“The Historic position of Catholics in the
Church of
England”
A Lecture delivered at the Reading Branch of the
English Church Union
(St Leonard’s School Room, Reading, Berkshire)
Mr
Enraght, in an earnest address, said he should prefer to call his
lecture “ The historic position of Catholics in the Church of
England,” for he always said he was simply a Churchman, neither
high nor low.
Catholics were members of the universal Catholic
Church of Christ, in one sense coming down from the creation to the
present moment, and going on to eternity, and in another sense the
Church set up the Apostles at the day of Pentecost – The One Holy,
Catholic, and Apostolic Church.
(Hear, hear.)
Strictly speaking nothing was Catholic that was not held by the Apostles and handed down to the present day, and every deviation from that true faith was heretical – such as the doctrines of Papal Infallibility and the Immaculate Conception. What applied to doctrine applied also to practice.
Any practice which was Scriptural was perfectly allowable, but not so a practice which was superstitious, such as the burning of candles before images of saints. Catholics in the sense he had explained, alone truly represented the Church of England, all other members representing the Church only partially.
Before Henry VIII. A good deal went on in the direction of reformation, but the first absolute clear beginnings of reformation in doctrine and practice began in his reign. Although Henry worked only for his own selfish interests, God employed him for good, as He over-ruled the treachery of Judas to salvation of the world.
In the second year of Edward VI. Came out the first English Prayer Book that was absolutely Catholic. In his fifth year what was called the Revised Prayer Book was issued – as they believed revised very much for the worse. The proper way was for the Church to bring out the Prayer Book, to make canons and ordinances, and then for Parliament to ratify them ; but that was not the case with the Public Worship Regulation Act, so that Lord Penzance had no more real authority over him (the speaker) than any lady in the room ; and therefore they had to suffer accordingly.
The Act of Parliament that ratified and made law the second Prayer Book of Edward VI. Abused that Prayer Book in several places, and used strong expressions about it. It said the book was only brought about by people “desirous of gratifying their own sensuality,” and also that it was brought out by persons who mistook the first Prayer Book of Edward VI. ; and the second book was the only Prayer Book that tried to satisfy the Protestants.
All subsequent Prayer
Books had been going back to the first, as in that of Elizabeth
(1559), where a return was made to the first of Edward in several
places, while the alterations made in the reign of James I. Were more
Catholic in tone, the proposed uncatholic changes being peremptorily
refused. Again, the doings under Charles I. Were eminently Catholic.
Under Cromwell the good work of Reformation was unhappily
interrupted, but it was resumed under the auspices of Charles II.,
when they had a practical return to the first Prayer Book of Edward
VI.
Almost as soon as Elizabeth came to the Throne she got
her secretary to write to Archbishop Parker to say that what were
then called the Protestant innovations in the Church must be put
down. The Puritans of that day were really the ancestors of the
Church Associationists of the present day ; and he always “gibbeted”
them as the representative bad Churchman of the present day ; and
Elizabeth said she would “unfrock” Archbishop Parker if he did
not put the Puritans down. Archbishop Parker drew up his famous
“advertizements,” stating what those Puritans were to do and what
they were not to do ; but the Queen refused to sign them, and the
only copy in existence had written on the back by Lord Burleigh “Not
signed by the Queen,”
And yet, under the argument that
such a document was in existence, the case was gained against Mr.
Ridsdale ; and yet afterwards when the Church side was retaining him
the same lawyer said the documents did not exist, and that if they
could not be produced in Court they were not binding. Tearing their
own law to pieces was not the way to treat the English Church, nor
did it justify turning them out of their livings. (Hear, hear.)
More shameful treatment was never received by respectable Britons ; and the public ought to have those things put clearly before them, that they might see them in their true light. But even Archbishop Parker’s “advertizments” were never intended to pull down the ornaments rubrics. For instance, the orders for wearing of a surplice and the celebration of the Sacrament at least five or six times a year, meant to imply that at any rate the Puritans must come up to a certain point.
It was just the same with the canons of 1603. The 24th canon said that in a cathedral churches the Eucharist should be celebrate four times a year. Did that mean that the rubric in the Prayer Book which compelled a celebration at least once a week was put aside ? Certainly not ; the rubric was supreme, and those who were anxious to celebrate daily supreme.
Good churchmen and the Puritans, who were in the habit of not celebrating even four times a year. So with canon 25, the point was not that the cope was not to be regularly worn, but that the Bishop, the Dean, or at least a Prebendary or Canon resident, must celebrate, “in a cope,” in cathedrals on the principle festivals ; “the epistoler and gospeller being vested agreeably and properly to the church’s use” – that was, in copes also.
Then the ornaments
rubrics of the Prayer Book of Elizabeth said that the ornaments of
the minister should be such as they were in the second year of King
Edward VI. “ until other orders shall be dictated by the Queen
under proper authority.”
The question was, what was
that other order. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council agreed
in Mr Ridsdale’s case that the “ advertizements “ were the
other order, but as Mr Stephens argued in Mr Edwards’ case, they
were never signed, and consequently had no authority. All the efforts
in Elizabeth’s reign were to improve the church, and to do
everything possible for reverence and decency of Divine
service.
What the Church Association had been doing was to
try and bring back the Commonwealth persecution of some churchmen, if
certain clergymen and their congregation had not stood in the way,
backed up by the E.C.U., the Church of England Working Men’s
Association, and other excellent societies, the Church might now have
been under the Commonwealth state of things.
The lecturer
then referred to the troubles of the Church under the Roman Catholic
James II., and under William and Mary, and the sufferings of
conscientious clergymen in those days, observing that the driving out
of the “ non-jurors “ in the latter reign did immense harm by
admitting in their place all sorts of Erastians and Puritans. Queen
Anne did her best for the Church ; but in the time of George I., the
dominant Erastianism created a great ferment, ending in silencing of
Convocation, whose voice had only been revived in the present reign.
When Convocation began to speak again it was laughed at by all the
newspapers : but it was only after Convocation had allowed itself to
be silenced for 100 years that it began to be laughed at ; and it was
gradually regaining its influence, and if the Church should be
disestablished, it would be wanted to do its proper work.
The State had no more
right to legislate for the Church without hearing the Church’s
voice formally and synodically expressed, than the Church had to
legislate for the State. Everything went wrong during the silence of
Convocation. Then came the Wesleyan revival, then the Evangelical
revival, and lastly the Catholic revival under Keble, Pusey, and
Alex. Knox, and scores of other excellent clergymen and laymen. The
latter did not seem to be going down, but seemed to be answering to
Daniel’s prayer, that it should conquer the kingdoms (by love), but
should never be destroyed.
(Applause.)
*******
Mr. C. O. Fullbrook then
moved the following resolution :- “That the English Church Union
has special claims on the support of Churchmen as a Church Defence
Society ; because while recognising fully the necessity of offering a
vigorous resistance to all attacks on the historic position and
endowments of the Church of England, it has always given a ready
support to useful measures of Church reform, such as the increase of
the Episcopate, the revival of synodical action, and the better
representation of the clergy in Convocation, and it has not failed to
keep in the forefront the duty of defending the doctrine and
discipline, and all that concerns the spiritual character, of the
Church of England.”
The Union, he said, to a certain
extent was perfect, from a human point of view, and greatly assisted
in maintaining the spiritual rights and the constitutional liberties
of the Church against Erastianism, Rationalism, and Puritanism. He
asked them to join the Union and give their influence, small though
it might be, to a cause which defended the legitimate ritual of the
Church.
Mr. Williams seconded it, and it was carried,
A
hearty vote of thanks having passed to Mr Enraght on the motion of
the Rev. H. Last, seconded by Mr. S. Golder, the meeting was closed
in the usual manner.
*******
SEE:- Revd Richard Enraght 'Prisoner of Conscience'
*******
*N.B. because of his active opposition to the Conservative Government's Public Worship Regulation Act., and against the wishes of his congregation, the Revd Richard Enraght, his wife Dorothea, and their six young children were evicted at Easter 1883, 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.
*******
Reading Mercury 24 March 1888, transcription by D. Sharp (2025)