IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) // // ^.^^ '%;j < <;^ w- % ,^ >^^ ,%^^^ <» .^ fe fA 1.0 LI |2£ 1^ 12.2 i^ j]IM ^ US I 2.0 18 IL25 i 1.4 v] vi o AJ ''W /A f / Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 ^ A* i ^& i CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historicai IVIicroreproductions / institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the bust original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographicaily unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. D D D L ^ D □ Coloured covers/ Couverture da cuuleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommag^e Covers restored end/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^e et/ou pelliculde I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur Coloured inic (i.e. other than blue or blaci<)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re iiure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout6es lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, iorsqus cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas dtd filmdes. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppldmentaires; L'Institut a microfiimi le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6x6 possihie de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographiqus, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la methods normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ y D D Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d6color6es, tachet6es ou piqudes Pages detached/ Pages ddtauhdes Showthrough/ Transparence I I Quality of print varies/ Quality in^gaie de I'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel suppl^mentaire Only edition available/ Seule Mition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages iotalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une peiure, etc., ont 6t6 film6es d nouveau de fapon A obtenir ia meilleure image possible. Tl tc Tl P o fi b tl si o fi si o T si T vt M d ei b ri r( n This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction Indlqu6 ci-dessous lOX 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X ■>/,:;■,■ ■ ■ y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here he* been reproduced thenks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada L'exemplaire fllmA fut reproduit grAce h la g4n6ro8it6 de: La bibliothdque des Archive& publiques du Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Les images suivantes ont 6x6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nattetA de l'exemplaire fllm6. et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de fiimage. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. Les exemplaires orlginaux dont la couverture en papier est imprlm6e sont f JimAs en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernKkre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'iliustration, soit par le second plat, seion le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires orlginaux sont filmis en commen9ant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la derniire page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — v^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "r-ND"). whichever applies. Un des symboies suivants apnaraltra sur la dernlAre image de cheque microfiche, seion le cas: le symbols — ^- signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN ". IVIaps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction latios. Thosia too large lo be entirely included in one exposure ere filmed beginning in the upper left hend corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The follcwing diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre fiimis d des taux de rMuction diffirents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul cliche, 11 est fiimd d partir da /angle supArieu" gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images nicessaire. Les diagrammes suivants iliustrent la mithode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 'C/ A! f. BISHOP OF HURON'S OBJECTIONS / 'JO 'J'HK THEOLOGICAL TLACIIING ■ i OP TRINITY COLLEGE, ,',-i- tS AS NOW SET FORTH IN THK LKTTKRS OP I'KOVOST VVIIITAKEK, PUBLISHED WITH t THE ArrUORITY OF THE COJfPOHATION OF TRINITY COLLEGE. TO WIUOH 18 PBEFIXKU '■ ' '' ' ('' ' ' . A.isr A. T> n R JHJ S 8 i- - -■•'-.^^ ri isif, /i^i-'.iojlilwj ' VJl i r-;,i !':>.(!«>;;!-, ■..•■.:| -vi >i4: ,. ^^J V ''i / 1 i ■>(} 1 ol «w la r«a&ia*jxr« ^-kiA r«r* , „ „ )nvm CONTROVERSY AND REPLIES TO SOME OP THE STATEMENTS ' PUBLICLY MADE ON THE SUB.JECT. ♦ ! '•"' * I' • ■ '-1,, . '^.{^ ■' I ■ ■•> .'••;.; , .In,'. I ">j!u ■ LONDON, 0. W: PRINTED BY THOMAS KVAN8, DUNDAB STREET WEST. 1863. '(\ 'J-t , T^, PREFACE At a meeting of the Corporation of Trinity College held on the Gthinst., it wfts resolved that a special meeting of tlie corporation shoiild be held on the 21fcit, to take into consideration tlie written charges brought by me against tho teaching of Trinity College, and tho Provost's roply. The 2l8t May, was named to suit the conveni- ence of the Bishop of Toronto, and the Provost stated that liis reply to the charges then in his posseesion should be ready by that day. The following notice was ad- dressed to the meinb(3rs of the Corporation, on the 10th May : . " A meeting of tho Corporation ol Trinity College, will bo held at the College, on Wed- nesday the aist Inst., at 3 o'clock, on Hpecial business, I iim, Sir Your very obedient servant, CHAS. MAGRATII, Bursar and Secretary. On the 13th inst., a circular was issued by tlie Bursar, containing the following intimation: " As an opportunity cannot be given for a full meeting of tlie Corpora- tion, except by considerable delay, it is thought proper definitely to postix)ne the consideration of the charges of the Bishop of Huron and the Provost's reply until the return of the Bisliop of Ontario to his diocese." As much delay has already talcen place in consequence of postponements by the corporation; and as public expectation has bec^n much (excited upon this subject by addresses which have been delivered by the Bishops of Toronto and Ontario to their Synods and by jniblications which have been circulated, both in this country and in England, I deem it necessiiry now to pul)lish my charges against the teaching of Trinity Colh^ge. And aa several months must now elapse before the question can come before the Corporation. I have prefixed an address which I had prepared to be read at the intended meeting of the Corporaticm, on the 2l8t May. This address ^ontaines a brief notice of statements which have been ad- vanced with reference to the controversy concerning the teaching of Trinity College. London, C. W., May 20, 1862. BENJ. HURON. ^^:..»r- : .1 .. I- , , .M I 1, I .11 ■ . ,. / ■ ADDRESS y- ing Ka- the util the by iivio this geB [ipse resB the ad- ege. As the origin of the controversy whiehis now being ciiniod on (ionceruing the teaching ofTriuity College has been misunderstofwl by many, I think it advisal»le here to state the facts concerning it, although I have, in part at least, done this on several occasions. A clergyman of my diocese gave notice of a motion concerning Trinity College, which he proposed to bring forward at the meeting of the Synod in June, 1860. 1 now learn from the address of the Bishop ofToronto to his Synod last June, which has been published and circulated in the country, that this clergyman acted at the suggestion of the Bishop of Toronto. 1 told this gentleman before he proposed the resolution that ■' I was opposed to it, and would be against him." He, however, persevered in bringing forward the resolution in a speech, in which he passed the highest eulogiums on Trinity College. It was when the question of the College was thus, contrary to my wish, forced upon the Synod of my diocese, that an in- telligent layman rose and said that he and many others of the laity were at a loss what to think on this subject, as it was quite new to them, and requested mo to state my opinion of Trinity College for their information. In reply to the question thus proposed I then stated the opinion which I had formed of the teaching of 'I'linity College — the same which 1 lad expressed two months pre/iously to the Bishop of Toronto— the President f f tliis institution. In a correspondence with his Lordship upon the subject of the oollege, I had in the month of April stated, *' 1 cannot in my soul approve of the teaching of Tiiuity College." No notice liaU been taken of this statement, and when called upon in Synod to express my opinion I did not hesitate to do so. I wish this to be distinctly observed because it has been said that my objections to the teaching of the college were first announced to the Synod of my diocese, and that I had either concealed them from this Corpora- tion, or taken no step to bring the evil complained of before iuib body. The reply which I gave to the question of the delegate found its way into a local paper ; not exactly in the form in which I had given it, and without my knowledge. And a few days after, without any application having been made to me to ascertain whether the newspaper report was correct, or whether 1 could explain what I had said con- cerning the college, my reply was made the theme of several speeches at the annual convocation dinner in the dining hall of this college. These speeches wore carefully reported to the newspapers, and copies were sent to me. 1 shall not attempt to describe my feelings when 1 read these speeches. More particularly was I aston- ished to find the Provost of this college, which claims to be pre-eminently a Church institution, calling upon the undergraduates, who were present, to murk me — a bishop of the Church, as " the slanderer of the west." The epithets applied tome by the speakers on that occasion, still stand recorded in the public prints of the day and have never been disavowed or recalled. Such is the true history of the controversy which has taken place. It originated with the advice given by the Bishop of Toronto to one of my clergy, iind the doterrnination evinced by that gentleman to force the question of Trinity College before ray Synod, contrary to my expnjHsed wish. If undue publicity hps boon given through the newspaperu to this subject, the blame must rest upon tiiose who furnislicd to the press the after-dinner speeches to which I have referred, for I never wrote a single line for any newspaper upon tlio subject. The grounds of my objections to the teaching of the College were then called for, and 1 furnished them in a letter to tlie i'Lxocutivo Committee of my Synod in the month of August, 1860 ; and tliey were by tliat body transmitted to the Bishop of Toronto, President of the College, and to the Provost They were thus brought before the Corporation, In reply to them the Provost addressed three letters to the Bishop of Toronto, which were also laid before the Corporation. From this It will appear that my objections to tlie teaching of Trinity College were before the Bisiiop of Toronto in April, 18tJ0, were brought before the Corporation in August, 18(30, and were replied to liy the Provost iu September following. And now with a full statement, under his own hand, of the Provost's teaching on the points ob- jected to, I come before the Corporation to asli from them an opinion as to the light in which they regard these statemtnts. Various motives which 1 never avowed or entertained have been ascribed to me for objecting to tlie teacliing of the College, I feel myself called upon to notice the statements which have been made concerning my motives. It has been said that I huve " been manifestly opposed to Trinity College through the whole course of its progress," and that I have " done everything in my power to arrest the pro- gress of the University." Also that 1 moved Lord Elgin against granting the Charter of the College. To these statements I must give a most unqualified denial, and I can only attribute them to mistake or misinformation upon the part of the venerable Prelate who first made them. I, with many others, entertained the idea that it would have been better to have atHliated the College with the great Pro- vincial University, and thus have secured a part of the noble endowment which it enjoys ; and I think the result has proved that it would have been true wisdom to have done so ; for I find some of the most earnest supporters of the College — mem- bers of this Corporation — thus expressing tliemselves on this subject at the last meeting of the Synod of the Diocese of Toronto : — Dr. Fuller said " He had seen their College struggling with great difficulties, and lie had felt that the country, and especially the Church, haid sudered on ac- count of the want of larger means to carry on the College. He had seen the au- thorities of the College obliged to charge such fees to young men being educated there, a« shut out from its benefits a large number who would otherwise have gladly availed themselvee of its great advantages. They saw Trinity College una- ble, from want of funds, fully to carry out the noble purposes for which it came into being ; and whs it the part of a friend, if he thought he could get assistance for it, to fail to ask that assistance ? He thought not. He felt that in taking the step he now did, he was the staunchest friend of the College." Mr Harman : "If all the Colleges that were at present educating the youth of Canada could agree upon some system which would in no way militate with their own peculiar views, religious or otherwise, with regard to education, and have one large University which should put the cope stone on all the education which was carried on in the other institutions, this, he thought, would be putting University education on a correct footing in this Province. He was himself a member of King's College, London, a College which he was proud to say stood second to none in its en- deavors to uphold the truth of Church teaching ; but King's College, did not grant degrees — its students got their degrees from the University of London, although that was an institution from which religion was totally excluded. Now that was an exactly parallel position to the position which he would wish to see assumed in this country with regard to education. We had various Colleges teaching in va- rious manners, and as long as v/e had diversities of religious Ofunion, there must be difficulties of that kind to overcome— and only by allowing different Colleges to carry out different systems of teaching, and uniting them in one great whole as regarded the results of the teaching, could they hope to see University education placed on a proper footing." Mr. Harman went on to say that "With snob a comprehensive scheme of University education as he desired to see carried out, joxmg men desiring to enter College could come to the National University from all p»rtH of the v.< untry to paws their enhance oxaminntionH, and if th«'y were «uffi rlently adviinord to carry scliolarnhipH they lould take tlioHc schoIurHhipH with them to the various (VtlloKtm to which their pantnts or othors intorcHted inipht desiru to Hcnd thorn. Dr. Ik>vell : " Was it poKsiblc for a separate Coilt^ne to undt-rtake to educate and fit mon for these two profoHsioiis i* — liiiw and Medicine, (iod forbid that ho HhouUl do anything which would tciul to sap the foundations of Trinity College, or to alter the principles on which it whs based lUit he must look at the interesti; of the whole Province, and doing ho, he lield it to lit! iraposKible for separate Collegtm to underttike the work of educating for those profesgions ; and for this simple reason, that the vast expense which it would be necessary to 'ncur for the establihhnient of a 'thoroughly efficient nuulical school, could not be borne by any one collegiate ioBtitution in the country. Mut if the goverjinieril gavt; a system of University tiilucation, which would make degrees what they ougiit to be, a positivti stamp upon a man that he was tlie true guinea he professed to be, then tliere would be effected what was a very great denidfratuin in this country. Now, if be saw any posBiblc means of their getting an endowment which would enable tlKMu to bring law and medicine into the College, and to maintain it as a distinct University with full University powers, he would say let Trinity College by all means stand upon its own footing, and carry this out. Mut as this was an impossibility, it was their duty to accommodato themselves to circumstances, where they sacritii:ed no prin- ciple and where their object was to further the cause of University education to the extent of their power." " It might l)e supposed by some that, being so much attached to Trinity College, he need not look further ; but he felt bound to look to the wants of tlie country, in view partictdarly of the degraded state of his own profession, and foregoing all inferior advantjiges, he could not do otherwise than press the importance of liaving a wide and comprehensive scheme which would give to Upper Canada a system of Univergity education second to none in the world." (('heers.) From these statements it appears that the warmest friends of Trinity College are now advocates of a measure which I and others foresaw would be nectissary, and the avowal of which, by me, has been interpreted into hostility and ojiposition to the College. It has been asserted also that the reasons which I have given for objecting to the teaching of Trinity College are the ostensible, not the real grounds of my opposition. This I regard as a most serious charge. The form in which it has been lately put by the newly consecrated Bishop of Ontario is, that charges have been brought against the teaching of Trinity College " ostensibly on the ground of its having a tendency towards Rome, but really because it has not a iendencv towards Geneva." Such a statement as this concerning my motives, can only be met as I now meet it, with a most pointed and solemn denial of its truth. To search into the heart is the prerogative only of one, and to him with all reverence, but with the utmost confidence I can appeal, when I state that the charges which I have publicly brought against the teaching of Trinity College are the true reasons which have influenced mc, and that the idea of oVyecting to the college because no Calvinistic theories were taught there never once entered my mind. Nay more, with the same solemnity do I assert that I should be very sorry to see any more of what is vulgar- ly called Calvinism taught in our educational institutions than is contained in the articles of our Church, literally and grammatically interpreted. This charge, therefore, which has been publicly brought against me by the Bishop of Ontario is entirely without foundation in fact. And it will be a relief to the mind of every member of the Church, who is jealous of its honor, to be assured that a Bishop of his Church has not been guilty of coming before the world, as has been asserted of me by the Bishop of Ontario, with a lie in his right hand, hypocritically assigning one reason for his proceeding but in reality actuated by another and very different motive. It is deeply to be deplored that the Bishop of Ontario should have thought it expedient in hia first solemn address to his clergy and laity to have brought forward a question of Calvinism concerning which, he truly says, that the peace of the Church in Canada has not heretofore been disturbed by it. None of the aged bishops in tliis province ever considered such a proceeding necessary, and it surely would have ueen wiser to have followed their good example, than, on the unsound ba^ of a fialse assumption, to disturb the internal harmony of the Church by the \ introduction e(Miurfh()f KuKlimd. \\\h lionlrtliip imist smely hnvo foiKottcn the many cu«e» whicli Imvo lately l»wu (lucidcnl liy tliu FicluHiiwtical C'ouitH in Engknd, in which HlMliDpHof oniMMiurchchar^^cd o<;rt(iiii('lerKynioii with orrontroiiH teaching, and when the ({iicHtiniH (tinio Itcfon! the Ic^'id trilMiuidn thiMloctiincH of which their LordHhipH (;()ni|)liiim'd wei\, proiiniiiiced not to lie contrary to the doc- trines of the Ohorch of KnKland The (;a«« of Gotham and thtt UiBhop of Kxeter fiir- nlshcKan example ol this. After a loiii; and inoHt patient lu^arinK tlie hi^liest court in the realm pronounced that the d(M;trint!H of wlii'li the Hisliop complained and which he, ofcourno, re^^arded aH danKt'f^>"M. were not contrary to the ('hurch of En>;- land. Ilie same Ih true concernim^ tlie case of Archdeacon Donison, and the case of the Bishop of Salisbury against Dr. Rowland Williams, furnlslios an instance of a sim- ilar kind. For we lind a Bishop of our ('hurch accnsitiff a (Mer^jynian of error on a vital point, and ten days have been expended by most learned Council in argument to show that what his Lordthip had objected to as most dang(^rous was not in opposi- tion to the teaching of the Church ofKngland; when, therefore, the Bishop of On- tario has considered tlic subject more maturely he will see that doctrines and practices may be considered by bishops of the I'hurch as dangerous to the Church of England, which yet by Ecclesiastical Covirts may be pronounced as not contrary to its doctrines. Tlie Bishop of Ontario, also stateil in his address to his Synod, that 1 have acteil unreasonably In refiising to submit the question of the teaching of Trinity College to the Metropolitan of Canada. He says, "This seems to me the more unreasonable, because the Tx)rd Bishop of Huron once pro- posed to submit the whole case to the Lord Bishop ofRuperts Land for his decision." It sertainly surprises me not a little to find such a statement made by the Bishop of Ontario. I never made such a silly proposal as to allow the Ixird Bisliop of Ru- perts Land, or any other man, to decide for mo in a question in whicV my conscien- tious conv'ctions were involved. The following is the letter which I wrote to the Rev. A. Palmer on this subject, which I read at the meeting of the Corporation, in Fcbrtiary, in the presence of the Bishop of Ontario : " If the Provost could satisfy me, by laying his notes before me and an indif- ferent party, say the Bishop of Ruperts Jjand, who will be in Toronto on Saturday next, that the teaching is not such lis I have been led to believe, from the examin- ation of graduates of the College and from the documents I possess, then I will at the meeting of Synod, next week, state my change of opinion. Should such an ar- rangement as this be adopted the examination must be thorough and searching and I will be satisfied to abide by the result." My reason for mentioning the Bishop of Ruperts Land was not that he should decide anything for me, but that he should, by his presence, enable me to meet the Provost and enter into the proposed investigation. I stated in the same letter to Mr. Palmer : "I cannot meet the Provost alone." My reason for this was that the Provost had applied such epithets to me publicly as rendered it impossible for me to meet him while these epithets remain unrecalled. Tliis proposal, which was made by me in consequence of the interference of the Rev. A. Palmer, and the desire expressed by him to promote a settlement of the question, was declined by the Bishop of Toronto. In the course of the discussion I put to the Bishop of Ontario a question with reference to the pamphlet of the Provost, which was the subject of my resolution. I asked his Lordship twice whether that book contained heresy ? He twice decline(i to answer the question. It may appear strange that I should put such a question to his Lordship. The reason was that the venerable Archdeacon Brouqh, who then sat near me, had informed me that in a conversation with the Bishop of Ontario, his Lordship had stated to him that the view advocated in the Provost's letters concerning the reception of the glorified humanity of our Lord, by the faithful in the Lord's Supper was " hereticaL" Tnis will account for my putting the question, and may also account for the unwillingness of the Bishop of Ontario to reply. In conclusion J. would say, that, while I shall ever be ready with all faithful diMgence to banish and drive away all erroneous and strange doctrines, whether in my Synod or elsewhere, I shall never desecrate the public assemblies of the Church in my diocese by making them the arena of personal attack upon any man, or of defence from the personal attacks made upon me by others. L « OB-IECTIONS OF TIIK BlSIIOl' OF HURON ■ ' '" ' '' " ' ^ TO'IHK ■ " ' ^ TEACHING OF TRINITY COLLEGE, Vfnyfv in tHo lianu)(l whereas, these letters contain many things which appear to a large number of the memliers of this Church throughout the coimtry to bo highly objectionable, and whereas, the approval of this Corporation tliUH claimed for these letters is calculated to alienate the minds of the people from this University, and to destroy all confidence in it, as a sound and wife institution for the education of the youth of our church in the protestpnt principles of the Church of England; therefore, i)e it resolved, that this Corporation regrets that these letters should liave been published as by its authority, and desireH distinctly to record that it does not hold itself reBpon8ib!t3 for the opinions maintained in these letters," llie object of this resolution was to obtain from the Corporation an opinion on the letters which the Provost addressed to the Jjord Bishop of Toronto in reply to the charges brought by me against the teaching of Trinity College. In ask- ing for this opinion there was no attempt to judge or condemn the Provost imheard. He had been hoard in his defence in these letters, his pamphlet of 90 pages, carefully and elaborately written upon the charges brought against his teaching had been published avowpdly uncHer the sanction of this Corporation, and circulated throughout the country, and it was the duty of every niember of the Corporation to be thoroughly acquainted with its contents. But instead of pro- nouncing an opinion on the defence of the Provost c'i'ntalned in these letters, an amendment was adopted by the Corporation, which was moved by the Chief Justice, and seconded by the Bishop Elect of Ontario, the effect of which was to express the entire confidence of the Corporation in the teaching of the Provost, and to evade expressing any opinion on the Provost's pamphlet, which iraa the subject of the resolution moved by me. The following is the amendment: — " That it be resolved that the Corporation of Trinity College docs not assume cither to represent or te Identify itself with the views of any party In the Council. That the opinion expressed by the Corporation on the first letters of the Provost, vindicated the writer from the imputation of teaching doctrines not allowed by the Church, and to that opinion the corporation still adheres. That, although the second letter of the Provost was not submitted to the Corporation Its publication was authorised as stated by him. And, although the Corporation Is not committed to Its details, It Is not aware that It can be shown to be contraiy to the teaching of the Church ; that the Corporation cannot, therefore, entertain any proposition to condemn any portion of either of these letters without a specific statement, In writing, of the objections that are urged against them, , , ,• n»>t ■■■"■-.ui «;/ I then moved the following resolution : — -r , ' r'^n^t a committee be appointed to receive a v'rltten statement of the objections made to the doctrines contained In the three letters of the Provost and, also, of any answer thereto, and to report to this Corporation at a future meeting." In accordance with this resolution I have prepared written objections to the opinions contained In the betters published by the Provost of Trinity College, which ■< Te written after mature consideration. In reply to the charges brought by me agauist the teaching of Trinity College, which are, therefore, to be taken as a full and candid statement of his views, and as furnishing the best and strongogt argmnents which the Provost can adduce In favor of his opinions. , Wh«n »t l.h»' rri|iieNt of Iht* Kx«M-utt\e Committcn of th« Syncnl of luy dioooM. I i»«l«lr««m'«l A h^itor to (li«iu iit Aumiit, IHUO, twttinK forth the urouutlu \\\h>u which I hiul foi lod my opinion upon the tench inn of Trhiity ('tdlenc the only docu- numtM to which I coultl roft-r were (he notim whlih the StiuluntM hiwl tnken of tiie lectureH tlollvi'red to them by tlie FrovoHt. Severnl coplcH of thene uotvH htwl comu umier nty notice, nm! theyiiKrced lo entirely in till im^Htrtantpuintu that I could not rcHint the concluHion that i hud Iwfore me u correct utatemont of the teacliin({ of the I'rovoHt, or at nil eventH n faithful ivccoimtof the Idciu impurted. Hnve the level of a creature, or to encourage superstitious feelings concerning her. Our Church has wisely fol- lowed the example thus set by the Inspired writers. All that she has taught upon this subject may be summed up in one brief sentence Christ was born of a pure virgin. The Provost haH gone far beyond this in his v aching, and the effect upon the minds of Students has lu^en to make them believe that the answers in the manu- script notes which they had compiled were in accordance with the views put forth by him. Thty — one and all — believed that they had been taught that Mary had an appointed type in the law, and tliat she was "an instrument in bringing mankind into the Kingdom of Heaven." The Provost, in his pamphlet, page 26, says : — '• I consider this latt«r clause to be ojien to very dangerout constructions, as it might be understood to imply some past or permanent ministry of the Blessed Virgin, tending immediately to the salvation of mankind". This is precisely the opinion which I have formed and expressed concerning this answer. The Provost says he did not teach this, I, of course, believe him. But the Students must have supposed that he did teach it, for where elHC could they have learned it ?— not from the Holy Scriptures — not in the Church Catechism — not in the Creed — not from their parents and friends. They believerd confirms in heaven." The Apostles and in them all Priests, were made god's vicegerents here on (uirth, in his name and stead, to retain and remit sins. " When, therefore, the Priest absolves, God absolvcK if we be truly jHinitent." Such views oi the effectual judicial power of the Priest to forgive sins I must regard as most dangerous to young men. And I know that some who have been taught in Trinity ('oUege hold them. I feel nxyself, therefore, bound to enter my solemn protest against the teaching of stich in this institution. The next point which I would notice in the teaching of the Provost is his doctrine concerning the sacraments. As to the numbiu- of the sacnunents, I think it dangerous for our youth to be taught that there are two ''great sacraments" and other holy rites and sacraments, when our Church dogmatically teaches in the cjitechism that there are ' ' two only. ' ' And in the articles, ' ' there are two sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel, that is to say Baptism and the Supper of the Lord." And that these five commonly called sacraments, that is to say confession, penance, orders, matrimony and extreme-unction, are not to be counted for sacraments of the Gospel. Whatever may be said concerning the ancient use of the word ' ' sjicrament, ' ' since the Reformation the word has had but one application in our Church, and it caimot be regarded as either wise or safe to lead our young men to look upon other rites and ceremonies as at all to be placed on the same footing as the only two sacraments which Christ has ordained. This is well stated in a passage quoted b}' the Provost from Archbishop Seeker: " By the early writers of the WcKtern {i.e. the Popish) Church it was used to express almost anything relating tom this explanation it is very difhcult to collect what view the Provost really eutert^iins con- cerning the Sacrament of the Lords Supper. But he has (juoted in page 87 of his pamphlet a charge of the Bishop of St. David's, in which his I-rt>rd8hip altogether condemns the propositions of Archdeacon Denison, concerning this Sacrament. I therefore conclude that the Provost agrees with his Ix^rdship in repudiating the doc- doctrine taught by the Archdeacon. In that charge I iind some wise and judicious remarks concerning the use of the teiTn 'the real presence.' His Lordship says, ' The phntse real presence is foreign to the language of the Church of England, and has been wisely avoided as liable to abuse, and likely to deceive or scandalize the simple and ignorant. ' It must be apparent to all that the term which the Provost has employed, from the writings of Mr. Proctor, and has so vehemently defended, " that every faithful recipient partakes, in the Eucharist of the glorified humanity of our Lord' is much more likely to deceive and scandalize the simple and ignorant and should therefore be regarded as dangerous and avoided in lectures addressed to young men on the Catechism. The Provost had (juoted this charge with the highest commendation as exactly stating his own views, and ir it we find language employ- ed which is capable of being interpreted so as to express and support a view of the real presence of Christ in the sacrament which is not in accordance with the teaching of our Church. His Lordship speaks of what he ventures to call * the objective re- ality in the sacrament' and he says ' but they are apt to overlook the necessity for something beside the Instrument and the condition which is more indispensable than either, namely, the presence, the power, the spiritual agency by which the instru- ment is effectually applied.' It would have been well, had his Lordship remember- ed his own rule and avoided the use of phrases which arc capable of a most unscrip- tural interpretation. There is a passage in the Provost's pamphlet which sets the sacrament of the Lord s Supper before the reader in a light altogether different from that in which our Church teaches us to regard it. ITiis passage occurs in page 80th of the pamphlet, " I am perfectly satisfied to admit that it speaks of a supernatural gift, which both before the institution of the Eucharist tind aftei-wards mag have been and may still be received without it, but for the reception of which the holy conmiunion is the appointed mean and the only mean whereby Holy Scripture assures us that tee a^oM receive it if duly prepared," while our Church teaches that the Sacrament of the LoitJ's Supper is a rich mean of grace to the faithful recipient, it nowhere teaches that it is ^'the appointed mean and the only mean," whereby we can be assured that we shall receive the supernatural gift promised by God to his be- lieving people, nay more, the Kubric at the close of the service for the communion of the sick enjoina the Curate to instruct the sick man that '' if he do trtily repent him of his sins, and steadfastly believe that Jesus Christ hath suffered death upon the cross for him and shed his blood for his redemption, earnestly remembering the benefits he hath thereby, and giving him hearty thanks therefor, he doth eat and drink the body and blood of our Saviour Christ profitably tp his soul's health, although he do not receive the Sacrament with his mouth." Here is no doubtful and uncertain may such as the Provost employes, but the fullest assurance is to be given to the pnitent believing sufferer that without the Sacrament he has all the spiritual bless- ings signified in that ordinance. The unqualified application of the vi. of John to the Sacrament of tlu Lord's Supper is another feature in the teachhig of the Provost which cannot but be regard- ed as dangerous. The times in which we live demand a cautiim which at another period might not be necessary. There is a strong tide of opinion, more especially 18 amongst tho young, sotting towards those false doctrines and erroneous practices from which our forefathers at the lieformation freed the Church, and it is our duty to en- deavour by the use of every loKitimate mera Stu- dents of Trinity College the statement, that " the Church of F^nglaud lost at the Ko- formation some things which wore in themselves good and tended to edification." "The Provost in his 1st letter j)age 24th of his pamphlet, meets this, as he says, with a flat denial of its truth," in plain English, he pronouiK-es it a talKehood. Yet in his second letter, page 84, we find however the following passage. " I have never in- dulged in maudlin regrets respecting the losses we sustained at the reformation and there can be no possible colour for tho charge, except it be that, in reading of admirable early usjiges, which our Reformers did not venture to restore, such as that mentioned by Justin Martyr, the conveyance of the consecrated elements to all sick members of the Church after every public celebration of the Eucharist I have said that w« nuff/U well regret that we potseated not this usage in our Church, but that our regret should be controlled by the remembrance that a necessary conse- quence of the grievous abuses which precedtjd the reformation was to abridge our liberty, and to deprive us of " good Ihinga which might have been safely enjoyed in happier times." It is not to be wondered at that Students hearing such statements as the above should come to the conclusion that ' ' at the reformation, our Church lost some good things." The Provost speaks of " Admirable usages" which our Reformers did not venture to restore, and he instances the conveyance of the consecrated elements to sick after every publick celebration of the Eucharist, now this is a usage against which our Church in her Rubric upon this subject and in her Articles specially pro- tests. The Provost states that he has never indulged in maudlin regrets respecting losses susttiined at the reformation, and yet by his own showing he teaches young men that they may well regret that there are " admirable early usages" which we do not now possess, and that in the Church of England we aie now deprived of "■ good things," which in happier times we might have enjoyed. Surely the ten- dency of tliis teaching must be to make the Student dissatisfied with *.he Church of England as it now is, tuid to look with an eye of favor upon that Church which still retains those '' admirable usages," and in which those "■ good things" are now en- joyed. ITie CUergy of the Church of England are bound " so to minister the doctrine and sacraments and the discipline of Christ, as the Lord hath conamanded, and as this Church and realm hath received the same' ' I cannot but regard it as dangerous to lead young men to look back to the Church in the period before the reformation as possessing ' ' admirable usages' ' which our Reformers could not venture to restore and ae then enjoying ''good thmgs" of which we are now deprived. The Provost has adduced the names of many eminent men and has claimed them as his authorities for his teaching on different points. Amongst the authorities thus adduced we find Craimier, Latimer, Ridley, Hooper, Jewel, Hooker, Usher, Calvin and Baxter. Can the Provost show that these men embraced and taught his system as a whole ? That they taught, that the pardon of sin and justification are obtained by the penitent and believing sinner first in baptism, as the only effectual instrument of justification, and after baptism, by the authoritative absolutions of the Priest, aud that the Eucharist is " the only mean" whereby the supernatural gift of Christ as the food of the soul can mtli certainty be obtametl ? Can he adduce them as teaching that "all of us or nearly all [ten thousand to one] are baptised in infimcy, and therefore regenerated and justified of course ? That there is no certain forgiv- ness of sin after baptism to the penitent believer until the Priest has absolved him, and that then, and not until then, his pardon is confirmed in heaven, that " when the Priest absolves God absolves if we be truly penitent." Can he adduce them to support his view that " admirable early usages and " good things" enjoyed by the Church before the refonnation are not now possessed by us ? and that Faith sends us to Christ, not directly as our Church teaches in the Homily on Salvation, but indi- rectly though Sacraments and other ordinances ? and in fine, can he adduce any one of these great and good men in support of the system of Sacramental Salvation which, on his own showing he holds and teaches in the University ? Of this system I would say with Bishop Burnett. " Tlie doctrine of Sacramental Justification is justly to be reckon^ amongst the most mischievouii of all those priu;tioal errom t^t are Ut, t^e 14 Chureh of Rome. Since therefore this ib nowhere mentioned in all these large dis- ooureeB that are in the New Testament concerning justification, we have just reason to reject it. Kinco also the natural consequenco of this doctrine is to make men rest contented in low imperfect acts wlien they can be so eiwily made up by a Sacrament, we have just reascm to detest it as one of the depths of 8atan; the tendency of it be- ing to make those ordinances of the Gospel which wore given as a means to raise juid heighten our faith and repentance become engines to encourage sloth and impeni- tence." [ Burnet on Article xi . ] Were we at liberty to range through the voluminous writingn of these and other eminent men, and to select from one and anothor, some weak and, perhaps, erroneous opinion which, in their fallibility, they may have written, we could con- struct such a system of doctrine as would be utterly repugnant to God's word, and by pleading each of these men for something in our false system we might persuade the unwary to believe that we had their sanction for the whole. Such a proceed- ing would be most fallacious. If Latimer and Ridley, if Hooper and Jewel, if Hooker and Usher are worthy of being adduced as authorities on some, perhaps minor points, their opinion on the great fundamental doctrines of the Christian sys- tem should not be utterly despised and rejected. I have thus presented my objections to the teaching oi the Provost of lYiuity College. This Corporation is the only tribunal before which these charges can with propriety be brought; as a Clergyman of the Church of England, Mr. Whitaker is not under my jurisdiction, not being in my diocese, and therefore it would be not only absurd, but highly presumptuous in me, to present charges against hinx before any Ecclesiastical tribunal, and thus to interfere with the duties of another Bishop. But as Provost of this University, he is subject to my supervision, and when I think there is in his conduct or teaching any thing which calls for investigation, this is .'he only tribunal to which I can, with propriety, appeal. The Law has invested us, as a body, with plenary power to deal with all matters which concern the interests of the University, and I can never consent to throw upon others the responsibility of doing that which we are capable of doing, and which we alone are, by law, authoriz- ed to do. London, May 1862., -. , ., ,, BENJ. HURON. 1' H ,'f «; MCr. MicLood's Letter. i-tV ! „ , To the Editor of the Globe, i „, , Sir, — I have been absent from Canada for a few weeks past, on a summer tour, and consequently have not till now seen the published letter of the Bishop of Huron dated July 2l8t, in reference to Trinity College, and the reply to one of tb-) state- ments of the Bishop by the Provost of the college. I matriculated and entered Trinity College in the Autumn of 1865, with the design of preparing for the Ministry of the Church. At the end of my second term, I was obliged to leave on account of ill-health, and did not return. My acquain- tance, therefore with the College extends only over about five months of the first year in the arts' course. I received at the hands of the Provost and Professors, >>oth kindness and consideration which I shall always thankfully acknowledge, I iiave hitherto forborne taking any part in discussions about the institution; but, as the subject has now come up prominently before the public, and the Provost remarks that the controversy cannot rest where it is, I feel bound to give my unpressions from the stand-point of a student. The Bishop says, " Amongst other documents, I have in my possession a manu- script known in Trinity College by the name of the "Provost's Catechism;" it con- sists of 741 questions, with answers. It is placed in the hands of every student entering the university, and all are expected to learn it." The Provost replies, " I beg, therefore, to observe that no manuscript by the name of the " Provost's Catechism," or any other name, is placed in the hands of any student entering the university, far less is any student expected to learn it." I have not directly or indirectly communicated with the Bishop on the subject of the college — and yet, had I been questioned on the point at issue, I should have used precisely the alx)ve language employed by the Bishop, omitting only the word " placed." In making this remark, I do not wish to appear as in the slightest con- tradicting the Provost, whom, apart from theological views, I have learned highly to respect ; but I state the matter simply as 1 understood it while a student at the college. 16 At the commencement of the catechetical lectures, which are attended by all students, I inquired for the text-book, and was shown by my fellow studentg a catechism in manuscript, called the " I'rovoHt's CatechiBm." This, I was told, had been carefully compared with the Provost's manuscripts, obtained from him by a student of a former year, for that purpose, and could be relied on as correct. As the possessicm of a text-book is invaluable to a student, in order to the accurate prepara- tion of lectures, and not ever being aware that its use in this case was not consider- ed legitimate, I proceeded, in coi imon with all the students about me, to make a careful copy, under the impression a'.so that it might, in after life, serve as a valua- ble'manual of divinity for occjvsional reference. On observing, however, the ten- dency of its theology, I abandoned my intention, thinking it not a safe guide on some doctrinal points ; and considering that the atlmixture of what I thought un- sound teaching with very much that was valuable, only rendered the book the more dangerous to the ungiuirded possessor. At the examination of the students on the previous le<;ture, the questions of the Provost, and the answci-s of the students, usually went on in the regular order, and in the words of this Catechism, so as to lead me to conclude it was the very book before the Provost. I have however, occasionally observed the omission of a ques- tion, as stated by the Provost, and of one or more proof texts: while, on the other hand, I have often remarked the student's more general language corrected by the Provost, to the more accurate phraseology of the catechism. On the whole, I confidently apprehend that the so-called " Provost's Catechism used by the students, will be foimd essentially to correspond with the manuscript and questions used by the Provost. The publication of the latter will alone provide unquestioned data for ascertaining the doctrinal tendencies of the college teaching. I had not yet entered what is properly called the divinity class, my impressions v/ere therefore gatliered from the pulpit ministrations in the college chapel, and the catechism referred to. I took no notes, not having anticipated this public statement of my views: what I heard, I weighed carefully ; and I think I do not err, when I state, that the undoubted tendency of this teaching is, imobtrusively, but surely, to develope in the minds of the students, the essential principles of the theological sys- tem variously and technically known by the name of " Sacramental," or " Trac- tarian," ami that it is vain for parents to send their sons there, and then expect that they will come out unembued, more or less, with the sympathies and theology of that school. The esprit de corps of the college, which it is hard for any young man to resist, has a decided set that way. Roman Catholic newspapers were admitted by the students into their reading-room ; and at the morning and evening prayers said daily in the chapel; at the commencement of the Apostles' Creed, all the students were required to conform to the custom of turning suddenly round to face the com- munion table, the imaginary east, and at its close, to turn as suddenly back to the usual posture of worship. To this custom other students, besides myself, had an objection, in these days when turnings and genuflections are but too often made, not only the symbols of a party, but a silent means of inculcating superstitious no- tions, which it would be hard to defend in terms. On learning from one of the pro- fessors that no such idetvs were intended impliedly to be taught, I complied as the othera. In my own case, I was relinquishing one profession to fit myself for a higher one, and so was considerably beyond the years of those who usually entered college as students, and my religious views were naturally more formed, and yet, knowing the frailty of flesh and blood, and the danger of " unconsciously imbibing, in the process of learning, the seeds of an unscriptural system of theology, afterwards to be more fully developed, I trembled for myself, recollecting the apostolic injunc- tion, " Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed less he fall." I have always thought that the mental anxiety induced by this incessant fear and watchfulness, was one of the causes which bore down my never robust health, and imposed upon me the necessity of relinquishing my long cherished purpose of entering the min- istry. It is much to be deplored that there is not a Collegiate ChurcR Institution in either the Upper or Lower Province, to which the fions of parents holding sound evangelical views, can be sent; without the inevitable prospect of their being indoc- trinated into a system at once opposed to the Protestantism of our church and the simplicity of the gos{)el. ' Yours, &c. ToBONTO, September 12th, 1860. NEIL MoLEOD. *