{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_20801/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_20801","id":"gutenberg_20801","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/20801","summary":null,"tags":["Butler, Joseph, 1692-1752","Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Christianity"],"text":"Transcribed from the 1853 Rivingtons edition by David Price, email\nccx074@pglaf.org\n\n\n\n\n\nSOME REMAINS\n(HITHERTO UNPUBLISHED)\nOF\nJOSEPH BUTLER, LL.D.\n\n\nSOMETIME\nLORD BISHOP OF DURHAM.\n\n   \"I am more indebted to his writings than to those of any other\n   _uninspired_ writer, for the insight which I have been enabled to\n   attain into the motives of the Divine Economy and the grounds of moral\n   obligation.\"\n\n_From a Letter of the late Bishop Kaye_, _of Lincoln_.\n\nLONDON:\nRIVINGTONS, WATERLOO PLACE.\n1853.\n\nLONDON:\nGILBERT AND RIVINGTON, PRINTERS,\nST. JOHN'S SQUARE\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\nIt has long been a subject of regret that we should have so few remains\nof so great a writer as the author of the \"Analogy,\" not only the\ngreatest thinker of his day, but one almost equally remarkable for his\npersonal religion and amiability.\n\nThe few fragments and letters which remain unpublished, derive from this\ncircumstance a value wholly incommensurate with their extent, though, as\nto the few I have been able to recover, they seem to me worthy of notice\neven for their own sake.\n\nThere can, I suppose, be no doubt but that many letters on subjects\nconnected with their common pursuit,--the defence of religion by rational\narguments,--must have passed between Dr. Clarke and the \"Gentleman in\nGloucestershire,\" even up to the time of the former's decease; and the\nspecimen I am now able to exhibit certainly excites a wish that one could\nrecover more of a series which it is most likely that Dr. Clarke at least\ncarefully preserved.  The three letters now printed were all addressed to\nDr. Clarke; the first and last, though little known, were published many\nyears ago in the European Magazine.\n\nThe second and third Fragments are printed as they were written, having\napparently been noted down from time to time as the ideas occurred to\ntheir author; thus at the end of the first paragraph of the third\nFragment, the word \"direction\" was originally written \"advice,\" but was\nsubsequently altered in a different ink, being the same with that in\nwhich the sentences immediately following were written.  I have not\nthought myself at liberty to make any attempt to reduce these Fragments\nto better consistency; indeed, their present disordered state seems to me\nrather to add to their interest, as showing the mode in which the stones\nwere gathered for building up such works as the \"Analogy\" and the\n\"Sermons.\"  It will be observed that I have found a difficulty in reading\nthe last part of the third Fragment, and I am by no means sure that I\nhave quite hit the sense intended; I should like it to apply either to\nthe Cross set up at Bristol, or to the famous Charge delivered at Durham.\n\nI have added a cotemporary notice of the buildings at Bristol, and an\nanecdote showing how they were thought of, as well as a statement, made\nafter the Bishop's death, of his proceedings with regard to the church,\nwhich is now St. George's, near Bristol, in order to establish the fact\nof the separation of the property there mentioned from the bulk of his\nestate;--showing his desire to do something for the benefit of the people\nof Kingswood, a district the moral degradation of which had already\nattracted the attention of Whitefield and Wesley.\n\nThe following extract has been kindly communicated to me from the Diary\nof Dr. Thomas Wilson, the son of the great Bishop of Sodor and Man; and I\nprint it here more especially to invite the attention of all who take an\ninterest in these things to the fact, that a copy may have been made for\nthe King of the sermon there mentioned, and may possibly even yet be in\nexistence somewhere; if so, it cannot but be worth the trouble of\nrecovery and publication.\n\n   1737, December, Friday, 23rd.  \"The Master [_i.e._ Sir Joseph Jekyll,\n   Master of the Rolls] told me that the King desired that Dr. Butler,\n   Clerk of the Closet to the late Queen, might preach before him in the\n   Princess Amelia's apartments.  He preached upon the subject of being\n   bettered by afflictions, which affected His Majesty so much that he\n   desired the sermon, and assured him that he would do something very\n   good for him.  The Master desired that it might be known publicly, it\n   was told him by the Bishop of Oxford [Seeker].  The Master seemed\n   mightily pleased, and was in hopes it would be of great service to the\n   public as well as his private family, which will be a pleasure to\n   every body, and make even the death of Her Majesty (so great a seeming\n   loss) of advantage to the nation.\"\n\nI have been mainly induced to publish these Remains by the pleasure with\nwhich some copies I had given away privately have been received, and I\nconfess that the fruit I should be most gratified to see, would be the\nrecovery of some longer work, not less worthy of its Author's reputation.\n\nEDWARD STEERE, LL.D.\n\nUniversity College, London,\n1st September, 1853.\n\n\n\n\nFRAGMENTS.\n\n\nFrom the autographs of Bp. Butler now in the library at the British\nMuseum.  [Add. MS. 9815.]\n\n\n\nI.\n\n\nGod cannot approve of any thing but what is in itself Right, Fit, Just.\nWe should worship and endeavour to obey Him with this Consciousness and\nRecollection.  To endeavour to please a man merely, is a different thing\nfrom endeavouring to please him as a wise and good man, _i.e._\nendeavouring to please him in the particular way, of behaving towards him\nas we think the relations we stand in to him, and the intercourse we have\nwith him, require.\n\nAlmighty God is to be sure infinitely removed from all those human\nweaknesses which we express by the words, captious, apt to take offence,\n&c.  But an unthinking world does not consider what may be absolutely due\nto Him from all Creatures capable of considering themselves as His\nCreatures.  Recollect the idea, inadequate as it is, which we have of\nGod, and the idea of ourselves, and carelessness with regard to Him,\nwhether we are to worship Him at all, whether we worship Him in a right\nmanner, or conceited confidence that we do so, will seem to imply\nunspeakable Presumption.  Neither do we know what necessary, unalterable\nconnexion there may be, between moral right and happiness, moral wrong\nand misery.\n\nSincerity is doubtless the thing, and not whether we hit the right\nmanner, &c.  But a sense of the imperfection of our worship, apprehension\nthat it may be, and a degree of fear that it is, in some respects\nerroneous, may perhaps be a temper of mind not unbecoming such poor\ncreatures as we are, in our addresses to God.  In proportion as we are\nassured that we are honest and sincere, we may rest satisfied that God\ncannot be offended with us, but indifference whether what we do be\nmaterially, or in the nature of the thing abstracted from our way of\nconsidering it, Good and Right,--such indifference is utterly\ninconsistent with Sincerity.\n\nNo person who has just notions of God can be afraid of His displeasure\nany further than as he is afraid of his own Character, whether it be what\nit ought: but so far as a man has reason to fear his own character, so\nfar there must be reason to fear God's displeasure, or disapprobation;\nnot from any doubt of His Perfection and Goodness, but merely from the\nbelief of it.\n\nIs it possible that people can be Scepticks in _Opinion_, and yet without\nany doubtfulness, or solicitude about their _Actions_ and _Behaviour_?\n\n\n\nII.\n\n\nWhat a wonderful incongruity it is for a man to see the doubtfulness in\nwhich things are involved, and yet be impatient out of action, or\nvehement in it!  Say a man is a Sceptick, and add what was said of\nBrutus, _quicquid vult valde vult_, and you say, there is the greatest\nContrariety between his Understanding and his Temper that can be\nexpressed in words.\n\n* * * * *\n\nIn general a man ought not to do other people's duty for them; for their\nduty was appointed them for their exercise; and besides, who will do it\nin case of his death?  Nor has a man any right to raise in others such a\ndependance upon him as that they must be miserable in case of his death,\ntho' whilst he lives he answers that dependance.\n\n* * * * *\n\nHobbs' definition of Benevolence, that 'tis the love of power is base and\nfalse, but there is more of truth in it than appears at first sight; the\nreal Benevolence of men being, I think, for the most part, not indeed the\nsingle love of power, but the love of power to be exercised in the way of\ndoing good; that is a different thing from the love of the good or\nhappiness of others by whomsoever effected, which last I call single or\nsimple Benevolence.  How little there is of this in the world may appear\nby observing, how many persons can bear with great tranquillity that a\nfriend or child should live in misery, who yet cannot bear the thought of\ntheir death.\n\nGood men surely are not treated in this world as they deserve, yet 'tis\nseldom, very seldom their goodness which makes them disliked, even in\ncases where it may seem to be so: but 'tis some behaviour or other, which\nhowever excusable, perhaps infinitely overbalanced by their virtues, yet\nis offensive, possibly wrong; however such, it may be, as would pass off\nvery well in a man of the world.\n\n\n\nIII.\n\n\nShall I not be faithful to God?  If He puts a part upon me to do, shall I\nneglect or refuse it?  A part to suffer, and shall I say I would not if I\ncould help it?  Can words more ill-sorted, more shocking be put together?\nAnd is not the thing expressed by them more so, tho' not expressed in\nwords?  What then shall I prefer to the sovereign Good, supreme\nExcellence, absolute Perfection?  To whom shall I apply for direction in\nopposition to Infinite Wisdom?  To whom for protection against Almighty\nPower?\n\nSunday Evening, June 13, 1742.\n\nHunger and thirst after Righteousness till filled with it by being made\npartaker of the Divine nature.\n\nAd te levo oculos meos, qui habitas in coelis.  Sicut oculi servorum\n_intenti sunt_ ad manum dominorum suorum, sicut oculi ancillae ad manum\ndominae suae; ita oculi nostri ad Deum nostrum, donec misereatur nostri.\n\nAs all my passions and affections to my Reason such as it is, so in\nconsideration of the fallibility and infinite deficiencies of this my\nReason, I would subject it to God, that He may guide and succour it.\n\nOur wants as Creatures: our Demerits as Sinners.\n\nThat I may have a due sense of the hand of God in every thing, and then\nput myself into His hand to lead me through whatever ways He shall think\nfit; either to add to my burden, or lighten it, or wholly discharge me of\nit.\n\nBe more afraid of myself than of the world.\n\nTo discern the hand of God in every thing and have a due sense of it.\n\nInstead of deluding oneself in imagining one should behave well in times\nand circumstances other than those in which one is placed, to take care\nand be faithful and behave well in those one is placed in.\n\nThat God would please to make my way plain before my face, and deliver me\nfrom offending the scrupulousness of any {11}, or if not, O assist me to\nact the right part under it!\n\n\n\n\nLETTERS.\n\n\nI.\n\n\nFrom a Copy formerly belonging to Dr. Birch, and now in the library at\nthe British Museum.  [Add. MS. 4370.]\n\nREV. DR.\n\n'Twas but last night I received your letter from Gloucester, having left\nthat place three weeks since.  It revived in my mind some very melancholy\nthoughts I had upon my being obliged to quit those studies, that had a\ndirect tendency to divinity, that being what I should chuse for the\nbusiness of my life, it being, I think, of all other studies the most\nsuitable to a reasonable nature.  I say my being obliged, for there is\nevery encouragement (whether one regards interest or usefulness) now-a-\ndays for any to enter that profession, who has not got a way of\ncommanding his assent to received opinions without examination.\n\nI had some thoughts, Sir, of paying you my acknowledgments in person for\nthat surprising air of candour and affability with which you have treated\nme in the Letters that have passed between us.  But really I could not\nput on so bold a face, as to intrude into a gentleman's company with no\nother excuse but that of having received an obligation from him.  I have\nnot the least prospect of ever being in a capacity of giving any more\nthan a verbal declaration of my gratitude: so I hope you'l accept that,\nand believe it's with the utmost sincerity I subscribe myself,\n\nSir,\n\nYour most obliged, most obedient humble servant,\n\nJ. BUTLER.\n\nHamlin's Coffee-house,\nTuesday Morning.\n\n\n\nII.\n\n\nThe original of this Letter with the answer, which is roughly written on\nthe blank leaf, is, I believe, now in the library of Oriel College,\nOxford.  I am indebted for my copy to the kindness of the Rev. J. H.\nNewman, D.D., formerly of that College.\n\nREV. SIR,\n\nI had long resisted an Inclination to desire your Thoughts upon the\ndifficulty mentioned in my last, till I considered that the trouble in\nanswering it would be only carrying on the general purpose of your Life,\nand that I might claim the same right to your Instructions with others;\nnotwithstanding which, I should not have mentioned it to you had I not\nthought (which is natural when one fancies one sees a thing clearly) that\nI could easily express it with clearness to others.  However I should by\nno means have given you a second trouble upon the subject had I not had\nyour particular leave.  I thought proper just to mention these things\nthat you might not suspect me to take advantage from your Civility to\ntrouble you with any thing, but only such objections as seem to me of\nWeight, and which I cannot get rid of any other way.  A disposition in\nour natures to be influenced by right motives is as absolutely necessary\nto render us moral Agents, as a Capacity to discern right motives is.\nThese two are I think quite _distinct_ perceptions, the _former_\nproceeding from a desire inseparable from a Conscious Being of its own\nhappiness, the _latter_ being only our Understanding, or Faculty of\nseeing Truth.  Since a _disposition_ to be influenced by right motives is\na _sine qua non_ to Virtuous Actions, an Indifferency to right motives\nmust _incapacitate_ us for Virtuous Actions, or render us in that\nparticular not moral agents.  I do indeed think that no Rational Creature\nis _strictly speaking Indifferent_ to Right Motives, but yet there seems\nto be somewhat which to all intents of the present question is the same,\nviz. _a stronger disposition to be influenced by contrary or wrong\nmotives_, and this I take to be always the Case when any vice is\ncommitted.  But since it may be said, as you hint, that this stronger\ndisposition to be influenced by Vicious Motives may have been contracted\nby repeated Acts of Wickedness, we will pitch upon the _first Vicious\nAction_ any one is guilty of.  No man would have committed this first\nVicious Action if he had not had a _stronger_ (at least as strong)\n_disposition_ in him to be influenced by the _Motives of the Vicious\nAction_, than by the _motives of the contrary Virtuous Action_; from\nwhence I infallibly conclude, that since every man has committed some\nfirst Vice, every man had, _antecedent_ to the commission of it, a\n_stronger disposition_ to be influenced by the _Vicious_ than the\n_Virtuous_ motive.  My difficulty upon this is, that a _stronger natural\ndisposition_ to be influenced by the Vicious than the Virtuous Motive\n(which every one has antecedent to his first vice), seems, to all\npurposes of the present question, to put the Man in the same condition as\nthough he was _indifferent to the Virtuous Motive_; and since an\n_indifferency to the Virtuous Motive_ would have _incapacitated_ a Man\nfrom being a _moral Agent_, or _contracting guilt_, is not a _stronger\ndisposition_ to be influenced by the _Vicious_ Motive as great an\n_Incapacity_?  Suppose I have two diversions offered me, _both_ of which\nI could not enjoy, I like both of them, but yet have a _stronger_\ninclination to one than to the other, I am not indeed strictly\n_indifferent_ to either, because I should be glad to _enjoy both_; but am\nI not exactly _in the same case_, _to all intents and purposes of\nacting_, as though I was _absolutely indifferent_ to that diversion which\nI have the _least_ inclination to?  You suppose Man to be endued\nnaturally with a _disposition to be influenced by Virtuous Motives_, and\nthat _this Disposition is a sine qua non to Virtuous Actions_, both which\nI fully believe; but then you _omit_ to consider the natural Inclination\nto be influenced by Vicious Motives, which, _whenever a Vice is\ncommitted_, is at least _equally strong_ with the other, and in the first\nVice _is not affected by Habits_, but is as _natural_, and as much _out\nof a man's power_ as the other.  I am much obliged to your offer of\nwriting to Mr. Laughton, which I shall very thankfully accept of, but am\nnot certain when I shall go to Cambridge; however, I believe it will be\nabout the middle of the next month.\n\nI am, Rev. Sir,\nYour most obliged humble Servant,\n\nJ. BUTLER.\n\nOriel, Oct. the 6th.\n\n\nTHE ANSWER.\n\n\nYour objection seems indeed very dexterous, and yet I really think that\nthere is at bottom nothing in it.  But of this you are to judge, not from\nmy assertion, but from the reason I shall endeavour to give to it.\n\nI think then, that a _disposition to be influenced by right motives_\nbeing what we call _rationality_, there cannot be on the contrary\n(properly speaking) any such thing naturally in rational creatures as a\n_disposition to be influenced by wrong motives_.  This can be nothing but\nmere _perverseness of will_; and whether even that can be said to amount\nto a disposition to be influenced by wrong motives, _formally_, and as\nsuch, may (I think) well be doubted.  Men have by nature strong\ninclinations to certain objects.  None of these inclinations are vicious,\nbut vice consists in pursuing the inclination towards any object in\ncertain circumstances, notwithstanding _reason_, or the natural\ndisposition to be influenced by right motives, declares to the man's\nconscience at the same time (or would do, if he attended to it) that the\nobject ought not to be pursued in those circumstances.  Nevertheless,\nwhere the man commits the crime, the _natural disposition_ was only\ntowards the _object_, not formally towards the doing it upon wrong\nmotives; and generally the very essence of the crime consists in the\nliberty of the will forcibly overruling the _actual disposition towards\nbeing influenced by right motives_, and not at all (as you suppose) in\nthe man's having any _natural disposition to be influenced by wrong\nmotives_, as such.\n\n\n\nIII.\n\n\nFrom the original, now in the library at the British Museum.  [Add. MS.\n12,101.]\n\nREV. SIR,\n\nI had the honour of your kind letter yesterday, and must own that I do\nnow see a _difference_ between the nature of _that disposition which we\nhave to be influenced by virtuous motives_, and _that contrary\ndisposition_, (or whatever else it may _properly_ be called,) which is\nthe _occasion_ of our committing _sin_; and hope in time to get a\nthorough insight into this Subject by means of those helps you have been\npleased to afford me.  I find it necessary to consider such very abstruse\nquestions at different times and in different dispositions; and have\nfound particular use of this method upon that abstract subject of\n_Necessity_: for tho' I did not see the force of your argument for the\n_unity of the Divine Nature_ when I had done writing to you upon that\nsubject, I am now _fully satisfied_ that it is conclusive.  I will only\njust add that I suppose somewhat in my last letter was not clearly\nexpressed, for I did not at all _design_ to say, that _the essence of any\ncrime consisted in the man's having a natural disposition to be\ninfluenced by wrong motives_.\n\nI was fully resolved to have gone to Cambridge some time in this Term,\nnot in the least expecting but that I might have the Terms allowed there\nwhich I have kept here, but I am informed by one who has been there that\nit is not at all to be depended upon; but that it's more likely to be\nrefused than granted me.  My design was this; when I had taken the Degree\nof Batchelor of Arts at Cambridge, (which I would have done to have the\nPriviledge of that Gown,) to take that of Batchelor of Law a year\nafterwards, but if I cannot have the Terms I have kept for Batchelor of\nArts allowed there, it will be highly proper for me to stay at Oxford to\ntake that degree here, before I go to Cambridge to take Batchelor of Law.\nI will inquire concerning the truth of what the gentleman told me, and if\nI find he is mistaken and that I can take the degree of Batchelor of Arts\nat Cambridge next June, which is the time I shall be standing for it, and\nBatchelor of Law a year after that; I will make bold to accept of your\nkind offer to write to Mr. Laughton, and will acquaint you with it as\nsoon as I am satisfied, otherwise I will give you no further trouble in\nthe matter; and indeed I am sorry I should have given you any already\nupon it, but I thought I had sufficient reason to be satisfied, and had\nnot the least suspicion in the world that there was any uncertainty about\ngetting the Terms allowed, so I hope you will excuse it.\n\nI am with the greatest respect and gratitude for all your favours,\n\nRev. Sir,\nYour most obedient humble Servant,\n\nJ. BUTLER.\n\nOriel Coll., Oct. 10, 1717.\n\nI should have written yesterday, to prevent your trouble of writing to\nMr. Laughton, but I was not informed of what I have mentioned before last\nnight.\n\n* * * * *\n\nThis Letter, as well as the one immediately preceding, appears to have\nbeen intended by Dr. Clarke for publication, as in both the concluding\npassages relating to private matters have been struck through, and on the\nback of this last is written, \"These to be added to the next edition of\nLeibnitz's Letters.\"  I believe those Letters never reached a second\nedition.\n\n\n\n\nPRAYERS.\n\n\nFrom a Copy in Bp. Butler's handwriting, now in the library at the\nBritish Museum.  [Add. MS. 9815.]\n\nO Almighty God, Maker and Preserver of the world, Governor and Judge of\nall creatures, whom Thou hast endued with understanding so as to render\nthem accountable for their actions and capable of being judged for them;\nwe prostrate ourselves as in Thy presence, and worship Thee the Sovereign\nLord of all, in Whom we live and move and have our being.  The greatness\nand perfection of Thy Nature is infinitely beyond all possible\ncomprehension, but in proportion to our capacities we would endeavour to\nhave a true conception of Thy Divine Majesty, and to live under a just\nsense and apprehension of it: that we may fear Thee and hope in Thee as\nwe entirely depend upon Thee: that we may love Thee as supremely good,\nand have our wills conformed to Thy will in all righteousness and truth:\nthat we may be thankful to Thee for every thing we enjoy, as the gift of\nThine hand, and be patient under every affliction as what Thou sendest or\npermittest.\n\nWe desire to be duly sensible of what we have done amiss, and we solemnly\nresolve before Thee, that for the time to come we will endeavour to obey\nall Thy commands as they are made known to us.\n\nWe are Thy Creatures by Nature; we give up ourselves to be Thy servants\nvoluntarily and by Choice, and present ourselves, body and soul, a living\nsacrifice to Thee.\n\nBut, O Almighty God, as Thou hast manifested Thyself to the world by\nJesus Christ; as Thou hast given Him to be a Propitiation for the sins of\nit, and the Mediator between God and Man; we lay hold with all humility\nand thankfulness on so inestimable a Benefit, and come unto Thee\naccording to Thine appointment in His Name, and in the form and manner\nwhich He has taught us.\n\nOur Father, &c.\n\n\n\nMORNING PRAYER.\n\n\nAlmighty God, by whose protection we were preserved the night passed, and\nare here before Thee this morning in health and safety; we dedicate this\nday, and all the days we have to live to Thy service; resolving, that we\nwill abstain from all evil, that we will take heed to the thing that is\nright in all our actions, and endeavour to do our duty in that state of\nlife in which Thy Providence has placed us.  We would remind ourselves\nthat we are always, wherever we may go, in Thy presence.  We would be\nalways in Thy fear; and we beg the continuance of Thy merciful\nprotection, and that Thou would'st guide and keep us in all our ways\nthrough Jesus Christ our Lord.\n\n\n\nEVENING PRAYER,\n\n\nAlmighty God, whose continued providence ordereth all things both in\nHeaven and Earth; Who never slumberest nor sleepest; but hast divided the\nlight from the darkness, and made the day for employment and the night\nfor rest to Thy creatures the inhabitants of the earth: we acknowledge\nwith all thankfulness Thy merciful preservation of us this day, by which\nwe are brought in safety to the evening of it.  We implore Thy\nforgiveness of all the offences which we have been guilty of in it,\nwhether in thought, word, or deed; and desire to have a due sense of Thy\ngoodness in keeping us out of the way of those temptations by which we\nmight have fallen into greater sins, and in preserving us from those\nmisfortunes and sad accidents, common to every day, and which must have\nbefallen many others.  We humbly commit ourselves to the same good\nprovidence this night, that we may sleep in quiet under Thy protection,\nand wake, if it be Thy will, in the morning in renewed life and strength.\nAnd we beg the assistance of Thy grace to live in such a manner, that\nwhen the few days and nights which thou shalt allot us in this world be\npassed away, we may die in peace, and finally obtain the resurrection\nunto eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.\n\n* * * * *\n\nAlmighty God, Whose tender mercies are over all Thy works, who feedest\nthe fowls of the air and the beasts of the field, and hast given unto us\nall things that pertain unto life and godliness, we desire to have our\nsouls possessed with a due sense of Thy blessings, and to show forth our\nthankfulness by moderation and temperance in the use of them, by being\nkind and compassionate to those who are in distress, and by all those\ngood works which Thou hast appointed us to walk in.  And we humbly hope\nwe shall at last experience all Thy goodness to us consummate in that\nfuture state, which Thou hast prepared for them that love and fear Thee\nthrough Jesus Christ our Lord.  Amen.\n\n\n\n\nEXTRACT FROM THE MS. COLLECTIONS\n\n\n_From the MS. Collections of the Rev. W. Cole_, _now in the Library at\nthe British Museum_.  _Vol._ 10, _p._ 92, _taken at Bristol in the year_\n1746.\n\nHaving done with what is in the Cathedral, let us just step into the\nBishop's Palace on the south side of it: and here we cannot help\nobserving the generous Temper of the present worthy prelate; who in a\npoor Bishoprick of about 500 pounds per ann. has already laid out on\nbuilding an entire new Palace in the room of the old one which was gone\nto decay, above 3000 pounds.  The small Chapel belonging to the old one\nis standing; but entirely new fitted up, furnished in an elegant Taste\nand newly wainscoted and a Tribune from one of his Lordship's rooms to\nlook into it at the west end, over the door which is entirely new.  The\naltar piece is of black marble inlaid with a milk white cross of white\nmarble; which is plain and has a good effect.  In the East window over it\nis a small Crucifix with the B. Virgin and St. John under the Cross\nweeping, of old glass; and not very curious.  Over the new Door into the\nChapel from the Hall, in a void space made on purpose, is a very old Coat\nof Glass of the Arms of Berkly ensigned with a mitre: and this is another\nreason to make one think that the old Abbey of Bristol gave these arms to\ntheir Founder, for their own Coat.  I was pleased to find the present\nBishop paid such a regard to the memory of the Ancient Abbey and its\nFounders, as to preserve this old memorial of them with so much care and\nprecaution.  A pattern worthy to be imitated in an age, that to my\nknowledge, in certain places, has not only had such marks of their\nbenefactors taken away in order to get up modern crown glass; but has\nalso given away and destroyed such memorials of them, as the care of\ntheir predecessors for 3 or 400 years have with the utmost gratitude and\nveneration preserved.\n\nOver the hall chimney-piece, which is preserved with equal care by his\nLordship, are the arms of Bishop Wright impaled by his See, and a mitre\nover them, and R. W. on each side of them; as also Wright impaling per\nPale unde six martlets countercharged for Fleetwood.\n\nI don't see his Lordship's Arms in any part of the Palace, which has so\njust a title to have them in every part of it; but however, I shall give\nthem a place here in gratitude to his memory who so well deserves of this\nplace, which, though I have no concern in, nor no acquaintance with his\nLordship, yet one always has a value for a grateful and benevolent mind.\n\nThe arms of Joseph Butler, Lord Bishop of Bristol and Dean of St. Paul's,\nare: A. three covered Cups on Bend S, inter two Bendlets engrailed G.\n\nHis Lordship was, on the decease of the late Lord Bishop of Hereford, by\nhis Majesty appointed Clerk of the Royal Closet; and it is said that he\nhas also a promise, on the next vacancy, of a translation to the rich See\nof Durham, which will be well bestowed on a person of his Lordship's\nlarge and universal benevolence.\n\n* * * * *\n\nFrom the same.\n\nDr. Freeman, speaking of the chapel in the palace at Bristol, told me\nthat he was mentioning the neatness and elegance of it to Bishop Young at\nTherfield, who told him, that however he might admire the decency and\nelegance of it, yet upon his waiting, upon some occasion or other, on my\nLord Hardwick, his Lordship spoke to him of it, and asked him whether he\nhad not a design of pulling down the cross of marble over the Altar,\nwhich he thought was offensive; to which the Bishop replied, that it was\nprobable that he should not have set it up there, but that he should not\nchoose to have it said that Bishop Young had pulled down what Bishop\nButler had erected.\n\n\n\nSTATEMENT CONCERNING THE CHURCH AT KINGSWOOD.\n\n\nFrom a MS. in the British Museum.  [Add. 9815.]\n\nWhen the late Lord Bishop of Durham first intended to have a place of\nDivine Worship erected in Kings Wood, his Scheme was,--To solicit\nSubscriptions for building a Chapel, and to give 400 pounds towards the\nEndowment of it, in order to get the like Sum from the Governors of Q.\nAnn's Bounty.  And he was pleased to lay his Commands upon me to make\nApplication to persons the most likely to contribute to that good Work.\n\nThe report I brought him in Consequence of such Application, was to this\nEffect, that they highly approved of the pious and charitable design, but\ndisliked the particular Scheme of erecting a Chapel of Ease to the Church\nof St. Philip and Jacob, as this would not answer the good purposes his\nLordship intended; and therefore proposed a Division of the Parish, and\nthe Erection of a new Parish and parish Church.\n\nHis observations on this Proposal were the following,--That the intended\nChapel in Kings Wood would not have been a Chapel of Ease to Saint Philip\nand Jacob, but distinct from it, as the Incumbent would have had nothing\nfarther to do with the Chapel, or the income of it, but barely to\nnominate the Curate, who from thence forward would have been independent\nof him: However he thought the Scheme of erecting a new Parish to be much\npreferable in itself, but was attended with more difficulties; and\ntherefore gave up his own Scheme with pleasure, if the Parties concerned\nwould join their Endeavours to Execute the other.\n\nUpon this occasion He not only permitted, but _ordered_ me to say to all\nPersons, and in all Companies, that he had allotted a Benefaction of 400\npounds for that Use.  And when some of the principal Parishioners had\nfixed upon the Boundaries of their new intended Parish, and had presented\na kind of Petition or Memorial to him, To have those limits specified in\nthe intended Act of Parliament, they used the following expressions.\n\"Whereas it hath been made known unto Us,--That your Lordship hath\nproposed to endeavour to obtain an Act of Parliament for Dividing the\nsaid Parish of St. Philip and Jacob, and for erecting and endowing a\nChurch for the said Parishioners,--And that _you have been pleased to\noffer a large Subscription thereto_, We therefore with grateful Hearts\nhumbly take this opportunity of tendering you our hearty thanks for this\nyour pious and charitable Intention, and being very desirous that the\nsame may be executed, beg leave to assure your Lordship, that we will use\nour best Endeavours for promoting the same, &c.\"\n\nWhich Petition or Memorial He ordered his Secretary to copy out on two\nPieces of Parchment.  And then he, the Bishop, sent them to me to carry\nthem to the Parishioners to be signed; and directed me at the same time\nto desire some of the parishioners to attend him at his Palace, which was\non a Sunday Evening; And in their and my Presence he wrote the following\nwords at the Bottom of one of the Petitions:\n\n   \"I see no objection against the Division of the Parish above\n   mentioned, and hope the Gentlemen, whose Consent is necessary, will\n   agree to it, since the Inhabitants are the best judges, what is for\n   their own Convenience: and it is a matter of very little Concern to\n   any but them.--Jo. BRISTOL.\"\n\nLikewise when the Fields, which lay contiguous to the intended Church,\nwere to be purchased, he went to see them, and then and there declared in\nmy hearing, and, as far as I can recollect, in the hearing of several\npersons there present, viz. Messrs. King, Harrison, &c., That he would\npurchase them for the use of the intended Church, as soon as ever Sir\nAbraham Elton, the then Proprietor, could dispose of them.\n\nAlso He ordered me, at different times, to bring him a List or Account of\nall the monies advanced, or engaged for: And I always put down his name\nwith 400 pounds opposite to it, which he approved of.\n\nMoreover, in the preamble of the Act of Parliament, drawn up by Mr.\nPearson his Lordship's Secretary, under his Direction, there are these\nwords:\n\n   \"And the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Durham (late of Bristol) for\n   promoting so good a design is disposed and ready to give the sum of\n   400 pounds towards the Endowment of the new intended Vicarage, &c.\"\n\nWhich words in the first copy ran thus, \"And the Right Rev. the Lord\nBishop of Bristol, &c.,\" He being then Bishop of the See of Bristol; And\nI have heard his Lordship repeat those words in perusing the said Copy.\n\nFarther; upon the Coming of the present Lord Bishop of Bristol to this\nSee, He ordered me to draw up a short State of the Case relating to the\nnew intended Church, and the Several Expences necessary for completing\nthe Design, which Paper was afterwards shown to the Commissioners\nappointed by Act of Parliament for building the said Church, And they\nRequested, That it might be printed.  But before it was sent to the\npress, I transmitted a Copy to the late Lord Bishop of Durham, then in\nLondon, to know if his Lordship approved of the Publication of it, and\nwhether He would please to make any alteration.  His answer was, That he\nsaw no need of Alterations, and thought that the Printing and Dispersing\nof it might be of service to the charity.\n\nI then directed Mr. Oliver the Printer to call upon his Lordship for the\nManuscript, which he did; and after printing the same, He carried fifty\nCopies to his Lordship for his own use; One of which Copies was sent to a\npious and charitable lady, but whether by his Lordship, or his Secretary,\nI cannot say; The Issue of which was, A Benefaction of 200 pounds sent to\nhis Lordship, To be disposed of either for the building or the Endowment\nas his Lordship thought fit.  Now in the printed paper above mentioned,\nthere are the following remarkable expressions--\n\n   \"The late Lord Bishop of Bristol, now of Durham, and the Right\n   Worshipful the Mayor and Corporation of Bristol, _have contributed_\n   large Sums for carrying the said good Purposes into Execution, &c.\"\n\nAnd upon all times and occasions, after he had Purchased the contiguous\nGrounds above mentioned of Sir Abraham Elton for the sum of 375 pounds,\nHe used to say, That the purchase was for the use of the new Intended\nChurch, and did wish, That some little adjoining Tenement might be found,\nto be purchased with the remaining Sum of 25 pounds in order to make up\nthe even money of 400 pounds.\n\nAlso when I waited on his Lordship last in London, I was desired by Mr.\nWilloughby, the treasurer for the said Church, to ask his Lordship, How\nhe would please to have the rents of the purchased Grounds disposed of,\nas some rents were then become due, viz. whether to be applied towards\nthe endowment--or the Building.  And his answer was, That the rents,\nbeing the Interest of the money allotted for the Charity should be\napplied to the charity, as well as the Principal: But whether towards the\nEndowment or Building He was not yet determined: He believed, the\nEndowment: but would fix his answer, when he came down to Bristol.\n\nAnd after his coming down, He several times said, that he would give\norders concerning that affair.\n\nHe also sent to me one time to acquaint me, That he had a Benefaction put\ninto his hands of 200 pounds (the benefaction above mentioned), And was\npleased to desire my advice, Whether it should be applied towards the\nEndowment,--or the Building.  My answer was, That as the Building was so\nfar advanced, There was not much danger, but that Contributions might be\nraised to finish it,--Either by voluntary Subscriptions,--or a General\ncollection round the city,--or by both methods together.  But it would\nnot be found so easy a matter to raise Contributions for the Endowment.\nAnd the Sums hitherto procured were very far from being a Competency for\na _Resident_ Minister.  I then mentioned his Benefaction of 400 pounds,\nand the 400 pounds from Q. Ann's Bounty, as being a sum which might be\ndepended on,--Also the benefaction of 200 pounds in his Lordship's Hands;\nwhich possibly might obtain 200 pounds more from the Bounty;--So that the\nwhole Sum, to be reckoned upon, even with the supposed addition of 200\npounds from the Bounty, would only amount to 1200 pounds, which at 3 per\ncent., would make an Income of 36 pounds a year.\n\nHis Lordship was pleased to approve of this Reasoning upon the Case, and\nsaid, The 200 pounds should go towards the Endowment: And as his own was\na bad Life, the Benefaction should be enrolled in the name of Mr.\nPearson, in order to try to obtain 200 pounds more from Q. Ann's Bounty.\n\nAll these particulars I am willing to testify upon Oath.\n\nTHE END.\n\nGILBERT AND RIVINGTON, PRINTERS, ST. JOHN'S SQUARE, LONDON.\n\n\n\n\nFootnotes\n\n\n{11} I have been quite unable to decipher the original of this; by the\nletters it seems to make \"from offendimtum of Scrupleousness.\"","title":"Some Remains (hitherto unpublished) of Joseph Butler, LL.D.","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":6941}