"Letters of Business."

The Royal Commission, set up to deal with disorders in the Church of England, reported in 1906 that "Letters of Business" should be issued to Convocation with instructions to consider the necessity for the preparation of a new Rubric, regulating the vesture of Clergymen "At the time of their ministrations, with a view to its enactment by Parliament." A scheme was set on foot, by means of what the "Times" called "an honourable collusion" between the Bishop of Chester and the Archbishop of Canterbury, for the purpose of obtaining Canonical sanction for the use of Mass vestments. The scheme was nipped in the bud, however, by the powerful protest of the Laity. Of course, the object of the Archbishop was to secure the passing of a Canon, without consulting Parliament, which it was hoped might legitimate the discarded vestments in use before the Reformation. Eventually, through the action of the Church Association, a promise was obtained from the Premier, "That His Majesty would not be advised to consent to any such step until after a full and free discussion in Parliament itself of every proposed change."

Canon Law, without Parliament.

Of course, had the Canon been adopted, it could not possibly have legalised what is now forbidden by Statute. In Laud's time the Canons of 1640, framed and passed by arrogant ecclesiastics in the manner it was hoped this proposed Canon would have been, were hung up for all time, as a warning to future Archbishops. "Eternal vigilance" on the part of the Laity against the encroachment of Ecclesiasticism in high places is evidently quite as necessary as in matters appertaining to our national liberties.

Six months after, in 1907, Letters of Business were issued by the Crown to Convocation, and the Archbishop of Canterbury, as a preliminary to the holding of Convocation, announced, in the name of the Committee of the whole House of Bishops, the appointment of five Bishops to act as three sub-committees; the first, with the Bishop of Salisbury for its chairman, to draft a memorandum in regard to the ornaments; the second, presided over by the Archbishop in person, to suggest the "course of procedure in regard to the laws concerning public worship and the ornaments;" and a third, under the Bishop of St. Albans, to present a draft "Showing what changes, if any, ought to be suggested in the Prayer-Book generally."

Action of biassed subcommittees of House of Bishops.

It is to be noted that each of the chairmen named had publicly committed himself to a definite policy of reactionary change on the special subject entrusted to him. Indeed, so clear were these five bishops as to the long need of changes, that the Archbishop, in a speech of February 14th, 1907, declared "if the Royal Commission had been sitting a quarter of a century ago, it would have recommended Parliamentary action, but," added His Grace, "the recent commission did not do that." As a matter of fact, this was what the Commission, as already stated, had actually done, it had asked for suggestions from Convocation, "with a view to their enactment by Parliament."

In February, 1908, the first of the three reports advocating the restoration of the Mass vestments appeared. The five bishops frankly adopted the platform of Lord Halifax and the Ritualistic English Church Union, and by placing themselves at the head of the party pledged to the restoration of the outward trappings of the Mass, they demonstrated the depth and width of the cleavage which now stands revealed between the Bishops and the Laity of the Church of England. Recent information appears to show that Convocation has decided against the proposal to seek the approval of Parliament to any alteration of the Prayer Book; for it evidently fears that Parliament, if it considered the subject at all, would make more stringent the existing regulations against mass vestments.