mission of crimes? 8. Is not the Law of God, which, when rightly understood, affords an additional sanction to the Law of Man, so perverted by such a belief, as to become the means of counteracting the law of Man? 9. Is not such a belief injurious also to the individual, as well as to Society at large, by exciting ungrounded hopes in the confident hypocrite, 5 and driving modest virtue to despair? 10. Though the Creator is not accountable to the Creature, and His will alone determines, who shall be elected to eternal life, is it credible that a Being of infinite wisdom, justice, and goodness should elect on any other principles, than such as are consistent with those attributes? II. And does not absolute or indiscriminate 10 Election annul the distinctions of good and evil, of virtue and vice? Is therefore such Election possible on the part of a Being, who is infinitely wise, just, and good?'

12.

'CHAPTER VII. Of Regeneration, or the New Birth... 7. Is not our New or Spiritual Birth, as well as our First or Natural Birth, an event, 15 which happens only once in our lives? 8. If then we believe in the doctrine of our Church, that the New Birth takes place at Baptism, can we believe that they, who have been baptized according to the rites of that Church, will be regenerated at any other period?'

'CHAPTER VIII. Of Renovation... 6. Do not even the best of men 20 require, during the whole course of their lives, the aid of the Holy Spirit, to secure them from the danger of sin? 7. Is it not then presumption to suppose, that at any period of our lives, we can have become, either so perfect, or so secure, as to have no longer need of Renovation?'

Sam. Parr to Lord Holland, June 11, 1822. (Works VII. 144-146): 25 'I congratulate you upon your victory over the Bishop [of Peterborough]; I know him deeply, and he has more than once smarted under my lash. You were right in charging him with an ignoratio elenchi, as the case stood before the House. Yet the Bishop has a right to examine, and the distinction lies in this. In points of faith, the only rule is the thirty-nine articles; 30 for the Prayer-book is a question of discipline. The Prayer-book is confirmed by Parliament, and makes a part of the law; it cannot be altered without Parliament. We subscribe it-we consent to it-we subscribe ex animo to the use of the Book of Common Prayer. But what does ex animo mean? My Lord, it means not any opinion, but consent to practical use 35 ...... When joined to words of [or, as printed, is a clerical error] wishing, then it means readily, heartily......Now if a candidate is forbidden to use his own interpretation, so a Bishop lies under the same interdict; but Marsh transgressed that interdict by his written questions, and therefore there was no force in his plea, that the questions arose out of the articles. The Bishop 40 requires subscription, and the candidate subscribes, according to the sensus popularis. And both must be content with general declaration......Marsh says, "I have a right to examine candidates after their faith;" true, but the exercise of that right is limited-he is to be satisfied with their faith as it is manifested by the mere act of subscription. Well, have you no other 45 right to examine? Yes. What is the right? It is to examine the proficiency of the candidate in learning. Here his power is considerable............... My Lord, if Marsh be right, all other Bishops are wrong by neglecting their duty. I shall like to have my books at hand, and to converse two or

three mornings with you and Lord John Russell. Marsh will persevere, but change his form; I know that the Bishops are not pleased with him, though in all probability they will vote for him. Their silence was properly noticed in your House. I wish Lord Eldon to be chastised......You will 5 have again to contend with Marsh-pray collect matter. I am no bigot; but I do firmly maintain, that the result of arguing in your Lordship will be creditable to the Church-indeed it will, and that too amidst a great diversity of opinion-every circumstance will bear hard upon Marsh. You may eulogize Marsh's acuteness as a polemic, but you should not be so pro10 fuse in your praises upon his learning. I hear that he, from his officiousness and querulousness, is on bad terms with his Clergy; they will rejoice at his disgrace.'

Same to same, Hatton, June 14, 1822 (ibid. 148-150): 'I agree with your Lordship in resisting entirely the principle of a right to examine can15 didates by the test of any interpretation which any individual Bishop may be pleased to put on the meaning of the thirty-nine articles......But you must not, without some qualifications, oppose the right of a Bishop to examine a candidate. The question is to what extent and upon what points the examination is to go. I maintain that it goes to the learning of the 20 candidate, when he comes for ordination; and we must all along suppose that no complaint lies against his moral character..........The faith of the candidate is to be ascertained by a certificate from three clergymen, that to the best of their belief he has neither taught nor holden any opinion which impugns the doctrine or discipline of the Established Church; by the candi25 date's own subscription to the thirty-nine articles; and by the declaration of his consent, ex animo, to use the Liturgy as fixed by the law. Beyond these three points no Bishop has any concern with the faith of a candidate ......If a candidate betrays great inattention to the most common points of theology, great ignorance of the Greek Testament, great incapacity to 30 express his thoughts in Latin or English, then the want of learning will authorize the Bishop to reject him. Again, the Bishop may choose some subject connected or unconnected with the Articles, and command the candidate to write upon it. If the candidate should write absurdly, or very ungrammatically, the Bishop may reject him; if he writes very ingeniously 35 and very correctly, and at the same time manifests a deliberate intention to impugn the doctrine or discipline of the Church of England, then the Bishop may well say, that the unsoundness of his faith is not expiated by his erudition......The conduct of the Bishop of Peterborough is a gross and illegal innovation.'

40

Same to same, 14 Febr. 1823 (ibid. 158): 'It is worth your Lordship's while to buy a Charge. delivered by Magee, now Archbishop of Dublin, to the Clergy of Raphoe. He is very superior to Marsh in acuteness, vigour, and eloquence; and in page 31 of that Charge he stoutly maintains opinions which are opposite to those of Marsh upon the rights of individual Bishops 45 to interpret the Articles their own way. The authority of Magee is deservedly great; and in the House of Lords his words might be quoted with great advantage by any assailant of Marsh,'

Parr's dislike to Marsh may have been partly due to political differences; but was certainly exasperated by personal feeling. In 1817 Parr

coveted the see of Peterborough (Works, VII. 262); and had much correspondence with Marsh, as with Spencer, Madan, and John Parsons before him, on the subject of his non-residence. (Life by Jo. Johnstone, 789).

Christian Observer, June 1822, p. 390: 'We have not yet seen the amended edition, and therefore can say nothing of it. We understand that 5 the subject is likely to be mooted in the house of commons before the close of the present session.'

The wrongs of the Clergy of the diocese of Peterborough stated and illustrated. By the Rev. T. S. Grimshawe, M.A. rector of Burton, Northamptonshire; and vicar of Biddenham, Bedfordshire. London, Seeley. 1822. 8vo. 10 A refutation of Mr. Grimshawe's pamphlet, entitled "The wrongs.. illustrated." In which is given a correct account of the causes which have called forth the violent and abusive pamphlets against the bishop of Peterborough, &c. &c. London: printed for F.C. and J. Rivington, St. Paul's Church-yard, and Waterloo-place, Pall-Mall. 1822. 8vo. pp. 28.

15

Pp. 2, 3: Before the author of the following sheets proceeds to develope the real causes which have induced Mr. Grimshawe.. to labour... to rouse some inconsiderate men to again attack by the imposing means of a petition to the Senate one of the firmest pillars of the Church, it becomes him solemnly to affirm, that if in his belief there existed the least leaning 20 in the Bishop of Peterborough towards oppression, the least wish to impose a galling yoke on the Clergy, or even a prejudiced or narrow view of the sectarians and their tenets, he would be among the first to raise his voice against that or any other Prelate. But it is under the firm conviction that the whole proceedings have been dictated by a party smarting under detection, 25 disappointment, and a species of opposition as just as it is undisguised and powerful, . . . which has led the writer of the ensuing pages to take up the pen of controversy.'

...

Pp. 4, 5: Simeon's fund for the purchase of advowsons: 'even in the University of Cambridge reside some of the most persevering Sectarians, 30 who not only inculcate their doctrines among the students, and have regular breakfasts and meetings to which they are invited, but are ever on the watch to forward the purchase of these smaller livings, . . and thus their sect is continually strengthened with temporal possessions.'

Pp. 6, 7. Marsh's questions. 'These questions are so constructed as to 35 preclude the possibility of any member of the Sectarians above alluded to from escaping detection if their doctrine is unsound.' Pp. 8, 9. The questions no new standard. Nor has Mr. Grimshawe any right to complain about the rejection which gave rise to his pamphlet. The writer of these sheets has been credibly informed, that the person whom Mr. Grim- 40 shawe wished to have for his curate, though he did not absolutely refuse to be examined, gave his answers in so confused and ambiguous a manner that it was impossible to determine what his doctrines really were.' Pp. 10, II: Bp. Marsh 'is liberal in all his views respecting Sectarians, and out of the many instances which have come to my knowledge, I will relate one. 45 During the excitation caused by the examination before the Peers into the conduct of the late Queen, a Clergyman of the Church who had been converted from Judaism, was so active and loud in his chivalrous expressions

even from the pulpit, that the Rector of his Church in London no longer required his services. He procured a Curacy in the Diocese of Peterborough, to which after some advice he was licensed. The conduct of the parties by whom he was appointed not being as liberal as it should have 5 been, the Prelate interfered, and by his authority settled the stipend he was entitled to receive.' Pp. 11-19. The church of England excludes Calvinists. Pp. 19, 20. The curate nominated by Grimshawe in June 1820 was refused a licence on his refusal to submit to examination; Grimshawe threatened to petition parliament, but changed his mind. Pp. Case of Nevile's curate; pamphlets against Marsh. Pp. 22, 23. Grimshawe requested Marsh to give up his questions and threatened an appeal to law. Thurtell, whom he appointed curate, returned the questions 'with very strange answers, and with them, as an Appendix, three closely-written folio sheets filled up with confused dissertations and reserva15 tions, and so replete with restrictions, that it was impossible to discover what the opinions of Mr Thurtell were.' The bp. returned the questions, requesting plain answers. Thurtell replied that 'he could not give direct and positive answers. Therefore he was refused a licence.'

IO 20-22.

P. 25 Whenever erroneous replies have been returned,.. Bishop 20 Marsh has in every instance tried by argument and expostulation to convince the candidate of his errors, and always with that success, (excepting in the two instances before alluded to), which attends ability, learning, and kindness of heart.'

There is a temperate paper by Clericus against the 'Questions' in the 25 Christian Observer for July 1822, pp. 402–407.

A vindication of the right rev. the lord bishop of Peterborough from the animadversions of a writer in the Edinburgh Review: A letter to the rev. S[ydney] S[mith] rector of F[oston], &c. &c. by Hierophilus. London: printed for C. and J. Rivington, 62, St. Paul's church-yard, and 3, Waterloo-place, 30 Pall-Mall. 1823. 8vo. pp. 31.

On the article in the Nov. number, in which Marsh had been called 'bitter, bustling, tormenting;' in reply to Smith's charge of novelty (p. 28): 'Could you possibly be ignorant that at the time when this mode of enquiry was adopted by his lordship, a string of questions was already handed about 35 amongst young men preparing for the ministry, the tendency of some of which, with reverence be it spoken, was ill-calculated to promote sober piety and judicious ministration? The only come-at-able specimen of doctrinal examination previous to the dispersion of his lordship's questions when bishop of Llandaff, was one too likely to mislead.'

40 In fact Smith had spoken (Edinb. Rev. XXVII. 433) of Marsh with courtesy rare in that journal. We shall acquit the Bishop of all wrong intentions. He has a very bad opinion of the practical effects of high Calvinistic doctrines upon the common people; and he thinks it his duty to exclude those clergymen who profess them from his diocese. There is no 45 moral wrong in this..... We have no sort of intention to avail ourselves of an anonymous publication to say unkind, uncivil, or disrespectful things to a man of rank learning and character.' P. 434: No one bishop defended Marsh in the house. His Lordship states, that forty years ago, he was himself examined by written interrogatories, and that he is not the only

Bishop who has done it; but he mentions no names; and it was hardly worth while to state such extremely slight precedents for so strong a deviation from the common practice of the Church....

"The Bishop of Glocester ordains a young man of twenty-three years of age, not thinking it necessary to put to him these interrogatories, or putting 5 them perhaps, and approving of answers diametrically opposite to those that are required by the Bishop of Peterborough. The young clergyman then comes to the last-mentioned Bishop; and the Bishop, after putting him to the Question, says, 'You are unfit for a clergyman,'-though, ten days before, the Bishop of Glocester has made him one!'

IO

Pp. 437, 438: 'The Bishop not only puts the questions, but he actually assigns the limits within which they are to be answered. Spaces are left in the paper of interrogations, to which limits the answer is to be confined ;two inches to original sin; an inch and a half to justification; three-quarters to predestination; and to free-will only a quarter of an inch. But if his 15 Lordship gives them an inch, they will take an ell. His Lordship is himself a theological writer, and by no means remarkable for his conciseness. To deny space to his brother theologians, who are writing on the most difficult subjects, not from choice, but necessity; not for fame, but for bread; and to award rejection as the penalty of prolixity, does appear to us 20 no slight deviation from Christian gentleness. The tyranny of calling for such short answers is very strikingly pointed out in a letter from Mr. Thurtell to the Bishop.... "Beccles Aug. 28, 1821.... But it appears to me, that the Questions proposed to me by your Lordship are so constructed as to elicit only two sets of opinions; and that by answering them in so concise a 25 manner, I should be representing myself to your Lordship as believes in either of two particular creeds, to neither of which I do really subscribe.... I deem it indispensable to my acting with that candour and truth with which it is my wish and duty to act, to state my opinions in that language which expresses them most fully, plainly, and unreservedly. 30 This I have endeavoured to do in the answers now in the possession of your Lordship... I would humbly and respectfully appeal to your Lordship's candour, whether it is not hard to demand my decided opinion upon points which have been the themes of volumes; upon which the most pious and learned men of the Church have conscientiously differed; and upon which 35 the Articles, in the judgement of Bishop Burnet, have pronounced no definite sentence."'

...

one who

P. 441 The Bishop... is so thoroughly convinced of the pernicious effects of Calvinistic doctrines, that he does what no other Bishop does, or ever did do, for their exclusion. This may be either wise or injudicious, 40 but it is at least zealous and bold; it is to encounter rebuke and opposition from a sense of duty. It is impossible to deny this merit to his Lordship.'

P. 442 His Lordship boasts, that he has excluded only two curates. So the Emperor of Hayti boasted that he had only cut off two persons' heads for disagreeable behaviour at his table. In spite of the paucity of the 45 visitors executed, the example operated as a considerable impediment to conversation... How many persons have been deprived of curacies which they might have enjoyed, but for the tenor of these interrogatories ?' P. 447: 'The Bishop complains of the insolence of the answers made to