THE BATTLE OF CREEDS.

Evening Star, Issue 3128, 27 February 1873, Page 2

THE BATTLE OF CREEDS.

A great ecclesiastical fight has just been ended in England. The post of select preacher at the University of Oxford was vacant, and the Board, with whom rested the responsibility of the nomination, designated the Dean of Westminster, Dr Stanley, to the office. But the name of the Board’s nominee must be subjected to convocation for approval, which, till this occasion, was a mere matter of form, the composition of the Board being such as to command sufficient respect to ensure the acceptance of its appointments without resistance. A section of electors, led by a Doctor of Divinity, strenuously objected to the nomination, and the leader of it issued an extraordinary manifesto, in which Dr Stanley was designated “ a pernicious heretic,” and “the avowed champion of a negative and cloudy Christianity, which is really preparing the way for the rejection of all revealed truth.” From a newspaper discussion it grew into a religions controversy, and so warm did it wax that the Times was forced to lift up its voice and say, “What must be thought of the state of a Church and a University in which such accusations are brought by many of its most respected members against a I'ernof Wes - minster, who is also Dr Stanley? Tho enemies of the establishment could desire nothing better than th it such a vital disorganisation should be brought to light. This is the only interest which will really suffer from such a scancia’.” So the battle became one of Religious Intolerance v. Liberty of Conscience, and it is satisfactory to know that, though the contest was very keen, the latter won the day, as will be seen by the subjoined extract • “Yesterday (December 11) was fought out, in the theatre at oxford, what is destined, perhaps, to be i lie most important conflict in which the Broad Church party has yet engaged. Hitherto, they have tided their strength against the Evangelical and Ritualistic bodies in detail; hut on the present occasion, these two formidable opponents were massed against them. For some days past angry words have been bandied between the contending forces, and yesterday’s preparations showed that the contest was to be more than a verbal one. From an early hour the station at Paddington gave one the idea of a sort of academical Derby Day. By ten o’c'ock the platform was crowded with unmistakeable M. a’s.. with here and there a dignitary of the Church, or higher graduate. Lawyers had impressed their brief ba s into service for carrying their cap, gown, and hood ; while young M. A’s,, whom one knew about town, swaggered into smoking carriages, with the audibly announced intention of ‘giving Stanley a lift.’ Friend and fos faced each other in the narrow confines of a railway carriage, scarcely daring to utter a word either to the other, lest they should betray their tactics to the enemy. By-and-by the voting was over. The proc tors presented their lists to the Vice-Chan-cellor, who, amid breathless silence, pronounced the words, Majori parti placet! Then there was indeed a cheer, which rang through the building from basement to upper gallery, and was taken up outside in a way that reminded one of the Trial of the Bishops. The numbers voting being—Placet, 349 ; Non-placet, 287. Over 600 members, therefore —something like a full House of Commons—recorded their votes on this memorable occasion.”

At a lecture ou ‘‘ Socrates,” given by Dean Stanley, in London, on the same evening, the Bishop of Manchester said :—“ He rejoiced for the sake of a great IT Diversity, which he was sorry to say, had sometimes a reputation fur intolerance, and to which both he and the Dean belonged, and looked up to with affection—he rejoiced, he repeated, to think that an effort of considerable intolerance, though promoted, doubtless, by zealous and earnest men, had failed, and that the Dean had been returned as one of the preachers for Oxf rd, by a majority of 62 out of 600 electors. It was somewhat singular that the charge of corrupting youth which was brought against Socrates hud also been urged against Dean Stanley, as a reason for disqualifying him for the office at Oxford.”