THE DECREE.

"We decree, therefore, that all writings, whatever, which Porphyry, or any one else hath written against the Christian Religion, in the possession of whomsoever they shall be found, should be committed to the fire; for, we would not suffer any of those things so much as to come to men's ears, which tend to provoke God to wrath, and to offend the minds of the pious,"*

A similar decree of this Emperor, for establishing the doctrine of the Trinity, concludes with an admonition to all who shall object to it, that, "Besides the condemnation of divine justice, they must expect to suffer the severe penalties, which our authority, guided by heavenly wisdom, may think proper to inflict upon them."-Quoted by Gibbon, vol. 5, p. 15.

END OF SECTION III.

SECTION IV.

ON THE ASSERTION, THAT ARCHBISHOP LANFRANC EFFECTED AN ALTERATION OF THE SCRIPTURES.

THE Section thus headed, in the Answer to the Manifesto, would almost induce a guess that our angry doctor had learned his logic of Saint Patrick; it sheathes the vinegar of intended accusation, in the oil of palpable absurdity. To prove, you see, that there was no such thing, as an account of a general alteration of the Scriptures, to accommodate them to the faith of the orthodox, in the passage which I had referred to, as containing such an account: he finds the passage, agreeably to the reference I had given him, he produces it in his own note, and there to be sure the account is, and as I quoted it, in full effect, and to all the intent and purpose for which I quoted it, answering like the impressed wax to the engraven seal. O wicked forger, as in his account I still should be, though I were as the God of truth himself, without variableness or shadow of turning.

To perceive the absurdity of the accusations in this section, let the reader but run them over with the most obvious questions to himself, that a moment's pause upon them must suggest. 1. 66 The passage in Beausobre contains no such thing," &c. Answer. And there the thing is, subjoined in a note, by the denyer of the thing himself.

2. "And its evident meaning is," &c. Answer. Paddy is going to give us the evident meaning of that of which he has just told us "there is no such thing.”

Sancimus igitur ut omnia quæcumque Porphyrius aut quivis alius contra religiosum Christianorum cultum, conscripsit, apud quemcumque inventa fuerint, igni mancipentur, omnia enim provocantia Deum ad iracundiam scripta, et pias mentes offendentia, ne ad aures quidem hominum venire volumus."-Quoted by Lardner, vol. 4. p. 111.

3. "Lanfranc directs a revisal and correction to be made of certain copies that were in his possession, or to which his agents could have access." Answer. DOES HE SO? And who ever accused him of directing a revisal and correction to be made of copies that were not in his possession, or to which his agents could not have access?

4. “There are several questions connected with this statement, which ought to be fairly investigated, before we can form any decided opinion in the case." Answer. Not if there were no such thing as the statement itself: and if there were such a statement, should not the several questions have been investigated first, and the decided opinion suspended?

5. “Lanfranc, a man of good personal character, rivetting the chains of ecclesiastical slavery." Answer. What is a good personal character? or would it not have been better for mankind, if he had not been quite so good, and so had not rivetted the chains quite so fast,—what is it to you, or me, reader, if those who chain us to the earth, keep fast on Friday?

6. “The documents of history, &c, are very obscure.” Answer. So, so !!

7. "Those errors have been dissipated only very lately, by Mr. Sharon Turner, Mr. Hallam, and other eminent men of the present day." Answer. Saving their eminences' dignity, I warrant ye, they are no better than Methodist parsons, and owe all their eminence to their conformity to the opinions of Dr. John Pye Smith, or to the exhibition of their “human faces divine,” in the Evangelical Magazine.

8. "Every printer and bookseller perfectly well knows, and many readers of books know to their vexation, that even in the present day, when the art of printing renders accuracy so much more easy to be attained, many editions of good books are sent out shamefully incorrect." Answer. Is not this EVERY THING? and does it leave the possibility of either candour or piety, or of having any rational fear of God before his eyes, to the man who willdare to maintain that a God of mercy, truth, and power, would or could have given to man, a written, or book-contained revelation.*

* A written, or book-contained revelation. “God is just, equal, and good, and as sure as he is so, so he cannot put the salvation and happiness of any man, upon what he has not put it in the power of any man on earth to be entirely satisfied of." -Bishop of Salisbury's Preservative, p. 78, as quoted by Tindal, 414.

Bishop Jeremy Taylor, in his polemical works, page 521, after enumerating the vast variety of causes of difficulty and misunderstanding in revelation, concludes thus, “These, and a thousand more, have made it impossible for any man in so great a variety of matter, not to be deceived." "There is scarce any church in Christendom at this day, which doth not obtrude, not only plain falsehoods, but such falsehood as will appear to any free spirit, pure contradictions and impossibilities, and that, with the same gravity, authority, and importunity, as they do the holy oracles of God.”—Dr. Henry More, Mystery of Godliness, 495, quoted in Tindal, 314.

Take heed and beware, lest any man deceive you; believe them not !-Ascribed to Jesus Christ,-Because that which may be known of God, is manifest.— Romans i. 19.

9. Had Lanfranc's party made alterations of the smallest importance, it is morally impossible but the facts would have been placed in a clear light, and the evidence of them would have come down to posterity." Answer, by Dr. Smith himself, "The documents of history for that period, and some centuries after, are very obscure,"

10. "It is worthy of observation, that Lanfranc is remarked by Dr. Cave (Historia Literaria, vol.2, p. 148) to have been addicted to the making of alterations in the text, which he conceived to be amendments."

Answer. It is indeed, worthy of observation, and I hope the reader will observe it, and ask himself if his imagination could conceive a droller way than this of refuting the statement made in the Manifesto. The Doctor's reckoning of refutation to the Manifesto, then, as the sum of this section, stands thus

1st. There is no such thing as an account of a general alteration of the Scriptures to accommodate them to the faith of the orthodox; because, there the account actually is, quoted by the Doctor himself, from the very work in which it was stated that the account was.

2ndly. It is morally impossible, that such an alteration could have taken place, without more ample evidence of it coming down to posterity: because, every thing that was done in those dark ages, was sure to be set in the clearest light.

3rdly. It was morally impossible that Archbishop Lanfranc could have altered the Scriptures: because he was peculiarly addicted to the making of alterations in the text, which he conceived to be amendments; and,

4thly. Even supposing that Archbishop Lanfranc had procured the alteration of the Gospels, to accommodate them to the orthodox faith in England, when England was rivetted in the chains of ecclesiastical slavery, and bowed to a servility of subjection to the Pope, yet we are to infer, how impossible it was that any like or other alterations could have been made in the Gospels of France, Spain and Italy, which, you see, were so much further removed from papal influence.

11. "I now appeal," says the liberal D.D., "to any man of sense, whether it is not most unfair and absurd, to represent this obscure and dubious circumstance, and which is at most of no real importance, as in the smallest degree impugning the Scriptures."

To which I answer, that I also appeal to any man of sense, whether it was not quite as unfair in Dr. Smith, to set out with denying in toto, the existence of an account, which he at last admits and endeavours to explain away, to have impeached an author's veracity without materiel to fortify his impeachment, and to have given such hard names, as the prelude to such soft arguments.

Κυνος όμματ' έχων, κραδιην δελάφοιο.

SECTION V.

ON THE NATURE OF VARIOUS READINGS, AND THE INFERENCES TO BE DRAWN FROM THEM.

1." The pretended reference to the Unitarian New Version, is another instance of most disgraceful ignorance, or shameless perversion." So says the Rev. Dr. John Pye Smith, and one is the more sorry that he should say so; because it spoils the heading of the best written section in his book, in which the reader might otherwise be as pleased as I am to bear witness to Dr. John Pye Smith's able writing, deep learning, and ingenious reasoning.— There was all the less occasion to have introduced so clever a performance with so paltry a prologue. The reader, however, will, I hope, do my adversary the justice, to brush off this unworthiness, and let the subsequent matter stand in undiminished claim on the respect it merits. All that concerns the Manifesto or its author in this section (which is all that is amiss in it),— will be answered in the reader's observance-that the pretended reference to the Unitarian New Version, cannot at any rate be another instance of ignorance or perversion,-unless some one instance of ignorance or perversion had preceded it-which is not the case.

Neither can the reference with any propriety be called "pretended," if it be a real one-if the passage affecting to be quoted is there exactly to be found, in the book and page from which it purports to be made-which is the case.

And of which, to remove all doubt, the Doctor himself cites "the passage fairly and fully" in which-by his own shewing, is all and every thing that I did quote, and to the full effect and intent for which I quoted it; and much further matter to the same effect,-a droll way this, of convicting a man of " falsely pretending to quote."

But as "falsely pretending to quote"-were rather strong words, and in the general meaning and acceptation of them, would stand but awkwardly, applied to immediate evidence of the most accurate and literal quotation that could possibly be made; the Doctor himself softens off the more revolting point of the charge, by subjoining the wholly incompatible and contradictory meaning of his own," the tendency and application of which, he has so grossly perverted."

Upon the tendency and application of a passage,-I hope, one man has as good a right to exercise his own judgment as another; but sure, a man's "perverting the tendency and application of a passage," is a charge, which in itself involves his acquittal from the charge of falsely pretending to quote it.

2. To the Doctor's charge of the alternative of ignorance or

dishonesty, of which he bids his "worthy countrymen" judge against me, (page 22.) I put in his own discharge from the former (page 60.) "It is not ignorance;" and to the latter, I put in both the title and contents of this section itself:

66

The title, admitting-that there are VARIOUS READINGS, and therefore I have not represented a thing-which was not: The contents, admitting that "the number of various readings collected by Dr. Mill is computed at thirty thousand, and that a hundred thousand at least have been added to the list. Therefore, so surely, as thirty thousand, with a hundred thousand added thereto-doth amount to ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY THOUSAND, which is, the thing, and is what I have represented, I have not misrepresented the thing which Is.

If there be arithmetic in this-there is no room for the charge of dishonesty, and Dr. Smith's anger has outrun his wit.

3. But the superscription of this section will serve us―further than this, in its important clause-" AND OF THE INFERENCES THAT ARE TO BE DRAWN."

Reader, if thou art a true and genuine Protestant, thou wilt draw what inference thou pleasest, and maintain- not only thy right-but thy ability to draw an inference for thyself, as well as any man can draw it for thee; and to be unattainted either of dishonesty or of ignorance, though thy inferences should be the diametrical reverse of the inferences which Dr. John Pye Smith, or his holiness the Pope,-who never arrogated more than this Dr. John Pye Smith, would draw for thee.

If thou art a staunch Papist or (what is not in principle, a whit less papistical), a priest-worshipping dissenter,-why Dr. Smith's inferences, will, of course, be infallible with theeand well may be so.

But, as for the legitimate and uncontrolled drawing of inferences, it becomes a writer, who would assist and not coerce the reason of his reader, to submit his views as inferences which may be drawn, not as inferences which must, or as the only inferences which ARE TO BE drawn, not in impediment of the equal right of another to draw the most opposite inferences,but in recognition and deference to that right.

The main tact however, equally incumbent on the observance of all reasoners is, that their inferences, in any extent of their divergency-keep still their hold upon the original nucleus fact itself, and by no means of chicane and sophistry, be slipt on to some counterfeit or mistake of the fact, which must render the best spun reasoning in the world inconsequential.

Thus, it is in logic an Ignoratio Elenchi, an entire substitution of a matter that was not in question, for the matter that was ; when the combination of chances which is sufficient to go to sleep on as a good guess,-for what might have been the