 |
| Image Credit the Hathi Trust Digital Library and The University of Michigan Library The Old & New Birmingham by Robert Kirkup Dent (1880) Holy Trinity, Bordesley, Birmingham. (Church closed in 1971) Revd Richard Enraght, was Vicar of Holy Trinity from 1874 to 1883 |
THE REV. R. W. ENRAGHT ON LIBERALISM
On Saturday evening
the Rev. R. W. Enraght, Vicar of Holy Trinity, Bordesley,
delivered
an address at the Girls’ School Room, Trinity Terrace, on
“Why,
as a Churchman, I shall vote for the Liberals.”
There was a very large attendance, the room being well filled long before the lecture was commenced. It was quickly apparent that both political parties were about equally represented. Cheers were repeatedly called for the local candidates and the leaders of each, upon Mr Enraght entering the room he was enthusiastically received. Frequently interruptions took place during the evening, but the whole proceedings were conducted with perfect humour.
The mention of Lord Beaconsfield’s name having brought forth cheers and groans, Mr Enraght asked that they might all be taken as read, inasmuch as he should have to allude to his lordship several times, and also to prominent men. To take them all as read would greatly facilitate the business of the meeting.
Mr. Harris, churchwarden, who presided, said he was quite sure Mr. Enraght would give good reasons why he intended to vote for the Liberals.
The Rev. R. W. Enraght said he had been a Liberal for many years, long before the passing of the Public Worship Regulation Act, and therefore his clerical brethren had no need to write and ask him not in the heat of the moment to join the Liberal party. (Loud cheers.)
He had hitherto held his tongue, so as not to grieve his co-religionists, and he should have continued to do so, unless he felt that he was driven to speak out. (Hear, hear.)
At the present time he was very sorry to arrive at the belief that he was the solitary exception amongst the clergy of the town. (“No, no.” “McCarthy,” “Hear, hear.” and “Three cheers for McCarthy.”)
The gentleman who mentioned Mr McCarthy was quite right, but he (Mr. Enraght) was at the moment referring to the parochial clergymen only. For the time in a ministry of nineteen years he felt bound to speak out upon the subject on which he was going to address them. He had been thinking the matter over since notice was given of the dissolution of Parliament, and he had come to the conclusion that there was nothing that he could feel was an argument against speaking out but what he might call “funk.”
He should give general sundry reasons why he should vote for the Liberals, as the Liberals might direct him – (loud applause) – and he intended to reply to some of the principal objections raised by the Conservative party, and especially by his brother clergymen. He should pass by the foreign and domestic policy of the Government, although he dared say a great deal of what was said against the Government in reference to that policy was perfectly true. (“Hear, hear,” and “Question.”)
At all events, it was quite clear the Conservatives had had a very good innings, and they to make room for other men. (Applause.)
The present Government had brought out the Public Worship Regulation Act, which absolutely revolutionised and upset the Church from top to bottom. (Hear, hear.)
Their own prosecution in that parish under that Act was a pretty fair local test of what they had to expect from Conservatives. (Hear, hear.)
The authors of that persecution to a man were Conservatives, including one of the most fussy, if not one of the most enlightened of the number, who had been threatening him (Mr. Enraght) to the face that he would have him prosecuted, although he now went about denying that he did it. (Hear, hear.)
He then read a letter from the Hon. Mr. Calthorpe, who wrote that he considered the Public Worship Regulation Act an unfortunate measure. Mr. Chamberlain, with whom he had also been in communication, wrote, “I have no sympathy with the Public Worship Regulation Act and disapprove altogether the persecution of conscientious men to which it has led.” (Cheers.)
Mr Bright’s opinion on the subject, he remarked, had often been expressed. He (the Vicar) advised High Churchmen to unite and turn out the Conservative Government by joining the Liberals. Firstly, as a righteous retribution for their ecclesiastical iniquities – (applause) – and secondly, to teach all political parties a lesson of their strength with an eve to the future. (Hear. Hear.)
Objections were raised to this line of argument and action, and they were told to look at the ecclesiastical good the Conservatives had done and were doing by their appointments and ecclesiastical measures, &c.
To a great extent he granted all that, but the fallacy lay in taking for granted all that such ecclesiastical good appointments and good measures were, or ever had been confined to the Conservative Party. It was begging the question to say, “No other Liberal Minister, if Mr. Gladstone retires, will continue his good work.” He thought better of the Liberal Party than to think they would not make appointments and pass as good measures as the Conservative Government, even if Mr. Gladstone retires or died. (Hear, hear.)
Again, they were told to look at the education question, and see what the Conservatives had done in that direction. Granted, but the Liberals began it. (“Hear, hear.” and “Three cheers for George Dixon.”)
The Conservative Party were only following the Liberal lead. All the present Government had done in the matter was a little readjustment so as to catch or keep votes. (Hear, hear.)
Again Churchmen would say “Look at the Burials Bill.” To that he would reply that the mutation on those bills had not been continued to the Liberal Party.
He admitted that the question needed settlement, as did also that of disestablishment, although he was not there that evening to give advice upon the matter.
By voting against the Conservatives, he was told he should be playing into those who wanted to ruin the Church. By that they meant to disestablish her. His reply generally to those objections of the Conservatives was that the Conservatives conserved the Establishment, that was the connection between Church and State – that they might secure the votes of those who ate the loaves and fishes of Establishment, and for no higher reason, he honestly believed. (Applause.)
Lord Beaconsfield would disestablish the Church the next day if it saved his term. Yes, if it only got him seven, five, or three, or more years of office. (“Hear, hear,” and “No, no,”)
His political history, from beginning to end, proved that at least to be very probable. He believed that Lord Beaconsfield had no principle whatever, but the love of power and a determination to succeed if he could at any price. Although he did not say that Mr. Gladstone’s Administration did nothing which Churchmen of his way of thinking would disapprove, still, on the whole, no one did more for the best spiritual interests of the Church than Mr. Gladstone had done.
Mr. Gladstone’s episcopal appointments, his letters of business to Convocation, his efforts in connection with the Lectionary Bill, with the education question, and his opposition to the Public Worship Regulation Act were detailed by the lecturer, who said, putting the Liberals at the worst – that was six of one and six of the other so far as measures and appointments went – he believed the scales went down in favour of Mr. Gladstone’s Government. (Applause.)
As to the question of disestablishment, he believed – and he had been driven by the Conservatives to express his belief in it – that it would be the best thing for the Church, and perhaps the only true political move for the Church’s highest, that was her spiritual interest. (Applause.)
The way to prevent disestablishment was not to go on abusing the Liberals, but to join them now, make friends of them, and leaven their ranks with Churchmen, and with what they believed to be the Church’s principles, the Church’s idea and sympathies.
Mr. Gladstone complained, as he went up and down the country, that Churchmen as a body would not help him, and that most of his supporters were amongst the Dissenters. That ought not to be, and if they were to be successful as Churchmen they not let it be so any longer.
He believed the one main reason
why the Church was so weak in Birmingham was narrow-minded Church
policy which had been hitherto pursued in the town – fighting the
Liberals – good Liberals – whether they were right or wrong, as
though they were the bitterest of enemies, and fighting them at all
times. (Hear, hear.)
Again, Conservatives said,
“By voting for the Liberals, you are throwing in your lot with
those who hold that all power is not from above, but from below; you
are throwing in your lot with Radicals, Communists, Nihilists, and
what not ?”
He did not see that to be a fact any more in voting for the Liberals than voting for the Conservatives. (Hear, hear.)
If Churchmen considered that they held better doctrines in politics and religion than the Liberals did, he advised them to make friends with the Liberal Party and leaven them with better principles in every possible way.
The direst wrong done by any Government since the Reformation – with the exception of Cromwell’s Government – to the Church’s vital and essential principles had been done by the present Government – (cheers) – and for that reason, if for nothing else, yea, if all else were well and sound, he would fight against the Conservatives with all his might and power, so long as the Public Worship Regulation Act with its infamous and revolutionary clauses continued to be a statue of this realm. (Loud applause.)
- The Chairman said Mr. Enraght
would be pleased to answer any questions from the meeting. – Amidst
some little confusion. Mr. Thornhill got to the platform, and after
speaking in eulogistic terms of the vicar, said Mr. Enraght should
obey the law of the land and then they would support him. – A scene
of disorder followed, during which cheers were given for Messrs.
Bright, Munts, and Chamberlain. – The Vicar in the course of the
hubbub was understood to say that he and other clergymen were not
standing out against the law, but against a gross violation of their
rights as Churchmen. – Mr. Mynors proposed a vote of thanks to Mr.
Enraght, and the proposition having been seconded by the Rev. S.
Carter of Gooch Street, it was carried with acclamation.
*******
Text from Birmingham Daily Post 23 March 1880
*******
*N.B. Ten months after his 'Vote for the Liberals' Lecture, the Revd Richard Enraght was serving a six weeks prison sentence for his active opposition to the Conservative Government's Public Worship Regulation Act.
By Easter 1883, and against the wishes of his congregation, the Revd Richard Enraght, his wife Dorothea, and their six young children were evicted from their Bordesley Vicarage by order of the Lord Bishop of Worcester.
The Enraght Family with the help of the Church Union, moved to Brighton in Sussex, where Fr Enraght could continue his ministry helping his former vicar, Fr Wagner of St Paul's Brighton.
See the 'My Ordinations Oaths' page, written by Revd Richard Enraght while in Warwick Prison in December 1880.
*******
Transcription by D. Sharp 2025