The Sun.
London, England, 1849-12-18 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

JUDICIAL COMAIITTEE OF THE
PRIVY COUNCIL.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Archbishop of
York, the Bishop of London, the Marquis of Lana-
dowte, Lord Langdale, Lord Campbell, Mr. Baron
Parke, the Vice-Char.cellor Knight Bruce, Dr. Lush-
thgton, and Mr. Pemberton Leigh.)
GORHAM V. THE BISHOP OF EXETER.
The argument in this case was again resumed this
morning on the re assembling of tho Council, at ten
0 clt,ek.

Nothing can exceed the patience and attention which
ev,ell Member of this h!gh tribunal has bestowed upon
protracted, learned, and ing( nious arguments which
"11/0 been addressed to it, on the important question
le'eolved in this case, by the counsel on both
sides, After the second or third day, slight
algtlS of impatience were indicated by one or two
kezbers of the Council at the great length the argu-
!lent Was likely to run to, and a hint was more than
once thrown out to the Counsel that it would be highly
desirable if their speeches could be condensed without in-
Juring their force and efficacy • but, apart from those mo-
mentary signs of impatience, Lore seems to have been an
earnest endeavour prevalent among their Lordships
Iron) the first to give to the momentous question sub•
witted to their consideration and decision that sedulous
attention which it deserves at their bands.
The attendance of auditors this morning in the Coun-
cil Chamber showed that the public interest in the pro-
ceedings had not in the slightest degree abated.
Lord CAMPBELL said that he had met with the terms
Prevenient grace" in a passage in Milton's Paradise
4°.q. It occurred in the beginning of the eleventh book,
and whilst Mr. Badeley was arranging his papers, he
(Lord Campbell) would read the passage he had referred
le; It was related at the end of the tenth book that
Adam and Eve had committed a sin for which they felt
the greatest remorse, and sued heaven for pardon with
"notions of the deepest contrition, and the passage in
question proceeded as fellows :
"Thus they, in lowliest plight, repentant stood
Praying; for from the Mercy- seat above
Prevenient grace descending, had removed
The stony from their hearts, and made new flesh
Regenerate grow instead, that sighs now breathed
Unutterable, which the Spirit of prayer
Inspired, and wing'd far Heaven with speediest flight
Than loudest oratory."
Mr. BADELEY resumed his address shortly after ten
o'clock.
, He contended that the early Church had
without deviation held the doctrine of baptismal
regeneration. In proof of this he read voluminous
extracts from the Fathers. He then referred to the
Articles and formularies of the Church, and enumerated
from
principal persons concerned in their preparation, and
pal thence deduced that the doctrines entertained by
" appellant were inconsistent with the opinions of the
early Church on the fundamental doctrine of baptismal
regeneration.
It was remarkable bow the tone of the
tethers of the Church rose whilst treating the subject
t)f baptismal regeneration, and how eloquent their lan-
Page was in comparison with their more laboured
treatment of matters of minor importance. No doubt
.12 fathers were impressed with the importance and
'lLlcaey of the sacrament of baptism, and their language
expreseive of the doctrine of baptismal regeneration was
eloquent and dignified. The Learned Counsel proceeded
3 contend that the doctrine held by the fathers was
eoaflrmed by the Church at the time of the Reformation,
a was undoubtedly held moreover by the Church at
'4O present day; and in support of that position he read
tttracts from Bingham's Ecclesiastical Antiquities,
"alit on infant baptism, a work of Iremeus, an oration,
published by Saint Gregory iu the fourth century, the
*tontines of St. Augustine and St. Zeno, and Harding's
The passages be had read from the writings
i? the early fathers showed that they, without an excep-
Z'oes held that spiritual regeneration was given
"ceenditioaally to infants at baptism, and that
I prevenient act of grace was necessary. The
helplessness and innocency of infants were deemed
154Meient for the due administration of the sacrament ;
dud thatevas clearly and distinctly laid down in the 10th
Z,Ulutne of Saint Augustine's, p. 7, Benedictine edition.
'l4,e submitted that the structure of the formularies of
re ancient Church, passages of which he read, abun-
"4l4 proved that the doctrine for which he had been
contending bad been entertained by both the Eastern
441 Western Churches, and, indeed, by the whole of
Chri,tendom at that time.
that
LIISHINGTON asked if those formularies indicated
:lit anything beyond the grace of baptism was conveyed
• baptism ? He could find nothing analogous to the
'Pus operatum.
Mr. BADELEY said he understood that the full benefit
eta conveyed in and by baptism.
The Bishop of LONDON—lncluding the grace of God?
Mr. BADELEY said the grace of God was given by the
t ilnPle administration of the rite, in the case of infants;
t
in adults, frith and repentance on their parts were
fleeessary. Having shown what were the opinions of
• e ancient Church, both its the east and west, on the
subject of baptismal regeneration, the Learned Counsel
reed passages from the writings of the Venerable Bede,
bPeilhan's Concilia, the works of Bishop Wilkins, and a
t,.._°°k published by John d'Bargh in the fourteenth cen-
e7Y, to prove that the doctrine of baptismal regeneration
the
held by the Anglican Church contemporaneously with
`aLe Eastern and Western Churches. In Cranmer 'e Cate-
rape there was the sermon on baptism ; and he (Mr.
Ideley) believed that the opinions of Cranmer on the
bJect ut baptism were sound and consistent with the
141 ions of the early Church. ,It was remarkable that
Cranmer, who had altered his opinions on almost every
ether doctrine, had never changed his views on the sub-
Itet of baptism. Craumer laid it down in his Catechism,
at infants by baptism " were born again to the king-
ilLu▪ °_'ll3l„ of God ;" and in his sermon on baptism he set
a the benefits of baptism most fully, speaking of re-
retleration in particular. That was the doctrine held
_
Cranmer
:u_tle.ority at that timer It had been said that Cranmer
il4s_llnfluenced in his opinion on baptism by Bucer and
11..ter Martyn; but that could scarcely be, for Peter
was a Zuingliau, who was totally unsound on the
• aJect ot baptism; whilst Bucer was a Lutheran, and
IC•rt.ained Catholic doctrine. He had been told, too,
of'.t,_the parties employed in drawing up the formularies
• itte Church were Calvinists. He (Mr. Badeley) de-
ev that assertion ;it was historically untrue. And
~;47a_osupposing they were Calvinists, there was no autho-
tp".Y_ r saying that they drew up the formularies cone
,7Y to the well-known doctrines of the whole Churci>,
:nth the view ot accommodating them to their own
yob ©°f
What ground was there for saying at h
of the Reformation Cranmer and the other partieste
vin drew up the Articles had a leaning towards Cal-
riod n;;:. There was none whatever, for at that pe-
ve_ e. esentsm had nut become rife, and was indeed
bor..). little known if known at all. Melancthon was Pas. Calvinist ; 'and it is known that he expunged
(gages from a book of a Calvinistic character. He
~-,41,181; _Badeley) contended it was historically untrue that
rhen'uer, Luther, or Melancthon were Calvinists.
Nlureh bee "'no down to the Articles of the
tR u of England, drawn up in Convocation
eh0w.)..2 and there was nothing whatever to
"'At whetever the opinions might be of the iodi-