Page images
PDF
EPUB

persons respond to this mischievous call, and, blind to the evils which they will effect, prepare for the contest.

For some years, as controversy in the church has died away, party feelings have been declining too. There has been a gradual approximation of churchmen to each other. Without discussing points where they might differ, they find they can act together, and live together, as members and ministers of the same church. But this is a state of things which is looked at, perhaps unconsciously, with a jealous eye by some men. If party does die away, what becomes of them, and of their importance? A sharp contest in the society will quickly separate parties again, set up party distinctions, and restore the consequence of party leaders. This partly, and partly some real feeling of an extravagant kind, account for the present movements.

What tactics may do for the moment, (what the regular order issued in the "Record" to all persons to assemble in strength, for example, this day, may do,) it is of course impossible to say. That it can only answer for the moment, and that the overwhelming majority of the society, as soon as the country members can declare their sentiments, will declare them in favour of the "old ways," no one who knows the clergy can doubt for a moment.

The only consolation which the conscientious members of the society who adhere to their old opinions can have, in this deplorable state of things, is, that they have not provoked the strife-that they have submitted to much which they disliked-submitted in silence to the most shameful, or rather shameless, revilings in the "Record," which is now chosen as the organ of the movement-submitted to be stigmatized as dark, and legal, and careless-submitted to be branded with every epithet, in short, which that unscrupulous journal can apply to the persons, as well as the opinions, of those whom it dislikes-rather than provoke strife in such times as these. If the time is come when their principles will not allow them to submit any longer, their comfort must be, that they did not raise the storm-that, come ruin when it will, they did not call it." Let those who do raise the storm consider what will be their consolation for the mischief which they will effect.

DR. HAMPDEN.

THERE is a subject of such extreme importance to the best interests of the church that it is impossible to pass it over in silence, however painful it may be to say anything which may hurt the feelings of an individual. Every one is aware, from the newspapers, that on the lamented death of Dr. Burton, Dr. Hampden was appointed Regius Professor of Divinity, at Oxford, and that as soon as the appointment was announced, two most unusual steps were taken. Above seventy resident members of convocation, and forty of these acting as tutors, or in other ways connected with the discipline of their respective colleges, signed a petition to his Majesty against the appointment, and even the heads of houses met on the occasion; and although it

was decided by a majority of one (report says Dr. Hampden's own vote) that no public step should be taken, nine heads of houses, in like manner, joined to draw up a remonstrance against Dr. Hampden's appointment.

When it is remembered how serious and how delicate a step it is to attempt to interfere with the king's prerogative, how unusual, or almost unprecedented, such a step is, strong as the prejudices have often been against individuals,-when, again, it is considered how painful to every one it is to interfere with an individual, one too with whom business or society may make it constantly necessary to meet,-it must be allowed that the number of persons who joined in this step was very large, and that they could only have done so under very strong feelings and convictions. They state openly and distinctly, as it is understood, that they consider Dr. Hampden's opinions as unsound, and himself, consequently, as an unsafe teacher of divinity for the clergy. It is understood, on the other hand, that Dr. H.'s friends impute the whole proceeding to this one circumstance that Dr. H., last year, took a leading part in the attempt to introduce dissenters into the university-that they state that Dr. H. cannot be forgiven for this act, and that he has been an object of persecution and dislike ever since. Doubtless, the members of the University of Oxford, and the heads of houses there, are men, and, like other men, subject to prejudices and passions. Let every possible allowance be given and taken on that head. But if, after such full allowance, there can be found any reasonable person who will believe that above seventy men, chiefly clergy, of the first attainments and highest education, (and of these, above forty thought worthy, from their character and learning, to have the charge of the education of the young men of the university,) and that nine heads of houses, men in so ostensible and responsible a situation, would deliberately endeavour to fix the brand of unsound doctrine on an individual, and to destroy his character as a clergyman, and blast his prospects, simply because they were angry with him on a particular account; or, again, that such men would allow their passions so to blind them that, on account of this same dissatisfaction, they would venture on such a bold step as the taxing a man with error in doctrine, without considering whether the charge was capable of proof,-if any reasonable person can believe this, one may congratulate him on his powers of belief, and one's self in not sharing them. No; it is utterly impossible to come to any other conclusion than that such men, bringing such an accusation, believe that it is fully capable of proof. But Dr. H.'s friends say farther, that the accusation ought to have been preferred before, because the Bampton Lectures, on which it is chiefly founded, have been for some time before the world; nay, they go farther yet, and allege, that if it was thought that such unsoundness existed, it should have been brought forward before the proper tribunal in the university. In these points, they have undoubtedly a certain degree of justice on their side. But if the statement is taken as any argument against the validity of the accusations, let us see to what it really amounts. Simply to this-that when it was not absolutely necessary, from any outward

circumstances, no one liked the painful task of attacking the opinions and destroying the (theological) character of a member of the same university, a person of amiable private character-perhaps an acquaintance of long standing. The strict and stern rule of duty required it, and they, from kindness, shrunk from complying with its requirements! With respect to a public accusation before the proper tribunal, the reflexions to which the remark gives rise are painful, but may, perhaps, be useful. That remark shews how dangerous it is ever to shrink from the painful discharge of our duty, where great principles are involved-how unsafe it is in itself-in what evils it involves us, and how certainly it fails of attaining the end for which it is attempted. They who would have been the first to cry "persecution!" if it had been done, are the first to reproach and vilify those who, from kindness, left it undone. But after all possible allowances have been given and made on this score also, still they leave the question where they found it-that now, at least, so large a body of respon sible persons, at Oxford, have publicly charged Dr. H., under the most unusual circumstances, with unsound opinions. When it is considered that to the individual so charged, Government has confided the charge of giving half the clergy of England all the public instruction, in divinity, which they receive, if things proceed in their accustomed course, it must be felt that this is indeed a most serious matter.

Let us ask, whether it can possibly be right that government, having all this before them, having the full knowledge of the objections made, and the parties making them, should not stay their hands and, at least, inquire, not of this or that person, but gravely and deliberately, how far the allegations made are true. If Dr. Hampden's friends are as desirous as is said of having had his case investigated in the proper tribunal, could they not have suggested some such proceeding to the government? Is it not clear that only by some very solemn adjudication could these grave suspicions be repelled, and the course of government justified?

But are we left in the dark as to the nature of the charges? Not at all. Even last year, in two of the pamphlets which were the most spoken of in the heat of the controversy, Dr. Hampden's opinions as a theologian were publicly called in question, and extracts from his works, justifying the very serious charges, were made. And now, a pamphlet has been publicly circulated at Oxford, explaining what the charges are, and seeking to establish them by very large extracts from Dr. Hampden's writings. These passages go to question the soundness of Dr. Hampden's tenets on many points of the first importance and most vital interest.

It is better to argue this question on the lowest grounds. No one who looks at the passages will deny that they are very strange, very singular, very unusual in their modes of expression, and that they seem, at least, to be at variance with the commonly-received notions as to some of the great articles of our faith. Nevertheless, as it is understood that Dr. Hampden declares that he is a believer in the articles of the church of England, and as men are bound to receive the declaration of a respectable person on such a subject, let it be allowed that his

words, however strange, are in some way or other to be reconciled with the articles to which he has affixed his name. One may account for it as one pleases. One may suppose that he has ventured on subjects beyond his depth-that he has fairly mystified himself, and is not aware of his own meaning-or that he writes in so unusual a style that his meaning cannot be made out. Still it cannot be denied that it is a most fearful thing to have, as professor of divinity, one whose writings seem to militate against our commonly-received belief, and are to be reconciled with it, not by any common or usual processes of language, but by his positive declarations that whatever he may seem to say, he does not actually mean to say anything which is unsound. If he is to speak to his pupils as he writes, (and can we hope that he will speak anywhere more carefully than in St. Mary's pulpit, as Bampton Lecturer,) what is to become of them? He cannot be saying to them perpetually, "Remember that I believe the Thirty-nine Articles; and, whatever I may seem to say, you are to reconcile it with them." What then is to become of the future clergy of England who will be consigned to his care? Are they to learn this strange mode of speaking on the most vital doctrines, and are we to learn from our pulpits these seeming negations of all the truths held most precious?

Were the objections not graver than this-viz., that Dr. Hampden's mode of speaking and writing on the great doctrines of religion is such that it requires our being reminded from without that he remains as a declared believer in the articles of our church, in order to arrive at the conclusion that he can do so, can any man say that he is a safe teacher of divinity, or that the government should have constituted him such?

But what are we to say of such statements as this? When speaking of our Lord's sacrifice for sin, he says, that the term atonement, in its true practical sense, expresses a certain phenomenon of human nature-viz., that it cannot be at peace without the consciousness of atonement made for its sins; but that Scripture has met this with a parallel fact-viz., the perfect righteousness of our Lord, "which it has connected with our unrighteousness, and whose strength it has brought to the aid of our weakness. Thus, Christ is said emphatically to be our atonement, not that we may attribute to God any change of purpose towards man by what Christ has done, but that we may know that we have passed from the death of sin to the life of righteousness by him, and that our own hearts may not condemn us.' Now, in treating of other subjects, every one must allow that Dr. H. speaks obscurely, that the subjects are abstruse, and one may fairly argue that when any man begins to speak metaphysically, as Dr. H. does, of the great mysteries of religion, it may require more depth and knowledge than even his warmest admirers would claim for him, to prevent his often saying what may be of doubtful interpretation. But can there be any doubt as to his meaning on this point? Is this to be the doctrine from English pulpits?

This melancholy subject is one which has made a deep impression on churchmen, and the impression is not one which will be diminished

by time. The evils of it will, if the lectures remain in Dr. H.'s hands, be felt more and more widely from year to year. Nor can the consequences of such opinions be foretold. If they should prevail to any extent, what can be anticipated but a great schism in the church, a resolute separation of the healthy from the unhealthy portion, even with all its fearful consequences? And all this, with popery and dissent open-mouthed for our destruction!

It can hardly be doubted that Dr. Hampden's active advocacy of the claims of the dissenters last year has been his recommendation. For he is not understood to be a political clergyman, nor to have obtained either good or ill will in that way. The dissenters are the active electioneering agents in the borough towns, and it must be a subject of the bitterest regret for the present, and the bitterest anticipation for the future, that (in all human probability) to please them, such sad sacrifices of our peace and safety are made. Who would have believed a few months ago that dissent could have struck such a blow at the church of England?

BISHOP OF DURHAM.

THE death of so eminent a prelate as the Bishop of Durham cannot be passed over in silence, however unworthy of his excellence the tribute which can be offered to it here must be.

There is a just and due reverence felt among mankind for deep learning, for accurate thought, for clear views, and for decision of judgment; and no small portion of respect attends him who possesses any one of these gifts or acquirements in an abundant measure. Their combination is, in the highest degree, rare; and yet it may be said, with perfect truth, that the Bishop of Durham possessed them all. What struck the stranger most, was perhaps the clearness and unhesitating decision of his judgment. A nearer view, however, shewed that this was not (as is often the case) the result of a particular constitution of nature a mere excellent gift, but that the clearness and certainty of the decision arose in at least an equal degree from a deep knowledge of the subject on which it was given, and accurate reflexion on that subject, under all its bearings. For his great learning, and the accuracy of his thought, the works which he has left are abundant vouchers. The deep impression made by his speeches in Parliament, and the weight which they carried with them, sufficiently attest the clearness of his views, and the strength of his decisions. They who saw his retired life, and knew his earlier habits, might not have expected parliamentary speaking to have been a field well fitted for the display of his powers; but it was otherwise. His opponents always felt the weight of his speeches most forcibly; and the more generous among them were not slow to confess it. His words were clear, ready, and dignified; and, above all, everything he said was commended by the unsullied integrity of his life, and the uncompromising steadfastness of his principles.

Elevated from comparative poverty to distinguished stations, and finally to the command of large affluence, he brought with him none VOL. IX.-March, 1836.

2 x

« PreviousContinue »