A Reply to the Defense of Dr Stillingfleet, Chapter 2
CHAP. II. A Reply to what the Deans Subſtitute ſuggeſts in his cenſuring the Enquirers Deſign.
THIS Gentleman not being able to ſatisfie himſelf with his tedious Eſſay to evince the Enquirer to be a perſon neither very Modeſt, nor very Peaceable, gives himſelf the liberty of cenſuring the Deſign, as if it had been rather to reproach the Dr. than to vindicate and clear up the innocency of the Diſſenter. Thus he ſuggeſts that Mr. Lobb wrote what he wrote to expoſe the Dean to popular odium and fury; to perſuade the people never to look into the Deans book, or to ſtone him as an implacable enemy to all Loyal Diſſenters. Pref. p. 30. Book p. 6.
What reply is neceſſary to be made unto this charge, is not eaſie to imagine; for what though I ſhould ſolemnly declare, That the caſting reproach on Dr. Stillingfleet, or any other perſon, is what I perfectly hate; will he believe me? I can, and hereby do declare ſo much; but is it poſſible our Author ſhould give credit to any ſuch proteſtation, ſo long as 'tis almoſt natural for a man of his complexi…n to judg of others according to thoſe over-ſtrong propenſions he finds in himſelf to ſuch expoſing practiſes?
However, let me ask the Author what 'tis that provokes him to talk ſo confidently of the moſt ſecret motions of my ſoul? Why muſt expoſing the Dean to popular edium and fury, be my end? What overt-acts were there of ſuch a deſign? Did I miſrepreſent the Dean in any one inſtance? Or did I make it my buſineſs to carp at every little thing in his Preface? Did I inſiſt on far-fetcht conſequences, or force any undue ſenſe on his words? Did I ſpeak all I could to ſhew the Tendency of his Preface, or whole Book? Or did I take notice of any thing more than what was neceſſary for the clearing up the innocency of the Diſſenter? As to theſe particulars, you cannot faſten your Accuſation; But yet my aim muſt be expoſing the Dean; and why expoſing him? What, was the Dean expos'd, becauſe the charge with which he would load Diſſenters, was ſuch, that the very repeating and confuting it, tends to his Reproach? If ſo, whoſe fault is that?
I do freely confeſs, That I believe the Deans charge againſt Diſſenters to be ſo indecent, that thereby he hath loſt very much of that Eſteem he formerly had among Judicious Gentlemen of the Church of England; but this is not my fault, nor an Argument, that what I wrote in the Defence of the Diſſenter, was with a deſign of expoſing the Dean. A thing I could have eaſily done, without either wreſting his words, or impoſing a forreign ſenſe on 'em.
How eaſily could I have imitated the famous Biſhop Jewel, and have pick'd ſuch paſſages out of the Dean's Diſcourſes, as that Great Prelate did out of Harding, and have ſhewed how unlike himſelf the Dean acted, in contemning and pitying the Reverend Mr. Baxter, in comparing the judicious Mr. Alſop's Diſcourſe to the Bird of Athens, made up of Face and Feathers; and repreſenting Mr. Alſop himſelf ſo, as if all things had not been right, that is, as if he had been mad. Of this I the rather take notice, becauſe a very ſerious perſon on the reading the Dean's Book, came to me on purpoſe, to enquire whether Mr. Alſop was never mad? If not, ſaid he, Why did Dr. Stillingfleet write as if he had? Many other things of a more uncomely aſpect I could have taken out of the Dean's Writings, but I wav'd it, it not being my work in that Enquiry, or this Reply, to acquaint the World with the naevi of the Reverend Doctor; and therefore notwithſtanding the many provocations you have given me in your Defence of the Dean, I'm reſolved to treat the Dean more civilly than he did Mr. B. or Mr. A. or than you have Mr. B. or Mr. H. and the Country Conformiſt.
The expoſing men to Popular Odium and Fury, becomes only ſuch who hate Perſons more than their Opinions, and who have little to offer againſt their Adverſaries beſides hard words. It becomes not men, who pretend to act ſuitably to the Chriſtian Rule, to uſe railing Expreſſions inſtead of pungent Arguments; nor to expoſe the Perſon, inſtead of confuting his Opinion.
For this Reaſon I did in the M…deſt and Peaceable Enquiry, on a ſecond peruſal, expunge all ſuch words as might ſeem hard or unmeet, treating the Dean with the greateſt Candour and Reſpect, not ſuffering one paſſage to go to the Preſs, that might tend to his reproach, unleſs rehearſing the charge lain in againſt the Diſſenter as cloath'd with his own words, and the confuting him, muſt be eſteem'd as ſuch.
'Tis true, I ſhew'd the Tendency of his Diſcourſe, which I thought to be for the advancing the Papal Intereſt. The very thing the Dean's Subſtitute drives at in the Dean's Defence, wherein our Author goes much further than the Dean, or at leaſt hath expreſſed his ſentiments more freely, and with leſs caution. But ſhall this be conſidered as an expoſing you to popular odium and fury? You aſſert, That the Univerſal Church is a governed Society; That the Biſhops in their Colledg are the governing part; That the Biſhops conven'd in their Aſſembly, do not meet only for mutual Help and Concord, but for Regiment. The Aſſembly of Biſhops in Council, is not ſuch as that of Princes of ſeveral diſtinct Territories, who meet together in order to the maintaining and conſerving a general Union and Peace in the World; for inſtance, that at Nimmegen, at which Convention the Princes come freely; and when there, the One is not under the Regiment of the Aſſembly, but each one free to Conſent or Diſſent to any thing propoſed for Peace, their Territories being as ſo many diſtinct Independent Governments, whoſe Governours are not accountable to any General Council of Princes in the World. Such an Aſſembly of Biſhops you are not for: For this, ſay you, p. 601. makes Christian Communion as Arbitrary a thing, as the Confederacies of Princes; whereas the Epiſcopal Office is but One, and therefore ought to be adminiſtred by the mutual Advice and Conſent of Biſhops, who all equally ſhare in it; that is, the whole World muſt be conſidered as of One and the ſame Government; that the many particular Princes of di…tinct Territories, ſuch as England, France, Spain, Denmark, &c. are not Independent in their Government, but are accountable either unto One Univerſal Emperour, or Di…, &c. This is what you aſſert as to Church-Government, 'tis One all the World ever. Though leſſer Societies are variouſly diſperſed, yet are all under one and the ſame Government, the Biſhops of the one and of the other are oblig'd to meet together in their Colledge, or Di…, where they are all bound to ſubmit unto the Ca…, D…, or Determinations of the Colledge; that whoever diſſents from the Body of the Colledge is Schiſmatical. —This is your Notion, and for ought I know the Deans; a Notion that is the ſame with that of the French Papacy, that doth but fairly lead us to Rome.
But muſt the mentioning ſo much, expoſe you to the rage and fury of the people? If ſo, whom can you blame, but your ſelf? The like may be ſaid to the Dean, to whom I add this one requeſt, which is, to conſider the Tendency of his great Book, as well as of this your Defence of him; and if his Aimes and the Tendency of either of theſe Diſcourſes be different, 'twill be apparent that I was not miſtaken in my Charity of the Author, when I paſs'd my cenſure on his Treatiſe. However 'tis ſufficient, that the utmoſt I did was to expoſe the evil Tendency of the Book, endeavouring as much as poſſibly I could, to ſave the Dean from lying under Reproaeh, diſtinguiſhing between the Author and his Work.
This much may ſerve as more than enough to our Author's Cenſure of inviſible and unknown Deſigns.