« הקודםהמשך »
liturgy and articles, he cannot be a fit prejudice in his favour by printing his case person for the ministry of the established for distribution more than two months Church, This point being ascertained, ago, (to say nothing of the public controdue inquiry is then made as to his pro- versy in which I have had no part,) I ficiency: and the Bishop's chaplain will at have the stronger claim on your lordships any time assure all persons who doubt on for a patient hearing, while I am pleading that subject, that such inquiry is carried as my cause in your lordships' honse. far, as can possibly be desired. And with * From the recital of the petition it aprespect to examination in the Evidencés pears, that in the summer of 1820, the of Christianity, the Bishop's chaplain can petitioner, as rector of Blatherwick, in the inform them, not only that such examina- county of Northampton, vominated a pertion has never been neglected, but that son to that curacy, who consequently apthe Bishop bias printed for the use of those plied for my license; that the license was who apply to him for ordination, A refused him, because he refused to be ex. summary statement of the principal evi. amined, as required by the 48th canon; dences for the divine origin of Christi- that the petitioner then appealed to the anity.'” P. 30.
Archbishop, who decided for the right of
examination, which had been contested, Having thus done what we consi first by the petitioner's intended curate, der merely as an act of private jus
and then by the petitioner himself. llere tice, we proceed to a task of a more
the petitioner stops short in his recital. general nature. And if any of our
But your lordships should be informed of readers should suppose that they
what was done, on the reccipt of his
grace's answer. The petitioner nominated are sufficiently acquainted with the another person to the curacy of Blathersubject, and need not take the trou- wick, this second nomination bearing date ble of proceeding farther in the con the 20th of September, 1820. The pertroversy, we can only say to such a
son then nominated submitted without hereader, that we ourselves had a very
sitation to the examination required, which inadequate idea of the treatment amined, proved very satisfactory. And
as I expected from his readiness to be erwhich the Bishop of Peterborough as the testimony to his moral character has experienced, until
was no les satisfactory, than the proof his edition of his speech. which he had given of his sound doctrine, The pamphlets and reviews of his he was licensed to the curacy of Blatherlordship's adversaries contrived to wick. He is still the licensed curate confound two questions which are
there; I have never heard aby complaint in themselves sufficiently distinct, that the parishioners have no desire to
of him; and I bave reason to believe, viz. the bishop's right to examine; change hin. and the particular examination which “ Your lordships therefore may judge of he bad thought proper to adopt. my surprise, when on the 29th of March, The newspaper reports of the de. 1821, more than six months after the last bate in the House of Lords did not nomination, I received a letter from the convey a correct idea of Mr. Ne- petitioner, informing me, that he intended ville's complaint; and the official pated curate (that is, his first nominated
to bring my refusal to license bis nomicorrespondence to which we shall curate) by petition
before the legislature. return by and bye, served only to But from a comparison of this petition augment our perplexity and doubt, with the letters which the petitioner wrote by detailing a different grievance to the Archbishop, and which he himself from that which became the subject has printed, I now perceive that the obof petition. Under these circum- ject, for which he then contended, is at stances Bishop Marsh is at least of examination for a curate's license
present entirely abandoned. The riglit entitled to a hearing, and the most which he then contested, is now uoequiintolerant of his enemies must be yocally admitted. He says in this peticompelled to confess, that he speaks tion, that a bishop's right to examine a as he has always done, fully and curate, which had been the subject of a fairly to the point.
former correspondence, is not intended
to be denied.'. He now objects only to My Lords,
the mode of examination, or, as he calls it As the petitioner has already excited a in his petition, “ the nature of that pécu
liar mode.” Now, my lords, my mode of fore, the mode of examination to the disexamination is a very common mode ; an cussion of the bishop: and, viy lords, it examination by question and answer. I has wisely done so. For in every diocese, propose certain questions, as well to cu the bishop is most likely to be acquainted rates, as to candidates for holy orders, with the peculiar wants of his diocese ; that from the answers to those questions, most likely to understand, and best able I may learn the religions opinions of the to judge of irregularities either in doctrine foriner before I licence them; and the reli or in discipline, to which his diocese may gious opinions of the latter, before I or be exposed ; best alile, therefore, to dedain them. And, my lords, it is very peces termme what kind of examinations will sary that a bishop should obtain this know most effectually check them. The exa. ledge. But then the questions--the ques mination required for a curate's licence, is tions, which I employ for this purpose, required for the purpose of ascertaining, whether they are loo searching for those whether bis doctrine is " sound doctrine;" who dislike them, or whatever else may the expression used in a curate's license. be the canse, are questions, which, ac Now the mode of examination, which is cording to the petitioner, ought not to be best ada pted to such a purpose, is unendured. He prays your lordships to question ably that which is best calculated take them into your grave considera-' to detect deviations from sound doctrine. tion," and to afford such relief to those And this is the object of my examination who are affected by them, as to your lord qnestions. These questions, my lords, are sluips' wisdom nay seens good.
well adapted to the present wants of my “ The case therefore now submitted to diocese : they operate as a check on some your lordships is a case of pure theology. partially prevailing irregularities : and in For the questions, which the petitioner the use of these questions I exercise, I besubmits to your grave consideration, re lieve very usefully exercise, the discretion late entirely to the doctrines contained in entrusted to me by the 48th cavon. the Liturgy and Articles. Now, my lords, “ But let us suppose for the sake of argnan inquiry into subjects of this discription, ment, that these questions are objectionis an inquiry, which I believe your lord able. My lords, I make this supposition ships' house has never instituted on any merely for the sake of argumeot. For the former oecasi on. The Liturgy and Arti very same questions, which I now use, I cles derive indeed their authority, as stand- have used almost ever since I have been a ards of faith, from acts of parliament, bishop: and through they have been wellwhich require subscription to them. But considered by very sound divines, I have if it were deemed expedient to revise the never lieard any objection to them, till a Liturgy and Articles, the revision would clamour was excited against then about be referred either to the convocation, or ten months ago, by a few persons in the to commissioners specially appointed by diocese of Peterborough. Bit even on the the crown. For an inquiry into the truth supposition, that they are objectionable, or falsehood of religious doctrines is not (which however I contidently deny,) I the proper busjness of either house of par again ask your lordsbips, whether it would liament: though it would be presump be consistent with the constitution of the tuons to say, what they shall, or shall establislied Church to grant the prayer of not do.
this petition. The canons are laws for “Let us suppose then, that the said the bishops and clergy, which having pastheological inquiry were instituted in your sed the two houses of convocation, were lordships' honse, and let is further snp ratified by the royal assent. If therefore pose, that the inquiry eaded in this result, the 48th canou shall be so altered, as to that it would be very desirable to make remove the discretionary power which it an alteration in regard to the said ques yow leares to the bishops, the alteration tions, I apprehend, my lords, even in this must be made by the same authority, which case, that your lordships' bouse could not, made the cavon itself. And surely, my consistently with the constitution of the lords, as long as that canon remains in established Church, interfere for the pur füree, yon will not endeavoar to deprive a pose of correcting them,; and if not for bishop of that discretionary power, which the purpose of correcting them, much less he exercises by virtue of that canon, for the entire removal of them. My lords, “ But, my lords, the prayer of this peti. I will state the grounds of this opinion. tion is not confied to examinations for a
“ The 48th canon, which requires an curate's license. It goes much further. examination of curates before they are The petitioner prays also the interference licensed, bas prescribed no mode of ex of your lordships in the examination of amination whatever. It has left, there candidates for holy orders. The words REMEMBRANCER, No. 32.
6 candidates for lioly orders are the words, which document, as he firther says, contains with which the prayer of this petition is a pew standardof faith. Now the document, concluded. Now, my lords, I believe as he calls it,coasists of a string of questions; that since the Church has existed, no tem and subscription to questions would be so poral authority, either before or since the absurd, that no man in bis sober senses could reformation, has ever interfered with the require it. The name of the person exbishops of this country, as to their wode amined can be affixed only to his answers. of exainination for holy orders. Since If therefore the signing of his name to his then I have already shown, that consisi own answers is a subscription to a new ently with the constitution of the esta standard of faith, it is at the utmost only blished Church, your lordships could not a subscription to his own standard of faith. interfere even with an examination for a But, my lords, the signature to those an. cnrate's license, it follows à fortiori that swers is required for a very different, a the prayer of the petition cannot be very obvious, and a very common purpose. granted, as it equally effects the examina. It is required perely as an acknowledg. tions for holy orders. I can come there. ment on the part of the person examined, fore to no other conclusion, than that this that the answers, which are sent to me, are petition onght oot to be received, let the really his answers. And this signature allegations of it be what they may." P.5. which neitlier is, nor can be, required for
any other purpose, than merely to authenBut the bishop does not leave the
ticate the answers, is represented by the question here; he proceeds to put petitioner, as subscription to a document the issue of it upon the allegations setting forth a new standard of faith. alone, and his reasoning under this Really my lords, I could not have suphead is not less conclusive than the posed, tbat so gross a perversion of the passage that has already been ex
truth could ever have found its way into tracted. Having asserted and shewn
a petition to the House of Lords.
I will now consider what proof the that there is only one possible mo.
petitioner can bring, that my standard of tive which he can have in the pro- doctrine really is a new, a private, and an posal of his questions, namely, arbitrary standard. He bestows indeed to ascertain, from the answers to these titles, and very liberally bestows theni, whether the religious opi- them, on my examination questions: but nions of the person examined ac
the calling of a thing either by this or by
that name does not determine its real chacord with the doctrines of the established Church, and having, proved my lords, I am really at a loss to compre
racter, me:s it be rightly so called. And that the petitioner could not be ig- bend, how a string of questions can be connorant of this motive, his lordship sidered as a standard at all. They afford proceeds to confute the allegations indeed a test vi' doctrine, inasmuch as which he has enumerated.
the answers to them are tried, but tried
by no other standard than the standard set « Such my lords, are the allegations on forth by the authority of the church. It which the prayer of this petition is found. is such a perversion of terms to give the ed. And if they contained one particle of name of standard to nere questions, that truth, it would be the duty, not of your the charge preferred by the petitioner, if lordships, but of the convocation to inter it can be establislied at all can be estabfere. It would be the daty of the convo. lished only by a consideration of the ancation to compel a Bisliop, who could be
Even if the questions lead to the 80 regardless of bis most solenn obliga- answers, pay, my lords, if it be true that tions, to return to the standard, which lie the questions imply the answers, it will had thus disgracefully forsaken. But, my still be the answers, and not the questions, lords, I have not forsaken the standard of wbich must be made the subjects of trial. the Established Church. My offence con After all then the matter at issue comes sists in my unwearied endeavours to pre. simply to this. Do I try the answers to vent its being forsaken. Those endeavours my questions by the old and established have been successful: or your lordships standard, the litargy and articles: or do I would never have heard of this petition. try them by some new, some private, some
But, my lords, I must not merely deny arbitrary standard? My lords, if no credit the charges : I must confute them. Aud is to be given to my own solemn declarafirst, I will reply to the charge of requiring tion, that I acknowledge no other standspbscription, " subscription" (as the pe ard of faith, than the standard of the titioner says) " to the entire document,” Established Church, a standard which I
acknowledge, because it accords with holy. His lordship then adverts to what Scripture; and if that solemn declaration the coinplainant had called a priderives no support from the express refere
vate interpretation of the articles, ences to the Liturgy and Articles, cotained
and observes that, in every ebapter, under which those questions are arranged, it was incumbent “ If the petitioner, by his objections to on the petitioner to produce some ex
private interpretation, would exclucle exaample, in wliich the answers to my ques mination in the Liturgy and Articles; if he tions really had been tried by some new,
means, that Bishops should be satisfied somne private, some arbitrary standard.
with subscription to the Liturgy and If such examples exist, they are very easily Articles, and never ventnre to ask any found. My examination questions are questions about the meaning of them, he not answered in a corner. I do not give argues in opposition to the right, which he them to be answered in my presence, and had previously admitted. He forgets also, then pocket the paper, without giving the
that the canons reaire both snbscription person examined an opportunity of making and examination And, my lords if candi. a transcript. No, my lords, the questions dates for holy orders are not examined, are always sent to the persons to be ex and closely examined, as to their religious amined, who give the answers' at their opinions. if amidst the prevailing irreguleisure. Il, on the receipt of the answers, larity of doctrine, subscription to the I find any, which are at variance with the Liturgy and Articles is made the sole cridoctrines of the church, I never reject with- terion, by which a Bishop shull judge of ont previous remoustrance. I shew in sound doctrine, a similar, though not the what manner the answer differs from the
same effect, will be produced in this doctrine of the Liturgy and Articles; I country, which lias been already produced have somelimes succeeded in recalling in some parts of Switzerland, where there persons to the standard, which they had
are clergy, who subscribe to the creed of anadvisedly forsaken: and those only have Calvin, and preach the doctrines of Sobeen finally rejected who have persevered cinus." P. 24. in answers, which were irreconcileable with the doctrines of the church, as ex
The conclusion acquaints us with pressed in its Liturgy and Articles, accord the effects that the questions have ing to their literal and grammatical mean- produced. ing. My conduct therefore towards the persons examined has always been so open “ As this prayer is concluded in so soand undisguised, that if the charge pre lemo a manner, as might induce your lordferred by the petitioner were true, a proof ships to conclude, that by the granting of of it might easily be given. No proof has this prayer, the wliole body of clergy in been given, and onder such circumstances my diocese, as we'l as candidates for holy the absence of proof shews the impossi. orders, would be relieved from a grievous bility of proof. I will not retort on the burden, I will briefly state to your lordpetitioner and say, that by bis endeavours Slips the amount of the evil, (if it be an to excite suspicion as to my standard of evil,) which has been hitherto produced by doctrine, he has only excited suspicion in these questions. During the whole time regard to his own: but this, my lords, I that I have used these questions, the numwill confidently say, that I have never in ber of persons, who have been refused ora single instance departed from the stand dination in consequence of their answers ard of the Established Church. And if I to them, amounts to one. The number of have never employed any other standard, curates, who have been refused a license than that which is set forth by the antho in conseqnence of their answers to these rity of the Church, the remaining charge, qoestions, amounts to one also. The numthat I have set up a standard, which super- ber of corates, who have been refused a sedes the Liturgy and Articles falls of license, because they refused to answer at itself to the ground.
all, amounts to two ; namely, the intended My lords, I have now shewn, that the curate of Blatherwick, and a person who three principal allegations, the allegations came into my diocese about the same time, on which the prayer of the petition de for the pumpose of becoming curate of pends, namely, that I employ a new stand Burton Latimer. But as the right of ex. ard of faith, that I require subscription amination, which these two persons conto this new standard of faith, and that this tested, is now acknowledged by the peti. dew standard supersedes the Liturgy and tioner himself, the refusal to license them Articles, are allegations utterly devoid of can no longer be considered as a grievance. truth." P. 17,
There remains then one corate, and one
candidate for orders, And this is the Mr. Green have proceeded, the very mighty grievauce for which the house of appearance of episcopal jurisdiction lords is to be set in inotion. " It is true that these qnestions may, in taken away, and the clergy would
in the Church of England would be one respect, have tended to the exclusion of more. They may have prevented applica- be governed by orators, newspaper tións, as well for ordination, as for licen- editors, and rev ewers. Let us be ses ;' because wlierever an irregularity of thankful that the recent decision of doctriue exists, these questions seldomi the House of Lords has at least defail to detect it. But lierein lies their uti- layed the arrival of so grievous a lity ; a utility, which is proved by the calamity; and let us hope that it very clamour, that bas been raised against thein. For though they are distiked by will also tend to undeceive the misThe petitioner, and by others who think
taken men who look forward to such like bimself, I can coi fidentiy assert, that ao event as a blessing rather than a they are approved by the great body of my clergy; approved, my lords, because
That such are the sentiments of they are a check on fanaticism, from which
Mr. Neville we do not venture to the Church, in this country, has more to
affirm: but that they ought to be apprehend, than from any danger, that
his sentiments if he has any regard pow besets it.
“ My lords, I will conclude by advert- to consistency, is as certain, and as ing to the two principal points, on which demonstrable as any fact of the I have shewn, that the fate of this petition kind can be. Bishop Marsh has re. mast rest. I have shewn in the first place, ferred in his speech to Mr. Neville's that the prayer of it could not he granted printed case; and we shall take the by your lordships, consistently with the constitution of the Established Church, liberty of making some remarks whatever were the allegations on which it upon its nature and contents. It were founded. And I have shewn in the contains, under the title of - Official second place, that even if the issue of it Correspondence” the letters which be put on the allegations, the allegations, passed between Mr. Green, (the on which the prayer of the petition entirely curate nominated by Mr. Neville) depeuds, are entirely destitute of truth."
and the Bishop, and also the letters P. 26.
between Mr. Neville aud the Arch• The effect of this manly statement bishop of Canterbury. Extracts was such as might naturally be ex. from the Canons significantly itapected; only three peers assented to licised are prefixed to the whole. the motion made by Lord King, for Notes explanatory, .controversial, receiving Mr. Neville's petition, and and criminatory, are appended with even they did not venture to divide no sparing hand; anl the conthe bouse upon the question. The clusion consists of a comment exBishop's right to examine has been tending to ten or a dozen pages, in unequivocally admitted: and the which Mr. Neville recapitulates and mode of examination has been left, enforces the arguments of his curate, as the Canons of the Church wisely and contends that a Bishop has no ordain, to the discretion of each in- right to examine a curate coming dividual Prelate, It is not neces from another diocese, with the usual sary that difference of opinion testimonials. This is Mr. Neville's should cease to exist respecting Case. It was never published; it the exercise of that discretion in was never advertised; it was never particular cases-nor do we believe sold — But it was carried about in ihạt a temperate and respectful ex the pockets of pious Menibers of pression of such differences can ever Parliament, and distributed as exprove injurious to the Church or to purte statements usually are. the Beuch. But if every clergyman These steps were probably adoptwho may happen to dislike the de- ed out of delicacy to the Bishop of cisions of his diocesan, were to pro. Peterborough; but they also secured ceed, as Mr. Neville, and bis curate the following advantages—The ex: