The tafte (fays he to his patronefs or pupil) we spoke of may be defined, at large, a clear fenfe of the noble, the beau tiful, and the affecting, through nature and art. It diftin guishes and selects, with unerring judgment, what is fine and graceful from the mean and disgusting; and keeping a strict and attentive eye on nature, never neglects her but when na ture herself is in difgrace,

All our fpecies that are perfect bring the firft principles of taste with them into the world. Rollin produces inftances of univerfal taste in mufic and painting: "A concert, fays he, that has all its parts well compofed and well executed, both as to inftruments and voices, pleafes univerfally: but if any dif cord arifes, any ill tone of voice be intermixed, it shall displease even those who are abfolutely ignorant of inufic. They know not what it is that offends them, but they find fomewhat grating in it to their ears; and this proceeds from the tafte and sense of harmony implanted in them by nature. In like manner a fine picture charms and transports a spectator who has no idea of painting. Afk him what pleafes him, and why it pleases him, and he cannot eafily give an account, or specify the real reafon; but natural fentiment works almoft the fame effect in him as art and ufe in perfect judges."

A writer upon taste furely ought to know, that the definition he has laid down in the above paffage, is falfe and abfurd. If tafte could diftinguish and select with unerring judgment, it would cease to affume that name, because it would become judgment itself. To fay that what is called tafte is unerring, is contradited by every hour's experience in the fine arts. Every connoiffeur has his favourite in poetry, painting, architecture, and so on through all the provinces of literature; but all cannot bé unerring, for truth has only one principle. All of them, however, may be beautiful. One critic may admire the painting of sentiment, another, that of passion. The works of two masters may express the same subject, though in very different manners; and this, perhaps, is one of the strongest objections which lies to the word taste, the operations of which are arbitrary, nay fometimes constitutional; and depend upon the Structure of the nerves, and a thousand other circumftances that influence or determine it. Let this writer judge whether it is confustent with good writing to fay, as he does in the paffage before cited, that tafte keeps a ftrict and attentive eye on

nature.

With regard to Mr. Rollin's obfervation of a univerfal tafte in mufic, it is liable to the fame objection; for it is nonfenfe in terms. Had he fubftituted the word ear inftead of his favourite term, we fhould, it is true, have had no objection to the proE e 4 priety

Part the First. priety of the expreffion; but we are afraid that the obfervation, in fact, is falfe. We believe there are in this island of Great Britain fifty thousand people, with all their organs of hearing perfect, who know no difference between the good and bad execution of a grand piece of mufic.-As this author makes no violent profeffions of being an original; as his intention is generally moral and good-natured, and many of his obfervations very juft, we fhall here difmifs him without any further animadverfions on his stile and manner.

VII. Free and Candid Difquifitions relating to the Diffenters. Part the Firft. Being an Essay towards a Reformation in their Mode of conducting Public Worship. In which are contained some occafional Animadverfions on a late Publication, entitled, Public Prayer, a Treatife in two Parts, &c. 12mo. Pr. 35. Johnson.

THE

HE author's defign in this performance is to recommend written forms of prayer, drawn up by minifters themfelves, to be ordinarily made ufe of in diffenting congregations, as the method of prayer, which he apprehends to have greatly the advantage of any other. His plan, however, does not require, that every fyllable of a prayer should be written down, or that a minifter should confine himself to the very words which are before him; but that, in praying, he should use the fame liberty which a good preacher would use in his fermons ; that he should occafionally vary his expreffions; that he should introduce any pertinent thoughts, which may arise in his mind in the pulpit; and that his prayers themselves fhould be varied at difcretion.

What the author has offered on the fubject before him, he modeftly proposes to the fober and candid attention of the Diffenters in general, and especially fuch of them as have, of late, difcovered an inclination to liturgies; all the ufes of which, he thinks, would be fuperfeded by written forms of devotion,

Before he proceeds to fpecify the particular advantages attending the scheme he propofes, he points out fome of the principal objections which lie against both liturgies and extempore prayer.

Against liturgies it is alledged, that a fet form of prayer, by continual repetition, becomes tirefome and difagreeable; that it has a tendency to promote a habit of indolence; that it cannot be adapted to all the particular cafes which may occur; that it lays both minifter and people under many restrictions; and is an infuperable bar againft all farther improvements in the mode of worship.

In the fecond chapter he confiders the difadvantages of extemporary prayer: and in this cafe he appeals to experience. Some, he says, who use extemporary prayer, are so much at a lofs for thought and expreffion, as to difcover great difcomposure themselves, and to difcompofe many of their audience. Others, though more fluent in their delivery, fall into fuch improprieties in their language, or manner, as are highly unbe coming in the worship of God, and greatly offenfive to the more fenfible part of their hearers. Many ufe fuch low, or fingular expreffions, as often excite the diverfion of the gay, and the contempt of the grave. Others exprefs themselves in fuch inaccurate language (if it be always ftrictly grammatical) as muft make the more learned part of their audience blush for them. And many (máy I not fay? the majority of) diffenting minifters run into fo verbofe, diffuse, and perplexed a stile, that their hearers muft wait a confiderable time, before they can adopt their petitions. Their fentences confist of so many clauses, and fuch long parentheses, as either render them wholly unintelligible, or require a more close attention, to comprehend the fenfe of them, than hearers in general are difpofed to give, or indeed, than is confiftent with a proper exercise of devout affections. But, befides thefe inaccuracies of expreffion (and even where they are generally avoided) minifters, who pray extempore, too commonly fall into fome great improprieties in their manner ; to which they can scarcely pay a proper regard, while their invention is labouring for fentiment or expreffion. A difagreeable tone of voice, an harsh unnatural pronunciation, a violent and indecent motion of the hands, or the head, or a fhocking diftortion of the countenance, are improprieties which commonly attend extemporary prayer.

• These and the like improprieties, continues this writer, are very unfavourable to devotion. When minifters, especially the young and diffident, have nothing to depend upon, but their own invention, or at moft, a few fcattered materials in their memory, the fear of failing is apt to put them into a disagreeable trepidation, and naturally fills them with a degree of anxiety, which is inconfiftent with the exercise of devout affections, and which every impropriety in fentiment or language will generally increase.----The improprieties which affect him, will, for the moft part, proportionably affect his hearers, and often in a greater degree. His hefitations, or his blunders will difcompofe them; his oddities divert or difguft them; the triteness or the flatness of his expreffions will render them carelefs and inattentive; and, efpecially, the intricacy of his language will greatly contribute to reftrain and fupprefs those deyout affections, which ought, at all times, to be employed in

the

the worship of God. I ftay not to reafon on this matter; I only appeal to fact. Let the moft partial friends to extemporary prayer fay, whether there is that outward appearance of devotion, in those affemblies where it is used, as there is, where a liturgy is read; or rather, whether there are not all the marks of negligence and indevotion. Do the people in general seem to be praying? Would any ftranger, coming in amongst them, think that they were? It is a notorious fact, that multitudes feem to be quite otherwife employed. They too frequently, alas betray the thoughtless and indevout frame of their minds, by an indolent posture, a drowsy aspect, an unmeaning and vacant face, a wandering eye, an indecent fmile, or other improprieties of behaviour. And, even among those who seem beft employed, the generality appear, not to be fo properly praying themselves, as hearing the minister pray.'

There are many other difadvantages attending extemporary prayer which this writer particularly and fully confiders. He then proceeds to recommend written forms, and attempts to prove, that they have all the advantages of a liturgy and extemporary prayer, and feveral others peculiar to themselves.

The ufe of notes, he fays, prevents all the inconveniences of extemporary prayer; it fecures, or ought to fecure, those who lead the devotions of the people, from any great impro prieties of expreffion, of which men of fenfe may fometimes be in danger; it is a curb on the fancies and paffions of men, which, even where the heart is devout, may carry them beyond the bounds of propriety; it prevents that hesitation and embarraffment, which is too often obfervable in diffenting minifters; it guards them against any great difcomposure, which a variety of circumstances may occafion; it is a good relief to the memory; and invention, and thus renders the bufinefs of prayer more easy and pleasant to those who conduct the fervice; and effectually prevents thofe difcouragements under which young minifters among the diffenters often labour, and from which fome of them are not free, fo long as they live. In the use of such forms, the mind has nothing to do but to attend to the exercise of suitable affections; and therefore is most likely to be devout. Nor do minifters alone reap the benefits of this method of prayer: the people themselves have a proportionable share in them; when those who conduct public worship, not only exprefs themselves with propriety, but are compofed, ferious, and devout, it certainly has a happy influence upon the attention, and devotion of the people. Such, he fays, are the advantages of written forms in common with liturgies.

He goes on to fhew, that the scheme he proposes has all the advantages of extemporary prayer; that it admits of as much

variety

variety as can be defired; that it gives the minifter an opportunity to adapt his prayers to all particular occurrences; that it lays him under an obligation to diligence; and gives him scope for the exercife of his devout affections,

Besides these advantages it has others, he thinks, which are either peculiar to itself, or do not immediately belong to any of the former heads. By this method, he fays, a minister may avail himself of all the helps which are to be met with, in the compofitions of others, and in the facred writings; he may provide against all inconveniencies which may arife from indifpofition, or the difcomposure of his mind; he may be able to appropriate more time to the immediate worship of God than is generally allowed in diffenting congregations; and he may furnish his memory with materials for extemporary prayer on any emergency.

There are fome objections which may be urged against this mode of conducting public worship, which the author endeavours to remove; and, in order to give more authority to his arguments, he obferves, that many of the beft writers among the Diffenters have fhewn their approbation of written forms, and given ample proof of their antiquity; and that diffenters, by rejecting them as unlawful, act inconsistently with their own principles and practice.

At the conclufion he offers fome rules for compofing prayers, on the preceding plan.

The whole subject is treated in a very fair and sensible manner; and the writer proves inconteftibly, that the reformation he proposes, would redound to the honour of the Diffenters.

The only point in which his arguments appear defective, is, in proving that written forms have all the advantages of a liturgy. It is a fatisfaction to the worshipper to know beforehand what prayers are to be offered ; but this cannot be known, if the minister varies his form; if he does not, he might with equal advantage ufe a ftated liturgy. The prayer-book is perhaps of no fmall fervice to devotion. It often reftrains a gazing eye, and a wandering imagination, and fixes the attention to the bufinefs in hand. The common people readily join in those petitions which they fee and know, but use an arbitrary form, and they do not pray; they only hear the minif ter pray. Yet let us fuppofe them attending the minifter who would not prefer a liturgy, drawn up by men of distinguished abilities, before any of thofe crude compofitions which minifters in general would occafionally produce ?-Be this as it may, the scheme which our author recommends, if carried into execution, would redound to the honour of the Diffenters, as it would enable them to conduct their public worship with dignity

and