The Express.
London, England, 1866-07-06 00:00:00

afte erprefSfS.

TO CORRESPONDENTS
Advertlseraents intended for "The Express," London Evening
, must be at the Office, 10, Bouverie-street, by Two
iY laKk on the day of publication.

HAYMARKET.
TETI Eviwnto, A ROMANTIC ATTACHMENT.—DAVID
GARRICK Messrs. Bothern, Buell:dour, Chippendale. Rogers.
Clark, Coe, tra ; ifm Chippendale, &c.—LORD DuNDEKARy
MARRIED AND DONE FOR.—And A KM IN THE DARK.

PRINCESS'S.
sirETZNING, THE HUGUENOT CAPTAIN. Messrs. Vining,
rig . Honey; Hisses Neilson, Augusta Thomson. and Mrs.
Stirling.

BRITANNIA.
T/179 r/1111116 THE DOWNFALL OF PRIDE. Mean Rey-
nolds, Drummond, and Bigwood ; Mesdames Yarnold, Macarthy,
Miles, and Miss Mary Booth.—Joe Lund, Madame Ramadan, F,
Williams, & Muter F.. Sander—TlLE DEVIL'S PUNCH-BOWL

111011 WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE
TRW DAY —Morning, 7h. 37m Afternoon, 8/1. 81s.
TO-Iloaßow—Morning, Bb. 4 Afternoon, 9b. 80m,

LONDON, FRIDAY, JULY 6.

THE dispute concerning Ritualism, which has
attained dimensions so serious, is testing in turn
every one of the resources hitherto relied on for the
government of the Church of England, and it may
be said that there is not one of them which has
not proved weaker than either those who had to
hope or fear anything from it had been led to sup-
pose. The paternal authority of the Bishops is
utterly powerless in presence of a movement all
the promoters of which belong to that party which
claims a peculiar or rather au exclusive title for
the institution of Episcopacy. It is in vain that
any of the ritualistic priests are reminded of their
ordination vow reverently to obey their Bishop,
" following with a glad mind and will his godly
" admonitions, and submitting themselves to his
" godly judgment." The call to obedience is
met by a close scrutiny of the terms of the
engagement, and the ritualist clergyman
claims to decide by a standard of his
own selection whether the admonitions and
judgments of the Bishop are indeed godly, or
the contrary. The spiritual authority of the
Bishops thus failing, there remains their lawfal
coercive jurisdiction. It would be easy to assume,
as some of the Bishops have done, that this is a
formidable engine, reserved for use only in the last
resort against those who by obduracy and
impenitence have forfeited all claim to leniency ;
but until it is tried it is impossible to feel quite
sure that in that extreme case it will be effectual.
Prosecutions instituted to uphold Episcopal
authority have of late not unfrequently ended in
exposing its weakness ; and a Bishop now fears to
take a clerk into court, lest he should not only
have to pay the costs on both sides, but evoke,
on appeal to the Judicial Committee, a
judgment favourable to the very error which he
desired to condemn and suppress. In the hope of
making recourse to the ecclesiastical tribunals
unnecessary some of the Bishops have lately pro-
mulgated a strong legal opinion delivered by Sir
ROUNDELL PALMER and Sir HUGH CAIRNS, adverse
to the practices of the extreme Ritualists. But we be-
lieve that not a single chasuble has been put away,
or a single altar-light extinguished, in deference to
this opinion. The only effect of its adoption by
the Bishops has been to lead the defenders of
ritual to resort to Sir ROBERT PHILLIMORE, Dr.
DEAN E, and half a dozen other learned personages,
who it is understood have given an opinion
contrary on all points to that of the late Attorney-
General. While the state of the law is thus sur-
rounded with uncertainty it is impossible to ex-
pect that arguments founded on its supposed pre-
scriptions will be accepted because urged by a
Bishop. Episcopal authority having thus failed
to meet the case, it is natural to think of legisla-
tion as a remedy. But although one of the most
eminent of the Bishops has spoken in Parliament
in favour of restraining the excess of ritualistic
observances by law, a very little reflec-
tion suflices to show that this expe-
dient is altogether unavailable. Parliament,
as now constituted, representing all beliefs and all
unbelicfs, is not a competent or even a decent
legislature for any Church whatever, and it is to
its credit that it is aware of its disqualification.
The House of Commons will not discuss cere-
monies, nor the dogmas which ceremonies repre-
sent. For the sake of completeness we ought
perhaps to mention one more body, which, if its
fitness were to be measured by its preten-
sions, would have a better right than any
other to be heard on this subject. Convocation is
put forward by many as the appropriate and only
rightful legislature of the Church of England, and
of its recent session three days were spent by the
Lower, and one by the Upper House in considering
this question. The report presented by its com-
mittee on Ritual, and the conclusions adopted by
the general body, show that, when a prac-
tical question is before it, Convocation
well knows how narrow are the limits of
its authority. There was one condition on which
the Ritualists would accept the verdict of Convo-
cation—it must be substantially in their favour.
Accordingly, Convocation had adopted a report
which,while nominally unfavourable to them, really
covers them with the sanction of its opinion.
Such being the uncertainty of the rule of the
Church, and such the inefficiency of the means
hitherto adopted by those who have attempted to
restrain the excessive development of ritualistic ten-