2

perhaps there may fomething be ftill remaining to foften and palliate, fome faving Claufe or Exception may luckily occur to fhift and alleviate the Charge. St. Jerom, you fay, acknowledges this of himself and other Fathers. He does fo. But does he not here alledge the fame thing against Chrift and St. Paul? Yes,

by our Author's Confeffion. For he goes on charging, not only St. Paul, but even Jefus Chrift himfelf with the fame practice. Then pray, let me ask our Author one Question. Can he, or any Man whatever of common Senfe, imagine that St. Jerom would here infinuate of Jefus Chrift and St. Paul, that they did not think themfelves oblig'd to speak the truth, but that every thing was lawful, which ferv'd to gain the Victory. If our Author can believe this, I ani fure he must never affume the Title of Freethinker. If he cannot, then what St. Jerom fays here of himself and the Fathers, muft certainly be allow'd to have an innocent meaning, fuch a one as is perfectly confiftent with St. Jerom's opinion of Chrift and St. Paul. What that particular meaning is, I'll venture to open and explain, and fhall leave it with our penetrating Author to be examin'd and confuted at leifure. St. Jerom had been engag'd in difpute with one Jovinian on feveral Points, one of which related to Matrimony. Jovinian afferted, that a fingle or married Life made no difference of Merit in Perfons equal

in other respects. St. Jerom opposes this po fition as contrary to the general Doctrine of the Chriftian Church, and the Scriptures. He fpends one whole Book out of two on this Subject, and after its Publication hearing that fome few Expreffions and Paffages in it had given offence, as being too fevere and reflecting on the Marriage State, he writes a most elegant Defence of it to his learned Friend Pammachius, telling him his great furprize to find Men of Learning and a liberal Education fuch injudicious Interpreters. He wonders that they do not confider and allow for Occafions and Circumstances, which of courfe muft require a fuitable variety and turn in Expreffion. A Man in difpute, as he was, could not poffibly talk in that clear and exact way which a Preacher or Catechift would ufe, but must of neceflity take fome Latitude, muft put himfelf in various poftures of Defence, muft watch opportunities of ftriking and difarming his Adversary with abundance of art, caution, and dexterity. But ftill, tho' his words and expreffions bore occafional Latitudes and Peculiarities, yet his Truth and Honesty and Confiftency were fufficiently fecur'd, and no Prevarications were admitted in order to gain a Victory. He farther juftifies his way of managing the Dispute by appealing not only to Orators, as Demofthenes and Cicero, but to Plato, Theophraftus, Xenophon, and Ariftotle; and not

only

only to thefe but to Chriftian Writers, fuch as Origen, Methodius, Eufebius, Apollinaris among the Greeks, and to Tertullian, Cyprian, Minutius, Victorinus, Lactantius, and Hilary among the Latins, which if our Author will endeavour to prove as fraudulent as he would reprefent them, I'll promise to vindicate as to any particulars which fhall be alledg'd. In the

à me

t Debuerat prudens & benignus Lector, etiam ea quæ videntur dura, æftimare de cæteris : & non in uno atque eodcm libro, criminari me diverfas fententias protuliffe. Quis enim tam hebes, & fic in fcribendo rudis eft, ut idem laudet & damnet? ædificata deftruat, & destructa ædificet? & quum adverfarium vicerit, fuo noviffimè mucrone feriatur? Si rufticani homines, & vel rhetoricæ, vel dialecticæ artis ignari detraherent mihi, tribuerem veniam imperitia: nec accufationem reprehenderem, ubi non voluntatem in culpâ cernerem, fed ignorantiam. Nunc verò quum diferti homines, & liberalibus ftudiis eruditi, magis velint lædere, quàm intelligere, breviter RESPONSUM HABEANT, corrigere cos debere peccata, non reprehendere. Patet campus, ftat è contra acies, adverfarii dogma manifeftum eft: & "(ut Virgilianum aliquid inferam) "illum afpice contra, Qui vocat: Refpondeant adverfario. Alitèr teneant modum in difputando, alitèr virgam in docendo; & me in libris fuis, quid vel prætermiferim vel addiderim, doceant. Reprehenfores non audio, fequor magiftros. Delicata doctrina eft, pugnanti ictus dictare de muro: unguentis delibutus fis, cruentum militem accufare formidinis. Nec hoc dicens, ftatim jactantiæ reus fum, quòd cæteris dormientibus folus certaverim. Sed hoc dico, cautius eos poffe pugnare, qui me viderint vulneratum. Nolo tale certamen adeas, in quo tantùm te protegas: & torpente dextrâ, finiftrâ clypeum circumferas. Aut feriendum tibi eft, aut cadendum. Non poffum te æftimare victorem, nifi adverfarium videro trucidatum.

ET QUUM IPSE

Legimus, eruditiffime vir, in fcholis pariter; & Ariftotelea illa vel de Gorgiæ fontibus manantia, fimul didicimus, plura effe videlicèt genera dicendi : & inter cætera, aliud effe vasã‹ fcribere; aliud yes. In priori vagam effe difpu tationem & adverfario refpondentem, nunc hæe, nunc illa

D 2

propo

mean time, to prevent finifter fufpicions and

proponere: Argumentari ut libet, aliud loqui, aliud agere; panem, ut dicitur, oftendere; lapidem tenere. In fequenti autem aperta frons; & ut ita dicam, ingenuitas neceffaria eft. Aliud eft quærere, aliud definire: In altero pugnandum: in altero docendum eft. Tu me ftantem in prælio, & de vitâ periclitantem ftudiofus magifter doceas; Nali ex obliquo, & unde non putaris, vulnus inferre. Directo percute gladio. Turpe tibi eft hoftem dolis ferire, non viribus. Quafi non & hæc ars fumma pugnantium fit, alibi minari, alibi percutere. Legite, obfecro vos, Demofthenem : legite Tullium: ac ne forfitan Rhetores vobis difpliceant (quorum artis eft, verifimilia magis quàm vera dicere) legite Platonem, Theophraftum, Xenophontem, Ariftotelem, & reliquos qui de Socratis fonte manantes, diverfis cucurrêre rivulis: quid in illis apertum, quid fimplex eft? Quæ verba non fenfuum? Qui fenfus non victoria? Origines, Methodius, Eufebius, Apollinaris, multis verfuum millibus fcribunt adversùs Celfum & Porphyrium. Confiderate quibus argumentis, & quàm lubricis problematibus, diaboli fpiritu contexta fubvertant: Et quia interdum coguntnr loqui, non quod fentiunt; fed quod neceffe eft, dicunt adversùs eos qui dicuntur effe Gentiles. Taceo de Latinis Scriptoribus, Tertulliano, Cypriano, Minutio, Victorino, Lactantio, Hilario, ne non tàm me defendiffe, quàm alios videar accusâffe. Paulum Apoftolum proferam, quem quotiefquumque lego, videor mihi non verba audire, fed tonitrua. Legite Epiftolas ejus, & maximè ad Romanos, ad Galatas, ad Ephefios, in quibus totus in certamine pofitus eft; & videbitis eum in teftimoniis quæ fumit de veteri Teftamento, quàm artifex, quàm prudens, quàm diflimulator fit ejus quod agit. Videntur quædam verba fimplicia, & quafi innocentis hominis ac rufticani; & qui facere neç declinare noverit infidias: fed quoquumque refpexeris, fulmina funt. Hæret in caufsâ, capit omne quod tetigerit: tergum vertit, ut fuperet fugam fimulat, ut occidat. Čalumniemur ergo illum, atque dicamus ei: Teftimonia quibus contra Judæos vel cæteras hærefes ufus es, aliter in fuis locis, aliter in tuis Epiftolis fonant. Videmus excmpla captiva, fervierunt tibi ad vi&toriam, quæ fuis in voluminibus non dimicant. Nonne nobis loquitur cum Salvatore: aliter foris, aliter domi loquimur? Turbæ parabolas, difcipuli audiunt veritatem. Proponit Pharifæis Dominus quæftiones, & non edifferit. Aliud eft docere difcipulum, aliud adverfarium vincere. Hieron. Apolog. pro Lib. adv. Jovinian. ad Pammach. Ed. Bened.

preju

prejudices, let us go on farther with Jerom, felecting the most obnoxious Expreffions, and feeing whether all that Fraud and Iniquity is intimated by them, which our Author out of pure good Nature and Charity fuggefts. Non quod fentiunt, fed quod neceffe eft dicunt. In our Author's Tranflation, they alledg'd against the Gentiles, not what they believ'd, but what they thought neceffary. You obferve our Author is railing here against Fraud and Infincerity, and yet difpenfes with both in himself, in extracting this very paffage of St. Jerom. For the Text of the Father is really this. Interdum coguntur loqui non quod fentiunt: fed quod neceffe eft, dicunt adversus eos qui dicuntur effe Gentiles. They are forc'd fometimes not to Speak what they think; but they fay what is neceffary (in thofe circumstances) against those who are call'd Gentiles. The words interdum and coguntur our Author induftriously drops, that the Fathers may be thought always to speak on these occafions not what they believe, and without any fort of Force, but by inclination and choice. This is not the first time that poor St. Jerom has been mangled and mifreprefented; the Dif courfe on Freethinking, fome years ago, fell under the fharp rebuke of Phileleutherus Lipfienfis on this very account. But now behold the Conftruction and Inference. The holy Fathers did not think themselves oblig'd to speak the Truth; u Part. II. p. 10. Ed. 6.

they