Happily there are plenty of Churchmen, including the Archbishop of
Canterbury, who have quite as good a right to speak for the Church as Lord Hugh Cecil, who have never admitted that there is any essential opposition between " Cowper-Templeism " and the teaching of the English Church. We note with satisfaction that so sound a Churchman and Unionist as Sir John Kennaway, writing in Wednesday's Times, challenges Lord Hugh Cecil's right to speak for the Church. In Sir John Kennaway's opinion, "the principle which he denounces would have been accepted by a large majority of Churchmen if it had not been accompanied by provisions which dealt most unfairly with the Church of England as compared with other denominations." Mr. Leverton Harris, a prominent Tariff Reformer, also protests against Lord Hugh's "precious victory." In Mr. Leverton Harris's opinion, Lord Hugh's attitude does not repre- sent the great mass of non-militant and moderate Church- men who desire to see an end to the unhappy controversy which has for four years roused bitter passions in the Church of Christ. Again, be declares that Lord Hugh does not even represent the opinion of the majority of his party in the House of Commons or in the constituencies. Mr. Harris goes on to say that had the compromise been left to the undirected decision of either House, it would have been accepted. " Un- compromising dogma," ends Mr. Harris, " has doubtless gained a precious victory,' for which Lord Hugh and his circle of extremists can claim the laurels. Politically, I assert the Conservative Party has made a profound tactical blunder which is both recognised and regretted by the majority of its followers." Whatever else the rejection of the compromise has secured, it has clearly not helped to unite the party.
Previous page
