The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1875-10-16 00:00:00

THE PUBLIC MEETING.

A public meeting was held at the Union Hall in
the evening, which, in the unavoidable absence
of Lieutenant-Colonel Bag,nall (President of the
Union) was presided over by Major Drake, of the
Royal Engineers. There were also present :—The
Revs. C. Lowder (St. Peter's London Docks, Lon-
don), C. M. Pixell, P. Potter, G. Vaux, C. Boclding-
ton, and Messrs. G. J. Rowland and F. W. Smythe
(all of Wolverhampton), the Revs. J. Hipwell
(Lewisham), H. S.lSimmonds (Willenhall), F. Wil-
lett (West Bromwich), Ridesdale (Sedgley), J.
De Renzi (Reddall Hill), H. Gardiner (Smethwick),
J. Wylde (West Bromwich), R. W. Enraght (Bir-
mingham), J. S. Boldero (Amblecote); and Mr. S.
Howell (Birmingham).
The proceedings were opened by the Rev. J. S.
Boldero offering up prayer.
The Chairman said this was, as they were aware,
the annual meeting of the Midland District of the
English Church Union. The meeting, he should
tell them before they went any further, was not a
publie meeting, but was an open meeting to be
ruled by the Chairman. If anyone wished io ask
questions they were requested to put them to him
(Major Drake) after the last speaker had finished
his address, and in each case answers would, no
doubt be forthcoming. This was a time in which
Church matters were assuming more importance
in public mind than they had some years ago.
The English people always claimed the character
of being fond of fair play. They (the high church-
men) claimed the same fair play which an English-
man was proud of extending to all men and all
claims, and all they asked was that the doctrines
and actions of high churchmen should be judged
fairly and openly according to the English spirit of
fair play. He could not say that that spirit had
been openly shown during the last eight months.
It was the old motto "Give a dog a bad name and
hang him." Some time ago to call a man a ritu-
alist was to call him an individual for which there
could be no hope. He was condemned without the
benefit of clergy, in the same way that a dog was
condemned if seen running about with his tongue
hanging out of his mouth. They asked the Eng-
lish people what they had done that they should
be persecuted, and what had they done that they
should have those unpleasant phrases applied to
them. Let them call to mind what they knew of
ritualists of their own personal knowledge and
answer whether they were fewer services in those
churches than there were in others, or were they
worse conducted or less reverence shown. Were
the parsons pluralists, having four or five parishes
which they don't attend to? Indeed they were
not, as they found one parish afforded ample em-
ployment for each of them, worked as they worked
them. Well, he did not think if they searched
England over that the answer could be anything
but favourable to those much-abused people the
ritualists in that respect. What then had they
done? There was the stock answer to this, "It is
their ritualism we don't like." The clergymen
were however bound to obey one law, and that law
was the one to be found in the prayer book. Was
it lawful to hunt a man out of his parish simply
because when he opened his prayer book he found
certain laws which he was bound to obey, and did
not say, 'I will not obey fanciful laws which I
know nothing about." It has often been said, and
he (the speaker) had seen it several timesin news-
papers, "What would be said of soldiers if they
disobeyed the laws in the way these parsons did r
He could tell them he was a soldier himself, and
therefore could speak with authority on this sub-
ject. Supposing an order were to come out to-
morrow stating that on certain occasions, such as
royal reviews, officers were to wear the full dress
uniform which was worn in the time of George the
First, the army would have to put on that uniform,
and it would not do for colonels to say they did not
like it. It would not do for anyone to say that the
army did not wear that in the time of George the
Second. There was another aspect of the ques-
tion. He would ask the people who cried out
most loudly did they even obey the whole law
themselves. Even what was generally known as
law he did not believe there was one man who
obeyed it literally and thoroughly. Certainly not
the men who were calling out against 'the High
Churchmen so loudly. How many clergymen were
there who did not wear surplices of some kind.
Yet that it was wrong to do so, was as distinctly
laid down in the Purchas case as anything else.
That was among the things Mr. Purchas was con-
demned for doing. It was quite as illegal for a
clergyman to wear a stole in any part of the ser-
vice its to wear a chasuble. There v. as not one of
those clergy who was not doing something illegal.
The good old Bishop of Exeter was once speaking
to a clergyman who was not carrying out the
rubrics of the church. The clergyman excused
himself by saying he did not like to do things
which were not in accordance with the present
mode of worship. The Bishop looked sternly at
him, and said 'Don't talk to me about what you
don't like. If you don't like it get the book
altered. Until then do as the rubric says." He
did not think the clergymen belonging to the
church union had any desire to proceed further in
ritual than their congregations wished. He could
name clergyman after clergyman who had had the
vestments presented to them for some years before
they used them. It was the laity who wished for
those things. It was only p, few years ago that a
clergyman was presented with a set of vestments
by some colliers who formed. the greater part of
his congregation, and who said to him, We wish
you, sir, to wear these vestments, as we think you
ought to have something different from your every
day dress, when administering the Holy Commu-
nion." They had subscribed for them, and they
had learnt that it was laid down in the prayer
book, and they thought it wrong for a clergyman
to wear the same clothes when he was giving Holy
Communion as when he was offering up morning
prayer—(A Voice: "Nonsense ''). Another thing
that had caused a great outcry was confession,
simply because it had not been understood. He
(the speaker; was once sitting next a man who was
declaiming against icon fession. He said to him
"Can you tell me anything about confession ?" He
could not, and it turned out that he was talking of
what he knew nothing at all about. He thought
if they were to give up talking about what they
did not understand there would be a great deal
more christianity and brotherly love in England
than there was. He then called upon the Rev. C.
H. Pixell, Secretary of. the English Church Union,
to explain what its objects were.
The Rev. C. H. Pixel, of Christ Church, Wol-
verhampton, stated that the English Church Union
consisted of persons 'who must be communicants
of the church, and directly they ceased to be com-
municants they ceased to be members of the
Church Union. They did not want numbers. The
fight they were fighting was the fight of truth,
and they only wanted the good on their side. All
their members, therefore, were and must be com-
municants of the English Church. Their society
was a defensive society. They did not go mud-
dling' and interfering with other people. They did
not agree with many people, but still at the same
time they "Live and let live." They preferred
to leave those things in God's hands. All they
had to do was to preach the truth themselves.
He supposed the only thing that would represent
a defensive society would be a regiment drawn up
in a square. That was a most perfect specimen of
a defensive society, as it was not meant for attack,
but those who hurled themselves against them
were likely to experience some rough handling.
In like manner they simply acted on the defensive,
but teose who attacked them would find they were
able to take care of themselves—(A voice: "How

It.

about the Clifton and the Voysey cases ?" The
Chairman told him that if he would wait till the
close of the meeting his questions would be an-
swered). The speaker resumed. The next point
he would have them to think about was this. They
had no party politics at all. They thought a man
might be a good man whether he was a Radical,
a Liberal, or a Tory. But ot all orders of people.
there was no confidence to be put in Princes with
reference to God's Church. There would always
be troubles with the world and the church. They
(the Church Union) had often been accused of
being a Tory society; but from what he had heard
in this town it was call( d a Radical society. But
such was not the case; as a body they did not re-
cognise any political party. If the Liberals did
good for the Church they supported the Liberals;
or if the Tories did good for the Church they sup-
ported the Tories. They looked at the measures
themselves, not at the parties that passed them.
It was also said that it was nothing but a Ritual-
istic society. He (the speaker) belonged to many
Ritualistic societies; but the Church 'Union was
not a Ritualistic society, although there was a
great deal of Ritualism in the Church Union.
They took the Prayer Book as it was, and defended
the whole of it in its fullness. Whether it was
against doctrine or union those matters would be
found in the range of the Church. There were
many excellent societies for the promotion of
Ritualism, but the Church Union did not even in-
sist on its members preaching in their surplices.
He knew a member who preached in his black
gown. He said he preferred to do so, and they
were not the people to deprive him of his liberty.
They did not care what he wore, and told him he
must settle those matters with his congregation.
He was often asked, "What had the Church Union
ever done ?" They could say they had prevented
the mutilation of one of the creeds of the
Church. It had not appeared as prominent as it
might have done, because they wished every per-
son who felt an interest in the matter could act
indep-ndently. As the affair progressed they dis-
appeared from the front of the fight, hut it was
their organisation which kept the Athanasian
Creed in the Church; and if the Creed had gone
the Thirty-nine Articles would have gone too.
Then there was the question of marriage with a
deceased's wife's sister, which it had aided in re-
jecting-, and it had also assisted in other matters.
There were 12,000 members in the Union—not a
llrge number—hut they were stanch Church peo-
ple, and that number was not to be trifled with.
Their people were earnest, and they were deter-
mined by the grace of God to do whatever good they
could. He then invited those present to join
the Union. The associated members subscribed
2s Gd a year. They:co old not vote with the branch
but they could get up lectures and do a great deal
towards furthering the interests of the church.
And then there were the women societies, and
they were of the most valuable help to the work
of the society.
The Rev. C. F. Lowder (Loudon Docks) spoke
upon the general principles upon which they should
seek to be bound together in the English Church
Union. The defence of the Catholic faith was the
principal object of the Union, and in becoming
members of that Union it gave them an interest
and sympathy with the whole Catholic Church
throughout the world. He then spoke of the
change which had taken place in the English
Church of late years, and argued that the party to
which he belonged had only gone on logically step
by step in what they had done.
Mr. S. Howell (Birmingham), the Rev. R. W.
Enraght (Birmingham), and the Rev. C. Bodding-
ton (Wolverhamton) also addressed the meeting.
Mr. Enraght replied to sodle of the allegations
against the Ritulistic party contained in a paper
which he said had beenwidely distributed in the
neighbourhood, on the subject of auricular confes-
sion prayers for the dead, &c. With regard to the
secessions to Rome, he deplored them from the
bottom of his heart, but he did not wonder at
them. He only wondered that, after going through
what he had gone through 'from his family and
friends and fellow Churchmen, He only wondered
he stood there as a member of the Church of Eng-
land; he wondered he had not been driven out.
He saw he was regarded as a traitor by aßirming-
ham paper published that evening.
Some questions were asked by a young man at
the close of the meeting, to which Mr. Lowder
replied.