Art. 77. A Letter to a Friend. 8vo. 19. Bew. 1788. This writer aims fome heavy blows at national churches in general, and at the Church of England in particular. Five queftions are propofed refpecting the latter, which are answered much to her difadvantage. The defence we leave to thofe concerned, only we remark, that as to fome points of doctrine the Author appears to accord with the thirty-nine articles; and farther, that he is a Baptift: Infant-baptifm is, in his view, the fruitful fource of all evil. However, he does not feem to diftinguish between the practice itself and the manner of its adminiftration. Art. 78. A Blow at the Root of pretended Calvinism, or real Antinomianifm. By John Hampion. Evo. Is. Johnfon. 1788. By pretended Calvinism this writer means that which, under the fhew of attributing all to grace, deftroys the freedom of human actions, reduces man to a mere machine, and runs into the ftoical fatalifm. This (after Mr. Robertfon) he calls pretended, because it was not, he fays, the fyftem of Calvin, nor is it the fyftem of the Scripture, which never fo ftates the doctrine of the fall, as to exculpate finners, nor ever fo fpeaks of divine influence, as to annihilate moral agency.' Whether he is himself a Calvinist we enquire not: he appears to be a man of thought and knowlege, and we apprehend of piety and candour. He gives a ftrange account of the rant of fome who are ranked as pretenders. The topics of predeftination or neceffity, liberty or free-will, are attended with great difficultieshappily for us, practical religion and moral duty are far more obvious. This pamphlet is farther intended as a defence of another which is called Free Thoughts on the Extent of the Death of Christ, and on the Doctrine of Reprobation.' 1. The Sign given to Ahaz. A Difcourfe on Isaiah vii. 14, 15, 16. delivered in the Church of St. John, Devizes, at the triennial Vifitation of Shute Lord Bishop of Sarum, July 26, 1786. By Benjamin Blayney, B. D. Rector of Poulfhot, Wilts. To which is fubjoined, a propofed Emendation of a Paffage in a Differtation formerly published by the fame Author, on Dan. ix. ver. 20, &c. 4to. Is. Cadell. The learned Author of this Difcourfe adopts the idea of Mr. Poftlethwaite (in his fermon on the fame text preached and printed at Cambridge in the year 1781*), that in the prophecy in question, the birth of Christ is not given as the fign to Ahaz of his approaching deliverance, but the deliverance itfelf is the fign held forth to confirm the certainty of the future extraordinary birth; and adds, as a farther illuftration, that the fubfequent prediction of the calamities which were coming upon Ahaz, were alfo intended as a fign of the fame event. He understands the words "butter and honey, &c." as denoting that the Meffiah would appear in a humble ftation, and be contented with the moft ordinary food, and would felect good * See Rev. vol. lxiv. p. 478. men men from the multitude to be members of his fpiritual kingdom. He renders the paffage thus: "Butter and honey fhall he eat when he ball know to refufe what is evil and chufe what is good." difcourfe will be perufed with pleasure by those who are engaged in the critical ftudy of the Scriptures. The II. The Chriftian Paftor's Duty to teach the Divinity of Chrift with Difintereftedness and Charity. Preached at the Vifitation at Richmond, Yorkshire, May 30, 1787. Published at the Request of the Clergy. By the Rev. C. Francis, M. A. Rector of Wath. 4to. 1s. Baldwin, &c. A flight apology for orthodoxy, which, though neatly drawn up, goes very little farther than barely to fhew the Author's good in tentions. III. Preached Auguft 22, 1787, at the Ordination of the Rev. John Love, Minister of the Gospel at Crifpin-ftreet, Spitalfields. By the Rev. Thomas Rutledge. To which is added, the Charge, by the Rev. William Smith, A. M. Published at the Defire of the Congregation. 8vo. IS. Elliot and Co. 1787. Mr. Rutledge gives a very fingular reafon for not fupplying the defects and rectifying the inaccuracies of this difcourfe, namely, that the doing so would have made it, in fome meafure, different from that which was delivered to the auditors, and which they defired to be printed.' The Public has certainly nothing to do with this apology however, if it fatisfied the congregation to whom it was delivered, it may be fufficient; for it is not very probable that the defects of the publication will be perceived far beyond the precincts of Crifpin-street. CORRESPONDENCE. In answer to Curiofa's inquiry (mentioned in your entertaining Mifcellany for May laft) concerning the Odes to the holy Mountains,' which you could not find out by your Index; I beg leave to inform her by the fame channel, that the poem fhe inquires after is mentioned in the Monthly Review for August 1779 (vol. Ixi. P. 93.), and is entitled, The Jewish Bard. In Four Odes to the Holy Mountains. By John Wheeldon, A. M. 4to. IS. Goldfmith.' I am, Alnwick, July 18, 1788. Gentlemen, Your most obedient Servant, R. R.' It is to be found in the General Index, under the Author's name. Vide letter W. in the clafs POETRY, &c. *. Mr. Shaw's letter, dated from Rochdale, August 21, 1787, was not received till within a few days paft. +*+ Other Articles of CORRESPONDENCE will be found in our APPENDIX [publifhed with this Number], page 670. THE MONTHLY REVIEW, For AUGUST, 1788. ART. I. Warton's Edition of Milton's Poems, &c. continued: See our latt Month's Review, p. 12. MUC UCH will be found in Mr. Warton's notes, for which the admirers of the Miltonic Mufe will confider themfelves as indebted to this learned Editor, and which will contribute to convey his name to pofterity, united with that of our great poet. But notwithstanding the large portion of praise which we confefs is due to him for his long and learned attention to thefe Juvenile Poems; we cannot compliment him fo far as to fay we have read all his notes with approbation. We have observed in this volume, what is too frequently met with in valuable and approved commentaries-explanations given where no explanations are neceffary, and omitted, where the reader will expect to find them. Sometimes we meet with notes which are neither critical, explanatory, nor illuftrative; and the pages are often crowded by the adduction and juxtapofition of parallel places (if the occurrence of a particular word may be faid to conftitute a parallel place) from various authors, which may evince, indeed, the Editor's intimate acquaintance with our old English poets, but which often appear to us unneceffary, either to explain the meaning, or to render more confpicuous the beauties of his Author. Among the notes which are neither critical nor explanatory, may we not reckon the following? !! Penferofo, line 62. Moft mufical, moft melancholy.] I recommend this verfe as a motto for an Eolian harp.' 106. Such notes, as warbled to the firing Drew iron tears down Pluto's cheek.] When Handel's L'Allegro and 11 Penferofo were exhibited at Birmingham a few years ago, this paffage, for obvious reasons, was more applauded than any in the whole performance.' The note with which Mr. Warton prefents us, on the 45th line of Lycidas, will not, probably, make his readers fmile, but will VOL. LXXIX. H rather rather induce them to think he has given himself more trouble than was necessary, and afford them an opportunity of retorting on him his own words, Critics must fhew their reading in quoting books. As killing as the canker to the rofe.] Shakespeare is fond of this image, who, from frequent repetition, seems to have fuggefted it to Milton. SON N. Ixx. For CANKER vice the SWEETEST BUDS doth love. Again, ibid. xxxv. And loathfom CANKER lives in SWEETEST BUD. Again, ibid. xcv. Which, like a CANKER in thy fragrant ROSE, And of a rofe again, which had feloniously ftolen the boy's com plexion and breath, ibid. xcix. But for his theft, in pride of all his growth, A vengefull CANKER eat him up to death. And in the Two GENTLEMEN OF VERONA, A. i. S. i. -- As in the SWEETEST BUDS The eating CANKER dwells, fo eating love, &c. Again, TEMPEST, A. i. S. ii. Something ftain'd With grief, that's beauty's CANKER. And in the FIRST P. OF HENR. VI. A. ii. S. iv. And in HAMLET, A. i. S. iii. The CANKER galls the INFANTS of the SPRING And in K. RICHARD II. A. ii. S. iii. But now will CANKER forrow eat my BUD. And in the RAPE of LUCRECE, SUPPL. Shakef. i. 52. And in the MIDS. N. DR. A. ii. S. iii. The fairies are employed, The CANKER-Blooms have full as deep a dye As the perfumed tincture of the roses. But there the CANKER-Bloom is the dog-rofe. As in MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING, A. i. S. iii. "I had rather be a CANKER in a hedge, than a rofe in his grace." Shakespeare affords other inftances.' This is given as a fpecimen of what is to be often met with. In L'ALLEGRO, we have a fimilar lift of parallel places on the word triumphs; in IL PENSEROSo, another on arched walks; in ARCADES, there is another on curl the grove; and in COMUS we have a number of paffages brought together from various authors where where the words trip, tripping and trippingly occur to illuftrate the line, • Other trippings to be trod.' Subjoined to LYCIDAS are notes to explain what the Author meant by beaked promontory;—they knew not of his flory;-reverend fire, and tender flops of various quills; but Mr. Warton offers not a fyllable on the ferannel pipes, nor endeavours to point out the precife meaning of the word ferannel by the aid of one parallel paffage. It is poffible he might have fearched for it (as Johnfon did) in vain; but this he fhould have told us, as this would have afcertained it to be a word of Milton's invention; or at leaft firft employed by him in poetry. Inftances of the like kind are to be found in the notes affixed to the other poems. In L'ALLEGRO, nods and becks are favoured with an explanation; but the wreathed fmiles are left to explain themselves. Day's garish eye, in IL PENSEROSO, furnishes an opportunity of exhibiting a ftring of quotations from Spenfer, Joshua Silvefter, Browne, Sir J. Beaumont, Phineas Fletcher, Drayton, Shakefpeare, and Gay, in which the word eye occurs; but the word garish, which is rather lefs common and not quite fo well understood as the word eye, is found in neither of them. In COMUS he condefcends to inform his readers that quaint fignifies ftrange, odd, unufual; while on the phrafe blear illufion he is filent: and (not to adduce other inftances) on. line 293, And the fwinkt hedger at his fupper fat,' it is obferved that hedger is a paftoral word at once natural and new;' but on neither the meaning or merit of the adjective fwinkt is any obfervation of fered. It is the profeffed bufinefs of this commentary to point out Milton's imitations; and this, in general, is happily executed, his Editor having carefully traced him among the older poets, and marked many paffages in them which may reafonably be fuppofed to have furnished him with ideas, or affifted his conceptions. But this inveftigation, though it might prove fatal to an ordinary poet, ferves only to increase the reputation of our fublime bard. To him we may better apply an obfervation which we recollect Mr. Warton has made relative to Pope, he invades authors like a monarch, and what would be theft in other poets, is only victory in him. Places are taken notice of where he has even improved on Shakespeare: an inftance may be seen in Comus, 1. 22. But Critics, when employed in detecting imitations, are very apt to pursue the matter too far. Later poets are generally reprefented by them as imitating their predeceffors, in inftances where it is more reasonable to conclude they alike copied from * See the Effay on the Genius and Writings of Pope. Nature. |