The Express.
London, England, 1864-12-22 00:00:00

PRI NCF-eli S.

TIM terrace, BoRN 1) CoOD LUCK. Mr. D. Murray.
And THE STREEN OP LONDoN. flews. VininT. J. W. Ray,
P. Visbar, D. Murray, J. Nelson. U. Forrester, and R. Mellon
Mrs. U. Marston, Misses Bartlett and Gryune.

LYCEUM.

O lI^XING Ml* or!. Mr. Whidlcomb.
RV 1" MA.
mond. It•dotcre. Collett, Clifford : Miaa C. Leclercq.
And BAREFACED 11l I'OiTOR.S. lir. Widdicomb.

lIIGU WATER AT LONDUS-BRIDGE.

THIS DAY Morning, 7h. Sim_
ro-xoaaof !Laming. 51/ am...

.Afternoon. RA. r4m.
.Afternooa, feh. 31m.

LONDON, THURSDAY, DECBMBER 22.

TIIE various proposals for what is called a
" Reform " of the Final Court of Appeal in
Ecclesiastical Causes all assume that the clergy
are the true and only authorised expounders of the
doctrines of the Established Church. One emi-
nent divine boldly proposes that the Court shall
be compelled only of Bishops. Another, while
leaving their present functions to the lay Lords of
the Privy Council, would have them apply to the
Bishops to declare the doctrine of the Church iu any
case of heresy. A third argues that the reference
should be made to the Divinity Professors of Ox-
ford and Cambridge ; and a fourth would leave the
judgments of the Privy Council entirely to laymen,
in the hope that the Church would look sclely to
Convocation as an organ for tLe declaration of
doctrine. If we may believe some who assume to
have special authority to speak on the matter,
the question is to be brought before
Parliament at its meeting, and the names of
several eminent public men are mentioned in con-
nexion with various schemes. Fifteen years ago,
as we are reminded by the Quart,rly &vita., the
Earl of DEREY suggested in the House of Lords •
plan which at the time received the support of
Mr. GLADSTONE in a published pamphlet

That plan proposed in effect to leave to the Judicial Com-
mittee, only without the falls sous and bewildering presence
of the prelates who at present sit on it, the settlement of
all questions of law and of fact, and the totimate and
unrestricted power of advising the Crown as to the sen-
tence to be given in every case; providing only that, where
any matter of the Church's doctrine came incidentally in
question, the court should frame a mac and send it to the
bishops of the Church for their written opinion of what on
the matter in question the teaching of the Church of
England is.
The Q,,arfcrly added that

The judgment delivered by the spirittialty upon the point
of doctrine would tend greatly to protect the deposit of the
faith, whatever might be the decision of the court as to the
accused person. Thus in this very instance (that of the late
Privy Council decades) the escape of the acquitted persons
would be felt by no one to endanger the faith of the
Church, if the records of the court had shown aide by side
with their escape a deliberate declension of the episcopate
upon the teaching of the Church of England as to the
inspiration of the Scripture and the endurance of the
punishment of the wicked.

Before the matter goes any further it may be
worth while to ask whether the prelates who are
supposed to he ready and willing to declare the
doctrine of the Church on points as to which it
has not beeu explicitly stated in the Articles and
Formularies have been consulted on the subject.
They may have been ; they may have con-
sented. But we have heard before now of
men clamouring, sincerely enough for a time, for
"reforms" which they have found out at the last
moment they did not want, and which in fact they
would much rather be without. Those who speak
for the Bishops should of coarse know what thaw
right reverend persons arc prepared and anxious to
do, but lookers-on can only judge of the dispo-
sition of public men by their public conduct ; and
after the ,sperience of the last two or three years
we may be allowed to doubt whether the prelates
are really desirous of occupying a position in
which it would be their duty to declare the doc-
trine of the Church on doubtful points. This is
a matter open to common observation. Take,
for instance, the great controversy on inspiration,
a doctrine which lies at the very root of our popular
Christianity, and the disputes concerning which
threaten to deprive us of CnittieGwoftru's mag-
nificent boast, that the Bib'e, and the Bible only,
is the religion of Protestants. Have the Bishops
shown any eagerness to commit themselves to
positive and definite statements as to the nature
and extent of the inspiration to be ascribed to the
Sacred Scriptures? It is well known that they
have not. It is notorious that on this point their
language has been weak, wavering, and evasive.
Thu great demand of the public from the beginning of
the present controversy has been for some tangible
declaration of the Church's doctrine that might be
compared with the errors of the day. But the
Bishops, ready enough to denounce heresy, have
been rmst cart. ful to avoid making definite affir-
mative statements on their own part. They have
sought gr,,tirid from which they could condemn
others without laying themselves open to criticism.