Edward Taylor, Meditation 39.4

03 Tuesday May 2022

Posted by memoirandremains in Edward Taylor, Incarnation

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Edward Taylor, Edward Taylor Meditation 39, Meditation 39, poem, Poem Analysis, Poetry, Poetry Analysis

Fifth Stanza

I have no plea mine Advocate to give.

What now? He’ll anvil arguments great store

Out of his flesh and blood to make me live.

O dear bought arguments: good pleas therefor.

Nails made of heavenly steel, more choice than gold

Drove home, well clenched, eternally will hold.

Notes:

Since a lawyer is limited by the facts of the case (attorneys’ pleas spring from the state/

The case is in), and since this case is so dire, they “knock me down to woe”, the poet has nothing to help:

I have no plea mine Advocate to give.

There is nothing particularly musical about this line: it is a plain statement of fact. And this leaves him with the wholly prosaic question:

What now?

The first line and-a-half of this stanza contain no clever image, interesting musical devices. It is just a clear statement of fact. But when we turn to the Advocate’s work, the stanza becomes “poetic”. This is an interesting rhetorical tactic by Taylor, increasing the rhetorical fireworks when it comes to the Advocate’s work.

How will the Advocate plead for the poet, when the facts are against the poet?

He’ll anvil arguments great store

Out of his flesh and blood

The image striking: the argument will come from the Advocate’s own “flesh and blood”. Moreover, he will not merely take these arguments, they will be hammered like a blacksmith with iron at a furnace, He’ll anvil arguments.

The picture is grotesque and wonderful: how does not take an hammer and anvil to one’s own body? And yet it is out of the body of the Advocate that the defense is raised.

Here is a central mystery of the Christian claim. All human beings have a body which is ultimate derived from the body of Adam. All people are of one body: “And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth.” Acts 17:26 (ESV) Thus, in both a representative and physical sense, all human beings are born “in Adam”.

The Son of God is “made flesh”. (John 1:14) Christ then lives a sinless life, and yet suffers the death allotted to all of Adam’s descendants. Being innocent, and being representative, he bears the weight of the judgment against sin: “He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.” 1 Peter 2:24 (ESV) In the end he is vindicated (as evidenced by this resurrection, Romans 1:4). Christ becomes a new Adam. (Rom. 5:12-19) As raised, he stands as a new humanity.

⁴²So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. ⁴³It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. ⁴⁴It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. ⁴⁵Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. ⁴⁶But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. ⁴⁷The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. ⁴⁸As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. ⁴⁹Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven.

1 Corinthians 15:42–49 (ESV) Much, much more could said on this point from the New Testament. But is without question the doctrine of the Apostles that the physical body of Christ in life, death, burial, and resurrection, becomes the plea for our salvation: “For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.”

2 Corinthians 5:21 (ESV) The way in which that life of Christ becomes our life is a further discussion. The point here is that Taylor says nothing but what the Bible teaches. In a roughly contemporary work, William Gurnal uses an image which reminds of the language here in Taylor:

“He lived and died for you; he will live and die with you; for mercy and tenderness to his soldiers, none like him. Trajan, it is said, rent his clothes to bind up his soldiers’ wounds; Christ poured out his blood as balm to heal his saints’ wounds; tears off his flesh to bind them up.”

William Gurnall and John Campbell, The Christian in Complete Armour (London: Thomas Tegg, 1845), 6.

These arguments made from the body of the advocate bring life, “to make me live.” As Paul writes: “But the words “it was counted to him” were not written for his sake alone, 24 but for ours also. It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, 25 who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification.” Romans 4:23–25 (ESV)

These arguments come at great cost, “O dear bought arguments”. They will also work, they are “good pleas.”

The final couplet makes an in ironic use of nails:

Nails made of heavenly steel, more choice than gold

Drove home, well clenched, eternally will hold.

At one level, “nails” references the strength of this argument: They are “heavenly steel.” They are more precious that gold. And they have been fit so well, that the argument will be valid for all eternity: “Drove home, well clenched, eternally will hold.”

The final line contains two pauses, which slows down and underscores the proposition raised: This argument will stand.

The use of nails as the image for the argument then alludes to the basis for the argument: Christ’s sacrificial death. He was nailed to the tree, and in so doing, our sins were nailed to the tree. In this seeming loss, there was victory:

11 In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. 13 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, 14 by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. 15 He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.

Colossians 2:11–15 (ESV)

Edward Taylor, Meditation 39.3

02 Monday May 2022

Posted by memoirandremains in Edward Taylor

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Edward Taylor, Edward Taylor Meditation 39, poem, Poem Analysis, Poetry Analysis

Fourth Stanza

Joy, joy, God Son’s the sinner’s Advocate

Doth plead the sinner guiltless and a saint.

But yet attorneys’ pleas spring from the state

The case is in: if bad it’s bad in plaint.

My papers do contain no pleas that do

Secure me from, but knock me down to woe.

Notes:

There are three propositions in this stanza. First, the Son as Advocate can plead the guilty innocent. How this possible is not yet raised. Second, a lawyer’s work can be no better than the material he has to work with. Third, the material I can supply only proves my guilt.

Proposition one:

Joy, joy, God Son’s the sinner’s Advocate

Doth plead the sinner guiltless and a saint.

Aside from the spondee of JOY JOY, these two lines run in regular iambs. There is a usesful alliteration on S which draws primary elements together: Son SinnerS, Sinner, guiltless, Saint.

The work of this advocate does not merely obtain a not-guilty plea. The sinner is not merely left off for insufficient evidence. Rather, the work of the Son transforms the sinner into a saint. He is not only “not guilty”, he is positively innocent.

Proposition two:

But yet attorneys’ pleas spring from the state

The case is in: if bad it’s bad in plaint.

The plea an attorney can enter in a trial is limited by the nature of the underlying facts: the plea “springs from the state the case in.” To make the negative case clear: if it the facts are bad, the attorney’s plea (his “plaint”, as in “complaint”) is also bad. “If bad it’s bad in plaint” is a fine clause.

Proposition Three

My papers do contain no pleas that do

Secure me from, but knock me down to woe.

We now come to the poet’s particular situation. We have just been told that the quality of the plea will depend upon the quality of the facts. So what facts are here for the poet?

He looks to his legal papers, but there is nothing in the papers to absolve him.

My papers do contain no pleas that do

Secure me

What do the papers say:

The facts “but knock me down to woe.” Woe: that is condemnation.

Thus, the legal conflict is set in full: A lawyer can only plead what the facts permit. The facts here condemn. But the Son can somehow make a plea which can make the poet guiltless. How can this be? That is the matter of the remainder of the poem.

Edward Taylor, Meditation 39.2

29 Friday Apr 2022

Posted by memoirandremains in Edward Taylor, Literary Criticism

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Edward Taylor, Edward Taylor Meditation 39, poem, Poem Analysis, Poetry, Poetry Analysis

Third Stanza

Lord, hold thy hand: for handle me thou may’st

In wrath but, oh! A twinkling ray of hope

Methinks I spy thou graciously gracious display’st.

There is an Advocate: a door is ope.

Sin’s poison swell my heart would till it burst,

Did not a hope hence creep in’t thus, and nursed.

Notes:

Lord, hold thy hand: for handle me thou may’st

In wrath but, oh! A twinkling ray of hope

The accented first syllable with the vocative “Lord” presses the urgency of the whole. Nothing precedes “Lord;” no “dear Lord”, “Oh Lord” et cetera. He has no time to slow his plea.

The prayer is that God not discipline him in anger. This alludes to

Psalm 6:1 (AV)

O LORD, rebuke me not in thine anger, neither chasten me in thy hot displeasure.

In the original Hebrew, there is no injection “O”, it begins directly Yhwh [the name of the Lord, rendered into English as “Lord” following the custom of the earlier Jews to not use God’s covenant, and to substitute Adonai, “Lord”]

Next notice the alliterative H: hold, hand, handle, [wrath], and then, hope. The H’s draw attention to the danger faced by the poet. But the final H changes the direction of the poem’s movement. God has the right to judge him; this is indicated by the “may’st”; there is a moral permission for God’s action.

A twinkling ray of hope

Methinks I spy thou graciously gracious display’st.

There is an Advocate: a door is ope.

Here the rhyme works perfectly: hope/ope. The use of “poetic” “ope” not only makes the rhyme, it connotates something special by use of “special” language. The second line makes good use of an adverb/adjective graciously/gracious.

The poet faces danger: God is set to strike him in wrath. And there at the final moment he sees a “ray of hope” through an opening door: He sees and “Advocate.”

Sin’s poison swell my heart would till it burst,

Did not a hope hence creep in’t thus, and nursed.

This introduces an idea which is not intuitive in our contemporary understanding of “sin,” even within the church. Sin only pretends to be a pleasurable thing. We speak of temptation and sin as luxurious pleasures which we must forego, often for no apparent reason. A common conservation is to question “why” this is forbidden. Why would God not let me X.

The understanding of sin presented by Taylor is quite different. He never denies the degree to which is he tempted toward sin. But he also understands that sin is its own punishment. To ingest sin is a danger. No matter how desirable it may seem, it is poison.

Notice the correspondence of God’s judgment upon him and sin bursting his heart with poison: the danger of sin and the judgment of God are two sides of the same event. Notice that his heart is also saved from the poison of sin by the very same hope: His heart would have failed, “Did not a hope hence creep in’t”. The hope then “nurses” his heart to health.

Thus, the hope of his advocate saves him from the wrath of God and the danger of sin. In all salvation of God, the salvation is from death & sin (which are inseparable).

Edward Taylor, Meditation 38, conclusion

07 Thursday Apr 2022

Posted by memoirandremains in Edward Taylor, Puritan

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Edward Taylor, Edward Taylor Meditation 38, Meditation 38, poem, Poem Analysis, Poetry, Poetry Analysis

Seventh Stanza

My case is bad, Lord, be my advocate.

My sin is red: I’m under God’s arrest.

Thou hast the hit of pleading; plead my state.

Although it’s bad, thy plea will make it best. 40

If thou wilt plead my case before the king

I’ll wagon loads of love and glory bring

Judgment is coming, the court is set; but the Advocate has been appointed. The poet’s fear that he may be rejected has been met with

nor doth refuse

The vilest sinners case that doth him choose.

What then is left but to retain the attorney? And so we come this final stanza, a prayer as petition. The first two lines state his situation and request:

My case is bad, Lord, be my advocate.

My sin is red: I’m under God’s arrest.

These lines are interesting, because they are in the style of Hebrew poetry, which roughly stated entails to syntactically parallel lines where the second repeats and intensifies the propostion of the first.

The first states the matter generally: My case is bad: a bad case could be any unpleasant situation. The second line repeats the structure: My X is Y. But here, rather than the ambiguous “case” we have the more specific “sin.” Rather than bad, the sin “red.” By red, Taylor is alluding to Isaiah

Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD:

though your sins be as scarlet,

they shall be as white as snow;

though they be red like crimson,

they shall be as wool.

Isaiah 1:18 (AV)

The reference to red being the color of sin is explained in 1:15, which speaks of their acts of bloody violence, “your hands are full of blood.” The verse also illustrates well the nature of Hebrew poetry: First clauses in parallel:

Though you sins be as scarlet

Though they be red like crimson.

Second clauses in parallel

They shall be white as snow

They shall be as wool

In our poem the second clause contains more variation in structure.

Line 1, second clause,

Lord, be my advocate.

The second line does not repeat the request but instead intensifies the need:

I’m under God’s arrest.

By repeating the need rather than the request, he intensifies the expression of his desperation.

Thou hast the hit of pleading; plead my state.

Although it’s bad, thy plea will make it best.

“Hit of pleading” is admittedly unclear in the detail, though the general sense is apparent: You have the ability or strength to make such a plea. It sounds idiomatic (“hit the bottle,” “hit the bricks”), but I have not heard it before. You have this ability, plead (make an argument to the court on my behalf).

My state is bad, but you can put it in the best light.

The use of pleading/plea in three consequence lines is quite effective:

Thou hast the hit of pleading; plead my state.

Although it’s bad, thy plea will make it best. 40

If thou wilt plead my case before the king

I’ll wagon loads of love and glory bring

Does the final couplet make for a bribe: If you give them this I will give you that? No. God is no need, and thus is not fulfilled by the praise. But praise and thankfulness is the appropriate response to forgiveness. For instance, David’s great penitential Psalm 51 ends:

Psalm 51:19 (AV)

19 Then shalt thou be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness, with burnt offering and whole burnt offering: then shall they offer bullocks upon thine altar.

But perhaps it is best understood by its negative, what if there is no thankfulness for a benefit received:

Luke 17:11–19 (AV)

¹¹And it came to pass, as he went to Jerusalem, that he passed through the midst of Samaria and Galilee. ¹²And as he entered into a certain village, there met him ten men that were lepers, which stood afar off: ¹³And they lifted up their voices, and said, Jesus, Master, have mercy on us. ¹⁴And when he saw them, he said unto them, Go shew yourselves unto the priests. And it came to pass, that, as they went, they were cleansed. ¹⁵And one of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God, ¹⁶And fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks: and he was a Samaritan. ¹⁷And Jesus answering said, Were there not ten cleansed? but where are the nine? ¹⁸There are not found that returned to give glory to God, save this stranger. ¹⁹And he said unto him, Arise, go thy way: thy faith hath made thee whole.

Edward Taylor, Meditation 38.4

05 Tuesday Apr 2022

Posted by memoirandremains in Edward Taylor

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Edward Taylor, Meditation 38, poem, Poem Analysis, Poetry, Poetry Analysis

Fifth and Sixth Stanzas

What sayest my soul? Here all thy deeds are tried. 25

Is Christ thy advocate to plead thy cause?

Art thou his client? Such shall never slide.

He never lost his case; he pleads such laws

As carry do the same, nor doth refuse

The vilest sinners case that doth him choose. 30

This is honor, not dismay: nay

No habeas corpus gainst his clients came

For all their fines his purse doth make down pay.

He non-suits Satan’s suit or casts the same.

He’ll plead thy case and not accept a fee. 35

He’ll plead sub forma pauperis for thee.

Having laid the justice of the court, the poet now turns to himself. And in the manner of Psalm 42 (“why are you downcast O my soul”), he addresses his soul: by this he means himself, his mind, his desires, his life.

Soul what do you say?

This end cannot be escaped: Here all thy deeds are tried. You are coming to this court, what will you do about this day? Are you frightened? As will be raised in the final stanza, the count against the poet is serious: he is guilty and will receive a death sentence is someone does not intervene.

The argument is direct (for Taylor).

Is Christ thy advocate to plead thy cause?

This question is not quite “rhetorical”. It is not just, well since he is your advocate. It is rather think: He is truly your advocate? As Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 13:5, examine yourself if you are in the faith.

This manner of self-counsel is a form of righting one’s thoughts which is used in the Scripture. (See for example: https://memoirandremains.com/2015/08/04/six-questions-to-ask-in-the-midst-of-trial-and-depression/ )

The answer sought is “Yes.” Yes, Christ is my advocate:

¹My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

1 John 2:1 (AV)

What then flows from that? If he is my advocate, I am his client

Art thou his client?

Yes. Then what follows? He never ignores his work as advocate:

Such shall never slide.

And in that there is great comfort:

He never lost his case;

How so? He makes the right argument

he pleads such laws

As carry do the same,

But what about me? Perhaps he will not take my case

nor doth refuse

The vilest sinners case that doth him choose.

There is no one who has been rejected in coming for mercy. The only sin which will not be forgiven is the sin for which one does not repent. (There is the difficult issue of “Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit”. But what can be said is there is no instance in Scripture of someone making an honest repentance and their sin not being forgiven. The relationship between those points is beyond Taylor’s poem.)

That leads to a further question: but what of his honor?

This is honor, not dismay:

This then leads to a difficult line. A writ of Habeas Corpus requires an imprisoning authority justify to a judge the imprisonment. It is a relief for a wrongfully imprisoned person:

nay

No habeas corpus gainst his clients came

Perhaps Taylor means no such writ is needed, because his are never imprisoned:

For all their fines his purse doth make down pay.

Since there fine has been paid, they were not imprisoned, therefore, they don’t need a writ of habeas corpus.

Satan means the “Accuser”. In Revelation 12:10, he is called the accuser of the brothers. In Job 1-2, “The Satan” (a title, not a name) refers to the one who accuses Job. Satan brings an accusation, but the defense is so strong the judge throws the claim out, there is a “non-suit.”

He non-suits Satan’s suit or casts the same.

And yet another implied objection: But I cannot afford this attorney. I have nothing with which to pay:

He’ll plead thy case and not accept a fee. 35

He’ll plead sub forma pauperis for thee.

Sub forma pauperis is permission for a pauper to proceed with his action without the need of paying the costs of court.

And so, every objection is raised and rejected:

John Keats, Ode on Melancholy

02 Saturday Apr 2022

Posted by memoirandremains in Literature

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

John Keats, Ode on Melancholy, Poem Analysis, Poetry Analysis

This poem is fascinating in its development. The first stanza is a warning: When you fall into “melancholy”, do not seek to end the pain by forgetfulness (Lethe, the river of forgetting). Do not seek to end the pain by poison, suicide (nightshade). The solution here is not trying to drown and stop the painful emotion.

In fact he sees something here to not lose, For shade to shade will come too drowsily/And drown the wakeful anguish of the soul. That wakeful anguish is something keep. But why?

1.
No, no, go not to Lethe, neither twist
Wolf’s-bane, tight-rooted, for its poisonous wine;
Nor suffer thy pale forehead to be kiss’d
By nightshade, ruby grape of Proserpine;
Make not your rosary of yew-berries,
Nor let the beetle, nor the death-moth be
Your mournful Psyche, nor the downy owl
A partner in your sorrow’s mysteries;
For shade to shade will come too drowsily,
And drown the wakeful anguish of the soul. 10

Instead of running from the pain (which falls suddenly, like a storm), find something beautiful. The pain at first hides beauty (“hides the green in an April shower”), but do not let that dissuade you. “Glut thy sorrow on a morning rose.” And if your love is angry with you, even in that see her beauty.

This seems strange: We have not answered the question, “Why?”

2.
But when the melancholy fit shall fall
Sudden from heaven like a weeping cloud,
That fosters the droop-headed flowers all,
And hides the green hill in an April shroud;
Then glut thy sorrow on a morning rose,
Or on the rainbow of the salt sand-wave,
Or on the wealth of globed peonies;
Or if thy mistress some rich anger shows,
Emprison her soft hand, and let her rave,
And feed deep, deep upon her peerless eyes. 20

Why should you not not run from sorrow, or look away from beauty? Because “Beauty … must die.” Sorrow dwells with Beauty. But not merely Beauty will die, Joy, and Pleasure. Pleasure will turn to poison in the time it takes for a bee to sip at a flower.

And even in the Temple of Delight, Melancholy has a powerful presence, a “sovran shrine.” But this knowledge of the deep sorrow which lurks in the Temple of Delight and dwells with Beauty is only known by someone who is willing to accept Joy. The one who can truly taste Joy and see Beauty, will also be the one who can know the true nature of melancholy.

Keats is pointing to a manner of life, which goes beyond mere breathing and existence. Rather, he is seeking to know what is actually taking place in this world: A world of unimaginable Beauty, a world under a curse. In this we can see the turn of Romanticism, which sought to restore human feeling (not just emotion) to a culture which was praising a rather mechanical reason.

It is also interesting in comparison to our culture which treats sorrow or melancholy as a disease (and certainly there are people who suffer brutally with extreme bouts of depression. But we treat even the normal sadness which is part of life as something which must be avoided at all costs. And so, Keats’ poem is inexplicable in our culture.

3.
She dwells with Beauty—Beauty that must die;
And Joy, whose hand is ever at his lips
Bidding adieu; and aching Pleasure nigh,
Turning to poison while the bee-mouth sips:
Ay, in the very temple of Delight
Veil’d Melancholy has her sovran shrine,
Though seen of none save him whose strenuous tongue
Can burst Joy’s grape against his palate fine;
His soul shall taste the sadness of her might,
And be among her cloudy trophies hung.

John Keats: Poems Published in 1820 .

Edward Taylor, Meditation 38.3, What a thing is man?

26 Saturday Mar 2022

Posted by memoirandremains in Edward Taylor

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Edward Taylor, Last Judgment, Meditation 38, Perfect law, poem, Poem Analysis, Poetry, Poetry Analysis

Third & Fourth Stanza

Soft; blemish not this golden bench, or place

Here is no bribe, nor colorings to hide

Nor pettifogger to befog the case 15

But justice hath her glory here well tried.

Her spotless law all spotted cases tends

Without respect or disrespect them ends.

God’s Judge, himself; and Christ attorney is

The Holy Ghost registerer is found. 20

Angels the sergeants are, all creatures kiss

The book and do as evidences abound.

All cases pass according to pure law

And in the sentence is no fret, nor flaw.

We have moved to the court. The participants are noted:

God is judge.

Christ ,attorney

Holy Ghost, bailiff; court reporter (registerer)

Angels bring the parties in

All creature is produced as witness and evidence.

God’s judgment is perfect:

First, there is no corruption: “no bribe”.

Second, no bias: “nor colorings to hide”. Related, God is no respecter of persons: rich and poor have the same law. Lev. 19:15; James 2:1

Third, no lawyer can obfuscate the truth, “no pettifogger”. Bayer Cropscience AG v. Dow Agrosciences LLC (D. Del., Mar. 13, 2015, Civil No. 12-256 (RMB/JS)) [pp. 11-12] (“As such, it argues, this evidence supports Bayer’s understanding that MS Tech’s commercialization with Dow infringed its retained patents. Bayer pettifogs. This argument is a red-herring and must be put to rest.”)

Fourth, there is sufficient evidence “all creatures … do as evidences abound.”

Fifth, all adhere to the decision, “all creatures kiss the book.”

Sixth, the decision is just, “But justice hath her glory here well tried.”

Seventh, all is tried to a perfect law

Her spotless law all spotted cases tends

Without respect or disrespect them ends.

And

All cases pass according to pure law

And in the sentence is no fret, nor flaw.

These statements are all in answer to the question of the second stanza:

But flesh complains. What right for this? Let’s know

For right or wrong, I can’t appear unto’t.

And shall a sentence pass on such a suit?

That is the purpose of the opening word, “Soft.” Be quiet, speak softly. What you are saying makes no sense. You ask, How can this judgment be fair? Well, let us look to the court: The judge is perfect. The law is perfect. The record is perfect. The evidence is perfect. The lawyer is perfect.

Well, then what complaint is left?

As a final note, the couplet on these two stanzas work well musically and rhetorically:

Her spotless law all spotted cases tends

Without respect or disrespect them ends.

We have alliteration as a product of the repetition and reversal: the law is without defect, “spotless law”. The cases are of defective parties, “spotted cases.” The near rhyme of “law all” produces a sound chiasm l-aw – aw – l which holds the spotless-spotted together.

And

All cases pass according to pure law

And in the sentence is no fret, nor flaw.

Here the the last words, “no fret nor flaw” work quite well also. The no-fr, nor-fl create very close sounds which parallel meaning.

Psalm 19:7–14 (AV)

⁷The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. ⁸The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes. ⁹The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether. ¹⁰More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. ¹¹Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward. ¹²Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults. ¹³Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression. ¹⁴Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer.

Edward Taylor, Meditation 38.2, What a thing is man?

25 Friday Mar 2022

Posted by memoirandremains in Edward Taylor, Job

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Edward Taylor, Job, poem, Poem Analysis, Poetry, Poetry Analysis

Second Stanza

How do thy angels lay before thine eye?

My deeds both white and black I daily do?

How doth thy court thou panellst there them try?

But flesh complains. What right for this? Let’s know

For right or wrong, I can’t appear unto’t.

And shall a sentence pass on such a suit?

How can I appear before the tribunal of God? How even do angels appear before God? This first question is a bit obscure, but I believe it an allusion to a question from Job. And that allusion provides an opening to understand this stanza.

The story of Job concerns the Accuser (“the satan”) appearing before God. He twice challenges God concerning Job saying that Job only obeys because God is good to Job. God permits the accuser to strip Job of his children, his wealth, his physical well-being. Job’s friends appear to comfort Job and tell him: You are being punished because you have sinned. You need to repent.

I have heard in a series of lectures that Job’s friends take on the position of the accuser against Job. Part of the evidence come Job 4, where the first friend Eliphaz claims to have heard a mysterious spirit tell him that God finds no one right:

Job 4:12–21 (AV)

¹²Now a thing was secretly brought to me, and mine ear received a little thereof. ¹³In thoughts from the visions of the night, when deep sleep falleth on men, ¹⁴Fear came upon me, and trembling, which made all my bones to shake. ¹⁵Then a spirit passed before my face; the hair of my flesh stood up: ¹⁶It stood still, but I could not discern the form thereof: an image was before mine eyes, there was silence, and I heard a voice, saying, ¹⁷Shall mortal man be more just than God? shall a man be more pure than his maker? ¹⁸Behold, he put no trust in his servants; and his angels he charged with folly: ¹⁹How much less in them that dwell in houses of clay, whose foundation is in the dust, which are crushed before the moth? ²⁰They are destroyed from morning to evening: they perish for ever without any regarding it. ²¹Doth not their excellency which is in them go away? they die, even without wisdom.

The argument goes: God does not find even the elect angels pure before his eyes – which us, who are made of dust? The stanza alludes to this question: It is not as depressing as Job, the poet merely asks, What is the judgment of God on the angels (Eliphaz says God condemns the angels, which goes beyond the evidence). And if God judges the angels, what about someone like me whose actions are not all virtues: some of my acts are good, some bad.

This then leads to the development of Taylor’s thought:

But flesh complains. What right for this? Let’s know

For right or wrong, I can’t appear unto’t.

And shall a sentence pass on such a suit?

Stated vernacularly: “how is this fair?” How can God judge when: I’m flesh, what I am I to do? This also is Job’s question in response to the condemnation of his friends:

Job 9:1–12 (AV)

1 Then Job answered and said, 2 I know it is so of a truth: but how should man be just with God? 3 If he will contend with him, he cannot answer him one of a thousand. 4 He is wise in heart, and mighty in strength: who hath hardened himself against him, and hath prospered? 5 Which removeth the mountains, and they know not: which overturneth them in his anger. 6 Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble. 7 Which commandeth the sun, and it riseth not; and sealeth up the stars. 8 Which alone spreadeth out the heavens, and treadeth upon the waves of the sea. 9 Which maketh Arcturus, Orion, and Pleiades, and the chambers of the south. 10 Which doeth great things past finding out; yea, and wonders without number. 11 Lo, he goeth by me, and I see him not: he passeth on also, but I perceive him not. 12 Behold, he taketh away, who can hinder him? who will say unto him, What doest thou?

What we have in this stanza is an abbreviation of Job’s quandary: Who can stand before God’s judgment? And if that is so, then what can I do? Taylor does not go as far as Job’s friends, but he does see the ultimate judgment which is coming and asks, how will I survive this judgment?

As Christian in Pilgrim’s Progress says to Evangelist:

He answered, “Sir, I perceive, by the book in my hand, that I am condemned to die, and after that to come to judgment, Heb. 9:27; and I find that I am not willing to do the first, Job 16:21, 22, nor able to do the second.” Ezek. 22:14.

Edward Taylor, Meditation 38 “What a thing is man?”

24 Thursday Mar 2022

Posted by memoirandremains in Edward Taylor

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Edward Taylor, law, mercy, poem, Poem Analysis, Poetry, Poetry Analysis, Psalm 8

Meditation 38

1 John 2:1

Oh! What a thing is man? Lord, who am I

That thou shouldst give him thy law? (Oh, golden line)

To regulate his thoughts, words , life thereby.

And judge him wilt thereby too in thy time.

A court of justice thou in heaven holdst

To try his case while here he’s housed on mold.

Prosody:

OH! what a THING is MAN? LORD who am I

That THOU shouldst give HIM thy LAW? (Oh, GOLDen LINE)

To REGulATE his THOUGTS, WORDS, LIFE thereby.

And JUDGE him WILT THEREby TOO in thy TIME.

A COURT of JUSTice THOU in HEAven HOLDST

To TRY his CASE while HERE he’s HOUSED on MOLD.

I take the first syllable as accented due to the exclamation point; this shifts the accent from the first syllable. This changes tracks the cadence of the original question, “What a thing is man?” The paired accents with the pause: MAN? LORD place the weight of the questions on the word “LORD.” The accent on LAW with a question mark (and double pause) create a secondary focus on LAW.

The three accented syllables in a row in the third line draw attention to the scope of the law.

The fourth line is interesting because it lacks a “thou” before “wilt”, which must be then implied by the accent on “wilt.”

The couplet follows standard iambic.

Motto Verse

The motto comes from 1 John 2:

¹My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: ²And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

³And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.

1 John 2:1–3 (AV) The imagery comes from a law court:

“CASE I. Here is comfort in case of discouraging fear.—“O,” saith a believer, “I fear, my grace is not armour of proof; I fear, the cause will go against me at the last day.” Indeed, so it would, if thou wert out of Christ: but as, in our law-courts, the client hath his attorney or advocate to plead for him, so every believer, by virtue of the interest, hath Christ to plead his cause for him: “If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.” (1 John 2:1.) What, though Satan be the accuser, if Christ be the Advocate? Christ never lost any cause [that] he pleaded. Nay, his very pleading alters the nature of the cause: Christ will show the debt-book crossed with his own blood; and it is no matter what is charged, if all be discharged. Here is a believer’s comfort:—his Judge will be his Advocate.”

James Nichols, Puritan Sermons, vol. 5 Peter Vinke, “Of Original Sin Inhering” (Wheaton, IL: Richard Owen Roberts, Publishers, 1981), 470. And:

“So saith the Apostle 1 John 2:2. I write unto you, little Children, that ye sin not, and if any man sin, (that I shall take notice of by and by) we have an Advocate with the Father, and he is the propitiation for our sins: So that when an ungodly man sins, there the sentence of death comes out against him; But the Lord saith concerning his Children, Let their souls be pardoned, for I have found a ransom: Thou sayest, the best have their sin; True, but one man hath a ransom, hath a price paid for his sin, and thou hast none, none for ought thou knowest: In that condition wherein thou art, thou canst not know that thou hast any: Here’s the difference between Gods dealing with his Children & others, one sins, and the Lord acknowledges a propitiation presently, a ransom, a price, a pardon that’s laid in; but he acknowledges it not for thee.”

Jeremiah Burroughs, “The Fourth Sermon,” in The Difference between the Spots of the Godly, and of the Wicked (London: N.P., 1668), 90–91.

Summary:

Who am I, that you, God, would give me to me the law by which you judge me? You give it to me in this life that it will regulate the course of my life. And this law is good, it is “a golden line” (measure).

Allusions:

Line 1

Oh! What a thing is man?

3 When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; 4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? 5 For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.

Psalm 8:3–5 (AV) A common scornful jibe of some atheists is “Do you really think God cares about something as insignificant as human beings on out of how who knows how many planets in a universe of trillions of stars?” Same question in the Psalm.

Line 1-2

Lord, who am I

That thou shouldst give him thy law?

David has inquired of Nathan the prophet as to whether David can be a “house” (a temple) for God. Up until that time, Israel had a tent, not a fixed building. God replies that He will build a “house” (a dynasty) for David and that an everlasting king will come from that line (the Messiah, the Christ). David replies to this news:

¹⁸Then went king David in, and sat before the LORD, and he said, Who am I, O Lord GOD? and what is my house, that thou hast brought me hitherto? ¹⁹And this was yet a small thing in thy sight, O Lord GOD; but thou hast spoken also of thy servant’s house for a great while to come. And is this the manner of man, O Lord GOD? ²⁰And what can David say more unto thee? for thou, Lord GOD, knowest thy servant.

2 Samuel 7:18–20 (AV) This is an interesting allusion: In the poem, the immediate concern is the “law” why the motto is the Christ’s advocacy. This allusion ties the ideas together.

Line 3:

To REGulATE his THOUGTS, WORDS, LIFE thereby.

This is a concept which is found in various ways throughout the Bible, particularly the Old (or better, First) Testament. For example:

5 Behold, I have taught you statutes and judgments, even as the LORD my God commanded me, that ye should do so in the land whither ye go to possess it. 6 Keep therefore and do them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people. 7 For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the LORD our God is in all things that we call upon him for? 8 And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?

Deuteronomy 4:5–8 (AV)

7 And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. 8 And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes.

Deuteronomy 6:7–8 (AV)

Lines 4-6

And JUDGE him WILT THEREby TOO in thy TIME.

A COURT of JUSTice THOU in HEAven HOLDST

To TRY his CASE while HERE he’s HOUSED on MOLD.

The matter of a last judgment is found a few places. This is perhaps most particular behind these lines:

12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

Romans 2:12 (AV)

As for the housed on mold – or made of dirt—there is a lovely image Psalm 104. Rather than being an image of our disgrace (we are just dirt and water, a bag of chemicals), the image of condition is a picture of God’s mercy to us:

⁶The LORD executeth righteousness and judgment for all that are oppressed. ⁷He made known his ways unto Moses, his acts unto the children of Israel. ⁸The LORD is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy. ⁹He will not always chide: neither will he keep his anger for ever. ¹⁰He hath not dealt with us after our sins; nor rewarded us according to our iniquities. ¹¹For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them that fear him. ¹²As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us. ¹³Like as a father pitieth his children, so the LORD pitieth them that fear him. ¹⁴For he knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust.

Psalm 103:6–14 (AV)

Edward Taylor, Meditation 37, the conclusion

19 Saturday Mar 2022

Posted by memoirandremains in Edward Taylor, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Edward Taylor, Edward Taylor Meditation 37, poem, Poem Analysis, Poetry, Poetry Analysis

Am I hopped on thy knees, yet not at ease? 31

Sunk in thy bosom, yet thy heart not meet?

Lodged in thy arms yet all thing little please?

Sung sweetly, yet find not this singing sweet?

Set at thy table, yet scare taste a dish 35

Delicious? Hugged, yet seldom gain a kiss?

Why, Lord, why thus? Shall I question call

All relation to thyself? I know

It is no gay to please a child withal

But is the ground whence privileges flow. 40

Then ope the sluice: let something spout on me.

Then I shall in better temper be.

The closing stanzas now continue with the petition. Line 41 begins a series of balanced questions: If I possess such a state, then why do I not experience the benefit of that state?

The images all revolve around the state of being a child:

Sitting on a parent’s lap, held against the chest, arms folded around the child, a lullaby sung to child. Then, the child is at the table; then hugged. But the child is not at ease, his heart is troubled. There is food, but nothing to eat. I am hugged, but not kissed.

The structure of the questions is emphasized by starting each line with an accented syllable from line 32 through 36.

This leads to the existential query

Why, Lord, why thus?

Why do I know myself to be in this relationship to you, Lord; and still do not experience the benefits and joys of that relationship? What has gone wrong?

Shall I question call

All relation to thyself? I know

It is no gay to please a child withal

But is the ground whence privileges flow.

Should I question my relationship to you? It is not a trifle (a gay, “nosegay”?) to distract a child. To be in a relationship with you is a claim, a ground for privileges. He is pleading here the promise of 1 Corinthians 3:22-23, “All things are yours … and you are Christ’s.”

The poem is pray based upon a promise: Here God is a promise. You promise to that all things are mine, and that I am Christ’s. If I am Christ’s, if I am a child in my father’s lap, then I plead the promise, the status: This is the ground upon which I claim my privilege:

Then ope the sluice: let something spout on me.

Then I shall in better temper be.

Open to me your grace, let me experience you grace, then I will not continue to be so distraught. This poem is interesting because it ends with poet less hopeful than many other poems. He is distraught at the end. He plainly says he is in a poor temper.

I find this interesting because it shows the honesty of these meditations. To end on this note is not a public posture of piety or godliness. The tone is almost surly. I say it is “honest”, not because a negative expression is more honest, but because one would display this unhappiness as a show of piety or godliness.

There is a false piety which is always pleased. But the Scripture is filled with such wrestling. “How long O Lord, will you forget about me forever?”

We should note that Taylor has not despaired. He merely feels God is distant, and that distance merely draws him to plead with God. The difficulty drives him to seek relief from God.