"If I had twenty children of my own, I would inoculate them ev'ry one.-". "Ay, but should any of them die! what moan Would then be made, for vent'ring thereupon?" "No; I should think that I had done the best; And be resign'd, whatever should befall.—” "But could you really be so, quite at rest?" "I could"-" Then why inoculate at all? "Since to resign a child to God, who gave, Is full as easy, and as just a part, When sick, and led by Nature to the grave, As when in health, and driv'n to it by Art." AN ANSWER TO SOME INQUIRIES, CONCERNING THE AUTHOR'S OPINION OF A SERMON PREACHED AT UPON THE OPERATION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. SAY to the sermon?-Why, you all were by, A perfect, plain, intelligible rule, Whatever doctrine in one age was true, Tho' circumstance may change-its inward aim, No thinking Christian can be pleas'd to hear Be time, or place, or person, or what will, Its consecrated phrases, one would think, The modish critical haranguer, heard, But o'er his sounding canopy, why bring Of heads so fatten'd, and of hearts so starv'd, REMARKS ON DR. BROWN'S ESTIMATE, WRITTEN IN THE CHARACTER OF A LADY. THE book appears to my perusing sight, One seeming proof of such a coalition Somewhere before the middle of the book, Not who shall pay―as some divines have plann'd, Truly the works of distaff and of needle Are worth whole volumes of courageous Tweedle; With the sum total-" Britons! all be free; Take the brown musket up, and follow me: Let us be strong, be hardy, sturdy, rough; Till we are all beatifi'd in buff." 1 "We may with truth and candour conclude that the ruling character of the present times is that of a vain, luxurious, and selfish effeminacy." Brown's Estimate. Sect. 6. 2" It hath been urged indeed as a proof that the natural spirit of defence is not yet extinguished, that we raised such large sums during the Rebellion, and still continue such plentiful supplies for the support of our fleets and armies. This is weak reasoning: for will not cowardice, at least as soon as courage, part with a shilling or a pound to avoid danger?-The capital question therefore still remains-Not who shall pay, but who shall fight?" Sect. 6. WITH manners just the same, as we are told, Person and dress is left us to apply, But while men fight, both clergyfi'd and lay, Love of our country is the manly sound That clads in armour all the Virtues round: Where is this lovely country to be sought? Why 'tis Great Britain, in their little thought: And the two states which these divines advance, The Heav'n of England, and the Hell of France. Women must pray—and, if divines can reach No higher a theology-must preach. This world this sea bound spot of it-may seem The central Paradise in men's esteem, Who have great souls; but women who have none, Have other realms to fix their hearts upon. If such there be-the only certain scheme To guard against each possible extreme, Is to put on, amidst the world's alarms, With a good heart, our real country's arms; Faith, hope, and patience, from the tow'rs 'above, All-bearing meekness, and all conqu'ring love. REMARKS ON A PAMPHLET, ENTITLED, EPISTLES TO THE DOCTOR, this new poetic species "The sexes have now little other apparent distinction beyond that of person and dress: their peculiar and characteristic manners are confounded and lost: the one sex having advanced into boldness, as the other have sunk into effeminacy," Sect. 5. 4" Thus we have attempted a simple delineation of the ruling manners of the times: if any thing like ridicule appears to mix itself with this review, it ariseth not from the aggravation, but the natural display of folly." Sect. 5. These Epistles were published in the year 1757.- -"The species of poetry," says the editor," in which they are written has been used with great success among the French, by Chapelle, Chaulieu, La Farre, Gresset, madame Deshoulieres, and others."-To quote from them all the For a Chapelle, or a Chaulieu, In rambling rhymes, La Farre, and Gresset, In English verse and English sense, Of this new fangl'd melodee? Whom Dryads, Naiads, Nymphs, and Fauns, expressions alluded to in the following verses, would but swell out the notes to an unnecessary length. It is thought sufficient therefore to distinguish such allusions by Italic characters, Will make our metre flat and bare EPILOGUE TO HURLOTHRUMBO, OR THE SUPERNATURAL'. LADIES and gentlemen, my lord of Flame Adso! here's one of 'em. 'This play was written by Mr. Samuel Johnson, à dancing master, of Cheshire, and performed in the year 1722, at the Little Theatre, in the Haymarket, where it had a run of above thirty nights. We must refer the reader to the piece itself, to give him a just idea of the humour and propriety of the following epilogue; which was written by our author, with a friendly intention to point out to Mr. Johnson the extravagance and absurdity of his play. Mr. Johnson, however, so far from perceiving the ridicule, received it as a compliment, and had it both spoken and printed. Cr. A strange odd play, sir; Enter Author, pushes Hurlothrumbo aside. Au. Let me come to him.-Pray, what's that you say, sir? Cr. I say, sir, rules are not observ'd here. Au. Rules, Like clocks and watches, were all made for fools. Rules make a play? that is Cr. What, Mr. Singer? Au. As if a knife and fork should make a finger. Au. There's a rebellion tho'; and that's as good. Au. Why didn't here A spirit and a genius both appear? Cr. Poh, 'tis all stuff and nonsense. Au. Lack-a-day! Why that's the very essence of a play. own. Cr. Here wants Au, Wants what? why now, for all your cantWhat one ingredient of a play is wanting? [ing, Music, love, war, death, madness without sham, Done to the life by persons of the dram: Scenes and machines, descending and arising; Thunder and lightning; ev'ry thing surprising! Cr. Play, farce, or opera, is't? Au. No matter whether 'Tis a rehearsal of 'em all together. But come, sir, come, troop off, old Blundermonger, And interrupt the Epilogue no longer. [Author drives the Critic off the stage. Hurlo, proceed. Hurlo. Troth! he says true enough, Pursues the point beyond its highest height, Never, no never; not while vital breath I'll give it utterance-be it right or wrong: REMARKS ON DR. MIDDLETON'S EXAMINATION OF THE LORD BISHOP OF LONDON'S DISCOURSES CONCERNING THE USE AND INTENT OF PROPHECY. 2 PETER i. 19. "We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day-star arise in your hearts." THIS passage, sir, which has engag'd of late So many writers in such high debate About the nature of prophetic light Has not, I think, been understood aright: Nor does the critic Middleton's new tract Relate the meaning fairly, or the fact. But let this suit the priesthood, if you will, Pray what foundation for his critic skill? For Peter's doubting what he saw and heardFor scruples-first imagin'd, then infer'd? 50 The reason here assign'd is "Fear and dread, O vain suggestion? could they see and hear If they were struck with more than mortal awe, Their very fear was proof of what they saw; For strength to see, and weakness to sustain, Made, both alike, the heavenly vision plain: 60 Nor has he once attempted to devise [prise. What else should strike them with so great surIf, overcome with reverential dread, Th' amaz'd apostle wist not what he said, 10 Unbias'd reason would itself confess A greater light diminishing its less. Thus in the sacred books, if we recall The first recorded presence since the fall, Themselves from God when our first parents hid, It might be said, they wist not what they did: 70 Yet were they taught their comfortable creed, The promise of the woman's conq'ring seed; As here, th' apostles were empower'd to see That Jesus, God's beloved Son, was he. Peter, you know, sir, by his own account, Now search of mysteries the whole abyss, 20 30 40 What kind of sauntering spirit could suggest Such groundless cavil to a Christian breast? What Christian priest, at least, would choose to His Saviour's glory in a light so faint? [paint 1 "This wonderful apparition and heavenly voice might be accompanied with such circumstances as would naturally leave some doubt and perplexity on the mind concerning the precise manner and nature of the whole transaction. For Peter, as we read, was in such a fright and amazement at what he saw and heard, that he knew not what he said: and both he and the two other apostles then with him, James and John, were so greatly terrified, that they fell upon their faces to the ground, and durst not so much as look up, till Jesus, when the vision was over, came to raise and encourage them."-Dr. Middleton's Treatise, p. 55. 80 If, when God spake, each fell upon his faceHow oft in ancient times was this the case? What prophet, sir, to whom he spake of yore, His voice, or vision, unsupported bore? Moses himself, when unawares he trod On holy ground and heard the voice of God, Tho' turn'd aside on purpose to inquire What kept the bush unburnt amidst the fire, Stop'd in his search by the divine rebuke, Straight hid his face, and was afraid to look. Abram, the covenanted sire of all, Who, in his faith, upon the Lord should call, When he receiv'd the scal of it, the sign Of circumcision, from the voice divine, Fell on his face-and must we then conceit His proofs, that God talk'd with him, incomplete? Read how Isaiah thought himself undone When he had seen God's glory in his Son; Until the seraph, with a living coal From off the altar, purg'd the prophet's soul. Read how Ezekiel too, with like surprise, When Heav'n was open'd to his wond'ring eyes, Fell on his face, at the same glorious sight; Till, by God's spirit, made to stand upright, Thus Daniel prostrate, thus the great divine Who saw the apocaliptic scenes-in fine, Thus human strength alone could never stand, When God appear'd, unaided by his hand. To urge a reason then from fear, to doubt The glorious fact, that could not be without, Only befits a feeble, faithless mind, To heav'nly voice and vision deaf and blind. 91 100 Concluding it impossible from hence That this could ever be St. Peter's sense. Tho' " 'tis not only possible, it seems, But weak, moreover," as the doctor deems, "To doubt it-a comparison so just And hence th' apostle (is the inf'rence drawn, Peter not only might have made, but must.-" 120 Take all for true that quoted lines affirm; To prove the paradox from learned clerks: [way Of these endowments," Lightfoot shows the To favour that which we would recommend, This, sir, is his description of sound faith.— Is call'd to prove a voice from Heav'n a jest; 140 * P. 47. "Let us now return to the bishop's Discourses, in which he goes on to demonstrate the inconsistency of the author's (Collins) exposition, by telling us, that it makes Peter to say, in his own person, that the dark prophecies of the Old Testament were a surer and more certain evidence to himself, than the immediate voice of God, which he had heard with his own ears. And is it possible,' adds he, that St. Peter, or any man in his wits, could make such a comparison? To which question, so smartly and confidently put, I readily answer, that it is not only possible, that St. Peter might make such a comparison, but even weak to imagine that he could make any other." 3 P. 52. "Doctor Lightfoot also, the soundness of whose faith and erudition is allowed by all, speaks more precisely to my present purpose, and says, that If we observe two things, first, that the Jewish nation, under the second temple, was given to magical arts beyond measures; we may safely suspect that those voices, which they thought to be from Heaven, and noted with the name of bath-kol, were either formed by the devil in the air, to deceive the people; or, by magicians with devilish art, to promote their own affairs.' From which he draws this inference, which I would recommend to the special consideration of this eminent prelate: 'Hence,' adds he, the apostle Peter saith with good reason, that the word of prophecy was surer than a voice from Heaven."" 4 P. 141. "Now by the same method of reasoning, and the liberty which his lordship every where assumes, of supposing whatever premises be wants, and taking every thing for granted, which tends to confirm his hypothesis, we may prove any doctrine to be true, or divine, or whatever we please to make of it. Dr. Lightfoot has shown us the way." And then assume that the apostle too 150 160 170 But should the prelate think it mere grimace To talk of fable in St. Peter's case, Whose words exclude it, and expressly speak Of heav'nly truth; how frivolous and weak, In his more sober and sedate esteem, Must all this patch-work erudition seem! How will a Christian bishop too conceive Of what the doctor's margins interweave, Touching that scripture, where our Saviour And Heav'n the glorifying answer made! [pray'd, While from his note, sir, nothing can be learn'd But casual thunder, or bath-kol concern'd3. Will he not ask-Is it this author's aim, Under his bath-kol figments to disclaim All faith in voices of a heavenly kind? Is that the purpose of his doubting mind? You see th' apostle is extremely clear, That such a voice himself did really hear: He also had such wond'rous proofs beside, That voice concurrent cannot be deny'd. And, when our Lord had been baptis'd, there A voice from Heav'n, in words the very same. Here, in his answer'd prayer, tho', by mistake, Some said it thunder'd, some, an angel spake, We have his own authority divine; {mine." "This voice," said he, " came for your sakes, not Would not the bishop rightly thus oppose 181 Plain scripture facts to learning's empty shows? What signifies it then, upon the whole, How poor blind Jews have talk'd about bath-kol? What jarring critics of a later day, Or Lightfoot, here thrice ridicul'd, may say? Or Middleton himself-whose pious care For giftless churches prompts him to compare Voices from Heav'n, in his assuming page, To miracles beyond th' apostles age: Taking for granted, without more ado, His wild hypothesis about them too. [came Prodigious effort! see obstructed quite The Gospel promise, and the Christian right; 190 5 P. 48. "N. B. Thus when Jesus, a little before his death, was addressing himself to the Father, in the midst of his disciples and people of Jerusalem, and saying: Father, save me from this hour; Father, glorify thy name.' There came a voice from Heaven, saying: 'I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again. Upon which the people, that stood by and heard it, said that it thundered; others said, that an angel spake to him. (John xii. 28.) That is, part of the company believed it to be nothing more than an accidental clap of thunder; while others took it to be the bath-kol, or the voice of God, or of an angel, which was accompanied always with thunder." 6 P. 142, 145, 171. P. 50. "The reality of this oracular voice (bath-kol) is attested, as I have said, by all the Jewish writers, after the cessation of prophecy, in the same positive manner as the miraculous gifts of the Christian church by the primitive fathers, after the days of the apostles." |