, 1874-08-23

Both Houses Of the British Parliament have
agreed to bill, which is best described, in the
| words Of Prime Minister Digrael, as bill to
put down Ritua1ism. It has been discovered,
| however by the Lords and Commons, that put
ting down Ritualism does not mean anything
whatever 30 long as there is not 80 much as 4
definition OF RituaIiam- And SO it happens that
the bill is not to become law until after an-
other Parliament shall have met and defined
what Ritualsn is; what practices are included
under the name, and what are not; what cere-
monies may be innocently INDUCED in in English
CHURCHES, and what It would be illegal and
horetical to tolerate. On the definition
which the next Parliament shall make OF Ritual
ism, great deal will depend. Should Ritualsm
be SO defined Is to make ofrenses Of what large
portion Of the English Church consider at
most essentials Of their religion secession
from the Established Church may be looked for.
The Commons were disposed 10 be even mora
stringent against the Ritualists than the Lorda.
It is well known that several OF the Bishops are
Enthusiastically inclined while the two Azchbshops
Of the Kingdom are strictly Low Church. Consid-
ering their leanings, it was feared that the
Bishops might reject the complaints made
against ritualistic ministers by their parishion-
ers. The Commons proposed as an
amendment to the original bill that
in case Of such REFUSAL the latter
should have an appeal to the Archblshops-
The bill camo back to the Lords with the amend
nent but 30 great Was tho opposition OF the
Bishops that tho amendment Was lost Tho
Bishops Of Winchester and Lincoln wero espe-
cially violent in their opposition to it. The
former would not hear Of an A1chbishops usurp-
ing authority in bis diocese. There Was, he
claimed, a. strong scriptural authority for tho
government of Bishop in his diocese I'd there
was historical authority for the fact that Cesar
governed Rome. The episcopacy, hs assorted,
WIS q divine institution. 1nd ii he did not be-
Iore that it was he would trample his robe on
the ground. The foundation Of the episcopacy
was that the Bishop WAS the ruler and
Judge Of his diocese. Archblahops we're not rs
ancient as Bishops. They we're only the Preai-
dents OF Councils. Bishops we're Bishops by
Divine ordinance. Archbiahops or metropol-
tans we're such by human ordinance. Chief
Justice Holt has settled that matter in the caso
Of Long vs. Watson, in which he held that
Bishops we're Bishops jure diusno not jure hat-
n,ano. The Bishop Of Lincoln WAS equally
laudatory Of the rights OF his order. He in
quired whether the Lords we're going to estab-
lish Papacy in Canterbury, and whether they
we1e going to have Al anti-Pope 1t York
To avoid the ecyllA Of Puri:anism and the
Charybdis OF Romanian. it was necessary to
eteer midway between the two and not
1eavs everything to the decision Of netropou-
tan, who might be incompetent o. prejudiced-
Sir William Harcourt, the great Protestant lead
er, did not approve Of tho action Of the Lords On
the amendment 10 tho bill The Bishops. too,
received rather rough handling Il hia hands.
Hs could ses nothing divina IN the right BY
which thay held thar afacss. They vr1 Hsh-