REMARKS ON A LATE PAMPHLET, ENTITLED, "THE GROUNDS, ON WHICH THE CHURCH OF BY SHUTE, BISHOP OF DURHAM.” BY THE AUTHOR OF THE "Remarks on the Bishop of Durham's Charge." Πειθώμεθα τω θεώ, και μηδεν αντιλεγωμεν, καν εναντις είναι δοκη τοις ημετέροις λογισμοις και τοις οψεσι το λεγομενον ο μεν γας λογος αυτε απαραλογιστος" η δε αισθησις ημών ευεξαπατητος. Επει εν ο λόγος φησί, τουτο εστε το σωμα με, και πειθωμεθα και πιστευωμεν. Χρυσοστο ομ. εἰς Ματ. REMARKS ON THE INTRODUCTORY LETTER ΤΟ THE CLERGY OF THE DIOCESE OF DURHAM. NO minister of the God of peace has ever attempted to disseminate religious discord, who did not feel, or affect to feel, himself actuated by the most holy and edifying motives. In controversy, as in war, the aggressor is always eager to justify the aggression. It is not the lust of power, the thirst for preferment, the desire of revenge, or any earthly consideration, that urges him to the attack: the faith which he has bound himself to defend, is in danger: an imperious necessity compels him to detect the artifices, and expose the sophistry of its enemies. Thus is religion, the best gift of God to man, frequently identified with the worst passions of the human breast. This observation does not, cannot, apply to the Bishop of Durham. The benevolence of that prelate's character is a sufficient guarantee for the uprightnes of his intentions. He was indeed the aggressor in this controversy. He began by preaching a crusade against the opinions of his Catholic brethren, and then declared that the war, which he waged, should be an eternal war, a bellum usque ad internecionem.* He first pronounced us enemies to the honour of God the Father, to the mediatorship of God the Son, and to the sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit; † and afterwards condemned us of the guilt of idolatry, of blasphemy, and of sacrilege. But, though these were grevious charges, no one doubted that the right reverend Prelate was impelled by motives which would justify his conduct. What these motives were, indeed, we knew not; but we gave him credit for them. 66 The Bishop, however, in his introductory Letter, has thought proper to enter into an explanation. "There is," he says, "some danger, lest, under a "misconstrued indulgence to the popish petitions, we "should, by an appearance of indifference to our own "church, give countenance to doctrines and usages, which, as sincere Protestants, and readers of our "Bible, we must ever hold to be idolatrous, blasphemous, and sacrilegious."§ Some readers of the Bible, perhaps, may wonder what religious doctrines can have to do with petitions for political privileges; "what concord there can be between Christ and "Belial." But, not to press this subject here, I may ask, how to support the Catholic petitions can be construed into an indifference to the Church of England. I think it shews a strict adherence to the great principle on which the Church of England was founded. That principle was the right of private judgment: the obligation which binds every man to search the scriptures, and to embrace every doctrine which he discovers in them. But, if I have an equal right with you to judge for myself, what right have you to punish me for dissenting from you? If I believe Christ to be really present in the eucharist, and you believe him to be present by faith only, what is there in my opinion that The Grounds, &c. by Shute, Bishop of Durham, p. 9. + Charge to the Clergy of the Diocese of Durham, p. 5. The Grounds, &c. p. 8. § Ibid. should incapacitate me, or in yours that should qualify you, for civil employment? For our religious opinions we are answerable to God alone: "who art thou "that judgest," or rather punishest, "another man's "servant? To his own master he standeth or falleth. With much orthodox charity, the Bishop proceeds to lock the gates of Paradise against the great majority of the christian world. As if Christ had died for the insular Church of England alone, he boldly pronounces, that hardly any one, who professes the same doctrine with the church of Rome, can reasonably hope to enjoy the benefit of our common redemption.* In this view of the case, the fate of the English Catholics is peculiarly severe. Our conscientious adherence to what we conceive to be the doctrine of Christ excludes us from the privileges of our birthright here, and the same will exclude us from the joys of heaven hereafter. All the good things, both of this world and of the next, appear to be reserved for the professors of the established creed. In the gospel originally preached by our blessed Lord, if the poor man was refused the crumbs that fell from the rich man's table in this life, in that to come he might expect to be raised to an equality at least with his proud oppressor: in the new gospel of the Bishop of Durham, we are not only refused all share of the crumbs now, but are condemned to remain in a similar state of degradation for ever hereafter. But it was not only the fear of appearing indifferent to the Church of England that prompted the Bishop to publish his last pamphlet: he informs us that he was urged by another, and, perhaps, more efficacious, motive he wished to chastise the insolence of the Remarker, who had applied the opprobrious term of points at issue to the subjects discussed in the Bishop's Charge. If this be a crime of high treason against the established creed, I must plead guilty; though the words were certainly employed without the remotest The Grounds, &c. p. 8. + Ibid. p. 9. |