Part 2 (1/2)

None but infidels, it is true, would utter impieties like the above; but, alas, 'the infidels of our days have become formidable to the true believers, by an attention to morality, and the mild and gentle offices of pity, and by warning their fellow-citizens to avoid and detest the cruelties of religious persecution: how egregiously they mistake! Your Lords.h.i.+ps will rectify their notions, it is to be hoped, in these as well as in other respects.

They have an argument still more formidable against the truth of the foregoing accounts, concerning the death of Saul, which is, that they are so very different, that one of them must be false. To this we can only answer, as it becomes the faithful in all such cases of seeming contradiction; namely, that they were both written by the pen of inspiration, consequently must both be true, however contradictory or absurd they may seem to mere human reason.

21. David commanded that the children of Judah should be taught the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the Book of Jasher.* Many difficulties arise here about the Book of Jasher. It was extant previous to the writing the Book of Joshua,** the author of that book quoting it, and by the foregoing text it appears, it was not finished till after the accession of David to the throne of Israel. Now, if Joshua wrote the account of his own transactions, as is generally believed, the author of Jasher must have lived upwards of four hundred years; and if the Book of Joshua was not written till after the time of David, and by an unknown author, the infidels will affirm, that it comes under the description which is at the beginning of the second of these questions. And the misfortune is, we do not know how to confute them, but we hope your Lords.h.i.+ps will easily remove this, among many Other very great difficulties, now your long dormant seal is at length awakened. Our enemies have reproached us with the examples of the primitive church; they observe, that the priests were poor and indefatigable, but are now pampered and lazy. Fat benefices and lordly bishoprics, they say, cause a total eclipse of the light of religion, by obtruding, their opake substances between the eye of the priest and the kingdom of Heaven. But, alas, how palpably they mistake!

* 2 Sara. i. 18.

** Josh. x. 13.

The ancient priests were ignorant of their business; they despised riches, because they knew no better, or, perhaps, because they could not get them. But how are the understandings of men enlightened! how great the wisdom of the modern times! how are the sciences improved! Has it not been for many centuries discovered, that pain and mortification are fit companions for the devil, and therefore totally improper for saints? Can a poor wretch, inured to penury and the scourge, be suddenly reconciled to happiness and Heaven? Instead of enjoying the manna of the promised land, would he not be prescribing himself a fast; and when it became him to sleep rec.u.mbent on his couch of blessedness, would he not envy the d.a.m.ned their whips and scorpions? So difficult it is to eradicate long confirmed habits. But wherefore dwell on so unprofitable a subject? The wisdom of our divines has taught them to avoid such absurdities, to detest such errors. They will not lose their relish for pleasure, for want of practice.

29. David, by the instigation of the Lord, numbered the people-of Israel and Judah;* but afterwards, being probably ignorant by whose instigation he had acted, he repented of the deed. This repentance did not excuse him in the sight of the Lord, who offered him to chuse either, ”seven years” famine, three months defeat before his enemies, or three days pestilence.

David chose the latter, and seventy thousand men died. This memorable event has not escaped the inspired penman of the Book of Chronicles,**

who affirms, ”that Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number them;” but G.o.d was displeased with this thing, and therefore smote Israel. David repenting, was offered from G.o.d his choice, either ”three years famine, three months destruction before his enemies, or three days pestilence the latter of which he chose, and there died of Israel seventy thousand men.

Our too curious and inquisitive opposers, who are unwilling to believe ”cunningly devised fables,”*** enquire how it could be a crime in David to number the people, especially as it was by the instigation of the Lord. They beg to be informed, whether the Lord, and Satan, be one and the same person; and if not, which of the two was the instigator of this unhappy, business, and likewise which of the two ”infallible” and ”inspired” writers tells the lie? Lastly, they cannot conceive how the seven years famine in the Book of Samuel is dwindled into three in the Chronicles. To all these questions we answer, that it was sufficient to make this action of David's criminal, that the Lord disliked it after it was done; and as to its being done by his instigation, we must observe, that it is no uncommon thing for the Lord to be angry with his servants for obeying his commands.

* 2 Sam. xxiv.

**1 Chron. xxi.

*** 2 Pet. i. 10.

23. The instance of Balaam is a case in point.* Hence we infer, that, in the commands of the Lord, there is always a clause implied or understood, which leaves it to the discretion of the faithful to act as they think proper. It is true, that this position leads immediately to the doctrines of the Jesuits, which have been so universally abhorred: but why need we regard the abhorrence of the world, while we are convinced that our tenets are scriptural? With regard to the affairs of Satan and the Lord, we leave it to your Lords.h.i.+ps' management; but cannot help observing with derision, the futility of the objections respecting the three and seven years' famine. They have little skill in divine arithmetic, if this affords them any embarra.s.sment. They know nothing of the sublime logic by which divines prove three to be one, and one to be three. For example, if it were affirmed that Eldon is a Lord, Castlereagh is a Lord, and Sidmouth is a Lord, and yet they are not three Lords, but one Lord, this would be termed absolute and ridiculous nonsense, notwithstanding their close Ministerial union. But in holy matters it is quite otherwise,** as might easily be elucidated by instances too sacred to be commented upon by any unconsecrated individual.

* Qu. 16.

** See an excellent specimen of this in the Creed commonly ascribed to St. Athanasius.

94. Another instance of the imperfection of the art of arithmetic, as it is erroneously taught in our schools, appears in its affording no rule by which the two genealogies of Jesus Christ may be reconciled to each other. Matthew reckons twenty-seven generations from David to Christ.

Luke reckons forty-two; and the names totally disagree. Matthew traces the descent from Solomon, and Luke from Nathan, both sons of David.

According to our feeble notions, twenty-seven cannot be equal to forty-two, neither can Nathan, &c. be imagined to be Solomon, &c. The infidels suppose, that the two evangelists, rather than the church should be without the genealogy of its founder, chose to invent them; but we good Christians, who know that both writers were infallible and inspired, are ready to reject the clearest axioms of mere human science, and allow that, in sacred matters, the greater number may be equal to the less. These cavillers and infidels also demand how these genealogies of Joseph prove, that Jesus was the son of David, when it is avowed that Joseph was not his father? But they do not consider, that a married man is obliged to father all the children his wife may produce; and if this answer does not satisfy them, they must at all events confess, that Joseph was father-in-law to Jesus, by being married to his mother; consequently Jesus was son (in-law) to Joseph, Q. E. D. As there is no answering for the perverseness of men, there may perhaps be some, whom even this demonstration will not satisfy. To these we offer an argument discovered by the truly profound Mr. Pascal.* He justly observes, that when two witnesses disagree in the circ.u.mstances of a fact, we ought to believe them so much the more readily on that account, as it shews that they did not contrive the story in concert. This remark, it is to be hoped, will likewise put an end to the absurd custom which prevails in our courts of justice, of discrediting evidences, which, contradict each other, such contradictions being in reality a mark of truth, ”_a ceux qui prennent bien les choses_.”

* Les ”faiblesses” les plus apparentes sont des ”forces” a ceux qui prennent bien les choses, Par example les deux geneo logies de St. Matthieu, et de St. Luc, il est visible, que cela n'a pasete fait de concept. Voyes remarques sur les Pensees de Pastal Ed. Geneve, 1773.

25. It is mouch to be wished, that some of our spiritual directors, who have leisure time and large incomes, would be at the pains to rectify and adjust to the standard of holy writ, the many errors and omissions of profane historians.

When Christ was baptized by John, the heavens were, opened, and a voice was heard, declaring his divine origin. Such a prodigy must have awakened the attention of all Judea; yet we find the historians totally silent on the matter. It is strange, that the horrid ma.s.sacre of the children by the command of Herod should be totally unnoticed by Josephus, and even by the evangelists, Mark, Luke, and John.* Matthew alone mentions it; but his authority is fully sufficient to justify an interpolation (like many others) into the text of the other three evangelists, who are defective in that particular.

* If such an act of cruelty had been committed, it could not by any contrivance have been concealed, and Josephus, the inveterate enemy of Herod, and many of the most impartial historians of the Romans, living at that period, would have taken care to record such a public act of barbarity on the part of Herod.

Editor.

It is well known with what success the primitive Christians began the holy work of interpolating, suppressing, forging, and altering profane histories; but as we believe their piety always prevented their meddling with the sacred text, notwithstanding the arguments of infidels, who attempt to prove the contrary, these holy frauds have been found of infinite service in establis.h.i.+ng the cause of Christianity. Why do we forbear to pursue their great and laudable example? The modesty or the mistaken candour of these antients* have allowed them to interpolate no more than one paragraph concerning Jesus into the text of Josephus.