Gladstone pa.s.sed nearly a couple of months in Germany. The duty was heavy and dismal, but the journey brought him into a society that could not be without effect upon his impressionable mind. At Munich he laid the foundation of one of the most interesting and cherished friendships of his life. Hope-Scott had already made the acquaintance of Dr.
Dollinger, and he now begged Mr. Gladstone on no account to fail to present himself to him, as well as to other learned and political men, "good catholics and good men with no ordinary talent and information."
"Nothing," Mr. Gladstone once wrote in after years, "ever so much made me anglican _versus_ Roman as reading in Dollinger over forty years ago the history of the fourth century and Athanasius _contra mundum_." Here is his story to his wife:--
_Munich, Sept. 30, 1845._--Yesterday evening after dinner with two travelling companions, an Italian _negoziante_ and a German, I must needs go and have a shilling"s worth of the Augsburg Opera, where we heard Mozart (_Don Juan_) _well_ played and very respectably sung. To-day I have spent my evening differently, in tea and infinite conversation with Dr. Dollinger, who is one of the first among the Roman catholic theologians of Germany, a remarkable and a very pleasing man. His manners have great simplicity and I am astonished at the way in which a busy student such as he is can receive an intruder. His appearance is, singular to say, just compounded of those of two men who are among the most striking in appearance of our clergy, Newman and Dr. Mill. He surprises me by the extent of his information and the way in which he knows the details of what takes place in England. Most of our conversation related to it. He seemed to me one of the most liberal and catholic in mind of all the persons of his communion whom I have known.
To-morrow I am to have tea with him again, and there is to be a third, Dr. Gorres, who is a man of eminence among them. Do not think he has designs upon me. Indeed he disarms my suspicions in that respect by what appears to me a great sincerity....
DR. DoLLINGER
_Oct. 2._--On Tuesday after post I began to look about me; and though I have not seen all the sights of Munich I have certainly seen a great deal that is interesting in the way of art, and having spent a good deal of time in Dr. Dollinger"s company, last night till one o"clock, I have lost my heart to him. What I like perhaps most, or what crowns other causes of liking towards him, is that he, like Rio, seems to take hearty interest in the progress of religion in the church of England, apart from the (so to speak) party question between us, and to have a mind to appreciate good wherever he can find it. For instance, when in speaking of Wesley I said that his own views and intuitions were not heretical, and that if the ruling power in our church had had energy and a right mind to turn him to account, or if he had been in the church of Rome I was about to add, he would then have been a great saint, or something to that effect. But I hesitated, thinking it perhaps too strong, and even presumptuous, but he took me up and used the very words, declaring that to be his opinion. Again, speaking of Archbishop Leighton he expressed great admiration of his piety, and said it was so striking that he could not have been a real Calvinist. He is a great admirer of England and English character, and he does not at all _slur_ over the mischief with which religion has to contend in Germany. Lastly, I may be wrong, but I am persuaded he in his mind abhors a great deal that is too frequently taught in the church of Rome. Last night he spoke with such a sentiment of the doctrine that was taught on the subject of indulgences which moved Luther to resist them; and he said he believed it was true that the preachers represented to the people that by money payments they could procure the release souls from purgatory. I told him that was exactly the doctrine I had heard preached in Messina, and he said a priest preaching so in Germany would be suspended by his bishop.
Last night he invited several of his friends whom I wanted to meet, to an entertainment which consisted first of weak tea, immediately followed by meat supper with beer and wine and sweets. For two hours was I there in the midst of five German professors, or four, and the editor of a paper, who held very interesting discussions; I could only follow them in part, and enter into them still less, as none of them (except Dr. D.) seemed to speak any tongue but their own with any freedom, but you would have been amused to see and hear them, and me in the midst. I never saw men who spoke together in a way to make one another inaudible as they did, always excepting Dr. Dollinger, who sat like Rogers, being as he is a much more refined man than the rest. But of the others I a.s.sure you always two, sometimes three, and once all four, were speaking at once, very loud, each not trying to force the attention of the others, but to be following the current of his own thoughts. One of them was Dr. Gorres,[194] who in the time of Napoleon edited a journal that had a great effect in rousing Germany to arms.
Unfortunately he spoke more _thickly_ than any of them.[195]
At Baden-Baden (October 16) he made the acquaintance of Mrs.
Craven, the wife of the secretary of the Stuttgart mission, and auth.o.r.ess of the _Recit d"une Soeur_. Some of the personages of that alluring book were of the company. "I have drunk tea several times at her house, and have had two or three long conversations with them on matters of religion. They are excessively acute and also full of Christian sentiment. But they are much more difficult to make real way with than a professor of theology, because they are determined (what is vulgarly called) to go the whole hog, just as in England usually when you find a woman anti-popish in spirit, she will push the argument against them to all extremes."
FURTHER ADVANCE
It was at the same time that he read Bunsen"s book on the church.
"It is dismal," he wrote home to Mrs. Gladstone, "and I must write to him to say so as kindly as I can." Bunsen would seem all the more dismal from the contrast with the spiritual graces of these catholic ladies, and the ripe thinking and ma.s.sive learning of one who was still the great catholic doctor. At no time in Mr.
Gladstone"s letters to Manning or to Hope is there a single faltering accent in respect of Rome. The question is not for an instant, or in any of his moods, open. He never doubts nor wavers.
None the less, these impressions of his German journey would rather confirm than weaken his theological faith within the boundaries of anglican form and inst.i.tution. "With my whole soul I am convinced,"
he says to Manning (June 23, 1850), "that if the Roman system is incapable of being powerfully modified in spirit, it never can be the instrument of the work of G.o.d among us; the faults and the virtues of England are alike against it."
THE LADY HEWLEY CASE
I need spend no time in pointing out how inevitably these new currents drew Mr. Gladstone away from the old moorings of his first book. Even in 1844 he had parted company with the high ecclesiastical principles of good tories like Sir Robert Inglis. Peel, to his great honour, in that year brought in what Macaulay truly called "an honest, an excellent bill, introduced from none but the best and purest motives." It arose from a judicial decision in what was known as the Lady Hewley case, and its object was nothing more revolutionary or lat.i.tudinarian than to apply to Unitarian chapels the same principle of prescription that protected gentlemen in the peaceful enjoyment of their estates and their manor-houses. The equity of the thing was obvious. In 1779 parliament had relieved protestant dissenting ministers from the necessity of declaring their belief in certain church articles, including especially those affecting the doctrine of the Trinity. In 1813 parliament had repealed the act of William III. that made it blasphemy to deny that doctrine. This legislation, rendered Unitarian foundations legal, and the bill extended to unitarian congregations the same prescriptions as covered the t.i.tles of other voluntary bodies to their places of worship, their school-houses, and their burial-grounds. But what was thus a question of property was treated as if it were a question of divinity; "bigotry sought aid from chicane," and a tremendous clamour was raised by anglicans, wesleyans, presbyterians, not because they had an inch of _locus standi_ in the business, but because unitarianism was scandalous heresy and sin. Follett made a masterly lawyer"s speech, Sheil the speech of a glittering orator, guarding unitarians by the arguments that had (or perhaps I should say had not) guarded Irish catholics, Peel and Gladstone made political speeches lofty and sound, and Macaulay the speech of an eloquent scholar and a reasoner, manfully enforcing principles both of law and justice with a luxuriance of ill.u.s.tration all his own, from jurists of imperial Rome, sages of old Greece, Hindoos, Peruvians, Mexicans, and tribunals beyond the Mississippi.[196] We do not often enjoy such parliamentary nights in our time.
Mr. Gladstone supported the proposal on the broadest grounds of unrestricted private judgment:--
I went into the subject laboriously, he says, and satisfied myself that this was not to be viewed as a mere quieting of t.i.tles based on lapse of time, but that the unitarians were the true lawful holders, because though they did not agree with the puritan opinions they adhered firmly to the puritan principle, which was that scripture was the rule without any binding interpretation, and that each man, or body, or generation must interpret for himself.
This measure in some ways heightened my churchmanship, but depressed my church-and-statesmanship.
Far from feeling that there was any contrariety between his principles of religious belief and those on which legislation in their case ought to proceed, he said that the only use he could make of these principles was to apply them to the decisive performance of a great and important act, founded on the everlasting principles of truth and justice. Sheil, who followed Mr. Gladstone, made a decidedly striking observation. He declared how delighted he was to hear from such high authority that the bill was perfectly reconcilable with the strictest and the sternest principles of state conscience. "I cannot doubt," he continued, "that the right hon. gentleman, the champion of free trade, will ere long become the advocate of the most unrestricted liberty of thought." Time was to justify Sheil"s acute prediction. Unquestionably the line of argument that suggested it was a great advance from the arguments of 1838, of which Macaulay had said that they would warrant the roasting of dissenters at slow fires.
IV
In this vast field of human interest what engaged and inflamed him was not in the main place that solicitude for personal salvation and sanctification, which under sharp stress of argument, of pious sensibility, of spiritual panic, now sent so many flocking into the Roman fold. It was at bottom more like the pa.s.sion of the great popes and ecclesiastical master-builders, for strengthening and extending the inst.i.tutions by which faith is spread, its lamps trimmed afresh, its purity secured. What wrung him with affliction was the laying waste of the heritage of the Lord. "The promise," he cried, "indeed stands sure to the church and the elect. In the farthest distance there is peace, truth, glory; but what a leap to it, over what a gulf." For himself, the old dilemma of his early years still tormented him. "I wish," he writes to Manning (March 8, 1846) good humouredly, "I could get a synodical decision in favour of my retirement from public life. For, I profess to remain there (to myself) for the service of the church, and my views of the mode of serving her are getting so fearfully wide of those generally current, that even if they be sound, they may become wholly unavailable." The question whether the service of the church can be most effectually performed in parliament was incessantly present to his mind.
Manning pressed him in one direction, the inward voice drew him in the other. "I could write down in a few lines," he says to Manning, "the measures, after the adoption of which I should be prepared to say to a young man entering life, If you wish to serve the church do it in the sanctuary, and not in parliament (unless he were otherwise determined by his station, and not always then; it must depend upon his inward vocation), and should not think it at all absurd to say the same thing to some who have already placed themselves in this latter sphere. For when the end is attained of letting "the church help herself," and when it is recognised that active help can no longer be given, the function of serving the church in the state, such as it was according to the old idea, dies of itself, and what remains of duty is of a character essentially different." Then a pregnant pa.s.sage:--"It is the essential change now in progress from the catholic to the infidel idea of the state which is the determining element in my estimate of this matter, and which has, I think, no place in yours. For I hold and believe that when that transition has once been effected, the state never can come back to the catholic idea by means of any agency from within itself: that, if at all, it must be by a sort of re-conversion from without. I am not of those (excellent as I think them) who say, Remain and bear witness for the truth. There is a place where witness is ever to be borne for truth, that is to say for full and absolute truth, but it is not there."[197]
He reproaches himself with being "actively engaged in carrying on a process of, lowering the religious tone of the state, letting it down, demoralising it, and a.s.sisting in its transition into one which is mechanical." The objects that warrant public life in one in whose case executive government must be an element, must be very special. True that in all probability the church will hold her nationality in substance beyond our day. "I think she will hold it as long as the monarchy subsists." So long the church will need parliamentary defence, but in what form? The dissenters had no members for universities, and yet their real representation was far better organised in proportion to its weight than the church, though formally not organised at all. "Strength with the people will for our day at least be the only effectual defence of the church in the House of Commons, as the want of it is now our weakness there. It is not everything that calls itself a defence that is really such."[198]
HOPES FOR THE CHURCH
Manning expressed a strong fear, amounting almost to a belief, that the church of England must split asunder. "Nothing can be firmer in my mind," Mr. Gladstone replied (Aug. 31, 1846), "than the opposite idea.
She will live through her struggles, she has a great providential destiny before her. Recollect that for a century and a half, a much longer period than any for which puritan and catholic principles have been in conflict within the church of England, Jansenist and anti-Jansenist dwelt within the church of Rome with the unity of wolf and lamb. Their differences were not absorbed by the force of the church; they were in full vigour when the Revolution burst upon both.
Then the breach between nation and church became so wide as to make the rivalries of the two church sections insignificant, and so to cause their fusion." Later, he thinks that he finds a truer a.n.a.logy between "the superst.i.tion and idolatry that gnaws and corrodes" the life of the Roman church, and the puritanism that with at least as much countenance from authority abides in the English church. There are two systems, he says, in the English church vitally opposed to one another, and if they were equally developed they could not subsist together in the same sphere. If puritanical doctrines were the base of episcopal and collegiate teaching, then the church must either split or become heretical. As it is, the basis is on the whole anti-puritanic, and what we should call catholic. The conflict may go on as now, and with a progressive advance of the good principle against the bad one. "That has been on the whole the course of things during our lifetime, and to judge from present signs it is the will of G.o.d that it should so continue."
(Dec. 7, 1846.)
The following to Mr. Phillimore sums up the case as he then believed it to stand (June 24, 1847):--
... The church is now in a condition in which her children may and must desire that she should keep her national position and her civil and proprietary rights, and that she should by degrees obtain the means of extending and of strengthening herself, not only by covering a greater s.p.a.ce, but by a more vigorous organisation. Her attaining to this state of higher health depends in no small degree upon progressive adaptations of her state and her laws to her ever enlarging exigencies; these depend upon the humour of the state, and the state cannot and will not be in good humour with her, if she insists upon its being in bad humour with all other communions.
It seems to me, therefore, that while in substance we should all strive to sustain her in her national position, we shall do well on her behalf to follow these rules: to part earlier, and more freely and cordially, than heretofore with such of her privileges, here and there, as may be more obnoxious than really valuable, and some such she has; and further, not to presume too much to give directions to the state as to its policy with respect to other religious bodies.... This is not political expediency as opposed to religious principle. Nothing did so much damage to religion as the obstinate adherence to a negative, repressive, and coercive course.
For a century and more from the Revolution it brought us nothing but outwardly animosities and inwardly lethargy. The revival of a livelier sense of duty and of G.o.d is now beginning to tell in the altered policy of the church.... As her sense of her spiritual work rises, she is becoming less eager to a.s.sert her exclusive claim, leaving that to the state as a matter for itself to decide; and she also begins to forego more readily, but cautiously, her external prerogatives.
FOOTNOTES:
[181] Some proceedings, I think, of Mr. Disraeli and his Young England friends.
[182] Chapter of Autobiography: _Gleanings_, vii. pp. 142-3.
[183] On Reserve in Communicating Religious Knowledge--Tracts 80 and 87.
(1837-40). With the ominous and in every sense un-English superscription, _Ad Clerum_. Isaac Williams was the author.
[184] _Life of Shaftesbury_, i. p. 377. There is a letter from Bunsen (p. 373), in which he exclaims how wonderful it is "that the great-grandson of Anthony Earl of Shaftesbury, the friend of Voltaire, should write thus to the great-grandson of Frederick the Great, the admirer of both." But not more wonderful than Bunsen forgetting that Frederick had no children.
[185] See _Memoirs of J. R. Hope-Scott_, i. chapters 15-17. _Apologia_, chapter 3, _ad fin._
[186] _Story of Dr. Pusey"s Life_, p. 227.
[187] This letter of October 28 is in Purcell, _Manning_, i. p. 242.
[188] Mr. Gladstone to Dr. Hook, Jan. 30. "47.
[189] It was on the fifth of November, a week after this correspondence, that Manning preached the Guy Fawkes sermon which caused Newman to send J. A. Froude to the door to tell Manning that he was "not at home."--Purcell, i. pp. 245-9.
[190] For a full account of this book and its consequences the reader will always consult chapters xi., xii., and xiii., of Mr. Wilfrid Ward"s admirably written work, _William George Ward and the Oxford Movement_.
[191] It was in the midst of these laborious employments that Mr.
Gladstone published a prayer-book, compiled for family use, from the anglican liturgy. An edition of two thousand copies went off at once, and was followed by many editions more.
[192] _William George Ward_, p. 332.
[193] The story is told in Purcell, _Manning_, i. p. 318.
[194] Joseph Gorres, one of the most famous of European publicists and gazetteers between the two revolutionary epochs of 1789 and 1848. His journal was the _Rhine Mercury_, where the doctrine of a free and united Germany was preached (1814-16) with a force that made Napoleon call the newspaper a fifth great power. In times Gorres became a vehement ultramontane.
[195] See Friedrich"s _Life of Dollinger_, ii. pp. 222-226, for a letter from Dollinger to Mr. Gladstone after his visit, dated Nov. 15, 1845.
[196] _Hansard_, June 6, 1844.
[197] To Manning, April 5, 1846.
[198] To Manning, April 19, 1846.