298 Dr. Trapp on being Righteous Overmuch.'

is manifestly on the contrary extreme; when all manner of vice and wickedness abounds to a degree almost unheard of? I only answer at present that to be righteous overmuch is itself, very often at least, one sort of vice and wickedness, and a bad sort too.' After having set aside the exposition of those who would have the words to be spoken not in the person of Solomon himself, but in that of a carnal and corrupt reasoner persuading men to indifference and neutrality in religion, and having admitted that there can be no such thing, properly speaking, as being righteous overmuch, but that the expression is owing to the imperfection of language,' the doctor proceeds to explain what he means by being righteous overmuch. His doctrine is simply the old Aristotelian doctrine of the mean : 'When vertue rises beyond its due bounds, it loses its nature, and degenerates into vice; and since it loses its nature, it ought to lose its name.' Thus, courage degenerates into foolhardiness, temperance into abstinence, and so forth. Then the doctor defines more explicitly his position. 'To be righteous overmuch is to place much religion (where there is really none, but the contrary) in extraordinaries, in new inventions, and striking out into bye-paths.'

This, of course, is a hit at the Methodists; and among them the chief offenders were George Whitefield and William Law, the latter of whom he evidently regards as the fons et origo mali. On the appearance of the 'Christian Perfection' and the 'Serious Call,' Dr. Trapp had 'prophesied they would do harm, and so it had happened, for shortly afterwards up sprung the Methodists.' It is true that William Law and George Whitefield had little in common, except an intensely earnest spirit of piety; on almost every other point they differed as widely as two men could do. But it was not to be expected that Dr. Trapp could recognise these minor shades of distinction; it

Trapp and Law represent Two Extremes.

299

was enough for him that they both were tainted with that most hateful thing, enthusiasm. No; we must beg Dr. Trapp's pardon. These 'righteous overmuch' men were bad enough; but not quite so bad as that-only on the highroad to it. Another mischief,' says the doctor, 'is that it tends, at least, to that baneful plague ENTHUSIASM ! It is itself somewhat enthusiastical, at best, and tends, as I said, to downright enthusiasm. I do not say that all righteous overmuch are enthusiasts; but I do say that in all ages enthusiasts have been righteous overmuch. They began with the last-mentioned and ended with the other.'

Dr. Trapp's sentiments are so exactly the antipodes of those of William Law that they help, by their very contrast, to illustrate the subject of this biography; they represent the very spirit which Law consecrated his whole life to thwart. Perhaps he fell into the other extreme, particularly in the earlier stage of his life. Dr. Trapp, alluding especially to the 'Christian Perfection,' declares that 'it dejects and perplexes persons truly and sincerely religious, making them think they do not do their duty, when they really do; and, on the other hand, it hardens the wicked and prophane, making them explode the Christian religion, as being impracticable and, by consequence, irrational.' Whether this be so or no, Dr. Trapp took a very different view of Christianity; and, as that view was by no means an uncommon one in the eighteenth century, it is worth while to consider a few more of his sentiments, as illustrating very fairly that spirit of the age with which Law was so utterly out of sympathy.

Dr. Trapp, then, would have men go to church, 'even upon ordinary days, as often as their necessary business will permit;' he would have them 'practise all Christian vertues; but he differed in toto from Law in his view of what Christian virtues are. These men,' he says, with a

300 Dr. Trapp's Idea of the Christian Life.

special reference to Law (for he quotes a passage from the 'Christian Perfection' to illustrate his meaning), 'tell us that, according to the spirit and genius of the Christian religion, we must absolutely renounce all the possessions and enjoyments of the world, and have nothing to do with them. No sort of gayety or expensiveness in dress is permitted to any person whatsoever. And yet,' asks the doctor, was not our Lord present at weddings, feasts, and entertainments? nay, at one of them worked a miracle to make wine, when it is plain there had been more drank than was absolutely necessary for the support of nature, and consequently something had been indulged to pleasure and chearfulness ? ' Some of Christ's rules were, he thinks, 'only intended for the early Christians;' the Sermon on the Mount contains many 'hyperbolical phrases.' 'And surely,' he argues, 'some Christians not only may, but must, admit of pomps, otherwise what would become of sovereignty and magistracy? And all Christians must have to do with some vanities, or else they must needs go out of the world indeed; for the world is all over vanity.' Charity is all very well, but it may be recommended to man's wife and children; and does not the Scripture tell us that he who provideth not for his own household hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel'? As to pretending to have 'the Spirit of God, some way or other, and this made known in a particular and extraordinary manner,' it was nothing but a 'revival of the old fanaticism of the last century.' This doctrine of a 'light within is sheer Quakerism.' Therefore, 'go not after these impostors; shun them as you would the plague.'

'the ruin of a

No one who has followed so far the course of Law's life needs to be told that such sentiments as these would be utterly abominable in his eyes. In fact, considering the extreme repugnance he must have felt against them, it is

His sentiments shock William Law.

301

perfectly wonderful to see how calm and moderate he is in his reply. Others answered Dr. Trapp in a very different spirit, as the mere titles of their works show. One is called 'Dr. Trap Vindicated from the Imputation of being a Christian;' another, The Anti-over-righteous Trap.' But Law never forgets that such a work required an ' earnest and serious' answer. The subject is too solemn for him to show any of his wonted racy humour in dealing with it. Earnestness and seriousness breathe through every line of the Earnest and Serious Answer.'

On one point alone does he show anything like wrath. He cannot brook the thought that the doctor should have attempted to enlist the Blessed Saviour Himself on his side. 'O holy Jesus,' Law exclaims, with a burst of eloquence, in which righteous indignation is mingled with a most touching pathos,' that Thy Divine life should, by a preacher of Thy Gospel, be made a plea for liberties of indulgence! O holy Jesus! Thou didst nothing of Thyself, Thou soughtest only the glory of Thy Father, from the beginning to the end of Thy life; Thou spentest whole nights in prayer in mountains and desart places; Thou hadst not where to lay Thy head; Thy common, poor fare, with Thy disciples, was barely bread and dried fish; Thy miraculous power never helped Thee to any dainties of refreshment, though ever so much fatigued and fainted with labour. But yet, because this holy Jesus came into. the world to save all sorts of sinners, therefore He entered into all sorts of companies. But why did He do so? It was that He might reprove and convert sinners at their own tables.

'It is said that wherever the King is, there is the court; but with much more reason may it be said that wherever our Saviour came there was the Temple, or the Church. He came to feasts and entertainments with the same

302 spirit, for the same end, and in the same Divine power as He went to raise a dead corpse; namely, to show forth the glory of God. Wherever He came, it was in the spirit and power of the Redeemer of mankind; everything He did, was only to destroy the works of the devil. It made no difference to Him whether He did this in the Temple, or in the streets; at a feast, or at a funeral. As He was everywhere God, so every place became holy to Him.'

Law's Vindication of his Divine Master.

And so Law goes on to 'vindicate our Saviour's holy life and example from the shocking misapplication the doctor has made of it.' It is not necessary to enter here into Law's somewhat whimsical explanation of the miracle at Cana of Galilee, in reply to what he calls the doctor's 'horrid account' of it; but the above passage seemed worth quoting, not only for its intrinsic beauty, but also because it is highly characteristic of the man. Law suffered his adversary to abuse him as much as he pleased, and never gave one angry word in reply; but when the doctor seemed to reflect upon Law's Divine Master, then he spoke outmore in sorrow than in anger, but with some touch of anger nevertheless.

In the same spirit he vindicates S. Paul from what he considered Dr. Trapp's misinterpretation of the Apostle's famous saying to Timothy.

But when he deals with the doctor's strictures upon his (Law's) own early writings, he writes with a calmness and temperateness very rare in controversial divinity in the eighteenth century. On several points he shows plainly that the doctor had misrepresented his meaning; but there is not one word of personal bitterness. And when he turns from this old minister of the Gospel to his younger brethren in the ministry, his appeal is so tender and touching that I cannot refrain from quoting a few passages, especially as Law is generally thought to have been a severe man by