« PreviousContinue »
and fifty of the parishioners, all of them gliostseers of the two parishes of Widley and Wymering, men, women, and children, conformists and non-conformists, who object to Mr. Nugee's practices, and must be allowed its proper weight in estimating how far they bear out the expression “grave offence to many,'—the population of the parish being a little under two thousand. We mention this here to repair the accidental omission of it in its proper place in the evidence. The reason why we specially refer to the document is that it proves to demonstration that the objection here is to doctrine which is thought Roman by the objectors, but which all Churchmen will call Catholic, the doctrine of the Real Presence and a Sacrificing Priesthood.
Appendix C consists of an interesting communication from the incumbent of Christ Church, Clapham, of which we have only space to say that on the face of it it bears a conciliatory spirit; seeing that, in deference to the Bishop of Winchester, Mr. Abbot was content to forego what a large majority of his congregation, seven or eight hundred, desired, for the sake of conciliating thirteen objectors, parishioners and non-parishioners, none of whom were worshippers at Christ Church. This letter, together with Appendix D, which was produced to the Commissioners by Mr. Perry, and which refers to the satisfaction experienced by the churchwardens and parishioners of S. Michael and All Angels, Brighton, in the services as conducted by himself and the incumbent, Mr. Beanlands, are of some importance, because they prove in the two instances, and therefore are suggestive of further cases of a similar kind, how strong, and how widely diffused, is the love of this kind of service among the persons who communicate at these and similar churches. We observed above that no facts had come out in the evidence, of the existence of which we were not cognizant before. But we are obliged a little to modify the statement after reading these two documents. They convince us of a fact of which we were doubtful before, viz. that there are churches where the feeling in favour of such rites is all but unanimous.
For the sake of brevity we pass over Appendix E, which may be spoken of as a curious and elaborate defence of the genuineness of the Ornament Rubric, and its right to occupy its present place in the Prayer-book, in conformity with that assigned to it in the original MS. of the Sealed Book. Of Appendix F we need only say that it is a reprint of the Memorial on the Doctrine of the Eucharist, as signed by twenty clergymen, which was sent to the Archbishop of Canterbury by the Archdeacon of Taunton, in May 1867. We regret the appearance of Appendix G because, containing the opinions of Bishop Hopkins of Vermont on the one side, and those of his episcopal brethren on the other side, we do not see how it affects the question of Ritualism on this side of the Atlantic. Appendix H is the Petition of the President and Council of the English Church Union against the alteration of the Ornament Rubric; and the next two (I and K) contain the opinions of lawyers, pro and con, as consulted in one interest by the Archbishop of York and other bishops, and in the other by the Council of the English Church Union, the case having been carefully prepared by Mr. Perry; and lastly come the Resolutions of the Úpper and Lower Houses of Convocation, followed by the resolution of the Convocation of the Province of York, all dated 1866 and 1867. The proceedings of Convocation are of course not inserted; so we miss the celebrated Preamble which was rejected so ignominiously by the Lower House, when sent down to it from the Upper. Probably, the Upper House would scarcely now commit itself either directly or by implication to the opinion that Ritual Observances had had the effect of deterring Nonconformists from submitting to the Church.
Upon the whole then, if our opinion upon the Blue-book is asked, we answer, that we are entirely satisfied with the present appearance of things.
* If legislation was difficult before, it is well-nigh impossible now. No wonder Lord Shaftesbury was in a hurry. It would have been easy to legislate first, and take the evidence after the conclusion had been arrived at. But there is the evidence in black and white. People of common sense can judge for themselves who are the working bees and who are the drones. Meanwhile we wait the decision as to the actual state of the law in the case of S. Alban's, or in any other case that may be carried by appeal before the Privy Council. We have little doubt ourselves that the Judicial Committee would declare certain of the recent extravagances, such as using incense at the Magnificat, a violation of law; that they would affirm the legality of what are technically called the Vestments we have not the slightest doubt. For ourselves, and we think we may apswer for most of our readers, we avow that we shall be perfectly satisfied with their decision.
SOCIETY FOR THE PROPAGATION OF THE GOSPEL IN FOREIGN PARTS. 5, PARK PLACE, ST. JAMES'S STREET, LONDON, S.W.
24th Sept. 1867. • DEAR SIR,
• Will you have the kindness to correct an erroneous statement which was copied from the Christian Year-Book into the Christian Remembrancer for July, page 238 ?
• The Expenditure of the S. P. G. in 1865 was not 85,0001., as there stated, but 116,2461. In this sum I do not include (as is sometimes done) Capital purchased and Balance due from Treasurers at the end of the year : if these items were included the total Expenditure would be 130,8911., as is stated in the Society's Report for 1863, page 185. ,
I arn, DEAR SIR,
• Yours very faithfully,
" W. T. BULLOCK.
• Elitor of the
NOTICE.- The press of important matter in the present Quarter
compels us to postpone our SHORTER NOTICES.
SHORTER NOTICES OF BOOKS AND PAMPHLETS.
JULY.-G. Smith's Essays-Scriptural Studies
-Ffoulkes' Christendom's Divisions--Bishop
Christian Library-Thomson's Symbols of
Somerford Priory-Christian Year-Book-
LONDON : R. CLAY, SON, AND TAYLOR, PRINTERS.