A HARD CASE.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR."]
SIR,—Your correspondent, "K. J. V.," notices a point which, in the present stage of the Ritualist controversy, is not without interest. Mr. Rodwell complains that on his simplifying the• ritual at his church, St. Ethelburga, his large congregation of City men deserted him an masse, for a while leaving his church without a single worshipper. Alongside of this statement, we may read a remonstrance lately addressed by the Bishop of London to Mr. Pelham Dale, who, on being ordered by the Law• Courts to desist from a certain manner of celebrating the Com- munion Office, has for the last sixteen mouths desisted from celebrating it at all. I can remember a similar cessation of what Ritualists hold to be the most important act of Christian worship, at St. Alban's, when on one occasion, and for a short time, the law got the better of the clergy ; the same thing also happened at Mr. Ridsdale's church at Folkestone, during his legal troubles. An outsider may be tempted to smile at what appears the almost childish attitude of those who, if debarred from celebrating divine service after a certain manner, refuse. to celebrate it altogether ; but the question remains whether' our terribly spoilt child, the Ritualist clergyman, ought to be allowed to claim quite so much freedom with impunity. You., Sir, have lately been fair, almoSt generous, to the party ; but are you disposed to admit, not only that the Ritualist con. science is too sensitive and delicate an organ to be legally coerced, when it interprets the rubric touching the dress of the• ministers of the Establishment in a different manner to those• in authority, but also that it may absolve itself from following. such very plain directions as that of at least reading the first part of the Communion Service every Sunday, if this send. tiveness as to dress is likely to be hurt by such obedience P
We believed that Ritualists considered all ritual accessories as non-essential, important, if you please, but not necessary':: if, however, a congregation ceases to worship, and a minister ceases to give a congregation the means of worshipping, rather than omit ritual details, they must indeed be assuming vast importance in the Ritualist mind. The case of St. Raphael's,. Bristol, is not so very different to the above as "K. J. V." seems to suppose. This church has rather unfairly been described by Ritualists as " closed by a Bishop." It is no more closed by a Bishop than it is closed by Mr. Ward, the incum- bent, himself: The Bishop merely directs Mr. Ward to conduct the service after the manner which he, the Bishop, cons scientiously believes to be lawful. Mr. Ward practically answers,—Rather than not conduct it as I believe to be lawful, I will not conduct any service at all. If the Bishop tyrannises over Mr. Ward's conscience, it is no more than Mr. Ward would do over the Bishop's conscience, if he managed by a legal loophole to evade his directions, and performed a service which the Bishop would consider illegal. If Mr. Ward is responsible for what goes on in his church, the Bishop is equally responsible for what goes on in his diocese. I should describe the closing of the church as a result of the clashing of two over-sensitive consciences ; yet I think Mr. Ward might reasonably hope to be spared the bitterest depths of remorse if, in this instance, he disregarded his painfully tender regard for his own interpretation of the letter of a rubric, and throwing all the responsibility on his Bishop, merely obeyed him. To keep a church closed rather than obey a Bishop whom you have sworn to obey, seems rather exaggerated Quixotism.
As another instance of the growing importance which externals seem to be acquiring in the eyes of Ritualists, I may mention the reason given by Mr. Mackonochie, of St. Alban's, for re- fusing to remove a picture of the Blessed Virgin from that church, at his Bishop's command. He feared, if I remember rightly, that his people's faith in the Incarnation (the central doctrine of Christianity) would not survive the shock of such a
removal !--I am; Sir, &c., Z. S.
Previous page
