[
45]
not of the author himself, but of his uninspired translator, who may not always have fairly represented the meaning of the original; being, perhaps, unconsciously biassed so as to give a turn to the passage favourable to his own previously formed opinions.
It may be added, that this mode of citing texts, unless carefully guarded, is in danger of encouraging the baneful practice of adducing passages of scripture as though they were a collection of detached aphorisms, and not portions of a continued discourse, to be interpreted by reference to the context and the obvious intention and purpose of the writer.
The remark of some one, that at this rate we might prove from scripture the proposition, ‘
there is no God,’ is scarcely an exaggeration of the extent to which this abuse has sometimes been carried, or of the mischievous absurdities which have in this manner sought to derive the shadow of support from the highest authority.
The appearance of these tracts was enough to alarm the bigoted advocates of prevailing doctrines, who presently proceeded to adopt the usual arbitrary and oppressive mode of dealing with an opponent stigmatized with the odious and unpopular name of heretic.
A series of propositions was selected and condemned by a vote of the House of Commons, and the book itself ordered, as usual, to be burnt by the common hangman.
Mr. Biddle was summoned to the bar of the House, and interrogated whether he was the author of the obnoxious treatise.
Instead of committing himself by an avowal, he answered by asking, in his turn, whether it seemed reasonable that one brought before a judgment-seat
