Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

Thomson in our opinion had a much greater acquaintance with the capabilities of the Spenserian stanza. As a whole "Gertrude" requires more development in its story. Lord Jeffrey made a very good critical remark on this, in a private letter to Campbell: "It looks almost as if you had cut out large portions of it, and filled up the gaps very imperfectly." The shorter piece "O'Connor's Child" is far more complete; and as a whole, we know none of Campbell's poems which we prefer to this. His rhetorical eloquence, combined with clearness in expressing his meaning, fitted Campbell remarkably for patriotic odes; and the stormy element which he so often introduced, gave scope for the strong imagery in which he delighted. Moore speaks of Campbell as one,

In whose sea-odes-as in those shells
Where ocean's voice of majesty

Seems still to sound-immortal dwells
Old Albion's spirit of the sea.

They cannot indeed be praised too highly as in all respects answering our ideas of Tyrtæan poetry. His general lyric power was very effective, but our space forbids us to do more than remind the Reader of the beautiful "Ode to Winter".

As

Campbell was a very pure and pleasing prose-writer-his "Essay" prefixed to the "Specimens" has been much admired both for criticism and language. It is now being published separately by Mr. Murray in his " Home and Colonial Library". The "Specimens" ought to have been entitled "Specimens of British Poetry" not of the " British Poets". The shade of Motteux, for example, must have been much overcome by the unexpected compliment of being named amongst the Bards of his adopted country. The students and admirers of Campbell are probably fast decreasing. it has been said on another subject, the present age requires something more earnest than satisfied the last. But we prophesy that ultimately recourse must be again had to the study of what is called classical poetry, both for purification of taste and for articulateness of expression. We are no advocates for poetic formulas or for the pomposity and brocade so popular in the last century, but we demand that a poem be readable, be intelligible, that it recommend itself to us by itself; and the world will not labor to understand poetry through weariness, long suffering, and much mental anxiety, even though it be the offspring of genius, even though it come from the pen of Coventry Paterson or of Robert Browning.

MORCOTT.

II.

ON THE INTERNAL ARRANGEMENT OF CHURCHES, AND THEIR FURNITURE AND DECORATIONS.

THE main subject of this paper is one which perhaps requires a few preliminary remarks.

Opinions differ widely as to whether a place of worship as plain, or studiedly plainer, than a barn, is, or is not, more proper than a costly edifice upon which neither pains, expense nor art have been spared.

Since writing the forgoing I have seen the following remarks in the English papers for July 1849 last, on the speech of the Bishop of London touching this very subject. I need make no apology for giving them entire :

[ocr errors]

"Religion and art, says the Bishop of London, are essentially connected: a high authority, which ought to reconcile many sceptical persons to an inevitable truth. The right reverend chaplain to the Royal Aca“demy speaks in a double function, not only as a vindicator of art, but "as a ruler of the church: and without venturing on any doctrinal ques"tion beyond lay meddling, we are free to understand that the dogmas "of the protestant church do not forbid the consideration of the subject "on the broadest principles of religious feeling as well as of art. On such "grounds, persons who are familar with the aspect of art in religious edi"fices cannot comprehend why the usage of the English Church should "abandon that high influence to the Roman Catholic Church. It scarcely needed Mr. Ruskin to show, by "the Lamp of Sacrifice," that the "labour and faculties of man are well bestowed in rendering the house of "worship worthy of its purpose, aud that an edifice adorned with the "beauty which is the human reflex of the beauty of creation, is more fit"ting for the spirit of devotion than the sort of washhouse which is usual"ly constructed for the purpose. A contrary impression may be created "in the mind of those who are not familiar with ecclesiastical art, because "pictures and ornaments may to them, by their novelty, be matters of "curiosity; but it is to be remembered that the regular attendants in a "church must soon lose any such trivial sensation, and remain open to the direct and constant influences of art."-Spectator.

66

Again in another print the following farther notice of the same subject occurs :—

"There is a natural if not a necessary connection between religion, art, and science. He need hardly remind them that ancient art attained its "greatest splendour when employed in illustrating the mythology of the "Greeks and Romans. The masterpieces of Christian art are still to be "found over Catholic altars; and, although the severer genius of our own "Reformed Church disowns the assistance of painting as an adjunct to "those means by which devotion is excited, yet she does not disdain, but

on the contrary most cordially and respectfully invites, the assistance of the sister arts of sculpture and architecture. With the finest specimens "of these the city of London abounds. With respect to science, there is 66 not merely a natural but a necessary connection between it and religion. "What is science but the knowledge of truth? Science cannot but illus"trate the glories of Christianity. The Holy Scriptures are but truth"truth unmixed with error; and he could not but remark that some of "the most conclusive, convincing evidences of the existence, benevolence, and wisdom of the Deity, have been furnished by distinguished professors of science. He would not enumerate examples; but the dying testimony of Laplace was-" Whatever you do, never part with religion; never consent to the overthrow of your religion, When you overthrow "that, you overthrow all good government, all civil rights, all social kap 66 piness.'

46

66

66

[ocr errors]

As I am addressing myself chiefly to churchmen, I suppose few will be found prepared to deny, that the house of God should be made as little as may be unworthy of Him to Whom it is dedicated more particularly so in this land of Heathen and Mahomedans. Both these classes spare no pains to render their temples and musjids as grand as their means will permit; nor is this feeling confined to India, for the Heathen and Mahomedans as well as Christians of all nations of the earth have been guided by the same feeling; one in which our ancestors fully participated. No country in the world could, at the time of the Reformation, have boasted of so many, and so magnificent and richly ornamented religious buildings as England; and still, notwithstanding the necessary removal of many decorations decidedly objectionable on account of the superstitions attached and idolatrous veneration paid to them, to the neglect of true piety-and the lamentable destruction of ornamental work generally, England still possesses more beautiful churches than any other Christian country, and happily much wealth has of late years been devoted to so praiseworthy a purpose.

The monstrous additions to Roman Catholic churches on the continent, made during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, were neither needed nor adopted in our English buildings, except in some few instances of wainscoat work. A parallel disfigurement may be found, however, in those offsprings of puritanic sway, family "pues" or pews. As in the Roman churches, lumbering confessionals took the place of the once beautiful parcloses and chantry screens; so in the Protestant grew up those more hideous pews which in some instances have glazed doors and windows, like private dwellings in the open courts of the living God.

In the matter of expenditure on decoration of the house of God, we have the authority of Holy Writ to guide us by its

record of the Temple of Jerusalem; upon which. silver and gold and gems and the most precious timbers were used by King Solomon. We have many other ancient examples of the wealth and power devoted by the heathen, to raise temples to their Gods, of which so many and noble remains are to be found in Egypt, not to mention Greece and Rome and Hindustan.

Some there are, I am aware, who contend that the present or Christian dispensation does not require, nay has set aside, the need for raising goodly temples to God and to religion; but upon what good grounds, I must confess I cannot understand, for Christ preached in the Temple, and Himself drove away the sellers of doves, and it was on that memorable occasion He said "It is written, My house is the house of prayer, but ye have made it a den of thieves."

As a layman, and one who coming out at an early age, has spent the greater part of his life in this foreign land, where till within a few years back, churches were only known by name, I may be fairly supposed to have drawn my conclusions from personal observation rather than from pre-conceived notions, or from tutored dogmas of any particular party. I had however the advantage of much travelling as well as long residence in France before I left home, and of frequently visiting Malling Abbey, Kent, Canterbury and Norwich Cathedrals and many other ancient buildings in the different parts of England. Ever since my arrival in this country I have availed myself of every opportunity of following the same pursuits. During a residence lately of two and a half years in England, I was actively employed on repairs and restorations of churches, and in visiting every church I passed in my tours in Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, Cornwall, Devonshire, and Somersetshire, taking sketches and notes of their peculiarities. I was enabled to read and hear the various opinions current at a time when a perfect rage existed for church restoration and the revival of the beautiful styles of the middle ages, (engendered, I expect chiefly, by the building of the new houses of Parliament and the restoration of the Temple church.) The Cambridge Camden Society was then in the full vigor of the extravagant doctrines which brought it's decline; and the Oxford Architectural Society, more steady and reasonable, kept on it's useful course.

However much I may value the Cambridge Camden Society's publications, (upon which I indent) still, I must confess that I condemn much that has appeared. The third

edition of 1844 of "A few words to Church Builders," from whose pages I shall have to make extracts, has much in it, which to say the least, appears very childish-indeed were we to go to the whole length of the doctrine set forth, that we must have this, that, and the other, simply because we can find a precedent, it is evident that we need go still further; from the building to the furniture, from the furniture to the vestments, and from the vestments to the services to perform which they are essential; and having receded so far, to arrive at a starting point, we should find ourselves at Rome, or very near to it. Nor is the picture overdrawn; it is a notorious fact that the most active member of the Cambridge Camden Society at the time of the publication of the "Few words &c. &c." has since gone over to the Church of Rome. It is this that Mr. Close and others have denounced, with some shadow of justice, though they have exaggerated the facts.

Their doctrine of Symbolism, is one, (carried, as it was, to absurd extremes) which no man of due consideration can attempt to justify. I may here relate an anecdote bearing on this subject. I was one day visiting a fine church which was under repairs, directed by a young clergyman strongly imbued with the Cambridge ecclesialogical doctrines; he showed me a design for the floor of the chancel, in which were several Christian emblems, the sacred one of the cross being of the number. I disapproved, to his surprise; but I explained that there was a more cogent reason, against the placing these emblems in such a position than could be shewn for admitting them; for that putting them in the floor might be construed symbolically into treading them and the Christian religion under foot. I mentioned that the Mahomedans, for this reason, forbade the placing verses of the Koran in such positions, lest they be trodden on; or even so near the ground, that they might be defiled by dogs or other unclean animals.

It is possible that much symbolical meaning may have been intended, in earlier days, when men learnt upon a different system; when most people were content to be orally taught and did not read or think for themselves. But times are changed, and with them, the necessity for so much mystery has ceased; to re-introduce it would be mischievous at any time it could only form part of a system of teaching, and would have no virtue beyond it. Main principles and universally acknowledged forms and emblems alone, have been properly retained by the reformed Church,

« AnteriorContinua »