The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1870-11-12 00:00:00

A DISSENTING MINISTER IN A
CHURCH PULPIT.

A curious case has ocznrred in the dioct me of Ripon.
The Rev. Dr. Blackwood, vicar of Middleton Tysta,
had a visit in June last from the Rev. Dr. Steane, an
eminent Baptist miniiter, with whom he was going on
a religious deputstion to Scotland. Dr. Steane at.
tended church on the Sunday morning, as a worshipper,
and in the evening, after service. which was celebrated
by the vicar and his curate, Dr. Blackwood invited Dr.
Steane to address the congregation from the pulpit.
Hearing of this, the Bishop of Ripon wrote to Dr.
Blackwood to ask if it were true. Dr. Blackwood
replied in the affirmative, and added that he did not
think he had done wrong, the sermon not having been
delivered until after the service was finished, and there
being, so far as he could ascertain, no law to prevent
him "asking a Christian brother, when liturgical ser-
vices are concluded, to preach eound doctrine from the
pulpit." He goee on to support this position by the
following argument
:
"I know that there does exist:an obscure general impree-
lino that some law Is in force which precludes a beneficed
cleroman from inviting a Nonconformist brother to occupy
his pulpit under any cireurnatances ; but I have not been
able to learn satisfactorily the grounds forthat Impression.
•' Tee Act of Uniformity certainly did impose a penalty on
Nonconforming divines who should preach upon any day
of the week in any church, chapel. or place of worship
within the realm of England ; but the Acts of roleration
haying abolished penalties for public preaching In general,
and otherwise modified the Act of Uniformity, I cannot di.-
corer where the law Is to be found which binds the beneficed
clergyman in the manner Imagined.

" If there be such a law it would be wise to have It clearly
pointed out, for I venture to think that, under the altered
circumstances of our age, public Christian opinion already
dominoes a reasonable modid:ation of the present state of
things in this respect and that In the judgment of very
many div Inca of the Church of England such modification
wonld tend to invigorate our national Protedantiem, would
corvine° to the promotion of peace and good feeling, and
would redound to the special benefit of the Eitabhahed
Church Huh."

As to the expediency of asking Dr. ilteane to preach,
Dr. Dlsckwood says that a large portion of his cou.
gregation consists of Dissenters, who contribute freely
to parish fund. and parish work, all-wv their children
to attend the Church echoolo, and in fact, constitute a
happy family- -for "instead of being divided, as in
ROM, parishes, into homile camps, there exists perfect
harmony between us."

To thiP, rinderdate October 21, the Bishop of Ripon
replies that he has taken "the heat legal opinion' he
could obfain upon him queetione—(l) whether Dr.
Steane committed an unlawful act in preaching in a
Church pulpit; and (2) whether Dr. Blackwood is
legally responeitde for allowing an unlawful act to be
comulittxd. The opinion of conned], confirmed by the
Bishop'e own judgment, is a. follows
" The 19th section of the Act of l'udormity (IS and 14 Car.
II , cap. Iv makes it unlawfid for any person. to preach In
• church without the Hishop'a Menu, and the Elet section
imposes • penalty for so thdog.

-
Taere is no •uttiority for saying that these sections; are
repealed as you seen, to imagine by the Toleratbm Ac•e,
or otherwise Those statutes w era not Intended to alter
cm laws wid discipline of the Church, but only to relieve
Nonconformists it. atternian,e on their own worship.
Nonconformists are relieved by them from any penalties
except those to which they might be liable under the act
of Uniformity for preaching In rinlyoartilled places of
worship for Protestant Dissenters. This being so, Dr.
Steen, ornimitted an ualawf at act when he preached In
your parish church.

• As to the second I ineatloo, Are you legally responsible
for this the preaching of this sermon by Dr. do-,. to your
presence and by your rupees. Invitation, has rendered you
to the charge of betating the laws ecclesisatl,al by
.nctloning an unlawful addition to the service ordered
for evening prayer, end, further, you have broken the laws
voider attics' by disobeying the injunction of the both Canon,
IOW."

Believing that Dr. Blackwood " acted from miss',
prehension, and with no deliberate intention to break
the law," the Bishop is oontent not to proceed against
him, but simply to "admonish" him not "in future
to permit anyone to preach in your church who has not
a Bishop's license."

The correspondence is clomed by a letter from Dr.
Blackwood, in which he disputes the soundness of the
Bishop's law, affirms that any attempt to enforce the
Act of Uniformity in the manner indicated "would be
ite impotent as impolitic," and claime,in him own favour,
the "notorious fact that in many chnrchee and cathe.
drab, addressee from the pulpit, and musical perform.
acmes, do frequently occur, the liturgical services
having hist been concluded." Still, as he doee not
wish to give the Bishop "any avoidable trouble," and
as the matter "concern, rather privilege than con-
science," Dr. Blackwood says he shall 'respectfully
obey the Bishop's admonition," unless, on • "more
thorough investigation of the whole question," it
should appear desirable "to have the law fairly tested
and satisfactorily settled." And here the matter
stands. The question might easily be brought to an
isms (remarks the Pall Mall (Tazettc) by allowing a
Mormonite to preach polygamy at Si. Paul's, and then
awaiting the result.