In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

93 Church were as strenuously enforced by the conservative end of the spectrum as they were loosened at the other end. She is on more solid ground with her understanding of Anglicanism; having digested the solid work of Gerald R. Cragg, Gordon Rupp, John Spurr, and others, she is fully aware of the importance of the Church in English life during the century her study covers, and astute in noting that Anglican debates on subjects ranging from innate ideas to Raphael’s religion cannot be separated by ‘‘high’’ and ‘‘low’’ church attitudes . Raphael’s cartoon, ‘‘Christ’s Charge to St. Peter,’’ for example, would be problematic for the entire spectrum of Protestantism, and all could unite in accepting Richard Blackmore’s wonderfully evasive couplet ‘‘resolving’’ the issue : ‘‘But do not ask what Raphael’s notions were, / His judgement might, his pencil cannot err.’’ In her next chapter, Ms. Haynes turns to English collectors of Italian art and their various justifying arguments. Her sources are Charles Lamotte’s An Essay upon Poetry and Painting (1730), and Horace Walpole’s comments on his father ’s collection (1747), and her conclusion is rather obvious: paintings were to be judged on artistic merit rather than theological content; and those who could afford to purchase such paintings could be trusted not to view them with the impious superstitiousness of Roman Catholics. Her penultimate chapter is more interesting, a brief but useful survey of the ornamentation of Anglican churches and chapels during this period. Again, the Church itself was not split on the issue but simply of two minds. While recognizing the dangers of iconography , its slippery path to ‘‘sensuous contemplation, superstitions and idolatry ,’’ the Church nonetheless made sufficient room for ornamentation; one is reminded, surely, of Martin in Tale of a Tub, who carefully removes some but not all of the ornaments from his coat. The subject produced intense debates and pamphlet wars in individual churches , but one suspects these were local struggles for parish power. Ms. Haynes provides a generous offering of black and white glossy plates, and a bibliography of thirty-eight pages, many cited in rather ponderous notes that suggest an undigested doctoral dissertation . The writing is in need of polish; a thorough proofing would have caught typos: ‘‘nother’’ should read ‘‘another,’’ ‘‘that that’’ should read ‘‘that,’’ and ‘‘appeinterestar’’ should read ‘‘appear,’’ and perhaps the several errors in the quotation from Pope’s Essay on Criticism (‘‘barborous’’ should read ‘‘barbarous,’’ ‘‘begin’’ should read ‘‘began). Far more damaging, however, are the too numerous royal signposts of progress; in one paragraph alone: ‘‘as we shall see,’’ ‘‘as we have seen,’’ ‘‘as we saw,’’ and ‘‘we have explored.’’ And finally, after years of gnashing teeth over the journalistic misuse (CNN’s Wolf Blitzer being a prime culprit) of ‘‘begs the question’’ (as meaning, ‘‘I really , really want to ask this question’’), the solecism has infiltrated scholarship as well; perhaps it is time to throw in the towel on ‘‘begging the question— as on ‘‘judgment,’’ which almost consistently Ms. Haynes spells ‘‘judgement,’’ even when quoting those who spelled it ‘‘judgment.’’ Melvyn New University of Florida DAVID B. RUDERMAN. Connecting the Covenants: Judaism and the Search for Christian Identity in Eighteenth-Centu- 94 ry England. Philadelphia: Pennsylvania, 2007. Pp. 1–141. $55. One value of Mr. Ruderman’s project is suggested by this observation: ‘‘Written as a response to William Temple’s Essay on Ancient and Modern Learning, Wotton’s book evoked numerous responses, pro and con, and was even satirized by Jonathan Swift . . .’’ (emphasis added). Connecting the Covenants is a fascinating account of a scholarly tradition that most of us have encountered only in satires or in passing mentions of the challenges to Christianity that accelerated the slide toward secularism in the eighteenth century . William Wotton, along with William Whiston and Anthony Collins, are shown to be intensely serious scholars pursuing lines of inquiry designed either to fortify Christianity as historical criticism exposed fault lines, or, in the case of Collins, to indicate precisely where they occurred. Equally valuable is Mr. Ruderman’s conclusion, amply justified in his study: ‘‘Many of the most significant cultural wars of this period are to be located in the religious...

pdf

Share