The Lord Bishop of GLOUCESTER everywhere abounds with lively figures and animated forms of fpeech. In that very part of his difcourfe on the DOCTRINE of Grace, where he labours to expofe the weakness of objecting the want of Eloquence in the Holy Scriptures, by condemning it as imaginary and fantastical, and at beft the inftrument of fraud and falsehood, he hath conveyed his argument in all the most striking forms of Eloquence, with the spirit and energy of an ancient Orator. "Should therefore the Eaftern Eloquence be employed? "But this would be too inflated and gigantic for the Weft. "Should it be the Western? But this would be too cold and torpid for the East. Or fuppofe the generic Eloquence of "the most polished nations was to be preferred. Which fpecies of it was to be employed? The rich exuberance of "the Afiatic Greeks? or the dry conciseness of the Spartans? << The pure and poignant ease and flowing sweetness of the "Attic modulation? or the ftrength and grave severity of "the Roman tone? Or should all give way to that African torrrent, which arose from the fermented mixture of the "dregs of Greece and Italy, and foon overflowed the Church "with Theological conceits, in a sparkling luxuriancy of thought, and a fombrous rankness of expreffion? Thus various are the species! * Again- "But it will be faid, Are there not fome more "fubftantial principles of Eloquence common to all? "Without doubt there are. Why then fhould not these "have been employed to do credit to the Apoftolic inspira"tion? For good reasons respecting both the speaker and "the hearers. For what is Eloquence, but a persuasive turn "given to the elocution to fupply that inward, that conD 2 "scious * Doct. of Grace, L. 1. scious perfuafion of the speaker, fo neceffary to gain a fair hearing? But the first preachers of the Gospel did not "need a fuccedaneum to that inward confcious perfuafion. "And what is the end of Eloquence, even when it extends no farther than to thofe more general principles, but to «ftifle reason, and inflame the paffions? But the propaga"tion of Chriftian truths indifpenfably requires the aid of " reason, &c. Can any thing be more brilliant, more enlivened, more truly Rhetorical, than these paffages? What then are we to think of the writer and his intentions? Is he really fincere in this his reasoning? Or are these eloquent forms of speech so many marks of falsehood? Were they affumed as a fuccedaneum to confcious perfuafion? And is the end and defiga of them to fifle reafon, and to inflame the paffions? -The Right Reverend Author might fairly answer, that the colouring here given to his argument was not at all the effect of art, much less of any infidious defign; that his conceptions were clear and lively; that the importance of the subject had made the due impreffion upon his mind; that his ftyle of confequence became naturally warm and vehement; and I presume his Lordship would not allow that the foundnefs of his reafoning was at all impaired by the boldness of his figures. The inference then is unavoidable, that fuch modes of eloquence, as he hath here assumed, are the neceffary refult of forcible impreffions, and inlivened fentiments. Just as the most oratorial, nay, the finest poetical figures are the natural and proper language of tenderness, pity, and affection *. All these are therefore an effential part, not For this, we have an authority mouth was NO GUILE, laments,. in more than human. HE in whole this language, over the devoted city of not an accidental abuse, of human fpeech. Their natural power and tendency is not to betray or to deceive, but their primary and proper fignification is the true and real fentiments, difpofitions, and affections of the fpeaker, tho' like other marks of truth, they may be affumed by hypocrify, and perverted to the purposes of fraud and deception. The obfervation of these workings of nature, these unstudied expreffions of her affections and feelings, firft taught men to improve their powers, to arrange, direct, and discipline them. And in this there appears nothing effentially repugnant to uncorrupted nature, no more than in bracing the limbs, ftrengthening the body, and heightening the complexion by exercise. It is not indeed to be expected, that Man shall ever invariably employ his powers, either natural or acquired, to the pureft purposes. A grave and wife tribunal might have obferved and guarded against the inconveniencies of admitting infidious men to divert the attention from fome important point of enquiry, or to inflame the paffions, where the judgment only was to be informed: a babling Sophift might boaft, that he could confound the diftinctions between truth and falsehood, by the multitude of his words; or an eloquent pleader might triumph in concealing the weakness of his caufe in the fplendor of his harangue. Yet the obvious distinction of Jerufalem." He beheld the But "that are fent unto thee, how often "would I have gathered thy children "together as a hen doth gather her "brood under her wings, and ye "would not"! St. LUKE xiii. 34. *Nam & lacertos exercitatione conftringere, & augere vires, et colorem trahere naturale eft. Quinct. L 12. C 10. between * Quinct. Inft. Orat. L. 12. C. 1. between the legitimate application and the abuse of Eloquence still remains, as in the cafe of every other human accomplishment. The Rhetoricians themselves are perpetually inculcating this diftinction. They even pronounce, that none but the good man can attain to perfect Eloquence. If they direct that the Orator shall be ever careful to betray no appearance of artifice, it is not that they are confcious that Eloquence is in itself infidious, and its end immoral, but for another reafon much more honourable to their profeffion, which they expreffly fpecify.Striking figures and graceful forms of elocution, have so great an effect, when introduced with judgment, that men of vanity and false taste are apt to confider these as the whole of Eloquence, and imagine that they are only to collect fuch graces, and to display them to the best advantage. But critics inform them that in this they betray their want of real feeling, and therefore never can affect: that an oftentation of art is the mark of falsehood and deceit: but, that + Ego illud de figuris adjiciam breviter, ficut ornant orationem opportune pofitæ, ita ineptiffimas effe cum immodice petuntur. Sunt, qui neglecto rerum pondere & viribus fententiarum, fi vel inania verba in hos modos depravarint, fummos fe judicent artifices, idcoque non definunt eas nectere. Sed ne hæ quidem quæ recte fiunt denfandæ funt nimis. Nam et vultus mutatio, occulorumque conjectus multum in actu valet: fed fi quis ducere os exquifitis modis, et frontis ac luminum inconftantia trepidare non definat, rideatur. Et oratio habeat rectam quandam velut faciem : quæ ut ftupore immobili rigere non debebit; ita fæpius in ea, quam natura dedit, fpecie continenda eft. Sciendum vero in primis, quid quifque in orando poftulet locus, quid perfona, quid tempus. Major enim pars harum figurarum pofita eft in delectatione. Ubi vero atrocitate, invidia, miferatione pugnandum eft, quis ferat contrapofitis, & pariter cadentibus, & confimilibus irafcentem, flentem, rogantem? cum in his rebus cura verborum deroget affectibus fidem: & ubicunque ars oftentatur, veritas abeffe videatur. Quinct. L. 9. C. 3. perfect CMI perfect Eloquence is, and must be, the expreffion of TRUTH: that if they would perfuade and influence, their language must be that of nature; and that whatever perfuades and influences is the ELOQUENCE OF NATURE, and nothing else*. Quo quifque plus efficit dicendo, dicit. Quinct. L. 12. C. 10. hoc magis fecundum naturæ eloquentiam |