PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference -
LTC.O.885
3 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO
14
capable of officiating in England or Ireland without approbation of Archbishop of Province, or of holding preferment without consent of Archbishop and Diocesan Bishop.
4. A person ordained by a Colonial Bishop not 59 Geo. III, cap. 60,
having jurisdiction, or not residing in his diocese,
is not capable of preferment within Her Majesty's
dominions, or of officiating anywhere as a Minister
of the Established Church of England and Ireland.
ec. 4.
sec. 8.
5. A person ordained Priest by an English or 3 & 4 Vict, cap. 33. Irish Bishop after being ordained Deacon by any other Bishop, can only officiate in England or Ireland under leave from Diocesan, confined to two days at a time but renewable.
cap. 62,
6. But these disqualifications are wholly or par- 15 & 16 Vict., tially inapplicable to persons ordained by Colonial 16 & 17 Vict.. Bishops under commission from an English, Irish, or cap. 49. Colonial Diocesan.
iii. Scottish Episcopal Clergy may not accept preferment in England or Ireland without consent of 26 & 27 Vict, the Diocesan Bishop, but become permanently eligible cap. 94.
for preferment after once such consent is obtained.
iv. Clergy of the United States and Clergy 3 & 4 Vict., cap. 33, deriving ordination from Bishops consecrated under secs. I and 3. 5 Vict., cap 6, Jerusalem Bishopric Act, may officiate in England sec. 4. and Ireland under licence from the Diocesan Bishop, confined to two days but renewable.
One observation is necessary in order fully to understand the effect of these restrictions. Accord- ing to the prevalent opinion in the English and other Episcopal Churches ordination cannot pro- perly be repeated; therefore an ordination which does not itself (so far as the religious ceremony goes) qualify a man for officiating in England does not only leave him unqualified, but disables him for ever from obtaining a qualification. If it is inope- rative it incapacitates.
The general result of these Acts is that under them the Scottish Clergy occupy the most favourable position, then the East Indian and Colonial, then those of the United States, those ordained under the Jerusalem Bishopric Act, and those who are unlucky enough to have been ordained Priests in England after having received Deacon's orders else- where (it is difficult to conceive the reason of this severity), and lastly, those who are ordained by a
12
15
Colonial Bishop without jurisdiction or beyond his Diocese, including all those who have been ordained
by Bishops un-diocesed by the recent case.
These last, as I have observed, are declared incapable of preferment within Her Majesty's domi- nions, or of officiating anywhere as Ministers of the Established Church of England and Ireland. What the incapacity exactly amounts to may be a subject of question.
Persons ordained by Roman or Greek Prelates I understand to be equally incapacitated by 3 and 4 Vict., cap. 33, sec. 5; but this is denied by some lawyers. If not incapacitated their case would seem better than that of any other class of Clergy whom I have described, except those ordained by English or Irish Diocesans.
The first question which occurs is, whether there is any reasonable ground for all these distinctions, some of which look like the chance result of piece- meal legislation on a matter on which it was neccs- sary to defer to apprehensions imperfectly analyzed, It is of course intelligible that the Legislature should have intended to provide that the Clergy of the Church of England should have certain quali- fications-moral, intellectual, doctrinal, social, poli- tical, and ecclesiastical,i.e., that they should be of good character, fair education, and sound doctrine; that they should bave means of living, should be well affected to the Constitution in which they occupy a place, and should be canonically ordained.
For all these it is right that appropriate precau- tions should be taken. Thus a Clergyman in diffe- rent stages of his clerical progress is required to prove his character by testimonials, bis learning by examination, his orthodoxy by examination and sub- scription, his means of living by producing a title to Orders, and his Canonical Ordination by producing his Letters of Orders.
But if he passes all these tests, the question arises why is it necessary to ask an applicant for employ- ment or preferment where his orders were obtained? For this reason only, I apprehend. Testa imposed by law or cognizable by law are insufficient to secure the exclusion of improper persons from employment in the Established Church, and those legal tests are accordingly supplemented by leaving every Bishop at liberty to refuse ordination (which is the first
F
6