The Bishop of Liverpool (Dr. Ryle) delivered his first charge
on Wednesday to the Clergy of his diocese, at the pro- Cathedral, St. Peter's, Liverpool, and dealt, of course, as he could hardly help doing, at some length with the Ritualist question. He said in it, boldly enough what we, too, have often said, " Ecclesiastics, as a rule, are unfit to be judges. We do not shine on the Bench, whatever we may do in the pulpit. If there is one thing that Bishops and Presbyters rarely possess, it is the judicial mind and the power of giving an impartial, un- biassed decision." But Bishop Ryle did more than we could do to enforce this valuable lesson ; he illustrated it by giving the amplest proof in his own person how wide is " the diameter of being" which separates the episcopal from the judicial mind. First, he declared very strongly, indeed, for upholding all the ecclesiastical decisions of the Courts of Law ; but very soon it became evident that he was thinking only of the Ridsdale judgment, for at the close of his address he vehemently opposed tolerating Deism, Socinianism, or Romanism in the Protestant Church, whether in the teachings of the pulpit or in the symbolism of its ritual. Pure Deism has, perhaps, been ruled out of the Established Church in the case of Mr. Voysey ; but does the Bishop forget that the Privy Council has declared Bishop Coleus() to be a legitimate bishop of the Church of England, and is not Bishop Colenso precisely what Dr. Ryle at least probably means to describe under the head of Socinianism ?' Does he forget that the Courts of Law refused to regard Mr. Bennett's teaching as outside the pale of the Church ? And was not Mr. Bennett's teaching precisely what he regards as. Romanism ? Is he, or is he not, prepared to accept and enforce the Colenso and Bennett judgments, as well as the Ridsdale judgment ? If he is, how can he pretend that the Anglican Church is one of the orthodox Protestant type, in the same sense in which the Thirty-nine Articles, taken alone, are of the- orthodox Protestant type ? Does it not admit Rationalism on the one side, and semi-Romanism on the other? But if Bishop Ryle is not prepared heartily to accept and enforce the Colenso and Bennett judgments, how can he refuse the Ritualists- the right to make as light of the Ridsdale judgment as he himself is disposed to make of the Colenso and Bennett judgments P
Previous page
