interesting, or even perhaps thoroughly intelligible. If the number of our readers, who rejoice to be relieved for a brief half-hour from the more solemn and exciting topics of the day by themes of this nature, appear numerous, we shall willingly at some future period attempt the task. At present we conclude by noticing one or two more characteristics of the "Prelude" which have been almost passed by in our examination of its details. Often has it been observed that minds of a high order are rarely destitute of a keen sense of the ludicrous. The poem we have been reviewing displays a fund of quiet humour in the heart of our deceased Laureate, which his previously published works had hardly prepared us to expect. We subjoin a few. Here is the imperfect pack of cards which helped to amuse the evenings of his childhood: "Uncouth assemblage was it, where no few Had changed their functions; some plebeian cards The persons of departed potentates."-p. 24. And a few lines from the picture of the "ideal child" of the age :— This model of a child is never known To mix in quarrels; that were far beneath "not blind is he To the broad follies of the licensed world, These last lines really exhibit a pungency of satire which few would have looked for at Wordsworth's hands. The language of the "Prelude" is of great purity throughout, though the style is certainly at times too diffuse,-a common fault with its author, excepting perhaps in his sonnets. Had we room to do battle with Wordsworth's theory, that the diction of poetry should be identical with that of good prose, we might certainly select some instances from this poem, as from his other works, which, in our judgment, tend to decide the question against himself. For example, would the Laureate have recommended to masters of English prose such periphrases as the following ?— 66 the fair Holden where martyrs suffered in past time "Prepared to sojourn in a leasant town, Washed by the current of the stately Loire."-p. 241. "Of that first memorable onset made By a strong levy of humanity Upon the traffickers in Negro blood."-p. 277. Admissible in poetry, nay, even needful and ornamental we may admit such phraseology to be, but then what becomes of the Wordsworthian doctrine on this head? We prefer his practice in this matter to his theoretic principles. Some images strike us as peculiarly happy. One such we have already cited: Take another, if less elegant, yet not less forcible : "Could I behold Who, less insensible than sodden clay In a sea river's bed at ebb of tide, Could have beheld-with undelighted heart, We must however take exception against one comparison as being far more lively than dignified. A child, who runs with his little windmill toy in order to make it go faster than it could do while stationary, is surely no apt representation (p. 282) of those who sought to enact enormities in Paris, and made it their joy during the fearful reign of Terror. Finally, as we have said that the reader must not look for religion on the general surface, let us gladly state that there are many and touching exceptions to this statement, and seldom any thing that can be wrested into an anti-religious meaning. The intention of the work, and, in part, as we have said before, a proper reserve, will explain much of the causes of an absence of more frequent and definite mention of faith and of the world unseen. But the marvel is, considering Wordsworth's training and the times in which his youth was cast, that he remained so untainted by its snares, that he preserved so much of pious feeling and of courage to confess it; the blessing is, that no young man who makes the Laureate's poetry the study of his leisure hours, can imbibe thence aught that militates with domestic quietude, humbleness of heart, distrust of the world's law, contentedness and waiting in filial confidence upon his Creator,-nothing which, in short, is deeply at variance with the lessons which religion would implant. Of how few among our poets can this be said: what honour is due to him of whom we may say it! Blessings be ever with his memory. There may be for some few a still higher sanctity than that which he pourtrays, yet happy are they too who can learn thus to hallow the affections of this earth, "In some green bower Be hallowed, love that breathes not without awe; Love that adores, but on the knees of prayer, By heaven inspired; that frees from chains the soul, Of earth-born passions on the wings of praise Bearing a tribute to the Almighty's Throne."-p. 360. BISHOPS AND THEIR CLERGY. A Farewell Letter to his Parishioners. By the Rev. WILLIAM J. E. BENNETT. Cleaver. The Statement of the Clergy of S. Saviour's, Leeds. Masters. Memorial of the Churchwardens of the Parish of Westbourne to the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of Chichester, with his Lordship's Reply. Masters. THERE are perhaps few persons who have not been led by the events of the last three years to consider with more or less interest the present position and future prospects of the Church of England. Investigations commenced and carried on in a hostile spirit, with the design of discovering the points most favourable for attack, do not call for any remark in this place, but there is another class of inquirers summoned into existence by recent occurrences, in connection with whom we feel disposed to offer a few observations. It is the natural effect of violent convulsions in society to drive men back to first principles; and by parity of reason seasons of difficulty and debate force those whose lot is cast therein to reflect more freely and unconstrainedly upon the origin, growth, and characteristics of the system under which they find themselves called upon to live and act. Now this has been the case with a large body of English Churchmen. Had nothing unusual occurred, had there been no stirring of men's minds, no marked antagonism of evil and good, no extraordinary development of strength and weakness in the English communion, they would in all probability have passed through life, like their immediate predecessors, without troubling themselves with minute inquiry into the real state of our ecclesias tical economy, but content to believe and repeat the familiar assertion, that the English was the purest branch of CHRIST's Church upon the earth. These have by the influence of the times been converted into thinkers and inquirers. But the authorities of the Church of England, nay, the Church as a body, is not used to deal with such. It has so long been accustomed to hear (unless from avowed enemies) only the voice of compliment and adulation, that the acknowledgment of faults and deficiencies is taken as a mark of disloyalty. This holds good both with respect to those who are unprepared to commend every point in what may be called the Anglican theory, or to approve of every detail of its practice. Those who are willing to set their seal to each particular feature of that legal status which was the ultimate result of the varied policy of the ecclesiastical and secular authorities from the reign of Henry VIII. to that of Charles II., are regarded as faithful sons, whilst those on the contrary who though thankful for much, at the same time find much to deplore, much that is hard to reconcile with Catholic antiquity, are viewed as alienated already in heart, and as men on whose continued adherence no dependance can be placed. Yet surely this is both unjust and injurious to the real interests of the Church. There is a fair and broad medium between unqualified approbation of the theory of Anglicanism and disbelief that the Reformed Communion is a true and living member of CHRIST's body, possessing all that is essential to render it a due and sufficient channel of the benefits of CHRIST's Incarnation, a faithful and lawful nursing mother of immortal souls. We may fairly wish much undone, desiderate much which we possess not, without having our attachment questioned or our fidelity denied. So again with regard to points of practice. To drag forth to the light errors and defects in those who constitute the living Church, cannot properly be construed into disaffection or party malevolence. The ecclesiastical censor is not necessarily an ecclesiastical malcontent. There is all the difference in the world between the calm, well-considered exposure of the faults whether of systems or of men, and the passionate including all and every thing in one sweeping sentence of reprobation, the tendency of which is not to produce reform but mortification, not new life but more speedy death. We may seem to have been dilating upon what every one acknowledges, but truths acknowledged in the abstract are very often forgotten when applied in particular cases, and we desire that our foregoing remarks should be borne in mind during the perusal of the following pages. We have placed at the head of this article the titles of three publications, which tell the tale of one and the same contest waged in different parts of the country. The letter of Mr. Bennett is probably by this time in the hands of most of our readers, and the general nature of the unhappy controversy which has issued in his retirement from his important post, is sufficiently well known. We cannot however but say that we quite concur with him in the opinion, that having once tendered his resignation he could not avoid its completion by the aid of any legal technicality. It may have been a false step to make the offer. We think that it was. We have read that part of Mr. Bennett's letter upon "Desertion of the Flock," but whilst not insensible to the force of the argument which is there so eloquently and feelingly urged, we must still regret that the offer of resignation was made. We are bound to act not upon an ideal theory, but upon what we know to be the state of the case. If the English episcopate were independent of State influence, accustomed to lead rather than follow the popular mind, less reprehension than fell from the Bishop of London might perhaps have been legitimately treated as a moral compulsion to retire. But a Priest aware how much in these days the will of the nation enunciated by the press sways the decision of ecclesiastical authorities, would we think have been justified in acting upon the words of S. Chrysostom literally understood, "I have received this Church from GoD my SAVIOUR, and am entrusted with the care of this people's souls, and I cannot desert this charge. Throw me out by force, that I may at least plead your authority for the non-performance of my office." It is not, however, the individual case of Mr. Bennett which we wish now to discuss, but rather to draw attention to a most important subject which is thereby brought prominently into notice, we mean, the nature and limits of canonical obedience, or in other words, to the relative position of a Bishop and his clergy in the present day. Mr. Bennett's narrative is suggestive of this inquiry, as it affects the case of Bishop versus the incumbents of his diocese. In the statement of the clergy of S. Saviour's, Leeds, the same subject is reproduced, with the modification of a curate for defendant instead of an incumbent. Now we would have it distinctly understood that in what we are about to advance, we desire to forget as far as possible the individuals concerned in these two controversies. We have no wish to write as partizans of Mr. Bennett or of the clergy of S. Saviour's, still less to judge the Bishops of London and Ripon. The evils which we feel constrained to comment upon arise only in part from the personal character of these prelates. They may claim to have been guided but by precedent, and are only blameable inasmuch as they might have risen superior to the system, which has of late prevailed, instead of affording fresh and painful examples of its injurious tendency. The first point which occurs to us in relation to the events in question, is the inclination which is visible in both prelates to rule not judicially but arbitrarily. And here we would take them as illustrating the common practice of the episcopal bench. Our 1 Quoted by Mr. Bennett. |