The Sun.
London, England, 1847-12-21 00:00:00

• DECEMBER 21, 1847.

THE PREMIER and the PRELATES.
(Prom the Weekly Dispatch.)
Mr. Editor,—..A second-rate actor in a theatre,
who thinks he ought to be first, is sometimes com-
forted by being put into a part in which he has a
scene to himself. And when it comes does he not
make the most of it ? By stamping and staring,
whispering and bellowing, he renders himself the
hero of the moment, and takes care that the audience
shall remember him after the progress of the drama
has reduced him to his due proportions, and returned
him to his original insignificance. Sir, the Church
is striving to have her scene on the great national
stage. She is in danger and distress—in a fever and
a fury. Irish famine and commercial distress must
be quiet and retire, to make way for her piercing
screams and frantic gesticulations. The unexpected
and appalling calamity which has thus frightened the
venerable dame from her propriety is, that Lord John
Russell has recommended Dr. Hampden for the
vacant bishopric of Hereford.
The rebellion in the Church is beyond all prece-
dent. The hostile movement began with various
meetings and deprecatory resolutions of the provincial
clergy. As in other cases, the natural history, the
tail of the creature has moved the head, or, rather, a
half of its many heads. Thirteen Bishops have pro-
tested against the appointment. How virtue grows !
There were only seven intractable prelates when King►
James waited to make the Church papistical. And
now, when Lord J. Russell would inoculate it with
a little Liberalism, there are no less than thirteen
Abdiels faithful among the faithless. The laity of
the Church has rushed to the rescue of its bishops,
smarting under the Premier's rebuke for their pro-
test, and has fired off its own protest also, to receive
a similar rebuke. Lord John's sarcastic logic has
" stomach for them all." The "485 lay members
of the Church of England, including several peers,
Members of Parliament, &c.," take nothing by their
motion but an admonition to charity. Last comes
Henry of Exeter, himself a host, in three mortal
Times columns of small type, whacking and thwack-
ing the Whig Bishop-maker, and stimulating the
Dean and Chapter of Hereford to disregard the royal
conga c elire, and dare the martyrdom of a prce-
munire.

It is one of the evils of a false position that it turns
right into wrong. The Church of England is
founded on a false principle, and entangled in an un-
holy alliance with the State. Hence the very qua-
lities which adorn the office of a true bishop, a real
spiritual overseer, become a relative unfitness for its
dignities. Dr. Hampden is a sound philosopher, but
an unsound believer. He has more faith in the
moral nature of man than in the three creeds. His
writings are in a wise and lofty spirit, but they are
not in the spirit of the Chatechism and Prayer-
book. It is vain to blink the fact, that the man is a
heretic ; and the heretic is too much of a true man to
be fit for a Church of England bishop, if we take the
constitution of the Church itself for a standard. Here
is the weak point of the appointment. The Church
demands orthodoxy of all, and especially of its pre-
lates. Technically, the reply is good, that Dr.
Hampden has subscribed the 39 Articles. But what
is it morally ? Dr. Hampden would have been a
greater man had he kicked the mitre with his foot in-
stead of bowing his head to wear it. He might have
risen to martyrdom ; he only sinks into a bishopric.
But thus it must happen in the practical working
of such a system as that of the Church of England.
It does not require merit, but conformity; not mind,
but faith. The consistently truthful are out of place
in it. " What dost thou here, Elijah ?" We
must make allowance for this inherent incongruity.
And when we have done so, and look at the Church
simply as a political corporation, over which the Mi-
nister of the Crown exercises a legitimate influence,
the appointment assumes a different aspect, and does
Lord J. Russell more credit for moral courage than
any other act of his Administration.
Indeed it never is courage that the Noble Lord
wants. There was courage enough, and to spare,
in the pertinacity with which he persisted, at the
close of the last Parliament, in forcing a bishop upon
the inhabitants of Manchester. He then offended
the Dissenters, and now he equally offends the
Church. The protests of the one no more affect him
than did those of the other. Both seem to " pass by
him as the idle wind, which he regards not." He cuts
up the episcopal protest as coolly as if it were a
cucumber. His reply is a choice morsel of criticism.
How cleverly he hits the cowardice of the Bishops in
not avowing their own conviction of Dr. Hampden's
heresy, but falling back upon the alarms of others.
Flow neatly he reminds them of their having (some
of them at least) required candidates for holy orders
to have attended the lectures of this obnoxious Pro-
fessor. How cavalierly he sets aside the authority of
the University of Oxford, like one who was mindful
of its expulsion of John Locke. How quiet his
allusion to the poor old Primate, whose repose at
Lambeth is likely to be sorely disturbed. And what
a significant hint is given of that supreme authority
vested in her who inherits the throne of Elizabeth and
of Henry VIII. ; the living head of the Church and
disposer of its dignities; the Lady Pope of Anglican
Protestantism. The episcopal knuckles are smartly
rapped by his Lordship; and the royal conge d'elire
goes to Hereford as if nothing had happened.
Why should this outcry about Dr. Hampden be
raised just now ? He had promulgated no new doc-
trines of late. Nothing offensive, even to the most
unreasoning fanaticism, has been perpetrated recently
on his part. He has pursued a quiet course, holding
the confidential position of Regius Professor of
Divinity, and fulfilling its duties unquestioned ; and
for aught that appears, unquestionably. His cer-
tificates to his pupils have been required and accepted,
as preliminary to their ordination. For these ten
years there has been no protesting. No episcopal or
collegiate watchdog has barked at his heels as he left
his lecture-room. Apparently, he might have lived
and died in the arms of the Church and the odour
of sanctity, had not the Prime Minister picked him
out for a mitre. The commotion is made by the
promotion. The bishops quarrel, not with his laxity,
but with his luck. There are some dislocated ex-
pectations occasioned by the recent changes. Dr.
Hampden's main offence is to hare been fortunate in
a political friend. When will those godly men learn
to mind their own business ? Zeal slept soundly till
roused by the clink of cash and crozier. Then it
awakes, to begrudge the Liberal Doctor his new
honours and emoluments. The weights and scales of
orthodoxy are brought out; and Dr. Hampden is
weighed and pronounced wanting. Surely these
curators of religion shonld not have been silent so
long; or should not have spoken so bitterly now.
They have committed themselves by their quiescence,
or they commit themselves yet worse by their outcry.
There is no escape from the dilemma. Either they
were false in their silence or in their clamour they
are factious.
A better way was open to them, and they may
adopt it even yet. Let them strike work, and turn
out, like honest operatives when an unpleasant asso-
ciate is forced upon them by the master. The right
of the Queen to employ Dr. Hampden as a bishop is
clear. Equally clear is the right of the Bishop of
London, Exeter, and the rest, to cut and run, if
they cannot agree with their new companion. It is
never too late to say " Nolo Episcopari." The
whole thirteen may unfrock themselves in a twink-
ling. Nobody will prevent them. A baker's dozen
of mitres would be a magnificent windfall for the
Minister. Plenty of candidates would be found, who
would make no question of Dr. Hampden's sound-
ness. The two halves of the Bench might then be
fitly joined together. The whole team would pull
one way, instead of half being yoked to the rear of
the ecclesiastical waggon. They would thus wash
their hands effectually of Hampden and heresy. A
peaceful retirement would show Christian meekness
combined with orthodox conscientiousness. The
turn-out of thirteen Bishops, on a theological scruple,
would be a nine days' wonder. The world would
enjoy the novelty of an Episcopal strike.
By the reply of the Bishop of Norwich to an ap-
plication for his signature, it appears there has been
a sort of secret canvass to get up the protest. The
pro
testing Bishops were not satisfied with each speak-
ing independently for himself. They have been beat-
ing up for recruits. They have caballed to raise the
whole Bench against the appointment. They have
acted not by the impulse of a common inspiration ;
not by the fair and formal decision of an aggregate
meeting, tut by private applications and corre-
spondence. Was this right in itself? Was it frank
and just towards Dr. Hampden ? I may add, was it
decorous towards the Archbishop of Canterbury, the
Primate of all England, the head and overseer of
these plotting prelates ? The Archbishop is no party
to the protest. It has been in his hands, but does not
boast his signature. Yet his Grace was the party to
hsve stirred, had any stirabout been required. The
fitness of Dr. Hampden was a question for Lambeth
rather than for London. The government of the
Church is taken out of the Primate's hands. C. James,
of London, acts as viceroy over him. The busiest of
Bishops originates an Episcopal movement without
the concurrence of the Archbishop. He blows the
trumpet of clerical agitation without his captain's
orders. He leads the troop as if he had been its
commissioned commander. This would be irregular
anywhere • most of all in the Church. Dr. Howley
is not dead, though he may be dormant. The Canter-
bury throne has not been canted over. These for-

[PRics 51).

ward and obtrusive protesters should have waited for
the word from their Primate. But the Primate, ac-
cording to Lord John Russell, has already acquiesced
in Dr.
.Hampden's elevation. He sees no danger ;
and is bad discipline in the Bishops to have sharper
eyes. If it be not blasphemy, it is flat rebellion. A
fraction of the Bench is not an order in the State. A
deliberative College of Bishops is a new creation ; or,
rather, an usurpation. Neither State nor Church give
them the negative they arrogate. They are meddling
with matters which belong to higher authorities.
The Bishop of Exeter makes the modest proposi-
tion of calling the convocation from its grave, and
galvanising its corpse into an inquisition, that it may
sit in judgment on Dr. Hampden's faith. And why
stop with Dr. Hampden ? By parity of reason, the
successful candidates for all other clerical appoint-
ments might be overhauled in like manner. There
would be no need to look far for a chief inqui'itor.
The man is ready made for the office. How came such
an one ever to tumble into the nineteenth century, or
to draw breath in a British atmosphere ?
But the most violent ebullition of this mitred Mi-
nister of the Gospel of Peace is against the law, the
very law which makes his Church a Protestant
Church, links it with the Government of the country,
and in virtue of which he is himself a Bishop. He
calls the statute of Premunire, by which Henry
VIII. secured the headship of the Church to the
Sovereign of this country, " the most hateful and
most tyrannical law which is permitted to pol-
lute our statute-book." It is " the Magna Charta of
tyranny." He proceeds to assail the royal preroga-
tive :—" My Lord, the Crown has no right, can have
no right (I trust, too, that it will be found to have no
power) to force a bishop on the Church, when the
Church has just right to reject, as a setter forth of
erroneous and strange doctrine, contrary to God's
word." Demagogues may hide their diminished
heads. The worst laws have never been more roughly
handled by the most violent agitators. Rebellion
itself has scarcely defied prerogative more daringly.
Why, then, vituperative priest, what is thine own
Lordship but the gift of prerogative ? What thy
Churdh, but the creation of the law ? thy or-
thodox articles, but a legislative enactment ? What
the Prayer Book but the schedule of a Parliamentary
Bill, which became, by Royal Assent, after passing
Lords and Commons, the act of uniformity ? Know
thy Maker, Bishop of Exeter; and speak more reve-
rently of the powers that be.
It will pass away, all this bustle. The direct in-
centives to resistance, addressed to the Dean and
Chapter of Hereford, and in case of their succumbing,
to the consecrating bishops, will fall on ears too pru-
dent to be charmed to martyrdom. The mandate is
gone forth. Lord John Russell is teaching the Church
to know its proper place, and the bishops to know
theirs. He sticks to the supremacy of Parliamentary
law and royal prerogative, over the semi-temporal
and semi-spiritual corporation called the Church of
England. It is a bolder thing than if he had taken
the command of the Channel fleet. It makes ample
atonement for his late temporizing policy. Let him
hold on firmly, as it is his character to do, and
priestly insolence will quail before him, while hu•
manity rejoices in its rebuke and discomfiture.