the church. Taylor is a striking instance how far a Protestant might be driven in this direction. JUNE 6, 1830. Catholicity.-Gnosis.-Epistle of Barnabas.*—Epistle to the Hebrews. Tertullian.-St. John. IN the first century, catholicity was the test of a book or epistle-whether it were of the Evangelicon or Apostolicon-being canonical. This catholic spirit was opposed to the gnostic or peculiar spirit,-the humour of fantastical interpretation of the old Scriptures into Christian meanings. It is this gnosis, or knowingness, which the Apostle says puffeth up,-not knowledge, as we translate it. The Epistle of Barnabas, of the genuineness of which I have no sort of doubt, is an example of this gnostic spirit. The Epistle to the Hebrews is the only instance of gnosis in the canon: it was written evidently by some apostolical man' before the destruction of the Temple, and probably at Alexandria. For three hundred years, and more, it was not admitted into the canon, especially not by the Latin church, on account of this difference in it from the other Scriptures. But its merit was so great, and the gnosis in it is so kept within due bounds, that its admirers at last succeeded, especially by affixing St. Paul's name to it, to have it included in the canon; which was first done, I think, by the council of Laodicea in the middle of the fourth century. Fortunately for us it was so. I beg Tertullian's pardon; but amongst his many bravuras, he says something about St. Paul's autograph. Origen expressly declares the reverse. It is delightful to think, that the beloved apostle was born a Plato. To him was left the almost oracular utterance of the mysteries of the Christian religion; 2 while to St. Paul was committed the task of explanation, defence, 1 See Jan. 6, 1823, where Coleridge agrees with Luther in attributing the Epistle to Apollos. 2 "The imperative and oracular form of the inspired Scripture is the form of reason itself, in all things purely rational and moral."-Statesman's Manual, p. 22.-H. N. C. and assertion of all the doctrines, and especially of those metaphysical ones touching the will and grace; for which purpose his active mind, his learned education, and his Greek logic, made him pre-eminently fit. JUNE 7, 1830. Principles of a Review.-Party-spirit.-Truth and Error.* NOTWITHSTANDING what you say, I am persuaded that a review would amply succeed even now, which should be started upon a published code of principles, critical, moral, political, and religious; which should announce what sort of books it would review, namely, works of literature as contradistinguished from all that offspring of the press, which in the present age supplies food for the craving caused by the extended ability of reading without any correspondent education of the mind, and which formerly was done by conversation, and which should really give a fair account of what the author intended to do, and in his own words, if possible, and in addition, afford one or two fair specimens of the execution,—itself never descending for one moment to any personality. It should also be provided before the commencement with a dozen powerful articles upon fundamental topics to appear in succession. You see the great reviewers are now ashamed of reviewing works in the old style, and have taken up essay writing instead. Hence arose such publications as the "Literary Gazette" and others, which are set up for the purpose-not a useless one-of advertising new books of all sorts for the circulating libraries. A mean between the two extremes still remains to be taken.1 Party men always hate a slightly differing friend more than a downright enemy. I quite calculate on my being one day or other holden in worse repute by many Christians than the Unitarians and open infidels. It must be undergone by every one who loves the truth for its own sake beyond all other things. 1 The 1st Ed. adds here:-"I profoundly revere Blanco White; his Doblado's Letters are exquisite; but his Review . . . &c. &c." Truth is a good dog; but beware of barking too close to the heels of an error, lest you get your brains kicked out. JUNE 10, 1830. Southey's Life of Bunyan.—Laud.—Puritans and Cavaliers.-Presbyterians, Independents, and Bishops. I wish he had illustrated that mood of mind which exaggerates, and still more, mistakes, the inward depravation, as in Bunyan, Nelson, and others, by extracts from Baxter's Life of himself. What genuine superstition is exemplified in that bandying of texts and half-texts, and demisemi-texts, just as memory happened to suggest them, or chance brought them before Bunyan's mind! His tract, entitled, "Grace abounding to the Chief of Sinners," 1 "1 is a study for a philosopher. Is it not, however, an historical error to call the Puritans dissenters ? Before St. Bartholomew's-day, they were essentially a part of the church, and had as determined opinions in favour of a church establishment as the bishops themselves. SOUTHEY'S Life of Bunyan is beautiful. d Laud was not exactly a Papist, to be sure; but he was on the road with the church with him to a point where declared popery would have been inevitable. A wise and vigorous Papist king would very soon, and very justifiably too, in that case, have effected a reconciliation between the churches of Rome and England, when the line of demarcation had become so very faint. The faults of the Puritans were many; but surely their morality will, in general, bear comparison with that of the Cavaliers after the Restoration. The Presbyterians hated the Independents much morethan they did the bishops, which induced them to co-operate in effecting the Restoration. "Grace abounding to the Chief of Sinners, in a faithful Account of the Life and Death of John Bunyan," &c.-H. N. C. The conduct of the bishops towards Charles, whilst at Breda, was wise and constitutional. They knew, however, that when the forms of the constitution were once restored, all their power would revive again as of course. JUNE 14, 1830. Study of the Bible. NTENSE study of the Bible will keep any writer from being vulgar, in point of style. JUNE 15, 1830. Rabelais.-Swift.—Bentley.-Burnet. ABELAIS is a most wonderful writer. Pantagruel is the Reason; Panurge the Understanding,-the pollarded man, the man with every faculty except the reason. I scarcely know an example more illustrative of the distinction between the two. Rabelais had no mode of speaking the truth in those days but in such a form as this; as it was, he was indebted to the King's protection for his life. Some of the commentators talk about lis book being all political; there are contemporary politics in it, of course, but the real scope is much higher and more philosophical. It is in vain to look about for a hidden meaning in all that he has written; you will observe that, after any particularly deep thrust, as the Papimania,1 for example, Rabelais, as if to break the blow, and to appear unconscious of what he has done, writes a chapter or two of pure buffoonery. He, every now and then, flashes you a glimpse of a real face from his magic lantern, and then buries the whole scene in mist. The morality of the work is of the most refined and exalted kind; as for the manners, to be sure, I cannot say much. Swift was anima Rabelaisii habitans in sicco,—the soul of Rabelais dwelling in a dry place. 1 B. iv. c. 48.. "Comment Pantagruel descendit en l'Isle de Papimanes." See the five following chapters, especially c. 50; and note also c. 9 of the fifth book; "Comment nous fut monstré Papegaut à grande difficulté."-H. N. C. H Yet Swift was rare. Can anything beat his remark on King William's motto,-Recepit, non rapuit,-“that the receiver was as bad as the thief?" The effect of the Tory wits attacking Bentley with such acrimony has been to make them appear a set of shallow and incompetent scholars. Neither Bentley nor Burnet suffered from the hostility of the wits. Burnet's "History of his own Times" is a truly valuable book. His credulity is great, but his simplicity is equally great; and he never deceives you for a moment. TH : JUNE 25, 1830. 'HE fresco paintings by Giotto' and others, in the cemetery at Pisa, are most noble. Giotto was a contemporary of Dante and it is a curious question, whether the painters borrowed from the poet, or vice versa. Certainly M. Angelo and Raffael fed their imaginations highly with these grand drawings, especially M. Angelo, who took from them his bold yet graceful lines. People may say what they please about the gradual improvement of the Arts. It is not true of the substance. The Arts and the Muses both spring forth in the youth of nations, like Minerva from the front of Jupiter, all armed : manual dexterity may, indeed, be improved by practice. 1 Giotto, or Angiolotto's birth is fixed by Vasari in 1276, but there is some reason to think that he was born a little earlier. Dante, who was his friend, was born in 1265. Giotto was the pupil of Cimabue, whom he entirely eclipsed, as Dante testifies in the well-known lines in the Purgatorio:" "O vana gloria dell' umane posse ! Tener lo campo: ed ora ha Giotto il grido, Si che la fama di colui oscura."-C. xi. v. 91. His six great frescoes in the cemetery at Pisa are upon the sufferings and patience of Job.-H. N. C. |