Page images
PDF
EPUB

the vigor of life he came to this country, deeply imbued with those political principles which had guided him in his opposition to English misrule. His sympathies with the Democratic party were soon manifested. He exercised his privilege of voting, and otherwise showed the interest which he felt in the cause of his adopted country; but he did not become an active politician, or forget for a moment the high duties of his ministry. At the crisis which threatened the integrity of the Union, he avowed his opposition to the doctrines of nullification, regardless of the popularity which he might have acquired by flattering the pretensions of the State in which he lived. His letter to the Roman Catholic citizens of Charleston, which is found in the fourth volume of his works, is a model of prudence and impartiality, and well calculated to guard the Catholics against the abuse of the privileges of freemen. He wished them to vote freely and conscientiously, without bias or influence of any kind, according to their best judgment, for the interests of their country. Those who would impose on clergymen entire silence in regard to politics, virtually proscribe them, denying them the rights of the most humble citizen. It is seldom, indeed, that it is advisable for a clergyman to identify himself with a political party, as it is wholly unsuitable for him to become an active partisan, still less a tool; but he has rights in common with other citizens, of which, if he exercise them calmly and inoffensively, with a view to the public good, no one should censure or envy his enjoyment. It is his duty to teach his people the moral obligation of using their rights conscientiously, without suffering themselves to be tampered with or deceived by interested and unprincipled politicians, and to caution them against strife, violence, and outrage, that they may act as freemen, and not as making liberty a cloak for malice. We know of no better moral lecture on the eve of an election than the letter just referred to, or the discourse pronounced by him at Boston.

The organization of the diocese of Charleston, which was effected by the late lamented prelate, is developed in the constitutions of the local churches of the various States which composed it, in the addresses of the Bishop to the conventions assembled from year to year, and in the proceedings of those bodies, as reported in the fifth volume. The praise of much legal knowledge, and great skill in adapting the ecclesiastical system to local institutions and usages, must be awarded to the learned author of the constitutions. The candor of his statements, the

force of his appeals, the beauty of his descriptions, the thrilling power of his eloquence, will be acknowledged by all who read his addresses. The proceedings themselves bear a formal and solemn character, which, in some circumstances, would have been highly impressive. The assembling of the lay delegates in one house, and of the clergy in another; the declarations of adhering to the constitution, formally made by the officers in the hands of the Bishop, who presided with princely bearing; the conferences and reports of the two houses; and the confirmation of their acts by the prelate ;-all these forms and acts would have been of the most imposing character, had the Catholic population been great, the resources of the diocese considerable, the representatives numerous and influential, and the building in which they assembled suited to the grand occasion. But where the Catholics were few, and scattered over a vast territory, with limited means, the system could not be tested to advantage, and a feeling of disappointment necessarily arises on finding that scarcely any thing was accomplished by the committees charged to raise funds for general purposes. One great benefit, however, resulted from these annual assemblies. The trustee system, which had inflicted such dire evils on the diocese of Charleston, as well as on several other dioceses of the Union, was curbed and broken; the unlimited control of laymen over church property and funds was subjected to the provisions of a constitution which regulated their rights and privileges; and the representative system was adopted in a way to satisfy the cravings of a few for distinction, and yet to make them weary of the trouble and formality. In the mind of the illustrious prelate the constitution was the sovereign remedy for the pretensions of laymen who encroached on sacred ground; and such, in fact, it proved to be, when managed by one who possessed so much energy of character and such personal influence. But we hold it to be a dangerous experiment to ingraft popular institutions on those of the Church, and place the laity in a relation to the clergy, which, if it give them no real power, must prove dissatisfactory. The calamities which at that time afflicted the church of Philadelphia, and that of Charleston, led him to devise this plan, which he no doubt would have submitted to the judgment of his colleagues, had it been then customary for them to assemble in council for the common interests of the ecclesiastical province; but his importunate solicitations for this purpose failed of success until after the constitution had gone into full operation, when the

rights legally regulated could no longer be disturbed. The laity, by the law of Christ, are dependent on the clergy in all that regards the revealed doctrine and the administration of the sacraments; and under no circumstances can they claim rights over the temporalities of the Church in such a way as to check and control the clergy in the exercise of their spiritual privileges. The simplest way of preventing such interference seems to us to be by general disciplinary enactments, to be made by provincial or national councils, and applied to each diocese by synodical statutes. These could assume a form which even the public tribunals would respect, should unfortunately the necessity exist of seeking the protection of the law against the usurpations of ignorant or bold men who overstep the limits of their office, and seek to lord it over those whom Christ appointed to be their fathers and guides.

The interposition of Dr. England, to remedy the disorders occasioned by the unfortunate Hogan and his partisans in Philadelphia, is an evidence of his zeal and kind intentions, as well as of his unsuspecting charity and confiding honesty; although, as his letters themselves show, by the contrivance of unprincipled men, it aggravated the evils which then afflicted the congregation of St. Mary's. It is not necessary for us to dwell on so painful a topic, which many will regret to see presented again to the public consideration, so long after that schism has been extinguished; but history, which is no respecter of persons, does not cast the mantle of oblivion over past disorders. Her lessons are derived from the scandals of former days, as well as from examples of heroic virtue, and she summons from the dead the actors in every variety of scenes, to teach us, by the different results of their conduct, what we should shun, as well as what we should imitate.

"Là, rétraçant leurs foiblesses passées,

Leurs actions, leurs discours, leurs pensées,
A chaque état ils reviennent dicter

Ce qu'il faut fuir, ce qu'il faut imiter."

The Church in this country owes to Bishop England the celebration of provincial councils, which have given form and consistency to her hierarchy, and order to her internal economy. The venerated Carrol, the first Bishop of Baltimore, when this see was raised to the metropolitical dignity, held a meeting of his colleagues, then newly created, and adopted some few arrangements for their harmonious action. Nearly nineteen years passed without any other episcopal assembly. The distance of

several of the suffragan prelates from the chief see, their poverty, the need of their presence in their vast dioceses, ill provided with missionaries, were serious hindrances to their coming together in council; but it cannot be dissembled, that the weightiest impediment arose from the fear which some excellent men entertained, that such an assembly would occasion agitation among the clergy and people, and lead to rash innovations. The ardent character of the Bishop of Charleston was not calculated to diminish this apprehension. The ceaseless activity of his mind, his peculiar views on certain points of discipline, and his power in debate, were subjects of misgiving, so that little regard was paid to his suggestions, until Archbishop Whitfield was raised to the see. In the first council which he summoned, in 1829, Bishop England used with great moderation the success which crowned his efforts. The ease, the dignity, the power, the beauty of his language, in the unstudied effusions of the council-chamber, or in the conferences with the theologians, were more admirable than the flashes and thunders of his eloquence which amazed the crowded audiences in the public sessions. His moderation of sentiment and courtesy of manner surprised such of his colleagues as had known him only by his reputation as a bold, uncompromising patriot and prelate. Notwithstanding the caution with which his suggestions were received, he succeeded in inducing the adoption of many measures originating with himself, and he readily modified his own views to harmonize with those of his brethren in the episcopate. At his instance, it was resolved to hold the next council after the lapse of the canonical period of three years; but when the appointed time was approaching, the worthy metropolitan shrunk from the responsibility of a second experiment, and it was not until the Sovereign Pontiff intimated his express will, that his repugnance was overcome. We state these facts in no offensive spirit; we respect the motives of the prelate and his advisers; but it is right that the praise of originating and promoting these most important assemblies should be given to the eminent Bishop of Charleston. "Honor to whom honor is due."

We could have wished that the admirable letter to the clergy, and another of great beauty and force to the laity, which were published in the name of the first council, as also the letters of the second and third councils, which are known to be all from the pen of Dr. England, had found a place in the collection of his works. Besides their intrinsic value, they possess an adventitious authority as the expressions of sentiment of these venera

Should the sale of

ble assemblies through their eloquent organ. the works call for a second edition, as we fervently hope, this deficiency may be supplied. It may be right, however, to correct a mistake into which his biographer has fallen, in ascribing to him the Latin letters to the Archbishops of Cologne and Posen, which beautiful productions, worthy of a Cyprian or a Bernard, are from the pen of the lamented Rosati, the late pious Bishop of St. Louis. Dr. England, although an excellent scholar, did not possess that command of the Latin language which would enable him to write it with ease and dignity. His power lay in the use of the English, which he effectually employed in the defence of truth and of his father-land, as well as of the institutions of his adopted country.

[ocr errors]

ART. II. The Philosophy of Religion. By J. D. MoRELL, A. M. New York: Appleton & Co. pp. 359.

1849. 16mo.

MR. MORELL is, we believe, a Scotchman, and a minister of the Scottish kirk. He first made himself known to our community by a History of Modern Philosophy, written from the eclectic point of view, and which we have heard spoken of as a very clever performance. Some views advanced in that work touching the mutual relations of religion and philosophy were supposed to favor modern Rationalism, and the volume before us has been written to develop them, and to show that they are defensible on psychological principles. The volume has attracted no little attention among British and American Protestants, and though it contains nothing new or striking to one familiar with the later developments of Protestantismn on the Continent of Europe, or even in our own country, and though it is written in a dry, hard style, without much regard to idiomatic grace or propriety, we have read it with a good deal of interest, and, considering the source whence it emanates, we cannot help regarding it as a remarkable production.

Mr. Morell belongs to the progressive party among Protestants, the party that labors to continue the work of the Reformers of the sixteenth century, and carry it on to its legitimate termination. He retains, indeed, many traces of his Presbyterian and Evangelical breeding, but he departs widely from the formal teach

« PreviousContinue »