The Express.
London, England, 1864-09-15 00:00:00

Che enrrtoO•

TO CORRESPONDENTS.
Ad% ertisementa Intended foe " The &peer " Loudon Evening
raper, mutt be at the Moe, 10, Boarerle-street, by Twa
o duck on the day of pubtleatlon.

PRI3CIDSII..

Tem ITENta‘ BORN TO GOOD-WC[. Mr. D. Lamy.
And THE STREETS OF LONDON. Mama. J. W. Ray, David
Maher, D. Murray, J. Nelson, H. Forrester, and H. Mellon ;
Mrs. H. Manton, Miura Barnett and Gwynne.

TRW Eveinia. THE HABLOTTPEOGREZi.—Singing by Mr.
H. Clifton and Mr. J. H. Stead; Madame Elam —Mr. G. W.
Jester.—Conciading with THY MUTINY AT IHZ NOEL.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON-BRIDGE.

THU DAY Morning, lb. gra....Afternoon, lb. 27m.
TO-KoallOW Morning, lb. am.... Afternoon, St 11m.

LONDON, THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 15.

DR. PEsEY'S interesting pamphlet on the precise
legal force and wider ecclesiastical bearings of the
recent Judgment of the Crown in Council has been
criticised with considerable severity both by friends
and foes—perhaps, indeed, in some respects with
greater severity than a dispassionate review of its
statements will strictly justify. It is true that
throughout the pamphlet he speaks strongly as one
who feels strongly, and is thoroughly in earnest ;
but this is not at all surprising, nor need it be
offensive, if the position and convictions of the
writer are fairly considered. It must be remem-
bered, moreover, that Dr. Prsev's views on the
points at issue, so far from being the extreme and
isolated crotchets of an excited and controversial
mind, represent in subatance the deliberate opinion
of a considerable body amongst the English
clergy. The worst that can be said against the
writer of the pamphlet is, that he speaks more as
an earnest theoltgian than as a consistent church-
man, and that iu his zeal to defend what he re-
gards as the dogmatic purity of the Church he
overlooks to some extent what is due to the exi-
gencies of the Establishment.
In common with many theologians and divines,
both in and out of the Establishment, Dr. PESEY
looks upon the doctrines referred to in the recent
decision of the Privy Council as vital points of
faith, essential to the existence of the Church as •
Christian institution ; and, it seems, he at first
thought that the effect of the Judgment would be
to legalise their denial to any extent. In order to
teat the correctness of this view he prepared a Case
for the opiniou of counsel, embodying in a
series of questions some of the extreme results
which appeared to be legitimately involved in the
principles of the Judgment. This Case he submitted
to the ATTORNEY-GENERAL and Sir 1I con CAIRNS,
and their decision considerably narrowed the pre-
sumed legal effect of the Judgment. They give it
as their opinion that the recent judgments of the
Privy Council do not by necessary implication, or
otherwise, furnish the means of determining in the
abstract other legal questions, being absolutely re-
stricted to the particular cases submitted for deci-
sion ; and it would, therefore, be impossible to
derive from these decisions any rule for the deter-
mination of other hypothetical cases each of
which, should it ever assume • practical form,
must depend upon its own circumstances. Dr.
PUSEY thus learned that the legal effect of the
Judgment was narrower than he had originally
supposed. As he himself puts it : " The legal
" interpretation, ruled in each case, is the mini-
" mum which lies in the words. It matters not
" whether, by any apparent legitimacy of
" deduction, any other consequences might
"be derived from the letter of the
" Judgment. Any case, if not absolutely
" identical, would (I am informed) have to be
" moldered entirely de novo." But Dr. PESET
too clear-sighted not to see that this legal narrow-
ing of the Judgment does not, after all, materially
affect its moral and ecclesiastical influence, which
from his own point of view he very naturally regards
as likely to produce the most pernicious results.
The Judgment, he holds, virtually denies the faith
on points of vital moment, and the Loan CHAN-
CELLOR in delivering it "has, as far as in him
" lies, poisoned the springs of English justice for
" ages, in all matters of faith." " And at
" what price I" Dr. Puszv asks. "At the price
"of shaking the faith of godly minds in the
" Church of England, and of encouraging the
" ungodly in sin ; at the price of breakiug off
" Churches of the Colonies from the mother
" Church, and familiarizing devoted minds among
" us at home to thoughts of organic sever►nce
" from the Church, whose discipline is fettered by
" such • tribunal, that to attempt to enforce any
" article of faith is to occasion it to be denied by
" the supreme Jurisdiction ; of checking deeds of
" liberality to the Church, until she be freed from
" this bondage."
Turning to the practical question, as to the re-
medy for these serious evils, Dr. Pussy innate,
with considerable warmth and energy of language,
that the only alternative for sincere and godly
Churchmen is to demand from the Legislature the
abolition of the existing Court of Appeal, on pain
of leaving the Establishment. It is not very
clear from his statements what kind of ecclesiastical
court he would substitute for the present supreme
tribunal; but, so far as can be gathered from his
language, it would be a purely episcopal one—a
court or conclave of bishops. It is here that Dr.
PESEY'S zeal as a theologian outruns his consis-
tency and discretion as a member of the Esta-
blishment. No doubt, as an able and accomplished
divine, strongly attached to the dogmatic
aide of Christian teaching, Dr. Pi.:SEY
would like to have a Court pf Appeal
in eccdesiaatical cams that would confirm and
enforce in every particular his own doctrinal
views, and he very naturally concludes that this
tribunal should be a purely clerical or theological
one. But such a Court is not only inconsistent
with the notion of an Establishment, but radically
incompatible with its essential conditions. The
State as the trustee of the nation must of necessity
retain the supreme control of the high dignities,