and to console us with the assurance that " we have an Altar?" The Bible calls it an Altar, and the Church dare not tamper with the Bible.

"An objection, indeed, which to some persons would be of great weight is admitted to lie against the Camden recommendations: viz. that numbers who now frequent the abbey must be excluded; but this is summarily dismissed!

Neither have we considered ourselves called upon to suggest any means by which such parts of the service as the LESSONS or sermon could be made more audible to a congregation partly in the nave, as well because, as a matter of fact, the majority of those in the choir do not hear them now, as BECAUSE SUCH DIFFICULTIES OUGHT NOT TO BE AN IMPEDIMENT TO THE ADOPTION OF THE PLAN WHICH WE RECOMMEND.'

It is thus on principle, and deliberately, these church-restorers despise UTILITY, practically and theoretically admit that it is irreconcileable with their antient systems, so that if we will study utility we cannot be goud architects'-in other words, that for symbolic architecture, and medieval systems of interior arrangement, they will sacrifice the convenience and accommodation of the worshippers, who it seems are only expected to hear 'such parts of the service as the lessons or sermon.' It will hardly be credited that these advisers of the Dean and Chapter of Westminster, add that 'THE PEOPLE'-that is, the laity-banished into the nave-' their proper place'-' may see through the HOLY DOORS—the curtain being drawn aside' ! !”—pp. 30, 31.

We will not trust ourselves to characterize this extract, which seems to reach the very extremity of unfairness. It will hardly be credited (1.) that the Camden recommendations, so far from excluding numbers who now frequent the abbey, would multiply the accommodation manifold, by opening the whole nave, not indeed to sight-seers and musichearers, but to devout worshippers; (2.) that usefulness has always been insisted on by the C. C. S. as an essential to good architecture; and (3.) that the curtain-passage has reference to the existing arrangements in the abbey.

1. Let it be remarked here, that Mr. Close, in pages 31 and 34, quotes the whole of a Notice of the restoration of All Saints, Monksilver, with the exception of a few important words. We shall supply them in this place, because there appears to be insinuated against us a wish to lessen church accommodation. The Ecclesiologist says, "Every pue has been turned out, [and succeeded by substantial open seats, with finely carved ends, in keeping with the beautiful ancient standards. By this means additional room has been gained for thirty-five worshippers]." Mr. Close omits the words within brackets.

This will illustrate the misrepresentation of the Camden recommendations respecting Westminster Abbey resorted to by Mr. C. The Ecclesiologist is charged with summarily dismissing and sacrificing the accommodation of the worshippers; whereas the real effect of the recommendation is thus described: "Then the services being sung with due solemnity by a full choir, it would be found that England would no longer be the only country in which people cannot worship

in the nave which was made for them.

Then there would be no want

of accommodation, and if there were, the transepts and the choir-aisles *Not however with complete consistency, for in p 31, 1. 21, alterations are said to be strongly condemned," which in p. 34, l. 14, are discovered to "meet with unqualified praise.”

66

might be made available. And then might be seen one of those heartstirring scenes which may yet be witnessed abroad, when the whole of some vast cathedral is crowded with reverent kneeling worshippers."."-iii. 99.

2. Mr. Close's words, "we will study utility, we cannot be good architects," are not contained in the Ecclesiologist, and are opposed to one of its recognized principles, as all our readers know.

3. It will be desirable to transcribe the words in the Ecclesiologist referred to by Mr. C.: "In conclusion, we must observe, with regard to the proposed plan of throwing open the transepts, that very few of those so accommodated will be in sight of the altar; but a great argument against admitting people into the nave is founded upon the circumstance that the rood-screen obstructs the view of the altar. The new plan therefore, besides being in principle wrong, is liable to the same objection in a higher degree; for people may see through the Holy Doors (the curtains being drawn aside), but they cannot see round the corner from the transepts to the altar." In other words, the people will be placed more conveniently in the nave than in the transepts: for in the latter they cannot see; in the former they may (poterunt) see, if the curtain now hanging in the roodscreen doors be drawn aside. Let our readers suppose that more accommodation than the choir plies were required in King's College Chapel upon Lady Day, and it were suggested to throw the various chantries open for the reception of worshippers: would it be very popish to recommend the antechapel as a more fitting place for the new comers, because they may see through the Holy Doors (the curtain being drawn aside), but they cannot see through the wall between the chantries and the altar? Few, we are convinced, will think this an unwise or a wicked sugges

tion.

sup

"DEEPER AND MORE HIDDEN VIRTUES, ATTRIBUTED TO THE ANGELIC HARMONY OF BELLS!!!' The Cambridge Camden Society BELIEVES this, but will not REST upon it!'"'—p. 82, 1. 18.

This charge is untrue, and the quotations incorrect.

"This is termed a Hagioscope, or holy gazing-hole; under the Ritual of the Camden Society. Such an accommodation may again be needful, and its restoration is therefore very 'gratifying'! !"-p. 33, ad. fin.

66

As Mr. Close thinks it worth his while to repeat this falsehood, there is nothing for it but a repetition of our contradiction. The restoration of a Hagioscope is nowhere in the Ecclesiologist said to be very gratifying!!" Candour forbids us to congratulate Mr. Close upon the use he has made of his etymological researches. We recommend to him a more diligent use of the telescope-or distant gazing-hole-of truth, and a temporary surrender of the microscope-or little gazinghole-of criticism.

"S. Anne's, Lewes, does not meet with such unqualified praise. 'The altar and the rails are vile.... a shallow, meagre attempt at a Norman porch is added ;'

but—' there is'—as it should seem to be one redeeming circumstance—' a fairly shaped cock on the weather rod; but, absurdly enough, it is surmounted by a ball'!! (p. 158.)" p. 34, 1. 18.

To meddle with this pleasantry will be thought merciless, but as an example of Mr. Close's method of illustration, we copy part of the Ecclesiologist's account, which, according to Mr. C., notices but one redeeming point:

"S. Anne's, Lewes.-This church, one of the most curious specimens of Norman and Transition work, in Sussex, has lately undergone a thorough restoration, at the expense, we are credibly informed, of £1400 or 1500. In many respects the arrangements are commendable. The chancel has been freed from pues; open benches, with poppy-heads introduced; and a large space round the altar left free from even these....Capitals, strings, and windows, inside and out, have been decently restored....The nave has a fair open roof, though the interstices between the rafters are ceiled or painted."

There are more redeeming circumstances here than in some sermons we could mention.

'Why 'there is no consecration of the water' in private baptisms does not appear. The Rubrick 'enjoins that they shall say as many of the Collects appointed to be said before in the form of public baptism, as the time and present exigence will suffer,' certainly implying that all might be read if there were time. And Wheatly states that at least the prayer of consecration should be said." p. 37, ad fin.

but

It is satisfactory to find that Mr. Close admits a consecration of the water in holy baptism, and that he pleads for its use wherever practicable. Still he has no ground here for an attack upon us; for in the Answers to Correspondents, to which he himself refers (p. 38, 1. 3.), it is said: “Of course we did not mean that no clergyman uses it; merely that it was not required by our, any more than by the other branches of the Western Church, and that no one could possibly imagine it to be of the essence of the Sacrament."-Eccles. iii. 160. Mr. Close, too, presses Wheatly's words into a sense they scarcely bear. We are sorry to remark this, as the only authorities quoted against us in the course of this sermon are Count de Montalembert, Wheatly, and Dr. Kalley; and since we cannot admit foreigners or presbyterians as evidence, it would have been pleasant to find Mr. C. dealing fairly by his single Church-of-England witness. least," and gives simply his own recommendation, without urging any Wheatly says nothing of "at order of the established Church. and we hope that the first part of what follows, which is the author's It will be well to quote at length, private notion, will not be deemed by Mr. Close more worthy of attention than the conclusion, which is the law of the Church.

"And here I humbly presume to give a hint to my brethren, that the prayer appointed for the Consecration of the Water be never omitted. propriety of this prayer to beg a blesssing upon the Administration in general, I For besides the have already shew'd how necessary a part of the Office of Baptism the primitive Christians esteem'd the Consecration of the Water.

"And here it is to be noted that by a Provincial Constitution of our own Church, made in the year 1236 (the 26th of Henry iii.), which is still in force, neither water nor vessel, that has been used in the Administration of Private Baptism is afterwards to be applied to common uses. But out of reverence to the Sacrament, the water is to be poured into the fire, or else to be carried to the Church, to be put to the water in the Baptistery or Font: And the vessel also is to be burnt, or else to be appropriated to the use of the church, perhaps for the washing of the church linen, as Mr. Linwood supposes."+t-Wheatly, App. i.

"The Romish sympathies of the Ecclesiologist are discovered in no ordinary degree in a review of the life of this gentleman; an architect and member "of the religious order of S. Dominic.""‡

The words placed between inverted commas by Mr. Close are not found in the Ecclesiologist.

"The authoress is strongly censured for suggesting 'that there is a degree of superstitious excess of splendour in the vestments of the Church of Rome.' Her speculations, too, on the origin of Christian symbolism may be regarded as almost profane.' (p. 121). She is guilty of connecting it with heathen mythology!" p. 42. 1. 8.

Both of the quotations here from the Ecclesiologist are incorrect, and unfairly handled, as the originals will abundantly prove. They run thus: "We dislike excessively feeble comments, which are meant, we suppose, as sops to a large class of objectors, such as one on the superstitious" excess of splendour arrived at by the Church of Rome (p. 24). We much regret that the writer should have indulged (p. 133) in speculations as to the origin of Christian symbolism, which may be regarded as almost profane. Her theory seems to be that it arose from a desire to "conceal under the forms of paganism the practice of Christianity." If so, we should not surely wish to retain it." Remark were vain; for although, perhaps, Mr. C. does not "dislike excessively feeble comments," yet in our opinion they are better omitted.

A laudatory analysis of this paper is then given by the official organ of the society:

“The method employed in establishing THE CHURCH' is described. 'An oratory' was first built; these buildings have well-defined nave and chancel,' a characteristic of vital importance in the eyes of the society. 'An interesting description followed of the Cathedral Church at Funchal, and of its noble ecclesiastical establishment. The interior is fitted and decorated with much costliness, and the plate and ornaments are very sumptuous. The present state of Church art, and of the Church itself in the island, is very low, but not without encouraging signs!' The remedy for raising the tone of things recommended is the introduction of the publications of the Cambridge Camden Society, already not unknown to the clergy,'-i. e. the Romish priests,-' as likely to be of some service in recalling a better state of things.' p. 44, 1. 10.

This extract contains misrepresentations, which we will specify after having made some admissions. By" THE CHURCH" is certainly meant the Church of the island, and not the Church of England; by "the Clergy,"

+

"Bp. Gibson's Cod. i. 435, and Johnson's Eccl. Laws, 1236, 10."

As cited by Mr. Johnson, ibid."

"No. XXXII., May 1844, p. 124-126.”

the priests of the island, and not foreign physicians; an ecclesiastical establishment like that at Funchal we certainly think "noble"; well defined nave and chancel certainly appear a characteristic of vital importance in our eyes; and we do consider the publications of the C. C. S. likely to be of some service in recalling a better state of things. But it is not so much the establishment of the Church, as of parochial divisions which is described, and the publications of the C. C. S. are not recommended as the remedy for raising the tone of things. Since this will be our last extract, we feel emboldened to quote at length :

"The Rev. B. Webb read a paper on the ecclesiology of Madeira, communicated by the Rev. J. M. Neale, now a resident in that island. It gave an account of the discovery and colonization of Madeira, with a particular description of the method employed in establishing the Church, and in making parochial divisions. An oratory (ermida) was built in each district, and became the nucleus of the future parish. These buildings have well defined nave and chancel. An interesting description followed of the Cathedral Church at Funchal, and of its noble ecclesiastical establishment. The style is Flamboyant, adapted to the climate, by having very few and small windows, and nearly flat roof. The interior is fitted and decorated with much costliness; and the plate and ornaments are very sumptuous. Mr. Neale then briefly described some of the other churches in the island, and brought his historical sketch down to the present time. The Jesuits were introduced into the island in 1560, to supply the place of the clergy, who had been massacred by a party of French Huguenots, which had taken Funchal, and held it for fifteen days. The present state of Church art, and of the Church itself in this island, is very low, but not without encouraging signs. Mr. Neale concluded with expressing a hope that the publications of the C. C. S., as they were not unknown to the clergy, so they might be of some service in recalling a better state of things." -Eccles. iii. 117, 118.

With a notice of some trifling inaccuracies, we conclude our examination into these figments of an uncandid religionist. "Meek devotion" is printed "much devotion," p. 15, 1. 2; "hollow hood" is printed "holy hood," p. 15, 1. 33; "re-established" is printed "established," p. 18, 1. 38; the reference is omitted p. 28, 1. 27; the reference is also omitted p. 29, 1. 27; two sentences in different pages are printed together, without any mark of hiatus, p. 30, 1. 27; “creating" is turned into "erecting," p. 31, 1. 27; while a wrongly printed "adhac" is not changed into " adhuc," p. 29, 1. 17.

66

But we will detain our readers no longer. In one of the last eight numbers of the third volume of the Ecclesiologist occurred a review of Mr. Close's pamphlet against architecture, ending in these words: "We would recommend Mr. Close, when next he brings a charge against us, to quote from our own accredited writings, and not from the communications of our correspondents." This recommendation has been followed