not in that degraded sense in which those words mean an enslaved Clergy amidst an indifferent Laity, but in the only true and exalted sense which they ought to bear-in the sense of a Clergy whose freedom is bounded only by Law, and a State in whose free constitution and free press, and free aspirations, the voice of the Church finds its best expression. NOTE. THE SOCIAL RELATION OF THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH ΤΟ NONCONFORMISTS. Permission to preach. THE proposal to admit Nonconformist ministers, or the Presbyterian clergy of the Established Church of Scotland, to preach, under certain conditions, in the pulpits of the Church of England, would probably conduce so greatly to a better state of religious feeling, and an enlarged efficiency of the whole ecclesiastical force of the country, that it may be worth while to show how entirely it would be in conformity with principles and practices already acknowledged in the Church of England. During the hundred years from the Reformation to the Restoration, there is no doubt that it was the acknowledged usage. Under the 13th Eliz. c. 12, Presbyterian divines were permitted, on conforming to part of the XXXIX. Articles, not only to preach, but to hold benefices, in the English Church. At the Restoration this was prohibited. But even under the Act of Uniformity (13 & 14 Car. II. c. 15-20) it was possible, though with limitations of a more stringent character, for lecturers to preach even in parish churches with the consent of the Bishop, and in cathedral and collegiate churches with the consent of the ordinary, and accordingly Howe and Calamy did so preach occasionally. For these stringent regulations have now been substituted the milder forms prescribed by the recent Subscription Act. In this way, even without any alteration of the law, such occasional and exceptional lecturers or preachers, if they could so far conform, might be admitted. The question remains, whether the very wide latitude afforded by the recent change would fail to include any large body of Nonconformists. At any rate the permission, limited as it is, • Historical Inquiry, whether the Ministers of Nonepiscopal Churches may receive Allowance to preach occasionally in the Pulpits of the Church of England (London, 1859), p. 27. I Life of John Howe, by Henry Rogers, p. 176.-Baxter's Memoirs, p. 386. admits the principle. And even the Act of Uniformity (13 & 14 Car. II. c. 9, 11) appears to allow to Nonepiscopal foreigners or aliens not only the power of preaching, but of holding benefices. Further, by 32 George III. c. 63, the clergy of the Protestant Episcopal Church of Scotland, who are in the position of Dissenters towards the Established Churches of both countries, were permitted to officiate with the consent of the Bishop, although belonging to a different communion, and in some important points, both of ritual and discipline, divergent from the forms of the Church of England. And yet more, by 3 & 4 Victoria, c. 33, any one ordained by the Bishops of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States is allowed the same privilege; so that it is now lawful for clergymen to preach in our pulpits, who (with the American Episcopalians) entirely reject the Athanasian Creed, omit one of the Articles of the Apostles' Creed, and have adopted modifications of the Visitation and Burial Services-changes which, whether rightly or wrongly, remove what many Nonconformists regard as the chief stumblingblocks of the existing English Liturgy. 'As ' matters now stand,' writes an able and conscientious minister (who calls himself 'A Dissenter against his Will'), 'I could cross the Atlantic, and come back an ordained brother of English Churchmen, ready for any kindly recognition any Bishop on this side would grant me for the sake of his Ame'rican brother.' It is obvious that this circuitous opening through the American Church does, in fact, admit not only the whole principle here advocated, but a large part of the practice. It may be further pointed out, that there is not anything either in the practice or principle of allowing Nonepiscopalians to preach in our churches (under such conditions as might be agreed upon) to which the extremest High Churchman need object. It is not proposed-Nonconformists themselves probably would not wish-that they should be authorised to administer the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, or to ordain. But the right of persons not episcopally ordained to preach has been recognised at all times, both in the ancient and in the Roman Church. The famous preachers Pantænus, Origen, and St. Anthony, the founder of the monastic rule, were not in orders at all. St. Francis, when he first commenced his great career of preaching, was neither priest nor deacon. In the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States (lately recognised, by a large section of the English Episcopate, as part of the Anglican Communion') it is, I believe a not infrequent practice of the clergy to admit Nonepiscopal ministers to preach in their pulpits. The principle, therefore, is one which is recognised not only by English law, but by those ecclesiastical authorities which are regarded with most reverence by the only persons in the Church to whom such a practice could be expected to give umbrage. I have ventured to suggest, for the consideration of our ecclesiastical rulers, this relaxation of our system, as involving the maximum of increased usefulness and good feeling on both sides, with the minimum of organic change. There are two other measures which, whilst desirable on other grounds, would tend indefinitely to diminish the social estrangement which every true member of the National Church must deplore. Revision of the Authorised Ver sion. One is the opportunity of including Nonconformists with Churchmen whenever the time shall come for the revision of the Authorised Version. Whenever the reverential interest of Englishmen in the Bible shall have so increased as to render it impossible for the clergy and laity of the Church to continue to read, as Scripture, texts known to be spurious, translations known to be erroneous, and large portions of the Old Testament of which the meaning is perverted, then will come the day, which it would be as unwise prematurely to anticipate as it would be wrong needlessly to retard, when the question must be considered, to whose hands this most delicate yet necessary task must be confided. And inasmuch as the Authorised Version has become the property of the whole Protestant Anglo-Saxon community, and forms a religious bond between its different parts, closer than any other which exists, it is manifest that any substitute for it must combine as great and as extended an authority as it is possible to obtain. This-besides the probable need of invoking the learning of the Nonconformist as well as of the Established divines-would make it necessary that, in any Commission for the revision of the translation, both should have their place. For such a recognition of unity, for such a reunion in the grandest of all the works which belong to a National Church, we must look forward, and, looking forward, do all that in us lies to prepare for its accomplishment. Another such means may be specially named-the free admission of Nonconformists to our Universities. There may, especially in regard to the Colleges, be some practical difficulties of detail; but the general effects of such a measure (if past experience can enable us to forecast the future) can hardly fail to exercise the most beneficial influence both on Admission to the Church and the Dissenters. It must be remarked, that the same alarm as that now expressed has appeared at the proposal of each successive relaxation of the academical tests. the Univer. It was expressed by hundreds when it was prosities. posed to abolish the subscription to the Articles at matriculation. It was expressed again when it was proposed to abolish the subscription at the degree of B.A. It was expressed again, I believe, at every attempt to abolish the subscription at the degree of M.A., even after it had ceased, in its stringent form, to be exacted from the clergy. The ancient Universities and Colleges afford exactly that field of equal social intercourse, which would most effectually soften the exasperation and reduce the misunderstandings which now exist between Churchmen and Nonconformists. I believe, speaking as a Churchman, and as one who desires to maintain, so far as it can be maintained, the influence of venerable and sacred associations, that the genius of the place and the prevailing atmosphere of the society would have more power than any other single agency, I do not say to turn Nonconformists into Churchmen, or Roman Catholics into Protestants, or sceptical inquirers into devout believers, but at least to remove that sense of estrangement and hostility which now makes all approaches between them so difficult and so precarious. There is not at present-there has not been for the last forty yearsany lack of theological divisions within the University of Oxford. It has been the very battlefield of the contending armies, not of the Church of England only, but of the intellectual and ecclesiastical struggles of the whole nation. But the humanising, civilising, Christianising effects of the sense of a common University, of a common course of education, of a common pursuit of truth and of goodness, have rendered these differences compatible not only with private friendship, but with kindly sympathy-with earnest active work for the interests which the best spirits of the contending schools have at heart.8 Since these words were written, not three years ago, the two last of these proposals have been brought to the very eve of accomplishment. The union of Nonconformists with Churchmen in the Revision of the Authorised Version has been proposed by the most exclusive party in the Church, and even should the Government abdicate its proper function of taking the lead in so great a national work, it is now certain that, if it be done at all, it can only be by such a co-operation of the whole forces of English Religion and English Scholarship as is here contemplated. The entire opening of the Universities has also received so great an impulse both from within and without the Universities, that it is hardly possible to believe that so manifest a blessing will be any longer withheld by the Legislature. There remains the first of the three proposals-that of admitting Nonconformists to our pulpits. When we think who are the preachers that we thus exclude, and what are the congregations which we thus deprive of hearing what would in most cases be especially suitable to them, it is to be hoped that this relief also will not be long delayed. 296 THE THREE IRISH CHURCHES.1 [THIS Address was delivered to a similar audience to that before which the preceding Address on the Connexion of Church and State was delivered in the preceding year. One instance of that connexion-the Irish Established Church-at that time so little entered into general consideration, that neither by me nor any of the other speakers was the slightest allusion made to it. Within twelve months this corner of this subject, which was then too insignificant to be noticed, became the chief ground on which the larger question was discussed. It was not my intention on this occasion to re-enter that larger field. The main positions for which I before contended had not been shaken by anything that had occurred since. Nor was it my wish to discuss in detail any of the remedies which had been or which might have been proposed on the smaller questions which afterwards rivetted the public attention. I have carefully avoided the use of the phrases 'disestablishment' and 'dis' endowment,' from the conviction that, used as they are in different senses by the various parties who employ them, they are, until carefully defined, 'words without knowledge,' which 'darken 'counsel' rather than enlighten. Whilst expressing here a sincere respect for the Nonconformists of England and Free Churchmen of Scotland, I venture still to refer to the arguments I then used to show that liberty, progress, and order are best promoted by the connexion of the State with the Church, as represented, on the whole, in the Church of England, and that there is no reason for suddenly surrendering this opportunity of future greatness and usefulness because political opinion has for the moment coincided with a strong hierarchical movement against it. It was my endeavour to approach the subject by what, in his excellent answer to the Court of Rome, the patriarch of Constantinople calls the historical method,' and, in so doing, I will venture in all humility to use the admirable words of our great Quaker statesman, William Penn: 'Before I begin, I desire to premise that I intend not the reproach of any party. I am weary with seeing so much reproach in the world, for it gains nothing worth keeping, but hardens to desperateness what it is our duty to endeavour to soften. If without offence I may speak the truth, I 1 Address delivered in Sion College, Jan. 28, 1869. 2 Penn: Address to the Protestants in 1686. |