AN UNLIMITED COMMISSION. 33 to our mind it is altogether a fallacy to use such language, and only deceiving both ourselves and others. No; if we are to have a Commission at all, let it be free -free as the winds. Let it be free to hear, free to judge, free to report. Let its powers be simply restrained in the matter of action. Legislation is not for the few, but the many. Here, if it must be so, let Convocation have a voice, but not a veto. Alas, that the sound of that voice must always be received with misgivings so long as it is the muffled echo of but a part-not the whole-of the Church. Let the Parliament, then, as a matter of course, step in to determine, and the Crown finally set to its seal. But let us not mar our whole work by setting about it she will be graciously pleased to appoint a Commission, composed of 1st. By some modification of the Rubric, so as to dispense with certain 3rdly. By a re-arrangement of the Psalter. 4thly. By the use of but one Creed at each public service, and that one the Apostles' or Nicene Creed, except on Trinity Sunday, when that of St. Athanasius may be read. 5thly. By allowing the officiating Minister, at his discretion, to transfer the Litany, or that portion of the Communion Service which is usually read on Sundays, from the Morning to the Afternoon or Evening Services; and 6thly. By the addition of certain Prayers or Services for seasons of humiliation, or of thanksgiving; for a blessing on our home and foreign missions; for prisoners, and for various other special occasions. The Commission to be strictly required to confine its deliberations to the above points, and to such others as may be specially submitted to it by the Queen's authority: and on no account whatever to interfere with the doctrines of the Church, as contained in her Articles, Canons, and Liturgy."-Substance of a Speech, &c., by the Hon. and Very Rev. George Pellew, Dean of Norwich. Hatchard, 1861. d with hands tied, and fetters on our feet.* No solid or permanent good can ever come from such a mode of proceeding. The admitted sore points in the Church would be but thinly skinned over. The rankling ulcer would yet remain, and presently burst out afresh. A cure, to be effectual, must be radical; or at least we must show that all has been attempted that wisdom, kindness, and skill combined could suggest, to effectuate relief. We must now take leave of the "High Churchman," with whom, though differing upon the two points noted in this letter, we in the main agree: and we once more commend his twenty-four pages to all well-wishers to the cause of Liturgical Reform. Feb. 28, 1860. Yours, &c., "INGOLDSBY." LETTER LXXVI. THE BISHOP OF CARLISLE, THE HON. AND RIGHT REV. "It is bad enough for ladies to pull caps, but still worse for bishops to pull mitres."-SYDNEY SMITH'S Works, Vol. ii., p. 4. SIR, I am not prepared to say that the witty Canon's idea of combatant bishops is realised in the picture I am about to exhibit to my readers to-day. On the contrary, * A reference to the Commission of 1689 will show how impossible it is to limit the powers of any which should now issue, consistently with the nature of the work to be done. The Commission was addressed, Sept. 17, 1689, to Lamplugh, Archbishop of York, and nine other bishops, six deans, four professors and doctors (two from Cambridge, two from Oxford), four archdeacons, and six of the London clergy; nine (or more) of them, whereof three to be bishops, to form a quorum. See Return made to Mr. Heywood's motion by order of the House of Commons, June 2, 1854.—Parliamentary Paper, No. 283. BISHOP VILLIERS OF CARLISLE. 35 as might be anticipated from the birth and other antecedents of the Bishop of Carlisle, we have in him a model of Christian courtesy and good breeding; and the document on which our present article is founded† partakes in all respects of these excellent recommendations. Yet, for all this, it has the undoubted effect of suggesting to a sprightly imagination the manner in which such a scene as that supposed by Sydney Smith would have taken place if such a thing were possible. The bishop has addressed a REPLY to certain clergy of his diocese, who had memorialised him on the subject of a Revision of the Liturgy, expressing their desire (in commor with several of their brethren elsewhere) to hand down intact to their children "the precious inheritance they had received from their forefathers," at the same time affirming their conviction that "any attempt at the present time to alter the Book of Common Prayer would be attended with great danger to the peace and unity of the Church." The Reply to this Address is, after the approved fashion of Queen's Speeches to her Parliament, an echo in great measure of the document itself; signifying his lordship's sympathy with the memorialists' veneration towards our Prayer-book, a sense of thankfulness that we have such a treasure, and a determination to be not slack in his exertions to transmit the torch to the next generation, undiminished in lustre by passing through his hands. But here the bishop interposes an amendment to the Address, which he carries unanimously in his "own little court" by the aid of three powerful allies-common sense, liberality, and fearlessness of giving offence. Translated to Durham, June, 1860; died August, 1861. Reply of the Lord Bishop of Carlisle (Villiers) to an Address on the subject of the Revision of the Liturgy from the Rev. L. Jefferson, Rural Dean, and the Clergy of the Rural Deanery of Kirkby Stephen in the county of Westmoreland. February, 1860. He tells the clergy of the rural deanery of Kirkby Stephen, and through them the clergy of his whole diocese— let us hope, also, the clergy of some other dioceses-that this torch, after passing through so many hands, may possibly require trimming; that, unless from time to time miraculously renewed, the purest olive oil will not burn bright for evér; and that it is hard on the present runners in the race of life if they may not be allowed occasionally to dress their lamp, as their forefathers did before them. To quit the metaphor (which I am not aware of having seen applied before in elucidation of our well-worn thesis), let us hear the bishop speak for himself; for truly his words will bear repetition as well as those of any of his right reverend brethren who have hitherto been heard on the subject. It concerns "The question (says his lordship) which must arise to the mind of every thoughtful Churchman, anxious to see the stakes strengthened and the cords lengthened, is, how can the greatest number of England's people be brought within the pale of England's Church? I mean consistently with her fully maintaining the truth committed to her charge. It is not a clerical question more than that of a layman. the Church at large-the laity and the clergy alike. answer may be found in the spirit of the Preface to the Prayer-book itself, 'It hath been the wisdom of the Church of England, ever since the first compiling of her public Liturgy, to keep the mean between the two extremes of too much stiffness in refusing, and of too much easiness in admitting, any variation from it.'" The Strange that a sentiment, worthy of being written in letters of gold, should have ceased to have weight with so The author of this Preface is generally allowed to have been the excellent Bishop Sanderson, of Lincoln, formerly Rector of Boothby Pagnell, the adjoining parish to Ingoldsby. THE DISTRACTED STATE OF THE CHURCH. 37 many who still dwell with complacency on the obverse side of the picture, representing a view of "the factious, peevish, and perverse spirits," who will be satisfied with nothing that can be done in this kind by any other than themselves." The bishop proceeds, in a calm and dignified tone, to allay the fears of the memorialists as to the impossibility of conducting a Revision upon any other principle than that of disturbing the whole existing order and machinery of the Prayer-book. I must, however, refer my readers to the document itself, which has been extensively circulated throughout the kingdom, and is a powerful set-off against the counter demonstration of the Westminster Divines. It is full of sound sense and just conclusions; and breathes the spirit of a large and comprehensive Christianity, which, while mourning over that which is defective in our system, would retain and consolidate that which is good. Take the following of many paragraphs which space obliges me most reluctantly to pass over : "In dealing with the Revision of the Liturgy, we must look to the state of the National Church at large. What are we compelled to witness? Not the calm and simple method of carrying on Divine Worship in the Sanctuary which characterised our Church service in the days of our youth-a calmness and simplicity which was as compatible with fervent devotion as it was agreeable to the Protestant tone of the Liturgy of our Reformed Church. If it were not so, I would still say it is wise and right 'quieta non movere.' But we find in these days a parish church the scene of uproar disgraceful to us as Churchmen-nay, more, disgraceful to us as Englishmen. I find a people irritated by the introduction of customs which, if legal, had at any rate become obsolete. I find the bishop of the diocese unable to control the use or the abuse of forms and ceremonies; and I am persuaded that such scenes within the |