of will yet remain in publick schools till a fet of lads, with firmer refolution and more politick conduct than their predeceilors have hitherto fhewn in their different attempts to do themfelves juftice, 1hall apply the birch to the mafter, and conftrain Perillus to tafte the qualities of bis own bull. After a fingle beefom has been efficaciously diftributed between the periwig-pated regent and his chief drudge in canonicals, the cuftom of fticking up the three-twigg'd fafces near the block, will foon be abolished. The measure I recommend would prove more decifive and effectual in preventing future tumults, than a thoufand confultations between ftupid wardens, or as many reproofs of negligent prepoftors. There is a fingular tendernets about a pampered facerdotal rump, that would fhrink from the trial of a fecond fmarting, and while the first lafted would exhibit fuch diverting marks of fenfibility, as might almoft rival the loco-motive faculties of Mr. Aftley and his coadjutors, who entertain the publick with their feats of activity at Westminster. Thus children would no longer be fcourged into lofs of fpirit, nor would elegant domeftick females be infulted with the dirty triumphs of a father or a brother, over the defencelefs nudities of a full-grown truant. Some fchoolmafters alfo (carnificinam ex gymnafiis facientes) by the fame means might clcape fufpicion of deriving their attachment to the rod from motives which are beft explained by writers like Bartholinus de ufu flagrorum. I am no general advocate for rebellion; but in boys at least it might be tolerated, when their masters refufe obedience to the laws of decency. Cuftom will no more juftify the act of fuch publick flogging, than it will palliate the crime for which a late reverend pedagogue was executed at Tyburn. Could 1, Sir, by your means, excite a proper fpirit in youths whofe approach to manhood ought to exempt them from -fuch illiberal caftigation, I fhould not think the time employed in fcribbling this addrefs to you had been entirely thrown away. I am, &c. New College, 07. 2, 1780. A. B. family in the fame county. His grandfather George Stanhope, D. D. was chaplain to James I. and Charles I.; had the chancellorthip of York, where he was alfo a canonrefidentiary, held a prebend, and was rector of Wheldrake in that county. He was, for his loyalty, "driven to doors with eleven «Sufferings of the Clergy," part 11. p. 83. children, and died in 1644. See Walker's at Uppingham in Rutland, then at Leicefter; Young Stanhope was fent to fchool, first afterwards removed to Eaton, and thence chofen to King's College in Cambridge, in the place of W. Cleaver. He took the degree of B. A. in 1681; M. A. 1685; was elected one of the fyndics for the Univerfity of Cambridge, in the bufinefs of Alban Francis, 1687; minister of Quoi near Cambridge; vice-proctor 1683; was that year preferred to the rectory of Tring in Hertfordshire, which after fome time he quitted. He was in 1689 prefented to the vicarage of Lewisham in Kent by lord Dartmouth, to whom he had been chaplain, and tutor to his fon. liam and queen Mary, and continued to enHe was alío appointed chaplain to king Wiljoy the like honour under queen Arne. He commenced D. D. July 5, 1697, performing all the offices required to that degree publicly, and with great applaufe. He was made vicar of Deptford in 1703;/ fucceeded Dr. Hooper as dean of Canterbury the fame year; and was thrice chofen prolocutor of the lower houfe of convocation. He was alfo preacher of the Tucfday's lecture at St. in 1708, he was fucceeded by Dr. Mol. He Laurence Jewry, where, on his refignation died March 13, 1727-8, aged 68 years; and was buried in the chancel of the church ar Lewitham, where a monument was erected by his widow, with the following infcription: In memory Of the very Revd GEORGE STANHOPE, D.D. His and thrice PROLOCUTOR of the Lower Learning was clegant and comprehenfive, a beautiful Intermixture of the cleareft Reasoning with the purest Diction, attended with all the Graces of a juft ELOCUTION; as his Works from the PRESS have spoke the Praifes of his happy-Genius, his Love of God and Men; We cannot but lament that we are not furnithed with more ample materiais to do juf tice to the memory of this worthy man. His writings, which are an ineftimable treature of piety and devotion, are, “A "Tranflation of Thomas à Kempis, 1696," Svo. "The Sieur de Charron's Three Books of Wifdom, written originally in French, "with an Account of the Author, 1697;" of which a third edition appeared in 1729, 3 vols 8vo. "A Sermon on the Death of Dr. Gabriel Towerfon, late Rector of St. Andrew "Underhaft, London, and of Welwyn in "Hertfordshire, 1698," 4to. "A Sermon "on the Death of Mr. Robert Caftell, late "of Deptford in Kent, 1699," 4to. "Epic "tetus's Morals, with Simplicius's Comment; and the Life of Epictetus, 1700," 8vo. "Fifteen Sermons, 1700,” 8vo. “ A Para"phrafe and Comment upon the Epiftles and "Gofpels, 1705," 4 vols 8vo. "The Truth and Excellence of the Chriftian Religion "afferted against Jews, Infidels and Here"ticks; in Sixteen Sermons 1701, 1702, at "Boyle's Lecture, 17c6,"4to. "Rochefou"cault's Maxims, 1706," 8vo. "Parfons's "Chriftian Directory, 1716," 8vo. "St. Au"guftin's Meditations, 1720," 8vo. "A Fu"neral Sermon on Mr. Richard Sare, Book"feller, 1724," two editions, 4to. "Twelve "Sermons on feveral Occafions, 1727," 8vo. "Private Prayers for every Day in the "Week, and for the feveral Parts of each "Day; tranflated from the Greek Devo"tions of Bishop Andrews, with Additions, 1730." Of this pofthumous volume the editor was Mr. James Hutton; who obferves, that "Dean Stanhope's perfonal qualifications, prudence, and public fpirit, bore a confiderable refemblance to thofe of Bishop Andrews. His life was a conftant, uniform pattern of chearful, undifguifed, and unaffected piety. His uncommon diligence and industry, affiffed by his excellent parts, had enriched him with a large flock of polite, folid, and moft ufeful learning. He had not indeed acquired the knowledge of fo many languages as Bishop Andrews; but yet, befides his mother tongue, in which he had fo great a command, he was a matter of the Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and French. Thefe he put to their proper ufe, not for any vain oftentation, but as inftruments of procuring the knowledge of all trofe things which have rendered him an accomplished gentleman, a worthy man, and a fubitantial divine. His well-digeiled learn ing, accurate judgement, candor, and good nature, fhone very brightly in his converfation, as well as his preaching and his writings, all confecrated to the honour of God, and the promoting of virtue and religion: indeed fome who have converfed moft intimately with him have affured me, they never knew any that fo continually spoke and acted with a regard to thefe ends. His preaching was really admirable and edifying; his yle clear and plain, but noble; his reafonings eafy and strong; his perfuafions powerfully. moving; his aétion, and way of ipeaking, graceful, juft, and affecting; his fubjects well chofen, and fuited to his auditory. The greateft and beft of his hearers (and he often had the greatest in this nation) might learn what was profitable from him; which if they neglected to do, his Difcourfes will rife in judgement against them, and in the mean tine demonftrate, that he omitted nothing neceffary to deliver bis own foul. His writings are, or may be, in every body's hand, and every body will judge of them as they please; I fhall therefore leave them to do fo, and only affirm what I know from more than a fingle experience, that they are an ineftimable treafure for the devout people of this nation. Were I to speak particularly of all his private and public virtues, of his conftant preaching, and prudent and faithful discharge of all the parts of his miniftry, the many charities and good works he did in the courfe of his life, and the liberal provifion (in proportion to his fubftance) which he made for them in his laft will and teftament, I fhould far exceed the brevity I propofe. I hope fome abler hand will give his life and character at large, and do justice to his memory; and fo convince the world, that (though he was thereby cared of a great burden, yet) it was no fmall unhappiness to the church, that he was not raised to the highest order in it." His Dr. Felton fays, "The late Dean of Canterbury is excellent in the whole. thoughts and reafoning bright and folid. His ftyle is juft, both for the purity of language, and for firength and beauty of expreffion; but the periods are formed in fo peculiar an order of the words, that it was an obfervation, nobody could pronounce them with the fame grace and advantage as himself." In his tranflations, it is well known, Dr. Stanhope did not confine himfelf to a fric and literal verfion; but took the liberty of paraphrafing, explaining, and improving upon his author; as will evidently appear (not to mention any other work) by the flightest perufal of St. Auguftin's Meditations and the Devotions of Bithop Andrews. In the London Magazine for 1758, p. 163, is a curious correfpondence between Bithop Atterbury and Dean Stanhope, on the increafing neglect of public baptifm. And we mayreter to our own Magazine, 1777, p. 558, for an excellent consolatory letter of Dr. Stanhope; and to 1778, p. 570, for a grat-ful return to his benevolence. J. N. THE Rev. Mr. Lindley (from the account given of his Differtation in your Magazine for Auguft, 1779;) feems to have done more credit to the caufe he bath adopted, by his paffive conduct (the quirting of his prefer. ment), than by any active performance, I mean any ftrength of reafoning, he hath made ufe of in fupport of it. He fays that Jefus is not the Word, which St. John calls God, by which all things were made. This feems very strange! But, pray, is not the Word mentioned in the three fit verfes of this firft chapter of St. John, the fame alfo that is mentioned in the 4th; the fame to whom John Baptift was appointed the forerunner, the fame alfo, of whom it is exprefsly affianse, in the roth, that the world was made by him; nay, the very fame too that in the 14th verfe is faid to be made flesh, and to have dwelt among us? Ia hort, is not the very fame Word (the main fubject of the narrative) ftill spoken of through. out the first fourteen verfes at leaft? If not, where is the change? Where. abouts is the Word dropped, and Jefus fubftituted in the room of it? This, to me, feems an infuperable difficulty in Mr. L.'s fcheme. But one thing more efpecially I would humbly beg leave to afk, namely, why this first chapter of St. John, at least the former part of it, is now, all at once, dwindled into a mere preface? Is it not a part, an integral part, of St. John's gofpel? This, I believe, was never yet difputed. Why then is this frange degradation from its ancient digaity? There feems to be another difficulty in the forefaid fcheme that can be no way accounted for, unleis it be, that the old pretence of meta. phor, by which the natural force of this paffage hath hitherto been eluded, being grown weak by ufe, muft now receive fome additional strength by detracting proportionally from the credit of the narrative itself. Suppofing it were granted to Mr. L. and his Socinian brethren, that St. John, in this first chapter, had any part or portion of the 8th of Proverbs in. view; yet what could that avail for their pup fe, unleis it could be fhewn that the Ayos is Ipoken of in the one place for the very fame end or purpose that σοφία, or fapientia, is mentioned in the other? The 8th of Proverbs is profeffedly taken up in fetting forth the eternity and fupreme excellency of GINT. MAG. for October, 1780. 465 the divine wisdom. The firft chapter of St. John, at least the former part of it, is profefledly taken up in giving an account of our Saviour, and the important errand he came upon. To what purpofe then can the evangelift be fuppofed to introduce this account of his with a lofty encomium on the divine wisdom, as an attribute? Would not this be direally contrary to the natural order of things, and to the method conftantly purfued in every other inftance of the like nature? Did Homer, Virgil, or any other celebrated author, ever begin their narrative with enumerating the virtues of the hero, or the merits of the grand atchievements they were about to treat of? Quite contrary to this, they do all of them firft reprefent to us the hero and his atchievements, and then make their reflections, when they have put it into the power of their readers to judge of the justice and propriety of thofe refections, And this feems to be the method which the facred penmen have taken. The intent of the gofpels was to give us an account of our Lord's birth, life, doctrine, and fufferings; and the epifles do, upon every occafion, point out and extol the infinite power, wildom, goodness, and mercy of God displayed therein. Dr Ladner's paraphrafe upon the If, according to Mr. L. Jefus Chrift Mr. URBAN, INDULGE me in the liberty of mak ing a few remarks on thofe extra&s from Mr. Madan's fingular publication, which you communicated to the public in your Magazine for August. The obfervations which I fhall prefume to fuggeft relate entirely to his arguments in favour of polygamy. Had the great Creator, when he first formed the human race, intended to have eftabli eftablished polygamy, he would undoubtedly have created two or more women for Adam, instead of creating only one. The learned and ingenious Dr. Delany informs us, that the practice of polygamy amongst the Jews arose from a corrupt interpretation of Leviticus xviii. 18. But from whatever fource a custom fo degrading to human nature fprung, it is evident it was not univerfaliy, nor even generally, practifed by that people. If Mr. Madan could even prove that polygamy was ordained under the Mofaic difpenfation, fuch a command ought not to have any influence on Chriftians, unless it was alfo. inculcated in the New Teftament; which is the fole rule of a Chriflian's faith and practice. The chief view in which the Old Teftament is interefting to us, is, as a record of the prophecies relative to the advent of the Meiab, and the univerfal prevalence of his kingdom. When the Pharifees had been interrogating our blefled Maßter respecting the lawfulness of divorces, and plead ing the indulgence which Mofes gave to that practice, he replies, "For the barduefs of your hearts be wrote you this precept. But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this caufe fball a man leave father aud mother, and cleave unto his wife, and they train shall be one flefb." Surely the anfwer which Chrift here gives to the tempting queftion of the Pharifees, militates as Atrongly against polygamy as against divorces, and proves it to be the original appointment of the all-wife Creator, that "every man should have his own wife, and every swoman her own by band." Loft to every finer feeling of the hu man foul muff that man be who can plead in favour of polygamy; for polygamy is utterly deftruétive of that vir tuous and tender friendthip which Providence designed shou'd'subfiit between husband and wife, who are to walk as being beirs together of the grace of life." It reduces the female lex to the most degrading state of flavery, treating the merely as the objects of graufying appetite, infead of the faithful and affe&ionate partners, of men's cares and comforts. To be confidered in fo fordid a view, muft be a fituation infinitely more painful to a virtuous and delicate female mind than all the other evils of life. Polygumy, therefore, is an act of the greatet injustice and cruelty towards them. Great and numerous are the evils which would refult to fociety from the toleration of polygamy. Were a number of women to refide together in one houfe, who had all an equal right to the perfon of the husband, jealousy, envy, and contention, would inevitably prevail amongst them. The animohties of the mothers would be inherited by the children; and fuch a family, inflead of being a feminary of virtue, would be a fcene in which every paffion that difgraces human nature would take place. The virtuous education of children, which is one important end of marriage, would be utterly impracticable; because children can never be properly educated when there is not the utmoft confidence and harmony fubfisting between the parents, which is incompatible with à state of polygamy. It peculiar rewards await those who are the inftruments of " turning many to righteousness;" what, Mr. Urban, will be the punishment of them, who, by "handing the word of God decentfully," encourage men in the practice of that fenfuality which it was defigned to fubdue ? Sept. 10. A CHRISTIAN. Mr. URBAN, YOUR interting the following cafe will much oblige an old and comftant reader. The CASE. SUPPOSE I lived between tw● neighbours, the one a Papift, the other a Proteftant; the Papiff zealous for his religion, but his whole deportment extremely amiable and obliging as a neighbour; my other neighbour, the Proteftant, has his mind well informed, holds and venerates the true, genuine principles of Chriftianity, is a man of found judgment and real learning, but his natural temper four, haughty, and forbidding. I, who am fituated between these two, have children who are frequent vifitants at both their houses. My Proteftant neighbour fends them home difgufted with his rigid, unfociable manner; my other neighbour, delighted and taken with his. Their pathons immediately become judges of thefe different difpoɓtions: the company of the one is never fought after; and the other, on the contrary, becomes their friend, their confident, and, very early, their infrector and advifer. By imperceptible degrees he infinuates himself fo thoroughly into their hearts, they take hina him for their best friend and fpiritual guide. With all the fophiftry of Popery he perfuades them their everlasting happiness depends on leaving father and mother, &c. for what he calls the Gofpel, and works up their young and impaffioned minds to fuch a height of religious enthufialm, they confent to his guidance fo far as to leave their native home to be educated in a Popish feminary abroad, left their zeal fhould abate. They are thus feduced from me, before I law, or rather would fee, their danger. Now I am roufed, I put penal laws in full force against my neigh. bour: I oblige him to fly, and I bring home my children. What then? I have their bodies 'tis true, but will the laws of my country, which enabled me to recover them, recover alfo their minds ? How fhall I do that? The man whom I have wreaked the whole vengeance of the laws on, the man whom I call the feducer of my children, the enemy of their fouls, they look on as their fpiritual father, and difintereft d friend, who for their fakes is now perfe. cuted and hated. The laws of my country have done all that laws can do, but they can do no more. Behold then the utter insufficiency of penal laws! Infufficient, because entirely inadequate to the wished-for effect; the mind being the r REAL obje&, and the mind penal laws can never reach. Z. Mr. URBAN, Sheffield, Aug. 24. 1 Beg leave to communicate to you a few remarks on a fubje&t which feems to call loudly for reformation. It has been an ancient objection with Diffenters against pre compofed jorms of prayer, that, in confequence of their being always expreffed in the fame words, they are very unfavourable to devotion." Judicious replies have been made to this objection; yet, I apprehend, the point must at last be referred to every perfon's own feelings, What I would now obferve is, that the manner in which the Liturgy of the Church of England is too frequently read, is not likely to gain converts, many of the clergy burrying it over with fuch a careless indifference, as mut ferve rather to produce inattention than devotion. This is really the cafe with fome who deliver their dif courfes from the pulpit with the greateft propriety. Surely, if publick wor hip is a duty of any importance, this sa practice by no means to be defended. We have often read and heard high encomiums upon our Common-Prayer, How much then do they deferve cenfure who thus deprive it of its excellence! Thefe men fupport the cause of its adverfaries, and contribute more, perhaps, towards bringing it into dif efteem, than all the critical remarks that have ever been made upon it. But not only the, Liturgy, but the Scriptures themfelves are thus too often facrificed to ignorance or indo lence, by a drawling, unanimated monotony, or a pert, negligent familiarity; yet many of thofe who indulge themselves in thefe improprieties would probably think it infofferable to treat Shakspeare in this manner. And furely, if fuch respect is to be paid to human compofitions, fome reverence is due to the oracles of God. But, exclufive of their divine authority, I will venture to fay, that, were the Scriptures read in our publick worship with taste and propriety, they would gain a full attention from the audience, and be often abundantly more profitable than many elegant pulpit-difcourfes : for an intelligent reader may, in many cafes, make his recital answer the purpofe of a comment; and I am perfuaded, that were the Bible read in our churches by a Garrick or a Sheridan, we thould no longer fee that drowly indifference which too gene vally prevails. The word of God would then indeed be found to be quick and powerful, and be held in the chimation which it justly deserves. But I am forry to be informed that in our universities this point is fo little attended to, that divine fervice in the college chapels is hurried through with the most flavenly precipitation; and this is fo generally the cafe, that every reader there who aims at fome degree of propriety becomes frequently the fubject of ridicule. Yet these are our clerical urferies! Who can wonder then to fee fuch negligence in our churches? In the name of common fenfe, why are not thele irrularities conected? Publick worship is either an important y, or it is not. If it is a mere matter of form, it is high time it were abolished; for, in this view, it is a folema mockery, or at least an uprofitable employment of time; but if it is deemed a reasonable service, it furely ought to be rendered fo in the performance. Yours, &c. E. G. Account |