Anglican Confirmation 1820-1945: From 'Renewing the Baptismal Covenant' to 'The Sacramental Principle' 103266097X, 9781032660974

Citation preview

Routledge New Critical Thinking in Religion, Theology and Biblical Studies

ANGLICAN CONFIRMATION 1820–1945 FROM ‘RENEWING THE BAPTISMAL COVENANT’ TO ‘THE SACRAMENTAL PRINCIPLE’ Phillip Tovey

“This superb book draws on deep historical, theological and liturgical scholarship. Tovey distils knowledge of global Anglicanism into a readable and engrossing study. It is an essential guide to confirmation and its importance then and now.” - William Gibson, Oxford Brookes University “Perhaps reflecting its nebulous status, Confirmation in Anglicanism has remained a neglected topic, other than when used to defend prior doctrinal convictions. With a careful survey of the history of theological discourse and using statistics, where available, Phillip Tovey has provided a deeper narrative of debate and liturgical change in the Confirmation service in the Anglican Communion which gives a solid foundation for future less partisan considerations of this rite.” - Bryan D. Spinks, Bishop F. Percy Goddard Professor Emeritus of Liturgical Studies and Pastoral Theology, Yale University “The revision of initiation liturgy has been a significant feature of liturgical renewal in the Anglican Communion, as well as many other Churches around the world, in the last half-century. Tovey’s book clearly identifies and explores key issues which lie behind these revisions, and by giving careful attention to primary sources, explodes some longstanding myths. In considering theology, liturgical text, and liturgical practice, he brings together areas of study which are often dealt with separately, providing a holistic lens through which to examine this topic. He provides a clear analysis of key areas in the development of Anglican thinking about confirmation during this period and the resulting insights break new ground. This will become a key text on this period of developing Anglican thinking and practice in relation to confirmation.” - Mark Earey, Director of Anglican Formation, The Queen’s Foundation, Birmingham, UK

Anglican Confirmation 1820–1945

This book focuses on Anglican Confirmation in theology, liturgy, and practice from 1820 to 1945. This was a period of great change in the ways Anglicans approached Confirmation. The Tractarian movement transformed the Communion, and its ideas were carried overseas with the missionary movement. The study examines the development of a two-stage theology and its reception. It analyses the wave of liturgical revision expressed in England in the 1928 Prayer Book. It explores the episcopal changes in practice from the eighteenth-century paradigm to a new way of confirming. The revolution of the time has left a legacy that still informs practice, while doubts about theology and its liturgical application have left an existential crisis. The author reflects on how the current situation in various provinces has its roots in this period and the diffusion of ideas in the Communion. The book offers a fresh systematic examination of the neglected ecclesial practice of Confirmation, providing a more holistic view and clarifying developments to help us better understand the present. It will be of particular interest to scholars of Christian theology, liturgy, ecclesiology, and church history. Phillip Tovey is former Principal of the Diocese of Oxford Local Ministry Pathway and Warden of Readers. Before retirement, he worked in theological education for many years and has written extensively on liturgical issues, including a previous book on Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820. He has lectured on liturgical issues, in Uganda, South Africa, Hong Kong, and New Zealand, as Selwyn Lecturer. He is a member of Societas Liturgica, the Society for Liturgical Study, and the Inter-Anglican Liturgical Consultation.

Routledge New Critical Thinking in Religion, Theology and Biblical Studies

The Routledge New Critical Thinking in Religion, Theology and Biblical Studies series brings high-quality research monograph publishing back into focus for authors, international libraries, and student, academic, and research readers. This open-ended monograph series presents cutting-edge research from both established and new authors in the field. With specialist focus yet clear contextual presentation of contemporary research, books in the series take research into important new directions and open the field to new critical debate within the discipline, in areas of related study, and in key areas for contemporary society. Theological Fringes of Phenomenology Edited by Joseph Rivera and Joseph S. O’Leary Ecoflourishing and Virtue Christian Perspectives Across the Disciplines Edited by Steven Bouma-Prediger and Nathan P. Carson Eating God A History of the Eucharist Matteo Al Kalak The Origin of the Soul A Conversation Edited by Joshua R Farris and Joanna Leidenhag The Music of Theology Language – Space – Silence Andrew W. Hass, Laurens ten Kate and Mattias Martinson Anglican Confirmation 1820-1945 From ‘Renewing the Baptismal Covenant’ to ‘The Sacramental Principle’ Phillip Tovey For more information about this series, please visit: https://www.routledge. com/religion/series/RCRITREL

Anglican Confirmation 1820–1945 From ‘Renewing the Baptismal Covenant’ to ‘The Sacramental Principle’ Phillip Tovey

First published 2024 by Routledge 4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2024 Phillip Tovey The right of Phillip Tovey to be identified as author of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN: 978-1-032-66097-4 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-032-67682-1 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-032-67687-6 (ebk) DOI: 10.4324/9781032676876 Typeset in Sabon by MPS Limited, Dehradun

Contents

List of figures List of tables Acknowledgements

viii ix x

1

Introduction

1

2

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

6

3

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

42

4

Prayer Book revision before 1928

74

5

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

110

6

The English Practice of Confirmation

142

7

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion

170

Conclusions

196

Index

202

8

Figures

0.1 4.1 4.2 4.3 6.1 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5

Confirmation: Reformation The Anglican Communion 1820 The Anglican Communion 1930 Prayer Book Revision of Confirmation Confirmation statistics 1872–1938 Confirmations Episcopal Church 1876–1926 Confirmations in Canada The population of the Yukon 1901–1931 Denominational statistics for the Yukon 1901–1931 Confirmation in the Yukon

xi 83 85 86 157 171 176 182 183 183

Tables

2.1 3.1 4.1 4.2 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7

Theories of Baptismal Regeneration The relation of Confirmation to Baptism Some Evangelical Low Church suggestions for revision Voting for the new Prayer Book Confirmation in the Church of England Confirmation in the Church of Ireland Confirmation in the Scottish Episcopal Church Confirmation in the Church in Wales Confirmation in PECUSA Confirmation in the Church of India, Pakistan, Burma, and Ceylon Confirmation in the Church of England in Canada Revision of Confirmation in Southern Africa Confirmation in Nippon Sei Ko Kai Confirmation in Chung Hua Sheng Kung Hui Confirmation in the Diocese of Zanzibar Confirmations in Oxford Diocese Numbers and dates of Confirmation 1852–1861 Confirmations February 1861 Confirmations by Bishop Gwynne Frere’s redaction of Procter Confirmations in the Diocese of Lincoln 1869–1881 Confirmations Bishop Graves Statistics for the Missionary District Western Nebraska 1904 First visitation of Bishop Strachan 1840 Reports on the numbers of the 1842 visitation Confirmation tour 1845 Elgin County Growth of number of Confirmation services 1840–1846 Confirmations 1894

33 56 80 97 112 115 116 118 119 120 120 123 127 128 131 144 145 145 148 149 156 172 173 178 178 179 181 187

Acknowledgements

Thanks are given to those who have helped in the writing of this book. Rt Revs: George Connor, Colin Buchanan Very Rev: Ian Tarrant Rev Drs: Keith Beech-Gruneberg, Shintaro Ichihara, David Kennedy, Eileen Scully, Paul Sheppy Revs Mark Earey, Bosco Peters Professors: David Duce, William Gibson Dr: John Chesworth Jacquie Gunn, Ken Osmond, Laurel Parson, Jane Teal, Bin Xia Libraries: Bodleian Oxford, Crowther Library, Ripon College Cuddesdon Library

Figure 0.1 Confirmation: Reformation … from A.D. Crake. The Deformation and the Reformation … Designed by the author of the Anglican Missal (New edition). Oxford; London: A.R. Mowbray, 1885. Source: Author’s picture: By permission of the Principal and Chapter of Pusey House Oxford.

1

Introduction

Confirmation has a special place in Anglican history. The insistence of episcopal Confirmation with the laying on of hands is a particular aspect of Anglican polity. It is also the interface of clergy and laity and a sign of lay involvement in the church. Frances Knight talks of the high level of participation by the laity in Confirmation services in the nineteenth century.1 Similar enthusiasm was shown in an earlier and more maligned period in my previous book, Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820.2 This book builds on that volume, examining Confirmation in Anglicanism 1820–1945. On one level this might seem to be curious in that the order of Confirmation as a liturgy did not change at all in this period. But such a statement has built in assumptions, that the focus is only on liturgical text, that we are primarily focused on the Church of England, that the way that the text was used did not change. All these assumptions are not true. The period begins with an Anglican Communion in an embryonic form which develops through the period. This is due to the missionary expansion of Anglicanism, in part due to the rise of colonialism, but not simply a product of that history. So, a book that looks at Anglican Confirmation needs to take up various stories from many parts of the world. While it is true that the order of Confirmation does not change in England, in practice it did through the events of the 1928 Prayer Book. Also, there are many adaptations and revisions of Confirmation in the rest of the Anglican Communion. The complexity of the situation is such that while trying to be comprehensive, a book such as this cannot be totally exhaustive. In this period, several changes were suggested both to the liturgy in England and in the practice of Confirmation. But above all, the controversy beginning with the Tractarian movement was to transform Anglicanism and in it the theory and practice of Confirmation. This is not a book about the Tractarian movement, but it will have a lot to say about it, as it was one of the major forces of the day.3 While my interest is in liturgy, like the previous book I will look at the ‘biography’ of Confirmation and thus put Confirmation in a wider context.4 It is thus not just about a text but looks beyond the text to a text in context, or contexts.5 It is a long period but there are only a few studies of Confirmation in this time.6 It is a period of controversy with angry parties fighting in the courts DOI: 10.4324/9781032676876-1

2 Introduction in England, but also the export of those ideas by diffusion and plantation of ideas by missionaries. The mission mindedness of all the parties can often be neglected today. In various historiographical approaches, the story can be presented as Evangelicals against Tractarians, as a two-party controversy. However there was a broadness in Anglicanism, a third group (broad, liberal, modern) contributed to debates and suggestions of change. These views should not be overlooked in the discussion. With the beginnings of statistical information on churches, there is a temptation to look at the ‘success’ of Confirmation. Like all things to do with statistics and religion, questions of ‘success’ are hard to evaluate. Are increasing numbers being confirmed in England a sign of success, compared to the few confirmed in Korea due to the caution of the missionaries in their early work? Even with rising numbers, is this a success when put alongside general population growth or the stories of alienation from the Prayer Book by the Tommies in the trenches? Nevertheless, statistical information is indicative of the health and mission impact of the church particularly in a rite where there is a degree of personal choice. One of the more important events of the period is the English 1928 Prayer Book. This has recently been examined from several perspectives, church and state, or the ecclesiology of the events.7 There have been evaluations of its impact in other Provinces.8 What however is completely lacking is a liturgical evaluation of the book. Because of its ambiguous position in England, major studies of the liturgies and their development in the 20-year process of production have not been written. This leads to partial views of the book and its place in the wider wave of liturgical revision around the Anglican Communion. This book will touch on the issues but there is space for a major work in this area. This book then begins with theological issues. It then examines liturgical texts. Finally, there is a section on practice. Chapter 2 begins the discussion looking at the issue of Baptismal Regeneration. This was an issue in the eighteenth century but takes on a particular direction with Pusey’s tract on Baptism, Scriptural View of Holy Baptism (1835). This fuelled a bitter Baptismal Regeneration controversy through the Victorian period with many debating the issue along party lines. The chapter will focus on the debate in relation to Confirmation. Broad church views will also be introduced as they developed as FD Maurice reacted to the tract. This is a debate that is perhaps over but with a continuing diversity of approach. Chapter 3 deals with a different controversy that developed from the second wave of the Oxford movement. This is the Puller-Mason view which is sometimes called two stages in initiation.9 As it continued after the Second World War, it is sometimes called the Mason-Dix theory. Gregory Dix is to later say that the view was not refuted, but this is a statement that seems simply to ignore the facts. Curiously, the debate about the position is mostly an internal Anglo-Catholic discussion with some input from Broad church people and very little comment from Evangelicals of this period. The controversy

Introduction

3

continues in the post-war period where the view is almost completely refuted. A mild version of the theology probably was the prevailing view in the interwar years. Chapters 2 and 3 look at the major theological issues of the period. They chart the way the broadly Calvinistic theme of ‘covenant’ inherited from the eighteenth century is replaced with ‘the sacramental principle’. Chapters 4 and 5 focus on liturgical issues. Beginning with the historiography of 1928, Chapter 4 deals with proposed changes to the order of Confirmation, process in the developing Anglican Communion, and pre1928 changes to Confirmation in Anglicanism. Chapter 5 continues the story looking at England and then the rest of the Anglican Communion. Some of this history is complex, particularly in China, Korea, and Japan, and I have had to rely on help from friends in the area as I don’t speak the languages. Likewise, there are similar difficulties with Africa and the Zanzibar rites of the Univerities Mission to Central Africa (UMCA). Help was given to me in translating the Confirmation rite of the extraordinary suite of liturgies produced by the missionaries of UMCA. This is another neglected area of Anglican liturgical studies and would make for a significant piece of research for someone fluent in Swahili. While most rites are included in this chapter, there is always the possibility of having missed some, particularly with the multitude of languages, despite the aid of Griffiths.10 Chapters 6 and 7 deal with practice. Beginning with Samuel Wilberforce, Chapter 6 charts the overturning of the eighteenth-century episcopal paradigm of the candidate comes to the bishop, to the nineteenth-century approach of the bishop goes to the candidates. Wilberforce was the popularizer of this approach although the reform had arguably already begun earlier.11 The chapter also looks at an army chaplain who was a bishop and Frere in Truro. Questions of ceremonial are discussed as are other issues. The first is about orderliness at Confirmation refuting the position of Ollard.12 Another is the place of transport and Confirmation.13 Then boundary issues and Confirmation are discussed. An eye is also cast on the subculture of school Confirmation that became established in this period. Chapter 7 looks at episcopal practice around the Anglican Communion. This is necessarily selective depending on good and accessible records. Relying on biography is quite difficult as some are written as if a bishop never did Confirmation! Biography is a complex subject.14 Thus, efforts have been made to supplement the story with other information. The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada are both studied with sample cameos to develop the discussion of the previous volume.15 Likewise, India is studied following a previous monograph.16 The final chapter tries to draw all this together. Criticisms of the last book seem to believe that I was setting out to solve the theological issues around Confirmation in Anglicanism today. My intention is to only do this in the broadest sense of having a better understanding of where we have come from. A book on nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Confirmation cannot solve

4 Introduction twenty-first-century problems, particularly with the post-war discussion in the Anglican Communion being so significant. It will however at least map where some of the issues are coming from. This book does not exactly map the previous one, e.g., there is not a chapter on preaching. This is another paradigm change; in the eighteenth century someone was appointed by the bishop to preach at the Confirmation, while the nineteenth-century practice was for the bishop to do the preaching. There is however a similar interest in theory and practice in both books for them to complement one another. The cover picture of the previous book and Figure 0.1 for this book might be contrasted. They are both from the same book. The vestments of the bishop have changed. The church is now gothic in style rather than classical. The girls in veils rather than boys are central. It illustrated the major changes to Confirmation in the period of the book. Notes 1 Frances Knight, The Nineteenth-Century Church and English Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), p. 93. 2 Phillip Tovey, Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820, Liturgy, Worship and Society (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014). 3 Peter B. Nockles, Oxford Movement in Context: Anglican High Churchmanship, 1760–1857 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009). 4 For a biography of a rite, see John S. Lampard, Go Forth Christian Soul: The Biography of a Prayer (Peterborough: Epworth Press, 2005). 5 Lawrence A. Hoffman, Beyond the Text: A Holistic Approach to Liturgy (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995). 6 Peter John Jagger, Clouded Witness: Initiation in the Church of England in the Mid-Victorian Period, 1850–1875 (Allison Park, PA: Pickwick Publications, 1982). Peter J. Jagger, Christian Initiation 1552–1969: Rites of Baptism and Confirmation since the Reformation Period (London: SPCK, 1970). Colin Ogilvie Buchanan, Anglican Confirmation, Grove Liturgical Study (Bramcote, Nottingham: Grove Books, 1986). 7 John G. Maiden, National Religion and the Prayer Book Controversy, 1927–1928, Studies in Modern British Religious History (Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer, 2009). Dan D. Cruickshank, Theology and Ecclesiology of the Prayer Book Crisis, 1906–1928 (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019). 8 Peter Bingham Hinchliff, The South African Rite and the 1928 Prayer Book (London: for the Alcuin Club; A.R. Mowbray, 1960). 9 Buchanan, Anglican Confirmation. 10 David N. Griffiths, The Bibliography of the Book of Common Prayer, 1549–1999 (London; New Castle, DE: British Library; Oak Knoll Press, 2002). 11 Trevor Park, The Reform Bishops,1828–1840: A Biographical Study (Luton: St Bega Publications, 2016). 12 S. L. Ollard, “Confirmation in the Anglican Communion,” in Confirmation or the Laying on of Hands (London: SPCK, 1926). 13 Jagger, Clouded Witness: Initiation in the Church of England in the MidVictorian Period, 1850–1875.

Introduction

5

14 Robert Gittings, The Nature of Biography (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1978). 15 Phillip Tovey, Anglican Confirmation: 1662–1820 (Farnham: Ashgate, 2014). P. Tovey, “Mission and Confirmation: Models in Colonial America,” Anaphora 5, no. 1 (2011). 16 Phillip Tovey, Eighteenth-Century Anglican Confirmation: Renewing the Covenant of Grace, JLS 79 (Norwich: Hymns Ancient and Modern, 2015).

Reference list Buchanan, C. O. Anglican Confirmation. Grove Liturgical Study. Bramcote, Nottingham: Grove Books, 1986. Cruickshank, D. D. Theology and Ecclesiology of the Prayer Book Crisis, 1906–1928. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019. Gittings, R. The Nature of Biography. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1978. Griffiths, D. N. The Bibliography of the Book of Common Prayer, 1549–1999. London; New Castle, DE: British Library; Oak Knoll Press, 2002. Hinchliff, P. B. The South African Rite and the 1928 Prayer Book. London: for the Alcuin Club; A.R. Mowbray, 1960. Hoffman, L. A. Beyond the Text: A Holistic Approach to Liturgy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995. Jagger, P. J. Christian Initiation 1552–1969: Rites of Baptism and Confirmation since the Reformation Period. London: SPCK, 1970. Jagger, P. J. Clouded Witness: Initiation in the Church of England in the MidVictorian Period, 1850–1875. Allison Park, PA.: Pickwick Publications, 1982. Knight, F. The Nineteenth-Century Church and English Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Lampard, J. S. Go Forth Christian Soul: The Biography of a Prayer. Peterborough: Epworth Press, 2005. Maiden, J. G. National Religion and the Prayer Book Controversy, 1927–1928. Studies in Modern British Religious History. Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer, 2009. Nockles, P. B. Oxford Movement in Context: Anglican High Churchmanship, 1760–1857, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Ollard, S.L. “Confirmation in the Anglican Communion.” In Confirmation or the Laying on of Hands, 60–245. London: SPCK, 1926. Park, T. The Reform Bishops,1828–1840: A Biographical Study. Luton: St Bega Publications, 2016. Tovey, P. “Mission and Confirmation: Models in Colonial America.” Anaphora 5, no. 1 (2011): 39–58. Tovey, P. Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820. Liturgy, Worship and Society. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014. Tovey, P. Eighteenth-Century Anglican Confirmation: Renewing the Covenant of Grace. JLS 79. Norwich: Hymns Ancient and Modern, 2015.

2

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

The nineteenth century was a period of theological ferment. Some of the discussions relevant to Confirmation were inherited from the eighteenth century, but there were particular issues that developed in this period which changed the way Anglicans thought about Confirmation. If in the previous century the primary theological paradigm for sacramental theology in general and Confirmation in particular was ‘the covenant of grace’, this is to gradually disappear and be taken over by ‘the sacramental principle’. In these two phrases, the Church of England moved away from a reformed semi-Calvinistic position to a more Catholic position. There was also the development of a broad-church view, sometimes related, but often not, to previous latitudinarian views, some of which had splintered into Unitarianism. This is the century of very definite parties in the church which are highly antagonistic to another, and theologies begin to be developed as a combative response. However, we will see with some issues it is not simply Catholic versus Evangelical, for sometimes there are distinctions within the Catholic party, or addresses by the liberal part of the church, and they may be debating with one another. It is also worth remembering that discussions and debates in England were to spill out over the whole of the world through migration and mission work. The development of party mission societies enabled particular groups to operate according to their theological convictions in ways that perhaps they were unable to do so at home. There are several issues that need to be discussed. One is the question of Baptismal Regeneration. This was inherited from the previous century and remained an issue throughout the whole of this period due to the writings of E. B. Pusey and the Tract on Baptism. It is perhaps best to say that the debate has never really been fully solved. Later there developed a debate in high church circles about a two-stage theory of Baptism and Confirmation, which will be examined in the next chapter. This is somewhat technical but coloured people’s understanding of sacraments. A different broad-church approach is developed by F. D. Maurice who while not directly talking about Confirmation has a theology that affects the way sacramental acts are conceived. Finally, it is worth looking at the development of the ‘sacramental principle’ and how Confirmation was sacramentalized. DOI: 10.4324/9781032676876-2

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

7

Tractarian views There is a huge literature on the nineteenth-century debates about Baptismal Regeneration.1 These arise from the statements in the Book of Common Prayer which in the public Baptism of infants says that the child will ‘be regenerate and born anew of water and the Holy Ghost’, and that the child ‘may receive remission of his sins by spiritual Regeneration’, and states after the Baptism ‘that this child is regenerate’. Regeneration is also mentioned in the collect for Christmas Day. With regard to Confirmation, Regeneration is mentioned in the central prayer for the sevenfold gifts of grace; God ‘who hast vouchsafed to regenerate these thy servants by water and the Holy Ghost’. In one way this looks back to what happened at Baptism, but the question then is, what is happening at Confirmation? This depends on the interpretation of Baptismal Regeneration. In the previous book on Confirmation, it was shown that Regeneration was debated in the eighteenth century.2 It led to proposed changes in the service of removing the word ‘regenerate’ and replacing them with ‘been incorporated into the church’. It was also shown that there was a particular Restoration theology of Confirmation, which by this century seems to be unknown. Jagger studied the period 1852–1875 looking at the conflict between parties over Baptismal Regeneration and conversion.3 Spinks in a wider discussion of the development of Baptismal theology follows Jagger quite closely in his analysis.4 However, this chapter is only looking at Regeneration in the implications it has for Confirmation. Therefore, a different analysis is going to be given looking at the issue with two particular foci, the first being the work of Pusey in the Tracts, and the second being around the Gorham controversy. These were two particular points in the nineteenth century where the controversy flared up. Edward Bouverie Pusey

Born in Berkshire (now Oxfordshire) he became a fellow at Oriel Oxford. He studied languages including two years in Germany. In 1828, he was appointed Regius Professor of Hebrew and Canon of Christ Church Oxford. He became interested in the Tractarian Movement from 1833. In August 1834, he published Tract 67 Scriptural Views of Holy Baptism. This was followed up in September and October by two more tracts of the same name, expanding the argument. What originally was 49 pages becoming over 400. The tract flared up a huge controversy over the meaning of ‘Baptismal Regeneration’. A brief look needs to be taken at these opinions, but the focus needs to be held on: what is the implication for Confirmation? I propose to concentrate primarily on the first tract. The preface to the Tracts 67–69 begins with a general discussion of Scripture and Baptism. His key text is ‘Except a man be born of water and Spirit’ from John 3.5 He uses the term ‘the heavenly birth’ in Baptism and

8 Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation sees the language of Holy Scripture as ‘unlimited’.6 He attacks both Zwingli and rationalism, at times seeing them as combined. But sees: The blessed sacraments are a peculiar obstacle to its [rationalism] inroads, for their effects come directly from God.7 He is unhappy with a mix of German rationalism and popular American low church theology which he sees as prevalent, as in effect it denies the sacraments as means of grace. The remedy is to study the Fathers. He discusses the issue of sin after Baptism: Pardon in Baptism is free, full, instantaneous, universal, without any service on our part: the pardon on repentance for those who have forfeited their baptismal pardon, is slow partial, gradual as is the repentance itself.8 It is interesting that his thought goes from Baptism to penance without any discussion of Confirmation. Tract 67 begins with a discussion of Scripture as revealed truth. The doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration is a Scriptural truth. The neglect of this fact leads to weakness in the church. So, Regeneration in Scripture is connected to Baptism and Baptism is the source of spiritual birth. We are born of God, not of our faith. Baptism is the instrument of our Regeneration. So, our spiritual birth is attributed to water and the Spirit. The water is the outward cause, the Spirit the inward cause. Regeneration is the act of the Spirit of Christ. If we see the Scripture as the living word of God, this is the obvious and unambiguous meaning to Pusey. He then rejects previous Latitudinarian interpretations that Regeneration is only a change of state. You cannot enter the church without a spiritual Regeneration. One has to be born of the Spirit. This is an absolute necessity. Baptism is into Christ’s death. This is so we can walk in new life. So, there are two deaths. God baptizes us into Christ’s death in which we are passive and then there is the continual death to sin on which we work constantly. So, our death is accomplished in the water, our life worked in us by the Spirit. The death of Christ has power to abolish our corruption, his resurrection to bring us to new life. To put on Christ is not, contra Luther, to put on an Evangelical righteousness, but to receive the greatest gift of God. In discussing sealing, he points to this being a past completed action. He suddenly says that in talking this way he does not want to ‘exclude’ Confirmation, and admits it was originally a part of Baptism. He however never comes back to discuss this point. Discussing efficacy, he follows Augustinian doctrine. The water of Baptism is given efficacy to sanctify and work a love in us. He wants to invert Calvin, who feared too much would be given to the Sacrament. He rejects the idea that Baptism is a testimony to the faith of the convert. Baptism washes away sins.

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

9

Thus, he affirms that Baptismal Regeneration is a scriptural doctrine. That Regeneration is an act of God, in cleansing and renewing. That it leads to adoption as children of God and the indwelling of the Spirit. He located himself between Calvin, Zwingli, and Latitudinarians on the one hand and Roman Catholicism on the other. He is Augustinian in sacramental theology, but also uses notions of instrumentality and effectiveness. All this together puts a high stress on the event of Baptism and does not negate the importance of the sacramental element. He is aware that there are implications for Confirmation but does not develop the issue, in practice he used it as a thorough preparation for a communicant life. He finally worries about people falling away from Baptismal grace and sees the need for a penitential system. This synthesis was to be highly controversial. John Keble

Alongside Newman and Pusey, John Keble was one of the key Tractarians. He was primarily a pastor and a poet, working in parishes as well as having a chair in poetry. Colin Buchanan rightly said: it is extraordinary how the Tractarians and their immediate successors showed a lack of interest in the subject of Confirmation.9 We have already seen a passing reference in Pusey. Perhaps a little more could be said from Keble. Keble made his name as a poet in The Christian Year.10 These were published before the Tractarian controversies and so show to some extent a position that was to develop. There are poems for each Sunday of the year and then a miscellany on offices of the Prayer Book. The poem on Baptism begins: Where is it mothers learn their love? In every Church a fountain springs O’er which the eternal Dove Hovers on softest wings. What sparkles in that lucid flood Is water, by gross mortals eyed: But seen by Faith, ‘ tis blood Out of a dear Friend’s side. A few calm words of faith and prayer, A few bright drops of holy dew, Shall work a wonder there Earth’s charmers never knew. While not a theological treaty, it would be receptive to Pusey’s emphasis on the Spirit, baptized into death, and the efficacy of the Baptismal water.

10

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation There is also a poem on Confirmation, the first three verses saying: The shadow of th’ Almighty’s cloud Calm on the tents of Israel lay, While drooping paus’d twelve banners proud, Till He arise and lead the way. Then to the desert breeze unrolled Cheerly the waving pennons fly, Lion or eagle – each brightfold A lodestar to a warrior’s eye. So should thy champions, ere the strife, By holy hands o’er-shadow’d kneel, So, fearless for their charmed life, Bear, to the end, thy Spirit’s seal.

This takes up the idea of Confirmation equipping for Christian battle. While including the role of the Spirit, the danger is that the last line encouraged the view of sealing at Confirmation. This was a controversy that was to unfold. Village Sermons on the Baptismal Service was published in 1868 but the preface admits it was submitted earlier than that but not immediately published due to controversy. In these sermons, there are a number of comments on Regeneration: For thus saith the Church: “That he, coming to Thy Holy Baptism, may receive remission of his sins by spiritual regeneration.” Not only are his sins forgiven, but he has the root of holiness put into him. Not only is the Evil One driven out, but the good Spirit has come to dwell in his place.11 Keble affirms the place of the water as instrument: For as the child about to be baptized had been solemnly offered to God, by prayer, and by the threefold promise and vow made in his name by his sponsors: so it is meet that the water also, which is to be the outward mean and pledge of the child’s regeneration, should be in its way solemnly dedicated to God.12 Of the efficacy of Baptismal Regeneration, he says: That the Church commands us to thank God for its Regeneration. We are to say distinctly, “this child is regenerate”.13 Thus, he is following the outline of Pusey’s theology.

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

11

But Keble also mentions Confirmation in these sermons. He talks in the first sermon of our coming of age in Confirmation, a more pastoral approach. He sees the gift of the Holy Spirit imparted in both ordinances: The gift obtained by our Lord at His Own Baptism is applied to that particular water, as the Holy Spirit which came down on all at Pentecost, is applied to each one of us severally and particularly, by our own Baptism and Confirmation.14 The exact details of each application are not developed but will be later: The child will now by his Lord’s lovingkindness receive the full blessing of Regenerating grace, so, as soon as ever he is capable, he may be helped with more grace to turn to God more and more, … the Church, in asking for us, the fulness of God’s grace, meant especially to ask that our Confirmation might be very blessed: that we, coming worthily and kneeling before the Bishop, and feeling his fatherly hand over us, might be strengthened by the Holy Ghost to keep all our Baptismal vow.15 While there is a stress on the ‘full blessing of regenerative grace’, this does not exclude a further strengthening for spiritual maturity. This perhaps fills in an issue that Pusey never addressed but one that a pastor could not omit. A final comment from Keble reinforces this approach: The Holy Spirit, Who will have all men to be saved, Who then came to regenerate you by His free grace, was even then preparing for you this additional grace of Confirmation, and the still greater gift of the Lord’s Body and Blood.16 So, while there is an additional grace in Confirmation, to be enabled to keep the commandments, it is also a gateway to the sacrament of Holy Communion. I want to suggest at this point that what is lacking in Pusey is supplemented by Keble and presents a fuller picture, which enables us to see an early Tractarian view of Confirmation. While Baptismal Regeneration is the fullness of grace and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, Confirmation gives a further grace and an entrance into Holy Communion. What is distinct in this is a very strong stress on Baptismal Regeneration and an instrumental view of Baptism in this process. Review

There was fierce controversy about Baptismal Regeneration and how this related to Confirmation. It is not the purpose of the book to review the Baptismal Regeneration controversy in and of itself, but it does have an impact on Confirmation. Nias tends to view the debate as a confrontation between Anglo-Catholics and Evangelicals.17 This historiographical narrative leaves out

12

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

another strand of reaction, one often omitted, that of the broad-church approach. Broad-church reactions to Baptismal Regeneration produced a fresh theology also of lasting influence and with a distinct approach to Confirmation. So as a process of reappropriation, I will look at that now and then return to the Baptismal Regeneration controversy later insofar as it impacts on Confirmation. Broad-church views Pusey’s tract was to have a big impact, but not perhaps in the way he envisaged. F. D. Maurice read the Tract and reacted against it. He was to develop a broad-church theology which was of significant influence. F. D. Maurice

Frederick Dennison Maurice in 1860 became professor of English Literature at King’s College London and chaplain of Lincoln’s Inn. In 1835, he was forced to leave King’s over questions of orthodoxy. He worked for the education of workers. He died in 1872 still preaching and lecturing. Maurice was very influential in his day with a number of people following aspects of his theology. He was significant in the Christian Socialist Movement. His writings were numerous, diverse, and sometimes obscure. To look at Maurice’s views on Baptism, one needs to go back to his understanding of the gospel. God the Father so loved the world that he sent his Son to die on the cross for our sins. He rose, ascended, and sits as king of the kingdom he proclaimed. Christ as King rules over the whole human race and his salvation is complete. He rules as King of the nations and of the Church which is a sign of his Kingdom. Maurice is totally orthodox in his doctrine of the Trinity and incarnation. In his soteriology, he expresses the completeness of the work and so the present reign of Christ over all humanity. Humanity is saved but may not know it by ignorance or refuses to believe it by unbelief. But to those who believe they realize their status as children of God and join the church. The sign of this is Baptism. Baptism forms an important part of his understanding of sacramental signs, which for him include Baptism and eucharist, but also Bible, creeds, liturgy, and church order. All of these in particular ways are signs of the Kingdom. For him, the dominical sacraments witness to the gospel message, so there is no sacramental theology detached from the completed work of Christ. Another aspect of his theology is the dialogical methodology. While he does contrast various views and disagrees with many aspects, he always seems to find something good to say about someone with whom he is in dialogue. He dislikes the party spirit of his age, which is probably why he avoided being called broad-church and tries to disagree in a civil manner. It is this method that expresses comprehensiveness. So, Baptism is a sign of the person and work of Christ. Maurice’s assertion then is one of union:

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

13

‘Baptism asserts for each man that he is taken into union with a divine Person’18 Baptism declares man’s true and right constitution to be of union with God19 The idea of the Scriptures … is that Jesus Christ came upon earth to reveal a kingdom, which kingdom is founded upon a union established in his person between man and God … If then the setting up of this kingdom, and the adoption of men into it be not connected … with the rite of baptism20 Baptism affirms a man to be in a certain state … A man is brought into a certain state.., into a state of union with Christ.21 In the earliest edition of the book, Maurice said concerning Tractarians: They, looking at baptism as an act done in an instant, and accomplishing its purpose in an instant, and not rather as a witness of an eternal truth, the sacrament of constant union, the assurance of a constant living presence.22 ‘The sacrament of constant union’ is picked up by Davies, Vidler, and Spinks, but only seems to have been used in this earlier edition.23 Nevertheless, it captures the importance of union with God through the incarnation and redemption and Baptism as the witness to this as a fact. Maurice had reacted to Pusey’s tract on Baptism. He saw Pusey as saying that at Baptism the sinful person was fully regenerated to the Christian life, but the grace that was given to do this was gradually overcome by sin and the person was in a constant round of seeking grace in confession to get back to the grace they have lost. The Christian was thus trapped in a cycle of grace and defeat. This was a view to which he could not subscribe. Nor was he happy with the Evangelical view which he thought said that nothing happened at Baptism, conversion being the important event, thus Baptism was almost deceptive claiming various words like Regeneration but denying that it had happened till conversion. Maurice saw his view as in the Prayer Book and consonant with it. He was in no hurry to ask for liturgical revisions and used the language of the Prayer Book in his teaching on Baptism and Confirmation. He sees Baptism as ‘the only door to enter into Christ’s fold’.24 He saw himself following Luther and seeing Baptism as the transition point in life, the point of justification. Baptism declares to its members spiritual citizenship. Baptism is connected to the spiritual act, repentance, and a spiritual promise, remission. ‘Baptism is not a momentary act but a perpetual sacrament’.25 Baptism is a new birth, an introduction to the spiritual world. Like Luther he says we should claim our position as children of God, shown by our Baptism, and become what we are. The meaning of Baptism is we are brought into God’s family. It is a new birth. We are adopted into Christ by Baptism. He also talks of Baptism in covenant terms.

14

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

Confirmation was addressed in The Church A Family: Twelve Sermons on the Occasional Services of the Prayer-Book. He sees Confirmation as: an ordinance of the Christian family. The name points of a blessing already conferred. That which is not yet given to us, cannot be confirmed … Confirmation must correspond in its kind and character to that which has preceded it.26 Here he is thinking of infant Baptism, of an act to fulfil its intention. We want something not to make baptism more complete, but to show how complete it is.27 Confirmation is seen as testimony to the whole of childhood being a divine culture. It is a witness to God being the child’s parent. Confirmation is more than an act of conscious faith. God is the foundation of our services. In Confirmation, the candidate understands that he is adopted by God. He is bestowed with further gifts for life in the same race. It connects to passages of Scripture, previously poorly interpreted where not the Spirit but spiritual gifts are given. It is an assurance of the Spirit of Love being with them. F. W. Robertson

Frederick William Robertson in 1847 moved to Holy Trinity Brighton where he became famous as a preacher. Dying in 1853 his published works became very popular. He was friends of both Maurice and Kingsley. Robertson preached five sermons relevant to this study with some letters and Confirmation preparation notes that expounded his position. The first sermon on Baptism was preached in 1850. It starts with a broadchurch methodology saying there are opposing views on Baptism based around Baptismal Regeneration and what is not needed is a timid third view but ‘a truth larger than either’.28 He then defines the positions as Rome, modern Calvinism, and Scripture/ Church of England. Quoting the Council of Trent Robertson sums up the Roman position as ‘Christ’s merits are instrumentally applied by Baptism’.29 He notes that ‘timid modifications’ of this position are becoming popular in the Church of England. He rejects anti-Catholic rhetoric and sees in the Roman position an acknowledgement that you are joining the church, not an association. He agrees with Rome that you are a child of God which he says, ‘Baptism declares you such’. But he distinguishes between Rome, which says Baptism creates you as a child of God, and his view ‘Baptism proclaims you the child of God’. In the view of Rome, he sees, a crass materialism and magic. He also dislikes the doctrine by Romanizers which:

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

15

Makes the Christian life a struggle for something that is lost, instead of a progress to something that lies before.30 He sees a sadness in Tractarian writing, a longing for Baptismal purity that is gone. The second view is that of modern Calvinism. It starts by distinguishing the visible and invisible church. Baptism admits to the former but only a few into the latter. Baptismal Regeneration is a change of state from being outside to inside the church, but the real benefit of Baptism is to the elect. You become God’s child when you are consciously aware of it. He says this is similar to Rome; it creates the fact rather than testifying to it. He sees this as faith makes true what was not true before. But the love of a mother is stronger than this Calvinist view, believing in the goodness of her child. The third approach that of Robertson is what he thinks as Biblical and the doctrine of the Church of England. He starts with ‘our Father’ which proclaims God as Father of all. Christ revealed this, and as Son of Man and Son of God redeemed the world from ignorance of the relationship. In Christ, humanity was sanctified to God. Humanity then is God’s children; the sin of humanity is to live as if this is false. To know that you are a child of God and call him Father is Regeneration. Baptism is the visible witness to this eternal truth. ‘Baptism authoritatively reveals and pledges to the individual that which is true of the race’.31 Baptism applies this truth to you by name; to recognize God as Father is to be regenerate. Baptism does not create a child of God; it does not make the fact, but only reveals it. In response to the Catechism which says Baptism made a child of God, he uses an analogy of coronation. One is Queen before coronation. Coronation declares that fact to the nation. ‘Baptism is God’s authoritative declaration in material form of a spiritual reality’.32 He sees the value of this position as preventing exclusiveness, in the church being humanity joined in Christ, and this doctrine sanctifies materialism. The second sermon deals with two difficulties, one seemingly denying original sin and the other reducing Baptism to a superfluous ceremony. Original sin he defines as ‘a denial of God’s paternity’. It was from this that Christ came to redeem us, revealing God as Father. Receiving that revelation is Regeneration. So, he distinguishes between being a child of God and realizing it. In a way, this is a reinterpretation that he does not go into deeply. Does he make Baptism superfluous? He argues not. Truths and ideas need material forms. The creation gives us God. Baptism is a fact to rest on, doctrine realized into flesh and blood. Baptism is also a sign of the Church. This changes the attitude towards other churches. Baptism is also an authoritative symbol. It is identical to that which it proclaims. Baptism is your warrant that you are His child. The sermon on Regeneration was preached in 1852. Working from John 3: 5-7, he expounds the doctrine of the Trinity. Then he looks at the kingdom of God, which is entered into by Regeneration. This is done by a

16

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

Baptism in water and a Baptism in the Spirit. It is a revelation to our sense and our spirit. The fact that is substantiated by Baptism is God’s covenant. It is the revealed ‘will’ of God. He discusses a variety of views of Regeneration, that which identifies water and Spirit (Rome and others in the Church of England), and that which separated them, the Spirit working in conversion. He sees us as born as animal but awaking at some point to the spirit. This he sees as spiritual Regeneration. Two sermons from 1849 are subtitled as Confirmation lectures. The first is on the Parable of the Sower. This is preached after Confirmation and before reception of the Lord’s Supper. He sees Confirmation as creating a season of excitement that changes the ordinary. How many will continue in what they promised in Confirmation? This he sees answered in the Parable of the Sower. Free will does allow some to fall away. This can be by a want of spiritual perception, a want of depth of character, and dissipating influences. He then tells them of the early Communion he is planning and exhorts them to come. The second sermon is Jacob’s Wrestling. It is being preached later, on the day of them receiving Communion. He sees this experience as like Jacob’s ladder, meeting the Lord of Love. His ministry is entrusting truth to them. Baptism reveals to you God is your Father. Confirmation tells you of selfdedication to God. It is a self-consecration to His will. The sermons on Baptism were opposed by people in Brighton. But they also made an impression and a Quaker applied to him for Baptism. His response to the Gorham Judgment was to disagree with both Gorham and the bishop. The reasons are the same as in the sermon on Baptism. Indeed, from his letters, we see that the sermons on Baptism were a response to this conflict in the Church of England. There was a further question in his letter about the liturgy calling a child ‘a child of wrath’. His answer is that if you live your life denying you are a child of God, then indeed you are a child of wrath. His Confirmation notes are structured as a Catechism. Q. What is Baptism? A. The authoritative declaration of a fact. Q. What fact? A. That I am God’s child. Q. Why then do you say that I am so made, in Baptism? A. Being made I mean – declared to be. Q. Explain what you mean. A. As soon as a king dies, his successor is king. Coronation declares the fact but does not make him king. He was one before, but it corroborates, declares, affirms, seals the fact by a recognized form used for that purpose.33 Thus, in preaching and catechizing he is teaching a consistent approach to Baptism and Confirmation.

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

17

C. Kingsley

Charles Kingsley in 1860 became Regius Professor of Modern History at Cambridge followed by, in 1860, a canon of Chester Cathedral and then in 1873 a canon of Westminster Abbey. He was influenced by Maurice, was a friend of Darwin, and welcomed the theory of evolution. He wrote novels including some for children. He debated in print with John Henry Newman. He was also much involved in the Christian Socialist Movement and social reform. His theological writings are mostly collections of sermons. One place to start on Baptism and Confirmation is to look at the sermon on God’s Covenants. Kingsley wants to stress the love of God. Working from the Litany he points out the love of God as Father and the completed redemption of Jesus and the Spirit striving in our hearts. Thus, in prayer: We may pray boldly to Him to spare us, because we know that we are already His people, already redeemed with his most precious blood, already declared by holy baptism to be bound to Him in an everlasting covenant.34 For Kingsley, Baptism and covenant are key ideas. God operates to his creation and people in covenants. Baptism is based on the completed work of Christ who reigns on high. Baptism declares the covenant to be applied to me by name. While his normal language is that we are declared as God’s children in Baptism, in this sermon he talks in one instance of in Baptism being made God’s children. In another sermon, he says: My baptism is a witness and a warrant, a sign and a covenant between me and God, that I belong not to old Adam of Paradise, but to the Lord Jesus Christ, who sits at God’s right hand.35 Baptism as a sign and warrant is important to Kingsley but it is a sign of what is already a fact, that I belong to Jesus. Baptism is based on: God’s love is above us and around us, like a warm, bright, life-giving sun. We may shut our eyes to it, but it is there still.36 So, as he hints here, he sees the possibility of disbelieving the Baptismal covenant but the truth that we are children of God remains. ‘We can no more become not God’s children, than a child can become not his own Father’s son’.37 But we can try to be what we are not. So, we may fall from grace. But we can always return after straying and by thinking of our Baptism we may be at peace. In the Spirit of Bondage, Kingsley makes contrast between Baptism and Confirmation. In discussing ‘the wages of sin is death’ and escaping sin, he says ‘believe the warrant of your Baptism. Believe the message of your

18

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

Confirmation’.38 This is because Baptism says God does not hate you but loves you and you are his child. We become what we are by claiming and using what we have. He then develops this in a series of comparisons: Baptism says: You are God’s child, whether you know it or not. Confirmation says: Yes; but now you are to know it, and to claim your rights as His sons … Baptism says: You are regenerated and born from above, by water and the Holy Spirit. Confirmation answers: True, most true; but there is no use in a child’s being born, if it never comes to man’s estate … Baptism says: You may and ought to become more or less such a man as the Lord Jesus was. Confirmation says: You can become such; for you are no longer children.39 So, Confirmation is taking on ourselves the adult dimension of our faith. However, that still rests on the fact that we are children of God as witnessed to us in our Baptism. The social dimensions of Baptism can also be seen in his sermons and his Christian socialism is driven by his sacramental theology. In his Second Sermon on the Cholera, he concludes: If you really believe that your children are God’s children, that at baptism God declares your little ones to be His, you will be ready to take any care or trouble, however new or strange it may seem, to keep your children safe from all foul smells, foul food, foul water, and foul air, that they may grow up healthy, hearty, and cleanly, fit to serve God as christened.40 This is an application to a particular social problem, but it is one application of a more general principle: He takes poor fishermen and mechanics, and sends them forth to acquaint all men with the good news that God is their King, and to baptize them as subjects of that kingdom, bound to rise in baptism to a new life, a life of Jove, and brotherhood, and self-sacrifice, like His own. He commands them to call all nations to that sacred Feast wherein there is neither rich nor poor, but the same bread and the same wine are offered to the monarch and to the slave.41 Elsewhere he talks of the treasures of the church: The Bible, which proclaims man’s freedom, Baptism his equality, the Lord’s Supper his brotherhood.42 This Christian Socialist approach worked out in his parish ministry with talking equally to low and high. He arranged Confirmation classes so all

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

19

could participate together and rearranged the Confirmation day to avoid the old evils of much time spent in the pub. The day began and ended in the rectory, throwing a dinner at the end of the day for all the candidates. It is the social application of Baptism that is one of the distinctives of Charles Kingsley in his broad-church approach to Baptism and Confirmation. F. J. A. Hort

Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828–1892) was an important Biblical scholar. He was born in Dublin as a strict Evangelical and went to Rugby School, where there was a broad-church influence. In 1846, he went to Cambridge meeting Westcott and Lightfoot becoming lifelong friends. In 1852, he became a fellow of Trinity Cambridge. On marrying in 1857 he became vicar in Hertfordshire. In 1872, he returned to Cambridge with a distinguished academic career. He was friends with both Maurice and Kingsley. He had already been influenced by Maurice when in Cambridge. In 1848, he wrote to Gerald Blunt expressing delight in Blunt’s warm appreciation of Maurice’s chapter on Baptism. In the same year, he writes another letter saying how he rejects the Evangelical view of Baptism and follows that of Maurice. His only question is if the candidate receives the Spirit in Baptism or receives an increase of the Spirit in Baptism. He refuses to join any party and holds to the language of Baptismal Regeneration but denies the AngloCatholic interpretation of the phrase. In 1867, he writes to a lady who has joined the Church of England. This important letter explains his views on Baptism and Confirmation. I think we may find a distinct meaning and a true benefit in [Confirmation] it even in these cases. Whatever else Confirmation may be, it is a solemn Christian entrance on the responsibilities of mature life. Baptism chiefly concerns us as to what we are, Confirmation as to what we do. Baptism assures us that we are children of God, members of Christ and His body, and heirs of the heavenly kingdom. But when we reach manhood or womanhood, we enter on a world of duties far more distinctly than before; we begin to have works to do for our Lord and our brethren. For these new tasks we need special help, and this is what Confirmation gives us. It is an assurance of active ‘gifts of grace,’ varied helps from the One Spirit, a spirit of ‘wisdom,’ of’ strength,’ of’ holy fear,’ meeting all our own efforts and, giving them power from on high. Confirmation reminds us strongly that Baptism is not so much a single event, accomplished once for all, as the beginning of a life which calls for daily rekindling and renewal. Doubtless we have no right to say that the unconfirmed receive no such strengthening from the Spirit, any more than we dare say that the unbaptized are strangers to God and His kingdom. But there is a clear benefit in taking advantage of the outward expression of this’ grace,’ not only because it is our duty as Churchmen (though that is not really a small matter), but because the

20

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation tangibleness of the outward form gives us true assistance by enabling us to take hold of the blessing, to use it confidently as our own.43

Thus, Baptism and Confirmation are assurances of the grace of God, recognized and required as people of the church, but they also encourage us to take up the moral life. In 1877, he writes to his daughter who is getting confirmed: First, I would say, do not allow yourself to think of Confirmation as a new burden. It is a new responsibility, and every new responsibility may be turned by ourselves into a burden; but in itself it is only a blessing. Think of it as what the word means--a strengthening. We are all full of weaknesses and ignorances. If we think ourselves particularly strong about anything, there is reason to fear that it is only a dangerous weakness wrongly seen but Confirmation gives us the promise of such strength and guidance as we shall need continually as time goes on. Our Confirmation points back to our Baptism, and we learn through the Catechism to see much of what they both mean. They do not lay upon us something strange and fresh, but teach us what we were always made and meant to be, and enable us to live accordingly more and more. We have not got to strive hardly after some distant object; we have to know and remember that already, without any act of ours, we are children of the great and gracious Heavenly Father; members, that is, as it were parts and limbs, of His blessed Son, Jesus Christ, He being our Head; and beings enjoying the privilege of having our whole lives ruled by the laws of a great invisible and heavenly kingdom.44 So, we need to remember what God has already done and become what we are meant to be. A similar letter was written to his son on his Confirmation in 1879. First, he explains Baptism: You were not only born into the world of men. You were also born of Christian parents in a Christian land. While yet an infant you were claimed for God by being made in Baptism an unconscious member of His Church, the great Divine Society which has lived on unceasingly from the Apostles’ time till now. You have been surrounded by Christian influences; taught to lift up your eyes to the Father in heaven as your own Father; to feel yourself in a wonderful sense a member or part of Christ, united to Him by strange invisible bonds; to know that you have as your birthright a share in the kingdom of heaven, the world of invisible laws by which God is ruling and blessing His creatures. This is the privilege of a Christian, to know assuredly and clearly the facts which relate to all men; to be conscious of God as Him in whom you live and move and have your being, though a veil that hides Him still rests on the eyes of those to whom the Gospel of His Son has not been made known.45

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

21

He goes on to explain the meaning of Confirmation: The very name Confirmation reminds us how large a part of our misdeeds comes simply from weakness, negligent and guilty weakness. It repeats the command, “Be strong and of a good courage,” with the addition,” Be strong (strengthened,
 !"μ#!$%
) in the Lord and in the power of His might,” and gives warning that no part of God’s armour can be safely neglected in our daily battle.46 He then exhorts his son to remember God’s blessings. Let the touch of the good old Bishop’s hands upon your head dwell always in your memory as a sign of the Hands of blessing which are ever being laid upon your head out of heaven. Let nothing ever make you doubt or forget your heavenly Father’s love and desire of your good, or dream that He can ever cease His patient working in and for you and all His children.47 He talks of a lifelong and constantly renewed Confirmation. Hort, in 1867, also preached on Baptism and Confirmation and in 1885 on Newness of Life (a Confirmation sermon) in Cambridge and other Sermons. The sermon on Baptism and Confirmation is to his congregation in Hertfordshire with a Confirmation service two months away. He begins by reminding them that they are members of the Church, not a building or parish but the Church of Christ’s a universal body. He then says that Baptism is the entrance into that church. Interestingly, he sees private or family Baptisms as less than perfect and wants Baptisms in the service with the congregation, ‘Baptism is the act not of the clergyman only, but of the whole congregation or Church’.48 He stresses the importance of the words of the service ‘we receive this child into the congregation of Christ’s flock’. The child then grows up under the influence of Christ. Baptism is a religious blessing that brings us near to God and to other people. But Baptism is an act of God alone. ‘By Baptism God declares us to be his children’49 we are born but more than animals. Baptism is a pledge by which we can assure ourselves that we can rightfully say I am a child of God. He rejects the idea that by the water and words ‘something starts into the being within the child which was not there before’.50 But Baptism is what Christ appointed as the way into the kingdom of God. In Baptism, God acknowledges the candidate as his own. Hence, we can call God Father, and God gives us a birth from above, a birth of the Spirit. We are to live up to this declaration. Confirmation is the time when the person recognizes what happened, welcomes and accepts it. Confirmation is strengthening in the heavenly road. The second sermon from 1885 Newness of Life is a post-Confirmation sermon at Sherborne School. He relates new life back to Baptism, being plunged in the river. But the death of Baptism is also related to Christ’s

22

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

actual death. Baptism brings us to new life. In Paul’s day, the candidates were adults. Today, they are mostly children and so there are two parts to our repentance and faith, Baptism and Confirmation. It is easy to sink back into sin, so we need to walk in new life which we do with our fellow Christians. Confession of sin in private and public prayer and holy Communion are the ways to walk in new life. In confession, we live out the renunciation of Baptism and in Communion, we are united to Christ and to fellow Christians. In the first sermon, he clearly rejects Tractarian views of Baptism. He avoids talking about becoming a child of God at Baptism. Baptism is more a revelation of the status and an act of God in declaring that we are a part of Christ’s kingdom and thus children of God. There is an operation of the Spirit, but we have to continue in renunciation and faith. Faith in what God has done for us in Christ. Phillips Brooks

Phillips Brooks was the Bishop of Massachusetts. He is famous now for writing ‘O Little Town of Bethlehem’ and his teaching on preaching, but he was also famous in his day as a broad churchman, introducing the new ideas from England to America. He began studying Maurice in 1868 having heard him preach in a previous visit to England.51 The influence of Maurice can be illustrated in a couple of sources from his prodigious publications. The first is from a sermon preached in 1885 in Advent while he was in Philadelphia, The Church of the Living God. It starts in perhaps an unusual place that of emergency Baptism. He paints a dark story in which the emergency Baptism is of an unconscious child and is swiftly followed by its death. Did this ceremony do any good? He sees the rite as of ‘profound and beautiful significance’.52 This is not because there is any difference in the heavenly destination of a child dying, baptized or not, but the Baptism is a solemn and tender recognition of the child’s humanity. ‘It belongs to God … because humanity belongs to Him’.53 We claim the child for Him, appropriating the redemption of Christ, who revealed that we belong to God. We now declare the child a member of the church, which is humanity belonging to God, a realization of the church belonging to God. He then develops the significance of the act as unconnected to social standing of the candidate or their financial position. The child is a part of the church of the living God. Every human being in very virtue of birth into the redeemed world is a potential member of the Christian Church. His Baptism claims and asserts his membership.54 This approach to Baptism clearly follows the lines of F. D. Maurice. There is no discussion of original sin in contrast to the Prayer Book. Humanity has been redeemed by Christ, Baptism is joining the church, which is the part of

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

23

humanity that has realized that redemption. Through Baptism humanity grows richer: ‘Baptism is the utterance of the rejoicing welcome’. He then talks of the poor and degraded in society and says: They are all members of the Church, member of Christ, children of God, heirs to the kingdom of heaven. Their birth made them so. Their Baptism declared the truth which their birth made true.55 By taking the extreme example, Phillips Brooks uses it to effectively explain Baptism (the sermon then discusses the Lord’s Supper and the ministry). Humanity is redeemed by Christ; Baptism declares that redemption. It was a lot of theology packed into the first third of the sermon. A second key source to understand the approach of Phillips Brooks is a published sermon on Baptism and Confirmation.56 Like Maurice, Brooks preached catechetical sermons based on the Prayer Book. This appears to be in that genre, as there is much discussion of the text of the service. He begins by asking: what must one do to be a Christian? He looks to the four questions in the Baptismal service and then reveals his approach to Confirmation. Any man who can answer them [the four questions] may be baptized. And since Confirmation is only the re-assertion of the Baptismal Promises, and for its whole meaning and value is thrown back on Baptism, gets all its color from Baptism shining through it, it follows that those questions may be properly take as the test of Confirmation too….57 The four questions from the Prayer Book are about the renunciation of the devil, belief in the Christian faith as in the Apostles’ Creed, willingness to be baptized, and keeping the commandments. While this might seem to put an emphasis on our effort, Brooks is keen to point out that ‘we love because He loved us’. Hence the replies ‘I will by God’s help’. This Godward side is expressed in his concluding remarks. He asks for the hearers to go higher and listen to a far greater invitation: Christ himself, whose spirit and whose words the Church but faintly echoes, stands at the door of His own great spiritual kingdom and bids you enter.58 Thus, Christ invites ‘come in’ and the liturgy of the church has the same message in Baptism and Confirmation, ‘come in’. Phillips Brooks in both these sermons is closely following F. D. Maurice. There are hints at the more ‘socialist’ implications of the teaching. There is no interaction with questions of Regeneration and not much on the role of the Holy Spirit in Confirmation, a topic that was soon to engulf the Church of England. However, it does illustrate the wide influence of Maurice in Anglicanism.

24

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

Frederick Temple

Frederick Temple from 1858 was head of Rugby school which followed the broad-church tradition of Thomas Arnold. His contribution to Essays and Reviews in 1860 led to controversy. In 1869 he became Bishop of Exeter, in 1885 he was translated to London and in 1896 he became Archbishop of Canterbury. His first introduction to F. D. Maurice seems to have been around 1840.59 In 1850 with the debates on Baptismal Regeneration sparked by Pusey and the raging controversy on the Gorham case, he wrote a series of letters to Mr. Scott about Baptismal Regeneration.60 The argument follows a similar trajectory as Maurice. On the one hand, there are the Methodists who emphasize conversion with the Damascus Road as their Biblical text. On the other hand, there are the Roman Catholics and Pusey who take the realistic language of Scripture and emphasize the material element of the sacrament. He disputes both parties most notably because he comments that in the New Testament most of the new Christians were adults unlike today. So, he sees Baptism as being a positive assurance of grace, given and to be given. This grace is the gift of the Spirit, but the Christian life is a struggle against sin as in Romans 7. He is happy with the language of Regeneration, not least because it is Biblical but thinks it is open to confusion and does not easily fit in pastoral experience. The Christian develops as Bible reading leads to a deeper conversion. He does not see Confirmation as a thing in itself; but still not enough stress is put on it. He laments triannual Confirmations and would prefer a regular admission to Communion with Confirmation coming when available. He calls Confirmation the sacrament of conversion and Baptism the sacrament of Regeneration.61 Confirmation he calls the completion of Baptism. This is more pastoral language and not a precursor to later Anglo-Catholic debates. It is including aspects of the two parties and linking Regeneration and conversion to Prayer Book liturgy. All this is a variant, widening the broad-church approach. When at Rugby, he was concerned to make Confirmation something significant. It was an annual service, and he took it very seriously. He would help in the preparation but also got the housemasters involved so that the right pastoral care could be made. In Exeter, he confirmed 93,203 people, exhorting the clergy to be diligent in preparation and trying to limit the numbers at any one service so that the service was meaningful. This required him to follow the trend set by Bishop Wilberforce of increasing the number of Confirmation centres.62 In London, he disputed with his suffragan bishop, Walsham How, Bishop of Bedford, over arrangements for Confirmations. Bishop How had been used to confining his ministrations to the East End of London; Temple wanted him to work across the diocese as directed by him. The relationships between diocesan bishops and their suffragans were in the early stages. His Confirmation policy in Exeter seems to have been continued in London and Canterbury.

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

25

Temple combined a theological approach that to some extent followed Maurice with probably the best practice of his time. It developed in the 1850s and seems to have continued through the rest of his ministry. Baptism and Confirmation are not separate, Confirmation being a strengthening of the grace given and most likely seen as a part of ‘grace to be given’. The ‘grace given in Baptism’, i.e., the Holy Spirit, is perhaps softer than Maurice, but still stresses the divine gift in Baptism, and this is not an act of human will. Broad-church attitudes to the Prayer Book and forms of worship

Conybeare estimated that in 1853, 20% of the Church of England clergy were broad-church (Low Church 36%, High Church 34%).63 There had been an argument for church reform from broad-church people. Thomas Arnold in Principles of Church Reform argued for comprehension of dissenters, synodical government (as we would now call it), clergy from the lower classes (including permanent deacons), and liturgical reform.64 He saw the need for few changes to the text but more important the repeal of legislation to allow for freer services and greater variety of services. Many of the objections of the eighteenth century were still around and Evangelicals were arguing for and against lessons from the Apocrypha, as for example the anonymous letter in the Christian Observer.65 Early Tractarians were criticized in the Christian Observer for their conservatism on the question of liturgical reform.66 Gradually the pressure through the century was increasing push to liturgical reform.67 All of this William Palmer saw as a justification for Tractarianism.68 Maurice has a different approach, although he was aware of all this agitation around. He saw Baptism as but one sign of a ‘universal and spiritual constitution’. Supposing these signs to be Baptism, the Creeds, Forms of Worship, the Eucharist, the Ministerial Orders, the Scriptures.69 Although the kingdom of Christ is internal, it also manifests in kingdom signs. Liturgy is the worship of a body, a family. His approach is to look for signs that are in common with other churches (an ecumenical approach) and sees them as building blocks of the kingdom. Regarding the Book of Common Prayer, Maurice and company are happy to use the language of the Prayer Book and believe their interpretation to be the correct one. They use Regeneration, new birth, and justification as they have explained. There was then very little cause to change the Prayer Book. We have also seen that both Maurice and Brookes preached through the Prayer Book in a series of sermons. Today this might seem a strange thing to do. But if forms of worship are a part of a spiritual constitution, then this seems less anomalous.

26

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

Their theology does not seem to have been one that invited liturgical reform and thus they were not pushing for revision as the Tractarians increasingly were. However, they contribute a background to the suggested reforms in 1928.70 Although the lens of the war chaplains influenced liturgical reform, the Grey Book (1923) expressed a broad-church approach to liturgical revision.71 Review

The approach of F. D. Maurice and friends was a change in the way Baptism and Confirmation were viewed. It did not build on previous Baptism theology from the eighteenth century and Conybeare is incorrect in connecting all broad-church theology to Latitudinarianism (at least in the case of F. D. Maurice).72 The theology was of influence in its time, on both sides of the Atlantic, and has come to the fore from time to time, e.g., with Eric James in the 1960s.73 In terms of historiography, we need to see Anglican history from the nineteenth century as not a simple black and white between Evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics, but one in which the two parties have subdivisions and a more elusive third strand in broad-church approaches. The Regeneration controversy It is not the purpose of this book to follow all the details of the baptismal Regeneration controversy. Nias suggests that the controversy was brewing from 1816 with Mant’s Bampton lectures and that it was fuelled by Laurence’s book of the same year and then Bethell’s book of 1816.74 Pusey’s Tracts of 1835 then lit the fire. A huge series of pamphlets and books followed. The fire was then refuelled in 1846 with the Gorham controversy. Gorham was presented for a living but suffered the wrath of the pugnacious Bishop Phillpotts. The bishop declared him unorthodox in his baptismal theology and refused to induct him. Various judicial stages led to an induction under the command of the Archbishop. The Gorham controversy sparked a pamphlet war with many dimensions to the argument. Much of this is tangential to Confirmation. Nias suggests that the debate was quenched by the publishing of Mozley’s 1862 Baptismal Controversy; however, by then ‘baptismal Regeneration’, as a soundbite for party allegiance, positive and negative, had become a feature of both the Church of England and Anglicanism which was to last at least another century.75 Many people wrote books and pamphlets about Regeneration advocating one side or another and some of the writing was very provocative. An exhaustive survey is not required at this point as many of the key people only addressed the issue of baptismal Regeneration and omitted Confirmation. But some did address both. This next section looks at a variety of people and their view of Confirmation in the light of baptismal Regeneration.

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

27

Alexander Jolly

Indicative of baptismal controversy, the Bishop of Moray expounded the doctrine of baptismal Regeneration (and Confirmation) as a result of an upsurge in Calvinist thinking in the Scottish Episcopal Church in 1826. The bishop died in 1838, but the work A Friendly Address on Baptismal Regeneration was reprinted in 1840 when the controversy over Pusey’s Tract was developing and thus can be seen as adding a Scottish traditional high church voice to the discussion.76 Jolly sees understanding of baptism as key to the Christian life. Working from the Catechism he says our baptismal name points to our two families by nature and by grace. The baptismal name reminds us of our second birth ‘our Regeneration in that holy sacrament’, which is a birth to righteousness or ‘justification by grace’.77 The sacraments are outward signs pledging to us inward and spiritual grace. So, in baptism we are born again to a new hope. This he draws out of John 3, Titus, and accounts of baptism in Acts and then a selection of the Fathers. Regeneration is connected to the washing of baptism and the work of God; baptism and Regeneration are ‘convertible terms’. When we sin after baptism, we repent and return to the grace given. Meanwhile, the Spirit is at work both in Regeneration and in a person’s life. Quoting Jeremy Taylor, he says: The baptised person must receive other mysteries, which are more signally perfective. Confirmation is yet more perfective, and is properly the perfection of baptism.78 He then quotes Hebrews 6: 1–2 and the positive comment of Calvin on Confirmation’s apostolic origin. The gap between Baptism and Confirmation is seen as a time to give catechetical instruction. The promise of Confirmation is a greater gift of the Holy Spirit. So, the Christian life begins with our Regeneration in Baptism which is sealed by Confirmation. The Friendly Address does present a different view from a more Calvinistic position asserting the centrality of Baptismal Regeneration and the importance of Confirmation as a conferring of a further work of the Holy Spirit. It differs from Pusey in a less mechanical view of Regeneration and a clearer operation of the Spirit throughout the believer’s life. As such it was a more traditional high church position. Henry Phillpotts

Another example of that is Henry Phillpotts, Bishop of Exeter (1830–1869). A pugnacious and controversialist bishop who was more of an old high church bishop than a Tractarian. On Baptism, he held and propounded a doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration. In his visitation charge of 1842, he

28

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

writes warmly about the Tracts exhorting his clergy to follow the rubrics of the Prayer Book to the letter. He also endorses the view of: the necessity and efficacy of the Sacraments as appointed means, in and by which God is please to impart the vital and saving grace of Christ.79 He is sad at the decline in Baptism particularly in Cornwall and exhorts the clergy to diligence in baptizing and encourages monthly Communion. However, the charge barely mentions Confirmation and stresses an increase in Baptism. In his 1848 visitation charge, he spends considerable time defending the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration. He maintains that spiritual Regeneration is the effect of infant Baptism, and we must be careful not to stray from this doctrine. He is particularly alarmed by The Layman’s Prayer Book which he sees as ‘unfit for ordinary use in churches’.80 It is not exactly clear as to which book he is referring to, but the type of revision he dislikes can be seen in the later Revision of the Book of Common Prayer which recasts the beginning of the Confirmation prayer to say: Almighty and everliving God, who hast vouchsafed to receive these thy servants into thy Visible Church by Baptism, and hast given them a desire thus publicly to profess their faith in thee….81 This is a continuation of views from the eighteenth century now interpreted as an attack on Baptismal Regeneration. He affirms and quotes in his charge the Prayer Book version of this prayer which says that they have been regenerated in Baptism but again he has little to say about Confirmation save to quote from the earlier prayer books: Confirmation is ministered to them that be baptized, that by imposition of hands and prayer they may receive strength and defence against all temptations to sin, and the assaults of the world and the devil.82 So, the controversy is primarily about Baptism and not developed into Confirmation. Indeed, it is sometimes said that Pusey’s view of Baptismal Regeneration is so strong that there is little left to say about Confirmation. A clergyman

Thoughts on Baptismal Regeneration were published by an anonymous clergyperson in the Diocese of Barbados. This is a rejection of a Puseyite view of Baptismal Regeneration. As there is only “one Baptism,” or birth of water, so there can be only one birth of the Spirit; but it by no means follows, that they should invariably

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

29

accompany each other. On the contrary, as they are in themselves distinct, so they may be conferred at two distinct periods of time.83 He then develops his argument to say that the opposite view is contrary to Scripture, the Prayer Book, and the Articles of Religion. He would also say that pastoral experience shows that not all who are baptized are regenerated of the Holy Ghost. For Confirmation, the importance is the renewal of the Baptismal vow and that the strong language of Confirmation is conditional: the strong declarations of the “Confirmation Service” be only conditional, and if the parties confirmed be declared “regenerate,” only upon the supposition that they are fulfilling their Baptismal vow.84 He sees the Prayer Book as having been drawn up for believers. Thus, we have a more ‘low church’ view of sacraments and Confirmation. John Davidson

John Davison, onetime fellow at Oriel College Oxford, published in 1874 Remarks on Baptismal Regeneration; they were originally published in 1810 and were republished after the Tracts. He represents a more traditional high church view. He begins by asserting the real spiritual Regeneration that occurs in both adult and infant Baptism. Thus, you cannot say of a baptized person that they are unregenerate. However, he also stresses the importance of faith and repentance as necessary parts of Baptism. He absolutely rejects that Regeneration is affected because of the particular nature of the water. Rather, he points to the importance of the role of the Spirit. Davidson considers the relationship of Baptism and Confirmation. One significant addition to theological discussion is the place he puts on the Catechism, teaching those who were baptized so that they could realize the importance of Baptism to them. He sums up his view on the relation between Baptism and Confirmation in the following way: We have said that Confirmation is a supplement to Baptism. We mean, that it is a supplement to it, inasmuch as it adds to Baptism the actual attestation of the child, who had been baptized, to the covenant of the Gospel, with the seal of his own moral powers. But the Church does not regard it to be such a supplement as may draw down from God the grace of Regeneration: that grace is presupposed to exist, and is declared to have been bestowed “by water and the Holy Ghost,” that is, in Baptism. Therefore, Confirmation is not an adult Baptism, but on the part of the child an adult recognition of the vicarious Baptismal vow.85

30

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

He is very keen to assert that a real Regeneration has occurred but also that this is recognized in Confirmation where the response of the candidate is verbalized. So, it is not a reaffirmation of the Baptismal vow but more an appropriation of that vow. Samuel Wilberforce

Samuel Wilberforce, as Bishop of Oxford, had to deal with the Tractarians and their developing practices within his diocese. We will see in a later chapter his practice and theology of Confirmation. He however did not fully agree with Pusey about Regeneration. He said in this Addresses to Ordinands: We shall preach fearlessly regeneration as God’s act, as that which depends on His will, and His gift through Christ … in the faithful use of His own prescribed means, to give to all whom He has chosen to be grafted into His Church.86 This asserts the action of God and says little about the water. While this may sound rather Calvinist, he goes on to state the possibility of the work of God being barred by unrepentance and unbelief. In his Confirmation address at Eaton in 1847 he stresses to the candidates the vow they make and the lifelong nature of that vow. While God has been calling them, now is the time to respond and devote their life to God, who helps with his grace. For from Baptism the dew of the Holy Spirit has been ‘falling on you’, and there is grace for today to choose Christ’s way in the world. The address does not use any particular biblical justification for the views expressed and there is a stress on the commitment of the candidate.87 William Goode

William Goode, an Evangelical, rejected strong Baptismal Regeneration doctrines. His major work is on the effects of infant Baptism.88 He views the formularies of the church as, on the one hand, rejecting that sacraments are signs, unrelated to the grace of God, and on the other the view of Trent that sacraments operate ex opero operato. He is wanting to be broad and not excluding and so rejects the view illustrated above as Baptism is about joining the visible church but thinks that Bishop Phillpotts advocates a view too close to the Tridentine approach. He stressed the clauses in the Articles that talked of worthy reception of the sacraments, and that they have to be received by faith. He supports the view that sacraments sow the seed but ultimately only benefit the elect: the full Baptismal blessing can be enjoyed by those only who are adopted by Christ as wheat – as true members of his mystical body.89

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

31

This Calvinist view he asserts is the position of the reformers. There is a degree to which he wants to operate under a rule of ‘supposition’. Infants are baptized on the supposition that they will in their life fulfil all the requirements of Baptism, i.e., faith and repentance, and will only then get the full benefits and be spiritually regenerate. As with Bishop Phillpotts, Goode has little to say about Confirmation. This is in part because the book is a refutation of the Bishop of Exeter. However, a book about infant Baptism might have benefitted with some deliberation of Confirmation. Consideration is made of the issue of baptized children dying before their Confirmation and Goode asserts that Confirmation is not a sacrament and thus not necessary for salvation. He warms to the view that Confirmation is necessary before receiving holy Communion as it gives a pastoral opportunity for Christian teaching. John Campbell

Dedicating his book to Lord Ebury, John Campbell shows himself as a part of the group that wanted to revise the Prayer Book in a more protestant direction. Essays on Baptismal Regeneration was published in 1865 and was clear about the dangers of the doctrine. Baptismal Regeneration, Confirmation, absolution, ordination, and burial are all areas he wants revised. He is relieved that the Gorham case allows in his view that Evangelical clergy can teach Baptismal Regeneration as an ‘error, a snare, and a deadly delusion’.90 He acknowledges that most people think the Prayer Book teaches Baptismal Regeneration and that this is a problem for Evangelical clergy and thus he advocates liturgical reform. He starts, on the one hand, with Spurgeon’s sermon and, on the other, with the treatments of Bishop Phillpotts. He has a major discussion on a large number of opinions that were set out in the day, and he is not impressed by the work of Mr. Goode. He stands for a body of clergy who reject the idea that Baptismal Regeneration is the teaching of the Prayer Book. He quotes one Evangelical view: in Baptism some positive, clear, distinct, intelligible blessing and benefit, called by the name of ‘regeneration,’ was conveyed to the infant. This benefit is reconciliation to God: a change of state, but not necessarily a change of nature; not an alteration of the moral condition of the child, but simply a change by which the child is brought into the outward communion of the Church; and this is the state which in the Service is called ‘regeneration’.91 However, he is not very impressed with this approach and sees it at variance with the Scripture. He also quotes Mr. Venn: He said he believed that in the Baptismal Service regeneration is said to be bestowed conditionally or hypothetically, on the hypothesis that the infant really professes faith.92

32

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

The discussion of a variety of views leads to an appeal for the revision of the liturgy. He confesses inconsistency in the reformers and thus sees the need for reform. He conceded that the Prayer Book teaches some sort of Baptismal Regeneration but rejects Pusey’s interpretation of ‘Regeneration by Baptism’ as ‘wholly without foundation’.93 Thus, he has a problem with the reference to Regeneration in the Confirmation service. He also attacks some popular works of preparation for Confirmation, which he sees as bolstering Baptismal Regeneration. In naming Regeneration as ‘the deadly dogma of Baptismal Regeneration’, he then shows great dislike for the present services of Baptism and Confirmation. He sees only two options for Evangelical clergy, revise the liturgy or leave the Church of England, as some did, starting alternative Evangelical churches.94 John Thomas Waller

Baptismal Regeneration, a Blasphemous Fable is a collection of letters showing that the debate about Baptismal Regeneration had spread to Ireland. Suppression of Irish bishoprics had provoked the Assize Sermon in 1833. The Church of Ireland was disestablished in 1871. With some control over their Prayer Book, the Irish would be able to revise their liturgy and proposals were made in 1861 to remove all reference to Baptismal Regeneration.95 The title reveals Waller’s opposition to Baptismal Regeneration as being propounded by others. One letter reveals his basic assertion: I altogether deny that the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration is taught in the Prayer Book, or was ever for a moment intended by the compilers of the Prayer Book. On the contrary, the great bulk of their writings show that they held this Popish doctrine in as great abhorrence as do the Evangelicals at the present day.96 He is similarly trenchant in another letter: I therefore oppose the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration on the ground that it is – firstly, a pernicious and dangerous doctrine: and secondly, nonconsonant with the teaching of the Church of England.97 His view is that Regeneration is not automatic at the time of receiving Baptism, and that Regeneration can occur at any time in a person’s life. Faith in the candidate is a requirement for this Regeneration. Later he quotes with approval the Irish Articles of 1615 which said: All God’s Elect are, in their time, inseparably united unto Christ, by the effectual and vital influence of the Holy Ghost, derived from Him, as from

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

33

the head, unto every true member of His mystical body. And being thus made one with Christ, they are truly regenerated and made partakers of Him and of all His benefits.98 This reveals his more Calvinistic approach. He has a high view of the Catechism which is the important preparation for Confirmation. For Waller, the important point for Confirmation is the renewed commitment: It is no wonder, therefore, that candidates for Confirmation be required to make the highest statements, when they will soon be called on to say, Do you here, in the presence of God and of this congregation, renew the solemn promise and vow that was made in your name at your Baptism, ratifying and confirming the name in your own persons,” & c. And everyone shall audibly answer, “ I do.99 Thus, he represents a further Evangelical view, but this time from Ireland. J. B. Harford

In 1912, it was possible to summarize the debate on Baptismal Regeneration into five different positions. This was done by J. Battersby Harford in his article on Baptism in The Prayer Book Dictionary produced in the Northwest of England and commended by the Bishop of Liverpool.100 Beginning with the phrase ‘this child is regenerate’, he divided the interpretation of this as set out in Table 2.1. Harford explains the first position as that of an actual new birth of all baptized infants unconditionally. However, this has to be squared with Table 2.1 Theories of Baptismal Regeneration Theory

Qualification

Exponent

Regenerate in the full sense of all baptized and unconditionally Sacramentally regenerate

Infused with good habits or germ

The Roman schoolmen

Meant in a secondary sense not a full scriptural sense

Fathers, Reformers, Mayer Bishop Wilberforce Calvin

Regeneration as change of state Regenerate in full sense if elect Regenerate by anticipation

Renovation as change of heart Faith and repentance given to the elect, but cannot tell who is elect Supposition that sponsors will make good the promises

Augustin, Usher, Goode

34

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

actual facts of the behaviour of the people. So, this is in his view watered down to mean an infusion of good habits that have to the set-in motion by human willpower assisted by grace, or by sovereign grace alone. In reality, in many people, the good habits were hindered by sin and never acted on at all. Harford would criticize this as an artificial and false position. He sees a modification of this as the view that a germ of eternal life has been planted in the candidate. The second view of sacramental Regeneration only really becomes true when there is an inward Baptism of the Holy Ghost. This he sees in Mayer’s Catechism published in the time of Archbishop Laud and he also sees it as common between the Fathers and the reformers. Harford describes this as Regeneration in a secondary sense and not the full scriptural sense. The change of state of the third position is one of being introduced into a sphere of grace and new spiritual surroundings. This happens in the coming a member of the church. This is set in distinction to Regeneration which is an inner change of heart caused by the work of the Holy Spirit. He sees this in the work of Harold Brown and Waterland. He also quotes Bishop Wilberforce who says that the regenerate man who will not be converted is a fearful spectacle. Although not mentioned, there would seem to be an overlap here with Evangelical conversion theology and more Latitudinarian approaches of earlier times. The fourth category relates to Calvinistic theology. While this has ceased to be the paradigm for sacramental theology it continues to be one option. Harford quotes Calvin as saying that Baptism is God’s instrument for change and Regeneration, and that this fully applies to infants. However, this Regeneration only occurs if the candidate is elect, and that we do not know who is in that category. We therefore proceed with the assumption that the baptized child is elect. The final category sees the child as regenerate by anticipation, supposing that the answers given on its behalf will be made good by the child at Confirmation. Grace is conditionally made over the child providing that the conditions are fulfilled. Regeneration is thus potential rather than actual until the signs of life are manifest. Harford goes on to quote Augustine as representing this position along with Bishop Usher and Goode. This is a helpful classification, linking the early church and the ongoing debate about Regeneration in Baptism, but omitting the views of F. D. Maurice. Harford notes that there are problems both in infant Baptism and in adult Baptism between the experience of Regeneration and the sign of Regeneration in Baptism. This was particularly a problem in areas where there is a catechumenate, and the life of a catechumen shows a life in Christ. He does not particularly develop this classification and the relationship of Baptism to Confirmation, but those views that stress the actual impact of Baptism as Regeneration in its fullest sense can only have a lesser place for Confirmation in their theology.

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

35

Conclusion The debate on Baptismal Regeneration had an inevitable impact on Confirmation, not least because of the mention of Baptismal Regeneration in the Confirmation prayer. The way Pusey expounded the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration produced hot debates in Evangelical, broad-church, and old high church parties. His approach to the Scripture and in particular John 3 is quite literal. As the term is rooted in Scripture, some view (and not a simple rejection) has to be found but the diverse views in the church widened rather than narrowed, with varieties of conditional views in Evangelicalism, and realized eschatological views in the broad-church. If Baptismal Regeneration brings all the benefits of redemption, then what is the point of Confirmation? A new approach gave a very different answer than Anglicanism had hereto seen. Notes 1 J. C. S. Nias, Gorham and the Bishop of Exeter (London: SPCK, 1951). J. B. Mozley, A Review of the Baptismal Controversy (Rivingtons, 1862). J. B. Mozley, The Primitive Doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration (London: J. Murray, 1856). C. H. Spurgeon, Baptismal Regeneration (London: Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 1864). 2 Phillip Tovey, Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820, Liturgy, Worship and Society (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014). 3 Peter John Jagger, Clouded Witness: Initiation in the Church of England in the Mid-Victorian Period, 1850–1875 (Allison Park, PA: Pickwick Publications, 1982). 4 Bryan D. Spinks, Reformation and Modern Rituals and Theologies of Baptism: From Luther to Contemporary Practices (Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2006). 5 E. B. Pusey, Tracts for the Times: For 1834–35, Tract No. 47–70; Records of the Church, No. XIX–XXV (London: Rivington, 1840). 6 Ibid., p. 26; p. 63. 7 H. P. Liddon, Life of Edward Bouverie Pusey (London: Longmans, 1894), http://anglicanhistory.org/pusey/liddon/1.15.html. 8 E. B. Pusey, Scriptural Views of Holy Baptism (London: Rivington, 1835), https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Tracts_for_the_Times/Tract_67. p. viii. 9 C. O. Buchanan, Anglican Confirmation, Grove Liturgical Study No. 48 (Bramcote: Grove, 1986), p. 30. 10 John Keble, The Christian Year: Thoughts in Verse for the Sundays and Holydays Throughout the Year (London: R. & A. Suttaby, 1827). 11 J. Keble, Village Sermons on the Baptismal Service (London: J. Parker, 1869), p. 101. 12 Ibid., p. 197. 13 Ibid., p. 273. 14 Ibid., p. 220. 15 Ibid., p. 221. 16 Ibid., p. 222. 17 J. C. S. Nias, Gorham and the Bishop of Exeter (London: SPCK, 1951). 18 Frederick Denison Maurice, The Kingdom of Christ: Or, Hints on the Principles, Ordinances and Constitution of the Catholic Church, in a Letter

36

19 20 21 22 23

24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation to a Member of the Society of Friends Vol. 1, 2 ed. (London; New York: Rivington, 1842), p. 417. The Kingdom of Christ: Or, Hints on the Principles, Ordinances and Constitution of the Catholic Church, in a Letter to a Member of the Society of Friends. Vol. 2, 2 ed. (London: Rivington, 1842), p. 3. The Kingdom of Christ: Or, Hints on the Principles, Ordinances and Constitution of the Catholic Church, in a Letter to a Member of the Society of Friends Vol. 1, p. 381. Ibid., p. 424. Alex R. Vidler, F.D. Maurice and Company. Nineteenth Century Studies (London: SCM Press, 1966), p. 97. D. H. M. Davies, Worship and Theology in England. Vol. 3 (Princeton, NJ, 1961). Vidler, F.D. Maurice and Company. Nineteenth Century Studies. Spinks, Reformation and Modern Rituals and Theologies of Baptism: From Luther to Contemporary Practices. Maurice, The Kingdom of Christ: Or, Hints on the Principles, Ordinances and Constitution of the Catholic Church, in a Letter to a Member of the Society of Friends Vol. 1, p. 13. Ibid., p. 397. The Church a Family: Twelve Sermons on the Occasional Services of the PrayerBook (London: John W. Parker, 1850), p. 72. Ibid., p. 77. Frederick William Robertson, Sermons Preached at Brighton: 1st–4th Series, New edition (New York: Harper Brothers, 1871), p. 267. Ibid., p. 268. Ibid., p. 271. Ibid., p. 274. Ibid., p. 275. Stopford A. Brooke, Life and Letters of Frederick W. Robertson, M.A.: Incumbent of Trinity Chapel, Brighton, 1847–53, People’s edition (London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Co., 1877), p. 346. Charles Kingsley, Sermons on National Subjects, vol. 22, The Works (London: MacMillan, 1880), p. 430. Ibid., p. 422. Ibid., p. 426. Ibid., p. 426. Ibid., p. 408. Ibid., pp. 409–10. Ibid., p. 152. Ibid., p. 121. Frances Eliza Grenfell Kingsley, Charles Kingsley. His Letters and Memories of His Life. Vol. 1 (London: Macmillan, 1910), p. 230. Arthur Fenton Hort, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort Vol 1 (London: Macmillan, 1896), pp. 81–82. Ibid., pp. 223–24. Ibid., p. 273. Ibid., p. 274. Ibid., p. 274. Fenton John Anthony Hort, Cambridge & Other Sermons (London; New York: Macmillan, 1898), p. 86. Ibid., p. 89. Ibid., p. 90.

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

37

51 A.V.G. Allen, Life and Letters of Phillips Brooks Vol. 1 (New York: Dutton and Co, 1900), p. 212. 52 Phillips Brooks, Twenty Sermons (London: Macmillan, 1899), p. 43. 53 Ibid., p. 44. 54 Ibid., p. 45. 55 Ibid., p. 46. 56 Baptism and Confirmation (New York: E.P. Dutton & Co., 1880). 57 Ibid., p. 6. 58 Ibid., p. 30. 59 E. G. Sandford, Memoirs of Archbishop Temple. (Vol. 2) (London: Macmillan and co, 1906), p. 442. 60 Ibid., p. 449. 61 Ibid., p. 505. 62 Ibid., p. 586. 63 William John Conybeare, Essays Ecclesiastical and Social (London: Longman: Brown: Green: Longmans, 1855). 64 Thomas Arnold, Principles of Church Reform (London: B. Fellowes, 1833). 65 Anon, “Letter to Editor,” The Christian Observer 26 (1826). 66 “Works on Church Reform,” The Christian Observer (1834). 67 Ronald Claud Dudley Jasper, Prayer Book Revision in England, 1800–1900 (London: SPCK, 1954). 68 William Palmer, A Narrative of Events Connected with the Publication of the Tracts for the Times, with Reflections on Existing Tendencies to Romanism, and on the Present Duties and Prospects of Members of the Church (Oxford: John Henry Parker, 1843). 69 Maurice, The Kingdom of Christ: Or, Hints on the Principles, Ordinances and Constitution of the Catholic Church, in a Letter to a Member of the Society of Friends. Vol. 2, p. 456. 70 George K. A. Bell, Randall Davidson: Archbishop of Canterbury. 1 (London: Oxford University Press, 1935). Donald Gray, The 1927–28 Prayer Book Crisis 1, Joint Liturgical Studies vol. 60 (Norwich: SCM-Canterbury Press, 2005). The 1927–28 Prayer Book Crisis 2, Joint Liturgical Study, vol. 61 (Norwich: SCM-Canterbury Press, 2006). Ronald Claud Dudley Jasper, The Development of the Anglican Liturgy, 1662–1980 (London: SPCK, 1989). 71 Frederick B. MacNutt, The Church in the Furnace; Essays by Seventeen Temporary Church of England Chaplains on Active Service in France and Flanders (London: Macmillan and Co., 1917). 72 Conybeare, Essays Ecclesiastical and Social. 73 B.S. Moss, Crisis for Baptism: The Report of the 1965 Ecumenical Conference Sponsored by the People and Parish Movement (New York: Morehouse-Barlow Company, 1966). 74 Nias, Gorham and the Bishop of Exeter. Ibid. Richard Mant, An Appeal to the Gospel, Bampton Lectures (London: Rivington, 1816). Christopher Bethell, A General View of the Doctrine of Regeneration in Baptism (London: F.C. & J. Rivington, 1821). 75 Mozley, The Primitive Doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration. 76 Alexander Jolly, A Friendly Address on Baptismal Regeneration … A New Edition, with a Short Account of the Author, by P. Cheyne (London: James Burns, 1840).

38

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

77 Ibid., p. 3. 78 Ibid., p. 24. 79 Henry Phillpotts, A Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Exeter at the Triennial Visitation in June, July, August, and September 1842 (London: J. Murray, 1842), pp. 18–19. 80 A Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Exeter (London: J. Murray, 1848), p. 7. 81 A. Layman, Revision of the Book of Common Prayer (New York: Anson D.F. Randolph & Co., 1868), p. 54. 82 Phillpotts, A Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Exeter, p. 43. 83 Clergyman, Thoughts on Baptismal Regeneration (London: Wertheim and Macintosh, 1849), p. 6. 84 Ibid., p. 20. 85 John Davison, Remarks on Baptismal Regeneration: By … John Davison … Originally Published in the Quarterly Review for July 1810 (Oxford: John Henry Parker, 1847), p. 17. 86 Samuel Wilberforce, Addresses to Candidates for Ordination, on the Questions in the Ordination Service (Oxford and London: J. H. and Jas. Parker, 1860), p. 45. 87 An Address Delivered at the Confirmation at Eaton College on Friday, February 18, 1847 (London: Francis and John Rivington, 1847). 88 William Goode, The Doctrine of the Church of England as to the Effects of Baptism in the Case of Infants: With an Appendix Containing the Baptismal Services of Luther and the Nuremberg and Cologne Liturgies (New York: Stanford and Swords, 1850). 89 Ibid., p. 26. 90 John Campbell, Essays on Baptismal Regeneration: Theories Examined, Errors Exposed, and Dangers Demonstrated (London: John Snow, 1865), p. xi. 91 Ibid., p. 32. 92 Ibid., p. 38. 93 Ibid., p. 313. 94 John Fenwick, The Free Church of England: The History and Promise of an Anglican Tradition (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004). 95 Liturgical Amendment Society (Ireland), Amendments in the Book of Common Prayer (London: Hamilton, Adams, 1861). 96 John Thomas Waller, Baptismal Regeneration a Blasphemous Fable: Letters to Canon Crosthwaite And … The Lord Primate (Dublin: George Herbert, 1883), p. 5. 97 Ibid., pp. 10–11. 98 Ibid., p. 39. 99 Ibid., p.76. 100 J. Battersby Harford, “Baptism,” in The Prayer Book Dictionary, ed. George Harford, Stevenson Morley, and J. W. Tyrer (London: Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons Ltd, 1912), pp. 82–83.

Reference list Allen, A. V. G. Life and Letters of Phillips Brooks Vol. 1. New York: Dutton and Co, 1900. Anon. “Letter to Editor.” The Christian Observer, 26 (1826): 87–88. Anon. “Works on Church Reform.” The Christian Observer, 34 (1834): 172–87. Arnold, T. Principles of Church Reform. London: B. Fellowes, 1833.

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

39

Bell, G. K. A. Randall Davidson: Archbishop of Canterbury. 1. London: Oxford University Press, 1935. Bethell, C. A General View of the Doctrine of Regeneration in Baptism. London: F.C. & J. Rivington, 1821. Brooke, S. A. Life and Letters of Frederick W. Robertson, M.A.: Incumbent of Trinity Chapel, Brighton, 1847–53. People’s Edition. London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Co., 1877. Brooks, P. Baptism and Confirmation. New York: E.P. Dutton & Co., 1880. Brooks, P. Twenty Sermons. London: Macmillan, 1899. Buchanan, C. O. Anglican Confirmation. Grove Liturgical Study No. 48. Bramcote: Grove, 1986. Campbell, J. Essays on Baptismal Regeneration: Theories Examined, Errors Exposed, and Dangers Demonstrated. London: John Snow, 1865. Clergyman. Thoughts on Baptismal Regeneration. London: Wertheim and Macintosh, 1849. Conybeare, W. J. Essays Ecclesiastical and Social. London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans, 1855. Davies, D. H. M. Worship and Theology in England. Vol. 3. Princeton, NJ, 1961. Davison, J. Remarks on Baptismal Regeneration: By … John Davison … Originally Published in the Quarterly Review for July 1810. Oxford: John Henry Parker, 1847. Fenwick, J. The Free Church of England: The History and Promise of an Anglican Tradition. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004. Goode, W. The Doctrine of the Church of England as to the Effects of Baptism in the Case of Infants: With an Appendix Containing the Baptismal Services of Luther and the Nuremberg and Cologne Liturgies. New York: Stanford and Swords, 1850. Gray, D. The 1927–28 Prayer Book Crisis 1. Joint Liturgical Studies. Vol. 60, Norwich: SCM-Canterbury Press, 2005. Gray, D. The 1927–28 Prayer Book Crisis 2. Joint Liturgical Study. Vol. 61, Norwich: SCM-Canterbury Press, 2006. Harford, J. B. “Baptism.” In The Prayer Book Dictionary, edited by George Harford, Stevenson Morley and Tyrer J. W., London: Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons Ltd, 1912. Hort, A. F. Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, Vol. 1. London: Macmillan, 1896. Hort, F. J. A. Cambridge & Other Sermons. London; New York: Macmillan, 1898. Jagger, P. J. Clouded Witness: Initiation in the Church of England in the MidVictorian Period, 1850–1875. Allison Park, PA.: Pickwick Publications, 1982. Jasper, R. C. D. The Development of the Anglican Liturgy, 1662–1980. London: SPCK, 1989. Jasper, R. C. D. Prayer Book Revision in England, 1800–1900. London: SPCK, 1954. Jolly, A. A Friendly Address on Baptismal Regeneration … A New Edition, with a Short Account of the Author, by P. Cheyne. London: James Burns, 1840. Keble, J. Village Sermons on the Baptismal Service. London: J. Parker, 1869. Keble, J. The Christian Year: Thoughts in Verse for the Sundays and Holydays Throughout the Year. London: R. & A. Suttaby, 1827. Kingsley, C. Sermons on National Subjects. The Works. Vol. 22, London: Macmillan, 1880.

40

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

Kingsley, F. E. G. Charles Kingsley. His Letters and Memories of His Life. Vol. 1. London: Macmillan, 1910. Layman, A. Revision of the Book of Common Prayer. New York: Anson D. F. Randolph & Co., 1868. Liddon, H. P. Life of Edward Bouverie Pusey. London: Longmans, 1894. http:// anglicanhistory.org/pusey/liddon/1.15.html. Liturgical Amendment Society (Ireland). Amendments in the Book of Common Prayer. London: Hamilton, Adams, 1861. MacNutt, F. B. The Church in the Furnace; Essays by Seventeen Temporary Church of England Chaplains on Active Service in France and Flanders. London: Macmillan and Co., 1917. Mant, R. An Appeal to the Gospel. Bampton Lectures. London: Rivington, 1816. Maurice, F. D. The Church a Family: Twelve Sermons on the Occasional Services of the Prayer-Book. London: John W. Parker, 1850. Maurice, F. D. The Kingdom of Christ: Or, Hints on the Principles, Ordinances and Constitution of the Catholic Church, in a Letter to a Member of the Society of Friends Vol. 1. 2 ed. London; New York: Rivington, 1842. Maurice, F. D. The Kingdom of Christ: Or, Hints on the Principles, Ordinances and Constitution of the Catholic Church, in a Letter to a Member of the Society of Friends. Vol. 2. 2 ed. London: Rivington, 1842. Moss, B. S. Crisis for Baptism: The Report of the 1965 Ecumenical Conference Sponsored by the People and Parish Movement. New York: Morehouse-Barlow Company, 1966. Mozley, J. B. The Primitive Doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration. London: J. Murray, 1856. Mozley, J. B. A Review of the Baptismal Controversy. London, New York: Rivingtons, 1862. Nias, J. C. S. Gorham and the Bishop of Exeter. London: SPCK, 1951. Palmer, W. A Narrative of Events Connected with the Publication of the Tracts for the Times, with Reflections on Existing Tendencies to Romanism, and on the Present Duties and Prospects of Members of the Church. Oxford: John Henry Parker, 1843. Phillpotts, H. A Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Exeter. London: J. Murray, 1848. Phillpotts, H. A Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Exeter at the Triennial Visitation in June, July, August, and September 1842. London: J. Murray, 1842. Pusey, E. B. Scriptural Views of Holy Baptism. London: Rivington, 1835. https://en. wikisource.org/wiki/Tracts_for_the_Times/Tract_67. Pusey, E. B. Tracts for the Times: For 1834–35, Tract No. 47–70; Records of the Church, No. XIX–XXV. London: Rivington, 1840. Robertson, F. W. Sermons Preached at Brighton: 1st–4th Series. New edition. New York: Harper Brothers, 1871. Sandford, E. G. Memoirs of Archbishop Temple. (Vol. 2). London: Macmillan and co, 1906. Spinks, B. D. Reformation and Modern Rituals and Theologies of Baptism: From Luther to Contemporary Practices. Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2006.

Baptismal Regeneration and Confirmation

41

Spurgeon, C. H. Baptismal Regeneration. London: Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 1864. Tovey, P. Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820. Liturgy, Worship and Society. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014. Vidler, A. R. F.D. Maurice and Company. Nineteenth Century Studies. London: SCM Press, 1966. Waller, J. T. Baptismal Regeneration a Blasphemous Fable: Letters to Canon Crosthwaite And … The Lord Primate. Dublin: George Herbert, 1883. Wilberforce, S. An Address Delivered at the Confirmation at Eaton College on Friday, February 18, 1847. London: Francis and John Rivington, 1847. Wilberforce, S. Addresses to Candidates for Ordination, on the Questions in the Ordination Service. Oxford; London: J. H. and Jas. Parker, 1860.

3

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

Later in the nineteenth century, a distinct two-stage theory of Baptism and Confirmation was developed.1 This is seen in the work of John Frere, F. W. Puller, and A. Mason who advocated the theory, and it was opposed by Theodore Wirgman a high church priest in South Africa, Darwell Stone, and several other theologians. The discussion is a mixture of biblical, patristic, and liturgical discussion and ultimately the most significant issues were hermeneutical. It would have potentially significant ecumenical implications which we will see in other chapters. The debate about this view continued throughout the rest of our period and was left unresolved to be taken up after the Second World War. First let’s look at the proponents and then the reactions to the theory. Two-stage theory We begin then with those that propose a two-stage theory. There are in fact two major proponents (with a forebear) and then a number of supporters. John Frere

A relatively unknown author, John Frere was the rector of Cottenham in Ely diocese. The title of his 1845 book conveys this thesis The Doctrine of Imposition of Hands, or, Confirmation: The Ordained and Ordinary Means for Conveying the Gift of the Holy Ghost.2 He also contributed to chapters in books of sermons. The preface of the book says that he submitted the manuscript to a learned friend who said the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration was obscured by his position on Confirmation and that this was not in accord with the Prayer Book. This is an objection that will be repeated. He calls Confirmation for those who were baptized as an infant a ‘completion’ of their Baptism. Those who refuse Confirmation ‘forfeit’ the benefit of the ‘covenant’. Here older language is being used, making him a point of transition. But he refuses to say the Baptism alone has no effect. Regarding the work of the Spirit, he maintains the primary locus of the Spirit is Confirmation and not Baptism, but he does not deny a minor work DOI: 10.4324/9781032676876-3

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

43

of the Spirit in Regeneration or planting the seed, and so we are born again, but not in Pentecostal power. He sees this as scriptural, according to the Fathers, and some Anglican divines. Baptism is still ‘the mother of all mysteries’ and without it one cannot be confirmed. He regrets the timidity of Anglicans’ views on Confirmation and asserts: Confirmation is the ordinary and effectual means for conveying the promised gift of the Holy Ghost, by the imposition of the bishop’s hands with prayer.3 He thinks the lack of clarity means that pastorally candidates are unsure of their position. He is aware of the early church baptizing and confirming in one rite and that this is the present position of the Greek Church. He maintains the early theology was of Baptismal Regeneration and reception of the Spirit at Confirmation (assuming the early authors would have worked with these two categories). He thus maintains the Holy Spirit is not bestowed on us in Baptism but in Confirmation. The basis for his argument is Acts 8. Later he appeals to the seal of the Spirit in Ephesians as relating to Confirmation not Baptism. Discussing the other occasions in the Book of Acts, he continues to affirm that the gift of the Holy Spirit is through the apostolic laying on of hands (even if mentioned in some but not every case). He concludes, before a list of corroborating testimonies with: The view of Confirmation here presented is of such vast important, and entails such momentous consequences, that its truth deserves to be either established or refuted.4 This is perhaps a wiser conclusion than some of the later proponents of the theory. F. W. Puller

Puller wrote his work What is the Distinctive Grace of Confirmation? in 1880. At that time, he was vicar of Roath but was to become a member of the Society of St John the Evangelist (the Cowley Fathers) and wrote a significant book on anointing the sick. The book on Confirmation began as a paper read before a deanery chapter. It was later published, and he says that he would have liked to have revised it but never got around to such work. The heart of his argument is found in several places. He quotes Cyprian to say that Baptism: puts away our sins, sanctifies us, re-forms us into a new man, makes us a temple seated for receiving the Holy Spirit; Confirmation pours out the Holy Spirit upon the temple which has been newly formed.5

44

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

He questioned the relationship of Baptism and Confirmation asking if we should: understand that Confirmation sets up in the soul a new relationship to the Holy Ghost, which it had not before; so that, although in Baptism from the Holy Ghost operates and works on the soul by his purifying, consecrating, regenerating influence, yet he does not impart his indwelling Presence until he is given in a new way by the laying on of hands.6 He therefore summarizes his view in this way: In Confirmation there is not merely an increase of a gift already imparted in Baptism, but that here is set up in the soul a new relation to the Holy Ghost which it had not before, even his indwelling presence.7 His argument is based in part on the biblical passages used classically for a discussion of Anglican Confirmation, Acts 8 where the Apostles trip to Samaria, Acts 19 where Paul meets the disciples of John the Baptist, and Hebrews 6 where a part of elementary teaching is the laying on of hands. However, a much more distinct theology about the contrasting operation of the Spirit in Baptism and Confirmation is drawn. He also uses several patristic sources in order to argue the case. However, it must be said that there are a number of problems with his exegesis. There is much less certainty today about these types of sacramental claims made from the Book of Acts.8 Also the patristic arguments have been shown to be weak.9 One of the problems which he insufficiently accounts for is, he is contrasting the patristic situation of a unified Baptismal rite mostly for adults, where hand laying is almost immediately after Baptism, to infant Baptism followed years later by a Confirmation. Indeed, the external working of the Spirit in Baptism that he describes seems to correspond more to an Old Testament view of the operation of the Spirit, and the internal working of the Spirit, as he described in Confirmation, seems to be more of the New Testament view, but arguably from Baptism. The very title of the book sets up a suggestion that there is some distinctive grace of Confirmation. But it would be easy to respond by saying that there is nothing distinctive in Confirmation, as the theology of Herbert Thorndike proposed in the previous century. At the end of his paper, he begins to ask questions about infant Confirmation. He is aware that the Eastern Church confirms at Baptism and begins to hint that this is something that we should do. This is an argument based on patristic precedent and eastern practice. It was not something that was to be developed within Anglicanism although there was a spin off on issues of Communion of all the Baptised. The Church Quarterly Review first discussed Puller in a review article in

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

45

1880. This was positive in tone. It criticizes a low view of Confirmation, which only sees it as a renewal of Baptismal vows. This the reviewer sees as the prevailing view. He thanks Puller for calling us to see Confirmation as having high importance. In the detailed theology, i.e., that Baptism is purifying, and Confirmation imparts the Spirits indwelling and presence, he says, ‘we can scarcely follow him to this trenchant conclusion’.10 But the ‘practical conclusion’ of the article is that Confirmation must be held of higher importance than the last 200 years. This interpretative conclusion is not really held up by the evidence and is more of a Tractarian historiographical presupposition.11 In 1886, the Church Quarterly Review published an article on ‘The Age of Confirmation’. It reviewed present practice and statistics and thought that trying to confirm on or just after candidates began work was bad practice. It argued for younger Confirmations and, if that was not possible, early admission to Communion. In theological terms, it contrasted the non-sacramental view, i.e., that Confirmation is only a renewal of Baptismal vows with the sacramental view that it conveys grace. For the latter view, it constantly refers to the work of Puller with admiration. The one caveat is that: it is difficult to prove that no kind of Indwelling can ever be attributed to Holy Baptism12 Apart from this caveat, the author seems to fully agree with Puller’s theology that Confirmation imparts the indwelling (or presumably fuller indwelling) of the Holy Spirit and the suggestion that Confirmation should be at a younger age. The Church Quarterly Review of 1898 contains a further review article including Puller.13 It clearly states that Pusey believed the Spirit to be given in Baptism. It points out that Tractarian theology led to a much wider adoption of Baptismal Regeneration and that something real concerning the Holy Spirit happened in Confirmation; Puller it sees as contributing to this. The article identifies some differences with Mason on infant Confirmation. The review broadly supports two-stage theory. A. Mason

Arthur Mason took up Puller’s theology in The Faith of the Gospel, 1888.14 This is ‘a manual of Christian doctrine’ and Confirmation receives particular attention after a section on Baptism. He starts with an approach that Baptism and Confirmation form one sacrament. He uses the analogy of the eucharistic bread and chalice, all part of one sacrament. He asserts that in Scripture and in the Fathers there is a distinctive grace of Confirmation. He further asserts that Acts 8 shows:

46

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation unmistakably that the gift of the Holy Ghost was associate with the Laying on of Hands, not the Baptismal water.15

We will see later that this is not the patristic interpretation of the passage. He calls those who see the passage as giving extraordinary gifts ‘ill-instructed Christians’. Confirmation is also called sealing, in his opinion; sealing is always a second act. He will develop these themes in his book. A thorough exposition of his theory was published in The Relation of Confirmation to Baptism in 1891.16 This meticulously looks through Biblical and Patristic evidence to argue that one is regenerate in Baptism, but Confirmation brings the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Regarding the gift of the Holy Spirit, he says: In so special and unique a sense does this gift belong to Confirmation, that, notwithstanding all previous operations upon the soul, the Baptised but unconfirmed believer may, unless Divine action departs from its ordinary course, be truly said not to have received the Holy Ghost.17 The book does not look at the pastoral implications of this, but others would. His thesis is set out in the introduction: Baptism and Confirmation can only be regarded … as forming together one sacrament; and yet each part of that sacrament has its own special gift to convey.18 His argument is from antiquity rather than dogmatics which might have upheld two separate sacraments. In discussing Baptism and unction in Pacian, he says: Yet the two things form inseparable part of the one and the same regenerating sacrament.19 Later he says that ‘Confirmation is an integral part of Holy Baptism’.20 Indeed, he defines his task as: Not so much to show what Confirmation is in itself, but how it stands in relation to Baptism. I am persuaded that the main difficulty lies less in defining what Confirmation adds to Baptism, than in defining what Baptism confers apart from Confirmation.21 While the relational aspect is very important, and he is right to stress this, there is still an impression that he deals with Confirmation as the star and Baptism as the planet revolving around it, not the other way round. At times he seems to fit the evidence to his theory. This can be seen in anachronistic statements such as ‘Basil was neither ignorant of Confirmation,

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

47

nor regarded it as unimportant, is of course necessary to state’.22 Well of course he was ignorant as the term Confirmation is a Western term from the sixth century. Basil has just discussed the flood of Baptism cleansing the soul and making it the habitation of the Spirit. This would not support his argument, particularly as this exposition is made without any discussion of unction. Thus, he adds a gloss to fill in the evidence. Likewise, in discussing Gaudentius, ‘We cannot suppose that S. Gaudenius meant to teach that the sacramental water alone brought all these benefits’.23 Here the theory is correcting the evidence. Several times he is looking for defining points in the service. This reflects the scholastic approach of ‘a point of consecration’, as for example in the Eucharist with bells, elevation, and genuflection after the dominical words. Modern liturgical theology has moved away from such an approach to seeing the whole as consecratory. The taking of this scholastic approach can be seen in comments such as: Thus far the question is left open, at the exact moment, and by what act, in the process of regeneration, S. Athanasuis believed the Spirit to have been given,24 and Yet in spite of this language, which emphasises the oneness of Baptism, Chrysostom was no less fully aware than others, that there was a special point in the Baptismal service at which the gift of the Holy Ghost was given, and that it was not the moment of immersion.25 This is a methodological problem; an alternative approach is hinted at in this last quote where the ‘oneness of Baptism’ might have been an alternative hermeneutic. His commitment to scholastic methodology influences his results. The Church Quarterly Review of 1892 published an article on Confirmation which was also a review of Mason.26 This continues the discussion on the importance of Confirmation that had run in previous articles and warmly reviews the book, not least for its scholarship. It sees two key conclusions: 1 That Confirmation must be regarded as an integral part of Baptism and that in the early church Baptism was seen to have three parts: a Baptismal immersion b Unction c Imposition of hand 2 That it was not Baptism but the subsequent rites to which the gift of the Holy Spirit was ascribed.

48

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

This leads to the startling conclusion that: the baptized but unconfirmed believer may … be truly said not to have received the Holy Ghost.27 The reviewer admits that this conclusion is a stumbling block to many and tries to mitigate it by saying that there is some action of grace in the baptized after Baptism and before Confirmation. The reviewer expands Mason’s comments on Jesus breathing on the disciples after the resurrection saying, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit’ John 20: 22. The original Greek is
 !"!#π$!%μ# &'($#(receive Holy Spirit). The translators have technically added ‘the’ to make sense in English. Bishop Westcott had used the absence of ‘the’ to say that this was a quickening of the Spirit before the imparting at Pentecost.28 Mason and the reviewer use this to theologize about Baptism and Confirmation. Ironically, the use of this phrase will be used by Wirgman to undermine their argument. The reviewer continues to warmly review Mason until a discussion of the age of Confirmation. Mason had suggested that Baptism and Confirmation should be done together and so that Baptism could be delayed until it could be united at the age of 5 or 6. The reviewer wishes to lower the age of Confirmation or admit children to Communion by a first Communion process. Overall, this was a favourable review of Mason. Tom Thompson sees Mason as bringing to the discussion a wealth of Patristic discussion.29 A number were to espouse the Puller-Mason theory in full, but Gregory Dix was completely wrong to suggest that Mason’s book ‘was never answered’, as we will see in the next section.30 But now we will continue with advocates of the two-stage theory. Bishop H. T. Kingdon

Bishop Hollingworth Tully Kingdon was bishop of Fredericton, New Brunswick.31 He had a long episcopate having previously served in England. Kingdon was a high church bishop holding the two-stage theory. Fairweather quotes a Confirmation sermon of the bishop in which he says: You have come here to-day to complete Baptism, to fill up what was begun in Baptism. As in Baptism your body was consecrated to God, so in Confirmation should the Holy Spirit dwell in your hearts, filling your whole being as the temple of Solomon was filled after it was consecrated.32 But more significant is his lectures published in the book God Incarnate.33 The lectures were delivered at the General Theological Seminary in New York. Thus, his influence was both in Canada and the United States. The seven lectures covered the whole of Christian doctrine. Of particular interest is the last on ‘the gift of the Holy Ghost’. As a significant survey of pneumatology, in it he addresses Confirmation. The church he sees as united

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

49

in the Holy Spirit. We are initiated into the church by Baptism. In this, we are washed of sin and born again. From Acts and the Epistles, he says: It is taken for granted that none is perfect in his Christian privileges until he has received the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands.34 The justification is from the stories of Samaria and Ephesus. He also assumes that the anointing/sealing metaphors in the epistles involve real oil. Confirmation, then, is the one especial rite whereby the Gift of the Holy Ghost, the promise of the Father, the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, is communicated to the Baptized Christian.35 He admits that Samaria was unusual but sees a special reason for the need of the apostles coming to the town, the inclusion of the Gentiles. The discussion of Confirmation is only a few pages in the book, but he confidently asserts the two-stage theory without any critical reflection. This perhaps indicates a growing adoption of this view as orthodoxy in certain circles. R. W. Randolph

The Church Times of 1896 carried an article on ‘Holy Baptism and Confirmation’ by R. W. Randolph. While simply reiterating the views of Puller and Mason, the importance of the article is found in two things. One is that Randolph was the principal of Ely Theological College. The late nineteenth century saw the creation of theological colleges for the training of ordinands. Thus, we can assume that the Puller-Mason theology was being taught to ordinands in at least one college. Also, that the Church Times was willing to publish an article that took a page, and a half shows that it was willing to support the view and that in some circles it had become Anglo-Catholic orthodoxy. Charles Gore

While Canon of Westminster, Charles Gore wrote the book The Church and the Ministry. While primarily a book about ordained ministry, he does look at the laying on of hands in ordination and suddenly says: The narrative of Acts elsewhere assures us that the Apostles laid their hands on all Christians after their Baptism, in order by this means to impart them that gift of the Holy Ghost which is the essence of Christian life.36 It is an off-the-cuff comment that is an aside on the use of hands in ordination and not given the rigorous argument that we might expect from

50

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

Gore. This comment needs to be held in mind until the review of biblical opinion at the end of the chapter. Bishop Hall of Vermont

Anglo-Catholic ideas gradually developed in the United States. Bishop Henry Hobart of New York (1811–1830) expounded an old high church approach which became popular in the Episcopal Church.37 The Tracts were published in New York in 1840, and Episcopalians were aware of their existence. The General Theological Seminary in New York was to become a centre of Anglo-Catholic thought. Arthur Hall was born in England and after graduation joined the Society of St John the Evangelist (SSJE). He was sent to America to work in the house there. He became a naturalized American and was elected to be bishop of Vermont in 1894. At that point, he cut his links with SSJE and devoted his life to work as a bishop, publishing a number of books as a part of his teaching ministry. Confirmation (1904) sets out his approach to the rite.38 He points out that Confirmation in practice is a ratification of vows for those who were baptized as infants, but also adds that in America it was also important as a catechetical opportunity for those who have transferred from another denomination. However, he says that neither of these is the heart of the rite. In his introduction, he asks if Confirmation is a fuller bestowal of the gift of the indwelling Spirit conferred in Baptism or is the Spirit the gift of Confirmation? He then has a detailed discussion of the history of the Prayer Book service and a summary of patristic evidence. He is better aware of the hermeneutical issues than many: Thus it is often hard to decide whether scriptural or patristic language about Baptism ought to be understood of the sacred washing alone or of the initiatory rites of the washing and the sealing, Baptism and Confirmation, thought of in conjunction one with another, and almost as two parts or stages of one process of admission to the spiritual Body.39 While acknowledging that the Spirit is involved in the washing away of sins at Baptism, he nevertheless says that ‘in Confirmation we are made partakers of the Holy Ghost’.40 Acts 8 is seen as the distinct scriptural justification of this point. He then discusses patristic texts and Jeremy Taylor. He ends the chapter in a favourable discussion of Mason, while admitting that the view has its Anglo-Catholic critics. Bishop Hall’s work advocates the two-stage theory. While he is aware of potential hermeneutical issues, he does not seem to have taken them much into account. As yet a more critical approach to the basic scriptural texts is wanting as is a more nuanced reading of the Fathers.

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

51

Bishop Chase of Ely

Confirmation in the Apostolic Age (1909) is a detailed study of mostly the Biblical texts concerning Confirmation.41 Chase begins with a discussion of the Divine economy seeing two key phases, that of the incarnation and that of the coming of the Holy Spirit. He sees Baptism and Confirmation as linked to each of these. Baptism is for the forgiveness of sins and adoption as children of God. In it, we are regenerated and incorporated into the church. It is thus connected to Easter and the work of Christ. In Confirmation, the child of God is made a ‘partaker of the Holy Spirit’.42 It is this divine side that is essential, everything else is secondary. In looking through the evidence in the Book of Acts, he simply assumes that the laying on of hands is a part of Baptism and that Samaria is normative. Other passages that confirm this view are discussed but where hand laying is not mentioned, it is assumed to have happened. Baptism and Confirmation are called two sacramental acts each with a distinct spiritual meaning. Regarding the Biblical language of sealing and unction, he comes to the conclusion that anointing was a sign in the apostolic age. This is in part done by an examination of early Fathers, Tertullian, the Canons of Hippolytus, and Irenaeus, and then reading them back into the New Testament. He admits that there is no evidence for about a century but cannot believe that anointing sprang up with no apostolic warrant in the second century. After a detailed biblical discussion, he comes back to Samaria as the key text in showing that Confirmation was an apostolic norm. He thus concludes that there are two distinct but associated acts. Baptism brings regenerated life, while Confirmation the fullness of the new life in the Spirit. Bishop Chase thus reiterates a two-stage theory. His starting point seems to make this an inevitable conclusion, and in his dealing with Acts and the Fathers fills in the evidence when it is wanting. Others are not so sure about the interpretation of the evidence. Methodology is important in the whole debate. Francis Hall

Not to be confused with Bishop Hall, but also an American, Francis Hall was a systematic theologian with ten volumes on Dogmatic Theology. His method was to follow the line of reasoning of the sacramental principle which we will see in more detail at the end of this chapter. In volume 9 on The Sacraments he considers Confirmation. He is quite sure of the nature of Confirmation. In Baptism we receive the Holy Spirit in this sense that we are thereby taken into the body of Christ … But it is in Confirmation that the Holy Spirit becomes a formal gift to the soul.

52

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

He then goes on to cite Bishop Hall as authority for this view. Thus, there is a strong advocacy of the two-stage approach. S. L. Ollard

In 1926, S. L. Ollard wrote the chapter ‘Confirmation in the Anglican Communion’ in the book Confirmation. This is 285 pages long and covers the period from 1500 to 1850. Numerous quotes from Anglican divines and bishops scatter the pages and it is still helpful as a reference work. The chapter sets out a historiographical approach that sees the eighteenth century as lax and the Oxford Movement as reviving the church. Ironically, the examples he cites of poor behaviour are from 1833. Ollard is particularly interested in the work of Jeremy Taylor, who is rather confusing and in a later view of the importance of Confirmation talks about Confirmation as bestowing the Spirit.43 In his dislike of Calvinism and the eighteenth century, and his positive view of Pusey, Ollard is trying to put a High Church interpretation of events and supports a two-stage view. Considering he wrote in 1926 it is unfortunate that he stops at 1850 and so completely omits discussion of second-stage Tractarian theology. Review

Thus, beginning with Puller and Mason several Anglican Catholics line up to support the thesis of two stages. It seems to have had a growing reception without always considering the implications. However, significant numbers of the same party also opposed it. Opposition to the theory Some of the sharpest opposition comes from Catholic-minded Anglicans both in England and overseas. Thus, this is primarily a debate within the Catholic wing of the church. Broad-church people reiterated the position as outlined in the last chapter. Evangelicals take a long time to notice the discussion. What is clear is that Anglo-Catholics did not simply accept the theory. William Bright

Within a year, Mason’s work is being criticized. William Bright, in 1892, published a series of sermons, Morality and Doctrine, inspired by F. D. Maurice’s linking of doctrine and ethics.44 One sermon is on Divine Sealing. In that sermon, he attacks Mason’s biblical theology. The text is Eph: 4.30 and he comments: Whatever special gift of “power” was to be bestowed through the laying on of Apostolic hands, through the rite which is now so appropriately

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

53

described as Confirmation, the effects assigned to the great regenerating sacrament are such as to involve a true presence of that Holy Spirit to whose agency, in the text, the sealing is attributed.45 In a footnote, he particularly mentions Mason’s work, which he thinks lacks consistency. He begins to envisage the implications of the theory requiring: A serious alteration in the pastoral teaching of the clergy, in the practices of the Church, in the text of the Prayer Book offices and the Catechism.46 He comments that there are other ways to hold a high view of Confirmation. This was a quick response to Mason’s book, but it does pick up on the weakness of not thinking through the pastoral implications of the theory. Others are to take up theological and pastoral questions. Augustus Theodore Wirgman

A more substantial refutation was composed by A. Theodore Wirgman, a Vice Provost in Port Elizabeth, South Africa. His 1897 book The Doctrine of Confirmation is a substantial and systematic refutation of the Puller-Mason theology.47 He does this from a Puseyite position, recognizing that the PullerMason theology undermines Pusey’s doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration. He is quite clear that Baptism involves Regeneration and rebirth including the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Confirmation is an event in which further gifts of the Spirit are given for ministry in the church and world. The Prefatory Note is a blistering attack on the theory which he describes as ‘contrary to the received teachings of the Western Church’.48 He calls it a novel doctrine of Confirmation. He says the doctrine overshadows the dominical sacraments, is at serious variance to Anglican formularies so that it is to be rejected and not to be received, and minimizes the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration. He suggests that if infant Baptism leaves an ‘empty temple’, then there is no point in such a practice. The rest of the book is a detailed discussion of biblical and patristic texts taking care to refute Mason at as many points as possible. In the exegesis of Acts 8, he rebuts Mason’s assertion that: Nothing could be clearer than the distinction which the sacred historian here observes between Christening and the Laying on of Hands.49 Wirgman points out that the text says ‘they received Holy Spirit’ without the definite article.50 He argues that this use of ‘Holy Spirit’ is always about the gifts of the Holy Spirit and not the person. He quotes Bishop Westcott as the basis for his approach.

54

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

So, this is one example of a systematic refutation of Mason. Wirgman reasserts a Puseyite traditional approach to Confirmation in the face of what he sees as a novel doctrine that is uncatholic. The Church Times of 9 July 1897 had a full-page review of Wirgman’s book. It warmly accepts the book and respects that this was written by a missionary in the field. It acknowledges the encyclopaedic nature of the work but regrets some of the polemic language. Acknowledging the lack of discussion of Confirmation in the early Tractarians, it encourages clergy to read the book. It is critical of the interpretation of ‘receive Holy Spirit’
μ)*'$#π$!%μ#&'($#in Acts 8 because it thinks that the uses of this in the New Testament have not all been fully accounted for, particularly in the Baptism of Jesus. It welcomes the suggestion of the use of unction/oil in Confirmation. Apart from some small criticisms, this was a welcoming review. Wirgman replied in a letter dated 2 September 1897. He denied that he had omitted the linguistic discussion on passages on the Baptism of Jesus, but suggested that this was a unique event with the revelation of the Trinity such that the language would be different. He welcomed other suggestions as giving him recommendations for a second edition. Wirgman receives cautious approval in a review article in The Church Quarterly Review 1898.51 While there are some criticisms of ‘statements to be regretted’, there is also a warm reception to a view that reasserts the position that the indwelling of the Spirit happens at Baptism and that Confirmation is a strengthening of the gifts of grace. The reviewer thinks that it is worth examining the evidence again. Wirgman had argued that Acts 8: 15 was not about the indwelling of the Holy Spirit because it says, ‘they received the Holy Spirit’,
μ)*'$#π$!%μ#&'($. Once again in the Greek, there is no ‘the’ and we saw above Mason used the same argument in John 20. Wirgman cites Vaughan on Romans 5: 5.52 He could also have appealed to Hort on 1 Peter and Bullinger on the Holy Spirit.53 The view was not uncommon in the surrounding decades. Nevertheless, the reviewer backs off from such a clear distinction and suggests that therefore there is a weakness in Wirgman’s case. The reviewer to some degree agrees that Wirgman undermines Mason, seeing the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in both Baptism and Confirmation. He also regrets the division in the Catholic wing over the relationship of Baptism and Confirmation. Darwell Stone

The chapter on ‘The Baptismal Gift of the Holy Spirit’ in Darwell Stone’s Holy Baptism (1899) is an exposition of the opposite approach to PullerMason. He comments that: Of late years an opinion that His gift in Baptism is merely an operation of the Holy Spirit from without the soul, and that His personal indwelling is not received until those who have been Baptised are also confirmed, has been brought to notice.54

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

55

He then expounds the Baptismal office to show that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is the doctrine of the Prayer Book. He brings into discussion the difficulty to grasp a clear distinction between outward and inward operations of the Spirit, the harmony of a Baptismal indwelling and the life of Christ, and finally the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration where being a child of God supposes being a temple of the Holy Spirit. He follows many in rejecting that Acts 8 refers to the initial dwelling of the Spirit and his summation of patristic evidence is that: When they distinguish the two [Baptism and Confirmation] they by no means deny that the gift of the indwelling of the Spirit is conferred in Baptism.55 In considering the two-stage position, he comments that the theology of a pastor changes the way they look at people and this would have great significance in the context of a country where many are baptized but not confirmed. It is in the final endnote that he admits the whole chapter has been written to refute the Puller-Mason theory. In the Outline of Christian Dogma (first edition 1900), Darwell Stone turns again to look at Confirmation. Of late years an opinion has been held by many in the Church of England that Confirmation sets up in the soul an entirely new relation to the Holy Ghost, who in Baptism acts upon the soul from without, but does not impart His personal indwelling or act upon the soul from within until Confirmation.56 He carefully reviews the Biblical evidence but concludes that the variety of Baptism stories makes it hard to say that baptized Christians were without the indwelling Spirit until a Confirmation and there is no mention of this in Romans. Concerning the patristic evidence, he says: On turning to the teaching of the Fathers, we reach a very complicated question.57 The complication is that in the Fathers’ time, Baptism and Confirmation were administered together. It is quite hard to work out if some comments are about a particular part or about the whole. Generally, the Fathers attribute the indwelling of the Holy Spirit to Baptism. So, it is hard to work from the limited references that can be interpreted as confirming a two-stage approach, that the position is proved. It can even be shown that some of the Fathers chosen seem not to support the two-stage view in other places. So, he strongly argues for Regeneration in Baptism and the bestowal of the indwelling Spirit.

56

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

W. H. Griffith Thomas

Colin Buchanan mentions the lack of any Evangelical voices in this discussion: In the first half of this century there were no evangelicals in sufficient contact with the issue to call the Biblical bluff.58 One exception to this is Griffith Thomas who was the principal of Wycliffe Hall, Oxford and later migrated to Wycliffe Hall Toronto. In his 1913 book The Holy Spirit of God, he reviews the biblical passages in Acts and concludes with some pertinent hermeneutical issues: It is essential to study all the instances, and it will then be seen that the Holy Spirit was not restricted to the laying on of the hands of the Apostles, or to the laying on of hands at all. There was a variety of methods in this one definite gift.59 Thus, there was a certain calling of bluff on the biblical evidence, and it is found to be wanting. D. Mackenzie

Summing up the discussion on the relationship of Confirmation to Baptism, K. D. Mackenzie in 1926 divided the views into two basic groups, the first having three subsets.60 This is summarized in Table 3.1. The fundamental division according to Mackenzie is based on the view taken of the effect of Baptism. In the first group, Baptism brings forgiveness, Regeneration, unity with Christ, and the personal indwelling of the Holy

Table 3.1 The relation of Confirmation to Baptism Theory 1 At Baptism, forgiven, regenerated, united with Christ, indwelt by the Holy Spirit Confirmation is:

2 Baptism as Regeneration, Confirmation as indwelling of the Holy Spirit

Qualification

Exponent

a The gift of closer union b The bestowal of growth and stability c An outpouring of further gifts and closer relationship

Tractarian Fathers Thomas Aquinas, Council of Trent Theodore Wirgman A. Mason, F. W. Puller

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

57

Spirit. There are then three different explanations as to what Confirmation does, bringing closer union, helping growth, and outpouring further gifts. In his opinion option a, the gift of closer union, is held by those who uphold the sacramental doctrine of Confirmation, the Tractarian Fathers, and the Eastern churches. In option b, the bestowal of growth and stability, he sees in the doctrine of Thomas Aquinas and the Council of Trent. Option c is maintained by Theodore Wirgman, but he does not see many people supporting the view. In the second group, maintained by Mason and Puller, the argument is that the Holy Spirit does not indwell at Baptism not until Confirmation. Mackenzie points out that this requires a belief that Western theology has been untrue to both Scripture and the Fathers. Mackenzie finds the scriptural evidence indeterminate. While Acts 8 would seem to favour the second view, there are many other passages that point in another direction. He also finds the evidence from the Fathers as indeterminate. However, in conclusion, he sees a danger in giving a lesser sacrament, i.e., Confirmation, a higher potency than that instituted by our Lord, i.e., Baptism. Thus, his final comments seem to suggest that he does not support the second group. Oliver Quick

The debate was however to continue. Oliver Quick in his influential book The Christian Sacraments, first published in 1926 and still in print in the 1960s, had a short excursus on Confirmation.61 He commends the work of Mackenzie and seems to sit on the fence between Mason and Stone. However, he famously says that a view that sees the indwelling of the Spirit to be years after Baptism leads to ‘intolerable’ conclusions. It is perhaps surprising that Quick is so coy and he certainly does not summarize in any depth the discussion that has happened. It might be in part because of an ascendancy of a two-stage theory in this period, but it did not lead to the conclusion of the debate rather its continuance. H. J. Wotherspoon

Henry Johnstone Wotherspoon was a Scoto-Catholic minister in the Kirk.62 In his Croall Lectures, he addresses the debate going on in the Church of England.63 He sees Confirmation not as a distinct rite, nor a part of Baptism, but a part of ‘Baptismal administration’. It is our confession of faith but prompted by the Spirit. He finds the two cases in Acts as insufficient evidence of hand laying at all Baptisms. He thinks that Mason and Puller have not discussed the Biblical material sufficiently. He does not see that the word Baptism includes laying on of hands, as both in Acts 8 and Hebrews the two are clearly divided. He thinks that some interpretations ‘beg the question’ and start from an assumption that the theory is right. He comments that patristic writers are not always careful in their expressions. He thinks the

58

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

elaborate nature of the argument is its own refutation. Thus, he rejects ‘the novel view’. Wanting to see Confirmation as important, he notes that the rubric requiring episcopal hands is uncatholic as it would bar eastern Christians from Communion. Dyson Hague

One further exception to the lack of Evangelicals is Dyson Hague who was the lecturer in Liturgics of Wycliffe College Toronto. Hague wrote an Exposition of the 1918 Canadian Book of Common Prayer with a chapter on Confirmation. This is not a critical wrestling with other views, but it does expound a more traditional Evangelical view.64 Hague had already written a book to help teenagers prepare for Confirmation.65 In that he called on the passages in Acts and Hebrews as the basis for Confirmation. However, he clearly denied that ‘the bishop gives the Holy Spirit’ and saw it more as a benediction, with much Old Testament precedent, and a spiritual coming of age. In his Exposition, he states that Confirmation is a public profession of faith for those who have come of age. He thus particularly liked the addition of a question that asked for ratification of the Baptismal vow. This probably expresses the view of most Evangelicals throughout this period. There was a lack of engagement with Anglo-Catholic theology and a repetition of traditional views staying close to the Prayer Book. 1938 Doctrine Commission report

The report of the Doctrine Commission marginally talks about Confirmation.66 It reaffirms the view that the proper minister of Confirmation is the bishop. It also asserts that both Baptism and Confirmation confer an indelible character, perhaps something that some would not view as traditional Anglican theology, particularly on Confirmation. There is one page that discusses the relationship of Baptism to Confirmation. It makes some generalizations about the debate. The precise relation between the gift bestowed in Baptism and the gift bestowed in Confirmation cannot be defined.67 It argues that this debate is as old as Tertullian and Augustine, although it is doubtful either would understand the question. It notes that there are those who would see Acts 8 as the first bestowal of the Holy Spirit. However, it says that this is incompatible with a belief in entry into the body of Christ through Baptism. The body of Christ is the sphere of the Spirit. Looking at the text of the Prayer Book, it sees Confirmation as associated with the gifts of the Spirit from Isaiah 11. Confirmation is receiving gifts for mission in the world and ‘there is a real gift of grace bestowed in Confirmation’.

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

59

Hermeneutical questions A few people began to see that at the root of this new doctrine there were hermeneutical questions both on the Scripture and the patristic evidence, and how they should be related to current practice. This was slow to develop but there were early warning shots. This is perhaps the most important part of the whole debate. H. B. Swete

In his major Biblical study, The Holy Spirit in the New Testament, first edition 1909, Swete, professor of Divinity in Cambridge, only touches in passing the events of Acts and the issues of Confirmation.68 Such as is said, however, is not very supportive of more advanced views. It would be precarious to gather that St Paul everywhere as a matter of course laid his hands on the baptized.69 He then says it was not Paul’s policy to baptize and he may have followed that up with a blessing. He is interested in Ephesus where Paul laid on hands as happened in Samaria. But this only created a ‘presumption’ that this happened regularly. Regarding the laying on of hands, he says: In none of these instances of the laying on of hands is there any trace of a belief in the magical virtue of the act. It is simply the familiar and expressive sign of benediction inherited by the Apostles from the Synagogue and adapted to the service of the Church.70 So, there is not a ringing endorsement of ‘a special gift’ of the Holy Spirit in hand laying nor is he convinced that references to unction are anything but metaphorical. Tom Thompson

The 1914 The Offices of Baptism and Confirmation is a collection of texts and discussion of the development of the two offices.71 There is a reference to Mason, graciously acknowledging the value of the patristic quotations. While there is no direct criticism of Mason, there is implied criticism in some of the methodological comments. One or two quotations will reveal a different approach. This includes the ratification of Baptismal vows. The first related to the use of the term Confirmation. The word ‘Confirmation’ is used in this book for the rite which follows Baptism, either immediately or after some interval. The word, however, dates only to the fifth century, and is confined to western Europe.72

60

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

This is a caution about anachronistic reading. He warns on the theological interpretation of rites: The most perplexing question is that of Confirmation; the liturgies do not speak with a harmonious voice on the subject.73 This suggests some caution from the more definite interpretation of Mason. This is further underlined in: The rites which have been examined do not, as a whole, give a definitive testimony about the moment when the Holy Spirit is supposed to be given.74 Again, this methodologically suggests assumptions in Mason that later study disputes. The hermeneutical methods and conclusions will be debated throughout this century. Biblical commentaries

As well as the debate among liturgists and systematic theologians, the question of Biblical interpretation is important. In this period, there are many commentaries on the Acts of the Apostles, but few discuss anything to do with Confirmation. The omission suggests that a number of biblical scholars thought there was no connection between Acts 8, the events at Samaria, and present-day practices of Confirmation. One example of this is Adolph von Harnack who in his study of Acts mentions that Baptism is the way one enters the community but that this was not the task of the Apostles. He makes no mention of the laying on of hands as a specifically apostolic rite.75 Another is Foakes-Jackson who in 1931 suspected that the mention of the laying on of hands was a later conception of the sacrament.76 There are, however, others who do mention Confirmation and with those who do there is a variety of interpretations. John B. Sumner, Bishop of Chester, published A Practical Exposition of the Acts of the Apostles in 1838. In considering the work of the Holy Spirit he sees the reference in Acts 8 as: not the sanctifying influence followed by Peter, (Acts ii. 38) … that the gifts now received were extraordinary powers which the apostles possessed….77 Thus, the Samaritans had received the Holy Spirit in Baptism and received extraordinary gifts from the apostles, those of tongues and prophecy. F. D. Maurice in his sermons on Acts (1894) takes a different line. He begins with the divisions of Jews and Samaritans. This is now a key time in history when they are reunited in Jesus the King. What was to be the sign that this

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

61

unity had happened. It had to be the same gift as Pentecost in which the languages of the world were united. Thus, they needed the gift of tongues: The gift of tongues had not been a mere accidental outward token given then. It had been a token of a Presence which bound together men of different dialects and customs into one.78 This is a view that will return. David Thomas’ (a Welsh Free Church pastor) commentary of 1870 also supports the extraordinary event of Samaria. He did not think that there was some failure by Philip, but because of, the position of the Apostles they were required as the church leaders to ‘enter every open door’ as the church developed.79 He sees bestowal of the Spirit as not the Baptismal operation of the Spirit, but of a miraculous endowment of gifts of the Spirit. Of substantial academic weight is H. A. W. Meyer’s (a German Lutheran pastor and superintendent) critical and exegetical commentary of 1884. He notes the extraordinary context of Acts 8, the fact that the Spirit did not come in Baptism. The extraordinary event was the advance of the gospel beyond Judea. He rejects any idea of a fault in Philip’s ministry or the subjective reception of the Samaritans. He believes this extraordinary event needed direct apostolic intervention, and thus an indication of approval. He is not convinced that there is any suggestion that the laying on of hands was an apostolic instruction for all Baptisms. Indeed, in a footnote, he warns of the danger of making such assumptions and linking that assumption to present-day Confirmation. Surely this entirely peculiar state of matters should have withheld the Catholics from grounding the doctrine of Confirmation on our passage….80 So, he affirms a similar view to F. D. Maurice and questions the Acts 8 text as justifying present-day Confirmation. Richard Rackham, Community of the Resurrection, wrote the volume in the Oxford Commentaries on the Acts of the Apostles in 1901. He starts in his comments in Acts 8 saying that it is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, which is not innate in humanity that makes one a full church member. In contrasting four passages in Acts, he determines that there are some extraordinary and some ordinary conveyances of the Spirit. Thus, he concludes that for Luke: Through the laying on of hands of the apostles the Spirit is given. We are justified then in finding here the beginning of the Church’s rite of Confirmation.81 He justifies the lack of hand laying in the next story of the Ethiopian eunuch as being due to this being a part of a beginning, including a time

62

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

elapse for normal practice to develop. He partially discusses the text in suggesting that the eunuch did not receive the Spirit, which would be a huge anomaly in terms of his own presupposition, and even in supporting the variant reading of the Bezan text, it only says the Spirit fell on the eunuch and makes no mention of the laying on of hands. William Furneaux, the Dean of Winchester, wrote a commentary in 1912 and is quite brief on Acts 8. He supports the view that the events ‘testify to the expansion of the church’. He sees no implication that the ‘the Holy Spirit had not been given in Baptism’. If this were the only passage on Baptism, it would support the idea that the apostles’ hands were needed to convey the Spirit, but other passages show ‘such an inference to be erroneous’.82 Thus, he is rejecting the view that the passages in Acts support Confirmation. The new theory is advocated by W. F. Burnside (Headmaster of St Edmunds School Canterbury) in the Cambridge Commentaries for Schools. This is significant as it was used as a school textbook. He says that four things are shown by the passage: 1 2 3 4

Baptism in the name of Jesus did not convey the Spirit The Apostles prayed for the gift to be given The Apostles laid hands on the baptized Then followed the manifestation of the Spirit, in manifold forms.

He reiterated that ‘the laying on of hands usually follows closely on Baptism’, and asserts: The Church of England both in Holy Baptism and in Confirmation adheres closely in the rites themselves and in doctrine to the New Testament.83 The nature of the book possibly made it more influential than the previous more scholarly texts. Looking at previous generations, John Chrysostom was clear that what was given by the apostles was the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit. He seems unsure as to why this had to happen but saw it as providential, the miraculous gifts showing the inclusion of the Samaritans.84 Augustine in discussing the passage also assumes that what was lacking was the gift of tongues which required the apostles to bring the gift to the Samaritans.85 Calvin was clear that as they had been baptized they had received the Holy Spirit, for this is the teaching of both Peter and Paul.86 So again it was the miraculous gifts that were being endowed by the laying on of hands. However, since these gifts have ceased, any hand laying is a vain and empty ceremony.

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

63

Review

While the three biblical texts were the classic basis for Confirmation, the lighter touch was that they provided an example of the laying on of hands. Some of the theologians in this chapter have made a great claim on the texts, that they show that the laying on of hands is a normal part of Baptism in apostolic times. This is quite selective; there are other passages in Acts where there is no mention of hand laying, e.g., the story of the Ethiopian eunuch. The new theory had to jump hoops of its own making to explain this away. If we take a different text ‘repent and be baptized’ as Peter says at Pentecost, this can be used by Baptists to say repentance must come before Baptism and so only adults can be baptized. It is the same hermeneutic which takes one small passage and declares it normative in all cases. All the evidence needs to be heard first and then an overview needs to be created. If we look at the three texts, they are in fact quite different. In Acts 8, the fact that the Samaritans have not received the Holy Spirit is seen as an anomaly, not the norm. They were not baptized as children and receive the Spirit years later. These were adults in a step beyond the Jewish Christianity that had so far existed. An anomaly is not a good place to argue for a norm. The Ephesian disciples were disciples of John the Baptist, so one could argue that they were not Christians, so again a rather anomalous situation, one we do not face today! The verse in Hebrews might well suggest that some Christian communities saw hands as foundational, but not necessarily all.87 Similarly, Wotherspoon and Thompson warn about the interpretation of the patristic evidence. Mason seems to have the mentality of looking for the ‘moment of consecration’ or the sacramental moment, a scholastic hermeneutic on a patristic text. This is not the way the Fathers look at the rites. Theirs is a much more holistic approach, after all post Baptismal anointing is immediately after Baptism by minutes. While calling one part the seal of the Spirit, this does not necessarily exclude the idea that the Spirit is active in the whole service. It is the work of Geoffrey Lamp, after this period, who finally puts the new theory to rest. The debate about the relationship of Baptism to Confirmation has been very important. It undoubtedly influenced liturgical change. It encouraged bishops to stress the place of the Spirit in Confirmation. But it also made a hard boundary in the body of Christ and excluded many Christians. It was something that inhibited the movement to unity. It was primarily a discussion in the Anglo-Catholic movement, but no one noticed that it was essentially uncatholic and novel. Those Catholics who rejected it were in fact closer to the universal tradition of the church. The sacramental principle In the eighteenth century, the primary paradigm for understanding Baptism and Confirmation was that of ‘covenant’.88 There were those who were clearly drawing on Calvin and his covenant approach to sacramental theology.

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

64

Others were using the term in a wider biblical sense giving a slightly different interpretation. However, all persuasions in the church used this as the basis for their understanding. While in the nineteenth century there were those who continued to follow that theology, I want to suggest that there was a primary change in theological thinking from ‘covenant’ to ‘the sacramental principle’. This great shift can be seen in a number of works. John Henry Newman

The British Critic and Quarterly Theological Review was a high church review that was taken over by the Tractarians with Newman as editor. In an anonymous review of a work on Bishop Jewel in 1841, there is a passage that outlines the sacramental principle, in relationship to the surplice controversy: All the parts of the holy Catholic system do hang together; if it be a delusion, then even surplices are sinful; if, on the other hand, it be a life- giving Ordinance of divine, appointment, one vast Sacrament, (so to say), then even surplices, are in their way essential. It is one, or it is the other; it cannot be something between both. If surplices and the like be, as the moderate Reformers said, merely +',-(.; if they do not indicate, something real and divine; if they be not part of a system necessary to keep up the true knowledge of God in an imperfect state; if they be not essential, in their place, to the Sacramental principle of the Church, the principle of engaging the soul through the body in behalf of things divine.89 Perhaps this indicates that Newman had already moved to a belief in the sacramental principle before going to Rome. The Tracts emphasized the importance of the sacraments but in an unsystematic way. Newman, however, used this phrase in his An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine (1845) which was written on him becoming a Roman Catholic. The phrase is used but not elaborated on. There are a few passages where it is utilized but it is one of his key principles: The Incarnation is the antecedent of the doctrine of Mediation, and the archetype both of the Sacramental principle and of the merits of Saints … From the Sacramental principle come the Sacraments properly so called; the unity of the Church, and the Holy See as its type and centre; the authority of Councils; the sanctity of rites; the veneration of holy places, shrines, images, vessels, furniture, and vestments.90 And The doctrine of the Incarnation is the announcement of a divine gift conveyed in a material and visible medium, it being thus that heaven and

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

65

earth are in the Incarnation united. That is, it establishes in the very idea of Christianity the sacramental principle as its characteristic.91 In a third passage, he gives his definition of the sacramental principle, which is: a certain virtue or grace in the Gospel which changes the quality of doctrines, opinions, usages, actions, and personal characters which become incorporated with it, and makes them right and acceptable to its Divine Author, when before they were either contrary to truth, or at best but shadows of it.92 The way this term is used includes some things from Scripture, Baptism and eucharist, and others clearly not even from the Fathers. The essay received criticism both then and now. Mortimer O’Sullivan said that he set up a problem, chose his criteria, then chose his evidence, and pronounced that everything was fine.93 Nevertheless, the phrase began to be used in Anglican sacramental theology in a way it had not been before. Francis Paget

Francis Paget contributed a chapter on ‘Sacraments’ in Lux Mundi (first edition 1889).94 The sacramental system he sees rooted in creation and incarnation. He defines the system as: The regular use of sensible objects, agents and acts as being the means or instruments of Divine energies.95 Built upon the foundational doctrines of the Christian faith, Paget stresses the incarnation and Jesus’ use of material objects as the basis for his sacramental theology. He sees sacraments as characteristic of the Church’s corporate life. He sees Jesus as espousing the sacramental principle. Thus, sacraments embrace our whole life and witness to the claims of Christianity. Furthermore, the sacraments keep us in an eschatological perspective. Lux Mundi was a turning point in the Catholic movement; it outlined a more open (liberal) approach, as in the essay of Gore on the Holy Spirit, but here we see a consolidation. Paget makes ‘the sacramental principle’ central to his sacramental theology and thus sets the direction for the Catholic movement in its whole approach to sacraments. The elaboration of this phrase and its closeness to Roman Catholic theology were ground-breaking in such a central text. Morgan Dix

As rector of Trinity Church New York, Morgan Dix gave the Bishop Paddock Lectures in 1892. The title of the book is significant in the

66

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

theological approach, The Sacramental System Considered as The Extension of the Incarnation. Beginning with an experience in nature and then connecting it to a similar experience in church, Morgan Dix begins to explain the sacramental system. He sees two sides to the system, a commonplace side and an ideal or mystical side. God created the world and humanity; Christ came and united the world to Divinity. The divine is extended to humanity by the extension of the incarnation. These are the introductory thoughts that outline the theological lectures. He realizes that there is an intense dislike of sacramental doctrine in the protestant mind. There are often suggestions of superstition. But he says these arguments often start at the wrong point and need to begin with creation and incarnation. He quotes Arthur Mason as to the importance of creation and sees creation as a sacramental system. Indeed, humanity itself is a sacrament as was Christ’s incarnation. In Confirmation, which he calls a lesser sacrament: From Him a special benediction and power descend on the young soldier of Christ.96 The outward sign is the laying on of hands and the inward gift is the gifts of the Holy Spirit. The importance of Morgan Dix is of a dedicated parish priest who wrote many books and was well connected in New York society. He is indicative of the spread of Tractarianism in the United States. Darwell Stone

The Outline of Christian Dogma (first edition 1900) constructed as a basic systematic theology begins with God and then creation; the fall and redemption lead to the person and work of Christ. He then deals with the church and at that point begins to discuss the sacraments. He sees the sacramental principle as rooted in this approach: Since the day of Pentecost … the ordinary way in which God bestows grace on the souls of men is through the glorified humanity of our Lord and the working of God the Holy Ghost. The closest means of union with the glorified humanity of Christ, and the most immediate mode of contact with God the Holy Ghost are in the mystical body of Christ, that is, the Church, and are open to man in the use of the Sacraments. Thus, the Christian Church is the channel of grace. The sacramental principle thus affirmed is in harmony with much besides … It is an answer to the felt needs of man that he should receive grace in objective ways by means of that which can be seen and felt. The Christian Church is a visible society … It is reasonable that incorporation

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

67

into the society and maintenance in its life should be accomplished by sacramental rites.97 This then in Stone’s opinion is the normal way that God works among us through the sacramental ministry of the church. Paul Bull

A member of the Community of the Resurrection, Paul Bull published a book on The Sacramental Principle in 1915.98 He has a broad view of creation and sees the world as a sacrament, even in a scientific age. The importance of matter is reaffirmed in the incarnation and criticizes Puritans who did not see the world as redeemable. The church is the kingdom of God in the world which is the body of Christ. It is not till he progressed this far that can he talk about sacraments. The sacramental principle is that the ‘Spirit expresses itself in matter’, in the world through humanity, and the cultures we produce.99 Baptism is Regeneration, born again to a state of grace. Baptizing infants shows that forgiveness is a free gift of God’s love. Confirmation, once a part of Baptism, ‘admits the young recruit into the fighting ranks of the army of the Lord of Hosts’.100 The way the argument has been conducted allows for a number of ordinances to be called sacraments. There is no limitation of the number of sacraments to two. Oliver Quick

The Christian Sacraments (first published 1927) became a classic of a Catholic exposition of the sacraments.101 The chapters of the book show a following of the sacramental principle. It begins with a discussion of symbols and instruments. Then aesthetics and ethics of sacraments are discussed. Then Christ’s life as a sacrament is discussed in relation to the incarnation and atonement. After all this, the more traditional aspect of the number of sacraments is discussed. But before any discussion can be made of Baptism and eucharist, the nature of the church is elaborated. The ‘sacramental outlook’ is central to his approach rooted in the incarnation. Review

These examples look at sacraments by ‘the sacramental principle’. Lux Mundi and The Christian Sacraments went through many editions and thus their theology was very influential. Paul Bull was a part of the scholarly group of the Community of the Resurrection. Thus, these various authors indicate the change in paradigm of Anglican sacramental theology. This indeed is one of the great transformations in this period of Anglican history. While the eighteenth century approached Confirmation through the lens of ‘covenant’, the nineteenth century left this behind and developed the lens of ‘the sacramental principle’.

68

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

Conclusion These two chapters have looked at two very important doctrinal disputes in the Anglican Church. Both originated from the Tractarian movement, but they were to have a worldwide impact. The Baptismal Regeneration controversy began with Pusey, and this was fiercely contested in the church. It forced some into secession and led to the revising of both Anglican Prayer books and Methodist ones. The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation was a later controversy and it continued beyond the present timescale of the book. However, many objections to the new theory were made by Catholic Church people and it was contested in its day. Behind the scenes, a shift was occurring in the paradigm of sacramental theology away from ‘international Calvinism’ to the sacramental principle. With this theological background in mind, it is now possible to look at liturgical revision and episcopal practice. This will form the content of the next chapters. Notes 1 Here I am using the categories of C. O. Buchanan, Anglican Confirmation, Grove Liturgical Study No. 48 (Bramcote: Grove, 1986). 2 John Alexander Frere, The Doctrine of Imposition of Hands, or, Confirmation: The Ordained and Ordinary Means for Conveying the Gift of the Holy Ghost (London: Francis & John Rivington, 1845). 3 Ibid., p. 9. 4 Ibid., p. 75. 5 F. W. Puller, What Is the Distinctive Grace of Confirmation? (London; Oxford; Cambridge: Rivingtons, 1880), p. 28. 6 Ibid., p. 12. 7 Ibid., p. 25. 8 James D. G. Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit: A Re-Examination of the New Testament Teaching on the Gift of the Spirit in Relation to Pentecostalism Today (Naperville, IL: A. R. Allenson, 1970). 9 G. W. H. Lampe, The Seal of the Spirit: A Study in the Doctrine of Baptism and Confirmation in the New Testament and the Fathers, 2nd ed. (London: SPCK, 1967). 10 Anon, “Confirmation,” Church Quarterly Review 11, no. 21 (1880), p. 180. 11 Phillip Tovey, Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820, Liturgy, Worship and Society (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014). 12 Anon, “The Age for Confirmation,” Church Quarterly Review 23, no. 45 (1886), p. 66. 13 D. Stone, “The Relation of Confirmation to Baptism,” ibid., no. January (1898). 14 Arthur James Mason, The Faith of the Gospel: A Manual of Christian Doctrine (London: Rivingtons, 1888). 15 Ibid., p. 279. 16 The Relation of Confirmation to Baptism, as Taught in Holy Scripture and the Fathers (London; New York: Longmans, Green, 1891). 17 Ibid., p. 415. 18 Ibid., p. 1. 19 Ibid., p. 142.

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

69

Ibid., p. 141. Ibid., pp. 454–55. Ibid., p. 354. Ibid., p. 157. Ibid., p. 283. Ibid., p. 365. Anon, “Primitive Teaching on Confirmation and Its Relation to Holy Baptism,” Church Quarterly Review 34, no. 67 (1892). Ibid., p. 9. F. B. Westcott, The Gospel According to St. John: The Authorized Version (London: J. Murray, 1889), p. 295. Tom Thompson, The Offices of Baptism and Confirmation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1914). G. Dix, The Theology of Confirmation in Relation to Baptism (London: Dacre Press, 1946), p. 7. E. R. Fairweather, “A Milestone in Canadian Theology: Bishop Kindon’s God Incarnate,” Canadian Journal of Theology 4, no. 2 (1958). Ibid., p. 109. Hollingworth Tully Kingdon, God Incarnate (New York: T. Whittaker, 1890). Ibid., p. 198. Ibid., p. 200. Charles Gore, The Church and the Ministry – 4th ed. revised (London: Longmans Green and Co, 1900), pp. 235–36. P. B. Nockles, “The Oxford Movement in the United States,” in The Oxford Movement 1830–1930, ed. S. J. Brown and P. B. Nockles (Cambridge: CUP, 2012). Arthur Crawshay Alliston Hall, Confirmation (London; New York; Bombay: Longmans, Green and Co, 1904). Ibid., p. 50. Ibid., p. 59. Frederic Henry Chase, Confirmation in the Apostolic Age (Macmillan & Co.: London, 1909). Ibid., p. 8. Tovey, Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820, pp. 8–11. William Bright, Morality in Doctrine (Longmans Co.: London, 1892), pp. 90–91. Ibid., pp. 90–91. Ibid., p. 91. A. Theodore Wirgman, The Doctrine of Confirmation (London; New York: Longmans, Green, 1897). Ibid., p. vii. Mason, The Relation of Confirmation to Baptism, as Taught in Holy Scripture and the Fathers, p. 19. Wirgman, The Doctrine of Confirmation, p. 60. Stone, “The Relation of Confirmation to Baptism.” Chas John Vaughan, St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (Cambridge: Macmillan and Son, 1861), p. 103. E. W. Bullinger, The Giver and His Gifts; or the Holy Spirit and His Work (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1905), pp. 15–16. F. J. A. Hort, The First Epistle of St. Peter 1. 1–11 (London: Macmillan, 1898), p. 61. Darwell Stone, Holy Baptism (London: Longmans, Green, and Co, 1899, 1905), p. 67. Ibid., p. 79.

70 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64

65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation Outlines of Christian Dogma (London: Longmans, 1903), pp. 167–8. Ibid., p. 169. Buchanan, Anglican Confirmation, p. 32. W. H. Griffith Thomas, The Holy Spirit of God (London: Longmans, Green, & Co., 1913), p. 276. K. D. Mackenzie, “The Relation of Confirmation to Baptism,” in Confirmation (London: SPCK, 1926). Oliver Chase Quick, The Christian Sacraments (London: Fontana, 1964). Bryan D. Spinks, Scottish Presbyterian Worship: Proposals for Organic Change, 1843 to the Present Day (Edinburgh: St Andrew Press, 2020), pp. 117–22. Henry Johnstone Wotherspoon, Religious Values in the Sacraments: Being the Croall Lectures, 1926–1927 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1928), pp. 183–215. Dyson Hague, Through the Prayer Book: An Exposition of Its Teaching and Language: The Origins and Contents of Its Services: With Special Reference to the More Recent Features of the Canadian Prayer Book (London, New York, Toronto: Church Book Room Press, 1932). “Confirmation: Why We Have It, What It Means, What It Requires” (1903). Archbishops’ Commission on Christian Doctrine, Doctrine in the Church of England: The Report of the Commission on Christian Doctrine Appointed by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York in 1922 (London: SPCK, 1938). Ibid., p. 250. Henry Barclay Swete, The Holy Spirit in the New Testament (London: Macmillan and Co., 1909). Ibid., p. 107. Ibid., p. 384. Tom Thompson, The Offices of Baptism and Confirmation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1914). Ibid., p. vii. Ibid., p. 207. Ibid., p. 220. Adolf von Harnack, The Acts of the Apostles, trans. J. R. Wilkinson, New Testament Studies Iii (New York: G.P. Putnam, 1909), pp. 268–69. F. J. Foakes-Jackson, The Acts of the Apostles (New York and London: Harper and Brothers, 1931). John Bird Sumner, A Practical Exposition of the Acts of the Apostles (London: J Hatchard and Son, 1838), p. 110. Frederick Denison Maurice, The Acts of the Apostles: A Course of Sermons (London: Macmillan, 1894), p. 104. David Thomas, A Homiletic Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles (London: Dickinson, 1889), p. 131. Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer, Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the Acts of the Apostles (New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1884), p. 170, footnote 7. Richard Belward Rackham, The Acts of the Apostles, Oxford Commentaries (London: Methuen & Co., 1901), p. 117. William Mordaunt Furneaux, The Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary for English Readers (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1912), p. 111. W. F. Burnside, Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text for Use in Schools (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1916), p. 12. John Chrysostom, “Acts of the Apostles,” Patristic Bible Commentary, https:// sites.google.com/site/aquinasstudybible/home/acts-of-the-apostles/st-john-chrysostom-on-acts/chapter-2/chapter-3/chapter-4/chapter-5/chapter-6/chapter-7/ chapter-8.

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

71

85 Augustine, Sermons (20–50) on the Old Testament, trans. Edmund Hill (New York: New City Press, 2014), p. 137. 86 Jean Calvin, Commentary Upon the Acts of the Apostles, trans. Henry Beveridge (Edinburgh: T&T Clarke, 1859), p. 338. 87 George-Raymond Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament (London: Macmillan, 1962). 88 Tovey, Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820. 89 Anon, “Bishop Jewel,” The British Critic and Quarterly Theological Review 30, no. 59 (1841), p. 24. 90 John Henry Newman, “An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine” (1890), pp. 93–94. 91 Ibid., p. 325. 92 Ibid., pp. 354–55. 93 Mortimer O’Sullivan, Theory of Developments in Christian Doctrine Applied and Tested (London; Dublin: J.W. Parker; W. Curry, 1846). 94 F. Paget, “Sacraments,” in Lux Mundi: A Series of Studies in the Religion of the Incarnation, ed. Charles Gore (London: J. Murray, 1889). 95 Ibid., p. 297. 96 Morgan Dix, “The Sacramental System Considered as the Extension of the Incarnation” (1893), p. 86. 97 Stone, “The Relation of Confirmation to Baptism,” p. 144. 98 Paul Bertie Bull, The Sacramental Principle (Longmans & Co.: London, 1915). 99 Ibid., p. 136. 100 Ibid., p. 158. 101 Oliver Chase Quick, The Christian Sacraments (London: The Fontana Library, 1927, 1964).

Reference list Anon. “The Age for Confirmation.” Church Quarterly Review, 23, no. 45 (1886): 52–83. Anon. “Bishop Jewel.” The British Critic and Quarterly Theological Review, 30, no. 59 (1841): 1–45. Anon. “Confirmation.” Church Quarterly Review, 11, no. 21 (1880): 176–88. Anon. “Primitive Teaching on Confirmation and Its Relation to Holy Baptism.” Church Quarterly Review, 34, no. 67 (1892): 1–20. Archbishops’ Commission on Christian Doctrine. Doctrine in the Church of England: The Report of the Commission on Christian Doctrine Appointed by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York in 1922. London: SPCK, 1938. Augustine. Sermons (20–50) on the Old Testament. Translated by E. Hill. New, York: New City Press, 2014. Beasley-Murray, G-R. Baptism in the New Testament. London: Macmillan, 1962. Bright, W. Morality in Doctrine. London: Longmans Co., 1892. Buchanan, C. O. Anglican Confirmation. Grove Liturgical Study No. 48. Bramcote: Grove, 1986. Bull, P. B. The Sacramental Principle. London: Longmans & Co., 1915. Bullinger, E. W. The Giver and His Gifts; or the Holy Spirit and His Work. London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1905. Burnside, W. F. Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text for Use in Schools. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1916.

72

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

Calvin, J. Commentary Upon the Acts of the Apostles. Translated by H. Beveridge. Edinburgh: T&T Clarke, 1859. Chase, F. H. Confirmation in the Apostolic Age. London: Macmillan & Co., 1909. Chrysostom, J. “Acts of the Apostles.” In Patristic Bible Commentary. https://sites. google.com/site/aquinasstudybible/home/acts-of-the-apostles/st-john-chrysostomon-acts/chapter-2/chapter-3/chapter-4/chapter-5/chapter-6/chapter-7/chapter-8. Dix, G. The Theology of Confirmation in Relation to Baptism. London: Dacre Press, 1946. Dix, M. “The Sacramental System Considered as the Extension of the Incarnation.” 1893. New York. Longmans http://anglicanhistory.org/usa/mdix/paddock/03.html Dunn, J. D. G. Baptism in the Holy Spirit: A Re-Examination of the New Testament Teaching on the Gift of the Spirit in Relation to Pentecostalism Today. Naperville, Ill.: A. R. Allenson, 1970. Fairweather, E. R. “A Milestone in Canadian Theology: Bishop Kindon’s God Incarnate.” Canadian Journal of Theology 4, no. 2 (1958): 101–10. Foakes-Jackson, F. J. The Acts of the Apostles. New York and London: Harper and Brothers, 1931. Frere, J. A. The Doctrine of Imposition of Hands, or, Confirmation: The Ordained and Ordinary Means for Conveying the Gift of the Holy Ghost. London: Francis & John Rivington, 1845. Furneaux, W. M. The Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary for English Readers. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1912. Gore, C. The Church and the Ministry – 4th ed. revised. London: Longmans Green and Co, 1900. Hague, D. “Confirmation: Why We Have It, What It Means, What It Requires.” 1903. Issue 86194 of CIHM/ICMH microfiche series. Hague, D. Through the Prayer Book: An Exposition of Its Teaching and Language: The Origins and Contents of Its Services: With Special Reference to the More Recent Features of the Canadian Prayer Book. London; New York; Toronto: Church Book Room Press, 1932. Hall, A. C. A. Confirmation. London; New York; Bombay: Longmans, Green and Co, 1904. Harnack, Adolf von. The Acts of the Apostles. Translated by J. R. Wilkinson. New Testament Studies Iii. New York: G.P. Putnam, 1909. Hort, F. J. A. The First Epistle of St. Peter 1. 1–11. London: Macmillan, 1898. Kingdon, H. T. God Incarnate. New York: T. Whittaker, 1890. Lampe, G. W. H. The Seal of the Spirit: A Study in the Doctrine of Baptism and Confirmation in the New Testament and the Fathers. 2nd ed. London: SPCK, 1967. Mackenzie, K. D. “The Relation of Confirmation to Baptism.” In Confirmation, 285–94. London: SPCK, 1926. Mason, A. J. The Faith of the Gospel: A Manual of Christian Doctrine. London: Rivingtons, 1888. Mason, A. J. The Relation of Confirmation to Baptism, as Taught in Holy Scripture and the Fathers. London; New York: Longmans, Green, 1891. Maurice, F. D. The Acts of the Apostles: A Course of Sermons. London: Macmillan, 1894.

The relationship between Baptism and Confirmation

73

Meyer, H. A. W. Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the Acts of the Apostles. New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1884. Newman, J. H. An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine London: James Toovey, 1890. Nockles, P. B. “The Oxford Movement in the United States.” In The Oxford Movement 1830–1930, edited by S. J. Brown and P. B. Nockles (pp. 133–150). Cambridge: CUP, 2012. O’Sullivan, M. Theory of Developments in Christian Doctrine Applied and Tested. London; Dublin: J.W. Parker; W. Curry, 1846. Paget, F. “Sacraments.” In Lux Mundi: A Series of Studies in the Religion of the Incarnation, edited by C. Gore, 296–317. London: J. Murray, 1889. Puller, F. W. What Is the Distinctive Grace of Confirmation? London; Oxford; Cambridge: Rivingtons, 1880. Quick, O. C. The Christian Sacraments. London: The Fontana Library, 1927, 1964. Quick, O. C. The Christian Sacraments. London: Fontana, 1964. Rackham, R. B. The Acts of the Apostles. Oxford Commentaries. London: Methuen & Co., 1901. Spinks, B. D. Scottish Presbyterian Worship: Proposals for Organic Change, 1843 to the Present Day. Edinburgh: St Andrew Press, 2020. Stone, D. “The Relation of Confirmation to Baptism.” Church Quarterly Review 46, no. January (1898): 357–82. Stone, D. Holy Baptism. [in Undetermined] London: Longmans, Green, and Co, 1899, 1905. Stone, D. Outlines of Christian Dogma. London: Longmans, 1903. Sumner, J. B. A Practical Exposition of the Acts of the Apostles. London: J Hatchard and Son, 1838. Swete, H. B. The Holy Spirit in the New Testament. London: Macmillan and Co., 1909. Thomas, D. A Homiletic Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. London: Dickinson, 1889. Thomas, W. H. G. The Holy Spirit of God. London: Longmans, Green, & Co., 1913. Thompson, T. The Offices of Baptism and Confirmation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1914. Tovey, P. Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820. Liturgy, Worship and Society. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014. Vaughan, C. J. St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans. Cambridge: Macmillan and Son, 1861. Westcott, F. B. The Gospel According to St. John: The Authorized Version. London: J. Murray, 1889. Wirgman, A. T. The Doctrine of Confirmation. London; New York: Longmans, Green, 1897. Wotherspoon, H. J. Religious Values in the Sacraments: Being the Croall Lectures, 1926–1927. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1928.

4

Prayer Book revision before 1928

This chapter will begin a discussion of liturgical revision 1820–1945 and how it affected Confirmation. It will take us up to the 1928 debacle in England, and a discussion of the rest of the Anglican Communion. The previous two chapters were primarily doctrinal. The liturgical implications of those doctrines will be seen in this and the next chapter. However, first there needs to be some consideration about how to approach this task and to set the revisions in a wider historical context. Historiographical considerations There are many methodological pitfalls in writing a history of Anglican Confirmation from 1820 to 1945. Clearly, there are events in England that are of great importance, Tractarianism, ritualism, the Royal Commissions, the proposed Prayer Book revision, the Great War, and the trauma of 1928. The danger is that someone from England will let this dominate the narrative and fit other parts of the Communion into this story. A brief review of various approaches will illustrate the issues, particularly in relation to the 1928 Prayer Book. There are several accounts of this crucial period. One of the earliest is in George Bell’s monumental biography of Randall Davidson.1 Davidson was Archbishop of Canterbury 1903–1928 and thus led the church through the second Royal Commission and through the whole of the 1928 saga. Bell was chaplain to the archbishop 1914–1925 and immediately after Dean of Canterbury. By the nature of a biography, he is very focused on the archbishop, suggesting the archbishop was not interested in liturgy, that work on the Prayer Book was stopped during the war, and that the archbishop’s indifference led to a lack in leadership in getting it through parliament. Martell produced a thesis which followed the same methodology reading more of Davidson’s documentation.2 John Maiden looks more at the place of ‘national religion’ in the debates.3 As ‘Protestant England’, how far could the nation go in accommodating ‘popery’ in the Church of England? The narrative is thus focused on church and nation. Dan Cruickshank is interested in the theology and ecclesiology of the process.4 He questions DOI: 10.4324/9781032676876-4

Prayer Book revision before 1928

75

several conclusions by previous authors and sets out the changing theology and ecclesiology of the church, even mentioning Confirmation. Donald Gray gives a brief introduction to the whole period, with an Anglo-Catholic and liturgical eye, but barely mentions other parts of the Communion and talks of the Church of England as ‘Mother Church’.5 Bell and Martell have concentrated on Davidson, Cruickshank on the Proceedings of Convocation. There is a considerable amount of further information in auto/biographies, e.g., of Henley Henson (Bishop of Durham), AC Headlam (Bishop of Gloucester), and Darwell Stone (English Church Union) but also helpful are those of Cyril Garbett (Bishop of Southwark), A. F. Winnington-Ingram (Bishop of London), Cosmo Gordon Lang (Archbishop of York) and T. B. Strong (Bishop of Oxford) all of which discuss liturgical revision and the attitudes of the respective persons.6 These provide rich resources on opinions and processes. Cuming, in A History of Anglican Liturgy, is aware of other revisions but tends to concentrate on places with English-speaking settlers/colonizers.7 Jasper is also aware of overseas developments but is not fully comprehensive.8 This book is looking at the processes of this period but through the lens of one service (processes which may be different to other rites) and will aim to be more comprehensive regarding the Anglican Communion. Thus, the England narrative will have to be interrupted with interjections from sister churches. However, there are further historiographical considerations. Frere understood that Prayer Book revision had a wider influence: A wider reference still is required, for the revision of the Prayer Book is a project which touches a broader field than England.9 He had considerable correspondence with Anglican liturgical reformers across the world. Frere indicated his knowledge of the continental Liturgical Movement: This is the significance of the present moment in the world of worship, and it is well that we in England should realize that we are sharing in a worldwide movement. And not merely being agitated by local unrest.10 It is clear from the article, in 1913, that Frere sees two parts to this worldwide movement, one is within Anglicanism and the other is in the continental Roman Catholic Church. For the latter, he specifically discusses changes to the Psalter, music, and the Breviary. Frere seems well aware of the broader movements even if his time is going to be consumed by mainly an English agenda. But he had an even wider perspective that comes out in his last book: now when there is much awakening in the East; and in the Latin West a strong and realistic Liturgical Movement is in full progress … we find in

76

Prayer Book revision before 1928 the Anglican Communion, … that we are now more ready than we were fifty years ago to revalue traditions of worship which have come to us from the patristic era, from medieval and scholastic times, from Roman or Genevan sources, and from our own chequered experience of four hundred years.11

Frere does not say much in his writings about the Liturgical Movement, but the quotes above from 1913 and 1938 indicate that he has an awareness of liturgical change outside of Anglicanism. But should he be seen as a part of the Liturgical Movement? Ben Gordon-Taylor and Nicolas Stebbing disagree with Cuming, because Cuming starts the Liturgical Movement in England with Heber and Dix and excludes Frere. Gordon Taylor and Stebbing say that the periodization should include Frere.12 The evidence would support their case. To adapt Frere’s comment from above, we need to at least have an awareness that liturgical revision in this period has a ‘broader field’ than Anglicanism. Much of the history of the Liturgical Movement has been dominated by Roman Catholic scripts, which is not surprising considering Vatican 2 was the fruit of the movement and there is ongoing discussion of the implications of that council. Often these scripts are only concerned with the Roman Catholic Church.13 Thus, a useful article of the history of the Liturgical Movement is given by H. Ellsworth Chandlee.14 He says that it begins with the 1832 reforms at the Abbey of Solemnes in France. Key developments are the 1903 Motu Proprio of Pius X on church music with the expected active participation of the laity, the 1909 conference at Malines in Belgium, and the work of Dom Odo Casel in Germany. Alongside this pastoral work, Chandlee points to the development of liturgical study and the beginning of liturgical journals. The article argues for a liturgical movement beginning in Anglicanism with ritualists but also the academic work of Frere and Heber and the liturgical revisions in the Anglican Communion of this period. For Reformed Churches, Chandlee looks to the work of Eugene Bersier in Paris, and the Church Service Society in Scotland from 1843.15 The liturgies of the Church of South India may be outside this book but the foundations for them are created in this period, and they draw into the Movement other Free Churches. Spinks and Fenwick include the Anglican liturgical changes of the period in their discussion of the Liturgical Movement, although they see it as a preliminary to the post-World War II Liturgical Movement.16 Billington, an English Methodist, follows a similar interpretation pointing to the works of Ryder Smith, as an early Methodist pioneer in the Movement, but also seeing the movement develop more in British Methodism post-World War II.17 Massey Shepherd gives a longer perspective seeing roots in the Scottish liturgical revision and the liturgical work of Bishop Rattray, and in America the 1892 revision with the guidance of William Reed Huntington.18 In contrast Frank Senn, the American Lutheran, links together Roman Catholic, Anglican, and Lutheran developments as ‘Liturgy in the Age of

Prayer Book revision before 1928

77

Romanticism’.19 Senn notes the work of liturgical revision in the Prussian Union Church (Agenda 1822), Philip Schaff who crossed the waters to work in the Reformed seminary at Mercersburg and was inspired by the ‘evangelical catholic spirit’, and Nikolai Grundtvig in Denmark. Arne Geiwald and Gunther Thomann would add to this the importance of the neo-Lutheran movement after 1817, when there were plans to form the Prussian Union Church, and the later High Church Movement in Germany, which was conscious of similarities and differences with the Oxford Movement.20 Senn sees all these movements in a variety of churches on either side of the water as linked. There are issues of classification either ‘liturgy in the age of romanticism’, as Senn, or an early part of the Liturgical Movement, as in Fenwick and Spinks, the important thing is that the liturgical discussions that are going to dominate the next two chapters are not disconnected. This wider context is both that of the wider Anglican Communion, and then the movements in Roman Catholic, Lutheran, and Reformed churches. It was indeed a ‘worldwide movement’ to quote Frere.21 Pressure for the revision of the Prayer Book in England 1820–1905 The history of Prayer Book revision 1820–1940 is complex. We are now going to divide the liturgical history in England into two sections. The first period is of argumentation for change (or not) and ends with the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline. The subdivisions of the period are taken from Archbishop Davidson’s submission to the Royal Commission.22 This is followed by a second period mostly concerning the 1928 proposals. George Bell subdivides that period in his biography of Davidson.23 This may be a rather stratified typology, but Davidson lived through the whole controversy, Bell suggests as a rather reluctant participant. This is also a rather England-centred narrative, so I will attempt to include the rest of the Anglican Communion which came into being during this period. Indeed, this is the great missionary expansion of Anglicanism, certainly not all done by the Church of England, but one of worldwide earnest endeavour. This will be shown in the examining of texts later in the chapters. Through all this time in England, there was one service that of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, which was examined in detail in the previous volume.24 The end of the eighteenth century had seen the development of simplified liturgies either orthodox as in the case of Methodist productions or unorthodox in the rise of the Unitarian Church. There were also the final remnants of the non-juror’s liturgical revision in the Episcopal Church of Scotland, although the non-jurors themselves died out before 1820. Thus, this early period does not begin in a neutral gear but rather with those of a Low Church mindset looking for simplification and clarification of the Prayer Book. This was to all change quite swiftly with the rise of Tractarianism and then later of ritualism. The rather gentle divisions of the eighteenth century

78

Prayer Book revision before 1928

were to change into strong party lines in the nineteenth century leading to the production of different societies dedicated to being in conflict with their opposites. The Church of England became a body of warring sects. The divisions and debates in England were to spill into the rest of the Anglican Communion. In this early period, there were some mild revisions around the Communion, mostly in the overseas settler churches, as they existed, but there was also an ebb and flow with some new churches joining Anglicanism and some people leaving to become continuing Anglicans. The charting of change, therefore, is thus of at first theoretical reform, leading to violent confrontation, with more significant changes building up to the next period. Proposed liturgical changes in the Church of England

While there was stability in the liturgical text, there was considerable unrest in the church during this period, and numerous changes were suggested. Throughout the whole of this century, various suggestions for Prayer Book reform were made. As in the eighteenth century, much of the focus was on other services, particularly Holy Communion and daily prayer. This was particularly so with the rise of ritualism which produced a whole genre of missals, for parishes, and books of hours, for developing monastic movement.25 The reaction was very sharp, as they seemed to undermine the Protestant nature of the Church of England, and it led to the generation of continuing Anglicans of an evangelical nature who then revised the liturgy in their particular direction.26 Not all of the suggestions for revision from any one group necessarily included proposals for Confirmation. Jasper lists 91 references to Prayer Book revision from 1828 to 1877.27 Peaston, looking only at evangelicals, lists 21 references between 1831 and 1914.28 The British Museum Catalogue lists 134 books on Prayer Book revision from 1820 to 1899.29 Thus, there is a large volume of literature arguing for revision, while the 1662 book remained unchanged. However, as many of the suggestions do not touch on Confirmation, and many of the more ‘Catholic’ suggestions were centred on the Eucharist, there is in fact a smaller body of literature to look at. The ebb and flow of discussion about the nature of worship is highly complex, with different groups writing in different contexts at different times. A masterful discussion of the issue is given by the Archbishop of Canterbury at the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline where for two days in 1905 he answered questions about the history of ‘the growth of present difficulties in the Church of England’.30 Archbishop Davidson gave a detailed and balanced description of the history which he divided into three periods: 1 1840–1866. This period was the end of the Tracts, the development of the Camden Society, an attention to the present rubrics, the Pimlico riots, and various petitions.

Prayer Book revision before 1928

79

2 1866–1892. Archbishop Davidson makes the beginning of this final setting up of the Church Union (Anglo-Catholic) and the Church Society (evangelical). This period is marked by a large number of ritual trials, including the sending of some people to prison, the ritual martyrs; the Royal Commission on Ritual; the Convocation Prayer Book; the trial of Bishop Edward King of Lincoln. 3 1892–1905. This final period the Archbishop sees as a consolidation period for the high church with the addition of lots of special services and offices. The bishops appear to be aware of the need for greater elasticity and the desire to take people to court has disappeared. The whole period ended with the conclusion of the Royal Commission that the laws on liturgical discipline had broken down and were not fit for use. During this earlier period, there are various locations for the discussion, in Parliament, in convocations (revived in this period), in the law courts, in numerous publications, and on the streets. It is not necessary to go through the whole history of this ferment and the sharp divisions that occurred within the church. The purpose of this chapter is to look at the implications of this upheaval and the suggestions for changing the service of Confirmation. There are three particularly important groups to look at, who have to be considered. One is the group suggesting Prayer Book revision championed by Lord Ebury, the other is the Church Association, and then a final view of the High Church party. Suggested Prayer Book revision

Lord Ebury led one group of Evangelicals and Low Church people who were interested in reforming the Prayer Book. Lord Ebury and other noble Lords from time to time tried to introduce bills to affect Prayer Book revision, but to no avail. In 1859, he started the ‘Association for Promoting a Revision of the Book of Common Prayer’. Mostly, these revisions wanted to clarify rubrics, excising things that could have a particular Catholic interpretation, and rewrite prayers where doctrinally unacceptable. But there were others in the early period; of particular importance is C. H. Davies from Oxford who produced a series of publications including completely revised prayer books suggesting moderate revision of the Book of Common Prayer. Revisions became more strongly Protestant as the ritual wars failed to support the evangelical position. It should also be remembered that one of the goals of this type of group at this time was a further comprehension of Free Church people. Thus, suggested liturgical revision had in mind for Confirmation, not only the clarification of a more Protestant version of the Church of England but also one that would be able to include moderate dissenters (Table 4.1). In terms of the Confirmation service, one clear goal throughout most of this period is to remove any reference to baptismal regeneration, as is found in the prayer for the sevenfold gifts. This was strongly advocated in much

Title Rubrics Introduction

Davis Moderate Bingham Liturgicae Revision BCP 1859 Recusae Exemplar 1863 Title Changed rubrics Recast

BCP for Evangelical Christian Layman Churches 1867 Suggestive Contribution Revision BCP 1871

The Book of Common Prayer Revised 1874

Title

Title Two rubrics Introduction recast

Rubric for an address

Introduction Bishops introduction

Renewal of baptismal vow Versicles and responses Sevenfold gifts

Kneeling and imposition Confirmation prayer Greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Blessing Rubric

Collect Five questions Versicles and responses Moderates Recast from language of baptismal forgiveness of all regeneration sins Kneeling and imposition Confirmation prayer Greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Hymn or Anthem Address Blessing or Aaronic blessing

Rubric for question of repentance Versicles and responses Recast to avoid baptismal regeneration

Six questions

Two prayers for divine help

Three questions Versicles and responses Recast to avoid baptismal regeneration

Kneeling and imposition Kneeling and imposition Confirmation prayer Prayer of blessing Confirmation prayer Greeting Lord’s prayer Modified collect Collect

Greeting Lord’s prayer Modified collect Modified collect

Greeting Lord’s prayer Modified collect Collect

Blessing

Blessing Hebrews 13

Blessing Overseas rubric

Prayer Book revision before 1928

BCP

80

Table 4.1 Some Evangelical Low Church suggestions for revision

Prayer Book revision before 1928

81

reform but also highly resisted by the High Church party, who produced their own interpretation of this phrase based on the work of Pusey as we saw in previous chapters. The issue came to a head once more in the Gorham controversy in 1847. Davis recasts the statement in the infant baptism service from ‘seeing now … that this child is regenerate’ to ‘seeing now … that this child is dedicated to the living and true God’.31 It is probable therefore that he would want to change the statement about regeneration in the prayer of the sevenfold gifts, although in his notes (he does not supply a full text for the changes) he objects more to the statement that they have been given forgiveness of ‘all’ their sins asking for some moderation of the statement. The other services all recast the sevenfold gifts prayer to avoid any suggestion of baptismal regeneration. The Book of Common Prayer 1874 talks of God who has ‘vouchsafed to call these thy servants to a knowledge of thy grace and faith in thee’.32 There is a tendency in all of the other services to increase the number of questions asked of the candidates, or of the catechumens, the term used by Bingham.33 The 1867 and 1871 Prayer Books clearly have a goal of comprehension. The Christian Layman’s 1871 service while following the order of the Prayer Book significantly recasts the content in a Free Church direction.34 The 1867 service does not require Confirmation to be performed by a bishop and gives a rubric to question the candidate about their personal repentance and faith.35 The revised 1874 book includes a final rubric to say that in overseas contexts when the bishop is not available a presbyter may perform Confirmation. It would have been interesting to know what this rubric had in mind. The Church Association

A second strand in the debate at the Prayer Book was led by the Church Association. This was established in 1865 and in 1904 had 17,000 members.36 They saw themselves as an opponent of the ritual disorders in the church. They viewed the Prayer Book as essentially a Protestant document which was now being reinterpreted in a Papist way. Their approach therefore was to take those they saw as infringing the law through the law courts and to petition Parliament against ritual abuses. They had a number of societies which they particularly regarded as leading infringers, the English Church Union, the Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament, the Holy Cross Society, and the Society of St John the Evangelist. The latter was one of the male monastic orders that had developed within the Church of England through the Catholic revival. The approach of resort to the courts by the Church Society and others was not always successful. The first court case was in 1854 Westerton versus Liddell which concerned the furnishings of the church. While the ecclesiastical courts condemned almost all of the ritual ornaments, the decision was overturned in the Privy Council speaking in favour of the ritualists. One of

82

Prayer Book revision before 1928

the last cases was that in 1888 of the Church Association against the Bishop of Lincoln. Once again this was not a clear judgement in favour of all the points of the more Protestant side. In this war of litigation, the question of Confirmation did not arise, but was more centred on practices at the Eucharist. This is in part an issue to do with the lack of ‘Catholic’ bishops in the early period who might be willing to modify the Confirmation service in a more ritual direction. The High Church party

At first, there was not much agitation for Prayer Book revision in the High Church party. It is possible to show that the early Tractarians wanted to be faithful to the Prayer Book; however, there are some tracts where enrichment of the present text is desired, e.g., Track 75 ‘On the Roman Breviary’. A significant amount of liturgical revision was done by making additions to the text of the Book of Common Prayer, liturgical interpolations. This was particularly done for the Holy Communion service, and in adding more services than morning and evening prayer.37 Part of the early conservatism of the High Church party was due to historical study of the Prayer Book. In 1823, Dr Charles Lloyd Regius Professor of Divinity in Oxford and later Bishop of Oxford gave a series of lectures on the history of the Prayer Book and its sources. In 1832, William Palmer published Origines Liturgicae which made the ideas widely available. It was therefore easy to show that the contents of the Book of Common Prayer had medieval origins and could be regarded as preserving the Catholic tradition.38 However, further study of history showed that there was a signing with the cross at Confirmation in 1549 Prayer Book and that this book had omitted the Confirmation being performed with chrism. Thus, in 1867 the Rev’d R F Littledale wrote a book called Catholic Revision.39 This listed many suggested changes including the use of chrism and the sign of the cross at Confirmation, and a suggestion to change the wording such that the service cannot be conceived as simply a renewal of baptismal vows. A second significant work occurred in the Church Quarterly Review for 1876. Once again this was a list of proposed changes which in terms of Confirmation suggested a return to the 1549 rite. Official change

In 1852, the Convocation of Canterbury was restored, and in 1861 the Convocation of York. This enabled the church to have its own arena in which issues over ritual could be debated. In 1854, a report was produced suggesting a few changes that might occur to the services, particularly changing the rubrics to enable greater flexibility. Alongside this were several bills introduced to Parliament by Lord Shaftesbury and Lord Ebury trying to

Prayer Book revision before 1928

83

contain ritualistic practices. This led eventually to the formation of a Royal Commission on Ritual in 1867 which hardly looked at Confirmation at all. The Royal Commission finished in 1870 and as a result of this the church deliberated altering the rubrics in light of the Ritual Commission. A second Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline began in 1904 and finished in 1906. The deliberations of the church as a result of it were published in The Convocation Prayer Book 1907.40 This book proposed the possible extending of the question of the renewal of baptismal vows in limited circumstances, but this was not supported by York. Thus, there were much stronger suggestions for change by the parties outside of the official church structure and the timid responses from the Convocations were of little satisfaction to anybody. A look at the wider Anglican Communion In our timeframe, we see the development of the Anglican Communion, both in terms of churches and in concept. The emergence of the Lambeth Conference, an idea from the new world, gave shape to this Communion and a structure to establish it. This can be illustrated using network theory. It is perhaps helpful to illustrate the development by two network diagrams (Figure 4.1). In 1820, England and Ireland were in a United Church (until disestablishment in Ireland). Scotland is an independent Province, but it is recovering from the

South America

USA

Canada

Europe

England

West Indies

South Africa

Ireland

India (including Australia)

Legend Province

Diocese(s)

Figure 4.1 The Anglican Communion 1820.

Chaplains and or missionaries

New Zealand

Scotland

84

Prayer Book revision before 1928

penal laws of the previous century which had much diminished the church. Regarding America, England was at war with America 1812–1815 and thus there were limited church relations and animosities that needed overcoming. There were some overseas dioceses in Canada, West Indies, and Calcutta. These were the beginnings of Provinces, but for these dioceses, bishops are all appointments from England. There are also many chaplaincies and missionary work around the world which grows with the expansion of the missionary societies, both in number of societies and in personnel. Thus, England is a central hub with two ‘star formations’, one on dioceses and the other on chaplaincies/ mission stations (Figure 4.2).41 By the Lambeth Conference of 1930, the situation is more complex. There are now 13 independent Provinces connected to England by the Archbishop of Canterbury calling the Lambeth Conference. They are joined together by the dotted lines. This is a partial mesh topology, but there are other interconnections developing in the mesh with mission work from America and Canada. There are also star networks from England, America, and New Zealand, through overseas missionary work from those Provinces. The number of dioceses, in effect extra provincial to Canterbury, is large, 16, some of the previous missionary districts having become dioceses. Thus, there is considerable development of the network of the Anglican Communion towards increasing complexity. But this is not simply questions of the formation of Provinces, constitutions varied, and this affected the possibility of liturgical reform. England itself is in constitutional reform to enable Prayer Book revision and early constitutions of some Provinces tied them to the Prayer Book and this needed altering, as for example in New Zealand. These complications to the network led to different Provinces being able to reform the liturgy at different rates. Thus, the liturgical reform of Confirmation was not centred on England but a rather complex set of interactions with different causes (Figure 4.3). The map shows a set of interconnected revisions across the Communion. There are the revisions in Spain, Portugal, and Mexico in the 1880s. This is a result of people leaving the Roman Catholic Church over the 1870 doctrine of Papal Infallibility. This movement also included the Old Catholic Churches, with whom Anglicans enter into Full Communion with the Bonn Agreement of 1931. A later agreement will be reached with the Philippine Independent Catholic Church. There is liturgical revision in the Far East due to the Prayer Book not fitting the missionary setting. Indeed, in a number of places, we will see revision being asked for because the setting is one primarily of adult baptisms contra the assumption of the Prayer Book that infant baptism is the norm. Then there are Provinces which had their own processes of liturgical revision and were ahead of England. This would include The Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Church of Scotland. Both churches had eighteenth-century revisions and both continued revision in the nineteenth century. The Church of Ireland was disestablished in 1869/1871 and thus had to do a certain amount of Prayer Book revision in its reorganization.

Prayer Book revision before 1928

UGA

TZA

KEN

SSD

MUS GIB

EGY

ISR

GHA

IRN

NGA

MYS

FLK

SGP ARG

KOR England

Ireland

Scotland

Wales India

South Africa Japan Canada

China

West Indies

New Zealand

USA

CUB

Australia PAN LBR

Figure 4.2 The Anglican Communion 1930.

MEL

85

86 Prayer Book revision before 1928

Figure 4.3 Prayer Book revision of Confirmation.

Prayer Book revision before 1928

87

Thus, there are a number of threads to the revision story that did not begin in England, but after the 1928 crisis, there were Provinces that incorporated the revisions of that book, in their case legally rather than the painful impasse in England. So, a variety of network changes have been happening with dissolved relations, new relationships, and some continuing associations.42 This is in the context of ongoing definitions within the network of itself and different types of external relationships. Scotland

The Episcopal Church in Scotland had most of the Penal Acts repealed in 1792. The remnant of the penal laws made a distinction between clergy who had been ordained in England or Ireland and those who had been ordained in Scotland. The former ministered to qualified congregations, often composed of English people or English soldiers, and used the 1662 Book of Common Prayer. The other congregations were ministered to by priests ordained in Scotland, often much poorer parishes, and who upheld particular Scottish traditions. The bishops of course were all Scottish, but the qualified congregations looked for clergy from England or Ireland. This led to a certain amount of conflict. The church had begun to renew itself with a series of synods reshaping its ministry. In 1809, the canons of the church were revised, and in 1811 the alternative Scottish Eucharist was authorized by the church.43 It is not clear what happened to the alternative Confirmation service which seems to have been used by the bishops. It was not authorized by canon until 1890 and was finally included in the 1912 Book of Common Prayer for Scotland, but there is sufficient evidence to show that certain bishops deviated from the 1662 book at Confirmation by following a version of the Scottish Non-juror tradition as was seen in the previous century.44 In 1845, the Reverend Sir William Dunbar, who was minister at St Paul’s Chapel Aberdeen, wrote to the Bishop of London expressing concern about the situation in Scotland. He viewed himself as working in the English Episcopal chapels in Scotland and called himself a presbyter of the Church of England. He sees these chapels as independent of the Scottish Episcopal Church and is wary of differences in theology and practice between the two churches. The chapel was begun in 1720 and has only had clergy from England or Ireland and had strictly adhered to the 1662 Prayer Book. In 1842, a temporary union was made with the Scottish Episcopal Church and a Confirmation service was arranged; Bishop Skinner was to come and perform the holy ordinance. However, the Rev Dunbar complained because the service differed from the English Prayer Book. He wanted Scottish bishops in the future to guarantee that Confirmation would occur according to the English book. He quotes from a number of Scottish works to show dissimilarities in theology, which indicate the continuation of usages,

88

Prayer Book revision before 1928

nonjuring additions to the service. This includes Bishop Jolly’s catechism of 1829 which says: Q. What is the effect of Confirmation? A. Being anointed with the Holy Ghost, in order to be perfect Christians. Q. How does the Bishop convey the Holy Spirit to him? A. By laying his hands upon him, and praying that he may receive the Holy Ghost. Q. Was there no outward sign or symbol anciently used in Confirmation? A. Yes; the person confirmed was signed and sealed with the sign of the cross, and anointed with the holy chrism or ointment.45 The footnotes explicitly show that the Rev Dunbar objected to the latter ceremonies, consignation and anointing, being included in a Confirmation service. Another issue from the eighteenth century was that of lay and schismatic baptism. There had been a long debate in the Church of England concerning the validity of lay baptism. The debate continued in the Episcopal Church of Scotland and related particularly to Confirmation, as this was the time when people who were transferring from Presbyterianism would reconsider their spiritual life. There was much scholarly debate and a distinct practice evolved. The Forty Lesson Catechism of Bishop George Innis, first printed in 1765, was adopted by Bishop Jolly and continually printed in this period, it said: Q. Is it necessary that baptism be performed by the bishop, or by a clergyman ordained by him, and duly authorized for that purpose? A. Yes; for none can baptize without a commission from Jesus Christ; and it was to the apostles and their successors and substitutes that Christ gave the commission. Q. But may not any Christian baptize in case of necessity? A. No; because he that baptizes must have authority to represent God, and act and promise in His Name; and none can have this authority but those that are commissioned by Christ, as mentioned in the preceding question.46 There was some who supported conditional baptism, as they were unsure of the regularity of Presbyterian practice.47 Indeed, a canon of 1838 sanctioned conditional baptism for those who were doubtful of the validity of their baptism.48 Some, like Bishop Phillpotts, who doubted lay baptism viewed Confirmation as sufficient to make up for any defects, but others favoured conditional baptism.49 In 1886, Bishop Chinnery-Haldane, Bishop of Argyll, required that all those coming for Confirmation who were a convert from Presbyterianism to be conditionally baptized prior to Confirmation.50 This was very controversial drawing much criticism, but it should be noted that the bishop was a friend of Mr Mackonochie, one of the extreme ritualists who

Prayer Book revision before 1928

89

was later to go to prison.51 Liturgically, this approach was expressed by the publication in Scotland of services of conditional baptism and Confirmation.52 Newspapers indicate the practice of the Scottish Episcopal Church for Confirmation. A report from Largs calls Confirmation the reception of ‘the seal of the Spirit’, an Orthodox term for chrismation.53 In Dunkeld, the Bishop held a service of Morning Prayer at 8 am, Confirmation at 9 am and Holy Communion at 10 am.54 By putting the services together, most of those confirmed went on to receive Holy Communion. The Scottish variation in the Confirmation service is also noted in the newspapers. A Confirmation that Muthill is noted as being according to ‘Scotch Use’, an unusual term pointing back to the nonjuring tradition.55 The Bishop of St Andrews testified at the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline to a different form of Confirmation in Scotland.56 There was, however, a growing Tractarian influence in the Scottish Episcopal Church.57 This can be seen in the Edinburgh order of Confirmation for 1907 where the rubrics say that girls should be wearing Confirmation veils.58 Veils was a particular Tractarian innovation. While people previously had been expected to dress smartly for Confirmation, the use of veils was not usual in previous generations even when the wearing of bonnets was common. The separate Scottish tradition finally comes to the fore in the Scottish Book of Common Prayer 1912. Here, an alternative order for the ministration of Confirmation is given which adds to the service, a Bishop’s address, a longer form the renewal of baptismal vows, and the signing of the cross. This is done following the 1549 Book of Common Prayer using the words: N. I sign thee with the sign of the cross [here the Bishop shall sign the person with the sign of the cross on the forehead] and I lay my hands [or hand] upon thee in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.59 This differs from previous Scottish versions of Confirmation with the omission of mentioning the use of chrism.60 America

Controversy over baptismal regeneration had been an issue in America from the very beginning. The draft Prayer Book removed the term from the Confirmation service, but it was included in the official book of 1789. Hobart, third Bishop of New York, was clear that regeneration occurs in baptism. By this, he means: a change of state, from our natural state, in which we have no title to the blessings of the gospel confident, to “regenerate with water and the Holy Ghost, and having received the forgiveness of their sins”.61

90

Prayer Book revision before 1928

This however is dependent upon our repentance, and baptism is of no value unless we fight sin, an old high church view similar to William Wilberforce. Thus, the phrase in the prayer at Confirmation looks back to what has happened in baptism in the context of the service where we commit ourselves to fight against sin. Hobart himself had been a part of a controversy about regeneration, but this developed in America with the accepting of Tractarian views as we saw in previous chapters. The period from 1789 to 1871 was one in which numerous corrections were made to the text of the liturgy. Marshall treats this as one family, as the corrections were frequent but not significant doctrinally.62 The next major revision came in 1892.63 This started at the General Convention of 1880 with the desire to enrich the book and give greater flexibility. Suggestions were brought back to subsequent Conventions, but it was 12 years later that the work was completed.64 Thus, in 1886, 1889, and 1892, various options were considered, including a reading from Acts, various forms of the renewal of baptismal vows, and signing with the cross.65 Apart from the reading of Acts, to make clearer the Biblical basis for Confirmation, many of these suggestions were discarded. William Huntingdon Read commented on some of the difficulties of producing the 1892 service. First, he quotes from an English ritualist: The Confirmation Service, as one of the very poorest in the Anglican rites, stood particularly in need of amendment and enrichment, especially by the removal of the ambiguous word “Confirmation” applied to the acts of the candidates, whereby the erroneous opinion that they came merely to confirm and ratify their baptismal promises, and not to be confirmed and strengthened in virtue of something bestowed upon them, has gained currency.66 He then quotes from an American evangelical: I still hope you will see your way clear to modify the present draft of the proposed Confirmation Office, as it gives a much higher Sacramentarian idea of it than the present, a concession which will greatly please the Sacerdotalists, to which they are by no means entitled.67 Thus, the party divisions were also a factor in the American church, and comments and criticisms of proposals occurred on both sides of the Atlantic. The actual changes finally proposed are in fact quite modest. Hatchett talks of only two significant changes, the presentation and the Scripture reading.68 Confirmation was seen as an office in and of itself that did not need to be connected to any other service. John Henry Hobart had revived Confirmation in the Episcopal Church by being proactive, and Ruth Myers indicates other bishops such as David Greer of New York, Charles Slattery in Massachusetts,

Prayer Book revision before 1928

91

and Anson Graves in Nebraska who likewise travelled around performing Confirmations.69 Canada

The Provincial Synod of Canada was formed in 1861, marking a growing independence. In 1877, the Synod drew up special forms of service, e.g., for the consecration of churches. This is the beginning of the adaptation of the Book of Common Prayer to a Canadian context. Armitage says that the stirrings for change in Canada came as a result of industrial development, the influx of many races and peoples, and the rise of a national spirit.70 The Bishop of New Westminster had approved some alternative Services and Prayers which included an alternative introduction to the Order of Confirmation.71 The General Synod of 1911 made the decision to revise the whole of the Book of Common Prayer. There was a growing awareness of the difference between Canada and England, and the outlook of the present age and 300 years ago. The Church of England in Canada saw itself as ‘engaged in pioneer work’ as compared to the Church of England in an old and settled community. The committee that developed this work was called ‘The Committee on Prayer Book Enrichment and Adaptation’. Some of the enrichments are considered for contextual reasons, and there is a coy reference to the Ornaments Rubric being untouched suggesting an awareness of Anglo-Catholic agendas, but a cool reception of the issues. The process between 1911 and 1914 is set out by Armitage. By 1914, a draft prayer book was published ready to go to the General Synod 1915.72 This was adopted in 1915 and began to be used in this draft form. In this interim period, people were able to make suggestions as to how to improve the text. There was one that influenced the Confirmation service, that of adopting the use of the Revised Version of the Bible in the readings from Scripture rather than the Authorised Version. The final revised text was then approved by the General Synod in 1918.73 The 1921 synod adopted a Canon which finally made it legal.74 Much of the original drafting of changes for Confirmation came from the work of Dr Williams, the Bishop of Huron (1905–1926). He is himself an indication of the developing face of Canada. He was born in Wales in 1853 and trained for the ministry at St David’s College Lampeter. He was a curate in Blaenau Ffestiniog and moved to Canada in 1887 where he became a professor at Huron Theological College. He then ran a parish and became an archdeacon in Canada before becoming Bishop of Huron. He was Metropolitan of Ontario from 1926 to 1931, when he died. The Confirmation service has been particularly enriched in the early part of the service. The candidates are presented to the bishop. The preface is reworked, amplified, and enlarged. There then follows three readings from Scripture, from Acts 8, Acts 19, and Hebrews 5 and 6. These are traditional texts for the justification of Confirmation. There is then a longer form of the

92

Prayer Book revision before 1928

renewal of baptismal vows, which follows suggestions of alternative forms from the upper house in the convocation of Canterbury in 1914. The adjusting of the words was to affect the Canadian context where often many of the candidates are adults, and often they had never had godparents apart from their parents. So, two of the assumptions of how it should work in England were not working in the Canadian context. Other revision

The mission work of the church led to a questioning of the social assumptions of the 1662 Prayer Book. It assumes a stable Christian environment in which most baptisms are of children who are then brought up by godly parents and catechized before Confirmation and then Holy Communion. But what if the majority of candidates are adults? This required some adjusting of the service, as in Korea where baptism and Confirmation were united together. Such questions were also raised in China and New Zealand. There was widespread unease with the initiation rites as they did not fit the mission context. Revision in Ireland will be analysed in the next chapter. In 1910, the Bishop of New Westminster composed an alternative introduction. In Japan, the sheer difficulty of translating the preface into Japanese led to its abandonment. Lambeth Conference 1908

The Lambeth Conference, meeting every ten years, was a gathering of the bishops of the Anglican Communion to consider issues of mutual interest. It began to define the nature of independent Anglican churches in a fellowship together. It eschewed from the beginning being a legislative body, but its comments and resolutions have had an impact throughout the Communion. The encyclical from the 1908 conference made some comments about private revision. The growing experience of the Anglican Communion in different parts of the world and among different races has pointed to the necessity for the adaptation and enrichment of forms of service and worship which have come down to us from other times. Such adaptation and enrichment are advisable, and indeed essential, if our Church is to meet the real needs of living men and women to-day.75 This sounds quite positive and might be an agenda for some radical work. In reality, the issues being discussed at the time were around translation issues for the name of God and clergy, as can be seen in China, and the irrelevance of many of the rubrics as can be seen discussed in England.76 If there was a sense in England that the Book of Common Prayer no longer fitted the context, then it was even more so in the missionary context.

Prayer Book revision before 1928

93

The resolutions suggested ways forward. In resolution 24, we can see that the Book of Common Prayer is seen as a bond of union, a mythology that continued until the 1958 conference. As such this leads to a certain conservatism and desire to retain the Prayer Book. This was particularly so of evangelicals at the time, who ran some of the larger missionary societies such as Church Missionary Society (CMS). Their tendency was to translate the Book of Common Prayer into the vernacular languages.77 However, that, in itself, runs into problems, but resolution 24 sets the direction of intelligibility and the needs of the races. Resolution 24 While the educative value of the Book of Common Prayer and the importance of retaining it as a bond of union and standard of devotion should be fully recognised, every effort should be made, under due authority, to render the forms of public worship more intelligible to uneducated congregations and better suited to the widely diverse needs of the various races within the Anglican Communion.78 It is unlikely today that any Lambeth Conference would want to talk about ‘uneducated congregations’. There is an air of colonial superiority in the text. A further consideration of parental revision suggests the areas that might be changed. Resolution 27 In any revision of the Book of Common Prayer which may hereafter be undertaken by competent authority, the following principles should be held in view: a The adaptation of rubrics in a large number of cases to present customs as generally accepted; b The omission of parts of the services to obviate repetition or redundancy; c The framing of additions to the present services in the way of enrichment; d The fuller provision of alternatives in our forms of public worship; e The provision for greater elasticity in public worship; f The change of words obscure or commonly misunderstood; g The revision of the Calendar and Tables prefixed to the Book of Common Prayer.79 This is a fairly modest agenda and has not as yet grasped the concept of a more radical revision that is implicit in the missionary idea of adaptation to a rainbow of different cultures.

94

Prayer Book revision before 1928

The second period in England 1905–1928 In England in this period, the main issue is of the 1928 Prayer Book. At the end of the Royal Commissions, the Prayer Book was shown to be ‘too narrow’ for the present church and its context and the law should be reformed, to ‘admit of reasonable elasticity’.80 The Archbishops petitioned the government to ask the King to produce Royal Letters of Business. There was caution by the government but on 10 November 1906, the archbishops received a letter from the King and a letter was sent to the Canterbury Convocation authorizing them to debate the Royal Commission.81 Bell describes the process as: Far too long a story to describe the various stages even of the progress to and in Convocation.82 Arguably, this story is yet to be told in its fullness, most historians concentrating on the key strands of eucharist and reservation.83 Bell’s chronology is divided into three periods:84 1 1905–1914, ‘before the war’ 2 1914–1920, the war and immediate aftermath 3 1920–1930, the 1928 Prayer Book Cruickshank argues that most of this new book was complete by 1920 and that the war seems to have had little impact on the process of revision. Indeed, a good deal of the revision was completed before the war. It then had to be steered through Parliament, with the catastrophic failure, and then the bishops had to decide what to do. Davidson quickly bowed out at the end of the process, as he resigned in 1928 to allow the next archbishop time for the 1930 Lambeth Conference. 1906–1920

Once the Letter of Business was received, Convocation began to work on revision. The process was somewhat laborious with four houses of Convocation able to discuss liturgical revision and come up with similar or divergent opinions. Davidson had described the process as ‘independent deliberation with occasional conference’.85 But also some areas had separate subcommittees working on particular areas. Not only that, Davidson set up an Advisory Committee on Liturgical Questions in 1911, giving another body a stake in the process.86 Davidson wanted some evangelical representation on the group.87 A. J. Mason, whom we have seen earlier, suggested two people, T. W. Drury and H. Gee, who eventually were included. This was not an altogether successful body as its relationship to Convocation was not clear, York was not involved with creating it, the terms of reference were vague, and it could not initiate discussions. It ceased work in 1915.

Prayer Book revision before 1928

95

Davidson also wanted to have lay voices in the process. Thus, there was a parallel procedure of structural reform of Convocation leading to the setting up of the National Assembly in 1920. Once this was formed, the whole process of revision recapitulated to include the laity in the deliberations. While this can be seen as exhaustive, it was also exhausting and unwieldy, and contributed to the slowness of the process. It does however lead to extensive material showing the theology of the day which is still a relatively untouched source. Stocks’ Chronological List of Reports up to 1921 and Hellins’ list to 1946 register at least 50 different reports beginning in 1907.88 The process started with the ornaments rubric, Psalter, sentences, and litany to gradually cover the whole book. The main discussions were around reservation and Holy Communion. Confirmation was not a major issue compared to these and is often seen as something on which the bishops were to agree. The York Convocation in 1919 raised the question of, is the gift of the Holy Spirit first given in Confirmation, some objected to that suggestion.89 This was to lead to modification of the earlier text. Canterbury Convocation had discussed Royal Letter of Business 504 and made the minor suggestion that the preface begins with ‘Dearly beloved in the Lord’. Hardly a major amendment; it was accepted. In 1920, the discussion on infant baptism No 528 did suggest that the interrelationship of baptism, Confirmation, and communion needed to be emphasized in both baptism and Confirmation. Thus, only York Convocation raised the major theological issue of the day perhaps indicating a greater acceptance of Anglo-Catholic views in the south and a stronger evangelical voice in the north. Outside of the official process one other proposal is worth noting, the 1913 A Prayer Book Revised.90 This was published anonymously but was the work of Percy Dearmer, and a preface of commendation was written by Charles Gore, Bishop of Oxford. Dearmer was later to contribute to the Grey Book.91 The Confirmation service includes two small but significant changes for 1662. The first question to the candidates is completely recast such that the question is not about reaffirming baptismal promises, rather the question is ‘Do you … come here to seek the grace of Confirmation’?92 This question sweeps away Cosin’s insertion of the renewal of baptismal vows. The second change is to add to the rubrics a laying on of hands and a signing of the candidate (with no suggestion of oil), thus being more like 1549 (but without a change in the words). The impact of the book is not clear, but it contributes to the wideranging debate of the day. Returning to the official process, by April 1920 the Archbishops and Prolocutors of Convocation could reply to the Royal Letters of Business.93 This reply included report 533 Proposals for the Revision of the Book of Common Prayer, a table of lessons, revised Psalter, and the Athanasian Creed. Included in the first item were proposals to revise the Confirmation service.

96

Prayer Book revision before 1928

World War I

Bell suggests that the War produced considerable change and that the eucharist had become more central.94 He later adds that reservation for the communion of the sick had grown because of the War.95 These are two of the key debating points of the new book and to some extent led to its downfall. The War also changed the church’s attitude to praying for the dead, praying for enemies, and belief in purgatory.96 Returning war chaplains were also clear that many in society were alienated from the Prayer Book, a fact ignored by those who were to oppose the new book based on ‘Protestant England’.97 Maiden and Cruickshank differ on whether the War slowed down the process.98 But it would seem not, and the next step was to get the proposals through Parliament. World War I was to have an impact on other countries in the empire. For India, her troops being a key part of the war effort, it renewed the desire for independence. Indeed, there was some opposition to Indian troops in the War at all. For Australia and New Zealand, the war led to a growing sense of national identity, as seen in Anzac Day. Likewise, a sense of being Canadian developed through the War. All of this contributes to conceptions of Provincial independence. There was also much suffering in the War. The UMCA missionaries in German East Africa were interred and the local Christians enslaved in chain gangs.99 These experiences led to a greater sense of independent identities, which contributes to a Provincial and liturgical diversity. Kevin Fielden suggested that the decline in Confirmations from 1914 to 1919 was a result of a reaction against the War being supported by the clergy.100 This is a contested view, as is the narrative of decline in this period, some of this we will come to later.101 Also, we will look at Confirmations on the front. Nevertheless, the War had an impact on church life including Confirmation. The 1928 Prayer Book

The Royal Letters of Business envisage an enactment in Parliament, so the question was, how best to do this. The Church Assembly (Powers) Act 1919 enabled the setting up of the National Assembly. The importance of this was that lay people were involved and this lessened the suggestion that the House of Commons was in some way the house of laity of the Church of England. Davidson wanted to get the book through Parliament without a doctrinal discussion on the floor of the House. Parliament had long ceased to only represent Anglican opinion. Meeting in 1920 the National Assembly appointed a committee to report on the answers to the Royal Letters. This was reported in 1922 (N.A. 60).102 This provoked three alternative proposals, the Green Book, the Orange Book, and the Grey Book. The Green Book was the work of the AngloCatholic English Church Union. The Orange Book was produced by the

Prayer Book revision before 1928

97

moderate Catholic Alcuin Club with much input from Frere. The Grey Book was a group of more liberal people including some war chaplains. There was no contribution by evangelicals who primarily resisted change and were weakening themselves by internal disputes.103 It is not clear that the Green Book had much influence, but it was debated by the bishops and Martell thinks it lingered in the 1920s as a focus of opposition.104 The Orange Book was in parts influential, particularly in South Africa in Confirmation. The Grey book was commended to the bishops by William Temple and had influence in the United States, where parts were authorized. The details of their proposals will be seen in a later chapter. In 1922, the House of Bishops introduced a Revised Prayer Book (Permissive Use) Measure (N.A. 84).105 The Archbishop was flooded with suggestions for change, the vast majority concerning the eucharist. The revision stage began in 1925 first in public but then the bishops at Lambeth Palace. Cosmo Gordon Lang as Archbishop of York said of the process: Let the test of our proposals be not whether they go beyond or fall short of what any party would desire, but whether they give a fair and generous place to each and all.106 Not everyone was so gracious. Bishop Knox and Rev Darwell Stone led opposition in the clergy and Sir William Joynson-Hicks in the laity. The bishops were provided with the ‘quarto’ books, the proposals of N.A. 85 were in the middle and suggestions of clergy and laity on either side.107 A draft book was presented to Convocation in 1927. The proposals were passed in both Convocations and then went to the National Assembly. Majorities were secure in all houses (Table 4.2).108 The story from here goes sour. The book failed to get through the Commons 238 to 205. A revision of the book was made (on key points) which once again got church approval and once again failed in the Commons (266 to 220).109 Various people including evangelicals had roused the nation on a ‘no popery’ ticket.110 Sir William Joynson-Hicks, former Home Secretary, marched from the Church Assembly, where he lost, to campaign in the Commons against the book. This included writing a book The Prayer Book Crisis, which was a Protestant Prayer Book interpretation of English history.111 This was just one of many books and pamphlets on the 1928 debacle. Table 4.2 Voting for the new Prayer Book 1927 Bishops Clergy Laity

For 34 253 230

1928 Against 4 37 92

For 32 183 181

Against 2 59 92

98

Prayer Book revision before 1928

Aftermath and retrospect

This was a huge crisis for the Church of England. The effort to get some freedom from the state had failed. The impact of this is still reverberating almost a century after. It was also of importance in the Anglican Communion, Provinces looking into the English fishbowl. Bell blames church disunity and lack of leadership by Davidson on the failure.112 There were rumblings in favour of disestablishment from some of the bishops and others in the church. The bishops in 1929 recognized that there was no going back and ‘in this present emergency and until further order be taken’ that they would allow the use of the 1928 Prayer Book in the parishes, and this included the use of the 1928 Confirmation rite. Thus, from 1929 to 1965, the Church of England was effectively in legal rebellion with the state, a revolt of 36 years. Those Provinces that had delayed their liturgical revision to see what happened in England carried on anyway, e.g., the United States and Scotland. Some Provinces adopted the 1928 Prayer Book almost completely, e.g., New Zealand and India. A detailed liturgical examination of 1928 was never to come to pass. W. K. Lowther Clarke wrote a short work ‘reconsidering’ the revision, Brightman gave a critique, and a later Liturgical Commission gave some idea of use. Unfortunately, Brightman concentrates on other parts of the books and just questions the headings in the Confirmation service.113 W. K. Lowther Clarke 15 years later comments that ‘much of the new matter is in regular use’.114 However, he is critical of the process, particularly of the bishops drafting the final book. He points to how little there has been in detailed discussion, a comment that could be said to this day. His detailed notes on Confirmation comment extensively on the rubrics. He says the rite has rooted itself in Acts 8 but notes ‘the relevance of which has been disputed by some Protestant scholars’.115 Thus, a doubt is raised as to this explanation of Confirmation. The second alternative set of baptismal vows is seen as appropriate for those baptized as adults, an adaptation long needed. The final blessing is a catena of Pauline passages and was much used and admired. He had further criticisms of process and timing not least that a system that produced a new book without any road-testing was seriously inadequate. A supplement to this retrospect is the 1957 Liturgical Commission survey on the use of the book. Here, Confirmation comes in the category widely used, as well as the baptismal offices. The alternative eucharistic prayer was seldom used, along with prime.116 Conclusion The Anglican Communion came into existence in this period and quickly evolved. The development of Provinces and constitutions that enabled or hindered liturgical reform is an important part of the story. This was assisted by the development of the Lambeth Conference. The Church of England was

Prayer Book revision before 1928

99

a part of, but not the initiator of, liturgical reform in the Communion. The missionary movement and the Tractarian development into ritualism put pressure on the Prayer Book. The missionary movement revealed the social assumptions behind the Prayer Book. In Asia, the church was in a new context where it was a minority, with other religions shaping society. Also, the number of baptisms was primarily of adults not children and this showed the assumption of infant baptism and teenage Confirmation was wanting. While not the fount of change, the Church of England was still influential and the 1928 Prayer Book was adopted in other Provinces, even if its use in England was technically illegal. Notes 1 George K. A. Bell, Randall Davidson: Archbishop of Canterbury. 1 (London: Oxford University Press, 1935). Randall Davidson: Archbishop of Canterbury. Vol 2. (London: Oxford University Press, 1935). 2 J. D. Martell, “The Prayer Book Controversy 1827–1928” (Durham, 1974). 3 John G. Maiden, National Religion and the Prayer Book Controversy, 1927–1928 (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2009). 4 Dan D. Cruickshank, Theology and Ecclesiology of the Prayer Book Crisis, 1906–1928 (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019). 5 Donald Gray, The 1927–28 Prayer Book Crisis: (1) Ritual, Royal Commissions, and Reply to the Royal Letters of Business, vol. 60, Joint Liturgical Studies (Norwich: SCM-Canterbury Press, 2005). Donald Gray, The 1927–28 Prayer Book Crisis 2, vol. 61, Joint Liturgical Study (Norwich: SCM-Canterbury Press, 2006). 6 Herbert Hensley Henson, Retrospect of an Unimportant Life. 1920–1939., vol. 2 (London: Oxford University Press, 1943); Ronald Claud Dudley Jasper, Arthur Cayley Headlam. Life and Letters of a Bishop. (Faith Press; Morehouse-Barlow: London; New York, 1960); Frank Leslie Cross, Darwell Stone, Churchman and Counseler (Westminster: Dacre Press, 1943); Charles Smyth, Cyril Forster Garbett, Archbishop of York (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1960); S. C. Carpenter, Winnington-Ingram, the Biography of Arthur Foley Winnington-Ingram, Bishop of London, 1901–1939 (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1950); John Gilbert Lockhart, Cosmo Gordon Lang (London: Hodder and Stoughton Ltd, 1949); Harold Anson, T.B. Strong, Bishop, Musician, Dean, Vice-Chancellor (London: SPCK, 1949). 7 Geoffrey Cuming, A History of Anglican Liturgy (London: Macmillan 1969). 8 Ronald Claud Dudley Jasper, The Development of the Anglican Liturgy, 1662–1980 (London: SPCK, 1989). 9 Walter Howard Frere, Some Principles of Liturgical Reform: A Contribution Towards the Revision of the Book of Common Prayer (London: John Murray, 1911), p. 9. 10 W. H. Frere, “The Reconstruction of Worship,” The Church Quarterly Review 75 (1913), p. 146. 11 Walter Howard Frere, The Anaphora or Great Eucharistic Prayer: An Eirenical Study in Liturgical History (London: SPCK, 1938), pp. v–vi. 12 Benjamin Gordon-Taylor and Nicolas Stebbing, Walter Frere: Scholar, Monk, Bishop (Norwich, Norfolk: Canterbury Press, 2011), pp. 138–90.

100

Prayer Book revision before 1928

13 Alcuin Benedictus Reid, The Organic Development of the Liturgy: The Principles of Liturgical Reform and Their Relation to the Twentieth-Century Liturgical Movement Prior to the Second Vatican Council (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2005). 14 H. Ellsworth Chandlee, “Liturgical Movement, The,” in A Dictionary of Liturgy and Worship, ed. G. J. Davies (London: SCM, 1972). 15 Bryan D. Spinks, Scottish Presbyterian Worship: Proposals for Organic Change, 1843 to the Present Day (Edinburgh: St Andrew Press, 2020). 16 John R. K. Fenwick and Bryan D. Spinks, Worship in Transition: The Twentieth Century Liturgical Movement (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1995). 17 Raymond John Billington, The Liturgical Movement and Methodism (Aylesbury: Epworth Press, 1969). 18 Massey Hamilton Shepherd, The Liturgical Movement and the Prayer Book: The Twenty-Ninth Annual Hale Memorial Sermon (Evanston, IL.: SeaburyWestern Theological Seminary, 1946). 19 Frank C. Senn, Christian Liturgy: Catholic and Evangelical (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997). 20 A. Giewald, and G. Thomann, The Lutheran High Church Movement in Germany and Its Liturgical Work: An Introduction (Great Britain: Amazon, 2011). 21 For Lutheran Confirmation, see Arthur Christian Repp, Confirmation in the Lutheran Church (Saint Louis, MO: Concordia Pub. House, 1986). For Presbyterians, Richard R. Osmer, Confirmation Presbyterian Practices in Ecumenical Perspective (Louisville, KY: Geneva Press, 1996). For Roman Catholics, Gerard Austin, Anointing with the Spirit: The Rite of Confirmation (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2004). For British Methodists, Neil Dixon, Troubled Waters (London: Epworth Press, 1979). 22 Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline, Minutes of Evidence Taken before the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline. Volume 2 (London: Wyman and Son, 1906), pp. 340–402. 23 Bell, Randall Davidson: Archbishop of Canterbury. Vol 2., pp. 1325–59. 24 Phillip Tovey, Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820, Liturgy, Worship and Society (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014). 25 Mark Dalby, Anglican Missals and Their Canons: 1549, Interim Rite and Roman, vol. 41, Joint Liturgical Studies (Cambridge: Grove Books Ltd., 1998). 26 John Fenwick, The Free Church of England: The History and Promise of an Anglican Tradition (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004). 27 Ronald Claud Dudley Jasper, Prayer Book Revision in England, 1800–1900 (London: SPCK, 1954). 28 Alexander Elliott Peaston, The Prayer Book Revisions of the Victorian Evangelicals (Dublin: APCK, 1963). 29 British Museum, Catalogue of Printed Books: Liturgies (London: W. Clowes and Sons, 1899). 30 Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline, Minutes of Evidence Taken before the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline. Volume 2. pp. 340–402. 31 Charles Henry Davis, Moderate Revision of the Prayer-Book, on the Orthodox Principles of Its Preface, Advocated and Illustrated in a Conciliatory Spirit, to Promote the Union of Sound Protestant-Catholic Churchmen Holding No Extreme Opinions … with Appendices, Etc (J.H. Jackson Seeleys: London, 1853), pp. 41–42. 32 Prayer Book Revision Society, The Book of Common Prayer Revised (London: S D Edwins and Co., 1874), p. 367.

Prayer Book revision before 1928

101

33 R. Bingham, Liturgiæ Recusæ Exemplar. The Prayer Book as It Might Be: Or, Formularies, Old, Revised, and New, Suggesting a Reconstructed and Amplified Liturgy (1863). 34 Christian Layman, A Suggestive Contribution in Aid of the Revision of the Liturgy of the Book of Common Prayer … In Order That Its Scriptural Character May Be More Fully and Effectually Established. (London: Edward A. Mitchener, 1871), pp. 41–43. 35 Ministers and Members of the Established and Nonconformist Churches, The Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, with Other Services. Prepared for Use in the Evangelical Churches, by Ministers and Members of the Established and Nonconformist Churches (W.W. Johnson: London, 1867). 36 Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline, Minutes of Evidence Taken before the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline vol. 1 (London: Printed for H.M.S.O., by Wyman and Sons, 1906), pp. 293–95, 296–308. 37 Dalby, Anglican Missals and Their Canons: 1549, Interim Rite and Roman, 41. 38 W. Palmer, Origines Liturgicae, or, Antiquities of the English Ritual: And a Dissertation on Primitive Liturgies (Francis & John Rivington, 1845). 39 Richard Frederick Littledale, Catholic Revision: A Letter to Charles Thomas, Lord Archbishop of Canterbury (London: G.J. Palmer, 1867). 40 Church of England, The Convocation Prayer Book (London: John Murray, 1907). 41 D. Yang, “What Shape Is Your Network?” (2018), https://www.sendinstitute. org/network-shape/. 42 W. Y. Degby and E. Pelto, “Cross-Border M&A as a Trigger for Network Change in the Russian Bakery Industry,” Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing (2013). 43 Marion Lochhead, Episcopal Scotland in the Nineteenth Century (London: Murray, 1966). 44 Francis C. Eeles, Traditional Ceremonial and Customs Connected with the Scottish Liturgy, vol. 17, Alcuin Club Collections (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1910), p. 119. Episcopal Church in Scotland, The Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church According to the Use of the Church of England, Together with the Psalter or Psalms of David Pointed as They Are to Be Sung or Said in Churches, and the Form or Manner of Making, Ordaining and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests and Deacons, and the Scottish Liturgy and the Permissible Additions to and Deviations from the Service Books of the Scottish Church as Canonically Sanctioned (Edinburgh: Cambridge University Press, 1912). 45 William Dunbar, English Episcopal Chapels in Scotland. A Letter from a Committee of Managers … Of St. Paul’s Chapel at Aberdeen, to The … Bishop of London; Containing a Statement of the Proceedings in the Case of That Chapel, and of Its Minister … Sir W. Dunbar, Bart., Etc (Aberdeen: David Wyllie and Son, 1845), p. 54. 46 Episcopal Church in Scotland, The Church Catechism: To Which Are Added Some Instructions Proper for Young Persons Before They Are Confirmed (Aberdeen: Geo. Clark & Son, 1848). 47 Warwick Elwin, The Minister of Baptism: A History of Church Opinion from the Time of the Apostles, Especially with Reference to Heretical, Schismatical and Lay Administration (London: J. Murray, 1889). 48 Ibid., p. 283.

102

Prayer Book revision before 1928

49 Henry Phillpotts, A Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Exeter at the Triennial Visitation in June, July, August, and September 1842 (London: J. Murray, 1842). 50 Afterwards Chinnery-Haldane James Robert Alexander Haldane, A Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Argyll and the Isles … 1886 (St. Giles’ Print. Co.: Edinburgh, 1886). 51 T. I. Ball, A Pastoral Bishop: A Memoir of Alexander Chinnery-Haldane, D.D.: Sometime Bishop of Argyll and the Isles (London; New York: Longmans, Green, 1907). 52 Episcopal Church of Scotland, Form for the Conditional Baptism and Confirmation of Persons Seeking Admission into the Church (Edinburgh: St. Giles’ Printing Company, 1887). 53 The Scottish Magazine, and Churchman’s Review, vol. 2 (Edinburgh: R Lendrum & Co., 1850), p. 208. 54 Ibid., p. 315. 55 The Scottish Magazine, and Churchman’s Review, vol. 1 (Edinburgh: R Lendrum & Co., 1849), p. 48. 56 Discipline Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical, Minutes of Evidence Taken before the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline: Presented to Both Houses of Parliament by Command of His Majesty Vol. 3. (London: Wyman, 1906), p. 349, section 22,576. 57 William Perry, The Oxford Movement in Scotland (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1933). 58 Episcopal Church in Scotland, Order of Confirmation or Laying on of Hands: Upon Those That Are Baptised and Come to Years of Discretion; as Used in the Diocese of Edinburgh; Together with Forms of Certification of Confirmation and Admission to Holy Communion (Edinburgh: R. Grant & Son, 1907). 59 The Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church According to the Use of the Church of England, Together with the Psalter or Psalms of David Pointed as They Are to Be Sung or Said in Churches, and the Form or Manner of Making, Ordaining and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests and Deacons, and the Scottish Liturgy and the Permissible Additions to and Deviations from the Service Books of the Scottish Church as Canonically Sanctioned, p. 371. 60 See Tovey, Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820,pp. 50–52. 61 John Henry Hobart, A Companion for the Book of Common Prayer, Containing an Explanation of the Service, 4th ed. (New York: The Protestant Episcopal Tract Society, 1838), p. 57. 62 Paul Victor Marshall, Prayer Book Parallels: The Public Services of the Church Arranged for Comparative Study (New York: Church Hymnal Corp., 1989), p. 14. 63 Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, The Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church: According to the Use of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America: Together with the Psalter or Psalms of David (New York: J. Pott & Co., 1892). David N. Griffiths, The Bibliography of the Book of Common Prayer, 1549–1999 (London; New Castle, DE: British Library; Oak Knoll Press, 2002), 1892/5. 64 Ernest Joseph Dennen, Introduction to the Prayer Book (New York: E.S. Gorham, 1906), p. 51. 65 General Convention of the Episcopal Church, “Notification to the Dioceses of the Alterations and Additions in the Book of Common Prayer; Proposed in the

Prayer Book revision before 1928

66 67 68 69 70 71

72 73

74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85

103

General Convention of 1883, and to Acted Upon at the General Convention of 1886” ([Place of publication not identified], 1885). General Convention Episcopal Church, “Alterations and Additions in the Book of Common Prayer (Official)” (1886). Protestant Episcopal Church – Joint Committee on Liturgical Revision, Preliminary Report of Liturgical Committee, 1889. Proposed Alterations and Additions in the Book of Common Prayer (New York: James Pott, 1889). William Reed Huntington, A Short History of the Book of Common Prayer Together with Certain Papers Illustrative of Liturgical Revision, 1878–1892 (New York: T. Whittaker, 1893), p. 151. Ibid., p. 151. Marion J. Hatchett, Commentary on the American Prayer Book (New York: Seabury Press, 1951), p. 266. Ruth A. Meyers, Continuing the Reformation: Re-Visioning Baptism in the Episcopal Church (New York: Church Pub., 1997), pp. 10–11. W. J. Armitage, The Story of the Canadian Revision of the Prayer Book (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1922), p. xi. Church of England in Canada Diocese of New Westminster, Diocese of New Westminster: Services and Prayers, Authorized by Adam, Third Bishop of New Westminster, Administrator of the Diocese of Kootenay: For Use in the Diocese of New Westminster and Kootenay, 1911 (Vancouver: Printed for the Diocese of New Westminster by the Moore Print. Co., 1911). Church of England in Canada, Draft Report of the Joint Committee of Both Houses of the General Synod on the Adaptation, Enrichment and Revision of the Book of Common Prayer (London: Cambridge University Press, 1914). The Book of Common Prayer: And Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church According to the Use of the Church of England in the Dominion of Canada: Together with the Psalter or Psalms of David Pointed as They Are to Be Sung or Said in Churches: And the Form or Manner of Making, Ordaining, and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests and Deacons (Cambridge University Press, 1918); Griffiths, The Bibliography of the Book of Common Prayer, 1549–1999, 1922/1 Ibid., p. 411, 1922.1. William K. Lowther Clarke, Liturgy and Worship: A Companion to the Prayer Books of the Anglican Communion (London: SPCK, 1932), p. 796. Lambeth Conference, Conference of Bishops of the Anglican Communion: Holden at Lambeth Palace, July 6 to August 5, 1908: Encyclical Letter from the Bishops, with the Resolutions and Reports (London: SPCK, 1908), p. 17. S. I. J. Schereschewsky, The Bible, Prayer Book, and Terms in Our China Missions Addressed to the House of Bishops (Geneva, NY, 1888). See Griffiths, The Bibliography of the Book of Common Prayer, 1549–1999, pp. 469–588. Lambeth Conference, Conference of Bishops of the Anglican Communion: Holden at Lambeth Palace, July 6 to August 5, 1908: Encyclical Letter from the Bishops, with the Resolutions and Reports, p. 33. Ibid., p. 34. Bell, Randall Davidson: Archbishop of Canterbury Vol. 1, p. 471. Ibid. Ibid., p. 647. Cruickshank, Theology and Ecclesiology of the Prayer Book Crisis, 1906–1928. Bell, Randall Davidson: Archbishop of Canterbury. Vol 2. Randall Davidson: Archbishop of Canterbury. Vol 1, p. 653.

104

Prayer Book revision before 1928

86 Gray, The 1927-28 Prayer Book Crisis: (1) Ritual, Royal Commissions, and Reply to the Royal Letters of Business, JLS 60, p. 33. 87 Martell, “The Prayer Book Controversy 1827–1928.”, p. 19. 88 John Edward Stocks, A Chronological List of Reports of Committees of Both Houses of the Convocation of Canterbury, 1847–1921 (London, 1921). E. W. J. Hellins, A Chronological List of Reports of Committees of Both Houses of the Convocation of Canterbury, 1928–1946 and 1921–1927 (London, 1928). 89 Convocation of the Province of York, The York Journal of Convocation (York: W.H. Smith & Son, 1919), pp. 62–65. 90 P. Dearmer, A Prayer-Book Revised (London: A. R. Mowbray, 1913). 91 Donald Gray, Percy Dearmer: A Parson’s Pilgrimage (Norwich: Canterbury Press, 2000), p. 165. 92 Dearmer, A Prayer-Book Revised, p. 134. 93 Bell, Randall Davidson: Archbishop of Canterbury. Vol 2, pp. 1327–28. 94 Ibid., p. 1326. 95 Ibid., p. 1333. 96 Peter Waddell, “Guns, Gore and God: Bishop Gore and the First World War,” Journal of Anglican Studies 15, no. 1 (2017), p. 99. 97 Frederick B. MacNutt, The Church in the Furnace; Essays by Seventeen Temporary Church of England Chaplains on Active Service in France and Flanders (London: Macmillan and Co., 1917). John G. Maiden, National Religion and the Prayer Book Controversy, 1927–1928, Studies in Modern British Religious History (Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer, 2009). 98 National Religion and the Prayer Book Controversy, 1927–1928. Cruickshank, Theology and Ecclesiology of the Prayer Book Crisis, 1906–1928, p. 29. 99 A. G. Blood, History of the UMCA. Vol. II. 1907–1932 (London: Industrial Press (Southend) Ltd, 1957). 100 K. Fielden, “The Church of England in the First World War” (East Tennessee State University, 2005), p. 48. 101 Callum G. Brown, The Death of Christian Britain: Understanding Secularisation, 1800–2000 (London: Routledge, 2010), pp. 104–5. 102 Donald Gray, The 1927–28 Prayer Book Crisis 2, vol. 61, Joint Liturgical Studies (Norwich SCM-Canterbury Press, 2006). 103 Maiden, National Religion and the Prayer Book Controversy, 1927–1928, p. 58. 104 Martell, “The Prayer Book Controversy 1827–1928”, p. 31. 105 Bell, Randall Davidson: Archbishop of Canterbury. Vol 2, p. 1329. 106 Lockhart, Cosmo Gordon Lang., pp. 300–1. 107 Martell, “The Prayer Book Controversy 1827-1928”, p. 36. 108 Gray, The 1927–28 Prayer Book Crisis 2, 61., p. 20. 109 Ibid. 110 John G. Maiden, “English Evangelicals, Protestant National Identity, and Anglican Prayer Book Revision, 1927–1928,” Journal of Religious History 34, no. 4 (2010). 111 William Joynson-Hicks, The Prayer Book Crisis (London & New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1968). 112 Bell, Randall Davidson: Archbishop of Canterbury. Vol 2, p. 1356. 113 F. E. Brightman, “The New Prayer Book Examined,” Church Quarterly Review 104, no. July (1927). 114 W. K. Lowther Clarke, The Prayer Book of 1928 Reconsidered (London: SPCK, 1943), p. 1.

Prayer Book revision before 1928

105

115 Ibid., p. 56. 116 Jasper, The Development of the Anglican Liturgy, 1662–1980, p. 127.

Reference list Anson, H. T.B. Strong, Bishop, Musician, Dean, Vice-Chancellor. London: SPCK, 1949. Armitage, W. J. The Story of the Canadian Revision of the Prayer Book. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1922. Austin, G. Anointing with the Spirit: The Rite of Confirmation. Collegeville, MN.: Liturgical Press, 2004. Ball, T. I. A Pastoral Bishop: A Memoir of Alexander Chinnery-Haldane, D.D.: Sometime Bishop of Argyll and the Isles. London; New York: Longmans, Green, 1907. Bell, G. K. A. Randall Davidson: Archbishop of Canterbury. Vol 1. London: Oxford University Press, 1935. Bell, G. K. A. Randall Davidson: Archbishop of Canterbury. Vol 2. London: Oxford University Press, 1935. Billington, R. J. The Liturgical Movement and Methodism. Aylesbury: Epworth Press, 1969. Bingham, R. Liturgiæ Recusæ Exemplar. The Prayer Book as It Might Be: Or, Formularies, Old, Revised, and New, Suggesting a Reconstructed and Amplified Liturgy. Wertheim, Macintosh & Hunt, London, 1863. Blood, A. G. History of the UMCA. Vol. II. 1907–1932. London: Industrial Press (Southend) Ltd, 1957. Brightman, F. E. “The New Prayer Book Examined.” Church Quarterly Review 104, no. July (1927): 219–52. British M. Catalogue of Printed Books: Liturgies. London: W. Clowes and Sons, 1899. Brown, C. G. The Death of Christian Britain: Understanding Secularisation, 1800–2000. London: Routledge, 2010. Carpenter, S. C. Winnington-Ingram, the Biography of Arthur Foley WinningtonIngram, Bishop of London, 1901–1939. New York: Oxford University Press, 1950. Christian L. A Suggestive Contribution in Aid of the Revision of the Liturgy of the Book of Common Prayer … In Order That Its Scriptural Character May Be More Fully and Effectually Established. London: Edward A. Mitchener, 1871. Church of England. The Convocation Prayer Book. London: John Murray, 1907. Church of England in Canada. The Book of Common Prayer: And Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church According to the Use of the Church of England in the Dominion of Canada. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1918. Church of England in Canada. Draft Report of the Joint Committee of Both Houses of the General Synod on the Adaptation, Enrichment and Revision of the Book of Common Prayer. London: Cambridge University Press, 1914. Church of England in Canada Diocese of New Westminster. Diocese of New Westminster: Services and Prayers, Authorized by Adam, Third Bishop of New Westminster, Administrator of the Diocese of Kootenay: For Use in the Diocese of

106

Prayer Book revision before 1928

New Westminster and Kootenay, 1911. Vancouver: Printed for the Diocese of New Westminster by the Moore Print. Co., 1911. Clarke, W. K. L. Liturgy and Worship: A Companion to the Prayer Books of the Anglican Communion. London: SPCK, 1932. Cross, F. L. Darwell Stone, Churchman and Counseler. Westminster: Dacre Press, 1943. Cruickshank, D. D. Theology and Ecclesiology of the Prayer Book Crisis, 1906–1928. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019. Cuming, G. A History of Anglican Liturgy. London: Macmillan 1969. Dalby, M. Anglican Missals and Their Canons: 1549, Interim Rite and Roman. Joint Liturgical Studies. Vol. 41, Cambridge: Grove Books Ltd., 1998. Davis, C. H. Moderate Revision of the Prayer-Book, on the Orthodox Principles of Its Preface, Advocated and Illustrated in a Conciliatory Spirit, to Promote the Union of Sound Protestant-Catholic Churchmen Holding No Extreme Opinions … With Appendices, Etc. London: J.H. Jackson Seeleys, 1853. Dearmer, P. A Prayer-Book Revised. London: A. R. Mowbray, 1913. Degby, W. Y. and Pelto, E. “Cross-Border M&A as a Trigger for Network Change in the Russian Bakery Industry.” Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 28, no. 3 (2013): 178–89. Dennen, E. J. Introduction to the Prayer Book. New York: E.S. Gorham, 1906. Dixon, N. Troubled Waters. London: Epworth Press, 1979. Dunbar, W. English Episcopal Chapels in Scotland. A Letter from a Committee of Managers … Of St. Paul’s Chapel at Aberdeen, to The … Bishop of London; Containing a Statement of the Proceedings in the Case of That Chapel, and of Its Minister … Sir W. Dunbar, Bart., etc. Aberdeen: David Wyllie and Son, 1845. Eeles, F. C. Traditional Ceremonial and Customs Connected with the Scottish Liturgy. Alcuin Club Collections. Vol. 17, London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1910. Ellsworth Chandlee, H. “Liturgical Movement, The.” In A Dictionary of Liturgy and Worship, edited by G. J. Davies, 216–22. London: SCM, 1972. Elwin, W. The Minister of Baptism: A History of Church Opinion from the Time of the Apostles, Especially with Reference to Heretical, Schismatical and Lay Administration. London: J. Murray, 1889. Episcopal Church in Scotland. The Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church According to the Use of the Church of England, Together with the Psalter or Psalms of David Pointed as They Are to Be Sung or Said in Churches, and the Form or Manner of Making, Ordaining and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests and Deacons, and the Scottish Liturgy and the Permissible Additions to and Deviations from the Service Books of the Scottish Church as Canonically Sanctioned. Edinburgh: Cambridge University Press, 1912. Episcopal Church in Scotland. The Church Catechism: To Which Are Added Some Instructions Proper for Young Persons Before They Are Confirmed. Aberdeen: George Clark & Son, 1848. Episcopal Church in Scotland. Order of Confirmation or Laying on of Hands: Upon Those That Are Baptised and Come to Years of Discretion; as Used in the Diocese of Edinburgh; Together with Forms of Certification of Confirmation and Admission to Holy Communion. Edinburgh: R. Grant & Son, 1907.

Prayer Book revision before 1928

107

Episcopal Church of Scotland. Form for the Conditional Baptism and Confirmation of Persons Seeking Admission into the Church. Edinburgh: St. Giles’ Printing Company, 1887. Fenwick, J. The Free Church of England: The History and Promise of an Anglican Tradition. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004. Fenwick, J. R. K., and Bryan D. Spinks. Worship in Transition: The Twentieth Century Liturgical Movement. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995. Fielden, K. “The Church of England in the First World War.” East Tennessee State University, 2005. Frere, W. H. “The Reconstruction of Worship.” The Church Quarterly Review 75 (1913): 139–60. Frere, W. H. The Anaphora or Great Eucharistic Prayer: An Eirenical Study in Liturgical History. London: SPCK, 1938. Frere, W. H. Some Principles of Liturgical Reform: A Contribution Towards the Revision of the Book of Common Prayer. London: John Murray, 1911. General Convention Episcopal Church. “Alterations and Additions in the Book of Common Prayer (Official).” 1886. General Convention of the Episcopal Church. “Notification to the Dioceses of the Alterations and Additions in the Book of Common Prayer; Proposed in the General Convention of 1883, and to Acted Upon at the General Convention of 1886.” [Place of publication not identified], 1885. Giewald, A., and Thomann, G. The Lutheran High Church Movement in Germany and Its Liturgical Work: An Introduction. Great Britain: Amazon, 2011. Gordon-Taylor, B., and Nicolas Stebbing. Walter Frere: Scholar, Monk, Bishop. Norwich, Norfolk: Canterbury Press, 2011. Gray, D. The 1927–28 Prayer Book Crisis 2. Joint Liturgical Study. Vol. 61, Norwich: SCM-Canterbury Press, 2006. Gray, D. Percy Dearmer: A Parson’s Pilgrimage. Norwich: Canterbury Press, 2000. Gray, D. The 1927–28 Prayer Book Crisis: (1) Ritual, Royal Commissions, and Reply to the Royal Letters of Business. Joint Liturgical Studies. Vol. 60, Norwich: SCM-Canterbury Press, 2005. Griffiths, D. N. The Bibliography of the Book of Common Prayer, 1549–1999. London; New Castle, DE: British Library; Oak Knoll Press, 2002. Haldane, afterwards Chinnery-Haldane James Robert Alexander. A Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Argyll and the Isles … 1886. Edinburgh: St. Giles’ Print. Co., 1886. Hatchett, M. J. Commentary on the American Prayer Book. New York: Seabury Press, 1951. Hellins, E. W. J. A Chronological List of Reports of Committees of Both Houses of the Convocation of Canterbury, 1928–1946 and 1921–1927. London 1928. Henson, H. H. Retrospect of an Unimportant Life. 1920–1939. Vol. 2, London: Oxford University Press, 1943. Hobart, J. H.. A Companion for the Book of Common Prayer, Containing an Explanation of the Service. 4th ed. New York: The Protestant Episcopal Tract Society, 1838. Huntington, W. R. A Short History of the Book of Common Prayer Together with Certain Papers Illustrative of Liturgical Revision, 1878–1892. New York: T. Whittaker, 1893.

108

Prayer Book revision before 1928

Jasper, R. C. D. Arthur Cayley Headlam. Life and Letters of a Bishop. London; New York: Faith Press; Morehouse-Barlow, 1960. Jasper, R. C. D. The Development of the Anglican Liturgy, 1662–1980. London: SPCK, 1989. Jasper, R. C. D. Prayer Book Revision in England, 1800–1900. London: SPCK, 1954. Joynson-Hicks, W. The Prayer Book Crisis. London; New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1968. Lambeth Conference. Conference of Bishops of the Anglican Communion: Holden at Lambeth Palace, July 6 to August 5, 1908: Encyclical Letter from the Bishops, with the Resolutions and Reports. London: SPCK, 1908. Littledale, R. F. Catholic Revision: A Letter to Charles Thomas, Lord Archbishop of Canterbury. London: G.J. Palmer, 1867. Lochhead, M. Episcopal Scotland in the Nineteenth Century. London: Murray, 1966. Lockhart, J. G. Cosmo Gordon Lang. London: Hodder and Stoughton Ltd, 1949. Lowther Clarke, W. K. The Prayer Book of 1928 Reconsidered. London: S.P.C.K., 1943. MacNutt, F. B. The Church in the Furnace; Essays by Seventeen Temporary Church of England Chaplains on Active Service in France and Flanders. London: Macmillan and Co., 1917. Maiden, J. G. “English Evangelicals, Protestant National Identity, and Anglican Prayer Book Revision, 1927–1928.” Journal of Religious History 34, no. 4 (2010): 430–45. Maiden, J. G. National Religion and the Prayer Book Controversy, 1927–1928. Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2009. Marshall, P. V. Prayer Book Parallels: The Public Services of the Church Arranged for Comparative Study. New York: Church Hymnal Corp., 1989. Martell, J. D. “The Prayer Book Controversy 1827–1928.” Durham, 1974. Meyers, R. A. Continuing the Reformation: Re-Visioning Baptism in the Episcopal Church. New York: Church Pub., 1997. Ministers and Members of the Established and Nonconformist Churches. The Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, with Other Services. Prepared for Use in the Evangelical Churches, by Ministers and Members of the Established and Nonconformist Churches. London: W.W. Johnson, 1867. Osmer, R. R. Confirmation Presbyterian Practices in Ecumenical Perspective. [in Undetermined] Louisville, KY: Geneva Press, 1996. Palmer, W. Origines Liturgicae, or, Antiquities of the English Ritual: And a Dissertation on Primitive Liturgies. Francis & John Rivington, 1845. Peaston, A. E. The Prayer Book Revisions of the Victorian Evangelicals. Dublin: APCK, 1963. Perry, W. The Oxford Movement in Scotland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1933. Phillpotts, H. A Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Exeter at the Triennial Visitation in June, July, August, and September 1842. London: J. Murray, 1842. Prayer Book Revision Society. The Book of Common Prayer Revised. London: S D Edwins and Co., 1874.

Prayer Book revision before 1928

109

Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America. The Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church: According to the Use of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America: Together with the Psalter or Psalms of David. New York: J. Pott & Co., 1892. Protestant Episcopal Church. – Joint Committee on Liturgical Revision. Preliminary Report of Liturgical Committee, 1889. Proposed Alterations and Additions in the Book of Common Prayer. New York: James Pott, 1889. Reid, Alcuin Benedictus. The Organic Development of the Liturgy: The Principles of Liturgical Reform and Their Relation to the Twentieth-Century Liturgical Movement Prior to the Second Vatican Council. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2005. Repp, A. C. Confirmation in the Lutheran Church. Saint Louis, MO: Concordia Pub. House, 1986. Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical, Discipline. Minutes of Evidence Taken before the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline: Presented to Both Houses of Parliament by Command of His Majesty Vol. 3. London: Wyman, 1906. Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline. Minutes of Evidence Taken before the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline Vol. 1, London: Printed for H.M.S.O., by Wyman and Sons, 1906. Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline. Minutes of Evidence Taken before the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline. Vol. 2. London: Wyman and Son, 1906. Schereschewsky, S. I. J. The Bible, Prayer Book, and Terms in Our China Missions Addressed to the House of Bishops. Geneva, NY 1888. The Scottish Magazine, and Churchman’s Review. Vol. 1, Edinburgh: R Lendrum & Co., 1849. The Scottish Magazine, and Churchman’s Review. Vol. 2, Edinburgh: R Lendrum & Co., 1850. Senn, F. C. Christian Liturgy: Catholic and Evangelical. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997. Shepherd, M. H. The Liturgical Movement and the Prayer Book: The Twenty-Ninth Annual Hale Memorial Sermon. Evanston, IL.: Seabury-Western Theological Seminary, 1946. Smyth, C. Cyril Forster Garbett, Archbishop of York. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1960. Spinks, B. D. Scottish Presbyterian Worship: Proposals for Organic Change, 1843 to the Present Day. Edinburgh: St Andrew Press, 2020. Stocks, J. E. A Chronological List of Reports of Committees of Both Houses of the Convocation of Canterbury, 1847–1921. London 1921. Tovey, P. Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820. Liturgy, Worship and Society. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014. Waddell, P. “Guns, Gore and God: Bishop Gore and the First World War.” Journal of Anglican Studies 15, no. 1 (2017): 88–107. Yang, D. “What Shape Is Your Network?” (2018). https://www.sendinstitute.org/ network-shape/. Convocation of the Province of York. The York Journal of Convocation. York: W.H. Smith & Son, 1919.

5

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

Introduction The Oxford Movement stimulated the climate calling for liturgical reform. The movement had a worldwide impact due to the diffusion of ideas to existing churches and the missionary effort of the church. Evangelicals, particularly those in CMS, tended to translate the Prayer Book into the vernaculars of the mission field with minimum change. High Church missionaries tended to adapt the Prayer Book to their own ideas. This chapter looks at the textual changes in various editions of the Prayer Book. The period is the high period of colonialism and so the narrative of the day is often colonialist in language and perception. I continue to use some of that language to give the flavour of the period, while recognizing its faults. The arrangement of Provinces will follow the order given in the 1930 Lambeth Conference, thus using a contemporary ordering.1 The focus of this chapter is on liturgical text. Some scholars prioritize the text above all other factors.2 Others want to set the text in a social context; thus, the study of liturgy is the study of the use of the text.3 Day has helpfully opened up the meaning of text which in part breaks any impasse in the theory of text in liturgy.4 While this chapter will concentrate on the text itself, the rest of the book is clearly putting the text in a setting. Confirmation is both a text used and a liturgical act. We looked at some of the politics of the text in the previous chapter, and we started with overall theological issues, but now we centre on the text itself. Historically liturgical studies have concentrated on the text. This is in part because with some services we only have the text and no other evidence as to what happened. This is not so for Anglican Confirmation, as there is an abundance of evidence of various sorts, including draft orders, discussion, and proposals for revision. Churches of the Communion Church of England

The 1928 Prayer Book as a crisis in the life of the Church of England has been related in the previous chapter, but it also influenced and was DOI: 10.4324/9781032676876-5

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

111

influenced by liturgical revision in the Anglican Communion. This section will give a more detailed analysis of the liturgical text of most of the Provinces and dioceses. In 1906, Royal Letters of Business were issued and discussion began. Increasingly the question of enrichment came to the fore and by 1914 the main issues had been resolved.5 Actual liturgical text came with the Revised Prayer Book (Permissive Use) Measure, 1923, NA 84 (Table 5.1).6 The National Assembly received proposals from the Convocations and had discussed previous documents with suggestions for liturgical change.7 The changes to the 1662 service in NA 84 are significant. The preface is rewritten to include a reading from Acts 8 and an explanation of Confirmation: Holy Scripture doth here teach us that in Confirmation there is an outward sign, the laying on of hands with prayer, the effectual token of an inward grace which is the strengthening gift of the Holy Spirit to those who rightly receive it … that he will pour forth his Holy Spirit upon those who in Baptism were made his children by adoption and grace.8 This is a complex text. The first half virtually elevates the status of Confirmation to a sacrament. The classic definition of a sacrament includes the ‘outward sign’ with an ‘inward grace’. The word ‘sacrament’ is avoided most probably because the book would then contradict the 39 Articles which say that there are only two dominical sacraments (Article 25). So, in effect the text does not say that Confirmation is a sacrament, while going so far as it dares, to say it is a sacrament. There is also some ambiguity in the second clause which might be interpreted in a two-stage way. This was objected to by Dr Knox, retired bishop of Manchester: A Sacramental character will be given to Confirmation whereby those who have not had episcopal laying-on of hands will be placed outside the Church.9 This perhaps influenced the later episcopal revision committee and the final form of 1928. The other major change of NA 84 was to strengthen the renewal of Baptismal vows. Rather than one question, the candidate is now asked three. This might be seen as strengthening the Protestant view of Confirmation and may well have been seen as such in the day. However, it should be remembered that liturgically Cosin had suggested such a text and that theologically Thorndike would give weight to this approach.10 Perhaps there was an intention to give the impression that different parties in the church had gained ground.

112

Table 5.1 Confirmation in the Church of England

d e f g

h i j k l m

Revised Prayer Book ECU 1923 Green Measure 1923 Book NA84

Title Opening rubrics Preface Renewal of Baptismal vow

Title Opening rubrics New preface Renewal of Baptismal vows Renunciation Confession Commitment

ECU alternative order 1923

Title Rubrics New preface Renewal of Baptismal vow Renunciation Confession Commitment

Versicles and Versicles and responses responses Prayer for sevenfold Prayer for sevenfold gifts gifts

Versicles and Versicles and responses responses Prayer for sevenfold Prayer for gifts sevenfold gift

Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer

Kneel and imposition Confirmation

Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer

Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubric

Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubric

Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Rubric

Prayer for Consignation Chrismation

The peace Collect Blessing

Proposals for revision Alcuin club occasional 1928 … 1923 Grey book offices 1924 Orange book Title Rubrics New preface

Title Revised rubrics New preface

New title Rubric New preface Renewal of vows

Renunciation

Renunciation

Renunciation Confession Commitment

Commitment Commitment Veni Creator Versicles and Versicles and responses – revised responses Prayer for sevenfold Prayer for decent of gifts Holy Spirit and sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer

Address Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect New blessing Rubrics

Prayer for consignation Sign of cross (optional Chrismation) Declaration of communicant status Bishop’s charge The peace Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Blessing of candidates

Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer

Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect New blessing

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

a b c

1662

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

113

The proposals produced several reactions including real concrete liturgical texts. They were from different parties, two basically of Anglo-Catholic background and one of a broad-church group. There were no concrete proposals from Evangelicals who at this point wanted to make no changes (a contrast to previous generations). The books are classified by their colour, Green, Orange, and Grey. The Green Book was produced by the Anglo-Catholic English Church Union.11 The main order follows the 1923 revision. The alternative order replaces the Confirmation prayer with a prayer for consignation. The text is from the 1549 Prayer Book with the addition of chrism. The proposal was not accepted but it did show a growing desire to include chrism. The Gray Book was produced by a group of Broad-Church people including those who had been war chaplains.12 Perhaps the most significant change suggested here was to the preface. There was a move away from the ambiguities of the proposal. the Church follows the example of the Apostles and the teaching of Holy Scripture. The laying on of hands with prayer is an outward sign and pledge of an inward grace which is the strengthening gift of the Holy Spirit to those who rightly receive it.13 It then continues by a reading from Galatians on the fruit of the Spirit. Thus, it follows the sacramental idea of Confirmation but only as a strengthening and avoids questionable interpretations of Acts. This was not taken up in England. The Grey Book did however have a wider influence, parts of it being authorized in America. The Orange Book was a product of the Alcuin Club and possibly the work of Walter Frere.14 This follows the approach of the Green Book alternative proposals but with some tidying up of the wordings. The significant addition is the declaration of communicant status which it takes from the Church of Sweden. The Orange Book was to have considerable influence in South Africa. The final proposals that were taken to parliament, the draft 1928 Prayer Book, did not include any of these proposals.15 There was however a modification to the introduction. In 1919, there had been a debate in the York Convocation about the relation of Baptism to Confirmation and it was suggested that the wording should not diminish the place of the Spirit in Baptism.16 Frere was in the convocation and was amenable to suggestions on this point. This theological point was sufficiently important such that the preface was modified to say: The Scripture here teacheth us that a special gift of the Holy Spirit is bestowed through laying on of hands with prayer … strengthen with his Holy Spirit in Confirmation those who in Baptism were made his children.17

114

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

This is a weakening of NA 84 being vaguer about what ‘the special gift’ was and a stronger declaration of the strengthening approach. Buchanan however points to the Occasional Prayer for Candidates for Confirmation, which is much easier to interpret in a two-stage way.18 The 1928 text was to be used by bishops at Confirmations, even if not approved by Parliament. The Church of Ireland

Events in Ireland had a wider significance and arguably some of this should have been in the last chapter.19 The Church Temporalities Act of 1833 led to the suppression of several Irish bishoprics. This act resulted in the famous sermon in Oxford and the rise of the Tractarian movement. In 1869, the Irish Church Act disestablished the Church of Ireland, and despite opposition, the Act came into force in 1871. This dissolved the United Church of England and Ireland, the union being from 1801, and resulted in an independent Church of Ireland. In 1870, the church started a synod looking for ways to organize themselves. The synod adopted a constitution, raised money for the church upkeep, and accepted a motion for Prayer Book reform.20 There was considerable debate in the General Synod concerning an Irish Prayer Book. There were only a small number of churches influenced by the Oxford Movement, but there were more orthodox high church clergy who did not want extreme change. Another key factor in the church was the Evangelical revival in the 1850s, sometimes called the ‘Ulster Revival’ pushing the church in a Low Church direction. Proposals were brought to the 1871 Synod and those of 1872–1878.21 Alongside the Prayer Book was a revision of the canons which were restrictive of any ‘Catholic’ practice. One example of proposals for revision is the Liturgical Amendment Society (Ireland) which suggested a whole series of amendments to the Prayer Book. This was a more Evangelical group as can be seen in the proposed removal of the reference to Regeneration at Baptism in the Confirmation service to be replaced with the statement that they were baptized, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.22 While sympathetic to this, a moderating voice came from William Conyngham Plunket, Lord Plunket, Bishop of Meath, and later Archbishop of Dublin. Lord Plunket served on the revision committee. His vision was of a comprehensive church that went forward together in the gospel. He was in favour of changing the key phrase ‘Regeneration’ to substitute the term with ‘born again’. He was trying to allow that Regeneration might occur after Baptism, and not just at Baptism, as a compromise position.23 In the end there was a modest revision in 1878.24 In the 1878 service of Confirmation, only two changes were made: to give an alternative to the last collect, and a rephrased and tentative rubric was

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

115

added requiring Confirmation before receiving Communion. A rubric said the bishop may give an address where he thought appropriate. The theology of the rite is explained by John Macbeth, in a historical and mildly orthodox high church commentary on the rite, as a combination of the early church view of being ‘strengthened’ and a reformation approach of ‘renewal of Baptismal vows’.25 The process of Prayer Book revision began in 1909. A committee was formed from the General Synod to look at ways in which the canons and rubrics might be modified without making any changes in doctrine. The purpose of this was to adapt the Prayer Book ‘to the requirements of the present time’. There was a 16-year process of consideration of a large number of proposals.26 The committee had in front of them resolution 27 from the Lambeth conference, the table of suggestions from the Lower House of Convocation of Canterbury in 1908, and the schedule of suggestions for the Scottish Episcopal Church.27 One of the suggestions in the 1912 proposals was to add an introduction to Confirmation. There were further proposals in 1913 in a protracted process through the diocesan synods. The production was very slow between 1921 and 1926 due in part to the political situation (Table 5.2). Table 5.2 Confirmation in the Church of Ireland 1662

1878

1926

Title Opening rubrics Preface

Title Opening rubric Preface

Renewal of Baptismal vow

Renewal of Baptismal vow

Title Opening rubric Preface [Bishop’s address] Renewal of Baptismal vow

Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer

Versicles and responses Prayer of sevenfold gifts

Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect

Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect

Episcopal blessing

Episcopal blessing Rubric re adult Baptism Final rubrics

Final rubric

Kneeling and imposition Confirmation prayer

Renunciation Confession of faith Commitment to the commandments Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneeling and imposition Confirmation prayer [Hymn and address] Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect [Hymn] Blessing Rubric re-adult Baptism Final rubric

116

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

Michael Kennedy sees the expansion of the commitments at the beginning as following Bishop Cosin.28 While the revision that occurred was fairly minor, and mostly practical, the book was to turn into a much-loved version of the Prayer Book. The Episcopal Church in Scotland

Some of the history of revision of Confirmation in Scotland is both in a previous book and in the previous chapter.29 Variations in the different rites are given in Table 5.3. The liturgical additions in the Edinburgh 1907 service are important for similar practices in England that were revealed at the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline, but with the disapproval of the Commission. It is also important to acknowledge that the ‘lay Baptism’ controversy (i.e., people being unsure of their Baptism because the minister Table 5.3 Confirmation in the Scottish Episcopal Church BCP 1662

Edinburgh 1907

BCP 1912

SBCP 1929

Title

An Order of Confirmation

Title

Opening rubrics

Rubrics include Confirmation veils Hymn Bishop’s Address Three questions to the candidate

An Alternative Order for the Ministration of Confirmation Rubric

Preface Renewal of Baptismal vow Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubric

Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and hymn ‘Come Holy Ghost’ Signing with cross Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Hymn Episcopal blessing Quietly go home

[Bishop’s address] Three questions to the candidate Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Signing with cross Confirmation prayer

Opening Rubrics From Canon 29 New Preface 3 questions to the candidate Rubric against interpolations Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition

Lord’s prayer Collect Collect

Signing with cross Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect

Episcopal blessing

Episcopal blessing

Liturgical greeting

Final rubrics

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

117

was not episcopally ordained) was also strong in Scotland. There was even published a service of Conditional Baptism and Confirmation in 1887.30 The 1929 Book of Common Prayer had in the Catechism: Question. What is Confirmation? Answer. Confirmation is an apostolic and sacramental rite by which the Holy Spirit is given to complete our Baptism, so that we may be strengthened in our Christian life. Question. How did the Apostles administer Confirmation? Answer. The Apostles administered Confirmation by praying that the Holy Spirit might come down upon those who had been baptized, and by laying their hands upon them.31 It has a new introduction to the Confirmation service adapting the English 1928 service, with ‘a special gift of the Holy Spirit’ being bestowed. The second question includes the candidates saying the Apostles Creed. Thus, Scotland having an already high church tradition of Confirmation included elements from the English 1928 Prayer Book. The Church in Wales

The Act to disestablish and disendow the Church in Wales was passed in 1914.32 Due to the War, its enactment was delayed, and further legislation followed such that the Province was finally formed in 1920. Having been a part of the Church of England, the Church in Wales at first continued to use the 1662 Book of Common Prayer. However, an adaptation of the 1662 rite was produced that included various additions from the 1928 Prayer Book. This was called The Churchpeople’s Prayer Book and was commended by the Archbishop of Wales.33 The book was the work of the Bishop of Monmouth, Gilbert Cunningham Joyce.34 Although commended in Wales, it was also used in some of the border dioceses. The foreword introduces the book with some specific characteristics. First, it upholds scrupulously the doctrine of the Book of Common Prayer. Second, it has added resources to meet the needs of the present-day worshipper. Thus, it defines itself as a strictly limited experiment in revision. There are also further changes that are explanatory of the language. Once again, there is, on the one hand, a sense of loyalty to the Book of Common Prayer, but, on the other hand, a realization of it no longer relating to present circumstances (Table 5.4). In the Confirmation service, the changes are very few: a heading to indicate the renewal of Baptismal vows separates this from the act of Confirmation; a space for a bishop’s address; and the introduction of the Veni Creator. This is however following the order of service from Truro unfavourably mentioned in the Royal Commission for Ecclesiastical Discipline and is indicative of the progress of Anglo-Catholic views in the Church in Wales.

118

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

Table 5.4 Confirmation in the Church in Wales 1662

1928

1935 Churchpeople’s Prayer Book

Title Opening rubrics Preface Renewal of Baptismal vow

New title Rubric New preface Renewal of those

Title Preface Renewal of Baptismal vow

Renunciation Confession Commitment Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubric

Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect New blessing

Bishops address Veni Creator Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Blessing Final rubric

The Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America

The previous chapter tracked the liturgical revision in the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America (PECUSA) in the nineteenth century. Another round of suggestions to improve the Prayer Book came in 1913 and the following years. The report from the commission suggested extending the renewal of Baptismal vows, changing the act of Confirmation to a performative, ‘I confirm thee’ and reciting the Apostles Creed.35 The second report removed the suggestion of the Creed, added a possible hymn, e.g., Veni Creator, allowed the option of signing with the cross, and created an exhortation by the bishop after Confirmation.36 This was followed by a third report which was simpler, exchanging the preface for a presentation, extending the renewal of Baptismal vows, and keeping the bishop’s exhortation.37 A fourth report continued the process towards the 1928 Prayer Book (Table 5.5).38 The 1928 changes are also very modest. Massey Shepherd sees the service in two parts: the renewal of Baptismal vows, which he sees as a reformation addition, and the ancient prayer for the blessing of the Holy Spirit. He asserts that the lesson should not be read to suggest that the candidate did not receive the Holy Spirit at Baptism. He intimates that anointing with oil was never prohibited and so applauds the restoration of oil in the Scottish and South African rites.39 Hatchet sees the lesson as important in the context of being surrounded by churches that deny Confirmation. He also notes the 1549 wording and seems to say that chrism could be used and is desirable.40

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

119

Table 5.5 Confirmation in PECUSA 1662

1789

1892

1928

Title Opening rubrics Preface

Title Rubric Preface

Renewal of Baptismal vow

Minor change to 1662

Title Rubric Preface Presentation Lesson Acts:8 Renewal of Baptismal vow

Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer

Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Who art

Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Who art

Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubrics

Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubrics

Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubrics

Title Rubric Preface Presentation Lesson Acts:8 Renewal of Baptismal vow Promise to follow Jesus Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Who art and with doxology Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubrics

India

In 1833, with the creation of Dioceses in Bombay and Madras, the Anglican Church in India became a third province of the Church of England with Calcutta as Metropolitan. The Church of India, Pakistan, Burma, and Ceylon became an autonomous Province in 1930. The first meeting of the Provincial Synod authorized the use of the English 1928 Prayer Book.41 But soon it revised the liturgy creating an Indian variant which particularly stressed the place of witness and mission, through the influence of Bishop Azariah of Dornakal. This it did by modifying the introduction and adding a further question in the renewal of Baptismal vows ‘Do ye acknowledge yourselves bound to confess the faith of Christ crucified…’.42 While these are minor changes, they do show a different context of the church (Table 5.6). The quest for church unity threw up questions of the nature of episcopacy and the connection to Confirmation. We noted in a previous chapter how the Baptismal Regeneration controversy pushed away a number of Free Churches, even leading to a change in their liturgy. Now the movement is in the opposite direction.

120

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

Table 5.6 Confirmation in The Church of India, Pakistan, Burma, and Ceylon 1928

CIBC

An alternative order of Confirmation Rubric New preface

Order of Confirmation Rubric Preface with extra paragraphs stressing mission Renewal of vows Renunciation Confession Commitment Pledge to witness Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Kneel and imposition Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect New blessing

Renewal of vows Renunciation Confession Commitment Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect New blessing Church of England in Canada 1918

The history of revision has already been explained in Canada. The liturgical changes are set out in Table 5.7. Table 5.7 Confirmation in the Church of England in Canada 1662

Draft 1914

1918

Title Opening rubrics

Title Rubric Presentation Preface Readings from Scripture Renewal of Baptismal vow Renunciation Declaration of faith Commitment of life Versicles and responses Prayer for the sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubric

Title Rubric Presentation Preface Readings from Scripture Renewal of Baptismal vow Renunciation Declaration of faith Commitment of life Versicles and responses Prayer for the sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubric

Preface Renewal of Baptismal vow

Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubric

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

121

Armitage describes the service as one that stands alone and complete. As such the Canadians have gone in the direction that Bishop Cosin was suggesting at the 1662 revision. The evaluation of Philip Carrington, Bishop of Québec 1937–1944, and Archbishop and Metropolitan of Canada 1944–1960 was ‘it served well for 40 years’.43 The Church of England in Australia

The first bishop in Australia was Broughton consecrated in 1836. Prior to that he had been archdeacon of Australia, from 1829, when Australia had been part of the Diocese of Calcutta. Bishop Daniel Wilson of Calcutta had authorized him to admit people to Communion without Confirmation: The permission for the young to approach the Lord’s Table when “desirous” of Confirmation is allowed by the rubric. The examination of them privately and the decision upon their qualifications all fall within the office and duty of a presbyter. Of course you would not read the Confirmation service, nor proceed to imposition of hands, nor pronounce the Apostolic Benediction which has ever been accounted (with ordination, jurisdiction, correction of doctrine and discipline, and superintendence) the peculiar spiritual province vested in the office termed “Episcopal.” Any solemnity which can be given to your examination and admission to the Holy Communion (short of these specified things) would of course be most desirable at your distance from your diocesan.44 The archdeacon wrote to clergy in Tasmania explaining what he intended to do in the service of admittance: If there be any young persons, not under fourteen years of age, willing to take upon them the “vows and promises made for them in Baptism,” and whom upon examination you shall deem properly qualified, I shall be desirous, as I have before stated, of admitting them publicly to that engagement. Immediately after the Nicene Creed I should feel satisfaction in delivering an address to them, and in receiving their promises according to the form directed by the “Order of Confirmation” omitting only the imposition of hands and the collect having reference to it. After this I should propose to administer the Holy Communion to such of these young persons as may have beforehand declared to you their disposition to become partakers, and of whose fitness you may be satisfied. At the same time, of course I am desirous that any others of the congregation who are willing should also communicate. My address to the young people, though not delivered from the pulpit, will be in lieu of a sermon, as I conceive the service will be long enough.45 This is quite an unusual practice. Admission to Communion without Confirmation occurred in England occasionally in the eighteenth century.46

122

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

It was also necessary in colonial America, and John Wesley admitted people in Savannah. Similarly, the practice occurred in the Channel Islands, where there are records in the service register of this happening, until 1818 when the first bishop visited.47 Admission without Confirmation also occurred in Aotearoa before Bishop Selwyn.48 This is the first instance of a presbyter using the Confirmation service, omitting the laying on of hands and relevant prayers, to admit to Communion. Church of the Province of Southern Africa 1934/1954

The manner of revision in South Africa was extremely slow. This is in part because of the process that was set up in the canons and constitution of the church, which set revision over two triennial synods.49 Liturgical reform started in 1911 with a schedule of ‘Suggestions and Adaptations of Services’, but there was nothing here on Confirmation.50 It finished with A Book of Common Prayer for Use in the Church of the Province of South Africa 1954.51 For much of this time the debate centred around the Eucharist, and in particular the Eucharistic prayer.52 Of particular importance in South Africa was the work of Walter Frere, e.g., Some Principles of Liturgical Reform, and the mission of the Community of the Resurrection, of which he was part, with their influential houses in South Africa.53 The events in England were closely followed in South Africa.54 Revision of Confirmation began in 1919 with the permission of bishops to use the proposed rite drawn up by the English convocations.55 This in England was followed in 1923 with Revised Prayer Book Measure (NA 84) which was an important document, particularly the Confirmation preface. A development from this discussion was the production of an Office for the Admission of Catechumens as adult Baptism was still significant within the church and particularly in African congregations.56 The church had not caught up with the fact that there were places where the majority of Baptisms were adult Baptisms and the 1662 context of infant Baptism followed years later by Confirmation was not the South African context. In 1922, Fr. Hebert of the Society of Sacred Mission made a series of proposals concerning Baptism and Confirmation; this did not impress the bishops. In 1926, An Alternative Form of the Occasional Offices of the Church was proposed by the bishops being a mixture of NA 84 and features taken from the ‘Orange Book’.57 A further intervention was led by Canon Gould in 1928 where he drafted a single right of an admission of catechumens, blessing of the font, Baptism, and Confirmation. This was perhaps too radical for the bishops and in 1934 An Alternative Form for the Calendar and Occasional Offices came to the Provincial Synod and was approved and re-approved in 1939.58 These were finally incorporated into the 1954 Prayer Book, but most of the work was complete in the 1920s and 1930s (Table 5.8).

Table 5.8 Revision of Confirmation in Southern Africa English Draft Revision 1919

NA 84 1923

Alcuin club 1926 Alternative 1934 Alternative 1954 Prayer occasional offices Occasional Offices Occasional Offices Book 1924 Orange book

Title Opening rubrics Preface Renewal of Baptismal vow

Title Opening rubrics New preface Renewal of Baptismal vows Renunciation Confession Commitment

Title Rubrics New preface Renewal of Baptismal vows or Renunciation Confession Commitment

Title Revised rubrics New preface

Title Rubrics New preface Renewal of Baptismal vows

Title Rubrics New preface Renewal of Baptismal vows

Title Rubrics The introduction

Renunciation

Renunciation Confession Commitment

Renunciation Confession Commitment

Veni Creator Spiritus Versicles and responses Prayer for decent of Holy Spirit and sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Sign of cross (optional Chrismation)

Veni Creator Spiritus Versicles and responses Prayer for decent of Holy Spirit and sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Sign of cross (optional Chrismation)

Renunciation Confession Commitment Renewal of promise Veni Creator Spiritus Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts

Commitment

Versicles and Versicles and Versicles and Versicles and responses responses responses responses Prayer for Prayer for Prayer for Prayer for decent sevenfold gifts sevenfold gifts sevenfold gifts of Holy Spirit and sevenfold gifts Kneel and Kneel and Kneel and imposition imposition imposition Prayer for consignation

Kneel and imposition Sign of cross (optional Chrismation)

123

(Continued)

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

1662

124

1662

English Draft Revision 1919

NA 84 1923

Alcuin club 1926 Alternative 1934 Alternative 1954 Prayer occasional offices Occasional Offices Occasional Offices Book 1924 Orange book

Confirmation prayer

Confirmation prayer

Confirmation prayer

Sign of cross (optional Chrismation) Declaration of communicant status Bishop’s charge The peace

Confirmation prayer

Confirmation prayer

Confirmation prayer

Declaration of communicant status

Declaration of communicant status

Declaration of communicant status

Liturgical greeting

Liturgical greeting

Lord’s prayer Collect

Lord’s prayer Collect

Lord’s prayer Collect

Collect Blessing of candidates

Collect Blessing of candidates Final rubric

Collect Blessing of candidates Final rubric

Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Collect New blessing

Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect

Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect

Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect

Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubric

Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubric

Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubric

Final rubric

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

Table 5.8 (Continued)

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

125

The 1926 An Alternative Form of the Occasional Offices of the Church shows the incorporation of various features. There is a strengthened introduction with the Samaria reading. This is followed by: Holy Scripture here teaches us that in Confirmation there is an outward sign, the laying on of hands with prayer, the spiritual token of an inward grace, which is the strengthening gift of the Holy Spirit.59 This is one of the strongest statements in a Confirmation preface. The three questions in the renewal of Baptismal vows follow English suggestions. A rubric suggesting singing Veni Creator or some other hymn was a common interpolation to the text in high church circles in England. The consignation with optional chrism had been suggested in the Orange Book but also connects with Scottish practice. The declaration of communicant status is likewise from the Orange Book. The closeness to the English discussion and high church practice is partially because Gray, though not a Tractarian, encourages high church clergy to come to South Africa. Also, because most of the clergy were originally from England and kept an eye on what was happening ‘at home’. There was at this point little input from African clergy. A further factor was the work of the Community of the Resurrection in South Africa, and thus a strong connection with Walter Frere, who was in correspondence with people in South Africa.60 The 1926 alternative form remains unchanged right through to the 1954 Prayer Book. The alternative forms were reissued every decade (1936, 1946) until the final book was created, but this is just outside our period. F. C. Synge has some stinging comments about the service, which while published later would equally apply to the 1926 version.61 He is critical of the Acts lesson as it might imply that the candidates have not received the Holy Spirit and that this is reinforced by the statement of the bishop after Confirmation that ‘you have received of God the gift of His Holy Spirit’. This he argues is contradicted by statements in the Baptismal service and the beginning of the prayer for the sevenfold gifts. So, he finds it ‘incoherent’. The Church of the Province of New Zealand 1934/1955

The events of 1928 were closely followed in New Zealand which like other Provinces had a constitution linking them to the Church of England by the 39 Articles and the 1662 Book of Common Prayer. There had, however, already been moves towards a more independent position; thus, the Fifth General Synod was of ‘the branch of the United Church of England and Ireland’ in 1871 but by the Sixth General Synod in 1874 the church had changed its name to ‘The Church of the Province of New Zealand’.62 The Church Chronicle in 1927 noted three good reasons for Prayer Book reform: first that the old book reflects a different historical context which is

126

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

not appropriate for today; second that much of the phraseology needs improving; third that there are needs today not addressed in the old prayer book, for example the need for prayers for missionary work, and the need to pray for Confirmation candidates. The assumption that seems to be in the article in the Church Chronicle, and in the covering letter, was that New Zealand would follow England in adopting the new book.63 The letter points out that this would require some constitutional changes.64 New Zealand dealt with the parliamentary rejection in England in its own particular way. In 1934 it noted that the legislative requirements had not been fully enacted and thus the House of Bishops decided that some of the provision from the English 1928 Prayer Book would be allowed to be used in that the bishops would not question their use.65 This applies to Confirmation which was included in the list of services. It would not be until 1955 that a schedule of approved services gave the 1928 material full authorization as alternative services.66 The process of quietly allowing 1928 services to be used and finally their authorization prior to a second round of liturgical revision parallels very closely the situation in England.67 Japan

After Japan reopened to the wider world, American, Canadian, and British missionaries began work in 1859. Prayer Book translation was part of their mission. In England, terminology was used of the mission as ‘outside the empire’, but a less ethnocentric view might be of ‘mission in the Japanese Empire’. The period of the book sees the growing industrialization of Japan, and imperial ambition with the annexation of Korea in 1910, and the invasion of Manchuria in 1931. Nippon Sei Ko Kai became a Province in 1930. There were several translations of the Prayer Book beginning with Morning and Evening Prayer in 1876/1877.68 Selecting five of the Prayer Books of this period, we see the development of the Confirmation liturgy (Table 5.9).69 The 1891 Prayer Book is a faithful rendition of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer in a classical style. There is a certain amount of seeking the right terminology, using a loan word for bishop ‘episcopo’ according to the 1887 canons of the church. The 1895 book is the final book of the early phase and the first complete prayer book. It incorporates aspects of both the English and American traditions. The 1662 Preface is abandoned. It is not the most felicitous English and complex to translate. Instead, a presentation was included from American texts. The 1938 book has both American and English 1928 influences, but like the rest of the revisions in the period is quite modest in its amendments. It is distinctive of Japanese liturgy in this period that it incorporated both English and American traditions.

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

127

Table 5.9 Confirmation in Nippon Sei Ko Kai 1662

1891

1895

1915

1938

Order of Confirmation

Firm belief ceremony

Rubrics Preface

Rubrics Preface

Renewal of Baptismal vow Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubrics

Renewal of Baptismal vow Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubrics

Laying on of Laying on of Laying on of hands of the hands of the hands of the laity laity laity Rubrics Preface Preface Introduction Acts 8: 14–17 Acts 8: 14–17 Presentation Presentation Presentation Acts 8: 14–17 Duties of Duties of Duties of candidates candidates candidates Renewal of Renewal of Renewal of Baptismal Baptismal Baptismal vow vow vow Versicles and Versicles and Versicles and responses responses responses Prayer for Prayer for Prayer for sevenfold sevenfold sevenfold gifts gifts gifts Kneel and Kneel and Kneel and imposition imposition imposition Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation prayer prayer prayer Liturgical Liturgical Liturgical greeting greeting greeting Lord’s prayer Lord’s prayer Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Collect Collect Collect Collect Episcopal Episcopal Episcopal blessing blessing blessing Final rubrics Final rubrics Final rubrics

China

Missionary work resumed in the Chinese Empire after the shameful imperialistic opium wars and the annexation of Hong Kong in the 1842 Treaty of Nanking. The English conception was of mission ‘outside the empire’; in fact, it was Anglican mission in the Qing dynasty of the Chinese Empire. This was a complex period with several internal rebellions and wars with Japan. Chung Hua Sheng Kung Hui became a separate Province in 1912. Translating the Prayer Book was a part of the missionary enterprise beginning in 1847/1848.70 Like Japan, there were American, English, and Canadian influences. The history of and questions about translation in Chinese Prayer Books are well documented but the study of them is in their beginnings.71 Two prayer books will illustrate some of the developments (Table 5.10). Schereschewsky was an American missionary and collaborated with Burdon to produce a book based on 1662 and the American 1879 Prayer Book.72

128

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

Table 5.10 Confirmation in Chung Hua Sheng Kung Hui 1662

Burdon and Schereschewsky 1872

Lushington (North China) 1937

Title Opening rubrics

Title Opening rubrics

Title Rubrics including for adults

Preface

Preface (slightly modified)

Renewal of Baptismal vow

Renewal of Baptismal vow

Versicles and responses

Versicles and responses

Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubrics

Prayer for sevenfold gifts (slightly modified) Kneel and imposition of hands Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect – modified Collect Episcopal blessing

Invocation Presentation and prayer Preface with Acts 8 or sermon Renewal of Baptismal vow Individual answers Versicles and responses Prayer for candidates and Veni Creator Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Episcopal exhortation and blessing Hymn

The changes are only minor. The 1937 North China book shows Tractarian and 1928 influences. Lushington was a controversial appointment as bishop and opened the church to Tractarian ideas. One of the problems in China was the assumption by foreign prayer books of candidates mostly being babies and Confirmation at adolescence. This simply did not fit the context, where most candidates were adults. This may explain an 1879 Chinese Prayer Book having two Confirmation services one for children and one for adults.73 The North China book adds a rubric to say adults should be confirmed right after Baptism. This worked where there were many adult catechumens who could be baptized on an episcopal visit. There is a presentation from the American 1928, the new preface includes Acts 8 like England 1928 with the laying on of hands as ‘an external sign’. The singing of Veni Creator was an interpolation in Tractarian churches; here it is included in the rite. Events overtook the Province before it was able to complete a Provincial Prayer Book.

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

129

Extra-provincial Korea

Anglican Mission began in Korea with a missionary Bishop Charles Corfe in 1899, the period of the Korean Empire. The first five years of the mission were spent in immersing the missionaries in Korean culture. Evangelization began after that. The bishop of Korea worked with the Chinese bishops but during this period it was extra-provincial to Canterbury. Bishop Charles Corfe explains some of the missiological approach and the actions of the church in an early book.74 In this early period, they did not translate a service of infant Baptism because almost all candidates for Baptism were adults. They were admitted as catechumens.75 They then went into a period of Christian education and formation. The Korean Catechism had a section on Confirmation. 173. Are there any other Sacraments besides the two chief Sacraments which Christ ordained in His Church? There are five lesser Sacraments which have come down to us from the time of the Apostles until now. 174. What are they? Confirmation, Penance, Holy Orders, Holy Matrimony, and the Visitation of the Sick. 75. Are all these five of equal importance? No, Confirmation all Christians must receive when they come to years of discretion … 176. What is the outward sign in Confirmation? The imposition of the Bishop’s hands on the head of the Christian and the prayer for the descent of the Holy Spirit. 177. What is the spiritual grace of Confirmation? At Confirmation, the Holy Spirit comes upon the Christian and bestows on him His sevenfold gifts that he may become a brave soldier of Jesus Christ, 178. How often may Confirmation be received? Only once. 179. Who administers Confirmation? The Bishop. 180. How must Christians prepare for Confirmation? They must resolve heartily to act all their lives in accordance with the vow they made to God when they were baptized.76 This expresses a broad approach which could be read as following Mason but is probably a more traditional Tractarian approach. For early liturgical translation, the adult Baptism service and Confirmation were in the first services translated.77 Baptism was

130

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

administered on the three great festivals with Confirmation occurring immediately after Baptism; thus, the first section of introduction and renewal of vows was omitted.78 The reading from Acts was added in 1905 under the influence of the American Prayer book.79 A more Anglo-Catholic book was produced in 1939. Zanzibar

The UMCA came to Zanzibar in 1846. Bishop Frank Weston (Bishop 1907–1924) found that he needed to create a diocesan liturgy as there was constant pressure for change as each new missionary came out from England with the latest ‘Catholic’ ideas.80 His missiological approach was to try to avoid westernizing Africans before they became Christians and saw Christian faith and the Church as the fulfilment of African religious hope. A vernacular architectural tradition was developed.81 There were also adaptations of local tribal initiation.82 The liturgical renewal began with the ‘Zanzibar Breviary’ and an Evensong offprint all in Swahili. In the 1920s, they were negotiating with the Society of Saints Peter and Paul for the publication of a number of volumes of liturgy. In a letter between Townend and Canon Spanton, the whole programme of publication is set out.83 There are to be ‘two’ volumes of Sala (prayer) 1 Sala 1. This is the Zanzibar Breviary and the Evensong offprint.84 2 Sala 2 comes in two parts i Sala 2 (i) This is what is needed for Sunday, primarily a missal.85 ii Sala 2 (ii) This is ‘other matter’ including Confirmation ‘Kipa Imara’.86 They also published a lectionary and translated the Bible, particularly the Apocrypha which they wanted for lessons and canticles. Some of the money for this was raised by Bishop Weston at an Anglo-Catholic congress. He worked through the creation of the breviary, but died before completing Sala 2, which was revised and completed by Bishops Birley and Lucas. The Confirmation liturgy of Zanzibar is an adapted version of Anglican Confirmation with prayers from 1662, the Sarum rite, and Roman Catholic sources (Table 5.11).87 It starts by removing all the additions of renewing Baptismal vows and begins in the same place as the Sarum rite. The prayer for the sevenfold gifts with Amens is also from Sarum and is more responsorial, an adaptation to Africa perhaps. The making of the sign of the cross in oil is pre-reformation and then the ending of the service is a reordering of 1662 with ‘Defend O Lord’ being returned to an intercession over all the candidates.

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

131

Table 5.11 Confirmation in the Diocese of Zanzibar 1662

Zanzibar Confirmation

Order of Confirmation Opening rubrics Preface Renewal of Baptismal vow

Sakramenti ya Kipa Imara Rubrics

Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Kneel and imposition Confirmation prayer Liturgical greeting Lord’s prayer Collect Collect Episcopal blessing Final rubric

Verse by Bishop Versicles and responses Prayer for sevenfold gifts Collect Directions on chrism N I place on you … (signing with chrism) Liturgical greeting Defend o Lord Collect Lord’s prayer Episcopal blessing

Thus, he stabilized his diocese regarding liturgy, Confirmation by using a new rite. This made it possibly the highest diocese in the Anglican Communion but mostly unknown as it was in Swahili. Smith describes the practice of Bishop Weston: His Confirmations were very simple. He had no hymns, and did not usually give an address. He went round the church with his chaplain and confirmed each candidate by name where he knelt, first signing him with the Cross on the forehead in oil and then laying his hand on his head with prayer. He liked to gather the confirmed together afterwards, when he talked to them and said prayers with them.88 Here is a picture of a very high church missionary in pastoral practice. The Christianization of local initiation rites was controversial but began in this period. Some saw them in a negative view.89 Others were more positive to this Christianization.90 There were other initiatives for this adaptation in other parts of Africa by different missionary societies.91 In Masasi, it was initiated by the African clergy and later written up by the English missionaries.92 It would appear that on occasion this was connected to Baptism and/or Confirmation, but they were not integrated. Robertson questions how Baptism and Confirmation connect to this rite.93

132

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

Conclusion Prayer Book revision around the 1920s was a wave of revision that did not begin in England. As mission work began the assumptions of the Prayer Book 1662, of infant Baptism followed much later by Confirmation, did not fit pioneer missionary situations, where adult Baptism would be the norm, an early cry for inculturation. As dioceses became independent Provinces and had the constitutional framework for liturgical change, so revision became possible, and thus began in the United States, Canada, Scotland, and Ireland. As such England was late in the process. However, the fuel for liturgical change came at first from Evangelicals in England, but this was completely overtaken by ritualist pressure for enrichment and elasticity. It thus tended to be more Anglo-Catholic in flavour. To this could be added a search for identity in Spain, Portugal, and Mexico reacting to Vatican 1 (not included in this chapter as they were not yet part of the Communion). Therefore, what might be rather inaccurately called a 1928 wave of liturgical revision in the Anglican Communion can be argued as the first wave of Anglican liturgical revision as a part of the wider liturgical movement. Notes 1 Lambeth Conference, The Lambeth Conference 1930: Encyclical Letters from the Bishops; with Resolutions and Reports (London: SPCK, 1930), pp. 6–13. 2 Bridget Nichols, Liturgical Hermeneutics: Interpreting Liturgical Rites in Performance (Frankfurt am Main; New York: P. Lang, 1996). 3 Martin D. Stringer, On the Perception of Worship: The Ethnography of Worship in Four Christian Congregations in Manchester (Birmingham: University of Birmingham Press, 1999). 4 Juliette Day, Reading the Liturgy an Exploration of Texts in Christian Worship (London: Bloomsbury, 2014). 5 G. K. A. Bell, Randall Davidson, Archbishop of Canterbury (London: Oxford University Press, H. Milford, 1935), pp. 648 ff. 6 National Assembly of the Church of England, Revised Prayer Book (Permissive Use) Measure, 1923 (London: National Assembly of the Church of England, SPCK, 1923). 7 Dan D. Cruickshank, Theology and Ecclesiology of the Prayer Book Crisis, 1906–1928 (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019). 8 National Assembly of the Church of England, Revised Prayer Book (Permissive Use) Measure, 1923, p. 84. 9 Anon, “Dr Knox and Prayer-Book Revision,” The Manchester Guardian, 15 October 1923. 10 Phillip Tovey, Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820, Liturgy, Worship and Society (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014). 11 English Church Union, A Suggested Prayer Book, Being the Text of the English Rite Altered and Enlarged in Accordance with the Prayer Book Revision Proposals Made by the English Church Union (London: Humphrey Milford, 1923). 12 Group of Clergy and William Temple, A New Prayer Book: Proposals for the Revision of the Book of Common Prayer and for Additional Services and Prayers (London: Oxford University Press, 1925).

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

133

13 Ibid., http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/CofE1928/Grey%20Book/part2A. html#Confirmation 14 Alcuin Club, A Survey of the Proposals for the Alternative Prayer Book; Part 2, Occasional Offices (London: A.R. Mowbray, 1924). 15 Church of England, The Book of Common Prayer: With the Additions and Deviations Proposed in 1928 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1928). 16 Convocation of the Province of York, The York Journal of Convocation (York: W.H. Smith & Son, 1919), pp. 63–64. 17 Ibid., http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/CofE1928/CofE1928_Confirmation& Marriage.htm 18 Colin Ogilvie Buchanan, Anglican Confirmation, Grove Liturgical Study (Bramcote, Nottingham: Grove Books, 1986), p.33. 19 It is included here for issues of space. 20 Kenneth Milne, A Short History of the Church of Ireland (Dublin: The Columba Press, 2003). 21 W. Sherlock, The Story of the Revision of the Irish Prayer Book (Dublin: Church of Ireland Print. and Pub. Co., 1910). 22 Liturgical Amendment Society (Ireland), Amendments in the Book of Common Prayer (London: Hamilton, Adams, 1861). 23 F. D. How, William Conyngham Plunket: Fourth Baron Plunket and Sixty-First Archbishop of Dublin: A Memoir (London: Isbister, 1900), p. 107. 24 Church of Ireland, The Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, According to the Use of the Church of Ireland: Together with the Psalter or Psalms of David, Pointed as They Are to Be Sung or Said in Churches, and the Form and Manner of Making, Ordaining and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests and Deacons (Dublin: Association for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1878). 25 John Macbeth, Notes on the Book of Common Prayer, According to the Church of Ireland, Historical and Explanatory (Dublin: Association for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1901), p. 210. 26 Church of Ireland, The Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments, and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, According to the Use of the Church of Ireland: Together with the Psalter or Psalms of David, Pointed as They Are to Be Sung or Said in Churches, and the Form and Manner of Making, Ordaining, and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons (Dublin; London: Association for Promoting Christian Knowledge; Humphrey Milford, Oxford University Press, 1927). The Preface. David N. Griffiths, The Bibliography of the Book of Common Prayer, 1549–1999 (London; New Castle, DE: British Library; Oak Knoll Press, 2002), 1927/8/9. 27 M. Kennedy, R. Clarke, E. Turner, and B. Mayne, The Prayer Books of the Church of Ireland 1551–2004 (Dublin: The Columba Press, 2004), pp. 26–33. 28 M. Kennedy, The Book of Common Prayer (2004) Commentaries, (Church of Ireland Publishing, 2011), http://ireland.anglican.org/cmsfiles/pdf/Worship/ resources/commentaries/Commentaries_new.pdf. The Study of Liturgy: Christian Initiation, p. 25. 29 Tovey, Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820. 30 Episcopal Church of Scotland, Form for the Conditional Baptism and Confirmation of Persons Seeking Admission into the Church (Edinburgh: St. Giles’ Printing Company, 1887). 31 Episcopal Church in Scotland, The Scottish Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the

134

32

33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

Church, Together with the Psalter, Pointed as It Is to Be Sung or Said in Churches, and the Form or Manner of Making, Ordaining and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests & Deacons (Edinburgh: Cambridge University Press, 1929), p. 425. David Walker, A History of the Church in Wales (Penarth: Church in Wales Publications for the Historical Society of the Church in Wales, 1976). E. T. Davies, Disestablishment and Disendowment: Why? How? Results? (Penarth: Church in Wales Publications, 1970). Church in Wales, The Churchpeople’s Prayer Book (Monmouth: Snowden & Co (Publishers) Ltd., 1935). Griffiths, The Bibliography of the Book of Common Prayer, 1549–1999. 1935/2. Donald Gray, The 1927–28 Prayer Book Crisis 2, vol. 61, Joint Liturgical Studies (Norwich SCM-Canterbury Press, 2006), pp. 46–47. Episcopal Church Joint Commission on the Book of Common Prayer, “Report of the Joint Commission on the Book of Common Prayer Appointed by the General Convention of 1913” (1916). Second Report of the Joint Commission on the Book of Common Prayer Appointed by the General Convention of 1913 (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1919). Third Report of the Joint Commission, on the Book of Common Prayer, Appointed by the General Convention of 1913 (New York: Macmillan, 1922). Fourth Report of the Joint Commission on the Book of Common Prayer, Appointed by the General Convention of 1913 (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1925). Massey Hamilton Shepherd, The Oxford American Prayer Book Commentary (New York: Oxford University Press, 1950). Marion J. Hatchett, Commentary on the American Prayer Book (New York: Seabury Press, 1951), p. 297. Peter J. Jagger, Christian Initiation 1552–1969: Rites of Baptism and Confirmation since the Reformation Period (London: SPCK, 1970), p. 67. Church of India Burma and Ceylon, “Order of Confirmation” (Madras: Anglican Communion Office Archive), 88/9 Philip Carrington, The Anglican Church in Canada: A History (Toronto: Collins, 1963), p. 252. Frederick Taylor Whitington, William Grant Broughton, Bishop of Australia; with Some Account of the Earliest Australian Clergy (Sydney: Angus & Robertson, 1936), p. 41. Ibid., p. 40. Tovey, Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820. Eighteenth-Century Anglican Confirmation: Renewing the Covenant of Grace, vol. 79, Joint Liturgical Studies (Norwich: Hymns Ancient and Modern, 2015). S. C. Matthews and L. J. Matthews, Matthews of Kaitaia: The Story of Joseph Matthews and the Kaitaia Mission (Dunedin: A.H. and A.W. Reed, 1940), p. 108. Andrew-John Bethke, “A Historica Survey of Southern African Liturgy: Liturgical Revision from 1908 to 2010,” Journal of Anglican Studies 15, no. 1 (2017). Peter Bingham Hinchliff, The South African Liturgy: The Story of the Revision of the Rite and Its Consecration Prayer (Cape Town: Oxford University Press, 1959). Church of the Province of South Africa, A Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church,

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

52 53 54 55 56 57

58

59 60 61 62

63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71

135

Together with the Form and Manner of Making, Ordaining and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests and Deacons. Set Forth by Authority for Use in the Church of the Province of South Africa (London: Oxford University Press; Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1954). Griffiths, The Bibliography of the Book of Common Prayer, 1549–1999. 1954/1. Peter Bingham Hinchliff, “Theory and Practice of Prayer Book Revision in South Africa,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 11, no. 1 (1960). Walter Howard Frere, Some Principles of Liturgical Reform: A Contribution Towards the Revision of the Book of Common Prayer (London: John Murray, 1911). Peter Bingham Hinchliff, The South African Rite and the 1928 Prayer Book (London: for the Alcuin Club; A.R. Mowbray, 1960). “Revising Christian Initiation Rites: Practical Problems in South Africa,” Studia Liturgica 2 (1963), p. 274. See the Register of Baptisms (and Admissions as Catechumens), All Saints Church Hlayakazi outstation 1908–1913, University of the Witwatersrand Archive, AB1054-C-1-01, http://historicalpapers-atom.wits.ac.za/ab1054-c-1-01-jpeg-pdf. Alcuin Club, A Survey of the Proposals for the Alternative Prayer Book; Part 2, Occasional Offices. Church of the Province of South Africa, An Alternative Form of the Occasional Offices of the Church: Set Forth by Authority for Use in the Church of the Province of South Africa Where Allowed by the Bishop (Grahamstown: Grocott & Sherry, 1926). Church of the Province of Southern Africa, An Alternative Form of the Calendar and Occasional Offices of the Church: Set Forth by Authority for Use in the Church of the Province of South Africa Where Allowed by the Bishop (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1936). Church of the Province of South Africa, An Alternative Form of the Occasional Offices of the Church: Set Forth by Authority for Use in the Church of the Province of South Africa Where Allowed by the Bishop, p. 19. Ronald Claud Dudley Jasper, Walter Howard Frere: His Correspondence on Liturgical Revision and Construction, vol. 39, Alcuin Club Collections (London: SPCK, 1954). F. C. Synge, “South African Letter,” Theology 58, no. 46 (1955). General Synod New Zealand, Proceedings of the Fifth General Synod of the Branch of the United Church of England and Ireland (Dunedin: Matthews, Baxter & Co., 1871). Proceedings of the Sixth General Synod of the Church of the Province of New Zealand (Wellington: New Zealand Times, 1874). “The New Prayer Book,” Church Chronicle and Official Gazette for the Diocese of Wellington 48 (1927), pp. 73–74. Herbert E. Evans, “The Revised Prayer Book,” ibid., no. 5, pp. 74–75. The Church of the Province of New Zealand, Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth General Synod (Wellington: Coulls, Somerville, Wilkie Ltd., 1934), p. 262. Proceedings of the Thirty-Third General Synod (Christchurch: Coulls, Somerville, Wilkie Ltd., 1955), pp. 76–78. See also Bosco Peters, The Anglican Eucharist in New Zealand, 1814–1989, vol. 21, Alcuin/Grow Liturgical Studies (Bramcote, Nottingham: Grove Books, 1992). Griffiths, The Bibliography of the Book of Common Prayer, 1549–1999, p. 515. My thanks go to Rev Dr Shintaro Ichihara for much help in this section and Lydia Morey. Griffiths, The Bibliography of the Book of Common Prayer, 1549–1999, p. 477. S. I. J. Schereschewsky, The Bible, Prayer Book, and Terms in Our China Missions Addressed to the House of Bishops (Geneva, NY, 1888).

136

72 73 74

75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84

85 86

87 88 89 90 91 92

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

Chloe Starr, “Rethinking Church through the Book of Common Prayer in Late Qing and Early Republican China,” in Christian Encounters with Chinese Culture, ed. P. Wickeri (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2015). “The Prayer Book in Nineteenth Century China,” Monumenta Serica 56 (2008). Bin Xia, “Facing a Task Unfinished: Two BCP Revisions in the Historical CHSKH in the 1920–30s” (Yale, 2022). Starr, “Rethinking Church through the Book of Common Prayer in Late Qing and Early Republican China.” Tsz Ting Choi, “Comparison of Two Chinese Prayer Books (1872 and 1879” (2021), http://archives.hkskh.org/Page.aspx?id=3092&lang=1. Corfe Charles John, The Anglican Church in Corea. Being Documents … Issued by Authority During the Episcopate of the First Bishop of the Church of England in Corea between 1889 and 1905, Together with an Introduction. By C. J. Corfe, Bishop (London: Rivingtons, 1906). Ibid., pp. 51–52. Ibid., pp. 38–39. Ibid., p. 43. Ibid., p. 48. Ibid., p. 49. H. Maynard Smith, Frank, Bishop of Zanzibar: Life of Frank Weston, D.D., 1871–1924 (London; New York: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge; Macmillan Co., 1926), pp. 288–92. G. A. Bremner, “The Architecture of the Universities’ Mission to Central Africa: Developing a Vernacular Tradition in the Anglican Mission Field,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 68, no. 4 (2009). W. V. Lucas, E. O. James, and W. G. de Lara Wilson, Christianity and Native Rites (London: Central Africa House Press, 1950). Bodleian Library, UMCA archive, box UMC SF 42, 5260, 19 July 1928. Diocese of Zanzibar, Kitabu Cha Sala Za Kanuni Ilivyo Desturi Ya Kanisa La Ungurja (London: Soc. of SS. Peter and Paul, Ltd., 1925). Online at http://justus. anglican.org/resources/bcp/Zanzibar/index.html Sala Ya Jioni (London: Society of SS. Peter & Paul, 1925). Online at Sala Ya Jioni. Nyimbo Za Kanuni (1925) (mammana.org). Bernard Wigan, “Outline and translation of Eucharistic Prayer,” in The Liturgy in English (London: Oxford University Press, 1964). Diocese of Zanzibar, Kitabu Cha Ibada Za Kanuni Na Kuhudumu Sakramenti Pamoja Na Kawaida Za Kanisa Ilivyo Desturi Ya Kanisa La Unguja (London: Society of SS. Peter & Paul, 1928). Online at http://mammana.org/bcp/ kiswahili1928/kitabu1928.pdf. English translation: E. C. Whitaker, Documents of the Baptismal Liturgy (London: SPCK, 1960), pp. 252–53. Smith, Frank, Bishop of Zanzibar: Life of Frank Weston, D.D., 1871–1924, p. 84. J. Raum, “Christianity and African Puberty Rites,” International Review of Mission 16 (1927). Lucas, James, and Wilson, Christianity and Native Rites. S. Kaplan, “The Aficanization of Missionary Christianity: History and Typology,” Journal of Religion in Africa 16, no. 3 (1986). A. M. Stoner-Eby, “African Clergy, Bishop Lucas and the Christianizing of Local Initiation Rites: Revisiting ‘the Masasi Case’,” ibid., 38 (2008).

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

137

93 Ian Robertson, “The Jando and Initiation in Southern Tanzania,” in Liturgical Inculturation in the Anglican Communion, ed. D. R. Holeton, Alcuin/Grow Liturgical Studies (Nottingham: Grove Books, 1990).

Reference list Alcuin Club. A Survey of the Proposals for the Alternative Prayer Book; Part 2, Occasional Offices. London: A.R. Mowbray, 1924. Anon. “Dr Knox and Prayer-Book Revision.” The Manchester Guardian, October 15, 1923, 7. Bell, G. K. A. Randall Davidson, Archbishop of Canterbury. London: Oxford University Press, H. Milford, 1935. Bethke, A-J. “A Historica Survey of Southern African Liturgy: Liturgical Revision from 1908 to 2010.” Journal of Anglican Studies 15, no. 1 (2017): 58–87. Bremner, G. A. “The Architecture of the Universities‘ Mission to Central Africa: Developing a Vernacular Tradition in the Anglican Mission Field.”. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 68, no. 4 (2009): 514–39. Buchanan, C. O. Anglican Confirmation. Grove Liturgical Study. Bramcote, Nottingham: Grove Books, 1986. Carrington, P. The Anglican Church in Canada: A History. Toronto: Collins, 1963. Church in Wales. The Churchpeople’s Prayer Book. Monmouth: Snowden & Co (Publishers) Ltd., 1935. Church of England. The Book of Common Prayer: With the Additions and Deviations Proposed in 1928. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1928. Church of India Burma and Ceylon. Order of Confirmation. Madras: Anglican Communion Office Archive. Church of Ireland. The Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, According to the Use of the Church of Ireland: Together with the Psalter or Psalms of David, Pointed as They Are to Be Sung or Said in Churches, and the Form and Manner of Making, Ordaining and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests and Deacons. Dublin: Association for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1878. Church of Ireland. The Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments, and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, According to the Use of the Church of Ireland: Together with the Psalter or Psalms of David, Pointed as They Are to Be Sung or Said in Churches, and the Form and Manner of Making, Ordaining, and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. Dublin; London: Association for Promoting Christian Knowledge; Humphrey Milford, Oxford University Press 1927. Church of the Province of South Africa. An Alternative Form of the Occasional Offices of the Church: Set Forth by Authority for Use in the Church of the Province of South Africa Where Allowed by the Bishop. Grahamstown: Grocott & Sherry, 1926. Church of the Province of South Africa. A Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, Together with the Form and Manner of Making, Ordaining and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests and Deacons. Set Forth by Authority for Use in the Church of the

138

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

Province of South Africa. London: Oxford University Press; Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1954. Church of the Province of Southern Africa. An Alternative Form of the Calendar and Occasional Offices of the Church: Set Forth by Authority for Use in the Church of the Province of South Africa Where Allowed by the Bishop. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1936. Clergy, Group of, and William Temple. A New Prayer Book: Proposals for the Revision of the Book of Common Prayer and for Additional Services and Prayers. London: Oxford University Press, 1925. Convocation of the Province of York. The York Journal of Convocation. York: W.H. Smith & Son, 1919. Cruickshank, D. D.. Theology and Ecclesiology of the Prayer Book Crisis, 1906–1928. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019. Davies, E. T. Disestablishment and Disendowment: Why? How? Results?. Penarth: Church in Wales Publications, 1970. Day, J. Reading the Liturgy an Exploration of Texts in Christian Worship. London: Bloomsbury, 2014. Diocese of Zanzibar. Kitabu Cha Sala Za Kanuni Ilivyo Desturi Ya Kanisa La Ungurja. [in Swahili] London: Soc. of SS. Peter and Paul, Ltd., 1925. Diocese of Zanzibar. Sala Ya Jioni. [in Swahili] London: Society of SS. Peter & Paul, 1925. Diocese of Zanzibar. Kitabu Cha Ibada Za Kanuni Na Kuhudumu Sakramenti Pamoja Na Kawaida Za Kanisa Ilivyo Desturi Ya Kanisa La Unguja. [in Swahili]. London: Society of SS. Peter & Paul, 1928. English Church Union. A Suggested Prayer Book, Being the Text of the English Rite Altered and Enlarged in Accordance with the Prayer Book Revision Proposals Made by the English Church Union. London: Humphrey Milford, 1923. Episcopal Church in Scotland. The Scottish Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, Together with the Psalter, Pointed as It Is to Be Sung or Said in Churches, and the Form or Manner of Making, Ordaining and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests & Deacons. Edinburgh: Cambridge University Press, 1929. Episcopal Church Joint Commission on the Book of Common Prayer. Fourth Report of the Joint Commission on the Book of Common Prayer, Appointed by the General Convention of 1913. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1925. Episcopal Church Joint Commission on the Book of Common Prayer. “Report of the Joint Commission on the Book of Common Prayer Appointed by the General Convention of 1913”. (1916). Episcopal Church Joint Commission on the Book of Common Prayer. Second Report of the Joint Commission on the Book of Common Prayer Appointed by the General Convention of 1913. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1919. Episcopal Church Joint Commission on the Book of Common Prayer. Third Report of the Joint Commission, on the Book of Common Prayer, Appointed by the General Convention of 1913. New York: Macmillan, 1922. Episcopal Church of Scotland. Form for the Conditional Baptism and Confirmation of Persons Seeking Admission into the Church. Edinburgh: St. Giles’ Printing Company, 1887.

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

139

Evans, H. E. “The Revised Prayer Book.” Church Chronicle and Official Gazette for the Diocese of Wellington 48, no. 5 (1927). Frere, W. H. Some Principles of Liturgical Reform: A Contribution Towards the Revision of the Book of Common Prayer. London: John Murray, 1911. General Synod New Zealand. Proceedings of the Fifth General Synod of the Branch of the United Church of England and Ireland. Dunedin: Matthews, Baxter & Co., 1871. General Synod New Zealand. Proceedings of the Sixth General Synod of the Church of the Province of New Zealand. Wellington: New Zealand Times, 1874. Gray, D. The 1927–28 Prayer Book Crisis 2. Joint Liturgical Studies. Vol. 61, Norwich SCM-Canterbury Press, 2006. Griffiths, D. N. The Bibliography of the Book of Common Prayer, 1549–1999. London; New Castle, DE: British Library; Oak Knoll Press, 2002. Hatchett, M. J. Commentary on the American Prayer Book. New York: Seabury Press, 1951. Hinchliff, P. B. “Revising Christian Initiation Rites: Practical Problems in South Africa.” Studia Liturgica 2 (1963): 273–84. Hinchliff, P. B. The South African Liturgy: The Story of the Revision of the Rite and Its Consecration Prayer. Cape Town: Oxford University Press, 1959. Hinchliff, P. B. The South African Rite and the 1928 Prayer Book. London: for the Alcuin Club; A.R. Mowbray, 1960. Hinchliff, P. B. “Theory and Practice of Prayer Book Revision in South Africa.” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 11, no. 1 (1960): 87–97. How, F. D. William Conyngham Plunket: Fourth Baron Plunket and Sixty-First Archbishop of Dublin: A Memoir. London: Isbister, 1900. Jagger, P. J. Christian Initiation 1552–1969: Rites of Baptism and Confirmation since the Reformation Period. London: SPCK, 1970. Jasper, R. C. D. Walter Howard Frere: His Correspondence on Liturgical Revision and Construction. Alcuin Club Collections. Vol. 39, London: SPCK, 1954. John, C. C. The Anglican Church in Corea. Being Documents … ... Issued by Authority During the Episcopate of the First Bishop of the Church of England in Corea between 1889 and 1905, Together with an Introduction. By C.J. Corfe, Bishop. London: Rivingtons, 1906. Kaplan, S. “The Aficanization of Missionary Christianity: History and Typology.” Journal of Religion in Africa 16, no. 3 (1986): 165–86. Kennedy, M. The Book of Common Prayer (2004) Commentaries. Church of Ireland Publishing, 2011. http://ireland.anglican.org/cmsfiles/pdf/Worship/resources/ commentaries/Commentaries_new.pdf. Kennedy, M., Clarke, R., Turner, E., Mayne, B. The Prayer Books of the Church of Ireland 1551–2004. Dublin: The Columba Press, 2004. Lambeth Conference. The Lambeth Conference 1930: Encyclical Letters from the Bishops; with Resolutions and Reports. London: SPCK, 1930. Liturgical Amendment Society (Ireland). Amendments in the Book of Common Prayer. London: Hamilton, Adams, 1861. Lucas, W. V., E. O. James, and W. G. de Lara Wilson. Christianity and Native Rites. London: Central Africa House Press, 1950.

140

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

Macbeth, J. Notes on the Book of Common Prayer, According to the Church of Ireland, Historical and Explanatory. Dublin: Association for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1901. Matthews, S. C., and L. J. Matthews. Matthews of Kaitaia: The Story of Joseph Matthews and the Kaitaia Mission. Dunedin: A.H. and A.W. Reed, 1940. Milne, K. A Short History of the Church of Ireland. Dublin: The Columba Press, 2003. National Assembly of the Church of England. Revised Prayer Book (Permissive Use) Measure, 1923. London: National Assembly of the Church of England, SPCK, 1923. “The New Prayer Book.” Church Chronicle and Official Gazette for the Diocese of Wellington 48 (1927). Nichols, B. Liturgical Hermeneutics: Interpreting Liturgical Rites in Performance. Frankfurt am Main; New York: P. Lang, 1996. Peters, B. The Anglican Eucharist in New Zealand, 1814–1989. Alcuin/Grow Liturgical Studies. Vol. 21, Bramcote, Nottingham: Grove Books, 1992. Raum, J. “Christianity and African Puberty Rites.” International Review of Mission 16 (1927): 581–91. Robertson, I. “The Jando and Initiation in Southern Tanzania.” In Liturgical Inculturation in the Anglican Communion, edited by D. R. Holeton. Alcuin/ Grow Liturgical Studies (pp. 27–31). Nottingham: Grove Books, 1990. Schereschewsky, S. I. J. The Bible, Prayer Book, and Terms in Our China Missions Addressed to the House of Bishops. Geneva, NY 1888. Shepherd, M. H. The Oxford American Prayer Book Commentary. New York: Oxford University Press, 1950. Sherlock, W. The Story of the Revision of the Irish Prayer Book. Dublin: Church of Ireland Print. and Pub. Co., 1910. Smith, H. M. Frank, Bishop of Zanzibar: Life of Frank Weston, D.D., 1871–1924. London; New York: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge; Macmillan Co., 1926. Starr, C. “The Prayer Book in Nineteenth Century China.” Monumenta Serica 56 (2008): 395–426. Starr, C. “Rethinking Church through the Book of Common Prayer in Late Qing and Early Republican China.” In Christian Encounters with Chinese Culture, edited by P. Wickeri, 81–102. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2015. Stoner-Eby, A. M. “African Clergy, Bishop Lucas and the Christianizing of Local Initation Rites: Revisiting ‘the Masasi Case’.” Journal of Religion in Africa 38 (2008): 171–208. Stringer, M. D. On the Perception of Worship: The Ethnography of Worship in Four Christian Congregations in Manchester. Birmingham: University of Birmingham Press, 1999. Synge, F. C. “South African Letter.” Theology 58, no. 46 (1955): 57–60. The Church of the Province of New Zealand. Proceedings of the Thirty-Third General Synod. Christchurch: Coulls, Somerville, Wilkie Ltd., 1955. The Church of the Province of New Zealand. Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth General Synod. Wellington: Coulls, Somerville, Wilkie Ltd., 1934. Tovey, P. Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820. Liturgy, Worship and Society. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014. Tovey, P.. Eighteenth-Century Anglican Confirmation: Renewing the Covenant of Grace. Joint Liturgical Studies. Vol. 79, Norwich: Hymns Ancient and Modern, 2015.

Anglican Prayer Book revision 1928 and after

141

Tsz T. C.. “Comparison of Two Chinese Prayer Books (1872 and 1879).” (2021). http://archives.hkskh.org/Page.aspx?id=3092&lang=1. Walker, D.. A History of the Church in Wales. Penarth: Church in Wales Publications for the Historical Society of the Church in Wales, 1976. Whitaker, E. C. Documents of the Baptismal Liturgy. London: SPCK, 1960. Whitington, F. T. William Grant Broughton, Bishop of Australia, with Some Account of the Earliest Australian Clergy. Sydney: Angus & Robertson, 1936. Wigan, B. The Liturgy in English. London: Oxford University Press, 1964. Xia, B. “Facing a Task Unfinished: Two Bcp Revisions in the Historical Chskh in the 1920-30s.” Yale, 2022.

6

The English practice of Confirmation

There was a revolution in the way that Confirmation was practised in the nineteenth century. At the beginning of the period, the eighteenth-century pattern was continued by the bishops, which might be characterized as the candidate comes to the bishop.1 This was changed in the Victorian period to the bishop going to the people, and thus a considerable increase in the number of Confirmation centres each year. This transition has been said to have occurred through the rise of the railways and under the influence of Bishop Samuel Wilberforce. These theories need further testing. The picture on the cover (Figure 0.1) illustrates Crake’s ideal of a Confirmation service and while this may have been the practice in a few cases in 1885, it was to become a more common practice in the twentieth century. This chapter will concern itself then with both the place of Wilberforce, Confirmations in other settings, schools and battlefields. Then we will look at disorder in Confirmations and question Ollard’s narrative. After that an examination of the growth of Confirmation. Finally, a number of boundary issues in relation to Confirmation are to be investigated. Episcopal practice Samuel Wilberforce – Oxford and Winchester

The inherited patterns of Confirmation from the long eighteenth century were gradually overthrown by a new pattern developed in the middle of the nineteenth century. Some of this is a response to criticism of the past, but the major influence is often seen as Bishop Samuel Wilberforce in Oxford Diocese (1845–1869) and his reforms of Confirmation practice.2 The pattern of Confirmation set in the Victorian era is one that is still used in the Church of England. So, the changes and issues to do with the practice of Confirmation are still relevant today as well as being of historic interest. Jagger explains the inherited tradition by contrasting Samuel Wilberforce with his predecessor.3 He notes that in 1840, Bishop Baggot had nine Confirmation centres which 20 years later Bishop Wilberforce had increased to 188. Indeed, it would seem that the aim of Bishop Wilberforce was to visit DOI: 10.4324/9781032676876-6

The English practice of Confirmation

143

each centre every three years. This entailed a considerable amount of travel and Jagger theorizes that the ability to travel more easily due to the railways was a factor in many bishops increasing the numbers of centres. A similar narrative is told by David Edwards. He … transformed the service of Confirmation, which had previously tended to be a formality conducted for large numbers in a few centres by a bishop with his mind in the House of Lords. Wilberforce would go to a village and confirmed them, taking pains to make the occasion memorable for each candidate on whom he laid his hands. He seemed to be ubiquitous by means of horses and the new railways.4 Daniel has an even more negative interpretation of eighteenth-century Confirmation. In the past, in Confirmations … The bishops had too often preferred to consult their own convenience rather than the edification of those placed under their charge. They held but few Confirmations, and those only in central places; so that the mob of candidates [experienced] … the rite hastily administered … the short, perfunctory, and ill heard address.5 He then contrasts it with the zeal of Bishop Wilberforce. He set himself with untiring energy, and no disposition to spare himself, to hold Confirmations in every part of the diocese; so that all might see and know the right, its meanings and blessings … In the town and in the village, in the school, the asylum, and the workhouse, he would give all their chance.6 The effect of this was quite demanding on himself, sometimes conducting two or three Confirmations on any one day. Reginald Wilberforce gives a similar interpretation. The rite of Confirmation was administered by Bishop Wilberforce in a manner essentially his own. Before his time Confirmations were held generally in some town; a number sufficient to fill the rail would come up at a time, and the Bishop would pronounce the words once, and dismiss the candidates. Bishop Wilberforce altered all this … at Confirmations the bishop exerted most fully and most successfully all his powers of solemn persuasiveness.7 Both Wilberforce and Ashwell wax lyrical on the impressive way in which Bishop Wilberforce conducted Confirmations, in both there is a hagiographic element, but it would point to Wilberforce’s prioritizing of Confirmation as a way to stir people to follow Christ.8 Reginald Wilberforce illustrates the

144

The English practice of Confirmation Table 6.1 Confirmations in Oxford Diocese Date

Numbers

1846–1848 1851–1854 1855–1857 1858–1860 1860–1863 1866–1869

9,249 14,057 12 16,586 13 18,747 18,570 20,028

Centres

217 188

difference from the past by referring to a letter from a local publican from a large town.9 The publican said that in the past Confirmations were occasional and that hundreds of young men and women would come to the town (girls in white Confirmation dresses). He would hold a large ball and many of the young people would attend making a profit for the publican. Now that the bishop is ubiquitous, such large events do not occur and consequently, he has lost business. Similar stories are reported of Confirmations being festive occasions in newspapers of the time.10 Bishop Wilberforce seems to have taken a different line to his predecessor on Confirmation. He had a much more itinerant view of Confirmation; he went out and confirmed at many centres. He records the numbers of Confirmations and, sometimes, centres in his triennial visitation addresses (Table 6.1).11 Wilberforce was indefatigable in leading Confirmations sometimes doing three a day. An example of this can be seen in 1859, a week in north Buckinghamshire. Sunday week the Bishop held a Confirmation at Stony Stratford at II, another at Calverton at 3, preaching at New Wolverton at 6.30. On Monday he confirmed at Beachhampton at 2, at Shenley at 3, and preached at Stony Stratford. On Tuesday and Wednesday he confirmed at Haversham, Hanslope, North Crawley, and Newport Pagnell, preaching in the evenings at Hanslope and Newport. Thursday he confirmed at Weston Underwood and Sherrington, preaching in the evening at Olney. Friday, confirmed at Great Wolston and North Wolverton, preaching at 7.30 at Buckingham.14 He seems to have preached at each Confirmation and had developed an extemporary mode of preaching and so there is little recorded of his talks. One address was published, given at Eaton College.15 The emphasis in this talk is on making a choice and fighting the good fight. It is unfortunate that this seems to be one of the few addresses recorded. Another difference from the eighteenth century is that bishops now seem to take the lead in preaching. Papers in the Diocese of Oxford archive confirm the approach of the previous paragraph.16 These show that Wilberforce systematically visited the

The English practice of Confirmation

145

diocese performing Confirmation. He expected thoroughgoing preparation suggesting that this be done in the winter, as they were to know the Catechism and the Confirmation service. The candidates were to be taught the scriptural nature of the rite (from Acts texts). They would present a card to say they had been prepared. They were to dress well and speak clearly. Girls were to wear a white handkerchief on their heads. Wilberforce visited each of the three archdeaconries in turn always in the early part of the year (Table 6.2). Table 6.2 Numbers and dates of Confirmation 1852–1861 Year

Archdeaconry

Begin

End

Number of centres

1852 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861

Buckingham Berkshire Oxon Buckingham Berkshire Oxon

21 26 22 13 26 10

23 March 7 April 12 April 19 April 3 April 14 April

58 57 63 66 61 66

Feb Feb Feb March Feb Feb

This is a more systematic approach than is sometimes presented about Wilberforce and Confirmation. These records corroborate the arduous schedule mentioned above. The plan for north Oxon in February 1861 was as shown in Table 6.3. Table 6.3 Confirmations February 1861 Date

Time

Number of parishes who came to the service

16th 17th

3 pm 11 am 3 pm 12.30 pm 4 pm 11 am 3 pm 11 am 3 pm 1 pm 4 pm 11.45 am 3 pm 12 noon 12 noon 3 pm 12 noon 11 am 2.30 pm 11.30 am 3 pm

1 2 2 1 2 3 5 3 4 3 1 2 2 3 1 3 4 3 1 4 5

18th 19th 20th 21st 22nd 23rd 25th 26th 27th 28th

146

The English practice of Confirmation

This must have entailed dining and staying with local clergy and gentry, as distances and roads must have prohibited returns to Cuddesdon Palace. While the railways had recently opened, the geographical pattern does not suggest their use and some of the centres were never on a railway. His zeal for Confirmation is seen in his 1849 letter to the Rev W. I. Baker of Kirtlington who is chided for his neglect in providing candidates for Confirmation, and when some came their poor behaviour.17 He threatens him with ecclesiastical discipline if he does not improve. From 1850 onwards, he conducted Lent missions to various towns in the diocese. This entailed preaching and frequent Communions. One of the features of these missions was that he held Confirmations as a part of the mission to enable people to express their developing commitment.18 There is a report in the Church Times of a Confirmation at St Thomas the Martyr Oxford. This was a particular ritualistic church, and the bishop seems to have accommodated to the situation. The order of service was: Meet bishop at gate and procession chanting Ps 68 Hymn Thy Holy Cross Bishop conducted to chair at chancel arch Address by Bishop Silent prayer Veni Creator Address by Bishop Versicles and prayers Laying on of hands. Amens chanted by choir. Girls first, youth after. Address by Bishop Chants rest of service. Benediction Process out singing Nunc Dimittis back to gate. The Church Times saw this as a ‘model’ service.19 It however suffers the criticism of the many interpolations into the service, and probably only represents one way that Bishop Wilberforce confirmed. He is seen by some as bringing single-handedly a unique reform to Confirmation. This needs to be tempered in several ways. It is more likely that he took up what he has seen previously, for example in Bishop Sumner, who also increased the number of centres. Wilberforce was more the popularizer and example of a new approach to Confirmation. But there are two other factors that might be significant in Wilberforce’s itinerant Confirmation ministry. The first is the Wilberforce family relationship to Wesley. As an Evangelical family they knew the Wesley family. The apostolic zeal for gospel preaching seems to have been transferred in Samuel Wilberforce to an apostolic zeal for Confirmation. However, there is a second person who may have been of influence. When Samuel Wilberforce was an undergraduate at Oxford, Bishop John Henry Hobart the third

The English practice of Confirmation

147

Bishop of New York visited Oriel College, his own college, and dined there. Bishop Hobart was also zealous to confirm from the very point of his consecration as Bishop. Indeed, Samuel Wilberforce as a vicar wrote a book on the history of the Protestant Episcopal Church of United States of America with glowing comments on the ministry of Bishop Hobart. His knowledge of the church was second-hand, but he also came to know John Caswell, an Englishman ordained as a priest in America who returned to England for further ministry. Thus, there are several other influences on Samuel Wilberforce’s pattern of Confirmation than a simple unique development as suggested by some. A further influence may well be Bishop CR Sumner, Bishop of Winchester 1827-1869. He had also wanted to increase the number of centres. When he arrived there were 22 centres for Confirmation in Hampshire; by 1832, Bishop Sumner had increased the number to 45 and in 1868 this had grown to 69.20 It is quite clear that an increase in centres by Sumner precedes Wilberforce’s bishopric. Indeed, it may be that Wilberforce was influenced by Sumner during his incumbency on the Isle of Wight and as his archdeacon in Surrey. The impression given from this variety of writing clearly makes Bishop Wilberforce an important person in the reform of the practice of Confirmation. He has reversed the approach which asks candidates to come to the bishop, to one where the bishop comes to the candidates in their parish. The degree to which this is fostered by changes in transportation needs careful consideration. Llewellyn Gwynne – War Chaplain

Bishop Llewellyn Gwynne was a Welsh CMS missionary in Sudan who volunteered as a chaplain in the Army Chaplains department at the beginning of the First World War. Snape looking at the interpretation of army chaplains calls him a ‘figurehead and their natural post-war leader’.21 Snape sees him having served with distinction and honour and as having many chaplains under his command. Unfortunately, because of his antipathy to Lloyd George, he returned to Sudan after the war. The returning chaplains to Britain had a significant impact on the church and society.22 Recently, Gwynne’s diary for part of the war July 1915 to July 1916 has been published which gives some insight into the operations of a war chaplain who is a bishop.23 Based in St Omer he travelled around conducting Confirmations (and other services). He does not always record the numbers confirmed but seems to narrate all the events. These vary in number from a couple of hundred to individual Confirmation and they are located in a variety of places, from army rooms, hospitals, and in the open air. Table 6.4 gives an indication of his work. Clearly, there were candidates in March 1916 he simply did not record any figures in his diary. He is very diligent in doing Confirmations, and at

148

The English practice of Confirmation Table 6.4 Confirmations by Bishop Gwynne Date Year 1915

1916

Month August September October November December January February March April May June July

Number of services

Numbers recorded

5 6 4 6 9 3 9 8 13 2 11 5

127 282 39 124 207 23 30 527 39 270 80

time has prepared various individuals, but that is mostly done by the other chaplains. He is willing to confirm individuals, sometimes in hospital. He discusses ways of telling the parishes that someone has been confirmed and works to develop a system. He had to work with Canadian chaplains and in meeting a Canadian bishop has a rather patronizing attitude: The Canadians, like all young Dominions and young children just learning to walk, are very jealous of their young powers and resent the paternal assistance in learning to walk.24 He appears as a diligent episcopal chaplain, who ministered as was possible in a war context, and with interest from the troops in Confirmation. By the end of the war, the chaplains who had worked on the front were critical of the practice of Confirmation and its relative ineffectiveness. Our old Confirmation standards of teaching the Eucharist look utterly puny, and sinful, in the light of war lessons. And the call waxes more urgent still, when we see how minute a proportion of Church of England men have even this understanding that is so dim. Instruction by year only has proved a desperate failure.25 The catechetical approaches of the past had proved wanting in light of the horrors of the First World War. Increasingly the chaplains realized that there was a vast gulf between the church and ordinary people. This criticism particularly shows the failure of the teaching that have been received to support men in their war experience. Many troops were alienated from the Prayer Book. The war chaplains were influential in the church after the war, e.g., Eric Milner-White and Geoffrey Studdert Kennedy.

The English practice of Confirmation

149

Walter Frere – Truro

Bishop of Truro 1923–1935, Walter Frere was an example of a high church bishop taking Confirmation seriously. Frere had been a founder member of the Community of the Resurrection. He was involved in many discussions about liturgical revision, not least concerning the 1928 Prayer Book.26 His A New History of the Book of Common Prayer first published in 1901 revised the previous work of Francis Procter from 1870, both of which went into numerous editions. Buchanan rightly points out a shift in the theological emphasis of the meaning of Confirmation (Table 6.5). Table 6.5 Frere’s redaction of Procter Procter

Procter and Frere

Confirmation occupies an important position in the economy of the Church, which is pointed out in the last rubric, that it is the admission to full Communion. 27

Beyond its own intrinsic importance, as the gift of the Spirit and the corollary of Baptism, Confirmation occupies an important position in the economy of the Church, which is pointed out in the last rubric, that it is the admission to full Communion. 28

The sentence added to Procter in the New Edition suggests that Frere held the new Confirmation theory advocated by Mason and Puller. In Some Principle of Liturgical Reform (1911), he suggested changes to every service in the Prayer Book. On Confirmation, he wishes the preface and question to be recast such that it follows the Catechism by emphasizing the grace of God. He wished that the 1549 words and signing be reintroduced, linking better with Baptism and following ‘primitive use’ and the ‘Defend O Lord’ be said over the whole group.29 In Truro, Frere used the 1928 Prayer Book. Phillips recalls that for Confirmation he was known to arrive on a Saturday and talk to the candidates. On Sunday he led Matins and Litany. He then confirmed the candidates. After that came Holy Communion with a sermon giving the candidates their first Communion.30 Frere himself seems to have varied the way he conducted the service not least in where he puts addresses, he contrasts Sundays and weekdays.31 He says that he always wears a mitre and holds in his left hand his staff, confirming with the right hand. He always makes the sign of the cross (not in the 1928 book) before the Confirmation prayer, and he generally has a hymn to the Holy Spirit after the renewal of vows. Thus, despite being a key influence in 1928 he still has liturgical interpolations. School Confirmation

“I‘ve never been confirmed,” said East. “Not been confirmed!” said Tom in astonishment. “I never thought of that. Why weren’t you confirmed

150

The English practice of Confirmation

with the rest of us nearly three years ago? I always thought you’d been confirmed at home.”32 This short conversation in Tom Brown’s School Days opens another Confirmation practice, the school Confirmation. The reforms of Thomas Arnold at Rugby School, after he became headmaster in 1828, included the school Confirmation. Arnold was a broad-church person and his sermon Before Confirmation is him taking a catechetical role in Confirmation preparation.33 He exhorts the boys to seek first the kingdom of God and avoid vice. He sees Confirmation as asking for God’s help. The aim of the school and Confirmation is to produce Christian gentlemen. George Moberly also introduced reforms, this time at Winchester College and on Tractarian lines. The fourth of his Five Short Letters addresses religious education and in particular Confirmation.34 The study of classics also includes reading the New Testament in Greek. Confirmation is carefully prepared and there is opportunity to talk to him during the process. Auricular confession is not included but confessing to a friend and to God is encouraged as a discipline. It is important not just to get confirmed but also to become communicant. His aim in all this is to produce a gentlemen saint.35 While there are examples of school Confirmation not being a great religious event, there are also accounts of its importance. A boy from Harrow recounts his Confirmation in 1851: During the Confirmation service itself a sudden feeling came across me of the most intense delight, when I called to mind that I was dedicating myself, soul and body, to so good a Master – to one who was all merciful, and all powerful.36 He talks about receiving Communion 12 days later and how he felt strengthened by this and happy. For some it was an important event. Pusey wrote a book of prayers for schoolboys including a prayer prior to Confirmation.37 William Wood, a master at Radley, writes of how he prepared boys for the coming Confirmation, including private conversations.38 He describes the events around the Confirmation in May 1856. On Saturday, the Bishop of Colombo addressed the boys of the school. On Sunday, the sermon is on Confirmation and the Warden addresses the boys who are to be confirmed. On Monday, the Bishop, Samuel Wilberforce arrives by horse with the bishop of Moray (in a carriage). The three bishops process in and ten boys are confirmed. The service was described as ‘most affecting’. They then went to the School Room where there were three more addresses. There was then a dinner, and the bishop was farewelled the next day. School Confirmation was not only an enduring reform and one that is still an important part of the practice of Confirmation; it was also exported as a

The English practice of Confirmation

151

part of setting up Anglican schools across the Empire. Jean Barman talks of the importance of Confirmation in the life of Anglican schools in British Colombia.39 The same could be said of Australia and New Zealand. School Confirmation is a particular context for the rite and one that endures where the parish Confirmation was to see a great decline. Review

So, the period sees a change of practice which became the new paradigm for episcopal Confirmation ministry. There is also the development of school Confirmation which likewise is a continuing practice. These newer approaches are exported in the missionary movement. Disordered Confirmations There are number of examples where Confirmation seems not to have been administered in a seemly way. These need some exploring particularly in light of the historiographical assumptions of Ollard who attributes disorder to the eighteenth century whereas there are more examples of disorder in the nineteenth.40 Disorder in the congregation and by the bishop

William Cecil, rector of Long Stanton, gives an account of the events in 1833 in a book written as an appeal to the bishop.41 The Evangelical, William Cecil, protests about the disorder at the Confirmation. The candidates left his parish at 8 am and arrived in Cambridge at 10.30. They were sitting in the church at 3 pm and were still no closer to getting confirmed. The bishop was confirming in the chancel but what he may not have noticed was the increasing scrum in the crowd sat in the church, who fought to get forward to be let in to get confirmed. At three o’clock, William Cecil left with his candidates to try to get to the chancel through the crowd, his gown and coat were ripped. There was a further wait of an hour in the chancel as the candidates move forward to the bishop who confirmed them two at a time. They finally left the church at four o’clock in the afternoon and William Cecil was disgusted at what he called a riot within the church. He related this back to a similar occurrence in 1825. A letter from ‘Mentor’ in the Christian Guardian comments on the arrangements of the same day. Here, he points out that Confirmation lacked good scriptural grounds, but that it was essential for those baptized as children. The bishop had announced the day and times on which Confirmation would occur, once in the morning and once in the evening in the same church. People had travelled sometimes ten miles on foot, but it was not clear which parishes should be at which services. Therefore, some people who travelled long distances arrived to find the church full. These were provided hospitality in some other churches, but some of them went for

152

The English practice of Confirmation

refreshment in public houses. The letter clearly thinks this is a highly undesirable and not a suitable spiritual preparation for Confirmation. He therefore suggests more detailed planning, integrating which parishes should attend at which time and argues for more frequent Confirmations. This information might be supplemented by a report in the Bury and Norwich Post which indicated that a group of 50 persons were travelling by wagon to a Confirmation in July and one of the wagons overturned. Seventeen of them were severely injured. It should be added that travel was a problem for bishops as well. Jagger suggests that in 1840 neither the Archbishop of Canterbury nor the Bishop of London laid their hands on the head of each candidate.42 He does not say what they actually did but it would appear to be similar to Archbishop Vernon Harcourt in the lack of physical contact. The source that he quotes for this however seems to have been misread. John and William Hull are petitioning concerning the fact that these two bishops are not following the rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer.43 However, their complaint seems to be that a hand was not laid upon each individual candidate and the Confirmation prayer said of each person, rather what seems to happen is the prayer was said over a number of candidates on which a hand was laid while the prayer was being said. This approach is also testified to in the Royal Commission on Ritual. Thus, attempts to document Confirmations without any laying on of hands seem to fall short when the evidence is examined. Confirmation and ritualism

In 1850, controversy arose in Leeds over the relationship between Confirmation and confession. In 1849, a woman had gone to St Saviours Church for Confirmation preparation. The clergy expected as part of the preparation she should make a confession. Mr Beckett, who was at that time a deacon, led a recollection of the commandments and then heard the woman’s confession. She was then sent to Mr Rooke who was a priest for absolution. It would appear that the practice of confession before Confirmation was regarded as essential in this parish and the group of 50 that were confirmed had mostly made their first confession.44 The introduction of auricular confession was a highly controversial aspect of the Oxford Movement. The practice at St Saviours led to an investigation by the bishop. It led to the suspension of both the clergy, who had not treated the event as something optional or voluntary, but as a required aspect of preparation even when it was known that woman’s husband was against the practice.45 Mr Rooke and the rest of the clergy, except for Mr Beckett, all seceded to Rome in 1851. The Plymouth Journal 1852 reports considerable disorderly behaviour, the headline calling it a riot, around a Confirmation in Plymouth; it was widely reported.46 The Bishop of Exeter, Philpott, came to do a Confirmation at St Peter’s Eldad. There were 190 candidates for the Confirmation and 20 clergy

The English practice of Confirmation

153

in the church to receive the bishop. Of those children, 15 were sailors and 16 were soldiers and marines. Considering that the expected age was 14 shows very early entrants into the armed forces at that time. The numbers were a considerable drop from the previous Confirmation at Plymouth when 799 candidates had been confirmed.47 As the bishop was driven to the church, tremendous groans were made by a crowd outside that startled the people inside. As the bishop processed out at the end of the service, he was met again by the crowd who groaned, hissed, and hooted at the bishop and the party. The object of this approbation was the vicar Mr Prynne who was disliked because of his introduction of confession, which the crowd thought as Romish.48 The paper even called him ‘the obnoxious minister’. They were disappointed that the bishop had not disciplined him. The police had to protect the bishop whom the crowd were obstructing from entering his carriage. Similar dislike of developing Anglo-Catholic practice is expressed by the newspaper of events at the Confirmation at Witnesham.49 The Bishop of Norwich had come to confirm 155 candidates including those from neighbouring parishes. Thirty were from Claydon and Akenham and this included Father Ignatius (Rev Joseph Leycester Lyne) who came as a guest.50 He was dressed in monastic habit, and this has clearly been a local issue of debate. He remained in the porch and when the litany was said, knelt down and joined in the responses. On Sunday, the bishop followed up the Confirmation by preaching on Holy Communion and administering it to 69 people. This in itself is of interest as not all those confirmed received, but clearly the bishop has ordered events so that Confirmation is quickly followed by a Holy Communion service, a further development in practice. The paper is clearly against the revival of religious life in the Church of England. It regards Father Ignatius with great suspicion and as a disrupter of the Confirmation service.51 The fact that he stays in the porch indicates that he is avoiding the Bishop, as he was barred from ministry in churches, although it was said that the church was full. Daily News 1854 reports unpleasantness in Selby Abbey.52 The vicar F. W. Harper had refused Confirmation certificates to four or five children, sent by their parents for examination, on the grounds that they would not commit themselves to receiving Communion on Easter Sunday. This led to a petition by parents to the Archbishop of York which was given to him as the service began. The Archbishop conducted an investigation and was willing to confirm all but one of the children, who was deemed to be too young. The children included those of the church warden and the superintendent of Selby railway station. This is indicative of a tightening up on regulations by the parish clergy which was happening in this period. The English Church Union in 1866 began to question the right of bishops to refuse candidates based on their age.53 This seems to be in response to 30 candidates being rejected by a bishop who is unnamed. The question centres around a right of appeal and whether candidates can be rejected without suitable examination. This last point was suggested to be illegal by

154

The English practice of Confirmation

Robert Phillimore. The exact details of the further questions of this case are perhaps not relevant save to show that there was anxiety around the practice of Confirmation, both by the bishops and in the previous case by the clergy. Reflections on disorder

Both Ollard and Jagger cite cases of disordered Confirmation. The references to bishops not laying on of hands seem to be not proved or a misreading of the text. Ollard uses the information to tar the eighteenth century, but in fact it more reasonably is directed to the nineteenth century. It has been possible to provide a series of examples of disorder at Confirmations. In part, this was solved by an increasing number of Confirmations, an increase in the episcopate, and the influence of improved communication. However, despite that, in small country churches, Confirmation services may still be crowded with the potential for disorder. Growth of Confirmation Early nineteenth-century bishops were not without knowledge in consideration of the difficulty of people travelling to Confirmation. Bishop Hampden of Hereford was well aware of the difficulties of children and particularly girls having to travel long distances. His 1848 Confirmation tour was carefully organized that candidates did not have a great distance to go, leading him to hold Confirmations in some more remote parts. The memorial by his daughter notes railway officials who had given Confirmation candidates free travel. This indicates that railways were even becoming important in 1848. The ease of travel

The issue of travel and the development of the railways also need to be considered in relationship to this new pattern of Confirmation. Owen Chadwick said, talking of the period 1872–1911: The railways and the increased activity of bishops and a larger number of bishops … made Confirmation nearer to being universal.54 Peter Jagger says: The ease, comforts and increased facilities of travel by railway … Enabled more frequent and widespread Confirmations.55 This theory has been reiterated recently in an unofficial report by some members of the Faith and Order Commission: In the second half of the nineteenth century, the necessity of parish Confirmations became apparent and normal. Though this required much

The English practice of Confirmation

155

more Episcopal time, it was now more possible because of the railway services throughout the country. As a consequence, more bishops were required to administer Confirmation pastorally and decently.56 Kilvert records in his diary taking a train back from Confirmation and being with the bishop in the carriage in 1876. The ability to travel faster was to have an impact on the Confirmation tours, but more one of strengthening a trend than beginning it. The early nineteenth century had seen an improvement in the roads. A network of stagecoaches was set up across the country. Gradually the times taken decreased as the road network improved. Books were developed showing the road network and indicating inns at which one could stay or dine. Travel from Oxford to London might take six hours immediately before the railway with a number of places to change the horses (about every 10–15 miles). Bishops of course would have their own carriages, but this indicates the time taken in travel. The railways considerably speeded up travel times and made places closer together. But Bishop Wilberforce did not have a large, developed railway system in his diocese when he began his episcopate. There were two lines in the diocese of Oxford, which now included the three counties of Oxfordshire, Berkshire, and Buckinghamshire. The London to Birmingham Railway constructed in 1838 ran through the northeast corner of the diocese with a branch line to Aylesbury.57 This was not much help to a bishop living just outside of Oxford. The Great Western Railway came through the southern half of the diocese, Steventon opening in 1840 being the station for Oxford, a distance of ten miles from Oxford. In 1844, a branch line was built from Didcot to Oxford and terminated there for a number of years.58 Lines north of Oxford were constructed to Birmingham (1852) and Worcester (1853).59 The London and North Western reached Oxford in 1851.60 It was not until 1864 that the branch line from Princes Risborough to Oxford through Wheatley was constructed giving the bishop a railway station in the next village to Cuddesdon.61 It is clear therefore that Wilberforce did not begin his reformation of Confirmation due to the development of the railways. It did provide him however with a way to get to London, the earliest train timetables making the journey about two hours. It also enabled him to get off at Slough and travel to see the Royal family at Windsor. Thus, he could use the railway to quickly travel to London for his official duties but had like his predecessors to travel on horse around the diocese. Growing self-reflection

There is a growing reflection by the bishops on their Confirmation ministry and an analysis of its strength and weakness. Thus, not only is there the collection of Confirmation data but also a reflection on it to give some indication of the impact of the church.

156

The English practice of Confirmation

Bishop Christopher Wordsworth of Lincoln in 1882 gives detailed information on 13 years of Confirmation statistics. He separates the information out into males and females and distinguishes between Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire. After 1870, there was an appointment of a bishop suffragan in Nottinghamshire who was delegated the role of confirming in that county. It is clear that Christopher Wordsworth is a reformer and sees the need to labour and visit people in a variety of centres. Although he does not actually break down the absolute numbers into numbers the centre, he lists the numbers from individual parishes. In the spring of 1880, he confirmed in 35 places in Lincolnshire and the bishop suffragan also held Confirmations in Lincolnshire. It is not recorded the number of Confirmations held by the bishop suffragan of Nottingham (Table 6.6). Table 6.6 Confirmations in the Diocese of Lincoln 1869–1881 Year

Lincolnshire

Nottinghamshire

Total

1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881

5,209 5,298 3,475 3,408 5,342 3,658 3,545 3,424 4,272 3,940 3,572 4,414 3,823

923 1,704 2,763 1,332 1,629 2,037 1,922 2,376 2,074 1,969 2,170 2,021 2,078

6,132 7,002 6,238 4,740 6,971 5,695 5,467 5,800 6,346 5,909 5,742 6,435 5,901

The high point in the list is 1870 with the appointment of a suffragan bishop. This is however not sustained with an alarming drop to 1872 and then a slight resurgence. However, there seems to be a gradual trend of decline. Bishop Christopher Wordsworth is aware that there is a problem as indicated by these figures and asks himself what proportion of the population is actually coming forward for the Confirmation. He works on the figures of 1880 in Lincolnshire and contrasts those figures with the population of 469,994 and thus estimates that not quite 1% of the population of Lincolnshire was confirmed that year. For Nottinghamshire in 1880, 2,021 were confirmed whereas the population was 188,000 ‘not much more than half of one percent of the population’. He also notes that in all cases, there are more women candidates than men and in the 1880 example only 772 young men were confirmed. Continuing in self-reflection he asks what ought the percentage of population be who should be confirmed? He gives two examples, Spalding with 1,600 inhabitants and Grantham with 550. In the last 12 years, he

The English practice of Confirmation

157

estimates that 2% of the population per annum have been confirmed. In Grantham, he estimates over 14 years 4.5% of the population have been confirmed. These he singles out as particularly good examples. Turning to Nottingham with only a 1% expectation to be confirmed, he considers that 1,800 people should be confirmed each year in that town alone. He then turns to the national statistics noting that the population is 26 million and that the total number confirmed was 176,464 about 0.6 percent of the population and of this only 70,554 were males. He had argued in 1863 at the committee appointed to consider the extension of the episcopate that there were at least 80,000 persons every year who ought to be confirmed but were not due to the lack of bishops.62 It may be that his pastoral experience tempered this theological hope. He exhorts his fellow clergyman to be diligent in the work of catechizing promising to be equally assiduous in his work of Confirmation. A further example might be given in the charge by Bishop Charles Gore of Oxford in 1914. He also has clearly done some investigation of the figures as he says that in the last seven years, the percentage of those confirmed from the total population has varied from 1.34% to 1.10%. At the same time, he commends the quality of the candidates coming forward, an argument that would seem to prioritize quality over quantity. These are examples of an increasing viewing of statistics, and a noting of the weakness of the church in light of the overall population figure. While in the eighteenth century some figures were recorded, and increases noted, here the figures seem to show a gradual decline in terms of overall population and an increasing awareness by the church of that gradual decline. In both dioceses, there had been the reform of introducing suffragan bishops; this does not seem to have had much influence on this unfortunate trend. There was a regular collection of statistics for Confirmation from 1872. These statistics are shown in Figure 6.1.

Confirmaons 300000 250000 Confirmaons Linear (Confirmaons)

200000 150000 100000 50000 0 1860

1870

1880

1890

1900

1910

1920

Figure 6.1 Confirmation statistics 1872–1938.

1930

1940

1950

158

The English practice of Confirmation

The trend was an increase until a peak in 1911, with a growth after the war and then a decline. However, the overall trend line in dots shows this is a period of increase. Changes in conduct of the service

The Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline discovered some Confirmation practices that it found disturbing. It was clear that there was a difference between the practice of bishops, some would get the candidates to come up and kneel in a row, and others would have candidates come either individually or in pairs to kneel before them for the laying on of hands. Different bishops have different practices, neither of which seem to be problematic. Of more concern was the practice of Confirmation in Truro. A diocesan service book had been developed which had additions and interpolations in the service. Thus, the order of the service was: Hymn Liturgical greetings and doxology Psalm 23 Lesson from Acts 8 and then from Hebrews 6 Short creed Preface from 1662 Bishops first address Renewal Baptismal vow Confirmation prayers from 1662 Veni Creator Confirmation Bishops second address Prayers as from 1662 A number of issues are raised from this order of service. Some were concerned with the material prior to the beginning of the official service. It was noted that in the past Confirmation may have been preceded by Morning Prayer and a sermon. The Truro service seemed to truncate that. However, it was pointed out that bishops were free to add what they thought was appropriate to the beginning of the service, but this had limits. The Rev Dr Gibson said: I do not want to attack what is known as the jus liturgicum of the bishops; but it does seem to me that there is a limit to what Bishop should do in altering and adding to the Book of Common Prayer.63 The lack of the ministry of the word was commented on by Bishop Cosin who try to have it included in the 1662 revision. There was more concern over interpolating addresses and hymns within the Confirmation service.

The English practice of Confirmation

159

Some felt that this was not following the directions of the Book of Common Prayer. The particular concern was given to the singing of Veni Creator and the implications this might have for the theology of Confirmation. It is ironic that the agonizing over this as shown in the Royal Commission will soon be swept away when liturgical revision enables much of the practice of Truro to become part of the Church of England. It also shows that the new practice has become that the Bishop invariably gives addresses at Confirmations and the parish clergy are now excluded from that task. A letter in the Church Times in August 1927 questions the way that bishops adapt the use of the Confirmation service. Is there, Sir, any service in the prayer book so mangled, interpolated, and revised by the clergy as is the Confirmation service by the Bishops?64 He records a visit to a Confirmation with 100 candidates in a cathedral. He comments that there were three hymns, two addresses, two blessings, and that the candidates were confirmed four at a time. In light of the hope that the revised book would bring back order to the church, the author hopes such order would descend upon the bishops. It is clear that the practice of adapting the service, as objected to in the Royal Commission had become common practice. Review

While there is growth in the numbers of services, bishops, and candidates, this is not in proportion to the growth of the population. Bishops seem to have begun to use the statistics they collected to reflect on their effectiveness. Bishops also adapted the service mostly with interpolations, a development that was not always appreciated. This was in part due to the ferment of the Catholic revival. However, the clergy were now excluded from preaching at Confirmation. Boundary issues Issues arose concerning Confirmation, holy Communion, and people from other churches. Some happened at early ecumenical occasions, e.g., the Communion service in Westminster Abbey for the committee of translators of the Revised Version (1870), an Evangelical Alliance meeting (1873), where Bishop Cummins was attacked for receiving Communion from a Presbyterian minister (by an ex Zanzibar missionary), and the Kikuyu controversy (1913).65 Questions about Confirmation in terms of Church Union in India were also raised.66 It will suffice to look at two other examples about boundaries and Confirmation. One happened on home soil and in another the Archbishop of Canterbury was consulted about an overseas concern. These examples show the role of Confirmation as a boundary or barrier, and that this was a shifting role.

160

The English practice of Confirmation

Confirmation and chrismation

An innocuous extract from the diary of Archbishop Edward White Benson for September 1888 raises a very complex issue. The bishop in Jerusalem, George Blyth (1887–1914), had contacted him about some Greek Orthodox who want to become Anglican. They had approached the CMS missionaries who contacted the bishop in Jerusalem saying they would prepare them for Confirmation as the rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer. The bishop however did not think this was the right thing to do. Archbishop Benson advised him to admit them to Communion and give them a blessing but not confirm.67 Bishop Blyth had adopted the position by the prelates of the eastern churches that ‘the Chrism is their equivalent to our Confirmation’.68 However, relationships with the CMS were not good and the whole topic flared up again, particularly after Bishop Blyth’s Primary Charge in 1890, which was stirred up in England by The Guardian where CMS was accused of proselytism.69 An encyclical by five English bishops was sent, which tended to vindicate the mission society. The 1888 Lambeth Conference denounced proselytizing Eastern Churches, CMS was working with that policy, but there were individuals who asked to transfer. There was a phrase in one of the reports that said that chrismation occurred at Baptism without the laying on of hands but ‘we do not regard this as requiring members of the Orthodox Greek Church to receive our Confirmation’.70 The reply of CMS was that while this was in the report it was not in the encyclical or resolutions. It would appear that the Bishop in Jerusalem was refusing Confirmation, even to those who wanted it, and that this upset the CMS missionaries, but this was only part of a bad-tempered dispute between CMS and the bishop.71 The Guardian of 1891 thought that the bishops had made a mistake and argued for the absolute requirement of Confirmation, but Wirgman supported the bishops and saw them as forming policy unless refuted by a Lambeth Conference.72 The issue of differences in eastern and western initiation is in fact a much longer debate.73 It goes back as far as and beyond the Council of Florence (1439) where Pope Eugenius IV asked about the legitimacy of eastern priests administering the chrism. Dorotheus of Mytilene seems to have answered the question to the Pope’s satisfaction, but there were others who had already rejected the eastern position, e.g., Nicholas I (became pope 800).74 There were a whole series of different popes and theologians who debated the issue. Benedict XIV (pope 1740) gave a softer interpretation and deemed them ‘to be accounted valid’. It would appear that this view has prevailed. Dealing with transfers

Issues arose in England, as they previously had about the transfer of Christians into the Church of England. The approaches of a couple of examples will illustrate various solutions.

The English practice of Confirmation

161

One case was considered by Archbishop Frederick Temple in 1901.75 The situation is that some Lutheran ladies wish to receive Communion in a Church of England parish but did not want to be confirmed (because they have Lutheran Confirmation). The archbishop starts with the traditional statement that they ought to be confirmed and they should be told so. But then he goes on to mitigate this by saying, if they refuse, they should not be denied Communion. This seems to be in part because they are not Church of England people pushing a different line, but they are Lutheran people who have been taught something different, but there are no fundamental differences. He says their Confirmation may be invalid according to our rules but valid in their eyes. Thus, he seems to move validity from an absolute plain to a more subjective one. He thought they should get confirmed but we are doing worse if we bar them from Communion. He then says Confirmation is not like Baptism, unrepeatable; it is repeatable. So, if their first Confirmation were valid it would not be made invalid by being repeated. This is a remarkable thing to say, declaring Confirmation is repeatable has not been the standard line. A debate ran on about the extent and limits of the Confirmation rubric, some universalizing it, and others with a more restricted interpretation.76 In this letter, we see that boundaries are being challenged for good ecumenical reasons. Archbishop Temple’s reply starts from a standard position but then moves in a new direction with a relativizing of validity, giving space for conscience, saying Confirmation is repeatable, and considering the consequential impact of a hard-line position. In it, there is scope for ecumenical discussion. A letter in 1934 of Herbert Hensley Henson, Bishop of Durham, to Veronica Irvine deals with a lady who is getting confirmed having grown up in the Church of Scotland.77 The bishop sees this as a correct move considering her worshipping in an Anglican church but sympathizes with her ‘inner conflict’. He comforts her by saying he has no doubt that the ‘Presbyterian Church of Scotland is a true and living branch of the Church Catholic of Christ’. He sees the Church of England as having preserved some parts of the Christian tradition of great value lost for others in the reformation. In this, we see a generosity to the Church of Scotland, and he does not want to see her experiencing alienation from her previous tradition. He then expresses that Confirmation is linked to Baptism. You claim your place in the ‘covenant of grace’ and then God blesses you with the Spirit in the laying on of hands. Then comes the life of Communion. While this might seem more traditional, there is a generous interpretation of her previous tradition and an ecumenical approach to other churches. Review of boundaries

Confirmation is not only a rite of growth to maturity, seen as a rite of passage using Van Gennep’s theory, but is also a boundary rite, which does not fit in so easily to that model.78 In these instances, it is more a rite about

162

The English practice of Confirmation

the symbolic construction of community, who is in and who is out, and a ritual marking of that change of boundary for the individual.79 Changing theology of Confirmation influences that boundary as does perceptions of other churches, and of the place of the church in society. These boundaries have been tested in relationship to Orthodox, Lutheran, and Presbyterian individuals. The ecumenical movement would test that on an ecclesial level. One other aspect of identity comes to the fore in the Jerusalem case, the attitude to the book of ritual and the symbolic rite of Confirmation. The CMS missionaries were in one way trying to be ‘according to the book of Common Prayer’. Strictness to the ritual and the ritual as a symbolic code varied from person to person. The Lambeth bishops kept reiterating that the Book of Common Prayer shaped Anglican identity but at the same time Anglicans were busy revising that ritual and thus identity. Identity ritual and boundaries come together. Conclusion This chapter has taken a diverse approach to the practice of Confirmation. By beginning with a few bishops, we have been able to see a number of features. Bishop Wilberforce was a major gatekeeper in changing the practice of Confirmation. If in the eighteenth century the bishops basically conducted a tour and said, ‘come to me’, Wilberforce went out to the parishes. This was not a unique approach to him, others had started the trend, but he popularized it, and it remains the paradigm to today. Of particular interest is his use of Confirmation in missions, not an approach presently espoused. The ‘railway theory’, set forth by Jagger, needs some modifying in the earlier period, and to it might be added an improvement in roads, prior to the coming of the railways. The number of Confirmations conducted by Bishop Gwynne in the great war suggests some form of religious life in the troops, an ongoing discussion. Bishop Frere shows the application of ‘Catholic’ principles to Confirmation, at times in the face of opposition. Ollard had tried to show that the eighteenth century had disordered Confirmations. While my previous book revealed a lot of concern about disorder, there is very little evidence it happened. In the nineteenth century, there are several examples of disorder, some relating to societal anti-Tractarian feeling. Ollard is thus applying the criticism to the wrong period and the wrong group. It is well established that Confirmation was on the increase in the period, and this was helped by the ‘increase of the episcopate’. It is doubtful however that this was keeping up with the increase in the population and some bishops were aware of this. This is not just a statistical issue but also one concerning questions of church and society. While Confirmation is often treated as a rite of passage, it is much more rarely seen as constructing community as a boundary rite. Questions of the construction of Anglican identity and Confirmation come together in its

The English practice of Confirmation

163

boundary position. The relation to other churches becomes an issue of identity and theology. This will continue to be an issue in the next chapter. Notes 1 Phillip Tovey, Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820, Liturgy, Worship and Society (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014). 2 K. B. Cully, Confirmation Re-Examined (Wilton: Morehouse-Barlow Company, 1982), p. 66. Jerome Grosclaude, Samuel Wilberforce (1805–1873): Reinvinter L’eglise Sous Victoria (Rennes: PU Rennes, 2023). 3 Peter John Jagger, Clouded Witness: Initiation in the Church of England in the Mid-Victorian Period, 1850–1875, Pittsburgh Theological Monographs, New Ser. 1 (Allison Park, PA: Pickwick Publications, 1982). 4 David L. Edwards, Leaders of the Church of England, 1828–1944 (London; New York: Oxford University Press, 1971), pp. 97–98. 5 George William Daniell, Bishop Wilberforce (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company, 1891), p. 52. 6 Ibid., p. 53. 7 Reginald Garton Wilberforce, Bishop Wilberforce (Oxford: A.R. Mowbray, 1905), pp. 57–58. 8 A. R. Wilberforce Reginald Garton Ashwell, Life of the Right Reverend Samuel Wilberforce, D.D.: Lord Bishop of Oxford and Afterwards of Winchester, with Selections from His Diaries and Correspondence. Vol 1. (London: J. Murray, 1880). 9 Reginald G. Wilberforce, Life of the Right Reverend Samuel Wilberforce, Dd Lord Bishop of Oxford and Afterwards of Wichester: With Selections from His Diaries and Correspondence: Volume 2 (London: Murray, 1881), p. 5. 10 Phillip Tovey, Anglican Confirmation: 1662–1820 (Farnham: Ashgate, 2014), p. 107. 11 Peter John Jagger, Clouded Witness: Initiation in the Church of England in the Mid-Victorian Period, 1850–1875 (Allison Park, PA: Pickwick Publications, 1982), p. 160. 12 Reginald G. Wilberforce, A Charge to the Diocese of Oxford, at His Third Visitation, November 1854 (London: Parker, 1854), p. 3. 13 A Charge Delivered at the Triennial Visitation of the Diocese, November 1857 (London: Parker, 1857), p. 5. 14 Ashwell, Life of the Right Reverend Samuel Wilberforce, D.D.: Lord Bishop of Oxford and Afterwards of Winchester, with Selections from His Diaries and Correspondence. Vol 1, p. 229. 15 Samuel Wilberforce, An Address Delivered at the Confirmation at Eaton College on Friday, February 18, 1847 (London: Francis and John Rivington, 1847). 16 Oxfordshire History Centre, Printed programs of Confirmations to be held by the Bishop, 1853–1883, DIOC/1/E/4/A/3. 17 R. K. Pugh and J. F. A. Mason, The Letter-Books of Samuel Wilberforce, 1843–68, vol. 47, Oxfordshire Record Society (Leeds: Buckinghamshire Record Society and the Oxfordshire Record Society, 1970), p. 159. 18 Daniell, Bishop Wilberforce, pp. 54–55. 19 Anon, “Confirmation at Oxford,” The Church Times, 1865. 20 Trevor Park, The Reform Bishops,1828–1840: A Biographical Study (Luton: St Bega Publications, 2016), p. 180. 21 M. Snape, “Church of England Army Chaplains in the First World War: Goodbye to ‘Goodbye to All That’,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 62, no. 2 (2011), p. 335.

164

The English practice of Confirmation

22 L. M. Parker, “Shell-Shocked Prophets: The Influence of Former Anglican Army Chaplains on the Church of England and British Society in the Inter-War Years” (Birmingham, 2013). 23 Peter James Howson, The First World War Diaries of the Rt. Rev. Llewellyn Gwynne July 1915–July 1916, vol. 25, Church of England Record Society (Padstow: Boydell Press, 2019). 24 Ibid., p. 118. 25 Frederick B. MacNutt, The Church in the Furnace; Essays by Seventeen Temporary Church of England Chaplains on Active Service in France and Flanders (London: Macmillan and Co., 1917), p. 206. 26 Benjamin Gordon-Taylor and Nicolas Stebbing, Walter Frere: Scholar, Monk, Bishop (Norwich, Norfolk: Canterbury Press, 2011). 27 Francis Procter, A History of the Book of Common Prayer: With a Rationale of Its Offices (London: Macmillan, 1870), p. 405. 28 Francis Procter and W. H. Frere, A New History of the Book of Common Prayer: With a Rationale of Its Offices, on the Basis of the Former Work by Francis Procter (London: Macmillan 1949), pp. 606–7. 29 Walter Howard Frere, Some Principles of Liturgical Reform: A Contribution Towards the Revision of the Book of Common Prayer (London: John Murray, 1911), pp. 202–4. 30 C. S. Phillips, Walter Howard Frere: Bishop of Truro (London: Faber & Faber, 1947), pp. 88–89. 31 Ronald Claud Dudley Jasper, Walter Howard Frere: His Correspondence on Liturgical Revision and Construction, vol. 39, Alcuin Club Collections (London: SPCK, 1954), p. 278. 32 T. Hughes, Tom Brown’s School Days (London: Macmillan, 1868), p. 321. 33 T. Arnold, Sermons Preached in the Chapel of Rugby School, with an Address before Confirmation … Second Edition (London: B. Fellowes, 1833), pp. 365–77. 34 G. Moberly, Five Short Letters to Sir W. Heathcote … On the Studies and Discipline of Public Schools (London: Rivingtons, 1861). 35 Ryan Blank, “Schoolboy Confirmation and Tractarian Masculinities, Circa 1835–66,” in Ecclesiastical History Society (unpublished, 2018/19). 36 C.L.H. Memorials of a Harrow Schoolboy (London: James Nisbet, 1873), p. 24. 37 E.B. Pusey, Prayers for a Young Schoolboy, ed. H. P. Liddon (London: Rivingtons, 1883). 38 M. Spurrell, ed. Wood’s Radley College Diary (1855–1861), vol. 70 (Oxford: Oxfordshire Record Society, 2016). 39 J. Barman, Growing up British in British Columbia: Boys in Private School (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2011). 40 S. L. Ollard, “Confirmation in the Anglican Communion,” in Confirmation or the Laying on of Hands (London: SPCK, 1926). 41 Ibid., pp. 213–6. 42 Jagger, Clouded Witness: Initiation in the Church of England in the MidVictorian Period, 1850–1875, p. 171. 43 J. Hull and W. W. Hull, Observations on a Petition for the Revision of the Liturgy of the United Church of England and Ireland, with a Report of the Discussion It Caused in the House of Lords (London: B. Fellows, 1840). pp. 6, 13. 44 George Peirce Grantham, A History of Saint Saviour’s, Leeds: With a Full Description of the Church (London; Leeds: Jos. Masters; Harrison & Son: J. Smith, 1872). 45 George Hills, To the Parishioners of St Saviours‘, Leeds, More Particularly the Poorer Members of the Congregation, in Their Present Distress of Unfaithful Pastors: A Letter, of Affectionate Counsel (London: F. J. Rivington, 1851).

The English practice of Confirmation

165

46 “Riot at the Bishop of Exeter’s Confirmation,” Liverpool Mercury, 5 November 1852. 47 “Auricular Confession and the Confirmation at Plymouth,” The Essex Standard, and General Advertiser for the Eastern Counties, 29 October 1852. 48 Albert Clifton Kelway, George Rundle Prynne: A Chapter in the Early History of the Catholic Revival (London; New York: Longmans Green, 1905). 49 “Confirmation at Witnesham and Parochial Visits by the Bishop of Norwich,” The Ipswich Journal, 4 July 1863. 50 Beatrice de Bertouch, The Life of Father Ignatius, O.S.B., the Monk of Llanthony (London: Methuen, 1904). 51 He gets a better write up by Kilvert. William Plomer, Kilvert’s Diary 1870–1879: Selections from the Diary of the Rev. Francis Kilvert (New York: Macmillan, 1947), pp. 21–23, 47–48. 52 “Withholding of Confirmation Certificates,” Daily News, 15 April 1854. 53 “The Age of Candidates for Confirmation,” The Leeds Mercury, 14 August 1866. 54 O. Chadwick, The Victorian Church, Part Two: 1860–1901 (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1970), p. 222. 55 Jagger, Clouded Witness: Initiation in the Church of England in the MidVictorian Period, 1850–1875, p. 151. 56 J. Hind and P. D. L. Avis, The Journey of Christian Initiation: Theological and Pastoral Perspectives (London: Church House Pub., 2011), p. 100. 57 Bradshaw’s Railway Atlas – Great Britain and Ireland 1852 (Truro: Historical Images Ltd, 2012). See p. 68 for 1841; cf. p. 43 for 1852. 58 E. T. MacDermot, revised C. R. Clinker, History of the Great Western Railway Volume 1 1833–1863 (London: Ian Allan, 1964). 59 O. S. Nock, The Great Western Railway in the Nineteenth Century (London: I. Allan, 1962). 60 See map p. 9. 61 Richard Lingard, Princes Risborough-Thame-Oxford Railway (Oxford: Oxford Pub. Co., 1978). 62 J. H. Overton and E. Wordsworth, Christopher Wordsworth, 1807–1885 (London: Rivingtons, 1888). 63 Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline, Minutes of Evidence Taken before the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline vol. 1 (London: Printed for H.M.S.O., by Wyman and Sons, 1906). § 1048. 64 Sacerdos, “Confirmation Service,” Church Times XCVIII, no. 3367 (1927). 65 R. T. Davidson and W. Benham, Life of Archibald Campbell Tait, Archbishop of Canterbury. Vol. 2 (Macmillan, 1891), pp. 63–74. John Fenwick, The Free Church of England: The History and Promise of an Anglican Tradition (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), p. 88. Colin Buchanan, “Costly Communion: Ecumenical Initiative and Sacramental Strife in the Anglican Communion,” in Confirmation – the Excluding Feature? A Study of Anglican Confirmation in Its Ecumenical Implications 1870–1920, ed. Mark D. Chapman and Jeremy Bonner (Brill, 2019). Colin Reed, “Denominationalism or Protestantism? Mission Strategy and Church in the Kikuyu Conference of 1913,” International Bulletin of Missionary Research 37, no. 4 (2013). “No Kikuyu Heresy Trial,” The New York Times, 10 February 1914. “The Kikuyu Controversy,” Marlborough Express, 27 February 1914. 66 A. E. Morris, “Confirmation and South India—I,” Theology 20, no. 115 (1930), pp. 28–40. “Confirmation and South India—II,” Theology 20, no. 116 (1930).

166

The English practice of Confirmation

67 Arthur Christopher Benson, The Life of Edward White Benson: Sometime Archbishop of Canterbury, 2 vols., vol. 2 (London: MacMillan, 1990), pp. 224–5. 68 Anon, “Missionary Progress and Problems,” The Review of the Churches 1 (1891–2), p. 123. 69 Eugene Stock, The History of the Church Missionary Society … Vol. 3 (London: The Society, 1899), p. 523. 70 Lambeth Conference, “Conference of Bishops of the Anglican Communion, Holden at Lambeth Palace, in July 1888: Encyclical Letter from the Bishops with the Resolutions and Reports” (London, 1888), p. 101. 71 Anon, “The Lambeth ‘Advice’,” The Church Missionary Intelligencer 42 (1891), pp. 717–23. 72 A. Theodore Wirgman, The Doctrine of Confirmation: Considered in Relation to Holy Baptism as a Sacramental Ordinance of the Catholic Church, with a Preliminary Historical Survey of the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit (London; New York: Longmans, Green, 1897), p. 494. The modern approach in the Church of England, Legal Advisory Commission of the General Synod, “Ordinands: Requirement of Confirmation,” ed. Church of England (London: Legal Advisory Commission of the General Synod, 2009). 73 Wirgman, The Doctrine of Confirmation: Considered in Relation to Holy Baptism as a Sacramental Ordinance of the Catholic Church, with a Preliminary Historical Survey of the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit, pp. 488–94. 74 Wirgman is working from, Charles Witasse, Tractatus Theologici: In Septem Tomos Distributi … De Sacramento Confirmationis (Venetiis: Recurti, 1738). 75 Frederick Charles Macdonald, A History of Confirmation: … From the First to the Twentieth Century (London: Skeffington, 1937), pp. 193–4. 76 J. W. Hunkin, Episcopal Ordination and Confirmation in Relation to InterCommunion and Reunion: A Collection of Anglican Precedents and Opinions (W. Heffer & Sons, 1929). 77 Evelyn Foley Braley, Letters of Herbert Hensley Henson (London: SPCK, 1951), pp. 89–90. 78 Arnold van Gennep, The Rites of Passage (London: Routledge, 1960). 79 Anthony P. Cohen, The Symbolic Construction of Community (London: Ellis Horwood Ltd. and Tavistock Publications Ltd., 1985).

Reference list “The Age of Candidates for Confirmation.” The Leeds Mercury, 14 August 1866. Anon. “Confirmation at Oxford.” The Church Times, 1865, 713–725. Anon. “The Lambeth ‘Advice’.” The Church Missionary Intelligencer 42 (1891): 859. Anon. “Missionary Progress and Problems.” The Review of the Churches 1 (1891–2). Arnold, T. Sermons Preached in the Chapel of Rugby School, with an Address before Confirmation … ... Second Edition. London: B. Fellowes, 1833. Ashwell, A. R. Wilberforce Reginald Garton. Life of the Right Reverend Samuel Wilberforce, D.D.: Lord Bishop of Oxford and Afterwards of Winchester, with Selections from His Diaries and Correspondence. Vol 1. London: J. Murray, 1880. “Auricular Confession and the Confirmation at Plymouth.” The Essex Standard, and General Advertiser for the Eastern Counties, 29 October 1852. Barman, J. Growing up British in British Columbia: Boys in Private School. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2011.

The English practice of Confirmation

167

Benson, A. C. The Life of Edward White Benson: Sometime Archbishop of Canterbury. 2 vols. Vol. 2, London: MacMillan, 1990. Bertouch, Beatrice de. The Life of Father Ignatius, O.S.B., the Monk of Llanthony. London: Methuen, 1904. Blank, R. “Schoolboy Confirmation and Tractarian Masculinities, Circa 1835–66.” In Ecclesiastical History Society: unpublished, 2018/19. Bradshaw’s Railway Atlas – Great Britain and Ireland 1852. Truro: Historical Images Ltd, 2012. Braley, E. F. Letters of Herbert Hensley Henson. London: SPCK, 1951. Buchanan, C. “Costly Communion: Ecumenical Initiative and Sacramental Strife in the Anglican Communion.” In Confirmation – the Excluding Feature? A Study of Anglican Confirmation in Its Ecumenical Implications 1870–1920, edited by D. C. Mark and J. Bonner, 11–41. Boston: Brill, 2019. C.L.H. Memorials of a Harrow Schoolboy. London: James Nisbet, 1873. Chadwick, O. The Victorian Church, Part Two: 1860–1901. London: Adam and Charles Black, 1970. Cohen, A. P. The Symbolic Construction of Community. London: Ellis Horwood Ltd. and Tavistock Publications Ltd., 1985. Conference, Lambeth. “Conference of Bishops of the Anglican Communion, Holden at Lambeth Palace, in July 1888: Encyclical Letter from the Bishops with the Resolutions and Reports.” London, 1888. “Confirmation at Witnesham and Parochial Visits by the Bishop of Norwich.” The Ipswich Journal, 4 July 1863. Cully, K. B. Confirmation Re-Examined. Wilton: Morehouse-Barlow Company, 1982. Daniell, G. W. Bishop Wilberforce. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company, 1891. Davidson, R. T., and W. Benham. Life of Archibald Campbell Tait, Archbishop of Canterbury. Vol. 2. London: Macmillan, 1891. Edwards, D. L. Leaders of the Church of England, 1828–1944. London; New York: Oxford University Press, 1971. Fenwick, J. The Free Church of England: The History and Promise of an Anglican Tradition. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004. Frere, W. H. Some Principles of Liturgical Reform; a Contribution Towards the Revision of the Book of Common Prayer. London: John Murray, 1911. Gennep, Arnold van. The Rites of Passage. London: Routledge, 1960. Gordon-Taylor, B., and N. Stebbing. Walter Frere: Scholar, Monk, Bishop. Norwich, Norfolk: Canterbury Press, 2011. Grantham, G. P. A History of Saint Saviour’s, Leeds: With a Full Description of the Church. London; Leeds: Jos. Masters; Harrison & Son: J. Smith, 1872. Grosclaude, J. Samuel Wilberforce (1805–1873): Reinvinter L’eglise Sous Victoria. Rennes: PU Rennes, 2023. Hills, G. To the Parishioners of St Saviours‘, Leeds, More Particularly the Poorer Members of the Congregation, in Their Present Distress of Unfaithful Pastors: A Letter, of Affectionate Counsel. London: F. J. Rivington, 1851. Hind, J., Avis, P. D. L. The Journey of Christian Initiation: Theological and Pastoral Perspectives. London: Church House Pub., 2011. Howson, P. J. The First World War Diaries of the Rt. Rev. Llewellyn Gwynne July 1915–July 1916. Church of England Record Society. Vol. 25, Padstow: Boydell Press, 2019.

168

The English practice of Confirmation

Hughes, T. Tom Brown’s School Days. London: Macmillan, 1868. Hull, J., and W. W. Hull. Observations on a Petition for the Revision of the Liturgy of the United Church of England and Ireland, with a Report of the Discussion It Caused in the House of Lords. London: B. Fellows, 1840. Hunkin, J. W. Episcopal Ordination and Confirmation in Relation to InterCommunion and Reunion: A Collection of Anglican Precedents and Opinions. W. Heffer & Sons: Cambridge, 1929. Jagger, P. J. Clouded Witness: Initiation in the Church of England in the MidVictorian Period, 1850–1875. Pittsburgh Theological Monographs, New Ser. 1. Allison Park, PA: Pickwick Publications, 1982. Jasper, R. C. D. Walter Howard Frere: His Correspondence on Liturgical Revision and Construction. Alcuin Club Collections. Vol. 39, London: SPCK, 1954. Kelway, A. C. George Rundle Prynne: A Chapter in the Early History of the Catholic Revival. London; New York: Longmans Green, 1905. “The Kikuyu Controversy.” Marlborough Express, 27 February 1914. Lingard, R. Princes Risborough-Thame-Oxford Railway. Oxford: Oxford Pub. Co., 1978. MacDermot, E. T., revised Clinker, C. R. History of the Great Western Railway Volume 1 1833–1863. London: Ian Allan, 1964. Macdonald, F. C. A History of Confirmation: … ... From the First to the Twentieth Century. London: Skeffington, 1937. MacNutt, F. B. The Church in the Furnace; Essays by Seventeen Temporary Church of England Chaplains on Active Service in France and Flanders. London: Macmillan and Co., 1917. Moberly, G. Five Short Letters to Sir W. Heathcote … ... On the Studies and Discipline of Public Schools. London: Rivingtons, 1861. Morris, A. E. “Confirmation and South India—I.” Theology 20, no. 115 (1930): 28–40. Morris, A. E. “Confirmation and South India—II.” Theology 20, no. 116 (1930): 71–76. “No Kikuyu Heresy Trial.” The New York Times, 10 February 1914. Nock, O. S. The Great Western Railway in the Nineteenth Century. London: I. Allan, 1962. Ollard, S. L. “Confirmation in the Anglican Communion.” In Confirmation or the Laying on of Hands, 60–245. London: SPCK, 1926. Overton, J. H. & Wordsworth E. Christopher Wordsworth, 1807–1885. London: Rivingtons, 1888. Park, T. The Reform Bishops,1828–1840: A Biographical Study. Luton: St Bega Publications, 2016. Parker, L. M. “Shell-Shocked Prophets: The Influence of Former Anglican Army Chaplains on the Church of England and British Society in the Inter-War Years.” Birmingham, 2013. Phillips, C. S. Walter Howard Frere: Bishop of Truro. London: Faber & Faber, 1947. Plomer, W.. Kilvert’s Diary 1870–1879: Selections from the Diary of the Rev. Francis Kilvert. New York: Macmillan, 1947. Procter, F. A History of the Book of Common Prayer: With a Rationale of Its Offices. London: Macmillan, 1870. Procter, F., and W. H. Frere. A New History of the Book of Common Prayer: With a Rationale of Its Offices, on the Basis of the Former Work by Francis Procter. London: Macmillan 1949.

The English practice of Confirmation

169

Pugh R. K., Mason J. F. A. The Letter-Books of Samuel Wilberforce, 1843–68. Oxfordshire Record Society. Vol. 47, Leeds: Buckinghamshire Record Society and the Oxfordshire Record Society, 1970. Pusey, E. B. Prayers for a Young Schoolboy [Ed. By H.P. Liddon]. London: Rivingtons, 1883. Reed, C. “Denominationalism or Protestantism? Mission Strategy and Church in the Kikuyu Conference of 1913.” International Bulletin of Missionary Research 37, no. 4 (2013): 207–12. “Riot at the Bishop of Exeter’s Confirmation.” Liverpool Mercury, 5 November 1852. Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline. Minutes of Evidence Taken before the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline Vol. 1, London: Printed for H.M.S.O., by Wyman and Sons, 1906. Sacerdos. “Confirmation Service.” Church Times XCVIII, no. 3367 (1927): 152. Snape, M. “Church of Engladn Army Chaplains in the First World War: Goodbye to ‘Goodbye to All That’.” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 62, no. 2 (2011): 318–45. Spurrell, M., ed. Wood’s Radley College Diary (1855–1861) Vol. 70. Oxford: Oxfordshire Record Society, 2016. Stock, E. The History of the Church Missionary Society … ... Vol. 3. London: The Society, 1899. Synod, L. A. Commission of the General. “Ordinands: Requirement of Confirmation.” edited by Church of England, 5. London: Legal Advisory Commission of the General Synod, 2009. Tovey, P. Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820. Liturgy, Worship and Society. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014. Wilberforce, R. G. A Charge Delivered at the Triennial Visitation of the Diocese, November 1857. London: Parker, 1857. Wilberforce, R. G. A Charge to the Diocese of Oxford, at His Third Visitation, November 1854. London: Parker, 1854. Wilberforce, R. G. Life of the Right Reverend Samuel Wilberforce, Dd Lord Bishop of Oxford and Afterwards of Wichester: With Selections from His Diaries and Correspondence: Volume 2. London: Murray, 1881. Wilberforce, R. G. Bishop Wilberforce. Oxford: A.R. Mowbray, 1905. Wilberforce, S. An Address Delivered at the Confirmation at Eaton College on Friday, February 18, 1847. London: Francis and John Rivington, 1847. Wirgman, A. T. The Doctrine of Confirmation: Considered in Relation to Holy Baptism as a Sacramental Ordinance of the Catholic Church, with a Preliminary Historical Survey of the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit. London; New York: Longmans, Green, 1897. Witasse, C. Tractatus Theologici: In Septem Tomos Distributi … ... De Sacramento Confirmationis. [in Latin]. Venetiis: Recurti, 1738. “Withholding of Confirmation Certificates.” Daily News, 15 April 1854.

7

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion

The development of the Anglican Communion is a complex subject.1 There is clearly international interaction, on a personnel scale with missionaries, priests, and bishops moving around the ‘overseas’ church, and in and out of various empires. Different times, peoples, and places form a variety of contexts, in missiological terms from initial evangelization to a more settled church. The practice is vast, and a series of short case studies will shape this chapter to look at how Confirmation was used in practice. Previous works looked at North America and India in the long eighteenth century.2 This chapter will take a small selection of nineteenth-century bishops and look at their practice of Confirmation, in the United States, Canada, and India.3 The inclusion of these case studies will undoubtedly raise questions of the process of selection. Case studies are well known in historical and social science research.4 Marshall and Rossman outline 16 sampling strategies in their typology.5 In the process below, I have snowballed and looked for ‘typical’ and used ‘opportunities’. In considering case studies from the whole communion, there are questions of availability of data (and the sheer amount available) and questions of language (I would love to do more on the far east but don’t know the languages). The case studies are improved, if there can be some contrasts, and a variety of available evidence for each case study (to enable triangulation). As this is a period when statistical data becomes available, this will be used but caveats about the accuracy of the data need to be considered. There are also contrasts across the communion in the availability of statistical data; England has a highly developed statistic department; in contrast, the Anglican Church of Aotearoa New Zealand to this day has no such administration. It also should be added that there is a ‘pragmatism’ in some of the case studies, building on previous work and looking to potential future research. America The first case studies come from the Episcopal Church in the United States of America. In the nineteenth century, the United States was expanding, and the church reorganized itself to enable mission both at home and overseas. The DOI: 10.4324/9781032676876-7

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion 171

Figure 7.1 Confirmations Episcopal Church 1876–1926.

period saw an increase in members, in dioceses, and mission districts. David Holmes sees this period as a revival of the Episcopal Church and a turning point in its history.6 While there is an increase of membership, there is not a proportional increase in clergy, nor is the increase in membership proportional to the overall population growth. However, the statistics for Confirmation show a steady increase over the period and an upward trend (the dotted line is the trend line) (Table 7.1).7 With this brief overview, we will look at two bishops drawing on biographical, autobiographical, published works, and convention documents.8 Anson Roger Graves

Anson Graves (1842–1932) was born in the east but migrated to the west in 1847, taking three weeks to cross the continent. He writes a colourful autobiography of his life.9 He was sceptical about Christianity, but staying with an uncle who was episcopalian, and through sermons and conversation, was baptized in 1863. After that he heard a sermon on Holy Communion and began to receive communion, getting confirmed later by Bishop De Lancey. In 1868, he entered General Theological Seminary, New York after a few years of farm work, some teaching and odd jobs. While at seminary, he became a paid lay reader at All Saints Church, New York where he looked after 500 children in the Sunday school. In 1870, he was ordained deacon in New York, the next year he was priested. After a tour of Europe, he took his first charge in 1872 in Nebraska. Part of the parish work was to conduct missions in the four mission churches. This was mostly an intensive preaching programme, but this developed into Confirmation classes. He moved to New Hampshire and married. Then moved back in 1883 to Minneapolis. He says in his six years at the church he presented for Confirmation on average 50 people a year and that sometimes at the Confirmation lectures there were 150 people present.

172

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion

This implies public Confirmation lectures. There was considerable growth in the church and in his last year he did 92 baptisms and presented 60 for Confirmation. Bishop Beecher, the successor of Bishop Graves, in his 1914 address to the annual convocation says that in about 1900 the whole of the United States was divided into missionary districts.10 These had by his time become ecclesiastical provinces and they were a part of province six. The districts were led by missionary bishops, under the canon passed by the General Convention in 1835. The concept of the missionary bishops is expounded by Bishop Doane of New Jersey in one of the first such consecrations.11 In 1889, the House of Bishops, with, according to Graves, the advice of Bishops Whipple (Bishop Minnesota 1859-1901),12 Knickerbacker (Indiana), and Gilbert (bishop coadjutor of Minnesota) decided to divide the Diocese of Nebraska and create a missionary district.13 In fact, the decision had come from the Diocese of Nebraska where Bishop George Worthington was convinced that the diocese as too large.14 In 1890, Graves was consecrated bishop of The Platte in his own church where he was rector (bishop 1890–1910). He was consecrated by Bishop Tuttle of Montana, Bishop Hare of South Dakota, and Bishop Burgess of Quincy.15 He then began an itinerant ministry as a missionary bishop constantly visiting around his diocese. He had six clergy in the diocese with 19 places of worship and 375 communicants. He assiduously travelled around conducting services, missions, baptisms, and Confirmations. He travels to the General Convention and the Lambeth Conference. There are five railway lines through the diocese which he uses, they bring in people, but also let people leave, and he notes that some churches lose a large number of the best people. He mentions Confirmations regularly, but the autobiography is not a statistical record. Some contrasts are shown in Table 7.1. Table 7.1 Confirmations Bishop Graves Year

Confirmations

1893 1894 1904

63 156 264

He reports in 1904 the numbers confirmed and communicant (Table 7.2): So, he saw steady growth and a usual gap between those confirmed and those who were communicant. It is not clear in these figures about the number of ‘native’ Episcopalians. Bishop Whipple is famous for this work with the ‘Indians’. Several times in his travels he mentions different tribes. In 1890, he visited the Chippewa Indians and confirmed 30. He seems to see this as simply a part of his work. In his Hale Memorials Sermon at Western Theological Seminary in 1908, he set out his strategy as a missionary bishop.16 He rejects revivalist approaches

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion 173 Table 7.2 Statistics for the Missionary District Western Nebraska 1904 Baptized

4359

Confirmed Communicant

2,395 1,668

and thinks that there needs to be steady patient work. He thinks missionaries should be itinerant over an area and not in one town. The growth of towns was very unpredictable and so this allowed flexibility. However, the diocese did run a school and a hospital. He saw an important place for lay readers and women in building up the church. He anticipated an annual Confirmation in the large churches as a part of his missionary strategy. Charles Lewis Slattery

Slattery was born in 1867 to a clerical family in Pennsylvania.17 His Father died when he was young, and he lived with his mother. They moved to Maine where he was confirmed at age 15. He then went to live with his brother who was a farmer on the plains in Colorado. He began to teach at a school and save money for college. He wrote to Phillips Brooks who encouraged him to go to Harvard, which he entered in 1887. He was impressed by the preaching of Phillips Brooks. He made some money by teaching at Sunday school. He was delighted when Phillips Brooks was elected Bishop of Massachusetts. He had decided to prepare for the ministry and went to the Episcopal Theological School in Cambridge, renowned for its critical biblical scholarship. He was ordained in 1894 and took a job at Groton school (to 1896) which included looking after a small church. Like Phillips Brooks, he was impressed by the work of F. D. Maurice. He then became the Rector and Dean of the Cathedral of Minnesota (1896–1907), and he extended the time of his ministry there on the unexpected death of Bishop Whipple. He now began his writing career and became a prodigious author. After a couple of biographies, he wrote his most influential work The Master of the World. After 12 years, he moved to Springfield Massachusetts (1907–1910) where he used the Confirmation register to work out who was no longer attending and began a process of visitation. But he was then called to Grace Church New York (1910–1922), where he took on a number of important roles and grew fond of his bishop, Bishop Greer. While in New York he wrote Why Men Pray, A Study of the Lord’s Prayer and The Holy Communion as preparatory works for Holy Communion. In 1922, he was elected coadjutor Bishop of Massachusetts (1922–1927). He valued the ministry of Confirmation, bringing him, as bishop, in touch with young people and being the instrument for the Holy Spirit to come anew to those with an open heart. He had several Confirmation sermons

174

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion

which he memorized. He was clear that while there is an operation of the Holy Spirit in Confirmation, the Spirit begins work in baptism. He frequently wrote a note of encouragement to those who had presented candidates for Confirmation at the end of the day.18 He worked on Prayer Book revision for what was to become the 1928 American Book of Common Prayer. In 1927, Bishop Lawrence of Massachusetts resigned, and Slattery took over as diocesan (1927–1930) while a bishop he wrote the book Following Christ which was his instruction for Confirmation. The Light Within was written while he was at Grace Church New York in 1915. It is a wide-ranging discussion of the Holy Spirit. Within the book, he discusses the place of sacraments and rites: We think of the Holy Spirit as living in the Church. In the Holy Spirit we are members one of another. In every great service of the Church, – Baptism, Confirmation, Holy Communion, Ordination, – the Holy Spirit is invoked. By Him we are incorporated, through Baptism, into the spiritual body of Christ.19 He sees sacraments as being the means of grace because of the working of the Holy Spirit. He mentions a variety of texts from Acts but clearly does not put priority on any one of them seeing a diverse operation of the Spirit. He notes that forms of service in the Prayer Book have prayers that invoke the Spirit. He knows that Confirmation was once a part of baptism and says that in the West it was reserved to the bishop. If the candidate was an adult, they were immediately confirmed at baptism. He sees infant baptism as guided by the Holy Spirit. In our lives, the response of the heart to God invites the work of the Holy Spirit. It is highly likely that he was aware of the controversy around Confirmation, but in this book, he sees the Holy Spirit at work in our lives in many points of our life. Following Christ was his last book, although others were in preparation. It is a book to prepare candidates for Confirmation. The book is wide-ranging and includes further reading in small bibliographies. The chapters are on decision, character, creed, church, worship, Holy Communion, and knowing Christ. In the appendix, he creates a Catechism which says about Confirmation: The Church provides the Laying on of Hands, or Confirmation, wherein, after renewing the promises and vows of my baptism, and declaring my loyalty and devotion to Christ as my Master, I receive the strengthening gifts of the Holy Spirit.20 He also adds a service of preparation and introduction before Confirmation, and a prayer after Confirmation, which he authorizes in the diocese. This gives some indication of the importance he gave to Confirmation. He also comments on the importance of Confirmation in his biography of David Hummell Greer who was his bishop in New York. As bishop, he

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion

175

would respond quickly to a phone call which said that there was a sick person who needed confirming. When the day had been thus spent, ordinarily he would have a Confirmation in the evening, and on Sundays he would visit two or three parishes for Confirmation. Not counting the persons confirmed by other bishops, he himself would confirm in a single year about three thousand persons.21 He also mentions the importance of preaching at Confirmation. It may well be that his own practice of Confirmation was modelled on Bishop Greer. In 1928, Slattery wrote an article in The Witness, the national paper for the Episcopal Church, on the new prayer book as Chairman of the Commission. He says about the Confirmation service: The Confirmation Service has been changed only slightly by the omission of the exhortation at the beginning of the service, and the addition of a question and answer pledging the candidate to loyal discipleship to Christ.22 In 1913, he wrote the report on Prayer Book Revision for the General Convention. In this, he questions some of the proposals and asks if changing a prayer for a performative ‘I confirm thee’ is an improvement and if it detracts from baptism. He likewise is not sure about adding the signing with the cross as this might reduce the act in baptism. He sees the ‘primitive norm’ as simple hand laying. His conclusion is ‘in any case this part of the proposed revision needs deliberation’.23 Review

These two examples in the Episcopal Church are a contrast between a missionary bishop and an east coast bishop. Both see Confirmation as an integral part of their ministry and mission. One wrote extensively and included Confirmation as a part of his corpus. In the expansion in the West, Confirmation was a part of the mission of the church. The whole experience of the church in these diverse contexts fed into the liturgical revision of the 1928 American Prayer Book. Canada Throughout the period of this book, Canada was also expanding to the West. There was the settlement of Upper Canada by Loyalists and then European settlers. Then came a period of expansion to the West with the development of the railways.24 The Church Mission Society had engaged in

176

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion

mission to First Nations people and settlers in the Red River settlements (now Winnipeg), hence Bishop Mountain’s heroic visitation of the West.25 But there was work in upper and lower Canada with growing urbanization and then industrialization. After the First World War, which gave Canada a stronger national identity, the Depression was of great impact on the country and the church. The General Synod of the Church of England in Canada has been trying to collate some basic statistical data since the first general synod in 1894. They set up a committee to recommend how to collate information, who reported back to the next synod suggesting a pro forma. By the eighth session of General Synod, in 1918, there was a long report on the importance of statistics and the unreliability of the dioceses in providing the information. Thus, for a number of years, the data was not published or only published in brief summary forms. In 1927, the Anglican Church of Canada decided again to gather statistical data and publish it for the General Synod. The 1962 report gave the information for the end of the period of this book.26 Thus, the information is very variable in its reliability and includes gaps in the data. Using what is available, the overall picture of Confirmation in Canada is as shown in Figure 7.2. The chart shows a general increase over the period, which was also a period of settlement and population growth. The gaps in the data are when it was not collated. There is a decline towards the end of the period which turns around to a significant increase after the Second World War. Philip Carrington sees several problems in the last few years.27 Externally, Canada

Figure 7.2 Confirmations in Canada.

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion 177 was greatly affected by the Wall Street Crash and the Depression. There was also drought and famine in the prairies. Internally, some dioceses lost all their assets because of the crash. Also in this period, the CMS decided to withdraw from working in Canada requiring the national church to reorganize to cover the work that was happening. So, interpretation of the chart needs to consider the wider society as well as the church. People who are moving around trying to find work and dependent on soup kitchens probably don’t want to join a Confirmation class. The statistics have made us focus on the end of the period; we will examine first, however, the start of the period with the first bishop of Toronto. John Strachan

Born in Aberdeen, Scotland, in 1778, after the death of his Father in 1794, he migrated to Canada to continue tutoring activities. He was ordained priest in 1803 and moved to York, Ontario. This was attacked in the war with America in 1812 when he negotiated the terms of surrender of the town. He became involved in key organizations of loyal Canadians. He was critical of Bishop Mountain’s approach and said that what was needed was not an English bishop in Canada but a missionary bishop who would travel the country and preach the gospel.28 In 1839, he was consecrated the first bishop of Toronto. He was then deeply involved in the politics of Canada and the running of the church, with a keen eye on education. He was an old high churchman who was influenced by Bishop John Henry Hobart of New York.29 He wanted to defend the First Nation people of Canada and was active in mission work. He died in 1867. There are several sources on his life, biographies, diaries, and other works.30 Of particular importance for this book are the tours where he conducted Confirmation. In 1820, while at York, Bishop Mountain held a visitation and 16 clergy came. As a part of the visitation, many people were confirmed. Strachan would have been there and presented people for Confirmation. In June 1840 as first bishop of Toronto, he began his first visitation and Confirmation tours. He conducted these as a series of trips radiating out from Toronto (Table 7.3). The total number of Confirmations was said to be about 2,000. Bethune, his successor emphasizes how bad travel was and the heroic nature of the tour. He also adds on Confirmation: Scarcely a day passed without one Confirmation service; and very frequently there were two. The Bishop invariably preached on these occasions; and after the Confirmation service, addressed the candidates at considerable length. These addresses were always very impressive ones; they were simple and practical, and touched closely the sympathies and feelings of the young.31

178

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion

Table 7.3 First visitation of Bishop Strachan 1840 Date

Direction

Parish clergy visited

Numbers confirmed

May June July September October

Niagara North East West Toronto

8 8 32 34

139 152 800 700 ?

At Brantford, he confirmed a number of Mohawk and also at Tuscarora a number of First Nations people and people of colour. The visitation was held in the cathedral in September. In 1842, he went north and toured around Lake Huron in canoes. He conducted Baptisms and Confirmations travelling 2,500 miles and confirming 756 people. Details are included in a journal of the trip. At the visitation in 1844, he gives a slightly different account of the trip. In Table 7.4, the first line is from the journals and the second his report at the visitation. Perhaps he included in the latter some places not in the former. However, discrepancies are a part of the data at this time. Table 7.4 Reports on the numbers of the 1842 visitation Direction

Stations

Confirmed

Miles

Huron 1842 Journal Huron 1842 Visitation

78

756 2923

2500 2277

Discrepancies show that the figures mentioned are not as accurate as we might wish and a bit impressionistic. Indeed, Bethune becomes quite sketchy about the second major Confirmation tour and gives no other details of possibly ten more tours that he would have done, if he conducted them every two years. Henderson, however, adds some additional comments on Strachan’s approach.32 He says that whereas in England bishops held very large Confirmations in Cathedrals and major churches, and Mountain and Stewart had held triennial Confirmation tours, Strachan tried to go to every mission and congregation to perform Confirmation. He would publish his tour in The Church. As he got older, he organized the division of the diocese to make Confirmation more possible. Henderson says in older age he came to dread the Confirmation tours because of the physical demands of travel, although the coming of the railways helped. Looking at the 1845 tour and concentrating on Elgin County we can build up a detailed picture of part of one tour. Information from his journal on the 1845 Confirmation tour can be supplemented from parish records and The Church.33 The bishop’s journal only mentions four places in Elgin County. Confirmation records say there were in fact ten Confirmations. The Church

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion 179 has 13. There are two recorded by the bishop with no records (labelled below as bishop in the record column); some of the churches in the list are now closed. There are two where there are both registers, and they are mentioned in the journal (church, bishop) and five where there are registers but no mention in the journal. There are three other appointments in The Church. The church records give names and ages. From this, we can see that there are no people confirmed under 15. The largest group is in fact people in their twenties. One person is confirmed in her seventies and there is a higher number of female candidates, but this is not vastly disproportionate. Confirmation candidates are scattered across all age ranges. The number of candidates at each centre varies and there are comments that give reasons for this in the journal, e.g., the fact that the church is relatively new and might not have anyone stationed there. In Trinity Howard, three families are all but two of those confirmed, showing how complete families took the opportunity to get confirmed. The bishop travels in a westward direction. He is doing Confirmations most days, sometimes twice a day. The locations show a clear incremental progress except for 24th July which seems implausibly far part, but The Church shows Wardville as 29th which is geographically more plausible and so I have moved the rows to The Church’s sequence. The journal shows him getting up early in the morning to move on, living in a variety of accommodation. The roads are mostly poor, and he comments when they have been improved in any way to aid travel (Table 7.5). Table 7.5 Confirmation tour 1845 Elgin County Date 1845 Place

Male Female Total Record

22 July 23

13

9

22 34

Church Bishop

8

12

21

Church Bishop Bishop The Church

24 25 25 26 27 28 28 29 (24) 30 31 1 August

St Charles Dereham Richmond Port Borwell St James Malahide St Thomas Port Stanley 3 pm St Peters Dunwich (Tyrconnel) St Thomas Westminster Delaware Munecy Town 4 pm St James Wardsville St Matthews Iona Mills Zone Mills Trinity Howard Trinity Mersea

41 3

1

4 8

4

3

7

15

12

27

12 2

18 4

30 6

Church Bishop Bishop The Church The Church Church The Church Church The Church Church Church

180

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion

By triangulating the data, it is possible to get a more accurate picture of events than from any one source and to iron out any discrepancies. It is as Bethune said he confirmed every day with no days of rest doing one or two Confirmations a day. He became a bishop at 61 and died at 89 so these schedules he set for himself were demanding considering his age. From 1851, there are records of Strachan using the train to travel on these tours.34 He had given up travelling by canoe and was using the steam ships to travel to various islands. The visits were publicized in the Church which is how candidates and clergy knew where the bishop would be travelling. He tried to maximize the visits. He would sometimes conditionally baptize those who had doubts about their baptism by non-episcopally ordained ministers (see the section on the Scottish Episcopal Church).35 He would give an address to the whole congregation before the service and one to the candidates at the end. Only towards the end of his life were these written down, previously they were extemporary.36 He would also go and visit the housebound and confirm in the home if needed. He was usually accompanied by his chaplain. These tours showed that he was an ‘indefatigable bishop, who knows the diocese far better than any other individual’.37 Later in his ministry, he began to confirm every other year in the large churches in towns. In 1859, he did his last tour south of Kingston with 44 appointments confirming 1,670 people.38 In this last tour, he travelled 1,119 miles 300 by train and the rest by coach. Thus, while Strachan’s policy to ‘go to the people’ parallels that of Wilberforce and Hobart,39 like them the policy preceded the railways; rather than created by the railways, it was reinforced by them.40 Strachan did not insist on Confirmation before ordination. In the eighteenth century, there were numerous examples in England of ordination candidates not being confirmed. The same issue arose in Canada. The normal practice in England was for a Confirmation shortly before ordination. Strachan tended to ordain first and do the Confirmation later. Likewise, he advised people to communicate dissenters and not wait for Confirmation to receive communion if they so wished. He saw a problem with the gaps in time between Confirmation tours and thus recommended admission.41 Strachan struggles with developing Tractarianism. At first, he was impressed by the Tracts, but his sympathies ran out when Newman went to Rome.42 As many clergy came from Britain to Canada, they brought with them the latest developments and so controversies began over ritual.43 Unfortunately in Canada this was to become acrimonious. In the 1847 Visitation Charge, he notes the increase of Confirmations and the growing understanding of it as an apostolic ordinance (Table 7.6).44 He was disappointed that he only confirmed 4,358 people in 1846 which he did not think was following the increase in population. He also noted that the number of elderly candidates was decreasing. He begins to deal with baptismal regeneration saying that the Prayer Book teaches baptismal regeneration, and we cannot forget that. However, he does not believe

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion 181 Table 7.6 Growth of number of Confirmation services 1840–1846 Year

Number of stations

1840–1841 1842–1843 1845–1846

74 102 197

that all those who have been regenerated will be in heaven, for you can lose the grace of baptism. He expects children to be taught the faith at home and in church. The Catechism helps in spiritual development and then the child can be brought to Confirmation to renew the baptismal vows and receive spiritual strengthening.45 In the Notes, he backs up his statements from various sources. He quotes the bishop of Jamaica saying that in baptism and Confirmation, the prayers assert and petition for baptismal regeneration and so at baptism we are forgiven, adopted as children of God, and enter into a covenant with God.46 He then quotes from Scott saying that the Holy Spirit begins to work in the baptismal candidate.47 In all this, he is reasserting a traditional high church view, which we have seen is not the same as Pusey. There are four Confirmation sermons as an appendix in Bethune. The first stresses what God has done for the candidates, the covenant that they have entered, and their need to fulfil their vows. He calls Confirmation ‘a point of union’ between two sacraments and exhorts them to the regular taking of Holy Communion. In the second, he stresses the solemn declaration that has been made but that it is the start of an ongoing process, thus the need for daily prayer and the taking of Holy Communion. He says that each day we should pray ‘thy kingdom come’ and then go out and make it happen. In the third, he stresses their need to persevere in faith and not to give up. In the fourth, he stresses the apostolic nature of Confirmation and the fact that it was approved of by the reformers. While there is a renewing of commitment, there is also a renewal of ‘the covenant of grace’, quite an eighteenth-century term.48 Bishop Strachan tries to be more than a British bishop in Canada, to be a missionary bishop in a new world. He is thus trying to reform the nature of episcopacy inherited from England and shape it for a new context. The example of his labours in Confirmation tours is impressive considering his age, particularly in the last years. Bishop Isaac O Stringer

In contrast to Bishop Strachan, in the great city of Toronto, is the ministry of Bishop Isaac O Stringer in the Yukon. Born in Ontario (1866) he went to Wycliffe College and is an example of an evangelical bishop in Canada. Hearing the call to the Arctic from a visiting bishop he responded to the invitation and was sent in 1892 to Herschel Island on the Beaufort Sea in the

182

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion

far north of the Yukon above the Arctic Circle.49 The place was populated by whalers and Inuit. There was a small population in a very harsh environment.50 He got married and with his wife they ministered to the local people and had two children. There were no conversions in his ministry in the north and they spent a lot of time in helping the sick, including doing operations, translating into the vernacular biblical passages, and some teaching. He had to withdraw due to sickness (a bad case of snow blindness) but was selected in 1905 as the bishop of Selkirk (later called Yukon), living in Dawson, which he continued doing until 1931, when he became archbishop of Rupert’s Land and lived in Winnipeg. He died suddenly in 1934. As missionary and bishop, he wrote a journal every day with details of the arctic life. His wife also kept a journal and before marriage they sent a large number of love letters. The summer period was the only time to travel, which was by boat and foot, travelling extremely long distances to visit the remote settlements of the Yukon. In 1909, he was delayed from returning to Dawson and was caught in an early winter storm. This is the occasion when he had to eat his seal skin boots to save himself from starvation. This became a famous story in the day and was mentioned in newspapers in England in a later visit.51 He also dined out with the King and Queen at Lambeth Palace based on the story. The population of the Yukon suddenly grew by the gold rush of 1896–1899. Over 100,000 miners suddenly moved to the Territory. While they were not in the far north this would have had an impact on Stringer in supply routes and in visits to Dawson which exploded as a town and then shrank back. Thus, 1901–1931, the Yukon is in a period of population decline and stabilization (Figure 7.3).52

Figure 7.3 The population of the Yukon 1901–1931.

The Canadian census includes figures on religious affiliation. This too seems to be influenced by the Gold Rush (Figure 7.4).

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion 183 Religion Yukon 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 1901

1911

1921

Anglican

Roman Catholic

United

Linear (Anglican)

1931 Lutheran

Figure 7.4 Denominational statistics for the Yukon 1901–1931.

In the first decade, all denominations are declining. The United Church refers to Presbyterians, Congregationalists, and Methodists which merged in 1925 and it also declines. The Roman Catholic Church was the largest church in 1901 (prior to the merger creating the United Church) but shows steep decline and then a flattening out. The church that shows some growth after 1921 is the Anglican Church and a plausible hypothesis might be that this is showing some of the fruit of the pioneer evangelization of Stringer and others, and the continued work of Stringer as a bishop. Statistics for Confirmations during Stringer’s episcopate are to be read with some caution. Yukon seems to be a diocese with poor returns to the General Synod church statistics, but using the available data an unexpected graph emerges (Figure 7.5).53

Figure 7.5 Confirmation in the Yukon.

There are relatively small numbers being confirmed each year with a sudden spike during 1916–1918. Some of Stringer’s journals have been transcribed by

184

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion

Walter Vanast.54 These cover the years 1909, 1912, 1917, 1924, and 1927. There is inconsistent recording of Confirmation numbers although as they are such small numbers, there is often a list of the names of people. The 1909 trip includes records of baptisms, 18, and Confirmations, 8. This seems to corroborate the low numbers in this early period. Unlike other parts of the world, e.g., in the Far East, Stringer did not question the assumptions of the Prayer Book by putting baptism and Confirmation together for adults. Rather he seems to have used Confirmation as a further opportunity for catechesis and exhibiting orthopraxis. The 1917 journal also supports the figures; indeed the statistics sent to General Synod are in fact lower than the journal which has 105 Confirmations. The years after that have less meticulous recording of Confirmations in the journals, sometimes recording a service without numbers or names. There seems to be a steady growth in the end of his episcopate. Bishop Stringer seems to have been cautious in his Confirmations. He carefully records that couples have been married before Confirmation. He was against various aspects of Inuit culture (without being negative about the whole), e.g., alcohol and infanticide; and he disliked the way women used liaisons in the political economy of the tribe. The local notion of marriage was more flexible than his views. To be confirmed you had to have a Christian marriage as defined in the Prayer Book. This expresses his evangelical orthopraxis. In 1812, Stringer held a regional clerical convocation. It was agreed to extend the work in the Mackenzie Delta. Vanast comments that this was no longer a mission area ‘since all the Inuit had converted’.55 While during his time in Herschel Island, Stringer saw no conversions, kindness, and patience led to many of the Inuit deciding to become Anglican after he left. Indeed, rather than the individual conversions that evangelical theology expected, there is more of a suggestion of a people movement. The diary of 1917 records a Confirmation in Aklavik on 24 July.56 Preparation for Confirmation occurred by preaching about it at a service and then discussions of who wanted to go forward. There are other places in the diary when some who want to be confirmed are deemed unsuitable. There is further instruction the next day (presumably for those who are getting confirmed). Then later in the day is an open-air service when a hymn was sung and 17 people were confirmed. This was followed by a service of Holy Communion using a couple of packing crates and a tablecloth as an altar. There were 41 Inuit communicants at the service and the three Anglican clergy dressed in robes. As supplies were difficult, bannock was used as communion bread and red currant juice from preserves as wine. Stringer records the service as remarkable, impressive, solemn, and most primitive (in a good sense). The Confirmation in Cambridge Bay on 14 August 1927 records the text of the sermon as Romans 13: 12–14. The text is worth examining even if there is no record of the sermon, there are some suggestions in this text.

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion 185 12

The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armour of light.13 Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissension and jealousy.14 Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the flesh. In an environment that has extremes of light and darkness, the first half of verse 12 is quite suggestive of a metaphorical link. The next two verses would be easy to relate to an evangelical moral agenda, of being against alcohol and in favour of ‘Christian marriage’. Stringer as bishop was involved in matters outside the diocese. He was on the General Synod of the church which at the time was considering liturgical revision.57 This included revision of the Confirmation service, although it is not noted that he made a particular contribution. As a bishop he had to approve of the changes and would have used the new service. He was also at various Lambeth Conferences; the 1908 one encouraged adaptation to mission contexts. While Stringer does not seem to have questioned contemporary missionary methods and evangelical assumptions, he is far from the caricature of a Bible thumping missionary. His approach is one of practical care for people and this seems to have been the platform for evangelization. But his loving kindness also carried through into episcopal pastoral care, through annual trips to the north taking a variety of pastoral services, including Confirmation, and visiting his people. He wanted to have local schools rather than boarding schools for First Nation and Inuit people. His work as bishop was to constantly raise money and personnel for the diocese and for projects that benefited the people. Confirmation was treated as a normal part of the Anglican economy, strengthening the faith of the Inuit people. Review of Canada

1820 to 1940 saw remarkable changes in Canada and the making of the modern Canadian nation. There were large numbers of people who settled in the country increasingly in the west. The First World War helped develop the national identity, particularly through the battles of the Somme, Vimi Ridge, and Passchendaele. The first bishop of Toronto was naturally involved in the development of the country, with a more establishment vision for the church which was not accepted. However, by contrast, he had a more ‘primitive’ and missionary concept of a bishop, which he thought was required in Canada, and faithfully exercised a ministry to his diocese through Confirmation, being a part of a worldwide movement to go to the people. Bishop Stringer’s diocese was a complete contrast to a metropolitan city, the remote north of the Yukon. An example of an evangelical bishop, who saw mission through kindness and practical care. He is one of the ‘heroic’ bishops of Canadian

186

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion

history and perhaps shows the best side of evangelicalism. With a sparse population, numbers of Confirmations were always going to be small, but he is diligent in his work walking and paddling vast distances to see his people, at times putting his life at risk. India A previous volume examined some episcopal studies from India.58 This volume is going to develop that enquiry with a case study of Bishop Daniel Wilson, another evangelical bishop, and the first metropolitan of the Province. Indeed, this is a period when the Church of England in India is established. The church gradually works to free itself from the state and becomes independent. Daniel Wilson

Daniel Wilson was the first Metropolitan of India, Burma, and Ceylon, and Bishop of Calcutta (1832–1858). As vicar of Islington, his last post in England, he had meticulously prepared people for Confirmation. He also wrote a tract on the subject. He had strong evangelical links. In 1832, he was consecrated as bishop of Calcutta by the Archbishop of Canterbury and the bishops of London, Bristol, and Gloucester in the chapel at Lambeth Palace. Stopping in Cape Town on the way to Calcutta he confirmed 240 ‘catechumens’.59 This is an interesting term as normally a catechumen is preparing for baptism but here it is used for those preparing for Confirmation. He was advised not to overwork for a couple of years on arriving in Calcutta. One of the problems of some of his predecessors was that they had not lived very long in post due to climate and disease. So about five months after arriving, he held his first Confirmation in the cathedral of 470 candidates. He gave two addresses at the service and in the second gave the candidates a rule of life: 1 Pray every day of your life for more and more of God’s Holy Spirit. 2 Prepare at once for receiving aright the Holy Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ. 3 Read every day some portion of God’s Holy Word. 4 Reverence and observe the Holy Sabbath. 5 Keep in the unity of the Church. 6 Avoid bad company, and seek the company of the good. 7 When you have got wrong, confess it, and get right as soon as you can.60 He also involved himself in baptisms, but it does not look like he confirmed those he baptized (mostly adults) at the same time. He told the Archdeacon of New South Wales (Broughton, Australia was in his diocese) to admit people to communion without Confirmation.

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion 187 He conducted Confirmations as a part of his visitation tours. He had a vast diocese and so the tours were often long and arduous. The tours were paid for by the state but there was often a push to be careful with money, but it was required that the bishop conduct a visitation every five years. Starting from Calcutta he would travel, preach, talk to missionaries, and confirm. Bateman narrates seven visitations, most over a number of years as he travels his diocese and metropolitanate.61 A part of the process was to send out Articles of Enquiry to establish the condition of his diocese.62 The bishop travelled in a large party; Atherstone estimates there were as many as 200 people.63 In this, he is following a similar policy of his predecessors.64 However, the most remote stations were not always visited some not seeing the bishop in a decade.65 Confirmation candidates were encouraged to travel to the bishop.66 But this policy was in part because in 1844/1845 he almost died from an attack of malaria and had to furlough in England to recuperate. In the early addresses, he attacks the caste system and says that it needs replacing with Christian values.67 Charles Hoole sees this as the origin of Dalit liberation.68 Atherstone however also notes that it was common for Indians and English to form separate congregations.69 Thus, in October 1848, he confirmed 223 English at the cathedral and two days later confirmed 160 ‘natives’.70 This practice, however, seems to be more pragmatic than deliberate segregation. The visits include the whole of India, Burma, and Ceylon. In his charge of 1845, he estimated that he confirmed 2,000-3,000 people in the metropolitical visitation.71 One example of his tours is that starting in September 1894 and is part of his fifth visitation. Table 7.7 compiles his Confirmations. Much of his travel was by river steamers in this tour around his diocese.72 Table 7.7 Confirmations 1894 Date

Place

Numbers

22 September 1894 26 September 30 October 4 November 15 November 5 December 19 January 1895 20 January

Chinsurah Krishnaghur Allahabad Allahabad Chunar Ghazeepore Khoolna Sunderbunds

7 94 11 4 29 31 5 321

Numbers getting confirmed varied and not all places he visited had a Confirmation service, but they were a regular part of the tour, and he notes the services in his diary. In November 1841, he records the reception of four Roman Catholics into the ‘Protestant faith’, which entails Confirmation and Holy Communion.73 Thus, he keeps to the rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer requiring episcopal Confirmation before communion.

188

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion

In his Plain and Affectionate Address, written before he became a bishop, he outlines the meaning of Confirmation: The word Confirmation means strengthening or establishing. It is applied to the religious rite of laying on of hands because the young person then confirms and ratifies, in his own person, the vows which had been made for him at his baptism; and the Bishop confirms and strengthens him in his pious resolutions, by prayer, and imposition of his hands.74 In Sermon 8 of his visitation sermons, he says: and we are also God’s by the consecration of baptism, and the renewal of our vows, which most of us have made in our own persons at our Confirmation.75 He further says about Confirmation in Sermon 19: all the supposed advantages of baptism in adult years are secured by the primitive and edifying rite of Confirmation, which is retained, after the example of the apostles, in all the branches of Christ’s Holy Church; when the parents and sponsors resign their charge, and the catechumen, ratifying and confirming his vows, is solemnly admitted, after due examination, by prayer and the imposition of hands, to the profession of his faith in his own name, and all the personal blessings and privileges of the covenant of grace.76 He writes a letter in 1855 to his grandchild who has just been confirmed: Confirmation will of itself do you little good unless you meant what you solemnly promised; that is, to take on you, now you are come to age, the vows made in your name at your baptism.77 The rest of the letter exhorts her to seek the strength of the Spirit to fulfil those vows. Thus, his emphasis is on the renewal of vows and taking up the Christian life as a theology of Confirmation. He is aware of the developments in England. He attacks Tractarianism and suggests that he will sack anyone who holds to Tract 90.78 He followed closely the Gorham case and sided with Gorham and the Privy Council. He was also sympathetic to Goode’s attack on the bishop of Exeter.79 Thus, we can see the evangelical bishop fulfilling his episcopal duties. He holds a ‘Calvinistic’ covenant baptism theology similar to that held in the eighteenth century. Indeed, the way the diocese was set up is a continuation of the practice of the church in England in an eighteenth-century mode. It required the church to separate from the state and become a Province before there could be more flexibility in the system.

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion 189 Review

Space does not permit more about India. One person worth further study would be Bishop Azariah of Dornakal. While bishop, there was a big increase in baptisms and Confirmations as a people movement occurred. This was perplexing at the time as large numbers of Hindus, mostly lower caste, converted to Christianity.80 Daniel Wilson shows the continuation of eighteenth-century approaches and a holding to Calvinistic covenant theology. Conclusion This chapter has only been able to give no more than a snapshot of three Provinces at different times in the development of the Communion. The whole of Anglicanism, with a variety of theologies, was in a state of missionary endeavour. Too often books on the nineteenth century forget the missionary focus of the time. In some places, there was pioneering and selfless mission; in other places, the pitch was gentler. In places where missionaries preceded the bishop, new Christians were admitted to communion before Confirmation. In some places, the missionary bishop was sent to evangelize, so Confirmation could be incorporated immediately into the life of the church. Indeed, in some places, Confirmation was a part of the missionary strategy. Bishops and churches can be seen struggling with identity. At first, they are a transplant but the bishop and the church have to become a part of the new context. Patterns from England did not always fit, as primary evangelism was the need (and not only for indigenous people). The First World War, in particular, led to identity change in some parts of the Communion. Also, there is evidence that the Depression had an impact on Confirmation statistics in more than one Province. The nineteenth century is the time of greater ease of travel and world communications with the telegraph, steam ships, and the railways. This led to the possibility of greater control from home and did help bishops slightly, but the evidence from this chapter does not support the ‘railway theory’ of ease of travel increasing Confirmations. Bishops were aware of their duties and planned tours on arrival and were mostly consistent throughout their ministry, health permitting. This is a period of a growing church, sometimes of pioneering. As such, over a longer period, one can see steady growth in Confirmations in many parts of the Anglican Communion. Growth and decline are complex issues, not least relying on good accurate data.81 This is not always available and hampers more precise conclusions. Notes 1 J. W. C. Wand, The Anglican Communion: A Survey (London: Oxford University Press, 1948).

190

2

3

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

15 16 17 18 19

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion

William L. Sachs, “The Transformation of Anglicanism: From State Church to Global Communion” (2002). Kevin Ward, A History of Global Anglicanism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006). William L. Sachs, The Oxford History of Anglicanism Volume 5 (Oxford: OUP, 2019). Phillip Tovey, Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820, Liturgy, Worship and Society (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014); Eighteenth-Century Anglican Confirmation: Renewing the Covenant of Grace, Joint Liturgical Studies 79 (Norwich: Hymns Ancient and Modern, 2015). I am aware that previous reviewers thought the last book overstretched itself by looking at North America and may well level the same criticism. However, the aim is not to produce an England-centred narrative and try to get a wider grasp of the stories. Due to space, this will however be impressionistic and limited. Robert K. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods (London: Sage Publication, 1994, 2015). Catherine Rossman and Gretchen B. Marshall, Designing Qualitative Research (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1999, 2011). David L. Holmes, A Brief History of the Episcopal Church (Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 2000). Alexander B. Andrews, Fifty Years of Statistics, 1876–1925 (Also 1926–1930) of Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America (Raleigh, NC, 1931). The choice of bishops follows the suggestion in Ruth A. Meyers, Continuing the Reformation: Re-Visioning Baptism in the Episcopal Church (New York: Church Pub., 1997). It also builds on the previous volume. Anson Rogers Graves, The Farmer Boy Who Became a Bishop: The Autobiography of the Right Reverend Anson Rogers Graves (Akron, OH: New Werner Co., 1912). Missionary District Western Nebraska, Journal of Convocation (Kearney: The Hub, 1914). G. W. Doane, The Missionary Bishop. The Sermon [on Rom. X. 15] at the Consecration of Jackson Hemper, D.D., Missionary Bishop for Missouri and Indiana (Burlington: J.L. Powell, 1835). Henry Benjamin Whipple, Lights and Shadows of a Long Episcopate. Being Reminiscences and Recollections. (New York and London: Macmillan, 1912). Diocese of Nebraska, Joint Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Council (Omaha: The Western Printing Company, 1890). For early Episcopal history in Nebraska, see W. J. Barnds, “The Episcopal Church in Nebraska to 1875,” Historical Magazine of the Protestant Episcopal Church 31, no. 1 (1962). Anon, “A Church Home on the Range: The History of the Western Missionary District,” http://s3.amazonaws.com/dfc_attachments/public/documents/3246925/ WestDistrictHistory.Final.pdf. List of Bishops of the Episcopal Church in the United States of America (2021), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bishops_of_the_Episcopal_Church_in_the_ United_States_of_America. Anson Rogers Graves, “The Missionary Work of the Church in the West,” (1908). Howard Chandler Robbins, “Charles Lewis Slattery,” (1931). Dudley Tyng, “Massachusetts Episcopalians 1607–1957,” (1960), p. 90. Charles Lewis Slattery, The Light Within: A Study of the Holy Spirit (London: Longsman’s Green and Co., 1915), p. 262.

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion 191 20 Charles Lewis Slattery, Following Christ (Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1929), p. 165. 21 David Hummell Greer, Eighth Bishop of New York (New York: Longmans, Green and Co, 1921), p. 256. 22 “The New Prayer Book,” The Witness, 8 November 1928, p. 3. 23 Prayer Book Revision: A Review of the Report of the Joint Commission on the Book of Common Prayer Appointed by the General Convention of 1913 (New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1916), p. 19. 24 W. J. A. Donald, “The Growth and Distribution of Canadian Population,” Journal of Political Economy 21, no. 4 (1913). 25 George Mountain, The Journal of the Bishop of Montreal, During a Visit to the Church Missionary Society’s North-West America Mission (London: Seeley, 1845). 26 Committee on Statistics and State of the Church, “Report of the Committee on the Statistics and State of the Church” (Toronto: The General Synod, 1962). 27 Philip Carrington, The Anglican Church in Canada: A History (Toronto: Collins, 1963). 28 G. M. Craig, “Strachan, John,” in Dictionary of Canadian Biography (University of Toronto/Universite Laval, 1976). 29 O. R. Osmond, “The Churchmanship of John Strachan,” Journal of the Canadian Church History Society 16, no. 3 (1974). 30 A. N. Bethune, Memoir of John Strachan First Bishop of Toronto (Toronto: Henry Rowsell, 1870). T. B. Roberton, The Fighting Bishop, John Strachan, First Bishop of Toronto: And Other Essays in His Times (Ottowa: Graphic Publishers, 1926). J. L. H. Henderson, John Strachan 1778–1867 (Canada: University of Toronto Press, 1969). 31 Bethune, Memoir of John Strachan First Bishop of Toronto, p. 182. 32 Henderson, John Strachan 1778–1867, p. 80. 33 Elgin County Branch of the Ontario Genealogical Society, “Anglican Church Confirmations, Elgin County, Ontario, Canada, 1842–1864,” https://ogs.on.ca/ elgin_google/sites.google.com/site/elginbranchogs/Home/vital-records/ Confirmations-recorded-in-the-parish-register-of-st-peter-s-anglican-church1842-1864.html. John Strachan, “Appointments for Confirmation,” The Church, 11 July 1845. 34 J. L. H. Henderson, “John Strachan as Bishop 1839–1867” (Board of Examiners, General Synod of Canada, 1956), p. 332. 35 Ibid., p. 446. 36 Ibid. 37 William Stewart Darling, Sketches of Canadian Life (London: D. Bogue, 1849), p. 277. 38 Henderson, “John Strachan as Bishop 1839–1867”, p. 496. 39 Tovey, Anglican Confirmation 1662-1820, p. 157. 40 Peter John Jagger, Clouded Witness: Initiation in the Church of England in the Mid-Victorian Period, 1850–1875 (Allison Park, PA: Pickwick Publications, 1982), p. 151. 41 Henderson, “John Strachan as Bishop 1839–1867”, p. 447. 42 Osmond, “The Churchmanship of John Strachan.” 43 C. F. Headon, “Developments in Canadian Anglican Worship in Eastern and Central Canada, 1840–1868,” Journal of the Canadian Church Historical Society 27, no. 2 (1975). 44 John Strachan, A Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Toronto (Toronto: Diocesan Press, 1847).

192 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion

Ibid., p. 64. Ibid., p. 73. Ibid., p. 74. Tovey, Eighteenth-Century Anglican Confirmation: Renewing the Covenant of Grace. Richard Stringer, “The Bishop Who Ate His Boots” (Sheba Films, 2007). F. A. Peake, The Bishop Who Ate His Boots: A Biography of Isaac O. Stringer (Toronto: Anglican Church of Canada, 1966). “The Bishop of ‘the Lone North West’ Dr Stringers’s Adventures in Yukon,” The Manchester Guardian, 15 June 1914. Figures from the Dominion Bureau of Statistics. Figures from The General Synod of the Church of England in the Dominion of Canada, Journal of Proceedings (Kingston: Ontario Churchman Office, 1909), and other years. W. Vanast, “Five Western Arctic Inspection Journeys by Bishop Isaac Stringer” (n.d.), https://healthandcarestore.academia.edu/WalterVanast. Ibid., p. 1. Ibid., pp. 17–18. W. J. Armitage, The Story of the Canadian Revision of the Prayer Book (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1922). Tovey, Eighteenth-Century Anglican Confirmation: Renewing the Covenant of Grace. Josiah Bateman, The Life of the Rev. Daniel Wilson: With Extracts from His Journals and Correspondence 1, 2 vols., vol. 1 (London: Murray, 1860), p. 305. Ibid., p. 336. The Life of the Right Rev. Daniel Wilson, D.D., Late Lord Bishop of Calcutta … With Extracts from His Journals and Correspondence … Shortened Edition (London: John Murray, 1861). Daniel Wilson, Two Charges Delivered to the Clergy in the Diocese of Calcutta (Madras: Vepery Mission Press, 1835), p. 33. Andrew Atherstone, The Journal of Bishop Daniel Wilson of Calcutta, 1845–57 (Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, 2015), p. xviii. Tovey, Eighteenth-Century Anglican Confirmation: Renewing the Covenant of Grace. Atherstone, The Journal of Bishop Daniel Wilson of Calcutta, 1845–57, p. xviii. Ibid., p. xix. Wilson, Two Charges Delivered to the Clergy in the Diocese of Calcutta., p. 79. Charles Hoole, “Bishop Wilson and the Origins of Dalit Liberation” (2003), http://www.baldaeus.com/html/0066.html. Atherstone, The Journal of Bishop Daniel Wilson of Calcutta, 1845–57, p. xxvi. Ibid., p. 177. Daniel Wilson, A Farewell Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Calcutta, in May 1845. Second Edition (London: Hatchard and Son, 1845), p. 11. Atherstone, The Journal of Bishop Daniel Wilson of Calcutta, 1845–57. Josiah Bateman, The Life of the Right Rev. Daniel Wilson, D.D., Late Lord Bishop of Calcutta and Metropolitan of India 2 vols., vol. 2 (London: Murray, 1860), p. 193. Daniel Wilson, Sermons and Tracts, 2 vols., vol. 2 ( London: George Wilson, 1825), p. 424. Daniel Wilson, Sermons Delivered in India During the Course of the Primary Visitation. By Daniel Wilson, D.D. Bishop of Calcutta, and Metropolitan (London: J. Hatchard and Son, 187, Piccadilly, 1838), p. 151.

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion 193 76 Ibid., pp. 385–6. 77 Bateman, The Life of the Right Rev. Daniel Wilson, D.D., Late Lord Bishop of Calcutta and Metropolitan of India 2., p. 365. 78 Wilson, A Farewell Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Calcutta, in May 1845. Second Edition, p. 74. 79 Atherstone, The Journal of Bishop Daniel Wilson of Calcutta, 1845–57, p. 196. 80 C. Graham, Azariah of Dornakal (Indian Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1972). J. M. Brown, R. E. Frykenberg, and A. M. Low, Christians, Cultural Interactions, and India’s Religious Traditions (W.B. Eerdmans, 2002). 81 D. Goodhew, Growth and Decline in the Anglican Communion: 1980 to the Present (Abingdon: Routledge, 2017).

Reference list Andrews, A. B. Fifty Years of Statistics, 1876–1925 (Also 1926–1930) of Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America. Raleigh, NC, 1931. Anon. “A Church Home on the Range: The History of the Western Missionary District.” http://s3.amazonaws.com/dfc_attachments/public/documents/3246925/ WestDistrictHistory.Final.pdf. Anon. List of Bishops of the Episcopal Church in the United States of America. 2021. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bishops_of_the_Episcopal_Church_in_the_ United_States_of_America. Armitage, W. J. The Story of the Canadian Revision of the Prayer Book. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1922. Atherstone, A. The Journal of Bishop Daniel Wilson of Calcutta, 1845–57. Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, 2015. Barnds, W. J. “The Episcopal Church in Nebraska to 1875.” Historical Magazine of the Protestant Episcopal Church, 31, no. 1 (1962): 21–35. Bateman, J. The Life of the Rev. Daniel Wilson: With Extracts from His Journals and Correspondence 1. 2 vols. Vol. 1, London: Murray, 1860. Bateman, J.. The Life of the Right Rev. Daniel Wilson, D.D., Late Lord Bishop of Calcutta … With Extracts from His Journals and Correspondence … Shortened Edition. London: John Murray, 1861. Bateman, J.. The Life of the Right Rev. Daniel Wilson, D.D., Late Lord Bishop of Calcutta and Metropolitan of India 2 vols. Vol. 2, London: Murray, 1860. Bethune, A. N. Memoir of John Strachan First Bishop of Toronto. Toronto: Henry Rowsell, 1870. “The Bishop of ”the Lone North West“ Dr Stringers’s Adventures in Yukon.” The Manchester Guardian, June 15 1914. Brown, J. M., R. E. Frykenberg, and A. M. Low. Christians, Cultural Interactions, and India’s Religious Traditions. Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans, 2002. Carrington, P. The Anglican Church in Canada: A History. Toronto: Collins, 1963. Committee on Statistics and State of the Church. “Report of the Committee on the Statistics and State of the Church.” Toronto: The General Synod, 1962. Darling, W. S. Sketches of Canadian Life. London: D. Bogue, 1849. Doane, G. W. The Missionary Bishop. The Sermon [on Rom. X. 15] at the Consecration of Jackson Hemper, D.D., Missionary Bishop for Missouri and Indiana. Burlington: J.L. Powell, 1835.

194

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion

Donald, W. J. A. “The Growth and Distribution of Canadian Population.” Journal of Political Economy, 21, no. 4 (1913): 296–312. Dictionary of Canadian Biography. University of Toronto/Universite Laval, 1976. Elgin County Branch of the Ontario Genealogical Society. “Anglican Church Confirmations, Elgin County, Ontario, Canada, 1842–1864.” https://ogs.on.ca/ elgin_google/sites.google.com/site/elginbranchogs/Home/vital-records/Confirmationsrecorded-in-the-parish-register-of-st-peter-s-anglican-church-1842-1864.html. Goodhew, D. Growth and Decline in the Anglican Communion: 1980 to the Present. Abingdon: Routledge, 2017. Graham, C. Azariah of Dornakal. Delhi: Indian Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1972. Graves, A. R. The Farmer Boy Who Became a Bishop: The Autobiography of the Right Reverend Anson Rogers Graves. Akron, OH: New Werner Co., 1912. Graves, A. R. The Missionary Work of the Church in the West. Western Theological Seminary, Chicago (1908. Headon, C. F. “Developments in Canadian Anglican Worship in Eastern and Central Canada, 1840–1868.”. Journal of the Canadian Church Historical Society 27, no. 2 (1975): 26–37. Henderson, J. L. H. John Strachan 1778–1867. Canada: University of Toronto Press, 1969. Henderson, J. L. H. “John Strachan as Bishop 1839–1867.” Board of Examiners, General Synod of Canada, 1956. Holmes, D. L. A Brief History of the Episcopal Church. Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 2000. Hoole, C. “Bishop Wilson and the Origins of Dalit Liberation.” (2003). http://www. baldaeus.com/html/0066.html. Jagger, P. J. Clouded Witness: Initiation in the Church of England in the MidVictorian Period, 1850–1875. Allison Park, PA: Pickwick Publications, 1982. Marshall, C., Rossman, G. B. Designing Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1999, 2011. Meyers, R. A. Continuing the Reformation: Re-Visioning Baptism in the Episcopal Church. New York: Church Pub., 1997. Mountain, G. The Journal of the Bishop of Montreal, During a Visit to the Church Missionary Society’s North-West America Mission. London: Seeley, 1845. Nebraska, Diocese of. Joint Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Council. Omaha: The Western Printing Company, 1890. Nebraska, Missionary District Western. Journal of Convocation. Kearney: The Hub, 1914. Osmond, O. R. “The Churchmanship of John Strachan.” Journal of the Canadian Church History Society, 16, no. 3 (1974): 46–59. Peake, F. A. The Bishop Who Ate His Boots: A Biography of Isaac O. Stringer. Toronto: Anglican Church of Canada, 1966. Robbins, H. C. “Charles Lewis Slattery.” 1931. New York: Harper. Roberton, T. B. The Fighting Bishop, John Strachan, First Bishop of Toronto: And Other Essays in His Times. Ottowa: Graphic Publishers, 1926. Sachs, W. L. The Oxford History of Anglicanism Volume 5. Oxford: OUP, 2019. Sachs, W. L. “The Transformation of Anglicanism: From State Church to Global Communion.” 2002. Cambridge: CUP.

The practice of Confirmation in the Anglican Communion 195 Slattery, C. L. David Hummell Greer, Eighth Bishop of New York. New York: Longmans, Green and Co, 1921. Slattery, C. L. Following Christ. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1929. Slattery, C. L. “The New Prayer Book.” The Witness, 8 November 1928, 3–4. Slattery, C. L. Prayer Book Revision: A Review of the Report of the Joint Commission on the Book of Common Prayer Appointed by the General Convention of 1913. New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1916. Slattery, C. L. The Light Within: A Study of the Holy Spirit. London: Longsman’s Green and Co., 1915. Strachan, J. “Appointments for Confirmation.” The Church, 11 July 1845. Strachan, J. A Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Toronto. Toronto: Diocesan Press, 1847. Stringer, R. “The Bishop Who Ate His Boots.” Sheba Films, 2007. The General Synod of the Church of England in the Dominion of Canada. Journal of Proceedings. Kingston: Ontario Churchman Office, 1909. Tovey, P. Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820. Liturgy, Worship and Society. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014. Tovey, P. Eighteenth-Century Anglican Confirmation: Renewing the Covenant of Grace. Joint Liturgical Studies. Vol. 79, Norwich: Hymns Ancient and Modern, 2015. Tyng, D. “Massachusetts Episcopalians 1607–1957.” 1960. Vanast, W. “Five Western Arctic Inspection Journeys by Bishop Isaac Stringer.” (n.d.). https://healthandcarestore.academia.edu/WalterVanast. Wand, J. W. C. The Anglican Communion: A Survey. London: Oxford University Press, 1948. Ward, K. A History of Global Anglicanism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Whipple, H. B. Lights and Shadows of a Long Episcopate. Being Reminiscences and Recollections. New York; London: Macmillan, 1912. Wilson, D. A Farewell Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Calcutta, in May 1845. Second Edition. London: Hatchard and Son, 1845. Wilson, D. Sermons and Tracts. 2 vols. Vol. 2, London: George Wilson, 1825. Wilson, D. Two Charges Delivered to the Clergy in the Diocese of Calcutta. Madras: Vepery Mission Press, 1835. Wilson, D. Sermons Delivered in India During the Course of the Primary Visitation. By Daniel Wilson, D.D. Bishop of Calcutta, and Metropolitan. London: J. Hatchard and Son, 187, Piccadilly, 1838. Yin, R. K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. London: Sage Publication, 1994, 2015.

8

Conclusions

While eighteenth-century Confirmation had been interpreted in a negative way through Tractarian historiography, the opposite narrative was imprinted on the nineteenth century. This was seen as a period of correcting mistakes, hence the contrasting pictures on the previous book and figure 0.1.1 This is however a partial visualization, because it is an idealization at the time the book was made and does not take account of the expansion of the church. The nineteenth century is the great mission period. Through migration and through pioneer work, the Anglican Church became a global entity. This raises questions about the relationship with colonialism, and perhaps the easy acceptance of the latter in this period, but mission was not a simple subservience to colonialization, nor was mission confined to the British Empire, but the two were often entwined.2 One of the aims of this book has been to acknowledge that expansion, and thus not write a history simply based on the British Isles or the north Atlantic. This aim suddenly opens up the scope of the book to one that might seem to some to be overambitious. Another aim has been to look at Confirmation in context. Previous liturgical histories might have concentrated on the text alone, discussing the minutiae of textual change. In this history, I have tried to view the text in a context, both of historical theology and of episcopal-ecclesiological practice. Confirmation is important as is indicative of the lay commitment in the church. Thus, conclusions will be grouped in the three categories of theology, liturgy, and practice. Confirmation theology There was a major paradigm shift of the theology of Confirmation in the late nineteenth century. One neglected strand was that of F. D. Maurice whose works introduced a broad-church approach, in reaction to the Tract of Pusey on Baptism.3 The approach was reiterated later in the period by Dr Major at Ripon College, and it lived as an alternative script.4 A second theology was introduced by Puller (1880) and Mason (1891) and led to great controversy.5 It was not fully accepted by older Tractarians but became gradually the prevailing view of the church. Its highest point liturgically in England was in DOI: 10.4324/9781032676876-8

Conclusions

197

NA 84, which itself was exported. The older views still existed but became vestiges while the knowledge power grew in the Puller-Mason line. The historiography of some in later times has been to emphasize the Tractarian developments, ignoring the broad-church approach.6 The diffusion of these theologies is complex and hard to classify. It is clear enough that those overseas were reading the Tracts, some with interest. There is clear evidence of an acceptance of Tractarianism in the Episcopal Church, such that one of its bishops felt the need to secede. There was hostility in India from the Metropolitan Daniel Wilson. In China, appointing Bishop Lushington to North China was controversial and he introduced liturgical change in a more ‘Catholic’ direction. Canada and New Zealand had their own controversies. However, the party acrimony of England was not always exported in the same way, different cultures were reacting in different ways. Of deep interest is the comment of Bishop Weston who tried to stabilize the liturgy in Zanzibar from waves of neoteric ritualist theory. If the eighteenth century had a paradigm of ‘covenant’ for sacraments based on an international Calvinism, the nineteenth century saw the emergence of a new paradigm, that of ‘the sacramental principle’.7 This is not to say that the new paradigm existed alongside those with the previous model, Bishop Wilson in India and Bishop Stringer in Canada illustrate that, but the power systems of the church absorbed the new thinking. As applied by later Catholics, this had profound implications on boundaries. While ‘the sacramental principle’ does not necessarily have destructive effects, the implications of the Puller-Mason line led to severe ecumenical implications and drew Anglicans away from Free Church Christians. Bitter controversies around intercommunion and church unity occurred. Ultimately, the biblical and patristic presuppositions of the case were unmasked, but that was not to happen till later. The Puller-Mason line ascended and conquered the Anglican Church in numerous places. Confirmation liturgy Suggestions for liturgical change had been frequent in the eighteenth century, many of them only finding fulfilment in separation, first in the Non-jurors, and then in the Unitarian movement. Suggestions turned into a deluge in the nineteenth century. The Tractarian movement at first did not advocate Prayer Book revision but the ritualists forged ahead, and reactive approaches produced counter proposals. The failure to stem the tide by prosecution, and the secession of a few, led to some adopting a ‘no change’ policy. The Church of England moved like the proverbial ‘mighty tortoise’ and by 1928 had produced a new Prayer Book containing the old and the new. Powerful lay people like Joynson-Hicks were not successful in the National Assembly but were able to cross the road to parliament and cry ‘no popery’.8 This contributed to the retirement of the archbishop and the freezing of liturgical reform in England for 40 years.

198

Conclusions

The narrative above is ethnocentric with a Church of England perspective. It would be easy to suggest that the liturgical revision of Confirmation then spread across the Communion directed from England. This colonial narrative would be false. There were problems with the Prayer Book initiation services. Selwyn in New Zealand wished to change them as bishop of the Māori church where there were predominantly adult Baptisms. Also, Canada, Scotland, and the Episcopal Church (United States) were already thinking of liturgical change but some exercised restraint to see the outcome in England. Once the calamity happened, they moved on quickly. It is more like Anglicans started to swarm and one bee remained. England certainly did not lead the way; rather, it showed its inflexibility because of its establishment. The changes that indicated the theological paradigm change were liturgically shown in the revision of the introduction to the Confirmation service. There a description of Confirmation was given in terms of the language of the Catechism’s definition of a sacrament; ‘the outward and visible sign’ of the episcopal application of the hand, and ‘the inward and spiritual grace’ of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. A tempered version of this talks of the ‘special gift’ of the Holy Spirit, a more ambiguous phrase open to diverse interpretations. This could be accompanied with consignation and anointing. The increasing number of interpolations stretched the text in ways that would have surprised Bishop Cosin. Confirmation practice The eighteenth-century model of Confirmation was that it was attached to triennial visitations. Candidates were expected to go to the bishop who would advertise the tour in local newspapers. Usually, there were large numbers, but few centres. Illness or old age would hinder this programme. Gradually, some bishops did an annual tour of parts of the diocese to relieve the burden. While some continued this pattern into the nineteenth century, there was a reform to increase the number of centres. Wilberforce incorporated this reform into his episcopal ministry. He increased the number of centres and had growing numbers of candidates. Clergy that did not provide candidates were reproved and Confirmation was a part of the missions he conducted. The bishop now tried to go to the candidates rather than the candidates come to the bishop. This change in practice is another paradigm change in the nineteenth century. Around the world there was a growing number of candidates for Confirmation. This was a period of expansion through migration and missionary endeavour. In places of church planting, the candidates for Baptism and Confirmation were mostly adults. A catechumenate was introduced by missionaries of all theological colours and this either enables the joining together of Baptism and Confirmation or there was a preConfirmation catechumenate.9 Church planting led to more bishops, although some sent a missionary bishop from the beginning. Depending on the location, some bishops kept a triennial Confirmation-visitation tour but others conducted annual tours. There are even a

Conclusions

199

few cases where bishops visited more than once a year.10 In England, an ‘increase of the episcopate’ with the development of suffragan bishops enabled more opportunities for Confirmation. Another significant development was of the school Confirmation. Some have suggested that this increase is connected to the growth in the railways. This is sometimes called the ‘railway theory’ of Confirmation.11 This book has examined the theory in England, Canada, and the United States. The conclusion from this study is that the evidence is simply not there. In all cases, increase in numbers of centres preceded the railways. They were used, once they were there, along with ships on lakes, sea, and rivers, but bishops used whatever means they could to visit and confirm. The nineteenth century saw the beginnings of gathering statistics and so a more accurate picture can be given. We have seen that there may be questions of the accuracy of this data. In many places, the number of Confirmations is growing but often this is not keeping up with the growth in population. Some of the bishops are aware of this. There is a pattern in some countries of a decline in numbers during the depression. As Frances Knight points out, Confirmation is a point of measurable lay choice.12 The Anglican Church was in a period of strong growth. This is never even around the world and worldwide figures are to be read with caution, but this period tells a very different story than what is to come. Postscript This book builds on a former one on the eighteenth century. There are major shifts in practice and in the theology of Confirmation. The shift in practice is still with us, the theology of Confirmation has continued to develop. Indeed, there was an intensification of debate in the post-war period. The missionary effort led to greater independence in the churches overseas and an increase in independent Provinces. Such language is of course a colonial vestige, but it was the language of the day. The book has tried to look at Confirmation not just as a rite but as a practice of one church with its own outworking of the Christian faith. Anglicans have a particular spin on Confirmation insisting on episcopal Confirmation only. But the internal debate of the theology (and lesser so practice) has been huge. In this period, there is a transition of Confirmation being seen as ‘renewing the covenant of grace’ to being a part of ‘the sacramental system’. This is to be challenged in the following period. Notes 1 A. D. Crake, The Deformation and the Reformation (Oxford: Mowbray, 1886). 2 For older views of those involved, see M. Warren, Caesar, the Beloved Enemy: Three Studies in the Relation of Church and State (London: SCM Press, 1955). S. Neill, Colonialism and Christian Missions (London: Lutterworth Press, 1966). And, A. Porter, Religion Versus Empire?: British Protestant Missionaries and Overseas Expansion, 1700–1914 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004).

200

3

4 5

6 7 8 9 10 11

12

Conclusions

D. L. Robert, Converting Colonialism: Visions and Realities in Mission History, 1706–1914 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2008). Frederick Denison Maurice, The Kingdom of Christ: Or, Hints on the Principles, Ordinances and Constitution of the Catholic Church, in a Letter to a Member of the Society of Friends Vol. 1, 2 ed. (London; New York: Rivington, 1842). E. B. Pusey, Tracts for the Times: For 1834–35, Tract No. 47–70; Records of the Church, No. Xix–Xxv (London: Rivington, 1840). Henry Dewsbury Alves Major, “Why We Value Baptism and Confirmation,” Modern Churchman 15, no. 6–8 (1925). F. W. Puller, What Is the Distinctive Grace of Confirmation? (London; Oxford; Cambridge: Rivingtons, 1880). Arthur James Mason, The Relation of Confirmation to Baptism, as Taught in Holy Scripture and the Fathers (London; New York: Longmans, Green, 1891). Colin Ogilvie Buchanan, Anglican Confirmation, Grove Liturgical Study (Bramcote, Nottingham: Grove Books, 1986). B. D. Spinks, Liturgy in the Age of Reason: Worship and Sacraments in England and Scotland, 1662–C.1800 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008). William Joynson-Hicks, The Prayer Book Crisis (London & New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1968). P. Tovey, Of Water and the Spirit: Baptism and Mission in the Christian Tradition (Norwich: Hymns Ancient & Modern Limited, 2015). CPSA Diocese of Zululand St Augustine’s Mission, Baptism and Confirmation Registers, Historical Papers, University of the Witwatersrand, AB1053-G-1. http://historicalpapers-atom.wits.ac.za/ab1053-g-1-02-jpeg-pdf. O. Chadwick, The Victorian Church, Part Two: 1860–1901 (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1970). Peter John Jagger, Clouded Witness: Initiation in the Church of England in the Mid-Victorian Period, 1850–1875 (Allison Park, PA: Pickwick Publications, 1982). Frances Knight, The Nineteenth-Century Church and English Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998).

Reference list Buchanan, C. O. Anglican Confirmation. Grove Liturgical Study 48. Bramcote, Nottingham: Grove Books, 1986. Chadwick, O. The Victorian Church, Part Two: 1860–1901. London: Adam and Charles Black, 1970. CPSA Diocese of Zululand St Augustine’s Mission, Baptism and Confirmation Registers, Historical Papers, University of the Witwatersrand, AB1053-G-1. http://historicalpapers-atom.wits.ac.za/ab1053-g-1-02-jpeg-pdf Crake, A. D. The Deformation and the Reformation. Oxford: Mowbray, 1886. Jagger, P. J. Clouded Witness: Initiation in the Church of England in the MidVictorian Period, 1850–1875. Allison Park, PA.: Pickwick Publications, 1982. Joynson-Hicks, W. The Prayer Book Crisis. London & New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1968. Knight, F. The Nineteenth-Century Church and English Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Major, H. D. A. “Why We Value Baptism and Confirmation.” Modern Churchman 15, no. 6–8 (1925): 410–9.

Conclusions

201

Mason, A. J. The Relation of Confirmation to Baptism, as Taught in Holy Scripture and the Fathers. London; New York: Longmans, Green, 1891. Maurice, F. D. The Kingdom of Christ: Or, Hints on the Principles, Ordinances and Constitution of the Catholic Church, in a Letter to a Member of the Society of Friends Vol. 1. 2 ed. London; New York: Rivington, 1842. Neill, S. Colonialism and Christian Missions. London: Lutterworth Press, 1966. Porter, A. Religion Versus Empire?: British Protestant Missionaries and Overseas Expansion, 1700–1914. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004. Puller, F. W. What Is the Distinctive Grace of Confirmation?. London; Oxford; Cambridge: Rivingtons, 1880. Pusey, E. B. Tracts for the Times: For 1834–35, Tract No. 47–70; Records of the Church, No. XIX–XXV. London: Rivington, 1840. Robert, D. L. Converting Colonialism: Visions and Realities in Mission History, 1706–1914. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2008. Spinks, B. D. Liturgy in the Age of Reason: Worship and Sacraments in England and Scotland, 1662–c.1800. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008. Tovey, P. Of Water and the Spirit: Baptism and Mission in the Christian Tradition. Norwich: Hymns Ancient & Modern Limited, 2015. Warren, M. Caesar, the Beloved Enemy: Three Studies in the Relation of Church and State. London: SCM Press, 1955.

Index

Note: page references with ‘n’ indicate notes section Acts of the Apostles 27, 43, 44, 45, 49, 50, 51, 52, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 70n75, 70n76, 70n77, 70n78, 70n79, 70n80, 70n81, 70n82, 70n83, 70n84, 71n86, 72, 73, 90, 91, 98, 111, 114, 119, 125, 127, 128, 130, 145, 158, 174 Advisory Committee on Liturgical Questions 94 Alcuin Club 4n8, 5, 97, 101n44, 106, 112, 113, 123, 124, 133n14, 135n54, 135n57, 135n60, 137, 139, 164, 168 Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820 1, 4n2, 5n15, 5, 35n2, 41, 68n11, 69n43, 71n88, 73, 100, 102n60, 109, 132n10, 133n29, 134n46, 140, 163n1, 163n10, 169, 190n2, 191n39, 195 Anglo-Catholic 2, 11, 19, 24, 26, 49, 50, 52, 58, 63, 75, 79, 91, 95, 96, 113, 117, 130, 132, 153 Aquinas, T. 56, 57 Armitage, W. J. 91, 103n70, 105, 121, 192n57, 193 Arnold, T. 24, 25, 37n64, 38, 150, 164n33, 165 Augustine 33, 34, 58, 62, 71n85 Azariah of Dornakal 119, 189, 193n80, 194 baptismal regeneration 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 19, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 35n1, 37n75, 37n76, 38n83, 38n85, 38n90, 38n96, 39, 40, 41, 42, 42, 43, 45, 53, 55, 68, 79, 80, 81, 89, 119, 180 Barbados 28

Bell, G. 37n70, 39, 74, 75, 77, 94, 96, 98, 99n1, 100n23, 103n80, 103n84, 104n93, 104n105, 104n112, 105, 132n5, 137 Benson, E. W. 160, 166n67, 167 Bishop Usher 33, 34 Bright, W. 52–53, 69n44, 72 Broad Church 2, 6, 12–26, 14, 19, 24, 25, 26, 35, 52, 113, 150, 197 Broughton 121, 134n44, 141, 186 Buchanan, C. 4n6, 4n9, 5, 9, 35n9, 39, 56, 68n1, 70n58, 71, 114, 133n18, 137, 149, 165n65, 167, 200n6, 200 Bull, P. 67, 71n98, 71 Burnside, W. F. 62, 70n83, 71 Calvin, J. 8, 9, 27, 33, 34, 62, 63, 71n86, 72 Camden Society 78 Campbell, J. 31–32, 38n90, 39 Canada 3, 48, 83, 84, 91–92, 103n71, 103n72, 103n73, 105, 121, 132, 134n43, 137, 170, 175–186, 191n27, 191n30, 191n33, 191n34, 191n43, 192, 194, 195, 197, 198, 199 case study 170, 186, 190n4, 195 Catechism 15, 16, 20, 27, 29, 33, 34, 53, 88, 101n46, 106, 117, 129, 145, 149, 174, 181 Chadwick, O. 154, 165n54, 167, 200n11, 200 Chase 51, 69n41 China 3, 85, 92, 103n76, 109, 127–128, 135n71, 136n72, 140 Chrismation 89, 112, 123, 124, 160 Christian Socialist Movement 12, 17, 18, 23

Index Chung Hua Sheng Kung Hui 127, 128 The Church Association 79, 81–82 Church of England 1, 4n6, 5, 6, 14, 15, 16, 19, 23, 25, 26, 32, 35n3, 37n71, 38n88, 38n94, 39, 40, 55, 57, 62, 70n66, 71, 74, 75, 77–83, 87, 88, 91, 94–98, 104n100, 107, 108, 111–114, 119, 132n6, 132n8, 133n15, 137, 139, 143–163, 163n3, 163n4, 163n11, 163n21, 164n22, 164n25, 164n42, 164n43, 165n55, 166n72, 167, 168, 169, 191n40, 194, 197, 198, 200n11, 200 The Church of England in Australia 83, 85, 121–122, 134n44, 186 The Church in the Furnace 37n71, 40, 104n97, 108, 164n25, 168 Church of Ireland 32, 83, 84, 114–116, 133n20, 133n21, 133n22, 133n24, 133n25, 133n26, 133n27, 133n28, 137, 139, 140 Church Missionary Society 93, 110, 147, 160, 162, 177 The Church of the Province of New Zealand 83, 84, 85, 92, 96, 98, 125–126, 135n62, 135n65, 135n67, 139, 140, 151, 170, 197, 198, 213 Church of the Province of Southern Africa 122–125, 135n57, 135n58, 135n59, 137 Church Quarterly Review 44, 45, 47, 68n10, 68n12, 69n26, 71, 73, 82, 99n10, 104n113, 105, 107 Church of Scotland 161 Church Society 79, 81 Church of South India 76 Church Times 49, 54, 146, 159, 163n19, 165n64, 166, 169 Church in Wales 85, 117–118, 134n32, 134n33, 137, 138, 141 The Churchpeople’s Prayer Book 117, 118, 134n33, 137 Community of the Resurrection 61, 67, 122, 125, 149 Confirmation; anointing/chrismation 112, 118, 123, 124, 125, 131, 198; consignation/signing with the cross 82, 88, 90, 95, 112, 113, 123, 125, 131, 198; liturgy 74–141; see also entries on Prayer Books Confirmation practice 142–195; admission to communion without confirmation 121, 122; increase in

203

candidates 157–158, 162, 171, 176, 180, 189; increase in centres 142, 147, 198, 199; increase in episcopate 154, 162, 199; refusal 153; school 3, 19, 21, 24, 149–151, 164n32, 164n33, 164n35, 164n36, 164n38, 164n39, 166, 167, 199; veils 4, 89, 116; see also entries on Samuel Wilberforce and bishop Sumner Confirmation theology 6–73 Convocation Prayer Book 1907 79, 83, 101n40, 105, 107, 109 Convocation, Canterbury 82, 92, 94, 95, 97, 104n88, 115 Convocation, York 82, 95, 97, 104n98, 109, 113, 133n16, 138 Cosin, J. 111, 116, 121, 158, 198 Council of Trent 14, 56, 57 covenant 3, 5n16, 5, 6, 13, 16, 17, 29, 42, 63, 64, 67, 134n47, 140, 161, 181, 188, 189, 190n2, 192n48, 192n58, 192n64, 195, 197, 199 Crake, A. D. xi, 199, 200 Cuming, G. 75, 76, 99n7, 106 Darwell Stone 42, 54–55, 69n54, 75, 97, 99n6, 106 Davidson, J. 29–30 Davidson, R. 74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 94, 95, 96, 98, 99n1, 100n23, 103n80, 104n112, 105, 132n5, 137, 165n65, 167 Davies C. H. 79 Davies, D. H. M. 13, 36n23, 39 Dearmer, P. 95, 104n90, 104n91, 104n92, 106, 107 Dix, G. 2, 48, 69n30, 72, 76 Dix, M. 65–66, 71n96 Doctrine Commission 1938 58 Drury, T. W. 94 Dunbar, W., Sir 87, 88, 101n45, 106 Eastern Churches 57, 160 Eighteenth-Century Anglican Confirmation: Renewing the Covenant of Grace 5n16, 5, 134n47, 140, 190n2, 192n48, 192n58, 192n64, 195 English church Union 75, 81, 96, 113, 132n11, 138, 153 Ephesian disciples 63 Evangelical Prayer Book Revision 79–81

204

Index

Evangelical 2, 6, 8, 11, 13, 19, 25, 26, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 52, 56, 58, 77, 78, 79, 80, 90, 93, 94, 95, 97, 100n28, 104n110, 108, 110, 113, 114, 132, 146, 151, 181, 184, 185, 186, 188 Fenwick, J. 38n94, 39, 76, 77, 100n16, 100n26, 107, 165n65, 167 Frere, J. 42, 42–43, 68n1 Frere, W. 3, 75, 76, 77, 97, 99n9, 99n10, 99n11, 99n12, 107, 113, 122, 125, 135n53, 135n60, 139, 149, 162, 164n26, 164n28, 164n31, 167, 168 Furneaux, W. 62, 70n82, 72 Garbett, C. 75, 99n6, 109 General Theological Seminary 48, 50, 171 Goode, W. 30–31, 33, 34, 38n88, 39 Gordon-Taylor, B. 76, 99n12, 107, 164n26, 167 Gore, C. 49–50, 65, 69n36, 71n94, 72, 73, 95, 104n96, 109, 157 Gorham case 7, 16, 24, 26, 31, 35n1, 35n17, 37n74, 40, 81, 188 Graves, A. 91, 171–173, 190n9, 190n16, 194 Gray, D. 37n70, 39, 75, 99n5, 104n86, 104n91, 104n102, 104n108, 107, 134n34, 139 Green Book 96, 97, 112, 113 Greer, D. 90, 173, 174, 175, 191n21, 195 Grey Book 26, 95, 96, 97, 112, 113, 133n13 Griffith Thomas, W. H. 56, 70n59 Gwynne, L. 147–149, 164n23, 167 Hague, D. 58, 70n64, 72 Hall, A. 50, 52, 69n38, 72 Hall, F. 51–52 Hatchett, M. J. 90, 103n68, 107, 134n40, 139 Hebert 122 Hebrews 27, 44, 57, 58, 63, 80, 91, 158 Henson, H. 75, 99n6, 107, 161, 166n77, 167 Hinchliff, P. B. 4n8, 5, 134n50, 135n52, 135n54, 139 Hobart, H. 50, 89, 90, 102n61, 109, 146, 147, 177, 180 Holy Spirit, baptism 55, 60, 62, 181;

bishops 58, 88, 129, 174; confirmation 24, 43, 45, 49, 51; Dunn 68n8, 72; gift 11, 27, 43, 46, 47, 54, 95, 111, 112, 113, 117, 118, 123, 125, 129, 174, 198; grace 25, 30; Griffith Thomas 56, 70n59; indwelling 11, 45, 46, 48, 53, 54, 55, 56, 61, 198; partaker 51; presence 53; regeneration 11, 18, 34; Swete 59, 70n68, 73 Hort, F. J. A. 19–22, 36n43, 36n48, 39, 54, 69n53, 72 How, W. 24 India 76, 83, 85, 96, 98, 119–120, 134n42, 137, 159, 165n66, 168, 170, 186–189, 192n73, 192n75, 193n77, 193, 195, 197 infant baptism 14, 28, 29, 30, 31, 34, 44, 53, 81, 84, 95, 99, 122, 129, 132, 174 Jagger, P. J. 4n6, 4n13, 5, 7, 35n3, 39, 134, 139, 142, 143, 152, 154, 162, 163n3, 163n11, 164n42, 165, 168, 191n40, 194, 200n11, 200 James, E. 26 Japan 3, 85, 92, 126–127 Jasper, R. C. D. 37n67, 37n70, 39, 75, 78, 99n6, 99n8, 100n27, 105n116, 108, 135n60, 139, 164n31, 168 Jerusalem 160, 162 John 3 15, 27, 35 John Chrysostom 62, 70n84 Jolly, A. 27, 37n76, 39, 88 Joynson-Hicks, W. 97, 104n111, 108, 197, 200n8, 200 Keble, J. 9–11, 36n10, 36n11, 39 Kikuyu Controversy 159, 165n65, 168, 169 Kilvert 155, 165n51, 168 King, E. 79 Kingdon, H. T. 48–49, 69n33, 72 Kingsley, C. 14, 17–19, 36n34, 36n42, 39, 40 Knight, F 1, 4n1, 5, 199, 200n12, 200 Korea 2, 3, 92, 126, 129–130 Lambeth Conference 83, 98, 160, 162, 185; of 1888 160, 166n70, 167; of 1908 92–93, 103n75, 103n78, 108, 115; of 1930 84, 94, 110, 132n1, 139 Lampe, G. 68n9, 72

Index Lang, C. G. 75, 97, 99n6, 104n106, 108 Latitudinarian 6, 8, 34 lay baptism 88, 116 Lord Ebury 31, 79, 82 Lowther Clarke, W. K. 98, 103n74, 104, 108 Lutherans 61, 76, 77, 100n20, 100n21, 107, 109, 161, 162, 183 Mackenzie, K. D. 56–57, 70n60, 72 Maiden, J. 4n7, 5, 74, 96, 99n3, 104n97, 104n103, 104n110, 108 Martell, J. D. 74, 75, 97, 99n2, 104n87, 104n104, 104n107, 108 Mason, A. G. 2, 42, 45–48, 49, 50, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 59, 60, 63, 66, 68n14, 69, 72, 94, 129, 149, 196, 197, 200n5, 201 Massey Shepherd 76, 100n18, 118, 134n39 Maurice, F. D. 2, 6, 12–14, 17, 19, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 34, 35n18, 36n22, 36n23, 36n24, 37n69, 40, 41, 60, 61, 70n78, 72, 173, 196, 200n3, 201 Methodist 68, 76, 77 Meyer, H. A. W. 73 Meyers, R. 103n69, 108, 190, 194 Mountain, G. 177, 178, 191n25, 194 Mozley J. B. 35n1, 37n75, 40 National Assembly 95, 96, 97, 111, 132n6, 132n8, 140, 197 New Zealand 83, 84, 85, 92, 96, 98, 125–126, 135n62, 135n65, 135n67, 139, 140, 151, 170, 197, 198, 213 Newman, J. H. 9, 17, 64–65, 71n90, 73, 180 Nias, J. C. S. 11, 26, 35n1, 35n17, 37n74, 40 Nippon Sei Ko Kai 126, 127 Old Catholic 84 old high church 27, 35, 50, 90, 177 Ollard, S. L. 3, 4n12, 5, 52, 151, 154, 162, 164n40, 168 Orange Book 96, 97, 112, 113, 122, 123, 125 original sin 15, 22 Paget, F. 65, 71n94, 73 A Prayer Book Revised 95, 104n90, 104n92 Protestant Episcopal Church of the

205

United States of America 118–119, 170–173 penance 8, 129 Phillips Brooks 22–23, 37n51, 37n52, 38, 173 Phillpotts, H. 26, 27–28, 30, 31, 38n79, 38n82, 40, 88, 102n49, 108 Plymouth Journal 152 Prayer Book, America 1928 89–91, 118–119; Canada 1920 91–92, 120–121; England 1928 96–98, 110–113; Ireland 1926 114–116; Scotland 1928 87–89, 116–117; Wales 117–118 Presbyterian 70n62, 73, 88, 100n15, 100n21, 108, 109, 159, 161, 162 Puller, F. W. 2, 42, 43–45, 46, 49, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 68n5, 73, 149, 196, 197, 200n5, 201 Pusey, E. B. 6, 7–9, 11, 13, 24, 27, 30, 35, 35n5, 35n7, 35n8, 40, 45, 52, 68, 81, 150, 164n37, 169, 181, 196, 200n3, 201 Quick, O. 57, 67, 70n61, 71n101, 73 Rackham, R. 61, 70n81, 73 railways theory of confirmation 146, 154–155, 162, 172, 189, 199 Randolph, R. W. 49 renewal baptism vows 29, 45, 80, 82, 83, 89, 90, 92, 95, 111, 112, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 123, 125, 127, 128, 130, 131, 149, 158, 188 Revised Prayer Book (Permissive Use) Measure (NA 84) 111, 112, 122, 123, 197 Revised Version of Bible 159 Robertson, F. W. 14–16, 36n28, 36n33, 39, 40 The Royal Commission, ritual 79, 83, 152; ecclesiastical discipline 74, 77, 78, 83, 89, 94, 100n22, 100n30, 101n36, 102n56, 109, 116, 117, 158, 159, 165n63, 169 Royal Letters of Business 94, 95, 96, 99n5, 104n86, 107, 111 sacramental principle 3, 6, 51, 63–67, 68, 71n98, 71, 197 Samaritans 60, 61, 62, 63 Scottish Episcopal Church 27, 87–89, 116–117, 180

206

Index

Scriptural View of Holy Baptism Tract 67, 2, 7, 35n8, 40 Selwyn, G. 122, 198 Senn, F. 76, 77, 100n19, 109 Slattery, C. L. 90, 173–175, 190n17, 190n19, 191n29, 194, 195 Spinks, B. D. 7, 13, 35n4, 36n23, 40, 70n62, 73, 76, 77, 100n15, 100n16, 107, 109, 200n7, 201 spiritual regeneration 7, 8, 10, 16, 28, 29 Society of Saint John the Evangelist 50 Stebbing, N. 76, 99n12, 107, 164n26, 167 Strachan, J. 177, 191n28, 191n29, 191n30, 191n31, 191n32, 191n33, 191n34, 191n38, 191n41, 191n42, 191n43, 191n44, 193, 194, 195 Stringer, I. O. 181–185, 192n49, 192n51, 192n54, 194, 195, 197 Strong, T. B. 75, 99n6, 105 Sumner, C. R. 146, 147 Sumner, J. B. 60, 70n77, 73 Swete, H. B. 59, 70n68, 73 Taylor J. 27, 50, 52 Temple, F. 24–25, 37n59, 40, 161 Temple, W. 97, 132n12, 138 Thompson, T. 48, 59–60, 63, 69n29, 70n71, 73 Tovey, P.: Anglican Confirmation 1662–1820 4n2, 5n15, 5, 35n2, 41, 68n11, 69n43, 71n88, 73, 100n24, 102n60, 109, 132n10, 133n29, 134n46, 140, 163n1, 163n10, 169, 190n2, 191n39, 195; Eighteenth Century Anglican Confirmation 5n16, 5, 140, 169, 190n2, 192n48, 192n58, 192n64, 195; Mission and confirmation 5; Of Water and Spirit 200n9, 201

Tractarian 1, 7–12, 15, 22, 27, 45, 52, 56, 57, 68, 89, 90, 99, 114, 125, 128, 129, 150, 162, 164n35, 167, 196, 197, 213 Universities Mission to Central Africa 3, 96, 104n99, 105, 136n81 Van Gennep, A. 166n78, 167 Waller, J. T. 32–33, 38n96, 41 West Indies 83, 84, 85 Wilberforce, S. 3, 24, 30, 33, 34, 38n86, 41, 142–147, 150, 155, 162, 163n2, 163n5, 163n7, 163n8, 163n9, 163n14, 163n15, 163n17, 163n18, 166, 167, 169, 180, 198 Wilson, D. 121, 186–189, 192n59, 192n61, 192n62, 192n65, 192n67, 192n68, 192n69, 192n71, 192n72, 192n73, 192n74, 192n75, 193n77, 193n78, 193n79, 193, 194, 195, 197 Winnington-Ingram, A. F. 75, 99n6, 105 Wirgman, T. 3, 42, 48, 53–54, 56, 57, 69n47, 69n50, 73, 160, 166n72, 166n73, 166n74, 169 Wordsworth, C. 156, 165n62, 168 World War 1, 96, 104n96, 104n100, 107, 109, 147–148, 163n21, 164n23, 167, 169, 176, 185, 189 Wotherspoon, H. J. 57–58, 63, 70n63, 73 Wycliffe College Toronto 56, 58, 181 Zanzibar 3, 130–131, 136n80, 136n84, 136n86, 136n88, 138, 140, 159, 197 Zwingli, U. 8, 9