« PreviousContinue »
" the re
and Elias specially raised from the universal mass of dead souls (if I may so speak) only to talk with Jesus, and after that to sink again into another slumber for ages ?
Your correspondent, however, it seems, has got a stronger argument for the sleep of the soul, and that is our Lord's declaration, John xi. 11, &c. “Our friend Lazarus sleepeth.” But what is there peculiarly strong in an expression which was familiar among the Jews; and not familiar only, but comfortable and endearing? Or what is there to support this notion, in what our Saviour says of his being surrection and the life;" for the belief of the conscious state of the soul in Hades, throws no difficulty upon that precious declaration. How are we to be raised from thence to eternal life, or supreme felicity, but by his merits ? and upon what ground do we look for the resurrection of the body, but by being united to him, that so at the last day our vile bodies may be made like unto his glorious budy?
We are challenged to prove by Mr. Blackburne, " how, and in what manner the soul acts while it is deprived of the body," and he might, with equal modesty, have challenged us to give him a minute description of the soul itself, and how it acts upon the body while connected with it here upon earth. It might be as well for gentlemen who are so fond of opposing catholic doctrines, to define their own system a little more accurately, and to free it from all difficulties and objections, before they call upon others to give explanations of subjects that are inexplicable? The soul-sleeping notion rests solely upon a metaphysical difficulty how the soul can exist in an incorporeal state, and upon a miserable perversion of a few innocent terms, which have been drawn from present and familiar experience, to give us some idea of the future and unseen world.
There is a passage in the Revelations, which must, I think, at once cut this notion up by the roots, with all those on whom the Scriptures have an absolute and determinate weight. It is in chap: vi. 9, 10, 11. “ And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held. And they cried with a loud voice, saying How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? And white robes were given unto every one of them: and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellow servants also, and their brethren should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.”
I shall here close my remarks upon this subject, hoping that your correspondents, the London Curate and the Soul-sleeper, will not take my
London, August 9, 1803,
TO THE EDITORS OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCHMAN'S MAGAZINE.
I RECEIVED the other day a most interesting and highly gratifying
letter from a gentleman in Yorkshire, a quondam Fellow of University College, O.xford; who, inter alia, says-“ I am in pursuit of a publication of Bishop Taylor's, which I have never been able to procure, its title is—' A Discourse of artificial Beauty in Point of Conscience between two Ladies. By J. T. D. D.' i.e. (says Bp. Kennet in his Register, page 787) Jeremy Taylor, D, D. Lord Bishop of Down and Connor-it was printed at London in 1662, in 8vo.- I think every thing which came from the of this divine man so valuable, that I could wish this publication (which from its subject promises something curious, and, at least, entertaining) rescued from oblivion ;-if, Sir, you could meet with it either in the library of the British Museum, any
other collection, you would highly gratify me, and, I doubt not, many, very many, others by its republication in the Orthodox Churchman's Magazine ; the Editors of which would, I presume, willingly insert it in one or more of their numbers; for I conceive it to be a Pamphlet only.”
In Sion College Library there are three copies of this book ;—one printed in 1656, by Royston; which, I suppose, is the first Edition. This has a sort of Vignette in the title-page, in which a radiated sun is depicted, with the following motto on a label; “ Qui sequitur me non ambulat in Tenebris ;” and the title itself runs thus" À Discourse of auxiliary Beauty or artificiall hansomeness in point of conscience between two Ladies. The title of the next edition, dated 1692, is as follows,
A Discourse of artificial Beauty in Point of Conscience between two Ludies." An epistle dedicatory to all the fair sex (of twenty pages), is added to this edition ; the first having merely an address of the publisher to the ingenuous reader, of five pages. The third copy in Sion College Library, exhibits a curious specimen of the artifices of publishers. Old Ballard, of Little Brituin, a name familiar to “ the stall-reader," was the
and it bears date 1701 ; but in fact nothing in this edition is new, except the Title-page, which varies from both the others :-" ral letters (now this is an utter error, for the whole book is disposed in the form of a conversation, and begins, “ Madam I am not more pleased
you look so well,' &c.) between two ladies, wherein the lawful. ness and unlawfulness of artificial beauty.in point of conscience are nicely debated. Published for the satisfaction of the fair sex. Each of these editions has a similar frontispiece; representing two ladies standing by a table, (over which is a looking-glass), conversing together; and at the bottom is this passage from Euripides, Nούν χρή Θεάσαθαι.
But notwithstanding what Bp. Kennet says, I am satisfied this Book was not written by Bp. Taylor. In the edition of 1692, preserved at Sion College, these words occur in the Epistle Dedicatory, (P. 2.) “ the author of this book (supposed to be a learned Bishop) ;--and in the margin we have a M. S. note in the hand-writing of Professor Ward, viz.mader. Taylor,” together with a reference to a case of conscience in P. 412 of Bp. Taylor's Ductor dubitantium ; in which the words “ artificial
handsomeness” occur, but nothing which may lead us to suppose that Bp. Taylor was the author of the work in question. Bp. Taylor's Ductor dubitantium was published in 1660, and the first edition of the discourse in 1656.-On the M.S. note of Professor Ward is another in the hand-writing of my very intelligent and most obliging friend the present Librarian of Sion College, viz. " it (the discourse) is not mentioned by Wood, in the second edition, and does not beas any internal evidence of its being the Bishop's. In the original edition the publisher tells the reader that he is certainty informed a woman was the author and writer of it.”. The passage here referred to is this-“ Reader, this discouse, of which (as I am certainly informed) a woman was not only the chiefe Occasion but the author and writer:"-This, however, I doubt not, is a mere fiction. The book is not so contemptibly written as some one, whom I shall have occasion to quote by and by, asserts; it must have been the work of a person of considerable learning, not a little skilled in the art of reasoning. --- In the first edition of Wood's Athena Oxonienses, it is ascribed to Jer. Taylor, and is said to have been printed in 1662; but in the second edition of Wood, which claims to be “s very much correct ed,” it is left out in the catalogue of that Prelate's works.
However, it is deemed the work of a Bishop nevertheless, though not of Bp. Taylor. In the second edition of Wood, P. 314, it is expressa ly assigned to BISHOP GAUDEN; as it is also in Bp. Gauden's life in the Biographia Britannica ; but then, truth obliges me to acknowledge that the Biogr. Britt. gives the book likewise to Bp. Taylor ; and, what is curious, both lives are subscribed C. Mr. Morant of Colchester's sige nature. In the General Biographical Dictionary (Edit. 1798) the work is given to Bp. Gauden; but the compilers do not seem to have gone to the bottom of this question; they say~"Soon after his death (Gauden's) there came out a discourse, &c. 1662;"_but we have seen it was published in 1656. In the catalogue of the British Museum, the work is ina serted under the word Gauden.-Bp. Gauden died in 1662; and Bp. Taylor in 1667. The list of Bp. Gauden's works must have been made up before Bp. Taylor's decease; though we all are aware of the controversy respecting the Evrwv Baodinn.-But how came Bp. Kennet to specify the edition of 1662, (as having) the letters J. T. D. D. in the titlepage? Bp. Kennet must have written this on herrsay evidence. The edition at the British Museum, is this very edition ; and I can assure your readers that these letters do not becur in the title-page. My kind friend Mr. Watts, of Sion College, having occasion to visit the Museum last week, was so good as to take the trouble of collating that edition with those under his own immediate care; and I here insert the transcript he made of its uitle" A Discourse of artificial Beauty in point of Conscience, between two Ladies : with some satyrical Censures on the Vulgar Errors of these Times. London, 'printed for R. Royston, at the Angel, r: Ivy-lane. MDCLXII."
Bp. Kennet's statement is clearly incorrect. Mr. Watts at the same time transribed a memorandum," in an old hand, written on a blank leaf in the Museum copy to this effect:-" The following frothy, metaforical book containing an apology for women's painting, was certainly wri tby Dr. Gauden. The language hath.great afhnity with the subjeci, a daub, a fucus of words, without any thing solid or satisfactory, &c. vid. a just Defence of the Royal Martyr, Lond. printed 1699, P. 215, 216, &c." The book here referred to, is doubtless Wagstaffe’s incomparable work, intituled, “ A Vindication of K. Charles, the Martyr: proving that his Majesty was the author of Erxw Bacshin, &c. I read this book some time ago with supreme satisfaction. Dr. Beniley's head was not clearer than Wagstaffe's; the former does not more completely nullify the ascription of the book called Phalaris's Epistles to the Sicilian Tyrant of that name, than the latter establishes the authenticity of King Charles's work. My edition of “ the Vindication,” is dated 1711 ; it' is in quarto, I conceive that which the memorandum points out must have been in octavo; because there are but 165 pages in mine. The passage alluded to occurs P. 112:-" Let any man compare this book (the Esew Businexn) with the other works of this glorious martyr (K. Charles) and he cannot but see the same generous and free expression, the same clearness of reason, the same greatness of mind, in short, the same majesty throughout. But for the works of Dr. Gauden, there is nothing in the world more ưnlike; a luscious style, stuffed with gaudy metaphors, and fancy, far more expression than matter, a sort of noisy and romantic eloquence. These are the ornaments of Dr. Gauden's writings, and differ as much from the gravity, and majesty of the king's book, as tawdriness does from a genteel and accomplished dress.”
I trust there cannot be two opinions upon the subject; and I have only to lament that my Yorkshire correspondent will not have the gratification of reading a work of Bp. Taylor's which he had not seen before.-Indeed it is not likely that “this divine man," as my friend justly denominates him, would have written an apology for painting the face; for such is the intent of the work; of which, for the amusement of some of your readers, I will subjoin a specimen or two; taking the liberty to add here and there a note of my own; first observing, that “ the discourse' (we should call it now “ a dialogue”) seems to have made a little noise in the world; for Baxter in his Christian Directory, evidently alludes to it; the passage is written at the end of the Sion Coll. Edition of 1692. “ As for the ridiculous effeminate fashions of some men; and the patching, painting, nakedness and other, antick fasbions of some women ; and the many hours which they daily waste in dressing, adorning, and preparing themselves for the sight of others, (they) remain as badges of a foolish and childish sort of persons, &c. Let the patrons of them please their patients by proving them laryful, whilst they have no wiser work to do ; and when they have done, let them go on to prove that it is lawful for sober persons to wear such irons as they do in Bedlam; and that such chains as they in Newgate wear, are no signs of a prisoner ; and that 'tis lawful for an honest woman to wear a harlot's habit.” (p. 244).
The book is an elaborate defence of the practice of painting the face. Two ladies meet together : and one telling the other, after complimente ing her on her looking so well, that she is jealous " lest a person so esteemed for modesty and piety, should use some colour or tincture to advance her complexion ;'--the lady suspected replies; and argues that all painting of the face is not unlawful. The discourse is managed throughout in this way. Thirteen objections against face-painting are urged; and as many answers made to them; and at last the dispute concludes thus, “ moderately and charitably," on the side of the object ing lady. “Madam, I must not only grant you your so-well-merited requests,” (the passing a favourable judgment on those who paint, and pardoning the length of the answers to the objections) " which you shall find have with me the power of commands, being so just and ingenuous : but I must add those most hearty thanks which I owe you for the generous freedom of your discourse, which hath the courage and ability to bring to the review of reason and true religion a case of conscience, which few dare touch or try, contrary to the common vote and credulity, which (for aught I see) may in this, as in other things it oft doth, prove a common error: wherein you deserve the more applause, because in this I do not think you are any way partial to yourself, or so much pleading your own cause, as civilly affording a charitable relief and protection to others, whose infirmity may require or use such helps.
“ For myself, as I wish I may never need any such aids, so truly I should not scruple to use God's and nature's indulgence with those cautions of modesty and discretion which are necessary to accompany all our actions natural, civil and religious; which falling under the empire of our will and choice, are subject to the judicature of God and of our own consciences.
“ Mean time your ladyship hath by the clearness and force of your reason, redeemed me from the captivity wherein by a plebeian kind of censoriousness and popular severity, I sometime delighted, to disparage and lessen those who are reported or suspected to use any auxiliary beauty, notwithstanding I saw in all things else their worth and virtue every way commendable, imitable, and sometime admirable. So much have
you made me a chearful conformist to your judgment and charity, which I find follows not easie and vulgar reports, but searcheth the exacter rules of reason and religion ; which lights, as they now shine in the Church of God, I do not think have left, mankind in the dark as to any thing morally and eminently either good or evil. In the discerning of which, so as to follow the one, and fie the other, I pray
God ever guide us by his Truth and Grace.
“ Tit. 1. 15. To the pure all things are pure ; but to the defiled aud unbelievers nothing is pure, but even their mind and conscience is defiled.”Here the volume concludes; comprized in 238 pages 12mo.
I discern nothing offensive in the author's style here. I am no apologist for Bp. Gauden's style, but perhaps the asserters of the authenticity of King Charles's thoughts " in his solitudes and sufferings,” in order to exalt that of the latter writer, and to draw a stronger line of distinction between them, have depressed the style of the former below its just level. A man whose writings have been given to Bp. Taylor in one instance, and to whom have been ascribed those of King Charles in another, can hardly be held to have written so very contemptibly as some have supposed and others have pronounced.
I give you now a specimen taken from the body of the work. PP. 71-3. But, (Madam,) in vain do I listen to your words,” (this is an answer to Objection 6th, that painting the face argues an heart unsatisfied with God's works and disposings) “ when I see your contrary actions, by which you give yourself the fullest answer, and save me the