By Canon W. II. Jones. 



341 



There is indeed one characteristic of the Consuetudinary, which, 

 though perhaps subordinate to its main pnrpose, can hardly fail to 

 strike anyone who attentively studies it — the way, that is, in which 

 it assigns to each member of the cathedral body, not only his own 

 distinct office, but also his own personal share in the work and 

 services of the cathedral. It regards all of them — from the bishop 

 down to the youngest acolyte — as forming one compact religious 

 household ; and the individualism of the separate members is merged 

 in the corporate life and work of the whole. In this respect, the 

 cathedral system has, now for some centuries, exhibited a complete 

 contrast to the ancient order and rule. Our staff is miserably 

 shrunken; all sa.vefou)', out of more than fifty canons, are virtually 

 ostracised, practically without any share in the services, and though 

 given solemnly at their installation a a place in chapter/' never 

 allowed, or at all events invited, to occupy it. Our worship is, for 

 the most part vicarious — the canon is per-force represented by the 

 vicar-choral — and he in turn by the lay vicar — that invention o£ 

 post-reformation times — who at one time was even charged with 

 saying the litany. And each of these claiming separate rights and 

 interests, and each being " a law to himself/ - ' there has sprung up 

 an " imperium in imperio " ; the whole cathedral body has become 

 a set of disintegrated atoms, rather than/as in mediaeval times, a 

 well-adjusted and harmonious whole. We ought, it may well be 

 said, gladly to welcome any measures, which would substitute for 

 that individual liberty, almost license, claimed and exercised by the 

 few, such corporate action and freedom as would recognize the rights 

 of all, and so bring the cathedral nearer to the grand ideal that was 

 before the mind of our first founder — St. Osmund. 



