I understand that rule by which we judge of all Truth, and which
irresistibly convinces the mind. The
means of information are EXPERIENCE and AUTHORITY:
Experience (as you may see No. 4.)
is either external, which furnishes us
with the ideas of sensible objects;
or internal, which helps us to the
ideas of the operations of our own
minds. This is the common stock of all
our knowledge; nor can we possibly have ideas any other way without our organs or
faculties.
11. Authority, abusively so called, as
if all its informations were to be received without examine, is either
humane or divine: humane authority is called also moral certitude; as when
I believe an intelligible relation made by my friend, because I have
no reason to suspect his veracity, nor he any interest to deceive me. Thus all
possible matters of fact, duly attested by coeval persons as known to them,
and successively related by others of different times, nations, or
interests, who could neither be imposed upon themselves, nor be justly
suspected of combining together to deceive others, ought to be received by
us for as certain and indubitable as if we had seen them with our own
eyes, or heard them with our own ears. By this means it
is, I believe there was such a city as Carthage, such a Reformer as Luther, and that
there is such a Kingdom as
Poland. When all these rule concur in any matter of fact, I take
it then for demonstration, which is nothing else but irresistible
evidence from proper proofs: but where any of these conditions are
wanting; the thing is
uncertain, or, at best, but probable, which,
with me, are not very different.
12. The authority of God, or divine revelation, is the manifestation
of Truth by Truth it self, to whom it is impossible to lie: whereof at large in
Ch. 2. of the following Section. Nothing in nature can come to our knowledge but by
some of these four means, viz. the experience of the senses, the experience
of the mind, humane and divine revelation.
CHAP. IV.
Of the Ground of PERSUASION.
13. Now, as we are extremely subject to deception, we
may, without some infallible rule, often take a questionable proposition
for an axiom, old wives fables for moral certitude, and humane Impostures
for divine revelation. This infallible rule, or ground of all right persuasion,
is evidence; and it consists in the exact conformity of our ideas or
thoughts with their objects, or the things we think upon. For as we have
only ideas in us, and not the things themselves, 'tis by those we must form
a judgment of these.
14. Ideas therefore being representative beings, their evidence naturally consists in the
property they have of truly representing their objects. Not
that I think every idea has a perfect pattern to represent, as the ideas of
length and motion in my mind are like the length and motion of the
pen I handle; for some ideas are but the result of certain powers in the particles
of bodies to OCCASION particular sensations in us; as the sweetness of sugar
and the cold of ice, are no more inherent in them than pain in the knife
that cuts me, or sickness in the fruit that surfeits me. But though such
occasional ideas have no existence out of our imagination, yet the pleasure,
pain, and other qualities they excite, show
us the good or harm their subjects may do us; which renders the knowledge of them as useful
as that of the properties which really exist in the things themselves. Without the
heat and light of fire, what should its figure and quantity serve for? And what sets a
price upon amber-greece, but the perfume? The Reason then why I believe the
idea of a rose to be evident, is the true representation it gives me of that
flower. I know it is true, because the rose must contain all the properties
which its idea exhibits, either really, as the bulk and form, or occasionally, as the
color, taste and smell. And I cannot doubt of this, because the properties must belong to the exemplary
cause, or to nothing, or be the figments of my own brain: but nothing can have no
properties; and I cannot make one single idea at my pleasure, nor avoid receiving Ideas when
objects work on my senses: therefore I conclude the properties of the rose are not the
creatures of my fancy, but belong to the exemplary cause, that is, the object.
15. The evidence of the ideas of the operations of the mind, is infallible as that of our own
being; and if by any Impossibility we should call the latter in question, 'twould but serve to give
us the greater assurance of it: For besides the unavoidable supposition of our existence in this very
proposition, I doubt if I am; so it is clear, that whatever doubts must needs be as much something as what affirms, and this something I call my self. Let us now but strictly require this
evidence in all the agreements and disagreements of our Ideas in things merely speculative, and as far as we can in
matters of common practice, (for these must of necessity sometimes admit probability to supply the
defect of demonstration); and we may without a lazy reliance upon authority, or a skeptical
progress to infinity, successfully trace the Truth, and bring it to view the
light from those subterraneous caverns where it is supposed to lie concealed. It is impossible for us to err as long as we take
evidence for our guide; and we never mistake, but when we wander from it by abusing our
liberty, in denying that of any thing which belongs to it, or attributing to it what we do not see in its
idea. This is the primary and universal origin of all our errors.
16. But God the wise Creator of all,
(ever to be named and thought upon
with reverence) who has enabled us
to perceive things, and form judgments of them, has also endued us with
the power of suspending our judgments about whatever is uncertain, and of never
assenting but to clear perceptions. He is so far from putting us upon
any necessity of erring, that as he has thus
privileged us on the one hand with a
faculty of guarding ourselves against prepossession, or precipitation, by
placing our liberty only in what is indifferent, or dubious and obscure;
so he provides on the other hand, that we should discern and embrace the Truth,
by taking it out of our power to dissent
from an evident proposition. We must
necessarily believe, that it is impossible the same thing should be and not be
at once: nor can all the world persuade us to doubt of it. But we need not
admit that there's no void in nature,
or that the earth absolves an annual course about the sun, till we get
demonstrations to that effect.
17. If people precipitate their assent, either because they find the
search of Truth attended with more difficulties than they are willing to
run through, or because they would not seem to be ignorant of any thing,
this is their fault. Wherefore let us attribute all our false notions to
our own anticipation and inattention: let us confess our destruction to be
of our selves; and cheerfully thank our kind Disposer, who has put us
under a law of bowing before the light and majesty of evidence. And truly if
we might doubt of any thing that is clear, or be deceived by distinct
conceptions, there could be nothing certain: neither conscience, nor God
himself, should be regarded: no society or government could subsist. But
it is as true, that if we could not suspend our assent to dubious or
obscure propositions, Almighty Goodness (which is impossible) should be the
real cause of all our errors.
18. If it should be asked, why assent is denied to true propositions,
since evidence necessarily requires it?
I answer, 'tis because they are not made
evident: for perspicuity and obscurity are relative terms, and what is
either to me may be the quite contrary to to another. If things be delivered
in words not understood by the hearer, nor demonstrated to agree with other Truths already very clear, or now so made to him, he cannot conceive 'em. Likewise if the
order of nature and due simplicity be not observed, he cannot see them evidently true or false; and so suspends his
judgment, (if no affection sways him) where another, it may be, receives perfect
satisfaction. Hence it is that we frequently, with indignation and wonder, attribute that to the
stupidity and obstinacy of others, which is the fruit of our own confused
ratiocination, for want of having thoroughly digested our thoughts; or by affecting ambiguous
expressions, and using such as the other has no ideas to at all, or
different ones from ours.
SECT. II.
That the Doctrines of the Gospel are not contrary to Reason.
1. After having said so much of Reason, I need not operosely show what it is to be contrary to it; for I take it to be very intelligible from the precedent Section, that what is evidently repugnant to clear and distinct
ideas, or to our common notions, is contrary to Reason: I go on therefore to prove, that the
doctrines of the Gospel, if it be the Word of God, cannot be so. But if it be objected, that very few maintain they are: I reply, that no Christian I know of now (for we shall not disturb the
ashes of the dead) expressly says Reason and the Gospel are contrary to one another. But, which returns to
the same, very many affirm, that though
the doctrines of the latter cannot in
themselves be contradictory to the
principles of the former, as proceeding
both from God; yet, that according to
our conceptions of them, they may seem directly to clash: and that though we cannot reconcile them by reason of our
corrupt and limited understandings;
yet that from the authority of divine revelation, we are bound to believe and acquiesce in them; or, as the
Fathers taught 'em to speak, to adore what we cannot comprehend.
CHAP. I.
The absurdity and effects of admitting any real or seeming contradictions in RELIGION.
2. This famous and admirable doctrine is the undoubted source of all the
absurdities that ever were seriously vented among Christians. Without the
pretense of it, we should never hear of the transubstantiation, and other ridiculous
fables of the Church of Rome; nor of any of the Eastern ordures, almost all received
into this Western sink: nor should we
be ever bantered with the Lutheran impanation, or the ubiquity it has produced, as one
monster ordinarily begets another. And though the Socinians disown this practice, I am mistaken
if either they or the Arians can make
their notions of a dignified and creature-God capable of Divine Worship, appear more reasonable than the
extravagancies of other sects touching the
article of the Trinity.
3. In short, this doctrine is the known refuge of some men, when
they are at a loss in explaining any
passage of the Word of God. Lest they should appear to others less
knowing than they would be thought, they make nothing of fathering that
upon the secret counsels of the Almighty, or the nature of the thing,
which is, it may be, the effect of inaccurate Reasoning, unskillfulness in
the tongues, or ignorance of history. But more commonly it is the
consequence of early impressions, which they dare seldom afterwards correct by more free and riper
thoughts: So desiring to be teachers of the Law, and understanding neither what they say, nor those things which they affirm, they obtrude upon us for
doctrines the commandments of men. And truly well they may; for if we once admit this
principle, I know not what we can deny that is told us in the name of the Lord. This
doctrine, I must remark it too, does highly concern us of the laity; for however it came to be first established,
the clergy (always excepting such as deserve it) have not been since wanting to themselves, but improved it so far as not only to make the plainest, but the most trifling things in the World mysterious, that we might constantly depend upon them for the
explication. And nevertheless, they must not, if they could, explain them
to us, without ruining their own design, let them never so fairly pretend it. But, overlooking all
observations proper for this place, let us enter upon the immediate examen of the
opinion it self.
4. The first thing I shall insist upon is, that if any Doctrine of the New
Testament be contrary to Reason, we have no manner of idea of it. To say, for instance, that a
ball is white and black at once, is to say just nothing; for these colors are so incompatible in the same
subject, as to exclude all possibility of a real positive idea or conception. So to say, as the Papists, that
children dying before baptism are damned without pain, signifies nothing at all: For if they be intelligent
creatures in the other world, to be eternally excluded God's Presence, and
the Society of the Blessed, must prove ineffable torment to them: But if they think they have no
understanding, then they are not capable of Damnation in their sense; and so they should not say they are in Limbo-Dungeon, but that either they had no
souls, or were annihilated; which (had it been true, as they can never show) would be reasonable enough, and easily conceived. Now if we have no Ideas of a thing, it is certainly but lost
labor for us to trouble our selves about it: For what I don't conceive,
can no more give me right notions of God, or influence my Actions, than a Prayer delivered in an unknown tongue can excite my devotion: if
the trumpet gives an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the
battle? And except words easy to be understood be uttered, how shall it be
known what is spoken? (1 Cor. 14.8, 9.)
Syllables, though never so well
put together, if they have not Ideas
fixed to them, are but words spoken in
the air; and cannot be the ground of
a reasonable service, or Worship. (Rom. 12.1.)
5. If any should think to evade the difficulty by saying, that the ideas of
certain doctrines may be contrary indeed to common notions, yet consistent with themselves, and I know
not what supra-intellectual truths, he's but just where he was. But
supposing a little that the thing were so; it still
follows, that none can understand these doctrines except their perceptions be
communicated to him in an extraordinary manner, as by new powers and
organs. And then too, others cannot
be edified by what is discoursed of 'em,
unless they enjoy the same favor. So that if I would go preach the Gospel
to the wild Indians, I must expect the the ideas of my words should
be, I know not how, infused into their souls in order to apprehend me: and according to this
hypothesis, they could no
more, without a miracle, understand my speech than the chirping of birds;
and if they knew not the meaning of my voice, I should even to them be a
barbarian (1 Cor. 14.11.), notwithstanding I spoke mysteries in the Spirit. But what do
they mean by consisting with themselves, yet not with our common notions?
Four may be called Five in Heaven; but so the
name only is changed, the thing remains still the same. And since we cannot in this
world know any thing but by our common notions, how shall we be sure of this pretended
consistency between our present seeming contradictions, and the theology of the
world to come? for as 'tis by Reason we arrive at the certainty of
God's own existence, so we cannot otherwise discern his revelations but by
their conformity with our natural notices of him, which is in so many
words, to agree with our common notions.
6. The next thing I shall remark is, that those, who stick not to say
they would believe a downright contradiction to Reason, did they find it
contained to the Scripture, do justify all absurdities whatsoever; and, by opposing one
light to another, undeniably make God the author of all incertitude.
The very supposition, that Reason might authorize one thing, and the
Spirit of God another, throws us into
inevitable skepticism; for we shall be
at a perpetual uncertainty which to obey: nay, we can never be sure which
is which. For the proof of the divinity of Scripture depending upon
Reason, if the clear light of the one
might be any way contradicted, how shall we be convinced of the infallibility
of the other? Reason may err in this point as well as in any thing else; and we
have no particular promise it shall not, no more than the Papists that
their senses may not deceive them in
every thing as well as in transubstantiation. To say it bears witness to it
self, is equally to establish the Alcoran or
the Poran. And 'twere a notable argument to tell a Heathen, that the
Church has declared it, when all societies will say as much for themselves,
if we take their word for it. Besides, it may be, he would ask whence the Church had
authority to decide this matter? And if it should be answered from the Scripture, a thousand to one
but he would divert himself with this
circle. You must believe that the Scripture is divine, because the
Church has so determined it, and the Church
has this deciding authority from the Scripture. 'Tis doubted if this
power of the Church can be proved from the passages alleged to that purpose; but
the Church it self (a party concerned) affirms it. Hey-day! are not these
eternal rounds very exquisite inventions to giddy and entangle the unthinking and the
weak?
7. But if we believe the Scripture
be divine, not upon its own bare assertion, but from a real testimony consisting in the
evidence of the things
contained therein; from undoubted effects, and not from words and letters; what is this but to prove it by
Reason? It has in it self, I grant, the greatest characters of divinity.
But 'tis Reason finds them out, examines them, and by its principles
approves and pronounces them sufficient; which orderly begets in us an
acquiescence of Faith or persuasion. Now if particulars be thus severely
sifted; if not only the doctrine of Christ and his
Apostles be considered, but also their
lives, predictions, miracles, and
deaths; surely all this labor would
be in vain, might we upon any account
dispense with contradictions. O!
blessed and commodious system, that dischargest at one stroke those troublesome
remarks about history, language, figurative and literal senses, scope of the
writer, circumstances, and other helps of interpretation!
We judge of a man's wisdom and
learning by his actions, and his discourses; but God, who we are assured has not left himself without a
witness,
(Acts 14.17) must have no privileges above the maddest enthusiast, or the
Devil himself, at this rate.
8. But a veneration for the very words of God will be pretended: this
we are pleased. with; for we know that God is not a man that he should lie.
(Numb. 23.19). But the question is not about the words, but their sense, which must be ever
worthy of their Author, and
therefore according to the genius of all speech, figuratively interpreted, when
occasion requires it. Otherwise, under
pretense of Faith in the Word of God,
the highest follies and blasphemies
may be deduced from the letter of Scripture; as, that God is subject to
passions, is the author of sin, that Christ is a Rock, was actually guilty
of and defiled with our transgressions,
that we are worms or sheep, and no
men. And if a figure be admitted in these passages, why not, I pray, in all
expressions of the like nature, when
there appears an equal necessity for it?
9. It may be demanded why I have so long insisted upon this article, since
that none expressly makes Scripture and Reason contradictory, was acknowledged before?
But in the same place mention is made of some who hold,
that they may seem directly to clash; and that though we cannot reconcile them
together, yet that we are bound to acquiesce in the decisions of the former.
A seeming contradiction is to us as much as a real one; and our
respect for the Scripture does not require us to grant any such in it,
but rather to conclude, that we are ignorant of the right
meaning when a difficulty occurs; and so to suspend our judgment concerning it,
till with suitable helps and industry we discover the Truth. As for acquiescing in what a
man understands not, or cannot reconcile to his Reason, they know best the fruits of
it that practice it. For my part, I'm a stranger to it, and cannot reconcile
my self to such a principle. On the contrary, I I am pretty sure he pretends
in vain to convince the judgment, who explains not the nature of the thing.
A man may give his verbal assent to he knows not what, out of fear,
superstition, indifference, interest, and the like feeble and unfair
motives: but as long as he conceives not what he believes, he cannot sincerely acquiesce in it,
and remains deprived of all solid satisfaction. He is constantly perplexed
with scruples not to be removed by his implicit Faith; and so is ready to be
shaken, and carried away with every wind of doctrine. (Ephes.
4.14). I will believe because I will believe, that is, because I'm in the
humor so to do, is the top of Apology. Such are unreasonable men,
walking after the vanity of their minds, having their understandings
darkened, being strangers to the life of God through the ignorance that is
in them, because of the hardness of their hearts. (Ephes. 4.17, 18).
But he that comprehends a thing, is as sure of it as if he were himself the
author. He can never be brought to suspect his profession; and, if he be
honest, will always render a pertinent
account of it to others.
10. The natural result of what has
been said is, That to believe the divinity of Scripture, or the sense of any
passage thereof, without rational proofs, and an evident consistency, is a blameable
credulity, and a temerarious opinion, ordinarily grounded
upon an ignorant and willful disposition, but more generally maintained out of a gainful
prospect. For we frequently embrace certain doctrines
not from any convincing evidence in them, but because they serve our designs
better than the Truth, and because other contradictions we are not willing
to quit, are better defended by their means.
CHAP. II
Of the Authority of REVELATION,
as it regards this Controversy.
11. Against all that we have been establishing in this Section,
the Authority of Revelation will be alleged with great show, as if without
a right of silencing or extinguishing
REASON, it were altogether
useless and impertinent. But if the distinction
I made in the precedent Section, N. 9.
be well considered, the weakness of
the present objection will quickly appear, and this controversy be better
understood hereafter. There I said
REVELATION was not a necessitating motive of assent, but a mean of
information. We should not confound
the way whereby we come to the knowledge of a thing, with the grounds
we have to believe it. A man may inform me concerning a thousand matters I never heard of before,
and of which I should not as much as think if
I were not told; yet I believe nothing purely upon his word without evidence in the things themselves. Not the
bare authority of him that speaks, but the clear conception I form of what he
says, is the ground of my persuasion.
12. If the sincerest person on earth should assure me he saw a cane without two ends, I neither
should nor could believe him; because this relation plainly contradicts the idea of cane. But if he told me he
saw a staff that, being by chance laid in the earth,
did after some time put forth sprigs
and branches, I could easily rely upon
his veracity; because this no way contradicts the idea of a staff, nor transcends
possibility.
13. I say possibility; for omnipotency it self can do no more. They impose
upon themselves and others, who require assent to things contradictory,
because God, say they, can do all things, and it were limiting of his power to
affirm the contrary. Very good! we heartily believe God can do all things:
but that mere NOTHING should be the object of his power, the very
omnipotency alleged will not permit us to conceive. And that every
contradiction, which is a synonym for impossibility, is pure
nothing, we have already sufficiently demonstrated. To say, for example, that a thing is extended
and not extended, is round and square at once, is to say nothing; for these
ideas destroy one another, and cannot subsist
together in the same subject. But when we clearly perceive a perfect agreement and
connection between the terms of any proposition, we then conclude it
possible because intelligible: so I understand God may render immediately
solid, what has been hitherto fluid; make present beings cease to
exist or change their forms; and call those things that are not, as though they
were. (Rom 4.17). When we say then, that nothing is impossible with God, or that
he can do all things, we mean whatever is possible in it self, however far
above the power of creatures to effect.
14. Now, such is the nature of a matter of fact, that though it may be conceived possible enough, yet
he only can with assurance assert its existence who is himself the author, or by
some means of information comes first to the certain knowledge of it. That there was
such an island as Jamaica, no European could ever reasonably deny:
and yet that it was precisely situated
In such a latitude, was watered with
those rivers, clothed with these woods, bore this grain, produced that
plant, no English-man before the discovery of America, could positively
affirm.
15. Thus God is pleased to reveal
to us in Scripture several wonderful
matters of fact, as the creation of the
world, the last judgment, and many
other important truths, which no man
left to himself could ever imagine, no
more than any of my fellow-creatures
can be sure of my private thoughts:
For who knoweth the things of a man save the spirit of a man that is in him? even
so the things of God knoweth none
but the Spirit of God. (1 Cor. 2.11.) But as secret things
belong unto the Lord; so those things
which are revealed, belong unto us and to our children. (Deut. 29.29). Yet, as we discoursed
before, we do not receive them only because they are revealed: For besides the
infallible testimony of the revelation from all requisite circumstances, we
must see in its subject the indisputable characters of DIVINE WISDOM and
SOUND REASON; which are the
only marks we have to distinguish the
oracles and will of God, from the impostures and traditions of men.
16. Whoever reveals any thing, that
is, whoever tells us something we did
not know before, his words must be intelligible, and the matter possible. This
RULE holds good, let God or man be
the revealer. If we count that person a fool who requires our assent to
what is manifestly incredible, how dare
we blasphemously attribute to the most perfect being, what is an acknowledged
defect in one of our selves? As for unintelligible relations, we can no more
believe them from the revelation of God, than from that of man; for the
conceived ideas of things are the only subjects of believing, denying, approving, and every other
act of the understanding: therefore all matters revealed by God or man, must
be equally intelligible and possible; so far both revelations agree. But in this
they differ, that though the revelation of man should be thus qualified, yet
he may impose upon me as to the truth of the thing; whereas what God is pleased
to discover to me is not only clear to my
reason, (without which his revelation could make me no wiser) but likewise it is
always true. A man, for example, acquaints me that he has
found a treasure: this is plain and possible, but he may easily deceive me.
God assures me, that he has formed man
of earth: This is not only possible to God, and to me very intelligible; but
the thing is also most certain, God not being capable to deceive me, as man is.
We are then to expect the same degree of perspicuity from God as from
man, though more of certitude from the first than the last.
17. This Reason persuades, and
the Scriptures expressly speak it. Those prophets or dreamers were to be
stoned to death (Deut. 13.1,2,3) that should go about to seduce the people from the
worship of one God to polytheism (the service of many Gods), though they
should confirm their doctrine by signs and wonders. And though a
prophet spoke in the name of the Lord, yet if the thing prophesied did not come to pass, it was
to be a rational sign he spoke presumptuously of himself, and not of God. (Deut.
18.21,22). It was revealed to the prophet Jeremy in prison, that his
uncle's son would sell his field to him (Jer. 22.7,8), but he did not conclude
it to be the word of the Lord till his kinsman actually came to strike the bargain with him.
The Virgin MARY, though of that sex that's least proof against flattery and
superstition, did not implicitly believe she should bear a
child that was to be called the son of the most High, and of whose kingdom there
should be no end (Luke 1.34,35), till the angel gave her
a satisfactory answer to the strongest objection that could be made: nor
did she then conclude (so unlike was she to her present worshippers) it
should unavoidably come to pass; but
(ver. 38) humbly acknowledging the possibility,
and her own unworthiness, she quietly wished and expected the event.
18. In how many plates are we exhorted to beware of false prophets (Mat. 7.14.)
and teachers, seducers (2 Tim. 3.13.) and deceivers? (Tit. 1.10.) We are
not only to prove or try all things, and to hold fast that which is best
(1 Thess. 5.21.), but also to try the spirits whether they be of God. (1
Joh. 4.1). But how shall we try? how shall we discern? Not as the horse and
mule which have no understanding (Psa. 32.9.), but as circumspect and
wise men, judging what is said. (Eph. 5.15, 1 Cor. 10.15.). In a word, it was from
clear and weighty reasons, both as to
fact and matter, and not by a blind obedience, that the men of God of old
embraced his revelations, which on the
like account we are willing to receive
of their hands. I am not ignorant how some boast they are strongly persuaded
by the illuminating and efficacious operation of the Holy Spirit, and that they
neither have nor approve other reasons
of their FAITH: but we shall endeavor in its proper place to undeceive them; for no
adversary, how absurd or trifling soever, ought to be superciliously disregarded by an
unfeigned lover of men and truth. So
far of REVELATION; only in making it a mean of information, I follow Paul
himself, who tells the Corinthians, that he cannot profit them except he
speaks to them by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by
doctrine. (1 Cor. 14.6.)
CHAP. III.
That CHRISTIANITY was intended a Rational and Intelligible
Religion; proved from the Miracles, Method and Style of the
New Testament.
19. What we discoursed of REASON before, and
REVELATION now, being duly weighed, all the doctrines and precepts of the New Testament (if it
be indeed divine) must consequently
agree with Natural Reason, and our
own ordinary ideas. This every considerate and well-disposed person will
find by the careful perusal of it: and
whoever undertakes this task, will confess the Gospel not to be hidden from us,
nor afar off, but very nigh us, in our mouths, and in our hearts. (Deut.
30.11,14.). It affords the most illustrious examples of close
and perspicuous ratiocination conceivable; which is incumbent on me in
the explication of its MYSTERIES,
to demonstrate. And though the evidence of Christ's doctrine might claim
the approbation of the Gentiles, and
its conformity with the types and
prophecies of the Old Testament, with
all the marks of the MESSIAH concurring in his person, might justly
challenge the assent of his country-men; yet to leave no room for doubt,
he proves his authority and gospel by such works, and miracles as the stiff-necked
Jews themselves could not deny
to be divine. Nicodemus says to him, No man can do these miracles which thou
dost, except God be with him (Joh. 3.2.) Some of the Pharisees
acknowledged no sinner could do such things. (Joh. 9.16.) And others, that
they exceeded the power of the devil. (Joh. 10.21).
20. JESUS himself appeals to his very enemies, ready to stone him for
pretended blasphemy, saying; If I do not the works of my Father, believe me
not: but if I do, believe not me, believe the works; that you may know, and
believe that the Father is in me, and I in him (Joh. 10.37,38.): that is, believe not rashly
on me, and so give a testimony to my works; but search the Scriptures, which
testify of the Messiah; consider the works I do, whether they be such as become God, and are attributed to him: If they be, then conclude and believe that I am he,
&c. In effect, several of the
people said, that Christ when he should come could do no greater wonders; and many of the Jews believed, when they saw the
miracles which he did.
21. How shall we escape, says the Apostle, if we neglect so great a Salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; God also bearing them witness with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to his own will? Those who heard Christ, the Author of our Religion, speak, and saw the
wonders which he wrought, renounce all the hidden things of dishonesty,
all craftiness and deceitful handling of the Word of God: And that they manifest nothing but Truth, they commend themselves to every
man's conscience, that is, they appeal to every man's Reason, in the sight of God. Peter exhorts Christians to be ready always to give an
answer to every one that asks them a Reason of their hope. Now to what purpose served all these miracles, all these appeals, if no regard was to be had
of men's understandings? if
the doctrines of Christ were incomprehensible, contradictory; or were
we obliged to believe revealed nonsense? Now if these miracles be true, Christianity must consequently
be intelligible; and if false, (which our adversaries will not grant) they
can be then no arguments against us.
22. But to insist no longer upon such passages, all men will own the verity I defend, if they read the
sacred writings with that equity and attention that is due to mere humane
works: nor is there any different rule to be followed in the interpretation of Scripture
from what is common to all other books. Whatever unprejudiced person shall use those
means, will find them notorious deceivers, or much deceived themselves,
who maintain the New Testament is
written without any order or certain rule, but just as matters came into
the apostles' heads, whether transported with enthusiastic fits, (as
some would have it) or, according to others, for lack of good sense and a liberal education. I think I may justly
say, that they are strangers to true method, who complain of this confusion
and disorder. But the proof of the
case depends not upon generalities: though, whenever it is proved, I will not
promise that every one shall find a
justification of the particular method
he was taught, or he has chosen, to
follow. To defend any PARTY is
not my business, but to discover the TRUTH.
23. The facility of the GOSPEL
is not confined only to method; for the style is also most easy, most natural, and in the common
dialect of those to whom it was immediately consigned. Should any preach in Xenophon's strain to the present Greeks,
or in correct English to the country-people in Scotland, 'twould cost them
much more time and pains to learn
the very words, than the knowledge
of the things denoted by them. Of old, as well as in our time, the Jews
understood Hebrew worse than the tongues of those regions where they
dwelt. No pretenses therefore can
be be drawn from the obscurity of the language in favor of the irrational hypothesis: for all
men are supposed to understand the daily use of their Mother-Tongue; whereas the
style of the learned is unintelligible to the vulgar. And the plainest authors that write as they speak, without the
disguise of pompous elegance, have ever been accounted the best by all good
judges. It is a visible effect of Providence that we have in our hands the monuments of the Old Testament, which in the New are always supposed,
quoted, or alluded to. Nor is that all, for the Jewish service and customs continue to this day. If this had been true of the Greeks and Romans, we should be furnished with those
helps to understand aright many unknown particulars of their Religion, which make us Rulers and Teachers in Israel. Besides, we have the Talmud, and other
works of the Rabbins, which, however otherwise useless, give us no small
light into the ancient
rites and language. And if after all we should be at a loss about the meaning of any
expression, we ought rather to charge it upon distance of time, and the
want of more books in the same
tongue, than to attribute it to the
nature of the thing, or the ignorance
of the author, who might be easily
understood by his country-men and
contemporaries. But no Truth is to
be established, nor falsehood confuted
from such passages, no more than any
can certainly divine his fortune from
the sound of bow-bell.
24. If any object, that the Gospel is
penned with little or no ornament, that
there are no choice of words, nor studied expressions in it; the accusation is true, and the Apostles themselves acknowledge it: nor is there a
more palpable demonstration of their
having designed to be understood by
all. I came not to you, says Paul (1 Cor.2.1.), with excellency of speech, or
wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. (Ver. 4.) My speech and my
preaching was not with
enticing words of humane wisdom, but
in demonstration, or conviction of the spirit or mind, and in power or efficacy. This he
speaks in reference to
the philosophers and orators of those times, whose elocution, 'tis confessed,
was curious, and periods elaborate, apt to excite the admiration of the hearers, but not to
satisfy their Reasons; charming indeed their senses
whilst in the Theatre, or the Temple,
but making them neither the better at
home, nor the wiser abroad.
25. These men, as well as many
of their modern successors, were fond enough of their own ridiculous systems,
to count the things of God foolishness (1 Cor. 2.14.), because they did not agree with their
precarious and sensual notions; because every sentence was not wrapped
up in mystery, and garnished with a
figure: not considering that only false
or trivial matters need the assistance
of alluring harangues to perplex or amuse. But they were enemies and
strangers to the simplicity of Truth.
All their study, as we took notice, lay
in tickling the passions of the people at
their pleasure with bombast eloquence,
and apish gesticulations. They boasted
their talent of persuading for or against any thing. And as he was esteemed the
best orator that made the worst cause appear the most equitable before the
judges, so he was the best philosopher that could get the
wildest paradox to pass for demonstration. They were only concerned
about their own glory and gain, which they could not otherwise support, but
(according to an artifice that never fails, and therefore ever practiced) by
imposing upon the people with their authority and sophistry, and under
pretense of instructing, dexterously detaining them in the grossest ignorance.
26. But the scope of the apostles
was very different: piety towards God,
and the peace of mankind, was their gain, and Christ and his Gospel their
glory; they came not magnifying nor
exalting themselves; not imposing but declaring their doctrine: they did not confound and mislead, but convince
the mind; they were employed to dispel ignorance, to eradicate superstition, to propagate Truth,
and reformation of manners; to preach deliverance to captives (Luk. 4.18.), (i. e.) the
enjoyment of Christian liberty to the slaves of the Levitical, and pagan priesthoods;
and to declare salvation to repenting sinners.
27. I shall add here some of the characters which David gives of the
law and word of God, that we may admit nothing as the will of heaven
but what is agreeable to them: the
law of the Lord, says he, is perfect,
converting the soul. The testimony of
the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.
The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart. The commandment
of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring
for ever. The judgments of the Lord are true, and righteous altogether. I have
more understanding than all my teachers,
for thy testimonies are my meditation.
I understand more than the ancients, because I keep thy precepts. Thy word is
a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto
my path. The New Testament is so
full of this language, and the contents of it are every where so conformable to it, that I
shall refer the reader to the particular discussion of the whole in the
second discourse. But I must remark in the mean-time that not a
syllable of this language is true, if any contradictions seeming or real
be admitted in Scripture. As much may be said of Mysteries; but we
shall talk of that by and by.
CHAP. IV.
Objections answered, drawn from
the Pravity of Humane REASON.
28. There remains one objection yet, upon which some lay
a mighty stress, though it's like to do them little service. Granting, say they, the
GOSPEL to be as reasonable as you
pretend, yet corrupt and depraved Reason can neither discern nor receive divine
verities. Ay, but that proves not divine verities to be contrary to sound
Reason. But they maintain that no man's Reason is sound. Wherefore I
hope so to state this question, as to cut
off all occasion of dispute from judicious and peaceable men. Reason
taken for the principle of discourse in
us, or more particularly for that faculty every one has of judging of his ideas according to their
agreement or disagreement, and so of loving what seems good unto him, and hating
what he thinks evil: Reason, I say, in this
sense is whole and entire in every one
whose organs are not accidentally indisposed. 'Tis from it that we are
accounted men; and we could neither
inform others, nor receive improvement ourselves, any more than brutes,
without it.
29. But if by Reason be understood
a constant right use of these faculties, viz. if a man never judges but
according to clear perceptions, desires nothing but what is truly good for him, nor
avoids but what is certainly evil: Then,
I confess, it is extremely corrupt. We
are too prone to frame wrong conceptions, and as erroneous judgments
of things. We generally covet what
flatters our senses, without distinguishing noxious from innocent pleasures; and our
hatred is as partial. We gratify our bodies so much as to
meditate little, and think very grossly
of spiritual, or abstracted matters. We are apt to indulge our inclinations, which we
term to follow nature (1 Cor. 2.14): so that the natural man, (Ψυξικος constantly signifies the animal, and never the natural state of man. It should be in this place translated 'sensual,' as it is very rightly, Jam. 3.15. and Jude. v.19.) that
is, he that gives the swing to his appetites, counts divine things mere
folly, calls Religion a feverish dream of superstitious heads, or a politic
trick invented by
statesmen to awe the credulous vulgar. For as they that after the
flesh mind the things thereof (Rom. 8.5,7.), so their
carnal wisdom is enmity against God. Sin easily besets us. (Heb. 12.1.) There is a
law in our members (Rom. 7.23.) or body, warring against the law of our
minds or Reason. And when we would do good, evil is present with us
(Ver. 21). If thus we become stupid and unfit for earthly speculations, how
shall we believe
when we are told of heavenly things? (Joh. 3.12).
30. But these disorders are so far
from being Reason, that nothing can be
more directly contrary to it. We lie
under no necessary fate of sinning.
There is no defect in our understandings but those of our own creation,
that is to say, vicious habits easily contracted, but difficultly reformed. 'Tis
just with us as with the drunkard, whose I cannot give over drinking is a
deliberate I will not. For upon a wager, or for a reward, he can forbear
his cups a day, a month, a year, according as the consideration of the value or
certainty of the expected gain does influence him. Let no man, therefore,
say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for as God cannot be
tempted to evil, so neither tempteth he any man: but every man is tempted
when he is drawn away, and enticed of his
own lust. (Jam. 1.13,14.)
31. Supposing a natural impotency
to reason well, we could no more be
liable to condemnation for not keeping the commands of God, than those to whom the
Gospel was never revealed for not believing on Christ: For how shall they call on him
in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have
not heard? (Rom. 10.14.)
Were our reasoning faculties imperfect, or we not capable to employ
them rightly, there could be no possibility of our understanding one another in
millions of things, where the stock of our ideas should prove unavoidably
unequal, or our capacities different.
But 'tis the perfection of our Reason and Liberty that makes us deserve
rewards and punishments. We
are persuaded that all our thoughts are
entirely free, we can expend the force of
words, compare ideas, distinguish clear
from obscure conceptions, suspend our
judgments about uncertainties, and yield
only to evidence. In a word, the deliberations we use about our designs,
and the choice to which we determine our selves at last, do prove us the
free disposers of all our actions. Now
what is sound Reason except this be it? Doubtless it is. And no Evangelical,
or other knowable Truth can prove insuperable, or monstrous to him that
uses it after this manner, But when
we abuse it against it self, and enslave
it to our debauched imaginations, it is averse from all good. We are so
habituated, I confess, to precarious
and hasty conclusions, that without
great constancy and exercise we cannot recover our innate freedom, nor
do well, having accustomed our selves so
much to evil. (Jer. 13.23.) But though 'tis said in Scripture, that we will
neither know nor understand; 'tis there also said, that we
may amend our ways, turn from our iniquity, and choose life.
Encouragements are proposed to such as do so.
We can, upon serious reflections, see
our faults, and find that what we
held most unreasonable, did only appear so from superficial disquisitions,
or want of necessary helps; from deference to authority, and principles taken
upon trust; from irregular inclinations
and self-interest, or the hatred of a party.
32. But notwithstanding all this some are at a world of pains to rob themselves (if they could) of their
Liberty or Freewill, the noblest and most
useful of all our faculties, the only
thing we can properly call ours, and the
only thing that neither power nor fortune can take from us. Under whatever
veil these men endeavor to hide
their folly, yet they are engaged in it
by extreme pride and self-love: For,
not willing to own their ignorance and miscarriages, (which proceed from passion,
sloth, or inconsideration) they would
remove all the blame from their will, and charge it upon a natural impotency
not in their power to cure. Thus they ingeniously cheat themselves, and
choose rather to be ranked in the same condition with brutes or machines,
than be obliged to acknowledge their humane frailties, and to mend.
33. Since therefore the perfection or
soundness of our Reason is so evident
to our selves, and so plainly contained
in Scripture, however wrested by some
ignorant persons, we should labor to
acquire knowledge with more confident
hopes of success. Why should we entertain such mean and unbecoming thoughts, as if Truth, like the Almighty, dwelt in
light inaccessible,
and not to be discovered by the sons
of men? Things are always the same,
how different soever the conceptions
of men about them may be; and
what another did not, I may happily
find out. That nothing escaped the sight of former ages is a tale to be
told where one person only speaks, and
no body present must contradict him.
The slips and errors which are taken
notice of in the world every day, serve only to put us in mind that many able men did not examine
the Truth with that order and application they should or might have done.
There are a thousand things in our power to know, of which, through prejudice or
neglect, we may be, and frequently remain ignorant all our
lives; and innumerable difficulties
may be made by imagining MYSTERIES where there are none, or by
conceiving too discouraging and unjust
an opinion of our own abilities:
whereas, by a parity of Reason, we
may hope to outdo all that outdid
others before us, as posterity may exceed both. 'Tis no presumption therefore
for us to endeavor setting things in
a better light; as to know what we
are able to perform is not pride, but foolishly to presume none else can
equal us, when we are all upon the
same level: For who maketh thee to differ from another? And what hast thou
that thou didst not receive? Now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory as if
thou hadst not received it? (1 Cor. 4.7.) Have we
not all the same sure and certain promises of light and assistance from
above, as well as the privilege of Reason in common? If any lack wisdom,
let him ask it of God, who gives to all men liberally, and upbraideth not, and
it shall be given him. (Jam. 1.5.)
34. To conclude, let no body think
to be excused by this imaginary corruruption, but learn from the Scripture,
our infallible oracle, that the Gospel,
if it be the Word of God, is only contrary to the opinions and wishes of
lewd men, that love to walk after their
own lusts; of those that speak evil of
the things which they understand not (2 Pet. 3.3.), and debauch themselves in what they know in
common with brutes. (Jude, v. 10). It is hid to them
whose minds are blinded by the God of this world (2 Cor. 4.3,4.); and to those who live by
the ignorance and simple credulity of
their brethren. To be brief, it is
contrary to the false reasoning of all that will not know what it is to reflect or
consider; but it is not above
the possibility of their Reason when
they shall better improve their faculties. The creation of the world was against the
system of Aristotle, the immortality of the soul against the hypothesis of Epicurus, and the
liberty of the will was impugned by many ancient philosophers.
[How
the absolute liberty we experience in our selves, is consistent with God's
omnipotency and our dependence on him, shall in due place be considered.] But is this to be
contrary to Reason? Have not these men been quite baffled by as very
heathens as themselves? And are not their other errors since detected
and exploded by most of the learned? Besides, they wanted a principal mean
of information, viz. REVELATION.
SECT. III
That there is nothing MYSTERIOUS, or ABOVE
Reason in the GOSPEL.
1. We come at length to enquire whether any Doctrine of the GOSPEL be ABOVE, though not contrary to REASON. This
expression is taken in a
twofold signification. First, It denotes a thing intelligible of it self, but
so covered by figurative words, types
and ceremonies, that Reason cannot
penetrate the veil, nor see what is
under it till it be removed. Secondly,
it is made to signify a thing of its own
nature inconceivable, and not to be judged of by our ordinary faculties and ideas, though it be never
so clearly revealed. In both these senses to be above Reason is the same thing with MYSTERY; and, in effect,
they are convertible terms in divinity.
CHAP. I.
The History and Signification of MYSTERY in the Writings of the GENTILES.
2. What is meant by REASON we have already largely discoursed; but to understand
aright what the word MYSTERY imports, we must trace the original of it as far
back as the theology of the ancient Gentiles; whereof it was a considerable
term. Those nations, who (as Paul elegantly describes them) (Rom 1. 22, 23, 25.)
professing themselves wise, became fools; who changed the glory of the
incorruptible God into the image and likeness of corruptible man, of birds, of
beasts, and creeping things; who turned the Truth of God into a lie, and
worshipped the creature as well as (and sometimes more than) Creator: Those
nations, I say, ashamed or afraid to exhibit their Religion naked to the view of
all indifferently, disguised it with various ceremonies, sacrifices, plays, &c. making the
superstitious people believe
that admirable things were adumbrated by these externals. The priests,
but very rarely, and then obscurely,
taught in public, pretending the injunctions of their divinities to the contrary, lest their
secrets, forsooth, should
be exposed to the profanation of the
ignorant, or violation of the impious.
They performed the highest acts of
their worship, consisting of ridiculous, obscene, or inhumane rites, in the inmost
recesses of temples or groves consecrated for that purpose: and it
was inexpiable sacrilege for any to enter there [—Procul, O procul este Profani!
Conclamat vates, totoq; absistite luco, Virg. l.6. Aeneid, v. 259. Callimach.
Hymn. in Apol. v. 2.] but such as had a spedcial mark and privilege, or as much as to
ask questions about what passed in
them. All the excluded were forthat reason styled the PROFANE, as those
not in orders with us the LAITY.
3. But the cunning priests, who knew how to turn every thing to
their own advantage, thought fit to initiate
or instruct certain persons in the meaning of their rites. They gave out that such as died
uninitiated [Plat. in Phaedon. pag. 69. Edit. Paris. 1578.
Isocrat. in Panegyr. Initiaq; ut appellantur, ita re vera principia vitae
cognovimus: neq; solum cum laetitia vivendi rationem accepimus, sed etiam
cum spe meliore moriendi. Cic. l. 2 de Leg. c. 14.] wallowed in
infernal mire, whilst the purified and
initiated dwelt with the Gods; which
as well increased their veneration for,
as a desire of enjoying, so great a happiness. The initiated, after some
years preparation to make them value what cost so much time and patience, were
devoutly sworn [Quis Cereris ritus audet vulgare Profanis? Magnaque Threieio sacra
reperta Samo? Ovid. l. 2. de Arte Amand. v. 601. Aristid.] never to discover
what they saw or heard under pain of
death [Solipater in Divis. Quest.], though they might discourse of
them amongst themselves, lest too great a constraint should tempt them to blab the
secret. And do religiously they kept this oath, that some of them,
after their conversion to Christianity,
could hardly be brought to declare
what passed at their initiation in Gentilism. The Athenians thought no
torments exquisite enough to punish Diagoras
[Aristophanes in Avibus; etiam Suidas in voce.] the philosopher, for divulging their
mysteries; and not content
to brand him with atheism for laughing at their weakness, they promised a
talent as a reward to any that
should kill him. 'Twas death to say Adonis was a man; some suffered
upon that account: and many were torn in pieces at the Mysteries
[Acarnanes
duo Juvenes per Initiorum dies non Initiari Templum Cereris, imprudentes
Religionis, cum caetera turba ingressi sunt. Facile eos Sermo prodidit,
absurde quaedam percunctantes: Deduttiq; ad Antistites Templi, quum palam
effet per errorem ingressos, tanquam ob infandum scelus intersecti sunt.
Livius, lib. 31. cap. 14.] of Ceres,
and the orgies [Witness the story of
Pentheus, which afforded the subject
of a tragedy to Euripides.] of Bacchus, for their inadvised
curiosity.
4. Credible authors report, that the priests confessed to the initiated how these
mystic representations were
instituted at first in commemoration
of some remarkable accidents, or to
the honor of some great persons that
obliged the world by their virtues
and useful inventions to pay them such acknowledgments. But let this be as
it will, Myein [Μυειν] in their systems signified to initiate: Myesis [Μυησις], initiation: Mystes [Μοσης], a
name afterwards given the priests,
denoted the person to be initiated, who
was called an Epopt [Scholiast. in Aristophanis
Ranas.] when admitted;
and mystery [Μυστειον] the
doctrine in which he was initiated. As there were several
degrees [Schol. in Plut. Aristophan. Act. 4. Sc. 2.], so there were different
sorts of mysteries. The most famous were
the Samothracian, the Eleusinian, the
Egyptian, and those of Bacchus, commonly known by the name of orgies
[Pars obscurer cavis celebrabant Orgia cistis, Orgia quae frustra cupiunt
audire Profani. Cat. Epigram. 64. v. 260.]; .though the word is
sometimes put for any of the former.
5. From what has been said it is
clear, that they understood by mystery
in those days a thing intelligible of it self, but so veiled by others, that it could
not be known without special revelation.
I need not add, that in all the Greek
and Roman authors it is constantly put
as a very vulgar expression, for any thing sacred or profane that is designedly kept
secret, or accidentally obscure. And this is the common acceptation of it still; for when we cannot
see clearly into a business, we say
it is a mystery to us; and that an obscure or perplexed discourse is very mysterious. Mysteries of
state, science, and trades run all in the same notion.
6. But many not denying what is
so plain, yet being strongly inclined
out of ignorance or passion to maintain what was first introduced by the craft
or superstition of their fore-fathers,
will have some Christian doctrines to
be still mysterious in the second sense of
the word, that is, inconceivable in themselves, however clearly revealed.
They think a long prescription will argue it folly in any to appear against them, and
indeed custom has made it dangerous.
But, slighting so mean considerations,
if I can demonstrate that in the New Testament mystery is always used in the
first sense of the word, or that of the Gentiles, viz. for things naturally very
intelligible, but so covered by figurative
words or rites, that Reason could not discover them without special revelation;
and that the veil is actually taken away; then it will manifestly follow
that the doctrines so revealed cannot
now be properly called mysteries.
7. This is what I hope to perform in the sequel of this section, to the entire
satisfaction of those sincere Christians more concerned for the Truth than the
old or gainful opinion. Yet I must first remove out of my way certain
common places of cavilling, with which, not only the raw beginners of the most implicit
constitution raise a great dust upon all occasions, though not able to
speak of anything pertinently
when jolted out of the beaten road; but truly their venerable teachers are
not ashamed sometimes to play at this small game, which, they know, rather
amuses the prejudiced of their own side, than edifies the adversaries of any
sort. I wish there were more even of
a well-meaning zeal without knowledge, than of art or cunning in this conduct.
CHAP. II.
That nothing ought to be called a
MYSTERY, because we have
not an adequate Idea of all its
Properties, nor any at all of its
Essence.
8. I shall discuss this point with
all the perspicuity I am able. And, first, I affirm, that nothing can be said to
be a mystery, because we have not an adequate idea of it, or a distinct view
of all its properties at once; for
then every thing would be a mystery.
The knowledge of finite creatures is
gradually progressive, as objects are
presented to the understanding. Adam did not know so much in the twentieth
as in the hundredth year of his age; and Jesus Christ is expressly recorded to
have increased in wisdom as well as in stature (Luk. 2.52.). We are said to
know a thousand things, nor can we doubt of it;
yet we never have a full conception
of whatever belongs to them. I understand nothing better than this table
upon which I am now writing: I
conceive it divisible into parts beyond
all imagination; but shall I say it is above my Reason because I cannot count
these parts, nor distinctly perceive their
quantity and figures? l am convinced
that plants have a regular contexture,
and a multitude of vessels, many of them equivalent or analogous to those
of animals, whereby they receive a
juice from the earth, and prepare it, changing some into their own
substance, and evacuating the excrementious parts. But I do not clearly
comprehend how all these operations are
performed, though I know very well
what is meant by a tree.
9. The reason is, because knowing nothing of bodies but their properties,
God has wisely provided we should understand no more of these than are useful
and necessary for us; which is all our
present condition needs. Thus our
eyes are not given us to see all quantities, nor perhaps any thing as it is in
it self, but as it bears some relation to
us. What is too minute, as it escapes
our sight, so it can neither harm nor
benefit us: and we have a better view
of bodies the nearer we approach them, because then they become more convenient
or inconvenient; but as we remove farther off, we lose their sight
with their influence. I'm persuaded
there's no motion which does not excite some sound in ears disposed to be
affected with proportionable degrees
of force from the air; and, it may
be, the small animals concerned can
hear the steps of the spider, as we do those of men and cattle. From these
and millions of other instances, it is manifest, that we have little certainty of any thing but as it is noxious or
beneficial to us.
10. Rightly speaking then, we are
accounted to comprehend any thing when its chief properties and their several
uses are known to us: for to comprehend in all correct authors
is nothing else but to know; and as of
what is not knowable we can have no idea, so it is nothing to me. It is improper
therefore to say a thing is above our Reason, because we know no more of
it than concerns us, and ridiculous to supersede our disquisitions about it upon that
score. What should we think
of a man that would stiffly maintain water to be above his Reason, and that
he would never enquire into its nature, nor employ it in his house or
grounds, because he knows not how
many particles go to a drop; whether the air passes through it, is incorporated with it, or
neither? This for all the world as if I would not go because I cannot fly. Now
seeing the denominations of things are borrowed from their known properties, and that
no properties are knowable but. what concern us, or serve to discover such as
do, we cannot be accountable for comprehending no other, nor justly required more
by reasonable men, much less by the all-wise DEITY.
11. The most compendious method therefore to acquire sure and useful knowledge, is
not to trouble ourselves nor others with what is useless, were it known;
or what is impossible to be known at all. Since I easily perceive the good
or bad effects of rain upon the earth,
what should I be the better did I comprehend its generation in the clouds?
for after all I could make no rain at my pleasure, nor prevent its falling at any time. A probable
hypothesis will not give satisfaction in such cases: the hands, for
example, of two clock-dials may have the same external motion, though the
disposition of the latent springs which produce it should be very different. And to affirm this
or that to be the way, will not do, unless you can demonstrate that no other
possible way remains. Nay; should you hit upon the real manner,
you can never be sure of it, because the evidence of matters of fact solely depends upon
testimony: and it follows not that such a thing is so, because it may be so.
12. The application of this discourse to my subject admits of no difficulty; and it
is, first, that no Christian doctrine, no more than any ordinary piece of
nature, can be reputed a mystery, because we have not an adequate or
complete idea of whatever belongs to it. Secondly, that what is revealed
in Religion, as it is most useful and necessary, so it must and may be as easily
comprehended, and found as consistent with our common notions, as what we
know of wood or stone, of air, of water, or the like. And, thirdly, that
when we do as familiarly explain such doctrines, as what is known of natural
things, (which I pretend we can) we may then be as properly said to
comprehend the one as the other.
13. They trifle then exceedingly, and
discover a mighty scarcity of better arguments, who defend their mysteries by
this pitiful shift of drawing inferences from what is unknown to what is
known, or of insisting upon adequate ideas; except they will agree, as
some do, to call every spire of grass, sitting and standing, fish or
flesh, profound mysteries. Arid if out of a pertinacious or worse humor they will be
still fooling, and call these things mysteries, I'm willing to admit as many as they please in Religion, if they will allow
me likewise to make mine as intelligible to others as these are to me.
14. But to finish this point, I conclude, that neither GOD himself, nor
any of his attributes, are mysteries to
us for want of an adequate idea: no,
not eternity. The mysterious wits do
never more expose themselves than
when they treat of eternity in particular. Then they think themselves in their impregnable
fortress, and strangely insult over those dull creatures that cannot find a thing where it
is not. For if any bounds (as beginning or end) could be assigned to
eternity, it ceases immediately to be what it should; and you frame
only a finite, or rather a negative idea, which is the nature of all
limitation. Nor can it be said, that therefore eternity is above Reason in
this respect, or that it is any defect in us not to exhaust its idea; for what greater
perfection can be ascribed to Reason than to know precisely the
nature of things? And does not all its errors lie in attributing those properties to a thing which it has not, or taking any away that it
contains? Eternity therefore is no more
above Reason because it cannot be imagined, than a circle, because it may;
for in both cases Reason performs its
part according to the different natures
of the objects, whereof the one is
essentially imaginable, the other not.
15. Now it appears that the pretended mysteriousness of eternity does not
consist in the want of an adequate notion, which is all that we consider in
it at present. The difficulties raised
from its duration, as, that succession seems to make it finite, and that all
things must exist together if it be instantaneous, I despair not of solving
very easily; and rendering infinity also
(which is inseparable from it, or rather
a different consideration of the same
thing) as little mysterious as that three
and two make five. But this falls naturally into my second discourse,
where I give a particular explication of the Christian tenets, : according
to the general principles I am establishing in this.
16. As we know not all the properties of things, so we can never conceive the
essence of any substance in the world. To avoid ambiguity, I distinguish, after an excellent modern
philosopher, the nominal from the
real essence of a thing. The nominal
essence is a collection of those properties or modes which we principally
observe in any thing, and to which we give one common denomination or
name. Thus the nominal essence of the sun is a
bright, hot, and round body, at a certain distance from us, and that has a constant
regular motion. Whoever hears the word sun pronounced, this is the
idea he has of it. He may conceive more of its properties, or not all
these; but it is still a collection of modes or properties that makes his
idea. So the nominal essence of honey consists in its color, taste, and
other known attributes.
17. But the real essence is that intrinsic constitution of a thing
which is the ground or support of all its properties, and from which they
naturally flow or result. Now though we are persuaded that the modes of things
must have such a subject to exist in, (for
they cannot subsist alone) yet we are absolutely ignorant of what it is. We
conceive nothing more distinctly than
the mentioned properties of the sun,
and those whereby plants, fruits, metals, &c. are known to us; but we
have no manner of notion of the several foundations of these properties,
though we are very sure in the mean time,
that some such thing must necessarily be. The observable qualities
therefore of things is all that we understand by their names, for which reason they are called their
nominal essence.
18. It follows now very plainly, that nothing can be said to be a mystery,
because we are ignorant of its real essence, since it is not more knowable in one thing
than in another, and is never conceived
or included in the ideas we have of things, or the names we give 'em. I had
not much insisted upon this point, were
it not for the so often repeated sophistry of some that rather merit the
encomiums of great READERS than great REASONERS. When they would have the
most palpable absurdities and contradictions go down with others, or make them
place Religion in words that signify
nothing, or what they are not able to
explain, then they wisely tell them,
that they are ignorant of many
things, especially the essence of their
own souls; and that therefore they must not always deny what they cannot conceive. But this is not all; for
when they would (instead of confuting them) make those pass for ridiculous or arrogant
pretenders, who maintain that only intelligible and possible things
are the subject of belief, they industriously represent them as presuming
to define the essence of God with that
of created spirits. And after they
have sufficiently aggravated this presumption of their own coining, they
conclude, that if the contexture of
the smallest pebble is not to be accounted for, then they should not insist upon
such rigorous terms of believing, but sometimes be content to submit their
Reason to their teachers, and the determinations of the Church.
19. Who perceives not the weakness and slight of this reasoning?
We certainly know as much of the SOUL as we do of any thing else, if
not more. We form the clearest conceptions of thinking, knowing, imagining, willing,
hoping, loving, and the like operations of the mind. But we are strangers to the
subject wherein these operations exist.
So are we to that upon which the roundness, softness, color and
taste of the grape depend. There is
nothing more evident than the modes and properties of BODY, as to be extended,
solid, divisible, smooth, rough,
soft, hard, &c. But we know as little of the internal constitution, which
is the support of these sensible qualities, as we do of that wherein the
operations of the SOUL reside.
And, as the great man I just now mentioned observes, we may as well deny
the existence of body, because we have not an idea of its real essence, as call
the being of the soul in question for the
same reason. The Idea of the soul then is every whit as clear and
distinct as that of the body; and had there
been (as there is not) any difference,
the soul must have carried the advantage,
because its properties are more immediately known to us, and are the
light whereby we discover all things
besides.
20. As for GOD, we comprehend
nothing better than his attributes. We know not, it's true, the nature
of that eternal subject or essence wherein infinite goodness, love,
knowledge, power and wisdom co-exist; but we are not better acquainted
with the real essence of any of his creatures.
As by the idea and name of GOD we understand his known attributes and
properties, so we understand those of all things else by theirs; and we
conceive the one as clearly as we do the other. I remarked in the
beginning of this chapter, that we knew nothing of things, but such of
their properties as were necessary and useful. We may say
the same of God; for every act of our religion is directed by the
consideration of some of his attributes, without ever thinking of his
essence. Our love to him is kindled by his goodness, and our thankfulness
by his mercy; our obedience is regulated by his justice; and our hopes
are confirmed by his wisdom and power.
21. I think I may now warrantably
conclude, that nothing is a mystery,
because we know not its essence, since
it appears that it is neither knowable
in it self, nor ever thought of by us:
so that the divine being himself cannot with more reason be accounted
mysterious in this respect than the most contemptible of his creatures. Nor
am I very much concerned that these essences escape my knowledge:
for I am fixed in the opinion, that what infinite goodness has not been
pleased to reveal to us, we are either sufficiently capable to discover
our selves, or need not understand it at all. I hope now It is very
manifest that mysteries in religion are
but ill argued from the pretended mysteries of nature; and that such as
endeavor to support the former by the
latter, have either a design to impose upon others, or that they have
never themselves duly considered of this matter.
CHAP. III.
The Signification of the Word MYSTERY in the Kew Testament,
and the Writings of the most ancient Christians.
22. Having so dispatched these adequate ideas, and, I know
not what, real essences, we come now
to the main point upon which the
whole controversy chiefly depends.
For the question being, whether or no
Christianity is mysterious, it ought to
be naturally decided by the New Testament, wherein the Christian faith is
originally contained. I heartily desire
to put the case upon this issue, I appeal to this tribunal: for did I not
infinitely prefer the Truth I learn from these sacred records to all other considerations, I
should never assert that there are no mysteries in Christianity.
The Scriptures have engaged me in this
error, if it be one; and I will sooner be reputed heterodox with these only
on my side, than to pass for orthodox with the whole world, and have them against me.
23. Now by searching the Scriptures
I find some of the evangelic doctrines called mysteries, in a more general, or in a more particular
sense. They are more generally so called with
respect to all mankind: for being certain matters of fact only known to
God, and lodged in his decree, or such events as were quite lost and forgot
in the world, it was impossible for
any person, though never so wise or learned, to discover them; for the things of God
knoweth none but the Spirit of God (1 Cor. 2.11.), as none can find out the
secret thoughts of man till he tells them himself. Such revelations then of
God in the New Testament are called mysteries, not from any present
inconceivableness or obscurity, but with respect to what they were before this
revelation, as that is called our task
which we long since performed.
24. If any should question this, let
him hear the Apostle Paul declare
for himself and his fellow-laborers
in the Gospel; We speak, says he, the wisdom of God hid in a MYSTERY, which God
ordained before the World for our Glory, which none of the Princes of the World knew,
&c. And, to show that this Divine Wisdom was a Mystery for want of revealing Information, he presently subjoins,
eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man the things which God hath prepared for them that love him; but God hath revealed them to us by his Spirit. The most perspicacious
philosophers were not able to foretell the Coming of Christ, to discover the
resurrection of the body, nor any other matter of fact that is delivered in the Gospel: And if they happened now and then to say something like the Truth, they did but divine at best, and could never be certain of their
opinion. It is a most delightful thing to consider what pains the enquiring Heathens were often at to give a Reason for what depended not in the least upon any
principles in their philosophy, but was an historical Fact communicable by God alone, or such as had undoubted
memoirs concerning it. Of this I think it not amiss to add the following Example.
25. The same experience that taught the Gentiles their mortal condition, acquainted them also with the
frailty of their natures, and the numberless calamities constantly attending them. They could not
persuade themselves that the species of man came in such deplorable circumstances out of the
hands of an infinitely good and merciful Deity; and so were inclined to impute all to the
wickedness of adult persons, till they perceived that death and misfortune did not spare innocent
children more than robbers and pirates. At last they imagined a pre-existent
state, wherein the Soul acting separately like Angels, might have contracted some extraordinary
guilt, and so for
punishment be thrust into the body, which they sometimes compared to a prison, but oftener to a grave. This was likewise the
origin of transmigration, though in process of time the sins of this
world became as much concerned in that
opinion as those of the other. But nothing is more ingenious than the account which Cebes the Theban gives
us of this matter in his most excellent
Portraiture of humane Life. He feigns
[Cebet. Tab. p. 11. Ed. Amft. 1689.] imposture
sitting in a throne at
the gate of life, in the shape of a most beautiful lady, holding a cup
in her hand: she obligingly presents it to all that are on their journey to
this world, and these as civilly accept
it; but the draught proves ignorance and error, whence proceed all
the disorders and misery of their lives.
26. This point was a great mystery
to these honest philosophers, who had
only fancy to guide them, and could
not pretend to instructions from the
mind of God; but the thing is now no mystery to us that have the mind
of Christ. (1 Cor. 2.16.). We know that Adam the first
man became also the first sinner, and
mortal; and that so the whole race
propagated from him could be naturally no better than he was: By one man sin entered into the
world, and death by sin. (Rom. 5.12.)
27. But some doctrines of the Gospel are more particularly called
mysteries, because they were hid from God's
peculiar people under the Mosaic economy; not that they knew nothing
concerning them, for the Law had a shadow of good things to come (Heb. 10.1.); but they
were not clearly and fully revealed till
the New Testament times, being veiled
before by various typical representations, ceremonies, and figurative expressions. Christ tells his
disciples, Many prophets and kings have desired to see those things which you see, and
have not seen them, and to hear those
things which you hear, and have not
heard them. (Luke 10.24.) Paul says, we use great PLAINNESS of speech, and
not as Moses who put a VEIL over
his face (2 Cor. 3.12,13.): and then expressly adds,
that this VEIL is taken away in Christ (Ver. 14.), which could not be truly affirmed, were the things revealed
still inconceivable; for I know no difference
between not hearing of a thing at all, and
not comprehending it when you do. In
another place Paul has these remarkable words; The preaching of Jesus
Christ according to the REVELATION of the MYSTERY which was kept secret
since the world began; but now is made
MANIFEST, and by the Scriptures of
the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, MADE
KNOWN to all nations for the obedience of faith. (Rom. 16.25,26.)
28. These passages alone sufficiently prove the assertions contained in
No. 6 and 7 of this Section, viz. First,
that the Mysteries of the Gospel were certain things in their own nature intelligible enough, but called
mysteries by reason of the veil under which they were
formerly hid. Secondly, that under the
gospel this veil is wholly removed. From which, Thirdly, follows the promised
conclusion, that such doctrines cannot
now properly deserve the name of mysteries.
29. It is observable, that the hottest sticklers for the Fathers do cite
their authority only where they think
it makes for them, and slight or suppress it when not favorable to their
cause. Lest it should be maliciously
insinuated, that I serve the Holy Scriptures after the same manner, I shall
here transcribe all the passages of the
New Testament where the word mystery
occurs, that a man running may read with conviction what I defend. The
whole may be commodiously reduced
to these heads. First, mystery is read
for the Gospel or the Christian religion
in general, as it was a future dispensation totally hid from the Gentiles,
and but very imperfectly known to
the Jews: secondly, some particular
doctrines occasionally revealed by the
apostles are said to be manifested mysteries, that is, unfolded
secrets. And, thirdly, mystery is put for any thing veiled under parables or
enigmatical forms of speech. Of all these in order.
30. Mystery is read for the Gospel or Christianity in
general in the following passages: Rom. 16. 25, 26. The preaching of Jesus Christ
according to the revelation of the MYSTERY which
was kept secret since the world began; but now is made manifest, and by the
writings of the prophets, according to
the commandment of the everlasting
God, made known to all nations
for the obedience of Faith. Now, in
what sense could this mystery be said to
be revealed, this secret to be made
manifest, to be made known to all nations by the preaching of the Apostles,
if it remained still incomprehensible?
A mighty favor indeed! to bless the
world with a parcel of unintelligible
notions or expressions, when it was
already overstocked with the Acroatic discourses of Aristotle,
with the Esoteric doctrines of Pythagoras, and the mysterious
jargon of the other sects of philosophers; for they all made high
pretenses to some rare and wonderful
secrets not communicable to every one
of the learned, and never to any of the
vulgar. By this means the obsequious disciples apologized for all that was
found contradictory, incoherent,
dubious, or incomprehensible in the
works of their several masters. To
any that complained of inconsistency
or obscurity, they presently answered,
O, Sir, the philosopher said it, and you
ought therefore to believe it: he knew
his own meaning well enough, though
he cared not, it may be, that all others should do it too: so the occasions of
your scruples, Sir, are only seeming, and not real. But the Christian Religion has no need of such
miserable shifts and artifices, there being nothing in it above or contrary to
the strictest Reason: and such as are of another mind may as well justify
the idle dreams of the philosophers,
the impieties and fables of the Alcoran, or any thing as well as Christianity. The
second passage is in 1 Cor.
2.7. the words were but just now read, and need not here be repeated. The
third passage is in 1 Cor. 4.1. Let a man so account of us as the ministers of Christ, and the
stewards or dispensers of the MYSTERIES of God; that is,
the preachers of those doctrines which
God was pleased to reveal. The fourth passage is in Ephes. 6.9. Praying — for
me, that utterance may be given unto me
that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the MYSTERY of the Gospel. Parallel to this is the fifth
passage in Col. 4.3, 4. Praying also for
us, that God would open unto us a door of utterance to speak the MYSTERY of Christ — that
I may make it manifest as I ought to speak. The clearness of
these words admits of no comment.
The sixth passage is in Col. 2.2. That their
hearts might be comforted being knit together in love, and unto all the
riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the knowledge of the MYSTERY of God, and of the Father, and
of Christ. Here is evidently meant the
revelation of the Gospel-state: for
whatever right conceptions the Jews might have of the Father, they had
not that full knowledge of Christ and
his doctrines, which are the inestimable privileges we now enjoy. The seventh passage is in
1 Tim. 3. 8, 9.
Likewise must the Deacons be grave, not
double-tongued, not given to much wine,
nor greedy of filthy lucre, holding the
MYSTERY of the Faith in a pure conscience; that is, living to what they
believe. The eighth and last passage
relating to this head is in 1 Tim. 3.16.
And without controversy great is the
MYSTERY of Godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit,
seen of Angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received
up into Glory. I will not now insist
upon the various readings of these
words, nor critically determine which
is spurious or genuine. All parties
(how much soever they differ about their sense) agree that the gradations of the
verse are Gospel-Revelations; so that the Mystery of Godliness cannot
be restrained to any one, but is common to them all: It refers not to the
nature of any of them in particular, but
to the revelation of 'em all in general.
And it must be granted, without any
dispute, that the gracious manifestation of Christ and his Gospel is not only to us wonderfully
stupendous and surprising, but that it was likewise a
very great Mystery to all preceding the New Testament Dispensation. From
these passages it appears, that the Gospel and the following expressions are
synonymous, viz. The Mystery of the
Faith, the Mystery of God and Christ, the Mystery of Godliness, and the Mystery
of the Gospel. No Doctrine then of
the Gospel is still a Mystery (for the
Apostles concealed nothing from us that was useful, and have acquainted us
with the whole Counsel of God [Acts 20.20,27.]: ) but 'tis the
Gospel it self that was heretofore indeed a Mystery, and cannot now after
it is fully revealed, properly deserve that appellation.
31. We design in the second place to show, that certain matters occasionally revealed by the Apostles, were only
mysterious before that revelation. The
Jews, who scarce allowed other nations to be men, thought of nothing less
than that the time should ever come
wherein those nations might be reconciled to God (Rom. 11.15.), and be made
coheirs and partakers with them of the same
privileges. This was nevertheless resolved upon in the divine decree, and
to the Jews was a mystery, but ceases so
to continue after the revelation of it
to Paul, who, in his Epistles, has openly declared it to all the world.
The first passage we shall allege to that
purpose is in Eph. 5.1-6,9. If you have heard of the dispensation of the
grace of God which is given me to you-ward,
how that by revelation he made known
unto me the MYSTERY (as I wrote
before in few words, whereby, when you read, you may understand my knowledge
in the MYSTERY of Christ), which in
other ages was not made known unto the
sons of men, as 'tis now revealed unto
us, his holy apostles and prophets, by the
Spirit; that the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the same body, and partakers
of his promise in Christ by the Gospel — and to make all men see what is the
fellowship of the MYSTERY, which from the
beginning of the world hath been hid in
God. The second passage is in Rom. 11.25. For I would not, brethren, that you
should be ignorant of this MYSTERY,
that blindness in part is happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles
be come in. The third passage is in Col. 1.
25, 26, 27. — The Church, whereof I
am made a minister according to the dispensation of God which is given to me
for you, to fulfill the word of God, even
the MYSTERY which hath been hid
from ages and generations, but now is
made manifest to his saints: to whom
God would make known what are the
riches of the glory of this MYSTERY
among the Gentiles. The fourth passage is in Eph. 1.9,10. Having made
known unto us the MYSTERY of his will, according to his good pleasure which
he hath purposed in himself, that in the
dispensation of the fullness of times, he
might gather together into one all things
in Christ. These places require no
explication, for the sense of them all
is, that the secret of the vocation of the Gentiles is in the Gospel made known, manifested and declared; and therefore remains no longer a Mystery. The next thing under the
designation of a Mystery in the above-mentioned sense is one circumstance of the Resurrection. The Apostle having no less clearly and solidly than largely reasoned upon this
subject, (1 Cor. 15.) obviates an objection or scruple that might be raised about the
state of such as should be found alive on the earth at the last day. Behold, says he, ver. 51, 52. I show you a MYSTERY, I impart a
secret to you; we shall not all sleep, or die, but we shall all be changed in a
moment, in the twinkling of an eye;—the dead shall rise, and we shall be changed. It is not the
doctrine of the resurrection then, you see, that is here called a mystery, but only this particular
circumstance of it, viz. that the living shall at the sound of the last
trumpet put off their flesh and blood, or their mortality, without dying, and be in an Instant rendered incorruptible and immortal, as well as those that shall revive. In the fifth
chapter to the Ephesians, ver. 31, 32. we learn that the mutual love and conjunction of man and
wife is a type of that indissoluble union which is between Christ and his Church. This was questionless a great Mystery before we were told it, but now there is nothing more intelligible than the
foundation of that resemblance or figure. The Kingdom of Antichrist in opposition to the Gospel or Kingdom of Christ is also called a Mystery, because it was a secret
design carried on insensibly and by degrees: but at length, all obstacles being removed or surmounted, it appears bare-faced to the
light, and (as it was divinely fore-told) ceases to continue a Mystery. Let no
man deceive you by any means, says Paul to the Thessalonians, (2 Thess. 2. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.) for that
day shall not come except there be a falling away or apostasy first; and that
man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition, &c. And now you know what
withholdeth, that he might not be revealed in his time; for the MYSTERY of Iniquity doth already work, only he who now hindreth, will hinder till he be taken out of the way, and then shall that wicked
one be revealed. These are all the passages relating to the second head.
32. Mystery is, thirdly, put for any
thing veiled under parables or enigmatical expressions in these parallel places
following. The first is in Mat. 13.10,11. The disciples came and said unto
him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them,
Because it is given to you to know the MYSTERIES of the Kingdom of Heaven, but to them it is not given. The
second passage is in Mark 4.11. And Jesus said to his disciples, Unto you is
given to know the MYSTERY of the
Kingdom of God; but unto them that are without, all these things are done in
parables. The same words are repeated in Luk. 8.10. And it is most evident
from all of 'em, that those things which Christ spoke in parables were not
in themselves incomprehensible, but
mysterious to them only to whom they
were not unfolded, that (as it is there said) hearing they might not understand.
It is now the most ordinary practice in
the world for such as would not be understood by every one, to agree upon a way of
speaking peculiar to themselves.
Nor is there any thing more easy than the explication which Christ
gave of these parables at the request
of his disciples.
33. There are but two passages only left, and mystery in them has no reference to any thing in particular, but
it is put for all secret things in its utmost latitude or acceptation. The first
place is in 1 Cor. 13.2. And though I
have the gift of prophecy, and understand all MYSTERIES and all knowledge, and though I have all
faith so that I could remove mountains, and have no
charity, I am nothing. The second, parallel to this, is in 1 Cor. 14. 2. He
that speaketh in an unknown tongue, speaketh not unto men but unto God;
for no man understandeth him, however
in the Spirit he speaketh MYSTERIES;
that is, what is intelligible enough to
him, are secrets to such as understand
not his language.
34. Having so particularly alleged
all the passages where there is mention
made of mysteries in the New Testament, if any should wonder why I
have omitted those in the Revelation,
to such I reply, that the Revelation cannot be properly looked upon as a
part of the Gospel; for there are no new doctrines delivered in it.
Far from being a Rule of Faith or Manners, it is not as much as an explanation of any
point in our Religion. The true subject of that book or vision is a prophetical history of the
external state of the Church in its various and interchangeable periods of prosperity or
adversity. But that I may not fall under the least suspicion
of dealing unfairly, I shall subjoin the few texts of the Revelation wherein
the word mystery is contained. The first is in Rev. 1. 20. The MYSTERY
of the seven stars which thou sawest in
my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks: Well, what is the mystery or
secret of these stars and candlesticks? The seven stars are the Angels of
the seven Churches; and the seven candlesticks, which thou sawest, are the seven
Churches, namely, of Asia. Another
passage is in chap. 17.5,7. And upon
her forehead was a name mitten, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE
GREAT, &c. And the Angel said,—
I will tell thee the MYSTERY of the Woman.
This he performs too in the
following verses, which you may consult. Nor is it undeserving our particular notice, that Mystery is here
made the distinguishing mark of the false or
Antichristian Church. Mystery is a name written on her forehead; that is,
all her Religion consists in Mystery, she
openly owns, she enjoins the belief of Mysteries. And, no doubt on't, as far
as any Church allows of Mysteries, so far it is ANTICHRISTIAN, and may
with a great deal of justice, though little
honor, claim kindred with the scarlet Whore. The only remaining text
is in chap. 10. 5, 6, 7. And the Angel
which I saw stand upon the sea and upon
the earth, lifted up his hand to Heaven,
and swore by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created Heaven and the things
that therein are, and the earth and the things that therein are, and the sea and
the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer; but that in the
days of the voice of the seventh Angel, when he shall begin to sound, the MYSTERY of God
should be finished: that is, that all the things figuratively delivered
in this prophecy concerning the Gospel
(which was shown above to signify the same with the Mystery of God) should have their final
accomplishment, and so end with this globe and all therein contained.
35. I appeal now to all equitable persons, whether it be not evident to any that can read, that Mystery in the whole New Testament is never put for any thing inconceivable in it self, or not to be judged of by our ordinary
notions and faculties, however clearly revealed: And whether, on the contrary, it does not always signify some things naturally intelligible enough; but either so veiled by figurative
words and rites, or so lodged in God's sole knowledge and decree, that they could not be discovered without special
revelation. Whoever retains any real veneration for the Scripture, and sincerely believes it to be the Word of God, must be ever concluded by its
authority, and render himself, in spite of all prejudices, to its evidence. He that says the Gospel is his only Rule of Faith, and yet believes any thing not warranted by it, he is an arrant
hypocrite, and does but slyly banter all the world.
36. Nor can a more favorable opinion be harbored of those, who, instead of
submission to the dictates of Scripture and Reason, straight have
recourse to such persons as they specially follow or admire, and are ready
to receive or refute an opinion, as these shall please to direct them. Pray,
Doctor, says one of his Parishioners,
what think you of such a Book? it seems to make things plain. Ah! dear
Sir, answers the Doctor, it is a very bad book; he's a dangerous man that
wrote it; he's for believing nothing
but what agrees with his own purblind, proud and carnal Reason. P.
Say you so, Doctor? then I'm resolved
to read no more of it, for I heard you often preach against Human Reason;
I'm sorry, truly, it should unhappily fall into my hands, but I'll take care
that none of our family set their eyes upon it. D. You'll do very well, Sir:
besides, this Book is still worse than I told you, for it destroys a great many
points which we teach; and should this doctrine take, (which God forbid)
most of the good Books you have at home, and which cost you no less pains
to read than money to purchase, would signify not a straw, and serve only for waste-paper to put under
pies, or for other mean uses. P. Bless me, good Doctor, I pray God forgive me reading
such a vile treatise; he's an abominable man that could write it; but
what? my books worth nothing, say
you? Dr. H*s Sermons, and Mr. Cs Discourses waste-paper? I'll never believe it, let who will
say the contrary; Lord, why don't you excommunicate
the author and seize upon his books?
D. Ay, Sir, Time was, — but now
it seems a man may believe according
to his own sense, and not as the Church
directs; there's a Toleration established,
you know. P. That Toleration, Doctor, will—. D. Whist, Sir,
say no more of it; I am as much concerned as you can be; but it is not safe
nor expedient at this time of day to find faults.
37. There are others far from this
simplicity, but as firmly resolved to
stand fast by their old systems. When
they tell us of Mysteries we must believe them, and there's no remedy for
it. It is not the force of Reasoning that
makes these for Mysteries, but some by interest; and they'll be sure
to applaud and defend any author
that writes in favor of their cause,
whether he supports it with Reason
or not. But I'm not half so angry
with these men as with a sort of people that will not be at the pains of examining any thing, lest they should
become more clear-sighted or better informed, and so be tempted to take up a
new road. Such persons must needs be
very indifferent indeed, or they make
Religion come into their Scutcheons.
38. The mention of Scutcheons naturally puts me in mind of those who
are little moved with any Reasons,
when the judgment of the Primitive
Church comes in competition. The
Fathers (as they love to speak) are
to them the best interpreters of the
words of Scripture; "And what
those honest men," says a very ingenious person [M. de Fontenelle, dans son
Histoire des Oracles.], "could not make
good themselves by sufficient Reasons, is now proved by their sole authority. If the Fathers foresaw this," adds the
same author, "they were not to be blamed for sparing themselves the labor of reasoning more
exactly than we find they
commonly did." That truth and falsehood should be determined by a majority of voices, or certain
periods of time, seems to me to be the most ridiculous of all follies.
39. But if antiquity can in good earnest add any worth to an opinion,
I think I need not fear to stand to its decision: "For if we consider the duration of the
world," (says another celebrated writer [Monsieur Perrault dans ses
Parallelles des Anciens & des Modernes.]) "as we do
that of man's life, consisting of Infancy, Youth, Manhood, and old
Age; then certainly such as lived before us were the Children or the
Youth, and we are the true Ancients of the World. And if experience" (continues he)
"be the most considerable advantage which grown persons have over the younger
sort, then, questionless, the experience of such as come last into the world must
be incomparably greater than of those that were born long before them: for
the last comers enjoy not only all the stock of their predecessors, but to
it have likewise added their own observations." These thoughts are no less
ingenious than they are just and solid. But if antiquity be understood in the vulgar sense, I
have no Reason to despair however; for my assertion too will become ancient
to posterity, and so be in a condition to support it self by this commodious
privilege of prescription.
40. Yet feeling I am not likely to live till that time, it cannot be amiss
to make it appear that these same Fathers, who have the good luck to be
at once both the Young and the Old of
the World, are on my side. 'Tis not out of any deference to their judgments, I confess, that I take these
pains. I have freely declared what
value I set upon their authority in the beginning of this book: but my
design is to show the disingenuity of those, who pretending the highest
veneration for the writings of the Fathers, never fail to decline
their sentence when it suites not with their humor or interest.
41. Clemens Alexandrinus has every where the same notion of mystery
that I have, that the Gentiles had, and
which I have proved to be that of the Gospel. In the 5th Book of
his Stromates, which merits the perusal of all that are curious to
understand the nature of the Jewish and Heathen Mysteries; in that Book, I
say, he puts the matter out of all doubt, and quotes several of those
texts of Scripture, which I have already alleged to this purpose. Nay he tells us, that the
Christian discipline was called Illumination, because it brought hidden
things to light, the Master (CHRIST) alone removing the Cover of the Ark, that is,
the Mystic Veil. [Page 578. edit. Col. 1688.] He adds in express
words, that those things which were mysterious and obscure in the Old Testament
are made plain in the New.
42. Every one knows how the Primitive Christians, in a
ridiculous imitation of the Jews, turned all the Scripture into Allegory;
accommodating the properties of those animals mentioned in the Old Testament to
events that happened under the New. They took
the same liberty principally with men, where they could discover the least
resemblance between their names, actions, or state of life; and carried
this fancy at length to numbers, letters, places, and what not. That which in the
Old Testament therefore did, according to them, represent any thing
in the New, they called the type or mystery of it. Thus
TYPE, SYMBOL, PARABLE, SHADOW, FIGURE, SIGN
and MYSTERY, signify all the same thing in Justin Martyr. This
Father affirms in his Dialogue with Tryphon the Jew, that the name of
Joshua was a mystery representing the name of Jesus; and that the holding
up of Moses' [Excd. 17.11.] hands during the
battle with the Amalekites in Rephidim, was a type or mystery of Christ's
cross, whereby he overcame death, as the Israelites there did their enemies:
and then he adds the following remark; This is to be considered, says he,
concerning those two holy men and prophets of God, that neither of them
was able in his single person to carry both MYSTERIES, I mean the type of his
cross, and that of being called by his name.
[Page 338 edit. Col. 1686.] In the same dialogue he calls the predictions
of the prophets SYMBOLS, PARABLES and MYSTERIES, explained by the succeeding
prophets. [Pag. 294.]
43. When Tertullian in his Apology justifies the Christians from those
inhumane practices whereof their enemies most unjustly accused 'em, he
cries, "We are beset, we are discovered every day;-— But if we keep always hid, how are
those things known which we are said to
commit? Nay, who could make them known? Such as are guilty! Not so, surely: for all
Mysteries are of course under an oath of secrecy. The Samothracian, the Eleusinian
Mysteries are concealed; how much rather such as being discovered would now provoke the
justice of men, and might expect to meet with that of God hereafter?"
[Quotidie obsidemur, quotidie prodimuct,— Si
semper latemus, quando proditum est quod admittimus? Immo a quibus prodi
potuit? Ab ipsis reis! Non utique; cum vel ex forma omnibus Mysteriis
silentii fides debeatur, Samorthracia & Eleusinia reticentur; quanto magis
talia quae prodica interim etiam Humanam animadversionem provocabunt, dum
Divina servatur? Pag. 8. edit. Paris, 1675.] They are secret
practices, you see, and not incomprehensible doctrines which this
Father counted Mysteries.
44. Origen makes the encampments of the Israelites in
their journey to the promised land to be [Lib. 6.
contra Cels. pag. 291. edit Cantab. 1677.] symbols or mysteries describing
the way to such as shall travel towards Heaven, or heavenly things. I need not add what
he says of the writings of the prophets, of the vision of Ezekiel, or the
Apocalypse in particular: for he is universally confessed to have brought
this mystic or allegorical method
of interpreting Scripture to its perfection, and to have furnished matter
to all that trod the same path after him; an honor, in my opinion, not to be
envied him. But he was so far from thinking any doctrine of our Religion a
mystery in the present sense of
the word, that he expressly affirms them [Lib. 3. contra
Cels. pag. 135.] to agree all with COMMON NOTIONS, and to commend
themselves to the assent of every well-disposed hearer.
45. The other Fathers of the three first centuries have exactly
the same notions of mystery: And should they
in this matter happen to contradict
in one place what they established in
another, (as they ordinarily do in most things) it would only serve to
exclude them from being a true rule to others that were none to themselves.
But what is no small prejudice in our
favor, seeing we have to do with men so apt to forget, they keep very constant
to this point: so that I
may justly hope by this time the cause of incomprehensible and inconceivable
mysteries in Religion should be readily given up by all that sincerely
respect FATHERS, SCRIPTURE, or REASON.
CHAP. IV.
Objections brought from particular Texts of SCRIPTURE, and from the Nature of FAITH answered
46. Some men are so fond of mysteries, and it seems they find
their account in it, that they are ready to hazard any thing sooner than
part with them. In the mean time, whether they know it or not, they lay nothing
less than their Religion at stake by this conduct; for it is an ugly sign
when people profess that what they believe is above the examination of
Reason, and will suffer it by no means to come into question: It argues in themselves a
distrust of their cause; and others conclude, that what dares not abide the
trial of Reason, must needs it self be unreasonable at bottom.
47. Notwithstanding these consequences are so obvious, they harden themselves against them, and are
not ashamed to bring even Scripture to countenance their assertion. You
shall hear nothing more frequently
in their mouths than these words of the Apostle, Beware lest any man spoil you
by PHILOSOPHY and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the
rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. (Col. 2.8.) Ridiculous! as if
Reason and Truth were vanity and
craft! By philosophy is not here understood sound Reason, (as all interpreters agree) but the
systems of Plato, of Aristotle, of Epicurus, of the Academics, &c. many of
whose principles are directly repugnant to common sense and good morals.
Sophistry was never more in vogue than in the days of Paul; and several out
of these sects embracing Christianity, found the way to mix with it
their old opinions, which they were loath to quit for good and all. The
Apostle therefore had weighty grounds to warn his converts not to confound the
inventions of men with the doctrine of God.
It appears nevertheless that this good
advice was to little purpose, for you'll find the grossest mistakes and
whimsies of the Fathers to have been occasioned by the several systems of
philosophy they read before their conversion, and which they afterwards
foolishly endeavored to reconcile with Christianity, to the entire ruin
almost of the latter, as we shall show in the following chapter.
48. But as no particular hypothesis whatsoever has a right to set up
for a standard of reason to all mankind, much less may vain philosophy or
sophistry claim this privilege: and so far am I from aiming at
any such thing, that it is the very practice I oppose in this book. When
some have advanced the metaphysical nonsense of doting philosophers into
articles of faith, they raise a loud clamor against Reason, before whose
evidence and light their empty shadows must disappear. For as in
philosophy so in Religion every sect has its peculiar extravagancies, and
the INCOMPREHENSIBLE MYSTERIES of the latter do perfectly answer the
OCCULT QUALITIES of the former. They were both calculated at first
for the same ends, viz. to stop the mouths of such as demand a Reason
where none can be given, and to keep as many in ignorance as interest
shall think convenient. But God forbid that I should
impute the like nefarious designs to all that contend for mysteries now,
thousands whereof I know to be the best meaning men in the universe. This
sophistical or corrupt philosophy is elsewhere in the New Testament
styled (1 Cor. 3.19.) the wisdom of this world, to which
the Greeks were as much bigoted, as
the Jews were infatuated with a fancy
that nothing could be true but what
was miraculously proved so: The Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after Wisdom.
(1 Cor. 1.22.). But this boasted Wisdom was then foolishness with God, and so
it is now with considering men.
49. A passage out of the epistle to the Romans is cited likewise to prove
Humane Reason not a capable judge of what is divinely revealed. The words
are, The carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the
law of God, neither indeed can be. (Rom. 8.7.). But If these words bespoken of
Reason, there can be nothing more false; because Reason
does and ought to subject it self to the
Divine Law: yet this submission argues no imperfection in Reason, as our
obedience to just laws cannot be said
to destroy our liberty. Reason must first understand the Law of God, and then
comply with it; for a man can no more deserve punishment for not observing such
laws as are unintelligible, than for not performing what
was never enjoined him. The carnal mind then in this place is not Reason,
but the carnal desires of lewd and
wicked mean; whose practices, as they
are contrary to the revealed law of
God, so they are to that of sound Reason too .
50. What has been discoursed of pretended wisdom and sensual minds, may
be easily applied to another passage where it is said, that the weapons of
our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of
strong holds, casting down imaginations, and every high thing that
exalteth it self against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity
every thought to the obedience of Christ. (2 Cor. 10.4,5.) It is plain from
the words as well as the scope of the whole,
that these are the thoughts and imaginations of foolish and profane men, and
should be captivated or
reformed by Reason as well as Scripture; as, in effect, they
often are: for such persons not ordinarily allowing
of argument from Scripture, are first
persuaded by Reason, and after that
they receive the Scripture. But can
Reason cast down or destroy it self?
No; but it reduces those vain and
impious sophisms which borrow its
name to cover or authorize the disorders they occasion.
51. It would be extremely tedious
to go one by one over all the texts
which ignorant or perverse Men allege against that use of Reason in
Religion which I particularly establish. Any single passage to my purpose should, one would think, give
sufficient satisfaction to all Christian lovers of Truth: for the word of
God must be every where uniform
and self consistent. But I have quoted several in the second chapter of the
second section, to speak nothing of
what I performed m the foregoing
chapter of the present section. Yet
because because this Reasoning might be retorted, and to leave no plausible
pretenses to cavillers or deceivers, I have
punctually answered the strongest objections I have observed in the most
celebrated pieces of divinity; I say which I have observed, for I should read
the Gospel a million of times over before the vulgar notion of mystery
could ever enter into my head, or any passage in that book could suggest to
me that the sense of it was above Reason or enquiry. Nor do I find
my self yet inclined to envy those who entertain other thoughts of it,
when all the while they openly acknowledge it to be a divine revelation.
But seeing the most material difficulty made to me by a friend, is, that
my opinion destroys the nature of FAITH, I shall with all the brevity I can deliver my
sentiments concerning this subject.
52. I will spend no time upon the ordinary divisions of faith into historical,
temporary, or justifying,
lively or dead, weak or strong, because most of these are not so much faith it
self, as different effects thereof. The word imports belief or persuasion,
as when we give credit to any thing which is told us by God or man;
whence faith is properly divided into
human and divine. Again, divine
faith is either when God speaks to us immediately himself, or when we
acquiesce in the words or writings of those to whom we believe he has
spoken. All faith now in the world is of this last sort, and by consequence
entirely built upon ratiocination. For
we must first be convinced that those writings are theirs whose names they
bear, we then examine the outward state and actions of those persons, and lastly
understand what is contained to
their works; otherwise we cannot determine whether they be worthy of God or not,
much less firmly believe them.
53. To be confident of any thing without conceiving it, is no real
faith or persuasion, but a rash presumption, and an obstinate prejudice,
rather becoming enthusiasts or impostors that the taught of God, who has
no interest to delude his creatures, nor wants ability to inform them
rightly. I proved before, (Sect 2. Chap. 2.) that
the difference between human and divine revelations did not consist in
degrees of perspicuity, but in certitude. So many circumstances frequently concur in
history as render it equal to intuition: Thus I can as soon
deny my own being as the murder of
Cicero, or the story of William the Conqueror; yet this happens only sometimes: But God speaks always Truth
and certainty.
54. Now since by revelation men
are not endued with any new faculties, it follows that God should lose his end
in speaking to them, if what he said did not agree with their common notions. Could that
person justly value
himself upon being wiser than his neighbors, who having infallible assurance that something called Blictri
had a being in nature, in the mean
time knew not what this Blictri was?
And seeing the case stands really thus,
all faith or persuasion must necessarily consist of two parts, knowledge and
assent. 'Tis the last indeed that constitutes the formal Act of Faith, but not
without the evidence of the first: And this
is the true account we have of it all over the New Testament. There we
read that without Faith it is impossible to please God; but he that cometh
to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently
seek him. (Heb. 11.6.). So the firm persuasion of a pious man that his
requests will be granted, is grounded upon his knowledge of the being, goodness and
power of God. It was reckoned no crime
not to believe in Christ before he was
revealed; for how could they believe in him of whom they had not heard? (Rom.
10.14.) But with what better Reason could any be
condemned for not believing what he
said, if they might not understand it?
for, as far as I can see, these cases are
parallel. Faith is likewise said to come by hearing (Ver. 17.); but without
understanding 'tis plain this hearing would signify
nothing, words and their ideas being reciprocal in all languages.
55. The Author of the Epistle to
the Hebrews does not define FAITH a
prejudice, opinion, or conjecture, but
conviction or demonstration: Faith, says he, is the confident expectation of
things hoped for, and the demonstration of things not seen. (Heb. 11.1.) These last
words, things not seen, signify not (as some
would have it) things incomprehensible or unintelligible, but past or future matters of
fact, as the creation of the world, and the resurrection
of the dead, or the belief of some things invisible to our corporeal eyes,
though intelligible enough to the eyes of
our understanding. This appears by
all the examples subjoined to that definition. Besides, there can be properly no
faith of things seen or present, for then 'tis self-evidence, and not
ratiocination: Hope that is seen is not
hope, for what a man sees why doth he
yet hope for? But if we hope for what we
see not, then do we with patience wait for it. (Rom. 8. 24,25.) So the Patriarchs received not the
promises, but saw them afar off, and were
persuaded of them. (Heb. 11.13.)
56. Without conceiving faith after
this manner, how could Christ be termed the Light of the World (John 8.12
& 9.5.), the Light
of the Gentiles (Act. 13.47.)? How could believers be said to have the Spirit of Wisdom,
(Eph. 1.17.) and to have the eyes of their hearts enlightened (Ver. 18.)? For the
light of the heart or understanding is the knowledge of things;
and as this knowledge is more or less, so the mind is proportionably
illuminated. Be not unwise, says the Apostle, understanding what the will
of the Lord is. (Eph. 5.17.) And in another place he exhorts men never to act in dubious
matters till they are fully persuaded in their own minds (Rom. 14.5.)
57. But to all this will be objected
that remarkable instance of Abraham's
Faith, who was ready to sacrifice his
only Son, notwithstanding God had
promised that Kings should descend of
him, and his Seed be numerous as the
stars of Heaven, or the sand upon
the sea shore. Did Abraham blindly
obey then, without reconciling the
apparent contradiction between God's
present command and his former promises? Far from it: for 'tis expressly
recorded, that he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten,
of whom it was said, that in Isaac shall thy
Seed be blessed [So λογισαμενος should be translated.]: Reasoning that God was able to raise him again from the dead,
from whence also he had received him in a figure. (Heb. 11.1-18,19.) He rightly concluded that
God was able to revive Isaac by a Miracle, as he was miraculously born,
according to another promise, after his
parents were past having children,
(ver. 12.) and so as good as dead: therefore it is elsewhere written of Abraham,
that being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was
about an hundred years old, neither yet
the deadness of Sarah's womb; nor staggered at God's promise through unbelief;
but being strong in Faith he gave glory to God, and was fully persuaded that
what he had promised he was able also to perform. (Rom. 4.19,20,21.)
58. Now what is there in all this,
but very strict Reasoning from experience, from the possibility of the
thing, and from the power, justice,
and immutability of him that promised it? Nor can any man show me
in all the New Testament another signification of Faith but a most firm
persuasion built upon substantial reasons. In this sense all Christianity is
not seldom styled the Faith; as now we
usually say that we are of this or that PERSUASION, meaning the profession of some Religion. But surely
nothing can better root and establish
our persuasion than a thorough examination and trial of what we believe;
whereas the weakness and instability
of our Faith proceed from want of
sufficient reasons for it, whereupon
incredulity always follows; then
fails obedience, which is the constant
sign and fruit of genuine Faith; and
hence spring all the irregularities of men's lives. He that faith I know him, and keepeth not his
commandments is a liar — For he that faith he abideth
in him, ought himself also to walk as he
walked. (1 John 2. 4,6.) Nor can it possibly fall out otherwise, but that he who believes
without understanding must be tossed
and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the slight and cunning of
men ready to deceive. (Eph. 4.14.)
59. Though the Authority of the New
Testament be so clear in this matter,
yet I shall further confirm it by the following observations. First, if Faith
were not a persuasion resulting from the
previous knowledge and comprehension of
the thing believed, there could be no degrees nor differences in it; for these are
evident tokens that men know more or less of a thing, as they have desires or opportunities to learn it. But
that there are such degrees appears by
the Scripture, where those that have
only an imperfect and perfunctory knowledge of Religion are compared to infants who feed only upon
milk (1 Cor. 3.2.); but they who arrive at a more full
and accurate certainty are likened to grown men that can digest stronger food. (Heb. 5.12,13,14.)
60. My next observation is, That
the Subject of Faith must be intelligible
to all, since the belief thereof is commanded under no less a penalty than
damnation: He that believeth nor,
shall be damned. (Mark. 16.16.) But shall any be damned for the non-performance of
impossibilities? Obligations to believe
do therefore suppose a possibility to
understand. I showed before that contradiction and nothing were convertible
terms; and I may now say
as much of Mystery in the theological sense: for, to speak freely, contradiction and Mystery are but two emphatic ways of
saying Nothing. Contradiction expresses Nothing by a couple of ideas that destroy one another,
and Mystery expresses nothing by words that have no ideas at all.
61. The third observation shall be,
That if any part of Scripture were unintelligible, it could never he rightly translated, except the
sound of the words, and not their sense, be looked upon as the revelation of God. Terms can
by no means be understood, unless the things they denote be understood also.
I may well understand things without their names, but never names without knowing their subjects. And,
in good earnest, to what sort of assurance can any man pretend, that he has made a right version of what he
openly professes not to conceive? It cannot be imagined how much the notion of Mystery contributes to the
obscurity of Scripture in most translations. When an able linguist meets with a difficult passage, he presently
takes it for a Mystery, and concludes it is to no purpose to be at more pains
about what is in it self inexplicable. But an uncapable translator lays his
own blundering nonsense, and all the mysterious fruits of his ignorance to
God Almighty's charge. These are the wretches who plentifully furnish the Atheistical
and Profane with all the matter of their objections against Scripture. But
I hope in time we may see a remedy to these disorders.
62. The fourth observation is, that
except Faith signifies an intelligible persuasion, we cannot give others a Reason
of our hope, as Peter directs us. (1 Pet. 3.15.) To
say that what we believe is the Word of God, will be to no end, except we
prove it to be so by Reason; and I need not add, that if we may not examine and understand
our Faith, every man will be obliged implicitly to continue of that Religion wherein he
is first educated. Suppose a Siamese Talapoin (or priest) should tell a Christian Preacher
that Sommonocodom (the God of the Siameses) forbad the goodness of his Religion to be tried
the light of Reason; how could the Christian confute him, if he likewise should
maintain that certain points of Christianity were above Reason? The question would not be then,
whether Mysteries might be allowed in the true Religion, but who had more
right to institute them, Christ or Sommonocodom?
63. My last observation shall be, That either the Apostles could not write
more intelligibly of the reputed Mysteries, or they would not. If they would not,
then 'tis no longer our fault if we neither understand nor believe them, for
nothing cannot be the object of belief: and if they could not write
more clearly themselves (which our adversaries will not suppose) they
were so much the less to expect credit from others.
64. But 'tis affirmed, that GOD has
a right to require the assent of his creatures to what they cannot comprehend:
and questionless, he may command whatever is just and reasonable, for to
act tyrannically does only become the Devil. But I demand to what end
should God require us to believe what we cannot understand? To exercise, some
say, our diligence. But this at first sight looks ridiculous, as if the
plain duties of the Gospel, and our necessary occupations, were not sufficient
to employ all our time. But how exercise our diligence? Is it possible for
us to understand those Mysteries at last, or not? If it be, then all I contend for
is gained; for I never pretended that the Gospel could be understood without
due pains and application, no more
than any other Book. But if it be impossible after all to understand them,
this is such a piece of folly and impertinence as no sober man would be guilty of, to puzzle
people's heads with what they could never conceive, to exhort to, and command the
study of them; and all this to keep 'em from idleness, when they can scarce find
leisure enough for what is on all hands granted to be intelligible.
65. Others say that GOD has enjoined the belief of MYSTERIES to
make us mare humble. But how? By letting us see the small extent of our
knowledge. But this extraordinary
method is quite needless, for experience acquaints us with that every day;
and I have spent a whole Chapter in the second Section of this Book, to
prove that we have not an adequate idea of all the properties, and no idea
of the real essence of any substance in the world. It had been a much
better answer, that God would thus abridge our speculations, to gain us the
more time for the practice of what we
understand. But many cover a multitude of sins by their noise and heat
on the behalf of such foolish, and unprofitable speculations.
66. From all these observations,
and what went before, it evidently follows that Faith is so far from being an
implicit assent to any thing above
Reason, that this notion directly contradicts the ends of Religion, the nature
of man, and the goodness and
wisdom of God. But at this rate, some will be apt to say, Faith is no
longer faith but knowledge. I answer,
that if knowledge be taken for a present and immediate view of things, I have
no where affirmed any thing like it, but: the contrary in many places. But
if by knowledge be meant understanding what is believed, then I stand by
it that Faith is knowledge: I have all
along maintained it, and the very words are promiscuously used for one
another ion the Gospel. We know, i.e. we believe, that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the World. I know,
and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of it self
You know that your labor is not in vain in
the Lord. (Joh. 4.42, Rom. 14.14., 1 Cor. 15.58.)
67. Others will say that this notion of Faith makes Revelation useless.
But, pray, how so? for the question is not, whether we could discover all
the objects of our Faith by ratiocination: I have proved on the contrary,
that no matter of fact can be known without revelation. But I assert,
that what is once revealed we must as well understand as any other matter in the
world, revelation being only of use to inform us whilst the
evidence of its subject persuades us. Then, reply they, Reason is of more Dignity
than Revelation. I answer, Just as much as a Greek Grammar is superior
to the New Testament; for we make use of Grammar to understand the language,
and of Reason to comprehend the sense of that Book. But in a
word, I see no need of comparisons in this case, for Reason is not less from
God Revelation; 'tis the candle, the guide, the judge he has lodged
within every man that cometh into this world.
68. Lastly, it may be objected, that
the poor and illiterate cannot have
such a Faith as I maintain. Truly if
this can be made out, it may pass for
a greater Mystery than any system of
divinity in Christendom can afford: for
what can seem more strange and wonderful, than that the common people
will sooner believe what is unintelligible, incomprehensible, and above their
reasons, than what is easy, plain, and
suited to their capacities? But the vulgar are more obliged to Christ, who
had a better opinion of them than these
men; for he preached his Gospel to them in a special manner; and they,
on the other hand, heard him gladly (Mark 12.37.),
because, no doubt, they understood his instructions better than the
mysterious lectures of their priests and
scribes. The uncorrupted doctrines
of Christianity are not above their
reach or comprehension, but the gibberish of your divinity schools they
understand not. It is to them the
language of the beast, and is inconsistent with their condition in his
world, when their very teachers must serve above an apprenticeship
to master it, before they begin the study of the Bible. How slowly must
the Gospel have moved at the beginning, if such as were called to preach it had
been obliged to qualify themselves after this manner! and no wonder that it has such little
effects now upon men's lives, after it is so miserably deformed and almost ruined by
those unintelligible and extravagant terms, notions, and rites of Pagan
or Jewish original.
69. Thus I have distinctly answered the several objections made to me,
and I shall add no more on this subject of Faith, when I have considered a
passage in the first Epistle to Peter, where it is written, that the
Angels desire to see into certain things; yet those
things are not inconceivable mysteries,
but the coming of Christ and the Gospel-state of salvation, which were divinely foretold to the Jews, and concerning which they carefully reasoned
then; though, now those things are fulfilled, we are not permitted that liberty. Receiving the end of
your Faith, says Peter, the salvation of your souls;
of which salvation the prophets have enquired and diligently searched, who
prophesied of the grace that should come unto you; searching what or what manner
of time the Spirit of Christ, which was
in them did signify, when it testified before-hand the sufferings of Christ, and
the glory that should follow: unto whom
it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us, they did minster
the things which are now reported unto you by them that have preached unto you
by the Holy Ghost sent down from Heaven, which things the Angels desire to
look into. (1 Peter 1.9-12.) Now here's no great Mystery in all this, that the Angels, who
being finite creatures, can know nothing but by experience, ratiocination, or revelation,
should be as curious as the Jews, to penetrate into
those future events of such importance, and so very obscurely revealed.
CHAP. V.
Objections, drawn from the Consideration of MIRACLES,
answered.
70. When all other shifts prove ineffectual, the partisans
of MYSTERY fly to MIRACLES as their last refuge: but this is too weak
a place to make any long resistance, and we doubt not of beating 'em
quickly thence with ease and safety. But seeing, for the most part, the state
of this controversy is never distinctly laid, I shall first endeavor to give a
clear notion of the nature of Miracles, and then leave it to be considered whether I have much reason to
apprehend any danger from this objection. A MIRACLE then is
some action exceeding all humane power, and which the Laws of NATURE
cannot perform by their ordinary operations.
71. Now whatever is contrary to reason can be no miracle, for it
has been sufficiently proved already, that contradiction is only another word for
impossible or nothing. The miraculous action therefore must
be some thing in it self intelligible and possible, though the manner of doing it be extraordinary.
So for a man to walk safe in the midst of fire is conceivable, and
possible too, should any thing capable of repelling the heat and flames surround him:
but when such a security
is not provided by art or chance, but is the immediate effect of supernatural power, then it makes a
miracle. An able physician does sometimes restore sight to the blind; and a
hand or foot must dry up, when the circulation of the blood and humors is
too much excluded from it: but if
without the ordinary time and applications those members be cured in
an instant, at the command or desire of any person, such an action is
truly miraculous, as well as the sudden restoration of a sick body to
health, which art or nature must spend a great deal of time and pains upon.
72. No miracle then is contrary to
reason, for the action must be intelligible, and the performance of it appear
most easy to the author of nature, who may command all its principles at his
pleasure. Therefore all those miracles are fictitious, wherein there occur
any contradictions, as that Christ was born without opening any passage
out of the Virgin's body; that a head spoke some days after it was
severed from the body, and the tongue cut out; with multitudes of this kind
that may be met with among the Papists, the , the Bramins, the Mahometans, and in all
places where the credulity of the people makes 'em a merchandise to their
priests.
73. Let us next consider, that God is not so prodigal of miracles,
as to work any at random. The order of nature is not altered, stopped, or
forwarded, unless for some weighty design becoming the divine wisdom and
majesty. And, indeed, we learn from Scripture and Reason, that no miracle
is ever wrought without some special and important end, which is either
appointed by those for whom the miracle is made, or intended and declared
by him that works it. If the Apostles had barely cured the blind, the
deaf, the lame, the diseased, this would certainly procure 'em an
extraordinary esteem; and in some places too divine worship, as it
happened to Paul and Barnabas at Lystra, when they had cured a born
cripple without any farther circumstance (Acts 14.11, &c.); but this was only a means to
gain the attention of these idolaters to the doctrine they were about to
preach in their city. Nor is there any miracle mentioned in the New
Testament, but what served to confirm the authority of those that wrought
it, to procure attention to the doctrines of the Gospel, or for the like
wise and reasonable purposes.
74. By this rule the celebrated feats of goblins and fairies, of witches,
of conjurers, and all the heathen prodigies, must be accounted fictitious,
idle, and superstitious fables; for in all these there appears no end
deserving a change in nature. Besides, they evidently contradict our idea of
God, and quite subvert his providence. Diabolical delusions would hereby
receive equal confirmation with divine revelation, miracles being performed
in favor of both. Nay, the wonders of the Devil and his agents would
infinitely exceed in number and quality those of God, and his servants:
which assertion must hold true, were no stories believed but the best attested
in every County of England, to speak nothing of more credulous nations;
for it is very observable, that the more ignorant and barbarous any people
remain, you shall find 'em most abound with tales of this nature, and stand
in far greater awe of Satan than Jehovah. In a word, the
heathens, after this rate, would be riveted in their idolatry, and the
ugliest hag or most beggarly astrologer equalize the prophets and apostles. But
why should good reasons
be spent in confutation or mere fictions? for I challenge any person whatsoever
to produce one instance of these lying wonders that contains all the true
characters of historical evidence; and withal I dare engage as soon to prove
the goodness of the Alcoran as of the Gospel, if the belief of any miracles,
except divine ones, be granted me. But they must draw some advantage from the superstitious
fear of the people, who so industriously cherish it.
75. After what has been already observed, I need not add, that all
miracles secretly performed, or among
that party only to whose profit and advantage the belief of them turns, must
be rejected as counterfeit and false; for as such cannot bear the test
of moral certitude, so they contradict the very design of miracles, which
are always wrought in favor of the unbelieving. But the Papists alone
must be a witnesses of their own miracles, and never the heretics they
would convert by them: nor is their practice less ridiculous in confirming one miracle
by another, as that of Transubstantiation by several more.
76. From all this laid together, it
follows, that nothing contrary to reason, whether you consider the action
or design, is miraculous. But there's a good old distinction that serves
all turns: though miracles are not contrary to
Reason, says one, yet they are surely above it. In what sense pray? Which is
above Reason, the thing, or the manner of it? If it be answered, the last, I suppose the
objector thinks I mean by miracle some philosophical experiment, or some
phenomenon that surprises only by its rarity. Could I
tell how a miracle was wrought, I believe I might do as much my self; but
what may be said to have been this or that way performed, is no miracle at
all. It suffices therefore, that the truth of the action be demonstrated, and
the possibility of it, to any Being able to govern nature by
instantaneously extracting, mollifying, mixing, infusing, consolidating,
&c. and this, it may be, by the ministry of thousands at once; for
miracles are produced according to the laws of nature, though above its
ordinary operations, which are therefore supernaturally assisted.
77. But finally, it will be said, that in the State of the Question,
at the beginning of my Book, I maintained the
manner as well as the thing was explicable. But of what? of Miracles?
No surely; but of those doctrines in confirmation whereof the miracles are
wrought. This I stand by still, and may add, I hope, that I have clearly
proved it too: but to say as much of miracles would be to make 'em no
miracles, which shows the weakness, and impertinence of this objection
CHAP. Vl.
When, why, and by whom were MYSTERIES brought into Christianity.
78. The end of the LAW being righteousness (Rom. 10.4.), JESUS CHRIST
came not to destroy but to fulfill it (Matt. 5.17.): for he fully and
clearly preached the purest morals, he taught that reasonable worship, and
those just conceptions of Heaven and heavenly things, which were more
obscurely signified or designed by the legal observations. So having
stripped the Truth of all those external types and ceremonies which made
it difficult before, he rendered it easy and obvious to the meanest
capacities. His disciples and followers kept to this simplicity for some
considerable time, though very early diverse abuses began to get footing
amongst them. The converted Jews, who continued mighty fond of their
Levitical rites and feasts, would willingly retain them, and be Christians
too. Thus what at the beginning was
but only tolerated in weaker brethren, became afterwards a part of Christianity if self, under the
pretense of apostolic prescription or tradition.
79. But this was nothing compared to the injury done to Religion by the
Gentiles; who, as they were proselyted in greater numbers than the Jews,
so the abuses they introduced were of more dangerous and universal influence. They were not a little
scandalized at the plain dress of the Gospel,
with the wonderful facility of the doctrines it contained, having been
accustomed all their lives to the pompous worship and secret mysteries of
deities without number. The Christians on the other hand were careful to
remove all obstacles lying in the way of the Gentiles. They thought the
most effectual way of gaining them over to their side was by compounding the
matter, which led them to unwarrantable compliances, till at length
they likewise set up for mysteries. Yet not having the least precedent for
any ceremonies from the Gospel, excepting Baptism and the Supper, they
strangely disguised and transformed these by adding to them the Pagan Mystic
Rites. They administered them with the strictest secrecy; and, to be inferior to their
adversaries in no circumstance,
they permitted none to assist at them, but such as were antecedently prepared or
initiated. And to inspire their Catechumens with most ardent desires
of participation, they gave out that what
was so industriously hid were tremendous and unutterable mysteries.
80. Thus lest simplicity, the noblest ornament of the Truth, should
expose it to the contempt of unbelievers, Christianity was put upon an
equal level with the Mysteries of Ceres, or the Orgies of Bacchus. Foolish and mistaken
care! as if the most impious superstitions could be sanctified by the name
of Christ. But such is always the
fruit of prudential and condescending terms of conversion in RELIGION,
whereby the number and not the sincerity of professors is mainly intended.
81. When once the philosophers
thought it their interest to turn Christians, matters grew every day worse
and worse; for they not only retained the air, the genius, and sometimes the
garb of their several sects, but most of their erroneous opinions too. And
while they pretended to employ their philosophy in defense of Christianity,
they so confounded them together, that
what before was plain to every one, did now become intelligible only to the
learned, who made it still less evident
by their litigious disputes, and vain subtleties. We must not forget that
the philosophers were for making no meaner a figure among the Christians
than they did formerly among the heathens; but this was what they could
not possibly effect, without rendering every thing abstruse by terms or
otherwise, and so making themselves sole masters of the interpretation.
82. These abuses became almost incurable, when the supreme magistrate
did openly countenance the Christian Religion. Multitudes then professed
themselves of the Emperor's persuasion, only to make their court, and
mend their fortunes by it, or to preserve those places and preferments
whereof they were already possessed. These continued pagans in their
hearts; and it may be easily imagined that they carried all their old
prejudices along with them into a Religion which they purely embraced out
of politic considerations: and so it constantly happens, when the
conscience is forced and not persuaded, which was a while after the case
of these heathens.
83. The zealous Emperors erected stately Churches, and converted the
Heathen Temples, Sanctuaries, Fanes or Chapels, to the use of Christians,
after a previous expiation, and placing the sign of the cross in them to assure
their possession to Christ. All their endowments, with the
benefices of the Priests, Flamens, Augurs, and the whole sacred tribe,
were appropriated to the Christian Clergy. Nay, their very habits,
[— Non discolor ulli Ante aras cultus; velantur corpora lino, Et Pelufiaco praefulget flamine vervex.Sil. Ital. lib. 3. v. 23; Alba decet Cererem vestis; Cerealibus albam, Sumine — Ovid. Fast. l. 4. v. 619; Cic. l. 2. de. Leg.
cap. 18.; Lucian, de Deae Syriae Sacerdotibus; Martial: l. 12. Ep. 29.]
as white linen stoles, mitres, and the like, were retained to bring
those, as was pretended, to an imperceptible change, who could
not be reconciled to the Christian simplicity and poverty. But indeed the
design at bottom was to introduce the
riches, pomp, and dignities of the
clergy which immediately succeeded.
84. Things being in this condition,
and the rites of Baptism and the Supper being very sensibly
augmented, it will not be amiss before I pass further to lay down a short
parallel of the ancient Heathen and new-coined Christian Mysteries. And I
shall endeavor so to do it, as to make it evident
they were one in nature, however different in their subjects.
85. First, their terms were exactly the same without any alteration:
they both made use of the words initiating and perfecting.
They both called their MYSTERIES myeseis, teleioseis, teleiotika,
epopteiai, &c. They both looked upon initiation as a kind of
deifying. And they both styled their priests mystagogue, mystes,
hierotelestes, &c.
86. Secondly, the preparatives to their initiations were the same. The
Gentiles used several washings and lustrations
[Ovid. Fast. l. 4. v. 315, Tibul. l.2.]; they fasted, and abstained
from women before initiation; though the wiser sort did laugh at those who
thought such actions could expiate sin, or appease heaven. But the
Fathers, the admired Fathers, imitated them in all these things; and this
was the origin of abstinence from certain kinds of meat, of your mock
anniversary fasts, and the clerical celibacy.
87. Thirdly, the Christians kept their Mysteries as secret as the
Heathens did theirs. Chrysostom says, We shut the doors when we celebrate
our Mysteries, and exclude the uninitiated. Basil of Cesarea assures us,
that the esteem of mysteries is preserved only by silence. And Synesius
says, that the Gentile Mysteries were performed by night, because their
veneration proceeds from men's ignorance about them
[De providen. Sect. 2.]. But why should
that deserve blame in others, good Synesius, which you allow in your own
party? or is it that the Christians have a better right to Mysteries than
the Gentiles?
88. Fourthly, the Fathers were extremely cautious not to speak
intelligibly of their Mysteries before unbelievers, or the Catechumens;
whence you frequently meet in their writings with these or the like
expressions, The Initiated know, the Initiated understand what I say. And
as the Heathens did by proclamation drive away all the profane from their
mysteries, so the deacons of the primitive
Church cried aloud before the celebration of Baptism, but chiefly of the Supper,
Go out all you Catechumens, walk out all that are not initiated, or
something to this effect, for they often varied the form. Cyril of
Jerusalem has a very singular passage to our purpose, Now
when catechising is rehearsed, if a Catechumen should ask you what the
teachers said; tell it by no means to any that is not initiated: for we
entrust you with a Mystery, and the hope of the Life to come. Keep this
Mystery then to him that rewardeth: and if any should say unto you, What
harm is it, if I also learn? Answer him, that so sick persons desire wine:
but if it be given to any unseasonably, it makes him frantic, and so two
evils happen; both the sick man is destroyed, and the physician is
disparaged. Thus if a Catechumen hears of those things from any of the
faithful, he grows likewise frantic; for not understanding what he heard,
he argues against the thing, and laughs at what is said: so the Believer
that told it him is condemned as a betrayer of secrets. Now you being one
of us, see that you blab out nothing: not that what we say are not worthy
to be spoken, but that others are not worthy to hear them. When you
were a Catechumen your self, we never told you what was proposed. But when
you have learnt by experience the sublimity of those things which are taught, you
will then be convinced that the Catechumens are unworthy to hear them.
89. Fifthly, the steps and degrees
in both their Initiations are the same. The Heathens had five degrees necessary to
perfection. First, common
Purgation; Secondly, more private
Purgation; Thirdly, a liberty of standing amongst the Initiated; Fourthly,
Initiation; and, Lastly, the Right of seeing every thing, or being
Epopts. Among the Christians likewise there were five steps by which their
penitents were re-admitted to communion. First they were obliged to remain
some years separate from the congregation lamenting their sins, whence this
step was called proclausis. Secondly, they were removed nearer
the people, where during three years they might hear the priests, though not see
them: this step was therefore called acroasis. Thirdly, for three years
more they might hear and see, but not
mix with the congregation: this period was called hypoptosis. Fourthly,
they might stand with the people, but not receive the sacraments: this was their
systasis. And, Fifthly, they were admitted to communion, which was
called methexis. The new converts likewise, under preparation to
participate of the mysteries, were styled catechumens; then
competents; and, lastly, Epopts, perfect, or believers: which are the very
degrees in name and quality, to which Pythagoras obliged his disciples.
90. I could, draw out this parallel much larger, but here's enough to
show how Christianity became mysterious, and how so divine an institution
did, through the craft and ambition of priests and philosophers, degenerate
into mere paganism.
91. Mystery prevailed very little in the first hundred or century of
years after Christ; but in the second and third it began to establish it
self by ceremonies. To baptism were then added the tasting of milk and
honey [Tertullian. pag. 102.], anointing, the sign of the cross, a white garment, &c. There was
quickly after a farther accession of questions and answers, of antecedent fastings and watchings, kissing, and set times of administration. After
baptism they did not wash for a whole week, exactly answerable to the
superstition of the Gentiles, who never put off the garment in which
they were initiated till it fell all to tatters
[Scholiast. in Plut. Aristophan.]. Next were added injection of
salt and wine into the mouths of the baptized, and a second unction, with
imposition of hands. But in later
times there was no end of lights, exorcisms, exsufflations, and many
other extravagancies of Jewish, or Heathen original. From this source
sprang not only the belief of omens, presages, apparitions, the custom of
burying with three shovel-fulls of earth, with other vulgar observations
among Christians; but also lights, feasts
or Holy-days, consecrations, images, worshipping towards the east, altars,
music, dedications of churches,
and in them distinct places for the LAITY, (as they speak) and the CLERGY: for there is nothing
like these in the writings of the Apostles, but
they are all plainly contained in the Books of the Gentiles, and was the
Substance of their Worship.
92. All the rites of the Supper, too
tedious to particularize, were introduced by degrees after the same manner. So by endeavoring to make the
plainest things in the world appear
mysterious, their very nature and use were absolutely perverted and destroyed, and are not yet fully restored
by the purest Reformations in Christendom. But we must not forget how Tertullian himself
has acknowledged that for their frequent crossings and other
Baptismal rites, for their scrupling to
let any of the bread and wine fall to the
ground, or to receive them from any
hand but the priest's, with the like ceremonies, they had no color of authority from the Scriptures, but only
from custom and tradition.
93. Now their own advantage being the motive that put the primitive clergy upon reviving
mystery, they quickly erected themselves by its assistance into a separate
and politic body, though not so soon into their various
orders and degrees. For in the two
first centuries we meet with no sub-deacons, readers, or the like; much
less with the names or dignities of Popes, Cardinals, Patriarchs,
Metropolitans, Archbishops, Primates, Suffragans, Archdeacons, Deans, Chancellors,
Vicars, or their numerous dependents
and retinue. But in small time mystery made way for those, and several
other usurpations upon mankind, under pretense of laborers in the Lord's vineyard.
94. The degrees or constitutions concerning ceremonies and discipline,
to increase the splendor of this new State, did strangely affect, stupify, and
amaze the minds of the ignorant people; and made them believe they
were in good earnest mediators between God and men, that could fix sanctity to certain
times, places, persons, or actions. They seemed almost a different and more divine
species of creatures, distinguishing themselves from other men in their
garb, in their manner of living by tithes and donations, in their separate
places at church, and several other ways. By this means the clergy were able
to do any thing; they engrossed at length the sole right of interpreting
Scripture, and with it claimed infallibility, to their body.
95. This is the true origin and progress of the Christian mysteries; and we
may observe how great a share of their
establishment is owing to ceremonies. These never fail to take off the
mind from the substance of Religion, and lead men into dangerous mistakes:
for ceremonies being easily observed, every one thinks himself religious
enough that exactly performs them.
But there is nothing so naturally opposite as CEREMONY and CHRISTIANITY. The latter discovers Religion
naked to all the world, and the former delivers it under mystical
representations of a merely arbitrary signification.
96. It is visible then that ceremonies perplex instead of explaining;
but supposing they made things easier,
then that would be the best Religion
which had most of them, for they are
generally, and may all be made, equally significative. A candle put into
the hands of the baptized, to denote
the light of the Gospel, is every whit
as good a ceremony as to make the sign
of the cross upon their fore-heads,
in token of owning Christ for their
Master and Saviour. Wine, milk
and honey signify spiritual nourishment, strength, and gladness; as well
as standing at the Gospel betokens our readiness to hear or profess it.
97. In short, there's no degree of
enthusiasm higher than placing Religion in such fooleries; nor any thing
so base as by their fraudulent arts to
make the Gospel of no effect, unless as
far as it serves a party. But I shall have a better occasion of exhausting
the subject of ceremonies elsewhere,
I treat of 'em here only as they made
up the Gentile Mysteries, and were
afterwards brought in to constitute those of the Christians. But as the
vast multitudes of the latter quickly rendered all secret rites almost
impossible, so to preserve the Mystery, things were purposely made
downright unintelligible, or very perplexed. In this point our pretended Christians outdid all
the Mysteries of the Heathens; for the
honor of these might be destroyed by discovery, or the babbling tongue
of any initiated person; but the new mysteries were thus securely placed
above the reach of all sense and
Reason. Nay, so jealous were the
CLERGY of their own order, lest any of 'em should irreligiously unfold those
sublime Mysteries to the
profanely inquisitive LAITY, that
they thought fit to put it as much out of the power bf the Holy Tribe it self,
as out of ours, to understand them; and so it continues, in a great
measure, to this day.
The CONCLUSION
Thus I have endeavored to show others, what I'm fully convinced of my
self, that there is no MYSTERY in CHRISTIANITY, or the most perfect Religion;
and that by consequence nothing contradictory or inconceivable, however
made an Article of Faith, can be contained in the Gospel, if it be really
the Word of God: for I have hitherto argued only upon this supposition,
for the reasons to be seen towards the end of the Preface.
Notwithstanding all pretenses that may be made to the contrary, it is
evident that no particular instances
or doctrines of any sort can serve
for a proper answer to this DISCOURSE; for, as long as the reasons of it hold good, whatever
instance can be alleged must either be found not mysterious,
or, if it prove a MYSTERY, not divinely revealed.
There is no middle way, that I can see. When those passages of Scripture I have
cited for my assertion, are either
reconciled to such as any would bring against me, or proved not to be understood
by me; when my arguments against all inconceivable mysteries, and
the absurdity of God's revealing any such Mysteries, are confuted, 'tis
time enough then for others to produce examples, or for me to consider 'em.
And though by convincing people that all the parts of their RELIGION must
not only be in themselves, but to them also must appear, sound and
intelligible, I might justly leave every one to discover to himself the
reasonableness or unreasonableness of his Religion (which is no
difficult business, when once men are persuaded that they have a right to
do it;) yet the duties I owe GOD and the world oblige me to proceed
further according as I enjoy health or leisure, without limiting my self
as to any time, that being a thing in no man's power to
command at his pleasure.
My next Task therefore is (God willing) to prove the doctrines of the New
Testament perspicuous, possible, and
most worthy of God, as well as all calculated for the highest benefits of man.
Some will not thank me, it's probable,
for so useful an undertaking; and
others will make me a Heretic in grain
for what I have performed already.
But as it is duty, and no body's applause, which is the rule of my actions; so, God knows, I no more value this cheap and ridiculous
nick-name of a Heretic than Paul did before me: for I acknowledge no ORTHODOXY but the TRUTH;
and, I'm sure, wherever the TRUTH
is, there must be also the CHURCH,
of God I mean, and not any human faction or policy. Besides, the
imputation of heterodoxy being now
as liberal upon the slightest occasions,
out of Ignorance, passion, or malice,
as in the days of Ireneus and Epiphanius, it is many times instead of a
reproach the greatest honor imaginable.
Some good men may be apt to say, that, supposing my opinion never so
true, it may notwithstanding occasion much harm; because when people
find themselves imposed upon in any
part of Religion, they are ready to call the whole in question. This offense is plainly
taken, not given; and my design is nothing the less good, if
ill-disposed persons abuse it, as they
frequently do learning, reason, scripture, and the best things in the world.
But it is visible to every one that they
are the contradictions and mysteries unjustly charged upon Religion, which
occasion so many to become Deists and
Atheists. And it should be considered
likewise that when any, not acquainted with it, are dazzled by the sudden
splendor of the Truth, their number is not comparable to theirs who
see clearly by its light. Because several turned Libertines and Atheists
when PRIEST-CRAFT was laid so open at the Reformation, were Luther,
Calvin, or Zwinglius to be blamed
for it? or which should weigh most
with them, these few prejudiced skeptics,
or those thousands they converted
from the superstitions of Rome?
I'm therefore for giving no quarter to
ERROR under any pretense; and will
be sure, wherever I have ability or
opportunity, to expose it in its true
colors, without rendering my labor
ineffectual, by weakly mincing or softening of any thing.
FINIS.
|