Cambridge PapersBall, W. W. Rouse (Walter William Rouse)
History
Cambridge Papers
Ball, W. W. Rouse (Walter William Rouse)
Trinity College (University of Cambridge); University of Cambridge -- History
Until the era of the Reform Bill some regulation like this was
accepted as a matter of course, but when, in that period of enquiry,
all things were put to the proof, doubts as to its wisdom began to be
voiced. In 1834 Thirlwall, then assistant-tutor to Whewell, in an open
letter dated 21 May, while advocating the admission of dissenters to
the University, lamented the constant repetition in college chapels of
a mechanical service, believing the practice to be detrimental to the
interests of religion: he further expressed the opinion that
attendance at chapel services should be voluntary. He referred to a
then recent statement by Wordsworth in which the latter had said "the
alternative is not here between compulsory religion (as it is called)
and any other religion, but between compulsory religion and no
religion at all," and on this remarked:
I cannot indeed draw such delicate distinctions as my friend seems
to make in this passage; for as the epithet compulsory applied to
religion appears to me contradictory, the difference between a
compulsory religion and no religion at all is too subtle for my
grasp. But if for _religion_ we substitute the word _service_,
which would probably better express his meaning, then I should quite
agree with him, that, in this case, a voluntary service would soon
be changed into no service at all: that is, the persons who are now
compelled to attend, if they were left at liberty, would stay away.
And this is the very reason why I think it would be better that they
should be allowed to do so.
The argument was amplified in a second letter dated 13 June. This was
skilful enough as a piece of dialectics though hardly likely to
convince opponents.
That an officer of the college should express such views and in this
way was regarded by Wordsworth as scandalous, and five days after the
publication of the first letter, without asking for any explanation,
he, with the consent or approval of Whewell and the two deans (Thorp
and Carus), removed Thirlwall from his office of assistant-tutor. This
arbitrary act was generally resented in the Society even by those who
disagreed with Thirlwall or thought that he had been indiscreet in his
advocacy; some too considered the act unstatutable, but Thirlwall
refused to appeal to the Visitor, and shortly afterwards left
Cambridge on his appointment, in November 1834, by the lord
chancellor, to the important living of Kirby-under-dale in Yorkshire.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account