Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

describing, and that without his usual power and succinctness, the errors it had to overcome, the states of society it had to learn, and the position in which it found the human mind. On the whole we think these lectures worthy of an attentive perusal, and of the former part we can say also that it is worthy of the author of the Lectures on the History of Literature, but we think it unequal to his fame in the second part. The present translation is a truthful one, both as to mere language and the mind of the original, but it is not a pleasing nor an elegant one. In fact we do not often forget in reading it, that we are reading a translation. The translator has prefixed a life of the author, to which we are indebted for the facts of the sketch we have laid before our readers of Schlegel's literary life. It is written with candour and moderation, and gives considerable insight into the character of our author. We cannot conclude our notice without remarking with admiration the noble use to which Schlegel put his philological knowledge. It is indeed true that it is now conceded very generally that the study of languages is all-important as auxiliary to historical investigation, but it seems to us that the great field opened to view in the first instance by Leibnitz, and since partially, but as far as he could go, thoroughly explored by Schlegel, of parallelism in physical science and philology, has never been adequately made use of. It was an idea evidently much present to the mind of Schlegel, and most happy should we be to see that the translation of his works produced the effect of inciting some among us to prosecute so inviting but arduous a field of inquiry.

TEXTS FOR THE HOLY DAYS OF THE CHURCH.
(Continued from Vol. I. p. 385.)

S. VINCENT.

DEUT. iii. 11.-Behold, his bedstead was a bedstead of iron.

JOB Xxiii. 10.—But he knoweth the way that I take when He hath tried me, I shall come forth as gold.

JOB XXXiii. 21.-His flesh is consumed away, that it cannot be seen :—and his bones that were not seen stick out.

Ps. xxxix. 4.-My heart was hot within me, and while I was thus musing the fire kindled; and at the last I spoke with my tongue.

ISA. xi. 29. He giveth power unto the faint: and to them that have no might, He increaseth strength.

JER. i. 18.-For, behold, I have made thee this day a defenced city, and an iron pillar and brasen walls against the whole land.

S. JOHN xii. 24.-Truly, verily I say unto you, except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.

2 TIM. ii. 5. And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully.

REV. ii. 7. To him that overcometh [VINCENTI] will I give to eat of the Tree of Life, which is in the midst of the Paradise of GOD.-Also v. 11. and v. 17.

REV. iii. 12.-Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the Temple of My GOD, and he shall go no more out.

CONVERSION OF S. PAUL.

JER. xlix. 27.-Benjamin shall raven as a wolf: in the morning he shall devour the prey, and at evening he shall divide the spoil.

NUM. xxiv. 4.-He hath said, which heard the words of GOD, which saw the vision of the ALMIGHTY, falling, but having his eyes open.

1 SAM. x. 6. And the Spirit of the LORD will come upon thee, and thou shall prophesy unto them, and shall be turned into another man.

JOB Xxiii. 16.-For GOD maketh my heart soft: and the ALMIGHTY troubleth

me.

JOB Xxviii. 2.-Iron is taken out of the earth: and brass is molten out of the stone.

JOB XXXviii. 21.-Knowest thou it, because thou wast then born, or because the number of thy days is great? [Cf. 1. CORIN. xv. 8.]

Ps. lxviii. 20.-That thy foot may be dipped in the blood of thine enemies: and that the tongues of thy dogs may be red through the same. CANT. ii. 17.-Until the day break, and the shadows flee away, turn my beloved.

ISA. xxi. 3.—Therefore are my loins filled with pain: pangs have taken hold upon me, as the pangs of a woman that travaileth: I was bowed down with the hearing of it, I was destroyed at the seeing of it.

ISA. xxviii. 29.-This also cometh forth from the LORD of Hosts: which is wonderful in counsel, and excellent in working.

ISA. xlviii. 15.-I, even I, have spoken: yea I have called him; I have brought him, and he shall make his way prosperous.

JER. XXXI. 19.—Surely after that I was turned, I repented: and after that I was instructed, I smote upon my thigh and was ashamed, yea even confounded because I did bear the reproach of my youth.

LAM. i. 13. From above He hath sent fire into my bones, and it prevaileth against them: He hath spread a net for my feet, He hath turned me back.

PURIFICATION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY.

1 SAM. i. 24.—She took him up with her,—and brought him into the House of the LORD in Shiloh; and the child was young.

ISA. lx. 1.-Arise, shine, for thy light is come: and the glory of the LORD is risen upon thee.

CHURCH DISCIPLINE BILL.

We printed last week the draft of a new "Church Discipline" Bill. It is understood, we believe, that the measure will not be pressed through this session;-but that the bill is printed and distributed for general consideration, with the view of proceeding in the matter next year.

The subject is one of great and general interest and importance; and one also, we may be permitted to add, of the very greatest difficulty. We cannot have it too thoroughly discussed. And we are well satisfied,

therefore, to see that there is this disposition to allow the forthcoming measure-for some measure there must, sooner or later, most certainly be-to be maturely considered and adjusted.

The present bill is a reprint, with a few very material alterations, of the existing Church Discipline Act, the 3 & 4 Vic. c. 86;—and while in one very small but certainly important particular, that of Appeal to the Privy Council in cases of heresy, it proposes to retrace the steps of its predecessor, and to restore the old court and the old law;-it in other points continues but too much in the same path,—and adds fresh anomalies and fresh innovations.

We will begin with this matter of "Appeal." One of Lord Brougham's acts, the one which established the judicial committee of the Privy Council, abolished at a stroke the ancient supreme appellate jurisdiction in ecclesiastical causes of the Court of Delegates, a court as old as the Reformation, and transferred it to the new Judicial Committee. The constitution of the Court thus abolished was this. The cognizance of all ecclesiastical causes and offences lay, in the first instance, with the Bishop. From the Bishop an appeal lay to the Archbishop, and his decision was, by the 24th of Henry VIII., declared to be final. An act of the following year, however, declared that "for lack of justice in the Archbishops' courts, the party may appeal to the King in Chancery," by whom a commission was thereupon directed to be issued, to hear and determine. The commissioners thus appointed, generally Bishops, judges, and civilians, were called "Delegates," and the "Court of Delegates was thus the general court of supreme jurisdiction in all ecclesiastical matters. In one point alone, however, there was an exception. Where the Crown was a party to any suit of ecclesiastical cognizance, the appeal from the Archbishop was not to the Delegates, but to the Spiritual Peers in the Upper House of Convocation assembled.

Now, it is obvious, of course, that even this machinery, which it is now proposed, in the one point of heresy, to restore, was not altogether unexceptionable. In will-cases, divorces, validity of marriages, and tithes the four main channels of modern Ecclesiastical Court business -it, of course, matters not two straws whether the Supreme Court of Appeal is or is not a body simply heathen; or rather, it is perhaps right and desirable that these matters -- purely temporal as they are in substance-should be under a judicial management the same in kind as that which presides over all other temporal causes in the kingdom. But when matters really ecclesiastical are in hand, the question becomes widely different.

Matters really ecclesiastical may probably resolve themselves into two classes: 1st, the government of the Clergy; and 2ndly, questions of pure doctrine. But the efficient external discipline of the Clergy, though certainly a matter primarily and intimately concerning the Church, seems to stand on a very different footing from the maintenance and determination of sound doctrine. It may be well that the delegates of the Crown should have the supreme jurisdiction in that judicature which is to maintain obedience, decorum, and purity among the Clergy. Not only does it concern society at large as well as, though less intimately than, the Church, that the order and moral efficiency (so to speak) of

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

the Clergy should be truly and thoroughly maintained; but it is also the recognized and undoubted meaning of the Ecclesiastical Supremacy of the Crown, that in these matters, in the great police (so to say) of the Corporation of the English Church, the Sovereign, as its temporal head, should be supremely responsible, and, subject to the law, supremely powerful. But in questions of pure doctrine-in questions where the point disputed is whether this or that is the true doctrine of the Church —what, we ask, can be more contrary to precedent,-more contrary to the laws of universal Christendom, from the first hour of the Christian era to the present moment,-more contrary to the plainest meaning of the English Ecclesiastical supremacy, as expressly defined and asserted by Queen Elizabeth herself, and by every act of Parliament which refers to it, what more contrary, above all, to the simplest common sense,— than that a body of "delegates," commissioners named at random by the Chancellor,-gentlemen who might, in the present constitution of the Kingdom, be of any form of religious belief, or of none at all,— Dissenters or Romanists, if so it chanced, (though in Henry the Eighth's time this was of course impossible,)—what can be more absurd than that in such questions, such a body as this should sit in judgment on the solemn sentence of the Archbishop of Canterbury, pronounced after, and on appeal from, a previous and equally solemn sentence of a Bishop of the Province? The appeal to the Upper House of Convocation appears to us really the only course to pursue, if an appeal there must be, in order to procure, under present circumstances, at once a more authoritative opinion, and one more likely to speak the real voice of the Church, than the sentence of the Archbishop. It is not, of course, that a good body of delegates might not, if so it chanced, be selected, whose learning and authority would furnish a more sound, and perhaps more weighty, judgment than that of the Archbishop; but this is nothing to the point. It would be an accident. And the real objection is, that the tribunal admits of an opposite and fatal construction. It might be Romish—it might be Dissenting.

Such is the Court of Appeal proposed, in cases of heresy, to be revived by the bill before us. The Court of Delegates, in its entire jurisdiction, was swamped by Lord Brougham. It was succeeded by the Judicial Committee of Council,-originally, not only not better, but much worse than the Court of Delegates. For whereas the Delegates might be so chosen as to constitute a real Court of Appeal from the Archbishop,a Court both more intrinsically authoritative, and certainly, legally speaking, more learned; the Court of the Privy Council, on the other hand, as at first constituted, never could be so formed,—as it was already cut and dried-a body of Judges, necessarily all laymen, and possibly none Churchmen. By the present Church Discipline Act, passed three years ago, the Court of the Committee of Council was retained, but the Bishop of Exeter obtained the insertion of a clause making the attendance of a Bishop always necessary in Episcopal cases. That Act abolished summarily the ordinary Episcopal jurisdiction in the matter of clerical offenders (where the offence was not also a civil one) whether it were a question of doctrine or practice; and it gave the Bishop, instead, the power of originating and holding a sort of nondescript commission

over the case; all the ordinary course of sueing by a third party for the offences in question being taken away. There was then the ordinary proceeding by articles, but only at the instigation of the Bishop; the ordinary appeal to the Archbishop: and then the ordinary appeal to the Council. The bill now before us proposes to abolish entirely the appeal to the Archbishop; to restore the Court of Delegates as a Court of Appeal in cases of heresy; but in every other case to retain the Court of the Judicial Committee; and to give these appeals, per saltum, at once from the Bishop. It also again restores private prosecution under some restrictions.

Space fails us at present from going farther into the policy of these alterations; we must therefore content ourselves to-day with simply protesting against the abolition of the Archiepiscopal appeal; and while we gladly recognize and hail the distinction set up between cases of "heresy," and cases of police, we would only call attention to the fact that a Court of Delegates, consisting of Judges and lawyers now, is not, as it was fifty years ago, necessarily a Church court at all; and we would suggest whether the other ancient Court of Appeal, the Upper House of Convocation, would not be both a safer and a more authoritative tribunal.

And

But we hope to return to these points at a future opportunity. this the more, as there are also other changes suggested by the bill which will require notice; particularly the substitution of a "preliminary inquiry" in private, by consent, for the present machinery of the previous commission, and the creation of a rather startling phenomenon, in the shape of "a Diocesan Council."—From "The Guardian," July 15.

CHURCH DISCIPLINE.

WE resume the consideration of the Church Discipline Bill, lately laid on the table of the House of Lords, but now happily defunct. The Bill has been withdrawn for the session, but it may not be useless to proceed with our inquiry into its merits;-it may at least serve to warn our readers against the spirit of modern Church Legislation.

:

The principal points of difference from the present act were these:1. The new Bill substituted a trial before the Bishop and a "Diocesan" Council of Twelve, for a trial before the Bishop and three

assessors.

2. It allowed a private preliminary inquiry, if the accused party should consent thereto.

3. It abolished the appeal to the Archbishop.

4. It retained the appeal to the committee of Privy Council in all cases except those of doctrine; and changed it from an appeal from the Archbishop into an appeal direct from the Bishop.

5. It restored the Court of Delegates as the supreme Court of Appeal in cases of doctrine,-making this appeal also per saltum at once from the Bishop.

« AnteriorContinuar »