[9] Guardian1, 15th May 1889.
The claim maintained by the Archbishop in his Judgment3, by virtue4 of his metropolitical5 authority and by that alone, to cite, try, and sentence one of his suffragans, is undoubtedly6 what is called in slang language "a large order." Even by those who may have thought it inevitable7, after the Watson case had been so distinctly accepted by the books as a precedent8, it is yet felt as a surprise, in the sense in which a thing is often a surprise when, after being only talked about it becomes a reality. We can imagine some people getting up in the morning on last Saturday with one set of feelings, and going to bed with another. Bishops9, then, who in spite of the alleged10 anarchy11, are still looked upon with great reverence12, as almost irresponsible in what they say and do officially, are, it seems, as much at the mercy of the law as the presbyters and deacons whom they have occasionally sent before the Courts. They, too, at the will of chance accusers who are accountable to no one, are liable to the humiliation13, worry, and crushing law-bills of an ecclesiastical suit. Whatever may be thought of this now, it would have seemed extravagant14 and incredible to the older race of Bishops that their actions should be so called in question. They would have thought their dignity gravely assailed15, if besides having to incur16 heavy expense in prosecuting17 offending clergymen, they had also to incur it in protecting themselves from the charge of being themselves offenders18 against Church law.
The growth of law is always a mysterious thing; and an outsider and layman19 is disposed to ask where this great jurisdiction20 sprung up and grew into shape and power. In the Archbishop's elaborate and able Judgment it is indeed treated as something which had always been; but he was more successful in breaking down the force of alleged authorities, and inferences from them, on the opposite side, than he was in establishing clearly and convincingly his own contention21. Considering the dignity and importance of the jurisdiction claimed, it is curious that so little is heard about it till the beginning of the eighteenth century. It is curious that in its two most conspicuous22 instances it should have been called into activity by those not naturally friendly to large ecclesiastical claims—by Low Churchmen of the Revolution against an offending Jacobite, and by a Puritan association against a High Churchman. There is no such clear and strong case as Bishop2 Watson's till we come to Bishop Watson. In his argument the Archbishop rested his claim definitely and forcibly on the precedent of Bishop Watson's case, and one or two cases which more or less followed it. That possibly is sufficient for his purpose; but it may still be asked—What did the Watson case itself grow out of? what were the precedents—not merely the analogies and supposed legal necessities, but the precedents—on which this exercise of metropolitical jurisdiction, distinct from the legatine power, rested? For it seems as if a formidable prerogative23, not much heard of where we might expect to hear of it, not used by Cranmer and Laud24, though approved by Cranmer in the Reformatio Legum, had sprung into being and energy in the hands of the mild Archbishop Tenison. Watson's case may be good law and bind25 the Archbishop. But it would have been more satisfactory if, in reviving a long-disused power, the Archbishop had been able to go behind the Watson case, and to show more certainly that the jurisdiction which he claimed and proposed to exercise in conformity26 with that case had, like the jurisdiction of other great courts of the Church and realm, been clearly and customarily exercised long before that case.
The appearance of this great tribunal among us, a distinctly spiritual court of the highest dignity, cannot fail to be memorable27. It is too early to forecast what its results may be. There may be before it an active and eventful career, or it may fall back into disuse and quiescence28. It has jealous and suspicious rivals in the civil courts, never well disposed to the claim of ecclesiastical power or purely29 spiritual authority; and though its jurisdiction is not likely to be strained at present, it is easy to conceive occasions in the future which may provoke the interference of the civil court.
But there is this interest about the present proceedings31, that they illustrate32 with curious closeness, amid so much that is different, the way in which great spiritual prerogatives33 grew up in the Church. They may have ended disastrously34; but at their first beginnings they were usually inevitable, innocent, blameless. Time after time the necessity arose of some arbiter35 among those who were themselves arbiters36, rulers, judges. Time after time this necessity forced those in the first rank into this position, as being the only persons who could be allowed to take it, and so Archbishops, Metropolitans37, Primates38 appeared, to preside at assemblies, to be the mouthpiece of a general sentiment, to decide between high authorities, to be the centre of appeals. The Papacy itself at its first beginning had no other origin. It interfered39 because it was asked to interfere30; it judged because there was no one else to judge. And so necessities of a very different kind have forced the Archbishop of Canterbury of our day into a position which is new and strange to our experience, and which, however constitutional and reasonable it may be, must give every one who is at all affected40 by it a good deal to think about.
![](../../../skin/default/image/4.jpg)
点击
收听单词发音
![收听单词发音](/template/default/tingnovel/images/play.gif)
1
guardian
![]() |
|
n.监护人;守卫者,保护者 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2
bishop
![]() |
|
n.主教,(国际象棋)象 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3
judgment
![]() |
|
n.审判;判断力,识别力,看法,意见 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4
virtue
![]() |
|
n.德行,美德;贞操;优点;功效,效力 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5
metropolitical
![]() |
|
Metropolitical | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6
undoubtedly
![]() |
|
adv.确实地,无疑地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7
inevitable
![]() |
|
adj.不可避免的,必然发生的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8
precedent
![]() |
|
n.先例,前例;惯例;adj.在前的,在先的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9
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: |
|
|
10
alleged
![]() |
|
a.被指控的,嫌疑的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11
anarchy
![]() |
|
n.无政府状态;社会秩序混乱,无秩序 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12
reverence
![]() |
|
n.敬畏,尊敬,尊严;Reverence:对某些基督教神职人员的尊称;v.尊敬,敬畏,崇敬 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13
humiliation
![]() |
|
n.羞辱 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14
extravagant
![]() |
|
adj.奢侈的;过分的;(言行等)放肆的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
15
assailed
![]() |
|
v.攻击( assail的过去式和过去分词 );困扰;质问;毅然应对 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
16
incur
![]() |
|
vt.招致,蒙受,遭遇 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
17
prosecuting
![]() |
|
检举、告发某人( prosecute的现在分词 ); 对某人提起公诉; 继续从事(某事物); 担任控方律师 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
18
offenders
![]() |
|
n.冒犯者( offender的名词复数 );犯规者;罪犯;妨害…的人(或事物) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
19
layman
![]() |
|
n.俗人,门外汉,凡人 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
20
jurisdiction
![]() |
|
n.司法权,审判权,管辖权,控制权 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
21
contention
![]() |
|
n.争论,争辩,论战;论点,主张 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
22
conspicuous
![]() |
|
adj.明眼的,惹人注目的;炫耀的,摆阔气的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
23
prerogative
![]() |
|
n.特权 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
24
laud
![]() |
|
n.颂歌;v.赞美 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
25
bind
![]() |
|
vt.捆,包扎;装订;约束;使凝固;vi.变硬 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
26
conformity
![]() |
|
n.一致,遵从,顺从 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
27
memorable
![]() |
|
adj.值得回忆的,难忘的,特别的,显著的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
28
quiescence
![]() |
|
n.静止 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
29
purely
![]() |
|
adv.纯粹地,完全地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
30
interfere
![]() |
|
v.(in)干涉,干预;(with)妨碍,打扰 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
31
proceedings
![]() |
|
n.进程,过程,议程;诉讼(程序);公报 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
32
illustrate
![]() |
|
v.举例说明,阐明;图解,加插图 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
33
prerogatives
![]() |
|
n.权利( prerogative的名词复数 );特权;大主教法庭;总督委任组成的法庭 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
34
disastrously
![]() |
|
ad.灾难性地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
35
arbiter
![]() |
|
n.仲裁人,公断人 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
36
arbiters
![]() |
|
仲裁人,裁决者( arbiter的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
37
metropolitans
![]() |
|
n.大都会的( metropolitan的名词复数 );大城市的;中心地区的;正宗的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
38
primates
![]() |
|
primate的复数 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
39
interfered
![]() |
|
v.干预( interfere的过去式和过去分词 );调停;妨碍;干涉 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
40
affected
![]() |
|
adj.不自然的,假装的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
欢迎访问英文小说网 |