Copy of the Clerical Petition, relative to the subscription to the 39 Articles, signed by 250 clergymen and others, and offered on the 6th February, 1772, to the House of Commons,* with subsequent proceedings. "To the Honourable the Commons of Great Britain, in Parliament assembled. "The humble petition of certain of the Clergy of the Church of England, and of certain of the two professions of Civil Law and Physic, and others, whose names are hereunto subscribed, "Sheweth, "That your petitioners apprehend themselves to have certain rights and privileges which they hold of God only, and which are subject to his authority alone. That of this kind is the free exercise of their own reason and judgment, whereby they have been brought to, and confirmed in, the belief of the Christian religion, as it is contained in the Holy Scriptures. That they esteem it a great blessing to live under a constitution, which, in its original principles, ensures to them the full and free profession of their faith, having asserted the authority and sufficiency of Holy Scriptures in — ‘all things necessary to salvation; so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation.' That your petitioners do conceive that they have a natural right, and are also warranted by those original principles of the reformation from Popery, on which the Church of England is constituted, to judge in searching the Scriptures each man for himself, what may or may not be proved thereby. That they find themselves, however, in a great measure precluded the enjoyment of this invaluable privilege by the laws relating to subscription; whereby your petitioners are required to acknowledge certain articles and confessions of faith and doctrine, drawn up by fallible men, to be all and every of them * From the Annual Register for 1772, p. 171. agreeable to the said Scriptures. Your petitioners therefore pray that they may be relieved from such an imposition upon their judgment, and be restored to their undoubted right as Protestants of interpreting Scripture for themselves, without being bound by any human explications thereof, or required to acknowledge, by subscription or declaration, the truth of any formulary of religious faith and doctrine whatsoever, beside Holy Scripture itself. "That your petitioners not only are themselves aggrieved by subscription, as now required, (which they cannot but consider as an encroachment on their rights, competent to them both as men and as members of a Protestant establishment,) but with much grief and concern apprehend it to be a great hindrance to the spreading of Christ's true religion: As it tends to preclude, at least to discourage, further enquiry into the true sense of Scripture, to divide Communions, and cause mutual dislike between fellow Protestants: As it gives a handle to unbelievers to reproach and vilify the clergy, by representing them (when they observe their diversity of opinion touching those very articles which were agreed upon for the sake of avoiding the diversities of opinion) as guilty of prevarication, and of accommodating their faith to lucrative views or political considerations: As it affords to Papists, and others disaffected to our religious establishment, occasion to reflect upon it as inconsistently framed, admitting and authorizing doubtful and precarious doctrines, at the same time that Holy Scripture alone is acknowledged to be certain and sufficient for salvation: As it tends (and the evil daily increases) unhappily to divide the clergy of the Establishment themselves, subjecting one part thereof, who assert their Protestant privilege to question every human doctrine, and bring it to the test of Scripture, to be reviled, as well from the pulpit as the press, by another part, who seem to judge the articles they have subscribed to be of equal authority with the Holy Scripture itself: And lastly, as it occasions scruples and embarrassments of conscience to thoughtful and worthy persons in regard to entrance into the ministry or cheerful continuance in the exercise of it. "That the clerical part of your petitioners, upon whom it is peculiarly incumbent, and who are more immediately appointed by the state, to maintain and defend the truth as it is in Jesus, do find themselves under a great restraint in their endeavours herein, by being obliged to join issue with the adversaries of revelation, in supposing the one true sense of Scripture to be expressed in the established system of faith, or else to incur the reproach of having departed from their subscriptions, the suspicion of insincerity, and the repute of being ill-affected to the Church; whereby their comfort and usefulness among their respective flocks, as well as their success against the adversaries of our common Christianity are greatly obstructed. "That such of your petitioners as have been educated with a view to the several professions of Civil Law and Physic, cannot but think it a great hardship to be obliged (as are all in one of the Universities, even at their first admission or matriculation, and at an age so immature for disquisitions and decisions of such moment) to subscribe their unfeigned assent to a variety of theological propositions, concerning which their private opinions can be of no consequence to the public, in order to entitle them to academical degrees in those faculties; more especially as the course of their studies, and attention to their practice respectively, afford them neither the means nor the leisure to examine whether and how far such propositions do agree with the word of God. "That certain of your petitioners have reason to lament, not only their own, but the too probable misfortune of their sons, who, at an age before the habit of reflection can be formed, or their judgment matured, must, if the present mode of subscription remains, be irrecoverably bound down in points of the highest consequence, to the tenets of ages less informed than their own. 66 That, whereas the first of the three articles, enjoined by the 36th canon of the Church of England to be subscribed, contains a recognition of his Majesty's supremacy in all causes ecclesiastical and civil, your petitioners humbly presume, that every security, proposed by subscription to the said article, is fully and effectually provided for by the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, prescribed to be taken by every deacon and priest at their ordination, and by every graduate in both Universities. Your petitioners, nevertheless, are ready and willing to give any further testimony which may be thought expedient, of their affection for his Majesty's person and government, of their attachment and dutiful submission in Church and State, of their abhorrence of the unchristian spirit of Popery, and of all those maxims of the Church of Rome, which tend to enslave the consciences, or to undermine the civil or religious liberty, of a free Protestant people. "Your petitioners, in consideration of the premises, do now humbly supplicate this Honourable House, in hope of being relieved from an obligation so incongruous with the right of private judgment, so pregnant with danger to true religion, and so productive of distress to many pious and conscientious men, and useful subjects of the state; and in that hope look up for redress, and humbly submit their cause, under God, to the wisdom and justice of a British Parliament, and the piety of a Protestant King. "And your petitioners shall ever pray," &c. This petition was signed by Archdeacon Blackburne, who was probably the author of the celebrated work, entitled, "The Confessional, or a full and free enquiry into the right, utility, edification, and success of establishing systematical Confessions of Faith and Doctrine in Protestant Churches;" and it also received the signatures of the Rev. Theophilus Lindsey, and the Rev. John Jebb, as well as those of Wyvill, Law, Disney, Chambers, and many other men of high consideration in point of talents, learning, and moral worth. It was read to the House of Commons by Sir William Meredith, who spoke in its support, and a spirited debate ensued on the question of bringing the petition up, which was ultimately decided in the negative, by a large majority (217 to 71). In the course of the discussion, the Hon. Mr. Fitzmaurice said, that "as to the Universities, he believed, that they had a power to remedy any defect of this nature, (probably alluding to the subscription test,) which there might be in their constitution, and he was persuaded, that upon proper application they would be ready to undertake so desirable a work. Why then bring the affair before this House? the step was certainly precipitate." SUBSCRIPTION AT MATRICULATION. 671 Lord George Germain declared, with reference to the thirtynine articles, that it appeared to him "a melancholy thought and indeed a crying grievance, that his son at sixteen must subscribe, upon entering the University [of Oxford] what he himself could not understand, much less explain to him, at sixty. The matter certainly called aloud for redress, and ought alone, as had been justly observed, to determine them to enter into the merits of this petition."* Mr. Charles Jenkinson commenced his speech, by stating, that "the subscription required from young students at the Universities upon matriculation seemed to have struck the House as the most forcible argument for taking this petition into consideration. But let him ask, have the Universities been properly solicited to grant relief in this case? He conceived not; because if they had, they would in all probability have rectified the abuse. It was said, indeed, that they did not possess the power; but that was said without any authority. The University of Oxford had lately altered its constitution in a much more essential article: it had made a new regulation in the qualification necessary to entitle a man to vote in choosing members of parliament. Having allowed them the power of altering their laws in the greater point, how could they deny it them in the less? Suffer the Universities themselves then to rectify this matter, they had the power and, he hoped, the will; when they failed it would be time enough for them (the House) to take the point into consideration." Lord John Cavendish declared, that he was sure, that "the articles wanted a revision; because several of them were heterodox and absurd, warranted neither by reason nor by scripture, and savouring strongly of the dark ages, in which the doctrines in them were originally fabricated. For let me tell you, (he continued,) these articles are much older than the Reformation. Many of them are Popish tenets, invented by a crafty priesthood, when they were forging chains for the human mind, and sinking it into ignorance and barbarism, that being masters in spiritual, they might also become lords and masters in temporal concerns. What * Cobbett's Parliamentary History of England, vol. xvii. p. 266. |