THE LH UitCH OF ENGLAND IN THE COLONIES.
In his amendment after Sir William Molesworth' ,s Mr. Glad- stone mooted in the Colonial aspect a question which he and his friends would be very glad to moot at home : ho fought on Co- lonial Around a combat which he would willingly wage on his na- tive soil, and which might most profitably. be discussed in a freer spirit than it has yet attained. But on the Colonial ground, in this Colonial debate at least, we see the matter quite nakedly and dis- tinctly. It appears that in the Australian Colonies the Church of England is in a very anomalous position. Holding a certain re- lation to the State through the parent Establishment at home, its highest dignitaries possess a considerable degree of power over their subordinates,--a power 'which may be very oppres- sively exercised against individuals, and is yet very barren of beneficial results to the Church itself. Certain limitations on the power of the superiors would positively augment their power to do good ; but it would be difficult to arrange the details here, for want of the requisite local knowledge. One instance cited by Mr. Gladstone is instructive. A Colonial bishop can deprive a clergyman of his licence, and by so doing can de- prive him of his bread; but he cannot enforce the attendance of witnesses to substantiate a charge against him. The bishop can only act arbitrarily or not at all ; the clergyman has no guarantee of justice ; the only enforcement of discipline is tyranny. A more unwholesome and ineffective state of authority can hardly be imagined. Mr. Gladstone proposed to enable the clergy of the Anglican communion in the Australian Colonies to assemble with the laity and axrange. plans for the better regulation of their church in those provinces. A most reasonable proposal, which would simply place the Church of England on an equality with other sects in those colonies; its actual position at present being less advantageous. The reception of this proposition was remark- able. Ministers showed themselves unwilling, if not incapable of discussing it, and set the Attorney-General to raise legal diffi- culties. Mr. Roebuck met it with blank scepticism.
In short, it was felt by all engaged, that while they were con- tending on Colonial ground, the victory or defeat was to be repeated on English ground ; and Ministers were obstinate to resist a per- fectly reasonable proposition for the Australian Colonies, lest they should be called upon to entertain the same proposition for this country. In this country the position of the Church of England is very similar: it cannot choose a course between oppressive authority and indiscipline, but alternates between both ; it cannot hold councils to regulate its own affairs, as any sect can do ; it cannot accommodate itself to the actual state of facts and opinions ; but, irrevocably anchored on the old level, it must break up before the rising tide, simply because it is not permitted to amend its an- chorage. Ile same party that pleaded for the Church of England in the Colonies would fain plead for the Church in England : it would be met by the same reluctance to grapple with an embarrassing subject, the same lack of insight, which cannot appreciate the urgency of the appeal, and also with some peculiar and further difficulties. One may suffice for " the rest of the thir- teen reasons " : to place the Church of England on an equality with the numerous independent sects of this island, would either entail an intolerable ecclesiastical power, combining the arbitrary functions of the Wesleyan Conference with a State warrant—or it would involve the necessity of disestablishment. Many who are urging such propositions as Mr. Gladstone's, are not prepared for either of those inevitable issues. Ministers simply refuse to med- dle with so troublesome a subject, which may be staved off for a season : of course they do not perceive the hazard that the ques- tion will become more troublesome and dangerous with the lapse of time, or they would not supinely sacrifice high interests to their own present ease. The cause of their supineness is the common cause of most misconduct—want of clear insight. But the sub- stantial dangers are not diminished by postponement. On the con- trary, the difficulties to a settlement only accumulate with delay. alievertheless, if a spark of unprejudiced intelligence and genuine zeal resides in the breasts of those who must have the matter most at heart—the dignitaries of the Church—a certain re- source is not wholly inaccessible. It is to be presumed that they desire the safety and healthy working of their Establishment ; that, conscious of solemn purpose and piety in themselves, they give credit for the same qualities in their brethren • and that therefore they can confide in each other. In the matter of this Colonial discipline, they need not wait for the wholesale legislation in which Mr. Gladstone has been foiled : let them, waiving exactions, pro- ceed as if they were a voluntary corporation—at least in all respects as wisely and as disinterestedly : let them take counsel how they can beste the regulation of the Church in the Colonies to fall in wiatihraCnclonial requirements, and forego any species of tech- nical authority which weakens rather than fortifies. For example, simply to relieve the superior in the colony of the power to de- prive a clergyman of his licence without proof of cause, would be a sacrifice of apparent authority, only to gain increased influence. If powers are needed from Parliament for any such purpose, asked with a candid singleminded spirit, most assuredly they would not be refused.
A like course is probably under the consideration of the Bishops at home. They have been holding frequent meetings, and these matters can scarcely have been absent from their minds. Surely their deliberations must have gone beyond the jurisdiction in lieu of the Judicial Committee of Privy Council, for which the bill introduced by the Bishop of London would provide—were it suffered to become law. Without waiting-for legislation, formal assemblages of Convocation, or Episcopal Councils, it would be quite possible, if they possess sufficient zeal and spirit of sacrifice, for themselves to arrange their conduct and methods of adminis- tration, so as at once to mitigate mere arbitrary authority and to promote the genuine discipline of the Church. By such a course they would anticipate some of the most dangerous and embarrassing questions that await the future of the Church of England, and would attain a solution in a way not to sacrifice an iota of the real interests of the Church, her real authority or sacred rights.
Previous page
