« AnteriorContinuar »
upon many important points, quite as much so as those who have connected themselves with different medical schools. For instance we have Allopathy, Homeopathy, Hydropathy, and the new 'pathy called “the expectant method.' One man fills his patient up to the brim with pills and draughts, another doses his victims with imaginary drugs in proportions equally imaginary; one deluges his patient with pump mixture, packs him up in wet sheets, scalds him with hot water, scrubs the skin off his body, and then plunges him into a cistern of cold water as a sort of refresher; while another uses neither drugs, imaginary drugs, nor water, but pockets his fee, and blandly leaves nature to do her curative work in the best possible style. They are all medical men, they are unanimous in describing themselves as belonging to the healing profession, but whatever unity there may be in the name, there is none in spirit. There is no more hope of their coming to an agreement, except that of plundering their patients, than there is of an acid and an alkali mingling in solution without neutralising each other. And to my mind there is the same degree of fundamental difference between the theological schools; they profess to show how spiritual diseases are to be healed, but their methods are as widely at variance as are those of Allopathy and Hydropathy."
“I think, Doctor, that there is more of ingenuity than fitness in your illustration. All the theological schools, and all the sects, are united in the name of Jesus.”
“Yes, and are satisfied with being united in the name, for they care not to become one in his spirit. In our times men are more afraid of being called infidels or sceptics, than they are of performing unchristian actions. They spend so much of their time talking about their religion, that they have none left wherein to practise it."
“I am half inclined to believe, Doctor, that you are becoming sceptical of the faith.”
“ You must not trouble to believe anything of the kind, George," answered the Doctor rather tartly. “ I confess to being the enemy of mere wordmongering and falsehood in every form, but especially do I hate lying in the name of God. I have no faith in lies, and above all else I have no confidence in those who undertake to say that no word must be spoken until they have painted and decorated what they call the truth. The poor two-legged creatures stand up in their pulpits to make professions, which, practically considered, are quite foreign to the great aim of their lives. And as far as infidelity among the working-classes is concerned, I have no doubt that the clergy are solely responsible for it. They have been unfaithful to their sermonspoken words, and the people who judge more from the life of a man than they do from his discourses, could not be blind to the contradictions. The preachers spoke of equality and brotherhood in their discourses; but, with a few noble exceptions, did nothing to prove their belief in the doctrine they had promulgated.”
Lester felt that, although it had been bitterly said, there was a painful measure of truth in Dr. Moule's words. The latter spoke very warmly, for no man hated hypocrisy more intensely, or loved honest speech more thoroughly, than he did. It was one of his common remarks, that he cared not what religion a man was of, if he would but honestly profess and carry it out. He loved many Catholics and Socinians, whom he knew to be good men, but for any man to profess piety and then to act meanly, was his abhorrence. He believed that the majority of ministers hated each other ; or that if they did not go quite so far as to hate, they were at least jealous of each other's suc.
cess, although, even in relation to the successful, in public, declaring their sympathy.
* The other evening," said he, “I turned into the Hall, while the 'AntiPapal Indignation Meeting' was being held. The audience was greatly excited, for Doctor Growler was upon his legs, and as usual, like a real Scotch terrier, he was snapping and showing his teeth at the Pope, which, as a matter of course, brought down the applause of the house, much to Growler's satisfaction. When I entered he was demonstrating' that he was prepared to die the martyr's death in defence of Protestantism, was even prepared to go any length to aid in destroying the Papal system; but it struck me that if such were the case he ought not to stay in England but should go to Rome and nail his protests upon the door of St. Peter's. Why keep so carefully out of harm's way? Did the Apostles and early teachers do that?"
"But you would not argue that every Protestant is called upon to incur the danger of losing his life? It may be as much a duty to keep out of danger as it is to utter the truth. If we are to pray to be preserved from temptation, I see no reason why it should not be argued that we have no right to tempt others to persecute."
"I do not argue for men running into danger. It is not every man's calling to become a martyr, but every man is bound to abstain from boasting of his heroism when he has resolved to incur no risk. Growler remains in England to brave the Pope, but will not venture upon bearding him in Rome. The real heroes said less but worked more bravely. Growler has taken a leaf out of Falstaff's book, for he makes sure the enemy is powerless before drawing his sword. It is the old story of a live ass kicking a dead lion, and then braying about his glorious victory. For, after all the howling, and applauding, the poor old Pope is dead enough, although the unhappy old man won't lay down, thus he becomes a butt for the shafts of such curs as Growler. There he stood, thundering, and what he misnames arguing' about the Man of Sin and the Scarlet Woman; while, unanimous in their applause, the lights of all our Churches and Chapels were grouped around him like flies round a treacle pot. It reminded me of a strange scene I once witnessed in a workhouse lunatic asylum. As in a very Babel, all the idiots, with their upturned faces, were jabbering their satisfaction while a lunatic was making them a speech about the wickedness of the man who made them such thin gruel, and arrogantly assumed to be their master.”
Lester enjoyed the richly humourous manner of the Doctor while delivering the latter portion of his speech; it is certain, too, that the fact of his being so severe against Growler was especially grateful to the young rector, who, under the impression that they were valuable, had recently invested somewhat largely in Growler's works, but much to his annoyance, on reading them, he made the discovery that they were not written, but built by the aid of scissors and paste, out of materials which had been ruthlessly plundered from other men's writings. Hence he was prepared not only to appreciate the severe criticism of the Doctor, but to increase it by adding remarks of his own. Still, he could not overlook the fact, that instead of proving the theory about ministers hating each other, this instance tended to establish the contrary; for were not the lights of all the Churches busy applauding Growler ? But when this was pointed out, Doctor Moule had a sufficient answer.
“Oh, yes; they were applauding with their hands and feet but not with their hearts. They hated him quite as much as they hated the Pope. They were sitting in brotherly union, because an outsider was to be condemned,
yet, when that was over, they were as ready to condemn each other. I have heard them preach in their own places, and, as a rule, half their time is devoted to cutting up a neighbouring preacher, some dear brother in Jesus, and his doctrines. They are united in name as gold and copper are in being money, and there is no nearer likeness, no closer affinity. But come, said he, rising, “I must visit a patient near the quay, let us walk together, and have one turn more upon the pier. A turn in the evening air will be far more profitable than sitting here pulling miserable Dutch dolls to pieces."
Lester gladly agreed, for having found himself to be as incapable of successfully opposing, as he was of agreeing with, the Doctor's arguments and illustrations, he accepted the opportunity of a ramble as furnishing an excellent means of changing the conversation. When it had ended, they two parted, each returning home busily engaged in wondering when and where they should meet again.
But Lester was considerably benefited by the turn the conversation had taken; which, if it had not been strictly logical, and admirably conceived, was at least well calculated for making him look with greater confidence upon the future. For some weeks he had been hampered by the idea of being incompetent to perform the duties of his station, and, like most young men who possess a noble modesty, coupled with real, but as yet untried, strength of character, he had mistaken his fears for positive proofs. When he had finished reading the works of Growler, his mind was strangely oppressed, for knowing them to be extensively sold, and not having learnt the fact that people buy popular religious books more for show than for use, he foolishly imagined they were as widely read. He had been disgusted by their maudlin sentimentality, their japanish show of scholarship without the substance, their straining after effect, and the pompous arrogance of their verbal humility, and had concluded that if such was the religious teaching required by the world, he was incapable of supplying it. But when Doctor Moule began his attack, although displeased by its tone, he felt greatly relieved, for there was no longer the conviction on his mind of being the only person who considered Growler to be a spiritual mountebank, who cared more for the halfpence than for the donkey he balanced upon his oratory. Thus he had gained more confidence in his own judgment, and was better prepared for facing his new position. Possibly if this conversation had taken another turn, this history would never have been written; for in his frame of mind, it needed but a feather's weight to make him abandon the living of Crosswood, at least until by serving in the capacity of a curate elsewhere he should have gained the practical knowledge he considered necessary. Doctor Moule, without knowing it, had really given him the rectory, for by compelling bim to recognise the fact that all earnest men commence life with doubting their own powers, he had inspired him with courage to enter bravely upon his task.
NOTICE. OUR readers will be glad to hear that we are now able definitely to fix a time for the opening of the new place in Newman Street. On the first Sunday in August there will be a Morning Service; and the opening will be commemorated by a Tea Party and Soirée, to be held in the last week in July, of which further particulars will be given.
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE REFORMATION.-XXVI.
A NEW ERA. WITH the opening of the fifteenth century, humanity awoke from the torpor of three centuries. The Reign of Spiritual Terror is now rapidly coming to an end. The Church might still, and did, burn, torture, and murder those she-called Heretics ; but from the ashes of those she burns, there ever arise new foes. Mankind is no longer prostrate; a great idea has taken possession of men's souls, and they are ready to fight, ready to die (if need be), for it. Even the obedient sons of the Church, in matters of doctrine, are, to a great extent, adherents of the new idea. This new idea is—that humanity was not intended to be the Slave of the Priest. The Church is no longer the irresponsible Despot that she was; men have begun to examine her commands, and to subject them to criticism. The Nations, as nations, have awakened to a sense of their independence; and patriotism is everywhere setting itself in opposition to the sacerdotal despotism which has hitherto been supreme. It is true, that there has been opposition before, but it has been on the part of heretics only, never of whole nations. The power and authority of the Church have yet remained intact; and the heresies have mainly arisen from disgust at the immorality and vice of the hierarchy, and especially of the Papal Court.
The opposition now is of a different kind. There is a latent consciousness everywhere, that the old relations between Church and State should be altered ; that in secular matters, at least, the State should be supreme-a consciousness which, ere long, we shall see finding an articulate expression in various ways. Civil rulers, strengthened by the feeling existent in the national mind, will no longer quietly tolerate the interference of the Church in temporal concerns; nay, in more than one instance, when their interest points that way, materially encroach upon what have hitherto been deemed the inalienable and sacred rights of the Church. The life of the European ' nations, was no longer pervaded and impressed, as it had formerly been, by ecclesiastical influence. The development of national character, and the separate organisation of the various monarchies, were making important advances. It thus became indispensable that the relation of the ecclesiastical to the secular powers should be thoroughly remodified.'* Remodified it accordingly sought to be.
It is true, that this movement is not to end in the severance of Church and State ; for when the Church finds that she can no longer lord it over kings, with the same absolute sway as formerly, she will accept the new conditions on which the alliance of the kingly and priestly powers can be maintained, and will earn by her services to kings what she can no longer extort from their fears. The oppression of the people will remain the same. At the beginning of the fifteenth century, however, these new conditions have not been settled ; and kings are using the changed feeling of the people for the purpose of wresting them from the Church. It is, therefore, a siguificant fact, that the two great Reformers of the time-Wycliffe and Hussare supported by the ruling State-authorities in their opposition to the Papacy and the hierarchy. We have seen Wycliffe defended by the Duke of Lancaster, the Earl Marshal, and the Queen-Mother; while Huss numbered among his earlier supporters the king, and a large portion of the nobility of Bohemia, as will be shewn in reviewing his career. It is not, of course, to be supposed that these movements on the part of
* Ranke. History of the Popes, i. 31.
the laity, and the glad reception of what the Church called heresy on the part of the English people, were unnoticed or unproductive within the Church. On the contrary, there had been growing up a new movement of reform within the Church. The first of such movements took place under Hildebrand, but that bad turned out a failure, because the men who succeeded that great Pontiff were not governed by the same spirit, and because, also, the idea itself was one impossible of achievement. The present movement was not on the part of the Papacy but of the hierarchy, whose wisest members clearly saw that the clergy were losing the respect of the people, and therefore in danger of losing their power. They attributed, rightly or wrongly, the corruption and vice of the priesthood to the unlimited power of the Pope, and the interference of the Papacy in the national Church governments; they supported the Papacy as a centre of unity, but would subordinate the papal authority to the authority of the Church as represented by its Councils. Thus, at the beginning of the fifteenth century, we see the Papal autocracy attacked on various hands; a strong party of dissatisfied laity within the Church looking with suspicion both on Pope and hierarchy; a heretical party without the Church desirous to destroy it, and a party of reforming bishops desirous of renovating it. It was the signal failure which attended the efforts of this latter party which led the Church in the end to accept the alliance of the State on its own conditions. At this time, therefore, opposition was making itself apparent both within and without the Church. The former found its ultimate expression in the great Reforming Council of Constance, the latter was identified with John Huss.
In such a threatening aspect of affairs, it is hardly possible to imagine that the state of things disclosed by history, with reference to the hierarchy and Papacy, could have subsisted. It would seem, indeed, that a judicial blindness must have fallen on the priesthood. The position can only be fully appreciated by imagining a vessel in the midst of a stormy sea, the crew all below, thinking nought of the surrounding danger; some sleeping, some carousing, and others quarrelling; while above, the captain and the officers are disputing as to who shall take the helm, and guide the ship into a safe port. Meanwhile the winds whistle ever shriller and more shrill; the big storm-clouds gather round; the seas mount higher and higher, and threaten the vessel with destruction ; but still the crew pay no heed, and sleep, carouse, and quarrel only the more, while the captain and officers are as far as ever from having settled their dispute. This was, in fact, the position in which the Church was at the time when Wycliffe was completing his labours, and Lollards were becoming numerous-when John Huss commenced his work, and the great Bohemian revolt against Rome was soon to arise thereout; and when the better and more wary among the priesthood were arriving at the conclusion that some reform was necessary, and must be effected.
Let us look for a moment at what was the aspect of things within the Church; and first, at the state of the inorals of the clergy, and their capacity for meeting the spiritual wants of the people. John Trithemius, the Abbot of Spanheim, thus exposes the corruption of the priesthood in the fifteenth century :-“ Unlettered and rude men,” he says, " wholly destitute of merit, “ rise to the priesthood. No attention is paid to purity of life, a liberal “education, or a good conscience. The bishops, occupied with temporal " affairs, devolve the trouble of examining candidates upon persons of no “experience. The study of Scripture and learning are totally neglected by "the priests, who prefer occupying themselves with the training of dogs and