New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-08-29
TILE RERL1LS CONTR0VERSY.

country.
TIE BURIALS CONTROVERSY.
Sturdy John Bright's recent speech III the
House of Commons on the Burials bill was al
unanswerable argument for tolerance ana lip-
crafty. even from the lowest point OF view
within the Established Church. He dld not
speak as a NOnconformist, for there were sew
eral features of the measure of which he coulu
not approve, but contended that Churcbmen
had 10 cause for uneasiness and alarm, mas
much as the passage of the bill would have
most wholesome and invlgorating effect on
the Church OF England. He proved his point
by homely illustration. He knew n poor
man. ninety years of age, who, having lost
his wife twenty years ago, had gone every
Sunday for years a distance OF two
miles to the spot where she was
buried. there to think of her he had
lost to shed a tear over her grave and to
pray that their separation might only be tenn
porary Now if this plot were in the church
ward near his home the Dissenter's affection
for the spot would be just as great as il 1t
were in a public cemetery or in Noncon-
formist chapel yard; he would cherish ana
visit il, would turn time after time even to
enter the church and if he did not evenIu-
ally become regular attendant and men,
her of that church. it would be absolutely
impossible for him to be hostile to it. In
word. Dissenters would come to respect and
love the church under the walls Of which
their loved ones lay.
Mr.. Bright's argument loses force with mat
ter-Of-fact Americans who bury their dead in
variaby in cemeteries remote from Their
homes, and too often neglect to visit
thc family graves, coming sometimes, indeed, to
regard them as the dearest spot on
earth only in the mean and sordid sense that
the plot aud the stone-cutting have cost so
much. In England the feeling of attachment
to the last resting place of husband or wife,
parents or children, is one OF the strongest
RELIGIONS sentiments. The wild violet that
grows there looks up with hopeful eyes to
tell the secret of its own sprlngtlde resurrec-
ton and to remind those who are left behind
Of the unending freshness OF immortality. ii
the droning of the supplied choristcrs mingics
with the crcaling of the ferns and the twt-
terjne OF the birds beside that cherished grave,
will not the mourners heart be turned toward
the time-honored church which ministers so
graciously to all in the cAuTchyard!
Undoubtedly Mr.. Bright is right in cOnclud-
INC that the Burials bill, instead OF being
measure of disestahlishmeut will lessen the
p,cscnt feeling in favor of that course, and
allure many DissenteIs to return to the Es
tohlished Church. Aside from the fact on
which he laws so much stress, that new ties
will be set up between the Church and those
who are now strangers to IT, the removal of
IN hbpralItv
intelligence Of a great religious communion
will be an unmixed good to itself and to the
world. That Church is in reality, one Of the
broadest in Christendom. In ritual, how wide an
interval separates the rich ceremonial OF the Rt-
ualistic priest from the plain and simple service
of the Evangelical country parson! In faith.
what latitude is allowed for Dean Stanley's
explanations of the Creeds, for Canon Far
rar's views respecting Endless Punishment for
Dr. Pusey's differences from Paristic teach
ing. and for Father MackonOchics belief in
the Real Presence Yet the Church of Eng
land. with this extreme elasticity of faith and
practice, bears an unenviable reputation for
narrowness and bigOtTy, and mainly because
it cllngs so tonaciOusy to exclusive privileges
in matters of fouIth-rate importance, like the
Burials service.
For twenty years the controversy has
gone on, and scandalOus scenes have
been enacted in English churchyards appa-
rently for no better reason than that the burials
order was part of the whole devotional ser
vice of the Church, and that resistance must
be offered to any and every innovation, mas
much as the first concession would be sign
of weakness, and would be followed immcdi-
ately by disestablishment. Such course of
action and reasoning has restricted the use
fulness of the Church and exposed it to I'M
charitable criticism. 1t now seems probable
that this vexatious question will be dealt with
in q spirit of larger liberality. The over
whelming majority which the Burials bill re-
ceived on It's second reading showed that there
was no longer anything like ecclesiastical op-
position to it. Not a single Liberal voted
against it, and the Conservative minority went
as low as 70. With such a vote as this in
the Commons, the House of Lords will scarcely
venture to strike out the amendments which
have enlarged the scope of the original bill,
and made it genuine reform measure, albeit
not so generous III its provisions as the Non
conformsts desired. The great body of Con-
servative churchmen, with the Archbishops
and Bishops at their head, realize that the IN
terests of their communion will be promoted
by satisfactory settlement of a controversy
which only brings it into disrepute. With
this sentiment in the Church, 1t will be a
Thousand pities If the Burias bill does not
become a law.