« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
damaged his reputation for sincerity. and in the tone of the noble lord's re. His Lordship intended to pass an Act marks, he (the Duke of Argyll) entirely which should be a strong parliamenta- concurred. Much of the language in ry declaration, and nothing more; but, which the right rev. prelates had stated thanks to a still Protestant party, this
the grounds on which they based their has been prevented, and we may hope opposition to the see of Roine, was not that the Romanists will not be allowed only of a nature in which he could not to insult our Queen and Faith, and
conjur, but was, he was free to state, then, by the connivance of our minis- particularly in the celebrated protest of
which they had heard, language involv.. ters, enabled to laugh at the penalties ing, in his opinion, precisely the same we have imposed.
obnoxious spiritual assumption as that In the House of Lords, the speak- against which he objected on the part of ing was admirable; the Duke of Wel- Rome. He had nothing to do with argulington and Lord Lyndhurst battled ments of that kind addressed to Her well with their unfortunate position Majesty's Government or to the right as promoters of the fatal Act of 1829. rev, prelate, but as the noble earl was The speech of the latter was a full fond of arguments addressed to members and bold denunciation of the arro
of the House, would he allow him (the gant claims of the Romanists, and
Duke of Argyll) to take his own line of
argument ? expressed determined resistance to
It was in the noble earl's their insulting aggressions.
recollection that, on the occasion of preThe Duke of Argyll made, howe
senting a petition, some time back, he
(the Duke of Argyll) had expressed his ver, the best and most convincing satisfaction that during the ministerial speech in support of the Bill,—so crisis no Government had been formed good, that we deeply regret that any in England on the basis of passing over effect it produced should have been in total silence an act which he believed marred by the vote of the noble duke to be an aggression against the spirit if for the rejection of Sir F. Thesiger's not the letter of the public law of Europe, efficient clauses. There is so much and of the municipal law of this country. of real point and interest in this The noble earl, rising on that occasion speech, that we have thought it right with some warmth to deny the inputation to extract the following portion,
cast upon him by the terms of his (the which we think deserving of our
Duke of Argyll’s) observations on the readers' serious consideration.
way in which he had treated the ques
tion, told their lordships he would not “If they had attentively listened to have formed the Government of England the speech of the noble earl (the Earl on the basis of passing over in total siof Aberdeen,) they would have found lence that act of the Pope. He did not that all the arguments he had brought know the form in which the noble earl forward naturally divided themselves into would have expressed that opinion, for he three. First of all, there were argu- had not stated it, but there were two ments ad hominem addressed to the noble documents which required to be dealt lord at the head of Her Majesty's Go. with in the matter-a certain rescript of vernment and his colleagues-arguments the Pope and a pastoral letter by Cardi. founded on quotations with respect to nal Wiseman. The offensive expressions previous language used by them, which which caine home to the hearts of Enhe (the Duke of Argyll) did not feel glishmen were (as we understood) concalled on to answer. He inferred from tained in the terms of the latter. A more their silence it was not easy to answer pompous and more absurd document those arguments, and that the language proceeding from a proud and foolish held by them, and by those connected priest had never been brought under the with the great party to which they be- notice of the English people; and if the longed, ou former occasions, was not noble earl had answered it in his place in strictly consistent with the line taken by parliament, he would tell him that he them on the present occasion. He had conceived it not only to be beneath his nothing to do with that question either, notice in the distinguished position he nor had any of their lordships. The occupied, but the notice of any individual noble earl then addressed the argumentum
in the country. an hominem to the members of the right • The noble earl had referred to other rev. bench, and had remarked on cer- religious sects in this country, and had tain documents emanating from them, asked why not attack them ? He men
tioned the Episcopal Church of Scotland, have advanced an argument different the Wesleyans, and other sects, and said from that which they had urged against that they had ecclesiastical districts. He this Bill. Excommunication was, it was (the Duke of Argyll) would have no ob- said, a notorious power of the Catholic jection to see the same legislative prohi- Church. The legislature had tolerated bition as was applied to the Roman Ca. that Church. The priest was acting in tholics also applied impartially to the spiritual things; what right, therefore, Episcopal Church of Scotland. But, had the State to interfere with that priest ? although he made that admission, he It was very true (it was said) that the protested in the most emphatic manner man whom it concerned was ruined, but against their lordships being seriously that was an accident, the priest had no.. called upon to debate the question whe- thing to do with that; the State was ther they were bound to treat the Pro- bound to allow the priest to fulminate testant Dissenting sects in the same his excommunications as he pleased. He manner in which they were entitled to (the Duke of Argyll) rejoiced, however, treat the vast hierarchy of the Roman to say that there was a judge upon the Catholic Church. All dioceses were ec- bench and a jury who took a different clesiastical districts, but it did not follow view of the case. They said, “No! we that ecclesiastical districts were the same do not tolerate everything that the Roas dioceses. Their lordships must look man Catholic priests might think neat the claims made by one religious body cessary to the exercise of their religion, and the claims made by the other, before and we will fine this priest in £70;' and they could make a just comparison. The he was fined accordingly. Now, what he doctrines of the different bodies must be wanted to point out was this :—He had regarded. Take the case of excommuni- no doubt all their lordships rejoiced in cation. Excommunication in the mouth this result, but what he contended for of a Presbyterian or a Wesleyan was a was, that their lordships should be more totally different thing from the excoin- cautious in the stating of their abstract munication contemplated by the Roman principles. If they pursued logically to Catholic Church. A trial took place in its legitimate result the argument that, Ireland about five years ago arising out because they tolerated the Roman Cathoof the following circumstances :-- A Ro- lic faith, therefore they must tolerate man Catholic conceived that he had a everything that was enforced by the right to read the Bible, provided that it Roman Catholic Church, then they gave was the Douay version, and he did so. up the whole moral ground upon which He was found fault with by the priest, their opposition to that faith was made who, before all the congregation, cursed
to rest. If he were asked whether he him from the altar in these horrible and was prepared to act upon the same prinblasphemous terms :- My curse and ciple with regard to other religious God's curse upon- and all who work bodies, he would say he was. A certain in the same field with him, or even sit at Bishop Skinner having had some disa.. the same table !' What was the conse- greement with one of his clergy, thought quence of this excommunication ? The it consistent with his duty to use lan. man was totally ruined. He was a miller, guage almost as offensive as that used and no man would carry grain to his from the altar by the Catholic priest. He mill--no one would speak to him-he issued a fulmination against Sir William was alone in the community. He was Dunbar, and pronounced a sentence of advised to bring an action against the excommunication against him, in which priest; he did so, and the cause was he said that all his (Sir W. Dunbar's) tried before a jury in the north of Ire- acts were done apart from the mystical land, and what were the arguments used body of Christ, and warned all Christians by the lawyer of that priest ? They were in the most solemn manner from holding the identical arguments which their lord- any spiritual communication with him ships had had dinned into their ears week in his spiritual capacity. An action was after week and month after month, by brought against Bishop Skinner, and it the opponents of the Bill now before was only not tried because, as he (the their lordships. The argument was this: Duke of Argyll ) understood, a compro• Since you have guaranteed the Roman mise was submitted to. He had adduced Catholic religion, you must tolerate these two cases because he believed that everything that is necessary to the deve- theoretically the principle which had lopinent of that religion. If the noble been stated by the noble earl would go lords who rejected this Bill, had been against the recognized principle of the retained by that priest, they could not existing law.
REPORT OF THE OPINIONS OF THE
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE
• It was contended that the ultramon. doctrine and discipline, are to be tane spirit of the Roman Catholics was watched with vigilance, lest they totally different from what it was fifty or should forge fresh chains for the consixty years ago, but he warned their lord
sciences of those committed to their ships not to suppose that the ultramon- oversight, whether they be laymen or tane body of the Church of Rome did of the clerical order. Had we a pronot know what was best for their own interest. He would entreat the House perly and liberally constituted con to look at the spirit in which this act
vocation at home, acting wisely, and had been done. The Pope had acted
in a thoroughly christian spirit, for froin his own sole will and pleasure ; and
the whole episcopal Church; these he would remind their lordships, that colonial bishops might be permitted the Church which the Pope by a breath
to hold their own local synods, conhad made, the Pope by a breath could stituted upon the same comprehensive rule. He entreated the House and principle; but even then, their acts or country to believe that the
declarations should be inoperative that was now being passed, did not at all until they had received that sanction, interfere with those advances, real or which must alike ratify the decisions supposed, which the Roman Catholic of the convocation at home. We religion was conceived be making. He
have thought it well to extract the conceived that under no circumstances, following proceedings of the Adelaide and at no time, should the advances,
with the answer of their even in error, be met by the arm of power. He trusted that the advances
bishop :the purely spiritual advances, which the Catholic religion was now making in our land, were but the current of an eddy, and not the main current of the streain.
AUSTRALASIAN BISHOPS," AT SYDNEY, Nay, he trusted and believed it was but
IN OCTOBER, 1850. the rise of a single wave, and not the advancing of the tide. Nevertheless, he
To the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop declared, whatever might be the case
of Adelaide. with regard to that advance, the floor of
Chapter House, Adelaide, Feb. 5, 1851. parliament formed no part of the field on
My Lord.—We, the Clergy of the which such advances must be met, but
Diocese of Adelaide, having deliberated they must trust to far other exertions to
at your Lordship’s suggestion, upon the meet it. This, however, he must ob
Minutes of Proceedings at a meeting of serve, that the Roman Catholic Church
the Metropolitan and Suffragan Bishops had not always advanced by merely spi Sydney in October last, have now the
of the Province of Australasia, held at ritual means.
He therefore entreated their lordships to remember that they
honour of submitting for your Lordship's bad a solemn responsibility to discharge,
consideration our views and opinions not only to themselves but to future
thereon, as embodied in the following generations. If the Roman Catholic
propositions. Church was to advance, they were bound
Though unfortunately under the neto see that that advance should not be
cessity of differing from your Lordship aided by footsteps proudly trampling on
on many points, we trust that our manthe ancient principles of their public law,
ner of doing so will be deemed wexcep
tionable. and the sacred prerogatives of this king- only do justice to the chief pastors of the
We are persuaded that we dom's Crown."
Australasian Churches by giving them credit for a sincere and earnest desire to
advance the interests of true religion in THE AUSTRALASIAN Synos.
their respective dioceses. As presbyters We refer our readers with pleasure and deacons of the Church of England, to the following proceedings of a por
we must claim to be considered no less tion of the Australasian clergy, with
desirous of securing the attainment of
the great ends of the Church's institurespect to the meeting held and the
tion. resolutions passed by the Bishops of
It was not thought necessary to remark Tasmania, Adelaide, &c. These ga- upon those matters contained in the mitherings of our colonial bishops, with nutes which are determined by the rubrics, their authoritative declarations of referred to the decision of the ordinary ;
or, judging from the general usages in that, should a period arrive when it should the mother country, left to the discretion be deemed expedient that Her Majesty of each individual clergyman.
should relinquish the right of nomi. Any attempt to enforce a rigid uni- nating to colonial sees, we are of opinion formity on inivor or trivial matters that, according to ancient usage, such would, it is to be feared, not only fail in right of nomination should be vested in its object, but would tend to engender the of the diocese over which the strife and evil surmisings.
bishop is to preside. The Church needs rest. May its chief
Church Membership. pastors be endued with the spirit of wis. MINUTE.-On a discussion of the phrase, dom, power, love, and of a sound mind; "duly baptized," it was understood and may we all, clergy and laity, be that the word “duly " was intended to divinely enabled to maintain the faith be explained by the words following, " in unity of spirit, in the bond of peace, viz.,- with water, in the name of the and in righteousness of life.”
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and Propositions above referred 10.
not to refer to the person baptizing. 1. That our proceedings may be made public.
7. That as the Australasian bishops 2. That we proceed to the consideration of the Minutes seriatim ; omitting,
“disclaim” the right, power, or wish however, all discussion upon the question cretion, the licences of clergymen,” we
“to suspend or revoke, at their own disof baptismal regeneration, except to affirm on the propriety or otherwise of
are of opinion that the licences to incumits introduction into the “ Minutes."
bencies should, as far as possible, be in 3 That we regard the meeting of the
the same form of words as those issued
to incumbents in England, and not reBishops respectively of Sydney, Tasmania,
vocable at “pleasure.” New Zealand, Adelaide, Newcastle, and
8. That it is desirable there should be Melbourne, simply as a voluntary assembling of the chief pastors of the Aus
a power of depriving clergy, convicted of tralasian dioceses, to confer upon matters
iinmorality or heresy, of their incumben:
cies. affecting the interests of the Church. 4. That, while we approve mainly of
Status of Clergy. the objects on which the bishops pro..
9. That we view with some degree of posed to consult—as specified in Sec
fear and disapprobation the desire of the tion I., ---We cannot refrain from express
Australasian bishops to licence clergying regret that, as they had not conferred
men to charges of a “temporary nature,” with their respective clergy before their and the wish expressed by them that meeting, they should have forwarded
candidates for holy orders should place their “Minutes” to England, with a view,
themselves entirely at the disposal of it is presumed, to Imperial Legislation, their bishop for some definite term of without previously submitting them to
years, and leave to him the responsibility the c!ergy and laity of their respective
of appointing and changing their station dioceses.
during such period ;''-
-as we believe such
a policy, if general, would, under present Future Synods and Conventions.
circumstances, be injurious to the main5. That, adverting to chap. iii., “ On
tenance of mental independence, docFuture Synods and Conventions,” we
trinal purity, and pastoral fidelity among are of opinion that it would be prefer
the junior clergy, and would be inimical able for the clergy and laity to meet in
to their domestic comfort and general one assembly or convention, consisting of usefulness. every licensed presbyter having cure of 10. That it is of the utwost iinporsouls, and one or more laymen chosen by
tance to the respectability, influence, and and out of the members of each congre
efficiency of the clerical body in this gation, in full communion, and presided diocese to keep up, as far as possible, over by the bishop of the diocese.
the standard of secular and theological Subdivision of Dioceses and Nomination learning for candidates for holy orders of Bishops.
which is required by the bishops at home. 6. That the right and power of Her 11. 'I hat, under present circumstances, Most Gracious Majesty to subdivide the it is not advisable to adınit to the diacoAustralasian dioceses and to nominate nate, for the service of the Church in bishops thereto has hitherto been wisely this diocese, persons whose previous po. and beneficially exercised, and ought for sition in the colony would materially imthe present to be retained intact; and pair their influence.
12. That, for the due preservation of for and injudicious. That the construction order and harmony, it is desirable that put by them upon the “Creed, Articles, no deacon or catechist should be intro.. and Liturgy,” with respect to this subject, duced into any district already under the would, if imposed, be tantamount to a new care of a preshyter, but on the nomina- article of faith ; and that the dogmatical tion of such presbyter to whom the said determination of a question which has deacon or catechist should be subordi- ever been practically considered an open nate.
one, virtually narrows the terins of comLITURGY.
munion with our Church. Marriage of Persons, neither of whom
Education. belong to the Church.
16 That whilst desirous of seeing a 13. That whereas, up to a recent pe- school established in connection with riod, no marriages of Dissenters in Eng- every Church in this colony, we shall be land were legal, unless celebrated ac- prepared to regard favourably any system cording to the rites and ceremonies of of education in which the Bible shall be the Established Church ; and whereas the basis of the instruction given. at the present time the majority of Dis
Missions. senting marriages are so celebrated in 17. That we hail with great satisfacthe mother-country-we are of opinion tion the establishment of the Australathat no Australasian clergyman ought sian Board of Missions in connexion with to refuse to marry any parties who may our Church, with a view to the conver. apply to him, though they be not mem- sion of the aboriginal inhabitants of Ausbers of our communion.
tralasia, and the Isles of the Western Ministering to Dissenters.
Pacific; and we earnestly hope and pray 14. That, while we are relieved from that such measures may be adopted and any legal “obligation" to perform re- carried out by its members as may be ligious services for persons who are not crowned with the Divine blessing. members of our Church.-yet, to guard (Here follow the signatures of eleven against any misconception, we desire to
clergymen.] express our readiness to afford our mi. nisterial offices, as far as in us lies, to
The following is the Bishop's reply, any one who may need or desire them.
“ Claremont, February 6, 1851. MINUTE. We deem it expedient to ex- “ My dear Mr. Farrell- I return, for
press an opinion on some points publication, the resolutions and opinions touched upon in chap. vii., as we be- arrived at by the clergy on the Minutes lieve these points must be left, to a of the Conference at Sydney, which, on certain extent, to the discretion of the my return, I submitted for their conofficiating minister. We feel bound, sideration. They appear to me to be however, to remark, that in section 8, characterised by a calm and serious letter d, no mention is made of mar- spirit, which, under the circumstances riages to be solemnized on certificate of excitement lately prevailing, is pecufrom the Registrar's Office; but we liarly gratifying. Should Her Gracious cannot suppose that it is intended by Majesty, as Supreme Head of the Church such omission to condemn the solem- of England, authorize the clergy and nization of such marriages by minis- laity of the Australasian diocese to frame ters of our Church.
their own ecclesiastical polity, subject to We desire also 10 express the diffi. her approval,--and should it be deemed culty we are under of understanding advisable to depart on any point from what is meant by the advice of the the existing constitution of the English bishops tu repel from the Holy Coin- Church, I trust that the pattern of other munion persons who have married reformed Protestant and Episcopal within the prohibited degrees“ until Churches will be followed, and the relathey have repented and be reformed.” tions of the bishops, clergy, and laity, as Holy Baprism.
set forth in the Scriptures, carefully pre15. That the introduction by the Aus- served - I remain, yours very truly, tralasian bishops of the question of Holy
“ AUGUSTUS ADELAIDE. Baptism into their Minutes was uncalled “ The very Rev. Dean Farrell."
LONDON: J. H. JACKSON, ISLINGTON GREEN.