CONTENTS OF ESSAY X. Combination for religious ends-Parties are necessary- their dangers — party leaders. Our present parties-our obligations to the Evangelical body-good service done by the High Church party-the tendencies of Free Thought. The evils of Party Spirit-illustration from the various criticisms of the Lambeth Conference true estimate of the value of that meeting. The Ritualist section of the High Church body-its disloyalty and mischievous tendency its manifest affinity to the Modern Church of Rome false views of the Eucharist-practice of the Confessional. Faults of the Evangelical party-dangers inherent in their mode of procedure-isolation in regard to Churchmanship- - narrowness in regard to Free Thought. Appeal for the co-operation of all moderate men, whether Evangelicals or High Churchmen-a common ground for this in the PrayerBook-the duty of forbearance and concession in smaller matters of rubrical observance. In this argument no objection to a Revision of the Prayer-Book-no antagonism to the idea of the Reunion of Christendom-hopeful symptoms of our time-prevalent love of Hymns. INN LIB PARTIES AND PARTY SPIRIT. HARDLY anything is more difficult than to define the exact point where combination for a supposed religious end ceases to be good and begins to be an absolute evil. Combination there must be, under most circumstances, in this bad world, for the securing of such a purpose. Victory can seldom be attained, at least in critical times, by solitary struggles. But, on the other hand, there cannot well be combination without party; and party involves great risks, both to truth and to charity. In party-action there must be mutual understandings and definite arrangements: and these require-we need not use the word compromise, for this would be to assume the very point at issue-but certainly some surrender of the individual will for the presumed general good. If there is resistance on the part of the individual will in matters of no essential importance, so that combination is made impossible, and the great end consequently lost, through perverse obstinacy or vanity or fanciful preferences, we feel no difficulty in condemning such resistance. But there are great dangers too on the opposite side. In order to make sure of combination serious convictions may be sacrificed the judgment of those who unwillingly follow may really be better than the judgment of those who lead; and thus for the sake of victory the very thing is lost which alone makes victory valuable. Those, again, who at first have followed unwillingly may in time catch the enthusiasm of their party: passion then takes the place of judgment: combination is presently regarded as the end and not the means; and in this heat the high moral tone is evaporated, which ought to preside over all action for the public good. We have unhappily not far to go for an illustration of this tendency of party-movement to degenerate into party-spirit. The spectacle presented by both Houses of Parliament, for some considerable time past, is a very uneasy subject for those who are anxious for the real welfare of their country at home, and for its creditable reputation abroad. Parties have most evidently been outbidding one another for popular acceptance; while it is useless to deny that on both sides, in the midst of much energetic action, there has been a widespread absence of honest conviction. And now, in this present year, let any one take the pages of Hansard, and measure the space devoted in the speeches of both Houses, on either side, in mutual recrimination, and he will find too much reason for uncomfortable thoughts in regard even to the credit of Parliamentary Govern ment. In the present instance our subject is connected entirely with Religious Parties; and here it is peculiarly important to look on the moral aspects of the question. It is sometimes said that the chief danger, in matters of this kind, is to the foolish followers the weak and second-rate men, who must necessarily be led by others, or to the selfish followers, who may have something to gain by associating themselves under eminent leadership. But in truth, in all times of religious conflict, there are special moral risks to the leaders themselves. The temptation of a leader is to consider, not simply what is true, but what will produce an effect; to seize the first weapon that comes to hand, especially if he is conscious that he can wield it well; and not to inquire into methods too closely, if it appears likely that they will lead to success. Moreover each such leader is exposed to the moral dangers which are more peculiarly incident to his personal character. He may be endowed with too much subtlety or he may be beset by excessive vanity. A sensitive or overbearing temperament may have been pampered by applause; or the consciousness of exerting personal influence for years may have become so delightful, that a habit of something like intrigue may have been fostered and formed. The more closely we look into the matter, the more clearly we see how serious are the risks of party-action in the affairs of Religion. A leader demoralised under the influence of seductive temptations is a peril to the whole community. "If the blind lead the blind, shall they not both fall into the ditch?" Under the double action of inexcusable compliance on the one hand and unscrupulous leadership on the other, party-combination may become highly injurious to the most sacred interests. The party-combination, once |