+ 
- amounts to saying nothing. 
1809.] Rev. Robert Robinson and the late Bishop of London. 1 
father was, or where he resided. It was 
somewhere in the north of England, 
which is taking so wile an extent, as 
It is indeed 
said, that Dr. Porteus was born- in 
Yerkshire: but that isa large county, 
itis owned ‘his father was a tradesman, 
of but little eminence.” But (ifit-bea 
matter of any Consequence, in such ac- 
counts, to know) let us enquire what 
sort of tradesman? Perhaps he was a 
barber also? Who can tell? It is pra- 
dently concealed, for such a shocking 
circumstance should not disgrace the 
annals of a bishop. ‘* His grandfather,” 
we ate informed, “ had repaired to this 
3 2 
country,” from Scotland, “at no distant 
period.” Why mention his grand-father, 
Tn truth, © 
without saving who he was? 
T suspect him to have been the identical 
Japtain Porteus, whom the mob seize 
and murdered, in Queen Anne’s time. 
But what are all such considerations to 
the purpose? Jf either of their fathers 
had been much lower still, or if,, on the 
contrary, they had been ever so cievated, 
neither circumstance ought’ to be: taken 
into a rational consideration of them. 
They are to be estimated only, as what 
they were in themselves, If they were 
good and useful men, their memory 
should, on that account only, be cherished 
with respect and affection. 
But Robert Robinson, was once a 
hearer of Whitfield.—True!’ Many a 
bright sun hath risen from behind a 
cloud. Luther was once a papist; and 
even Dr, Tillotson, once a dissenting 
teacher. ‘Perhaps Dr. Porteus may 
have heard Whitfield himself: and it 
Seems, there was a party, who thought 
there was “too much of the fanatical 
spirit of passed times” in the doctor’s 
exhortation, respecting the day which is 
Still popishly called Good-Friday. ~ If 
there was intolerance in it, that was a 
pity: most likely the good bishop’s ma- 
turer judgment would have rejected 
every thing of that kind in after-life. 
{ am as friendly as Dr. Porteus 
could be to a_ religious observance on 
that day; but not as a commanded ob- 
Servance; for I contend, that no man 
has a right to command another, in any 
religious matter whatever. Nor would 
I observe it with fasting. Such puerile 
foolery is not devotion: God cannot be 
more pleased with the prayers, or praises 
of those who have empty stomachs, than 
with those of his children, who more ra- 
tionally receive his good gifts with thank~. 
fulness, and richly enjoy them. 
Tt is but a poor representation of Ro- 
binson, as an author, merely that’ he 
translated Saurin’s sermons, (it should 
have been said, some few only) and 
Claude’s Essay, and wrotea Vindication 
of Christ's Divinity. Did this gentleman 
never hear of his other works, left nearly, 
or giite ready for the press? viz, his 
Eeclesiastical Researches; his History 
of Baptism; his Sermons, &c. ?—works 
that will prove his natural and acquired 
abilities; his very extensive reading, and 
deep application, as long as their lan- 
guage shall be understood. 
Poor Robert Robinson’s motives are 
also much misunderstood aad misre-— 
presented: ‘ Happy,” says this writer, 
** at the opportunity afforded by a dig- 
nitary of the established church; the as- 
piring dissenter readily entered the lists, 
and broke a lance against the mitre.” 
This is so far from being correct,’ that 
there never was a more unaspiring man: 
never was one who thought less of 
establishments and priests of all de- 
scriptions, A dignitary of the church 
was no more, 10 his view, than its poorest 
curate; and that poorest curate, no more 
than a Baptist teacher, or any other 
man. He had no mere reverence for a 
mitre, than fora foolscap.. And he in- 
deed. entertained his own peculiar sen- 
timent, that Christianity did not origi- 
naily countenance any distinct ministe- 
rial order. Such a circumstance, there- 
fore, as opposing a bishop, could not 
give him the smallest degree of happi- 
ness. Robinson wrote and spake only 
to be useful. He cared for nothing, but 
disseminating what be thought to be 
important truth. His views, indeed, 
changed in after-life ; and if we were te 
judge of Dr. Porteus from the beau- 
tiful character which he has drawn of 
the Redeemer, in (Lf think) one of his 
sermons, it seems as if he and Robinson 
were nearly congenial in sentiment. 
But Robinsen ‘ was not fortunate 
enouch. to obtain an episcopal rejoinder — 
to his reply.” He would not have con- 
sidered such a rejoinder as any thing 
fortunate, nor piaced the smallest degree 
of more estimation on it for being epis- 
copal, than if it had. been written by a © 
layman, or a tradesman. The truth 
most probably was, the bishop was con- 
winced that he had the weakest side of 
the argument, and was too prudent to 
call fgr further discussion; for this gen- 
tleman says, ‘it must be allowed that 
Robinson handled. his weapons with great 
skill.” He had therefore a victory; an 
3 | even 
