MR. GLADSTONE'S LETTER AND 1HE NON- CONFORMIST DISMAY. T HE mixture
of resignation and panic with which Mr. Gladstone's letter on the subject of Anglican orders has been received, especially by eminent Nonconformists, in this country, has something in it both of pathos and comedy. Mr. Gladstone himself shows very little illusion as to the magnitude of the result which may possibly be attained by the Pope's Commission to investigate the validity (or invalidity) of Anglican orders, unless, indeed, his too sanguine hope that the result may conceivably be a decided opinion in favour of the validity of these orders, should have any foundation, which we venture to say it has not ;—for in the actual condition of the question in the minds of the weightier Roman Catholic theologians, we believe such a result to be almost as impossible as would be a deliberate retractation, or attempted retracta- tion, of the decree of the Vatican Council in relation to the infallibility of the Pope speaking ez cathedra, and with a view to teach the Church on any question of doctrinal or moral truth. The whole story of the Roman Catholic procedure with respect to Anglican orders during the three hundred years which have elapsed since the Reformation, shows that hitherto, at least, Rome has hardly thought it worth while to entertain so much as the possibility that Anglican orders might be valid. The orders of the Greek Church, though out of communion with Rome, and the orders of the Jansenist Church, which is held to be heretical on important points of doctrine, have, we believe, never been seriously doubted at Rome, while the orders of the Anglican Church have never been regarded since the first breach with Rome as worthy of so much as serious examination. That may, of course, be evidence of prejudice or arrogance, or what you please, in Rome, but of whatever condition of mind it is evidence, it is certainly evidence of this, that whatever con- cessions may now be made under the influence of Leo =Us conciliatory policy, there can be no sudden turning round and withdrawal such as Mr. Gladstone ventures to suggest, though even he only suggests it as barely possible. It is not the habit of Rome to make a great and sudden voile face of this kind. We are far from deny- ing the possibility that the Commission now examining the question may report in favour of a conditional reordination of Anglican priests and deacons, instead of the present practice of reordaining them without even so much as an admission that they may, by possibility at least, be validly ordained already. But the very fdynost that we believe to be possible in the present condition of the Roman view of our Anglican history as a Church, ' would be the introduction of a conditional reordination in the case of the admission of an Anglican priest or deacon into the Catholic Church, instead of passing over that possibility as one not even deserving express mention, which is the present practice. Whether such a concession as that would have any practical consequence at all in bringing about a more serious rapprochment between the two Churches, we cannot judge without knowing more than we do know as to the humility of the extreme ritullistic party in the Anglican Church. If they are bent on seizing the merest excuse for submission to Rome that Leo XIII.'s liberality may provide, it is just conceivable that a few score of Anglican priests might leave our national Church on such a concession, who would not leave it without such a concession ; but after all the secession of a. few score of extreme Ritualists would not mean an earthquake in the national Church, and would not indeed mean nearly as much as the secession which followed Dr. Newman's conversion in 1845. But this is really the most that could possibly come of the investigation which the excellent old Pope has set on foot ; and this, as we have said, would hardly constitute a great epoch in the history of Angli- canism. For the most part, the Anglican Church would continue to be regarded by Rome as distinctly heretical on the doctrine of the Sacraments as well as on other im- portant points. Her orders will continue to be regarded as in the highest degree uncertain, even if they receive the tardy recognition of a bare doubt in their favour. And, what is more important, the vast majority of Anglican priests and deacons will continue to think that they have far better reason to treat the Roman Church with distrust and frigidity than the Roman Church has to treat them in the same fashion. Mr. Gladstone's attitude towards the excellent old Pope, and his readiness to be extremely grateful for the smallest display of benignity towards our communion, will find extremely little support, we venture to say, among even High Church Anglicans. The vast majority of them may be ready to admit that Leo XIII. is going as far as he possibly can in the direction of con- ciliation, but they will certainly add that he is not going far enough to render it possible to contemplate any re- union, since that would require a confession of error on the part of Rome, which would be cutting the ground from under her own feet.
But what interests us most in the effect produced by Mr. Gladstone's letter, is the panic it has diffused amongst the independent Churches. Dr. Guinness Rogers, who is not in any way disposed to condemn Mr. Gladstone for adhering to the view of the'essential character of Anglican episcopacy which he has always held, and who treats his former political leader with all his old enthusiastic admiration, is nevertheless in a white-heat of dread lest anything in Mr. Gladstone's letter should shake the Protestant fervour of either Anglican Churchmen or Nonconformist Dissenters. His address at the Memorial Hall, Farringdon Street, on Tuesday, was the address of a man who feared a moral earthquake, and was determined to do all in his power to hold up the standard of Protestantism in difficult and dangerous times. We do not understand why he thinks that Mr. Gladstone's letter menaces either the Anglican Church or the independent Churches of the Nonconformist bodies, but his address is delivered in a key which we are entirely unable to explain unless he does hold that eccentric view. Take the follow- ing as showing Dr. Guinness Rogers's tone " Mr. Gladstone was greatly concerned about the progress of un- belief in these days, but he [Dr. Rogers] ventured to think that the bulwark against it would not be made the stronger by an attempt at union between the different Churches of Christendom. Were they really sighing for reunion ? The Free Churches got along very well together. The Church of England would be thankful for reunion with them, but on what terms ? Absorption ! If they turned to the Church of Rome, he found that idea still more clearly marked out. Did Rome mean to make any concessions? The Pope might be a most amiable man, but his position and the position of the Church of Rome was to-day precisely what it had been in the past. Were they prepared to see undone the great work of the Reformation ? After all, what good would it be to a young cura'.o
to say that his orders were recognised by Rome ? Would Non- conformists recognise them any the more ? Nevertheless, it would make a remarkable difference to the country itself. These gentlemen of the Establishment were not ministers of an Independent Church, but of the National Church, and it was the National Church because of the direct, and he hoped eternal, breach with Rome, and what right bad they to barter away the liberty which this country had purchased ? The Nonconformity of England and America would not become entangled again in the yoke of bondage."
The excellent Doctor is evidently much disturbed, and though he rejects with ardour the notion that anything serious is going to happen, he rejects it with a sort of vehemence that seems to imply a most modest and indeed humble anxiety on the subject. And the Rev. Joseph Parker writes to Tuesday's Times in a panic far more vividly expressed. " The primary question," he declares, " is what is to become of us if Leo XIII. should say to the Primate of England, We find that your orders are valid.' Where would the independent religious com- munities' be then ? They would not only be still more deeply desocialised and made to be more arrogant and ridiculous; they would be simply blown to pieces by a new and tremendous gun." And he concludes thus :- " I feel that the whole Christian Church is being thrust into a false position, and that she invites the enemy to spike her guns." Well, this gives us, we confess, quite a new feeling of the extreme modesty of the ultra-Protestants of this country. Because Mr. Gladstone is grateful,— perhaps rather more grateful than the occasion requires,— to an excellent Pope for wishing to do Lord Halifax and his few followers a pleasure, the heroes of the "inde- pendent religious communities" in this country send up a wail of dismay which suggests a great want of confidence in their own principles and position. Nothing of the smallest significance has happened, or will happen, unless indeed the " independent religious communities," as well as the National Church of this country, are so seriously discontented with their own position, that they are pre- paring themselves for some great stampede. Their panic strikes us as a very new sign of the times. Is Pro- testantism indeed protesting too much, like persons of frail character anticipating a fall ? If not, we cannot understand why a letter that can change nothing, even if Rome should be prepared to admit the possible validity of Anglican orders,—surely not a catastrophe even if it did occur,—should be treated as if the stars were about to fall from heaven and the powers of heaven to be shaken. This is a wonderful testimony to the power of Mr. Gladstone to shake the minds of men, but surely never was there a milder or more strictly hypothetical premoni- tory symptom of a great upheaval than Mr. Gladstone's long letter,—or a more sudden outbreak of unexpected humility and alarm.
Previous page
