THE IRISH SYNOD ON SCREENS.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR:1 &n,—I read with much regret your article in this week's .Spectator, entitled, "The Irish Synod on Screens." It is -marked by a total want of sympathy towards the Irish Church, and by ignorance of many of the facts connected with her recent history. Since the date of Disestablishment, her principal 'occupation was not, as you state, the screwing of money out -of the despoiling Government, nor yet Revision. Her first work was the framing of a Constitution, which has since worked admirably, and which has been one great means of preventing her breaking up into Congregationalism. Her next work was the -establishment of a Snstentation Fund, the great object of which was the keeping-up of the means of grace for the scattered mem- bers of oar Church in outlying districts, where they could not afford to.do so themselves. This Sustentation Fund has been formed by the contributions of Irish Churchmen, freely given. The subscriptions of our own members sufficed for our needs, amounting, as they did, to nearly a quarter of a million each
year, with the happy result that no congregation, however re- mote or scattered, has been left without a resident clergyman. In addition to this, more Churches have been built, restored, or enlarged than had ever been done in the same number of years previously.
The subject of Revision did occupy the attention of the General Synod for some years during its sessions, which usually lasted about one month in each year ; but this is a different thing from saying that it was the principal occupation of the Church at large. The result of revision is now to be seen by any one who will take the trouble to examine the Revised Prayer-Book, which may be purchased for the sum of Is. 6d. It is by this book we claim to be judged, and not by any debates which took place during the revision of it. It is surely no light thing to be able to say that this revision has been carried through suc- cessfully, and that it is honestly accepted by all classes of Irish Churchmen.
No such division as you imagined exists between the clergy and laity in our Church. They have worked, and are working, heartily together. The motion to petition for the removal of the screen. in Christ Church Cathedral was rejected by a large majority of the clergy and laity, voting together. Mr. Jacobs' Bill was rejected by a majority of the clergy, chiefly on the ground that it was unnecessary, and that over-legislation is bad, —not for any innate love they may have for screens.
The Irish Church has had a difficult part to play, during the past few years of her existence. It is not too much to ask— and it is all she asks—that she shall be fairly judged by outside critics, especially by men who, like the editor of the Spectator, admires earnestness of purpose, wherever found.—I am, Sir, &c., Killarney Rectory. GERALD DE C. MEADE. [We think that the evidence is against Mr. Meade.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
