and a more complete appreciation of the confusions on which the High Church doctrine rests, and of the causes which have led to its growth at different times.

By the way, I never accused Keble or Newman of saying, that to belong to a true Church would save a bad man; but of what is equally unchristian, that a good man was not safe unless he belonged to an Episcopal Church; which is exactly not allowing God's seal without it be countersigned by one of their own forging. Nor did I say, they were bad men, but much the contrary; though I think that their doctrine, which they believe, I doubt not, to be true, is in itself schismatical, profane, and unchristian. And I think it highly important that the evils of the doctrine should be shown in the strongest terms; but no word of mine has impeached the sincerity or general character of the men; and, in this respect, I will carefully avoid every expression that may be thought uncharitable.

LXXIX. TO W. W. HULL, ESQ.

Rugby, April 30, 1834.

I have indeed written a large part of a volume on Church and State, but it had better be broken up into smaller portions to be published at first separately, though afterwards it may be altogether. My outline of the whole question is this:-I. That the State, being the only power sovereign over human life, has for its legitimate object the happiness of its people,-their highest happiness, not physical only, but intellectual and moral; in short, the highest happiness of which it has a conception. This was held, I believe, nearly unanimously till the eighteenth century. Warburton, the Utilitarians, and I fear Whately,' maintain, on the contrary, that the State's only object is "the conservation of body and goods." They thus play, though unintentionally, into the hands of the upholders of ecclesiastical power, by destroying the highest duty and prerogative of the Commonwealth. II. Ecclesiastical officers may be regarded in two lights only, as sovereign or independent; if they are priests, or if they are rulers. A. Priests are independent, as deriving either from supposed holiness of race or person, or from their exclusive knowledge of the Divine Will, a title to execute certain functions, which none but themselves can perform: and therefore these functions, being of prime necessity, enable them to treat with the State not as members or subjects of it, but as foreigners conferring on it a benefit, and selling this on their own terms. B. Rulers, of course, are independent and sovereign, ipsâ vi termini. III. But the ecclesiastical officers of Christianity, are by God's appointment neither priests nor rulers. A. Not Priests, for there is one only Priest, and all the rest are brethren; none has any holiness of person or race more than another, none has any exexclusive possession of divine knowledge. B. Not Rulers, for, Christianity not being a Opaketa or ritual service, but extending to every part of human life, the rulers of Christians, quà Christians, must rule them in all matters of principle and practice; and, if this power be given to Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, by divine appointment, Innocent the Third was right, and every Christian country should be like Paraguay. You shall have 1) The views of Archbishop Whately on this subject were afterwards fully set furch in the 4th and 5th volumes of his Essays.

the rest by and by; meantime I send you up a paper about the Universities. If you like it, sign it, and try to get others to do so; if you do not,

burn it.

LXXX. TO REV. JULIUS HARE.

Rugby, May 12, 1834.

I would admit Unitarians, like all other Christians, if the University system were restored, and they might have halls of their own. Nay I would admit them at the colleges, if they would attend chapel and the Divinity Lectures, which some of them, I think, would do. But every thing seems to me falling into confusion between two parties, whose ignorance and badness I believe I shrink from with the most perfect impartiality of dislike. I must petition against the Jew Bill, and wish that you or some man like you would expose that low Jacobinical notion of citizenship, that a man acquires a right to it by the accident of his being littered inter quatuor maria, or because he pays taxes.' I wish I had the knowledge and the time to state fully the ancient system of TápolKol, μÉTOLKO, &c., and the principle on which it rested; that different races have different rópa, and that an indiscriminate mixture breeds a perfect "colluvio omnium rerum." Now Christianity gives us that bond perfectly, which race in the ancient world gave illiberally and narrowly, for it gives a common standard of vópipa, without observing distinctions, which are in fact better blended.

[This letter, as well as the preceding, alludes to the subjoined Declaration, circulated by him for signature.]

The undersigned members of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, many of them being engaged in education, entertaining a strong sense of the peculiar benefits to be derived from studying at the Universities, cannot but consider it as a national evil, that these benefits should be inaccessible to a large proportion of their countrymen.

"While they feel most strongly that the foundation of all education must be laid in the great truths of Christianity, and would on no account consent to omit these, or to teach them imperfectly, yet they cannot but acknowledge, that these truths are believed and valued by the great majority of Dissenters, no less than by the Church of England; and that every essential point of Christian instruction may be communicated without touching on those particular questions on which the Church and the mass of Dissenters are at issue.

66

And, while they are not prepared to admit such Dissenters as differ from the Church of England on the most essential points of Christian truth, such as the modern Unitarians of Great Britain, they are of opinion, that all other Dissenters may be admitted into the Universities, and allowed to take degrees there with great benefit to the country, and to the

1) Extract from a letter to Mr. Sergeant Coleridge. "The correlative to taxation, in my opinion, is not citizenship but protection. Taxation may imply representation hoc, and I should have no objection to let the Jews tax themselves in a Jewish House of Assembly, like a colony or like the clergy of old, but to confound the right of taxing oneself with the right of general legislation, is one of the Jacobinical confusions of later days, arising from those low Warburtonian notions of the ends of political society." See also Preface to his Edition of Thucydides, vol. iii.

probable advancement of Christian truth and Christian charity amongst members of all persuasions."

LXXXI. * TO H. BALSTON,' ESQ.

Rugby, May 19, 1834.

I am very glad that you continue to practise composition, but above all I would advise you to make an abstract of one or two standard works. One, I should say, in philosophy ;-the other in history. I would not be in a hurry to finish them, but keep them constantly going, -with one page always clear for Notes. The abstract itself practises you in condensing and giving in your own words what another man has said; a habit of great value, as it forces one to think about it, which extracting merely does not. It further gives a brevity and simplicity to your language, two of the greatest merits which style can have, and the notes give you an opportunity of a great deal of original composition, besides a constant place to which to refer any thing that you may read in other books; for having such an abstract on hand, you will be often thinking when reading other books, of what there may be in them which will bear upon your abstract.

The latter part of your letter I very heartily thank you for it is a great over-payment of any exertions of mine when what it would be a breach of duty in me to omit, is received so kindly and gratefully. At the same time I have always thought that it was quite impossible in my situation to avoid feeling a strong personal interest in most of those whom I have had to do with, independently of professional duty.

I shall be always glad to see you or to hear from you.

LXXXII. TO W. EMPSON, ESQ.

Rugby, June 11, 1834.

The political matters on which you touch, are to me of such intense interest, that I think they would kill me if I lived more in the midst of them; unless, as was said to be the case with the Cholera, they would be less disturbing when near, than when at a distance. I grieve most deeply at this ill-timed schism in the Ministry, and, as men, who have no familiarity with the practice of politics, may yet fancy that they understand their principles, so it seems to me that both Lord Grey and the seceders are wrong. We are suffering here, as in a thousand other instances, from that accursed division between Christians, of which I think the very Arch-fiend must be xar' in the author. The good Protestants and bad Christians have talked nonsense, and worse than nonsense so long about Popery, and the Beast and Antichrist,

that

the simple, just and Christian measure of establishing the Roman Catholic Church in three-fifths of Ireland seems renounced by common consent. The Protestant clergy ought not to have their present revenues in Ireland -so far I agree with Lord Grey-but not on a low economical view of their pay being over-proportioned to their work; but because Church property is one of the most sacred trusts, of which the sovereign power in the Church (i. e. the King and Parliament, not the Bishops and Clergy)

1) For the sake of convenience, an asterisk has been prefixed to the names of those correspondents who had been his pupils at Rugby.

is appointed by God trustee. It is a property set apart for the advancement of direct Christian purposes, first by furnishing religious instruction and comfort to the grown up part of the population; next by furnishing the same to the young in the shape of religious education. Now the Christian people of Ireland, i. e. in my sense of the word the Church of Ireland, have a right to have the full benefit of their Church property, which now they cannot have, because Protestant clergymen they will not listen to. I think, then, that it ought to furnish them with Catholic clergymen, and the general local separation of the Catholic and Protestant districts would render this as easy to affect in Ireland as it was in Switzerland, where, after their bloody religious wars of the sixteenth century, certain parishes in some of the Cantons, where the religions were intermixed, were declared Protestant and others Catholic; and, if a man turned Catholic in a Protestant parish, he was to migrate to a Catholic parish, and vice versâ. If this cannot be done yet, then religious grammar schools, Catholic and Protestant, such as were founded in England so numerously after the Reformation, would be the next best thing; but, whist Ireland continues in its present low state of knowledge and religion, I cannot think that one penny of its Church property ought to be applied to the merely physical or ordinary objects of government. I have one great principle, which I never lose sight of; to insist strongly on the difference between Christian and nonchristian, and to sink into nothing the differences between Christian and Christian. I am sure that this is in the spirit of the Scriptures: I think it is also most philosophical and liberal; but all the world quarrels either with one half of my principle or with the other, whereas I think they stand and fall together. I know not whether Mr. Spring Rice takes a strong interest in questions concerning education, but I am very anxious-the more so from the confusions prevailing about the Universities-that the Universities should be restored, that is, that the usurpations of the Heads of the colleges should be put down, according to those excellent articles of Sir W. Hamilton's which appeared in the Edinburgh Review some time since. I think that this is even more important than the admission of the Dissenters. And also, if ever the question of National education comes definitely before the government, I am very desirous of their not "centralizing" too much, but availing themselves of the existing machinery, which might be done to a great extent, with very little expense, and none of that interference with private institutions, or even with foundations, of which there is so great, and I think in some respects, a reasonable fear. But I will conclude and release you.

LXXXIII. TO REV. DR. LONGLEY.

Rugby, June 25, 1834.

Though sorry that you did not concur with my views, yet I was not much surprised, being long since used to find myself in a minority on those matters. Yet I do not see how any man can avoid the impression that Dissent cannot exist much longer in this country as it does now; either it must be comprehended within the Church, or it will cease in another way, by there being no Establishment left to dissent from. And, as I think that men will never be wise and good enough for the first, so I see every thing tending towards the second; and this fancied reaction

in favour of the High Church party seems to me the merest illusion in the world; it is like that phantom, which Minerva sent to Hector to tempt him to his fate, by making him believe that Deiphobus was at hand to help him.

Meantime, our little common wealth here goes on very quietly, and I think satisfactorily. I have happily more power than Lord Grey's government, and neither Radicals to call for more nor Tories to call for less, and so I can reform or forbear at my own discretion. . . . I find Westmoreland very convenient in giving me an opportunity of having some of the Sixth Form with me in the holidays; not to read, of course, but to refresh their health when they get knocked up by the work, and to show them mountains and dales; a great point in education, and a great desideratum to those, who only know the central or southern counties of England. I must ask your congratulations on having finished Thucydides, of which the last volume will appear, I hope, in October. I have just completed the Eighth Book, and hope now to set vigorously to work about the Roman History.

LXXXIV. TO THE ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN.

Rugby, July 2, 1834.

I must write to thank you for your Charge, which delighted me. . . . . It is delightful to read a Charge, without any folly in it, and written so heartily in the spirit of a Christian Episcopacy, for which I have always had a great respect, though not exactly after the fashion of Keble and Newman. I trust, if it please God, that we shall meet this summer; and it is truly kind in you to try to make your arrangements suit ours. I shall bring over to you my beginning of "the State and the Church," which I shall like to talk over with you. . . The other day, slept at our house, and fairly asked me for my opinion about the connexion of Church and State, which I gave him at some length; and I found, as indeed he confessed, that the subject was one on which his ideas were all at sea; and he expressed a great earnestness that something should be written on the subject before the next Session of Parliament. He did not know, and I think it is a common complaint, the Statutes passed about the Church in Henry the Eighth's and Edward the Sixth's reigns, and which are still the apxa of its constitution, if that may be said to have a constitution which never was constituted, but was left as avowedly unfinished as Cologne Cathedral, where they left a crane standing on one of the half-built towers, three hundred years ago, and have renewed the crane from time to time, as it wore out, as a sign not only that the building was incomplete, but that the friends of the Church hoped to finish the work whenever they could. Had it been in England, the crane would have been speedily destroyed, and the friends of the Church would have said that the Church was finished perfectly already, and that none but its enemies would dare to suggest that it wanted any thing to complete its symmetry and usefulness.

I have been writing two sermons on the Evidences,-1st, of Natural Religion, and 2nd, of Christianity, intended for the use of those of my boys who are now leaving us for college. I mean, if I live, to preach a third next Sunday, on the differences between Christians and Christians, which, as our two Examiners will hear it, both of whom have published pamphlets against the Dissenters, will not, I suspect, be very agreeable to