ButMr。Gladstonehasotherargumentsagainstpersecution，argumentswhichareofsomuchweight，thattheyaredecisivenotonlyagainstpersecutionbutagainsthiswholetheory。"TheGovernment，"hesays，"isincompetenttoexerciseminuteandconstantsupervisionoverreligiousopinion。"Andhenceheinfers，that"aGovernmentexceedsitsprovincewhenitcomestoadaptascaleofpunishmentstovariationsinreligiousopinion，accordingtotheirrespectivedegreesofvariationfromtheestablishedcreed。Todeclineaffordingcountenancetosectsisasingleandsimplerule。Topunishtheirprofessors，accordingtotheirseveralerrors，evenweretherenootherobjection，isoneforwhichtheStatemustassumefunctionswhollyecclesiastical，andforwhichitisnotintrinsicallyfitted。"
Thisis，inouropinion，quitetrue。ButhowdoesitagreewithMr。Gladstone’stheory？What！theGovernmentincompetenttoexerciseevensuchadegreeofsupervisionoverreligiousopinionasisimpliedbythepunishmentofthemostdeadlyheresy！TheGovernmentincompetenttomeasureeventhegrossestdeviationsfromthestandardoftruth！TheGovernmentnotintrinsicallyqualifiedtojudgeofthecomparativeenormityofanytheologicalerrors！TheGovernmentsoignorantonthesesubjectsthatitiscompelledtoleave，notmerelysubtleheresies，discernibleonlybytheeyeofaCyriloraBucer，butSocinianism，Deism，Mahometanism，Idolatry，Atheism，unpunished！TowhomdoesMr。
GladstoneassigntheofficeofselectingareligionfortheState，fromamonghundredsofreligions，everyoneofwhichlaysclaimtotruth？EventothissameGovernment，whichisnowpronouncedtobesounfitfortheologicalinvestigationsthatitcannotventuretopunishamanforworshippingalumpofstonewithascoreofheadsandhands。Wedonotrememberevertohavefalleninwithamoreextraordinaryinstanceofinconsistency。
WhenMr。GladstonewishestoprovethattheGovernmentoughttoestablishandendowareligion，andtofenceitwithaTestAct，Governmentis_topan_inthemoralworld。Thosewhowouldconfineittosecularendstakealowviewofitsnature。Areligionmustbeattachedtoitsagency;andthisreligionmustbethatoftheconscienceofthegovernor，ornone。ItisfortheGovernortodecidebetweenPapistsandProtestants，JansenistsandMolinists，ArminiansandCalvinists，EpiscopaliansandPresbyterians，SabelliansandTritheists，HomoousiansandHomoiousians，NestoriansandEutychians，MonothelitesandMonophysites，PaedobaptistsandAnabaptists。ItisforhimtorejudgetheActsofNiceandRimini，ofEphesusandChalcedon，ofConstantinopleandSt。JohnLateran，ofTrentandDort。ItisforhimtoarbitratebetweentheGreekandtheLatinprocession，andtodeterminewhetherthatmysteriousfilioqueshallorshallnothaveaplaceinthenationalcreed。Whenhehasmadeuphismind，heistotaxthewholecommunityinordertopaypeopletoteachhisopinion，whateveritmaybe。Heistorelyonhisownjudgment，thoughitmaybeopposedtothatofnine—tenthsofthesociety。Heistoactonhisownjudgment，attheriskofexcitingthemostformidablediscontents。Heistoinflict，perhapsonagreatmajorityofthepopulation，what，whetherwechoosetocallitpersecutionornot，willalwaysbefeltaspersecutionbythosewhosufferit。Heis，onaccountofdifferencesoftentooslightforvulgarcomprehension，todeprivetheStateoftheservicesoftheablestmen。Heistodebaseandenfeeblethecommunitywhichhegoverns，fromanationintoasect。Inourowncountry，forexample，millionsofCatholics，millionsofProtestantDissenters，aretobeexcludedfromallpowerandhonours。Agreathostilefleetisonthesea;butNelsonisnottocommandintheChannelifinthemysteryoftheTrinityheconfoundsthepersons。AninvadingarmyhaslandedinKent;buttheDukeofWellingtonisnottobeattheheadofourforcesifhedividesthesubstance。Andafterallthis，Mr。
Gladstonetellsus，thatitwouldbewrongtoimprisonaJew，aMussulman，oraBuddhist，foraday;becausereallyaGovernmentcannotunderstandthesematters，andoughtnottomeddlewithquestionswhichbelongtotheChurch。Asingulartheologian，indeed，thisGovernment！Solearned，thatitiscompetenttoexcludeGrotiusfromofficeforbeingaSemi—Pelagian，sounlearnedthatitisincompetenttofineaHindoopeasantarupeeforgoingonapilgrimagetoJuggernaut。
"Tosolicitandpersuadeoneanother，"saysMr。Gladstone，"areprivilegeswhichbelongtousall;andthewiserandbettermanisboundtoadvisethelesswiseandgood;butheisnotonlynotbound，heisnotallowed，speakinggenerally，tocoercehim。Itisuntrue，then，thatthesameconsiderationswhichbindaGovernmenttosubmitareligiontothefreechoiceofthepeoplewouldthereforejustifytheirenforcingitsadoption。"
Granted。ButitistruethatallthesameconsiderationswhichwouldjustifyaGovernmentinpropagatingareligionbymeansofcivildisabilitieswouldjustifythepropagatingofthatreligionbypenallaws。Tosolicit！IsitsolicitationtotellaCatholicDuke，thathemustabjurehisreligionorwalkoutoftheHouseofLords？Topersuade！Isitpersuasiontotellabarristerofdistinguishedeloquenceandlearningthatheshallgrowoldinhisstuffgown，whilehispupilsareseatedabovehiminermine，becausehecannotdigestthedamnatoryclausesoftheAthanasianCreed？WouldMr。Gladstonethinkthatareligioussystemwhichheconsidersasfalse，Socinianismforexample，wassubmittedtohisfreechoice，ifitweresubmittedintheseterms？——"IfyouobstinatelyadheretothefaithoftheNicenefathers，youshallnotbeburnedinSmithfield;youshallnotbesenttoDorchestergaol;youshallnotevenpaydoubleland—tax。Butyoushallbeshutoutfromallsituationsinwhichyoumightexerciseyourtalentswithhonourtoyourselfandadvantagetothecountry。TheHouseofCommons，thebenchofmagistracy，arenotforsuchasyou。Youshallseeyoungermen，yourinferiorsinstationandtalents，risetothehighestdignitiesandattractthegazeofnations，whileyouaredoomedtoneglectandobscurity。Ifyouhaveasonofthehighestpromise，asonsuchasotherfatherswouldcontemplatewithdelight，thedevelopmentofhisfinetalentsandofhisgenerousambitionshallbeatorturetoyou。
Youshalllookonhimasabeingdoomedtolead，asyouhaveled，theabjectlifeofaRomanoraNeapolitaninthemidstofagreatEnglishpeople。Allthosehighhonours，somuchmorepreciousthanthemostcostlygiftsofdespots，withwhichafreecountrydecoratesitsillustriouscitizens，shallbetohim，astheyhavebeentoyou，objectsnotofhopeandvirtuousemulation，butofhopeless，enviouspining。Educatehim，ifyouwishhimtofeelhisdegradation。Educatehim，ifyouwishtostimulatehiscravingforwhathenevermustenjoy。Educatehim，ifyouwouldimitatethebarbarityofthatCeltictyrantwhofedhisprisonersonsaltedfoodtilltheycalledeagerlyfordrink，andthenletdownanemptycupintothedungeonandleftthemtodieofthirst。"Isthistosolicit，topersuade，tosubmitreligiontothefreechoiceofman？Wouldafineofathousandpounds，wouldimprisonmentinNewgateforsixmonths，undercircumstancesnotdisgraceful，giveMrGladstonethepainwhichhewouldfeel，ifheweretobetoldthathewastobedealtwithinthewayinwhichhewouldhimselfdealwithmorethanonehalfofhiscountrymen？
WearenotatallsurprisedtofindsuchinconsistencyeveninamanofMr。Gladstone’stalents。Thetruthis，thateverymanis，toagreatextent，thecreatureoftheage。Itistonopurposethatheresiststheinfluencewhichthevastmass，inwhichheisbutanatom，mustexerciseonhim。Hemaytrytobeamanofthetenthcentury:buthecannot。Whetherhewillornot，hemustbeamanofthenineteenthcentury。Hesharesinthemotionofthemoralaswellasinthatofthephysicalworld。HecannomorebeasintolerantashewouldhavebeeninthedaysoftheTudorsthanhecanstandintheeveningexactlywherehestoodinthemorning。Theglobegoesroundfromwesttoeast;andhemustgoroundwithit。Whenhesaysthatheiswherehewas，hemeansonlythathehasmovedatthesameratewithallaroundhim。Whenhesaysthathehasgoneagoodwaytothewestward，hemeansonlythathehasnotgonetotheeastwardquitesorapidlyashisneighbours。Mr。Gladstone’sbookis，inthisrespect，averygratifyingperformance。Itisthemeasureofwhatamancandotobeleftbehindbytheworld。Itisthestrenuouseffortofaveryvigorousmindtokeepasfarintherearofthegeneralprogressaspossible。Andyet，withthemostintenseexertionMr。
Gladstonecannothelpbeing，onsomeimportantpoints，greatlyinadvanceofLockehimself;and，withwhateveradmirationhemayregardLaud，itiswellforhim，wecantellhim，thathedidnotwriteinthedaysofthatzealousprimate，whowouldcertainlyhaverefutedtheexpositionsofScripturewhichwehavequoted，byoneofthekeenestargumentsthatcanbeaddressedtohumanears。
ThisisnottheonlyinstanceinwhichMr。Gladstonehasshrunkinaveryremarkablemannerfromtheconsequencesofhisowntheory。Iftherebeinthewholeworldastatetowhichthistheoryisapplicable，thatstateistheBritishEmpireinIndia。
Evenwe，whodetestpaternalgovernmentsingeneral，shalladmitthatthedutiesoftheGovernmentofIndiaare，toaconsiderableextent，paternal。There，thesuperiorityofthegovernorstothegovernedinmoralscienceisunquestionable。TheconversionofthewholepeopletotheworstformthatChristianityeverworeinthedarkestageswouldbeamosthappyevent。ItisnotnecessarythatamanshouldbeaChristiantowishforthepropagationofChristianityinIndia。ItissufficientthatheshouldbeanEuropeannotmuchbelowtheordinaryEuropeanlevelofgoodsenseandhumanity。Comparedwiththeimportanceoftheinterestsatstake，allthoseScotchandIrishquestionswhichoccupysolargeaportionofMr。Gladstone’sbook，sinkintoinsignificance。InnopartoftheworldsincethedaysofTheodosiushassolargeaheathenpopulationbeensubjecttoaChristiangovernment。Innopartoftheworldisheathenismmorecruel，morelicentious，morefruitfulofabsurdritesandperniciouslaws。Surely，ifitbethedutyofGovernmenttouseitspoweranditsrevenueinordertobringsevenmillionsofIrishCatholicsovertotheProtestantChurch，itisafortiorithedutyoftheGovernmenttouseitspoweranditsrevenueinordertomakeseventymillionsofidolatersChristians。IfitbeasintosufferJohnHowardorWilliamPenntoholdanyofficeinEnglandbecausetheyarenotincommunionwiththeEstablishedChurch，itmustbeacryingsinindeedtoadmittohighsituationsmenwhobowdown，intemplescoveredwithemblemsofvice，tothehideousimagesofsensualormalevolentgods。
Butno。Orthodoxy，itseems，ismoreshockedbythepriestsofRomethanbythepriestsofKalee。Theplainredbrickbuilding，theCaveofAdullam，orEbenezerChapel，whereuneducatedmenhearahalf—educatedmantalkoftheChristianlawofloveandtheChristianhopeofglory，isunworthyoftheindulgencewhichisreservedfortheshrinewheretheThugsuspendsaportionofthespoilsofmurderedtravellers，andforthecarwhichgrindsitswaythroughthebonesofself—immolatedpilgrims。"Itwouldbe，"saysMr。Gladstone，"anabsurdexaggerationtomaintainitasthepartofsuchaGovernmentasthatoftheBritishinIndiatobringhometothedoorofeverysubjectatoncetheministrationsofanewandtotallyunknownreligion。"TheGovernmentoughtindeedtodesiretopropagateChristianity。Buttheextenttowhichtheymustdosomustbe"limitedbythedegreeinwhichthepeoplearefoundwillingtoreceiveit。"HeproposesnosuchlimitationinthecaseofIreland。HewouldgivetheIrishaProtestantChurchwhethertheylikeitornot。"Webelieve，"sayshe，"thatthatwhichweplacebeforethemis，whethertheyknowitornot，calculatedtobebeneficialtothem;
andthat，iftheyknowitnotnow，theywillknowitwhenitispresentedtothemfairly。Shallwe，then，purchasetheirapplauseattheexpenseoftheirsubstantial，nay，theirspiritualinterests？"
AndwhydoesMr。GladstoneallowtotheHindooaprivilegewhichhedeniestotheIrishman？Whydoeshereservehisgreatestliberalityforthemostmonstrouserrors？Whydoeshepaymostrespecttotheopinionoftheleastenlightenedpeople？WhydoeshewithholdtherighttoexercisepaternalauthorityfromthatoneGovernmentwhichisfittertoexercisepaternalauthoritythananyGovernmentthateverexistedintheworld？Wewillgivethereasoninhisownwords。
"InBritishIndia，"hesays，"asmallnumberofpersonsadvancedtoahighergradeofcivilisation，exercisethepowersofgovernmentoveranimmenselygreaternumberoflesscultivatedpersons，notbycoercion，butunderfreestipulationwiththegoverned。Now，therightsofaGovernment，incircumstancesthuspeculiar，obviouslydependneitherupontheunrestrictedtheoryofpaternalprinciples，noruponanyprimordialorfictitiouscontractofindefinitepowers，butuponanexpressandknowntreaty，matterofpositiveagreement，notofnaturalordinance。"
WhereMr。Gladstonehasseenthistreatywecannotguessfor，thoughhecallsita"knowntreaty，"wewillstakeourcreditthatitisquiteunknownbothatCalcuttaandMadras，bothinLeadenhallStreetandCannonRow，thatitisnottobefoundinanyoftheenormousfoliosofpapersrelatingtoIndiawhichfillthebookcasesofmembersofParliament，thatithasutterlyescapedtheresearchesofallthehistoriansofourEasternempire，that，inthelongandinterestingdebatesof1813ontheadmissionofmissionariestoIndia，debatesofwhichthemostvaluableparthasbeenexcellentlypreservedbythecareofthespeakers，noallusiontothisimportantinstrumentistobefound。Thetruthisthatthistreatyisanonentity。Itisbycoercion，itisbythesword，andnotbyfreestipulationwiththegoverned，thatEnglandruleIndia;norisEnglandboundbyanycontractwhatevernottodealwithBengalasshedealswithIreland。ShemaysetupaBishopofPatna，andaDeanofHoogley;
shemaygrantawaythepublicrevenueforthemaintenanceofprebendariesofBenaresandcanonsofMoorshedabad;shemaydividethecountryintoparishes，andplace，arectorwithastipendineveryoneofthem;andallthiswithoutinfringinganypositiveagreement。Iftherebesuchatreaty，Mr。Gladstonecanhavenodifficultyinmakingknownitsdate，itsterms，and，aboveallthepreciseextentoftheterritorywithinwhichwehavesinfullyboundourselvestobeguiltyofpracticalatheism。
Thelastpointisofgreatimportance。For，astheprovincesofourIndianempirewereacquiredatdifferenttimes，andinverydifferentways，nosingletreaty，indeednotentreaties，willjustifythesystempursuedbyourGovernmentthere。
Theplainstateofthecaseisthis。NomaninhissenseswoulddreamofapplyingMr。Gladstone’stheorytoIndia;because，ifsoapplied，itwouldinevitablydestroyourempire，and，withourempire，thebestchanceofspreadingChristianityamongthenatives。ThisMr。Gladstonefelt。Insomewayorotherhistheorywastobesaved，andthemonstrousconsequencesavoided。Ofintentionalmisrepresentationwearequitesurethatheisincapable。Butwecannotacquithimofthatunconsciousdisingenuousnessfromwhichthemostuprightman，whenstronglyattachedtoanopinion，isseldomwhollyfree。Webelievethatherecoiledfromtheruinousconsequenceswhichhissystemwouldproduce，iftriedinIndia;butthathedidnotliketosayso，lestheshouldlayhimselfopentothechargeofsacrificingprincipletoexpediency，awordwhichisheldintheutmostabhorrencebyallhisschool。Accordingly，hecaughtatthenotionofatreaty，anotionwhichmust，wethink，haveoriginatedinsomerhetoricalexpressionwhichhehasimperfectlyunderstood。Thereisoneexcellentwayofavoidingthedrawingofafalseconclusionfromafalsemajor;andthatisbyhavingafalseminor。Inaccuratehistoryisanadmirablecorrectiveofunreasonabletheory。Andthusitisinthepresentcase。Abadgeneralruleislaiddown，andobstinatelymaintained，wherevertheconsequencesarenottoomonstrousforhumanbigotry。ButwhentheybecomesohorriblethatevenChristChurchshrinks，thatevenOrielstandsaghast，theruleisevadedbymeansofafictitiouscontract。Oneimaginaryobligationissetupagainstanother。Mr。GladstonefirstpreachestoGovernmentsthedutyofundertakinganenterprisejustasrationalastheCrusades，andthendispensesthemfromitonthegroundofatreatywhichisjustasauthenticasthedonationofConstantinetoPopeSylvester。Hissystemresemblesnothingsomuchasaforgedbondwithaforgedreleaseindorsedonthebackofit。
WithmoreshowofreasonhereststheclaimsoftheScotchChurchonacontract。Heconsidersthatcontract，however，asmostunjustifiable，andspeaksofthesettingupoftheKirkasadisgracefulblotonthereignofWilliamtheThird。Surelyitwouldbeamusing，ifitwerenotmelancholy，toseeamanofvirtueandabilitiesunsatisfiedwiththecalamitieswhichoneChurch，constitutedonfalseprinciples，hasbroughtupontheempire，andrepiningthatScotlandisnotinthesamestatewithIreland，thatnoScottishagitatorisraisingrentandputtingcountymembersinandout，thatnoPresbyterianassociationisdividingsupremepowerwiththeGovernment，thatnomeetingsofprocursorsandrepealersarecoveringthesideoftheCaltonHill，thattwenty—fivethousandtroopsarenotrequiredtomaintainorderonthenorthoftheTweed，thattheanniversaryoftheBattleofBothwellBridgeisnotregularlycelebratedbyinsult，riot，andmurder。WecouldhardlyfindastrongerargumentagainstMr。Gladstone’ssystemthanthatwhichScotlandfurnishes。Thepolicywhichhasbeenfollowedinthatcountryhasbeendirectlyopposedtothepolicywhichherecommends。AndtheconsequenceisthatScotland，havingbeenoneoftherudest，oneofthepoorest，oneofthemostturbulentcountriesinEurope，hasbecomeoneofthemosthighlycivilised，oneofthemostflourishing，oneofthemosttranquil。Theatrocitieswhichwereofcommonoccurrence:whileanunpopularChurchwasdominantareunknown，Inspiteofamutualaversionasbitteraseverseparatedonepeoplefromanother，thetwokingdomswhichcomposeourislandhavebeenindissolublyjoinedtogether。Oftheancientnationalfeelingthereremainsjustenoughtobeornamentalanduseful;justenoughtoinspirethepoet，andtokindleagenerousandfriendlyemulationinthebosomofthesoldier。Butforalltheendsofgovernmentthenationsareone。Andwhyaretheyso？
Theanswerissimple。Thenationsareoneforalltheendsofgovernment，becauseintheirunionthetrueendsofgovernmentalonewerekeptinsight。ThenationsareonebecausetheChurchesaretwo。
SuchistheunionofEnglandwithScotland，anunionwhichresemblestheunionofthelimbsofonehealthfulandvigorousbody，allmovedbyonewill，allco—operatingforcommonends。
ThesystemofMr。GladstonewouldhaveproducedanunionwhichcanbecomparedonlytothatwhichisthesubjectofawildPersianfable。KingZohak——wetellthestoryasMr。Southeytellsittous——gavethedevilleavetokisshisshoulders。Instantlytwoserpentssprangout，who，inthefuryofhunger，attackedhishead，andattemptedtogetathisbrain。Zohakpulledthemaway，andtorethemwithhisnails。Buthefoundthattheywereinseparablepartsofhimself，andthatwhathewaslaceratingwashisownflesh。Perhapswemightbeabletofind，ifwelookedroundtheworld，somepoliticalunionlikethis，somehideousmonsterofastate，cursedwithoneprincipleofsensationandtwoprinciplesofvolition，self—loathingandself—torturing，madeupofpartswhicharedrivenbyafranticimpulsetoinflictmutualpain，yetaredoomedtofeelwhatevertheyinflict，whicharedividedbyanirreconcileablehatred，Yetareblendedinanindissolubleidentity。Mr。Gladstone，fromhistenderconcernforZohak，isunsatisfiedbecausethedevilhasasyetkissedonlyoneshoulder，becausethereisnotasnakemanglingandmangledonthelefttokeepincountenancehisbrotherontheright。
Butwemustproceedinourexaminationofhistheory。Having，asheconceives，provedthatisthedutyofeveryGovernmenttoprofesssomereligionorother，rightorwrong，andtoestablishthatreligion，hethencomestothequestionwhatreligionaGovernmentoughttoprefer;andhedecidesthisquestioninfavouroftheformofChristianityestablishedinEngland。TheChurchofEnglandis，accordingtohim，thepureCatholicChurchofChrist，whichpossessestheapostolicalsuccessionofministers，andwithinwhosepaleistobefoundthatunitywhichisessentialtotruth。Forherdecisionsheclaimsadegreeofreverencefarbeyondwhatshehasever，inanyofherformularies，claimedforherself;farbeyondwhatthemoderateschoolofBossuetdemandsforthePope;andscarcelyshortofwhatthatschoolwouldascribetoPopeandGeneralCounciltogether。Toseparatefromhercommunionisschism。TorejecthertraditionsorinterpretationsofScriptureissinfulpresumption。
Mr。Gladstonepronouncestherightofprivatejudgment，asitisgenerallyunderstoodthroughoutProtestantEurope，tobeamonstrousabuse。Hedeclareshimselffavourable，indeed，totheexerciseofprivatejudgment，afterafashionofhisown。Wehave，accordingtohim，arighttojudgeallthedoctrinesoftheChurchofEnglandtobesound，butnottojudgeanyofthemtobeunsound。Hehasnoobjection，heassuresus，toactiveinquiryintoreligiousquestions。Onthecontrary，hethinkssuchinquiryhighlydesirable，aslongasitdoesnotleadtodiversityofopinion;whichismuchthesamethingasifheweretorecommendtheuseoffirethatwillnotburndownhouses，orofbrandythatwillnotmakemendrunk。Heconceivesittobeperfectlypossibleformankindtoexercisetheirintellectsvigorouslyandfreelyontheologicalsubjects，andyettocometoexactlythesameconclusionswitheachotherandwiththeChurchofEngland。Andforthisopinionhegives，asfaraswehavebeenabletodiscover，noreasonwhatever，exceptthateverybodywhovigorouslyandfreelyexerciseshisunderstandingonEuclid’sTheoremsassentstothem。"Theactivityofprivatejudgment，"hetrulyobserves，"andtheunityandstrengthofconvictioninmathematicsvarydirectlyaseachother。"Onthisunquestionablefactheconstructsasomewhatquestionableargument。Everybodywhofreelyinquiresagrees，hesays，withEuclid。ButtheChurchisasmuchintherightasEuclid。Why，then，shouldnoteveryfreeinquireragreewiththeChurch？Wecouldputmanysimilarquestions。EithertheaffirmativeorthenegativeofthepropositionthatKingCharleswrotetheIconBasilikeisastrueasthattwosidesofatrianglearegreaterthanthethirdside。
Why，then，doDr。WordsworthandMr。Hallamagreeinthinkingtwosidesofatrianglegreaterthanthethirdside，andyetdifferaboutthegenuinenessoftheIconBasilike？Thestateoftheexactsciencesproves，saysMr。Gladstone，that，asrespectsreligion，"theassociationofthesetwoideas，activityofinquiry，andvarietyofconclusion，isafallaciousone。"Wemightjustaswellturntheargumenttheotherway，andinferfromthevarietyofreligiousopinionsthattheremustnecessarilybehostilemathematicalsects，someaffirming，andsomedenying，thatthesquareofthehypothenuseisequaltothesquaresofthesides。Butwedonotthinkeithertheoneanalogyortheotherofthesmallestvalue。Ourwayofascertainingthetendencyoffreeinquiryissimplytoopenoureyesandlookattheworldinwhichwelive;andthereweseethatfreeinquiryonmathematicalsubjectsproducesunity，andthatfreeinquiryonmoralsubjectsproducesdiscrepancy。Therewouldundoubtedlybelessdiscrepancyifinquiriesweremorediligentandcandid。Butdiscrepancytherewillbeamongthemostdiligentandcandid，aslongastheconstitutionofthehumanmind，andthenatureofmoralevidence，continueunchanged。Thatwehavenotfreedomandunitytogetherisaverysadthing;andsoitisthatwehavenotwings。Butwearejustaslikelytoseetheonedefectremovedastheother。Itisnotonlyinreligionthatthisdiscrepancyisfound。Itisthesamewithallmatterswhichdependonmoralevidence，withjudicialquestions，forexample，andwithpoliticalquestions。Allthejudgeswillworkasumintheruleofthreeonthesameprinciple，andbringoutthesameconclusion。Butitdoesnotfollowthat，howeverhonestandlaborioustheymaybe，theywillallbeofonemindontheDouglascase。Soitisvaintohopethattheremaybeafreeconstitutionunderwhicheveryrepresentativewillbeunanimouslyelected，andeverylawunanimouslypassed;anditwouldberidiculousforastatesmantostandwonderingandbemoaninghimselfbecausepeoplewhoagreeinthinkingthattwoandtwomakefourcannotagreeaboutthenewpoorlaw，ortheadministrationofCanada。
Therearetwointelligibleandconsistentcourseswhichmaybefollowedwithrespecttotheexerciseofprivatejudgment;thecourseoftheRomanist，whointerdictsprivatejudgmentbecauseofitsinevitableinconveniences;andthecourseoftheProtestant，whopermitsprivatejudgmentinspiteofitsinevitableinconveniences。BotharemorereasonablethanMr。
Gladstone，whowouldhaveprivatejudgmentwithoutitsinevitableinconveniences。TheRomanistproducesreposebymeansofstupefaction。TheProtestantencouragesactivity，thoughheknowsthatwherethereismuchactivitytherewillbesomeaberration。
Mr。Gladstonewishesfortheunityofthefifteenthcenturywiththeactiveandsearchingspiritofthesixteenth。Hemightaswellwishtobeintwoplacesatonce。
WhenMr。Gladstonesaysthatwe"actuallyrequirediscrepancyofopinion——requireanddemanderror，falsehood，blindness，andplumeourselvesonsuchdiscrepancyasattestingafreedomwhichisonlyvaluablewhenusedforunityinthetruth，"heexpresseshimselfwithmoreenergythanprecision。Nobodylovesdiscrepancyforthesakeofdiscrepancy。Butapersonwhoconscientiouslybelievesthatfreeinquiryis，onthewhole，beneficialtotheinterestsoftruth，andthat，fromtheimperfectionofthehumanfaculties，whereverthereismuchfreeinquirytherewillbesomediscrepancy，may，withoutimpropriety，considersuchdiscrepancy，thoughinitselfanevil，asasignofgood。ThattherearetenthousandthievesinLondonisaverymelancholyfact。But，lookedatinonepointofview，itisareasonforexultation。Forwhatothercitycouldmaintaintenthousandthieves？Whatmustbethemassofwealth，wherethefragmentsgleanedbylawlesspilferingrisetosolargeanamount？St。Kildawouldnotsupportasinglepickpocket。Thequantityoftheftis，toacertainextent，anindexofthequantityofusefulindustryandjudiciousspeculation。Andjustaswemay，fromthegreatnumberofroguesinatown，inferthatmuchhonestgainismadethere;somayweoften，fromthequantityoferrorinacommunity，drawacheeringinferenceastothedegreeinwhichthepublicmindisturnedtothoseinquirieswhichalonecanleadtorationalconvictionsoftruth。
Mr。GladstoneseemstoimaginethatmostProtestantsthinkitpossibleforthesamedoctrinetobeatoncetrueandfalse;orthattheythinkitimmaterialwhether，onareligiousquestion，amancomestoatrueorafalseconclusion。IftherebeanyProtestantswhoholdnotionssoabsurd，weabandonthemtohiscensure。
TheProtestantdoctrinetouchingtherightofprivatejudgment，thatdoctrinewhichisthecommonfoundationoftheAnglican，theLutheran，andtheCalvinisticChurches，thatdoctrinebywhicheverysectofDissentersvindicatesitsseparation，weconceivenottobethis，thatoppositeopinionsrue;northis，thattruthandfalsehoodarebothmaybothbetrue;equallygood;noryetthis，thatallspeculativeerrorisnecessarilyinnocent;butthis，thatthereisonthefaceoftheearthnovisiblebodytowhosedecreesmenareboundtosubmittheirprivatejudgmentonpointsoffaith。
Istherealwayssuchavisiblebody？Wastheresuchavisiblebodyintheyear1500？Ifnot，whyarewetobelievethatthereissuchabodyintheyear1839？Iftherewassuchabodyintheyear1500，whatwasit？WasittheChurchofRome？AndhowcantheChurchofEnglandbeorthodoxnow，iftheChurchofRomewasorthodoxthen？
"InEngland，"saysMr。Gladstone，"thecasewaswidelydifferentfromthatoftheContinent。Herreformationdidnotdestroy，butsuccessfullymaintained，theunityandsuccessionoftheChurchinherapostolicalministry。Wehave，therefore，stillamongustheordainedhereditarywitnessesofthetruth，conveyingittousthroughanunbrokenseriesfromourLordJesusChristandHisApostles。Thisistoustheordinaryvoiceofauthority;ofauthorityequallyreasonableandequallytrue，whetherwewillhear，orwhetherwewillforbear。"
Mr。Gladstone’sreasoningisnotsoclearasmightbedesired。Wehaveamongus，hesays，ordainedhereditarywitnessesofthetruth，andtheirvoiceistousthevoiceofauthority。
Undoubtedly，iftheyarewitnessofthetruth，theirvoiceisthevoiceofauthority。Butthisislittlemorethansayingthatthetruthisthetruth。NoristruthmoretruebecauseitcomesinanunbrokenseriesfromtheApostles。TheNicenefaithisnotmoretrueinthemouthoftheArchbishopofCanterbury，thaninthatofaModeratoroftheGeneralAssembly。IfourrespectfortheauthorityoftheChurchistobeonlyconsequentuponourconvictionofthetruthofherdoctrines，wecomeatoncetothatmonstrousabuse，theProtestantexerciseofprivatejudgment。ButifMr。GladstonemeansthatweoughttobelievethattheChurchofEnglandspeaksthetruthbecauseshehastheapostolicalsuccession，wegreatlydoubtwhethersuchadoctrinecanbemaintained。Inthefirstplace，whatproofhaveweofthefact？
Wehave，indeed，hearditsaidthatProvidencewouldcertainlyhaveinterferedtopreservetheapostolicalsuccessioninthetrueChurch。ButthisisanargumentfittedforunderstandingsofadifferentkindfromMr。Gladstone’s。HewillhardlytellusthattheChurchofEnglandisthetrueChurchbecauseshehasthesuccession;andthatshehasthesuccessionbecausesheisthetrueChurch。
Whatevidence，then，haveweforthefactoftheapostolicalsuccession？AndherewemayeasilydefendthetruthagainstOxfordwiththesameargumentswithwhich，inoldtimes，thetruthwasdefendedbyOxfordagainstRome。InthisstageofourcombatwithMr。Gladstone，weneedfewweaponsexceptthosewhichwefindinthewell—furnishedandwell—orderedarmouryofChillingworth。
ThetransmissionofordersfromtheApostlestoanEnglishclergymanofthepresentdaymusthavebeenthroughaverygreatnumberofintermediatepersons。Now，itisprobablethatnoclergymanintheChurchofEnglandcantraceuphisspiritualgenealogyfrombishoptobishopsofarbackasthetimeoftheConquest。Thereremainmanycenturiesduringwhichthehistoryofthetransmissionofhisordersisburiedinutterdarkness。AndwhetherhebeapriestbysuccessionfromtheApostlesdependsonthequestion，whetherduringthatlongperiod，somethousandsofeventstookplace，anyoneofwhichmay，withoutanygrossimprobability，besupposednottohavetakenplace。Wehavenotatittleofevidenceforanyoneoftheseevents。Wedonotevenknowthenamesorcountriesofthementowhomitistakenforgrantedthattheseeventshappened。WedonotknowwhetherthespiritualancestorsofanyoneofourcontemporarieswereSpanishorArmenian，ArianorOrthodox。Intheutterabsenceofallparticularevidence，wearesurelyentitledtorequirethatthereshouldbeverystrongevidenceindeedthatthestrictestregularitywasobservedineverygeneration，andthatepiscopalfunctionswereexercisedbynonewhowerenotbishopsbysuccessionfromtheApostles。Butwehavenosuchevidence。Inthefirstplace，wehavenotfullandaccurateinformationtouchingthepolityoftheChurchduringthecenturywhichfollowedthepersecutionofNero。That，duringthisperiod，theoverseersofallthelittleChristiansocietiesscatteredthroughtheRomanempireheldtheirspiritualauthoritybyvirtueofholyordersderivedfromtheApostles，cannotbeprovedbycontemporarytestimony，orbyanytestimonywhichcanberegardedasdecisive。Thequestion，whethertheprimitiveecclesiasticalconstitutionboreagreaterresemblancetotheAnglicanortotheCalvinisticmodel，hasbeenfiercelydisputed。Itisaquestiononwhichmenofeminentparts，learning，andpietyhavediffered，anddotothisdaydifferverywidely。ItisaquestiononwhichatleastafullhalfoftheabilityanderuditionofProtestantEuropehaseversincetheReformation，beenopposedtotheAnglicanpretensions。Mr。Gladstonehimself，wearepersuaded，wouldhavethecandourtoallowthat，ifnoevidencewereadmittedbutthatwhichisfurnishedbythegenuineChristianliteratureofthefirsttwocenturies，judgmentwouldnotgoinfavourofprelacy。AndifhelookedatthesubjectascalmlyashewouldlookatacontroversyrespectingtheRomanComitiaortheAnglo—SaxonWitenagemote，hewouldprobablythinkthattheabsenceofcontemporaryevidenceduringsolongaperiodwasadefectwhichlaterattestations，howevernumerous，couldbutveryimperfectlysupply。ItissurelyimpolitictorestthedoctrinesoftheEnglishChurchonahistoricaltheorywhich，toninety—
nineProtestantsoutofahundred，wouldseemmuchmorequestionablethananyofthosedoctrines。Noristhisall。
Extremeobscurityoverhangsthehistoryofthemiddleages;andthefactswhicharediscerniblethroughthatobscurityprovethattheChurchwasexceedinglyillregulated。Wereadofseesofthehighestdignityopenlysold，transferredbackwardsandforwardsbypopulartumult，bestowedsometimesbyaprofligatewomanonherparamour，sometimesbyawarlikebarononakinsmanstillastripling。Wereadofbishopsoftenyearsold，ofbishopsoffiveyearsold，ofmanypopeswhoweremereboys，andwhorivalledthefranticdissolutenessofCaligula，nay，ofafemalepope。Andthoughthislaststory，oncebelievedthroughoutallEurope，hasbeendisprovedbythestrictresearchesofmoderncriticism，themostdiscerningofthosewhorejectithaveadmittedthatitisnotintrinsicallyimprobable。Inourownisland，itwasthecomplaintofAlfredthatnotasinglepriestsouthoftheThames，andveryfewonthenorth，couldreadeitherLatinorEnglish。Andthisilliterateclergyexercisedtheirministryamidstarudeandhalf—heathenpopulation，inwhichDanishpirates，unchristened，orchristenedbythehundredonafieldofbattle，weremingledwithaSaxonpeasantryscarcelybetterinstructedinreligion。ThestateofIrelandwasstillworse。"TotaillaperuniversamHiberniamdissolutio，ecclesiasticaedisciplinae，illaubiqueproconsuetudineChristianasaevasubintroductabarbaries，"aretheexpressionsofSt。Bernard。Weare，therefore，atalosstoconceivehowanyclergymancanfeelconfidentthathisordershavecomedowncorrectly。WhetherhebereallyasuccessoroftheApostlesdependsonanimmensenumberofsuchcontingenciesasthese;
whether，underKingEthelwolf，astupidpriestmightnot，whilebaptizingseveralscoresofDanishprisonerswhohadjustmadetheiroptionbetweenthefontandthegallows，inadvertentlyomittoperformtheriteononeofthesegracelessproselytes;
whether，intheseventhcentury，animpostor，whohadneverreceivedconsecration，mightnothavepassedhimselfoffasabishoponarudetribeofScots;whetheraladoftwelvedidreally，byaceremonyhuddledoverwhenhewastoodrunktoknowwhathewasabout，conveytheepiscopalcharactertoaladoften。
Sincethefirstcentury，notless，inallprobability，thanahundredthousandpersonshaveexercisedthefunctionsofbishops。
Thatmanyofthesehavenotbeenbishopsbyapostolicalsuccessionisquitecertain。Hookeradmitsthatdeviationsfromthegeneralrulehavebeenfrequent，andwithaboldnessworthyofhishighandstatesmanlikeintellect，pronouncesthemtohavebeenoftenjustifiable。"Theremaybe，"sayshe，"sometimesveryjustandsufficientreasontoallowordinationmadewithoutabishop。WheretheChurchmustneedshavesomeordained，andneitherhathnorcanhavepossiblyabishoptoordain，incaseofsuchnecessitytheordinaryinstitutionofGodhathgivenoftentimes，andmaygiveplace。AndthereforewearenotsimplywithoutexceptiontourgealinealdescentofpowerfromtheApostlesbycontinuedsuccessionofbishopsineveryeffectualordination。"Therecanbelittledoubt，wethink，thatthesuccession，ifiteverexisted，hasoftenbeeninterruptedinwaysmuchlessrespectable。Forexample，letussuppose，andwearesurethatnowell—informedpersonwillthinkthesuppositionbyanymeansimprobable，that，inthethirdcentury，amanofnoprincipleandsomeparts，whohas，inthecourseofarovinganddiscreditablelife，beenacatechumenatAntioch，andhastherebecomefamiliarwithChristianusagesanddoctrinesafterwardsramblestoMarseilles，wherehefindsaChristiansociety，rich，liberal，andsimple—hearted。HepretendstobeaChristian，attractsnoticebyhisabilitiesandaffectedzeal，andisraisedtotheepiscopaldignitywithouthavingeverbeenbaptized。Thatsuchaneventmighthappen，nay，wasverylikelytohappen，cannotwellbedisputedbyanyonewhohasreadtheLifeofPeregrinus。Theveryvirtues，indeed，whichdistinguishedtheearlyChristians，seemtohavelaidthemopentothoseartswhichdeceived"Uriel，thoughRegentoftheSun，andheldThesharpest—sightedspiritofallinHeaven。"
NowthisunbaptizedimpostorisevidentlynosuccessoroftheApostles。HeisnotevenaChristian;andallordersderivedthroughsuchapretendedbishoparealtogetherinvalid。DoweknowenoughofthestateoftheworldandoftheChurchinthethirdcenturytobeabletosaywithconfidencethattherewerenotatthattimetwentysuchpretendedbishops？Everysuchcasemakesabreakintheapostolicalsuccession。
Now，supposethatabreak，suchasHookeradmitstohavebeenbothcommonandjustifiable，orsuchaswehavesupposedtobeproducedbyhypocrisyandcupidity，werefoundinthechainwhichconnectedtheApostleswithanyofthemissionarieswhofirstspreadChristianityinthewilderpartsofEurope，whocansayhowextensivetheeffectofthissinglebreakmaybe？SupposethatSt。Patrick，forexample，ifevertherewassuchaman，orTheodoreofTarsus，whoissaidtohaveconsecratedintheseventhcenturythefirstbishopsofmanyEnglishsees，hadnotthetrueapostolicalorders，isitnotconceivablethatsuchacircumstancemayaffecttheordersofmanyclergymennowliving？
Evenifitwerepossible，whichitassuredlyisnot，toprovethattheChurchhadtheapostolicalordersinthethirdcentury，itwouldbeimpossibletoprovethatthoseorderswerenotinthetwelfthcenturysofarlostthatnoecclesiasticcouldbecertainofthelegitimatedescentofhisownspiritualcharacter。Andifthiswereso，nosubsequentprecautionscouldrepairtheevil。
Chillingworthstatestheconclusionatwhichhehadarrivedonthissubjectintheseveryremarkablewords:"Thatoftenthousandprobablesnooneshouldbefalse;thatoftenthousandrequisites，whereofanyonemayfail，notoneshouldbewanting，thistomeisextremelyimprobable，andevencousin—germantoimpossible。Sothattheassurancehereofislikeamachinecomposedofaninnumerablemultitudeofpieces，ofwhichitisstrangelyunlikelybutsomewillbeoutoforder;andyet，ifanyonebeso，thewholefabricfallsofnecessitytotheground:andhethatshallputthemtogether，andmaturelyconsiderallthepossiblewaysoflapsingandnullifyingapriesthoodintheChurchofRome，willbeveryinclinabletothinkthatitisahundredtoone，thatamongahundredseemingpriests，thereisnotonetrueone;nay，thatitisnotathingveryimprobablethat，amongstthosemanymillionswhichmakeuptheRomishhierarchy，therearenottwentytrue。"WedonotpretendtoknowtowhatpreciseextentthecanonistsofOxfordagreewiththoseofRomeastothecircumstanceswhichnullifyorders。Wewillnot，therefore，gosofarasChillingworth。Weonlysaythatweseenosatisfactoryproofofthefact，thattheChurchofEnglandpossessestheapostolicalsuccession。And，afterall，ifMr。
Gladstonecouldprovetheapostolicalsuccession，whatwouldtheapostolicalsuccessionprove？Hesaysthat"wehaveamongustheordainedhereditarywitnessesofthetruth，conveyingittousthroughanunbrokenseriesfromourLordJesusChristandhisApostles。"Isthisthefact？IsthereanydoubtthattheordersoftheChurchofEnglandaregenerallyderivedfromtheChurchofRome？DoesnottheChurchofEnglanddeclare，doesnotMr。
Gladstonehimselfadmit，thattheChurchofRometeachesmucherrorandcondemnsmuchtruth？Andisitnotquiteclear，thatasfarasthedoctrinesoftheChurchofEnglanddifferfromthoseoftheChurchofRome，sofartheChurchofEnglandconveysthetruththroughabrokenseries？
Thatthefounders，layandclerical，oftheChurchofEngland，correctedallthatrequiredcorrectioninthedoctrinesoftheChurchofRome，andnothingmore，maybequitetrue。ButwenevercanadmitthecircumstancethattheChurchofEnglandpossessestheapostolicalsuccessionasaproofthatsheisthusperfect。
Nostreamcanrisehigherthanitsfountain。ThesuccessionofministersintheChurchofEngland，derivedasitisthroughtheChurchofRome，canneverprovemorefortheChurchofEnglandthanitprovesfortheChurchofRome。Butthisisnotall。TheArianChurcheswhichoncepredominatedinthekingdomsoftheOstrogoths，theVisigoths，theBurgundians，theVandals，andtheLombards，wereallepiscopalChurches，andallhadafairerclaimthanthatofEnglandtotheapostolicalsuccession，asbeingmuchnearertotheapostolicaltimes。IntheEast，theGreekChurch，whichisatvarianceonpointsoffaithwithalltheWesternChurches，hasanequalclaimtothissuccession。TheNestorian，theEutychian，theJacobiteChurches，allheretical，allcondemnedbycouncils，ofwhichevenProtestantdivineshavegenerallyspokenwithrespect，hadanequalclaimtotheapostolicalsuccession。Nowif，ofteachershavingapostolicalorders，avastmajorityhavetaughtmucherror，ifalargeproportionhavetaughtdeadlyheresy，ifontheotherhand，asMr。Gladstonehimselfadmits，Churchesnothavingapostolicalorders，thatofScotlandforexample，havebeennearertothestandardoforthodoxythanthemajorityofteacherswhohavehadapostolicalorders，howcanhepossiblycalluponustosubmitourprivatejudgmenttotheauthorityofaChurchonthegroundthatshehastheseorders？
Mr。Gladstonedwellsmuchontheimportanceofunityindoctrine。
Unityhetellsus，isessentialtotruth。Andthisismostunquestionable。ButwhenhegoesontotellusthatthisunityisthecharacteristicoftheChurchofEngland，thatsheisoneinbodyandinspirit，wearecompelledtodifferfromhimwidely。
Theapostolicalsuccessionshemayormaynothave。Butunityshemostcertainlyhasnot，andneverhashad。Itisamatterofperfectnotoriety，thatherformulariesareframedinsuchamannerastoadmittoherhighestofficesmenwhodifferfromeachothermorewidelythanaveryhighChurchmandiffersfromaCatholic，oraverylowChurchmanfromaPresbyterian;andthatthegeneralleaningoftheChurch，withrespecttosomeimportantquestions，hasbeensometimesonewayandsometimesanother。
Take，forexample，thequestionsagitatedbetweentheCalvinistsandtheArminians。DowefindintheChurchofEngland，withrespecttothosequestions，thatunitywhichisessentialtotruth？WasiteverfoundintheChurch？Isitnotcertainthat，attheendofthesixteenthcentury，therulersoftheChurchhelddoctrinesasCalvinisticaseverwereheldbyanyCameronian，andnotonlyheldthem，butpersecutedeverybodywhodidnotholdthem？Andisitnotequallycertain，thattherulersoftheChurchhave，inveryrecenttimes，consideredCalvinismasadisqualificationforhighpreferment，ifnotforholyorders？
LookatthequestionswhichArchbishopWhitgiftpropoundedtoBarret，questionsframedintheveryspiritofWilliamHuntington，S。S。[Onequestionwas，whetherGodhadfrometernityreprobatedcertainpersons;andwhy？TheanswerwhichcontentedtheArchbishopwas"Affirmative，etquiavoluit。"]Andthenlookattheeighty—sevenquestionswhichBishopMarsh，withinourownmemory，propoundedtocandidatesforordination。
WeshouldbelothtosaythateitherofthesecelebratedprelateshadintrudedhimselfintoaChurchwhosedoctrinesheabhorred，andthathedeservedtobestrippedofhisgown。Yetitisquitecertainthatoneorotherofthemmusthavebeenverygreatlyinerror。JohnWesleyagain，andCowper’sfriend，JohnNewton，werebothPresbytersofthisChurch。Bothweremenofability。Bothwebelievetohavebeenmenofrigidintegrity，menwhowouldnothavesubscribedaConfessionofFaithwhichtheydisbelievedfortherichestbishopricintheempire。Yet，onthesubjectofpredestination，NewtonwasstronglyattachedtodoctrineswhichWesleydesignatedas"blasphemy，whichmightmaketheearsofaChristiantotingle。"IndeeditwillnotbedisputedthattheclergyoftheEstablishedChurcharedividedastothesequestions，andthatherformulariesarenotfoundpracticallytoexcludeevenscrupulouslyhonestmenofbothsidesfromheraltars。Itisnotoriousthatsomeofhermostdistinguishedrulersthinkthislatitudeagoodthing，andwouldbesorrytoseeitrestrictedinfavourofeitheropinion。Andhereinwemostcordiallyagreewiththem。ButwhatbecomesoftheunityoftheChurch，andofthattruthtowhichunityisessential？Mr。
GladstonetellsusthattheRegiumDonumwasgivenoriginallytoorthodoxPresbyterianministers，butthatpartofitisnowreceivedbytheirheterodoxsuccessors。"This，"hesays，"servestoillustratethedifficultyinwhichgovernmentsentanglethemselves，whentheycovenantwitharbitrarysystemsofopinions，andnotwiththeChurchalone。Theopinionpassesaway，butthegiftremains。"Butisitnotclear，thatifastrongSupralapsarianhad，underWhitgift’sprimacy，leftalargeestateatthedisposalofthebishopsforecclesiasticalpurposes，inthehopethattherulersoftheChurchwouldabidebyWhitgift’stheology，hewouldreallyhavebeengivinghissubstanceforthesupportofdoctrineswhichhedetested？Theopinionwouldhavepassedaway，andthegiftwouldhaveremained。
Thisisonlyasingleinstance。Whatwidedifferencesofopinionrespectingtheoperationofthesacramentsareheldbybishops，doctors，presbytersoftheChurchofEngland，allmenwhohaveconscientiouslydeclaredtheirassenttoherarticles，allmenwhoare，accordingtoMr。Gladstone，ordainedhereditarywitnessesofthetruth，allmenwhosevoicesmakeupwhat，hetellsus，isthevoiceoftrueandreasonableauthority！Here，again，theChurchhasnotunity;andasunityistheessentialconditionoftruth，theChurchhasnotthetruth。
Nay，taketheveryquestionwhichwearediscussingwithMr。
Gladstone。TowhatextentdoestheChurchofEnglandallowoftherightofprivatejudgment？Whatdegreeofauthoritydoessheclaimforherselfinvirtueoftheapostolicalsuccessionofherministers？Mr。Gladstone，averyableandaveryhonestman，takesaviewofthismatterwidelydifferingfromtheviewtakenbyotherswhomhewilladmittobeasableandashonestashimself。PeoplewhoaltogetherdissentfromhimonthissubjecteatthebreadoftheChurch，preachinherpulpits，dispensehersacraments，conferherorders，andcarryonthatapostolicalsuccession，thenatureandimportanceofwhich，accordingtohim，theydonotcomprehend。Isthisunity？Isthistruth？
Itwillbeobservedthatwearenotputtingcasesofdishonestmenwho，forthesakeoflucre，falselypretendtobelieveinthedoctrinesofanestablishment。Weareputtingcasesofmenasuprightaseverlived，differingontheologicalquestionsofthehighestimportanceandavowingthatdifference，areyetpriestsandprelatesofthesamechurch。Wethereforesay，thatonsomepointswhichMr。Gladstonehimselfthinksofvitalimportance，theChurchhaseithernotspokenatall，or，whatisforallpracticalpurposesthesamething，hasnotspokeninlanguagetobeunderstoodevenbyhonestandsagaciousdivines。ThereligionoftheChurchofEnglandissofarfromexhibitingthatunityofdoctrinewhichMr。Gladstonerepresentsasherdistinguishingglory，thatitis，infact，abundleofreligioussystemswithoutnumber。ItcomprisesthereligioussystemofBishopTomline，andthereligioussystemofJohnNewton，andallthereligioussystemswhichliebetweenthem。ItcomprisesthereligioussystemofMr。Newman，andthereligioussystemoftheArchbishopofDublin，andallthereligioussystemswhichliebetweenthem。Allthesedifferentopinionsareheld，avowed，preached，printed，withinthepaleoftheChurch，bymenofunquestionedintegrityandunderstanding。
DowemakethisdiversityatopicofreproachtotheChurchofEngland？Farfromit。Wewouldopposewithallourpowereveryattempttonarrowherbasis？WouldtoGodthat，ahundredandfiftyyearsago，agoodkingandagoodprimatehadpossessedthepoweraswellasthewilltowidenit！Itwasanobleenterprise，worthyofWilliamandofTillotson。ButwhatbecomesofallMr。Gladstone’seloquentexhortationstounity？Isitnotmeremockerytoattachsomuchimportancetounityinformandname，wherethereissolittleinsubstance，toshudderatthethoughtoftwoChurchesinalliancewithoneState，andtoendurewithpatiencethespectacleofahundredsectsbattlingwithinoneChurch？AndisitnotclearthatMr。Gladstoneisbound，onallhisownprinciples，toabandonthedefenceofaChurchinwhichunityisnotfound？IsitnotclearthatheisboundtodividetheHouseofCommonsagainsteverygrantofmoneywhichmaybeproposedfortheclergyoftheEstablishedChurchinthecolonies？HeobjectstothevoteforMaynooth，becauseitismonstroustopayonemantoteachtruth，andanothertodenouncethattruthasfalsehood。ButitisamerechancewhetheranysumwhichhevotesfortheEnglishChurchinanycolonywillgotothemaintenanceofanArminianoraCalvinist，ofamanlikeMr。