On the eastward position, it was held that some of
the most Romanising of the Anglicans had consecrated at the north end of the altar, and not at the northern extremity of the western side, and that many of those who had consecrated at the northern extremity of the western side had held rather extreme Reformed doctrines. The Court held, therefore, that there is a discretion in the matter, and that no doctrine is involved in the use made of that discretion. Nevertheless, the Court decided on the next head that the Bishop had done wrong in not taking care that all the manual acts of consecration could be clearly seen by those of the congregation who were so placed as to see them, and who desired to see them. As to the singing of the " Agnus Dei " after the consecration and before the reception of the elements, the Court again decided that it had not been objected to by even extreme Reformers. What the Reformers had objected to was the saying of the " Agnus Del" "privately, lest the people be edified," as was sarcasti- cally remarked. The singing of the " Agnus Dei " publicly was not thought Romanising by some very keen Reformers. The use of the "Anus Dei " could only be condemned on the ground that the singing of any hymn or anthem at this place in the Communion Service is illegal, and this the Court denied. On the question of lighted candles, the view taken was that they are part of the decorations, which, like the flowers and the cross, have been restored by modern taste, and that they are not symbols of any special doctrinal view rejected by the Anglican Church ; and this view was supported by very elaborate evidence. The sign of the cross in the absolution and benedic- tion was condemned, the Court holding that the Anglican Church distinctly regards the use of this sign as a "rite," prescribing it, for instance, in baptism ; and that, as the use of " additional " rites not sanctioned in the Prayer-Book is pro- hibited in the Communion Service, this " rite " cannot be allowed. The judgment concludes by pointing out that even that which is lawful is not always expedient, and that sowing divisions in the Church by the use of even lawful ceremonies which repel worshippers, is not in keeping with the apostolical conception of Christian charity.
Previous page
