LETTERS TO THE EDITOR,
THE RIDSDALE JUDGMENT.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."]
SIR,—In the autumn of 1874 you specially commended a meeting of clergy and laity who met at Blandford, and carried a resolu-
tion, with regard to the Ornaments Rubric, to adhere to the surplice only. Later on you stated that the way to content the moderate High-Church party, without whom the Establishment could not remain, was to admit either position of the celebrant, but " to resist the introduction of the novel eucharistic vest- ments, which is a conspicuous challenge to the people," &c. But now a new agitation against this last judgment is to have the
high sanction of the Spectator. I am grievously disappointed, along with many Broad-Church clergymen, at the line which is
now taken by you, in deference to Malcolm McColl and others.
From whom, amongst the clergy, does all this agitation come ? The Parches memorial was signed by less than 5,000 of the
21,000 clergy, and this number has been diminished since. By
strengthening this party you diminish the possibility of concessions to the Broad-Church party. Such is the Bishop of Peterborough's neutral zone, enlarged by the omission of the Athanasian Creed.
It is the High-Church party who constitute themselves the de- fenders of the Faith, "non possumuses " on every subject which does not happen to coincide with their prejudices. The Low-
Church are quite willing to forego the Athanasian Creed. I am grievously disappointed with the support you now invariably
accord to the most intolerant section within the Church. Who, too, are the most liberal in their subscriptions, the High or the Low ? C. M. S., £190,000; S. P. G., £136,000; Additional Curates' Aid (omitting sums locally raised), £41,000; Church Pastoral Aid, 153,000.-1 am, Sir, &c.,
Glenville Rectory, Blandford. J. LEE-WARNER.
P.S.-11 this party bring about Disestablishment, as you now begin not obscurely to hint, is there any likelihood that any future Church body in which the laity join will be more favourable to vestments, or will it not much rather solve the matter as our meeting did at Blandford ?
[Mr. Lee Warner confounds our view as to the use of the vestments themselves, with our view as to the law of the ques- tion. We quite hold to all we said in 1874, regarding the use of the gay vestments themselves as childish, indecorous, and superstitious.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
