as his biographer informs us) a fourth ftirring of the ground divinely laid in him, ftrengthened and roused with fuperabundant grace. Admonished by others not to bury in the earth a talent and truft of fo high and precious a nature, he resumed his pen in the name of God; and in the progrefs of his writing, did very leifurely, and without diftraction (for he had no stock to profecute his own bufinefs with), write thofe glorious and excellent pieces, which will last as long as the world endures.' Thefe pieces are enumerated in the present Memoirs; and we find, that this extraordinary man, in the space of fix years, produced no less than thirty different treatifes.

This remarkable perfon having vifited, for fome weeks, a gentleman of diftinction in Silefia, was feized with a fever at his houfe; and, by drinking an immoderate quantity of water, was swelled to a furprising degree, and at the fame time encreased the force of his diforder. Yet in this condition he was folicitous to be carried to his own home at Goerlitz, that he might have the fatisfaction of being attended by his family. A particular account of his laft fick nefs, and fome curious circumftances relating to his death and burial, are collected together from different authors, and make a part of the prefent publication. His friend Dr. Koeben attended him in his illnefs; and after giving a particular description of it in a letter to some gentleman of diftinction at Horndorf, he gives an account of the examination their admired Jacob was obliged to fubmit to, before an impertinent curate called Theodore would vouchsafe to adminifter the holy facrament to him. This was a mortifying circumftance, especially to thofe profound adepts in the occult-fciences, who had been taught to look up to Jacob as their mafter, and probably looked down with contempt on the curate, as an officious and empty coxcomb. But the meek man fubmitted to the clerical impofition with great patience and humility; and having fatisfied this pretended judge of orthodoxy as to the rectitude of his views and principles, he receiv ed the facrament with great devotion, and departed this world with all the ferenity of a virtuous and holy spirit, on Sunday the 17th of November 1624.

It was with great difficulty that the friends of the deceased could procure a burial for him according to the rites of that country. The clergy extended their malice even to the afhes of this harmless man, and positively refufed to officiate at his grave, and pay him the decent honours of a departed Chriftian, till the magiftrates interpofed, and infifted on their due performance of the funeral rites eftablished by the laws of their fenate. Notwithstanding this injunction, poor Jacob's obfequies were but imperfectly performed. The preacher, who was appointed to the fermon, apologifed for his having been

obliged

obliged to undertake fo difagreeable a tafk. He wished himfelf at the distance of a hundred miles, rather than officiate at the grave of a Jacob Behmen; but fince he only preached by contraint, he was determined to preach a fermon that Jacob's friends would not be difpofed to thank him for.

The grave of this good man was infulted, and his monument (fent from Silefia as an honorary memorial to his name') was mutilated, and treated with every mark of indignity.

The Tranflator of these Memoirs appears to have made the myftic writers of Germany his capital ftudy. He informs us, that he hath tranflated Peter Poiret's myftic Library, and Theophilus's Germanic Theology, from the Latin. Many treatifes of the fame ftamp he hath also tranflated from the German; particularly "The evangelical Converfion of Dr. John Thaulerus at the Age of 50 Years, drawn up by his own Hand ;" and "a complete Narrative of God's wonderful Dealings with Hiel,"remarkable myftic writer, who appeared about 1550 in the Netherlands, and whofe writings were patronifed by that learned Hebraift Benedictus Arius Montanus, and whose works were published in the original Low Dutch by that celebrated printer Christopher Plantin.

a

Hiel indeed was only the mystical Hebrew name given him by Montanus, and fignifies The Life of God. His real name was Henry Fanfon, a clothier by trade, of whom Mr. Okely hath given a fhort account in a Postscript to thefe Memoirs, and informs us, that he gathered the chief particulars of this extraordinary man from Poiret's Library, and Arnold's Ecclefiaftical and Heretical Hiftory.

Though the curious may be gratified by the biographical anecdotes of fuch extraordinary myftics as Thaulerus and Hiel; yet we think plain primitive Chriftianity will receive little advantage from the fpiritual reveries of writers, whofe chief characteristic is obfcurity and confufion.

ART. IV.

First Truths, and the Origin of our Opinions explained. With an Inquiry into the Sentiments of modern Philofophers relative to our primary Ideas of Things. Tranflated from the French of Pere Buffier. To which is prefixed a Detection of the Plagiarifm, Concealment, and Ingratitude, of the Doctors Reid, Beattie, and Ofwald. 8vo. 6 s. Boards. Johnson. 1780.

FTER the immortal works of LOCKE, CLARKE, and BUTLER, our country might well have difpenfed with a tranflation of the metaphyfics of Father Buffier. They will add very little to our knowledge of the intellectual world; for the bon pere, in order to establish his first Truths," hath run in

to

to vulgar errors; and wanting ftrength of mind to unfold the deep and obfcure receffes of human nature, he flies to mystery as a refuge for ignorance; and when he finds himself bewildered, he declares that his fubject is incomprehenfible.

1

This performance may be very acceptable to thofe who are ftudying the elements of metaphyfics. Profound adepts may poffibly esteem it too fuperficial for them. The learned Jefuit doth not always reafon with folidity. He dwells on commonplace arguments; and even these are not placed in the most advantageous light. The third part, containing, "Firft Truths relative to Spiritual Beings," is a remarkable inftance of trite, defultory, and unfatisfactory reasoning. Take the following fpecimen :

• Phyfical proofs of the immortality of the foul are deduced from this confideration, that with all our powers of knowledge and reason, we can discover no fubject or principle of deftruction in it for, in fhort, we know of no deftruction but what is occafioned by a change or feparation in the parts of a whole. Now, we not only do not difcern any parts in the foul, but farther, we pofitively fee that it is a fubftance perfectly one, which has no parts.

• We have obferved in fpeaking of unity, that it is a quality not ftrictly applicable to a body: That whatever is body is not faid to be one, but in an arbitrary refpect; and it is in such a manner one, that at bottom it is no more than a collection of feveral unities, each of which cannot properly be called one. Let us take a watch, for example; we cannot fee any thing in the body that hath more unity; for if the leaft of its parts happens to be wanting, it is no longer a watch, properly speaking. Yet what is this unity but a collection of diftinct things and parts? Touch the pendulum, and you do not touch the wheel. Had they fentiment or feeling, the pendulum might be fenfible of pain, or be unhappy, while the wheel should enjoy pleasure, and be happy, without either feeling what the other did.

It is not the fame with regard to the foul, which is fo far one, that I cannot make impreffions on what I might imagine to be one of its parts, without making impreffion on what I should fancy to be another part of his fubftance: or, to speak more justly, an impreffion cannot be made on its fubftance, without being made on the whole of its fubftance..... I may impress a colour on the wheels that fhall not affect the pendulum. In the foul, on the contrary, one part muft neceffarily be the other; and to fpeak more properly, the foul must have no parts; for while we suppose parts in it, whatever makes an impreffion on one part of the foul, neceffarily makes an impreffion on the whole foul together.'

After more of this fort of argumentation, illuftrated by fome. futile comparisons, F. Buffier recurs once more to his favourite conclufion, viz. that as the foul hath been demonftrated to be one and fimple, without parts and compofition, (ergo) there can be no principle of deftruction in fouls, and we have no room to judge that they are liable to perish or be deftroyed.'

The good Father's logic as little befriends him, when he quits the metaphyfical for the moral argument, and would deduce the foul's immortality from the infinitude of its defires.

If (fays he) my foul be mortal, the moft rational defire I have will never be accomplished. Now this defire is imprinted on my heart by the Author of my existence, who thereby indi-. cates my future deftiny. God would therefore have placed in me a defire that muft only tend to give me regret and pain: he would have placed in me a falfe indication of my destiny, and deceived me in the moft effential article of my life, which is inconfiftent with the truth, wisdom, and purity of God. We cannot therefore conceive the existence of a good and wife God, who is our Author, without conceiving, at the fame time, that our fouls must exift after this life, in order to arrive at that happiness with the defire of which he hath inspired us; for it is certain we do not poffefs it in this life, even by wisdom and virtue, that should lead us to it. In a word, if the foul were. mortal, God would not have acted with the wifdom and equity that are effential to his nature, and without which God would not be what he really is. The existence of God, therefore, is a proof of the duration of our fouls after this life.' The good Father had not penetration enough to fee to what dangerous conclufions fuch arbitrary and prefumptuous reasonings as these naturally lead, and what a handle they would afford the Atheift, to conteft the doctrine of Providence, and the very attributes of God himself. Can any mode of argument be more abfurd and inconfiftent than that which would establish the proof of a future ftate on the wretchednefs and imperfection of the prefent? -or than that which reprefents the Deity as neglectful of the interefts of virtue in this life, in order to demonftrate how greatly he will reward it in another ?-Would any one prefume to fay, that the Deity might not have wife and benevolent ends to answer by the creation of an order of rational beings, whofe existence might be limited to a certain period? Suppose the great Sovereign of the univerfe did think proper to extinguifh any part of the intelligent creation, would any being have the infolence to arraign his juftice, his wifdom, or goodness, and blafphemously tell him, that if the foul were mortal, he had not acted with the wisdom and equity that are effential to his nature ?'-According to the reasonings of the learned Jefuit, fuch

language

language might be used, were fuch an event to take place, even in the moft diftant ages of futurity.

F. Buffier, though he hath exceeded all the bounds of modesty and humility in the foregoing quotation on the neceffity of the foul's being immortal, in order that God may be wife, just, and good; yet modeftly and ingenuously obferves, that it is learning a great deal, to fee diftinctly we can acquire no knowledge of certain matters (viz. about spiritual beings); and that all we might have learned of them may or ought to be forgotten, as incapable of giving fatisfaction to a rational mind.'

It is (continues the good Father) the moft folid fruit, perhaps, of metaphyfical knowledge, to make us fully fenfible of the limits of our understanding, and of the vanity of fo many ancient and modern philofophers, who have thought it better to ufe a language that is incomprehenfible, than to reprefs the ridiculous ambition, and the dangerous vanity of faying things, that neither are, nor can be understood by any person.'

Though there are many valuable obfervations in this work,, yet F. Buffier fitaters himself too much when he says, that he hath been careful to admit as notions none but clear and precife ideas; and to acknowledge no principles but the judgments adopted by common fenfe.'

As to the Tranflator's Preface, though it is not deftitute of fhrewdness, yet it is fo grofsly illiberal, that we remember not to have read any, thing fo offenfive to decency and good manners, even in the rancorous productions of fome of the late controvertifts in metaphyfics. The Writer hath exceeded Dr. Priestley in his abuse of the Scotch Doctors; but with a larger quantity of that author's virulence, hath unluckily too fmall at portion of his ingenuity and good fenfe, to recompenfe for that fhameful affront to candor and civility which is too flagrant in every page to escape the notice or indignation of any unpre-judiced reader.-One fpecimen of it will be fufficient Of later years the Tranftweedian regions have fwarm'd with a new fpecies of men, different from their itinerant pedlars in the wares they fell, but fimilar in the manner of packing them together from the labours of others. Thefe are writers, or rather book-makers," who obtain but a mediocrity of knowledge between learning and ignorance;" for fuch is the opinion of anauthor, whofe opinion to judge, and whofe candour in decifion, defervedly place him above the fufpicion of being inadequate or unjuft in the fentence he hath pronounced.' And yet, notwithstanding this infidious reflection, the world (not Scotlandonly) will number HUME, ROBERTSON, SMITH, BLAIR, BEATTIE, and Lord KAMES, among the firft ornaments of genius, taste, and erudition.-But as for this writer of prefaces, and retailer of literary flander-who is he?

APP. REV. Vol, lxiii,

M m

ART.