Smashing JQuery 1st Edition Jake Rutter - PDF

Download (2025)

https://ebookultra.com/download/smashing-jquery-1st-edition-jake-
rutter/

Visit ebookultra.com today to download the complete set of

ebooks or textbooks
Here are some recommended products for you. Click the link to
download, or explore more at ebookultra.com

On the Line Jake Maddox Sports Stories Jake Maddox

https://ebookultra.com/download/on-the-line-jake-maddox-sports-
stories-jake-maddox/

Designing For Android 1st Edition Smashing Magazine

https://ebookultra.com/download/designing-for-android-1st-edition-
smashing-magazine/

Professional jQuery 1st Edition Cesar Otero

https://ebookultra.com/download/professional-jquery-1st-edition-cesar-
otero/

Mastering jQuery Mobile 1st Edition Lambert

https://ebookultra.com/download/mastering-jquery-mobile-1st-edition-
lambert/
Smashing WordPress Themes Making WordPress Beautiful 1st
Edition Thord Daniel Hedengren

https://ebookultra.com/download/smashing-wordpress-themes-making-
wordpress-beautiful-1st-edition-thord-daniel-hedengren/

Smashing CSS Professional Techniques for Modern Layout 1st

Edition Eric Meyer

https://ebookultra.com/download/smashing-css-professional-techniques-
for-modern-layout-1st-edition-eric-meyer/

Heart Proteomics Methods and Protocols 1st Edition Jake

Cosme

https://ebookultra.com/download/heart-proteomics-methods-and-
protocols-1st-edition-jake-cosme/

Stock Market Strategies That Work 1st Edition Jake

Bernstein

https://ebookultra.com/download/stock-market-strategies-that-work-1st-
edition-jake-bernstein/

Rick Rubin In the Studio Jake Brown

https://ebookultra.com/download/rick-rubin-in-the-studio-jake-brown/
Smashing JQuery 1st Edition Jake Rutter Digital Instant
Download
Author(s): Jake Rutter
ISBN(s): 047097723X
Edition: 1
File Details: PDF, 18.96 MB
Year: 2011
Language: english
01_9780470977231-ffirs.indd i 12/16/10 10:59 PM
 SMASHING
jQuery

01_9780470977231-ffirs.indd i 12/16/10 10:59 PM

 PUBLISHER’S ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Some of the people who helped bring this book to market include the following:

Editorial and Production

VP Consumer and Technology Publishing Director: Michelle Leete
Associate Director—Book Content Management: Martin Tribe
Associate Publisher: Chris Webb
Publishing Assistant: Ellie Scott
Development Editor: Linda Morris
Technical Editors: Andrew Croxall, Dennis Cohen
Copy Editor: Linda Morris

Marketing
Senior Marketing Manager: Louise Breinholt
Marketing Executive: Kate Parrett

Composition Services
Compositor: Wiley Indianapolis Composition Services
Proof Reader: Susan Hobbs
Indexer: Potomac Indexing, LLC

01_9780470977231-ffirs.indd ii 12/16/10 10:59 PM

 SMASHING
jQuery

Jake Rutter

A John Wiley and Sons, Ltd, Publication

01_9780470977231-ffirs.indd iii 12/16/10 10:59 PM

 This edition first published 2011
© 2011 Jake Rutter.

Registered office
John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ,
United Kingdom

For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services and for information about
how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our
website at www.wiley.com.

The right of the author to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in
accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy-
ing, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that
appears in print may not be available in electronic books.

Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as

trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names,
service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The
publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book. This
publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to
the subject matter covered. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not
engaged in rendering professional services. If professional advice or other expert
assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Wiley and the Wiley Publishing logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of John
Wiley and Sons, Inc. and/or its affiliates in the United States and/or other countries, and
may not be used without written permission. iPhone, iPad, and iPod are trademarks of
Apple Computer, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
Wiley Publishing, Inc. is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in the
book. This book is not endorsed by Apple Computer, Inc.

All Web site information, including prices and privacy settings, correct at time of going
to press. Please check appropriate Web site for current details.

978-0-470-97723-1

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Set in 10/12 Minion Pro by Wiley Composition Services

Printed in the United States by Krehbiel

01_9780470977231-ffirs.indd iv 12/16/10 10:59 PM

 About the Author

Jake Rutter is a user interface designer and front-end developer with a keen interest in
writing jQuery for Web site applications. Jake is currently the senior Web designer and
developer for Direct Wines, a company that sells wine online and offline, where he manages
the front-end for four e-commerce Web sites. He is very enthusiastic about working with Web
technology and is always pushing himself to learn something new in an industry that is
ever-changing.

In his spare time, he runs a blog at onerutter.com, where he posts tutorials on jQuery,
PHP, Magento, WordPress, CSS, and HTML. Jake lives in Connecticut with his wife and
two dogs.

01_9780470977231-ffirs.indd v 12/16/10 10:59 PM

 Author’s Acknowledgments
Many thanks to my project team: Chris Webb, for giving me the opportunity to write this
awesome book; Linda Morris, my project editor, for correcting my schoolboy errors; and
Andrew Croxall and Dennis Cohen, my technical editors, for ensuring that my code and
explanations were correct.

Also, I cannot forget to thank my wife for supporting and helping me through the process of
writing a book. I wouldn’t have been able to get through this challenge without her. To my
parents for teaching me that hard work really pays off and prepares you when you try to
achieve what you used to think was impossible. Thanks to my current and past employers for
giving me the opportunity to work with open-source projects such as jQuery to push the
limits of the Web.

Most importantly, an enormous thanks to John Resig and the jQuery team and community
for creating a remarkable library that has brought me great career opportunities and the
ability to create amazing Web applications with less code.

01_9780470977231-ffirs.indd vi 12/16/10 10:59 PM

 Contents

PART I: INTRODUCING JQUERY AND JAVASCRIPT 3

Chapter 1: Introducing jQuery 5

Discovering JavaScript Libraries 6
Realizing the benefits of using a JavaScript
library versus the traditional approach 6
Getting to know the main library players 7
The jQuery advantage 9
Chapter 2: Getting Started with jQuery 19
Setting Up Your Development Environment 20
Using Firebug in Firefox 21
Downloading the jQuery Library 27
Including the jQuery Library in Your Web Page 30
Understanding the jQuery Wrapper 31
Running code outside of document ready handler 34
Preventing conflicts with other libraries 34
Using JavaScript with jQuery 35

PART II: LEARNING THE JQUERY FUNDAMENTALS 37

Chapter 3: Using Selectors, Filters, and CSS: jQuery at Its Core 39

Working with DOM Elements using jQuery Selectors 40
Selecting page elements by using CSS selectors 41
Filtering DOM Elements Using jQuery Selector Filters 52
Applying basic filter definitions 52
Creating zebra-striped tables using the even and odd filter 53
Styling the first and last items in a list or collection of elements 55
Filtering elements that contain a specific element 56
Filtering elements that do not contain any elements or text 57
Filtering elements that contain text 59
Selecting Elements in the DOM by Their Attributes 60
Selecting links that contain a specific Web site address 61
Selecting all elements that end with a specific word 62
Manipulating your HTML and CSS with jQuery 63

02_9780470977231-ftoc.indd vii 12/16/10 10:59 PM

 CONTENTS

Adding, removing, cloning, and replacing DOM elements

and content 64
Working with CSS and jQuery 69
Chapter 4: Working with Events 71
Understanding Events in jQuery 72
Working with Document and Window Events 72
Detecting complete loading of the DOM with the ready() event 73
Preloading images with the load() event 73
Showing an alert as a user leaves a page 76
Displaying a backup image using the error event 77
Getting Started with Event Delegation 77
Using bind to attach an event handler to an element 78
Using live to attach an event handler to an element 79
Using delegate to attach an event handler to an element 80
Capturing Mouse Events 81
Adding and removing content to or from a
page with a mouse click 82
Understanding how the double-click event works 85
Creating a tooltip that shows content during the hover event 85
Creating basic Add to Cart functionality
with mousedown and mouseup events 89
Creating a rollover effect on a button with images 93
VIII Capturing Form Events 94
Adding a border to a form field when the user adds focus 94
Showing a message after a user leaves an input field 95
Capturing Keyboard Events 95
Chapter 5: Making Your Web Site Come Alive with Effects 99
Discovering What jQuery Effects Can Do 100
Showing and Hiding Elements Using Show and Hide 101
Setting a message to appear only once on site
using the show method and cookies 103
Toggling between show and hide 104
Sliding Elements Up and Down 106
Displaying Alternate Search Options with the slidetoggle Method 107
Fading Elements 109
Building a Basic Image Gallery with a Fade Transition 110
Adding Delay to Create a Timed Animation 114
Chaining Multiple Effects Together 115
Creating a News Feed Ticker with Multiple Effects 116
Creating Advanced Animations 119
Building an image gallery with text captions
using advanced animations 120
Additional easing effects using the jQuery easing plug-in 127

02_9780470977231-ftoc.indd viii 12/16/10 10:59 PM

 CONTENTS

PART III: APPLYING JQUERY TO YOUR WEB SITE 129

Chapter 6: Improving Navigation: Menus, Tabs, and Accordions 131

Setting All Links on a Page to Open in a New Window 132
Setting an Active Item in Your Navigation Menu 133
Creating a Basic Drop-Down Menu 135
Using advanced effects to the basic drop-down menu
using animate 141
Creating an Accordion Menu 142
Creating Tabbed Content 147
Chapter 7: Creating Interactive and Exciting Tables 155
Styling the Data in Tables with CSS 156
Adding alternating row colors using filters 157
Adding a simple hover effect to rows 157
Adding an advanced hover effect to rows 159
Manipulating the Data in Tables 161
Adding a message after the first/last rows of the table 162
Removing a row using a filter selector 164
Adding a row after a row based on its index value 165
Removing a row based on its index value 166
Adding a message after rows with specific content 166
Removing a row based on its content 166
Setting Up Table Pagination with jQuery 166 IX
Creating Advanced Tables Using jQuery Plug-ins 172
Sorting rows using the tablesorter plug-in 173
Changing default sort order 175
Creating sexy charts with tabular data using Visualize 176
Creating a bar chart 177
Chapter 8: Creating Advanced Forms with jQuery 181
Focusing on an Input Box After Page Load 182
Disabling and Enabling Form Elements 182
Highlighting Current Fields in Forms 183
Creating Default Text within Input Fields 186
Limiting Character Counts on Input Fields 188
Creating a Check All Check Boxes Link 190
Getting the Value of an Input Box 191
Retrieving the Value of a Select Option 193
Adding Simple E-Mail Validation to a Form 194
Copying the Contents of One Field into Another 198
Enhancing Forms with Plug-Ins 201
Incorporating qTip into your Web site 201
Creating a basic form field qTip using the title attribute 203
Using the jQuery validate plug-in to validate your forms 203
Adding Simple validation to a contact form 204
Adding advanced validation rules and messages
to a contact form 208

02_9780470977231-ftoc.indd ix 12/16/10 10:59 PM

 CONTENTS

PART IV: EXPLORING ADVANCED JQUERY 211

Chapter 9: Working with Dynamic Data and Ajax 213

Discovering Ajax 214
Loading Dynamic Content from a Web page 215
Loading all of the content 216
Handling errors if the content you load is missing 217
Loading sections of the content 219
Submitting Forms Using Get and Post 221
Using POST to submit contact forms without page reload 223
Working with XML Data 227
Parsing Internal XML Data and Creating HTML 229
Working with JSON Data 231
Retrieving Internal JSON Data and Creating HTML 234
Creating a Delicious User Widget by Receiving JSONP
Data from API Requests 235
Creating a Yelp Top Reviews Widget
Using JSONP via the Yelp API 241
Getting Approved for a Yelp API Key 243
Using the Yelp API to Show Reviews Based
on Telephone Numbers 243
Chapter 10: Creating and Using jQuery Plug-Ins 251
X Getting to Know Plug-Ins 252
Incorporating a jQuery Plug-In into Your Web Site 253
Incorporating jQuery UI into Your Web Site 253
Downloading jQuery UI 255
Adding jQuery UI to your site 255
Understanding how jQuery UI widgets work 256
Customizing the design of jQuery UI 256
Creating a UI theme with ThemeRoller 258
Using jQuery UI themes 261
Incorporating jQuery UI features into your Web site 261
Incorporating Popular jQuery Plug-Ins into Your Web Site 269
Using jQuery tools 269
Fancybox 272
Writing Your First jQuery Plug-In 274
Sketching out the plug-in 275
Understanding the plug-in structure 276
Setting the options for the plug-in 276
Creating the plug-in 277
How to Distribute a jQuery Plug-In 284
Packaging your jQuery plug-in for distribution 284
Submitting your plug-in to Web sites 285

02_9780470977231-ftoc.indd x 12/16/10 10:59 PM

 CONTENTS

Chapter 11: Developing for the Mobile Web with jQuery 287
Building for the Mobile Web Using jQuery 288
Mobile Browsers 288
Understanding CSS3 289
Understanding HTML5 290
Getting set up to start mobile Web design 291
Working with the Apple iPhone Safari mobile browser 293
Working with the Google Android browser 293
Displaying content based on which smartphone your users have 295
Developing mobile Web sites and applications with jQuery 296
Introducing jQuery Mobile Preview 296
Mobile Frameworks 296
Working with Appcelerator Titanium Mobile 296
Working with the jQTouch plug-in 298
Chapter 12: Finding jQuery Resources 301
Watching jQuery Grow 302
Using the jQuery Web Site 303
Working with jQuery API documentation 303
Finding jQuery tutorials 304
Attending a jQuery meetup or conference 304
Submitting bugs to the bug tracker 306
Getting involved in the jQuery forum 308
Other Web Design and Development Resources 308 XI
INDEX 309

02_9780470977231-ftoc.indd xi 12/16/10 10:59 PM

02_9780470977231-ftoc.indd xii 12/16/10 10:59 PM
 Introduction

jQuery has become a part of my everyday routine in Web design and development, so when
Wiley approached me about writing a book on jQuery, I was thrilled. jQuery has opened up a
world of possibility for Web design. Through this book, I hope to show others how using
jQuery can really speed up your development time and allow you to write interactive compo-
nents that you thought were impossible without serious programming knowledge.

Think of this book as both an introduction and cookbook of jQuery examples with real-world
solutions that you can use in your everyday working environment. Smashing jQuery is divided
into four parts, which I detail here.

PART 1: INTRODUCING JQUERY AND JAVASCRIPT

The first part of the book introduces you to jQuery from a beginner’s perspective by discuss-
ing JavaScript libraries and how they have become an important part of every Web designer
and developer’s daily toolbox. The benefits of using jQuery are explained in-depth, giving you
a full understanding of why jQuery has become so popular. I also touch on the importance of
using progressive enhancement. After I lay the foundation for why you should be using
jQuery, I dive right into how to get jQuery set up and ready to use on your Web site.

PART 2: LEARNING THE JQUERY FUNDAMENTALS

The second part of the book walks you step-by-step through all of the jQuery fundamentals
such as using selectors and working with events and effects. The selectors in jQuery are
extremely powerful, which is why I have dedicated an entire chapter to guiding you through
all of the different kinds of selectors, giving examples of their usage. Events and effects are also
covered in Part 2, to give you a solid foundation for building your own Web site application
and user interface components.

PART 3: APPLYING JQUERY TO YOUR WEB SITE

The third part of this book focuses on how you can apply the jQuery concepts I discuss earlier
in the book to your Web site or application. (Part 2 offers examples but not full tutorials such
as how to create your own accordion menu or tabbed navigation.) Part 3 also covers using
jQuery to improve form validation on your Web site.

03_9780470977231-intro.indd 1 12/16/10 11:00 PM

 INTRODUCTION

PART 4: EXPLORING ADVANCED JQUERY

There comes a point in every jQuery developer’s career when they want to move on to more
advanced topics such as working with and creating plug-ins, writing jQuery to handle Ajax
requests, or working with jQuery mobile apps. Part 4 delves into these advanced topics. Plus, I
include a chapter that outlines all of the jQuery resources that are available online.

WHO THIS BOOK IS FOR

This book was written for Web designers and front-end developers who are just starting out
with jQuery. You may have installed and set up a plug-in, but your aren’t really familiar with
how to write your own jQuery. Maybe you’ve heard the buzz online about jQuery and are
looking for someone to show you how to use jQuery to improve your Web site. Readers
should have a solid background in HTML and CSS and a basic understanding of JavaScript.

ABOUT THIS BOOK

Code and URLs in this book use a special font that looks like this: www.jquery.com. Code
listings have been colorized similar to how IDEs and text editors use syntax coloring to help
to distinguish between elements of the syntax, such as methods, properties, comments, and so
on. New terms appear in an italic font. Text that you should type is in a bold font. All of the
examples in the book are shown using the Firefox Web browser, but all examples are compat-
ible with Microsoft Internet Explorer 6+, Mozilla Firefox 2.0+, Apple Safari 3.0+, Opera 9.0+,
2
and Google Chrome. The code presented in the book’s examples is available for download at
www.wiley.com/go/smashingjquery.

03_9780470977231-intro.indd 2 12/16/10 11:00 PM

 I
PART
I INTRODUCING
JQUERY AND
JAVASCRIPT

Chapter 1: Introducing jQuery

Chapter 2: Getting Started with jQuery

04_9780470977231-pp01.indd 3 12/16/10 11:00 PM

04_9780470977231-pp01.indd 4 12/16/10 11:00 PM
 SMASHING JQUERY

1
CHAPTER
1 INTRODUCING
JQUERY

JQUERY IS A JAVASCRIPT LIBRARY created In this chapter, I guide you through the benefits
to help Web designers and developers write and of using a JavaScript library, show you the
extend JavaScript interactions quickly and different libraries that are commonly grouped
concisely using a defined set of methods wrapped into the same category as jQuery, and give you a
around the native JavaScript functions. jQuery good background on the features of jQuery and
does not offer any new functionality, but it takes why it’s a great library.
existing hard-to-understand-and-write JavaScript
APIs (application programming interfaces) and
makes them available to a wider audience through
easy-to-understand-and-write jQuery syntax.

05_9780470977231-ch01.indd 5 12/16/10 11:00 PM

 PART I: INTRODUCING JQUERY AND JAVASCRIPT

DISCOVERING JAVASCRIPT LIBRARIES

JavaScript libraries allow Web designers and developers to extend Web page interactivity and
usability by employing a framework of commonly used JavaScript functions built using native
JavaScript primitives.

Think of libraries as frameworks or blueprints with a set of rules and guidelines to help you
build your Web site. JavaScript libraries make writing JavaScript much easier for Web
designers and developers — they are a starting point. Many popular libraries such as
Prototype, MooTools, Dojo, YUI, and the main focus of this book, jQuery, are used widely
on the Web today. Each library has a specific feature set, with jQuery owning the DOM
(Document Object Model) manipulation space.

The Document Object Model is the actual HTML code that represents a Web page, structured
like a tree, with each branch being a node tied together in a hierarchical sense. Each node can
be accessed most commonly through CSS and also through JavaScript using selectors. The
DOM is the API (application programming interface) for how Web designers and developers
can manipulate the Web page using methods created by the HTML standards committee.
HTML 5 offers a new set of APIs for interacting with the DOM and creating a richer Internet
experience for users. After a Web page is fully loaded, the DOM is ready to be interacted with.

A JavaScript framework allows a Web designer or developer to extend the DOM by adding a
JavaScript include (library.js) to a page and then using special functions set up within
6 the library.

REALIZING THE BENEFITS OF USING A JAVASCRIPT

LIBRARY VERSUS THE TRADITIONAL APPROACH
The greatest benefit of using a JavaScript library is being able to tap into a huge assortment of
functions to extend your Web pages beyond dull, non-interactive content.

JavaScript libraries can offer ways for Web designers and developers to work with effects,
animations, events, Ajax, and interactive user interface widgets for faster and rapid Web
development. Designers and developers are not limited to those functions provided by the
library. You can also write your own.

The beauty of JavaScript libraries for Web designers who understand the DOM is that
manipulating the DOM with a library becomes inherently easier than manipulating it by
using the limited API of JavaScript.

In order to get the same features by writing your own JavaScript, you would have to spend
countless hours and long nights programming, testing, and bug fixing, which would probably
result in massive amounts of code. JavaScript libraries help greatly in this area by reducing the
amount of code it takes you to do something that might normally be four times as big if it was
done with native JavaScript.

05_9780470977231-ch01.indd 6 12/16/10 11:00 PM

Other documents randomly have
different content
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Infant
Schools and Dissenters
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.

Title: Infant Schools and Dissenters

Author: John Alexander

Release date: September 27, 2020 [eBook #63325]

Most recently updated: October 18, 2024

Language: English

Credits: Transcribed from the 1836 J. Fletcher edition by David Price

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK INFANT SCHOOLS

AND DISSENTERS ***
Transcribed from the 1836 J. Fletcher edition by David Price.

INFANT SCHOOLS AND DISSENTERS.

A VINDICATION
OF

“A LETTER OF AFFECTIONATE REMONSTRANCE,” &c.

FROM

THE MISTAKES RESPECTING IT MADE BY WILLIAM GEARY, ESQ.

AND FROM THE MISREPRESENTATIONS OF IT MADE BY THE REV. JOHN PEROWNE,
RECTOR OF ST. JOHN’S MADDERMARKET, IN THEIR
RESPECTIVE PAMPHLETS.

BY JOHN ALEXANDER,
MINISTER OF PRINCE’S STREET CHAPEL, NORWICH.

NORWICH:
SOLD BY J. FLETCHER; JARROLD & SONS;
AND THE OTHER BOOKSELLERS.
JACKSON & WALFORD, LONDON.

1836.
 PREFACE.

The following Vindication was written during the week in which the
Rev. John Perowne’s “Observations” appeared; and the publication of
it has been hitherto delayed, partly from an unwillingness to pursue
the subject of my “Letter” any farther, and partly from a
determination not to publish till a fair opportunity had been given to
obtain subscribers to the New Infant School Society. In replying to
Mr. Geary it was impossible to write with any other impression than
that I was answering a gentleman and a Christian; and I hope that
such an impression is manifested in my pages. And though Mr.
Perowne has chosen to make my “Letter” on Infant Schools the
pretext for a rude and personal attack, as well as for insulting the
whole body of Dissenters, I have nevertheless endeavoured to treat
him with some degree of forbearance, and have in many instances
chastised him with whips only, when scorpions were at hand. The
great questions at issue between Churchmen and Dissenters never
can be settled by slander and abuse. Mr. Perowne’s pamphlet
therefore must be an utter failure; and I hope that all who have read
it, or who may read this, will retire from them both, diligently and
devoutly to study the New Testament, as the only standard of
Christian faith, and of Ecclesiastical government.
Norwich, June 6th, 1836.
 A VINDICATION, &c.

When I had read the pamphlet, published by my esteemed friend Mr.

Geary, in reply to my “Letter,” it appeared to me that the facts,
relative to the proposed Infant School Society, were sufficiently
before the public; and, therefore, I determined to send him a few
explanatory remarks in writing, rather than to make any reply
through the medium of the press. Having been induced to alter my
determination, I respectfully submit to Mr. Geary’s consideration, the
following brief observations.
Before the examination of the Infant Schools took place in St.
Andrew’s Hall, the public were informed, by the newspapers, that it
had been determined on, at a meeting held in the Guildhall, to which
none but members of the Establishment were invited. William
Moore, Esq. was in the chair, and the following resolution was
passed:—“Resolved, that the system of Infant Education might be
beneficially extended in this city; and, with a view of prominently
bringing forward its advantages, that there should be an
examination of the children now receiving instruction in the Infant
Schools of this city.” The meeting which adopted that resolution,
appeared to me to originate and to authorize the examination of the
schools—and, whatever private understanding there might be with
Mr. Wilderspin, all that the public knew was what the resolution
stated; and Mr. Wilderspin appeared to us, not as accomplishing “his
own speculation,” but as the agent, employed by the meeting, to
carry its resolution into effect. I think, therefore, that what I have
stated, in the eighth and ninth pages of my “Letter,” is fully borne
out by all the facts of the case.
I said nothing in my “Letter” to intimate that the children of
Dissenters would be excluded from the proposed schools. My
explanation of the “Advertisement” which occasioned the “Letter”
was this: “I understand it to mean, that the members of no other
Christian church shall be allowed to participate with you in the
formation of the society, or in its committee, or in its operations.” If,
however, I had expressed a fear that the church catechism might be
introduced, or that some arrangement might be made which would
prevent Dissenters from sending their children to the schools, the
speeches at the public meeting, and Mr. Geary’s pamphlet,
satisfactorily negative such an apprehension. All parties have united
in declaring that the schools will be open to all classes, and that
there will be no rules nor formulas against which Dissenters can
object. At the public meeting, as reported in the newspapers, the
Dean expressly stated, that “they had no desire to exclude the
children of any persons of whatever religion, because the children
would not be instructed in any points that any person might not
learn; as they would be taught to worship and adore God, to know
the merits of our Saviour, to fear God and honour the King, and to
live in peace and unity with one another. Their rules, said he, would
be open to persons of all denominations, who would have the
opportunity of sending their children, if they accorded with those
rules.” Mr. G. Seppings “stated that the school would be open to the
children of persons of all denominations, who might choose to send
them.” In full accordance with these decisive statements, Mr. Geary
says, “I cannot help again recurring to a mistake into which my
reverend friend has fallen, and which is throughout implied, in
regard to the exclusion of the children of dissent. He may rest
assured, that nothing is decided with respect to the discipline of the
schools, which can possibly be held to be an impediment with any
conscientious Dissenter who desires to place his child there:—no
impeding tests or testimonials on entering the school—no offensive
rituals when there.” And in another part of his pamphlet he
declares, “I have seen the progress of the society in embryo, first,
last, midst, and throughout all, without witnessing any symptoms of
such a spirit. Should it appear, I am prepared to contend with it
hand to hand—foot to foot; and, should it unhappily prevail, I should
feel bound to quit the society.” The speeches at the public meeting
are, however, a sufficient guarantee that no such spirit will
“unhappily prevail;” and I “rest assured,” that, so far as the schools
are concerned, they will be as comprehensive as those which already
exist, and to which the children of Churchmen and Dissenters are
admitted on equal terms. I deeply regret, however, that my
interpretation of the “Advertisement” has unfortunately proved true,
and that, though the children of Dissenters are to be admitted into
the schools, Dissenters themselves are, quite unnecessarily I think,
excluded from the committee of the society, and from all its
operations.
The public meeting, at which the preceding speeches were
delivered, was distinguished by the expression of many liberal and
Christian sentiments; and those of us who were excluded from it,
were in no small degree gratified in learning, from the public papers,
that several of the speakers expressed themselves so decidedly in
favour of the liberal system advocated in my “Letter,” and that they
regretted that circumstances constrained them to unite with the
present exclusive system. “Mr. Bignold said he had not been in
favour of any exclusive views; and if it had been thought right to
establish a general society, he should have with pleasure supported
it. That had not been agreed to, but if the Dissenters chose to
establish another society, his funds should be at their service.” “The
Rev. R. Hankinson spoke in favour of an open society. He said he
belonged to several in the city, all of which were carried on with the
greatest unanimity. He had, however, yielded his opinions to those
of others better qualified, perhaps, to judge.” I need not add that
these are also the sentiments of Mr. Geary, who says, in reference to
my wishes for an union of all parties, “I truly sympathize with him in
those views and feelings which, were it practicable, would suggest
such an union;” and, “my reverend friend cannot feel more intense
satisfaction than I do, in thus witnessing the joyful and happy state
of brethren dwelling together in unity.”
I most earnestly hope and pray that these sentiments, so
honourable to the gentlemen who uttered them, may more
extensively prevail, till they have removed those “insuperable
barriers” which at present exist, and till they have rendered that
union “practicable,” which so many feel to be desirable. Depend
upon it, there are not half the difficulties really existing, which some
persons imagine. The united system, if tried, would, I am
persuaded, work well—and I am sure that all who engaged in it
would be made better and happier by their combined exertions in
doing good. There are some things, connected with both Church of
Englandism and Dissent, in which the two parties could not unite
without a compromise of principle. As religious men, we have,
however, a common cause to promote, and a common enemy to
withstand. We ought, therefore, as Christians, to unite in every
thing that admits of an union; and, as Infant Schools appear to me
to be precisely of that character, I deeply regret that we have not
united in them. I am somewhat comforted, however, by the
persuasion, that an exclusive system cannot last. There is an
influential and increasing party in the church much opposed to it,
and who, as is stated in my “Letter,” “would be glad to co-operate
with other Christians in educating and in evangelizing the people.”
The adoption of the exclusive system has occasioned regret in the
minds of many persons whom the church would have done well to
conciliate; and I much question whether either party is perfectly
satisfied with the proceedings that have been adopted.
Another remark or two will bring this part of my pamphlet to a
close. Mr. Geary is mistaken in supposing that I mentioned Leicester
and Taunton as towns “where a satisfactory union had been
effected.” My extracts respecting them were intended to shew Mr.
Wilderspin’s opinion respecting the union of various denominations
in the work. I said nothing respecting any schools at Leicester; and
I quoted Mr. Babington’s speech for the sake of shewing, not only his
sentiments, but Mr. Wilderspin’s also, because he calls it “an
admirable speech.” And as to Taunton, after quoting what Mr.
Wilderspin had said in approbation of the mixed committee, I
distinctly stated that “a school was set up on opposite principles.”
Having stated in my “Letter” that the extracts which I had made
from Mr. Wilderspin’s book abundantly proved that he was “decidedly
opposed to the exclusive system advertised for Norwich,” Mr. Geary
replies that this appeal to the authority of Mr. Wilderspin “requires
qualifying;” and “that the cases do not lead to this conclusion.” If
Mr. Geary will be so good as to turn again to my quotations, I think
he will be induced to agree with me that Mr. Wilderspin could
scarcely have used stronger language than he has used in reference
to this subject. He most enthusiastically admires Joseph Lancaster’s
system, because of “its benevolent and Catholic spirit,” which
establishes “schools for all;” and he solemnly declares that he always
has laboured on “the broadest principle,” and that he determines to
act “on that, and on that alone, through the remainder of his life.” I
think, therefore, I am authorized in repeating my former declaration,
that “he is decidedly opposed to the exclusive system advertised for
Norwich.”
These cursory remarks are intended to rectify some mistakes into
which Mr. Geary appears to me to have fallen in his perusal of my
“Letter.” After all, I rejoice to believe that he and I are one in
sentiment and feeling on this subject. The gentlemanly and
Christian tone of his letter, is an interesting evidence that there may
be discussion and controversy without violating any of the principles
of the gospel, or any of the courtesies of life. I thank him, for his
testimony that my “Letter” “is characterised by a spirit of mildness
and conciliation,” and I am glad to find that he has read it in the
spirit in which it was written. I thank him also for the manner in
which he has spoken of the “courtesy” manifested by the Dissenters
connected with the Infant Schools in this city towards their brethren
in the Establishment. And I take leave of him in the hope, and with
the prayer that, though we cannot walk together through every path
on earth, we may, through “the precious blood of Christ,” and the
sanctifying grace of the Holy Spirit, both of us be found in that
heaven of light and love, where we shall no longer “see through a
glass darkly, but face to face, and where we shall know even as also
we are known.”

I come now to the consideration of a subject on which I enter with

reluctance. Since Mr. Geary’s pamphlet appeared, “Observations” on
my “Letter” have been published by a person who styles himself,
“The Rev. J. Perowne, Rector of St. John’s Maddermarket, Norwich.”
With some of the members of his family, I have, for a long time,
been acquainted. They have belonged to my congregation for
nearly twenty years; and one of them has lately become a member
of the church of which I am the Pastor. With Mr. Perowne himself
my acquaintance has been but slight, and I am left to gather my
opinion of his character and ministry almost entirely from the
“Observations” which he has published. Those observations are of
such a nature that it is impossible to reply to them either gravely or
respectfully; and I am quite of opinion that the most dignified course
would be, not to reply to them at all. I fear however that some of
the statements which he has made, relative to the Infant Schools in
this city, and relative to the principles and conduct of the Dissenters,
may be believed by some persons, if they are not contradicted; and
as he has chosen to make my “Letter” the occasion of propagating
many slanders, I think it due to the public to submit to the
humiliation of replying to such an antagonist.
I am persuaded that every man who read my “Letter,” with an
“honest heart,” believed that my object in writing it was what I
avowed; and that I wished my fellow-christians in this city to unite in
educating Infants, because I thought that such an union would
promote the interests of true religion. From the testimony of Mr.
Geary’s pamphlet, and from several communications which have
been made to me, I am gratified with knowing that the “Letter” has
been received, by many religious and intelligent persons, in the spirit
in which it professed to be written. With their testimony I am
satisfied; and therefore Mr. Perowne must excuse me if I do not
strive to vindicate myself from his charges of hypocrisy and
falsehood. As he is the accuser, I have no need to become the
vindicator. And all that I intend to do is to gather, from his own
“Observations,” the evidence which they afford of his character and
competency.
As Mr. Perowne is a clergyman who claims the attribute of
“reverence,” and who has solemnly declared that he was “inwardly
moved by the Holy Ghost to take upon him this office,” and “that he
will maintain and set forward quietness, peace, and love among all
Christian people,” it was not unreasonable to expect that his
“Observations” would be in accordance with his vows and
professions. I think, however, that I do not misrepresent his
publication when I say that none of the fruits of that Spirit, with
which he professes to be “inwardly moved,” are to be found in it—
that it is abundantly fruitful in rude personalities, in wanton attacks
on motives, in wilful distortions of the plainest language, in pompous
ignorance, and in supercilious pretensions—and that all these
qualities are left unredeemed even by the occasional introduction of
better sentiments and feelings. Sometimes a man will use hard
words, or manifest intemperate passions, under the influence of
strongly exciting circumstances. But here a calm and dark spirit of
evil reigns throughout the whole of a pamphlet, which was written in
the retirement of his study, and which he had no occasion to write at
all. This, however, is mere description, and we must analyze the
“Observations” themselves in order to ascertain whether it be truth.
One prominent feature of the pamphlet is its utter dissimilarity, not
only to the Christian spirit which pervades Mr. Geary’s Defence, but
also to the speeches delivered at the Public Meeting, when the
Infant School Society was formed. In them there is nothing
ferocious, or insulting to any class of the community; but, on the
other hand, an expression of respectful regret that certain obstacles
prevented, in the opinion of the speakers, the formation of a more
comprehensive society, which some of them would certainly have
preferred. Whether, in the course of Mr. P’s. pamphlet, he alludes
personally to any of those speakers, I will not take upon myself to
determine. But he vehemently denounces all Churchmen, who
would unite with Dissenters in an Infant School, as “traitors to the
church,” and as “encouragers of dissimulation,” “who help forward
the ruin of the church by echoing the sentiments of liberalism.” Not
being acquainted with the gradations in the ecclesiastical hierarchy, I
am unable to decide what rank he may hold among his brethren, or
what authority he may derive from the rectory of “St. John’s.” But
he evidently speaks of himself, and addresses himself to clergymen
and others oraculously, as if he were the Polyphemus of a party. “I
tell them,” says he, “in the name of every true son of the church.” “I
assure them that no true son of the church would listen to them.”
“We say to every churchman, profit by the lesson here taught you.”
These, however, may be merely “great swelling words of vanity,” and
I may be perfectly right in the conjecture that his brethren disown
alike his authority and his spirit, and are disposed to “leave him
alone with his glory.”
A considerable portion of Mr. Perowne’s pamphlet, consists of
vituperations against the Dissenters. Dissent, it is well known, is a
relative term, and is applied to such persons, in this country, as
profess to derive their doctrines and forms of church government
from the Scriptures, rather than from the liturgy and canons of the
Church of England. They believe that the Scriptures are sufficient to
direct them in these matters; and they believe that their allegiance
to Jesus Christ requires them to submit to his supreme dominion as
the only head of the church, and to reject the ecclesiastical authority
which either Protestants or Papists may claim, but which Christ alone
possesses. On this great principle they dissent from all
establishments of religion by the civil power; and they desire to
stand quite independent of state endowments, and of state
interference in their spiritual concerns, so as to constitute a
“kingdom which is not of this world.” Dissent therefore can only be
found in those countries where some particular form of religion is
established by the civil power. There is no dissent in America,
because there is no Established Church there. The government of
that country protects all denominations of Christians in the
profession of their religion, but it does not elevate one denomination
above the rest, nor does it prescribe to any denomination what
forms of prayer they shall adopt, what doctrines they shall believe,
or what bishops or pastors they shall choose. Viewing the term,
dissent, chronologically, there are in this country two classes of
Dissenters. The first class includes the Church of England, which
some time ago dissented from the Church of Rome, which had been,
for several centuries established in this country; and the other class
is composed of those who have gone still farther from the Church of
Rome, and have dissented from the Church of England. In Scotland,
the Established Church is not Episcopalian, as in this country, but
Presbyterian; so that when Dr. Chalmers, who belongs to the
Established Church in Scotland, comes into England, he is a
Dissenter during his stay, and is not permitted to preach in any of
the pulpits of the church; and if Mr. Perowne were to cross the
Tweed, he would instantly become a Dissenter, and might find it
necessary to defend himself against the attacks of the “Apostolical
Establishment” [15] of that country, which binds all her sons “to root
out and destroy all prelacy.” Using the term dissent in its general
acceptation, Mr. Perowne says, “the only doctrine in which all
Dissenters agree is that of dissenting from the church.” Now
whether “dissenting from the church” be a “doctrine” or a practice is
not of much consequence, nor is it a very wonderful discovery, that
all Dissenters should agree to dissent. But Mr. Perowne is not aware
that he has brought the same argument against dissent, that the
Roman Catholics bring against Protestantism; and one argument is
worth just as much as the other, which is just nothing at all. The
“Rector of St. John’s Maddermarket,” when that church belonged to
the Papists, might have said to the Protestants, “I should like to
know what doctrines Protestantism considers essential. The only
doctrine in which all Protestants agree, is that of protesting against
the church. That is ‘essential’ to their religion, and that alone.”
These, the reader will perceive, are precisely Mr. Perowne’s words, if
the term dissent be substituted for Protestant; and though he has
endeavoured to make many of them look impressive, by printing
them in italics, I consider them too puerile to admit of any serious
refutation.
But the object of Mr. Perowne, in the paragraph from which I have
quoted, is to shew that, while Dissenters agree in practical dissent,
they widely differ in doctrine. “In other respects, says he, a man
may be a Socinian, an Arian, a Quaker, an Anabaptist, an Irvingite, a
Calvanist, an Armenian, [16] or a Baxterian. He may hold any notions
he pleases. If he do but dissent, he has the essential doctrine of
their religion.” Now how blind a man must be, not to perceive that
all this language is as much against Mr. Perowne and his church, as
it is against Dissenters, and that he himself falls into the very ditch
into which he attempts to throw dissent. Are there not doctrines
believed, and even taught in the Church of England, “wide as the
poles asunder?” Are there not some heresies within her pale from
which Dissenters are happily free? May not millenarianism be found
in some of her clergy, as well as among the Irvingites? Does not Mr.
Perowne himself sanction persons who leave their own parish
churches to attend at “St. John’s Maddermarket,” because he
preaches a gospel which is opposed to the preaching of the other
clergy? Is not this acting on one of the leading principles of dissent,
which asserts the right of Christians to choose their own ministers?
And if these things be so—and I could enumerate perhaps quite as
many varieties of doctrine in the church as Mr. P. can find out of it—
why should he “cast the first stone” at Dissenters, for the very sin of
which he himself is guilty? and why should he attempt to “pull out
the mote from his brother’s eye, when there is a beam in his own?”
Mr. Perowne speaks very contemptuously of all professors of religion
who are not members of his own community; and especially of
Roman Catholics and Socinians. The doctrines, which are held by
both these denominations, appear to me to be subversive, in
different ways, of the gospel of Christ. They probably consider me
to be in equal error; and though we cannot have communion
together in religious worship, I think that I should be acting an
unchristian part, were I to refuse to unite with them in any works of
benevolence, in which we can unite without the compromise of
religious principle. Mr. P’s. object in referring to these persons is to
bring our Infant School System into disrepute; and therefore we
must examine his statements. “If I am rightly informed,” says he,
“the school in Crook’s Place and that in St. Miles’ have Socinians
among the most regular and active superintendents.” I am not
much acquainted with the school in Crook’s Place; but I once visited
it, for the purpose of examining the children on Scripture subjects;
and, with the exception of a little girl, who said that “the High Priest
of the church was the king of England,” they gave very satisfactory
answers to my questions relative to the great doctrines of
redemption; so that heterodoxy was not perceptible there. With the
school in St. Miles’ I am more intimately connected; having been
accustomed to visit it monthly. There are Dissenters on the
committee, but none of them are Socinians. There are also
members of the Establishment on the committee, and in the office of
treasurer and secretary; and, though I am not acquainted with their
individual sentiments, yet I have no reason to suspect that any of
them entertain Socinian doctrine—and I fully believe that Mr.
Perowne’s charge has not the slightest foundation in fact.
But even if Socinians were “among the most regular and active
superintendents,” with what consistency can they be objected to on
that account by Mr. Perowne? “If a man will but leave the Church of
England,” says he, “or assist in pulling it down, he is a Christian
brother, even though he denies the Lord who bought him, or bow
before an idol.” Now, to say nothing of the grammar of this
sentence, or of the “false accusation” which it involves, I would ask
whether Mr. Perowne himself, as a minister of the Established
Church, does not acknowledge both “Papists and Socinians” to be
Christian brethren? Does he not recognise the validity of popish
baptism, and acknowledge its regenerating qualities to be as
effectual as his own? Would he not admit a Roman Catholic priest,
who had recanted, to his pulpit without re-ordination, and thereby
acknowledge that a popish bishop is able to communicate the Holy
Ghost? But, without proceeding in these inquiries, relative to the
Catholic who “bow before an idol,” let us notice the case of the
Socinians, who “deny the Lord that bought them.” Has Mr. Perowne,
who renounces all communion with them as a church, no
communion with them individually? Most assuredly he has; and
there is not a Socinian in the kingdom whom he would hesitate to
receive and to acknowledge, under certain circumstances, as “a
Christian brother!” He receives tithes and church rates from them;
and thereby has communion with them in the support of the
“Apostolical Establishment.” He admits Socinians to speak and vote
amidst the “peaceful and loving scenes” which are witnessed at
vestry meetings; and Mr. Perowne himself, being in the chair, would
act upon a resolution which had been carried by a Socinian majority,
and thereby permit Socinians to bear rule in the church. Were a
Socinian to be seen kneeling at the altar of the church, Mr. Perowne
would not dare to refuse him the bread and wine, if he were not “an
open and notorious evil liver.” And when the Socinian, who dies in
the very act of “denying the Lord that bought him,” is conveyed in a
coffin to St. John’s Maddermarket, Mr. Perowne clothes himself in
white, and solemnly declares, “I heard a voice from heaven saying
unto me, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord; even so saith
the Spirit; for they rest from their labours.” Mr. Perowne then calls
this same Socinian his “dear brother”—he gives God “hearty thanks
that it hath pleased him to deliver this brother out of the miseries of
this sinful world”—he declares that “it hath pleased Almighty God of
his great mercy to take unto himself the soul of our dear brother
here departed”—he prays that, when he himself dies, and that when
those around him “shall depart this life, they may rest in Christ as
our hope is this our brother doth”—and then he completes and
crowns the whole by declaring, “We therefore commit his body to
the ground; earth to earth; ashes to ashes; dust to dust; in sure and
certain hope of the resurrection to eternal life, through our Lord Jesus
Christ!” And yet this very Mr. Perowne rails against the orthodox
Dissenters for associating with Socinians, and solemnly
anathematizes all Bible Societies and Infant Schools which permit
Socinians to become members! “Ye blind guides, which strain at a
gnat, and swallow a camel!”
Were the Dissenters of this country to abstain from all interference
in “contested elections,” and to leave both church and state to the
care of others, such a course of proceeding might be very agreeable
to Mr. Perowne, but I question whether it would be serviceable to
civil and religious liberty. If, however, there be any guilt in this
matter, it does not lie exclusively at the door of nonconformist
“teachers and members,” and when Mr. P. offers to feel their pulse,
and to write out prescriptions for them, he ought to remember the
proverb, “Physician heal thyself.” Party politics have, I confess, no
charms for me; and I very earnestly desire that all religious men
who come in contact with them, whether Church-people or
Dissenters, may so conduct themselves as to give no “occasion to
the enemies of God to blaspheme.”
Utterly forgetful of the strife which is often manifested at the “vestry
meetings” of his own church, he ventures to attack our “church
meetings,” at which, he says, “peaceful and loving scenes sometimes
take place.” I dare say that if Mr. Perowne knew much of the history
of “church meetings,” from those which were held in Corinth, during
the apostolic times, down to our own days, he might tell of some in
which peace and love were not very apparent. A thinking mind will
perceive, however, that an ecclesiastical system may be good in
itself, and even divine in its origin, as that at Corinth was, and yet it
may be very imperfectly and improperly exhibited and administered
by human beings. In such a case the fault is not in the system, but
in the men. But whatever exceptions to peace and love may have
occasionally appeared in our church meetings, I deny that Mr.
Perowne’s description is applicable to their general character. Our
churches are formed on the principle that none but those who
profess and practise the gospel of Christ are eligible for membership;
and when any person of contrary character is discovered among us,
he is excluded from the society, and, as a matter of course, falls into
the Establishment. Taking them with all their imperfections, I
believe not only that they are formed according to the apostolic
model, but that they are among the best societies of men to be
found in this sinful world—“and no man shall stop me of this
boasting” on their behalf. The church of which I am the pastor, was
formed about sixteen years ago. It then contained thirteen
members, and since then between three and four hundred have
been added. Our church meetings are held monthly, for the
purposes of devotion, of receiving additional members, and,
occasionally, for the transaction of business, necessary to preserve
the order and purity of the church. I do not, of course, expect that
Mr. Perowne will believe my testimony on this subject, but I
confidently appeal to the members of my church for evidence
respecting the character of our meetings. Those “hallowed
influences,” to which Mr. Perowne so contemptuously refers, have
abundantly blessed them, nor do I expect to witness any scenes
more truly “peaceful and loving,” till “the general assembly and
church of the first born” appears in heaven.
Another charge, which Mr. Perowne vehemently urges against
Dissenters, is that they are aiming to destroy the church to which he
belongs. “The leading organs of dissent,” says he, “openly avow
that nothing but the destruction of our church will satisfy them.” I
should think my own church destroyed, if it were to be overrun with
infidelity or heresy, or if it were to be broken up and dispersed as a
society of Christians. But, as Mr. Perowne is acquainted with “the
leading organs of dissent,” he knows very well that Dissenters have
no desire to see the Church of England brought into such a
condition; and that all they wish is that the Established Church
would support its own ministers, and pay its own expenses, without
taxing other churches. And this, if I understand him rightly, he
would call “the destruction of the church.” If so, all the dissenting
churches are destroyed already. They have no connection with the
state, as a controlling power—they choose their own ministers—and
they pay their own expenses. They are therefore, according to Mr.
Perowne, in a state of “destruction”—they are “things which are
not,” and he may perhaps be aware that such things are sometimes
employed “to bring to nought things which are.”
But the wholesale charge which he brings against the
Nonconformists is, that their system “leads men to tear in pieces the
body of Christ—to set at nought the powers that be—to speak evil of
dignities—to imbibe and inculcate a disloyal, republican,
revolutionary spirit.” And he might have added, with equal truth,
that it is productive of hydrophobia, that it brought the cholera into
the country a short time ago, and that it turned all the members of
our churches into cannibals. Charges such as he has brought, false
and ridiculous as they are, have been incessantly repeated since the
day when the Head of our churches was himself reviled by the
priests, as “a fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to give
tribute to Cæsar.” And they will no doubt continue to be repeated,
till “the accuser of the brethren is cast out.” They are always freely
used by those who find it more convenient to revile than to argue;
and they are as useful to such persons, as the broken lantern was to
the watchman, who always kept it by him to exhibit as a proof that
his victims had been guilty of a riot.
I now proceed to select some specimens of the manner in which he
has perverted the language of my letter, and also some specimens of
the literature and logic with which his “Observations” are
interspersed.
Alluding to the title of my letter he asks, “What right a Dissenter has
to remonstrate with the members of the church, on any steps they
think proper to take with regard to the education of the children
belonging to their own communion?” The proper answer to this
question is, that I had no right at all to remonstrate on such a
subject. But what will the reader think, when I tell him that I never
did remonstrate on such a subject, and that Mr. Perowne’s apparent
object in giving such a form to his question is to excite a prejudice
against my Letter at the very beginning of his “Observations.” He
knows that the Infant Schools, which the members of the
Establishment projected, were not for “the education of children
belonging to their own communion,” but for “the children of persons
of all denominations.” And he knows that my remonstrance was
directed against those who wished to make the members of one
church the Instructors of Infants, to the exclusion of the members of
all other churches. The artifice which he has adopted may have
answered the purpose which he had in view, but it is not the result
of an upright and honourable mind, and it manifests much more of
the subtilty of the serpent than of the harmlessness of the dove.
Mr. Perowne, having remarked that I had advised the Establishment
to act on “the principles on which the Infant Schools in Norwich have
hitherto been conducted,” asks, “What are those principles?” And
professing to gather his reply from my Letter, he answers, “That the
Dissenters should have the chief management of them,” while “the
members of the Established Church, afford help in directing the
concerns, and in defraying the expenses.” Such “counsel,” I admit,
is as impertinent as to deny to Churchmen the right “to educate the
children belonging to their own communion.” But I never gave such
counsel; and Mr. Perowne’s interpretation of my language is both
unjust and absurd. The statement in my letter is this. The
committees of the Infant Schools “are composed of members of the
Establishment and of other Christian churches”—and, as it respects
the school in St. Miles’, “repeated efforts have been made to induce
members of the Established Church to afford greater help in
directing its concerns, as well as in defraying its expenses.” Now
mark the injustice of my commentator. In professing to quote my
language, he leaves out the word “greater,” which is an important
word in the sentence, and then he tells his readers that my counsel
is “that the Dissenters should have the chief management of the
schools” about to be instituted. And now mark his reasoning. The
Dissenters have made repeated efforts to induce Churchmen “to
afford greater help in directing the schools;” therefore Dissenters
desire to have “the chief management of them!” Admirable logic! If
“a supposed second Solomon” be needed in the schools of Dissent,
no such prodigy is required in the Establishment. Her “mountains
have laboured,” and her Solomon is born!
The next specimen is of a similar character. I had said, in my Letter,
that as the promoters of the public examination in St. Andrew’s Hall
had, in order to effect it, “received assistance from their dissenting
fellow citizens, as well as from others,” our “friendly proceedings”
would be “used against ourselves,” if they “were to be rewarded by
our utter exclusion from all future participation with Churchmen in
the system of Infant Education.” “Brethren!” exclaims Mr. Perowne,
“Brethren! here you have a truth of the utmost importance, plainly
told you from the pen of a Dissenter.” And what is the truth that my
dissenting pen has told? Why, that the conduct of the church, in
excluding Dissenters, would be “against” those “friendly
proceedings” which we had shewn towards the church. But because
it would be against our courtesy, Mr. Perowne, in the might and
majesty of his logic, jumps to the conclusion that it would be against
our nonconformity! And then, having made this notable discovery,
for which he certainly deserves a patent, he blows his “penny
trumpet,” and summons the whole hierarchy to listen to his
proclamation, that if the church will uniformly treat Dissenters as
they have been treated in this business, the “venerable
Establishment” is secure. “Brethren! here you have a truth of the
utmost importance!”
Mr. Perowne complains of the pain which I have produced in him, by
what I have said “about love and union.” “Such things,” says he
“painfully remind us of the days of Charles the first.” This Charles, it
will be remembered, as the “head of the church,” in his days, and
“out of a like pious care for the service of God, as had his blessed
father,” published the “Book of Sports,” which authorized the people
to amuse themselves with all sorts of games, &c. on the Lord’s day,
and which the clergy read to their congregations after divine
service. I have no wish, however, to mention “Charles the first” to
any man of acute sensibility, and I was not aware that my
recommendation of “love and union” would remind any one of that
ill-fated monarch. Mr. Perowne’s peculiar sensibility on this subject,
and the remarkable fact that, in writing a pamphlet on Infant
Schools, he should twice refer to “Charles the first,” and “our
martyred Charles,” is calculated to excite strange suspicions in the
mind of a believer in the doctrine of metempsychosis. Why should
Mr. Perowne feel pain when he is reminded of “Charles the first?” or
why should “love and union” remind him of “our martyred Charles”
at all, except on the principle of the Bramins, that “we should never
kill a flea, lest we inflict pain on the soul of some of our ancestors.”
It is true that Charles frequently boasted that he was “a true son of
the church.” It is true that Charles entertained the very same
feelings against Puritans, as Mr. Perowne does against Dissenters. It
is true that some of the sentiments in Mr. P’s. pamphlet are as
precisely Icôn Basilikè as if they had been dictated by the soul of the
headless monarch. It is true, as Bishop Burnet says, that Charles
the first “loved high and rough measures, but had neither skill to
conduct them, nor height of genius to manage them. He hated all
that offered prudent and moderate counsels; and, even when it was
necessary to follow such advices, he hated those that gave them.” It
is true—but, to use Mr. Perowne’s language, “I forbear to finish a
picture so painful to contemplate,” and shall only add, that David
Hume, in his history of England, states that the last word the king
said, was, “Remember”—and that “great mysteries were supposed to
be concealed under that expression.”
Mr. P. appeals to the Collect which I quoted, and which he says I
have “mutilated,” as affording evidence that “exclusive Churchmen,
are consistent Churchmen;” thereby leading us to infer that the
church teaches her members to shew their consistency by their
exclusiveness, even in the exercise of prayer, and in the presence of
Deity! Supposing, however, that the Collect afforded evidence of the
charity of the church, rather than of her bigotry, I advised her
members to act in accordance with its spirit, and thereby to “add
practice to profession and to prayer.” This advice, Mr. P. intimates,
is, on my part, an assumption of infallibility—as if none but a Papist
could consistently enjoin practical piety, or admonish his hearers to
shew their faith by their works. “Is Mr. A. infallible?” my inquisitor
asks, and immediately adds, “The Pope of Rome could not have
gone further!” I have not heard much of the Pope lately, but in
former times he was a tolerably far traveller, especially when he was
in the pursuit of Dissenting heretics. But as Mr. P. may perhaps
claim an acquaintance, as well as a relationship with his Holiness, I
shall not dispute the matter, but humbly submit to the decision, that
the Pope of Rome never went further than I have gone in my
“Letter.”
The next paragraph, in Mr. P’s. “Observations,” is chiefly historical,
and he has contrived to give us “a bird’s eye view” of the state of
religion in this country, from the days of “our martyred [28] Charles”
downwards. It thus begins. “It is said that our church ought to set
an example of meekness and conciliation. I SAY she has done so to
an extent unparalleled in modern times.” In proof of this oracular
declaration, he shews in the first place, what the church has done.
“And what has been her conduct while attacked by the army of the
aliens?” To this question, I will first give my own answer, and then
Mr. Perowne’s. My own answer is this. She “excommunicated, ipso
facto,” whosoever affirmed “that the Church of England, by law
established under the King’s Majesty, is not a true and an apostolical
church.” She erected a spiritual court, in which her ministers sat in
judgment on men’s consciences. She maintained a star chamber,
where she slit men’s noses, and cut off their ears. She passed
corporation and test acts; and an act of uniformity, by which two
thousand godly ministers were driven from her pulpits, and in some
cases persecuted unto death by her virulence. Mr. Perowne’s
account of her conduct amidst all these transactions is this.
“Confiding in her God, she has continued her labour of love, scarcely
raising her hand to ward off the blows that have been aimed at
her!” But her historian goes on to inform us that her acts of
“meekness and conciliation,” in former days, are far surpassed by
her present conduct; for this is what I suppose Mr. P. intended to
mean when he said, “She has done so to an extent unparalleled in
modern times.” Whatever his ambiguity may mean, he certainly
endeavours to represent the church as greatly increasing in
“meekness and conciliation;” for now, when she sees the wicked
Dissenters attempting to assassinate her, she does not even “lift her
hand” as she did formerly; but, like a true member of “the Peace
Society,” she merely “withdraws from such” persons; and she thus
withdraws, says her historian, “not in a spirit of revenge and
bitterness, but in the spirit of Him who prayed for his enemies!” I
shall refrain from commenting on this concluding declaration, any
farther than to ask, whether the remotest comparison between the
spirit breathed throughout Mr. Perowne’s pamphlet, and the dying
prayer of the Redeemer, is not an insult to the “meek and lowly”
Jesus.
We now proceed to what may be appropriately called “the patronage
paragraph.” It was occasioned by the following sentences in my
Letter, “addressed to the members of the Established Church.” “I
know well that such an exclusive system is not the desire of you all.
There are some among you who wish to see the Church of England
‘national’ in her feelings and in her philanthropy, as well as in her
name, and who would be glad to co-operate with other Christians in
educating and in evangelizing the people; but who at the same time
deem it desirable, on the whole, to submit to other parties in the
church, whose patronage and support are valued.” “This passage,”
says Mr. Perowne, “I consider in itself a sufficient reason for my
publishing to the world my own views and feelings on the subject in
question. The parties alluded to must be clergymen.” Why must
they be clergymen? Merely because I had used the words
“patronage and support.” I used the words in their general
acceptation, just as any person, in “pretended holy orders” would
use them, little thinking of the ecclesiastical meaning which “a real
reverend” might put upon them. I knew that if Dissenters were
excluded from the committee of Infant Schools, such a proceeding
would obtain for the schools the “patronage and support” of such
persons in the church as would unite only with Episcopalians; and as
some of those persons have influence and property wherewith to
help the schools, I supposed that such “patronage and support”
would be “valued.” But my words happened to be read by a man
who understands by “patronage and support” the means of
obtaining a better living than “Saint John’s Maddermarket.” And,
with this idea in his mind, he begins to reason on the subject with a
sagacity all his own. “The parties alluded to,” says he, “must be
clergymen.” And his argument in proof is this—“Patronage” is no
temptation to laymen. They therefore never act dishonestly to gain
it. It never deters them “from following out the convictions of their
own minds.” None but clergymen can be guilty of this. Now I, “the
Rev. John Perowne,” am a clergyman—and, referring perhaps to the
principle that “blessings brighten as they take their flight,” he adds,
“my character is of some value to me”—and then, wishing to be
thought as pure as Cæsar’s wife, he declares, “I cannot allow myself
to be even suspected.” No, indeed. Were a patron to become
suspicious, it might prevent the desired “patronage” from being
bestowed. And should any “exclusive Churchman” ever offer this
“senior wrangler” a better living than he now possesses, we shall all
see the triumph of principle, and the “value” of “character,”
displayed, by his declining it. He will say, “Nolo Episcopari” in the
presence of a mitre—whenever it is offered to him.
But to proceed with this “patronage paragraph.” I had said, in my
Letter, “I know well, that such an exclusive system is not the desire
of you all.” Now this “exclusive system” is the desire of Mr. Perowne,
and he has put himself forward as its great champion. He therefore
concludes that, as I have described a class of persons whose views
are directly opposed to his, I must have meant himself! His
argument is—Mr. A. says that some persons do not approve of this
“exclusive system.” I do approve of it. Therefore he refers to me!
Q.E.D. Whether such syllogisms come from Oxford or from
Cambridge, I am unable to determine, as I know not at which of the
Universities Mr. Perowne was educated, and as Dissenters are
“excluded” from them both.
In the course of this immortal paragraph, two things yet remain to
be briefly noticed. First, he charges me with uttering a direct
falsehood, and says that he will not believe my statements unless
they are “authenticated by at least two witnesses.” I have already
intimated that I shall not trouble myself to gain his assent to any
statements I have made. He had before him the speeches made at
the public meeting; he had before him Mr. Geary’s pamphlet; in both
of which the statements I have made are reiterated; and yet, though
he had before him the testimony of these three or four witnesses, he
says he will not believe, till he has “at least two witnesses.” Let him
disbelieve it then. And, secondly, in his note to the paragraph, he
charges some of the clergy with consenting to “unite with Dissenters
in the Bible Society,” “on condition” that a Dissenter should pay their
subscriptions. I hope it is distinctly understood that, in these pages,
I make no attack upon the clergy, and that I have to do with Mr.
Perowne only; yet, though the clergy do not need me as their
defender, I am bound to declare that, having associated with several
of them in the Bible Society for nearly twenty years, I believe that
they joined it from true conviction, and not from such a base and
paltry “condition” as that which Mr. Perowne alleges. He has,
however, carefully abstained from mentioning names, and from
advancing proofs, both of which ought to have accompanied such a
disreputable accusation of his brethren.
The bishops, of whom he speaks in the next paragraph, were
“immured in a prison” on a charge of high treason; and a bill, to
exclude them from the House of Lords, passed both houses of
parliament, and received the signature of “our martyred Charles.”
And, if it was ever “made unlawful for an Episcopalian to worship
God according to the dictates of his own conscience,” Mr. Perowne
ought to know that this was done by parliamentary authority, and
that the church might even now visit every Dissenter with pains and
penalties, for not worshipping within her walls, were she not
mercifully prevented by the Act of Toleration.
One more paragraph yet remains. I had said in my Letter, that “the
essential doctrines and hallowed influences” of religion “ought to be
far dearer to us all than any forms of ecclesiastical government. For
the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and
peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.” This, he intimates, is equivalent
to saying that “forms of ecclesiastical government” are “matters of
little moment.” I did not say so. I said that doctrines and influences
ought to be “far dearer” to us than such forms. Having, however,
made me say that they are “matters of little moment,” he asks, why
then do we separate from the church? I ask in reply, why does the
church impose them? and why does he write a pamphlet against
those who conscientiously refuse to comply with them? Let Mr.
Perowne regenerate a child by baptism, and cross its forehead, if he
pleases. Let him kneel at the table, around which Christ and his
disciples sat, if he pleases. Let him call a Socinian his “dear brother,”
and bury him “in sure and certain hope of the resurrection to eternal
life,” if he pleases. But let him not attempt to compel me to adopt
such practices; let him not anathematize me for not conforming to a
church which declares that it “hath power to decree rites and
ceremonies,” when I believe that such “power” is possessed by
Christ alone. I am not the separatist. I “stand fast in the liberty
with which Christ hath made me free.” He is the schismatic who
insists upon the practice of unscriptural and popish ceremonies, as
the terms of communion with the church of Christ. “The schism,”
says Archbishop Laud, in addressing Papists, and in justifying the
church of England in her dissent from the church of Rome, “The
schism is theirs whose the cause of it is; and he makes the
separation who gives the first cause of it, not he that makes an
actual separation upon a just cause preceding.” Let Mr. Perowne talk
no more about separation, but remember that “those who live in a
house of glass should never throw stones.”
Mr. Perowne denounces the application which I have made of the
passage of Scripture, which I quoted for the purpose of illustration.
“I did not before know,” says he, “that ‘forms of ecclesiastical
government,’ and ‘meat and drink’ were synonimous terms.” And
what of that? There are many things which Mr. Perowne does not
know. He does not know, for instance, how to spell synonymous,
and until he has learned that, I shall not undertake to instruct him in
higher matters.
Several of the extracts which I have made, from the observations in
this wretched pamphlet, place the writer of them in a most
unfortunate predicament. He either believes that his interpretations
of my language are the true meaning, or he does not so believe. In
the former case, his “Observations” manifest a want of sense; in the
latter case, a want of honesty. It is impossible to go through his
pamphlet without lamenting over the condition of a church which is
compelled to submit to such incompetent or unprincipled
instructors. What must be the follies or fanaticism of disciples who
are taught to explain passages of Scripture on the principles on
which “this true son of the church” has explained my Letter. This,
however, is a subject on which we are not left to mere conjecture.
In the volume which contains some of the “Sermons” with which Mr.
Perowne has edified his flock, he teaches that Jesus Christ is shortly
coming in person to reign in Jerusalem—that the saints will be raised
from the dead, at least a thousand years before the general
resurrection, for the purpose of reigning together with Christ—that
Jerusalem will be to them “what Windsor castle is to our king and his
family”—and that they will have “various enjoyments through the
medium of the senses,” “meat and drink” included. He also declares,
“I have said nothing of the new division of the Holy land, of the
rebuilding of the Temple, or of the re-institution of the Temple
service; THOUGH ALL THIS WILL CERTAINLY TAKE PLACE!!” There now. Let
any Irvingite or Swedenborgian beat that if he can. And let all
Dissenters take joyfully the abuse which Mr. Perowne has heaped
upon them, so long as the law tolerates them in leaving St. John’s
Maddermarket, in order to be instructed by those who “understand
what they say, and whereof they affirm.”
I have now done with “The Reverend John Perowne, Rector of St.
John’s Maddermarket, Norwich.” I have examined his reasonings. I
have corrected his mistakes. I have exposed his
misrepresentations. In so doing I have endeavoured to comply with
the motto which he has inserted in his title page, and to “MARK them
which cause divisions and offences;” and I now retire from the study
of his “Observations,” deeply impressed with the conviction, that
fallen indeed must that cause be, which either needs, or accepts
such a defender.

THE END.

Norwich:
PRINTED BY JOSIAH FLETCHER, UPPER HAYMARKET.
 FOOTNOTES.

[15] Mr. Perowne uses the expression, “our apostolical

establishment,” as if there had been an Established Church in the
days of the apostles. The establishment of religion by the state, did
not take place till the reign of Constantine, which was three hundred
years after Christ, and when the church had become grossly
corrupted by “the mystery of iniquity.” It is still more erroneous to
speak of “our apostolical establishment,” for the Protestant Church of
England was not established till the time of Henry the Eighth.
[16] A man who writes himself “reverend,” and who intermeddles
with latin and logic, ought to be able to spell correctly. “Calvanist”
and “Armenian,” are wrong. The former should be Calvinist, and the
latter should be Arminian. I hope that the Infant School system,
which Mr. Perowne patronises, will not be so “exclusive” as to
exclude spelling from its literature. Let Mr. P. take advantage of this
hint—for he learnedly remarks, “Licet vel ab hoste doceri.”
[28] Mr. Warner, a clergyman of the Church of England, in his
“Conformist’s Plea for the Nonconformists,” observes “It is absurd to
call him a martyr, for there was too great a complication of causes
which led to his execution, to ascribe it wholly or principally to
religion. The vice which ruined him was insincerity; so that his
enemies saw that they could not trust him to perform his insincere
though liberal promises.”
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebookultra.com