s kind is the exercise of their
own reason and judgment. They conceive they are also warranted by those
original principles of reformation from popery on which the church of
England is constituted, to judge, in searching the scriptures, each
man for himself, what may or may not be proved thereby. They find
themselves, however, in a great measure precluded the enjoyment of this
invaluable privilege, by the laws relative to subscription, whereby your
petitioners are required to acknowledge certain articles and confessions
of faith and doctrine, drawn up by fallible men, to be all and every
one of them agreeable to the said scriptures. Your petitioners therefore
pray that they may be relieved from such an imposition upon their
judgment, and be restored to their undoubted right as Protestants, of
interpreting scripture for themselves, without being bound by any human
explanations thereof--holy scripture alone being acknowledged certain
and sufficient for salvation." This petition was presented by Sir
William Meredith, who said that he considered it as meriting the most
serious attention of the house, as the grievance which affects the minds
and consciences of men was more burtdensome than that which affects
their property. It was inconsistent, he observed; with the liberality
of the present age to oblige men to subscribe to the truth of articles
which they could not believe; and he urged that such injunctions tended
to establish, under religious authority, habits of prevarication and
irreligion; were productive of great licentiousness in the church; and
operated to the destruction of Christian charity. He affirmed that
the removal of these shackles would give a strength to the established
church which nothing could shake, and that no danger could arise from
such a reformation while the hierarchy existed. He concluded with
remarking that the oaths of allegiance and supremacy were quite enough
for the security of the church and state.

The champion of the church on this occasion was Sir Robert Newdigate,
member for the University of Oxford. Sir Robert considered the petition
as praying to overturn the church of England, which he argued was only
to be found in the thirty-nine articles and the Book of Common
Prayer. He accused those clergymen who had signed it with possessing
accomodating consciences; such consciences as had subverted the church
in the last century. As for the house of commons, he maintained that
it had no powe