The Liverpool Standard, and General Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1854-07-25 00:00:00

call the attent

public to

above important

-arday evening, on returning with my school chil-
dren from Chest= - treat provided for

tire, after enjoying

un by our committee, we were stopped in Dale-street,
1 the school banners taken down by order of Mr. In-

;or Qui

luiry, whether the banners were

illegal, he replied, he believed not, but that the magis-
trates had given orders to have all such processions put
down. There remained, of course, no other alternative
but to obey. I felt bound, as a clergyman of a Church
which teaches the duty of loyalty and obedience to the
e Queen, to set an example of submission even to what I

conceived to beat;

authority

annous exercise

of lawfully constituted

I have nothing to complain of on the part of the police.
The inspector performed his unpleasant duty with as much
courtesy as was possible. He was simply carrying out the

orders of his sup,

rs. But I beg to protest most
emphatically against what I maintain to be a gross inter-
ference with public liberty—an encroachment on the
rights and privileges of British freemen.
I know something of the mind of the working-classes
in this town. I have, Sir, as you are aware, some eleven
hundred working-men in the body of my church, and I
believe they are a fair sample of many thousands besides,
and I venture to say, in their name, that such an exercise
lem hold the

the powers t 1

s not calculated to
great respect, or in

magist
to "
Why shot

cannot

said that they are party ban

neither orange nor green ; they contain nothing save
representations of St. John's Church and Schools, together
with the Holy Bible. Truly, matters have come to a
mournful condition, when the exhibition of such banners,
displaying one of the National Churches, and the blessed
Volume of R 7

-,evelation, whereon the National religion is
based, is considered an offence in the eyes of English

magistrates.

But it will be said that it matters not what the nature
of the banner may be, all such should be put down as
tending to provoke a breach of the peace. Whom do they
provoke ? Protestants ? No. Irish Romanist*? Yes.
Then let the magistrates adopt all necessary precautions
to prevent a breach of the peace on the part of Romanists;
and should such occur, let the law be fairly executed upon
all such disturbers of the peace. Why should the unrea-
sonable bigotry of Romanists be made the measure of
"" ? I r by

hbert.., save no hesitation in professing- my
conviction that this order of the magistrates is in plain
violation of the spirit of the British Constitution. I
admit that the law authorizes the magistrates to prevent
anything which is calculated to provoke a breach of the
peace by giving needless offence; but here a caution must
be observed, and a distinction made between him who
gives and him who unreasonably takes offence.
There is scarcely a thing that one can say or do which
may not give offence to some weak-minded persons—from
a tradesman's bill puffing off some rival establishment, to
a controversial tract, or sermon, designed to expose error.
All these offend the opposite parties. Should they there-
fore be suppressed ? Certainly not. The question is not
whether this or that will offend any one, but is it calcu-
lated to give reasonable offence ?—is it of such a nature
that a reasonable man might be offended at it ? If not,
however unpleasant it may be to the prejudices or blind
bigotry of some, we should not be restricted in our liberty
of speech or action. I call attention to this point. I con-
tend that it is a most dangerous principle to admit into
the executive, and one which must, if carried out, even-
tuate in the subversion of civil and religious liberty ; that
whatever gives offence to another must be suppressed by
the magistrates ; for, according to this maxim, our pla-
cards announcing controversial lectures, our Protestant
publications, our Protestant meetings, must all be sup-
pressed—yea, the very existence of Protestant places of
of worship would be inconsistent with• this principle, for
we know they give offence to Romanists ; so much so, that
at Rome, where they have all the power in their own
hands, Englishmen are compelled to worship their God
in a hay-loft outside the gate of the eternal city. In this
respect, Rome Pagan was more tolerant than Rome
Papal ; for the former allowed " Paul to dwell two whole
years in his own hired house, preaching the kingdom of
God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord
Jesus Christ with all confidence, no man. forbidding him."
Acts xxviii. 31.

Perhaps some will say that all parties should be treated
alike, and that, therefore, processions of all sorts should
be put down. Now, I for one, have always questioned the
expediency or propriety of what are called party pro-
cessions, but still I hold the principle here enunciated
utterly false and untenable. All parties should not be
treated alike. " Woe unto them that call good evil and
evil good." Truth and falsehood should not be treated
alike—truth and loyalty should be treated as such, and
falsehood and treason should be treated as such.
The fact is, Rome is endeavouring to overthrow our
Constitution by raising the cry of liberality, impartiality,
and equality. "Treat all parties alike," is her motto for
the present, well knowing that this is a preliminary, as it
is also a direct step, to the establishment of error. In the
British Constitution truth was made originally ascendant;
but as Rome's design is ultimately to. re-establish Popery, if
possible, she is persuading our unsuspecting rulers to treat
all parties alike—to put all religions on the same footing.
We would do well to remember that, when this is accom-
plished, the ascendancy of error is not far distant.

- It is then an error in policy, as it is a sin against
Heaven, to treat all parties in the same manner without
regard to their moral qualifications or political principles.
I would earnestly call, therefore, upon the Protestants of
Liverpool, as they value their civil and religious liberties,
to awake before it be too late, or they will find themselves,
ere long, deprived of those liberties which have been
handed down to them by their martyred forefathers. It'
may be thought that the taking down of a school banner
is but a trifling matter—and so it is in itself—but,
under the present circumstances, it involves important
principles, principles with which the stability of our
Protestant kingdom is indissolubly bound up; and I
solemnly but respectfully warn the magistrates, that if,
from motives of peace, they exercise their official authority
to restrict the liberty of the subject in things lawful,
and merely gratify the tyranny of an intolerant mob, there
will rest on them the fearful responsibility of those serious
consequences which may one day proceed from an indig-
nant people when oppressed beyond the limits of endurance.
It is the province of the magistrates not only to
" execute justice," but also to " maintain truth."—l am,
Sir, yours very faithfully. W. F. TAYLOR.
St. John's Church, Liverpool, 20th July, 1854.

WEEKLY COMMUNION, &c

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD

SlR,—May I request you of your kindness to insert the
following as a rider and corollary to my former letter ?
A " Churchman of Liverpool" asserted that " Church
authority, as well as scriptural, for weekly Communion
could not be produced ;" to support which he drew out a

few isolated rubrics, one of which was garbled, and the
remainder misinterpreted. Since then, however, by seve-
ral writers, those rubrics have been naturally connected,
and compared with, and made to explain each other ; and
yet this gentleman, with a boldness peculiarly his own,
asserts that the "Rubrics which he formerly quoted have
been altogether unnoticed" by his adversaries of the pen.
Mix a little obstinate prejudice on any subject in the
nature of one who may be in all other matters sharpwitted
enough, and you will find his understanding as impervious
to the conclusions of reasoning from the opposite party,
as the feathers of a goose are to water ; arguments he will
not see, and like that perverse animal who was once
" convinced against his will," he likewise will be " of the
same opinion still."
In the first place, then, I would remind the " Church-
man" that he has jumbled together two laws of the
Church which are altogether distinct, and so has drawn
from them a non sequitur conclusion. There is one law
for the officiating priest and members of collegiate chapels
and cathedrals, all of whom are in holy orders; and there
is another law for the curate of a parish, and for the lay
members of his congregation.

With regard to the -former,—it is supposed that daily
Communion would be the practice amongst such as are
especially set apart for, and whose sole business consists
in the ministering of holy things ; and that " the Collect,
Epistle, and Gospel shall serve all the week after ;" and it
commands, therefore, that " in collegiate and cathedral
churches, where there are many priests and deacons, they
shall all receive the Communion every Sunday AT THE
LEAST." (Why did "The Churchman" omit the words at
the least ?) But with regard to the latter, it proceeds
upon the clear supposition that the opportunity for
receiving the Communion should be offered by the curate
every Sunday or Holy-day, but should only be actually
celebrated when four, or three at the least, shall have pre-
viously signified their intention to receive with him. And
lest too frequent an omission of the post-Communion
should occur, especially in small parishes, it orders that
"every parishioner shall communicate at the least three
times in the year."
One, therefore, of these cases is not an "exception" and
the other the "rule," but they are both rules, and both
provide what shall be in either case the minimum amount
of exceptions.
Secondly, I assert that any person, impartially examin-
ing the rubrics of the Communion Service from the first
one which orders that " The table at the Communion-
time (i.e., before the Commandments, &c.), having a fair
white linen cloth upon it, shall stand," B(c., down to the
last which debars "the celebration of the Lord's
Supper except there be a convenient number to commu-
nicate with the priest ;"—any one, I say, so doing cannot
well fail to see that the whole Communion Service is the
rule, and the omission of the post-Communion the excep-
tion, which our Prayer-Book contemplates and authorises.
No clergyman obeying the rubrics is authorised to begin
that Communion Service without at least having the cloth
laid, so as to signify that he himself is ready, and that the
exceptional alternative of a half-service is altogether
owing to the hardness of his parishioners' hearts, which
at " the beginning was not so ;" whereas that clergyman
and that congregation are carrying out the wishes of the
Church, and the practice clearly laid down in Holy Scrip-
ture (Acts xx. 7), who habitually celebrate it together on
the "first day of the week."
Thirdly, " The Churchman" has founded an argument
on the text "breaking of bread from house to house,"
which I think he must be aware is false in doctrine, as
well as diametrically opposed in practice to the 71st
canon, which he so obligingly asks Mr. Wray if he is
willing to violate. The text literally is, " They continued
daily with one accord in the temple, and in breaking of
bread at home." It is so translated in the marginal
references of our Bible, and these were added at its last
revision to correct the mis-translations of " The Bishops'
Bible" in such places as were either of doubtful meaning,
or not of sufficient importance to render in words totally
different from those in the received and familiar text. By
this, then,
we see, as in so many other passages, that the
first disciples at Jerusalem, so long as their unbelieving
brethren would permit them, always offered God prayer
and praise according to the temple service of the first
covenant, and then returned to " THE upper chamber" for
the Lord's Supper, the "peculiar ceremony of Chris-
lianity."—l am, Mr. Editor, truly yours, C. E, S, IV.
The Willows, July 17,1864