highly obliged to the Abbé's zeal in my commendation, and goodness in not concealing what he thinks my error. And his testifying some esteem for the book just at a time when his brethren raised a clamour against it, is an instance of great generosity and candour, which I shall ever acknowledge. Your, &c. LETTER II. TO THE HON. JAMES CRAGGS. June 18, 1711. IN your last you informed me of the mistaken zeal of some people, who seem to make it no less their business to persuade men they are erroneous, than doctors do that they are sick; only that they may magnify their own cure, and triumph over an imaginary distemper. The simile objected to in my essay, (Thus wit, like faith, by each man is applied To one small sect, and all are damn'd beside.)* plainly concludes at this second line, where stands a full stop and what follows, (Meanly they seek, &c.) speaks only of wit, (which is meant by that blessing, and that sun,) for how can the sun of faith be said to sublime the southern wits, and to they became their rivals; and Pontano, Politiano, Sannazaro, Sadoleti, Bembo, and Musurus, have left works which Erasmus and Reuchlin must have been content to admire, rather than to ridicule. See Essay on Criticism, ver. 691, note. * Essay on Criticism, ver. 396. ripen the geniuses of northern climates? I fear, these gentlemen understand grammar as little as they do criticism; and, perhaps, out of good-nature to the monks, are willing to take from them the censure of ignorance, and to have it to themselves. The word they refers (as, I am sure, I meant, and as I thought every one must have known) to those critics there spoken of, who are partial to some particular set of writers, to the prejudice of all others. And the very simile itself, if twice read, may convince them, that the censure here of damning, lies not on our church at all, unless they call our church one small sect: and the cautious words (by each man) manifestly show it a general reflection on all such (whoever they are) who entertain those narrow and limited notions of the mercy of the Almighty, which the reformed ministers and presbyterians are as guilty of as any people living.* Yet after all, I promise you, Sir, if the alteration of a word or two will gratify any man of sound faith, though weak understanding, I will (though it were from no other principle than that of common good-nature) comply with it. And if you please but to particularize the spot where their objection lies, (for it is in a very narrow compass,) that stumbling-block, though it be but a *The author has here vindicated himself against his critics with judgment, sense, and spirit; and has at the same time displayed a liberality of opinion which regards alike the uncharitable bigots of every religious sect. little pebble, shall be removed out of their way. If the heat of these good disputants (who, I am afraid, being bred up to wrangle in the schools, cannot get rid of the humour all their lives) should proceed so far as to personal reflections upon me, I assure you, notwithstanding, I will do or say nothing, however provoked, (for some people can no more provoke than oblige,) that is unbecoming the true character of a catholic. I will set before me the example of that great man, and great saint, Erasmus ;* who in the midst of calumny pro * Jortin speaks on this subject with his usual candour and ingenuity. See also Essay on Criticism. "Le Clerc often censures Erasmus for his lukewarmness, timidity, and unfairness, in the matter of the Reformation; and I, as a translator, have adopted these censures, only softening them a little here and there: for I am, in the main, of the same opinion with Le Clerc as to this point. As protestants, we are certainly much obliged to Erasmus; yet we are more obliged to the authors of the Reformation, to Luther, Melancthon, Zuinglius, Ecolampadius, Cranmer, Bucer, &c. But here I would observe, once for all, that many arguments may be plausibly urged on the other side, either to excuse, or at least to extenuate very much that conduct of Erasmus which offended the protestant party. Erasmus, as you may see in this account of his life, was not entirely free from prejudices of education, and had some indistinct and confused notions about the authority of the church Catholic. He talks much of submitting his own opinions and his own judg ment to her by an act of implicit faith and unlimited obedience. He thought it not lawful to depart from the Church of Rome, corrupted as she was. He was afterwards shocked also at the violent quarrels which arose about the Lord's Supper amongst the Reformers, the Zuinglians, and the Lutherans; for in those days, Zuinglius and his adherents were the only men who talked reasonably upon that subject. He was no less shocked at the pestilent tumults and rebellions of the Rustics, the Fanatics, and ceeded with all the calmness of innocence,* and the unrevenging spirit of primitive Christianity. However, I would advise them to suffer the mention of him to pass unregarded, lest I should be forced to do that for his reputation which I would never do for my own; I mean, to vindicate so great a light of our church from the malice of past times, and the ignorance of the present, in a language which may extend farther than that in which the trifle about criticism is written. I wish these gentlemen would be contented with finding fault Anabaptists. I cannot believe, that the fear of losing his pensions, and of coming to want, made him say and do things which he thought to be unlawful: but it may be fairly supposed, that he was afraid of disobliging several of his oldest and best friends, who were against the Lutheran reformation; of offending, not only Henry VIII. and Charles V. and the Popes, and George of Saxony, and Wolsey, &c. but even his patrons Warham, Montjoy, More, Tonstal, Fisher, Campegius, Bembus, Sadolet, and many others whom he loved entirely, and to some of whom he was much obliged. These things might influence his judgment, though he himself was not at all aware of it. There is no necessity to suppose, that he acted against his conscience in adhering to the Church of Rome. No: he persuaded himself that he did as much as piety and prudence required from him, in freely censuring her defects." Warton. * I doubt this is not strictly true. See his answers to Lee, archbishop of York. Though it must be owned this miserable prelate had provoked the incomparable man, by the most infamous scurrilities and abuse. Warburton. Dr. Warburton, methinks, could not, with propriety, object to Erasmus, that he had answered an opponent with warmth, and even vehemence of spirit. The liberal sentiments of Erasmus are in no parts of his works more striking, than in the Dedication fixed to St. Hilary, and his fine Preface to the Enchiridion Militis Christiani. pre Warton. with me only, who will submit to them right or wrong, as far as I only am concerned; I have a greater regard to the quiet of mankind than to disturb it for things of so little consequence as my credit and my sense. A little humility can do a poet no hurt, and a little charity would do a priest none: for, as St. Austin finely says, Ubi charitas, ibi humilitas; ubi humilitas, ibi pax.* Your, &c. LETTER III. TO THE HON. JAMES CRAGGS. July 19, 1711. THE concern which you more than seem to be affected with for my reputation, by the several accounts you have so obligingly given of what reports and censures the holy Vandals† have thought fit to pass upon me, makes me desirous of telling so good a friend my whole thoughts of this matter; and of setting before you, in a clear light, the true state of it. I have ever believed the best piece of service one could do to our religion, was openly to express our detestation and scorn of all those mean It were to be wished that all the sentiments of St. Austin had been equally candid and judicious. Warton. † Alluding to the anger expressed by the ignorant bigots of his religion, against the most able parts of his Essay. He says in the Poem, "And drove the holy Vandals off the stage!" Bowles. |