Читать книгу The History of Persecution - Samuel Chandler - Страница 5

Table of Contents

The Rev. Dr. Samuel Chandler was descended from ancestors heartily engaged in the cause of Nonconformity, and great sufferers for liberty of conscience. His paternal grandfather was a respectable tradesman at Taunton, in Somersetshire. He was much injured in his fortune by the persecutions under Charles the Second, but “he took joyfully the spoiling of his goods, knowing in himself that he had in heaven a better and an enduring substance.”

The father of Dr. Chandler was a dissenting minister of considerable worth and abilities, who spent the greater part of his life in the city of Bath, where he maintained an honourable name.

Our author was born at Hungerford, in Berkshire, in the year 1693; his father being at that time the pastor of a congregation of protestant dissenters in that place. He early discovered a genius for literature, which was carefully cultivated; and being placed under proper masters, he made a very uncommon progress in classical learning, and especially in the Greek tongue. As it was intended by his friends to bring him up for the ministry, he was sent to an academy at Bridgewater, under the care of the Rev. Mr. Moore: but he was soon removed from thence to Gloucester, that he might become a pupil to Mr. Samuel Jones, a dissenting minister of great erudition and abilities, who had opened an academy in that city. This academy was soon transferred to Tewkesbury, at which place Mr. Jones presided over it for many years with very high and deserved reputation. Such was the attention of that gentleman to the morals of his pupils, and to their progress in literature, and such the skill and discernment with which he directed their studies, that it was a singular advantage to be placed under so able and accomplished a tutor. Mr. Chandler made the proper use of so happy a situation; applying himself to his studies with great assiduity, and particularly to critical, biblical, and oriental learning. Among the pupils of Mr. Jones were Mr. Joseph Butler, afterwards Bishop of Durham, and Thomas Secker, afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury. With these eminent persons he contracted a friendship that continued to the end of their lives, notwithstanding the different views by which their conduct was afterwards directed, and the different situations in which they were placed.

Mr. Chandler, having finished his academical studies, began to preach about July, 1714; and being soon distinguished by his talents in the pulpit, he was chosen, in 1716, minister of the Presbyterian congregation at Peckham, near London, in which station he continued some years. Here he entered into the matrimonial state, and began to have an increasing family, when, by the fatal South-sea scheme of 1720, he unfortunately lost the whole fortune which he had received with his wife. His circumstances being thereby embarrassed, and his income as a minister being inadequate to his expences, he engaged in the trade of a bookseller, and kept a shop in the Poultry, London, for about two or three years, still continuing to discharge the duties of the pastoral office. It may not be improper to observe, that in the earlier part of his life, Mr. Chandler was subject to frequent and dangerous fevers; one of which confined him more than three months, and threatened by its effects to disable him for public service. He was therefore advised to confine himself to a vegetable diet, which he accordingly did, and adhered to it for twelve years. This produced so happy an alteration in his constitution, that though he afterwards returned to the usual way of living, he enjoyed an uncommon share of spirits and vigour till seventy.

While Mr. Chandler was minister of the congregation at Peckham, some gentlemen, of the several denominations of dissenters in the city, came to a resolution to set up and support a weekly evening lecture at the Old Jewry, for the winter half year. The subjects to be treated in this lecture were the evidences of natural and revealed religion, and answers to the principal objections against them. Two of the most eminent young ministers among the dissenters were appointed for the execution of this design, of which Mr. Chandler was one, and Mr. afterwards Dr. Lardner, who is so justly celebrated for his learned writings, was another. But after some time this lecture was dropped, and another of the same kind set up, to be preached by one person only; it being judged that it might be thereby conducted with more consistency of reasoning, and uniformity of design; and Mr. Chandler was appointed for this service. In the course of this lecture, he preached some sermons on the confirmation which miracles gave to the divine mission of Christ, and the truth of his religion; and vindicated the argument against the objections of Collins, in his “Discourse of the grounds and reasons of the Christian Religion.” These sermons, by the advice of a friend, he enlarged and threw into the form of a continued treatise, and published, in 8vo. in 1725, under the following title: “A Vindication of the Christian Religion, in two parts: I. A Discourse of the nature and use of miracles. II. An Answer to a late book, entitled, A Discourse of the grounds and reasons of the Christian Religion.” Dr. Leland observes, that in this work our author “clearly vindicates the miracles of our Saviour, and shews, that, as they were circumstanced, they were convincing proofs of his divine mission.” But though Mr. Chandler refuted the arguments of Collins against Christianity, he was not unwilling to do justice to his merit, and therefore candidly said, in the preface to his own book, “The preface to the Discourse of the grounds and reasons is, in my judgment, an excellent defence of the liberty of every one’s judging for himself, and of proposing his opinions to others, and of defending them with the best reasons he can, which every one hath a right to, as a man and a Christian.” Our author also zealously opposed any interference of the civil magistrate in the defence of Christianity: “Though the magistrate’s sword,” says he, “may very fitly be employed to prevent libertinism, or the breach of the public peace by men’s vices, yet the progress of infidelity must be controuled another way, viz. by convincing men’s consciences of the truth of Christianity, and fairly answering their objections against it. Is it not surprising, that men, who take their religion upon trust, and who therefore can know but little of the intrinsic worth of Christianity, or of that strong evidence that there is to support it, should be in pain for it, when they find it attacked by any new objections, or old ones placed in a somewhat different view from what they were before; or that they should call out aloud to the magistrate to prevent the making them, because they know not how otherwise to answer them? But that men of learning and great abilities, whose proper office it is to defend Christianity, by giving the reasons for their faith, and who seem to have both ability and leisure thus to stand up in the behalf of it, should make their appeal to the civil power, and become humble suitors to the magistrate to controul the spirit of infidelity, is strangely surprising. It looks as if they suspected the strength of Christianity; otherwise, one would think they would not invite such strange and foreign aids to their assistance, when they could have more friendly ones nearer at home, that would much more effectually support and protect it; or at least, as though they had some other interest to maintain than the cause of common Christianity; though at the same time they would willingly be thought to have nothing else in view, but the service and honour of it. If the scheme of our modern deists be founded in truth, I cannot help wishing it all good success; and it would be a crime in the civil magistrate, by any methods of violence, to prevent the progress of it: but if, as I believe, Christianity is the cause of God, it will prevail by its own native excellence, and of consequence needs not the assistance of the civil power.” A second edition of this work was published in 1728. Having presented a copy of it to Archbishop Wake, his grace expressed his sense of the value of the favour in the following letter, which is too honourable a testimony to Mr. Chandler’s merit to be omitted. It appears from the letter, that the Archbishop did not then know that the author was any other than a bookseller.

“Sir,

“Though I have been hindered by business, and company extraordinary, the last week, from finishing your good book, yet I am come so near the end of it, that I may venture to pass my judgment upon it, that it is a very good one, and such as I hope will be of service to the end for which you designed it.

“I think you have set the notion of a miracle upon a clear and sure foundation; and by the true distinction of our blessed Saviour, in considering him as a Prophet sent from God, and as the Messiah promised to the Jews, have effectually proved him, by his doctrine and miracles, to be the one, and by his accomplishment of the prophecies of the Old Testament to be the other.

“I cannot but own myself to be surprised, to see so much good learning and just reasoning in a person of your profession; and do think it a pity you should not rather spend your time in writing books, than in selling them. But I am glad, since your circumstances oblige you to the latter, yet you do not wholly omit the former. As we are all, who call ourselves Christians, obliged to you for this performance, in defence of our holy religion, so I must, in particular, return you my thanks for the benefit I have received by it; and own to you that I have, as to myself, been not only usefully entertained, but edified by it. I hope you will receive your reward from God for it. It is the hearty wish of,

“Sir, your obliged friend,

“William Cant.”

“Lambeth House, Feb. 14, 1725.”

Besides gaining the archbishop’s approbation, Mr. Chandler’s performance considerably advanced his reputation in general, and contributed to his receiving an invitation, about the year 1726, to settle as a minister with the congregation in the Old Jewry, which was one of the most respectable in London. Here he continued, first as assistant, and afterwards as pastor, for the space of forty years, and discharged the duties of the ministerial office with great assiduity and ability, being much esteemed and regarded by his own congregation, and acquiring a distinguished reputation both as a preacher and a writer.

In 1727, Mr. Chandler published “Reflections on the conduct of the modern deists, in their late writings against Christianity: occasioned chiefly by two books, entitled, A Discourse of the grounds and reasons, &c. and the Scheme of literal prophecy considered: with a preface, containing some Remarks on Dr. Rogers’s preface to his eight sermons.” In this performance he exposed the unfair methods that were employed by the enemies of Christianity in their attack of it, and the disingenuity of their reasoning; and in his preface, he combated some sentiments which had been advanced by Dr. Rogers, canon residentiary of Wells, and chaplain to the Prince of Wales, to the prejudice of free inquiry, and the right of private judgment. Mr. Chandler, who considered what had been advanced by Dr. Rogers, “in favour of church power and authority,” as strongly savouring of the spirit of persecution, could not refrain from examining the Doctor’s scheme, which was to blend religion and politics together, or to make religion not a personal but a state matter. Accordingly he has offered some very spirited and judicious remarks on this subject, with a design to shew that religion, as it implies a belief of certain principles, and a peculiar method of worshipping God, said to be contained in revelation, is a purely personal matter; and that every man ought to be persuaded in his own mind, of the nature of its proofs, and doctrines, and principles, and to dissent from the public establishment, if he finds it erroneous in any, or every, article of its belief; since no man is to be saved or damned hereafter, for the faith or practice of his superiors in church or state, and because neither nature nor revelation hath given them, nor can give them, a right or power to judge or believe for others.

In 1728, he published, “A Vindication of the antiquity and authority of Daniel’s prophecies, and their application to Jesus Christ; in answer to the objections of the author of the Scheme of literal prophecy considered.” “Among other prophecies of the Old Testament, which the author of the ‘Literal Scheme’ would not allow to have any literal reference to the Messiah, he reckoned those of Daniel; and to make out this the more clearly, he began with endeavouring to prove, that they are no prophecies at all; that the book of Daniel was not written by the famous Daniel mentioned by Ezekiel; and that it contains a manifest reference to, or rather, an history of, things done several hundred years after that Daniel’s time. This attempt to depreciate the authority and antiquity of a book, which our author esteemed a noble testimony to the truth of Christianity, induced him to try whether the ‘Literal Schematist’s’ criticisms were just, and his arguments conclusive; with which view he enters into a particular examination of the Eleven Objections, wherein Mr. Collins had comprised what he had to urge against the book; and, upon the whole, he concludes, that these objections are of no weight, and therefore do not deserve any regard from the thinking and impartial part of mankind. He then produces some distinct arguments to prove the proper antiquity of Daniel’s book; and having so far established its authority, he proceeds to the consideration of the several prophecies contained in it, in order to obviate the exceptions of Mr. Collins against the Christian interpretation of them, and at the same time to shew, that the explications which this writer would substitute in their stead, are founded on palpable mistakes, and consequently false; all which he has executed with great learning and acuteness.”

Mr. Chandler had a strong conviction of the pernicious nature, and dangerous tendency, of the Romish religion, and was desirous of exposing the persecuting spirit by which that church has been so much characterised: and it was with this view that he published, in 1731, in two volumes, 4to., a translation of “The history of the inquisition, by Philip à Limborch:” to which he prefixed, “A large introduction, concerning the rise and progress of persecution, and the real and pretended causes of it.” In this introduction Mr. Chandler says, “I will not deny, but that the appointing persons, whose peculiar office it should be to minister in the external services of public and social worship, is, when under proper regulations, of advantage to the decency and order of divine service. But then I think it of the most pernicious consequence to the liberties of mankind, and absolutely inconsistent with the true prosperity of a nation, as well as with the interest and success of rational religion, to suffer such ministers to become the directors-general of the consciences and faith of others, or publicly to assume, and exercise such a power, as shall oblige others to submit to their determinations, without being convinced of their being wise and reasonable, and never to dispute their spiritual decrees. The very claim of such a power is the highest insolence, and an affront to the common sense and reason of mankind; and wherever it is usurped and allowed, the most abject slavery both of soul and body is almost the unavoidable consequence. For by such a submission to spiritual power, the mind and conscience is actually enslaved; and by being thus rendered passive to the priest, men are naturally prepared for a servile subjection to the prince, and for becoming slaves to the most arbitrary and tyrannical government. And I believe it hath been generally found true by experience, that the same persons who have asserted their own power over others, in matters of religion and conscience, have also asserted the absolute power of the civil magistrate, and been the avowed patrons of those admirable doctrines of passive obedience and non-resistance for the subject.” At the close of this piece our author observes, that the use of the view which he had given of the rise and progress of persecution, was, “to teach men to adhere close to the doctrines and words of Christ and his apostles, to argue for the doctrines of the gospel with meekness and charity, to introduce no new terms of salvation and Christian communion, not to trouble the Christian church with metaphysical subtilties and abstruse questions, that minister to quarrelling and strife, not to pronounce censures, judgments, and anathemas, upon such as may differ from us in speculative truths, not to exclude men from the rights of civil society, nor lay them under any negative or positive discouragements for conscience sake, or for their different usages and rites in the externals of Christian worship; but to remove those which are already laid, and which are as much a scandal to the authors and continuers of them, as they are a burden to those who labour under them.” This piece was written with great learning and acuteness, but was attacked by Dr. Berriman, in a pamphlet, entitled, “Brief remarks on Mr. Chandler’s introduction to the history of the inquisition.” Our author published, in the form of a letter, an answer to these Remarks, in which he defended himself with great spirit. This engaged Dr. Berriman to write “A Review of his remarks;” to which Mr. Chandler replied, in “A second letter to William Berriman, D. D. &c. in which his Review of his remarks on the introduction to the history of the inquisition is considered, and the characters of St. Athanasius, and Martyr Laud, are farther stated and supported.” This publication was soon followed by another, entitled, “A Vindication of a passage of the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of London, in his second pastoral letter, against the misrepresentations of William Berriman, D. D. in a letter to his lordship;” and here the controversy ended. As our author had the firmest persuasion, that there was nothing in the principles of protestant dissenters which rendered them unfit to hold offices in the state, or in corporations, and that it was a manifest injustice to deprive them of the common rights of citizens, he likewise published, in 1732, in 8vo., “The dispute better adjusted about the proper time of applying for a repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts, by shewing that some time is proper; in a letter to the author of the Dispute adjusted, viz. the Right Reverend Dr. Edmund Gibson, Lord Bishop of London.”

Among other learned and useful designs which Mr. Chandler had formed, he began a Commentary on the Prophets; and in 1735, he published, in 4to., “A Paraphrase and critical commentary on the prophecy of Joel;” which he dedicated to the Right Honourable Arthur Onslow, Esq. Speaker of the House of Commons. He afterwards proceeded a great way in the prophecy of Isaiah; but before he had completed it, he met with the MS. lexicon and lectures of the famous Arabic professor Schultens, who much recommends explaining the difficult words and phrases of the Hebrew language, by comparing them with the Arabic. With this light before him, Mr. Chandler determined to study the Hebrew anew, and to drop his commentary till he should thus have satisfied himself, that he had attained the genuine sense of the sacred writings. But this suspension of his design prevented the completion of it; for engagements of a different kind intervened, and he never finished any other commentary on the prophets. He continued, however, to publish a variety of learned works, and displayed a very laudable zeal in support of religious liberty, and of the truth of divine revelation.

In 1736, he published, in 8vo., “The History of Persecution, in four parts; viz. I. Amongst the heathens. II. Under the Christian emperors. III. Under the papacy and inquisition. IV. Amongst protestants. With a preface, containing remarks on Dr. Rogers’s Vindication of the civil establishment of religion.” In 1741, appeared, in 8vo., “A Vindication of the history of the Old Testament; in answer to the misrepresentations and calumnies of Thomas Morgan, M. D. and Moral Philosopher.” Dr. Leland observes, that in this work of our author he has clearly proved, that Morgan “hath been guilty of manifest falsehoods, and of the most gross perversions of the scripture history, even in those very instances in which he assures his reader he has kept close to the accounts given by the Hebrew historians.” He likewise published, in opposition to the same writer, in 1742, “A Defence of the prime ministry and character of Joseph.”

In 1744, Mr. Chandler published, in 8vo., “The witnesses of the resurrection of Jesus Christ reexamined, and their testimony proved entirely consistent.” This was a very important controversy, which was at that time much agitated; and Dr. Leland, who stiles our author’s piece upon the subject “a valuable treatise,” observes, that, in his last chapter, “he hath summed up the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus with great clearness and judgment.” In 1748, he published, in 8vo., “The case of subscription to explanatory articles of faith, as a qualification for admission into the christian ministry, calmly and impartially reviewed; in answer to, 1. A late pamphlet, entitled, The Church of England vindicated, in requiring subscription from the clergy to the Thirty-nine Articles. 2. The Rev. Mr. John White’s Appendix to his third letter to a dissenting gentleman. To which is added, The speech of the Rev. John Alphonso Turretine, previous to the abolition of all subscription at Geneva, translated from a manuscript in the French.” His writings having procured him a high reputation for learning and abilities, he might easily have obtained a doctor’s degree in divinity, and offers of that kind were made him; but for some time he declined the acceptance of a diploma, and, as he once said, in the pleasantness of conversation, because so many blockheads had been made doctors. However, upon making a visit to Scotland, in company with his friend, the Earl of Findlater and Seafield, he, with great propriety, accepted of this honour, which was conferred upon him without solicitation, and with every mark of respect, by the two universities of Edinburgh and Glasgow. He had, likewise, the honour of being afterwards elected a fellow of the Royal Society, and of the Society of Antiquaries.

On the death of King George the Second, in 1760, Dr. Chandler published a sermon on that event, in which he compared that prince to King David. This gave rise to a pamphlet, which was printed in the year 1761, entitled, “The history of the man after God’s own heart;” wherein the author ventured to exhibit King David as an example of perfidy, lust, and cruelty, fit only to be ranked with a Nero, or a Caligula; and complained of the insult that had been offered to the memory of the late British monarch, by Dr. Chandler’s parallel between him and the King of Israel. This attack occasioned Dr. Chandler to publish, in the following year, “A Review of the history of the man after God’s own heart; in which the falsehoods and misrepresentations of the historian are exposed and corrected.” In this performance our author, though he could not defend the character of the Jewish prince from all the accusations that were brought against him, yet sufficiently cleared him from many of them. His learning and sagacity also appeared to great advantage in this piece; and his skill in the Hebrew language, and his extensive acquaintance with biblical learning, enabled him to correct a variety of mistakes into which his opponent had fallen, from his taking many things as he found them in our common English translation, without paying any regard to criticisms, various readings of particular passages, or the opinions of expositors and commentators. It must, however, be confessed, that in this controversy Dr. Chandler expressed himself with too much warmth and asperity, which was indeed not unusual with him in his polemical writings. But this being a subject on which he was determined to enter into a full investigation, he prepared for the press a more elaborate work, which was afterwards published in two volumes, 8vo., under the following title: “A Critical history of the life of David: in which the principal events are ranged in order of time: the chief objections of Mr. Bayle, and others, against the character of this prince, and the scripture account of him, and the occurrences of his reign, are examined and refuted; and the psalms which refer to him explained.” As this was the last, it was, likewise, one of the best of Dr. Chandler’s productions. We may safely assert, that, in point of judgment, it is far superior to Dr. Delany’s Life of King David, and that it is every way equal to it with respect to literature. The explanations of the psalms, which relate to the Jewish monarch, are admirable; and the commentary, in particular, on the sixty-eighth psalm, is a masterpiece of criticism. The greatest part of this work was printed off at the time of our author’s death, which happened on the 8th of May, 1766, in his seventy-third year. During the last year of his life, he was visited with frequent returns of a very painful disorder, which he endured with great resignation and Christian fortitude. He repeatedly declared, “that to secure the divine felicity promised by Christ, was the principal and almost the only thing that made life desirable: that to attain this he would gladly die, submitting himself entirely to God, as to the time and manner of death, whose will was most righteous and good; and being persuaded, that all was well, which ended well for eternity.” He was interred in the burying-ground at Bunhill-fields, on the 16th of the month, and his funeral was very honourably attended by ministers, and other gentlemen. He expressly desired by his last will, that no delineation of his character might be given in his funeral sermon, which was preached by Dr. Amory. In this sermon, Dr. Amory, after observing that he was restrained from delineating Dr. Chandler’s character, by his desire expressed in his last will, says, “He had indeed himself made this unnecessary; as his masterly and animated defences of the great doctrines of natural and revealed religion, had abundantly manifested the uncommon greatness and strength of his genius, the large extent and rich variety of his learning, and the solid grounds on which his faith was founded: together with his hearty attachment to the cause of rational piety and Christian liberty, and his abilities for defending them. And after he had ministered for forty years in this place, with so great reputation, it might appear superfluous to inform any present, how full of exalted sentiments of the Deity, how judicious and how spirited his public prayers were, and how instructive and animating his discourses.” He had several children; two sons and a daughter who died before him, and three daughters who survived him, and both married; one of them to the Rev. Dr. Harwood.

Dr. Chandler was a man of very extensive learning, and eminent abilities; his apprehension was quick, and his judgment penetrating; he had a warm and vigorous imagination; he was a very instructive and animated preacher; and his talents in the pulpit, and as a writer, procured him very great and general esteem, not only among the dissenters, but among large numbers of the established church. He was well known, and much respected by many persons of the highest rank, and was offered considerable preferment in the church; Dr. Amory says, that “the high reputation which he had gained, by his defences of the Christian religion, procured him from some of the governors of the established church, the offers of considerable preferment, which he nobly declined. He valued more than these the liberty and integrity of his conscience; and scorned for any worldly considerations to profess as divine truths, doctrines which he did not really believe, and to practise in religion what he did not inwardly approve.” But he steadily rejected every proposition of that kind. He was principally instrumental in the establishment of the fund for relieving the widows and orphans of poor protestant dissenting ministers: the plan of it was first formed by him; and it was by his interest and application to his friends, that many of the subscriptions for its support were procured.

In 1768, four volumes of our author’s sermons were published by Dr. Amory, according to his own directions in his last will; to which was prefixed a neat engraving of him, from an excellent portrait by Mr. Chamberlin. He also expressed a desire to have some of his principal pieces reprinted in four volumes, octavo: proposals were accordingly published for that purpose, but did not meet with sufficient encouragement. But in 1777, another work of our author was published, in one volume, 4to, under the following title: “A Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul to the Galatians and Ephesians, with doctrinal and practical observations: together with a critical and practical commentary on the two Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians.” This work was published from the author’s own manuscript, which was evidently intended for the press, by the Rev. Mr. Nathaniel White, who succeeded him as pastor of the congregation of protestant dissenters in the Old Jewry. That gentleman observes, in the preface to this work, that “there seems to have been something in Dr. Chandler’s genius and strength of mind, as well as in the unremitted course of his studies, which eminently fitted him to comment upon the writings of St. Paul, and to follow that deep and accurate reasoner, through his continued chain of argument, so as to preserve the whole distinct and clear; though, from the peculiar vigour of the apostle’s imagination, the fervour of his affection, the compass of his thought, and the uncommon fulness of his matter, his epistles are remarkable for sudden digressions, long parentheses, remote connections, and unexpected returns to subjects already discussed. These, added to many other circumstances common to ancient writings, must necessarily occasion a considerable degree of obscurity and difficulty, which it is the business of the sacred expositor as much as possible to remove. In this view, the distinguishing excellence of Dr. Chandler’s paraphrase seems to be, that the author adheres most closely and constantly to the spirit of the original, keeps the full idea of the inspired writer, and only that, as far as he could apprehend it, before him, and never steps aside to pick up any hints, however ornamented, which are not directly conveyed, or strongly implied by the apostle: so that, not merely in the text, but in the paraphrase, we find ourselves reading St. Paul himself, though in a language more accommodated to our own conception, and with an illustration which true learning, deep attention to the subject, and uncommon critical sagacity enabled him to afford us.”——“The notes will abundantly recommend the work to the studious and judicious enquirer, who will find no difficulties artfully evaded, or slightly and superficially touched; no unnecessary parade of reading, though many striking proofs of the most extensive and liberal erudition.” Dr. Chandler also left, in his interleaved Bible, a large number of critical notes, chiefly in Latin.