We have said sufficient in another column of the curious
in- difference displayed by Mr. Mackonochie in his correspondence with the Bishop of London to the obligation of his vow of canonical obedience, but we must in fairness to him add here that the evi- dence seems to show that the picture of the Virgin in St. Alba', Holborn, now complained of, ha e been where it Is since 1873r and the crucifix since 1869, without incurring the criticism of the Archdeacon ; and that it is not very easy to see what, in such a church as that of St. Alban's, where probably none except Ritualists ever attend, unless it be to pick holes in the doings of the Ritualists, the objection is to either. Of course in a country church, such objects would really interfere with the worship, and probably oven prevent the attend- ance of numbers who would hold them dictinctly idola- trous. But that can hardly be the case in a London church, and no sensible man now really holds either that pictures and statues lead to idolatry, or that the external adornment of aft churches should be the same. We feel no sympathy with the tendencies of the Ritualists, but we cannot avoid the conviction that there is something artificial, something done for popular effect, and not simply to protect Protestant parishioners who cannot conveniently worship elsewhere, in the crusade now car- ried on against them by Archdeacons and Bishops. To say the least, the Public Worship Act has promoted a morbid passion for insisting on strict uniformity of practice, where there is neither need for strict uniformity, nor advantage in it.
Previous page
