Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, 1 July 1791.

. . . Mr S. Wilkin has been [on] his Annual circuit into Cambridgeshire & was so kind as to take me with him we travelled in an open carriage we have been at Cambridge & Ely & Scham &c.  The greatest part of 4 days were spent at Cam.g all the time in a manner in conversation with Mr Hall & his & Mr W’s friends I made all the use of my time I could in gaining information from him & in that point I think I can say my Journey has not been in vain I am happy to see he makes a firm stand against Socinianism he considers it as contrary to Scripture & that its general tendency is opposite to the growth of Religion & real piety. . . .

In an accompanying note from a Mr. Martineau to Kinghorn, Martineau asks for Kinghorn's attendance at a meeting to discuss the riots, most likely the riots against Priestley in July 1791 in Birmingham.

William Richards, Lynn, Norfolk, to Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, 1 November 1791.

I am much pleased with the news from France.  Strange indeed it will be if the Churches of Roman Catholics are metamorphosed into Baptist Meetings!  I wish your Friend every kind of success he can wish perfectly persuaded his cause is good.  About Bristol I have heard nothing nor have I the least idea what is going forward.  I asked Mr. Rippon when I last wrote if he know any thing about it but tis only lately I wrote & have not heard since.

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to William Richards, Lynn, 16 November 1791.

I have not heard from Mr Rippon yet but Mr Hughes who you say is one now at Broad Mead I know well he is by no mean destitute either of learning or abilities.  However a Caleb Evans is a very rare character & we have much reason to lament his loss.

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, January 1792.

. . .  such is the progress of opinion that Dr Priestley after all the dust he has raised about the learned Unitarians of Antiquity is much nearer Orthodoxy in the most essential points of religion than his Friends of Antiquity ever were.

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, 6 February 1792.

You enquire next of the Academy. I hear Mr Jenkins late of Wrexham in Denbighshire & Mr Hughes (alias Dr Gill) preach at Broad Mead & attend the Academy.  But I apprehend Dr Evans will be much missed in that part of the kingdom & particularly in a few years when the young stock which have not known him go out for tho they may gain as much knowledge now as before yet many of his Incidental Instructions were more usefull than any other part of his attendance & these will be repaired with the greatest difficulty—

W. W. Wilkins, Bath, to Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, c. 1792.

[Concerning James Hinton, Baptist minister at Oxford] His studies are not abstruse but such as render him very popular as a preacher & entertaining as a social friend.  He is pretty o[r]thodox but lets his people believe what they like even Socinianism (that great Devil that so plagues poor Hall) provided they be not quarrelsome.  Peace is his favorite motto.

               But this has bro.t ye Cam. Church to my mind—Peace I fear has forsaken her & how it will end is very problematical. Hall has taken it into his head that his predecesser has been shamefully negligent in point of discipline & has set his shoulders to ye great work of reform with Herculean efforts. I suppose if he continues as he has begun he will soon be without a man of sense & spirit in his church. Then he may shake his rod over ye heads of the rest & shout out Victoria—Veni—Vidi—Vici—For one effort he has been heartily laughed at & by another (wh. was successful) he has compleatly disgusted two of his most valuable frds at least.  I wd. give you ye particulars but that a record of Folly and extravagance is neither pleasant to write or to read—Besides as ye Blaze is but just bursting from ye smoaking embers I know not if I ought to say more about it & wd. wish thus much not to go farther from you than to Durrant—Hall himself is at his wits’ end with Joy & Exultation.  Surely, grief that there was occasion to sever a limb from ye body wd. have been more like St Paul—A surgeon indeed hacks & lives & rejoices because the trade goes on & ye cash comes in—Hall rejoices in the precedent wh. this affair has set. I don’t know whether or no you heard of ye Woodstock mob—Hinton with four of his friends nearly fell a sacrifice to it. He read me a very interesting acct of it in M.S. it will shortly appear in 1s pamphlet. It will do honour to h[is] feelings & courage & it will bring c[ertain] great folks into very well deserv’d contempt.

William W. Wilkins (1752-1812) was Benjamin Beddome’s assistant at Bourton-on-the-Water, 1777-92.  He came from Cirencester, studied at Bristol and then finished in Scotland. He had just met with James Hinton at Oxford; Hinton would soon publish his Defense of the Dissenters of Oxford in 1792 about the Woodstock mob.

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, 19 November 1792.

I had some conversation a few weeks ago with a Roman Catholic Clergyman who very frankly answered every question I put to him respecting the state of the Church & Clergy of France, from which I thought I could clearly see that Babylon is falling with Vengeance.  He represented almost the whole nation as in rebellion against the Pope that there was no legal Church authority in the kingdom—the decrees of the National Assembly infringing on the Popes Prerogative so much as to set his Authority aside. The successes of the French are truly astonishing by last weeks papers tho the scenes occasioned by intestine wars are really dreadful beyond imagination. What is in futurity God only knows.  The signs of the destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon too much apply to us Ezek 22.23 &c &c. There is scarcely a circumstance which we do not see in England as far as ancient language can be considered as analogous to modern times—but the Lord reigneth—and under his care & government things may be so ordered as either to make Confusion unnecessary or the means of producing peace.  And in the most dreadfull calamities he knoweth them that trust in him.

David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, to Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, 26 January 1793.

On Robert Robinson, former Baptist minister at Cambridge: “. . . it is easy to see that he leans to Arianism, and has a disgust at the Doctrine of the Trinity, and what he writes on Poland seems as if he approved rather of Socinianism than Calvinism. . . . But he has been of an intolerant spirit and so was Luther, and too much of it is in the world at the Day.  That men should contend earnestly for the faith, is a Scripture rule, ergo a Duty incumbent on every Christian.  But that they call one another ill names, is more from Pride and Malice than love and humility.”

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, 12 March 1793 [mismarked as Feb. 12].

I must tell you my surprize at finding a Proclamation from the King for a general Fast.  I suppose you will have read it [in] your Newspapers before you receive this.  For my part I am very sorry for it—The appointment of a Fast before a stroke has been struck or calamity in any way felt is unusual, to say that War is the calamity that calls for humiliation is very singular since it appears to me that this war might easily have been avoided. Had we any signs of real humiliation before God in the Hearts of our great men and that in sincerity they united before the throne of Grace to intreat Mercy the case would be different but even then fasting & endeavouring to end the war would go together.  Is this the case?  Is the Nation to be commanded to pray for the success of our arms that their prayers may aid the designs of those who regard not God nor consider the operation of his hands?  Can we wish the destruction of a people who have just risen from slavery and on whose existence perhaps the freedom of Europe depends?  I dont mean that Europe must be like France before they can be free but that if Monarchy as before was established again such power would be thrown into the hands of Courts that the people would be nothing.  Besides how can those feel any Humiliation for our being plunged in a war they earnestly wished might be averted?  The sorrow of these was not so much to see the war approaching as that his Majesties Ministers never seemed desirous to stop it, but rather have brought it on and I believe have been designing it for some time back. . . . Whatever may be the motives which I cannot pretend to say it will operate as a trap to the Dissenters as many of them will be put in an unpleasant situation by it.  While a fawning clergy are seeking preferment by sacrificing conscience calling a worldly system the Church of Xt. and increasing the national guilt by their very prayers! – I hope however the Dissenters will all see the snare & be prudent enough to escape it which may be easily done.

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, April 1793.

My dispositon is far from making feuds in society. . . . Norwich has been all along very quiet—Sentiments have been various & violent on all sides but the parties were so balanced that quietness has been the effect. . . .” [He mentions An Apocalyptical Key, A Discourse on the Rise & Fall of Papacy, by Robert Fleming (1701).]

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, 10 March 1794.

I begin to think there is a great necessity for to preach the doctrines of Grace warmly & endeavour to confute the insinuations of Arminianism & Socinianism.  I am apprehensive that without this Dissenters will degenerate & religion go down among them till they become like an empty honeycomb a well compacted form but nothing more. I think I shall pay more atttention to them than I have done for of late I have been more struck with their importance & evidence than I used to be—and firmly to establish truth is the best way to subdue or however to keep down error.

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, 6 May 1794.

Socinianism is clear only because all difficulties are left out not because it is capable of solving any one of them. On this account—I cannot help laughing in my own mind at the parade they make as if they could fairly knock the poor Calvinists o’ the head, so that they could not have a word to say for themselves when if any one brings their system to the bible it is seen in a moment that if our bibles are to be trusted that will not do—

David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, to Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, 26 July 1794.

You do not think [Robert] Robinson was a Socinian.  Mr. F[uller] appears to be differently minded and Dr. Priestley seems to have gloried in him as a convert.   Indeed some of R.s expressions look so like it, that it would admitt of some debate, wch I think not worth while.  However it is quite plain he was not a Trinitiarian, or he would not have written as he did. . . . So that I do not wonder that some of Rs people were suspicious of his sentiments.

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, 12 August 1794.

His [Andrew Fuller’s] arguments on Election &c are very strong. Tis strange Priestleys disciples should hold predestinarians in such contempt—This I have long said was no proof they had more sense than other men—as they denied the plain consequence of their own darling opinions.  As to Robinson I think as before—Mr F[uller] did not shake me much because I knew the letters that passed between R & Dr P.  The fact was flattery was a foible in R’s character—he dispensed it with unsparing hand.  When he & Dr P became acquainted it was not at all strange he should give the Dr a little—the Dr was proud of obtaining R as R was foolish in flattering him publishes the letter.  When it first appeared it was considered as decisive but M R’s friends who know his manner say there is no decisive evidence in it for he would both write & speak occasionally in such a style as had no meaning in it. . . Mr F has argued the point on the whole well & I should like to see a Socinian reply to it in order to see what they would make of it. But in every place in wch the argument may be turned on himself it must be given up as weak or at least as not to his point.

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, 4 September 1794.

I confess I have been puzzled at the reasons they [Socinians] should deny divine influences the less they make of Xt, & the more they diminish the grandeur of the plan of salvation the more necessary divine influence must be because they diminish the impression of the means of keeping up the attention of the mind to religion & according to their plan ought to have something else to put in its place.  Besides one would think they might admit it in their religious system for the sake of their philosophy which as necessarianism ultimately—refers all things to God.

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, 7 October 1794.

Since I wrote last I have had my mind a little engaged about a political question very far remote from the hot-headed politics of the present day both Aristocratic & Democratic viz. Whether a Christian can engage in War and if he can whether he ought to engage in it on account of religious liberty? . . . It may not be impossible that there may be cases in which it may be better for a Christian to resist oppression than to bear it but the idea of spreading desolation & death among innocent & guilty is so opposite to Christianity that things must be very desperate indeed before it can be justified for my part I confess I know not where to draw the line.

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, 29 December 1794.

Paine who rendered his name so famous by his Rights of Man published some months ago a pamphlet in favor of Infidelity called the Age of Reason. It is a silly thing, to those used to deistical arguments a mere nothing.  But I hear it is taking a rapid spread in America—Here at home that cause is fast spreading. I have been told it has become fashionable for Ladies to spout out sentiments of Infidelity!  However there will not be one christian the less for all this—And this is my consolation—What you say of Establishments is true in a certain respect—the Grand Seignior has as much right to choose his religion as any of his subjects—this is true—but his choosing a religion for himself & professing it—is a very different thing from establishing it.  The religion of the prince will probably be the religion professedly of the bulk of the people and the effect will be that it will be protected by law.—But this is a very different thing from establishing it by law as the peoples religion which they are to profess—and from which they are not to deviate except by favor.—This is the case with all state religions.  An act of Toleration in itself asserts that people ought to believe differently—but they are tolerated from political reasons not as men doing right who ought on that account to be protected but as men whose weakness it is better to bear with than attempt to punish. This is the spirit of all those things in general. And tho a good act of Toleration renders the subject equally secure as if he was of the establishment yet it proves that the spirit of the government is that of establishing a religion of their own & not of protecting men in the profession of what they believe.

James Hinton, Oxford, to Joseph Kinghorn, 30 June 1795.

My Church unanimous, Party rages without but all is peace within . . . .  Do you correspond with any Bristol [... ] We have a member of our Church there—Ryland is dilig[ent]and much beloved—Hughes beloved at the Academy, but not a popular preacher—He is extremely sensible but wants urbanity—All in all he is one of our first young men . . .  Hall preached with amazing applause at Kettering Association—

Obison Kirkbride, Hull, to David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, 12 January 1796.

 . . . for I am fully persuaded that no errors in Doctine, have done so much injury to the Cause of Christianity at large, as the abominable spirit of bigotry and intolerance, which has been, and still continues to be, but too much the guide, of many who profess to be leaders of the people . ..

Obison Kirkbride, Hull, to Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, 12 January 1796.

Tom P[aine]’s Age of Reason, is very little attended to here.  I have seen the 1st Part, but it quite satisfied me I have never enquired after the 2nd Do.  I think either the old or new Testament entitled to infinitely more regard than 10,000 Ages of Reason, of such silly fellows as Tom P.

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, 26 January 1796.

Kinghorn has written a response to Paine’s Age of Reason, but he won’t publish it because an anonymous tract The Age of Infidelity, by a Layman, had recently come out. 

[Thomas Williams (1755-1839) was a London Calvinistic preacher (Independent), writer, and bookseller, operating from 10 Stationer’s Court, Ludgate Street, London, from 1800 to 1818. In 1793 he was one of the founding editors of the Evangelical Magazine. In 1794 he published work on Thomas Paine referenced above, entitled The Age of Infidelity: In Answer to Thomas Paine’s Age of Reason, Part 1.  The following year William Button published Williams’s The Age of Credulity, as well as his An Historic Defence of Experimental Religion; in which the Doctrine of Divine Influences is Supported by the Authority of Scripture, and the Experience of the Wisest and Best Men in all Ages and Countries (2 vols; (1795). In 1796 Williams's came out with a sequel to the above work, The Age of Infidelity:  Part II. In Answer to the Second Part of The Age of Reason, another work printed by Button. For more on Williams and Button, see William Rogers, Philadelphia, to [Thomas Williams], London, 27 February 1796.]

David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, to Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, 6 February 1796.

Dr. Priestley laboured to set aside the atonement of Xt and every Socinian does the same. And in effect if not in plain words declare that there was no need of the death of Christ in order to the salvation of men, that he died only to confirm the doctrine he taught, but not to make an atonement for sin!  They will acknowledge that the Gospel is a dispensation of mercy, to men as frail creatures, but not of mercy thro the atoning blood of Christ.  With them reason and virtue is all. Tho they think our doctrine is unreasonable, I am perswaded that in point of reasonableness allowing the bible to be a revelation of the will of God, and the doctrines it contains to be the rule of our faith, ours has infinitely the advantage, and theirs is folly in the extreem.

W. W. Wilkins, [Bourton-on-the-Water],  to Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, 11 April 1796.

I hope you’ll hear something better from Hall & Co.  I shd. like much to hear an acc.t of ye campaign as soon as conv.t  Both in & out of ye pulpit much interest will I dare say be excited . . . Perhaps Hall wd. give an opinion if you were to sift him I think he wd. take yr side—Our evg. passed in desultory uninteresting chat.

David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, to Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, 31 December 1796.

He who preaches the word without feeling its influence on his own heart: will never be in any real concern of mind, whether those to whom he preaches feels its power or not.  If the preacher does not enjoy the comforts flowing from divine truth he cannot comfort others with those comforts wherewith he is comforted of God.  For if he is a stranger to the exceeding riches of the grace of God manifested to himself, he cannot heartily recommend that Grace to fellow men.  If he does not heartily approve of the holy Law of God, and his just indignation against sin, in the righteous execution of the sentence of his Law; he cannot press it home upon the consciences of others; nor recommend that holiness he does not love.  However usefull human learning is in its proper place, it never did, nor never can merely of itself, qualify any one for the work of the Gospel ministry, even tho it be joined with great natural abilities. These may make Criticks, disputants, Rhetoricians and Philosophers, but not Christian ministers in the proper sence of the word.

William Button, Paternoster Row, London, to Joseph Kinghorn, 15 March 1797.

He is asking Kinghorn to contribute to a new Magazine he is publishing.  He is expecting assistance from Mr Smith of Eagle Street as well “Mr Hughes late of Bristol and now of Battersea, who spent an hour with me yesterday & from whom I understand that you & he were fellow students. . . . National affairs are gloomy.” 

John Carlill, Hull, to Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, 6 Apri 1797.

If you have any acquaintance with Dr Ryland of Bristol, you would serve us essentially by making application to him on our account.  We wrote to him some time ago, but have had no reply, & as we are all entire strangers to him, perhaps he may not think it worth while to take any notice of us.   [Carlill is seeking a minister for a new church.]

David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, to Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, 10 June 1797 [commenting on Joseph’s previous letter about a riot in Norwich].

But to return to your letter, there has been no mention made of the affray at N[orwich]. in Hull advertiser, so that I should not have heard of it so soon as you feared.  Nor does York Courant mention it, I suppose they are afraid of alarming the country with any thing that looks like violent measures being begun by the soldiers.  And as it was not done by the Authority of the commanding officer, tho he may connive at it, and screen his men from punishment, it would be unfair to impute the conduct of the men to him, notwithstanding that some emesaries [sic] may have prompted them to it; as I suppose N. is like other places, having not only imprudent but violent men on both sides.

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, 22 August 1797.

He admires Wilberforce’s book on the Establishment and Practical Christianity, but laments, “What a pity it is such a man should vote for war!  Especially this war!”

Samuel Favell, London, to Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, 30 August 1797.

I have sometimes thought that by the improvements in Grammar & a more accurate knowledge of words most controversys will be shortened—by classyfying [sic] subjects into knowable & unknowable—For instance the Essence of Body is a question that so far eludes research that I believe Men of Science agree to let it alone—Is not the question of Matter & Spirit something like this incapable of data that can lead us to demonstration—thus the materialist refines & sublimates his matter into something very much like what has been called a spiritual substance—It may be said that something may be struck out of the wildest speculations . . .

[Samuel Favell (1760-1830) was a prominent Dissentng layman, originally operating in Tooley Street, Southwark. His first wife was a member at Carter Lane. His second wife was Elizabeth Beddome (1765-1830), daughter of Benjamin Beddome, Baptist minister at Bourton-on-the-Water. She too was a member at Carter Lane but Favell never appears in the membership rolls of Carter Lane, Unicorn Yard, or Maze Pond. It is possible he attended at Dean Street (that church book is no longer extant) and also possible he was an Independent (in 1812 he was serving as a deacon at the Camberwell Green Congregational Church) and was always a "hearer" among the Baptists, which was not uncommon at that time. He partnered for a time with his second wife's brother, Boswell Brandon Beddome (a member at the Baptist meeting in Maze Pond) as woollen drapers (Beddome, Fysh and Co., 170 Fenchurch Street). Favell operated a second partnership as a slopseller with William Bousfield at 12 St Mary-Axe. (Bousfield was also a member at Carter Lane).  See Church Book, Horsley-down and Carter Lane, 1719-1808, Metropolitan Tabernacle, London; and R. A. Ford, Camberwell Green Congregational Church, 1774-1996 (Broadstairs, Kent, UK: Westwood Press, [1996]). For more on Favell, click here for his entry in the Biographical Index.]

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, 6 February 1798.

Bicheno has published a pamphlet a few months ago which he calls the probable progress & issue of the present disturbances, here he draws a very black picture of things, he thinks commotions will not be over till the years 1819 or 1822.  He supposes the Angels are now pouring out the vials—That the first vial began to be poured out in 1793 and we may conclude the second (wc. he supposes is begun to be poured) is now pouring.  But the uncertainty in the application of many prophecies is a great obstacle in my mind since Interpreters apply them to so many different things . . . .  

Joseph Kinghorn, Norwich, to his parents, Rev. and Mrs. David Kinghorn, Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, 3 April 1798.

The French are now awfull scourges on the Continent, but when they have answered their end as awfully will they be punished.  Exaggeration is very common among men and it is probable they are not so black as they are by some described. But besides their cruelties, wc. are unequalled by any thing lately in Europe—their being most of them Infidels & many of them Atheists professedly in all the higher or (accordg. to present times) the more active ranks of society, and their having strumpets drawn in processions as Goddesses &c &c—is I believe quite true. I think every expectation is cutt [sic] off for Europe in general except from Gods providence.  All those notions of liberty wc. the French revolution very generally raised a few years ago are at an end, they are the tyrants not the deliverers of men. Yet I think we ought to believe with caution the reports about their designs, for it is certainly the interest of our governors that the poeple should be very much frighted just now, as money will flow much more readily from the influence of that passion than of any other.

Text: Joseph Kinghorn Correspondence, Typescript, Kinghorn Papers, 4/3/1, Angus Library, Regent's Park College, Oxford. Simon Wilkin, Kinghorn's friend and devoted member of his congregation, died on Jan. 10, 1799. There were several Wilkins in Norwich affiliated with the Baptists and, in some instances, with the local newspaper. David Kinghorn, his father and favorite correspondent, was asked to leave the church at Bishop Burton, East Riding, Yorkshire, in June 1799.