His method,as he explains,is to find the true 'idea'of a constitution and a national church.The 'idea,'he explains,does not mean the conscious aim of the persons who founded or now constitute the bodies in question.An 'idea'is the subjective counterpart of an objective law.92It corresponds to the vital force which moulds the structure of the social organism,although it may never have been distinctly formulated by any one of the actors.In this sense,therefore,we should have to proceed by a historical method.We should study the constitution as we study the physiology of a physical body;93and he works out the analogy at some length.So far,Coleridge is expressing the characteristic view that Nature in general is to be regarded as an evolution;only that evolution is to be understood in the sense of Shelling not in the sense of either Darwin.Of course,when Coleridge professes to find the 'idea'of the church and state,what he really finds is not the idea so much as his idea of the idea --which may be a very different thing.His theory of 'evolution'is compatible with assuming that evolutions are illegitimate whenever he happens to dislike them.
He coincides rather curiously with James Mill in asserting that the 'social bond'was originally formed to protect property,not to protect life.94He discovers accordingly that the ancient races,Jews,Goths,and Kelts alike,divided the land into two parts,one to be inherited by separate families,the other to be set apart for the nation.From the latter or the 'nationality'springs the church establishment.This property belongs rightfully and inalienably to the nation itself.It is held by what he calls the 'clerisy.'Its functions are,in the first place,to provide a career by which the poorest classes may rise to a higher position;and secondly,to provide for the development of all the qualities which distinguish the civilised man from the savage.95Briefly,then,the church is that part of the national organism which is devoted to educating the people to be,obedient,free,useful organisable subjects,citizens,and patriots,living to the benefit of the estate,and prepared to die for its defence.'Henry VIII would have surpassed Alfred if he had directed the 'nationalty'to its true purposes;that is,especially to the maintenance of universities,of a parochial clergy,and of schools in every parish.Unluckily,Henry VIII's 'idea'of a national church was vague.Ideas were not his strong point.Coleridge appears to be especially troubled to work the principles into conformity with his views of Catholic emancipation.The peculiarity of the theory is that the church,according to him,seems to be simply a national institution.It might exist,and in fact,did exist before Christianity,as is proved not only by the Jewish but by the Druidical church.96That it should be Christian in England is a 'blessed accident,'or 'providential boon'--or,as he puts it,'most awfully a godsend.'Hence it follows that a primary condition of its utility is that the clerisy should contribute to the support of the other organs of the community.They must not be the subjects of a foreign power,nor,as he argues at length,subject to the desocialising influence of celibacy.It follows that the Roman church is unfitted to be ever a national church,although,if that danger be sufficiently obviated,no political disqualifications should be imposed upon Romanists.And thus,too,the Church Catholic is essentially a body which has no relations to any particular state.It is opposed to the world,not to the nation,and can have no visible head or 'personal centre of unity.'97The church which makes such claims is the revelation of Antichrist.
We need not inquire into the prophecies.It is enough to say that to Coleridge as to Southey the preservation of an established church seemed to be an essential condition of morality and civilisation.They differed from the ordinary Tory,who was content to defend any of the abuses by the cry of sacrilege and confiscation.
The church was to be made worthy of its position,and rendered capable of discharging its high functions effectually.Coleridge,it may be said,would fully admit that an organ which had ceased to correspond to its idea must die.It could not continue to preserve itself by mere force of obstruction,but must arouse,throw off its abuses,and show itself to be worthy of its high claims.Meanwhile,however,he was perhaps more anxious to show the Utilitarians that in assailing the institution on account of its abuses,they were really destroying the most essential guarantee of progress.He sums up,in a curious passage,the proofs of modern degradation.98The wicked eighteenth century is of course responsible for everything.
