Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

For example, the Arminian believes that it is true, in a certain sense, that man's salvation is wholly the fruit of Divine grace; and there is a sense in which the Calvinist believes that every man can be saved if he will, and that it is entirely his own fault if he be not saved; now whether the explanations and distinctions by which these theologians reconcile their sentiments to their systems, the main parts of which may seem so much at variance with them, be satisfactory or not, it is obvious, that when under the influence of strong and excited feeling, and solely intent on a practical exhibition of what they feel rather than perceive to be important truth, they will use nearly the same language and appear to occupy each other's ground. The subtle distinctions with which each, in a cooler statement of his opinions, reconciles his practice to his theory, are quite forgotten: each abandoning what is peculiar in his system, they must for a moment meet on that common ground where both parties are in the right.

The same remarks, to a considerable extent, apply even where there is in the author's mind a consistent system of doctrine. A perfect freedom from the precision of a system, eminently characterizes the sacred writings, which were intended to treat theology, not as it is taught in the schools, but in the most impressive form for all practical purposes; it is conveyed to us in fragments and detached parts, as present exigencies or peculiar circumstances suggested; and the consequence is, that the sacred writers often express themselves with a strength and energy, which at first sight, and without a careful comparison of such passages with others, would appear to be hardly consistent.

Jeremy Taylor's loose and popular phraseology, together with another circumstance already adverted to, the characteristic ardour with which he expresses himself on any topic which, for the moment, engages his attention, perpetually betray him into apparent discrepancies of statement, but which, in very many instances, are, we are persuaded, no more than apparent. This, however, will be granted only by those who possess an extensive familiarity with his phraseology, and a disposition to interpret it with candour.

But this apology, it must be admitted, only extends to certain points. It cannot be denied, that his works abound in many real as well as apparent discrepancies and misstatements, and show, as before stated, that he did not hold any consistent system of theological opinions. Thus, in the question of original sin, he was in some respects a Pelagian, yet (as Heber observes) these sentiments are at direct variance with numberless expressions in his practical writings. Again, that he was no Calvinist in theory, is certain; yet he often uses language which can by no possibility be made to quadrate with any opposite system of doctrine.

This Essay will be concluded with some very brief remarks on the general character of Jeremy Taylor's principal productions. Little or nothing will be said of his peculiarities of manner or style; enough, it is conceived, has already been said on these points in the preceding parts of the Essay. No author ever stamped his writings with the impress of his mind more strongly than did Jeremy Taylor.

In noticing his works, we shall generally take them in the order in which they were published, except when they are on the same or kindred subjects ;—such will be classed together.

The first work which, according to this arrangement, demands attention, is his "Episcopacy Asserted;" published at the request of Charles I. in 1642. As the few observations to be made on this piece equally apply to his "Apology for Authorized and Set Forms of Liturgy," first published in 1646, and his " Discourse of Confirmation," which did not appear till 1663, they may all be classed together. On such subjects, Jeremy Taylor might have been expected to put forth all his powers; yet these works may be safely pronounced, on the whole, the least successful of his controversial writings. Some of his readers may probably impute this inferiority rather to the nature of the subjects, than to any fault in the writer. point, it is not for us to deliver a judgment. "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." The "Apology for Liturgies," however, is undeniably far superior to the other two. Of the "Discourse of Confirmation," even Bishop Heber is constrained to say, that he cannot consider it "a favourable specimen of Taylor's genius."

On this

In these works, but especially the first and last, he has furnished most conclusive evidence of the correctness of certain remarks formerly made on his character as a reasoner, and of the influence his learning exerted over his logical powers. It was there remarked, that he is but too apt to measure his arguments more by number than by weight, and to furnish rather what his vast reading has supplied, than what his deliberate judgment could approve. This is obviously the case in the present instances. In his eagerness to make good, and more than make good his positions; to render unassailable, institutions which he so profoundly reverenced and admired;—he presses every argument, sound and unsound, into the service;

and, though he omits nothing that is really valid, introduces much that is perfectly worthless, and which no judicious advocates in the same cause, even in his own time, ever thought of employing. He who, in defending" episcopacy," could argue that the form of ecclesiastical government and polity which Christ intended for his church, must be purely matter of revelation, and who could then attempt to seek episcopacy in the New Testament, in all its parts, and in its fully developed form; he who could find, in the appointment of the twelve apostles and seventy disciples, the first institution of bishops and presbyters; he who, in defending the rite of confirmation, could allege the descent of the Holy Ghost on our Lord after his baptism, and our Saviour's declaration to Nicodemus, of the necessity of baptism by water and the Spirit, as proof that confirmation is a divinely constituted rite, can hardly be trusted as a judicious controvertist, however multifarious or profound his learning. Not seldom would he be likely to impair the force of arguments really sound, by mingling them with others so obviously absurd and puerile. All these treatises, however, are full of learning; and in many parts distinguished by great acuteness and ingenuity of argument; while the "Apology for the Authorized and Set Forms of Liturgy," contains many splendid specimens of Taylor's characteristic eloquence.

The next considerable work which demands notice, and which first appeared in 1648, is his " Liberty of Prophesying." This, of all his controversial pieces, is the one by which his name is best known, and which has most endeared him to posterity. It is, as already stated, a defence of toleration, a doctrine then little understood and less practised.

Though one of the earliest, and by far the most eloquent work, that had as yet appeared on this much controverted subject, it was by no means the first. The independents, to whom undoubtedly belongs the immortal honour of having first advocated, and of having first attempted to carry into practice, the principles of toleration, had already published several tracts and sermons in defence of this doctrine.

It is true that Jeremy Taylor's work is a defence of toleration, yet those who should judge of it merely from a knowledge of other great works on the same subject, (more especially that of Locke,) would form a very erroneous conception of its nature. It differs from other works very materially, both in the nature of the arguments on which it lays the most stress and in the extent to which it advocates the doctrine itself. In some respects the toleration for which Taylor pleads, is far more limited than a just and enlarged view of the subject would demand, and in others more extensive than is contended for even by many of its advocates at the present day. A word or two on these points.

As to his arguments, he has chiefly insisted on those which other writers on the same subject have considered subordinate, while those which they justly regard as principal, he has nearly omitted altogether. Thus, while the generality of those who have advocated toleration, at least since Locke's time, have founded their arguments principally on the inalienable right of all men to form their own opinions on the subject of religion, as irresponsible, except to the Supreme, for the exercise of their freedom of thought, Jeremy Taylor pleads for it principally on the grounds of the infinite difficulty, and, in many cases, absolute impossibility, of ascertaining what is truth; and the consequent expediency and duty of treating differences of opinion with enlarged charity and forbearance. He pleads for it from a deep compassion for human infirmities and frailty; others, from a consciousness that such freedom is an inalienable prerogative of our nature. It follows, of course, from his mode of exhibiting and defending the doctrine, that his toleration would only extend to those subordinate and non-essential points, in which it may be absolutely impossible or exceedingly difficult to ascertain the truth; and that, consequently, if there are any fundamental truths which may be deemed sufficiently plain to all, and about which there is little or no dispute, toleration is not to be extended to those who deny them. It is precisely within these limits that he constructs his theory.

In consequence, as it was necessary, on his hypothesis, to draw the line somewhere, he would extend toleration to all who agree in the belief of the prime articles of the christian faith, as embodied in the Apostles' creed, with the single exception of the clause respecting" Christ's descent into hell;" leaving all at perfect liberty to form their own opinions on all subordinate points of doctrine and of church

government.

This theory, defective as it is, was, it must be confessed, an astonishing triumph of charity for that age, and, had it been fully acted upon, would, in those times, have been productive of as much practical benefit to the nation to which it was more immediately proposed, as a theory founded on principles far more comprehensive and abstractedly more just; and for this simple reason, that in that age there were few who did not agree in the fundamental articles of the Apostles' creed; all the more bitter and intolerant feeling was

e

displayed precisely on those points, on which Taylor would have left every man to the liberty of his own reason. Still, however, viewed as a theory of toleration, irrespective of the peculiarities of the age and nation, it must be acknowledged to be exceedingly imperfect. It was this which induced us to observe, that in some respects, the toleration for which he pleads is far more limited than it ought to be. It is obvious that his theory extends no indulgence to those who should deny any of the prime articles of the Apostles' creed, (a class of men who are now universally admitted to have as much right to toleration as any other classes of religionists,) still less to those who should reject christianity altogether, or to the professors of a totally different system of religion. There are many passages of the work, however, which indicate that Jeremy Taylor was not far from more comprehensive views of the subject, and that he often found himself shackled by the limits he had imposed on himself. This is clearly apparent in his apologies for the "anabaptists" and "papists," apologies which subjected him in many quarters to the severest

censures.

It is not difficult to trace the causes which induced Jeremy Taylor to found his plea for toleration, rather on the pity due to human frailty than on the rights of reason. It was another of the many instances, -some of which have been already referred to,—in which his philosophy was the fruit of his benevolence, and in which the instincts of an ardent and unfeigned charity, in the absence of more enlarged and comprehensive speculation, led him at least a considerable distance on the road to truth.

But it has been remarked, that if in one respect Jeremy Taylor's theory was defective, and the toleration for which he pleaded too limited, in another it is far more extensive than many of its advocates in the present day would approve. He goes so far as to contend, (as indeed might be inferred from the title of the work,) that no communion ought to impose on its ministers the belief of any other articles, than those fundamental ones on which he bases his whole scheme of toleration. Into this view he was naturally led by considering the question not merely as an advocate of the rights of men, but as a theologian anxious for the growth and prosperity of the christian church. The mere advocate of the civil rights of men has done his duty on this great point, when he has vindicated their liberty to form and express their own opinions without reference to any particular system of religious belief. It is enough for him if no man imposes his peculiar opinions on his neighbour, and no communion its doctrines on another communion. But the christian, viewing the whole subject in relation to the principles of that religion he professes, would go somewhat farther. It is, indeed, a general truth, that every community of men has an abstract right to admit and exclude its own members on its own terms; but Jeremy Taylor would have these terms as few and as simple as possible; not multiplied beyond the most apparent necessity, nor beyond the candid interpretation of the great statute-book. Such a man would argue thus for the sake of the union and the consequent progress of the universal church.

Whether Jeremy Taylor's principles can ever be acted on to the fullest extent, with respect to the admission or exclusion of the ministers or stated members of any particular communion, may admit of question; but there is little hazard in asserting, that they ought at least to regulate the intercourse of the ministers and members of differing communions, with one another. Viewed in this light, his system exhibits a profound knowledge of the great principles of evangelical charity, and forms an illustrious instance of the extent to which a sublime and eminently practical piety can sometimes overbear all the prejudices of a particular age and country, and anticipate that better order of things,-that reign of universal forbearance and love,―to which all things are tending. It may be confidently affirmed that the views of Jeremy Taylor on this subject are rapidly diffusing themselves in the present day. While religious communions continue to stand sullenly aloof from one another on points which they all mutually admit to be non-essential; while their ministers refuse all interchange of offices; so long must they, when judged by the enlarged principles of the gospel, be accounted intolerant, whatever liberty they may allow to one another. They may not wish to impose their creed on other denominations of christians; but so long as there is no sympathy, no communion, no interchange of kindness between the differing parties, so long are they violating the great principle of christian toleration. They may retain their different opinions; they may, they must form separate communions on those differences; but whenever those differences are confessedly non-essential, it ought not to prevent, and the time is coming when it will not prevent, a truly fraternal intercourse. Then, and not till then, will they be truly tolerant.

Jeremy Taylor, after he had attained the honours of a bishopric, was charged with having at least partially abandoned the principles maintained in the "Liberty of Prophesying," in certain public discourses, more especially in his "Sermon," preached at the opening of the Parliament in Ireland. It ap

pears, however, to the present writer, as to Bishop Heber, that Taylor cannot be justly charged with having materially modified any of his main opinions. The supposition has very probably flowed from the altered tone which Jeremy Taylor adopted. We all know that a total change of circumstances will make a wonderful difference in the mode of stating certain sentiments we still hold, as well as in the degree of zeal with which we defend them. It was not in human nature that Jeremy Taylor (and with all his excellencies, he was by no means exempt from our common frailties) should express himself, when raised to a bishopric, and, above all, severely annoyed by those very differences of religion for which he had claimed toleration, with the same earnestness and eagerness with which he expressed himself, when his own church was under a cloud, and a suppliant for that indulgence which she, in common with other communions, had so long denied to others.

66

The "Liberty of Prophesying" is introduced by a beautiful dedication to Hatton, in which the writer' briefly but most eloquently expounds the principles of the work. The work itself is divided into twentytwo sections. The first two are occupied in explaining the general principles on which his scheme of toleration is founded; the following seven, in showing that there is no certain judge of controversies; neither " scripture," from the differing views of its interpreters; nor "tradition," nor councils," nor "the pope," nor the "fathers or writers ecclesiastical," nor the church" in its diffusive capacity." The next three sections are employed in discussing the "authority of reason," and "the causes which render errors innocent in pious persons." The thirteenth and fourteenth enjoin the conduct to be pursued "towards those who differ from us;" the fourteenth is a noble chapter on the origin of persecution. From the fifteenth to the twentieth sections, the author is engaged in showing within what limits the principle of toleration should be adopted by churches and governors, with an apology for the anabaptists and Roman catholics. The last two sections are thus entitled ; "The duty of particular churches in allowing communion,” and, “That particular men may communicate with churches of different persuasions, and how far they may do it."

There are some subordinate

Such is the general character and such the outline of this great work. statements with which few would in this day agree, but which cannot be specifically noticed in the narrow limits of the present Essay. The whole work abounds in learning, and is full of Taylor's sublime and characteristic eloquence.

[ocr errors]

The next work of any considerable magnitude was, his "Life of Christ, or the Great Exemplar." As the Holy Living and Dying," (which was published very shortly after it,) and the "Contemplations on the State of Man," are all mainly of a practical and devotional character, they will here be classed together, as they have many of the same general features of resemblance, and were intended to serve precisely the same great ends.

To these works, more especially, are applicable certain observations which were made some few pages back, when speaking of Jeremy Taylor's religious character. It was then mentioned, as a matter of regret, that the pious author did not always give sufficient prominence to those cardinal doctrines of the gospel, which lie at the basis of the whole christian system; and, without which, precepts may be enjoined, indeed, but will never be fully obeyed. That Jeremy Taylor firmly believed all this; that he was deeply impressed with the beautiful and symmetrical structure of the gospel, and the mutual subordination of all its parts,— is evident from numberless passages of his works; still he is apt, in the works now under consideration, to introduce the grand and inspiring topics of the christian faith with too great a rarity; to insist on many*

* These observations apply not so much to the "Great Exemplar," however, as to the "Holy Living and Dying," and the "Contemplations on the State of Man." As a brief illustration, we may point to the following observations in the section on "Contentedness in all Estates and Accidents." We should like to know whether a bereaved parent or friend was ever very effectually consoled by such considerations as these.

"To cure which, [sorrow for a departed friend,] we may consider, that all the world must die, and therefore to be impatient at the death of a person, concerning whom it was certain and known that he must die, is to mourn, because thy friend or child was not born an angel; and, when thou hast awhile made thyself miserable by an importunate and useless grief, it may be thou shalt die thyself, and leave others to their choice, whether they will mourn for thee or no: but, by that time, it will appear, how impertinent that grief was, which served no end of life, and ended in thy own funeral. But what great matter is it, if sparks fly upward, or a stone falls into a pit; if that which was combustible be burned, or that which was liquid be melted, or that which is mortal do die? It is no more than a man does every day; for every night death hath gotten possession of that day, and we shall never live that day over again; and when the last day is come, there are no more days left for us to die."-" But (as concerning thy own particular) remove thy thoughts back to those days in which thy child was not born, and you are now, but as then you was, and there is no difference, but that you had a son born: and if you reckon that for evil, you are unthankful for the blessing; if it be good, it is better that you had the blessing for a while, than not at all; and yet, if he had never been born, this sorrow had not been at all."

of the very subordinate motives to obedience, at a length very disproportioned to their relative magnitude and importance; and now and then, though not very often, to enforce great duties, or inculcate self-control, moderation, severity of manners, and contempt of the world, by a profuse employment of arguments, not false in themselves, but totally inefficacious; arguments which would better befit the pages of those stoical moralists, whom he so lavishly quotes, than those of a christian theologian; arguments which, if they are worthy of mention at all, might be glanced at with the utmost brevity; so inconsiderable is the influence they exert, compared with those grand and overpowering motives which the gospel supplies, which ought ever to be the principal incentives to " Holy Living and Dying," and the never-ceasing subjects of those who would teach the way either to the one or the other.

It may also be observed, that a more cautious style of expression would have been eminently desirable in many instances, to guard his readers against the error and the danger of supposing that there is some meritorious efficacy in their good deeds, or that heaven may be purchased by a certain amount of prayers and alms. It is certain, that Taylor's fixed and often repeated opinion was, that a christian's obedience flows simply from an unfeigned reception of the cardinal doctrines of the gospel, and derives its whole value from the efficacy of Christ's work. It was stated in a preceding page that Jeremy Taylor was apt to express himself with extraordinary latitude and want of caution, and the causes of this peculiarity were pointed out; there are, perhaps, few of the instances of incautious expression referred to in the above work, which, when interpreted, as in all fairness they ought to be, by comparison with other portions of his writings, are not susceptible of a sound solution. Still there are some instances in which he cannot be vindicated from inconsistency of statement; while there are many others, in which, though he may have meant well, he has not expressed himself wisely.

To him, however, who peruses these works with correct views, and who habitually applies to them, as he goes on, the grand principles and doctrines of the gospel, there are few pieces of practical theology which may be rendered more profitable. They are evidently the productions of one who had attained very exalted views of that elevation and purity of character, which it is the object of christianity to form in all who embrace it; who himself panted to attain it; and who habitually, and diligently, and prayerfully used all those holy "arts," and "instruments," and "methods," which Infinite Wisdom has enjoined for the conservation and increase of piety. They are the works of one who knew much of human nature—of its infirmities, and its temptations; and of the whole science (and it is a profound one) of christian experience. The Life of Christ, or the Great Exemplar," is as characteristic both of Jeremy Taylor's peculiar excellences, and his peculiar defects, as any of his works; and it may be added, that it is one in which the former appear in the most attractive, and the latter in their least repulsive, forms. The chief excellences of Jeremy Taylor do not, as is well known even to his most superficial readers, consist in continuity of thought, or regularity of method, but in detached passages of exquisite beauty. Now, as the work in question is, in fact, nothing more or less than a number of devout meditations on the principal incidents of our Saviour's life, the qualities above mentioned are not much missed, because not much wanted.

The title of the work, "The History of the Life of Christ," can give the reader but a very imperfect, or rather an erroneous, idea of its nature or its contents. The "Great Exemplar," by which it is generally known, gives a much more correct impression. It is, as already stated, a series of devout reflections and meditations on the principal events in our Saviour's history. It is almost wholly practical, and has scarcely an observation of a critical nature in it. Nay, the author not only makes no attempt to elucidate the critical difficulties of the gospel narrative, or to harmonize apparent discrepancies, or to arrange the events of Christ's life in chronological order, but avails himself of the accounts, often most fabulous and absurd, which the traditions of the early ages have preserved respecting our Lord, his family, and his disciples.

Many of these "Discourses" are amongst the most beautiful and impressive specimens of Jeremy Taylor's eloquence. And it may be remarked, as a proof of the exuberance and fertility of his mind, that many of those "sections," which are on subjects apparently the most barren, are rich in vigorous thought and beautiful illustration. It is impossible not to admire, with what felicitous art, with what originality, -he will often found, on the most trivial fact of sacred history, a train of the most impressive reflection. The reader may easily see an illustration of this remark, by turning to discourse the first, section third, on the "Duty of nursing Children in Imitation of the blessed Virgin Mother;" or the discourse, section fourth, entitled " Considerations of the Epiphany of the blessed Jesus by a Star, and the Adoration of Jesus by the Eastern Magi;" and to the thoughts on " Meditation," which, by the by, with the exception of

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »