CHAPTER IX.
Scruples About The Athanasian Creed.
In the December of 1827 the old scruples, that came into his head some two years before, about the Athanasian Creed revived. Perhaps it is better to give the words of the Journal before going into particulars on this point. He says—
"Tuesday, Dec. 4.—.... Thursby came to dine and sleep here. We conversed till nearly 12, almost incessantly, about his concerns first, then about mine. I let him know my thoughts of resigning my preferment on account of the Athanasian Creed. He was at first very much displeased at them, but seemed better satisfied as I explained myself."
"Wed., Dec. 5.—I came down after a wakeful night, and much confirmed in my resolution to take decided steps about declaring against the Athanasian Creed. Thursby seemed to coincide much more nearly with my views. We talked on this and other topics until 11 or 12, when he went away. I went out in Great Brington till 2; dined; then ran to Althorp .... came back and wrote long letters to my father and the Bishop of Chester, about my intended declaration, and probable resignation of my living. I here solemnly affirm that before last week I had no sort of idea of taking this step. I am now writing on Friday, fully determined upon it. The circumstances which led me to this decision are:—1st. My many conversations of late, and correspondence with, dissenting ministers, by whose words I have been led to doubt the perfectness of our Establishment. 2ndly. My discussions and reflections about retrenchments, leading me to consider the probability of more preferment, and how I could accept it. 3rdly. The quantity of Church preferment which has been of late changing hands, by which I have been led to think how I should answer an offer myself. And, 4thly. My thoughts about signing Baily's boy's testimonial, which has led me to reckon more highly on the value of my signature."
From the letters of those who undertook the setting of Mr. Spencer's troubles at rest, it appears that his difficulties about the Athanasian Creed did not arise from the doctrines there put forth about the Blessed Trinity and Incarnation; but that he objected to the terminology as un-Scriptural, and to the condemning clauses in the beginning and end of the Creed. Dr. Blomfield is the first to reason with him; his answer to the letter above-mentioned is couched in the following terms:—
"The letter which I have just received from you astonishes and confounds me; not that I ought to be surprised at anything strange which you may do, after what I have lately witnessed and heard; but I must say, in plain terms, that your letter is the letter of an insane person. You profess to be willing to ask advice and hear reasoning, and yet you take the most decided steps to wound the feelings of your friends and injure the cause of the Church, without giving those whom you pretend to consult an opportunity of satisfying your doubts. You suffer your father to be with you two days without giving him a hint that you were meditating a step incomparably the most important of your life, and most involving his happiness; and then, in the midst of his security, write him a letter, not to tell him that you are doubtful on certain points and wish to be advised, but that your mind is made up and you are determined to act. Surely common sense and filial duty ought to have suggested the propriety of waiting till you had communicated with me, although even to me you do not state what your doubts and difficulties are with sufficient precision to enable me to discuss them; but you write a long panegyric upon your own sincerity and humility, of which I entertained no doubt, and thus, after repeated conferences with Dissenting ministers and Roman Catholic priests, far more astute and subtle reasoners than yourself, you are worked up into an utter disapprobation of one of the articles of our Church, having all along concealed your doubts from your nearest and dearest friends, and from me, who had an especial claim to be made acquainted with them. Is this sincere and judicious conduct?"
He proceeds to some lengths in this style, then tells him that it is one thing to doubt of the truth of a doctrine, and another thing to believe it to be false, and that one should take no step of importance until he thought in the latter way. He tells him to be quiet for some time, and give him the objections one by one. This Mr. Spencer does, and the answer is partly, that given in Dr. Blomfield's life, page 85, and partly, another letter he wrote to him within a fortnight's time. The argument of this good ecclesiastic shapes itself thus:—
"The general proposition of excluding all from salvation who do not believe the doctrine of the Trinity and Incarnation, as set forth in the Athanasian Creed, is laid down with certain limitations. The Protestant Church does lay it down thus, as is evident from certain quotations from the Articles. Besides, she never intends to pronounce a condemnation on any, like the Church of Rome. The meaning, therefore, of these clauses is an assertion of the truth of the doctrine simply; and for this he quotes the opinion of some commissioned interpreters and the admission of "the most scrupulous and captious Baxter that such exposition may be received."
This is the sum of Dr. Blomfield's argument; he gives several other authorities for his opinion. We need not be surprised that the argument was not convincing; and Mr. Spencer says, in his Journal:—"I had a letter from the Bishop of Chester this morning, which was weak in argument and flippant; I hope good may result from it." The weakness of the Bishop's argument arises from the dilemma in which he was placed. If he said the Anglican Church does really condemn all who hold not her doctrines, then she would arrogate to herself the claim of infallibility which she takes good care to disclaim, and even makes an article to that effect. If she does not condemn, what is the meaning of allowing the clauses to remain in her formularies, and require her ministers to subscribe, read, and preach them? His only line of argument, considering his position, was to steer a middle course, and this he endeavoured to do, and succeeded pretty well. But shifting difficulties by trying to reconcile contradictions, is a process that may calm an easy-going mind, previously disposed to indifference, but never can satisfy a clear, earnest one, that seeks the truth in all its terrible reality and straightforward meaning. A Church composed of a mass of heterogeneous elements in doctrine and practice, must be very hard set indeed when driven to give an account of herself. The wonder is, that she cannot see the absence of a Divine guidance, even in the admissions she is forced to make, if not in the very nature of her own human constitution. Only a Catholic can account for a creed, and if there was not a body of living teachers with the promise of Divine direction in their formal decisions and utterances, the Church that Christ established would not exist; and only Catholics can claim and prove this very hinge of their system, which pseudo-bishops have their hits at when they writhe under the pressure of difficulties they cannot answer.
The letter of this Bishop did not settle Mr. Spencer's mind—it unsettled him the more. Two or three clergymen were invited to talk him back to the old way, but with similar success. Lord Spencer then gets one of the London clergy to undertake the task which foiled so many. We give the father's letter of introduction, as it is so characteristic of his paternal affection and concern, and at the same time his due consideration for his son's conscientious difficulties. The Earl was staying in Althorp for a few days, and left this letter for George on his departure: