[8] Guardian1, 14th October 1885.
This generation has seen no such momentous2 change as that which has suddenly appeared to be at our very doors, and which people speak of as disestablishment. The word was only invented a few years ago, and was sneered3 at as a barbarism, worthy4 of the unpractical folly5 which it was coined to express. It has been bandied about a good deal lately, sometimes de coeur léger; and within the last six months it has assumed the substance and the weight of a formidable probability. Other changes, more or less serious, are awaiting us in the approaching future; but they are encompassed6 with many uncertainties7, and all forecasts of their working are necessarily very doubtful. About this there is an almost brutal8 clearness and simplicity9, as to what it means, as to what is intended by those who have pushed it into prominence10, and as to what will follow from their having their way.
Disestablishment has really come to mean, in the mouth of friends and foes11, simple disendowment. It is well that the question should be set in its true terms, without being confused with vague and less important issues. It is not very easy to say what disestablishment by itself would involve, except the disappearance12 of Bishops13 from the Upper House, or the presence of other religious dignitaries, with equal rank and rights, alongside of them. Questions of patronage14 and ecclesiastical law might be difficult to settle; but otherwise a statute15 of mere16 disestablishment, not easy indeed to formulate17, would leave the Church in the eyes of the country very much what it found it. Perhaps "My lord" might be more widely dropped in addressing Bishops; but otherwise, the aspect of the Church, its daily work, its organisations, would remain the same, and it would depend on the Church itself whether the consideration paid to it continues what it has been; whether it shall be diminished or increased. The privilege of being publicly recognised with special marks of honour by the State has been dearly paid for by the claim which the State has always, and sometimes unscrupulously, insisted on, of making the true interests of the Church subservient19 to its own passing necessities.
But there is no haziness20 about the meaning of disendowment. Property is a tangible21 thing, and is subject to the four rules of arithmetic, and ultimately to the force of the strong arm. When you talk of disendowment, you talk of taking from the Church, not honour or privilege or influence, but visible things, to be measured and counted and pointed22 to, which now belong to it and which you want to belong to some one else. They belong to individuals because the individuals belong to a great body. There are, of course, many people who do not believe that such a body exists; or that if it does, it has been called into being and exists simply by the act of the State, like the army, and, like the army, liable to be disbanded by its master. But that is a view resting on a philosophical23 theory of a purely25 subjective26 character; it is as little the historical or legal view as it is the theological view. We have not yet lost our right in the nineteenth century to think of the Church of England as a continuous, historic, religious society, bound by ties which, however strained, are still unbroken with that vast Christendom from which as a matter of fact it sprung, and still, in spite of all differences, external and internal, and by force of its traditions and institutions, as truly one body as anything can be on earth. To this Church, this body, by right which at present is absolutely unquestionable, property belongs; property has been given from time immemorial down to yesterday. This property, in its bulk, with whatever abatements and allowances, it is intended to take from the Church. This is disendowment, and this is what is before us.
It is well to realise as well as we can what is inevitably27 involved in this vast and, in modern England, unexampled change, which we are sometimes invited to view with philosophic24 calmness or resignation, as the unavoidable drift of the current of modern thought, or still more cheerfully to welcome, as the beginning of a new era in the prosperity and strength of the Church as a religious institution. We are entreated28 to be of good cheer. The Church will be more free; it will no longer be mixed up with sordid29 money matters and unpopular payments; it will no longer have the discredit30 of State control; the rights of the laity31 will come up and a blow will be struck at clericalism. With all our machinery32 shattered and ruined we shall be thrown more on individual energy and spontaneous originality33 of effort. Our new poverty will spur us into zeal34. Above all, the Church will be delivered from the temptation, incident to wealth, of sticking to abuses for the sake of gold; of shrinking from principle and justice and enthusiasm, out of fear of worldly loss. It will no longer be a place for drones and hirelings. It is very kind of the revolutionists to wish all this good to the Church, though if the Church is so bad as to need all these good wishes for its improvement, it would be more consistent, and perhaps less cynical35, to wish it ruined altogether. Yet even if the Church were likely to thrive better on no bread, there are reasons of public morality why it should not be robbed. But these prophecies and forecasts really belong to a sphere far removed from the mental activity of those who so easily indulge in them. These excellent persons are hardly fitted by habit and feeling to be judges of the probable course of Divine Providence36, or the development of new religious energies and spiritual tendencies in a suddenly impoverished37 body. What they can foresee, and what we can foresee also is, that these tabulae novae will be a great blow to the Church. They mean that, and that we understand.
It is idle to talk as if it was to be no blow to the Church. The confiscation38 of Wesleyan and Roman Catholic Church property would be a real blow to Wesleyan or Roman Catholic interests; and in proportion as the body is greater the effects of the blow must be heavier and more signal. It is trifling39 with our patience to pretend to persuade us that such a confiscation scheme as is now recommended to the country would not throw the whole work of the Church into confusion and disaster, not perhaps irreparable, but certainly for the time overwhelming and perilous40. People speak sometimes as if such a huge transfer of property was to be done with the stroke of a pen and the aid of a few office clerks; they forget what are the incidents of an institution which has lasted in England for more than a thousand years, and whose business extends to every aspect and degree of our very complex society from the highest to the lowest. Resources may be replaced, but for the time they must be crippled. Life may be rearranged for the new circumstances, but in the meanwhile all the ordinary assumptions have to be changed, all the ordinary channels of activity are stopped up or diverted.
And why should this vast and far-reaching change be made? Is it unlawful for the Church to hold property? Other religious organisations hold it, and even the Salvation41 Army knows the importance of funds for its work. Is it State property which the State may resume for other uses? If anything is certain it is that the State, except in an inconsiderable degree, did not endow the Church, but consented in the most solemn way to its being endowed by the gifts of private donors42, as it now consents to the endowment in this way of other religious bodies. Does the bigness of the property entitle the State to claim it? This is a formidable doctrine43 for other religious bodies, as they increase in influence and numbers. Is it vexatious that the Church should be richer and more powerful than the sects44? It is not the fault of the Church that it is the largest and the most ancient body in England. There is but one real and adequate reason: it is the wish to disable and paralyse a great religious corporation, the largest and most powerful representative of Christianity in our English society, to exhibit it to the nation after centuries of existence at length defeated and humbled45 by the new masters' power, to deprive it of the organisation18 and the resources which it is using daily with increasing effect for impressing religious truth on the people, for winning their interest, their confidence, and their sympathy, for obtaining a hold on the generations which are coming. The Liberation Society might go on for years repeating their dreary46 catalogue of grievances47 and misstatements. Doubtless there is much for which they desire to punish the Church; doubtless, too, there are men among them who are persuaded that they would serve religion by discrediting48 and impoverishing49 the Church. But they are not the people with whom the Church has to reckon. The Liberationists might have long asked in vain for their pet "emancipation50" scheme. They are stronger men than the Liberationists who are going in now for disendowment. They are men—we do them no wrong—who sincerely think Christianity mischievous51, and who see in the power and resources of the Church a bulwark52 and representative of all religion which it is of the first importance to get rid of.
This is the one adequate and consistent reason for the confiscation of the property of the Church. There is no other reason that will bear discussion to be given for what, without it, is a great moral and political wrong. In such a settled society as ours, where men reckon on what is their own, such a sweeping53 and wholesale54 transfer of property cannot be justified55, on a mere balance of probable expediency56 in the use of it. Unless it is as a punishment for gross neglect and abuse, as was alleged57 in the partial confiscations of the sixteenth century, or unless it is called for as a step to break down what can no longer be tolerated, like slavery, there is no other name for it, in the estimate of justice, than that of a deep and irreparable wrong. This is certainly not the time to punish the Church when it never was more improving and more unsparing of sacrifice and effort. But it may be full time to stop a career which may render success more difficult for schemes ahead, which make no secret of their intention to dispense58 with religion. This, however, is not what most Englishmen wish, whether Liberals or Conservatives, or even Nonconformists; and without this end there is no more justice in disendowing a great religious corporation like the Church, than in disendowing the Duke of Bedford or the Duke of Westminster. Of course no one can deny the competence59 of Parliament to do either one or the other; but power does not necessarily carry with it justice, and justice means that while there are great and small, rich and poor, the State should equally protect all its members and all its classes, however different. Revolutions have no law; but a great wrong, deliberately60 inflicted61 in times of settled order, is more mischievous to the nation than even to those who suffer from it. History has shown us what follows from such gratuitous62 and wanton wrong in the bitter feeling of defeat and humiliation63 lasting64 through generations. But worse than this is the effect on the political morality of the nation; the corrupting65 and fatal consciousness of having once broken through the restraints of recognised justice, of having acquiesced66 in a tempting67 but high-handed wrong. The effects of disendowment concern England and its morality even more deeply than they do the Church.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
guardian
|
|
| n.监护人；守卫者，保护者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
momentous
|
|
| adj.重要的，重大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
sneered
|
|
| 讥笑，冷笑( sneer的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
worthy
|
|
| adj.(of)值得的，配得上的；有价值的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
folly
|
|
| n.愚笨，愚蠢，蠢事，蠢行，傻话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
encompassed
|
|
| v.围绕( encompass的过去式和过去分词 )；包围；包含；包括 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
uncertainties
|
|
| 无把握( uncertainty的名词复数 )； 不确定； 变化不定； 无把握、不确定的事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
brutal
|
|
| adj.残忍的，野蛮的，不讲理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
simplicity
|
|
| n.简单，简易；朴素；直率，单纯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
prominence
|
|
| n.突出；显著；杰出；重要 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
foes
|
|
| 敌人，仇敌( foe的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
disappearance
|
|
| n.消失，消散，失踪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
bishops
|
|
| （基督教某些教派管辖大教区的）主教( bishop的名词复数 )； （国际象棋的）象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
patronage
|
|
| n.赞助，支援，援助；光顾，捧场 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
statute
|
|
| n.成文法，法令，法规；章程，规则，条例 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
formulate
|
|
| v.用公式表示；规划；设计；系统地阐述 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
organisation
|
|
| n.组织，安排，团体，有机休 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
subservient
|
|
| adj.卑屈的，阿谀的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
haziness
|
|
| 有薄雾，模糊； 朦胧之性质或状态； 零能见度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
tangible
|
|
| adj.有形的，可触摸的，确凿的，实际的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
pointed
|
|
| adj.尖的，直截了当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
philosophical
|
|
| adj.哲学家的，哲学上的，达观的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
philosophic
|
|
| adj.哲学的，贤明的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
purely
|
|
| adv.纯粹地，完全地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
subjective
|
|
| a.主观(上)的，个人的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
inevitably
|
|
| adv.不可避免地；必然发生地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
entreated
|
|
| 恳求，乞求( entreat的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
sordid
|
|
| adj.肮脏的，不干净的，卑鄙的，暗淡的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
discredit
|
|
| vt.使不可置信；n.丧失信义；不信，怀疑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
laity
|
|
| n.俗人；门外汉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
machinery
|
|
| n.(总称)机械，机器；机构 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
originality
|
|
| n.创造力，独创性；新颖 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
zeal
|
|
| n.热心，热情，热忱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
cynical
|
|
| adj.(对人性或动机)怀疑的，不信世道向善的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
providence
|
|
| n.深谋远虑，天道，天意；远见；节约；上帝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
impoverished
|
|
| adj.穷困的，无力的，用尽了的v.使（某人）贫穷( impoverish的过去式和过去分词 )；使（某物）贫瘠或恶化 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
confiscation
|
|
| n. 没收, 充公, 征收 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
trifling
|
|
| adj.微不足道的；没什么价值的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
perilous
|
|
| adj.危险的，冒险的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
salvation
|
|
| n.（尤指基督）救世，超度，拯救，解困 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
donors
|
|
| n.捐赠者( donor的名词复数 )；献血者；捐血者；器官捐献者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
sects
|
|
| n.宗派，教派( sect的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
humbled
|
|
| adj. 卑下的，谦逊的，粗陋的 vt. 使 ... 卑下，贬低 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
dreary
|
|
| adj.令人沮丧的，沉闷的，单调乏味的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
grievances
|
|
| n.委屈( grievance的名词复数 )；苦衷；不满；牢骚 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
discrediting
|
|
| 使不相信( discredit的现在分词 )； 使怀疑； 败坏…的名声； 拒绝相信 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
impoverishing
|
|
| v.使（某人）贫穷( impoverish的现在分词 )；使（某物）贫瘠或恶化 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
emancipation
|
|
| n.（从束缚、支配下）解放 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
mischievous
|
|
| adj.调皮的，恶作剧的，有害的，伤人的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
bulwark
|
|
| n.堡垒，保障，防御 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
sweeping
|
|
| adj.范围广大的，一扫无遗的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
wholesale
|
|
| n.批发；adv.以批发方式；vt.批发，成批出售 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
justified
|
|
| a.正当的，有理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
expediency
|
|
| n.适宜；方便；合算；利己 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
alleged
|
|
| a.被指控的，嫌疑的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
dispense
|
|
| vt.分配，分发；配(药)，发(药)；实施 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
competence
|
|
| n.能力，胜任，称职 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
deliberately
|
|
| adv.审慎地；蓄意地；故意地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
inflicted
|
|
| 把…强加给，使承受，遭受( inflict的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
gratuitous
|
|
| adj.无偿的，免费的；无缘无故的，不必要的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
humiliation
|
|
| n.羞辱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
lasting
|
|
| adj.永久的，永恒的；vbl.持续，维持 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
corrupting
|
|
| （使）败坏( corrupt的现在分词 )； （使）腐化； 引起（计算机文件等的）错误； 破坏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
acquiesced
|
|
| v.默认，默许( acquiesce的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
tempting
|
|
| a.诱人的, 吸引人的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |