[To THE Enrroa Or THE SeSOTATOR."1
Sin,—May I refer your correspondents (Spectator, March 16th) to the rubric which follows the ministration of baptism to such as are of riper years "It is expedient that every person thus baptized should be confirmed by the Bishop so soon after his Baptism as conveniently may be: that so he may be admitted to Holy Communion." It is possible to argue that the rule of the Church of England is absurd, and in these go-as-you-please times it is no doubt the case that many un- confirmed people are admitted to Holy Communion, as quite possibly some may be who have not been baptised. But it seems difficult to understand how any one can argue, as Mr. Cowley-Brown does, that " the case of any others" beyond those brought up from the first in the system of our Church "does not seem to have been contemplated," in face of the rubric which I have quoted.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Radley College. T. FIELD.
[It seems to us that the rubric cited is, in truth, only another proof that the Church of England, though she may prefer Confirmation, will not repel unconfirmed persons. The fact that specific reasons are given for withholding the Com- munion in certain cases, and that want of Confirmation is not one of them, is a proof that exclusion for other reasons is not intended. No lawyer, however strict, would, we venture to assert, say that the rubrics read together constitute a prohibition of the administration of the Communion to un- confirmed persons.. That no such prohibition exists is our contention.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
