NOTICE POSTPONED. (Hansard, 10 February 1860)

VISCOUNT DUNGANNON,
who had a notice on the paper, To call Attention to the Performance of Divine Service at Sadlers Wells and other Theatres by Clergymen of the Church of England on Sunday Evenings; and to move a Resolution, that such Services, being highly irregular and inconsistent with Order, are calculated to injure rather than advance the Progress of sound religious Principles in the Metropolis and throughout the Country; intimated that in consequence of a suggestion that had been made to him, and owing to the interest attached to the proceedings in the other House that evening, he should postpone until Friday, February 24th, his Notice for calling the attention of their Lordships to the performance of Divine Service at Sadler's Wells, and other theatres, by clergymen of the Church of England on Sunday evenings, and concerning which he proposed to move a Resolution to the effect that such services, being highly irregular and inconsistent with order, are calculated to injure rather than advance the progress of sound religious principles in the metropolis and throughout the country. It was a matter of the most serious importance, both as regarded the interests of true religion and the stability of the Church in this country. It was a question 804 on which he thought there ought to be the fullest and freest discussion, both on the part of their Lordships generally, and particularly the right rev. Bench of Bishops; and he therefore would postpone his Motion to the 24th February.

§ LORD PORTMAN
trusted the noble Lord would reconsider his determination to bring this matter forward for discussion between this and the 24th February. No topic was more calculated to disturb the tranquillity and equanimity of their Lordships' House, and he trusted he would reconsider whether it was wise to raise a discussion on the subject.

VISCOUNT DUNGANNON
I am bound distinctly to state that in bringing forward this Motion I conceive I am doing nothing more than making use of my privilege as an independent Peer of Parliament, and that I am endeavouring to discharge my duty as a sincere and honest Churchman; and nothing can induce me to withdraw it.

THE MARQUESS OF WESTMEATH
thought the subject altogether had better be left in the hands of the right rev. Prelate of the diocese of London, who, by his great good sense, and the judicious exercise of the powers entrusted to him, had attracted the good feeling and admiration of all the members of the Church of England. It might be safely left in his hands, and he trusted that the Motion would not be persevered in.

VISCOUNT DUNGANNON
repeated that he could not withdraw his Motion.

THE EARL OF RODEN
concurred in the expediency of not bringing forward the subject for discussion. It involved very delicate questions which would be far better dealt with by the Bishops. He thought it had better be withdrawn.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR
observed that if in bringing this Motion forward, it could be shown that its object was to deal with anything in the shape of irreverence or breach of decorum, or anything of which a good Christian had a right to complain, the House and the country would be much obliged to the noble Lord for calling their attention to it and animadverting upon it; but if these services were conducted with piety, propriety, devotion, and decorum, he thought there was no reason why they should be dealt with or interfered with.

THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY
said, he had only to express an opinion in unison with that of the noble Lord who suggested the withdrawal of the Motion. He felt convinced that the noble Viscount 805 who had brought the subject before the House was solely actuated by zeal for religion and reverence of the Church. At the same time it must be borne in mind that if the new system merely attracted by its novelty and curiosity, then alterations would soon cease, and the whole practice would come to a natural end. If, on the contrary, the system was founded on other grounds—was productive of good, and likely to benefit those who greatly needed benefit—he was sure the House would be unwilling to interfere or place an obstacle in the way.

THE BISHOP OF LONDON
said, as the noble Marquess had made allusion, in connection with this movement, to himself, he might state that in considering this question he had felt it to be a difficult and a delicate one, but that he had in no respect interfered with it in one way or the other. What had been done had been done by individuals on their own responsibility. He confessed that when the movement was first mentioned it appeared to him to be a sort of incongruity to have services in such places, and he privately expressed an opinion with the view of advising the clergy to be cautious in the matter. It was a very delicate and difficult question, and one on which he was unwilling at present to express an opinion. By doing so he might prevent clergymen from that which in their consciences they felt bound to do. Therefore neither he nor his right rev. Brother of Winchester, in whose diocese the same practices had taken place, had expressed either approbation or disapprobation of the movement.

VISCOUNT DUNGANNON
said, he had listened with great attention to the suggestions that had emanated from one he so highly respected as the Archbishop of Canterbury, but he felt a conviction in his own mind that these proceedings were utterly at variance with decency and order, and that therefore he had a duty to discharge from which he would not shrink.