CHURCH AND STATE.* [EDINBURGH REVIEW FOR APRIL, 1839.] The author of this volume is a young man | it less the second time, and stil! less the third of unblemished character and of distinguished time; and now it seems to me to be n: defence parliamentary talents, the rising hope of those at all." "My good friend,” said Lysias, “you stern and unbending Tories, who follow, re- quite forget that the judges are to hear it only luctantly and mutinously, a leader, whose ex- once." The case is the same in the English perience and eloquence are indispensable to Parliament. It would be as idle in an orator them, but whose cautious temper and moderate to waste deep meditation and long research on opinions they abhor. It would not be at all his speeches, as it would be in the manager of strange if Mr. Gladstone were one of the most a theatre to adorn all the crowd of courtiers unpopular men in England. But we believe and ladies who cross over the stage in a prothat we do him no more than justice when we cession with real pearls and diamonds. It is say, that his abilities and his demeanour have not by accuracy or profundity that men become obtained for him the respect and good-will of the masters of great assemblies. And why be all parties. His first appearance in the cha- at the charge of providing logic of the best racter of an author is therefore an interesting quality, when a very inferior article will be event; and it is natural that the gentle wishes | equally acceptable? Why go as deep into a of the public should go with him to his trial. question as Burke, only in order to be, like Burke, coughed down, or left speaking to green benches and red boxes? This has long ap peared to us to be the most serious of the evils which are to be set off against the many liess ings of popular government. It is a fine and true saying of Bacon, that reading makes full man, talking a ready man, and writing an exact man. The tendency of institutions like those of England is to encourage readiness in public men, at the expense both of fulness and of exactness. The keenest and most vigorous minds of every generation, minds often admi rably fitted for the investigation of truth, are habitually employed in producing arguments, such as no man of sense would ever put into a treatise intended for publication,--arguments which are just good enough to be used once, when aided by fluent delivery and pointed language. The habit of discussing questions in this way necessarily reacts on the intelligence of our ablest men, particularly of those who are introduced into Parliament at a very early age, before their minds have expanded to full maturity. The talent for debate is developed in such men to a degree which, to the multitude, seems as marvellous as the perform|ances of an Italian improvisatore. But they are fortunate, indeed, if they retain unimpaired the faculties which are required for close reasoning or for enlarged speculation. Indeed, we should sooner expect a great original work on political science--such a work, for example, as the "Wealth of Nations"--from an apothe cary in a country town, or from a minister in the Hebrides, than from a statesman who, ever since he was one-and-twenty, had been a dis. tinguished debater in the House of Commons. We are much pleased, without any reference to the soundness or unsoundness of Mr. Gladstone's theories, to see a grave and elaborate treatise on an important part of the philosophy of government proceed from the pen of a young man who is rising to eminence in the House of Commons. There is little danger that people engaged in the conflicts of active life will be too much addicted to general speculation. The opposite vice is that which most easily besets thein. The times and tides of business and debate tarry for no man. A politician must often talk and act before he has thought and read. He may be very ill-informed respecting a question; all his notions about it may be vague and inaccurate; but speak he must; and if he is a man of talents, of tact, and of intrepidity, ne soon finds that, even under such circumstances, it is possible to speak successfully. He finds that there is a great difference between the effect of written words, which are perused and reperused in the stillness of the closet, and the effect of spoken words, which, set off by the graces of utterance and gesture, vibrate for a single moment on the ear. He finds that he may blunder without much chance of being detected, that he may reason sophistically, and escape unrefuted. He finds that, even on knotty questions of trade and legislation, he can, without reading ten pages, or thinking ten minutes, draw forth loud plaudits, and sit down with the credit of having made an excellent speech. Lysias, says Plutarch, wrote a defence for a man who was to be tried before one of the Athenian tribunals. Long before the defendant had learned the speech by heart, he became so much dissatisfied with it, that he went in great distress to the author. "I was delighted with your speech the first time I read it; but I liked ☛ The State in its relations with the Church. By W. E. GLADSTONE, Esq., Student of Christchurch, and M. P. for Newark 8vo. Second Edition. London. 1839 We therefore hail with pleasure, though as suredly not with unmixed pleasure, the appear ance of this work. That a young politician should, in the intervals afforded by his parlia mentary avocations, have constructed and propounded, with much study and mental toil, an original theory on a great problem in politics. Is a circumstance which, abstracted from all | signs of much patient thought. It is written consideration of the soundness or unsoundness throughout with excellent taste and excellent of his opinions, must be considered as highly temper; nor is it, so far as we have observed, creditable to him. We certainly cannot wish disfigured by one expression unworthy of a that Mr. Gladstone's doctrines may become gentleman, a scholar, or a Christian. But the fashionable among public men. But we hearti- doctrines which are put forth in it appear to ly wish that his laudable desire to penetrate us, after full and calm consideration, to be beneath the surface of questions, and to arrive, false; to be in the highest degree pernicious; by long and intent ineditation, at the knowledge to be such as, if followed out in practice to of great general laws, were much more fashion- their legitimate consequences, would inevita able than we at all expect it to become. bly produce the dissolution of society; and for this opinion we shall proceed to give our reasons with that freedom which the importance of the subject requires, and which Mr. Gladstone both by precept and by example invites us to use, but, we hope, without rudeness, and, we are sure, without malevolence. Mr. Gladstone seems to us to be, in many respects, exceedingly well qualified for philosophical investigation. His mind is of large grasp; nor is he deficient in dialectical skill. But he does not give his intellect fair play. There is no want of light, but a great want of what Bacon would have called dry light. Whatever Mr. Gladstone sees is refracted and distorted by a false medium of passions and prejudices. His style bears a remarkable analogy to his mode of thinking, and indeed exercises great influence on his mode of thinking. His rhetoric, though often good of its kind, darkens and perplexes the logic which it should illustrate. Half his acuteness and diligence, with a barren imagination and a scanty vocabulary, would have saved him from almost all his mistakes. He has one gift most dangerous to a speculator,--a vast command of a kind of language, grave and majestic, but of vague and uncertain import,--of a kind of language which affects us much in the same way in which the lofty diction of the chorus of Clouds affected the simple-hearted Athenian. Before we enter on an examination of this theory, we wish to guard ourselves against one misconception. It is possible that some persons who have read Mr. Gladstone's book carelessly, and others who have merely heard in conversation or seen in a newspaper that the member for Newark has written in defence. of the Church of England against the support ers of the Voluntary System, may imagine that we are writing in defence of the Voluntary Sys tem, and that we desire the abolition of the Established Church. This is not the case. It would be as unjust to accuse us of attacking the Church because we attack Mr. Gladstone's doctrines, as it would be to accuse Locke of wishing for anarchy because he refuted Fil mer's patriarchal theory of government; cr to accuse Blackstone of recommending the confiscation of ecclesiastical property because he L' γη του φθεγματος, ως ιερον, και σεμνον, και τερατώδες. denied that the right of the rector to tithe was When propositions have been established, derived from the Levitical law. It is to be and nothing remains but to amplify and deco- observed that Mr. Gladstone rests his case on rate them, this dim magnificence may be in entirely new grounds, and does not differ more place. But if it is admitted into a demonstra-widely from us than from some of those who tion, it is very much worse than absolute non-have hitherto been considered as the most sense--just as that transparent haze through which the sailor sees capes and mountains of false sizes and in false bearings, is more dangerous than utter darkness. Now, Mr. Gladstone is fond of employing the phraseology of which we speak in those parts of his work which require the utmost perspicuity and precision of which human language is capable, and in this way he deludes first himself, and then his readers. The foundations of his theory, which ought to be buttresses of ada-ory rests upon a fiction. He is still less satismant, are made out of the flimsy materials which are fit only for perorations. This fault is one which no subsequent care or industry can correct. The more strictly Mr. Gladstone reasons on his premises, the more absurd are the conclusions which he brings out; and when at last his good sense and good nature recoil from the horrible practical inferences to which his theory leads, he is reduced sometimes to take refuge in arguments inconsistent with his fundamental doctrines; and sometimes to escape from the legitimate consequences of his false principles under cover of equally faise history. It would be unjust not to say that this book, though not a good book, shows more talent than many good hooks. It contains some eloquent and ingenious passages. It bears the illustrious champions of the Church. He is Lot content with the "Ecclesiastical Polity," and rejoices that the latter part of that cele brated work "does not carry with it the weight of Hooker's plenary authority." He is not content with Bishop Warburton's "Alliance of Church and State." "The propositions of that work generally," he says, “are to be received with qualification;" and he agrees with Bolingbroke in thinking that Warburton's whole the fied with Paley's "Defence of the Church," which he pronounces to be "tainted by the original vice of false ethical principles,” and "full of the seeds of evil." He conceives that Dr. Chalmers has taken a partial view of the subject, and "put forth much questionable mat. ter." In truth, on almost every point on which we are opposed to Mr. Gladstone, we have on our side the authority of some divine, eminent as a defender of existing establishments. Mr. Gladstone's whole theory rests on this great fundamental proposition-that the Pro pagation of Religious Truth is one of the prin cipal ends of government, as government. 1 Mr. Gladstone has not proved this proposition, his system vanishes at once. We are desirous, before we enter on the dis cussion of this important question, to point ou clearly a distinction which, though very obvious, seems to be overlooked by many excellent people. In their opinion, to say that the ends of government are temporal and not spiritual, is tantamount to saying that the temporal welfare of man is of more importance than his spiritual welfare. But this is an entire mistake. The question is not whether spiritual interests be or be not superior in importance to temporal interests, but whether the machinery which happens at any moment to be employed for the purpose of protecting certain teinporal interests of a society, be necessarily such a machinery as is fitted to promote the spiritual interests of that society. It is certain that without a division of duties the world limited to this short life and to this visible world. He finds himself surrounded by the signs of a power and wisdom higher than his own; and, in all ages and nations, men of all orders of intellect, from Bacon and Newton down to the rudest tribes of cannibals, have believed in the existence of some superior mind. Thus far the voice of mankind is almost unanimous. But whether there be one God or many-what may be his natural and what his moral attributes--in what relation his creatures stand to him-whether he have ever disclosed himself to us by any other reve. lation than that which is written in all the parts of the glorious and well-ordered world which he has made-whether his revelation be contained in any permanent record-how that record should be interpreted, and whether it have pleased him to appoint any unerring interpreter on earth-these are questions respecting which there exists the widest diver. sity of opinion, and respecting which the great majority of our race has, ever since the dawn of regular history, been deplorably in error. could not go on. It is of very much more importance that men should have food than that they should have pianofortes. Yet it by no means follows that every pianoforte-maker ought to add the business of a baker to his own; for if he did so, we should have both much | worse music and much worse bread. It is of much more importance that the knowledge of religious truth, should be widely diffused Now here are two great objects :-One is the than that the art of sculpture should flourish protection of the persons and estates of citi among us. Yet it by no means follows that zens from injury; the other is the propagation the Royal Academy ought to unite with its pre- of religious truth. No two objects more ensent functions those of the Society for promot-tirely distinct can well be imagined. The ing Christian Knowledge, to distribute theolo- former belongs wholly to the visible and tangigical tracts, to send forth missionaries, to turn ble world in which we live; the latter belongs out Nollekens for being a Catholic, Bacon for to that higher world which is beyond the reach being a Methodist, and Flaxman for being a of our senses. The former belongs to this Swedenborgian. For the effect of such folly life; the latter to that which is to come. Men would be that we should have the worst possi- who are perfectly agreed as to the importance ble Academy of Arts, and the worst possible of the former object, and as to the way of atSociety for the Promotion of Christian Know-taining it, differ as widely as possible respectledge. The community, it is plain, would being the latter object. We must therefore pause thrown into universal confusion, if it were supposed to be the duty of every association which is formed for one good object to promote every other good object. As to some of the ends of civil government, all people are agreed. That it is designed to protect our persons and our property, that it is designed to compel us to satisfy our wants, not by rapine, but by industry,-that it is designed to compel us to decide our differences, not by the strong hand, but by arbitration, that it is designed to direct our whole force, as that of one man, against any other society which may offer us injury,—these are propositions which will hardly be disputed. before we admit that the persons, be they whc they may, who are intrusted with power for the promotion of the former object, ought always to use that power for the promotion of the latter object. Mr. Gladstone conceives that the duties of governments are paternal;-a doctrine which we will not believe till he can show us some government which loves its subjects as a father loves a child, and which is as superior in intelligence to its subjects as a father is superior to a child. He tells us, in lofty, though somewhat indistinct language, that “Government occupies in moral the place of r av in physical science." If government be indeed Now these are matters in which man, with-To av in moral science, we do not understand out any reference to any higher being or to why rulers should not assume all the functions any future state, is very deeply interested. which Plato assigned to them. Why should Every man, be he idolater, Mohammedan, Jew, they not take away the child from the mother, Papist, Socinian, Deist, or Atheist, naturally select the nurse, regulate the scnool, overlook loves life, shrinks from pain, desires those the play-ground, fix the hours of labour and of comforts which can be cajoyed only in com- recreation, prescribe what ballads shall be munities where property is secure. To be sung, what tunes shall be played, what books murdered, to be tortured, to be robbed, to be shall be read, what physic shall be swallowed! sold into slavery, to be exposed to the outrages-why should not they choose our wives, limit of gangs of foreign banditti calling themselves patriots-these are evidently evils from which men of every religion and men of no religion wish to be protected; and therefore it will hardly be disputed that men of every religion and of no religion have thus far a common interest in being well governed. But the hopes and fears of man are not our expenses, and stint us to a certain number of dishes, of glasses of wine, and of cups of tea? Plato, whose hardihood in speculation was perhaps more wonderful than any otner peculiarity of his extraordinary min l, and who shrank from nothing to which his principles led, went this whole length. Mr. Gladstone is not so intrepid. He contents himself with lav ng down this proposition—that, whatever be can only be secured for right uses by applying ne body which in any community is employed to them a religion." to protect the persons and property of men, that body ought also, in its corporate capacity, Here are propositions of vast and indefinite to profess a religion, to employ its power for extent, conveyed in language which has a cer the propagation of that religion, and to require tain obscure dignity and sanctity, attractive, conformity to that religion, as an indispensable we doubt not, to many minds. But the mo qualification for all civil office. He distinctly ment that we examine these propositions declares that he does not in this proposition closely, the moment that we bring them to confine his view to orthodox governments, or the test by running over but a very few of the even to Christian governments. The circum- particulars which are included in them, we stance that a religion is false does not, he tells find them to be false and extravagant. This us, diminish the obligation of governors, as doctrine which "must surely command uni such, to uphold it. If they neglect to do so, versal assent" is, that every association of "we cannot," he says, "but regard the fact as human beings, which exercises any power aggravating the case of the holders of such whatever, that is to say, every association creed." "I do not scruple to affirm," he adds, of human beings,-is bound, as such associa "that if a Mohammedan conscientiously be- tion, to profess a religion. Imagine the effect lieves his religion to come from God, and to which would follow if this principle were teach divine truth, he must believe that truth to really in force during four-and-twenty hours. be beneficial, and beneficial beyond all other Take one instance out of a million:-A stagethings to the soul of man; and he must, there- coach company has power over its horses. fore, and ought to desire its extension, and to This power is the property of God. It is used use for its extension all proper and legitimate according to the will of God when it is used means; and that, if such Mohammedan be a with mercy. But the principle of mercy can prince, he ought to count among those means never be truly or permanently entertained in the application of whatever influence or funds the human breast without continual reference he may lawfully have at his disposal for such to God. The powers, therefore, that dwell in purposes." individuals acting as a stage-coach company, can only be secured for right uses by applying to them a religion. Every stage-coach com pany ought, therefore, in its collective capacity, to profess some one faith-to have its articles, and its public worship, and its tests. That this conclusion, and an infinite number of conclu. sions equally strange, follow of necessity from Mr. Gladstone's principle, is as certain as it is that two and two make four. And if the legiti mate conclusions be so absurd, there must be something unsound in the principle. We will quote another passage of the same sort: Surely this is a hard saying. Before we admit that the Emperor Julian, in employing his power for the extinction of Christianity, was doing no more than his duty-before we admit that the Arian, Theodoric, would have committed a crime if he had suffered a single believer in the divinity of Christ to hold any civil employment in Italy-before we admit that the Dutch government is bound to exclude from office all members of the Church of England; the King of Bavaria to exclude from office all Protestants; the Great Turk to exclude from office all Christians; the King of Ava to exclude from office all who hold the unity of God-we think ourselves entitled to demand very full and accurate demonstration. When the consequences of a doctrine are so startling, we may well require that its foundations shall e very solid. The following paragraph is a specimen of .he arguments by which Mr. Gladstone has, as he conceives, established his great fundamental proposition: 66 Why, then, we now come to ask, should the governing body in a state profess a religion? First, because it is composed of `individual men; and they, being appointed to act in a defi nite moral capacity, must sanctify their acts done in that capacity by the offices of religion; inasmuch as the acts cannot otherwise be ac ceptable to God, or any thing but sinful and punishable in themselves. And whenever we turn our face away from God in our conduct, "We may state the same proposition in a we are living atheistically. . . . . . . In fulfil. mare general form, in which it surely must ment, then, of his obligations as an individual, command universal assent. Wherever there the statesman must be a worshipping man. is power in the universe, that power is the But his acts are public-the powers and inproperty of God, the King of that universe- struments with which he works are publichis property of right, however for a time with- acting under and by the authority of the law, holden or abused. Now this property is, as it he moves at his word ten thousand subjec were, realized, is used according to the will of arms; and because such energies are thus es the owner, when it is used for the purposes he sentially public, and wholly out of the range has ordained, and in the temper of mercy, jus- of mere individual agency, they must be sanc. tice, truth, and faith, which he has taught us. tified not only by the private personal prayers But those principles never can be truly, never and piety of those who fill public situations, can be permanently, entertained in the human but also by public acts of the men composing breast, except by a continual reference to their the public body. They must offer prayer and source, and the supply of the divine grace. praise in their public and collective character The powers, therefore, that dwell in individu--in that character wherein they constitute the als acting as a government, as well as those organ of the nation, and wield its collected that dwell in individuals acting for themselves, force. Whenever there is a reasoning agency there is a moral duty and responsibility in- | recognition of the doctrine of national person ality can justify. National honour and good Here again we find propositions of immense extent, and of sound so orthodox and solemn, that many good people, we doubt not, have been greatly edified by it. But let us examine the words closely, and it will immediately become plain, that if these principles be once admitted, there is an end of all society. No combination can be formed for any purpose of mutual help,-for trade, for public works, for the relief of the sick or the poor, for the promotion of art or science, unless the members of the combination agree in their theological opinions. Take any such combination at random-the London and Birmingham Railway Company, for example--and observe to what consequences Mr. Gladstone's arguments inevitably lead. "Why should the Directors of the Railway Company, in their collective capacity, profess a religion? First, because the A new ground, certainly, but whether very direction is composed of individual men ap- imperative may be doubted. Is it not perfectly pointed to act in a definite moral capacity clear, that this argument applies with exactly bound to look carefully to the property, the as much force to every combination of human limbs, and the lives of their fellow creatures-beings for a common purpose, as to govern bound to act diligently for their constituents ments? Is there any such combination in the bound to govern their servants with humanity world, whether technically a corporation or not, and justice--bound to fulfil with fidelity many which has not this collective personality from important contracts. They must, therefore, which Mr. Gladstone deduces such extraordiBanctify their acts by the offices of religion, or these acts will be sinful and punishable in nary consequences? Look at banks, insurance offices, dock companies, canal companies, themselves. In fulfilment, then, of his obligations as an individual, the Director of the Lon-ciations for the relief of the poor, associations gas companies, hospitals, dispensaries, assodon and Birmingham Railway Company must for apprehending malefactors, associations of be a worshipping man. But his acts are public. medical pupils for procuring subjects, associaHe acts for a body. He moves at his word ten tions of country gentlemen for keeping foxthousand subject arms. And because these hounds, book societies, benefit societies, clubs energies are out of the range of his mere indi- of all ranks, from those which have lined Pallvidual agency, they must be sanctified by pub- Mall and St. James's Street with their palaces, lic acts of devotion. The Railway Directors down to the "Free-and-easy" which meets in must offer prayer and praise in their public the shabby parlour of a village inn. Is there Mr. Gladstone's argument will not apply as a single one of these combinations to which well as to the State? In all these combina tions-in the Bank of England, for example, or in the Athenæum Club-the will and agency of the society are one, and bind the dissentient minority. The Bank and the Athenæum have a good faith and a justice different from the good faith and justice of the individual memdeposit bullion with it. The Bank is a person to those who The Athenæum is a and collective character, in that character wherewith they constitute the organ of the Company, and wield its collected power. Wherever there is reasoning agency, there is moral responsibility. The Directors are reasoning agents for the Company. And therefore there must be attached to this agency, as that without which none of our responsibilities can be met--a religion. And this religion must be that of the conscience of the Director himself, or none. There must be public worship and a test. No Jew, no Socinian, no Presbyterian, no Catholic, no Quaker, must be person to the butcher and the wine-merchant. If the Athenæum keeps money at the Bank, permitted to be the organ of the Company, and the two societies are as much persons to each to wield its collected force." Would Mr. Glad-other as England and France. Either society stone really defend this proposition? We are Bure that he would not; but we are sure that into difficulties. If, then, they have this unity may increase in prosperity; either may fall to this proposition, and to innumerable similar of will; if they are capable of doing and suffer propositions, his reasoning inevitably leads. Again,- "National will and agency are indisputably one, binding either a dissentient minority of the ubiect body. in a manner that nothing but the bers. ing good and evil, can we, to use Mr. Gladstone's words, "deny their responsibility, or their need of a religion to meet that responsi bility?" Joint-stock banks, therefore, and clubs, "having a personality, lie under the ne |