tained in the extracts which were quoted. Mr. Collison next showed that Ridley's injunction for breaking down altars could not be binding upon other dioceses. He sketched the history of the disputes respecting altars from that time to the accession of William of Orange, assigning each order or counter-order bearing on the subject to its right place. He established that stone altars (if ornaments of the church), were distinctly enjoined by the last enactment of the Church, at the revision in 1662; by which the Rubric enforcing the use of such ornaments of the Ministers as were in use in the second year of King Edward VI., was strengthened by the remarkable addition of the words "ornaments of the church." No one could deny that a stone altar was such an ornament in the year referred to; and this Rubric of 1662 is the only authoritative standard of the Church, repealing absolutely any intervening canons, precedents, or injunctions.

The thanks of the Society were given to the writer.

After some remarks on the paper just read, in the course of which it was stated that stone tables are at this day almost universally used by the Protestants abroad (as was also argued by Durel in his Government of Foreign Reformed Churches, p. 30, ed. 1662), while the altars of the Roman Catholics are almost as universally cased in wood, the President adverted to a circular which had been issued by direction of the Committee, requesting payment of arrears, and to the fact mentioned by the Treasurer that, though nearly 400 such applications had gone out, all for small sums, and chiefly to persons who had left the University, only one case (as he understood), had occurred of retirement from the Society. This was a circumstance probably unprecedented in the affairs of similar Societies. He also alluded to a report, about which questions had been asked, concerning a legacy of £6,000 which was said to have been left to the Society; communications had been received which authorised him to say that he believed it to be true, though not of such a nature as to justify the Committee in announcing it officially. He also paid a high compliment to the great and successful exertions of the Rev. A. Sayers, and the Committee engaged in the restoration of the church of S. Mary le Crypt, GLOUCESTER, by whose exertions a sum beyond all anticipation (including a munificent donation from the executors of the late Mr. James Wood), had been collected, and the work conducted under the direction of architects (Messrs. Daukes and Hamilton), one of whom was now present, having come to consult the Committee on a point of some difficulty.

An audited statement of the accounts of the Society, since May, was submitted by the Rev. H. Goodwin, Treasurer.

The Rev. W. Scott, of Queen's college, Oxford, expressed the pleasure he had had in attending a meeting of the Society, and moved a vote of thanks to the President, which was answered by acclamation. A paper by the Rev. B. Webb, on the " Adaptation of the Pointed Style to tropical climates," was deferred for want of time.

The meeting adjourned, some time beyond the usual hour.

ANNUAL REPORT OF THE BRISTOL AND WEST OF
ENGLAND ARCHITECTURAL SOCIETY, 1844.

THE Architectural Society of Bristol has published its Fifth Annual Report, containing the laws and regulations, and a very considerable list of Members.

The Report of the Committee states that the Society followed the example of the Cambridge Camden Society in forwarding a memorial to her Majesty's Commissioners for Building Additional Churches and Chapels, with reference to certain points in their rules which appeared liable to objection, e. g., the introduction of galleries, the toleration of pews, the position and material of the font. These representations met with kind consideration at the hands of the Commissioners.

The Committee recommends to the Members to aid in promoting the circulation of the Bristol and West of England Archæological Magazine.

The south Porch of S. John Baptist, Slimbridge, Gloucestershire, has been restored under their superintendence, and a grant of money made for the repair of the Tower of S. Mary's, Bitton.

A Norman font, also, has been erected in the church of All Saints', Bristol, at the expense of the Vicar of the parish, under the care of

the Committee.

AN Architectural Society has been established in the Archdeaconry of Northampton, under the patronage of the Lord Bishop of Peterborough, the Diocesan. It already numbers above one hundred members. The rules are similar to those of the earlier Architectural Associations.

of

SURGE IGITUR ET FAC: ET ERIT DOMINUS TECUM. Ir the Ecclesiologist and those concerned in it have had a good deal to bear, and to try them, from without, they have had more to rejoice in, and to encourage them, in themselves. Among other such sources encouragement they have been fortunate in their mottos; and the glow of comfort and hope that has occasionally sprung up to them from this cause is something which none can tell but those who have felt its power. It is like a talisman, or a charm. At this moment, when pausing on the threshold of a new career, we might have felt some disposition to misgiving, if not alarm. Such a feeling, if it ever existed, must be dissipated by the recollection of a monosyllable that has often before now girded up

our resolution, and set

hope in the place of despair-TRY. How much work there is in that little word! Whenever people have told us we could not do such or such a thing, we have all the more set ourselves to do it, and have done it by the word TRY. It has cleansed churches, rescued fonts, setting up altars," transformed sectarian

restored the altar without "

churchwardens into active and loyal servants of the sanctuary, reconIt involves, in fact, the whole

ciled parishes, and abolished pues.

character and history of the Ecclesiologist and the Cambridge Camden Society. They now part company: the mother sends her child to seek his fortune: may they go on in their parallel ways, working, it is hoped, to the same end, so far as that has God's favour, doing twice the work, because each doing as much as before in its own way. They may now start afresh on their several roads: the one with increased activity among its members resident in the central scene of its operations; the other, building a more substantial edifice on its old foundations, when it shall have cleared them of the rubbish thrown in through haste, or taken at random. Yes, we will TRY again; if this little word has already given us hope, our new motto shall give us confidence, Surge igitur et fac, et erit Dominus tecum. FAC may well be taken as the development of TRY.

EPIGRAM.

On a modern church to which, though conspicuous by its spire, was attached a very inadequate chancel.

A shallow chancel, scarce six feet by ten,
Which rail'd and painted forms a decent pen;
A lofty spire that bears its glittering vane
One hundred feet exalted from the plain-
Say, was this would-be-Christian elevation
Built for devotion or for ostentation?

By the tall spire we guage the pride of man,
The world's devotion by the chancel span.

1. Memoranda connected with the building of the Chapel of the Holy Trinity, Roehampton. By the late J. W. BOWDEN, Esq. London: Rivingtons. 1844.

2. Views and Details of Littlemore Church, near Oxford. By H. J. UNDERWOOD, Esq. Oxford: 1840.

A MELANCHOLY interest clothes the little pamphlet which we have named the first at the head of this article; for within the few months which have elapsed since the publication of it, its author has been called away from the service of the Church in earth.

Of the chapel at Roehampton,-whose chief founder, we believe, as well as annalist (though his deep modesty has left this untold in the pages before us) Mr. Bowden was,- -some account has already been given in the second volume of the Ecclesiologist. We need not therefore again describe it, premising merely that our regret (which, by the way, was not expressed in that article) at its wanting that essential feature, a chancel, is not by lapse of time diminished; nay rather by maturer reflection, deepened. Of this lack, at Roehampton, the immediate cause was probably, as we shall show, imitation of Littlemore church; the ultimate cause, in both cases, the confusion existing a few

years back, in the minds of those very early restorers (for every year is liow an age) of Catholic architecture, between college chapels and parish churches. The form of the college chapel was the most familiar to their religious mind; and to this (in any other place of worship) unsatisfactory shell they attempted to adopt parochial arrangements. This theory, which we do not recollect to have seen so explicitly stated before, will, we believe, in a great measure serve to explain some of the errors into which the not yet fully-taught restorers of ecclesiastical decency have fallen. Of the opposite mistake, that of building a college chapel like a parish church, S. Mark's College chapel, Stanley Grove, is an instance.

Our business is not however so much at present with Roehampton chapel as with Mr. Bowden's pamphlet, and with this, the last legacy of an earnest mind, we can have no fault to find. It is a beautiful exposition of the true design and character of a Christian church, and as such, will, we doubt not, be extremely useful both in the more immediate neighbourhood, for whose use it is in the first instance intended, and elsewhere, wheresoever it shall be circulated, as under a due regard to circumstances, we counsel its being, as a short and popular apology for the great truths of reality, symbolism, and perpetual prayer. It is divided into two sections, the first containing the fasti and description of the building; the second (to which we more particularly call attention, recommending its separate re-publication in a cheap form, for general circulation) consisting of, "remarks explanatory of those principles of Christian architecture, which the leading features and details of the chapel are calculated to illustrate."

It seems that this chapel replaces a proprietary one, which again succeeded a private chapel consecrated by Archbishop Laud in honour of the HOLY TRINITY, which dedication was therefore chosen for the new chapel, and properly, we think, under the circumstances, though otherwise not fitted for so small a place of worship. The money to build the new church was collected at the Offertory, and the Holy Communion was not omitted. The old chapel was solemnly closed on the Feast of the Purification, 1842, by the celebration of the Holy Communion, most of the members of the Committee and the architect attending and communicating. This is as it should be: till churcharchitects learn that they have a sacred responsibility to fulfil, till, in order to speak out plainly and at once, they feel, or are taught, that all who have the daring to meddle with the construction of churches, thereby, though not in Holy Orders (and why not so, William of Sens, and Alan of Walsingham, and William of Wykeham, were priests?) yet do become “ Religious," and are bound to shape their living accordingly, we can hope very little for Ecclesiology.

In pages 18, 19, of the work before us, are some beautiful remarks upon our un-Christian custom of keeping the church-doors closed, save for the short period of service. We hear with great satisfaction that it is the intention of the Vicar to keep the new church of S. Giles, Camberwell, constantly open.

In pages 25, 26, occur a mystical description and explanation of

the east end of Roehampton chapel, viewed from the interior, with which we cannot altogether concur.

We are, we confess, somewhat doubtful as to the propriety of applying new and private symbolism so circumstantially to so high and mysterious a doctrine as that of the Ever-Blessed TRINITY, and should therefore counsel the omission of this paragraph, in case our suggestion of re-publication be adopted. We need not say that we also disapprove of the Ten Commandments being absorbed, as in this case, into the furniture of the Holy Table. It may be as well to mention, by way of a hint, that in a new church resembling Roehampton and Littlemore in its general plan, where a chancel (alas, far too shallow) has been screened off, the Commandments are affixed to the south wall of the nave, not far from the rood-screen, an arrangement which we do not shrink from asserting is the only complete fulfilment which can be made of the 82nd Canon, under such circumstances.

We cannot close these remarks, without mentioning with approbation the very felicitous manner in which type and antitype are combined in the sacred subjects emblazoned in the eastern triplet; the former by the legends, the latter by the sacred pictures which they enclose.

The event of Mr. Bowden's recent loss, combined with his well-known friendship with the founder of Littlemore church (a fact which can be no secret, as it is recorded in the dedication of one of the volumes of the "Parochial Sermons,") and the manifest resemblance of the two buildings in their general form and spirit, lead us to join to this notice of his pamphlet some few reflections upon the earlier church of S. Mary of Littlemore. These retrospective notices are far from being useless or needless. The Cambridge Camden Society has existed more than five eventful years, and the Ecclesiologist more than three, and several attempts at better things were made before their institution; clearly therefore modern Ecclesiology has existed long enough to have a history, and a more eventful one than could have been conceived possible in so short a space of time. We shall therefore but half understand our position, if we do not from time to time look back, and review what progress we have made, not at the same time forgetting how much more we shall have to accomplish donec Templa refecerimus. Time was, and that no further back than our first volume, when to have at all praised a church deficient in a visible chancel, would have been in the highest degree improper and dangerous. Now however our principles are so well known, and have been so often and so clearly stated, as to render any misapprehension of our sentiments absolutely impossible, except to the wilfully ignorant. We have proclaimed loud and long, till the timid and the wavering even (not to mention those who having at first boldly opposed us, have, now that the matter has been clearly set before them, made honourable surrender), are being forced into agreement with us, that chancels and screens are no less indispensable to a church, than doors and windows to a private dwelling, that the first is just as deficient without the one as the latter without the other, and this by the unanimous voice of the whole Church. Now therefore the time has come when we may, without misgiving, venture to do what we must all in some sort feel to be an act of justice, make honourable mention of Littlemore church, first as being in itself the