New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-11-05
RELIGIOUS STRIFE.
A NEW BRITISH REVIEW.

s,vrSrss oP THE ENGLISH RITCAIIsTs-TuEIR
RELATIONS WITH THE CIVIL LAW DEFINED.
IrRoM rH. REGULAR CORRESPONDENT OF THE TRiBuSRl
LONDON, Oct. 21.-Mr. Gladstone has himself put
an end 20 The story Of his having been offered
100000 a year 10 take charge of Turkish finances
There is not word of truth in it, he says. iet
grave newspapers have been gravely specializing ON
the probabilities of his accepting proposal III itSeh
most improbable, and which, in fact never was
made Nobody seems to know who started the
rumor Int the Paris papers entitled to the credit
of inyentine q great number of highly ingenious
particnlars respecting the offer, and the reception
met with.
Tbelote Prime Ministerial. felt himself called upon
10 DENY with equal energy the rimors that he
intends to resume the leadership OF the " l-iberai
marty, and that he had made mp his nlnd on the
policy that was to reunito its discordant SECTIONS!
IL il not trno that he has made any declaration on
the subject of the political future other than what
was announced to the world Is months ago. Nor
thirdly. has he written about the Church Of England
in the new Church Quarterly Recioc or elsewhere.
lie IA willing 10 have il known that he has written
an article in that Review respecting the Church ana
State question in Italy, which contains, he THINKS,
some interesting information on the subject oil
patronage and popular election of clergy All these
contradictions Mr. Gladstone has been writing TO
friend in Glasgow, who has duly passed them ON TO
Glasgow journal for publication; unpublished they
are To the greater less satisfaction of that large
Part of the English people who persist IN dsbeieV-
ing that Mr. Gladstone can permanently divorce
himself from public life. Denials are Of no great
use. Almost a. soon as rumor is laid another
springs M.
Bnt whoever reads the article on the Church OF
England in the new Review above mentioned Will
zoe why Mr. Gladstone did not wish 10 rest under
the irnputation OF having written II. The refer
ences 10 him in that article are indeed, such rs he
hy no possibility could make to himself. The article
contains among other things history from the
High Church point of view of the passage OF the
Public Worship act. II might he possible Tor MI
Gladstone TO speak of the House OF Commons as
having thrown a savage rD rictts INTO ms own teeth
II is not possible that he should describe speech of
his own as one of remarkable power. In charity lot
us suppose that the people who accused Mr.. Glad
stone of writing the article had not themselves read
IT, No doubt il is a remarkable paper full OF spirit
though not the spirit of brotheTly love- and no doubt
II eyinces considerable power in misstating case
The usual amenities of ecclesiastical controversy
are not wanting Sir William HaIcOurt took
leading part in the advocacy OF the Pubic worship
act in the House of Commons The advocate OF the
men whose Illegal practices that act was meant 10
suppress describes him as man to whom g11nnlng
through "a hOrse-colar il pleaSuTable occupation IL
grin. The majority which passed the bill was
puritan conspiracy;" and later, we hear OF Puritan
fuclemen. with greedy hurry, blocking the way to
any possible negotiation. The negotiation in
ouestion is a negotiation which the Reviewer would
have been disposed to enter into after the Purchas
Judgment with some party not named; that the two
might agree on the precise degree OF obedience
which the Ritualsts should render to the law,
rs declared in that Judgment. And the whole artl-
che is a discussion of that and kindred questions 1t
is of importance because il s declaration on behalf
of the High Church party distinguished so far as 1t
is distncuishable from the Ritualistc faction. The
Church Quarterly Roic'c, IN fact, appears as the
ayowed and suppose also the authorized, organ of
the High Church party. The first number came ont
ON Monday and although il publishes an advertise
rnent of Epp's cocoa where prospectus might he
looked for nobody who reads il will be left i'll doubt
If its aims and character. A sufficiently explicit
statement of its position is supplied III The declara-
ton that orr standpoint is that OF progressive
English High Churchmen of TractaIian extraction,
who will neither admit that the modern Ritualists
can show any right to dictate to their more prudent
and more Anglican and national brother hlgh
Cbnrchmen, nor that those High Churchmen are
justified IN abandoning the Ritaalists, because OF
some waywardness, to the rayages OF the Puritan
wolf"
Toward The Ritualists the RecicU is sympathetic;
what it is toward the Low Church such phrases as
the Puritan wolf and similar hints Of tenderness
scattered along its pages show clearly enough. Its
function is moreover to give voice TO that powerful
body IN the Church of England which maintains,
like the Roman Church. the rightful supremacy OF
ecclesiastical over civil law in ecclesiastical matters
Unlike Rome having no infalHbe heal, it sets mp
the right OF private Judgment upon the decisions OF
the highest LEGAL tribunals. These decisions are to
Ike obeyed if they suit High Church views; if they
do not-well, The counsel 10 disobedicnce is risky
ono, and to act upon ii might entail disagreeable
consequences; so it is somewhat warlly put. or
the Purchas Judgment it is said that the persons
principally Interested were unable 10 square the
latest conclusions of the Prvy Council with history,
law, or preceding decisions Of the same tribunal"
Many previous malefactOrs have held similar opin-
ions about the decisions of the magistrates who con-
demned them yet as q rule. the operation of law has
not been suspended 10 await their conversion.
There is, however difficulty in finding ont from
this latest deliverance Of the High Church party
where the line is 10 be drawn between critical dissent
from judicial conclusions and overt dsobedience to
the mandates of the law. The writer hopes the utl-
mate decision the burning questions of Rituslism
will not come before the reprieyed Judicial Com
mitteeD but before such permanent court of appeal
as NAV hereafter be established. Delay would be
gained for one thing and there reliance of course OF
getting Ritualist or two on the new Beach Which
ever be the tribunal and whatever be its decision,
opecouh wish he thinks that it's conclusions should
be received with o stOd bow Of silent acquies
cenee." He hopes, indeed, that the discussions he
invokes nav not take the form Of questioning the
Legitimacy of the tribunal itselffor curious reason
which Dssenters will not forget for the reason
that Church and State have played too long into
each others hands in England TO make il decent for