THE FOLKSTONE CASE.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume 2, Issue 107, 27 July 1877, Page 2

THE FOLKSTONE CASE.

(TO THE EDITOR OF THE AKAROA MAIL.) Sir,—The judgment of the Privy Council in the above Case does great credit to the Judicial Bench. The research, the calmness and moderation with which the whole subject is discussed, ought, to satisfy all judicious and moderate men. The first and most prominent point was that of vestments. None but the "extreme Ritualists laid claim to any other vestment than the surplus. It is now definitely held by the.highest legal tribunal, that capes, albs, and chasubles are illegal. ,/ The eastward position, if such as to prevent the congregation from witnessing the breaking of bread, is likewise illegal. There can be no doubt that the effect of •* this limitation of the posture of the ministers destroys-the idea of the bread being a sacrifice, and as a corollary, that whatever maybe the forth in which the bread is **■ presented, it must be bread "as usually eaten," and that that bread is to be broken. At this stage it is important to lookback to the results of the various decision-

which have been recently given. In the case of Martin v. Mackonochie, it was held that the elevation of the paten and cup above the head is illegal. Likewise that of the chalice, or of the offertory alms is illegal. This was the judgment of the Court of Arches in the case of Mr. rurchas. In the case of Mr. Mackonochie it was held" that' prostration, or kneeelmg during the prayer of consecration, was likewise illegal, as well an lighted candles and incense. In the case of Mr. Purchas it was held that mixing the water with the sacramental wine was illegal, as well as tippets, stoles, dalmatics, maniples, tunics, bells, signs of the cross, kissing the Gospel Book, and leaving the communion table uncovered on Good Friday. In the same case processions, palms, the use of ashes on Ash Wednesday, high celebrations, and of, feasts not directed by the. church, or images of Our Saviour, or of the Virgin Mary, and stuffed dove over the communion table on Whit Sunday were all illegal. It will thus be seen that all the novelties introduced during the last 35 years have been condemned, after the most searching and exhaustive examinations into the history, practice, and doctrines of the Church since the Reformation. It is now to be hoped and expected that the two great sections will rest satisfied with these decisions, and will unite in promoting the great objects of a National Church, in bringing the masses of the country to a knowledge of the Sacred Scriptures. Those who are not satisfied with these decisions [and desire to have additional ceremonies and rites in public worship, ought to seek this liberty, not within the pale of a National Church, but in some other ecclesiastical organisation in which they can minister in comfort and peace. J A.K.H.