AN APOLOGY FOR THE AUTHOR.

Ir good and ill nature equally operated on mankind, I might have saved myself the trouble of this apology, for it is manifest, by the reception the following discourse hath met with, that those who approve it are a great majority among the men of taste. Yet there have been two or three treatises written expressly against it, besides many others that have flirted at it occcasionally, without one syllable having been ever published in its defence, or even quotation to its advantage, that I can remember; except by the polite author of a late Discourse between a Deist and a Socinian.

Therefore, since the book seems calculated to live at least as long as our language and our taste, admits no great alterations, I am content to convey some apology along with it.

The greatest part of that book was finished above thirteen years since, 1696; which is eight years before it was published. The author was then young, his invention at the height, and his reading fresh in his head. By the assistance of some thinking, and much conversation, he had endeavoured to strip himself of as many real prejudices as he could; I say, real

ones, because, under the notion of prejudices, he knew to what dangerous height some men have proceeded. Thus prepared, he thought the numerous and gross corruptions in religion and learning might furnish matter for a satire, that would be useful and diverting. He resolved to proceed in a manner that should be altogether new; the world having been already too long nauseated with endless repetitions upon every subject. The abuses in religion he proposed to set forth in the allegory of the coats and the three brothers, which was to make up the body of the discourse. Those in learning he chose to introduce by the way of digressions. He was then a young gentleman, much in the world, and wrote to the taste of those who were like himself; therefore, in order to allure them, he gave a liberty to his pen, which might not suit with maturer years, or graver characters; and which he could have easily corrected with a very few blots, had he been master of his papers for a year or two before their publication.

not

Not that he would have governed his judgment by the illplaced cavils of the sour, the envious, the stupid, and the tasteless; which he mentions with disdain. He acknowledges there are several youthful sallies, which, from the grave and the wise, may deserve a rebuke. But he desires to be answerable no further than he is guilty; and that his faults may be multiplied by the ignorant, the unnatural, and uncharitable applications of those who have neither candour to suppose good meanings, nor palate to distinguish true ones. After which, he will forfeit his life, if any one opinion can be fairly deduced from that book, which is contrary to religion or morality.

Why should any clergyman of our church be angry to see the follies of fanaticism and superstition exposed, though in the most ridiculous manner, since that is the most probable way to cure them, or at least to hinder them from further spreading! Besides, though it was not intended for their perusal, it rallies nothing but what they preach against. It contains nothing to provoke them, by the least scurrility upon their persons or their functions. It celebrates the Church of England, as the most perfect of all others in discipline and doctrine; it advances no opinion they reject, nor condemns any they receive. If the clergy's resentments lay upon their hands, in my humble opinion, they might have found more proper objects to employ them on. Nondum tibi defuit hostis; I mean those heavy, illiterate scribblers, prostitute in their reputation, vicious in their lives, and ruined in their fortunes; who, to the shame of good sense as well as piety, are greedily read, merely upon the strength of bold, false, impious assertions, mixed with unmannerly reflections upon the priesthood, and openly intended against all religion; in short, full of such principles as are kindly received, because they are levelled to remove those terrors that religion tells men will be the consequence of immoral lives. Nothing like which is to be met with in this discourse, though some are pleased so freely to censure it. And I wish there were no other instances of what I have too frequently observed, that many of the Reverend body are not always very nice in distinguishing between their

enemies and their friends.

Had the author's intentions met with more candid interpretation from some, whom, out of respect, he forbears to

name, he might have been encouraged to an examination of books written by some of those authors above described; whose errors, ignorance, dulness, and villainy, he thinks he could have detected and exposed, in such a manner, that the persons who are most conceived to be infected by them, would soon lay them aside, and be ashamed. But he has now given over those thoughts; since the weightiest men in the weightiest stations are pleased to think it a more dangerous point to laugh at those corruptions in religion which they themselves must disapprove, than to endeavour to pull up those very foundations wherein all Christians have agreed.

He thinks it no fair proceeding, that any person should offer determinately to fix a name upon the author of this discourse, who hath all along concealed himself from most of his nearest friends; yet several have gone a farther step, and pronounced another book † to have been the work of the same hand with this; which the author affirms to be a thorough mistake, he having yet never so much as read that discourse e; A plain instance how little truth there is in general surmises, or in conjectures drawn from similitude of style, or way of thinking.

Had the author written a book to expose the abuses in law or in physic, he believes the learned professors in either faculty would have been so far from resenting it, as to have given him thanks for his pains; especially if he had made an honourable reservation for the true practice of either science.

* Alluding to Dr. Sharp, the Archbishop of York's representation of the Author. +Letter of Enthusiasm, supposed to have been written by Colonel Hunter.-See Swift's Letter to him.

But religion, they tell us, ought not be ridiculed; and they tell us truth; yet, surely, the corruptions may; for we are taught, by the tritest maxims in the world, that religion, being the best of things, its corruptions are likely to be the worst.

There is one thing which the judicious reader cannot but have observed, that some of those passages in this discourse, which appear most liable to objections, are what they call parodies, where the author personates the style and manner of other writers, whom he has a mind to expose. I shall produce one instance; it is in the 00th page. Dryden, L'Estrange, and some others I shall not name, are here levelled at; who having spent their lives in faction, and apostasies, and all manner of vice, pretended to be sufferers for loyalty and religion. So Dryden tells us, in one of his prefaces, of his merits and sufferings; thanks God, that he " possesses his soul in patience." In other places he talks at the same rate; and L'Estrange often uses the like style; and I believe the reader may find more persons to give that passage an application. But this is enough to direct those who may have overlooked the author's intention.

There are three or four other passages which prejudiced or ignorant readers have drawn, by great force, to hint at ill meanings; as if they glanced at some tenets in religion. In answer to all which, the author solemnly protests, he is entirely innocent, and never had it once in his thoughts, that anything he said would in the least be capable of such interpretations, which he will engage to deduce full as fairly from the most innocent book in the world. And it will be obvious to every reader, that this was not any part of his scheme or de