The Press. — London, England, 1858-07-31 00:00:00

Mos' or/o'w- A .4;2. 4 9 „.....„ ~..... 91 1 STAMPED ....SIXPFNCE. UNSTAMPED..FIVEPENCE. LONDON, SATURDAY, JULY 31, 1858. No. 274.—V0L. VI. THE PRINCIPLE OF THE AGE. STRANGE changes in public . feeling take place to mark and distinguish one generation from another. What was esteemed a virtue in one age often comes to be viewed as a vice in the next. Time was when every man felt it to he right to take some side, and to be known by some dis tinctive name. Our forefathers divided them selves into Cavalierilir "&nuidhea4s, Whigs or Tories, High Churchmen , or Low Churchmen. And in what they professed to be, they were in earnest : they took their side decisively with all its consequences ; they fought for it, they bled for it, they died for it,' itnecessary. The reason was, dory bad a prlnripte, even though, in some cases, that principle was only party. Party may exist without principle ; but still it may be laid down as an axiom, that wherever there is , principle , there oust be party. V1lIK: LV W What is the distinguishing Aseipore of the present age ? It would be rither'diabuit to say, except that it he distinctiv e at all. Parties and pitncipiel amithecoliaiog maarged, alter a Amp suoisiir, liiiititiefirnouw.-ig sort of whitey-grey-4, dillt, indistinct mixture, which passes under the general name. of Lilteralistn. There are indeed :different shades of this cloth, such as " Liberal Conserieative "- and. " Con servative bibsii,r 4 semi-Liberal " and 4 ' ultia , Liberal ;" but these 111 ; partake, it milli,* obi. served, of the saraiAbubtfill, 'hurl-14 114 ' etilatirt They neither embody a principle, Tux 'define •• party. And why all this ambiguity ? . O M% but because men in the present day do noihiradt to be known to belong to any party; an( they shirk identification with any party because they have no fixed principle. If, then, we were asked, What is the principle of the present age ? we should reply, The principle of the present age is to have no principle at all. We see the manifestation of this spirit in a great variety of ways extending itself to all offices and professions of men. Among political men it is, indeed, most marked ; but it pervades, also, to a great extent, what is called the "religious world." All are seeking to merge and lose their distinctiveness under some ambiguous general terms, just as all ranks and classes are assuming one common dress. This, therefore, may be said to be the mark (so far as it has any mark) of the age. The way in which we discover that this is the characteristic of the age in which we live, is net merely by observing the outward signs of it which we have indicated in the adoption of am biguous Janus-faced designations, but by putting Individuals to the test of principle. For instance, a man calls himself a Conservative : ask him to join the Conservative Club—his answer is, "I " would rather not be committed." Or, he pro fesses to be a true Protestant, earnestly desirous to uphold the Established Church, and to with- LATEST EDITION. stand Popery : propose to him that he should join the " National Club," by which means he can most effectually do this, and his reply is, "I " quite approve of your principles, and heartily " wish success to your objects, but I would " rather not be committed." This is a thing of every-day occurrence. Men are as much afraid (nay in some cases more afraid) of being corn niettea to a principle as of being committed to a prison. Yet it is not so much moral cowardice that is at the bottom of this as self-seeking. Their fear is of damaging their worldly interests, of foreclosing their prospects of advancement, if they comiWithemselves decisively to any party. They chem., rather to take their stand at the angle issisaretwo ways meet, so that they may keep their eye upoivihatis coming in either direction — or •may make their advance in the direction that looks most inviting. , Men of this stamp are as common as houses with a notice up in their front that they are "to be let or sold" ; and though furnished," principle., you w0u1,d,40, only an empty house. In the "religious world," so-called, the spirit upon which 'we are commenting exhibits itself -tide . other signs. Any one who has mixed much among the rising race of our theologians, or read; their writings and observed their tone, 4141ite remarked that there is a careful avoid ft,kir everything that is lignite in terms or dogmatic in doctrine in their words and works. All is vague, general, hazy, and indistinct. You cannot tell for certain to what school of theology (the man, belongs. Even the most sacred doc trines of our religion—such as the Atonement, the infutite nature of CHRIST'S sacrifice, the me thod of a sinner's justification, the extent of future reward or punishment—are enunciated (if enun ciated at all) in the most general terms. There are no dogmatic statements. No definite creed is propounded. It is only " Christian truth," `without our being told what that truth is ; and " Christian charity," without our being instructed in' what that charity consists. So far as any terms'are used, the object seems to be to obscure rather than to define. It is true this arises from the system being an importation, in a great degree, from Germany, partaking, as a conse quence, of the misty, hazy character of the Ger man school of theology ; but it has a deeper origin even than this. It arises out of a latent shame at what has been received truth—a ten dency to give up, in compliance with the spirit of the age, that vrhich has stamped many of our forefathers with an opprobrious name. Its new name is descriptive enough of it. It is " Broad Church," by which is meant something tighly liberal in religion, and which is, in fact, 'a prin ciple that would merge all distinctions of Roman Catholic or Protestant, orthodox or evan gelical, Churchman or Dissenter, in one colour less mass, to pass under the general name of " Christian," without any one knowing distinctly what it means. The words of Scripture may be quoted, but no inferences are to be drawn from them, because an honest mind might deduce doctrines which would be inconvenient•to some party or other. So, say these men, "We leave questions just where Scripture leaves them, and will not presume to define." From the spirit which we have thus noted, it cannot be doubted, has arisen the extreme anti pathy that manifests itself on every occasion to the once honoured name of " Tories," and latterly even to that of " Conservative." This spirit, too, is working great changes on the phase and outward temper of the whole mixed mass of society. It has succeeded in abolishing sth of November services, lest, reminded annually of GoD's our nation, feelings of unfriendliness should be kept up between us and will shortly do away with the Roman Catholic Oath in Par liament. Its cant terms are "Toleration," "Liberty," "Charity,"—terms =objectionable in themselves; but the question is, What do they betoken? What is to be the issue of this spirit? Now, the first remark that we would make upon it is, that if both politicians and theologians are thus shy of avowing any creed—any distinc tive principles—it is because, as we have said before, they have in reality no principle at all. It is only Indifferentism cloaking itself under the high-sounding terms of " Religious Liberty," " Toleration," and "Charity." But thus to make a parade of their spirit of religious liberty, when by religious liberty they mean the liberty to be irreligious, or to plead for freedom of conscience when their only conscience is their convenience, is at once a mockery and a profanation. Such men as these remind us of a class of men that we read of as becoming common in our East Indian dominions --men born of English fathers and Hi ndoo mothers, and therefore "half-colour" men. The second remark which we make bold to advance is this, that the prevalence of this spirit is one reason why we have no really great men among us in the present day. No man can become a great man by splitting himself into two halves. One other observation that all earnestness and wholly inconsistent with which we have noticed lent. It might be very to defend their opinions to prove their orthodoxy the least, we must award many of them prokss to be " ready furnished," b y our b e i ng everybody knows too well What the thruiture of mercies to our m aladr fa r lahtd `beil l " l i t ee .4est to aid in and alienation sho them a single article that is made of any real the Papists. It 1 principle..:. In not akw cases, if you entered in, distinction of the 1 - ----- -- ri - 0 .N. -: I occurs di, . j 2 .. .! 0 , ." 11 / 4 01r - , n - (1 depth offc .* It ' 1_ 2 1 h such a . ' ou t ,, tik cf, las beco At i l b :,;o l 111 4 ,- wrong in , . -.,-, •s, ; ,,al f .... iby blow *,t. . , . 3'' ,, ,s t 4:: , ok,•• rby blood. S-. : ,,,.., -..t, I—. rkd and them I. e