In some respects I have a feeling like the Dean’s, but I hold theological and ecclesiastical principles such as he did not adopt. One fundamental difference between us was that he overlooked the exercise of Church _discipline_, to which I attach great importance. The study of State organisations has convinced me that the “union of Church and State” creates insuperable barriers in the way of ecclesiastical discipline. If the Church be linked to the State, so that a subject of the State becomes thereby legally entitled to membership and communion,—that forms a strong bar to a faithful correction of moral misconduct and fundamental disbeliefs. It was a great difficulty under the Commonwealth. The devoted and holy Thomas Wilson, Bishop of Sodor and Man, found it so in carrying on his diocese. He said in his famous “Ecclesiastical Constitutions” that his desire was “We may not stand charged with the scandals which wicked men bring upon religion, when they are admitted to, and reputed members of, Christ’s Church; and that we may, by all laudable means, promote the conversion of sinners, and oblige men to submit to the discipline of the Gospel.” But for myself, let me say I have not found any difficulty in the maintenance of discipline in Congregational Churches. Whatever might be the basis of Dr. Stanley’s far-reaching comprehension, it appears to me there might be a much broader range of religious sympathy and co-operation between distinct religious bodies connected with the maintenance of well-accentuated beliefs, and the exercise of ecclesiastical discipline.
In the early part of the following year I visited Edinburgh to lecture for the Philosophical Society of that city. My subject was “The Great Rebellion”; and I made a double attempt, first, to vindicate the Parliament policy as against the despotic unconstitutionalism of the infatuated monarch; and secondly, to criticise the proceedings of some eminent men on the Puritan and popular side. The society invited me to lecture again, when different historical ground was taken, and a sketch was presented of English and Scotch life in the days of Queen Anne.
My old friend, and large-hearted host, the Rev. George D. Cullen, favoured me with the company at dinner, of Dr. Goold, Moderator of the Free Church; Dr. Hanna, son-in-law to Dr. Chalmers; Dr. Alexander, and others—and we had earnest talk about topics of the day. Scotch and English elements of thought, blended so as to bring diversities into view, without any portion of the acrimony common to polemical debate. True blue Presbyterianism rose in contrast with milder colours of Ecclesiasticism. There was no want of thrust or repartee, but we kept the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace. Edinburgh society is of the choicest kind. Some of the best talkers may be found on the other side the border; and memories of celebrities in Auld Reekie, are amongst the most pleasant of my life. On the occasion just noticed, my friend Mr. Cullen took me over to St. Andrews; and there Principal Tulloch did the honours of ciceroneship to perfection. In the evening we dined at the house of Professor Swann, where further social enjoyments of a high university order were found to be in store.