Virginia gazette. [volume] (Williamsburg, Va.) 1893-192?, 1904-09-10
The Chancel.
Its Status.

Stu at1a 1ou say mat to< Df1t0H
Episcopal Church viii be restored along
the lines suggested in the GAZETTE By
myself. With my cordial consent you
arc at liberty to TO take that back. 1
would say bo ssver. IL Is Too patent to
every reAectiug.ehurchman TO suppose a
different course would be pursued than
that suggested. But the initial start
ing point contemplated that "a differ
emit course would DC adopted" hence my
conservative opposition. and l am glad
somebody's understanding has been
aroused TO the truth. Some men make
more haste than speed" because they
don't think. and not because they mean
to be ugly or contrary.
But you. Mr.. Editor. very mildly say,
"our correspondent (mesning myself
has evidently been nisled into. the belize
that the plan is 70 repeat an old mis-
take" My dear sir, you are 10 error as
to this. 1 made no mistake. Had a
not been tor my timely action Ia the
matter, the old mistake" very likely
would haye been repeated" and sadly
So nArAOANs NAeAOAA 114 AAaAlAAOus
would have been swept aside, regardless
VI the needed $ Nv, anI tue enquir-
ing sophisticated churchman wOu!u
have been ingeniOusly handicapped. Ii
was "misled, form what source does
the unerring hight eminat>.
About the time the restoration Of the
old-time church was much talked OF, the
subject ablaze, and the IRE upon the lips
of the people, the NestrY OF the Church
held a meeting on Saturday evening.
May 23ro, I9O4.l and It was unani-
mously decided 10 restore the interior oi
old Bruton Church 10 It's original Torn"
(priOr TO 1s+O.) This quotation can
not be denied. IL is part of the church
record. This does not look Ike was
uisled. etc. What was It that had 20
be restored' Among other things. the
chaucel was the most prominent.
AID interim. "a church leahet had been
printed, (its imprint nameless,) aud one
of its paragraphs under the head OF
Modern Improvements, read as fol-
| lows:
''In ls4O, the interior Of the church
was remodeledI partition wall was
built across the nave. the chancel remov.
ed from the east end Of the church and
built out from this wall, the old pulpit
was removed and the original form anC
appearance of the church destroyed"
In restoring the church. so called. on,
of the several things 10 be done was [,
reinstate the chancel in the east end o
the church where IL uniaithfully has
been previous TO Is+O. This was tn
only subject OF restoration that engage,
my attention. and I opposed it from
many considerations. chief OF " hic
was. The restoration of the chaucel j.
1910, TO the West end OF the church
where the trausepts are. would neve
have been made except TO harmonic IA
: appointments OF the church. These az
5 pointments could not be in harmony
since the transepts were At one end q
) the church. and the chancel At the Other
In 1910. this fasrant discrepancy va
. discovered and forthWi the dismeu
bered factors were brought into juS
Imposition. The church being built o
the plan of the cruciform all of its part
should be in relation 10 each other. Th
head OF the church is the chancel, becaus
there the transepts are.
The present condition of the churc
: has passed the scrutiny of the eclesiast
5 cal exposures for more than halfcentur,
and had there been any necessity for
change it would have been made nolen
/ volens, long ago.
t am glad the vestry has seen BIT 20 Is
more its resolution of Nav 23rd. it ma
I be. that it might avoid being misled il
70 the plan TO repeat and old mistake
Respectfully.