xi • ■;■• m RELIGIOUS EDUCATION, ACADEMICAL AND COLLEGIATE. The object of the following pages is to give a sketch of existing facts respecting Religious Education in the Universities and Colleges of Oxford and Cambridge ; to shew to what extent they have been opened to persons of all religious professions, what Securities for sound teaching they yet possess, and how far such Securities might be modified. But it is by no means necessary that their several systems should be exactly alike. And in fact, notwith- standing their common objects, and general similarity, we shall have to notice some points of difference, as well as of agreement, in their regulations concerning Religious Teaching, Discipline, and Public Worship. 1. Matriculation. In both Universities alike admis- sion to simple membership of the University is open to persons of all creeds. There are no Religious Tests for any persons, whether attached to Colleges, or unattached, at their Matriculation. By the University Acts of 1854 and 1856, Jews and Mahometans, as well as Christians of all denominations, are admissible. And at Oxford, members of the University declared to be not of the Church of England, were, by a Statute passed presently after the Act of 1854, exempted from all the statutable requisitions and penalties, and Examinations, connected with religion ; and all Tutors were exempted from the duty of instructing them in the doctrine and discipline of the Church of England. And practically, I suppose, if not by Statute, the case was generally the same at Cambridge. 2. Degrees. No Subscription is required at Cam- bridge upon taking any Degree, except Degrees in Divinity : nor any at Oxford for the Degrees of B.A. or B.C.L. or B.M., or for Degrees in Music. But at Oxford " The Declaration of Assent,^' as it is worded in the Clerical Subscription Act of 1865 (but with the omission of the last clause), is required to be made and subscribed on taking the degree of B.D. and the higher Degrees in the several faculties of Divinity, Arts, Law, and Medicine. For Honorary Degrees no religious Test has ever been required. 3. Admission to Senate and Convocation. At Oxford, the higher Degrees taken as above give admis- sion to the governing body of the University, the Convo- cation ; but at Cambridge, for admission to their Senate, a Declaration of bond fide membership of the Church of England is required by the 45th Section of the Cambridge University Act of 1856. Here therefore the position of the two Universities differs ; admission to the governing body being restricted at Cambridge, and this by the law of the land, to those who make a Declaration of Church Membership, which if construed strictly would exclude all Non-Conformists ; whereas at Oxford it is restricted only to those who can declare that they " assent to the 39 Articles of Religion, " and to the Book of Common Prayer, and of the Order- " ing of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons," and " believe " the doctrine of the Church of England, as therein set " forth, to be agreeable to the Word of God." But whilst this Declaration would exclude Unitarians, Bap- tists, and Romanists, it might include the great majority of English Non-Conformists, Wesleyans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, and others who, though not bond fide Members of the Church of England, might yet assent to her Doctrine as set forth in her Articles and Liturgy, if only they were sufficiently acquainted with it. The University of Oxford, indeed, which had adopted in 1868 this " Declaration of assent" in lieu of Subscrip- tion to the 39 Articles and to the three Articles of the 36th Canon, not under the law of the land but by its own Statute, might have proceeded further to remove Sub- scription from the Degrees, reserving it, as at Cambridge, for admission into the Convocation. But it could not have done so without some risk of injustice to certain Schools, and the certainty of injustice to several of the Colleges, in which the Fellows were obliged to proceed to those higher Degrees at which Subscription is required. 4. Professorships. Nor, again, could the University have reserved Subscription for admission into the Convo- cation, without altering indirectly the condition under which persons were eligible to Professorships in cases where the higher Degrees alone, and not membership of the Convocation, were the necessary qualification. And this is a common condition in the case of Profes- sorships in Oxford, but not universal; some of them being tenable by those who have only taken the Degree of B.A. or B.C.L. In some few cases, two, I think, at Cambridge, five at Oxford, Professorships are limited to Clergymen of the Church of England by having Canonries annexed to them by special Acts of Parliament; and the Act of Uniformity (13, 14 Ch. II. c. 4) ; provides that every Public Professor in either of the Universities shall make the Declaration of Conformity to the Liturgy of the Church of England. 5. Colleges and Halls. Then as to Halls and Colleges, in both Universities the same Act provides that the Declaration of Conformity shall be made and sub- scribed by all the Heads, Fellows, Chaplains, and Tutors. Fellows of Colleges also, until the passing of the " Pro- missory Oaths' Act, 1868," have taken the Oaths of allegiance and supremacy at their election, as directed by the Act of the 1st George I. stat. 2. c. 13, and subsequent Acts. The Act of George I. applied not only to members on the Foundation of Colleges, but also to Exhibitioners, who were required to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy until the '^ Promissory Oaths' Act" substituted the one form of the Oath of Allegiance therein prescribed, (or a Declaration to the same effect,) for the several Oaths prescribed by previous Acts, and thus rendered those who could not have taken the Oath of Supremacy admissible to Scholarships and Exhibitions. Exhibitioners and Scholars are commonly Undergra- duates ; and for the most part Fellows are also elected as Undergraduates or as Bachelors of Arts, and have not therefore in either University made any religious sub- scription before their election. But in many of the Oxford Ordinances, under the Act of 1854, the Fellows are required to proceed within a limited period to those higher Degrees in Arts, Law, or Medicine, which would in Oxford require them to make and subscribe the *' Declaration of Assent." Those Ordinances also re- quire the performance of the Services of the Church of England in the College Chapels; and make contumacious nonconformity a cause for depriving the Head of his Headship, or a Fellow of his Fellowship. And the Act ;^ UIUC . of Uniformity, by §. 13. (17), requires the Services of the Church of England, and no other, to be performed in the College Chapels in both Universities. Clerical Fellows, and Chaplains f are of course bound by the Act. In Oxford, also, if not in Cambridge, Tutors of Colleges and Halls are University Officers, and are required by the Statutes of the University to be sound in religion according to the Doctrine and Ritual of the Church of England, and to instruct their Pupils (except such as are declared to be Non-Conformists) in the Rudiments of Religion and in the 39 Articles of Religion. In most cases also the Heads of Colleges must be Clergymen. In Cambridge, of the seventeen Heads of Colleges ten must by their Statutes be Clergymen, and at present fifteen are so. In Oxford only one of the nineteen Heads of Colleges is now a layman, but it is understood that two of them might be so, and indeed a third also, had not a Living been annexed to his Head- ship. The annexation of a Benefice to his Headship in like manner requires that one of the Principals of the Jive \ancient Halls in Oxford should be in Holy Orders, which otherwise he need not be, but all the five are at present Clergymen. But of the Fellows in the several Oxford Colleges, with two or jthree exceptions, either all of them, or a certain proportion of the whole number in each, (the proportion varying from one-third to half or two-thirds of the whole number,) must by their Statutes or Ordinances be Clergy- men, or become so within certain limited periods. The Jive ancient Halls in Oxford, having no inde- pendent corporate existence, are directly under the Statutes of the University, which prescribe the qualifi- cations of the Tutors, and the performance of the Chapel Services, as in the case of the Colleges. But in both Universities, under the Acts of 1854 and 1856, there are or may be, what are called in Oxford Private Halls, in Cambridge Hostels, of which the Principals must in Oxford be " Members of the Convocation," and must therefore have made the Statutable Subscription ; but in Cambridge, by Section 23 of the Act of 1856, they may be any " Members of the University," of such standing and qualifications as the University may prescribe. In Oxford, moreover, by a Statute passed in 1868, there may be Scholars members of the University, and entitled to all its privileges, not attached to any College or Hall, but under the supervision of certain University Delegates, who must be, or must have been, members of the Convocation ; and these Scholars, until they have completed the Terms required for their first degree, must be under Tutors who are to take care that they are instructed in the rudiments of Faith and Religion. At Cambridge, also, by Statute passed in 1869, there may be Students, unattached to College or Hostel, upon similar principles. There had been eighteen such Students admitted at the close of the year 1869. The number at Oxford at the same time was sixty-six. 6. Religious Instruction. The actual amount or nature of religious instruction in the several Colleges and Halls cannot of course be stated particularly. It must needs vary from time to time in respect of the attention paid to special books and subjects, (such as the Evidences of Religion, the study of the Holy Scriptures Old or New, or the History or Doctrines of the Church,) accord- ing to the views of individual Heads or Tutors, Preach- ers, Lecturers, and Catechists. But the Universities themselves not only provide public sermons, but indirectly they guide the general religious instruction by what they require from the Examinees in their Public Examinations ; and this with reference to all who are examined, whatever may be their future destination or profession — a requisition of the first im- portance. In Oxford also the University prescribes, as above, that Tutors shall instruct their Pupils in the rudiments of faith and religion, and in the 39 Articles ; and very recently she has established a School of Di- vinity, as a fifth school, w^hich may be passed in order to the first Degree ; and which, like the Schools in Law and Natural Science, may be in some measure pre- paratory to distinct professional studies, and preparatory also to the lectures of her Divinity Professors. 7. Proposed Legislation. Imperfect and incomplete as the preceding sketch of the systems of the two Uni- versities, and their several Colleges, cannot but be, it may yet suffice to shew generally what the facts of the case are, what securities for sound religious teaching these Institutions at present possess, yet how very much more open they are than is commonly supposed. It may shew what that is which some persons desire to overthrow, and others may inconsiderately undermine. It is a Parent's question, and if the parents of the youth of England were but sufficiently aware of what is at stake, they w^ould be earnest in their resistance to an attack made in name upon " Religious Tests," but really and in effect, as many persons not ill-informed nor in- considerate apprehend, upon Religious Education, nay even upon Religion itself. Certainly this was not the design of the ^eminent persons in Cambridge and Oxford who lately memorial- ized Her Majesty's Government for the abolition of all our Tests. They saw reasons, no doubt, for the measure 8 they desired, though they scarcely offered any, I think, in December last, but only expressed " their opinion, that " the time had arrived when the Religious Tests imposed " upon persons in the University might with advantage " be repealed ;" and their belief, '' that it was of the " highest importance for the fame and welfare of the " University that this long-pending question should be " brought to a speedy and satisfactory settlement." But these representations did not proceed from the Universities as such, nor from a majority of the resident members in either of them. The majority of the resident Officers and Teachers hi both Universities either, as at Cambridge, declared themselves " opposed to any enact; " ment for relaxing Religious Tests in the University and " Colleges, which failed to secure the religious character " and worship of those institutions in connexion with " the Church of England," — or expressed their strong opinion, that " the abolition of the Religious Tests in " the University and Colleges" would " seriously imperil " the Christian character of the said University and " Colleges, and their efficiency as places of religious " education ;" — or agaiii, as at Oxford, '' earnestly depre- " cated any legislative enactments which should tend to " separate Education from Religion, or fail to secure a " Christian Education for the youth of this country in ^' the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge," and " deprecated in particular any new enactments which " should destroy or impair that connexion of the Col- " leges in the said Universities with the Church of " England, in respect of their teaching, government, and " common worship, which recent Acts of Parliament had " distinctly recognised and enforced." The Cambridge Declarations received 118 signatures, including those of 12 Heads of Colleges and 12 Professors; 9 whilst that at Oxford was signed by nearly 140 resident Graduates holding, or who had held, University or College offices connected with education or discipline, including 19 Heads of Colleges or Halls, and 13 Pro- fessors. These Declarations anticipated the Bill, and since the Bill appeared they have been followed not only by petitions from both Universities in their corporate capacity, but by others expressing the opinions against the Bill of so considerable a number of non-resident Members of both Universities who had formerly resided and held University or College offices, that it cannot be doubted on which side the judgment of the most expe- .rienced persons has been given. Could the inquiry be extended to the country at large, and if only the facts were known and weighed, the question at issue might be felt to be, as it is, a very im- portant part of a far wider question, seriously affecting Religious and Christian Education altogether. It would be found that some really religious and eminent men, but who have imbibed erroneous view of Creeds, and Articles, and Subscriptions — (there were marvellous in- stances of such views in former debates about University Tests in both Houses of Parliament) — uniting themselves with some who are hostile to religion, and some who are indifferent to it, and with many Non-Conformists misled by an almost fanatical antipathy to religious establish- ments, or a morbid jealousy of the Established Church of England, have unhappily combined to divorce Re- ligion from Education, and banish Christian teaching from our Colleges and Schools. It i^ a Parents' question, and it deeply affects Christian parents in all ranks of society. 10 8. Proposed Modification of the Tests' Bill. Yet it is not pretended, nevertheless, that the existing sys- tems are perfect, or that there must be no legislation on the subject, or that the University Acts of 1854 and 1856 might not be improved. By no means. I could point to more than one improvement much to be desired ; and there are alterations which, if not altogether approved, yet may not be inadmissible. So long ago as 1864 the following propositions were in substance submitted to the then movers of the " Tests' Abolition (Oxford) Bill." (1) That for Degrees, other than Degrees in Divinity, no Religious Tests should be required. (2) That Members of Convocation should make a Declaration of Church Membership. (3) That Teachers should be subject to the Clerical Test. (4) That to individual Professors, by special permission of the University, Convocation should be open without any Test. (5) That independent Halls might be opened by per- sons not Members of Convocation. (6) That Graduates, also, not members of Convocation, should have the privilege of voting for Members for the University. These propositions were recommended upon the ground that they left " intact the great principle that the govern- " ment of the University and the Colleges should be so " lodged in the Church of England, as to give ample and " adequate security for the religious instruction and dis- " cipline of the University." They had been agreed upon in fact by Mr. Gladstone and Sir Wm. Heathcote, as modifications of the Bill to which there could be no reasonable objection ; yet they were altogether rejected by its promoters. But if they were just and reasonable 11 in 1864 in the judgment of such men as Sir W. Heathcote and Mr. Gladstone, they are reasonable and just now. If there have been political changes within the last five years, there has been no change in Christianity, or in human nature, or in the principles of religious education. It is too often assumed that the Colleges founded, several of them, before the Reformation, and the Univer- sities growing by slow degrees from voluntary associa- tions to national institutions, were not established for the Church of England, but partly for members of the Church of Rome, in part for the nation at large, for British subjects of every creed. I cannot think the assumption correct ; scarcely so as to the Universities, much less as to the Colleges. Both these Universities, though they derived many privileges from early Royal Charters, from the time of Henry III. to Henry VTII., were not incorporated by Act of Parliament until the 13th of Elizabeth. That Act is expressly attributed in the preamble to the Queen's favour, and " the great " zeal and care" of the Lords and Commons " for the *' maintenance of good and godly literature and the " virtuous education of youth within either of the same " Universities." It cannot be doubted what " good and " godly literature" and " virtuous education" were in- tended. Nor can it be fairly questioned that the Colleges founded and endowed after the Reformation were in- tended for the Christian education of members of the Church of England. The intentions of Founders, it may be added, are expressed in just the same terms before and after the Toleration Act. Nay, even the Colleges founded in Roman Catholic times were not designed /or the Church of Rome, but /or the Church of England ; that is to say, for the English branch of the Church Catholic. Their charters and statutes 12 no doubt attest the Founders' adherence to doctrines and practices then allowed by the Church, but afterwards deemed to be inconsistent with Holy Scripture and Primitive Christianity, yet they shew nevertheless that these Foundations were simply intended to promote the Christian Religion of the then Church of England. But the present Church of England is surely one and the same Church with the Church before the Reformation. This, accordingly, has been by continued legislation admitted to be the fact. The latest Acts of Parliament acknowledge it. The Oxford Act of 1854 was intended to be " for the advancement of Religion and Learning," and by Section xxviii. it enabled Colleges to amend their Statutes " for the interest of Religion and Learning," and " to make Ordinances for promoting the main de- " signs of the Founders and Donors." So was Cambridge in 1856 empowered to frame Statutes, " in order to pro- " mote useful learning and religious education, and the " main designs of the Founders and Donors, so far as is " consistent with these purposes." Over and over again, in the Ordinances framed for Colleges by the Commis- sioners under these Acts, each College is described as " a place of religion, learning, and education." And it is shewn beyond dispute by the subsequent Regulations that the " Religion" here intended is that of the Esta- blished Church of England. Nevertheless, it does not follow that we are to restrict our advantages to the Church of England exclusively. There is another principle also to be observed. It is our duty to extend our advantages so far as we can ; but always with this proviso, that we do not so extend them as seriously to impair or even extinguish them. The State requires the performance of this duty ; and the Univer- sities recognise it. They may not have readily perceived 13 that they could so extend their advantages to persons of all creeds, as not to undermine or destroy the very blessings which they desired to extend. To reconcile these principles was, and is, the problem to be solved ; and the solution is not easy. Very serious difficulties, and consequences deeply to be lamented, have been known to occur in Colleges where the experiment has been most fairly tried. It is easy to talk of the pursuit of truth, freedom of inquiry, religious equality, the con- flict of opinions, and the certainty that truth will prevail in the end ; but all this is in reality irrelevant to the question at issue, the practical question of Religious Education. Such phrases apply rather to later periods of life and larger communities. Education, so called, without Religion, is not Educa- tion ; nor is it what English parents desire at our hands. But Religion is not mere sentiment, nor can it be separated from doctrine, and distinct and definite doc- trine. You cannot speak to the purpose about the object of our worship, or prayer, or present duties, or future hopes, without implying or stating doctrines. And your morality must be based upon these doctrines. And this the promoters of the present Bill admit ; but they deny that they " are doing that which in any way tends to bring " about the cessation of definite religious teaching in " the Colleges," — they grant that " religious teaching in " the Colleges may no longer be confined to the doctrines " of the Church of England," — " that religion in the " Colleges may be various — that it shall be free is the " object of the Bill." But that " it shall cease to be " definite — is not," we are told, " the necessary, the " legitimate, or the natural result of such a Bill as this." The authors of the measure are the best exponents of their own expectations of its effect ; but of its probable 14 effect in practice the four or five hundred persons, practically conversant with Academical Education, who have expressed a strong opinion against the measure, may be better judges. The religion and the religious teaching in the Colleges, it is said, must be free, but may be various ; they are to be definite, but may not be confined to the doctrines of the Church of England. The freedom, therefore, and the variety 'Bttte4i^beyond the limits which are permitted within the Church of England ; they must be co-exten- sive with all those variations of religious opinion which lead to separation from the Church of England, co-ex- tensieft- indeed with the doctrines not only of all Sects, but of all Religionists not actually disallowed by the laws of lingland. Less than this will scarcely be consistent with " the great principles of religious equality." Now this is intelligible when applied to the people of a great country ; perhaps to a great University, which might have separate Colleges with various teaching within it. How can we have this various yet definite teaching within each separate College ? The Students may be various, no doubt, whether will- ing to be taught, or allowed for conscience' sake to be absent from the Chapel or the Lecture-room. We have no tests for learners, and we need none. But is the Teaching also to be various within the walls of a single College ? If this is what is intended, or expected, it seems emi- nently unpractical, or were it practicable, deleterious. And we have no sufBcient assurance to the contrary when we are told that " the effect of the Bill will not be *' to destroy those provisions which the Statutes of the ' Colleges may continue for religious worship, discipline, " or teaching, except only so far as they conflict with the " principle of religious equality by the imposition of 15 " religious tests." For these College Statutes are alter- able at any time at the discretion of certain majorities within the Colleges, with the consent of Visitors (at least at Oxford) and of the Queen in Council. And so long as this provision remains, as on many accounts it ought to remain, we can have no final settlement of this vexed question. But with the abolition of all Tests we know not who the Fellows might be, nor what might be the tenets of the Instructors. True, the Bill makes one reservation. It does " not " apply to the Headship of any College." But this by itself is not much ; not enough surely to satisfy the in- quiries of a considerate father. For religious parents must needs desire that the Teachers of their sons should be Teachers oithe truth, not merely of some definite doc- trine, but of what they believe to be sound doctrine. They ought to know this ; and those who appoint the Teachers should know it too. It is v^ith a College as with a Parish. The congregation and the Bishop who are to institute and receive a Minister, ought to have some reasonable assurance that he is sound in the faith. The earliest, the simplest, and the least inquisitorial method for giving them this assurance is his own Declaration of his re- ligious profession. We want no more. We do not want to test each person's opinions in every particular. The word " Test" has an invidious sound. We only want some security that those who teach, or train, our students have that most important qualification for their office which we cannot know by a mere examination, which we do not wish to search out by a minute inquiry, but which may generally be ascertained by a Declaration on their part, such as the " Declaration of Assent" at Oxford, or that at Cambridge, that they are " bona^ members of the " Church of England." 16 If indeed all our Tutors, College Officers, and Teach- ers, were Clergymen, we should need no other Declara- tion than what they would have already made. But they are not so. And, at Oxford at least, the number of Lay Fellows and Lay Teachers has of late increased, and is increasing, to a considerable extent. The Act of 1854 has reversed the proportion, both as regards Fellows and Teachers.* But I will not pursue these matters further. I will only refer, in conclusion, to possible Modifications of the Bill; and to those which have been already mentioned as agreed upon and recommended on a similar occasion in 1864 by Mr. Gladstone and Sir W. Heathcote, I still adhere, as at once sufficient, reasonable, and just. I gave my reasons for this opinion in published Notes upon Academical Subscription in 1866, to which these few pages are but supplementary. Those proposals would, I think, have met the difficulty, and solved the problem before us fairly ; but they were not accepted, and I could be content to go somewhat farther, and many persons now, I conceive, in both Universities would be content — (1) That the Senate at Cambridge and Convocation at Oxford should be open, without the requirement of any Religious Declarations or Securities. (2) That all Degrees, except Degrees in Divinity, should be equally open at Oxford, as they already are at Cambridge. * In 1880 there were 541 Fellows of Colleges, of whom 327 were Cler- gymen and 214 Lay Fellows. In 1865 the total number was 397; the Laymen being 180, the Clergymen 217; but in 1870, the entire number being 367, the Laymen are 190, the Clergy 177. Similarly as to Tutors and Lecturers in the Oxford Colleges: in 1865 there were 61 Clerical, 33 Lay Teachers ; in 1870 the Clerical teachers are 50, the Lay teachers 65. 17 (8) That for University Professorships, and Offices, not connected with Instruction or Examinations in Re- ligion and Morals, nor endowed with Canonries, or Ecclesiastical Benefices, no Religious Tests should he- re quired. (4) But that Religious Securities should be required from persons Lay, or Clerical, employed in Collegiate Instruction or Discipline, or in regulating the perform- ance of, or attendance upon. Divine worship. (5) And that the Liturgy of the Church of England, and no other, should be used in all existing College Chapels ; but not necessarily in Private or Independent Halls, or in such Colleges as may be freely established hereafter in both these Universities. There have been other Schemes also suggested with the same desire to open the Colleges, as well as the Universities, as far as possible, or to devote a consider- able portion of their endowments to the advantage of Non-Conformists, only so far as may be consistent with the maintenance within their w^alls of definite Religious In- struction, and a sound Christian Education for the youth of this country, according to the principles of the National Church. And very serious evil it will entail upon this country both in Church and State, if at any time, through defect of such Education, the future Ministers of the Church shall be driven elsewhere for academical instruc- tion, and the Laity and Clergy of England be educated apart. (1) Thus it has been suggested that out of Collegiate Endowments " University Fellowships'" should be esta- blished, of which the holders should be free from all Religious Tests, but should have no voice or vote within the Colleges. (2) Or, that without disturbing the number of Fellows 18 in each College, the Fellows should be divided into two classes, Senior and Junior, as at several Colleges in Cambridge, and at Christ Church, in Oxford ; of whom the former alone should be the governing body in each Col'ege, and subject to Tests; the latter free from Tests, but holding their Fellowships only for limited periods, except by election into the higher class. (3) And some again would have a stricter form of Tests for Teachers, a simpler form for Fellows in general. No one of these suggestions can be deemed undeserv- ing of consideration by those who know the present state of the Universities, and the great waste of Endow^ments at present upon persons whose only merit has been that they have passed a good examination at about 22. Then the question has been raised by many, wliat Tests should be required, or what for different persons. Some would adopt the use simply of the Apostles' Creed, w^hich, however, would scarcely now secure the higher teaching from considerable error. Others have proposed the Nicene Creed, which again would not exclude some of the most lamentable corruptions of Christian faith and worship. It is not necessary that the Securities in both Universities should be alike, nor that they should be alike for all persons. Cambridge and Oxford might severally retain their present Tests for Teachers, whilst Fellows of Col- leges, not being Teachers, might simply make the Declaration of Conformity, or declare their adherence to the Nicene or to the Apostles' Creed. All these are points for careful and separate consider- ation, as they relate severally to the Universities, and to the Colleges, which stand upon different grounds. Nay, even the several Colleges themselves, being so many 19 distinct Corporations, with divers charters aiid statutes framed at different periods, might be deemed not unde- serving of separate consideration. To enact that all Religious Tests shall be swept away once for all in all these Institutions alike, may be a convenient mode of legislating, but to those who know these Institutions best cannot but appear arbitrary and unwise. Whilst as to the attempt to carry the principles of religious equality, not into our Universities with separate Halls and Col- leges within them, or affiliated to them, for the sons of persons of divers creeds (for that is intelligible and feasible), but into each separate College, this, — if this is indeed what the present Bill is intended to effect, — would only lead, I fear, to confusion instead of harmony, to indifference to truth instead of love of truth, to mere Secular Education so called, (for Education it is not,) instead of that Religious and Christian Education which, however imperfectly, our Colleges seek to impart to the sons of Christian parents in this Christian country. EDWARD HAWKINS. Oriel College, June 8, 1870. BAXTER, PRINTER, OXFORD. s> %% *• ■• W- p^