The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1877-09-30

The Crisis in the English Church.
Can national church exist in Il parlla-
mcntary State where not only maiorty Of
the Legislature but Of the court invested
with supreme ecclesiastical authority il or
may be indifferent and even hostile to it, in
tercsts; To unbiased observers the ques-
ton must appear especially pertinent since
the storm of protest and Indignation called
forth by the Ridsdalc Judgment from a Sec
tion OF the Anglican clergy.
II Is plain enough that the present agita-
tion IS distinct in character from any which
have preceded IL. There have been many
disputes concerning points Of doctrine and
ritual, but hitherto these have been silenced
by the decision of ultimate ecclesiastical
courts, and there has been no question of
disobedience on the part OF large minority
OF ministers. Now, on the other hand, the
existing drblters of the Establishment, con-
stitu;ed by recent legislation. are avowedly
set at nausht by considerable body, and
she sentence OF the judicial Committee OF
the Privy Council j. pronounced al out
rage done to common SENSE" in protest
signed by upward Of thousand priests. in
This Is state Of things entirely unproce-
dented in the history of the English church,
and it is far more ominous Of disruption
than any assaults which have been organ
tied by enemies without the pale.
II Will not do to assume that the right Is
all on one side in this quarrel or that the
recusont attitude of the Ritualsts IS merely
the expression OF an impertnent design TO
iOist the views of a small faction upon an
unwilling majority. A revolt Of such pro-
portions rs the present is the exponent Of
something more substantial than u wrangle
about clerical vestmcnts. The strength and
significance Of this movement are not bound
up with this or that construction Of the
merits in the Ridsdale. but lie in the funda-
mental objection 10 the jurisdiction Of the
court. The attitude Of the rltualistic clergy
derives a certain force and dignity from the
fact that il seems to represent appeal 10 the
traditional principle Of church government.
1t wears the aspect OF protest against the
secular spirit Of recent parliamentary inter-
ventiOn in ecclesiastical affairs, and OF in
flexible adherence To the bulwarks Of ecclesi-
a-tlcal independence.
Nomnally OF course the Crown has been
the final arbiter in Church matters since
the beginning Of the English schism. But
IN practice the direction of ecclesiastical
concerns has, for the most part, been left to
the Episcopal body. The permauencc OF the
English Establishment is, no doubt, partly
due to the chary use of the Crown preroga-
tive. But if secular int lriercnce would have
been scarcely tolerable on the part OF SOW
ercigus loyal to the Anglican faith, how can
Is ili. 10 provoke resistance when emarat-
ing from parliamentary majority largely
recruited from Catholic and Monochrome
lists? In such n case the instructive ieal-
og-y Of the clergy would be fortified hy rca-
son, for il is hard t. see how a legislature
thus constituted could logically stop short
OF complete Gisc9,ablishmcnt. From the
moment the principle o! legislative super
vision is actively exercised, itis obvious that
the existence of a State Church Will hinge
on the election OF a few moro Disorders 10
the House Of Commons.
With the arguments for or against discs
tabhshment We have 10 concern. but it is
worth while to point out that in the existing
crisis the Eitualsts seem to be fighting the
battle Of the Church Of England. II Is this
fact, unreco-,nzed 10y the bench OF bishops,
but dimly visible 70 n multitude % the info
rior clergy, which gives Importance to the
existing crisis. We neel only call attention
to two measures against which the Ritual
istic party has been especially outepoAen,
and which will clearly Indicate tho dr.it Of
recent legislation. one is tho Public Wor-
ship Regulation act, which is unquestiona-
| bly, the grcatc5t innovation in the methods
OF ccc,c-iaetical jurisdiction that has taken
ttffa1
tue diocesan courts are practically SUPER
seeded in matters connected with the reli-
gious service. The Judge Of the new court
is not required 10 be Il civilian, or learned in
canon law, but may ba any Judge Of COM
mon law or barris,er Of ten years standing.
Moreover the tribunal IS invested with co.
crciye power to enforce Sentences, If ueod be,
| by Imprisonment and bishops arc required
10 act out the decisions OF the new Judge as
instruments of the court. No doubt tie
conduct Of Lord PINzANcE In this delicate
| situation has given satisfaction 10 the ma
! jortv of litigauts, but this, rs the Ritu-
ali,te insist, is n mere accident. In cas-" the
two Archbi4hops fail TO agree, the right Of
nomination passes to the Crown, and there
| l. nothing to prevent Prime Minister from
giving the place to Di7-entor.
Again, take the present constitution Of the
Judicial Committee Of the Privy Council, the
| supreme exponent Of ecclesiastical law.
This now consists Of ten lay justices from
whom no training in theology or Church
history Is required, all OF whom, with one
exception, may be common law Judges and
need not be even members Of the Anglican
communion. II Is sometimes urged ia miti-
| 1Rtinn of allh n GYgLam that tho fnnntia