USA > Virginia > Ecclesiastical law and discipline. A charge to the clergy of the Protestant Episcopal church of Virginia > Part 7
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8
76
say, the number of transgressors is not great enough to re- quire more rigorous action, we reply, that in the primitive Church it was always considered and urged as a reason for pressing discipline, that but few transgressed, for if it was then neglected, it would soon be impracticable, and nothing would be heard but fruitless lamentations, and unheeded warnings. The history of the early Churches bears abun- dant testimony to this. St. Paul did not wait for members to sin greatly, but exercised godly discipline as soon as it was needed, that others might fear to offend. Still it may seem to some of you that I am weak, that it becomes not the dignity of the Episcopal Office to be dwelling on such things. The Episcopal Office may be comparatively useless by reason of, and the Church itself die of such dignity. At any rate, permit us to say with the Apostle, "For we are glad when we are weak, and ye are strong, but this also we wish, even your perfection." We are willing to be one of the weak things and foolish things, if God will only use us for some good purpose in your behalf. Nay, we ought not only to be willing, but rejoice to be weak and foolish with Solomon, and the Prophets, and Apostles, and Fathers, and Reformers, who ever warned men against despising what seemed to some of the wise and mighty of this world, as little things, but which they knew were by little and little sinking immortal souls down into the gulf of perdition. We wish to leave behind us our full testimony as to the evil ten- dency of those things, whose character and effects we have now been witnessing during a ministry of nearly forty years. When dead, or our voice can be heard no more among you, we wish to speak by this record. Such is our interest in your welfare, that we feel as if death itself shall not alto- gether sunder the tie that binds us together, but that we may still continue to care for you, and perhaps have some know- ledge of your affairs.
And to you, my dear brethren of the clergy, who I well
77
know deeply sympathize in all that I have said, who often ask for counsel and help in these things from your Bishops, if I shall have furnished you the least light and strength in the path of duty by what I have written, I shall be amply repaid for all the time, thought, study and prayer which I have bestowed upon it. I commend it and you, and your dear people, to Him who alone is able to give it any power, or you any success, or to present them faultless and with- out reproach to himself in the great day.
Yours in the Lord.
W. MEADE.
DR. JOHNSON'S OPINION
OF BISHOP COLLIER, THE AUTHOR OF THE BOOK FROM WHICH THE FOL- LOWING EXTRACTS ARE TAKEN.
"Being a fierce and implacable non-juror, he knew that an attack on the theatre would never make him suspected for a Puritan; he therefore published a short view of the im- morality and profaneness of the English stage, I believe, with no other motive than reli- gious zeal and honest indignation. His onset was violent. Those passages which, while they stood single, had passed with little notice, when they were accumulated and exposed together, excited horror. The wise and the pious caught the alarm, and the nation won- dered why it had suffered irreligion and licentiousness to be openly taught at the public charge."-LIFE OF CONGREVE.
APPENDIX.
EXTRACTS FROM THE CELEBRATED WORK OF JEREMY COLLIER, ON THE ENGLISH STAGE, PUBLISHED IN THE YEAR 1698.
The following testimonies are well calculated to enforce what has been previously said on theatrical representations. I ask a careful reading and candid estimate of them. In the first part of the work, the Author ex- amines the English plays very critically, and exposes the false sentiments, improper language, and vicious characters set forth in them, comparing them with the celebrated plays of Greece and Rome, and showing how, in many things, the latter were better friends of virtue and religion. In the sixth and last chapter, from whence the following extracts are taken, he gives you the opinion of the best of the heathen concerning the stage, as it existed among them, the sense of the primitive Church on the stage as it then was, and some testimonies as to the English stage. From these extracts three things will plainly appear :- Ist. That the same reigning errors belong to the stage in all ages; that it can only be sus- tained by humoring certain follies, exciting certain passions, and minis- tering to certain corrupt propensities of our nature. 2ndly. That some professing christians wished to frequent theatres and public shows in those days, as well as now, and used the same arguments in favor of the indulgence. 3rdly. That faithful ministers opposed them by the same arguments now used, and the pious of those days abstained from them for the same reasons which influence such as condemn and avoid them now.
The sixth and last chapter thus begins :- Having in the foregoing Chapters discovered some part of the Disorders of the English stage; I shall in this last, present the reader with a short view of the sense of antiquity, to which I shall add some modern authorities ; from all which it will appear, that plays have generally been looked on as the nurseries of vice, the corrupters of truth, and the grievance of the country where they are suffered.
This proof from testimony shall be ranged under these three heads :-
Under the first, I shall cite some of the most celebrated heathen Phil- osophers, Orators and Historians, men of the biggest consideration, for sense, learning and figure.
The Second shall consist of the laws and constitutions of Princes, &c.
The Third will be drawn from church records, from Fathers, and councils of unexceptionable authority.
DIVISION 1ST.
1st. I shall produce some of the most celebrated Heathen Philoso- phers. To begin with Plato. This Philosopher tells us "that plays raise the passions, and pervert the use of them, and by consequence are
80
dangerous to morality. For this reason, he banishes these diversions his commonwealth."
Xenophon, who was both a man of letters and a great general, com- mends the Persians for the discipline of their education. 'They won't (says he) so much as suffer their youth to hear anything that's amorous or tawdry.' They were afraid, want of ballast might make them mis- carry, and that 'twas dangerous to add weight to the bias of nature.
Aristotle lays it down for a rule, ' that the law ought to forbid young people the seeing comedies. Such permissions not being safe, till age and discipline had confirmed them in sobriety, fortified their virtue, and made them as it were proof against debauchery.' This Philosopher, who had looked as far into human nature as any man, observes farther : ' That the force of music and action is very affecting. It commands the audience and changes the passions to a resemblance of the matter before them. So that where the representation is foul, the thoughts of the company must suffer.'
Tully cries out upon 'licentious plays and poems, as the bane of so- briety and wise thinking. That comedy subsists upon lewdness, and that pleasure is the Root of all evil.'
Livy reports the original of plays among the Romans. 'He tells us they were brought in upon the score of religion, to pacify the Gods, and remove a mortality. But then he adds that the motives are sometimes good, when the means are stark naught. That the remedy in this case was worse than the disease, and the atonement more infectious than the plague.
Valerius Maximus, contemporary with Livy, gives much the same ac- count of the rise of Theatres at Rome. 'Twas devotion which built them. And as for the performances of those places, which Mr. Dryden calls the ornaments, this author censures, as the Blemishes of peace. And which is more, He affirms, 'They were the occasions of civil dis- tractions ; And that the State first blushed, and then bled for the enter- tainment. He concludes the consequences of plays to be intolerable. And that Massilienses did well in clearing the country of them. Seneca complains heartily of the extravagance and debauchery of the age; And how forward people were to improve in that which was naught. That scarce any one would apply themselves to the study of nature and moral- ity, unless when the Play-House was shut, or the weather foul. That there was no body to teach Philosophy, because there was no body to learn it. But that the Stage had nurseries, and company enough. This misapplication of time and fancy, made knowledge in so low a condition. This was the cause the hints of antiquity were no better pursued, that some inventions were sunk, and that human reason grew downwards, rather than otherwise. And elsewhere he avers, that there is nothing more destructive to good manners than to run idling to see sights. For there vice makes an insensible approach, and steals upon us in the dis- guise of pleasure.'
Tacitus, relating how Nero hired decayed gentlemen for the Stage, complains of the mismanagement, and lets us know 'twas the part of a Prince to relieve their necessity, and not to tempt it. And that his bounty should rather have set them above an ill practice, than driven them upon it.
81
And in another place, he informs us that 'the German women were guarded against danger, and kept their honour out of harm's way, by having no Play Houses among them.'
Plays, in the opinion of the judicious Plutarch, are dangerous to cor- rupt young people, and therefore Stage Poetry, when it grows too hardy and licentious, ought to be checked. This was the opinion of these celebrated authors with respect to Theatres. They charge them with the corruption of principles and manners, and lay in all imaginable caution against them. And yet these men had seldom anything but this world in their scheme, and formed their judgments only upon natural light and common experience. We see then to what sort of conduct we are obliged. The case is plain, unless we are little enough to renounce our Reason, and fall short of Philosophy, and live under the pitch of Heathenism.
DIVISION 2ND.
I shall now, in the second place, proceed to the censures of the State ; and show in a few words how much the Stage stands discouraged by the Laws of other countries and our own.
To begin with the Athenians. This people, though none of the worst friends to the Play-House, ' thought a comedy so unreputable a Perform- ance, that they made a law that no Judge of the Areopagus should make one.'
I come next to the Lacedemonians, who were remarkable for the wisdom of their laws, the sobriety of their manners, and their breeding of brave men. This government would not endure the Stage in any form, nor under any regulation.
To pass on to the Romans. Tully informs us that their predecessors counted all Stage Plays uncreditable and scandalous. Insomuch that any Roman who turned actor was not only to be degraded, but likewise as it were disincorporated and unnaturalized by the order of the Censors.
St. Augustine, in the same book, commends the Romans for refusing the Jus Civitatis to Players, for seizing their Freedoms, and making them perfectly foreign to their Government.
In the Theadosian Code, Players are called Persona intronesta, that is to translate it softly, persons maimed and blemished in their reputation. Their Pictures might be seen at the Play-House, but were not permitted to hang in any creditable place of the Town. Upon this text Gothofred tells us the function of Players was counted scandalous by the civil Law. And that those who came upon the Stage to divert the people, had a mark of infamy set upon them. Famosi sunt ex edicto.
I shall now come to our own Constitution. And I find by 39 Eliz. cap. 4, 1, Jac. cap. 7, That all Bearmards,* common Players of Inter- lude, Counterfeit Egyptians, &c., shall be taken, adjudged Rogues, Vagabonds and sturdy beggars, and shall sustain all pain and punish- ment, as in this Act is in that behalf appointed. The penalties are infa- mous to the last degree, and capital too, unless they give over. 'Tis true, the first Act excepts those Players which belong to a Baron or
* Persons who kept bear gardens or places of indecent entertainment.
11
82
other Personage of higher degree, and are authorized to Play under the hand and seal of such Baron or Personage. But by the later Statute, this privilege of Licensing is taken away. And all of them are expressly brought under the penalty without distinction.
About the year 1580, there was a Petition made to Queen Elizabeth, for suppressing of Play-Houses. 'Tis somewhat remarkable, and there- fore I shall transcribe some part of the relation.
Many goodly Citizens, and other well disposed Gentlemen of London, considering that Play-Houses and Dicing-Houses were Traps for young Gentlemen and others, and perceiving the many inconveniences and great damage that would ensue upon the long suffering of the same, not only to particular persons but to the whole City ; and that it would also be a great disparagement to the Governors, and a dishonour to the Govern ment of this honourable city, if they should any longer continue, ac- quainted some pious Magistrates therewith, desiring them to take some course for the suppression of common Play-Houses, within the city of London and Liberties thereof; who thereupon made humble suit to Queen Elizabeth and her Privy Council, and obtained leave of her Majesty to thrust the Players out of the City, and to put down all Play- Houses and Dicing-Houses within their Liberties, which accordingly was effected. And the Play-Houses in Grace-Church street, &c., were quite put down and suppressed.
I shall give a modern instance or two from France, and so conclude these authorities.
In the year 1696, we are informed by a Dutch Print, (M. L' Archevique appugi, &c.,) That the Lord Arch-Bishop, 'supported by the interest of some religious persons at Court, has done his utmost to suppress the Public Theatres by degrees; or at least to clear them of Profaneness.'
And last summer the Gazettes in the Paris Article affirm :- That the King has " ordered the Italian Players to retire out of France, because they did not observe his Majesties Orders, but represented immodest pieces, and did not correct their obscenities and indecent gestures."
The same Intelligence the next week after, acquaints us, that 'some persons of the first quality at Court, who were the Protectors of these Comedians, had solicited the French King to re-call his order against them, but their request had no success.'
And here to put an end to the modern authorities, I shall subjoin a sort of Pastoral Letter published about two years since by the Bishop of Arras, in Flanders. The Reader shall have as much of it as concerns him in both Languages.
An Order of the most Illustrious and most Reverend Lord Bishop of Arras against Plays.
Guy De Seve De Roche Chonart, by the grace of God, &c., Bishop of Arras : To all the Faithful in the Town of Arras, Health and Bene- diction. A man must be very ignorant of his Religion, not to know the great disgust it has always declared for Publick Sights, and for Plays in particular. The Holy Fathers condemn them in their writings; they look upon them as reliques of Heathenism and schools of Debauchery. They have been always abominated by the Church; and notwithstanding those who are concerned in this scandalous Profession are not absolutely
83
expelled by a formal Excommunication, yet she publicly refuses them the Sacraments, and omits nothing upon all occasions, to show her aver- sion for this employment, and to transfuse the same sentiments into her children. The Rituals of the best governed Dioceses have ranged the Players among those whom the Parish Priests are obliged to treat as Excommunicated Persons.
Unless, therefore, we have a mind to condemn the Church, the Holy Fathers, and the most holy Bishops, 'tis impossible to justify Plays ; neither is the defence of those less impracticable, who by their Counte- nance of these Diversions, not only have their share of the mischief done there, but contribute at the same time to fix these unhappy ministers of Satan in a Profession, which by depriving them of the sacraments of the Church, leaves them under a constant necessity of sinning, and out of all hopes of being saved, unless they give it over.
DIVISION 3RD.
I shall now, in the Third place, give a short account of the sense of the Primitive Church concerning the Stage. And first, I shall instance in her Councils.
The Council of Illiberis, or Collioure in Spain, decrees, 'That it shall not be lawful for any woman who is either in full communion or a pro- bationer for Baptism, to marry, or entertain any Comedians or Actors ; whoever takes this liberty shall be excommunicated.'
The first Council of Arles runs thus: 'Concerning Players, we have thought fit to excommunicate them as long as they continue to act.'
The second Council of Arles made their 20th Canon to the same pur- pose, and almost in the same words.
The Third Council of Carthage, of which St. Augustine was a mem- ber, ordains, 'That the Sons of Bishops, or other Clergymen, should not be permitted to furnish out Public Shows, or plays, or be present at them : Such sort of Pagan Entertainments being forbidden all the Laity. It being always unlawful for all Christians to come amongst Blas- phemers.'
The second council of Chaalon sets forth, That Clergymen ought to abstain from all over-engaging Entertainments in Music or Show- (oculorum, auriumque ellicebris.) And as for the smutty and licentious insolence of Players and Buffoons, let them not only decline the hearing it themselves, but likewise conclude the Laity obliged to the same con- duct.
TESTIMONY OF THE FATHERS.
To begin with Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch, who lived in the second century. ""Tis not lawful (says he) for us to be present at the Prizes of your Gladiators, lest by this means we should be Accessaries to the mur- ders there committed. Neither dare we presume upon the liberty of your other shows, lest our senses should be tinctured, and disobliged with indecency and profaneness. God forbid that Christians, who are remarkable for Modesty and Reservedness ; who are obliged to Discipline and trained up in Virtue ; God forbid, I say, that we should dishonour our thoughts, much less our practice, with such wickedness as this.'
84
Tertullian, who lived at the latter end of this century, is copious upon this subject. I shall translate but some part of it. In his Apologetick he thus addresses the Heathens: 'We keep off from your Public Shows because we can't understand the warrant of their Original. There's superstition and Idolatry in the case. And we dislike the entertainment because we dislike the reason of its Institution. Besides, we have no- thing to do with the Frensies of the Race-Ground, the Lewdness of the Play-House, or the Barbarities of the Bear-Garden. The Epicureans had the Liberty to state the Notion and determine the Object of Pleasure. Why can't we have the same Privilege? What offence is it then if we differ from you in the idea of satisfaction? If we won't understand to brighten our Humour, and live pleasantly, where's the harm? If any body has the worst of it, 'tis only ourselves.'
His Book de Spectaculis was wrote on purpose to dissuade the Chris- tians from the publick Diversions of the Heathens, of which the Play- House was one. In his first chapter he gives them to understand, ' That the tenour of their Faith, the Reason of Principle, and the Order of Dis- cipline, had bar'd them the Entertainments of the Town. And therefore he exhorts them to refresh their Memories, to run up to their Baptism, and recollect their first Engagements. For without care, Pleasure is a strange bewitching Thing. When it gets the Ascendant 'twill keep on Ignorance for an excuse of Liberty, make a man's Conscience wink, and suborn his Reason against himself.
' But as he goes on, some people's Faith is either too full of Scruples, or too barren of Sense. Nothing will serve to settle them but a plain text of Scripture. They hover in uncertainty because it is not said as expressly, thou shalt not go to the Play-House, as 'tis thou shalt not kill. But this looks more like Fencing than Argument. For we have the meaning of the prohibition, though not the sound, in the first Psalm- Blessed is the man that walks not in Counsel of the ungodly, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of the scornful.'
The Censors, whose business it was to take care of regularity and manners, looked on these Play-Houses as no other than Batteries upon Virtue and Sobriety, and for this reason often pulled them down before they were well built. So that here we can argue from the Precedents of mere Nature, and plead the Heathens against themselves.
And granting the regards of Quality, the advantages of age, 01 Tem- per, may fortify some people; granting Modesty secured and the Diver- sion refined as it were by this means; yet a man must not expect to stand by perfectly unmoved and impregnable. No body can be pleased without Sensible Impressions; nor can such Perceptions be received without a train of Passions attending them. These Consequences will be sure to work back upon their Causes, solicit the Fancy, and heighten the original pleasure. But if a man pretends to be a Stoic at Plays, he falls under another imputation. For where there is no impression, there can be no pleasure. And then the Spectator is very much impertinent in going where he gets nothing for his Pains. And if this were all, I suppose Christians have something else to do than to ramble about to no purpose.
'Even those very Magistrates who abet the Stage, discountenance the Players. They stigmatize their Character, and cramp their Freedoms.
85
The whole Tribe of them is thrown out of all honour and privilege. They are neither suffered to be Lords nor Gentlemen. To come within the Senate, or harangue the people, or so much as to be Members of a Common Council. Now what Caprice and Inconsistency is this! To love what we punish, and lessen those whom we admire! To cry up the Mystery, and censure the Practice; for a man to be as it were eclipsed upon the score of Merit is certainly an odd sort of Justice ! True. But the Inference is stronger another wav. What a confession then is this of an Ill Business, when the very Excellency of it is not without Infamy.
' Since, therefore, human Prudence has thought fit to degrade the Stage ,notwithstanding the Divertingness of it: Since Pleasure can't make them an interest here, nor shelter them from Censure, How will they be able to stand the shock of Divine Justice, and what Reckoning have they Reason to expect Hereafter?
' Will you not then avoid this seat of Infection? The very Air suffers by their Impurities; and they almost pronounce the Plague. What though the performance may be in some measure pretty and entertain- ing? What though Innocence, yes, and Virtue, too, shines through some part of it? 'Tis not the custom to prepare poison unpalatable, nor make up Ratsbane with Rhubarb and Sena. No. To have the mis- chief speed, they must oblige the Sense, and make the Dose pleasant. Thus the Devil throws in a Cordial Drop to make the draught go down, and steals some few Ingredients from the Dispensatory of Heaven.'
Clemens Alexandrinus affirms, 'That the Circus and Theatre may not improperly be called the Chair of Pestilence. Away then with these Lewd, Ungodly Diversions, and which are but Impertinence at the Best. What part of Impudence, either in words or practice, is omitted by the Stage? Don't the Buffoons take almost all manner of Liberties, and plunge through Thick and Thin, to make a jest? Now those who are affected with a vicious satisfaction will be haunted with the Idea, and spread the Infection. But if a man is not entertained, to what pur- pose should he go thither? Why should he be found where he finds no- thing, and court that which sleeps upon the sense? If 'tis said these Diversions are taken only to unbend the mind, and refresh Nature a little. To this I answer. That the spaces between Business should not be filled up with such Rubbish. A wise man has a Guard upon his Recreations, and always prefers the Profitable to the Pleasant.'
St. Cyprian, or the Author de Spectaculis, will furnish us farther.
Here this Father argues against those who thought the Play House no unlawful Diversion, because 'twas not condemned by express Scrip- ture. 'Let Mere Modesty (says he) supply the Holy Text, and let Nature govern where Revelation does not reach. Some things are too black to lie upon Paper, and are more strongly forbidden because unmen- tioned. The Divine Wisdom must have had a low opinion of Christians had it descended to particulars in this case. Silence is sometimes the best method for Authority.'
And after having described the infamous Diversions of the Play House, he expostulates in this manner :- ' What business has a Christ- ian at such Places as these? A Christian who has not the Liberty so much as to think of an ill thing. A Christian has much better sights
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.