abusing the reader's patience to produce a long train of Authorities. Though it may not be improper to give the sentiments of the last, though not the least able of them, on this head.-Opere pretium est admonere te, amice Lector, quid nobis de tota hujus Libri materia cogitandum esse videatur, Primum quidem amici Job sic statuunt, quandoquidem tot tantisque cladibus Deus amicum ipsorum Job afflixit, ei Deum esse iratum, eum igitur poenas tales aliquo scelere, vel aperto, vel occulto commeruisse. Cujus sum sententiæ testes adhibent generationes hominum priores, in quibus inauditum est, inquiunt, Deum vel integros viros aspernatum, vel impios manu apprehendisse. Si quis nostræ ætatis homo sic disputaret, nemo esset quin ejus temeritatem atque audaciam miraretur, qui rem aperte falsam sumeret, cum sæpissimè eveniat et summas miserias experiri hac in mortali vita viros bonos, et florentissimam fortunam, flagitiosos. Tamen Job, id quod est maxime considerandum, redargutione tali non utitur. Non id negat, quod sui amici, Patrum memoria teste confirmabant; quod tamen Job, si falsum id sibi videretur, uno verbo, Mentiris, poterat confutare. Atque etiam idem Job alterum negans, tales se miserias crimine aliquo suo fuisse commeritum, alteruin tamen non dissimulat, Deum sibi adversari ; in qua ipsa sancti viri confessione adversariorum causa ex parte vincebat, cum suas clades Job sic acciperet, ut iræ divine consueta signa, cumque inde non parum animo æstuaret. Quæ cum ita sint, nos sic existimamus, non falsos fuisse memoriæ testes Job amicos; atque adeo, PRIMIS MUNDI TEMPORIBUS, homines impios fuisse, præter solitum naturæ cursum, divinâ irà percussos, iisque acceptos plagis, quarum sancti homines essent immunes; Deo Opt. Max. humanas res ita moderante, ut Religionem in terris tueretur, et ut homines, con talia exempla paterentur cogitarent essc in cœlo Deum justum, a quo mortales ut recte factorum præmium sperare deberent, sic scelerum ultionem timere. HOUBIGANT in librum Job, lectori.

But,

But, since the writing of my Dissertation, the language of the rabbinical men has been greatly changed. And, partly to keep up the antiquity of the book, but principally to guard against an extraordinary Procidence, several of them, in defiance of their senses, have denied that this, which this honest Pricst of the Oratory makes to be the subject of the book of Job, has indeed any thing at all to do with it. Amongst the foremost of these is Dr. Richard Grey, the epitomiser of Albert Schultens' Comment on this book. In the preface to his Abstract, amongst other things, he has criticised my opinion of the scope of the book in the following manner.-Nam quod dicit vir clariss. id præcipue in hoc libro disceptari, nempe an bonis semper bona, malisque mala, an utrisque utraque promiscue obtingent; hanc autem quæstionem (a nobis quidem alienam, minus ideo perpensam) nusquam alibi gentium præterquam in Judæa nec apud ipsos Judæos alio quovis tempore, quam quod assignat, moveri potuisse, id omne ex veritate suæ hypotheseos pendet, et mea quidem sententia, longe aliter se habet. Præf. p. 10-15. For as to what this writer [the author of the D. L.] says, that the main question handled in the book of Job is whether good happens to the good, and evil to evil men, or whether both happen not promiscuously to both; and that this question (a very foreign one to us, and therefore the less attended to) could never be the subject of disputation any where but in the land of Judea, nor there neither at any other time than that which he assigns; all this, I say, depends on the truth of his hypothesis, and is, in my opinion, far otherwise. That which depends on the truth of an hypothesis has, indeed, generally speaking, a very slender foundation: and I am partly of opinion it was the common prejudice against this support which disposed the learned Prefacer to give my notions no better a name. But what I have shewn to be the subject of the book is so far from depending on the truth of my hypothesis, that the truth of my hypo

thesis depends on what I have shewn to be the subject of the book and very fitly so, as every reasonable hypothesis should be supported on a fact. Now I might appeal to the learned world, whether it be not as clear a fact that the subject of the book of Job is whether good happens to the good, and evil to evil men, or whether both happen not promiscuously to both; as that the subject of the first book of Tusculan Disputations is de contemnenda morte. On this I founded my hypothesis, that the book of Job must have been written about the time of Esdras, because no other assignable time could at all suit the subject— But 'tis possible I may mistake in what he calls my hypothesis: for aught I know, he inay understand not that of the book of Job, but that of the Divine Legation. And then, by my hypothesis, he must mean the great religious principle I endeavourod to evince,

THAT THE JEWS WERE IN REALITY UNDER AN

EXTRAORDINARY PROVIDENCE. But it will be paying me a very unusual compliment to call that my hypothesis which the Bible was not only divinely written, but was likewise divinely preserved, to testify; which all Believers profess to believe; and which none but Unbelievers and Answerers to the Divine Legation directly deny. However, if this be the hypothesis he means, I need desire no better a support. But the truth is, my interpretation of the book of Job seeks support from nothing but those common rules of grainmar and logic on which the sense of all kind of writings are or ought to be interpreted.

He goes on in this manner. Nempe id unum voluisse mihi videtur sacer Scriptor, ut iis omnibus, utcunque afflictis, humilitatis et patientiæ perpetuum extaret documentum ex contemplatione gemina, hinc infinitæ Dei perfectionis, sapientiæ & potentiæ; illinc humanæ, quæ in sanctissimis quoque viris inest, corruptionis, imbecillitatis & ignorantiæ. For the SOLE purpose of the sacred writer seems to me to be this, to compose a work that should remain a perpetual document

of

of humility and patience to all good men in affliction from this twofold consideration, as on the one hand of the infinite perfection, power, and wisdom of God; so on the other, of human corruption, imbecility, and ignorance, discoverable even in the best of men. Such talk in a popular discourse, for the sake of a moral application, might not be amiss: but to speak thus to the learned world, is surely out of season. The Critic will be apt to tell him, he hath mistaken the Actor for the subject; and that he might on the same principle as well conclude that the purpose of Virgil's poem is not the establishment of an empire in Italy, but the personal piety of Eneas. But to be a little more explicit. The book of Job consists of two distinct parts; the narrative, contained in the prologue and epilogue; and the argumentative, which composes the body of the work. Now when the question is of the subject of a book, who means any other than the body of it? yet the learned Doctor mistaking the narrative part for the argumentative, gives us the subject of the introduction and conclusion for that of the work itself. And it is very true that the beginning and the end do exhibit a perpetual document of humility and patience to all good men in affliction. But it is as true that the body of the work neither does nor could exhibit any such document. First it does not; for, that humility and patience, which Job manifests before his entering into dispute, is succeeded by rage and ostentation when he becomes heated with unreasonable opposition. Secondly, it could not; because it is altogether argumentative; the subject of which must needs be a proposition debated, and not a document exemplified. A precept may be conveyed in history; but a disputation can exhibit only a debated question. I have shewn what that question is; and he, instead of proving that I have assigned a wrong one, goes about to persuade the reader, that there is no question at all.

He proceeds. Quamvis enim in sermonibus, qui

in

in eo habentur, de religione, de virtute, de providentia, Deique in mundo gubernando sapientia, justitia, sanctitate, de uno rerum omnium principio, aliisque gravissimis veritatibus dissertetur, nunc tamen quem dixi unicum esse libri scopum, tam ex initio et fine, quam ex universâ ejus œconomiâ cuivis opinor manifestum erit. Ea enim, ut rem omnem summatim complectar, Jobum exhibet, primo quidem querentem, expostulantem, effræno luctui indulgentem; mox (quum, ut sacri dramatis natura postulabat, amicorum contradictione, sinistrisque suspicionibus magis magisque irritatus et facessitus esset) imprudentius Deum provocantem, atque in justitia sua gloriantem; ad debitam tandem summissionem suique cognitionem revocatum, tuin demum, nec antea, integritatis suæ tam præmium, quam testimonium a Deo reportantem. For although in the speeches that occur, there be much talk of religion, virtue, and providence, of God's wisdom, justice, and holiness in the government of the world, of one principle of all things, and other most important truths, yet that this which I have assigned is the only scope of the book will appear manifest to every one, as well from the beginning and the end as from the economy of the whole. For to say all in a word, it first presents Job complaining, expostulating, and indulging himself in an ungovernable grief: but soon after (when, as the nature of the sacred drama required, by the contradiction of his friends, and their sinister suspicions, he became more and more teased and irritated) rashly challenging God, and glorying in his own integrity: yet at length brought back to a due submission and knowledge of himself. The reader sees that all this is just as pertinent as if I should say, Mr. CHILLINGWORTH'S famous book against Knot the Jesuit, was not to prove the religion of Protestants a safe way to salvation, but to give the picture of an artful Caviller and a candid Disputer... "For, although, in the arguments that occur, there be much talk of protestantisu, popery, infallibility, a judge of controversies, funda

mentals