THE RITUALISTS AND THE EVANGELICALS. T HE announcement that in the
coming election of a Proctor for the Clergy in Convocation to take the place of Canon Wilkinson, Prebendary Cadman will be opposed as too friendly to Ritualism, will surprise any one who has ever been inside his church. Yet the statement seems to be true, albeit it be strange, and coming so soon after the proceedings at the Islington Evangelical Conference; and the controversy which has sprung out of them, it may be taken to indicate the formation of two distinct groups— using the word in the French sense—in the Evangelical party. Hitherto, the distinction between the extreme and the centre men in the High Church party has been very marked, but there has been nothing corresponding to it among the Evangelicals. Now, the omission is to be set right, and though the great body of tho party will vote for Mr. Cadman, a few ardent spirits will seek a representative who has not suffered himself to be led astray by such blind guides as common-sense and Christian charity. The chief sinners at the Islington Con- ference were Canon Eliot and Mr. Goe, and besides the melan- choly defection revealed by their speeches, a correspondent of the Record has lately brought to light the fact that one at least of them practises what he preaches. The point that gave most offence in the Islington speeches was the " level- ling-up " policy, which proposes to admit preaching in the surplice, surpliced choirs, and choral services into Evangelical churches. Mr. Goe contended that these practices, being in themselves harmless, and also as impart- ing "additional brightness and liveliness" to the service, "should be generously acknowledged as consistent with a loyal adhesion to Evangelical truth." Mr. Eliot asked the Conference to have done with the huge mistake of "wasting powder and shot against such mere trifles as surplices and choir boys, and the like." It is difficult to go all lengths with Mr. Goe, because to do so would be to admit that a sermon may become brighter and livelier by being preached in a sur- plice, a conclusion which, for the sake of a large number of Churchgoers, we could heartily wish were true. But it is on no such trivial ground as this that the Extreme Left of the party rest their protest. One of the Record's correspondents says boldly that the wonder at Islington was not that such a man as Canon Eliot should have made such a speech, but that such a man as Canon Eliot should have been allowed to speak at all. Rumours, it seems, from Bournemouth "have often given pain." The church of which Canon Eliot is Vicar has not served the purpose for which it was designed. It was built as a protest against the surrounding Ritualism ; it has really be- come Ritualist itself. Instead of playing the part of a "warn- ing beacon," Mr. Eliot has preferred to be a humble imitator. It is quite natural, therefore, that he should plead for more toleration to Ritualists, and protest against the "disastrous policy of attempting to stay error by prosecutions and imprisonments.' He is not really the enemy of the Ritualists ; consequently, he has no desire to see them turned out of the Church of England. One of his critics, indeed, has no doubt as to what his ultimate destination will be. He once knew a case exactly like his which ended in Rome, and it is to Rome that Canon Eliot is unconsciously marching. Nobody has yet been found to say that Mr. Cadman is also marching towards Rome, but it is quite possible that before the day of election comes, even this wonderful imagination will have been conceived and brought forth.
The one fact of real interest about this singular con- troversy is the effect which it will have in the long- run on the relations of the two centre parties to one another. It is plain that there is at present less in common be- tween the Extreme and the Moderate Evangelicals, than there is between Moderate Evangelicals and Moderate High Churchmen. Nearly everything that Mr. Eliot said at Isling- ton might have been said by hosts of men who have always been accustomed to call themselves High Churchmen • and but for the prosecutions, which have greatly increased the fellow-feeling between the Moderate men and the Ritualists of the High-Church party, it would hardly occur to them that they and Mr. Eliot belonged to different Ecclesiastical parties. If the Evangelicals as a body take to preaching in the surplice, to having choral services sung by surpliced choirs, and to emphasizing the positive rather than the negative side of their faith—the points on which they and High Churchmen agree, rather than those on which they differ—it will be very difficult to draw a line between them and the High Church- men who have precisely the same kind of services, and preach sermons not greatly differing from theirs. If this process were to go on without interruption, the two centres would Laturally be drawn together, as against the Extreme Right on the one side, and the Extreme Left on the other. To the latter, the change would be of no importance. The Extreme Evan- gelicals have always been weak, both in numbers and influence. d3ut the Ritualists have beyond doubt gained a great deal from their forming the extreme wing of a large party, and the amalgamation of the centres would mean that this source of strength would be cut off for the future. Instead of shading off by imperceptible degrees into the general body of High • Churchmen, they would stand out in sharp antagonism to an -enormous array of Moderate Churchmen, belonging professedly to neither party, and tending, therefore, to regard any party outside themselves as alien from the true spirit of the Church of England. If this rearrangement of parties were
• -effected after the Ritualists had secured toleration, it might not greatly matter. But if it were effected before that time, -it might make the conquest of toleration very much more difficult. The motive with which that toleration will be given will be, in most cases, a dislike of the possible conse- quences arising from the refusal of it, and the magnitude of these consequences will greatly depend upon the number of the clergy who regard themselves as in some sort mixed -up and bound to make common cause with the Ritualists. As long as the party lines between High Churchmen and Evan- gelicals remain where they are, many of the former will regard themselves in this light. 'These men,' they will say, 'go very much beyond me ; but, after all, they are High Churchmen, end it is not for me to desert them when they are oppressed.' But if the party lines are drawn differently—and the thing that comes most naturally to the mind of a Moderate High :Churchman is his substantial identity with the Moderate Evangelical—he may be more inclined to look upon the Ritual- ists as simple disturbers of the Ecclesiastical peace. How the
• problem will work out depends mainly upon the extent to which Ritualism has really leavened the High-Church party. If the extent to which it has done this is considerable, the Moderate Evangelicals, on coming up to the point where the Moderate High Churchmen were yesterday, will find that they have moved a day's journey further on, and that the relative distance between them still remains what it was. Whether ihis will prove to be the case, nothing but time and experience can show. So far as merely a priori considerations go, the probabilities on both sides are curiously balanced.
Previous page
