THE CRISIS IN THE CHURCH
[We hope to publish next week a further article on this subject by Bishop Clore.—En. Spectator.] THERE have been many controversies in the Church of England during the past fifty years to which men have referred as being critical and as jeopardizing her future. The language of exaggeration may often have been used, as happens when we see something which we love in danger. To-day, however, it cannot be an exaggeration to say that the Church of England, as we have all been brought up to know and to reverence her, is threatened. The danger strikes at the very basis upon which our National Church has been reared.
. It is a very difficult and delicate subject to write about, because, though we are sensible of the gravity of the crisis, we feel that bitter words would be quite out of place. We fully acknowledge that those who, in our judgment, are trying to undo the work of the Reformers, and therefore to destroy the character of the National Church, are men of great sincerity, very often of great ability and nearly always of great spiritual force. There is not so much religion in the world that we can afford to stir up theological hate against any who profess and Call themselves Christians. What is needed above all things is that spirit of toleration and mutual forbearance Which is breathed in every part of the Book of Common Prayer. All the same, unless we preserve and maintain the foundation upon which the Church of England is built, there will be no possibility of saving that com- prehensiveness without which a " National Church " is a contradiction in terms. The Prayer Book was framed in order to unite ; and if we destroy its principles we destroy the possibility of continued unity. That is the whole point.' We would give way on most things for the sake of peace, and we desire nothing more than that everybody who is a member of the family of the Church should have freedom to worship in his own" way. But we cannot sign away the ConStitution which makes both freedom and unity simultaneously attainable. • As was pointed out recently in the remarkable circular, entitled " A Call to Action," what is at stake as a result of the present controversies and movements within the Church of England is nothing less than the historical character of the Church. Where is the centre of authority ? The Reformers laid it down that the Bible was the final test of truth and that everything necessary for the Christian life was to be found therein. The party which calls itself Anglo-Catholic exhorts Church- men to submit themselves, not to the Church of England as constitutionally established in this country, but to some imperfectly defined tradition of international Catholicism. It places this tradition above the legally constituted authority. Anglo-Catholics do not respect, even if they do not actively dislike, the Reformation. They regard it as a rather unfortunate incident. Many of them insist, too, upon the importance of practices such as Mariolatry, the Mass, the control of the priests over conscience, and the suppression of private judgment, against which the Reformers fought with all the emphasis of which they were capable.
Now let us repeat that - we do not recommend for a moment—provided that the principles of the Reform- ation be preserved—that anybody should be deprived of any teaching or any rites from which he may obtain spiritual comfort. In large towns, of course, forbearance is particularly easy. One has to do little more than cross the street to find that kind of service which is desired. In country districts where only one church supplies the needs of a great variety of persons, the problem is much more difficult. There the profound wisdom of the Church of England in providing what may be called the greatest common measure of ritual and dogma is, as it were, epitomized and symbolized. By far the most remarkable characteristic of the Church of England is her comprehensiveness. She stands as an institution virtually co-extensive with the nation- s family to which every British subject belongs by right unless he expresses the wish, as he has a perfect right to do, not to conform.
This comprehensiveness which postulates restraint and compromise for the sake of ensuring unity and holding together a great national possession is perhaps expressed more perfectly in what is called The Preface— written in the reign of Charles II.—than in any other part of the Prayer Book. " It hath been the wisdom of the Church of England," says that wonderful mani- festo, " ever since the first compiling of her publick Liturgy to keep the mean between the two extremes, of too much stiffness in refusing and of too much easiness in admitting any variation from it." It goes on to point out how the Church, though yielding to alterations in the Prayer Book which were demanded from time to time, contrived that its character as determined at the Reformation should stand " firm and unshaken not- withstanding all the vain attempts and impetuous assaults made against it by such men as are given to change, and have always discovered a greater regard to their own private fancies and interests than to that duty they owe to the publick." Later the Preface says that the general aim of the revisers has been " not to gratify this or that party in any of their unreasonable demands ; but to do that, which to our best under- standings we conceived might most tend to the preserva- tion of peace and unity in the Church." Finally, the writers say that although they know that. it is impossible to please all, " owing to the variety of apprehensions, humours and interests," they nevertheless have good hope that what is presented in the revised Prayer Book will be " accepted and approved by all sober, peaceable and truly conscientious sons of the Church of -England."
The truth is that in the past conscientious divisions in the Church cut even deeper than they do to-day ; yet! for the sake of peace, and in order to keep the Church! national, restraint was exercised and the principles of the Reformers—amazingly well suited to the genius of the English people—kept her comprehensive. Are we to believe that there is really less power of tolerance, less good will, less restraint, less sense of discipline to-day, than there used to be ? We cannot believe it.
The comprehensiveness of the Church of England has been made possible more by the affiance of State and Church than by any other single expedient. We know enough of history not to be unduly astonished or distressed at the exclusiveness of clerically-minded' persons. After all, that exclusiveness is often—indeed, generally—only a sign of intense conviction. One man: wants to force another into the path of truth only in: order that the other man may be kept sound and safe.) The organizers of the Inquisition themselves were moved by no less admirable a motive. But it accords with the English genius that no spiritual ruler should be regarded as infallible. On several occasions within modern times clergy of the Church of England were allowed to remain' within the fold only as the result of rulings by an outside and perfectly impartial tribunal—to wit, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. But for the decisions of that lay committee the Church might easily have lost, such men as Kingsley, F. D. Maurice and Colenso. Again, without the Establishment there would be no possibility, of real comprehensiveness. We understand, and in some measure sympathize with, the heartburnings caused in the Church when the State seems to be indifferent to or to retard reform. Yet in our judgment the price is well worth paying. By having an Established Church we definitely connect the State with the profession of Christianity. We say in effect : " We are a Christian nation. From Christianity we derive all our inspiration."
It is a signal error to divorce the State from all concern in religion. We say this from the point of view of the State and not from the point of view of the Church. Among many of those who demand Disestablishment to-day we are accustomed to meet the strangely con- tradictory argument that the Church does not sufficiently identify herself with political and economic progress.. We venture to say that if these persons had never heard: of the Establishment they would be driven to invent it as the best means of connecting religion with public affairs. They would want to begin by forcing Govern- ments to profess themselves Christian.
We are often told that those who wish to undo the work of the Reformation are now in the ascendant within the Church. They may possibly be in the ascendant by virtue of ability, earnestness and energy. But we cannot believe that they outnumber, or anything like outnumber, those who desire that the main principles of the Reforma- tion and of the Book of Common Prayer should remain as they are. It is difficult to arrive at any statistics on the subject. With a view to informing ourselves and our readers as to the exact position we have, therefore, decided to address certain questions to a representative number of clergy of the Church of England, whom we shall ask to be kind enough to answer them. These questions are 1. Do you desire the principles of the Reformation as expounded in the Book of Common Prayer to be maintained ?
2. Do you desire the Church of England to be a national and comprehensive Church ?
3. Do you consider the Establishment the best means of securing No. 2 ?
When we have received the answers we shall—without revealing any names—publish the results.
Previous page
