The Sun.
London, England, 1845-02-28 00:00:00

TILE RUBRIC.

Earl FORTESCUE said that the petition of which
he had given notice from Exeter and Southmolton,
and from the Reverend William Carwithen, D.D.,
for a revision of the law attached to the
observance of the rubric in the service of the Church,
would oblige him to state the facts of the proceedings
that have resulted from the agitation of that question;
because, although the circumstances themselves were of a
to al nature, they were to be taken in connexion with
the opinions which were expressed on the subject in the
other districts. On the 19th of last November the
Right Rev. Prelate who presided over the diocese, ad-
dressed a pastoral letter to his clergy, in which he com-
manded a greater uniformity to the directions of the
rubric. Whether the Right Rev. Prelate were correct or
not in his construction of the law of the Church, he
seemed to be prepared for considerable opposition to his
orders, but he (Lord Fortescue) believed that he was quite
unprepared for the amount of opposition that was offered.
This excitement was occasioned without the slightest
efforts of any political party, for in most cases the
question was taken up by the religious portion of the
community. Indeed, he believed it was confined almost
entirely to the members of the Established Church.
Various meetings were held on the subject
and requisitions were forwarded to nearly every church-
warden, requesting them to confer with their congrega-
tions on the subject. At these meetings resolutions,
strongly framed, and against the conduct of the Right
Reverend Prelate, were unanimously agreed to. But
even where these meetings were not held, still
a feeling of great excitement prevailed amongst the
congregations, and the letter of the Right Rev. Prelate
was spoken of in terms of a deprecatorycharacter. They
declared that the Right Reverend Prelate was inciting
theta to depart from the established maxi-ns of the
Protestant Church, and numerous protests were entered
against the recommended course. After this fer-
ment and excitement had prevailed for three or four
weeks, more or less, the Right Rev. Prelate issued a
second communication, quashing the directions con-
tained in his former letter. But still this had not the
desired effect, for the Right Reverend Prelate found
it a matter of some difficulty to restore the former
peaceful state of his diocese. Notwithstanding the can-
celling of the first letter, the unpopular practices still
prevailed in one of the parishes in the city of Exeter.
In this state things continued, until the petitioners
thought they had no other mode of proceeding than to
present an appeal to this House. The first petition
which he had to present was from the city of Exeter.
This petition was agreed upon at a meeting convened by
the mayor of that city, and was signed by upwards
of 3,200 members of the Church of England. The
petition was, he believed, signed unanimously ; and
that circumstance, in his opinion, gave it the
greater weight. The petitioners complained that their
feelings had been outraged by the violations of the
privileges which they had hitherto enjoyed ; that these
proceedings tended to impose laws inconsistent with the
feelings of the people ; that the attempt to revive usages
now obsolete were rapidly destroying the uniformity of
one diocese and another; and that this led to circumstances
which deeply violated their sense of the necessity
of peace and good feeling in the Established Church.
The petitioners said that the effect of these proceedings
had been greatly to disturb the quietude of the
Established Church. They asserted that the Book
of Common Prayer contained directions for alter-
ing the usages of the Church whenever the events
of the times should render it necessary. The
petition concluded by praying for an alteration in
the rubric, so as to establish uniformity in the Church.
He was persuaded that the feelings which were expressed
in the petition were entertained by a very large portion
both of the clergy and laity in the county with which
he was connected.—(Hear.) It was impossible
that the whole of the rubric could be fulfilled, and yet a
clergyman, omitting to conform to it in any par-
ticular, was liable, for the first omission, to twevle
months' imprisonment ; for the second, a longer
period ; and for the third, imprisonment for life.
He had, both in public and private, uniformly depre-
cated the expression of angry feeling or the use of vitu--
perative language. At the only meeting he attended the
petition he had now presented was substituted for a resolu-
tion that was proposed. He thought the Legislature ought
to interpose for the purpose of regulating the for-
mulm of the Church in all parts of the country. (The
Noble Lord then read extracts from a pamphlet,
written by Mr. Benson, the Master of the Temple,
in which that Rev. Divine recommended some alterations
in the rubric of the Church.) He cordially supported the
prayer of the petition. He had another petition to pre
sent to their Lordships, and although it was differently
worded, it was to the same effect. It was numerously
signed by, members of the Church of England residing
in the parish of Uppingham. The last petition he had
to present was from the Rev. William Carwithen, D.D.,
The Rev. Gentleman complained that the rubric of the
Established Church had been altered, and prayed their
Lordships to take the matter into their serious considera-
tion. The Reverend Gentleman had been long attached
to the Protestant Church, and no man performed the
functions of a clergyman more conscientiously, or with
more benefit to his flock, than the Rev. Gentleman whose
petition he had then the pleasure of laying before ther
Lordships. Thanking their Lordships for the attention
with which they had listened to him, he begged to move
that the petition he had just mentioned be immediately
taken into consideration, and afterwards printed.
The Bishop of EXETER asked permission to
occupy their Lordships' attention for a short time,
while he answered the speech of the Noble Lord.
He did not expect that the House would wish him to
enter upon his defence. Had he to make that defence,
certainly there was no place he would choose for it so
readily as the House of Lords. He felt it a great honour
and a great privilege to make his defence before that
House. That House was the very sanctuary of honour
and of privilege. But he did not ask their Lord-
ships to hear his defence, for he had no defence to
make. He was charged with the spiritual care of a
diocese. He was an officer of the Church of Christ, and
for his conduct responsible to no other tribunal, but only
to the Church. He should, therefore, at once refuse to
enter into any defence, but he did not refuse to enter
into a statement of what had led to his conduct in the
matters referred to, and of what his conduct had been.
He should state, then, that he had not voluntarily
taken up this line of conduct. It had been
forced upon him by circumstances. This was
one of the effects of the attention to ecclesiastical
subjects in England. When a gentleman took upon
himself the care of souls, he took upon himself,, in the
most solemn manner, by his ordination vow, to observe
the usages of the Church. Several gentlemen who
felt their consciences thus bonud had applied to him
for permission to follow out the usages which the
rubric prescribed. He felt bound to grant that
permission ; but matters had not stood there. Com-
plaints had been made, and differences had occurred.
As the ecclesiastical prop of the diocese, he felt it to be
his duty to settle this dispute, and in attempting to obviate
the objections from Taunton, and other places, had
arisen the circumstances which prompted the complaints
contained in the petition pr,sented by the Noble Lord.
Under these circumstances he called a canonical council
to assist him with their advice. There were nineteen.
members of that council, two thirds of whom advised
him to take the steps which he subsequently took,
and every one of those had the charge and care of,
a pariah. Under these circumstances he put forth
that letter of which the Noble Lord had spoken.
There were parties in the country who wanted to make
most important changes in society, and they were not
merely confined to laymen or to churchmen; they were
a considerable body of men objecting to the Liturgy, be-
cause it opposed the doctrines which they themselves
advocated. It had happened to him (the Bishop
of Exeter) to be obliged to proceed against
one or two persons for setting at nought the
injunctions of the Liturgy, and (he believed the
thing was common) this had happened in one or
two instances in the parishes of bis own diocese,
that portions of the Prayer Book were tampered with
or set at nought. He had heard it said—" How is it
possible for the Bishop to proceed against clergymen for
1 'awing out portions of the baptismal service, when,
every time he goes to church, he must have portions
of the rubric set at nought. That was one reason he
could assure their Lordships for his seeking to introduce
those changes. The Noble Lord said that he (the
Bishop of Exeter) was attempting to revive ancient
usages which had long fallen into disuse.—(Hear, hear.)
There was a meeting called in his diocese of individuals
described in the circulars as worshippers of the Church
of England in town of Sonthmolton, he believed, and
at that meeting certain resolutions were passed in ac-
cordance with the wishes of the Noble Earl, who
be it remembered was Lord-Lieutenant and Custos
Rotulorum of the county. The meeting was only too
happy to adopt the resolutions of the Noble Earl.
It was not to be supp )sed that the petition, although
it expressed the opinion of the Noble Earl and those
with whom h was associated, represented the opinions of
all the people of Southmolton. Ho felt thegreat advantage
of standing face to face with the Noble Earl.—(Elear,
hear.) Ho was glad to be opposed to a generous oppo-
nent like the Noble Earl, and he trusted that he would
tell him what they were all about, as he must
confess he did rot know.—( A laugh.) He was
nit aware what ceremonies had fallen into disuse in the
Church. The meeting at which the petition was got up
that had been presented by the Noble Earl, was presided
over by the Mayor of Exeter, a most worthy individual.
He (the Bishop of Exeter) had not lately read the
newspapers much, but he understood that the speeches
that had been delivered were singular for the ignorance
they displayed. There was one speech, however, he had
read, and only one, Mr. Bere's, a barrister of five
years' standing, • that did not take the same line
as the Noble Earl. He proposed petitioning
the Queen, and not coming to that House.
afterwards thepThe example was set by the Noble Lord opposite, and
etiMtioanyeodr otfheExQenteQer'n , and
but other
now
perens.
At fisfirst
followed
they were petitioning their Lordships. But h e must
say he thought their determination not to to