On this page
- Text (2)
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
are to reprove , rebuke ^ and exhort with aW long-suffering * . The proper punishment of -it low , mean , indecent , scurrilous way of writing seems to be neglect , contempt , scorn and indignation / These latter expressions
seem prophetical @f the fate otPame ' s attack on the Bible . It is a pity that any prosecution should revive a work falling into oblivion ] Let us have more regard for the mild and tolerant genius of our coiamon ^ Cferistianity . * JOHN EVANS .
lies hid in a well ; and , as though misled by this adage , we sometimes overlook it when before our eyes , and then take vast pains to draw it from its deep retirement . And when we have fatigued ourselves with a tedious and fruitless search , we either reward our
labour by embracing a shadow for the substance , or charge our own blindness on the supposed obscurity of the thing pursued . In fact , it is not so much profundity of thought which is necessary for the discovery of truth , as a quickness of perception to see
what kind and degree of evidence are required ; and a comprehension of mind which can balance arguments against objections , and ascertain on which side the scale preponderates . But to return to Dr . Priestley . Dr . Priestley , then , was a man in whom acute&ess
and comprehension of intellect were combined in a pre-eminent degree . la the grasp of his understanding and the extent of his views , he far indeed surpassed every contemporary writer of whom I have any knowled ge * Aiid in accordance at once with the greatness of hi 3 Conceptions and the singleness
of his soul , he writes with a simplicity which has seldom been paralleled and never surpassed . Bent on some great object , he never stops to set biff a single idea to the best advantage , but as though secure as to the general validity of his reasonings , he leaves the naked truth to make its own
impression . From a magnanimity of thought peculiarly his own , he overlooks inferior objections whidi might be brought against the views which he defends or those which he attacks , and never descends to those subtleties which have secured a more general admiration to writers whose talents
have borne no comparison to his . In one respect , I confess , Dr . Priestley was not a profound thinker \ — he thought without effort , and enables his reader , for the titne being , to think without effort also . He often seizes
his point at once , and gams by a glance resembling intuition what others would have endeavoured to establish by the formalities of a long and elaborate proof . He is never obscure , and therefore never leaves us to wonder at the
depth of that knowledge which we find ourselves unable to comprehend . But Dr . Priestley sometimes errs in his judgment . And who does not ?
Mr . C 0 &wMBr . Chanmng ? s Sermon >^ Cnaracter ^ 7
Sm ^ HAVE read Dr . Channing's la ^ t I sermon witii gr $ at pl&asure and interest ^ A glowing fervour of feeling , coafer ; ouled by a vigorous understanding , breathes in every page . ® ut
I am sorry that lie should have thought it necessary to cast certain reflections upon the English Unitarian $ > and upon that eminently great and good man Dr . Priestley . To these reflections I should pr ) bably have replied , had not this been already done by abler hands . But there is one observation relative
to Dr . P . on which I cannot forbear to make a remark . Dr . Priestley is represented as ^* distinguished mor ^ fpr rapidity than . for profoundness of thought . " To this I reply , without
hesitation , that if to think justly is to think profoundly ; that if in every matter of controversy to see where the question hinges , and to separate that which is extraneous from that which
is essential ; that if to penetrate into the abstruser mysteries of metaphysical science , and to make that clear to many which before perplexed the few $ that if to dive into the recesses of the human mind , and thence to draw forth negative reasonings to
array against what had passed tor positive proofs ; that if all this indicates profoundness of thought , Dr . Priestley was the profoundest thinker of his age . But what is it , after all , that not unfrequently passes for profoundness of thought ? Laborious research , which promises much , and
accomplishes nothing . Instances might be produced of writers who have been thought profound , who have seldom arrived at a just conclusion , who have only lost themselves in the depth , of their own conceptions , and bewildered those who have admired their profundityt It is said , indeed , that truth
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Jan. 2, 1825, page 7, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2532/page/7/