Letters on church matters

←

Letters on church matters (1851)
by A. J. B. Beresford Hope

→

sister projects: Wikidata item

949744Letters on church matters1851A. J. B. Beresford Hope

LETTERS

ON

CHURCH MATTERS.

By D. C. L.

Price 3s. 6a.

LETTERS

ON

CHURCH MATTERS.

BY

D. C. L.

REPRINTED FROM THE "MORNING CHRONICLE."

VOL. I.

"The world is nat′rally averse
To all the truth it sees or hears;
But swallows nonsense, and a lie,
With greediness and gluttony."

LONDON:
JAMES RIDGWAY, PICCADILLY.
1851.

London: Printed by Petter, Duff, and Co.

Crane-court, Fleet-street.

CONTENTS.

LETTER :: PAGE

I. Lord John Russell and Scotch Episcopacy . . . 3

II. High Churchmen and the Royal Supremacy . . . 7

III. Lord Ashley and his Meeting . . . 12

IV. National Club . . . 17

V. The Bishop of London and Mr. Bennett . . . 28

VI. The London Union on Church Matters . . . 33

VII. The Bishop of London and Mr. Bennett . . . 39

VIII. Can Convocation be Reformed . . . 42

L. Proseuché-Lord Ashley and Mr. Alford . . . 49

X. Archdeacon Sinclair and his Visitation . . . 54

XI. The Bishop of London's Reply to the Clergy of the Arch-

deaconry of Middlesex . . . 61

XII. Mr. Bennett's Resignation . . . 70

XIII. The late Meeting for the Revival of Convocation . . . 73

XIV. The Revision of the Prayer Book . . . 79

XV. Mr. Bennett and the Bishop of London . . . 85

XVI. Lord Ashley and the Revision of the Prayer Book . . . 89

XVII. Mr. Bennett's Resignation . . . 95

XVill. The Bishop of Manchester . . . 97

XIX. The Theory of Episcopacy.-I. . . . 104

XX. The Bishop of Manchester's Rejoinder . . . 111

LTI. The Late Meeting of Convocation . . . 120

XXII. Lord John Russell and the Bishops . . . 123

XXIII. Lord Ashley in the House of Commons . . . 126

XXIV. The Theory of Episcopacy.-II. . . . 131

XXV. Marriage with a Deceased Wife's Sister . . . 137

XXVI. Papal Aggression and the Scotch Bishops . . . 141

XXVII. Parliamentary Reform and the Mummeries of Superstition . . . 144

XXVIII. Lord Stanley and Mr. Gladstone . . . 148

XXIX. Lord John Russell, Low Churchmen, and the Bishops . . . 150 LETTERS ON CHURCH MATTERS. - I. LORD JOHN RUSSELL AXD SCOTCH EPISCOPACY. Nov. 25, 1850. IN Lord John Russell's sufficiently notorious letter to the Bishop of Durhan1 upon the new Papal hierarchy occurs the following passage: -" It is impossible to confound the recent measures of the Pope with the division of Scotland into dioceses by the Episcopal Church, or the arrangement of districts in England by the 'Wesleyan Conference." The first question which most readers of the letter have proba- bly asked themselves is, Why should Lord John have broken the flow of his argument by an abrupt ejaculation about matters which, so far from confounding them with the Pope's measures, we had not so much as thought about? The answer to this is not quite so obvious, but it is very undeni- able. Qui s'excuse s'accuse. The "recent measures of the Pope" are so easily, viewed political1y, to be confounded with at least the division of Scotland, as to be absolutely and entirely parallel with it, and accordingly Lord John's his- torical knowledge made him uneasy, and led him to blurt out what is, in point of fact, a refutation of his whole letter. In proving this, I shall, it seems to me, be doing good ser- vice to the Church and hierarchy of England. The first requisite A 2

We have now come back to the point at which we always find ourselves, after all—the great unfairness of constituting a one-sided tribunal for the redress of supposed infractions of the Rubrical law only upon the side which has happened to offend Lord John Russell, Mr. Drummond's butler, and Mr. Cuthbert, of "bottomless-pit" notoriety. Let it be knowrn that Archdeacons Sinclair and Hale are collecting their evidence as to infractions of the Rubric in this and that church; how can they, without blushing, refuse to report to the Bishop—if credible witnesses can be found to substantiate it—that in this church the prayer for the church militant is not read; in that, baptisms are not performed at the time ordered by the Rubric, or in the place the Canons bid; in a third, the Athanasian Creed is constantly omitted; in a fourth, Ascension Day (not to mention other church holidays) is suffered to pass unnoticed; that in all, the provision for public daily prayers and readings of Holy Scripture, so useful and consolatory, especially in a large city, and so expressly ordered in the same page of he Prayer Book which contains the direction for arbitration, which Archdeacon Sinclair misunderstands, is entirely ignored; or, to take one particular instance, that in a parish of which a dignitary is inclun bent, the illegal fee of two shillings and ten pence is exacted for every baptism, the result of which is, that children to a fearful number in that extensive parish remain unbaptized. How, I say, can the Archdeacons refuse to report such cases, and how can the Bishop decline to take any cognizance of them?

High Churchmen differ very widely from Lord Ashley and his followers. It is absolutely a mystery to them how honest men with ordinary faculties can read the Prayer Book as the latter do. But as these accept the Prayer Book, the "large party" has never attempted to assail them; and as they find no difficulty in living under the actual Prayer Book, they cannot say that they are hardly used. High Churchmen trust their cause to truth, to that truth which they know to be enshrined in the Book of Common Prayer, and they go on amid many difficulties to do the work of the Church of England with quiet confidence. But on the other side we hear the voice of hatred, and the broil of angry passion—"Out with them, out with them." Well, let the Ministry and their new allies turn us out; I have warned them what they will bring about by that act of desperate madness!

XV.

MR. BENNETT AND THE BISHOP OF LONDON.

JAN. 21, 1851.

I trust we have heard the last of so unfortunate a con- trivance fiS this publication would infallibly turn out, to kindle strife vhere harmony may nov exist, to subject honest men to the torment of a divided conscience, and to compel them to Inake questions, now in solution, matters of principle, and to fight for theln as such, without the hope of an accom- 11lodation. The fear of the Ministry driving on the Bench to acts of intolerance being nov reuloved, such considerations as those I have just stated must prevail. Our bishops 111USt desire to return to that status in quo vhich last autulnn disturbed, and to escape, with all possible and decorous haste, frolll their pre- sent attitude of preparation for a fierce intestine war in which they would be the assailants. Thus, sir-to return to the point fro111 vhich I started- the Russell revel ended, all parties but the "large party" of High Churchnlen find thelnselves in their vrong place, with vrong allies, and ahning after bnpossible results. The "large part:r" itself was at first adopting some erroneous policy, but it corrected itself just at the right tÍ1ne. Churchmen vill have enough to make theln fearful for the future; but one forll1 of the perpetual danger which they are ever incurring has been averted-one part of the history of the Eng1ish Church has been played out: the first scene at the FlanlÍnian Gate; the second in the Dishop of Durhaln's study; the rest-no matter "There; at last the epilogue, vhen the chief perfornler, vho began roaring and bouncing and 111Rwling like a lion, confessed his real naUle and vocation :-

"When lion rough in wildest rage doth roar,
Then know that I, one Snug the joiner am,
No lion fell, nor else no lion's dam."

END OF FIRST SERIES.

PETTER, DUFF AND CO. PRINTERS, CRANE COURT, FLEET STREET.