had heard a great deal about the susceptibilities of 

 the clergy ; he would venture to put in a plea for 

 the susceptibilities of the laity. It would be unwise, 

 he said, to shut their eyes to dissensions which 

 existed in the Church. Interpolations of faith 

 and doctrine were set before them by individual 

 clergy, and they had " uses " introduced at their 

 services which were alien to the Church of England. 

 Had the laity no right to speak on such questions ? 

 They had every right, and they would exercise it. 

 If they did not, to whom could they look for guid- 

 ance ? Not to the bishops. Why not ? " Because 

 we have bishops who do not govern, and clergy 

 who will not obey." The Church of England, he 

 contended, was passing through an extremely 

 grave crisis, and to argue that the laity must have 

 nothing to say to strange interpretations of faith 

 and doctrine was absurd. 



In January, Mr. John Kensit. of London, a pub- 

 lisher, began a course of visiting churches where 

 ritualistic uses were practiced, and on their intro- 

 duction, rising, and, as a communicant and rate- 

 payer of the Church of England, protesting against 

 them. So he did at the Church of St. Ethelburga, 

 Bishopsgate, where he demanded to be given the 

 communion "in the Protestant way," secured the 

 removal of illegal objects, and caused the curate in 

 charge to resign his position rather than give the 

 communion to him as he demanded ; and at St. 

 Michael's Church, Curtain Road, where a protest 

 was made against the ceremony of aspergation, or 

 sprinkling with holy water, and one of his associates 

 was arrested for " brawling," while a summons was 

 asked for against the curate for assault by throwing 

 water (the aspergation) upon the Protestants. For 

 some of his protests Mr. Kensit was himself taken 

 to court and fined. He prepared a petition to 

 the Convocation of Canterbury, calling the atten- 

 tion of the houses to the alleged illegal practices 

 .ind asking them to take steps to have them cease. 

 He had difficulty in finding any member of Convo- 

 cation willing to introduce the petition, when he 

 received an unexpected letter from the Bishop of 

 London offering to present it the next day. The 

 bishop added to the offer the words: " It would 

 greatly strengthen my hands in dealing with this 

 very important matter if you would assure us that 

 you would discontinue your protests at divine 

 service and would submit to me a memorial stating 

 objectionable practices and your reasons for object- 

 ing to them." Mr. Kensit replied with an assur- 

 ance that he would make no public protest in any 

 Church for two calendar months, and that he would 

 cause arrangements that had been made for public 

 protests in thirteen other dioceses to be similarly 

 uspended. The following statements were made in 

 Mr. Kensit's petition to the bishops : 



"The petition of the undersigned, John Kensit, 

 a baptized communicant of the Church of England, 

 humbly showeth 



" I. That grave scandal and distress have been oc- 

 casioned to the minds of many, including the peti- 

 tioner, by the restoration within many churches, 

 both of the metropolis and throughout the land, of 

 the practices and teachings which were discarded 

 by the national Church at the time of the blessed 

 Reformation, all of them borrowed from the Church 

 of Rome, and designed to teach the false doctrine, 

 among others (a) that the consecrated wafer is not 

 merely an ' emblem of the Lamb of God,' but, in 



ANGLICAN CHURCHES. 



9 



the words of the Bishop of Southwell, is 'actually 

 and really the Lamb of God,' to be worshiped by 

 the congregation as being ' God blessed forever- 

 more ' ; (b) that this ' Lamb of God ' so reproduced 

 in the hands of a priest ' under the form of bread 

 and wine ' is offered upon an ' altar ' by the priest, as 

 a sacrifice, for the remission of pain or guilt, and 

 for the absent or dead. 



"II. That grave injustice is done to the laity 

 when idolatrous rites are enacted publicly by the 

 officiant in public worship, because his acts are 

 those of the congregation which he represents, and 

 in whose person he addresses the Almighty. Every 

 person present, therefore, who does not protest 

 is an accomplice and participant in these illegali- 

 ties. As a result, thousands of parishioners are de- 

 barred from attending public worship, and repelled 

 from, the Lord's Table by the conduct of clergymen 

 who, though members of the Protestant Reformed 

 Church of England as by law established, yet re- 

 pudiate the very name of Protestant, and in defi- 

 ance of their ordination vows preach, teach, and 

 inculcate the doctrines and practices of the Church 

 of Rome. 



"III. That these abuses, though growing rapidly, 

 owing to the protection afforded to the wrongdoers 

 by the bishops, have gone on uninterruptedly for 

 many years, and that the inaction of the bishops 

 can be in no way due to the recent proceedings 

 taken by your petitioner. 



" IV. That great social and domestic evils are be- 

 ing felt in many families owing to the inculcation 

 of the practice of sacramental confession upon can- 

 didates for confirmation and others for which no 

 warrant exists in the Reformed Church of England ; 

 and nothing would do so much to check this evil as 

 its outspoken condemnation by the House of Bishops. 



" V. That your petitioner recognizes the right of 

 the legislature to alter, vary, and add to the ritual 

 now in lawful use, and also the binding nature of 

 the decisions of the Queen in Council, but he re- 

 spectfully submits that no other standard can pos- 

 sibly be acceptable to the whole Church as estab- 

 lished by law. The only hope of peace in an 

 established church is the common agreement to be 

 bound by the same formularies until they have 

 been amended by the same authority which origi- 

 nally enacted them. 



"VI. Your petitioner submits the following list of 

 some ornaments and ceremonies which have already 

 been declared by the Queen's courts to be illegal : 

 Unlawful ornaments of the minister : (1) the alb ; 

 (2) the berretta ; (3) the chasuble ; (4) the cope ; (5) 

 the dalmatica ; (6) the tunic or tunicle ; (7) the man- 

 iple. Unlawful ornaments of the church : (8) a 

 baldachino ; (9) lighted candles when not required 

 for giving light ; (10) a stone altar ; (11) a cross on, 

 or over, or in apparent connection with the com- 

 munion table ; (12) a crucifix ; (13) stations of the 

 cross. Unlawful ceremonies : (14) bowing down 

 before or addressing worship to the consecrated 

 elements; (15) the attendance of acolytes ; (16) toll- 

 ing of bell at consecration ; (1.7) making the sign of 

 the cross over the people ; (18) hiding the manual 

 acts ; (19) elevation of the elements : (20) the use of 

 incense ; (21) the ceremonial mixing of water with 

 the wine during divine service; (22) the use of 

 wafers in lieu of bread ' usual to be eaten.' 



" The growth of these illegal practices is indi- 

 cated by the following table : 



