Skip to main content

Full text of "The secret history of the Oxford Movement, with a new preface containing a reply to critics"

See other formats















CHURCH ASSOCIATION, 14, Buckingham Street, Strand, W.C. 
SWAN SONNENSCHEIN & CO., Ltd., Paternoster Square, EC. 






THE Church Times, in its issues of September 9th, 
16th, and 23rd, 1898, devoted a considerable portion 
of its space to a criticism of this book, and has now 
reprinted these articles as a pamphlet of thirty-two pages. 
It is generally understood that this is the recognised reply of 
the Ritualistic party, and therefore it has been thought well 
that I should answer it in these pages. 

I freely admit, at the outset, that if personal insult, 
libels, and vituperation could kill a book, The Secret History 
of the Oxford Movement could not survive the attack of 
The Church Times. But I venture to submit that the thinking 
men and women of England view with natural distrust 
a cause which cannot exist without descending to tactics of 
this kind. They require something more than outbursts of 
anger, and an exhibition of vexation and annoyance, to 
convince them that my book cannot be relied on. The 
Public care little or nothing as to what my personal views 
may be. What they want to know is, — Did the Tractarians 
and Ritualists really utter the words cited in the book, and 


did they do the deeds therein attributed to them ? They 
will judge according to evidence, and not according to the 
opinions either of the author or of The Church Times. 

It may be well to give some specimens of the insult and 
abuse heaped on my head by my critic. Here are a few 
extracts : " The incident provokes more than one question 
about the ' honourable and straightforward ' mode in which 
Mr. Walsh obtained the private papers of gentlemen who 
intended them to remain private " — implying, of course, 
that I obtained them by dishonourable and crooked methods. 
There is, I freely admit, no doubt whatever that these 
gentlemen " intended " their papers " to remain private " ; 
and their anger arises from the fact that they are now 
published in the light of day. Men who work in the dark 
always hate the light. Again, it is affirmed that I am 
" either a fool, writing of things which he does not under- 
stand, or a knave, trying to gull a still more ignorant 
public." It would have been wiser for The Church Times 
to prove me either a " fool " or a " knave," than to thus libel 
me in its columns. It also affirms that in my book I have 
inserted " something out of the purloined papers of the 
Society of the Holy Cross." To charge a man with using 
stolen property, without producing a scrap of evidence 
in support of the accusation, is an offence which is held in 
abhorrence by all upright men, no matter what their religion 
may be. Yet one more Church Times libel I must quote 
before I pass on. It affirms that " the perusal of his book 


is rather like peering over the shoulder of a man who is 

reading a stolen letter." 

Now all this is simply an unworthy attempt to blacken the 

character of a man whose book it has failed to refute. There 

is not one word of truth in these discreditable accusations, 

and no one is more convinced of their falsehood than 

The Church Times itself, for — be not too much startled, my 

reader, when I tell you — that paper has, within the past 

twelve-months, given me, on these very points, a character 

for honesty, fairness, and honour, of which, for a time at 

least, I was exceedingly proud, since I thought I had fairly 

done my best to earn it. According to The Church Times, 

of September, i8g8, I must be a kind of sneaking villain ; 

yet in the opinion of the same paper, of January 21st, 1898, 

page 63, I was fully entitled to the following testimonial 

(the italics are mine) : — 

" In The Church Intelligencer, for January, there appeared 
considerable extracts from what seem to be the private papers of the 
Society [of the Holy Cross]. It was well known that Mr. W. Walsh 
had the same laudable object in view as Mr. Miller, and had for 
a long time been trying in a fair and honest way to obtain some of 
the Society's papers for publication. Mr. Walsh is a fair and open 
opponent, and we regret that he has been less successful than his 

After reading the above unsolicited testimonial to my 
fairness and honesty, I am afraid that my readers will think 
that the editor of The Church Times has a very bad, or at 
least a very convenient, memory. The desperate necessities 


of the Ritualistic cause, owing to the wide circulation of 
my book, seem to have led my reviewer into the dangerous 
paths of inconsistency and libel. His conduct, at any rate, 
furnishes loyal Churchmen with one more illustration of 
the very tactics exposed in my book. I do not think 
it will tend to raise the Romanizers in the estimation of 
straightforward Englishmen. And here I may remark that 
this is not the first time that The Church Times has noticed 
my book. It reviewed it with all the honours of leaded 
type — though now it says it " did not think it worth powder 
and shot " — in its issue of December 3rd, 1897, pp. 663, 664. 
It then adopted the line of ridiculing the book, but it ended 
its review by giving me, in all seriousness, the following 
testimonial : — 

" Whatever we may think of his book, we cannot but respect 
Mr. Walsh. In honourable contrast to most of our latter-day 
Tappertits, he has regard to the decencies of controversy, and we 
could wish his pen enlisted in a better cause." 

What, may I ask, has happened since December 3rd, 1897, 
that has led The Church Times to alter its estimation of 
my personal character ? Then I was worthy of honour 
and respect. Now it declares that " Mr. Walsh has 
queer notions of honour." I have stated that my copy of 
The Priest in A bsolution cost £6. 6s, and my critic asserts that 
'" None but a dirty-minded man, bent on misusing the book, 
would buy it at such a price." Evidently the desire is to 
produce the impression that I have written a dirty and 


indecent book, like The Priest in Absolution itself. But 
I appeal to my readers against such an unworthy insinuation. 
They know that I have not written one word which could not 
be read without a blush by the purest minded man or 
woman that ever breathed. What, I again ask, has 
happened since December, 1897, to induce this change of 
front ? Is it not the desire, somehow or other, to get out 
of a most unpleasant difficulty ? " If we cannot answer 
his book, we can at least throw mud at the author," is a 
statement which would accurately describe the new attitude 
of The Church Times. 

The great object of The Church Times is to persuade the 
public that, after all, there are no such things as secret 
societies within the Church of England, excepting, perhaps, 
the Order of Corporate Reunion. But in order to succeed in 
its task it has to resort to misrepresentation. If it cannot 
succeed in blackening the character of a Protestant, it may 
at least hope for success in white-washing the men who work 
in the dark to destroy the Protestantism of the Church and 
Nation. It might just as well try to persuade sensible men 
that there is nothing which bats and owls love more than 
the noonday sun, and that they hate to be seen prowling 
about at night. If ever there was an ecclesiastical society 
which deserved to be termed secret, as I have amply proved, 
it is the Society of the Holy Cross. But according to my 
critic it is only 
*' A private Society of English clergymen who meet together for the 


conduct of their own private affairs. We cannot imagine anything 
more detestable, more utterly opposed to gentlemanly feeling, than to 
pry into the doings of such a Society." 

I have no doubt that the Clan-na-Gael, Fenians, and 
Invincibles would say the same thing about any person 
who revealed their secret doings to the British Government. 
But, after all, here comes in the question, Is it truth- 
ful to describe the S. S. C. as merely a body of clergymen 
" who meet together for the conduct of their private affairs " ? 
I have shown, by clear and indisputable evidence which 
The Church Times has not dared to attempt to refute, that 
they meet together to secretly discuss public affairs. Again, 
if there be no secrecy in the societies named, how is it that 
The Church Times is unable — so it says — to test my quota- 
tions by the original documents ? " Many of his statements," 
it declares, " are by their very nature unverifiable. * I have 
given,' he says, ' full references and proofs for everything.' 
But references to inaccessible documents are useless." 
" The greater part of Mr. Walsh's history is, therefore, 
unverifiable " ; and consequently it leaves "the greater part " 
of this book untouched by its criticisms. In reply to all 
these excuses for inability, it may suffice to state that the 
admissions of The Church Times supply me with an unexpected 
additional proof of the secret nature of these Ritualistic 
societies. Their documents must indeed be secret, when 
the leading champion of the Ritualistic party is not allowed 
the use of them for the purpose of crushing The Secret History 


of the Oxford Movement. As to these secret and tell-tale 
documents, my opponent, not having anything better to say, 
discreditably insinuates that I may have forged some of them ! 
" Even," it shamelessly asks, " if Mr. Walsh should produce 
them, who is to say whether they really are what they purport 
to be ? " The question implies a libel on my character, but 
passing that by, the answer is obvious. I profess, for 
instance, to quote speeches made at secret Synods of the 
Society of the Holy Cross, and I give the dates on which 
they were held, and the pages of the documents from which 
I take my extracts. Let the authorities of the Society of 
the Holy Cross be applied to, and asked to produce their 
copies of the reports of the Synods in question. I am pre- 
pared to produce mine, and then let some outside authority 
judge between us. This, I venture to suggest, is a more 
manly and Christian way of settling a dispute than that of 
inflicting a back-handed and cowardly stab on a man's 

The Church Times pleads that the Society of the Holy 
Cross is not a secret society, because it has issued a paper 
on " The Nature and Objects of the Society," and also 
an " Address to Catholics." " As soon," it says, " as the 
members felt their inner life strong enough for the strain 
they launched forth into publicity ; they took the most 
public occasion possible to make themselves known." The 
documents referred to were circulated first in the year 1867. 
Yet ten years later, in 1877, at a monthly Chapter of the 


Society of the Holy Cross, the Rev. Nathaniel Dawes, now 
Bishop of Rockhampton, complained that " Our weakness 
hitherto had been our secrecy; " and the Rev. Joseph Newton 
Smith, founder of the Society, boasted that " our secrecy 
had been a protection to us." And even as late as the 
May, 1881, Synod, the Rev. William Crouch affirmed that 
" he thought the secrecy of the Society's doings a mistake " 
(see infra, pp. 125, 126, 64). The published documents 
referred to above were only bait to catch fish. The 
fish cannot judge from the bait the reception which 
awaits it when landed by the fisherman. That is 
a secret only made known to the fish when hauled on 
shore. Those documents were not, after all, scattered 
abroad indiscriminately, and those who read them gained 
thereby no adequate knowledge of the secret policy of 
the Society of the Holy Cross. If the Society of the 
Holy Cross is not secret, why are such efforts made to 
keep its documents from the light of day ? Is it not 
because it has "loved darkness rather than light "? " For 
every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh 
to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved " (Margin, 
"discovered," John iii. 20). 

1 notice that The Church Times admits that there is a 
Secret History of the Oxford Movement. u The Oxford 
Movement," it reluctantly confesses, " undoubtedly has its 
secret history. ... It is interesting to calculate how much 
of it is locked up in the muniment room at Hawarden. 


A great part of this secret history will, by degrees, be 
revealed." My fault seems to be that I have revealed it too 
soon to suit the convenience of the Ritualists, and that 
I have revealed too much of it for their comfort. Indeed, 
my opponent evidently approves of the secrecy of the 
Tractarians, when it assures its readers that " A little 
more of the old secrecy of the Tractarians would not 
harm us." 

On the subject of "Reserve" and "Economy," The Church 
Times seems to think that the Tractarians were anything 
but wise, though it by no means censures their teaching. 
The early Tractarians were, it asserts, " unfortunate in 
many of their expressions," and " were singularly incapable 
of judging the effect upon their contemporaries of what 
they might say." But, after all, it boasts that " the 
Tractarians freely published their theory of * Reserve ' ; 
they taught it openly as the solemn duty of all who were 
engaged in communicating religious knowledge." I have 
never denied that the Tractarians published their doctrine 
of " Reserve " openly ; what I have asserted, and still 
assert, and have fully proved in the following pages, is that 
they practised it in secret, and that the theory led in many 
instances to double-dealing, evasions, and deceptions, such 
as were utterly inconsistent with Christian ideas of truth- 
fulness and straightforward dealing. 

In the course of its attack The Church Times makes one or 
two admissions about The Priest in Absolution which are 


worth remembering. It carefully abstains from uttering 
one word of censure of that book, which the late Archbishop 
of Canterbury (Dr. Tait) denounced as "a disgrace to the 
community" ; but it frankly admits, and apparently glories in 
the disgraceful fact, that " the book deals, of course, with 
filth ", and it pleads in excuse that " a book of moral theology 
must, therefore, deal with certain disgusting subjects." If 
the book deals with "filthy" and "disgusting" subjects, it 
is only in order that the Father Confessors who read it 
may subsequently deal with these loathsome subjects in the 
Confessional. These acknowledgments of The Church Times 
reveal the character of the Ritualistic Confessional in its 
true light. It is a place where, at the will and discretion of 
the Father Confessor, certain " filthy " and " disgusting " 
subjects are talked about, often by persons of opposite 
sexes. It is pleaded by my critic that The Priest in A bsolution 
" exactly resembles a medical work on pathology." 
I imagine that the overwhelming majority of medical men 
will resent the comparison as a gross insult on an honour- 
able profession. There is nothing secret in medical books. 
They may be bought by anybody in the open daylight ; 
while of The Priest in Absolution it was said, by Canon 
Rhodes Bristow — then a member of the S. S. C. — that " If 
the book were published it would be prosecuted as an 
obscene book" (infra, p. 136). Yes; and unfortunately, 
there is reason to fear that it is " an obscene book," which 
has frequently led to "obscene" talk between the Father 


Confessor and his penitent. Herein lies its condemnation 
in the minds of all right-thinking men and women. 

As to the semi-secret Confraternity of the Blessed 
Sacrament, The Church Times has the unblushing audacity 
to declare that it "offends Mr. Walsh by praying in secret " ! 
There is not a line in my book to justify such an assertion. 
What I complained of was that its semi-secrecy was used 
for the purpose of propagating, with greater safety, doctrines 
and practices which are unlawful within the Church of 
England. My critic denies that the monthly Intercession 
Paper of the C. B. S. is secret in any sense. Then why did 
the Superior General advise that the back numbers should 
be " destroyed," to prevent outsiders reading them ? The 
Rev. James Hodgson, formerly Superior of the Bloxham 
Ward of the C.B.S.,was of an opinion different from that of 
The Church Times. He wrote to the Ritualistic Church Review, 
July 5th, 1873, p. 400 — " Why are they {Intercession Papers 
of C. B. S.] marked ' Confidential ' ? Does not this imply 
secrecy ? Undoubtedly." 

But it is pleaded that there cannot be any secrecy in the 
C. B. S. because its " annual meetings and services are 
advertised in the public press." There would, of course, be 
nothing secret in those " meetings " if the general public 
were invited to attend them ; but that is the very thing 
which the authorities of the C. B. S. do not want. They 
cannot legally keep the public out from their Requiem 
Masses in Church, yet no one is allowed to be present at 


the annual meetings except those who can produce the medal 
showing that they are members. The secrecy of the C. B. S. 
is also shown in the fact that it never prints the names of 
its lay members, and although the names of its Priests- 
Associate are printed every year, care is taken that no 
Protestant Churchman shall see a copy of the list. Some 
of the Priests-Associate refuse to allow their names to be 
printed even in this secretly circulated list, for fear lest 
they should be found out. Is there no secrecy in all this? 

The information which I have given about Ritualistic 
Sisterhoods may, The Church Times thinks, be " largely 
bogus," though it fails to produce any evidence in proof of 
its suggestion. It declares that a Convent is " essentially 
a private house," and that therefore outsiders have no right 
to take notice of what goes on within its walls. This was 
the plea put forward some years since by the keepers of 
" private " lunatic asylums, but the Legislature paid no 
attention to the plea. The English public insisted on having 
such " private houses" placed under public inspection, and 
I have no doubt that ere long they will insist on a similar 
inspection of the " private houses " termed Convents. The 
plea of privacy did not avail for Convents at the time of the 
Reformation, and I do not see why it should avail now. 
The Church Times is discreetly silent about the private burial 
grounds in some of these Ritualistic Convents. Is it afraid 
that some day an awakened and indignant British public 
will close them for ever, as ought to have been the case long 


ago ? After all, Convents are no more " private houses M 
than are the factories in which women are employed, and they 
ought to be as fully open to Government inspection. Those 
who have read what has already taken place in Ritualistic 
Convents, as revealed in the unrefuted books of Miss 
Margaret Goodman, Miss Cusack, " Maude," and " Sister 
Mary Agnes," will be the first to laugh the plea of privilege 
to scorn. But if The Church Times cannot refute the 
damaging exposures of these ladies, it can at least insult 
the ladies themselves. To insult honourable ladies is not 
generally considered manly conduct. It terms them " these 
wretched women " ! It declares : " we cannot control our 
indignation " — merely because I have quoted a book printed 
for the use of the St. Margaret's, East Grinstead, Sisterhood. 
I freely admit that it does not "control its indignation." 
From the beginning of its criticism to the end its indignation 
runs away with its reason. There is nothing which so 
rouses the " indignation " of secret plotters as to be found 
out. I did not base my charge of secrecy against Ritualistic 
Sisterhoods merely on the ground of a Blue Book, which 
might be bought and sold by anybody, but on docu- 
mentary evidence which The Church Times has not dared 
to refute. 

In an appendix to my book, I give a lengthy collection of 
extracts from what I expressly term the "published writings" 
(p. 373) of the Ritualists, as distinguished from their secret 
writings which are largely cited in the body of the book. 



This is the way in which The Church Times comments on 
this collection of extracts : — 

" Most of them are plain statements of Christian doctrine 5 some 
of them are in very bad taste ; some we dislike intensely 5 some would 
be almost universally repudiated by our friends. But of all alike 
we ask, Where is the secrecy ? Where is the plot ? Where the 
conspiracy ? Wise or foolish, they are all published utterances . . . 
But these things were not done in a corner. They were done with 
ferocious publicity. We are grateful to Mr. Walsh for collecting the 
evidence ; he saves us so much trouble ; his own pages pulverize his 
theory of secrecy and conspiracy." 

If I had tried to prove the secrecy of the Oxford 
Movement from this collection of extracts, the comment of 
The Church Times would have been very much to the point. 
But I have done nothing of the kind. They are placed in 
the appendix for the express purpose of separating them from 
the secret history. They were inserted "for reference." 
The evidence of secrecy is contained in what The Church 
Times terms "the greater part of Mr. Walsh's history," and 
which it has not even attempted to refute. 

It is a significant fact that out of nearly twelve columns 
given to an " examination " of my book The Church Times 
devotes only about two and a half columns to an attempt to 
disprove my accuracy. At the commencement of its tenth 
column only does it set itself seriously to work to prove me 
inaccurate on matters of fact. It begins that tenth column 
(September 23rd, p. 830) with the remarkable acknowledg- 
ment : " We have, so far, assumed that Mr. Walsh's 


information is accurate." If so, nine columns of its space 
were either wasted, or simply used for the purpose of personal 
insult and libellous statements which it is quite unable to 

At last, then, The Church Times commences work which, if 
well done, would help the cause of my opponents more than 
any amount of mere bluster. " We can," it states, " take 
certain of its [Secret History] statements which concern 
matters of public knowledge, and see how they will stand 
the test of inquiry." Here, at long last, we come to 
fair and proper criticism, as to which no author has a right 
to complain. As a matter of fact I court criticism of this 
kind. If anyone can prove that, on matters of fact, I have 
misrepresented my opponents, I shall be grateful to him for 
pointing out my mistakes. 

I need hardly add that my critic places in the forefront of 

its " examination " the very worst (supposed) blunders that it 

can possibly produce against me. They are exactly seven in 

number, and are of so unimportant a character that were 

I to plead guilty of error in every instance they would not 

affect my general trustworthiness. Even historians of the 

highest esteem with the public are found to be occasionally 

inaccurate on minor points ; but that does not induce their 

readers to be so foolish as to throw away their books, as 

though they were produced by conscious liars. My own book 

extends to over 400 pages. I have, in compiling it, received 

not the slightest assistance from anyone. The wonder to 

b 2 


me is, that, although I took the utmost possible pains to 
be accurate, The Church Times can only produce seven 
unimportant instances in which it assumes that I am 
historically wrong. But it assumes too much. 

(i) I plead guilty to being inaccurate as to one charge 
alone, and that an inaccuracy which injures nobody, and is 
so trifling that it amuses me to find The Church Times making 
such a great mountain out of its little mole hill. It is 
connected with the visits of Lord Halifax, " Father Puller," 
and the Rev. T. A. Lacey, to Rome, with reference to the 
recognition of Anglican Orders by the Church of Rome. It 
is admitted by those who know the facts of the case that 
each of these three gentlemen went to Rome on the same 
errand, and had a common object ; and that the travelling 
expenses of the two last named were paid by the English 
Church Union. In the annual report of the E. C. U. for 1897, 
.page 17, occurs the following item of expenditure, under the 
heading of " Reunion Expenses " : " Expenses at Rome of 
Revs. Father Puller andT.A. Lacey, £145. 15s 7^." Where 
then does my inaccuracy came in ? I wrote (page 356) : 
" There went with Lord. Halifax to Rome two members of 
the English Church Union." It seems that, after all, they 
did not go "with " Lord Halifax, but a few months later on! 
I frankly acknowledge that my chronology was in this 
instance inaccurate. But who, I may well ask, is injured by 
it? Is " Father Puller," or Mr. Lacey, or Lord Halifax, or 
the English Church Union, or anybody else, the worse for 


this inaccuracy ? In connection with these visits I quote 
a certain outrageously Romanizing document which 
Mr. Lacey, when at Rome, circulated amongst the 
Cardinals there, a translation of which appeared in the 
Roman Catholic Tablet, November 7th, 1896, and I add this 
comment : " Probably Mr. Lacey never dreamt that such 
a document would ever see the light of day in England.'* 
In reply to this The Church Times asserts it saw " copies of 
this document in the Reading Room of the Shrewsbury 
Church Congress," in October, 1896. I can only state that 
I was present at the Shrewsbury Church Congress, that 
I attended the Reading Room several times every day 
during the Congress, and that I never saw a single copy of 
the document in question. Then, I have said, with reference 
to the visits of these three gentlemen to Rome, that " A 
verbatim report of their interviews with the Pope would be 
interesting reading." It now appears that only one out of 
the three had an interview with the Pope, and that was Lord 
Halifax. So, in my next edition, I will alter "their" 
into " his." 

Having thus pleaded guilty to an error on the subject of 
these visits to Rome, I may as well say at once that I am 
not going to plead guilty to any other charge brought 
against me by The Church Times. 

(2) I have given a quotation from Oakeley's Historical 
Notes on the Tractarian Movement, relating the Popish per- 
formances of certain Tractarians when they travelled on the 


Continent, and I commented on that quotation to the effect 

that when they returned home " they were careful not to 

let the English public know where they had been, what they 

had said, and what they had done, when abroad. At home 

they had passed as faithful sons of the Reformed Church 

of England ; on the Continent they were seen in their true 

colours." In reply The Church Times refers me to three 

books which it names, as containing reports of such journeys 

to the Continent, with some very candid acknowledgments 

by the authors. To which I rejoin by asserting that we are 

not to judge of the conduct of a large party by the conduct 

of only three of its members. Nor do I believe that these 

gentlemen told all they did in the books they wrote. 

Mr. Oakeley, who was himself one of those early Tractarians 

who thus travelled on the Continent, tells us : " Whatever 

our Tractarian friends may have been on this side of the 

Channel, there could be no doubt of their perfect Catholicity 

on the other " (page y$). This implies that, in the opinion 

of one well qualified to give an opinion, they were when at 

home in England something very different from what they 

seemed to be when abroad. Their " perfect Catholicity " 

was evidently not manifested when they were in England. 

That is exactly what I have said in my book, and I see no 

reason for withdrawing what I have said on this subject. 

When Faber, while nominally an Anglican clergyman, kissed 

the Pope's foot, during an interview, did he proclaim that 

fact in his Sights and Thoughts in Foreign Churches ? When 


Manning, while Archdeacon of Chichester, visited Rome, 
and knelt down in the mud before the Pope's carriage, did 
he make known his disgraceful action to the public when 
he came home ? We know it was kept secret until after his 
death as a Roman Cardinal ! 

(3) Under the heading of " Imputations on Dr. Pusey," 
The Church Times is very angry with me, because I have 
censured that gentleman for his " personal and private 
austerities." I have, it is true, censured him for the folly 
of wearing hair shirts, and for recommending Confessors 
to order Sisters of Mercy to use the cruel "Discipline" — 
a kind of cat-o -nine-tails — " for about a quarter of an hour 
a day," and I still think he deserves censure for giving such 
advice. As to anything that I have said against Dr. Pusey, 
I have given evidence for everything, and all The Church 
Times can say in reply is that " Dr. Pusey died the honoured 
confidant of men who knew his intimate life." I have no 
doubt that he had the confidence of men and women who 
believed in his doctrines and conduct ; but that can be said 
of even some of the greatest heretics who ever lived. I have 
nothing to withdraw on this head, because my critic has not 
produced any evidence against me. 

(4) Under the head of "The Petition of 1873" I am 
charged with misrepresenting the petitioners as desiring 
the addition of certain doctrines to the Book of Common 
Prayer, " as not being contained there already." On the 
contrary I actually quoted that part of the petition in which 


the petitioners plainly imply that in their opinion the 
doctrines in question were those of the Church of England. 
I wrote {infra, page 71) : . 1 

" The Book of Common Prayer, says this petition, is * manifestly 
incomplete, through the absence in many particulars of such Services 
and Rubrics as would give adequate expression to this claim of the 
Church of England to be Catholic in her doctrine, usage, and 
ceremonial.' M 

No one, in his senses, would ever suppose that the 
Romanizers who signed this very Romanizing petition, ever 
taught distinctly that the doctrines of the Real Presence, 
Eucharistical Adoration, and the Eucharistic Sacrifice were 
not contained within the Prayer Book. Yet they certainly 
were most inconsistent when they signed a petition which 
asked for the " addition " of these " doctrines " to the 
Book of Common Prayer. We do not ask for the " addi- 
tion " of a thing to a book, when we know that it is there 
already. I dealt with this Petition fairly, and have not 
misrepresented it in any way. 

(5) I am charged with " the suppression of a material 
fact " because in my account of the Order of Corporate 
Reunion I did not mention that Mr. Mossman, one of its 
Bishops, was expelled from the English Church Union for 
professing to confer Holy Orders. In reply I have to state 
that if I had in any way charged the English Church Union 
with being responsible for the conduct of the Order of 
Corporate Reunion, then the suppression of this fact in my 



book would be — to quote my critic — " as misleading as 
a direct falsehood." But I did nothing of the kind. 
I in no way even hinted at any official connection between 
the two organizations. To quote (from another part of his 
review) my critic himself: "We do not complain of mere 
omissions. Mr. Walsh was not bound to say everything 
he knew." 

(6) I am charged with misrepresentation because I state 
that, in my opinion, the Alcuin Club is really the Society 
of St. Osmund under another name. I made the same 
assertion in a letter which I wrote in The Times of 
September 5th, 1898. The Bishop of Winchester, having 
read the letter, wrote to me stating that as he was himself 
a member of the Alcuin Club, he wished to know on what 
authority I made the statement. To that letter I sent the 


following reply : — 

September $th, 1898. 

My Lord, — In reply to your letter of enquiry, I herewith send the 
evidence which, in my opinion, justified me in asserting that "The 
Society of St. Osmund " still exists under the new name of the 
" Alcuin Club." On February 18th, 1897, Mr. A. E. Maidlow Davis, 
Secretary of the Society of St. Osmund, and now Secretary of the 
Alcuin Club, issued a privately-printed letter to the members of the 
former of these societies, of which I have seen a copy. It was printed 
in full in The English Churchman of February 25th, 1897, page 126. 
In it, Mr. Davis announced that a meeting would be held of the 
members of the Society of St. Osmund on February 25th : — 

" For the purpose* of dissolving the Society of St. Osmund. 


Enclosed are particulars of the Alcuin Club, whose work will cover 
more ground than our Society has been able to touch, and I 
consequently presume that you will be glad to continue your support 
of English Ceremonial by joining the Club, at least as an Associate, at 
the annual subscription of five shillings. Unless I hear jrom you to 
the contrary on the dissolution of the Society of St. Osmund, I shall 
therefore assume that you wish to become an Associate of the Alcuin 
Club, and will accordingly propose you for election." 

I am fully convinced that this "dissolving of the Society of 
St. Osmund " was in name only, and not in reality. The free and easy 
way in which the Secretary assumes that all the members of the 
Society will join the Club strengthens my opinion. A similar proposal 
was made to the Society of the Holy Cross, by the Rev. E. G. Wood, 
after the exposure of the Society's connection with The Priest in 
Absolution. The Society had got into public disgrace through its 
Popish teaching, and therefore " he counselled disbanding the Society, 
with the view of thereby escaping an Episcopal censure, and of recon- 
structing the Society under the same or a similar title, at as early 
a date as possible " (See, for proof, my Secret History of the Oxford 
Movement, p. 131). 

I do not possess a complete list of the names of the Council of the 
Alcuin Club. When, however, its formation was first made officially 
known to the public through The Church Times of March 10th, 1897, 
a selection of the names was printed with the announcement. From 
it I learn that at least five members of the Council of the Society of 
St. Osmund were transferred to the Council of the Alcuin Club, viz., 
the Revs. A. L. Coates, W. H. H. Jervois, G. H. Palmer, and 
Mr. W. J. Birbeck and Mr. Athlestan Riley (formerly Chairman of the 
Society of St. Osmund), and, as I have already stated, the Secretary 
of the Society was made Secretary of the Club. The Church 
Times gives his address as that of the Society of St. Osmund, so that, 
for a time at least, both organizations used the*same office. Add to 


this that the work of the Alcuin Club is practically identical with that 
of the Society of St. Osmund, and there can be little or no cause for 
doubt left, that the latter, as I stated in The Times, " still exists under 
the new name of the Alcuin Club." 

I have known a somewhat similar transaction to take place in 
another religious society, which became absorbed in a new society, 
giving up its original name. The publications of the Alcuin Club 
are of a distinctly Ritualistic character, and can only help on the 
Romeward Movement. 

I do not find that my letter to The Times asserts that the Alcuin 

Club is a " secret " Society. Still, if your lordship thinks it bears that 

interpretation, I willingly admit that I have no proof of its secrecy 

beyond that which is implied in the facts mentioned in this letter. 

I remain, My Lord, 

Your obedient Servant, 

To The Right Rev. 

The Lord Bishop of Winchester. 
The Bishop of Winchester sent me an answer to this 
letter, but as he marked it " Private," I am unable to print 
it here. I may, however, mention that he does not accept 
my view of the situation, but considers that I " have been 
inadvertently misled." I much regret that I cannot accept 
his lordship's view. A study of the avowed publications of 
the Alcuin Club proves that it is still carrying on substantially 
the work of the Society of St. Osmund, though I do not 
charge the present members of the club — excepting those 
who were members of the S. S. O. — with responsibility for 
what the Society of St. Osmund undertook in aid of Popish 


(7) I quote several Roman Catholic testimonies acknow- 
ledging the important services rendered to the Church of Rome 
by the Ritualists. The Church Times complains that I say "not 
a word of the far more numerous occasions on which there 
has come from the same quarter a wail over the effect ot 
the movement, in checking conversions to Papalism." If 
these testimonies are so very numerous, why, may I ask, 
does not The Church Times print a collection of them ? 
I do not believe that they exist. I know that a few obscure 
individuals, not qualified, so far as the public are aware, to 
speak on the subject, have said something of the kind ; 
but what is the value of their testimony compared with 
that of the leaders <oi the Church of Rome to the contrary, 
which I quote in my book ? 

I now respectfully submit that the criticisms of The Church 
Times are remarkable most of all for their weakness ; while 
I freely admit that in its personal insults and bluster it has 
used the strength of a Samson, though with the self- 
destructive results which marked the closing efforts of that 
giant's life. The accuracy of this book is by no means 
injured by the criticisms of The Church Times, but, I am 
happy to state, its circulation has been thereby greatly 

I am not surprised at the line adopted towards my 
book by The Church Times, but I confess that I did expect 
something of a more elevated character from The Saturday 


Review and The Spectator. Both of these papers have a high 
character for literary ability ; it is, therefore, all the more to 
be regretted that they have, on this occasion, ignored fair 
criticism, and descended to the level of mere abuse. In one 
respect they are more open to censure than The Church 
Times, for while the latter does give a small portion of its 
space to prove me inaccurate, they attempt nothing of the 
kind. The Saturday Review speaks of the " worthlessness " 
of this book, which, in its opinion, deserved to be put aside 
as " neither demanding nor deserving notice " in its columns. 
And then it inconsistently gives two columns of its space to 
a notice of it ! 

" We cannot," it says, u pretend to be interested in scraps of 
gossip, apparently overheard on other men's backstairs, or at the 
keyholes of churches and clergy houses." 

It produces no evidence for the untrue assertion contained 
in this sentence, for the simple reason that it has none to 
produce. Strange to relate, its next sentence is in defence 
of gentlemanly conduct ! " The publication of documents," 
jt remarks, " printed for private circulation and marked 
* Confidential,' may be consistent with Mr. Walsh's notion 
of an honourable gentleman's behaviour." I may be per- 
mitted to remind The Saturday Review that, while a gentleman 
is bound to respect all honourable secrets and confidences, 
he is bound in honour to pay no respect whatever to 
dishonourable secrets and confidences. In the opinion of 
an overwhelming majority of honourable Churchmen, the 


Ritualistic clergymen, whose Secret Societies I have exposed, 
are engaged in dishonourable conduct, and they consider it 
is as much a duty to reveal their underground and traitorous 
proceedings, as it would be in the case of conspirators 
against the State. If I had got possession of the secret 
-documents of the Ritualists in any dishonourable way, then, 
indeed, I should be justly open to a lecture on " an 
honourable gentleman's behaviour ; " and I am quite sure 
that if the Ritualists had known even a single instance in 
which I had so obtained them, they would have published 
the fact on the housetops long ago. 

The criticisms of The Spectator are written in an angry 
tone. There is no attempt made to disprove a single 
statement made in the book which has raised its very 
wrathful indignation. It even descends to personal insult 
for want of a more useful weapon. It actually affirms that 
" Mr. Walsh's discussion of the question " of the Confes- 
sional and The Priest in Absolution, "may minister a good 
deal of matter to the prurient." This is a most untruthful 
assertion, as anyone must know who reads this book. 
Nothing of such a character can be found within its 
pages. Being short of material for fair criticism The Spectator 
must needs invent charges against the book. It actually 
declares that, in the Appendix, under the heading of " What 
the Ritualists Teach," "there is no passage from the 
writings of any of the modern leaders of the High Church 
party ; nor, indeed, from any one of eminence in earlier 


days." Now, as a matter of fact, which anybody can 
see for himself, I have quoted in the Appendix, amongst 
others, such prominent men of the party as Lord Halifax, 
the Bishop of Lincoln (Dr. King), Archdeacon Hutchings, 
Dr. Pusey, Canon Carter, the Rev. T. Mozley, the Rev. 
C. S. Grueber, and the Rev. A. H. Mackonichie. This 
assertion of The Spectator reminds me of the teaching 
approved by Newman, who declared that a Christian " both 
thinks and speaks the truth, except when careful treatment 
is necessary." 

The Spectator thinks that I ought " in common decency " 
to have left out of the Appendix " the list of utensils used 
by some Ritualists in Divine Service " ; and, especially, 
" the ' cautels ' or cautions for the clergy in celebrating the 
Holy Communion." In this I do not agree with my critic. 
Probably the Ritualists are heartily ashamed of their 
folly in these matters being made known to Protestants. 
The Spectator asserts that I have " printed these for the 
derision of the ignorant and vulgar." I did nothing of the 
kind. I printed them, not for the " derision," but for the 
information of the public, and without note or comment of 
my own. I should imagine that the class of the community 
most likely to hold these follies in derision, are, not the 
" ignorant and vulgar," but the learned and refined, whose 
common sense and good taste is outraged by the grossly 
carnal directions given in those " cautels." 


I now rise from the criticisms of The Church Times, 
Saturday Review, and The Spectator, to breathe the purer 
atmosphere which surrounds the criticism of the Rev. W. 
Sanday, d.d., Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity, Oxford. 
My other critics, who talk so much about gentlemanly 
conduct, would do well to study the courteous style of 
criticism adopted by one who is their superior in every 
respect. Professor Sanday did me the honour of referring 
to this book -in a sermon which he preached in Christ 
Church Cathedral, Oxford, on August 14th, 1898, and which 
— with other sermons-^-he has since published in a volume 
entitled The Conception of Priesthood. He is by no means 
a friend to this book, mainly, as it appears to me, on the 
ground that its tendency will be to prevent peace being 
arrived at between the Protestant and Ritualistic parties. 
I frankly admit that peace between truth and error is not 
to be desired. Dr. Sanday seems to think that I look upon 
everything secret as necessarily evil. I can assure him 
I do nothing of the kind. While writing about the secret 
plottings of the Romanizers I had only in my mind those 
" Who loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds 
were evil " (John iii. 19). Professor Sanday says of nry- 
self : " He regards everything that has any resemblance 
to the practice of the Church of Rome as wrong : he does 
not ask if it is bad, or preponderantly bad, in itself. It is 
" enough for him that it has the stamp of Rome." Here 
again my critic is in error. Everyone knows that there are 


good things in the Church of Rome, as well as bad, just as 
in base sovereigns there is some good gold. I have objected 
to nothing as " Roman " which an overwhelming majority 
of the most learned English Divines since the Reformation 
have not also objected to on the same ground. I have 
written in no narrow-minded spirit. If Professor Sanday 
had mentioned any particular Roman practice which I had 
objected to as Roman, but which is in itself good, I should 
then be in a better position to answer him. But he has 
carefully abstained from doing so. At the same time I have 
to thank him for some things he has said about this book. 
He thinks it " one of the most effective " weapons used by 
the Protestants against the extreme Ritualists. " We must," 
he says, " take the book as an indictment — and an indict- 
ment with evidence alleged " ; and he thinks that " if it had 
come much earlier — twenty, or thirty, or forty years ago — 
it might have shaken the edifice of the Church more seriously 
than it can do now. And in itself perhaps it is well that 
some things should be known which have hitherto been more 
or less concealed." 

" The effect of The Secret History of the Oxford Movement" says 
Professor Sanday, " would be on the contrary — at least if it were read 
without discrimination — rather to disunite than to unite, to discredit 
one large section of the Church, to undermine and destroy its 

" The author himself would not, I think, disclaim this object in 
writing. And his book has been taken up and is, I believe, being 
circulated widely by those who openly profess to have that object. 



Now, a book will no doubt work far more quietly than sensational 
scenes in church or before a magistrate, but 1 do not on that account 
consider it the less but rather the more really formidable. And this 
particular book seems to me very much calculated to have the effect 
which is sought. For I must do the author the justice to say that 
he has written calmly and temperately. He has expressed a great 
desire to be fair towards those he criticizes and not to misrepresent 
them. There may be different opinions as to what constitutes 
fairness j but so far as it consists in an appeal to documents, the 
claim in this instance cannot be denied " (The Conception of Priesthood, 
page 117). 

w. w. 

London, January 4th, 1899. 


Just as this Edition is passing through the Press, (but 
too late for any lengthy notice,) The Church Times' review of 
my book has appeared. It is most of all remarkable for 
its angry abuse, baffled rage, and personal insult. An 
attempt is made to prove that I am inaccurate on a few 
matters of but slight importance; but even if The Church 
Times were correct in all the instances cited by it — which 
is by no means the case — the general character of the book 
for accuracy as to facts would not be affected. The 
Ritualists have now said their worst against The Secret 
History of the Oxford Movement, and it is a comfort to feel 
that I have nothing to fear from it. I am preparing a full 
reply to my critics, which will shortly be published. 

W. W. 

London, September 2yd, 1898. 


In sending a third and cheaper edition of this book 

to the Press, I desire to express my thankfulness to 

God for the large circulation to which it has already 

attained. It has, of course, been severely censured by 

the friends of those whose misconduct and disloyalty it 

exposes, but, so far as I am aware, no one has even 

attempted to prove that it is in any way inaccurate as 

to its statement of facts. 

W. \V, 

London, July i8th, 189S. 


I HAVE written this book at the request of an eminent 
Dignitary of the Church of England, noted for the 
liberality and breadth of his views of religion. He repre- 
sented to me the need of a work which might be the means, 
in God's hands, of opening the eyes of loyal Churchmen to 
what is going on underneath the surface; and, as I have 
had exceptional opportunities for studying this aspect of the 
Ritualistic question, I have, though with not a little anxiety, 
complied with his request. I have written in no narrow- 
minded or party spirit. There is not, I believe, a single 
expression of my own opinion in the volume which will give 
offence either to Evangelical Churchmen, Broad Church- 
men, or old-fashioned High Churchmen of the school of the 
late Bishop Samuel Wilberforce and Dean Burgon. I have 
little doubt that men of all these parties will agree with 
what I have written. Ritualists and Romanizers will, of 
course, not agree with me at all. Those who work in the 
dark do not love the man who seeks to drag them forth into 
the light of day. 

I have taken every pains to be fair towards those whose 
conduct and teaching I criticize. I would not willingly 
misrepresent them in any way whatever. It was my anxiety 


to be fair and accurate, which induced me to adopt the plan 
of allowing these secret workers to tell their story in their 
own words. And, therefore, I have given full references 
and proofs for everything, taken from the writings of the 
Ritualists themselves. All my authorities are Ritualistic, 
with the exception of, perhaps, a score, whose testimonies 
were necessary for my purpose. The italics in the quotations 
are, with a very few exceptions, my own, not those of the 
persons quoted. 

It is a significant fact that secrecy has largely character- 
ized the Ritualistic Movement, even from the first year 
of its existence, when it was known by another name. 
Abundant proofs of this fact will be found in the following 
pages. Secret Ritualistic Societies have now come into 
existence, and they are increasing in number every year. 
At present the Church of England is literally honeycombed 
with Secret Societies, all working in the interests of the 
scheme for the Corporate Reunion of the Church of England 
with the Church of Rome. These secret plotters are the 
real wire-pullers of the Ritualistic Movement. 

A great deal of that which was strictly secret in the early 
days of the Oxford Movement has now been made public 
by means of the Biographies and Letters of some of the 
principal actors. I have endeavoured to utilize the revela- 
tions made in those publications in the following pages. 
They are scattered here and there through many volumes, 
and no attempt has hitherto been made to bring them 
together in one book. But my principal authorities have 
been the secret and privately printed documents of the 
Ritualists themselves. From these I have been able to 
give reports of speeches delivered in the secret meetings of 


Secret Societies, and of Semi-Secret Societies, several of 
them by men who have since risen to positions of eminence 
within the Church of England. In these secret gatherings 
they expressed themselves with a freedom which they have 
never adopted in their public utterances. 

The Secret History of the Priest in Absolution is here 
given for the first time. Lord Redesdale's exposure in the 
House of Lords, in 1877, of that very indecent Confessional 
book for the use of Ritualistic Father Confessors, raised 
a great storm of indignation throughout the country. His 
lordship was not an Evangelical, but — as the present Bishop 
of Winchester informs us in his Life of Archbishop Tait — 
" a sober and trusted High Churchman of the earlier sort/' 
Of course, the exposure produced a terrible commotion in 
the ranks of the Secret Society of the Holy Cross, which 
was held responsible for the book. The Brethren of that 
Society held many occult meetings to consider what they 
should do under such adverse circumstances. I have given 
full reports of these secret gatherings, as printed for the use 
of the Brethren only. I think most sober-minded Church- 
men will admit, after reading the speeches delivered by 
prominent Ritualistic clergymen on those occasions, that the 
proceedings of the Society were by no means characterized 
by straightforward dealing, but that, on the contrary, they 
were decidedly cunning and Jesuitical. In this connection I 
have necessarily had to comment largely on the Ritualistic 
Confessional ; but I have carefully abstained from writing 
anything which would offend the modesty of any Christian 
man or woman. 

Of necessity much has been left out of this volume which 
1 should have been glad to insert. There are intervals in 


the Secret History of the Oxford Movement which have 
yet to be filled up, when the documents necessary for the 
purpose are forthcoming. 

It is hoped that this volume may be the means of proving 
to many Churchmen, who have hitherto taken no interest 
in the Ritualistic question, that the contest now going on 
within the Church of England, and which, unhappily, 
threatens to rend her asunder, is not one about trifles. 
There are many men and women who love to hear the best 
music sung in our Churches, and wish to have the services 
conducted with the utmost possible reverence, who do not 
wish to surrender the priceless privileges of the Reformation, 
including freedom from Papal tyranny, in order that their 
Church, and the Church of their forefathers, shall, instead 
of going forward, return to the corruptions of the Dark 
Ages. It is hoped that this volume may enable many to 
see that behind the Ritual, and the outward pomp and 
grandeur of Ritualistic services, are the unscriptural doctrines 
which that Ritual is designed to teach, and which our 
forefathers found unendurable. All loyal Churchmen, by 
whatever name they call themselves, should unite in ejecting 
the lawless from their ranks, after an effort has been made 
to secure their obedience. Things are rapidly drifting 
towards a state of Ecclesiastical Anarchy. Indeed, in 
thousands of parishes, Anarchy already prevails, where 
Ritualistic priests persist in making their own whims and 
fancies their supreme law, and in doing only that which is 
right in their own eyes. I think it was Sydney Smith who 
said, of the Tractarian clergyman of his own time, that 
" He is only for the Bishop, when the Bishop is for him." 
It is so still; but with this unfortunate difference, — as a 


rule, the Bishop "is for him." Episcopal smiles and favours 
are heaped on the secret plotters whose work is described 
in this volume ; and the leaders of the State vie with the 
Bishops in promoting those who are systematically law- 

The influence of public opinion needs to be brought to 
bear upon this question. Compromise is out of the 
question. Either our Rulers in Church and State must 
unite together in maintaining law and order, or the Church 
of England will cease to be the Established Church of the 
nation. I am not pleading in any way for the narrowing of 
the existing boundaries of the Church of England, as defined 
in her formularies and laws. No considerable body, at 
present, wishes for anything of the kind. But I do maintain 
that law and order ought to be supreme in the Church, as 
much as in the State, and at present this, unfortunately, is 
not the case. At present the extreme Ritualists are a law 
unto themselves. There is not in existence a tribunal to 
whose Judgments they will yield obedience, when they 
come into collision with their own superior judgments. 
Reasonable men would say that it is better to have even 
imperfect tribunals than no tribunal at all ; and that it 
is wise to obey those which exist until efforts for their 
reformation are successful. But this does not appear to be 
the opinion of the Ritualists. Better that all English 
Church law and order shall go down than they should 
cease to do as they like. Bearing in mind their whole- 
hearted efforts for Corporate Reunion with Rome, as 
described in the two last chapters of this volume, when a 
state of loyalty and obedience to the Pope would again 
come into existence in the Church of England, does it not 



look very much as though the Romanizers were bent on 
upsetting all law and order within the Church of England, 
and producing a state of Anarchy, solely in order that on 
the ruins may be erected the law and order of the Pope 
of Rome ? 

W. W. 
London, September 4th, 1897. 



Chapter I. — The Secret History of the Oxford Move- 
ment .---.--i 

Birth of the Movement — Its Secret Teaching— Promoters 
dislike their names being known to the Public — Tract " On 
Reserve" — Newman writes against Popery — "Eats his dirty 
words " — Ward on Equivocation — Newman Establishes a Monas- 
tery — Pusey gives his approval — Newman's double dealing about 
it — Lockhart's experience in this Monastery — Mark Pattison's 
experience — " Stealing to Mass at the Catholic Church " — Faber's 
visit to Rome — Faber kisses the Pope's foot— Desanctis on Jesuits 
in Disguise — Midnight secret Meetings at Elton — Dr. Pusey 
privately orders a "Discipline with five knots" — Dr. Pusey 
secretly wears hair shirts — Ritualistic Sisters of Mercy to take 
the "Discipline" — A Ritualistic Sister whipped most cruelly — 
Romanists sell articles of " Discipline " to Ritualists — Maskell's 
Testimony as to Tractarian evasions and trickery. 

Chapter II. — The Society of the Holy Cross - - 46 

Its secret birth in 1855 — Brethren forbidden to mention its 
existence — Its secret Statutes — Its secret signs — Its mysterious 
"Committee of Clergy" — The Roll of sworn Celibates — Their 
Oath — Its secret Synods and Chapters — Brethren must push the 
Confessional amongst young and old — Its Confessional Book for 
little children — Its secret Confessional Committee — Issues the 
Priest in A bsolution — Secret birth of the Retreat Movement — First 
secret Retreat in Dr. Pusey's rooms— Starts the " St. George's 
Mission " at St. Peter's, London Docks — Dr. Pusey a member of 
the Mission — The Bishop of Lebombo a member of the Society of 
the Holy Cross — Sensational letter from him— Ritualistic Holy 
Water — Brethren alarmed at publicity — The Society establish an 
Oratory at Carlisle — Its secret history — Organizes a Petition for 
Licensed Confessors — Reports of speeches at its secret Synods — 
Their dark plottings exposed. 


Chapter III. — The Secrecy of the Ritualistic Con- 
fessional - - - - - 80 

The Confessional always a secret thing — Abuse of the Ritual- 
istic Confessional at Leeds — Dr. Pusey on the Seal of the Con- 
fessional — Ritualistic Sisters teach girls how to confess to priests — 
Secret Confessional books for penitents — Dr. Pusey revives the 
Confessional — Four years later writes against it — He hears Con- 
fessions in private houses — " His penitent's burning sense of shame 
and deceitfulness " — Bishop Wilberforce's opinion of Dr. Pusey — ■ 
A Ritualistic priest's extraordinary letter to a young lady — How 
Archdeacon Manning hears Confessions on the sly, "a hole and 
corner affair." 

Chapter IV. — The Secret History of "The Priest in 

Absolution" - - - - - - 93 

Part I. of the Priest in Absolution — Praised by the Ritualistic 
Press — Part II. secretly circulated amongst "Catholic" priests 
only — Lord Redesdale's exposure of the book in the House of 
Lords — Archbishop Tait says it is " a disgrace to the community " 
— Secret letter from the Master of the Society of the Holy Cross — 
Statement of the S. S. C. — Special secret Chapter of the Society to 
consider the Priest in Absolution — Full report of its proceedings, with 
speeches of the Brethren — Refuse to condemn the book — Discus- 
sion in Canterbury Convocation — Severe Episcopal Censures — 
Immoral Ritualistic Confessors ruin women ; Testimony of Arch- 
deacon Allen — Dr. Pusey's acknowledgments of the dangers of the 
Confessional ; It is the road by which a number of Christians go 
down to hell — Another secret meeting of the Society of the Holy 
Cross — Reports of the speeches and resolutions — Some Bishops 
secretly friendly to the Society — Canon Knox-Little's connection 
with the Society of the Holy Cross — Strange and Jesuitical 
Proceedings at the Society's Synod. 

Chapter V. — The Order of Corporate Reunion - - 147 

Origin of Order of Corporate Reunion shrouded in mystery — 
Its first " Pastoral " — It professes " loyalty " to the Pope — Prays 
for the Pope in its secret Synod — Its Bishops secretly consecrated 
by foreign Bishops — Who were they ? " Bishop " Lee and 
" Bishop " Mossman — " Bishop " Mossman professes belief in the 
Pope's Infallibility — Birth of the Order rejoices the Romanists — 
Its proceedings discussed by the Society of the Holy Cross — Some 
secret documents — Eight hundred Church of England clergy 
secretly ordained by a bishop of the Order. 



Chapter VI. — Ritualistic Sisterhoods - 16a 

Ritualistic Sisterhoods formed on Roman models — Dr. Pusey 
visits Romish Convents in Ireland — Borrows Rules from English 
and Continental Nunneries — Hislop on the Pagan origin of Con- 
vents — Dr. Pusey's first Sister visits Foreign Convents — Miss 
Goodman's experience of Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood — Rule of Obedi- 
ence — Shameful tyranny over the Sisters— The Sister must obey 
the Superior " yielding herself as wax to be moulded unresistingly" 
— The mercenary Rule of Holy Poverty — Are Ritualistic Convents 
Jails? — The Vow of Poverty at St. Margaret's, East Grinstead — A 
secret Convent Book quoted — Life Vows — Is it easy to embe zzle 
the Sister's money ? — The secret Statutes of All Saints' Sisterhood, 
Margaret Street ; and the Clewer Sisterhood — Sisters and their 
Wills — Evidence before the Select Committee — Bishop Samuel 
Wilberforce on Conventual Vows — Archbishop Tait on Conventual 
Vows — Ritualistic Nuns Enclosed for Life — " Father Ignatius' " 
Nuns — Whipping Ritualistic Nuns — Miss Cusack's experience of 
Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood, " a Hell upon earth " — Cases of Cruelty in 
Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood — Hungry Sisters Tempted — Private Burial 
Grounds in Ritualistic Convents — Secret Popish Service in a 
Ritualistic Convent Chapel ; a Mass '* in Latin from the Roman 
Missal" — Superstitious Convent Services — Extracts from a secret 
book for Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood — Sisterhoods and Education : A 
Warning to Protestant Parents. 

Chapter VII. — The Confraternity of the Blessed 

Sacrament ------ 20a 

Protestant Martyrs and the Mass — Latimer's testimony — 
Restoration of the Mass by the Ritualists — Birth of the Confra- 
ternity of the blessed Sacrament — Its objects and work — Its secret 
Intercession Paper, ordered to be "destroyed" when done with-^ 
Its " medal " may be buried with deceased members — First expo- 
sure of an Intercession Paper at Plymouth — Great excitement — How 
the Rock found an Intercession Paper — Secret proceedings at New 
York — The secret "Roll of Priests- Associate " — Dread lest it 
should fall into Protestant hands — Curious letter from a Priest- 
Associate — Extracts from the papers of the C. B. S. — Requiem 
Masses for Souls in Purgatory — Advocates Fasting Communion — 
Bishop Samuel Wilberforce on Fasting Communion : " detestable 
materialism " — Opposes Evening Communion — Proofs that it is 
sanctioned by the Primitive Church — C. B. S. term it "spiritually 
and morally dangerous" — Eucharistic Adoration of C. B. S. 
Identical with that of Rome — Its Idolatrous character — The 
C. B. S. on the Real Presence— The " Eucharistic Sacrifice " — 
— Bishop Beveridge on Sacrifice — Transubstantiation advocated 
by name — Bishop Wilberforce Censures the Confraternity of the 
BJesged Sacrament. 


Chapter VIII. — Some Other Ritualistic Societies - 227 

A Purgatorial Society in the Church of England — The Guild 
of All Souls — Extracts from its Publications — Masses for the Dead 
in the Church of England — Festival on "All Souls' Day" — The 
Fire of Purgatory the same as that of Hell — Bishop of London 
(Dr. Temple) gives its President a Living — The Secret Order of 
the Holy Redeemer — An Inner Circle ; The Brotherhood of the 
Holy Cross; its secret rules quoted — The "Declaration" of the 
Order of the Holy Redeemer — The Pope the " Pastor and Teacher 
of the Church" — Why its members stay within the Church of 
England — Extraordinary and Jesuitical letter of "John O. H. R." 
— Its mysterious Superior said to be a "Bishop," though not in 
the Clergy List. Who ordained and consecrated him ? — The 
secret Order of St. John the Divine — Extract from its secret rules 
— Society of St. Osmund — Its rules and objects — Prays for the 
Pope — Its silly superstitions — Driving the Devil out of Incense 
and Flowers — The Adoration of the Cross — A degrading spectacle 
— Its Mary worship — Holy Relics— Advocates Paying for Masses 
for the Dead — The Society merged in the Alcuin Club — The Club 
joined by several Bishops — Laymen's Ritual Institute of Norwich 
— Its Secret Oath — Secret Guild Books of St. Alphege, Southwark 
— Guild of St. John the Evangelist, at St. Alban's, Holborn — 
Confraternity of All Saints', Margaret Street — The Railway Guild 
of the Holy Cross. 

Chapter IX. — The Romeward Movement - 260 

V Corporate Reunion with Rome desired — Not individual Seces- 

sion — The reason for this policy — How to "Catholicise" the 
Church of England — Protestantism a hindrance to Reunion — 
Reunion with Rome the ultimate object of the Ritualistic Move- 
ment — Newman and Froude visit Wiseman at Rome — They 
inquire for terms of admission to the Church of Rome — Secret 
Receptions into the Church of Rome — Growth of Newman's love 
for Rome — Newman wants " more Vestments and decorations in 
worship" — William George Ward: "The Jesuits were his 
favourite reading" — Publication of Tract XC. — Mr. Dalgairn's 
letter to the Univers — Secret negotiations with Dr. Wiseman — 
" Only through the English Church can you (Rome) act on the 
English nation " — Keble hopes that yearning after Rome "will be 
allowed to gain strength " — Mr. Gladstone on the Romeward 
Movement — He hopes those " excellent persons " who love all 
Roman doctrine will " abide in the Church " — "The Ideal of a 
Christian Church " — Dr. Pusey's eulogy of the Jesuits censured 
by Dr. Hook — Mr. Gladstone's article in the Quarterly Review — 
Pusey hopes " Rome and England will be united in one" — Pusey 
asks for " more love for Rome " — He praises the ''superiority" 
of Roman teaching— Pusey believes in Purgatory and Invocation 
of Saints — He yet " forbids " his penitents to invoke the Saints — 


Manning's remarkable letter to Pusey — Manning's visit to Rome 
in 1848 — Kneels in the street before the Pope— His double dealing 
in the Church of England — The Roman Catholic Rambler on the 
Oxford Movement. 

Chapter X. — The Romeward Movement - 307 

The Association for the Promotion of the Unity of Christendom 
•—Sermons and Essays on Reunion — Denunciation of Protestantism 
— Treasonable letter in the Union Review — The A. P. U. C. de- 
nounced by the Inquisition — Degrading Reply of 198 Church ot 
England Dignitaries and Clergy — Archbishop Manning's opinion 
of the Romeward Movement — The Society of " the Holy Cross 
Petition for Reunion with Rome — Signed by 1212 clergymen — 
The English Church Union — Its work for Union with Rome — 
Approves Dr. Pusey's Eirenicon — Pusey writes that there is 
nothing in the Pope's " Supremacy" in itself to which he would 
object — The Catholic Union for Prayer — A Colonial Priest on 
Reunion with Rome — The "levelling up" process — The real 
Objects of the English Church Union — The Lord's Day and the 
Holy Eucharist — Lord Halifax wants Benediction of the Blessed 
Sacrament — E. C. U. members find fault with the Book of 
Common Prayer — E. C. U. Petitions the Lambeth Conference for 
Reunion — Reunion asked for under " The Bishop of Old Rome " 
— Lord Halifax prefers Leo XIII. to the Privy Council — Dean 
Hook in favour of the Privy Council — Mr. Mackonochie's Evidence 
before the Ecclesiastical Courts' Commission — Asserts there has 
been no "Ecclesiastical Court" since the Reformation — A 
Ritualistic Curate supplies the " Kernel" to Roman Ritual — He 
preaches the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary — Lord 
Halifax and " Explanations " of the Pope's Infallibility — The 
Homilies on the Church of Rome — Rome has already reaped an 
harvest from Ritualistic labours — Secession as well as union a 
Scriptural duty — Objections to Reunion with Rome. 

Appendix. — What the Ritualists Teach - - - 373 

The Bible — The Book of Common Prayer — The Thirty-nine 
Articles— Reunion with Rome — The Pope's Infallibility, Primacy 
and Supremacy — The Reformers and the Reformation — Some 
Ritualistic " Ornaments of the Church " — The Real Presence— 
The Power and Dignity of Sacrificing Priests — The Sacrifice of 
the Mass — The Ceremonies of Low Mass — Some Cautions for 
Mass Priests — Purgatory — Auricular Confession and Priestly 
Absolution — Invocation of Saints — The Virtues of Holy Salt, 
Holy Water, and Holy Oil — Monastic Institutions — Protestantism 
— The Importance of Ritual — Dissent. 


- 411 







Birth of the Movement — Its Secret Teaching — Promoters dislike their names 
being known to the Public — Tract " On Reserve " — Newman writes 
against Popery — M Eats his dirty words " — Ward on Equivocation — 
Newman Establishes a Monastery— Pusey gives his approval — Newman's 
double dealing about it — Lockhart's experience in this Monastery — Mark 
Pattison's experience — " Stealing to Mass at the Catholic Church " — 
Faber's visit to Rome — Faber kisses the Pope's foot — Desanctis on 
Jesuits in Disguise — Midnight secret Meetings at Elton — Dr. Pusey 
privately orders a " Discipline with five knots " — Dr. Pusey secretly wears 
hair shirts — Ritualistic Sisters of Mercy to take the "Discipline" — A 
Ritualistic Sister whipped most cruelly — Romanists sell articles of 
" Discipline " to Ritualists — Maskell's Testimony as to Tractarian evasions 
and trickery. 

THE late Cardinal Newman, the first leader of the 
Tractarians, has stated in his Apologia that he ever 
considered and kept July 14th, 1833, as the start of 
the Tractarian Movement. Within three months from that 
date he published his work on the Arians of the Fourth 
Century, in which the " Disciplina Arcani," or the " secret 
teaching," which found such favour with a few of the early 
Fathers, was held up to the admiration of English church- 
men of the nineteenth century. It was most appropriate 
that a religious movement in which secrecy has played so 
important a part should be inaugurated by the publication 
of such a work. It has served as a seed from which many 
a noxious weed has grown. Closely connected with the 
11 Disciplina Arcani " is what is termed the " Economical " 
mode of teaching and arguing. The difference between the 


two is thus defined by Newman himself. " If," he writes, 
"it is necessary to contrast the two with each other, the 
one may be considered as withholding the truth, and the 
other as setting it out to advantage." 1 As an illustration 
of this " Economy " he quotes with approval the very 
objectionable advice of Clement of Alexandria: — 

" The Alexandrian Father," he affirms, " who has already been 
quoted, accurately describes the rules which should guide the Christian 
in speaking and writing economically. ' Being fully persuaded of the 
omnipresence of God,' says Clement, 'and ashamed to come short of 
the truth, he is satisfied with the approval of God, and of his own 
conscience. Whatever is in his mind, is also on his tongue j towards 
those who are fit recipients, both in speaking and living, he harmon- 
izes his profession with his thoughts. He both thinks and speaks 
the truth ; except when careful treatment is necessary, and then, as a 
physician for the good of his patients, he will lie, or rather utter a 
lie, as the Sophists say. . . . Nothing, however, but his neighbour's 
good will lead him to do this. He gives himself up for the Church.' " 3 

As to the " Disciplina Arcani," Newman justifies it on 
several grounds, and affirms that in the Church of Alexandria 
the Catechumens were not taught all the doctrines of the 
Christian Faith. Many of these were treated by their 
teachers as secret doctrines to be held in reserve. " Even 
to the last," he asserts, " they were granted nothing beyond 
a formal and general account of the articles of the Christian 
Faith ; the exact and fully developed doctrines of the 
Trinity and the Incarnation, and still more, the doctrine 
of the Atonement, as once made upon the Cross, and 
commemorated and appropriated in the Eucharist, being 
the exclusive possession of the serious and practised 
Christian." 3 It is worthy of note that Newman affirmed 
that these secret doctrines were not learnt from the 
Scriptures. " Now first," he writes, " it may be asked, 
How was any secrecy practicable, seeing that the Scrip- 
tures were open to everyone who chose to consult them ? 
It may startle those who are but acquainted with the 

1 Newman's Avians, p. 65. Seventh edition. 2 Ibid., pp. 73, 74. 3 Ibid., p. 45. 


popular writings of this day, yet, I believe, the most 
accurate consideration of the subject will lead us to 
acquiesce in the statement, as a general truth, that the 
doctrines in question [i.e., the secret doctrines of the early 
Church] have never been learnt merely from Scripture" And 
then he adds : — " Surely the Sacred Volume was never 
intended, and is not adapted, to teach us our Creed." 4 
Thus early in the Tractarian Movement were its disciples 
taught not to look to the Bible only for what they should 
believe. The traditions of men were set up as of equal 
value with the Written Word. No wonder that such a 
Movement led to many and grievous departures from 
Christian truth. Teaching like this was eagerly imbibed 
by the disciples of Newman, who very naturally, though 
without sufficient reason, inferred that, if the Alexandrian 
Fathers were justified in hiding certain doctrines of 
Christianity from the popular gaze, as secrets to be made 
known only to the initiated whom they could trust, the 
Tractarians of the nineteenth century might lawfully 
imitate their example. Accordingly, they, at first, from their 
pulpits preached the ordinary doctrines of the Church of 
England, as they had been taught for nearly three hundred 
years ; while secretly, and to those only who could be trusted, 
they taught those Romish doctrines and practices which 
they dared not then expose to the light of publicity. 

There was a measure of secrecy observed even in the 
formation of the Tractarian Movement. As early as 
September 3rd, 1833, one of the party — the late Professor 
Mozley — writing to his sister, after announcing that with his 
letter she would " receive a considerable number of Tracts, 
the first production of the Society established for the 
dissemination of High Church principles," proceeds to give 
particulars of the plans of the party ; but finds it necessary, 
before closing his letter, to add this caution for her 
guidance : — " But for the present you must remember all 

4 Ibid., p. 50. 

J * 


these details I have been going through are secret."* Here, it 
will be observed, the real object of the Movement is frankly 
revealed. It is to be a Society for "the dissemination of 
High Church principles." But when the prospectus of the 
Society was made public, there was not one word in it 
which might lead the public to suppose that " The Associa- 
tion of the Friends of the Church " — as it was termed — had 
the slightest desire to promote High Church views. That, 
the real object, was kept back in reserve, to be imparted 
only to the elect of the party. In a letter to a friend one of 
the members of the new Association actually went so far as 
to assert : — " We want to unite all the Church, orthodox 
and Evangelical, clergy, nobility, and people, in maintenance 
of our doctrine and polity." 6 

" There was, indeed," writes one of the leaders of the 
Tractarians, the Rev. William Palmer, " much misappre- 
hension abroad as to our motives, and we had no means of 
explaining those motives, without the danger of giving publicity 
to our proceedings, which, in the then state of the public mind 
on Church matters, might have led to dangerous results." 7 

This dread of the light of day was fully shared by 
Newman, who, writing from Oriel College, Oxford, to his 
friend Mr. J. W. Bowden, on August 31st, 1833, remarks : — 
" We are just setting up here Societies for the Defence of 
the Church. We do not like our names known, but we hope 
the plan will succeed." 8 The very same day Newman wrote 
to another intimate friend, Mr. F. Rogers — subsequently 
known as Lord Blachford — as follows : — 

" Entre nous, we have set up Societies over the kingdom in defence 
of the Church. Certainly this is, you will say, a singular confidential 
communication, being shared by so many ; but the entre nous relates 
to we. We do not like our names known." 9 

This dread of having their names " known " to the public 

' Motley's Letters, p. 33. 

6 Palmer's Narrative of Events Connected with Tracts for the Times, p. 212. 
Edition, 1883. 7 Ibid., p. 108. 

8 Newman's Letters and Correspondence, Vol. I., p. 448. 9 Ibid., p. 450. 


is still felt by the members of several Ritualistic societies of 
the present generation. It is a noteworthy fact that for 
fifteen years — from 1880 to 1896 — no list of the Brethren of 
the secret Society of the Holy Cross— though a fresh list is 
printed and circulated every year— came into Protestant 
hands. When the " Suggestions " for the formation of 
" The Association of the Friends of the Church " were printed 
and circulated, care was even taken that no outsider, into 
whose hands a stray copy might chance to fall, should be able 
to discover from it whence it came, or who were responsible 
for it. This was a matter for astonishment on the part of 
Mr. J. W. Bowden, who, writing from London to Newman, 
on November 4th, 1833, mentions that : — 

" Those to whom I have shown the ' Suggestions ' say, ' But where 
are the names ? Who are they ? Where are they ? ' For even the 
word Oxford does not appear thereon. For aught the ■ Suggestions ' 
say, the founders of the scheme might belong to the operative classes 
of Society, and their head-quarters might be in some alley in London. 
The year, too, should be put ; a reader might, if he found a dirty 
copy, suppose the whole scheme ten years old." 10 

Amongst the prominent laymen who supported the 
Tractarian Movement was Mr. Joshua Watson. He drew up 
the first Lay Declaration organized by the Tractarians at the 
close of 1833. His brother wanted to know too much about 
the objects of the Declaration and was refused the information 
by Mr. Joshua Watson in the following terms : — 

" As to the query, whence it comes and whither it goes, the only 
answer is, what does that signify ? Never mind, if it dropped from 
the clouds. If you like it, sign it ; if you do not, let it alone. As to 
its ulterior destination, I reply that, without the gift of second sight, 
I pretend not to answer." 11 

Dr. Pusey, at this time, had not publicly joined what 
Newman termed "the grand scheme." 12 But on November 
7th, 1833, the latter was able to announce to the Rev. Hurrell 
Froude, then the most advanced Romanizer of the new 

10 Ibid., p. 472. 

11 Memoir of Joshua Watson, by Archdeacon Churton, p. 209. Second edition. 
B Newman's Letters, Vol. I., p. 478. 


party, that Pusey was circulating the recently issued Tracts 
for the Times. 13 Six days later Newman privately informed 
Mr. Bowden that Pusey had joined the new party, but he adds 
the caution that his name "must not be mentioned as of 
our party." 1 * It is interesting to note that Newman, at the 
same time, mentioned that Mr. Gladstone " has joined us." 
At this period Newman was writing a series of anonymous 
articles in the Evangelical Record, over the signature of 
"Churchman." 16 It is certain that if he had made known 
his High Church views to the then editor of that paper, his 
articles would have been refused. 

Already Newman was himself practising his doctrine of 
Reserve. He had departed, in his own mind, from several 
of the Protestant doctrines of his forefathers, but the world 
knew nothing at all about the change in his views. What 
he kept secret from the public, he made known to his trusted 
friends. Thus, for example, he wrote, on November 22nd, 
1833, to the Rev. S. Rickards : — 

" I must just touch upon the notice of the Lord's Supper. In 
confidence to a friend, I can only admit it was imprudent, for I do 
think that we have most of us dreadfully low notions of the Blessed 
Sacrament. / expect to he called a Papist when my opinions are 
known. But (please God) I shall lead persons on a little way, while 
they fancy they are only taking the mean, and denounce me as the 
extreme." 16 

Here a truly Jesuitical spirit manifests itself. Hurrell 
Froude acted in a similarly underhanded manner. In one of 
his letters to a friend, written only one month after the 
commencement of the Movement, he remarked : — " Since I 
have been at home, I have been doing what I can to proselytise 
in an underhand way." 17 Is there not reason to fear that 
many of the clergy, who do not call themselves Ritualists, 
are in our own day imitating the bad examples shown by 
Newman and Froude, more than sixty years ago ? The danger 

13 Newman's Letters, Vol. I., p. 476. 14 Ibid., p. 482. 

u Ibid., p. 483. u Ibid., p. 490. 

W Froude's Remains, Vol. I., p. 322. 


is to be looked for in nominally Evangelical parishes, as well as 
in those under avowedly High Church management. In 
looking through the privately printed Annual Report of the 
Merton College (Oxford) Church Society, for 1892, which 
supports several Ritualistic causes, and advocates reunion with 
the corrupt Eastern Church, I was surprised to read, in the 
list of members, the names of several clergymen who at the 
present time hold Evangelical incumbencies or curacies. 
These gentlemen would, no doubt, be considerably annoyed, 
were their connection with this private Society made known 
to their present congregations. It may, however, be fairly 
asked, why should they in secret be members of a High Church # 
Society, while in public they profess to be Evangelicals ? 
Let them be consistent, and if they do not hold High 
Church views, withdraw from such an organization. I do 
not assert that these gentlemen are insincere, for we 
cannot read the secret thoughts of others, but, until they 
cease to be members, I cannot help wondering whether 
they are acting on the Ritualistic principle of " Reserve 
in Communicating Religious Knowledge ? " 

Newman's views on Reserve and Economy when first 
published in 1833, created a great deal of interest ; but this 
was as nothing when compared with the effect produced, 
in 1838, by the publication of Isaac Williams's pamphlet 
" On Reserve in Communicating Religious Knowledge." 
It formed No. 80 of Tracts for the Times, and this 
he subsequently supplemented by another and larger 
pamphlet on the same subject, being No. 8j of Tracts 
for the Times. The doctrine taught by Williams set the 
whole of the Church of England in an uproar. His 
Tracts were condemned by almost every Bishop on the 
Bench. In BricknelFs Judgment of the Bishops upon Trac- 
tartan Theology, pp. 424-472, there are printed extensive 
extracts from Episcopal Charges in which the doctrine of 
Reserve is condemned in the strongest terms. Tract 80 
commences with a clear exposition of its purport. 


"The object of the present inquiry," writes Isaac Williams, " is to 
ascertain, whether there is not in God's dealings with mankind, a very 
remarkable holding back of sacred and important truths, as if the 
knowledge of them were injurious to persons unworthy of them " (p. 3) 

Amongst the doctrines which Williams mentions as those 
which are to be held back in Reserve from the uninitiated, as 
great secrets of Christianity, are those of the Atonement, 
Faith and Works, the free Grace of God, the Sacraments, 
and Priestly Absolution. 

" Not only," he writes, " is the exclusive and naked exposure of so 
very sacred a truth [as the * Doctrine of the Atonement'] unscriptural 
and dangerous, but, as Bishop Wilson says, the comforts of Religion 
ought to be applied with great caution. And moreover to require, 
as is sometimes done, from both grown persons and children, an 
explicit declaration of a belief in the Atonement, and the full 4 
assurance of its power, appears equally untenable." {Tract 80, p. 78.) 
" These riches " [i.e., certain * sacred truths '] are all secret, 
given to certain dispositions — not cast loosely on the world. . . The 
great doctrines which of late years have divided Christians, are again 
of this [' secret '] kind very peculiarly, such as the subjects of Faith 
and Works, of the free Grace of God, and obedience on the part of 
man. . . They appear to be great secrets, notwithstanding whatever 
may be said of them, only revealed to the faithful." {Ibid., pp. 48,49.) 

"With respect to the Holy Sacraments," Williams remarks, in 
his second pamphlet on Reserve, " it is in these, and by these chiefly, 
that the Church of all ages has held the Doctrine of the Atonement 
after a certain manner of Reserve. . . . Now here it is very evident 
at once that the great difference between these two systems [i.e., what 
Williams terms the true Catholic, and the modern Protestant system] 
consists in this, that one holds the doctrine secretly as it were, and in 
Reserve j the other in a public and popular manner." {Tract 87, 
pp. 88, 89.) 

" The same may be shown with respect to the powers of Priestly 
Absolution, and the gifts conferred thereby. It is not required for our 
purpose to show the reality of that power, and the magnitude of those 
gifts which are thus dispensed. But a little consideration will show 
that if the Church of all ages is right in exercising these privileges, 
the subject is one entirely of this reserved and mystical character. Its 
blessings are received in secret, according to faith : they are such as 


the world cannot behold, and cannot receive. The subject is one 
so profound and mysterious, that it hardly admits of being put forward 
in a popular way, and doubtless more injury than benefit would be 
done to religion by doing so inconsiderately." (Ibid., p. 90.) 

No wonder that the Bishops condemned such doctrines 
as these. " Far from us," wrote Dr. Musgrave, Bishop of 
Hereford, u therefore, be it to withhold from our Christian 
people any doctrine revealed in God's Word as needful for 
salvation, or to impose upon them for such, anything not 
there revealed." 18 Dr. Blomfield, Bishop of London, 
indignantly rejected the secret teaching of Isaac Williams. 
" Anything," he declared, " of the nature of a ■ Disciplina 
Arcani,' I as promptly reject." 19 It is worthy of note here 
that in his Autobiography — which was not published until 
1892 — Williams admits that the Evangelical party, when his 
Tract on Reserve was published, took a right view as to its 
real meaning. " With regard to the great obloquy," he 
writes, " it [Tract on Reserve] occasioned from the Low 
Church Party, this was to be expected — it was against their 
hollow mode of proceeding ; it was understood as it was meant, 
and of this I do not complain." 20 It is certain that 
Evangelical Churchmen understood it as meaning that the 
Tractarian clergy felt themselves justified in imparting to 
those only whom they could trust their real and Romish 
doctrines concerning the Atonement, Faith and Works, 
Grace, the Sacraments, Priestly Absolution, and other doc- 
trines; and to Protestants this naturally looked like double- 
dealing and Jesuitism. No wonder they were indignant. 

It is admitted by one who for many years held a promi- 
nent position amongst the advanced Ritualistic clergy (the 
Rev. Orby Shipley) that this " Doctrine of Reserve " was 
" both taught and acted upon " to " a wide extent " by the 
Tractarians. 21 And the Master of the secret Society of the 

18 Bricknell's Judgment of the Bishops, p. 434. 19 Ibid., p. 436. 

, " Autobiography of Isaac Williams, p. 91. 
31 Orby Shipley's Invocation of Saints and Angels, p. xi. London, 1869. 


Holy Cross, addressing the May, 1873, Synod of that 
Society, said : — 

" We look back to a time when Catholic truth and worship were 
in a condition almost resembling that of the Church of the Catacombs, 
when the utmost reserve was thought necessary, even in speaking of 
simple facts of the Creed. The Gorham case, and the intrusion of 
the Schismatical Hierarchy of Rome, with the anti-Catholic animus to 
which they gave force, were still hanging over us, and what was done 
for the truth was mostly done in a corner.'"® 

The subtlety of a Jesuit could not have invented a more 
ingenious scheme. 

Early in 1836, both the Standard and the Edinburgh 
Review censured the Tractarian Party in strong terms. 
These attacks greatly annoyed Newman, who, writing to 
Keble on January 16th of that year, remarks : — " Now, 
since many of these notices are made under the impression 
that we are Crypto- Papists, here is an additional reason for 
tracts on the Popish question." 2S Dr. Pusey readily fell in 
with this subtle scheme for writing against Popery. He 
evidently thought it a clever dodge for throwing dust in 
the eyes of the public, and leading many Protestants, 
thus blinded, to adopt High Church principles, before they 
were aware of it. On this subject Pusey wrote to a friend : — 

" I know not that the Popish controversy may not just be the 
very best way of handling Ultra-Protestantism, i.e., neglecting it, 
not advancing against, but setting Catholic views against Roman 
Catholicism and so disposing of Ultra- Protestantism by a side wind, 
and teaching people Catholicism, without their suspecting, while they 
are only bent on demolishing Romanism. I suspect we might thus 
have people with us, instead of against us, and that they might Jind 
themselves Catholics before they were aware." ^ 

The impression that the leaders of the Tractarians were 
secretly Papists was a very natural one. Those who doubted 
could not produce legal evidence in proof of what they 

82 S.S.C. Master's Address, May Synod, 1873, p. 3. 
28 Newman's Letters, Vol. II., p. 153. 
84 Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. I., p. 332. 


feared : but the knowledge of the suspicions which existed 
led Newman to adopt a course to ward off suspicion, which, 
had it been understood by his opponents, would have greatly 
increased their impressions as to Crypto-Papists being at 
that time in the Church of England. He determined, as 
we have seen, to write against Popery. How could anyone, 
then, suppose that the man who said such strong things 
against the Church of Rome was in any sense a disguised 
Romanist ? It was not the first time he had written against 
portions of the Roman system. No Protestant could have 
said fiercer things than he had said in the past, and 
continued to say, so long as it answered his purpose. Here 
are a few extracts from his utterances, beginning with the 
year 1833, and ending with 1839. I ta ^e the extracts as 
cited by Newman himself, in his famous letter to the Oxford 
Conservative Journal, January, 1843. In the Lyra Apostolica, 
published in 1833, he declared that the Church of Rome 
was a " lost Church." At page 421 of the first edition of 
his work on the Avians of the Fourth Century, he wrote of 
" the Papal Apostacy." In No. 15 of Tracts fov the Times, 
in 1833, he wrote : — 

" True, Rome is heretical now. . . If she has apostatized, it was at 
the time of the Council of Trent. Then, indeed, it is to be feared the 
whole Roman Communion bound itself, by a perpetual bond and 
covenant to the cause of Anti-christ." 

Again, in the same year he wrote, in Tvact 20. " Their 
[Papists'] communion is infected with heresy ; we are bound 
to flee it as a pestilence. They have established a lie in the 
place of God's truth, and by their claim of immutability in 
doctrine, cannot undo the sin they have committed." 

In 1834 Newman affirmed that : — 

" In the corrupt Papal system we have the very cruelty, the craft, 
and the ambition of the republic 5 its cruelty in its unsparing sacrifice 
of the happiness and virtue of individuals to a phantom of public 
expediency, in its forced celibacy within, and its persecutions without ; 
its craft in its falsehoods, its deceitful deeds and lying wonders ; and 
its grasping ambition in the very structure of its policy, in its 


assumption of universal dominion $ old Rome is still alive ; nowhere 
have its eagles lighted, but it still claims the sovereignty under another 
pretence. The Roman Church I will not blame, but pity — she is, as 
I have said, spell-bound, as if by an evil spirit 5 she is in thraldom." 

In the same year, in No. 38 of Tracts for the Times, 
Newman termed the Church of Rome " unscriptural," 
"profane," "impious," "blasphemous," "gross," and 
" monstrous." In the year 1838, in his lectures on 
Romanism and Popular Protestantism, he said of the 
Church of Rome : — 

" In truth she is a Church beside herself, abounding in noble gifts 
and rightful titles, but unable to use them religiously j crafty, obstinate, 
wilful, malicious, cruel, unnatural, as madmen are. Or, rather, she 
may be said to resemble a demoniac, possessed with principles, 
thoughts, and tendencies not her own. . . Thus she is her real self 
only in name, and till God vouchsafe to restore her, we must treat her 
as if she were that evil one which governs her." 

What Protestant could utter abuse of Popery more 
fierce than is contained in the above extracts from Newman's 
own words ? But there is this marked difference between 
the two. The Protestant means what he says when he 
denounces Rome ; while Newman did nothing of the kind. 
He meant his denunciation of Popery to be dust with which 
to blind the eyes of his opponents, and prevent them 
discovering his real aims ; and there can be no doubt it, 
for a time, in a large measure served its purpose. When the 
denunciations had done their work, however, they were 
unreservedly withdrawn, and that by the author himself. In 
the letter to the Oxford Conservative Journal mentioned 
already, Newman cited all the extracts given above from his 
writings, together with other similar statements, and then he 
adds this remarkable confession of his guilt : — 

** If you ask me how an individual could venture, not simply to 
hold, but to publish such views of a Communion [i.e., the Church of 
Rome] so ancient, so wide-spreading, so fruitful in saints, I answer, 
that I said to myself, 'I AM NOT SPEAKING MY OWN 
WORDS, I am but following almost a consensus of the divines of my 

Newman's double dealing. 13 

Church. They have ever used the strongest language against Rome, 
even the most learned and able of them. I wish to throw myself into 
their system. While I say what they say I am safe. SUCH VIEWS, 
reason to fear still, that such language is to be ascribed, in no small 
measure, to an impetuous temper, a hope of approving myself to 
person s respect, and a wish to repel the charge of Romanism." 

Accordingly he withdrew all the charges made against the 
Church of Rome in the above quotations from his writings. 
In those writings his denunciations of Rome are put forth, 
not as those of a " consensus of divines " of the Church of 
England, but as his own. And yet, all the while, he tells us, 
he was "not speaking his own words ! " It was " necessary 
for our position " to write thus. There was no other 
effectual way to gain " person's respect " for his consistency, 
and to "repel the charge of Romanism." In short his 
conduct was a practical illustration of the doctrine of the 
" Economy " advocated in his book on the Arians, in which, 
as we have seen, he cites with approval the doctrine of 
Clement of Alexandria, that a Christian " Both thinks 
and speaks the truth ; except when careful treatment is 
necessary. J an d then, as a physician for the good of his 
patients, he will lie, or rather utter a lie, as the Sophists 
say." Can we wonder that the men and women of that 
generation doubted the word of Newman ? He did not tell 
the world at that time — so far as I can ascertain — that he 
had ever believed in his own denunciations of Romanism 
when he wrote them. It was nearly a quarter of a century 
after, that, in his Apologia, he let the public know that he 
" fully believed " all his accusations against Rome at the time 
he made them ; but in the same book he admitted that his letter 
to the Oxford Conservative Journal was, after all, but "a lame 
apology." 25 There can be no question as to its lameness, and 
not all the subtlety displayed in the Apologia is able to deprive 
it of its crippled character. A few days before the retractation 

Apologia Pro Vita Sua, pp. 201, 204. Edition, 1889. 


was published at Oxford, Newman wrote to his friend, 
James R. Hope-Scott, to announce the coming event. 
" My conscience," he told his correspondent, " goaded me 
some two months since to an act which comes into effect, 
I believe, in the Conservative Journal next Saturday, viz., to eat 
a few dirty words of mine." 26 A few days later Mr. Hope- 
Scott acquainted Newman with the effect his retractation 
had produced on his acquaintances. " People whom I have 
heard speak of it," he wrote, "(few, perhaps, but fair 
samples) are rather puzzled than anything else." 27 Newman's 
conduct for several years before this date had fairly 
"puzzled" everybody, both friends and foes. They could 
not make him out ; he was a mystery they could not 
penetrate. The suspicion that he was acting in an under- 
hand way was not confined to Protestants, as the rejoinder 
he wrote to the last quoted letter of Mr. J. R. Hope-Scott, 
clearly shows. Writing to him, on February 3rd, 1843, 
Newman gives the following additional explanation of his 
retractation : — 

" My reason for the thing was my long-continued feeling of the 
great inconsistency I was in of letting things stand in print against 
me which I did not hold, and which I could not but be contradicting 
by my acting every day of my life. And more especially (i.e., it 
came home to me most vividly in that particular way) I felt that I 
was taking people in; that they thought me what I was not, and were 
trusting me when they should not, and this has been at times a very 
painful feeling indeed. I don't want to be trusted (perhaps you may 
think my fear, even before this affair, somewhat amusing) 5 but so it 
was and is ; people wont believe I go as far as I do — they will clino- to 
their hopes. And then, again, intimate friends have almost reproached 
me with * paltering with them in a double sense, keeping the word oj 
promise to their ear, to break it to their hope.'' They have said that my 
words against Rome often, when narrowly examined, were only what I 
meant, but that the effect of them was what others meant. I am not 
aware that I have any great motive for this paper beyond this — ■ 
setting myself right, and wishing to be seen in my proper colours, 

* Memoirs of J. R. Hope-Scott, Vol. II., p. 19. *7 Ibid., p. 20. 


and not unwilling to do such penance for wrong words as lies in the 
necessary criticism which such a retractation will involve on the part 
of friends and enemies." 28 

Turning back to August gth, 1836, we note that, on this 
date, one of Newman's friends, the Rev. R. F. Wilson, wrote 
to complain of his " unnecessary " Economy, and mentioned 
a case in which he had so acted. " By-the-bye," he asked 
Newman, " why will you economise so unnecessarily at 
times? as if to keep your hand in. You sent Major B. 
away with a conviction that you looked on D. as a very fine, 
noble character. As he had this information fresh from you, 
I did not venture to say anything subversive of your 
judgment ; so now he will probably publish the high 
admiration and respect with which D. is looked up to by his 
late comrades — more especially by Mr. Newman." 29 There 
is something truly Jesuitical in the way Newman acted 
towards " Major B." on this occasion. Unfortunately there 
is reason to fear that it was by no means an exceptional 
case either with himself or his disciples. There is an 
absence of English straightforwardness and plain dealing in 
the whole business which is far from satisfactory. 

The conduct, I may here remark, of Newman's successor 
as leader of the advanced Tractarians, viz., the Rev. 
William George Ward (author of the Ideal of a Christian 
Church) was even more Jesuitical. Writing of the period 
when Mr. Ward was still a clergyman in the Church of 
England, his son informs us that — 

" He had long held that the Roman Church was the one true 
Church. He had gradually come to believe that the English Church 
was not strictly a part of the Church at all. He had felt bound to 
retain his external communion with her members, because he believed 
that he was bringing many of them towards Rome ; and to unite him- 
self to the Church which he loved and trusted, to enjoy the blessings 

23 Ibid., pp. 20, 21. This remarkable letter is not reprinted in Newman's 
Letters and Correspondence. Why was it suppressed ? 
29 Newman's Letters, Vol. II., p. 207. 


of external communion for himself, if by so doing he thwarted this 
larger and fuller victory of truth, had seemed a course both indefensible 
and selfish." 30 

No man could have acted like this, unless his views of 
truthfulness had been strangely perverted. And this was 
markedly the case with Mr. Ward in his Tractarian days. 
His son relates of his father, that — 

" In discussing the doctrine of equivocation, as to how far it is 
lawful on occasion, he maintained, as against those who admit the 
lawfulness of words literally true but misleading, that the more straight- 
forward principle is that occasionally when duties conflict, another 
duty may he more imperative than the duty of truthfulness. But he 
expressed it thus : * Make yourself clear that you are justified in 
deception, and then lie like a trooper.' " 31 

The establishment by Newman of a Monastery at Little- 
more, near Oxford, affords another specimen of the secrecy 
and crookedness which characterized the Tractarian Move- 
ment. His plans for such a Monastery, which was first 
started in Oxford, and subsequently removed to Littlemore, 
appear to have been in a partly developed condition early 
in 1838 ; but at that time were shrouded in secrecy. On 
January 17th of that year he wrote to his friend Mr. J. W. 
Bowden : — 

"Your offering towards the young monks was just like yourself, and 
I cannot pay you a better compliment. It will be most welcome. 
As you may suppose, we have nothing settled, but are feeling our 
way. We should begin next term ; but since, however secret one may 
wish to keep it, things get out, we do not yet wish to commit young 
men to anything which may hurt their chance of success at any 
college in standing for a Fellowship." 32 

The scheme for a Monastery was, for some unknown 
reason, postponed for a time, but not abandoned. It was 
evidently in Newman's thoughts very much during the 
following year. " You see," he wrote to Mr. F. Rogers, 

30 William George Ward and the Oxford Movement, p. 356. First edition. 

31 Ibid., p. 30. 82 Newman's Letters, Vol. II. f p. 249. 


September 15th, 1839, "if things came to the worst, I 
should turn Brother of Charity in London — an object which, 
quite independent of any such perplexities, is growing on 
me, and, peradventure, will some day be accomplished, if 
other things do not impede me." 33 The secrecy so much 
desired by Newman, as mentioned in his letter cited above, 
seems to have been successful, at least in one instance. One 
of the body of young men who were Newman's disciples, 
succeeded, in 1840, in gaining a Fellowship at Lincoln 
College, Oxford, which certainly would not have been the 
case had the authorities been aware that he was at the time 
a " monk." The success of his policy of secrecy, in this 
instance, appears to have given Newman intense satisfaction. 
He wrote, on January 10th, 1840, in great glee to his friend 
Bowden, announcing the joyful news : — > 

"To return to Lincoln; after rejecting James Mozley for a 
Fellowship two years since for his opinions, they have been taken by 
Pattison, this last term, an inmate of the Coenobitium. He happened to 
stand very suddenly, and they had no time to inquire. They now stare 
in amazement at their feat." 34 

This letter implies that the " Coenobitium," or Monastic 
Establishment, was already in existence. It was possibly 
the same Institution as that mentioned in the late Professor 
Mozley's Letters as a "Hall" (p. 79). Professor Mozley 
was one of the first inmates of this " Hall." He was, as 
is well known, one of the most enthusiastic supporters of 
Tractarianism in its early days; but he failed to keep up 
with the pace at which its leaders were marching Romeward, 
and drew back. His subsequent work on the Baptismal 
Controversy, in which he justified the Gorham Judgment, 
gave great offence to his former friends. But at this period 
he enjoyed the fullest confidence of Newman. There are 
several allusions in Mozley's Letters to the mysterious 
" Coenobitium," though it is not mentioned by that name. 

• Ibid , p. 285. ■* Ibid., p. 297. 


Writing on April 6th, 1838, to his brother, the Rev. Thomas 
Mozley, the future Regius Professor of Divinity, announces 
that "Newman intends putting some plan or other of a 
Society into execution next term, and I am to be a leading 
member — though whether principal or vice-principal I 
cannot tell you. But if there are only two of us, which 
seems likely at present, I must either be one or the other. 
Johnson, of Magdalen Hall, will join ; he is the only one we 
are certain of. But after the Oriel contest is over, others 
may be willing." 35 Three weeks later Newman's plans were 
in a more developed condition, for Mozley writes to his 
sister : — " I must inform you that Newman has taken a 
house, to be formed into a reading and collating establish- 
ment, to help in editing the Fathers. We have no prospect 
of any number joining us at present. Men are willing, but 
they have Fellowships in prospect, as R. And P., who stood 
at Oriel, and passed a very good examination — the best, as 
some have thought — has a Fellowship at University in 
prospect, which would be interfered with by joining us, for 
we shall of course be marked men." 36 Though the house 
was taken in April, it was late in Autumn before it was 
occupied. To Mozley .was entrusted the task of furnishing 
it, and getting it ready as a place of residence for the embryo 
" Monks." It was to be a comfortable place after all, and 
it is somewhat amusing to read Mozley's description of his 
preparatory labours, as sent by him to his sister on October 
18th :— 

" I have been busily engaged ever since coming up with making 
arrangements for the Hall — bustling about, calling at the upholsterers, 
giving orders for coal. The place is at present airing and warming. 
[t will look decent enough when everything is in it. There are quite 
gay carpets in both sitting-rooms j as is natural in fitting up, one 
forgets the commonest things at first, till they come upon one one by 
one. I shall expect to find numerous deficiencies after all, when I come 
to the actual habitation of the place, and just at this moment, the 

w Mozley's Letters, p. 75. K Ibid., p. 78. 


thought of coal-scuttles has flitted by me, and I have booked it in 
my memoranda." 3 ? 

In March, 1840, Newman seems to have been considering 
the advisability of moving his Monastic Establishment to 
Littlemore, about three miles from Oxford, and making it 
a Hall attached to, and recognized by, the University of 
Oxford. On the 21st of that month he wrote to his friend 
Rogers, asking for his advice on this subject : — 

" Supposing I took theological pupils at Littlemore, might not my 
house be looked upon as a sort of Hall depending on Oriel, as 
St. Mary's Hall was ? And if this were commonly done, would it not 
strengthen the Colleges instead of weakening them ? Are these not 
precedents ? And, further, supposing a feeling arose in favour of 
Monastic Establishments y and my house at Littlemore was obliged to 
follow the fashion, and conform to a rule of discipline, would it not 
be desirable that such institutions should flow from the Colleges of 
our two Universities, and be under their influence ? I do not wish 
this mentioned by Hope to anyone else. I may ask one or two 
persons besides." ^ 

Four days before this letter was written Newman wrote, 
from Littlemore (March 17th), to his more intimate friend, 
Dr. Pusey, putting his plans before him in a more unreserved 
fashion. " Since I have been up here," he wrote, " an idea 
has revived in my mind, of which we have before now talked, 
viz., of building a Monastic House in the place, and coming 
up to live in it myself." 39 Dr. Pusey appears to have 
heartily approved of his friend's monastic scheme. Pusey' s 
biographer informs us that " the plan of life contemplated 
[by Newman] was substantially his [Pusey's] own." 40 
On March 19th, Pusey replied to Newman's letter : " Cer- 
tainly it would be a great relief to have a fiovrj in our Church, 
many ways, and you seem just the person to form one. . . . 
I hardly look to be able to avail myself of the iiovr], since I 
must be so busy when here on account of my necessary 

87 Ibid., p. 83. 3 s Newman's Letters, Vol. II., p. 303. 

89 Life of Dr. Pusey >, Vol. II., p. 135. • Ibid., p. 136. 

2 * 


absences to see my children, unless indeed I should live long 
enough to be ejected from my Canonry, as, of course, one 
must contemplate as likely if one does live, and then it 
would be a happy retreat." 41 

The subtle scheme of attaching his Monastery to a Protes- 
tant University under the guise of " a sort of Hall," fortunately 
did not succeed. But the scheme for erecting a Monastery 
at Littlemore was at once acted on. On May 28th, 1840, 
Newman informed Mrs. J. Mozley : — " We have bought 
nine or ten acres of ground at Littlemore, the field between 
the Chapel and Barnes's, and, so be it, in due time shall erect 
a Monastic House upon it."* 2 It was not, however, until 
February, 1842, that Newman actually removed to Little- 
more, and started there his new Monastery. We gain some 
idea of the kind of building it was from a passage in 
the Rev. Thomas Mozley's Reminiscences of the Oxford 
Movement : — 

" The building," writes Mr. Mozley, " in which Newman had now 
made up his mind to resume the broken thread of these noble [Monastic] 
traditions was a disused range of stabling at the corner of two village 
roads. Nothing could be more unpromising, not to say depressing. 
But Newman had ascertained what he really wanted, and he would 
have no more. He sent me a list of his requirements, and the only 
one of a sentimental or superfluous character was that he wished to 
be able to see from his window the ruins of the Mynchery [an 
ancient Convent] and the village of Garsington. There must be a 
library, some ' cells,' that is, studies, and a cloister, in which one or 
two might turn out and walk up and down — of course, all upon the 
ground floor. The Oratory or chapel was to be a matter altogether 
for future consideration." 43 

The Rev. Frederick Oakeley, one of Newman's early 
friends, and subsequently a pervert to the Church of Rome, 
tells us that this new building was known as the " Littlemore 

41 Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. II., p. 137. 

42 Newman's Letters, Vol. II., p. 305. 

48 Mozley 's Reminiscences, Vol. II., p 213, 


Monastery"; 44 and that "the fact is generally known, that 
the life at Littlemore was founded upon the rule of the 
strictest Religious Orders" 46 — that is, in the Church of 

Of course Newman's removal from Oxford to Littlemore, 
and the erection in the latter place of a new Monastic- 
looking building, excited the greatest curiosity in the 
University. Visitors came to Littlemore in abundance, 
anxious to fathom the mystery, and to discover Newman's 
great secret ; very much to his annoyance, since for many 
reasons he did not wish his privacy to be disturbed. In his 
Apologia he reveals to the world what his indignant feelings 
were like at the prying curiosity of his visitors : — " I cannot 
walk into or out of my house," he exclaimed, " but curious 
eyes are upon me. Why will you not let me die in peace ? 
Wounded brutes creep into some hole to die in, and no one 
grudges it them. Let me alone, I shall not trouble you 
long." 46 

It was not the common members of the University only 
who took a natural interest in his new Monastery. " Heads 
of Houses," he tells us, " as mounted patrols, walked their 
horses round those poor cottages. Doctors of Divinity dived 
into the hidden recesses of that private tenement uninvited, 
and drew domestic conclusions from what they saw there. 
I had thought that an Englishman's house was his castle ; 
but the newspapers thought otherwise, and at last the matter 
came before my good Bishop." 47 

The interference of the Bishop of Oxford annoyed Newman 
more than anything else. The Bishop wanted to know the 
whole of the facts of the case, and this was exactly what 
Newman did not wish to let him know. His lordship, 
in a gentlemanly and straightforward manner, sent him a 
letter, asking for full information; and Newman replied in 
accordance with his " Economical " policy, in which by 

44 Oakeley's Historical Notes on the Tractarian Movement, p. 93. * Ibid., p. 94 
46 Newman's Apologia, p. 172. Edition, 1889. 47 Ibid., -p. 172. 


this time he had become quite an adept. The reader is 
already in possession of proofs, which cannot be refuted, 
that Newman had set up a Monastery at Littlemore, and 
that its rules were of the strictest kind. Bearing this in 
mind, the future Cardinal's Jesuitical dealing with his 
Diocesan can best be shown by reprinting here in full 
the Bishop's letter of inquiry, and Newman's evasive 
answer, as published by the latter himself, in his Apologia. 
The Bishop wrote on April 12th, 1842 : — 

'* So many charges against yourself and your friends which I have 
seen in the public journals have been, within my own knowledge, 
false and calumnious, that I am not apt to pay much attention to what 
is asserted with respect to you in the newspapers. 

" In (a newspaper), however, of April 9th, there appears a 
paragraph in which it is asserted, as a matter of notoriety, that a 
so-called Anglo- Catholic Monastery is in process of erection at Little- 
more, and that the cells of dormitories, the chapel, the refectory, the 
cloisters of all may be seen advancing to perfection, under the eye of a 
parish priest of the Diocese of Oxford. 

" Now, as I have understood that you really are possessed of some 
tenements at Littlemore, as it is generally believed that they are 
destined for the purposes of study and devotion, and as much suspicion 
and jealousy are felt about the matter, I am anxious to afford you an 
opportunity of making me an explanation on the subject. I know 
you too well not to be aware that you are the last man living to 
attempt in my Diocese a revival of the Monastic Orders (in anything 
approaching to the Romanist sense of the term) without previous 
communication with me, or indeed that you should take upon your- 
self to originate any measure of importance without authority from 
the heads of the Church, and therefore I at once exonerate you from 
the accusation brought against you by the newspaper I have quoted ; 
but I feel it, nevertheless, a duty to my Diocese and myself, as well 
as to you, to ask you to put it in my power to contradict what, if 
uncontradicted, would appear to imply a glaring invasion of all 
ecclesiastical discipline on your part, or of inexcusable neglect and 
indifference to my duties on mine." 

On April 14th, Newman sent his reply to the Bishop of 
Oxford (Dr. Bagot). It was as follows : — 

" I am very much obliged by your lordship's kindness in .allowing 

Newman's letter to his disiiop. 23 

me to write to you on the subject of my house at Littlemore ; at the 
same time, I feel it hard both on your lordship and myself that the 
restlessness of the public mind should oblige you to require an 
explanation of me. 

" It is now a whole year that I have been the subject of incessant 
misrepresentation. A year since I submitted entirely to your lordship's 
authority 5 and, with the intention of following out the particular act 
enjoined upon me, I not only stopped the series of Tracts on which I 
was engaged, but withdrew from all public discussion of Church 
matters of the day, or what may be called ecclesiastical politics. I 
turned myself at once to the preparation for the press of the translation 
of St. Athanasius, to which I had long wished to devote myself, and 
I intended, and intend, to employ myself in the like theological 
studies, and in the concerns of my own parish and in practical 

" With the same view of personal improvement, I was led more 
seriously to a design which had been long on my mind. For many 
years, at least thirteen, I have wished to give myself to a life of 
greater religious regularity than I have hitherto led ; but it is very 
unpleasant to confess such a wish even to my Bishop, because it 
seems arrogant, and because it is committing me to a profession 
which may come to nothing. For what have I done that I am to be 
called to account by the world for my private actions, in a way in 
which no one else is called ? Why may I not have that liberty which 
all others are allowed ? I am often accused of being underhand and 
uncandid in respect to the intentions to which I have been alluding; 
but no one likes his own good resolutions noised about, both from 
mere common delicacy, and from fear lest he should not be able to 
fulfil them. I feel it very cruel, though the parties in fault do not 
know what they are doing, that very sacred matters between me and 
my conscience are made a matter of public talk. May I take a case 
parallel, though different ? suppose a person in prospect of marriage : 
would he like the subject discussed in newspapers, and parties, 
circumstances, &c, &c, publicly demanded of him at the penalty of 
being accused of craft and duplicity ? 

" The resolution I speak of has been taken with reference to myself 
alone, and has been contemplated quite independent of the co-operation 
of any other human being, and without reference to success or failure 
other than personal, and without regard to the blame or approbation 
of man. And being a resolution of years, and one to which I feel 
God has called me, and in which I am violating no rule of the Church 
any more than if I married, I should have to answer for it, if I 


did not pursue it, as a good Providence made openings for it. In 
pursuing it, then, I am thinking of myself alone, not aiming at any- 
ecclesiastical or external effects. At the same time, of course, it 
would be a great comfort for me to know that God had put it into the 
hearts of others to pursue their personal edification in the same way, 
and unnatural not to wish to have the benefit of their presence and 
encouragement, or not to think it a great infringement on the rights 
of conscience if such personal and private resolutions were interfered 
with. Your lordship will allow me to add my firm conviction that 
such religious resolutions are most necessary for keeping a certain 
class of minds firm in their allegiance to our Church j but still I can 
as truly say that my own reason for anything I have done has been 
a personal one, without which I should not have entered upon it, and 
which I hope to pursue whether with or without the sympathies of 
others pursuing a similar course. 

" As to my intentions, I purpose te live there myself a good deal, 
as I have a resident Curate in Oxford. In doing this I believe I am 
consulting for the good of my parish, as my population in Littlemore 
is at least equal to that of St. Mary's in Oxford, and the whole of 
Littlemore is double of it. It has been very much neglected j and in 
providing a parsonage-house at Littlemore, as this will be, and will be 
called, I conceive I am doing a very great benefit to my people. At 
the same time it has appeared to me that a partial or temporary 
retirement from St. Mary's Church might be expedient during the 
prevailing excitement. 

"As to your quotation from the (newspaper) which I have not 
seen, y©ur lordship will perceive from what I have said that no 
* Monastery is in process of erection,' there is no * chapel,' no 
1 refectory,' hardly a dining-room or parlour. The * cloisters ' are my 
shed connecting the cottages. I do not understand what 'cells of 
dormitories ' means. Of course I can repeat your lordship's words, 
that 'I am not attempting a revival of the Monastic Orders, in anything 
approaching to the Romanist sense of the term,' or 'taking on myself 
to originate any measure of importance without authority from the 
Heads of the Church.' I am attempting nothing ecclesiastical, but 
something personal and private, and which can only be made public, 
not private, by newspapers and letter writers, in which sense the 
most sacred and conscientious resolves and acts may certainly be 
made the objects of an unmannerly and unfeeling curiosity."* 8 

48 Newman's Apologia, pp. 172-176. 


So it was only a " Parsonage House," and not a Monastery 
at all that Newman was setting up at Littlemore ! Twenty- 
two years later, in his Apologia, he wrote that: — "There 
is some kind or other of verbal misleading, which is not 
sin." 49 This was no doubt a case of the kind. His 
previous statements, however, and the after history of the 
building, flatly contradict his assertions made in his truly 
" Economical " letter to his Bishop. As we have seen 
above, when Newman bought the land on which to build, 
he wrote to Mrs. Mozley that " in due time " he would 
u erect a Monastic House upon it " ; and there is nothing to 
show that he ever altered his mind. His brother-in-law, 
the Rev. Thomas Mozley, refers to the building also, in his 
Reminiscences , as a Monastic establishment ; and Newman's 
friend Oakeley, as we have seen, admits that it was known 
as the " Littlemore Monastery." Only three months before 
his reply to the Bishop, Newman wrote (January 3rd, 1842) 
to his friend, Mr. James Hope-Scott, in a way which clearly 
shows what were his real objects at the time : — " I am," he 
declared, " almost in despair of keeping men together. The 
only possible way is a Monastery, Men want an outlet for their 
devotional and penitential feelings, and if we do not grant it, 
to a dead certainty they will go where they can find it." 50 
I do not assert that in thus wilfully deceiving his Diocesan, 
Newman thought he was doing anything wrong. There is 
such a thing as a " conscience seared with a hot iron " 
(1 Tim. iv. 2) ; and his certainly appears to have been at this 
period in that condition. Men may come to that lamentable 
state that they think it a duty to deceive others. And 
what sort of place was this " Parsonage House," which 
Newman falsely declared to his Bishop was not a Monastery? 
Let Father Lockhart answer. He and Mr. Dalgairns were 
the first inmates, and were actually in the Monastery at the 
very moment when the Bishop of Oxford wrote his anxious 

49 Ibid., p. 348. 60 Memoirs of J. Hope-Scott, Vol. II., p. 6. 


letter of inquiry. The following is Lockhart's own descrip- 
tion of the life they were then leading : — 

"We had now arrived at the year 1842, when we took up residence 
with Newman at Littlemore. Father Dalgairns and myself were 
the first inmates. It was a kind of Monastic life of retirement, 
prayer and study. We had a sincere desire to remain in the Church 
of England, if we could be satisfied that in doing so we were members 
of the world-wide visible communion of Christianity which was of 
Apostolic origin. We spent our time at Littlemore in study, prayer, 
and fasting. We rose at midnight to recite the Breviary Office, 
consoling ourselves with the thought that we were united in prayer 
with united Christendom, and were using the very 'words used by the 
Saints of all ages. We fasted according to the practice recommended 
in Holy Scripture, and practised in the most austere Religious Orders 
of Eastern and Western Christendom. We never broke our fast, 
except on Sundays and the Great Festivals, before 12 o'clock, and not 
until 5 o'clock in the Advent and Lenten seasons." 51 

One day when the Evangelical Warden of Wadham 
College, Oxford, knocked at the door of the Littlemore 
" Monastery," alias " Parsonage House," Newman himself 
opened it. " May I see the Monastery? " asked the visitor. 
" We have no Monasteries here" replied Newman, who, there- 
upon, angrily and uncivilly slammed the door in the Warden's 
face ! 51 The Roman Catholic author to whom I am indebted 
for this story gives us further evidence tending to prove that 
it was a " Monastery " notwithstanding Newman's denial. 

" The story of the life at Littlemore," he writes, " has never yet 
been told ; and it would be impossible to glean from Newman's 
scanty allusions in the Apologia, or even from his letter to the 
Bishop, any idea of its primitive austerities and observances. I tell 
these as nearly as possible as they are told by Littlemore men to me. 
Lent was a season of real penance for the inmates. They had 
nothing to eat each day till 5, and then the solitary meal was of 
salt-fish. No wonder Dr. Wootten, the Tractarian doctor, told them 
they must all die in a few years if things went on so j and no wonder 
Dalgairns had a serious illness, at which some relaxations were 

51 Biography of Father Lochhart, p. 35. Leicester : Ratcliffe College. 

52 Cardinal Newman: A Monograph, by John Oldcastle, p. 23. The author 
of this work is editor of the Weekly Register. 


made — a breakfast, of bread and butter and tea, at noon ; taken 
standing up at a board— a real board, erected in the improvised refectory, 
and called in undertones by some naturally fastidious ones a 'trough.' 
The ' chapel ' was hardly more pretentious than the dining-room. 
At one end stood a large Crucifix, bought at Lima by Mr. Crawley, a 
Spanish merchant living in Littlemore. It was what was called 
' very pronounced ' — with the all but barbaric realism of Spanish 
religious art. A table supported the base; and on the table were two 
candles (always lit at prayer-time by Newman), the light of which 
was requisite ; for Newman had veiled the window and walls with 
his favourite red hangings. Of an altar there was no pretence ; the 
village church at Littlemore being Newman's own during the first 
years of his residence there. A board ran up the centre of the chapel, 
and in a row on either side stood the disciples for the recitation of 
Divine Office, the ' Vicar ' standing by himself a little apart. The 
days and hours of the Catholic Church were duly kept j and the only 
alteration made in the Office was that Saints were invoked with a 
modification of Newman's making — the ' Ora pro nobis ' being 
changed in recitation to ' Oret.' " 63 

Amongst the inmates of Littlemore Monastery were 
Frederick S. Bowles, subsequently a Roman Catholic priest; 
and, as I have already stated, John B. Dalgairns, afterwards 
a priest at Brompton Oratory ; Ambrose St. John, who 
became a priest at the Birmingham Oratory ; Richard 
Stanton, subsequently an Oratorian priest ; Lockhart (from 
whom I have quoted), who died, in 1892, as a Roman priest; 
and Albany Christie, who joined the Jesuit Order. Mark 
Pattison, afterwards the well-known Rector of Lincoln 
College, Oxford, paid a fortnight's visit to the Monastery, 
commencing at the close of September, 1843. He kept a 
diary while he was there, from which I take the following 
extract as exhibiting the kind of life which was led in the 
establishment : — 

" Sunday, October 1st. — St. John called me at 5.30, and at 6 went 
to Matins, which with Lauds and Prime take about an hour and 
a half j afterwards returned to my room and prayed, with some 
effect, I think. Tierce at 9, and at 11 to Church- Communion. 

M Ibid., p. 25, 


More attentive and devout than I have been for some time; hope 
I am coming into a better frame j thirty-seven communicants. 
Returned and had breakfast. Had some discomfort at waiting 
for food so long, which I have not done since I have been unwell 
this summer, but struggled against it, and in some degree threw 
it off. Walked up and down with St. John in the garden ; 
Newman afterwards joined us. . . At 3 to Church j then Nones 
. . . Vespers at 8, Compline at 9 ; the clocks here very backward. 
Very sleepy, and went to bed at 10." 54 

When Newman seceded to the Church of Rome in 
1845, the Littlemore Monastery was broken up, and 
most of its members followed their leader to Rome, and 
thus closed a noteworthy chapter in the secret history of 
the Tractarian Movement. 

This may, perhaps, be an appropriate place to mention 
that some sort of a " religious community " was established 
at about this period, by the Rev. Frederick W. Faber 
(subsequently known as Father Faber of the Brompton 
Oratory), in the Parish of Elton, of which he became 
Rector in 1842, though he did not enter into residence 
until the following year. Meanwhile, between his accept- 
ance of the living, and commencing work as Rector, 
Faber travelled abroad, and became desperately enamoured 
of the Roman Catholic system and religion. " He saw 
then," writes his biographer, " that he must within three 
years either be a Catholic, or lose his mind." 55 Faber went 
abroad with letters of introduction from Dr. Wiseman, 
subsequently Cardinal Wiseman, addressed to Cardinal 
Acton, and to the Rev. Dr. Grant, a Roman Catholic priest, 
both then resident at Rome. It was by no means uncommon 
at that time for young Tractarians to visit the continent, 
where, unknown and unobserved by prying eyes at home, 
they could indulge their taste for Popery to their hearts' 
content. " The disciples of the Oxford School," writes 

54 Mark Pattison's Memoirs, pp. 190, 191. 

66 Bowden's Life of Father Faber, p. 168. Second edition. 


Father Oakeley, from personal experience, "had a general 
sympathy with all foreign churches." 

" We endeavoured," Father Oakeley relates, " especially the younger 
and less occupied members of our Society, to improve our relations 
with foreign Catholics by occasional visits to the continent. For this 
purpose Belgium was preferred to France, because of the greater 
external manifestation of religion in that country. Whatever our 
Tractarian friends may have been on this side of the channel, there 
could be no doubt of their perfect Catholicity on the other. It was, 
in fact, of so enthusiastic and demonstrative a, character as to astonish 
the natives themselves, and sometimes, even, perhaps, to shame them. 
Our friends used to distinguish themselves by making extraordinarily 
low bows to priests, and genuflecting, even in public places, to every- 
one who looked the least like a Bishop. In the churches they were 
always in a state of prostration, or of ecstasy. Everything, and 
everybody, was charming ; and such a contrast to England ! Catholics 
might have their faults like other people, but even their faults were 
better than Protestant virtues. There was always a redeeming point 
even in their greatest misdemeanours ; their acts of insobriety were 
far less offensive than those of Englishmen, and evidences of their 
Catholicity might be traced in their very oaths." 66 

Of course, when these young gentlemen came back to 
England from their continental trips, they were careful not 
to let the English public know where they had been, what 
they had said, and what they had done, when abroad. At 
home they passed as faithful sons of the Reformed Church 
of England ; on the continent they were seen in their true 
colours. Yet, even when at home, in Oxford, some of the 
young Tractarians indulged their passion for real Popery, in 
a daring though secret manner. The Rev. E. G. K. Browne, 
who, before his secession to Rome, was for some years a 
Tractarian clergyman in the Church of England, writing of 
events which transpired in the early period of the Move- 
ment, informs us that then men of the Tractarian party 
might " be found studying S. Thomas Aquinas, Bellarmine, 
and Perrone, and using the Garden of the Soul and the 

M Oakeley's Historical Notes, pp. 73, 74. 


Paradisus Animcz as books of private devotion, but secretly , for 
fear of their fellow men — some might be seen stealing to Mass at the 
Catholic chapel — humble and mean as it was — but disguised, 
and pouring out their hearts to their God, concealed from the 
view of man by some pillar, beseeching Him to guide them 
into the truth, for none dared trust another, or confer with 
the friend of his bosom, or the companion of his earlier 
days, on so sacred, so awfully sacred a subject as the 
salvation of the soul." 57 When Faber arrived at Rome, in 
1843, he was "not scandalized" even by the "relic worship" 
he beheld there. 58 He wrote home, under date May 20th, 
1843, to state that Dr. Wiseman's letters had engaged for 
him " the cheerful kindness of several of the Roman clergy, 
and a portion of almost every day is spent with them, either 
visiting the holier Churches, and Convents famous for 
miracles and the residence of Saints, or in amicable 
discussion of our position in England." 59 Paradoxical it 
must seem to my readers to know that in the same letter 
Faber declares : — " I find my attachment to the Church of 
England growing in Rome, the more I bewail our position." 
He rejoiced that " Protestantism is perishing," and that 
" what is good in it is by God's mercy being gathered " — 
not into the Church of England, but — " into the garners 
of Rome " ; and he assured his correspondent that his 
whole life, " God willing, shall be one crusade against the 
detestable and diabolical heresy of Protestantism." On 
Holy Thursday he went to the Church of St. John Lateran. 
The Pope was present, and Faber was in an ecstasy. " I 
got," he says, "close to the altar, inside the Swiss Guards, 
and when Pope Gregory descended from his throne, 
and knelt at the foot of the altar, and we all knelt with 
him, it was a scene more touching than I had ever 
seen before. . , In the midst that old man in white 

87 Browne's Annals of the Tractarian Movement, p. 41. Third edition. 
58 Bowden's Life of Faber, p. 156. w Ibid., p. 156. 


prostrate before the uplifted Body of the Lord, and the dead, 
dead silence — Oh what a sight it was ! . . I bared my head 
and knelt with the people, and received with joy the Holy 
Father's blessing, till he fell back on his throne and was 
borne away. 60 On June 17th Faber had a private audience 
with the Pope. He appeared in "full dress" at the Vatican, 
and was told that " as Protestants did not like kissing the 
Pope's foot," he would "not be expected to do it." But 
this clergyman of the Reformed Church of England — Rome's 
greatest enemy — scorned to avail himself of the proffered 
dispensation ! On entering the audience chamber — to quote 
Faber's own report of the interview — " I knelt down, and 
again, when a few yards from him, and lastly, before him ; 
he held out his hand, but I kissed his foot ; there seemed to me 
a mean puerility in refusing the customary homage. . . I 
left him almost in tears, affected as much by the earnest, 
affectionate demeanour of the old man, as by his blessing 
and his prayer. I shall remember St. Alban's Day, in 1843, 
to my life's end." Faber prayed at the shrine of " St." 
Aloysius, the Jesuit, on the feast of that "Saint;" and his 
biographer, Father Bowden, says that " he left the Church 
as if speechless, and not knowing where he was going." 
Twice he took up his hat to go to the English College at 
Rome, for the purpose of abjuring the Church of England ; 
but on each occasion some unrecorded event prevented him 
from carrying out his impulse. The longer he stayed in 
Rome the more he loved both it and its Church. On July 
5th, he declared: — "The nearest approach I can make to 
an imagination of heaven is that it is like Rome." He went 
to a Pontifical Mass, and the sight filled him with 
rapturous joy. " When the Pontiff, his eyes streaming 
with tears, slowly elevated the Lord's Body, suddenly 
from the roof some ten or twelve trumpets, as from 
heaven, pealed out with a long, wailing, timorous jubilee, 

•° Ibid,, p. 163. 


and I fell forward completely overcome." 61 From Rome 
Faber went to Florence, and while there he had gone 
so far away from the sound judgment of an English 
Churchman, that he was actually " persuaded to wear a 
miraculous medal M ; and " on his return home he brought 
with him two rosaries blessed by the Pope/' 62 After all this 
he actually began once more to act as a Church of England 
clergyman, by taking up his residence at Elton as its new 
Rector. How he could do so with an easy conscience 
is a mystery to any truth-loving Englishman. It certainly 
was not honest on his part ; and the whole transaction has 
a very ugly look about it. I do not say that Faber was at 
this time a Papist in disguise, for I cannot prove it. But if 
anyone came forward now and proved it I should not feel 
the least surprise. 

I am not one of those who suffer from " Jesuitism on the 
brain," and I do not, so to speak, see a Jesuit round every 
street corner. But I certainly am inclined to attach a good 
deal of importance to the revelations made by the late 
Rev. Dr. Desanctis, formerly parish priest of the Madallena, 
Rome, Professor of Theology, Official Theological Censor of 
the Inquisition, and subsequently Minister of the Reformed 
Italian Church at Geneva. Desanctis was a man of high 
personal character, and from the offices he held while at 
Rome was enabled to obtain an intimate acquaintance with 
the inner working of Romanism and Jesuitism. In his 
work on Popery and Jesuitism in Rome in the Nineteenth 
Century, a translation of which was published in London, in 
1852, he gives a great deal of valuable information concerning 
the secret and inner working of Tractarianism, which, at 
that period, was popularly known in England and abroad as 

" My Jesuit Confessor," says Dr. Desanctis, " was Secretary to the 
French Father Assistant [of the Jesuit Order], and as he esteemed me 

•' Bowden's Life of Faber, p. 170. M Ibid., pp. 175, 177. 


much, and accounted me an affiliated member of the Society, he 
made many disclosures to me." 

Amongst these disclosures were the following : — 

" Despite all the persecution they [the Jesuits] have met with, 
they have not abandoned England, whore there are a greater number 
of Jesuits than in Italy; that there are Jesuits in all classes of society ; 
in Parliament ; among the English clergy ; among the Protestant laity, 
even in the higher stations. I could not comprehend how a Jesuit 
could be a Protestant priest, or how a Protestant priest could be a 
Jesuit ; but my Confessor silenced my scruples by telling me, omnia 
munda mundis, and that St. Paul became as a Jew that he might save 
the Jews; it was no wonder, therefore, if a Jesuit should feign 
himself a Protestant, for the conversion of Protestants. But pay 
attention, I entreat you, to my discoveries concerning the nature of 
the religious movement in England termed Puseyism. 

" The English clergy were formerly too much attached to their 
Articles of Faith to be shaken from them. You might have employed 
in vain all the machines set in motion by Bossuet and the Jansenists 
of France to reunite them to the Romish Church ; and so the Jesuits 
of England tried another plan. This was to demonstrate from history 
and ecclesiastical antiquity the legitimacy of the usages of the English 
Church, whence, through the exertions of the' Jesuits concealed 
among its clergy, might arise a studious attention to Christian 
antiquity. This was designed to occupy the clergy in long, laborious, 
and abstruse investigation, and to alienate them from their Bibles." 63 

On another occasion a Roman priest was asked by 
Desanctis : — " But do you not think it would be for the 
greater glory of God, that all the Puseyites should become 
Catholics ? " The reply to this question was : — 

" No, my son, the Puseyite movement must be let alone that it may 
bring forth fruit. If all the Puseyites were to declare themselves 
Catholics, the Movement would be at an end. Protestants would be 
alarmed, and the whole gain of the Catholic Church would be reduced 
to some million of individuals and no more. From time to time it is 
as well that one of the Puseyite leaders should become a Catholic, in 
order that, under our instructions, the Movement may be better 
conducted ; but it would not be desirable for many of them to come 
over to Catholicism. Puseyism is a living testimony to the necessity 

83 Desanctis, Popery and Jesuitism in Rome, pp. 128, 134. 

• 3 


of Catholicism in the midst of our enemies -, it is a worm at the root 
which, skilfully nourished by our exertions, will waste Protestantism 
till it is destroyed." 64 

I know very well that Ritualists will pooh pooh and laugh 
at these statements of Desanctis. But, for my part, I cannot 
see that I should reject his testimony merely because he was 
a convert from Rome. Why should I not trust the word of 
a Protestant, against whose character — so far as I can 
ascertain — nothing can be said, and who had exceptional 
opportunities of getting at the real facts of the case ? If we 
reject the evidence of reliable persons, how can history be 
properly written ? In dealing with the Secret History of the 
Oxford Movement it would be highly improper not to quote 
what Dr. Desanctis has written on this important subject. 
And those who have most closely studied the Secret History 
of Tractarianism, Puseyism, and Ritualism, will be more 
disposed than others to give credence to his statements. 

To return to Faber. When he commenced his work at 
Elton, as Rector, he determined, says his biographer, " to 
model his pastoral operations on the system pursued by the 
[Roman] Catholic Church, and to work his parish, as he 
expressed it, 'in the spirit of St. Philip and St. Alphonso.'" 65 
No doubt these two " Saints " were " St." Philip Neri, 
founder of the Oratorian Order, of which Faber subsequently 
became a member ; and " St." Alphonsus Liguori, author 
of the Glories of Mary. Faber circulated amongst his 
parishioners a History of the Sacred Hcart, m in which he 
advocated the adoration of the material heart of our Lord — ■ 
a modern custom invented by the Jesuits. His biographer 
has to admit of this practice that it cannot "be said that it 
belongs to the genuine spirit of the Established Church." 
After he had been at Elton about six months, Faber found 
that it was not so easy as he expected to pervert his 
parishioners to his Romanizing views. On March 24th, 

* Desanctis, Popery and Jesuitism in Rome, p. 17. 

66 Bowden's Life of Faber, p. 179. P* Ibid. , p. 180. 


1844, he wrote to a friend : — " I feel impatient, thinking 1 
could do all things in my parish as if I were a Roman," After 
a time, a measure of success attended his efforts, and he was 
able to start in his parish the Religious Community to 
which I have already alluded. The mystery and secrecy 
with which Faber shrouded this Community cannot be 
better described than in the words of Father Bowden : — 

"A number of persons, chiefly young men, began," writes Faber's 
biographer, "to go to confession to him, and to receive Communion. 
Out of the most promising of these penitents he formed a sort of 
Community. They were accustomed to meet in the Rectory every night 
at twelve o'clock, and to spend about an hour in prayer, chiefly in reciting 
portions of the Psalter. On the eves of great feasts, the devotions 
were prolonged for three or four hours. The use of the Discipline 
was also introduced on Fridays, eves of festivals, and every night in 
Lent, each taking his turn to receive it from the others.'" 67 

It may be well to explain here, for the benefit of the 
Protestant reader, who may be pardoned for want of 
information on the subject, that the " Discipline " secretly 
used by the fanatics at Elton, is a kind of cat-o'-nine tails, 
knotted, and made with either cord or steel, with which 
each penitent is whipped on the bare back, either by himself 
or another, as a penance for his sins. Very early in his 
career the late Dr. Pusey seems to have fallen in love with 
this form of Romish superstition ; but his early regard for it 
remained concealed from the public gaze, until the publica- 
tion of the Memoirs of James Robert Hope-Scott, in 1884, 
when a letter from Dr. Pusey to Mr. Hope-Scott, dated 
September gth, 1844, first saw the light of day. The latter was 
travelling abroad at the time he received this letter, which 
contained two or three commissions for him to execute 
while on the continent. One of these was to purchase a 
number of Roman Catholic books, for Dr. Pusey's use ; the 
second, to collect information concerning " the system as to 
Retreats " amongst Roman Catholics ; and the third was, to 

« Ibid., p. 183. 



purchase a specimen " Discipline." The latter commission 
was put into the postscript of his letter, and was as follows : — 

" There is yet a subject on which I should like to know more, if 
you fall in with persons who have the guidance of consciences, — what 
penances they employ for persons whose temptations are almost 
entirely spiritual, of delicate frames often, and who wish to be led on 
to perfection. I see in a spiritual writer that even for such, corporal 
severities are not to be neglected, but so many of them are unsafe. 
/ suspect the * Discipline ' to be one of the safest, and with internal 
humiliation the lest. Could you procure and send me one by B. ? 
What was described to me was of a very sacred character j 5 cords, 
each with 5 knots, in memory of the 5 wounds of our Lord. I should 
be glad also to know whether there were any cases in which it is 
unsafe, e.g., in a nervous person." M 

One cannot help wondering, if a cat-o'-nine tails, or rather 
of five, with five cords, was not thought too severe for persons 
of " delicate frames," what would be the penance inflicted 
on those who possessed strong constitutions ? 

About two years after his letter to Mr. James Hope-Scott, 
Dr. Pusey appears to have commenced the use of " Hair 
Cloth" and " Disciplines." On the " Feast of St. Simon and 
St. Jude," 1846, he wrote to the Rev. J. Keble, who at about 
that period became his Father Confessor, — " Will you give 
me some penitential rules for myself ? I hardly know what 
I can do, just now, in a bodily way, for nourishment I am 
ordered; sleep I must take when it comes; cold is bad for me; 
and I know not whether J am strong enough to resume the Hair 
Cloth. However, I hope to try." 69 The word " resume" in 
this letter proves that Pusey had used " Hair Cloth " before 
the date of his letter; but for how long I cannot tell. Later 
on in the same year he wrote again to Keble : — 

" I am a great coward about inflicting pain on myself, partly, I 
hope, from a derangement of my nervous system. Hair Cloth I know 
not how to make pain : it is only symbolical, except when worn to 
an extent which seemed to wear me out. / have it on again, by God's 

68 Memoirs of J. Hope-Scott, Vol. II., pp. 52, 53. 

69 Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. III., p. 99. 


mercy. I would try to get some sharper sort. Lying hard I like best, 
unless it is such as to take away sleep, and that seems to unfit me for 
duties. Real fasting, i.e., going without food, was very little discomfort, 
except in the head, when the hour of the meal was over, and 
Dr. Wootten said and says, * It was shortening my life.' Praying with 
my arms in the form of a cross, seemed to distract me, and act upon 
my head, from this same miserable nervousness. / think I should 
like to be bid [i.e., by Keble as his Father Confessor] to use the 
Discipline. I cannot even smite upon my breast much because the 
pressure on my lungs seemed bad. In short, you see, I am a mass of 
infirmities." 70 

This is, indeed, a most pitiful letter, and one to be wondered 
at. Instead of saying that he was wearing Hair Cloth again, 
" by God's mercy," it would have been more accurate to have 
said that he was wearing it through his own folly and super- 
stition. He certainly could not plead either Scriptural or 
Church of England authority for the practice. One might 
make some excuse for Dr. Pusey on the score of his then 
enfeebled state of health, were it not that when he regained 
his ordinary health there is no evidence to show that he gave 
up the use of either Hair Cloth, or the Discipline. On the 
contrary, in his Manual for Confessors, published in 1878, 
he recommends both as penances for sinners. His biographer 
informs us that "with Keble's sanction" Pusey made it a 
rule " to wear Hair Cloth always by day, unless ill " ; and 
that " he was very anxious to use ' the Discipline ' every night 
with Psalm li. Keble did not advise it. Pusey entreated. 
1 1 still scruple,' wrote Keble, ' about the Discipline. I 
could but allow, not enjoin it to anyone.' " 71 

The use of the " Discipline," and of other penitential 
" articles of piety," as they are sometimes termed, is, almost 
of necessity, kept secret by those who adopt them. Some 
idea, however, of the extent to which these articles of torture 
are used at the present time within the Church of England 
may be gained from the following article, which appeared 

7° Ibid., p. 100. 71 Ibid., pp. 104, 108. 


in the Westminster Gazette, of September gth, 1896 — a paper 
which cannot be accused of any undue partiality for 
Protestantism : — 

" John Kensit, ' the Protestant Bookseller,' has given Paternoster 
Row a new sensation this week. For some days past a large part of 
his window has been used for the exhibition of a large sheet displaying 
half a dozen * instruments of torture,' said to be used and recommended 
by 'members of the Church of England.' 

" Whoever they are used by — and it is pretty certain they are not 
mere ornaments or playthings — these * instruments of torture ' by no 
means belie the name Mr. Kensit has bestowed upon them. Take 
that broad stomacher of horse-hair, for example, and place it next to 
the skin ; imagine the discomfort of the first five minutes as each 
bristly hair presses against the body, and picture the torture of each 
succeeding five minutes it is worn. Then turn from this mild 
' Discipline ' to the severer penance of the Barbed Heart. This is a 
maze of wire, the size of the palm of one's hand, upon one side of 
which barbs project, finer than the ends of the barbed fences of our 
fields. How many of these are pressing to-day against lacerated 
breasts ! Of similar construction, and equally fiendish in purpose, 
are the Wristlets and Anklets and the broad band of netted barbs 
which the penitent fastens around his or her leg. All of these may 
possibly be worn under conditions which will mitigate the severity of 
the torture ; but there would seem to be no way of softening the 
lash when applied to the bare skin, so what can be said of the two 
Scourges exhibited by Mr. Kensit ? One is of hard knotted ropes, 
half a dozen ends attached to a pliant handle j the other is of well- 
hardened and polished steel, each end of the five chains neatly 
finished with a steel rowel. Every blow from this, when the penitent 
swings it over his shoulder upon his bare back, must produce five 
wounds, bruises, or sores. No wonder the crowd gazes incredulously 
until ordered to ' move on.' 

" Since this queer little exhibition opened, the bookseller has stood 
a running fire of question and expostulation. The instruments had 
not been on view an hour before a gentleman entered the shop and 
delivered himself after this fashion : — 

" * Look here, sir, whoever you are, if you're the proprietor of this 
place take those things out of your window. It's a lie. It never 
could be done. I believe it's just one of your advertising dodges. I 
won't believe that those things were ever made to be used in this 


w Mr. Kensit is accustomed to that sort of salutation, so lie 
waited till his visitor had ended a long tirade, and then quietly 
remarked: — 

" * Will you take the trouble to go into the shop next door and ask 
the shopman to show you a selection of these things. Ask him 
[a Roman Catholic publisher] to name his price, and let him tell 
you who buys them. Then you can come back and apologise to me.' 

" ' The gentleman/ said Mr. Kensit, when he told a representative 
the story on Monday, ' went into the shop next door. In five 
minutes he was back again with a bundle under his arm.' * Mr. 
Kensit,' he said, * you're right. They sell them, and I've bought a 
few to take home and show to my family. They'll never believe it 
unless I do.' 

" * Well,' said Mr. Kensit, • did you ask who purchases them ? ' 

" ' I did,' said the gentleman, * and if you'll believe me, the shopman 
said that for every one he sold to a Catholic he sold three to Church 0/ 
England people!' 

" ' I not only believe it,' said Mr. Kensit, * but I know it.' " 

There is certainly, as I have already said, no Scriptural 
authority for the use of the " Discipline." We do read that 
"By His stripes we are healed" (Isa. liii. 5); but never that 
we are spiritually healed by the stripes and bruises inflicted 
by ourselves. How far the use of the " Discipline " has 
spread amongst Ritualists at the present day is one of those 
secrets which have not been fully revealed. Yet there is reason 
to fear that it is on the increase, and is much more widespread 
than is generally supposed. There is cause to believe that in 
some Ritualistic Convents the "Discipline" is not unknown. 
Dr. Pusey, as is well known, in conjunction with the late 
Miss Sellon, founded several Convents, and retained spiritual 
authority over them until his death. In his Advice on 
Hearing Confession, for the use of Ritualistic Father 
Confessors, directions are given as to the penances to be 
imposed by the Confessor on Ritualistic Sisters of Mercy. 
One of these, if " the Superior of the Convent approves," 
is as follows : — For mortifications ; the Discipline for about 
a quarter of an hour a day." 72 It may here be asked, if a 

7* Pusey's Manual for Confessors, p. 243. 


Sister refused to undergo this severe and cruel penance, 
would she be considered as having broken her Vow of 
Obedience ? The answer to this question is given by 
Dr. Pusey himself. His advice to Sisters of Mercy is : — 
" Study to be perfectly obedient to your spiritual father. . . . 
Now perfect obedience implies prompt, punctual, willing, 
unquestioning obedience, unless the thing commanded be 
evident sin." 73 There can be no doubt, therefore, that the 
Sister would feel it a bounden duty to take the " Discipline 
for about a quarter of an hour a day," if ordered to do so by 
her " Spiritual father," the Confessor. The subject is not 
a pleasant one to those who hate cruelty; but it is of 
so secret a character that it seems almost impossible to 
discover the priestly culprits who order English ladies 
to be thus whipped on their bare backs, as they may 
think right and proper. One of these cases has fortunately 
come to light, in which the Discipline was used most 
cruelly and shamefully in a Ritualistic Convent, inflicted 
on the Sister, not by command of her Confessor, but 
by a " Mother " of the Convent. The story is related 
by Miss Povey, who, as " Sister Mary Agnes, O.S.B.," 
was for seventeen years a Nun in Convents controlled 
by the notorious " Father Ignatius." She writes : — 

" One day I was coming from Nones at 2.45 p.m. This 
'Mother' ['Mary Wereburgh of the Blessed Sacrament'] com- 
manded me to stay where I was, and not to return to work, and 
then said: — 'You have got the Devil in you, and I am going to 
beat him out.' All left the sacristy but myself, the Mother 
Superior, and one Nun, who was ordered to be present at the 
casting out of the devil. I was commanded first to strip. I saw 
' the Discipline,' with its seven lashes of knotted whipcord in her 
hand, and I knew that one lash given (or taken by oneself) was 
in reality seven. I should mention that at certain times it was 
the rule to Discipline oneself. . . Then I began to undress ; but 
when I came to my vest, shame again overcame me. ' Take that 
thing off,' said the Mother Superior. I replied, 'I cannot, reverend 

78 Pusey's Manual for Confessors, p. 245. 


Mother ; it's too tight.' The Nun who was present was told to 
help me to get it off. A deep feeling of shame came over me 
at being half-nude. The Mother then ordered the Nun to say the 
* Miser ere,' and while it was recited she lashed me several times with 
all her strength. I was determined not to utter a sound, but at 
last I could not restrain a smothered groan, whereat she gave 
me one last and cruel lash, and then ceased. Even three weeks 
after she had * Disciplined ' me, I had a very sore back, and it hurt me 
greatly to lie on it (our beds were straw put into sacks). There was 
a looking-glass in the room I now occupied (Nuns do not usually 
have them), and I looked to see if my back was marked, as it was so 
sore. Never shall I forget the shock it gave me. I turned quickly 
away, for my lack was Hack, blue, and green all over." 74 

Many of my readers, on reading this horrible yet true 
story, will naturally ask themselves, are there any other 
Mothers Superior who act in a similar manner? If the 
secrets of Convents were revealed, how many more tales of 
" Discipline " cruelty should we hear ? We need not make 
rash and wholesale assertions, but is there not cause for 
inquiry and anxiety ? 

Faber, to whom we once more return, not only used the 
" Discipline " himself; he also, as a penance, wore " a thick 
horse-hair cord tied in knots round his waist." 76 He still, 
however, continued to act as Rector of Elton. On August 
12th, 1844, he informed Newman : — " I seem to grow more 
Roman daily, and almost to write from out the bosom of the 
Roman Church, instead of from where I am." 76 By December 
he made the discovery — which he ought to have made long 
before — that his position in the Church of England was a 
dishonest one. " I feel as if I was living a dishonest life," 77 
he wrote to Newman. And yet, strange as it may seem to 
some, with this conviction upon him he continued for nearly 
another year to officiate in the Church of England. At this 
time he published a Life of St. Wilfrid, of which Father 

74 Nunnery Life in the Church of England, by Sister Mary Agnes, O.S.B., 
pp. 97-99. 

75 Life of Faber ; p. 187. 76 Ibid., p. 187. 77 Ibid.,ip. 189. 


Bowden says : — " It is difficult to conceive how " certain 
passages in it " could have been written by a member of the 
Church of England" 78 — so thoroughly Roman were they. 
Bowden quotes several passages from this " Life," from 
which I take the following specimens : — 

" He (Wilfrid) saw that the one thing to do was to go to Rome, 
and learn under the shadow of St. Peter's Chair the more perfect way. 
To look Romeward is a Catholic instinct, seemingly implanted in us 
for the safety of the faith " (p. 4). 

" Certainly, it is true that he materially aided the blessed work of 
rivetting more tightly the happy chains which held England to 
St. Peter's Chair — chains never snapped, as sad experience tells 
us, without the loss of many precious Christian things " (p. 84). 

At last the time came when Faber publicly renounced his 
connection with the Church of England. On Sunday, 
November 16th, 1845, he addressed his congregation in Elton 
Church for the last time. He told them that " the doctrines 
he had taught them, though true, were not those of the 
Church of England ; that, as far as the Church of England 
had a voice, she had disavowed them, and that consequently 
he could not remain in her communion." 79 The next day he 
left the parish, accompanied by his two servants, and by 
seven members of his " Religious Community," all of whom 
were admitted the same evening at Northampton, by Bishop 
Wareing, into the Church of Rome. 

It would have been well for the Church of England had 
the case of Faber been the last of its kind. But I think that 
anyone who, during the past twenty years, has carefully read 
the Ritualistic newspapers, must be of the opinion that 
Faber's example is more or less followed at the present time 
by many hundreds, not to say thousands, of Ritualistic 
clergy, who have no greater moral right to remain in the 
Church of England than Faber had during the last two 
years of his ministry as Rector of Elton. The gates which 
admit to the ministry, be it remembered, are kept by the 

78 Life of Faber, p. 190. 79 Ibid., p. 201. 


Bishops, who have admitted to the ranks of the clergy of 
the Church, by ordination, every one of these traitors and 
conspirators, and therefore on the Episcopal Bench the 
responsibility of the mischief caused by them primarily rests. 
It is certain, therefore, that greater care is needed now than 
ever before, on the part of the Bishops, to prevent the 
ordination of men who hold Roman doctrines. And the 
laity have a right to complain, and they do complain justly 
and bitterly, that in many instances these Romanizing con- 
spirators are preferred by the Bishops to influential dignities 
and valuable livings in their gift, while hard-working and 
law-abiding clergymen are coldly passed by, as quite 
unworthy of Episcopal notice or favour. These things are 
alienating the hearts of multitudes of the laity from the 
Church of England ; and it is the truest wisdom of our rulers 
in Church and State to reflect that widespread discontent 
is not a thing to trifle with. The results of Archbishop 
Laud's efforts to Romanize the Church in the seventeenth 
century ought to serve as a salutary warning to Statesmen 
and Bishops of the nineteenth century. The dangers 
arising from the labours of the Ritualists are far greater than 
from those of their predecessors two hundred and fifty years 
ago. Laud and his party would never have dared to make 
such strides Romewards as have been made by our modern 
Ritualists. May God grant that the civil wars which were 
largely the result of Laud's foolish and disloyal operations, 
may not be repeated in England ere the close of the forth- 
coming century ! We make no rash prophecy : no one can tell 
what the future may bring forth. But are there not already 
clouds in the ecclesiastical and political sky, which may 
suddenly grow larger and larger, until they burst forth in 
civil and religious convulsions which every lover of his 
country must dread ? 

I do not think that I could more appropriately close this 
chapter than by citing a very accurate description of the 
secret policy off the early Tractarians, given by one of the 


party, the Rev. William Maskell, Vicar of St. Mary's 
Church, in a letter which he published, in 1850, shortly 
before his secession to Rome. 

" As a fact," wrote Mr. Maskell, " the Evangelical party, plainly, 
openly, and fully, declare their opinions upon the doctrines which 
they contend the Church of England holds : they tell their people 
continually, what they ought, as a matter of duty towards God and 
towards themselves, both to believe and practise. Can it be pretended 
that we [Tractarians], as a party, anxious to teach the truth, are 
equally open, plain, and unreserved ? If we are not so, is prudence, 
or economy, or the desire to lead people gently and without rashly 
disturbing them, or any other like reason, a sufficient ground for our 
withholding large portions of Catholic truth ? Can any one chief 
doctrine be reserved by us, without blame or suspicion of dishonesty ? 
And it is not to be alleged, that only the less important duties and 
doctrines are so reserved : as if it would be an easy thing to distinguish 
and draw a line of division between them. Besides, that which we 
are disputing about cannot be trivial and unimportant ; if it were so, 
we rather ought, in Christian charity, to acknowledge our agreement 
in essentials, and consent to give up the rest. 

" But we do reserve vital and essential truths ; we often hesitate 
and fear to teach our people many duties, not all necessary in every 
case or to every person, but eminently practical, and sure to increase 
the growth of the inner spiritual life ; we differ, in short, as widely 
from the Evangelical party in the manner and openness, as in the 
matter and details of our doctrine. Take, for example, the doctrine 
of Invocation of Saints ; or, of Prayers for the Dead ; or, of Justification 
by Faith only ; or, of the merit of good works ; or, of the necessity of 
regular and obedient Fasting ; or, of the reverence due to the blessed 
Virgin Mary; or, of the Propitiatory Sacrifice of the Blessed Eucharist; 
or, of the almost necessity of Auricular Confession and Absolution, 
in order to the remission of mortal sin; — and more might be mentioned 
than these. Now, let me ask you ; do we speak of these doctrines 
from our pulpits in the same manner, or to the same allowed extent, 
as we speak of them one to another, or think of them in our closets ? 
Far from it ; rather, when we do speak of them at all, in the way of 
public, ministerial, teaching, we use certain symbols and a shibboleth 
of phrases, well enough understood by the initiated Jew, but dark and 
meaningless to the many. All this seems to me to be, day by day 
and hour by hour, more and more hard to be reconciled with the 
real spirit, mind, and purpose of the English Reformation, and of 


the modern English Church, shewn by the experience of 300 
years. It does seem to be, daily, more and more opposed to 
that single-mindedness of purpose, that simplicity and truthfulness and 
openness of speech and action, which the Gospel of our Blessed Lord 
requires. We are, indeed, to be ' wise as serpents '; but has our 
wisdom of the last few years been justly within the exceptions of 
that law? Let me not be understood as if supposing that any motive, 
except prudence and caution, has caused this reserve j but there are 
limits beyond which Christian caution degenerates into deceit, and an 
enemy might think that we could forget that there are more texts 
than one of Holy Scripture which speak of persecution to be undergone, 
for His sake, and for the Faith. 

"And if reserve in teaching carried to such an extent be, as I 
conceive it to be, unjustifiable, it is equally wrong, and to be 
condemned, in the practice of those who listen to, and endeavour to 
obey such teaching. What can we think — when honestly we bring 
our minds to its consideration — what can we think, I say, of the 
moral evils which must attend upon and follow conduct and rule of 
religious life, full of shifts and cow promises and evasions ? a rule of 
life based upon the acceptance of half one doctrine, all the next, and 
none of the third ; upon the belief entirely of another, hut not daring 
to say so; upon the constant practice, if possible, of this or that 
particular duty, hut secretly, and fearful of being 'found out '; doing 
it as if under the pretence of not doing it ; if questioned, explaining 
it away, or answering with some dubious answer 5 creeping out of 
difficulties; anything, in a word, but sincere, straightforward, 
and true. It would really seem as if, instead of being Catholics — 
as we say we are — in a Christian land, we were living in the city of 
heathen Rome, and forced to worship in the Catacombs and dark 
places of the earth." 80 

80 A Second Letter on the Present Position of the High Church Party in the Church 
of England, by the Rev. William Maskell, pp. 65-68. Third edition. 
London: Pickering, 1850. 



Its secret birth in 1855 — Brethren forbidden to mention its existence — Its 
secret Statutes — Its secret signs — Its mysterious "Committee of Clergy " 
— The Roll of sworn Celibates — Their Oath — Its secret Synods and 
Chapters — Brethren must push the Confessional amongst young and old 
— Its Confessional Book for little children — Its secret Confessional Com- 
mittee — Issues the Priest in Absolution — Secret birth of the Retreat 
Movement — First secret Retreat in Dr. Pusey's rooms — Starts the 
" St. George's Mission " at St. Peter's, London Docks — Dr. Pusey a 
member of the Mission — The Bishop of Lebombo a member of the 
Society of the Holy Cross — Sensational letter from him — Ritualistic Holy 
Water — Brethren alarmed at publicity — The Society establish an Oratory 
at Carlisle — Its secret history — Organises a Petition for Licensed Con- 
fessors — Reports of speeches at its secret Synods — Their dark plottings 

AFTER Tractarianism had become known as Puseyism, 
and both had developed into what is now termed 
Ritualism, it was felt by many members of the party 
that the time had come when the secret workers in what 
Hurrell Froude had so truthfully termed, in 1834, " the 
Conspiracy," 1 should combine together in secret societies, 
the more effectually to carry out their objects. One 
of the most dangerous of these organizations is the 
Society of the Holy Cross, which was founded on 
February 28th, 1855. It began in a very small way, and 
gradually extended its borders, until it became the most 
powerful of all the secret organizations connected with the 
Ritualistic Movement. It began with only six members, 
of whom three subsequently joined the Church of Rome ; 9 

1 Froude's Remains, Vol. I., p. 377. 

8 S. S. C. Master's Address, to May Synod, 1875, p. 3. 


and its founder was the Rev. Joseph Newton Smith, 3 who 
still survives. The only other surviving member of the 
original six is the Rev. A. Poole, Rector of Laindon Hills, 
Essex. A few others joined the Society during the year 
1855, °f whom the following are still living: viz., the 
Rev. John Sidney Eoucher, now Rector of Gedding, Bury 
St. Edmunds (who withdrew in 1877) ; the Rev. Canon 
Francis H. Murray, Rector of Chislehurst (who withdrew 
in 1877) 9 an( * tne R ev » G. Cosby White, now Vicar of 
Newland, Malvern Link. It so happens that several of the 
secret documents of the Society of the Holy Cross have 
come into my possession, in an honourable and straight- 
forward manner, and on these my description of the Society 
is mainly built. I have no more hesitation in making use of 
these documents than Her Majesty's Government would 
have in using the secret documents connected with a 
conspiracy against the State, should they come into their 
possession. For the early history of its movements I 
am much indebted to the Master's [the late Rev. A. H. 
Mackonochie's] Address Delivered to the Society in Synod, 
on the Festival of the Invention of the Holy Cross, 1870, and 
privately printed for the use of the brethren only. For 
the first twelve years of its existence, that is, until 1867, 
"caution was," said the Master, "enjoined upon the 
brethren in the matter of mentioning it" (p. 3). This one 
official statement is alone sufficient to show its secrecy, and 
how much it dreaded publicity. It has not lost its secret 
character yet. It so happened that I was at Folkestone 
during Church Congress week, in October, 1892, and while 
there I met a clergyman whom I knew to be still a member 
of the Society. I ventured to ask him — he knew who I was 
at the time — whether the Society of the Holy Cross had 
increased in numbers during the past fifteen years ? 
" Don't you know, sir," was his very emphatic reply, " that 

* Twenty-one Yean in St. George's Mission, p. -18. 


the Society of the Holy Cross is a secret Society, and that 
its members are pledged to secrecy?" "Oh, yes," I rejoined, 
"I know it very well; but I never before heard it so candidly 
acknowledged by one of its own members " ! He declined 
to give me the information asked for, though I should have 
thought that such a very harmless question might easily 
have been answered. 

The information which I am now about to give my readers 
concerning the Constitution of the S. S. C. — as it is commonly 
called — is taken from its official book, entitled Societatis 
Sanctce Cruets Statuta, which is printed in English, the 
title alone being in Latin. So fearful is this Society of the 
Holy Cross lest anyone outside its ranks should see these 
Statutes, that it is expressly provided (chapter ii., sec. 10, 
page 4) that when a brother resigns his membership of the 
Society, he " shall return to the Master his Cross, and the 
Books of Statutes and Offices." The Cross is one of a 
peculiar pattern, made expressly for the Society, and is usually 
worn suspended on the breast, or from the watchchain, so 
that, as they walk along the streets, the brethren of the 
S. S. C. may be able to recognise one another as belonging 
to this secret Society, even though they may not know each 
other personally. The Books of Statutes and Offices are 
three in number, viz., the Statuta, already mentioned ; 
the Preparation for and Thanksgiving after Mass, printed in 
English ; and the Societatis Sancta Cruris Officia, which 
is entirely in Latin, and contains the " Officium Proprium"; 
the " Ordo ad Synodum " ; the " Formula ad Cruces Bene- 
dicendas "; the " Ordo ad Recipiendum Candidatum Electum 
in Societatem " ; the "Ordo ad Fratrem Admittendum," 
the " Ordo ad Admittendum Fratrem in Regulam Rubram"; 
a somewhat similar office for admitting to the " White Rule"; 
and an order for admittance into the Roll of Celibates. 

The Society consists (Statuta, chapter i., sec. 1) "of Bishops, 
Priests, Deacons, and candidates for Holy Orders." "The 
Objects of the Society" are, as stated (in chapter i., sec. 2) "to 


maintain and extend the Catholic Faith and Discipline, and 
to form a special Bond of Union between Catholic Priests : 
(1) By promoting Holiness of life among the Clergy ; (2) By 
carrying on and aiding Mission work at Home and Abroad ; 

(3) By issuing and circulating Tracts and other Publications ; 

(4) By the exercise of Temporal and Spiritual Charity among 
the Brethren ; (5) By holding Synods and Chapters for 
Prayer and Conference ; (6) By common action in matters 
affecting the interests of the Church ; (7) By correspondence 
between the Brethren; (8) By the affiliation of Guilds of 

A prominent official of the S. S.C., with whom I had an 
interview about two years since, informed me that no action 
whatever has been as yet taken with reference to the last of 
these objects. With reference to the third of these objects a 
u Tract Committee " has been formed in the Society, whose 
work is (chapter vii., sec. 4) " to prepare, procure, revise, 
adapt, and publish Books and Tracts useful for furthering 
the objects of the Society." Now it is one of the proofs of 
the Jesuitical tactics adopted by the S. S. C. that although 
this Tract Committee has published a considerable number 
of books and tracts they never make known to the public 
the fact that they really emanate from the S. S. C. The 
most advanced Ritualistic doctrines are taught in these 
publications, which — I am happy to inform my readers — 
may henceforth be known to them by the statement on the 
title-page of each — " Edited by a Committee of Clergy." 
Whenever this is read on the title-page of any book or tract, 
it may be safely translated into " Society of the Holy Cross 
Tract Committee." 

The identity of the- Society with the "Committee of 
Clergy" seems to have been kept a profound secret, for 
some of the brethren appear to have known nothing at all 
about it. At the September, 1877, Synod, the Rev. Charles 
Edward Hammond expressed "the surprise he felt on dis- 
covering that the Tract Committee [of S.S.C.] and the 


Committee of Clergy were the same body." 4 At the same 
Synod the Rev. Robert James Wilson " said that until then 
he had no idea of the identity of the Tract Committee and 
the Committee of Clergy." 5 The Rev. A. H. Mackonochie 
informed the brethren that "the Tract Committee came 
into existence soon after he became Master. Its work was 
to bring out Tracts, and it adopted some already in exist- 
ence. He stated that the Tract called Pardon through the 
Precious Blood, and the Altar Manual, had been considered 
clause by clause by the Society." 6 

There are two classes of members, viz., " Brethren " and 
" Probationers." Both are required to " wear openly the 
Society's Cross," when " practicable " (chapter ii., sec. 5). 
This, of course, may be done with safety, since the outside 
public are not able to identify it. When two brethren meet 
" the one shall salute the other with the words, ' Pax tibi,' 
to which the reply shall be, 'Per Crucem;'" but ; it is 
cautiously provided that these salutations shall not take 
place " in the company of strangers " (chapter ii., sec. 6). 
One brother writing to another must begin his letter thus : 
— "P. >£ T. My Dear Brother"; and end with " ' In 
D. N.J.C.,' or some corresponding form of subscription" 
(Ibid., sec. 7). It is provided by chapter ii., sec. 9, that : — 
" Upon the death of a brother notice thereof shall be given 
to the Secretary, as soon as possible, by any brother 
cognizant of it, and the Secretary shall, forthwith, inform 
the brethren, that they may say Mass for the soul of their 
brother, either on the day of the funeral, or as soon after as 
practicable." In this Statute the reader will perceive one 
proof of the Romanizing character of the Society. 

" Every brother," says chapter ii., sec. 3, " shall be 
required to attend all the Synods and chapters he can, and 
positively the two Synods on May 3rd and September 14th 

4 S. S. C. Analysis of Proceedings, September Synod, 1877, p. 23. 
6 Ibid., p. 24. 6 Ibid., p. 24. 


(Feasts of the Holy Cross), unless unavoidably prevented, in 
which case he shall state the reason to the Master, and 
ask for a Dispensation." These "two Synods," I may here 
remark, are held in the Church of St. Peter's, London 
Docks, with locked doors ; and this has been the case for 
many years past. Is it not time that the Bishop of London 
prevented a church in his diocese from being used for secret 
meetings, where plots are continually being hatched for the 
destruction of Protestantism ? The brethren are required 
to maintain strict secrecy as. to what takes place in these 
Synods and Chapters. By chapter vi., sec. 24, it is provided 
that : — " The Brethren shall be strictly forbidden to divulge 
the proceedings of the Synods and Chapters, except so far as 
the publication is authorized by the Society." It is further 
ordered (Ibid., sec. 8), that : — " The Brethren and Pro- 
bationers in Synod shall sit vested in Cassock, Surplice, and 
Biretta, and in Chapter in Cassock and Biretta" These 
" Chapters " are meetings of the members, held on the 
second Tuesday of every month, except May and September. 
They have been held in various places during the history of 
the Society, including the House of Charity (1855-56) ; the 
Clergy House, 10, Great Tichfield Street (1856-57) ; the 
Mission House, Wellclose Square (1857-58) ; and the Clergy 
House, Crown Street, Soho. Next it shared a room with 
the Guild of St. Alban's, in Langham Street, from which 
they moved together to 3, New Boswell Court, Clare Market; 
and, again, in 1863, to tne Clergy House, St. Alban's, 
Holborn. It was also located for some years in a house in 
a back street near St. Alban's Church, viz., 5, Greville Street, 
Brook Street, Holborn, now the head-quarters of the "Guild 
of St. Martin " for postmen. Its present meeting place I 
have been unable to discover. In addition to these Synods 
and Chapters, special District Meetings of the brethren, 
living in various parts of the country, are held in the 
provinces from time to time. 

It is ordered that "Before the holding of any Synod, Mass 



shall be Celebrated solemnly, with a short Sermon from a 
Brother, and the Officium Proprium shall be said" (chapter vi., 
sec. 4). " When the Synod shall extend over two days, a 
Mass shall be said for Departed Brethren on the second day, 
in a Church selected by the Master" (sec. 5). Those of the 
Brethren unable to attend the Synod, are expected, " if 
practicable, to say Mass for the Intention of the Society" 
(sec. 6), whenever an opportunity may be given them. It is 
also directed that "An Analysis of the Proceedings at 
Synod and Chapter shall be sent by the Secretary to all 
Officers, and to such Brethren who may desire it " (sec. 21). 
The Analysis is headed " S. S. C." The greatest care is 
taken to prevent copies falling into the hands of outsiders. 

" There are," says chapter x., sec. 1, "four progressive 
degrees of obligation in the Society, termed respectively, the 
Ordinary, the Green, the Red, and the White Rule." The 
Ordinary Rule is " binding upon all the Brethren and Proba- 
tioners. The other three (are) entirely voluntary, but 
recommended for adoption ; the White Rule being restricted 
to Celibates." These Celibates are, apparently, considered 
as the very cream of the Society of the Holy Cross. Their 
names are kept on a separate list, which is known as the 
" Celibate Roll." A full list of the Brethren, and Probationers 
of the Society is privately printed every year, for confidential 
use ; but the " Celibate Roll," so far as I can ascertain, has 
never been trusted to print. There is a " Vicar " of this 
Roll. At the May Synod, 1881, the Rev. H. D. Nihill, then 
Vicar of St. Michael's, Shoreditch, was nominated as 
" Vicar of the Celibate Roll." In 1895 the Vicar was the 
Rev. E. G. Wood, Vicar of St. Clement's, Cambridge. By 
chapter xviii., sec. 5, "It is recommended that some external 
Symbol, and by preference a ring, be worn by Brethren of 
the Celibate Roll." A gentleman with whom I am acquainted, 
some years since came into the possession of one of these 
" rings," made of iron — I understand that others are made 
of silver, and some of gold — and he could not for some time 


make out its use. On looking more closely into it he 
discovered a very tiny indentation ; but that was all. 
Wondering very much what it meant, he secured the assis- 
tance of a powerful magnifying glass, and then discovered 
within the indentation, the magic words " S. S. C." It was 
the Celibate Ring of the Society of the Holy Cross ! Each 
member of this " Roll " takes a vow, or, rather, an oath of 
celibacy, " for a limited period, or for life, " (chapter xviii., 
sec. i). It is made in Latin, of which the following is a 
translation :— 

" I, N , profess and promise to Almighty God, Father, Son, 

and Holy Ghost, and to all the Saints, that 1 will lead a life of 
Celibacy for [so many years, or the rest of his life]. So help me 
God ! " 7 

The regulations for the guidance of the daily life of 
those attached to the various " Rules " are very minute. 
Those attached to the "White Rule" — that is, the Celibates 
« — must " say Mass daily " (chapter xvi., sec. 4) ; " frequent 
the Sacrament of Penance at least monthly" (sec. y); "say 
daily an office for each of the Hours, Prime, Terce, Sext, 
None, or Vespers, and Compline " (sec. 8) ; and " make a 
Retreat each year " (sec. 14). Those attached to the " Red 
Rule" must "say Mass on all Sundays and other Holy 
Days " (chapter xiv., sec. 4) ; " frequent the Sacrament of 
Penance at least three times a year " (sec. 7) ; observe the 
" Hours " of Prime, Compline, Sext, and None (sec. 8) ; and 
"make a Retreat each year" (sec. 15). Those attached to 
the " Green Rule," must also " say Mass (if practicable) on 
all Sundays and other Holy Days " (chapter xii., sec. 4) ; 
" frequent the Sacrament of Penance at least once a year " 
(sec. 7) ; make a yearly Retreat (sec. 12) ; and daily say 
a Mid-Day Office and Compline or Family Prayer (sec. 8). 
Those attached to the " Ordinary Rule," have a lighter set 
of directions than their brethren. The following "Rules and 
Usages of the Church " (sic !) are said to be binding on all 

7 S. S. C. Officio,, p. 31. 


who belong to the Society of the Holy Cross, which professes 
to be unable to grant any " dispensation therefrom " : — 

" i. To Celebrate, or at least to hear Mass (if practicable), on all 
Sundays and other Holy-days. 

"2. To say Mass or Communicate fasting since the midnight 

"3. To use Sacramental Confession as the conscience requires 

it." 8 

It will thus be seen that this secret Society of the Holy 
Cross is officially pledged to maintain much which ordinary 
loyal Churchmen consider as nothing less than Popery. The 
Confessional has always been a strong point with the Society. 
The importance attached to it is further seen in the Chapter 
of its Statutes devoted to " The Spirit and Discipline of 
the Society." Section 5 of that Chapter orders that : — 

" The Brethren shall devote themselves diligently to the Science of 
the Care of Souls, and shall labour in bringing young and old who are 
under their influence to value duly the Sacrament of Penance." 

We here discover that wherever members of the S. S. C. 
are found they are expected to act as missionaries of the 
Confessional, and that not only for the old, but also for the 
young. It is now many years since the Society, under 
its Jesuitical disguise of " A Committee of Clergy," issued a 
series of little " Books for the Young." No. I. of this series (a 
copy of the fourth thousand of which lies before me) was 
written for very little children, " six and a half or seven years 
old." 9 The following extracts from this book will show to 
my readers the fearful character of the Confessional teach- 
ing, imparted by the Society of the Holy Cross to very 
young children : — 

" It is to the priest, and to the priest only, that a child must 
acknowledge his sins, if he desires that God should forgive him. Do 
you know why ? It is because God, when on earth, gave to His 

8 5. S. C. Statuta, p. 34. 

9 " Books for the Young." No. I., Confession. Edited by a Committee of 
Clergy. Fourth thousand, p. 15. 


priests, and to them alone, the Divine power of forgiving men their 
sins." 10 

" Go to the priest, who is the doctor of your soul, and who cures 
it in the name of God." n 

" I have known poor children who concealed their sins in Con- 
fession for years. They were very unhappy, were tormented with 
remorse, and if they had died in that state, they would certainly have 
gone to the everlasting fires of hell "II! 12 

" This acknowledgement, made in secret, once for all, this acknow- 
ledgement which the Confessor himself forgets the next minute." 13 

" Whilst the priest is pronouncing the words of Absolution, Jesus 
Christ pours the torrents of His grace into the soul of the penitent 
Christian. . . During this time the happy penitent ought to keep 
himself very humble, very little, at the feet of Jesus, hidden in the 
priest." M 

"A little sinner of six and a half or seven years old, if he has sinned 
seriously, and if he repents and confesses seriously, has as much 
right to absolution as if he was twenty." 16 

" However painful it is to acknowledge a fault of this kind, it must 
be bravely confessed, without lessening it ; it is almost always sins of 
impurity that weak penitents dare not tell in Confession." 16 

To help on its Confessional work the Society of the Holy- 
Cross possesses a "Penitentiary Committee," whose work is 
"to advise, when referred to, on Cases of Conscience, and 
other matters connected with the Sacrament of Penance." 17 
This Committee forms a consultative body to which Father 
Confessors throughout the country may apply for advice and 
help in their work. The latest privately printed list of 
Members of this Committee which I have seen, is that of 
1895-96, issued with the official " Roll of the Brethren and 
Probationers of the Society of the Holy Cross," in that year. 
The members of the Committee were then : the Rev. E. G. 
Wood, Vicar of St. Clement's, Cambridge ; the Rev. S. G. 
Beal, Rector of Ronaldkirk, Darlington; the Rev. A. Poole, 
Rector of Laindon Hills, Romford ; the Rev. A. J. Mickle- 

10 Ibid., p. 3. « Ibid., p. 4. 12 Ibid., p. 4. 

13 Ibid., p. 7. 14 Ibid., p. 13. y = Ibid., p. 15. 

16 Ibid., p. 24. l ? S. S. C. Statuta, chapter viii., sec. 4, p. 22. 


thwaite, Vicar of St. Luke's, Chesterton, Cambridge 
(Secretary) ; the Rev. R. A. J. Suckling, Vicar of St. 
Alban's, Holborn; and the Rev. T„ A. Lacey, Vicar of 
Madingley, Cambridge. 

It was the Society of the Holy Cross that made itself 
responsible for that abominable book, written for the 
guidance of Ritualistic Father Confessors, and known as 
the Priest in Absolution. This work was issued in two 
parts, the first of which was published; and the second 
issued for private circulation amongst those Father Con- 
fessors who could be trusted by the S. S. C. The price 
of Part II. was, to the brethren, 5s 4^, post free. I possess 
a copy of both parts, which I purchased a few years since, 
after the work had been exposed in the House of Lords, in 
1877, by the late Lord Redesdale. My copy contains a 
cutting, pasted on the inside, from the catalogue of Henry 
Sotheran & Co., the well-known London second-hand 
booksellers. After mentioning that the price of this copy 
was no less than £6. 6s, it is added : — 

" So zealously guarded from public observation (for obvious 
reasons) is the Priest in Absolution that it is most unlikely that 
another copy will ever be offered for sale." 

The second part was issued without even the printer's 
name attached. On the title-page it is stated that the book 
is " Privately Printed for the Use of the Clergy " ; and it is 
dedicated : — 

" To the Masters, Vicars, and Brethren, of the Society of the Holy 
Cross. This volume, begun at their request, and continued amongst 
many labours and infirmities, with the hope that it may serve to 
increase piety and devotion, is humbly and affectionately dedicated 
by an Unworthy Brother Priest." 

The " Unworthy Brother Priest " carefully abstained 
from putting his name to his book, which was a translation 
with adaptations, from a filthy French Roman Catholic 
book, being A Manual for Confessors, by the Abbe Gaume. 
It so happened that this priest was dead when his translation 


was exposed in the House of Lords, but it was then made 
known to the public, for the first time, that his name was the 
Rev. J. C. Chambers. We shall return to this important 
event in the Society's history later on. 

The " Retreat Committee " of the S. S. C. has increased 
its operations very much during recent years. In fact, the 
Society claims to have been the first to introduce Retreats 
into the Church of England. The Master of the Society, 
addressing the Synod of 1870, boasted that "the Retreat 
Movement" was "begun and fostered by the Society." 18 
The first Retreat for the Clergy was held during the month 
of July, 1856, in Dr. Pusey's house at Oxford. It was 
marked by the secrecy which has ever characterized the 
movements of the Society of the Holy Cross. The outside 
public knew nothing at all about it ; and so anxious were its 
promoters to prevent Churchmen generally from obtaining 
information, that the late Rev. Charles Lowder, who was 
present, and who was then a member of the S. S. C, and 
in charge of its East London Mission, found it necessary, 
in writing about it confidentially to his mother, to add this 
caution : — " This account that I have given you is meant to 
be private, so do not let it go out of the house." 1 * About seventeen 
or eighteen clergymen were present at this secret Retreat, 
which lasted a whole week. " Dr. Pusey has entered," 
wrote Mr. Lowder to his mother, " very kindly into it, and 
given us the greatest assistance, besides lodging and boarding 
us all." 20 The Romish offices of Prime, Terce, and Sext, were 
used at this Retreat, and several conferences were held by 
the members, at which various subjects of interest were 
discussed, including the Confessional. By the Statutes of 
the S. S. C. it is provided that the Retreat Committee shall 
" Prepare and publish, as near as practicable to the Feast 
of Epiphany in each year, a list of Retreats, stating the 

18 The Master's Address, 1870, p. 7. 

19 Charles Lowder : A Biography, p. 96. First edition. * Ibid., p. 96. 


place where each will be held ; the persons to whom 
communications may be addressed ; the times at which 
each will begin and end ; the expense ot living during 
the Retreat, and the name of the conductor" (chapter 
vii., p. 21). Now, here it seems as though all secrecy 
were cast aside, and the utmost publicity required. The 
Committee shall not only "prepare," but also "publish" the 
List of Retreats. And yet, notwithstanding this rule, a 
measure of secrecy is thrown around this List. It is 
periodically advertised in the Church Times, but no intimation 
is given that the Retreats have been organized by the 
Society of the Holy Cross. It would never do to make 
such a public display of its work, moderate High Churchmen 
might be thus frightened from taking part in Retreats 
organized by such a very advanced Society ! Accordingly, 
a much needed " Economy " and " Reserve " is practised 
by the authorities. The Confessional is a special feature 
of these Retreats. The ordinary printer for the S. S. C, 
Mr. Knott, Brooke Street, Holborn, has published a four- 
paged tract, entitled Instruction for Retreats, which in all 
probability is the production of one of the brethren. 
Those who enter the Retreat are here directed that, before 
it commences, they should "go to Confession," and "join 
in the offering of the Holy Sacrifice " ; and they are told : — 
" If you have made a Confession in Retreat, go back to 
your own Director as soon as possible." At these gatherings, 
whether for the clergy or the laity, for men or for women, 
the full Romanizing doctrines held by the Ritualists may 
be — and, I understand, really are — taught with safety, 
and with a frankness which could not be practised from 
the pulpit. Loyal Churchmen would do well to avoid 
Retreats, if they wish to retain their allegiance to the 
principles of the Protestant Reformation. 

The year following the formation of the Society of the 
Holy Cross witnessed the starting, by that Society, of " The 
St. George's Mission," in the East End of London. The 


Rector of St. George's, at that time, was the late Rev. Bryan 
King, and he approved heartily, not only of the general 
principles on which it was proposed to carry on the Mission, 
but also of that necessary secrecy as to certain parts of 
the scheme which it was desirable to keep from the 
knowledge of the public. The first clergyman placed by the 
Society of the Holy Cross in charge of the Mission was the 
late Rev. Charles Lowder, and to him, on May 31st, 1856, 
the Rev. Bryan King wrote as follows : — " Upon the 
principles of your scheme for the Mission, of course, I quite 
agree ; as to the time for carrying some of them out, and 
the Christian Economy and Reserve to be observed (respecting 
some of them), of course that must be left to the members of 
the Mission." 21 This Reserve and Economy was particularly 
shown in the earliest Reports of the " St. George's Mission," 
in which its Ritualistic character was studiously kept out 
of sight, and thus, no doubt, many were induced to aid it 
who would otherwise have withheld their subscriptions and 
donations on conscientious grounds. It is only fair to add 
here that this Economy and Reserve is no longer observed 
in the annual Report of the Mission. It is no longer 
necessary. The Mission was largely indebted to the 
assistance and advice of the late Rev. Dr. Pusey. There 
are several allusions to his help in the Life of Charles Lowder, 
and it would appear from one of these that Dr. Pusey was 
at one time himself a member of the Mission. Writing to 
his father, with reference to the Mission, on May 6th, 1856, 
Mr. Lowder said : — " I pray that it may be a good work for 
the Church ; my desire is to make it a thoroughly Catholic 
one, a life of poverty, and self-denial, and dedication to 
God's service, and, if it may be, the revival of a really 
Religious Order for missionary work — men trained in holy 
living for the work of winning souls. Dr. Pusey and the other 
members of the Mission wish me to go, and we have had 

11 Charles Lowder : A Biography, p. 93. First edition. 


already sufficient promise of support to justify our com- 
mencement. . . Dr. Pusey has about £150 or £160 at his 
disposal, which he will give it." 22 On May 16th, 1856, the 
Rev. Bryan King wrote to Mr. Lowder : — 

" As we are beginning a very eventful experiment in the 
Church of England, it is most important that we should 
begin it upon a sound and safe basis. Both you and I may 
be deceived or biassed: you may regard the Mission too 
exclusively from your point of view, as of course I may from 
mine. Send then your letter and this to Dr. Pusey for his 
counsel ; he, in Oxford, has the advantage of consulting far 
better and wiser heads than yours or mine, learned Canonists 
and earnest and experienced parish priests. Beg him to draw 
up an experimental scheme or Constitution for the Mission." 2 * 
There was a difficulty in securing a licence from the Bishop 
of London for Mr. Lowder to work in the Mission, and 
Dr. Pusey was consulted about the difficulty. 24 The late 
Dean Stanley, and the Archbishop of Dublin (Dr. Trench) 
gave help to the Mission from time to time. Even the late 
Bishop of Oxford (Dr. S. Wilberforce), in less than a year 
after its foundation, became quite infatuated with the 
Mission. On May 10th, 1857, he wrote to the Rev. W. J. 
Butler concerning it : — " I quite long to go and cast myself 
into that Mission." 25 Those dignitaries of the Church 
would never have given their aid had they been made fully 
acquainted with the objects of those who controlled the 
work. How the S. S. C. must have " laughed in their 
sleeves " at the success of their Jesuitical manoeuvres I 
But what will straightforward Englishmen think of them ? 

In 1877 Mr. Lowder wrote a volume entitled Twenty-One 
Years in S. George's Mission, in which he describes at length 
the work carried on there. He tells us, amongst other 
interesting information, that in the Mission work : — 

Charles Lowder: A Biography, p. 86. First edition. 

23 Ibid., p. 90. * Ibid., p. 99, • 

25 Life of Bishop Wilberforce, Vcl. II., p. 341. 


"When the soul is touched with contrition, and anxious to make 
her peace with God, we recommend Sacramental Confession, and 
have reason to be most thankful that this has been our practice from 
the beginning.'" 26 

•' It is very gratifying to witness the reverence of our worshippers, 
and to know how many devoutly appreciate the blessings they 
enjoy in the constant Celebrations of the Holy Eucharist. ... Is it a 
time of sorrow, the anniversary of a death or funeral ? They fly to 
the Altar, and ask the Priest who Celebrates, and some of their friends 
also, to remember before God the soul of their departed one." 27 

The work of the Mission grew more and more Romanizing 
as the years went on, until at the present time the services 
are as advanced, if not more advanced, in a Romeward 
direction, than in any other church in London. The 
" Thirty-seventh Annual Report," issued in 1893, mentions 
that during the year 1892 no fewer than 3500 Confessions 
were heard in the church ; and it is recorded that one of the 
former clergy of the Mission, " Father W. Edmund Smythe," 
had been appointed Bishop of Lebombo. In the St. Peter's 
(London Docks) Parish Magazine™ there is published a 
letter from this gentleman, who is a member of the Society 
of the Holy Cross (then only Bishop-Designate), dated 
Isandhlwana, Zululand, November 4th, 1892, in which he 
describes the opening of a new chapel in South Africa 
(towards which the S. P. C. K. gave £25), which clearly 
shows the Romeward tendencies fostered in its past and 
present workers in East London by the Mission of the 
Society of the Holy Cross. 

"We can't," writes the Bishop- Designate, "do very much in the 
way of ceremonial out here of course, but the College students are 
getting to understand how to do things properly, and so we do our 
best. We vested in the Chapel and then went round the outside of 
the building in procession, the Bishop in Cope and Mitre, with two 
boys to support him, Mr. Gallagher, as Subdeacon, carrying the Cross 
in front. We had Incense, but not Holy Water ! " 29 

26 Twenty-one Years in St. George's Mission, p. 48. r Ibid., p. 54. 

23 The *• St. George's Mission" is now popularly known by the name of 
" St. Peter's, London Docks." 
29 St. Peter's Parish Magazine, January, 1893, p. 3. 


It is evident from the whole tone of this letter that this 
S. S. C. Episcopal Brother very much regretted the absence 
of the " Holy Water " ; but he comforts himself by adding : — 
" By degrees we shall get more things." At the opening of 
the chapel he tells us that " High Mass " was celebrated by 
the Bishop, and then he describes a number of Romish 
ornaments already in use in the chapel : — 

" It will interest you," he writes, " to know that the Altar Cross 
is one of the large Crucifixes which Fr. Massiah (another S. S. C. 
Brother) sent out for me. I have just received an anonymous present 
from England of some Cruets, one pair of which will go there. We 
have one Altar Frontal, which the Bishop has given us, and have 
managed to spare a linen Altar Cloth and some Purificators, &c, from 
our store at Isandhlwana. There is also a large picture of Our Lady ; 
so the Chapel is not altogether unfurnished. By degrees we shall get 
more things." 3° 

It may be useful to mention here that the use of Holy 
Water is spreading considerably amongst the Ritualists. As 
far back as 1870 it was recommended, in a popular Manual 
of Devotion, which has had a large circulation amongst 
members of that party. The title of the book is the 
Golden Gate, and its author is the Rev. S. Baring-Gould, 
the well-known writer of novels, and now Rector of Lew 
Trenchard, Devon. In the service termed the " Last 
Agony," for a dying person, the author gives the following 
superstitious directions as to what should be done in the 
room immediately after death : — 

" The body is then decently laid out, and a light placed before it. 
A small Crucifix is put in the hands of the deceased upon his breast, 
while the body is sprinkled with Holy Water" 31 

The Priest's Prayer Book, a large volume which has 
passed through seven or eight editions, was edited by two 
members of the Society of the Holy Cross, viz., the late 
well-known Rev. Dr. Littledale, and the Rev. J. E. Vaux. 

30 St. Peter's Parish Magazine. January, 1893, p. 4. 

31 The Golden Gate, by the Rev. S. Baring-Gould, Part III., p. 128. Edition, 


It provides for the use of the clergy in the Church of 
England a special form for blessing Holy Water, to which it 
actually attributes the power of curing bodily diseases, and 
driving the devil out of people 1 Here is the rubric and 
prayer for this purpose : — 

" He [the priest] shall then Hess the water on this wise .— 
" O God, Who, in ordaining divers mysteries for the salvation of 
mankind, hast been pleased to employ the element of water in the 
chiefest of Thy Sacraments : give ear to our prayers, and pour upon 
this water the might of Thy blessing, that as it serves Thee in those 
holy mysteries, so by Thy Divine Grace it may here avail for the 
casting out of devils, and the driving away of diseases ; that whatsoever 
in the houses or places of the faithful is sprinkled therewith, may be 
freed from all uncleanness, and delivered from hurt." 33 

In the Master's Address to the Society of the Holy Cross, 
in 1870, he said : — " The policy of the Society, up to the 
September Synod of 1867, was that of privacy. Caution 
was enjoined upon the Brethren in the matter of mentioning 
it. It was thought, and no doubt wisely, that the first thing 
to be done was to deepen the inner life of the Brethren 
before launching out into greater publicity. In view, 
however, of the Church Congress at Wolverhampton, in 
the above year, it was determined to reverse this policy, 
and to distribute broadcast a new paper of the Nature and 
Objects of the Society, specially drawn up for the occasion. 
Together with this, was issued a short Address to Catholics 
and both obtained great publicity." 33 Three years later, 
the then Master of the S.S.C. in his "Address," said that 
the Society had " developed from secrecy to the most 
open publicity, so far as its existence and objects are 
concerned." 34. It is well for his veracity that the Master 

32 The Priest's Prayer Book, p. 221, seventh edition, issued in 1890. The same 
form appears in all the subsequent editions, including that still on sale. A 
similar form for blessing Holy Water is printed in the Day Office of the 
Church, p. xiii., together with another form for driving the devil out of the 
water before it is blessed. 

33 The Master's Address, S. S. C-, 1870, p. 3. 
54 Ibid., 1873, p. 4. 


added the saving clause, " so far as its existence and objects 
are concerned"; because its essential secrecy has continued 
ever since, and at the present time is even more marked 
than ever. The Society gives to the public occasionally — 
very rarely, it should rather be said — a certain amount of 
information concerning its work, but as recently as its May, 
1881, Synod, Brother the Rev. William Crouch said that 
" he thought the secrecy of the Society's doings a mistake," 86 
and, as we have already seen, the Statutes of the Society 
continue to enjoin secrecy on the Brethren. 

The Master of the S. S. C, addressing the May, 1876, 
Synod, said that the Society "started with its secrecy" ; u 
and that " during the first eight years of the Society's life, 
its Statutes and Rules existed only in Manuscript." 37 He 
also said that from the formation of the Society, " The bond 
of union between the Brethren was to be as strict as possible. 
None but themselves were to know their names, or of the 
existence of the Society, except those to whom it might 
be named to induce them to join : but this only with leave of 
the Society." 38 Care was also enjoined on the Brethren to 
keep secret even the old documents of the Society, and, if 
necessary, to destroy them, lest any outsiders should know 
what was going on in their dark apartments. The Master, 
addressing the May, 1875, Synod, expressed his feelings of 
alarm on this point, in the following terms : — " The question 
has again arisen of the use of Post Cards in writing on 
Society business. I earnestly hope that the Society will let 
me press upon each Brother most strongly the undesirability 
of this practice. In these days there is great strength in a 
Society like ours being able to keep its private character. 
At present outsiders know only of our existence ; but each 
little liberty, such as the use of these Post Cards, opens one 
more aperture for the entrance of inquisitive eyes. This 

36 S. S. C. Analysis of May Syncd, 1881, p. 24. 

46 The Master's Address, May, 1876, p. 6. 

* Ibid., p. 3. M Ibid., p. 3. 


same principle applies to taking the greatest possible care, 
either to destroy, or to keep in some safe place, the old Rolls, 
and other printed matter, such as Acta, Agenda, and Notice 
Papers." 39 At the September, 1876, Synod, the Master 
found it necessary to refer again to the subject. " Let me," 
he said, " urge upon you care with regard to the Statutes, 
Roll, Acta, and other documents of the Society. A descrip- 
tion of it from a ' London Correspondent ' appeared a few 
weeks ago in an Aberdeen newspaper. It was accurate 
enough to be correct in the names of the Saints to whom 
two of the local branches are dedicated. If we are to 
maintain the privacy which has hitherto been our rule, it 
can only be done by caution/' 40 

At the May Synod, 1870, of the Society, a paper on 
"The Establishment of an Oratory in London by the 
Society of the Holy Cross," was read by Brother the 
Rev. Orby Shipley, who some years later seceded to the 
Church of Rome. Mr. Shipley was well known as the 
writer of advanced Romanizing works on various theo- 
logical subjects, and was a very active supporter of the 
S. S. C. His paper was during the summer of 1870 
" Privately Printed for the Society," at its expense, and in the 
following year was published by him, as an appendix to a 
book entitled, The Four Cardinal Virtues. The Oratory which 
he proposed was to be a centre for all the advanced 
Ritualists of the country, at which they could meet from 
time to time, and in which the Ritual should be of the 
most extreme character. 

" Thus we should desiderate," for the Oratory, said Mr. Shipley, 
" these elements at the least : — The Asperges ; the ' Censing of 
persons and things ' or the use of Incense in a Ritual manner j 
the correct Introits, Graduals, Offertories, Communions ; Gospel 
Lights ; Consecration Lights on the Altar and Consecration Candles 
in front of the Altar, in addition to the Six Altar Candles and 

99 Ibid., May Synod, 1875, p. 10. 

• The Master's Address, September Synod, 1876, p. 8. 



two Sacramental Lights j the use of the Altar Bell ; the Lavabo ; 
and, of course, the Eucharistic Vestments, for Celebrant, Ministers, 
Servers, and Acolytes." 41 

In short, the founders of the Oratory, Mr. Shipley said, 
"would not feel satisfied until they had restored to the 
Church of England a rendering of the sacred Mass which 
was fully Mediaeval in the richness, costliness, taste, and 
perfection of its details." The Synod decided, after hearing 
Brother Shipley's paper, that the establishment of such 
an Oratory was deserving of further consideration. The 
idea of having such an Oratory in London appears to 
have been abandoned for a time, but not forgotten. Two 
years later it was determined to erect such an Oratory, 
not, however, in the Metropolis, but in the far North, 
in the city of Carlisle. For this purpose funds were 
necessary, but it was decided not to make a public appeal, 
but to set all the Brethren to work privately collecting 
amongst their friends the necessary pecuniary assistance. 
Accordingly the late Rev. A.. H. Mackonochie wrote 
letters on the subject to the Brethren, but very much 
to the annoyance of the secret wire-pullers a copy of 
one of these letters came into the hands of the editor of 
the Rock, who published it in his columns, and thus 
removed the mystery which served as a protection to a 
dangerous movement, and made known to the public its 
real objects. Mr. Mackonochie's letter was as follows : — 

" s. s. c. 

"St. Alban's Clergy House, Holborn. 

"May nth, 1872. 
"P. >J< T. 

" My Dear Brother, — The Vicar of the Carlisle Branch has 
asked me to commend to your notice the following resolution passed 
at the Synod last week : — 

41 On the Establishment of an Oratory by the S. S. C. Privately printed edition, 
p. 17. Mr. Shipley stated that the Society as such "is in no way responsible 
for the opinions" which he expressed in his paper ; but it was certainly read 
by request of the authorities of the S. S. C, who paid £5. us for printing 
it, and who did not censure Brother Shipley's opinions. 


" ' That the S. S. C. approves of the scheme for the proposed Oratory 
in Carlisle, and, subject to the necessary funds being raised by 
private subscription among the Brethren, undertakes to treat for the 
securing of a site for the purpose.' 

" The Carlisle Oratory is a work which the Synod considered to 
deserve the utmost attention of the Society — 1. The Carlisle clergy 
are completely overridden by an Ultra- Protestant clique, the strength 
of which lies in the Dean, 43 and a powerful tradition left by the two 
late Bishops. ... 4. The Bishop is quite willing to encourage work 
(especially an increase of celebrations), and he has consented to 
license a Chaplain to the proposed Religious House. 5. There is an 
earnest demand for the privileges which such a House would afford. 
A site may be had in the parish of Holy Trinity (the poorest in 
Carlisle), of which the priest has given his consent to the scheme, 
but it is of the utmost importance the site should be secured at 
once. If you will kindly exert yourself among your friends, and send 
any money you can get at once to Brother the Rev. C. H. V. Pixell, 
Skirwith Vicarage, Penrith, he will account for it to the Society, in 
Chapter, and send you a receipt. 

u Believe me, Dear Brother, 

" Yours most truly in our Blessed Lord, 

"A. H. Mackonochie." 4S 

At that time the Rev. T. S. Barrett (now Rector of 
Teversall, Mansfield), was Rector of St. George's, Barrow- 
in-Furness, and, being one of the Brethren of the S. S. C, 
and living in the district, he naturally took a deep interest 
in the Oratory scheme. In November, 1872, he also made 
an appeal for furniture for the Oratory, mentioning that, 
amongst other things, it would require an Altar Cross, 
Altar Lights, Vesper Lights, Cottas, Cassocks and Stoles, a 
Sacring Bell, Frontals and Super Frontals, Banners, Flower 
Vases, &C. 44 These Ornaments were not then as common as 
they are now, and that they should be required for the new 
Oratory was a clear proof that its promoters intended to 
work on advanced Romanizing lines. But, unfortunately, 
the public knew nothing about Mr. Mackonochie's letter or 

42 That is, Dr. Close, who was then Dean of Carlisle. 

43 The Rock, July 4th, 1873, p. 448. 
« Ibid. 


Brother Barrett's appeal, until a full six mpnths after the 
Oratory was actually opened, and the mischief done. 

About a month before Mr. Mackonochie's letter was 
written, anonymous letters were sent to the Protestant Dean 
of Carlisle (Dr. Close), and these contained intelligence of 
such an alarming character that he at once wrote to the 
Bishop of Carlisle on the subject. The Bishop replied that 
an application had been made to him to grant a licence for 
certain clergymen to work in a Carlisle parish, under the 
" Private Chapels Act." He had taken a legal opinion 
on the question of his powers to do this, and had been 
11 informed that it would be within the law." " This being 
so," continued the Bishop, " I said that in the event of an 
Institution being established upon the scheme described 
I would give a licence on certain conditions. The chief of 
these was that I should require to be satisfied that there 
would be no Ritual developments, contrary to what had 
been decided to be lawful." 45 Meanwhile, the clergy of 
Carlisle and neighbourhood had taken alarm, and towards 
the end of April, 1872, they presented an Address on the 
subject to the Bishop of Carlisle, signed by no fewer than 
120 of their number, earnestly asking his lordship to give no 
encouragement to those who asked his licence for Brethren 
of the Society of the Holy Cross to officiate in the proposed 
Oratory. " Should such a step be taken," they said, " the 
consequences would be most disastrous to the best interests 
of the Church in this diocese. Schism and division would 
be multiplied and aggravated, and a permanent feud 
established in the heart of the Cathedral city." The Bishop 
was rather in favour of the scheme of the S. S. C, than 
otherwise, yet he could not ignore the opinions of such a 
large number of his clergy. So in his reply to their Address 
he tried to allay their fears, but would make no definite 
promise either way. And thus the matter rested until the 

44 The correspondence is published in full in the Church Association Monthly 
Intelligencer, June, 1872, pp. 146-148. 


new Oratory was actually opened in the January of the 
following year, when another storm of public indignation 
arose. On January 17th, the Dean once more wrote to the 
Bishop calling his attention to the reports of the opening 
ceremony which had appeared in the Carlisle papers, and 
at which " the high Ritual " was witnessed which " usually 
characterised " the proceedings of the Society of the Holy 
Cross; and he asked the Bishop, "whether the building 
in question, or the officiating clergyman were licensed " 
by him, " or whether they have obtruded themselves on the 
citizens of Carlisle without your Lordship's permission " ? 
To these questions the Bishop replied : — " The services to 
which you refer have had no sanction from me — unless it be 
regarded as a sanction that I have taken no active steps in 
opposition to them." *• Thus the Society of the Holy 
Cross triumphed in Carlisle, mainly through a want of 
firmness on the part of the Bishop, who could easily have 
inhibited all the brethren, but did not. And so it has been 
ever since on the part of only too many of the Episcopal Bench, 
who, rather than permit a " row,-" have been willing to allow 
the Romanizing party to have their own way. These Bishops 
have reversed the Apostolic order which declares that " the 
wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable " 
(James iii. 17). The fault has not been confined to our 
prelates, it has been shared also by both clergy and laity. 
It would be well if all these timid ones, who love peace more 
than the purity of the Faith, were to lay to heart the words 
and act in accordance with the spirit which moved Martin 
Luther when, at the Diet of Worms, he said : — " It is for me 
a great joy to see that the Gospel is now, as in ancient days, 
a cause of trouble and discord. That is the character and 
destiny of the Word of God. Jesus Christ hath said, * I came 
not to send peace on earth, but a sword.' God is wonderful 
and terrible in His counsels ; let us dread lest, in thinking to 

46 Carlisle Journal, January 31st, 1873, from which this correspondence was 
reprinted in the Church Association Monthly Intelligencer, March, 1873, pp. 20, 21. 


stop discords, we persecute God's Holy Word, and bring 
down on our heads a fearful deluge of insurmountable 
dangers, of present disasters and eternal desolations." 47 

Early in 1873 a petition was presented to Convocation, 
signed by 483 Ritualistic priests, asking for Licensed 
Confessors in the Church of England. This petition 
naturally created a great sensation at the time, and led 
to many large anti-confessional meetings being held in 
London and the Provinces; to an important declaration 
on the subject by a Committee of the Upper House of 
Convocation for the Province of Canterbury ; and a 
discussion in the House of Lords, on July 14th, in the 
course of which the Marquis of Salisbury denounced 
habitual confession. " We know," said his lordship, 
" that besides its being unfavourable to what we believe to 
be Christian truth, in its result it has been injurious to the 
moral independence and virility of the nation to an extent 
to which probably it has been given to no other Institution 
to affect the character of mankind." Everybody was talking 
about this daring petition, but not one of the public knew 
who its real organizers were. The real wire-pullers preferred 
to remain in the dark, and they were the authorities 
of the Society of the Holy Cross. On March 14th, 1873, 
the Rev. A. H. Mackonochie, who was then Master of the 
Society of the Holy Cross, sent out to all the brethren a 
printed circular letter, enclosing copies of the petition for 
signature, in the course of which he informed them that 
" The memorial was presented to the Society in Chapter 
last month, and again, after a further revision by the 
Committee, on Tuesday last. It was then adopted, con- 
sidered clause by clause, a few verbal alterations being left 
to the final decision of the Committee, and finally agreed 
to." In the confidence of its secret May, 1873, Synod, the 

4 " D'Aubigne's History of the Reformatien, Book VII. , chapter ix., p. 206. 
Edition, Edinburgh, 1846. 


Master of the Society talked freely on the subject. " You 
are aware," he said, " that it [the petition] was not 
presented in the name of the Society, and the public papers 
have shown you that the blame of it is principally laid on 
me personally. It seems to have done for the Truth much 
more than the most sanguine expectations of its promoters 
anticipated, and, if I were entitled to it, I should gladly 
accept that blame as praise. I am, however, bound to say 
that it belongs to brethren senior to me, and far more able." 48 
It had been organized by a special Committee of the 
S. S. C, who had collected the signatures. There was 
certainly something Jesuitical in the way it was managed. 
The petition asked for many things besides Licensed 
Confessors, and clearly proves that the Society of the Holy 
Cross, and large numbers of other Ritualists, are far from 
satisfied with the existing formularies of the Church of 
England. The Book of Common Prayer, says this petition, 
is " manifestly incomplete, through the absence in many 
particulars of such Services and Rubrics as would give 
adequate expression to this claim of the Church of England 
to be Catholic in her doctrine, usage, and ceremonial." This 
"want of completeness " is considered by the petitioners as 
a " distinct grievance." They object to any scheme which 
would " alter the Book of Common Prayer " in what they 
term " an un-Catholic direction " ; but they are most anxious 
for a revision of that Book on Romish lines, for they 
suggest that Convocation should " promote " the " addi- 
tion " to the Prayer Book of the following matters : — 

" The doctrines, that is to say, of — 

" I. The Real Presence of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in the 
Holy Communion, ' under the form of Bread and Wine.' 

" II. The adoration due to Him there present. 

" III. The Sacrifice which He there offers by the hands of His 
Priest to the Divine Majesty." 

The petitioners further pray that any " alterations " 


The Master's Address, S. S. C, 1S73, p. io, note. 


which may be made in the Book of Common Prayer shall 
include : — 

"The full provision of the ancient and proper Introits and 
Graduals, together with the Secreta, Communions, and Post-Com- 
munions, for Festivals, Sundays, and Ferial Days." 

" That provision may be made for the decent and reverent Reserva- 
tion of the Blessed Eucharist, and that an Office be prepared for the 
Communion of the Sick therewith." 

" That the use of Unction may be restored in Holy Baptism and 
Confirmation, as well as in the Visitation of the Sick, together with 
the proper Services for the Consecration by the Bishops of the Oils 
for the said purposes." 

The clause which gave its name to this petition of 
dissatisfied Ritualists was as follows : — 

"That in view of the wide-spread and increasing use of Sacra- 
mental Confession, your Venerable House may consider the advisa- 
bility of providing for the education, selection, and Licensing of duly 
qualified Confessors, in accordance with the provisions of Canon 
Law." 49 

There is one other feature of this petition worthy of 
special note. It mentions certain usages which, " while 
they are extensively promoted by or used under Episcopal 
countenance and sanction, are nevertheless neither expressly 
nor by necessary implication enjoyned by the Book of 
Common Prayer " — such as, "The use of solemn and other 
processions as well in Cathedral and Parish Churches as 
elsewhere. The formal presentation to Archbishops and 
Bishops of Croziers and Pastoral Staves, and the ceremonial 
use thereof. The use of Processional Crosses and Banners, 
Credence Tables, Chalice Veils, coloured Altar Cloths, and 
the like." It is indeed noteworthy that the Society of the 
Holy Cross should thus frankly admit that none of these 
things have the sanction of the Book of Common Prayer. 
But, it may well be asked, if not by that authority, by what 
other authority are they introduced ? 

- 49 The full text of the petition was published in the Rock, June 6th, 1873, 
P- 3S3. 


Of course Convocation declined to grant the impudent 
request of the petitioners. It had neither the power 
nor the will to do anything of the kind. Whatever official 
statements on the subject of Confession may have been 
issued by the Convocations of the Church of England, from 
time to time, they have never been favourable to the claims 
of the Society of the Holy Cross. The wish expressed for 
additions, of a Romanizing character, of services for special 
occasions, was really an attempt to alter the Constitution 
of the Church of England, and in such a manner that, 
if granted, every true lover of the Reformation would 
have been compelled, by the dictates of his conscience, to 
leave at once a Church which sanctioned ceremonies of 
such a Popish and superstitious character. Nothing less 
than Revision of the Book of Common Prayer on Romaniz- 
ing lines will ever satisfy the aspirations of the Ritualists. 
It is sometimes said that we " shall soon have to fight the 
battle of the Reformation over again." But those who 
carefully study what is now going on in the Church of 
England do not look forward to the commencement of 
such a warfare. They know that the great battle has 
already commenced. It is an encounter of life and death. 
Bishops and Statesmen may wilfully shut their eyes to 
the dangers that surround the Reformed Church, and 
cry "Peace, peace, when there is no peace," and vainly 
strive to reconcile the opposing sections. But the attempt 
is in vain. It is impossible to reconcile Protestantism 
and Priestcraft, or Sacerdotalism ; nor is such a peace on 
Christian principles desirable. The end of the struggle 
must be that either Protestant Churchmen — old-fashioned 
High Churchmen were not ashamed to call themselves 
Protestants — must retain their position, and recover the 
lost property which honestly belongs to them ; or else the 
Sacerdotalists will oust them out of their rights and out 
of the Church of England, which will then once more 
place on itself that fatal chain of Papal bondage which 


has been the curse of every country that has submitted 
to it. 

It may now be serviceable to take, as it were, a glimpse 
into a few of the Synods and Chapters of the Society of 
the Holy Cross, with a* view to finding out the kind of 
business usually transacted at these secret gatherings. For 
this purpose we shall consult some of the official reports 
privately printed for the use of the brethren only. We 
commence with the " Analysis of Proceedings of May 
Synod, 1874," which, as the document itself records, 
"was held in St. Peter's Church, London Docks." At 
10 a.m. on the first day of the Synod, there was a 
" Solemn Mass " offered. The special subject for discus- 
sion was "The Sacrament of Penance, its present position, 
and future prospects in the Church of England." It was 
opened by a speech from Brother the Rev. H. D. Nihill, 
who " contended that the great need of the present day 
was, to set forth the power and dignity of the Sacrament 
of Penance itself, as apart from all questions of the benefit 
of Direction, or the comfort of consultation with a 

Brother Canon Carter, of Clewer, maintained that before 
Penance can be regarded " as established on its true 
grounds, two points must be enforced, neither of which are 
as yet countenanced by authority — (1) Its Sacramental 
character, as really conveying grace ; and (2) Its habitual 
use, as a means of growth of the spiritual life." 

Brother Macfarlane, Vicar of Dorchester, Oxon, spoke 
of his experience in an agricultural parish. He found that 
the poor " when in earnest gladly receive the means of 
reconciliation for sins after Baptism " ; but they " do not 
come habitually to confession, except in few cases." It is 
" not so generally welcomed by the tradesmen or farmers." 
As to the future' prospects of the Confessional, that "seems 
to depend upon the degree of toleration which the Catholic 
Movement obtains at the hands of our rulers in Church and 


State. If the Catholicity of the Church of England is 
preserved, the Sacrament of Penance must daily gain 
ground." He recommended the establishment of a " Chair 
of Moral Theology." 

Brother the Rev. Charles Lowder thought they "must 
be prepared to show that Confession is neither unmanly 
nor un-English " — which was, I should think, a somewhat 
formidable task to undertake. 

Brother the Rev. Rhodes Bristow, now Canon Mis- 
sioner of the Diocese of Rochester, and Rector of St. Olave, 
Southwark, said that he valued the freedom accorded by the 
Church of England. We must, he said, " strive to raise the 
Sacrament of Penance to its due position, but we must be 
careful to do so as English Churchmen." 

Brother the Rev. James Dunn, now Vicar of St. John the 
Baptist, Bathwick, Bath, "spoke of the difficulty felt by 
old people in going to confession to young priests. He 
suggested that more experienced priests should visit country 
parishes from time to time for the purpose of hearing 

Brother the Rev. H. P. Denison, now Vicar of St. 
Michael and All Angels', Notting Hill, "distinguished 
between voluntary and compulsory Confession. He 
maintained that the Church of England puts a man upon 
his honour to confess his mortal sins before Communion." 

Brother the Rev. C. Bodington, now Canon of 
Lichfield, and Diocesan Missioner, lamented that " Our 
people do not realize what the Sacramental system of the 
Church is. If we get them to understand this, they 
will quickly see that, without Confession, there is a link 


Brother the Rev. R. C. Kirkpatrick, Vicar of St. 
Augustine's, Kilburn, "expressed a wish that country 
brethren would make it known that they were ready to hear 

The Synod next proceeded to consider a pamphlet by 


Brother the Rev. E. G. Wood, now Vicar of St. Clement's, 
Cambridge, on " Jurisdiction in the Confessional," in the 
course of which he maintained that every Rector, Vicar, or 
Perpetual Curate of a parish " can, without license of the 
Bishop, give to another priest jurisdiction to hear the 
Confessions of all who may come to him at the church or 
other place, within the parish, appointed for the hearing of 
Confessions." 60 

Brother F. W. Puller, now Head of the " Cowley 
Fathers," " maintained that we should be careful to find out 
when our Absolutions are valid ;" but it does not appear 
that he told his brethren how this difficult question was to 
be solved. 

A discussion next took place as to the alteration of the 
fourth of the Society's Statutes, in which Brother W. M. 
Richardson (now Bishop of Zanzibar) ; Brother T. Outram 
Marshall (now Organizing Secretary of the English Church 
Union) ; Brother Bagshawe; Brother F. H. Murray (Rector 
of Chislehurst) ; and Brother G. A. Jones (Vicar of St. Mary's, 
Cardiff), took part. This closed the first day's proceedings 
of the Synod, at which one hundred and thirty-six brethren 
were present. 

On the second day of the Synod, a "Mortuary Mass" was 
offered for the dead brethren at 9 a.m. I need not summarize 
the discussions on this occasion, further than to state that 
the subjects considered included the revision of the Statutes 
of the Society, the results of the London Mission, the 
position of the Ritualistic clergy in view of ecclesiastical 
proceedings against them, and the Public Worship Regula- 
tion Bill, then before the country. It is important, however, 
to record that Brother N. Dawes (now Bishop of Rock- 
hampton, Queensland), who had become a Probationer of 
the Society of the Holy Cross in 1872, was at this Synod 
promoted to the ranks of the Brethren. 

80 Jurisdiction in the Confessional, by the Rev. Edmund G. Wood, m.a., 
p. 15. Printed for the Society. 


The September, 1874, Synod met as usual in St. Peter's, 
London Docks. On the first day, after the " Solemn Mass " 
and the preliminary business had been transacted, a number 
of letters from absent brethren were read. Brother 
Hutchings (now Archdeacon of Cleveland) wrote, " expres- 
sing a hope that in Ritual, S. S. C. would move in the 
direction of the Roman rather than the Sarum Use." 
Brother J. E. Stocks (now Vicar of St. Saviour's, Leicester) 
also wrote with reference to a motion by Brother Bodington. 
After this the Synod discussed the following subject : — 
" That the action of the Society in 1868-9, committing itself 
to the principle of the Roman Ritual, be reconsidered." 

Brother Linklater (now Vicar of Holy Trinity, Stroud 
Green) urged that " the Society should leave the brethren 
free in the matter of Ritual." He personally preferred the 
Sarum Use. 

Brother Bristow, Canon Missioner of St. Saviour, South- 
wark, "hoped that the Roman Use would still prevail." 

Brother C. Parnell (Curate of St. Bartholomew, Brighton) 
declared that he "would follow the Roman Ritual at the 
services of the Society, while individual brethren might 
follow their own bent." 

Brother E. M. Chaplin " advocated the use of the Roman 
Rite, both for accuracy and uniformity." 

Brother J. B. Powell (now Curate of St. Paul's, Knights- 
bridge, London) "was strongly in favour of the Sarum 
Use, but hoped that liberty would be granted by the 
Society to use either form." 

Brother N. Green-Armytage (now Perpetual Curate of the 
Chapel-of-Ease, Boston), Brother Grieve (now dead), and 
Brother C. E. Hammond (now Vicar of Menheniot, 
Cornwall), would all "leave the brethren free." 

Eventually it was decided to appoint a special Committee 
to consider the question more fully. Brother Bishop 
Jenner, it should be added, moved the following amend- 
ment, which was lost : — " That in the regulations hitherto 


laid down, the Society does not intend to bind the brethren 
to the adoption of the principle of any particular Rite." 

The next subject considered by the Synod was " The 
Present Constitution and Reform of Convocation." 

Brother Rhodes Bristow " reminded the brethren that 
Convocation might step in to-morrow, and take away our 
locus standi altogether." 

Brother Charles Lowder said that " while Convocation 
needs much reform, it is the Assembly which, by God's 
providence, is the representative of the Church. We should 
welcome the co-operation of the faithful laity, as in Diocesan 
Conferences, while refusing to give them equal power to 
that of the clergy." 

Brother Orby Shipley gave as "his opinion that 
Convocation is not the sacred Synod of the Church." 

Eventually it was decided that " The Master be requested 
to communicate to the President of the English Church 
Union the opinion of the Society," which was that the 
Union should issue special Tracts on the subject of 

On the second day of the Synod (September 16th) after 
the " Mortuary Mass " had been offered, it was proposed 
by Brother Bagshawe (now dead), seconded by Brother 
Rhodes Bristow, and carried unanimously : — " That the 
Roll of the Brethren be referred to the Master's Council 
before it is republished." This motion led to a speech by 
Brother Bagshawe, which shows in a very marked manner, 
how much the Society of the Holy Cross dreads the light 
of day. He said that " we should be most careful to preserve 
the strictly private and confidential character of the Roll, but 
in the event of a copy falling into hostile hands it is most 
important that all the Brethren, whose names are therein 
printed, should be staunch and true to S. S. C." At that 
time the names of the members were quite unknown to the 
public, and it was not until 1877 that a copy of the Roll fell 
into the hands of the Editor of the Rock, who at once 

the "roll" of the s. s. c. 79 

published it in his paper. The publication caused the 
utmost consternation in the ranks of the S. S. C, and, 
coming as it did immediately after the exposure of its 
Confessional book, the Priest in Absolution, in the House of 
Lords by the late Lord Redesdale, it led to the secession of 
nearly one-half of its members, who suddenly left the 
Society in a fright as soon as their identity was discovered. 
The Roll of the S. S. C. for 1895-96 has printed on its 
outer cover, and again on its title-page, the following 
significant directions, which clearly show how anxious 
the Society still is that the names of its brethren shall be 
kept secret : — 

"Private and Confidential. To he returned to the Secretary ly 
any brother leaving the Society ; or ly the representatives of a deceased 

The Society of the Holy Cross still continues to exist, and 
its energies are as great as ever. But its secrecy is greater 
than ever. Amongst its members are the Bishops of 
Zanzibar and Lebombo, and many of the most prominent 
of the Ritualistic clergy. So carefully are its papers — 
generally headed with the letters " S. S. C." — kept, that I 
have been unable to get any reports of its Synods and 
Chapters dated later than i88t, with the important 
exception of a recent Roll of Brethren. If any of my readers 
are in a position to supply me with any of the more recent 
papers of the Society I shall be thankful, in order that I may 
use them in any later edition of this book which may be 
called for. I have, however, some reason for believing that 
a few years since a serious schism took place in its ranks, 
and that the seceders have formed themselves into another 
Society, whose name I have been unable to discover. 
Nearly all the old members, whose names appeared in the 
Roll for 1880, have disappeared in the more recent Roll 
which I possess. 



The Confessional always a secret thing — Confessional Scandal at Leeds — 
Dr. Pusey on the Seal of the Confessional — Ritualistic Sisters teach girls 
how to confess to priests — Secret Confessional books for penitents — 
Dr. Pusey revives the Confessional — Four years later writes against it 
— He hears Confessions in private houses — His penitent's "burning 
sense of shame and deceitfulness " — Bishop Wilberforce's opinion 
of Dr. Pusey — A Ritualistic priest's extraordinary letter to a young 
lady — How Archdeacon Manning heard Confessions on the sly — "A 
hole and corner affair." 

AURICULAR Confession is always a secret thing. 
L Both penitent and Father Confessor are expected 
to respect the secrecy of the Confessional. Were 
it a public transaction it would lose its attraction to a 
certain class of minds, and the power of the priest would 
cease to exist. It gives to the priest a power over the 
penitent which nothing can destroy but the grace of God. 
" I could never bear to meet him in the street," was the 
exclamation of a poor woman who had gone to Confession 
to her Vicar for more than a dozen years, but who, when I 
knew her, had learnt to be content with confessing her sins 
to Jesus Christ, and receiving direct from Him His all- 
sufficient absolution. She told me that whenever she saw 
her Father Confessor coming down the street towards her, 
she always went down a side street to avoid meeting him. 
The obligation of silence on the part of the penitent is thus 


taught in a widely circulated little book, edited by the Tract 
Committee of the secret Society of the Holy Cross : — ■ 

" There is a mutual obligation between the Confessor and the 
person making Confession, to keep secret what is said. He is 
solemnly bound to secrecy, and you also are bound to observe a 
reverent and religious silence upon what has been said. Be very 
careful yourself on this point. If you talk about what has passed in 
Confession, the priest may get the blame of its being known." * 

The Confessional frequently interferes with the confidence 
which should exist between husband and wife. The wife 
will tell her Father Confessor things which she would not 
dare to mention to her husband ; nor would she be expected 
ever to repeat to him the secret conversations between herself 
and her Confessor. An illustration of this took place in a 
Puseyite Church at Leeds, as far back as 1850. The Bishop 
of Ripon (Dr. Charles T. Longley, afterwards Archbishop of 
Canterbury) held an official and public inquiry as to a 
Confessional scandal connected with the Church of St. 
Saviour's, Leeds. After the inquiry he wrote, and published, 
a letter to the Vicar, the Rev. H. F. Beckett, from which I 
take the following extract : — 

" It appeared in evidence," wrote the Bishop, "which you did not 
contradict, and could not shake by any cross-examination, that 
Mr. Rooke, who was then a Deacon, having required a married 
woman who was a candidate for Confirmation to go for Confession 
to you as a priest, you received that female to Confession under these 
circumstances, and that you put to her questions which she says made 
her feel very much ashamed, and greatly distressed her, and which 
were of such an indelicate nature that she would never tell her 
husband of them." 2 

Instead of trying to place the matter before Dr. Longley 
in a more favourable light, Mr. Beckett's reply to the 

1 Pardon Through the Precious Blood, edited by a Committee of Clergy, 
p. 31. Fifty-fourth thousand, 1883. 

8 A Letter to the Parishioners of St. Saviour's, Leeds, by the Bishop of Ripon, 
p. 37. London. 1851. 



Bishop seemed to make the case even darker against himself, 
for he declared : — 

" Your lordship cannot but see that Mrs. 's not mentioning 

what had passed between her and myself to her husband is nothing 
at all to the purpose, since no woman would, I suppose, ever tell 


On the part of the Ritualistic Father Confessor, secrecy 
must be observed, no matter what the consequences may 
be. Rather than divulge the secrets entrusted to him the 
Confessor is recommended by the Rev. Dr. Pusey to resort 
to that which common-sense people would call lying and 

" No Confessor," writes Dr. Pusey, " should ever give the slightest 
suspicion that he is alluding to what he has heard in the tribunal \ 
but he should remember the canonical warning : * What I know 
through Confession, I know less than what I do not know.' Pope 
Eugenius says that what a Confessor knows in this way, he knows it 
' ut Deus ' ; while out of Confession he is only speaking * ut homo ' : 
so that, * as man,' he can say that he does not know that which he 
has learned as God's representative. I go further still : ' As man he 
may swear with a clear conscience that he knows not, what he knows 
only as God.' " 4 

This is fearful teaching. Imagine. the Confessor in an 
English Court of Justice. He is sworn to " tell the truth, 
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth " concerning the 
charge against the prisoner at the bar. He is asked, " Did 
the prisoner ever tell you that he stole those boots ?" The 
Confessor has heard from the prisoner, in the Confessional, 
a full acknowledgment of his guilt, yet when asked this 
question, he may, according to Dr. Pusey, " swear with a 
clear conscience that he knows not, what he knows only as 
God." There is another alternative which Dr. Pusey does 
not advise the Confessor to adopt. He might respectfully 

8 A Letter to ike Parishioners of St. Saviour's, Leeds, by the Bishop of Ripon, 
p. 38. London, 1851. 

4 Pusey's Manual for Confessors, "Adapted to the Use of the English Church,*' 
p. 402. 


but firmly decline to answer concerning what he had heard 
in the Confessional, and then take the consequence like a 
courageous and honest man. But, instead of this, he is 
recommended to " swear," calling God's holy name to 
witness to the truth of a statement which he knows is a lie, 
and an abominable perjury! Is this the kind of teaching 
which ought to be given to the clergy of the Reformed 
Church of England ? The book which contains it is a 
standard authority with Ritualistic Father Confessors. 

Every effort is made by Ritualistic Confessors to bring 
young children, as well as adults, to the Confessional, even 
at a very tender age. Dr. Pusey teaches that it is " the 
ordinary and right custom among the faithful to bring 
young children to Confession from the time they are seven 
years old ; and it is a great negligence of parents to omit 
doing so." 5 Sisters of Mercy sometimes help to bring the 
children to Confession. The " Sisters of the Church," other- 
wise known as the " Kilburn Sisterhood," and sometimes as 
the " Church Extension Association," have published several 
little books to teach little ones how to Confess to Priests. 6 
The Sisters of St. Margaret's, East Grinstead, are expected 
to urge the girls under their care to make a full and complete 
Confession of their sins. Here are their instructions on this 
point, being the advice to them of their Founder and Father 
Confessor, the late Rev. Dr. Neale, as contained in their 
privately printed book, entitled, the Spirit of the Founder, 
Dicit Fundator. 

" And this I say not so much about you, as about the confirmed 
girls. Whoever of you prepare these for their Communions, this 
above all things teach them, the great danger of a sacrilegious Con- 
fession : the utter uselessness as well as wickedness of each succeeding: 
one, while that first sin remains unwiped out. And this more 
especially, that if any one of them leaves us in that state, in all 

8 Ibid., p. 159. 

6 Such as their Manual for the Children of the Church, wlrch has passed through 
several editions, but was suppressed when publicly exposed. It is also taught 
in several of their " Catechisms." 

6 * 


human probability she will never come out of it. Because, even 
granted that she is pressed about Confession, after she has gone out 
into the world, the sin will grow more and more terrible to look at ; 
and if she kept it back from her first priest, small chance is there 
that she will have courage to make it known to a second." 7 

It is not uncommon for Ritualistic Father Confessors to 
circulate privately printed Manuals of Confession, for the use 
of children as well as adults. I have come across several of 
these. One is entitled A Manual of Confession for Children. 
" Translated and Adapted from the French. By a priest of 
the English Church. Privately printed." Even the printer's 
name is not given. As a specimen of the awful teaching 
thus imparted to our little ones, I quote the following from 
this Manual : — 

" A good Confession ought not only to be humble and sincere, but 
also full. You must tell your Confessor all the sins you can 
remember. For if you hide one sin on purpose, you lie to God; you 
would be guilty of a great crime ; and you would not even receive the 
pardon of those sins which you have confessed." 8 

When the practice of Auricular Confession was revived, 
about five years after the birth of the Tractarian Movement, 
great care was taken in keeping secret the numerous little 
books of devotion and manuals for Confession circulated 
amongst the Tractarians. The author of Five Years in a 
Protestant Sisterhood, and Ten Years in a Catholic Convent, 
published in 1869, relates her own experience in this matter, 
some fifteen years after Auricular Confession had been re- 
introduced. After mentioning some particulars concerning 
one of her lady friends, she proceeds : — 

" We drove out together frequently, and from her I learned much 
of the habits and customs of the High Church party. She had all the 
little books of doctrine, which at that time had been 'adapted ' from 
' foreign sources ; ' all the little wonderful compilations about ' How 
to Prepare for a First Confession,' * Prayers for the Penitential 

7 The Spirit of the Founder, p. 24. Privately printed for the use of the Sisters 
of St. Margaret's, East Grinstead. 

8 A Manual of Confession for Children, p. 12. Privately printed. 


Seasons/ ' Devotions for the Holy Eucharist,' ■ Hours for the Use of 
Members of the English Church,' which were ' privately printed,' 
and handed about with a thousand injunctions to secrecy, from one to 
another of the initiated.'* 9 

To the late Dr. Puseyis due the blame of reviving Auricular 
Confession in the Church of England. He commenced 
hearing Confessions in 1838. In 1850 Dr. Pusey wrote : — 
" It is now some twelve years, I suppose, since I was first 
called upon to exercise this office " — of Father Confessor, 10 
that is, in 1838. Again, in 1851 he wrote to the Bishop of 
Oxford: — "What I say of Confession, I say upon the 
experience of thirteen years." !1 In a letter which he wrote 
to the Times, November 29th, 1866, Pusey remarked : — 
" During the twenty -eight years in which I have received Con- 
fessions, I never had once to refuse Absolution." Twenty- 
eight years from 1866 brings us back again to 1838. It 
seems almost incredible that four years after that date 
Dr. Pusey wrote a learned and thoroughly Protestant treatise 
to prove that in the early Church not a single trace can be 
found of private Confession to priests, with a view to thus 
obtaining God's pardon for sins ! This appeared in 1842, 
in the form of lengthy " Notes " to the works of Tertuliian, 
in the Library of the Fathers, extending from page 376 to 
page 408. In these notes Dr. Pusey quotes with decided 
approval the opinions of St. Chrysostom on the subject of 
Confession : — 

"There could," wrote Dr. Pusey, "if Romanists would fairly 
consider this, be no way in which Confession to God alone, exclusive 
of man, could be expressed, if not here. S. Chrysostom says, * to 
God alone,' * apart in private,' 'to Him Who knoweth beforehand,' 
1 no one knowing,' ' no one present save Him Who knoweth,' * God 
alone seeing,' ' unwitnessed,' ' not to man,' * not to a fellow-servant,' 
' within,' ' in the conscience,' ' in the memory,' ' Judging thyself ' (in 
lieu of the Priest being the Judge), 'proving ourselves, each himself, 

9 Five Years in a Protestant Sisterhood, and Ten Years in a Catholic Convent, 
p. 15. London : Longmans, 1869. 

10 Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. III., p. 269. » Ibid., p. 335. 


not the one to the other,' ■ in Church, to God * (i.e., in the General 
Confession). Accordingly, one Romanist writer boldly pronounces 
all these passages spurious ; and (since they are unquestionable) 
another of great name, Petavius, condemns them as ' being uttered 
in a declamatory way to the ignorant multitude for the sake of 
impressiveness.' But certainly, poor as such an excuse would be for 
what, according to Romanists, is false teaching, the passages are too 
numerous and too uniform to admit of it ; they manifestly contain 
S. Chrysostom's settled teaching,' and Petavius condemns them as 
* devoid of sound meaning, if fitted to the rule of the exact truth.' " 13 

Dr. Pusey thus summarized the whole question from an 
historical point of view : — 

"The instances, then, being in each case very numerous, the 
absence of any mention of Confession in the early Church under the 
following circumstances, does, when contrasted with the uniform 
mention of it in the later, put beyond question that at the earlier 
period it was not the received practice." 13 

Who would have thought that the man who thus held up 
to the admiration of English Churchmen the teaching of 
St. Chrysostom, of " Confession to God alone, exclusive of 
man," was at the very moment hearing Confessions himself, 
and had been hearing them for four years previously ! The 
utmost caution was exercised by Dr. Pusey in his Con- 
fessional work, and his very great dread of publicity led to 
practices which were anything but straightforward. His 
underhand proceedings disgusted some of even his warmest 
friends. As early as 1850, the Rev. W. Maskell, one of his 
disciples who subsequently seceded to Rome, published 
a Letter to Dr. Pusey, in which he exposed his secret 
Confessional tactics : — 

" What, then," wrote Mr. Maskell, " let me ask, do you conceive 
that the Bishop of Exeter would say, of persons secretly received [to 
Auricular Confession] against the known wish of their parents, of 
Confessions heard in the houses of common friends, or of clandestine 
correspondence to arrange meetings, under initials, or in envelopes 

12 " Library of the Fathers." Tfrtullian, p. 401. Oxford : J. H. Parker, 1842. 

13 Ibid., p. 405. 

penitents' burning sense of deceitfulness. 87 

addressed to other persons? — and more than this, when such 
Confessions are recommended and urged as a part of the spiritual 
life, and among religious duties ; not in order to quiet the conscience 
before receiving the Communion. Think not that I write all this to 
give you unnecessary pain ; think not that I write it without a feeling 
of deep pain and sorrow in my own heart. But there is something 
which tells me, that, on behalf of thousands, this matter should now 
be brought before the world plainly, honestly, and fully. I know 
how heavily the enforced mystery and secret correspondence regarding 
Confessions, in your Communion, has weighed down the minds of 
many to whom you and others have ' Ministered.' I know how 
bitterly it has eaten, even as a canker, into their very souls : I know 
how utterly the specious arguments which you have urged, have failed 
to remove their burning sense of shame and deceitfulness " (p. 21). 

We get a further peep into Dr. Pusey's cautious mode of 
hearing Confessions, in Miss Cusack's ("The Nun of 
Kenmare ") Story of My Life. This lady, in her early life, 
before her secession to Rome, was an inmate for some years 
of one of Dr. Pusey's sisterhoods. 

" It was," writes Miss Cusack, " notable that no matter what the 
Doctor [Pusey] thought or said about the necessity of availing oneself 
of the ' Sacrament ', he was very careful to whom he administered it. 
Further, it was well known that he administered the Sacrament of 
Confession, for the most part, in open defiance of the Bishop of the 
Diocese, where he met his penitents, literally, ' on the sly.' I believe 
that the secrecy, and concealment, and devices which had to be used 
to get an audience with the Doctor, for the purpose of Confessing, 
had a little, if it had not a good deal, to do with his success. The 
lady (few men went to Confession) who availed herself of the 
privilege, or who could obtain it, was looked upon with more or less 
holy envy, and felt correspondingly elated." 1 * 

It was at about this time that Dr. Pusey compiled, and 
secretly circulated, his Hints for a First Confession. Since 
his death they have been given to the world in the ordinary 
way, but for a period of upwards of thirty years after these 
Hints were first printed, I cannot find the slightest reference 

14 The Story of My Life, by M. F. Cusack, "The Nun of Kenmare," 
p. 63. London, 1891. 


to them in any newspaper, biography, or any published 
book whatever. The world for that long period knew 
absolutely nothing about this little book, which all the while 
was working untold spiritual mischief in the Church of 
England. The teaching contained in these Hints was of a 
thoroughly Romanizing character. Here is an extract from 
the book, in proof of what I have said : — 

" A Confession [i.e., to a priest] avails which contains all you can 
recall. If other sins come back to your mind afterwards, which you 
would have confessed had you remembered them, they should be 
confessed afterwards, because the forgiveness is conditional upon the 
completeness of the Confession. Completeness implies that there 
should be care and faithfulness in discovering sins, and that nothing 
so discovered should be kept lack" 16 

The High Church Bishop of Oxford (Dr. Samuel Wilber- 
force) was justly indignant with Dr. Pusey, when he fully 
realized the thoroughly Romanizing character of his 
Confessional work. For this, and for issuing "adapted" 
editions of Roman Catholic books, Bishop Wilberforce 
inhibited him, in November, 1850, from officiating in the 
diocese of Oxford, and did not remove the inhibition until 
nearly two years had passed by. On November 30th, 1850, 
the Bishop wrote to Dr. Pusey : — ■ 

" You seem to me to be habitually assuming the place and doing 
the work of a Roman Confessor, and not that of an English clergy- 
man. Now, I so firmly believe that of all the curses of Popery this 
is the crowning curse, that I cannot allow voluntarily within my 
charge the continuance of any ministry which is infected by it." 16 

If the Bishops of the present day would only act as Bishop 
Wilberforce did, they would, unfortunately, find their hands 
full of this kind of work. The Confessional is now taught 
(in quite as Romish a form as that which was condemned by 
him) by thousands of nominally Church of England clergy- 
men, who glory in what Dr. S. Wilberforce so truly termed 

15 Hints for a First Confession, by Dr. Pusey, p. 14. Edition, 1884. 

16 Life of Bishop S. Wilberforce, Vol. II., p. go. 

"the very secret stealthy way." 89 

M the crowning curse " of Popery. Had the Bishops done 
their duty this u curse" would have been stamped out long 

A few other typical illustrations of the secrecy of the Con- 
fessional may here be added, out of many more which could 
easily be brought forward ; the first from the year 1847 ; 
the second from the year 1853 ; and the third from 1872. 
The author of that well-known book, From Oxford to Rome, 
published in 1847, and written by one who was in full 
sympathy with the Tractarian Movement, informs us : — 

" Confession the young Anglican has been accustomed to regard as 
one of his secret privileges. Scarcely ever spoken of, even in the most 
confidential intercourse, it is yet practised very extensively, and, as we 
believe, most beneficially, in the English Church." 17 

This is an important testimony, as coming from one who 
believed in the Confessional, and was not ashamed to acknow- 
ledge the mystery which surrounded its practice in his time. 

The second instance is connected with the experience of 
the Rev. Lord Charles Thynne, who was for several years a 
clergyman in the Church of England, but seceded to Rome 
in 1853. After taking this decisive step his lordship addressed 
a lengthy letter to his late parishioners, giving his reasons 
for leaving the Church of England. The secrecy practised 
by the Tractarians with regard to Auricular Confession was 
one of those reasons. 

"I believe," wrote Lord Charles Thynne, u that in order to obtain 
the remission of our sins by Absolution, it was necessary to confess 
them to some one possessed of authority to receive Confessions, and 
to give Absolution. I believe this to be necessary for all who have 
fallen into sin after Baptism. But when I had recourse to the only 
means within my reach, when I was a member of the Church of 
England, / was pained by the very secret stealthy way in which alone 
my necessities could be met, showing that so far as the Church of 
England was concerned there was something unreal and unauthorized 
in the act." 18 

17 From Oxford to Rome: and how it fared with some who lately took the Journey, 
p 205. London : Longmans, 1847. 
16 Browne's Annals of the Tractarian Movement, p. 296. Third edition. 


The next illustration contains the unwilling testimony of a 
Ritualistic Father Confessor himself. At a meeting for the 
election of Proctors to Convocation, held at Durham, 
February 19th, 1874, the late Rev. G. T. Fox, a clergyman 
of high personal character, read to the audience a letter 
written by the Rev. Charles Jupp, a Ritualistic Father 
Confessor, to a young lady, making an appointment with her 
to receive her confession. The following was the letter 
read : — 

" Houghton-le-Spring. May 16th, 1872. 

" My Dear Miss , — As usual, important letters are always 

delayed, and I fear my reply to yours of last week's date will not reach 
London till after you have left. I will, therefore, only say that I was 
very glad indeed to hear from you, and particularly on the subject you 
mentioned. I shall be quite ready and willing (in virtue of my office) 

to see you as you desire. Mrs. has left, and we have the house 

to ourselves. Parishioners are so constantly coming on business of 
one kind or another, that your visits would not be noticed. Please do 
not hint anything to Mr;. Jupp, as I think all parochial affairs, of 
whatever kind, ought to be known to the priest only, and his lips 
sealed to every enquirer. We should be so glad to see you back after 
your long absence. 

" In great haste, 

" Yours faithfully in Christ, 

" Charles Jupp." » 

The late Cardinal Manning, in his Anglican days, while 
Archdeacon of Chichester, heard Confessions in the same 
stealthy manner. Mr. Purcell, his Roman Catholic 
biographer, relates that : — ■ 

"In his Diary, 1844-47, and in his letters to Laprimaudaye and 
Robert Wilberforce, Manning constantly makes use of the somewhat 
mysterious terms — Under the Seal, and In Sacro. To the initiated 
amongst High Church Anglicans these symbolic terms signified the 
Sacrament of Penance or Confession, and the Eucharistic Sacrifice ; 
outside the Anglican community commonly called the Mass. These 
holy and wholesome Catholic doctrines Manning, as an Anglican, 
held and taught, if not in public, in private. In his sermons and 

19 Church Association Monthly Intelligencer, March, 1874, p. 98. 



Charges he practised 01/coyo/u'aj or spoke under reserve, or in mere 
outline, of Confession and the Eucharistic Sacrifice. But in his 
private exhortations he inculcated these Catholic doctrines in all their 
fulness. The Archdeacon of Chichester practised what he preached. 
He offered up, as I have shown, the Eucharistic Sacrifice for the 
quick and the dead. He received penitents in Confession ; and 
exercising the power of the Keys, he loosed them from their sins j 
pronouncing in due form, whilst making over them the sign of the 
Cross, the words of Absolution. 

" Protestant prejudice, popular ignorance, and the hostility of the 
authorities of their own Church, compelled the unhappy High Church 
Anglicans to cast a veil of mystery or secrecy over the practice oj 
Confession. Instead of being an ordinary and common-place act of 
duty practised coram ecclesia y Confession amongst the Anglicans was, 
if I may so speak, a hole-and-corner affair, spoken of with bated 
breath, and carried on under lock and key."" 

There were other difficulties which Father Confessors had 
to contend with. The Rev. William J. Butler, Vicar of 
Wantage, and subsequently Dean of Lincoln, writing to 
Archdeacon Manning, August 29th, 1840, remarked : — " The 
difficulty with which, as Vicar of Wantage, I am confronted 
in the practice of hearing Confessions is the opposition to be 
feared on the part of the husband to the wife's ' opening her 
grief to another man." 21 It is hardly to be wondered 
at that husbands should object to their wives going to 
Confession, more especially to bachelor priests, since, 
according to the opinion of one of those Father Confessors 
quoted above (p. 82), " no woman would, I suppose, ever 
tell her husband what passed in her Confession." A married 
woman will tell her Father Confessor things which she would 
never dare to talk about to her own husband. Mr. Purcell 
throws some light on the secret way in which Archdeacon 
Manning heard the Confessions of his penitents : — 

" It was a common practice for Manning, even in the days when 
in his Charges or sermons he was denouncing * Romanism ' and the 
Popes, to hear Confessions at Lavington and Oxford, as well as at 

20 Purcell's Life of Cardinal Manning, Vol. I., p. 489. 
81 Ibid., p. 490. 


Wantage and elsewhere. It must be admitted that ' the halo of 
romance ' thrown round the practice of Confession — of which the 
Vicar of Wantage so feelingly complained, was in no small measure 
due to the mystery or secrecy attached to the performance of the act, 
even by Manning himself. At Lavington, for instance, it was his 
practice to walk from the Rectory to the Church at a time when no 
service was going on, and no congregation present ; in a few minutes, 
by appointment, his penitent would follow. On one occasion, when a 
near relative of the Archdeacon's was staying with her family at the 
Rectory, the children, playing of an afternoon in the grounds, were 
surprised to see * Uncle Henry' walking towards the church. No bell 
had rung for service ; the church was closed. Presently their mother 
passed along the gravel walk in the same direction. In their eager 
curiosity to discover the meaning of this novel proceeding, the 
children scampered across the lawn to the church door, when their 
wondering eyes discovered ' Uncle Henry ' seated on a big arm-chair 
with his back to the altar, and their mother kneeling on the altar 
step." 22 

The facts I have already mentioned tend to show that 
our Ritualistic Confessors resemble the Roman Catholic 
Confessors, as described by one of themselves : — 

" The most responsible office of the priest of God," writes Father 
Augustine Wirth, O.S.B., " is the hearing of Confessions ... in the 
pulpit he can |ouch certain sins only with kid gloves, in the Confes- 
sional he probes the sores to the very bottom. In the pulpit he must 
be a lion, in the Confessional a fox"** 

22 Purcell's Life of Cardinal Manning, Vol. I., pp. 492, 493. 

23 The Confessional, adapted by the Rev. Augustus Wirth, O.S.B., p. v. 
Fourth edition. Published at Elizabeth, New Jersey, 1882. 




Part I. of the Priest in Absolution — Praised by the Ritualistic Press — 
Part II. secretly circulated amongst "Catholic" priests only — Lord 
Redesdale's exposure of the book in the House of Lords — Archbishop 
Tait says it is "a disgrace to the community " — Secret letter from the 
Master of the Society of the Holy Cross — Statement of the S. S. C. — 
Special secret Chapter of the Society to consider the Priest in Absolution — ■ 
Full report of its proceedings, with speeches of the Brethren — Refuses to 
condemn the book — Discussion in Canterbury Convocation — Severe 
Episcopal Censures — Immoral Ritualistic Confessors ruin women ; 
Testimony of Archdeacon Allen — Dr. Pusey's acknowledgments of the 
dangers of the Confessional ; " It is the road by which a number of 
Christians go down to hell" — Another secret meeting of the Society of the 
Holy Cross — Reports of the speeches and resolutions — Some Bishops 
secretly friendly to the Society — Canon Knox-Little's connection with the 
Society of the Holy Cross — Strange and Jesuitical Proceedings at the 
Society's Synod. 

FOR many years the Ritualistic Father Confessors 
possessed no book of their own to guide them in their 
work, and were therefore entirely dependent upon 
Roman Catholic books written in Latin, or French, and as 
many of these Confessors were by no means Latin scholars, 
and numbers of them knew nothing of French, it was at 
length found necessary to make an effort towards supplying 
this long-felt want. The work was undertaken by the 
Rev. J. C. Chambers, a well-known clergyman, who, in 1863, 
was Master of the secret Society of the Holy Cross. 
Instead, however, of writing an independent treatise on 
the Confessional, he contented himself with translating 


and adapting a Roman Catholic work, written by the 
Abbe Gaume, which he issued under the now well-known 
title of the Priest in Absolution, It was divided into two 
parts. Part I. was published in 1866, and sold to the 
public ; and a second edition was issued in 1869, but this 
was soon after withdrawn from public sale. When the first 
edition appeared it received a warm welcome from the 
Ritualistic press. The Union Review declared that it was 
" a golden treatise," " full of wisdom, sound teaching, and 
very valuable suggestions with regard to the Sacrament of 
Penance." But the reviewer evidently perceived a danger 
which was not realized by Mr. Chambers, for he wisely 
added that " It would have been far better to have issued 
the book in Latin." l No doubt it would have been " far 
better" for the Ritualistic Father Confessors had this 
warning been issued in time. It was clearly not wise to 
reveal to the English public in all its hideous deformity the 
moral filth of the Confessional. Had it been printed in 
Latin very few would have discovered its indecent character. 
The Church Review affirmed that the book could " be spoken 
of with the highest praise. It is a book which demands 
prayerful study, and our clerical readers will find it the 
greatest boon." 3 

The publication of the first half of the Priest in A bsolution 
did not create any public excitement. It's unhappy birth 
appears to have been unnoticed by Protestant Churchmen. 
The second part was issued in 1872. It is dedicated " To the 
Masters, Vicars, and Brethren, of the Society of the Holy 
Cross," and the dedication states that it was " begun at 
their request." A note to the " Advertisement to the 
Reader " states that : — 

" To prevent scandal arising from the curious or prurient misuse 
of a book which treats of spiritual diseases, it has been thought best 
that the sale should be confined to the clergy who desire to have at 

1 Union Review, Volume for 1867, p. 215. 
8 Church Review, March 23rd, 1867, p. 278, 



hand a sort of vade-mecum for easy reference in the discharge of 
their duties as Confessors." 

In this way the laity of the Church of England were kept 
in the dark as to what was going on. But not only was 
every effort made to keep the book out of their hands ; but 
even ordinary Church of England clergymen were not 
allowed to purchase it, unless they were Father Confessors, 
or could give a reference to some well-known Ritualistic 
priest. One Church of England clergyman ventured to 
send Mr. Chambers himself stamps for a copy, and was not 
a little surprised on receiving the following reply : — 

"18, Soho Square. 

" Dear Sir, — The book is only delivered to such priests of the 
English Church as are in the habit of hearing Confessions, or are 
known to me personally, or through friends.' As your name is 
entirely unknown to me, I must require a reference to some well- 
known High Church priest, or I must return the stamps. 

"J. C. Chambers." 3 

When Mr. Chambers died there was a great danger lest 
the unsold copies of the Priest in Absolution — which was his 
private property — should be sold to some second-hand or 
other bookseller, and thus one of the great secrets of the 
Society of the Holy Cross should become widely known to 
the Protestants of England. There was no time to be lost. 
At the Monthly Chapter of the Society, held June gth, 1874, 
a letter was read from the Rev. Joseph James Elkington, 
then Curate of St. Mary's, Soho, asking the Society to buy 
the copyright from the executors of Mr. Chambers. After 
some discussion, it was moved by the Treasurer, the Rev. 
John Andrews Foote, seconded by the Rev. E. M. Chaplain, 
and carried unanimously : — " That the copyright of the 
Priest in A bsolution having been offered to the Society, the 
brethren be requested to subscribe towards the purchase, 
such subscriptions to be returned out of the proceeds of 
sale." 4 In the official report of the Chapter at which this 
resolution was passed, a special notice was issued, stating 

8 The Roch, June Gth, 1873, p. 391. * 5. 5. C. June Chapter, 1874, p. 2. 


that " the probable value of the copyright, together with the 
copies of the book on hand, is £100," and asking the 
brethren to lend £5 each towards the cost, the book when 
paid for to "remain the property of S. S. C." The subject 
was mentioned again at the next Monthly Chapter, but, as 
only one £5 had been promised, nothing definite was done, 
though a letter was read from Mr. Elkington, asking for a 
higher price. Matters, however, made rapid progress during 
the next month, for, at the August Chapter, the Master of the 
Society of the Holy Cross announced to the brethren that 
the " Copyright was now the property of the Society ; the 
difficulties relating to the purchase having been satisfactorily 
settled." 5 However that may have been, on the following 
month the money had not all been paid, for the Treasurer of 
the Society had to issue, in that month, a special circular, 
announcing that £25 was still due to the executors of 
Mr. Chambers. From the " Balance Sheet " of the Society, 
presented to its September Synod, 1874, it appears that the 
copyright and stock of the Priest in Absolution had been 
bought for £75, or £25 less than was first asked for it. By 
a resolution passed at the May, 1875, Synod of the Society, 
it was decided that the money "lent by brethren for the 
purchase of the Priest in Absolution, be repaid out of the 
balance in hand of the general fund of the Society." 6 Part I. 
of the Priest in A bsolution was sold to the public for 2s 6d ; 
Part II. was sold to the brethren at 5s 4^, post free. How 
many copies were sold before the Society acquired the copy- 
right I have no means of ascertaining ; but after that date 
there must have been a considerable sale, to judge by the 
balance sheets of the Society of the Holy Cross. That for 
May, 1875, reported the sale of copies to the value of 
£20. ys 6d ; for May, 1876, £38. 17s <\d ; September, 1876, 
£4. 11s ^d; and in September, 1877, £g. 16s nd — making a 
total of £73. 13s id. 

1 S. 5. C. August Chapter, 1874, p. 1. 

4 S. S~C. Analysis 0/ Proceedings 0/ May Synod, 1875. P- 6. 


On June 14th, 1877, the late Lord Redesdale exposed 
the Priest in Absolution in the House of Lords. 
His lordship was not a fanatic, nor could anyone fairly 
describe him as an Evangelical Churchman. On the 
contrary he was, says Dr. Davidson, the present Bishop 
of Winchester, " a sober and trusted High Churchman, 
of the earlier sort." 7 Lord Redesdale quoted from 
the book itself, which he held in his hand. After this 
exposure it was commonly reported by the Ritualists 
that his lordship's copy had been stolen for his use 
from the library of a Ritualistic priest. No one, how- 
ever, ventured to name the clergyman who had lost 
his copy, and as a matter of fact there was not a word 
of truth in the rumour. The copy was obtained in a 
perfectly honourable and straightforward manner by the 
late Mr. Robert Fleming. This false rumour was repeated 
again at Brighton, during the summer of 1890, by the 
Rev. C. Hardy Little, Vicar of St. Martin's, Brighton; 
but at a great public meeting held in the Dome, Brighton, 
on June 20th of that year, Mr. Fleming himself appeared 
on the platform, and told to the vast audience, which 
included a considerable number of Ritualists, the true story 
of how he came into possession of the Priest in Absolution, 
and his version of the case has never since been challenged 
by the Ritualists. Mr. Fleming, who held the original 
copy of the book in his hand, from which Lord Redesdale 
had quoted in the House of Lords, said that a gentleman 
occupying a prominent position in the Church of England 
had given it to him, at his request, for some little service 
which he had been enabled to render to him. As he 
presented him with the book that gentleman said smilingly 
to him, " you won't make a bad use of it ? " To which he 
replied, "All right." The statement that the book was 
stolen, he emphatically declared, was an absolute falsehood. 8 

7 Life of Archbishop Tait, Vol. II., p. 171. First edition. 
• English Churchman, June 26th, 1890, p. 415. 


Lord Redesdale, in the course of his speech in the House 
of Lords, quoted largely from the Priest in Absolution, to 
prove that it was a grossly indecent and abominable book. 
Some of the portions read were so vile that, as the Right 
Rev. Biographer of Archbishop Tait informs us, " many of 
the quotations were necessarily withheld from publication 
either in the newspapers or in Hansard"* Lord Redesdale 
concluded his speech by saying : — 

u I must say, my Lords, that I think it high time the laity should 
move in this matter. Hitherto it has been treated too much as 
one exclusively for the clergy. In calling your lordship's atten- 
tion to the subject, I am actuated simply by a sense of duty, for I feel 
that the time has arrived when there should be a decided condemna- 
tion of such practices." 10 

The Archbishop of Canterbury (Dr. Tait) addressed the 
House, after Lord Redesdale sat down. He said : — 

" The fact that such a book should be printed and circulated is to 
my mind a matter of very great concern. The Noble Earl spared us 
from many details ; but, at the same time, he read quite enough to 
show that no modest person could read the book without regret, and that 
it is a disgrace to the community that such a book should be 
circulated under the authority of clergymen of the Established Church. 
... I cannot imagine that any right-minded man could wish to have 
such questions [as those suggested in the Priest in Absolution] 
addressed to any member of his family ; and if he had any reason to 
suppose that any member of his family had been exposed to such an 
examination, I am sure it would be the duty of any father of a family 
to remonstrate with the clergyman who had put the questions, and 
warn him never to approach his house again." n 

As a result of this exposure great excitement was created 
in the minds of all loyal Churchmen, who were righteously 
indignant at learning the filthy character of the Ritualistic 
Confessional, as revealed in the Priest in Absolution. That 
indignation was greatly strengthened when, a few weeks 

9 Life of Archbishop Tait, Vol. II., p. 172. 

10 Ibid., p. 172. 

11 Church Association Monthly Intelligencer, August, 1877, pp. 314-316. 


later, the late Rev. A. H. Mackonochie, of St. Alban's, 
Holborn (who was for many years Master of the Society of 
the Holy Cross) published a correspondence which he had 
with another clergyman, in which he declared concerning 
the Priest in Absolution, that " Its principles are those which 
govern, I believe, all Confessors among ourselves." 12 The 
daily papers of the United Kingdom, almost without 
exception, gave expression to the feelings of the country, in 
leading articles condemning the Society of the Holy Cross, 
and its Confessional book, in the severest terms. About 
two months after the exposure Lord Abergavenny forwarded 
to the Archbishop of Canterbury an address on the subject 
signed by peers and noblemen of England, Ireland, and 
Scotland, in which they expressed their " sorrow and deep 
indignation at the extreme indelicacy and impropriety of 
the questions therein [in the Priest in Absolution] put to 
married and unmarried women and children." This address 
was signed by the Duke of Westminster, the Duke of 
Wellington, the Duke of St. Albans, the Duke of Manchester, 
the Duke of Grafton, the Duke of Leinster, the Marquises 
of Abergavenny, Bristol, Ailesbury, Conyngham, and 
Hertford; the Earls of Redesdale, Jersey, Harrowby, 
Fortescue, Cork, Morley, Fitzwilliam, Clancarty, Sydney, 
Bessborough, Seafield, Cadogan, Ilchester, Mansfield, 
Normanton, Harewood, Spencer, Bantry, Desart, Camper- 
down, Manvers, Lucan, Arran, Bradford, Shaftesbury, 
Roden, Haddington, Cowper, Darnley, Donoughmore, 
Chichester, Dunmore, Elphinstone, and Longford; by 
Viscounts Hardinge, Midleton, Hawarden, Lifford, Strath- 
alien, Powerscourt, Sidmouth, and Torrington ; and also by 
Lords Sondes, Henniker, Leconsfield, Wynford, Hampton, 
Ebury, Rivers, Sandys, Churchill, Bolton, Cottesloe, 
Oranmore, Talbot de Malahide, Clonbrock, Dynevor, 
Forester, Walsingham, Digby, Dorchester, Foley, Denman, 

12 The Priest in Absolution and the Society of the Holy Cross : a Correspondence 
between a London Priest and A. H. Mackonochie, p. 17. 



Abinger, Crofton, Zouche, Ruthven, Penrhyn, Chelmsford, 
Huntingfield, Inchiquin, Colchester, Enfield, Eversley, 
Waveney, Airey, Ellenborough, Delamere, Ventry, Bateman, 
and Dudley. 

I now proceed to relate the attitude adopted by the 
Society of the Holy Cross towards the exposure of the 
Priest in Absolution. My authorities for what I shall 
record are mainly the secret documents of the Society 
in my possession. Two days before Lord Redesdale's 
exposure, viz., on June 12th, at the Monthly Chapter of the 
Society, the Rev. Robert James Wilson, who subsequently 
became Warden of Keble College, Oxford, called the 
attention of the brethren to the notice which Lord 
Redesdale had given of his intention to bring the Priest 
in Absolution to the attention of the House of Lords. 
"After some conversation," says the official report of the 
proceedings, "it was decided that the Master should be 
left to use his own discretion in dealing with the matter." 13 
The " Master " at that time was the Rev. F. LI. Bagshawe, 
Vicar of St. Barnabas', Pimlico. On June 25th this 
gentleman sent out to the brethren the following printed 
letter : — 

"St. Barnabas, Pimlico. 

"June 25///, 1877. 

11 P. ^ T. 

" Dear Brother, — I think it will be satisfactory to you to know 
that I have not remained inactive during the present attack upon our 
Society in connection with the Priest in Absolution. The Bishops 
have referred the book to a Committee, consisting of the Archbishop of 
Canterbury, and the Bishops of London, Winchester, Gloucester and 
Bristol, and Ely. This Committee has asked us to meet them on 
Thursday, the 28th. I have reason to think that the Bishops are 
disposed to be friendly. The whole question was discussed at a 
Meeting of the Council, including the Assessors, on Saturday. You 
shall have immediate information when anything further is done. 

u S. S. C. June Chaffer, 1877, p. 6. 


I have decided also not to accept the resignation of any brethren for 
the present, not to print the Roll of members, nor to permit the 
distribution of the Priest in Absolution until after the September 

" You would perhaps like to know the true relation of S. S. C. to 
the Priest in Absolution. Some years ago, the Society requested 
Br. Chambers to prepare a book on the subject ; when he had done 
so, he published the first part of the Priest in Absolution, but 
retained the second part for private circulation. It was entirely his 
own work, and executed on his own responsibility : its sheets were 
never submitted to the Society. When he died, the whole remaining 
stock would have been sold by his executors, and have been exposed 
for public sale. 

" In order to prevent an action so contrary to the compiler's wish, 
and hurtful to the Society, to whom it was dedicated, we bought the 
book, and have been responsible for a limited and cautious supply to 
priests of known character. 

" Believe me, 

" Yours Faithfully, 

" In D.N. J. C., 
" Francis Ll. Bagshawe." 

There was need for Mr. Bagshawe's action in refusing to 
accept the resignations of the brethren for the time being. 
The more timid of the brethren were thoroughly frightened 
by the exposure which had taken place, more especially 
after the Rock had published a complete list of their names 
and addresses, which made them most anxious to leave an 
organization that had brought them into trouble with their 
parishioners. The Master acknowledges that the Society was 
" responsible for a limited and cautious supply to priests of 
known character " of the now notorious Confessional book ; 
and it is quite evident from the whole of his letter how 
greatly the Society dreaded the light of publicity being 
thrown on its dark underground proceedings. There is 
reason to believe that most of the brethren who at this 
period left the Society did so, not because they disapproved 
of the Society or the Priest in A bsolution, but simply through 
fear. The fact that scarcely any of them publicly repudiated 


either the one or the other is a proof of .this. There were, 
however, a few exceptions, of which the most remarkable 
was that of the Rev. Frank N. Oxenham — he joined the 
S. S. C. in 1872 — who, as early as June 19th, wrote to the 
Archbishop of Canterbury : — 

" When, in consequence of your Grace's observations, I looked into 
the book, I felt that no words could be too strong to condemn the 
principles advocated, and the advice given in that book as to the 
questioning of persons who came to Confession. If the practice of 
Confession involved, which it certainly does not, any such questioning, 
I should regard it with abhorrence. I am sure, my Lord, that a very 
large number of the members of the Society of the Holy Cross are as 
ignorant as I was of the contents of this unhappy book, and would 
repudiate its principles in the matter to which I have alluded as 
sincerely and utterly as I do. In justice to those persons, as well as 
to myself, I am venturing to trouble your Grace with this communica- 
tion. I very deeply regret that the Society of the Holy Cross ever 
came into possession of this book, and I shall take the earliest 
opportunity open to a private member, to move that all remaining 
copies of the second part of the Priest in Absolution be forthwith 
destroyed." M 

This condemnation of the Priest in A bsolution, I may here 
remark, came from one who was for many years an advanced 
Ritualist, and is therefore all the more valuable on that 
account, as showing its mischievous and dangerous character. 
Unfortunately for Mr. Oxenham's opinion, a " very large 
number of the members " of the Society of the Holy Cross 
did not " repudiate its principles." The proposal that the 
Society should burn the remaining copies in its possession 
was brought forward, though not by Mr. Oxenham, at the 
May Synod, 1878, when the following resolution was carried 
by thirty-four to eight : — " That this Synod is not in favour 
of the destruction of the remaining copies of the Priest in 
Absolution at the present time." 15 The Society would not 
even allow that there was any possibility of the advice on 

14 Life of Archbishop Tait, Vol. II., p. 174. 

15 S. S. C. Analysis of the May Synod, 1878, p. 16. 


questioning, contained in the book, being misused, for when 
Mr. Oxenham, at the Special Chapter, held July 5th, 1877, 
moved that " the advice given in this book as to questioning 
penitents is at least liable to injurious misuse," his motion 
was lost. The report of the proceedings does not state 
how many voted for or against it. 16 

On the day before Lord Redesdale's speech the Master of 
the Society of the Holy Cross wrote to the Bishop of 
London on the subject, and informed him that the Priest in 
Absolution could " only be obtained by those who are known 
clergymen of the Church of England/' and that " very few 
copies " had in consequence been distributed ; and stating that 
" the Society bought the work up at considerable pecuniary 
loss." These statements can scarcely be described as 
accurate. The official statements of receipts for. the sales 
before the Master wrote this letter, quoted above, clearly 
prove that there had been what may be fairly termed a 
considerable sale for such a work. As we have seen, £75 was 
paid for the copyright, and £73. 13s id had already been 
received from the sales. Where, then, was the " considerable 
pecuniary loss " ? In addition to these sales, it is well to 
remember that Mr. Chambers himself must have sold a 
considerable number of copies before the Society purchased 
the book. Was it, therefore, truthful for Mr. Bagshawe to 
inform the Bishop that only a " very few copies " had been 
distributed ? I think not. And was there not something 
like equivocation in the Master's further statement to the 
Bishop :— " I venture to assert that the great body of these 
clergy are not acquainted with the contents of this book, 
and some scarcely know of its existence " ? The Master, in 
this letter, also informed the Bishop that the Rev. J. C. 
Chambers had compiled the book. This was startling 
news for the Bishop, who, in his reply to the Master's letter, 
wrote : — 

" Few things have ever given me more pain than the very unex- 
18 Minutes 0/ the Special Chapter, p. 11. 


pected information that the late Mr. Chambers was the compiler of 
that volume which I have seen, and that you were Master of the 
Society which owns and circulates it. I am, of course, aware of 
the line of defence indicated by the term professional character ; but 
I must say that, in my judgment, a system of Confession which 
makes such a book necessary or even useful to the Confessor, carries 
with it its own condemnation." 

The Bishop's letter shows how carefully the leading 
authorities of the S. S. C. had kept their proceedings from 
the knowledge of their own Diocesan. Mr. Bagshawe's 
next letter to the Bishop was written on the day after the 
exposure in the House of Lords, and contained the following 
paragraph : — 

" As you have written to me in such a kind way, I am quite entitled 
to tell you, as my Bishop, that I have never thought the book a useful 
one, or recommended it to others. It is a matter of sorrow that 
some of us differ with our Bishops at all, but I cannot help feeling, 
after listening to a debate such as that on Thursday night, that our 
practice with regard to Confession is very widely misapprehended. 
One of my objections to the Priest in Absolution is that its language 
is not calculated to remove that misapprehension." 

It would be interesting to know what other objections the 
Master had to the book, which he in no way condemns as 
bad in itself. Yet the unsold copies of the book were, as 
he subsequently acknowledged, kept in his own care, and 
therefore no copies could have been circulated without his 
knowledge and sanction. In his Address to the May Synod, 
1878, he said : — " Hitherto the book has been in my care — 
now it will cease to be so." 17 It is evident, therefore, that 
his letters to the Bishop of London were written for a 
purpose, viz., that of making his lordship think more highly 
of the Master than he really deserved. Actions speak more 
strongly than words, and Mr. Bagshawe's words seem to 
contradict his actions. 

The interview of the representatives of the Society of the 
Holy Cross with the Bishops took place at Lambeth Palace, 

w S.S. C. Master's Address, delivered at the May Synod, 1S78, p. 6. 


on Thursday, June 28th. The representatives were the 
Master of the Society, together with the following members 
of his secret Council : — The Rev. C. F. Lowder, Vicar of 
St. Peter's, London Docks ; the Rev. Joseph Newton Smith, 
founder of the Society of the Holy Cross ; the Rev. F. H. 
Murray, Rector of Chislehurst ; the Rev. H. D. Nihill the 
Rev. R.J.Wilson, subsequently Warden of Keble College; the 
Rev. John William Kempe ; and the Rev. G. Noel Freeling, 
the latter of whom, however, was not on the " Council." To 
the surprise of these gentlemen, instead of meeting the 
Bishops they expected, they found waiting for them the 
Archbishops of Canterbury and York, and the Bishop of 
London only. The Master had brought with him a carefully- 
prepared Statement to the Bishops;* but he was only allowed to 
read about one-half of it, the remainder was sent to the 
Bishops on the following Saturday. This Statement, which, 
with the correspondence already alluded to, was subsequently 
printed for private circulation amongst the brethren, com- 
menced with an account of the nature and objects of the 
Society of the Holy Cross, and then proceeded to give the 
history of its connection with the Priest in Absolution, which 
has, I think, already been sufficiently related above. But I 
may quote the following extract from the Statement, as 
having an important bearing on the revival of Auricular 
Confession in the Church of England : — 

" All, or nearly so," said Mr. Bagshawe, " of our members had, as 
a matter of fact, found the blessing of Confession ; and very many of 
them were constantly applied to by those who desired to share in 
that blessing. Perpetually, at our meetings, questions of difficulty 
were asked, as our members began to learn the existence of sin and 
its power in their parishes. They felt the need of guidance in the 
ministry to which they believed themselves to be called. Under 
these circumstances, the Rev. J. C. Chambers was asked, I believe 
informally, and before I joined the Society in 1868, to undertake a 
work for their assistance, adapted to the needs of the Church of 
England and the state of modern society. It was felt that they could 
not have made a better choice. He possessed, more than any of theii 


number, the confidence of the Bishops for prudence, learning, moral 
integrity, and purity of purpose. His experience was vast. Members 
of both Houses of Parliament, Clergy, Barristers, Merchants, Trades- 
men, and Costermongers were amongst his penitents. In 1869 the 
first part of the work was published. It was entirely on Mr. Chambers's 
own responsibility. The Society was responsible for the request, but 
not for the manner of execution. In 1872 or 1873, the second part 
was brought out." 

Mr. Bagshawe made a singular error in stating that the 
first part was published in 1869. ^ was > as * have already 
mentioned, published in 1866, and the second edition was 
published in 1869. The Bishops referred to as having 
" confidence " in Mr. Chambers could hardly have been 
aware of his advanced Romanizing views, or that he was 
Father Confessor to so many influential people. The 
second half of that gentleman's official Statement to the 
Bishops consisted of an apology for the Priest in A bsolution, 
concerning which he had, as we have seen, written but a 
few days before, that " he had never thought the book 
a useful one" ; but of which he now affirmed that it was "a 
work upon an important subject from which good might 
be gained by those who read it with a right motive." " I 
consider," he continued, " very many propositions in the 
Priest in A bsolution doubtful, and from some I completely 
disagree. Yet I should be very far from saying that the 
discussion of such questions is not productive of good." 
The Master next proceeded to call attention to the " various 
cautions with which the book abounds " ; but goes on very 
candidly to acknowledge that : — 

" We believe that in certain cases questions must be ashed of the 
penitent, partly to clear what has been ambiguous in his statement, 
and partly to help him to confess what he really wishes to say, but 
is hindered in saying from shyness. In no case should any new 
matter be imported, unless there is very strong reason to believe that 
something has been suppressed, and then it should be approached 
with the utmost care." 

It was evidently the desire of the Master to move as much 


of the blame as possible from the Society of the Holy Cross, 
but he utterly failed in impressing the Bishops with his view 
of the case. Instead of repudiating the book altogether, he 
asserted that " no harm has been done by the kind of 
circulation which the Society has permitted." One result 
of this interview, as recorded in the official and privately 
circulated report of the proceedings, was " the surrender of 
a copy of the Priest in A bsokition to the Archbishop, and the 
promise of a surrender of the Statutes. The Master took 
the Statutes and the Office Book to the Archbishop on 
the following day." On June 30th, the Archbishop of 
Canterbury wrote to Mr. Bagshawe : — " I understand from 
you that a meeting of your Society will be held on Thursday 
of next week. Let me, through you, urge upon the Society 
the duty of at once repudiating the book which has caused 
so much alarm. This is due both to yourselves and to the 
Church. It is absolutely necessary that I should be in 
possession, not later than Thursday evening, of any 
resolutions you pass." The reason for the Archbishop's 
haste was that on the following day, July 6th, the subject 
was to be discussed by the Bishops in the Upper House 
of Canterbury Convocation, and they had postponed the 
consideration of the subject for a day, to suit the convenience 
of the Society. 

On Thursday, July 5th, a " Special Chapter " of the 
Society of the Holy Cross, to consider the action of the 
Society, was held at 5, Greville Street, Brooke Street, 
Holborn. Seventy-five brethren were present. Fortunately, 
I have come into possession of the official and secret report 
of this very secret meeting, held in a private house. From 
this I learn that the Master informed his brethren that it 
was " his opinion that unless the Society yielded to some 
extent to the wishes of the Bishops, we were in danger of 
a synodical statement by the Upper House against the 
Sacraments of the Catholic Church. To avert this, which 
would cause the gravest anxiety to many of the clergy and 


the laity, he advised the Chapter to pass a resolution to stop 
the further circulation of the Priest in Absolution" Canon 
T. T. Carter, of Clewer, who was the next speaker, moved a 
resolution, thanking the Master for the statement laid before 
the Bishops, and expressing " general approval of the same." 
This was seconded by the Rev. George Davenport Nicholas, 
Vicar of St. Stephen's, Clewer, and carried unanimously. 
Before it was passed, however, there was some grumbling 
on the part of a few of the brethren. The Rev. C. D. 
Goldie "thought that the Society had been betrayed into 
too hasty action " ; while the Rev. A. H. Stanton, Curate 
of St. Alban's, Holborn, revealed the fact that " the Council 
was not unanimous " in its action, and that he and the 
Rev. Henry Aston Walker, now Vicar of Chattisham, Ipswich, 
" had strongly opposed the idea of a deputation." The 
well-known Rev. A. H. Mackonochie said that he " was one 
of the Master's Council who had been averse to any 
deputation to the Bishops at all." He believed that the 
Bishops " had got up this attack " upon the Society, and 
desired to fix upon it the stigma of " indecent publications." 
" He warned the brethren that if they gave up the book, they 
would not escape the stigma." 

The Chapter next proceeded to read letters from absent 
brethren, including one from the Rev. Dr. Littledale, and 
also a resolution passed by the Edinburgh Local Chapter 
of the Society, to the effect that "the Society's further 
connection with the book was undesirable." On the other 
hand, the Cheltenham Local Chapter had sent up a 
resolution to the effect that it " was opposed to any repudia- 
tion of the book." The Rev. C. F. Lowder next addressed 
the meeting, and for politic reasons recommended "the 
Chapter to withdraw the book from circulation." He 
concluded by reading a further Statement which had been 
drawn up, he said, with the assistance of the Rev. T. W. 
Perry and Dr. Walter Phillimore (now Sir Walter Philli- 
more, Bart., Q.c). This statement was discussed by the 


Chapter, and after several amendments had been adopted, 
was carried unanimously. Thereupon Canon T. T. Carter 
moved that, — 

" The Society presents this Statement to the Right Reverend the 
Bishops and the Reverend the Clergy in Convocation assembled, in 
deference to the expressed desire of the Archbishops of Canterbury 
and York, and the Bishop of London, whom the delegates of the 
Society met at Lambeth. In deference to the expression of the 
desire on their part, the Society has determined that no further copies 
of the book shall be supplied." 

In moving this resolution Canon Carter said that he, 
" while revising the proof sheets of the work, had recom- 
mended the author to publish it in Latin." He was in 
favour of withdrawing the book " because we cannot heartily 
endorse it as a whole " ; and "because the Bishops ask us 
to give the book up." The Rev. Charles Bodington (now 
Diocesan Missioner for Lichfield) supported the motion. 
He said that he did so " because it kept clear of any condemna- 
tion of the book. While he should consider it injudicious to 
endorse the book as it stands, he thought that withdrawing 
it in deference to the Bishops' wishes need not make the 
slightest difference in our teaching and practice with regard 
to Confession." The Rev. William Crouch, now Vicar 
of Gamlingay, however, " believed our position would be 
weakened by giving up the book. No doubt the book was 
imperfect, but as much might be said of all books, save 
one." The Rev. F. N. Oxenham " considered that the 
charges had been fairly brought against the book, though 
parts of it are exceedingly valuable, yet the general tone of 
the work, though guarded, he held to be deeply injurious if 
generally used. He felt that the Society ought to condemn 
the book." This courageous statement of Brother Oxenham 
appears to have received no encouragement from the 
brethren present, for, when he proposed an amendment 
embodying his views, it was lost. After a good deal of 
further discussion, with the consent of Canon Carter, the 


following resolution was passed, by twenty-eight against 
twenty, instead of that proposed by Brother Oxenham :■ — 

a That, under these considerations, the Society of the Holy Cross, 
while distinctly repudiating the unfair criticisms which have been 
passed on the book called the Priest in Absolution, and without 
intending to imply any condemnation of it, yet, in deference to the 
desire expressed by the Archbishop of Canterbury to the represen- 
tatives of the Society, resolves that no further copies of it be supplied." 

This was a most important resolution. By it the Society 
declined to censure the book either in whole or in part. 
Mr. Oxenham proposed to insert the words " as a whole " 
after " condemnation of it " ; but his proposal was rejected 
by twenty-one to eighteen. The promise to withdraw the 
Priest in A bsolution from circulation served its purpose very 
well with the Bishops in Convocation the next day ; but 
it was a promise which was valueless, for it was subsequently 
repudiated by the Society as a whole, very much to the 
annoyance of the Master of the Society, who considered, 
as we shall see presently, that by repudiating the resolution 
of the Special Chapter the Society had broken faith with 
the Bishops, and in such a way as to compel him, as an 
honourable man, to resign his position as Master of the 
Society of the Holy Cross. Before this Special Chapter 
closed the Rev. James Benjamin Parker said " he was 
prepared to move that a copy of the Society's Roll " of the 
Brethren should be given to the Bishops. But the Master 
very soon put a stop to Brother Parker's injudicious 
proposals. He informed the Chapter that he had already 
refused to give a copy to the Archbishop. Mr. Bagshawe 
was evidently too wide awake to do anything of the kind. 
There is nothing, I am certain, that the Society of the 
Holy Cross dreads more than that the names of its 
members shall be known to the general public. They 
could not even trust the secret to one Archbishop ! 

On Friday, July 6th, the Upper House of Canterbury met 
to consider the Priest in Absolution. There were present, in 


addition to the Archbishop of Canterbury, who, of course, 
presided, the Bishops of London, Llandaff, Gloucester and 
Bristol, Norwich, Hereford, St. Albans, Lichfield, Bath and 
Wells, Chichester, Salisbury, Oxford, and St. Asaph. Not 
one of these Prelates, whether High Churchmen or 
Evangelicals, had one word to say in favour of either the 
Priest in A bsolution, or the Society of the Holy Cross, which 
they held responsible for the book. They unanimously 
condemned both the one and the other, though some of 
them bore testimony to the personal character of some of 
the members of the Society. My readers may find a 
verbatim report of the speeches of these Prelates, on this 
remarkable occasion, in the Chronicle of Convocation, Sessions 
July 3-6, 1877, pages 310-336. My quotations from the 
speeches are taken from this official report. 

The Archbishop of Canterbury, who, in the course of his 
speech, presented to the Bishops the resolutions of the 
Special Chapter of the S. S. C. passed the previous day, 
said: — " The persons with whom we have now to deal, it 
appears to me, have adopted a system altogether alien from 
the system of the Church of England, which yet might 
not find its natural home, under existing circumstances, in 
the exaggerated Ultramontane form of the present Roman 
Catholic Church. This system must seek a home some- 
where else than in the Reformed Protestant Church of 
England. . . I am sure your lordships will agree with me 
that it will be most dangerous to allow them in this Church 
powers to propagate doctrines, to introduce and carry into 
effect practices which are entirely alien from the spirit and 
teaching of the whole body of the Divines of the Church of 
England from first to last." The Archbishop then called 
attention to a little confessional book for children, " Edited 
by a Committee of Clergy," and entitled " Books for the 
Young," No. I., Confession. It must have had, he said, a 
very wide circulation, for the copy from which he quoted 
was one of the " Eighth Thousand." He said that he did[ 


not know who the "Committee" were who were responsible 
for that book. He trusted that they were few in number, 
and not more than two or three. What would he have said, 
if he had known that this little book, which he so sternly 
condemned, was, in reality, issued by the Society of the 
Holy Cross, but without its name being attached to it ? 
Of course the Society was too wise to enlighten Dr. Tait 
on this important subject. The little book taught that 
little children from six and a-half years old should go to 
Confession ; and these little ones were instructed that, " It 
is to the priest, and to the priest only, that the child must 
acknowledge his sins, if he desires that God should forgive 
him." In conclusion his Grace said, " I have now given 
your lordships all the information that I have on this 
subject ; I do it with the greatest pain. I do it with a full 
appreciation of the goodness of the men with whom we 
have to deal : but no admiration of -any points in their 
character ought, I think, to make us hesitate as to whatever 
may appear to be our duty in the endeavour to counteract 
what I feel obliged to call a conspiracy within our own body 
against the doctrine, the discipline, and the practice of our 
Reformed Church." 

The Bishop of London said that in the First Part of the 
Priest in Absolution there are some pages which contain 
things as bad as are to be found in the Second Part. He 
noticed that, by the resolution of the Society of the Holy 
Cross which had been sent to them, the remaining copies of 
the Priest in Absolution were not to be destroyed, but none 
others are to be supplied. " There, consequently," said the 
Bishop, who evidently suspected trickery, " they are to 
remain, and at some future opportunity, when the opinion 
of the Society undergoes a change, I presume they will 
again be available as they have hitherto been." " I shall," 
he continued, "ask your lordships to permit me to move, 
in the first place, that this House holds the Society of the 
Holy Cross responsible for the preparation and dissemination 


of the book called the Priest in Absolution. The question is, 
how far they have by their resolutions withdrawn that 
responsibility ; and I am afraid I must say that they have 
not withdrawn it at all. They have not repudiated the 
book, nor expressed their regret that it has been published. 
They have given no opinion in condemnation of it ; on the 
contrary, they say they do not intend to imply any con- 
demnation of it, though, in deference to the desire expressed 
by the Archbishop, no further copies of it will be supplied. I 
shall, therefore, ask your lordships to agree to a resolution 
to this effect : — 

" ' That this House, having considered the first resolution appended 
to the " Statement of the Society of the Holy Cross, presented to this 
House on Friday, July 6th, 1877," i s °^ opinion that the Society has 
neither repudiated nor effectually withdrawn from circulation the 
aforesaid work.' " 

The Bishop of London then proceeded with his speech, 
and termed the little book on Confession, quoted by the 
Archbishop, "a wretched little book," after which he moved 
this further resolution : — 

" That this House hereby expresses its strong condemnation of any 
doctrine or practice of Confession which can be thought to render 
such a book necessary or expedient." 

The Bishop of Llandaff seconded the resolutions. He 
said : — "It appears to me, after reading a good deal of this 
book, that it and its papers are books and papers which 
ought to appear within the pale of the Roman Catholic 
Church, and not within the pale of the Church of England." 
In conclusion, the Bishop expressed his belief that dispensed 
Jesuits had in the past worked mischief within the Protes- 
tant Churches. "I am very unwilling," he said, "to suppose 
that anything of the kind is done at the present day, but 
this is an important fact in history which at any rate may 
well be borne in mind." 

The Bishop of St. Albans, who was a High Churchman, 
said : — " I think it is high time that some restraint should 



be placed on the doctrine and practice of Confession that 
has become prevalent among us lately. I was, of course, well 
aware that this practice was beginning to prevail to a great 
extent ; but I do not think it ever impressed itself on my 
mind so fully as it did when, on Good Friday last, I took 
part in the service, for the first time in many years, in a 
church which has acquired a very unenviable notoriety — 
I mean the Church of St. James's, Hatcham. In looking over 
that church after the service had concluded I saw in a 
transept or side chapel — I saw with my own eyes — a 
Confessional of the Church of Rome, with its seat for the 
Confessor, a place for the penitent to kneel upon, curtains, 
and the usual paraphernalia of such places. Now, I do not 
wish to say one unkind word concerning the Incumbent of 
that church, although I must say his conduct has cost me 
the most miserable weeks of the whole of my Episcopate. 
I repeat that I do not wish to say anything unkind of him ; 
but I cannot forget on the present occasion that he is an 
office-bearer in this Society of the Holy Cross." The Bishop 
concluded by supporting the resolution. I may here note 
that Confessional Boxes, which so astonished the late Bishop 
of St. Albans, have now become very common in Ritualistic 
churches. The Bishops have the power to remove them, but, 
with a very few exceptions, they refuse to use their powers. 
Many of them can talk against Popery in the Church of 
England, but the laity are asking, Why do they not act ? 
We need deeds more than words in these dangerous days. 

The next speaker was the High Church Bishop of 
Lichfield (Dr. Selwyn). He said : — " I must say, from the 
observation which I have made of the documents placed 
before us, that they do contain the very gravest elements 
of suspicion, and that they would make me — although I do 
not pledge myself as to my future course either as regards &n 
Incumbent or a Curate — entertain doubts as to whether 
I could appoint one of these clergymen to one of those offices 
or the other. . . We, as Bishops of the Church of England, 


cannot sanction their doctrines or practices, and therefore 
we call upon them in terms of earnest but affectionate 
expostulation to retreat from a position which we feel to be 
so utterly wrong." 

The High Church Bishop of Oxford (Dr. Mackarness) 
declared that he cordially concurred in the resolution, but 
he added : — " I feel bound to say with respect to some of the 
persons who are said to be members of this Society, that 
I do not believe they have the slightest idea of any conspiracy 
against the doctrine and discipline of our Reformed Church." 
At the same time his lordship declared that he " disapproved" 
of the Priest in A bsolution. 

The Bishop of St. Asaph said : — " The system of 
Confession which we have been discussing, followed by 
priestly absolution, has no sanction from Scripture or from 
the formularies of the Church of England. I believe that 
it is most injurious to those who come to confess, and 
most detrimental to the Minister who receives Confession. 
. . . What was the result of the system in Ireland, when 
assassination was frequent in that country ? Did not the 
assassin go to Confession the previous day and obtain 
relief to his conscience ? And what was the effect on the 
priest's own mind ? Was it likely that he could come in 
contact with so much sin and contract no defilement ? 
Alas ! let the ■ moral aspect of many countries on the 
continent supply the answer." 

The Right Rev. Dr. Moberly, Bishop of Salisbury, who 
next addressed the House, avowed that he believed 
Confession to be right, and yet even he condemned in very 
severe language the Priest in Absolution, and the teaching 
of the Society of the Holy Cross, as contained in its "Books 
for the Young," No. I., Confession. He said : — " I entirely 
agree with the resolution ; but I think that this matter is a 
much more difficult one than on the surface it appears. I 
cannot doubt that Confession and Absolution were enjoined 
by our Lord Himself, and that they form a real part of the 

8 * 


system of the Church, and under certain circumstances are 
capable of being blessed in the highest possible degree for 
good to those who partake of them. At the same time, by 
carrying them to the excess taught and practised by the 
persons whose conduct is before us to-day they cannot but 
be productive of great and serious evil. ... I believe the 
practice of habitual Confession to be mischievous in the 
highest degree, and I have a particular object in referring to 
it, for the greater part of my life, as that of others of your 
lordships, has been spent as a schoolmaster, and I confess 
that there is not one thing in all the world which is deeper 
in my heart and conscience than the corrupting mischief of 
any such system as this getting into our schools." 

The Bishop of Bath and Wells said : — " We have seen 
how the authors of this book, by the doctrine and practice 
they have set forth, have scandalized the public mind, and 
I am sure that if we, the Bishops of the Church of England, 
were to aid and abet such doctrine and practice, we should 
lose the respect and confidence of the country. For these 
reasons, I think it most important that we should 
unanimously agree to the resolutions before us." 

The last speech from which I shall quote was that of the 
High Church Bishop of Chichester. u I think," he said, 
" this is a very serious matter, and that it is the duty of this 
House to protest in the strongest manner against the 
teaching of these Romanizing doctrines, and the adoption 
of these Romanizing practices. There is not a single 
syllable in the Statutes [of the Society of the Holy Cross] 
about Confession to Almighty God, and seeking forgiveness 
through Jesus Christ. There is no intimation that the 
means of forgiveness are open to all who come to God 
through Christ. Nothing of the sort is said, and this is a 
case in which omission appears to me to be fatal. It leads 
the people to lean on the priest. You cannot find that in 
the Scriptures, and no one would say that it is inculcated 
in the formularies of our Church." 


The resolutions were then put, and carried unanimously. 

I have devoted a considerable amount of space to the 
speeches of the Bishops on this occasion, partly because of 
their intrinsic value, and also because the book in which 
alone they are recorded verbatim is exceedingly scarce, and 
is, therefore, quite out of the reach of ordinary Churchmen, 
who may be glad to have the chief points of the speeches 
within reach in these pages. It will be observed that the 
Priest in Absolution was thus unanimously condemned by all 
the Bishops of Canterbury Convocation present on this 
occasion, and since then not one Bishop of the Church of 
England has ever publicly said, or written, one word in its 
favour. Perhaps one of the most damaging exposures of the 
evil results of the Ritualistic Confessional ever made in public, 
was that made in the Lower House of Canterbury Convoca- 
tion, on July 4th, 1877, two days only before the debate in 
the Upper House. The subject of Confession had been sent 
down to the Lower House, by the Bishops, for discussion, in 
consequence of the exposure of the Priest in Absolution in 
the House of Lords. In the course of the debate in the 
Lower House, Archdeacon Allen rose and said : — 

" I find it printed that it is a shame to suspect any of these 
Clergymen of misusing this mode of treatment of spiritual disease. 
A shame to suspect them ! If that is said, I must say something on 
the other side. I was talking to an elderly clergyman — a Rural 
Dean, older than myself — a man who has daily prayer in his church, 
and whom all his friends and neighbours respect — a venerable and 
wise High Churchman, and he told me that in his own experience 
he had known three clergymen who had practised this teaching of 
habitual Confession as a duty, who had fallen into habits of immorality 
with women who had come to them for guidance. That was the 
testimony of an old-fashioned High Churchman ; and I will give his 
name to any one who asks me for it. You know it is said a discreet 
Confessor will make a proper use of this book [the Priest in 
Absolution]. A discreet Confessor 1 Is it possible that discretion 
can be a quality of every young clergyman who is a member of this 
Society, which is said to have a property in this book ? " 18 

18 Chronicle of Convocation. Sessions, July 3-6, 1877, p. 231. 


The truth of Archdeacon Allen's charge against these 
three Ritualistic clergymen does not appear to have been 
ever challenged, much less refuted. It raises the very 
serious question, How far is the Ritualistic Confessional used 
for immoral purposes by wicked and evil-disposed clergy- 
men ? No one wishes to make sweeping and general charges 
on such a subject. But is there not just cause for anxiety ? 
Is not human nature the same in all ages ? That the Con- 
fessional has been grossly used for immoral purposes, by 
evil-disposed priests, and that to a gigantic extent in the 
Church of Rome, is amply proved, beyond the possibility of 
refutation, by the Bulls of the Popes themselves against 
solicitant priests. Anyone who wishes for clear and ample 
evidence on this point, based exclusively upon Roman 
Catholic authorities, should certainly read An Historical 
Sketch of Sacerdotal Celibacy, by Mr. Henry C. Lea, of Phila- 
delphia. Mr. Lea's book is not sufficiently known in 
Europe, and I only wonder that an edition of such a learned 
work has never yet been published in England. He proves 
conclusively that the Confessional has been used, by wicked 
priests, for the vilest purposes in the past, and that the 
offence is not unknown to the nineteenth century. It 
appears that the Abbe Helsen, who for twenty-five years had 
been and still was a Roman Catholic preacher in Brussels, 
addressed an indignant remonstrance to the Archbishop of 
Mechlin, in 1832, in which he exposed to the light of day the 
awful immorality existing at that time amongst the Romish 

" Helsen," writes Mr. Lea, " alludes to the scandals of the Con- 
fessional as a cause of its avoidance by the faithful and as contributing 
powerfully to the growth of religious indifference, and that these 
scandals exist is not a mere matter of conjecture or inference. If it 
were so, there would be no need for reiterating the prohibitions against 
the absolution by Confessors of their fair partners in guilt, which is 
still occasionally found to be necessary by modern Councils ; nor 
would Pius IX., in 1866, have felt himself obliged to declare that the 
power granted to Bishops to absolve in cases reserved to the Pope 


shall not in future extend to offences reserved for Papal absolution by 
Benedict XIV.'s Bull ' Sacramentum Pcenitentice.' In fact, the crime 
of * solicitation ' must have become notoriously frequent before the Con- 
gregation of the Inquisition at Rome could have felt impelled, in 1867, 
to put forth an Instruction addressed to all Archbishops, Bishops, and 
Ordinaries, complaining that the Constitutions on the subject did not 
receive proper attention, and that in some places abuses had crept in, 
both as to requiring penitents to denounce guilty Confessors, and as 
to the punishing of Confessors guilty of solicitation [i.e., soliciting 
women, while in the Confessional, to immorality]. It therefore 
urged the officials everywhere to greater vigour in investigating such 
offences, and gave a summary of the practice of the Inquisition in 
regard to these matters." 19 

Bearing these and other similar facts in mind, I am 
not at all surprised to learn, on the reliable authority of 
Archdeacon Allen, that within the experience of even one 
clergyman "three " instances were made known in which the 
Ritualistic Confessional has been used by Father Confessors 
for the vilest purposes. Are we to suppose that those three 
were the only guilty persons in England ? If the experience 
of others could only be made public, is there not reason to 
fear that the instances would be considerably multiplied ? 
Has not, at least, one clergyman, since 1877, been deprived 
of his living for the crime of seducing a young lady through 
the Confessional ? Clerical celibacy is rapidly spreading 
amongst the Ritualists, and it is not at all a pleasant 
thought that our wives, daughters, and sisters may be 
going to Confession to some young bachelor priest, and 
talking with him on subjects which should never be alluded 
to. This sort of thing is bad enough when the Confessor 
happens to be a married man, but when he is a celibate 
the dangers are greatly increased. Let it not be said that 
I am bringing reckless and wholesale charges against the 
Ritualistic clergy. I am doing nothing of the kind. I am 
simply dealing with facts, and with possibilities, which we 

19 Lea's History of Sacerdotal Celibacy, p. 633. Second edition. Boston : 
Houghton, Miffen & Co., 1884. 


cannot afford to ignore. That the Confessional may be 
used for the vilest purposes is acknowledged even by the 
author of the Priest in Absolution, who, as a Ritualistic 
Confessor of many years' experience, speaks with some 
authority on this point. While writing on the care which 
the Confessor should exercise in hearing the Confessions of 
females, he remarks : — 

** Nothing more shows the fearfulness of Satanic devices than that 
it is possible that a Sacrament which was instituted to drive forth 
from souls sin and the devil, and make them living temples of the 
Holy Ghost, may be profaned by abusers of its ministrations to the 
grossest iniquity." 20 

This testimony of the Editor of the Priest in Absolution 
is corroborated by that of Dr. Pusey, given after he had 
himself been hearing Confessions for forty years. He tells 
us of one way in which the Confessional is still abused by 
Confessors : — 

" It is a sad sight," writes Dr. Pusey, " to see Confessors giving 
their whole morning to young women dovotees, while they dismiss 
men or married women, who have, perhaps, left their household 
affairs with difficulty to find themselves rejected with, ' I am busy, 
go to someone else ! ' so that, perhaps, such people will go on for 
months or years without the Sacraments. This is not hearing 
Confessions for God's sake, but for one's own." 31 

Again, Dr. Pusey warns the Confessor, when in the 
Confessional, — 

" You may pervert this Sacrament [of Penance] from its legitimate 
end, which is to kindle an exceeding horror of sin in the minds of 
others, into a subtle means of feeding evil passions and sin in your 
own mind." 22 

He also warns the Confessor, who hears Confessions 
while u in a state of mortal sin," which does not necessarily 
imply what the world would term a wickedness : — 

" If the ministry of a Confessor is beset with dangers, even for a . 

80 The Priest in Absolution, Part II., p. 77. 

11 Pusey's Manual for Confessors, p. 108. B Ibid., p. 102. 


good man, how can one in your condition hope to escape ? There is 
but too great danger, that you will add fresh crimes to your account 
by an undue indulgence to faults in others which you have not 
overcome in yourself; or, worst of all, being the cause of temptation 
to others, thereby proving yourself no spiritual father, but rather a 
ravening wolf 5 no Minister of God, but of the devil j no physician, 
bat the murderer of souls." 28 

And yet one more quotation from Dr. Pusey which, with 
all my heart and soul, I believe to be the solemn truth : — 

" Be assured," he writes, " that this is one of the gravest faults of 
our day in the administration of the Sacrament of Penance, that it is 
the road by which a number of Christians go down to hell." u 

When the Editor of the Priest in A bsolution, and the Rev. 
Dr. Pusey, both experienced Father Confessors themselves, 
make such startling acknowledgments as those I have just 
quoted, is it surprising or unreasonable that Protestant 
Churchmen also should raise a loud note of warning, and 
urge people on no account to enter on that road, by which 
" a number of Christians go down to hell " ? It cannot be 
Christ's road, for he who walks on that road, cannot possibly 
go astray. Such dire possibilities as those so frankly 
acknowledged by these two noted Ritualistic leaders, can 
never result from that Confession to the Great High Priest, 
the Lord Jesus Christ, practised by all devout Protestant 
Christians. The Father Confessor, as Dr. Pusey admits, is 
often, while in the Confessional, the "murderer of souls." 

And now let us return once more to the Society of the 
Holy Cross and its proceedings, in relation to the Priest in 
Absolution. The ordinary Monthly Chapter of the Society 
was held on July 10th, 1877, when an address of sympathy 
with the Society was read from the so-called " Church of 
England Working Men's Society." The Rev. G. D. 
Nicholas rose and complained that the caution given to the 
brethren by the Master at the Special Chapter, as to the 

u ibid., p 99. 

** Ibid., p. 315. 


" strictly confidential " nature of its proceedings, had been 
ignored. A lady had actually " told him, on the following 
morning, that she knew that the vote of the Society was not 
unanimous." Next a letter was read from Brother Oxenham, 
who was evidently anxious to keep his promise to the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury. That gentleman enclosed a motion 
which he wished to bring before the September Synod, if 
approved by the Chapter. The motion was as follows : — > 

"That inasmuch as certain parts of the Priest in Absolution, 
relating to the questioning of penitents, are, in the opinion of this 
Synod, at least very liable to injurious misuse, this Synod resolves 
that all copies of the said book now in the possession of the Society 
shall be destroyed." 25 

To tolerate the discussion of such a very proper motion 
as this was what the brethren could never assent to. The 
very thought was treason. So, in pious horror, the Rev. 
Robert James Wilson exclaimed that " he hoped that the 
Chapter would not allow Brother Oxenham's motion to be 
placed on the Agenda " of the September Synod. So to 
make quite sure that the hated and dreaded discussion 
should not take place, Brother Wilson proposed, and the 
Rev. Edgar Hoskins (now Rector of St. Martin's, Ludgate, 
London) seconded the following resolution : — " That 
the Society thinks it undesirable to enter at the Synod 
into a reconsideration of its relations to the Priest in 
Absolution" 56 There was no difference of opinion in the 
Chapter as to the desirability of stifling discussion on 
Brother Oxenham's motion, and accordingly Brother 
Wilson's resolution was "carried unanimously." And yet, 
notwithstanding this decision of the July Chapter, when 
the September Synod was held the relations of the Society 
to the Priest in Absolution were very fully considered, as 
the official report of the proceedings fully shows, though, 
of course, Brother Oxenham's motion was rigorously 

* S. 5. C. July Chapter, 1877, p. 2. " Ibid., p. 10. 



One of the special subjects discussed at the July Chapter 
was " Our Action Towards the Bishops." It was introduced 
by the Rev. C. F. Lowder, who, after mentioning that the 
Upper House of Convocation had appointed a Committee 
to consider the Statutes of the Society of the Holy Cross 
and the Priest in Absolution, proceeded to congratulate the 
Society on having so far escaped Episcopal censure. That, 
it seems, was largely due to the Bishop of Oxford, who, 
while denouncing the Society and its Confessional Book in 
public, was at the same time secretly plotting for the purpose 
of shielding them from the expected censure of the Episcopal 
gench. In the course of his speech Brother Lowder said 
that " Putting aside the rhodomontade and ad captandum 
Words of the Archbishop about a 'conspiracy,' he saw 
grounds for hope in the line taken by the Bishop of Oxford, 
who, he believed, was friendly to us, and had moved for a 
Committee in order to save the censure which was hanging over 
us. That censure would be most serious to the Society at 
large, and especially to the younger brethren, and those 
holding positions under Government. He advised that a 
deputation of the Society should go before the Committee 
[of Bishops] with the object of explaining and defending 
the Statutes." Brother Lowder concluded his speech by 
moving a resolution to the effect that the Master in Council 
take such steps as might seem best to explain the work of 
the Society to the Committee of the Upper House of Con- 
vocation. This resolution was severely criticised by several 
of the brethren. In particular, Brother A. H. Mackonochie 
declared that he differed entirely from the course proposed. 
" The leading mind among the Bishops was," he said, 
"simply hatred to the Society as far as they knew it. . . 
At the meeting at Lambeth the Archbishop had surrep- 
titiously got the Statutes out of the Master, and having 
obtained them the Archbishop of York announced that he 
should not feel himself bound to respect the confidence of 
the Society. The Bishops' object was to put down the 


Society, which they hate and fear. They have already a 
great idea of its power." 

Canon T. T. Carter said he " must agree with Brother 
Mackonochie as to the evident animus of the Bishops. 
They would destroy us if they could, and the principles 
we uphold. . . There were Bishops, he knew, who hated 
the way in which they were kept under by the Archbishop, 
and only wanted to be backed up ; and our power against 
the Archbishop lay in those men being able to show our 
position. . . Now that we have gone so far, we must not 
withdraw from the course we have taken." 

The Rev. T. Outram Marshall (Organizing Secretary o- 
the English Church Union) said he could support Brothei 
Lowder's motion, if the powers of the deputation were 
limited. " He looked upon it as an opportunity to teach 
the Gospel to those who seldom hear us." This will no 
doubt be news to many. It was certainly impertinent on 
Mr. Marshall's part thus to imply that the Bishops seldom 
heard the Gospel, and that it was the duty of a secret 
Society of Father Confessors to " teach " it to them ! 

The Rev. Robert Eyton (now Canon of Westminster) 
declared that " He was glad of unburdening his mind, and 
stating what might have to be his course of action. There 
was a great tide of feeling in the country setting in towards 
Catholicism as the only safe ground. He hoped the Society 
would not by its policy at this great crisis check that tide. 
If it ever came to his having to choose between remaining 
in the Society, and ceasing to minister in the Church of 
England, he felt no doubt what he should do, deeply as he 
should regret his severance from S. S. C." It may help 
towards explaining Mr. Eyton's position if I mention that he 
at that time held a curate's license under the Bishop of 
London, and therefore what he meant was that rather than 
lose that license he would, though with deep " regret," leave 
the Society of the Holy Cross. As a matter of fact, he has 
since withdrawn from the Society, though whether his heart 



is still with it or not, now that he is a Residentiary Canon of 
Westminster, is more than I can say. Certainly, so far as I 
can ascertain, Canon Eyton has never publicly denounced 
the Society of the Holy Cross, and he must at one time have 
been anxious that his connection with it during seven years 
should be unknown to the general public. 

The Rev. Nathaniel Dawes (now Bishop of Rockhampton, 
Australia) supported the motion. He said : — " Our weak- 
ness hitherto had been our ' secrecy.' He deprecated a spirit 
of uncourteous defiance towards the Bishops. . . . There 
is no need to go to the Bishops as penitents, but we must 
not forget our obligations to them." From this I gather 
that, in the opinion of Brother Dawes the Society of the 
Holy Cross had done nothing for which they needed to 
express sorrow. 

One of the speakers, the Rev. Edmund Gough de Wood, 

Vicar of St. Clement's, Cambridge, is evidently of a subtle 

turn of mind. After declaring that if the Society went to 

the Bishops, without being first invited, it would be like 

" rushing into the lion's mouth," he recommended the 

Society to revise its Statutes. " Our Statutes," he said, 

u were not drawn up for the public. The Society used to 

be a secret Society. If now it becomes a public one it might 

be wise to alter them ; perhaps to have certain Constitutions 

for outsiders to see, and an * Interior Rule ' for ourselves." 

Some persons would term a proposition, such as this," 

thoroughly Jesuitical. Eventually the Chapter passed 

Brother Lowder's motion, but with the proviso that the 

Master should not go before the Committee of the Upper 

House, unless " summoned by them." 

A short discussion followed on the " Resignations of 
Brethren." The Rev. Joseph Newton Smith (Founder of 
the Society of the Holy Cross) made a speech, in the course 
of which he displayed considerable hatred of publicity. He 
" thought we ought to cultivate ' the wisdom of the serpent.' 
He did not share the admiration some brothers had 


expressed for English honesty and straightforwardness. He 
thought our secrecy had been a protection to us, and he 
therefore was opposed to surrendering the Roll to the 

Before the Chapter closed protests were made by two of 
the brethren. The Rev. E. G. de Salis Wood said that he 
" wished to protest against the statement in the Address [of 
the Society of the Holy Cross] to Convocation, that ' the 
Church of England teaches that Confession is not a matter 
of compulsory obligation.'" The Rev. A. H. Mackonochie 
declared that " he agreed with Brother Wood in this sense, 
that for those who are in mortal sin there is no way 
generally of obtaining pardon, save in the Sacrament of 

Two days before this Chapter was held the Rev. W. J. 
Knox-Little (now Canon Knox-Little) preached (on 
July 8th) a sermon on the subject of the Priest in Absolu- 
tion to his own congregation at St. Alban's Church, 
Manchester, and subsequently he published it in pamphlet 
form. I refer to it here as illustrating the tactics of some 
leading Ritualists. The preacher had not the courage to 
tell his people plainly that he was himself a member of the 
Society of the Holy Cross, yet to save his conscience he thus 
referred to the matter : — 

" My connection, indeed, with the Society of the Holy Cross is of 
the slightest, but my knowledge of the good and holy men who are 
leading members of it is intimate, and I believe, from all I have 
heard of it, that the Society of the Holy Cross is a noble Society, no 
matter what calumny may be heaped upon it." 27 

Was this a strictly accurate way for Canon Knox-Little 
to describe his connection with the Society of the Holy 
Cross ? Was it right to say that his " connection " with it 
was " of the slightest," when he was a full member at the 

v The Priest in Absolution, by Rev. W. J. Knox-Little, m.a., p. 26. London : 


very moment he was speaking ? And notice the expression, 
" from all that I have heard of it"; as though he had no 
personal knowledge of its dark history and Popish Statutes ! 
It may reasonably be asked here, If the S. S. C. " is a noble 
Society," why did Canon Knox-Little sever his connection 
with it the next year ? 

At the August, 1877, Chapter of the Society of the Holy 
Cross, a letter was read from the Master of the Society " to 
the effect that, as some of the brethren had expressed their 
disapproval of his action in surrendering the Statutes to the 
Archbishop, he thought it would be well to give an oppor- 
tunity at the [September] Synod for an expression of 
opinion on the part of the Society as to his conduct." On 
the motion of the Rev. Anthony Bathe, now Vicar of Friday - 
thorpe, York, a resolution assuring the Master that he 
possessed "the full confidence of the Society" was carried 
unanimously. The Rev. Charles Stebbing Wallace (now 
Vicar of the Church of the Ascension, Lavender Hill, S.W.) 
brought before the Chapter the difficult circumstances in 
which he was placed. He said, " that the Archbishop of 
Canterbury had refused to license him to the Curacy of 
St. Barnabas', Beckenham, because he would not leave 
S. S. C." On the motion of the Rev. H. D. Nihill, seconded 
by the Rev. Anthony Bathe, a resolution was passed by the 
Chapter unanimously thanking Brother Wallace for his 
courageous conduct. At this Chapter, it may interest some 
to know, the late Archdeacon Denison was admitted into the 
Order of Probationers. The Archdeacon made no secret of 
his connection with the Society of the Holy Cross. In his 
Notes of My Life, he glories in the fact that he joined it 
because of the attack on it in 1877. 

The September, 1877, Synod of the Society of the Holy 
Cross was looked forward to by the brethren with more 
than ordinary interest and anxiety. It was the first Synod 
of the whole Society held since Lord Redesdale's exposure 
of the Priest in Absolution. I am sorry to state that the 


Sermon to the brethren, and the Master's Address to the 
Synod on this important occasion have not come into my 
possession. But I do possess the official and secret report 
of the Synod itself, which was held in St. Peter's Church, 
London Docks, on September 13th and 14th. The proceed- 
ings began each day at the early hour of 9 a.m. and lasted 
until 7 p.m. 28 At this Synod an effort was made by several 
of the brethren to nominally break up the Society, but to 
continue it under another name, so as to avoid the official 
censure of Convocation. The truly Jesuitical scheme seems 
to have been suddenly sprung on the Society, for Brother 
Mackonochie denied that the Synod had the power to 
discuss the question " after twenty-four hours' notice." It 
was said that " very many " of the brethren had received no 
notice of what was coming on. A series of resolutions 
bearing on the subject had been prepared. It was, however, 
soon evident that there would be a strong opposition to the 
proposals for disbanding the Society, and a protest was 
entered against the discussion of the question at that Synod. 
After an excited debate, it was decided that the Resolutions 
should be brought forward as an amendment to the first 
motion on the agenda paper. That motion was the result of 
the recent discussion in public of the Priest in A bsolution. 
A desire was expressed at the Synod that the Statutes 
might be revised, with a view to toning down some of 
the expressions in the Statutes of the Society, not that 
anyone objected to the doctrine contained in those Statutes, 
but to the use of terms, such as "The Mass," and " Sacra- 
ment of Penance," &c, which had given offence to the 
Bishops. Accordingly, the Rev. William Henry Hutchings 
(now Archdeacon of Cleveland) proposed, and the Rev. Edgar 
Hoskins seconded, the following motion : — - 

" That in the opinion of this Synod it is advisable that a Committee 
be appointed to consider the form of the Society's Statutes, with a 
view to modification or otherwise." 

38 Charles Lowder : a Biography, p. 311. First edition. 


In proposing this motion, Brother Hutchings said that : — 
" It was the opinion of a well-known Oxford Professor 29 that 
to dissolve would be to create confusion in certain minds, 
and would involve some loss of self-respect ; if we dissolved 
we acknowledged ourselves to be in the wrong, and destroyed 
the great instrument we had for promoting the Catholic 
Revival in this country. ... To appoint a Committee to 
consider the form of the Statutes would be to withdraw the 
Statutes as they now stand, and so prevent the Bishops from 
considering them." This was a clever scheme, and proves 
to my mind that the motion of Brother Hutchings was 
mainly intended to " draw a red herring " across the trail of 
the Bishops. 

The Rev. Edgar Hoskins, now Rector of St. Martin's, 
Ludgate Hill, London, in seconding the motion, " thought 
it would be very disastrous for the Society to disband. 
What we have to stand up for is Eucharistic Truth, and 
freedom of Confession in the Church of England." 

The Rev. William Purton declared that, in his opinion, 
S. S. C. " was one of the outposts which we were bound to 
defend ; he thought it would be cowardly to disband." 

The Rev. W. J. Knox-Little (now Canon Knox-Little) 
" maintained that we must do what was right, and leave the 
result to God. Losing self-respect ! A dread of what would 
be said ! Fear of the laity ! All this must be put out of the 
question. • He was opposed to the mere withdrawal of terms; 80 
that, he believed, would be inadequate to meet the difficulty. 
Did the Synod (he asked) believe in the certainty of a 
Synodical condemnation ? Did we realize the force of such 
condemnation ? It would be impossible to remain in the 
Society after such a condemnation. What was S. S. C. 
that Catholic work should be given up for it ? To revise 

29 Who was this " well-known Oxford Professor " ? I am inclined to think 
he was Dr. Pusey, who had evidently been consulted by the Society, for at 
this Synod a letter was read from him on the question of revising the 

80 That is, to such "terms " as the " Mass," Ac., in the Statutes. 


the Statutes by the withdrawal of terms would not be to 
avert a Synodical condemnation. He would support the 
resolutions in favour of disbanding." 

These were brave words, coming from one who soon after 
withdrew from the Society, without waiting for any 
" Synodical condemnation." I have altered the wording of 
his speech, in accordance with his own corrections, as given 
in the October Chapter, p. i. 

At this point, Brother E. G. de Salis Wood obtained 
permission to bring forward his resolutions, as an amend- 
ment to the motion of Brother Hutchings. They are 
somewhat lengthy, but I think it maybe useful to quote them 
here in full, omitting only the last two clauses, as not of any 
importance. They reveal a plan for disbanding the Society, 
so far as the public knowledge of their proceedings went, 
while at the same time providing for its continuance under 
another name, by which scheme the general public would be 
led to suppose that it had ceased to exist altogether. The 
following were the resolutions (the italics are mine) : — 

I. That on and after the 15th day of September, 1877, the Society 
of the Holy Cross be disbanded, and that all its members be and they 
are hereby freed from all obligations imposed by the Society in respect 
to its Statutes, Laws, or Rules of Life (save and except the obligation oj 
confidence as regards past proceedings of Synods and Chapters and of 
this Synod), as well as from any formal bond of union or mutual 
obligations at present subsisting in virtue of Membership in the 

" II. (a.) That the Master, the Secretaries, the Treasurer, and two 
other Brethren chosen by them, shall be and are hereby constituted 
Trustees of the funds, papers, and other property of the Society, 
without power of disposition except as hereinafter provided. 

" (b.) That it be and is suggested to the said Trustees, that from 
time to time, at their discretion, they should invite to informal conference 
all whose names shall have been upon the Roll of the Society on the 14th 
September, 1877, as well as such other priests as they may choose . 31 

31 This was a plan for continuing the S. S. C. in existence under another 
name, together with power to add to their number. There was a great deal 
of subtlety in such a plan, which is more clearly developed in the next section. 


" (c.) That the Trustees shall have power to transfer the property 
of the Society to any other Society with similar objects and like consti- 
tution, which at any future time may be formed, if they shall receive 
the sanction expressed by a vote of the majority of those present and 
voting at such a Conference as is provided for in the foregoing section ; 
at least one month's notice having been given to all whose names 
were on the said 14th day of September on the Roll of the Society of 
the Holy Cross." 

In moving this resolution as an amendment the Rev. 
E. G. Wood said that " the Society had been rushed down 
hill into the midst of its foes, and was now surrounded, and 
in danger of being cut to pieces. There was nothing for it 
but to ' take open order,' to skirmish as it were for a time, to 
pass through our enemies and re-form in a stronger position. In 
other words, he counselled disbanding the Society, with the view 
of thereby escaping an Episcopal censure, and of reconstructing 
the Society under the same or a similar title, at as early a 
date as possible. This it was well known was the opinion 
of at least one Bishop who was friendly towards us. 32 .... 
The course he (Mr. Wood) advocated derived great support 
from consideration of the policy of the Apostolic See, when 
the Jesuit Order was suppressed by Clement XIV. — not 
because it had done wrong, but simply, as the Pope 
emphatically asserted, for the sake of the peace of the 
Church. And that was the ground on which he (the 
speaker) urged the disbanding of the S. S. C. . . . The 
Society, as appeared from the list of resignations the Master 
had read out, was rapidly bleeding to death." 

In thus comparing the Jesuits with the Society of the 
Holy Cross, Mr. Wood certainly used a most appropriate 
illustration. It is, however, a great pity that the authorities 
of the Church of England did not suppress the S. S. C, 
as Pope Clement XIV. did the Jesuit Order. Mr. Wood's 
amendment did not find favour with a section of the 

3S It would be interesting to know who the Bishop was, who thus played a 
double part, censuring the Society in public, and helping it on with a friendly 
lift in secret 1 


brethren in Synod, for no sooner had he concluded his 
speech than several of them raised the question, was the 
amendment in order ? The Master of the Society definitely 
ruled that it was ; but that did not satisfy the discontented 
brethren, who actually had the daring to challenge the 
Master's ruling. The Rev. H. D. Nihill moved, and the 
Rev. T. Outram Marshall seconded the following motion : — 
" That the ruling given by the Master was not correct." 
Of course, this was equivalent to a vote of censure, and an 
excited debate followed, in which Bishop Jenner took part. 
Eventually the Master triumphed, for only thirty-six voted 
for the resolution, while fifty-three voted against it. Mr. 
Wood's amendment was thereupon once more declared in 
order, and the general debate was continued. 

Canon George Body (now Canon Missioner of Durham) 
tl spoke strongly in favour of disbanding. He gave his 
reasons for having remained in S. S. C. under its altered 
circumstances. The Rule was a help to him. He desired 
to fight shoulder to shoulder with those who were fighting 
the same battle ; but now he thought that the work of the 
Society could not be continued without great injury to the 

The Rev. C. D. Goldie moved another amendment to the 
effect that the Society should assure the Bishops that the 
Council would "be anxious" to "consider any recommenda- 
tion which may be made by their lordships, and to coincide 
with any amendments which are in accordance with the 
teaching of the early Church, and the Formularies of our 

The Rev. Frederick William Puller (now head of the 
Cowley Fathers) supported Brother Goldie's amendment. 
He said that he was against disbanding, but " he admitted 
that it was possible that the wording of the Statutes might 
be improved, and he allowed the force of the arguments that 
they had been drafted under the idea that they would be 
seen only by those who would understand them." 


The Rev. William H. Colbeck Luke affirmed that he 
"would shelve the question of disbanding for the present." 

The Rev. A. H. Mackonochie declared that "for his own 
part (and many had expressed their agreement with him) he 
did not mean to be disbanded, but would hold on, with any 
who chose to join him, as the S. S. C, in spite of any vote 
for disbanding." 

The Rev. T. Outram Marshall, spoke against disbanding, 
and then went on to make a very startling announcement. 
He declared that, " There were five or six Bishops who wished 
us well, and who would be glad to do all in their power to prevent 
the Upper House of Convocation from condemning the Society." zz 
Mr. Marshall proceeded, with an astuteness which would 
have done credit to the General of the Jesuits, to point out 
that, " They would be able to lay great stress on the fact 
that the Statutes were under consideration ; they [the ' five or 
six Bishops '] wanted to stand by us, and we should thus enable 
them to do so. f the Archbishop of Canterbury found that 
the Bishops were divided, he would probably shrink from 
pressing the matter ; and so this storm, like many others, 
would pass away." 

In this Mr. Marshall was a true prophet. The Statutes 
were revised ; but rejected by the Society afterwards ; the 
Archbishop did not press the matter; the storm passed 
away, and the Society went on its way rejoicing, mainly, 
I have no doubt, through the treachery of these five or six 

The Rev. Arthur Hawkins Ward, Vicar of St. Raphael, 
Bristol, informed the Synod that " he had come most 
reluctantly to the conclusion that we must, for a time, 
disband. Unless we did so the censure of the entire 
Episcopate would come upon us." 

Archdeacon Denison spoke next. He asked, "What 

85 What hypocrites these "five or six Bishops" must have been! They 
succeeded in their underhand proceedings, for the dreaded censure of the 
Upper House did not take place. 


advantage could there be in disbanding ? We should part 
with some of the most precious things we possessed, and 
should gain nothing. He had turned towards that Society, 
believing that the brethren, at any rate, would stand firm. 
As to a Synodical condemnation, he laughed at it ! On the 
vote of this Synod, he believed, hung the hope of the Catholic 
Church of England. We had heard very much about Episcopal 
condemnation, but such a condemnation would be based 
upon Protestant principles. Our attitude should be, 'You 
shall kill me, if you choose, but you shall not stop me.' " 

After some further discussion, Brother Goldie withdrew 
his amendment. Brother Wood's amendment for disbanding 
was then put, and was lost by a great majority, only nine 
voting for it, and sixty-seven against it. At last Brother 
Hutchings's original motion, in favour of a Committee to revise 
the Statutes, was put to the Synod, and was carried, forty-one 
voting for it, and twenty against it. 

On the second day of the Synod an important debate took 
place on the Priest in Absolution. The Rev. Orby Shipley 
(who is now a Roman Catholic) opened the discussion by 
moving the following very startling resolution : — 

"That, in consequence of the evil effects which have ensued 
from the private circulation of the Priest in Ah solution, the bad use 
made of its contents, and the false charges founded upon garbled 
quotations, it is due both to the memory of its compiler, and to the 
character of its owners, that the work be published in the ordinary 
course of trade, and this Synod hereby authorises the same." 

Of course this resolution was equivalent to flinging defiance 
at the Bishops, and at all the opponents of that filthy 
book. Brother Shipley " declared, emphatically, that 
the book was pure and holy. Publicity, he held, was now 
the only safeguard for our personal character against the 
evil which had been done by its private circulation. . . 
He protested against the action of those brethren who had 
publicly condemned the book, which they admitted they had 
never read." 


The Rev. H. D. Nihill seconded the resolution, and said that 
"the most miserable circumstance about the question was the 
condemnation of the book by those who had not read it." 

The Rev. W. C. Macfarlane moved and Brother Goldie 
seconded as an amendment — " That all the words after 
1 That ' be omitted, in order to insert the following ' inasmuch 
as the book called the Priest in Absolution has been 
withdrawn from circulation, the copies in possession of the 
Society be at the disposal of the Master/ M 

The Rev. Joseph Newton Smith " opposed the publication 
of the book ; he could not see how we should mend matters 
by increasing the opportunities of unprincipled people to sin 
by sowing the book broadcast." 

What an acknowledgment this was, to be made by no less 
a person than the Founder of the Society of the Holy Cross ! 
A more severe, though, apparently, unintentional, condemna- 
tion of the Priest in A bsolution, could not have been passed by 
any Protestant Churchman. To circulate the book publicly 
would, in his estimation, " increase the opportunities " of 
committing sin in the world, and thus do the work of Satan 
more effectually. Those whose painful duty it has been to 
read its dirty pages, as I have, will quite agree with Brother 
Newton Smith, who does not, however, appear to have 
condemned the book itself. If the book would have had 
such an evil effect on the general public, is there not reason 
to fear that it may have already had an evil effect on some 
of the young bachelor Father Confessors who have already 
studied it, and who are made of the same flesh and blood as 
other mortals ? 

The Rev. W. J. Knox-Little delivered a speech on the 
subject, which I report as corrected by himself later on in 
the report of the October, 1877, Chapter of the Society. 
He said that " circumstances had compelled him to speak of 
the book in public. He had not seen the book, and therefore 
he acted upon the descriptions of it which he had seen and 
heard, by those able to speak accurately on the subject. He 


defended the general principle of the book, but deprecated 
the extracts, of which an unwarrantable use had been made. 
At the same time he acknowledged his disapproval of it as 
a work on moral theology, and he by no means repented of 
what he had said. With regard to the motion he argued 
that it would be hardly honourable to publish the book in 
the face of Convocation." 

The Rev. A. H. Mackonochie "thought the book a most 
useful one for young priests, and expressed a hope that it 
might be circulated again at some future time." He 
supported the motion. 

The Rev. Charles Parnell, Curate of St. Bartholomew, 
Brighton, " opposed the publication of the book " ; and the 
Rev. Charles Stebbing Wallace "urged that, as men of 
honour, we had no right to publish the book." 

The Master, in reply to a question, explained that " the 
amendment meant that the book should be destroyed 
privately, without casting any stigma upon the author. He 
maintained that, as honourable men, we could never put the 
book out again." 

The Rev. T. Outram Marshall " opposed both the destruc- 
tion and the publication of the book." 

The Rev. R. Rhodes Bristow supported the amendment. 
" If the book were published, it would be prosecuted, he said, as 
an obscene book. We did not want the book. Dr. Pusey 
was bringing out a work on Moral Theology. He would 
therefore instruct the Master to deal with the book as with 
waste paper." 

The book of Dr. Pusey, referred to by Mr. Bristow, was 
in reality only another adapted translation of the same book 
from which the Priest in A bsolution was translated, namely, 
the Abb6 Gaume's Manual for Confessors. Dr. Pusey's 
translation was published early in 1878. 

At last the debate ended. The question was then put, 
" That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the 
question." This was carried by thirty-four to eight. The 


amendment was therefore lost. The original motion was 
then put. Twelve voted for it, and thirty-one against ; and 
therefore it was lost. 

The Society would neither publish nor destroy the book. 
I learn from the official report of this Synod that the 
Society received several messages of sympathy with the 
brethren for what they had suffered under the attack 
upon them for their connection with the Priest in Absolu- 
tion. One message was from the " Church of England 
Working Men's Society " ; another from the Bristol Branch 
of the English Church Union ; and a similar one from 
the Penrith Branch of the Union ; and two other resolu- 
tions of sympathy were received from the London Province 
of the Guild of St. Alban's and the Wolverhampton Branch 
of the same Guild. Several other branches of the English 
Church Union sent, later on, similar resolutions. At the 
October Chapter, a letter was read from the Rev. Richard 
Whitehead Hoare, Vicar of St. Michael's, Croydon, 
" enclosing a letter expressing the sympathy and goodwill 
which the Bishop of Grahamstown felt towards S. S. C." 34, 

The action of this Synod led, eventually, to the resignation 
of the Master of the Society (the Rev. F. L. Bagshawe). 
At the October Chapter a long letter was read from him, in 
which he complained bitterly of the way in which he had 
been treated by the Society. His first thought had been, he 
said, to resign at once, immediately after the Synod, on the 
ground that his policy had been " distinctly negatived " by 
the Synod. " I asked leave," he wrote, " to destroy privately 
the copies of the Priest in A bsolution, on the ground that we 
were bound in honour never to circulate that book again " ; 
but the Synod refused to grant his request. He would not, 
however, resign at that time, lest it should hinder the success 
of the efforts being made to revise the Statutes " Negotia- 
tions of a private kind," he added, "have been already 
opened with several Bishops ; but if these fail, either on 

84 S.S. C. October Chapter, 1877, p. 2. 


your part or on theirs, and the work of the Committee is 
rendered fruitless, I have but one course open to me " — that 
is to ask them " to elect another Master who can carry 
out the policy of resistance " to the Bishops. 

A letter such as this must indeed have been a bombshell 
in the Society, and have added greatly to the difficulties of 
its position. Before the Chapter concluded its sittings it 
passed unanimously a resolution expressing their "continued 
and complete confidence " in the Master, and a hope that he 
would not resign. 

Several months passed by without anything being definitely 
done by the Society of the Holy Cross with regard to their 
Confessional book. But meanwhile the Committee appointed 
to revise the Statutes of the Society were hard at work. 
The Committee consisted of the following seventeen 
members, all of whom signed its report, presented to the 
May, 1878, Synod : — The Revs. F. LI. Bagshawe (the 
Master), C. F. Lowder, John Andrews Foote, Edgar 
Hoskins, T. T. Carter (of Clewer), G. R. Prynne (Vicar of 
St. Peter's, Plymouth), Henry Edward Willington, William 
Henry Hutchings, L. Alison, R. Rhodes Bristow, J. W. 
Chadwick, Charles Bodington (now Canon of Lichfield), 
R. J. Wilson, Charles D. Goldie, Frederick William Puller, 
R. H. Parry, and George Body. At the April, 1878, 
Chapter of the Society, it was announced that the Com- 
mittee of Revision had " communicated the Report (without 
any signature of Members attached)^ to the following Bishops — 
London, Winchester, Oxford, Ely, Lichfield, Peterborough, 
Exeter, and Chichester, but that no copies of the Report have been 
supplied to the two Archbishops"™ This significant omission 
of the Archbishops, shows that the Committee were either 
afraid of their knowing too much of their proceedings, or was 
an intentional insult to their Graces. Perhaps it was both. 

85 This shows how afraid they were to be known to the Bishops. Their 
Report, as presented to the May, 1878, Synod, does contain all the names 
of the Members of the Committee mentioned above. 

36 5. 5. C. April Chapter, 1878, p. 3. For a complete list of the Members of 
this secret Society up to the year 1897, see Church Association Tract, No. 244, 
price one penny. 


And why, it may be asked, was not the Report sent to all 
the Bishops of the southern and northern provinces ? 
Those in the north were left out altogether, while only eight 
Bishops in the southern province, out of twenty-two, received 
a copy of the document. I can only account for the 
omission by the dread of publicity and the light of day, 
which has ever characterised the owl-like proceedings of the 
Society of the Holy Cross. 

When the May, 1878, Synod of the S. S. C. met, the 
Master's address was entirely taken up with the recent 
attack on the Society, and the revision of its Statutes. 
He mentioned that in 1877, the Society numbered exactly 
three hundred members, but that during the past year 
their had been no fewer than 122 resignations. He found, 
however, one consolation in the fact that the Society 
had " been honoured by the addition to its ranks of one 
of the most distinguished members of the Church of 
England, the Ven. Archdeacon Denison." 37 It is evident 
that the Master had a higher personal sense of honourable 
conduct than the Society as a whole possessed. He said, 
in the course of his address : — 

" I pass on to another question that will be brought before you, 
simply because it involves what is personal to me. At a Special 
Chapter of the Society last year a printed letter was drawn up and 
sent to the Bishops, in which it was promised that the Priest in 
Absolution should not be circulated. The language was somewhat 
ambiguous. I thought I understood it, and assured the Archbishop 
and others that the book was absolutely and for ever withdrawn. 
Last September Synod I discovered that some brethren looked 
forward to its re-circulation at some future time. Hitherto the book 
has been in my care — now it will cease to be so. If the Society 
resolves to preserve the book it must be with a motive, and how that 
motive can be reconciled with my personal representation to the 
Bishops will be a difficult question for my own after-consideration." 38 

The sermon to the brethren at this Synod was preached 

s ? S. S. C. Master's Address, May Synod, 1878, p. 7. 
18 Ibid., pp. 5, 6. 


by the Rev. Canon Carter, of Clewer, but as I do not 
possess a copy I am unable to quote it here. The Report 
of Committee appointed to consider the form of the Society's 
Statutes, I fortunately possess. The suggested alterations 
were twenty-six in number, and mainly consisted of the 
omission of the words " Mass," " Sacrament of Penance," 
and " Sacramental Confession " from the Statutes and 
Office Books of the Society. The report shows that four 
members of the Committee, not included in the list given 
above, refused to sign the report. The Rev. John Comper, 
Rector of St. Margaret's, Aberdeen, it is stated, was 
"opposed to such suggested alterations as would involve 
the removal of the terms ' Mass ' and ' Sacrament of 
Penance ' from the Statutes and Rules of the Society.' 
The Revs. A. H. Mackonochie, H. D. Nihill, and J. W. 
Biscoe, were "opposed to all the alterations suggested." 39 

Now, although this Committee were quite willing to delete 
the terms " Mass " and " Sacrament of Penance " from the 
documents of the Society, it is quite clear from their report 
that they saw no harm in them, and therefore they retained 
the things represented by these terms, while rejecting the 
names for politic reasons. As to the term " Mass," they 
declared that it " can be most legitimately used by English 
Churchmen at the present day, so only that scandal to the 
ignorant be avoided." 40 They also justified the use of the 
term " Sacramental Confession " ; 41 and, as to the other 
expression they affirm that " the members of S. S. C. were 
in no way going beyond what the Church of England 
permits, when they spoke in their Statutes of the ' Sacra- 
ment of Penance,' that sacred rite which seals and completes 
the work of penitence for post-baptismal deadly sin." 42 It is, 
therefore, quite certain that this precious Report in reality 
withdrew nothing but empty names, and was primarily 
intended for the purpose of throwing more dust in the eyes 

89 Report of Committee, p. 16. 40 Ibid., p. 5. 

41 Ibid., p. 11. 42 Ibid., p. 11. 


of the Bishops. It was worthy of a conclave of Jesuits 
rather than of a committee of clergymen within the 
Reformed Church of England. 

At the commencement of the Synod letters were read 
from Archdeacon Denison, and the Revs. Robert Herbert 
Godwin (of St. Cyprian's Theological College, Bloemfontein), 
G. P. Grantham, and William Webster (subsequently Dean 
of Aberdeen) " deprecating the suggested changes in the 
Statutes," and from the Revs. George Croke Robinson and 
Arthur Gordon Stallard (" suggesting amendments to certain 
of the proposed changes "); and from Charles John Corfe (now 
Bishop of Corea), who " advocated the suggested changes." 

The Master rose to propose the following motion : — 
" That the Report of the Committee appointed to consider 
the Society's Statutes be received and adopted " ; and was 
about to speak to it, when the Rev. T. Outram Marshall 
rose and declared that, in his opinion the motion was out of 
order. Of course this raised a discussion at once. The 
Master ruled that his own motion was " strictly in order " ; 
but this did not satisfy the rebellious Organizing Secretary 
of the English Church Union (Mr. Marshall), who at once 
moved " That the ruling given by the Master is not correct." 
He found a seconder in the Rev. Lyndhurst Burton 
Towne, but the Master refused to put the rebel motion to 
the Synod, whereupon the discontented brethren had to 
" eat humble pie," and sit down. 

The Master then delivered the speech he had prepared in 
support of his own motion. 

The Rev. R. Rhodes Bristow seconded the Master's 
motion, and announced that " The Committee, while con- 
vinced that the Statutes contained nothing but sound 
doctrine, had sought the peace and unity of the Society by 
suggesting the changes in our terminology. . . Some might 
say that we were drawing back, but it was in order that we 
might strike a harder blow." 

The Rev. A. H. Mackonochie complained of one of the 


brethren, whose name does not appear to have been men- 
tioned. u He asserted that the Society had been betrayed 
by one brother, who left the Society as soon as he got 
it into difficulties." 

The Rev. John Edwards (now the Rev. J. Baghot De La 
Bere, Vicar of St. Mary, Buxted) " advocated the use of the 
terminology in the Statutes. The term ' Sacrament of 
Penance/ he maintained, was not only theologically correct, 
but expressed the intercourse which existed between a priest 
and a penitent." 

The Rev. John William Kempe said that "to speak only of 
the one word ' Mass,' eternity alone will tell how grievously 
sacramental and supernatural life in England has suffered, 
from the disuse of this venerable term." He moved as an 
amendment that the Synod, while thanking the Committee 
for their labours, " declines to admit any of their recom- 

The Rev. Charles Bodington pointed out that "neither 
our teaching nor our practice would be altered by the 
adoption of the suggested changes of terminology." 

Bishop Jenner, " as the only Episcopal brother present, 
appealed to the Synod for conciliation." 

When the voting took place, fifty-one voted for the 
Master's motion, and fifty-eight against it. The motion 
was therefore declared lost. The Society refused to adopt 
the revised Statutes, and consequently reverted to the old 
Statutes. The amendment of Brother J. W. Kempe was 
then put, and was carried, fifty-seven voting for it, and 
fifty-one against. It is evident from the voting that the 
Society of the Holy Cross was very closely divided on the 
subject of revision. 

On the second day of the Synod a very important protest 
was read by Brother Mackonochie. It was as follows : — 

" We, the undersigned Brethren and Probationers of the Society of 
the Holy Cross, being, as members of that Society, part proprietors 
of a certain property consisting of a number of copies of the Priest 


in Absolution, do hereby refuse and withhold our consent to the 
destruction of that property j and we do hereby protest against any 
discussion upon the question of destroying that property in this 
Synod, on the ground that such destruction, without the consent 
of us as part proprietors, would be an illegal act." 

This protest was signed by Archdeacon Denison, the 
Revs. John Edwards (now Baghot De La Bere), A. H. 
Mackonochie, Arthur Henry Stanton, H. D. Nihill, Charles 
Parnell, John Comper, Thomas Isaac Ball, William Moore 
Richardson (now Bishop of Zanzibar), John Barnes Johnson 
(Vicar of St. Mary, Edmonton), James Hipwell, Edward 
Heath, George Musgrave Custance (Rector of Colwall, 
Malvern), — Collins, Cecil Wray, and William Crouch 
(Vicar of Gamlingay). 

The friends of the Priest in Absolution were determined, 
if possible, to stop discussion. They objected to the 
following motion being put to the Synod, but which had 
appeared on the Agenda paper :-— 

"That, inasmuch as the book called the Priest in Absolution had' 
been withdrawn from circulation, the copies remaining in the Master's 
hands be destroyed." 

So, before this resolution was brought forward, Brother 
Mackonochie moved " That the resolution on the Agenda 
paper is not in order." 

This last motion was immediately put to the vote, and 
lost, sixteen voting for it, and twenty-three against. 

Brother Macfarlane then moved the motion which had 
been placed on the Agenda paper; but he was careful to 
explain that "the book itself needed no commendation; 
the motion was quite irrespective of the merits of the book. 
A pledge had been given to the Bishops, and we were bound 
to redeem it." 

The Rev. William Crouch, however, was of a different 
mind. He boldly declared that " to redeem the pledge to 
the Bishops would be to break the Eighth Commandment. " 

The Rev. Frederick William Puller " thought that this 


was hardly the occasion for destroying it, but he thought 
at some future time we might destroy it as lumber." 

The Rev. C. D. Goldie said that " we needed such a book 
as the Priest in A bsolution. 

The Rev. William John Frere (Principal of Hockering 
Training College, Bishops Stortford) " quoted Brother 
Bodington's opinion as to the value of the book. He 
thought that we might put forth another book on Con- 
fession, and remarked that Dr. Pusey's work does not 
touch upon the Seventh Commandment." 

The Rev. Robert Eyton (now Canon of Westminster) 
" said that we were not called upon to give up our private 
copies of the book." He would support the motion. 

The Rev. H. D. Nihill informed the Synod that "he 
burnt all bad literature; he was not ashamed of the 
Priest in A bsolution,** 

Brother Macfarlane's motion was put to the Synod, and 
lost by a very large majority, forty-nine voting against it, 
and only eleven for it. After a great deal of discussion the 
following amendment was passed as a substantive motion, 
by thirty-four to eight : — 

" That this Synod is not in favour of the destruction of 
the remaining copies of the Priest in Absolution at the 
present time." 

What the Society of the Holy Cross has done, in its 
corporate capacity, with reference to the Priest in A bsolution , 
since the Synod whose secret proceedings I have just 
described, is more than I can say, but I have reason to believe 
that it still retains possession of the book. So careful 
have the members of the S. S. C. been to keep their under- 
ground proceedings from the knowledge of the general 
public, that it was not until eighteen years had passed by, 
after the celebrated exposure of 1877, that any Protestant 
Churchman was able to see a single secret document of the 
Society connected with that important event in its history. 
I have reported the Society's secret proceedings, and the 


speeches delivered at its meetings, at considerable length, for 
what I believe to be sufficient reasons. There is no other 
way in which the general public can be made acquainted with 
what is going on underneath the surface. Secrecy cannot 
be defeated except by publicity. And it is important that 
the public shall know that many of the men whose secret 
utterances I have here reported, have since been promoted 
to high positions in the Church, possibly because their real 
sentiments were unknown to those in whose hands the higher 
patronage of the Church has been placed. I have no doubt 
they will be very much annoyed at being thus shown in their 
true colours, nor is there any doubt that they will bitterly 
denounce me for dragging their secret speeches out into 
the light of day. But it cannot be helped. Certainly the 
Society of the Holy Cross, as a Society — whatever may be 
said in favour of individuals — does not come out with much 
credit to itself. Its underhand dodgery and Jesuitical tactics 
deserve the contempt of all men who love straightforward 
dealing. Its filthy Confessional book has never been con- 
demned by the Society as a whole, though a few of its 
members have written and spoken against it. On the 
contrary, the Society seems to glory in what many will 
consider its shame. Individual members of the Society 
found themselves, in the latter part of 1877, * n many 
instances subject to a great deal of unpleasant criticism from 
their Protestant parishioners. Some of them put a bold face 
on the matter, while others published apologies for their 
conduct. As a rule, these were so worded as to commend 
the Society of the Holy Cross, instead of condemning it, and 
at the same time to represent themselves as the victims of 
unmerited censure. One of the most remarkable of these 
apologies was that issued by the Rev. John Erskine Binney, 
at that time Vicar of Summerstown, near Oxford. His 
parish was, immediately after Lord Redesdale's exposure, 
placarded with an address to the people, in which it was 
mentioned that the Vicar was a member of the Society 



of the Holy Cross. Mr. Binney did not, in his reply to the 
placard, deny the charge, nor did he in any way censure the 
Priest in Absolution; but he declared that he had "too much 
confidence " in the " good sense " of his people to suppose 
that the placard would " in any way affect " their " mutual 
relations as Pastor and Flock." 

"The chief intent of the placard," he continued, "seems to be to 
reflect on a certain book called the Priest in Absolution, and it 
chooses to assume that this work is . the text-book of the Clergy 
whose names are mentioned, in some of their most important 
ministerial relations with their parishioners. Now it may be well for 
me to say most distinctly that, though I glory in being a member of the 
Society of the Holy Cross, because I know that in its twenty-five 
[sic] years of existence it has done more, under God, to raise the 
personal tone of the parochial Clergy than any other institution, yet 
that I do not know the work in question, nor do I wish to know it." 

This document was dated June 22nd, 1877, an d although 
at that time Mr. Binney gloried in being a member of the 
Society of the Holy Cross, yet when the next secret list of 
its members appeared his name was withdrawn. 

I believe that all loyal members of the Church of England 
will endorse the opinion of the late Dr. Harvey Goodwin, 
Bishop of Carlisle, who, writing to a member of the Society 
of the Holy Cross, on December 29th, 1877, emphatically 
declared that, " It [S. S. C] has created a scandal in the 
Church of almost unparalled magnitude, and it seems to me 
that the only right course for wise and loyal Churchmen is 
to wash their hands of it." 43 

48 S. S. C. Copy of Correspondence, p. 2. 



Origin of Order of Corporate Reunion shrouded in mystery — Its first 
" Pastoral " — It professes " loyalty " to the Pope — Prays for the Pope in 
its secret Synod — Its Bishops secretly consecrated by foreign Bishops — 
Who were they ? — " Bishop " Lee and " Bishop " Mossman — " Bishop " 
Mossman professes belief in the Pope's Infallibility — Birth of the Order 
rejoices the Romanists — Its proceedings discussed by the Society of the 
Holy Cross — Some secret documents— Eight hundred Church of England 
clergy secretly ordained by a Bishop of the Order. 

THE Order of Corporate Reunion is even more secret 
and mysterious than the Society of the Holy Cross, 
and what is more serious, it is more unblushingly 
Popish, going to the length of acknowledging the Pope as 
the lawful Head of the whole visible Church on earth. It 
does not, however, advocate individual secession to Rome, 
but acts on the lines which the late Rev. Dr. Littledale laid 
down for the Ritualists many years since. That gentleman, 
in a lecture on " Secession to Rome," which he delivered 
at Ipswich and Norwich, referring to those who had 
already seceded to Rome, remarked : — 

" They go (over to Rome) to get something which they cannot get, 
do not get, or what often comes to the same thing, think they cannot 
get, in the English Church. When once they have got this notion 
fairly into their heads, all the No-Popery tracts and lectures in 
England will not keep them back. The real cure is to give them here 
what they are going to look for ; and if they get all they want from 
us, you may be very sure few of them will take the trouble to go 
further. Now, this is what the Tractarians, as they are called, 
are trying to do, and it is for this that they are so heartily abused 

10 * 


every day of their lives by persons who do not understand what they 
want." l 

Dr. Littledale contented himself with supplying the rank 
and file of the Ritualists, in the Church of England, with 
the Romish doctrines and ritual for which they craved. It 
is true that he wrote a well-known book, entitled Plain 
Reasons Against Joining the Church of Rome, but in that work 
he did not bring forward what he evidently considered the 
strongest argument to prevent people going over to Rome. 
He supplied that argument in the lecture just cited, and acted 
upon it in his Priest's Prayer Book, of which he was joint 
editor with the Rev. J. E. Vaux. In that book will be found a 
large collection of the most superstitious of Romish practices, 
together with most of the peculiar doctrines of the Church 
of Rome. But the Order of Corporate Reunion goes 
further than Dr. Littledale. It professes to supply not only 
Popish doctrines, but also Orders and Sacraments such as 
even the Church of Rome must admit to be valid, though 
she refuses to acknowledge those of the Church of England. 
It has Bishops secretly consecrated, and these are prepared 
to give conditional re-ordination to such of the clergy of 
the Church of England as may choose to submit to the 
process. It admits the laity of both sexes to its ranks, 
and these are, as a general rule — with possibly a few 
exceptions — conditionally re-baptized when they join the 
Order. These laymen and women being in the secret, no 
doubt know where to go to in order to receive valid Sacra- 
ments. It is stated that no one is admitted to the^ Order 
but bond-fide members of the Church of England. As a 
matter of fact several of its officials have seceded to Rome. 

The actual origin of the Order of Corporate Reunion 
is shrouded in mystery. Its rulers made known to the 
public the existence of the Order during the summer of 
1877, but it appears to have been organized, more or less 

1 Defence of Church Principles, " Secessions to Rome," by the Rev. Dr.R. F. 
Littledale, p. 4. 


imperfectly, about a year before that date, and even at 
that early period to have been known to a trusted few on 
the Continent, as well as at home. 2 It held a secret 
Synod, in London, on July 2nd, 1877, at which a " Pastoral " 
of the Rulers was approved, which had been previously 
drawn up. A copy of this document was subsequently 
written out, and taken abroad, where it was attested by 
a foreign Roman Catholic Notary, named " Adrian De 
Helte," to be a true copy, and as such signed by him on 
August 15th. The Pastoral was formally promulgated by 
being read on September 8th, in the presence of witnesses 
whose names have not been made public, on the steps at 
the west end of St. Paul's Cathedral, and in other places 
throughout the land. 3 This Pastoral was also printed in 
the Reunion Magazine, an official periodical issued by the 
Order, but which was withdrawn from circulation about 
a year after its commencement. It is too lengthy a 
document to reprint here in full, and therefore I must 
confine myself to a few extracts. It commences thus : — 

" In the Sacred Name of the Most Holy Undivided and Adorable 
Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Amen. 

" Thomas, by the favour of God, Rector of the Order of Corporate 
Reunion, and Pro- Provincial of Canterbury ; Joseph, by the favour of 
God, Provincial of York, in the Kingdom of England 5 and Laurence, 
by the favour of God, Provincial of Caerleon, in the Principality of 
Wales, with the Provosts and Members of the Synod of the Order, 
to the Faithful in Christ Jesus, whom these Presents may concern ; 
Health and Benediction in the Lord God everlasting." 

The Pastoral proceeds to deplore " the evil state into 
which the National Church of England has been brought by 
departure from ancient principles and by recent events " ; 
and it positively asserts, as " certain " that " all semblance 
of independent existence and corporate action has departed 
from the Established Church." A brief history of the 
Church of England to the present day is then given, in the 

2 Reunion Magazine, p. XI. 3 Ibid., p. 11. 


course of which it is affirmed that the Act of Submission of 
the Clergy, in the reign of Henry VIII., " is the root of all 
our existing evils and miseries." The reign of Edward VI., 
the Protestant King, is described as "a period of wild 
confusion," while that of the Romanist, Queen Mary, is 
referred to as one " of Catholic reaction." The glorious 
Revolution of 1688 comes in for a measure of abuse, and it 
is declared that after "the riot, blasphemy, and general 
wickedness of the Great Rebellion, the Revolution of 1688 
was the beginning of yet more serious trouble for the 
Established Church." Coming down to our own day, it 
affirmed that " every vestige of distinct corporate entity has 
utterly disappeared from the Church." Against these and a 
host of other real or imaginary evils the Order of Corporate 
Reunion raises its protesting voice. It protests, in particular, 
"against the disuse of Chrism in Confirmation, and the 
inadequate form for the administration of that Sacrament 
now in use within the Church of England ; as well as against 
the total abolition of the Apostolic practice of Anointing the 
Sick with Oil — by which every baptized person is curtailed 
in his spiritual privileges, and robbed at the hour of death of 
an important part of his rightful heritage. Many persons," 
continues the Pastoral, " have lamented the loss of this 
last-named Sacrament : We, by the favour of God, are now 
enabled to restore it." 

Next, the Pastoral grumbles at the School Boards, and the 
existing relations of Church and State; and at last announces 
the remedy which the Order has provided for all the " evils " 
which trouble their minds. "We affirm," they triumphantly 
declare, " that in the Providence of God, the evil itself has 
opened the door to a remedy. For the Bishops of the 
Church of England, having yielded up all canonical authority 
and jurisdiction in the spiritual order, can neither interfere 
with, nor restrain, Us in Our work of recovering from 
elsewhere that which has been forfeited or lost — securing 
three distinct and independent lines of a new Episcopal Succession, 


so as to labour corporately, and on no sandy foundation, 
for the healing of the breach which has been made." 

Here is their grand remedy for everything. The Orders 
and Sacraments conferred in the Church of England are, 
in their opinion, open to grave and serious doubt ; but now, 
" three distinct lines of a new Episcopal succession," have 
been secured by the Bishops of the Order of Corporate 
Reunion — though they carefully abstain from mentioning 
their source, or by whom they were conferred — who are 
thus able to remedy all defects in the Church of England, 
in the hope of eventually securing that Corporate Reunion 
with the rest of Christendom, which it is their " chief aim " 
to secure. Of course they think it necessary to make known 
the doctrinal basis on which the new Order is built. 

" In thus associating ourselves together," says the Pastoral, H we 
solemnly take as the basis of this Our Order the Catholic Faith as 
denned by the Seven General Councils, acknowledged as such by the 
whole Church of the East and the West before the great and deplor- 
able schism, and as commonly received in the Apostles' Creed, and 
the Creed of Nicaea, and the Creed of St. Athanasius. To all the 
sublime doctrines so laid down, We declare our unreserved adhesion, 
as well as to the principles of Church constitution and discipline, set 
forth and approved by the said Seven General Councils. Further- 
more, until the whole Church shall speak on the subject, We accept 
all those dogmatic statements set forth in common by the Council of 
Trent and the Synod of Bethlehem respectively, with regard to 
the doctrine of the Sacraments. . . 

"Thanking Almighty God most humbly for the restoration of 
Brotherhoods, Sisterhoods, and Guilds, We solemnly affirm that the 
Monastic Life, duly regulated according to the laws of the Catholic 
Church, is a most salutary institution, in perfect harmony with the 
spirit of the Gospel ; and is full of profit to those who, being care- 
fully tried and examined, make full proof of their calling thereto. 
Our services will always be at the disposal of such — upon whom We 
invoke the Divine blessing." 4 

The thought which naturally suggests itself to a loyal 
Churchman on reading this Pastoral for the first time, is 

4 Reunion Magazine, pp. 88-98. 


one of astonishment, that men who thus doubt the validity 
of the Orders and Sacraments of the Church of England, 
should, notwithstanding, continue to act as her Ministers, 
or in any way remain within her communion as members 
of such a Church. How they reconcile their conduct with 
their Ordination vows is a puzzle hard, indeed, to unravel, 
except on a theory very little to their credit. When it 
becomes lawful to do evil that good may come, then, and 
not till then, can their conduct be justified. The real 
object of such a policy is, of course, to bring not only 
themselves, but the whole Church of England with them, 
back to the Pope — and this is what they mean by "Corporate 
Reunion," as distinguished from individual secession. The 
same policy was set forth as far back as 1867, in the columns 
of the Union Review, by a Ritualist, in the form of a letter 
to a foreign Roman Catholic. 

"With such a position,' wrote the Ritualist, "it is surely, I say, 
much better for us to remain working where we are — for what would 
become of England if we were to leave her Church ? She would be 
simply lost to Catholicism, and won to Rationalism. . . . Depend 
upon it, it is only through the English Church itself that England can 
be Catholicised j . . . and so long as the Church of England remains 
what she is, to join you [Rome] in any but a corporate capacity would 
be, in our view, to sin against the truth." 6 

The utter disloyalty of this secret Order of Corporate 
Reunion to the Church of England, and its real loyalty to 
the Pope of Rome, is more clearly revealed to us by a 
glimpse at its first Synod, afforded to us by no less a person 
than a high official in the Order itself, viz., " Laurentius, 
O.C.R., Provincial of Caerleon." This official states 
that :— 

" It is quite true that we [O. C. R.] do not assume an attitude of 
independence towards the Holy See. We frankly acknowledge that, 
in the Providence of God, the Roman Pontiff is the Jirst Bishop in the 
Church, and, therefore, its visible head on earth. We do not 

5 Union Review, Volume for 1867, p. 410. 


believe that either the Emperor of Russia or the Queen of England is 
the head of the Church. As the Church must have some executive 
head, and as there is no other competitor, we believe the Pope to be 
that head. But he is more to us than this, for he is our Patriarch as 
well. So that we admit his claim to the veneration and LOYALTY of 
all baptized men, and in a special degree of all Western Christians, 
and in these capacities we prayed for him in our Constituent 
Synod." 6 

Probably the authorities of the Order of Corporate 
Reunion think they can best show their " loyalty " to the 
Pope by acting a double part. Ordinary people, however, 
will think that they are traitors in the camp, and that the 
sooner they are drummed out of it the better. 

There has been a good deal of conjecture as to the 
identity of the men whose names appear at the head of the 
Pastoral. Who are "Thomas," Pro- Provincial of Canter- 
bury; "Joseph," Provincial of York; and "Laurence," 
Provincial of Caerleon ? We can only answer this question 
from indirect sources of information. The first guess at their 
identity appears to have been made by the Rev. W. Allen 
Whitworth, a Ritualistic clergyman opposed to the Order, 
who, in a long letter to the Church Review, December 28th, 
1878, affirmed that the Rev. F. G. Lee, Vicar of All Saints', 
Lambeth, was one of the three Bishops of the Order of 
Corporate Reunion ; and he distinctly terms him " Bishop 
F. G. Lee " ; and he refers to " the Roman, Greek, and 
Armenian Bishops who joined together, secretly to con- 
secrate Dr. F. G. Lee and his colleagues." 7 A lay official of 
the Order of .Corporate Reunion, a Mr. William Grant, who 
is referred to in the Reunion Magazine as " Registrar " of the 
Order, published in pamphlet form a reply to Mr. Whit- 
worth's attack. 8 Mr. Grant denies many of Mr. Whitworth's 
assertions, but he does not deny that Dr. Lee was a Bishop 

• Reunion Magazine, p. 242. 
1 Church, Review, December 28th, 1878, p. 623. 

8 Is the Order of Corporate Reunion Schismatical ? by William Grant. London : 
D. Nutt. 


of the O. C. R., or that he and his colleagues were secretly 
consecrated Bishops by three " Roman, Greek, and Armenian 
Bishops." There can be no doubt that he would have 
denied these statements also had they been false, and as 
" Registrar " of the Order he must have been fully acquainted 
with the facts of the case. The next attempt to identify the 
three mysterious Bishops of the O. C. R. was made by the 
Whitehall Review, early in 1879. That paper published the 
following paragraph : — 

" The three Anglican clerics who have obtained Episcopal consecra- 
tion from the Dutch Jansenists, for the purpose of ' revalidating ' the 
Orders of clergymen having doubts about their priesthood, are 
singularly modest in their signatures. The ' Rector Provincial, 
Canterbury ' is ■ >J< Thomas/ the ' Provincial of Caerleon ' is 
' >J< Laurence,' the ' Provincial of York ' is * >J< Joseph.' Might I 
suggest that * Thomas ' sign for the future, ' >J< Frederick George 
Lee ' ; Bishop ' Laurence,' ' >J< Joseph Leycester Lyne ' ; and Bishop 
' Joseph,' ' >J< Thomas W. Mossman ' ! Perhaps Bishop ' Laurence ' 
might prefer to call himself ' >J< Ignatius ' ; if so, one would not 
object, as it would give a better idea of his real name." 9 

It is not a little remarkable that the Whitehall Review was 
certainly correct in at least two out of the three names 
which it identified, and, for anything I know to the 
contrary, may have been right as to the whole three of 
them. Dr. Lee, and the Rev. Thomas W. Mossman (now 
dead), for many years Rector of West Torrington, Lincoln- 
shire, were certainly Bishops of the O. C. R., and I have 
never heard that the Rev. Joseph L. Lyne, alias " Father 
Ignatius," has denied the accusation of the Whitehall 
Review, though I have serious doubts as to his identity. 

Seven years after the foundation of the Order, the 
Birmingham Daily Gazette, in a leading article, remarked : — 
" Strange as it may seem, Dr. Lee and certain other clergy 
of the * Establishment ' are said to have been consecrated as 
Bishops by some mysterious triumvirate of an Eastern, a 

9 Quoted in Church Times, March 14th, 1879, p. 163. 


Latin, and an Anglican prelate, no one knows when, where, 
or by whom. It is certain that Dr. Lee has been challenged 
over and over again to say explicitly what is the fact, and 
has never done so. It is said that there is no doubt that he 
does exercise Episcopal functions, and has been seen in 
Episcopal vestures, of course of a more mediaeval pattern 
than the 'Magpie' attire familiar to the House of Lords. 
It is said also to be beyond doubt that individuals have been 
re-baptized, re-confirmed, if not ordained by him or his 
supposed colleagues." 10 

The Rev. A. Jerome Matthews, a Roman Catholic priest, 
wrote to the Trowbridge Chronicle, of October 16th, 1886, a 
letter, in which he asserted that Dr. Lee was reputed to be 
" one of three Anglican clergymen who went in a vessel for 
a sea voyage in company with three foreign schismatical but 
real Bishops. That when in mid-ocean, the three clergymen 
were conditionally baptized, ordained Deacons and Priests, 
and then consecrated Bishops. That they went to mid- 
ocean to be in nobody's diocese, and that Dr. Lee does not 
deny the allegation." n In the same paper, in its issue for 
November 29th, 1886, another Roman Catholic priest, the 
Rev. W. F. Trailies, wrote that " the Order of Corporate 
Reunion is under Dr. Lee, who is undoubtedly a Bishop, 
which is more than can be said by anybody of his neighbour 
at Lambeth Palace." 12 

So much for Dr. Lee. As to the Rev. Thomas W. 
Mossman, that gentleman publicly acknowledged that he 
possessed Episcopal Orders, in a letter to the English 
Churchman : — 

" I believe," he wrote, u that the Bishops of England ought to be 
elected by the Christian people of England, and that the election 
ought to be approved and confirmed by the Pope, as the visible head 
of God's Catholic Church here on earth. . . . All I have ever claimed 

10 Quoted in the English Churchman, January 1st, 1885, p. 10. 

11 Quoted in Brinckman's Controversial Methods of Romanism, p. xvi. 

12 Ibid., p. xvi. 


for myself is to be in what are termed Episcopal Orders, and even that 
not publicly/' 13 

The advanced views held by these two " Bishops " con- 
cerning the Pope and Papal Infallibility, will no doubt surprise 
many of my readers. Dr. Lee has published a little volume 
of sermons, entitled Order Out of Chaos, from which I quote 
the following passage : — 

" The government of the Catholic Church by Bishops, Primates, 
Metropolitans, and Patriarchs, with One Visible Head, is so exactly of 
that practical natuce, that no wholly independent and isolated religious 
body can possibly partake either in its government or in the blessing 
of being rightly governed, so long as it remains independent. . . . The 
Visible Head of that One Christian Family, as Christendom has 
universally allowed, is the Bishop of the See of St. Peter. Unlike all 
other Bishops, he has no superior either in rank or jurisdiction. Now, 
when any part of a family, by misunderstanding and perverseness, 
becomes disobedient to, or out of harmony with, its Visible Head, 
weakness and confusion, as regards its oneness, are certain to 
supervene." 14 

In this book " Bishop " Lee reprints a letter, which he 
had addressed to the Guardian, in which he declares : — 

" As I am personally challenged on this point, I hold, and have 
always held (mere rough contradictions have no effect on me) that 
the Pope is the Archbishop's [of Canterbury] direct spiritual superior 
both in rank and authority." 1 * 

He even expresses approval of the modern doctrine of the 
Immaculate Conception of the Virgin, which was not made 
an article of faith in the Church of Rome until December 
8th, 1854. " It seems to many," Dr. Lee writes, " that the 
doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of our Blessed Lady 
is but the due and reasonable complement of the Theotokos 
of Ephesus. 18 

Since he wrote these last words, Dr. Lee has written a 

13 English Churchman, March 5th, 1885, p. no. 

14 Order Out of Chaos, by Frederick George Lee, d.d., pp. 60-62. London, 

w Ibid., p. 50. M Ibid., p. 6. 



large volume to prove that the Immaculate Conception, as 
defined by Pius IX., ought to be believed by all Christians. 

" Bishop " Mossman professed faith in the Pope's personal 
Infallibility, as defined by the Vatican Council of 1870, and 
yet remained nominally in communion with the Church of 
England until his death, in 1885, when he was received into 
the Church of Rome by Cardinal Manning. Writing to the 
Church Review, in 1881, Mr. Mossman remarked : — 

" I used to be as opposed to the doctrine of Papal Infallibility as it was 
possible for anyone to be. Deeper reflection has, however, convinced 
me that there is really nothing in it to which exception need be taken. 
Granting an administrative Head of the whole Catholic Church, 
granting a Primate of Christendom, by the same right even that the 
Archbishops of Canterbury profess to be Primates of the English 
Church — namely, 'by Divine Providence/ it is surely only reasonable 
to believe that, if this Head of the Universal Church were to teach 
ex- cathedra, or authoritatively, anything pertaining to faith or morals, 
to the whole flock of God, of which he is the Chief Shepherd upon 
earth, he would most surely be guided by the Holy Ghost in such a 
way as not to teach Satan's lie instead of the truth of God. This is 
the way in which I should feel disposed to understand the Vatican 
Decree. And so far from seeing anything inconsistent with reason, 
or history, or Holy Scripture, or the Catholic Faith, in that Decree, 
thus understood, it appears to me that natural piety itself, and a belief 
in God's providential guidance of His Church, would lead us to 
accept it." 17 

The birth of the Order of Corporate Reunion was hailed 
with delight by the Romanists of England and the continent. 
This, of course, was quite natural. They knew very well 
who would get the benefit of the labours of the O. C. R., 
and they were quite willing to encourage its growth, and to 
wait patiently for the harvest time to come. About two 
years after its birth a correspondent of the Church Times 
declared that Roman Catholics at home and abroad only 
ridiculed the Order of Corporate Reunion. Thereupon 
Mr. William Grant, who signed himself as " Registrar, 
O. C. R.," wrote to that paper : — 

11 Church Review, November 3rd, 1882, p. 531. 


" In reply to one paragraph in the letter printed in your last issue 
from ' H. A. B.,' will you permit me to say that my own experience 
is diametrically opposed to that of your correspondent. In the place 
of ' ridicule ' I have found respectful interest and good wishes. 
Personally, I have received, at the very least, over fifty letters of 
inquiry and * Godspeed ' from eminent Roman Catholic priests and 
members of Religious Orders, and well-known Roman Catholic 
laymen. I was lately shown a letter addressed by his Eminence 
Cardinal Manning to an Anglican layman, who had requested the 
Cardinal's opinion of the O. C. R., in which his Eminence, whilst 
insisting on the fact that individual secession was the rule of his 
Church in England, utterly refused to condemn the aims and objects 
of the O. C. R., stating that every organization which tended to a 
restoration of unity was to be respected. " 18 

The Civilita, Cattolica, the organ of the Jesuits, and 
published at Rome, in its issue for April 20th, 1878, printed 
a letter from its English correspondent on the O. C. R. 

" The Order of Corporate Reunion," he writes, " actively pursues 
its labours, and its officers have sent forth a Pastoral Letter containing 
an exposition of its views and ends. It is known that several Anglican 
ministers in connection with this Society have induced a Greek 
Bishop — whose name, however, it has not as yet been possible to 
ascertain — to ordain them under certain conditions, in order that the 
doubt to which Anglican Orders are subject may not be alleged as a 
reason for taking exception to the validity of their operations. The 
three leading officers of the Order have received Episcopal consecra- 
tion from the same quarter — a quarter which, according to what is 
said, is of such a character as to completely exclude any question as 
to the validity of the Orders so conferred, when once the time shall 
come for submitting the matter for examination to the Holy See. 
So soon as a sufficient number of the Anglican clergy shall have in 
this way removed the difficulty which arises from their ordination, 
the Order hopes to be able to present its petition for Corporate 
Reunion with the Catholic Church, signed by a number of members 
so imposing as to render it impossible for the Holy See not to 
recognise the gravity and importance of the movement." 19 

The schemes of the Order of Corporate Reunion did not 

18 Church Times, August 22nd, 1879, p. 528. 

10 Quoted in Church Association Monthly Intelligencer, Volume for 1878, p. 238. 

S. S. C. REPORT ON O. C. R. 159 

receive the approval of the great majority of the Ritualistic 
party. It is ever the fate of the pioneers of ecclesiastical 
movements to receive a good deal of censure from the rank 
and file far away behind them. Yet it is generally found 
that where the pioneers of a religious movement stand at 
any particular year, the rank and file will be found standing 
a quarter of a century later on. Such has been the rule 
with the Ritualistic Movement since its birth in 1833. The 
Order of Corporate Reunion is at present the pioneer of 
the Ritualistic Movement, being much nearer to Rome than 
any of its predecessors. It has consequently come in for 
a great deal of criticism from the rank and file of the 
Ritualistic party. Even the secret Society of the Holy Cross 
has taken up arms against the Order of Corporate Reunion. 
At the monthly Chapters of the former of these Societies 
during the close of 1878, and in the early portion of 1879, 
and also at its September Synod, 1878, the action .of the 
O. C. R. was again and again discussed by the brethren in 
their secret gatherings. The S. S. C. even appointed a 
Special Committee to examine the whole question, " Bishop " 
Thomas W. Mossman was at that time a member of the 
S. S. C, and in its secret conclaves fought valiantly for the 
Order of which he was a " Bishop." The " Bishop " even 
presented a " Report " of his own on the subject to the 
Society of the Holy Cross, some time during the year 1878, 
the most remarkable passage in which is the following : — 

" The O. C. R. admits none but those who accept the whole 
Catholic Faith ; and its work is to gather them together, and form 
them into one great spiritual Order : and then, when the time appointed 
comes, as most surely in God's Providence it will come, whoever 
lives to see it, we shall go with our thousands of faithful clergy and 
laity, and we shall say to the Patriarchs of the East and West, ' We 
all hold the Catholic Faith in its fulness and integrity, can you refuse 
to admit us to intercommunion ? ' / have the best possible ground for 
believing that, whatever might be the action of the other Patriarchs, 
the Patriarch of the West [the Pope] would not look coldly on our plea, 


and would not only grant it, but would give besides every concession 
that could in reason be demanded." 20 

At the November, 1878, Chapter of the Society of the 
Holy Cross the " Report " of Brother Mossman was read to 
the brethren, but did not receive any approbation from them, 
for they passed the following motion unanimously : — M That 
although Br. Mossman's Report is printed and circulated 
amongst the brethren, the Society distinctly repudiates the 
opinions expressed in it." 21 At this Chapter the preliminary 
Report on the O. C. R. of the special Committee of the 
S. S. C. was read. There was attached to it, as an Appendix, 
several extracts from letters which the Committee had 
received from " Bishop " Mossman. In one of these letters 
he wrote : — ■ 

" I can only speak profitably of what I am able to testify of my 
own personal knowledge. The most important part of this is that a 
Consecration has undoubtedly taken place. I have been frequently 
asked what is meant by * three distinct and independent lines of 
Episcopal Succession ' in the First Pastoral of the Order of Corporate 
Reunion. Let me distinguish carefully between what I have been 
told and what I know. What I have been told is, that three Anglican 
clergymen have been consecrated Bishops from three distinct sources. 
That may be true, or it may be the reverse. What I know is, that 
one Anglican clergyman 22 has been consecrated a Bishop by a 
Catholic Bishop j and by a Catholic Bishop I mean one who is now 
at this present time, and who was when he performed the act of 
consecration, in full communion with either the See of Rome, the 
Patriarch of Constantinople, or the Archbishop of Canterbury. It 
will thus be seen that the Bishops of all so-called heretical or 
schismatical bodies are excluded vi terminorum. More than this I 
am pledged not to reveal at present. I know it will appear very 
strange to many that such a thing could have taken place. I am not 
sure that I should have been able to believe it myself, had not 
the documents which attest the consecration, signed and sealed 
by the consecrating Prelate himself, attested by witnesses, and other 

20 Br. Mossman's Report on the Order of Corporate Reunion. Presented to S.S. C, 
p. 10. 

81 5. 5. C. November Chapter, 1878. Acta, p. 4. 

82 There can be no doubt that " Bishop " Mossman here referred to himself 


corroborative evidence, been placed in my hands for examination in 
the most frank and unreserved manner possible." 23 

It will thus be seen that the mystery which surrounds the 
identity of the Consecrating Bishops was not altogether re- 
moved by " Bishop " Mossman. He was evidently " pledged " 
not to make their names public. A great many guesses have, 
from time to time, been made as to who the Consecrating 
Bishops really were, but nothing certain has been made known 
to the public from that day to this. Since its foundation the 
Order of Corporate Reunion appears to have influenced for 
evil a considerable number of the Ritualistic clergy. In the 
November, 1881, issue of the Nineteenth Century, Dr. Lee 
wrote an article on " The Order of Corporate Reunion," in 
the course of which he asserted that "Already there are 
representatives of the O. C. R. in almost every English 
diocese" (p. 755). The Roman Catholic Standard and 
Ransomer, edited by a priest who was formerly an advanced 
Ritualistic clergyman, in its issue for November 22nd, 1894, 
p. 323, says : — " We have heard just lately that there are 
now eight hundred clergymen of the Church of England who 
have been validly ordained by Dr. Lee and his co-Bishops 
of the Order of Corporate Reunion. If so, Dr. Lee's dream 
of providing a body with which the Pope could deal seems 
likely to be realized." 

* S. S. C. Report 0/ Committee on the Older 0/ Corf crate Reunion, pp. 9, 10. 




Ritualistic Sisterhoods formed on Roman models — Dr. Pusey visits Romish 
Convents in Ireland — Borrows Rules from English and Continental 
Nunneries — Hislop on the Pagan origin of Convents — Dr. Pusey's first 
Sister visits Foreign Convents — Miss Goodman's experience of Dr. Pusey's 
Sisterhood — Rule of Obedience — Shameful tyranny over the Sisters — The 
Sister must obey the Superior, "yielding herself as wax to be moulded 
unresistingly " — The mercenary Rule of Holy Poverty— Are Ritualistic 
Convents Jails ? — The Vow of Poverty at St. Margaret's, East Grinstead 
— A secret Convent Book quoted — Life Vows — Is it easy to embezzle the 
Sister's money ? — The secret Statutes of All Saints' Sisterhood, Margaret 
Street ; and Clewer Sisterhood — Sisters and their Wills — Evidence 
before the Select Committee — Bishop Samuel Wilberforce on Conventual 
Vows — Archbishop Tait on Conventual Vows — Ritualistic Nuns Enclosed 
for Life — "Father Ignatius's" Nuns — Whipping Ritualistic Nuns — Miss 
Cusack's experience of Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood — "A Hell upon earth " — 
Cases of Cruelty in Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood — Hungry Sisters Tempted — 
Private Burial Grounds in Ritualistic Convents — Secret Popish Service 
in a Ritualistic Convent Chapel — A Mass " in Latin from the Roman 
Missal" — Superstitious Convent Services — Extracts from a secret, book 
of Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood— Sisterhoods and Education: A Warning to 
Protestant Parents. 

I HAVE nothing whatever to say against any good work 
which Ritualistic Sisterhoods may undertake, nor 
would I treat the Sisters themselves otherwise than 
with personal respect. But in writing about Ritualistic 
Sisterhoods I remember that I have to deal with a system 
which at the Reformation was entirely ejected, root and 
branch, out of the Reformed Church of England, and, as 
most loyal Churchmen believe, for very good reasons. The 
so-called " Religious Life " in Ritualistic Sisterhoods is an 
exact reproduction of that system which the Church of 


England abolished in the sixteenth century. The spread 
of this Conventual system in the Church of England is 
witnessed with serious and reasonable alarm by many of the 
wisest of Churchmen and Churchwomen. There are at the 
present time, within the Church of England, a greater 
number of Sisters of Mercy than were in this country 
before the suppression of Monasteries and Convents by 
Henry VIII. The wealth possessed by Ritualistic Convents 
is, I have no doubt, far greater than that possessed by the 
Roman Catholic Convents of England in the early part of 
the sixteenth century. These institutions are not legally 
recognized by the Church of England, but efforts are 
constantly being put forth to obtain for them that legal 
sanction which they possessed in this country before the 
Reformation. In view of these efforts I have thought it 
desirable to devote a chapter of this book to Ritualistic 
Sisterhoods. It is most appropriate that this should be so, 
since every Ritualistic Sisterhood is as truly a secret Society 
as is the Society of the Holy Cross, or the Order of 
Corporate Reunion. What passes within Convent walls 
is a secret known only to the initiated, or to outsiders by 
means of revelations made by Sisters who have forsaken 
the so-called "Religious Life." The secret Statutes, 
regulating not only the lives of the inmates, but also the 
disposal of their property, are quite unknown to the general 

The rules of the first of these Tractarian Sisterhoods 
were copied from Roman models. The thought of estab- 
lishing such institutions came into the minds of the 
Tractarian leaders several years before the first was founded. 
As early as February 21st, 1840, Dr. Newman wrote to 
his friend Bowden : — " Pusey is at present eager about 
setting up Sisters of Mercy." 1 

At this period Dr. Hook, Vicar of Leeds, was anxious 
to establish a Sisterhood in that town, but on the sly. 

1 Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. II., p. 155. 

II * 


Writing to Dr. Pusey from the Vicarage, Leeds, June gth, 
1840, he remarked : — 

" I perfectly agree with you in thinking it to be most important to 
have a class of persons acting under us, and answering to the Sisters of 
Charity in some foreign Churches. But there will be great difficulties 
in the way. Although we shall obtain the co-operation of the really 
pious of all classes ultimately, there will be much opposition from those 
' Evangelical ' ladies who at present control the visiting societies. . . . 
What I should like to have done is this : for you to train an 
elderly matron, full of zeal and discretion, and thoroughly imbued 
with right principles, and for her to come here and take lodgings with 
two or three other females. Let their object he known to none but 
myself, and, I would speak of them merely as well-disposed persons 
willing to assist my Curates and myself as other persons do, in 
visiting the sick." 3 

In the following year Dr. Pusey spent two months in 
Ireland for the special purpose of studying the Roman 
Catholic Sisterhoods. 8 The Irish Romanists very naturally 
gave him a hearty welcome. Writing to Newman, August 
9th, 1841, Pusey remarked : — " The Roman Catholics have 
been so civil I have not known what to make of it. I have 
had to fight off being introduced to the one and the other, 
and they shake hands so cordially, and are so glad to see 
ons! e.g., a. Roman Catholic Bishop of British Guiana." 4 
He saw also the Roman Catholic Archbishop Murray, of 
Dublin. Some of Pusey's friends were greatly distressed at 
the rumours which were flying about as to the object of this 
mysterious journey to Ireland, and one of them, the Rev. 
E. Churton, wrote to him about it, in evident alarm. Three 
years after the commencement of the first Sisterhood, Dr. 
Pusey wrote to his friend Mr. A. J. Beresford Hope, describ- 
ing the plan upon which it was founded. " We naturally," 
he wrote, "went by experience. Lord John Manners procured 
us the rules of the Sisters of Charity at Birmingham. I had 

a Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. III., p. 7. s Ibid., Vol. II., p. 243. 

4 Ibid., p. 246. 


some rules by me, used by different bodies in England 
and on the Continent." 6 

The system which Dr. Pusey thus imported into the 
English Church was not only Popish, but also Pagan in its 
origin. Nuns and Monks existed long before Christianity, 
and they still exist to-day amongst those who do not worship 
the true God. Mr. Hislop, in his learned work entitled 
the Two Babylons, tells us that, in connection with the 
ancient Babylonish religion — 

"There were Monks and Nuns in abundance. In Thibet and 
Japan, where the Chaldean system was early introduced, Monasteries 
are still to be found, and with the same disastrous results to morals 
as in Papal Europe. In Scandinavia, the priestesses of Freya . . who 
were bound to perpetual virginity, were just an order of Nans. In 
Athens there were Virgins maintained at the public expense, who 
were strictly bound to single life. In Pagan Rome, the Vestal 
Virgins . . occupied a similar position. Even in Peru, during the 
reign of the Incas, the same system prevailed, and showed so 
remarkable an analogy, as to indicate that the Vestals of Rome, the 
Nuns of the Papacy, and the Holy Virgins of Peru, must have sprung 
from a common origin." 6 

It seems that as early as June 5th, 1841, a young lady, 
named Miss Marian Hughes, who subsequently became the 
Mother Superior of one of Dr. Pusey's Convents at Oxford, 
took " a vow of celibacy," under the guidance of Dr. Pusey 
himself. 7 Newman celebrated the Holy Communion on 
this occasion, in St. Mary's Church, Oxford. Shortly after 
this event Miss Hughes went abroad. The biographer of 
Dr. Pusey informs us that she went in company with the 
Rev. C. and Mrs. Seager — 

" In order to study, as far as might be possible, the ' Religious ' Life 
among women in France. At Bayeux they made the acquaintance of 
the Bishop, and of the Abbe Thomine, Canon of the Cathedral and 
Archdeacon of Caen. M. Thomine was the Director of fifteen 
Convents, and he allowed Miss Hughes to go as a visitor to the Hotel 

* Ibid., Vol. III., p. 22. 

6 Hislop' s Two Babylons, p. 223. Seventh edition. 

* Life of Dr. Pussy, Vol. III., p. 10. 


Dieu in Bayeux, which was served by a community of White 
Augustines or Ursulines. She was received with great cordiality, and 
was allowed to ask as many questions as she liked. She found the 
Nuns as fervent and simple-hearted as could be wished : perfect 
harmony reigned between the different grades of Sisters, and the 
hospital and schools under their management were admirably con- 
ducted. The Rule of this House had not been published; but 
Miss Hughes was allowed by M. Thomine to learn much of it. She 
afterwards visited the Convent of the Visitation at Caen, which was, 
of course, under the published Rule of St. Prancis de Sales. Pusey 
was much interested in these details, and in such information as 
Mr. Seager could collect about the conditions under which temporary 
vows were allowed in the French Church. In the regulations of the 
first English Community of Sisters, it is not difficult to trace the 
influence of the information thus conveyed. Indeed, the Rule first 
adopted was largely taken from that of St. Francis de Sales, though it 
was modified after a few years of practical experience." 8 

Of course, visits to Popish Convents such as that made 
by Miss Hughes and her Puseyite companions, were kept 
as secret as possible. It would never have done to have 
taken the public into the confidence of men and women 
about to revive that Conventual system which Englishmen 
everywhere hated and dreaded. Already, it will be 
observed, the taking of Conventual Vows was contemplated 
by the leaders of the new Movement, and Miss Haghes 
had actually taken one of those Vows, that of celibacy. 
From that day to this the authorities of the Convents 
founded by Dr. Pusey have never given to the public any 
idea of the actual terms of the Vows taken by their Sisters. 
They form a part of the secret work of the Ritualists, 
which sadly needs Government Inspection, as much in the 
interests of the Sisters themselves, as of that of their 
relatives and friends. Fortunately, however, a lady of high 
personal character, who was for several years one of 
Dr. Pusey's Sisters in a Convent, of which the late 
Miss Sellon was the Mother Superior, in the year 1863 
gave the public the benefit of her painful experience, in a 
• Life of Er. Pusey, Vol. III., pp. io, II, 


volume entitled Sisterhoods in the Church of England, and 
with it the rules which regulate two out of the three Vows 
taken by these Sisters. The following is an extract from 
the " Rule of Holy Obedience " : — 

"Ye shall ever address the Spiritual Mother with honour and 
respect ; avoid speaking of her among yourselves ; cherish and obey 
her with holy love, without any murmur or sign of hesitation or 
repugnance, but simply, cordially, and promptly obey with cheer- 
fulness, and banish from your mind any question as to the wisdom of 
the command given you. If ye fail in this, ye have failed to resist a 
temptation of the Evil One." 9 

There is nothing in the " Blind Obedience " of a Jesuit 
worse than this " Rule of Holy Obedience." In the hands 
of a wicked Mother Superior it might at any time lead to 
the commission by a Sister of the foulest crimes. If the 
Mother Superior gives a command to commit a crime, the 
Sister must obey, banishing from her mind " any question 
as to the wisdom of the command given " her ! In later 
years Dr. Pusey required a similar blind obedience to be 
given by the Sisters of Mercy to their Father Confessors. 
In his Manual for Confessors, published in 1878, he gives 
the following directions to Sisters of Mercy : — 

" I would have great respect paid in Confession to your Confessor, 
for — (to say nothing of the honour due to the priesthood) — we ought 
to look upon them as Angels sent by God to reconcile us to His 
Divine goodness; and also as His lieutenants upon earth, and therefore 
we owe them all reverence, even though they may at times betray 
that they are human, and have human infirmities, and perhaps ask 
curious questions which are not part of the Confession, such as your 
name, what penances or virtues you practise, what are your tempta- 
tions, &c. I would have you answer, although you are not obliged 
to do so." 10 

We may indeed pity the unfortunate Sister who has to 

* Sisterhoods in the Church of England, by Margaret Goodman, pp. 79, 80. 
London : Smith Elder, 1863. It were much to be desired that a new edition 
of this valuable book should be published. It is now out of print. 

10 Pusey 's Manual for Confessors, p. 190. 



submit to priestly rule of this infamous kind. If that priest 
is a bad man, what terrible moral evils he may be guilty of ! 
As we have learnt already (see page 117) three Ritualistic 
Confessors were mentioned by the late Archdeacon Allen 
who had fallen into acts of immorality with women who 
came to them in Confession. Who can wonder at it that 
reads Dr. Pusey's Manual for Confessors, or the Priest in 
A bsolution ? It will be observed that the Sister is forbidden 
to show any " hesitation or repugnance " in carrying out 
the orders of the Mother Superior. Here is an instance of 
an indignity offered to one of Dr. Pusey's Sisters, by Miss 
Sellon, the Mother Superior. It is recorded by the late 
Rev. W. G. Cookesley : — ■ 

"One of the Sisters was one day employed in the menial office of 
lacing Miss Sellon's boots. Whilst she was thus employed with one 
of the Lady Superior's feet, that dignitary thought lit to bestow her 
other foot on the head of the stooping Sister. Some little disposition 
to objection and resistance to this disgusting insult being manifested, 
was immediately checked by the Lady Superior, who remarked that 
such humiliation was good for the Sister." n 

The orders of a Father Confessor are, it appears, 
sometimes equally disgusting. Of one of the inmates of 
Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood, Mr. Cookesley records that — ■ 

" A Sister who had been hasty with her tongue, and had thrown 
out some unguarded expression, was commanded by the Rev. Mr. 
Prynne, one of the Confessors to the Institution, to lie down flat on 
the floor, and with her tongue to describe the figure of a Cross in the 
dirt:' 12 

The Rev. R. M. Benson, who for many years was 
Superior of the " Cowley Fathers," and Chaplain of several 
Ritualistic Sisterhoods, wrote an introduction to a little 
book for the guidance of Sisters of Mercy, entitled : — The 
Religious Life Portrayed for the Use of Sisters of Mercy, and 
this is what he says to them about their Vow of Obedience :— 

11 A Letter to the Archbishop of Dublin, by the Rev. W. G. Cookesley, p. 76, 
London: Ridgway, 1853. u Ibid., p. 11. 


" A Religious [i.e., a Sister] has made the sacrifice of her will in 
taking the Vow of Obedience : she is no more her own, but God's j 
and she must obey her Superiors for God's sake, yielding herself as 
uax y to he moulded unresistingly" (p. 13). 

Anyone who submits to a Vow of Obedience like this, 
" yielding herself as wax to be moulded unresistingly," is 
more truly a slave to her Superiors than any negro slave is 
to his master, since slavery of the mind and soul is in her 
case added to that of the body. Moral slavery is the 
greatest of all tyrants. Is it right that any free born 
Englishwoman should be permitted to take a Vow of 
Obedience of this horrible character? The victims are 
truly objects of pity. Another lady, who was for a time one 
of Dr. Pusey's Sisters, commenting on the Rule of Obedience 
quoted above, very truly remarks :— 

" Plainly, this whole Rule of Obedience is simply the counterfeit of 
that entire self-consecration which the Christian, whose soul has been 
redeemed, owes to his Redeemer. To Him, indeed, and to His holy 
will revealed in the Scriptures, the Christian owes an unhesitating, 
unquestioning obedience. If His providential dealings appear 
mysterious, child-like trust and entire confidence and submission are 
due from those who know that the Judge of all the earth ' must 
needs do right,' though His ways are past finding out. . . But this 
Rule of Holy Obedience is, in fact, a part of that corrupt and perverted 
Christianity which, since its first manifestation in the Church, has 
beguiled ignorantly devout souls — a system which, indeed, 'admits 
the whole canon of truth, and yet contrives that it should teach only 
error.' It is part of a carefully devised system for depriving the soul of 
obedience to God." 13 

We now come to the consideration of the " Rule of Holy 
Poverty" in Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood. It is as follows: — 

" It is not permitted to any Sister to appropriate anything, however 
small, or under whatever pretext, to herself j since each shall, on the 
day of her entrance, renounce in favour of the Community, not only 
the possession, but the use and disposition of everything which is 
hers, or shall be given to her. All this being under the entire regula- 
tion of the Superior. Ye shall neither ask for, nor receive anything 

18 The Anglican Sister of Mercy, pp. 62, 63. London : Elliot Stock, 1895. 


without permission; and when ye shall have received it, ye shall 
place it in the hands of the Mother Assistant for the use of the 
Society." 14 > 

There is certainly in this " Rule of Holy (?) Poverty " 
something which looks very much like what City men term 
" sharp practice." It is a grand scheme for relieving 
English ladies of their money. "A lady," writes the Rev. 
W. G. Cookesley, "who joined Dr. Pusey's establishment, 
as a Sister, carried into the common stock a capital pro- 
ducing, I believe, so large a sum as £1200 per annum ; when 
she subsequently left the Society, which she did to join the 
Church of Rome, she did not possess a penny ! " 16 Here we 
are face to face with another very serious evil, which sadly 
needs a remedy at the hands of Parliament. A Sisterhood 
which retains the property of a Sister who desires to leave 
its walls, ought to be compelled by law to return her fortune, 
after deducting a reasonable amount for her support 
while in the Convent. This "Rule of Holy Poverty" is 
manifestly unjust on the face of it. A provision should be 
made, in every case, which shall secure the pecuniary rights 
of each Sister, and not leave her dependent — should she 
decide upon leaving the Sisterhood — on the doubtful charity 
of the authorities. But even if such a provision were made, 
something more should be done to remove the difficulties 
which surround a Sister desirous of leaving a Sisterhood. 
Miss Goodman, writing from the standpoint of one who had 
practical experience, informs us that — • 

"The fact that these Conventual establishments are closed against 
all unwelcome visitation, and that any of the inmates may be secluded 
from all intercourse and communication with their family and friends, 
at the will of the Superior, is, if not a breach of the law of England, at 
least an alarming and dangerous innovation, and in direct opposition to 
the spirit of civil and religious liberty in this country. Since it is 

14 Goodman's Sisterhoods in the Church of England, pp 82, 83. 

15 Cookesley's Letter to the Archbishop of Dublin, p. 12. London: Ridgway, 


possible for a young girl to be kept secretly , in strict seclusion, in a 
Convent professedly connected with the Church of England, not only 
against her own inclinations, but against the wishes of her parents and 
friends, and even in despite of their efforts to remove or communicate 
with her, it is superfluous to add that this fact is one of grave import- 
ance, and demands the consideration of the Legislature. The 
unfortunate inmates of lunatic asylums, private as well as public, are 
shielded by the law from ill usage and unjustifiable restraint ; surely 
the inmates of Religious Houses, who devote themselves to the good 
offices of nursing and comforting the sick and afflicted, teaching 
ignorant adults and training children — or even if solely engaged in 
prayer and worship — ought not to be left entirely to the tender 
mercies of high-handed and uncontrolled power, exercised by 
irresponsible Superiors, whose authority is absolute." 16 

If what Miss Goodman here states be true — and I have 
discovered no reason for doubting it — it follows that Ritual- 
istic Convents are, in some instances, nothing better than 
jails for innocent young ladies, and consequently that, like 
jails, they ought to be under Government Inspection. 
Nominally, in most if not all of these Convents, the Sisters 
may be free to leave when they please ; but even here moral 
bolts and bars are used which more effectually prevent their 
escape than any material ones could. 

"A Sister," writes Miss Goodman, "under some circumstances 
would find it very difficult to leave. Those who enter Sisterhoods 
abandon family ties j they acquire peculiar habits ; are ignorant of the 
state of things without their Nunnery gates. ... I have known 
several Sisters who have spent every penny of their capital 5 and 
Dr. Pusey also knows them much better than I do. Without money ; 
without friends $ without clothes (Sisters who persist in leaving 
Miss Sellon's are sent forth in Sisters' garb, and they are instructed 
to send everything back as soon as they can clothe themselves) ; 
without an idea which way to look for occupation 5 what is a Sister to 
do who leaves a Nunnery ? . . . The foregoing is no overdrawn 
picture of the difficulties: I am speaking from certain facts which 
came under my own observation." 17 

The Vow or Rule as to Poverty varies in different Con- 
vents. The Sisterhood of St. Margaret's, East Grinstead, is 
16 Goodman's Sisterhoods, pp. vii., viii. V Ibid., p. 113. 


a very large one, devoted mainly to nursing, but also paying 
a great deal of attention to the publication of books, and 
the production of ecclesiastical embroidery. It so happens 
that I possess a secret book written for the use of this 
Sisterhood, entitled The Spirit of the Founder. It consists of 
extracts from addresses privately delivered to the Sisters by 
the Founder of the Sisterhood, the late Rev. Dr. Neale. 
From this book I take the following extracts relating to the 
Vows taken by the Sisters :— 

"Of the three Vows," said Dr. Neale, u that every Sister implicitly 
or explicitly takes — Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience — the two last 
are perfectly easy to understand. They bind you to a Sister's life, not 
certainly here, but certainly somewhere, as long as you live" (pp. 5,6). 

We thus learn that at East Grinstead the Vows are taken 
for life, making it morally impossible for a Sister to with- 
draw from her profession, so long as she retains a belief in 
Ritualistic principles as to the so-called " Religious Life." 
Dr. Neale seems to have insisted very much upon the 
alleged wickedness of a Sister ever withdrawing from a 
Sister's life. " Let me repeat to you," he said to them on 
one occasion, " once more, that, henceforth, ever to draw 
back from a Sister's life is sacrilege : sacrilege in the highest 
degree : inasmuch as the Doctors of the Church have always 
taught that sacrilege of person is worse than sacrilege of 
place" (Ibid., p. 89). It seems that in this Sisterhood the 
Sisters are not required to part with the whole of their 
property to the Convent on joining it. 

" A Sister coming to us," says Dr. Neale, " and not able to pay any, 
or all, of the dowry of this House, is then bound to mention in Con- 
fession why not, and to tell the priest how she disposes of her income " 
(Ibid., p. 11). 

I am afraid that there is in the Confessional a great deal 
too much interference with the disposal of the property of 
Sisters. It is open to grave objection that an excitable and 
enthusiastic young lady should be expected to tell her Father 
Confessor what she has done with her money. It is no busi- 


ness of his, and if he is a bad man he can easily use his 
opportunities to enrich the Convent at the expense of justice. 

"Let us imagine," said Dr. Neale, on another occasion, to his 
Sisters, " a Sister wishing to join us with a certain income belonging 
unrestrictedly to herself j when she makes the Vow of Poverty, what 
does she promise, and what does she not promise ? She promises, 
in the first place, to give up what is called the usufruct of it ; that is, 
neither directly nor indirectly to lay out a farthing of it on herself. 
She promises to keep nothing in hand, to have, as the usual expression 
goes, no pocket money, to buy nothing for herself with her own 
money, either necessary or unnecessary. She does not promise — 
God forbid — to devote all her income to this House. When I say God 
forbid, I mean what I say. There have been some griping, grasping 
Religious Houses which have been satisfied with nothing less, but 
they have always been regarded the plague spots of Religious 
Communities" (Ibid., pp. 7, 8). 

I wonder whether Dr. Neale had Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood 
in his mind, when he thus denounced those "griping, 
grasping Religious Houses" which — as was the case with 
Dr. Pusey's — requires the Sister to devote all her income to 
the Convent ? Dr. Neale understood what he was talking 
about, and when he terms such Convents "plague spots," 
it leads us to express a hope that such places may speedily 
be removed from the Church of England, and thus prevent 
the spreading of the "plague." At St. Margaret's, East 
Grinstead, the Sisters may not spend their own money. The 
Mother Superior kindly spends it for them ! I wonder 
whether Convent authorities ever give a really satis- 
factory and business-like account to the Sisters of the 
way their money is spent ? Immense sums of money flow 
into some Convent coffers. Is there ever any auditing of 
accounts by a public auditor ? There ought to be, and 
Parliament should insist upon it. History proves that there 
have been very wicked Mother Superiors, and very wicked 
Father Confessors of Convents. The present Ritualistic 
system makes it very easy for the authorities to embezzle the 
Sisters' money, with but little or no risk of discovery, 


should they feel tempted at any time to do so. To plead 
that all these people are pious and quite above acting 
dishonestly, is not sufficient to allay doubt and suspicion. 
It is a plea which is never used with regard to our public 
religious Societies, as a reason why their accounts should 
not be publicly audited ; and therefore it ought not to be 
used to shield those secret Societies which exist within 
Convent walls. The Vow of Poverty is quite unnecessary. 
Why cannot a private Sister attain to holiness while 
retaining control over her fortune, and spend her own 
money as she likes ? This Vow keeps her in cruel bondage. 
And then, after she has thus parted with her whole fortune 
■ — in some cases amounting to many thousands of pounds — 
she is, perhaps, coolly insulted by such advice as the 
following, given in " Father Benson's " Religious Life 
Portrayed for the Use of Sisters of Mercy : — 

" Accept the food set before you, as though given out of mere 
charity ; and however coarse and uninviting it may be, reflect that 
you do not deserve even that " (p. 33). 

A considerable amount of useful information about 
Ritualistic Sisterhoods may be read in a Government Blue 
Book, published in 1870, and containing the Report 
from the Select Committee on Conventual and Monastic 
Institutions. As an appendix to this Report, there are 
printed the, till then, strictly secret Statutes of two 
Sisterhoods, viz., that of All Saints', Margaret Street, and 
the Clewer Sisterhood. This Report is, unfortunately, 
but very seldom seen, and, like many other Blue Books, is 
quite unknown to the general public. From it I learn that 
in the Clewer Sisterhood the Statutes declare that — 

" The Sisterhood is formed without Vows, for the observance of 
the Rules of Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience, in which state of life 
the Sisters offer themselves perpetually to God, to live alone for His 
glory, in the love of Jesus, and to serve Him in the persons of His 
poor and suffering ones." 18 

18 Report, p. 224. 


But, surely, if they promise and offer themselves to God 
"perpetually" to observe the Rules of Poverty, Chastity, 
and Obedience, such an offer is, practically, the same thing 
as a Vow ? It would be hard to define the difference. 
Canon T. T. Carter, who has been Warden of the Clewer 
Sisterhood from its commencement, has written a treatise 
to prove, amongst other things, that " the dedication " of 
a woman to a life of celibacy in a Sisterhood, "whether 
expressed or implied, or however expressed, was regarded 
as tantamount to a vow." 19 The Rev. Dr. Neale, Warden 
of the East Grinstead Sisterhood, said that "a Vow is 
tantamount to an Oath." 20 The Rules which regulate the 
property of the Clewer Sisters, though open to abuse, are 
not so bad as those which obtain in Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood. 
They are as follows : — 

" 15. Sisters who are able, are expected to contribute each £50 
annually to the Community Fund, but this sum may be increased at 
the desire of any Sister. 

" 16. The sum to be contributed by each Sister, shall be settled 
between herself and the Warden and Superior $ the arrangement 
being strictly confidential. 

"17. In the event of any Sister desiring to give or bequeath any 
property to the Community, or any of its Houses, she shall satisfy the 
Visitor that she has informed the next-of-kin, or the next in degree, if 
more than one (or give to the Visitor a sufficient reason for her not 
having done so) of her intention, that any objections on their part may 
be duly considered, and that they may have the opportunity of laying 
such objections before the Visitor." 21 

According to these Rules the amount of a Sister's 
contribution to the Community Fund is kept a profound 
secret, known only to the priest who acts as Warden, the 
Mother Superior, and herself. Even the Council of the 
Sisterhood are to know nothing at all about it. Those two 
" old hands " working on a susceptible young lady, could 

19 Vows and the Religious State, by the Rev. T. T. Carter, p. 73. London : 
Masters, 1881. 

20 Spirit 0/ the Founder, p. 71. sl Report, p. 226. 


easily, if they pleased — I do not say that they would 
so act — work the arrangement very much to the advan- 
tage of the Community Fund. And then, supposing the 
Sister subsequently desires to " give " ; or, when dying, 
" bequeath " a part, or the whole, of her property to the 
Sisterhood, it can be very easily managed under Rule 17, 
even though that Rule seems at first sight so fair to the 
next-of-kin. It is very right that she should inform her 
nearest relations as to what she proposes to do with her 
property, but, it will be observed, there is an important 
exception made to this salutary provision. She may "give 
to the Visitor a sufficient reason for her not having done so," 
and then, calling in the aid of her Father Confessor, the 
Warden, and the Mother Superior, the result of their 
conference will, no doubt, be quite satisfactory to the 
Convent. But what will her next-of-kin think about it ? 
Even if they are permitted, according to Rule 17, to lay their 
objections to losing the money (which they might reasonably 
expect from their relative) before the Visitor, it does not 
necessarily follow that their protests will be successful. In 
either case the Convent has an unfair advantage. We 
know from the history of Romish countries what the threats 
of a priest can accomplish at a dying bed. 

An illustration, I do not say of undue influence, but 
of the way in which Ritualistic Convents benefit largely by 
the wills of dying Sisters, is thus given by Miss Goodman, 
in her Sisterhoods in the Church of England, p. 16 :■— 

" The father of H [one of Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood] was a 

Scotch baronet, and when he died, his property went to his eldest 

son ; but Lady , the mother of H , was an heiress, and a 

considerable part of her own large property was settled on herself for 
life, to be divided equally afterwards among her daughters and 

younger sons. When H was dying at Bradford [Convent], her 

mother and sister were sent for ; but they were allowed to stay only 

two days, of which one was Sunday. On the Monday H made 

a will leaving her share of her mother's property absolutely to 
Miss Sellon [the Mother Superior], or to the Sisterhood, which is 


much the same thing. The mother expressed a wish that her daughter 

should do otherwise, but in vain ; so Lady went away with the 

pleasant reflection that Miss Sellon, through whom she was seat 
away from her daughter's death bed, will inherit as a daughter from 

In the Sisterhood of All Saints', Margaret Street, it is 
provided by the Statutes, that no Sister leaving the 
Sisterhood, even if " dismissed," shall have any right to any 
portion of the money or property which she has given to it, 
whether as a dowry or otherwise. The rule, which is very 
stringent, is as follows : — 

" 1 8. No Sister, whether dismissed or not, or whether remaining or 
not, or her heirs, executors, or administrators, shall have or be entitled, 
either in her lifetime or after her decease, to, or shall have power to 
claim, either at law or in equity, any estate, right, title, interest, property, 
or share whatsoever in or to the real estate or chattels real, houses, 
leasehold or copyhold estates, stocks, funds, and monies, or in or to the 
household furniture, books, linen, china, and other chattels personal, and 
effects belonging to or held in trust for or used for the purposes of the 
said Society, or any of them, or any part or parts thereof, anything 
herein contained to the contrary thereof in anywise notwithstanding." 22 

It is evidently quite possible that a Sister may, whether 
intentionally or otherwise, be " dismissed " contrary to strict 
justice, yet, according to this rule she is, even in such a case, 
barred from any claim for compensation on the property of 
the Sisterhood, which, of course, includes what she has 
given to it. Such a rule is open to grave abuse. By 
Rule 22 the first Mother Superior, Miss H. B. Byron, is 
excepted from the operations of Rule 18, to this extent, that, 
should the Sisterhood be dissolved in her lifetime "the 
houses and property of the said Society in Margaret Street, 
Cavendish Square, shall be reconveyed to and vested in the 
said Harriet Brownlow Byron, her executors, administrators, 
and assigns." It is evident that Miss Byron looked after 
her own interest very well. It would have been well had the 
authorities shown an equal regard for the interests of the 

K Report, p. 215. 


t7& Secret history of the oxford movement* 

other Sisters. By this same Rule 22, it is provided that the 
" whole of the property and effects" of the Sisterhood shall, 
in the event of its being dissolved, " be disposed of to such 
charitable purposes in connection with the Church of 
England " as the trustees may select, the unfortunate Sisters 
being in no way provided for by the Statutes, though they 
have probably contributed the greater portion of the Sister- 
hood property out of their own private fortunes. On July 
21st, 1870, Mr. W. Ford, the Honorary Solicitor of this 
Sisterhood, was examined before the Select Committee of 
the House of Commons on Conventual and Monastic 
Institutions. He was questioned by the Committee on this 
subject, as follows : — 

" 3768. They [the Sisters] have not precluded themselves by these 
Statutes or regulations from taking property by trustees ? — No ; they 
may receive property in their own names or in the names of trustees ; 
when the Sisters go away or die they or their representatives shall not 
be considered to have any right to a share of the property of the 

"37^9* Though they may contribute some, they are not to take any 
away ? — It is not put so in express words, but that is the legitimate 
inference I think." 23 

In the course of his evidence Mr. Ford stated that at 
'All Saints', Margaret Street, the Sisters take no Vow of 
Poverty, and may continue to hold any personal property 
of their own, which they may not have handed over to the 
Sisterhood. The Statutes are signed by all the Sisters, 
who promise to observe them " God being our helper." 
Mr. Ford was asked by the Committee, if this was not 
equivalent to an oath : but he denied that it was, though he 
admitted that " a great many persons of tender conscience 
might feel " that, in thus invoking the name of God as a 
witness to their promise, " they were entering into a solemn 
obligation, and that if they failed in it, they would feel it 
some sort of a burden on their conscience." 24 Mr. E. E. 

33 Report, p. 173. M Ibid., p, 17 . 


Freeman, Solicitor of the Clewer Sisterhood, also gave 
evidence before the Select Committee, and stated that in 
that institution a similar, but verbal declaration of consent 
to the Statutes was made by each Sister, ending with the 
words, " God being our helper." 25 From this gentleman's 
evidence we further learn that the rules as to the possession 
of private property are more severe at Clewer than at 
All Saints', Margaret Street, as the following questions and 
answers show : — 

"4097. Do I rightly understand that they [Clewer Sisters] give 
up nothing on entering the Community ? — They give up nothing on 
entering 5 they make arrangements for the disposing of their property, 
and they do not deal with their money after entering the Institution." 

"4100. But is it the arrangement, or one of the rules, that they 
shall not hold any property for their own benefit ? — Yes." 

"4103. But it is understood that they shall not employ any 
moneys or properties that they may receive for their own purposes, 
after they have joined ? — Yes." 26 

What the rules are as to the Vows of Poverty, Chastity, 
and Obedience, which obtain in the numerous other Sister- 
hoods within the Church of England I have been unable to 
ascertain. 27 They are kept as great secrets, known only to 
the initiated. Could not the Charity Commissioners make 
inquiries on this subject ? The Rules of the Sisterhoods 
which I have come across, may, of course, have been altered 
since those were issued which I have quoted, but I have no 
reason to hope that, if altered, they have been altered for 
the better. 

This subject of Conventual Vows demands the serious 
attention of loyal Churchmen everywhere, and especially of 
our Bishops, whose influence is, in some instances at least, 

" Ibid., p. 193. " Hid., p. 190. 

2 7 From a letter published in the Life of Archbishop Tait, Vol. I., p. 456, 
I learn that in the " Sisterhood of the Holy Cross," which works in connection 
with the St. George's Mission at St. Peter's, London Docks, •'Perpetual Vows' 
are taken by the Sisters. By the way, is there any connection between this 
M Sisterhood of the Holy Cross," and the secret " Society of the Holy Cross," 
both of which work in the same parish ? 

12 * 


considerable over the Sisterhoods in their dioceses. In the 
opinion of many of the most learned Divines of the Church 
of England these Vows are most dangerous, and wholly 
without Scriptural authority. A case is mentioned in the 
Life of Archbishop Tait, in which a clergyman of the Church 
of England administered a Vow of perpetual Celibacy to a 
young lady who was only eighteen years of age ! No wonder 
that the Archbishop termed the taking of such a vow " a 
sinful act." 28 It is very common nowadays to see very young 
Sisters of Mercy walking in our streets. How many of them 
have taken Perpetual Vows ? It would be easy to fill 
several pages with extracts from the writings of English 
Divines in proof of their opposition to Conventual Vows, 
and certainly it is quite reasonable to ask the question, 
Why cannot we have Sisterhoods without any Vows, direct 
or indirect ? Is it not possible to be kind to the sick and 
poor, and to educate the young without them ? The 
history of many Deaconesses' Homes, conducted on 
Protestant principles, is an ample answer to the question. 
No sensible person objects to Christian women banding 
themselves together for Christian work; on the contrary, 
they ought to be encouraged in their good resolutions to 
the utmost. But, surely, he is not to be considered an 
enemy of Christian charity who faithfully points out the 
dangers and evils which invariably follow the taking of 
Vows of Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience? The late 
Bishop Samuel Wilberforce was ever a great friend to 
women's work in the Church, yet he, old-fashioned High 
Churchman though he was, felt bound to raise a warning 
cry on this grave subject. Writing on April 14th, 1850, to 
a clergyman who had submitted to him the rules of a 
proposed Sisterhood, he remarked : — 

" I object, then, absolutely, as un-Christian and savouring of the 
worst evils of Rome, to the Vows involved in such a context in the 
statement as, * She is for ever consecrated to the service of her 

• * Life of Archbishop Tait, Vol. I., p. 466. 


heavenly Spouse.' I object to the expression itself as unwarranted 
by God's Word and savouring of one of the most carnal perversions of 
the Church of Rome. ... I add my solemn warning that such 
tampering with the language, acts, and temper of the Church of Rome 
in young women of our communion must tend to betray them into 
infidelity to their mother Church, and to perversion to the Papal 
schismatical and corrupt communion." 29 

At the Oxford Church Congress, in 1862, Bishop S. 
Wilberforce delivered a stirring speech on the subject of 
Vows, strongly condemning them, whether taken for life, 
or for a shorter period, and this although he was quite 
in favour of Sisterhoods, when free from this and other 
Romanizing peculiarities. He said : — 

" I think so far we are agreed — but if it were to be imagined from 
the silence of any that those who were silent went on to approve, in 
the first place, of Vows of Celibacy being made for life; or, secondly, 
of the taking Vows of Celibacy for a fixed time by those who give 
themselves to that life, I believe it would be an entire mistake of the 
meeting. I am bound to say this, in order that there may be no 
mistake of one holding the office God has given me, that I should 
not have felt at liberty to take any part in the engagements of any 
Sisterhood of which such Vows formed a part 30 — because, firstly, 
/ see no warrant for them in the Word of God — and it would seem to 
me that to encourage persons to make Vows, for which there is no 
distinct promise given that they should be able to keep them, would 
be entangling them in a yoke of danger ; secondly, because it seems 
to me that our Church has certainly discouraged such Vows. . . . 
I feel, therefore, that I may venture to say that, instead of the 
Perpetual Vows representing the higher, it is the admission of a 
lower standard. . . I believe that the abuses of that life have come, 
first from the promises of perpetuity ; and, secondly, from the abuse 
connected with the admission of persons having property, and being 
led to give that property up, in a moment of excitement, to this purpose. 
. . . One single word on the use of the term ■ Religious.' I confess 

89 Life of Bishop Wilberforc*. Vol. III., pp. 330, 331. 

30 In his diary for November 30th, i860, the Bishop records that during a 
visit he had that day made to the Clewer Sisterhood, he " would not consent 
to altering rule about no Vows." (Life of Bishop Wilberforce, Vol. III., 
p. 332.) It is evident from this that the authorities wished to introduce Vows. 
Have they been introduced since then ? 


that I have the very deepest objection in any way whatever to 
applying the word * Religious ' to such a life. I think it was adopted 
at a time when the standard of lay piety was very low, and at all 
events, as no good seems to me to be got by the use of a word 
ambiguous at least in its meaning, and which seems to imply that 
God can be better served in the unmarried Sisterhood than in the 
blessed and holy state of matrimony, I think it is a pity that it should 
be used." 81 

Archbishop Tait, a Broad Churchman who, like Bishop 
Wilberforce, had no objection to Sisterhoods, if they could 
be kept free from Romish corruptions and abuses, was 
equally stern in his denunciation of Vows. Writing to a 
gentleman, on December 27th, 1865, who had asked for his 
opinion on the subject, Dr. Tait, who was then Bishop of 
London, replied : — 

"There is no warrant for supposing that I in any way approve 
of Sisterhoods in which Perpetual Vows are administered. I 
have on more than one occasion stated publicly my belief that all 
Vows or oaths administered under the circumstances you describe, 
not being sanctioned by the Legislature, and being taken by persons 
not authorized to receive them, are of the nature of illegal oaths. It 
is a grave question whether a clergyman of the Church of England, 
administering such an oath, does not make himself amenable to 
prosecution before the magistrates." 83 

A London Sisterhood, whose name is not given, applied 
to Dr. Tait to licence a certain clergyman as their Chaplain. 
His lordship replied, expressing his willingness to do so, 
provided only " that habitual Confession shall not be urged 
upon the Sisters or any inmates of the House " ; and, 
secondly, " that no Vows whatsoever shall be administered 
or sanctioned by the Chaplain." These very reasonable 
and moderate conditions were, however, rejected by the 
Chaplain. He would subject himself to no such conditions, 
and consequently the Bishop very properly refused to licence 

81 Life of Bishop Wilberforce, Vol. III., pp. 332, 333. 
32 Life of Archbishop Tait, Vol. I., p. 457. 


him. The Bishop wrote to the Mother Superior of the 
Sisterhood, giving his reasons for his refusal to license the 
Chaplain : — 

" It is felt," he wrote, " that such Vows are not warranted by 
anything in the teaching of our Church, and are rash, as binding the 
conscience not to follow the leadings of God's providence in case of a 
change of circumstances. If, notwithstanding this, any ladies choose 
to bind themselves by Vows, I do not see what can be done to 
prevent their acting in a way unwarranted by the Church, and rash, 
from a mistaken notion that real devotion of life to Christ's service is 
strengthened by this attempt to forecast the events of our changeful 
life which God retains in His own keeping. The Church of Rome, 
in sanctioning such Vows, sanctions also a power of dispensing with 
them ; buj the claim to such dispensing power is rightly repudiated 
by us — so that a Vow for life may be an entanglement of the 
conscience, when God plainly, in our changing relations, prescribes 
for us a change of duty. The only Vows which the Church of 
England sanctions are such as the Formularies recognize as based on 
the teaching of God's Word ; and for these the law of the land 
provides by giving its additional sanction to the Formularies." 83 

The Bishop's exhortations were in vain. The Mother 
Superior wrote to him, in the name of all her Sisters, to 
say that they would rather go without a licensed Chaplain 
than have one on the condition laid down by his 
lordship. M 

There is another subject connected with Ritualistic 
Sisterhoods, which needs to be mentioned here. There are 
now, scattered throughout the country, several Ritualistic 
Convents of Enclosed Nuns, who are supposed to never leave 
the Convent walls. Miss Goodman mentions that, in her 
time, there was an order of Enclosed Nuns in Dr. Pusey's 
Sisterhoods. " The Sisters at Plymouth," she states, " do 
not speak of themselves under the title of ' Nuns ' ; they are 
Sisters of Mercy ; but those of the community belonging to 
the Order of the ' Sacred Heart ' are termed * Nuns ' by 
the Sisters of Mercy, and the place of their habitation a 
1 Nunnery.' As I have before observed, the ' Order of the 

83 Jbid., p. 461. M See the Mother Superior's Letter, ibid., p. 462. 


Sacred Heart,' or, as it is often termed, the ' Order of the 
Love of Jesus,' is strictly * Enclosed,' and their time is 
supposed to be spent in almost perpetual prayer, for the 
living or the dead, according as their prayers are 
solicited." 3B 

Miss Goodman further mentions that the rules of this 
Enclosed Order of the Sacred Heart are modelled after 
those of the Poor Clares in the Church of Rome, but that 
in the former Order the discipline is, in some respects, more 
cruel than in the Church of Rome. 

" The relatives of a Poor Clare," writes Miss Goodman, " can speak 
with her through a * grille ' ; the relatives of an Anglican are to think 
of the Sister as in the grave, and it is esteemed a falling away from 
the rule for a recluse to desire even to see one so near and dear to her 
as a mother. An aged lady has for years been trying every means to 
obtain, as she says, ' only one word ' from a beloved daughter at 
Miss Sellon's, but without success : she has written most imploringly 
to Miss Sellon, and has begged the interference of the Bishop of 
Exeter, who declares himself powerless in the matter ; yet there is 
nothing to forbid the meeting except the rule of the Order to which 
the daughter has devoted herself." 86 

Another Order of Enclosed Nuns existed for several years 
at Feltham, Middlesex, from whence it was removed to 
Twickenham ; and, later on, to West Mailing, Kent. Its 
Home is known as the " Convent of S. Mary and S. Schol- 
astica." I have no idea how many Nuns reside within its 
walls. Originally this Nunnery was under the control of the 
Rev. J. L. Lyne, who calls himself "Father Ignatius," after 
Ignatius Loyola, founder of the Jesuit Order. A schism 
took place in its ranks, and the Feltham Nuns seceded from 
the control of " Father Ignatius." That gentleman, how- 
ever, keeps on another Nunnery of his own at Llanthony, 
where he has also a Monastery. In 1879 this Convent was 
in Slapton, Devonshire, where, in company with two others, 
I had an interview with " Ignatius " himself, who told me 
that his Nuns " never see the face of man " — his own face, 

85 Goodman's Sisterhoods in ths Church of England, p. 125. M Ibid., p. 213. 


I presume, excepted. "Sister Mary Agnes, O.S.B.," who 

was for seventeen years one of the Nuns under " Father 

Ignatius," states that the " Discipline," or cat o' nine tails, 

was used by the Nuns in the Convent, 87 and this is confirmed 

by the Monastic Times, June 24th, 1884, a periodical issued 

by " Ignatius " himself. Sometimes this " Discipline " was 

inflicted by the " Mother Superior " against the will of the 

unfortunate Nun, an instance of which is given above (p. 40). 

That horrible, but perfectly true story, the accuracy of 

which has not been publicly denied by " Ignatius," reads 

like a chapter of Convent life taken from the Dark Ages. I 

wish I could think it were an isolated case ; but when 

I remember that one in the position of the late Dr. Pusey, 

as recently as 1878, recommended, as I have already 

stated, this self-same " Discipline," as a penance for Sisters 

of Mercy, I cannot help feeling anxious about the fate of the 

unhappy creatures subject to it. In his well-known Manual 

for Confessors, Dr. Pusey recommends Ritualistic Father 

Confessors to prescribe for Sisters of Mercy, as a penance, 

and " For mortifications, the Discipline for about a quarter of 

an hour a day " (p. 243). There is something truly horrible 

in such a penance. A " quarter of an hour a day " of 

whipping on the bare back, amounts to ninety-one hours of 

whipping every year I What an outcry there would be raised 

all over England if it were discovered that the humblest 

woman in East London were subject to such torture as this, 

even though it were inflicted by herself! Is it not evident 

that the inherent evils of Convent life are growing up rapidly 

in what used at one time to be termed the Reformed Church 

of England ? This " Discipline " — which is sometimes 

made of spiked steel instead of whipcord — is in itself quite 

enough to make a Convent an abode of misery and woe, 

rather than a paradise on earth which some of the friends of 

the so-called " Religious Life " assert it to be. Would to 

87 Nunnery Life in the Church of England, by Sister Mary Agnes, O.S.B., 
p. 97- 


God that the history of the inmates of Ritualistic Convents 
could be written for the benefit of the public ! A cry of 
horror would, I have no doubt, then be heard throughout 
the length and breadth of the land. A few ladies only of 
those who have left Ritualistic Sisterhoods have published 
their bitter experiences for the good of the public. The 
principal of these are Miss Cusack, who, after leaving 
Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood, became a Roman Catholic, and 
was known as " The Nun of Kenmare," and who has now 
become a Protestant; Miss Margaret Goodman, who has 
written two books on the subject, viz., her Experiences of an 
English Sister of Mercy, and Sisterhoods in the Church of 
England; Miss Wale, who wrote the Anglican Sister of 
Mercy, giving her experience of Dr. Pusey's Sisterhoods ; 
and " Sister Mary Agnes," who wrote Nunnery Life in the 
Church of England, being her experience of life in Father 
Ignatius's Nunnery. All these writers agree as to the misery 
of the so-called " Religious Life " in Anglican Convents. 

Miss Cusack was one of the earliest of those who joined 
Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood, of which she remained a member 
for about five years. She joined the branch of the Sisterhood 
which then existed at Osnaburgh Street, London, and of 
which a Miss Langston was at that time Superior. One of 
the ladies in this Convent was known as Sister Jane. This 
lady, Miss Cusack states — 

u Let drop many little hints as to the state of affairs [in the Sister- 
hood], with which she was far from being satisfied, but above all 
she warned me against Miss Sellon, and not without cause. Her 
description of the Plymouth Sisterhood was that it was ' a hell upon 
earth,' and later, I knew, from personal experience, that she was not 
far astray." 38 

A very curious story is told by Miss Cusack as to the way 
in which Dr. Pusey heard the Confessions of the Sisters. It 
implies that he systematically broke the " Seal of Confession." 
Miss Sellon, she states — 

88 Story of My Life, by N. F. Cusack, p. 65. 


"Made one strict rule for her own protection, which was never 
broken. No Sister was allowed to go to Confession unless she 
was in the house, and she always remained in the room next 
to the one which Dr. Pusey occupied when he heard the Sisters' 
Confessions. When he had heard one Sister he always went into her 
room before he heard the Confession of another Sister ; hence I think 
we were not unreasonable in concluding that he told Miss Sellon — if 
not in words, at least by implication — what had passed. And this 
was religion ! " 39 

It may be well to remark here, that Miss Cusack is not 
the only person who has brought such a charge as this 
against Dr. Pusey. The late well-known and highly esteemed 
Rev. Mark Pattison, Rector of Lincoln College, Oxford, 
wrote as follows : — 

" I once, and only once, got so low by fostering a morbid state of 
conscience as to go to Confession to Dr. Pusey. Years after it came 
to my knowledge that Pusey had told a fact about myself, which he 
had got from me on that occasion, to a friend of his, who employed 
it to annoy me." 40 

The Confessional, when in the hand of a bad-tempered 
Confessor, must be often the means of making the life of 
the poor Sisters burthensome. Certainly what Miss Cusack 
relates about Dr. Pusey has a very suspicious appearance, 
indirectly corroborated as it is by Mr. Mark Pattison's 

Miss Cusack mentions the case of a clergyman and his 
wife who were foolish enough " to give up their baby girl to 
Miss Sellon to train her for a Convent life." 

"Alas," she writes, "for their utter ignorance of the person to 
whom they had given their treasure. I pitied the poor babe from my 
heart. It was treated shamefully j and I believe some years later the 
parents found out their mistake, and reclaimed their child. But the 
poor little thing was for years at the mercy of a woman who knew no 
mercy, and at the caprice of one who never considered the feelings or 
the welfare of anyone except herself." 41 

It is possibly to the case here mentioned that Miss 
Margaret Goodman refers, in her Sisterhoods in the Church 

39 Ibid., p. 71. 40 Mark Pattison's Memoirs, p. 189. 

41 Cusack's Story of My Life, p. 77. 


of England, Miss Goodman wrote from a bitter experience 
of Miss Sellon's Sisterhood, of which for several years she 
was a member. This child, if she were the one referred to 
by Miss Cusack, was named Lucy, and it appears that there 
were several other " child novices " in the branch Convent 
at Bradford, Wilts :— 

"One day," writes Miss Goodman, "the little novices, attended by 
the lady who had charge of them, were spending their hour of 
silence in the grounds at Bradford. During this time the children 
were not only required to refrain from speaking or crowing, but they 
were expected to remain perfectly still. Little Lucy had a great fear 
of wasps : indeed, she was altogether rather a timid little one ; so, as 
one of these insects wheeled nearer and nearer, the child shrank back. 
' Sit still, Lucy,' was the admonition she received. Poor Lucy obeyed, 
but watched the wasp in agony ; at length it almost touched her face, 
and then she pleaded, * Please, may I move just a very little bit j I am 
so frightened.* " 43 

No wonder that poor little Lucy's mother, when she was 
only eight years old, came and took her away from the 
Convent. " It was found," Miss Goodman informs us, 
" that her mind had been overwrought, and, at the direction 
of the medical attendant, who feared a disease of the brain, 
all tasks were suspended for more than a year" (p. 132). 
I think my readers will consider that, under such treatment 
as is described above, the wonder is that Convent training 
did not drive the poor sensitive little child mad. Miss 
Cusack's estimate of Miss Sellon is shared by Miss Goodman, 
though the latter, by way of apology, pleads that it was her 
office which spoiled the woman in Miss Sellon. Both these 
ladies were Sisters at the same time. Miss Goodman quotes 
a letter which she once received, which she states confirms 
her own opinion of the Mother Superior. 

u Those under Miss Sellon suffered from want of the commonest 

care. Anything that affected her own comfort or that of was 

ordered immediately — other things were forgotten. It was a fault 
even to do anything for a sick person without the ' Mother's ' orders \ 

i2 Goodman's Sisterhoods in the Church of England, p. 135. 


and she, late at night, late in the morning, unpunctual at all times, 
would forget to give any. At the same time, it was always thought 
right to do anything for her, with or without orders j and so. sharing 
none of the hardships of others, she was unaware what they were." ** 

Miss Goodman boldly brings charges of " cruelty" against 
the authorities of this Sisterhood, and supports her charges 
by evidence which has never been refuted. She mentions, 
amongst other cases, that of a Sister, whose sufferings at the 
hands of Miss Sellon appear to have facilitated her death. 

"The Sister of whom I am now writing took a cold which, being 
neglected, proved fatal, from being constantly obliged to remain many 
hours with damp feet. She had asked for new boots some months 
previously, but her request had been overlooked, I suppose ; while, to 
add to her necessity, she was Portress at the House in Osnaburg 
Street, and in taking her messages to the Superior, she had to cross an 
exposed courtyard, during a wet and cold season. If the poor Sister's 
death had been occasioned by a cold caught while in the execution of 
some act of mercy, we might not so much have deplored it, but it seems 
extremely sad that a valuable life should have been sacrificed to an 
absurd rule. Her work as Portress must have taken her frequently 
into the presence of her Superiors, therefore it is strange that the 
need of shoes was not observed. . . I must distinctly affirm, that her 
death ought not to have been unexpected, and could only have been 
so to those who were wholly absorbed in other matters — that is, in 
administering to the slightest wish and whim of the Lady Superior. 
The contrast is more evident in this case, because the^ Sister was one 
of those who came and went to the several Houses in the train of the 
'Mother'; and thus, while all was confusion in the anxiety and 
confusion of so great an arrival, SHE CRAWLED ABOUT 

A story like this is enough to make a Briton's blood 
boil with righteous indignation. Where was the womanly 
kindness of the women who ruled this Convent, to allow a 
poor creature thus to die " unnoticed and unpitied," and all 
for the want of a pair of shoes ! And does not the thought 
that there may be scores of other tenderly-reared ladies 
at present in these Ritualistic Convents, suffering similar 

u Ibid., p. 18. ** Ibid., pp. 19, 20. 


cruelties, and " crawling about unnoticed and unpitied," 
make us justly anxious that these Convents, as well as 
those of the Church of Rome, should be open to Govern- 
ment inspection? The objections commonly brought against 
such inspection are of the feeblest kind, and might just as 
reasonably be brought against the existing Government 
inspection of factories. The sensible way to argue is that, 
if factories need inspection, how much more do Ritualistic 
Convents ? And if the Government inspection of factories 
in recent years has — as everybody admits — remedied many 
and grave abuses, why should not a similar reformation of 
abuses be expected as the natural result of Government 
inspection of Convents ? 

Honour and attention were paid to this young lady when 
too late to do her any good. " If a splendid funeral," 
remarks Miss Goodman, " could atone for any want of care 
in her lifetime, poor Sister Fridswida's would certainly 
have gone a long way. The coffin was very beautiful, and 
the pall was a gorgeous mass of white and gold " (p. 23). 

While the comfort of poor Sister Fridswida was thus 
shamelessly neglected, that of Miss Sellon (the Lady 
Superior) and Dr. Pusey (the Father Confessor of the 
Convent), were very carefully attended to. 

"Most elaborate was the care bestowed in preparing the suite 
of rooms [in the Convent] in which Miss Sellon and Dr. Pusey lived. 
I may mention that some hundreds of pounds were spent in making 
ready their apartments, which formed a suite of rooms in the tower of 
the Abbey. I do not mean in furniture only, but in carrying hot- water 
pipes into every room and passage, in addition to the open grates -, in 
opening walls for extra doors, &c. A long spiral flight of stone steps 
was covered with wood, on which was nailed rich carpeting; and 
whenever the Lady Superior ascended or descended, these pieces of 
carpeted wood were fitted on to each step, and taken up again when 
she had ceased to walk upon them." 46 

Certain ladies held office in the Convent, who were known 
as " Eldresses." These, like Miss Sellon, appear to have 

46 Goodman's Sisterhoods in the Church of England, p. 37. 


had their share of the good things of this life, not enjoyed 
by the ordinary Sisters : — 

" Two young Novices having occasion to go into the kitchen late 
one evening, saw on the dresser a large dish of cold soup prepared 
for next day's dinner. One said, * How good it looks ' ! and drawing 
near, they observed suet dumplings floating in it. They declared 
they must taste the dumplings ; but they took a morsel more, and 
a morsel more, until they had made most alarming inroads, and 
went to bed trembling, lest a searching inquiry should be made the 
next morning. Will there be * an hour ' for stealing the dumpling ? 
It was at the time, just before we went to bed, that we were apt to j eel 
most ravenously hungry; and, in winter, terribly cold also, and altogether 

" Though opposed to the rules, the Chapel was at one time often 
without a Are, and we left it for bed after two hours of almost inces- 
sant repeating aloud of Psalms and other prayers, nearly all of which 
were said standing. On leaving one night, myself and the Novices 
were met, as we passed down the corridor to our respective cells, by a 
droll girl, a kind of servant in the house, and who from having lived 
amongst the Irish, before being taken by the Sisters, had acquired 
many of their expressions. She invited us to * Come and see true 
" Holy Poverty ," ' as practised by the governing powers in the Abbey : 
Eldresses as they were termed. * Sure,' said Martha, ' if its cold and 
hungry ye are, come here, and its Holy Poverty I'll show ye.' She 
tripped on before, and threw open the door of an Eldress's cell, 
saying, * Sure, and arn't this Holy Poverty ? ' We stood peering over 
each other's shoulders round the open door, perfectly fascinated. After 
an interval of years, every object in that little cell is clearly before me ; 
so strong was the impression which, from contrast with our own state, 
it made upon me. The cell of the Eldress contained a blazing fire, a 
heaped-up feather bed, instead of a healthy hard mattress, and on her 
table stood a bountiful plate of cold meat, and a small horn of wine." *• 

The existence of Nunneries in the Church of England, the 
inmates of which are supposed never to leave their walls, 
makes it all the more important that I should call public 
attention to the fact that private burial grounds now exist 
within some Ritualistic Convents. I have heard of several 
such places, the existence of which is, as far as possible, 

48 Ibid., pp. 105-107. 


kept a profound secret from the outside world. One such 
private burial ground certainly exists within Ascot Priory, 
one of Dr. Pusey's Sisterhoods, within the premises of 
which Dr. Pusey died. Miss Goodman says that Ascot 
Priory is the head-quarters of the " Order of the Sacred 
Heart," which I have already mentioned. Several of the 
Nuns are buried within those walls, though whether their 
deaths were properly registered or not is more than I can 
say. Certain it is that the existence of such places is 
naturally calculated to arouse suspicion. They ought not to 
be tolerated by the Government, and those already existing 
ought to be at once closed by authority. It would be well 
if some Member of Parliament were to question the Govern- 
ment on this subject, and make an effort to secure a return 
of all such secret burial places, whether connected with 
Ritualistic or Roman Catholic Sisterhoods. 

The very existence of such burial grounds within Convent 
walls would, at any time, facilitate the commission of crime. 
In Roman Catholic Convents, it is well known, illegitimate 
infants, and even the Sisters themselves, have been murdered, 
and secretly buried. Human nature is the same all the 
world over, temptation and opportunity are all that are 
needed to rouse certain natures to deeds of evil, and though 
we have heard of no such foul deed as murder in Ritualistic 
Convents, it is just as well that nothing shall be tolerated 
which is calculated to arouse suspicion and help on iniquity. 
Depend upon it, once the people of England realize that 
such secret burial-places do exist, their just indignation will 
not be removed until they are closed for ever. It is better 
and wiser far to prevent evil and crime, than to cure them 
after they have been committed. 

Ritualistic Sisterhoods mainly exist for the propagation 
of what ordinary and loyal churchmen term advanced 
Romanizing practices and doctrines. In the chapels 
attached to several of these institutions advanced Ritualism 
is secretly practised which the world at large knows nothing 


about. It is nothing uncommon now for the Reserved 
Sacrament to be kept in the chapels, and even " Benediction 
of the Blessed Sacrament " is not unknown. The Rev. 
Owen C. H. King, a Ritualistic clergyman was, before 
his ordination, frequently present at the services of the 
St. Margaret's, East Grinstead, Sisterhood, in the chapel 
attached to their Convent in Queen Square, London, and at 
which the Rev. Dr. Littledale officiated. When Mr. King 
became a Roman Catholic he published a pamphlet, entitled, 
The Character of Dr. Littledale as a Controversialist, in which 
he described the secret services at which he was present. 
The pamphlet was published during Dr. Littledale's lifetime, 
and I have never heard that he publicly, or otherwise, denied 
the facts mentioned by Mr. King in the following statement, 
nor yet have the Sisters themselves done so : — 

" Not many years ago, while preparing for the ministry of the 
Church of England, I was engaged in voluntary lay work in connec- 
tion with St. Alban's, Holborn. During this time ... I was on many 
occasions present at certain services performed in the chapel connected 
with the branch of the East Grinstead Anglican Sisters, established 
in Queen Square, London. Dr. Littledale is the Chaplain of this 
institution, and Dr. Littledale (the author of' Plain Reasons against 
Joining the Church of Rome ') several times was the officiant. Now 
as an 'Anti-Roman' controversialist, he has written against the 
following : — 

" 1. The doctrine of 'Concomitance,' i.e., that Christ is present 
whole and entire under either species in the Blessed Sacrament — from 
which it follows that the Blessed Sacrament cannot be reserved in one 
kind only. 

" 2. The * modern Roman Rite ' of Benediction of the Blessed 

" 3. The use of the Latin tongue in Church Services. 

" 4. The use of images of the Blessed Virgin and the Saints. 

" But as Chaplain to the East Grinstead Sisters, Dr. Littledale 
adopts all these customs. Everyone of these things is practised by 
him, and I am prepared, if called upon, to prove my assertion by the 
production of such evidence as it will be impossible to resist. Once 
I attended a 'Mass ' at Queen Square, which, to my utter astonishment, 
was said in Latin from the Roman Missal, and although Dr. Littledale 



was not the officiating minister on that occasion, still the demeanour 
of the assembled Sisters showed that they were witnessing a service 
to which they were quite accustomed. On the altar, at which this 
* Mass ' was said, is a Tabernacle, and in this Tabernacle is kept a 
vessel called a Ciborium, which contains consecrated altar breads — 
that is to say, the Anglican Sacrament is Reserved in one kind by 
Dr. Littledale for the purposes of Communion, and for another 
purpose also, which I will explain presently. People outside the 
circle no doubt will think this an extraordinary performance for a 
Church of England clergyman to go through who has penned his 
name to the Thirty- nine Articles. What, then, is to be thought of 
one who has been engaged by the S. P. C. K. to write against all these 
things? But more than this. On Sunday afternoon the 'modern 
Roman Rite of Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament ' is performed 
at this singular Anglican altar, and Dr. Littledale exposes on the altar 
a * consecrated ' wafer, in a Monstrance, for the worship of the Sisters, 
and the chosen few who are permitted to he present. The hymns which 
are used on this occasion are sung in Latin, and in fact the whole 
performance is an exact imitation of the well-known service of the 
Roman Catholic Church. After this, one would scarcely be surprised 
to hear that the chapel is not without a sacred image, surrounded 
with flowers and candles. I challenge Dr. Littledale to deny these 
things ; as I said before, I am prepared to prove them all." 47 

The services provided for the clothing of a Novice, and the 
Installation of a Mother Superior of a Ritualistic Sisterhood, 
as provided in the Ritualistic Priest's Prayer Book, have 
much of superstition connected with them. This book has 
had an immense circulation amongst the Romanizing clergy 
during the past thirty years, and I regret to state that it has 
been recommended to town curates by the Bishop of Truro 
(Dr. Gott) as one of those books which he has "found 
exceptionally valuable " to himself. 48 The service for 
" Clothing of a Novice in a Sisterhood " in this Priest's 
Prayer Book, assumes that a " Bishop, or some one in his 
stead, vested in Albe, Stole, and Cope," shall perform the 

4 ? The Character of Dr. Littledale as a Controversialist, by Owen C. H. King, 
pp. 5-7. London : Burns and Oates. 

48 The Parish Priest of the Town, by John Gott, d.d., pp. 214, 216. First 
edition. London : Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1887. 


ceremony. At one point in the service " the Benediction 
of the Candle" takes place; after which "the Officiant 
shall light the Candle, and place it in the hands of the 
Postulant." Later on it is ordered that " the Novice's 
Habit shall be blessed," and it is asserted that this dress will 
be to the Postulant " a sure protection, a token of her 
profession, a beginning of holiness , and a strong defence against 
all the darts of the enemy" There is certainly no Scriptural 
or Church of England authority for supposing that the dress 
of a Sister of Mercy will protect her from the devil, or be to 
her in any way a " beginning of holiness." The marvel 
is how Church of England clergymen, in this enlightened 
nineteenth century, can believe in such superstitions. Yet, 
after all, it must be admitted that there is no limit to the 
superstitions and follies which men will believe, when once 
they have forsaken the Bible as their only Rule of Faith. 
And what are we to think of the following portion of this 
service, published in all seriousness ? 

" The Bishop shall then deliver the Habit to the Postulant, saying — 
" Receive this Habit that thou mayest wear it unspotted before the 
Judgment seat of our Lord Jesus Christ."^ 

Surely, this is an impossible task to give to the poor 
Postulant ? The said " Habit " will, no doubt, be worn 
out long before she appears " before the Judgment seat." 
How, then, can she wear it, and in an " unspotted " 
condition too, on that great occasion ? Besides, one may 
reasonably ask, what authority is there, in earth or heaven, 
for assuming that anybody will be dressed in the " Habit " 
of a Ritualistic Sister of Mercy on the great Day of 
Judgment ? 

When the time comes for the Postulant to become a fully 
professed Sister, another religious service is provided for the 
occasion, termed a " Form for the Profession of a Sister." 
In this it is directed that the Bishop shall bless the Habit 

40 The Priest's Prayer Booh, pp. 302-306. Seventh edition. Eighteenth 
thousand. London, 1890. 



if it be a new one, in the same words as in the case of a 
Postulant, and, in addition, he " shall bless the Veil and 
Ring " to be worn by the Sister on the occasion, and also 
a " garland of flowers." 50 The Priest's Prayer Book also 
contains a form of religious service for the " Installation of 
a Mother Superior." The Mother Superior, like a Lord 
Bishop, must needs have a " Pastoral Staff" of her own, and 
it is ordered at a certain point in the service — " Then shall 
the Bishop proceed to bless the Pastoral Staff;" and, 
accordingly he has the daring to pray to God thus : — 
"Almighty and Merciful God, Who of Thine unspeakable 
goodness hearkenest to our supplication, and of Thine 
abundant loving kindness givest to us the desire to pray, 
plenteously pour the might of Thy bless ^ing upon this Staff" 
The Bishop must then " bless the Ring of office " to be 
worn by the Mother Superior, and say : — "Bl »j ess, O Lord, 
and hal *h low this Ring, and send upon it Thy sevenfold Holy 
Spirit." 51 Is there not something very much like blas- 
phemous irreverence in asking that God the Holy Ghost 
shall be poured out on a gold ring? Things like these are 
what have made men Infidels in France and elsewhere. 
Certainly if holiness consists in the possession of material 
objects blessed by a Bishop, Sisters of Mercy possess 
holiness to an extraordinary degree. They possess, as we 
have seen, Holy Candles, Holy Habits, Holy Veils, Holy 
Rings, Holy Flowers, and even a Holy Pastoral Staff for 
each Convent. Poor, deluded victims, of a superstitious 
system ! Is there any valid reason why Christian women 
should not band themselves together — as is the case in many 
Deaconesses' Homes — without adopting the superstitious 
customs of Popery and Paganism ? 

It is not to be wondered at that superstition follows the 
Sisters within the Convent walls. In the secret Manual of 

60 The Priest's Prayer Book, pp. 306-311. Seventh edition. Eighteenth 
thousand. London, 1890. 
51 Ibid., pp. 311-3x4. 


Prayers According to the Use of Devonport, which is also known 
to the Sisters as the Devonport Manual, many superstitious 
services are provided for. I should explain that this secret 
book is for the use of Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood, and is printed 
at their own private press. In the " Office of the Choir of 
the Holy Sepulchre " is a hymn in honour of the winding 
sheet which wrapped our Lord's dead body. The first verse 
is as follows : — 

" The glories of that sacred Winding Sheet 

Let every tongue record j 
Which from the Cross received with honour meet 

The Body of the Lord." 62 
In the " Office of the Choir of the Pierced Heart " is a 
hymn in praise of the spear which pierced our Lord's side, 
and of the nails which fastened Him to the Cross ! 

" What tongue, illustrious Spear ! can duly sound 
Thy praise, in heaven or earth ? 
Thou who didst open that life-giving Wound, 
From whence the Church had birth. 

" And equal thanks to you, blest Nails I whereby 
Fast to the Sacred Rood, 
Was clench'd the sentence dooming us to die, 
All blotted out in Blood." 53 

On reading this one cannot but feel that it would be just 
as reasonable to have a hymn in praise of the man who thrust 
the spear in our Saviour's side ; and another in honour of 
the man who drove the nails into His Body ; for they were 
but instruments for carrying out their master's orders. 

I possess also a copy of the first part of the secret 
Devonport Manual, "printed at the Printing Press of the 
Devonport Society, a.d. 1861." From it I learn that the 
Sisters wear useless and superstitious Scapulars. 

" On putting on the Scapula : — 

" Lord, protect me under the shadow of Thy Wings." 54 

w Devonport Manual, Part III., p. 338. There is no date to the edition of 
this book which I possess. 
M Ibid., p. 332. M Devonport Manual, Part I., p. 4. 


What, in the opinion of this Sisterhood, are the virtues 
of their Scapulars, we are not told, but we can hardly be 
thought uncharitable if we assume that, in their opinion, 
they are the same as those derived from the Scapulars 
worn by Roman Catholics. Scapulars were the product 
of the Dark Ages, and are, in the Church of Rome, 
generally supposed to be a protection against fire and 
drowning, and enable the wearer to pass into heaven 
soon after they have entered Purgatory. I cannot find in 
either of the two parts of the Devonport Manual in my 
possession, that the Sisters are ever required to specially 
pray for their own relatives and friends outside of the 
Convent. At page 4 of Part I. the Sister is directed to 
pray thus : — " Bless my dear Mother and my Community," 
but the Mother is the Mother Superior, and not the 
Superior Mother at home. It would appear that the 
Sisters are expected to act as though they had no mothers, 
relatives or friends outside the Convent ; or, as if they 

were all dead and buried. 

" Of what use/' asks the Devonport Manual of the Sister, " will it 
be having left the world, if you still dwell on its news, or to have 
given up your relations if you are taken up or entangled with the wish 
to receive letters or visits from them ? " 56 

In many of the Ritualistic Sisterhoods much of the time 
of the Sisters is devoted to the care of the sick, and not a 
few of them act as nurses for the sick and dying. Dr. Pusey 
said, at the Oxford Church Congress, that " the Sister is the 
Pioneer of the priest," which amounts to this : wherever 
the Sister goes, she prepares and makes ready the way, 
as a pioneer, for the priest to follow her. We may be 
quite sure that the priest whom the Sister may recommend 
is, whenever possible, one of the Father Confessor class. 
In only too many instances the Nursing Sisters act as 
zealous missionaries of the Ritualistic cause, and use 
their influence to persuade young ladies — more especially 
those with large fortunes — to enter Ritualistic Convents. 

56 Devonport Manual, Part T., p. 32. 


In the secret book for the use of St. Margaret's, East 
Grinstead, Sisterhood, the Spirit of the Founder, Dr. Neale, 
their Warden, is reported as having said to them : " You 
stand, if not in the place of priests, yet in the place of God's 
ambassadors, to those to whom you are sent." 57 Nor is 
their influence in the matter of will-making to be despised. 
It would be interesting to know how many legacies to 
Convents, and bequests for the erection of new Romanizing 
Churches, are the result of the influence of Nursing Sisters 
of Mercy. Protestant families are never theologically safe 
with Ritualistic Nursing Sisters in their houses. 

The influence of Ritualistic Sisterhoods in destroying a 
love for Protestantism, and planting a love for more or less 
of Roman Catholic doctrine in its place, is most of all seen 
in their educational work, whether it be carried on by 
means of schools or books. Convent Schools for the upper 
and middle classes are now very numerous, and constitute 
a serious danger to the Protestantism of the Church of 
England. The specially sad thing is that many parents 
who dislike Ritualism exceedingly, send their daughters to 
these schools to be educated, merely because they are cheap. 
The policy is a selfish one, and cannot be justified by those 
who believe that the welfare of the souls of their children 
should be, to Christian parents, a first consideration. In 
elementary schools for the poor also these Sisters are 
frequently seen as teachers. The " Sisters of the Church," 
who are known by various aliases, such as "The Kilburn 
Sisterhood," " Church Extension Association," &c, devote 
themselves largely to the work of education, and are 
publishers of many works, in which Auricular Confession 
for young and old is taught, as also the Real Presence, and 
the Eucharistic Sacrifice. The Sisterhood of St. Margaret's, 
East Grinstead, publishes the most extremely Romanizing 
books of any Sisterhood I am acquainted with. One of the 
worst of these is the Night Hours of the Church, in three 

'< The Spirit of the Founder, p. 94. 


volumes. In the " Editor's Note J ' to the second volume it is 
stated that these Night Hours are translated from the 
" Roman Breviary," and that the work has " been carefully 
brought into accordance with the Latin original." In this 
work services are provided for " All Souls' Day," and for 
the festival of " Corpus Christi," two Roman Catholic 
holidays which are not found in the Kalendar of the Book 
of Common Prayer ; the first of these being held in support 
of the doctrine of Purgatory, and the second in honour 
of Transubstantiation. Throughout these volumes the 
Intercession of Departed Saints is asked for, and they 
are invoked by name, especially the Virgin Mary. The 
following extracts prove the Invocation of the Virgin : — 

" Blessed art thou, Virgin Mary, Mother of God, that believedst 
the Lord : for there hath been a performance of those things which 
were told thee : behold thou art exalted above the choirs of Angels. 
Intercede for us to the Lord our God." 58 

" Holy Mary, Virgin Mother of God, intercede for us." 69 

In a "privately printed" volume of Offices from the 
Breviary, dated 1885, for use in St. Saviour's Hospital, 
Osnaburgh Street, London, N.W., which is under the 
control of another Sisterhood, is contained a Hymn to the 
Virgin, the first verse of which is as follows : — ■ 

" Those five wounds of Jesus smitten, 
Mother ! in my heart be written, 
Deep as in thine own they be ! 
Thou, my Saviour's Cross who bearest, 
Thou, tjiy Son's rebuke who sharest, 
Let me share them both with thee." w 

On the question of the general work of Ritualistic 
Sisterhoods, and their objects, I cannot do better than quote 
here the following wise remarks from Cautions for the 
Times, edited by the late Archbishop Whately : — 

"The principal method of decoy, at present, is not so much 
argument as other kinds of persuasion. Among these, none seem 

58 Night Hours of the Church, Vol. II., p. 173. M Ibid., p. 128. 

w Offices from the Breviary, p. 95. 


more popular just now than what are called 'Brotherhoods' and 
' Sisterhoods of Mercy ' ; the real grand object of which appears to 
be, not so much almsgiving itself, as, under pretence of that, imbuing 
with Tractite" [now called Ritualistic] "principles those who receive, 
and those who administer * the charity.' And it is part of the system 
not only to make a great parade of their works of charity, but also to 
represent themselves as the only persons who pay any regard to the 
wants of the poor in those localities where such associations have 
been at work. . Bold and persevering assertions often gain credence 
with the thoughtless j and thus it has come to be believed by many, 
in some cases which have lately made much noise in the world, that 
in such and such districts the poor were left wholly unthought of till 
these Sisterhoods arose ; the truth being the very reverse : twenty 
times as much was being done for the poor, and in a more judicious 
and efficient way, by persons who were content to go about their 
labour of love quietly, without blowing a trumpet before them, or 
wearing any fantastic uniform." 61 

■ Cautions for the Times, p. 344. 



Protestant Martyrs and the Mass — Latimer's testimony — Restoration of the 
Mass by the Ritualists— Birth of the Confraternity of the Blessed 
Sacrament — Its objects and work — Its secret Intercession Paper — Ordered 
to be " destroyed " when done with — Its " medal " may be buried with 
deceased members — First exposure of an Intercession Paper at Plymouth — 
Great excitement — How the Rock found an Intercession Paper — Secret 
proceedings at New York — The secret " Roll of Priests- Associate " — Dread 
lest it should fall into Protestant hands — Curious letter from a Priest- 
Associate — Extracts from the papers of the C. B. S. — Requiem Masses 
for Souls in Purgatory — Advocates Fasting Communion — Bishop Samuel 
Wilberforce on Fasting Communion ; " detestable materialism " — Opposes 
Evening Communion — Proofs that it is sanctioned by the Primitive Church 
— C. B. S. term it "spiritually and morally dangerous" — Eucharistic 
Adoration of C. B. S. Identical with that of Rome — Its Idolatrous character 
— The C.B. S. on the Real Presence — The "Eucharistic Sacrifice" — 
Bishop Beveridge on Sacrifice — Transubstantiation advocated by name — 
Bishop Wilberforce Censures the Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament. 

THOSE who have read the History of the Reformation 
are aware that in the estimation of the Church of 
Rome, the principal offence of the Protestant Martyrs 
of that period was their opposition to the Sacrifice of the 
Mass, and to the doctrine of Transubstantiation on which it 
is founded. Those holy Martyrs would rather die than 
express one word of approval of the Mass. In the course 
of a Disputation which Bishop Latimer held at Oxford, on 
April 18th, 1554, he said : — " These famous men, viz., 
Mr. Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury; Mr. Ridley, 
Bishop of London ; that holy man, Mr. Bradford ; and I, 
old Hugh Latimer, were imprisoned in the Tower of 
London for Christ's Gospel preaching, and for because we 


would not go a Massing." 1 No one who has read the writings 
of the Reformers can fail to see how much they hated and 
loathed the Sacrifice of the Mass. They always used the 
strongest possible language in denouncing it ; and yet not 
stronger than the Church of England still uses in her 
Article XXXI.: " The Sacrifices of Masses, in the which it 
was commonly said that the priest did offer Christ for the 
quick and the dead, to have remission of pain and guilt, 
were blasphemous fables, and dangerous deceits." Probably 
there was not one of the men who were God's instruments 
for delivering England from Papal bondage, who would not 
have subscribed to Latimer's opinion of the Mass and Mass 
priests. "Another denying of Christ," he said, "is this 
Mass-monging. For all those that be Mass-mongers be 
deniers of Christ ; which believe or trust in the Sacrifice of 
the Mass, and seek remission of their sins therein. For 
this opinion hath done very much harm, and brought 
innumerable souls to the pit of hell ; for they believed the 
Mass to be a Sacrifice for the dead and living." 2 

That which the Protestant Martyrs protested against with 
their dying breath : those " blasphemous," " dangerous," 
and "deceitful" things — as the Church of England still 
terms them — have, unhappily, been restored by our modern 
Ritualists within the Church of England. The only 
difference between them is that the one is said in Latin, 
and the other in English. Even this difference has, in some 
instances, been removed. The Rev. Owen C. H. King, now 
a Roman priest, but formerly a Ritualist, states that he was 
present at a " Mass " offered up in the Chapel of the East 
Grinstead Sisters in Queen Square, London, which " was said 
in Latin from the Roman Missal; " 3 and Mr. King's statement, 
though made in a published pamphlet, has never, so far as 

1 Latimer's Remains, p. 258. Parker Society edition. 

2 Latimer's Sermons, p. 521.. Parker Society edition. 

3 The Character of Dr. Littledale as a Controversialist, by Owen C. H. King, 


I am aware, been refuted. And that there may be no 
mistake as to the identity of the Roman Mass and the 
Ritualistic Mass we read in the St. Margaret's, Leytonstone, 
Parish Magazine, for April, 1894, the following statement : — - 
" The Mass of the Church of England is identical with the Mass 
of the Church of Rome" 

The early Tractarians, when they commenced their work, 
taught the doctrines of the Real Presence and the " Eucha- 
ristic Sacrifice," but they were very guarded in their language, 
and carefully abstained from extreme statements. In this 
direction they practised the doctrine of " Reserve in 
Communicating Religious Knowledge." It was soon realized 
that the propagation of these doctrines was essential for the 
success of the ultimate object of the Movement — Corporate 
Reunion with Rome. It was not, however, until 1862 that 
a society was founded for the special purpose of teaching 
the Real Presence and the " Eucharistic Sacrifice." The 
name which the new society assumed was that of the 
" Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament." I look upon 
this Confraternity as a semi-secret Society, which shrinks as 
much as possible from the light of publicity. I am not 
aware that its members are under any vows of secrecy as to 
its proceedings, but there is a manifest dread lest its privately 
printed documents should fall into Protestant hands. As 
an instance of this I may mention that the Confraternity 
issues every month, to all its members, an lt Intercession 
Paper" containing the subjects for which the members are 
to pray each day, and also subjects for their "thanksgiving." 
Every care is taken to prevent a copy of this Paper falling 
into Protestant hands. There are about 15,000 printed 
every month, yet, large as the number is, it is but rarely 
that anyone sees a copy who is not a member of the Con- 
fraternity. The reason of this is explained, I have no doubt, 
by the advice given to the members by the Superior General 
of the C. B. S. (Canon T. T. Carter, of Clewer), at its annual 
secret meeting, on June 20th, 1878. 


" Let me add, however," said Canon Carter, " that it is a matter of 
importance to be careful not to leave about the Intercession Papers, to 
be misused by ill-disposed persons [as I am using them in this 
Chapter?], and that they should be destroyed when no longer in use. 
We are taught to be 'wise as serpents/ as well as * harmless as 
doves ' ; and we shall do well not to encourage the modern tendency to 
attack all that savours of Catholic truth or Catholic use. I would 
add, that it is most desirable that Associates should not fail to notify 
changes of address, as far as may be possible, so as to avoid the 
miscarriage of the Intercession Papers. In consequence of the want 
of such care a considerable number of such papers wander about the 
country unclaimed, liable to all hinds of misuse." 4 

At the annual meetings of the C. B. S., none are admitted 
unless they can produce the medal which proves that they 
are members, so that these gatherings are of a private 
character. The rulers of the Confraternity are naturally 
nervous lest anyone should gain an entrance into the annual 
meeting with a member's medal to which he, or she, may 
not be entitled. It was thought necessary, at the annual 
meeting on June ist, 1893, to give the Associates a word of 
warning on this subject, and also to repeat the warning of 
1878 concerning the Intercession Papers. In the course 
of his annual address, on the former date, the Superior 
General said : — 

" I have also to remind Associates that care be always taken as to 
notices of changes of addresses, that our Papers may not wander 
broadcast through the Post Office : and also that notice be given in 
case of death. The Secretary tells me that he has only just been able 
to stop Papers that had been sent every month to an Associate who 
had been dead fourteen years. Moreover, for the medals special care 
is needed. They might be buried with deceased persons, 5 if so desired, 
or they should be at once returned. Otherwise, our medals run a great 
risk of being used by unfit persons, who may thus pass themselves 
off as members of the Confraternity." 6 

4 Address of the Superior General at the Conference, June 20th, 1878, pp. 4, 5. 

5 What good would that do for the dead ? The suggestion tends towards 

6 C.B.S. Annual Report, 1893, p. ix. 


So far as I have been able to ascertain, no copy of the 
Intercession Paper of the C. B. S. came into the possession of 
an Editor of either of our daily papers until thirteen years 
after the founding of the Society. 7 On July 15th, 1875, the 
Western Daily Mercury, of Plymouth, published an analysis 
of the contents of the Intercession Paper for the July of that 
year, together with a list of the officers of its various 
Branches, and a leading article on the subject, in the course 
of which it remarked : — " Not a few people, we fancy, will 
be surprised at seeing [in the C. B. S. list] men, whom they 
believed to be honest, straightforward clergymen of the 
Established Church, allied with this dangerous Guild ; and 
some clergymen, who have been one thing to members of 
the Confraternity, and another to the rest of the community, 
will hardly thank our correspondent for making apparent 
their double dealing. . . We name these gentlemen because 
they deserve notoriety, and it will be well if their friends 
and neighbours fittingly recognize their connection with 
the Confraternity. If they all, or any of them, have hitherto 
found it convenient to keep their connection with their 
Guild a secret, shared only by a few congenial spirits, they 
can do so no longer, for they now stand before the world in 
their true colours. They stand officially connected with an 
organization which is deliberately setting itself to undo the 
work of the Reformation, which desires to substitute for the 
Protestantism for which our fathers bled an Anglican 
counterpart of Romish sacerdotalism." 

The exposure by the Western Daily Mercury was reprinted 
in several London papers, and produced a great deal of 
excitement and dismay in the Ritualistic camp. Indeed, a 
reward was offered, by advertisement, of Three Pounds to 
anyone who would give to a local solicitor, information as 
to who " stole " the Intercession Paper which had caused such 
a commotion. Although the Western Daily Mercury was, 
as I have said, the first daily paper to call attention to the 

7 The Ruck, a Protestant Church paper, published an exposure in 1873. 


C. B. S., the honour of being actually the first of all the 
papers to expose its Intercession Paper is claimed by the 
Rock, which, in its issue for May 23rd, 1873, tells its readers 
the very interesting story of how it came into possession of 
the secret document. 

" Even Ritualists," said the Rock, " are not exempted from human 
frailties. One of the number seems to have let his copy [of the 
C. B. S. Intercession Paper\ drop in the public street, where the word 
' Confidential ' placed at the top did not prevent its being picked up, 
and eagerly scanned by the first youngster who passed that way. In 
this case it luckily happened that the lad to whose lot the treasure 
fell, not knowing what to make of it, took it to his father, a worthy 
shoemaker in the district of St. Alphege, Southwark, who . . was as 
much puzzled as his boy had been, and left the Paper lying on the 
parlour table. Presently, in walks a Sister of Mercy (they swarm in 
those parts), whose quick eye instantly recognized the strayed Paper, 
which, with the remark (true enough we don't doubt) that ' it 
belonged to her master,' she immediately clutched. Mr. Crispin, 
however, not relishing this summary mode of doing business, insisted 
on having the Paper back ; but, as the Sister positively refused to part 
with it, a tussle ensued, which ended in her discomfiture and the 
recovery of the prey. Our friend, who had now become quite alive to 
its importance, took an early opportunity of showing it to the Scripture 
Reader of his district, and he, we may readily imagine, saw at once 
what an important evidence of the stealthy manner in which the 
Ritualistic moles and bats are working had thus providentially been 
thrown in his way, for although the C. B. S. had been many years at 
work, it had hitherto contrived to keep its proceedings pretty secret." 8 

Probably it was the action taken by the Rock which led 
the Superior General of the C. B. S., at its next anniversary, 
to say to the members : — " We must endeavour to make our 
position accord with our constitution, in keeping, as far as 
possible, out of public notice.'" 9 How forcibly this statement 
reminds us of the words of our Saviour : — " For every one 
that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, 
lest his deeds should be reproved " {margin, " discovered," 

8 The Rock, May 23rd, 1873, p. 335. 

9 Report of the Twelfth Anniversary of the C.B.S., p. 3. 


John iii. 20). The Rock's exposure led to a considerable 
amount of local controversy in the provinces, where the 
Priests-Associate were very angry at having their names 
made known to their own congregations, as connected with 
such a Romanizing society. One of them wrote a long 
letter to the Banbury Guardian on the subject, in the course 
of which he asked two questions, to which, at the same 
time, he gave his own very candid answers. " But it may 
be said," wrote the Rev. James Hodgson, who described 
himself as " Superior of the Bloxham Ward C. B. S.," "why 
are they [Intercession Papers'] marked * confidential ' ? Does 
not this imply secrecy ? Undoubtedly. But anyone can 
see in a moment why it is. We are members of a Church 
that has two great sections in it, and we live among a people 
a large portion of whom 'care for none of these things.' " 10 
Later on in this same year the Confraternity of the 
Blessed Sacrament held its local anniversary in New York. 
Reports of its proceedings were kept from all the Church 
papers of that city, whether High Church or Evangelical. 
But what was undoubtedly an official report was sent to the 
Ritualistic Church Times, of England, where in due course 
it appeared. When the news of what had occurred came 
to the ears of the loyal members of the Protestant Episcopal 
Church of America, they were naturally very indignant. 
The Church Journal of New York, which was by no means 
unfriendly towards moderate High Churchmen, commenting 
on what had occurred, remarked : — 

" By way of London comes to us an account, carefully withheld 
from the American Church papers, of a meeting in June last in this 
city, of what appears to be a secret association of American clergymen. 
If there is wrong done to anyone in the account given, we shall be 
ready and glad to give room for the righting of the wrong. But if a 
secret and conf den tial Confraternity exists among us, whose purposes and 
meetings are carefully concealed from publicity in the American Church, 

10 Mr. Hodgson's letter is reprinted in the Ritualistic Church Review, 
July 5th, 1873, p. 400. 


it is time we all knew it. The thing, like murder, ' will out,' and 
the mass of the clergy, bound by their ordination vows, and doing 
their work openly and honestly in the light, feel it unfair that there 
should be an inner motive circle where the profane are not admitted; a 
Brotherhood of secret purposes and secret ties." 11 

The secrecy of the Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament 
is also seen in another direction. It never prints, even for 
private circulation, a list of its lay Associates. But it does 
print yearly a Roll of Priests- Associate. Every possible care 
is taken to keep this Roll strictly S2cret. Scarcely any one 
outside of its ranks can procure a copy for love or money. 
Yet even this secretly circulated Roll does not contain 
the names of all the Priests-Associate. The Confraternity 
possesses in its ranks a body ot priests who are so afraid 
that their connection with it shall be known, that they 
refuse permission to the authorities to print their names 
even in this secret and confidential Roll. So, every year, 
as the new Roll comes out, there are found printed 
therein the two following official notices: — 12 

" Notice — Priests who do not wish their names to appear in the 
printed list should give notice to the Secretary to that effect." 13 

" N. B. There are in addition [to those whose names are printed j 
certain Priests- Associate who do not wish their names to appear in 
print." 14 

Another notice proves how much afraid the rulers of the 
C. B. S. are lest some Protestant should get hold of a copy 
of the Roll : 

" The Secretary General would be most grateful if Priests- Associate 
would kindly inform him of their changes of addresses from time to 
time. So many of the Rolls are returned through the G. P. O., and 
very many copies Jail into the hands of those who had letter not have 
them." 15 

An amusing incident in the history of the C. B. S. took 

11 The Rock, October 24th, 1873, p. 717. 

13 I copy from the Roll of Priests-Associate for 1894, the last which I have 

13 Ibid., p. 88, note. M Ibid., p. 23. u Ibid., p. 77. 



place in 1877. In that year the Editor of the Rock published 
a pamphlet entitled the Ritualistic Conspiracy, containing 
a list of clergymen who had supported the Ritualistic cause 
by joining Ritualistic societies, or signing Petitions in 
support of Ritualism. One of the clergymen whose name 
appeared in this pamphlet was the Rev. H. P. Denison, a 
nephew of the well-known Archdeacon Denison. This 
gentleman sent fourpence to the Editor of the Rock for a 
copy. On this, the Editor wrote to Mr. Denison, asking 
him, as a member of the C. B. S., to send him a copy of the 
last Roll of Priests- Associate, To this Mr. Denison sent the 
following reply : — 

" Sir, — I am sorry to have forgotten to answer your letter sooner. 
Personally, I should be delighted to send you the C. B. S. Roll, for 
you to correct your list, hut I could not do so without the consent of the 
Superior-General. If he gives his consent I shall be very happy to 
forward it. — Yours truly, " Henry Phipps Denison. 

"East Brent, Highbridge, November 8M." 16 

I need hardly add that the Superior-General never gave 
his consent. 

And now I come to the task of describing more fully what 
is the real work of the Confraternity of the Blessed 
Sacrament. It is a Society composed of bishops, priests, 
laymen, and women. It was founded in the year 1862 ; and 
in 1867 was united to the " Society of the Blessed 
Sacrament." In the year 1894, no less than 1682 clergymen 
in the Church of England, and 13,444 laymen and women, 
were members of this Confraternity. 17 The Rev. Orby 
Shipley informs us that the C. B. S. — as it is usually termed 
— is the "daughter" 18 of the notorious Society of the Holy 
Cross, which was responsible for that very indecent Con- 
fessional Book, the Priest in A bsolution. 

We learn from the official Manual of the Confraternity of 

16 The Rock, November 16th, 1877, p. 961. 
V Annual Report of C. B. S. for 1894, p. iv. 
18 Shipley's Four Cardinal Virtues, p. 249. London, 1871. 


the Blessed Sacrament — a book which is on public sale — that 
its " Objects " are : — 

" i. The Honour due to the Person of our Lord Jesus Christ in 
the Blessed Sacrament of His Body and Blood. 

" 2. Mutual and special Intercession at the time of and in anion 
with the Eucharistic Sacrifice. 

"3. To promote the observance of the Catholic and primitive 
practice of receiving the Holy Communion fasting." 19 

We here discover what the work of the Confraternity of 
the Blessed Sacrament really is. It is nothing less than the 
propagation, in the Church of England, of the blasphemous 
Sacrifice of the Mass, under the name of " The Eucharistic 
Sacrifice ! " As to " Fasting Communion," it is sufficient to 
say that the first and best Communion administered by our 
Saviour Himself, was received immediately after a meal. 
Even a Roman Catholic Sub-Dean of Maynooth College has 
admitted that — 

" The Blessed Eucharist was instituted by our Lord after supper, 
and for a short time was celebrated and administered only after 
supper. Martene shows that for the first three centuries, and even 
much later, it was still in many places celebrated after supper." 20 

Among the "Recommendations" printed in the Manual is 
the following : — 

"To make Offerings for the due and reverent celebration of the 
Holy Eucharist." 21 

This looks very much like a revival of that sacrilegious 
custom of the Church of Rome, paying for Masses! St. Peter 
forewarns us — " There shall be false teachers among you " ; 
and of these teachers he says — " And through covetousness 
shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you " 
(2 Peter ii. 1, 3). The way in which the priests of the 
Church of Rome, at the Reformation, made " merchandise " 
of men's souls, by their Masses, was that which, as much as 

19 Manual of C. B. S., p. 5. Ninth edition. 

20 Notes on the Roman Ritual, p. 26I, by the Rev. James Kane. Dublin, 1867. 

21 Manual, p. 6. 

14 * 


anything, made Englishmen first detest and hate the Mass. 
The Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament is now apparently 
trying hard to revive this scandalous custom in our Reformed 
Church of England, under the name of " Offerings for the 
due and reverent Celebration of the Holy Eucharist ! " 

Another of these " Recommendations " is, to offer up at 
the Holy Communion, " Prayers for the Visible Unity of 
Christendom." At page 70 we read the prayers for this 
object recommended by the Confraternity. The following 
is an extract from the first of these : — 

" We earnestly pray Thee for the restoration of visible unity of 
worship and communion between the divided members of the 
Catholic Church, both East and West." 

Here we find the Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament 
praying that the Church of England, and the Eastern 
Churches, may again be in " visible unity," not only with 
the Eastern Church, but also with the Church of Rome. 
On this subject, and the many objections which may be 
brought against Corporate Reunion with Rome, I shall have 
a great deal to write in a later chapter. 

In the " Laws of the Confraternity " it is provided that — 

" Grants of Altar Vessels, Vestments, or Altar Linen shall be made 
by the Council-General, according to the means placed at their disposal, 
to such poor Parishes and Missions as may need assistance." B3 

The " Vestments " here referred to are, mainly, such as 
the Popish Chasuble, Alb, Tunicle, Stole, &c, all of which 
have been declared illegal by the Courts of Law. 

Every member of the Confraternity is expected to offer 
prayers for the dead. A service used by the C. B. S. is 
entitled " Vespers of the Blessed Sacrament." It concludes 
with this prayer : — 

" May the souls of the Faithful, through the mercy of God, rest 
in peace. Amen." 23 


Manual of C. B. S., p. 15. Ninth edition. » Ibid., p. 34. 


The Church of England, on the contrary, exhorts her 
children, saying : — 

" Neither let us dream any more, that the souls of the dead are 
anything at all holpen by our prayers." 24 

But the Confraternity rests by no means satisfied with 
Prayers for the Dead. She now holds an annual Mass for 
the Dead, under the name of a " Solemn Requiem." This 
service is announced every year in the October number of 
the Intercession Paper. The Confraternity believes, in common 
with the Church of Rome, that the faithful departed are 
benefited spiritually by the offering up by a sacrificing priest 
of consecrated bread and wine. It has held this view for 
many years. At its secret Annual Conference, May 27th, 
1880, the Hon. C. L. Wood (now Lord Halifax) read a 
paper, which was afterwards privately printed by the Con- 
fraternity, in which he asserted that : — 

'* As the Cross sums up in one single act the atoning efficacy of the 
offering which Christ made throughout His whole life, and by his 
death upon the Cross, so the Eucharist, which perpetuates and applies 
that offering, enables us to offer up our whole souls and bodies in life 
and in death as an acceptable sacrifice to the Father of all. . . . Are 
we troubled about those who in the shadow of death are awaiting the 
Judgment ? The blood of the Sacrifice reaches down to the prisoners 
of hope, and the dead as they are made to possess their old sins in the 
darkness of the grave, thank us as we offer for them the Sacrifice which 
restores to light and immortality." 25 

Here we have, in reality, though the words are not used, 
Masses for the Dead to get them out of Purgatory, taught 
by the Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament. 

In Suggestions for the Due and Reverent Celebration of the 
Holy Eucharist, privately printed for the Confraternity of the 
Blessed Sacrament, the priest is directed, at page 9, to offer 
the following prayer : — 

" Receive, O Holy Father, Almighty, Everlasting God, this pure 

84 Homily Concerning Prayer. Part third. 
35 Eightcsnth Annual Report o/C. B- £., p- xij. 


Oblation, which I, Thy unworthy servant, offer unto Thee, the Living 
and true God, for my numberless sins, offences and negligences ; for 
all who are here present, as also for all faithful Christians, living and 
departed, that it may avail to our salvation unto life eternal. Amen." 

Who can doubt that here we have a Mass for the Dead ? 
At the " Solemn Requiem " of the Society, on November 
ioth, 1890, the preacher, the Rev. E. de S. Wood, used the 
word Purgatory without a blush of shame. He said "The 
souls in Paradise are offering the homage of their spiritual 
sufferings in the realms of Purgatory, and are helped by our 
prayers and Eucharistic offerings on their behalf." 26 How 
different all this is from the teaching of the Church of 
England, which, in her Homily Concerning Prayer, instructs 
us that " These words [Luke xvi. 19-26], as they confound 
the opinion of helping the dead by prayer, so do they clean 
confute and take away the vain error of Purgatory ." 

We learn more about the work and objects of the 
Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament from the secret 
Intercession Papers which it issues every month. To com- 
mence with the latest of these which has come to my hands, 
that for May, 1897, I find amongst the subjects for prayer : 
"That obstacles may be removed ... to the celebration 
of the Holy Eucharist with the traditional and ancient 
ceremonial sanctioned by the Church." 27 Anyone who 
reads the Suggestions for the Due and Reverent Celebration of 
the Holy Eucharist, issued by the C. B. S., cannot doubt that 
by "the traditional and ancient ceremonial" is meant that 
of pre-Reformation times. The officiating clergyman is, in 
this pamphlet, required to have, for use at Holy Communion, 
amongst other things, " a clean Purificator," " Burse," 
" Corporals," " Cruets for wine and water," " a Perforated 
Spoon ... for the removal of flies and other impurities 
from the Chalice." He is also required to say a number of 
secret and Popish prayers taken from Popish Missals, those 

26 Church Times, November 14th, 1890. 
2 >" Intercession Paper, May, 1897, p. 8. 


provided by the Book of Common Prayer being evidently 
not adequate for his purpose. 

The Associates of the Confraternity were required, on 
May 7th, 1897, to pray " That the Primitive and Catholic 
practice of Fasting Communion by priests and people may 
be generally recognized, and that obstacles to Fasting Com- 
munion may be removed." 28 The late Bishop Samuel 
Wilberforce, though an old-fashioned High Churchman, had 
very decided opinions on this subject of Fasting Communion. 

" It is not," he said, " in a light sense that I say this new doctrine 
of Fasting Communion is dangerous. The practice is not advocated 
because a man comes in a clearer spirit and less disturbed body and 
mind, able to give himself entirely to prayer and communion with 
his God j but on a miserable degraded notion that the consecrated 
elements will meet with other food in the stomach. // is a detestable 
materialism. Philosophically it is a contradiction j because, when the 
celebration is over, you may hurry away to a meal, and the process 
about which you were so scrupulous immediately follows. The whole 
notion is simply disgusting. The Patristic quotations by which the 
custom is supported are mis-quotations." 29 

On May 27th, 1897, the Associates of the C. B. S. were 
required to pray "That Evening Communions may cease." 80 
We have already learnt, on the authority of the Roman 
Catholic Professor Kane, that in the Primitive Church 
Evening Communion was the rule. Singularly enough this 
testimony is confirmed by that of the Rev. "Father" 
Puller, head of the " Cowley Fathers," who, in the course 
of a paper which he read at the annual conference of the 
C. B. S., on May 28th, 1891, said : — 

" We have, I hope, got beyond the notion that the early Church 
objected to Afternoon and Evening Celebrations. The early Church 
in no sort of way objected to Evening Celebrations per se. She 
celebrated continually in the afternoon or evening. She had an 
Evening Celebration every day in Lent. In some Churches all 
through the year there were ordinarily three Celebrations in the week, 

28 Ibid., p. 9. 

29 Dean Burgon's Lives of Twelve Good Men, Vol. II., p. 56. First edition. 

30 Intercession Paper, May, 1897, p. 24. 


namely, on Sunday, Wednesday, arid Friday; and two of these 
Celebrations were Afternoon Celebrations, and only one of them was 
early. It is a complete mistake to suppose that the early Church had 
any objection to Afternoon or Evening Celebrations." 3l 

Ritualists are never tired of exhorting us to take the 
Primitive Church as our model. Why, then, should the 
C. B. S. every month in the year pray to God that the truly 
Primitive custom of Evening Communion " may cease " ? 
Surely it cannot be wrong to follow a custom sanctioned by 
the practice of our Lord Himself at the first Lord's Supper ? 
Possibly the authorities of the C. B. S. were not altogether 
satisfied with " Father " Puller's candid acknowledgment 
on this important subject, for at their annual conference on 
June ist, 1893, a paper specially devoted to the question of 
11 Evening Communion," was read by the Rev. T. I. Ball, 
Provost of Cumbrae College. This gentleman tried to get 
out of the Scriptural difficulty in a very daring, not to say 
wicked, manner. While he admitted that " our Lord Jesus 
Christ instituted the Eucharist on the Paschal evening," 22 he 
boldly declared that — 

"As Holy Scripture does not help us [Ritualists] much in this 
matter, we may boldly say, that it was not intended to help us in this ; 
but that we were meant to learn all that we need to learn from the 
practice and precept of the faithful companion of the Bible — the 
Catholic Church." 33 

Is not this a case of " Down with the Bible, and up with 
the Church " ? Or, rather, does it not remind us of the 
conduct of those Pharisees — the Ritualists of their day — 
of whom our Saviour said : — " Full well ye reject the 
commandment of God, that ye may keep your own 
tradition " ? (Mark vii. 9.) Mr. Ball proceeded to heap up 
insult and abuse on a custom which certainly had the 
Saviour's Holy sanction. " Evening Communion," he said, 
" is an act of schism, in the gravest sense of the term." 34 
" They are spiritually and morally dangerous." 35 " It is 

31 Twenty-Ninth Annual Report of C.B.S., p. xxiii. 

32 Thirty-First Annual Report of C. B. S., p. xv. 

33 Ibid., p. xv. u Ibid., p. xvii. * Ibid., p. xxi. 


profane to invite men by Evening Communion to undertake 
a religious duty." 36 

The members of the C. B. S. are required to pray " That 
obstacles to the due and reverent Reservation of the Blessed 
Sacrament for the Sick may be removed, and that the use 
of the Sacrament of Holy Unction may be restored through- 
out the Anglican Church." 87 

As to the first of these I shall have some comments to 
make further on. It may, therefore, suffice if I here simply 
quote the words of Article XXVIII. : — " The Sacrament of 
the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved, 
carried about, lifted up or worshipped." And there is 
certainly no trace in the New Testament of either of these 
customs being observed by the Apostles. As to the 
worshipping of the Sacrament, this is a practice which is 
much encouraged by the C. B. S. It would be easy to 
multiply proofs of this, but I will here content myself with 
quoting the Altar Book for Young Persons, issued by the 
Confraternity itself: — 

" I worship Thee, Lord Jesu, 
Who on Thine Altar laid, 
In this most awful service, 

Our Food and Drink art made. 

" I worship Thee, Lord Jesu, 
Who, in Thy love divine, 
Art hiding here Thy Godhead 
In forms of Bread and Wine." ** 

On this important point of adoration of the consecrated 
Sacrament the teaching of the Confraternity is indentical 
with that of the Church of Rome. This was acknowledged 
by its Superior General at the annual conference on 
May 31st, 1877. I may here be permitted to mention that 
the anniversaries of the Confraternity are always held on 

86 Ibid., p. xxii. 

3 7 Intercession Paper, May, 1897, p. 15. 

38 Altar Book for Young Persons, p. 69. Twenty-sixth thousand, 1884. The 
number printed shows how widely the spiritual poison has been spread. 


" Corpus Christi Day," a Popish festival not to be found in 
the Kalendar in our Prayer Books. It was instituted by 
the Popes in the Dark Ages in honour of the doctrine of 
Transubstantiation. The Superior General said: — ■ 

" Whatever other differences, therefore, there may be between us 
and the Church of Rome (and I do not wish to question the fact that 
there are important differences) yet no such difference as is commonly 
supposed exists between us on this great doctrine of Eucharistic 
Adoration. We adore the same mysterious presence of our 
Blessed Lord, veiled from mortal eyes, through the grace of a like 
consecration." 39 

As to the " Sacrament of Extreme Unction M it may be 
sufficient to remark that the Church of England knows no 
such Sacrament. At the Reformation she ejected it from 
her system, for wise and sufficient reasons. I am not aware 
that the C. B. S. has published any form of service for the 
administration of Extreme Unction. Probably its Priests- 
Associate use that provided in the Priest's Prayer Book. 
In this form the priest is required to anoint the five senses 
of the sick person with oil " on his right thumb." When 
the time comes for anointing the sick person's nose, the 
following directions are given : — 

" Then upon the nostrils, saying, 

" Through this anointing, and His most loving mercy, the Lord 
pnrdon thee whatever thou hast sinned by smelling/' 40 

Another subject for the intercessions of the Associates was 
" That there may be true repentance and due use of 
Sacramental Confession on the part of those needing it." 41 
The Confraternity is very fond of Auricular Confession, 
even though the Church of England, in her Homily of 
Repentance, Part Second, teaches : — " It is most evident 
and plain, that this Auricular Confession hath not the 
warrant of God's Word." In its Altar Book for Young 

39 Fifteenth Annual Report of C. B. S., p. x. 

40 Priest's Prayer Book, pp. 91, 92. Seventh edition, 1S90. 

41 Intercession Paper, May, 1897, p. 16. 


Persons the Confraternity prints a form of Confession in the 
presence of a priest (p. 29). 

The Associates are also required to pray : — " That there 
may be a more widespread belief in the Catholic doctrine of 
the Real Presence and of the Eucharistic Sacrifice." 42 It 
would be easy to fill many pages with extracts from the 
documents of the Confraternity showing what its teaching 
is on these subjects. To commence with a sermon preached 
before the Confraternity by the Rev. A. H. Ward, in 1871. 
That gentleman then declared — 

" That the Holy Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ under 
the forms of Bread and Wine, that therein is Christ Himself, His 
Body, Soul and Divinity, as truly as at Bethlehem, or Nazareth, or 
Calvary, or at the right hand of God, we take as certain." ** 

On the following year the annual sermon on behalf of the 
Confraternity was preached by the Rev. George Body, now 
Canon of Durham. We find that gentleman declaring 

" The Eucharistic Sacrifice is a necessary consequence of the Real 
Presence. If the Bread and Wine become, by the action of the Holy 
Ghost in consecration, the Body and Blood of Christ, it follows that 
when we offer the Sacrament we offer the Body and Blood of Christ, 
i.e., Christ Himself under the forms of Bread and Wine." ** 

A remarkable sermon was preached before the C. B. S. at 
its anniversary, June 20th, 1889, by one who has since made 
a name for himself in the world, viz., the Rev. Charles Gore, 
now Canon Residentiary of Westminster, and Examining 
Chaplain to the Bishop of Lincoln. Canon Gore said : — 

" Christ is present in the Eucharist indeed externally to us, 
objectively and really; He is present as the Bread of Life, the 
Sacrifice for sins, the Object of worship. He is present wherever the 
consecrated elements are." ** 

42 Ibid., p. 12. 

43 The Holy Eucharist and Common Life, by Rev. A. H. Ward, p. 8. London : 

41 Jewish Sacrifices and Christian Sacraments, p. 27. London : Rivingtons, 1872. 
45 The Eucharistic Sacrifice, by Charles Gore, p. 13. Privately printed for 
the Confraternity. 


This teaching is undoubtedly strong, and quite without 
warrant from the formularies of the Church of England. 
Many hundreds of volumes have been written on the Real 
Presence, and it is manifestly impossible for me to give 
space to an exhaustive treatise on the subject in this book. 
But I may point out that a localized presence of Christ 
" wherever the consecrated elements are " is contrary to 
the teaching of the great English Divine, Richard Hooker, 
who wrote : " The Real Presence of Christ's most blessed 
body and blood is not therefore to be sought for in the 
Sacrament, but in the worthy receiver of the Sacraments." 46 
The Church of England teaches that there may — in her 
sense of the words — be a real eating and drinking of the 
Body and Blood of Christ, without the aid of a consecrating 
priest — a theory which is certainly inconsistent with the 
Ritualistic idea that the Presence is only the result of 
priestly consecration. In one of the Rubrics attached to 
" The Communion of the Sick " the Church orders that — 

" If a man, either by reason of extremity of sickness, or 
for want of warning in due time to the Curate, or for lack 
of company to receive with him, or by any other just 
impediment, do not receive the Sacrament of Christ's Body 
and Blood, the Curate shall instruct him, that if he do truly 
repent him of his sins, and steadfastly believe that Jesus 
Christ hath suffered death upon the Cross for him, and shed 
His Blood for his redemption, earnestly remembering the 
benefits he hath thereby, and giving Him hearty thanks 
therefore, he doth eat and drink the Body and Blood 
of Our Saviour Christ, profitably to his soul's health, 


In this case the Body and Blood of Christ is certainly not 

eaten with the sick man's mouth. It is an act of faith, not 

of the body. And is not this the same way in which ordinary 

communicants are said by the Church of England to eat the 

< 6 Hooker's Works, Vol. II., Book V., lxvii., 6, p. 84. Oxford edition, 1865. 


Body of Christ : — " Take and eat this," saith the Minister, 
"and feed on Him in thy heart by faith with thanksgiving." 
And again, in her Twenty-eighth Article she instructs us 
that " The mean whereby the Body of Christ is received 
and eaten in the Supper is faith " — not a man's mouth, as 
the Ritualists teach. Our Saviour has never had more than 
one Body. Of that Body, in its glorified condition as it now 
exists in heaven only, the Black Rubric at the end of the 
Communion Service says : — " The natural Body and Blood 
of our Saviour Christ are in heaven, and not here ; it being 
against the truth of Christ's natural Body to be at one time 
in more places than one." If that Body, the only one our 
Saviour possesses, is " not here," how can it be in the 
consecrated bread and wine, as the C. B. S. and the Ritualists 
teach ? I once went into a Ritualistic Church on an Easter 
Sunday morning, and saw behind the Communion Table, 
in large letters, the text of Scripture : — " He is risen ; He is 
not here " (Mark xvi. 6). What an undesigned sermon that 
was against a localized Real Presence on the so-called 
" Altar " ! Let us take heed to the warning words of our 
Saviour : — " Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is 
Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false 
Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and 
wonders ; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall 
deceive the very elect" (Matt. xxiv. 23, 24). 

And as to the so-called " Eucharistic Sacrifice," which 
our modern Ritualists admire so much, and which they 
consider as a true, proper, and propitiatory sacrifice, and 
not a mere commemoration of the Sacrifice once for all 
offered upon the Cross by our Saviour, I cannot do better 
than quote the convincing argument of the High Church 
Bishop Beveridge, as contained in his book on the Thirty 
Nine Articles. These, then, are his words, while explaining 
Article XXXI. They ought to be sufficient to convince any 
earnest seeker after truth : — ■ 

" And as this doctrine is contrary to Scripture, so is it repugnant to 


reason too, there being so vast a difference betwixt a Sacrament and 
a Sacrifice : for in a Sacrament God offereth something to man, but in 
a Sacrifice man offers something to God. What is offered in a 
Sacrifice is wholly or in part destroyed, but what is offered in 
a Sacrament still remaineth. And there being so great a difference 
betwixt the one and the other, if it be a Sacrament it is not a Sacrifice, 
and if it be a Sacrifice it is not a Sacrament, it being impossible that 
it should be both a Sacrament and a Sacrifice too. To which we 
might also add, that, according, to this opinion, Christ offered up 
Himself before He offered up Himself. I mean He offered up 
Himself in the Sacrament before He offered up Himself on the Cross ; 
which offering up Himself in the Sacrament was either a perfect or an 
imperfect Sacrifice or oblation. To say that Christ should offer up 
an imperfect Sacrifice to God is the next door to blasphemy ; but yet 
a perfect one that Sacrifice could not be, for then it need not have 
been repeated again upon the Cross. But I need not heap up more 
arguments to pluck down that fabric, the foundation whereof is 
already destroyed. It is Transubstantiation that is the ground of this 
fond opinion, therefore do they say the Body of Christ is really 
offered up to God, because the bread is first really turned into the 
Body of Christ ; but now it being proved before that the bread is 
still bread after, as well as before consecration, and not the very Body 
of Christ ; though the bread be consecrated by man, the very Body of 
Christ cannot be offered to God in the Sacrament ; and therefore, if 
they will still call it a Sacrifice, they must acknowledge it is such a 
Sacrifice wherein there is nothing but bread and wine offered to God, 
and by consequence no propitiatory Sacrifice : for, as we have seen, 
' without shedding of blood there is no remission,' and in the breaking 
and pouring forth of bread and wine there is no shedding of blood, 
and not, therefore, any remission of sins." 

In many of the papers printed by the C. B. S. the term 
" Mass " is applied to the Lord's Supper. The Hon. C. L. 
Wood used it in his paper read at its eighteenth anniversary, 
in which he spoke of the custom of "getting up in the 
morning to go to "Mass." 47 In 1882, the Rev. J. B. 
Wilkinson said that " Children should be instructed, not 
only by oral teaching, but by bringing them to Celebrations 

*? Eighteenth Annual Report of C. B. S., p. XV. 


of the Blessed Sacrament for Children, or to put it more 
simply, to Children's Masses." ** 

The teaching given in meetings of the C. B. S. sometimes 
amounts to the full modern Roman Catholic doctrine of 
Transubstantiation. At a meeting of the St. Mary's, 
Prestbury, Ward of the Confraternity, in 1871, the 
Rev. A. L. Lewington, now Chaplain of Ardingly College, 
Hayward's Heath, read a paper, which was subsequently 
published, in the course of which he said : — 

u When we say that the Presence of Christ is objective, we under- 
stand that It is there without communion as with communion, abiding 
under the outward and Visible Form in the consecrated Elements, so 
long as the consecrated Elements are unconsumed. Again, we say 
that the Presence of Christ is Whole. Whole Christ comes to us, and 
is incorporated with us, in His Sacrament. His Body, His Blood, 
His Soul, His Divinity, are present. And not only that, but He is 
wholly present in every particle, just as much as in all that is 

" When we separate from the notion of substance everything gross 
and material, we may regard the term TRANSUBSTANTIATION 
as a convenient definition of the results of consecration which the 
Articles do not exclude. . . . But those who rightly maintain 
the term Transubstantiation understand it to signify that what is in 
outward accidents — in sight, taste, and touch — Bread and Wine, by 
consecration becomes, not in accidents but in substance, the Body and 
Blood of Christ." 4 9 

Even more bold were the Romanizing utterances of the 
Rev. E. W. Urquhart, at a " Synod " of the C. B. S. held at 
Salisbury on April 30th, 1889. I attach more importance to 
what Mr. Urquhart said than to the paper of Mr. Lewington, 
because it was read at a much larger gathering of the 
Confraternity, and because it was subsequently published 
"by request of members present." Mr. Urquhart advocated, 
without reserve, the modern teaching of the Church of 
Rome, and frequently admitted that he believed in the 

48 Twentieth Annual Report of C. B. S., p. ix. 

49 The Doctrine of the Real Presence, by Rev. A. L. Lewington, pp. 6, 9. 
Oxford: Mowbray, 1871. 


doctrine of Transubstantiation, both name and thing. Here 
are some extracts from his address, which has never been 
repudiated by the authorities of the C. B. S. : — 

" Those teachers who profess to accept a real Objective Presence, 
while repudiating Transubstantiation, are placed in a hopeless 
dilemma ; as was plainly seen by Zuinglius, when he maintained that 
there was no alternative between Transubstantiation and the figurative 
view which he himself upheld. But the great Church of the West 
[that is, the Church of Rome] does not stand alone in its clear 
definite enunciation of the Divine truth in Eucharistic doctrine. 50 

"On this great subject, therefore [i.e., the Real Presence], there is, 
happily, no room for difference between these two great Branches of 
the Church Catholic [i.e., the Eastern Church and the Church of 
Rome]. And if the unity of Christendom is ever to be restored, it can 
only be by the Church of England frankly accepting the full statement 
of Eucharistic truth as expressed in the authorized formularies of West 
and East alike} 1 

"We are bold to maintain that the Eucharistic teaching of the 
Church of England is essentially one with that of the whole of the rest 
of Catholic Christendom, East as well as West. It is, indeed, that 
which, if she would make good her claim to be an integral part of the 
Catholic Church, she is bound to maintain. 52 

" But if it be asked why I lay such stress on a term which has 
given rise to so much odium and has been so misunderstood as 
Transubstantiation, I would answer, first, because I would remove all 
needless barriers between ourselves and the rest of Catholic Christendom, 
and, secondly, because experience shows that no other expression 
defines what we mean so unmistakably.^ 

" If ours be indeed, as we maintain it to be, the same Church of 
England which was planted by S. Augustine on the Mission of 
S. Gregory the Great, ours is the Church, and ours the faith of Wilfrid 
and Anselm, of Edmund Rich and Thomas More, quite as truly as it 
is of later worthies ; and we may look forward to a time, though we 
all may be gathered to our rest, when such open repudiation of 
Eucharistic Truth, even by our Ordained Ministry, as we now deplore, 
may be as impossible as it is now in the Priesthood of the Latin and 
Eastern Communions. But the consciousness of our own grievous 

50 The Doctrine of the Real Presence, by Rev. E. W. Urquhart, p. 9. Oxford : 
61 Ibid., p. 10. 52 Ibid., p. 11. M Ibid., p. 13. 


shortcomings should prevent us from being high-minded, and check 
that bitter and spiteful attitude towards our brethren of the Roman 
Communion, which is so painful a feature in too much of the con- 
troversy of the day. Remember that, whatever be their short- 
comings, they, throughout the ages, have been faithful guardians of 
the central verity of the Incarnation, and along with it, of the precious 
deposit of Eucharistic truth, which we have in years past insulted, 
neglected, and profaned. And in conclusion, to avoid misunder- 
standing, whilst / hold that the time has come when we must ourselves 
recognize the identity of our own teaching with that which is expressed 
in the Tridentine canons by Transubstantiation, and with the authorized 
formularies of the Eastern Church j it is only gradually, as they are 
able to learn, that we should expect to bring this conviction home 
to the minds of our weaker brethren, whom we are striving to brincr 
over to the faith" 54 

With such a love for Popery as that which is exhibited 
by this Confraternity we need hardly wonder that during the 
year 1892, it requested all its members to pray "That the 
Ecclesiastical authorities in foreign countries, both East and 
West, may become willing to give Communion to English 
Catholics, on conditions which the latter may lawfully 
accept." 55 

It is a sad thing to see a Confraternity, engaged in teaching 
some of the worst doctrines of Popery, so widely supported 
by clergy of the Church of England. And even sadder is it 
to find that many of them have been promoted to high 
offices in the Church, and to livings in the gift of the Crown 
and the Bishops. In 1894 amongst its members were the 
Bishops of Zululand, Zanzibar, Nassau, Lebombo, and 
Corea, Bishops Hornby and Jenner, and the Deans of 
Rochester and Chichester. 

One High Church Bishop, early in the history of the 
Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament, had his eyes open 
to its dangerous and Popish character. Bishop Samuel 
Wilberforce wrote as follows to its Superior General, Canon 
T. T. Carter : — 

" It is," wrote Bishop Wilberforce, "sure to stir up a vast amount 

M Ibid., pp. 14, 15. * Intercession Paper o/C.B.S., June 1892, p. 18. 



of prejudice from its singularly un-English and Popish lone. . . . 
I view with the utmost jealousy any tendency to ally that reviving 
earnestness to the unrealities and morbid development of modern 
Romanism. You may do much one way or the other. I entreat you 
to consider the matter for yourself, and as Bishop I exhort you to use 
no attempts to spread this Confraternity [of the Blessed Sacrament] 
amongst the clergy and religious people of my diocese." 

In closing this chapter, let me once more quote Bishop 
Latimer. His words are as necessary now, within the 
Church of England, as when they were first spoken : — 

" Wherefore stand from the altar, you sacrileging (I should have 
said, you sacrificing) priests 5 for you have no authority in God's 
Book to offer up our Redeemer : neither will He come any more into 
the hands of sacrificing priests. . . . And I say, you lay people, as ycu 
are called, come away from forged sacrifices, which the Papists [and 
now Ritualists] do feign only to be lords over you," 56 

* Latimer's Remains, p. 259. 



A Purgatorial Society in the Church of England— The Guild of All Souls- 
Extracts from its Publications— Masses for the Dead in the Church of 
England— Festival on "All Souls' Day"— The Fire of Purgatory the 
same as that of Hell— Bishop of London (Dr. Temple) gives its President 
a Living— The Secret Order of the Holy Redeemer— An Inner Circle; 
The Brotherhood of the Holy Cross; its secret rules quoted— The 
"Declaration" of the Order of the Holy Redeemer— The Pope the 
" Pastor and Teacher of the Church " — Why its members stay within 
the Church of England — Extraordinary and Jesuitical letter of "John 
O. H. R." — Its mysterious Superior said to be a " Bishop," though not in 
the Clergy List ? Who ordained and consecrated him ? — The secret 
Order of St. John the Divine — Extract from its secret rules — Society of 
St. Osmund — Its rules and objects — Prays for the Pope — Its silly 
superstitions — Driving the Devil out of Incense and Flowers — The 
Adoration of the Cross — A degrading spectacle — Its Mary worship — Holy 
Relics — Advocates Paying for Masses for the Dead — The Society merged 
in the Alcuin Club — The Club joined by several Bishops — Laymen's 
Ritual Institute of Norwich — Its Secret Oath — Secret Guild Books of 
St. Alphege, Southwark — Guild of St. John the Evangelist, at St. Alban's, 
Holborn — Confraternity of All Saints', Margaret Street — The Railway 
Guild of the Holy Cross. 

PROBABLY the majority of my readers will be 
surprised to learn that there exists a Purgatorial 
Society nominally within the Church of England. 
Yet, strange and almost incredible as this may seem, it is a 
fact. This Society bears the title of " The Guild of All 
Souls," and was founded in the year 1873, for the special 
purpose of propagating within the Church of England a 
belief in Purgatory, and as a result of this, the offering 
of Prayers for the Dead, and of Masses to get them out of 
Purgatorial flames. It is a widespread organization, with 
branches all over England, and also in Scotland, the United 
States, Madras, Montreal, Prince Edward Island, Port 

15 * 


Elizabeth, Barbados, and New South Wales. According to 
the annual report for 1897 — as recorded in the Church 
Times, May 28th, 1897 — the Guild possesses seventy-one 
Branches. It includes amongst its members 646 clergymen, 
which is certainly a large number for such an extremely 
Romish society. The semi-secrecy of the Guild is shown 
in the fact that the public are never permitted to know who 
these clergymen are, with the exception of those who form 
its Council. The Guild issues a quarterly Intercession Paper, 
which is a strictly secret document. It always contains a 
list of churches in which Masses for the Dead are said 
every month, together with the names of deceased persons 
for whom prayer is asked. The latest copy of the Annual 
Report which I have been able to secure is that for 1895. It 
states that " During November, in addition to those on All 
Souls' Day, there were 991 Special Requiem Masses [offered] 
in connection with the Guild, and the regular Requiem 
Masses maintained throughout the year are now, at least, 
480 each month." l 

For the use of its members the Guild of All Souls has 
issued a book entitled the Office of the Dead A ccording to the 
Roman and Sarum Uses — certainly not according to the use 
of the Book of Common Prayer, which is altogether too 
Protestant a compilation to suit the purposes of the Guild 
of All Souls. It has also published a book, entitled the 
" Treatise of S. Catherine of Genoa on Purgatory, edited with 
an Introductory Essay by a Priest-Associate of the Guild of 
All Souls." The title-page states that it is published by 
" John Hodges " ; but it has on several occasions been 
officially advertised in the Church Times as one of the 
" Publications M of the Guild, and therefore I hold it 
responsible for its contents. In the portion which contains 
the translation of what Catherine of Genoa wrote, we read 
(in the chapter entitled " Of the Necessity of Purgatory : 

1 Guild of All Souls, Report, 1895, p. 3. 


What a terrible Thing it is ") that the pains of Purgatory 
are "as sensible as the pains of hell." 2 The Priest- 
Associate of the Guild of All Souls who writes the 
Introductory Essay is evidently enraptured with what he 
actually terms " the extreme moderation of the Roman Church 
upon the doctrine of Purgatory." 3 This gentleman's Popish 
sympathies are further manifested by his unblushing avowal 
that he believes in Transubstantiation ! 

" It is only," he writes, " within the last eight or nine years, since 
the publication of Mr. Cobb's Kiss of Peace, that Anglicans have 
begun to realize that there is no essential difference between the 
doctrine of the Real Presence, as they hold it, and the doctrine of 
Transubstantiation, as defined by the Council of Trent." * 

In the official Manual of the Guild of All Souls several 
" Litanies for the Faithful Departed " are printed. From 
these I take the following extracts :— 


" That it may please Thee to give rest to the e ^? 

souls of the faithful departed, c^ ST 
That it may please Thee to cause light 

perpetual to shine upon them, ^ „, 

That it may please Thee to wash them in £ ^ 

Thy Precious Blood and to clothe them - 5* 
in white robes." 6 

" From the shades of death, where they sit desiring 5 

the light of Thy Countenance, £ 

From Thine Anger, which they grieve to have ^ a. 

provoked by their negligence and ingratitude, ^ ^ 

From the bonds of sin, wherein they have been * 5 j*- 

entangled by the disorder of their affections, b 
From the pains, which are the just penalty 

of their sins." 6 

* Give Thy noly dead, O Lord, 
Portion in the Sacrifice, 
And prayers offered in Thy Church, 
Hear us, Holy Jesu. 

2 S. Catherine of Genoa on Purgatory, p. 40. 

8 Ibid., p. 11. 4 I oid., p. 12. 

5 Manual o/G.A. 5., pp. 16, 17. • Ibid., p. 20. 



" Make them share, O Jesu Blest, 
In the intercession 
Of the Saints before Thy Throne, 
Hear us, Holy Jesu. 

" Make all prayers and pious deeds, 
Holy rites and services, 
To increase their happiness, 
Hear us, Holy Jesu." 7 

In a sermon preached for the Guild of All Souls, on " All 
Souls' Day, 1883 " — a Popish festival not found in the 
Prayer Book Kalendar — by the Rev. H. Lloyd Russell, 
Vicar of the Annunciation, Chislehurst, that gentleman 
affirmed that — 

" We believe that the mercy and justice of God in His dealings 
with their [faithful departed] souls, are reconciled by their being 
detained for a certain time in a middle place, there to be punished, and 
purified, and dealt with, according to His good pleasure, until He sees 
fit to admit them to the enjoyment of the Beatific Vision." 8 

Six years later, in 1889, the annual sermon before the 
Guild of All Souls was preached in St. Alban's, Holborn, 
by the Rev. John Barnes Johnson. The preacher told his 
deluded hearers that — 

" Blessed are they whom the Divine Fire thus changes now in the 
time of this mortal life. Blessed are they who know this Fire here on 
earth as the Fire of Love. But those who know it not, those who 
flee from it, yet cannot escape the Fire. If they remain in the world, 
St. Peter tells us the world is reserved for Fire. If they die, and go 
hence, the Fire awaits them in Purgatory ; or, more terrible, in Hell. 
And everywhere the Fire that awaits them is the same Fire." 9 

" God, even in the Fire, shall be known [by the faithful dead] to 
be their Father, burning out all the falsehood and revealing the truth. 
Therefore let us join together now in offering the Sacrifice of the Mass 
for all departed souls." 10 

7 Manual ofG.A.S.,^. 26. 

8 The Intermediate State, by the Rev. H. L. Russell, p. 9. Published by the 
Guild of All Souls. 

9 Things Present and Things to Come, by J. B. Johnson, p. 17. London. 
Kegan Paul, 1890. 

10 Ibid., p. 22. 

"the souls in purgatory." 231 

For the year 1894 the annual sermon for the Guild of All 
Souls was preached by the Rev. E. G. de Salis Wood, 
Vicar of St. Clement's, Cambridge. Mr. Wood said that — 

" Amongst all the consoling truths of our holy religion there was 
none more consoling than what Christian doctrine taught concerning 
Purgatory ; and the consideration of the state of the holy souls 
detained there, though at all times most salutary, was especially 
salutary at the present. . . . The merits of Christ reigned every- 
where, in Purgatory as well as on earth ; the glorious, merciful work 
which was done for Christian souls in Purgatory was done by the 
merits of Christ alone. Never let the objection weigh with them for 
a single moment that the Christian doctrine of Purgatory evacuated 
the merits of Christ. It did nothing of the kind ; on the contrary, it 
extended them to the other world as well as to this ; and so we did 
well to intercede for the souls in Purgatory. Theirs was a blessed 
state, though one of pain." n 

Now, of course, for all this, as every well-informed and 
loyal Churchman knows, there is not to be found, either in 
Scripture or in the formularies of the Church of England, 
the slightest approach to an appearance of any authority 
whatsoever. You may search your Bible and Prayer Book 
from cover to cover, and you will not find one word in either 
of them which sanctions the teaching of the Guild of All 
Souls. The only proper place for such teaching is within 
the Church of Rome, and it would be a great blessing to the 
Church of England if every one of its members went there 
at once, without waiting for Corporate Reunion ; though, of 
course, they would not be spiritually improved by their 
secession. But is it not an extraordinary thing that when 
the important living of St. Matthias', Earl's Court, London, 
fell vacant in 1892, the Bishop of London (now Archbishop 
of Canterbury), Dr. Temple, as patron, gave it to the 
Rev. Jonas Pascal Fitzwilliam Davidson, President of this 
very Guild of All Souls ! This is the way in which many 
of our Bishops too frequently act. Not having the fear of 
loyal Churchmen before their eyes, they become indifferent 

11 Church Times, November 9th, 1894, p. 1195. 


to their opinions, and not seldom treat an earnest remon- 
strance with contempt. But a day of reckoning will surely 
come, when the Bishops will be required to put their house 
in order. Just now, in connection with various Bills in 
Parliament, they are seeking to increase the powers they 
already possess. But how can we trust them with more 
power, so long as we behold them using that which they 
already possess in shielding — through the Episcopal Veto — 
law-breakers from the punishment of their misdeeds ; and 
even in promoting these very law-breakers to positions of 
honour and trust ? The powers the Bishops at present 
possess are too often used to the injury of the truth, and in 
the propagation of error. 

I have, in the chapter on the Confraternity of the Blessed 
Sacrament, given quotations from the Homilies of the 
Church of England condemning both Prayers for the 
Dead and Purgatory. It is very well known that Purgatory 
is no part of Christianity ; it is purely heathen in its origin. 
It is a doctrine well calculated to make the dying beds of 
Christians miserable. Who could have "a desire to depart" 
from this life with the prospect of Purgatorial pains before 
him ? The religion of Purgatory, as it exists in the Church 
of Rome, is a very hard one for poor people, who cannot 
afford to pay their priests liberally for Masses for the Dead. 
And there are signs that the payment for Masses is about to 
be restored within the Church of England. Bishop Latimer 
spoke very truly of " Purgatory Pick Purse." Is there any 
limit to the toleration of the Church of England ? Is the 
time coming when she will tolerate anything and everything 
— except decided Protestantism? At present she is torn 
with dissensions. The present state of things cannot go 
on very much longer. We have infallible authority for 
saying : — " If a house be divided against itself, that house 
cannot stand" (Mark hi. 25). 

There is another mysterious and very secret Society 
nominally within the Church of England, whose special 


delight it is to work in and " level up " Protestant parishes. 
It is known as the " Order of the Holy Redeemer." From 
what I have been able to ascertain concerning its mischievous 
operations, I should not be surprised to hear that it is 
secretly affiliated to the " Order of Corporate Reunion." No 
owl ever loved the darkness more than does the " Order of 
the Holy Redeemer." It possesses an inner circle known as 
the " Brotherhood of the Holy Cross." I possess a copy of 
its secret " Manual for Brethren of the B. H. C." It states 
that " this Brotherhood was started by a few friends who 
were studying for Holy Orders." The third of its Rules is 
as follows : — 

" That, as the work of the B. H. C. can be best accomplished 
without opposition, its very existence be kept in strict secrecy." 

The fourth Rule is "That Brethren shall be faithful 
members of the Anglican Church " — though how that can be 
is hard indeed to understand. They may be nominally 
members of the Church of England, but that they are 
" faithful " members I will never admit. The Brethren are 
required " To endeavour to get others to join this Brother- 
hood " ; but it is cautiously added that " Before speaking to 
anyone about it you should obtain advice and instruction 
how to proceed from your Superior." In a secret Inter- 
cession Paper of the Brotherhood of the Holy Cross for 
August, 1889, the members are requested to pray " For help 
for band of Catholics, working with success in Islington " — 
a thoroughly Protestant neighbourhood. A list of " Recom- 
mended books" is added, which includes the Glories of 
Mary, a most idolatrous book in honour of the Virgin Mary, 
written by " St." Alphonsus Liguori. It is so superstitious 
as well as idolatrous that even some Roman Catholics are 
found who are ashamed of its utterances. 

As to the larger Order of the Holy Redeemer I learn from 
its secretly circulated Monthly Leaflet for April, 1891, edited 
by " the Secretary General," that those who join the Order 
as " Postulants," must make and sign a " Declaration " of 


their faith, which is printed in this same issue of the Monthly 
Leaflet. It is as follows : — 

" The Declaration Required of Postulants for Admission 
to the Order of the Holy Redeemer. 

"I having signed the Nomination Form of the above 

Order, desire to profess my faith. 

" I believe : — 

" I. The Catholic Faith, as defined by the Seven General Councils 
accepted by the Undivided Church, and as commonly received in the 
Apostles' Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Creed of St. Athanasius. 

" II. The common Sacramental statements of the Western Council 
of Trent and the Oriental Synod of Bethlehem. The following is a 
digest of these propositions : — 

" That there are Seven Sacraments instituted by our Lord, 
viz. : — 

i. Baptism which, necessary to all men for Salvation, remits 
original and actual sin, and is the instrumental cause of 

ii. Confirmation. 

iii. The Holy Eucharist in which, after Consecration, our Lord 
Jesus Christ, true God and Man, is truly, really and 
substantially present under the species of Bread and Wine, 
and a whole and perfect Christ is contained in each kind, 
and in every part thereof. Furthermore, that in the Holy 
Eucharist a true and propitiatory Sacrifice is offered for the 
faithful, both living and dead. 

iv. Orders. v. Matrimony. vi. Penance. vii. Extreme 

" III. The position of the Bishop of Rome is that of * Archbishop 
of all the Churches,' i.e., Chief Bishop (and consequently Pastor and 
Teacher) of the Church." 

This is certainly a very sensational document, but the 
whole history of the Order of the Holy Redeemer, so far as 
I have been able to unravel it, is quite in accordance with 
its teaching. In the Bamet Times of May 6th, 1892, appeared 
a very noteworthy letter, in reply to a correspondent, from 
one who, as I happen to know from other sources, held high 
office in the Order of the Holy Redeemer. He signed 


himself as "John, O. H. R.," and gave some important 
information as to the real objects of the Order. 

" In 1887," he wrote, " I joined the Order of the Holy Redeemer, 
a body working within the English Church under Episcopal approval. 
On behalf of the Order in particular, I have written when my 
multifarious duties have permitted me. I daily receive orders from 
the ecclesiastical Superior of the Order, and I hope faithfully execute 
them, but the reception of Holy Orders opens another question, which 
I leave him [his opponent in the correspondence] to propound, and 
to which I will happily give an equally candid answer. Finally, I do 
utterly and entirely love, with my whole heart and soul, all Christian 
bodies, more especially the Church of Rome, which, I believe, despite 
accidents and not inherent faults of discipline, to be the purest and 
most apostolic body that has ever existed, impeccable and infallible. 
Likewise, I believe that the Pope is not by honorary Primacy, but by 
Divine appointment and by the mercy of God, Supreme Head of the 
whole Church of Christ throughout the world, and that those who 
refuse his rule forfeit all title to the name of Catholicity. . . . 

" Moreover, I believe that in discipline, doctrine, and in morality, the 
Church of England has been utterly corrupt, as the need of the Oxford 
Revival and the malignant opposition to it from the children of this 
world has fully attested, and I believe that no man is justified in staying 
within that Church, save when he feels the vocation of God to 
assist in restoring her to her lost place, in humble, implicit, 
and unquestioning submission to the see of peter, and to the 
authority of our holy father, the pope, which is the object 
of the Order of the Holy Redeemer." 

Here we have, indeed, the very essence of what is 
commonly termed Jesuitism, and in its most virulent form. 
Where was the conscience of the man who wrote like this ? 
And yet it can scarcely be considered worse than the 
statement of the Rev. Dr. Ward's biographer, that he 
(Dr. Ward) stayed for years in the Church of England for 
the sole purpose of bringing over a greater number to 
Rome. 12 

A " Notice " which appears in the Intercession Paper of the 
Order of the Holy Redeemer, for February, 1890, shows how 

u See above, p 15. 


terribly afraid the Order was lest its secret documents should 
be lost : — " It may be interesting to the Brethren to learn 
that the legal proceedings recently taken by the Order have 
been perfectly successful. The documents unlawfully detained 
were yielded, and further steps rendered unnecessary." In 
the following April the Order was in a most joyful condition, 
for it expected to receive the approval of the Bishop of 
London (Dr. Temple). In its Intercession Paper — or Leaflet, 
as it is sometimes called — for that month, appears the 
following announcement : — " It may interest the Brethren 
to hear that the approval of the work of the O. H. R. was 
asked of the Bishop of London. His decision is yet 
pending." Later on a High Church Vicar wrote to the 
Bishop on the subject, and received as an answer that he 
had never given any approbation to the Order. This 
gentleman, the Rev. V. H. Moyle, Vicar of Ashampstead, 
sent the Bishop's letter to the English Churchman, in which 
it appeared on June 2nd, 1892. Mr. Moyle, in sending this 
letter, added this further information concerning the 
O. H. R. : — " They have recently taken and opened a Convent 
at Stamford Hill, London. . . . Their object being the 
ultimate subjection of England and England's Church to 
Popery, I would warn all your readers against them." The 
March, 1890, Intercession Paper had a mysterious request for 
prayer " For several men, wishing to work for God, who are 
labouring at present under a false banner." Does that mean 
that they were labouring for Ritualism under the " false 
banner " of Protestantism ? It looks very much like it. A 
pamphlet circulated by the Order affirms that its " Superior 
General " " was ordained priest " ; 13 but it does not say by 
whom he was ordained. In a correspondence which has 
since appeared in the Roman Catholic Tablet, this gentleman 
asserted that he was also in Episcopal orders. I have since 
found out his real name, and it does not appear in the Clergy 
List, or Crockford's Clerical Directory, Was he ordained and 

18 0. H. R. Tracts, No. I., p. 12. 


consecrated secretly by " Bishop " F. G. Lee, of the " Order 
of Corporate Reunion " ? This is another Jesuitical mystery 
which needs unravelling. I once had a letter from the 
" Brother John " who wrote the letter to the Barnet Times, 
quoted above, in which occurs the following paragraph : — 
" Shall I have the pleasure of seeing you personally at All 
Saints', Lambeth, next Wednesday night, or shall I send 
tickets ? I can get you a seat in the choir of Lady Chapel 
with the Order," that is, the Order of the Holy Redeemer. 
I did not accept the invitation, for I did not wish anyone to 
suppose that I had anything to do with such a society. But 
Brother John's letter was that which first led me to suspect 
that there was a connection of some sort between the 
O. H. R. and the O. C. R., for All Saints', Lambeth, is the 
Church of which " Bishop " F. G. Lee was and still is the 
Vicar. In 1891 the O. H. R. issued to its members a 
monthly paper entitled the Catholic, which described itself 
as " The Official Publication of the Order of the Holy 
Redeemer." In the October issue amongst the intercessions 
asked for was this : — " That devotion to Our Lady may 
spread in England ; " it also contained a Hymn to the Virgin 
of a most idolatrous character, and an article in favour of 
" Invocation of Saints and Angels." This was followed, in 
the January, 1892, number by the following interesting item 
of news : — 

"On S. Thomas Day, 1891, the Chapter of S. Thomas, of Canter- 
bury met at the Home of the Good Shepherd. The Superior presided, 
and after Evensong had been sung, proceeded to the admission of a 
Postulant. The chapel was well filled, and included among the 
congregation were many who are not members of the Order. The 
Rev. Fr. Square delivered a short address upon our work, and upon 
the conclusion of the office all adjourned to enjoy the unfailing 
hospitality of the Rev. Br. Philip, the Provincial of S. W. London." 

It will be observed that mention is here made of two 
clergymen, the " Rev. Fr. Square," and the " Rev. Br. 
Philip," but who they are I cannot tell. In a leaflet issued 


by the Order, which I had lent to me in 1893, the names 
and addresses were printed of those to whom application 
might be made — by those wishing to join — for further par- 
ticulars concerning the Order. Only one of these was a 
clergyman, and he was simply styled " Father George." 
By the aid of the address given I was able to find this 
person out, in the far East of London. What was my 
astonishment when I discovered that he was, and had been 
for the previous two years, acting as curate to the only 
Protestant incumbent in that part of London ! I felt it 
my duty to see the incumbent, who, there and then, sent 
for this " Father George," and asked him, in my presence, 
if he was the person mentioned in the leaflet of the 
O. H. R., which I had brought with me ? " Father George " 
was very much astounded at being found out, and very 
much frightened, too ; but he was compelled to acknow- 
ledge that he was " Father George." The old Protestant 
Vicar sternly, and yet with a kindly voice, asked him if 
he thought it right or honourable to come to him — an 
Evangelical and Protestant clergyman — as curate, while he 
held office in an Order which was engaged in bringing the 
Church of England back to the Pope ? The result of our 
interview was that the curate had to leave his curacy. 
He was " run to earth." On looking through the Clergy 
List for 1897, I was pleased to find that " Father George " 
had had no curacy since 1893, when he left East London. 
The old Vicar pleaded so hard with me to spare him the 
worry of publicity that I have, out of, it maybe, mistaken 
kindness to him, abstained from mentioning the case in 
print, with one exception, until now. I am prepared to 
give names and addresses to those who prove to me that 
they have a right to question me on the subject. 

I am not going to say that the Order of the Holy 
Redeemer is a large body. I do not think it is. But it 
claims to have a great many Branches, and to have even 
extended its borders into several of our Colonies. There is 


evidently money at the disposal of the ostensible leaders, 
while the real leaders keep themselves within their native 
darkness. A few men of this class can do a great deal 
of mischief, probably where it is least expected. A young 
man who joined the Order told me that he was introduced 
to it by the teacher of his Bible-class in an Evangelical 
Sunday-school in Islington. The case I unearthed at East 
London shows further the wish of the Order to play a 
subtle part in Protestant parishes. Moral obligations sit 
loosely on a certain class of minds. Many persons are not 
particular as to the weapons they use, so that what they 
term " The Church " gains the benefit of their operations. 

I wish that I could think the Order of the Holy 
Redeemer the only secret Ritualistic Society which, like the 
owl, loves most to work in the dark. I have heard — and 
on what I consider reliable authority — that there exist 
Ritualistic Societies, the members of which are required 
never to part with their rules to anyone outside their ranks. 
There lies before me, as I write, the Rules and Constitution 
of a Society which terms itself the " Order of St. John the 
Divine," and which is being pushed just now by Ritualists 
in East London. It contains the following "Notice": — 

" The Objects, Rules, and Constitution of the Order are submitted 
for your perusal and consideration in strict confidence. In accepting 
this sheet for perusal you pledge yourself that you will neither show it, 
nor impart its contents in any way, to any other person." 

The Order, says the document, requires that " none shall 
be admitted who are not Communicants of the Church 
Catholic in England." The real objects of these secret 
organizations are never, I believe, fully committed to print 
or to writing, but are given verbally only. 

There is a small section of the advanced Ritualistic party 
who have become so bold that they flaunt their Romeward 
leanings in the face of the public in the most unblushing 
manner. Some members of this section formed themselves 
into a society which termed itself the "Society of St. Osmund." 


It was founded in 1889, and several men of note joined its 
ranks. In 1895 it printed, in its Annual Report, the names 
of the Bishop of Bloemfontein, the Bishop of Pretoria, the 
Bishop of Cairo, United States, the Dean of Argyll and the 
Isles, and the Dean of Bloemfontein in its list of Vice- 
Presidents. It was permitted to hold its annual meetings 
for 1891, 1892, 1893, 1894, and 1895 in the Church House, 
Westminster. In 1892 the chair was taken by Sir Theodore 
C. Hope, k.c.s.i., who is also a member of the Council of 
the English Church Union ; and in 1893 by Mr. Athelstan 
Riley, also a member of the Council of the E. C. U., and 
one who has made himself very prominent as a member of 
the London School Board. In the handbill of the anniver- 
sary for 1892 it was announced : — " The Bishop-elect of 
Bloemfontein, South Africa (a Vice-President of the Society 
of St. Osmund) will be presented with a Set of Low Mass 
Vestments at this meeting." At its anniversary in 1894, as 
announced in the Annual Report printed beforehand, " The 
Holy Eucharist " was " offered up " in St. Margaret Pattens, 
Rood Lane, London, " by the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop 
of Cairo (Illinois)." During the London School Board 
Election, in 1894, the Society of St. Osmund was exposed 
in the English Churchman, and as the exposure was reprinted 
in a large number of daily papers it created a great deal of 
excitement. Down to that period the Society had been in 
the habit of printing with its Annual Report a list of those 
churches in London, the Provinces, and the Colonies in 
which Holy Communion would be celebrated " for the 
intention of the Society " ; but after the exposure a fit of 
dread seems to have seized the Council, for in the Report 
for 1895 the list was suppressed, for obvious reasons. In an 
official paper of the Society it is stated that its " Objects " 
are : — 

" 1. — The Restoration and Use of English Ceremonial in the 
English Church, the rubrical directions of the Sarurn Liturgical Books 
being taken as the basis. 


tc 2. — The publication of such books, pamphlets, or leaflets as, in 
the judgment of the Council, are likely to promote the objects of the 

"3. — The encouragement of Liturgical study among the Members 
of the Society. 

" 4. — The assisting by advice, and in other ways, those who are 
desirous of following English customs in their Churches." 

All this looks comparatively innocent. The Society was 
not going to promote the advance of " Roman " Ritual. It 
only wanted to restore "English Ceremonial. ,, What could 
be more commendable from a loyal Churchman's point of 
view ? But it also wished to restore — and here lay the real 
cause of its existence — the use of " the Rubrical directions 
of the Sarum Liturgical Books," and this meant a great 
deal ; more, in fact, than the general public were aware of. 
It meant the restoration of the Ritual which was in use in 
England before the Reformation, a Ritual which had as great 
an authority and sanction from the Pope as that which is 
technically termed " Roman Ritual." The chief difference 
between the two is that Sarum Ritual is far more elaborate, 
superstitious, and puerile than that termed " Roman." 
Anyone who needs proof of the thoroughly Popish char- 
acter of the Ritual advocated by the Society of St. 
Osmund cannot do better than consult a book which it 
published, entitled Ceremonial of the Altar, compiled by 
a clergyman on its Council, who subsequently seceded to 
the Church of Rome. This book has been frequently 
advertised amongst its "Publications," though the title- 
page states that it is published by a London firm. The 
work is remarkable also for its very advanced Romish 
doctrine, implied in its prayers and directions. It tells 
the Ritualistic priest how to use his eyes, how to use his 
hands, and when he is to turn his little finger in certain 
directions, and how to place his thumbs. With regard 
to his hands, there is a whole section devoted to telling 
the priest how to manage them ; when they are to be 



" joined,'* when " extended," and when " laid on the 
altar." He is to bless the people with " fingers out- 
stretched, little finger towards persons blessed." He is 
warned not to "fidget at the altar," told that he must 
" stand evenly on both feet " ; and on no account must 
he forget to " keep the elbows to the sides when praying 
with hands extended." He is even told when to " kiss " 
the table and the Gospel book, and other things; and 
how " with the right thumb (to) make a small sign of 
the Cross." On no account must the priest omit " at the 
name of Mary to bow slightly," and also " at the name of 
the Saint of the day " ; and he must not forget to say the 
words of consecration " with his elbows resting on the edge 
of the altar." The directions are so numerous and minute 
that it is no wonder if they give a fit of the " fidgets " to 
any nervous priest who has to observe them. 

The Ceremonial of the Altar, in its "Ordinary of the 
Mass," directs the priest to say : — 

" I confess to God, to Blessed Mary, to all the Saints, and to you, 
that I have sinned exceedingly in thought, word, and deed, by my 
fault : I beg Holy Mary, all the Saints of God, and you to pray for 
me." 14 

The most startling prayer of all is that which is printed 
on the portion entitled the " Canon of the Mass." The 
priest is directed to pray — 

"That Thou [God] wouldst be pleased to keep it [the Church] 
in peace, to preserve, unite, and govern it throughout the world $ 
and also for Thy servant our Pope N., our Bishop N., our 
Sovereign N." 15 

Some excuse might be made for praying for the Pope. 
We should pray for all men. But to pray for the Pope as 
" our Pope " is quite a different matter. He is not the 
Pope of English Churchmen, and a Society which 
recognizes him in that position cannot be said to be loyal 

14 Ceremonial of the Altar : a Guide to Low Mass, compiled by a Priest, p. 22. 
Second edition. 15 Ibid., p. 45. 


to the Church of England. It has been said by friends 
of the Society of St. Osmund that this book was issued for 
the purposes of Liturgical study, and not for the actual use 
of the clergy of the present day. But this theory is refuted 
by the statement of the editor in his Preface, who declares 
that "The directions have been drawn up for the use of 
loyal [?] sons of the Church of England." 16 I ought to have 
mentioned above that one of the directions, which, I think, 
may reasonably be termed disgusting, is that which tells 
a clergyman, just after he has given the Communion to 
a sick person — 

" Wash your fingers, and let the sick man drink the ablution." x ? 
The Society of St. Osmund has shown itself a warm 
friend to Mariolatry. Mr. Athlestan Riley translated for it 
the Hours of the Blessed Virgin Mary, According to the Sarum 
Breviary, and also the Mirror of Our Lady. When we 
remember that there is not to be found in the Bible a single 
petition from a saint on earth to a saint in heaven, and that 
no such petition or invocation can be found within the 
Book of Common Prayer, it is easy to see that those who 
bring in such Popish practices are thoroughly dissatisfied 
with what they must consider the meagre provision for 
their devotional life placed at their disposal by either the 
Word of God or the Church of England. In this Mirror of 
Our Lady we read the following statements : — 

" Our merciful Lady is that Star that succoureth mankind in the 
troublesome sea of this world, and bringeth her lovers to the haven of 
health, therefore it is worthy that she be served and praised at 
Mattins time." 18 

" When all other succour faileth our Lady's grace helpeth. 
Compline is the end of the day 5 and in the end of our life we have 
most need of our Lady's help, and therefore in all these hours we 
ought to do her worship, and praising." 19 

"It is reasonable that seven times each day she [Mary] be 
worshipped and praised." 


16 Ibid., p. iii. 17 Ibid., p. 118. 

i ? Mirror of Our Lady, p. 7. w Ibid., p. 8. *> Ibid. , p. 9. 

16 * 


u After ye have then called yourself and others to the praising of 
God and of His glorious mother, our Lady, ye sing an hymn in 
worship and praising of her." 21 

" Here ye incline, both in token and in reverence of our Lord's 
meek coming down for to be man, and also in worship of that most 
clean and holy Virgin s womb." 23 

There is nothing, I think, in the whole range of Roman 
Catholic literature more awfully idolatrous in the way of 
Mary worship, than this. So long as God's Word stands : — 
" Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and Him only 
shalt thou serve," so long must this worship, whether it be 
termed Latvia, Doulia, or Hyperdoulia, be condemned by all 
true friends of Christianity. 

Idolatry and superstition are closely related. It is so in 
the Society of St. Osmund. It has published another book 
full of superstition as well as idolatry, entitled the Services 
of the Holy Week, The friends of the Society have pleaded 
that it, like the Ceremonial of the Altar, was issued for the 
purposes of Liturgical study, and not for actual use by 
English Churchmen of the nineteenth century. But in 
this case also the documents of the Society itself refute 
the plea put forward. In the annual report for 1895 the 
Council state that " a second edition of the Services of Holy 
Week has been published," and it adds that " a considerable 
demand for this publication points to the fact that there is 
an increasing desire to become acquainted with the special 
offices of this holy season, ruthlessly swept away at the 
Reformation, but now being happily revived among us." 23 
This proves that the book is designed for use, and not for 
study only. On turning to the services for " Good Friday," 
as provided in this work, we find that of the Adoration 
of the Cross set forth in full. This very idolatrous per- 
formance is now actually to be seen in several Ritualistic 
Churches each Good Friday. At St. Cuthbert's, Philbeach 
Gardens, London, for several years past, the Vicar has 

21 Mirror of Our Lady, p. 20. 22 Ibid., p. 34. 

33 Annual Report of Society of St. Osmund, for 1895, p 4. 


issued a printed notice of services to be held in his 
Church in Passion Week. It has always included the 
announcement that the " Adoration of the Cross " — as it is 
therein termed — would take place at 9.30 a.m. on Good 
Friday. I have a copy of the notice for 1896 by me as I 
write. In that year I was present at the service, and 
beheld the clergy, choir, and about two hundred men, 
women, and children, adore the Cross — which lay at the 
foot of the steps on the floor — by throwing themselves flat 
on the floor, and kissing the foot of the Cross while in this 
literally " sprawling " attitude, the choir meanwhile singing, 
from Hymns Ancient and Modem, No. 97, the hymn addressed 
to the Cross : — 

" Faithful Cross, above all other 

One and only noble Tree, 
None in foliage, none in blossom, 

None in fruit thy peer may be j 
Sweetest wood and sweetest iron j 

Sweetest weight is hung on thee." 

This was sung in accordance with the directions given in 
the Services of Holy Week. The following extract from the 
service for the Adoration of the Cross still further reveals its 
thoroughly idolatrous character : — 

" Then the Priests, uncovering the Cross by the right side of the 
Altar, shall sing this Antiphon: — 

" Behold the Holy Cross, on which the Saviour of the world did 
hang for us. come and let us worship. 

" The choir, genuflecting, reply : — 

11 Antiphon. We venerate Thy Cross, O Lord." 

" Then the clerks shall proceed to venerate the Cross, with feet 
unshod, beginning with the Senior.'* 

" When this is done, the Cross shall be solemnly carried through 
the midst of the choir by the two aforesaid priests, the Candle- 
bearers preceding them, and shall be set down before some Altar, 
where it shall be venerated by the people." ^ 

For " Easter Eve " a service is provided for " Blessing 
the Fire," in which it is stated that " Holy Water is sprinkled 

* Services of Holy Week, pp. 30-32. 


over the fire." 26 Incense is to be used, and a form is given 
for driving the devil out of it, as follows : — 

"I exorcise thee, most unclean spirit, and every illusion of the 
enemy, in the Name of God the Father Almighty, and in the Name 
of Jesus Christ His Son, and in the might of the Holy Ghost, that 
thou may est go forth and depart from this creature of Frankincense with 
all thy fraud and malice : that this creature may be sanc^-tiried in the 
Name of our Lord Jesus Christ ; that all who taste, or touch, or smell 
the same may receive the strength and aid of the Holy Ghost." 26 

A collect is then offered up, in which God is asked to send 
down His blessing "upon this incense," that "by the smoke 
thereof every illusion whereby the enemy doth assault soul 
or body may be put to flight." 27 Soon after follows " The 
Blessing of the Paschal Candle." 28 A Deacon is ordered 
to " put Incense into the candle in the form of a cross " ; 
and God is asked to accept " this solemn oblation of wax, 
the work of bees." 29 The officiating priest is ordered to 
put on a red Cope, and " stand before the Altar," while the 
Litany of the Saints is sung. The Litany is too long to 
print here entire. I therefore select from it the following 
items : — 

" Holy Mary, Pray for us. 
Holy Mother of God, Pray. 
Holy Michael, Pray. 
St. Peter, Pray. 

All ye holy Apostles and Evangelists, Pray. 
St. Gregory, Pray. 
St. Sixtus, Pray. 

St. Denys with his companions, Pray. 
St. Augustine, Pray. 
St. Agnes, Pray. 
All Saints, Pray." 30 

Later on in the service the priest is required to " drop 
wax from the candle into the font in the form of a cross " ; 
and to " dip the candle into the font, making the sign of 

25 Services of Holy Week, p. 40. 2G Ibid., p. 38. 27 Ibid., p. 39. 

88 Ibid., p. 40. » Ibid., p. 42. 3° Ibid., pp. 47, 48. 


the cross with it." 31 All this to every loyal and soberminded 
Churchman must seem childish and puerile to a degree, 
and those persons may be pardoned who doubt whether 
anyone in a state of sanity could, with a solemn face, 
publicly perform such an outrageous farce. But it is no 
laughing matter. Unless this sort of thing is put down by 
authority it will increase as the years go on, and the evil 
will grow worse with time. Some, as they read this, will 
naturally ask, Have the Bishops gone asleep ? They have 
taken an oath to " banish and drive away " all false doctrine 
contrary to God's Word, and the ritual which I have 
described is designed to teach false doctrine. Why, then, 
do not their lordships act ? When an unfortunate Pro- 
testant Minister does anything extreme the Bishops become 
wide awake at once, and soon show that they possess power 
to put down what they dislike. Suppose they were to 
publicly declare that they would not license a curate to 
any Vicar who tolerates these idolatrous and superstitious 
practices in his Church ? That would soon bring many of 
them to their senses, and compel these lawless rebels to 
submit to authority. We want a Bench of Bishops who 
will fearlessly do their duty. As Episcopal Sees fall vacant, 
pressure must be brought to bear on the Prime Minister to 
recommend for the vacant Sees men who will insist on the 
supremacy of law and order in their dioceses, and sternly 
put down these Ritualistic Anarchists, whose own will is 
their only supreme law, and who persist in doing that which 
is right only in their own eyes. 

To return to the Services of Holy Week. It provides a 
service for "Palm Sunday," which commences with a 
" Sprinkling of Holy Water," 32 and is followed by the 
priest driving the devil out of " the flowers and leaves " to 
be used in the service :— " I exorcise thee," he exclaims, 
* Creature of flowers or branches . . . and henceforth let 
all the strength of the adversary, all the host of the devil, 
81 Ibid., p. 53. v Ibid., p. 3. 



every power of the enemy, every assault of fiends, be 
expelled and utterly driven away from this creature of flowers 
or branches." 83 I did not know, until I had read this Service, 
that the devil ever resided within flowers. Ritualistic young 
ladies especially will now need to be careful. Would it not 
be wise for them, before going with a bouquet of flowers to 
the theatre, to take it to some priestly " Father," in order 
that he may, in this way, drive the devil out of the flowers ? 
If he could drive the devil out of the people who carry the 
flowers, it would be much more profitable. The priest next 
sprinkles " the flowers and leaves" "with Holy Water"; 34 and 
he is required to carefully observe the following Rubric : — 

"When the Palms are being distributed, a Shrine with relics 
[that is, with the holy bones of some supposed Saint] shall be made 
ready, in which shall hang in a Pyx the Host \ and two clerks, not 
joining the procession to the first station, shall come to meet it at the 
place of the first station ; a lantern shall precede it, with an unveiled 
cross and two banners." 35 

Where they are to get the " Relics " from I do not know. 
Can they purchase them at Rome for money? These 
" Relics " are mentioned in several other portions of the 
service. Another service is here provided, by the Society of 
St. Osmund, for M Maundy Thursday." It is ordered that 
the sub-deacon shall "prepare three Hosts to be conse- 
crated," one of which, after consecration shall " be placed 
with the cross in the sepulchre.'" 86 On this day, it appears, 
" the oilstock of the Holy Chrism is kissed in place of the 
Pax." After this the " altar " is to be washed by the priest 
with wine and water, who is to finish up the business by 
kissing it. 37 Before closing my remarks on this book I 
must mention that on Good Friday the Pope is ordered to 
be prayed for in terms which can only be used by those 
Ritualists who are thoroughly disloyal to the independence of 

33 Services of Holy Week, p. 3. 
tf ibid., p. 17. 

34 Ibid., p. 5. 

tf Ibid., pp. 19, 20. 

« Ibid., p. 6. 


the Church of England of all Papal control. The following 
extracts prove this : — 

"Let us pray also for our most blessed Pontiff N., that our God 
and Lord, who hath chosen him from the Order of the Episcopate, 
would preserve him in health and safety to His Holy Church, for the 
governance of God's holy people." 

" Almighty and everlasting God . . . regard our prayers : and 
with Thy mercy preserve our chosen prelate j that all Christian 
people governed by such authority, and obeying so great a Pontiff, may 
ever increase in faith and works." w 

The wonder is that the people who teach this sort of 
thing, do not consistently " obey so great a Pontiff," by at 
once going over openly to his communion. If the Pope is 
appointed by God, as is here asserted, " for the governance 
of God's holy people " without exception, then the conduct 
of those Ritualists who believe this is undoubtedly that 
which is usually termed " double dealing." We cannot afford 
to laugh at or despise this sort of thing. It has a tendency 
to grow and multiply, like weeds in a garden. The sooner 
these Popish weeds are pulled up out of the garden of the 
Church of England the better it will be for those healthy 
plants whose proper place is in her soil. It is nearly thirty 
years since the Ritualists first published a translation into 
English of the Liturgy of the Church of Sarum. Canon 
T. T. Carter, of Clewer, Superior General of the Confrater- 
nity of the Blessed Sacrament, wrote an Introduction to it 
in which he affirmed that the translation was " a boon of the 
greatest value " ; and expressed his own personal " sense 
of its great value." 39 In the " Canon of the Mass " this 
translation also contains a prayer for " our Pope "; *° and 
as a specimen of superstition I may mention that one of the 
rubrics in it directs : — " Let the Priest rinse his hands, lest 
any remnants of the Body or Blood should have remained on 

88 Ibid., p. 26. 

39 The Liturgy of the Church of Sarum, with Introduction by Rev. T. T. 
Carter, pp. vi., vii. Second edition. London : Hayes. 
• Ibid., p. 63. 


his fingers or in the chalice." * The following prayer is 
very disloyal and Popish : — 

" For the Pope. 
" Let us pray also for the Blessed N. our Pope ; that our God and 
Lord, who elected him to the Order of the Episcopate, may preserve 
him safe to His Holy Church that he may govern the holy people 
of God." 43 

There is not one word of warning in the book which 
contains this prayer, reminding the reader that God never 
did appoint the Pope to " govern the holy people of God." 

There is one other publication of the Society of St. Osmund 
which I must notice, because it proves how anxious some 
of the Ritualists are to revive the evil custom of paying for 
Masses for the Dead, and at the same time to restore many of 
the most degrading death-bed customs of the Papacy, which 
obtained in England during the Dark Ages. It is entitled 
Ceremonial and Offices Connected with the Burial of the Dead, 

" It will be seen," writes the author, " that Chauntry priests were 
not overpaid : but as half a loaf is said to be better than none, surely 
it would be worth the while of some aged or infirm priest to accept a 
moderate stipend or voluntary offering of £60 or £jo a year to act in 
that capacity. 43 One of the most distressing things I know of in the 
Anglican Church is the difficulty of getting a priest to say Mass for 
some departed friend or relation, because when asked he will tell you 
he does not like leing paid for Sacraments, &c. ; but surely this is a 
prudish line to take — the * labourer is worthy of his hire ' — and as 
St. Paul said, 'They which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar.' 

" Let priests then awaken to a greater sense of duty in this respect, 
and the great work of charity they have the power of bestowing, and 
remember that in accepting an Honorarium for a Mass they are not 
receiving a fee, but an offering." 44 

All this means, of course, however covered over with 

41 The Liturgy of the Church of Sarum, with Introduction by Rev. T. T. 
Carter, p. 78. Second edition. London : Hayes. 

42 Ibid., p. 114. 

43 That is, to act as a " Chauntry Priest," whose sole work would be that of 
offering Masses for the Dead to get them out of Purgatory. 

44 Transactions of the Society of St. Osmund, Part III., " Ceremonial and 
Offices Connected with the Burial of the Dead," pp. 73, 74. 


words, a revival of what Bishop Latimer justly denounced 
as "Purgatory Pick Purse." The "honorarium for a Mass" 
is not, says the writer of this pamphlet, "a fee, but an 
offering." But when the priest refuses to say the Mass 
without his "honorarium," would not that refusal be 
equivalent to a demand for a " fee "? It would be the same 
as saying : — " I cannot sell the Lord's Body in this Mass, 
like Judas sold it of old for thirty pieces of silver. That 
would be very wicked ; but for all that, if you cannot give 
me a money * offering,' you cannot have the Mass." What 
is the essential difference, in a case like this, between the 
conduct of Judas and that of the Ritualistic priests? Judas 
might have said to the chief priests, " I cannot sell the 
Lord Jesus to you ; but it is quite open to you to make me 
an ' honorarium,' or free-will * offering ' of thirty pieces of 
silver for my services in handing Him over to you." 

The writer of this pamphlet, towards its close, tells us 
that he has in it sketched those "beautiful rites of our 
Holy Mother the Church with which, in the plenitude of 
her glory, peer and peasant alike were fortified and honoured, 
and through the wickedness of man alone were lost to long 
generations that followed. It becomes nothing less than a 
solemn duty devolving upon us, in this so-called enlightened 
age, to restore and resuscitate all that our forefathers so dearly 
cherished"** Amongst the "beautiful rites" which, in the 
opinion of this Society of St. Osmund, it is our " solemn 
duty " to " restore," are the following, as described in the 
pamphlet which I am considering : — 

" Richard Marsh, Bishop of Durham, in 1220 enjoins as follows : — 
' When the Eucharist is taken to the Sick, let the priest have a clean 
and decent Pyx, so that one always remains in the Church, and in the 
other he carries the Lord's Body to the Sick, the Eucharist itself being 
enclosed in a very clean purse. The Pyx will be covered with a clean 
linen cloth, and a light will be carried before it, and a cross also, 
unless the cross has already been carried to another sick man. A 

46 Ibid., p. 71. 


little bell will also be rung before the priest to excite the devotion of 
the faithful. The priest will always have with him a stole when he 
carries the Eucharist to the Sick, and when the sick man is not very- 
far off the priest will go to him in a surplice. He will have a vessel 
of silver or tin, kept especially for the purpose, that he may give 
to him [the sick man] the ablutions of his fingers after Com- 
munion.' " 46 . \ | 

" Arriving at the sick man's house, the priest sprinkled it with Holy ' 
Water, saying, ' Peace be to this house,' and having heard his Confes- 
sion, absolved him and given him the kiss of peace, he administered 
the Viaticum and Extreme Unction." 47 

"This service [for deceased Guildsmen in the Dark Ages] was 
followed . . by three solemn Masses, at each of which every brother 
present went up at offertory time to the altar and put his Mass 
Penny for the good of the departed soul into the hands of the sacri- 
ficing priest." *• 

I have no doubt that the " sacrificing priest " thought that 
the custom of each brother paying a " Mass Penny " into his 
hands was a very " beautiful rite " indeed, as it appears the 
Society of St. Osmund also does at the present time ; but I 
should imagine that the overwhelming majority of English- 
men are now of a very different opinion. We think the other 
" rites " described above to be far from " beautiful," especi- 
ally that one in which the sick man is to drink the dirty 
water in which the priest has washed his hands ! 

On February 18th, 1897, tne Hon. Secretary and Treasurer 
of the Society of St. Osmund sent out a circular-letter to 
the members announcing that a " general meeting" would 
be held on February 25th " for the purpose of dissolving the 
Society of St. Osmund." This would indeed have been 
good news for English Churchmen, had it been strictly in 
accordance with the facts. What was actually " dissolved " 
was, not the Society, but its name, as is clear from the 
Secretary's letter which appeared in full in the English 
Churchman of February 25th, 1897, page 126. 

46 Transactions of the Society of St. Osmund, Part III., " Ceremonial and 
Offices Connected with the Burial of the Dead," p. 55. 
«' Ibid., p. 56. « Ibid., p. 62. 


" Enclosed," wrote the Secretary to the members of the Society of 
St. Osmund, " are particulars of the ALcuin Club t whose work will 
cover more ground than our Society has been able to touch, and / 
consequently presume that you will continue your support of English 
Ceremonial bij joining the Cluby at least as an Associate, at the annual 
subscription of five shillings. Unless I hear from you to the contrary , 
on the dissolution of the Society of St. Osmund, / shall therefore 
assume that you wish to become an Associate of the Club, and will 
accordingly propose you for election." 

The Secretary of the new " Alcuin Club " is the gentleman 
who had hitherto acted as Secretary of the Society of 
St. Osmund ; and several of the Committee of the " Club " 
are the same gentlemen who served on the Council of the 
Society of St. Osmund. There is, therefore, but little, if 
any, room for doubt that the " Club " and " Society " are to 
all intents and purposes the same. An article on the new 
" Club" appeared in the Church Times of March 19th, 1897, 
from which I learn that it will be a larger and more influen- 
tial organization than the Society was. " Both members and 
associates," it states, " must be in communion with the 
Church of England " ; and it announces that " The Club 
has already been joined by the Bishops of Oxford, Salisbury, 
and Edinburgh," and by Professor W. E. Collins, of King's 
College, London; Canon J. N. Dalton, of Windsor; Canon 
A. J. Mason, of Canterbury ; the Rev. Hugh P. Currie, 
Principal of Wells Theological College ; and Canon W. E. 
Newbolt, of St. Paul's Cathedral. The names of the Com- 
mittee are given by the Church Times. The clergy are all 
extreme Ritualists. 

"The work of the Alcuin Club," says the Church Times, " will be 
chiefly in books and tracts, illustrated by exact reproductions of 
miniatures and photographs of Church furniture, ornaments, vest- 
ments . . . the ornaments of the altar and the liturgical colours will 
be taken next ; then the occasional services will be dealt with, the 
Divine service, the Litany or Procession, and the Celebration of the 

I fear that there is nothing to be expected from the new 


Alcuin Club likely in any way to benefit the cause of 
Protestantism. It is an organization which will need 
careful watching, nor is it at all pleasant to find that the 
Bishops of Oxford, Salisbury, and Edinburgh, the Principal 
of one of our Theological Colleges, and the Prcfessor in 
another Theological College, have joined it. English 
Churchmen would be glad to hear the good news of their 
having withdrawn from its ranks. 

There are many extremely Ritualistic Societies or Guilds 
of a merely local character scattered throughout the 
country, whose objects and operations are well worthy of 
consideration. It would, however, require a volume to deal 
with them thoroughly, and I fear that when produced it 
would not be very interesting. All I can do, therefore, 
with regard to these local Societies is to call attention 
to a few of them. The " Laymen's Ritual Institute for 
Norwich," which existed for several years, and, for anything 
I know to the contrary, may be still in existence, required 
its members to take an "oath" of fidelity, which probably 
included the shielding of its secrets. I have two secret 
" Reports " of this Institute before me, viz., those for 1873 
and 1875. In the former it is announced that — 

" There has been an accession of members ; and the test of 
membership has been remodelled, by the requirement of an oath from 
each candidate, as a bond of fidelity and adherence." 

" The Institute, in conjunction with other Catholic societies, has 
no other work than steady perseverance in its course, against every 
obstacle opposing the spread of Catholicism and its Ritual, until such 
time as it and they shall have succeeded in banishing for ever from the 
Church of England the Bastard Faith of Protestantism." ^ 

The Report further added that • the Institute had 
circulated papers entitled, Devout Acts in Honour of Our 
Blessed Lady} In the following year an effort was made 
by some of the members to substitute a " Declaration " for 
the " Oath " hitherto taken by new members, but on a 

49 Report of Norwich Laymen's Institute for 1S73, pp. 4, 7. w Ibid., p. 5. 


division the proposition was "lost by a large majority." 61 
The Institute had a very great hatred for the Reformation, 
and, in its Report for 1875, expressed its hatred in very 
vigorous language : — 

" Perhaps," it says, " not intentionally, but in fact, the so-called 
Reformation is a dark and, in some sense, damnable spot in our 
Church's history." 52 

It may be said that the work of an Institute like this 
is a very small affair, not worthy of notice here. But it 
is a good old proverb which exhorts us never to " despise 
the day of small things," whether for good or evil. That 
this teaching was given a quarter of a century ago only 
proves how widely the evil had spread even so far back 
as then. At the present time the evil has grown immensely. 

To come closer to our own day. What are we to think 
of the parochial Guilds connected with the Church of 
St. Alphege, Southwark ? Somehow or other, I know not 
how, the Roman Catholic priest who edited the St. George's 
Magazine — that is, for St. George's Roman Catholic 
Cathedral, Southwark, which is close to St. Alphege — got 
hold of a few books belonging to them, and exposed them in 
its columns. 

" A little book," wrote the Editor, " has lately come into our 
possession, which we think deserves a few words of notice in our 
local Magazine. It is issued, in connection with one of the many 
Protestant 63 places of worship with which we are surrounded, by 
a clergyman of the Established Church. 

" It is called the * Manual of Tertiaries of the Order of Reparation 
to Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament. 1 It contains the Rules of the 
'Order,' a 'Litany of Reparation,' the Office of Benediction, a Litany 
of the Blessed Sacrament, the Litany of Our Lady, a Litany of the 
Incarnation (mainly addressed to the Blessed Virgin), and fourteen 
hymns — half of them addressed to Our Lady, and half to the Blessed 
Sacrament. The Seven Sacraments are accepted; life vows (for 
1 Sisters ' — perhaps the ' Founder and Father Superior * has some 

61 Report for 1875, p. 5. 52 Ibid., p. 7. 

53 Roman Catholics always call the Ritualists and their Churches " Pro- 
testant," though it is very well known that the Ritualists repudiate the term. 


special reason for saying ' the Brothers cannot take solemn vows ') 
are recognized ; ' Sacramental Confession ' is enjoined, as well as 
fasting, ' unless dispensation be obtained from the Superior ' ; 'medals 
and crosses are blessed and sprinkled with Holy Water ' ; the ' Hail 
Mary ' is prescribed } certain prayers are given to be ' said at Mass 
after the Canon.' . . . Mr. Goulden's Tertiaries sing : — 

" ' Queen of Heaven, Queen of earth, 
Mistress of the Church of Christ, 
Mother of our second birth — 

Pray for us, O Mother dear,' 
" or invoke her in words more familiar and dear to us, as 'Virgin 
most powerful,' 'Virgin most merciful,' 'Cause of our Joy,' and 
' Gate of Heaven.' " «■ 

I possess two other Guild books used at St. Alphege, 
Southwark. One of them is the Manual of the Church 
Confraternity. When I was last in that Church I saw a 
notice posted up, in very large letters, inside the building, 
announcing that no person would be considered as a mem- 
ber of the congregation, who had not joined the " Church 
Confraternity." Of course in this way a kind of moral 
compulsion is put upon the parishioners to join the Con- 
fraternity. On opening the Manual I find that all members 
" must observe the rule of the Church [what Church ?] and 
Communicate every Sunday fasting." 65 Before being ad- 
mitted into the Confraternity it is required that " every 
member shall make an open profession of belief in the 
Catholic and Apostolic Religion" 56 in the presence of the 
Vicar of the parish. He must profess that he believes 
" that there are truly and properly Seven Sacraments insti- 
tuted by Christ " 57 , though Article XXV. declares that five 
of these seven " are not to be counted for Sacraments of the 
Gospel." The members must also profess that in " the 
Great Eucharistic Sacrifice " we " obtain His Grace for 
ourselves and the whole world, pardon for all our sins, and 
that the faithful departed may rest in peace safe in the 

54 5/. George's Magazine, June, 1890, pp. 145, 146. 

M Church Confraternity, p. 5. 

56 Ibid., p. 5. W Ibid., p. 6. 


arms of Jesus " ; 58 and they also declare that " in that most 
Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist there is verily and indeed 
the true Body and Blood of Christ, and that under either 
kind alone Jesus is received whole and entire." 59 I wonder 
does the Bishop of Rochester know all that is going on 
in St. Alphege, Southwark ? He went down recently to 
consecrate the church, and spoke in the highest terms of 
the work being carried on there. I wonder did he look into 
the special hymn book, copies of which are placed in every 
seat in the church ? He would have found a large number 
of them addressed to the Virgin and the Saints. Ought 
not this Popish book to have been swept out of the Church 
for ever, as an essential condition of consecration ? Are the 
Bishops to be the last persons in their dioceses to find out 
what their clergy are doing ? 

Another Guild in the parish of St. Alphege, Southwark, is 
"The Guild of the Sacred Heart of Jesus." Its annual 
commemoration is kept " on the Sunday after the Feast of 
the Sacred Heart of Jesus." 60 This is, as is well known, a 
Feast in honour of a practice introduced by the Jesuits, for 
the purpose of worshipping the material heart of our Lord. 
This Guild is for "boys of good character under twenty years 
of age," who are expected "To receive the most Holy Sacra- 
ment (fasting) every Sunday, and to go to Confession once a 
month."* 1 They have given to them a "List of Things to 
be Remembered," which is as follows: — 

" The sign of the Cross should be made before and after prayers, at 
absolutions and blessings. 

" In passing an Altar a bow should be made. 

"Boys, when they communicate, must genuflect before going up to 
the Altar to communicate. 

" At the Consecration, immediately the Sanctus Bell rings, every- 
body should bow down and worship Jesus, Who is then present on 
the Altar, under the Form of Bread and Wine." 62 

88 Ibid., p. 7. M Ibid., p. 7. 

60 S. Alphege, Southwark, the Guild of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, p. 4. 
6i Ibid., p. 5. 63 Ibid., p. 9. 



In the "Form of Reception " used for the "Guild of St. 
John the Evangelist," in the parish of St. Alban's, Holborn, 
and " Privately Printed for the Guild/' it is ordered that, 
after certain prayers have been offered : — 

" The Priest then sprinkles the Collars, Crosses, and Candles with 
Holy Water, and incenses them. Those who are about to be admitted 
then come up to the Altar." 63 

Another Guild at St. Alban's, Holborn, is known simply 
as " The Perseverance." One of the Rules is " To be 
present at the Holy Sacrifice every Sunday." 64 As a 
temptation to join the Guild it is stated that — 

" At the death of any Member a special Funeral Mass will be said 
for the repose of his soul." 65 

The members of "The Confraternity of All Saints," 
Margaret Street, London, are "girls and young women 
only." In their Manual they are instructed that " Special 
Confession of our sins is also a very blessed help and 
privilege to many Christians really trying to lead a holy 
life." 66 One of the privileges which the members enjoy is 
thus described : — " In case of the marriage (if approved by 
the Sister Superior), to help her in her settlement." 67 I am 
afraid the Sister Superior would not give her approval if one 
of the members wished to marry a Protestant Churchman. 
A Guild like this must necessarily have a powerful influence 
over the girls who belong to it. 

"The Railway Guild of the Holy Cross" is for men 
employed on Railways. It has a body of " Clerical Associ- 
ates " attached to it, mostly extreme Ritualists. It has also 
Women Associates ; but it is a rule that their " names are 
not for publication." 68 There is a slight leaven of Popery in 
this Guild, for I find in its Manual that "The Crosses, with 

63 Guild of St. John the Evangelist, p. 18. Across the top of the title page, in 
ordinary type, is printed the words, "Not to be taken away." 

64 Manual of the Perseverance, p. 9. "Privately Printed." " Ibid., p. 10. 
66 Manual of the Confraternity of All Saints, p. 10. 6 ? Ibid., p. 4. 
68 Manual of the Railway Guild of the Holy Cross, p. 24. 


their Cords, being placed upon the Altar, or held by one 
of the Brethren, shall be blessed by the Priest," 69 though what 
good that will do the Crosses and Cords the Manual does 
not reveal. The priest is to bless them by saying : — " Ble^ss, 
O Lord, we beseech Thee, and sanc*Kify these Crosses, 
which we bless in love and honour of Thy Glorious 
Cro*ss." 70 

These are but a few specimens out of an innumerable 
body of Guilds scattered all over the country, where the 
parish is in Ritualistic hands. All these are not equally 
advanced in a Romeward direction ; but what I have 
quoted may serve to show my readers one of' the most 
powerful means by which the country is being leavened with 
Ritualism. All Guilds are not secret ; but in all cases they 
enable the local clergy to impart privately to the members, in 
confidence and safety, High Church notions of the Church, 
her Sacraments, Orders, and Doctrine. Church of England 
parents should keep a watchful eye over their young sons 
and daughters, lest they should join any Guild which does 
not work on lines that are loyal to the Church of England. 
The Guild Movement of the present day helps greatly the 
so-called "Catholicising" of the Church of England, which 
is essential as a preliminary work, in preparing the way for 
Corporate Reunion with Rome. 

* Ibid., p. 15. 1° Ibid., p. 15. 

17 * 



Corporate Reunion with Rome desired — Not individual Secession — The 
reason for this policy — How to " Catholicise" the Church of England — 
Protestantism a hindrance to Reunion — Reunion with Rome the ultimate 
object of the Oxford Movement — Newman and Froude visit Wiseman 
at Rome — They inquire for terms of admission to the Church of Rome — 
Secret Receptions into the Church of Rome — Growth of Newman's love 
for Rome — Newman wants "more Vestments and decorations in worship" 
— William George Ward : " The Jesuits were his favourite reading " — 
Publication of Tract XC. — Mr. Dalgairns' letter to the Univers — Secret 
negotiations with Dr. Wiseman — " Only through the English Church 
can you (Rome) act on the English nation " — Keble hopes that yearning 
after Rome "will be allowed to gain strength" — Mr. Gladstone on the 
Romeward Movement — He hopes those " excellent persons " who love 
all Roman doctrine will "abide in the Church" — "The Ideal of 
a Christian Church" — Dr. Pusey's eulogy of the Jesuits censured by 
Dr. Hook — Mr. Gladstone's article in the Quarterly Review — Pusey hopes 
" Rome and England will be united in one " — Pusey asks for " more love 
for Rome " — He praises the "superiority" of Roman teaching — Pusey 
believes in Purgatory and Invocation of Saints — He "forbids" his- 
penitents to invoke the Saints — Manning's remarkable letter to Pusey — 
Manning's visit to Rome in 1848 — Kneels in the street before the Pope — 
His double dealing in the Church of England — The Roman Catholic 
Rambler on the Oxford Movement. 

THE great object of the Ritualistic Movement from its 
very birth, in 1833, was that of Corporate Reunion 
with the Church of Rome. The wirepullers have 
always been opposed to individual secession, not so much on 
the ground that it was a thing evil in itself, but because its- 
tendency was to prevent the realization of their larger 
schemes. As far back as 1867 a leading quarterly of the 
advanced Ritualists declared that, instead of seceding to- 
Rome, " it would be much better for us to remain working 
where we are — for what would become of England if we 


[Ritualists] were to leave her Church? She would be 
simply lost to Catholicism. . . Depend upon it, it is only 
through the English Church itself that England can be 
Catholicised." x The same article, referring to this 
corporate and visible unity with the Church of Rome, 
declared : — 

** Here you have the real heart and soul of the present Movement ; 
this is the centre from which its pulsations vibrate, and from which its 
life-blood flows." 3 

As far back as June 13th, 1882, at the annual meeting 
of the English Church Union, Lord Halifax, its President, 
declared that corporate reunion " is the crown and com- 
pletion of that great Movement which has transformed the 
Church of England " ; 3 and he has repeated the assertion 
many times since. But in order to the realization of such a 
reunion it is first of all necessary to make the Church of 
England look as much like the Church of Rome as possible. 
" A Colonial Priest " of the Ritualistic party, writing to the 
Church Review, of September 21st, 1888, remarked: — 

" It seems to me utterly premature to consider reunion, especially 
with the great Patriarchal See of the West [Rome] as within even 
distant probability, until the Anglican Communion as a whole is 
Catholicised. There lies our work . . . Therefore, let every one, 
while praying daily for reunion, remember that the surest way to 
accomplish it is by working towards the purification of our own 
branch of the Catholic Church." 

According to the opinion of some of these gentlemen the 
Reformed Church of England is not sufficiently respectable, 
at present, for the Pope to have her, even as a present. 
She first needs " purification " from Protestantism. In a 
volume, with an Introductory Essay by Dr. Pusey, one of 
the writers very frankly declared that — 

"The first great hindrance that is before us arises from the 
Protestantism of England. Till this is removed, the Reunion of our 

1 Union Review, Volume for 1867, p. 410. 2 Ibid., p. 398. 

8 See official report of this speech, published by the E. C. U., p. 13. 


Church, as the Church of England, with either the Greek, or Latin 
Churches, is absolutely hopeless." 4 

May God grant that this " great hindrance " may ever 
remain to repel the machinations of the traitors to our 
spiritual liberties ! 

The reunion schemes of the Tractarians were at first kept 
a profound secret from all but the initiated. In this, as in 
so many other matters, the leaders cleverly practised their 
doctrine of " Reserve." So well was the secret kept that 
for several years their proceedings were a great puzzle even 
to many Roman priests. The Hon. and Rev. George 
Spencer, a prominent priest, and son of an English peer, 
was one of these puzzled ones for a time ; but at last he 
became enlightened. In a letter to the Roman Catholic 
Univers, of Paris, in 1841, he wrote : — ■ 

" Indeed, quite lately I still held to the idea, that, in a short time, 
we should see them [the Tractarians] prepared to quit their Church 
in considerable numbers, and unite with us in labouring to effect the 
conversion of their brethren; but the nearer the approaches they 
make to Catholic sentiments, the more resolved they appear to be to 
rectify their position — not by quitting the vessel [the Church of 
England], as if they despaired of its safety, but by guiding it together 
with themselves into the harbour of safety " [that is, into the Church 
of Rome]. 6 

This leavening of the Church of England with so-called 
11 Catholic " principles and practices — in other words, the 
infusion into her system of more or less of Popery — 
commenced with the Tractarian Movement, in 1833, an d has 
been going on ever since. Yet, even now, it appears that we 
are not, as a Church, decent enough for the Pope to accept 
us as a present. At the Norwich Church Congress, October, 
1895, a Ritualistic clergyman said: — "The Church of England 
is not fit for communion with either the Eastern Church or 
the Church of Rome. We are not good enough for them.'" 6 In 

4 Essay on Reunion, p. 89. 

1 Quoted in Bricknell's Judgment of the Bishops upon Tractarian Theology, 
p. 681. 

e English Churchman, October 17th, 1895, p. 706. 


this leavening process, as well as in the carrying out of the 
ultimate object of the Movement, great " Reserve in com- 
municating Religious Knowledge " was observed. 

Much of that which in the early history of Tractarianism 
was kept a profound secret, has since been made public 
through the biographies of some of the principal actors. In 
the " Lives " of these men are now to be read their most 
confidential communications one with the other, in which 
their love of Popish doctrines, and their desire for Corporate 
Reunion with Rome, appear in the clearest possible light. 
By the aid of this light it may be useful to trace the gradual 
progress of this Romeward Movement. 

The late Cardinal Newman stated that he ever considered 
the 14th of July " as the start of the religious Movement of 
1833." A few months before that date, Newman, in 
company with his friend, Richard Hurrell Froude, while 
travelling on the Continent, had visited Monsignor (sub- 
sequently Cardinal) Wiseman at Rome. " We got 
introduced to him," wrote Froude, " to find out whether 
they would take us in [i.e., to the Church of Rome] on any 
terms to which we could twist our consciences, and we 
found to our dismay that not one step could be gained 
without swallowing the Council of Trent as a whole.'* 7 
While on this journey Newman fell seriously ill with a fever. 
On his recovery he decided to return at once to England. 
While in a weak condition, and before starting, he tells us : 
" I sat down on my bed, and began to sob violently. My 
servant, who had acted as my nurse, asked what ailed me. 
I could only answer him : — ' I have a work to do in 
England.' " 8 What that work was we now know full well. 
It was that of Romanizing the Church of England. 

With reference to this remarkable visit to Rome, the Rev. 
William Palmer, who for ten years was one of the foremost 
leaders of the Tractarian Movement (but subsequently 

7 Fronde's Remains, Vol. I., p. 306. 

• Newman's Apologia Pro Vita Sua, p. 35. Edition, 1889. 


retired from it on account of its Romanizing tendencies), 
and who was the intimate friend of Newman and Hurrell 
Froude, tells us that " Froude had with Newman been 
anxious to ascertain the terms upon which they could be 
admitted to Communion by the Roman Church, supposing 
that some dispensation might be granted which would enable them 
to communicate with Rome without violation of conscience.'" 9 
Mr. Palmer adds that this visit to Rome was unknown to the 
friends of Newman, and that if he (Mr. Palmer) had known 
about these circumstances, it is a question "whether he should 
have been able to co-operate cordially with him." " Nay," 
writes Mr. Palmer, " if I had supposed him willing to forsake 
the Church of England, I should have said that I could in 
that case have held no communion with him." 10 It must be 
admitted that there was something very suspicious in thus 
keeping secret from even their most intimate friends such a 
very important visit. 

Mr. Palmer further states that " Newman and Froude had 
consulted at Rome (with Dr. Wiseman) upon the feasibility 
of being received as English Churchmen into the Papal 
Communion, retaining their doctrines." 11 This statement, 
however, was denied by Cardinal Newman, in a note dated 
October nth, 1883, attached to his Via Media , Vol. II., 
p. 433. Edition 1891. Newman therein says that : — u If this 
means that Hurrell Froude and I thought of being received 
into the Catholic Church while we still remained outwardly 
professing the doctrine and the communion of the Church of 
England, I utterly deny and protest against so calumnious a 
statement. Such an idea never entered into our heads. I 
can speak for myself, and, as far as one man can speak for 
another, I can answer for my dear friend also." Now this 
statement of Newman's in the case of any ordinary man of 
position would be considered as conclusive, but in his case 
it is not so, and for this reason : — In his note on " Lying 

9 Palmer's Narrative of Events Connected with the Tracts for the Times, p. 40. 
Edition, 1883. 10 Ibid., p. 40. n Ibid., p. 73. 


and Equivocation," attached to his Apologia Pro Vita 
Sua, Newman writes : — " For myself, I can fancy myself 
thinking it was allowable in extreme cases for me to lie, but 
never to equivocate." 12 And again he writes in the 
same note : — " A secret is a more difficult case. Sup- 
posing something has been confided to me in the strictest 
secrecy, which could not be revealed without great dis- 
advantage to another, what am I to do ? If I am a lawyer, 
I am protected by my profession. I have a right to treat 
with extreme indignation any question which trenches on the 
inviolability of my position ; but, supposing I was driven up into 
a corner [as Newman certainly was by Palmer's statement], 
/ think I should have a right to say an untruth.'" 13 If such a 
thing happened as that which Mr. Palmer relates, then it 
would certainly be " a great disadvantage " to the memory 
of Hurrell Froude, as well as to himself, if Newman 
V revealed " the truth about such an underhand proceeding ; 
and therefore, in such a case (assuming it only to exist), 
Newman would feel that he had " a right to say an 
untruth " when " driven into a corner." It is evident, 
therefore, that Newman's denial does not settle this impor- 
tant question. 

Lord Teignmouth, in his Reminiscences, mentions a 
remarkable case of a dispensation, given with Episcopal 
sanction, to a pervert to Popery. He says : — 

" / saw the conditions on which a lady, nearly related to an intimate 
friend of mine, a Scotch Baronet, had been received into the Romish 
allegiance by a priest of Amiens, whom she had consulted, as sanctioned 
by the Bishop of the Diocese. They were as follows: — that she 
should not be required to censure the Church of England, to forego 
the use of the authorized version of the Holy Scriptures, to abstain 
from the domestic worship of Protestants, or to acquiesce in any form 
of Mariolatry." u 

Fa Di Bruno's Catholic Belief has had a very large circu- 

12 Apologia Pro Vita Sua, p. 360. Edition, 1889. 13 Ibid., p. 361. 

14 Reminiscences of Many Years, by Lord Teignmouth, Vol. II., p. 291. Edin- 
burgh : David Douglas, 1878. 


lation in England. In a published letter to the author, 
dated May 2nd, 1884, Cardinal Manning terms it " one of 
the most complete and useful Manuals of Doctrine, Devotion, 
and Elementary information for the instruction of those 
who are seeking the truth." In this book is contained 
the following question and answer, which seem to me to 
have a very direct bearing on the possibility of a secret 
reception of Dr. Newman into the Church of Rome, in 

1833 :— 

" Question. — Nicodemus was a disciple of Christ, though secretly > 
cannot I in like manner be a Catholic in heart and in secret ? " 

*' Answer. — Nicodemus was a disciple of Jesus Christ in secret > 
but he presented himself to our Lord. Begin therefore by presenting 
yourself to the Catholic priest, to be instructed and received into the 
Church. After being received into the Church privately, if weighty 
reasons in the judgment of your spiritual director justify it, such as- 
loss of home, or property, or employment, and so long as those 
weighty reasons last, you need not make your Catholicity public, but 
may attend to your Catholic duties privately." 15 

The Tractarian Movement had only been in existence a 
very short time when people began to suspect it as being in 
reality a Romeward Movement. Within a month or two- 
after its birth some were calling Newman a " Papist " to his- 
face. On December 22nd, 1833, he wrote to Miss Giberne : — 
" Mr. Terrington called on me yesterday. He was very- 
kind, and said he intended to sign the Address to the 
Archbishop, and did not call me a Papist to my face, as some- 
other persons have. " 16 As early as May, 1834, KebJe asserted 
privately that " Protestantism, though allowable three 
centuries since, is dangerous now." 17 As is well known, the 
publication of Tracts for the Times was one of the earliest 
works undertaken by the party. Directly after their birth 
they were denounced as containing Popish doctrines. On 
December 7th, 1833, a clergyman wrote lamenting the 

15 Catholic Belief, by the Very Rev. Joseph Faa Di Bruno, d.d., p. 23a 
Fifth edition. 

16 Newman's Letters, Vol. II., p. 10. 17 Ibid., p. 41. 


insertion in one of the Tracts of such expressions as " con- 
veying the sacrifice to the people," " intrusted with the keys 
of heaven and hell," and " intrusted with the awful and 
mysterious gift of making the bread and wine Christ's body 
and blood " ; and, in view of such expressions, he closed his 
letter with the wise and much-needed, but sadly neglected 
warning : — " We must take care how we aid the cause of 
Popery." 18 On June 5th, 1834, Newman complained to his 
friend Froude : — " My Tracts were abused as Popish, as 
for other things, so especially for expressions about the 
Eucharist." 19 The Tracts, as they continued to appear,, 
from time to time, until the last, in 1841, grew more and 
more Romish in their character ; and they were supple- 
mented by a flood of other publications written by various 
members of the party, of even a more Romanizing character. 
The work of " Catholicising " the Church of England was,, 
by these means, pushed rapidly forward. In July, 1834,. 
Newman repudiated the word '* Protestant " ; 20 and even 
six months before that time Hurrell Froude had the audacity 
to declare : — " I am every day becoming a less and less loyal 
son of the Reformation. It appears to me plain that in all 
matters that seem to us indifferent or even doubtful, we 
should conform our practices to those of the Church which 
has preserved its traditionary practices unbroken. We 
cannot know about any seemingly indifferent practice of the 
Church of Rome that it is not a development of the Apostolic 
ethos." 21 Already Rome was the model for the Tractarians- 
to follow. On November 5th of this year Newman did a 
kind act for Popery, which he has recorded in his Journal : — 
" November 5th. — Did not read the special Gunpowder Plot 
service." The celebrated M. Bunsen, 1835, declared that, in his 
opinion, the Tractarians were " introducing Popery without 
authority." 22 In 1836 people asserted that the Tractarians- 

18 Palmer's Narrative, p. 226. 

19 Newman's Letters, Vol. II., p. 47. m Ibid., p. 59. 

51 Froude's Remains, Vol. I., p. 336. M Newman's Letters, Vol. II., p. 143. 


were secretly Romanists. Newman wrote on this subject to 
Keble, and told him that people were under " the impression 
that we are Crypto-Papists." 23 

In this year Newman began to use the " Breviary " of the 
Church of Rome. Of course the Thirty-nine Articles were 
in the way of the success of the conspirator's plans. " I 
am no great friend of them," wrote Newman to Perceval, 
January nth, 1836, "and should rejoice to be able to substi- 
tute the Creeds for them." u It is, indeed, something to be 
thankful for that even down to the present time the Ritualists 
have laboured in vain to remove these " forty stripes save 
one " — as they have been termed — from off their backs. 

It was at about this time that Newman discovered, very 
much to his astonishment, that the early Fathers of the 
Church looked upon the Bible as the only Rule of Faith, as 
all good Protestants do in this nineteenth century. There 
are several allusions to this unwelcome discovery in 
Newman's Letters. On August 9th, 1835, he wrote to 
Froude : — " By the bye, I am surprised more and more to 
see how the Fathers insist on the Scriptures as the Rule of 
Faith, even in proving the most subtle parts of the doctrine 
of the Incarnation." 26 Again, on August 23rd, 1835, he 
wrote : — " The more I read of Athanasius, Theodoret, &c, 
the more I see that the ancients did make the Scriptures 
the basis of their belief. ... I believe it would be 
extremely difficult to show that Tradition is ever considered 
by them (in matters of faith) more than interpretative of 
Scripture. . . . Again, when they met together in Council 
they brought the witness of Tradition as a matter of fact, 
but when they discussed the matter in Council, cleared their 
views, &c, proved their power, they always went to Scripture 
alone" 26 Two years later Newman wrote to Mr. Rogers : — 
u The Fathers do appeal in all their controversies to Scrip- 
tures as a final authority. When this occurs once only it 

27 Newman's Letters, p. 153. * Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. I., p. 301. 

25 Newman's Letters, Vol. II., p. 124. 26 Ibid., p. 126. 


may be an accident. When it occurs again and again 
uniformly, it does invest Scripture with the character of an 
exclusive Rule of Faith." It is, indeed, a pity that Newman 
and his followers did not imitate the excellent example of 
the Fathers. We have to thank him, however, for his very 
candid acknowledgments on this gravely important subject. 
They prove that the Fathers were thorough Protestants on 
the question of the Rule of Faith. 

Dr. Pusey's biographer states that in September, 1836, 
Newman informed Pusey that he believed in the Sacrifice of 
the Mass, as taught by the Council of Trent. " As to the 
sacrificial view of the Eucharist," he wrote, " I do not see 
that you can find fault with the formal wording of the 
Tridentine Decree," 27 which, as every student knows, 
teaches the Sacrifice of the Mass. At this time, says his 
biographer, " Pusey also acquiesced in the formal wording of 
the Council of Trent on the subject, except so far as its 
words were modified by the doctrines of Transubstantiation 
and Purgatory." 28 

For three years Newman and the band of followers who 
had gathered round him, including Dr. Pusey and the Rev. 
J. Keble, had been diligently sowing Popish tares in the 
Church of England, and the harvest was about to commence. 
By this time Newman had " learned to have tender feel- 
ings " towards the Church of Rome, as he tells us ; but 
his "Judgment was against her." It "went against my 
feelings," he says, "to protest against the Church of 
Rome." 29 He had become an adept in the art of mystifying 
people. " I used irony in conversation," he wrote, " when 
matter-of-fact men would not see what I meant. This kind 
of behaviour was a sort of habit with me." 30 " Irony " is 
defined in our dictionaries as " a mode of speech in which 
the meaning is contrary to the words," and as " dissimula- 

27 Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. II., p. 33. » Ibid. 

89 Apologia Pro Vita Sua, pp. 127, 128. First edition. *° Ibid., p. 115. 


■tion" for the purposes of ridicule. But surely, when those 
to whom this irony was addressed, as in this instance, did 
" not see " the irony, but took the falsehood for truth, they 
•were nothing better than wilfully and shamefully deceived by 
Newman ! Of course, for a few years, the ultimate object 
of the Movement was not much talked about. Its chief 
promoter had, as he tells us, come back from Rome, early 
in 1833, fully convinced that Protestant " Reformation 
principles were powerless to rescue " the Church of England 
from her existing condition; and that "there was need of 
.a second Reformation." 81 Three years of that "second 
Reformation " had now passed by, and its results were highly 
•satisfactory to Newman. 

* It was," he wrote, "through friends, younger, for the most part, 
'than myself, that my principles were spreading. They heard what I 
said in conversation, and told it to others. Undergraduates in due 
time took their degree, and became private tutors themselves. In this 
new status, in turn, they preached the opinions which they had already 
learned themselves. Others went down to the country, and became 
-curates of parishes. Then they had down from London parcels of 
the Tracts, and other publications. They placed them in the shops 
-of local booksellers, got them into newspapers, introduced them to 
clerical meetings, and converted more or less their Rectors and their 
brother curates." 32 

From 1836 the Tractarian march to Rome was much 
•more rapid than before, and that under cover of an attack 
upon Popery. In 1839 ** was proposed to erect the 
Protestant Martyrs' Memorial at Oxford. Pusey did not 
like it at all. He spoke strongly against it, " as unkind to 
the Church of Rome," towards which his sympathies were 
already being drawn out. The erection of a Monastery was 
-contemplated, and plans were being laid for the establishment 
of Sisterhoods. The Rev. John Keble, another of the leaders, 
had begun to hate the reformers. " Anything," he wrote 
to Pusey, January 18th, 1839, "which separates the present 

81 Apologia Pro Vita Sua, p. 95. First edition. * Ibid., p. 133. 



Church from the Reformers I should hail as a great good." M 
In Keble's opinion, at this time, the Reformers " were not 
as a party to be trusted on ecclesiastical and theological 
questions." 84 Long before this period the news of the 
work going on at Oxford had reached Rome, and had 
greatly rejoiced the heart of the Pope. The then 
Bishop of Oxford (Dr. Bagot) heard about these Papal 
rejoicings, and became greatly alarmed. He wrote to Pusey 
about it : — 

u There are now," he said, "friends of mine staying at Rome — 
sensible men, too, and without gossip— and I am assured that the 
language of the Pope (as I am informed in one instance), and that of 
all the English Roman Catholics of rank residing there, is that of joy 
and congratulation at the advances which are being made in Oxford 
towards a return to the doctrines of the * true Church.' " 35 

Newman became Editor of the British Critic, and soon 
after regretted that he had allowed in its pages " an article 
against the Jesuits," of which he " did not like the tone " ; S8 
which is certainly not to be wondered at, for a fellow feeling 
makes us wondrous kind towards those whose tactics we 
may adopt. The Rev. Isaac Williams, author of two of the 
Tracts for the Times, in his Autobiography writes: — " I have 
lately heard it stated from one of Newman's oldest friends, 
Dr. Jelf, that his mind was always essentially Jesuitical.' ' 87 

In 1839 tne M second Reformation " had proceeded so far 
that one of its disciples, the Rev. J. B. Morris, preaching 
before Oxford University, had the audacity to teach the full 
doctrine of the Sacrifice of the Mass, and to declare that 
every one was an unbeliever and carnal who did not 
believe it. 38 

Early in 1840 Newman became afraid of the mischief he 

33 Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. II., p. 71. 

34 John Keble, by Walter Lock, m.a., p. 96. London, 1893. 

35 Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. II., p. 73. M Apologia, p. 135. 
37 Autobiography of Isaac Williams, p. 54. 

33 Newman's Letters, Vol. II., p. 291. 

First edition 


was working in the Church, though he had no repentance 
for his wrongdoing. On January ioth he wrote to his 
friend Bowden : — " Things are progressing steadily ; but 
breakers ahead ! The danger of a lapse into Romanism, 
I think, gets greater daily. I expect to hear of victims. 
Again, I fear I see more clearly that we are working up 
to a schism in our Church." 39 The whole tendency of the 
Movement has been in the direction of schism. It has 
already effectually broken up the peace of the Church of 
England, divided her into parties, and may lead to a great 
schism at any time. Its tendency has also been in the 
direction of individual secession to Rome on the part of 
those who have been too impatient to wait for Corporate 
Reunion. Some of the Ritualistic leaders occasionally 
boast that they keep men from going over to Rome. It 
may be that they do keep a few here and there, for a short 
time, but the general tendency of their work is the other 
way. Cardinal Manning knew more about secessions to 
Rome, and their cause, than any man in England, and this 
is what he said about them in 1867 : ^ 

" Every Parish Priest happily knows how empty and foolish is the 
boast they [Ritualists] make of keeping souls from conversion. The 
public facts of every day refute it. . . . Such teachers are, as Fuller 
quaintly and truly says, like unskilful horsemen. They so open gates 
as to shut themselves out, but let others through." 40 

Several months later Newman saw clearly enough that 
the work of the Tractarians was driving men to Rome, and 
yet neither he nor they ceased their operations on that 
account. On September 1st, 1839, ne wrote to Mr. Mann- 
ing, the future Cardinal: "I. am conscious that we are 
raising longings and tastes which we are not allowed to 
supply ; and till our Bishops and others give scope to the 
development of Catholicism externally and wisely, we do 

39 Newman's Letters, Vol. II., p. 299. 

40 Essays on Religion, Second Series, edited by Archbishop Manning,, 
pp. 14, 15. 


tend to make impatient minds seek it where it has ever been, in 
Rome" 41 And what remedy, it may be asked, did Newman 
propose to Manning for the longings for more Popery which 
they had created in the minds of their disciples ? It was 
simply that of giving them, in the Church of England, the 
Popery which they would otherwise go to Rome for, instead 
of teaching them that they were under a delusion in suppos- 
ing that Popish poison is the pure " milk of the Word." 
Ritualists supply Popery in the Church of England as some 
Irishmen supply whisky — without a license. 

So Newman, in the letter just quoted, wrote to Manning: 
— " I think that, whenever the time comes that secession to 
Rome takes place, for which we must not be unprepared, we 
must boldly say to the Protestant section of our Church — 
* You are the cause of this ; you must concede ; you must 
conciliate, you must meet the age ; you must make the 
Church. . . more equal to the external. Give us more 
services, more vestments and decorations in worship ; give us 
Monasteries. . . Till then you will have continual seces- 
sions to Rome." 42 Did it never, I wonder, occur to Newman 
that Protestant Churchmen had conscientious objections to 
granting the Popery which he coveted for himself and his 
followers ? Loyal Churchmen will have nothing to do with 
Popery, either within or without the Church of England. 

But, as we have seen on the authority of Cardinal 
Manning, the Ritualistic cure for longings for Popery, is, in 
practice, an utter failure. A few months later Newman's 
faith in the Church of Rome had greatly increased, for he 
had come to fear that she was the only body capable of 
resisting the devil. " I begin," he wrote, " to have serious 
apprehensions lest any religious body is strong enough to 
withstand the league of evil but the Roman Church. At the 
end of the first millenary it withstood the fury of Satan, and 
now the end of the second is drawing on." ** By the end of 

41 Purcell's Life of Manning, Vol. I., p. 233. ** Ibid. 

43 Newman's Letters, Vol. II., p. 300. 



the year he thought " Rome the centre of unity " ; u and yet 
for another five years he kept away from that centre. At 
this period he not only "wished for union between the 
Anglican Church and Rome," but he also went so far as to 
do what he could "to gain weekly prayers for that object " ; 
and drew up forms of prayer for union to be used by his 
disciples. 45 At this time a Roman priest, the Hon. and 
Rev. George Spencer, was also urging the offering of prayers 
with the same aim. With this object in view, Mr. Spencer 
paid a visit to Newman, in 1840. With reference to this 
visit Newman writes : — " So glad in my heart was I to see 
him [Spencer] when he came to my rooms, whither Mr. 
Palmer, of Magdalen, brought him, that I could have laughed 
for joy ; I think I did." Newman, however, thought it best 
to disguise the joy he felt, and therefore, when Mr. Spencer 
came he was "very rude to him," and "would not meet 
him at dinner." 46 The Oxford Tractarians frequently 
visited the Continent, on holiday tours, and while there 
cultivated the good opinion of foreign Roman Catholics,. 
and in this they were encouraged by their leaders. In the 
autumn of 1840 Mr. James R. Hope-Scott was travellings 
thus abroad, when he received a letter from Dr. Pusey,. 
containing the following paragraph : — " I am very glad that 
you are seeing so' much of the R[oman] C[atholics]. One 
wishes that they knew more of our Church, and we more of 
y e better among them." 47 At home the Rev. William George 
Ward, who subsequently succeeded Newman as the leader 
of the advanced Tractarians, was diligently engaged in the 
study of Roman Catholic books of theology. He preferred 
them to the early Fathers. " Both in ascetics and in 
dogmatics," writes Mr. Ward's son, " the Jesuits were his 
favourite reading" 48 at this period. We need not wonder 

44 Newman's Letters, Vol. II., p. 319. 

*• Apologia, pp. 222, 224. First edition. ** Ibid., p. 224. 

*7 Memoirs of James R. Hope-Scott, Vol. I., p. 239. 

48 William George Ward and the Oxford Movement, p. 146. First edition- 

TRACT XC. 275 

at this now, though at the time it was kept strictly secret. 
What an excitement it would have caused- in 1840, had it 
been publicly known that the favourite study of one of the 
leaders of the Tractarians was the writings of the Jesuits ! 
That kind of study is far more common now amongst 
modern Ritualists than it was fifty-six years since, and the 
Romeward Movement is now far more under Jesuitical 
influence than ever it has been hitherto. Mr. James R. 
Hope-Scott, during the visit to the Continent just mentioned, 
frequently visited the Jesuits at Rome, and in his now 
published letters shows how any feeling which he may have 
entertained against them gradually wore itself away. On March 
27th, 1841, he wrote to his brother: — "The General of the 
Jesuits I continue to visit, and am grown very fond of him." 40 
The most memorable event of the year 1841 was the 
publication of Newman's celebrated " Tract XC." A large 
volume might now be written about its contents and its 
history. It was a plea for the lawfulness of teaching in the 
Church of England many Roman Catholic doctrines, as 
taught authoritatively in that Church, on the ground that 
they were not opposed by the Thirty-nine Articles, and it was 
at the same time a very daring attempt to " Catholicise " 
the Church of England in the interests of the great scheme 
for Corporate Reunion with Rome. The best description of 
the objects of Tract XC. seems to me to be that given by the 
four Oxford Tutors, directly after it was published. One of 
the Tutors was the Rev. A. C. Tait, afterwards Archbishop 
of Canterbury. 

" The Tract has," wrote the Tutors, " in our apprehension, a highly 
dangerous tendency, from its suggesting that certain very important 
errors of the Church of Rome are not condemned by the Articles of the 
Church of England— for instance, that those Articles do not contain 
any condemnation of the doctrines — 

" 1. Of Purgatory. 

" 2. Of Pardons. 

« Memoirs of J. R. Hope-Scott, Vol. I., p. 266. 

18 * 


"3. Of the Worshipping and Adoration of Images and relics. 

" 4. Of the Invocation of Saints. 

" 5. Of the Mass. 
" as they are taught authoritatively by the Church of Rome, but only 
of certain absurd practices and opinions which intelligent Romanists 
repudiate as much as we do. It is intimated, moreover, that the 
Declaration prefixed to the Articles, as far as it has any weight at all, 
sanctions this mode of interpreting them, as it is one which takes 
them in their ' literal and grammatical sense,' and does not ' affix any 
new sense to them.' The Tract would thus appear to us to have a 
tendency to mitigate beyond what charity requires, and to the prejudice 
of the pure truth of the Gospel, the very serious differences which 
separate the Church of Rome from our own, and to shake the confidence 
of the less learned members of the Church of England in the Scrip- 
tural character of her formularies and her teaching." 60 

Four days after this Protest had been made by the four 
Tutors, the Hebdomadal Board of Oxford University con- 
demned the Tract, on the ground that " modes of interpreta- 
tion, such as are suggested in the said Tract, evading rather 
than explaining the sense of the Thirty-nine Articles, and 
reconciling subscription to them with the adoption of errors 
which they were designed to counteract, defeat the object, 
and are inconsistent with the due observance of the above 
mentioned Statutes." 61 

Archbishop Tait never regretted the part he took in con- 
demning Tract XC. In 1880, he said : — " Were it all to 
happen again I think I should, in the same position, do 
exactly as I did then." 52 Newman's friend, the Rev. Isaac 
Williams, says : — " Many have naturally supposed that it 
was the condemnation of the Tract No. XC, by the Heads 
of Houses, which gave his [Newman's] sensitive mind the 
decided turn to the Church of Rome. But I remember 
circumstances which indicated that it was not so. He talked 
to me of writing a Tract on the Thirty-nine Articles, and at 
the same time said things in favour of the Church of Rome 

60 Life of Archbishop Tait, Vol. I., pp. 81, 82. First edition. 
« Ibid., p. 84. 62 Ibid., p. 87. 


which quite startled and alarmed me." 53 Two pages later on 
Mr. Williams writes : — " Nothing had as yet impaired our 
intimacy and friendship, until one evening, 54 when alone in 
his rooms, he told me he thought the Church of Rome was 
right, and we were wrong, so much so, that we ought to join 
it. To this I said that if our own Church improved, as we 
hoped, and the Church of Rome .also would reform itself, it 
seemed to hold out the prospect of reunion. And then 
everything seemed favourably progressing beyond what we 
could have dared to hope in the awakening of religion, and 
reformation among ourselves. That mutual repentance 
must, by God's blessing, tend to mutual restoration and 
union. ' No/ he said, ' St. Augustine would not allow of 
this argument, as regarded the Donatists. You must come 
out and be separate. '" 55 This argument from the conduct 
of the Donatists was not then for the first time adopted by 
Newman. In connection with it the essentially Jesuitical 
and double-dealing tactics of Newman are again clearly 
revealed. In a "private" letter to the Rev. J. B. Mozley, 
November 24th, 1843, he wrote : — 

"Last summer four years (1839) ^ came strongly upon me, from 
reading first the Monophysite controversy, and then turning to the 

63 Autobiography of Isaac Williams, p. 108. 

54 The editor of the A utobiography says that "this conversation took place 
after the publication of Tract No. XC." ; but I venture to assert that, but for 
this note, no reader of the Autobiography would think otherwise than that the 
speech was made before the publication of Tract XC. The editor, writing long 
after the death of Williams, makes an assertion, but emits to give any proof of 
it. On the other hand there is clear evidence that Williams's interview with 
Newman must have taken place somewhere about this date. Tract XC. was 
published February 27th, 1841 ; and Newman withdrew to Littlemore in 
February, 1842. Now Williams states : — " When he [Newman] shut himself up 
in his Monastery at Littlemore, and previously during the latter part of his stay 
at Oxford, I was able to withdraw myself from him." The interview referred 
to must have therefore taken place some time before Newman left Oxford, and 
therefore in the year 1841. In either case it makes little, or no difference 
in Newman's essentially dishonest and dishonourable position at that time. 
An honest man, holding the opinions Newman then expressed to Williams, 
would at once have seceded to Rome, and not wait till 1845. 

65 Ibid., pp. no, in. 


Donatist, that we were external to the Catholic Church. I have never 
got over this. I did not, however, yield to it at all, but wrote an article 
in the British Critic on the Catholicity of the English Church, which 
had the effect of quieting me for two years. Since this time two 
years the feeling has revived and gradually strengthened. I have all 
along gone against it, and think I ought to do so still. I am now 
publishing sermons, which speak more confidently about our position 
than I inwardly feel ; but I think it right, and do not care for seeming 
inconsistent." 56 

This " inconsistency," or double-dealing, or Jesuitism, or 
whatever it may be called, was only a part and parcel of 
his ordinary conduct at this time. His friend Isaac Williams 
says that " the feelings and thoughts he [Newman] would 
express to one person or at one time, differed very much in 
consequence from what he might express to another or on 
another occasion " ; and he adds that it " was long before 
it was publicly known what Newman's thoughts really were, 
And he was for some time accused by some of dishonesty 
and duplicity." 57 He was working in the dark, yet actively 
carrying on the secret underground conspiracy to bring back 
the Church of England to Rome. In his pamphlet entitled 
a Letter to the Bishop of Oxford on Occasion of Tract XC, 
dated March 29th, 1841, Newman wrote of: — "The ines- 
timable privileges I feel in being a member of that Church 
over which your lordship, with others, presides " (p. 33); 
" the Church which your lordship rules is a Divinely 
ordained channel of supernatural grace to the souls of her 
members " (p. 34) ; and " I consider the Church over which 
your lordship presides to be the Catholic Church in this 
country" (p. 34). And yet, for two years before writing 
this he had come, as we have just seen, to hold the opinion 
that those who were inside the Church of England " were 
external to the Catholic Church " ! In this same Letter to 
the Bishop of Oxford, Newman further asserted that "it is 
very plain that the English Church is at present on God's 

56 Newman's Letters, Vol. II., p. 430. 
67 Williams's Autobiography, pp. 112, 113. 


side " (p. 39) ; and that, " Did God visit us with large 
measures of His grace, and the Roman Catholics also, they 
would be drawn to us, and would acknowledge our Church 
as the Catholic Church in this country" (p. 44). It is hard, 
yea, impossible, I venture to submit, to reconcile such 
statements as these, with those Newman had already made 
in writing to his confidential friends. Soon after the 
publication of the pamphlet just cited, the Rev.W. G. Ward 
wrote to Dr. Pusey as follows : — " I have heard Newman 
say that it is, to say the least, doubtful whether there can 
be said to be a valid Sacrament administered unless the 
priest adds mentally what our Eucharistic Service omits." 68 
On reading this, I cannot help asking myself whether we 
have in it a key to the fact that in almost all our advanced 
Ritualistic Churches private prayers are said, by the 
officiating clergyman, during the Communion Service, 
which are not required by the Book of Common Prayer. 
Are they intended to make a doubtful consecration certainly 
valid, by adding " mentally what our Eucharistic Service 

Very advanced Romanizing doctrines were at this time 
secretly held by many of the Tractarians, who, it may be 
remarked in passing, were then becoming known as 
Puseyites. Even as early as July, 1841, Mr. Ward, writing 
to Dr. Pusey, stated that : — 

" There are many persons who, on the one hand, do not accuse 
the Reformers of disingenuousness, and yet, on the other, consider 
the following doctrines and practices allowed by the Articles: — 
(1) Invocation of Saints ; (2) Veneration of Images and Relics -, (3) An 
intermediate state of purification with pain; 59 (4) The Reservation 
of the Host j (5) The Elevation of the Host j (6) The Infallibility of 
some General Councils j (7) The doctrine of desert by congruity, in 
the received Roman sense j (8) The doctrine that the Church ought 
to enforce Celibacy on the clergy." 60 

68 William George Ward and the Oxford Movement, p. 177. 

69 That is, a Purgatory. 

60 William George Ward and the Oxford Movemet, p. 176. 


If only the majority of the Church of England could 
have been induced to accept the views of these advanced 
Romanizers, she would soon have been sufficiently 
" Catholicised " for reunion with the Papacy. Nothing 
would have delighted Ward more than such a result. 
" Restoration of active communion with the Roman Church 
is," he wrote to a friend, in 1841, "the most enchanting 
earthly prospect on which my imagination can dwell." 61 
The Romanizers evidently thought they were, even then, 
within a measurable distance of the realization of their 
hopes. So full of expectation were they that they could 
not keep the good news to themselves. Their Roman 
Catholic brethren on the continent must be let into the 
secret. So an anonymous letter was sent soon after 
Tract XC. appeared, for publication to the Roman Catholic 
Univers of Paris. The author's name was suppressed for 
obvious reasons, but it is now known that the author was 
the Rev. W. G. Ward, and that it was translated for him 
into French by Mr. J. D. Dalgairns, of Exeter College, 
Oxford. From this very remarkable and thoroughly 
Jesuitical letter, I give the following extracts : — 

" You see, then, sir, that humility, the first condition of every sound 
reform, is not wanting in us. We are little satisfied with our position. 
We groan at the sins committed by our ancestors in separating from 
the Catholic world. We experience a burning desire to be reunited 
to our brethren. We love with unfeigned affection the Apostolic See, 
which we acknowledge to be the head of Christendom ; and the more 
so because the Church of Rome is our mother, which sent from her 
bosom the blessed St. Augustine, to bring us her immovable faith. 
We admit also, that it is not our formularies, nor even the Council of 
Trent, which prevent our union. After all these concessions, you 
may ask me, why, then, do you not rejoin us ? What is it that 
prevents you ? . . . 

" There are at this moment, in the Anglican Church, a crowd of 
persons who balance between Protestantism and Catholicism, and 
who, nevertheless, would reject with horror the very idea of a union 
with Rome. The Protestant prejudices, which, for three hundred 

61 William George Ward and the Oxford Movement, p. 142. 


years, have infected our Church, are unhappily too deeply rooted 
there to be extirpated without a great deal of address. [Did he not 
really mean sly cunning ?] We must, then, offer in sacrifice to God 
this ardent desire which devours us of seeing once more the perfect 
unity of the Church of Christ. We must still bear the terrible void 
which the isolation of our Church creates in our hearts, and remain 
still till it pleases God to convert the hearts of our Anglican confreres, 
especially of our holy fathers, the bishops. We are destined, I am 
persuaded, to bring lack many wandering sheep to the knowledge of 
the truth. In fact, the progress of Catholic opinions in England, for 
the last seven years, is so inconceivable that no hope should appear 
extravagant. Let us, then, remain quiet for some years, till, by 
God's blessing, the ears of Englishmen are become 
accustomed to hear the name of rome pronounced with 
reverence. At the end of this term you will soon see the fruits of 
our patience." 63 

The publication of this traitorous letter very naturally 
created a great deal of public excitement. It was trans- 
lated into German and Italian, and widely circulated on 
the continent, where it produced great joy in the Roman 
camp. A Mr. Hamilton Gray of Magdalene College, 
Oxford, wrote to the Univers to say that the letter was not 
written by any member of the Tractarian party, but by 
either a Low Churchman or a Romanist. Its authorship is 
now, however, placed beyond question by the publication 
of Mr. Ward's life by his son, who tells us that " the 
fact remained that its sentiments were not disclaimed by 
the representatives of the ' extreme ' party, and a pro- 
gramme far more bold and outspoken than anything in 
Tract XC. was thus practically known to be in contemplation 
for moving the Anglican Church in a Romeward direction. 63 

Secret negotiations were entered into with Dr. Wiseman, 
and the conditions of Corporate Reunion with Rome were 
discussed with him, at Oscott College. One of the plans 
then discussed was a secret affiliation of the advanced 
Tractarians with the Roman Catholic Fathers of Charity, 

62 Catholic Magazine, March, 1841, as quoted in Bricknell's Judgment of the 
Bishops, pp. 678-80. 68 W. G. Ward and the Oxford Movement, p. 190. 


the Tractarians, apparently, to remain all the while in 
communion with the Church of England Mr. Wilfrid 
Ward tells us that " Mr. Phillipps [a prominent Roman 
Catholic] had urged that the Fathers of Charity, the Order 
of the great Italian Reformer Antonio Rosmini, then 
represented in England by the excellent and pious Father 
Gentili, should open their Order at once to the Oxford 
school, and adapt its rules to their position and ante- 
cedents." 64 The scheme came to nothing, so far as the 
public are aware, and it is asserted by Mr. Wilfrid Ward 
that it " met with no encouragement from Newman or 
from any responsible members of the party." But that 
it should be seriously discussed at all is in itself sufficiently 
startling, and proves how far gone in deception those were 
who desired such a secret affiliation with a Roman Catholic 

Dr. Pusey's Romeward tendencies were rapidly developing. 
In this year he visited several Roman Catholic Convents in 
Ireland, with a view to starting Anglican Convents in 
England. One of his disciples, the Rev. E. Churton, sent 
him an indignant letter of protest on his attitude towards the 
advanced Romanizers. " Instead of controlling the ebulli- 
tions of the young wrong-heads, you have suffered yourselves 
to be inoculated with their frenzies. . . . You have let them 
get ahead of you and drag you after them. Hence your 
proposal of reviving Monastic Life, and your very unfortunate 
appearance at Dublin [to visit Romish Convents], which has 
so deeply perplexed our best allies there. ... As for 
yourselves, that which has compelled me, most unwillingly, 
to forsake that entire union with you in which I found so 
much comfort, has been that you have seemed to treat these 
excesses as if they were providential indications for your 
guidance, and thought it a kind of ' quenching the Spirit ' 
to keep them within rule and order." 65 In reply to this 

64 W. G. Ward and the Oxford Movement, p. 190. 
60 Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. II., p. 269. 


very outspoken communication, Dr. Pusey sent a letter 
to Mr. Churton which must now be considered as far 
from satisfactory. He mentioned what he termed " the 
unnaturalness of our present insulated state, separated 
from the rest oC the East and West"; but he declared 
that " there is no wish for a premature union ; it is only 
wished and longed and prayed for that we may both become 
such, that we may safely be united." " As to Monasticism," 
he continued, "I have long [how "long" I wonder] strongly 
thought that we needed something of this sort; it is not 
Romanish but primitive. ... I think it would be a great 
blessing to our Church to have some such institutions." M 
Dr. Pusey's judgment was directly opposed to that of the 
Church of England as to Monastic Orders, as anyone can 
see for himself who reads her " Homily On Good Works," 
Part Third, in which she terms them, in no complimentary 
language, " superstitious and pharisaical sects, by Antichrist 
invented." Early in 1842, the Bishop of Salisbury (Dr. E. 
Denison), High Churchman though he was, became alarmed 
at the spread of Romanizing principles in the Church of 
England, and indignant at the conduct of Dr. Pusey, to 
whom he wrote on March 9th, 1842 : — " Will you also allow 
me to say how much I regret that you either have not felt 
disposed or not at liberty to express any strong disapproval 
of the language about our own Church and that of Rome 
which has been used in various publications, and has 
naturally excited a very strong and general sensation." 67 
While labouring for Corporate Reunion with Rome, Pusey 
bitterly opposed any union between the Church of England 
and the Lutheran Church. 

Newman's love for Popery was also growing rapidly. He 
tells us that : — " In spite of my ingrained fears of Rome, and 
the decision of my reason and conscience against her usages 
[he does not say her doctrines], in spite of my affection for 
Oxford and Oriel, yet I had a secret longing love of Rome, the 

66 Ibid., p. 271. 67 Ibid., p. 281. 


Mother of English Christianity, and I had a true devotion 
to the Virgin Mary." 68 He considered that the Anglican 
Church " must have a ceremonial, a ritual, and a fulness of 
doctrine and devotion, which it had not at present, if it were 
to compete with the Roman Church with any prospect of 
success. . . . Such, for instance, would be Confraternities, 
particular devotions, reverence for the Blessed Virgin, 
prayers for the dead, beautiful churches, munificent offerings 
to them and in them, Monastic Houses, and many other 
observances and Institutions, which I used to say belonged 
to us as much as to Rome." 69 This was a very extensive 
Ritualistic " Plan of Campaign" ; but I fear that I cannot — 
judging by the evidence which I have already produced — give 
Newman credit for any very warm desire that the Church 
of England should " compete with the Roman Church with 
any prospect of success." He wanted, not competition, but 
peace and union between the Churches. It is true that he 
made some efforts to keep people from going over to Rome ; 
but what was his object in doing so ? To a Roman Catholic 
correspondent he wrote, on April 8th, 1841 : — " It is my 
trust, though I must not be too sanguine, that we shall not 
have individual members of our communion going over to 
yours." 70 A month later he explained the reason for this 
opposition to individual secession, in another letter to a 
Roman Catholic : — " We are keeping people from you," he 
wrote, " by supplying their wants in our own Church. We are 
keeping persons from you : do you wish us to keep them from 
you for a time or for ever ? It rests with you to determine. I 
do not fear that you will succeed among us ; you will not 
supplant our Church in the affections of the English nation ; 


upon the English nation. I wish, of course, our Church 
should be consolidated, with and through and in your com- 
munion, for its sake, and your sake, and for the sake of unity." n 

68 Apologia Pro Vita Sua, p. 165. Edition, 1889. 

69 Ibid., p. 166 7° Ibid., p. 188. n ibid., p. 191. 


So that, after all, Newman did not wish to keep the 
English people from Rome " for ever," but only " for a 
time," during which Rome should have a chance to " act 
upon the English nation " in her own interests ! Are not 
these the sly tactics carried on by the majority of the 
Ritualists in our own day? In 1843, Newman, as we 
have already stated, publicly withdrew the denunciations 
of Rome which during the previous ten years he had 
uttered, as so many " dirty words." In the same year 
many of the early friends of the Tractarian Movement began 
to be alarmed at the rapid progress which their followers 
were making towards Rome, and some of them withdrew 
from the party on that account : of these, the most prominent 
was the Rev. William Palmer, who had worked for the 
Movement since its commencement in 1833. He published 
the reasons for his withdrawal in a pamphlet entitled, A 
Narrative of Events connected with the Publication of the Tracts 
for the Times, with Reflections on the Existing Tendencies to 
Romanism. This pamphlet, with additions, was re-issued by 
its author, in 1883. In the course of it Mr. Palmer gives 
ample proof of the Romish tendency of the Movement, as 
it then existed, by a series of extracts from the writings of 
its leaders, whose principles, he affirmed, " tend to the 
restoration of Romanism in its fullest extent, and the total 
subversion of the Reformation." 72 From these extracts I 
select the following : — 

" We talk of the blessings of ' emancipation from the Papal yoke,' 
and use other phrases of a. like bold and undutiful tenour. We trust, 
of course, that active and visible union with the See of Rome is not 
of the essence of the Church ; at the same time we are deeply con- 
scious that in lacking it, far from asserting a right, we forego a great 
privilege." ? s 

" [The Pope is] the earthly representative of her [the Church's] 
Divine Head." 

78 Palmer's Narrative, p. 165. Edition, 1883. T 3 Ibid., p. 161. 


"The Holy See [is] the proper medium of communion with the 
Catholic Church." 74 

This tendency to Romanism does not appear to have 
given any alarm to such well-known members of the party as 
the Rev. John Keble and Mr. Gladstone. The former, on 
May 14th, 1843, wrote to Newman : — " Certainly there is a 
great yearning even after Rome in many parts of the Church, 
which seems to be accompanied with so much good that one 
hopes, if it be right, it will be allowed to gain strength" 75 If 
Keble were at that time a truly loyal son of the Reformed 
Church of England, would he have rejoiced at this u great 
yearning even after Rome," and have hoped that it would 
gain strength " ? Of course this was written in confidence, 
and Keble never could have anticipated that it would ever 
have been made public, or there can be no doubt he would 
have written with greater caution. In the Foreign and 
Colonial Quarterly Review for October, 1843, Mr. Gladstone 
wrote an article on " The Present State of the Church," in 
which he admitted that there were at that period, within the 
Church of England — 

"Propagators of Catholic tenets and usages, who do not scruple to 
denounce Protestantism as a principle of unmixed evil 3 in whom the 
attraction of the Church's essential Catholicity is sufficient, but only 
just sufficient, to overcome the repulsive force of the Protestant 
elements admitted into her institutions ; and who do not dissemble 
that, in their view, Rome, if not a true normal pattern of Christianity, 
is yet the best existing standard, and one to which we ought to seek 
to conform. Rome, who is always at our gates as a foe, though in her 
legitimate sphere she be also an elder sister. With this foe they 
parley, and in the hearing of the people on the wall. At the same 
time they relentlessly pursue, with rebuke and invective, the Protestant 
name." 76 

One would have supposed that Mr. Gladstone would have 
recommended that such a set of traitors should at once have 
been turned out of the Church in disgrace. That is what 

? 4 Palmer's Narrative, p. 163. T 5 Lock's John Keble, p. 120. 

76 Gladstone's Gleanings of Past Years, Vol. V., p. 66. 

"the holy example" of the romanizers. 287 

they richly deserved. But, unfortunately, he heaped up praise 
on the traitors, and hoped they would not go over to Rome, 
but remain in the Church of England, and " enlighten it " 
by their " holy example." 

"Although," wrote Mr. Gladstone, "we carefully distinguish this 
section from the legitimate Catholic development, of which we believe 
it to be an exaggeration, we rejoice that these excellent persons abide in 
the Church, to enlighten it by the holy example of their lives. We 
rejoice that they feel the awful responsibility of that condemnation,, 
which they would undertake to pronounce against her, by the act of 
quitting her communion." 77 

And what was " the holy example " which these men were 
showing to the Church ? A few weeks after Mr. Gladstone 
thus held them up for admiration, they were described by 
Mr. Newman, who knew them better than any man living, 
as men "who feel they can with a safe conscience 
remain with us [i.e., in the Church of England] , while they 
are allowed to testify in behalf of Catholicism, and to pro- 
mote its interests, *.*., as if by such acts they were putting 
our Church, or at least a portion of it, in which they are 
included, in the position of Catechumens. They think they 
may stay, while they are moving themselves, others, nay, say the 
whole Church, towards Rome." 78 

The publication of Mr. Palmer's pamphlet led to the 
Rev. William George Ward writing his notorious and! 
Romanizing work entitled, the Ideal of a Christian Church, 
which was avowedly a reply to Mr. Palmer. Mr. Ward, 
shortly before the time when he wrote the Ideal, having 
heard that the Rev. R. W. Sibthorp had left the Church 
of Rome, and returned to the Church of England, of which 
he had at one time been an ordained Minister, was greatly 
annoyed, and vented his indignation in a letter to Mr. 
Phillipps, a Roman Catholic, in these terms : — " By this- 
time you have doubtless heard of Mr. Sibthorp's step^ 

77 Ibid., p. 70. 

78 Memoirs of James R. Hope-Scott, Vol. II., p. 25. 


How unspeakably dreadful : it makes one sick to think of 
it. . . . His reception among us [Tractarians] will be, I 
fully expect, of the most repulsive character ; I for one shall 
decline any intercourse with him whatever." 79 

That Romanizing tendencies existed in the Church of 
England Mr. Ward candidly acknowledged, and even 
-expressed his joy at the fact. In his Ideal he quotes, as 
accurate, the statement of the Christian Remembrancer, for 
November, 1843 (the quarterly organ of the Tractarians), 
which affirmed that the " tendencies to Rome " were 
" deeply seated and widely spreading " ; and that members 
■of the party were "by hundreds straggling towards Rome." 80 
In this same Ideal Mr. Ward, referring to the Twelfth of 
the Thirty-nine Articles, declared: — "I subscribe it myself 
•in a non-natural sense." At page 565 he wrote : — " We 
find, oh most joyful, most wonderful, most unexpected 
-sight ! we find the whole cycle of Roman doctrine gradually 
possessing numbers of English Churchmen." At page 567 
he wrote : — " Three years have passed, since I said plainly, 
that in subscribing the Articles, / renounce no one Roman 

It is not to be wondered at that disloyal utterances 
such as these raised a hurricane of indignant opposition in 
the Church. It would have been a lasting disgrace to her 
had such statements been allowed to pass unchallenged. 
On November 10th, 1844, Mr. Ward was summoned to 
appear before the Vice-Chancellor of the University of 
Oxford. When he appeared he was asked whether he 
denied the authorship of the Ideal of a Christian Church; 
.and whether he disavowed certain passages in the book ? 
Mr. Ward replied, asking for more time before he answered 
these questions. This was granted to him. He again 
appeared before the Vice-Chancellor on December 3rd, 
when, acting under legal advice, he refused to answer the 

79 W. G. Ward and the Oxford Movement, pp. 201, 202. 

8,1 Ward's Ideal of a Christian Church, p. 566. Second edition. 


pusey's eulogy of the Jesuits. 289 

questions. On December 13th, notice was given that at a 
Convocation to be held on February 13th, 1845, certain 
propositions would be placed before Convocation, two of 
which were as follows : — 

(1) "That the passages now read from a book entitled the Ideal of 
a Christian Church Considered, are utterly inconsistent with the 
Articles of Religion of the Church of England, and with the declara- 
tion in respect of those Articles made and subscribed by William 
George Ward previously and in order to his being admitted to the 
degrees of B.A. and M.A. respectively, and with the good faith of 
him, the said William George Ward, in respect of such declaration 
and subscription." 

(2) " That the said William George Ward has disentitled himself 
to the rights and privileges conveyed by the said degrees, and is 
hereby degraded from the said degrees of B.A. and M.A. respectively." 

The announcement of this proposed action in Convocation 
created intense excitement throughout the Church of 
England, and raised the anger of the advanced Tractarians 
— including Dr. Pusey and Mr. Gladstone — to a boiling 
state. The attitude of Dr. Hook towards the book was 
very remarkable. First of all, he declared that Ward had 
" maligned the English Church for the purpose of eulogizing 
that of Rome." 81 Dr. Pusey informed him that although he 
" did not agree with the book," yet that — 

" Ward is really very greatly benefiting the Church by his practical 
suggestions and opening people's eyes to amend things. It is 
shocking to think of * degrading ' one by whom we are benefiting." 83 

At first Hook decided not to vote at all on the question 
to be brought before Convocation. Dr. Pusey's publications, 
more especially his praise of Ignatius Loyola, the founder 
of the Jesuits, had greatly displeased him. 

"I do honestly confess," he wrote to Pnsey, " that the publication 
of Romish Methodism by yourself, and your eulogy of the founder 
of the Jesuits, had some influence upon my mind, and. makes me 
pause as a strong, decided, vehement Anti-Romanist. These 
publications and the legendary Lives of the Saints will have the 

81 Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. II., p. 415. « Ibid., p. 421. 



same effect in England as the fanatical movement in France 3 they 
will make men decided Infidels." 83 

On February 13th Ward appeared before the Convocation, 
and made a defence of his book, after which it was 
condemned by a majority of 391 votes ; his degradation 
was affirmed by a majority of 58 only. At the same 
meeting of the Convocation a proposal was made to 
censure Tract XC, and there can be no doubt that it 
would have been carried were it not that the Proctors rose 
and vetoed the motion, which consequently had to be 
abandoned. One of the Proctors afterwards was promoted 
to the Deanery of St. Paul's (Dr. Church), and even 
received the offer of the Archbishopric of Canterbury on the 
death of Dr. Tait. 

Dr. Hook and Mr. Gladstone both voted against 
the condemnation of Mr. Ward's book, and against his 
degradation. Mr. Gladstone's vote was given after a careful 
study of the Ideal of a Christian Church. In the December, 
1844, issue of the Quarterly Review he had written a lengthy 
review of the book, in which, while he criticised many of 
Mr. Ward's statements, and expressed his dissent from them, 
he at the same time gave expression to his own views of 
Mr. Ward's attitude towards Rome in terms which gave 
great offence to loyal Churchmen. 

" We are prepared to contend," wrote Mr. Gladstone, " that 
even those who may be influenced more or less by the sympathies 
which Mr. Ward has avowed for Romish opinions, and by his 
antipathy to the proceedings taken at the Reformation, are in 
no degree thereby released from their obligation to continue in 
the communion of the Church. If their private judgment prefers 
the religious system of the Church of Rome to their own, and 
even holds the union of the English Church with Rome to be 
necessary to her perfection as a Church, yet, ' so long as they 
cannot deny that she is their spiritual parent and guide ordained 
of God, they owe to her not merely adhesion, but allegiance. . . . 
The doctrine that such persons ought to quit the pale of the Church, 

83 Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. II., p. 431. 


in our view both drives them upon sin, and likewise constitutes 
an unwarrantable invasion of the liberty which the Church herself 
has intended for them." 84 

I venture to submit that Mr. Gladstone's argument would 
not be accepted in the Army. If, in a time of warfare, it 
were discovered that some of the officers in a citadel pre- 
ferred the rule of the enemy to that of their own sovereign, 
and at the same time were actively at work for the purpose 
of handing over the whole citadel to the enemy, the 
authorities would soon deal with the traitors *in a very 
different manner from that suggested by Mr. Gladstone for 
the traitor officers of the Church Militant. It would not be 
thought " an unwarrantable invasion of the liberty " of those 
officers to treat them as they deserved ; indeed, it would be 
considered a bounden duty to deprive them at once of their 
commissions in the army, and turn them out of it in 

It must not be supposed that Dr. Hook's vote in defence 
of Ward was the result of any wish on his part to aid 
in the reunion of the Church of England with the Papacy. 
Individual or corporate reunion with Rome was ever an 
.abomination to Hook, who, in his later years, fought most 
-vigorously against the more advanced Romanizers. At the 
•close of the year 1844 he viewed with horror the thought 
£hat Newman might secede, and rejoiced when he heard a 
rumour that he would not go over. In this cheerful frame 
of mind he wrote to Dr. Pusey : — 

" I am so glad and thankful that Newman has been saved from 
-this downfall: may he be still preserved from the fangs of Satan. 
Although I am quite convinced that the number of Romanizers is very 
•small, yet there are several persons who would follow Newman, and I 
should myself fear that any person going from light to darkness would 
•endanger his salvation. I should fear that it would be scarcely 
possible for anyone who should apostatize from the only true Church 
.of God in this country to the Popish sect, to escape perdition ; having 

84 Gladstone's Gleanings, Vol. V., pp. 152, 153. 

19 * 


yielded to Satan in one temptation he will go on sinking deeper and 
deeper into the bottomless pit." 85 

In this letter Dr. Hook further asserted that Rome is 
identical with Antichrist, and that " Romanism is preparing 
the way for infidelity.' 5 Dr. Pusey was not at all pleased 
with this letter. It annoyed him very much to hear from 
his friend such plain denunciations of the Papal Communion ; 
and therefore he wrote back a letter of protest against Hook's 
strong language : — 

"I am," wrote Pusey, " frightened at your calling Rome Antichrist, 
or a forerunner of it. I believe Antichrist will be infidel, and arise 
out of what calls itself Protestantism, and then Rome and England 
will he united in one to oppose it. Protestantism is infidel, or 
verging towards it, as a whole." 86 

Pusey's hatred of Protestantism here comes out in the 
strongest light ; and his hatred of it was shared by the other 
leaders of his party. But he could not bear to hear any of 
his disciples or friends say anything against Rome. Soon 
after he had written the above letter to Dr. Hook, he was 
very disappointed with the new Charge of Archdeacon 
Manning, because of its severe criticism of the Papacy. So 
he wrote to Manning : — 

" Thank you for your Charge. While it is in a cheering tone, is 
there quite love enough for the Roman Church? . . . I only desiderate 
more love for Rome." 8 ? 

In the light of Manning's subsequent history it does 
indeed seem strange to find him thus censured at this- 
period for not loving Rome enough. Manning did not 
agree with Pusey on this subject. There was more 
manliness in his reply than could be found in the letter of 
his leader : — 

" One powerful obstruction," he wrote to Pusey, u to the very work 
in which you are spending yourself arises, I believe, out of the tone 
you have adopted towards the Church of Rome. Will you forgive 
me if I say that it seems to me to breathe, not charity, but want of 

S5 Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. II., p. 446. M Ibid., p. 447. 87 Ibid., p. 454. 


decision ? . . . Now what are the facts but these ? The Church of 
Rome for three hundred years has desired our extinction. It is now 
undermining us. Suppose your own brother to believe that he was 
divinely inspired to destroy you. The highest duties would bind you 
to decisive, firm, and circumspect precaution. Now a tone of love 
such as you speak of seems to me to bind you also to speak plainly of 
the broad and glaring evils of the Roman system. Are you prepared 
to do this ? If not, it seems to me that the most powerful warnings 
of charity forbid you to use a tone which cannot but lay asleep the 
consciences of many for whom, by writing and publishing, you make 
yourself responsible." w 

Dr. Pusey's biographer acknowledges that his "attitude 
at this juncture created perplexity in still higher quarters." 89 
It seems to have perplexed the Archbishop of Canterbury, 
whose Chaplain, the Rev. B. Harrison, wrote to Pusey a 
letter on the subject. Pusey's biographer does not print 
this letter, but he does print the reply to it, in which 
Pusey's dislike for unity with Protestants, and his love for 
much that is Roman, is candidly acknowledged. 

"I cannot," wrote Pusey, "any more take the negative ground 
against Rome ; I can only remain neutral. I have indeed for some 
time left off alleging grounds against Rome, and whether you think 
it right or wrong, I am sure it is of no use to persons who are really 
in any risk of leaving us. . . From much reading of Roman books, 
I am so much impressed with the superiority of their teaching ; and 
again, in some respects, I see things in Antiquity which I did not 
(especially I cannot deny some purifying system in the Intermediate 
State, nor the lawfulness of some Invocation of Saints) that I dare 
not speak against things." 90 

Dr. Hook's hopefulness as to the* state of Newman was 
without solid foundation. No one can read Newman's 
Letters, or the Life of Dr. Pusey, without finding abundant 
evidence to prove that Newman's heart had been for many 
years in Rome, and that, to be consistent, he ought to have 
seceded several years before he actually did leave the 
Church of England. Some evidence of Newman's love for 
Rome has already been given above. This may now be 

88 Ibid., p. 455. " Ibid., p. 455. w Ibid., pp. 456. 457. 


supplemented by the following extracts from his letters to 
friends. On September ist, 1843, he wrote to the Rev. 
J. B. Mozley: — "The truth then is, I am not a good son 
enough of the Church of England to feel I can in conscience 
hold preferment under her. I love the Church of Rome too 
well"* 1 On the 22nd of the same month he wrote to 
Mrs. J. Mozley: — "You cannot estimate what so many, 
alas ! feel at present, the strange effect produced on the 
mind when the conviction flashes, or rather pours, in upon it 
that Rome is the true Church." n He was here evidently 
speaking for himself, and of his own " convictions." The 
claims of Rome seem to have occupied his mind very much 
at this time. Seven days later he again referred to the 
subject in a letter to Mrs. Thomas Mozley : — 

" I do so despair of the Church of England," wrote Newman, 
**. and am so evidently cast off by her, and, on the other hand, I am 
so drawn to the Church of Rome, that I think it safer, as a matter 
of honesty, not to keep my living. This is a very different thing 
from having any intention of joining the Church of Rome. However, 
to avow generally as miich as I have said, would he wrong for ten 
thousand reasons." 93 

So he kept his longings for Rome as a secret within his 
own breast, and those of a few relatives and near friends 
whom he could trust. The consequence of this was that 
he appeared to the public in a character different from that 
which was really his. A month later he had come to the 
opinion that the Church of England was " not part of the 
Catholic Church." H'e wrote to Dr. Manning, on October 
25th, 1843 :— 

" I must tell you then frankly (but I combat arguments which to 
me, alas, are shadows) that it is not from disappointment, irritation, 
or impatience, that I have, whether rightly or wrongly, resigned 
St. Mary's ; but because / think the Church of Rome the Catholic 
Church, and ours no part of the Catholic Church, because not in com- 

" Newman's Letters, Vol. II., p. 423. 

92 Ibid., p. 424. M Ibid., p. 425. 


munion with Rome ; and because I feel that I could not honestly be a 
teacher in it any longer." 94 

The arguments which thus induced Newman to resign 
the living of St. Mary's, ought to have induced him at 
once to resign his membership in the Church of England. 
He had no moral right to remain in a Communion which 
he was convinced formed " no part of the Catholic Church." 
Indeed he ought, on his own showing, to have resigned his 
living several years before he resigned St. Mary's, since, in 
his letter to Mrs. J. Mozley, on November 24th, 1844, ne 
wrote : — " A clear conviction of the substantial identity of 
Christianity and the Roman system has now been on my 
mind for a full three years " 95 — that is, from 1841. He did 
not, however, secede to Rome for another year after writing 
this letter, so that at least for full four years he had acted a 
double part — outwardly a member of the Church of England ; 
inwardly a member of the Church of Rome. 96 On Novem- 
ber 16th, 1844, Newman wrote to Dr. Manning : — " As far 
as I know myself, my one paramount reason for contemplating 
a change is my deep, unvarying conviction that our Church 
is in schism, and my salvation depends on my joining the 
Church of Rome." 97 

From his resignation of St. Mary's until his reception 
into the Church of Rome, Newman made Pusey his con- 
fidant. The correspondence which passed between them is 
painfully interesting, and shows that Pusey wished for more 
or less of Popery, but would not submit to the Pope until 
the Church of England had done so in her corporate 

94 Newman's Apologia, p. 221. Edition, 1889. 

95 Newman's Letters, Vol. II., p. 445. 

96 From a letter to Dr. Pusey, dated February 19th, 1844, we learn that the 
date of the birth of Newman's conviction that the Church of England was 
no part of the Catholic Church was the year 1839. " I must say," Newman 
then wrote, " that /or four years and a half [that is, from the year 1839] I have 
had a conviction, weaker or stronger, but on the whole constantly growing, 
and at present very strong, that we are not part of the Catholic Church." 
(Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. II., p. 381.) 

9 ? Purcell's Life of Cardinal Manning, Vol. I., p. 258. 


capacity ; while Newman had become impatient to depart, 
and was willing to accept both Pope and Popery, without 
waiting for the Church of England to set him the example. 
Pusey wrote that he looked to " a Reunion of the Church 
as the end " of the Tractarian Movement ; and, meanwhile, 
his anxiety was to ascertain " on what terms and in what 
way " the Church of England could " be reunited with the 
rest of the Western Church." 98 Many persons will be 
surprised to learn that although, on August 28th, 1844, 
Newman had written to Pusey boldly declaring his con- 
viction that the Church of England was " not part of 
the Church," yet on the 14th of the following November 
Pusey thus wrote to the Rev. Prebendary Henderson : — 
" You are quite right in thinking that Newman has no 
feelings drawing him away from us : all his feelings and 
sympathies have been for our Church." " It is difficult 
to acquit Dr. Pusey of a charge of wilful deception, or at 
least of equivocation, in writing like this. On October 8th, 
1845, Newman was received into the Church of Rome at 
Littlemore ; and on October 16th a letter from Pusey, on 
his secession, appeared in the English Churchman, in which 
he remarked : — " He [Newman] seems then to me not so 
much gone from us, as transplanted into another part of the 
Vineyard." 10 ° 

Many since then have mourned over the loss of Newman 
to the Church of England. For my part I conceive it to be 
a blessing that he went. His heart's affection was with 
the great enemy of the Church of England ; his place was 
therefore no longer within her fold.- Already he had infected 
many of his disciples with a love for Romanism. 

The month which witnessed the secession of Newman 
beheld also the appointment of the Rev. Samuel Wilberforce 
as Bishop of Oxford. The new Bishop, even before his 
arrival in his Diocese, had fears as to his approaching 

98 Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. II., p 404. 

w Ibid., pp. 406, 445. 10 ° Ibid., p. 461. 


relations to the Regius Professor of Hebrew, which he made 
known in a letter to Miss L. Noel. To her Dr. Wilberforce 
expressed the opinion that Pusey was " a very holy man " ; 
but he added : — 

" He [Dr. Pusey] has greatly helped, and is helping, to make a party 
of semi-Romanizers in the Church, to lead some to Rome. . . . He 
says, for instance, that he does not think himself as an English 
Churchman at liberty to hold all Roman doctrine ; but he does ' not 
censure any Roman doctrine,' whilst he holds his Canonry at Christ 
Church, and his position amongst us, on condition of signing Articles, 
one half of which are taken up in declaring different figments of 
Rome to be dangerous deceits and blasphemous fables." 101 

Pusey wrote to Dr. Wilberforce on the day of his election 
to the Oxford Bishopric, and received a reply which seems 
to have surprised him very much. It was a somewhat 
severe criticism of his teaching. In his rejoinder to the 
Bishop-Elect, Pusey once more revealed his love for much 
that was distinctly Roman : — 

'* I did not mean," wrote Pusey, " to state anything definitely as to 
myself, but only to maintain, in the abstract, the tenability of a certain 
position, in which very many are, of not holding themselves obliged 
to renounce any doctrine formally decreed by the Roman Church." 

Pusey proceeded to inform his future Diocesan that he 
could no longer refuse his " belief to an intermediate state of 
cleansing, in some cases through pain " ; or, in other words, 
of his belief in the existence of Purgatory. The effect of his 
acceptance of this belief was, he said, that ever since he had 
" been wholly silent about Purgatory." He had also come 
to believe in Invocation of Saints. On this latter point he 
acted most inconsistently. He told the Bishop-Elect: — 
" Practically then I dissuade or forbid (where I have authority) 
Invocation of Saints ; abstractedly, I see no reason why our 
Church might not eventually allow it, in the sense of asking 
for their prayers " ; and towards the conclusion of his letter 

101 Life of Bishop Wilberforce, Vol. I., p. 311. 


he added : — " I cannot but think that Rome and we are not 
irreconcilably at variance." 102 

It is here seen how rapidly Pusey was marching on the 
road to Rome, though he seems to have never expected to 
arrive at the end of the journey. It added much to the 
difficulties of his position that he had now, in Dr. Wilberforce, 
a bishop carefully watching his movements, and ready to 
censure him when necessary. Time went on, and the 
Romeward Movement with it. By the year 1847, even 
Archdeacon Manning had discovered its tendency towards 
Rome, and its illogical position in the Church of England. 
He wrote to Pusey, on January 23rd of that year : — 

" You know how long I have to you openly expressed my conviction 
that a false position has been taken up in the Church of England. 
The direct and certain tendency, I believe, of what remains of the 
original Movement is to the Roman Church. You know the minds- 
of men about us better than I do, and will, therefore, know how strong, 
an impression the claims of Rome have made on them; and how 
feeble and fragmentary are the reasons on which they have made a 
sudden stand or halt in the line on which they have been, perhaps- 
insensibly, moving for years. It is also clear that they are * revising 
the Reformation ' — that the doctrine, ritual, and practice of the Church 
of England, taken at its best, does not suffice them." 103 

At about the same time Dr. Hook, Tractarian though he 
was, grew more and more alarmed at the conduct of the 
Romanizing party. In great trouble he wrote to Manning 
from his Leeds Vicarage : — 

" Those whom I took for Church of England men, and who as such- 
hated Popery, who once, as in the Tracts for the Times, openly assailed 
Popery, I rind now to be enamoured of her. I find young men 
thinking it orthodox to read and study Popish books of devotion, and 
to imitate Popish priests in their attire ; I find Justification by Faith r 
the doctrine of our Articles, the test of a standing or falling Church,, 
repudiated, and consequently a set of works of supererogation and a 
feeling in favour of the intercession of those who are supposed to have 
been more than profitable servants." 104 

102 Life of Dr. Pusey, Vol. III., pp. 43-45. ln3 Ibid., p. 135. 

104 Life of Cardinal Manning, Vol. I., p. 328. 


At this very period the views of Dr. Manning were in a 
state of transition — his face was turned Romeward. During- 
the summer of 1847, he travelled abroad on the Continent. 
At Liege he fell in love with the Sacrifice of the Mass, and 
wrote in his diary: — " I cannot but feel that the practise of 
Elevation, Exposition, Adoration of the Blessed Eucharist 
has a powerful effect in sustaining and realizing the doctrine 
of the Incarnation." 105 In 1848 Archdeacon Manning visited, 
Rome. While there strange things happened, of which the 
world knew nothing until after his death. One day, while 
in the Piazza di Spagna, he saw the Papal carriage ap- 
proaching towards him. As it passed he knelt down in the 
street before the Pope — and he all the time an Archdeacon 
in the Reformed Church of England ! 106 Mr. Purcell, the 
future Cardinal's biographer, tells us in the chapter which he 
devotes to this visit to Rome that — 

"In his Diary Archdeacon Manning nowhere says in so many 
words, that he took a personal part in the veneration of relics which 
he so often witnessed and described with touching fidelity. Yet from 
the tone and spirit of his testimony I have no doubt that at St. Philip 
Neri's Oratory at Florence, for instance, the relics of the Saint were- 
laid on the forehead and pressed to the lips of the Archdeacon of 
Chichester." 107 

The history of Manning's change of views in favour of the 
Church of Rome, as related by Mr. Purcell, greatly surprised 
the English public, when it was first published. It revealed 
• an absence of straightforward conduct on Manning's part 
for which no really valid excuse has yet been offered. His ' 
double dealing is frankly admitted by his Roman Catholic 
biographer, who writes : — 

" What, I grant, is a curious difficulty, almost startling at first, is to 
find Manning speaking concurrently for years with a double voice. 
One voice proclaims in public, in sermons, charges, and tracts, and, in 
a tone still more absolute, to those who sought his advice in Confes- 
sion, his profound and unwavering belief in the Church of England as- 

"* Ibid., p. 352. m Ibid., Vol. II., p. 456. 10 " Ibid., Vol. I., p. 407, note. 


the Divine witness to the Truth, appointed by Christ and guided by 
the Holy Spirit. The other voice, as the following confessions and docu- 
ments under his own handwriting bear ample witness, speaks in almost 
heartbroken accents of despair at being no longer able in conscience 
to defend the teaching and position of the Church of England ; whilst 
acknowledging at the same time, if not in his confession to Laprimau- 
daye, at any rate in his letters to Robert Wilberforce, the drawing he 
felt towards the infallible teaching of the Church of Rome." 108 

It was while in this transition state that Manning published 
several volumes of his Anglican sermons. In 1865, just 
before he was consecrated titular " Archbishop of West- 
minster," Manning consulted a friend as to the wisdom of 
having them republished. The friend gave as his opinion, 
that, as a Roman Catholic, Dr. Manning could not con- 
scientiously republish them. Yet in the letter conveying 
this opinion, his friend (Dr. Bernard Smith) bore testimony 
to the services rendered to the Church of Rome by these 
Anglican sermons. 

" I confess," wrote Dr. B. Smith, " I was greatly surprised to see 
how close [that is, in these sermons] you bring the Anglican Confes- 
sion to the Church of Rome. But what I admired most in the perusal 
of these volumes was not the many strong Catholic truths I met with, 
but that almost Catholic unction of a St. Francis of Sales, or of a 
St. Teresa, that breathes through them all. That the reading of these 
works must have great influence over the Protestant mind I have no 
doubt. I also believe that no sincere Protestant can read over these 
volumes, who sooner or later will not take refuge in the ark" 109 [by 
which, of course, Dr. Smith meant the Church of Rome]. 

What is here said of Manning's Anglican Sermons may, 
with equal truth, be said of many scores of volumes written 
by Ritualistic clergymen. These works teach principles 
which must logically lead to the Church of Rome, even when, 
as is sometimes the case, they are accompanied with criticisms 
on some portions of the Roman system. Doubts as to the 
Church of England entered Manning's mind as early as 1846. 

108 Lift of Cardinal Manning, Vol. I., p. 463. 

109 Ibid., Vol. II., p. 722, note. 


In his Diary for the August of that year he wrote that, in his 
opinion, the Church of England was " diseased organically " 
by its " separation from Church toto orbe diffusa and from 
Cathedra Petri"; by its "abolition of penance," and by its 
" extinction of daily sacrifice." no On July 5th, 1846, he 
wrote in his Diary : — " Something keeps rising and saying, 
* you will end in the Roman Church.' " " If the Church of 
England were away there is nothing in Rome that would 
repel me with sufficient repulsion to keep me separate, and 
there is nothing in Protestantism that would attract me. . . 
I am conscious that I am further from the English Church 
and nearer Rome than I ever was. . . Yet I have no positive 
doubts about the Church of England. I have difficulties — 
but the chief thing is the drawing of Rome. It satisfies the 
whole of my intellect, sympathy, sentiment, and nature, in a 
way proper, and solely belonging to itself." m Mr. Purcell 
adds to the above extracts from Manning's Diary the follow- 
ing significant comments : — 

" It is curious to note from these entries that the breakdown of 
Manning's belief in the English Church took place so early as 1846, 
two years before Hampden's appointment, and four years before the 
Gorham Judgment. In his sermons and charges there are not the 
slightest indications of such a misgiving. In his correspondence with 
Mr. Gladstone at this period, not a hint or suggestion was conveyed — ■ 
not that the Church of England was organically and functionally 
diseased— but that it had fallen from the high ideal of perfection,, 
which Manning had so fervently and eloquently attributed to it in his 
public utterances. From the evidence of his own Diary, from his 
letters to Laprimaudaye and Robert Wilberforce, it seems as clear as 
daylight that, intellectually Manning had, years before the Gorham 
Judgment, lost faith in the Church of England." 112 

Notwithstanding his "loss of faith in the Church of 
England," Manning continued to outwardly profess what 
in his heart he had ceased to believe in. On February 12th, 
1848 — three years before he left the Church of England — he 
wrote from Rome to his intimate friend, Robert Wilberforce z 

110 Ibid., Vol. I., p. 483. m Ibid., pp. 485, 486. m Ibid., pp. 487, 488. 


— "I cannot rest the Church of England and its living 
witness on anything higher than an intellectual basis. I 
trust it, because I think it to be right, not because I believe 
it to be right. It is a subject of my reason, and not an 
object of my faith." 113 The following year he wrote, 
" under the seal," more strongly : — 

" Protestantism is not so much a rival system, which I reject, but 
no system, a chaos, a wreck of fragments, without idea, principle, 
•or life. It is to me flesh, blood, unbelief, and the will of man. 
Anglicanism seems to me to he in essence the same, only elevated, 
constructed, and adorned by intellect, social and political order, and 
the fascinations of a national and domestic history. As a theology, 
-still more as the Church or the faith, it has so faded out of my mind 
'that I cannot say I reject it, but I know it no more. I simply do not 
•believe it. I can form no basis, outline, or defence for it." 1U 

And yet he continued to receive the emoluments of a 
Church in which he had ceased to have any real faith 1 Was 
this honest ? Was it not, rather, double dealing, such as 
looked very much like a case of receiving money under false 
pretences ? In any case it reminds us of those of whom it is 
recorded that they possessed " a conscience seared with a 
hot iron " — past any conscientious feeling. For more than 
a. year after this Manning wrote letters to his penitents, 
having for their object the strengthening of their faith in the 
Church of England. One such letter, dated May 6th, 1850, 
is printed by his biographer, in which occurs the following 
assertion: — "Judging by the evidence of the Primitive Church 
there are many, and they very grave and vital, points on 
which the Church of England seems more in harmony with 
Holy Scripture than the Church of Rome." 115 One wonders 
whether Manning at the time really believed what he thus 
wrote. I very much doubt it. It seems that this letter was 
the means of preventing Manning's penitent from going over 
to Rome. Manning's real views at this time were knbwn 
only to four or five other persons, his intimate friends, 

113 Life of Cardinal Manning, Vol. I., p. 509. U4 Ibid., p. 515. us Ibid., p. 473. 


all of whom, like himself, eventually joined the Church of 
Rome. They were Robert Wilberforce, James Hope, William 
Dodsworth, Henry Wilberforce, and, perhaps, Laprimaudaye. 
Mr. Gladstone was an intimate friend, but the secret of his 
{Manning's) views was carefully kept from that statesman. 

"On learning in January last [1895]," writes Mr. Purcell, "the 
substance of Manning's letters to Robert Wilberforce, Mr. Gladstone 
was surprised beyond measure. Speaking with evident pain, he said, 
— ' To me this is most startling information, for which I am quite 
unprepared. In all our correspondence and conversations, during an 
intimacy which extended over many years, Manning never led me to 
believe that he had doubts as to the position or Divine authority of the 
English Church, far less that he had lost faith altogether in Anglicanism. 
That is to say, up to the Gorham Judgment [in 1850]. The Gorham 
Judgment, I knew, shook his faith in the Church of England. It 
was then that Manning expressed to me — and for the first time — his 
doubts and misgivings.' After a few moments' reflection, Mr. 
Gladstone added : — * I won't say Manning was insincere, God forbid I 
But he was not simple and straightforward.' " 116 

I venture to submit that the majority of Englishmen will 
-see, in such conduct, clear evidence of insincerity, as well 
as of a want of " straightforward " conduct. The clearest 
proof of Manning's ecclesiastical dishonesty — I canno.t here 
use a milder term — is obtained by a comparison of a letter 
which he wrote to Robert Wilberforce, on June 25th, 1850, 
with a published letter, which he addressed to the Bishop of 
Chichester, dated July 2nd, 1850 — only a week later. The 
two letters afford a striking instance of that " double voice " 
in which he then frequently spoke. In the first of these 
letters, which was strictly private, Manning wrote : — 

" I have not seen Churton's Charge ; but the course he and others 
have taken has helped more than most things to convince me that the 
Church of England has no real basis. . . . Logically, I am convinced 
that the One, Holy, Visible, Infallible Church is that which has its 
circuit in all the world, and its centre accidentally at Rome. But I 
mistrust my conclusion. ... I have made a first draft on the Oath of 
Supremacy, in a letter to my Bishop. But I have written myself fairly 
over the border — or Tiber rather." 117 

116 Ibid., p. 569. »? Ibid., p. 558. 


In the other letter, to his Bishop, Manning does not write 
anything which would lead his Diocesan, or the public, to 
suppose that he had written himself over "the Tiber," or 
into the Church of Rome. On the contrary, while criticising 
sharply the relations to the State of the Church of England, 
and her connection with the Court of Law which had just 
acquitted Mr. Gorham, he informed his lordship that he 
had still left a strong faith in the Church of England — 
though, as a matter of fact, as we have already seen, he had 
long since ceased to have any faith in her at all. 

"We believe," wrote Archdeacon Manning, "the Church in 
England, as a member or province of this Divine Kingdom 
[the Church], possesses, * in solidum,' by inheritance and participation 
in the whole Church, the inheritance of the Divine Tradition of Faith, 
with a share in this full and supreme custody of doctrine and power 
of discipline, partaking for support and perpetuity, in its measure and 
sphere, the same guidance as the whole Church at large, of which, by 
our Baptism, we have been made members. 

" The Church in England, then, being thus an integral whole, 
possesses within itself the fountain of doctrine and discipline, and has 
no need to go beyond itself for succession, orders, mission, jurisdiction. 
. . . But we trust that as, in the period of the great Western schism, 
the Churches of Spain, France, Germany, and many others, were 
compelled to fall back within their own limits and to rest upon the full 
and integral power which, by succession, they possessed for their own 
internal government, so the Church in England has continued to be a 
perfect member of this Divine Kingdom, endowed with all that is of 
necessity to the valid ministry oj the Faith and Sacraments of Christ."™ 

Who, at that time, would have thought that the writer 
of this strong eulogy of the Church of England actually 
considered that in writing it he was " fairly writing himself 
over the border — or Tiber " ? If the Church of England 
was all that Manning asserted, possessed of valid Orders 
and Sacraments, without going " beyond itself " to outside 
communions, why had he made up his mind to leave a 

118 Appellate Jurisdiction of the Crown in Matters Spiritual : A Letter to the- 
Bishop of Chichester, by Henry Edward Manning, Archdeacon of Chichester, 
pp. 4, 5. 


Church, which he declared was " a perfect member of 
this Divine Kingdom " ? In the history of the Romeward 
Movement in the Church of England there are but few, 
if any, incidents more deplorable than the double dealing 
of Dr. Manning during his last years in that Church. 

Down to the year 185 1, the Romeward Movement in the 
Church of England had led to the secession to Rome of a 
large number of prominent clergymen and laymen. The 
list of distinguished seceders given in Browne's Annals of 
the Tractarian Movement affords ample proof of the services 
rendered to the Church of Rome by the Oxford Movement. 
No wonder that Cardinal Wiseman rejoiced at what he saw 
going on around him, and looked forward with an almost 
boyish glee to the good time coming, when, as he hoped, 
England would once more accept Papal supremacy. But 
the services rendered to Rome by the Movement were by no 
means confined to supplying her with some of the ablest 
of her children. A prominent Roman Catholic magazine, 
the Rambler, during the year 1851, devoted several articles 
to the subject of " The Rise, Progress, and Results of 
Puseyism," as it was then commonly termed. The tone 
of these articles was, throughout, one of deep thankfulness 
for what had been already accomplished. 

" From the moment that the Oxford Tracts commenced," said the 
Rambler, "the Catholic Church assumed a position in the country 
which she had never before attained since the schism of the sixteenth 
.century. With what a depth of indescribable horror of Catholicism 
-the whole mind of England was formerly saturated, few can compre- 
ihend who have not personally experienced it. . . . The sons and 
•daughters, of Anglicanism were brought up to regard the Catholic 
Church as the devil's masterpiece. . . . No one read Catholic books, 
«no one entered Catholic churches ; no one ever saw Catholic priests j 
few people even knew that there were any Catholic bishops resident 
•in England. Except in connection with Ireland, the Catholic Church 
was forgotten. 

" See now the change which has come over the English people as a 
nation. Violently Protestant still, its attitude towards the Catholic 




Church is extraordinarily changed. It dislikes her, but it no longer 
despises her. . . . Crowds attend the services of Catholic and of 
Puseyite churches j but while in the latter there is hissing and groan- 
ing, in the former a stillness the most profound pays strange homage 
to the elevation of the most Holy Sacrament. None but fools and 
fanatics deny some merits to the Church of Rome and her clergy. 
Everywhere the change appears. . . . And whatever other causes may 
have combined to work this wonderful result, to the Movement of 
J&33 it surely must chiefly be attributed." 119 

119 The Rambler, March 185 1, pp. 246, 247. 



Th3 Association for the Promotion of the Unity of Christendom — Sermons and 
Essays on Reunion — Denunciation of Protestantism — Treasonable letter 
in the Union Review — The A. P. U. C. denounced by the Inquisition — 
Degrading Reply of 198 Church of England Dignitaries and Clergy — 
Archbishop Manning's opinion of the Romeward Movement — The Society 
of the Holy Cross Petition for Reunion with Rome — Signed by 1212 
clergymen — The English Church Union — Its work for Union with Rome 
— Approves Dr. Pusey's Eirenicon — Pusey writes that there is nothing 
in the Pope's " Supremacy " in itself to which he would object — 
The Catholic Union for Prayer — A Colonial Priest on Reunion with 
Rome — The " levelling up " process — The real Objects of the English 
Church Union — The Lord's Day and the Holy Eucharist — Lord Halifax 
wants Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament — E. C. U. members find 
fault with the Book of Common Prayer — E. C. U. Petitions the Lambeth 
Conference for Reunion — Reunion asked for under "The Bishop of Old 
Rome " — Lord Halifax prefers Leo XIII. to the Privy Council — Dean 
Hook in favour of the Privy Council — Mr. Mackonochie's Evidence 
before the Ecclesiastical Courts' Commission — Asserts there has been no 
"Ecclesiastical Court" since the Reformation — A Ritualistic Curate 
supplies the " Kernel " to Roman Ritual — He preaches the Immaculate 
Conception of the Virgin Mary — Lord Halifax and " Explanations " of 
the Pope's Infallibility— The Homilies on the Church of Rome — Rome 
has already reaped a harvest from Ritualistic labours — Secession as well 
as Union a Scriptural duty — Objections to Reunion with Rome. 

THE time at length arrived when it was thought 
desirable by those who longed for the Corporate 
Reunion of the Church of England with the Eastern 
Church and the Church of Rome, to band themselves into 
societies to promote the object the)'' had at heart. Some 
of these societies made the Reunion question a part only 
of their programme ; but from the commencement of its 
existence the Association for the Promotion of the Unity 
of Christendom laboured for this one object alone. This 

20 * 


Association was founded at a private meeting held in 
the parish of St. Clement Danes, Strand, London, on 
September 8th, 1857, on tne motion of a Roman Catholic 
layman, seconded by a Church of England clergyman, and 
supported by members of the Greek Church. At that 
meeting thirty-four persons joined the infant Association. 1 
In a statement issued by One of its chief officers (the 
Rev. F. G. Lee) in 1864, it was mentioned that in that year 
it had grown into a membership of 7099, of whom "nearly 
a thousand " were Roman Catholics, and about three 
hundred were "members of the Eastern Church." Mr. Lee 
also affirmed that, "The Association has been approved in 
the highest ecclesiastical quarters, both amongst Latins, 
Anglicans, and Greeks. The Holy Father gave his blessing 
to the scheme when first started, and repeated that blessing 
with a direct and kindly commendation to one of the 
English secretaries, who was more recently granted the 
honour of a special interview." 2 In an appendix to the 
volume of sermons from which I have just quoted, and 
which was " Printed for certain members of the Association 
for the Promotion of the Unity of Christendom," an official 
prospectus of the Association is printed, in which it is 
mentioned that " the names of members will be kept strictly 
private."* On the occasion of its seventh anniversary 
Masses were said for the success of its work not merely 
by ordinary clergymen, but even by Archbishops, Bishops, 
and Monks, and these were offered in England, Scotland, 
Ireland, France, Austria, Prussia, Denmark, Italy, Belgium, 
Switzerland, Malta, North America, South America, and 
South Africa. 4 

The Association still exists, and at the present time 
numbers upwards of ten thousand members, but from its 
birth until now it has never, so far as I can ascertain, 

1 Sermons on the Reunion of Christendom, Vol. I., pp. x., xi. 

2 Ibid., p. xii. 3 Ibid., p. 329 
4 The Church and the World, Vol. I., p. 201. 


printed a list of its members, not even for its own private 
use, so afraid are they lest their names should be found 
out. In the prospectus just referred to there is printed 
a short list of Diocesan Secretaries, and of persons to whom 
applications for information could be made, but as to the 
rank and file of the Association nobody knows who they are, 
excepting the head officials. In January, 1863, the Union 
Review was founded by members of the Association, and 
was subsequently conducted by them, though the Associa- 
tion as such was not held responsible for its contents. 
But inasmuch as it expressed the views held by those 
who guided the Association, it may not be considered as 
inappropriate if I give here a few extracts from it, which 
show its thoroughly Romanizing character. 

" It is a shocking scandal that one of the Homilies of the Estab- 
lished Church should even contain heretical reasoning against the 
belief in a state of connection [Sic. Probably correction is meantj 
hereafter, and the benefit of prayers for t the departed." 6 

" The English Church is in a state t of penance ; her daily Sacrifice 
taken away, and the perpetual Presence on her Altars withdrawn, 
except in a few favoured places where both have lately been 
restored." 6 

"The hair shirt, and the spiked cross or belt, sacrificing bodily 
ease altogether, with the sharper but less wearing means by which 
the various Acts of the Passion may be followed and sympathized 
with step by step, are all valuable in their several degrees, but require 
adaptation to particular cases." 7 

" We venture to say, heresy has been practically triumphant for 
three hundred years together, through the Prayer Book." 8 

"We will not tamely accept the illogical and incomplete system 
which the Reformers have left us in the Prayer Book as it is." 9 

Perhaps the most remarkable document ever printed in 
the Union Review was a lengthy letter written by a member 
of the Association to a Roman Catholic priest in Germany. 
The thoroughly Jesuitical and traitorous character of the 
Ritualistic Movement is therein very candidly revealed by 

6 Union Review, Vol. III., p. 147. Ibid., p. 395. » Ibid., p. 397, note. 

8 Ibid., p. 621. Ibid., p. 626. 


one of its warmest friends. He announced that for the 
previous twenty-five years — i.e., from 1842 — the leaders of 
the party had been preaching M the Catholic faith," and 
that their doctrines had "secretly yet surely been working, 
like the leaven," during that period. 10 From this note- 
worthy letter I give the subjoined additional extracts : — 

" Our belief is that the Church of which we are members is 
Catholic in her Faith, and Catholic in her usages, and that 
Protestantism in any shape and form has no legal place within her."" ll 

" Day and night — in the Church, and in the closets — there ascend 
in England from thousands of mourning hearts, smitten with a sense of 
their bereavement, the fervent expressions of an intense longing of a 
burning desire for the restoration to our unhappy country of this 
most glorious privilege of Visible Unity [with the Church of Rome]. 
Here you have the real heart and soul of the present Movement ; this is 
the centre from which its pulsations vibrate, and from which its life 
Hood flows.'" 12 

" At the outset of this Union Movement our eyes turned Eastward, 
rather than rest on the spot on which now they so love to dwell. For 
now, at last, is God mercifully removing the scales from our eyes. 
Every year we begin to understand you [the Church of Rome] better, 
and, therefore, to love you more." 13 , 

" Here, in a sense of the danger of the common foe, and of the 
identity of that Faith which is to overcome him, we hope to find one 
ftrong force of attraction to draw not only the Protestant to us, but 
both together to you [Rome]. But when? ah! when? The time 
cannot be so very far off. The strides which have been made during 
the last ten years are enormous 5 and, as I say, we are all, however 
opposed, moving on together." u 

" I hope I have now said enough to justify any convictions that 
there is no reason for discouragement, on either of these two heads, 
but that it is reasonable lo hope that at the end of this third period, 
say twenty years hence, Catholicism will have so leavened our Church, 
that she herself, in her corporal capacity, and not a mere small section 
of her, like ourselves, will be able to come to you [the Church of 
Rome] and say : — * Let the hands which political force, not spiritual 
choice, have parted these three hundred years, be once more joined. 
We are one with you in Faith, and we have a common foe to fight. 

10 Union Review, Vol. V., p. 379. n Ibid., p. 380. 12 Ibid., p. 39S. 

13 Ibid., p. 400. l < Ibid., p. 408. 


There may be a few divergencies of practice on our side. We seek to 
make no terms ; we come only in the spirit of love and of humility ; but 
at the same time we feel sure that the Chief Shepherd of the Flock of 
Christ [the Pope] will deal tenderly with us, and place no yoke upon 
us which we are not able to bear.' " 16 

" With such hopes, then, and with such a position, it is surely, I 
say, much better for us to remain working where we are, for what 
would become of England, if we were to leave her Church ? She 
would be simply lost to Catholicism, and won to Rationalism. . . . 
Depend upon it, it is only through the English Church itself that 
England can be Catholicised." 16 

" The work now going on in England is an earnest and carefully 
•organized attempt, on the part of a rapidly increasing body of priests 
and laymen, to bring our Church and country up to the full standard 
of Catholic Faith and practice, and eventually to plead for her union 
with you [the Church of Rome]." 17 

The object of the Oxford Movement is very truthfully 
revealed in the last of these extracts from the Union Review. 
Corporate Reunion with the Church of Rome has ever 
been the great aim of the wire-pullers of the Oxford 
Movement. This necessarily involves the death of the 
Reformation Movement of the sixteenth century, at least 
within the Church of England, and implies that the 
Reformation was a sin, if not a crime. Here and there some 
uninfluential Ritualist is now heard to declare that he wants 
nothing of the kind, but it is well to remember, when we 
hear such statements, that the movements of an army are 
not guided by the views of the rank and file, but by the wills 
of the commanding officers. The language of this article in 
the Union Review is clearly that of a traitor, who remains 
within the camp of the Church of England for the sole 
purpose of doing his best to deprive her of her independence 
and liberty, and hand her over to the tyranny of her greatest 
enemy. And the strange thing is that this writer's 
traitorous article was never repudiated by the leaders of 
the Ritualistic party. There is reason to believe that it only 

16 Ibid., pp. 408, 409. w Ibid., p. 410. W ibid., p. 412. 


too accurately represented their views of the situation. 
Before parting with the Union Review I may be permitted 
to give two more quotations from subsequent volumes : — 

" We have grown wiser than some of our forefathers ; on 
questions of doctrine, of ritual, and of religious practice, such for 
instance as the Confessional, we are separated hut a hair's Ireadth 
from Rome ; we no longer consider ourselves involved in the guilt and 
peril of idolatry, if, when we are abroad, we frequent the service of 
the Mass; we prefer Notre Dame to the Little Bethels of French 
Protestantism, and claim affinity with Rome or the Orientals rather 
than with Luther or Calvin." 18 

" By way of suggesting something practical ourselves, we will in 
this paper recommend, as a first and essential preliminary towards 
the Reunion of Christendom, the total abolition of the Thirty-nine 
Articles." 19 

The members of the Association for the Promotion of the 
Unity of Christendom were very zealous in furthering the 
work they had on hand. The papers of the Association 
were translated into several Continental languages, and the 
members, while travelling abroad, scattered these papers 
broadcast throughout Europe. In England its work was 
brought before the public chiefly in connection with special 
services in churches, on which occasions the Ritual adopted 
was of the most advanced type. The cause of the 
Association was also advocated through the press by means 
of letters in Ritualistic and other newspapers, warmly 
advocating Reunion with Rome and the East. Nor was 
their zeal confined to the periodical press. Two volumes of 
Sermons on the Reunion of Christendom were issued by the 
members, several of them from the pens of Roman Catholic 
and Greek clergymen. These were followed, in 1867, by a 
remarkable volume of Essays on the Reunion of Christendom, 
which, at the time of its publication, attracted a great deal 
of public attention. The Association, as such, disclaimed 
any official responsibility for the opinions expressed either 
in the Essays or in the Sermons, each member of the 

18 Union Review, Volume for 1869, p. 373. l9 Ibid., Volume for 1870, p. 289. 


Association who contributed to the volumes being held 
responsible only for his own utterances. Probably the 
Essays would not have been so widely read were it not that 
the " Introductory Essay " was written by the Rev. Dr. 
Pusey, who, as my readers are already aware, had for many 
years been labouring zealously to promote Corporate 
Reunion with Rome, and had written two or three volumes 
on the subject. In his " Introductory Essay " Dr. Pusey 
wrote : — 

" The idea itself, that the Council of Trent might be legitimately 
explained, so that it could be received by Anglo-Catholics, and that 
our Articles contain nothing which is, in its grammatical sense, 
adverse to the Council of Trent, remains untouched and unrepudiated. 
And this is the intellectual basis of a future union, when God shall 
have disposed men's hearts on both sides to look the difficulties in 
the face, and the presence of the common foe, unbelief, shall have 
driven them together." 20 

There are other articles in this collection of Essays on 
Reunion which call for attention here. The writers are 
more outspoken than Dr. Pusey, on some points, though 
on all important matters they seem to agree. Canon 
Humble, a member of the Scottish Episcopal Church, who 
wrote on " The Exigency of Truth," evidently believed in 
the doctrine of " Reserve in Communicating Religious 
Knowledge," for, in a spirit which I must term Jesuitical, 
he declared that — 

" There are many who are quite willing to admit the Primacy, or 
even more, of the Bishop of Rome, who do not therefore see that they 
are in anywise bound to proclaim their belief to all the world by 
immediately joining the Roman Communion." 21 

" Had men listened to the voice of God, in place of giving reins to 
their violent tempers, we can scarcely doubt that Rome would have 
become a Monarchy by assent of the whole Church." 22 

"The Primacy of Rome was given to her, certainly not by the 
Church, but by the great Head Himself. . . . Rome was allowed to 
have the first place under the Patriarchal system, but she had that 
which no General Council could either give or take away. She was 

80 Essays on Reunion, p. xxviii. 8l Ibid., p. 9. B Ibid., p. 26. 


-constituted to be the strength and support of all other Churches — the 
centre round wkich alt others should gather." 23 

The marvel is how a man who could write like this did 
►not consistently act upon his principles, and go over to 
Rome at once. Only on principles which are commonly 
termed Jesuitical could he remain as a Minister of a Church 
which refuses to acknowledge either the Primacy or 
Supremacy of the Pope. What he terms "the Exigency 
of Truth" alone compelled him to remain where he was, 
with a view to Corporate Reunion with Rome. The Rev. 
-George Nugee, then Vicar of Wymering, wrote, in these 
Essays on Reunion, an article on "A Conference of 
Theologians," in which he, as a clergyman of the Church 
-of England, affirmed that " the Supremacy need not be an 
abiding hindrance to Reunion."- 24 If this be so, it follows 
-that the Protestant Reformation was nothing less than a 
grave error, and the sooner it is undone the better. Loyal 
-Churchmen, however, are of a different opinion. They 
believe that the Reformation was one of the greatest 
blessings God has given to England, and that it would be 
.a sin and a disgrace to undo its glorious work. Papal 
Supremacy, in any shape or form, is an insuperable barrier 
to Reunion with Rome. There is nothing good to be 
obtained by it ; but it is certain that we should obtain much 
that is evil, and lose our civil and religious liberties. The 
Protestantism of England is also, on the other hand, as 
long as it remains, an insuperable barrier to the Reunion 
schemes of these Rcmanizers. They realize this fact to tHe 
full, and consequently they do everything in their power to 
give Protestantism a bad name, as a preliminary to its final 
removal. This was very candidly admitted by the Rev. 
W. Percival Ward, Rector of Compton Valence, in his 
paper on "The Difficulties of Reunion," which I have 
already quoted (see p. 261), but which will bear repetition 
here : — - * 

™ Essays on Reunion, pp. 27, 28. ** Ibid., p. 83 


"The first great hindrance," he wrote, "that is before us arises 
from the Protestantism of England. Till this is removed, the Reunion 
of our Church, as the Church of England, with either the Greek, or 
Latin Churches, is absolutely hopeless." 26 

Here we find a strong reason for maintaining, and even 
increasing, the Protestantism of the Established Church. 
So long as it exists Reunion with Rome is "hopeless." It 
is Protestantism which, by God's help, has been the cause 
of England's prosperity, and of that of all other Protestant 
countries. While Roman Catholic countries, which acknow- 
ledge Papal Supremacy, are everywhere going down in the 
scale of nations, Protestant countries are everywhere 
growing in prosperity, and extending their borders on every 
hand. The Protestant nations are at the head of the world, 
in everything which make nations truly great and glorious. 
We have therefore no reason to be ashamed of the word 
Protestantism, though we have just cause for being ashamed 
of the men in the Church of England who are trying to 
destroy that religion which gives them their daily bread. 
The man who bites the hand which feeds him is justly held 
in contempt. 

Another of the articles in the Essays on Reunion, which 
was written anonymously, very candidly, and in the most 
brazen-faced fashion, unblushingly boasted that the Ritual- 
ists were doing the work of the Church of Rome within the 
Church of England. Any honest man of business would say 
that if they were doing Rome's work they ought to receive 
Rome's pay, and not that of the Church of England. But 
fit is to be feared that large numbers of Ritualists possess 
what the Apostle terms a " conscience seared with a hot 
iron " (1 Tim. iv. 2) — hardened, and past feeling. What 1 
have just said may, at first sight, seem to some of my 
readers, almost incredible, and therefore I give below the 
actual words of this Ritualistic writer — 

" The marvel is, that Roman Catholics whatever their views may 

tt Ibid., p. 89. 



be, do not see the wisdom of aiding us to the utmost. Admitting 
that we are but a lay body with no pretensions to the name of a 
Church, we yet, in our belief (however mistaken) that we are one, are 
doing for England that which they cannot do. We are teaching men 
to believe that God is to be worshipped under the form of Bread, and 
they are learning the lesson from us which they have refused to learn 
from the Roman teachers, who have been among us for the last three 
hundred years. We are teaching men to endure willingly the pain of 
Confession, which is an intense trial to the reserved Anglo-Saxon 
nature, and to believe that a man's ' I absolve thee ' is the voice of 
God. How many English Protestants have Roman priests brought 
to Confession, compared with the Anglican clergy ? Could they have 
overcome the English dislike to ' mummery ' as we are overcoming it ? 
On any hypothesis, we are doing their work." 26 

These traitors within the camp knew very well that the 
Church of Rome would not care to have the Church of 
England even as a present, unless she had first of all 
repented of her Protestantism, and adopted Romish doctrines 
and practices. Consequently their great efforts, for the 
time being, centred round the " Catholicising " work 
described in the above statement. 

" Let us be assured," wrote the Rev. T. W. Mossman, Rector of 
West Torrington, " that the Roman and Greek Churches cannot, if 
they would, hold out the right hand of fellowship to us, so long as we 
are uncatholic in our practice. . . . We see then most clearly, as the 
conclusion of the whole matter, that by adopting and promoting 
really Catholic Ritual observances, we are, as far as in us lies, pro- 
moting in the most effectual way possible the accomplishment of 
Visible Unity and intercommunion amongst all parts of the Church j 
and that by neglecting or opposing Catholic Ritual we are doing our 
best, or our worst, to hinder the glorious consummation of the visible, 
corporate Reunion of the whole Christian family." 27 

For several years after the formation of the Association 
for the Promotion of the Unity of Christendom, Roman 
Catholics were permitted to join it. As we have already 
seen, large numbers of them became members, and Masses 
for its object were offered in several Romish countries. 

* Essays on Reunion, p. 180. 

K Ibid., pp. 288, 289. 


But in April, 1864, the Roman Catholic Bishops in England 
seem to have become alarmed as to possible dangers to 
their people, through being joined together with non- 
Romanists in religious work. They, accordingly, addressed 
a letter to the Inquisition on the subject, asking for an 
authoritative decision on the question. On September 16th, 
1864, tne Inquisition sent its official reply, signed by Cardinal 
Patrizi, to the Bishops, condemning the A. P. U. C, and 
ordering all Roman Catholics to withdraw from it. From 
this document I give the subjoined extracts : — 

" It has been notified to the Apostolic See that some Catholics and 
even ecclesiastics, have given their names to a Society established in 
London in the year 1857, *for promoting ' (as it is called) 'the Unity 
of Christendom ' ; and that several articles have been published in the 
public papers signed with the names of Catholics, in approval of this 
Society, or supposed to have been written by ecclesiastics in its favour. 
Now, the real character and aim of the Society are plain, not only from 
the articles in the Journal called the Union Review, but from the very 
prospectus in which persons are invited to join it, and are enrolled as 
members. Organized and conducted by Protestants, 28 it has resulted 
from a view, put forth by it in express terms, that the three Christian 
Communions, the Roman Catholic, the schismatic Greek, and the 
*Anglican, though separated and divided one from another, have yet an 
equal claim to the title of Catholic. Hence its doors are open to all 
men whencesoever — Catholics, schismatic Greeks, or Anglicans — but 
so that none shall moot the question of the several points of doctrine 
in which they differ, and each may follow undisturbed the opinions of 
his own religious profession. . . . 

" The Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office, to whose scrutiny 
the matter has been referred as usual, has judged, after mature con- 
sideration, that the faithful should be warned with all care against 
-being led by heretics to join with them and with schismatics in 
entering this Association. The most Eminent Fathers the Cardinals, 
placed with myself over the Sacred Inquisition, entertain, indeed, no 
doubt that the Bishops of those parts address themselves already with 
diligence, according to the charity and learning which distinguish 

28 Roman Catholic controversialists persist in calling Ritualists " Pro- 
testants," though they repudiate the name. I need hardly add that no true 
Protestant would ever join a Society to pray for Reunion with Rome. 


them, to point out the evils which that Association diffuses, and to 
repel the dangers it is bringing on. Yet they would seem wanting 
to their office, did they not, in a matter of such moment, further 
enkindle the said Bishops' pastoral zeal : this novelty being all the 
more perilous as it bears a semblance of religion, and of being much 
concerned for the unity of the Christian society. 

" The principle on which it rests is one that overthrows the Divine 
constitution of the Church. For it is pervaded by the idea that the 
true Church of Jesus Christ consists partly of the Roman Church 
spread abroad and propagated throughout the world, partly of the 
Photian schism and the Anglican heresy, as having equally with the 
Roman Church, one Lord, one faith, and one baptism. . . . The 
Catholic Church offers prayers to Almighty God, and urges the 
faithful in Christ to pray, that all who have left the Holy Roman 
Church, out of which is no salvation, may abjure their errors and be 
brought to the true faith, and the peace of that Church, nay, that all 
men may, by God's merciful aid, attain to a knowledge of the truth. 
But that the faithful in Christ, and that ecclesiastics, should pray for 
Christian unity under the direction of heretics, and, worse still, 
according to an intention stained and infected by heresy in a high 
degree, can no way be tolerated. . . . 

" Hence, no proof is needed that Catholics who join this Society are 
giving both to Catholics and non-Catholics an occasion of spiritual 
ruin : more especially, because the Society, by holding out a vain 
expectation of those three communions, each in its integrity, and 
keeping each to its own persuasion, coalescing in one, lead the minds 
of non- Catholics away from conversion to the faith, and, by the 
Journals it publishes, endeavours to prevent it. 

" The most anxious care, then, is to be exercised, that no Catholics 
may be deluded, either by appearance of piety or by unsound opinions, 
to join or in any way favour the Society in question, or any similar 
one ; that they may not be carried away by a delusive yearning for such 
new-fangled Christian unity, into a fall from that perfect unity which 
by a wonderful gift of Divine Grace stands on the firm foundation of 

"C. Card. Patrizi." 

"Rome, this 16th day of September, 1864." ■ 

The issuing of this document was, indeed, a terrible blow- 
to the promoters of the A. P. U. C. It not merely proclaimed 

29 I quote from the official Roman Catholic translation, in Synodi Dioeeeseop 
Suthwarcensis, Londini, 1868, pp. 186-190. 


war against the Association, but treated it with unmitigated 
contempt. Its members are termed " heretics " ; and the 
Association is declared to be engaged in the task of 
" diffusing evils," and producing " dangers " in the Church. 
Its chief " principle " is even said to " overthrow the Divine 
constitution of the Church"; and its "intention" is declared 
to be " stained and infected with heresy in a high degree." 
But some of the Ritualists seem to take a special delight in 
humbly kissing the Papal toe which has just kicked them. 
No fewer than 198 clergymen of the Church of England,, 
members of the A. P. U. C, answered the document issued 
by the Inquisition of cruel and evil memory, with an address 
of contemptible humiliation and explanation. The one 
thing they seemed to dread was to offend the Pope. Not 
a thought of the effect of their traitorous conduct on the- 
Protestants of England ever seems to have entered their 
heads. They put their names to their address, but, no- 
doubt, with the knowledge that none of the public would' 
ever know who they were. The secret has been kept ever 
since. What a storm of indignation would have swept over 
them, had their identity been known at the time to the 
people amongst whom they ministered ! It will be observed 
that some of them held high office in the Church of 
England, describing themselves as " Deans" and "Canons." 
Their address to what they termed "the Sacred Office" of 
the Inquisition is not generally known, and therefore I print 
it in full :— 

" To the Most Eminent and Most Reverend Father in Christ and 
Lord C. Cardinal Patrizi, Prefect of the Sacred Office. 

"We, the undersigned Deans, Canons, Parish Priests, and other 
Priests of the Anglo- Catholic Church, earnestly desiring the visible 
reunion, according to the will of our Lord, of the several parts of the- 
Christian family, have read with great regret your Eminence's letter 
* to all the English Bishops.' 

" In that letter, our Society, instituted to promote the Reunion of all' 
Christendom, is charged with affirming in its prospectus that 'the- 


three Communions, the Roman Catholic, the Eastern, and the 
Anglican, have an equal claim to call themselves Catholic.' 

" On that question our prospectus gave no opinion whatever. What 
we said, treated of the question of fact, not of right. We merely 
affirmed that the Anglican Church claimed the name of Catholic ; as 
is abundantly plain to all, both from the Liturgy and the Articles of 

" Moreover, as to the intention of our Society, that letter asserts our 
especial aim to be, ' that the three Communions named, each in its 
integrity and each maintaining still its own opinions, may coalesce 
into one.' 

"Far from us and from our Society be such an aim as this; 
from which must be anticipated, not ecclesiastical unity, but merely a 
discord of brethren in personal conflict under one roof. What we 
t>eseech Almighty God to grant, and desire with all our hearts, is 
simply that oecumenical intercommunion which existed before the 
separation of East and West, founded and consolidated on the 
profession of one and the same Catholic faith. 

" Moreover, the Society aforesaid should all the less excite your 
jealousy that it abstains from action, and simply prays, in the words 
of Christ our Lord, ' May there be one Fold and one Shepherd.' 
This alone finds place in our hearts' desire, and this is the principle 
; and the yearning we express to your Eminence with the utmost 
earnestness, with sincere heart and voice unfeigned. 

" As to the Journal entitled the Union Review, the connection 
between it and the Society is purely accidental, and we are, therefore, 
in no way pledged to its dicta. In that little work, various writers 
put forth indeed their own opinions, but only to the further elucida- 
tion of the truth of the Catholic faith by developing them. That 
-such a mode of contributing papers should not be in use in Rome, 
where the controversies of the day are seldom under discussion, is 
hardly to be wondered at ; but in England, where almost every 
-question becomes public property, none results in successful con- 
viction without free discussion. 

" To hasten this event, we have now laboured during many years. 
"We have effected improvements beyond what could be hoped for, 
where the faith of the flock, or Divine worship, or clerical discipline, 
may have been imperfect ; and, not to be forgetful of others, 


"venerable Church of Rome, that has for a long time caused some 
to mistrust us. 


" We humbly profess ourselves your Eminence's servants, devoted 
to Catholic unity." 30 

On this document, and the reply given to it by the 
Inquisition, Cardinal Manning addressed a pastoral letter 
to the clergy, entitled the Reunion of Christendom. In this 
document, while firmly upholding the decision of the 
Inquisition forbidding Roman Catholics to join the 
A. P. U. C, Dr. Manning showed how much he rejoiced in 
his heart at the work of that Society. Of the address 
to the Inquisition, by 198 Church of England clergymen, 
he wrote : — 

" We do not regard this as a merely intellectual or natural event. 
We gladly recognize in it an influence and an impulse of supernatural 
grace. It is a wonderful reaction from the days within living 
memory when fidelity to the Church of England was measured by 
repulsion from the Church of Rome. It is as wonderful an evidence 
of the flow in the stream which has carried the minds of men 
onwards for these thirty years nearer and nearer to the frontiers of 
the Catholic faith. It is a movement against the wind and tide of 
English tradition and of English prejudice ; a supernatural movement 
like the attraction which drew those who were once farthest from the 
Kingdom of Heaven to the side of our Lord. A change has visibly 
passed over England. Thirty years ago its attitude towards the 
Catholic Church was either intense hostility or stagnant ignorance. 
It is not so now." 31 

At this period Dr. Manning seems to have devoted a great 
deal of his attention to the Romeward Movement in the 
Church of England. He thankfully acknowledged the 
services rendered by the Ritualists to the Church of Rome, 
and simply laughed to scorn their boast that they kept their 
followers from joining the Church of Rome by giving to them 
Popery within the Church of England, in order that it might 
be unnecessary for them to go to Rome for it. In the course 
of his inaugural address to the Roman Catholic Academia, 
in 1866, Archbishop Manning entered at considerable length 

30 Purcell's Life of Cardinal Manning, Vol. II., pp. 279, 280. 
« Ibid., p. 286. 



into the effects of Ritualism on -the prosperity of the Church 
of Rome in England. He said : — 

" In the last thirty years there has sprung up in the Anglican 
Establishment an extensive rejection of Protestantism, and a sincere 
desire and claim to be Catholic. Ever since the Reformation, indeed, 
the writers of the Anglican Church have claimed to be Catholic ; but 
none that I know disclaimed to be Protestant. They assumed that a 
Protesting Christian was ipso facto a primitive Catholic. Not so now. 
Protestantism is recognized as a thing intrinsically untenable and 
irreconcilable with the Catholic faith. The school of which I speak 
claim to be Catholic because they reject Protestantism with all its 
heterodoxies. In this school are to be found many Catholic doctrines, 
not exactly or fully expressed or believed — for such are not to be 
found either full or exact outside of the Catholic Church — but more or 
less near to truth. For instance, the Church of England forbids the 
use of the term Transubstantiation, by declaring the doctrine to be 
an error. The doctrine of the Real Presence, less Transubstantiation, 
is like the doctrine of one God in three Persons, less the doctrine of 
the Trinity. Not only is the term rejected, but the conception is 
correspondingly inaccurate. This runs through all the Catholic 
doctrines which are professed out of the unity of the Church, and 
apart from the traditions of its sacred terminology. It is under this 
limitation that I go on to say that at this time the doctrine of the 
Sacraments, their nature, number, and grace ; the intercession and 
invocation of saints, the power of the priesthood in sacrifice and 
absolution, the excellence and obligations of the religious life, are all 
held and taught by clergymen of the Church of England. Add to 
this, the practice of Confession, and of works of temporal and spiritual 
mercy in form and by rule borrowed from the Catholic Church, 
are all to be found among those who are still within the Anglican 
communion. I must also add the latest and strangest phenomenon 
of this movement, the adoption of an elaborate ritual with its 
vestments borrowed from the Catholic Church. 

" On ail these things I trust a blessing may descend. I see in 
them many things : First, they are a testimony in favour of the 
Catholic Church, which has always unchangeably taught and practised 
these things ; secondly, a testimony against the Anglican Reformation, 
which has always rejected and cast them out." 32 

M Every parish priest happily knows how empty and foolish is the 

82 Essays on Religion and Literature, pp. 12, 13. Second series. 


boast they [Ritualists] make of keeping souls from conversion [to 
the Church of Rome]. The public facts of every day refute it. 
They may keep back the handful who surround them, and hide the 
truth from their own hearts, but the steady current of return to the 
Catholic and Roman Church throughout the whole of England is no 
more to be affected by them than the rising of the tide by the palms 
of their hands. Against their will, certainly, and perhaps without 
their knowledge, they are sending on numberless souls into the truth 
which they probably will never enter. But the number of those 
[Ritualists] whose good faith is doubtful is not great. The multitude 
of those who are drawn by a simple and natural reverence to clothe 
what they sincerely believe with a becoming ritual, and who worship 
piously and humbly in Churches which might almost be mistaken for 
ours ... is very great, and is perhaps continually increasing. They 
are coming up to the very threshold of the Church. They have learned 
to look upon it as the centre of Christendom, from which they sprang, 
and upon which their own Church is supposed to rest. They use our 
devotions, our books, our pictures of piety ; they are taught to believe 
the whole Catholic doctrine, and to receive the whole Council of 
Trent, not indeed in its own true meaning, but in a meaning invented 
by their teachers. This cannot last long. Such teachers are, as 
Fuller quaintly and truly says, like unskilful horsemen. They so open 
gates as to shut themselves out, but let others through." M 

Since the year 1867 the Association for the Promotion of 
the Unity of Christendom has not come very prominently 
before the public. But it has worked in private ever since, 
in ways with which the outer world is not generally 
acquainted. It is advertised in several of the Ritualistic 
annuals, and twice a year " Celebrations " for the 
"intention " of the Society are offered in English, Scottish, 
and Colonial Churches. The Church of Rome no longer 
gives the Association any help ; she only reaps the fruit of its 


Amongst the Ritualistic societies which, as a portion only 
of their operations, advocate and labour for the Corporate 
Reunion of the Church of England with the Church of 
Rome, is the secret Society of the Holy Cross. In the year 
j 867, at the Wolverhampton Church Congress, this Society 

33 Ibid., p. 14. 

21 * 


issued an Address to Catholics, in which its deep, heartfelt 
longings for Reunion with Rome found expression. 

" It may well be," says this Address, " nay, it is, a very grievous 
drawback to the Church of England that she is not now in visible 
communion with the Western Patriarchate." 34 

By the " Western Patriarchate " is, of course, meant that 
of the Church of Rome. I venture to assert that the 
majority of loyal Churchmen are quite certain that the 
absence, during the past three centuries, of " visible 
communion " with Rome, instead of being " a very grievous 
drawback to the Church of England/' is, in reality, a great 
blessing for which England cannot be too thankful to 
Almighty God. It is no " drawback " to either individuals, 
nations, or Churches, to be spiritually free from Papal 
bondage. Should the S. S. C. gain its objects, then farewell 
for ever to our religious liberty ! 

During the few months immediately preceding the 
Wolverhampton Church Congress, of 1867, tne authorities 
of the Society of the Holy Cross were busily engaged in 
securing signatures, from both clergy and laity, to an 
Address to the Bishops assembled that year, at the first 
Lambeth Conference. The Romeward leanings of the 
Society, which was described at that time, by a Ritualistic 
newspaper, as " a shy and retiring organization," 35 are still 
more clearly seen in this Address, which was publicly 
advertised at the time as emanating from the S. S. C. The 
following extract from this document will be read with 
disapprobation by all who love the freedom of the Church of 
England, and believe that it would be a sin to join the 
Roman communion, whether individually or corporately : — 

"We are mindful of efforts made in former time by English and 
foreign Bishops and theologians to effect, by mutual explanations on 
either side, a reconciliation between the Roman and Anglican Communions. 
And, considering the intimate and visible union which existed between 

M S. S. C. Address to Catholics, p. 13. 
• Church News, August 21, 1867, p. 372. 


the Church of England and the rest of Western Christendom, we 
earnestly entreat your lordships seriously to consider the best means 
of renewing like endeavours ; and to adopt such measures as may, 
under the guidance of God's Holy Spirit, be effectual in removing 
the barriers which now divide the Western Branch of the Catholic 
Church." 36 

I do not know any expression which more clearly and 
accurately describes the work of the Ritualists than 
that of " removing the barriers " between the Church of 
England and the Church of Rome. Those "barriers" 
were set up by our Reformers, nearly 350 years ago, and 
for good and sufficient reasons. They are as much needed 
now as ever, for Rome has not improved, but has rather 
grown worse, since the Reformation. It is, therefore, the 
bounden duty of all who love the Reformation, whatever 
may be their ecclesiastical or social position, however exalted, 
or however humble, to resist all attempts at removing them, 
whether those attempts are made by the secret Society of 
the Holy Cross, or by any other Ritualistic society or indi- 
vidual. This S. S. C. Address to the Lambeth Conference 
was signed by no fewer than 1212 clergymen in the Church 
of England, and by 4453 of the laity, of whom 1995 were 
women. 87 It will no doubt surprise many of my readers to 
learn that so far back as the year 1867 such a large number 
of clergymen were found anxious for " a reconciliation between 
the Roman and Anglican Communions." If so many could 
be found then, is there not good reason for fearing that the 
number has multiplied since, and that the dangers to our 
Church from this Romeward Movement have multiplied also ? 
A few names only of those who signed this Address were 
published in the papers — the great majority of them are 
unknown until this day. Amongst others, it was signed by 
the Rev. Dr. Pusey ; the late Canon H. P. Liddon ; Canon 
T. T. Carter, of Clewer; the Rev. W. Butler, late Dean of 
Lincoln ; the Rev. F. H. Murray, then and now Rector of 

K Ibid., September nth, 1867, p. 426. * Ibid., September 25th, 1867, p. 455. 


Chislehurst ; the Rev. R. M. Benson, then head of the 
Cowley Fathers ; the Hon. and Rev. H. Douglas, now Vicar 
of St. Paul's, Worcester ; the Rev. A. Wagner, Vicar of 
St. Paul's, Brighton ; Rev. P. G. Medd, now Rector of 
North Cerney, Cirencester ; the Rev. G. R. Prynne, Vicar 
of St. Peter's, Plymouth ; the Hon. Colin Lindsay, then 
President of the English Church Union, and subsequently a 
seceder to Rome ; and the Hon. C. L.Wood, now Lord Halifax, 
and the present President of the English Church Union. 

The secrecy which surrounds the work of the Society of 
the Holy Cross has prevented me from learning much as to 
its operations in furtherance of Reunion with Rome since 
1867, but I have heard nothing which would lead me to- 
suppose that it has withdrawn from the position which it 
then adopted. There can be no doubt that during that 
period it has laboured zealously in Romanizing the services 
of the Church of England, and it even went so far as to make 
the adoption of " Roman Ritual " the rule for the Brethren 
to follow. And it has certainly laboured hard ever since 
1&67 in teaching Romish doctrine. The Master of the 
Society, in his Address to the September, 1876, Synod, 
went so far as to declare that " no Brother [of the S. S. C] 
should be considered disloyal to the Society who agrees in 
opinion with the rest of Western Christendom, except in one 
article, or its immediate consequences, which denies that the 
Brother himself is a Catholic." 88 The " one article " here 
referred to, there can be no question, was that of Papal Infalli- 
bility. A man can therefore agree with every other doctrine 
of "the rest of Western Christendom," that is, with the 
Church of Rome, without being in any way " disloyal " to 
the Society of the Holy Cross. That, no doubt, is the case; 
but here the important question comes in, Is not such a man 
" disloyal " to the Church of England ? At the September, 
1878, Synod of the S. S. C. the following resolution proposed 

38 The Master's Address. Festival of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, 
1876. p. 5. 


by Brother Lowder, and seconded by Brother Goldie, was 
carried nem. con. : — " That this Synod regards with much 
interest the attempts to revive the life and action of the 
A. P. U. C. [Association for Promoting the Unity of Christen- 
dom] , and holds that the time is now come for its adopting 
some more practical measures for the promotion of the 
Unity of Christendom, and in particular that the S. S. C. 
would desire to co-operate with the A. P. U. C. in obtaining 
the sanction of the Catholic Patriarchs of Western and 
Eastern Christendom for freedom to English Catholics to 
communicate at Catholic altars in foreign countries." 39 In 
the course of the discussion which took place on this resolu- 
tion, Brother Mossman informed the Brethren that the 
Order of Corporate Reunion "had arisen out of the yearning 
of many hearts for visible unity and communion with the See 
of Peter. He gave an account of an interview he had had 
with Cardinal Manning, to whom he had mentioned four 
points which, he believed, would be urged by the Catholic 
party in any negotiations with the Holy See. (1) The 
recognition of Anglican Orders; (2) the marriage of priests; 
(3) the giving of the chalice to the laity ; (4) the Liturgy in 
the vernacular. The answers of his Eminence had been 
satisfactory, though he would not commit himself to speak 
authoritatively on the matter." 40 At this same Synod the 
Society of the Holy Cross considered its attitude towards 
the Order of Corporate Reunion, and a Committee was 
appointed to consider the subject. Subsequently the Society 
adopted and published the Report of this Committee. It 
was decidedly against the O. C. R. The conclusion arrived 
at is contained in the following paragraph : — " We therefore 
hold that the assumed jurisdiction of the Order of Corporate 
Reunion is without any lawful foundation, that its claims 
cannot be substantiated, and that Catholics should therefore 
be warned against joining the Association, as involving 

39 S.S.C. Analysis of Proceedings, September Synod, 1878, pp. 9-11. 
• Ibid., p. 10. 


themselves thereby in the guilt of schism, and probably of 
sacrilege." 41 

One of the members of the Society of the Holy Cross, 
the Rev. N. Y. Birkmyre, Vicar of St. Simon's, Bristol, 
gave expression, in 1888, to his wishes for Reunion in a very 
candid manner indeed. He was preaching for the Church 
of England Working Men's Society on that occasion, and, 
speaking for himself and the Society, he declared : — - 

"We must never be content to settle down till the Church of 
England can say boldly, not by the mouth of two or three individuals, 
but by the mouths of the Archbishops and Bishops of the Church, 
to the Sister Churches: — * See, here we have cast out from ourselves 
Protestantism, we now every one of us believe and use the Sacraments, 
and now we say, receive us again into inter-communion, let us all be 
one again.'' . . . And the second great danger is the idea of building 
up a modified, but still practically a National religion. People say 
that the Church of Greece and the Church of Rome teach one thing, 
and the Church of England something else, hut if the Church of 
England teaches anything about the Blessed Sacrament different from 
the others she teaches a lie. No, we must understand that the teaching 
is one." 43 

Another Ritualistic Society, which has made Corporate 
Reunion with Rome one of the planks in its platform, is the 
English Church Union. In its earlier years this subject 
was kept somewhat in the background, and when mentioned 
in public was generally referred to as " the Corporate 
Reunion of Christendom," a convenient expression which 
mzy mean more or less according to the intention of the 
person who uses it. The attitude of the Union was to a 
large extent that which it adopted, in its earlier years 
towards Ritual. Its rules did not fully reveal their plans to 
the public. One of the most prominent members of the 
Union, the Rei. T. W. Perry, at an ordinary meeting of 
that Society on February 16th, 1869, very candidly explained 

41 Statement of the Society of the Holy Cross Concerning the Order of Corporate 
Reunion, p. 10. Revised edition. 

42 Church Times, A.ugust 14th, 1885, p. 623. 


the tactics of the Union in the following terms : — " It is 
quite clear," he said, " it would never do for the President 
and Council, any more than it would do for a general and 
his officers, to explain all their tactics. They must be as 
candid as they can, but they must observe such reticence 
as is necessary." 43 The English Church Union had been 
many years in existence before it became officially pledged 
to Corporate Reunion with Rome. Previous to that period 
its work consisted largely in educating its followers as to 
the alleged duty and necessity of such a union. The 
subject was frequently discussed at meetings of its branches 
throughout the country, and these branches occasionally 
passed resolutions on the question, which, while they were 
not binding on the Central Council, yet served to show the 
direction in which the tide was flowing Romeward. To 
sooth the minds of the more timid of their followers the 
Unionists were heard, from time to time, talking against 
some of the practical abuses of the Church of Rome, and 
finding fault with a few of the doctrines taught in Continental 
books of devotion. What Bishop Robert Abbot said of 
Laud and his followers, might with equal justice be said 
of those wily Ritualists who, while denouncing Rome, are 
labouring zealously for Reunion with her. 

"If they do at any time," said Dr. Abbot, "speak against the 
Papists, they do but beat a little about the bush, and that but softly 
too, for fear of waking and disquieting the birds that are in it ; they 
speak nothing but that wherein one Papist will speak against another, 
as against equivocation, and the Pope's temporal authority, and the like j 
and perhaps some of their blasphemous speeches. But in the points 
of Free Will, Justification, Concupiscence being a sin after Baptism, 
Inherent Righteousness, and certainty of Salvation ; the Papists beyond 
the seas can say they are wholly theirs; and the Recusants [Roman- 
ists] at home make their brags of them. And in all things they keep 
themselves so near the brink, that upon any occasion they may step 
over to them." ** 

43 English Church Union Monthly Circular, Volume for 1869, p. 99. 

44 Heylin's Life of Laud, p. 42. Dublin, 1719. 


At the Annual Meeting of the English Church Union, 
June I2th, 1861, the President of the Union, the Hon. Colin 
Lindsay (who subsequently seceded to Rome) congratulated 
the members that on that morning they had offered up to 
the Throne of Heaven their " united prayers for the 
Reunion of Christendom." Though he does not appear to 
have mentioned it by name, there can be no doubt that 
he included Reunion with Rome in that expression. 

In 1865 Dr. Pusey startled the ecclesiastical world by 
the publication of the first volume of his Eirenicon, the 
object of which, as the title-page states, was to prove that 
the Church of England, as "a portion of Christ's one 
Holy Catholic Church," might become " a means of 
restoring visible unity " to the whole of the Church 
throughout the world. A more detailed, and also an 
accurate summary of its object was that given by the 
Union Review, which remarked that : — " The object of the 
book is to prove that in all essentials for Unity, the 
Churches of England and Rome are one, and that, as a 
Catholic interpretation can most readily and truly be given 
both to the Decrees of Trent and the Thirty-nine Articles, 
nothing need hinder their mutual acceptance. He holds it 
to be a mistake to suppose that any of the Articles were 
levelled against the doctrines of the Roman Communion 
as set forth by the Council of Trent, or that the Decrees of 
Trent were levelled against anything upheld by the English 
Church, or that they really maintain anything which the- 
English Church has condemned. 45 Dr. Pusey considers that 
those parts of the Roman system which are popularly spoken 
of as Romanism are but excrescences like the many heresies 
among ourselves." 46 In other words, his attitude towards 
Rome was very much like that of Laud and his followers, as- 

45 Those who wish to read an able and conclusive refutation of the position 
adopted by Dr. Pusey, should read Dean Goode's Tract XC. Historically 
Refuted. Second edition, 1866. London : Hatchards. 

46 Union Review, Volume for 1866, p. 2. 


described by Bishop Robert Abbot, in the sermon quoted 
above. The only differences between the two are that Dr. 
Pusey went much further in a Romeward direction than 
Laud ever dreamt of, and that he wrote far more gently of 
Papal error than Laud would ever have sanctioned. The 
Roman Catholic newspaper, the Weekly Register, reviewed 
the Eirenicon at considerable length, and this drew from 
Dr. Pusey himself a letter, dated November 22nd, 1865, 
addressed to the Editor of that paper, in the course of 
which he made the following remarkable statements : — 

** I have long been convinced that there is nothing in the Council 
of Trent which could not be explained satisfactorily to us, if it were 
explained authoritatively, i.e., by the Roman Church itself, not by 
individual theologians only. This involves the conviction on my side, 
that there is nothing in our Articles which cannot be explained 
rightly, as not contradicting anything held to be de fide in the Roman 
Church. . . . As it is of moment, that I should not be misunderstood 
by my own people, let me add, that I have not intended to express 
any opinion about a visible head of the Church. We readily recognize 
the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome ; the bearings of that Primacy 
upon other local Churches, we believe to be matter of ecclesiastical, 
not of Divine law j but neither is there anything in the Supremacy 
in itself to which we should object." 

No doubt Dr. Pusey would wish the "Supremacy" of the 
Pope to be exercised over the Church of England — in case 
of Reunion — in the gentlest possible manner, but to be 
willing to accept it in any shape or form, with the lessons of 
the past for our guidance, is an act which must be abhorred 
by every liberty loving Englishman. This country knows, 
from bitter experience, what Papal supremacy means. The 
lessons of the Martyr fires lit in Mary's reign are not yet 
forgotten in England. 

Dr. Pusey's book speedily attracted the attention of the 
English Church Union. At its next annual meeting a 
resolution was unanimously carried, expressing the rejoicing 
of the Union at its publication, together with an earnest 
hope for the Reunion of Christendom. The resolution was 


proposed by the Rev. W. Gresley, Vice-President of the 
Union, in the following terms : — 

" That this Union rejoices in the publication of Dr. Pusey's letter 
(the Eirenicon) to the author of the Christian Year, and earnestly 
hopes and prays that God, in His own time and in His own way, will 
so dispose the hearts and minds of His people, that the sad divisions 
which now rend the seamless robe of Christ may be healed j and 
that the whole of Christendom may be re-united into one holy 
communion and fellowship, to the glory of our Lord God, and the 
salvation of the human race." 47 

Mr. Gresley, in moving this resolution, informed the 
members of the Union that he had brought the subject 
forward at the request of the Council. He said that their 
scheme for Reunion included not only the Roman and 
Greek Churches, but the Dissenters also. " It would not," 
he declared, " be a truly Christian scheme which did not 
embrace them also " ; but he did not stop to explain that 
the only condition on which Dissenters will ever be admitted 
into the Church of England — by Ritualists — is that of abso- 
lute surrender, and that is a condition which they can never 
be expected to accept. So that Reunion with Dissenters, 
on Ritualistic principles, is quite " out of the range of 
practical politics." Individual Dissenters may come over 
to the Church of England on this condition, but to expect 
that any Nonconformist Church will do so, as a body, is 
simply the dream of sacerdotal fanatics. The discussion on 
Mr. Gresley's resolution was enlivened by the appearance of 
the Rev. Archer Gurney — a member of the Union — who 
stood up to propose an amendment. His remarks were 
received, however, with hisses and uproar, and constant 
interruption, and he could only find three persons to vote 
for him. Yet he told the Union some plain and wholesome 
truths, which it would have done well to lay to heart. He 
declared that there were members of the Union (though, as 
it turned out, there were only three in the meeting) " who are 

* English Church Union Monthly Circular, Volume for 1866, p. 191. 


not prepared to assent to Reunion with Rome on any basis 
whatsoever, constituted as Rome now is, and maintaining 
the claims she now maintains." While Mr. Gurney was 
speaking Dr. Pusey was present at the meeting, which 
had just elected him a Vice-President of the English 
Church Union. When, therefore, Mr. Gurney attacked 
him by name, he at once roused the anger of the 
Romanizers. Yet, nothing daunted, Mr. Gurney went on 
with his indictment. " I am," he continued, " heartily 
persuaded that the Eirenicon — recognizing, as I do, the 
purity of motive of the writer — is, nevertheless, most 
dangerous in its effects, and, in addition, calculated to 
deprive us of the truth as it is in Christ Jesus. . . . These are 
the principles which I come before you to uphold this day 
— the independence of the Catholic Episcopate of any Pope, 
of any single Bishop claiming to exercise Universal Primacy 
and Supremacy. And he [Dr. Pusey] whom you so much 
delight to honour has expressed his conviction that there is 
nothing objectionable in such a Supremacy. I hold his own 
words in my hand, and he has distinctly said, not only that 
1 we readily recognize the supremacy ** of the Bishop of 
Rome,' but that * there is nothing in that Supremacy in 
itself to which we should object.' I say, as a Catholic, 
he is not Catholic who uses such language as this ; . . . 
and mark this, one of the chief Bishops of the American 
Church has told us, that the man whom you delight to 
honour is a Gallican on the wrong side of the water." At 
this point there was great confusion in the meeting, and 
angry shouts from the Romanizers were heard all over the 
room. When Mr. Gurney sat down, Dr. Pusey rose to 
reply to him, and was received with long-continued cheering. 
As to the question of Papal Supremacy, he said that he 
did " not know where it is denned in what Supremacy 
consists." " It matters not," he continued, " under whom 

46 The word actually used by Dr. Pusey was " Primacy " not " Supremacy." 


we live, 49 so that by living under that authority it does not 
touch our conscience." 

At the next annual meeting of the English Church Union, 
June 19th, 1867, the President announced the formation of a 
new Society ("The Catholic Union for Prayer") which had 
been promoted by the Union, for the purpose of praying for 
the whole Church, and more especially for the restoration of 
its unity. 

"There is,", said the President, "one powerful weapon we can all 
•use ; that is, Prayer. The Council, feeling this so strongly, have 
promoted the establishment of a new Union, called the ' Catholic 
Union for Prayer.' The object of this Union is to combine all who 
love God and His Church in an Holy Confraternity to pray for the 
Holy Catholic Church, and for our portion of it in particular. If we 
.all unite in saying the Lord's Prayer once every day for this great 
object, we may, relying upon the Divine promise to grant all petitions 
offered in Christ's name, look forward with confidence to the speedy 
deliverance of the Church of England, and her Reunion with East and 
West. Let us labour hard for this glorious end." 50 

A prospectus of this " Catholic Union for Prayer," which 
I possess, states that its Warden was Dr. Pusey, the Hon. 
Colin Lindsay its secretary, and that fourteen well-known 
members of the Ritualistic party — seven clerical and seven 
lay — constituted its Council. " All Churchmen," it states, 
" being communicants of the Catholic Church, are earnestly 
nvited to join this bond of prayer, this Holy Confederation, 
for the Reunion of Christendom" ; and, no doubt with a view 
to promote secrecy, it is added that " the names of the 
Associates shall not be published." The " Catholic Union 
for Prayer " is mentioned in every volume of the monthly 
magazine of the English Church Union for several years 
after its formation, after which I can find no record of its 

49 Most Churchmen believe that it does matter very much "under whom 
they live"; but it is evident that with Dr. Pusey to live under Papal 
Supremacy, "would not touch our [his?] conscience." With loyal Churchmen 
•it would be otherwise. 

50 The Liberties of the Church, an Address by the Hon. Colin Lindsay, p. 22, 
•.English Church Union Office. 


existence. Probably we shall know more about it when the 
last volume of the Life of Dr. Pasey is published. 

The subject of the Reunion of Christendom was kept 
prominently before the public by the English Church Union, 
after the publication of Dr. Pusey's Eirenicon. It was 
discussed at the meetings of many of its branches, and 
occasionally resolutions on the subject were passed. When the 
Lambeth Conference met, in 1878, at the annual meeting of 
the Union that year, a resolution was carried unanimously, 
affirming that the Union viewed the Conference with the 
deepest interest, "in the hope that their united counsels may 
tend to the peace and well-being of the Church, the reunion 
of those separated from her fold at home, and the restoration 
of visible communion between the various Apostolic Churches 
of Eastern and Western Christendom." 51 In the annual 
report of the President and Council adopted at the same 
meeting, a paragraph appeared which was almost word for 
word the same as the resolution I have just quoted. 52 

No one can doubt, who has studied the operations of the 
English Church Union, that the prime mover in all its 
Corporate Reunion work has been its President, Lord 
Halifax. He was elected to that office, April 21st, 1868, on 
the resignation of the first President, the Hon. Colin 
Lindsay. That gentleman, in his letter of resignation, 
assigned reasons for ceasing to be President which were only 
ostensible. He pleaded his state of health. 53 No doubt he 
was in ill-health at the time, but that which brought on the 
crisis was his determination to secede to the Church of 
Rome, an event which took place not long after his resigna- 
tion. At that time the new President had not been called 
to the House of Lords, and was known as the Hon. 
Charles L. Wood. Since he became President of the English 
Church Union his whole heart and soul have been thrown 
into the work of healing the breach that took place between 

51 Church Union Gazette, Volume for 1878, p. 179. 52 Ibid., p. 154. 
53 History of the English Church Union, p. 99. 


England and Rome in the sixteenth century, and he has 
done all that in him lay to assist that " levelling up " process 
within the Church of England which seems to have been 
thought necessary, as a preparation for the expected recon- 
ciliation. It seems to have been generally accepted as a 
principle by the advanced section of the Ritualists that the 
Church of England is not in a sufficiently Catholic condition 
— at least in practice — to make her respectable enough to 
keep company with the truly holy and Catholic Church of 
Rome ! Hence the necessity for " levelling up." This idea 
of the relative position and purity of the Churches of England 
and Rome found expression in a letter written by " a Colonial 
Priest," which appeared in the Church Review of September 
21st, 1888. A brief extract from this letter I have already given, 
but it may be well to give its statements at greater length. 

"It seems to me," wrote this Ritualistic priest, " utterly premature 
to consider Reunion, especially with the great Patriarchal See of the 
West [i.e., with Rome], as within even distant probability, until the 
Anglican Communion, as a whole, is Catholicised. There lies our 
work ; for every priest and every faithful lay person to live, each in his 
or her little sphere, the Catholic life. When as yet the Holy Sacrifice 
of the Mass is offered daily in only two hundred churches ; while the 
Holy Sacrament of Unction is ignored by every member (so far as I 
know : I shall be delighted to find that I am wrong) of the Anglican 
Episcopate 5 while multitudes of laity never dream of purging their 
souls of deadly sin by Sacramental Confession, and multitudes of priests 
never teach them that such is their bounden duty 5 while fasting 
reception of the Body and Blood of our Lord is still the exception ; 
while almost every kind of heresy can be taught unchecked from our 
pulpits ; while Bishops can still deny the very existence of sacrifice 
or priesthood in the Christian Church ; while it is still possible for a 
Bishop to be threatened with legal penalties for celebrating the Divine 
Mysteries with bare decency, and for the head of the Anglican 
Communion, the successor of St. Augustine and St. Thomas of 
Canterbury, to decline taking proceedings on merely legal grounds 5 
while these scandals, and a thousand like them, still daily take place, is 
it not premature to think of asking the Apostolic See [Rome] to 
reconsider its position towards us, for which it has had only too much 
justification ? And yet English Catholics, knowing the fearful 

"cleanse our own house of heresy." 337 

corruption yet disgracing the English Church? 4, can find it in their 
hearts to accuse the Latin communion of Mariolatry, and such like. 
We, to accuse Continental Catholics of excess of devotion to blessed 
Mary, when with us the most holy Mother of God has, at the best, 
but a mere grudging honour paid to her, as if every offering of love at 
the feet of Mary could be anything but a most real worship of her 
Incarnate Son! Let us cleanse our own house of heresy. Let us get 
rid of that Pharisaic self-righteousness which imagines all perfection 
to be contained within the four corners of the Prayer Book, and 
despises everything * un-English.' 

" Before any communication with either East or West can be even 
thought of, the following reforms [?] must be accomplished : — 

" i. A daily celebration of Mass by every priest to become the 
rule, according to the long-standing Western custom. 

"2. The restoration to our Altars generally of the sweet perpetual 
presence of Jesu in the most Holy Sacrament. 

" 3. The full recognition and use of Extreme Unction. 

" 4. Sacramental Confession of mortal sins to be recognized as 
the Church's rule. 

" 5. Restoration to our formularies of definite and distinct Prayers 
for the Faithful Departed, tnd of Invocations of our Lady and the 

" 6. Uuiversal belief throughout our communion in (a) the Real 
and Substantial Presence of our Lord, under the form of bread and 

wine, in the Sacrament of the Altar; (b) that in the Mass a true, 


real, and propitiatory Sacrifice, as well for the living as the departed, is 
offered to God the Father, even the Immaculate Lamb ; (c) that there 
are seven Sacraments of the New Law, though the two ' Sacraments 
£>f the Gospel ' are of pre-eminent dignity and necessity. . . . 

" I firmly believe that the day will come when such a Reformation [?] 
will have penetrated throughout the length and breadth of the English 
Communion, from the Primate of All England to the peasant at the 
plough. God has wrought such great things for us during the last 
fifty years, that it would be faithless to doubt that, in His own time, 
every vestige of Protestant heresy will be purged out from us. But 
the time is not yet. Therefore let everyone, while praying daily for 
.Reunion, remember that the surest way to accomplish it is by working 
towards the purification of our own branch of the Catholic Church." 

I do not in any way hold the English Church Union 

64 Not a word does this Ritualistic writer say about the "fearful corrup-- 
lion " which actually does exist in the Roman Communion. 



responsible for this letter of " A Colonial Priest " ; but I do 
assert that the principles which he lays down are those 
which have guided the Union. I am not aware that it has, 
like this correspondent of the Church Review, advocated the 
Invocation of Saints, but it has certainly, by means of the 
literature on sale at its central office, advocated the Mass 
for the living and the dead. It now holds a " Requiem 
Service " for its deceased members every year. It has, 
as we have seen, advocated the Confessional, and many of 
its branches even defended the Society of the Holy Cross, 
when attacked for its indecent confessional book, the Priest 
in Absolution. This policy of "levelling up," which has 
made the English Church Union such a thoroughly 
" Preparatory School for Rome," was boldly advocated by 
the Rev. V. S. S. Coles, now the head of the Pusey House, 
Oxford, in a sermon which he preached on " The Place of 
E. C. U. Objects in a Churchman's Life." The sermon 
was printed verbatim in the Church Union Gazette, for 
September, 1891. 

"We must," said Mr. Coles, speaking for himself and his brethren* 
of the E. C. U., " pray that we may all recognize the true unity of the- 
great portions of the Church, Roman, Greek, Anglican, now, through.! 
our sins and those of our fathers, outwardly divided, and that these- 
outward divisions may pass away in a day of blessed Reunion. 
Meanwhile, that the . . . unspeakable mystery of the Altar may be- 
recognized as a Divine Communion, a true Sacrifice, a Real Presence- 
demanding a special adoration ; that Holy Communion may be- 
rightly prepared for, and to this end that there may be wider oppor- 
tunities, and more frequent use of Private Confession; that the- 
ancient Catholic rule of Fasting Communion may be better observed ;. 
. . . that the Anointing of the Sick may be rightly and dutifully- 
restored j that all rites and ceremonies which witness to our union- 
with the rest of the Catholic Church, and to the doctrines which we 
hold in common, may be protected and restored. . . These are the- 
objects with which our Society is chiefly concerned." 

It must be admitted that this is going a long way towards 
carrying out the Plan of Campaign laid down by "A. 
Colonial Priest" three years before, while it is entirely 


founded on the principles which guided his very 
discreditable letter. The English Church Union is clearly 
responsible for what Mr. Coles said, since they published 
his sermon, without finding any fault with it, in their 
official organ. And what made Mr. Coles' statement of 
E. C. U. policy so gravely important was, that it repre- 
sented the policy of a Society which at that time numbered 
nearly four thousand clergymen, and twenty-four bishops, in 
its ranks. 

All through this modern agitation for Corporate Reunion 
there has but little been said against the corruptions of the 
Church of Rome. Some of the practical abuses found in her 
fold have been censured, but it has been in the gentlest 
possible manner, and with many apologies to Rome for taking 
such a liberty ; and it has been carefully explained that fault 
has not been found so much with the authorized religion of 
Rome, as with that " unauthorized''' teaching given by some 
of her children, especially on such a subject as the 
extravagant devotion to the Virgin Mary. To quote 
again the words of Bishop Abbot, " If they do at any time 
speak against the Papists, they do but beat a little about 
the bush, and that but softly too, for fear of waking and 
disturbing the birds that are in it." The "levelling up" 
process, the work of preparing the way for Reunion with 
Rome has not yet, in the estimation of Lord Halifax, and 
some of his brethren on the Council of the English Church 
Union, been fully accomplished, even in the most advanced 
of Ritualistic Churches. The Ritualistic party no longer 
declare that they are satisfied with the Book of Common 
Prayer. They wish to add largely to it from Roman sources. 
For many years they resisted Revision of the Book of 
Common Prayer, on Protestant lines: now, influential 
members of the party are now advocating it on Romanizing 
lines. A remarkable volume of Essays was published in 
1892, entitled the Lord's Day and the Holy Eucharist. Of 
the eight gentlemen who contributed to it, seven were 

22 * 


members of the English Church Union, and of these four 
were members of its Council, including Lord Halifax, 
President of the Union. I look upon this volume as, 
indirectly, a manifesto of the English Church Union, or at 
least as an indicator of what its policy is likely to be, though 
officially the Union has not given it its approval. But we 
can best judge of what the future policy of a Society will be 
by ascertaining the views of those who rule it. The first 
essay in this volume was from the pen of Lord Halifax 
himself. His lordship affirms that some of the " changes 
in the Liturgy" made by the Reformers in the sixteenth 
century were u mistaken," and that we should not decline 
to do our " very best to get them remedied." 55 In other 
words, we should pull down a part of the work of the Refor- 
mation. He goes on to affirm that there are " shortcomings " 
in the English Church ; and that the " arrangements of our 
present Liturgy, with the dislocation of the Canon which 
those arrangements involve, is a most serious blot on the 
Eucharistic Service of the English Church," which "urgently 
calls for reform." 56 In other words, Lord Halifax is 
thoroughly dissatisfied with the Prayer Book, and is 
determined to go in for its Revision, but, to save appearances, 
he will not use that word, but expresses what he wants by 
the term "reform." The result of seeing services conducted 
on strictly Church of England lines, even under High 
Church auspices, seems to fill him with disgust. He sighs 
for what he has seen on the Continent. 

"In this connection," writes the President of the English Church 
Union, p. 38, " let me say it, though I say it with shame, that of all the 
sad and discouraging sights which it is possible to see, none appears 
to me so sad and so discouraging as the sight of an English Cathedral, 
even the best, after being any time on the Continent. Contrast 
Westminster Abbey with the Cathedral at Cologne, or any French 
Cathedral, and you will almost wish never to enter it again till a 
radical change has been effected in all its arrangements." 

Lord Halifax evidently wishes English Cathedrals to be 

55 The Lord's Day and the Holy Eucharist, p. 27. &6 Ibid., p. 28. 


modelled after the Roman Catholic Cathedrals of the 

Continent. There are, it is well known, several English 

Cathedrals where the services are conducted on High 

Church lines, but even of these, Lord Halifax is ashamed : 

the sight of them makes his heart sad, and discourages the 

Romanizing hopes that fill his breast. We may well ask, 

had the Reformers of the sixteenth century been men of the 

views of Lord Halifax, would England ever have escaped 

from the degrading slavery and cruel intolerance of Papal 

bondage ? We cannot doubt that if those who guide the 

policy of the English Church Union could have their own 

way, the iron heel of the Papacy would once more crush 

the independence and liberty of the Reformed Church of 

England. In his essay Lord Halifax asks, " Why should 

not the recitation of the Commandments be omitted at the 

choral celebration of Holy Communion on Sundays, just 

as is now often done at early celebrations of Holy 

Communion " ? 57 We may well answer this question by 

asking him another — What do you want them left out for ? 

Are the Commandments of God " grievous " (1 John v. 3) 

unto you ? Or is the reason of your wish to omit them 

to be found in the manifest fact that the Second of them 

forbids the use of pictures and images in Divine worship ? 

It is, no doubt, most inconvenient for a Ritualistic priest 

to read aloud that Second Commandment before the 

congregation, when they can see the skirts of his dress 

touching one of the forbidden things ? Every lover of the 

Word of God will — Lord Halifax notwithstanding — plead 

that the Commandments of God may remain, whatever else 

it maybe necessary to remove from the Communion Service. 

The fact that the President of the English Church Union 

pleads so earnestly for additions to the Communion Service 

is a clear proof that he, and his followers, are longing for 

many things which the Church of England, in her wisdom, 

has thought it best not to provide for her children. He 

5 7 Ibid., p. 29. 


wants additional Gospels, Epistles, and Collects to be pro- 
vided for the Black Letter Days, and for " Services for the 
Dead." 58 He also " pleads " for the " restoration where it is 
possible of the practice of Reserving the Blessed Sacrament 
in our Churches." 59 The ostensible reason for restoring the 
Reserved Sacrament is that it is then always ready to be 
given to the sick in cases of emergency ; but the real reason 
is for purposes of adoration. The Ritualists do not plead for 
the Reservation of the wine ; but only for half a Sacrament — 
the consecrated wafer. Why not both ? Loyal Churchmen 
are aware that there is no provision in the Book of Common 
Prayer for giving the sick the Communion in one kind, 
according to the modern Roman Catholic fashion, first made 
obligatory in the fifteenth century. The English Communion 
for the Sick requires the clergyman to consecrate both wine 
and bread in the sick room. Suppose, then, the Church were 
to give permission to Reserve the bread, how much time 
would the Minister gain by such a permission, were he still 
to be required to consecrate the wine in the sick room ? 
None whatever. The real reason then why the Reserved 
Sacrament is so earnestly longed for is adoration, and this is 
shown in Lord Halifax's essay, in which he makes it plain 
that he is most anxious for the restoration of the service 
known as the " Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament," 
which cannot be performed unless a Reserved wafer is kept 
until evening for this service. 

" It will be said," writes Lord Halifax, " by some that it [the 
Reserved Sacrament] will be a step to Benediction and other practices 
which are of comparatively modern origin ; by others, that in the 
imperfectly instructed condition of our people it might lead to 
irreverence. Now, in regard to both these objections may not this 
be asked — and it is a remark which, I think, applies to many other 
matters of a not dissimilar nature — why should we object to certain 
practices which have grown up round the Blessed Sacrament, and 
which experience has proved to he useful for encouraging the devotion of 
the Faithful?"™ 

58 The Lord's Day and the Holy Eucharist, p. 29. 69 Ibid., p. 35. m Ibid., p. 35. 


The answer to all this is that the service of the Benediction 
of the Blessed Sacrament, and the Reservation of the 
Sacrament, would both certainly lead to that which the 
Black Rubric terms V idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful 

Another contributor to this volume of essays, who is also 
a member of the English Church Union, the Rev. E. W. 
Sergeant, seems anxious for the entire omission of the Ten 
Commandments from the Communion Service. " It is," he 
writes, " no part of the priest's office in the ritual of the 
Eucharist, like another Moses from Mount Sinai, to convey 
God's laws to the people." 61 Another supposed defect in 
the Book of Common Prayer, which is nothing less than gall 
and wormwood to the whole Romanizing party, is termed by 
Mr. Sergeant " one of the most mischievous innovations in 
our Eucharistic Office/' It is that, "whereas in the rubrics 
alone of the Ordinary and Canon of the Mass in the Sarum 
Missal the word altar occurs thirty times, it does not occur once 
in any part of our Prayer Book.'" 62 This gentleman is also 
sorely grieved because " such marked prominence " is given 
in the Prayer Book to the title, " The Lord's Supper " ; and 
he asks with burning indignation, " Why change the title ? 
Why reject the old and certainly inoffensive term 'the 
Mass'?" 63 

It is, therefore, quite clear that these gentlemen are not 
satisfied with the Prayer Book as it is. They are not 
content, however, with introducing all these Romanizing 
novelties on their own responsibility, and without any 
sanction from the law. What they now want is that they 
shall be incorporated into the Book of Common Prayer, and 
thus made part and parcel of the law of the Reformed 
Church of England. If it is asked, why do Prayer Book 
Churchmen object to these changes and additions, the 
answer is that the result of adopting them would be a 
gigantic schism in the Church of England. The Church 

61 Ibid., p. 125. ■" Ibid., p. 124. ra Ibid., p. 121. 


which for nearly four centuries, excepting during the brief 
interval of the Commonwealth, has stood firmly against all 
the storms and oppositions through which it has passed, 
would at once fall to the grotfnd, rent asunder by traitors 
within her fold. Can statesmen view such a possibility with 
pleasure ? A Prayer Book Romanized on the lines of the 
English Church Union could not be accepted by any honest 
Protestant Churchman, and the whole Protestant power of 
Protestant England would be behind those who would then 
once more fight again, for dear life, the battle of the 
Reformation. Yet nothing less than this will satisfy the 
wire-pullers of the Ritualistic party. It is useless to talk of 
a possible compromise between the Lord's supper and the 
Sacrifice of the Mass. They are as opposed to each other 
as light and darkness, as the Word of God and the corrupt 
Traditions of men. This preparatory work for Corporate 
Reunion with Rome must be resisted by all in whose hearts 
the memory of the Protestant Martyrs is not dead ; by all 
who love civil freedom and religious liberty. 

As time went on the English Church Union became more 
and more energetic in labouring for Reunion. As I have 
said, the volume of essays on The Lord's Day and the 
Holy Eucharist, which appeared in 1892, was not issued by 
the Union, though it certainly does clearly indicate what its 
policy is. Going back four years from that date, we find the 
Council of the E. C. U. bringing the Reunion Question once 
more before the Lambeth Conference, which again met in 
that year. At the annual meeting of the Union, June 14th, 
1888, an Address to the Conference was unanimously adopted, 
which concluded with the following paragraph : — 

"We would conclude with our most earnest prayers that the 
counsels of this great gathering of the Episcopate round the chair of 
St. Augustine may be so guided and inspired by God the Holy Ghost, 
as to quicken the life of the Church of England throughout all its 
branches, to win back those who have separated themselves from its 
fold, and, above all, to prepare the way for the restoration of visible 
unity between the Anglican Communion and the rest of the Western 


Church, and the Reunion of East and West, and to hasten the dawn 
of that blessed day of restored peace and goodwill among all Christian, 
people, when there shall be One Flock and One Shepherd." w 

In moving the adoption of this Address, Lord Halifax 
said that Corporate Reunion was "that hope which is 
nearest and dearest " to the hearts of the members of the 
Union, and that they longed for the time " when the schisms 
and divisions which divide the West shall have been healed, 
when East and West shall be again one, and all shall be 
again united in the bonds of a visible unity as in the days of 
old." The views of the Council of the E. C. U. were echoed 
by its branches. At a meeting of the Cheltenham Branch, 
December 17th, 1889, the Chairman, the Rev. G. Bayfield 
Roberts, who was subsequently selected to write the official 
History of the English Church Union, said that — 

" Unhappily, as a Protestant, Canon Bell looked to Reunion with 
Dissenters, and to an utter and irremediable breach with the Churches 
of the East and West. They, as Catholics, looked to Reunion with 
those Churches of the East and West which, in their fine ancient 
Patriarchates, possessed the historical Episcopate, to Reunion under the 
Primacy of him to whom the Fathers gave the Primacy . . . the 
Bishop of ' old Rome.' Was this a rash statement ? At any rate, it 
was historically true, and was substantially the same as that to which 
Lord Halifax gave utterance at the Annual Meeting [of the E. C. U.] 
in London, in 1885: — 'Peace among yourselves, peace with our 
separated brethren at home, the restoration of visible unity with the 
members of the Church abroad, East and West alike, but, above all, 
with the great .Apostolic See of the West, which has done so much to- 
guard the true faith in the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ and 
the reality of His life-giving Sacraments. These things surely should 
be our object — the object nearest our hearts.' " w 

Lord Halifax's speech, in 1885, in favour of Reunion with 
Rome, quoted by Mr. Roberts, led to a correspondence 
between his lordship and Canon Hole, now Dean of 
Rochester, in which the President of the English Church 
Union declared that although he did " most earnestly desire 

w Church Union Gazette, Volume for 1888, pp. 168, 216-220. 
^Ibid., Volume for 1890, p. 45. 


the restoration of visible communion between ourselves and 
the members of the Roman Church," yet he did not wish for 
such a union " by a sacrifice of the truth, but through the 
truth." 66 But here of course comes in the question, What is 
" the truth " which his lordship is unable to sacrifice ? I 
have no doubt that he would be willing to " sacrifice " a great 
deal of that which Protestant Churchmen consider as 
Scriptural truth. The really practical question is, how 
much of that which the Pope considers as the " truth" would 
Lord Halifax require him to surrender as the price of 
Reunion ? Would he require him to give up either his 
Primacy or Supremacy, or any one of the doctrines of the 
Council of Trent ? I very much doubt it. Lord Halifax 
would be very glad to " sacrifice M Protestantism, but there 
is very little, if anything at all, in the official doctrines of 
Rome which he would wish a re-united Church to lose. The 
speech which Mr. Roberts quoted was referred to by Lord 
Halifax himself the year after it was delivered. At the 
annual meeting of the E. C. U. in 1886, Lord Halifax said : — - 
" I ventured to say something on this subject at our last annual 
meeting, and though fault has been found in some quarters with what 
I then said, I have nothing to retract. On the contrary, I desire to 
emphasize what I said last year. The crown and completion of the 
Catholic Revival which has transformed the Church of England 
within the last fifty years is the Reunion of Christendom. We desire 
union with those from whom we are separate, not by a sacrifice of 
truth, but through the truth, and among our brethren with whom we 
long to be at one, none come before those who are in communion with 
the Roman See. . . Our own instincts — nay our own experience as 
Anglicans — point out the practical need of a central authority. What 
has been the history of the South African Church ? Has it not been 
on one side a willingness to recognize in the Archbishop of Canterbury 
the authority of an Anglican Patriarch ; on the other an attempt to 
claim the fulness of Papal authority for the Privy Council ? After all, 
if a central authority is good for the Anglican Communion, a central 
authority must be good for the Church at large. . . . Certainly those 
who are willing to recognize an appeal from the Archbishop of 

66 Church Union Gazette, Volume for 1890, p. 50. 


Canterbury to the Judicial Committee need not scruple to an appeal to 
a Christian Bishop. Is there a single instructed Christian who 


The answer to Lord Halifax's question is that there is a 
very large number of very well " instructed Christians " who 
would prefer the Privy Council to the Pope. There is a 
great deal of misconception as to what the functions of 
the Judicial Committee really are. I suppose that most 
High Churchmen will admit that the late High Church and 
learned Dean Hook was an " instructed Christian." Yet 
this is what he wrote on the subject : — 

"I see no objection to the Committee of Privy Council being 
our Final Court of Appeal : they do not form a Synod, and here is 
the mistake so often made. In an ancient Synod the members were 
legislators as well as judges. If they decided that such or such a 
thing was contrary to law, they might say, ' The law is a bad one, 
therefore we will make a new law.' The Committee of Privy 
Council does nothing of the kind. I wish to obey the law. You say 
that the law says one thing, I say it means another — and who shall 
decide ? It is a question, not of opinion, but of fact j and who can 
deal with such a subject so well as lawyers ? Who could be worse 
judges than ecclesiastics, who would endeavour to bend the law to 
their opinions ? 

" The old High Churchman was wont to say, ' I will do what the 
Church orders me to do.' f I like,' he might say, 'lights upon the 
altar j but if you dislike it, let us ask what the law says. To 
ascertain that fact I go, not to parsons but to lawyers, who are not to 
make the law, but to discuss what it was made by ecclesiastics." 68 

It is here most important to point out that Lord Halifax 
and the English Church Union are manifestly bent on 
pulling down the authority of Her Majesty's Judicial 
Committee of Privy Council, for the sole purpose of setting 
up that of the Pope of Rome in its room. " Who would 
not," asks Lord Halifax, " prefer Leo XIII. to the Privy 
Council " ? There is, he says, " a practical need for a 
central authority " ; and such an authority would, he thinks, 

6 7 Ibid., Volume for 1886, p. 242. 

68 Life and Letters of Dean Hook, p. 588. Sixth edition. 


" be good for the Church at large " — the authority, of 
course, being that of the Pope. It may be well to remind 
my readers that the Reformers of the sixteenth century were 
of a different opinion. It was their glory and their boast 
that they cut themselves off from all communication with 
such a " central authority " as the Pope, and inserted in the 
Reformed Prayer Booh the petition : — " From the Bishop of 
Rome, and all his detestable enormities, Good Lord, deliver 
us." The fact is that there is no existing authority within 
the Church of England to which the Ritualists will give 
their full obedience, when its decisions come into conflict 
with what they, in their superior wisdom, assert to be the 
law of the Church. Reasonable men would say that it 
is better to have some authority within the Church of 
England, however imperfect it may or may not be, than to 
have no binding authority at all. It is better to have 
unsatisfactory Ecclesiastical Courts than to have no 
Ecclesiastical Courts at all. It is better to have the Privy 
Council as the Final Court of Appeal than to have no Court 
of Appeal at all. One result of the labours of the English 
Church Union is the spread of Anarchy in the Church. 
That well-known Ritualist, the late Rev. A. H. Mackonochie, 
Vicar of St. Alban's, Hblborn, who was for many years 
supported by the English Church Union — of which he was 
a leading member — in his rebellion against the decisions of 
the Courts of Law, gave evidence, on March 2nd, 1882, 
before the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Courts. 
From the official Report of that Commission I take the 
following extracts of Mr. Mackonochie's evidence bearing 
on the subject before us : — 

" 6089. Then is there no Ecclesiastical Court ? — Not as far as I 
can see. 

" 6090. So that every man can do what is right in his own eyes ? — 
That is not our fault. 

" 6091. Of course not. That is the state of things ? — Yes. 

" 6092. Has there never been an Ecclesiastical Court ? — Not since 
the Reformation." 


" 61 7 1. Then why do you think that the Bishops have no authority 
now ? — Because they have got bound up in the State Courts." 

"6178. But does it not strike you that that is fatal to the idea 
of any society existing, that he must judge entirely for himself ? — 
Yes ; then I cannot help it." 

Anarchy and lawlessness in the Church, a state of things 
in which every clergyman does that which is right in his 
own eyes, and in which he will submit to no authority which 
opposes his own opinions, is certainly one calculated to create 
alarm. I do not assert that it exists amongst the whole of 
the clergy of the Church of England. Far from it. We may 
be thankful that there are yet thousands of clergymen who 
love law and order; but, on the other hand, it cannot be 
denied that the lawless spirit is very widespread indeed 
amongst the Romanizing clergy. Nor should it be forgotten 
that the spirit of lawlessness and anarchy is a contagious 
disease. It will not stop within the Church. The people of 
England will argue that what is good for the clergy is good 
also for them. If the Ministers of the Gospel will not obey 
the laws of the Church, why should they obey the laws of 
the State ? This is an aspect of the Ritualistic question 
which is deserving of the serious attention of statesmen. 
But the unfortunate thing is that those in authority in the 
State, in only too many instances, smile upon rebellion, give 
the rebels words of encouragement, and present them to 
many of the high places in the Church which are in their 
patronage, while those who show respect to law and order 
are frequently frowned upon, and left out in the cold. The 
time has come when the people of England should, through 
Parliament, bring both the Government for the time being — 
both Conservative and Liberal Governments are equally guilty 
— to account. No law-breaker should ever receive promotion 
at the hands of the Crown through its accredited advisers. 

I might easily multiply quotations from the utterances of 
members of the English Church Union advocating Corpor- 
ate Reunion with the Church of Rome, but I should only 


weary my readers by doing so. As illustrating the kind of 
Romish teaching frequently given to the branches of the 
Union, I may, however, be permitted to add here the 
following extract from a speech delivered at the annual 
meeting of the Devon Branch, on July 30th, 1889. On that 
occasion the Rev. Ernest Square, then Vicar of St. Mary 
Steps, Exeter, but now Rector of Wheatacre, Suffolk, said : — ■ 

" He did not know where they were to go for their Ritual if it was 
not to the Church of Rome, which seemed to be the living Church, 
and in whose Ritual he could see nothing harmful. She was the 
greatest Church in Christendom — there could be no doubt about it — ■ 
and he did not think they could go to a better pattern than the Church 
of Rome for their Ritual. She had kept up her Ritual, which the 
Church of England had not done, through all the ages. We had been 
most slovenly, and with us it had been a kind of domestic Ritual, no 
more than they would have in their own homes or at their own tables 
— and not so good. The Church of Rome had always kept her own 
Ritual, and, therefore, he did not see why the English Church should 
not go to her for help in this matter." G9 

The adoption of the full Roman Ritual has now become 
very common in Ritualistic churches ; but some of the 
party go even further than Mr. Square, for they teach all the 
doctrines of Rome which the Ritual is intended to symbolize. 
Three years before Mr. Square's Exeter speech, the Rev. 
William Stathers, Curate of St. Matthias', Earl's Court, and 
now Curate of St. Benet and All Saints', Kentish Town, was 
dismissed from his curacy by his Vicar, on the charge of 
Romanizing. The charge seemed an extraordinary one, 
coming from a Vicar who himself adopted, in the services of 
his Church, the full Ritual of the Church of Rome. In self- 
defence Mr. Stathers, who was then, and still is, a member 
of the English Church Union, published a Letter of 
Explanation to the members of the congregation, in the 
form of a pamphlet of sixteen pages. He pleaded that while 
Mr. Luke, his Vicar, had given his congregation the shell, 
he (Mr. Stathers) had given them the kernel, and he evidently 

69 Western Times, July 31st, 1889. 


thought the kernel a much better thing than the shell. The 
shell was Roman Ritual ; the kernel was Roman doctrine. 

"The teaching," wrote Mr. Stathers, " which I have regularly given 
from the pulpit of S. Matthias's is in perfect harmony with the Ritual 
of that Church. There are only three kinds of Ritual possible in our 
churches : — The Ritual of self-pleasing, invented out of the Incum- 
bent's own head j the old English Ritual, very elaborate and now 
lost, but which some are fruitlessly trying to bring back ; and the 
Modern Roman, very simple, regulated by the Sacred Congregation of 
Rites at Rome, and possessing present authority. It is the latter 
Ritual, I am happy to say, which is followed at S. Matthias's, and I 
am bound to say that while the accuracy of it would be a lesson to 
many Roman congregations, they could never hope to approach its 
dignity. To many it will not seem surprising that rinding St. 
Matthias's possessed of a particular kind of shell, I did my best to- 
provide the corresponding kernel, or that rinding myself face to face 
with a skeleton, I did my best to clothe it with flesh and make it 
instinct with life. 

" Some persons may perhaps be of opinion that in preaching the 
doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of our Lady I have gone beyond 
Tridentine limits, and have thus far been inconsistent. I have never, 
however, insisted on the doctrine as of necessity for faith, but have 
simply given the reasons for it, and have left objectors free to hold the 
Immaculate Birth instead. Moreover, the doctrine, though outside the 
Tridentine definitions, can hardly be said to be outside Prayer Book 
limits." 70 

I am not aware that Mr. Stathers has ever publicly 
repudiated his teaching, as expressed in this pamphlet, 
. though he still holds a curacy in the same Diocese of London. 
In his Protest he further informed his readers that — 

" Mr. Luke having desired to be informed more precisely as to the 
exact meaning which I attached to the phrase * general teaching 
Tridentine ' [contained in Mr. Stathers' advertisement for a curacy in 
the Church Times], 71 I explained to him at a private interview, and, if 

7° A Protest and Explanation, by the Rev. William Stathers, p. 12. 

~ l Mr. Stathers' advertisement, which he truly described as " most unmis- 
takable," was as follows: — "Town Curacy or Sole Charge (in the South> 
desired at once, by a priest of considerable experience ; 35, musical, unmarried, 
fond of children. Extempore and written sermons. Ritual (not necessarily 
advanced) on Roman lines preferred. General teaching Tridentine. — W. S., 85, Mar- 
ton Road, Middlesbro."— Church Times, December 21st, 1883, p. 959. 


■I remember rightly, by letter, that I meant the general teaching of the 
Western Church, the most satisfactory summary of which teaching, 
and at the same time an authoritative summary, is to be found in the 
Catechism of the Council of Trent, points having reference to the Papal 
Supremacy being excluded by the necessity of the case." ( 72 ) 

I must now hasten on to the time when, on February 14th, 
1895, Lord Halifax delivered at Bristol his now notorious 
•speech on Reunion with Rome. It was, I may here remark, 
delivered at a meeting of the Bristol branch of the E. C. U., 
and was subsequently printed and circulated by the Council, 
•thus giving to it an official sanction and approval. It was a 
very long speech, and its delivery created a great deal of 
excitement and controversy in Church of England circles, 
its influence went further and extended to Rome, where the 
Pope himself greatly rejoiced at the welcome news which it 
•contained. In this speech the President of the E. C. U. 
went further towards Rome than ever he went before. Even 
•some of his own friends were surprised, though they did not 
repudiate his utterances. His lordship laid down what he 
considered as reasonable conditions on which Reunion 
'between England and Rome could take place ; but it was 
noticed that he did not require the Church of Rome to give 
up any one of her peculiar doctrines, not even the doctrine 
of the Pope's personal Infallibility, as taught by the Vatican 
Council of 1870 ! As to the latter truly monstrous doctrine 
all that he seemed to require, to enable English Churchmen 
to accept it, was that it should be sugar-coated to suit the 
English palate ! 

" Even in regard to the Vatican Council," said Lord Halifax, " it 
.appears not impossible that mistakes and exaggerations as to its scope 
.and consequences may have been made, and that as time goes on 
explanations will emerge which may make the difficulties [ought he 
not to have said falsehoods ?] it seems to involve less than they have 
sometimes appeared ? ... If by Papal Infallibility it is only meant 
that the Pope is Infallible when acting as the Head of the whole 
•Church, and expressing the mind of the Church, and after taking all the 

72 A Protest and Explanation, p. 3. 


legitimate and usual means for ascertaining that mind, in determining 
which the authority and witness of the Bishops, as representing their 
respective Churches, must be paramount, and then only in regard to 
the substance of the deposit handed down from Christ and His 
Apostles, it would seem that the difficulty of a possible agreement is 
not so insuperable as it has been sometimes represented. Certainly, it 
is not such as to preclude all endeavours to find possible terms of 
peace on other matters. In any case, till it is proved to the contrary, 
let us nourish the hope that such explanations are possible." 73 

But here it may well be asked, would not the acceptance 
of the Pope's Infallibility, in any shape or form, or with any 
" explanation," be in a reality a " sacrifice of the truth " ? 
How could a Union based on such a falsehood be a Union 
"through the truth"? "Do not let us be afraid," said 
Lord Halifax, in his Bristol speech, " to speak plainly of 
the possibility, of the desirability of a union with Rome. 
Let us say boldly we desire peace with Rome with all our 
hearts" 74 Language like this is very different from that of 
the old-fashioned High Churchman, the Rev. John Moultrie, 
of Rugby : — 

" Your Pope may be a learned priest, and a prince of high degree, 
But God and Jesus Christ are more Infallible than he ; 
And I in God, through Jesus Christ, rest all my faith and hope, 
And indeed I cannot part with these for Prelate or for Pope. 
I still must keep my simple creed, and tread the path I've trod 
By the help of my Redeemer — by the guidance of my God." 76 

" No peace, but deadly warfare still, between those twain must be, 
While the one would bind both heart and mind, and the other 

set them free j 
No peace for Rome and England, but a stern, relentless strife j 
Till Light shall vanquish Darkness, Death be swallowed up of 

Life." 76 

If there is one man of the sixteenth century who, more 

than any other, is honoured by Protestants all over the 

7 s Reunion of Christendom. Speech by Lord Halifax, p. 24. (English Church 
Union Office.) 
? 4 Ibid., p. 35. 
? 5 Moultrie's Altars, Hearths, and Graves, p. 79. Edition, 1854. 

* Ibid., p. 63. 



world, it is Martin Luther. But he was God's instrument 
for freeing the nations from Papal bondage, and for this 
amongst other reasons, he is hated and reviled by modern 
Ritualists, who are not worthy to unloose his shoe strings. 
In his Bristol speech Lord Halifax went out of his way to 
insult his honoured memory by declaring that although he 
-began his career as " a harmless and necessary Reformer," 
ihe eventually became " a needless and noxious rebel." 77 
Luther certainly was, very much to his credit be it recorded, 
a " rebel " against the usurped Supremacy of the Pope ; but 
in the opinion of the majority of the ablest men who have 
lived since his times, his rebellion was a very necessary 
one, and by no means " needless." It was the only way in 
which the world could get rid of an intolerable spiritual 
slavery. Luther's rebellion against the Pope was obedience 
to Almighty God, and therefore it makes us justly indignant 
to find such a brave and holy deed stigmatized as a 
"noxious" crime. It will, I trust, never come to pass that 
the children of this great " rebel " against tyranny and 
corruption will come to terms of peace with that system 
against which he waged an unrelenting warfare, not even 
at the invitation of Lord Halifax. " Who," asked his 
lordship, " can endure the sense of being separated from 
those [Roman Catholics] with whom in all essentials of 
belief and sentiment we are one?" 78 The answer to such 
a question is that there is no need whatever for the 
Ritualists to " endure " such a melancholy state of things 
for even one day longer. Why need they be " separated " 
any more ? The Papal door is wide open to receive them, 
and the sooner they go over the better it will be for the 
Reformed Church of England. When traitors are discovered 
within the citadel zealously pleading with its rulers to 
surrender to an enemy whose yoke is too heavy to bear, 
the best thing to do is to turn them out of the citadel at 

77 Reunion of Christendom. Speech by Lord Halifax, p. 8. 

78 Ibid., p. 18. 


once, if they refuse to go voluntarily. There is no safety 
for the citadel while traitors are within its walls. It cannot, 
I think, be seriously pleaded that there are any doctrines 
officially taught by the Church of Rome to which gentlemen 
of Lord Halifax's stamp can have any conscientious 
objections. "We are convinced," he says, "on the one 
hand that there is nothing whatever in the authoritative 
documents of the English Church which, apart from the 
traditional glosses of a practical Protestantism, contains 
anything essentially irreconcilable with the doctrines of the 
Church of Rome." 79 Certainly, the majority of loyal 
Churchmen think otherwise. They still retain the opinion 
that the Thirty-nine Articles contain a great deal which is 
" irreconcilable with the doctrines of the Church of Rome," 
and that is also the opinion of Roman Catholic divines who 
may be allowed to know what the real doctrines of their 
Church are much better than any member of the English 
Church Union. One of the " documents of the English 
•Church" is the Book of Homilies. Every clergyman ot 
the Church of England has solemnly subscribed to the 
Thirty-nine Articles. Every curate must subscribe them, 
and every new incumbent of a living is bound to read them 
through to his new congregation. In one of those Articles 
— the 35th — it is declared that the Homilies "contain a 
.godly and wholesome Doctrine, and necessary for these times/ 1 
that is, for this year of our Lord, 1897. We know very 
well that the clergy are not bound to accept every historical 
•statement in the Homilies, but they are bound to the 
•" doctrine " taught in them. I would therefore ask Lord 
Halifax whether he can reconcile the following extract from 
the " document " known as the Homily of the Peril of 
Idolatry, Part Third, " with the doctrines of the Church of 
Rome " ? The language is somewhat rough, but, as it is 
" appointed to be read in Churches,'" there can be nothing 
^wrong in reading it in this book of mine. 

1 9 Ibid., p. 30. 

23 * 


" Which the idolatrous Church [of Rome] understandeth well enough. 
For she being indeed not only an harlot (as the Scripture calleth her), 
but also a foul, filthy, old withered harlot (for she is indeed of ancient 
years) and understanding her lack of natural and true beauty, and 
great loathsomeness which of herself she hath, doth (after the custom 
of such harlots) paint herself, and deck and tire herself with gold, 
pearl, stone, and all kind of precious jewels, 80 that she, shining with 
the outward beauty and glory of them, may please the foolish 
phantasy of fond lovers, and so entice them to spiritual fornication 
with her ; who, if they saw her (I will not say naked) but in simple 
apparel, would abhor her, as the foulest and filthiest harlot that ever 
was seen : according as appeareth by the description of the garnishing 
of the great strumpet of all strumpets, 'the mother of whoredom,' 
set forth by St. John in his Revelation." 

Soon after his Bristol speech, Lord Halifax went to Rome, 
where he had several interviews with the Pope, with a view 
to the success of his Reunion schemes. A verbatim report of 
his interviews would be interesting reading. In his speech 
at Bristol he had not, as I have said, asked Rome to give 
up one of her doctrines as a condition of her Reunion with. 
England, not even the Papal Infallibility. But he did insist 
on the Pope's recognition of the validity of Anglican Orders. 
There went to Rome, a few months after Lord Halifax, two 
members of the English Church Union, whose travelling" 
expenses were paid for by the Union, One of the party, the 
Rev. T. A. Lacey, a member of its Council, and also a 
member of the secret Society of the Holy Cross, wrote a 
document for the private use of the Roman Cardinals, to* 
whom the question of the validity of Anglican Orders had 
been remitted for consideration. Probably Mr. Lacey never 
dreamt that such a document would ever see the light of 
day in England ; but, somehow or other, the Tablet got hold 
of a copy, and published it in full — translated from the- 
original Latin — in its issue for November 7th, 1896. In this 
document Mr. Lacey made some very candid admissions,, 
and some inaccurate assertions, such as the following : — 

80 Just like our modern Ritualistic priests, who "deck and tire " themselves* 
and their Churches in a similar fashion. 


"The Reformation," wrote Mr. Lacey, "begun under Henry VIII., 
effected nothing contrary to Catholic faith. There took place, I 
admit, certain things which were criminal, and certain things which 
are still to be deplored; the withdrawal from the Communion of the 
Roman Church, the extirpation of the Religious Life." 

"The English Church, delivered from so many dangers, has differed 
in nothing from the other national Churches included in the Catholic 
unity, save that she has lacked communion in Sacris with the Holy 

" Many have turned their eyes with great desire to the Holy 
Roman Church as to the Mother from whom the light of the Gospel 
was first shed upon us." 

"In the year 1865, he [Dr. Pusey] published his Eirenicon, in 
which he dealt with the question of visible unity to be brought about 
by means of the Anglican Church. He added much concerning the 
differences of worship and doctrine ; that such things did not relate to 
faith ; the discord between the Anglican and Roman formularies to 
be more apparent than real ; the power of the Roman Pontiff to be 
a not insuperable obstacle ; and the like. This letter of so celebrated 
a man created incredible enthusiasm." 

The hopes of Lord Halifax and his followers were doomed 
to disappointment. Instead of recognizing the validity of 
Anglican Orders the Pope issued his now famous Bull 
declaring them to be, in his estimation, invalid. This Bull 
came as an unexpected thunderstorm in the Ritualistic camp. 
The Romanizers had flattered, cringed to, and prostrated 
themselves before the Church of Rome in a state of abject 
humiliation, in the hope that the Pope would do them the 
honour of recognizing them as real sacrificing priests. 
Instead, however, of being honoured by him, they were 
treated with the most unmitigated and well-deserved 
contempt. Instead of receiving a Papal blessing, they were 
spurned from the throne of the Vatican with a Papal kick. 
For a time, in bitter rage and dissatisfaction, the Ritualists 
turned their faces towards the Eastern Church, and declared 
that they would go in for Union with that corrupt com- 
munion, and leave Rome to her fate. A few Churchmen were 
deceived by these professions, and declared that the English 


Church Union would now cease to labour for Reunion with 
Rome. But they little realized the depths of spiritual 
degradation of which the Ritualists are capable. The tide 
has already turned, and once more we see the Ritualists 
crawling along to kiss the Papal toe that kicked them only 
the other day. In his speech at the annual meeting of the 
English Church Union, June 1st, 1897, Lord Halifax bitterly 
complained that the present dominant authority in the 
Church of Rome in England threw " every obstacle in the 
way of any step that may be taken towards bringing about 
a better understanding, and the eventual Corporate Reunion 
of the Anglican Communion with the Roman Church. " 
" We have indeed," said his lordship, " honestly desired — 
we desire still — to see the relations which existed between 
St. Cyprian and the Church of Carthage on the one side, 
and St. Stephen and the Roman Church on the other, as 
insisted on in the Encyclical Satis Cognitum, restored between 
Canterbury and Rome." 81 

It is a noteworthy fact that while the leaders of the 
Ritualistic party have advocated Corporate Reunion with 
Rome, and have opposed individual secession, yet the over- 
whelming majority of individual perversions to Rome in this 
country have been from the ranks of the Tractarians, Puseyites, 
and Ritualists. The Tractarians prepared the ground, the 
Puseyites planted, the Ritualists watered, and the Pope has 
reaped the harvest. As far back as 1850 Bishop Samuel 
Wilberforce wrote to Dr. Pusey : — " I firmly believe that 
the influence of your personal ministry does more than the 
labours of an open enemy to wean from the pure faith and 
simple Ritual of our Church the affections of many of those 
amongst her children." 82 To the Rev. C. Marriott, the 
Bishop wrote, November 23rd, 1850 : — " He (Dr. Pusey) 
tries to retain these souls to the Church of England, but in 
vain. He has given the impetus, and he cannot stop 

81 Church Times, June 4th, 1897, p. 668. 

82 Life of Bishop Wilberforce, Vol. II., p. 80. 


them. He has no deep horror of the Popish system ; none 
has been infused into the early beginnings of their awakened 
spiritual consciousness ; they have practically been set by him 
on a Romish course:' M Even Dr. Pusey's Father Confessor, 
the Rev. J. Keble, acknowledged that " a larger number, 
possibly, has seceded to Rome from under his (Dr. Pusey's) 
special teaching than from that of any other individual now 
among us." 84 It has been more or less the same with all 
the Ritualistic teachers. A correspondent of the Roman 
Catholic paper called the Ransomer, who was in an excellent 
position for obtaining accurate information on the subject, 
wrote as follows : — 

" But has this development of Ritualism in the Establishment 
satisfied souls, won the working classes, or last, but not least, stayed 
the stream of secessions to Rome? Not one whit. I have never met 
a high Anglican who was contented with the condition of his Church. 
The vast multitudes of the poor, and the labouring men and women 
are more conspicuous than ever by their absence from the functions of 
Ritualism. As to conversions [to Rome] it is well known that nine out 
of every dozen are the direct result of Ritualistic training." 86 

In the year after this testimony was written, the Rev. Mr. 
Whelan, a Roman Catholic priest, preaching at St. Wilfrid's, 
York, said : — 

" I am bold enough to say here that Ritualism is one of our consola- 
tions, for I think it to be the Preparatory School for the training of 
English Catholics. By Ritualism our great dogmas are taught to 
thousands who would not listen to us. In Ritualism we have a 
powerful solvent for melting the frost-bound traditions of three 
centuries. Many, perhaps, may be hindered from finding the real 
home of truth, but a larger numler are helped by this approximation 
in externals, and become obedient children of the faith." M 

The Irish Ecclesiastical Record, the official organ of the 
Roman Catholic priesthood of Ireland, in its issue for July, 
1891, published a remarkable article on "The Conversion of 

83 ibid., p. 85. M Ibid., p. 95. 

85 Ransomer, July 22nd, 1893. 

86 Catholic Standard, June 23rd, 1894. 


England," written by a priest residing in Manchester. It 
says : — 

"There are two forces at work regarding the Catholicism of the 
country. . . One is inside the Church, and the other outside it; 
one Catholic, the other Protestant, though Catholicising. The 
Ritualists, and the Ritualists alone, are doing all that is being done 
among Protestants. How many parsons from Newman to Rivington 
have been converted by priests ? True, all have been received by 
priests. But how many have confessed their obligations to our 
sermons or our writings that we Catholic priests were in any degree 
answerable for their conversion? The Catholicising movement in 
the Establishment has not been the result of the missionary activity of 
the Catholic Church in England. It is true to say that convert priests 
receive more converts than others, but that is mainly on account of 
personal influence in certain non-Catholic quarters where we have no 
access, as well as having a keener grasp of difficulties which we never 
feel. Men who pass through the fire themselves are good guides. 
This external movement is of vast importance. At this hour Jive 
thousand Church of England clergymen are preaching from as many 
Protestant pulpits the Catholic faith (not, indeed, as faith) to 
Catholicising congregations, much more effectively, with less suspicion 
and more acceptance than we can ever hope to do. Protestant sister- 
hoods are doing, we feel sure, the best they can under the circum- 
stances to familiarize the Philistine with Nuns — and that is much. 
Protestant societies, like St. Margaret's, Westminster, furnish poor 
country missions (there are poor country Protestant missions, and city 
ones too) with Black Vestments for Requiems on All Souls'. This is, 
indeed, a matter for devout thankfulness. We could desire no better 
preparation for joining the Catholic Church than the Ritualists* 
Preparatory School; and the fact that from them we have secured the 
majority of our converts, strengthens us in our view of it." 87 

The Month, the organ of the English Jesuits, in its issue 
for November, 1890, published an article on " The Newest 
Fashions in Ritualism," in which it declared that — 

" At any rate the Ritualists are doing a good work, which in the 
present state of the country, Catholics cannot do in the same propor- 
tion j they are preparing the soil and sowing the seed for a rich 
harvest, which the Catholic Church will reap sooner or later"** 

87 Irish Ecclesiastical Record, July, 1891, p. 644. 
M The Month, November, 1890, p. 333. 


There remains one great question to be considered. Many 
will ask, Why should there not be a movement for the 
Corporate Reunion of the Church of England with the 
Church of Rome? What harm can it do? Is not Christian 
unity a Christian duty ? To this I answer, that Protestants, 
in objecting to Reunion with Rome, do not forget that 
Christian unity is a Christian duty, but it is to be feared that 
modern Ritualists do forget that separation is just as much a 
Christian duty as unity. It was by God's command that, in 
Old Testament times, the Jews were separated from the 
Gentile nations. This separation was considered by Moses 
as a special result of God's favour, when he addressed the 
Lord in these words : — " For wherein shall it be known here 
that I and Thy people have found grace in Thy sight ? Is 
it not in that Thou goest with us ? so shall we be separated, 
I and Thy people, from all the people that are upon the face 
of the earth " (Exodus xxxiii. 16). It would have been a 
grievous offence against Almighty God, had the Israelites 
sought unity with the Gentiles, though it was always open to 
the latter to seek unity with the former. And in the Christian 
Church this duty of separation is clearly set forth in the New 
Testament. How else are we to explain such texts as 
" Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, 
saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing ; and I will 
receive you" (2 Cor. vi. 17) ; and, " I heard another voice 
from heaven saying, Come out of her my people, that ye be 
not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her 
plagues " (Rev. xviii. 4) ? It is wisdom for Churches, as 
well as individuals to keep out of bad company. We must 
be united only with that which is good, and separate from 
all that is evil. The written Word of God, and the 
traditions of man can never unite together. Protestantism 
and Popery must evermore remain separated. 

There are many other grave and weighty reasons against 
Reunion with Rome, but it would require a volume to exhaust 
the subject. I may, however, point out, that from a merely 


worldly point of view there are strong and sufficient reasons 
for trying to defeat the schemes of the English Church 
Union and kindred societies. Popery is an enemy to National 
Prosperity. Looking abroad throughout the whole world, we 
find that Popery degrades the nations, instead of raising 
them to a higher level. The Ritualists cannot point to a 
single Roman Catholic country which is even on a level with, 
much less superior to, Protestant countries. On the con- 
trary, Popery has dragged down Spain from her proud 
eminence, to be the most degraded and poverty-stricken 
nation in Europe, excepting Turkey. It has kept the South 
American republics and nations in a state of degradation,, 
immorality, and ignorance deplorable to behold. Would any 
Englishman wish this Protestant country to become what 
the Papal States were under the temporal rule of Pope 
Pius IX. ? Would English working men wish to exchange 
wages with their brethren in any Roman Catholic country in 
the world? Every part of Ireland is under the same govern- 
ment. Why, then, is it that the Roman Catholic portions 
of that unhappy land are those in which more poverty, 
dirt, disloyalty, and ignorance are to be found, than in the 
Protestant portions ? The answer to this question must be 
that the religion of Popery is at the bottom of this marked 
difference. Before we listen with pleasure to the Reunion 
with Rome plans of the Ritualists, let us calmly consider the 
facts, not only of history, but of the everyday life around us. 
When we contrast Popish countries with Protestant lands, 
can we doubt any longer which religion most promotes 
National Prosperity ? Is there any valid reason for supposing 
that England will become more prosperous if she forsakes- 
her civil and religious liberties, and goes back to Papal 
bondage, at the request of Lord Halifax and the English 
Church Union ? Common sense can answer these questions 
in only one way. Protestantism and National Prosperity go 
together, like Siamese twins. They cannot be separated. 
And let it not be said that this is an argument which 


Christians should ignore, for has not the Word of God 
taught us that true " Godliness is profitable unto all things, 
having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is 
to come " (1 Timothy iv. 8) ? 

We also object to Reunion with Rome because we have 
nothing good to gain by it. As Protestants we already 
possess the whole of the Christian religion, in that we 
possess the Bible. What more do we need ? Ours is the 
religion of St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke, St. John, St. 
Peter, St. Paul, and the Blessed Virgin Mary. They taught 
nothing but Protestantism, and never taught even one of the 
peculiar doctrines of Rome. Open the New Testament, and 
if you consult either the Authorized Version or the Roman 
Catholic version in English, the result will be the same. 
You will not discover one word in either version about 
the Supremacy of the Pope, or of Papal Infallibility, of 
Purgatory, Auricular Confession, the Sacrifice of the Mass, 
the Invocation of Saints, Prayers for the Dead, Indulgences, 
Holy Water, Holy Scapulars, Holy Wells, Holy Breads, 
Holy Beads, or any one of the false doctrines and superstitions 
of Romanism, which have now become dear to the hearts of 
our modern Romanisers. What will England gain if she takes 
all these things back again ? She will gain what we should 
gain were we to throw away the good gold sovereigns 
supplied to us from Her Majesty's Mint, and instead apply 
to the makers of bad money for a supply of sovereigns, 
made from a slight quantity of real gold, and a large 
quantity of base metal. To act like this in worldly matters 
would be accounted folly; but is it not even greater folly to 
act so in spiritual things ? Yet this is what the Ritualists are 
anxious for us to do. And our answer to their solicitations 
must be a stern resolve to allow of no adulteration of the 
Christian religion which, thank God, we possess. Popery 
is the great adulterator of the Christian religion. She has 
nothing to give us that is good for the souls of men. What 
she is anxious to do in Protestant England is well described 


in the Bible as " making the Word of God of none effect 
through your tradition " (Mark vii. 13) ; and " teaching for 
doctrines the commandments of men " (Matt. xv. 9). The 
question before us is, Shall Protestant England submit to 
be fed with the chaff which comes from the Pope's table, 
when she is already fed with the good grain of the Gospel, 
as contained in the Bible? Our answer is, that, by God's 
. grace, this thing shall never be. Shame, double shame, 
on the Ritualistic traitors who are trying to bring us back 
to Papal bondage ! 

We object further, to the Reunion schemes of the 
Ritualists because they are opposed to our National Indepen- 
dence, and to our civil and religious liberties. Should the 
Ritualists succeed, we should have again a Roman Catholic 
King of England, and the unhappy days of James II. would 
be repeated. By means of his spiritual weapons, the Pope 
of Rome, through the Confessors of the King and his 
Statesmen, would rule the British Empire in temporals as 
well as spirituals. Rome has, during the past half century, 
put forth her claims to temporal power with a haughtiness 
which was never exceeded by a Hildebrand or an Innocent 
III. The throne itself would be at the mercy of the Pope. 
I know some of my readers will smile at this, as the 
utterance of a visionary and an alarmist. Yet, for all this, 
Mr. Gladstone's statement is literally true : — " Rome has 
refurbished, and paraded anew, every rusty tool she was 
fondly thought to have disused." 89 The late Rev. Thomas 
Francis Knox, of the Brompton Oratory, tells us, in a book 
published as recently as 1882, and compiled at the request 
of Cardinal Manning, that the following decree, passed at 
the Fourth Council of Lateran, is still a "part of the 
ordinary statute law of the Church " : — 

" If a temporal lord, after having been required and admonished 
by the Church, shall neglect to Cleanse his land from heretical 

89 Rome and the Newest Fashions in Religion, by the Right Hon. W. E. 
Gladstone, p. xxvii. 



defilement, let him be excommunicated by the metropolitan and the 
other Bishops of the province. And if he shall through contempt fail 
to give satisfaction within a year, let this be signified to the Sovereign 
Pontiff, that he may thereupon declare his vassals absolved from 
allegiance to him f and offer his land for seizure by Catholics that they 
may, after expelling the heretics, possess it by an incontestable title and 
keep it in the purity of the faith." w 

Is it wise to bring about a state of things in which this law 
may stand a chance of being enforced ? Is a system which 
still retains such a law to be trusted by liberty-loving English- 
men ? In a volume of essays, edited by Cardinal Manning, 
a similar claim is put forward, in which we read that — 

" To depose Kings and Emperors is as much a right as to excom- 
municate individuals and to lay Kingdoms under an interdict. These 
are no derived or delegated rights j but are of the essence of that Royal- 
authority of Christ with which His Vicegerents on earth are vested." 91 

How can National Independence exist when such a law as- 
this is enforced ? The real ruler would be, not the nominal 
sovereign, but a foreign potentate called the Pope. Mr. 
Gladstone's assertion on this point, supported as it was by 
abundant proofs, should not be forgotten. " No one," he 
wrote, "can now become her [Rome's] convert without 
renouncing his moral and mental freedom, and placing his 
civil loyalty and duty at the mercy of another," 92 that is, the 
Pope. Mr. Gladstone made this statement in 1874, and has 
never withdrawn it. But has Rome improved since Mr. 
Gladstone wrote? On the contrary, these disloyal utterances- 
have been re-asserted again and again by her theologians. 
In the fourth edition of the Catholic Dictionary, published 
in 1893, with the Imprimatur of Cardinal Vaughan, we are 
told what is the opinion on the subject of the Deposing 
Power now held by Roman theologians. It is stated that 
this power is at present fallen "into abeyance." But that 

90 Records of English Catholics, by Thomas Francis Knox, d.d. Vol. II., 
p. xxvii. 

91 Essays on Religion and Literature, edited by Archbishop Manning, p. 417- 
Second series. 

92 Rome and the Newest Fashions in Religion, p. xxiv. 


is not the fault of the Pope and his party. It is the result 
of the strong arm of Protestantism. Anyhow the statement 
of the Catholic Dictionary affords a strong confirmation of 
Mr. Gladstone's assertion that " Rome has refurbished and 
paraded anew every rusty tool she was fondly thought to 
have disused." 

" The ordinary opinion of Roman theologians may be seen stated in 
full in the pages of Ferraris. ' The common opinion teaches that the 
Pope holds the power of both swords, the spiritual and the temporal, 
which jurisdiction Christ Himself committed to Peter and his 
successors. . . . The contrary opinion is held to savour of the 
heretical belief condemned by Boniface VIII. in the Constitution 
Unam Sanctam.' * Accordingly, unbelieving kings and princes can 
be deprived by the sentence of the Pope, in certain cases, of the 
dominion which they have over believers ; for instance, if they have 
forcibly seized upon Christian countries, or are endeavouring to turn 
their believing subjects from the faith, and the ltke.' Barbosa and other 
Canonists hold that ' a King who has become a heretic can be removed 
from his Kingdom by the Pope, to whom the right of electing a 
successor passes, if his sons and kindred are also heretics.' ' There is 
nothing strange in attributing to the Roman Pontiff, as the Vicar of 
Him Whose is the earth and the fulness thereof, the world and all that 
dwell therein, the fullest authority and power to lay bare, a just cause 
moving him, not only the spiritual but also the material sword, and so 
to transfer sovereignties, break sceptres, and remove crowns.' The 
Canonists produce numerous instances where this has been actually 
done, as when Gregory II. deposed the Byzantine Emperor Leo III. ; 
Gregory VII. deposed the Emperor Henry IV. j Innocent IV., in the 
Council of Lyons, deposed the Emperor Frederick II., &c. 

"The celebrated Constitution Unam Sanctam (1303) teaches that 
' both swords, the spiritual and the material, are in the power of the 
Church, but the latter is to be wielded for the Church, the former by 
the Church ; one by the hand of the priest, the other by the hand of 
Kings and magistrates, but at the pleasure and sufferance of the priest. 
One sword must be under the other, and the temporal authority must 
be subject to the spiritual power.'" 93 

The political aspect of the question of Corporate Reunion, 
set before us in the above extracts, is one which seems to be 

93 Catholic Dictionary, p. 280. Fourth edition. 


almost entirely ignored ; yet it is one which every patriotic 
Englishman would do well to consider. The Church of 
Rome is not only a religious body, she is also a political 
power as well ; and, therefore, her twofold character must 
be taken into view. A proposal, which should involve the 
bestowal on the Emperor of Russia of the right to depose 
our Queen from her throne, would at once be reprobated by 
all loyal Englishmen. Why should a proposal, such as that 
of the Ritualists, which involves the right of the Pope to 
depose the Queen, be thought of more highly ? All true 
friends of our National Independence will, therefore, oppose 
the Ritualistic plans for Corporate Reunion with Rome. 

We are also opposed to Corporate Reunion with Rome 
because it would certainly lead -to the death of our Religious 
Liberty. The " woman drunken with the blood of the 
saints " (Rev. xvii. 6)> has not lost her cruel nature. She 
has slain the saints of God with the sword and fire, and has 
never repented of her crimes and wickedness. Has she 
ever expressed sorrow for burning to death our Protestant 
Martyrs ? The history of many centuries is red with the 
blood she has shed. Is there no feeling of shame left in 
those Ritualists who plead for Corporate Reunion with her ? 
If Rome had ceased to be what she once was, we would not 
bring her past crimes and murders to her remembrance. 
But in this point, alas ! more than in any other, she is 
indeed semper eadem. Her persecuting laws are still the 
same as when in the Dark Ages her infernal Inquisition 
performed, unhindered, its bloodthirsty work. The modern 
authorities of the Church of Rome still glory in the 
intolerant work of their Church in those days. The leading 
quarterly journal of that Communion in this country, as 
recently as 1877, said : — 

" It would have been a kind of ingratitude and treachery to Jesus 
Christ Himself — we may almost say it would have exhibited the 
implicit spirit of apostasy — had the hideousness of sectarianism been 
permitted [in the Dark Ages] to sully the fair form of Catholic unity, 


had heresy been permitted to poison the pure air of Catholic truth. 
. . . So far is any apology from being needed for the then existent 
intolerance of heretics that y on the contrary, an apology would be now 
needed for the Mediceval Church — and would indeed not very easily be 
forthcoming — had she tolerated the neglect of such intolerance. . . . 
And we need hardly add — though we will not dwell on this — that 
the same principle, which applied to Mediceval Europe, applies in 
its measure to any contemporary country, such as Spain, in which 
Catholicity has still entire possession of the national mind." 94 

This is a fair warning, which might well set Ritualistic 
Reunionists thinking. It is confirmed by the testimony of 
a modern Jesuit Professor, whom Cardinal Newman termed 
" a great authority " and " one of the first theologians of the 
day," the late Rev. Edmund J. O'Reilly, s.j., who had been 
a Professor at Maynooth College, and at St. Bruno's 
College, North Wales. Professor O'Reilly declared that — 

" The principle [of " liberty of conscience "] is one which is not, 
and never has been, and never will be, approved by the Church of 
Christ." 95 

Another late Professor of Maynooth College, the Rev. 
T. Gilmartin, is equally strong in his denunciations of 
liberty of conscience. 

"The State," he writes, "can punish heresy as an evil in itself 
and as an offence against the Church, and the Church can require 
the assistance of the State in suppressing heresy, if its interference 
be deemed necessary for the good of society." 96 

Another contemporary priest, who has been made a 
Monsignor by the present Pope (Leo XIII.), argues strongly 
against allowing "political Liberty of Conscience" in Roman 
Catholic countries. "How," he asks, "could the Catholic 
State allow this so-called Liberty of Conscience ? As well 
might you ask a person to allow poison to be introduced in 

94 Dublin Review, January, 1877, P- 39- 

95 The Relations of the Church to Society, by Edmund J. Reilly, 8.J., pp. iii. r 
273. London, 1892. 

95 Manual of Church History, by the Rev. T. Gilmartin. Vol. II., p. 228. 
Dublin, 1892. 


his body. Do you say, what a cruel and bigoted thing for 
the Catholic Church and State to put down heresy ? We 
only ask you to allow the Catholic State the right no man 
will deny himself or his neighbour, to reject poison from his 
system." V I need hardly add here that the State can only 
"put down heresy" by physical force. Again, this Mon- 
signor remarks : " If to-morrow the Spanish Government, 
as advised by the Catholic Church, were to see that a greater 
evil would ensue from granting religious liberty than from 
refusing it, then it would have a perfect right to refuse it. Of 
course the Protestant Press would teem with charges 
of intolerance; and we should reply: TOLERATION 

Now, the Ritualists know all this very well, just as much 
as you or I do ; yet, strange to relate, their dearest ambition 
is to place English Churchmen under the rule of this cruei 
and intolerant Church. Are they not, in this, real foes of 
our religious liberties ? The faithful and eloquent warning 
of the late Canon Melville may well be quoted here : — 

" Make peace, if you will, with Popery ; receive it into your Senate j 
shrine it in your churches 5 plant it in your hearts. But be ye certain, 
as certain as that there is a heaven above you, and a God over you, 
that the Popery thus honoured and embraced is the very Popery that 
was loathed and degraded by the holiest of your fathers : the same in 
haughtiness, the same in intolerance, which lorded it over Kings, 
assumed the prerogative of Deity, crushed human liberty, and slew the 
Saints of God." 

And now, in bringing this volume to a close, I would 
name one last and crowning reason against adopting the 
Reunion Plan of Campaign of the Ritualists. They wish 
our Church and nation to be joined once more, in a 
Corporate capacity, with the Church of Rome. They do 

9 7 Liberty of Conscience, by the Rev. Walter Croke Robinson, p. 22. 
London :*The Catholic Truth Society. 

98 Ibid., p. 24. 



not, as a preliminary condition, require the Church of Rome 
to purge herself of a single one of her false doctrines. They 
do not seek — though that would be a vain task — to raise her 
to the higher level of the Reformed Church of England ; 
but they seek to drag down the Church of England to the 
level of the Church of Rome. It is an unholy task which 
they have undertaken, on which the smile and blessing of 
Almighty God cannot be expected to rest. In common with 
most of the learned Divines of the Church of England since 
the Reformation and — as we have seen — in accordance with 
the teaching of her Homilies, we object to Reunion with the 
Papacy because the Church of Rome is the Babylon of the 
Revelation. This has been most clearly and conclusively 
proved in that brief, able, unanswered, and unanswerable 
treatise of the late Bishop Christopher Wordsworth, of 
Lincoln, entitled : — Union with Rome : Is not the Church of 
Rome the Babylon of the Apocalypse ? " I cannot too urgently 
press upon my readers the great advantage of reading this 
shilling book. It was not written by an Evangelical 
Churchman, but by one of the old-fashioned High Church 
School, one whose great learning is acknowledged by all 
scholars. He proves that to expect the Reformation of the- 
Church of Rome is to go contrary to the spirit of the- 
Revelation. Her hopeless doom is to be " burnt with fire."' 
She will be Babylon even unto the end. 

"Nearly eighteen centuries," writes Bishop Wordsworth, "have- 
passed away since the Holy Spirit prophesied, by the mouth of St. 
John, that this Mystery would be revealed in that city which was then- 
the Queen of the Earth, the City on Seven Hills — the City of Rome. 

" The Mystery was then dark, dark as midnight. Man's eye could' 
not pierce the gloom. The fulfilment of the prophecy seemed, 
improbable — almost impossible. Age after age rolled away. By- 
degrees the mists which hung over it became less thick. The clouds 
began to break. Some features of the dark Mystery began to appear,, 
dimly at first, then more clearly, like Mountains at daybreak. Then 
the form of the Mystery became more and more distinct. The Seven 
Hills, and the Woman sitting upon them, become more and more: 



visible. Her voice was heard. Strange sounds of blasphemy were 
muttered by her. Then they became louder and louder. And the 
golden chalice in her hand, her scarlet attire, her pearls and jewels 
were seen glittering in the sun. Kings and Nations were displayed 
prostrate at her feet, and drinking her cup. Saints were slain by her 
sword, and she exulted over them. And now the prophecy became 
clear, clear as noon-day ; and we tremble at the sight, while we read 
the inscription, emblazoned in large letters, * Mystery, Babylon the 
Great,' written by the hand of St. John, guided by the Holy Spirit of 
God, on the forehead of the Church of Rome." " 

And now we know, in a nutshell, what the Ritualistic 
Conspiracy really means. What the future may bring forth 
God only knows. But what the duty of all loyal Churchmen 
is, is clear and evident. We must raise once more the good 
old war cry, " No Peace with Rome." While Lord 
Halifax and his followers would lead us astray from the 
good old ways of our forefathers, into open rebellion against 
the revealed will of God, let us hearken to God rather than 
to man. And His cry to one and all is not to join the 
Church of Rome, but to separate ourselves as far as possible 
from her. The command of God the Holy Ghost is, 
(Rev. xviii. 4, 5). 

For the Church of England let our prayer be : — 

" God send her swift deliverance from the plagues which vex her now, 
God heal the discord in her heart, and chase the trouble from her 

brow ! 
And when her penal hour hath past, and purged her from her sin, 
Restore her prosperous state without, and her peace and joy within. 

99 Wordsworth'9 Union with Rome, p. 62. Eleventh edition. London: 
Longmans, 1893. 

24 * 


" God give her wavering clergy back that honest heart and true, 
Which once was theirs, ere Popish fraud its spells around them 

threw ; 
Nor let them barter wife and child, bright hearth and happy home, 
For the drunken bliss of the strumpet kiss of the Jezebel of Rome. 

" And God console all holy hearts, now yearning for the day, 

When this black cloud shall pass at length from England's skies 

away ! 
God help us all to struggle still, with patience and with might, 
Against darkness, lies, and bondage, for Freedom, Truth, and 

Light ! 

M And God forgive the fallen ones — by their own weak hearts 
And convert the misbeliever, and reclaim the renegade 
And God unite the good and true, the faithful and the wise, 
Till the Dayspring come on the night of Rome, and the Sun of 
Truth arise"! 100 

100 Moultrie's Altars, Hearths, and Graves, p. 65. Edition, 1854. 



I HAVE been requested to give, as an appendix, a series 
of classified quotations showing " What the Ritualists 
Teach " in their published writings. For this purpose 
I have taken nothing at second hand. I have examined the 
original of every authority cited, and have carefully examined 
the context of each quotation. Unlike the quotations in the 
body of this book, those given in this appendix are free from 
any italics inserted by myself. Where italics occur they 
are those of the author cited. It is hoped that this 
collection of quotations may be useful for reference, and 
for this purpose it has been made intentionally lengthy. 


"The recollection of these events should suffice to prove the 
mistake of supposing that the Sacred Scriptures, without note or 
comment, in the hands of all, are a sufficient guide to truth ; the 
Bible thus used is not useless only, but dangerous to morality and 
truth." — Golden Gate, by the Rev. S. Baring-Gould, Rector of Lew 
Trenchard, Part L, p. 177. Edition, 1875. 

" Whether a dogmatic creed or belief in the infallibility of a book 
[the Bible], furnish the best grounds of religion may be doubted, but 
what is certain is, that the former is the toughest, if only because 
least easily proved false. A man may believe in God, because he 
feels that the world is an enigma without that key, and it is impossible 
to demonstrate the non-existence of a God. But if a man's faith is 


pinned to a document, and that document be proved to have flaws in 
it, away goes his faith." — Germany Past and Present, by Rev. S. 
Baring-Gould, Vol. I., p. 193. Edition 1879. 

" The Crucifix should be the first lesson book for their [English 
Home Missionaries] disciples, and the Holy Scriptures must never 
be put into the hands of unbelievers." — Union Review for 1867, 

P- IS- 

" Gradually it had come to be taken for granted that the Holy 
Scriptures were sufficient for our guidance without the Church's 
teaching, and that Christian men were justified in drawing their 
religious faith directly if not exclusively from that source. Hence an 
endless variety of sects." — Union Review for 1865, p. 148. 

"The Church is not the ambassador only, but the plenipotentiary 
of God in the world : the credentials of a plenipotentiary may serve 
to identify him, and even to map out for him his policy, but his name 
implies an authority unlimited by any instruction or credentials ; and 
it must be borne in mind that the credentials of an ambassador serve 
for his introduction only, not for future use ; and his instructions, if 
he has any, are for his own private and secret perusal, not for the 
inspection of those with whom he treats. Whether the advocates of 
Biblical supremacy as against Church authority are willing to accept 
a metaphor which so inadequately suits their purpose is a matter 
about which there cannot be much doubt." — Union Review for 1870, 
p. 298. 

" To hear the Church was to hear the Bible in its truest and only 
true sense. Was it not an abuse of the Bible to send shiploads of 
copies across the seas to convert the nations? " — Speech of the Rev. 
R. Rhodes Bristow, Vicar of St. Stephen s, Lewisham, at a meeting of 
the English Church Union, January 22nd, 1890. Reported in the 
Church Union Gazette, March, 1890, p. 99. 

"The Bible is not the sole and only Rule of Faith." — Paper read 
by Mr. H. W. Hill, at a meeting of the Chiswick Branch of the 
English Church Union, February 3rd, 1890. Reported in Church 
Union Gazette, May, 1890, p. 153. 

" Noi is it any infringement of the reverence due to the Bible, as 
God's Word, to declare openly and distinctly that 'Bible Christianity' 
is an invention of the Devil, having for its object to obstruct and 
defeat God's Word under the hypocritical pretence of love and zeal 
for His Word." — Church Review, July 12th, 1862, p. 427. 


"The Catholic Church is always in time (as well as in degree) 
before the Bible." — Church Review, October 8th, 1864, p. 989. 

"A faith appealing to the Bible only can find no firm resting 
place." — On the Use and Abuse of the Bible, by the Rev. Thomas 
Robinson, m.a., p. 27. London: Church Printing Co. 

" The Church did not give us the Bible that we might each take his 
own religion from it. We take our religion from the Church, which 
is living ; then we prove it, if we will, from the Holy Bible." — 
St. Andrew, Worthing, Parish Magazine, December, 1893, p. 3. 

" Our Blessed Lord did not intend any written document to be the 
basis of the Faith He founded." — Christ Church, Doncaster, Parish 
Magazine, March, 1895. 


" I would only urge that we should not on this account ignore the 
serious character of the actual changes made [in the Liturgy by the 
Reformers in the sixteenth century], or decline to do our very best to 
get them remedied. The more really secure we feel as to the position 
•of the English Church, the more willing we should be to acknowledge 
its shortcomings." — Lord Halifax, in the Lord's Day and the Holy 
Eucharist, p. 27. London, 1892. 

" How has it been possible that Catholics — not ultra-Catholics, but 
Catholics teaching the doctrines and observing the ritual of the 
Universal Church — have been, and to some extent still are, subject to 
suspicion and ill-treatment in a National Church professing to 
be Catholic, and acknowledging the authority of * the Church,' and 
referring, as to a standard, to the usages of the Primitive Church ? 
The answer, it is feared, to these questions must be, that these 
troubles have their origin in the defects of the English Service Book ; 
in the fact that our Reformers, with a clear duty marked out, went 
beyond the line which the finger of duty marked out, and thus 
entailed upon the Reformed Church a heritage of weakness and 
indecision." — The Rev. E. W. Sergeant, in the Lord's Day and the 
Holy Eucharist, p. 120. 

" Why bring into such marked prominence [in the Communion 
Service] the title ' The Lord's Supper,' a name for the Eucharist of 
comparatively infrequent use and of doubtful applicability to tlte 


actual rite ? . . . Laudable as the motive may have been, the effect 
has been disastrous, more disastrous perhaps than any of the othej 
Liturgical changes, since it has given occasion to ignorant and heretical 
writers to represent our * Communion Service ' as something 
generically different from the ' Mass,' whereas it is nothing less than 
the same thing in another form." — Ibid., pp. 121, 122. 

" What a contrast between the careful instructions and the beautiful 
preparatory office for the priest provided in all the old English Service 
Books, in the Roman and most of the Greek, and the utter absence 
of any such provision in the Book of Common Prayer ! Not a word 
about vesting, or about the reverent and careful preparation of the 
elements : not a syllable to correspond to the minute and exhaustive 
Cautelce Missce of the old books." — Ibid., p. 122. 

" Besides these numerous admissions, our [Communion] Office 
has, it must be said, other faults. The chief and most obvious is, that 
it sadly obscures the oblation." — Ibid., p. 127. 

" Is it possible, with every allowance for their difficult position, to 
acquit our Reformers of causing needless offence (to say the very least) 
when, not contenting themselves with a liberty which they exercised 
to the very verge of license in the way of expurgation and modification, 
they cut up and reset with not too skilful hands the splendid mosaic 
of the ancient service, so that the very outlines of the old pattern are 
barely rocognisable ? " — Ibid., p. 131. 

" Good men cannot understand that we should not be perfectly 
satisfied with things as they are, ' apostolic order and evangelic truth,' 
according to the favourite formulary, and be willing to fight a 
tremendous fight for the retention of all the Rubrics, totidem verbis. 
We are not to be scandalized, it seems, by such extraordinary directions 
as we are almost ashamed to quote, but where is the use of closing our 
eyes wilfully to facts ? ■ And there shall be no celebration of the 
Lord's Supper, except there be a sufficient number to communicate 
with the Priest, according to his discretion. And if there be not above 
twenty persons in the Parish of discretion to receive the Communion, 
there shall be no Communion, except four, or three at the least, 
communicate with the Priest.' There can be no mistaking the 
meaning of that — the intention. It was to take away, to extirpate as 
as far as might be, the notion of the Sacrifice ! And this setting at 
nought by authority of the primary act of Catholic worship from the 
days of the Apostles downwards, is to be mildly acquiesced in, or even 


bravely battled for. No, that is asking rather too much. How can 
Catholics be supposed to support this? How can they hide their 
light under a bushel, for the sake of conciliating sound Anglicans who 
do not believe in the Presence and the Sacrifice ? Are they not obliged 
to protest against a rule which is not a dead letter, but still takes away 
the Daily Sacrifice from almost all our altars, which renders the 
offering at least uncertain in most of our churches, which strips the 
country priest of his right to communicate in his village church, with 
the whole Church throughout the world, unless three Protestant 
clodhoppers happen to be of his way of thinking ! . . . Yet the rule 
in question is simply odious in itself, and we cannot fight for its 
retention in order to gratify moderates. We believe the Blessed 
Sacrament to be the daily Food of the priest of God, and by this 
obnoxious Rubric he is stripped of his heritage." — Union Review for 
1865, pp. 619, 620. 

"We venture to say, heresy has been practically triumphant for 
three hundred years together, through the Prayer Book. It was 
designed to be so, and it has been so." — Hid., p. 621. 

" We cannot allow it to be thought that we are satisfied with the 
Prayer Book as it is. It would not be honest not to say that we aim 
at nothing short of Catholic Restoration, and as one step to this, at 
the excision of these grievous Rubrics, and, a little later, at the 
modification of these ambiguous Articles, if they are to be retained at 
all." — Ibid., p. 622. 

" We cannot and we will not tamely accept the illogical and 
incomplete system which the Reformers have left us in the Prayer 
Book as it is. It has been tried for three hundred years and found 
wanting." — Ibid., p. 626. 

" And when we remember that this essential service [Sacrifice of 
Mass] was taken away by the unhappy, the presumptuous Rubrics 
we have cited, we lack words to express our sense of moral 
indignation at the daring of the men who framed them. But peace 
be with them ! They knew no better. May God be merciful to 
their souls ! " — Ibid., p. 630. 



" The half-abrogated Articles ' cracked and strained by three 
centuries of evasive ingenuity,' are rather a trashy foundation for 
anything." — Rev. H. H. Henson, Vicar of Barking, in Guardian, 
August 24th, 1892, p. 1 25 1. 

" Of course, there has been a large party who swear by them [the 
Thirty-nine Articles], and the existence of whose forms of belief in 
the Church of England is guaranteed by their being retained 5 but it 
is impossible to deny that they contain statements, or implications 
that are verbally false, and others that are very difficult to reconcile 
with truth. In the times that are coming over the Church of England, 
the question will arise, What service have the Articles of the Church 
of England ever done ? . . . Before union with Rome can be effected, 
the Thirty-nine Articles must be wholly withdrawn." — Christian 
Remembrancer, No. 131, p. 188. 

" By way of suggesting something practical ourselves, we will in 
this paper recommend, as a first and essential preliminary towards 
•the Reunion of Christendom, the total abolition of the Thirty-nine 
Articles." — Union Review, for 1870, p. 289. 

" Some [of the Thirty-nine Articles] contain statements which are 
unintelligible ; in the case of others, one is tempted to wish that the 
statements were unintelligible or nonsensical in order to escape the 
disagreeable impression of their being — well, truly Protestant ; others 
contain contradictions, or qualifications which eviscerate or destroy 
what has gone before : there are statements of facts which are not 
wholly indisputable ; there are trivial points of Christian discipline or 
of every-day life, which derogate from the importance and value of a 
confession of faith. Meanwhile, with all these defects and blemishes, 
the Thirty-nine Articles continue to be paraded as the authoritative 
standard of Anglican doctrine, and they are imposed as a heavy yoke 
upon the consciences of all who would serve in the ministry of the 
Church. And we venture to assert that one of the most imperative 
reforms in the Church of England is the total abolition of these 
Thirty-nine Articles." — Ibid., p. 294. 

" We maintain that so long as this Article [Article VI.] remains 
among the formularies of the Church of England, so long will there 
be an insuperable bar to any union or fusion of the Church of England 
with the rest of the Catholic family. The Article distinctly ignores 
Tradition, and it positively affirms private judgment." — Ibid., p. 293. 


"Of all the obstacles and hindrances to reunion with Rome, 
probably the greatest is that rather unwieldy compilation known as 
the Thirty-nine Articles, somewhat facetiously called the 'Forty 
Stripes save one.' " — Church Review, November 12th, 1864, p. 1127. 

" How strange it seems that in our Prayer Book we should pray 
that all Christians ' may agree in the truth of God's Holy Word, and 
live in unity and godly love,' when in the very same book — in the 
Articles — the Roman Church is charged with ' superstitions ' and 
* vain inventions contrary to the Word of God ' {see Articles XXII., 
XXVIII., &c). We need not wonder at such incongruity in 1572 — 
but how long ? " — Olive Leaf, by Rev. W. Wyndham Malet, Vicar of 
Ardeley, p. 50. 

" Doubtless they [Thirty-nine Articles] are Articles of Peace, and 
have always been intended to be construed largely and charitably, so 
as to square with * The Faith once delivered to the Saints ' ; but the 
prima facie aspect of more than one of them is nothing less than 
(most erroneous. To turn at once to perhaps the most obnoxious, the 
Twenty-fifth. We are there told, to the horror of that valuable 
periodical, the Union Chretiennes, that the five great Sacramental 
Ordinances — Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and Extreme 
Unction — have grown 'partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles.' 
What a singular assertion, only to be understood in any sense of one 
out of the five {Extreme Unction), and in that case surely a very bold 
and uncalled-for denunciation of a foreign practice. Then there is 
the Thirty-first, which seems to come very near denying the 
Eucharistic Sacrifice. . . The fact is, then, I must conclude that the 
sooner we are rid of the Thirty-nine Articles the better. We can, 
and we must, and do put a Catholic interpretation on them as they 
are, but this is only making the best of a bad matter." — Letter of the 
Rev. Archer Gurney, Curate in Charge of Rhayader, in Church 
Review, January 3rd, 1863, pp. 9, 10. 

"Almost all sincere Reunionists would allow that whatever 
temporary advantages accrued from the setting forth of the Thirty- 
nine Articles three centuries ago, very great permanent disadvantages 
(have followed from their continued retention in the English Church 
since. They have done little good at home and untold mischief 
abroad. For there are some Articles which, unless their language is 
duly weighed and carefully explained, sound very startling in the 
ears of foreign Catholics, whether Greeks or Latins : and do more to 


render the idea of corporate Reunion impracticable than anything 
else. Of late years, however, so many contradictory explanations of 
them have been given— Sharpe, and Tomline, Hey, Newman, and 
Harold Browne, have so greatly shattered people's belief in them — that 
at the present time, as the Christian Remembrancer has more than 
once declared, they might be quietly set aside, to the great advantage 
of religion and morality in the Church of England." — Church News, 
August 2 1 st, 1867, p. 367. 


" We have no wish to revile the faith of Roman Catholics, for it is 
the same faith as our own j we have no wish to insult their worship, 
for we worship God in the same Eucharist ; and as for those practical 
evils which disfigure their faith and worship, we believe that intelligent 
Roman Catholics, in their inmost hearts, think much the same about 
these things as we do ourselves. The real difference in matters of 
faith between a sincere and intelligent Roman Catholic and a Catholic- 
minded member of the Church of England is the merest shadow of a 
shade. Each refers to Holy Scripture, each refers to the history of 
the Church through its eighteen centuries of existence, as the real test 
of the truth of its doctrines, and the difference between them cannot 
therefore be great. The spirit of schism would lead each to magnify 
difference to the greatest possible extent, but the spirit of Christian 
faith and love will lead to a different conclusion. Two things we 
know for certain, viz., first, that Catholic Unity is a plain Christian 
duty ; and, secondly, that there can be no such thing as Catholic Unity 
without the Bishop of Rome as the lawful Primate and President of 
Christendom. Let us maintain and declare these truths frankly and 
fearlessly." — Catholic Unity, by the Rev. Edward Stuart, Perpetual 
Curate of St. Mary Magdalene, Munster Square, London, p. 79. 
London, 1867. 

" Of course to those whose cry is ■ No peace with Rome,' and whose 
glory is in the shame of divided Christendom, it [i.e., Corporate Re- 
union] is a thing as incredible as hateful, the wish that it may ever be 
so is father to the thought ; but to others I would say, do remember 
that even now there is union, although unhappily not visible and 
corporate. . . . What we have to strive and pray for, is the restora- 
tion of the outward, visible, corporate manifestation of that unity. Do, 
brethren, consider seriously these things, and be not led away by blind 


prejudice, and by that insensate outcry against Rome and Popery." — 
Disunion and Reunion, p. 14. A Sermon by the Rev. C. J. Le Geyt, 
Incumbent of St. Mathias', Stoke Newington. 

" The Council of Trent is not an insurmountable obstacle to Reunion 
[with the Church of Rome], but that it may be so explained that we 
could receive it." — Dr. Pusey in his Letter addressed to the Editor of 
John Bull, and dated December 7th, 1865. 

" But they [Anglicans] should know well, and never forget, that for 
the English Church Corporate Reunion without Reunion with Rome 
is, if not an impossibility, a step not to be desired." — Reunion Magazine, 
No. 1, p. 5. 

" I still feel, that as matter of doctrine, that is of belief, the difference 
between what is held by English Churchmen and what is held by 
Roman Catholics, is infinitesimal." — Reminiscences of the Oxford 
Movement, by Rev. T. Mozley, formerly Rector of Plymtree, Vol. II., 
p. 386. Second edition. 

" It is most refreshing to find that the doctrinal differences which 
separate the Roman and Anglican Communions disappear when 
viewed in the light of unimpassioned inquiry." — Union Review, for 
1868, p. 363. 



• " I used to be as opposed to the doctrine of Papal Infallibility as it 
was possible for anyone to be. Deeper reflection has, however, con- 
vinced me that there is really nothing in it to which exception need be 
taken. Granting an administrative head of the whole Catholic Church, 
granting a Primate of Christendom, by the same right even that the 
Archbishops of Canterbury profess to be Primates of the English 
Church— namely, * by Divine Providence,' it is surely only reasonable 
to believe that, if this head of the Universal Church were to teach 
ex cathedra, or authoritatively, anything pertaining to faith or morals, to 
the whole flock of God, of which he is the chief shepherd upon earth, 
he would most surely be guided by the Holy Ghost in such a way as 
not to teach Satan's lie instead of the truth of God. This is the way 
in which I should feel disposed to understand the Vatican decree. 
And so far from seeing anything inconsistent with reason, or history, 


or Holy Scripture, or the Catholic Faith, in that decree, thus under- 
stood, it appears to me that natural piety itself, and a belief in God's- 
providential guidance of His Church, would lead us to accept it." — 
Rev. Thomas W. Mossman, Rector of Torrington, in Church Review, 
November 3rd, 1882, p. 531. 

" It is quite true that we do not assume an attitude of independence 
towards the Holy See. We frankly acknowledge that, in the 
Providence of God, the Roman Pontiff is the first Bishop in the 
Church, and, therefore, its visible head on earth. We do not believe- 
that either the Emperor of Russia or the Queen of England is the head 
of the Church. As the Church must have some executive head, and as 
there is no other competitor, we believe the Pope to be that head. But 
he is more to us than this, for he is our Patriarch as well. So that we 
admit his claim to the veneration and loyalty of all baptized men, and 
in a special degree of all Western Christians." — Letter of a Bishop of 
the Order of Corporate Reunion, in Reunion Magazine, No. 2, p. 242. 

" We in England look upon the Patriarch of Rome as the First 
Bishop, the President of the General Council of the Church of Christ."' 
— Olive Leaf by Rev. William Wyndham Malet, Rector of 
Ardeley, p. 12. 

"England has her holy orders and ordinances of worship from 
Rome. She recognizes His Holiness as the chief bishop of all." — 
Ibid., p. 38. 

" In the Church of England, likewise, the Bishop of Rome has no 
authority. But in the Church of God, a universal spiritual body, all, 
of course, belongs to St. Peter's successor, which was originally given 
to St. Peter by our Lord. Whatever the Divine donation was origin- 
ally, man did not bestow it, and man cannot take it away. Moreover,, 
the government of the Catholic Church by Bishops, Primates, Metro- 
politans, and Patriarchs, with One Visible Head, is so exactly of that 
practical nature, that no wholly independent and isolated religious 
body can possibly participate either in its government or in the blessing 
of being rightly governed, so long as it remains independent. . . . 
The Visible Head of that One Christian Family, as Christendom has- 
universally allowed, is the Bishop of the See of St. Peter. Unlike all 
other Bishops, he has no superior either in rank or jurisdiction. Now,, 
when any part of a family, by misunderstanding and perverseness, 
becomes disobedient to, or out of harmony with, its Visible Head, 
weakness and confusion as regards its oneness is certain to supervene." 
Order out of Chaos, by Rev. F. G. Lee, Vicar of All Saints', Lambeth,. 
pp. 60-62. 



" I have to own that, in spite of the telling illustrations of Mrs. 
Trimmer's History of England, I never yet succeeded in getting up an 
atom of affection or respect for the three gentlemen canonized in the 
1 Martyrs' Memorial ' at Oxford. As Lord Blachford once observed 
to me, * Cranmer burnt well,' and that is all the good I know about 
him." — Reminiscences of the Oxford Movement, by Rev. T. Mozley r 
Rector of Plymtree, Vol. II., p. 230. 

" To protest altogether against the wickedness of the Reformation 
by entirely ignoring its pretended claims upon English Christians,, 
the Monks of Llanthony have set up 'the Shrine of the Perpetual" 
Adoration of the Most Holy Sacrament.' " — Little Manual of Devotions,. 
by Rev. J. L. Lyne, alias " Father Ignatius," p. 4. 

" Don't beat about the bush to try and deceive, to try and make 
people believe you [Ritualists] are what you are not. You know you< 
have no respect for the Reformation ; you know you believe it has 
wronged our dear old Church of England ; you know you believe that 
it was a cruel, cowardly piece of tyranny of a wicked, murderous 
despot; and although after centuries have painted over and gilded 
over the diabolical acts of Henry VIII., yet you cannot point to one 
single Scriptural or ecclesiastical authority that can be quoted for the 
manner in which the work was carried out, or the work itself." — The- 
Present Position of the Ritualists, by "Father Ignatius," p. 25. 

" For ourselves we do not scruple to say that we regard the death of 
Edward and the accession of Mary as the most fortunate circumstance 
for the Church of England." — Union Review for 1871, p. 358. 

" In Germany the Church was utterly rooted out, and a new 
religion, called Protestantism, invented by Luther and Calvin and 
other malcontents, was substituted in its place. But in England this- 
was not the case. The Church remained, but remained in fetters. 
In character it was identical with the Church of old, holding the same 
essential truths, sacraments, and orders ; but it was infected with- 
Protestantism, which poisoned its blood, and diseased the whole body, 
yet without destroying its vitality. Thank God, the Church of 
England is rapidly recovering her health, and though heresy may still 
linger on in her members, she has sufficient strength in time to expel* 
every trace of the disease and recover her ancient vigour. In England 
the Church was corrupted by Protestantism." — Golden Gate, by Rev. 
S. Baring- Gould, Rector of Lew Trenchard, Part I., p. 146. Edition,. 

384 - APPENDIX. 

" The English Reformation, as carried out, was, from every sound 
Churchman's standing-point, an unjustifiable and wicked act — heartily 
reprobated and condemned by many." — Reunion Magazine, No. i, 
•p. 6. 



An Altar with Super Altar. 
An Altar Cross or Crucifix. 
A Super- Frontal. 

■Chalice Veil. 
A Canister for Wafers. 
A Spoon. 

A Perforated Spoon. 
A Chalice Cover and Lace for 

Veiling the Blessed Sacrament. 
An Aumbrye. 
A Triptych. 
Pede Cloth. 
Houselling Cloth. 
Rood Screen. 
A Scallop Shell. 
A Baptismal Shell. 
A Water Bucket. 
A Baptismal Cruet. 
Paintings and Images of Our Lord, 

Our Lady, and Saints. 
A Portable Altar. 
Altar Bread Cutters. 
Altar Bread Irons. 
Altar Canister. 

Two Standard Candlesticks. 

Flower Vases. < 

Processional Candlesticks. 



Cantoral Staves. 

Amice (for an Archbishop or 



Grey Amyss. 
Pectoral Cross. 

The Cappa Magna. 
The Pall. 

From the Directorium Anglicanum, pp. 336-341. Fourth edition. 



u Thou, God and Man, art in our midst, 
The Altar is Thy Throne ; 
We bow before Thy Mercy Seat, 
And Thee, our Maker, own. 

My soul, fall prostrate to adore, 

In lowliest worship bent ; 
Each day I live I love Thee more, 

Sweet Sacrament ! Sweet Sacrament ! " 
—5"/. Agatha's, Landport, Sunday Scholars' Book, Appendix, Hymn 474. 

" You will go [to the Altar] with this one solemn thought ever 
present to your mind, namely, that your body is about to become a 
tabernacle for the most sacred Flesh and Blood of Jesus, God 
Incarnate ! " — The Parish Tracts, by Rev. J. H. Buchanan, First 
Series, No. X., " Confirmation." 

" Let every one who hears you speak, or sees you worship, feel 
quite sure that the object of your devotion is not an idea or a senti- 
ment, or a theory, or a make-believe, but a real personal King and 
Master and Lord : present at all times everywhere in the omnipresence 
of His Divine Nature, present by His own promise, and His own 
supernatural power in His Human Nature too upon His Altar-Throne, 
there to be worshipped in the Blessed Sacrament as really, and literally, 
and actually, as you will necessarily worship Him when you see Him 
in His beauty in Heaven." — St. John the Baptist. A Sermon by the 
Rev. H. D. Nihill, Vicar of St. Michael's, Shoreditch, p. 8. 

" Yes, in that piece of consecrated Bread he knew our Lord had 
come — had changed that very Bread into His own Body, and that wine 
in the chalice into His most precious Blood. Little child as he was, 
the Holy Spirit had taught him all the great mystery of that Sacram nt, 
and when he saw his father kneel to receive what appeared to his 
eyes but a piece of bread, he knew his father had really eaten the 
Body of His Saviour." — Stories Told to the Choir, No. 2, p. 19. 
Oxford : Mowbray, 1874. 

" Kenneth understood now, and he would understand more some 
day, how that Jesus comes at the bidding of His priest upon the Altar, 
and passes Himself into the little Pieces of Bread and into the Wine 



in the Chalice, and so is ' verily and indeed taken and received by the 
faithful in the Lord's Supper.' "— tbid.\^. 22. 

" And then to think that Jesus comes His Own very Self to offer 
Himself in Sacrifice to God, and to listen to all our prayers. That's 
the sign He's come, when the big bell tolls three, just as the priest 
says the words of consecration * This is my Body — This is my Blood.' " 
—Ibid., No. 5, p. 20. 

"Think of Jesus on the Cross dying for you. Think of His 
coming down upon our Altars under the forms of Bread and Wine ! 
Every crumb on the paten, every drop in the chalice has now become 
the whole Body, Blood, Soul, Spirit, and Divinity of Jesus ! Now is 
the time for you to worship Him !" — The Server's Mass Book, by the 
Rev. G. P. Grantham, p. 21. London : Masters. 

" The following is a beautiful method of manifesting devotion to 
the Most Holy Sacrament : — When the Hymn, ' Hail, Jesus, Hail ! ' 
is sung, let the Ceremoniarius, or his Assistant, carry a hand-bell, and 
as often as the words, " Sweet Sacrament we Thee adore,' occur, let 
him sound it. The procession will pause, and all, excepting the 
sacred Ministers, turning round, will sink humbly on their knees, and 
adore the Blessed Sacrament." — Oratory Worship, p. 32. London : 
Church Press Company, 1869. 

" Far worse than any kind of idolatry is the Christian religion, if 
the Host on the Altar is not Very God." — The Sacrament of the Holy 
Eucharist. A Lecture by Rev. J. L. Lyne, alias " Father Ignatius," 
p. 16. 

" Other Sacraments contain the Grace of God, but the Holy 
Eucharist is God Himself." — Practical Thoughts for Sisters of 
Charity, p. 137. London: Hodges, 1871. 

" As surely as the Boy Carpenter was the great Eternal God, so 
also surely the Bread and Wine which you have seen and handled, and 
received into yourself this day is the great and Eternal God too : the 
God who hideth Himself. Adore in silence and in trembling awe." — 
Ibid., p. 300. 

" Hidden God and Saviour, Have mercy upon us. Most High and 
adorable Sacrament, Have mercy upon us. Tremendous and 
life-giving Sacrament, Have mercy upon us." — The English Catholics 
Fade Mecum, pp. 71, 72. Third edition. 


" As you walk to Church, say : — 

" I rise from dreams of time 
And an Angel guides my feet, 
To the Sacred Altar Throne 
Where Jesus' Heart doth beat." 

— Private Prayers, edited by the Rev. W. H. Hutchings (now Arch- 
deacon of Cleveland), p. 43. Windsor : privately printed. 

" Lord Jesus, I have this day received on my tongue, Thy most 
holy Flesh and Blood.": — Ibid., p. 52. 

" Again, as to our conversation. How jealous should Commun- 
icants be over the words that pass through the door of those lips, 
wetted with the Holy Blood, spoken by the tongue that has tasted 
the Sacred Body of the Lord." — Instructions on the Holy Eucharist, 
edited by Canon T. T. Carter, p. 124. Second edition. London: 



" They [priests] are peacemakers under Him who carry on this 
work for Him, applying the precious Blood to the souls of men by 
the Sacraments for the remission of sin." — The Evangelist Library : 
Exposition of the Beatitudes, edited by the Cowley Fathers, p. 31. 

" The priest is permitted to share certain sorrows of Christ in 
which the layman has no part." — Ibid., p. 32. 

" But those priests who worthily fulfil their office shall be more 
specially called the sons of God, because they shall have an especial 
likeness to Him, having been made partakers in a chosen way of the 
priesthood of His only begotton Son." — Ibid., p. 2>3> 

" You are not, then, to look upon him [the Confessor- Priest] as a 
friend only, or a constant sympathizer, but as one who is over you in 
the Lord — one who should sometimes reprove, and you to accept it 
without feeling as though the rebuke was given by an equal, who 
may sometimes encourage you, but rather as a guide than a friend ; 
one with whom you are to be on terms of intimacy different to your 
relation to all other persons on earth ; with whom you are not to talk 
as you would to others, as on an equal footing, but as speaking to 
one to whom respect and obedience is due. He is neither to be spoken 

25 * 


to nor of, in any manner approaching to familiarity." — Hints to 
Penitents, p. 128. Third edition. 

"The priest, as far as his priesthood is concerned, is Christ 
Himself the Sovereign and Eternal Priest." — A Brief Answer to 
Objections Brought Against Confession, Translated by the Feltham 
Nuns, p. 23. 

" The priest perpetuates Jesus Christ in our midst to endless ages, 
that is why we should go to him as Jesus Christ, and to Christ by 
him." — Ibid., p. 21. 

" Learn to perceive Almighty God concealed for you in His 
priests." — Ibid., p. 23. 

" A penitent, prostrate at the feet of the priest, is a man raised, and 
elevated, and supremely honourable." — Ibid., p. 24. 

" Fear the eye and the voice of the priest." — Ibid., p. 24. 

" The priests are, on earth, the spiritual police of Almighty God j 
they must hunt out, track, pursue, and arraign sinners, as the police 
pursue and apprehend thieves and rascals." — Ibid., p. 26. 

" The lay element already too greatly preponderated [in the Church 
of England], and no more of it was needed. It was not that he 
undervalued the office of the laity, whose high and noble prerogative 
it was to listen and obey, but it was for the Ministers of the Church 
with all their responsibilities to magnify their office, if so be that 
others would intrude upon it." — Extract from a Speech by the Rev. 
Luke Rivington, at an Ordinary Meeting of the English Church Union, 
January 14th, 1868. English Church Union Monthly Circular, for 
1868, p. 6j. 

"They may call me a Papist, and laugh at my Creed, 
'Tis the Faith that will save in the hour of need j 
Let them talk, let them laugh, but when death is at hand 
The priest is the only true friend in the land." 

Hensal-cum-Heck Churc/t Monthly, November, 1895. 


" Q. Have we not already named another way in which we are to 
be mindful of the Departed ? 

" A. Yes ; we offer the Holy Sacrifice for them. 

" Q. Why so ? 

"A. As being propitiatory. The Sacrifice of the Cross was 


propitiatory for all, for the Living and the Faithful departed. The 
Sacrifice of the Eucharist, which is one with the Sacrifice of the Cross, 
is alike propitiatory for all." — A Catechism on the Church, by Rev. C. S. 
Grueber, Vicar of St. James's, Hambridge, p. 158. Edition 1874. 

" If you speak about the Mass, do not beat about for some one or 
other of the names which mean the same thing, but under cover of 
which men are accustomed to allow that is in their idea not the same 
thing. Men hate the little word, because they think it means the 
same thing that they see done abroad in other portions of the same 
One Holy Catholic Church : and is not that, if we belive in One Holy 
Catholic Church, precisely the truth that we ought to be labouring in 
every way to teach them ? " — St. John the Baptist. A Sermon by 
the Rev. H. D. Nihill, p. 2. 

" An attempt to approach nearer to the Roman Catholics in the 
manner of celebrating High Mass would be of immense service to 
our Church ; and if we could introduce such a little office as is often 
seen at the Brompton Oratory and other places, where the people 
seem to have everything their own way, except that a young priest 
gives out the hymns, and recites a few Aves and Paternosters, the 
whole being followed by a good extempore sermon, and the Bene- 
diction of the Blessed Sacrament, we should have little cause to 
complain of the inroads of the Methodists." — Union Review, for 1868, 
p. 22. 

* The Sacrifices of the Golden Altar and the Earthly Altar are as 
much Sacrifices of Praise, of Thanksgiving, of Prayer, and of 
Propitiation for Sin, as was the Sacrifice of the Cross." — Union 
Review, for 1866, p. 260. 

" Teach men to deny the Sacrifice of the Mass, and they are on 
the high road to the denial of ali Sacrifice whatever." — Church News, 
February 17th, 1869, p. 99. 

" It is the glory of the Eucharist that, through the instrumentality 
of that Body and Blood which He gave for the life of the world upon 
the Cross, and which He still gives to us under the veils of bread and 
wine in the Sacrament of the Altar, Jesus Christ perpetuates on our 
behalf, here below in the visible sanctuaries of His Church, the 
functions of His Eternal Priesthood : it is our dignity, and the glory 
of our consecration as a royal priesthood, that He has entrusted the 
offering of the Sacrifice made on Calvary to human agencies, and 



that He permits it to depend upon us whether He, the great High 
Priest of our profession, shall be allowed to exercise His priestly 
functions at our altars or no. By His gracious condescension, the 
free will of the Blessed Virgin was permitted to co-operate with God 
in determining the time of the Incarnation : by a condescension no 
less gracious He leaves Himself in our power in the Eucharist, which 
is the extension of the Incarnation." — Eighteenth Annual Report of 
the C. B. S., paper by Hon. C. L. Wood, now Lord Halifax, p. x. 

• The Sacrifice of the Altar is one and the same Sacrifice with that 
offeied on Calvary. It is not a different Sacrifice, nor a repetition : 
it is the same." — Golden Gate, by the Rev. S. Baring-Gould, Rector 
of Lew Trenchard, Part III., p. 163. Edition, 1875. 

" By virtue of this life-giving Sacrament, have mercy, O most kind 
Lord Jesus Christ, on the holy universal Church. . . . Give, by this 
holy Sacrament, true charity to our enemies and to ourselves, and 
to all Thy faithful people succour, help, and consolation ; bestowing 
Thy grace upon those still in the flesh, and granting eternal rest to all 
the faithful departed." — The Communicant's Manual, by the Bishop of 
Lincoln (Dr. King), pp. 55, 57. Sixth edition. London : Mozley 
and Smith, 1877. 

" The mode in which High Mass should be sung in the Oratory of 
the Society of the Holy Cross on Festivals, should be of the highest 
type known to Catholic Christendom, by which the Holy Sacrifice 
may be offered according to the use of the Church of England. It 
should possess every element in ritual, and music, and other 
accessories, which the tradition of the Church sanctions. ... But 
the founders of the Oratory would not feel satisfied until they restored 
to the Church of England a rendering of the sacred Mass which was 
fully Mediaeval in the correctness of its use, and more than Mediaeval 
in the richness, costliness, taste, and perfection of its details. Thus 
we should desiderate these elements at the least : — The Asperges ; 
the ' Censing of persons and things,' or the use of iucense in a ritual 
manner ; the correct Introits, Graduals, Offertories, Communions j 
Gospel Lights 3 Consecration Lights on the Altar and Consecration 
Candles in front of the Altar, in addition to the Six Altar Candles 
and two Sacramental Lights 5 the use of the Altar Bell ; the Lavabo j 
and, of course, the Eucharistic Vestments, for Celebrant, Ministers, 
Servers, and Acolytes." — The Four Cardinal Virtues, by the Rev. 
Orby Shipley, pp. 246, 247. London: Longmans, 1871. 


" And under the Christian covenant of grace, and in the Church 
which is the Body of Christ, the Christian Priest may daily stand 
before the altar offering up the great commemorative Sacrifice of 
Christ, for his own sins, and for the sins of the people. . . . Daily, 
therefore, in the * Church's Prayer Meeting ' held when the Celebrant, 
representing the congregation, and assisted by, and in union with 
them, makes effectual intercession for the people, pleading the 
tremendous Sacrifice for sin before God, and standing, like Aaron, 
between the living and the dead, to make atonement for them." — St. 
Philip's, Sydenham, Church Magazine, March, 1896, p. 1. 

" So then, be sure, whatever else you do, that you go to Mass on 
this great day. A Christian child who is able to go to Mass on 
Christmas Day, and who does not go is not good. He does not 
deserve to have any Christmas treats, and he ought not to enjoy 
them if he has them." — Hosanna : A Mass Book for Children, with 
Preface by the Rev. R. A. J. Suckling, Vicar of St. Alban's, Holborn, 
p. 44. London: W.Knott, 1891. 

" And Thurifer first, with his censer bright, 
And then Sub-deacon the cross who bears, 
Lifted on high 
That all may descry 5 
And on either side is an Acolyte, 
With other Clerics together in pairs, 
Walking to West and back to East, 
With vested Deacon and vested Priest, 
All of them bearing the taper Light. 

" Then to the Altar returned, they say 
The Holy Mass ; and the people all 
Hold up their lighted tapers high, 
While Gospel and blessed Canon are sung, 
And Gloria shouted by every tongue, 
* — God grant that all 
Who on Jesus call 
May one day mingle that throng among, 
Who ever shall keep in' the yonder sky, 
With happy rapture and bliss for aye, . 

The gladness and joy of a Candlemas day !" 

— The Mysteries of Holy Church, by the Rev. G. P. Grantham, p. 99. 
London : Masters. 


" Father, gentle, full of love, 

Hear us while we humbly pray ! 
Look Thou from Thy throne above 
On the Sacrifice to-day. 

■ Which at Christ, our Lord's command 
We, redeemed from sin's control, 
Offer for our Church and land, 
And for every faithful soul. 

" Mindful of Our Lady dear, 

Saints and all the ransomed quire, 
Who in rest for ever blest 

Serve Thee with love's fond desire. 

•' Hear this prayer 5 and by the power 
Of this holy Sacrifice 
Grant us grace to see Thy face 
In the halls of Paradise 1 " 

Ihid.y pp. xviii, xix. 


Oh dear ! We want such a lot of things for our poor District Church 
(St. John's) : Vestments, Cope, Processional Crucifix, Tabernacle (for use), 
Sanctus Bells. Pictures, and Everything. The thorough cleaning of the 
Church (first time for thirty years) is exhausting our means. Do send some- 
thing, Please. — Address, Priest-in-charge, 2, Pavilion-street, Doncaster." 

"100 LITTLE MARYS WANTED.— Is your name Mary ? 
^ ^ Then do send me a shilling, there's a dear child, towards a 
shrine for Our Lady in our poor Church of St. John. Tell me your little 
troubles and I will remember you at Mass. — Address, Priest-in-Charge, 
2, Pavilion-street, Doncaster." — Advertisements in the Church Review, June 14th, 

" The Mass is not one Sacrifice and Calvary another. It is the 
same Sacrifice." — A Book for the Children of God ! p. 1 19. London : 
W. Knott, 1 89 1. 

" The one Sacrifice for sin for ever, the same at the altar and at 
the Cross, the * Eucharistic Sacrifice,' or ' Sacrifice of the Mass.' " — 
The Rights of the English Churchmen, a Sermon preached before the 
u Church of England Working Men's Society," by Rev. H. D. 
Nihill, p. at. Published by the Society. 



"In celebrating Mass some portions have to be said secretly, so 
that the Celebrant hears himself, but is not heard by others." — 
Ceremonial Guide to Low Mass,* by two Clergymen of the Church of 
England, p. 5. 

" There are three occasions only when the elbows are placed on the 
Altar — (1) At the consecration of the Host. (2) At the consecration 
of the Chalice. (3) While receiving the Host." — Ibid., p. 7. 

"The head is bowed towards the Book whenever the names occur 
of the Blessed Virgin Mary, or of the Saint of whom the Mass is 
said." — Ibid., p. 18. 

" The Hands [of the Consecrating priest] are to be joined palm to 
palm j and before the Consecration the fingers are to be extended one 
opposite the other, and the right thumb placed over the left in the 
form of a cross." — Ibid., p. 27. 

"As is remarked by St. Liguori, it is a mistake, on making a 
genuflection, to raise the tips of the fingers upwards." — Ibid., p. 30. 

" On saying * The holy Gospel is written,' the Celebrant separates 
his hands, and placing the left upon the Book, he makes a small Sign 
of the Ci obs with the tip of the thumb of the right hand on the Book, 
in the place of the opening words of the Gospel that is to be read. 
Then, placing his left hand on the lower part of his breast, he makes 
similar Signs of the Cross with the right thumb on his forehead, and 
breast." — Ibid., p. 36. 

" When the Wine has been consecrated and the inclination made, 
the Chalice is raised in a straight line, in order that it may be seen 
and adored by the people ; but the foot must not be lifted higher than 
the eyes of the Celebrant." — Ibid., p. 41. 

" When the priest is to bless any person or any thing he turns the 
little finger of the right hand towards the object which he is to bless." 
—Ibid., p. 43. 

* In the Preface of this disloyal book, occurs the following significant 
passage : — " The original of this book is Low Mass (London : Burns and Oates), 
which is an English translation of the fourth book of Cesari's Ceremonte della 
Messa. . . . The thanks of the Editors are offered to the courteous translator 
and editor of the English edition, a clergyman of the Society of Jesus, who 
kindly gave them leave to adapt the book to the use of the English Church " 
(p. vi.). 


" The breast is struck with the right hand ten times. — During the 
Confiteor, at the words 'my fault,' the breast is struck with the 
fingers of the right hand united and slightly curved." — Ibid., p. 46. 

" If, on his way to the Altar, he [the priest] passes the place where 
the Blessed Sacrament is reserved, or where a relic of the Holy Cross 
is exposed, he genuflects on one knee." — Ibid., p. 60. 

" The priest then says the Corifiteor. . . . ' I confess to God, to 
Blessed Mary, to all Saints, and to you ; that I have sinned exceed- 
ingly in thought, word, and deed, by my fault. I beseech holy Mary, 
all Saints of God, and you, to pray for me." — Ibid., p. 64. 

" He [the priest] must bow his head to the Cross when passing the 
middle of the Altar." —Ibid., p. 78. 

"On saying [at the Creed] ' in one God,' the priest joins his hands 
and bows his head to the Cross. ... At ' Jesus Christ ' he bows his 
head to the Cross. ... At ' together is worshipped ' he bows his 
head to the Cross." — Ibid., p. 82. 

" He [the priest] raises his eyes to God and immediately lowers 
them, saying meanwhile secretly : — ' Receive, O Holy Trinity, this 
oblation which I, a miserable and unworthy sinner, offer in honour of 
Thee and of Blessed Mary and of all Thy Saints for my sins and 
offences ; for the salvation of the living and the repose of all the 
faithful departed. In the name of the Father and of the Son, and of 
the Holy Ghost. Amen." — Ibid., p. 86. 

" The priest holds the newly consecrated Host over the Altar in his 
thumbs and forefingers, the other fingers being held together and 
extended : he raises his body, withdrawing his elbows from the Altar, 
but leaving on it his hands as far as the wrists, and at once inclines 
and adores the Host. Then raising himself, he elevates the Host as 
far as he conveniently can, that It may be seen and adored by the 
people." — Ibid., p. 103. 

" After the Consecration he replaces the Chalice upon the Corporal, 
and inclining reverently, adores the Sacred Blood."— Ibid., p. 106. 

"Having signed himself, he brings the Chalice to his mouth, 
holding the Paten under it, and raising it to about the level of his 
chin. Then, standing upright, he reverently receives the Precious 
Blood. ,: — Ibid., p. 121. 

"He [the priest] makes a profound Reverence to the principal 
Image in the Sacristy." — Ibid., p. 132. 


" If any Particle [of the Consecrated Wine] fall on any of the Altar 
Linen, or on the ground, the priest is to place a clean cloth on the 
spot, choosing a more convenient time for doing what is requisite. 
He must afterwards wash the linen or the ground, scraping it somewhat 
on the place where the Particle fell : the water and whatever may have 
been scraped off are to be thrown into the Sacrarium." — Ibid., p. 177. 

" Palls having the upper side of silk, are prohibited by the Sacred 
Congregation of Rites." — Ibid., p. 187. 

"When once employed in the Sacrifice of the Mass, it [the 
" Purificator "] should not be used for other purposes, nor be handled 
by Laics (not having the required permission), until after having been 
washed by a Clerk in Holy Orders." — Ibid., p. 187. 

" The Sacred Vessels are the Chalice, Paten, Ciborium, and Pyx, 
none of which may be handled by those not in Holy Orders, unless 
with special permission." — Ibid., p. 189. 

" By a decree of the Council of Bishops (October 25th, 1575), 
the exterior of the Tabernacle is to be gilt, and the interior lined 
throughout with white silk. ... The Tabernacle is exclusively 
reserved for the preservation of the most Holy Sacrament. . . . The 
Sacred Congregation of Rites [the Pope's own Congregation at 
Rome] forbids Relics of the Passion, or of the Saints, or the Holy 
Oils, to be placed within the Tabernacle." — Ibid., p. 195. 

"According to the Constitution of Benedict XIV., July 16th, 
1746, the Cross is to be placed between the Candlesticks." — Ibid., 
p. 196. 

" Statuettes of the Saints, in gold or silver, are, in Rome, often 
placed upon the Altars during the great festivals." — Ibid., p. 198. 


" The seventh Cautel [Caution] is : that before Mass the priest do 
not wash his mouth or teeth, but only his lips from without with his 
mouth closed as he has* need, lest perchance he should intermingle 
the taste of water with his saliva. After Mass also he should beware 
of expectorations as much as possible, until he shall have eaten and 
drunken, lest by chance anything shall have remained between his 
teeth or in his fauces ; which by expectorating he might eject." — The 
Directorium Anglicanum, by the Rev. F. G. Lee, p. no. Fourth 


" The question arises, if after having communicated of the Body 
he [the priest] shall have the water already in his mouth, and shall 
then for the first time perceive that it is water — whether he ought to 
swallow it or to eject it. . . . It is, however, safer to swallow than to 
eject it ; and for this reason, that no particle of the Body [of Christ] 
may be ejected with the water." — Ibid., p. 113. 

" If a fly or spider or any such thing should fall into the Chalice 
before consecration, or even if he [the priest] shall apprehend that 
poison hath been put in, the wine which is in the chalice ought to be 
poured out, and the chalice ought to be washed, and other wine and 
water put therein to be consecrated. But, if any of these contin- 
gencies befall after the consecration, the fly or spider or such-like 
thing 'should be warily taken, oftentimes diligently washed between 
the fingers, and should then be burnt, and the ablution together with 
the burnt ashes must be put in the piscina. But the poison ought, 
by no means, to be taken, but such Blood, with which poison has 
been mingled, should be reserved in a comely vessel, together with 
the relics." — Ibid., pp. 113, 114. 

"If the Eucharist hath fallen to the ground, the place where it lay- 
must be scraped, and fire kindled thereon, and the ashes reserved 
beside the Altar. Also, if by negligence any of the Blood be spilled, 
upon a table fixed to the floor, the priest must take up the drop with 
his tongue, and the place of the table must be scraped, and the 
shavings burnt with fire, and the ashes reserved with the relics beside 
the altar, and he to whom this has befallen must do penance forty 
days." — Ibid., pp. 115, 116. 

" If anyone by any accident of the throat vomit up the Eucharist, 
the vomit ought to be burned, and the ashes ought to be reserved near 
the altar. And if it shall be a cleric, monk, or presbyter, or deacon,, 
he must do penance for forty days." — Ibid., p. 116. 


" The preacher then enlarged upon the thought of the penal aspect 
of Death, and drew a distinction between the temporal and the eternal 
punishment of sin, pointing out that, while to venial sin there is a 
temporal punishment annexed, mortal sin involves both an eternal and 
a temporal punishment : and next proceeded to insist that upon this 
doctrine is really based the solemnities of the dead, in which that 
congregation were then engaged. The Church had not given us them 


to gratify our feelings. They were assembled there to do a great act 
of charity towards the dead, to fulfil a great duty towards them and 
not merely for the sake of keeping their memory green, as the world 
does. We had much more to do than that : we had an intercession 
to make for the dead, and that was founded upon this distinction 
which he had tried to draw between the temporal and eternal 
punishment for sin. For while God remitted the eternal punishment 
for repented sin, He did not necessarily remit the temporal punish- 
ment, part of which is the penalty of death. For the vast majority 
of Christians the temporal punishment must be paid in the world 
to come, and the souls in Paradise, because they had not taken up 
their cross here, and not been mindful of the example of our Lord, 
are offering the homage of their spiritual sufferings in the realms of 
Purgatory, and were helped by our prayers and Eucharists, offered in 
their behalf." — Sermon by the Rev. E. G. Wood, Vicar of St. 
Clement's, Cambridge, preached at the Solemn Requiem of the 
Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament, November 10th, 1890, and 
reported in the Church Times, November 14th, 1890, p. 11 17. 

'* From the power of evil spirits, good Lord, deliver them [the 
faithful dead]. From the gnawing worm of conscience, good Lord, 
deliver them. From cruel flames, good Lord, deliver them. From 
intolerable cold, good Lord, deliver them." — The Priest's Prayer 
Book, p. 188. Fourth edition. 

" From the shades of death, where they sit desiring the light of Thy 
countenance, good Lord, deliver them ['the faithful departed']." 
" From the pains, which are the just penalty of their sins, good 
Lord, deliver them [' the faithful departed ']." — Manual of the Guild 
of all Souls, p. 20. Fourth edition. London, 1880. 

" Were it not for the prevailing looseness and inaccuracy of thought 
and expression upon theological questions, which is one of the 
characteristics of the present age, it would be a matter for surprise 
that the extreme moderation of the Roman Church upon the doctrine 
of Purgatory should be so little known and recognized." — St. Catherine 
of Genoa on Purgatory, with Introductory Essay by a Priest 
Associate of the Guild of All Souls, p. 11. London, 1878. 

" How great a thing is Purgatory ! For myself, I can neither say 
nor conceive anything that approaches to it. I have a glimpse only, 
that those pains, being as sensible as the pains of hell, the soul, 
nevertheless, which has in it the least stain, or the least imperfection 


receives them as a particular witness of God's goodness to her." — 
Ibid., p. 40. 

" At the death of any Member a special Funeral Mass will be said 
for the repose of his soul, when all members are, if possible, to 
attend." — Manual of the Perseverance, St. Alban's, Holborn, p. 10. 

" Q. Is there a Purgatory of any sort ? 

"A. Purgatory means a condition or state of purgation. All who 
are perfected can only be ' made perfect through suffering,' either in 
this world, or that which is to come, or in both. We may, therefore, 
rightly speak of this process as Purgatorial, and of the sphere of its 
operations as Purgatory." — A Catechism on Some Great Truths, by 
the Rev. J. B. Johnson, m.a., p. 36. Second Edition. London: 
Masters, 1893. 

" And when the altar is decked with care, 
The Clergy to celebrate Mass prepare. 
They enter the Chancel-gate within, 
As the Choir solemn Introit begin : 
1 Grant them, O Lord, Thy rest divine, 
* And light perpetual o'er them shine ' ! 

" The Deacon the corpse hath censed ; the Priest 
Hath sung the Collects ; and humbly prayed 
That she who now on her bier is laid, 
Partaker maybe in the heavenly Feast. 

" And when Epistle and Tract are o'er, 
Again is the smoking censer swung 
About the body which lies before, 
Ere is the Holy Gospel sung. 

" The Priest hath finished ; the Mass is said j 

The living in holy brotherhood, 
In blest commune with the saintly dead, 
Have feasted on the all-precious Food. 
And while his cope doth the Priest resume 

And rigid biretta, the Choir alone 
The Dies Irce, the Day of Doom, 

Solemnly chanteth in mournful tone." 
— The Mysteries of Holy Church, by the Rev. G. P. Grantham, p. 121. 
London : Masters. 

" The Church in the Middle state is called the Suffering Church. 
It is Purgatory, the place where holy souls are made perfect." — 
A Book for the Children of God, p. 83. London: W. Knott, 1891. 



" Be assured that this is one of the gravest faults of our day in the 
administration of the Sacrament of Penance, that it is the road by 
which a number of Christians go down to hell." — Dr. Pusey's Manual 
for Confessors, p. 315* 

" Telling his penitents that they must explain the motives which 
led to their faults, and that they must not confess carelessly, but lay 
bare all the sources and movements of their sins to their Confessor, 
as, without so doing, they could not be purified." — Ibid., p. 26. 

" It is a sad sight to see Confessors giving their whole morning to 
young women-devotees, while they dismiss men and married women 
. . . with • I am busy, go to some one else.' " — Ibid., p. 108. 

"Be sure you [Confessor] impress upon those .who have hidden 
their sins [from the priest in Confession] the enormity of the crime 
they have committed in trampling underfoot their Saviour's blood." — 
Ibid., p. 128. 

" Those [scrupulous persons] who do not live under a Rule must 
voluntarily submit themselves to a learned and wise Confessor, 
obeying him as God Himself, laying all their concerns freely and 
simply before him, and never coming to any determination without 
his advice. Such an one, S. Philip said, need not fear being called to 
account by God." — Ibid., p. 180. 

"No Confessor should ever give the slightest suspicion that he is 
alluding to what he has heard in the tribunal, but he should remember 
the Canonical warning : * What I know through Confession, I know 
less than what I do not know.' Pope Eugenius says that whatever a 
Confessor knows in this way, he knows it ' ut Deus ' ; while out of 
Confession he is only speaking 'ut homo' : so that, 'as man,' he can 
say that he does not know that which he has learned as God's repre- 
sentative. I go further still : As man, he may swear with a clear 
conscience that he knows not, what he knows only as God ! ! ! " — 
Ibid., p. 402. 

" That Confession is ordinarily — i.e., where it may be had, and 
where the soul is capable of grasping the fact that it is so — necessary 
in case of mortal, i.e., conscious, wilful, deliberate sin, which destroys 
the grace of Baptism and the union of the soul with God ; and that it 
is not necessary in any other case." — 'The Rev. A. H. Mackonochie in 
the Priest in Absolution and the Society of the Holy Cross; A Corre' 
spondence, p. 23. 


" Since it [the Priest in Absolution'] has been so prominently before 
the public, I have been trying to make acquaintance with it, and find 
that its principles are those which govern, I believe, all Confessors 
among ourselves." — Ibid., p. 16. 

'* Jesus the sinless One bore all their sins this day [Good Friday] ; 
even Judas went to the priests this day, and said, ' I have sinned.' " — 
Mission Tract : Good Friday, p. 4. London : Church Printing Co. 

" Yes, I am going to God's priest, 
To tell him all my sin, 
And from this very hour I'll strive 
A new life to begin. 

" When I confess with contrite heart 
My sins unto the priest, 
I do believe from all their guilt 
That moment I'm released. 

" I go then with a humble heart, 
To have my sins forgiven ! 
And angels, while I kneel, will sing 
A hymn of joy in heaven." 
— Manual of the Children of the Church, p. 40. Third edition. 
London : Church Sunday-school Union, which is a Branch of the 
Kilburn Sisterhood. 

" If you are tempted to hide a sin in Confession, say, ' O God, help 
me to tell my sins, because the devil is tempting me not to tell 
them." — Ibid., p. 41. 

" The labourer is worthy of his hire, and those who minister to 
us in spiritual things should reap the benefit of our carnal things, 
i.e., our worldly substance, our money. As there is no fee for hearing 
Confessions, gratitude requires that we should at least contribute 
either to the Offertory or to the Alms-box whenever we make use of 
the Sacrament of Penance ; especially we should make a point of this 
when we Confess at a Church which is not our own Parish Church." 
— How to Make a Good Confession, p. 14. Seventh thousand. 
London : W. Knott. 

" Nor should you [in Confession] make any mention of feelings 
of any kind, unless they are wilfully indulged feelings of hatred or 
lust." — Ibid., p. 9. 


M I must again repeat that Confession and Absolution form God's 
regular channel for conveying His forgiveness, and that if we will net 
take pardon in His way, we are not likely to get it in our own." — 
IVhy Dont You Go to Confession ? p. 7. Thirteenth thousand. 
London : C. J. Palmer. 

Ask pardon for your impious defiance of His love. Turn and 
throw yourself at His feet, like the Prodigal Son. He waits for you 
in the Confessional, hidden in His priest." — Brief Answers to Okjec* 
tions Brought Against Confession, p. 40. London : E. Longhurst. 

" Confession is the toilet of the conscience. The priest washes and 
cleanses the soul, soiled with sin 5 he restores it to health, pure and 
white. Those children who will not be attended to by their mothers, 
remain all day dirty and disgusting. The souls who will purposely 
neglect the cleansing of Confession are unclean souls, vile and base 
souls." — Hid., p. 29. 

" God alone is the giver of all spiritual life and grace and favour, 
and yet we are not bid to go direct to God for these gifts (for that 
right we forfeited at the fall) j but we are to go to the Church which 
stands between us and God in its appointed sphere." — The Mediation 
of the Church, by the K.ev. Edward Stuart, m.a., p. 9. Second edition. 
London : C. J. Palmer. 

" When a penitent, perfectly contrite, cannot Confess, either through 
physical inability, or impossibility of obtaining a Confessor, mortal 
sin is remitted by the mercy of God, anticipatorily. . . . Imperfect 
contrition or attrition is sorrow arising from mingled or lower 
motives, and requires the application of the Sacrament. . . . Mortal 
sin cannot ordinarily be forgiven, without absolution. But the priest 
cannot loose what he has no knowledge of. Therefore, mortal sin 
must be enumerated. Confession must be entire, true, simple. Entire : 
No mortal sin consciously omitted. Mention modifying circum- 
stances. . . . Name the number or the duration of each kind of sin — 
sins of thought as well as deed. Nothing hidden which may show 
the state of the soul. Nothing hidden through proud shame."-^ 
Catechetical Notes, by the Rev. Dr. Neale, of East Grinstead, 
pp. 138, 139. 

"Cases of Sacrilege: 1. A false confession consciously made: it 
invalidates every succeeding confession until this sin be acknowledged." 
— Ibid, p. 140. 

" Our Church puts no kind of restriction either upon the disclosures 



of the penitent, or the inquiries of the Confessor; and this throws 
open a door to all that minuteness of detail which is sometimes 
thought to constitute the especial evil of the Roman Confessional." — 
British Critic. Volume for 1843, p. 326. 

M We know that he [the Confessor] is bound by every tie, moral, 
divine, £nd ecclesiastical, to keep our secrets. For these and other 
reasons, we ought to put away shame, and readily confess all our 
sins to him without reserve." — The Destruction of Sin, by the Rev. 
J. C. Chambers, Editor of the Priest in Absolution, p. 15. 

"The power of the remission of sins is ordained in the hands of the 
priesthood, and no other channel whatsoever is appointed for our 
assured forgiveness." — The Ministry of Consolation, p. 26. Edition 


"Our Church, moreover, howsoever men may mistake her meaning, 
does indeed enjoin the absolute completeness and unreservedness of 
our confession." — Ibid., p. 36. 

"The obedience which alone befits the human soul in spiritual 
relations must be free and unquestioning, preventing with a settled 
purpose of submission, every command which the judgment of the 
priest may see fit to lay upon us." — Ibid., p. 76. 

" There are, therefore, generally more sins to be found under this 
commandment [seventh] than under any other — and remember, we 
pray thee, that it were a false shame utterly misplaced at the tribunal 
of Penitence, even as of necessity, if thou wert to shrink from 
confessing, openly and honestly, all sins against purity and modesty." 
— Ibid., p. 154. 

" Perfect absolution is only promised to those who make special 
confession of their sins. I mean a confession of all the sins on their 
conscience, confessed to Almighty God in the hearing of His priest, 
mentioning every sin." — Simple Lessons, edited by the Rev. T. T. 
Carter, Part III., p. 106. Edition 1876. 

" Those who have never heard of Confession to God through his 
priest, or having heard of it, are really and honestly unable to believe 
that it is of any use, we are bound charitably to hope and pray that it 
[Confession to God] may be enough. Those who have died without 
confessing, and there are millions such, must be left to the 
* uncovenanted mercies of God.' . . But, just as God has appointed 


Holy Baptism for our regeneration, and the forgiveness (in the case of 
adults) of all sins committed up to that time 3 just as He has ordained 
the Holy Communion for * the strengthening and refreshing of our 
souls, by the Body and Blood of Christ ' ; so has He most mercifully 
appointed a way — one way and only one — for the certain forgiveness 
of sins committed after Baptism, by applying to our souls, for this 
special purpose, 'the Precious Blood of Christ,' once shed for us upon 
the Cross of suffering. That way, and I repeat that there is no 
other, is Sacramental Confession. Confession to a Priest." — Plain 
Speaking on Confession, p. 6*. London, 1869. 

" Thy garments, spotless, white and pure, 
From the baptismal sea, 
Need daily cleansing to restore 
The first ' Absolvo Te.' 

" Take not a conscience to thy God 
Stained with impurity ; 
The fountain flows for thee to wash, 
Its name ' Absolvo Te.' 

" There is no other cleansing now, 
Our Saviour left the Key 
Which opens rivers of His Blood, 
In the 4 Absolvo Te.'" 

— Stories Told to the Choir, No. VIII., " Sprinkled with Blood," p. 12. 
London : Mowbray. 

" And then my eyes were opened, and there knelt in the distance 
little Gerald Deane ; and I thought I saw, yet very indistinctly, one 
self-denying and wearied priest sitting near Gerald's side. And above 
them I saw the Form of One Crucified, from whose hands, which 
were raised in benediction fell, drop by drop, the Precious Blood. 
And as each drop fell on the burden, it dissolved away, and the priest 
heard the whisper, ' Loose him, and let him go,' and then I heard 
one priest's voice, in solemn, measured tones, ' By His Authority 
committed unto me, I absolve thee ; ' and as Gerald returned and 
knelt by Philip's side I knew he was at peace, that the heavy burden 
of sin was laid at the foot of the Cross, that he was marked with the 
Precious Blood which had fallen so lovingly on his soul. And the 
priest was ever at his duty, the delegate of the Invisible Presence, and 
the Form was ever by his side, and ever and ever dropped from the 

26 * 


Hands and Feet and Side the ' Blood which cleanseth from all Sin.' " 
— Ibid., pp. ii, 12. 

" The words on the lips of a Christian priest in such days are of 
this nature : ' You are ill of a disease that almost must, to a certainty, 
kill you eventually. There is no known remedy but this which we 
hold in our power. This cannot fail, if properly applied. I do not say 
that your case is hopeless ; I do not say that you cannot be otherwise 
healed -, but, honestly, I know no other way of curing you ! Will you 
try it ? ' As has been well and truly said by one not long ago gone 
to his rest : The man who confesses to God may be forgiven ; he 
who confesses to a priest must be forgiven." — Six Plain Sermons, by 
Richard Wilkins, Priest, pp. 28, 29. London : E. Longhurst. 


" Holy Michael, Archangel, defend us in conflict : that we perish 
not in the dreadful day of Judgment." — The Grail, by Rev. G. A. 
Jones, Vicar of St. Mary's, Cardiff, p. 21. 

" Star of Ocean fairest 
Mother, God who barest, 
Virgin thou immortal, 
Heaven's blissful portal. 

" Loose the bonds of terror, 
Lighten blinded error, 
All our ills repressing, 
Pray for every blessing. 

" Virgin, all excelling, 
Gentle past our telling, 
Pardoned sinners render, 
Gentle, chaste, and tender/' 

Day Office of the Church, p. xxiii. 

• v Mother of the King Eternal, 
Virgin, loved by choirs supernal, 
Save us from our foes infernal, 
With thy gentle prayers above." 

Union Review for J 863, p. 503. 


" Dear Spouse of sweet Mary, we ask for thine aid, 
Thy patronage crave, and thy prayers ; 
Saint Joseph, blest guardian of Jesus our Lord, 
Oh I soothe all our griefs and our cares." 

Oratory Worship, p. 90. 

" Next to Mary, what thy power, 
Tutor of the God-man ! 
Oh ! shield us in temptation's hour; 
Save us from sin's hateful ban. 

" Alleluia ! glory, Joseph ! 

Glory, dearest Saint, to thee ! 
Alleluia 1 glory, Joseph ! 

Thankful praise we give to thee." 

Hid., p. 93. 

" When the soul is about to depart from the body, then more than 
ever ought they who are by to pray earnestly upon their knees around 
the sick man's bed; and if the dying man be unable to speak, the name 
of Jesus should be constantly invoked, and such words as the following 
again and again repeated in his ear : — 

" Into Thy hands, O Lord, I commend my spirit. O Lord Jesus 
Christ, receive my spirit. 

" Holy Mary, pray for me. 

" Holy Mary, mother of grace, mother of mercy, do thou defend 
me from the enemy, and receive me at the hour of death." — The 
Golden Gate, Part III., p. 127, by Rev. S. Baring-Gould, Rector of 
Lew Trenchard. 

" Some very extravagant expressions of St. Alphonsus Liguori, 
respecting the blessed Virgin Mary, can be easily explained, and 
placed in a light that the most Protestant Christian must receive 
if he believes what our Lord says of the power of prayer, e.g., such 
expressions as ' O Mary save me ; When Jesus will have no mercy, 
I turn to thee ; give me thy help ; guide me ; save me, for in thee do 
I put my trust.' " — Popery, a sermon by " Father Ignatius," p. 3. 

" O ye holy Virgins of God, pray for us, that we may obtain pardon 
of our sins through your prayers." — Lesser Hours of the Sarum 
Breviary, p. 120. London, 1889. 

" Remember, O most loving Virgin Mary, that never was it known 
that any who fled to thy protection, implored thy help, and sought thy 


intercession, was left unaided. Encouraged with this assurance, I fly 
unto thee, O Virgin of Virgins, my Mother, to thee I come, before thee 
I stand sinful and sorrowful. O Mother of the Incarnate Word, 
despise not my petitions, but mercifully vouchsafe to hear them." — 
Catholic Prayers for Church of England People, by the Rev. A. H. 
Staunton, Curate of St. Alban's, Holborn, p. 136. Second edition. 
London: W. Knott, 1893. 

"O Thomas [a Becket] Martyr most constant, and invincible 
Confessor, splendour of the priesthood, the glory of France, the glory 
of England ! Reign, O blessed father, over the Church for which thou 
didst shed thy blood, and pour forth thy prayers to God for the 
salvation of us all." — Devotions in Honour of St. Thomas of Canterbury , 
by the Rev. H. G. Worth, late Curate of St. John the Divine, 
Kennington, p. 138. Second edition. London: W. Knott, 1895. 



" The Priest shall bless the Salt on this wise. 
" We humbly implore Thee, Almighty and Everlasting God, that 
of Thy bountiful goodness thou wouldst be pleased to bl^ess and 
sanc^tify this creature of Salt, which Thou hast created for the 
service of men, that it may profit for the health both of soul and body 
of them that take it, and that whatsoever is touched or sprinkled 
therewith may be freed from all uncleanness, and from all attacks of 
spiritual wickedness ; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen." — 
The Priest's Prayer Book, p. 221. Seventh edition. 

" He shall then bless the Water on this wise. 
" O God, Who in ordaining divers mysteries for the salvation of 
mankind, hast been pleased to employ the element of Water in the 
chiefest of Thy Sacraments : give ear to our prayers, and pour upon 
this water the might of Thy bless ^ing, that as it serves Thee in those 
holy mysteries, so by Thy divine grace it may here avail for the 
casting out of devils, and the driving away of diseases; that whatsoever 
in the houses or places of the faithful is sprinkled therewith, may be 
freed from all uncleanness, and delivered from hurt." — Ibid. 

"The [dead] body is then decently laid out, and a light placed 
before it. A small Crucifix is put in the hands of the deceased, upon 
his breast, or the hands are themselves placed crosswise, while the 


body is sprinkled with Holy Water." — The Golden Gate, Part I J J., 
p. 128. 

" The Exorcism of the Salt. 
" I exorcise thee, creature of salt, by the living God, ►£• by the true 
God, *b by the holy God, ►£ by the God Who, by the Prophet Eliseus, 
commanded thee *%• to be cast into the water that the barrenness of 
the water might be healed, that thou mightest be salt exorcised tor the 
spiritual health of believers, and be to all who take thee health of soul 
and body." — The Directorium Anglicanum. Edited by the Rev. F. G. 
Lee, Vicar of All Saints', Lambeth, p. 306. Fourth edition. 

" Exorcism of the Water. 
"I exorcise thee, creature of water, in the name of God the Father 
Almighty, and in the name of Jesus Christ His Son our Lord, and in 
the virtue of the Holy Ghost, to become water exorcised to chase 
away all power of the enemy, and to be able to uproot and overthrow 
the enemy himself and his apostate angels ; b}' the virtue of the same 
Lord Jesus Christ." — Ibid., p. 307. 

" The priest then sprinkles the Collars, Crosses, and Candles, with 
Holy Water, and Incenses them. Those who are to be admitted 
[into the Guild] then come up to the Altar." — Guild of St. John the 
Evangelist, St. Allan s, Holborn, London, Form of Reception, p. 18. 
Privately printed. 

" In the death chamber let a small table be placed at the foot of the 
bed to serve as a stand for a Cross and two Candles, these latter to be 
kept burning night and day till the hour of interment arrives, as a 
sign of the light into which the departed soul has passed."— The 
Parish Tracts, by Rev. J. Harry Buchanan. First Series. No. IV., 
" The Dying and the Dead." 

" The Exorcism [0/ Oil~\ . 

" I adjure thee, O creature of Oil, by God the Father 4* Almighty, 
Who hath made heaven and earth, the sea and all that therein is. 
Let all the power of the adversary, all the host of the devil, and all 
haunting and vain imaginations of Satan be cast out, and flee away 
from this creature of Oil, that it may be to all them that shall use the 
same health of mind and body in the Name of God the Father *i* 
Almighty, and of Jesus *b Christ His Son our Lord, and of the 
Jloly Ghost the Comforter, and foi the love of the same Jesus. 


Christ our Lord, Who is ready to judge both the quick and the dead, 
and the world by fire. R. Amen." — Day Office of the Church, 
p. lxix. 


" We long to hear the Divine Office ever going up to God from 
thousands of Religious Houses, and to see Fountains and Tintern and 
Kirkstall, and other noble foundations blossoming up again all over the 
land." — St. John the Baptist. A Sermon by the Rev. H. D. Nihill, 
Vicar of St. Michael's, Shoreditch, p. 14. 

" It is a pious custom of devout Christians on seeing a Monk, to 
kneel and kiss the hem of the Sacred Habit ; if done from love to 
Jesus, and reverence to the Habit of the Consecrated Life, a great 
blessing will be received." — Little Manual of Devotions, by Rev. J. L. 
Lyne, alias " Father Ignatius," p. 6. 

" Parents such as these [i.e., those parents who refuse to permit 
their children to become Monks or Nuns], lose all claim to such 
privileges as the fourth Commandment of the Decalogue gives to 
them ; they are the enemies of God and their children's souls. 
Blessed are those children who hearken to God rather than to them." 
— Llanthony Monastery Tracts, No. I. : " Why are you a Monk ? " 
p. 12. 

" Some of our Protestant friends tell us that Monkery, as they call 
it, is, not of Christian origin, but of Pagan origin. My Protestant 
brethren, I quite agree with you that it is. You are perfectly correct, 
Monasticism is of Pagan origin. The best illustration of the 
Monastic school among the Philosophic Pagans was Plato." — An 
Answer to the Question, Why are you a Monk? by Father Ignatius, 
p. 11. 

" Brethren, the five hundred million Buddhists, the largest and most 
influential religion in the world, possess Monasteries to a vast extent. 
In Banghok, the capital of Siam, in that capital alone, there are over 
ten thousand monks." — Ibid. p. 15. 



" He forgets what has been humourously pointed out, that the first 

Protestant of all was the Devil Just as the first Non-Catholic 

and Anti- Ritualist was Judas." — The Congregation in Church, p. 78. 
New edition. London : Mowbray. 

" Heretic means a choice, and it is not always perceived that heretic 
and a Protestant are much the same thing." — Ibid., p. 187. 

" Protestants can be shown to detest Jesus Christ and His teaching, 
and to prefer immorality, polemics, and cant thereto." — Brainless, 
Broadcast Benevolence, p. 17. Brighton: H. and C. Treacher. 


" The Protestant is quite right in recognizing the simplest attempt 
at Ritual as the 'thin end of the wedge.' It is so. . . . It is only 
the child who is not terrified when the first creeping driblet of water 
and the few light bubbles announce the advance of the tide, and the 
Protestant is but a child who does not recognize the danger of the 
trifling symptoms which are slowly and surely contracting the space 
of ground upon which he stands." — Church Review, June 24th, 1865, 
P- 587- 

"The Ritual question is one which, you will agree wjth me, is of 
great importance. To abolish Scriptural and Catholic Ritual, and at 
the same time to hope to maintain unimpaired the Catholic Faith, is, 
in my humble opinion, a great delusion. They both go together ; and 
if one falls, both will fall. . . . With the abolition of the symbolic 
ornamenta of the Church, doctrinal loss will be the result ; and the 
great Movement now going on will become stationary, and will 
gradually cease." — The President of the English Church Union — Church 
Review, April 25th, 1868, p. 402. 

"Nor, again, are we merely contending for the revival among 
ourselves of certain ceremonies because they are practised by the rest 
of the Catholic Church ; but we contend for our Ritual for the precise 
reason which is urged for its suppression — because it is the means, the 
importance of which becomes clearer every day, which the Church 
has seen fit to employ to express the truth of Christ's Sacramental 
Presence amongst His people." — The President of the English Church 
Union — Church Review, June 20th, 1868, p. 583. 


" Now there are, of course, many Catholic practices that necessarily 
result from a belief in the Real Presence of our dear Lord upon the 
Altar. Among the minor ones are bowing and genuflecting. Bowing 
to the Altar at all times, not because it is so much wood or stone put 
together in a certain shape, covered with handsome cloths, decked 
with flowers and lights ; not for this, were -it all ten times as gorgeous. 
Not for this, but because the Altar is the Throne of God Incarnate, 
where daily now, thank God, in many a Church in the land He 
deigns to rest. . . . And genuflecting, not to the Altar, but to the 
* Gift that is upon it;' to the God-Man, Christ Jesus, when He is 
there." — Six Plain Sermons, by Richard Wilkins, Priest, p. 57. 
London : E. Longhurst. 


" Nevertheless, although not actually schism, it is schismatical to 
attend Dissenting Meeting Houses, or to subscribe to, or assist the 
sectarian objects of Dissenters in any way. The same cannot be said 
of Roman Catholic Churches, and their objects, because the Roman 
Catholics are a branch of the true Church." — The Congregation in 
Church, p. 202. New Edition. London : Mowbray. 

" The Catholic Church is the home of the Holy Ghost. It is His 
only earthly home. He does not make His home in any Dissenting 
sect. Sometimes people quarrel with the Church, and break away 
from her, anH make little sham churches of their own. We call these 
people Dissenters, and their sham churches sects. The Holy Ghost 
does not abide — does not dwell — with them. He goes and visits them 
perhaps, but only as a stranger." — A Book for the Children of God, 
p. 77. London: W. Knott, 1891. 

" The Bible is the Book which God has given to His Church, and 
it belongs to the Church alone, and not to any Dissenting sect. No 
one but a Catholic can safely read the Bible, and no Catholic can read 
it safely who 4oes not read it in the Church's way." — Ibid., p. 100. 


Abbot (Bishop Robert) on timid speak- 
ing against the Papists, 329, 339 

Aberdeen (Dean of) [Very Rev. 
William Webster] objects to 
changes in Statutes of S.S.C., 141 

Address to Catholics by the Society of 
the Holy Cross, 63 

Alcuin Club, 253, 254 

— its work, 253 

— its Episcopal members, 253 
Alison (Rev. L.), 138 

Allen (Archdeacon) on Immoral Ritua- 
listic Confessors, 117, 119 

All Saints', Margaret Street, Sister- 
hood, Vows in, 174 

— how its inmates dispose of their 

property, 177, 178 
All Souls' Day, a Popish Festival 

observed by the Guild of All 

Souls, 230 
Altar Book for Young Persons, 217 
Anglican Sister of Mercy, 169 
Anarchy (Ecclesiastical), viii., 348, 349 
Archdeacon of Cleveland (Ven. W. H. 

Hutchings) hopes the S. S. C. 

will favour Roman Ritual, 77 

— Proposes Revision of S. S. C. 

Statutes, 128 

— Member of Committee for Revising 

Statutes of the S. S. C, 138 
Ascot Priory, Private Burial Ground 

at, 192 
Association for the Promotion of the 

Unity of Christendom, 307-323 

— its birth and membership, 308, 309 

— its Letter to the Inquisition, 317 

— Reply of the Inquisition, 317-319 

— and the Society of the Holy 

Cross, 327 
Association of the Friends of the 
Church, 5 

— Mysterious " Suggestions " for, 5 
Auricular Confession and Priestly 

Absolution, What the Ritualists 
teach about, 399-4O4 
Autobiography of Isaac Williams, 9, 
271, 277, 278 

Bagot De La Bere (Rev. J.) [formerly 
Edwards] defends the term 
" Sacrament of Penance," 142 

Bagshawe (Rev. Francis LI.) on the 
Roll of Brethren of S. S. C, 78 

— Secret Letter on the Priest in Abso- 

lution, 100, 101 

— Letter to the Bishop of London, 104 

— the Priest in Absolution in his care, 

104, 139 

— Resigns the office of Master of the 

S. S. C, 137 

— Remarkable Speech to Brethren of 

S. S. C, 139 

Banbury Guardian, 208 

Baring-Gould (Rev. Sabine) recom- 
mends Holy Water, 62 

Barnet Times, Jesuitical Letter to, 235 

Barrett (Rev. T. S.) appeals for 
S. S. C. Oratory at Carlisle, 67 

Bath and Wells (Bishop of) [Lord 
A. C. Harvey)] Speech on the 
Priest in Absolution, 116 

Bathe (Rev. Anthony) on the Master 
of S. S.C., 127 

Beckett (Rev. H. F. ) on Wives, 
Husbands, and the Confessional, 
81, 82 

Benediction of the Blessed Sacra- 
ment in a Ritualistic Convent 
Chapel, 193, 194 

— Lord Halifax on, 342 

Benson (Rev. R. M.) on a Nun's Vow 

of Obedience, 169 
Beveridge (Bishop) on the Real 

Presence and Eucharistic Sacri- 
fice, 222 
Bible (The) What the Ritualists teach 

about, 373-375 
Binney (Rev. John Erskine) glories 

in being a Member of S. S. C., 146 
Biography of Father Lockhart, 26 
Birkmyre (Rev. N. Y.) on Reunion 

with Rome, 328 
Bishop of Oxford (Dr. Bagot) writes 

to Newman about Littlemore, 

Monastery, 22. 



Bishops (The) smile on and favour law 
breakers, ix. 

— their neglect of duty, 42 

— their opinion of the Priest in Abso- 

lution, and Society of the Holy 
Cross, 1 10- 1 17 

— on the Confessional, 111-116 

— five or six wish well to S. S.C., 

x 33 

— and Ritualistic Sisters of Mercy, 

Blachford (Lord)— see Rogers (Mr. F.) 
Blessing the Paschal Candle, 246 
Bloemfontein (Bishop of) [Dr. J. W. 
Hicks] presented with a set of 
Low Mass Vestments, 240 

— a Vice-President of the Society of 

St. Osmund, 240 
Bodington (Canon Charles) on Con- 
fession, 75 

— on the circulation of the Priest in 

Absolution, 109 

— Member of Committee for Revising 

Statutes of the S. S. C, 138 

— Speech in Secret Synod of S. S. C, 

Body (Canon George), his reasons 
for remaining in the S. S. C, 

— Member of Committee for Revising 

Statutes of the S. S. C, 138 

— on the Eucharistic Sacrifice, 219 
Book of Common Prayer, not com- 
plete, 71 

— Proposed additions to, 71, 72 

— Revision of, on Ritualistic lines, 


— What the Ritualists teach about 

the, 375-377 
Books for the Young. No. I., Confession, 
54, 56, in, 112, 115 

— termed "A wretched little book," 

Bowden (Mr. J. W.) 4, 5, 6, 16, 17, 

42, 172 
Bowden's Life of Father Faber, 28, 30, 

31, 32, 34, 35, 41, 42 
Bricknell's Judgment of the Bishops, J, 

9, 262, 281 
Brinckman's Controversial Methods of 

Romanism, 155 
British Critic, 271 
Bristol Branch of English Church 

Union sympathises with S.S.C., 

Bristow (Canon Rhodes) on the 
*' Sacrament of Penance," 75 

— hopes " the Roman Use would still 

prevail," 77 

— on Convocation, 78 

— on the Priest in Absolution, 136 

Bristow (Rev. Canon Rhodes) Mem- 
ber of Committee for Revising 
Statutes of the S. S. C, 138 

— Speech on Revision of Statutes 

ofS.S.C, 141 
Brotherhood of the Holy Cross, 233 

— the inner circle of the O. H. R., 233 

— its " very existence to be kept in 

strict secrecy," 233 

— its secret Intercession Paper, 233 
Browne (Rev. E. G. K.) on Tractarians 

going secretly to Mass, 29 
' — Annals of the Tractarian Move- 
ment, 30, 89 
Bruno's Catholic Belief, 265 
Bunsen (M.) on the Work of the 

Tractarians, 267 
Burgon (Dean), v. 
' — Lives of Twelve Good Men, 215 
Butler (Dean William J.) on Husbands, 

Wives, and the Confessional, 91 
Byron (Miss H. B.) Mother Superior 

of All Saints', Margaret Street, 

Sisterhood, 177 
Cairo (Bishop of) a Vice-President of 

the Society of St. Osmund, 240 
Cardinal Newman: a Monograph, 26, 

Carlisle (Bishop of) [Dr. Harvey 

Goodwin] severely censures 

S. S.C., 146 
Carlisle, Oratory of the Society of the 

Holy Cross at, 66-69 
Carter (Canon T. T.) on "The 

Sacrament of Penance," 74 

— and the Statement of S. S. C, 108 

— revises the Proof Sheets of the 

Priest in Absolution, 109 

— and the circulation of the Priest in 

Absolution, 109, no 

— Speech on the "animus" of the 

Bishops, 124 

— Member of Committee for Revising 

Statutes of the S. S. C, 138 

— Vows and the Religious State, 175 

— Advice about Intercession Paper of 

C.B. S., 205 

— on Eucharistic Adoration, 218 
Catholic Dictionary, 366 

Catholic Standard on the work of the 
Order of Corporate Reunion, 161 

Catholic Union of Prayer, 334 

Cautions for the Times, 200 . 

Celibates of the Society of the Holy 
Cross, 52, 53 

— their secret Oath, 53 

Celibacy (Vow of) taken by a girl of 

eighteen for life, 180 
Ceremonies of Low Mass, What the 
Ritualists teach about the, 393-395 
Ceremonial of the Altar, 241-244 



bhadwick (Rev. J. W.) Member of 
Committee for Revising Statutes 
of the S. S. C, 138 

Chambers (Rev. J. C.) translates 
and Edits the Priest in Absolution, 
93-95, 104, 105 

Chaplin (Rev. E. M.) advocates 
Roman Ritual, 77 

Character of Dr. Littledale as a Contro- 
versialist, 193, 194, 203 

Charles Lowdcr, 57, 59, 60, 128 

Chauntry Priests, 250 

Cheltenham Chapter of the Society of 
the Holy Cross, 108 

Chichester (Bishop of) [Dr. Durnford] 
severely censures the Society of 
the Holy Cross, 116 

Chronicle of Convocation, 111-117 

Church of England Working Men's 
Society present an address of 
sympathy with the Society of the 
Holy Cross, 121, 137 

Church Review, 91, 153, 157, 208, 261, 

336, 337 
Church Times, 154, 158, 208, 214, 228, 

231. 253, 328, 358 
Church Union Gazette, 335, 345, 346, 


Churton (Rev. E.) protests against 
Dr. Pusey's conduct, 282 

Civilita Caitolica, 158 

Clerical Celibacy, 118, 119 

Clewer Sisterhood, its Rules of 
Poverty, Chastity, and Obedi- 
ence, 174 

— how its inmates dispose of their 

property, 175 
Close (Dean) opposes Carlisle Oratory 

of S. S.C., 67, 68 
Cobb's Kiss of Peace, 229 
Coles (Rev. V. S.S.) on the "levelling 

up " policy of the English Church 

Union, 338 
" Committee of Clergy," The, 49 
Confession, Lord Salisbury on 

habitual, 70 

— Secret discussion on, 74, 75 

— Dr. Pusey on the Seal of, 82 
Confessions, The secret stealthy way 

Tractarians heard, 89 

— How Archdeacon Manning heard, 

90, 91, 92 

— How Dr. Pusey heard Ritualistic 

Sisters', 187 
Confessional, Jurisdiction in the, 76 

— The Secrecy of the Ritualistic, 80-92 

— Indelicate Questions to a Married 

Woman in the, 81 

— Wives, Husbands, and the, 81, 

82, 91 

— Ritualistic Sisters and the, 83 

Confessional, The age Children should 
be brought to the, 83 

— The priest is "in the Confessional 

a Fox," 92 

— The Bishops on the, 1 11- 116 

— Ritualistic Priests ruin Women 

through the, 117 

— often the road " down to hell," 121 

— and the property of Ritualistic 

Sisters of Mercy, 172 
Confessor, Extraordinary Letter to a 

Young Lady from a, 70-72 
Confessors, Petition for Licensed, 


— Immoral and Wicked, 117-121 

— How Ritualistic Sisters should 

treat their, 167 
Confraternity of the Blessed Sacra- 
ment, 202-226 

— its birth, 204, 210 

— its secret Intercession Paper, 204, 205 

— its medals may be buried with 

members, 205 

— exposed by the Rock and Western 

Daily Mercury, 206, 207 

— keeps as far as possible out of 

public notice, 207 

— its secret doings in America, 208 
-T- its secret Roll of Priests-Associate, 

209, 210 

— the " daughter" of the Society of 

the Holy Cross, 210 

— its Manual, 211 

— its objects, 211 

— advocates Masses and Prayers for 

the Dead, 211, 213 

— and Fasting Communion, 211, 215, 


— prays for Corporate Reunion with 

Rome and the East, 212 

— its secret Annual Conference, 213 

— and Purgatory, 214 

— its A Uar Book for Young Persons, 217 

— prays for the Restoration of the 

Reserved Sacrament, 217 

— agrees with Rome on Eucharistic 

Adoration, 218 

— prays for Restoration of Extreme 

Unction, 218 

— observes Corpus Christi Day, 218 

— advocates Sacramental Confession, 


— advocates the Real Presence and 

Eucharistic Sacrifice, 219 

— advocates the Mass, 222, 223 

— teaches Transubstantiation, 223-225 

— its Episcopal Members, 225 

— Bishop Wilberforce on its Popish 

character, 225 
Convent of S. Mary and S. Scholas- 
tica, West Malfing, 184 



Convents, Shocking Cruelty in Ritual- 
istic, 40, 189 

— Private Burial Grounds in, 191, 192 
Convocation, Society of the Holy 

Cross debate on, 78 
Convocation (Canterbury House of) 
Discussion on the Priest in Abso- 
lution and the Society of the Holy 
Cross, in, 110-117 

— Resolution of Upper House, cen- 

suring both Society and book, 

113. 117 
Cookesley (Rev. W. G.), 168 
Corea (Bishop of) [Dr. C.J. Corfe] on 

the Revision of Statutes of 

S.S.C., 141 

— a Member of the Confraternity of 

the Blessed Sacrament, 225 
Council of Trent, 263, 269, 330 
Cross, Adoration of, at St. Cuthbert's, 

Philbeach Gardens, 245 
Crouch (Rev. 'William), 64 

— opposes giving up the Priest in 

Absolution, 109 

Cusack (Miss) her experience in Dr. 
Pusey's Sisterhoods, 186, 187 

Dalgairns (Mr. J. D.), 280 

D'Aubigne's History of the Reforma- 
tion, 70 

Davidson (Rev. J. P. F.) President of 
the Guild of All Souls, 231 

Dawes (Rev. N.) [now Bishop of 
Rockhampton] becomes a Mem- 
ber of the Society of the Holy 
Cross, 76 

Denison (Archdeacon) joins the 
Society of the Holy Cross, 127, 139 

— Laughs at Sy nodical condemna- 

tion of S. S. C, 134 

— opposes the disbanding of 

S. S.C., 134 
■ — objects to changes in Statutes 

of S. S. C, 141 
Denison (Rev. H. P.) on compulsory 

Confession, 75 

— Letter about the C. B. S. Roll of 

Priests-Associate, 210 
Desanctis (Rev. Dr.) on Jesuits dis- 
guised as Puseyites, 32 

— Popery and Jesuitism, 33, 34 
Devonport Manual, a secret book of 

Dr. Pusey's Sisters, 197, 198 
" Disciplina Arcani," 1, 2, 3 
'" Discipline" (The) at Elton, 35 
• — Dr. Pusey sends for a, 36 

— as used by Ritualists described, 38 
^— Cruelties of, 38 

-»— prescribed for Ritualistic Sisters 

of Mercy, 39, 185 
-— used most cruelly on a Ritualistic 

Nun, 40 

Dissent, What the Ritualists teach 
about, 410 

Dunn (Rev. James) on Confession to 
Young Priests, 75 

" Economical " mode of speaking and 
writing, 2 

"Economy" and St. George's Mis- 
sion, 59 

Edinburgh Chapter of the Society of 
the Holy Cross, 108 , 

Enclosed Nuns in Ritualistic Con- 
vents, 183 

— in Dr. Pusey's Sisterhood, 183, 184 

— at Feltham, 184 

— at West Mailing, 184 

— at Llanthony, 184 

— at Slapton, 184 

English Churchman, 97, 155, 156, 236, 

240, 252, 262, 296 
English Church Union (Bristol and 

Penrith Branches of) sympathises 

with S. S. C, 137 

— its Council do not "explain all 

their tactics," 329 

— offers prayers for the Reunion of 

Christendom, 330 

— approves of Dr. Pusey's Eirenicon, 

33L 332 

— its first President secedes to 
Rome, 335 

— its '" levelling up " policy, 338 

— Address to Lambeth Conference in 

favour of Reunion of Christen- 
dom, 344 

— Speech before the Exeter Branch 

of, 350 
Equivocation, 16 
Essays on Reunion, 261, 313-316 
Eucharistic Adoration, 218 
Eucharistic Sacrifice, 219, 221, 222 
Evangelical Party (The) described 

by Mr. Maskell, 44 
Evening Communion, 213, 214 
Extreme Unction, 218 

— Superstitious service of, 218 
Eyton (Canon Robert) Speech on the 

Society of the Holy Cross, 124 

— on the circulation of the Priest in 

Absolution, 144 
Faber (Rev. Frederick William) visits 
the Continent, 28 

— not scandalised by Relic Wor- 

ship, 30 

— declares Protestantism a diabolical 

heresy, 30 

— kisses the Pope's foot, 31 

— prays at the Shrine of Aloysius 

the Jesuit, 31 

— thinks Heaven " is like Rome," 31 

— returns with Rosaries blessed by 

the Pope, 32 



Faber (Rev. Frederick William) his 
work at Elton, 34 

— his Secret Society at Elton, 35 

— discovers he is " living a dishonest 

life," 41 

— his Life of St. Wilfrid, 42 

— received into the Church of 

Rome, 42 
Fasting Communion, 211, 215 

— Bishop S. Wilberforce on, 215 
"Father George" of the O. H.R., 

• his Jesuitical conduct in a 
Protestant parish, 238 
Fathers (The) and the Rule of 

Faith, 268 
Fathers of Charity, 281, 282 
Feltham Ritualistic Nuns, 184 
Five Years in a Protestant Sisterhood, 85 
Fleming (Mr. Robert) how he dis- 
covered the Priest in A bsolution, 97 
Foote (Rev. John Andre wes) and the 
Priest in Absolution, 95 

— Member of Committee for 

Revising Statutes of S. S. C, 138 
Frere (Rev. William John) Speech on 

the Priest in Absolution, 144 
From Oxford to Rome, 89 
Froude (Rev. Hurrell) proselytises in 

an " underhand way," 6 

— Remains, 6, 46, 267 
Gilmartin's Manual of Church History, 

Gladstone (Mr.) on the Romeward 
Movement, 286, 287, 290 

— Gleanings of Past Years, 286, 287, 290 

— on Archdeacon Manning's want of 

Straightforwardness, 303 

— Rome and the Newest Fashions in 

Religion, 364, 365 
Godwin (Rev. Robert Herbert) objects 

to changes in Statutes of the 

S. S.C., 141 
Goldie (Rev. C. D.) on the action of 

S. S. C, 108, 132 

— Member of Committee for Revising 

Statutes of S. S. C, 138 

— says the Priest in Absolution is 

" needed," 144 
Goodman (Miss Margaret) on the 
serious evils in Ritualistic Sister- 
hoods, 170, 171 

— Sisterhoods in the Church of England, 

167, 171, 184, 188-191 

— Her sad story of a dying Sister of 

Mercy, 176 

Gore (Rev. Canon Charles) on the 
Real Presence and the Consecra- 
ted Elements, 219 

Grahamstown (Bishop of) [in 1877], 
expresses his " goodwill " to the 
S.S.C., 137 

Grant (Mr. William) Letter on the 
Order of Corporate Reunion, 158 

Green- Armytage (Rev. N.) on the 
Church of Rome, 77 

Guild of St. Alban's, London and 
Wolverhampton Provinces of, 
sympathise with the S. S. C, 137 

Guild of All Souls, 227-232 

— its Objects, 227 

— its secret Intercession Paper, 228 

— its Office for the Dead According to 

the Roman and Sarum Uses, 228 

— its semi-secrecy, 228 

— teaches Transubstantiation, 229 

— its Manual, 229, 230 

— observes " All Souls' Day," 230 

— its President promoted by Bishop 

Temple, 231 
Guild of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, 257 
Guilds, their work, 259 
Gurney (Rev. Archer), his courageous 

attack on Dr. Pusey, 332, 333 
Halifax (Lord) on the use of the Ten 

Commandments, 341 

— on Benediction of the Blessed 

Sacrament, 342 

— most earnestly desire visible 

communion with Rome, 346 

— prefers Leo XIII. to the Judicial 

Committee of the Privy Council, 


— his Speech at Bristol, 352, 353 

— on Papal Infallibility, 352, 353 

— terms Luther "a needless and 

noxious Rebel," 354 
Hammond (Rev. Canon C. E.), 77 
Heylin's Life of Laud, 329 
Hislop's Two Baby Ions, 165 
Hoare (Rev. R. Whitehead), 137 
Hodgson (Rev. James) Letter on the 

C.B.S., 208 
Holy Water used by Ritualists, 62, 247 

— dead bodies to be sprinkled with, 


— its supposed virtues, 63 
Homily Concerning Prayer, 213 
Homily on Repentance, 218 
Homily on Good Works, 283 
Homily on Peril of Idolatry, 356 
Honorarium for a Mass, 250, 251 
Hook (Rev. Dr.) anxious to establish' 

a Sisterhood at Leeds, 163 

— his remarkable letter to Dr. Pusey 

on Sisters of Charity, 164 

— on Pusey's eulogy of the Jesuits, 289' 

— on Secession to Rome, 291 

— on the Judicial Committee of 

Privy Council, 347 
Hooker's Works, 220 
Hope-Scott (Mr. James R.), 14, 25 

— Visits the Jesuits at Rome, 275 



Hornby (Bishop) a member of the 
Confraternity of the Blessed 
Sacrament, 225 • 

Hoskins (Rev. Edgar) and the Priest 
in Absolution, 122 

— favours revision of the Statutes of 

S. S.C., 128 

— opposes disbanding S. S. C, 129 

— Member of Committee for Revising 

Statutes of S. S. C, 138 
Hughes (Miss Marian) takes a Vow of 
Celibacy, 165 

— visits Roman Catholic Convents on 

the Continent, 1G5, 166 
Hutchings (Rev. W. H.)— see Arch- 
deacon of Cleveland 
Hymns, Ancient and Modern, 245 
Immaculate Conception of the Virgin, 

Incense, Driving the Devil out of, 246 
Inquisition (The) Letter to, from the 

A. P. U.C., 317 

— Reply of the, 317-319 

— Memorial to, from English clergy, 


Instructions for Retreats, 58 

Intercession Paper of the Confraternity 
of the Blessed Sacrament, 204, 
205, 206, 213, 214, 215, 217, 218 

— ordered to be destroyed when 

used, 205 

— exposed in the Rock 

— exposed in the Western Daily 

Mercury, 206 

— how the first copy was found by a 

Protestant, 207 

— its secret character admitted, 208 
Intercession Paper of the Guild of All 

Souls, 228 
Intercession Paper of the B. H. C, 233, 

235. 236 

— recommends Liguori's Glories of 

Mary, 233 
Invocation of Saints, Dr. Pusey 
believes in, 297 

— what the Ritualists teach about, 

Irish Ecclesiastical Record, 359 
Jenner (Bishop), on the Ritual of the 

Society of the Holy Cross, 77 

— 132, 142 i 
Jesuits in Disguise, 32 
Jesuit Order, 131 

Jesuits (The), Newman dislikes an 
article against, 271 

— their works the " favourite read- 

ing" of Rev. W. G. Ward. 274 

— Mr. J. R. Hope-Scott's visits to, 


— Dr. Pusey eulogises the Founder 

of, 289 

Johnson (Rev. John Barnes) on the 

Fire of Purgatory, 230 
Judicial Committee of Privy Council, 


— Lord Halifax and Dean Hook on 

the, 347 
Jurisdiction in the Confessional, 76 
Kane's Notes on the Roman Ritual, 211 
Keble (Rev. John) on " Yearning after 

Rome," 286 

— would allow, but not enjoin the 

"Discipline," 37 

— on Protestantism, 266 

— on the Reformers, 270 

Kempe (Rev. John William) praises 

the term " Mass," 142 
Kensit (Mr. John) exhibits Ritualistic 

Instruments of Torture, 38 
Kilburn Sisterhood, 83 
King (Rev. Bryan), 59, 60 
King (Rev. Owen C. H.), what he 

saw in a Ritualistic Convent 

Chapel, 193, 194, 203 
Kirkpatrick (Rev. R. C.) on hearing 

Confessions, 75 
Lacey (Rev. T. A.) his secret Mission 

to Rome, 356 

— his Paper for the private use of 

Roman Cardinals, 357 
Latimer (Bishop) Sermons, 203 

— Remains, 203, 226 

— on forged Sacrifices, 226 

— on " Purgatory Pick Purse," 251 
Laymen's Ritual Institute for Nor- 
wich, 254, 255 

— its secret Oath, 254 

Lea's History of Sacerdotal Celibacy, 

Lebombo (Bishop of) [Dr. W. E. 

Smy the] a Member of the Society 

of the Holy Cross, 61 

— His work in Zululand, 61, 62 

— a Member of the Confraternity of 

the Blessed Sacrament, 225 

Lee (Rev. F. G.) and the Order of 

Corporate Reunion, 153-155 

— on the "rank and authority" of 

the Pope, 156 
Lewington (Rev. A. L.) Teaches 

Transubstantiation, 223 
" Levelling Up," how it is done, 

336, 338 
Liberty of Conscience denounced, 

368, 369 
Licensed Confessors (Petition for), its 

secret history, 70-72 
Lichfield (Bishop of) [Dr. Selwyn] 

Speech on the Society of the 

Holy Cross, 114 
Life of Archbishop Tait, 97, 98, 102, 

1S0, 181, 276 



Life of Bishop Wilberforce, 60, 181, 

182, 297, 358 
Life of Dr. Pusey, 10, 19, 20, 36, 37, 

85, 163-166, 271, 282, 283, 289, 

290, 292, 293, 296, 298 
Linklater (Rev.) on the Ritual of the 

S. S.C., 77 
Litany of Our Lady, 255 
Litany of the Saints, 246 
Little (Canon Knox) his sermon on 

the Priest in Absolution, 126 

— his connection with the Society of 

the Holy Cross, 126 

— on revision of the Statutes of the 

S.S. C, 129 
Little (Rev. C. Hardy) and the Priest 

in Absolution, 97 
Littledale (Rev. Dr.), 108 

— on how to prevent secessions to 

Rome, 147 

— Defence of Church Principles, 148 

— Chaplain of a Ritualistic Sister- 

hood, 193 

— officiates at Benediction of the 

Blessed Sacrament, 194 
Littlemore Monastery, 16-28 
Liturgy of the Church of Sarum, 249, 

Llandaff (Bishop of) [Dr. Ollivant] 

Speech on the Society of the 

Holy Cross, 113 
Llanthony, Enclosed Nuns at, 184 
London (Bishop of) [Dr. Jackson] 

censures the Ptiest in Absolution, 

104, 112, 113 
Longley (Archbishop Charles T.) 

Letter on Confessing a Married 

Woman, 81 
Lord's Day and the Holy Eucharist, 

339-344 , % , 

Lowder (Rev. Charles) describes the 
first Ritualistic Retreat 57, 58 

— and St. George's Mission, 59-61 

— on Auricular Confession, 75 

— on Convocation, 78 

— recommends withdrawal of Priest 
in Absolution from circulation, 108 

— Speech on the action of Bishop 

Mackarness, 123 

Luke (Rev. W. H. Colbeck) on dis- 
banding the S. S. C, 133 

Luther (Martin) Speech at Diet of 
Worms, 69 

Macfarlane (Rev. Brother) on the 
" Sacrament of Penance," 74 

Mackonochie (Rev. A. H.) on the 
" caution " of the.S. S. C., 47 

— Letter on Carlisle Oratory of 


— on the principles of the Priest in 

Absolution, 99 

Mackonochie (Rev. A. H.) opposes 
S. S. C. deputation to the Bishops, 

— Speech on the action of the 

Bishops, 123 

— on compulsory Confession, 126 

— opposes disbanding S. S. C, 133 

— thinks the Priest in Absolution 

"a most useful book for young 
priests," 136 

— his evidence before the Royal 

Commission on Ecclesiastical 

Courts, 348 
Manners (Lord John) [now Duke of 

Rutland] secures Rules of Romish 

Sisterhoods, 164 
Manning (Archdeacon), how he heard 

Confessions, 90, 91, 92 

— his double-dealing, 299-305 

— kneels before the Pope's carriage, 


— Mr. Gladstone on his want of 

straightforwardness, 303 
Manning (Cardinal) on Secessions to 
Rome, 272, 321-323 

— Essays on Religion, 272, 321-323, 365 
Manual of Confession for Children, 84 
Marshall (Rev. T. Outram) secret 

Speeches on the Bishops, 124, 133 

— opposes destruction or publication 

of the Priest in Absolution, 136 
Maskell (Rev. William) describes the 
crooked ways of Tractarians, 44 

— Second Letter, 44, 45 

— Letter to Dr. Pusey, 86, 87 
Mass, The, Bishop Latimer on, 202 

— preached before the University of 

Oxford, 271 

— Rev. E. W. Sergeant on, 343 
" Mass Penny," 252 

Melville (Canon) his warning against 
Popery, 369, 371, 372 

Memoirs of J. R. Hope-Scott, 14, 25, 
36, 274, 275, 287 

Monastic Institutions, What the Rit- 
ualists teach about, 408 

Monastic Orders, 283, 284 

Monastic Times, 185 

Monks and Nuns. Pagan origin of, 165 

Morris (Rev. J. B.) preaches the Sac- 
rifice of the Mass before Oxford 
University, 271 

Mossman (Rev. T. W.) and the Order 
of Corporate Reunion, 154, 155, 

— professes faith in the Pope's Infal- 

libility, 157 

— his secret Letter on the Order of 

Corporate Reunion, 160 

— his Report on the O. C. R. to the 

S. S. C, 159 




Mozley (Rev. Professor James B.), 3, 
17, 18, 277, 294 

Mozley (Rev. Thomas), his description 
of Littlemore Monastery, 20, 25 

Nassau (Bishop of) [Dr. E. T. 
Churton] a Member of the Con- 
fraternity of the Blessed Sacra- 
ment, 225 

Neale (Rev. Dr.) advice to Ritualistic 
Sisters, 83, 172, 173 

Newman (Rev. J. H.) on secrect 
doctrines, 1-3 

— on truthfulness, 2 

— does not wish the names of his 

party known, 4 

— expects to be called a Papist, 6 

— writes strongly against Popery, 


— eats his " dirty words," 14, 285 

— establishes a Monastery, 17, 21 

— Bishop of Oxford's Letter to, 22-24 

— life in Newman's Monastery, 26-28 

— his interview with Wiseman at 

Rome, 263, 264 

— has " a work to do in England,' 


— on uttering an untruth, 265 

— called a Papist to his face, 266 

— begins to use the Breviary, 268 

— believes in the Sacrifice of the 

Mass, 268 

— his use of " irony," 269 

— his mind " essentially Jesuitical," 


— dislikes an article against the 

Jesuits, 271 

— thinks " Rome the centre of unity," 


— " thought the Church of Rome was 

right," 277 

— has " a secret longing love of 

Rome," 283 

— writes: — "I love the Church of 

Rome too well," 294 

— his secession to Rome, 296 

— Letters, 4, 5, 6, 10, 15, 16, 17, 19, 

20, 266, 267, 268, 271, 272, 273, 
274. 294, 295 

— Via Media, 264 

— Apologia Pro Vita Sua, 13, 21, 22-24, 

25, 263, 265, 270, 271, 274, 284, 


— Letter to the Bishop of Oxford, 278 
Nicholas (Rev. G. Davenport) and 

the Statement of S. S. C, 108 

— on the secret nature of S. S. C, 122 
Night Hoars of the Church, 200 
Nihill (Rev. H. D.) on the " Sacra- 
ment of Penance," 74 

— is "not ashamed of the Priest in 

Absolution," 144 

Nineteenth Century, article on the 

Order of Corporate Reunion in 

the, 161 
Nunnery Life in the Church of England, 

40, 41, 185 
Oakeley (Rev. Frederick) on life in 

Littlemore Monastery, 21 

— describes Tractarian conduct on 

the Continent, 29 
Offices from the Breviary, 200 
" One of our Consolations," 359 
Order of Corporate Reunion, 147- 161 

— its Objects, 148 

— its Birth, 148 

— First Pastoral of the, 149-151 

— " Thomas, Rector " of the, 149 

— "Joseph, Provincial of York," 149 

— " Laurence, Provincial of Caer- 

leon," 149 

— opposes School Boards, 150 

— doubts the validity of the Orders 

of the Church of England, 151 

— professes "loyalty" to the Pope, 


— acknowledges the Pope as "visible 

head " of the whole Church, 152 

— Who are the secretly consecrated 

Bishops of the, 153-155 

— Mr. William Grant's letter on, 


— The Civilita Cdttolica on the, 158 

— The Society of the Holy Cross and 

the, 159-161, 327, 328 

— said to have reordained eight hun- 

dred clergy of the Church of 
England, 161 

— accepts the dogmas of the Council 

of Trent, 251 
Order of the Holy Redeemer, 233-239 

— its mysterious inner circle, 233 

— its Monthly Leaflet, 233 

— its Popish profession of Faith, 


— acknowledges the Pope as 

" Teacher " of the whole Church, 


— treasonable Letter of "John 

O. H.R." 235 

— afraid of the light, 235 

— opens a Convent at Stamford Hill, 


— its object the subjection of Eng- 

land to Rome, 236 

— "Rev. Father Square's" address 

to, 237 
Order of St. John the Divine, a secret 

Society in East London, 239 
Oscott College, Reunion with Rome 

discussed at, 281 
Oar National Independence in peril, 

365. 366 



Oxenham (Rev. Frank N.) censures 

the Priest in Absolution 102, 109, 

no, 122 
Oxford (Bishop of) [Dr. S. Wilber- 

force] on Dr. Pusey as a Roman 

Confessor, 88 

— [Dr. Mackarnes.s] Speech on the 

Society of the Holy Cross, 115 

— [Dr. Mackarness] tries to save the 

S. S. C. from censure, 123 
Oxford Martyrs' Memorial, Pusey 

dislikes it as "unkind to the 

Church of Rome," 270 
Parker (Rev. James Benjamin) and 

the Roll of the S. S. C, no 
Palmer's Narrative of Events, 4, 264, 

267, 285, 286 
Papal Infallibility, 157, 352 

— What the Ritualists teach about, 

381, 382 
Parnell (Rev. Charles) on the Roman 
Ritual, 77 

— opposes publication of Priest in 

Absolution, 136 
Pattison (Rev. Mark), his experience 
in Littlemore Monastery, 27 

— goes once to Dr. Pusey to Con- 

fession, 187 
*' Peace with Rome with all our 

hearts," 353 
Penitentiary Committee of the Society 

of the Holy Cross, 55 
Penrith Branch of English Church 

Union sympathises with the 

S.S.C., 137 
Perjury and Lying, 82, 83 
Perry (Rev.T.W.) and the Society of 

the Holy Cross, 108 
Phillimore (Sir Walter) and the 

Society of the Holy Cross, 108 
Pixell (Rev. C. H. V.), 67 
Plymouth Ritualistic Sisterhood, " a 

hell upon earth," 186 
Pope (The) (The Order of Corporate 

Reunion recognises) as ' ' Visible 

Head " of the Church, 152 

— Prayed for as ''our Pope," 242 

— recognised as Governor of the 

Church, 248, 250 

— rejoices at the work of the Tract- 

arians, 271 

— the " Representative " of the 

Divine Head of the Church, 285 

— Dr. Pusey on the Supremacy and 

Primacy of, 331 

— Rev. G. B. Roberts on the Fri- 

macy of, 345 
Protestantism a "Bastard Faith," 


— "a dark and damnable spot in the 

Church's History," 255 

Protestantism, the great hindrance to 
Union with Rome, 261 

— " is dangerous now," 266 

— Dr. Pusey's opinion of, 292 

— What the Ritualists teach about, 

Popery, an enemy to National 

Prosperity, 362 
Powell (Rev. J. B.) on the Ritual of 

the Society of the Holy Cross, 77 
Priest in Absolution, vii. 

— its original price, 56 

— Secret History of, 93-147 

— translated and edited by Rev. 

J. C. Chambers, 93-95 

— said to be a "golden treatise," 94 

— praised by the Church Review, 94 

— curious letter about the, 95 

— supplied only to High Church 

priests, 95 

— its copyright purchased by the 

Society of the Holy Cross, 95, 96 

— secret documents concerning, 
_ quoted, 95, 96, 100-110, 121-144 

— its sale, 9b, 103 

— how Mr. Robert Fleming discovered 

the, 97 

— exposed in the House of Lords, 97, 


— Lord Redesdale on the, 98 

— Archbishop Tait terms it " a dis- 

grace to the community," 98 

— peers protest against the, 99 

— its "principles" said to guide all 

Ritualistic Confessors, 99 

— secret Letter on, from Rev. Francis 

LI. Bagshawe, 100, 101 

— debate on, in secret Synod of 

S. S. C, 134-136 

— another debate on, in secret Synod 

of S. S. C, 142-144 
Priest's Prayer Book on Holy Water, 


— its services for Sisters of Mercy, 


Private Burial Grounds in Ritualistic 
Convents, 191, 192 

Prynne (Rev. G. R.) Member of Com- 
mittee for Revising statutes of 
S. S.C., 138 

Puller (Rev. F. W.) on valid Absolu- 
tions, 76 

— on Revising the statutes of S. S. C, 


— Member of Committee for Revising 

Statutes of S. S. C, 138 

— on Evening Communion, 215 
Purcell's Life of Cardinal Manning, 91, 

92, 273, 295, 298-303, 321 
Purgatorial Society, A, 227-232 
Purgatory and the C. B. S, 214 



Purgatory and the Guild of All Souls, 

— What the Ritualists teach about, 

" Purgatory Pick Purse," 251 
Purton (Rev. William) defends the 

Society of the Holy Cross, 129 
Pusey (Rev. Dr.) joins the Tractarian 

Movement, 6 

— his subtle scheme for writing 

against Popery, 10 

— approves of Newman's proposed 

Monastery, 19 

— sends for a " Discipline," 36 

— wears hair-cloth, 36 

— would like to be ordered the " Dis- 

cipline," 37 

— Manual for Confessors, 39, 40, 82, 

83, 120, 121, 136, 167, 185 

— first Retreat held in his rooms, 57, 


— and St. George's Mission, 59, 60 

— on the Seal of Confession, 82, 187 

— on bringing children to Confession, 


— begins to hear Confessions in 1838, 

8 5 

— in 1842 writes against Confession, 

85, 86 

— how Confessions were heard in his 

Sisterhood, 87 

— M doing the work of a Roman Con- 

fessor," 88 

— Hints for a First Confession, 87, 88 

— on the fearful evils of the Confes- 

sional, 120, 121 

— eager to set up Sisters of Mercy, 


— visits Romish Convents in Ire- 

land, 164 

— procures the Rules of Romish 

Convents, 164 

— Enclosed Nuns of "The Sacred 

Heart " in his Sisterhood, 183, 184 

— recommends the " Discipline " for 

Sisters of Mercy, 185 

— charged with breaking the Seal of 

Confession, 187 

— hears Confessions " on the sly," 87 

— his Introductory Essay to Essays 

on Reunion, 261 

— dislikes the Oxford Martyrs' 
Memorial, 270 

— his eulogy of the Founder of the 

Jesuits, 289 

— his opinion of Protestantism, 292 

— desires "more love for Rome," 292 

— his conduct censured by Dr. 

Manning, 292 

— praises the " superiority " of 

Roman books, 293 

Pusey (Rev. Dr.) Bishop "VViiberForce 
censures his Romanizing work, 

297- 358 

— acknowledges his belief in Pur- 

gatory and the Invocation of 
Saints, 297 

— Eirenicon, 330-332, 357 

— on the Primacy and Supremacy of 

the Pope, 331, 333 

— said to have been " a Gallican on 

the wrong side of the water," 


Railway Guild of the Holy Cross, 258 
Real Presence, What the Ritualists 

teach about the, 385-387 
Records of English Catholics, 365 
Reformers and the Reformation, 

What the Ritualists teach about 

the, 383, 384 
Reilly's Relations of the Church to 

Society, 368 
Relics (Shrine with) recommended 

by the Society of St. Osmund, 248 
"Removing the Barriers" between 

England and Rome, 325 
Requiem Masses, 212, 213, 228 
Reserve in Communicating Religious 

Knowledge, 7-9 
" Reserve " observed in the St. 

George's Mission, 59 
" Retreat Committee " of the Society 

of the Holy Cross, 57 
Retreats, Instructions for, 58 

— the first in Dr. Pusey's rooms, 60 
Reunion Magazine, 149, 150, 151, 153 
Revision of the Prayer Book on 

Ritualistic lines, 339-344 
Riley (Mr. Athelstan) his Connection 
with the Society of St. Osmund, 240 

— translates the Mirror of Our Lady, 

and the Hours of the Blessed Virgin 
Mary, 243 
Ritualism, its Object from its 
birth, 260 

— "the Preparatory School for 

Rome," 359, 360 

— one of the " consolations " of 

Rome, 359 
Ritualists (The), their Objects and 
work, 261 

— doing Rome's work, 316 

— the results of their teaching, 

359, 360 

— preparing a harvest for Rome, 360- 
Ritualistic Sisterhoods, 162-201 
Reunion with Rome, 261 

— Rev. W. G. Ward on, 280 

— Union Review on, 311, 312 

— Essays on Reunion on, 313, 315, 316- 

— Protestantism the "great hinaer- 

ance" to, 315 



Reunion with Rome, Work of the 
Society of the Holy Cross for, 


— Rev. N. Y. Birkmyre on, 328 

— How to promote, 336-338 

— E. C. U. Address to Lambeth 

Conference on, 344 

— Lord Halifax most earnestly 

desires, 346 

— Objections to, 362-372 

— What the Ritualists teach about, 

380, 381 
Roberts (Rev. G. Bayfield) History 
of the English Church Union, 335, 345 

— on the Primacy of the " Bishop of 

Old Rome," 345 
Robinson (Rev. George Croke) on 

the Revision of the Statutes of 

S.S.C., 141 
Rock, 67, 72, 78, 95, 206, 207, 209 

— publishes the Roll of Brethren of 

S. S. C, 101 
Rockhampton (Bishop of) becomes a 
Member of the Society of the 
Holy Cross, 76 

— on the Secrecy of the Society of 

the Holy Cross, 125 
Rogers (Mr. F.) 4, 16, 19 
Roman Ritual (Discussion on) in 

S. S.C. Synod, 77 
Rome (Church of) Reunion with, 261 

— we are "Not good enough for" 

the, 262 

— Secret Receptions into the, 265, 266 

— Rev. W. G. Ward on Reunion 

with the, 280 

— How Reunion with, is to be 

accomplished, 280 

— Conditions of union with, dis- 

cussed at Oscott College, 281 

— " Yearning after " the, 286 

— Work of the A.P.U.C. for Re- 

union with the, 307-323 

— "A friendly feeling towards " the, 


— Speech in favour of the Ritual of 

the, 350 

— What the Church of England says 

about the, 356 

— The duty of separation from, 361 

— Objections to Reunion with, 362- 


— the Babylon of the Book of the 

Revelation, 370, 371 

Rome (The name of) " pronounced 
with reverence," 281 

Romeward Movement (The), 260-372 

Russell (Rev. H. Lloyd) on Punish-