Letter r%5& LSI A LETTER HIS GRACE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, EXPLANATORY OF THE PROCEEDINGS AT OXFORD, ON THE APPOINTMENT OF THE PRESENT REGIUS PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY. " IT (CHRISTIAN ZEAL) PLANS NO INTRIGUES, IT RECOGNISES NO PARTIES, IT RELIES ON NO ARM OF FLESH: IN A WORD, CHRISTIAN ZEAL IS NOT political." — Newman's Sermons, Vol. II. p. 431. SECOND EDITION. WITH AN ADDITIONAL POSTSCRIPT. LONDON: B. FELLOWES, LUDGATE STREET. 1836. .[JPrice Sixpence.] R. CLAY, PRINTER, BRE AD-STREET-HI LL. A LETTER, fyc. 8j'c. My Lord Archbishop, If your Grace should be disposed to complain of the manner in which your name has been mixed up in the recent extraordinary proceedings at Oxford, I feel satisfied that your present cor respondent will receive, from yourself, no share of that blame. The personal enemies of Dr. Hampden have placed your Grace in an invidious situation. They have called on you to adopt their repre sentations of Dr. Hampden's unfitness for the Regius Professorship of Divinity, and to con demn, on ex parte evidence, a most able and learned man, whose character, in all the rela tions of life, defies censure, and even suspi cion. The calumniators of Dr. Hampden have required your Grace to condemn, as detrimental to the best interests of the Church, his Majesty's conduct in signing the appointment ; and they have required your Grace to express a condem nation of your own conduct, if, being aware of his being a Socinian, you omitted to protest ao-ainst Dr. Hampden's nomination; or of your own judgment, if (as I understand is the case) you declared that you knew of no objection what ever to him as a Theologian. The knowledge of several facts seems requisite to account for these extraordinary demands, on the part of certain Members of the University of Oxford, upon your Grace. I shall pass over all the charges of " Soci nianism, Heterodoxy, Heresy, and dangerous Doctrines," upon which the changes have been so repeatedly rung, supported as the accusers of Dr. Hampden have attempted to support them, by extracts from his works. Those works have been for years before the public, and no individual whatever has attempted to fasten any such charges upon their author, before the present very seasonable moment. I consider then that any discussion, by me, at this time, of Dr. Hampden's writings would be an impertinence, especially as to his Bampton Lectures, since they particularly have received the tacit as sent of the right reverend body, over which your Grace presides, and more than the tacit approbation of that learned body, before whom they were delivered. A course of Bampton Lectures, preached before the L niversity of Oxford, by the appointment of the Heads of Colleges, and published, as it were, under their sanction, cannot be regarded as an obscure or insignificant work ; and if a volume of heretical or dangerous Divinity were to appear from the universities, with the implied appro bation of one or other of those bodies, we mar be convinced that some member of the Episcopal Bench would be found to discover its errors and denounce its dangers. That no such step has been taken with the book in question is a proof that none such was called for: and that the Bench of Bishops coincided with the Uni versity of Oxford, in their estimation of Dr. Hampden's Bampton Lectures. It cannot be alleged that these Lectures escaped observation ,* thev attracted the notice of the late Lord Grenville, ' who, as Chancellor of the University, promoted Dr. Hampden to the Headship of St Mary Hall ; thev were reviewed in the leading literary periodi cal publications, and in some at great length; but no where was there any insinuation of the author's dangerous, much more of his heretical opinions. Within the walls of Oxford something more than acquiescence in Dr. H.'s views has been ex pressed. I could quote the favourable remarks during the delivery of the Bampton Lectures, and even, after their publication, of individuals whose names now appear amongst the number of Dr. Hampden's enemies ; — but it is enough to look to the conduct of Oxford. When Dr. Hampden was about to be elevated to a share in the government of the University, to be placed over one of the houses of education at Oxford, and that too, on the well-understood grounds of the services he had rendered, not to the University alone, but also to the Church ; was even a whisper heard to question the justice of his promotion ? When recently he was appointed Moral Philosophy Professor, by some of the Heads of Houses who now have enrolled them selves amongst his persecutors, did a murmur of disapprobation or distrust impugn their decision? When he was a candidate for the degree of doctor in divinity, or, in the language of the statutes of the University, sanctce theologice pro fessor, was there any intimation of his unfit ness ? Was not that degree, itself a professorship of divinity, unanimously conferred on him ? Does the emolument of his present station make the difference ? Is it the opinion of the masters and doctors of Oxford that a man may be perfectly fit to be an unpaid Professor of Theology, but that if the same person is appointed to an en dowed chair, the church, the state, even the whole Protestant cause is in danger? If Dr. Hampden's religious opinions are So- cinian, or otherwise unsound, could a more dan gerous step be taken than that of making him Professor of Moral Philosophy ? of placing him in a situation, where he might safely, because indirectly, and in an oblique manner, as it were, insinuate into the unprepared, and therefore unsus pecting minds of his youthful auditors, his heretical opinions? But I must urge my questions a little further. — If Dr. Hampden had proved himself a traitor to his duty as Bampton Lecturer, were the members of the University justified in trusting him again with any office whatever, even though the duties of that office were necessarily wholly distinct from his erroneous opinions ? Ought they to have shown any countenance ; — is it probable they would have extended any honourable dis tinction to an individual who had already deceived and betrayed them ? Cambridge was not so indifferent to the faith of her Professors, when, some few years back, she refused to receive the late amiable and excel lent Sir James Smith as her Botanical Professor, because he was a Unitarian. His qualifications for the office none could question, and his hetero doxy in religion was not aggravated or blackened by interested concealment or deceitful professions. One of the most active, and I lament to add, most uncandid, enemies of Dr. Hampden, conscious of the equivocal appearance his long silence must exhibit, attempts to defend his neglect of the alleged Socinianism of the quondam Bampton Lecturer. If his defence be successful, his ac quittal must involve the condemnation of others not circumstanced like himself. I extract his reasons from the Preface to the " Elucidations of Dr. Hampden's Theological Opinions," and I subjoin them ungarbled, and without comment.* My readers must decide whether they are satis factory, and if so, whether they are not just as * " It may be fairly asked of any resident of this place, who at this time directs attention to Dr. Hampden's works, why he has not done so in the considerable interval which has elapsed since their publication. The present writer's plain answer to this demand would be, that he had hoped to have been spared the necessity of an invidious task, which per tained more to others than to himself ; to those who were less connected by College ties with the author in question. He felt that he had no call of office or station that way, and that he could not put himself forward without an apology for so doing. Even now he cannot persuade himself to put his name to the title-page, though he makes no secret of it to those who choose to inquire."— Elucidations, 8>-c. Preface. cogent now as they ever were. I do not, there fore, feel myself called on to abate one iota of my assertion, that Dr. Hampden's " Bampton Lec tures" have received more than tacit sanction from the University of Oxford ; that they were not objected to, at the time when, if they are censur able, they ought to have been objected to, only because they contained nothing objectionable. After havinp; considered the avowed reasons for Dr. Hampden's persecution, I will shortly retrace the course of events since the time when the report of his intended preferment first reached Oxford. The first step taken then was, to call a private meeting (a hole-and-corner cabal) of certain mem bers of the University at Corpus College. This assembly selected what they called objectionable passages from Dr. Hampden's writings, and with these in their hands, requested that your Grace's influence might be exerted to crush Dr. Hamp den's prospects. It can excite no surprise that, by the well-known arts of culling a passage here and there, disconnecting it with its context, garbling a sturdy proposition, or misquoting and misapplying an opinion,* — a colourable case in * " Religion sums up all its practical energy in the one quality of resignation. It takes by the hand those feelings of the heart which look heavenward. Its divine ambition is to 10 the judgment of these secret inquisitors was established against Dr. Hampden. The results of loosen the ties which bind us to the present narrow scene of earthly duties, and to fix our thoughts and desires on the invisible spiritual world It is essentially abnegation of self, of present endearments, of the world around us, of our own power It works on the heart by faith, hope, love, patience ; means which in themselves divert us from confidence in our own activity, and so far check that activity. That Religion, in itself alone (sic,) tends to this extreme, is evidenoed in the lives of devotees, who have sought an entire abstractedness from society, and endeavoured to realize its sublime influence in their hearts, by stilling every thought into passiveness and repose: We are not to blame such persons for being too religious, for perverting and misrepresenting religion by ex cess. Their fault is, that they suffer their minds to imbibe it too exclusively (sic); that they leave no room for their own nature to develop itself; converting what was given for their comfort and encouragement in a sublime luxury and holy pastime. The religious instincts of the heart were surely never meant to absorb the whole man, according to the designs of Him, who implanted also both private and social affections in our own nature ....Thus Religion and Morality are two forces, sustaining the equilibrium of our nature. If either existed without the other, we should be carried away into a devious course." — B. L. pp. 96 — 98. Thus stands the passage in the " Elucidations," &c. ; but upon referring to Dr. Hampden's Lectures we find the follow ing important omission. " It is essentially abnegation of self, of present endearments, of the world around us, of our own power. It is, as I have said (using the thought and expression of Bishop Butler), resignation— a surrender of ourselves to interests and in fluences out of our own dominion and control. It works on the heart," &c. 11 these fair and candid labours are believed to exist in the pages of the " Elucidations," a work which, though it appears to the public as the industry of one man, is really the mighty effort of the first meeting held at Corpus. But these Doctors and Masters of Arts were doomed to discover, early in their course of political intrigue and private warfare, how different a thing it is to frame an indictment in secret and to sustain it in public. We are told the address to your Grace was carried unanimously. But when, in an evil hour, a measure similar to this was attempted to be forced on the meeting of the Heads of Houses, the official, authorized and responsible Board for the government of the Uni versity, the attempt failed, though the toils had been skilfully pitched, and detraction and intrigue had done their worst, to induce this meeting to declare that the Principal of St. Mary Hall's writings contained " dangerous opinions." An expression wide and cautious enough, one would Then follow these Notes : — ¦ 1. " Resignation to the will of God is the whole of piety," &c. — Butler s Sermonupon the Love of God, p. 224. Ed. 1820. " Religion consists in submission and resignation to the Divine will." — Sermon upon the Ignorance of Man, p. 268. The whole of this important parenthesis, together with the notes, have been omitted by the Author of the "Elucidations." Is this fair quoting ? 12 have expected, to carry almost any proposition through; yet this totally failed ; the Heads of Houses rejected the resolution. The next step was an attempt to excite the Undergraduates to declare heretical that which the Heads of the University could not discover to be even dangerous ; and on that declaration, to found a petition to some quarter or other, I know not what, against his appointment. Here another failure met them. The junior members of the University, those yet " in statu pupillarif reproved their reverend and senior advisers, by refusing to become parties to the condemnation of a writer on subjects for which, as yet, their know ledge and judgment could not be ripe to decide. These discomfitures would, it might have been expected, have repressed all but fanatic or per sonal rancour. These seventy-six Tutors and Fellows of Colleges, as they describe themselves, might, it would have been reasonable to expect, have retired, when they saw that Dr. Hampden's appointment had actually taken place. His ab sence, however, from Oxford was too tempting an opportunity to be lost. On the 24th February, another meeting was called at Corpus, to sign a requisition to the Vice-Chancellor, requiring him to propose to the Heads of Houses, an Address requesting "the Archbishops and Bishops of 13 the United Church to substitute the certificate of attendance on the Margaret Professor of Divi- nity for that of the Regius, from their Candidates for Ordination." Even this did not satisfy the zeal of these soi-disant champions of orthodoxy and safe opinions ; on the following day, 25th February, another assembly was held at Corpus, to request the Vice-Chancellor to summon a meeting of the Heads of Houses for " taking into consideration the means of giving Convocation an opportunity of disavowing and condemning the evil principles and doctrines contained in Dr. Hampden's Bampton Lectures and other writings." These " other writings" had been published for some years before Dr. Hampden was made Bampton Lecturer, and were appealed to as testimonies of his fitness, by those who recommended him to that office. These self- appointed censors therefore modestly called on the Heads of Houses to pronounce their own cen sure ; and who, let us ask, are the leaders of this learned conclave — of this faction ? First in the field appears a member of Trinity College, Dublin, who, without literary distinction in his own University, undertakes to transplant to Oxford the Irish arts of agitation ; next come some individuals, diligent and respectable, per haps, in the discharge of their various College 11 duties, but whose names are, and are likely to continue, unknown beyond the limits of the University. I shall, perhaps, be reminded that the individual whose name stands first on one — it may be more of the petitions or requisitions, has a much more extended fame than I have here allowed. I admit it ; but on the very equivocal support he has given to these proceedings, I shall have hereafter to remark. From such parties, then, as I have described, have arisen the unprecedented proceedings which, for the last three weeks or a month, have agitated the University of Oxford. Your Grace must, I imagine, have already discovered evidences of the combined operation, which indicates the exist ence of a party. Acts of aggression from mere personal hostility may reflect deeper disgrace on those who give the reins to such feelings ; but party spirit is more really noxious to the public. We certainly need, at the present moment, no new divisions in the Church : and by no one will the prospect of such be more deplored than by your Grace. Yet already the signs of such a spirit appear : already has the tocsin been sounded, and the angry passions, allying themselves with whatever of political frenzy or private enmity can be enlisted in their service, have rushed to the conflict. 15 Daily have the religious feelings of real Chris tians been shocked at the disgusting familiarity and political ribaldry with which religious topics have been defiled in the columns of the coarsest and most unchristian of the party journals.* Daily and weekly has every serious mind been outraged by the unchristian spirit which has inspired articles in some of the most notoriously infamous of the London newspapers, articles (with shame be it said) which there is but too much reason to suspect, have come from Oxford. Since I have begun this Letter, a number of the " British Magazine," intended especially for cir culation amongst the parochial clergy, has fallen into my hands, containing a copy of the " Elu cidations" stitched up with it ; and in this manner is this party and partial pamphlet launched into the world, under the fostering care of a monthly magazine. But the efforts of the party are not confined to such attempts ; the magazine itself is drugged with a shorter and lighter article against Dr. Hampden, in order that no tastes, no descrip tions of readers, may want a nostrum suited to their strength of literary digestions. In the spirit of party misrepresentation, the opposition to Dr. Hampden's appointment has * See the Standard, St. James's Chronicle, and John Bull, especially. \G been proclaimed as the opposition of the Uni versity. These representations I boldly declare to be a libel on Oxford. The opposition is that of an interested minority, swelled doubtless by signatures industriously hunted up, to the number of seventy-six (such at least is the amount, as we are told, of those who signed one of the Petitions.) I am not, however, aware that the signatures have ever been printed. Now, admitting that, after all the canvassing which the University underwent, seventy-six names were actually placed at the foot of any one Petition, this number forms but a minority of the Uni versity. I believe I am stating the number very low, when I say that, on an average, about two hundred resident members of Convocation are to be found in Oxford during term time. But we will inquire, with your Grace's permission, into the description of those who stand most prominent in the late affair. The Colleges which have taken the lead are Oriel, Corpus, and Christ Church. The heads of the two first Colleges are strongly opposed to the whole of these proceed ings. Indeed, every one who is at all acquainted with the character of the Provost of Oriel must have anticipated the manly and energetic part which he has taken throughout the whole busi ness. The President of Corpus, as every one 17 acquainted with the kindness and uprightness of his heart will readily believe, has taken no part against Dr. Hampden. Some one else, therefore, was to be looked out to preside over the meeting convened in the Common-room of his College, though without his sanction. That person was a rival candidate, disappointed of the headship of St. Mary Hall by the success of Dr. Hampden ! At the meeting, or meetings, held in Corpus, which fell far short in numbers, however, of seventy-six, Christ Church was represented by Mr. Pusey (I beg his pardon, I ought to have said Dr. Pusey, for he had become a Doctor in Divinity, in the absence of Dr. Hampden, whose duty as Regius Pro fessor it would have been to have presented the Hebrew Professor for his degree), and he ad dressed the meeting. I shall not state the effects of that address in my own words, but in those of one well acquainted with the facts he speaks to. " Upon Dr. Pusey's speaking, sixteen or seventeen of the party assembled left the meeting with a declaration, that it was a dirty, personal affair, and they would have nothing more to do with it." Having spoken of the leaders, we will now proceed to notice some of the herd. One of the petitioners, a graduate in divinity, a senior B 18 fellow of a College, on being requested to add his name, declared, with an oath, that though he knew nothing of the business, he would nevertheless sign the petition, because it was asainst the Ministers. I withhold the name of the individual, because I do not think it fair to pick out a name here and there, when I am unable to give an accurate list of the seventy-six. I certainly could mention several ; and I may be forced to give my list to the public in its imperfect state, for I certainly shall not select for publication only one, two, or three of the signatures. Another signer expressed his determination to petition, because such a step would indulge the University (the Church, he might have said) with the " fun of a row." It may be replied, perhaps, that the originator of a petition has not a right to refuse a signature when tendered. It may be so. But what excuse is to be made for those who canvass, — who invite persons clearly dis qualified, by their habits and talents, from giving a sober or a trustworthy judgment on the subject matter of such a petition,— who so licit undergraduates, nay boys fresh from school, to decide on the controversial merits of questions which tax the mature reflection of those who have completed their course of education,— who 19 force from his retirement an individual for years altogether withdrawn from public life, and one who already had, in conversation, declared his approbation, if not of Dr. Hampden's " Bampton Lectures," at least of his appointment to the Moral Philosophy Chair. Before, however, closing this Letter, I must inquire a little into points, very important in establishing a charge of false doctrine against any man. Are those with whom such accusations originate themselves free from all taint of heresy or errors ? Censure from some men may, in reality, be praise. More than whispers have passed ; even in print it has been hinted, that the author of the "Elucidations"* has published something very like papistical doctrines ; and I must con fess that a strong suspicion has crossed my own mind, that, not many years back, passages in the acknowledged works of him to whom the pamphlet in question has been attributed, would have rendered the writer liable to eccle siastical censures. It has also been said, in reference to this gentleman's acknowledged volumes, I fear with too much truth, that the doc trine of religious persecution is not confined to * " A Few Observations on Religion and Education in Ireland," by the Rev. Edward Stanley, A.M. Rector of Alderlev. 20 " Dens' Theology," or indeed to any other Roman Catholic divine. For the orthodoxy of another of Dr. Hampden's persecutors, I shall do no more than refer to the Rev. Hugh Rose. And with respect to another, and perhaps the most remarkable from his age and his learning, many persons still resident in Oxford can recollect the length of time, the number of years during which his ordination as a priest was delayed, on the alleged ground that scruples existed in his mind on some of the tenets of the Church ; as to the time or manner of their removal, I shall say nothing. Having now, my Lord, completed my painful task, I ask your Grace to look on the composition of that factious minority by which your Grace has been called upon to join in what can only be described, as the persecution of a scholar, a divine of first-rate talents, acquirements, and virtues ; by which you have been called on not only to offer an affront to his Majesty's accredited and responsi ble advisers, but to insult his Majesty himself, by withholding your confidence from one who had received an appointment under the handwriting of the Sovereign of these realms, and of the Head of this Church. These extraordinary demands on your Grace, united to a desire to warn the public against the 21 misrepresentations, interested views, and distorted statements to which a most excellent individual was to be sacrificed, have alone induced me to come forward in a manner no less repugnant to my feelings than to ray habits. I have no private ends to advance, no private enmity to gratify. With this declaration I will conclude, by sub scribing myself, With every sentiment of respect, Your Grace's Obedient humble Servant, A Member of the University of Oxford. P.S. — While these pages were in the press, the following extraordinary paper reached me. It contains an addition proposed to be made to the statutes of the University, by which Privi- legium the present Regius Professor of Divinity is to be excluded from the Boards, in whom the appointment and control of select preachers is vested, on the ground that the University has no confidence in him. " Quum ab Universitate commissum fuerit S. Theologiae Professori Regio, ut unus sit ex eorum numero, a quibus designation- selecti Concionatores, secundum Tit. XVI. § 8, necnon ut ejus consilium adhibeatur, si quis Concionator coram Vice-Cancellario in qusestionem vocetur, secundum Tit. XVI. § 11, quum vero qui nunc Professor est, scriptis 22 suis publici juris factis ita res theologicas tractaverit, ut in hac parte nullam ejus fiduciam habeat Universitas ; " Statutumest, quod munerum prsedictorum expers sit S. Theologiae Professor Regius, donee aliter Universitati placuerit. Ne vero quid detrimenti capiat interea Uni versitas, Professoris ejusdem vicibus fungantur alii; scilicet, in Concionatores selectos designando Senior inter Vice-Cancellarii Deputatos, vel eo absente, aut ipsius Vice-Cancellarii locum tenente, proximus ex or- dine Deputatus (proviso semper, quod sacros ordines susceperit), et in concilium de Concionibus adhibendo Praelector Dominse Margaretas Comitissas Richmondiae." The University, it seems, a Lay Corporation, is to consider theological questions, to decide that it has no confidence in the person appointed by the Supreme Head of the Church Professor of Theology, to censure him for doctrines pub lished long before his appointment, and to sus- Dend him from functions which by statute are annexed to his office. I do not believe that so monstrous a proposition can pass the Convoca tion, even though swelled, as that body will be, by all the country clergy, who will rush to Oxford, in order to wound, through Dr. Hampden's sides, a reforming Ministry. But at all events, I trust that the law officers of the Crown will consider how far the conduct of those who propose it is legal ; and that all those Masters of Arts who have any respect for the character of the Uni versity, any value for the privileges of private 23 judgment and mental independence, or any sym pathy with an individual of genius, learning, and virtue, struggling against the oppressions of a half-Popish, half-Methodistic faction, will appear on Tuesday next, the 22d of this month, in Convocation, and rescue that body from the disgrace of conduct unworthy of the darkest ages. Particularly, I trust that all liberal Conservatives will do so, in order to destroy the suspicion that their party is implicated in these proceedings ; — a suspicion which will do them, and ought to do them, much more permanent injury than the Whigs have suffered from their supposed con nexion with Mr. O'Connell. POSTSCRIPT TO THE SECOND EDITION. While a Second Edition of these pages is passing through the press, new subjects of regret and indignation force themselves on my attention. One of the most striking of them consists of the following " Declaration, left for signature at Corpus Christi College, Oxford," March 10, 1836. " We, the undersigned, engaged or interested " in the religious instruction of this place, feel 24 " it our bounden duty at the present crisis to " make this public declaration. " We have seen with alarm the office of the li King's Professor of Divinity in the University " entrusted to one whose publications abound '• with contradictions to the doctrinal truths " which he is pledged to maintain, and with " assertions of principles which necessarily tend " to subvert not only the authority of the Church, " but the whole fabric and reality of Christian " truth. ''¦' We cannot allow any explanations of insu- '•' lated passages, or particular words, to be valid " in excuse against the positive language, the " systematic reasonings, and the depreciating " tone, with which in Dr. Hampden's works the '•' Articles of our Church are described as mere " human speculations, the relics of a false and " exploded philosophy, and full at once of error '• and mischief. " We abstain from imputing to the Author a "personal disbelief of those doctrines which " have been so seriously endangered by his pub- ¦' lications; but we hold that the frame of mind " which could produce and send forth statements " so dangerous and so unguarded is, in itself, a " complete disqualification for the grave and " responsible office of presiding over our aca- 25 " demical studies in Divinity, and consequently of " guiding the religious instruction of one half of " the country. " Having refrained from any expression of " our opinions upon the nature and tendency " of Dr. Hampden's publications till the last " moment that forbearance was compatible with " our duty to the Church and the University, we " now solemnly protest against principles which " impugn and injure the word of God as a " revealed faith and practice in its sense and use, " its power and perfection, and which destroy " the authority of the Church as a witness and " keeper of Holy Writ. We hereby declare our " stedfast resolution to oppose, under the bless- " ing of Almighty God, the spread of that false " philosophy to which those principles may be " traced, a philosophy which in other countries " has poisoned the very fountains of religious " truth, which for a long time reduced Pro- " testantism in its original seats almost to an " empty name, and changed the religion of the " Cross into the theology of Deism." [Here follow the Signatures.] These persons, designating themselves as " en gaged or interested in the religious instruction of 26 Oxford," assert that Dr. Hampden's " publica tions abound with contradictions to the doctrinal truths, which he is pledged to maintain, and with assertions of principles which tend to subvert, not only the authority of the Church, but the whole fabric and reality of christian truth ; " — but from the abundance of such contradictions they cite not one ; they do not even expound wherein the contradiction to doctrinal truth consists, or what is the doctrinal truth controverted. Yet the charge against Dr. Hampden is little less than perjury, in contradicting Articles which he has subscribed — contumacy, in impugning the autho rity of a Church to which he belongs, — and impiety, in attempting to subvert Christianity itself ! These are heavy charges and denun ciations, and they are pronounced in a strain of dogmatical authority that resembles the thunder of the Vatican itself, though it proceeds, in all likelihood, from Divines who have often, ere this, bawled out, " No Popery ! " lustily enough. Why not specify the contradictions to doctrinal truths of which they complain ? Why not prove the denial of, or the resistance to, any legal authority of the Church ? Why not select some one or more of the principles which are said to abound in his writings, and to tend to subvert the fabric (a strange phrase) of Christian truth ? After disdaining to substantiate their charges by any proof, it is, perhaps, reasonable and con sistent in these accusers to deprecate the pro duction of any passages, or particular words, in defence of the object of their persecution. The culprit is not to have the benefit of his own phraseology to elucidate his meaning ; — he is to be condemned for language pronounced to be positive, without being stated ; for reasoning- reproached for being systematic, without being- explained or opposed ; and for a tone styled depreciating, without any definite account of the object so depreciated ! The language, reasoning, and tone of Dr. Hampden so respectively positive, systematic, and depreciating, are denounced in this lumi nous indictment as the instruments by which he describes the Articles of the Church as human speculations, — the relics of a false and exploded philosophy, — and full at once of error and of mischief. Are then the Articles of the Church any thing more than human comments and expositions of the word of God ? Do they profess to be more ? If so. why brand the assumed authority of the Church of Rome with the name of Popery ? Where in that case is the vaunted Protestant principle of the right of private judgment in expounding the 28 Scriptures ? For if one exposition be more than human, all others not accordant with that one must be false. Dr. Hampden has subscribed the Articles, and complied, consequently, with the test required by the Church and the Law. The injunctions of the Crown prefixed to the Thirty -nine Articles, and the doctrines and practice of the most eminent Prelates of the Church, inculcate the wisdom and prudence of accepting such subscription as sufficient ; of not being over- curious in exacting a nice definition of the sense annexed to each expression ; and of not being peremptory and quarrelsome about those points which are acknowledged to be above our com prehension.* It is little less than a libellous inuendo * Such, or nearly such, are the words of Dr. Stillingfleet himself, in the Preface to a " Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity ;" and such is stated to be the invariable rule of the Church, by Archbishop Wake, in Letters to the Pastors and Professors of Geneva, and to Professor Turretin. In one to the latter, dated December 1, 1718, he writes : — " Hoc apud nos, turn ex mandatis regiis,'' (alluding, no doubt, to the declaration of James the First, prefixed to the Thirty- nine Articles,) " turn ex olim servata, et utinam semper servata, consuetudine fixum est atque stabilitum, neque a quoquam exquirere quid de his rebus sentiat, modo articulis religionis publico, auctoritate constitutis subscribat, neque in concionibus aut etiam disputationibus theologicis aliquid amplius de iis determinare quam quod illi articuli expresse statuant, et ab omnibus ad ministerii munus admittendis 29 to assert, that a person who has signed the Articles, and professes to maintain them, holds nevertheless in his heart, or insinuates by his writings, that they are false in philosophy, and full of error and mischief. They acquit him, indeed, of what they call " personal disbelief;" but they allege that the frame of mind which could produce such state ments is a disqualification for the office of Regius Professor. It is then the mental machinery, which the piece produced implies, and not the article it self, from which mischief is apprehended. The web actually woven has, it seems, no visible defect in its texture ; but the framework which could weave it cannot without danger be admitted among the instruments employed in fabricating opinions for Orthodox Clergymen. This is a new and some what nice inquisitorial faculty, which can detect a capacity for heresy in works it dare not deem heretical, and can pronounce that capacity for evil a disqualification for office. But if such subtle objections — not to the creed which a man professes, but to that of which he is deemed susceptible, — be valid, who conferred the power of pronouncing judgment and sentence without any hearing of profitendum requirant." — Mosheim, translated by M^Caire. vol. vi. p. 133. Svo. ed. 1 79-. 30 the cause, on certain persons, " engaged and interested in the religious instruction of Ox ford ?" They have, they say, refrained, till the last moment that forbearance was com patible with duty, from any expression of their opinions. True, they have forborne a long time ; for it was compatible with duty, it seems, to receive with applause from Lord Grenville, a head of a house, who asserted principles subversive not only of the Church, but of Christian truth. It was compatible with duty to appoint a man who described the Articles as mere human specu lations, false philosophy, and error, &c. — first, Doctor of Divinity, and then Professor of Philo sophy ; but when authority superior to their own appoints, on its own responsibility, the same man to an office over which they have no control, it is, forsooth, their imperious duty to attempt to wrest the patronage from the prerogative of the Crown, to secure for the University a veto on the recom mendations of his Majesty's official advisers; and if that should fail, to strip the office of the pri vileges annexed, and introduce dissension into the University, and schism into the Church. the end. k. CLAY, fRINTER, BREAD-STREET-HILL. YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 3 9002 03720 7967