The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1877-04-24 00:00:00

THE RITUALISTS AND THE
ESTABLISHMENT.

On Friday evening a lecture on "Mr. Tooth and
his Church" waa delivered in the Town-ball, by the
Rev. S. G. Reaney, of Reading. The chair was
occupied by Mr. Matthew Deveniah, J.P., who, in
introducing the lecturer, said he would not detain

them with more than a very few sentence:. If they
asked him why lie presided there that night, Inc
answer would be " I am an Englishman, and deem it
my duty to help forward every question which deeply
concerns the well-being of the nation politically MI
well as religiously. lam no friend to the establish-
ment and maintenance of religi ~,, by the Sigh ! I
believe that the history of ecclesiastical establishments
has been the history of injustice and tyranny, and
now clergymen of the Church of England are them-
selves beginning to feel this fact—with which Noncon-
formists have been as long familiar. The philosopher
Locke said that the 'Union of Church and State had !
occasioned nowe bloodshed than all other things put.
together !" Without entering into the question of
Mr. Tooth's tosition, lie had simply to say that if he
wishes liberty, and if his party wish,,, it, they gnat
pay for it—by relinquishing the favours of the State.
It would he utterly unjust to the rest of the nation to
permit the Ritualists to defy the law which they had
sworn to obey, ind yet to enjoy all the adv tango+
which their union with the state brought to them.
They must elect to have ,use or the other; either to
take the State front, with its supremacy—or to
relinquish those frvours as the price of their liberty.
' The one solution of the question lay in a complete
severance f Church and State—and to this they most
come, he was certain, sooner or Liter.
Mr. Heaney, in opening his lecture, expressed his
convktion that but for the all absorbing interest of
the nation in the Eastern Question very much interest
would have been felt in Church rptestiout. Ile further
proceeded to say that while many stoke in anything
but kindly terms of those who espoused such
questions and used towards them ungettenotts epithets
Such as political dissenters, he did not question
for a moment, that in a few years hence these same
people would speak in very different terms of those
who were now courageously fighting these battles, and
would regard them as the truly religious dissontent.
Certain it was that but for such political dissenters
. . . .

in the past who braved by God's help the sown and
obliquy of the men of the day, we should have had no
privileges to fight for toalay, and we should he careful
an to how we deal with the heritage which at inestim-
able cost and sacrifice ha, been handed down to no.
Proceeding to say that he wished quietly and gib..
passionately to consider the question, he went on to
recount the circumstance, connected with Mr. Tooth's
imprisonment, and the qu..,tion which he Wa4 anxious
to determine was whether Mr. To. ti. really was the
martyr which his friends wished to make him out to
be. After considering Mr. Tooth's relation to the
Church, and the obligations which he hasl undertaken
in connection with his office as a clergyman of the
Church of England, the lecturer lucidly showed that
he was simply a violater of the law, and was not
entitled to the epithet of martyr; Mr. Teipth could not
get rid of his obligations to the authorities of the
Church, unless by simply receding. The first part of
the lecture was chiefly takeout. with a recital of the
laws of the Church, from which it was clearly shown
that the independence and liberty for which Mr. Tooth
and his party are contending, are not to be found in
the Church as by law established —they are, therefore,
1 in their present position, simply :inserting an -unjust
I and unreasonable claim. The remaining part of the
lecture was occupied by a telling criticism of Canon
Ryles book on Church Reform, in which he recounts
the present dangers of the Church, danger,' which, the
lecturer said, are not heard of in other great Christian
bodies, and which are heard ..f in the Church of
England, simply because she is a state-formed and
state-regulated Church, and the conclusion of the
matter was simply this, that the way out of her
present distress and danger was to loose her
and let her go. The lecturer spoke in terms
high appreciation of the work which the Church of
England was capable of doing ; and which he believed
it would do with greater efficacy if she were left to
herself to do it. We had no fear of the future of that
church, and believed that disentablinhment would
simply open up a higher future for her. The lecture,
which was calm and careful in its statements, and
equally convincing, was attentively listened to and
received with many tokeno of approbation. A cordial
vote of thank* NVIM moved by the Chairman, and
seconded by Mr. Neave, who referred briefly to the
facto respecting Mr. Tooth, endorsing the opinions
expressed by the lecturer. Mr. Neave read a quotation
1 from the Times newspaper, showing that as the Act
, of Uniformity was the last great deed of settlement by
1 which the Church of England held her property, if
I that act was annulled, as would be the ease if the
Ritualists were allowed to disregard the provisions of
i the law, then nothing would stand between the Church
. of England and her property, and the claims of all the
I Noncomformists to participate in that property. We
, give the quotation, and commend it to the consider*.
' ton of Ritualiats and Churchmen generally : —" The
Act of Uniformity is the lent great deed of settlement
I by which the clergy hold their benefices, the dignitaries
. their thrones and :stalls, and the congregation their
churches. It is really nothing less than the latest title
deed of the Church of England. That a considerable
number of its requirements have become obsolete
chiefly through change of manners and customs, may
be allowod without prejudice to the meaning and
authority of the deed, considered as a whole. But as
it is called an Act of Uniformity and they who could
not submit to it are called Nonconfonniatn ; Uniformity
is the first principle as it is the very title of
the Act. . . . . If the Act of Uniformity is no
no longer good for anything then there remains no
reason why the successors of the muted 2,000 should
not step in. It opens up anew the question to whom
the property, and even the edifices belong" Then by
that Act of Uniformity, said Mr. Neave, the Noncon-
formists were driven out of the Establishment, and by
it have suffered during these three centuries, and it is
not to be supposed that now that Ritualists are feeling
the shoe pinch; that therefore they are to disband all
obligations to the State and yet retain all its favours.
This would be the establishment of an imperium in
inlper.o, which would be dangerous to the State and
ultimately fatal to civil and religious liberty. Mr.
Naive warned his hearers that whatever Ibtualiats
may say about the spiritual independence, their prin-
cipals were fatal to any real spiritual independence,
aad therefore care must be taken that they do not
Icarry away into this realm of independence the pro-
perty of 'the State. If they ars to have indepen•
deuce they can get it only by gointi forth from all the
benefits which the state confers. Ile vote of thanks
was unanimously carried. The meeting, which was
well attended, was altogether successful.