The Express.
London, England, 1858-10-20 00:00:00

ILIITIMMBE
Ts arms% LONDON, AIIIIIIANON. Kam
sod O. Maws Platkows.-111 41,78
.Wra
Illr. O. Ids/Isma—JACILI Illirtrillf MOM aiiioll.
Mi. L lararig—ALNl ART PUY! LI • IrtiMlL—Oarear et T.

?RIMINI%
Tais Varna AWAY WITI lIIILLICIROLT.-4.ad LIMB
JOBS. Mt. mares U. isim.—Ormire at T.

LYO.IIII.
Tim Finn.. EMZIABIL Mom Nary Verbalise, Imam
Ihwrne4 rol Jana Sews ; A. bleGua„ 111. K. Omsk sad
—The lAEA rimay.—AM TOO KUOB FOS GOOD
M ema.
T /IL Slims. Get Now; Ms m.Mixes....Gmmum, MI.

HIGH HAT= AT IMIDOSI BAIDOZ.
WaistTr=i= Lamer.

LONDON, WEDNESDAT, OCT. 20.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.

4 SPECIAL EDITION of the " EXPRESS,"
sentaining the results of the day's Rams, is pub-
lished every evening during the Sporting Season, at
six o'clock.

THIS is no laughing matter. It is all very well
for the clubs and the drawing-rooms—the wits of
Pall-mall and the politicians of Mayfair—to inner at
the theology of churchwardens and the eloquence of
vsetrymen. Nothing is more easy for moderate,
sensible, half-earnest sort of people, than to shrug
their shoulders sad uplift their eyebrows at the
vehemence, the bad taste, the exaggeration, and the
ignonuioe which occasionally find their way into
the rough protests which the English middle and
working chases are making against the fantastic
freaks and the insidious practices of the
Ronianising party in the Church. It is high
time to remind these philosophers of the boudoir
that the question is really not one of (esthetics at all.
The points for discussion are not the motives of Mr.
W6ll7Ell'ol', the refinement of Colonel VFAZW, or
the historical erudition of Mr. Baais—the question
is one that rises far higher and goes far deeper. Is
it, or is it not, true that the Protestant laity of this
country believe themselves to have a real ground for
uneasiness and apprehension in the alleged Roman-
ising tendencies of an active and zealous minority of
the Anglican clergy—tendencies manifested through
a long series of years by the maintenance of tenets
inoonsistent with Protestant orthodoxy, by the pro-
fession of principles incompatible with Protestant
liberty, and by the indulgence in practices,
all of which are repulsive to Protestant senti-
ment, and some of which have been pronounced
illegal by the highest ecclesiastical authority
known to Protestant tribunals ? To this question
we apprehend but one answer can be returned; and
it is an answer fraught with matter for the toot
serious camidoration by all true friends of theChareh
of England.
No one can have watched with any attention
the progress of public sentiment in regard to
that remarkable movement called Pussyism, with-
out discerning the growth amongst the English
middle and working classes of an ever-strengthening

protein against its follies and its dangeen.—
strong honest instinct of the people bee
that it was a sham-thing and a half-thief.
Nothing but the exemplary limp and uumenmehd
labours of many maw its professors have raved the
anomalous siegrowth from being as much hated as
contemned. The so-called perverts have bees is
by the popular sentiment as the really honed
men of the party, and those who remain in the
Anglican communion are, with the mass of the
people, the objects (whether justly or unjustly) of
suspicion and dislike. There are certain points es
to which the instincts of the English nation have in
all ages been peculiarly sensitive. The rough and
manly freedom of the English nature has always
been resentful of spiritual domination. There were
Reformers in England long before the Reformation.
The troublesome intermeddling of the Priest we. as
strongly felt and se strongly resented in the days of
Caster' ma in these days of Valium and
Bute. This feeling is the true and deep
root of the dislike and distrust now enter-
tained by the mass of the people for the
Romanising portion of the Anglican clergy. It is
instinctively felt that in substance these men are bent
en introducing two things almost equally distasteful
to the English laity—s Church that is to be the in-
fallible judge of truth, and a Prieethood that le to
be the iadispesnable guide of life. Of theme two
hateful things, the latter is the more odious to the
practical Englishman. In spiritual matters the
Englishmen wants no sacerdotal intermediary be-
tween him and his GOD ; in temporal matters, most
of all in clomestk mature, he will submit to the
intrusion of no holy pilferer, who comes with the
picklock of a pretended commission from on high,
to rifle the migrate, to filch the confides's, or to
alienate the affections of his daughter or his wife.
Within the precincts of the home the Protestant
Englishman will allow no spiritual Director to set
hie uninvited foot.
These

sentiments which hare for
ages been more or less dominant among a high and
fiee•spirited people—have lately been roused into
intense excitement by the facts with which we are
all familiar. Auricular Confession—the most stir
chieroua abuse of Rome—has been, and is now being
practised by the Rootaniaing section of the Anglican
clergy. The more subtle and less tangible ►ben of
spiritual Direction is suspected, and not without the
best grounds, to prevail at least es widely.
The popular sentiment, outraged at this dis-
cover,. giros loud and general expresties to
its dissatisfaction. What enmity ? These Anglisen
Confessors admit the charge and defend the radios,
holding up r their shield that which has been
happily called "a temelated Liturgy," and justifylug
Faction abhorrent to the Protestant England of the
1916 orlitury, by parading isolated peerages taken
from a book whose otherwise eminent beauty is still
marred and defaced by the scars and rents of the greet
religious conflict of the 16th. Now mark the conse-
quence of this: see for what these heady and
vexation, meddlers are responsible. The out-
raged Protestantism of England, thus placed
between the text of the Liturgy on the
cue hand and the practice of Auricular
Confession on the other, loses not a moment in

1111111111111 D