Your lordships have observed, that neither the Doctor nor any of his counsel, (one only excepted) have taken the least notice in his Answer, of this passage: It was produced and given in evidence against him, and twice at least mentioned by the managers. I wonder the author would not vouchsafe to explain it. Is not this silence a confession of his guilt? an innuendo? My lords, it is most scanda-guing with a furious and intemperate zeal lously plain, and as plainly seditious. against the present Toleration; he is representing it as a law that gives encouragement and protection to schismatical impostors, enthusiasts, hypocrites, to a mungrel union of sects, to Fanatics, Rebels, Traitors, Atheists, Deists, Tritheists, Socinianists, to the principles of lanaticism, regicide, and anarchy, to monsters and vipers, that scatter their pestilence at noonday, to Jews, Quakers, and Mahometans; in a word,, to all False Brethren; and after a great deal more of this unprecedented language he breaks out, (folio 19,)" These charges are so flagrant and undeniable, that a man must be very weak, or something worse, that thinks or pretends the Dissenters are to be gained, or won over, by any other grants or indulgence, than giving up our whole constitution." The counsel that did mention it, was pleased to say, that it rather commended the Toleration than found fault with it; as if it was some credit to the Toleration, which was intended to pull down and destroy the Church, that it had not done it. In what humour, my lords, that Answer was made, to so high and criminal a charge, I know not; the Commons might reasonably have expected a more serious answer. But, my lords, from hence we conclude that no Answer can be given to it.. "Have they not," says he, "ever since their unhappy plantation in this kingdom, by the intercession of that false son of the Church, bishop Grindall, always improved, and rise upon their demands in the permission of the govern-、 ment?" My lords, I would fain know whether Doctor Sacheverell, by these words, "A man must be weak, or worse, that thinks the Dissenters are to be won by any other indulgence than giving up our whole constitution," could mean any other than the present Dissenters, and that indulgence which is at present afforded them. Again (folio 10,) the Doctor affirms, "That whoever presumes to alter or innovate any point in the articles of the faith of our Church, ought to be arraigned as a traitor to the state; heterodoxy in the doctrines of the one, naturally producing, and almost necessarily infer ring rebellion and high-treason in the other, and consequently a crime that concerns as much the civil magistrate to punish and restrain, as the ecclesiastical." Then he goes on, and adds, "This assertion, at first view, may look like an high-flown paradox."-I own, at In the very line following he calls them first view it looked to me something like it," clamorous, insatiable, and church-devouring and I am not yet convinced but it is so. Are not the Dissenters heterodox in opinion? Consequently they are rebels and traitors, according to Dr. Šacheverell, and ought to be punished by the civil magistrate as such: That is to say, they are to be hanged as rebels, aud damned as Dissenters. Still, my lords, we have the Doctor's word for it, he has not betrayed the least want of Christian charity or moderation. malignants;" and then proceeds in the words I have mentioned: "Have they not," (i. e. the Dissenters)" ever since their unhappy plantation in this kingdom, by the intercession of that false son of the Church, archbishop Grindall, improved and risen upon their de mands in the permission of the government?" The prisoner's Defence has explained this passage; they were barely permitted or sufferred, he says, for a time by queen Elizabeth, Many are the paragraphs in this libel equal-but they have improved and risen upon dely obnoxious, and which, like these, are too plain to admit of any answer. My lords, I shall not lose time as to the second head, or charge, in this Article. Folio 8, you will find it asserted, as plain as words can speak, that to defend toleration is the mark or characteristic of a False Brother; and (folio 24,) you will find his portion assigned him, with all the rest of the False Brethren, "with hypocrites and unbelievers, with all liars in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, with the grand father of falshood, the devil and his angels." My lords, the charge which relates to the archbishop Grindall is, "That Doctor Sacheverell asserts, queen Elizabeth was deluded by him to the toleration of the Genevian discipline; and that, to shew his resentment against the archbishop for favouring toleration, he calls him a false son of the Church, and a perfidious prelate." The Doctor, throughout his Sermon, is ar mands, till in this age they have obtained an indulgence by act of parliament, and this act of parliament is manifestly what the Doctor has taken offence at.. Then he goes on" In so much," says he, " that queen Elizabeth, who was deluded by that perfidious prelate to the toleration of the Genevian discipline, found it such an headstrong, encroaching monster, that in eight years she found it would endanger the monarchy, as well as the hierarchy: and, like a queen of true resolution, and pious zeal for both, pronounced them factious, and suppressed them by wholesome severities." My lords, I think we should have been wanting in that duty we owe to the memory of that great prelate and father of the Church, who was so considerable in establishing the reformed religion, had we not taken notice of these harsh and unjustifiable expressions. Doctor Sacheverell speaks of them as carrying an undue asperity, but such as he hopes 437] for High Crimes and Misdemeanors. may be forgiven, since it was necessary, he pretends, that either queen Elizabeth, or that archbishop, must bear the blame; and he rather thought it reasonable to charge it on the archbishop, than to suffer it to lie at the queen's door. My lords, your lordships will observe, that all the answer he has given to this part of the charge, is, as if the Commons had impeached him for being too free with archbishop Grindall, for using, as he calls it, an undue asperity of expression towards him. My lords, is here one word of heresies, blasphemies, and the rest of those enormous offences, to which the Doctor would have these anathemas relate? No; there is nothing to be found here but Dissenters, schism, and toleration. If these anathemas are to be understood (as certainly they are) to extend to persons enti tled to toleration; then, my lords, that air of insolence that concludes the period is explained. "Let our superior pastors do their duty; that is to say, let them exert themselves, and But your lordships will discern that this pas-thunder out their anathemas, and let any sage is made use of in our charge, to shew that the Dissenters are represented as headstrong and encroaching monsters, dangerous to the monarchy, as well as the hierarchy; and the example of queen Elizabeth is produced, to shew how necessary it is by wholesome seve rities to suppress them. Are any strained constructions or innuendoes necessary to apply this evidence to the first and main head of the charge, which is, That Doctor Sacheverell asserts and maintains, "That the Toleration is unreasonable, and the allow ance of it unwarrantable ?" My lords, before I take my leave of this head, I cannot forbear saying upon this occasion, that sure I am the Toleration is not so dangerous to the monarch, as is this late notion of an hierarchy to the supremacy of the queen's majesty; which however I hope shall be continued and preserved in the crown of England, for the peace and safety of the Church, as by law established, to all posterity. My lords, to the next and last part, which relates to the thundering out ecclesiastical anathemas, the Defence is, that those anathemas are not intended against the persons intitled to the Toleration. To this I answer: he is particularly speaking, in this part of the libel, of the schismatics and Dissenters, and expressly names them in these words, (fol. 25.) "And yet if our Dissenters had lived in those times, they would have branded him as an intemperate, hot and furious zealot.--Schism and faction are things of impudent and encroaching natures, they thrive upon concessions, take permission for power, and advance a toleration immediately into an establishment."—Are not the Dissenters here expressly named? Are we not to understand the words Schism and Faction, as coupled with Toleration, to be meant of the Dissenters, and of them only ? Sure this is too plain to admit of any doubt. Then, my lords, he proceeds: "And are therefore to be treated like growing mischiefs, or infectious plagues, kept at a distance, lest their deadly contagion spread. Let us therefore have no fellowship with these works of darkness, but rather reprove them: let our superior pastors do their duty, in thundering out their ecclesiastical anathemas, and let any power on earth dare reverse a sentence ratified in heaven." power on earth dare reverse them." These words, my lords, seem too big and mighty, to mean little or subordinate power. Thus have we supported, and made good the several charges contained in the second Article. My lords, as the Commons are fully sensible how necessary it is to support the honour and justice of the Revolution, to which we owe no less than the inestimable blessing of her present majesty, the guardian angel of this Church and State, the future expectation of a Protestant Succession, the religion, laws, rights, and liberties of the British nation; so are they thoroughly convinced that the peace and welfare, the security and strength of the kingdom in great measure depend upon the inviolable preservation of the Act of Toleration, which has been most maliciously and seditiously traduced and misrepresented by Doctor Sacheverell. Mr. Thompson. My lords, it is my part to trouble your lordships with a reply to such answers as have been offered to the third Article of this Impeachment; and notwithstanding what has been said by the counsel, what has been produced in evidence, and what has been alleged by the Doctor himself to move your lordships' compassion; I am concerned even for his sake, that I can observe it to your lordships, that the charge in this Article remains entirely unanswered. Before I enter into the particulars, I must observe to your lordships, that if there were any doubtful, or any the least favourable construction to be made of some passages in this Sermon, the Commons would not have given your lordships this trouble, nor the Doctor an opportunity of censuring their impeachment as a hard-hearted and uncharitable prosecution. My lords, I cannot but think it very ungenerous to insult any man in misfortunes, or to treat one in his condition with scorn and indignity: neither have I or shall I be guilty of it; but I must take leave to say, that no other interpretation can be made of some passages applicable to this head, but what is criminal, since so many learned counsel, since so many able heads who have assisted the Doctor in his Defence? nay, since he himself, who should know best his own meaning, has not been capable of giving the least colour or pretence of any construction of them in his favour.. Trial of Dr. Henry Sacheverell, of her majesty's administration, nobody could Whatever pity your lordships may be inclined to in your private capacities, for any one who has (I cannot say through inadvertency) brought himself into affliction, whatever dispositions you may have to mercy, yet I need not say, that there is a compassion, a tender regard due to the welfare of your country, a care incumbent on you to suppress what has the least tendency to sedition, and the distur-senting teachers, and Popish priests, but no bance of the public peace of the kingdom, and that these important trusts have a claim to your lordships' justice, preferable to any private concern whatsoever. Not to detain your lordships any longer in generals, I shall proceed to state the charge and defence, that your lordships may have a view of the insufficiency of the latter. My lords, the charge is, "That the Doctor suggests and maintains, that the Church of England is in a condition of great peril and adversity under her majesty's administration:" He denies that he suggests any danger to the Church, only from vice, infidelity, blasphemy and heresy, but not at all from or under any part of her majesty's administration. 1 2 this? To the first part of this paragraph, about Now what answer, my lords, was given to rending the communion by schismatical im last, it was shifted off to the professed enemies, postors, and so to the other particulars, till the the infidels, blasphemers and hereticks, dis thing laid to the False Brethren, who, the Doctor says, neither punish nor discourage. But when the learned counsel came to the last the altars and sacraments, &c. they are pleased calamity of the Church, that of prostituting to make occasional conformists their Atheists, charge of arraigning the persons that do not &c. that receive the sacraments; but as to the discourage or punish those who prostitute altars to Atheists, &c. they thought fit to slide it over, and not say one syllable to it; they did not so much as mumble this thistle, and the others but very tenderly. Pray, my lords, in the interpretation I make, where is there any foreign intendment, any forced construction, The first passage I produced to your lord-pressed words, and positive assertions? Let or strained inference against the Doctor's exships, to prove the charge, was in page the 5th; every candid render, without prejudice, imI must beg leave to trouble your lordships with partially consider the meaning of this passage: reading it again, because it may be necessary: Is this a danger suggested from books or Though it were very obvious to draw a pa- pamphlets? Or is it not a plain and direct in rallel here betwixt the sad circumstances of the vective against those persons in the Church, Church of Corinth formerly, and the Church who are charged with being the occasion of of England at present, wherein our holy com- these dangers to the Church by their remissmunion has been rent and divided by factiousness in their duty, not only in not punishing, and schismatical impostors; her pure doctrine has been corrupted and defiled, her primitive worship and discipline profaned and abused, ber sacred orders denied and vilified, her priests and professors (like St. Paul) calummiated, misrepresented and ridiculed, her altars and sacraments prostituted to Hypocrites, Deists, Socinians and Atheists; and this done, I wish I could not say without discourage-places, as one of the Doctor's counsel was ment, I am sure with impunity, not only by pleased to say, to preach against vice and inour professed enemies, but, which is worse, by fidelity, immorality and profaneness; yet sure our pretended friends and False Brethren." and charge them in this method with their want none will say, that he is to revile his superiors, of duty, and care for the Church : what other end must such licentious reproaches produce, but a contempt of their persons, a lessening the dignity of their order, and a diminution of that character which gives them the capacity of doing good in the world whilst they preserve a veneration and esteem, but which must cease when they meet with the contrary? The Doctor was so sensible of this, when he mentioned it as his own case, that he thought the very im putation of a crime to any of his fonction, though acquitted of it, must leave a scar so as to have used the utmost caution, before he to blemish his character; sure then he ought preached or published this Sermon, and to have considered the pernicious consequences of reviling those in authority. If, as he was pleased to say, ill treating of him, who was an ambas. sador of Christ, was despising Christ himself; sure it cannot be thought an unnatural infe The learned counsel pretended to shew, that most of these calamities attending the Church, proceeded from the blasphemous and heretical books and pamphlets produced to your lordships, and that the Doctor meant them to be the cause of the danger he suggests: Now, pray, my lords, how can that construction be made? How can this be consistent with the Doctor's assertion, that all this is done, not only by professed enemies (which every body will agree takes in the infidels, blasphemers and heretics) but by pretended friends and False Brethren? When I took the liberty to observe on this passage, I stated it thus: Who could prostitute altars and sacraments to Hypocrites, Deists, Socinians, and Atheists, but some of the Doctor's own order? And who were to punish those crimes? Who could they be that did not discourage them, but suffered them to be committed with impunity, but his ecclesiastical superiors? And that they were part but not so much as discouraging those crimes? were thus prostituted, why must the world be N ference, if her majesty is said to be reviled, by reflecting on those who act under her commission, and are part of her administration. or any of the managers of this Article; and with very strenuous zeal he explains those passages by chiming in with the Doctor, in charging Occasional Conformists with Atheism, Deisin, and the worst of crimes; and then he concludes, that the Doctor, in those passages he cited, has not asserted the Church to be in danger under her majesty's administration; but not one syllable to this passage, which I cited in page the 16th. The third place I troubled your lordships The second passage I troubled your lordships with, is in page 16; he had been talking of the comprehension and union of the Church and Dissenters, and giving a great many hard names to it; which design your lordships know had its rise from a commission under the great seal from his late majesty to several fords, bishops, and other learned divines, who were to consider of proper methods to accom-with, was in the 18th page; his words are plish it: "but he thanks God, that providence "falshood always implies treachery; and had blasted the long projected scheme of these whether that is a qualification for any one to ecclesiastical Achitophels;" with other scurri- be trusted, especially with the guardianship of lous reflections on the design, and those con- our Church or Crown, let our governors concerned in it; and then he says, "That since sider:" These words speak so plainly, they this model of universal liberty and coalition need no comment, nor have they offered at any failed, and these False Brethren could not carry explanation of them; they must relate to perthe Conventicle into the Church, they are now sons, and can have no reference to books or resolved to bring the Church into the Conven- pamphlets, blasphemies or heresies, &c. by any ticle, which will more plausibly and slily effect construction whatever. her rain; what could not be gained by comprebension and toleration, must be brought about by moderation and occasional conformity; that is, what they could not do by open violence, they will not fail by secret treachery to accomplish. If the Church cannot be pulled down, it may be blown up; and no matter with these men how it is destroyed, so that it is destroyed." Now pray, my lords, where is the forced construction to make the Doctor in this passage speak of persons in Church and State who endanger the Church, and not of books and pamphlets, vice, infidelity, &c.? The fourth passage, my lords, was in page the 20th; he is talking of dangers from national sins, which are occasioned by Dissenters and False Brethren; and then he says, " And now are we under no danger in these deplorable circumstances? Must we lull ourselves under this sad repose, and in such a stupid lethargic security embrace our ruin? I pray God we may be out of danger; but we may remember the king's person was voted to be so, at the same time that his murderers were conspiring his death." The substance of the charge in this passage, He is on his second general head of the perils is an intention to reflect on the members who of False Brethren in the Church and State, and voted the Church to be out of danger, by the of those persons who could not accomplish the comparison and allusion to the vote relating to destruction of the Church by the comprehension, the king. The meaning seems evidently, that but were doing it another way, by occasional though the king was voted to be out of danger, conformity and moderation; I do not know yet he was not out of danger, and so though that either of these are condemned by the law the Church was voted out of danger, yet the for vice, infidelity, blasphemy, heresy or pro- Church was then, and is still in danger: but faneness; be that as it will, it is from the per- whether he meant it of the members that sons in Church and State the danger is sug-passed that Vote, is the question; he says he gested to arise, and who, as he is pleased to say, make use of these only as means to blow up and destroy the Church: but then, I suppose these persons in the Church must be interpreted to be only the most inferior, and so no reflection on the administration: as men of characters and stations in the State were construed to be constables, excise-men, and custom house officers, so these persons who were to bring about the comprehension, and are now blowing up and undermining the Church in another manner, must be church wardens, parish-clerks and sextons. These sort of constructions by the Doctor's learned counsel, are easy and natural, that I must agree with his observation, that they have not much argument, learning or eloquence to support them." And I cannot but observe a very extraordinary method of answering this passage and the text, by one of the learned counsel; he is pleased to cite two other passages in the Sermon, which were never mentioned by me, only meant it according to his notion of that vote of the king, that those not privy to the design against him voted him safe, whilst others conspired his murder; so when the members voted the Church of England to be in no danger under her majesty's administration, it was none of them, but others, that were conspiring her ruin. The Doctor was pleased to say too, that that Vote was a year and a half before the king's death, and that there were not a tenth part of those members who voted the king safe, the rest being turned out, and no House of Lords: be that as it will, they were the same parliament that voted the king out of danger; and they that conspired his death were part of those that voted him safe, and who turned out the rest to accomplish their designs: and though the parallel should not run so as to reflect on both Houses of Parlia ment, and all the members, yet if it glances at some of them, and was so intended, it is a Trial of Dr. Henry Sacheverell, circumstance of aggravation, and that is the only intent of its being part of the Article; and I cannot but think the Doctor was apprehensive of some reflection of that kind; for he says immediately in the very next words, "That he hopes what he has so freely spoken, will not give offence:" if he had not a view to that vote of the danger of the Church, there was no occasion for that apology. The fifth and last place 1 troubled your lordships with, was in the last page, where there were some pathetical expressions which the Doctor chose out of the Scripture, and managed them with others of his own, so as to represent the Church to be in the utmost peril; he mentions nothing of vice, blasphemy or infidelity: "But that she lies bleeding of the wounds she has received in the house of her friends:" He cited the Lamentations for it, but there being no such text there, I took the liberty of saying it was a lamentation of his own making. I should not trouble your lordships any more as to this particular, but that I am in some measure obliged to vindicate myself from what one of the learned counsel hinted upon this occasion; he was pleased to say in the defence to the first Article, he was as much at a loss to find out a passage in the Sermon, as one of the managers was to find the text in the Lamentations. Though, my lords, this is but a trifle to the thing in question before your lordships, yet since that learned gentleman was pleased to triumph, as if he had me sure and unanswerable on this point, I beg your lordships' indulgence that it may appear which of us is in the right. The Doctor cited that text to be in the 2d of Lam. 4th. I looked through the Lamentations, therefore knew I might venture to say what I did; I have looked over it again, and am sure there is no such text there. It gave me occasion to read and reflect on the other texts cited by the Doctor in the prophecy of Zachariah, the 13th chapter, where there are some words that I suppose are meant, though I could not but observe the Doctor to be very unhappy in the choice of his Scripture, this as well as others being directly contrary to his purpose. The words cited are in the 6th verse, the two preceding verses explain them; the subject matter was false prophecy. In the 4th verse it is said, "It shall come to pass in that day, that the prophet shall be ashamed, every one of his vision, when he has prophesied." In the 5th verse the prophet is to deny that he is a prophet, and say he is a husbandman and no prophet. And in the 6th verse he is asked, where he received his wounds? He answers, in the house of his friends: so that be retains the character of a false prophet all along; and what he says in each verse is equally true, and consequently that the wounds he received were not in the house of his friends. Whatever may be thought of the Doctor in this matter, I think I may conclude, that his learned counsel had his Scripture by hearsay, or else he would not [444 have triumphed when he had so little reason, There was a dispute, my lords, not many years since, between two learned divines of our Church, about the rights of our convocation; Common-Prayer book; but upon examination one insulted the other for his ignorance in the it appeared, that he who triumphed most, was most ignorant of what he charged on the other: whether this case is not somewhat applicable, I submit to your lordships. passages made use of to maintain this Article, Having done, my lords, with the several I think I may say the charge contained in it, (that the Doctor asserts the Church to be in danger, not only generally, or so as to be blasphemy or profaneness, but from under meant from vice, infidelity, schism or heresies, her majesty's administration) is not only charged here with speaking contrary to his affirmed, but strongly proved. He is not silence, as he was pleased to say, made criwords, or with negative crimes, nor is his minal. the evidence produced on the Doctor's behalf, I must now beg leave to observe a little on and in his defence to this Article. Your lordships had a collection of many scandalous books and pamphlets, drawn from obscurity, to be republished to the world, for the more effectual suppressing blasphemy and profaneness: and since the Doctor's counsel forbore to mention the particulars, I shall not enter that they have been proved to have been no into them; only in general I think I may say, way material to what is in issue before your notice, that most of these books appeared to lordships: but it may not be improper to take still concealed; some of them printed in Holhave stolen into the world, and the authors land 17 years ago, and others published since the Doctor's Sermon: and for the Observators, and Rights of the Christian Church, it is well known the author of one, and publisher of cannot be said to be tolerated with impunity, the other have been prosecuted; so that these nor meant as the provocation for the Doctor's censure. a and impious pamphlets: there are some others I am sorry there are any of these profane too, that have been published within these 17 years, which might have been taken notice of; but I do not find them in the Doctor's catalogue. There was a blasphemous Sermon preached and published by Dr. Binks; Mr. ing most of the present bishops; the same Dodwell's Charge of Schism, and unbishopgentleman's Baptismal Union of the Spirit, or his No Immortality of the Soul; and one Mr. Lesley's Project of uniting ours and the Gallic by the Doctor to tend to the right establishing Church: whether these books were thought but I do think they were worthy his notice, our Church and true religion, 1 need not say, and may vie with most in his collection; and doctrines, it had been a worth y task sure, and if he had been so incensed against erroneous well becoming his honest well-meaning zeal, |