THE COLONIAL EPISCOPATE.

New Zealander, Volume 8, Issue 681, 23 October 1852, Page 4

THE COLONIAL EPISCOPATE.

(Fiom "Bell's. WeeUy Mcsseiigci," M.iy 22.) ' ■"■ We have never yet met with a thoroughly consistant Protestant, who is acquainted wiih tho working of the Colonial Episcopate, who docs not a\ow that it is the source of unending trouble and inconvenience to the members of the Church of England The appointments to colonial bishoprics, generally speaking, of late years, have been so impolitic ; the temper # of the men selected for the office— almost in invariably of a Pii&eyitc complexion — so intolerable ; and the assumption of importance, as conferee! upon them by their position, so rediculous, that j colony after colony have the greatest cause to regret their nomination, and declared they should have been far better off had it never pleaded the home Government to inflict a bishop upon them. The spiritual tyranny exercised over the colonial clergy, in numerous instances, by their bishops, is no less intolerable than their general conduct towards the laity. They are at a safe distance from the effects of the force of public opinion. The broad ocean is between them and the mother country, and they know that in the time that" elapses between news sent home and an answer returned, the interest of the case will have died — and, more than this, that no home influence can have any power upon them, whilst neither law nor opinion is at hand to enforce the administration of evenhanded justice. Whilst, then, such things exist in almost every colony, and division rules in many a distant diocese, it assuredly is not the time to increase the mischievous power of one man, and to place the weapons 'U hi-> hands, by which he may exercise uncontrolled tlic laigest amount of spiritual despotism Yet such is the purpose which Mr. Gladstone, the Tractarian member for the University of Oxford, doubtless had in view when he introduced his Colonial Bishopric 13111 the other day into the House of Commons — ". measure, which Sir John Pakington thoroughly exposed on "Wednesday last, showing its Jesuitical tendencies, and happily succeeded in throwing out of Parliament for the present session. But for the energy and the thorough Protestantism of the Colonial Secretary, Mr. Gladstone would have managed, by this measure, to break down the Queen's supremacy in her colonies — would have virtually abolished the connection of Church and State, and introduced a system that would have rent the colonies to pieces by religious schism for no other object than to set up that Sacratnemtal system, whose practice is to bind the souls of men in an iron bondage, and to establish a despotism so closely akin to that of the Church of Home, as to make it impossible to trace any ieal difference between them. We should b/>pe that the noble bearing and unflinching conduct of Sir John Pakington on this occasion will give a direct falsehood to the generally circulated report, that the Earl of Derby's Government is tinged Avith Tractarianism. Had Lord John Itussell been in office, we have no hesitation in asserting our belief, that Mr. Gladstone's Colonial Bishops Bill would have been allow to pass, and then not two years would have elapsed before the mischief — already great enougli — would have been trebled, and other colonies where bishops of Tractarian views have not yet been sent, would also have been plunged in religious strife and polemical contention Happily this manceuver has been nipped in the bud, and its intention annihilated; for if Sir John Pakington could defeat so despotic a measure, in a Parliamentary hostile to Lord Derby's administration, there is not much probability of Mr. Gladstone's success, when a General Election shall have strengthened its hand. But we are anxious to enquire what any member of the University of Oxford can be thinking about in returning Mr. Gladstone as his representative in Parliament ? His Itomanising bias is patent to the whole counti'y; his advocacy of of the separation of Church and State, that the former may ride roughshod over the latter, is open and decided ; his support of the admission of Jews into Parliament, is positive and unequivocal; has advocacy of every measure, which as an antiProtestant bearing is so conclusive, that he is generally termed the mis-representative of Oxford. Much as Oxford deserves the obloquy of having fosteied Roman Catholic views, and having aided the stealthy movement to un-Protestantise the Church oi England, we do not believe that Jesuitry and Papal craft predominate to the extent generally supposed amongst the members of Convocation : neither do we think that many " High Churchmen" will lend their aid to slab their mother, by replacing Mr. Gladstone in a position to do her the greatest damage, and to show his zeal in behalf of every object that tends to humilate her. It is a usual custom with the University of Oxford, were etiquette is most stringently "observed, to retain a member of Parliament when once lie is elected. But if that University rejected Sir Robert Peel, for his conduct on the subject of Roman Catholic emancipation — the precedent is too strong and recent, not to induce the present members of Convocation to get rid of Mr. Gladstone for offences, no less unworthy than that of his predecessor. We rejoice to hear that a movement has com- j menced amongst the non-resident membcis of Convocation to oust Mr. Gladstone at the next election, and that men of all shades of religious sentiments have already sent in their adhesion ; but there is a further report current, that the resident members adhere to their Romanising and Jews' disabilities-removal member, so that they will endeavour to return him as a means of erfectually neutralising the votes of Sir R. H. Inglis. Now, the residents in Oxford form the focus, whence the anti-Protestant spirit flows, these men, by giving circulation to falsehood on the last occasion, secured Mr. Gladstone instead of Mr. Round, and they are, as we perceive by the Morning Chronicle — fit organ for such a purpose — at the same trick again. But the strength of Convocation lies in the country ; and here the battle is to be fought to unseat Mr. Gladstone, and to return a member who will support the established religion of the country against Popish machinations and Infidel attacks. If any waver as to etiquette in such a matter, Sir John Pakington's exposure of Mr. Gladstone's Colonial Bishops Bill oxight at once to show them that no terms can be held with an individual who proves by every word and action that ho intends to do all he can to promote Tractarian supremacy —to separate Church and State, and make the Queen's majesty a nonentity, not only abroad, but also in the home portions of her dominions. The rejection of Mr. Gladstone at the next Oxford University election is a duty incumbent on the faithful servants of thfeir Master, and that feeling must, and, we feel assured will, overrule every idea of worldly expediency, etiquette, or policy.