THE "BISHOP OF ENGLAND AND IRELAND IN JERUSALEM."
WE most respectfully beg leave to decline the new title conferred upon us by the Standard, of " enemies to our venerable establish- ment." We are no enemies either to the Church of England or to any party in it ; albeit we may attempt at times to laugh some over- zealous brethren out of their follies.
The Standard maintains that the appointment of Bishop ALEX- ANDER to the see of "England and Ireland in Jerusalem" is not without precedent : "The beginning was made at least fifty-four years ago ; when, under the authority of an act of Parliament, Dr. White was consecrated Bishop of and Bishop in Philadelphia—Dr. Prevost Bishop of and Bishop in New York ; the solemn ceremony being performed in Lambeth Palace Chapel ; the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, the Bishops of Bath and Wells and Peter- borough assisting at the consecration."—They were not, however, appointed "Bishops of England and Ireland in America." So long as the American provinces continued part of the British em- pire, the Episcopal Church in what are now the United States was part of the Anglican Church. When the United States became an independent nation, the Episcopal Church there became the Epis- copal Church of the United States of North America : the conse- cration alluded to was performed at the request of the American Episcopalians, because there were no Bishops in America ; and the tradition in their church regarding the Apostolical succession ren- dered them desirous to have these functionaries consecrated by Prelates properly qualified. When what had been one nation became two, what had been one church became two ; and as it happened that there were no Bishops locally resident on the other side of the Atlantic, some were appointed, in order to render the separation possible. The American Bishops trace up the unbroken line of ordination to the Apostles through the Anglican Church, just as the English Bishops trace up theirs to the same source through the Roman Catholic Church. The American Church asserts the same independence of the Anglican in matters of discipline and doctrine that the Anglican does of the Roman. The consecration of the American Bishops was an act of accom- modation to a sister church, performed at its own request, and im- plying nothing more than the common belief of both churches in the necessity of preserving unbroken the series of Apostolical or- dinations.
The case of the Bishop "of England and Ireland in Jerusalem" it quite different. There are Bishops iieJerusakm already, who, according to the views of the Anglican Church, are quite compe- tent to bestow Apostolical ordination. There is no native church in Syria requesting at the hands of the Anglican Prelates an Apostolical Bishop. The consecration of Bishop ALEXANDER was not supplying a flock with a Bishop, but making a Bishop and sending him out to seek a flock. "Bishop Alexander has sworn no obedience, civil or ecclesiastical, to any authority in England " : why then is the reference to his connexion with the Church of England retained in his title ?* It is his connexion with' England—with the civil power of England—that, in the eyes of the Standard, gives value to his appointment. "For the first time, the Mussul- mans will have presented to them the Christian religion respectable in every way " : respectable, among other reasons, "from the con- dition of its professors—not the humble, uninformed, and perse- cuted Nestorians, but the powerful and intellectual English, the masters in every art, and the invincible in war." This is not merely recognizing the English character of Bishop ALEXANDER'S office : it reads somewhat akin to a preference of Matiomet, "the invin- cible in war," to the "humble, uninformed, persecuted" fishermen df Galilee.
"The Jews of Palestine," exclaims the fervid writer in the Standard, "participate in the anticipation of some approaching be- nefit, not less prized because in their apprehension it is not de- finite." For" not definite" read " definite." The approach of a mere missionary would excite no "anticipation of some approach- ing benefit" ; but there is a sound of money—of buying and sell- ing—in the title Bishop. The writer knows the Jews of Palestine ef the present day, and what is likely to interest them. The question is exclusively a political, not a religious question, though the writer in the Standard attempts to treat it in the latter point of view. No one is denying the right and duty of Christians "to teach all nations." The Church of England may send out as many missionaries as she pleases. When these missionaries have made as many converts in any country as require the superintend- ence of a Bishop, the Church of England may at their request bestow Episcopal consecration upon any properly-qualified person for whom they request that good office. Or the Church may sup- port congregational ministers, subject to the Bishops in England. But, according to the views of the Church of England, the charac- • The Bishop calls himself the Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem: witness the following advertisement in the Times of Thursday last- " The Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem begs to acknowledge the receipt of the Bret half of a 5/. note from a Lady,' and wishes the other half to be sent to 7 Palestine Place, Bethnal Green." ter of her Bishops is national as well as Christian; and for her, proprio mote, to appoint Bishops to any foreign country, is a viola- tion of national independence. What would the French people say to the appointment of a "Bishop of England and Ireland in Paris" ? The object in sending a Prelate in connexion with the Anglican Church to Jerusalem, is avowedly to make Christians of more consequence in the eyes of the natives : it is to make England the protector of Protestant rayahs, as France has been taking upon herself to be•the protector of Catholic rayahs. It is an attempt to interpose a foreign authority between the Government and its sub- jects. It is to implicate this country in the miserable intrigues of a barbarous people, and to perpetuate and increase the silly rivalry of France and England for influence in the Ottoman empire.
Previous page
