The Press.
London, England, 1856-09-13 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

arming hostility to Maynooth, he is most
egregiously and inexcusably mistaken.
We have all along been mindful only of the
ancient alliance betty an the Church of Eng-
land and the Tory or Conservative party,
which is one of the leading facts of modOth
English history, which his been greatly bete•
ficial to both, and arhlli we ardently long td
see restored. And we have sought to combin4
parties In the Chatth in favour of a Conserva-
tive policy, nut by Ignoring doctrinal difter-
onces, but by endeavetring to show that these
are not incompatible With political union. We
do not seek to underrate the importance of
theological controversies. We have no sym-
pathy with those who affect to be above such
luestions. We think meanly of that man who
dislikes his neighbour to possess strong con-
victions, simply because his own are weak ; and
because the earnestness of the former is a
standing reproof to his own indifference, and
a standing admonition to conquer his own
aversion to inquiry. But there is a species of
tolerance widely different from this careless
and thoughtless vacuity, and grounded on the
general fallibility of the human intellect,
which leads a rational man always to bear in
mind the possibility of his being in the wrong.
This moderation of mind, which logicians call
the formido oppositi, may coexist with as high
a degree of moral certainty as is necessary for
ease of conscience, without impelling us to a
crusade of extermination against all who hold
opposite opinions—not because we doubt our
own convictions, but because the limited range
of the human faculties forbids us to assert
dogmatically that no one else must doubt
them.
The difference between those who represent
the more exclusively authoritative element,
and those who represent the more exclusively
Protestant element in the Church of England,
is precisely one to be regarded in this spirit;
more especially as it does not involve any
saving points of faith. Both parties have
found the Church large enough to hold them
for three hundred years. Neither have as yet
thought it necessary to call for the excommu-
nication of their rivals. The worst they have
thought of one another has been that too
great prominence was given to particular doc-
trines, or that the operation of certain Church or-
dinances was erroneously explained, but neither
have ever supposed that anything taught by
their opponents was actually dangerous to
salvation. But the difference between Con-
servatism and Liberalism does involve the
very existence of our ecclesiastical institu-
tions. Why then should the clergy refuse
to unite upon an essential point because they
differ upon a non-essential one? First secure
your institutions, we would say to them, and
then return to the discussion of doctrines.
But do not act like the Greeks who occupied
their whole time in ecclesiastical disputes
whilst the Turks were storming their battle-
ments.

Further, we should remember that these
religious differences, be they great or small,
ought not to affect the relations of the Church
with the Conservative party ; for in the ranks
of the latter Churchmen of all opinions may
be found. The triumph of Conservatism
would not represent the triumph of any parti-
cular set of Church doctrines, but the inte-
grity of the whole Church. If anything were
to be lost by either party through the success
of Lord DERBY'S policy, the case would be dif-
ferent, but by the ascendancy of that policy
they have all to gain and nothing to lose.
Spiritually thelChurch would not be worse off
than she is at present, while her temporal po-
sition would be carefully guarded and strength-
ened.

We are not calling upon any party in the
Church to sacrifice anything for the sake of
supporting political Conservatism. We do not
require a compromise. We simply wish for
the present to let well alone. We have already
pointed out that each party in the Church
cannot expect to have a Cabinet of its own
construction. The security of the Church of
England must rest on the same foundation as
the security of our political fabric, in the com-
prehension, that is, of widely different classes
of opinion. It is to the want of a just percep-
tion of the advantages to be derived from this
system, and to the false opinion that auy corn-

SATURDAY,

bination among those who differ on a single
point is a dereliction of principle, that France
owes so many of her late troubles, and
America her pteeilili 011011. If, indeed, any new
question had arisen In the Church, there might
be more reason for chhvertifig theological views
into a political test. But now that the agita-
tion of the last trialty /airs has begun to
subside, and the Chitteh *Comparatively quiet
upon points of doctrine, It is no unfavorable
time lid call upon het, ss a body to direct her
attentldti more exclusively to the aspect of
political affairs—to consider whether her duty
does not just now invite her rather to aid in
the conservation of our institutions, than to the
agitation of spiritual differences, and whether
her wisest course for the next few years does
not lie ;more in a practical than in a specula-
tive direction.