Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T18:35:50.008Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Young's Night Thoughts in Relation to Contemporary Christian Apologetics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2020

Isabel St. John Bliss
Isabel St. John Bliss*
Affiliation:
Western College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

An Understanding of the purposes and the popularity of Young's Night Thoughts is possible only through a realization of their relation to contemporary currents of thought. For the most part critics have confined their attention to the so-called personal element and the treatment of the theme of death, and have neglected perhaps the most outstanding feature of the Night Thoughts, the interest in Christian apologetics. Though the nine poems reveal a shift in emphasis and purpose—the first five, of 459, 694, 536, 842, and 1068 lines respectively, chiefly concerned with moral reflections on life and death, and the last four, of 819, 1480, 1417, and 2434 lines, almost wholly devoted to apologetics—there is throughout a fairly definite effort to defend one phase or other of religion. This rationalistic defence of religion places the poems in the current of apologetic literature so outstanding in the late seventeenth and the early eighteenth century. Analysis of Young's aims and arguments will show to what extent he is following those of the outstanding defenders of religion and demonstrate that the Night Thoughts are to be considered as largely an expression of contemporary apologetics.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 49 , Issue 1 , March 1934 , pp. 37 - 70
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1934

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Hunt, Religious Thought in England, i, 271.

2 Birch, The Life of the most Reverend Dr. John Tillotson, … 2nd ed. (1753), p. 31.

3 Cf. Robert South, Sermons (Philadelphia, 1844), i, 492. “For it is a truth too manifest to be denied, that there have been more innovations upon, and blasphemies against the chief articles of our faith published in this kingdom, and that after a more audacious and scandalous manner, within these several years past, than have been known for some centuries of years before, even those times of confusion both in church and state betwixt forty-one and sixty not excepted: and what this may produce and end in, God only at present knows, and I wish the whole nation may not at length feel” (Sermon of 1694).

4 That this challenge to religion was not disregarded may be seen by examining the titles in Arber's Term Catalogues, where is listed book after book apparently devoted to showing the unreasonableness of atheism and the truth of natural religion as a basis for Christianity. In 1696 Bentley wrote: “But of all ages since the coming of Christ, I suppose this present has least reason to compain for want of work and imployment in defence of Religion.” Eight Sermons Preach'd at the honourable Robert Boyle's Lecture, in the First Year, mdcxcii (Cambridge, 1724), p. 346.

5 Cf. A Title listed by Arber for June, 1696: A Discourse concerning Natural and Revealed Religion: Evidencing the truth and certainty of both, by considerations (for the most part) not yet touch'd by any. Recommended, pursuant to the design of Mr. Boyle's Lecture, to the consideration of Atheists, Deists, and Scepticks; and useful to confirm and nourish the Faith and Piety of others. By S. N.

6 “All those who either are, or pretend to be Atheists; who either disbelieve the Being of God, or would be thought to do so; or, (which is all one), who deny the Principal Attributes of the Divine Nature, and suppose God to be an Unintelligent Being, which acts merely by Necessity; that is, which, in any tolerable Propriety of Speech, acts not at all, but is only acted upon: all men that are Atheists, I say, in this Sense, must be so upon one or other of these three Accounts.”—Samuel Clarke, A Discourse concerning the Being and Attributes of God, 8th. ed., (London, 1732), pp. 1–2. Cf. John Harris, Sermon ii (London, 1698), p. 7.

7 “The atheists … are divided into Sects, and (which is the mark and character of Error) are at variance and repugnancy, with each other and with themselves. Some of them will have mankind to have been thus from all Eternity. But the rest do not approve of infinite Successions, but are positive for a Beginning: and they also are subdivided into three Parties: the first ascribe the origin of men to the Influence of the Stars upon some extraordinary Conjunction or Aspect: others again reject all Astrology; and some of these mechanically produce Mankind, at the very first Experiment, by the action of the Sun upon duly prepared Matter; but others are of opinion, that after infinite blundering and miscarrying our Bodies at last came into this Figure by meer chance and accident.”—Bentley, op. cit., p. 103.

“Some have maintain'd, that this world hath thus existed from all Eternity in its present form and condition: but others say, That the Forms of particular worlds are generable and corruptible; so that our present System cannot have sustain'd an infinite Duration already gone and expired: but however, say they, Body in general, the common Basis and Matter of all Worlds and Beings, is self-existent and eternal: which being naturally divided into innumerable little particles or atoms, eternally endued with an ingenit and inseparable power of Motion, by their omnifarious concussions and combinations and coalitions, produce successively (or at once, if matterbe infinite) an infinite number of Worlds; and amongst the rest there arose this visible complex System of Heaven and Earth.”—Ibid., pp. 223–224.

8 Cf. Bentley, op. cit., p. 60, Harris, Sermons v and vi (1698), and Clarke, op. cit., p. 29.

9 Harris, Sermon i, p. 11, and Bentley, op. cit., p. 3.

10 Ibid., p. 38.

11 Clarke, op. cit., p. 168. But then, having a prejudice against the Notion of the Immortality of Human Souls, they believe that Men perish intirely at Death, and that one Generation shall perpetually succeed another, without anything remaining of Men after their departure out of this Life, and without any future restoration or renovation of things …. And so upon the whole, this opinion likewise if we argue upon it consistently, must finally recur to absolute Atheism. Cf. Bentley, op. cit., p. 21.

12 “There are some Infidels among us that not only disbelieve the Christian Religion; but oppose the assertions of Providence, of the Immortality of the Soul, of an Universal Judgment to come, and of any Incorporeal Essence: and yet to avoid the odious name of Atheists, would shelter and skreen themselves under a new one of Deists, which is not quite so obnoxious.”—Bentley, op. cit., p. 7.

“Profess'd Atheists can do no great Harm; for all Persons are aware of them … But there are few such; they have found a way to pass under a fairer Dress and a softer Name: They pretend to be true Deists and sincere Cultivators of Natural Religion; and to have a most profound Respect for the supreme and Almighty Being; But when this Profound Respect comes to be thoroughly examined and duly understood, it will appear to be the most abominable abuse that can be, and a most wicked and Blasphemous Idea of the Deity. For they make him either nothing but the Soul of the World, Universal Matter, or Natura Naturata, a God that is an absolute necessary agent, without any Rectitude in his will; without any Knowledge, Wisdom, Goodness, Justice, Mercy, or Providence over his Works.”—Harris, Sermon, vi, p. 10.

13 Clarke, op. cit., pp. 158–159.

14 “Some men would be thought to be Deists, because they pretend to believe the Existence of an Eternal, Infinite, Independent, Intelligent Being; and, to avoid the name of Epicurean Atheists, teach also that this Supreme Being made the World: Though at the same time they agree with the Epicureans in this, that they fancy God does not at all concern himself in the Government of the world, nor has any regard to, or care of, what is done therein. But, if we examine things duly, this opinion must unavoidably terminate in absolute Atheism.”—Ibid., p. 159.

15 “Some others there are, that call themselves Deists, because they believe, not only the Being, but also the Providence of God: that is, that every natural thing that is done in the World, is produced by the Power, appointed by the Wisdom, and directed by the Government of God: Though not allowing any difference between moral Good and Evil, they suppose that God takes no notice of the morally good or evil actions of Men; these Things depending, as they imagine, merely on the arbitrary Constitution of Human Laws.”—Ibid., p. 164.

16 Ibid., p. 165.

17 Ibid. pp. 167–168.

18 Ibid., pp. 169–170.

19 Op. cit., pp. 347–348.

20 The Principles of Deism Truly represented, and set in a Clear Light. In two Dialogues between a Sceptick and a Deist … 4th ed. (London, 1726), p. 7.

21 Ibid., p. 8.

22 Ibid., p. 77.

23 Ibid., p. 43.

24 The Weekly Miscellany, No. 134, as quoted in the Gentleman's Mag., v (1735), 347.

25 Birch, The Life of … Tillotson, pp. 296–297.

26 Cf. Leviathan, Ch. xiii.

27 South, Sermons, i, 337–338.

28 Tillotson, The Works of … containing two hundred Sermons and Discourses, on several Occasions (London, 1820), i, 418.

29 Clarke, op. cit., pp. 226–227.

30 Cf. South, op. cit., iii, 533, Clarke, op. cit., pp. 87, 96.

31 Clarke, op. cit., pp. 238–240.

32 Harris, Sermon iii, “The Notion of a God, Neither from Fear nor Policy.” Wilkins, On the Principles and Duties of Natural Religion, 4th. ed. (London, 1699), p. 52.

33 Clarke, op. cit., p. 87.

34 Clarke, op. cit., p. 27.

35 Ibid., p. 63.—Cf. Spinoza, Short Treatise on God, Man, and Ris Well-Being, Pt. i, Ch. iv, and Ethic, Pt. i, Prop. xxxii, xxxiii.

36 Quoted in the Gentleman's Magazine, iv (1734), 546–547.

37 Characteristics of Men, Manners, Opinions, Times, 5th ed. (Birm., 1773), i, 61, 128.

38 Ibid., i, 97–98.

39 Ibid., ii, 7.

40 Ibid., ii, 46.

41 Ibid., ii, 55.

42 Tillotson, Sermons, i, 330, 375–376, iii, 216, and Derham, Physico-Theology (London, 1798), ii, 417.

43 South, Sermons, iv, 19, iii, 34–36; Tillotson, Sermons, i, 395–398, ii, 475–476; Bentley, op. cit., p. 21; Harris, Sermon, i, pp. 8–11.

44 Tillotson, op. cit., i, 348–349; Wilkins, op. cit., p. 41; Harris, Sermon iii, p. 26.

45 Sermon iii, p. 19.

46 Clarke, op. cit., pp. 1–41.—Cf. Wilkins, op. cit., pp. 62–77.

47 Bentley, op. cit., pp. 60–61.

48 Ibid., p. 78. There is therefore an immaterial and intelligent Being that created our Souls; which Being was either eternal itself, or created immediately or ultimately by some other Eternal, that has all these Perfections. There is therefore originally an Eternal, Immaterial, Intelligent Creator; all which together are the attributes of God alone.—Cf. Derham, op. cit., ii, 153, and Burnet, The Theory of the Earth (London, 1684), p. 301.

49 Bentley, op. cit., p. 91.

50 Cf. Derham, op. cit., i, 135, and Burnet, op. cit., p. 295.

51 Cf. Brooke, Universal Beauty.

52 Bentley, op. cit., pp. 100–101.

53 Ibid., pp. 103–161.

54 Ibid., p. 162.

55 Bentley, op. cit., pp. 225–226.

56 Ibid., p. 335—Cf. Derham, op. cit., i, 115–123.

57 Bentley, op. cit., p. 335.

58 “Who would ever say or imagine such a body so different from the globe it serves, could be made by chance, or be adapted so exactly to all those fore-mentioned grand ends, by any other efficient than by the power and wisdom of the infinite God? Who would not rather, from so noble a work, readily acknowledge the workman and as easily conclude the atmosphere to be made by God, as an instrument wrought by its power, any pneumatic engine to be contrived by man!” Derham, op. cit., i, 36.

59 Ibid., i, 85.

60 Cf. Burnet, op. cit., pp. 291, 298, 306–307. South, Sermons, ii, 226. Derham, op. cit., ii, 206–207.

61 David Brewster, The Life of Sir Isaac Newton (New York, 1831), p. 210.

62 Opera, iv, 429 ff. quoted by Edwin Arthur Burtt, The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science (New York, 1927), pp. 285–286.

63 Elegantissima haecce Solis, planetarum et cometarum compages non nisi consilio et dominio entis intelligentis et potentis oriri potuit. Et si stellae fixae sint centra similium systematum, haec omnia simili consilio constructa suberunt Unius dominio ….

Hic omnia regit non ut anima mundi, sed ut universorum dominus … Deus summus est ens aeternum, infinitum, absolute perfectum: sed ens utcumque perfectum sine domine non est dominus deus … Dominatio entis spiritualis deum constituit, vera verum, summa summum, ficta fictum … A caeca necessitate metaphysica, quae utique eadem est semper et ubique, nulla oritur rerum varatio. Tota rerum conditarum pro locis ac temporibus diversitas, ab ideis, et voluntate entis necessario existentis solummodo oriri potest.—Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Glasguae, 1822), pp. 199–201.

64 Opticks, or a Treatise of the Reflections, Refractions, Inflections & Colours of Light. Reprinted from fourth edition (New York, 1931), p. 402.

65 Ibid., p. 405.

66 The full titles of Derham's works indicate the nature of the argument in each: Physicotheology: or, A Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God, from his Works of Creation, and Astro-theology: or, A Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God, from a Survey of the Heavens.

67 “And as myriads of Systems are more for the Glory of God and more demonstrate his Attributes than one, so it is no less probable than possible, there may be many besides this which we have the privilege of living in.”—Astro-Theology, pp. xliv–xlv.

68 Op. cit., pp. 117–118.—In curious contrast with this theory Derham had seen in the variety in men's faces evidence of divine creation, for chance would have made them all alike.—Physico-Theology, ii, 206–207.

69 Cf. Barrow, Sermons Preached upon Several Occasions (London, 1678), pp. 29–31. South, Sermons, i, 10, ii, 401, iv, 134–135. Tillotson, Sermons, vi, 288–289, vi, 294.—Tillotson emphasizes the necessity of thinking of all the attributes of God together and says that the greatest mistakes in religion have arisen from isolating one attribute and building a conception of the Deity on that alone.

70 Harris, Sermon, vi, p. 11.

71 South, op. cit., iv, 133–134.—Cf. the views of Archbishop King and Peter Browne as described by Hunt, op. cit., iii, 126.

72 George Berkeley, Alciphron: or, the Minute Philosopher (London, 1732), p. 170.

73 Clarke, op. cit., pp. 41–42.

74 Ibid., pp. 44–47.

75 But no other Body can be Self-Existent, because if so it would be individually the same, at the same time that it is supposed to be different.—Ibid., p. 48.

76 Ibid., p. 51.

77 Ibid., pp. 51–52.

78 As God's Works have been shown to be manifest Demonstrations of his Existence; so they are no less of his Perfections, particularly of his infinite Power, Wisdom, and Goodness; inasmuch as every Workman is known by his work.—Derham, Astro-Theology, p. 209.—Cf. Clarke, op. cit., pp. 73 ff., 110, 113.

79 Clarke, op. cit., pp. 114–117.

80 Tillotson, op. cit., i, 418.

81 Clarke, op. cit., pp. 179–182.

82 Ibid., p. 178.

83 Ibid., p. 192.

84 Ibid., pp. 194–195.

85 Harris, Sermon viii, p. 4. Wollaston, Religion of Nature Delineated (L., 1726), p. 7.

86 Dean Edward Young, Sermons on Several Occasions (London, 1702, 2 vol.), i, 47.

87 Clarke, op. cit., p. 223. Cf. Butler, The Analogy of Religion Natural and Revealed to the Constitution and Course of Nature, ed. by J. H. Bernard (London, 1900), pp. 48–49. Gastrell, A Moral Proof of the Certainty of a Future State, pp. 94–95.

88 Tillotson, Sermons, i, 330. Gastrell, op. cit., pp. 1–2 (Preface), 75, 76, 99–100.

89 South, Sermons, ii, 17. Gastrell, op. cit., p. 83.

90 Tillotson, op. cit., iv, 267–268. Gastrell, op. cit., p. 82.

91 Clarke, op. cit., pp. 271–272.

92 Ibid., pp. 265–266. Gastrell, op. cit., p. 82.

93 Clarke, op. cit., pp. 253–258. Wollaston, op. cit., pp. 113–114.

94 Gastrell, op. cit., pp. 4–5.

95 Op. cit., p. 73.

96 Ibid., p. 99.

97 He was therefore in great doubt, whether the surest means was to persuade the world to the belief of the sublime truths, that are contained in the Scriptures, concerning God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and concerning the person of Christ, was to enter much into the discussion of those mysteries. He fear'd, that an indiscreet insisting and descanting upon those points might do more harm than good.—Birch, op. cit., p. 326.

98 There are, however, more assertions of possibility of proof than attempts at proof.

99 Benjamin Ibbot, A Course of Sermons Preach'd in the Year 1714 (L., 1727), p. 77.

100 Clarke, op. cit., pp. 274–283.

101 Ibid., pp. 283–308.

102 Ibid., pp. 318–320.

103 Clarke, op. cit., pp. 320–370.

104 Ibid., pp. 371–444.

105 Night i, l. 320, Night ii, ll. 45 ff.

106 Night iv, ll. 728, 742.

107 Night iv, l. 200.

108 Night v, l. 81.

109 Cf. Berkeley, op. cit., pp. 130–131.

110 Night vii, ll. 904–906.

111 Night viii, ll. 773–774.

112 Night ix, ll. 836 ff., 957 ff., 1899.

113 Ibid., l. 1081.

114 Ibid., ll. 1643 ff.

115 In the preface he writes: “… for, as to the being of a God, that is no longer disputed; but it is undisputed for this reason only, viz., because, where the least pretence to reason is admitted, it must for ever be indisputable; and of consequence no man can be betrayed into a dispute of that nature by vanity which has a principal share in animating our modern combatants against other articles of our belief.”

116 Night ix, ll. 1440–1505.

117 Night ix, ll. 1448–59.

118 Ibid., ll. 1476–81.

119 Ibid., ll. 1482–84.

120 Ibid., ll. 1494–1501.

121 Night ix, ll. 907–915.

122 Ibid., ll. 1576–79.

123 Ibid., ll. 2202–5.

124 Ibid., ll. 1422–29.

125 Ibid., ll. 619–635.

126 Night ix, ll. 642–656.

127 Herbert Drennon, James Thomson and Newtonianism, A Dissertation submitted … in candidacy for the degree of doctor of philosophy, University of Chicago (1928), p. 64.

128 Night ix, ll. 138–140. Cf. Ibid., ll. 1596–1600.

129 Ibid., ll. 1079 ff.

130 Burtt, The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science, p. 291.

131 Night ix, ll. 1134 ff.

132 Ibid., ll. 597–1942.

133 Cf. Blackmore, Creation, Reynolds, A View of Death, Glover, “Poem on Sir Isaac Newton,” Mallet, Excursion, Ralph, Night, poems on Astronomy in Gentleman's Mag., 1734.

134 Night ix, 1197–1202.

135 Ibid., ll. 1722–25.

136 Ibid., ll. 1606–11, 1750 ff.

137 Cf. pp. 66, 98.

138 Night ix, ll. 772–774.

139 Night ix, ll. 844–845.

140 Ibid. ll. 1271–76.

141 Night iv, ll. 385–387.

142 Night ix, ll. 830–833.

143 Ibid., l. 1510.

144 Ibid., l. 1520.

145 Ibid., l. 1587.

146 Ibid., l. 1932.

147 Ibid., ll. 2026–28.

148 Ibid., ix, ll. 1658–67.

149 Night vii, ll. 1066–68.

150 Night iv, ll. 550–562.

151 Ibid., ll. 781–783.

152 Night vii, ll. 1150–55.

153 Ibid., ll. 1179–80. Cf. Night viii, l. 691.

154 Ibid., ll. 1169–76.

155 Night viii, ll. 707–708, 737–743.

156 Night vii, l. 250.

157 Ibid., ll. 177–179. Cf. Night VII, ll. 716–718, Night IX, ll. 377–378.

158 Night I, ll. 90 ff.

159 Night IV, ll. 270–271.

160 Ibid., ll. 703–716.

161 Night VI, ll. 650–656.

162 Night VI, l. 734.

163 Ibid., ll. 678–689.

164 To see in Young's use of analogy and necessary influence of Butler's famous Analogy is probably erroneous. The particular analogies used by Butler are quite different as his argument involves a consideration of the whole constitution of nature. The theory of Thomas that Butler definitely influenced the ideas and method of Young (Le Poète Edward Young, p. 438) seems hardly tenable. The resemblances which the Night Thoughts bear to the Analogy are also resemblances to works published earlier. The great differences in material and treatment seem to exclude any influence. While chronologically such an influence would have been possible, there is no definite evidence that Young ever read the Analogy. The later great reputation of the book suggests that it should have been known to such persons as Young as the outstanding apologetic work of the day. But as a matter of fact its contemporary reputation does not appear to have been so great. The Gentleman's Magazine, where criticisms and discussions of the religous books of interest at the moment are given, lists only one book referring to the Analogy from the time of its appearance in 1736 until after the Night Thoughts were written, and in all that time the magazine prints not a single comment on it.

165 Night VI, ll. 696–705.

166 Ibid., ll. 728–731.

167 Ibid., ll. 804–805.

168 Night VII, ll. 26–28.

169 Night VII, ll. 29–68.

170 Ibid., ll. 76–103.

171 Ibid., ll. 104–105.

172 Night VII, l. 142.

173 Ibid., ll. 139–252.

174 Ibid., ll. 275–278.

175 Ibid., l. 296.

176 Ibid., ll. 330–331.

177 Night VII, ll. 341–352.

178 Ibid., ll. 353–364.

179 Ibid., ll. 365–378.

180 Ibid., ll. 379–427.

181 Ibid., ll. 328–443.

182 Ibid., ll. 467–468.

183 Ibid., ll. 477–500.

184 Ibid., ll. 507–513.

185 Night VII, ll. 559–600.

186 Ibid., ll. 609–612.

187 Ibid., ll. 626–631.

188 Ibid., ll. 693–703.

189 Ibid., ll. 1122–28.

190 Henry Shelley, The Life and Letters of Edward Young (London, 1914), p. 167.

191 Moral Proofs of the Certainty of a Future State, p. 97.

192 Night IX, ll. 659–662.

193 Ibid., ll. 1173–83.

194 Ibid., ll. 2038–41.

195 Night IX, ll. 645–646.

196 Ibid., l. 1672.

197 Night IV, ll. 225–233.

198 Tillotson, Sermons, vi, 294.

199 Gastrell, The Principles of Deism, p. 7.

200 Butler, Analogy, p. 47.

201 Night III, l. 395, Night IV, ll. 676 ff.

202 Night IV, ll. 236–300.

203 Night VII, ll. 1029–40, 1102–16, Night IX, ll. 127–132.

204 Night IX, ll. 135–366.

205 Night VII, ll. 1043–17.