The Times of yesterday argues for the keeping up of
the use- less and futile Bishopric of Jerusalem, on no ground whatever that we eau understand, except that a few English tourists might like it, and that it will be a lasting monument of the willingness of the Anglican Church to ally itself with the Lutheran and Calvinist Church of Prussia. At least, that is the only meaning which we can give to its reply to the very pertinent question, " What has the Bishopric done, and why should any attempt be made to retain it P" That reply is apparently that at least it had the merit of forcing Dr. Newman into the Church of Rome. To advocate the sending of a Bishop where he has no see and no clergy worth talking of, that be may comfort the minds of a few tourists, and remind Englishmen at home that the Anglican Church once at least proclaimed itself nearer to a Lutheran and Calvinist Church than to the Church of Rome, is one of the most puerile suggestions ever made by an English journalist. That is not half as sensible as a pro- posal to keep up the burning of the effigy of Guy Fawkes on November 5th, because it pleases many boys, and reminds the English public of the bloody intentions of a few Romanising traitors. Will the Times write next November deploring the disuse into which the burning of effigies of Guy Fawkes has unfortunately fallen ?
Previous page
