ch
proves this. In Grotius' famous book on the truth of the Christian
Religion, there is a story that Mohammed had a tame pidgeon
which he taught to come and peck in his ear, in order to make his
followers believe that the bird was the organ by whom he received
revelations from God. This story is not believed, nor was ever
heard of among the Musselmen. On the publication of Grotius'
book, a friend learned in Oriental Literature, came to him and
asked him for his authority for this story, Grotius frankly owned
that he had none, in other words that the story was a pious fraud
in order to stigmatize Mohammedanism. "This story" Gibbon says,
"was accordingly left out of the Arabic version of Grotius' Book,
intended to circulate among the-Musselmen, for fear that they
should laugh at such a piece of ignorance or effrontery: but it still
maintains an edifying place in those copies printed for the perusal
of Christians."! I quote from memory.
It is really a pity that the Protestant Church, which like a Magdalen
professes to repent other errors committed during her former
connection with "the mother of abominations," should yet retain so
many of the bad habits contracted during their past intimacy.
Some folks have even pretended to have observed, that
notwithstanding their old quarrel, they seem to have
recommenced a "nodding acquaintance." I hope the report is
untrue.]
[fn65 Mr. Everett will probably say, that he made these deadly
stabs at my character upon the same principle that the New
England Cobbler killed the Indian Hogan Mogan. "Not out of
malice, but mere zeal Because he was an infidel."]
[fn66 I have a right to believe so, for Mr. Everett quotes Priestley's
notes, p. 339 of his work. Dr. Priestley united in his character, the
rare concurrence of a keen controversial writer, with great fairness
and candour. He seems always to have been willingly disposed to
resign an untenable opinion, when convinced by the arguments of
his opponent. His conduct in regard to the question between the
Jews and Christians, may be considered as a proof of this. He
wrote letters to the Jews in defence of Christianity, which were
replied to by Levi. In this controversy Levi had evidently the better
of Priestley. Priestley seems to have been sensible of this, which
occasioned him to examine the question more minutely. The result
of his examination led him to avow, in a Dissertation in the
Theological Repository published in England,
|