Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016 https://archive.org/details/lettertoherbertmOOclar A LETTER TO HERBERT MARSH, D.D. F.R.S. 8(c. S(c. STc. 31n Eeplp to cettam flDtJgertjationg CONTAINED IN HIS PAMPHLET RELATIVE TO The Hritish and Foreign Bible Society. 1 1 I By EDWARD DANIEL'^ CLARKE, LL.D. ** He would not pretend to place himself on a level with that gentleman, either in natural endotvments or literary attainments, but on this point he should have no fear fully to meet his objections, to which a complete answer might be given even by a child, provided only that child were a Christian.’* Speech of Lord Francis Osborne, Thursday, Dec, 12, 1811. CAMBRIDG E, PRINTED AND SOLD BY FRANCIS H0D80N ; SOLD ALSO BY THE BOOKSELLERS OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDG'! ; BY CADELL AND DAVIES, BOOKSELLERS, STRAND; BY T. PAYNE, PALL-MALL, LONDON ; Ac. &c. &c. 1812. iiaxTaa .g 5i •! .« O THM5i3H ■it i.‘ wanu^intiCCi miiJna ot nt Urt ■ -T ‘ ■ **■ l< 'ifxvni^ #»'. 't ' r-iV.- V ' ! ,:• tVi i4iBna’iu4 * - . 1. 1 i» f V. iu.«iU*o "ir;! te .n.j'.i - ">hi .•ninnH >A» ■ , w ki rn m n ^ ; k cw , -V.; , a \0 r-..,-. a| vtM -m'' - i- 7-* ■ 1,-Xi ^‘v,. ,V-i''. v ' tiri*S“.»’i Av', .*•'. ."1 •'• ^ '. ■ . ■ — - 4 - iiT 4< i4 :>Tt= S n '■« 1 F '*V. •■ ■ • .'.. .. «>.' !Hi! U 3 T> .-/'T • vj , •, <•, r. • /,’i ' ;;Ht iSOAJa 53 ^ ■: *■; i. 'j f .. , , .'i ;> ,*.»«O^SaOUg ; t ,.'j ftr*. J t. . >• . * :i? 0 ('Vt^As*^ ■^ViriuwTnoi i'l ^b^.‘ t^Vaow Wo »HDaoy^t^n i\i ab7>r« iAl ^«ata7> ymm ■sAT— .¥. A -Jbala'w W v&v \i ^si. ifiw yi\ b*o t^3Au«3t, i** ,1 il^n'l aifev.v» uiiv: Ui ADVERTISEMENT It is scarcely necessary to premise that the follow- ing observations were occasioned by the public in- troduction of the Author’s name * into a pamphlet, i and by animadversion attended with misrepresenta- I tion, upon the sentiments he delivered in a public * This use of the Author' s name, without his permission, was the more unwarrantable on the part of Dr. Marsh, as the most studied forbeaiance upon the occasion he alludes to, prevented the writer of this Letter from making any mention of him. There was certainly no reason to justify such reserve, after the public appeal to his writings, both by the Earl of Hardwicke, as Chairman, and by Lord Francis Osborne, Mover of the Reso- lutions ; but in seconding those Resolutions, the Author did not even allude to his “ Address ” because that production bore hig name. In order to bring forward the arguments in circulation against the Bible Society, he was therefore compelled to notice an anonymous hand-bill, circulated, not as from an individual, but with a plural expression, as from all the adversaries of the Bible Society. The circulation of the Bi£le alone is therein stated as “ THEIR OB.TECTION,” not as Dr. Marsh's objection. However, Dr. M. now claims all the honour of thifiiand-billj and of this honour no one would willingly bereave him. VI ADVERTISEMENT. assembly, in furtherance of what he conceived to be a religious duty. Upon a recent occasion, * Dr. Marsh expressed a determination “ never to decline a Controversy ” He will therefore be pleased with any thing having a tendency to gratify his favourite passion ; but much disappointed if he expect any continuance of it, in the Writer of this Letter. Having briefly discussed Dr. Marsh’s Pamphlet, in the following pages, it may now be asked, what is it Dr. Marsh is contending for ? He says he pleads for the Liturgy, f Who has decried the Liturgy ? Do the reports of the British and Foreign Bible Society decry the Liturgy ? Do they employ any language which can be interpreted to its disparagement ? Has Dr. Marsh read their reports F Has he read for ex- ample the seventh report ? If he have, does he re- collect the following passage in p. 20, of that report ; referring to a considerable grant of Bibles and Testa- ments “ to New York, for distribution by the Bible and COMMON PRAYER BOOK Society, under the patronage of Bishop Moore?” Does he recollect tlie following passage from the address of the said Bible and COMxMON PRAYER BOOK Society, in , See Letters to Mr. Lancaster, in the Morning Post. + See Inquiry, p. 45. TVhoever rejects (he Liturgy^" sa.y% he, “ a Churchman,'^ Did we need a prophet to give us thi^ information ? ADVERTISEMENT. Vll p.43, of the Appendixto the said seventh report ? viz. “ And next to the Bible which contains his revealed will, those who have established this Society have been accustomed to revere the Book of COMMON Prayer. This book, containing much of the pious sentiment and language which animated primitive martyrs, and in which they poured forth to their God and Saviour, their prayers and praises, was compiled by the care and labour of the Fathers of the Reformation in the Church of England. Universally admired for its simplicity and its pathos, it is acknow- ledged even by many who reject it, to be an affect- ing and correct display of evangelical doctrine, and ’to breathe the pure emotions of the devout soul. WHAT BETTER METHOD THEN CAN BE ADOPTED TO DISSEMINATE THE TRUTHS OF THE BIBLE, THAN BY DISPERSING A BOOK, WHICH, EXHIBITING THESE TRUTHS IN THE AFFECTING LANGUAGE OF DEVOTION, IMPRESSES THEM ON THE HEART AS WELL AS ON THE UNDER- STANDING?” Now after reading that the British and Foreign Bible Society did vote a supply of Bibles and Tes- taments to a Bible and COMMON PRAYER BOOK Society, and after reading such eulogy on the COMMON PRAYER BOOK in the Appen- dix to that Society's Report, I appeal to all the viii ADVERTISEMENT. remaining simplicity in Dr. Marsh’s mind, whether such a Society can be justly charged with design- ing to accomplish as a measure of ultimate utility, THE OMISSION OF THE LITURGY? But now comes the most marvellous part of the story — Now Dr. Marsh open wide your eyes, while, after your example, even larger capitals than your own, render prominent the FACT— • a fact which your concern for the Liturgy and fears for its safety from the machinations of the Dissenters, it is hoped you will duly appreciate — that the measure now brought under your notice WAS PROPOSED BY A DISSENTER. So much then in testimony of the respect borne towards our Liturgy, even by Dissenters themselves — so much in testimony of their liberal conduct in opposition to the hostility so unnecessa- rily manifested towards the Members of that body. Do we become “ ivorse Churchmen" by rendering justice- to whom justice is so deservedly due? Where then will justification be found for the outcry thus raised against them ? What is it Dr. Marsh w'ould require of Dissenters before he consents to join with them in the distribution of the Bible ? If the Dis- senter were to say “ / itill circulate a small Tract together zvith the Bible!" then might the Church- man answer, as it would be his duty to do, “ and so will 1 1" But when they both act upon egual ground. ADVERTISEMENT. in: how does it appear that the uncommented Bible would tend rather to the principles of the Dissenter than of the Churchman ? But Dr. M. seems pretty plainly to say, or to insinuate, for “ men scruple not to insinuate what they dare not assert” * that the Bible alone, without comment, HAS A TEN- DENCY TO MAKE MEN DISSENTERS!!! than which a greater Libel, or grosser insinuation against the established church, or more in unison with the tenets of Dissenters, was never before promul- gated. It is usually maintained by Churchmen that the foundation of their Creed is the pure text of sa- cred Scripture ; every other document being cha- racterized by the unavoidable infirmities of human nature. Addressing himself to the Clergy, Dr. M. enjoins them to give Prayer Books when they distribute Bibles. Is not this the practice of our Clergy in their respective parishes ? and since every parish ha» its minister, where is the evil to which he so often proposes the application of a remedy ? Is it that they assist in sending the Bible where they cannot bestow a Prayer-book ? Assuredly, this cannot be deemed an evil ! Indeed, the main purport of the pamphlet is lost from the view’ ! Where shall we seek for it ? * See Inquiry, p. 26 . "Note. Decent language, methinks, ad- dressed by a Margaret Professor to a very Reverend Dean ! X ADVERTISEMENT. Perhaps there is a passage couched in his 62d page which may possibly illustrate its object. These are the words. So long then as the British and Fo- reign Bible Society retains its present constitution, I can discover no other remedy for the evilt than that Churchmen should withdraw from it, and TRANS- FER THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS AND THEIR INFLUENCE TO THE SOCIETY FOR PRO- MOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE ! ! !” Of this Society be it added. Dr. Marsh is a member ! — That every success may attend its endeavours, is a superfluous wish for a Clergyman to express ; but measures of this kind do not seem calculated to promote its best interests. Now, as Churchmen are subscribing, and will, I am persuaded, still fur- • ther subscribe to the latter Society, even though they continue members of the former ^ I see no- thing which would be gained by the one from a de- sertion of the other. And as such desertion would not be very gracious^ nor very zvise, we must adopt Dr. Marsh’s ozvn words in apj^lication to his ozvn remedy — “ though it is considered as efectual, it is really zvorse than the disease." (See Dr. M. p. 73.) As the Author has fashioned his REPLY as nearly as he could to suit the complexion of the “ IN- QUIRY,” it was necessary to blazon the pages in a similar manner, with CAPITAL LETTERS and Italics, otherwise an insignificant obsen^ation might ADVERTISEMENT. XI sometimes pass off unheeded. “ The reader is re- quested to keep this FACT in remembrance, because we shall find it of great importance, when the views of the Society are more particularly examined.” Trumpington^ January 27 , 1813 . ix mil ♦ ■i Ui* v.MiTOi . iCM ').iiri. .X^ % j» - > >•/ ‘ r.lff?' >^IP .^IWWli V ' 9 ^ ’ *^>ff ■ffiiV.'j ■‘-■'fs.'i’ »*«•' #♦ "’.'K > » ••^»;jit^i mt'V 4 \nm f>5|*ifl' )o "A il'» i«9^ on. LjMI. ■ia^tt«’nj:ir ■ ■‘*- iW^P’A^*|*w4 c* III' .i.^Ui* iJlSfiU *< - 7 -.v;/:' * -A--' •r '.rrr-,^N *•' ^■;fer; '. •’ ■ ■ ■i©**^^* ' *• y 4# |(ftiif^Ad#W<*l >a? > ■' ^ ,iJi*V.i5 *r-^r^ Jr*' - I ! ■ 1 -*« ‘*1 ' A LETTER Sfc. Dear Sir ^5[^ou must excuse me If I avail myself of the privilege of old acquaintance, by indulging a little pleasantry excited in reading your long-pro- mised Anathema upon the Bible Society, and upon our proceedings in the Town-Hall. You have no objection, as I well know, to lay aside Gravity now and then ; and, were this not the case, it is not in my nature to discuss mere verbiage with solemnity. I Jiave another reason for treating the subject with some degree of levity. It serves to keep us all in good humour, and to steer clear of the sort of language which v'ou have addressed to my friend Mr. Dealtry in the long Note to the 77th Page, when you accuse him * of “ having stated 'u;hat he knew to he false.'* This is the more re- markable, as you commended ‘‘the amiable spirit of sincere and benevolent Christianity,” manifested by Mr. Vansittart’s Letter, f and charged other advo- cates of the Bible Society to “ take Lesson" from its Author. J I find, that with reference to Mr.Vansittart, * Inquiry, Note 45. + Ibid. P. 13. Note (6.) B t Ibid» 2 you have the wisdom to consider your different view of the Bible Society as a “ MISFORTUNE,” and I be- lieve you have by this time discovered, that every one of your friends agree with you in this respect. For my own part, whether you be contented to place me among that number, or not I entertain the same sentiments, and consider it the greatest misfortune of your literary career : but such cases among Au- thors, are never hopeless ; the loss is retrievable, and knowing }'our powers to make good the deficiency, I rather come to make merry wnth you upon the oc- casion, than to offer compliments of condolence; you are too good a chess-player to consider yourself as check-mated, because you have made a bad move. Bring out your Bishops, and Castle ! You have no idea of the consternation your emissaries occasioned in my nursery, previous to the appearance of j^our pamphlet. It was said that Queen Mary’s bonfires were forsooth to be renewed upon the Market-Hill, and that the Dean of Carlisle, Professor Deal try, myself, and others, were to be burnt as Heretics for our Protestant zeal. It was in vain I urged that as to Heresy, “ the boot was on the other leg” — that the most preposterous heresy was that which spoke of the injury likely to be created by giving a Bible without a Prayer Book. All this was to no purpose, “ Dr. Marsh's book” they said, was coming out” — my friends pitied me — the old nurses sat cross-legged to bring me good luck — and no one believed I could escape with a whole skin. Now then as the MOUNTAIN is delivered — and ther« is no danger of my being swallowed by the Mouse, I am at liberty to notice the use you have thought proper to make of my name. Yon have introduced it in allusion to a hand-hill ^vhich having been circulated in Cambridge, was no- ticed by me in the Town-Hail without any reference to the Author’s name, and which you now acknow- ledge to have proceeded from your Pen.* The ori- ginal document is now become so scarce, that I doubt whether the famous typographical relique of DC C21OrD0 be a whit more rare. But it contained the following memorable sentence, stating the objections not of a single individual, but of a set of men, to the Bible Society. No mention is made your objection, but of their objections. “ Whereas it has been insinuated, that they who object to the modern Bible Society object to the distribution of the Bible, it is necessary to reply, that their objec- tion is not to the distribution of the Bible, but TO THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE BiBLE ALONE.” This sentence 1 read to my audience, as containing a plain exposition of the objections made to the Bible Society by its adversaries, when leisurely stated, and in their own words. Not as your objections; nor was any mention made of your name. You com- plain of my stopping at the end of the sentence, and you rather cunnitigly put a comma after the word ALONE, as if the sentence did not end with that word j thereby falling into the very transgression of which you complain. It is a common trick in controversy, and I shall presently shew that you have recourse to *■ Inquiry, p. 79. Note, 4 it again. Let the reader judge for himself. “ But by stopping short at the words Bible alone, Dr. Clarke was enabled to give a new turn to the expres- sion” (See Inquiry, P. 26. Note.) STOPPING SHORT ! why where would you have one stop, but at the end of a sentence ? Now then, let us see whe- ther you do not this yourself in a case less warrant- able, where there is only a semicolon ? “ It is asked, by Dr. Clarke” ( Ibid. p. 23.^ “ whether the light of revelation shall be conveyed through the public Portals of the Temple, or by the Gate belonging only to the Priests f To this you add, “ if our Re- formers were now alive, those Priests, &c.” thus making it appear as if 1 had spoken of the Reformers, although the rest of the sentence would have shewn clearly of whom I was then speaking. If 1 had made a garbled extract, I might have called your remonstrances ‘‘fair play ” or if I had read only half of a sentence, which is what the readers of your pamphlet are instructed to believe was the case, * you might, perhaps, have had reason to say a false interpretation had been put upon your lan- guage ; but when I read the w hole sentence which maintains that the distribution of the Bible alone was objectionable, and considered, as we used to do in good old times, that a period wdiso. full stop, I surely had a right to begin my comment. The most re- markable })a t of the business comes now to be stated ; that after these hand-bills have been called in, an attempt is made to justify this doctrine j and * See Inquiry, p. 26 . Note, 5 you have the hardihood to tell us, zve forget that zve are Churchmen y because we do not countenance your blunders.* After objecting to the circulation of THE Word of God, in its purest form, you qualify the assertion, by adding, that you intend to give it for passport, or as a companion, according to your words, the Liturgy of the Church of England s although you know or ought to know, that the main purport of the British and Foreign Bible Society, namely, the universal diffusion of the Scriptures, by insisting upon this conditional mode of distribution, would be entirely defeated. — Would the Emperor of Russia, for example, suffer the translation of the Scriptures, in the language of Finland, to be circu- lated in his Empire, with the Liturgy of the-Church of England ? Would the Roman Catholics of Ireland suffer the Bible to travel among them, with your Companion P Come, come, this is all, as I said before, but mere Gallimatia — and so let it pass away ! You seem aware of the glaring inefficacy of your plan as extended to the general circulation of “ a mischitf -making Bible" — and therefore say. you do not address yourself to the universal Church of Christ, but to the Members and Ministers of the established Church ; or Churchmen, as you call them, t There would be no harm done, you aver. * You forget that you stre Churchmen.” Inquiry, p. 26 , Note. + “ I am addressing myself to Churchmen, in their inter- /Course with Churchmen, such as the Clergyman of a parish has 6 in giving a Bible alone, except by their hands ; they must give away a Prayer-book with the Bible, or else, giving the Bible alone, they forget that theij arc Churchjnen." Write me down for a believer in the “ Koran, the Ciiouking, the Vedam, or the Shaster,” * if this notion of thine be consistent with the doctrines of our established Church. It is not Protestantism ! I know not what it is ; but I had rather you had not maintained it. I expressed the same sentiments to you upon a former occasion, and had reason to hope from your great abilities, a belter jus- tification of your opposition to the Bible Society, than you have now afforded ; having often listened to you with instruction, and being ready to bear testimony to your talents in the words applied to the last of the Fathers by a writer well known to you — “ acute, graviter, copiose, dilucide, erudite dispu- tarit” , Whence then is this falling off, but from “ this FACT, wdiich I request the reader to keep in remembrance,” f that THE CAUSE IS RADICALLY BAD. Zeal, spreading with meteoric rapidity, for the annihilation of religious dissention, is the only xsith his parishiojiersy (See Inquiry, p. 3, See also p. 9, Note 5.) Then vihat reference hare your remarks to the Bible Society ? If you be merely instructing Clergymen in their pa- rish duties, they will tell you they do not require your advice. There is no Clergj'inan of the established church who does not distribute Prayer Books in his parish, if he distribute any book whatever ; and will the performance of this duty be interrupted by his belonging to the Bible Society ? If the British Clergy do their duty, all your aim is answered ; and if they do not, it is to no purpose that you address them. *■ Sec Inquiry, p. G9. + See Inquiry, p. 8. r ex'il of which you complain ; and you say we have had nothing similar since Peter the Hermit went preaching the Crusade.”* A more real manifesta- tion of the “ Deus Vult,” than Peter witnessed, may possibly have suggested to your mind this com- parison : and I am ready to confess, that similar feelings, directed to better purposes, have been called into action. • The censure bestowed upon Churchmen for distri- buting Bibles alone, is surely unusual among us, and requires the aid of all your talents to be tolerated even for an instant. Indeed you seem fully sensible of the immeasurable difficulties f wherein if has in- volved you; and armed as I am by lessons trans- mitted from a line of ancestry, who, as Clergymen, w^ere somewhat distinguished in their day, allow me to tell you those difficulties are insurmountable. You may publish pamphlet after pamphlet, and volume after volume, still all your arguments, according to your own position of them, must center upon this point, whether Clergymen, who assist in circulating the Bible alone, over the face of the whole earth. * Inquiry, p. 52. + “ I acknowledge that the arguments for the distribution of the Bible alone, are so specious, so popular, so apparently in the spirit of true Prolesianiism, while the arguments for the con- trary, &c. ARE EQUALLY DIFFICULT TO EXPLAIN, AN D DANGEROUS TO PROPOSE.” See Inquiry, p. 8. See also,p. 53. “ I sincerely lament, tliat I hare the misfor- tune to differ upon this subject with men of such distinguished abilities, and such acknowledged integrity, that this difference, alone sufficient to excite a distrust of my oxen opinion. But f 8 merit the reprobation you have bestowed upon them of having forgot that the_y are Churchmen.'* The main purport of your very best arguments ap- pears to me to apply solely to the duties of Clergy- men in thejr respective parishes — and there we are perfectly agreed. Where can be the harm you ask * of giving away a Prayer Book ? “ as a question pro- posed to the members of the church .” — None what- ever! We expect much good to result from such distri- bution, and are as anxious as you can be, to promote it. Visit my parish of I larlton, and distribute as many Prayer Books as you please ; the more the better ; it ■will be the first time the extraneous donors and dis- tributers of religious books, ever found out its wants. But supposing one or two among the parishioners should be found naughty enough (which I sincerely hope will not be tlie case) to reject the Liturgy, is the Clergyman also to deny the poor man a Bible? have considered the subject in all its bearings, and perhaps with more attention, than can possibly be bestowed on it by men in high situations. IT IS OF ALL SUBJECTS, ON WHICH I EVER UNDERTOOK TO WRITE, THE MOST INTRI- CATE AND PERPLEXED. And, though at various times I have instituted inquiries, which demanded close reasoning and profound thought, I never entered on a subject, which required so much penetration, as the present. IT IS A SUBJECT OF SO EXTRAORDINARY A NATURE, that, while orators, zchose xcisdom never goes beyond the surface^ feel competent to decide, there are points in it, which may elude the discernment of the most sagacious and profound." — How much this passage reminds one of “ where is the Wise, where is the Scribe, where is the Disputer of this world, &c. !” 1 Cor. 1. 20. * Ibid. p. 3. 9 or does he forget that he is a Churchmariy' by put- ting the Gospel into the hands of those who are willing to receive it ? Is this what you conceive to be “a dereliction of our duty as Churchmen” — Is this the FACT w'hich you print in such large capitals, in- volving the omission of the Liturgy in the distribu- tion of the Bible ?” If such be your exposition of the doctrines of our Church, I shall not scruple to as- sert, according to the tenor of your own words,* that we do “ become better Protestants by becom- ing worse Churchmen,” and I trust that eveiy Cler- gyman will join with me in an assertion so hypothe- tically founded. Professing a zeal for the Liturgy, you seem to disparage the BIBLE ; urging arguments j founded on its inability to support itself; maintaining that when alone, it is weak, but when in company,^ strong. Where is the Protestant that can agree with I you in such opinions? After being accustomed from our tenderest years to regard the Bible with reverence; to open that sacred volume with mingled sentiments I of awe and of gratitude, as containing all that is neces- j sary for our Salvation, shall a precept go forth to be inculcated in the minds of youth, that the I Bible, when alone, is incomplete and imperfect ? ! Cease, I beseech you, from observations, w’hich 1 remind us of the “ Heresy” we have so often sworn ! to renounce. Your persisting in them will soon call for ' more powerful reprehension than mine: Voices, I thundering out of Sion, will proclaim the inde- I ' * See Inquiry, p. 18. c i Ibid. p. 4 . 10 pendence and inviolability of the Bible. Under this persuasion, and this conviction, I have written to you; but my appeal is to my country. Although I am well aware that every Church has its Cardinalsy of all men I was least prepared to expect any thing resembling them in you. Do you recollect the words of the most eloquent writer 1 ever read, in the warning he gave to all of us upon this subject? “ That which I have written is consistent with the principles of an English Protestant, and with the ra- tional and guarded love to my country, which I am bound according to my ability, to warn, to vindicate and to defend.” And, as you speak* of “ the dark and intricate passages,” you have found “ between the portals of the Temple and the Altar, where Pil- grims lo.se their way,” let the “ Priests and Minis- ters of the Lord stand between the porch and the altar” with lamps “ well trimmed and burning” to dissipate the gloom, and enable you to walk less tortuously in the Sanctuary. Perhaps you begin to acknowledge that the arguments for the distribution of the Bible alone are sometimes “ so specious, so popular, so apparently in the spirit of Protestantism,” that, to cut the matter short, you know not how to get over them. Can the Bible ever become injurious by its distribution? Never! Never! Never! As to all that you have inserted respecting }mur Sermon at St. PauPs, and the compliments paid to it, f * Ibid. p. 24. + Sec Pp. 27, 28, 29, &c. arid particularly Note 12. P. 27, 11 apropos des hottes ! what can that Sermon of yours have to do with the Bible Society ? Do you mean to infer that the venerable Institution by which you were then employed, commissioned you to preach against the Bible Society ? I thought the theme of your discourse had been purely versus Lancaster. Surely I was not mistaken ! Whether this be the case or not, a person writing with the rapidity which I do now, must for the present postpone the consi- deration of your endeavour to make that Sermon subservient to a cause which you did not then avow^ Your pamphlet was published at four o’clock this afternoon, and having read it, I have endeavoured to reply this night to all which concerns me, and the cause wherein I have engaged. I have neither seen nor spoken to a single individual; but if you choose to con- sider my sentiments as those of a Party, (See Inquiry, p. 7,) you are perfectly at liberty to do so. If I be not mistaken, you have good reason to know that I am by this means associated with company which you would be very proud to keep ; although when you communicated Mr. Vansittart’s motive for publishing his Letter, you neglected to inform us that THE PRIME MINISTER OF GREAT BRITAIN, in consequence of your officious application to him, had written to you, and ex- pressed his UNEQUIVOCAL APPROVAL OF “ Indeed an honour was conferred on this Sermon, which I be- lieve was without precedents It is not common to hear peopla talk thus of their own performances. 12 THE BIBLE SOCIETY. Your giving publicity to this FACT might perhaps, you apprehend, put an end to the cry of “ the danger of the Church," and without this cry, what becomes of the adversaries of the Bible Society ^ They would in that case vanish only a little quicker than they will do now. Even as it is, their fate is decided, and you have helped to write them down ; dosing them with eighty pages of capitals and italics, which it is impossible they should survive, even if written with more attention to grammar,* and to good Protes- tant orthodoxy. Allow me now. Dr. Marsh, to wish you good night, and a speedy conversion to those principles which you before maintained in your higher station as Lecturer in our University Church. So will you be reconciled, not only to me, but to all your Christian brethren ; and while even your most inti- mate friends, those who have withheld their influ- ence from the Bible Society in consequence of your entreaty, do not hesitate to consider your opposition to that Society, as tending only to foment religions * When the Edinburgh Reviewers pointed out a single viola- tion of Grammar in your Sermon, it might be considered as a ca- sualty. But that the Margaret Professor should break Pris- cian’sbead with so small a weapon as his present pamphlet, and almost by every page of it, after it has been so long announced, so deliberately revised, and after all the changes and modifica- tion it has undergone, does indeed somewhat savour of bud luck frustrating a bad cause. Allow me to refer to the pages ; the errors will speak for themselves. See Pp, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 16, 20, 33, 62, 55, 67, 80, Sic. f'c. S)-c. 13 dissention, let me call to your recollection an his- torical FACT, related in language* which j/om will read with peculiar complacency, that “ the religions dissentions in the Greek Empire, by diminishing its strength, prepared its dovvnfal by the Turks: and God grant that the religious dissentions among our- selves, which unavoidably produce dissentions in the state, may not ultimately effect THE DOWN- FALL OF BRITAIN.” E. D. CLARKE. Trumpingion, January 27/A, 1812. * See Course of Lectures, part I. p. 115. Camb. 1809. '■ ' 1’ ;’*■ *Mr^ ^iwr^hr. *ti . nr'u^-i -Vr^. -’^f nf Hinx)ii Tt^' ^''-^Hiisr vffT ?*-fv ."mv i V. '’■<£?/* ', ■»■ ]•« ■' j rfi.lt(^t\ia''s.,,‘':, «i‘i ,*5^! ^^0(1 .'-in? ■^V.'(t,,f,r* V ifh-ir /f^lubi ’■<■'*•■ .'arx ’-'» t V' . :• . A,| 4.*, iJ*)*' ' - •» f !“tAj|l lit w, •• ..•.<>i' , 5f .| Ui, . -«' H 'K uf »* » '*-.-i^«' "li ne/- vitflT.i.'''''i'v< .. W '‘'O - 4; rj-il oiSfir ~ “ .-m: ■ ‘ /.1.V- V'- > ^i:f[ Oritto nJ80'if4 J«u- ; KjWiJf'- v\’a<' 'i y/C.'^ -/}«f Xoboifi.O j> )tijlJ.^ii.; >UV’ f. P Vi— M Uti aj! m «U>i.'«u<^ ... •'V.c. •«.. „ . 7»> -i.\.,x Haa / u *» T j