The Sun.
London, England, 1852-11-24 00:00:00

ATTORNEY-GENERAL, and, thus fortified, the
Bishops of OXFORD and FATTER most politely
bearded their too-compromising Archbishop. We
use the term advisedly, because we think the
conduct of the Archbishop has sown the seed of
all the mischief ; he very modestly threw doubt
indeed upon the unoffi,cial opinion of the ATTOR-
NEY-GENERAL, but adjourned, instead sof at once
proroguing, the Houses, professing great reluctance
to use his power. Had he boldly put them to the
test at once, had he dared them to carry out their
gentle threat of sitting whether he prorogued
them or not, he would have found himself, with
the British public, in the place of the seven
bishops, and they in that of JAMES 11. By his va-
cillating conduct, he allowed each House to appoint
committees, to prepare petitions to her MAJESTY,
relative to the correction of clerks (we hope the term
legally includes Bishops and Cathedral Chapters),
and to enter into warm discussions respecting in-
cluding, in the usual Address to the QUEEN, a
suggestion of reviving the active powers of Con-
vocation. The Lower House, moreover, had
rather hot debates on appointing a committee to
consider grievances in the Church, and necessary
reformations ; eventually a committee of unde-
niably able men was appointed to take into con-
sideration
a long paper on these subjects ; and not
the least notable circumstance respecting it was,
that it was introduced by Dr. SPRY, and seconded
by Archdeacon HARE, of Lewis ; the latter gentle-
man avowing as his reason for having joined in
preparing the paper, and for then seconding it, that
he wished practically to correct the erroneous, but
widely diffused mistake, that the High-Church
party was the only one which wished for the re-
vival of Convocation. He referred to Archbishop
WHA.TELY, as well as himself, in disproof of
the common opinion. It is remarkable, however,
that this paper of grievances enumerates as one,
that power of the Crown by which Dr. HAMPDEN
was installed at Hereford against the will of the
Cathedral authorities, but with the applause of
the whole country, a few bigoted bishops and
clergymen excepted ; and that another grievance
is the very one of the state of Cathedral Chap-
ters, to inquire into which her MAJESTY has al-
ready issued a commission ; she, as the Head of
the Church, having had the vanity to think the
matter as safe in the hands of her commissioners,
as in that of a committee of the Lower House of
Convocation. Perhaps, however, the country
will think that that house had some excuse here ;
the unbridled rapacity of the bishops, and the
facility of the last commission in applying
funds, intended for the augmentation of poor
livings, to building palaces for the wealthy and
luxurious successors of the Apostles, is fresh enough
in the memory of all. As we have said, in chal-
lenging and intimidating the Archbishop—in
getting this last committee especially appointed,
and in prolonging the debate for three days, the
Convocationists have certainly gained an impor-
tant step. This is asserted with a shout of triumph
by their own organ, and assented to by their
opponents.

We hardly think they will be allowed to make
good another step. They have the political
chances before them of a Low-Church Government
and a more thoroughly reformed Parliament, and
they have to encounter the /ait—generally averse
to their claim—and the reasonable prudence of
statesmen. What have ecclesiastical synods done
of late years for this country ? The two Most not-
able examples of them are, that of the established
Presbyterian Church in Scotland, and that of the
unestablished Wesleyan Church in England. Each
of them has generated an extensive and bitter
disruption of the respective bodies. Each has
originated an immense secession claiming to be
the true representatives of the respective Churches
—the Residuary Church and the secession in each
case hating each other with a bitterer hatred than
that of even Roman Catholics towards Protestants.
Yet each of these bodies rested their belief on
self-consistent creeds. No deep-seated internal
difference of faith sustained an irreconcileable
difference. In the ChUrch of England, on
the contrary, this can never be. Original
Acts of Parliament, the modern decisions
of courts of justice, the opinion of every
honest man, and the parties now dividing
the Eetahlighment, show that the Episcopal Church
is the Church of a compromise, and the Church
of comprehension. The Articles admit Mr. HUGH
STOWELL, and the Liturgy is the boast of Archdea-
con DasisoN. The former conciliates the followers
of the great Reformer of Geneva ; the latter re-
tains those who, but for emoluments, would prefer
the entire journey to Rome. A statesman of the
slightest prescience of consequences will never
hazard the mutual friction of such a box of Lu-
cifers.

Suppose, however, these ecclesiastics to be ga-
thered together in council, and suppose them under
the strong repression of the public gaze to be pre-
vented from exploding, and suppose them, in virtue
of the deliberative powers they now claim as their
unconditional right to agree upon certain schemes,
or memorials, and to lay them before the Govern-
ment, and eventually before the Parliament ;
how would such clerical propositions be regarded?
What would the assembly of laymen—the uncon-
secrated, the unsanctified creatures, whose pre-
sence Mr. DENISON would deem a pollution of
Jerusalem Chamber—what would they say to
them? We think the tone of lay feeling is plainly
such as would hazard the rejection of the most
reasonable proposals, not to say ensure contempt
of all that savoured of ecclesiastical ambition and
selfishness.

To meet this danger (and from their own
Church principles also), Archdeacon HARE, and
other men of the better class, urged the
Convocation to a distinct acknowledgment of the
right of laymen to form part of any Convoca-
tion. Of course, it was promptly rejected ;
but it was justly observed, that such a
proposition would tend most decidedly to
the separation of Church and State ; since it would
fcoornstthiteuctehutrwcho_b:dies of laymen—the Houses
of Parliament and the Convocation—legislators
There would be a represents_
tive body of the clergy and laity apart from the
national representation."
One fact is, however, clear—a National Church
must have a National Government. It must
bear the spiritual disadvantages as well as enjoy
the temporal advantages of its position. The
Government of this country is now composed,
like the country itself, of men of every variety
andindistopetnhsan
lag
of religious belief. They find amongst the institu-
tions of the country one Christian denomination
larger than any other taken singly, adopted by
the nation as the Church which it supports ;
This acceptance of sup-
port,but they find also that its bishops are taken into
the higher branch of the Legislature, and all
power in the Church confided to the Supreme
and this surrender of power they have
thefe Kingdom,Nation. This MC:imgisctilraotfe
on of government. In that opinion
deemedtalhweacaysaying correlative, and
all history and all experience has confirmed the laity
of England. The dissenting portion of the com-
munity would not endure, for a single Session, a
self governed sect in the possession of national
revenues to the amount, taking everything
into con-
sideration, of nearly ten millions apyear. States-
men would never tolerate such a corporation.
laity would themselves re-
volt, and the
Ethpeiseoplian
consummationa of Convocational in-
dependence would certainly prove the utter ruin
of the Establishment.

RUMOURED BETROTHMENT OF THE PRINCESS ROYAL.
—The report gains consistency that Prince Frederick
William, the heir of the Prussian crown, is betrothed to
the Princess Royal of England. The Princess of Prussia,
mother of the prince, will make another visit to England
next spring.—Augsburg Allgemeine Zeitung. [Prince
Frederick William, eldest son of the Prince of Prussia,
and nephew of the reigning monarch, was born October
18, 1831. The Princess Royal was born Nov. 21, 1840.]
HER MAJESTY'S OPPOSITION.—The character of the
present strange combination of political men, which
calls itself an Opposition, is strikingly un-English and
unfair. The one weapon made use of is deception. It
is used with considerable adroitness, and every variety
of fence, but still it is the same—deception.—Morning
Herald.

THE SU-MILE-BRIDGE AFFAIR.—In the Court of
Queen's Bench, Dublin, yesterday, the Judges of the
Court of Queen's Bench unanimously rejected the motion
of the Attorney-General to quash the coroner's inquisi-
tion at Six-mile-bridge.