A W eek ly N ew spaper and R ev iew .

DUM VOBIS GRATULAMUR, ANIMOS ETIAM ADDIMUS UT IN INCCEPTIS VESTRIS CONSTANTER MANEATIS.

Front the B r ie f o j H is Holiness P iu s IX . to T h e T a b l e t , June 1870.

V o l . 90. N o . 3005. L ondon, D ecember 1 1 , I897.

P r ic e sd ., b y P o st s %d .

[R eg i st e r e d a t t h e G e n e r a l P o s t O f f i c e a s a N ew spaper.

C hronicle o f t h e W e e k !

Page

Crucifixes Illegal in Anglican Churches—Mr. Balfour on Universities— The German Navy Bill in the Reichstag— Has France Forgotten the “ Revanche?”— The Belgian Defeat on the Congo— President M ’K inley’s Message— Hawaii to be Annexed— Resignation o f the Italian Ministry— Lord Rosebery and the “ Sport of Kings ” — Strikes and Trade — Another Way to the Pole— The Engineering Dispute—The Dreyfus Case—The Upper Nile Diffic u l t y ..................................................... 917 L eaders

British Bigotry and Irish Educa­

tion............................ Ç2I

C O N T

L ea d e r s (Continued) :

French View o f England’s Posi­

Page tion in Europe .. . . . 922 The Attitudes of Catholics To­

wards Pentateuchal Criticism .. 923 N o tes ». ». _ « . . 926 R e v iew s :

The Life and Times of Cardinal

Wiseman . . . . . . . . 928

Î ourneys Through France . 930 .ife in West London . . . . 930 Christmas Books . . . . . . 931 Homiletic : Lectures on Preaching 931 Allanson’s Little Woman . . . . 931 C orrespondence :

Rome :—(From Our Own Corre­

spondent) . . ». — — 933

E N T S .

C orrespondence (Continued) :

Page

News from Ireland — — 935 News from France . . . . .. 936 L e t t e r s t o t h e E d it o r :

The Anglican Mass . . . . 937 Christmas Letter .. . . .. 938 Save the Mother and the Babe . . 938 Sixty Thousand for Father Bans 938 Protestant Prohibitions o f Meat

Eating .....................................938 Reply to the Bishop of Bristol . . 939 Historical Research Society . . 940 University Intelligence . . . . 941 Catholic Evidence Lectures . . 941 Notes From India . . . . . . 941 C h r istm a s A ppeals .. . . 942 Books of the Week . . . . . . 942I

O b it u a r y So c ia l and P o l it ic a l

SUPPLEMENT.

Page ». 942 - 944

Archconfraternity of Our Lady of

Compassion.. . . . . . . 949 N ews from t h e Schools:

Views of the London School

Board Election . . .. «. 950 English College, Douai .. - .951 Newcastle School Board : Three

Catholic Candidates .. .. 951 N ew s from t h e D io ceses : Westminster ......................... 95!

Hexham and Newcastle . . .. 952 Leeds 953 L i v e r p o o l ....................... ... 954 Nottingham....................................954 P l ym o u t h ....................................955 Glasgow ....................... 955

Rejected MS. cannot be returned unless accompa7iied with address and postage.

CH R O N IC LE O F TH E W EEK.

IN ANGLICAN CHURCHES. F

CRUCIFIXES ILLEGAL

OR a long time past the High

Church party in the Church of England has been allowed to have its way and the terrors of the law seemed no longer a reality. The truce has been rudely broken in the case of the clergy at St. Mark’s, Marylebone. Art aggrieved parishioner appealed to Dr. Tristram, as Chancellor of the diocese of LoiidoD, against the innovations of the incumbent Mr. Fuller. Among the things complained of were the erection of “ Stations of the Cross,” and the placing of a large crucifix over the pulpit. It was further alleged that a reredos had been put up, in the centre of which was a box, apparently a tabernacle was meant, upon which was placed “ a bold brass crucifix.” The petitioner prayed the court to order the removal of the “ Stations of the Cross,” of the pulpit crucifix, and also the reredos with the crucifix which was so bold and brazen. And all these things the learned Chancellor has ordered to be done. It was shown in the evidence that “ the Stations of the Cross ” were used just as they would be in Catholic churches, and the Chancellor had therefore no hesitation in declaring that they were turned to “ superstitious uses ” and ordered their removal. The defendant, it would seem rather disingenuously contended that the Stations had been put up merely “ for decorative purposes.” The evidence was clearly against him and the Chancellor had no hesitation in rejecting the plea. “ As to the crucifixes, on inspecting the church the learned judge observed that four had been placed there— one on a box on the centre of the chancel reredos, another on the wall above and immediately behind the pulpit, another on the north wall of the church, and a fourth on the reredos in the side chapel. There was no judicial decision binding on the the Court to the effect that a crucifix might be set up or placed in a church as a lawful church ornament. The figure of our Saviour on the Cross as forming the central figure of the historical representation of the momentous scene of the crucifixion of our Lord was held by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the Exeter reredos case to be lawful as a church decoration. The

New Series. Vol. LVIII., No. 2,314.

judgment in the case of ‘ Westerton v. Liddell ’ stated : ‘ Upon the whole, their lordships, after the most anxiou® consideration, have come to the conclusion that crosses as distinguished from crucifixes have been in use as ornaments of churches from the earliest periods of Christianity; that when used as mere emblems of the Christian faith, and not as objects of superstitious reverence, they may still lawfully be erected as architectural decorations of churches; that the wooden cross erected on the chancel screen of St. Barnabas’ is to be considered as a mere architectural ornament, and that, as to this article, they must advise her Majesty to reverse the judgment complained of. Their lordships hope and believe that the laws in force respecting the consecration of any building for a church which also forbid any subsequent alteration without a faculty from the ordinary will be sufficient to prevent any abuse in this respect.’ But, for the purpose of the order which the Court was about to make in respect of the crucifixes placed by the vicar in the church, it was sufficient to observe that crucifixes at the time of the Reformation were enjoined to be removed from all churches as tending to superstition; that their introduction as ornaments into our churches had not the sanction of the Rubrics or the Canons; that their exclusion from our churches as ornaments had been ratified by the practice of nearly three centuries and a half; that the people’s churchwardens and the parishioners of this parish who were members of the Church of England conscientiously objected to their being retained in their church, and assigned their introduction as a reason for their refusal to attend Divine service.” The crucifixes are accordingly ordered to be removed. Notice of appeal was given. If, however, the ruling of Dr. Tristram is upheld we are likely to hear more of the matter in reference to other London churches. The crusade against crucifixes seems fairly started.

Mr. Balfour’s speech, in accepting, as

MR‘ - LF0UR Chancellor of the Edinburgh University, the u n i v e r s i t i e s , splendid gift of an Academic Hall from Mr.

McEwan, M.P., was happy and suggestive.

After a passing expression of regret that there should be so much difficulty in obtaining from the liberality of a not illiberal public the means of making our great British universities what all British universities should be, he pointed out that we scarcely compared favourably in this matter with the United States. At the same time he reminded his hearers that there were times and places where the last thing desired by a university was the possession of great public buildings which would have prevented the carrying out of