Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

able articles. To his pen alfo, "The British Critic," and "The Antijacobin Review," were indebted for various pieces of criticism.

But the ftrength of his principles is no where more apparent than in thofe articles where he comes forward armed with the panoply of truth, in defence of our civil and ecclefiaftical conftitution. It was there he ftruck his adverfaries with confternation; and we behold the hoft of Jacobins fhrinking away from before his face, and creeping into their caverns of darkness. But we are here betrayed into expreffons perhaps too violent for plain profe.-This reminds us of another part of our friend's literary character: we mean his poetical genius. That he contributed fome fine pieces of poetry to The Cornwall and Devon Poets," is well known. These were published in two fmall octavo volumes and the editor is faid to poffefs a fufficient quantity of good verfe, by Mr. Whitaker, to fill forty or fifty pages of a third volume, once in contemplation.

We have thus, with rapid glances, reviewed the productions of our old and valued friend; and hailed him in the feveral departments of the HISTORIAN, the THEOLOGIST, the CRITIC, the POLITICIAN, the ANTIQUARY, and the POET. Verfatility like Whitaker's is, in truth, of rare occurrence. But fill more rare is the fplendour of original genius, exhibited in walks fo various. Not that Mr. W. was equally happy in them all. His characteristic qualities as a writer, were acute difcernment, a velocity of ideas which acquired new force in compofition, with a power of combining images in a manner peculiarly ftriking, and of throwing on every topic of difcuffion the ftrongeit illuftration. With little fcruple, therefore, we hazard an opinion, that though his chief excellence was recognized in antiquarian research, he would have rifen to fome diftinction as a poet, had he cultivated in early youth the favour of the Mules. Be this as it may, there are none who will deem us extravagant in pronouncing, that Mr. W. was a great literary character. That he was good, as well as great,

Of the British Critic he was the regular coadjutor in antiquarian and other lore, from the beginning of 1797, to the very end of 1801; when a refufal to admit his opinions on the subject of Offian, caufed a feparation between him and the conductors of that work, though by no means any irritation or quarrel. 'We faw him in his laft vifit to London, with great fatisfaction and increafe of regard,

would

would fufficiently appear in the recollection of any period of his life; whether we faw him abandoning preferment from principle, and heard him" reafoning of righteousness and judgment to come," until a Gibbon trembled; or whether, among his parishioners, we witneffed his unaffected earneftness of preaching, his humility in converfing with the pooreft cottagers, his fincerity in affifting them with advice, his tenderness in offering them confolation, and his charity in relieving their diftreffes. It is true, to the fame warmth of temper, together with a fenfe of good intentions, we must attribute an irritability at times deftructive of social comfort; and an impetuoufnefs that brooked not oppofition, and bore down all before it. This precipitation was in part alfo to be traced to his ignorance of the world; to his fimplicity in believing others like himfelf-precifely what they feemed to be; and, on the detection of his error, his anger at diffimulation or hypocrify. But his general good humour, his hofpitality, and his convivial pleafantry, were furely enough to atone for thofe fudden burfts of paffion, thofe flashes, which betrayed his human frailty, but fill argued genius. And they who knew how "fearfully and wonderfully he was made," could bear from a Whitaker what they would certainly have refented in another. We should add, that in his family Mr. W. was uniformly regular: nor did he fuffer, at any time, his literary cares to trench on his domeftic duties.

Such was the Hiftorian of Manchefter, and the rector of Ruan-Lanyhorne; of whofe public and private life we have endeavoured to draw a faithful sketch: and we fhould now close up all, in marking the approaches to "the inevitable hour," at which this life was terminated, but for the literary fchemes ftill formed in that mind of high intelligence, and ftill prepared for execution.

66

Not many months before his death, the writer of this article heard him fpeak of Notes on Shakspeare," and "Illuftrations of the Bible." But he wished to finish his

[ocr errors]

Oxford," his London," and his "St. Neot," (already mentioned as projected publications) before he refumed his Shakespeare," on which he had occafionally written notes; and, to lay afide his Shakespeare, before he took up his "Bible." To the Bible, he ineant, at laft to withdraw himfelf from all other ftudies: it was "the Holy of Holics," into which he longed to enter.

All this he intended to do: and all this, if a few years had been added to his life, he would probably have done.

With a view to the laft three antiquarian works, (but chiefly to the London,") he determined to travel to the metropolis and thither he travelled, with all the ardour of youthful fpirits. But even for his athletic frame, he had a mind of too reftlefs an activity. Amidft his indefatigable refearches into the antiquities of the city, his friends detected the first symptoms of bodily decay. His journey to London, his vaft exertions there in procuring information, his energetic and various converfation with literary charac ters, brought on a debility which he little regarded, till it alarmed him in a stroke of paralyfis. From this ftroke, not long after his return into Cornwall, he recovered fo far as to be able to purfue (though not many hours in a day) his accustomed ftudies: and it was the Life of St. Neot that chiefly occupied his attention. Of the actual publication of this, which was in the piefs at the time of his death, a very good account may be feen in a preface prefixed to the volame, by Mr. Stockdale, and containing two letters of Mr. Whitaker's, in the laft of which he fill writes with confidence as to his further plans. Alas, never to be completed!

During this last year, his decline was gradual; nor, me lancholy as it was, could a Chriftian contemplate it without a lively mixture of pleafure; fince, when he became fenfible of his approaching diffolution, he was uniformly fupported by the cheerfulness of refignation, and the frength of faith. His were in truth the refignation and the cheer, ful nefs which became a primitive difciple of that Jefus in whole mercies he repofed, and to whofe mediation alone he looked with confidence. His end, we are affured, was fuch as could not but give comfort to thofe who viewed it; particularly when (on October 80, 1808), in the awful hour which gave him a nearer affurance of approaching happinefs, at peace with himfelf, his fellow-creatures, and his God, he fank as into quiet flumber, without a fruggle or a pang; and, with a fmile on his countenance, expired.

A

ART.

ART. II. A Differtation upon the Logos of St. John, comprebending the Subflance of Sermons, preached before the Univerfity of Oxford, by Richard Lawrence, LL D. Rector of Merfham, Kent. 8vo. pp. 83. 3s. 1808. Oxford. Parker.

DR. Lawrence being a writer who has paid particular atten

tion to the most profound and laborious works of modern biblical critics, his remarks on any particular topic, connected with that branch of ftudy, muft be exceedingly valuable. The differtation before us undoubtedly demands the closest attention of every theologian. It is become fo common a firatagem with a certain party adverse to the doctrine of Chrift's Divinity, to promulgate opinions in direct contradiction to the teftimony of antiquity, that the world ought to be protected from every mifrepresentation of this nature, by the utmost efforts of the learned. Dr. Lawrence propofes in this differtation to confider "the fuppofed origin of this expreffion, the feveral meanings which have been affixed to it, and the genuine acceptation of it among the earliest Christian writers on record." The work is accordingly divided into three parts, in which thefe three topics are feverally difcuffed. As to the origin of the term, he diftinctly confiders the alledged derivation of it from the Chaldea Paraphrafts, from the Platonic or Alexandrian Philofophy, from the Gnoftics, and from the terms used in the xxxiiid Pfalm, ver. 6. Upon all which points he plainly proves, that many things have been affumed as matter of fact, for which there is very little if any plaufible ground.

It is doubtful, for inftance, whether the Targumifts were ever known to St. John, or whether indeed they could be known, the time of their compofition and appearance being very uncertain. As to the adoption of the term in the sense of the Platonifts, this is ftill more improbable, fince it does not appear that the Philofophy alluded to was in any manner generally embraced by the Jews; the correfpondence difcoverable in the writings of Philo, being attributable only to the particular fentiments of that learned Jew, and his individual endeavours to combine the two fystems; at least there is no contemporary evidence to the contrary. In attributing the term, with many others in the proem of St.John's Gofpel, to the fyftem of Gnoftics, fome of the most learned authors appear to have confounded the tenets of the earlier and later heretics of that denomination; and thus to have fallen into a palpable anachronism. The Valentinian doctrines being fubfequent to the times of the Evangelift, he could at the utmost

only have alluded to them proleptically, and confequently by divine inspiration. That the term was fuggefted by the expreffion of the Pfalmift, Pf. xxxiii. ver. 6, Dr. L. is in no manner difpofed to admit, and indeed it would be a matter of extreme difficulty to reconcile the Pfalmift and the Evangeli, without falling into the groffeft contradictions.

There remains one more conceit as to its origin, and that is, that it is ufed metonymically, and this interpretation the learned author himself feems most inclined to adopt. Let the origin however of the word be what it may, another enquiry remains, namely, in what fenfe was the term applied by thofe from whom it has been fuppofed to be derived; and this enquiry leads the author into fome curious difquifitions concerning the term, whether derived from the Chaldee Paraphrafts, from the Alexandrian fchool, from the Gnoftics, or in the way of metonymy; and he concludes, from a very curious and critical difcuffion of its general ufe and application, that it muft at all events be understood in a perfonal point of

View.

"Whichfoever of thefe various fuppofitions we admit," fays the author, "whether we confider the term as ufed by the Evangelift metonymically according to the characteristical genius of his native language, or as derived from the phrafeology of the Gnoftics; or whether in conformity with the other conjectures, we choofe to fay, that it was fuggefted by a particular paffage in the Pfalms, or that it was a technical expreffion of Rabbinical ufage at the time, or that it was evidently borrowed from the Chaldee Paraphrafes, which were in equal eftimation with Jews and with Chriftians, ftill fhall we affume the fact, that it is to be contemplated folely in a perfonal point of view, in a point of view, which reprefents it as indicative of an actual subsistence, and a real perfon." P. 31.

On the abfurdity of fuppofing the Logos of the Evangelist to be a mere attribute, the learned author thus expreffes himfelf:-"But let us more minutely examine the fuppofed metaphorical fenfe, which has been fo confidently imputed to the language of St. John. We may indeed fay, if we please, that the attribute wifdom was in the beginning, and that he was in the beginning with God: but how can we with propriety affert that he was God? Can Deity be afcribed to an abftract quality? We may indeed flate, that God. is Wifdom, as St. John elfewhere terms him Love; but we cannot correctly reverfe the propofition, by flating that wifdom is God. And the reafon is obvious. God may be faid to be any abftra&t quality, congenial with his nature; but it would be manifeftly inaccurate to

C

BRIT. CRIT, VOL. XXXV. JAN. 1810.

fay,

« AnteriorContinuar »