No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2020
That interesting Devonshire worthy, Joseph Glanvill, has received a large share of attention in recent years because his interests so clearly reflect what he himself first termed his “climate of opinion.” He has been variously considered as a rational latitudinarian, a Cartesian, a spokesman for the “new science” in its Baconian aspect, a religious sceptic, and a revealing case of conformity to the Royal Society's demands for a “plain” style in prose. My aim is to point out that all of Glanvill's ostensibly diverse interests and attitudes fall into focus, and form a unified and consistent pattern, if we see him in the role of a religious and, at times, theological apologist for the Anglican settlement. The facility with which this popularizing writer turns the errors, facts, and philosophies of his age to the service of his particular ideology should remind us once again that ideas set in the continuity of their traditions are one thing; viewed as active participants in the life of a given generation of men they become quite another.
1 The more noteworthy examinations of Glanvill in recent years are those by R. F. Jones, collected in The Seventeenth Century: Studies in the History of English Thought and Literature from Bacon to Pope (Stanford, 1951); Moody E. Prior, “Joseph Glanvill, Witchcraft, and Seventeenth-Century Science,” MP, xxx (1932), 167-193; Basil Willey, The Seventeenth Century Background (London, 1934), pp. 170-204; Hartwig Habicht, Joseph Glanvill: Ein spekulativer Denker im England des XVII. Jahrhunderts (Zürich, 1936); G. R. Cragg, From Puritanism to the Age of Reason (Cambridge, 1950), pp. 61-86; Margaret Wiley, The Subtle Knot (Cambridge, Mass., 1952), pp. 197-226.
2 Godfrey Davies, “Arminian vs. Puritan in England, ca. 1620-1640,” HLB, v (1934), 157-158.
3 See Herschel Baker, The Wars of Truth (Cambridge, Mass., 1952), pp. 291-302, for a brief survey of the implications contained in the idea of the “double covenant.”
4 See Louis I. Bredvold, The Intellectual Milieu of John Dryden (Ann Arbor, 1934), pp. 73-107, for a full discussion of this movement.
5 The Worthies of England (London, 1662), “Devonshire,” p. 264.
6 Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Politie (London, 1682), i, i, p. 70.
7 R. W. Church, in his edition of Book i of the Lawes (Oxford, 1882), p. xxiv, noted 3 senses in which Hooker uses the term “Law of Nature”: (1) the law of creation generally, (2) the law of nonvoluntary agents, and (3) the law of human nature as known through reason.
8 Complete knowledge, of course, is never obtained by finite minds. “That Law the Author and Observer whereof is, one only God, to be blessed forever; how should either Men or Angels be able perfectly to behold?” (i, ii, p. 72).
9 Although “our sovereign good is desired naturally [and therefore] God the Author of that natural desire, had appointed natural means whereby to fulfill it” (i, xii, p. 95), nonetheless, the Fall had disabled Man so that he needed a super-natural canon of rules to guide him to salvation.
10 Two Choice and Useful Treatises (London, 1682), pp. 155-159. The other important and extensive discussion of Eternal Laws independent of God's will is Ralph Cudworth's Treatise Concerning Eternal and Immutable Morality, Bk. i, Chaps. i-iii. The relation of Eternal Law to Reason is discussed in the remaining books, but Cudworth's usual meandering diffuseness compares unfavorably with Rust, and in the final books he moves off into a defense of the “Light of Reason” against sensationalist epistemology. Cudworth's Treatise was doubtless well known to Rust and others of More's group, but it was not published until 1731.
11 See esp. An Elegant and Learned Discourse of the Light of Nature (London, 1654), pp. 25, 148, 182.
12 Cf. Hooker, Lawes, ii, viii.
13 Two Choice and Useful Treatises, p. 157.
14 It is in the Restoration that the motivation for the paradox becomes religious. The scientific tradition which enabled apologists to turn to a mechanical nature as proof of a divine architect also culminated in the period with Newton's triumph; but its ground principles had been laid down a century earlier. Cf. E. A. Burtt, Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science, rev. ed. (London, 1932), pp. 89-91, 288-295.
15 Lux Orientalis (1st ed. 1662) in Two Choice and Useful Treatises, pp. 97-98. Cf. “Anti-fanatical Religion and Free Philosophy” in Glanvill's Essays on Several Important Subjects in Philosophy and Religion (London, 1676), p. 21: “[God] is tyed by the excellency of his Beeing, to the Laws of Right, and Just, and … there are independent Relations of True and Good among things, antecedent to all Will, and Understanding, which are indispensable and eternal.” Cf. also “Of Scepticism and Certainty,” Essays, pp. 62-63; A Blow at Modern Sadducism (London, 1668; 1st ed. 1666), p. 51.
16 See Robert K. Merton, “Science, Technology and Society in Seventeenth Century England,” Osiris, iv (1938), 414-438.
17 See Bredvold, pp. 73-107.
18 Animadversions on … Fiat Lux (1662), quoted in Bredvold, p. 87.
19 Glanvill, “The Agreement of Reason and Religion,” Essays, pp. 26-28.
20 The apparent paradox of the use of Thomistic thought in reply to Rome is explained by Bredvold's discussion of fideism as an expedient measure while “the whole central tradition of the Roman Catholic Church is against the doctrine that Faith is best supported by a philosophic scepticism” (op. cit., p. 74).
21 Bacon's Works, ed. Spedding, Ellis, and Heath (London, 1857-59), iii, 353-354. The interpretation of Bacon's novelty was first stated by Robert Ellis in the introduction to this edition, i, 23-24.
22 Glanvill, The Vanity of Dogmatizing (London, 1661), pp. 189-195.
23 Walter E. Houghton, Jr., “The English Virtuoso in the Seventeenth Century,” JHI, iii (1942), 51-73, 190-219, discusses the development in detail. In his introduction to Bacon's works, Robert Ellis many years ago pointed out that the exception was Robert Hooke, who died at the end of the century still believing that “even physical and natural enquiries as well as mathematical and geometrical will be capable also of demonstration” (“General Scheme or Idea of the Present State of Natural Philosophy,” in Posthumous Works, ed. R. Waller, London, 1705, p. 7).
24 Aside from The Vanity of Dogmatizing, I have found 31 recurrences of the theme of the dangers of dogmatism spread across the whole length of Glanvill's career. Twenty of these passages are directly aimed at anti-Anglican groups, mainly the “enthusiasts.” In Scepsis Scientifica (1st ed. 1665; ed. John Owen, London, 1885), pp. li-lvii, the theme undermines atheism. It is employed against the Catholics in the following: Sciri/e tuum nihil est (London, 1665), sig. a2r; Catholick Charity Recommended (London, 1669), pp. 19-22; “Anti-fanatical Religion and Free Philosophy,” Essays (1676), pp. 25-26; The Zealous, and Impartial Protestant (London, 1681), pp. 26, 43 ff. “The vanity of dogmatizing” is asserted against enthusiasm in Lux Orientalis (1662), sigs. B1r-C1v; Plus Ultra (London, 1668), pp. 143-144; “A Letter Concerning Pre-existence … to … Richard Baxter,” [1661-62?], Biblioteca Platonica, I (1890), 187; Catholic! Charity Recommended, pp. 29-32, 40-50, 54-55; Way of Happiness (1st ed. 1670) in Some Discourses, Sermons and Remains of the Reverend Mr. Jos. Glanvil, ed. Anthony Horneck (London, 1681), pp. 4-8, 35, 83; “The Usefulness of Real Philosophy to Religion,” Essays (1676), pp. 24-26; “Anti-fanatical Religion and Free Philosophy,” Essays, pp. 11-15, 24-25, 26, 54-55; The Zealous, and Impartial Protestant, pp. 24-26.
25 Catholick Charity Recommended, pp. 54-55.
26 Ibid., pp. 28-29.
27 The Vanity of Dogmatizing, p. 4.
28 Way of Happiness in Remains, pp. 8, 67.
29 “Anti-fanatical Religion and Free Philosophy,” Essays, pp. 37-38.
30 “The Agreement of Reason and Religion,” Essays, p. 2. Glanvill frequently refers to the enthusiasts' citing of I Cor. 2: 2 and Col. 2: 8 against reason in religion, and always replies that “the Apostle there [Col. 2: 8] means either the pretended Knowledge of the Gnosticks, the Geneaologies of the Jews, or the disputing Learning of the Greeks” (“The Usefulness of Real Philosophy to Religion,” Essays, p. 39). He is consistent in insisting that the Bible should not be distorted by tearing Scripture passages out of their context.
31 Way of Happiness, pp. 58-59. Glanvill has particularly detailed and interesting discussions of the physiology of delusion in A Blow at Modern Sadducism, pp. 101-102, and a regicide memorial sermon of 1667, A Loyal tear dropt on the Vault, p. 29. In the latter he equates varieties of rebellious religiosity with melancholy arising from various humors being overheated. Cf. also Seasonable Reflections and Discourses in Order to the Conviction … of a Degenerate Age (London, 1676), pp. 150-151; Way of Happiness, p. 40; A Blow at Modern Sadducism, pp. 32-33; The Vanity of Dogmatizing, pp. 99-100; “The Usefulness of Real Philosophy to Religion,” Essays, pp. 14, 17-19; “The Agreement of Reason and Religion,” Essays, pp. 24-25; “Anti-fanatical Religion and Free Philosophy,” Essays, pp. 27-29.
32 “Anti-fanatical Religion and Free Philosophy,” Essays, pp. 24-25.
33 Way of Happiness, pp. 79-80.
34 The Vanity of Dogmatizing, pp. 99-100.
35 Ancients and Moderns: A Study of the Background of the “Battle of the Books,” Washington Univ. Studies, New Ser., Lang. and Lit., No. 6 (St. Louis, 1936), pp. 148-149.
36 Merton, Science, Technology and Society in Seventeenth Century England. See esp. Chaps. iv, v, and, on the shift to technology, x.
37 The Vanity of Dogmatizing, pp. 181-182, 6, and 240.
38 “The Usefulness of Real Philosophy,” Essays, p. 6. Houghton, “The English Virtuoso,” pp. 195-196, discusses how widely this approach was practiced in the later 17th century. It is typical that Glanvill's metaphor, taken in its total context, is drawn from a watch, that fascinating symbol of orderliness for the Restoration.
39 “The Usefulness of Real Philosophy,” Essays, p. 8. Glanvill frequently reiterates the value of the new science against atheism. Cf. “The Usefulness of Real Philosophy,” Essays, pp. 16-17, 33; Scepsis Scientifica (Owen ed.), pp. lii-lvii; Plus Ultra, sigs. A1r-B8r, pp. 137-142; Philosophia Pia (London, 1671), p. 79; A Praefatory Answer to Mr. H. Stubbe (London, 1671), pp. 60-63,
40 A Praefatory Answer to Mr. Henry Stubbe, pp. 143-144. For an account of Stubbe's relations with Glanvill and the Royal Society see Jones, Ancients and Moderns, pp. 249 ff., and the supplementary information in Harcourt Brown, Scientific Organizations in Seventeenth Century France (Baltimore, 1934), pp. 255-257.
41 Seasonable Reflections and Discourses, p. 143.
42 A Blow at Modern Sadducism, pp. 177 and 3.
43 Cf. Basil Willey, The Seventeenth Century Background, pp. 54-55, 194-204. Glanvill's “philosophical considerations” on witchcraft contain some proofs from Scripture (A Blow at Modern Sadducism, pp. 77-88, 95-97), but the relative value of Scripture proofs and experimental case histories, insofar as carrying conviction to the Restoration mind, is reflected in Samuel Pepys's reactions to Glanvill's two studies. In 1666 he had a copy of the 1st ed., which did not include the Tedworth case history, but only the “philosophical considerations.” Of this he commented “well writ, in good stile, but methinks not very convincing” (Diary [Bohn ed., London, 1905], vi, 72). Christmas Day 1667 he read with his wife Glanvill's drummer relation, and this time he speaks with enthusiasm: “a strange story of spies, and worth reading indeed” (Diary, vii, 233).
44 A Blow at Modern Sadducism, pp. 116-117. Bacon had recommended recording witch cases in connection with a proposed natural “History of marvels” in Advancement of Learning (Works, iii, 331).
45 “Against Modern Sadducism in the Matter of Witches and Apparitions” (a condensation of the early witch work for his 1676 collection), Essays, pp. 60 and 58; and A Blow at Modern Sadducism, sig. B3.
46 Philosophematum de Principiis Motuum Naturalium in H. Mori … opera omnia (London, 1675-79), trans. Paul Russell Anderson, Science in Defense of Liberal Religion (New York and London, 1933), p. 156. Both Anderson and E. A. Burtt (Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science) have discussed the More-Descartes problem in detail.
47 “Lux Orientalis, pp. 103-106, 113-127. Cf. More's Immortality of the Soul (1659), Chaps. xiv and xv.
48 Saducismus Triumphatus (London, 1681), Pt. i, pp. 99-100, 102. In The Vanity of Dogmatizing Glanvill asserted that pure spirit could exist without locality (pp. 100-101), but Lux Orientalis illustrates his belief that it is not effective or sensible apart from matter. In the 1676 essay version of The Vanity of Dogmatizing the passage on existence without locality was omitted.
49 I am now writing a book devoted to Glanvill's work and its place in the cultural currents of the Restoration.
50 “Science and English Prose Style in the Third Quarter of the Seventeenth Century,” in The Seventeenth Century, pp. 89-97, rptd. from PMLA, xlv (1930).
51 Jones, “Science and Language in England of the Mid-Seventeenth Century,” in The Seventeenth Century, pp. 148-156, rptd. from JEGP, xxxi (1932); George Williamson, The Senecan Amble (London, 1951), p. 280.
52 Mr. J. Glanvil's full Vindication of … Mr. Richard Baxter (London, 1690), fol. 2.
53 The dangers of language excess in working upon the passions is the burden of the following passages—sometimes chiding the “fanatick Phrases” of the dissenters, sometimes recommending the plain perspicuity of reasonable language to the Anglican clergy: Plus Ultra, p. 123; An Earnest Invitation to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper (1st ed. 1672; 7th ed. 1695), pp. 4-8; Seasonable Reflections and Discourses (1676), pp. 101-104; “Anti-fanatical Religion and Free Philosophy,” Essays, pp. 41-46, 52; Seasonable Defence of Preaching (1st ed. 1678; London, 1703), p. 42; Essay Concerning Preaching (1st ed. 1678; London, 1703), pp. 19-20.
54 A Blow at Modern Sadducism, pp. 116-117.
55 Cf. George Williamson, “The Restoration Revolt against Enthusiasm,” SP, xxx (1933), 571-603.
56 These were published together in 1678 (the year of the Popish Plot, although Glanvill's pamphlet on that event was not published until after his death in 1680) as An Essay Concerning Preaching and A Seasonable Defence of Preaching.
57 The Zealous, and Impartial Protestant, p. 35.