صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

referred to this source; and the quaifications and exceptions under which they maintain the duty of abstaining from enjoyment, serve only, in most instances, to bring upon their reasonings the additional charge of inconsistency.

Their objection to cards, dice, wagers, horse-races, &c. is said to be, first, that they may lead to a spirit of gaming, which leads, again, to obvious unhappiness and immorality; but chiefly, that they are sources of amusement unworthy of a sober Christian, and tend, by producing an unreasonable excitement, to disturb that tranquillity and equanimity which they look upon as essential to moral virtue.

They believe,' fays Mr Clarkson, that ftillnefs and quietnefs, both of spirit and of body, are neceffary, as far as they can be obtain ed. Hence, Quaker children are rebuked for all expreffions of anger, as tending to raise those feelings which ought to be fuppreffed; a rais ing even of the voice beyond due bounds, is difcouraged as leading to the difturbance of their minds. They are taught to rife in the morning in quietnefs; to go about their ordinary occupation with quietness ; and to retire in quietnefs to their beds. '

Now this, we think, is a very miserable picture. The great curse of life, we believe, in all conditions above the lowest, is its excessive stillness and quietness, and the want of excitement which it affords: and though we certainly do not approve of cards and wagers as the best exhilarators of the spirits, we cannot, possibly concur in the principle upon which they are rejected with such abhorrence by this rigid society. A remark which Mr Clarkson himself makes afterwards, might have led him to doubt of the soundness of their petrifying principles.

It has often been obferved,' he fays, that a Quaker boy has an unnatural appearance. The idea has arifen from his dress and his fedatenefs, which, taken together, have produced an appearance of age above the youth in his countenance. I have often been furprised to hear young Quakers talk of the folly and vanity of purfuits in which perfons, older than themfelves, were then embarking in pursuit of pleasure,' &c.

We feel no admiration, we will confess, for prodigies of this description, and think that the world is but little indebted to those moralists, who, in their efforts to ameliorate our condition, begin with constraining the volatile spirit of childhood into sedateness, and extinguishing the happy carelessness and animation of youth, by lessons of eternal quietness.

The next chapter is against music, and is, as might be expected, the most absurd and extravagant of the whole. This is Mr Clarkson's statement of the Quaker reasoning against this delightful art.

• Providence gave originally to man a beautiful and a perfect world,

He

[ocr errors]

He filled it with things neceffary, and things delightful and yet man has often turned these from their true and original defign. The very wood on the surface of the earth he has cut down, and the very ftone and metal in its bowels he has hewn and caft, and converted into a graven image, and worshipped in the place of his beneficent Creator. The food which has been given him for his nourishment, he has frequently converted by his intemperance into the means of injuring his health. The wine, that was defigned to make his heart glad, on reafonable and neceffary occafions, he has used often to the ftupefaction of his fenfes, and the degradation of his moral character. The very raiment, which has been afforded him for his body, he has abused also, so that it has frequently become a fource for the excitement of his pride. Juft so it has been, and fo it is, with mufic, at the present day.' I. p. 41, 42.

From which, if it follows that music ought to be entirely rejected and avoided, it must follow also, that we should go naked, and neither eat nor drink; and as to the arguments that follow against the cultivation of music, because there are some obscene and some bacchanalian songs, which it would be improper for young persons to learn, they are just such as might be used against their learning to read, because there are immoral and heretical books, which may possibly fall into their hands. The most authentic and sincere reason, however, we believe, is one which rests immediately upon the general ascetic principle to which we have already made reference, viz. that music tends to self-gratification, which is not allowable in the Christian system. Now, as this same self-denying principle is really at the bottom of most of the Quaker prohibitions, it may be worth while to consider, in a few words, how far it can be reconciled to reason or morality.

All men, we humbly conceive, are under the necessity of pursuing their own happiness; and cannot even be conceived as ever pursuing any thing else. The only difference between the sensualist and the ascetic is, that the former pursues an immediate, and the other a remote happiness; or, that the one pursues an intellectual, and the other a bodily gratification. The penitent who passes his days in mortification, does so unquestionably from the love of enjoyment; either because he thinks this the surest way to attain eternal happiness in a future world, or because he finds the admiration of mankind a sufficient compensation, even in this life, for the hardships by which he extorts it. It appears, therefore, that self-gratification, so far from being an unlawful object of pursuit, is necessarily the only object which a rational being can be conceived to pursue; and consequently, that to argue against any practice, merely that it is attended with enjoyment, is to give it a recommendation which must operate in its favour,

[ocr errors]

even with the most rigid moralist. The only consistent form of the argument is that which was adopted by the mortified hermits of the early ages, but is expressly disclaimed for the Quakers by their present apologist, viz. that our well-being in this world is a matter of so very little concern, that it is altogether unworthy of a reasonable being to bestow any care upon it; and that our chance of well-being in another world depends so much upon our anxious endeavours after piety upon earth, that it is our duty to employ every moment in meditation and prayer, and altogether sinful and imprudent to indulge any propensities which may interrupt those holy exercises, or beget in us any interest in sublunary things.

There is, evidently, a tacit aspiration after this sublime absurdity in almost all the Quaker prohibitions; and we strongly suspect, that honest George Fox, when he inhabited a hollow tree in the vale of Beevor, taught nothing less to his disciples. The condemnation of music and dancing, and all idle speaking, was therefore quite consistent in him; but since the permission of gainful arts, and of most of the luxuries which wealth can procure, to his disciples, it is no longer so easy to reconcile these condemnations, either to reason, or to the rest of their practice. A Quaker may suspend the care of his salvation, and occupy himself entirely with his worldly business, for six days in the week, like any other Christian. It is even thought laudable in him to set an example of diligence and industry to those around him; and the fruits of this industry he is by no means required to bestow in relieving the poor, or for the promotion of piety. He is allowed to employ it for self-gratification, in almost every way but the most social and agreeable. He may keep an excellent table and garden, and be driven about in an easy chariot by a pious coachman and four plump horses; but his plate must be without carving, and his carriage and horses (perhaps his flowers also) of a dusky colour. His guests may talk of oxen and broad cloth as long as they think fit; but wit and gaiety are entirely proscribed, and topics of literature but rarely tolerated. His boys and girls are bred up to a premature knowledge of bargaining and housekeeping; but when their bounding spirits are struggling in every limb, they must not violate their sedateness by a single skip their stillness must not be disturbed by raising their voices beyond their common pitch ;-and they would be disowned, if they were to tune their innocent voices in a hymn to their great Benefactor. We cannot help saying, that all this is absurd and indefensible. Either let the Quakers renounce all the enjoyments of this life, or take all that are innocent. The pursuit of wealth surely holds out a greater temptation to immorality, than the

study

study of music. Let them disown those who accumulate more than is necessary for their subsistence, or permit those who have leisure to employ it in something better than money-getting. To permit a man to have a house and retinue, from the expenses of which fifty poor families might be supported, and at the same time to interdict a fold in his coat, or a ruffle to his shirt, on account of their costliness and vanity, is as ridiculous, and as superstitious, as it is for the Church of Rome to permit one of her cardinals to sit down, on a meagre day, to fifty costly and delicious dishes of fish and pastry, while it excommunicates a peasant for breaking through the holy abstinence with a morsel of rusty bacon. With those general impressions, we shall easily dispose of their other peculiarities.

The amusements of the theatre are strictly forbidden to Quakers of every description; and this, partly because many plays are immoral, but chiefly because, on the stage, men personate characters that are not their own; and thus become altogether sophisticated in their looks, words and actions, which is contrary to the simplicity and truth required by Christianity. We scarcely think the Quakers will be much obliged to Mr Clarkson for imputing this kind of reasoning to them. We would rather hear at once that the playhouse was the Devil's drawing-room, and that the actors paint their faces, and deserve the fate of Jezebel. As to the sin of personating characters not their own, and sophisticating their looks and words, it is necessarily committed by every man who reads aloud a dialogue from the New Testament, or who adopts, from the highest authority, a dramatic form in his preaching. As to the other objection, that theatrical amusements produce too high a degree of excitement for the necessary sedateness of a good Christian, we answer, in the first place, that we do not see why a good Christian should be more still and sedate than his innocence and natural gaiety incline him to be; and, in the second place, that the objection proves Mr Clarkson to be laudably ignorant of the state of the modern drama, which, we are credibly informed, is by no means so extremely interesting, as to make men neglect their business and their duties to run after it.

Next comes dancing.-The Quakers prohibit this strictly; 1st, because it implies the accompaniment of music which has been already interdicted; 2dly, because it is useless, and below the dignity of the Christian character;' 3dly, because it implies assemblies of idle persons, which lead to thoughtlessness as to the important duties of life; 4thly, because it gives rise to silly vanity, and envying, and malevolence. The lovers of dancing, we think, will be able to answer those objections without our as

sistance;

sistance; such of them as have not been already obviated, are applicable, and are in fact applied by the Quakers to every species of accomplishment. They are applicable also, though the Quakers do not apply them, to all money-getting occupations in which there is room for rivalry and competition.

The reading of novels is next prohibited, not so much, Mr Clarkson assures us, on account of their fictitious nature, though that is ground enough for the abhorrence of many Quakers, but on account of their general immorality, and their tendency to produce an undue excitement of mind, and to alienate the attention from objects of serious importance. These are good reasons against the reading of immoral novels, and against making them our sole or our principal study. Other moralists are contented with selecting and limiting the novels they allow to be read. The Quakers alone make it an abomination to read any; which is like prohibiting all use of wine or animal food, instead of restricting our censures to the excess or abuse of them.

Last of all, the sports of the field are prohibited, partly on account of the animal suffering they produce, and partly from the habits of idleness and ferocity which they are supposed to generate. This is Mr Clarkson's account of the matter; but we shall probably form a more correct idea of the true Quaker, from being told that George Fox considered that man in the fall, or the apostate man, had a vision so indistinct and vitiated, that he could not see the animals of the creation as he ought; but that the man who was restored, or the spiritual Christian, had a new and clear discernment concerning them, which would oblige him to consider and treat them in a proper manner.' The Quakers, however, allow the netting of animals for food; and cannot well object to shooting them, provided it be gone about for the same economical purpose, and not for self-gratification,—at least in the act of killing.

Mr Clarkson proceeds next to discuss the discipline, as he calls it, or interior government of the Quaker society; but we think it more natural to proceed to the consideration of what he announces as their peculiar customs, which, for any thing we see, might all have been classed among the prohibitions which constitute their moral education.

The first is the peculiarity of their dress. The original rule, he says, was only that it should be plain and cheap. He vindicates George Fox from the charge of having gone about in a leathern doublet; and maintains, that the present dress of the Quakers is neither more nor less than the common dress of and sograve ber persons of the middling rank at the first institution of the society; and that they have retained it, not out of any supersti

« السابقةمتابعة »