New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1868-07-14

in the manner indicated in the report. A
fourth paper, signed by single name, objects
to the machinery proposed as means to give
effect TO the "grief of parishioners' as calcu-
lated to promote disturbance rather than peace.
and favOrs a large liberty in the use of anv
ceremonial that may help to put life and
heartiness into the services of public worship.
These papers argue chiefly against the articles
in the report which advise legislative or re-
pressve measures to preserve the prescribed
usage of the Church. Thomas Walter Perry
presents a fifth document, in which he urges
objections against the articles that state what
that prescribed usage has been in remote times.
NOn-usage he says, has not been proved in the
case of candles and incense; nor can antiquity
of usage be proved in respect to other Orna-
ments and practices which had been decided
to be lawful The Arches Court had declared
unlawful the use of incense, but had allowed
the use of lighted candles. The same rules Of
restraint could not fairly be applied to the
three classes of Ornaments-yestments, candles,
and incense-because, beside being unequally
justified by authority, they are unequally COM
planned of.
The impression made on the mind by all this
confusion of statement and argument Is not
very distinct but it is fair to infer that IN the
Judgment of these gentlemen, Rituaiism If it
be a mischief at all, is q mischief of doubtful
dimensions, and mpalpable substance, Vexa-
tious here and there in parishes, but harmless
as a disturbing element in the establishment.
They cOncede to it no gnifcance-ecclesiasti-
cal, doctrinal, or religious. They do not re-
gard it as originating in papistical tendencies,
or as Indicating a disposition to return to the
Church of Rome. Only one of these five mani
festoes makes mention of it in connection with
un- English modes of thought, and this one treats
quite contemptuousy the suggestion that ritu-
alism is a Renaissance of Rome, and pro-
nounces wholly grOundless the fear that it may
encourage superstition. 1t is noyelty-that IL
all-that has caught the fancy OF class OF SEN
timental people who want more color In ther
worship. High churchmen and loy churchmen
alike approve and disapprove of it, alike favor
and resent it both on the same grounds-that
it distracts feeling weakeDs sentiment, and calls
attention away from the doctrines and the OBJ
seryances which are essential to the vital In
huence of religion. Were ritualsm an evil,
menacing the unity of the English Church.
or threatening TO corrupt its sacrament
tai theory, the men who signed, as
well as the men who refused to sign the Re-
port of the Royal Commissioners, would
have treated it more seriously. They would
have pointed out the malign character OF its
influence. They would have traced it to its
origin They would have recommended watch
funess against it. They would not have adj
vised waiting for q few Disconnected parishion-
ers to complain Of it as a nuisance, but would
have charged the authorities to have an eye
on it, And instead of recommending restraint
would have urged prohibition. If this is the
result of their long and close investigation OF
the subject, we may be certain that the move
ment, however vehement and brilliant, has no
force as a revolution or reformation in the
English Church, and will pass away quietly
if its Importance be not unduly exaggerated.
The Royal Commission have even yet per-
formed but a portion of their comprehensive
task If their third Report is as sensible as the
first two, they win do much to alay the fears
of some timd souls, and abate the hopes OF
some ferVent ones.