« AnteriorContinuar »
more fatal. In this, as in every other function of the English clergy, there must be a combination and a balance of the official and the individual character. The congregation must recognise in the voice which leads their prayers, not merely an abstraction, a form, but the pastor, whom they individually know, and who individually knows them. Even his little mannerisms, his occasional defects, his particularities, and, at times (rarely, it must be but rarely), the individual feeling just touching, and deepening, and piercing through the official ceremonial, are ties between him and them. They present him to them as a real living being of flesh and blood, the same man at the altar, and in the pulpit, whom they have spoken to in the street and listened to in the cottage, and therefore it is that to intone the service, admirable and effective as it is in certain congregations under certain circumstances, is in others so objectionable
, and repugnant to the English taste. The English clergy (it is one of the first conditions of their value and their efficiency) must not be too far separated from the laity—not by dress, not by celibacy, not by modes of life, not by ceremonial, not by chancel screens, not by vestments. They must live amongst their flock according to the quiet, simple, practical type exhibited in Scripture, not as a caste. It will be better for themselves, better for their flock. Wherever this law has been forgotten, and a gulf and barrier has been set between the laity and the clergy, with a view first to elevate the clergy, and through them to elevate the laity, the result has been ultimately to degrade both, by making the clergy hypocrites and the laity unbelievers.
And what is true of the delivery of the Liturgy is true also of the sermon. God forbid that what is called pulpit eloquence should ever become the primary study among the English clergy! To express themselves clearly, simply, and with facility, whether in writing or in extemporaneous speaking, should indeed be a paramount object. It is to be learned, not by debating clabs, by boyish oratory, by speech-days, but by accustoming even boys, after they have been instructed on a subject, and have read and written upon it, simply to give the results in an extemporaneous form publicly in the presence of others. It is to be improved by teaching in schools
, and by any opportunity which presents itself for communicating in conversation with others. But here, again, clearness, simplicity, truthfulness, reality, and strong and manifest convictions on the part of the preacher himself, are the conditions required—the only conditions which will ultimately succeed. Without a life to correspond with the sermon, without earnestness, without zeal, without humility, without love, what
is pulpit eloquence but a mockery both of man and God? And these are not to be learned by all the arts of a Demosthenes or a Quintilian. It is the man, and not the eloquence, which touches the heart and converts the Christian. St. Paul's every word is burning, and every sentence mighty, but it is because the soul shines through it. Eloquence is not to be despised. When the solid foundation of personal piety is combined, it is most potent. But eloquence alone is only a sweet poison, deluding both the preacher and his flock.*
And lastly, there is one more process most powerful and most beneficial in the education of the clergy, which till within the i last few years has been grievously neglected, and is even now
only partially developed ; it is their meeting and communication together. Constituted as the English Church is, with the full possession of all divine truth—that truth composed (if the phrase may be employed) of polarised and seemingly antagonistic doctrines,-tending therefore, as the clergy always must do, to split into two parties, accordingly as they attach themselves to one pole or the other, and yet capable of seeing and recognising that the same authority which guarantees one half of the truth guarantees also the other—whatever brings them together, under a recognition of the same discipline, and of the same formularies, must tend to heal wounds, to remove prejudices, to correct errors, to widen and deepen belief and knowledge, and to promote that one grand end, without which all the labour of man is nothing—unity among those who are brothers. What arrangement and organisation may be most effective for this purpose may require great consideration. But on this fact there would appear to be a general agreement, that whatever brings the clergy together, and enables them to understand each other's views, to join in condemning acknowledged errors, in repudiating false accusations, in listening to candid arguments, and, above all, in praying for help and guidance, and the spirit of charity and love, to their one common Lord and Master, is fraught with blessings to the Church. Give it unity, give it concord; heal its unhappy divisions, and once more the standard of divine truth and of an impregnable faith may be raised among
Once more the hearts of the old will be warmed to labour
* We have placed at the head of this article an eloquent work, from the most eloquent of our Bishops. But it is not to the mere eloquence of the Bishop of Oxford that he will owe the place he will occupy in the History of the English Church, but to the many practical works which he has initiated and carried on, especially for the clergy of his diocese. A simple account of these works would be of high value to those who would develope and invigorate the machinery of the English Church.
and to fight for it. Once more the young will be attracted to battle and to suffer, where those whom they can reverence and trust are battling and suffering before them. And the English Church will continue to be the greatest instrument of blessing, which the hand of Providence, amongst all its mercies, has provided for this State and Country, even for the whole world.
ART. V.-1. The Life of J. M. W. Turner, R.A., founded on
Letters and Papers furnished by his Friends and Fellow Academicians. By Walter Thornbury. 2 vols. 8vo. London,
1862. 2. The Turner Gallery: a Series of Sixty Engravings from the
principal Works of Joseph Mallord William Turner ; with a Memoir and Illustrative Text. By Ralph Nicholson Wornum, Keeper and Secretary, National Gallery. Folio. London, 1861. THE preface to Mr. Thornbury's volumes might lead us to
expect a matured and carefully executed work. The author tells us that he has been engaged on the subject some four years ;' that he set to work steadily and quietly, letting no day, pass by without some search for materials, some noting down of traditions, some visit to Turner's old friends; determining not to complete my book, however long it took me, till I had collected for it all that patience and enthusiasm could glean, cull, or heap together.' (Pref. v., vi.) The four years, however, have not been entirely given to the composition of the Life of Turner;' for we find that from 1858 to 1861 Mr. Thornbury has also enriched our literature with at least nine other separate volumes, viz. “Every Man his own Trumpeter,' 3 vols. ; . Life in Spain, Past and Present,' 2 vols. ; 'Turkish Life and Character,' 2 vols.; * British Artists from Hogarth to Turner,' 2 vols. He has also contributed an article on Turner to the new edition of the 'Encyclopædia Britannica ;' he has taken up Mr. Ruskin's function of sending forth an annual pamphlet of dogmas on the picture-exhibitions of the London season; and it would seem, moreover, from hints scattered here and there, that this inde fatigable gentleman has found time to contribute to periodicals
. In a case of such alarming superfetation, it is vain to expect much vitality in the offspring. But whatever may be the merits of Mr. Thornbury's other productions, his Life of Turner' is simply the most deplorable piece of bookmaking that has ever fallen in our way. In a certain sense, indeed, Mr. Thornbury's
account of his operations may be correct, for the book does exhibit something of the spirit of research of a Paris chiffonnier, who goes about with his basket and picks up every bit of filth and tinsel that comes in his way; but for any really accurate investigation of facts worthy to be known, for any useful judgments upon facts that are ascertained, we must not look to Mr. Thornbury. His work is not calculated to advance Art by sound criticism, nor human nature by exhibiting the excellences of an eminent character.
Although the publishers do not hesitate to use in their advertisements a newspaper criticism which speaks of Mr. Thornbury as having had a personal acquaintance with Turner,' it is clear that the biographer never saw the painter, nor
even visited his gallery in Queen Anne Street.* It may appear surprising that the task of writing Turner's life should have been left to an utter stranger, since there must be among those who knew him persons well qualified to do justice to the subject. If we may take the liberty of naming one, we should suppose that the biography might most fitly have been undertaken by Mr. Jones, R.A., whose acquaintance with Turner was as close as any man's, who was one of his executors, and in the “Recollections of Chantrey' has shown himself able to employ the pen as well as he can use the brush, and as in early days he wielded the sword. But it would seem that, for whatever reason, Turner's personal friends have declined the task ; and hence it is that he has unhappily fallen a prey to a sort of manifold writer, in whose hands the materials which might properly have filled something less than 200 duodecimo pages are swelled out to 850 pages octavo, while the spongy tumidity of the book is by no means its worst characteristic.
Mr. Thornbury appears to have met with much courtesy and communicativeness from those who had anything to tell—from executors, from Academicians and other artists; from the two or three noblemen who, alone of their wealthy order, patronised the painter when living' (Pref. vi.); from other patrons or their representatives ; above all, from Mr. Ruskin, who is rewarded by being styled the greatest of all dead or living writers on art. (Ib. vii.) But, on the other hand, the statement that “to Mr. Wornum, an official of the National Gallery, I am indebted for two or three dates' (Ib. ix.), with the sneer at Mr. Wornum in one place as “an authority on the matter of dates, and dates
Mr. Thornbury himself nowhere claims acquaintance with Turner, and always speaks of him and of his house on the authority of others. See especially vol. ii. pp. 85, 173, and the chapter on 'The Turner Portraits.'
alone,' and the somewhat inconsistent, but not respectfully intended, mention of him elsewhere as an excellent authority on technicalities' (i. 267),-all this would seem to hint that Mr. Wornum may have shown some unwillingness to mix himself up with Mr. Thornbury's undertaking. If so, we congratulate him on his discreet caution; and, now that the result is seen, we imagine that most of the gentlemen who are distinguished by Mr. Thornbury's expressions of gratitude would be glad to erchange these for a share of the reprobation which he bestows on the official of the National Gallery.'*
The tone of Mr. Thornbury's remarks on earlier writers is not such as to bespeak for him much favour at the hands of critics, while it might fairly entitle them to require that an author who is so full of contempt for others shall himself produce something of a very superior kind. Thus he tells us that
Mr. Peter Cunningham once wrote a short memoir, full of prejudice, and still more full of errors. . . . . Mr. Timbs, with little of that courtesy that should distinguish literary men, has lately cut out a dozen or two of trite or erroneous Turner stories, and has published them in a catchpenny form--for which, as partly fulfilling Job's wish, I thank him.'
Pref. ix. Again :
· Among the German critics, Dr. Waagen stands pre-eminent for pompous blundering. He has one of those routine minds, unoriginal, formed by precedent and convention, and holding to the old and safe.' And then follows a long extract from the Berlin critic
, which, although the style of it is somewhat too German for English taste, contains nothing whatever that could warrant this attack on him. Dr. Waagen (whom Mr. Thornbury insults by styling him in the headline "THE GERMAN SOLOMON') regards Turner as pre-eminent in genius above all other landscape painters, and the single important fault that he points out is ‘his deficiency in a sound technical basis' (ii. 191-3)—the very deficiency which Mr. Ruskin, and Mr. Thornbury as his echo, also point out in saying (unjustly, as we think) that the Academy taught Turner nothing, not even the one thing it might have done—the mechanical process of safe oil-painting, sure vehicles
, and permanent colours.' (i. 59.) †
* Since this was written, we have seen some letters in the Athenæum,' which fully
bear out our conjecture. These letters are also very damaging to the biographer in other ways.
+ The truth seems to be that the Academy did teach Turner the safe use of his materials, but that, in striving after effects which had not before been attempted,