CHURCH AND STATE.* [EDINBURGH REVIEW FOR APRIL, 1839.] Tax author of this volume is a young man | it less the second time, and still less the third of unblemished character and of distinguished time; and now it seems to me to be no 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 appeared to us to be the most serious of the evils which are to be set off against the many blessings of popular government. It is a fine and true saying of Bacon, that reading makes a 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 admirably 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 performances of an Italian improvisatore. But they are fortunate, indeed, if they retain unimpaired the faculties which are required for close reason ing 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 distinguished 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 them. 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 assuredly not with unmixed pleasure, the appearance 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 consideration of the soundness or unsoundness of his opinions, must be considered as highly creditable to him. We certainly cannot wish that Mr. Gladstone's doctrines may become fashionable among public men. But we heartily wish that his laudable desire to penetrate beneath the surface of questions, and to arrive, by long and intent meditation, at the knowledge of great general laws, were much more fashionable than we at all expect it to become. signs of much patient thought. It is written throughout with excellent taste and excellent temper; nor is it, so far as we have observed, disfigured by one expression unworthy of a gentleman, a scholar, or a Christian. But the doctrines which are put forth in it appear to us, after full and calm consideration, to be false; to be in the highest degree pernicious; to be such as, if followed out in practice to their legitimate consequences, would, inevitably produce the dissolution of society; and for Mr. Gladstone seems to us to be, in many this opinion we shall proceed to give our rearespects, exceedingly well qualified for philo-sons with that freedom which the importance sophical investigation. His mind is of large of the subject requires, and which Mr. Gladgrasp; nor is he deficient in dialectical skill. stone both by precept and by example invites us But he does not give his intellect fair play. to use, but, we hope, without rudeness, and, we There is no want of light, but a great want are sure, without malevolence. of what Bacon would have called dry light. Before we enter on an examination of this Whatever Mr. Gladstone sees is refracted and theory, we wish to guard ourselves against distorted by a false medium of passions and one misconception. It is possible that some prejudices. His style bears a remarkable ana-persons who have read Mr. Gladstone's book logy to his mode of thinking, and indeed exer- carelessly, and others who have merely heard cises great influence on his mode of thinking. in conversation or seen in a newspaper that His rhetoric, though often good of its kind, the member for Newark has written in defence darkens and perplexes the logic which it should of the Church of England against the supportillustrate. Half his acuteness and diligence, ers of the Voluntary System, may imagine that with a barren imagination and a scanty voca- we are writing in defence of the Voluntary Sys bulary, would have saved him from almost all tem, and that we desire the abolition of the his mistakes. He has one gift most dangerous Established Church. This is not the case. It to a speculator,-a vast command of a kind would be as unjust to accuse us of attacking of language, grave and majestic, but of vague the Church because we attack Mr. Gladstone's and uncertain import,-of a kind of language doctrines, as it would be to accuse Locke of which affects us much in the same way in wishing for anarchy because he refuted Filwhich the lofty diction of the chorus of Clouds mer's patriarchal theory of government; or to affected the simple-hearted Athenian. accuse Blackstone of recommending the condenied that the right of the rector to tithe was fiscation of ecclesiastical property because he derived from the Levitical law. It is to be observed that Mr. Gladstone rests his case on entirely new grounds, and does not differ more widely from us than from some of those who ω γη του φθεγματος, ως ιερόν, και σεμνον, και τερατώδες. When propositions have been established, and nothing remains but to amplify and decorate them, this dim magnificence may be in place. But if it is admitted into a demonstration, it is very much worse than absolute non-have hitherto been considered as the most sense--just as that transparent haze through illustrious champions of the Church. He is which the sailor sees capes and mountains of Lot content with the "Ecclesiastical Polity," false sizes and in false bearings, is more dan- and rejoices that the latter part of that cele gerous than utter darkness. Now, Mr. Glad- brated work “does not carry with it the weight stone is fond of employing the phraseology of of Hooker's plenary authority." He is not which we speak in those parts of his work content with Bishop Warburton's "Alliance of which require the utmost perspicuity and pre- Church and State." "The propositions of that cision of which human language is capable, work generally," he says, "are to be received and in this way he deludes first himself, and with qualification;" and he agrees with Boling. then his readers. The foundations of his broke in thinking that Warburton's whole the 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 fied with Paley's "Defence of the Church," which are fit only for perorations. This fault which he pronounces to be "tainted by the is one which no subsequent care or industry original vice of false ethical principles," and can correct. The more strictly Mr. Gladstone "full of the seeds of evil." He conceives that reasons on his premises, the more absurd are Dr. Chalmers has taken a partial view of the the conclusions which he brings out; and subject, and "put forth much questionable matwhen at last his good sense and good nature ter." In truth, on almost every point on which recoil from the horrible practical inferences to we are opposed to Mr. Gladstone, we have on which his theory leads, he is reduced some- our side the authority of some divine, eminent times to take refuge in arguments inconsistent as a defender of existing establishments. with his fundamental doctrines; and some- Mr. Gladstone's whole theory rests on this times to escape from the legitimate consequences of his false principles under cover of equally false history. It would be unjust not to say that this book, though not a good book, shows more talent than many good books. It contains some eloquent and ingenious passages. It bears the great fundamental proposition-that the Propagation of Religious Truth is one of the principal ends of government, as government. If 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 out 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 al 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 revelation 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 respec.ing 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. clearly a distinction which, though very obvious, seems to be overlooked by many excelJent 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 | most unanimous. But whether there be one to teinporal interests, but whether the machinery which happens at any moment to be employed for the purpose of protecting certain temporal 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 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 than that the art of sculpture should flourish among us. Yet it by no means follows that the Royal Academy ought to unite with its present functions those of the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge, to distribute theological tracts, to send forth missionaries, to turn out Nollekens for being a Catholic, Bacon for being a Methodist, and Flaxman for being a Swedenborgian. For the effect of such folly would be that we should have the worst possible Academy of Arts, and the worst possible Society for the Promotion of Christian Know-taining it, differ as widely as possible respectledge. The community, it is plain, would be 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. Now here are two great objects:-One is the protection of the persons and estates of citi zens from injury; the other is the propagation of religious truth. No two objects more entirely distinct can well be imagined. The former belongs wholly to the visible and tangible world in which we live; the latter belongs to that higher world which is beyond the reach of our senses. The former belongs to this life; the latter to that which is to come. Men who are perfectly agreed as to the importance of the former object, and as to the way of at ing the latter object. We must therefore pause before we admit that the persons, be they who they may, who are intrusted with power for the promotion of the former object, ought al ways to use that power for the promotion of the latter object. As to some of the ends of civil government, all people are agreed. That it is designed to Mr. Gladstone conceives that the duties of protect our persons and our property, that it governments are paternal;-a doctrine which is designed to compel us to satisfy our wants, we will not believe till he can show us some not by rapine, but by industry,-that it is de- government which loves its subjects as a fa signed to compel us to decide our differences, ther loves a child, and which is as superior in not by the strong hand, but by arbitration,-intelligence to its subjects as a father is supethat it is designed to direct our whole force, as rior to a child. He tells us, in lofty, though that of one man, against any other society somewhat indistinct language, that "Govern. which may offer us injury,-these are propo- ment occupies in moral the place of To ay in sitions which will hardly be disputed. physical science." If government be indeed Now these are matters in which man, with-re way 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 school, overlook loves life, shrinks from pain, desires those the play-ground, fix the hours of labour and of comforts which can be enjoyed 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 our expenses, and stint us to a certain number patriots-these are evidently evils from which of dishes, of glasses of wine, and of cups of 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 tea? Plato, whose hardihood in speculation was perhaps more wonderful than any other peculiarity of his extraordinary mind, and who shrank from nothing to which his principles led, went this whole length. Mr. Gladstone is not so intrepid. He contents himself with lay ing down this proposition-that, whatever be can only be secured for right uses by applying the 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 certhe 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 moqualification 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 unisuch, 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 company 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 conclusions 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 be very solid. The following paragraph is a specimen of the arguments by which Mr. Gladstone has, as he conceives, established his great fundamental proposition: "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 definite moral capacity, must sanctify their acts done in that capacity by the offices of religion; inasmuch as the acts cannot otherwise be acceptable 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 fulfilmore 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 subject were, realized, is used according to the will of arms; and because such energies are thus esthe 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 sanctice, 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 involved in it The governors are reasoning agents for the nation, in their conjoint acts as such. 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 governor, or none." recognition of the doctrine of national person. A nation, 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 be come 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 constituentsbound to govern their servants with humanity and justice--bound to fulfil with fidelity many important contracts. They must, therefore, sanctify their acts by the offices of religion, or these acts will be sinful and punishable inary consequences? Look at banks, insurance themselves. In fulfilment, then, of his obligations as an individual, the Director of the London and Birmingham Railway Company must be a worshipping man. But his acts are public. He acts for a body. He moves at his word ten thousand subject arms. And because these energies are out of the range of his mere individual agency, they must be sanctified by public acts of devotion. The Railway Directors must offer prayer and praise in their public 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 permitted to be the organ of the Company, and to wield its collected force." Would Mr. Gladstone really defend this proposition? We are sure that he would not; but we are sure that to this proposition, and to innumerable similar propositions, his reasoning inevitably leads. Again,- "National will and agency are indisputably one, binding either a dissentient minority of the subject body, in a manner that nothing but the ments? Is there any such combination in the offices, dock companies, canal companies, if the Athenæum keeps money at the Bank, |