THE WORKS OF THE
REVEREND JOHN FLETCHER
NATURAL AVERSION
OF THE
HUMAN MIND TO THAT WHICH IS GOOD.
“SHOULD naked virtue give herself to view, Th' admiring world would pay the homage due,”
Says a philosophers whose erring mind Was to man's vice and monstrous evils blind.
Thus Joseph's piety, in tender age, Awakes the fury of fraternal rage;
By envy stung, his brothers all conspire The son to banish and deceive the sire.
Such was Pythagoras, a sage far famed;
And Aristides was THE JUST surnamed;
Great Socrates, unfortunately wise, Bravely confessed one Ruler of the skies, On Heaven reposed; while Greeks, a sinning race,
Levell'd his honours with the vile and base.
It is well known that ARISTIDES was banished from Athens for his excellent virtues; and in particular for his justice and beneficence, which gave umbrage to his fellow citizens. In the like manner that illustrious philosopher, who preached equity in Athens, lost his life through his support of truth which leads to piety. Many people, however, may not know that PYTHAGORAS was himself a martyr in the cause of virtue. For the sake of these, the following remarks, concerning the life and death of this great philosopher, are inserted from the account given by M. Dacier.
“Nothing could equal the respect shown to Pythagoras. He was regarded as the most perfect image of God among men; his dwelling was named the temple of Ceres, and when he went to the villages, it was said that he came not merely to instruct, but to bless mankind.
“Who could have thought but a man so respected, who never did any thing but good to society, would have enjoyed a tranquil old age, and a happy conclusion? But this is not always the lot of heroes and sages. The corruption and injustice of men promise, to such characters as these, more vexation than tranquillity. The last years of Pythagoras were clouded with persecution, and he met a tragical death. Observe the origin of his misfortunes.
“There was at Crotona a young man named Cylon, who was so elated with his birth, riches, and the great influence of his family, that he imagined it would be conferring honour on Pythagoras to become his disciple. The philosopher, not forming his judgment of men by external circumstances, perceiving this youth to be greatly depraved, dismissed him from his school.
“Cylon, being enraged at this injury, sought revenge. He every where defamed the philosopher, and endeavoured to render him suspected among the people, by representing his meetings as clubs of disaffected and seditious persons, whose aim was to overturn the state. These calumnies easily gained ground; (for the public were always unjust and suspicious, and ever ready to proceed to extremities against the sages, whom they considered as pedagogues who controlled and chastised them;) so that Pythagoras, their benefactor, was soon regarded as a public enemy at Crotona.
“One day when all his disciples were assembled with him in the house of Milo, Cylon went there with a crowd of ruffians, and a great number of his friends that were devoted to his resentment. They surrounded and set fire to the house. None escaped from the ruins save Pythagoras, Lysis, and Archippus; the latter fled to Tarentum, his own country, and Lysis to Thebes, where he became preceptor to Epaminondas.
“With respect to Pythagoras, he took the way to Locris; but the people being advertised of his intended visit to them, and dreading the wrath of Cylon, and the fate of Crotona, sent their principal magistrates to entreat him to depart from them. He went to Tarentum, from whence a new persecution shortly drove him. He went to Metapontum, but the sedition of Crotona served as a signal for a general insurrection against the Pythagoreans. The flame extended to all the cities of Greece. The schools of Pythagoras were demolished, and he himself, at the age of fourscore, murdered in a tumult at Metapontum; or, according to others, he died of hunger in the temple of the muses, where he had taken shelter. These are the most circumstantial and authentic materials I have been able to collect concerning the death of Pythagoras.
“Strange event,” concludes M. Dacier, “that the man who had appeased so many wars, calmed so many seditions, and extinguished the flame of discord in so many families, should perish in a tumult raised against himself. He was pursued from city to city, and the greatest part of his disciples were involved in the same ruin. It is very remark able that the cities which had persecuted Pythagoras the most, were the first who honoured his memory, and followed his laws with the greatest exactness.”
Those who neither embrace the Gospel, nor sound philosophy, will doubtless say, that the most active virtue has nothing to fear in these days. Does human nature differ at Paris and Toulouse from what it was at Crotona and Tarentum? Let us hear the decision of the two Rousseaus. “Socrates among us," says Rousseau the philosopher, who had such exalted ideas of man, “must not only drink the cup of poison, but he must also drink a bitter cup of insulting raillery and contempt, a thousand times
worse than death itself.” Rousseau the poet is of the same mind, in his Epistle to Count De Luc.
Si sur la terre aucun ne rous croit digne D’etre hai, c'est un fort mauvais signe, &c.
Are you regarded in this envious age Of hate unworthy? ’Tis a bad presage!
But you, ’tis said, pursue fair virtue's ways, And clear of vice in these degenerate days;
Object of scorn, if yet from talents free, Strange! what, not safe in mediocrity?
In all your conduct purest morals show, Your merit let observing mortals know, Procuring praise, and not provoke one foe.
This maxim treasure in your thoughtful mind, Acquire just praise, and war with all mankind.
M. de Voltaire, who had no relish for the severe truths of the Gospel, could not forbear publishing similar thoughts in his Epistle on Calumny.
Que le mensonge un instant vous outrage, &c.
Should slander cast a hellish flood on you, All burn with rage to prove that slander true:
Should truth beyond the clouds exalt her voice, To vindicate thy fame, mankind are ice.
Horace had nearly the same views, if we consult the following lines. (Epis. i. lib.
2.)
Post ingentia fata Deorum in templa recepti, Dum terras hominumque colunt genus, aspera bella
Componunt, agros adsignant, oppida condunt, &c.
Rome's founder, Leda's twins, the god of wine, By human virtues raised to power Divine, While they with pious cares improved mankind,
To various states their proper bounds assign'd, Commanded war's destroying rage to cease, And bless’d their cities with the arts of peace;
Complain’d their virtues and their toils could raise But slight returns of gratitude and praise.
Who crush’d the hydra, when to life renew'd, And monsters dire with fated toil subdued,
Found that the monster envy never dies, Till low in equal death her conqueror lies.
Virtue, while living, suffers causeless hate, But dead, we to the realms Divine translate.
The language of these poets illustrates the words of Jesus Christ; “Wo to you when all men speak well of you. Ye shall be hated of all nations for my sake.” Those who think Jesus Christ was deceived when he thus expressed himself, will doubtless conclude this canto of no advantage; but those who rise above mediocrity in virtue, and luke-warmness in piety, will perhaps be of another mind.
We need only view the persecutions which Pythagoras suffered, to be convinced how much philosophers deceive themselves in saying Christianity is a false religion, owing to its being the innocent cause of persecutions. It is granted that pure Christianity, like sound philosophy, has always been persecuted by wicked Pagans, sophistical reasoners, and carnal Christians; but instead of concluding that this religion is bad, we ought to infer that it is the most perfect and holy in the world, seeing it leads men to the most sublime virtue. And though it be hated and persecuted by all worldly minded persons, not even excepting those who have been dedicated to Jesus Christ in baptism, and consequently ought to tolerate the Gospel; yet it meets the cordial approbation of all honest men.
True Christianity is so excellent, that no wicked person can love it, and the more depraved men are, the more they persecute it. And from this source spring those numerous and bloody persecutions with which nominal Christians are reproached.
If it be demanded why wicked Christians are not only persecutors, but the fiercest persecutors, we answer, They persecute because they are wicked, and they are the most cruel persecutors because they are the greatest hypocrites, and consequently the
worst of men. “I will not cease to declare,” says Rousseau, “that persecutors who profess a religion of charity, and torment unbelievers, as though they wished to damn them in the present life, and so become the devil's harbingers, are not believers, but villains.” What numbers of persons have been entangled with, or confirmed in their incredulity by this difficulty, the solution of which we here present.
————————
REMARKS ON THE TRINITY,
TRANSLATED FROM THE FRENCH OF THE REV. J. FLETCHER.
BY THE LATE REV. MILES MARTINDALE.
SING nature's SIRE, sing his redeeming SON, And the blest PARACLETE with glory crown;
From God, our light, life, love, Divinely spring, His lofty praise let us incessant sing.
Let natures long as endless ages move, Of this thrice holy God proclaim the love.
Those who think Arius and Socinus more rational than St. Paul and St. John, will perhaps say this doxology is contrary to the second dogma of natural religion, which establishes the unity of the Godhead. But if candour and honesty oblige us, either to renounce revelation, or admit that God has revealed his extraordinary essence, eternal and perfect, existing without separation under the distinctions of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; it is evident, we cannot believe the whole Gospel without adoring the holy trinity in unity, as appointed by Jesus Christ and his apostles in the baptismal form.
Moreover, if God has revealed his essence to us by the terms of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the generation and the procession, it is because they are the best that man's imperfect language can furnish to convey ideas of a mystery altogether Divine.
Let us not forget that the ideas we attach to these words, in speaking of God, ought to be as much elevated above our common ideas, as the Supreme Being is above imperfect and finite beings. In the meantime this imperfect knowledge, like that which an infant in the cradle has of his father, mother, and nurse, may be sufficient for our present condition, as we are not called to speculate, but earnestly desire, as new-born babes, the sincere milk of the word, that we may grow thereby. This made St. Paul say, “For now we see through a glass darkly; but then face to face.”
We can in some measure conceive that an infinite and eternal Father has necessarily an infinite and eternal Son: if the Father be eternal, and if the Son be his eternal and perfect image, we can also comprehend that, as it would be absurd to admit of two infinities, the Father and Son are united in the most perfect manner by
an eternal Spirit of peace, powers and love. And thus being equally removed from Deism and Tritheism, we adore the sacred trinity to whom we have been consecrated in baptism.
If Christians adored three gods, they would adore three separate beings; but they abhor Polytheism, and say with St. John, “There are three that bear record in heaven:
ECKýQWVQKýQKýVTGKLýGPýGKUK: et hi tres unum sunt. And these three [hypostases,[2]
substances] are one:” the same one and perfect God. Those who consider the different nature of the words three and one used by St. John, will see the unreasonableness of those who say, “The Gospel calls us to believe three persons are only one.” Never was charge more false: the care taken by the apostle to change the words by which he expresses the unity of the substance, and the trinity of the substances, if I may use the term, is an incontrovertible proof:
The whole difficulty then lies in believing that God, who knows his own nature, (to give us a view of the greatness of our salvation, and the price of redemption,) has condescended to inform us that, in his adorable nature, there are three principles so perfectly united that they form a trinity of substances, without breaking the unity of the substance, or Divine essence. Thousands of intelligent persons are so far from finding any contradiction in this proposition, that, to reject it in opposition to the irrefragable evidence of Scripture and the catholic Church, they conclude they must suffer themselves to be blinded by the grossest pride, or unreasonable philosophy.
Those who worship only the Father, reject in part the Christians’ God, who does not exist without his Son and Spirit, any more than the sun exists without his light and heat. The Scriptures declare, that those who have not the Spirit of Christ believe not in the Son; and that such as receive not the Son, reject the Father, Rom. viii. 9;
1 John ii. 23. It follows then that Deists and their associates worship a being created by their proud reason, rather than the only true and living God, who particularly reveals himself in the Gospel, and who is called Thrice Holy, to show that the same perfect holiness shines in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
If we name the distinctions given to the Father, Son, and Comforter, or Holy Spirit, the principles, it is with reference to the creatures. For to these the Father is particularly a principle of life, the Son is a principle of light, and the Holy Spirit is a principle of charity. For in the Supreme Being these three distinctions are always in the most perfect unity, and never admit of the smallest shade of division.
The existence of a Supreme Being is the first truth in religion, and the unity of this Being is the second. This unity is not denied here, but we blame those who reject the distinction between the Father, the Word, and the Spirit, because they judge of this distinction by the diversity of three human persons. The enemies of the Christian religion would undoubtedly be right, if the personality in Divine nature was in all respects the same as personality in human nature. But good sense informs us, that the manner in which the Supreme Being exists is as much superior to our manner of
existing, as eternity is to time, or the omniscience of God to the feeble light of a mortal. It is hoped, however, that the word person, used by divines, has not produced any thing equivocal from which the Deists can take occasion to call us Tritheists, and thereby render the doctrine of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost ridiculous in the eyes of men.
It is true, in some sense we admit a trinity in the Supreme Being, and we shall always be regarded by the Deists as superstitious, because we believe what we have no clear and precise idea of. But, if the Deist's mode of judging be reasonable, will not he himself he obliged to renounce Deism, and must not the Atheist renounce his Materialism and Fatalism? Where is the Deist who has a clear idea of a Spirit, and of an infinite unity, that pervades all and divides nothing? Where is the Atheist who has a just conception of that chance, which, according to his doctrine, fixed the order of the world? Or how does he comprehend that fate which regulates all events? And what idea has he of those atoms which, after wandering at random in chaos, have at length formed the system of the universe, and which suddenly became so wise and regular in their motions, that the revolutions of sun, moon, the great planets and their satellites, of summer and winter, the flux and reflux of the ocean, are never wanting?
We therefore see, that the great objection these gentlemen have to revelation, equally militates against all the systems which they can substitute.
“God is an infinite Being,” says true philosophy. A being which I can comprehend, does not merit the name of infinite. He is no longer my God, but my equal, or my inferior: for, according to metaphysics, that which comprehends is greater than that which is comprehended; the same as in physics, that which contains is greater than that which is contained. When the hollow of my hand can hold all the water of the ocean, I may flatter myself that I can comprehend the essence of the Supreme Being:
and for this reason I conclude, that true philosophers will never reject the doctrine of the trinity in the Supreme Being, under a pretence that this doctrine is surrounded with difficulties which they cannot clearly unravel.
Some readers will perhaps demand why the trinity is so frequently mentioned in this work. Of what advantage is the doctrine? Dr. Priestley wished to know its use in morality and piety. “Does it render men more holy and happy?” An answer to this question shall be my apology.
In proportion as God has withheld the revelation of his trinity, the nations, not excepting the Jews, have abandoned themselves to their passions, and men in general have neither been good nor happy; and St. Paul draws their portrait in these words:
“Destruction and misery are in their ways, and the way of peace they have not known,” Rom. iii. 16, 17. In this fallen and corrupt condition in which human nature finds itself, the general knowledge of God, as a Creator, is insufficient to secure peace. Witness those who have no desire to behold the light; those who destroy themselves through an excess of despair; and those who would make their own exit, did not fear bind their impatient hands!
But things are soon changed, when the creating God reveals himself as Immanuel in believers; as soon as God, by the manifestation of his sanctifying Spirit, has re- established his image in their souls. Then the trinity being clearly revealed, God is adored in spirit and in truth, with a zeal like that which burned in the bosoms of the primitive Christians; then men begin to love and help each other with a charity which the world never saw before.
The multitude who believed in God manifested as Creator, Saviour, and Comforter, or (what is the same thing) those who truly believed in a trinity, “were all of one heart, and of one soul. Walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comforts of the Holy Ghost; and receiving their food with singleness of heart, they rejoiced in God the Saviour, with joy unspeakable and full of glory.” The God of hope filled them with joy and peace in believing, so that they abounded in hope through the Holy Ghost. Full of faith, like Stephen, they saw the glory of the Saviour, as with uncovered faces; by the Spirit of the Lord they were transformed into the same image, from glory to glory. Conducted by the Son to the Father, and sustained by the Spirit of adoption, they call God their gather with unshaken confidence, and praise him on the scaffolds with a transport of joy which the Deists never knew.
If we insist upon the knowledge and adoration of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, the three eternal principles that compose the Divine essence, it is not through superstition, as Dr. Priestley imagined, but because Scripture and experience concur in showing this to be the only mean of bringing sinners to that happy condition, in which they said, “We have access to the Father, by Jesus Christ, through the same Spirit: being justified by faith, we have peace with God, [the Father,] by our Lord Jesus Christ: we rejoice in hope of the glory of God; and we glory in tribulation, because the love of God is shed abroad in our Hearts, by the Holy Spirit given unto us.” It is sufficient to read this two-fold evidence in the Epistles and Acts of the apostles, to see that the holiness and happiness of the first Christians depended on the experimental knowledge of the mystery of the holy trinity: or of God manifested in their souls as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; or as Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier.
It is allowed things shortly changed; but this change is a proof that the doctrine of the trinity cannot be attacked without sapping the foundation of Christian piety. The Gnostics, who, like Dr. Priestley, prided themselves on being more enlightened than other Christians, by refinements contrary to the simplicity of the Gospel corrupted the doctrine of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; and the corruption of manners among the ancient heretics was the consequence of their first revolt. The Arians soon followed the Gnostics, tearing the Church on one hand, and the Sabellians on the other; during that time the greatest part of the Catholics, occupied in disputes with their adversaries, instead of growing in holiness, by a more lively knowledge of the Redeemer, and Sanctifier, contented themselves with repeating forms of faith; and they shortly substituted the repetition of orthodox creeds for true Christian faith, which works by love, and is always fruitful in good works. The Church will remain in this state, until the ministers preach with zeal, and the people embrace with ardour,