Chapter VII: Front Matter (7)

There were some antiently, whom St. _Chrysostom_[233] writes of, whether _Jews_, _Gentiles_, or _Hereticks_, I know not, who took great offence at the Story of this Wedding, accounting it, from what is related in St. _John_, as a riotous Feast, and that _Jesus_ and his Mother, and his Disciples, not only bore a part in the Revellings, but were most to blame for them, or he should not have countenanced them with his Presence, much less promoted them, by the Change of a large quantity of Water into Wine for the use of a Company, who were already _drunk_ with it. But I, with St. _Chrysostom_, am inclined to believe, that, if _Jesus_ did grace this Wedding with his Presence, there was no Excess encouraged, or so much as suffer'd at it. If he did accept of the Invitation of the Bridegroom, it was for an Opportunity, not so much to turn _Water_ into _Wine_, as to make a proper Discourse to the People of conjugal Duties; and, as he was a Searcher of the Hearts, secretly to admonish the Married of the Sin and Mischief of Adultery; tho' we read not of a seasonable and good Word spoken at it.

And the Empress _Eudocia_, a nursing Mother of the Church, has given us a Poetical, and I hope a fictitious Description of this Wedding. She makes a sumptuous and voluptuous Feast of it; and writes[234] of _Musick_ and _Dancing_ in abundance, enough to make us think of such Mirth and Pastime here, as was unbecoming of a Company of Saints to be present at. Whether it was, that this _Empress_, being only accustom'd to the Excesses of a Court, could form no meaner Conceptions of a Country Wedding; or whether she had any extra-scriptural Authority for what she writ, I know not: But I believe, that, if _Jesus_ was at all at a Marriage-Feast, the whole was conducted with Decency, Order, and Sobriety; and if he there wrought any Miracle, it was to manifest his Glory, to the Conversion of some, and Confirmation of the Faith of others.

And our _Translators_ of the _Bible_ too have given occasion to suspect somewhat of Excess at this Wedding; or they need not have made the Waterpots to hold two or three Firkins apiece. If I had been the Translator, they should not have held above two or three _Pints_ apiece, which Measure is as agreeable to the Original as _Firkin_; neither can I imagine, that _Jesus_, if he did convert Water into Wine, would do it in so large a Measure, for fear of an intemperate abuse of it, but only gave the Company a cast of his miraculous Power, and a little Taste of his Love and Good-will to them.

Such are the Conceptions, that, to the Honour of _Jesus_, I am willing to form of this _Wedding_; and wish that the Letter of the Story did suggest no worse Thoughts of it to us. I should be pleas'd, if no _Infidel_ really could, what I, but for the sake of the Mystery most unwillingly should, write any ludicrous Descants on it. But if this Story had been related of _Apollonius Tyranæus_, as it is of our _Jesus_, I would have ridicul'd and satiriz'd it to the utmost of my Power, and have render'd him and his Disciples of all Nations, as contemptible as I could, for the Belief of it; and I don't doubt, but our Christian _Priests_ would have given me ample Praises and Commendations for so doing. It is said of _Apollonius_, that for the Entertainment of his Friends, he commanded variety of nice Dishes of Meat, together with Bowls of choicest Wines, all on a sudden to descend upon his Table and range themselves in good Order. Whether there was any Truth in this Miracle of _Apollonius_, is not the Question; but Mr. _Chandler_[235] could see a Fault in it, (tho' none in _Jesus_'s Wine at this Wedding) as if it was done for the Pleasure of luxurious Appetites, tho' we read of no Intemperance at it, which can't be said of the _Wedding-Feast_ before us. Our _Divines_ I suppose, no more than myself, believe any thing of the said Miracle in _Apollonius_; but, if it was really wrought, I fancy, I could have lampoon'd him for it, and would have made it a diabolical Work, like that, as Fables go, of the Feastings of _Wizards_ and _Witches_; and our _Divines_ (passing by _Jesus_'s _Wine_ here) would readily, as they are Believers of the Storys of Witchcraft, have struck in with me.

But setting aside that miraculous Story of _Apollonius_, which has but _one_ Voucher; the Case before us is _Jesus_'s _turning Water into Wine_ for the use of Men, who had before _well drank_. How shall I force Nature and Faith to ridicule this Story? How shall I lay aside that profound Veneration for the Holy _Jesus_, which Conversation with the Fathers, more than the Prejudice of Education has begotten in me, and ludicrously here treat him and his Miracle too, as is incumbent upon me, to make way for the Mystery? In short, I can't do it, in my own Name; but having met with a satirical Invective of a supposed Jewish _Rabbi_ to this purpose, I here publish it, that our _Clergy_, as well as myself, may think of an Answer to it, and so prevent that Mischief it may do by being handed about among _Jews_ and _Infidels_, in Manuscript. It is as follows;

"You Christians pay Adoration to _Jesus_, whom you believe to be a
divine Author of Religion, sent of God for the Instruction,
Reformation and Salvation of Mankind, and what induces you to this
Belief of him, is, (besides some obscure Prophecies, which you can't
agree upon, and which neither your selves, nor any body else
understands the Application of) the History of his Miracles: But I
wonder, you should have a good opinion of him for his Miracles,
which, if he wrought no better than what are recorded of him, by
your _Evangelists_, are, if duly consider'd, enough to alienate your
Hearts from him. I can't spare time now to examine into all of them,
but according to the cursory Observation I have made on them, there
is not one so well circumstanced, as to merit a considerate Man's
belief, that it was the Work of an omnipotent, all-wise, just and
good Agent. Some of them are absurd Tales, others foolish Facts,
others unjust Actions, others ludicrous Pranks, others jugling
Tricks, others magical Enchantments; and if many of them had been
better and greater Operations than they are, and of a more useful
and stupendous Nature than they seem to be; yet the first Miracle
that he wrought, _viz._ that of his _turning Water into Wine_ at an
extravagant and voluptuous Wedding at _Cana_ of _Galilee_, is enough
to turn our Stomachs against all the rest. It is in itself enough to
beget in us an ill opinion of _Jesus_, and to prepossess us with an
aversion to his Religion, without farther Examination into it. It is
enough to make us suspect his other Miracles, of what Name soever,
to be of a base, magical, and diabolical Extraction; or he had never
set up for a divine worker of Miracles with so ill a grace. Would
any sober, grave, serious and divine Person, as you Christians
suppose _Jesus_ to have been, have vouchsafed his Presence at a
Wedding; where such Levities, Diversions and Excesses (in our Nation
of the _Jews_, as well as in all others) were indulg'd on such
Occasions, as were not fit to be seen, much less countenanc'd by the
_Saint_, you would make of him. If your _Jesus_, his Mother, and his
Disciples had not been merry Folks in themselves, they would have
declined the Invitation of the _Bridegroom_; nay, it they had been
at all graver and more serious People than ordinary, no Invitation
had been given to such _Spoil-Sports_: But boon Companions they
were, and of comical Conversation, or there had been at a Wedding no
Room for them. You Christians may fancy, what you please, of _Jesus_
and his Mother's Saintship; but the very Text of the Story implies,
they were Lovers of good Fellowship and Excess too, upon occasion;
or he had never, upon her Intimation, turn'd so large a quantity of
Water into Wine, after all or most of the Company were far gone with
it. You may suppose, if you please, that all were sober, and none
intoxicated, and that the Want of Wine proceeded from the abundance
of Company, rather than excess in drinking; but why then did _John_
the _Evangelist_ use the word [Greek: methysthasi], which implies,
they were more than half Seas over? And if _Jesus_ and his Mother
had not both a mind to _top_ them up; the one would not have
requested, nor the other have granted a Miracle to that purpose.
Whether _Jesus_ and his Mother themselves were at all _cut_, as
were others of the Company, is not so certain. She might be an
abstemious Dame for ought we know; tho' if old Stories are true of
her familiarity with a _Soldier_, of whom came her _chara Deûm
Soboles_, in all probability she would take a _Dram_ and a _Bottle_
too. But it looks as if _Jesus_ himself was a little _in_ for't, or
he had never spoke so waspishly and snappishly to his Mother,
saying, _Woman, what have I to do with thee_? _mine Hour is not yet
come_: which was very unbecoming of a dutiful Son, who, excepting
when he ran away from his Parents, and put them to[236] _Sorrow_ and
_Trouble_ to look him up, was, and is still in Heaven, say the
_Roman Catholicks_ a most obedient Child. You modern Christians may
put what Construction you can upon the words above of _Jesus_ to his
Mother, to salve his Credit; but the Fathers of your Church[237]
confess them to be a sharp and surly Reply to her, which, if it did
not proceed from the natural badness of his Temper, derived, _ex
traduce_, from his supposed Father yet, was certainly the effect of
Drinking, and that's the more likely, because it is a _broken_ and
_witless_ Sentence, such as _Fuddlecaps_ utter by halves, when the
_Wine's in_, and the _Wit's out_. Your modern _Commentators_ are
sadly puzzled to make good Sense of this broken and abrupt Sentence
of _Jesus_, and a pertinent Reply of it, to what his Mother said to
him, _they have no Wine_: If you will bear with me, I'll help you
out at this dead lift, and give you the true meaning of it _thus_.
_Jesus_'s Mother being apprised of a deficiency of Wine, and
willing, as well as the _Bridegroom_, that the Company should be
thorowly merry before they parted, intimates to her Son, (whom she
knew to be initiated in the Mysterys of _Bacchus_) _that they had no
Wine_: But before she could finish her Request to him, He, mistaking
her meaning, imagines, she was cautioning against drinking more
Wine, and exhorting him to go home; whereupon he takes her up short
and quick, saying, _Woman, what have you to do with me?_ (for that
too is the _English_ of the _Greek_) I'll not be interrupted in my
Cups, nor break Company; _for mine Hour is not yet come_ to depart:
But after he rightly apprehended her, he goes to work, and rather
than the Company should want their fill, by trick of Art, like a
_Punch-maker_, meliorates Water into what they call'd Wine. That
this is the obvious Interpretation, and natural Paraphrase of the
Words before us, shall be try'd by the Absurd Comments now-a-days
put upon them, that are enough to make a considerate Man laugh, if
not hiss at them.

"Some antient Hereticks[238], very gravely inferr'd from this
Expression, _Woman, what have I to do with thee_, that _Mary_ was
neither a Virgin, nor _Jesus_ her Son; or he had never accosted her
with such blunt Language, that implys, they could not be so akin to
each other. This was a perplexity to St. _Augustin_, and gave him
some trouble to explain the Expression, consistently with her
Virginity (for all she cohabited with the old Carpenter) and his
Filiation. But this being a quibble, that has been long since
dropt, I shall not revive, nor insist on it. But that the
Expression above do's suppose a little Inebriation, in _Jesus_, I
may avert, neither is there a better Solution to be made of it.

"The Fathers of your Church, being sensible of the absurdity,
abruptness, impertinence, pertness, and senslesness of the Passage
before us according to the Letter, had recourse to a mystical and
allegorical Interpretation, as the only way to make it consistent
with the Wisdom, Sobriety and Duty of the Holy _Jesus_. But you
_Moderns_, abandoning Allegories and Mysteries on Miracles, have
endeavour'd, I say, to put other Constructions upon it, as may
comport with the Letter and Credit of Jesus: But how insipid and
sensless they are, I appeal to a reasonable Man, who will give
himself the trouble to consult them, upon the Place, and save me
the Pains of a tedious and nauseous Work to recount them for him.

"But to Humour the Christian Priesthood at this Day, I will suppose
that _Jesus_, and his Mother, and Disciples, tho' Fishermen, to
have been all sober, grave and serious at this Wedding, suitably to
the Opinion that their Followers now would have us to entertain of
them. But then it is hard to conceive them, less than Spectators
and even Encouragers of Excess and Intemperance in others; or
_Jesus_, after their more than sufficient drinking for the
satisfaction of Nature, had never turn'd Water into Wine, nor would
his Mother have requested him to do it, if, I say, they had not a
mind, and took Pleasure in it too, to see the Company quite
_stitch'd up_.

"A sober, prudent and wise Philosopher or _Magician_, in the place
of _Jesus_, if he had an Art or Power to turn Water into Wine,
would never have exercised it upon such an occasion; no, not to
please his best Friends, nor in obedience to the most indulgent
Parent. What would he have said in such a Case? That the Company
had drank sufficiently already, and there was no need of more Wine:
The Bridegroom had kindly and plentifully entertain'd his Guests,
and he would not for the Honour of God, who had endow'd him with a
divine Power, be at the Expence of a Miracle to promote the least
Intemperance. Whether such a Speech and Resolution in _Jesus_, upon
this occasion, would not have been more commendable, than what he
did, let any one judge.

"If I was a Christian, I would, for the Honour of _Jesus_, renounce
this Miracle, and not magnify and extol it as a divine and good
Act, as many now-a-days do. I would give into, and contend for the
Truth of _that Gloss_, which the _Gentiles_ of old[239] by way of
Objection put upon it, _viz. That the Company having exhausted the
Bridegroom's Stock of Wine, and being in Expectation of more_;
Jesus, _rather than the Bridegroom should be put to the Blush for
deficiency, palm'd a false Miracle, by the help of the Governour of
the Feast, upon a drunken Crew; that is, having some spirituous
Liquors at hand, mingled them with a quantity of Water, which the
Governour of the Feast vouch'd to be incomparable good Wine,
miraculously made by_ Jesus: _and the Company being, thro' a
vitiated Palate, uncapable of distinguishing better from worse, and
of discovering the Fraud, admired the Wine and the Miracle; and
applauded_ Jesus _for it, and perhaps became his Disciples upon
it_. If I, I say, was a Disciple of _Jesus_, I would give this
Story such an old turn for his Credit. And I appeal to indifferent
Judges, whether such a daubing of the Miracle, to remove the
Offence of _Infidels_ at this Day, would not be politically and
wisely done of me. Whether modern Christians may be brought into
such a Notion of this supposed Miracle, I know not; but really
there is room enough to suspect such a Fraud in it.

"But supposing _Jesus_'s Change of Water into Wine to have been a
real Miracle; none commission'd of God for the Reformation and
Instruction of Mankind would ever have done it here. Miracles (as
Mr. _Chandler_[240] says excellently well) _must be such things, as
that it is consistent with the Perfections of God, to interest
himself in_; and again, _they must argue not only the Power of God,
but his Love to Mankind, and his Inclination to do them good_;
which this of _Jesus_ is so far from, that it has an evil Aspect
and Tendency, as is above represented; consequently it is to be
rejected, and no longer esteem'd a divine Miracle; neither is
_Jesus_ to be received as a Revealer of God's Will for it, as Mr.
_Chandler_ will bear me witness.

"No doubt on't, but you Christian Priests would have us _Jews_ and
_Infidels_, to believe the whole Company at this Wedding, for all
what is intimated by St. _John_ to the contrary, to consist of
sober and demure Saints. I will suppose so; but then, what occasion
had they at all for Wine? What reason could there be for God's
Power to interpose and make it, especially in so large a quantity,
for them? I can conceive none. If any of the Company had been taken
with fainting Fits; and _Jesus_ for want of a Cordial Bottle, had
created a chearing Drain or two, I could not have found fault with
it; tho' even here, if he had restored the _Patient_ with a word of
his Mouth, it had been a better Miracle, than making of Wine for
him: But that he should make for a Company of Sots, a large
quantity of Wine, of no less than twelve or eighteen Firkins of
_English_ Measure, enough to intoxicate the whole Town of _Cana_ of
_Galilee_, is what can never be accounted for by a Christian, who
should, one would think, wish this Story, for the Reputation of
_Jesus_ expunged out of the New Testament.

"Besides, if _Jesus_ had really and miraculously made Wine, which
no Power or Art of Man could do, he should, to prevent all
suspicion of deceit in the Miracle, have done it without the use of
Water. You Christians say, he is the original Cause of all Things
out of nothing; why then did he not[241] create this Wine out of
nothing? why did he not order the Pots to be emptied of their
Water, if there was any in them, and then with a word of his Mouth
command the filling them with Wine instead of it? Here had been an
unexceptionable Miracle, which no _Infidels_ could have cavil'd at,
for any thing, but the _needlessness_ of it. But this subject
Matter of Water spoils the Credit of the Miracle. The Water-Pots,
it seems, are to be fill'd, before _Jesus_ could do the notable
Feat; is not this enough to make us think, that Jesus was but an
artificial _Punch-maker_? Could not he create Wine without Water
for a Transmutation? Yes, you'll say he could: what was the Reason
then, that he did not? This is a reasonable Question to a learned
Priesthood: and a rational Answer should be given to it. And a
Question too it is that heretofore has been under debate. Some said
that the Water might be used to abate of the[242] immensity of the
Miracle, which otherwise for its greatness might have surpass'd all
Belief. But this Reason will not do. A Miracle can't be too great
in itself, if well attested, to transcend Credit: but it may easily
be too little to conciliate the Faith of a Free-Thinker. The
Fathers of your Church fetch'd a Reason, for the use of Water here,
from the Mystery; but since Mysterys on Miracles are set aside by
the Priesthood of this Age, they are to assign another and good
Reason of their own; or this Miracle is to be rejected, as a Piece
of Art and Craft in the Operator, if for no other Reason than
this, that _Jesus_ used Water to make Wine.

"All that I have to say more to this Miracle, is, that it is to be
wish'd, if Jesus could turn Water into Wine, that he had imparted
the Secret and Power to his Disciples of the _Priesthood_ of all
Ages since, which would have been of greatest Advantage to them in
this World. He has empower'd them, they say, to remit Sins, which
few old Sinners think themselves the less in danger for: And he has
enabled them, some say, to transubstantiate Bread into Flesh, and
Wine into Blood, which none but foolish and superstitious Folks
believe they ever did: And he promised to invest them with a Power
to do greater Miracles than himself, even to remove Mountains, and
to curse Trees; but I thank God, they never were of so strong a
Faith, as to put it in Practice, or we might have heard of the
_natural_ state, as well as we do now of the _civil_ state of some
Countrys, ruin'd and overturn'd by them. But this Power to
transmute _Water into Wine_, without Labour and Expence, would have
been of better worth to them, than all their other Priestly
Offices. Not, that our Conduits would thereupon run with Wine,
instead of Water; or that Wine would be cheaper and more plentiful
than it is now, excepting among themselves, if they could withal
curse Vineyards. They would make the best Penny they a could of
their divine Power. And as surely as they can now fell the
Waterdrops of their Fingers at a Christening, at a good Rate, they
would set a better Price on their miraculously made Wine, and give
a notable Reason for its dearness, _viz._ that Miracles should not
be _cheap_, which would bring them into Contempt, and lessen the
Wonder and Admiration of them."

So ends the Invective of a suppos'd Jewish _Rabbi_ against this Miracle; which our _Divines_, as well as myself, are to consider of an Answer to. Whether they shall think themselves able to answer the rational Parts of it, consistently with the Letter, I know not; but I own myself unable, and believe it impossible for them, to do it: And therefore they must of necessity go along with me to the mystical Interpretation of the Fathers; or this Miracle will turn to the dishonour of _Jesus_, and disadvantage of his Religion.

_Justin Martyr_[243] says, it is absurd to take the Stories of the Marriages and Concubinages of the _Patriarchs_ of the Old Testament in a literal Sense. And indeed, literally consider'd, they are some of them too luscious Tales to be related by divine and inspired Penmen: whereupon he, as well as St. _Paul_ and _Philo-Judæus_[244], turn these Stories for the Honour of God and Edification of his Church, into an Allegory. Consequently, if _Justin_ had had an occasion to speak of this Marriage before us, there's no doubt on't, but he would have made Mystery of all and every Part of it.

To the same purpose _Origen_[245] says, "That since the Law is a shadow of good Things to come, and writes sometimes of Marriages and of Husbands and Wives; we are not to understand it of Marriages according to the Flesh, but of the spiritual Marriage between Christ and his Church. As for Instance, _Abraham_ had two Sons, _&c._ here we ought not to confine our Thoughts to carnal Marriages, and their Offsprings; but to extend them to the Mysteries here signified. And there are almost a thousand other places in Scripture about Marriages; but in every place (_unusquisque Locus castum & divinum de Nuptiis continet Intellectum secundum Expositionem moralem_) is to have a divine, moral, and mystical Construction put on't. Whoever therefore reads the Scriptures about Marriages, and understands no more by them, than carnal Marriages; he errs, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the Power of God." From hence may be easily concluded, what was _Origen_'s opinion about this Marriage in _Cana_ of _Galilee_, if there were no other Passages in him for a Confirmation of it. But to come closer to the Purpose.

St. _Augustin_[246] says, there is Mystery signified in the Story of this Marriage, as in all _Jesus_'s Miracles, which it becomes us to open and search for; till, if possible, we are _inebriated_ with the spiritual and invisible Wine, that _Jesus_ made at this Feast. And again[247] says, Let us then consider the several Particulars of the Story, and what is meant by the six Waterpots; and the Water that is turn'd into Wine; and the Governor of the Feast; and who are the Bridegroom and the Bride; and who is the Mother of _Jesus_ in a Mystery; and what is to be understood by the Marriage.

And again, says St. _Augustin_[248], there is Mystery in this Marriage, or _Jesus_ upon no invitation had gone to it. The Bridegroom is our Lord himself, to whom it is said thou hast reserv'd the good Wine of the Gospel _until now_, that is, until the typified Time of the Celebration of this mystical Marriage, which according to St. _Augustin_[249] is to be on the sixth Age of the World, signified by the six Water-Pots, holding two or three Firkins apiece, that is, all Mankind, as they are divided into the _two_ sorts of _Jews_ and _Gentiles_, or into _three_, as they are descended of the _three_ Sons of _Noah_.

And in another Place, the same St. _Augustin_ interpreting this Story, says[250] thus; "Our Saviour is invited to a Marriage; what can that mean but that the Holy Spirit is courted and invocated by the Church, wishing to be espoused to him? _Jesus_ comes with his Disciples, that is, into a holy Place of a Company of Saints. _Mary_ the Mother of our Lord signifies to him, _that they have no Wine_; so the Church makes known to him, the Deficiency of the Spirit, which she waits for the Power of. And if _Jesus_ calls _Mary_, a Woman; he means the Church, who by Transfiguration may be a Virgin, the Mother, the Spouse of Christ, and a Whore too."

And again St. _Augustin_ explaining[251] what is meant by the Water, and the Wine that it wou'd be turn'd into, at the Time of the spiritual Celebration of this Marriage of Christ with his Spouse of the Church, says plainly enough, that by _Water_ is meant the Letter of the Scriptures; and by the best _Wine_ is to be understood spiritual Interpretations, which would transport the understandings of Men with divine knowledge; and warm their Hearts and Affections into a spiritual _Inebriation_; after the similitude of Wine natural.

St. _Theophilus_ of _Antioch_, a most antient Greek Commentator (who according to _Bishop Smalbroke_ should strictly adhere to the Letter) says[252], that by this Marriage is meant the Conjunction of Christ and his Church, as it is the Tradition of the Old and New Testament. And that _Jesus_ himself is the Bridegroom; and _Moses_ the Governor of the Feast.

Other Fathers, such as St. _Cyril_, St. _Theophylact_ and St. _Jerome_ are of the same mind about the mystical Interpretation of this Marriage, as might be prov'd by Passages out of them, if I had room here to cite them. But I must observe here, that according to the Fathers, the Story of this Marriage is but another Emblem of the Marriage of the Lamb with the Bride of the _New Jerusalem_, spoken of in the _Revelations_, to which all the Fowls of the Air will be invited, that is, spiritual and heavenly minded Christians, who[253] soar and fly aloft in their divine and sublime Contemplations on the anagogical Sense of the Scriptures, which will exhibit those intellectual Dainties, they are there to be entertain'd with.

What I have here said out of the Fathers to the Story of this Marriage, is enough to quicken our _Divines_ to search for the like mystical Interpretation of the whole. The Part of it that's most difficult to be spiritually expounded, is that saying of _Jesus_ to his Mother, _Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine Hour is not yet come._ For the clear interpretation of which, I own, I meet with little in the Fathers. But St. _Augustin_[254] assures us, there's latent Mystery in the words. How then shall we come at it? Why, if we cast away the _Interrogation_, and look upon the Sentence, as ellyptical, like an infinite number of prophetical ones, the Sense paraphrastically, and agreeably to the rest of the Mystery, arises thus: In answer to the Woman of the Church's Expectation of the Wine of the Spirit; _Jesus_ will tell her or make her to understand of what importance it is to her (and himself) to be supply'd with that mystical Wine to her Edification, which it was not his time to pour forth upon the Church, till the Celebration of his Nuptials with her.

And thus have I done with the Miracle of _Jesus_'s turning Water into Wine at a Marriage of _Cana_ of _Galilee_. Whether it be not an absurd and offensive Story according to the Letter, let any one judge. If the supposed Jewish _Rabbi_ has forced a worse Sense upon it, than it will naturally bear, our _Clergy_ may expostulate with him for it, which they hardly will any otherwise than by Exclamations against him, without Reason and Authority. But in the mystical Operation of this Miracle at the Marriage of Christ with his Church, there will be the Wisdom and Power and Goodness of God visible. And it will be a demonstration of _Jesus_'s _Messiahship_, in as much as the Water of the Letter of the Law and the Prophets can't be turn'd into the Wine of spiritual Interpretations, but we must discern how he is the Accomplisher and Fulfiller of them. And so I pass to an

11. _Eleventh_ Miracle of Jesus, _viz._[255] That of his healing a Paralytick, for whom the Roof of the House was broken up to let him down into the Room where _Jesus_ was.

And this Story (without excepting that of the Pool of _Bethesda_) is the most monstrously absurd, improbable and incredible of any according to the Letter. There is not one Miracle of _Jesus_ specifically related, that does not labour under more or less Absurdities, either in Substance or Circumstance: But this, for number and greatness of Absurdities, I think surpasses them all: And the Absurdities of it too are so obvious and stare a Man in the Face, that I wonder they are hitherto overlook'd; and that considerate and intelligent Persons have not before now hesitated and boggled at them. If Interest had not blinded the Eyes of our learned _Clergy_, they would easily have descry'd the Incredibilities and Absurdities of this Story; and in another _Impostor_'s Case presently have pointed them out to the ridicule of his Admirers and Adorers.

If a Man was to torture his Brains for the Invention of a romantick Tale of improbable and surprizing Circumstances, that he might, withal, hope to palm for a Truth, if it was but for a Week or a Day, upon the Faith and Understanding of the Credulous; he could never have presumed, I think, so far upon the weakness of their Intellects, as to imagine any thing so grossly and notoriously contradictory to Sense and Reason, would have gone down with them, as is _this_ before us, which has pass'd currently thro' many Ages of the Church, has been read with attention by the Learned, and revered by the rest of Christians, without any exception, hesitation, or doubt of the Truth of it. In short, so palpable is the falsity of the Story of this Miracle, that it requires no Sagacity to detect it; and was it not for the sake of the Mystery more than to expose the Folly of the _Clergy_ in believing of it, I had never bestow'd the following Pains on it.

The People, it seems, so press'd and throng'd about the Door of the House, where _Jesus_ was, that the Paralytick and his Bearers could not get near it. What did they so throng and press for? Was it to see _Jesus_, who was _without Form and Comeliness_, according to the Prophet _Isaiah_; or, who was one of the most graceful of the Sons of Men, as _Painters_ and _Publius Lentulus_ do describe him? This could not be the Reason of the Croud. Tho' a Person extraordinary, either for Beauty or Deformity may attract the Eyes of the People, and occasion too a Throng about him; yet this could be no Reason for a _Press_ about _Jesus_, at _Capernaum_, where he dwelt, and was commonly seen and well known.

Was it then to hear him preach? Nor this neither. Tho' an excellent Preacher does sometimes, and a very indifferent one does oftener draw multitudes after him; yet _Jesus_, as a Prophet, was without Honour at _Capernaum_, his own Country; consequently, it is not to be supposed that, for his Doctrine, he was so much follow'd here, tho' we read, that he _preach'd the Word unto them_.

Was it then to behold him working of Miracles and curing of the diseased? This is the likeliest Reason of the Crouds and Throng about him. And perhaps it was a Day appointed beforehand for his healing of the diseased, which might occasion a more than ordinary Concourse of the People. But then this Reason would have induced the People to make way for the _Lame_, _Blind_, and _Paralyticks_ to come to _Jesus_; for they frustrated their own Hopes and Expectations of seeing Miracles wrought; and acted more unreasonably than ever Mob did, or can be supposed to do.

But whatever was the Reason of this tumultuous Crouding, which is hard to be accounted for; it's said, the poor _Paralytick_ with his Bearers could not get to the Door of the House for the _Press_, and therefore in all haste is he haul'd to the Top of the House, and let down, thro' a breach of the Roof, into the Room where _Jesus_ was. What need was there of such Haste and Pains to get to _Jesus_ for a Cure? It was but waiting a while, not many Hours, and in all probability the Tumult would be appeas'd, and access easily had to him. But that the Bearers of the poor Man should enterprise a trouble and difficulty, that could not require less Time, than the Tumult could be supposed to last, is a little strange and somewhat incredible.

St. _Chrysostom_ says[256], that the _Paralytick_ saw that the Market-place or Street was throng'd with People, who had obstructed all Passage to the House, where _Jesus_ was; and yet he did not so much as say to his Friends and Bearers, "What's the Reason of this Tumult? Let's stay till it is appeas'd, and the House clear'd of the People, who ere long will depart; and then we shall privately and quietly get admittance to Jesus," But why did he not say so? Any one beside himself and his Bearers, if they had any Reason and Senses about them, would have so argued. St. _Chrysostom_ says, it was their _Faith_ that made them in such haste to get to _Jesus_: But I should have thought their _Faith_ might have work'd _Patience_, and disposed them to stay till Jesus could come out to them, or they get in to him: And it is an Addition to the strangeness and incredibility of this Story, that it did not.

But supposing this _Paralytick_ in such haste and danger of Life, that he could not wait the dispersion of the Tumult, but, for want of a free entrance at the Door, is, cost what it will, to be rais'd to the top of the House, and a breach must be there made for him. The Question is, whether such an Enterprize was or could be feisable and practicable? I have no Conception of the possibility of it. If they could not get to the Door of the House for the Press; of consequence they could not come at the Sides of it. How should they? over the Heads of the People? That's not to be imagined; consequently here's another difficulty in the Story, that renders it yet more strange and incredible.

But, without questioning the possibility and easiness of getting the _Paralytick_ and his Couch over the Heads of the Mob, to the sides of the House; thither he is brought, where we now behold him and his Bearers with their Pullies, Ropes, and Ladders (that were not at hand, nor could suddenly be procured) hauling and heaving him to the top of the House. Of what height the House was, is not of much Consequence. Some for the Credit of the Story may say[257], it was a _very low one_; tho' antient and modern _Commentators_ are pretty well agreed, that it was an _upper-Room_, where _Jesus_ was; consequently the House was at least two Stories high: But if it was much higher, I'll allow that Art and Pullies (which they wanted for the present) would raise the Man and his Bed to the top of it: So we will not dispute nor differ upon that matter. On the top of the House then, we are now to behold the _Paralytick_ and his Bearers with their Hatchets and Hammers, _&c._ (which they forgot to bring with them, for they could not think of any use they should have of them) uncovering the Roof of the House; breaking up _Tiles_, _Spars_, and _Rafters_, and making a Hole, capacious enough for the Man and his Bed to be let thro'. An odd, strange, and unaccountable Work _this_, which, if they had not been cunning Fellows, would hardly have enter'd into their Heads to project. But at work they are, when it was well, if Jesus and his Disciples escaped with only a broken Pate, by the falling of Tiles, _&c._, and if the rest were not almost smother'd with the Dust; for it was over their Heads that the breach was made. Where was the good Man of the House all this while? Would he suffer his House to be thus broken up, and not command them to desist from their foolish and needless Attempt, till the Mob was quell'd, and there was a free entrance at the Door of his House, which could not be long first? Is there nothing in all this, of difficulty and obstruction in the way of the belief of this Story?

Some modern _Commentators_, being aware of these difficulties in this Story, and willing to reconcile Men to the earlier belief of it, say, as _Drusius_[258] did, that the Houses of _Judæa_ were _flat-roof'd, and not ridg'd_: And Doctors, _Lightfoot_ and _Whitby_[259] say, there was a Door on their flat Roofs, by which the _Jews_ used to ascend to the top of their Houses, where they discours'd on the Law and religious Matters; and that it was thro' such a Door, by a little widening of the sides of it, that the _Paralytick_ was let down in the presence of _Jesus_. To which Opinion I would yield, if it was not liable to these Objections, _viz._ that it is not reconcilable to what St. _Luke_ says, of _their letting the Paralytick down thro' the Tiling with his Couch, in the midst, where Jesus was_; nor hardly consistent with what St. _Mark_ says of their _uncovering_ and _breaking up the Roof of the House_: which Expressions the _Evangelists_ had never used, if there had been a Door for him to descend by. But to indulge _Lightfoot_ and _Whitby_ in their Notion; I may ask them, what occasion was there then of widening the doorway, and breaking down the sides of it? They'll say, because the Passage otherwise was too narrow, for the Man's Couch to get thro'. Why then did not they take him out of his Couch, and let him down in a Blanket, a Chair, or a Basket? Or rather, why did not _Jesus_, to prevent this Trouble and Damage to the House, ascend thro' this Door, to the Top of it, and their speak the healing Word to this poor Man? To say, that _Jesus_ could not or would not go up to the Paralytick, I would not, for Fear of an Imputation of Blasphemy against me. Our _Divines_ therefore are to look for, what they'll hardly find, an Answer to the said Question, which will consist with the Wisdom, the Goodness and Honour of _Jesus_; or here will be another and insuperable Bar to the Credibility of this Story.

In short, there are more and greater Difficultys affecting the Credit of this Miracle, on the side of _Jesus_, than any before urg'd. Could not he, as it was antiently[260] objected, have made the Access to himself more easy? Could not he, to prevent all this Trouble and Pains of getting to the Top of the House, and of breaking up the Roof of it, have desired or even forc'd the People to make way for this poor Man and his Bearers? This was not impossible for him to do. If it was hard for another; it was not for him, who was omnipotent. He that could drive his Thousands before him out of the Temple; and draw as many after him into the wilderness, might surely, by Force or Persuasion have made the People, how unreasonably mobbish soever, to retreat. And why did he not? Without a good and satisfactory Answer, which I can't conceive, to this Question, here is the most unaccountable and incredible part of the whole Story, that reflects on the Wisdom, the Power and Goodness of _Jesus_. If there had been no other absurd Circumstances of it, this is enough to spoil its Credit, so far as that I believe it impossible for _Ministers_ of the _Letter_, with all their Wit, Penetration and Sagacity to get over it.

Believe then the Story of this Miracle, thus taken to Pieces, who can? It is such an Accumulation of Absurdities, Improbabilities, and Incredibilities, that a Man of the most easy Faith, if he at all think, can't digest. It's not credible, I said, to suppose, the People of _Capernaum_, where _Jesus_ dwelt, and was well known and little admired, would at all _press_ to see or hear him: And if the occasion of their Concourse was to behold his Miracles; it is less-reasonable to think they would tumultuate to their own disappointment; but rather make way for the diseased, for the satisfaction of their own Curiosity, to come to him: And if they did mob it to their own disappointment, about the Door of the House; it was next to impossible for the poor Man and his Couch to be heav'd over their Heads, and rais'd to the top of it: More unreasonable yet to think, the master of the House would suffer the Roof of it to be so broken up: But most of all against Reason to suppose, _Jesus_ would not give forth the healing word, and prevent all this Labour, or by his divine Power disperse the People, that the _Paralytick_ might have present and easy access to him.

Whether all this be not absolutely shocking of the Credit of this Story, let my Readers judge. In my Opinion, no Tale more monstrously romantick can be told. I don't here question _Jesus_'s Power to heal this Paralytick, nor the miraculousness of the Cure of him: The trouble of that Question is saved me, by the many other incredible Circumstances of the Story, which are such a Contradiction to Sense and Reason, as is not to be equall'd, in any thing, that's commonly receiv'd and believ'd by Mankind. _Cicero_ says, that there is nothing so absurd, which some of the Philosophers have not held. And they might and did, some of them, hold gross Absurdities. But the Letter of the Story of this Miracle before us, which is the Object of the Faith of our learned Priesthood at this Day is a Match for the worst of them.

But as absurd, as this Story is, I expect that our _Clergy_ will be disgusted at my ludicrous display of it; and that Arch Deacon _Stubbs_ in particular will again be ready to exclaim against me, and say, that this is turning a _miraculous Fact_ and a _divine Testimony_ of our Religion into Ridicule. Whereupon it is to be wish'd, _that Arch-Deacon_ would write, what would be a Pleasure to see, a Vindication of this Story. If he can account for the possibility and credibility of the Letter of it, he shall have my leave to make another dull Speech in _Convocation_ against me. And it is not unlikely, but he may say as much for it, as another Man: For as the Story is senseless, so it is the better suited to his Head and Brains. But if he don't, I much question, whether any other Clergyman of more Wit will, appear in Defence of it.

So absurd is the Letter of this Story, that for the Honour of _Jesus_, and Credibility of his Gospel, it is absolutely necessary to turn it into Allegory. To the Fathers then, let us go for their help in this Case. If they did not read me a better Lecture upon this Miracle, than do our modern _Commentators_, I should be almost tempted to renounce my Religion upon it: But as they have rationally and rightly instructed me in its true meaning, so I retain my Christian Faith, and admire the Sublimity of the Mystery, which I am now to give an account of.

By this _Paralitick_, St. _Hilary_[261] says, is to be understood _Mankind_ of all Nations, which opinion too the Fathers held of the _Paralitick_, who was heal'd at the Pool of _Bethesda_. And by his Palsy is not meant any bodily Distemper, but the spiritual Palsy of the Soul, that is, as St. _Augustin_[262] and St. _Jerome_[263] interpret, a dissoluteness of Morals, and an unsteadiness of Faith and Principles, which is the Condition of Mankind at present, who want _Jesus_'s help for the Cure of it. _Eusebius Gallicanus_[264] says, our Saviour's words signify, that it is not a bodily but a spiritual Disease here meant; or he had never said to the Paralytick, _Son, thy Sins are forgiven thee_, which words respect the inward Man, and demonstrate the Palsy here to be a disease Of the Soul.

The Man sick of the Palsy had _four Bearers_. And who are they mystically in this Case? Why, the Fathers[265] understand by them the _four Evangelists_, on whose Faith and Doctrine Mankind is to be carry'd unto Christ; for no Soul can be brought unto him, for the Sanation of his Sins and Errors, but by these _four_.

But to the top of the House is Mankind, thus paralytically diseased, to be carry'd by the four Evangelists, his Bearers. And what then is this House and its Top? The House of _Jesus_ is the intellectual Edifice of the World, otherwise call'd Wisdom's House; of the beautiful Buildings of which the Scriptures prophetically treat: therefore to the _sublime Sense_ of the Scriptures, call'd the Top[266] of the House, is Man to be taken: He is not to abide in the _low and literal Sense_[267] of them, where People _press_ and strive in vain to come to _Jesus_: But if he is taken to the Sublimity of the Scriptures and there _open_[268] _the House_ of Wisdom, he will presently be admitted to the Presence and Knowledge of _Jesus_.

Venerable _Bede_, who is altogether a Transcriber of the Fathers, for which Reason I cite him among the Fathers, says[269], that by the _Tiles_ of the House spoken of in St. _Luke_, is meant the _Letter_ of the Scriptures, which is to be laid open for the manifestation of Christ and of divine Mysteries to the healing of Man's spiritual Palsy, the unsteadiness and dissoluteness of his Morals and Principles.

So much, in short, then to the mystical Interpretation of the Story of this Miracle. The literal Sense of it is so encumber'd with romantick Circumstances, as are enough to turn a Man's Heart against Christianity it self: But in the Mystery there will be a most stupendous Miracle, which will be not only an Argument of _Jesus_'s divine Power, but of his _Messiahship_, as certainly as his House of Wisdom, of which the Scriptures write, is open'd to the Manifestation of his Presence, and to the Cure of Mankind of his paralytical Disease, call'd an instability of Faith and Principles.

And thus have I, in this _Discourse_, taken into Examination three more of _Jesus_'s Miracles; which I submit to the Judgment of my Readers, whether the literal Story of them does not consist of Absurdities, Improbabilities and Incredibilities according to the Proposition before us; and whether there is not a necessity, for the Honour of _Jesus_, to turn them into prophetical and parabolical Narratives of what will be mysteriously and more wonderfully done by him.

My next _Discourse_, if my mind hold, shall treat on the three Stories of _Jesus_'s raising of the dead, _viz._ of the Widow of _Naim_'s Son, of _Jairus_'s Daughter, and of _Lazarus_; after which I will give the literal History of Christ's Resurrection, that sandy Foundation of the Church, a Review; and so conclude my Discourses on the Miracles of our Saviour.

To run thro' all the Miracles of _Jesus_, and handle them in the manner I have done the foregoing, would be a long and tedious Work. But if our _Divines_ shall think, I have selected only those Miracles, which are obnoxious to Cavil and Ridicule; and have omitted others, that literally are a more unexceptionable Testimony of _Jesus_'s divine Power, and Authority; I will, for their Satisfaction take more of them to Task, and give the Letter of their Stories, the like ludicrous treatment. If I mistake not, the Miracles already spoken to, together with those of _Jesus_'s raising of the dead, and of his own Resurrection, are the most famous and remarkable of any others: And according to the Observation I have made on the rest, they are no less but rather more liable to Ridicule and Exception. But if any are of a contrary Opinion, and will let me know, which in their Judgment are more unexceptionable Miracles, I will vouchsafe them an Examination. I am sure there is not one Miracle, which the Fathers of the Church did not turn into Allegory; and if we don't at this Day make mystical Operations of them, they will none of them according to the Letter, stand their Ground, nor abide the Test of a critical Inquiry into them.

I don't expect, that this _Discourse_ will be any more pleasing and acceptable to the _Clergy_, who are _Ministers_ of the _Letter_ of _Jesus_'s Miracles, as well as of the Prophecies of him, than any of my former: But their Displeasure in the Case will give me no Disturbance, nor am I concern'd about any Resentment, they can make of it. If they are offended at these _Discourses_, they should as they came forth, have written solid Confutations of them, and so have prevented my Publication of any more of this kind: But instead of serious and potent Reasonings against me, I have met with little else but oral Railings, Exclamations, Defamations, and attempts for Prosecution; which have been so far from terrifying me, that they give me a secret Pleasure, and animate me to proceed in the Undertaking in hand.

I did not much question but the _Bishop_ of St. _Davids_, whom I look'd upon as a Person of Ingenuity and Learning, would, before this Time, have publish'd somewhat in Confutation of one or other of my former _Discourses_. Whether he was not obliged to it, or to make me some publick Reparation of the Injury done to my Reputation, by his slanderous Sermon, I appeal now to the worshipful _Societys_ for Reformation of Manners; to whom, and to other Civil Magistrates, I hope his Sermon, without Reason, will be a Caution, that no Pulpit-Invective move them to prosecute or think the worse of any Author.

Liberty of thinking, writing and judging for our selves in Religion is a natural, a Christian, and a protestant _Right_: It is a _Right_ that the Magistrates as well as the Subjects are interested in, and are to see to the Conservation of, or their Understandings as well as their Purses will be ridden and oppress'd by an ignorant and tyrannical Priesthood. I urge not this for my own security against Prosecution for Infidelity and Blasphemy, declaring that if the _Bishops_ of _London_, St. _Davids_, or _Arch-Deacon Stubbs_, who are zealous for Persecution, will but engage me on the Stage of Controversy, and make good their Accusations against me, I will submit to the worst Punishment, that can be inflicted on the worst Offender.

In the mean time I will go on with my Undertaking, to the advancement of Truth, and demonstration of the _Messiahship_ of the Holy _Jesus_, to whom be Glory for ever, _Amen_.

~_FINIS._~

FOOTNOTES:

[205] John. ix.

[206] Quid Lutum i linere opporet? hoc potius eæcum reddere, quis unquam hoc pacto curatus est? _In Loc. Johan._