CHAPTER XII.

DIVINITY.

[Sidenote: The Pulpit in the Restoration epoch.]

Passing from the biographers of divines to the divines themselves, we

observe that, with the signal exception of _Pilgrim's Progress_, nearly

all the writers in this department whose productions have established a

claim to rank among English classics belong to 'the company of the

preachers.' This is not in itself surprising; preaching stimulates

eloquence, and the homilist enjoys a much greater freedom of range, and

a fuller exemption from restraint, than the writer upon strictly

technical or professional subjects. It does, however, at first sight

seem remarkable, that an age so generally decried for immorality as the

Restoration should, with the decade immediately preceding, have been the

golden age of the English pulpit. In fact, as we have implied when

treating of the drama, the apparent licence of the age did not really

extend much beyond gay and fashionable circles, which could not greatly

affect the pulpit except to its advantage, by furnishing it with

impressive topics. Even in these circles immorality was far from

necessarily implying irreligion; and the sober citizens who crowded

churches and meeting-houses, and the universities, whose routine

afforded so many opportunities for the delivery of discourses from the

pulpit, were much as heretofore. In the rudimentary condition of the

press as an organ of public information and education, and when the

meeting was hardly an institution as yet, the spoken word possessed a

power of which the newspaper has since gone far to deprive it. In times

of public disquiet, such as the days of the Exclusion Bill or those

which preceded the Revolution, churches and chapels were crowded with

people seeking guidance, popular sermons went through edition after

edition, and popular divines were almost tribunes of the people.

Theological considerations moulded political opinion to a degree now

hardly conceivable; the storm of pamphlets on both sides called forth by

the resipiscence or tergiversation of a leading divine like Sherlock

shows what importance attached to his conduct upon either view of it.

The age, moreover, was in the stage of literary development most

favourable for pulpit eloquence. As a huge glacier takes longer to melt

than a small one, the quaint and involved periods of the Elizabethan

pulpit stood out longer than ordinary prose against the disintegrating

influence of seventeenth century taste, and while the new movement was

triumphant in most branches of literature, it in general only affected

the style of the sermon so far as to chasten and mellow it, leaving it

still that sonorous dignity and that flavour of the antique with which

stately and impressive eloquence can rarely dispense. The two greatest

preachers, Barrow and South, stand just upon this culminating point of

excellence, uniting the majesty of the old style to the ease and

clearness of the new. Tillotson, going a step further, and bringing the

pulpit down to the level of ordinary educated society, performed indeed

a most useful work, but inevitably prepared the way for the sensible but

unimpressive preaching of the next century.

[Sidenote: Isaac Barrow (1630-1677).]

Isaac Barrow, Master of Trinity College, was the son of a respectable

tradesman, linendraper to Charles I. His royalist and Arminian opinions

kept him back under the Commonwealth, but after the Restoration he was

acknowledged as the first mathematician of his country, except, as he

was the first to allow, another Isaac whose surname was Newton. Newton,

who had been Barrow's pupil, revised his lectures on optics (1669), an

epoch-making work, but composed in Latin, as were his scarcely less

celebrated lectures on geometry. His reputation as an English classic

rests upon two great theological works, his _Treatise on the Pope's

Supremacy_ (edited, after his death, by Tillotson) and his _Exposition

of the Creed_, and upon his sermons, which do not seem to have been

extremely popular in his own day, though gaining the suffrage of such

dissimilar men as Locke and Charles II., who called Barrow 'an unfair

preacher, because he exhausted every topic, and left no room for

anything to be said by anyone who came after him.' It may be reasonably

conjectured that when Barrow preached before Charles he did not indulge

in the inordinate expansiveness, it was not prolixity, that sometimes

drove away his congregation. It is to the king's honour that his

bestowal of the mastership of Trinity upon Barrow was entirely his own

act.

[Sidenote: Robert South (1633-1716).]

Robert South, on the whole perhaps the greatest preacher of his age, was

born in 1633, and educated at Westminster and Christ Church. He is

accused by Antony Wood, the principal authority for his life, of having

been a time-server, who sided successively with the Independents, the

Presbyterians, and the Church of England in the days of their power.

Wood seems, however, to have had some private grievance against him; and

if South was really at the same time so pliant and so able, it seems

strange that he should have attained no higher preferment than stalls at

Christ Church and Westminster. Quarrelsome he certainly was, and he

entered into a most acrimonious controversy with Sherlock, which it

required a royal proclamation to compose. He died in 1716.

[Sidenote: John Tillotson (1630-1694).]

Unlike South's, the character of John Tillotson is no matter for

controversy. With the possible exception of Archbishop Herring,[11] he

was the most amiable man that ever filled the see of Canterbury, and was

pronounced by the discerning and experienced William III. the best

friend he had ever had and the best man he had ever known. To the

meekness of the pastor Tillotson added the qualities of the statesman,

and happy was it for the Church of England that such a man could be

found to fill the primacy at such a time. As a master of oratory he is

greatly inferior in eloquence to both Barrow and South, but historically

is more important than either, for Addison was influenced by him, and

his discourses long gave the tone to the English pulpit, affording the

almost universally accepted model throughout the greater part of the

eighteenth century.

Of these three great preachers South is certainly the greatest as

respects eloquence and energy of diction. Almost every sentence is

striking, and at the same time in perfect good taste. By so much,

however, as he surpasses his rivals in purely literary qualities, does

he fall below them in others even more essential to the preacher. His

judgment is often greatly at fault, he commits himself to plainly

untenable propositions, and enforces them with the confidence of one

displaying self-evident truths. After a few experiences of this kind the

reader begins to look upon him as a rhetorician, and to prefer the more

cautious, but still vivid and vigorous ratiocination of Barrow; or the

'sweet reasonableness' of Tillotson, inferior to Barrow, as he to South,

in the gifts of the consummate orator, but more truly persuasive in the

gentleness of his expostulation and his transparent candour.

Edward Stillingfleet, Bishop of Worcester (1635-1699), though a fine

preacher, is less remembered in this capacity than for his unsuccessful

controversy with Locke and his _Origines Sacrae_, a work of great

learning in defence of the Church of England, which Coleridge in his

_Notes on Books_ emphatically prefers to the corresponding labours of

Chillingworth. Coleridge was naturally prejudiced in favour of the

antagonist of Locke, whose graces of mind and person, however, are

attested by a dispassionate witness, Pepys.

Theology, apart from eloquence, is hardly entitled to a place in

literary history; yet some of the theologians of the period were too

illustrious to be passed over without mention. John Pearson, Bishop of

Chester (1612-1686), ranks among the Fathers of the Church of England by

his standard work on the Creed. 'Pearson's very dust,' says Bentley, 'is

gold.' Barrow's great controversial treatise has been mentioned. George

Bull, Bishop of St. David's (1634-1710), achieved even more, for he

extorted the thanks of the clergy of France by his _Nicaenae Fidei

Defensio_ (1685), written in Latin, but afterwards translated into

English. The author's object was to prove the orthodoxy of the

Ante-Nicene Fathers, which had been disputed by several Protestant

divines; the cost of publication was borne by the munificent Bishop

Fell. The French prelates further paid Bull the equivocal compliment of

wondering why in the world so excellent a man did not join the Church of

Rome. _Talis cum sis, utinam noster esses._ Bull expounded his

difficulties in a treatise on the corruptions of that church, the most

popular of his works at home, but which, being written in English,

failed to vindicate his position in the eyes of the Frenchmen. Next to

these giants of learning may be named a very dissimilar person, Richard

Baxter (1615-1691), whom moderate men had designated for a bishopric at

the Restoration, but whom the Bartholomew's Day of 1662 made a

Nonconformist. He wrote one hundred and sixty-eight books, two of which

have survived, _A Call to the Unconverted_ and _The Saints' Everlasting

Rest_. The latter Professor Minto calls 'a volume of pious thoughts that

have a peculiar interest when we view them as the aspirations of an

infirm man turning wearily from the distractions of a time utterly out

of joint.' The writings of George Fox, the founder of Quakerism, mostly

belong to a previous period; but the _No Cross, no Crown_ of William

Penn (1644-1718) falls within Restoration literature. A far more

important work is the _Apology_ of Robert Barclay (1648-1690). This

remarkable book, which has been recommended by bishops to theological

students as the best available for many purposes, is the standard

exposition of Quakerism, and undoubtedly ranks among the classics of its

period. Mr. Leslie Stephen describes it as 'one of the most impressive

theological writings of the century: grave, logical, and often marked by

the eloquence of lofty moral convictions.' 'The St. Paul of the

Quakers,' says Coleridge of the author. Barclay, the descendant of an

old Scotch family, became a Quaker in 1667, following the example of his

father. He underwent some persecution, but was in the main shielded by

the favour of James II. His works were collected by Penn in 1692.

Two devotional writings of the age, besides Baxter's, obtained

sufficient currency to merit a place in the history of literature. _The

Whole Duty of Man_, first published in 1658, is an excellent

representative of the sobriety and sound sense characteristic of the

Church of England. At the same time it must be confessed that it has

more reason than unction, and seeks rather to menace and upbraid than to

allure men into the religious life. At the present day it would be

pronounced grievously deficient in fervour, servile in its political

teachings, and too exclusive in its appeals to prudential and

self-interested motives; but its adaptation to a positive and prosaic

age was sufficiently evinced by a circulation enormous for the period.

The authorship is involved in mystery: it is usually attributed to

Archbishop Sterne or Lady Pakington; but Sterne can hardly have had time

to write the seven other treatises ascribed, apparently with good

ground, to the same author; and it is clearly not the composition of a

woman. Evelyn attributes it on the authority of Archbishop Tenison to a

Dr. Chaplin, of University College, Oxford, who cannot be traced. Lately

Mr. Dobie, in the _Academy_, has ascribed it and its companions on

strong grounds to Richard Allestree, Provost of Eton, an intimate friend

of Bishop Fell. The Bishop appears to have copied some of them in his

own hand, and certainly was acquainted with the authorship. The most

important of the other works ascribed to the writer of _The Whole Duty

of Man_ are _The Causes of the Decay of Christian Piety_, _The Gentleman

and Ladies' Calling_, and _The Government of the Tongue_.

Another work of edification, which almost rivalled the popularity of

_The Whole Duty of Man_, was the _Practical Discourse concerning Death_

(1689), by William Sherlock (1641-1707), Master of the Temple and Dean

of St. Paul's, the divine whose tergiversations respecting the oath of

allegiance to William and Mary are so amusingly detailed by Macaulay. It

is a model of clear and forcible writing, but on the lowest plane of

unspiritual selfishness. 'How unreasonable is it for us to trouble

ourselves about this world longer than we are like to continue in it!'

exclaims Sherlock, with the air of one apologizing for enunciating a

truism.

[Sidenote: John Ray (1628-1705).]

Natural theology had a representative of much higher moral calibre than

professional theology found in Sherlock in John Ray (1628-1705). Ray, a

Cambridge man, prevented by scruples from ministering in the Church of

England after the fatal legislation of 1662, but substantially accepting

her doctrines, was the first English naturalist of eminence, and wrote

chiefly in Latin, but composed his treatise on _The Wisdom of God in the

Creation_ in his mother-tongue. The anthropomorphism of this earnest,

lucid, and ingenious book, the prototype of Paley's, is a defect hardly

to be avoided in an age when the Deity was almost universally conceived

as an artificer; and yet Ray comes very near indeed to the conception of

a power immanent in Nature. His style is limpid and persuasive; his

reasoning cogent; his good sense is apparent in his discussion of

spontaneous generation and the stories related in its support, although

the caution and modesty of his temper sometimes incline him to defer too

much to authority. He has no mercy, for example, on frogs rained from

the sky, but will not, in the face of the testimony of eye-witnesses,

carry scepticism to the point of disputing that they may have been

occasionally found immured in the middle of stones.

Ray's teleology had allies in Derham (1657-1735), an observant

naturalist and author of _Astro-Theology_, and in the Hon. Robert Boyle,

the best of men in disposition, and an admirable natural philosopher,

but feeble and diffuse as a natural theologian.

[Sidenote: Thomas Burnet (1635?-1715).]

Thomas Burnet, Master of the Charter House, is the reverse of Boyle in

most respects; a visionary as natural theologian and natural

philosopher, but the only writer of his day, the great preachers

excepted, who attained to sublimity in prose. A Cambridge man and a

pupil of Tillotson, Burnet was elected Master of the Charter House in

1685, and signalized himself by his courage in resisting James II.'s

attempted intrusion of Roman Catholics into the foundation. He became

Clerk of the Closet to William III., which post he was obliged to resign

from the freedom of his criticism of the Mosaic narrative, but retained

his mastership unmolested to his death. He left behind him two

theological works in Latin, privately printed, but soon afterwards

published, _De Fide et officiis Christianorum_ and _De Statu mortuorum

et resurgentium_, in which he carried the liberty of speculation very

far. The book on which his fame rests, _The Sacred Theory of the Earth_,

was also originally composed in Latin, to which circumstance it is

probably indebted for much of its exceptional dignity of style. It was

intended by the author as sober natural philosophy, but to a scientific

age appears a poetical vision of the former immersion and future

conflagration of the earth, justly compared by Mr. Gosse to the gorgeous

apocalyptic imaginings of Danby and Martin. According to Burnet the

earth was originally an egg both in shape and smoothness, enclosing the

waters in an 'antediluvian abyss.' At the universal deluge the earth

sank into this internal cavity. Upon the subsidence of the waters the

land partly emerged in the confused shapes into which it had been

tumbled by the crash, partly remained beneath the sea. The argument is

very ingenious and entertaining, and instructive also, for it exhibits

to perfection two of the most ordinary causes of fallacy, the assuming

imaginary data as unquestionable premises and the enthusiast's adoption

of sublimity as the standard of truth. Burnet's mind was the mind of a

poet; he had just enough science to misguide him, and more than enough

learning to gloss over the vagaries of his science. He is quite as much

at home in expounding the catastrophe of the future, the final

conflagration, as the watery catastrophe of which he believes the traces

to be visible everywhere around him. At the same time he has a strong

affinity to the rationalizing divines, even more visible in his strictly

theological writings, and would not for the world propound anything of

whose reasonableness he has not first convinced himself. As a writer he

stands high, combining the splendour and melody of a former age with the

ease and lucidity of his own. The following is a fair average specimen

of his picturesque imagination and impassioned diction:

'Thus the Flood came to its height; and 'tis not easy to

represent to ourselves this strange scene of things, when the

Deluge was in its fury and extremity; when the earth was broken

and swallowed up in the abyss, whose raging waters rose higher

than the mountains, and filled the air with broken waves, with

an universal mist, and with thick darkness, so as nature seemed

to be in a second chaos; and upon this chaos rid the distrest

Ark, that bore the small remains of mankind. No sea was ever so

tumultuous, as this, nor is there anything in present nature to

be compared with the disorder of these waters; all the poetry,

and all the hyperboles that are used in the description of

storms and raging seas, were literally true in this, if not

beneath it. The Ark was really carried to the tops of the

highest mountains, and into the places of the clouds, and

thrown down again into the deepest gulfs; and to this very

state of the Deluge and of the Ark, which was a type of the

Church in this world, David seems to have alluded in the name

of the Church, Psalm xlii. 7, Abyss calls upon abyss at the

noise of thy cataracts or waterspouts; all thy waves and

billows have gone over me. It was no doubt an extraordinary and

miraculous providence, that could make a vessel, so ill manned,

live upon such a sea; that kept it from being dashed against

the hills, or overwhelmed in the deeps. That abyss which had

devoured and swallowed up whole forests of woods, cities, and

provinces, nay the whole earth, when it had conquered all, and

triumphed over all, could not destroy this single ship. I

remember in the story of the Argonautics, Dion. Argonaut. l.

i., v. 47, when Jason set out to fetch the Golden Fleece, the

poet saith, all the gods that day looked down from Heaven to

view the ship, and the nymphs stood upon the mountain-tops to

see the noble youth of Thessaly pulling at the oars; we may

with more reason suppose the good angels to have looked down

upon this ship of Noah's; and that not out of curiosity, as

idle spectators, but with a passionate concern for its safety

and deliverance. A ship, whose cargo was no less than a whole

world; that carried the fortune and hopes of all posterity, and

if this had perished, the earth for any thing we know had been

nothing but a desert, a great ruin, a dead heap of rubbish,

from the Deluge to the conflagration. But death and hell, the

grave, and destruction have their bounds. We may entertain

ourselves with the consideration of the face of the Deluge, and

of the broken and drowned earth, in this scheme, with the

floating Ark, and the guardian angels.'

The most eminent natural theologian of the time after Ray, and one who

would have surpassed Ray in importance if his labours in this department

had been more than a brief episode in a busy career, was Richard

Bentley, whose power of destructive criticism in other fields proved how

formidable a champion he could be on the negative side of any question.

Bentley's massive intelligence, however, aptitude for broad commonsense

views, and impatience of niceties and subtleties, entirely qualified him

to embrace and expound the form in which natural theology commended

itself to the vast majority of the thinkers of his day. He dealt solely

with the materialism of Hobbes, 'there may be some Spinosists beyond

seas,' he says, but to him _de non existentibus, et de non apparentibus,

eadem est ratio_. The questions and the answers of a Goethe would have

been equally unintelligible to him; if Newman would certainly have

thought him shallow, he would as certainly have thought Newman

whimsical. He must be judged from the standpoint of his own day, and

from this his argument, delivered as the Boyle lecture for 1691 and

1692, must be pronounced a splendid and cogent piece of reasoning. It is

particularly remarkable for its absolute reliance on the doctrines of

Newton's _Principia_, when Newton had hardly a disciple out of England.

FOOTNOTES:

[11] On the flyleaf of a copy of Birch's _Life of Tillotson_ in the

British Museum is a transcript of a letter from Archbishop Herring to

the author, in which, acknowledging his dedication, he says: "I think

myself extremely honoured in having my inconsiderable name connected

with that of the best of my predecessors. I feel the disparity of the

characters, and must submit to the censure which will arise from a

comparison so infinitely to my disadvantage. But, as posterity, when the

real object is out of sight, may imagine from your picture that there

might be some distant shadow of a resemblance, I think I may, I think I

ought to enjoy the contemplation." The resemblance was closer than the

good archbishop's modesty would admit.

The Age of Dryden · 第 12 / 16 章