208 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



responsibility to the state, and to every member of the body politic. 

 I am not aware that any sacredness attaches to sermons. If preachers 

 stray beyond the doctrinal limits set by lay lawyers, the Privy Council 

 will see to it ; and, if they think fit to use their pulpits for the pro- 

 mulgation of literary, or historical, or scientific errors, it is not only 

 the right, but the duty, of the humblest layman, who may happen to 

 be better informed, to correct the evil effects of such perversion of the 

 opportunities which the state affords them and such misuse of the 

 authority which its support lends them. Whatever else it may claim 

 to be, in its relations with the state, the Established Church is a 

 branch of the civil service ; and, for those who repudiate the ecclesi- 

 astical authority of the clergy, they are merely civil servants, as much 

 responsible to the English people for the proper performance of their 

 duties as any others. 



The Duke of Argyll tells us that the " work and calling " of the 

 clergy prevent them from " pursuing disputation as others can." I 

 wonder if his Grace ever reads the so-called religious newspapers ? It 

 is not an occupation which I should commend to any one who wishes 

 to employ his time profitably ; but a very short devotion to this ex- 

 ercise will suffice to convince him that the " pursuit of disputation," 

 carried to a degree of acrimony and vehemence unsurpassed in lay 

 controversies, seems to be found quite compatible with the " work and 

 calling " of a remarkably large number of the clergy. 



Finally, it appears to me that nothing can be in worse taste than 

 the assumption that a body of English gentlemen can, by any possibil- 

 ity, desire that immunity from criticism which the Duke of Argyll 

 claims for them. Nothing would be more personally offensive to me 

 than the supposition that I shirked criticism, just or unjust, of any 

 lecture I ever gave. I should be utterly ashamed of myself if, when 

 I stood up as an instructor of others, I had not taken every pains to 

 assure myself of the truth of that which I was about to say ; and I 

 should feel myself bound to be even more careful with a popular 

 assembly, who would take me more or less on trust, than with an audi- 

 ence of competent and critical experts. 



I decline to assume that the standard of morality, in these matters, 

 is lower among the clergy than it is among scientific men. I refuse 

 to think that the priest who stands up before a congregation as the 

 minister and interpreter of the Divinity is less careful in his utter- 

 ances, less ready to meet adverse comment, than the layman who 

 comes before his audience as the minister and interpreter of Nature. 

 Yet what should we think of the man of science who, when his igno- 

 rance or his carelessness was exposed, whined about the want of deli- 

 cacy of his critics, or pleaded his " work and calling " as a reason for 

 being let alone ? 



No man, nor any body of men, is good enough, or wise enough, to 

 dispense with the tonic of criticism. Nothing has done more harm 



