« AnteriorContinua »
the latter sense, I observe, that cure the generation of chickens. Mr. Farmer acquiesced. (Mir. c. Wherefore 'ris probable that devils, iv. § 1, note t, p. 266.) But my being more skilful iban men, may author deems it “ ridiculous to strangely promote the generation think that Pharaoh's magicians, of several creatures beyond any Jezabel the queen, and king Ma- human art." nassch, did exercise the arı of My author next considers the poisoning,” and quotes Rev. xviii, opinion of those who “affirm that 23, where the word ça quaxeld the magicians'staffs were not really is neither taken for witchcraft, nor turned into serpents, but seemingly poisons, but for impostures, though so, by a deluding juggling trick of our translators have rendered it the devil, who might convey the witchcraft." p. 8. The following staffs away, and slip serpents in passage which presently occurs, their place." He thus proceeds, ihough long, may be thought wor- “ To all such as these I answer, thy of quotation, as an anticipa. that if they once recede from the tion of Mr. Farmer's discussions, letter of the text, and say it was a century afterwards, connected a juggle of the devil, I may as with a curious admission of limited well say it was a juggle merely of diabolical agency.
the magicians themselves, who
did “ Nor let any one think, that it by their sly and secret tricks as for the performance of these coun. ihe Hebrew word signifies, which terfeit miracles, they stood in our translators have rendered by need of the devil's assistance. their enchantments. Nor let any For what they performed either one wonder that the scriptures exceeded not the compass of hu- should say, the magicians' staffs man art, although miraculous in were turned into serpents; in re. the eyes of the vulgar. Or, if it gard, the scripture speaks only ac. it did, then it was not really per. cording to the deceived apprehen. formed, but a mere juggling im- sion of the standers by. Just so posture. Such kind of jugglers in the case of Samuel raised by the were those, who stood before Witch of Endor, it speaks accord. Pharaoh, in opposition to Moses ing to the deceived apprehensions and Aaron. For whosoever be- of Saul and his followers; for lieves that Pharaoh's Magicians neither that woman, nor all the could by the help of devils turn devils in hell could raise Samuel, in an instant, a stick into a serpent, who had been dead and buried he doth ascribe unto the devil an almost two years. As for those omnipotent creating power, equal who fancy that God did they raise to his who did but say, let such a Samuel ; 'tis a very likely thing thing be, and it was so." Having indeed, that God should refuse to controverted the opinion of St. answer Saul, when he consulted Augustine, he adds; “ 'Tis true, him in ways appointed by himself, that men by their well order. and yet should answer him when ing the seeds of plants, may he consulted in a forbidden way: hasten the generation of such Besides, if Samuel bad been raised plants, and the ripening of their by God, no doubt he would never fruits. They may, also, by put. have said unto Saul, Why hast ting eggs into camel's dung, pro- thou disquieted me?' for it would have been no disquiet nor trouble of the beaten road of scriptural unto him, to come upon God's criticism, errand. Some there are who will needs have it to be the devil in the And pointed out the way to noble daring: likeness of Samuel, because Saul's . The third error” ascribed to death was foretold. To this I an. our translalors," is, 6 Their swer, that 'twas the woman her- mistaking a consulter with oracles self, or a person confederated with or false prophets, for a consulter her, who spake it at a venture, with familiar spirits.” This cen. knowing that Saul was going to sure is supported by examining fight. But as for the certainty of the meaning of the Hebrew words his death, it could not have been in Deut. xviii. 11, and a reference foretold by the devil bimself.” to Isaiah xxix. 4, where my au.
Those who consult Mr. Farmer, thor finds the “cheating tricks” of (Mir.ch.iv.) will God that learned the oraclers “ plainly alluded writer agreeing with my author unto.” He substitutes oracler fir as to the nullity of the pretensions familiar spirit, according to the made by the magicians and the common version, adding,
• Here sorceress of Endor, but in the I suppose, the prophet chiefly allatter case, preferring their opinion ludes unto the necromantic oracler, who suppose that by a Divine in- or one that pretended to consult terposition Samuel, or his appear. with the dead; who himselt, of ance, was raised up to denounce his coofederate, did therefore cuun. judgments against Saul. It is re- terfeit a voice, like the pieping of markable that Mr. Farmer should a chicken, that it might the more neglect to naine thiş earlier work plausibly seem to be the small on the subjects he so ably treats, voice of a poor departed ghost." as, I think he must have seen it. P. 15. This opinion is sustained He observes, $ 2, p. 3, p. 306, by a reference io Isaiah viii. 19., that many learned men have according to the translauon of maintained that it was neither Junius and Tremelhus, our own Samuel nor an evil spirit who being hardly se'nse,” And a de, now appeared to Saul, but that scription of ventrikquists, such as the whole was the work of human" could speak with their moulbs imposture.” And at p. 321, he shut, and their voice would seem thus uses some of my author's to come out of their bellies, as if words, which I have lately quoted, they had been really possessed
-“ Here it may be asked, : Is it with a talking devil: hence called likely that God should refuse to Engastrimuthians by the Greeks, answer Saul, wben he consulted also Eurycleans, from Eurycles, him in ways appointed by bimself, a famous impostor of this kind; yet should answer him in a forbid. and as Plutarch testifies, anciently den way?”
called Pythons.” (P. 16.) Yet the character of Mr. Far- My author next considers the mer is above the imputation of case of Manasseh's impiety, and a designed suppression of obliga- after objecting to "our translators" tions to an author, who, perbaps, of the common version, on the prin. might first have led his mind out ciple before maintained, he thus VOL. VII.
concludes his first chapter. “But conformists, but who differed ma whosoever seriously views and con. ierially in their practice, on one siders that place, (2 Chrop. xxxiii. point; the avowal of their theo6, 7.) he shall find it a mere de- logical opinions. Here Dr. Walls scription of Idolatry, where there appears to advantage in compari. is mention of high-places and son with Mr. Farmer. The latter groves, and of altars dedicated not seems indeed to have so far overonly to Baal, but unto the whole looked the origin of the term host of heaven, as also of the set. preacher (præco of a herald) as ting up a carved idol in the very sometimes to have gone into a House of God. Wherefore it was pulpit with the design of disguissuitable to mention also that erew ing, rather than proclaiming, his of men who were set apart by doctrinal sentiments. I know not Manasses to officiate in this idola. what else to znake of the follow. wrous worship. Such as were va. ing description of Mr. Farmer, as rious sorts of oraclers and miracle. a preacher, which his intimate mongers. But how witches should friend and biographer, Dr. Kipcome in here I cannot tell, no nor pis, professes to give from fre. how devils neither, unless you be. quent hearing of him." lieve that devils made answer at “ He was particularly excellent the heathen oracles, which if you in the pulpit. His sermons were do, for my part I must crave leave rational, spiritual, evangelical, to dissent, judging them to be no. and not unfrequently pathetic. thing but the impostures of men. Mr. Farmer had an admirable And as Demosthenes did wisely talent, without trimming, of pleasobserve in his days that the Del. ing persons of very different senphian oracle did peamTitely, so I timents. When he was speaking am confident, if history be true, ofthe doctrines of the gospel, there that the Hammoncan did a negavdpre was a swell in his language that Selv, and that all the rest of the looked as if be was rising to a cheating pack did, one way or greater degree of orthodoxy in exother, ανθρωπιζειν." (p. 17, 18.) pression, than some persons might
Some account of the remaining approve ; but it never came to chapters, with the little which I that point. What he said was have been able to collect of the always consistent with the most opposition to this, then strange, liberal sentiments id matters of rework, and of the defence of it by ligion.” B. B. v. 681. It should a cotemporary author, who went be recollected that Mr. F's biograstill further into the question of pher was a Unitarian. diabolical agency, must be reservo
This swell in his language ed for a succeeding Number. would be much assisted in acquirVERMICULUS.
ing for the preacher the reputation of orthodoxy, by the report of those
who, like the author of his Memoirs, Mr. Farmer.
(1804, p. 31.) “ sometimes heard Sir,
July 27, 1812. Mr. Farmer speak in strong terms Your correspondents (pp. 227, of censure, concerning certain 369 — 371). have connected two modern publications, and particu. names, justly eminent among non. Jerly some of Dr. Priestley's." Dr. P. appears to have been con. such an imputation. For I can. tent with a plain stile, such as not help considering it as unwor. Swift recommended, proper words thy of Mr. Farmer's talents and in proper places, and would have character, to evade, instead of deemed a swell in his language meeting fairly, and freely discusssomething worse than a defect, ing a question which has been alhad it caused his opinions to be ways regarded in the popular misunderstood. Such a writer creed as highly important. Nor, could be no favourite with Mr. to his own enlightened mind, could Farmer.
it appear an alternative of trivial This censure of Dr. Priestley's consequence, whether Christians publications, as a recipe of singu. did or did not believe themlar virtue, to make a little ortho. selves subjected by the Divine will, doxy go a great way, or even to to the moral, if not the natural, restore a tarnished orthodox repu. influence of malignant beings, intation, I beg leave to recommend conceivably powerful, and only to those wbo may have occasion not omnipotent. for its use, from frequent obser
IGNOTUS. vation of its superior efficacy. To dispense this censure properly, it should be unmixed with any can.
Anabaptists. did acknowledgments of Christian SIR, virtues. These would very much Your correspondent Episcopus impair the effect. It should also complains (p. 493) of the use of be given in a high tone, ex cathe. the epithet" Anabaptist,” in drå, as by one having authority. Chalmers's Biog. Dictinnary. He
Mr. Farmer's three iinportant represents it as reproachful and topics, the Temptation, Miracles not descriptive.' I thought so and Demoniacs, almost unavoida. too, till lately an advertisement bly involved the question of evil caught my eye in the Times newsspirits. Yet it has been said, that paper, headed with ANA BAPTIST from his writings it could not be MEETING-HOUSE. The advertiseknown whether he denied or be ment to which this singular head. lieved their existence. This I line drew my attention was to the think is evidently the case as to a purport, that a meeting house was part of the “ Dissertation on Mira. about to be erected at Hackney, cles," where information on this and that plans and proposals point might be reasonably expect. would be received for building it. ed. I refer to ch. ii. g i, n. 2. in This is I find, on enquiry, a meetwhich the author proceeds “ to ing-house, for the Particular or inquire whether the scripture as. Calvinistic Baptists : the advertise. cribes the power of performing ment was, of course, drawn up miracles to the devil and his an. by themselves ; and therefore I gels.” The whole article is an conclude that this sect do not obable argumentum ad hominem. ject to being called Anabaptists, I wish some
your readers, more and that Mr. Chalmersis blameless. conversant with the valuable works
N.N, of this learned divine than myself, could relieve his memory from
Sir Samuel Romilly.
manner wbich he believed was SIR,
most acceptable to bim. He deI transcribe for your use part
termined to free himself from this
of Sir Samuel Romilly's Speech to
bondage ; he abandoned his prothe Electors of Bristol, April 2,
perty, he tore himself from his 1812; persuaded that you will connections, and quitting the
country and its tyrant, sought an admire the frankness of it, and the spist of freedom u bich it breathes. asylum in this land of liberty, Sir Samuel is answering objec.
where he had to support himself tions which had been made to him only by his own exertions. He
embarked himseli in trade, be eduas candidate for the representation
cated his sons to useful trades, of Bristol in Parliamenl.
and he was contented at his death " There is another matter,
to leave ibem, instead of bis ori. wbich perhaps does not deserve to be meniuntd; and yet I should ginal patrimony, no other inheri. be glad to say a few words upon he had given them, the example
lance than the habits of industry, it. It has been published in this
of his own virtuous life, an here. city that I am a foreigner, and that if you elect me you will send ditary detestation of tyranny and
injustice, and an ardent zeal in a foreigner to represent you in a
the cause of civil and religious British Parliament. Gentlemen,
other reasons I I was born and educated and have passed my whole lite in Eng. I am an Englishman. Gentlemen,
have to bless his memory is,—that land, with the exception of a short this is my origin; I trust I need interval which was spent in visit.
not blush to own it."" ing foreign countries. My father too was born and educated in Eng.
This is manly, the admirable
simplicity of a truly great mind. land, and spent his whole life in it. My grandfather, it is true, nent lawyer and statesmar', dis
Is it true, thing that this emi. was not an Englishman by birth, owned the Dissenters, on a late but he was an Englishman by choice.
He was born the heir to occasion, in the House of Conia considerable landed estate at
mons? It is most unlikely, Montpelier in the South of France; lic prints, was that a certain gena
The affair, as given in the pub. His ancestors had early imbibed and adopted the principles and tleman from Sussex charged Sir doctrines ot the reformed religion, Dissenters as ibeir advocate in
Samuel with being retained by the and he had been educated himself
that House. This personality it in that religious faith. He had the misfortune to live soon after
was natural for him to repel with ibe time u ben the Edict of Nantes, indignation. There is something the great 'loleration Act of the strange however in his
“ reply to
his accuser : “ He had never been Protestants of France, was revoked by Lewis the fourteenth, within the walls of a Disseating and he found himself exposed to place of worship !" all the vexations and persecutions
See “ An Account of the Entry of of a bigotted and tyrannical govern. Sir Samuel Romilly into Bristol, &c." ment, for worshipping God in the 12mo. Pp. 14, 15.