V. 7. Father Caffaro having quoted only THREE TEXTS applied by the opponents of the drama against the use of the stage, viz. Isaiah c. 3. v. 16, 17. I. Cor. c. 10. I. Thes. c. 5. v. 22.-I am compelled by candour, a love of truth, and the strong desire of having the question tried upon scriptural ground, to add those texts I have met with in various authors who have written upon this subject. Proverbs c. 23. v. 1. Matt. c. 5. v. 28. v. 16. Rom. c. Eph. c. 5. v. 4. I. Tim. c. 2. v. 5, Luke, c. 8. v. 14. John, c. 2. 6, 9. II. Tim. c. 2. v. 3, 4. Titus c. 3. v. 3. James, c. 4. v. 3. I. Pet. c. 1. v. 17.c. 5. v. 8. I have myself diligently sought after, and attentively perused those several passages; but such is my blindness, ignorance, or stupidity, I cannot for the life of me discover the smallest affinity between the different verses and the thing under reprobation. However, conviction being my object, I shall ever consider myself indebted to that man who will prove, to my satisfaction, the propriety of applying them to the condemnation of the drama. A LETTER FROM THE Learned Father CAFFARO, Professor of Divinity in Paris, ΤΟ Α DRAMATIC WRITER, Who had, from conscientious scruples, consulted the Reverend Divine, upon the Lawfulness or Unlawfulness of Writing for the Stage: WRITTEN IN THE YEAR 16 SIR, I HAVE avoided as much as I could, giving you my opinion in writing, about plays, considering the delicacy of the subject, and my own incapacity. But since you press me still to cure you of that scrupulous fear which lies upon your mind, I must pass over those two difficulties, choosing rather to expose myself on your account, than not to ease you of your doubts. In truth, Sir, the more I examine the holy fathers, the more I read the divines, and consult the casuists, the less able I find myself to determine any thing in this matter. I had no sooner found something in favour of the Drama among the schoolmen, WHO ARE ALMOST ALL OF THEM FOR ALLOWING IT, but I perceived myself surrounded with abundance of passages out of the Councils, and the Fathers, who have all of them declared against public shows*.-This question would have been soon determined, if the HOLY SCRIPTURE HAD SAID ANY THING ABOUT it. But, as Tertullian very well observes, "We no where find that we are as expressly forbidden in scripture to go to the circus and theatre, to see the fightings of gladiators, or be assisting in any show, as we are forbid to worship idols, or the being guilty of murder, treason, and adultery." IF YOU READ THE SCRIPTURES OVER AND OVER, YOU WILL NEVER MEET WITH ANY EXPRESS AND PARTICULAR PRECEPT AGAINST PLAYS. The fathers assert, that we cannot in conscience be any ways assisting to the drama. The schoolmen maintain the contrary: let us therefore endeavour to make use of St. Cyprian's rule, who says, that reason is to be heard, where Holy Writ is silent; and let us try to reconcile the conclusions of the divines, with the determination of the fathers of the church. But because it is a very delicate point, and the question consists in reconciling them together, I will not * Vide Introductory letter, page $7–53. advance any thing of my own sentiments, but bring St. Thomas Aquinas to speak for me; who being on one side a religious father, and holy doctor of the church; and, on the other side, the angel of the school, the master and head of all the divines, he seems to me the most proper of any to reconcile the disagreeing opinions of both parties. In the second part of his "SUMMS," among others, he starts this question: "What ought we to think of sports and diversions ?" And he returns an answer to himself, that provided they are moderate, they are not only free from sin, but in some measure good, and conformable to that virtue, which Aristotle stiles Eutrapelia, whose business it set just bounds to our pleasures. The reason which he alledges for it is this: A man being fatigulon by the serious actions of life, requires an agreea ble refreshment, which he can find no where so well as in plays: and to support his opinion, he quotes St. Augustin, who says, "I would have 66 you take care of yourself, for it is the part of a "wise man, sometimes to unbend his mind, which "is too intent upon his business." "Now, (continues St. Thomas) how can this "relaxation of the mind be effected, if not by "diverting words or actions? "Tis not therefore "sinful, or unbecoming a wise and virtuous man, "to allow himself some innocent pleasures.' Aquinas even accounts it a sin to refrain from diversion:-"Because whatever is contrary to 66 reason is vicious; now it is contrary to reason "that a man should be so unsociable and hard upon "others as to oppose their innocent pleasures, never “to bear a part in their diversions, or contribute "to them by his words or actions. Therefore "Seneca very justly and reasonably says;-'Let "your conversation be so tempered with prudence "and discretion, that none may charge you with being sullen, or despise you as one unfit for social "conversation: for it is a vice to quarrel with all 66 mankind, and thus to be imputed a morose and savage creature." of It is easy to determine, that the Father compreTds the stage under the general term of recreaHons, by his recommending agreeable words and actions for the relaxation of the mind.-This is the peculiar province of plays, being composed of wit and action, such as produce delight, and recreate the mind. I do not think you will find in any other diversion words and actions thus combined together. But let us attend once more to this great scholar, "It seems (says he) as if these players who spend "their whole lives on the stage, did transgress the "bounds of innocent diversion. If then excessive "diversions be a sin (as indubitably it is) the players "are in a state of sin; and so likewise are all those |