L O N D O N :
Printed forJ. BrothertoninCornhilland soldbyT. WarnerinPater-noster-Row, andA. DoddwithoutTemple-Bar. 1729.
Reverend Sir,
InyourLetterto Dr.Rogers, which he has publish’d at the End of hisVindication of the Civil Establishment of Religion, I find a Notion advanc’d by you: which as it is a common and plausible Topick for Persecution, and a Topick by which you, and many others, urge the Magistrate to punish [or, as you phrase it,to pinch][28]Men for controversial Writings, is particularly proper at this time to be fully consider’d; and I hope to treat it in such manner as to make you your self, and every fair Reader, sensible of the Weakness thereof.
You profess to “vindicate[29]a sober, serious, and modest Inquiry into the Reasons of any Establishment.”
And you add, that you “have not ordinarily found it judg’d inconsistent with the Duty of aprivate Subject, to propose his Doubts or his Reasons to the Publick in amodestway, concerning theRepealof any Law which he may think of ill Consequence by its Continuance. If he be a Man of Ability, and well vers’d in the Argument, he will deserve some Attention; but if he mistakes his Talent, and will be busy with what he very little understands, Contempt and Odium will be his unavoidable and just Allotment.” And you say, that “Religion is more a personal Affair, in which every Man has a peculiar Right and Interest, and a Concern that he be not mistaken, than in any other Case or Instance which can fall under the Cognizance of the Magistrate; and that greater Allowances seem due to each private Person for Examination and Inquiry in this, than in any other Example.”
And herein I must do you the Justice to acknowledge, that you speak like a Christian, like a Protestant, like anEnglishman, and a reasonable Man; like a Man concerned for Truth, like a Man of Conscience; like a Man concern’d for the Consciences of others; like a Man concern’d to have some Sense, Learning, and Virtue in the World; and, in a word, like a Man who is not for abandoning all the valuable Things in Life to the Tyranny, Ambition, and Covetousness of Magistrates and Ecclesiasticks.
But you observe, that “municipal Laws[30], how trivial soever in their intrinsick Value, are never to beinsulted; never to be treated withBuffooneryandBanter,RidiculeandSarcastick Irony. So that Dr.Rogers’s grand Adversary will have from you no measure of Encouragement to his manner of Writing.” Again, you “never[31]desire to see the Magistrate fencing in the publick Religionwith so thick a Hedge as shall exclude all Light, and shall tear out the Eyes of all such as endeavour to see thro’ it.Sober arguingyou never fear:Mockeryandbitter Railing, if you could help it, you would never bear, eitherfor the Truth or against it.”
Upon which I offer these following Considerations.
I.First, If what you callInsult,Buffoonery,Banter,RidiculeandIrony,Mockeryandbitter Railing, be Crimes in Disputation, you will find none more deeply involv’d in it than our most famous Writers, in their controversial Treatises aboutseriousMatters; as all Notions and Practices in Religion, whether reasonable or absurd, may be equally and justly deem’d: the Notions and Practices of Papists, Presbyterians, Quakers, and all other Sects, being no lessseriousto their respective Sects than ridiculous to one another. Let any Man read the Writings of our most eminent Divines against thePapists,Puritans,Dissenters, andHereticks, and against one another, and particularly the Writings ofAlexander Cook,Hales,Chillingworth,Patrick,Tillotson,Stillingfleet,Burnet,South,Hickes,SherlockandEdwards, and he will find them to abound withBanter,Ridicule, andIrony.Stillingfleetin particular, our greatest controversial Writer, who passes forgraveandsolemn, is so conscious of his use thereof, that he confesses that Charge of the Papists against him, saying[32], “But I forget my Adversary’s grave admonition, that Iwould treat these Matters seriously, and lay aside Drollery.” And again, after aBanterof near a Page, he says[33], “But I forget I am so near my Adversary’s Conclusion, wherein he sogravelyadvises me, that Iwould be pleas’d for onceto write Controversy, and not Play-Books.” Nor did I ever hear the Divines of the Church condemn the Doctor for his sarcastical Method of writing Controversy. On the contrary, I remember at the University, that he used to be applauded no less for his Wit than for his Learning. And to exalt his Character as a Wit, hisConferences between aRomishPriest, a Fanatick Chaplain, and a Divine of the Church ofEngland,&c.were spoken of as an excellentComedy, and especially for that Part which theFanatick Chaplainacts therein, who makes as comical and as ridiculous a Figure as he does in any of thePlaysacted on the Stage. And in hisControversywithDrydenabout theRoyal Papers, and those of theDuchessofYork, he was deem’d to have out-done that famousSatiristin tart Repartees and Reflections; and to have attack’d the Character of thePoetwith more severity, than thatPoet, who was so remarkable for his satirical Reflections on the holy Order, did the Character of theDivine: As for example, he says toDryden[34], “Could nothing be said by you of BishopMorley, but thatPrelate of rich Memory? Or had you a mind to tell us he was noPoet? Or that he was out of the Temptation of changing his Religion for Bread?” And many Citations us’d to be produc’d out of his Writings, as Specimens of his ironical Talent; among which I particularly remember hisRidiculeof his Adversary Mr.Alsop, a famous Presbyterian Wit and Divine; whose Book, which was full of low Raillery and Ridicule, he resembles[35]tothe Bird ofAthens, asmade up of Face and Feathers. And the Doctor himself adds, in Justification of the polite Method of Raillery in Controversy, thatthere is a pleasantness of Wit, which serves to entertainthe Reader in the rough and deep way of Controversy. Nor did Mr.Alsopwant Approvers of his Raillery in his own Party. Mr.Gilbert Rule[36], a greatScotchPresbyterian Divine, who defended him againstStillingfleet, contends in behalf of his Raillery, “That the Facetiousness of Mr.Alsop’s Strain needed to have bred no Disgust, being as a Condiment to preventTædiumand Nauseousness.” And he adds, “That he knows none that blame the excellent Writings of Mr.Fuller, which have a Pleasantness not unlike that of Mr.Alsop.”
And this manner of writing is seldom complain’d of, as unfit to be allow’d, by any but those who feel themselves hurt by it. For the solemn and grave can bear a solemn and grave Attack: That gives them a sort of Credit in the World, and makes them appear considerable to themselves, as worthy of a serious Regard. ButContemptis what they, who commonly are the most contemptible and worthless of Men, cannot bear nor withstand, as setting them in their true Light, and being the most effectual Method to drive Imposture, the sole Foundation of their Credit, out of the World. HenceStillingfleet’s Popish Adversaries, more conscious perhaps of the Ridiculousness of Popery than the common People among Protestants themselves, fall upon him very furiously. One says[37], “That by the Phrases, which are the chief Ornaments that set off the Doctor’s Works, we may easily guess in what Books he has spent his Time; and that he is well vers’d inDon Quixot, theSeven Champions, and otherRomantick Stories. Sure the Doctor err’d in his Vocation: Had he quitted all serious Matters, and dedicated himself wholly to Drollery and Romance, with two or threeYears underHudibras, he might have been a Master in that Faculty; the Stage might have been a Gainer by it, and the Church ofEnglandwould have been no Loser.”
Another of his Adversaries says, “[38]Peruse the Doctor Page after Page, you will find the Man all along in peevish Humour, when you see his Book brimfull of tart biting Ironies, Drolleries, comical Expressions, impertinent Demands, and idle Stories,&c.as if the discharging a little Gall were enough to disparagethe clearest MiraclesGod ever wrought.”
But what are theseclearest Miracles God ever wrought? Why, the most extravagant, whimsical, absurd, and ridiculous Legends and Stories imaginable; such as that ofSt. Dominick[39], who when the Devil came to him in the Shape of aMonkey, made him hold a Candle to him while he wrote, and keep it so long between his Toes, till it burnt them; and his keeping the Devil, who sometimes came to him in the Shape of aFlea, and by skipping on the Leaves of his Book disturb’d his Reading, in that Shape, and using him for a Mark to know where he left off reading: Such as St.Patrick’s heating an Oven with Snow, and turning a Pound of Honey into a Pound of Butter: Such asChrist’s marrying Nuns, and playing at Cards with them; and Nuns living on the Milk of the blessed VirginMary; and that of divers Orders, and especially theBenedictine, being so dear to the blessed Virgin, that in Heaven she lodges them under her Petticoats: Such as making broken Eggs whole;and of People, who had their Heads cut off, walking with their Heads in their Hands, which were sometimes set on again: Such as Failing for a hundred Years; and raising Cows, Calves, and Birds from the Dead, after they had been chopt to Pieces and eaten, and putting on their Heads after they had been pull’d or cut off; and turning a Pound of Butter into a Bell; and making a Bull give Milk; and raising a King’s Daughter from the Dead, and turning her into a Son; and the several Translations thro’ the Air of the VirginMary’s House fromPalestinetoLoretto, and the Miracles wrote there; and more of the like Kind.
Are these, or such as these theclearest Miracles God ever wrought? Do such Miracles deserve a serious Regard? And shall theGravitywith which Mankind is thus banter’d out of their common Sense, excuse these Matters fromRidicule?
It will be difficult to find any Writers who have exceeded the Doctors,Southand[40]Edwards, inBanter,Irony,SatireandSarcasms: The last of whom has written a Discourse inDefence of sharp Reflections on Authors and their Opinions; wherein he enumerates, as Examples for his Purpose, almost all the eminent Divines of the Church ofEngland. And Mr.[41]Collier, speaking of a Letter of the VenerableBedetoEgbertBishop ofYork, says, “The Satire and Declamation in thisEpistleshews thepious ZealandIntegrityof the Author;” which seems to imply, thatSatireandDeclamationis the orthodox and most pious Method of writing in behalf ofOrthodoxy.
Dr.Rogers, to whom you write, falls into the Method of Buffoonery, Banter, Satire, Drollery, Ridicule, and Irony, even in the Treatise to which your Letter is subjoined, and against thatPersonwhom you would have punish’d for that Method: When he says to him,[42]“Religion then, it seems, must be left to the Scholars and Gentlefolks, and to them ’tis to be of no other use, but as a Subject of Disputation to improve their Parts and Learning; but methinks the Vulgar might be indulged a little of it now and then, upon Sundays and Holidays, instead of Bull-baiting and Foot-ball.” And this insipid Piece of Drollery and false Wit [which is design’d to ridicule his Adversary for asserting, thatWhat Men understand nothing of, they have no Concern about; which is a Proposition that will stand the Test ofRidicule, which will be found wholly to lie against the Doctor, for asserting the Reasonableness of imposing Things on the People which they do not understand] is the more remarkable, as it proceeds from one, who is at the same time for using the Sword of the Magistrate against his Adversary. One would think the[43]Inquisitorshould banish theDroll, and theDrolltheInquisitor.
One of the greatest and best Authorities for thepleasantandironicalmanner of treatingseriousMatters, is that eminent Divine at the Time of the Reformation, the greatErasmus, who has written two Books in this way with great Applause of Protestants, and without subjecting himself to any Persecution of Papists: which makes it highly proper to propose them to the Consideration of the Reader, that he may regulate his Notions, by what, itmay be presum’d, he approves of in that Author. These two Books ofErasmusare hisColloquies, and hisPraise of Folly.
HisColloquieswere wrote in imitation ofLucian’sDialogues; and I think with equal, if not superior, Success.
Both these Authors had an Aversion to sullen, austere, designing Knaves; and both of them being Men of Wit and Satire, employ’d their Talents againstSuperstitionandHypocrisy.Lucianliv’d in an Age whenFictionandFablehad usurp’d the Name ofReligion, andMoralitywas corrupted byMenofBeardandGrimace, but scandalouslyLeudandIgnorant; who yet had the Impudence to preach upVirtue, and style themselvesPhilosophers, perpetually clashing with one another about the Precedence of their several Founders, the Merits of their different Sects, and if ’tis possible, about Trifles of less Importance: yet all agreeing in a different way to dupe and amuse the poor People, by thefantastickSingularity of their Habits, the unintelligible Jargon of their Schools, and their Pretensions to a severe and mortify’d Life.
These Jugglers and ImpostorsLucianin great measure help’d to chase out of the World, by exposing them in their proper Colours, and by representing them as ridiculous as they were. But in a few Generations after him, a new Race of Men sprung up in the World, well known by the Name ofMonksandFryars, different indeed from the former in Religion, Garb, and a few other Circumstances; but in the main, the same sort of Impostors, the same ever-lasting Cobweb-Spinners, as to their nonsensical Controversies, the same abandon’dWretches, as to their Morals; but as to the mysterious Arts of heaping up Wealth, and pickingthe People’s Pockets, infinitely superior to thePagan PhilosophersandPriests. These were the sanctify’d Cheats, whose Folly and VicesErasmushas so effectually lash’d, that some Countries have entirely turn’d these Drones out of their Cells; and in other Places, where they are still kept up, they are in some measure become contemptible, and obliged to be always on their Guard.
The Papists say, that these “[44]Colloquies, by turning intoRidiculethe Devotion to the holy Virgin and Saints, the Worship of Relicks and Images, religious Vows and Pilgrimages, have made more Hereticks than the Works ofLutherandCalvin.” And I find the reverend Mr.Trapp[after calling[45]Reliques,Foolish] celebratesErasmusforhaving abundantlyridicul’dthem.
HisPraise of Follytreats ofseriousMatters, in such a gay, familiar, ingenious and pleasant manner, as makes it a Work proper to be read by intelligent People, to remove out of their Minds all Bigotry contracted by Ignorance and an evil Education, all Peevishness, Hatred, and Ill-nature towards one another, on account of different Sentiments in Religion; and to form in them the natural Principles of Moderation, Humanity, Affection and Friendship. Our learned and ingenious BishopKennetcould not do a more signal Piece of Service to our Country, than by translating intoEnglishthis Book, which the Ladies have now an Opportunity of understanding no less than the Men; and from whence they may see the pleasant, amiable, and just Disposition of Mind of one of the most learned and ingenious Men that ever liv’d, as wellas Author of a great Number of religious and devotional Books; nor could the Bishop well give a heartier Stroke at Popery, than by approving ofErasmus’s[46]laughingat it, and applauding his numberlessTaunts on its Impostures, Cheats, and Delusions.
Our Clergy have ever treated Mr.Hobbeswith the greatest Mockery, Ridicule and Raillery: As for example,WardBishop ofSarum,BrambalBishop ofDerry,ParkerBishop ofOxford, Dr.Wallisin his several bantering Treatises against him,LucyBishop ofSt. Davids, Shafto, and particularly the ReverendDroll, Dr.Eachard, in twoDialogues, which, it is well known, have been universally well receiv’d by the Clergy, and that for their Treatment of Mr.Hobbesin the ridiculing Way; for which the Author himself makes the following just Apology, in hisDedicationof hisSecond Dialogueto ArchbishopSheldon, “That of all Triflers, ’tis theSet, theGrave, thePhilosophical, and theMathematical Trifler, to which he has the greatest Aversion; whom when he meets, very gravely making out all Men to be rational Beasts both in Nature and Conversation, and every Man, he pleases, a rational Rebel; and upon any Fright or Pinch a rational Atheist and Anti-Christian; and all this perform’d with allDemureness,Solemnity,QuotationofScripture,AppealstoConscienceandChurch-History; he must humbly beg hisGrace’sPardon, if then he has endeavour’d tosmilea little, and to get as much out of his Road and way of Writing as possible.” TheseDialoguesused to be much recommended to the Youth to make them laugh at MrHobbes, whowas constantly represented as provok’d and put out of all Temper by them, and was said to have vented this strange and impious Expression, upon its being told him, thatthe Clergy saidEachardhad crucify’dHobbes; “Why then don’t they fall down and worship me?”
Mr.Seldenhas been the constant Subject of Clergy-banter, for hisHistory of Tythes; in thePrefaceto which, “He reproaches the Clergy with Ignorance and Laziness, and upbraids them with having nothing to keep up their Credit butBeard,Title, andHabit; and their Studies reach’d no farther than theBreviary, thePostils, andPolyanthea.” For this Work he was attack’d more particularly by three Divines,Tillesly,Mountagu, andNettles. And their Success was thus originally represented[47], “That he was so gall’d byTillesly, so gagg’d byMountagu, and so stung byNettles, that he never came off in any of his Undertakings with more loss of Credit.” And this Jest has pass’d much upon the World, and been continued down in many Books, where Mr.Seldenis mention’d, to his Discredit with ignorant Readers, but not with the Knowing and Learned; who, as Dr.Wottontells us[48],have, now Party-heats are over, acquiesced in what Mr.Selden advanc’d;who first,of all Christians,set the Affairof Tythesin a clear Light.
It is usually said the Comedy calledIgnoramus, which is a Clergy-banter upon theLaw, was a design’d Return for Mr.Selden’sHistory of Tythes.
The Reverend Dr.Beaumont, late Master of St.Peter’sCollegeand King’s Professor of Divinity, has given us a Book, entitled, “Some Observationsupon the Apology of Dr.Henry Morefor hisMystery of Godliness;” which endeavours to render the said Doctorridiculous, and set People alaughingat him, (p. 9. &c. 64.) and used to be applauded as a complete Performance in the way of Raillery and Irony, and was well receiv’d for being directed against a Person esteem’d Heterodox.
Many Clergymen have written Books to banter the Works of Mr.Locke, among whom Dr.Edwardsmust have the first Place; whoseBrief Vindication of the fundamental Articles of the Christian Faith, which has theImprimaturbefore it ofJames,Beaumont,Covel, andBalderston, fourCambridgeHeads, was never exceeded by the most licentiousDroll.
WhenSorbier’sVoyagetoEngland, which was a pert and insolent Abuse and Satire on the Nation, and written in theFrenchmanner of contemptuously treating all Countries and Men butFranceandFrenchmen, was publish’d, it was deem’d proper that a drolling and satirical Answer should be given to it, and that the Reverend Dr.Spratshould be theDrollemploy’d; who perform’d his Part according to the Expectation of the Drolling Court of KingCharlesII. and as the ingenious Mr.Addisontells us,[49]Vindicated the Honour of his Country, in a Book full of Satire and Ingenuity.
BishopBeveridgeever pass’d for a serious and profound Divine; and his Writings have fix’d that Character upon him among the Religious of the High Church, who have receiv’d hisPrivate Thoughtsand his Volumes ofSermons, likeMannafrom Heaven. And yet possibly never Man had two more severe Attacks made upon him than he had; one by BishopStillingfleet, who inA Vindication of their Majesties Authority to fill the Sees ofthe depriv’d Bishops, &c. occasion’d by Dr.Beveridge’s Refusal of the Bishoprick ofBathandWells, satirizes both hisPrudenceand hisSincerity; and another, by an ingenious Bishop also, who inA short View of Dr.Beveridge’s Writings, has in a most refin’ddrolling mannerrepresented those Writings as abounding in most absurd and ridiculous Divinity.
But one of the justest and finest Pieces ofIrony, and the most timely and seasonably vented, and that deserves perpetual Remembrance, is,Andrewsthe grave Bishop ofWinchester’s Irony, onNealthe grave Bishop ofDurham; of which we have the following Relation in the PoetWaller’sLife, prefix’d before his Works: “On the Day of the Dissolution of the last Parliament of KingJamesthe First, Mr.Waller, out of Curiosity or Respect, went to see the King at Dinner; with whom were Dr.Andrewsthe Bishop ofWinchester, and Dr.NealBishop ofDurham, standing behind his Majesty’s Chair. There happen’d something very extraordinary in the Conversation those Prelates had with the King, on which Mr.Wallerdid often reflect. His Majesty ask’d the Bishops,My Lords, cannot I take my Subjects Money when I want it, without all this Formality in Parliament?The Bishop ofDurhamreadily answer’d,God forbid, Sir, but you should; you are the Breath of our Nostrils. Whereupon the King turn’d and said to the Bishop ofWinchester,Well, my Lord, what say you? Sir, replied the Bishop,I have no Skill to judge of Parliamentary Cases. The King answer’d,No Put-offs, my Lord; answer me presently. Then, Sir, said he,I think it is lawful for you to take my BrotherNeal’sMoney, for he offers it. Mr.Wallersaid the Company was pleas’d with this Answer, and theWit of it seem’d to affect the King.” Which shews the exceeding Aptness and Usefulness of a goodIrony; that can convey an Instruction to a vicious, evil, and tyrannical Prince, highly reflecting on his Conduct, without drawing on his Resentment.
To these famous Divines I might add the most eminent and renowned Philosophers of Antiquity, who, either out of a Contempt of Mankind, or to gratify their peculiar Tempers, or to correct the Vices and Follies of Men, and to instil virtuous Maxims in those who would only receive them in some pleasant way, set up for good Humour, Mirth, and Drollery, as their standing Method of Life, and of Conversation with the World; and have left behind them some of their occasional Sayings upon record, which do more Honour to their Memories than the most elaborate Treatises would have done, and more Good to Men; upon whom a Jest, or witty Saying, is more fitted to operate and make Impression than long Deductions and Reasonings, and particularly on Princes and great Men, who will receive no Instruction but in some very artful and short Way: whereof even the rudeDiogenes, theCynick, has given us a most incomparable Example, in his occasional Conference withAlexander the Great, who was put into such Temper by the mere Freedom and Raillery of the Philosopher, as to take every thing in good part he said to him, and consequently be dispos’d to reflect upon it, and to act with Discretion. At the Head of these Philosophers I placeSocrates, who has very generally in all Ages pass’d for thewisestofMen, and was declared so by anOracle; which, at least, was therein directed and influenc’d by some considerable human Authority, or by the common Sentiments of Men at that time. His Character Ishall give you in the words of the most ingeniousAddison, who was himself a Master ofHumourandDrollery, and practis’d them in Perfection, and with great Success in almost all his Prose-writings. “Socrates, says he[50], who was the greatest Propagator of Morality in the Heathen World, and a Martyr for the Unity of the Godhead, was so famous for the exercise of the Talent [of Raillery and Humour] among the politest People of Antiquity, that he gain’d the Name ofthe Drole.[51]” A Character that intitled him to the greatest Merit, as it most of all enabled him to promote Virtue.
I might also offer to your Confederation the Affair ofComedies; which all polite Governments have permitted, or establish’d, in their several populous and wealthy Cities, as the necessary and proper means to encounter Vice and recommend Virtue, and to employ innocently and usefully the vacant Hours of many, who know not how to employ their Time, or would employ it amiss, by entering into[52]Factions and Cabals to disturb the State; or by Gaming, or by backbiting Conversations about their Neighbours. And asComedies, which were originally very gross, grew by Use more polite and refin’d inSatireandRaillery: so the most celebrated Wits and Statesmen, and Persons of the greatest Quality, have engag’d and join’d with others in them, and performed with the greatest Success and Reputation to themselves; and have been valu’d, not only for their Talents ofIronyandDrollery, which were essential to the Credit of such Performances; but applauded, as acting the virtuous Part ofDroles.
In fine, Books of Satire, Wit, Humour,Ridicule, Drollery, and Irony, are the most read and applauded of all Books, in all Ages, Languages, and Countries. And as those which are exquisite in their kinds, are the standing Entertainment of the Ingenious and Learned; so others, of a lower kind, are to be found among the lower Readers, who sleep under all Works which do not make them merry.
In a word, the Opinions and Practices of Men in all Matters, and especially in Matters of Religion, are generally so absurd and ridiculous that it is impossible for them not to be the Subjects of Ridicule.
For what else can be expected from Men who generally take up their Opinions without any Inquiry into their Reasonableness or Truth, and upon the most incompetent Grounds? I cannot be supposed to injure Mankind, if I consider them under the Character which the very ingenious SirRichard Steelegives of himself; whoacknowledges[53]that (even while he took upon himself the Title of theCensorofGreat Britain, and in so many fine Papers corrects his Countrymen, and particularlythe Freethinkers, whom he directs the Magistrate to punish with Death)it had been with him, as it is with too many others, that a[53]sort of animplicit Religionseem’d the most easy and most comfortable; and that a blind Veneration forhe knew not what,and heknew not whom,stood for every thing important. And heconfesseshewas not enough aware, that this Implicitness of Conduct is the great Engine of Popery, fram’d for the Destruction ofgood Nature,as well asgood Sense. If so great a Man could take up with such a Method, and act the Part of aCensorand Directorof others, in a Matter which he had not at all consider’d, what can be expected else from others, but absurd and ridiculous Opinions and Practices?
And if some Men will fall into absurd and ridiculous Opinions, Habits, Forms, Figures and Grimaces; there will be those who willlaugh, nay, cannot helplaughingat them. Hence most Parties laugh at one another, without the least Scruple, and with great Applause of their own Parties; and the Leaders of the same Party laugh with one another, when they consider the absurd and ridiculous Opinions they profess, and how they cheat and govern their Followers; agreeably to whatCiceroreports ofCato[54], “Vetus autem illudCatonisadmodum scitum est, quimirari seaiebat, quod non rideret haruspex cum haruspicem vidisset.”
I think it may be justly suppos’d, that PopeAlexanderandThomas Becketcould not but laugh together at the Simplicity and Weakness of their Followers, the Papists, who receiv’d for truth the following Story. It was told as a Fact[55], “that whenThomas Becket, who never drank any thing but Water, sat at Table withPope Alexander, and that his Holiness would needs taste of his Cup; lest his abstemiousness should be known, God turn’d the Water into Wine: so that thePopefound nothing but Wine in the Cup. But whenBecketpledg’d him, it was turn’d into Water again.”
Laughingtherefore, andRidiculeinserious Matters, go round the World with no inconsiderable Applause, and seem highly proper for this World of Nonsense and Folly. To hinderlaughingupon such just Occasions as are given, is almost all oneas to hinderbreathing. A very witty, drolling, Dramatick Poet, and of the first Rank for Quality, says in aPrologueto his Auditors.
“Suppose now, at this Instant, one of you“Were tickled by a Fool, what would you do?“’Tis ten to one you’dlaugh:here’s just the Case.“For there are Fools that tickle with their Face.“Your gay Fool tickles with his Dress and Motions;“But yourgrave FoolofFoolswithsilly Notions.“Is it not then unjust that Fops should still“Force one tolaugh,and then take laughing ill?
II.Secondly, If it be a Fault in those reverend Divines, mention’d in the foregoing Article, to useIrony,Drollery,Ridicule, andSatire, in any Case; or if the Fault lies in an exorbitant Use thereof, or in any particular Species ofDrollery; as, for example, suchDrolleryas is to be found in the polemical Writings and Sermons of Dr.South; it is fit some Remedy should be employ’d for the Cure of this Evil. And the Remedy I would propose, should not be to have the Authors punish’d by the Magistrate, any more than for any other Faults in writing; but either to neglect and despise it, as Rage and Scolding, which drop into Oblivion with the Sound, and would have a Life given it by Resentment: or to allow Men tocriticizeandridiculeone another for theirIroniesandDrollery, and to exercise their Wit and Parts against each other; that being the true Method to bring Things to a Standard, to fix the Decency and Propriety of Writing, to teach Men how to write to the Satisfaction of the ingenious, polite, and sensible Part of Mankind: for Decency and Propriety will stand the Test of Ridicule, and triumph over all the false Pretences to Wit; and Indecency and Improprietywill sink under the Trial of Ridicule, as being capable of being baffled by Reason, and justly ridicul’d. And if any kind or degree ofRidiculebe absurd orridiculous, that will appear so upon Trial, no less than the low and grossRidiculeprevalent among the unpolite Part of the World: But that will never appear. On the contrary,Ridiculeof certain kinds, and under reasonable Directions and Rules, and used in proper Time, Place, and Manner, (all which also are only to be found out and fix’d by Trial and Experience) is both a proper and necessary Method of Discourse in many Cases, and especially in the Case ofGravity, when that is attended with Hypocrisy or Imposture, or with Ignorance, or with soureness of Temper and Persecution; all which ought to draw after them theRidiculeandContemptof the Society, which has no other effectual Remedy against such Methods of Imposition. And to determine in some measure the Nature and Extent of theIronyI contend for, asJust, I profess to approve the nobleSarcasmofElijah[56]; wherein he thus mocks thePriestsofBaal, saying in effect to them, “Cry aloud, foryourBaalis a fine God:He is either talking, or he is pursuing, or he is in a Journey; or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked.” And I concur with thePsalmist[57], who thought it no Indecency to say, thathe that sits in Heaven shall laugh them(that is, certain Kings, who wereDavid’s Enemies)to scorn; the Lord shall have them in Derision: and must judge, thatlaughing to scorn, andderidingthe greatest Men upon Earth, even Kings and Princes, to be a laudable and divine Method of dealing with them, who are only to be taught or rebuk’d in some artful way. I also approve of the followingSarcasmorIrony, whichhas a better Authority for it thanElijahor thePsalmist.Mosesintroduces God speaking thus after the Fall[58],Behold the Man is become like one of us, to know Good and Evil!And I think this Passage shews, that the whole Affair of theFall, of which we have so very brief an Account, was a very entertaining Scene; and would have appear’d so, if set forth at large; as indeed it does under the Hands of our Divines, who have supplied that short Narration by various Additions, founded on Conjectures, and particularly under the fine Hand of Dr.Tho. Burnet, who has made a most ingenious Dialogue of what he suppos’d pass’d betweenEveand theSerpent[59]. To say nothing ofMilton’s famousParadise Lost.
In fine, ever since I could read theBible, I was particularly pleas’d with theHistoryofJonas, where such a Representation is made of thatProphet’s Ignorance, Folly, and Peevishness, as exposes him to the utmost Contempt and Scorn, and fixes a perpetualRidiculeon his Character. And let me here observe, that thisHistoryhas had ample Justice done it, in an Explication thereof bytwo[60]very ingenious Authors, who, by most penetrating and happy Criticisms and Reflections, have drawn the Character ofJonasin a more open manner.
III. But,Thirdly, I wave myRemedy, and am ready to come into any Law that shall be made to rectify this suppos’d Fault ofIrony, by punishing those who are guilty of it.
The great Concern is and ought to be, thatthe Liberty of examining into the Truth of Things should bekept up, that Men may have some Sense and Knowledge, and not be theDupesofCheatsandImpostors, or of those who would keep them in the dark, and let them receive nothing but thro’ their Hands. If that be secur’d to us by Authority, I, for my part, am very ready to sacrifice the Privilege ofIrony, tho so much in fashion among all Men; being persuaded, that a great Part of theIronycomplain’d of, has its rise from thewant of Liberty to examine into the Truth of Things; and that if thatLibertywas prevalent, it would, without a Law, prevent all thatIronywhich Men are driven into for want of Liberty to speak plainly, and to protect themselves from the Attacks of those who would take the Advantage to ruin them for direct Assertions; and that such Authors asRabelais,Saint Aldegonde,Blount,Marvel,Thekeringil, and many others, would never have run into that Excess ofBurlesque, for which they are all so famous, had not the Restraint from writingseriouslybeen so great.
“If[61]Men are forbid to speak their Mindsseriouslyon certain Subjects, they will do itironically. If they are forbid at all upon such Subjects, or if they find it dangerous to do so, they will then redouble their Disguise, involve themselves in mysteriousness, and talk so as hardly to be understood, or at least not plainly interpreted by those who are dispos’d to do them a Mischief. And thusRailleryis brought more in fashion, and runs into an Extreme. ’Tis the persecuting Spirit has rais’d thebanteringone: And want of Liberty may account for want of a true Politeness, and for the Corruption or wrong Use of Pleasantry and Humour.
“If in this respect we strain the just Measure of what we callUrbanity, and are apt sometimes to take a buffooning rustick Air, we may thank the ridiculous Solemnity and sour Humour of ourPedagogues: or rather they may thank themselves, if they in particular meet with the heaviest of this kind of Treatment. For it will naturally fall heaviest, where the Constraint has been the severest. The greater the Weight is, the bitterer will be the Satire. The higher the Slavery, the more exquisite the Buffoonery.
“That this is really so, may appear by looking on those Countries where the spiritual Tyranny is highest. For the greatest ofBuffoonsare theItalians: and in their Writings, in their freer sort of Conversations, on their Theatres, and in theirStreets,BuffooneryandBurlesqueare in the highest Vogue. ’Tis the only manner in which the poor cramp’d Wretches can discharge a free Thought. We must yield to ’em the Superiority in this sort of Wit. For what wonder is it if we, who have more Liberty, have less Dexterity in that egregious way ofRailleryandRidicule?”
Liberty ofgraveExamination being fix’d by Law, I am, I say, ready to sacrifice the Privilege ofIrony, and yield to have a Law enacted to prevent it. I am, moreover, willing to leave the drawing up such a Law to your self; who honestly and impartially say[62], that all whodroll, let them be of any Party, let themdroll for the Truth or against it, should be equally punish’d.
Thus this grand Affair ofIrony,Banter, andRidicule; this last persecuting Pretence, upon which you would set the Humours and Passions of People,who are all at quiet, on float, and make a Fermentation, and raise a Persecution against particular People, seems perfectly settled, by yielding to your own Terms.
IV. Let me here add, that I am apt to think, that when you draw up your Law, you will find it so very difficult to settle the Point ofDecencyin Writing, in respect to all the various kinds ofIronyandRidicule, that you will be ready to lay aside your Project; and that you will be no more able to settle thatPoint of Decency, than you would be to settle by Law, thatCleanlinessin Clothes, and that Politeness in Dress, Behaviour, and Conversation, which become Men of Quality and Fortune in the World, and should be habitual to them: And that, if you are able to do that to your own Satisfaction, you will find it very difficult to engage the Lawmakers in your Project. For I am persuaded, that if our Lawmakers were, out of a rational Principle, disposed to give Liberty by Law toseriousOpposition to publickly receiv’d Notions, they would not think it of much Importance to make aLawabout a Method ofIrony. They will naturally conclude, that if Men may and ought to be allow’d to writeseriouslyin Opposition to publickly receiv’d Doctrines, they should be allow’d to write in their own way; and will be unwilling to be depriv’d of ingenious and witty Discourses, or such as some of them will judge so, about a Subject whereinserious freeDiscourse is allow’d. Besides, I am apt to think, that you, upon consideration of the Advantages which the Church has receiv’d from theBerkenheads, theHeylins, theRyves’s, theNeedhams, theLestranges, theNalsons, theLesleys, theOldesworths, and others, in theirMercurius Aulicus’s, theirMercurius Pragmaticus’s,theirMercurius Rusticus’s, theirObservators[63], theirHeraclitus Ridens’s,Rehearsals, theirExaminers[64], and the three Volumes against theRights of the Church; from theButlersin theirHudibras’s, and other Burlesque Works upon the Religion and Religious Conduct of the Dissenters; or from theEachards, theTom Browns, andSwifts; or from theParkers[65],Patricks[66],Souths[67],Sherlocks[68],Atterburys[69], andSacheverels[70]; in their Discourses, and Tracts against the Nonconformists, Whigs, Low-Church-men, and Latitudinarians; and other such ironical, satirical, and polemical Divines; and from suchdrollingJudges asHowel,Recorderof London, and the Chief JusticeJefferys, who, in all Causes, whereWhigsor Dissenters were the Persons accus’d and try’d before them, carried on the Trial by a[71]Train of ridicule on them, their Witnesses and Counsel: I say, I am apt to think, that you would be unwilling to be depriv’d of what has been and may be again so serviceable.
I am dispos’d to think that Dr.Snape, who is notoriously known to have gone into the greatest Lengths of Calumny and Satire against BishopHoadley[72], to have fall’n upon the dissenting Clergy in a burlesque and bantering Address to thePeirces, theCalamys, and theBradburys, and to have written a longironical Letterin the Name of theJesuitsto Mr.de la Pilloniere[73], will be thought a very improper Object of Censure for such Employment of his Pen. On the contrary, such sort of Attacks upon such Persons are the most meritorious Parts of a Man’s Life, recommend him as a Person of true and sincere Religion, much more than the strongest Reasoning, and the most regular Life; and pave the way to all the Riches, and Pleasuresand Advantages or Life; not only among those, who, under the Colour of Religion, are carrying on a commonCorporation Causeof Wealth, Power, and Authority, but among many well-meaning People, who allow of all Practices, which they suppose help out theTruth! It seems to me a most prodigious Banter upon us, for Men to talk in general of theImmoralityofRidiculeandIrony, and ofpunishingMen for those Matters, when their own Practice isuniversal IronyandRidiculeof all those who go not with them, anduniversal ApplauseandEncouragementfor suchRidiculeandIrony, and distinguishing by all the honourable ways imaginable suchdrollingAuthors for their Drollery; and when Punishment forDrolleryis never call’d for, but whenDrolleryis used or employ’d against them!
I don’t know whether you would be willing, if you consider of it, to limit the Stage it self, which has with great Applause and Success, from QueenElizabeth’s Time downwards, ridicul’d the seriousPuritansandDissenters, and that without any Complaints fromgood Churchmen, thatseriousPersons and Things werebanter’danddroll’dupon; and has triumph’d over its fanatical Adversaries in the Person ofPryn, who sufficiently suffer’d for hisHistrio-Mastix, and has been approv’d of as an innocent Diversion by the religious Dr.Patrickin hisFriendly Debate, in the Reign of KingCharlesII. when the Stage was in a very immoral State. I don’t know whether you would be willing even to restrainBartholomew Fair, where the Sect of theNew Prophetswas the Subject of aDrollorPuppet-Show, to the great Satisfaction of the Auditors, who, it may be presum’d, were all good Churchmen,PuritansandDissentersusually declining such Entertainments outofrealorpretendedSeriousness. (“A certain Clergyman thought fit to remark, that KingWilliamcould be no good Churchman, because of his not frequenting thePlay-House.”[74])
V. It will probably be a Motive with you to be against abolishingDrollery, when you reflect that the Men ofIrony, theDrolesandSatirists, have been and always will be very numerous on your side, where they have been and are so much incourag’d for acting that Part, and that they have always been and always will be very few on the side ofHeterodoxy; a Cause wherein an Author by engaging, may hurt his Reputation and Fortune, and can propose nothing to himself but Poverty and Disgrace. I doubt whether you would be for punishing your Friend Dr.Rogers, from whom I just now quoted anIronyon the Author ofThe Scheme of Literal Prophecy consider’d, or any one else, forlaughingat and making sport with him; or whether you would be for punishing the Reverend Mr.Trapp, who implies theJustnessandPropriety of ridiculing Popery; when he says[75], thatPopery is so foolish and absurd, that every body of common Sense mustlaughat it; and when he refers toErasmusfor havingabundantlyridicul’dtheirReliques; and himself putsRidiculein Practice against them, by representing their Doctrines and Practices asridiculously foolish, asdespicably childish, andMatter of mere Scorn; asmonstrous; asSpells,juggling Tricks,gross Cheats,Impostures[76], andwretched Shifts; and in fine, in representing by way ofSpecimen, all theirMiraclesasLegends; of which he says,These and a thousand more such like unreasonable Lies, which a Child of common Sensewould laugh at, are impos’d upon and swallow’d by the ignorant People, and make avery greatPart of the Popish Religion.
And this, in concurrence with Mr.Trapp, I also take to be the Case of Popery, that it must make Menlaugh; and that it is much easier to be gravely disposed in reading aStage-ComedyorFarce, than in considering and reflecting on theComedyandFarceofPopery; than which, Wit and Folly, and Madness in conjunction, cannot invent or make a thing more ridiculous, according to that Light in which I see their Doctrines, Ceremonies and Worship, the Histories and Legends of their Saints, and the pretended Miracles wrought in their Church; which has hardly any thingseriousin it but its Persecutions, its Murders, its Massacres; all employ’d against the most innocent and virtuous, and the most sensible and learned Men, because they will not beToolsto support Villany and Ignorance.
“Transubstantiation, saysTillotson[77], is not a Controversy of Scripture against Scripture, or of Reason against Reason, but of downright Impudence against the plain meaning of Scripture, and all the Sense and Reason of Mankind.” And accordingly he scruples not to say, in a mostdrollingmanner, that “Transubstantiation is one of the chief of theRomanChurch’slegerdemainandjuggling Tricksof Falshood and Imposture; and that in all Probability those common juggling Words ofHocus-pocus, are nothing else but a Corruption ofhoc est corpus, by way of ridiculous Imitation of the Church ofRomein theirTrickofTransubstantiation.” And as hearchlymakes the Introduction of this monstrous Piece ofgrave Nonsenseto be owing to its being at first preach’d by its Promoters withconvenient Gravity andSolemnity[78], which is the common Method of imposing Absurdities on the World; so I think that Doctrine taught with suchconvenient Gravity and Solemnityshould necessarily produceLevity, Laughter and Ridicule, in all intelligent People to whom it is propos’d, who mustsmile, if they can with safety, to see such Stuff vented with a grave Face.
In like manner many other Divines treat and laugh atPopery. Even the solemn and grave Dr.Whitbyhas written a Book againstTransubstantiation, under the Title of “Irrisio Dei Panarii,The Derision of the Breaden God,” in Imitation of the primitive Fathers, who have writtenDerisionsandMockeriesof thePaganReligion.
And he takes the Materials whereof this drolling Performance of his consists, from theholy Scriptures, theApocryphal Books, andWritingsof theholy Fathers, as he tells us in his Title-Page; three inexhaustible Sources of Wit and Irony against the Corrupters of true and genuine Religion. In like manner he turns upon the Popish Clergy the several Arguments urg’d by theJewishClergy in theNew Testament, for the Authority of theJewishChurch; and answers, under thatIrony, all that the Popish Clergy offer in behalf of theAuthorityof theirChurch, in aSermonat the End of hisAnnotationson St.John’sGospel.
Nor do our Divines confine theirDerisions,RidiculeandIronyagainstPoperyto their Treatises and Discourses, but fill theirSermons, and especially theirSermonson theFifthofNovember, and other politicalDays, with infinite Reflections of that Kind. Of theseReflectionsa Popish Author publish’d aSpecimen, in a Book intitled[79],Good Adviceto Pulpits, in order to shame the Church out of their Method ofdrollingandlaughing[80]atPopery. But this Book had no other effect, than to produce aDefenceof thoseSermonsunder the Title ofPulpit Popery true Popery, vindicating the severalDrollRepresentations made ofPoperyin thoseSermons.
Of thesedrollingReflections cited by the Popish Author out of our Church ofEngland Sermons, take these following for a Specimen of what are to be met with in thoseSermons[81].
“Pilgrimages, going Bare-foot, Hair-shirts, and Whips, with other such Gospel-artillery, are their only Helps to Devotion.——It seems that with them a Man sometimes cannot be a Penitent, unless he also turns Vagabond, and foots it toJerusalem.——He that thinks to expiate a Sin by going bare-foot, does the Penance of a Goose, and only makes one Folly the Atonement of another.Paulindeed was scourg’d and beaten by theJews; but we never read that he beat or scourg’d himself; and if they think his keeping under his Body imports so much, they must first prove that the Body cannot be kept under by a virtuous Mind, and that the Mind cannot be made virtuous but by a Scourge; and consequently, that Thongs and Whipcord are Means of Grace, and Things necessary to Salvation. The truth is, if Mens Religion lies no deeper than their Skin, it is possible they may scourge themselves into very great Improvements.——But they will find that bodily Exercise touches not the Soul; and consequently that in this whole Course they are like Men out of the way: let them flash on never so fast, theyare not at all nearer their Journey’s-end: And howsoever they deceive themselves and others, they may as well expect to bring a Cart, as a Soul, to Heaven.
“What say you to the Popish Doctrine of theSacrifice of the Mass.——According to this Doctrine, our blessed Saviour must still, to the end of the World, be laid hold on by Sinners, be ground with their Teeth, and sent down into their impure Paunches, as often as the Priest shall pronounce this Charm,hoc est corpus meum: and it seems that he was a false Prophet, when he said upon the Cross,It is finish’d, seeing there was such an infinite deal ofloathsom Drudgerystill to be undergone.
“ForPurgatory, ’tis not material in it self, whether it be, or where it be, no more than the World in the Moon; but so long as that false Fire serves to maintain a true one, and his Holiness’s Kitchen smokes with the Rents he receives for releasing Souls from thence, which never came there, it concerns him and his to see to it, that it be not suffer’d to go out.”
An ingenious Author, SirRichard Steel, has of late made aDedicationto hisHolinessthePopehimself, before a Book entitled,An Account of the State of the Roman Catholick Religion throughout the World, &c. In whichDedication, that most exalted Clergyman thePope, that [suppos’d] infallible Dictator in Religion, and most grave Person; who, ifseriousMatters and Persons were always to be treatedseriously, may vie with any other Mortal for a Right toseriousTreatment; is expos’d by incomparableDrolleryandIronyto the utmost Contempt, to the universal Satisfaction of Protestant Readers, who have been pleas’d to see a gross Impostor, howeverrespected and ador’d by godly and serious Papists, so treated.
VI. In fine, it is suited to the common Practice of this Nation to ridiculePoperyas well asNonconformity; and tho severalgraveBooks, written among us against Popery, in the Reign of KingJamesII. (of which yet theRomishPriests complain’d, as treating the King’s[82]Religionwith Contempt) were then very well receiv’d and applauded for Learning and strength of Arguing; yet, I believe, it may with more Propriety be said, that KingJamesII. andPoperywere[83]laugh’dorLilli-bullero’d, than that they wereargu’dout of the Kingdom.
The reading theKing’s Declaration of Indulgencein Churches 1688, had this fatalJestput upon it by a reverend Divine, “Who pleasantly told his People,That tho he was obliged to read it, they were not obliged to hear it[84]; and stop’d till they all went out, and then he read it to the Walls.” To which may be added, the famous Mr.Wallop’s excellent Comparison of thatDeclarationupon the Instant of its Publication, tothe scaffolding of St.Paul’s Church; which, as soon as the Building was finish’d, would be pull’d down.
BishopBurnetcelebrates, with the greatest Justness, our Taste, and indeed the Taste of the World in this Respect, when he relates howPoperywas then used among us; and he recites some of theJestswhich passed and were received with universal Applause. He tells us[85], “The Court was now (that is, in 1686,) much set on making Converts, which fail’d in most Instances, and produc’dRepartees; that whether true or false, were much repeated,and were heard with great Satisfaction. The Earl ofMulgrave(since Duke ofBuckinghamshire) was Lord Chamberlain; he was apt to comply in every thing that he thought might be acceptable, for he went with the King to Mass, and kneeled at it; and being look’d on as indifferent to all Religions, the Priests made an Attack upon him: He heard themgravelyarguing forTransubstantiation. He told them he was willing to receive Instruction; he had taken much Pains to bring himself to believe in God, who made the World and all Men in it: But it must not be an ordinary Force of Argument that could make him believe that Man was quits with God, and made God again. The Earl ofMiddletonhad marry’d into a Popish Family, and was a Man of great Parts and a generous Temper, but of loose Principles in Religion; so a Priest was sent to instruct him. He began withTransubstantiation, of which he said he would convince him immediately: And began thus, You believe theTrinity.Middletonstop’d him, and said, who told you so? At which he seem’d amazed. So the Earl said, he expected he should convince him of his Belief, but not question him of his own: With this the Priest was so disorder’d, that he could proceed no farther. One Day the King gave the Duke ofNorfolkthe Sword of State to carry before him to the Chappel, and he stood at the Door. Upon which the King said to him, My Lord, your Father would have gone farther. To which the Duke answer’d, Your Majesty’s Father was the better Man, and he would not have gone so far.Kirkwas also spoken to, to change his Religion, and he reply’d briskly, that he was already pre-engag’d, forhe had promised the King ofMorocco,that if everhe chang’d his Religion he would turnMahometan.” When K.Jamessent anIrishPriest to convert the D. ofBucks[Villers] the said Duke entertain’d the Priest with a Bottle, and engag’d him in aDialogue, which the Duke afterwards caus’d to be printed, to the no small Mortification of all Papists, who were therein exceedingly ridicul’d, and to the Triumph of all good Churchmen, who are never better pleas’d, than when they have theLaughon their side.
At this time also were publish’d two merry Books, by a couple of our Divines, with express View to make Protestants laugh atPopery, as at aFarce; and they were,The School of the Eucharist, wherein is a Collection of ridiculousMiracles, pretended to be wrought to support the Truth ofTransubstantiation, andPurgatory prov’d by Miracles.
I must not omit another incomparable Piece of Wit and Raillery againstPopery, publish’d at that time. It seems the famous Poet,Dryden, thought fit to declare himself aRoman Catholick; and had, as ’tis said, aPenanceinjoyn’d him by his Confessor, for having formerly writtenThe Spanish Fryar, of composing someTreatisein apoetical wayforPopery, and against theReformation. This he executed in aPoem, intituled,The Hind and Panther; which, setting aside the Absurdity of the Matters therein asserted, and of the several Arguments to maintain them, is, in other Respects, one of the most mean Compositions that ever the Press produc’d. Was it proper to pass over in silence such a Work, from whence probably the Popish Party expected great Matters, as knowing the Efficacy of Poetry, and being Witnesses of the Success the Author had had in hisAbsalomandAchitophelagainst theWhigs? Was it proper to writeseriouslyandgravelyagainst a Book, wherein the Author every where aims at Wit, Irony, and Burlesque, and does himself makeso ridiculous a Figure, as to be a standing Jest throughout the whole? Was not the Convert himself, as such, aJest, or as professing any Religion, aJest; who argu’d for Pay, and spoke as he was brib’d, and would have profess’d any Opinions, as is the Mode and Practice of the World, to which Salary and Preferments are annexed? Some ingenious Persons of the Times took a better Method, and agreeably to the Temper and Disposition of our Countrymen, and to the nature ofDryden’s Attack, and his interested Writing for Religion, made a Return in a Paper intituled,The Hind and Panther transvers’d to the Story of the Country-Mouse and City-Mouse: Out of which, for a Specimen ofjust Irony, andfine Raillery, I will give you the following Passage.
“Sirrah, saysBrindle,thou hast brought usWine,“Sour to my Taste, and to my Eyes unfine.“SaysWill,All Gentlemen like it. Ah! saysWhite,“What is approved by them must needs be right.“’Tis true, I thought it bad, but if theHouse“Commend it, I submit, aprivate Mouse.“Nor to their Catholick Consent oppose“My erring Judgment and reforming Nose.“[86]Why, what a Devil, shan’t I trust my Eyes,“Must I drink Stum, because the Rascal lies,“And palms upon usCatholickConsent,“To givesophisticated BrewingsVent?“SaysWhite,what antient Evidence can sway,“If you must argue thus and not obey?“Drawersmust be trusted, thro’ whose hands convey’d“You take the Liquor, or you spoil the Trade.“For sure those honestFellowshave no Knack“Of putting off stum’d Claret forPontack.“How long alas! would the poor Vintner last,“If all that drink mustjudge,and every Guest“Be allow’d to have an understandingTaste?
VII. I question whether High-Church would be willing to have the reverend Author of theTale of a Tub, one of the greatestDrolesthat ever appear’d upon the Stage of the World, punish’d for that or any other of hisdrollingWorks: For tho religious Matters, and all the various Forms of Christianity have therein a considerable Share ofRidicule; yet in regard of hisDrolleryupon theWhigs,Dissenters, and theWarwithFrance(things of asseriousand weighty Consideration, and as much affecting the Peace of Society, asJustificationbyFaith only,Predestination,Transubstantiation, orConstansubstantiation, orQuestionsaboutreligious Ceremonies, or any such interested Matters) theConvocationin their famousRepresentationof theProfanenessandBlasphemyof the Nation, took no notice of hisdrollingon Christianity: And his Usefulness inDrolleryandRidiculewas deem’d sufficient by thePiousQueenAnne, and herpious Ministry, to intitle him to a Church Preferment of several hundred Poundsper Ann.[87]which she bestow’d upon him, notwithstanding afanatick High-Churchman, who weakly thoughtSeriousnessin Religion of more use to High-Church thanDrollery, and attempted to hinder his Promotion, by representing to her Majesty, “What a Scandal it would be both to Church and State to bestow Preferment upon a Clergyman, who was hardly suspected of being a Christian.” Besides, High-Church receives daily most signal Services from his drolling Capacity, which has of late exerted itself on the Jacobite Stage ofMist’sandFogg’s Journal, and in other little Papers publish’d inIreland; in which he endeavours to expose the present Administration of publick Affairs to contempt, to inflame theIrishNation against theEnglish, and to make them throw off all Subjection to theEnglishGovernment, to satirize BishopBurnetand otherWhigBishops; and, in fine, to pave the way for a new or Popish Revolution, as far as choosing the most proper Topicks of Invective, and treating of them in the way ofDrollery, can do.