The Literary Remains of Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Volume 3Coleridge, Samuel Taylor
Religion
The Literary Remains of Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Volume 3
Coleridge, Samuel Taylor
Literature -- History and criticism
Here and in many other passages of his other works Jeremy Taylor very
unfairly states this argument of the anti-prelatic party. It was not
that the Church of England was afflicted (the Puritans themselves had
been much more afflicted by the prelates); but that having appealed to
the decision of the sword, the cause was determined against it. But in
fact it is false that the Puritans ever did argue as Taylor represents
them. Laud and his confederates had begun by incarcerating, scourging,
and inhumanly mutilating their fellow Christians for not acceding to
their fancies, and proceeded to goad and drive the King to levy or at
least maintain war against his Parliament: and the Parliamentary party
very naturally cited their defeat and the overthrow of the prelacy as a
judgment on their blood-thirstiness, not as a proof of their error in
questions of theology.
Ib. s. iv. p. 105.
All that I shall say, &c. 'ad finem'.
An admirable paragraph. Taylor is never more himself, never appears
greater, or wiser, than when he enters on this topic, namely, the many
and various causes beside truth which occasion men to hold an opinion
for truth.
Ib. s. vii. p. 111.
Of such men as these it was said by St. Austin: 'Cæteram turbam non
intelligendi vivacitas, sed credendi simplicitas tutissimam facit.'
Such charity is indeed notable policy: salvation made easy for the
benefit of obedient dupes.
Ib. s. ii. p. 119.
I deny not but certain and known idolatry, or any other sort of
practical impiety with its principiant doctrine, may be punished
corporally, because it is no other but matter of fact.
In the Jewish theocracy, I admit; because the fact of idolatry was a
crime, namely, 'crimen læsæ majestatis', an overt act subversive of the
fundamental law of the state, and breaking asunder the 'vinculum et
copulam unitatis et cohæsionis'. But in making the position general,
Taylor commits the 'sophisma omissi essentialis'; he omits the essential
of the predicate, namely, criminal;--not its being a fact rendering it
punishable, but its being a criminal fact.
Ib. s. iii.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account