"On behalf of the great body of High Churchmen": the Old High Church tradition in the later 19th century
An attempt was made to associate the High Church party in the Church with the extreme Ritualists as they were called—for his part, he must repudiate any such connection, and he must say with reference to the High Church clergy that the great mass of them were loyally endeavouring to carry on the public worship of the Church within the prescribed rules of Ritual allowed by the rubrics, and that they had no more sympathy with the extreme Ritualistic party than had the Low Church party with the extreme Calvinistic doctrines which were preached by those on the other side. As a moderate High Churchman, and one who wished that the services of the Church should be carried on in and according to the prescribed order of the Church's rules, he distinctly refused to be associated even by implication with those who committed the illegal extravagances, or to acknowledge in any way the persons
---
It was notorious, also, that the old High Church party were equally hostile to, and equally alarmed by, the present movement ... He would, however, quote the words of another remarkable man, still moving in the centre of Church life in Oxford. The passage to which he referred was from an eloquent sermon delivered last year by the Rev. John Burgon, Vicar of St. Mary's, Oxford, Fellow of Oriel College, Gresham, Lecturer in Divinity, and one of the leaders of the High Church party. The words which he used wore these—
"I behold with dismay the ghastly up-growth of one more sect—one more schism—one fresh aspect of Nonconformity; and I mourn not least of all, because I see plainly that these medieval extravagancies are making, if they have not already made, reconciliation with our Wesleyan brethren a thing impossible" ...
He felt that he had not done wrong in quoting the burning words of one of the most intellectual and highly respected members of the High Church party in Oxford. These were words which deserved the greatest consideration, and only represented, he believed, the general feeling of the more thoughtful members of that ancient historical party in the Church, which had been from old times faithful to the principles of the Reformation ... the objects of this new section were widely different.
---
What he had read, therefore, he believed to be sufficient to show that the object of this section was unmistakeably to undo the work of the Reformation, and that the old High Church party were against these Ritualistic movements.
---
I am not a Ritualist, but an old-fashioned and a moderate High Churchman; a High Churchman of that school which has come into active prominence within the last 40 years; and my opinions on Ritual and Ceremonial were formed before the modern school of so-called Ritualists came into existence. I hold them independently of that school ... On behalf, then, of the great body of High Churchmen, I protested and still protest against the unfair manner in which the word "Ritualism" has been handled in these debates, so far as that word has boon used to define what may be against the letter or the spirit of our Reformation, and the letter and the spirit of the Prayer Book in which that Reformation is enshrined. I protest against it. I am a Churchman of the Church of England. I am a Reformer, just so far as the Church of England is reformed. I am a Protestant, just so far as the Prayer Rook makes me a Protestant. I am an anti-Roman, thoroughly and entirely. Against everything that is adverse to the letter and the spirit of the Prayer Book, whether smelling of Rome or of Geneva, I protest; and anything which, without being strictly illegal, is unwise or extravagant, and forced upon ignorant or unwilling congregations by the fancy, the caprice, or the illguided zeal of hot young men, I stigmatize as folly.
---
He believed that no party in the Church, and certainly not the High Church party, desired to defy legitimate authority. There was, no doubt, an excrescence of that party which had indulged in extravagant observance of ritual.
(The illustration is from the magazine Punch during the midst of the debates on the Regulation of Public Worship Bill, referring to the Purchas Judgement.)
Amen. Even Pusey, too, was generally appalled at "Ritualism". Attention to Millinery rather than repentance. He had sympathy with their doctrinal convictions on the Eucharist, but was appalled at their angle, emphasis, and nonconformity.
ReplyDeleteThanks Ben. Your reference to Pusey being appalled at the nonconformity of the Ritualists is important. This is also what appalled the Old High Church tradition: the breaking down of the tradition and practice of Common Prayer and obedience to the canons.
DeleteI am beginning to think that a slower, more cautious adoption of ritual in the 19th century would have been much, much less controversial. The wearing of the stole, even the eastward position, for example, were quietly adopted in many parishes without provoking the outcry seen over advanced Ritualism. My instinct is that this could have also eventually embraced eucharistic vestments, as was recognised by the 1906 Report of the Committee on Ecclesiastical Discipline.
I am guessing Pusey and Keble would have had views rather like this. I suppose I am outlining a counter-factual in which advanced Ritualism did not occur, but in which the development of Old High Church and Tractarians across the 19th century led to a slower, less confrontational adoption of ceremonies that were seen as giving expression to particular readings established Anglican doctrines.
Brian.