New-York tribune., 1899-02-13
THE ANGLICAN CHURCH CONTROVERSY

THE ANGLICAN tHthtH tON b"'''
II is an interesting circumstance that with the
rcopening Of Parliament the chief issue before
the British Government is one not OF hnanc'
nor of diplomacy nor OF war. but OF religion, or
rather OF ccclesiastlcism. The legality of GER
lain rituasic practices in the Established
Church is at the fore. above all else. That may
uot argue its intrinsic importance. but merely
the comparative insignilicancc of other matters
With thc rcconUIIcSt of the SOudan effected, the
departure of the French from the Nile the sub
sidencc Of plague and famine in India the qu-
cscence OF affairs in China the settlement OF the
Crrtan business the establishment Of cordial re
latious with the United States and the mainten-
ancc and augmentation of domestic prosperity
the British skies are bright enough 10 cheer the
cloOniest pcsSimiSt. AT such Il time attention
may well be given 10 some detail Of ccclcNiasi-
cal practice In the silly season" big goose
berry is 4 godScnd 10 the sensation seeking
press.
Now. this is the state Of the case: Some
priests Of the Established Church are ndulging
in practices which other priests and many lay
men consider 10 be cOn,rary 10 the law ana
spirit of the Church. Such practices are the
reservation Of the Eucharist the teaching of The
Real Presence the use Of incense the wearing
of certain vestmentS and more or less obligatory
confession. Those who do these things do 50 on
the strength of the Ornaments Rubrc. which
they declare they have a right 10 interpret for
themselves. regardless of the Interpretation
made by the bishops Sir William llarcourt de
clares that claim to be sheer downright. inso-
lent folly" while the Archbishop of Canterbury.
while saying il is for the bishops 10 interpret
the Rubrics and for the clergy to accept their
tI.., ,.vf..- gfLs4g
upon his own Interpretation instead it is not in
the power of the Bishop 10 use cOmpuSion upon
him. II may also he recalled that DR. PuScy.
whose word should have weight with the ritual
isis. expressly denied the right of individual in
tcrprctation 10y the clergy.
The simplest way of stopping these practices.
if they he indeed illegal. would bc for any ag-
greved member of ;he Communion 10 bring suit
against the offending priest in The ecclesiastical
conrts. and if successful. have the priest inhib-
tied and imprisoned That can be- done how
ever. only with the consent Of the Bishop of the
diocese and that the bishops now decline To
give. on the ground that If they did there would
bc an epidemic of prosecutions on all manner Of
prctcxts which would cause vast scafda to the
Church. The alternative would be for the biSh-
ops themselves to take action in their own dis
mate it seems certain that they might do 50.
But they do not. partly because it would entail
heavy expenses upon them and parly because
they think it would not be for the good of The
Church For. they say. il would make them ap-
pear 10 b" leaders of faction instead Of over
sccrS of the whole Church. and il would do that
for the sake of an uncertainty. since il j. eN-
ceedlncly doubtful whether the prosecutions
would b" successful.
The bishops. moreover. appear 10 regard the
matter aS TOO small 10 be worthy Of action The
Bishop Of Norwich says that in his docc,, only
e-half Of per cent of the clergy transgrcss
his Interpretation of the l;ubrr. and half of
those do 80 in Low Church direction Then
there are only five offending rituall,rs in two
thousand Of the clergy. The proportion must
be larger in other dioccsps Certainly il is i'm
London. for no less than two hundred and
twenty priests In that diocese signed the recent
address 10 the Bishop dcfyng his authority in
the matter Of ritual. In the who'll. kingdom
there are about twenty three thousand clergy
men of whom fourteen thousand are brnefced
II t. probably fair 10 reckon that less than one
thousand. or. say, per cent of The whole are
acting contrary 10 The will Ui the bishops and
are reverting 10 medieval practices which were
abolished at the Reformation. The question j.
whether these few are To he dealt with by legal
, compulsOn or 10y moral suaSion or are to hr left
alone to break the law with impunity. IT the
first course b" pursued they will doubtless raise
the cry Of "pcr>ecutiOn for conscience sake"
and will pose as martyrs 10 their faith as in
deed some of them seem anxious 10 do If the
second bc tried il will probably fail for ,ncrc il
no one less amenabr 10 moral or intellectual
persuasion than zealoi. The third course
seems Objectionable for the law should he on
forced whether it be broken by few or by
many and neglect to enforce it brings II into
contempt Still. il is conceivable that in some
cases II is better to let fire burn itself out than
10 fan It's lames or TO scatter its brands. And