The Sun.
London, England, 1864-11-26 00:00:00

pended in sending bishops and missionaries to the
remotest corners of the globe, it is hotion -able that
h -re in Oxford—in the very centre of tee English
Church—there should any longer be su a want to
supply as that which notv exists ? I am sure
this great meeting will not separate x hour, doing
something effectual to meet the exigenc'es which
have been placed before them. (Cheers.) I will now
move—" That this meeting trusts that the diocese
of Oxford will not be behindhand in remedying this
evil, and pledges itself to the endeavour." (l'he
right hon. gentleman resumed his seat amidst loud
cheering.)
Mr DISRAELI then rose to second the motion,
and wts received with several rounds of enthusi-
astic cheering. Tne right hon. gentleman
said—My Lord Bishop, I can heartily second the
motion that has been made by my right hon.
friend, because it expresses only a feeling and a re-
solution which in that part of the diocese with which
I am more immediately connected, and which, in a
certain sense, I mey say I reptesent to-day, I have
exerted myself to the utmost in order to find there
a response which should carry into Effect the reso-
lution which my right hon. friend has moved. I
must say, however, that though some degree of
sympathy has been found among some individuals,
and sympathy has been expressed in a manner most
energetic, the general result has not been in my
opinion adequate to the greatness of the cause and
to the character of those institutions which have
been established in this diocese. It is a very diffi-
cult—perhaps I may say a more delicate than diffi-
cult—subject to touch upon ; but it appears to me
that it is necessary that upon this matter we should
have very clear ideas. Those diocesan institutions
which are established in the diocese of Oxford, and
not so fully and completely, but in some degree are
also established in, I believe, all the dioceses of
England, in fact sustain, or rather would sustain
and complete the parochial system of this country;
and their object is to adapt the machinery of the
Church to the ever fluctuating circumstances in the
condition of the nation. There are two reasons why
I think these institutions have not yet received in
this country that support which sometimes I flatter
myself I foresee they will acquire. In the first place
it must be remembered that those institutions are of
a novel character. They have, conparatively speaks
ing, only been recently established in this country ;
and in the next place—and that ie a much more
important consideration—it is a matter on which it
is very requisite that we should have a clear cone
ception. Those diocesan institutions have been
established in England during a period in which the
Church has been, with reference to the State, in a
condition of transition. Now, some 40 years ago
or less a very great change took place in the consti-
tution of this country ; it was, in fact, a revolu-
tion. But when the principle of religious liberty
was adopted as a principle of the political consti-
tution of the country, an effect was produced im-
mediately upon the position of the Church. That
party who are opposed to the Church in this
country—and we cannot flatter ourselves that there
ever will be a period in a country like England
when there will not be an anti-Church party—that
party, very naturally and very reasonably, of
course for the object of advancing their views,
called public attention to the anomaly which the
Church in this country presented the moment the
political constitution had adopted the principle of
religious liberty. Until that change the Parliament
of England had been a lay synod, and they
naturally said, "If you have a Legislature composed
of those who are not in the communion of the
Church your boasted union between Church and
State must, of course, expire, and the fall cf the
Church is at hand." Now if, under these circum-
stances, we had only to meet the natural oppo-
nents of the Church, I think the position of the
Church would not have been one of difficulty ; but
unfortunately some of the best friends of the
Church—men who for their elevated character, their
sincere principles, and their learning and devotion,
could not for a moment be looked upon with an
Rye other than friendly by the Church and by
Ciaurchm-n—were so alarmed by what they con-
sidered must be the logical consequences of that
revolution, that, although for a perfectly distinct
.oj:ct and far a contrary purpose, they counsell,d
the same policy as the anti-Ceurch par :y itself and
the diezolution of Church and State. An alarming
opinion was promulgated and looked upon with
favour by those whcm Churchmen knew sympa-
thised with them entirely in all the great objects
for which a Church is instituted. The consequence
of this state of cfliirs was a condition of great
perplexity among Churchmen—great timidity ,
great apparent inconsistency of conduce sometimes
apathy, because they did not know to what object
to devote their energies; sometimes perhaps a
fantastic though natural action ; but the practical
result was that there was no longer a cordial
co-operation among all claeaes of Churchmen
for those ebj,cts in which the interests of the
Church were concerned ; and all those diocesan
societies so admirably adan'ed to the wants of
the Church, and which would in their practice, as
well as in theie theory, have completed the parochial
system of this country, were launched at a time
when cordial co-operation between Churchmen, for
the reason I have alleged, was really impossible;
and that is one of the main reasons why that support
has not been received by those institutions which
they might have counted upon. But during this
period, and especially during the last 30 years, when
this principle of religious liberty which was adopted
some time before—a principle which I am sure no
Churchman now wishes to disturb or distrust—dur•
ing this period, when this principle was developed
and carried to its completeness, a paralysis \-7,1s
thrown upon the mild acion of Churchmen. But
then this remarkable eircumetance happened, which
ind...:ed has happened before in this country, that
the qatstion of Church and State had been so dis-
eassed by the nation generally, had been so de-
liberated upon, had been so considered and pondered
over, that the nation arrived at a result which may
not have been as logical as the result of the anti-
Church party, or of our alarmed friends, but which
was a solution, like all solutions of great questions
in England, not perhaps logical but essentially
practical—the country came to the determination
that the union of Church and State is perfectly con-
sistent with the existence and complete development
of the principle of religious liberty. (Cheers.) Now
all the paints that were urged then during the period
of transition to which I have referred have been
considered and solved by the country. Men who
are of very temperate opinions, representing, 1
believe, the general opinion of this country, have
considered that if you logically terminated the con-
nection between Church and State, it was not pro-
beble, for example, that in this age and in this coun-
try an imperium in imperio could be tolerated by the
State. They saw it was most improbable that the
Church, if the alliance were terminated, wouhrl be
allowed to remain in the possession of its consider-
able property and great privileges. They kniw
very well that the Government of this country,
knowing the importance of the religious principle
as one of the elements of governing mankind,
would never allow it to run waste and wild in
society. They foresaw that that would happen in
this country which had happened in other countries
where the alliance between Church and State has
been terminated, or churches have been confiscated
or plandered, namely, that the process of ministers
of all religions being salaried by the State would
take place; arid therewas a general feeling in this
country that if that del occur, there would be some-
thing besides religious truth that might be endan-
gered, and that political liberty itself would be im-
perilled. (Loud c'eeers.) The country,. therefore,
at that
rwell discussing the question for yellers, arrived
aii
practical conclusion. Well, there was
anotherssbl e point.
that
t.theltchhhadrchbeceonulhdellodngtehratexitiswt was
s thisienpo
country in consequence of the great spread of dis-
sent. But during. this period of transition we fell
upon a statistical age,
Statistics were studied
by the nation, and it wa
discovered that there had
not been a spread of dissent •
dissent had diminished—true retha
ht,.on the contrary,
religious dissent I am
speaking of—that the descendants of the old Puri- '
tan families, of whom I shall always speak with
the respect which their high qualities and historical
character deserve,were almost merged in the Church,
and that on the plea of a spread of dissent there

was in fact no reason for supposing that the Church
should not be maintained in its original constitu-
tional position. (dear, hear.) There was another
very important point which occupied the attention
of the country, that being the question which was
placed so prominently by the anti-Church party
before the country generally, namely, the contrast
of the Church with those millions of the population
who had either escaped its influence or certainly
were not in communion with it. But the reault of
deliberating over that startling condition of affairs
was this—the country come to a conclusion exactly
the reverseof that which the opponents of the Church
wished to instil into the public mind. For, knowing
the religious character of the people of England, it
was argued that if there are millions who are not
in communion with the National Church, because
they never had the opportunity of being connected
with it; if that is the case, it is our duty to provide
and support a machinery which, when the oppor-
tunity offers, will be able to deal with this popula-
tion, and, iu fact, instruct them in those great truths
in respect of which their tuition has been neglected.
It so happened, therefore, that the country itself
solved the question in a manner which may not
have been logical, but was essentially practical.
(Cheers.) And while the anti-Church party and a
considerable and most respectable section of Church-
men were discussing whether it was not prudent to
terminate the alliance between Church and State,
the period of transition passed, because the Ration
itself had come to the determination that the union
between Church and State should be supported. I
may take this to be the truth, that it arrived at that
result some three years ago, after many years' dis-
cussion, as is the custom in England when great
' principles of policy are at stake, and I believe that
I that is the secret reason and the real cause of the
change which has taken place in Parliament upon
the subject of church rates. (Hear.) That subject
of church rates is a matter no doubt of groat im-
portance ; when we consider that in the Parliament
which voted their abolition by a large majority, in
the course of a very few years there was a majority
in their favour, it can only be accounted for by this
cause, that the country having determined to sup-
port the ❑nion between Church and State, having
determined that the constitution should not -be
changed, and that practically its establishment was
consistent with the full development of religious
liberty, the country seized upon that question by
which to impress upon Parliament that it had re•
solved that that change should not take place. The
consequence of this state of affairs was very im-
portant, because 30 or 40 years ago there was an
alternative for the Church, and it might have been
open to the Church to abdicate its nationality
or to assert it, but there was no middle course.
(Hear, hear.) The country has resolved that its
nationality shall not be abdicated, and the con-
sequence is that the Church must assert that
nationality._ (Lour] cheers.) And, my lord, I re-
member, I think some three years ago, at a meeting
of one of the diocesan societies where I had the
honour of addressing you—l am not sure that it
was not this very society—l ventured very briefly
to point out the measures by which I thought that
nationality of the Church might be asserted, prac-
tically asserted—and although I would not now
enter into any details on that subject, I will notice
them briefly, because it will complete the position
from which I wish to draw some inference to affect
the opinion of the meeting of to-day. I said then
I thought there were five modes by which the na-
tionality of our Church should be asserted, and it
being not only a duty bat a necessity that that
nationality should be asserted. Can it be asserted
in a practical manner ? That is the question. I
said then that there were five measures by which I
thought that practically that nationality could
be asserted. I said, iu the first place, with regard
to the question of education. 1 hold that it is of the
utmost importance that the Church should not in
any way compromise that legitimate position which
it occupies now with reference to the question of
education—a position which the Church has ob-
tained by national circumstances, and which is
sanctioned by law. (Loud cheers.) Secondly, I
thought another practical measure for asserting its
nationality was to support, not a wild and extrava
gent plan, but a terep:,,rate and moderate plan far
the extension of tlte episcopate. (Renewed up-
piano.) The third measure was, teat in all ecie-
eiaslical matters which were not of a strictly
spiritual nature the assistance of the laity should
be called into co operation with the elergy—(hear,
hear)—in order that we should erase from the public
mind that vulgar, but pernicious error that the
Caureh is an eeclzeiasticalco/poration. (Cheers) The
fourth measure which I then ventured to say should
be adopted was to assert the rights and the duties 01
Churchmen as they exist in our parochial constitu-
tion, and which are secured to them by law. And the
fifth measure which I then impressed upon the as-
sembled diocese was to support end uphold those
diocesan institutions to support one of which we are
met this day. Nov, in my opinion, these were
measures temperate in conception, practical in exe-
cution, and if they were carried—and I believe
they might be carried—for they are thoroughly
adapted to the temper of the times, would add
amazingly to the efficiency (Atha Church. As lam
upon that subject I will venture to say also that
there ate three other measures which I think ought
now to engage the attention of Churchmen. The
first is, that we should in every possible manner
favour the formation of Convocation on a broader
basis, and with a fuller representation of the paro-
chial clergy. (Loud cheers.) I: is not necessary
❑or convenient to enter into details on such a
subject now; but I would just intimate that if the
two provinces were united the basic. would be much
broader, end that at this moment in the province
of York the parochial clergy are more fu,ly repre-
Kri,ed than they are in the province of Canterbury.
I think there is something ridiculous in the fact
that in the bishopric of London, for example,
where there are a thousand clergy, they are re-
presented in Convocation by two parochial clergy-
men on;y. (Hear, hear.) Toe naet measure is
one which I may induce my right hon. friend (Mr
Cardwell) to undertake—and that is to place the
relations of our Colonial Church, which remember
is not an established Church, in a more satisfactory
condition than they are at present. (Hear, hear.)
And the last measure—in my mind a paramount
one—is the formation of some tribunal of last appeal
in spiritual matters. (Loud and continued plau-
dits.) It appears to me that the circumstances of
the day imperatively demand this. I know the
difficulty—l know the delicacy of the question.
Still, after giving it that consideration which its
importance deserves, I am apt to believe that diffi-
culties may be overcome, and the moat delicate cir-
cumstances connected with it may be treated in a
happy manner. I do believe that, with that due

and necessary full consideration of the principle of
the royal supremacy, which I trust may never be
lost sight of for an instant, it is possible to re■
concile the requirements of the State with the
conscience of the Church. (Cheers.) Now allow
me to repeat what on a previous occasion,
some years ago, I had the honour of mentioning to
you that the object of this measure is to restore the
Church to its natural and, I may say, original effi•
ciency, by means which I think are essentially
practical, and which are in tone and in harmony
with the spirit of the age in which we live ; and 1
cannot but believe that, with cordial co.operation—
or rather, I would say I could not but believe, that
with cordial co•operatioa among Churchmen—these
eight measures might be carried. My lord, they
form a Church policy perfectly complete, perfectly
practical, and perfectly efficient. I see no argument
that can fairly be urged against them, and it tap-

pears to me that if these eight objects were attained
She Church in this country world occupy a position
of great influence and salutary power which it has
I not for a long period fulfilled and occupied.
tiheers.) Well, my lord, I had hoped that when I
should have the honour of addressing you agnin on
matters connected with these societies I might have
been able to congratulate you that the inconsistency,
and timidity, and perplexity which have paralysed
the fortunes of Churchmen for so many years would
have entirely disappeared. I did think that cordial
co-operation might have been expected from all
classes of Churchmen after the significant manner
in which the country decided that no disunion be-
, tween the Church and State should take place, but

that the old constitution of the country was con-
nected
with the fulfilment of the principle of civil '
1
and religious liberty. I thought that we might !
then have forgotten all our differences, and that ,
with open heart and united spirit we might have
laboured with perseverance, with temper, with
no expectation of precipitate success, but with
the determination of men who really see a
practical object before them; that we might have
worked for the attainment of the measures which I
have noticed to day, and which in my mind
form a complete Church policy. But I am sorry
to say that on the part of the diocese with which
I am connected I still find that difficulties are in
existence ; and although they are different
from those which we have encountered before,
they are cf a nature which paralyse in a great degree the
efforts which would be made for the support of diocesan so-
cieties, and especially of this which we are gathered toge-
ther to support. My right hon. friend has himself touched
with delicacy, but with clearness, upon the nature of those
difficulties. We are now told that the Church is in a very
difficult position, and that its condition is not satisfactory ;
and these pleas are made the argument, and I have no doubt
in many cases the conscientious ground, for not joining to-
gether and supporting associations like the present. Lut
this I observe, in contrast with the difficulties that we bad
to encounter three or four years ago, that the nature of the
difficulty is of a perfectly different character. In old days,
during the period of transition which I have sketched, the
Church was accused of apathy, having no hold on the feel-
ings of the great mass of the population, of exercising little
influence, and its fall was prophesied in consequence of those
circumstances. But the tone has now changed. No one ea,
cuses the church of not possessing influence. No one accuses
the Church of.wanting power or intelligence. But they say
it is still doomed, the Church must still fall, it is still in
greater danger than ever, and that danger comes not from
an anti-Church party, but from its own intestine dissensions
and from the differences that exist in its own bosom. I am
not here to deny, or, what is more, to regret the existence of
parties in the Church. Parties in the Church have always
existed. They existed in the Church at Jerusalem. They
existed in the Church at Ephesus. They existed always in
the Church at Rome. And it would be wonderful indeed, in
a country like England, where party has always been recog-
nised as the most efficient and satisfactory way of regulating
opinion and conducting public affairs, if party should not be
found in the Church alone. My lord, what is party ? Party
is organised opinion; and as long as the nature of man is of
that various and varying character which we all know it is,
so long will there be various and varying modes by which
it will express itself,or by which it may be counsel led upon
religious matters. There are some who are sustained by
symbolical ceremonies, and feel that their soul is only ade -
quately satisfied by ecclesiastical arrangements of that cha-
racter. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) There are others who
can only be sustained by the ecstacy of spiritual enthusiasm
but as long as they who counsel or pursue these modes meet
on the common platform of the true, sound Church prin-
ciples—and I hold that the acknowledgment of the Church
as the sacred depository of divine truth is a true Church
principle-1 do not think that such a course of conduct is
to be regretted; but on the whole I have no doubt that it
has been extremely advantageous to the country and to the
Church. And I believe that the two great parties in the
Church have effected as great advantages in the Church as
the two great parties in the constitution have achieved for
public liberty and the good government of the country.
(Hear, hear.) But there is yet another party to which I
must for a moment refer, because, no doubt, the influence
of that party upon that cordial co-operation of Churchmen
by which alone these societies can be effectively supported is
very great, and I cannot say that it is advantageous. Now,
that is a party which is described by an epithet which I have
observed that a distinguished prelate of the Church has
used in a recent address to his clergy, but which appears to
me to be an epithet that 1 should not use within these classic
walls, for it has hardly as yet entered into the category of
classical expressions. (Laughter.) It is an epithet, my lord,
that would imply a particular degree of comprehension.
(Hear, and another laugh) But, whilst fully acknowledging
the great abilities, the great eloquence, and the great know-
ledge of the new Church party to which I am alluding,l mast
say that there is this peculiarity about the comprehension
which they attempt to accomplish. Hitherto there has been
nothing new in a Church party aiming at the comprehensive
—but then this has always happened,that thecomprehension
which they have aimed at has been possible. (Hear, and a
laugh.) They have always wished to include those who be-
lieved anything ; but the remarkable peculiarity of the com-
prehension of the party to which I now refer is this, that
they seem to wish to include everybody who believes no-
thing. (Laughter.) Now, there is no doubt that the influ-
ence of the new party is very injurious to the society whose
interests have called us together to-day—and if we attempt
to get rid of the difficulty by avoiding to speak out, we in
fact do not remedy our position, but the deleterious process
from which we aro suffering goes on without any t fFurt on
the part of our friends to oppose its evil consequences. The
chairman having, as I think, successfully encountered the
unsatisfactory condition of mind among Churchmen which
was the cons( gre nee, and the long consequence, of the
change in our constitution--having overcome that difliaulty,
and Churchmen having it in their power, by the measures
to which I have referred, to place by their cordial co-ope-
ration the Caureh in its proper position in this country,
and establish these diocesan societies in full work and in -
flaecce, I want, if toy friends will permit me, or care to hear
my observations, to make a few rialilks upon the now diffi-
culty with which we have, to deal, for it would be unwise to
real the existence and influence of this now party with con-
tempt, and consider whether the difficulties which no doubt
exist are insuperable—whether we must yield to them, or
whether we have a prospect of overcoming them. Now,
this party is not founded upon the principle of authority—
on which all Church parties hither to in this country, an d
in all countries to some degree, have been founded. But it
is founded singular principle. It-is founded
upon
the principle of criticism. Now, doubt is an element
of criticism, and the tendency of criticism is necessarily
upon a very
sceptical. I use the epithet in a philosophical and not in
ais quite possible, for example,
thpaotPaua partyor 0(-i i
whichol9 is e n
founded'e.
I'
upon the principle of criti-
cism may arrive at conclusions which may be monstrous.
They easy, inspiration as a principle,
and ey
miraclesfi)r itesx4amPpir°a' reject
practice. That is possible. And I
conclusion, they should repudiate creeds and reject arti-
cles soift faith, because
logical,because that
having arrived at that
repudiate
and articles of faith
cannot exist or be sustained without acknow-
ledging the principle of inspiration and the practice of mi-
racles. (Hear, hear.) All that I admit; but what Ido not
understand, and what I wish to draw the attention of this
assembly and of the country to is this—that having arrived
at this conclusion—having arrived conscientiously at the
conclusion that with these opinions such a party mug re-
pudiate creeds and reject articles, that they should not carry
their principhs to their legitimate conclusion ; but that, re-
pudiating creeds and rejecting articles, they are still the
supporters of the ecclesiastical establishments—(loud cheers)
—fervent usholders of the dignitaries of the Church—even
of the rectors, vicars, and curates. (Laughter.) Now, this
is a matter of most serious importance, not merely for us to
consider as Churchmen, but for the country generally to
consider, whatever may be its opinion on forms of faith—
fur the position tslaY be very ethical. If it were true, as I
am told it is, that the age of faith has passed, then the posi-
lien of having a hierarchy, a vast hierarchy, apparently
supported by men of high cultivation, brilliant talents and
eloquence, and perhaps scone ambition, with no distinctive
opinion, might be a very harmless state of affairs, but it
would not certainly be a very permanent one. But, then,
my lord, instead of believing that the age of faith has passed,
when I observe what is passing
around me—what is taking
place in this country, and not only in this country, but in
other countries and hemispheres—instead of believing that
the age of faith has passed, I hold that the characteristic of
the present age is a craving credulity. (Laughter.) Why,
conviction of countless generations to
my lord, man is a being born to believe. (Cheers.) And it
you do not come forward—if no Church comes forward with
its title deeds of truth, sustained by the traditions of Bevel.
ral ages, and by the
guide him, he will form altars and idols in his own heart
and his own imagination, (Cheers.) But observe this.
What must be the relations of a powerful Church, without
distinctive creeds, with a being of that nature ? Why,
of course, the great principle of political economy will
be observed. Where there is a great demand there will be
a proportionate supply ; and commencing, es the new
school may, by rejecting the principle of inspiration, it will
end by every priest being a prophet—and beginning as they
do by repudiating the practice of miracles before long, rest
assured, we shall be living in a flattering scene of spiritual
phantasmagoria: (Cheers and laughter.) There are no
tenets, however:extravagant, and no practices, however
objectionable, which will not in time develop, under such a
state of affairs—opinions the most absurd, and ceremonies
the most revolting.

Qualia, demeus
lEgyptus portenta colet,"
Perhaps to he followed by the incantation of Canidia and
the Corpbanthian howl. (Great cheering and laughter.)
But consider the country in which all this may take place.
Dangerous in all countries, it would be yet more dangerous
in England. Our empire is now unrivalled for its extent—
but the base, the tnater!al base, of that empire is by means
equal to the colossal superstructure. It is not our iron ships.
It is not our celebrated regiments, It is not these things
which have created, or indeed really maintain our empire.
It is the character of the people. (Much applause,) And I
want to know where that, famous character of the English
people will be if they are to be _ofluenced and guided by a
Church of immense talent and great wealth and power with-
out any distinctive creed. (Hear, hear.) You have in this
country accumulated wealth that probably never has been
Equalled, and probably it will still increase. You have a
luxury that will some day probably rival even your wealth;
and the union of such circumstances with a Church with-
out a distinctive creed will lead, I believe, to a dissoluteness
of manners and of morals that has been seldom equalled in
the history of man, but which furnishes the tombs of em-
pires. (Cheers.) There is another point in connection with
this subject which I cannot help noticing on the present oc-
casion. It is the common blunder—the common cry—that ar-
ticles of faithtnd religious creeds aro the arms of the clergy,
end are used to tyrannise over the lend. They are exactly

the reverse. The preci e creed and the strict article are
the title deeds of the laity to the religion which has de.
scended to them. (Hear, hear.) And whenever these ques-
tions have been brought before Parliament, I have always
opposed alterations of creeds, articles, and subscriptions on
this broad principle—that the security and certainty which
they furnish are the special privileges of 1 he laity, and that
you cannot tell in what position the laity will be if that
security is withdrawn. (Cheers.) I must apologise for
having touched upon this subject; but it appears to me—l
know it from my own experience—to be one vitally con-
nected with the subject that has called us here to-day,
because the opinions of the new school are paralysing the
efforts of many who ought to be our friends. Before I con-
clude I cannot but ask myself this question. Will these
opinions succeed ? Is there a possibility of their success ?
My conviction is that they will fail. (Cheers.) Ido per-
fect justice to the great talent, the great knowledge, and the
considerable information which the new party command;
but I believe they will fail—for two reasons. In the first
place, having exan fined all their writings—l believe with-
out any exception—whether they consist of fascinating
eloquence, diversified learning, or picturesque sensibility—
(laughter)—l speak seriously what I feel—and that too
exercised by one honoured in this University, and whom to
know is to admire and regard , or whether you find them
in the etude conclusions of prelates who appear to me to
have commenced their theological studies after they grasped
the crozier—(loud cheers and laughter)—and who intro-
duce to society their obsolete discoveries with the startling
wonder and the frank ingeniousness of their own savages

—(great laughter and cheers)—or whether I read the lucu-
brations of nebulous professors—(laughter)—who appear in
their style to have revived chaos—(loud cheers)—and who,
if they could only succeed in obtaining a perpetual study of
their writings, would go far to realise that eternal punish-
ment to which they object. (Cheers.) Lastly, whether it
be the provincial arrogance and precipitate self-compla-
cency which dash and glare in an essay or review—(cheers,
laughter, and a hiss)—l find that the common charac-
teristic in all their writings is this, that their learn-
ing is always second-hand. (Cheers, laughter,
and slight hisses, followed by immense cheering.) I do not
say that because learning is second-hand it may not be
sound, or that knowledge because it is second-hand may
not be true. But this I do say, without any fear of denial
from any man competent to give an opinion upon the sub-
jeet—(laughter)--that there is something in original re-
search so invigorating to the intellect, and which so braces
and disciplines the human mind, that those who have un,
dergone the process arrive at their conclusions with great
caution and with great circumspection ; but when a man of
brilliant imagination has to deal with a vast quantity of facts
which have been furnished by the labours of others, he is
taunted too often to generalise with a fatal facility, and often
arrives at conclusions which in time he not only repudiates
but often has to refute. (Cheers.) In the second place, when
I examine those who have been the masters of the new
school in this learning, men who undoubtedly have gone
through the process of original research, and have not
found their equals for learning and perseverance and erudite
assiduity for many generations—the great scholars of Ger-
many —I find this in their labours. Doing full justice to
their qualities I find this in their labours, that there is really
nothing new. (Laughter and cheers.) I will admit their
great qualities; as Hebraists they are equal to the great
scholars who fl rurished at the end of the 17th century. In
their knowledge of the comic Benr!tic dialect they are infi-
nitely superior, in the new theory, or science of language,
as it is justly called, they have of course an advantage which
the old scholars have not shared with them, because it is
a science that has only been developed in our own time.
But this I do say, that in all important conclusions from the
alleged materials of the Book of Genesis down to the forma-
tion of the canon, and in every important event, historical,

literary, and spiritual, that occurred in that long interval,
they have been anticipated by the great llebrew scholars
who 11 urished in the 18th century. (Cheers,) I know it
may be said, and they have said it, that the suggestions of
Astruc or the investigations of Father Simon were known
only to those who like Item lived in their cells and their col-

loges ; but this is a vulgar and delusive error. The discove •
ries of those men, unrivalled for learning in the age in which
they flourished, formed the mind and inspired the labours
of the two greatest bodies of intellectual beings that have
existed certainly since the Greek philosophers, and who
were superior to the schoolmen—the freethinkers of Eng.
land and the philosophers of Franco. Therefore, the con-
clusions of these great men—these great scholars—were
placed before the public mind. All that inexorable logic, all
that irresistible rhetoric, all that the most bewildering wits
could avail themselves of to popularise those views, were
placed before the minds of the two leading nations of Europe
—the people of England and the people of France. And
they produced their effect. The greatest of revolutions was,
I will not say, occasioned by these opinions, but no one can
deny that the promulgation of those opinions largely con-
tributed to that great revolution popularly called the French
Revolution, which has not yet ended, and which is certainly
the greatest event that ever happened in the history of man.
Only the fall of the Roman empire can bo compared to it;
but that was going on for centuries, and so gradually, that
it cannot for one moment be held to have pawelf ully or

injuriously influenced the opinion of the world. Nuw, what
happened ? Look at the age in which we live, and the time
when thLse opinions were successfully promulgated by men
who, I am sure, with no intention to disparage the new

party, I may venture to say were not unequal to them.
Loc.,k at the Europe of the present day and the Europe of
100 years ago. It is not the same Europe. Its very form is
changed. Whole nations and great nations which then
flourished are no longer fouad. There is not a political consti..
tution in Europe existing at the present time which then
existed. The leading community of the continent of Europe
has changed all its landmarks, altered its boundaries, erased
its local names—the whole jurisprudence of Europa has been
altered—even the tenure of land, which of all human institu-
tions most affects the character of man, has been altered—the
feudal system has been abolished. Not merely laws have
been changed, not merely manners have been changed, but
customs have been changed. And what happened ? When
the turbulence was over—when the shout of triumph and
the wail of agony were alike stilled—when. as it ware, the
waters had disappeared, the sacred heights of Sinai and of
Calvary were again revealed, and amid the wreck of thrones
and tribunals, of extinct nations and abolished laws, man-
kind bowed again before the Divine truth that had been by
the omnipotent power of His ineffable wisdom entrusted to
the custody of and promulgation by a chosen people. (Loud
cheers.) Well then, because all their views are second hand
and nct new; because they have been already placed before
the mind of man with a power and spirit that it is in vain to
expect will be again equalled ; because, after so many sor-
rows and purified by so much suffering, mankind have re-

jected this new learning which is bolstered up for our edifi.
cation. I believe that the effects of this new school, power-
ful as they are and influential at this moment, and most
injurious in these diocesan societies, will fail. (Cheers )
Before sitting down there is only one other point I will touch
upon in reference to them. We are told every day that all I
may have feebly expressed to you may be true; but at the
same time there is a characteristic of the present age which
never existed in preceding ages, and which must be ruinous
and destructive to the Church and to all religious establish-
ments, and Mat is the progress of science. the teachings
of science and its discoveries are no`, we are told, consistent
with the teachings of the Church. Now lam sure there is
not one in this theatre who is not prepared to do full justice
to the merits of scientific men, and who does not fully ap-
preciate those discoveries of science which have added so
much to the convenience of life and the comfort of man.
Bat it is of great importance when this tattle about science
is mentioned that we should annex to it precise ideas.
I hold that the highest function of the service is the inter-
pretation of nature, and the interpretation of the highest
nature is the highest science. What is the highest nature ?
Man is the highest nature. But I must say that when you
compare the interpretation of the highest nature with the
most advanced, the most fashionable and modish school of
modern science—compare that with some other teachings
with which we are familiar—l am not prepared to say that
a lecture room is more scientific than the Church. (Cheers.)
What is the question now placed before the society with a
glib assurance the most astounding P The question is this
—is a man an ape or an angel ? (Loud laughter,) My
lord, lam on the side of the angel. (Laughter and cheers.)
I repudiate with indignation and abhorrence those views.
(Cheers.) I believe they are foreign to the conscience of
humanity, and I will say more, that even in the strictest
intellectual point of view,l believe the severest metaphysi-
cal analysis is opposed to that conclusion. But, on the
other hand, what does the Church teach us ? What is its
interpretation of this highest nature ? It teaches us that
man is made in the image of his Creator— a course of in-
spiration, of solace ; a source from which can flow only and
only every right principle of morals and every Divine truth.
(Cheers.) I say therefore that when we are told that the
teachings of the Church are not consistent with the disco
veries of science, and that in that sense the inferiority of the
Church is shown, I totally deny the proposition. (Cheers.)
I say that the scientific teaching of the Church upon the
most important of all subjects is, in fact, infinitely superior
to anything that has been brought forward by any of those
new discoveries. (Cheers.) In fact, it is between those
two principles that society will have to decide. Upon our
acceptance of that Divine truth of which the Church is the
guardian all sound and coherent and sensible legislation
depends. It is the only security for civilisation. It is the
only guarantee of real progress. (Hear, hear.) Now, it is
to promote, to foster, and to extend in this country, but
mainly, of course, to pay in this diocese, the teaching of the
Church that we are assembled here. Let us, if we can,
carry out in spioit the resolution which has been moved by
my right hon. friend. Let us act at least with united
energy, with that cordial co-operation which, if Churchmen
share, they will carry everything before them ; and the dis-
carding, as we have successfully discarded, all the attempts
which for some time appeared to paralyse our efforts and
circulate distrust amongst us from those who are the oppo-
nents of the Church and the Church principles. Let us
equally discard those new-fangled ideas of this new party
in the Church, which have extended only because persons
are always captivated with a novelty, but which I think, as
I have shown, is not extremely new; and let us by our
united efforts support those measures to which I adverted at
the commencement of my observations, and especially the
actions of these diocesan institutions. (The right hon.
gentleman here resumed his seat amidst vehement and
protracted cheers.)
The resolution was then put and agreed to.
The oubloriptiou to the fund Amounted to upwards of