The Sun.
London, England, 1862-10-03 00:00:00

; .
• •
E'
• 4
• •
Cri.
#4434 ''4:4171::41.11",211:tiitH116:::::11:1;N. 16,4114''s1111.1111....111:.r, ;(41146k:ca.". 4 1 4::
61
.751;
ltn
t
'Y. e‘..e.r
1 .„

L e e--d '

te-

r IN E W S PAP E. 13.
/ •,*-: ' --t--ti ti--:),c4-:; N
QUESTIONS BELATINCfig74
PRIMACY. '7_l:.:lV L174,,V-74,__
)
--40-------- \ 7P. .i'lr'4ql")Z,:tc.;
,-,..*6=teituit 4,07
The death of the late estimablel
__ §,,c,-
- -7,,,f ~. 7717:_?,,A.,‘„ ,
reflections, some of which, we art t _
occurred to the minds of Episcol laliaN, as al ak3
Nonconformists. A recital of all'. that is involved
in an Archbishopric of Canterbui ry, in the form of
income, patronage, and rank, sen .ds one involun-
tarily to the New Testament, to se le if anything is
to be found there which will give sanction to such
an importation of the spirit of the world into
the administration of the Church. Then a suspi-
cion crosses the mind of a looker-on, that, after
all, the Primacy of the English Church is but
a splendid pieco of show, without much real
utility ; else, how could the Guardian ven-
ture to say that, if it were not. for the necessity
for filling the vacancy which it has occasioned, the
death df Dr. Sumner would scarcely have excited
attention beyond. his own domestic circle ? Lastly,
we agree with a correspondent of that journal,
that the question, " Who is to ocanpy the See of
Canterbury ?" is "one of such tzeznenclous import
to the Church at large that it ought not to be left
to Lord Palmerston." It is true that, after having
already appointed two archbishops and nine bis-
hops, his lordship has, as the Saturday Review
jauntily says, "got his hand in ;" but doubts begin
to prevail in some quarters whether it is quite
seemly that such a man should create so many
" successors of the apostles," as by some they are
deemed. We are, therefore, not altogether sur-
prised to learn that—
" The President of the English Church Union has issued
a memorandum, in accordance with a resolution passed at
a meeting of the Council, respectfully requesting all the
members, women associates, and parochial associates of the
Union, daily (until after the appointment) to offer up
prayers and intercessions to Almighty God in behalf of the
patriarchal See of Canterbury, now vacant by reason of the
lamented death of the late archbishop. 'And the clerical
members of the Union are requested to provide for the
celebration of the Holy Communion for this intention
in their respective churches on some Sunday or other
day ; and all lay members, women associates, and paro-
chial associates, are urged to avail themselves of the oppor-
tunity of being present, and there to petition the Divine
Head of the Church so to dispose and govern the heart of
Victoria our Queen,' her advisers, and all others who are
privileged to take part in the nomination, election, confir-
mation, and consecration of bishops, that they may have
grace 'to make a wise choice—one pleasing' to our
Almighty Lord God, 'and conducive to His glory and
honour, and the advantage of His Church."

'CQGt L

We should have thought it better to pray that
somebody more trustworthy than a worldly Minister
of State should be " privileged to take part in the
nomination and selection of bishops." What would
be thought of entrusting a surgical operation to a
clergyman or a lawyer, and then praying that ho
might be divinely helped to perform it with success.
—Liberator.

ESSAY 8 AND REVIEWS-WHAT WILL
THE CHURCH DO?

The remarkable reticence of the Church press and
the clergy with respect to Dr. Lushington's judg-
ment on the Essays and Reviews has been of all
features of this controversy, one of the most signi-
ficant. While judgment was in suspense the press
teemed with books, pamphlets, articles, and letters.
The monstrosity of the opinions held and avowed
by the essayists was exposed in every shape, man-
ner, method, and temper. They were "infidel,"
" rationalistic," " dishonourable," "subversive of the
gospel," " contrary to the articles," &c., &c. More
important than this, they were formally denounced
and condemned by all the archbishops and bishops.
People, therefore, ask each other—What will the
Church do if the judgment sustains any of the
opinions held by the essayists ? Nobody could tell ;
but there was a vague and cloudy impression that
something very important, if not very dreadful,
would follow. Not a man hinted that it was all
"sound and fury signifying nothing." It was, for
once, believed that the Church was in earnest. Well,
judgment has been delivered, and it has sustained the
essayists and reviewers in some of their most
important opinions—in six out of thirteen of the
counts, delivered against Dr. Williams. That is
to say, the bishops, the thousands of clergymen, the
scores of pamphleteers, and all the clerical news.
papers have been adjudged to be wrong on half the
points at issue. One would have supposed that this
would have been considered, to say the least, a
serious matter, and one requiring a grave consulta-
tion of learned bishops, pundits, and divines. For
the issue is this. Having pronounced Dr. Williams
to be a heretic on these six points, and Dr. W
il-
liams having been adjudged to be orthodox .on
these points, it follows that they are heretic al !
What has supervened on so important a judgment ?
The Church newspapers have slurred it over, end
not a bishop or an archdeacon has alluded to it.
It is a grave matter for seven gentlemen to be
dishonest and heterodox, but it is nothing if we
are all dishonest and heterodox ! In that case
the least said the better. We thought they were
wrong, but finding that it is we who have blundered
—the best thing we can do is to hush the matter
up, and keep our livings." So the present silence
will, we believe, be generally interpreted.--Libe-
rator.