The Sun.
London, England, 1861-06-10 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, JUNE 10, 1861.

dress, and one goes so far as to prohibit the wearing of a
wrought night-cap ; and the 72d canon expressly-provides
that without a licence from the bishop no clergyman shall
attempt on any pretence whatever either of possession or
obsession by fasting' and prayer, to cast out any devil or
devils, under pain of the imputation of imposture or cosen-
age, and deposition from the ministry." Surely some change
is necessary to-prevent men giving their assent and consent
to such ridiculous and obsolete opinions.
How different would be public opinion, both of the bishops
and clergy, if they were known to be honestly at work endea-
vouring to bring the Articles into harmony with the New
Testament, and revising the Canons so that they might be
of use to regulate the affairs of the Church. But they are
not, as they think, in a position to do-it. The time is not
distant when it must be done. The comings proceedings in
the Court of Arches will show the necessity. Many will
read the Essays, and wonder why the anthqs should be
exposed to punishment, *bile their own consciences tell
them that they in some things are farther from the
Articles than •the Essayists. Public attention will be
called to topics of the deepest theological interest Men
not accustomed to ecclesiastical reading will study the
peculiarities and 'eccentricities of the Prayer Book,
and the conviction will gain in force and depth that for the
relief of the clergy, as an act of justice to Christianity, and
to harmonise the National Church with the intelligence of
the peoPle of England, there must be both a revision=-and
a-reform:
It may be said, that it is commonly considered that the
greater part of. the Prayer Book is not to be received as in
the days of Charles 11., that it is to be unddrstood in a mo-
dified sense, where itis:not absolutely repudiated : and that
no one now thinks of believing in the obsolete ritual, and
dogmas of a former time. ' Is this honest ? Are not the
the terms of subscription the same ? Have not the Bishops
opposed, and do , taey not continue to oppose even the
slightest revision of the Prayer Book, and of the terms of
subscription ? Is not the system of falsehood, which is up-
held and enforced by subscription, a national disgrace ? Is
it less so, because # is, tkpal:aily work of ,religious men—
the teachers of our natiliarthristianity ? How can the
doctrines, the creeds, and the dogmas be obsolete when
tcey are daily brought before the people in the various ser-
vices—and universally submitted for the belief of every
candidate before he can be ordained ? Admitting they are
prescribed by authority, is it light, that men should say
they believed them, when they do not ? that they will ob-
serve and teach them when they do not ? If the question be
put !respecting Popery and Papal priests, the Protestant
makes short work of giving an answer. And so would we
We sometimes :talk of men being before the age : but in
this matter we are sadly behind it. Some five centuries
since John de Wycliffe uttered the following noble senti-
ment in a letter to the Pope :—" I take as a part of faith
that no man should follow the Pope, no, nor any saint that
is now in heaven, but inasmuch as he followed Christ; for
James and John erred, and Peter and Paul sinned. "If this
be true why should English priests of the 19th century be
sworn to obey the decrees, doctrines, and ceremonies deter-
mined by 'a corrupt and tyrannical monarch, a sycophant
convocation, and a slavish parliament ? And if the chains
they are wearing chafe their flesh, and the rust on them
irritates
,their wounds, are the bishops of the present
day to try and rivet those chains, more_closely to the galled
and wounded body ? The hereditary principle in the epis-
copacy is the same : greedy after ecclesiastical law and
power. Lord Chatham in one of his noble defences of Eng-
lish liberty, satirically said, turning to the bishops in the
House of Lords—" If I had a doubt upon the matter, I
should follow the example set us by thd'raost Rev. Bench,
with whom I believe it is a maxim when any doubt in point
of faith arises, or any question of controversy is started, to
appeal at once to the greatest source and evidence of our
religion, I mean the Holy Bible I" The Biathep of Salis-
bury does not believe in this, and practically ignores Jesus
and the Apostles, and upholds Charles, his Ecclesiastical
Convocation, and his Parliament.
• It is said that the Esaayists have transgressed the bounds
prescribed by these authorities. And why should they not ?
Is the state of Biblical criticism only what it was in the time
of Charles ? Is the state of science the same ? Have we
no more theological knowledge than we had 200 years ago ?
Are there no changes in men's views of civil and religious
liberty ? And is it because an educated gentleman is a
priest of the National Church that he must walk in theruts
of King Charles, and think in harmony with the ecclesias-
tical statutes and dogmas of that period ? Can there be a
more weighty and just argument for the thorough reform of
the Church establishment, than its want of harmony with
the Scriptures, and with the spirit of truth and just liberty
required by a free nation in all that relates to its religious
interests and welfare ? If we take the Prayer Book as the
acts of Parliament require it to be taken, as the declarations
Made by the clergy, honestly made, must be understood,
then it is not possible from the laws of the human mind and
the multifarious contents of the book that one bishop upon
the Bench, or one clergyman in the Church, can believe
every part of it. • The high Anglican glories in the offices,
and repudiates the Articles—the low Churchman delights
in the Articles, and ignores the offices. The former keeps the
saints' days, and the latter ungratefully passes by them as if
they were not in the calendar ho has promised to observe.
The Essayists are outspoken, and so were some of the bi-
shops before they attained the episcopal mitre; but that orna-
ment has a magic power. It does not prevent a bishop frm
doing imprudent and rash things, but it soothes his mind,
renders him less curious, less anxious about the truth, bet-
ter satisfied with things as they are, and very irritable with
any one who thinks as frankly and writes as honestly as he
once did.

We may reeeive it as a fixed truth, that persecution for reli-
gions opinions and free theological thought, is not approved
by the intelligent, educated, and liberal classes of English
society. The persecutor must claim infallibility ; if not, the
opinions he is trying to suppress may be truth, which men
will one day universally receive.
A very remarkable paragraph has just appeared in what
the editor considers to be one of the most liberal papers of
the age. He considers himself to be the model and cham-
pion of religious liberty. In the true spirit of infallibility,
he approves and glories the Bishop of Salisbury for ap •
pealing to the Court of Arches in the case of the Essayists.
The paragraph is headed " Right at Last," and the editor
of the British Standard—the popular Non-Conformist jour-
nal, thus writes in the year of grace 1861 :—" Let the bi-
shops avail themselves of all the means at their disposal for
uprooting error and heresy ; if they succeed, well; if other-
wise, let them proceed to the Legislature for fresh powers.
It is not to be endured that men occupying the highest
places of the Establishment should be suffered to go on
preaching,writing, printing and publishing what they please,
although it involves the very vitals of Christianity. We
congratulate the Bishop of Salisbury therefore on his deci-
sion, and have no doubt that the results will be satisfactory
The court that should support the seven would deserve
to •be instantly annihilated:, The editor of the Re-
cord copied the paragraph into his columns, and
notorious as he is as a persecutor, a garbler of quota-
tions, and as an unscrupulous opponent, and glad as he
would be to endorse anything by the editor of the British
Standard, his faith failed him, and his want of accuracy, as
usual, was conspicuous. He gave what went before the sen-
tence I will re-quote, and what followed after it, but not a
mark or a sign that he had omitted it, being ashamed of it
himself and unwilling to degrade his brother editor among
the readers of the Record. The words omitted were, ,4 The
court that should support the seven would deserve to be in-
stantly annihilated." No one in reading the paragraph in
the Record would imagine that such an immortal sentence
had been omitted. I censure not the editor of the British
Standard for these sentiments ; he has a perfect right to ex.
press and publish what he thinks on religious liberty and
on theological subjects. I admirehis honesty, andregret that
theen Essayistsarg e d and
ifit
if
he did not live three or five centuries back. He clearly ap-
proves of ecclesiastical courts for theological opinions. If
would
do
justice
to them
have violated no law—that what
h
to none of the Articles, that
theyttthheeyfr shouldChavehopau°vwr te determinesp
writtenrfscommittedbAe d he
rlcihneisist
e they
should
h
no
contrary
offence against Rubrics or Canons,
then (says the greatest champion of religious liberty now
living) that Court would deserve to be instantly annihilated.
It is five centuries since, this very year, that John de
Wycliffe was elected Master of Baliol College,—" THE
MORNING STAR OF THE REFORMATION." Suppose the
nofagessor of the period
paragraph from the British Standard hadwboweedn
hwiitivtetebneeant
champion of the
hrthe Oxford Professor
wos thathlcuel
shouted
ehe time,asoi:avwmsetihvaceat
ari
matins
afshacaai hytnhoodr.
buTesehonef
vespersat ohs
xacfnfaooklrrmsdeguaipvics
of the present day, whose Essay has been so abused and
misrepresented. Wycliffe was intent upon the people pos-
sessing the Scriptures; and five centuries afterwards
Jowett is intent upon the right interpretation of them.
Both of these men have had to pay the penalty of their
honest advocacy of what they believed to be the truth. The
spirit and principle of the paragraph I have quoted would,
had it been possible, have crushed the Reformation by the
strong arm of ecclesiastical law : thank God that five
centuries since ecclesiastical law could not triumph, nor
will it, nor can it now.

There was another man, not a professor at Oxford, who
flourished about three centuries after Wycliffe. Every
element of true nobility was in his nature; his gifts for
the work he had to do were of the highest order, and his
power over his mother tongue enabled him to employ those
gifts for the benefit of all future generations. There were
infallible men at that time, as now, who denounced him
because he differed from them. They acted upon the advice
revived in the British Standard. " They availed them-
selves of all the means at their disposal for uprooting (his)
error and heresy,"—there was no need of " fresh powers,"
—what existed doomed him to twelve-and•a-half years'
confinement in Bedford jail, but he went on " writing, print-
ing, and publishing," and when a milder ecclesiastical
regime was established under James, ,John Runyan

was liberated, and continued to propagate his
"heresies" until the • time of his death. And
what is thought of him now? What is thought of his
persecutors and of the ecclesiastical law that de-
pived him of his, liberty ? So recently as last Monday
evening (May 27) a public-meeting was held, presided over
by Lord Shaftesbury. The chair Bunyan used to sit in was
on the platform, and it was intended on that occasion it
should be occupied by the chairman ; but Lord Shaftesbury
declined to occupy it, saying " that.he thought no man in
England was worthy to fill it ; so far as he was concerned it
should remain vacant." Now, mark the judgment of pos-
terity upon Bunyan's heresy—Lord Shaftesbury said, "By
God's immediate inspiration, or something very close upon
it, Bunyan had produced a book, which, after- the Bible,
had conferred greater benefit on every class of society than-
any other that had ever been written." Yet the author of
this book, by the ecclesiastical law now invoked upon the
Essayists, suffered imprisonment for twelve and a half years.
It is not reported that Lord Shaftesbury, who is among the
persecutors of the Essayists, said one word about Bunyan's
imprisonment and persecution by the Church of which his
lordship is a member.
It was in the year 1660 (two years before the" Act of Ifni-
' formity came into operation) that Bunyan was first impri-
poned, and when that act took effect, about 2,000 clergymen,
'rather than give their assent and consent to the Book of
Common-prayer, resigned their livings, and with 'their fami-
lies were cast-upon the world for conscience sake. There
ever
relived.among
Tthhee mp
rsaoyme
re
bo
of 0 tkh
toe wn ohbi
el tt h
ea
yn d b
couldest men that
not
con .
form was the same as is now used ; the terms and the form
and manner of subscription were the same then as now—
they could not tamper with truth--4hey would not pawn
'their manly honesty—they could not pollute their con-
sciences—but casting themselves upon the providence of
God they went forth not knowing whither theywent.
The late Dr. Richard Winter Hamiltentthus eloquently
refers to these truly honest men—" They were compelled
to admit the incompatibility-of an Establishment with the
lights of private judgment and conscience. They had
passed through many ordeals before, and each
one purified them. It is impossible to reprobate
in proper phrase their wrong. None could even doubt
their learning, their worth, their religiousness. These were
their offenses. If firm as a rock, they were serene as a star.
Never was there a more transcendent spectacle I their dis-
tant spires receded from their eye ; their gray hairs braved
the storm ; their conscience was their all * * We could
not have spared the spectacle. Our world is too poor in
such examples of sacrifice not to have needed this. The his-
tory of 'those times is too dark for perusal but for such
relief.'

Of course they were branded as heretics, and whenever
the mild and gentle powers of the ecclesiastical courts could
be brought to bear upon them, " for the health of their
souls,"—those powers were invoked. Ecclesiastical law was
at that time, by the many, thought to be, as it is now by
the few, a cure for heresy. We expect such notions to
flourish in the church of Rome, but not in the Church of
England ; and we are not surprised if we find them advo-
cated in a French, or Spanish, or Roman newspaper ; but
we are amazed when we see them dishonouring the columns
of a Nonconformist journal.

We have now finished the work which we undertook tr
do. The injustice, misrepresentation, and slander heaped
upon the Essayists by the bishops and clergy, and a small
section of the Dissenters, compelled us, having read the
volume, to state our convictions both as to its truths and

errors. We are grateful for its publication. It will prove
a great defence and bulwark in behalf of true Christianity.
It will reclaim multitudes of sceptics. The matters that

are not essential will be regarded in their proper light,
while those that are essential will be revived in all the

force in which Jesua placed them before mankind. The

religion of Jesus has been too long overlaid with creeds and

ceremonies. The Christianity of the Now Testament must

come forth and claim its proper authority in the human
heart. We hail this volume as one great means to this end.
Seeing the state of the clergy relative to the Essays
and Reviews, and hearing their charge against the Essay-
ists, that they have not faithfully kept their ordination

vows, we were led to ask and to answer the
qustion, " What is it that a clergyman of the Church
of England is required to believe ?" We have answered it
in the last three discourses. We owe it to the bishops and
clergy that we have had to do this work. Had they been
quiet and wise, the Essays and Reviews, like their prede-
cessors, would have disturbed no one. As it is, they have
challenged the intelligence and Christianity of thousands of
persons, both in and out of the Church, and they have re-
sponded to the call. Now, the appeal is to the ecclesias-
tical courts : should it fail, the disgrace to the Church of
England will be deeper than ever : should it succeed, it
win over to the views of the Essayists thousands of per-
sons who will feel that truth cannot be dependent on
ecclesiastical law, and a favourable verdict will but con-'
vince them of the truth of what has been so vituperatively
denounced. For ourselves we are satisfied that the works
of God in his universe and the truths of. his Divine reve-
lation, irrespective of the errors of men, will vindicate
themselves, and prove to be harmonious, while just
liberty and true piety will ever be allied in exploring
the one, and investigating the other, and like the alliance

of God, of nature, and of revelation, will prove to be
immutable, immortal, as fixed as the firmament of.heaven.
I conclude in the words of Bunsen. He says :—" I

know full well that an author who attacks conventional

opinions on which prejudices and interests have been

largely built, exposei himself to malignant attacks, mis.

statements, and misunderstandings, rather from what he
says, than from his maintaining with prudent reserve com-

• _ _
plete silence upon such important questions. I cannot,
however, see how such a reserve is to be justified, even on
the purest motives, if we consider the gravity of our times,
and the sacredness of the public duty imposed on those who
communicate their convictions upon such momentous sub-
jects. I would venture to say on my own behalf, after
forty years of meditation and reserve, or silence, that I
know in whom 1 believe, and that I believe what I know
and say. To those who are wedded to contrary opinions,
or are restrained by doubts and fears, I wish the same in-
ternal conviction to which meditation and study have led
me upon religious subjects, and the same peace of mind
which has resulted from that conviction."

THE WITHDRAWAL OF MR, DUNLOP
FROM PESTI'.

PESTII, May 31.—Mr. Dunlop, who has resided
for seven months here at Pesth, and has been
treated with much distinction by our highest circles,
is, as we have just learnt from Vienna, to our regret,
to take his definitive departure in a few days from
the Hungarian capital. Our correspondent writes
as follows :—" Vienna, May, 30.—1 have just learnt
from a perfectly sure source that, in consequence
of the repeated and urgent requests of Count Rech-
berg, addressed to the English Government, Mr.
Dunlop, the Secretary of the British Embassy, who
has resided in your city for some months, will
leave his post there in the course of next
week, My informant adds that Count Rech-
berg probably considers the recent expressions of
Lord John Russell in the House of Commons in
favour of Hungary as the result of Mr. Dunlop's
sympathizing reports from Hungary, and for that
reason renewed his often-repeated request in the
most urgent manner, so that Lord John thought it
best to yield. Mr, Dunlop will now again resume
his duties at the Embassy here." So far our Vienna
correspondent. If his announcement be true, and
we have not the slightest reason to doubt its authen-
ticity, it is another proof of what path the Austrian
Ministry has now entered on. We should like to
address only two questions to its leader :-I.Does
Count Rechberg believe that the presencehere of
Mr. Dunlop encouraged the Hungarian move-
ment ? We should think that it must at last
have become evident to everybody in Vienna
and elsewhere that we cannot, and may not,
abandon our legal basis ; and that to this end we do
not require any external encouragement. Besides,
Mr. Dunlop's expressions, as far as we have learnt,
have been chiefly of a nature to discourage those
who drew foreign notions into their calculations.
If, for that reason, the Vienna statesmen are really
apprehensive of Mr. Dunlop's influence on the
aspect of affairs here, then those are not so far wrong
who are convinced that on the other side of the river
Leitha (at Vienna) they would be glad if the men
here of the " legal-passive resistance" were to give
place to the" men of action," for in this respect the
Vienna Ministers might certainly have to complain
of Mr. Dunlop, who, as we know, never in any
conversation concealed his anxiety lest the move-
ment might overshoot the mark—go too fast and
too far. 2. Or rather has Count Rechberg to fear
the influence which Dunlop's reports on the move-
ment have exercised on the •English Ministry ?
Then it would be very difficult, not to say impossi-
ble, for Count Rechberg to close all the sources of
information to Lord John Russell which present
themselves to him in lieu of Dunlop's reports.
France has no representative here, and yet we fre-
quently find extremely well informed letters from
this place in the Moniteur, and we have only lately
heard from Paris that the Emperor has received de-
tailed communications from here. Can Count
Rechberg really think seriously, in the second half
of the 19th century, of cuttinroff the possibility of
a foreign Government receiving accurate informa-
tion about a movement like the Hungarian P
Pesth Lloyd.

THE PURE LITERATURE SOCIETY.—On Friday
the annual meeting of this society was held at Willis's
Rooms; M. du Chaillu attended and related some CUrlOllB
anecdotes respecting the gorilla.