CHAPTER XXII.

Surrender of Episcopal Authority-Circular to the Clergy-Alleged Retractation of the Charge-Increase of Rubrical Strife-Difficulties of the Clergy-Helplessness of the Bishop - Fruitless attempts to soften Prejudice-Dregs of the Cup of Mortification -The Archbishop's Letter-Recognition of the Principle of Bishop Blomfield's Charge--Justification of the Recusants-Plea for suspension of Hostilities-Temporary Pacification - The Hyper-Ritualists-St. Paul's Knightsbridge-St. Barnabas, Pimlico-Preliminary Inspection-Consecration - Ritual Developments -Interference of the Bishop-Visitation Charge of 1850The Church Service made "histrionic"-Imitation of the Romish Ceremonial-Resignation of the Incumbent of St. Paul's-Continuance of Ritual Disputes-Reflexions of Bishop BlomfieldExplanation of his Motives.

AVING—right or wrong-arrived at the conclusion that a due regard for the peace of the Church required at his hands the sacrifice of his longcherished convictions, as well as of his character for consistency, Bishop Blomfield applied himself without loss of time to the task-that too, a hopeless one, had he been able to dive into futurity,-of tranquillizing the public mind. Taking advantage of the exaggerations on the subject of the offertory, for which Archdeacon Hale's Charge had been made the pretext, the Bishop addressed a circular to his clergy, in explanation of the remarks which he had addressed to them on the occasion of his late confirmations, in which he formally disclaimed the intention imputed to

SURRENDER OF EPISCOPAL AUTHORITY.

343

him in some quarters, of endeavouring to force upon them a weekly offertory. "I observed," the Bishop said, “that the question of collecting alms at the offertory, when there was no Communion, was one which I had left, and must still leave, to the discretion of the clergy; that I should indeed rejoice to see the time when the state of the Church should be such as to make a weekly offertory practicable; but that such, I found, was far from being the case at present; and that I could not venture to do more than recommend-and I only recommended—the clergy to adopt that mode of collecting when charity sermons were preached for specific objects." After some further remarks in relation to the offertory, concluding with a hope that "by proper explanation on the part of the clergy those of the laity who objected to the practice might be reconciled to it," the Bishop went on to say: "I extended the expression of that hope to some other points of ritual uniformity, which I spoke of as desiring their introduction, but as leaving the time of introducing them to your judgment; being persuaded that an agreement on the part of the clergy on these matters would remove most of the apparent difficulties." And then, again reverting to the offertory, the Bishop instanced the collection made during the preceding year,-principally by means of the offertory, -for the Colonial Bishoprics' Fund, as an encouragement to the clergy to adopt that mode of proceeding still more generally on the occasion of collections for Church purposes, and repeated the expression of his hope that the opposition to it, "upon the extent of which he confessed that he had not calculated," would be withdrawn. "At all events,” he added, in conclusion, "my recommendation of this matter, which after all is nothing more than occasionally applying to the whole congregation a form to which those who communicate submit without question or demur, ought not in fairness to be regarded as indicating a disposition to favour any peculiar

344

RITUAL ANARCHY AND STRIFE.

theological opinions, least of all those against which, I may venture to say, few persons have protested more distinctly or emphatically than myself."

Scanty and, perhaps not unintentionally, vague as was the reference made in this circular to the general question of rubrical observances, it was sufficient for the purposes of those who were resolved that the Bishop's attempt to induce ritual uniformity should be defeated. The Islington clergy lost no time in informing the laity of the parish, in reply to the memorial which had been presented to them, that "in consequence of the letter recently circulated by the Bishop among his clergy, they felt at liberty to adhere to their usual mode of conducting the services of the Church." The success of the Ecclesiastical revolt in the parish of Islington was proclaimed, trumpettongued, by the organs of the Evangelical party; the Bishop's circular was treated as a wholesale retractation of his Charge; the Record interpreted the phrase "and other points of ritual uniformity," to mean the use of the prayer for the Church Militant, and the giving out of the psalms and hymns by the minister, which, it alleged, were "the only other points adverted to" in the Bishop's addresses to his clergy. In the construction so put upon his words the Bishop had now no option but to acquiesce; nor was he long in discovering the truth of what he had, on another occasion, himself so ably urged, that concession at the expense of principle is not the way to secure peace. The rubrical strife raged more fiercely than ever in his diocese; and while his own position was not less perplexing, it was more helpless than before. As regards the recusant clergy at Islington and elsewhere, the conflict between them and the Bishop was, of course, at an end; and their congregations being for the most part like-minded with them, the peace of their parishes, too, was not disturbed. But even in their case it is open to serious doubt whether their spiritual influence upon their flocks

DIFFICULTIES OF THE CLERGY.

345

did not suffer material injury by the fact of their having called on the laity to assist them in their resistance to the law and to their Ecclesiastical superior. In other parishes, where the clergy had acted upon the Bishop's recommendations and injunctions, the case was very different. Those who had done so reluctantly, had, it is true, no difficulty in retracing their steps: but they could not do so without exposing themselves to the reproach of a vacillating policy, regulated by the regard of man rather than by principle. Many of the clergy, however, were not prepared to recede from the position which they had taken up under the advice of their Bishop. Some of them had hailed the voice of authority which pointed out to them a course of action consonant with their own views; and not a few of these, possibly, attached an undue value to the externals of religion, and were therefore unwilling to relinquish what they considered an important gain. Others, who might have been content to have gone on in their old accustomed way, had been led to take of their ordination engagements in regard to ritual observances a stricter view; and matters to which they had never perhaps given much thought, had thus become with them matters of conscience. In all these cases the difficulty was thrown back from the diocese and the Bishop upon the individual parish and its clergyman, who, if his parishioners, or any considerable number of them, were averse to the changes introduced in the performance of Divine service, was placed in a painful dilemma between the dictates of his conscience and the demands of his flock, often urged in the most irreverent and hostile spirit; with the additional aggravation of having the example of his Bishop held up to him, as an unanswerable argument against what was termed obstinate and self-willed adherence to Tractarian practices. The result of all this was great discomfort and perplexity of mind to many of the clergy; alienation, in not a few instances, between them and their parishioners;

346

HELPLESSNESS OF THE BISHOP.

and, especially where the latter were themselves divided in opinion, much bitter strife and contention, to the serious hindrance of the work of the ministry, and the grievous injury of the cause of religion.

Upon the Bishop himself these deplorable consequences of the course which, from the best of motives, he had adopted, recoiled most severely. On the part of the clergy who had become involved in rubrical disputes with their flocks, there was an uncomfortable feeling, akin to that of officers towards a general who, after leading them into a perilous position, has deserted them, and left them to extricate themselves as best they may; nor were they, at the time, and while under the influence of sore feelings, always prepared to make due allowance for the extreme difficulty of the Bishop's own position. When appealed to, as he frequently was, he found that he had no rule to guide his decision, no authority to command, no power to persuade. He felt that he had no right, if he had had the inclination, to enjoin any clergyman to infringe the prescribed order of the Church, in violation of his ordination vows; he naturally hesitated to press that course upon the clergy, even in the shape of advice; and any attempt to reason with mal-content congregations, to soften their prejudices, and to induce acquiescence on their part in the observances which the clergyman might feel in conscience bound to maintain, was sure to draw down upon him the language of violent remonstrance, and, occasionally, of coarse and vulgar invective. When it had become possible for a low practitioner in a country town distracted by rubrical strife, to intimate to the Bishop of London that he was "instructed by the churchwardens," upon whom the Bishop had "urged the duty of adopting a more respectful and conciliatory course of proceeding towards their spiritual pastor," to "give his Lordship to understand that the approbation or disapprobation of a partial and prejudiced person was to them a matter of