Part 3

Before I conclude, I have a few words to add in reference to the publication of your pamphlet:—and first I would observe, that if you have failed in the proof of your proposition—if your allegations in the main stand contradicted by facts—if there is every reason to believe that the Clergy, although varying somewhat in matters unimportant, do, with comparatively few exceptions, subscribe _ex animo_ to the Articles and Liturgy—I then leave with you to determine, however you may “believe yourself engaged in the cause of truth,” in what manner your pamphlet is calculated to ascertain and promote it within the Church of England. Whatever may be your determination on this head, the judgment of the Clergy of this diocese, at least, is condemnatory of the course which you have taken. They feel that, for a period of years, from time to time, by your publications, you have vexed the Church in general, and this diocese in particular, troubled Israel, and given occasion to the enemies of the Church to exult. In this very pamphlet have you not described to us, in clear terms, what must be the value of a clergyman’s ministry among his flock, when his character for integrity—his honesty in his ordination vow—is suspected? Have you not put into the mouths of “some youthful profligates, led on by an ingenious sceptic,” questions relating to the Clergy, highly defamatory of their character as ministers of Christ, and injurious to the best interests of religion? Do you not suppose that your pamphlet has been perused by many who will rejoice in turning it to the worst of purposes—the purposes of infidelity—against the Clergy collectively, yourself individually, and the religion of Christ generally? Do you suppose that this publication has not been discussed in many dissenting assemblies of this diocese, and exultingly responded to—“Ah! so would we have it, so would we have it?” Too much reason have the Clergy to say, in sorrow and in sadness—“It is not an open enemy that has done us this dishonor;” it is a brother—one of our own order—a dignitary of our own Church, who is partaking of the same bread—

This, you may say, is hard language.—“But is there not a cause?” When I turn to the sentence, “While we thus perceive the variety of opinion prevailing amongst these several sections, we see also that from _all_ of them, more or less, Subscription is requiring that which, in the ordinary affairs of life, high-minded men would abstain from, _viz._ the necessity for qualifying the plain and straight-forward use of language;” and when I find you finally concluding, “In this state of things, I can hardly imagine any diversity of opinion, with respect to the Thirty-nine Articles, which calls for the resignation of a Clergyman; indeed it appears to me, that it would be simply absurd in any one to resort to such a step, unless under a decided wish for communion with some other church or body of christians”—I own that I am still startled at this bold expression of opinion: and I confess that, after much reflection, I have been at a loss to couch in softer terms, my sense of this grave imputation, and of this deliberate avowal, thus placed on record.

I have now finished a task in which I engaged with reluctance. I trust that I have fairly and temperately gone through the discussion of the subject; and I can aver that I have carefully endeavored not to misunderstand or misrepresent any thing which you have written. I hope, also, that I have given an impartial consideration to whatever you have advanced in support of your case: unfeignedly have I labored to investigate the subject in all its bearings, and arrive at an unbiassed result. How far I have succeeded in my object, others will judge. This, however, I will affirm, that, in the discharge of a public duty to which I have been unavoidably called, I have been actuated by no motive of private consideration, and especially by no unfriendly feeling towards yourself. And in conclusion I will add that, if anything which I may have advanced in explanation or in support of the present Subscription to our Articles or Formularies, should happily have placed the matter in a different and more satisfactory point of view, so as to clear up your present doubt and perplexity, I should feel more gratification and delight than I am able to express. And I hope, by the blessing of that God whose providence over-rules all things for good, this feeble effort may not be without its use.

I have the honor to be, SIR, Your sincere and faithful Servant, CHARLES GREEN.

BURGH CASTLE, 8_th_ _July_, 1843.

* * * * *

~~~~~~~~~

THE END.

* * * * *

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SLOMAN, Printer, King-Street, Yarmouth.

FOOTNOTES.

{8} Reformation is good when reformation is wanting, but to be always reforming is no reformation at all: it is behaving like children, tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine. All errors of any moment have been purged off long ago by the care of our Reformers, and why are we then still reforming? Physic may be proper at certain seasons, but to pretend to live constantly upon it, instead of food, is the certain way to impair, and in a little time to destroy, the best and soundest constitution in the world. _Remarks on Dr. Clarke’s Exposition_, _&c._ by Waterland, (_Works_, vol. 5, p. 436.)

{14} Romans, xiv. 4.

{22a} Mark xvi. 16.

{22b} Luke xii. 47, 48.

{22c} Romans, iii. 19.

{22d} Romans, ii. 12.

{23} John, iii. 19.

{25} Pearson on the Creed, Article ix, page 350. Archbishop Seeker, &c.

{27} I quote from memory, not having the pamphlet before me, nor being able to procure it; but trust what I have advanced is substantially correct.

{28} 1 Corinthians, xi. 18.

{29} I would undertake to prove that there is not an Article in any of our three Creeds, which was not directed against some particular and prevailing error. Dr. Burton’s _Sermons_ before the University of Oxford, p. 248.