{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_52265/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_52265","id":"gutenberg_52265","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/52265","summary":null,"tags":["British and Foreign Bible Society","Category: History - British","Category: History - Early Modern (c. 1450-1750)","Category: Politics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Lockwood, Richard. Reasons why a Churchman may ... refuse to subscribe to the British and Foreign Bible Society"],"text":"Transcribed from the [1817] J. Keymer edition by David Price, email\nccx074@pglaf.org\n\n\n\n\n\n                               OBSERVATIONS\n                                  ON AN\n                           ANONYMOUS PAMPHLET,\n\n\n                                  WHICH\n                          _HAS BEEN DISTRIBUTED_\n                                    IN\n                    Lowestoft, and its Neighbourhood,\n                                 ENTITLED\n                                 REASONS\n                                   WHY\n               A CHURCHMAN MAY WITH GREAT JUSTICE REFUSE TO\n                   SUBSCRIBE TO THE BRITISH AND FOREIGN\n                              BIBLE SOCIETY.\n\n                                * * * * *\n\n                                    BY\n                         FRANCIS CUNNINGHAM, A.B\n                           RECTOR OF PAKEFIELD;\n          _And Secretary of the Lowestoft Branch Bible Society_.\n\n                                * * * * *\n\n                                YARMOUTH:\n               Printed and Sold by J. Keymer, King-Street;\n\n            SOLD ALSO BY GOWING, LOWESTOFT; PARSONS, NORWICH;\n                      HATCHARD, AND SEELEY, LONDON.\n\n                                * * * * *\n\n\n\n\n_OBSERVATIONS_\nON AN\nANONYMOUS PAMPHLET.\n\n\nTHERE are many circumstances which might have induced a friend of the\nBible Society to refrain from noticing a work, under the circumstances of\nthe present pamphlet.  And, had it strictly adhered to its title, and\nsimply stated the reasons why a churchman might properly refuse to\nsubscribe to this institution, it would probably have remained unnoticed\nby me.  It might, in that case, have been hoped, that statements which\nare unacknowledged would not have been believed, and the reasonings of\nthe work might have been left, without much alarm, to do their worst.\nBut, as it has been observed to me, that the very circumstance of putting\neven the most improbable statements in print, invests them with a species\nof authority; and as there are many persons still unacquainted with the\nnature and operations of the Bible Society, and who, therefore, may\nmistake the boldness of assertion in this little work for the confidence\nof truth, I have yielded to the advice of some of my friends, in\nattempting to reply to it.  Before I proceed, however, to this reply, I\nwill beg leave to make a single observation on the _temper_ in which this\nattempt will, I trust, be made.\n\nThe author of this pamphlet has, in the first page of his work,\nreprobated the \u201carrogant and dogmatical style\u201d of his opponents; and, in\nthe conclusion of it, he has called their measures \u201cwicked, cruel, and\nunchristian.\u201d  It is my hope, that I shall not fall into the same error.\nI desire \u201cnothing to extenuate, nor set down aught in malice;\u201d to state\nfacts, not from the mere authority of the parties concerned in this\ncontroversy, but upon that of the most authentic documents; and, should I\nfail to convince my readers, it is my confident intention not at once to\nconclude their opinions \u201cunchristian\u201d and \u201ccruel,\u201d because they differ\nfrom my own; hard words, I may venture to say, ought not to be the\nweapons of our warfare, and I trust they never will be of mine.  I desire\nto remember the declaration of our Lord, \u201cthey that take the sword, shall\nperish by the sword.\u201d\n\nI may be permitted also to add, that in entering upon the consideration\nof this question, I consider myself as approaching a subject of the\nhighest importance.  When I am canvassing the merits of an instrument for\ncirculating the Word of God over every part of the world, I tremble lest\nthe ark should suffer in my hands; and I desire to go out to the warfare,\nnot so much with a \u201csword and a shield\u201d of human fabrication, as, \u201cin the\nname of the Lord,\u201d for the circulation of whose Word I wish to contend.\n\nThis pamphlet is entitled \u201cReasons why a Churchman may with great justice\nrefuse to subscribe to the Bible Society;\u201d and the reasons which are\nassigned may be said to be of three kinds: First, _That a better\nSociety_, _of a like kind_, _exists in the church_; Secondly, _That the\nBible Society does not answer to the professions and praises of its\nadvocates_; Thirdly, _That it is injurious to the established church_.\nUpon each of these points I shall now venture to make a few observations.\n\n_First_, It is said, _That a better Society_, _of a like kind_, _exists\nin the church_.  The Society to which the author alludes, is that\nestablished more than 100 years since, which is called the Society for\nPromoting Christian Knowledge.  Its object is threefold: To distribute\nBibles; also, Prayer Books and Tracts; and to send Missionaries.  Every\nmember of this Society is obliged to give good security that he is a\nchurchman, and there is no way in which, by its means, any other\ndenomination of christians can be benefited, but by the hands of\nchurchmen.\n\nThe advantages of this institution over the Bible Society which the\nauthor endeavours to establish are four.  _First_, It is a _Society which\nconsists entirely of churchmen_; _Secondly_, Bibles can be procured in it\nat a _cheaper rate_; _Thirdly_, The Bibles which it issues are more\n_useful_; _Fourthly_, It furnishes _Prayer Books and Tracts_.\n\nAs the Society whose cause the author exclusively advocates, is a society\nof churchmen, he maintains that, by its extension and prevalence, no\nvariety of interpretation in essential points would prevail, and\ntherefore no confusion be introduced amongst the unlearned.  All\nchurchmen would, he conceives, teach the same truths in the same manner.\nBut, is this accurate?  Is there such a perfect accordance of opinion\namongst churchmen?  If, for instance, Dr. Marat and Mr. Scott, each of\nthem churchmen, each of them members of the Old Society, and each of them\nmen of respectability, were to circulate Bibles, with their own\ninterpretations, would an exact conformity of opinion be produced?\nAssuredly not.  What, then, is the conclusion from this?  That of\nchurchmen, it can only be said as of churchmen and dissenters, they agree\nin the authority of the Bible; but there is no complete agreement as to\nthe interpretations of the Bible.  If churchmen, who are members of the\nOld Society, widely disagree upon essential points in the interpretation\nof the Bible, even the Old Society is no guarantee for unity.  A person,\nto be quite right, on the principle of the author, should subscribe\nexclusively to a Society, where each person would agree to promulgate\nonly the same interpretation of scripture; and where, it may be asked,\nwould such a Society be found?\n\nBut, secondly, the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge is affirmed\nto be best, because \u201c_it procures Bibles at a __cheaper rate_.\u201d  What is\nmeant by this assertion I cannot discover, unless the author designs to\nsay, that Bibles cost less to that Society in their original purchase.\nThis would be very inaccurate, as each are purchased at the same\nmarkets\u2014the markets to which the sale is confined by legislative\nenactment.  But the author proceeds to a statement of _facts_ on this\nsubject, which it may be well to consider.  It is said, page 7, \u201cA 12mo\nNon-pareil Bible is allowed to the subscribers for Promoting Christian\nKnowledge for 3_s._ 3_d._, but the British and Foreign Bible Society\nexpects from its subscribers 4_s._, 6_d._, for the same edition.\u201d  As to\nthis statement, I would say, in the first place, that it is grossly\nincorrect.  By every printed document of the Bible Society, this Bible,\nwhich is stated to be charged to its subscribers at 4_s._ 6_d._, is\noffered to them at 3_s._ 7_s._  But it may yet be said, The Bible from\nthe Old Society is then at all events cheaper than that of the New: Why\nare not the prices of the New Society reduced?  I answer, that in all the\ninstances, the Bibles of the New Society are within a few pence as cheap\nas in the Old.  But, if not, a most satisfactory reason may be given, in\nthe consideration of the object of the New Society, and of the means it\nhas adapted to pursue that object.  Its object is simply this, _to do the\ngreatest possible good_.  And, in order to accomplish this, it determines\nto supply Bibles precisely at the rate which may suit the convenience of\nindividuals, without impairing the general means of the Society; to suit\nthe exigencies of the poor on the one hand, and, on the other, to obtain\na suitable return for their money.  An exactly parallel case presents\nitself.  The Society for the relief of the Poor, in Spitalfields, are now\nselling rice at three-pence per pound.  Why, it might be asked, is the\nrice not sold cheaper than this?  It would be answered, because the\nobject is to do the greatest possible good.  Three-pence per pound is a\nprice which the poor can afford to pay, and, by receiving this instead of\na less price, the Society may perhaps be able to encounter the continued\npressure of the times.  Thus it is with Bibles.  The poor (as is evident\nfrom their free purchase of them) can afford to pay what they now pay for\nBibles, and which is about one half of what they would pay in the shops;\nwhilst the Society is by this return enabled to supply Bibles\ngratuitously to the destitute, and continue its operations through the\nworld.  Nor is this all: One reason why the Old Society originally made\nits prices so low, was, that it did not allow its subscribers to _sell_\ntheir Bibles, even at reduced prices, but constrained them to _give_ them\naway.  The New Society first discovered the error of this proceeding, and\nconcluding that a poor man would be likely more to value the Bible which\nwas bought, than the Bible which was given, recommended its subscribers\nas a general rule, rather to sell than to give.  Hence, amongst other\nadvantages, its subscribers might be justly called upon to pay to this\nSociety a higher price.  It may be observed, that the Old Society has now\nextended this privilege to its subscribers, and, on this ground, it is\nprivileged to raise its prices.\n\nBut not only, is it said, are the Bibles _cheaper_, but they are\n_better_: _better_, because, at the Old Society, may be had a _Bible with\na commentary_, the lowest price of which is fifty shillings.\n\nNow it may be observed, that this argument does not very happily square\nwith the last.  First, says our author, the Bibles of the Old Society are\nbetter, because they are cheaper; next, they are better, because they\nhave a commentary costing fifty shillings.  One of these two arguments\nmust be surrendered.  The Bibles cannot be at once cheaper, and cost a\nprice which excludes them from general circulation.  But, further, it may\nbe said, that every argument which assumes the importance of the\ncommentary to the Society, assumes the accuracy and value of the\ncommentary itself.\u2014Are all commentaries then valuable?\u2014Are there none\nwhich might be very dear at fifty shillings?\n\nBut a fourth reason, it is said, for the superiority of the Society for\nPromoting Christian Knowledge, is, that it provides Prayer Books and\nReligious Tracts.  The friends of the Bible Society are charged with\nsaying, \u201cthat the Bible, and the Bible alone, is the religion of\nProtestants;\u201d and our author affirms, that, but for the exertions of Dr.\nMarsh, the Prayer Book would not have been circulated.\n\nAs to the first of these charges, the Society pleads guilty.  They say,\nwhat the immortal Chillingworth said before them, They maintain the\nprinciple, for which their ancestors died triumphantly under the axe of a\nPopish executioner.  As to the second, it appeared, upon a pretty rigid\nscrutiny, that whereas many of the friends of the Bible Society had made\nlarge demands upon the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge for\n_Prayer Books_, Dr. Marsh had confined himself, in his own parish, to the\ncirculation of a little volume on the _Value of Tithes_.  But let us look\nat the subject a little more generally.\n\nOf Tracts it may be said as of a commentary that the connection of these\nwith any Society must exceedingly limit its extension, even amongst\nchurchmen.  Accordingly, these Tracts have been stated in print by\nchurchmen to be completely inconsistent with one another; some have been\ncalled \u201cheretical;\u201d some have been charged with involving \u201cthe worst\nerrors of Popery.\u201d  And, whatever may be the merit of these Tracts, to\ncall them, with our author, \u201csure and certain guides,\u201d is to affirm of\nthem what can be affirmed only of the Revelation of God.  Indeed, if\nthere were no other objection to our author\u2019s statement, there is this,\nthat these infallible guides are in the unfortunate habit of flatly\ncontradicting each other.  In this case, who is to arbitrate between\nthem?  I know not what arbitrator our author will propose.  I should say\nthe Bible? and I should go on to draw this inference\u2014subscribe than to\nthe Bible Society\u2014and transmit the doctrine of infallible \u201cguides\u2019\u201d in\nthe first vessel from Lowestoft to Rome.\n\nI am sorry that I should have felt any obligation to draw up what may\nbear even the semblance of a charge against the Society, at Bartlett\u2019s\nBuildings, of which I am a member.  That Society has many merits, and in\nits own sphere is capable of doing much good.  But, when an attempt is\nmade to canonize this Society; to apply it to objects which it can never\nreach; and to erect it on the ruins of a Society of wider basis and far\nmore extensive capabilities, it is difficult to be entirely silent.  It\nwas heartily to be wished, that these two Societies should never have\nbeen brought into invidious comparison, for, in a comparison, one of them\nmust fail; and, which ever suffers, Christianity suffers with it, because\nthe promotion of Christianity is the object of both.  As, however, these\ntwo Societies have been brought into comparison, by the author of these\n\u201cReasons,\u201d it seems requisite now to show, that the New Society has\ncertain peculiar and exclusive advantages, which justify churchmen in\nsupporting it.\n\nIn the first place, then, _the constitution of the Old Society\ndisqualified it from the universal supply of the Word of God_.  It had\nexisted for near a century, and during that time, I venture confidently\nto say, it had, even _at home_, done little of what was necessary for the\ndistribution of the Scriptures; and, _abroad_, scarcely any thing at all.\n\n_At home_, when examinations were made as to the circulation of the\nScriptures in many parts of England, especially in Lincolnshire, there\nwere villages where the Bible was alone to be found in the church; within\nabout a mile of the depository of the Old Society, full one half of the\nfamilies were without a copy of the Scriptures; in this diocese alone, it\nwas calculated that ten thousand families were destitute of the Word of\nGod; in that of Durham, seven thousand five hundred; and, which is a\ncertain proof of this assertion, since that time, nearly one million five\nhundred thousand copies have been distributed, principally in our own\ncountry, without, at the same time, the demand for the Scriptures being\nby any means supplied.\n\n_Abroad_, the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge has been able to\neffect still less.  It had, indeed, only in one instance, attempted the\ndistribution of the Scriptures.  This was in the year 1720, when it\nprinted, but not altogether at its own charge, an edition of the Psalms\nand the New Testament in the Arabic language.  And such was the want of\nfacilities for foreign operations, that, till lately, a part of that\nedition was mouldering in the cellars of the institution.  Except this,\nand the assistance it has given to the Danish mission in the East Indies,\nit may be said to have done little or nothing for foreign countries.  Nor\nlet me be conceived to impute it as blame to this Society that it has\ndone no more in a sphere, from which, from its constitution, it was\nexcluded.\n\nBut what is the inference from this?  That when, from the introduction of\nschools at home, an additional demand was created for the Scriptures, and\nwhen abroad the multiplication of missionaries created a new demand for\nthe Bible, in all the languages of the earth, it was not sufficient that\na Society existed which had proved itself insufficient for the supply of\nthe Scriptures, even under less trying circumstances.  It was necessary\nthat something more should be attempted, and, accordingly, the New\nSociety was constructed\u2014a Society, erected on the widest possible basis,\nand comprehending all the means and energies of all the worshippers of\nChrist.  The Old Society was left to pursue its domestic career; and the\nNew Society, beginning at home, extended itself over the whole world.\nThe one, as it has been said, is like the lamp at a particular sanctuary;\nthe other, \u201cthe pillar which preceded the march of the whole people of\nGod.\u201d\n\nNor is this wider operation and extension of the New Society the fruit of\naccident\u2014_it is the result of its constitution_.  This constitution\nacknowledges no sect or party amongst christians; it partakes of no\nreligious system; and therefore is equally applicable to all climates and\nall governments.  Accordingly, in Russia, in England, and in America, in\ncountries divided by the widest intervals in their religious and\npolitical administration, it is equally innoxious to the established\norder of things; it arrests every man who bears the title of a christian;\nseizes, as by a sort of natural affinity, upon that part of his creed\nwhich he holds in common with the whole christian world, and throws it\ndown to form as it were a basis for this institution: he may have much\nreligion, or little; what he has is converted by this Society to the\nglory of God, and the salvation of man.\n\nNor is the universality of that Society its only peculiar property\u2014it is\npeculiar to that institution _to be incorruptible_.  Its object is so\nsimple, that it needs no other safeguards than its own principles.  With\nthe Old Society that is not the case.  It is entrusted to human agents;\nand how can a person who lives at too great distance to attend the\nCommittees of this Society, know what Tracts may be admitted, or what may\nbe suppressed; what security has he for the consistency of the\nproceedings?  But the object and proceedings of the Bible Society are\nalways the same.  It is to distribute the authorised version of the\nBible, without note or comment; and whilst it adheres to this, whether\nthe members of a committee of this Society are well or ill affected to\nchurch or state, nothing more than the distribution of the authorised\nversion of the Scriptures can be effected.  Their deadliest plot can\nissue only in the circulation of that book, which is the best antidote to\ntheir own wickedness.  In the universality of its application, therefore,\nand the incorruptibility of its plan, the New differs from the Old\nSociety.\n\nBut let us now turn to the second objection of the author of this\npamphlet, _viz._, _That the Bible Society has been unduly commended by\nits advocates_, page 4, \u201cNeither,\u201d says our author, \u201cis the general\ncirculation of the Scriptures enacted by them, nor do their meetings\nproduce love and harmony amongst Christians of various denominations.\u201d\nThe first of those propositions, that the Scriptures are not distributed\n\u201c_universally_\u201d by the Bible Society is attempted to be proved by this\ncircumstance that they are not circulated \u201c_exclusively_\u201d by it.  In what\nmanner one of three facts establishes the other, I am at a loss so\ndiscover.  I heartily wish that, in the like way of reasoning it could be\nproved, that because the author is not the only person who has written\nagainst the Bible Society, _therefore_ he had not written against it at\nall.  But now look at the fact, as to the distribution of the Scriptures.\nThey are distributed to all classes, to heathens even, if they wish to\npossess them; and they are distributed not merely in the languages of\nthis country, but in fifty-three languages or dialects, of almost every\nkindred and people over the world.  Whatever comes short of a completely\ngeneral distribution of the Scriptures by the Bible Society, is\noccasioned by the want of funds.\n\nBut the author is not satisfied with this gratuitous assertion.  He goes\non, in the same strain of independent and courageous affirmation, to\nmaintain, that a feeling of love and harmony is not produced by the\nmeeting of various denominations of christians in this Society; and, in\nproof of this, he appeals to certain recent occurrences.  But what are\nthese recent occurrences he leaves us to divine.  If, indeed, he were to\nrefer to certain recent occurrences in another quarter, as evidences of\n\u201cbitter and unseemly contention,\u201d {12a} and of the \u201cdegradation\u201d of a\nmeeting assembled for grave deliberation into \u201ca British Forum, or a Bear\nGarden,\u201d {12b} probably every churchman would understand the hint,\nhowever obliquely conveyed.  But, as to the meeting of the Bible Society,\nI have attended both those of the Parent Institution, and in various\nparts of this and the neighbouring county, and I can truly say, that I\nhave never seen any feeling predominate, but that of christian love.  I\nhave never known any offensive peculiarity obtruded upon the assembly;\nand although it might have been sometimes wished, that, in points of\ntaste and expression, some of the speeches had been amended, yet, in\npoint of temper and spirit, and sober adherence to the main objects of\nthe meeting, they have admitted of no improvement.\n\nThe author of these observations has, I should suspect, never attended at\na meeting of this Society, or he would not have hazarded so extraordinary\na charge.  Let him and his friends be persuaded to judge in future,\nrather from their own experience, than from the representation of others.\nLet them come to these meetings, and, as men of feeling and principle,\nthey would, I am persuaded, be amongst the first to build up an\ninstitution, which they are now in such haste to destroy.  They would\nfind the principle of attraction in the Society to be as strong as its\nadvocates pretend; would find even themselves surprised into the vortex,\nand constrained, by a holy violence, to love the very men whom now they\nappear to distrust.\n\nBut I proceed to notice a third class of objections to this Society,\nviz.: those which are aimed at it as opposed to the _Established Church_,\nand to the _Society in Bartlett\u2019s Buildings_.  How is this objection\nverified?  The Society in Bartlett\u2019s Buildings had proceeded for many\nyears with a tolerably even step, and during the four years preceding the\nestablishment of the Bible Society, the avenge of its subscriptions and\ndonations was about \u00a32,234, whilst its whole income was \u00a311,818.  If this\nNew Society had tended to its injury, the subscriptions and income would\nof course have diminished.  But what is now the state of the case?  The\nsubscriptions to that Society during the last year amounted to \u00a37,440,\nand its income to \u00a344,215.  And here let it be observed, that, not only\nhas the income of the Society increased, but that part of its income\nwhich is applicable to the dispersion of Prayer Books and Tracts has much\nmore increased.  For the national supply of Bibles, which are in\nproportion to their sizes, more costly to the Society than Prayer Books,\nbeing at least divided by the Bible Society, a larger fund must remain\nfor the distribution of Commentaries and Tracts.\n\nBut we are taught, by the author, that the Society is injurious to the\nEstablished Church itself.  That the Bible may be injurious to scepticism\nor superstition is to be believed; but how it can be injurious to a\nchurch, founded upon the Word of Truth, it is not easy to comprehend.\nWill the Bible, like the heathen parent of ancient story, devour his own\noffspring?  But it is said, that the baptist, or the socinian, will give\nthe Word of God the colour of their own creed.  This, however, the\nchurchman cannot help.  However the baptist, or socinian, may procure a\nBible, he will, of course, put his own interpretation to it.  But we\nwould ask, how are the baptist or the socinian ever to be converted to\nwhat we term orthodoxy?  It must be by appealing to the Word of God.\nThey will not accept our interpretation of Scripture, any more than we\nwill theirs.  It is, then, only on the Word of God that we can meet for\ndiscussion.  This is the only remedy which we can propose, in ordinary\ncircumstances, for any error, because it is the only one which the person\nin error will allow to be applied.\n\nLet me beg the author to remember the principle upon which our church is\nfounded.  It is an appeal to _the Scriptures_.  \u201cWe do not,\u201d says Bishop\nJewell, _Apol. Ecc. Ang._, cap. 4, \u201cbetake ourselves to the fire and the\nsword, but to the _Scriptures_; nor do we assault with force of arms, but\nwith the _Word of God_.\u201d  \u201cBy the _Scriptures_,\u201d as says Turtullian, \u201cwe\nnourish our faith; by them we erect our hope; by them we establish our\nconfidence.\u201d  And, speaking of the churches of England and of Rome, he\nsays, (cap, 5.) \u201cnot to mention all the differences, because they are\nalmost infinite; _we have turned the Holy Scriptures into all languages_,\nand they will scarce allow them to be extant in any tongue; _we invite\nthe people to hear and read the Word of God_, they drive them away from\nit; we desire the cause in controversy should be understood by all, but\nthey fly from judgment; we trust to knowledge, they to ignorance; we\nbring truth to light, they to darkness; we venerate, as it is fit that we\nshould, the words of the apostles and prophets, they burn them.\u201d  Thus we\nsee, that the Scriptures were made the ground of appeal by our ancestors,\nwhen they separated from the Established Church, and formed our present\nestablishment.  Should we not, therefore, allow others to make the same\nappeal; and should we not be content to rest our defence upon the same\nground?\n\nBut let us next, in considering the influence of the Society on the\nEstablished Church, take into account certain facts, which force\nthemselves on the eye of the most cursory examiner.  It is obvious, that\nthe attendance at church in these times is considerably increased, and\ncertainly not the least increased where a Bible Society spirit most\nabounds.  In many places, also, great efforts have been made to build new\nchurches, to accommodate an overgrown population; and, moreover, a most\nextraordinary increase in the circulation of the Liturgy has taken place.\nA new Society also has arisen, whose only object is to distribute the\nFormularies of the Established Church.\n\nBut we are not yet at the end of the objections of this very industrious\nopponent.  The meetings of the Bible Society, it is said, by breaking in\na degree the line of demarcation between churchmen and dissenters, tend\nto injure the establishment; and that, although the dissenter may gain,\nthe churchman must lose by them.  But how can this be? can the union of\npersons, where the peculiarities of each is kept out of view, have any\nbearing upon those peculiarities?  Is it the fact, that churchmen have\nbeen converted to dissenters by these meetings?  If there is a danger of\nconversion taking place, is it not a bad compliment to the church to\nsuppose that she will be the loser?  In physics, when a larger body meets\na less, as in the case of the heavenly bodies, the smaller never fails to\nfollow the motion of the larger.  Why in the case of the church and\ndissenters alone, is this law to be reversed?\n\nWill the author allow me to add this observation, that if danger to the\nestablishment need not be apprehended from the distribution of the Bible,\nit is very much to be feared from the conduct of those who oppose this\nSociety.  In the first place, there is something very awful and ominous,\nin seeing those who are the appointed stewards of the Word of God, rising\nup to oppose any means by which its circulation is promoted; magnifying\nmole hills into mountains, if only they can throw them into the course of\nthis Society.  Opposition, such as this, is well calculated to shake\n\u201copinion,\u201d upon which every establishment must mainly, under the blessing\nof God, depend.  May not the enemies of the church, at least plausibly\nurge, that the church cannot be built upon the Scriptures, when so many\nchurchmen oppose their distribution without their own commentary?  And if\nthe persuasion were established among the poor, that our church is\nerected on the foundation of commentaries and tracts, instead of that of\nthe \u201capostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner\nstone,\u201d would not popular attachment quickly dissolve?\n\nThere are, however, still two points upon which I would wish to make a\nfew observations.  The first is, as to the statement of this writer,\n\u201cthat the income of the Bible Society is larger than its expenditure;\nthat a large sum is invested by this Society in various funds, and,\ntherefore, that the sum which has been obtained by subscriptions from the\npoor, is unjustly taken from them.\u201d  Now, to this I answer, that a large\nsum has indeed from time to time been invested by this Society.  But,\ndoes the Bartlett\u2019s Building\u2019s Society, or any other body of men, in\ntheir senses, neglect such a precaution?  By referring to the Report, we\nshall see that only so much is reserved by the Society, from year to\nyear, as is necessary to meet the engagements under which it has laid\nitself.  If the sum of stock, now stated by the auditors to be possessed\nby the Bible Society, is estimated, it will be found hardly more than is\nsufficient to pay the \u00a336,000 for which the Society stands engaged.  Had\nnot such a reserve been made in the last year, from the temporary\ndiminution in the income of the Society, it could not have fulfilled its\nengagements.\n\nA second charge is brought against it, on the subject of _Bible\nAssociations_.  The principle of these Associations is this\u2014The poor are\npermitted to pay one penny, or more, per week, to supply themselves with\na Bible; and afterwards, if they are so disposed, towards the general\nfunds of the Society.  This is called, by the author of these Reasons, a\n\u201cvexatious impost,\u201d and he adds, that it is \u201cwicked, cruel, and\nunchristian\u201d to \u201cdeduct such a sum from a poor family,\u201d to \u201ctax the\npaupers of the kingdom to supply foreign nations.\u201d\n\nI wish my readers and myself to forget the epithets which are here\nbestowed upon some of the most respectable persons in this kingdom; upon\nthe Bishop of Durham, for instance, who is president of one of these\nassociations.  It will be sufficient for me to reply to the argument upon\nwhich they are founded.\n\nIn the first place, it may be observed, that the payment of the sum of\none penny per week, is not at all of the nature of a \u201ctax,\u201d or \u201cvexatious\nimpost,\u201d it is strictly _voluntary_.  Nor is it \u201c_vexatious_,\u201d for the\ndisposition of man is not prone to inflict vexatious obligations upon\nhimself.  The days of the flagellants, if ever they existed, are over.\nBut this charge of the author seems to me to be founded upon a wrong\nestimate of the character of the poor, as well as ignorance of the\npractical effects of the associations.\n\nIt arises, in the first place, from _a wrong estimate of the character of\nthe poor_, and especially of the religious poor.  The sympathy which is\nprofessed by the author of these Reasons, is for suffering which only\nexists in his own conception.  Those who subscribe to Bible Associations\nhave no feeling of the cruelty which they are said to endure.  The best\ndelight which can animate a human breast, is afforded to them by the\nmeans of the Bible Society, in the easiest manner, as well as in the\nhighest degree.\n\nPersons in higher situations of life, are apt to look upon those beneath\nthem, as incapable of feeling those pleasures which they themselves\nenjoy.  Thus the clean cottage, the small, but decorated garden of a poor\nman, is passed by with indifference by the rich; yet the poor man has,\nperhaps, more exquisite pleasure in his enjoyments, than another,\npampered with all the superfluities of life.  So may it be with these\nsmall subscriptions to Bible Associations.  Although poor, a man is\nequally a man; he has drank \u201cmilk sweet as charity from human breasts;\u201d\nand feeling, as acutely as any other, his own spiritual wants, he may\nhave as earnest desire for the relief of his fellow-creatures.  Such I am\npersuaded is the state of many of the poor, and their language in giving\nto these Associations is not the pang which _cruelty_ extorts, but of\nthis kind\u2014\u201cI am not rich myself, but I will give my money, because I know\nthat he who giveth to the poor, lendeth to the Lord; because the souls of\nmultitudes are perishing for lack of that knowledge, which I am able, in\na degree, to impart to them.\u201d\n\nBut not only is this charge founded upon a wrong conception of the\ncharacter and habits of the poor, but upon a mistaken view of the real\npolitical and moral influence of these Associations.\n\nIt is admitted on all hands, that the best remedy for national distress\nwould be to create in the poor a spirit of independence; to raise them\nabove a state, in which they would stoop to receive from the public, that\nsupport which ought to be procured by their own industry and foresight.\nOn this ground, we establish clubs to provide against sickness; banks to\ndeposit savings; and there is reason to conclude, from the example of\nScotland, that if the principle of honest independence were duly\ncultivated, and means supplied for its full operation, an almost total\nsubduction of our Poor Rate might take place.  Bible Associations have,\nthen, a direct tendency to teach and to set at work this very principle.\nThey teach the poor economy, a habit of foresight, the benefit of order\nand christian co-operation.  They raise the poor from the rank of beggars\nto that of benefactors; and, whilst in common with clubs, they cherish a\nhabit of prudence, they root out the habit of selfishness, which clubs\nhave, perhaps, a tendency to produce.\n\nI may be permitted to say in conclusion, that although we may lament that\nsuch controversies should arise, because, as the author of these Reasons\nstates, our divisions are by these means made greater, still it is our\ncomfort to know, that the effect of such controversies is to create\ninquiry into the facts upon which they are founded.  And this inquiry,\nall that love truth, must most earnestly desire.  The friends of the\nBible Society wish to lay open every fact, to offer every plan for\ninvestigation, conscious of the simplicity and purity of their object and\nconduct.\n\nWhen the members of this Society, those of them, at least, who are not\nunder an error of judgment, are said in this pamphlet to \u201chave the aim\nand ambition to puritanize the whole community, and to raise the fabric\nof enthusiasm upon the ruins of church and state,\u201d I look to _fact_,\nwhich our author will at least allow to be as good a weapon as\nhypothesis, and having used in vain all my faculties to discover any\nground for the assertion, I venture to conclude, either that the author\nhas in his study dreamt of enemies whom he cannot have seen, or that he\nhas inserted this passage for the purpose of concluding his work with a\nflourish, even at the expence of truth.\n\nI recollect a fable, by which, some years since, this same false and\nfoolish charge was illustrated.  It said, that philosophers had fancied\nthey saw a monster in the sun, which, however, upon further examination,\nproved to be a fly in their own glass.  And my firm conviction is, that\nthe supposed monsters in this Society will prove to be flies in the\nglasses of our opponents.  From no single fact, at least, in the\nconstitution and general proceedings of the Bible Society, can these\npersons shew, that the slightest ground for such portentous apprehensions\nas are suggested, does exist, but in their own imagination.\n\nThe Bible Society has now existed long enough to prove how vain are\naspersions of this kind.  If such suppositions had been warranted,\nfourteen years would have developed them; but they still remain utterly\nunproved, and this Society is sufficiently known, and has been\nsufficiently examined.  We have, indeed, sometimes seen its brilliancy\nfor a short time obscured by works like our author\u2019s, where every thing\nis charged and taken for granted, but these clouds have passed away, and\nthen we have, when they have passed, observed this institution in the\nmean time risen to a higher meridian, beaming with more pure and\nbrilliant lustre, and imparting more extended and beneficent animation.\n\nIt is a happiness for the friends of the Bible Society to know, that\nopposition like this, is not new against an institution of the most\nacknowledged merits; and which has the testimony of the very writer of\nthese \u201cReasons.\u201d  At an early period of the existence of the Society for\nPromoting Christian Knowledge, the very same opposition was raised\nagainst itself.  In the year 1718, that Society thought proper to answer\nthese allegations, and I will extract a passage from a preface which it\npublished to some missionary letters.\n\nExtract from the Preface to a Collection of Letters from Foreign\nMissionaries, part 3, published by the direction of the Society for\nPromoting Christian Knowledge.  London, 1718, page vii.\n\n\u201cAs things of this nature are generally subject to various opinions and\nreflections, so hath in particular this undertaking met with the same\ntreatment since it came to be known in Europe.  It hath been highly\napproved by some, and disliked by others.  Some, who do not suppose an\nenterprize of this nature to be altogether impracticable, do, however,\nthink it now very improper, when every one _complains of hard tines_, and\nis called upon by _other expences nearer at home_; and, for this reason,\nthey are fur putting it off to a more convenient season.  Others have\nbeen startled _at the newness of the thing_ and are shy to venture into a\nroad so little beaten in this age, and so much exposed to danger and\ndifficulty.  Others have been bare spectators in this matter, unwilling\nto judge of a work, which, like a tender blade, did but just appear above\nground, _not discovering as yet what its fruit might prove_.  Others\nagain, have taken a transient view of the scheme, but declared their\nunwillingness to be farther concerned, till they should see some _eminent\nmen espouse it_, and by their example encourage others to engage in the\nsame.  Others are displeased with the heathen themselves, who, for the\nsake of a little gain, will conform to the christian name, but, at the\napproach of danger, quit it again, and relapse into their former ways.\n\n\u201cIt is not the design of this preface to examine at large the various\nopinions and judgments which hitherto have been passed on this affair,\nmuch less to determine how far they might be well-grounded, or how far,\nperhaps, they might be biassed by mistaken and prejudices.  However, thus\nmuch may be said in answer to those, who, on the one hand, are so easily\nterrified by the common calamities of the times, and, on the other, by\nthe expensiveness of the design, that they seem to be little acquainted\nwith the ways and dispensations of Providence.  For if we take a survey\nof the most considerable transactions, both under the law and the gospel,\nit will plainly appear, that, generally, the _best of works have been\ncarried on in the worst of times_, and that they have triumphed at last\n(though after much toil and labour) over all the clamours and oppositions\nthat wicked men and devils could raise against them.\n\n\u201cThe prophet assures us, that Jerusalem was rebuilt in strait and\ntroublous times.  And another of the inspired writers tells us, that they\nwere fain to work with one hand, and to hold their weapons in the other.\nAnd yet did the work gain ground in the midst of all those adversities;\nand the attempts made against it, were so far from disheartening the\nbuilders, that they did but more encourage them to go on with their\nlabour, till they saw the design brought to a happy conclusion.  However,\nit cannot be denied, that the opposition is then most destructive and\nfatal, when it comes from those that are WITHIN THE PALE OF THE CHURCH,\nAND WHO, UNDER AN EXTERNAL SHEW OF THE SAME CONFESSION, DESTROY THE\nVITALS OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH.\n\n\u201cHow backward the Jews were in building the Lord\u2019s temple, and under what\nfrivolous pretences they put off so unwelcome a work, doth plainly appear\nfrom the reproof given them by the prophet.  The time is not come, the\ntime that the Lord\u2019s house should be built, was the common plea for their\nsloth and drowsiness; but then the effect was, that whilst governors,\npriests, and people, were wholly bent on advancing their worldly\ninterest, and shamefully neglected the Lord\u2019s house, their vines and\nolives did not yield their increase, and the earth denied her fruits.\nAll which may possibly convince us, that even _outward prosperity doth in\na great measure depend upon the care employed in the worship of God_,\n_and its enlargement among_ JEWS AND HEATHENS.\n\n\u201cNor have those a sufficient plea for themselves, that undervalue a\ndesign because it is new, and because it hath been little attempted by\nprotestants.  Truly, this should rather be an inducement (not to stifle\nthe work in its infancy, but) to inflame that little of the spirit of\npower and love, which is left among us.  Should we be also willing to\ndie, because we see so many dead about us?  I mean, so many who are\nsupine and negligent in the greatest concerns of life and happiness.\nShould we not rather strengthen the more the things which remain, but are\nready to die, except they be supported betimes?  Which consideration\nshould make us shake off that natural drowsiness, which confineth the\nmind to narrow ends and purposes, and indisposeth it for any generous\nenterprise.  Nothing is more common, even among those who call themselves\nchristians, than to frame new ways and new methods for increasing their\nstock, and to improve every opportunity offered for that end.  Almost\nevery year produceth new schemes, and these new pursuits after the things\nof this world.  Let a design be never so new and uncommon, it will soon\nbe embraced, if it be but profitable, and conducive to some temporal end\nor other.  Why should a christian, then, be shy of a work because it is\nnew, when it may carry with it a never-fading reward?  Should not he be\nas ready and watchful to lay up riches in heaven, as the profane\nworldling is to improve his income on earth?\u201d\n\nSuch was the opposition once shown to this venerable Society, and by\npersons too within the pale of the church.  Who these persons were\nsignifies now as little to us, as the arguments which they advanced, and\nwhich have so happily failed of success.  And such we hope will be the\nfate of all objections to the Bible Society.\n\nCould these opposers of the Old Society, now contemplate its progress,\nhow would they shrink within themselves, and condemn their own blindness\nand bigotry.  Could they now see the fields trodden by Ziegenbalgh and\nSwartz, once \u201ca waste howling wilderness,\u201d now \u201crejoicing and blossoming\nas the rose,\u201d with what anguish would they regard their own hostility,\nand how would they bless the author of all good, for having wrenched the\nweapons from their hands.  Now every thing is seen by them in its proper\ncolour and dimensions; now every object is merged in the one great object\nof the prevalence of truth.  The triumphs of the gospel fills, if we may\nso speak, their whole field of vision.  Let the opponents, then, of the\nBible Society, learn a lesson from this.  For with them, soon, all the\nhopes and fears of this world will have passed away; they will see every\nobject in the light of the sanctuary, and measure every institution upon\nits sacred scale: the world will be nothing, and Christ will be all in\nall.\n\nMay these persons at that awful day be enabled to justify themselves\nbefore that God, who would not that _any_ should perish, but that _all_\nshould come to the knowledge of the truth; before that Saviour who has\ncommanded us to preach his gospel to all nations, and who, in the glowing\nlanguage of his own book, has shadowed out this and similar institutions,\nunder the image of an angel carrying the everlasting gospel to every\nnation, and language, and tongue, and people; before those souls, who are\nnow crying to us for help\u2014for that help, which the British and Foreign\nBible Society is seeking to impart.\n\n                                * * * * *\n\n                                * * * * *\n\n                                  FINIS.\n\n                                * * * * *\n\n                                * * * * *\n\n                           BY THE SAME AUTHOR,\n                       SERMON ON THE BIBLE SOCIETY,\n                                 PREACHED\n                              _AT BECCLES_,\n                                  AND AT\n                        ST. MARY\u2019S CHURCH, BUNGAY.\n                              _Price_ 6_d._\n\n                                * * * * *\n\n                                  ALSO,\n                       _THE FISHERMAN\u2019S DAUGHTER_:\n                                    A\n                        NARRATIVE FROM REAL LIFE.\n\n                _Price_ 3_d._ or 2_s._ 6_d._ _per dozen_.\n\n                                * * * * *\n\n            _Printed by J. Keymer_, _King-Street_, _Yarmouth_.\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES.\n\n\n{12a} Vide British Critic for May 1816, Arte 10.\n\n{12b} Vide British Critic for May 1816, Arte 10.","title":"Observations on an Anonymous Pamphlet, Which Has Been Distributed in Lowestoft, and Its Neighbourhood, Entitled Reasons Why a Churchman May with Great Justice Refuse to Subscribe to the British and Foreign Bible Society","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":7677}