Изображения страниц

verbial. "En tout chemin loyaute," is a Breton proverb, and it is one of the virtues attributed to them by a Breton writer, who assigns to them four virtues and three vices. Their virtues consist in a love of their country and their home, resignation to the will of the Almighty, loyalty to each other, and hospitality. Their vices are avarice, contempt for women and drunkenness. Their love of country and home is carried to an extent rivalling, if not exceeding that of the Swiss. The Breton not only loves the village where he was born, but he loves the field of his fathers, the hearth and the clock of his home, even the bed on which he was born, and on which he hopes to close his eyes. The conscript and the sailor are often known to die of grief when away from their native land. Brittany preserves for its children an inconceivable attraction, and there is no country in the world where man is more attached

to his native soil.

Of all parts of Brittany the Pays de Leon, which forms a portion of the department of Finisterre is the "most religious" and "most remarkable" for the number of its religious monuments, its fine Churches, its bone houses, Calvary way-side crosses and shrines.

Crosses are set up in every direction and of every description, from the plain unpretending simple cross of wood or stone to the huge crosses, flaunting in green paint and tears of gold-specimens of the taste of the Maire or Priest of the district. No Breton passes the sacred symbol without kneeling to salute it, and making the sign of the cross-evidence that the piety of those who first raised them, has not degenerated in their posterity. The country is rich and varied. The Leonais is tallest of all the Breton race; his dress is generally black or blue, with a coloured scarf round his waist; his hair is worn very long, and his broadbrimmed hat has a silver buckle. He is grave, of a calm, confiding faith, which nothing can shake or alter, and of intense religious feeling. The Church is the place of meeting where all his business is transacted, all his aspirations centred.

Our authoress gives an intensely interesting account of the barbarous massacre of Vendean Royalists at Quiberon. Surrounded by superior numbers they capitulated to the Republican army, on the condition that their lives should be spared, but the vile wretches of course did not keep their promise when they once had them in their power, and all were cruelly shot by order of that most infamous Government of modern times-the Convention. They were brought out in twenties and placed before a trench dug beforehand, and shot. The massacre lasted three weeks. In all there were 952 victims. Two Chapels had been erected near the scene of the wholesale murder; on one side is inscribed in letters of gold, "France in tears has raised it." On the Champ des Martyrs, where the execution took place, there is an Expiatory Chapel at the end of an avenue of silver firs, with a granite portico in the Doric style. Above is inscribed, "It is here they fell," and "The memory of the just shall be eternal."

Republicanism never took root in Brittany. The people, loyal to their King and faithful to their God, abhorred the Revolution, which sent their Monarch to the scaffold and overthrew the altars of their Saviour.

tions. "

[ocr errors]

"Nothing," says Souvestre, "can impair the freshness of her primitive faith. She yielded neither to anger nor fear. The bonnet rouge might be forced on her head, but not on her ideas. I will have your Church tower knocked down,' said a Republican emissary to the Maire of a village, 'that you may have no object to recall to you your old superstiAnyhow, you will have to leave us the stars,' replied the peasant, and these we can see farther off than our Church tower.' Mrs. Palliser gives an amusing account of the salt pans of Batz, and the paludiers, whose costumes are very remarkable and magnificent. She describes State bed, a tall four-poster, painted red, with green reps, tester, and curtains embroidered with yellow chenille. The great sign of wealth is to have the bedding reach to the top of the bedstead. To effect this, the base is formed of bundles of vine stalks, over which is spread the straw, and when the scaffolding has been raised some feet, a palliasse is placed

[ocr errors]


over it, then the feather bed, so that it ultimately requires a ladder to ascend to the top of the mountain of bedding, and There was a bolster and then it is difficult to crawl into it. two pillows, covered with velvet, which, with the sheets, were all trimmed with a kind of lace or network.

The coast, especially near Cape Finisterre and Penmarch, must be excessively grand, the giant rocks being thrown into wild confusion along the shore, and the cliffs rising to a great height.

It is full of exquisite woodcuts, representing the Churches, Mrs. Palliser's book is beautifully got up and well printed. antiquities, costumes and scenery of Brittany.

We cannot conclude our notice of this interesting volume without quoting a passage from an essay by Mr. Church on the same subject. Speaking of the faith of the Bretons he says:-

Brittany is a religious country, if ever the term could be applied to a country. The Church has set her seal on land and people. How she gained over these tough, stubborn, dark, thoughtful people is not the least wonderful question in her history. Her conquest is best explained by the countless legends of self-sacrifice and Gospel labour, which the Breton Calendar has of its own. But once gained they pay no divided allegiance; and if the outlines of their faith are coarse they seem indelible. The feeling that they are Christians is ever present to them. Even their tragedies begin in the most holy name. They delight in the title. Their most popular songs are religious. The cross is everywhere, the beggar traces it on his morsel before he touches it; on all things animate or inanimate, which are turned to the use of man, its mark is placed, it is set up in granite at the cross road, on the moor, on the shifting sands, where, as long as it is in sight above the waves, the passenger need not fear the tide "puisque," says his guide, "la croix

nous voit."


Literary Notices.

Another instalment of Letters on the Council, by Quirinus (Rivingtons) is before us. A brief notice must suffice. The present series fully bears out the favourable account we lately gave of the first portion. It well brings out the startling change which will be effected in ecclesiastical theory by the acceptance of Papal Infallibilism. In place of regarding the whole Church as the Body of Christ, and each member of it as endowed in his measure with the Holy Spirit for the rightful performance of his duties, whether civil or spiritual, the new theory vests all authority and all spiritual illumination in the Pope as its ultimate source on earth. It represents the kingdom of Christ as in commission, in the hands of the Bishop of Rome for the time being. As Quirinus says:—

The kernel of the doctrine, then, is this: there is on earth one sole lord and master over kings aud subjects alike, over nations as over families and individuals, against whom no right or privilege avails, and and whose slaves all are. The only difference is that some, viz., the Bishops, can on their side rule and lord it in their Dioceses as upper servants in the name of the Church or the Pope, so far as their master

does not interfere to stop them, while all others are mere slaves and

nothing more.

Pius the Ninth's own account of his position is this:

Seul, malgré mon indignité, je suis le successeur des apotres, le vicaire de Jésus Christ; seul j'ai la mission de conduire et de diriger la barque de Pierre; je suis la voie, la vérité, et la vie.

Quirinus does not adequately comment on this last clause. To us it sounds very much like blasphemy. Such a principle can hardly fail to have developments strange indeed to Catholic minds.

On the same subject we have also some portions of a Controversy between the Archbishop of Malines on the one part, and the Bishop of Orleans and Father Gratry on the other part. They are translated by the Rev. T. J. Bailey, and published by Mr. Hayes. Throughout the letters the Archbishop seems to rely chiefly on the supposed necessities of the case and the requirements of Roman theories more or less conceded, while Father Gratry appeals to Catholic tradition, and to fact and history. We need hardly say which side has the best of the argument. As may be inferred from the names of the writers the correspondence is well worth preserving. Father Gratry's letters have probably produced greater effect than anything else which has appeared in opposition to the new dogma, and, apart from the position he holds, the reader will readily understand the secret of his influence.

The Soul's Inquiries Answered in the Words of Scripture. (London: Hatchards, 1870.) Under this title Mr. G. Washington Moon presents us with a compilation containing sundry verses of Holy Scripture for every day in the secular year. These are printed upon one side of the leaf only, the opposite page being arranged after the fashion of a diary. The object of this is stated to be that readers may form a treasury of the autographs of their friends, under their respective birthdays. And the compiler suggests that we should take a second copy, and use it "for brief, but grateful, records of God's merciful dealings" with ourselves and our friends or relations. Frankly speaking, these little calendars of texts are not the sort of devotional books which we affect; but there are many who use and like them, and such will be pleased with this little work. It certainly possesses the merit of being very nicely printed and bound.

Most admirable is Mr. Liddon's Sermon at St. Paul's, Knightsbridge, for the Ascot Convalescent Hospital, Pauperism and the Love of God (Rivingtons). Nothing could be better aimed at a West End congregation. It puts our relations to the poor and the principle of Christian charity on a right footing, and brushes away some sophisms by which our wealthier Churchgoers are often deluded. A rapidity and apparent ease of argument unusual to the writer, adds to the effectiveness of the Sermon.


(The Editor is not responsible for the opinions of his Correspondents.) CONVOCATION AND THE REVISION COMPANIES.

SIR,-In connection with my former letter, let us now calmly survey the condition to which Convocation has brought us. It has virtually impugned the Church's version of the Scriptures, and proposed to give small may be the portion of leaven, the lump itself loses its integrity: it is no longer the pure wheat in its unmixed original character. A homoopathic poison is not the less a poison, nor is it the less insidious and deadly. Nay, and there it is where it ought not to be, even though it remain dormant; and a goodly security, indeed, have we that it will do so, the orthodoxy forsooth of those who have shown what that orthodoxy is by this very union, of those who themselves introduced that leaven. If the Convocation was not fully satisfied of its own sufficiency for the work, it surely should not rashly have undertaken it. To do so, while doubting its competency, and then "go down for help to Egypt," elsewhere, anywhere, to get that competency, is a wanton gratuitous insult and dishonour to the Church, on whose part they affect to act. It is volunteering a new task, avowedly beyond its ability, in order as it were to degrade her. That any consentient member of the Convocation should hereafter venture to censure false doctrine or schism in his own parish, or charge, would be simply absurd-he must leave that to those who, not having welcomed them at one moment, are free consistently to condemn them the next. And still more strongly is this applicable to those of the Upper House, who have actually, incredible as it may seem, defended the fearful desecration in Westminster Abbey. And yet they can wonder what it is that induces people to leave a Church, of which such are the rulers, ere it has become entirely the Babel to which they would transform it. And these are the descendants of the Clements, the Polycarps, and the Cyprians! But to return. Is it forgotten that the Scriptures, as to their covenants, were addressed to Churchmen only, as the exclusive charter of those who were in the older dispensation, or in subservience, under the later one, to the Apostles in the Church they founded: and that they who confessedly belong not to the former, and disown the latter as still historically and successively existing, can have "neither part nor lot in this matter?" They have invented and begun a new body of their own, and must devise their new code for it also. And yet these, for whose conversion to a truer faith, and the heavenappointed fold, the Church in charity puts up her prayers; these are they to whom her so-called representatives have appealed, to enable her rightly to understand her own peculiar and sole heritage! Let us, then, select a rioter as the best expounder of the law, and enquire of a republican for the fullest meaning of our monarchical statutes. And to what, then, is the condition to which we have been brought? Henceforth, the scholar is to have a Bible, and study it for himself. The unlearned is to have none. What he has had, he is told now, is untrustworthy, while, as to that offered instead, his answer must be, "You have shaken my house of refuge, raised by a legitimate architect of venerable stone, and now kindly propose to patch it up with untried compo, and newfangled co-labourers, of whom I know nothing, except that all they have hitherto built has been on rotten foundations and wrong principles. Away with such a cobbled messmedley; away with the foreign cement with which ye would daub it. I will have none of it." As to this version ever intruding itself into our public Services, it is to be hoped the Clergy have a little too much fidelity to their Church for that.

us a Sectarian one in its room. For be it ever remembered that however

[blocks in formation]

"We, the undersigned, Priests and Deacons of the Church of England, desire to express to your Grace, as our Chief Pastor, our grief and astonishment at the admission in Westminster Abbey, to the Blessed Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, of teachers of various sects, openly separate from our Communion, and more especially of one understood to be a denier of the Divinity of our Lord.

We also beg respectfully to state our belief that the Church expressly intended to guard against the possibility of such a cause of offence by the Rubric which requires that "there shall none be admitted to the Holy Communion, until such times as he be confirmed, or be ready and desirous to be confirmed."


SIR,-In connection with Lord Sandon's Bill for the introduction into parishes of "Church Councils," let me tell you what a self-constituted Council did in my parish. They met the Rector, and told him what they had decided on. He was not to allow a line to be sung in the Parish Church but what was in Tate and Brady's Collection. He was Finally he was to confine the Services to those held on Sundays, with to abandon the Weekly Communion and have a Monthly Celebration. Rector declined to be guided by this Council. He told them he never the addition of one to be held on Thursday evenings. Fortunately the had nor ever would use Messrs. Tate and Brady's effusions, and that he was determined upon using a hymn book of some sort or other. As to the Holy Communion he found it had been celebrated for some years every Sunday, and therefore he should continue to do so; and as to the number of Services, in that he must also be guided by his own judgment. And so the " 'Council" collapsed. This, Sir, is not an imaginary case, but really occurred in the parish in which I reside. THOS. S. DIXON.

Yours, &c.,

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]


SIR,-As various reports, which are more or less untrue, have found their way into the papers, connected with the refusal of the Bishop of Chester to consecrate the new Church of St. John Baptist, Green-lane, Liverpool, I ask you to publish the letters which I addressed to the Bishop on the subject. His Lordship has declined giving me his permission to publish his notes to me, in reply to mine, but I may be allowed to say that no reason has been assigned why the reredos was judged inadmissible. I may add that the only thing objected to was the reredos -an old work of art formerly in the possession of a Lancashire gentleman, and not, as reported, "from a celebrated Roman Catholic place of

worship." I may add that the Church has cost less than £15,000, not £30,000 as reported. Faithfully yours, G. F. BODLEY. 109, Harley-street, London, W., July 12, 1870.


"Falkner-square, Liverpool, June 23, 1870. "My dear Lord Bishop,-Understanding that some objections have been made to the reredos at the new Church at Green-lane, I think it best to put on paper some reasons for thinking that these scruples need not be considered valid. For, 1st, the carvings are all scriptural subjects, being entirely historical representations of the Passion of our Lord. The Crucifixion is one of them, but it is represented as the historical event and not as a crucifix. Your Lordship will recollect that the late Bishop of Exeter, who on one occasion declined to act where there was a representation of the Crucifixion in the reredos, said it should have his sanction if represented as an historical event, and at his desire the two thieves were added, and the reredos sanctioned. Now, in our reredos the subject is treated thus historically, the two thieves and other figures being there. Secondly, the reredos is in great measure an old one, but surely no demur can be made on this ground if there is nothing objectionable in the thing itself. In many Churches there are old altarpieces of foreign workmanship, they are numerous in the College Chapels at Oxford and Cambridge, and in many Churches in London and elsewhere. Thirdly, the reredos is, I know, very handsome in its character; but it must be borne in mind that the whole Church is one that is throughout, both nave and aisles and other parts, all somewhat richly decorated, the reredos is, therefore, only in due proportion and harmony with the rest of the building. Nor is it handsomer than many new ones recently erected, such as Westminster Abbey, Ely and Lichfield Cathedrals, St. John's College, Hurstpierpoint, and many others. Nor, I suppose, can there be any limit to the dignity and beauty of the ornaments in our Churches so long as they are free from any charge of doubtful orthodoxy. "I am fully persuaded from an artistic point of view, that a reredos of this kind is the best type to follow, and will be accepted as a work of art eminently suited to the place. There are several fine altar pieces of an almost similar nature at the South Kensington Museum which have been purchased by the nation, and are exhibited as models for our artists and workmen to follow. Finally, there is no principle or law whatever that could militate against this reredos remaining in the Church. It is confessedly a strictly legal ornament, and, knowing your Lordship's fairness and impartiality of judgment, I cannot but think that, as such, it will have your Lordship's sanction.

"I am, my Lord, faithfully yours, (Signed) "G. F. BODLEY. "P.S.-I must add that the removal of the reredos is impossible in the few hours now left us before to-morrow morning." "The Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Chester.

GROWING VEGETABLES IN CHURCHYARDS. SIR,-As I was passing along the other day to Doctors' Commons I was struck to see in the Churchyard of St. Andrew by the Wardrobe all sorts of vegetables growing, such as peas, cabbages, broad beans, lettuces, &c. I see the ancient Church is undergoing repair, let us hope that instead of peas, &c., that they may grow flowers to decorate the Church and altar, as that may be a step in the right way. Yours, &c.,


P. T.

We extract the following from the New York Church Journal of June 29th. There are letters from seventeen Bishops altogether in reply to a memorial in favour of removing the Filioque from the Nicene Creed. Some of the Bishops oppose any change, others are doubtful, we give only portions of the replies which bear most directly on Reunion: that of the Bishop of Kentucky is most remarkable, as he is generally supposed to be an extreme Low Churchman, and the latter part of his letter contains a deprecation of "Ritualism":


Bishop's Home, Frankfort, Nov. 1, 1867.

The Rev. J. Anketell :Rev. and Dear Sir,-My opinion on the question you submit to me was matured some years ago.

1. It is to be regretted that the attention of the framers of our Reformed Liturgy was not called to this point, and our Creed translated from early Greek copies. Then it would have retained "Holy Catholic Church," and made the omission you desire.

2. These changes are desirable inasmuch as they would place us in a more friendly relation with the Greek Church, and fortify the Catholic as opposed to the Romish position.

3. But inasmuch as we are already united de facto, and are not separated from Rome de fide, but only de forma, it is unwise either to agitate or to legislate.

4. And, finally, if ever it is taken up, it should first be by the Mother

Church of England; or, what would be far better, by such a body as the Lambeth Conference, when it has culminated into a Patriarchal Synod.

As I draw nearer the eternal world, as of late I have done, very near, not only by reason of my advanced age, but also by reason of a very dangerous illness, my earnest desire for "Unity in the Truth" of all those "who profess and call themselves Christians," is vastly increased. B. B. SMITH.


New York, Oct. 25, 1867. Rev. and Dear Sir, I will join heartily and cordially in what you propose in your note of the 23rd. Perhaps no one can estimate more highly than I the importance of a return to the primitive Creed of Nice, at least so far as the matter bears upon our relation to the Eastern Church. I know that the present form of our Creed is, in the estimation of our Oriental brethren, the chief obstacle to the restoration of intercommunion. And that they are right, and we are wrong in the matter, who can honestly doubt?

In my many talks in America upon the subject, I have heard but one substantial argument against the proposed change; and that is, that it will render more difficult the restoration of communion with the Church of Rome. But the brethren who use this plea have hopes in that quarter which I have not. To restore the Creed to the terms which alone the Catholic Councils have sanctioned, seems to me a simple duty; and I would not forego its performance to please a Church which would not relish the act only because of her own persistence in wrong-doing. No, our true position is communion on primitive grounds. We shall, I trust, never consent to meet Rome on any other. And by this act we should place ourselves more thoroughly and more firmly on that basis. Conformity to the Primitive Fathers was the guiding principle of the English Reformers. It has been affirmed anew by the recent Conference at Lambeth. And the restoration of the Creed would be, as towards Rome, but the perfecting of the work of the Reformation. I wish the design abundant and glorious success. Faithfully your brother, HORATIO SOUTHGATE.

The Rev. John Anketell.


Faribault, Jan. 21st, 1868. Dear Brother,-Yours came with much love, I am sure. God bless you for this token of your kind interest in our missionary work. I feel a deep interest in this question to which you refer, bnt confess that a question in which the whole Western Church is interested is too grave to be settled by individual action. The day will come when our whole Anglican branch will consider it and act wisely. In the mean time in our longing for union with the East, we must not separate from the West. My heart is with you iu every longing for unity. With love, yours, H. B. WHIPPLE. The Rev. J. Anketell.


Baltimore, Aug. 20, 1868. Rev. and Dear Sir,-I am glad that you so entirely concur in the view expressed in my note to you some months ago. If the movement is rigidly confined within the bounds then laid down, I apprehend that nothing but good can come of it. Yet I cannot share your sanguine calculations as to its effect in bringing about "reunion with the East." Mutual recognition of the Eastern and Anglo-Catholic Communions will, I trust, be brought about, and perhaps at no very distant day; but reunion is a long step beyond that, and a step which he must be a bold man who would venture to predict when either the "Orthodox" or we shall be ready to take.

In the mean while I am prepared personally and officially to favor our publication of a rectified version of the Nicæno-Constantinopolitan Ephesine Creed, as that which alone we recognise, without altering a word in either Prayer Book or Article.

I do not conceive that my own personal conviction on this point would entitle me to put the Diocese to the great trouble and expense of a special Convention on the subject; beside that, I should regard the precedent of such action as a dangerous one to set; and in this particular instance, have doubts whether the result would, on the whole, be favourable to your design. I am, Rev. and dear Sir, very faithfully your friend and brother, W. R. WHITTINGHAM,

The Rev. J. Anketell.


October 31, 1867. Rev. and Dear Brother,-I shall be willing, unless objections greater than I am now aware of could be urged, to vote, in my place, for the appointment of a committee of the two Houses to present to the General Convention of 1871 an accurate version of the Creed called the Nicene. Whether I should be ready, should I live to vote for its final adoption, unless the Mother Church and sister Churches went with us in the act, I cannot say. I cannot say I would not, nor can i yet say I would. If our entire communion would unite, I would vote for it in an instant. But I have doubts about our Church doing it alone. Very truly yours, J. WILLIAMS. The Rev. J. Anketell.

APPEAL and WARNING.-Churchmen who invite attacks

upon the Church by prophecies of disestablishment, and Churchmen who Parish Churches to the well-to-do minority-a tenth or twentieth-of the families in a parish. are equally helping on the Liberation Society to overthrow the Church.

would make the National Church a mere Episcopal sect by appropriating (as at present)

Every true Churchman will seek to save the Church by restoring the ancient freedom of Churches to rich and poor alike, as in all other Christian countries;

thereby alone regaining the electoral masses whom the un-Christian pew-rent National Association for Freedom of Worship, 16, Northumberland-street,

system has driven into irreligion or hostility.

Charing-cross; and Manchester. Subscriptions, 5s. Papers sent free.

The Church Herald.

LONDON, JULY 20, 1870.

The Week.

No event of modern times has burst upon the world with such terrible suddenness as the declaration of war by France against Prussia. The political horizon was calm and peaceful; in a moment a cloud arises and the thunderbolt falls. Thousands of lives are to be sacrificed, hundreds of homes are to be desolated, civilisation, industry, progress of all kinds are to be thrown back twenty or thirty years, in order to satisfy the ambition of one man-rather, we should say, that the attention of his people may be diverted from his own broken promises and unfulfilled engagements, by a series of battles with a foreign foe. France is so clearly the aggressor that, notwithstanding all our antipathy to Prussia, our sympathies are enlisted on her side; however, if we reflect and look back a few years, we shall see that this war is one of the most striking instances of retribution on record. France now, in the most violent and unjust manner and on an extremely frivolous pretext, picks a quarrel with Prussia, who is taken unawares. Possibly even that archplotter Bismark has for once been caught napping. In 1863 Prussia and Austria waged a most unjust and unequal war with Denmark in order to rob her of one of her provinces. These great Powers combined, having succeeded in winning a series of glorious victories over the brave little State, which was of course neglected by an English Liberal Government with its meddling and muddling Foreign Minister, in a few years time began to quarrel among themselves. Austria was plainly in the right, she had no desire for war, but Prussia was as determined to fight then without a pretext as France is now. Bismark, the greatest robber in Europe since the death of Cavour, seized upon Hanover and half-a-dozen independent States, which he annexed to Prussia, to the no small disgust of their inhabitants. Italy, always ready for mischief, who had secretly allied herself with Prussia, and accepted her gold long before the plotted war broke out, rushed into the fray. Austria was defeated and plundered, and victorious Prussia, proud of her ill-gotten gains, ruled supreme in Germany, the the most powerful State of Central Europe. The whole history of Prussia has been one of wrong and robbery. The province of Silesia was wrested from Austria, and Posen from Poland. Hanover, Hesse Cassel, Hesse Darmstadt, Nassau, and Frankfort were her plunder in the war of 1866. The three statesmen who in the last 20 years have been the representatives of might against right, of brute force against justice, are Cavour in Italy, Bismark in Germany, Glad stone in England; for the conduct of the latter to the Irish Church was much the same as that of the two former towards weak but legitimate sovereigns. Prussia has enjoyed four years of health and prosperity; now the hour of retribution has come. Even supposing her victorious in the end, which we do not anticipate, unless the rumour prove true of Prince Gortchakoff being now at Berlin to arrange an alliance between Prussia and Russia, she will have to

endure all the same miseries of invading armies which she
imposed on her neighbours in 1866. The origin of this war
may be traced to Prussia's unrighteous attack upon
in 1863, which, had the English Ministry of the time had a
grain of spirit or of right feeling, they would never have
allowed. Never was there a more aggressive or unjust war
For this,
than that of Germany against Denmark.
Germany has already suffered, and will now suffer again.
This is not the first striking instance of Divine retribution
on a nation which we have seen within the last twenty
years. In 1854 England waged an unrighteous and
unnatural war against Russia, a power with whom we
ought to be both politically and ecclesiastically allied. We
sided with an effete and immoral Mahommedan Power
against a Christian State. We were victorious, and con-
gratulated ourselves upon our victory. But a very few years
after the day of retribution came. Our Indian Empire was
rent in twain by a terrible and formidable mutiny;
hundreds of innocent lives were sacrificed, and millions of
money expended to quell this terrible rebellion, which was
brought about solely by the devotees of that very Mahom-
medan religion which we had supported and aided against
Christian Russia. We may well say, "Surely there is a God
that judgeth the earth."

It is at the least a remarkable coincidence that the same week in which the novel idea of Papal Infallibility was accepted by a majority of the Vatican Council should also witness a declaration of war between two such powerful combatants as Prussia and France. We have already so fully pointed out the reasons which must prevent the Council's decision having any weight with English Churchmen, that we need hardly repeat them. The Council is only an assembly of Prelates professing to belong to the Roman Patriarchate, the Orientals and our own Bishops being unrepresented; consequently, it is not a General Council. Again, even if we acknowledge that full freedom of discussion has been permitted, which is not the fact, the method of deciding the point by a bare majority of votes is contrary to those historic precedents which are our guides in such matters. Thirdly, it is well known that acceptance by the whole Church was always accounted the sure proof that the decree of a Council was indeed in accordance with Truth; but who can pretend that in this case Christendom assents? The deepest anxiety must be felt lest there should arise further disunion among Catholics, and our prayers for Reunion must go up with increased frequency and fervour. Doubtless some of those who opposed at first the declaration of the dogma will eventually side with the majority, for it is not everyone who has the courage to adhere to an unpopular cause. When we find eighty-eight absolutely voting non placet, and sixty-two giving a conditional vote, while there were about a hundred and sixty Bishops absent who may fairly be supposed to have been almost, if not all, opposed to the declaration of the dogma, it is absurd to pretend that the dogma is accepted even by the Roman Church. The victory thus gained is likely to prove ruinous to those who have fought so hard and sacrificed so much to obtain it. Whether the result may come speedily or be long delayed we know not, but it appears highly improbable that this new weapon thus obtained by a faction noted for their domineering and narrow bigotry, will not be freely employed with the object of crushing its opponents. The consequence of this will certainly be that the national Churches now in concord with Rome will cast off this unjustly imposed yoke, and leave in all probability a contemptible cabal of unlearned fanatics to represent at Rome the once venerated western Patriarch. But it is too soon for us to form any fair estimate of the results likely to follow. Should the dogma be pressed upon the minority for their acceptance, a split must take place, but the probability at present would appear to be that the result of the fierce European war now

commencing will place the Papacy in so dependant a position, that the successor of Pius the Ninth may not unlikely be a member of the moderate party, if not even the nominee of the Emperor of Austria or the King of Italy.

There is, certainly, no room for any doubt about the fallibility of the English Episcopate. We have elsewhere commented on the recent Westminster Abbey scandal, and have no desire to revert unnecessarily to so painful a subject. That the miserable shuffling of the majority of the Prelates should have brought them and their order into merited contempt is very sad, but is now unavoidable. What is absolutely necessary is that the Clergy and Laity should clear themselves of all complicity with the Episcopal betrayers of the Church; and this it seems to us can most effectually be done by a resolute insistance on the part of Churchmen that the intruding Socinian be removed from the New Testament Company. This would be to go to the root of the evil. The mischief arose from the admission of a Socinian to the Committee, of which the Sacrilegious Communion was a simple consequence. We object indeed on principle to admitting Nonconformists at all, except as assessors, but it must be granted there is a distinction between Socinians and other Dissenters; and a Socinian, as a denier of the Divinity of our Blessed Lord, we can in sense recognise. If a demand to this effect be made to the Committee in terms which shall convey one tithe of the disgust which Churchmen are feeling in this matter, the Bishops will yield at once from very fear of consequences. It is lamentable, indeed, to feel that this is the only effectual way of dealing with our Right Rev. Fathers in God. But so it is. To considerations of principle they are impervious, as witness their late disgraceful discussion in Convocation. We regret to see that the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol has since had the audacity to say at a meeting of his Company that "what had taken place out of doors since the last meeting would, he trusted, only bind the Company_more closely together." What can his Lordship mean? For ourselves, if the Socinian cannot be got rid of, we think the Revision of the English Version had far better be shelved altogether. The Committee have utterly forfeited the confidence of all orthodox Churchmen, who never contemplated, and will not tolerate, that "Revision" should be made the occasion of fostering infidelity under episcopal auspices.


Mr. Cross's useful Bill for prohibiting the sale of next presentations to Benefices has been smothered in the House of Lords, under circumstances by no means creditable to the wisdom or public spirit of that august assembly. If it was thought to require amendment any peer might have taken the work in hand himself, or moved that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee. But the House would have nothing to do with the measure in any shape. Lord Romilly absurdly alleged that the unanimity with which it passed through the Commons was rather a compliment to the vigilance and judgment of their lordships than a reason for adopting the measure. They were trusted (he said) to throw it out if objectionable; and throw it out they did! The Duke of Marlborough contenting himself with the mildest of protests, and a pledge to move for a Committee of Inquiry next Session.

In his earlier years, and as a member of the House of Commons, Lord Shaftesbury did much good service as a legislator. Latterly, however, he has become enamoured of the notion that it is his mission to reform the Church of England, in accordance with his favourite saying, that the Clergy have always corrupted the Church, and the laity have always purified it. His 'prentice hand he tried on the garments of the Clergy, and ludicrous was the failure. Nothing daunted, he now seeks to remodel the Ecclesiastical courts, and were

it not for the Erastian leaven that is sure to betray itself in the corruption of the whole, we should be inclined to wish him success in the attempt. At least he can do no harm by a thorough overhauling of the proceedings of the Diocesan Registrars, from whom he is with difficulty extracting official returns. Some of these gentry are mere sinecurists, who never even publish any accounts of the large sums which they receive for the small services which their deputies perform. Others make a point of exacting double the fees that lawfully accrue to them, and where there is no sum legally fixed, charge fancy prices for their assistance. Historical students who have occasion to consult the Diocesan Registers are mulcted in large sums for their inspection, and have no choice but to pay or go without the information that they require. Lord Shaftesbury has the gift of persistent firmness-ill-natured people might call it obstinacy. Let him use all persistency in bringing these old offenders to book, and he will do the Church and State a real though unobtrusive service.

The Radical press is fiercely enraged against the Marquis of Salisbury for his successful opposition to the University Tests Bill. They threaten in big words that since the House of Lords decline to sanction the headlong legislation of the combined High Church and Dissenting Radicals, and to throw open the Government of the Colleges without making any provision even for the maintenance of religious worship or instruction, a severer Bill shall be thrust upon them next Session, which they shall be compelled, under terrible penalties, to pass against their own deliberate convictions. How truly "Liberal" these people are towards those who venture to differ from their opinion! We must tell them, however, that to make their next Bill more obnoxious than this one, it must contain a definite provision in favour of infidelity, at least, and a distinct denial of any right to teach the Christian faith. Under the provisions of the Act just defeated, it would have been possible for a knot of clever young men to seize the reins of Government in a small College, and turn it into a Propaganda, not of heresy and schism merely, but of downright Atheism and infidelity. The tutors might be assimilated to the Brahma Somaj, the Chaplain a Socinian, and Captain Richard Burton, as Oriental Professor, might inoculate ingenuous youth with his notorious preference for Mahommedanism. The effect of the Marquis of Salisbury's resolution is to postpone the passage of the Bill until sufficient time has elapsed for enquiry, and proper safeguards have been found "for the maintenance of religious worship, and for the religious character of the education to be given" at our Universities; and we venture confidently to affirm that in this case the majority of the House of Lords better represents the mind of the nation at large, than do the frothy vapourings of Radical M.P.'s, or their thick and thin supporters whose tirades disgrace the daily and weekly papers.

There is little to record as to the advance of the Education Bill in Committee except the stand made by the Ministry in defence of the clause which introduces vote by Ballot for the members of school Board. Their policy is generally condemned even by the Liberal press. To us it seems thoroughly at one with their usual course, which is only consistent in its indirectness.

Acting under medical advice, the Bishop of London has determined to postpone the Visitation of his Diocese, which he had arranged to hold in the present year.

The decision given last week by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council iu the Purchas Case, dealt simply with the legal question as to the right to substitute a new promoter in such a suit in the place of one deceased. This point was decided in the affirmative. The court further pronounced its approval of the proposed new promoter as being

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »