Star.
London, England, 1821-06-15 00:00:00

COMPLAINT AGAINST A BISHOP.

Lord KING presented a Petition from a Clergy-
man of tha*lnle of H. W. Neville, Rector of Blake-
with, in aheaffiodese of Peterborough, and County of
Northampton, complaining of the conduct of his
Diocesan. The Clergyman in question having ano-
ther living where he wished to employ a Curate, the
Bishop of the Diocese had tendered to the Curate a
list of eighty-seven questions, and had subsequently
refused to induct him. The Petitioner had com-
plained to the Archbishop 'of Canterbury, who had
been of opinion that the conduct of the Bishop had
been perfectly warranted, and the Petitioner having
no other means of redress, had been compelled, with
much reluctance, to come before the House. The
Noble Lord said, it was difficult to ascertain the pre-.
cise limits of the canon law; but he believed, in a
case like the present, an appeal would lie to the com-
mon law of the land. T'se. law made it imperative
on a Clergyman to sign the 39 Articles, and lieeeald
see no right •the Bishop could have to require the
assent of .a Clergyman to distinct propositions of his
own: Under such circumstances it was mockers to
desire the l'etitioner to seek for redress where it
might be legally obtained. He (Lord King) had
heard, that questions similar to those proposed by the
Learned Prelate, had been termed cobwebs to catch
Calvinists. His main objection to such practices
was, that they had a tendency to produce a schism
in the Church. Peace and quiet and order, were the
great desiderata in the Church, and that had been
the doctrine and practice of all its ornaments, from
Hooker to Clarke. The 39 Articles themselves were
to be regarded chiefly as Articles of peace, arid per-
haps the less that was said of them the better. If by
an attempt to procure uniformity, the peace of the
Church should be endangered, he conceived it would
have been much more prudent not to agitate such
questions ; and he was surprised that the Learned
Prelate had not been of the same opinion.—The Peti-
tion was then read.
The Bishop of PETERBOROUGH said, that the
Petitioner had nominated a second Curate, who had
been licensed, and gave much satisfaction to the pa-
rishioner. After the lapse of many months, he was
surprised by the information that the Petitioner in.
tended to apply to the Legislature. The Petitioner
had in the first instance applied to the Archbishop of
Canterbury ; and in consequence of the Archbishop's
answer, the Petitioner had made a second nomina-
tion, which had been perfectly unobjectionable. The
question brought before their Lordships was not one
of law, but of mere theology. The 48th Canon had
left the mode of examination wholly to the Bishop,
and wisely; as he must be the best judge of the
wants of the parishioners. No objection, till about
ten months back, had ever been made to the q res-
Lions he had been in the habit of proposing. No se-
cular authority had ever interfered with the questions
proposed by the Bishop ; and as long as the Canons
were in force, the Bishop could act in no other man-
ner. The only object of the questions was, to ascer-
tain if the oeinions of the Clergyman-were consonant
to those of the Established Church ; and of that, as
appeared from the pamphlet he had published, the
Petitioner must have been fully aware. His questions
were always sent to the Clergyman, that they might
be answered at his leisure, and to none whose answers
were agreeable to the principles of the Established
Church, had induction been refused. He (the Bi-
shop) acknowledged no standard but that of the Esta-
blished Church, and demanded subscription to no
other.. If all power of examination should be taken
away from the Bishop, the case would soon be the
same as in certain parts of Switzerland, where there
was a Clergy subscribing to the doctrines of Calvin,
and preaching the tenets of Socinius. The questionS
he had put related wholly to sound doctrine, and
only one Curate had been refused induction for his
answers to the questions; and another for giving no
answer at all. That had bees the extent of the griev-
ance; and the questions had been approved by the
great body of the Clergy, as a check upon fanaticism.
Ile would leave the case in their Lordships' hands.
Lord KING, in reply, observed, that the only ques-
tion was, whether or not a new standard had been
introduced ? None of tire Learned Prelates had stated
that they had put similar questions. He should move
that the Petition be-laid on the table.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY stated, that
in the first instance an inquiry had been made of him

as to the powers of the Bishops. Ile had referred
the writer to the 48th Canon ; and that was the only
answer he could have given.
Lord CA'LTHORPL felt no anxiety as to the fate
of. the individual-Petitioner; but it appeared to him,
that if the plan of the Right Rev. Prelate should. be
generally adopted, it might prove fatal to the unva-
rying standard of the Church. Than that standard
nothing human could approach nearer-to perfection,
and nothing could conduce more to the purity of the
Church, than its Ankles being understood in their
plain, literal, and•gramtuatical meaning. That rule
had been violated by the Right Rev. Prelate; and,
he was afraiJ, was more calculated to sow dissention
in the Church, than all the efforts of• Dissenteri.. He
also could not help thinking. that the time was pecu-
liarly unfavourable for such an innovation. *.He.ht-
mented the necessity, though he did not see 'how it
could be avoided, of bringing the subject before. Pa-
rliament. He hoped the Right Rev. Prelate would put-
....