LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
EPISCOPAL DEFENDANTS.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."]
SIR,—Permit me to supply an omission, and also to make a correction, in your article on the intended prosecution of the Bishop of Lincoln.
I did say, as you correctly state, when giving evidence before the Ritual Commission, that it is a very difficult matter in England to bring a Bishop to trial for any ecclesiastical offence. But the published Report omits what happened imme- diately after I made that reply. Archbishop Tait asked me,— " What is the case as regards an Archbishop P" I answered, —" There are no means whatever provided for bringing an Archbishop to trial." Whereupon Archbishop Tait rejoined, —" I am exceedingly glad to hear it."
For myself, I would say that I should be very unwilling indeed to prosecute a Bishop for ritual deficiencies. Even on the highly improbable hypothesis of the Courts to which I should have to resort doing justice, or having any intention of doing it, the proceeding would be practically inexpedient in several ways, not the least being that of at once making it a point of honour with a very large body of persons to persist in, or even to adopt, the condemned practices as party badges ; just as it has been observed that in congregations where the modern innovation (perfectly colourless in itself) of congre- gational repetition of the General Thanksgiving has been introduced, that is the one part of the service where one can hear the lay voices at all, dead silence or inaudible muttering being the rule when the laity are directed to respond, and where, consequently, no party question can enter.—I am, Sir, &c.,
9 Red Lion Square, London, W.C. R. F. LITTLED ALE.
Previous page
