The Express.
London, England, 1866-01-13 00:00:00

--i:*:lusw.
wean, w.c.

aM Pataatsa, 37, Wait atatutd,

TURTLE, TURTLE, TURTLE.
Clear, Thick and Invalid Turtle Soaps always ready al
SAMESS-HALL, Itegent-street, PioadUly.—W. DONALD,
Ort;Priater•

Ehe ,',rrPrefni•

TO OORRISPONDOMI.
Leteitifsementa Untended for "The lltrpreas " London Evening
=, moat be at the Ofice, 10, Bonvarleetreet, by Two
It on ihe day of yabUestkea.

EIAYIUM=..

THIS &victim), BROTHER SAM. Haws. Sothern, McA-
dam, and Compton ; lltws Nally Moore, Snowdon, Am.—
ORPHZUS IN THE HATILARKAT. Mears Farrell & D. 'fisher ;
Mimes Keeley, Howard A Wright.—MY HUSS& \ b'S GHOST.

PRINCE:3BB.

Two Ivinano, WILT LOißllttea.—Atter which IT IS
MATRA TOO LATZ TO MIND. Messrs. Vining, G. Melville,
R. Mead, D. Murry, b. Ddhsera, T. Vlliiwa, J. G. Shore, G. Mor-
ey, and R. Caillnart ; Waage L. Moors and X. Rodgers.

LYCEUM.

Tarn Ego, THE Haliffßion trnurraxa. Mr. H.
WWlloomb.—THE MASTER OF RAVENSWOOD. Mesas.
Richter, forties, Vatic, Emery, Widdicomb, Fitzpatrick, Emma;
Mesdames rerun, Elzworthy, lamas, C. lacktral.

BRITAIIIIIA.

Turn IMRONCI, OLD DADDY LokalloB AND SIR RIAGINT
CIRCUS; OR, THE RACK FOR THZ GOLDEN APPLZS.—
nod tddrue. Swrtzeobaeli. BevanL-01mAr.-Bhower
of Golden Ralo.—And JOSUE, T MORMON'S DAOGHTFJA.

ILIGHFATIB AT LONDON-DUMB.

Tim Afternoon, mt. Oft
To-Nosiisow— Yawata/6 011 Baa.--Altarnoca6 06 3Ln.

LONDON, SATURDAY, JANUARY 13.

THE Duke of ARGYLL delivered an address at
Glasgow on Tuesday which may usefully be read
together with the recently publishcd letter of
Prince ORLOFF and Dr. POSEY'S Eirenikon. Ad-
dressed to the members of the National Bible
Society of Scotland, its subject was the nature of
that union with one another for which Christian
men should strive. The Bishop of OXFORD seeks
to gather all his countrymen into the Church of
England; Dr. Pcsav labours to reconcile us with
Rome ; and the prelates and clergy who attended
Prince ORLOFF'S corference are solicitous to bring
about a union of the Anglican and Greek Churches.
The Duke of ARGYLL questions the character of
these endeavours in order to ascertain whether
they are really indicative of an eminently Christian
spirit, and aim at objects consistent with the interests
of Christian truth. He observes very pertinently
that union with one set of men often means a
wider separation from another set of men, and
instances the requirement of the members of the
Greek Church, that before pressing any further
our desire for union with them, we should expli-
citly renounce the existing character of Protestants.
When the dissolution of an honourable and fruitful
union with Christians is proposed in the very name
of Christian union, we are warned as plainly as we
can be not to trust in words and names. The
Duke of ARGYLL does not hesitate to declare his
conviction that union, as understood by many who
are foremost in demanding it, is an object concerning
the utility and value of which the greatest doubt
may be entertained. "It is impossible not to con-
" calve that what many men mean by the unity of
" Christendom is the predominance of one great
" system of priesthood over the Christian world,
" which, so far from being a desirab'e object, is
" really a danger to the Christian Church, and
carefullly to be avoided." So far most laymen
will agree with the Duke ; it will nevertheless be
as well to look a little further, and not resting in
his conclusions, to consider his reasons. We
all flatter ourselves that we hold what we
believe with intelligent consciousness, but the
fact is that our opinions upon all matters,
and upon theologj among others, are to a con-
siderable extent the result of causes and not of
reasons. Periods and ages are marked by certain
definite directions and inclinations of opinion, and
the inevitable tendency of that opinion is to run
into excess. Against this tendency "the only
" safeguard is the independence of individual
" action and the independence of individual
" Churches." If this is a true representation of
the case, then a corporate union of all Christians,
supposing it possible, would be a contingency to
be earnestly deprecated. The Duke puts the
case very strongly when be says—" My sincere
" belief is, that not only is the antagonism of in-
" dividual opinion a necessary instrument of the
" maintenance of Christian truth, but that a cer-
" taro amount of antagonism between different
" Churches--originating in different influences,
" starting under different circumstances, and im-
" palled by different energies—forms an essential
" element in the maintenance of Christian truth
" and in the avoiding terrible evils." This we be-
lieve to be sound Protestant truth, and most
necessary for these times.

But now, without attempting to establish the
Duke's proposition by argument, and addressing
only those who are disposed to admit it without
hesitation, let us simply suggest its relations to
another class of efforts made in the name of Chris-
tian union, the consideration of which did not fall
within the limits of the Duke's Glasgow address.
Dr. Pussy and the Bishop of OXFORD, and the
Russian Greeks, are not the only persons who are
labouring to bring all Christians into one outward
and visible Church. While some would make
the character of the clergy, as being the exclusive
channels of celestial grace, the bond of union ;
others find a similar bond in the liberty of the
laity as represented by the authority of the State.
This is the meaning of the movement for "coin-
" prehension" in the Church of England, of which
we hear so much in and out of Parliament. But
does the liberty of the laity need to be secured, or
can it possibly be promoted, by such means ? The
question deserves to be well considered before the