72
“MORE OF THE ‘CONTRAST’,” The Ordeal (4 February 1809), pp. 72–3.
“B.”
———————————————
MESSRS. EDITORS,
AFTER reading your late Remarks on Dr. Mason’s ‘Contrast between the death of a Deist and the death of a Christian,’ my curiosity was strongly excited to read the whole of that article. I accordingly purchased the Panoplist for November, and sat down to read it. My eyes could hardly keep pace with my astonishment. What could induce Mr. Mason to publish a ‘Contrast’ between the deaths of Hume and Finley, when, notwithstanding his own remarks and inferences, every line of the Contrast is an argument against the cause which he has undertaken to support? Suppose Dr. Finley did wish to ‘feel just as he did when he first closed with Christ?’ or that he had assurance of the ‘politeness of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob?’ or that he wished for a substitute to take care of the cause of religion in this world, when he was about to leave it? What is this to the by-standers or any body else? Does it prove that the Christian religion is truth, and Deism a lie? I cannot see that it proves any such thing. But the whole story proves, incontestibly, that David Hume died with a composure and serenity, becoming a man who had nothing to fear beyond the grave; and that Samuel Finley died either insane, or felt much regret for the past, and more anxiety for the future.
From an attentive perusal of the ‘Contrast,’ I am convinced that it is calculated to do more hurt than good, be exhibiting the ‘Deist’ dying like a man, and the ‘Christian’ like a lunatick or a fool. I ask again, What could induce Dr. Mason to injure the cause, he pretends so warmly to have espoused? I must believe he is not the author of the ‘Contrast’ — he has probably been imposed upon by some diabolical evil-minded infidel, some wolf in sheep’s clothing, who wrote the ‘Contrast’ and procured its insertion in the Christian Magazine, before the Doctor had thoroughly examined it. Dr. Mason will not be under very great obligations to the Panoplist editors, for asserting, in such unqualified terms, that it is from his pen. I think they ought, in justice to the Doctor, and the cause of religion, to contradict the assertion immediately, that the vindication may tread upon the heels of the calumny.
Yours, &c. B.