Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

who faluted every body, in the manner ufually practifed by the Turks, by laying his hand on his heart, and bending his head every now and then. The grand fignior's fword, and two of his turbans, ornamented with precious ftones, were borne by men. The taste,

variety, and richness of the dreffes, the turbans, arms, and the furs, the beauty of the Arabian horfes, whofe houfings were edged with gold and filver, and covered with jewels, altogether formed a spectacie no where to be met with, but at Conftantinople.

After the proceffion I faw fome carriages of a very fingular conftruction. They were gilt, and made of basket-work; and are used by the Turkish ladies of quality, when they go abroad for amusemen. In these carriages there is a mattrefs, on which four women can fit conveniently enough: they are ufually drawn by buffaloes ; for horfes here are deftined to a better ufe, and this I think is right." Speaking of Turkifh monafteries, the traveller thus pro

ceeds:

A fimilar fpecies of fuperThe priests of the Syrian each other on certain days, Lucian, in relating this cir

There is another convent of dervifes at Tophana: and the Musfaimen have their Ignatius, their Bruno, their St. Francis, and their St. Anthony. There is one at Scutari, the dervises of which perform very fingular ceremonies. They dance once a week; and, from an excess of piety, mark themselves on the face, and other parts of the body, with a red hot iron. ftition prevailed among the ancients. Goddefs, who were eunuchs, whipped after drawing blood from their elbows. cumftance, adds, that the devotees among them all feared themselves, fome in the wrift, and others in the neck: on this account, he says, all the Affyrians had about them marks of burning. Men muft have conceived a terrible notion of God, before they could have reached fuch a pitch of infatuation.

The principles of all thefe dervifes, were they to live up to them, are very auftere; but here, as every where elfe, they only impofe on the vulgar, whofe fate it is to be conftantly the dupes of the artful. Thefe priefts conceal every vice under the garb of hypocrify, intoxicating themfelves continually with wine, opium, ftrong liquors, &c.

There is, however, a fect among the Turks, called Kalenders, whofe manner of thinking is very different from that of the dervifes whom I have been defcribing; and what is uncommon, and not difficult, their practice corrrefponds with their principles. The maxim of thefe people, according to Rycaut, is," This day we may call ours, to-morrow belongs to him who lives to enjoy it." Hence, difmiffing every melancholy idea, they think of nothing but enjoying the prefent moment; and they spend their lives in eating, drinking, and amufing themfelves. They maintain, that a tavern is as

holy as a mofque; and by a toleration the more extenfive as it is a theological one, they imagine this kind of worship to be as acceptable to the Deity as that of thofe who ferve him with aufterity and fubmiflion. There are none of this fect here.

The Mahommedans, as well as all the Chriftians of the eaft, in order to give the greater fanctity to monaftic inftitution, trace back their origin to the beginning of the world, and fay, that a nong the children of God, the pofterity of Seth devoted themselves to a monaftic and religious life on the holy mountain.'

In p. 194, the author fpeaks of the Alcoran, though it be now univerfally fpelled Koran, as the Al only implies the; and we might with equal juftice fay The Thebible. The printinghoufe now at Conftantinople we rather doubt: there was one.

The following paffage, in the commencement of a letter from Gibraltar, we prefent with applaufe; the fentiment is trite, we wish we could fay the practice:

After a long and tedious paffage, we are now performing qua rantine in this bay, which discord has fo often stained with gallant blood. Alas! when will men ceafe to become dupes to the ambition of their rulers? What avails it to be enlightened, if we cannot difcover that war can never be advantageous to any people; that this fcourge is equally ruinous to the conqueror and the conquered; and that it is the height of madness to fill a life fo fleeting and tranfitory with pain and anxiety? Excuse these reflections: they are the more melancholy, as it is to be feared that the wishes in which they originate will never be realifed.'

In a letter from Carthage, July 8, 1789, the author obferves, that many Carthaginian coins in copper, impreffed with the horse's head, are found on the spot, fome of which he bought. This fufficiently contradicts Eckhel's migration' of Carthaginian coins, in his late 4to, in which, by embrac ing too wide a plan, he has fallen into many errors. Indeed Shaw found fimilar coins there, elfe we fhould little trust the teftimony of the prefent author. When we find him fpeaking of the Ara Ægimori, the Ara Philenorum, &c. as ftill extant (p. 225,) we really are led to fufpect that thefe travels were fabricated in the clofet; a practice as ancient as the days of Gemelli Carreri; and now fo common, that half of the books of travels, published in France and England, are of this defcription.

[blocks in formation]

Letters to a Young Man. Part II. Occafioned by Mr. Evanfon's Treatife on the Diffonance of the Four generally received Evangelifts. By Jofeph Priestley, LL.D. F. R.S. 8vo. 35. fewed. Johnson. 1793.

AS

S Dr. Priestley provoked Mr. Evanfon to the prefent controverfy, it was certainly natural for him to make a reply. His talents, alfo, are unquestionably refpectable; his ftudies have been directed to the New Teftament; he is, also, as well as Mr. Evanfon, an Unitarian. On each of thefe accounts he appears a proper perfon to meet Mr. Evanfon in the prefent controversy.

The talents, as well as the proofs of integrity, exhibited by Mr. Evanfon, entitle him to refpect; and we were pleased at the following candid teftimony from Dr. Priestley,

By what particular train of thought Mr. Evanfon was originally led to entertain the doubts which at length produced the work on which I here animadvert, does not appear. That it was, directly or indirectly, from any difbelief of Chriftianity, I have not the fmalleft fufpicion. His noble conduct in refigning a valuable church preferment, rather than recite the offices, after he had rejected the doctrines, of the established church, is an abundant proof both of his firm belief of Chriftianity, and of the happy influence it had upon his mind; unbelievers in general making no fcruple to adhere to any church, fo long as they can receive the emoluments of it. The caft of Mr. Evanfon's writings alfo proves, not only that he is a Christian, but that Christian literature is his favourite ftudy, all his publications being of this kind, intended to enforce, and illustrate, fome article of Chriftian faith or practice.

But having given more particular attention to the fubject of prophecy, to which we are indebted for his excellent letter to the bishop of Worcester, he apppears to me to have overlooked, and undervalued, the evidence of Chriftianity from teftimony; not feeing to have confidered the nature of it, and how it has actually operated in all ages, and must do, while human nature is the fame that it now is, and ever has been. Alfo, not being able to vindicate, fo well as he could with, fome particular paffages in the Gofpels of Matthew, Mark, and John, and in fome of the Epiftles of Paul, which have been urged in fupport of doctrines and practices which he justly deems to be corruptions of genuine Christianity, he may have wifhed to find thofe books not to be genuine, as that would be the eafieft way of getting rid of the difficulty; and without confidering the external evidence of their authenticity, and not having the critical skill, or the patience, that was requfite to afcertain the true fenfe of thofe paffages, he has haftily concluded them to be fpurious productions. In a state of mind which I have fup

pofed

pofed, nothing is eafier than to find objections to any writings; and when a man has, though ever so haftily, and incautiously, advancced any thing in public, the best of us are fo much men, and have fo much of human imperfection about us, as to wish to defend it.

In this manner I endeavour to account for the work, the principles of which I have, in thefe Letters, undertaken to refute. In his excellent letter on the fubject of prophecy, Mr. Evanson first threw out an infinuation against the credit of the Gofpel of Matthew, which offended many of his friends, and the friends of Christianity. But he has given us all particular fatisfaction in producing the reafons on which that infinuation was founded, as we can now examine them, and judge for ourselves; whereas many perfons, having a high opinion of the judgment and integrity of Mr. Evanson, wore inclined to fuppofe his reafons to be more weighty than they will find them to be.'

Some parts, however, of the preceding paffage it may be difficult to reconcile with that candour and refpect which are due, in Dr. Priestley's own opinion, to Mr Evanfon: and fome of our readers may probably indulge themselves in a fmile, when they hear the doctor making the following de

claration:

The only circumftance that offends me in this work of Mr. Evanfon's, is the levity and contempt with which he treats those books of the New Teftament which he thinks he has feen reafon to reject. He had no occafion in this manner to hurt the feelings of many of his readers. What they have been long accustomed to read with reverence, they must be fhocked to fee made the fubje& of ridicule and unfparing farcafm, and efpecially by a profelfed Chriftian. From unbelievers we expect nothing better, and therefore we are prepared for every thing contemptuous that they can throw out. Having nothing in their habitual feelings and ftate of mind congenial to the fentiments of Chriftians (who believe that they derive every pleafing profpect for time and eternity from the Scriptures) it cannot be fuppofed that they fhould refpect those feelings of which they have no idea, and which they cannot conceive even to exift. They, therefore, have an excufe which Mr. Evanfon has not.

• Mr. Evanfon muft, in his early years, have been taught to perufe the whole of the New Teftament with nearly equal refpect; and in reading the Gofpels of Matthe v, Mark, and John, must have felt just as he did in reading that of Luke. And as he grew up, and reflected upon what he read, and attended to the impres which thofe writings made upon him, he must have perceived the fame unequivocal marks of genuine piety, and a difinterested regard to truth, in all the evangelifts. How he fhould ever come to lofe thofe impreffions, and feel differently in reading any of them, I

P 3

cannot

cannot tell. But whenever he came to fufpect or to think, that they were not genuine (which he must have done with great reluctance) he fhould have contented himself with fimply giving his reafons for the opinion he had adopted, and have difmiffed thofe books as old friends, to whom he had formerly conceived himself to be under fome obligation, and not have turned them out of doors with fo much rudeness and infult.

Mr. Evanfon may impute it to weaknefs and prejudice, but I own I have not been able to read his work, and copy fo much of it as I have thought proper to do, without very unpleafing feelings, Notwithstanding this, I hope it will not be perceived that it has at all influenced me in my replies to him, or that I have given way to afperity, where nothing but calm difcufiion was wanted. I could not treat Mr. Evanfon as he has done the authors of the Gofpels of Matthew, Mark, and John; and I am perfuaded they will approve of my conduct, and not think the worfe of their advocate for defending them without anger. On this, as on every other occafion, I could with to imbide their excellent fpirit, and in every controverfy, in which human prejudices and paflions are too apt to mix themselves, not to forget that I am a Chriftian,'

any

Though Dr. Priestley is certainly not a farcaftic writer, yet he does not furely hold himfelf bound to treat those parts of the New Teftament, which he does not confider genuine, with 'particular reverence:' and fome may probably think, that as Mr. Evanfon confiders thofe parts of the New Teftament forgeries, which he treats with contempt, he does not act fo much out of character, at least he is kept in countenance by many of thofe, who, by the oppofite party, have been deemed

heretics.

Thefe Letters contain, Remarks on the Nature of Hiftorical Evidence, which is illuftrated by that of the Propagation of Chriftianity-On the Authenticity of the Four Gofpels in general-On the Preference given by Mr. Evanfon to the Gofpel of Luke-On the Gofpel of Matthew in general-On Mr. Evanfon's Objections to particular Paffages in the Gospel of Matthew, contradictory to Pafläges in the Gofpel of LukeOn the Ignorance and Inconfiftencies, that Mr. Evanfon imagines he has difcovered in the Gospel according to MatthewOn the Things that Mr. Evanfon objects to, as unworthy of our Saviour, in the Gofpel of Matthew-On Mr. Evanfon's Objections to the Gospel of Mark-On Mr. Evanfon's Objections to the Epistle to the Romans-On Mr. Evanson's Objections to fome other Epiftles in the New Teftament-On the arbitrary Proceeding of Mr. Evanfon, in making Luke's Gofpel his ftandard, by which to examine the other GospelsIt also contains, Remarks on fome Paflages in Mr. Evanfon's Letter to the Bishop of Worcester, on the Date of Luke's Gospel-And on the Identity of Luke and Silas:

With

« AnteriorContinua »