Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

duces sounds, and affords us information of things occurring at a great distance. But the most perfect of all the senses, and, perhaps, next to the more simple operations of the mind, is that of sight. The eye, the beautiful organ of this power, is a type of its functions; in transparency, delicacy, and brilliancy, it surpasses all the other parts of the body, appearing to lose the grosser characteristics of animal matter, and to approach the nature of the mind, to which it serves as the most useful, rapid and extensive messenger, for procuring knowledge of the various objects in creation around us."

Such is the varied distribution of sense which the brain and nerves bestow upon the other parts of the frame. We are familiar with its uses; we know the kinds of bodies which are calculated to impress the different organs, and the manner in which those bodies effect their impressions, but of the nature of the brain and its operations we know nothing but by the effects produced.

To estimate the capacity of this organ we must trace the history of the human race from the beginning, and the systems which man has contrived and executed during this long period, for the accomplishment of his happiness: all his establishments, political, civil and military, are but developements of the mental faculty: by it have been framed all his regulations, social and moral. In short, every improvement has its origin from this

source.

By his superior intellect the philosopher surveys the creation around him, and in a certain degree transfuses into the affairs of men, the wisdom, and the beneficence which he discovers in the system of the universe -the astronomer penetrates the heavens, discovers new worlds, and thus expands our admiration of the Supreme Being in his works by the same means the chemist and experimentalist are enabled to analyse the various substances about him, and over which he has any power, and tracing ure to her recesses, draws forth valable instructions for the application of bodies to our wants and enjoyments. While the bulk of mankind led by the knowledge of others are directed in their proceedings by the same intellectual faculty, though

acting in a more humble degree. What the powers of the brain may hereafter be capable of, under new circumstances and combinations in life, remains for futurity to ascertain.

I

SIR,

AGREE with some writers in

your valuable work, that the marriage service is a subject of great and just complaint to Dissenters in general, but particularly so to Unitarian Dissenters, who if they even consider it as a mere ceremony, their feelings must be hurt, and their minds revolt at, what is so opposite to their sentiments, the Trinitarian form of worship contained in it. And as no good reason can be given why the feelings and consciences of so large and respectable a class of society should be thus wounded and oppressed, and in a matter too the most serious of their lives; let the evil be stated, the wrong be expressed, and if possible a remedy be procured. It may be asked, why not perform the marriage union before the civil magistrate, as it is now virtually a civil matter, and the breach of it an offence at common law. When a husband, or a wife so grossly fails in coujugal duty, that a remedy is sought for, recourse is generally had not to the Church, but to a civil court. The marriage service then ought to be performed in that court, where the parties can alone be made responsible for a breach of the contract. But if the marriage of two persons ought to be purely a religious contract and service, then let any one consider, whether in reason, such contract ought not to be performed agreeably to the religious sentiments of the parties immediately concerned, and whether such a mode would not be likely to be more binding, and have a more lasting influence upon their minds, than when performed according to the creeds and ceremonies of a church deemed by them erroneous. This is clearly a question of policy and of revenue on the part of the Established Church, as no good ground from scripture or reason can be made out for such monopoly. If the Quakers can properly marry amongst themselves, so might equally all other sects; and Dissenters ought as men of honour and conscience, to protest against such partiality and oppression, and as knowing themselves

On the Use of the Word BUT.

to be loyal men and true, ought never to cease their efforts till every civil disability, imposed on the ground of differences of religious opinion, be removed. But even should this be attained, and all penal statutes against Dissenters as such, were removed, that might not alter the present mode of celebrating the marriage service in the Church; and to this point I am desirous of calling the attention of your numerous readers; I am the more induced to do this, as a member of parliament gave notice last sessiou that he would early the next session bring the marriage act before the House for amendment. Would not this afford a proper opportunity for the Dissenters, who all complain of the grievance in question, to come forward as a body, and lay their complaint in a respectful but manly tone before parliament. If they were to act with zeal and union, their num,bers and influence are of too much importance to be lightly disregarded; Lord Sidmouth's bill is a case in point: If they are not wanting to themselves, similar exertions may produce similar results. Having thus briefly introduced the subject I trust some of your learned and able correspondents will enforce it in a more practical shape, and stimulate our Dissenting brethren to measures at once prompt and efficacious.

I

D. E.

On the Use of the Word BUT.
SIR,

T is possible I may be mistaken :

if I am I should be obliged to a better grammarian to set me right. The use of words is a matter of great importance, inasmuch as they are designed to give the clear and precise explanation of the thoughts of the mind; I apprehend, however, that several of your correspondents, as well as other good writers, have erred in the use of the word but. This is a conjunction, which, when we meet with it, is a kind of stop to the sense, and prepares the mind to expect a change of subject, or an opposition to what went before. You shall have this, but you shall not have that.

In the passages I shall quote below, has not this word then been misused?

"It cannot be doubted but the bcribe, when he spoke these words,

23

meant the One Supreme."-Gifford's Illucidation.

"Four miles from this stands the Castle; I have no doubt but the Romans occupied it, and possibly the Saxons and Danes."-Hist. of Eng.

"I take up the pen, not doubting but the remarks I offer will be received with candour and affection." Mr. Wright.

The conjunction that would have distinctly conveyed the author's meaning.

Dr. Priestley appears to have been fond of the old fashioned way of uniting the two conjunctions in one place, by which means he certainly might convey an idea the direct contrary of what he intended. Thus

"It will not be denied but that any man has a right to employ one of his hands." He meant that he has the right.

"We have no occasion to enforce our principles by penal laws, having no doubt but that the clergy will be able to support them by reason and argument." Would not this seem to imply that we have a doubt ?

"But notwithstanding this, I have no doubt but that I shall make it appear perfectly intelligible to you." If the word but had been left out in these sentences his meaning would have been distinct. The following, in the same page with the last, clearly shews that this criticism is just.

"Indeed, if he had, many doubts could not but have arisen in his mind with respect to it." Here the but is proper. See Familiar Letters.

Compare these two sentences; the one conveying an idea contrary to the other, yet both formed alike. "I trembling wak'd, and for a season

after

Could not believe but that I was in hell.” He thought he was in hell.

"Having no doubt but that the clergy," &c. He had not a doubt of the matter, although the expression seems to convey it.

:

In the following sentence from Dr. Paley, appears a similar redundancy "An agency so general as that we cannot discover its absence or assign its place."

Dr. Priestley is with great propriety regarded as an authority in the English language; and I should have been fearful of remarking upon the use he makes of words were it not that it is

24

Octavius Cæsar-William Pitt.-State of Religion in France.

well known Dr. Blair was himself guilty in his writings of the violation of all the rules he had laid down for the study and use of our language.

J. W.

Octavius Cæsar-William Pitt.
Aug. 18, 1815.
CTAVIUS CESAR entering

commended no less by the celebrity
of his uncle, Julius Cæsar, than by
his own insinuating manners and ad-
dress. William Pitt, also, on his first
appearance, at an early age, was as
much indebted to the high reputation
of his father, William Earl of Chat-
ham, as to a commanding and per-
suasive eloquence peculiarly his own.
Octavius Cæsar at first, pretending
great zeal for the republic, strenu-
ously supported Cicero against the
designs of Anthony, and raised an
army for its preservation and defence.
William Pitt, espousing with the same
apparent warmth the great cause of
his country, joined with Horne Tooke
and other popular leaders, against the
prevailing abuses of the representa-
tive system, and three times moved
the House of Commons for their re-
form. Octavius Cæsar, afterwards
coalescing with Anthony, turned his
arms against the steady friends of the
republic, and gave up Cicero to the
vengeance of an enemy, by whom he
was unjustly put to death. William
Pitt, also, having with equal readi-
ness, accepted office in alliance with
the supporters of the old system, not
only opposed successive motions for
a reform in the representation of the
people, but acquiesced in the prose-
cution of Horne Tooke, a more con-
sistent reformer, on an unprecedented
charge of High Treason. When,
however, Octavius Cæsar abandoned
the cause of the republic, he united
with the adherents of his own family
against the very men by whom his
uncle had been publicly assassinated.
But William Pitt on his apostacy, by
a more flagrant dereliction of princi-
ple, entered into the closest union with
the political enemies of his father,
against his own early and most dis-
interested friends. Octavius Cæsar,
also, when he had attained the object
of his ambition, became the patron
of literature and the arts; and, after
a long and prosperous administration,
left his country in the enjoyment of

1

external peace, and sole arbiter of the destinies of the world. But William Pitt, in the plenitude of his power, regardless of all liberal patronage, involved his country in a most disastrous war: and, having contributed largely to the subjugation of Europe, like another Phaeton, unable to guide the chariot of his father, perished

so rashly caused. Octavius Caesar, therefore, having been, by the general voice of his countrymen, proclaimed Augustus, has been honoured by the eulogy of eminent writers, in his own and each succeeding age. Whilst William Pitt, having no corresponding claims to the applause of the historian or the poet, however flattered by his infatuated or interested adherents, as the saviour of his country, or the heaven-born minister, will be more justly appreciated by posterity as the bane of Europe, and the chief promoter of his country's fall. Whilst, therefore, in the comparison of these two men, the parallel at times appears so striking, the equally marked contrast is by no means favourable to the character of William Pitt.

[ocr errors]

SIR,

TH

THE following extract from a bookseller's catalogue in Paris may tend to shew in some degree the state of religion in France, which is unhappily confirmed by the reports of travellers into that unhappy country.

THEOLOGY.

"Selecti a sacris scripturis versiculi ad usum studiosæ juventatis. 2 partes in 12.

"On ne peut disconvenir que nos livres saints ne soient maintenant, presque aussi inconnus à nos jeunes etudians que le Coran au les livres mystiques de pretres' Indiens. Cet extrait de toute lecriture sainte est disposé de telle maniere que deux versets seulement appris chaque jour pendant les cours des humanites peuvent en donner au moins cette connaissance generale de laquelle tant soit peu ininstruit devroit se faire une obligation rigoreuse."

TRANSLATION.

Verses selected from the Holy Scrip. tures for the use of young students.

We cannot deny that our holy scriptures are at present almost as unknown to our young students as the Coran or the mysterious books of

Hypotheses of the Resurrection.

Hindoo priests. This extract from
them is formed in such a manner that
two verses only learned every day du-
ring a course of classical studies will
afford at least that general knowledge
which every man, however slightly
educated, should think himself bound
to acquire.
W. F.

I

SIR,

Oct 6, 1815. WAS much gratified by remarking in your last number (x. 569.) a revival of the interesting inquiry already discussed in some former voJumes of the Monthly Repository (the sixth in particular) relative to "the state of the human being after death." After a serious and dispassionate perusal of much that has been stated in support of the various hypotheses to which the subject has given birth, I could wish to learn from any candid advocate of the opinion which supposes the human being wholly dissolved at death, in what sense we are to understand our Saviour's awful caution in Matt. x. 28, if man possess no principle that survives his dissolution; or, what object we can in such a case conceive he could have in making any distinction between a mortal destructible being, and an immortal imperishable one co-existing in the human organization ?

The late Dr. Doddridge considered this passage as affording a "certain argument in proof of the existence of a soul in a separate state, and of its perception of that existence; else (he added) the soul would be as properly killed as the body." Family Expos. V. i. S. 75. N. h. How far such a separate principle of the human orga♦nization may exist in a state of perception after death appears to me a very distinct question. Nor am I in the number of those who consider that question as of any material importance to the Christian's hope and comfort. To him, surely, it is the same when he enters into a state of happiness whether directly on his dissolution, or after a long interval of suspended consciousness. In either case the prospect itself of future joy remains the same; the promises of the gospel remain unaltered in each view of the subject; and are in the one case as much as in the other, I trust, equally the object of his hope, his affection and pursuit.

VOL. XI.

:

V. M. H.

P. S. It may be observed that our Saviour does not speak of the soul as the successive principle of man; or as the man in his second state, but seems to refer to both soul and body as coexisting.

SIR,

I WAS much pleased with seeing a

physiological correspondence begun in the year 1818, in the Monthly Repository (viii. 448), by a writer who signs his name Cantabrigiensis, and which letter was answered at p. 734, under the signature of T. P. In hopes of reviving a controversy which may make more clear the doctrine of the resurrection, I have taken the liberty to lay before you the substance of the letter and reply, and my reasons for being dissatisfied with both.

Cantabrigiensis laments that scripture evidence is in favour of that system which holds man to be one and indivisible, and wholly mortal, an hypothesis with which natural appearances agree, because, owing to this, should there be a resurrection, not only will a large portion of time and consciousness be lost in the grave, but also

1. If man wholly dies, a resurrection does not appear to be within the bounds of probability.

2. A new creation cannot rightly be called a resurrection; if it is allowed that there may be a new creation of an individual myself from the former being, it must also be allowed that there may be created from the same being an indefinite number of beings, all of them myself, if it is the will and power of the Creator which alone constitutes individuality and identity.

3. That the resurrection of Jesus is not a case in point. Never was his body corrupted, broken up and dissipated; miraculous power was not required to re-create it, but only to enable it to re-act. If a total dissolution and separation takes place, it is not then a resurrection which was the apostolic doctrine, but a re-creation.

4. The hypothesis of Dr. Wats (Logic, P. 1. c. 6. §6.) is but a supposition to avoid a difficulty. "Our own bodies must rise at the last day for us to receive rewards and punishments in them; there may be, perhaps, some original fibres of each hu

26

Hypotheses of the Resurrection.

man body, some stamina vitæ or primaval seeds of life, which may remain through all the stages of life, death and the grave; these may become the springs and principles of a resurrection, and sufficient to denominate it the same body. But, if there be any such constant and vital atoms they are known to God only." To this principle, Dr. Priestley and some of his disciples appear willing to refer for the principle of individuation.

In consequence of these difficulties this writer asks, "If the immortality of the soul wants support from scripture, and the restoration of the same body involve in it a physical contradiction, how is the preservation of individual consciousness and the resurrection of the same man to be explained, understood or believed?

To this letter T. P. replied.

1. That the resurrection of the same body, if there be but one absolute and eternal cause, is within the bounds of probability. For the existence of every being, being only the result of the will and peculiar operation of this cause, the restoration of any being, and all its parts, however long its existence has been suspended, has not in it any thing impossible or improbable: the same creative cause still possessing the same power. If the originally created being be renewed in the same manner, the same created effect must be the result of the operation; and not any reason appears why the same exact operation cannot be renewed, as well as it was originally excited, continued and suspended by the Infinite Operator.

tiplication of persons exactly ́similar
confusion would ensue, and such an
idea arises from supposing matter and
mind to have such an independent ex-
istence, that certain portions of each
Such
may constitute the same being.
a view arises from mistaken notions
He
o the Creator and the created.
is one and independent; all existence
must be either Deity himself or the
result of his operations; our future
existence therefore must be the exer-
cise of his power, and not from the
ordinary operation of what is called a
second cause.

That this reasoning is confirmed
by the historic evidence of the human
mind. By night, the perception for
useful and practical purposes is sus-
pended; but this, instead of destroy-
ing, strengthens and restores percep-
tion and consciousness. In trances and
suspended animation, the existence of
life is only known by its preserving
Why
the body from putrefaction.
then cannot Deity by immediate in-
tervention suspend existence, disor
ganise the mechanism, and again with
such alterations as new relations and
circumstances may require to re-or
ganise it?

2. The mind is a representation of
external things, therefore a unity of
person must be essentially connected
with conscious identity. By a mul-

The scripture compares death with sleep; he slept with his fathers is their Jesus awakened language for death Lazarus out of sleep after he had been dead four days, and his body become putrid; and this he did by the intervention alone of that power which first formed man from the dust, the same power which increased the widow's cruse of oil, and at another time fed five thousand from five loaves and a few small fishes.

s. The resurrection of Jesus is in point to prove our resurrection, for though it was the same body raised, yet that body was raised changed to a spiritual body, as was evidenced by its becoming at will invisible, and by its ascending the heavens. Yet though spiritual its capability of being handled, its ability to eat and drink as also to converse, prove its identity, and were to his apostles sufficient evidence that he who could produce this varied effect of visibility and invisibility, materiality and apparent immateriality with conscious identity, could in like manner raise their dead bodies and can do the same also by all who are in their graves.

If I have correctly stated the arguments of both these gentlemen, and I have so done to the best of my power, I am free to confess, Mr. Editor, that T. P. has not done justice to the objections of Cantabrigiensis; he appears to me instead of giving a philosophical answer as expected so as to have the subject intelligibly explained that it might be believed with the understanding, to have rather begged the question, resting the whole of his answer on the mighty power of God.

1. C. asserts that if a man wholly dies the resurrection of that man is not within the bounds of probability. T.P. instead of shewing that it is pre

« AnteriorContinua »