Page images
PDF
EPUB

the love of the Father is not in him." "The friendship of the world is enmity with God." "Be ye spiritually minded." "The carnal mind is enmity against God." "To be carnally minded is death." "Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them."

2. The stage is, in its tendency, "earthly, sensual, and devilish"-designed to allure the unwary-calculated to neutralize the religious effects produced in the minds of the young at our Sunday and other schools. That these ruinous effects may be secured, no expense, labour, or risk is spared. Finery and farce, ad infinitum, are resorted to by managers and actors. Hence thousands of pounds are expended to furnish the theatrical wardrobe of a first-rate actor, and twelve or fifteen hundred pounds are jeopardized on a single night's performance. Now the injunctions upon a Christian are these:-" Give me thine heart." "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind." "No man can serve two masters." "Lead us not into temptation." "They (Christians) are not of the world." "Set your affections on things above, not on things

on the earth."

3. The stage is attended with indecent expressions, licentious gestures, and immoral suggestions. In proof of this we might refer to numberless plays, with many of which our readers are, undoubtedly, familiar. But, to give weight to our argument on this delicate point, we shall make an extract from a work* whose author, though a minister of the gospel, was an advocate for the "British stage." "It cannot be denied," says he, "but that it has been long the fashion, and which has lately grown to a rank excess, to contaminate the language of the drama with a mixture of ribaldry and obscenity, and a profusion of all the contemptible equivocations of indecency. For these no excuse can be pleaded; they tend directly to corrupt the heart and to vitiate the moral sentiments. They profane the sacredness of modesty, and they wither that nice sensibility to the blush of shame which, when on particular occasions it shows its delicate tints on the cheek of youth and beauty, is inexpressibly captivating." Such

"A Picture of Christian Philosophy," p. 136. By R. Fellowes, A.B., Oxon.

is Fellowes' picture of the "British stage," and, as one of its christian patrons, he would undoubtedly give it in its best colours. Contrast this picture with the following words of holy writ:-"All that is in the worldthe lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life-is not of the Father, but is of the world." "Mortify your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, and evil concupiscence." "Pure religion is this-to keep himself unspotted from the world.”

4. The principles of the stage are derogatory to God, inasmuch as they profane, take in vain, and blaspheme, his holy name. The Christian is taught otherwise:-"Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain." "Swear not at all." Conscious that this was an evil calculated to bring down the curse of God upon this nation, an act* was once passed by the British legislature to prevent its continuance; and, if we are not mistaken, the said act remains in unmitigated force to this day. We subjoin the following extract, which alone will negative the question at issue:-"Be it enacted by our sovereign lord, &c., that if, at any time or times after the end of this present session of parliament, any person or persons do or shall in any stage play, interlude, show, &c., jestingly or profanely speak or use the holy name of God, or of Christ Jesus, or of the Holy Ghost, or of the Trinity, which are not to be spoken but with fear and reverence, shall forfeit for every such offence by him or them committed, ten pounds, the one moiety thereof to the king's majesty, his heirs and successors, the other moiety thereof to him or them who will sue for the same in any court of record in Westminster, wherein no essoine, protection, or wager of law shall be allowed.” Other acts of the same nature have been passed at various times in the British parliament to suppress the dangerous tendency of playhouses, &c. But hitherto all have proved abortive, as the present existence of the noxious nuisance testifies.

5. The playhouse is the rendezvous of libertines and strumpets-the hotbed of lust and profligacy; while the principles inculcated upon Christians are:-"Depart ye, depart ye; go out of her; touch no unclean thing." Be ye separate from sinners." "If

66

3rd Jac. I., cap. 21.

ye live after the flesh, ye shall die." "Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall." "Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful." "Can a man take fire in his bosom, and his clothes not be burned?" Can one go upon hot coals, and his feet not be burned?"

6. The stage, to say the least, has the "sppearance of evil;" whereas the Christian is to "abstain from all appearance of evil." To take the most liberal and verbal view of christian principles, the stage is of doubtful character. This is not our opinion only, but the opinion-the best opinion--that can be formed of the stage by those Christians who support it. Even the question under discussion endorses this opinion. Now, whatever is doubtful, whether in nature or tendency, cannot be supported by a Christian, nor by any man, unless it can be demonstrated to be right for a man to drink the contents of a cap in which he suspects there is poison. Joshua-like, Christians must be decided to serve God. What, then, can be more palpable than the incompatibility between the prin

[ocr errors]

ciples of a real Christian and those of the 'British stage?" And how it is that those Then who dogmatically insist upon sponsors "promising and vowing" that their godchildren should renounce the devil and all

his works, the vain pomp and glory of the world, with all covetous desires of the same, and the carnal desires of the flesh, and not follow nor be led by them," can be the foremost of those who frequent the playhouse,

we cannot divine.

7. There is another reason, of a somewhat more philosophical character, which confirms our opinion on this subject. It is this:-If the stage be perfectly congenial to, and the natural element of, the most sensual and wanton passions and cravings of the human mind in its unregenerate state, how can it please and merit the patronage of the same mind in its regenerated and sanctified state? The Christian is one who has "put off the old man with his deeds." Once he was "in darkness, but now he is light in the Lord." He has become "a new creature; old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new!" And his theme now is:-"Yea, doubtless, and I count all things but loss, for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ

Jesus my Lord." If the abandonment of the
stage be not one of the leading features in a
converted man's life, what is? And if a con-
verted man-a Christian-can, consistently
with his principles, support and patronize
the "British stage," what is it that he cannot
do?

"As by the light of opening day
The stars are all concealed,
So earthly pleasures fade away
When Jesus is revealed."

Stage-playing was repudiated by the more enlightened heathens, as the following extracts testify. Seneca, the moralist, says:"Nothing is more injurious to morality than attending upon such amusements; for by these means vice, through the medium of pleasure, insinuates itself into the mind." The Romans, according to Tully, "counted insomuch that any Roman who turned actor all stage-plays uncreditable and scandalous, was not only to be degraded, but likewise, as it were, disincorporated and unnaturalized by the order of the censors." And "a theatre* which was building (A. U. 599) was, by the appointment of the censors, ordered to be pulled down, as a thing hurtful to good

morals." If such were the sentiments of
heathens, the children of the night, what
children of the day?
ought to be the sentiments of Christians, the

We regret that those persons who have taken an affirmative view of this important of God for proofs in defence of their position. question have not had recourse to the word

C. W.'s argument, that the "British stage" originated from religious motives, proves too much, for supposing it thus originated, he must allow that it has been wholly diverted from its first purposes. Hence the stage has become another thing; consequently, the arguments which justified its adoption will not justify its continuance. Their weight is thrown into the other scale. But, if we wish to benefit by the tragical and comical follies of others, let us turn our attention to another quarter, for

"All the world's a stage,

And all the men and women merely players."

J. F.

By permission of the editors I would take this opportunity of cordially and conscientiously recommending to the perusal of every

* Adam's "Rom. Antiq.," p. 329.

young man interested in the mission of the | Rev. H. W. Beecher, entitled, "Lectures to British Controversialist, a pungent work on Young Men," and published by Hamilton, the temptations of the young, written by the | Adams, and Co.

AFFIRMATIVE REPLY.

[blocks in formation]

THE more important the question, as a general rule, the greater the diversity of opinion upon it; and, where religious enthusiasm can be brought to bear, that diversity will generally be much more amplified, and the ardour of the disputing parties increased. Being perfectly cognizant of these facts, and being likewise more desirous of giving encouragement to the free expression of opinion than of retarding it, we have nothing to regret in the part we took in the introduction of the present question, nor have we been disappointed at the subject eliciting greater warmth of feeling than is generally manifested in these pages. But to our task.

On introducing the question of the stage, we imagined that in all fairness we should rather keep in view its legitimate position and influence, than treat it under the adverse circumstances by which neglect and corruption have surrounded it. The subsequent affirmative writers have seemed also to appreciate this line of argument, and have adopted it. On the contrary, the negative writers have found it would best suit their purpose to deprecate this mode of procedure -to put prominently forward the abuses of the stage to impart to the whole argument a strong religious tone and colouring, and to make hard hits at those whose opinions are contrary to their own. Well, after all this we are not dismayed. We may have erred in our judgment, and may have to suffer the defeat consequent thereon; but there is yet one consolation, and it is this that, if we have erred, it has been in good company; for we have the testimony of the greatest writers of the greatest nations in favour of the beneficial influence of well-planned dramatic representations; and nearly the whole band of poets ancient and modern, living and dead-join, either in letter or in spirit, in

the same declaration. But we must descend more to details.

"Aristides" is the first with whom we join in debate. Passing over, for the present, his argument, that the stage is not a representation of society, and has no counterpart except in the mind of the author, which we unhesitatingly deny, we would inquire for an explanation of the following sentence which occurs in his paper, near its close:"We are debarred from having that higher order of theatricals which might be beneficial; and, so long as theatres are directly dependent on the public for support, so long must inferior theatricals prevail, for the few only can appreciate intellectual theatricals." What are we to infer from this sentence? or what is its common-sense translation? "Aristides," it may be unwittingly, but certainly very clearly, admits the possibility of a "higher order of theatricals;" and he certainly also admits their desirability, by using the words, "which might be beneficial !" If there is a probability of their being beneficial, it is desirable they should be tried. No one will deny this. And, to make it more clear to his readers that he is perfectly in earnest in this belief, “Aristides," at the close of his sentence, refers distinctly to "intellectual theatricals." But then, of course, "Aristides" is labouring under a mistaken notion! There is no intellectuality in theatricals! Oh, no! they are all abominations! designed to ensnare, engulf, ruin, and undermine all moral and intellectual aims and ends, and sanctioned only by those who are debased below the common level of their fellow-creatures! Wherefore, then, such allusions? But stay! Supposing that "Aristides" should be right, and that there really might be "intellectual theatricals "—— or, in other words, that theatres may be made piaces for intellectual culture and intellectual improvement-how would our Puritanie friends be affected under such circumstances? We apprehend that the same dictate which says unto other men, "Get wisdom"-" Seek knowledge and understanding""Cultivate and improve the intellectual

faculties which God has given you," would | should adopt anything which had been oriapply to them, and that they might, as con- ginated by the clergy, or which had been sistently as other men, adopt the means now devoted to the purposes of religion. Detestunder consideration, and the inconsistency able source for even the meanest advantage would lie rather "in the breach than in the to spring! In these days of boasted toleraobservance !" We believe "Aristides" is tion, to think of tolerating an institution right. The true drama has a decidedly upon such a plea! Excommunication, withintellectual tendency. We do not for a mo- out benefit of clergy, would be far too good ment suppose that "Aristides" intended to for us! Yet we are prepared to stand by do our cause such efficient service; it is one what we have written. It is not yet proved of those instances in which "zeal overshoots to our satisfaction that there is anything in her mark;" nevertheless, we are equally in- Dr. Johnson's writings upon which to build debted to him for his unintentional good an argument against the stage; and, as to service. Mr. William Prynne, had we time we could very considerably reduce the formidable appearance of his efforts to cast obloquy on the drama.

The next writer who claims our notice is J. E. P., who, after some just remarks, asks, with an air of self-satisfaction, “What ennobling quality is discoverable in envy? What christian grace in malice? What virtuous disposition in jealousy?" Surely the writer cannot be in earnest! Does he for a moment suppose that envy, malice, or jealousy are introduced upon the stage to find favour in the eyes or ears of the auditors? Never was a more mistaken notion! In all legitimate plays the characters who excel in any one or more of these particulars invariably come to an ignoble and infamous end. Need we now add that the reason of the introduction of these debasing passions into dramatic plots and histrionic entertainments is for the purpose of" showing virtue her own feature, scorn her own image," and deterring all those who witness the evil resulting from bad passions from falling into the like? We hope J. E. P. will, in future, have a better understanding of the subject.

It seems, after all, to have been left to W. T. to administer to all insane believers in the merits and mission of the stage the just retribution which they so richly deserve; and upon us (the unfortunate C. W., Jun.) the lash seems to have descended heaviest. To think that we, in the exercise of that freedom of thought and expression belonging to Englishmen, should have dared to defend an institution which "ever has been, is now, and ever will be," demoralizing and debasedwhich called forth the lamentations of the barly lexicographer, Johnson--and which, so far back as the days of the Monarch of the Oak, engaged the busy brains of Master Willism Prynne, not to abuse, but to chronicle the names of those who had performed that part before his time!. Or, again, that we

Turning to Johnson's Progress of the Drama," we find the opening stanza to consist of a tribute to the memory of Shakspeare, the greatest hero of the stage:"When learning's triumph o'er her barbarous Joes First rear'd the stage, immortal Shakspeare

rose.

Each change of many-coloured life he drew,
Exhausted worlds, and then imagined new.
Existence saw him spurn her bounded reign,
And panting time toil'd after him in vain:
His powerful strokes presiding Truth impress'd,
And unresisted passion storm'd the breast."

He does, indeed, lament that the public
taste sometimes induced managers to lower
the standard of their performances; but fur-
nishes the following just apology :-
"Hard is his lot that here by fortune placed,
Must watch the wild vicissitudes of taste:
With every meteor of caprice must play,
And chase the new-born bubbles of the day.
Ah! let not censure term our fate our choice,
The stage but echoes back the public voice;
The drama's laws the drama's patrons give,
For we that live to please, must please to live."
And he concludes by reminding his readers
that it was for them

"to bid the reign commence,
Of rescued nature and reviving sense;
To trace the charms of sound-the pomp of
show-

For useful mirth, and salutary woe;
Bid scenic virtue form the rising age,
And TRUTH diffuse her radiance from the
stage."

Let W. T. and "Aristides" digest these
lines!

1

With regard to W. T.'s challenge for us to "point to a single individual who ever became a more moral man by witnessing the representation of vice," we will endeavour to

perform the bidding. If our friend will turn | Let those who build their arguments upon X to the life of George Colman, who was very assertions only, remember they stand upon

dangerous ground.

"Adelphos" in the last number, and J. F. in the present, follow in much the same strain as their predecessors, and therefore do not require particular attention.

excellent in the character of George Barnwell, he will find it narrated that Coleman once received a fifty pound note from a person unknown, accompanied with a letter begging his acceptance of it as a token of the writer's gratitude, who was some years Several points to which we had intended ago saved from destruction by seeing him to have made allusion are already answered perform the part of Barnwell in a tragedy by D. H. in the preceding paper; we have of that name! We venture to say that other now, therefore, only to express a hope that instances are on record; but, as we are asked those who adopt our views as to the legitimate only for one, we need not give more. The purposes of the stage will endeavour, by all great Shakspeare himself says, in Ham-means in their power, to purify and elevate let:it-to make it less the slave of fashionable licentiousness, and more the receptacle and preserver of great thoughts and pure genius. C. W., Jun.

"I have heard That guilty creatures, sitting at a play, Have by the very cunning of the scene Been struck so to the soul, that presently They have proclaimed their malefactions."

NEGATIVE REPLY.

THE papers on the affirmative of this question are of an apologetic, instead of being of a defensive, nature. The writers in common admit that the British stage is in a corrupt state, but maintain that Christians, having neglected it, are themselves to blame; and the question they have discussed is, "May theatrical representations be made conducive to morality?"— "-one which few will be hardy enough to oppose. We will not grant them that the debate should be so construed. The British stage has a large constituency, among whom are many intelligent and christian men; and, as it cannot be supposed that these render it their countenance and support unreasoningly, we expected to have had the arguments by which these had satisfied their consciences of the propriety, or rather the righteousness, of their course. We cannot, however, admit a change in the terms of the debate, as it is not some ideal, nor what a future age may call the British, stage with which we have to do, but what actually is at the present day.

We are nearly at one with our opponents as to the value of theatricals, abstractedly considered. If it were possible to separate the stage from the present attendant abominations, it might be an institution calculated in an eminent degree to exalt the character; but such a title cannot be claimed for it until it has undergone a radical change. It

is forced into a stricter observance of the amenities of social life now than heretofore; for the people, despite its pestilent influence, have attained a higher morality; but the time has been when lady visitors, at the introduction of a new play, lest it might be of an equivocal character, were in the habit of wearing masks. What else, indeed, could be expected? At that period both writers and players were beneath the standard morality of other men, low as that was. The atrical representations are within their proper sphere when exhibiting the more lovely qualities of man's nature, and are, in that case, calculated to exert a beneficent influence on the auditory; but that sphere is unwisely extended when the less amiable traits find a place; for, though it may be argued that this is not acting faithfully to nature, and that we thereby lose, in variety of character, the moral lessons conveyed by representations in which these disfigurements of nature appear, even granting that the vicious experience poetical justice, are not a whit more salutary than those of our public strangulations. The support of good men need not be expected till this change has been effected.

We can examine only one or two of the statements of the opposing writers. Space compels us to be brief, else, as refutable matter abounds in other papers, ours might extend to a considerable length.

C. W. writes:-"Nor shall we err when

« PreviousContinue »