Files
Download Full Text (38.6 MB)
Content Warning
The Philander Chase letters were written in the 18th and 19th century and therefore may contain language that we understand today as harmful or offensive. You may encounter paternalist descriptions of Native Americans, racial slurs, or sexism. For more information, see our policy page.
Description
Marriott reflects on Chase's success in England and updates Chase on the matter regarding the British Critic article. He also provides an update on the subscriptions at Oxford and hopes that they will soon extend to Ireland.
Date
7-31-1824
Keywords
New York, Ohio, Dr. Bell, Mr. Wheaton, British Critic, Mr. Pratt, Lord Kenyon, Bishop Hobart, Dr. Gaskin
Recommended Citation
Marriott, G.W., "Letter to Philander Chase" (1824). Philander Chase Letters. 390.
https://digital.kenyon.edu/chase_letters/390
Rights Statement
Transcript
G.W. Marriott Esquire to Bishop Chase
Grantham Midland
Circuit 31st July 1824
My very dear Friend
Yesterday’s Post brought me from good Lord Kenyon your last kind letter from the Ship on the 17th instant. How it came to be so long after its date before arrival I do not know. For this, and the series which preceded it, which I shall “keep as the apple of my eye,” I heartily thank you, and, if I had not been promised this last kindness, I should have endeavored to acknowledge the former ones sooner. I still hope this may reach New York before you have departed for Ohio.
Considering the bustle of professional occupation in which the interval since we parted has been passed, I trust I may say, in correspondence with certain assurances in your letters which I value beyond all price, that neither my thoughts or my prayers have neglected you. I feel quite confident also that your preservation, comfort, safe return, and success in your Mission, have been the subject of fervent prayer from hundreds in this Country.
I hardly seem to know how I have parted with you (believing it to be forever in this world) without feeling that deprivation more keenly than I have done. I would, however, humbly hope, as I well remember when it would have been otherwise, that, after deducting what is due to your kind promise of writing to me, and what to my own continual occupations (mens curis occupata non vacat dolori, said you admired Jones) something may be put down to my progress, lingering and backsliding and imperfect as it is, in that “service of perfect freedom,” which certainly is partly constituted by the ceaseless routine of objects which in every time and place attend, promote and bless the career of a Christian. Above all can I ever doubt that, this short life ended, we shall, thro’ Him who “liveth and shall stand at the latter day upon the Earth,” meet again never to part? The word of God assures us that in the very commencement of heavenly bliss “the Spirits of the just made perfect” shall be our society. And what can rationally induce us to suppose that such of them, who have preceded, or shall follow us, to that blessed place, as were peculiarly dear to us on earth, shall not with ourselves have an encrease of happiness from mutual recognition?
In one respect your condition in England has certainly been like the great Apostles.’ You have “wanted” friends at one time, and “abounded” with them at another. The last wish of your last letter convinces me that, like him, you also “know how” to bear either condition. Of those who have ignorantly, or perversely, been enemies to your Cause, I trust, I can also sincerely speak as you do in the language of benediction, and I trust that God will forgive them, but sincerely hope they will not forgive themselves. At such a period for the march of civilization and intellect, and of unexampled religious exertion, an endeavor to defeat and thwart such a plan for the diffusion of the Gospel and extension of the Church of Christ, is certainly in no ordinary degree mischievous, and perverse on their parts. And as it will be to my last breath a satisfaction which I have no words to express that I have humbly labored to promote the Cause, so I cannot conceive those with whom I concur in principles of Christian action to be consistent in their opposition to it, unless on a more mature and deliberate view of the whole subject, and after opportunities for prejudice to be removed, they repent of their line of conduct, and wish they could retrace their steps.
I have had a letter from Dr Bell in Scotland. He is in a rage at a certain Presbyter’s Circular there, and says even he does not glory in, or even vindicate, that opposition. How he can disprove his originating it, I cannot conjecture. He disavows, and thoroughly disapproves, the B. Critic, and a certain [?] conduct. What that [?] or how he may feel towards the Bishop now, I do [?] Mr Wheaton experienced latterly no kindness from him. It is not improbable that the Bishop may address Mr Pratt publicly on the subject of the origin of the opposition, or at least that Mr P. may make public what the Bishop writes. I know no better plan to suggest for a correspondence, which, I trust, will never [?] but with the life of one of us, than to beg you to write under Cover to Lord Kenyon, taking care that Cover and Letter are not quite an Ounce. He can always be found, and he always knows where I am. From you I trust to keep up my acquaintance with the Church in the West, and I shall always be able to tell you something of the Parent Church here, and her interests. I wish I knew your family as well as you know mine. But you must treat me as if I loved them all for your sake, and tell me everything about them.
Adieu! My dear and excellent Friend. As long as I am on earth, and want prayer, may I have yours, as you undoubtedly shall have mine! In this, were they here, my dear Wife and Children would join. I am ever very affectionately and devotedly yours
G.W. Marriott
[Letter continues from bottom of page 10]
Bishop H. called on Mr Pratt, and announced his arrival in such a way as led the latter to suppose he had just come within a day or two to Town, on Monday the 29th instant. I afterwards discovered from Mr Wheaton that the Bishop had been in Town about a fortnight when he called Mr W. enquired for him at five places before he could find him out, and hoped to have heard from him as soon as he arrived. He thinks very ill of his state of health, and it seems he is not to return to America, but to the Continent, for the winter. The reason given to Mr P. for this was his unfitness at present to bear the hurry of business which would await him at New York. He was only dissatisfied with the Churchman’s Letter for ascribing the origin of the opposition to himself. I am glad at least that...
[Letter continues from top of page 7]
That Bishop Jolly’s Letter (which you saw at Dr Gaskin’s) of objections to it “would do honor to the first Prelate of any Church for its piety, sound doctrine and good discretion, as well as great ability and learning.” He is also very angry with Bishop Hobart’s interpretation of “walking by faith and not by sight,” and with the B. Critic for commending that interpretation. It happens to be the only part of the Article in the Review which I did not read, but, according to the Dr’s account of it, I am disposed to agree with the Bishop on consideration of the context, by which alone the right interpretation can be attained. The Dr is most strenuous in contending that sight refers to the life to come, and faith to the life that now is, and seems to think that no Divine, except Bishop H., ever thought otherwise. In this, however, he is clearly mistaken, Beveridge and Wells, if not many others, being of the same mind. I like Bishop H.’s Sermons as far as I have read them, and especially the Appendix on the Intermediate State.
At Northampton Assizes I saw Messengers Spencer and Ford, who are both most zealously disposed to Ohio. They were greatly delighted with the thoughts of possessing an Engraving of you, and begged me to order one for each of them, which I have done. My dear Wife says that the Printing-Press will cost more than £100, as I always thought it would, and that the subscription for that must be aided wherever I have opportunity. Her accounts of my dear Children are very good, I bless God, and I shall hope to join the happy Party in three weeks. I was rejoiced indeed at the good tidings you had of Mrs Chase, and your new immortal Gift. May God’s choicest blessings attend you and all yours!
By the kindness of Lord K. we are to possess a Copy of the Painting of you. We rejoice very much in this present, as calculated much more than any Engraving to preserve you in our Children’s minds. Mr S. will be glad on another ground of this additional Order. The original Painting is irrevocably destined for the Seminary, and the Engravings will expressly purport to be taken from the Painting presented to the Seminary.
I hope the spirit favorable to Ohio will begin well in Ireland, tho’ you could not set it going, and will continue here for some time. At Oxford the subscriptions more than doubled the sum printed after you left the place. £436 were paid from thence before I left London, and I am to know the additional names at Lincoln from Mr Pratt. If there are any remarkable ones, I will include them in my letter. The Gift from the University Chest (which I heard from good authority was intended) is not to come till October. I have just received notice of a donation of £5 from Mr Cust, the Canon of Windsor, whom you met at my house.
There is a little publication entitled “VIllage Conversations on the Liturgy of the Church of England by the Reverend Geo Davys A.M.” published in 1823 by Hatchard and Rivington, which I think you would stereotype for Ohio, if you saw it. It neither maintains nor opposes the jus divinum, but it does vindicate the Church on all subordinate grounds so judiciously, and so well explains the leading parts of the Liturgy, that I wish every Clergyman in England might give it away among his middle-rank poor Parishioners.