The Express.
London, England, 1850-03-09 00:00:00

sebesripthes NOM by kw, tad (taktng Holy Scripture
tar their guile) ere at Morey, tae
he meek* their psi
fail wilkeelt. asses or ceeeere. Upright sod
gesloill se all Teepees agree epos subjects
!ito ; ad h auk bevinefelly be be 'shad that the
eloweleese Goias oak issnlie for ee to feeble, is whetter
Ur. Gerbente h astray er repugnant to the doe-
trine el Go be
ed se by Mx weablished. Mr.
Gortra's eiseerls met make* le the widen oder-
eased by may WIWI MI ylserseeine. mbar; to the
whisk auk poem firm, by lb* ona pram*
I "th
chatsnigusga gyp
id
go Igo odis
whit" bane Mused kik -lb• mos and et
fikfee-ff
red On milks whkli they
have &dead hes weseelein end anbigenee scprenisne
the lermeheise 1 e5lll, if the dunks el Ile.Gedien le net
on-teary es repsisent to the assldne of the few& el Ws-
land se by 11w established, It Nana and a MAO
for refusing. him Wheels& Is She Ihkg he whlsACTera
bawl -.lnwithar=koll. This amt. senelllnged he the
purpose el her 3IIJII la imams which use
within its erimserw, bee se irehillatien sr authority to
settle saline el INk, se le Mambo what ought in guy
particular to be the doctriaeof the church of Elegised. Its
duty eatesile tidy to the eissideretios of that whit=
law established to be the eheigise of the *trek of
epos the lime sod legal etinnesesies of bar sedans sod lia
aviaries; sad weevil:eider thee It le set the duty of any esurt
es be 'ciente mid rigid le mess of this sort. We agree with
Sir Walter Scott in the spiels which hammered in Stones
as, in the Consistory Court of London—" That if any
artiste is really a subject of dubious Interpretation, it would
be highly improper that this court should fix cn erne
soselag, and prosecute all there who hold a costrary opi-
nion regarding its interpretation." In the examittatioe of
tide case we have not relied upon the doctrinal °pinhole of
any of the eminent writers by vitae piety, learning, mad
ability the Church of England has been distinguished; but
it appears that opinions, which we cannot in any important
particular distlegahh from those entertained by Mr. Owe
ban, have been propounded and maintained by many
eminent and Mentions prelates and divines who have
adorned the church from the time when the articles were
fire, without ensure or reproach, established. We do not
affirm that the doctrines and opinions of Jewell, Hooker,
Usher, Jeremy Taylor, Whitgift, Pearson, Carless, PPM
demos, and many others, can be received as evidence of the
doctrine of the Church of England; but their
emoduet, =Mamed sod unquestioned as it was,
proved at least the liberty which has been allowed
of =detaining such doctrine. Bishop Jewell writes.--
" This marvellous conjunction, and incerporatiom with
God, h fleet begun ant wrought by faith ; afterwards the
erne incorporation is assured to us, ad increased by bw
thm." Hooker writes—" We justly hold baptist to is
the doer of an actual entrance Into God's house—the ant
t begianingof life—a seal, perhaps, of the gram of
lot before received ; but, to our sanctification sate,
has not any other before it." Archbishop 'Usher,
In reply to the question " What say you of infants bap-
tised that are born in the church ? DA* the inward grace
to their baptism always attend the outw.erd sign ? Answer ;
Surely, no ' • the sacrament of baptism is effeetual only to
these, and to all those who belong to the election of
prase." Bishop Jeremy Taylor says—" Baptism and Its
effect may be separated, and do not always go in coo-
-1 Jesettes. The effect may be before, and therefore much
rather may it be after it. stoception ; the sacrament
operating in the virtue of Christ, even as the spirit shall
move.' Thera was even a tires when doctrine to
this effect was required to be studied in our church ;
and Whitgift, by • circular (rued in the year 1688,
enforced an order made In the year 1587, whereby
every minister under the decree of Master of Arts was
required to study and take for his model the Decades of
Budingen, as presented by the Queen and the Upper Howe
of Cinvocation. Ard there it is declared, amongst nume-
rous passages of a like tendency, " Toe Kid be.einning of our
uniting in fellowship with Christ is not wrought by the
sacraments"—in baption that I. Pealed and confirmed to
infants, which they had before. Sc with reapeet to the cha-
ritable interpretation of divine services, Hooker says, "The
church speaks of infants, as the rule of charity elloweth both
t 3 speak and to think." Biehe p Pearson aye, " When the
means are used, without something appearing to the contrary,
we ought to presume of the good effect." Bishop Carleton
ass a, " All that receive baptism are call-el the children of
God, regenerate, justified ; for to es they must be taken for
such in charity, until they show theneelv a otter." Aad
Bishop Prideaux says. " I.l3p.ism only pledges an external
and sacramental regeneration, while the church in charity
pronounces the the Holy Spirit renders an inward revisa-
-1 ratios." We espy as no opinion upon the theological amy-
-1 easy of these opinions, or any of them. The wntcre whom
we have cited are not always consistent with themselves,
end other wr:ters of great eminence and worthy 3f great
respect have held and publish, d very different opinions.
But the mere fact that such opinions hays been propounded'
and maintained by persons so eminent and so much re-
tiptoed, as well by very many others, appears to us mufti-
tdeely to prove that the liberty which wee left by the
snicker and formularies has been actually enjoyed and recr-
eated by the members &administers of the church of England.
The case not requiring it, we have abstained from expressing
any opinion of our own upon the theological correctness or
err rof the doctrine of Mr. Gorham, which was dimmed
before us at such yeas length, and with so mutt learning
His Honour the Via-Chancellir Knight Bruce dissents irom
the opinion we have formed ; but all the other members of
the Judicial Committee who were present are unanimously
agreed in opinion that the doctrine held by Mr. o...rharn is
not contrary or repugnant to the declared doctrine of the I
church of England as by law established, and that Mr. Gor-
ham ought not, by reason of the doctrine held by him, to
have been refused admission to the vicarage of Brampton
S,:eke. And we shall therefore humbly report to her
/Oahe" that the sentence pronounced by the learned
indite in the Arches Court of Canterbury ought to he re-
vetoed, and that it ought to be declared that the Lord Bishop
of Exeter has not shown sufficient cause why he did not in.
stitute Mr. Gorham in the said vicarage. We shall there-
fore humbly advise her Majesty to remit the cause with
that declaration to the Arches Court of Canterbury, to the end
that right and justice may there be done in this matter,
pursuant to the said declaration.
The delivery of the judgment occupied upwards of an
hour, and et its conclusion Qom were some manifestations
of applause, which were immediately checked by the officers
of the court.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT-YESTERDAY.

BEIOIIt Ma.

Ix ax Ams-WWW;i7vrolTor;.mmulirilit lonic IL

WINNINGTON.—EITRAOILDINAT CABS.
Mr. Dowse made an extraordinary application to the court
in this case. The iusolvent was disch +need in 1526, He
sou entitled to some family property which had lately been
realised, and all the creditors had been paid in toll, and there
cas now a surplus of 1001. in court. It happened that after
the dinkier's by this court Sir John Miles %Vinnicgton was
convicted of felony, and transported for seven years. The
term bad expired, but he had not returned to England. The
money had been obtained through the interference of Mrs.
Winoincton, and she had urged her claim for en allow-
ance under one of the sections of the act u
having been instrumental in getting property for the
creditors. The learned counsel, in making the application
mentioned that the crown, when applied to on one
occasion, had refused to interfere, on the ground that the
property, by the discharge of this court, was vested in the
creditors, notwithstanding the conviction. There was now
8001. in court without a claimant. The crown did not make
a claim, and the creditors could not, as they had been paid
20s. in the pound, with costs and interest.
Mr. Commissioner Harris was favourably dispoeed towards
the •pplieoion. lie, however, thought that the assignee
should make a re-assignment. He would consult the other
cimmissiontrs and see what could be done for bin. Win-
Manton, who was a person entitled to the consideration of
the court.