Ittttro to JO (Mtn.
THE BISHOP OF LONDON AND HE. 31117HICE.
2011s December 1853.
Sra—A paragraph in the Postscript of your last number suggests an in- quiry as to the part taken by the Bishop of London, as a member of the Council of King's College, in the matter of Mr. Mountie's dismissal. If he voted for it, how can he reconcile it to his conscience to allow Mr. Maurice to teach heresy at his leisure in the chapel of Lincoln's Inn ? He will hardly say that his hearers there are too advanced in life to be seduced by any strange novelties of doctrine. For it is notorious that the majority of them are of that class of young men for whose faith Dr. Jelf trembled while Mr. Maurice retained his Professorship. Moreover, it was for them especially that the condemned Essays were published, while we know that on the par- dealer points in dispute Mr. Maurice was wont to keep silence in King's College Either, therefore, the Bishop is guilty of a gross dereliction of duty in permitting Mr. Maurice to poison the minds of the young at Lincoln's Inn, or he must have voted against his dismissal at King's College. The Bishop is not noted for moral courage; but surely if the latter supposition is correct, he is' bound not only as a bishop but as a gentleman, to declare publicly his con- viction that Mr. Maurice has been unjustly condemned. If he does not make such a declaration, it must necessarily be understood, that by not with- drawing his licence from Mr. Maurice, he holds him innocent, and is bound to take measures to restore him to his Professorship.
Previous page
