A brief analysis of the formation of the history writing of the British Empire. In Seeley's view, Jesus, Milton, Goethe, and other distant figures can be grouped together, and they all infuse ethics and faith in the life of the community, thus making it more dynamic and united.
Of course, Sealy's approach also aroused the displeasure of orthodox Episcopalians, who regarded his exposition of miracles and doctrine as a recipe for secularism or skepticism, but received praise from members of the "broad church."
In addition to Frederick Morris, Arthur Stanley, John Davis and others, who also held liberal Anglican ideas, also expressed their approval of the book "The Biography of Jesus".
This is further evidence of the intellectual connection between Sealy and the liberal Episcopal Church.
Then, in the following years, as mentioned above, Sealy's re-examination of Goethe also aimed at exploring the issue of moral construction of the political community, based not only on interest in German scholarship, but also on inspiration from the indigenous liberal Anglican Communion.
In other words, the convergence of extraterritorial and local ideas led Seeley to attach great importance to the ethical and moral aspects of the state.
On the contrary, it is precisely because of his belief in the unity of the country that the two inspirations are fused.
And such a form of thought is not uncommon among liberal Anglicans.
In Forbes's view, there is a European thought behind all these statements, so it can be said that the liberal Anglican idea had a revolutionary impact at that time because it absorbed the fruits of German thought.
It is precisely under the above two aspects, especially the inspiration of the "Broad Church", that Seeley believes that religious belief plays a role that cannot be ignored in the process of national construction.
In other words, the nation-state and faith are closely integrated, and the latter, like ethnic blood, history and culture, are bonds of unity, and both give organic forms to national life.
What can be seen here is that the church/state unity repeatedly appears in the remarks of Sealy and other "broad church" figures, so what is the similarity between the two in the theory of the state?
As mentioned earlier, in his inaugural speech, Arnold emphasized the importance of modern history and repeatedly affirmed that the state is at the heart of a series of reflections.
In his view, the external form of the state, such as the way government institutions are organized, is important, but its internal part is more worthy of attention, because the highest purpose of the state is not to protect security and interests, but to provide the people with a way of life that conforms to justice.
It is precisely in this sense that the state is not a combination of simple collections of individuals, nor is it merely a mediator of wealth redistribution, but a political community closely related to intellectual and moral life.
On the one hand, it gives the people wholeness, and on the other hand, it is related to the mental and moral growth of each individual.
So, under the liberal Anglican idea, the state is also a living organism.
At the same time, for Arnold, since the state is an organism, the factors that determine the characteristics of that organism are roughly the following four points: racial origin, language, institution, and religious belief.
Bibliography:
Encyclopedia Britannica, International Chinese Edition, China Encyclopedia Press, 1999.
"Damei Encyclopedia" Editorial Department of "Damei Encyclopedia" of Guangfu Books Bureau 79th Year of the Republic of China.
