Page images
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

outrage on the consciences of his cle- whom he quotes, says their executions rical brethren at Exeter: “ 1688, Nov. “ resembled the slaughter of calves 9. The first thing his Highness did, and sheep.” was to go and pay his grateful ac P. 3, col. 2. “ John Valdesius or knowledgment to Almighty God, and Valdesso,” of whom, I think, there is to cause Te Deum to be sung in the some account in one of your early Cathedral Church for his safe arrival. volumes. Walton, in his “ Life of After the Collects were ended, Dr. Herbert,” on the authority of Mr. Burnet began to read his Highness's Farrer, who translated the declaration, at which the ministers of Hundred and Ten Considerations," the church, there present, were so sur describes “ John Valdesso” as prised that they immediately left their Spaniard,” who “had followed Charles seats and went out ; however, the V., as a cavalier, all the time of his Doctor continued reading, and the long and dangerous wars.” At length declaration being ended, he said, God he resigned liis appointments to the sare the Prince of Orange, to which Emperor, saying, "there ought to be the major part of the congregation an a vacancy of time between fighting swered, Amen."

and dying.” If this account, which I P. i. “The Nonconformist” has have also seen in some writer quite as well chosen, in the Italian Refor- early as Walton, be correct, he was mation, a subject unacountably over not merely a civilian” and “prilooked, so far as I have observed, by vate secretary” to the Emperor. Yet our ecclesiastical historians. I had Sandius, I observe, who claims Valoccasion to make this remark in Vol. desso as an Anti-trinitarian, gives no X. of Priestley's Works, where, at hint of his military character. Young, p. 290, some of your readers may find I see, in his Centaur, (Letter II., on a note on the subject.

Pleasure,) refers to the story, with I there quoted the complaint of some variations, thus addressing a gay Cornaro, on a sober life,” in 1549, assembly: “Ye fine men of rank and that l'opinion Lutherana was one of parts, a common soldier, (your contre mali costumi which then prevailed tempt no doubt,) shall reproach yon.' in Italy. The other two were l'adu- One of them, requesting dismission lazione, et la ceremonia, and la crapula from Charles V., gave this reason for (intemperance). This, Cornaro at- it: Inter vitæ negotia, extremumque tacked, in his Discorsi della Vita diem oportet aliquod temporis interSobria, the English translation of cedere. Much more inter vitæ volupwhich is a very common book. As to tates, and our last hour;" as if fightthe other two, the noble Venetian ing, were much more rational and fondly predicted, (for he says, son praiseworthy than dancing, into certo,) that some great genius, qualche death.” gentile

, spirito, would soon appear, to P. 6. Dr. Morell's valuable remarks oppose and drive them from society, on a highly important subject, remind lerarle dul mondo.

me of an anonymous publication, so Alas, for the credit of Italian pro- early as 1648, which has been long phecy, a third century is wearing away known as the production of Sir Wil. while we wait the advent of qualche liam Petty. It is a pamphlet of four gentile spirito. Still l'opinion Luthe- sheets in small quarto, entitled, “The rana proceeds; nor (judging from the Advice of W. P. to Mr. Samuel HartStyles very lately displayed at Brigh- lib, for the advancement of some parton, according to the Morning Chro- ticular Parts of Learning." I had nicle,) does l'adulazione retrograde. once the curiosity to examine it at

In the note to which I have referred, the British Museum. I also mentioned an Italian Testament, After proposing " that proper perprinted in 155), at Lyons, as trans sons be employed to collect from books lated from the Greek; a mode then, all rcal and experimental learning I apprehend, peculiar to the Reform-contained in thein, in order to faciliers, for whose use, in Italy, it was tate the way to farther improveno doubt designed. I also referred to ments,” the author recommends" that Clarke's Persecutions, 1651, (pp. 231 there be instituted Ergastula Literaria, -241,) for an account of martyrs in (literary workhouses, where children Italy, from 1546 to 1560. A Papist, 'may be taught as well to do some

Hing towards their living, as to read paper, from Dr. Gill, in which he asand write," and " that all children of serts that “ the Pædobaptists are ever above seven years old may be pre- restless and uneasy, endeavouring to sented to this kind of education, none maintain and support, if possible, being to be excluded by reason of the their unscriptural practice of infantpoverty and unability of their parents, baptism; though it is no other than a for hereby it hath come to pass, that pillar of Popery." many are now holding the plough, Then follows (p. 26) the “ Copy of which might have been made fit to a Letter published in the Whitehall

. steer the state.”

Evening Post, Sept. 17, 1747, with The author proceeds to recommend Notes by the Author.” This is a severe that “ such poor children be employed charge of inconsistency against the in works, whereby they may earn Dissenting" gentleman (Mr. Towgood) their living, equal to their strength for his zealous defence of Infant-Bapand understanding. And if they can- tism, compared with his assertion of not get their whole living, and their Christ's sole authority, in reply to Mr. parents can contribute nothing at all White. The Dissenting gentleman to make it up,” that they stay is loudly called upon to explain himsomewhat the longer in the work- self. One of your correspondents can, house." He further recommends, perhaps, say who was the anonymous " that they use such exercises, whether Letter-writer, and whether Mr. Towin work or for recreation, as tend to good ever replied. the health, agility and strength of their P. 50, col. 1.

“ The confounding bodies; that they be taught to read by of Wollaston with Woolston” was once much more compendious means than very common. Mr. Clarke, in his are in common use, which is a thing Preface to “The Religion of Nature,” certainly very easy and feasible ;"' 1750, attributes the mistake not only and “ that the elements of arithmetic to “the similitude of names,” but to and geometry be by all studied, being the circumstance of both those writers not only of great and frequent use in having been members of the same colall human affairs, but also sure guides lege in Cambridge. and helps to reason, and especial Ibid. col. 2. Voltaire's last mo. remedies for a volatile and unsteady ments were not so described nearer mind.” — Advice, pp. 3–5.

the time of his death in 1778. ConSuch, at the age of 25, without dorcet, in his Life, annexed to Vol. the benefit of an example, and with C. of his Works, (1792, p.

164,) scarcely a coadjutor, was the antici- says, not indeed much to the credit pation of improveinents, reserved for of Voltaire's sincerity, "L'Abbé Guua distant generation, but now contem- tkier confessa Voltaire, et reçut de plated by this almost universal genius. lui une profession de foi par laquelle in Ward's Gresham Professors, p. il déclarait qu' il mourait dans la 223, the Advice is mentioned as the religion Catholique où était né.” An earliest of the author's publications. earlier account, probably the earliest I cannot help remarking how highly in English, (An. Reg. 1778, XXI. 4,) honoured was Mr. Hartlib, by the con makes Voltaire reply to the question fidence of such a triumvirate, as Boyle, on the divinity of Christ : “ Áh! M. Milton and Petty!

le Curé, if I pass that article to you, P. 20. I thauk Mr. H. Taylor for you will demand if I do not also behis information. Since I mentioned lieve in the Holy Ghost, and so go on, Dr. John Taylor's pamphlet, I have until you finish by the Bull Ünigefound " A Letter to the Society of nitus.Protestant Dissenters at the Octagon P. 52, col. 2. The late King's "bad in Liverpool. . London, 1766.” This education.” In Lord Melcombe's Dipamphlet contains an introductory let. ary, (ed. 3, 1785, p. 171,) the Princess ier inviting to an examination of the Dowager, in October 1752, says of her subject of baptism. This is followed son Prince George, “that he was very by a letter from “ A Pædobaptist,” honest, but she wished that he was a with a reply, both which had appeared, little more forward and less childish, October, 1765, in the General Even- at his age,” (just past 14,) and " that ing Post, the first letter being occa- she hoped his preceptors would imsioned, by an advertisement in that prove him," adding, in answer to

the courtier's further inquiries, that The first of these interpretations, “she really did not well know what “ lovest thou me inore than thout they taught him; but, to speak freely, lovest thy nets, thy boats and thy fishshe was afraid not much; that they ing employment?"_bas been adopted were in the country, and followed their by Whitby and Pearce, and certainly diversions, and not much else that she has the claim of ingenuity to recoincould discorer.”

mend it. Peter was by occupation a P 52, col. 2. “The Bishop of Peter- fisherman ; and, judging from many borough, Mr. Stone and Mr. Scott.” little circumstances which are inciThe Princess (Diary, 172) says, “that dentally mentioned in the Gospels, Stone was a sensible man, and capable was fond of his employment, and took of instructing in things, as well as in a pleasure in it unconnected with any books—that Scott, in her opinion, was prospect of emolument. It was, therea very proper preceptor ; but that for fore, reasonable, as well as natural, the good Bishop, he might be, and she that Christ should endeavour to obtain supposed he was, a mighty learned from his own lips a confession that he man, but he did not seem to her very was not less attached to the cause of proper to convey knowledge to chil- the gospel than to his worldly occupadren; he had not that clearness which tion. Hence it has been thought, that, she thought necessary; she did not in the question, “Lovest thou me well comprehend hiin herself, his more than these?” our Lord bad a thoughts seemed to be too many for reference to the instruments of Peter's his words."

trade; which are supposed to have This Bishop of Peterborough was been upon the spot where Jesus and Dr. John Thomas, who had first so- bis disciples were assembled at the journed at Lincoln, and was, in 1761, time when this interesting dialogue translated to Salisbury :

commenced. But there is a delicacy * Another and another still succeeds,

and reserve in the Apostle's answer, And the last See more welcome than the supposition that the question re

which was altogether unnecessary on the former."

lated merely to his worldly occupaThis Prelate has been exalted, ap- tion : for, though he promptly and parently with great justice, to " a bad unhesitatingly replies, Yea, Lord !" eminence,” by Wakefield, in his Me- the answer is afterwards so qualified moirs, I. 15, 16. He is there repre- as to exclude all idea of comparison sented (from his treatment of my between his love to Christ and other friend's father) as an episcopal tan- objects. It is also worthy of remark, talizer," who made a common prae; that, in his subsequent answers, he tice of exercising the credulity and repeats, without any material variainsulting the feelings of his inferior tion, what he had said in his first reply; clergy."

cautiously avoiding that comparison,

whatever it might be, which it was the Remarks on our Lord's Question to from him: “Lord, thou knowest all

design of our Lord's question to draw Peter, Simon, Son of Jonas; things; thou knowvest that I love lovest thou me more than these” thee:'' As if he had said, "I am unJohn xxi. 15.

willing, after the severe trial which my Sir,

January 2, 1822. fidelity and attachment have lately unTHESE words are capable of three dergone, and the imperfect inanner in

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

me more than thou lovest these things, displayed, to make any further pro-thy nets, thy boats and thy fishing fessions ; but, notwithstanding my employment ? (2.) Lovest thou me three-fold denial of thee, at which thou more than thou lovest thy fellow-dis- hast manifestly hinted by thrice reciples? (3.) Lovest thou me more peating this embarrassing question, I than these love me? Is thy affection can affirm, with sincerity and confifor me stronger and more ardent than dence, that my love towards thee still that of Thomas and Nathanael, John remains unshaken." Now, had Peter and James, and those two other disci- attributed to our Lord's question the ples (ver. 2) who have accompanied meaning assigned to it by the advocates thee in this fishing expedition? of the above interpretation, it appears

to me that he could have had no difti- effectually promoted, mine will be in ealty whatever in returning a positive least danger of being forgotten.” Such and distinct answer, and in expressly appears to be the true interpretation declaring that he loved his Lord more of this confessedly difficult passage ; than his employment as a fisherman, and the grammatical construction of or any other worldly occupation. On the clause, as it stands in the original, this account I feel a considerable de- seems to me to require this interpregree of reluctance in adopting this in- tation : Ayatges de TELOV TBTWY; The terpretation ; and this reluctance is personal pronoun ou is only implied greatly increased by the circumstance in the termination of the verb : the of Peter and his companions having emphasis, therefore, rests correctly quitted their vessel some time before and properly upon the word pe. our Lord began the conversation, and “Lovest thou me more than these?” likewise of their having probably left On this account I feel strongly intheir fishing tackle behind them when clined to suspect that Doddridge and they came on shore.

others are not justified in adopting the The second interpretation—“Love third interpretation, -"Lovest "thou. est thou me more than thou lovest me more than these love me?” “The thy fellowo-disciples ?-is not liable to nominative of the personal pronoun," these difficulties. Jesus had just finish- says Matthiæ, (8 465,) " is usually ed his repast with his disciples, and omitted with the personal termination had begun a short but interesting con- of verbs, except where there is an emversation, by turning to Peter, and phasis, e. g. in an opposition, that is putting to him, in an abrupt and un- expressed or understood.” It follows, expected manner, the question which therefore, that, where such opposition has given rise to these remarks. The exists, the insertion of the pronoun is Apostle instantly perceived the drift essential; as in the following instance: of this question, and was aware of the “ All these have of their abundance embarrassing situation in which it cast in unto the offerings of God; but placed him. His reply, therefore, was she (aútn) of her penury hath cast in more guarded and deliberate than all the living that she had.” (Luke usual. Jesus had said, on a former xxi. 4.) In this and other similar occasion, when he called his Apostles cases the opposition is marked by the together and commissioned them to insertion of the pronoun; and its abpreach in his name, “ He that loveth sence in our Lord's question to Peter father or mother more thun me, is not affords strong presumptive evidence worthy of me; and he that loveth son against the correctness of Doddridge's or daughter more than me, is not wor- interpretation thy of me.” (Matt x. 37.) The time Others have objected to this interbad now arrived, when the necessity of pretation on different grounds, alleging acting up to the spirit of this injunc. that it was impossible for Peter to tion was more imperative and binding say whether his own love to Christ or than ever. But, instead of devoting that of his fellow-disciples was the himself exclusively to the support of stronger. He could have had no difhis Master's cause, Peter was disco- ficulty, it may be said, in affirming, vered among bis old associates, pur- that he was more attached to the cause suing his employment as a fisherman, of Jesus than to his employment as a and apparently forgetful of his duty as fisherinan, if he had understood the an apostle of Jesus Christ. With a question proposed to him, as Whitby view, therefore, as it would seem, to and Pearce have understood it: and ascertain his comparative attachment he could easily have ascertained the to Jesus and his fishing companions, comparative extent of his affection for our Lord puts to him the question, Christ and his fellow-disciples, though Lovest thou me more than these pi he might be unwilling, on many ac“ Yea, Lord," replies Peter," thou counts, to declare it in express terms kpowest that I love thee.” Then says in their presence. But he could not Jesus, " Feed my lambs.” “Let not possibly have determined by any test thy love for others exclude me from but that of experience, whether his a place in thy affections ; but love me love to Jesus was stronger than that through my disciples, and be assured, of Thomas or Nathanael, James or that when their interests are most John. There appears to me, however,

I confess, no particular force in this the Books of Daniel and Esther seem objection. Peter, it should be recol- probable? In the Hebrew copies of lected, had made a boast on a former those books we find, that under the occasion, that, whatever others might Persian monarcby, the king could not do, nothing should induce him to deny revoke a decree which he had once or betray his Master. “ Although all signed. This seemed very strange to should be offended,” says he, (Mark the inhabitants of Alexandria, living xiv. 29,) "yet will not I.” thus plac- under a very different government, ing his own attachment to Christ on and very ignorant of the ancient Perhigher grounds than that of his fellow- sian customs. Some of them, theredisciples. In this view our Lord's fore, boldly wrote another account of question to Peter might bave had some the circumstances of Daniel's being allusion to his former professions of thrown into the lion's den, in order to attachment, and might thus have been evade the difficulty. This appears to intended to convey an indirect rebuke me to furnish a very strong internal grounded on his late fickleness and proof, that the Books of Daniel and miscarriage.

Esther were written during the contiOf the above interpretations, the nuance of the Persian monarchy, as first and third have been most gene- otherwise this very remarkable custom rally adopted. The second appears to would probably not have been menme to be the only one which suits tioned in them. It strengthens this both the context and the grammatical argument to observe, that Josephus construction of the passage. Different in his history of Esther, and Racine in minds, however, will of course be dif- his play, have both committed the ferently affected by them; and it is error of making the king revoke his possible that many arguments in fa- decrec, which shews the high probavour of the first and third interpreta- bility that an historian who has given tions may have been overlooked by a correct history of these transactions, me in the course of the preceding re- must have lived while the custom was marks. If any of your learned readers, still in existence, that is, before the Sir, are in possession of such argu- destruction of the Persian empire. ments, by stating them in soune future This is of importance, because, as the Number of the Monthly Repository Book of Daniel certainly contains prothey will oblige your occasional cor- phecies of events long after the derespondent,

0. P. Q. struction of the Persian empire; if it

were written before that time, the SIR,

divine authority of its prophecies, A

T the conclusion of the Book of from which the truth of the Jewish following: “This Psalm was written easily be deduced, is an undeniable by David, when he fought with Goli- consequence in the opinion of ath, and is out of the number: 'I

T. C. H. was the least among my brethren, the youngest in the house of my father. Sir,

Junuary 12, 1822. Í fed my father's sheep. My hand S you have inserted an account the viol. And who told it to my Alexander with three Quakers, Vol. Lord? He is the Lord, he heareth. XVI. p. 701, I send you what I take He sent his messenger, and took me to be an equally authentic narrative of from my father's sheep, and anointed a less formal conference between Peter me with the oil of bis anointing. My the Great, the founder of the Russian brethren were fair and great, yet the Empire, and two respectable memLord did not take pleasure in them. bers of that Society, in the words of I went out to meet the Philistine, and one of them. If you think fit to ache cursed me by bis idols. But I, cept it, your readers will see that this having seized his sword from him, cut ancestor of Alexander was so far from off his head, and took away reproach affecting to adopt the peaceable prin. from the sons of Israel.'How is it ciples of the Friends, that he inquired that this has not been put in the Apo- of what use they could be in any kingeryphat Does the following account dom,

seeing they would not bear arms of the additions in the Apocrypha to and fight? Yet this conference seems


« PreviousContinue »