England -- Social life and customs -- Fiction; Orphans -- Fiction; Uncles -- Fiction; Young women -- Fiction
He also liked young Andrew, and on
finding that young Andrew wished to cultivate the True Vine instead of
the Virginia creeper, he promised him his help and his patronage. James,
who all his life had been applying the principle of selection to
flowers, realizing that what could be done with sweet peas could be done
equally well with human beings, gave Andrew his blessing, dipped into
his wife's stocking, and contributed what was necessary to supplement
the sizarship that shortly after this his son won at Trinity College,
Cambridge.
Andrew Grant, during his career as a clergyman, was called upon to
select with even more discrimination and rigour than his father before
him. He had first to make up his mind that the Puseyite party was not
going to oust the Evangelical party to which he had attached himself. He
had later on to decide whether he should anathematize Darwin or uphold
Bishop Colenso, a dilemma which he dodged by doing neither. He had also
to choose a wife. He chose Martha Rouncivell, who brought him L1000 a
year from slum rents in Sheffield and presented him with five children.
Apart from the continual assertions of scurrilous High Church papers
that he had ceased to believe in his Saviour, Andrew Grant's earthly
life was mercifully free from the bitterness, the envy, and the
disillusionment that wait upon success. His greatest grief was when the
spiritual power that he fancied was perceptible in his youngest son
Sholto, a spiritual power that might carry him to Canterbury itself,
turned out to be nothing but an early manifestation of the artistic
temperament. But that disappointment was mitigated by his consecration
in 1890 as Lord Bishop Suffragan of Clapham, in which exalted rank he
guarded London against the southerly onslaughts of Satan even as his
brothers of Hampstead, Chelsea, and Bow were vigilant North, West, and
East. It was a powerful alliance, for if the Bishop of Hampstead was
High, the Bishop of Bow was Low, and if the Bishop of Chelsea was Broad,
the Bishop of Clapham was Deep; although he preferred to characterize
himself as Square.
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