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

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," by our being
everybody knows too well What the thruiture of mercies to our m
aladrfarlahtd `beill"li tee .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 , ."
11/401r- , n-
(1 depth offc .* It' 1_ 2
1
h such a . ' out ,, tik cf,
las beco Atilb:,;ol 111 4
,-
wrong in , . -.,-, •s, ;,,alf ....
iby blow *,t. . , . 3'',,,s t 4::
, ok,••
rby blood. S-. : ,,,.., -..t, I—.
rkd
and them I. e