On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    ^ ti ^ m ^ f lciOT 'Wdufel have been depHved of Jn ^ ri ght . The refusal , in the « res ^ nt case ^ he must say appeared to him injudicious , and the power , if it did exist , ^^ K ^ stfi ^ ie » e ? eised . He would now look a little at the reasons assigned for the refas ^ I , which , as he had stated , consisted in words said to have formed

    part of a speech delivered by the petitioner at a county meeting . It was stated that he had said that 9-lOths of the clergy of the " Church of England did not believe all the Thirty-nine Articles

    of that Church ; that when they subscribed to recognitions of the damnatory clauses of St . Atbanasius ' s Creed , they signed what they did not believe . It was also stated that he had asserted there was

    nothing more damnatory in the Catholic system ; but it appeared clear , from the tenour of the petitioners argument , that his words had been imperfectly reported to the Bishop . It appeared that , in replying to what had been said by a preceding speaker , he had contended that the argument urged against the Catholic Church on account of the creeds which

    Catholics subscribed , might , by a parity of reasoning , be stated against the Church of England . To prove that this was the nature of his argument , the petitioner referred to the report of his speech in the newspaper which gave an account of the meeting . It contained nothing like the words attributed to him . He also

    requested that the whole tenour of his speech might be examined , in order that it might be judged whether it was possible he could have made such a statement . But it Would be said that several persons had stated that they heard the words uttered . These persons were ,

    however , unknown , and several were , on the contrary , ready to declare that the words were not used . Among others who were near the petitioner , was a gentleman , a relative of Sir V . Gibbs , who appeared to have attended the meeting for a purpose different from that of

    Mr . Jones ; but the account he gave of the words was far from supporting a charge which had been sufficient to Justify the depriving' the petitioner of all prospect of success in his profession * That gentleman blamed the manner of Mr . Jones * but completely e&culpated him from the tendency Attributed to his

    speech . This and othefr evidence was offered to the Biahopy bitt It did not produce the deeh-ed eifect of inducing the Reverend Prelate to countersign the ^ tes ^ timoniats , nor proetnre for Mr : Jones the n ame * ' df iiie % * Jr ^ ^ wtt had atcnsed him . H But it >> was ^ nienr of 'the pefcitrbher ^ IxbttM be ^ tfttGd more entire than had yet been donei A

    Untitled Article

    gentjemait , in the Course of the proceedings at the meeting * had iriade a charge against the Catholics that they signed intolerant creeds , and had observed that he would believe what "they « ighed , and not what they professed . This , by-thebye , was a mode of proceeding which the

    Bishop did not follow with regard to Mr-Jones ; for the Reverend Prelate would cot believe that gentleman on what he had signed ; for he had subscribed the Thirty-nine Articles , which he Was charged with denying . In answer , howr ever , to the argument of the Catholics ,

    Mr . Jones would not admit that they all signed intolerant creeds , but contended that if they did , he had no right to draw from speculative points in their creed a conclusion contrary to what they professed , because , if that Were admitted a fair argument , it might be turned against

    the churches of the United Kingdom . In particular , it might be urged against the members of the Church of , England that they signed the Thirty-nine Articles ; and yet , were the subscribers to be asked whether they believed that those who

    refused to acknowledge some of those Articles must be damned , nine-tenths of them , he was sure , would answer that they did not . This appeared to have been the course of his argument . He did not wish to enter into the details of

    controversy , or he could easily shew , that the argument used by the petitioner at a public meeting was nothing more than what had been said , over and over again , by some of the ornaments of the Church of England . The greatest lights of the Church had held the same language , and it was supported by one of the resolutions come to when' the scheme of

    comprehension was under consideration in 1691 . Was it not true that Tillotson , in speaking of the Athanasian Creed , had said he wished the Church were well rid of it ? Burnet , in the conclusion of his History , stated that 60 out of 100 signed it without reading or understanding it ,

    or caring about it , and that others subscribed from necessity . Does the Reverend Prelate mean to say , that had he been then living , he would have prevented that great man from filling the see of Salisbury ? Archdeacon Paley had , in his lMt » i «< i > i - ¦ ii » -i nn tf rt fl'W-gr - ¦ fi A * - » -i- ¦ ¦ » - » fcr » n i * l Jti <«« viia » m «< i >* PXfc . Worksrepeatedly expressed disapproba

    , - tion of the Athanasian Creed . On one occasion he states Jfli at he is pursuadedthe treat body ct ^^^ f ' ^ i ^ ' / dUlSa ^^ damnatory cim ^ li ^ m iet I ^^ Mfi ^ Bbtedr after lie had Made that declaration . Hei was instittited by a Iteve re ^* Prelate of high character ai ^ r theiptiblicatiott of his sentiments on this su ^ pf . If'hci di 4 not wish to ddtmfiBffi ttfhjch , might have tfae apjKjaratfee of a taunt ,

    Untitled Article

    intelligences ^ Parimmentary ^ & $ f

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), June 2, 1820, page 377, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2489/page/53/