HC Deb 12 May 1851 vol 116 cc862-4
SIR BENJAMIN HALL

said, that it appeared from a Parliamentary paper which had been laid before the House, that during the present year an Address was pre- sented to Her Majesty from the laity of the Church of England, in which they spoke of the "histrionic arrangements" for conducting the public services of the Church, and said that great alarm had been created by the apparent secession of so many members of the Church of England to the Popssh superstitions, and prayed that Her Majesty would be graciously pleased to interfere for the defence of the Church. In consequence of this Address, Her Majesty was pleased to desire the right hon. Secretary of State for the Home Department to communicate with the Archbishop of Canterbury upon the subject, and the right hon. Baronet wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury to this effect:— Her Majesty places full confidence in your Grace's desire to use such means as are within your power to maintain the purity of the doctrines taught by the clergy of the Established Church, and to discourage and prevent innovations in the modes of conducting the services of the Church not sanctioned by law or general usage, and calculated to create dissatisfaction and alarm among a numerous body of its members. He wished to ask his noble Friend at the head of the Government whether the Archbishop and Bishops had taken any steps in pursuance of the letter addressed by the right hon. Secretary of State for the Home Department to the Archbishop of Canterbury for the purpose of suppressing certain practices in places of worship belonging to the Established Church; and whether the Bishop of London has taken, or is about to take, any legal proceedings against those who sanction what his Lordship calls "histrionic performances" in the churches of his diocese?

LORD JOHN RUSSELL

said, that in consequence of the letter which his right hon. Friend the Secretary of the Home Department addressed to the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Archbishop of Canterbury replied, stating that he would lay the letter before the bishops, and call their attention to the subject. There was also at the same time an Address issued by twentyfour of the bishops to the clergy of the Established Church, respecting the practices to which the hon. Member had alluded. The Government had not heard anything further on the subject from the Archbishop of Canterbury; and he could not, therefore, inform the House what further steps the bishops proposed to take. But as the House was in possession of the general views of the bishops, he did not think it would be possible or convenient that in every case he should be called upon to state what steps particular bishops intended to take.

Back to