ty from the profane, mortification from the fenfual, or modefty from harlots? And will any deny that hired ftage-players have always, and that defervedly, borne thefe characters? Nay, though it could be fuppofed, that the fpectators received no hurt themselves, how is it poffible that the performances of fuch perfons can be attended, or their trade encouraged, without fin? This shows allo, that attending a good play, even fuppofing there were a few unexceptionable, cannot be vindicated upon Chriftian principles. It is pleaded for the new tragedy* lately introduced into our theatre, that it is an attempt to reform the stage, and make it more innocent or more useful. What this piece is in itself, nobody can fay with certainty till it be published, though the account given of it by report is not exceeding favorable. But let it be ever fo excellent in itself, the bringing of one good play upon the ftage is altogether infufficient, nay, is a method quite improper for reforming it. An author of a truly good piece would rather bury it in oblivion, than lend his own credit and that of his work, for the fupport of those that are bad. A Chriftian can never attend the ftage, confiftently with his character, till the scheme in general be made innocent or ufeful. He must not fin himself, nor contribute to the fins of others, in a certain degree, because, unless he do fo, they will fin without him in a higher degree. In fhort, fuch an attempt can be confidered in no other light, than as encouraging a pernicious practice, and supporting a criminal affociation. The better the play is, or the better the characters of those who attend it are, the greater the mischief, because the stronger the temptation to others who obferve it. There is one inducement to attendance on the ftage, which hath more influence than all the arguments with which its advocates endeavor to color over the practice; that it is become a part of fafhionable education. Without it, young perfons of rank think they cannot have that knowledge of the world which is neceffary to their accomplishment; that they will be kept in ruflicity of carriage, * Douglass. or narrowness of mind, than which nothing is more contemptible in the eyes of the reft of mankind; that they will acquire the character of stiff and precife, and be incapable of joining in polite conversation, being ignorant of the topics upon which it chiefly turns. No better than thefe, it is to be feared, are the reasons that many parents fuffer their children to attend this and other fashionable diverfions. How then fhall we remove this difficulty? Why truly, by faying with the apoftle John, to fuch as will receive it, "All that is in the world, the luft of the flefh, and the luft of the eyes, and the pride of life, "is not of the father, but is of the world." I John. ii. 16. It is certainly the greatest madness to seek the knowledge of the world by partaking with bad men in their fins. Whatever knowledge cannot otherwife be acquired, is fhameful, and not honorable. How cruel then are thofe parents, who, instead of endeavoring to infpire their children with a holy and manly refolution, of daring to appear fingular in an adherence to their duty, fuffer them to be plunged in fin, that they may not be defective in politenefs. Why fhould the world, or any thing else, be known, but in order to our fpiritual improvement?" This is not meant to condemn all human accomplishments, which have not an immediate reference to our religious im provement, but to affirm, that they ought to be kept in a juft fubordination and fubferviency, to the great and chief end of man. There are, no doubt, a great number of arts, both ufeful and ornamental, which have other immediate effects, than to make men holy; and because they are, by the greatest part of the world, abufed to the worst of purpofes, they are confidered as having no connexion with religion at all. But this is a mistake; for a good man will be directed in the choice and application of all fuch arts, by the general and leading purpofe of his life. And as he who eats for no other or higher end than pleafing his palate, is juflly condemned as a mean and groveling fenfualift, fo, whoever has no farther view in his edu cation and accomplishment, than to fhine and make a figure in the fashionable world, does not in that refpect act the part of a Chriftian. In fhort, thefe arts are among the number of indifferent things, which fhould be fupremely and ultimately directed to the glory of God. When they are not capable of this, either immediately or remotely, much more when they are contrary to it, they must be condemned. Therefore, all that is truly valuable, muft, by the very fuppofition, be innocently learned, and to bear with a noble difdain the fcoffs of more experienced finners is the greatest glory. Like to the above is another argument in favor of the ftage, that men must have amusements, and that the fstage is much better than many others, which would probably be put in its place. It is faid, that of all the time spent by the fashionable part of the world, at prefent, in diverfions, that which they allot to the ftage is moft innocently, or leaft hurtfully employed. Is there any more in this, than a declaration of the fhameful luxury and degeneracy of the prefent age, an alarming token of approaching judgment? Do not fuch perfons know, that all ferious Chriftians condemn every one of thefe criminal pleafures, and will never allow it as any advantage to exchange one of them for another. But it is lefs furprising to hear fuck palliative arguments used in converfation: an author above referred to has been bold enough, in print, to reafon in the fame way. He fays, "That no "abuse was ever admitted on any ftage, but might pafs "for perfect decency, when compared to what may have "been often heard of, at a goffipping, a merry making, 66 or a meeting of young fellows*." Again, after telling us that we cannot hope to abolifh the stage, he says, "And if we could, we fhould only make way for the "return of drunkenness, gaming and rude cabals, which "the more decent converfation and manners of civilized. "times have in a great manner abolished." I lay hold of this gentleman's reafoning, who pleads for civilizing the world, and not fanctifying it, as a confeffion of the weaknefs of his caufe, and a confirmation of all the arguments produced in this treatife againft the ftage. For, if he meant to fhow, that ftage-plays were agreeable to the purity of the gofpel, that drunkennefs is worfe (if indeed it be fo) could be no evidence of it at all. He muft therefore, if he fpeaks to any purpofe, plead for the toleration of finful diverfions, because they are comparatively less Morality of Stage Plays feriously confidered. p. 19. A a finful than others; and if that is the cafe, I deteft his principles, and fo will every Chriftian. ་་ แ Having mentioned this author, perhaps it may be expected, that I would take fome notice of the other arguments brought by him in defence of the stage. It is not eafy either to enumerate or comprehend them, they are thrown together in fuch confufion, and expreffed in fuch vague and general terms. He fays (page 3.) "The The people of this ifland are not inferior to thofe of any other age or country whatever. This will be a perfumption, "that if plays are a poifon, it is at leaft but flow in its operation." And, p. 17. "We may venture to ask, "Whether knowledge, whether induftry and commerce "have declined in this city (Edinburgh) fince the play"houfe was firft opened here? It will be owned, that "they have rather increased." I would venture to ask, What fort of an argument this is, and what follows from it, though both his affertions were allowed to be true, which yet may easily be in many refpects controverted? If the ftage, as he would infinuate, be the cause of our improvement, then is his argument felf-contradictory, for we ought to be greatly inferior in purity to the people of other countries, who have enjoyed the reforming stage much longer, which is contrary to his fuppofition. The truth is, the flage is not the caufe, but the confequence of wealth; and it is neither the caufe nor confequence of goodnefs or knowledge, except fo far as it certainly implies more knowledge than uncultivated favages poffefs, and is only to be found in what this author calls civilized nations. How eafy were it for me to name several vices unknown to barbarians, which prevail in places of taste and polished manners. Should I at the fame time infinuate, that thefe vices have contributed to improve us in knowledge and tafte, it would be juft fuch an argument as is here ufed in favor of the flage, and the plain meaning of both is, the abufe of knowledge is the caufe of it. It were worth while to confider a little our improvements in knowledge in this age, which are often the boaft of not the mot knowing writers. Perhaps it may be allowed, that there is now in the world a good deal of knowledge of different kinds, but it is plain we owe it to the labors of our predeceffors, and not our own. And therefore, it is to be feared, we may improve it no better than many young men do, who come to the eafy poffef fion of wealth of their fathers' getting. They neither know the worth nor the use of it, but fquander it idly away, in the most unprofitable or hurtful purfuits. It is doubtlefs, an eafy thing at prefent, to acquire a fuperficial knowledge, from magazines, reviews, dictionaries, and other helps to the flothful student. He is now able, at a very small expence, to join the beau and the fcholar, and triumphs in the tafte of this enlightened age, of which he hath the comfort to reflect, that he himfelf makes a part. But for our mortification, let us recollect, that as feveral writers have obferved, human things never continue long at a ftand. There is commonly a revolution of knowledge and learning, as of riches and power. For as ftates grow up from poverty to industry, wealth and power; fo, from thefe they proceed to luxury and vice; and by them are brought back to poverty and fubjection. In the fame manner, with refpect to learning, men rife from ignorance to application; from application to knowledge; this ripens into tafte and judgment; then, from a defire of diftinguishing themselves, they fuperadd affected ornaments, become more fanciful than folid; their tafte corrupts with their manners, and they fall back into the gulph of ignorance. The feveral fteps of thefe gradations commonly correfpond; and if we defire to know in what period of each, we of this nation are at present, it is probable, we are in the age of luxury, as to the first, and in the eve at least of a falfe and frothy tafte as to learning; and may therefore fear, that as a late very elegant writer expreffes it, We fhall relapfe faft into barbarifm. Another argument produced by this author, is, that the apostle Paul, in preaching at Athens, quotes a fentence from one of the Greek poets, and, in writing to the Corinthians, has inferted into the facred text a line from a ́ Greek play, which now fubfifts." This (he fays) is fuf |