The Sun.
London, England, 1864-03-26 00:00:00

THE Sri , LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 26, 1864.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

WESTMINSTER.

SING= &R APPLICATIoN.—A man, having the appear-
ance of a respectable artizan, entered the court and said he
wanted to have the magistrate's advice upon a matter of
considerable interest and importance to him.
Mr. Yardley—What do you want ?

Applieaat—l want to know who is to bury a person who
is dead.

Mr. Yardley—What do you mean ?

Applicant—Why, there is a person dead, and the ques-
tion is who has a right to bury her. It is my wife's mother,
who expired on Friday night, and it seems that I am ex-
pected to bury her, and I dont see why.
Mr. Yardley—Has she died in your home ?
Applicant—Yes. I have been supporting her. She has
been living for some time past with me and my wife ; and
now she is dead, who is to pay the expenses of her funeral ?
Mr. Yardley—Those who administer to a dead person's
effects generally do so.
Applicant—l cannot see why I should be expected to go
to the expense of the funeral when the deceased has sons
living. I was very willing to keep her, but that is no
reason why I should bury her, but I don't know what to
do.

Mr. Yardley—As a matter of necessity you had better
bury her, and use your remedy when you can to recover it.
Applicant—Can I recover the expense off her son if he
takes the things belonging to his mother without admini-
stering ?
Mr. Yardley—lf he takes the property she possessed, and
exercises the power of an administrator, you can. I think,
if you pay for the funeral, you will have your remedy
against any one possessing himself of the effects of the de-
ceased. Without taking out letters of administration he
would be an executor do son tart, and would be liable for
such a claim.

Applioant expressed himself satisfied with this opinion.

THAMES.

A BAD SON,—A respectable man came before Mr Part-
ridge and wished to make a long and detailed statement
respecting his son, who bad absconded from his home and
taken a diamond ring of great value with him.

He was requested by Mr Partridge to state what he
wished, as it was impossible to hear long statements from
applicants, who were very numerous.
The gentleman asked the magistrate to bear with him a
little white.

Mr Partridge—l am afraid I cannot, sir. You must
state what you want shortly.
After being repeatedly interrupted in his attempt to make
a long statement it came to this, that his son had been the
bane of his existence, and had robbed him of a valuable
diamond ring, an heirloom in his family.
Mr Partridge—lf your son has robbed you of a ring or
any other property you may give him into custody. See
the police inspector.

The gentleman begged of the magistrate to bear with
him a little longer.
Mr Partridge—There are a great number of persons
waiting to make applications.
The Gentleman—My son pawned the ring for £5, and
another person took it out, and I have offered him the
money, and he wants £lO from me, and will not give up
the ring without.

Mr Partridge—Bring an action against him in the County
Court.

The gentleman--Bat my son, who stole the ring and
pawned it—
Mr Partridge—l have already said you can give him into
custody of any policeman for a felony.
The Gentleman—Please to bear with me a little longer,
Mr, Partridge--I really cannot, sir ; the next application.

MARKETS—This Day.

COVENT GARDEN.

Increased supplies of produce are on sale here today.
Thete is a full average demand at the following quotations.
FRUIT.

s. d. s. d.
Pine apples 8 0 to 10 0
Colonial do., each 0 0 to 0 0
Grapes,per lb 6 0 to 10 0
Foreign do 1 6 to 2 6
Melons .
Nectarines, per dz 0 0 to 0 0
apples, per hf -sv. 3 0 to 4 6
Pears, per do
Oranges, per 100..3 6 to 8 0
Lemons, per 100 3 6 to 7 0
Gooseberries hf aye° 0 to 0 0
Strawberries pr pt 0 0 to 0 0

s. d. s d
Mulberries,prpt..o oto 0 0
Cherries, per lb. 0 oto 0 0
Foreign ditto, putiO oto 0 0
Filberts, per lb .. 2 6to 0 0
Walnuts, per 100 1 oto 2 0
Cobnuts, per lb .. 0 oto 0 0
Almonds, per bus 0 oto 0 0
Figs, per doz. .... 0 oto 0 0
Peaches.. . 0 oto 0 0
Currants, per h.sv 0 oto 0 0
Plums, per do. .. 0 oto 0 0
Greengages, pr do. 0 oto 0 0

Pastoral Letter of the Archbishop of

Canterbury.

The following Pastoral Letter has been addressed
to the clergy and laity by the Archbishop of Canter-
bury:—
"MY Rev. and dear Brethren,—l have reason to believe
that the minds of many among you are profoundly moved
by the theological questions which are at this moment
agitated. I daily receive from various quartets addresses
and letters of inquiry expressing much perplexity, and
seeking counsel at my hands; many members of our
Church, eminent for their rank, station, and talents, have
urged me to make a statement cf my sentiments on these
subjects ; and my opinion on single points has meanwhile
transpired in a manner unbecoming the occasion. I feel,
therefore, that the time has now arrived when I can no
longer refrain from publicly declaring my views on these
topics—thus giving a common answer to every memorial,
and a reply to every inquirer, The Church has a right to
know my mind on matters of such solemn interest to each
of her members; and the present seems to be the most pro-
per channel for such a communication. If it be asked why
these sentiments were not announced at the time of the de-
livery of the late judgment, the answer will be that an
ancient order of the Privy Council and the precedents of
its Judicial Committee seemed to forbid such a course.

" It would be entirely unbecoming in me as a member of
the Court to presume to criticise tin terms of a judgment
concurred in by the able and distinguished persons who
assented to it; but on a question so momentous, involving
as it does such grave issues to the Church of England, I
must claim to myself the privilege of giving expression to
opinions formed prior to the delivery of the judgment, and
wholly irrespective of the terms in which it is couched.

" In dealing with those passages in the ' Essays and Re-
views,' touching the authority of Holy Scripture, which
were objected to, I felt that I was in nowise called upon to
attempt any definition of inspiration, seeing that the Church
had not thought fit to prescribe one; but I did conceive that
I was bound by the most solemn obligations to maintain at
its exact level that estimation in which Holy Scripture is
held by our Church, as shown by the tenour of her Articles
and Liturgy, and to beware lest I should seem to sanction
a decision which should detract one jot of tittle from the
authority with which it is invested according to their lan-
guige.

" Now, in reviewing the terms in which the Church of
England speaks of Holy Scripture, it appears that in the
20th Article the Church designates it as ' God's Word
written.' It is not lawful for the Church to ordain any-
thing contrary to God's Word written.' In the 6th Article
the fellowing language is used :—" In the name of the Holy
Scripture we do understand those Canonical Books of the
Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any
doubt in the Church. In the Ordination Service, the
deacon is required to declare that he ' unfeignedly believes
all the canonical Scripture of the Old and New Testa-
ment;' and in delivering the Bible to the person to be ad-
mitted to the order of priesthood the bishop says, ' Take
thou authority to preach the Word of God.'
"From these passages it appears that the Church autho-
ritatively declares Holy Scripture to be identical with all
those canonical books of the Old and New Testament of
whose authority was never any doubt in the Church that it
is ' The Word of God,' and God's Word written.'
"That by the term canonical books' is meant books
which lay down a rule of faith authoritatively may be
clearly deduced from a subsequent passage in the same 6th
Article, in which it is stated that as to the other books
(which are not canonical) the Church doth not apply them
to establish any doctrine, leaving us to draw the natural in-
ference that the canonical books can be so applied ; while
in the previous sentence the Church declares that nothing
must be required to be believed as an article of faith but
what is read therein or may be proved thereby.

"It remained for me to consider how far the statements
of Dr. Williams respecting Holy Writ were reconcilable
with those express declarations of the Church in her formu-
laries and Articles. His estimate of the Bible is, ' That it
is an expression of devout reason, and therefore to be read
with reason in freedom; he finds in it a 'record of the
spiritual giants whose experience generated the religious
atmosphere we breathe;' and speaking of the Eternal
Spirit he says—' f such a spirit did not dwell in the
Church the Bible would not be inspired, for the Bible is
before alt things the written word of the congregation.
Bold as such a theory of inspiration may sound,' he adds,
' it was the earliest creed of the Church, and it is the only
one to which the facts of Scripture answer.'
" To myself these views of Holy Scripture appeared en-
tirely inconsistent with the terms of our formularies as cited
above. ' The expression of devout reason' must be the ex-
pression of man's teason and not of the Divine intelligence;
for to speak of the Deity, who has no superior, as ' devout,'
seems a manifest absurdity. Holy Scripture, then, under
this view, must be the word of man ; and can have no more
authority for the establishing of doctrine than such expres-
sions of devout reason as we have in the works of Hooker,
Taylor, and Barrow, who all wrote under such guidance,
doubtless, with prayer for the inspiration of the Holy
Spirit.' •
" Again, if Holy Scripture be no more than the 'record
of the experience of spiritual giants,' it can have no more
authority for establishing doctrine than the writings of the
authors just named. They, too, were ' spiritual giants,' and
they have recorded their experience for the benefit of the
Church ; but their words are not ' the Word of God their
writings are not God's word written ;' they are not
' canonical,'

".Lastly, if the Bible be before all things,' and no more
than the ' written voice of the congregation,' even though
that congregation shall hive prayed.to God that 'by His
holy inspiration' they may think those things that be
good,' it will be at the utmost no more than the voice of
the Church, which cannot bo adduced to establish doctrine
if that voice shall utter or ' ordain any thing contrary to
God's Word written '—of the Church, which may not 'so
expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant to
another.' The authority of the Church, by the 20th
Article, is clearly subordinate to the written word ; but if
the written word be the voice of the Church, then follows
the paradox, that the written word is subordinate to itself.
Holding, therefore, as 1 did, that there is an irreconcilable
difference between the language of the 6th and 20th Articles
respecting Holy Scripture on the one hand, and the state-
ments of Dr. Williams concerning it on the other; and
regarding the essential quality which constitutes the diffe-
rence to be that Holy Scripture, is treated of in the Articles
of Religion es of unimpeachable authority for the final esta-
blishing of doctrine, whereas no such authority can reside
in'the expression of devout reason,' in 'the record of the
experience of spiritual giants,' or in the written voice of
the congregation. I felt no hesitation whatever as to the
course which it would be my duty to pursue in respect of
the charge brought against Dr. Williams touching the
Word of God.

.. _
"On exqmining the charge under the same head brought
against Mr. Wilson, I find an assertion on his part that in
ncoe caihr idvaiyssrne :e Scriptures tome
o ta
ea
to
od
bt
eh
se
o canonicalgre a a
as
what he calls the ' pivot article of the Church'—viz., the
seem to infer hence that the
Church never calla Holy notfith appear,Article of Belief, ehlioef,wotohyled
expression ' Word of God' does
term is not applied collectively to the books of the Old and
New Testament. But in the 20th Article Holy Scripture
Scripture by that name; that this
is styled ' God's Word written;' it is spoken of as ' Holy
Writ'—phrases corresponding exactly with the term ' Holy
inbooks of the Old and New
co-extensiveScripture' i n
withthe 6tht
he
canonical Article, 0
f whichpriest
si t
the
declareda Church
stylest b
have before stated, as applied to all the contents of the Bible
Apocryphal Word fBG ordering
000 d k.
,s,
The term canonical, as I
denotes that they have the
theTes
excepttßa Testament
btlehenet'
property of a canon—s. e., 'regulative,' furnishing a rule
of faith, competent to be applied for the establishing of doc-
trine. Thus, according to the mind of the Church, the terms
' Holy Scripture," the canonical books of the Old and New
Testament,' i the Word of God,' and ' God's Word written,'
appear to be equivalent.'
"How far is the language Of Mr. Wilson reconcilable
with that of the Church on these points ?
" The sum and substance of that which ho labours repeat-
edly to establish I cannot but consider as conveyed in the
Scripture, whence it does
with it.' The meaning
following sentence :—' It may,' he says, ' be expressed thus
hold to be that there are
not the Word of God, and
this assertion I conceive to be entirely inconsistent with the
parts
ahaoiertrtl
slfyoirolt olfoor:bd
eootpl Godfhyuastt
ucirpt i
iopi
sant
Scripture
rohoeneewstxeahtiwoni
ZaillsiesetrtreaYdiction ; the Church treating
books of the Old Testament, with God's Word written, and
thus make the one co-extensive With the other.
Articles,which identify the Holy
Holy Scripture as God's Word written without stint or
to 'o'plpnrotrouohtht„othaeliong
qualification—Mr. Wilson, on the contrary, maintaining
that some parts of Holy Scripture are not the 'Word of God.
I may add that the passage of the 20th Article which says
that the Church may not ' so expound one place of Scrip-
ture that it be repugnant to another' is rendered nugatory,
if one portion only of the Bible is of Divine authority, and
the rest of human composition, for the Church might then
overrule the human portion by an appeal to the Divine, if
indeed it could distinguish between the two.
" On the whole I could not bat perceive that no less mo-
mentous a question than this was at issue---Whether a
clergyman should be permitted to proclaim to his people
that the term ' Word of God' is not to be identified with
' Holy Scripture;' whether, in fact, the Bible is still to be
our guide in matters of faith, still to have any power for
establishing doctrine, still to be canonical in the sense in
which I hold the term to be undoubtedly used by our
Church ; for if there be some portions of Holy Scripture
which are merely human, and have no divine sanction at
all, the Bible must cease to be an infallible rule of faith and
duty so long as we have no certain criterion whereby to dis-
tinguish between the human and the Divine element.
" The conclusion at which I arrived on the subject of the
charge against Mr Wilson, relating to the everlasting
punishment of the wicked, did not result from any doubt in
my mind as to the doctrine of the Church of England upon
this point. This doctrine I consider to be clearly indicated
in the Commination Service, the Burial Service, the Apostles'
Creed, and the Athanasian Creed ; to the effect that the re-
ward of the righteous is everlasting life, and the punishment
of the wicked everlasting death; nor do I conceive that the
Church has any more sure warrant for belief in the eternal
happiness of the sand than it has for belief in the eternal
euffering of the lost. Taut there was so much obscurity in

the forms of expression used by Mr Wilson on this
head that 1 did not consider the passage extracted from his
essay would warrant the charge that he had ' advisedly de-
clared and affirmed in effect that after this life, at the end of
the existing order of things on this earth, there will be no
Judgment of God, according to those men whom he shall
then approve everlasting life or eternal happiness, and to
those men whom he shall condemn everlasting death or
eternal misery.'
" Before I conclude I would address a few words of
counsel to those among you who are my brethren in the
ministry. You may be induced to ask what is the degree
of liberty alloyed to each of you, according to the mind of
the Church in dealing with the Bible. The view I have
taken of the claim which the whole of the Holy Scripture
has to be treated as the Word of God cannot interfere with
the right of discussing questions as to various readings or
the genuineness of a disputed text ; for this is no more than
to argue that a given text or reading is not a part of any
canonical book. But such an argument on the part of a
clergyman is a widely different thing from his assertion
that a portion of the Bible which he has acknowledged to
belong to a canonical book is not the Word of God.
Without any such latitude as this, there is ample room for
fair criticism; but criticism in the case of a minister of our
Church must have its limits, inasmuch as he has bound
himself to adhere to the plain meaning of the Articles and
formularies. You will, lam persuaded, feel convinced that
it cannot be agreeable to the mind of the Church that you
should transgress these limits. For the Church prescribes
order, and not confusion ; but what would not be the ,
amount of contusion if it were left to each minister to pro-
claim from his pulpit which portion of the Bible was the
Word of God, and which not ? And would not such licence
on the part of the clergy prove the bondage of the laity, who
would thus:be left without redress against such a dangerous
innovation ?

"Again, I am sure you will beware of giving any other
interpretation to the word everlasting' in the passages of
our formularies which relate to the punishment of the lost
than that of the 'eternal' in the sense of 'never ending.'
For whatever be the meaning of the word in these passages
in the case of the lost, the same must be its meaning in the
case of the saved; and our certainty of never-ending bliss
for penitent believers is gone it the word bears not the same
signification in the case cf the impenitent and unbelieving.
You will also do well to observe how the teaching of the
Church as to the eternity cf the Son of God must be vi-
tiated if, when the 2d Article of our Church declares that
Ha was begotten from everlasting of the Father, she leaves
us at liberty to suppose, under the restricted sense of the
word everlasting, that there was a time when the Son of
God was not.

" Well weighing, then, these graven onsiderations you will,
I doubt not, resolve to adhere steadfastly to these interpre-
tations of the language of our Church which have been
commonly accepted as agreeable to Holy Scripture and to
the doctrine of the Catholic Church. You will yourselves
reverence, and, will teach your flock to reverence, the
canonical Scriptures as the Word of God. You will re-
collet that, as regards the Old Testament, you have the
witness of St. Paul that all that portion of Holy Scripture
is given by inspiration of God ; while our Church declares
that God has caused all Holy Scriptures to be written for
our learning,' and speaks of the comfort of God's Holy
Word (which it here again identifies with Holy Scripture)
as that which will enable us to embrace and hold fast the
blessed hope of everlasting life.
" May God, of His infinite mercy, forbid that our people
should ever be robbed of the Divine consolations thence de-
rived I May that blessed Book continue to be regarded by
us all as our only infallible authority concerning matters of
faith and practice; as the volume which proclaims the
Saviour of the world, from Genesis to Revelations, and
bears within it the Gospel message of salvation through
Christ from its beginning to its end : may we find it to be
our solace in sickness, and our strength in the season of
temptation; our guide and comfort in life, our stay and
support in the hour of death; may it be our privilege to
preserve it in all its integrity and purity to this generation,
and hand it down as the Word of God to all them that
are yet to come.'
" I am your faithful and affeotionate
Friend and Brother,
" 0, T. CANTUA.R."
I, Lambeth Palace, March 14."