The Express.
London, England, 1861-11-15 00:00:00

(Stamped, ld. Additional.)

ricnptures. They ac4writed, without cavil, the sacred nar-
rative. but they explained all that was superintend
by natural causes, and they adopted, as the name of their
new system, the title of reibualion, and called themselves
rationalists. Supported by great learning. and even greater
ingenuity. the success of this school of philosophical theolo-
gians was transcendent. In the course of i's) years, ill which
it dourished, it absorbed the opinion of all the intellect of
Germany, and very greatly intlueticed, no doubt, the opinion
of all the protestant states. But where is ratiouldion,
and where are rationalists, now? They Lave erased to
exist ; they have been erased from the intellectual tablets
of livin,; opinion. Another school of philosophical theo-
logians arose in Germany, and with profound learning
awl inexorable logic they proved that rationalism was
irrational--(laughter)—anal they,) substituted, for the
nitioutd scheme of the interpretation of the Scrip-
tures a new scheine, called the mythical syateni.
But if it be true, which undoubtedly it is, that the mythical
theologians triumphantly demonstrated that retionalism
was inational, equally true it is that by this time the
nothusl system has itself become a myth. (Cheers and
laughter.) The most eminent and most distinguisb.l
votaries of that school have enlisted their energies and de-
voted their powers to • new and all triumphant develop-
ment of German theology which is now raging in that
COUOtrY, mid which, iu deference to the spirit of progress,
which is the characteristic, as we are told, of the 19th
century, generally ends in at recurrence to ancient
ideas. (Cheers anti laughter.) This new system connate in
a most able revival of pagan rantlurisiii. (Cheers.)
Now that is a literally true sketch of the various
phases through which the most intellectual opiniou of
Germany during the last century has passed. (Hear, hear.)
I auk you is the church to be alarmed Ly such over-reaching
and capricious q ectilations as three—Omar, beach—sod is
society to be disturbed by a volume which is after all but a
,comet-hand medley of these discordant, inconsistent, and
self-destroving theorise' No religious creed was ever
destroyed by • philosophical theory. Philosophise destroy
- themselves. Epicurus was at least as great a man, I ep-
, picheud, as Hegel, yet it was ncit Epicurus that subverted
the Olympian religion. But then, it may be said, are lucu-
brations of this nature not to be noticed and answered. I
reply both—let them be noticed and answered ; though I
would say in positing that hasty replies almost always
moist well-meters-I attacks. Let them be an-
swered by those who are equal to the occasion,
and 1 doubt not that many will acme forward. Yet that
a book of such &character, writes by clergymen of the church
of England, should pass unnoticed by authority, appears to
me most inconsistent ; therefore, I may be pernithed to
my that I think the notice taken of it by convocation does
great credit to the discretion of that body. I think that
convocatior, in the manner in which it dealt with that
volume, showed that good judgment which gradually hut
surely is obtaining for it public opinion. Couvocatitio de-
nounced that which it deemed a pestilent heresy. but it did
not recommend a prosecution of the heretics. lam bound
to say myself that I wish the example of convocation bad
been followed by others in high places. The wisest of men .
has said that for everything there is a season, and it does not
appear to no that the nineteenth century is a mama when 1
the church should punish error, but when it should rather ,
confute it. Now loving touched on the feeling. of per-
plexity
awl distrust, I would say one wool or the third
feeling which prevents union among churchmen and weaken*
the effort& of these diocesan societies. I allude to the feel- I
ing of discontent, which is a feeling that prevails among a
certain portion of the clergy, who take what are called
exalted notions of sockeisatical affairs. I speak with frank-
nem on this subject, because my object in cowing here
to-day is, if 1 possibly can, to advance • cause which re-
quires, I think, the united energies of the diocese. I know
that recent appointments, or rather the appoint-
mete s of late yeses to high places in the church,
and other public circumstances which are opposed
to the spread and support—it is supposed—of chnrch prin-
ciples, have made some persons look without any en-
thusiasm on the connexion which exists between church
mind state, and even to contemplate the possible dissolutiou
of that c.:.-unexion and alliance. Now, it is impossible to
speak of those who entertain those opinions without re-
spect, and I might say even affection, because we all of us is
• very great derree must share is the sentiments of those
who entertain those opinions, though we may not be able
to sanction their practical views. 1 look on them myself as
founded entirely on fallacy, and that fallacy comets, is my
opinion, iu the assumption that if the dissolution of the tie
between church and state took place, the church might
occupy that somewhat mediseval character which
so doubt in its time was highly beneficial to Europe,
and to no country more than to England ; but nay opinion
differs in that respect, for I do not believe that in this age
and is this country the civil power will ever submit to
superior authority, or even brook a rivaL I foresee if that
were to take piece, contest and controversy between church
amid state on reciprocal right, and duties. 1 foresee &pro-
bable struggle suds possible spoliation. lam not prepared
to run such hazards, for I should grieve to see this great
church of England, the centre of light, of learning, and of
liberty, in the country, occupying • position in reference to
society similar to that which is filled by the episcopal
church of Scotland, and even sinking into fas-
tidious, not to say cynical cougregution.m. It is
my opinion that the connexion between church and
state is to he upheld and viodicated—(cheers)-1111
principles entirely in unison with the spirit of the age. with
the circummoDoes with which we have to deal, sod on the
soundest principles of political philosophy. The most
powerful principle which governs men is the religious prio-
snide. It is eternal and indestruenbla for it take, its
origin in the nature of human intelligence. That will
never be contest unless it penetrates the origin of things,
and ascertains its relations with its Creator. All who are
here present well know that that in a knowledge whic.h,
unaided and alone, human intelligence can never attain.
A wise govermosint, therefore, would naturally seek to in.
dude Buchan element iu its means for mfiuenciug men, other.
wise it leaves ill society a principle more powerful than itself,
which iu due seamen will assert its supremacy, and, most
probably, in an obstructive manner. A wise government,
therefore, availing itself of religion, would, as it were, con-
secrate society and sanctify the state. (Hear, hoer.) But
how is this to be dose' That is a problem of modern
politics that has always most embarrassed statesmen, and
03 solution of it can be found in • salaried priesthood or in
complicated systems. Side by side, however, with the
church of England there hiss arisen a majestic corporation,
powerful, independent, sod wealthy, with the sanctity of
long umiak*, yet sympethisieg with authority, full of aim
ciliatioo, sod even of deference to the civil power, proudly
and deeply plant el in the loud, mixed up with al) our 01•11.1uers
slid customs, one of our chief guarantees of lend goverunient,
sad therefore one of our firmest securities for our COllOOOl3
liberties—the church of England a part of her history,
part of her life, part of England itself. (Cheers.) It is raid
sometimes that the church of England is hostile to religions
liberty. As well might it be said that the menarchy of
England was adverse to political freedom. Both ars in-
stitutions that ensure liberty by securing order. It a maid
sometimes that the church of England has proved nominal
to its imitadou, sod hams been unable to secure the spiritual
culotte of ilo teeming millions of the population. Within
the last Mt:, y, en, when the vast regular increase of our
population Las taken Owe, it is said that the ma.
chmery of the church of England has not been
sufficient to keep pace with it. But the iia-
chinery of the church of England, in that respect,
has only been incomplete, it has not been obsolete. It w:.s
said that the church of England has lost the great towns,
but unhappily it has never found time great towns.
They are the future of England. It is in the greed towns
that the greatest efforts of the church are to be made, it
is there that her greatest victories will be accomplished,
for the greater the population and the higher the education
of the people, the inure they will require a refined worship,
• learned theology, an independent priesthood, and a
sanctuary hallowed by the associations of historic ages.
(Chien.) Well then I say that here is a ground. dismiss- 1
ing all these unsubstantial and illusory feelings of perplexity,
of distrust cod of discontent—here is a ground upon which
all sections and parties of churchmen should unite sod
would be able to act together is maintaining the religious
settlement of this uountsy. (lieer, hear.) Is it mamma.
eery' Is there any cue now who will say that this union
between church and state is not assailed and in danger' It
is assailed mu the principal place in the realm—in parlia-
ment; it is in danger in an assembly where if churchmen I
were united the church must be irresistible. Nothing can
exceed the preparation, the perseverance, Ile ability, and I
willingly admit the conscientious feeling with which the
assaults upon the church are carried on in the House of
Coruumons. Churchmen would do wrong to treat lightly
these efforts because they believe they are the action of a
minority in the country, for the history of success is the '
history of minorities. Last session aloes • series of bills
were introduced, all with specific objects, yet all converging
to one point—au attack upon the authority of the church
and the most precious privileges of churchmen. Your cha-
rities were assailed, even your churchyards were invaded ;
your law of marriage was to be altered ; your public
worship—to use the language of your opponents—is to be
facilitated. (Hear, hear.) Finally, the sacred fabrics of the
churches are no longer to be considered national. True it is
that all these amanita were defeated ; but how defeated'
By a attain opal the physical energise of those who repelled
the attacks, on which it is not in human nature that you should
count unless the country and churchmen generally coins
forward to support them. Now I said that there should be
uo subject to-day os which I should snake • coutro-
vcrsial remark, sod I am not
.going to depart
from that rule, though I am going to tusks •
remark on the subject of church rates. My opiuiun on
that subject is well known. I look upon the carrying of a
measure fur the total and unconditional abolition of church
rates as a signal blow against the alliance between church
and state. (Hear, beer ) I think it is a measure that
under no conceivable circumstances—at least none that I
can conceive—should ever be permitted to pass. There is,
• however, a very general opinion that legislation upon the
Isubject, of church rates is necessary and desirable, and t,,hat
thelaw may be improved and es-Opted to existing circum-
stances. Be it so. But this I would venture to impress
upon churchmen who are present, and perluipe I may pre.
some to say upon scone who ere nut here, that