The American Republican gazette — Concord, N.H., 1803-04-14 00:00:00, page 1

niniilimiMiMM
THURSDAY, APRIL 14, 180 Q
AMERICAN REPUBLICAN GAZETTE.
—■« I— Ml J—Ml yq...,..., .!»»■»! n 1— -- J ■!! ■- ■ ^l.l 1 11 !.1 ** I. 1.,. t I Ji ,„., Ji.. .■ ,| 11, i, »inH^wAi»ilt»i I .!ft> lli l*' l ! i "**■,?. Tt2%^/***V 'l l *"*'.“■?""**"'"' ".''"' ""^ —- ißi MWiMii i ■;
PRINTED AND PUBLISHED AT CONCORD, (NEWHAMPSHIRE,) BY E. RUSSELL. <%
The Scriptures Defended,
THREE LETTERS.
[Concluded from our lafl.]
From the Aurora.
Rev. Mr. GEMMIL to T. PAINE.
Great Galley, 21st Feb. 1803.
Sir, TNthe Aurora of the Ift inst.
I appeared a letter,ddrefled to
you by the pious and venerable par.-
riot Samuel Adams. Your answer,
which the fame paper presented to the
public, merited in my opinion a reply.
For that reply, I have till this time,
waited in vain. I therefore take the
liberty of tfanfmitting to you, by the
fame public conveyance, a fewtho'^s
on the most prominent parts of your
letter. This liberty I am persuaded
you will indulge in one who with plea
fore, and with gratitude to the author,
often reviews the intrinsic merit and
memorable effeds of your writings in'
favour of the independence of the
-United States.
• " The books, you fay, that com
pose the New Testament, were voted
by yeas and nays to be the word of
God, as we now vote a law, by the
popifh councils of Nice and Laodi
cea about ,450 years ago. This vote
may appear authority enough to some
) and hot authority, enough 10 others.
It is proper, however, that every bo
dy should know the fad." You alio
affirm that 6; BifhopJVatfon acknowl
edged this fad."
This, fir, is an extraordinary pa
ragraph.- But the mild and the
forbearing spirit of the gospel and the
example of its benevolent author for
bid me to use the language, here,
which to many, it may seem to merit.
Far am I from charging you with the
base crime of intentional fallhood. I
shall not ascribe to you, an ignorance
of ecclesiastical hiftory which would
be reproachful to a schoolboy profef
fing to have read it. I shall impute
to ^inadvertence or precipitance, or
some left culpable cause, a statement
in this paragraph, which is absolutely
falfe. The idea which you mean to
convey and impress is (in your own
words extraded from the age of rea
son) that " ther^ was no such book as
the New Testament till more than
300 years after the time that Christ is
said to have lived :" or that the orig
in of that book was not believed to
be divine before the council of Nice
or Laodicea.
You well know, fir,that Clemenes,
Ignatius, arid Polycarp were cotenp
porary with the apostles themselves.
You well know that Justin, Irenaeus,
Theophilus, Melito, and Tertullian,
lived in the second century immedi
ately succeeding those who were the
companions of the apostles. You are
hot ignorant that Julius Africanus,
Ammonius, Orfgen, and Dionyfius of
Alexandria, lived and wrote before
the year 306. And if, when writing
to Mr. Adams, you had called up your
historical knowledge, you would have
been perfectly convinced that by the
writings of„thefe distinguished men
colleaively taken, the following prop
©fitions are proved to be true, viz.
$ ; ! I ,—-— — I : I i : - ■ — I 4
" Error of Opinion may be tolerated, where Reason is left free to combat it.—©jerffy fyeMffltamCH HS ^ fflg Back Os Safety.."— Jefferson.
,utCT^^Q^im=tm^=^#E=CTteratE^^
LIBERTY AND THE CONSTITUTION.. -7
from die time of the apostles the books
which compose the New Testament,
were quoted and alluded to with pe
culiar refpea as books sacred, divine
and infallible. They were collected
into a diftina volume ; publicly read
and expounded in religious assem
blies; commentaries on them written,
and formal catalogues of then pub
lilted long before the council of Nice
orLaodicea. In the year 178 Meli
to exprefsiy distinguishes the Old
Testament from the New. About 20
years later, this volume is by Tertul
lian called " the New Testament." —
And yet unfortunately for you, thro'
your zeal for infidelity you have in
the age of reason, averted, and in your
letter to Mr. Adams, injinuated, that
no such book as the New Testament
existed till more than 300 years after
the time of Christ. These proposi
tions I without any hatred affirm to
be true? "And it is proper that ev
ery body should know the fad,"
, Bishop Watson, you observe, has
acknowledged the truth of your a(-
fertion.^ Permit me, fir, without im
peaching your veracity, to corred
your misconception of, the meaning of
that eminently learned and pious pre
late, whose candour in controversy ii
,a most amiable pattern to infidels and
to Christians. He tells you that 27
books orpar& compose the New Tes
tament: that refoeding seven (and
I;hbfe the 4 footy:#) °fthofe parts, f^me"
'doubts were at firft entertained ; and
that the question concerning these
might be decided, as all questions con'
cerning opinions mufl be, by Vote. —
I But he tells you further, (and gives
you authority for what he lays) mat
“ the other twenty parts were owned
as canonical at all times, and by all#
Christians." " I hold i<' faith he "to
be a certain fad that all the books of
which the New Testament is compos
ed, were written, and most of them re-<
ceived by all Christians within a few
years after his death." Is this what
you call an acknowledgment that the,
' books which compose the New Testa
ment, were voted by yeas and nays to
be the word of God about 1450 years
And what if your aflertion tfere lit
erally true ? What if, not only seven
but all the books which compose the
New Testament had been adually de
clared, by a vote of the council of
Laodicea, to be the word of God?
Would this be any reasonable ground
either of doub, to the believer, or of
triumph to the infidel ? Would this
prove either that these books did not
exist, or were not acknowledged to be
divine, prior to that event ?
•Suppose the sophistry of ingenious
and industrious infidels could, in some
individuals or churches in the United
States, shake the credit with which the
holy scriptures are, at this day, regard
:ed. Suppole these individuals or
;churches should, for their own fatis
-Ihairing submit the question to the in.
j veftigation and decision of the gene
ral convention of the episcopal church
in May next—Suppose that conven
! tion, after a learned, full and free dit^
I cuffion, should b their votes declare
I that the New Testament is the .word^
I of God, and a pcrfe& rule of faith and
—— — ^— — == ^^
the,
praaice—Would this vote imply, or
would it prove to succeeding genera
tions, that the divine authority of the
New Testament was never acknowl
edged " till voted by the episcopal
convention of 1803 ?"., The answer
10 this question is so obyious, that|he
expression of it would insult your un
derstanding. Nor need I, to guard
the feebleft intelle^ agaipft the falla
cy of your arguments, fay, that not
withstanding such a vote, it would be
an eternal truth that for many hundred
) ears before that codvention, the New
Testament was received as divine by
a)l Christians, in all countries, and of
every denomination.
You address to Mr. Adams a scrip
ture phrase for those clergymen who
have co-operated with certain states
; men to abolish our representative sys
tem of government: " Thou (halt not
revile the gods, nor cuffe the rulers pf
thy people," « But those mini fters,
you fay, such as Dr. Emmons, curse
ruler and people both, so, the major
ity are politically the people."
I am one of those whom you are
pleased so often to honor with the
name of priests. And yet I perfectly
coincide with you in reprobating the
part which too many of them have
a€l^d during the political animalities
which for a few years, have convulsed,
aty|*at one time, endangered the e<-
g/^efice;of onr government. Norman
the severity of yenr censure eahiy
exceed their deserts.—Same of them
Ihave doubt/efs been deceived.—Oth
ers impelled by native pride, or aris
tocratic principles, or the prosed
I of gain or the hope of elevation, have
exerted all the influence attached
to their profeffion in behalf of a
faQion combined for the deftru&ion
of our excellent constitution and the
establishment of a monarchy bn its
ruins. On your return to this counx
try they raised against you, (what you
call " the war whoop of monarchical
prjeftcraft," but) what I call the voice
of federal hypocrisy. Your infidelity
was the oftenJiHe, your republican pen
the real ground oftheir alarm. For
no one deserving the name of a min
rifter of the gospel can seriously be
lieve, what they affected to fear, that
the religion of Jesus can be material
ly affected by the pre fence or ab
sence of Mr. Paine. In the book
which bears the name (but not the
evidence) of the Age of,Rcafon, they
have seen your molt poisoned arrow,
aimed with your utinoft (kill, and ex
erted with all your might, against that
religion. They have seen in that
book, but little more than the objec
lions, I had aliqoft said cavils and
quibbles, which, for ages pah, have of
ten been raised by inhaels, and as of.
ten vanquished by the force of rea
son. They have seen, in that bpok,
nothing new among thole objections,
except the boldness with whiehjhey
are revived and the blasphemy of the
language in which they are present
ed. They have seen that book, like
its predecessor, made the talk of a day,
and fallen into general contempt and
universal negle& , And can those fed.
eral clergymen sincerely apprehend,
from your return to America, a dead
ly wound to that religion which has
tiff <^% > \..;•-?
Volumb llL—Number 114.
'«^^^:E=^^^^:ettci^=::QffZiM:M=^£mz;rf:tt^^;::=CT:;=tt^H^&^ECT=tra:^==re=o'°°'"' '
• already unimpaired, unenfeebled, un.
sullied, sustained the learning of Por.
phyry, the power of Julien, the elo
bquence of Bolingbroke, the raillery
of Voltair, the subtlety of Home, arid
% the blasphemy of Paine.
Under the administration oftheir
favorite chief, their private encomia
urns and their public prayers arid eu
logies in his behalf were abundant,
and exceeded in extravagance by no
thing but the profufion and malignan
cy of the abuse which they bestowed
on those who were constrained by the
force of rerfon and integrity, to disc -
approve some of his measures. But
since the 4th of March ißai,toq ma-,
ny of them have omitted a weekly and
public fupplicatiqn for the firft mag
istrate of our country. They havej
zealously engaged in supporting anl
eastern newspaper, whose avowed o^^al
je& is opposition to his adminiftrationl
and to the great majority of the peo^a
ple.--——With all their profeffional ,
ftrengm they have swelled de ^'s= ;
of calumny to stain his repu a ton, : > fc
enfeeble his hands, to fubje' io it;
verfal contempt him and the govern,
ment, over which the proyidemx bl,
God has appointed him to pr<hde,
But, fir, the number of these n:n'
ters is comparatively small, and iik'
were greater, their conduct however
repfehenflbleibitfelf, ought not to be
viewed as a reproach to that divine f
religion "uffioL deciu:v3;h? <^^^% | ?'< ''4
to be the ^ minister of God"—which
commands us to "pray for all that
are in authority"—to " render honor
to whom honor is ||ue" —and to be
fubje& to the constituted authorities
" not only for wrath, but also for con
feience fake." And yet Ido not he
sitate to lay, that this condud has
done more injury to the cause of our
redeemer, than the boldness and ridi
cule, and blasphemy which you dis
play in mentioning his name, his gos
pel and the office of his ministers.
"Thou shalt not revile the Gods,"
is the firft part ofthe verse which you
quote. On this you fay, "it makes
no-part of my scripture, I believe but
one God."
I am fore you will not esteem me
uncandid when I fay that you w^ by
this to insinuate that the scriptures ad
mit aplurality of Gods, and to con,raft
this folly with the wifdo» of infideli
ty which acknowledges but one. Long,
fir, did the world experience the ut
most efforts' of natural reason in in
vestigating the nature and perfe& ions
of deity. And what were the effe&s
of those efforts? Every temple even
of enlightened Rome and phiiofophic
Greece was crouded with gods: and
the proud philosopher as well as the
humble peasant, bowed in humble ad-'
oration to departed profligates and
harlots, to bulls, to calves vd to rep
tiles. And can you imagine that, if
you had been cotemporary with the
sages of antiquity, your profoundcr
researches would have corre&ed this
^ predominant error; would you have*
banished from the mindstf Plates, A
riftofy Cicero, &c. their doubt; r<-
fpedirig the nature, number and, per
fedions of the Gods, and of the foul's
immortality? No, fir—Your raod.
elly repels with indignation, the ta