THE LEEDS CONFESSIONAL CASE

"1

323 The Bishop of Ripon held his inquiry concerning St. Saviour's Church in the vestry of Leeds Parish Church, on December 14 and 15, 1850. Dr. Hook was present, and the inquiry extended itself into all the Romanising practices and doctrines of the accused clergy. But the chief subject considered was a charge against the Rev. H. F. Beckett, one of the Curates, of hearing the confession of a married woman (who appeared as a witness), without the knowledge of her husband, and then asking her shockingly indelicate and indecent questions. Of this witness the Bishop subsequently stated:-"Every attempt was made, but in vain, to invalidate her simple, straightforward testimony; and no imputation was ever cast upon her general integrity." After the inquiry the Bishop wrote to Mr. Beckett :-"It appeared in evidence which you did not contradict, and could not shake by any cross-examination, that Mr. Rooke, who was then a deacon, having required a married woman who was a candidate for confirmation to go for Confession to you as a priest, you received that female to confession under these circumstances, and that you put to her questions which she says made her feel very much ashamed and greatly distressed her, and which were of such an indelicate nature that she would never tell her husband of them." 2 Mr. Beckett replied to the Bishop's letter, but he did not dare to deny the truth of the charges brought against him. He made, however, one remarkable assertion, which husbands whose wives go to Confession would do well to bear in mind. "No woman," he said, "would, I suppose, ever tell her husband what had passed in her Confession";3 and as to asking questions of the penitent, he wrote:-" The asking of questions according to the discretion of the Confessor is, your lordship must see, absolutely necessary to make Confession of value to those who have recourse to it." 4

It was thought absolutely necessary by the Bishop of Ripon (afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury) to print some of the indecent questions which this Puseyite priest put to 1 A Letter to the Parishioners of St. Saviour's, Leeds. By the Bishop of Ripon, p. 31. 8 Ibid. p. 38.

2 Ibid. p. 37.

4 Ibid. p. 39.

this woman in the Confessional.1 All that I can say about them here is that if any husband, be he Protestant or Ritualist, knew that his wife was asked those questions in Confession by her Ritualistic Confessor, the next time that Confessor came to that husband's house he would knock him down flat, and afterwards kick him out of the house. I do not say the husband ought to act thus: I only affirm that he could not very well help doing so. And I am quite certain that the filthy-tongued Confessor, who asked such obscene questions, would deserve all that he got from an outraged and justly indignant husband. Ordinary men of the world would be ashamed to ask such questions; but these brazen-faced Puseyite priests of St. Saviour's, Leeds, gloried in their shame. They issued a Statement of their case, in which they had the audacity to justify Father Confessors in asking penitents, male or female, indecent questions. As this, to my ordinary readers, will seem almost incredible, I give their justification of such dirty conduct in the priests' own words :

"We now come," said the clergy of St. Saviour's, "to the second charge, relied on by the Bishop, against Mr. Beckett. The same witness states that certain questions which he asked her were very indelicate.

"To those who do not recognise the presence of Almighty God in the ministrations of the Confessional, it may seem that an 'indelicate' question may be a wrong one. But we believe that He who has created physicians for bodily sickness, and by them is pleased to effect many merciful cures, has ordained other physicians in His Church for the relief of men's spiritual disorders; and that there is an analogy between the discretion which we willingly concede to those whom we consult for the health of our bodies, and that which must be exercised by the physicians of the soul. If this be true, a question in itself indelicate ceases to be so when it is known to be important to the safe treatment of the sufferer's case; and woe be to those who countenance the vicious refinement of this generation, and abet the world in its unceasing efforts to place a false delicacy between the soul and its salvation. It would doubtless be indelicate, were it not in the highest degree necessary, to drag sin from its lurking-place, and expose it to the sinner's view;

1 A Letter to the Parishioners of St. Saviour's, Leeds. By the Bishop of Ripon, p. 32.

INDECENT QUESTIONS DEFENDED

325

but that there is often a paramount necessity for doing this, will be doubted by none whose earnest thoughts of sin and of repentance, of God's wrath and of acceptance with Him, have not been checked and stunted, chilled or blasted, by the breath of Lutheran heresy and Socinian unbelief. Whether such a necessity existed in the case which has led the Bishop to visit Mr. Beckett with his severest displeasure, is known, and will be known, to none but God and Mr. Beckett himself. He was asked by Mr. Randall, at the 'investigation,' whether he would have put the same questions to his (Mr. Randall's) wife? to which he replied that under the same circumstances he would have put the same questions, not only to Mr. Randall's wife, but even to Mr. Randall himself." 1

A defence of this kind is simply a slander on an honourable profession. No medical man of honour would ever ask a patient such questions as those put to this woman in the Confessional. And even if, in some points, the analogy were to hold good, yet it would fail in this. The priest in the Confessional is not a physician but a quack, who kills souls, instead of curing them. The whole system of Confession on these indelicate lines is abhorrent to every enlightened Christian. It pollutes both Confessor and penitent.

The result of the Bishop's investigation was that all the clergy of St. Saviour's, with one exception, seceded to the Church of Rome. Out of fifteen clergy who had laboured in that Church since its consecration in 1845, no fewer than nine had now seceded to the Church of Rome. So much for the first attempt to exhibit the Oxford Movement in operation.

The Statement of the Clergy of St. Saviour's, Leeds, in Reference to the Recent Proceedings Against Them, p. 9. Leeds: S. Morrish. 1851.

CHAPTER XII

The Bristol Church Union-Pusey objects to a protest against RomeArchbishop Tait on the Church Discipline Act-The Judicial Committee of Privy Council-Lay Address to the Queen-Her Majesty's action in response-Lay Address to the Archbishop of CanterburyThe appeal to the Bishops-An Episcopal Manifesto-A Clerical and Lay Declaration in support of the Gorham judgment-The Confessional at Plymouth-Revival and reform of Convocation-Prosecution of Archdeacon Denison-The power and privileges of examining chaplains-The Archbishop's Commission of Inquiry-The Archbishop's judgment at Bath-How the Archdeacon evaded punishment -Pusey hoists the flag of rebellion-The protest against the Bath judgment-The Society of the Holy Cross-The Association for the Promotion of the Unity of Christendom-Startling revelations as to its early history-Secret negotiations with Rome-De Lisle's secret letter to Cardinal Barnabo-The Cardinal's answer-Newman consulted by De Lisle-The conspirators meet in London-Their secret, traitorous, and treacherous message to the Pope-The case of Westerton v. Liddell—Judgment—A Ritualistic rebel.

A NUMBER of independent "Church Unions," formed by the Tractarians, had been in existence for several years when the Papal Aggression commenced. The first of these, called the Bristol Union, was formed in 1844, to which were subsequently affiliated a number of local Church Unions throughout the country, all having the promotion of High Church principles as their chief object. In addition to these, but working independently on similar lines, were the Metropolitan Church Union, and the London Church Union. One of the chief promoters of the Bristol Church Union was the Rev. William Palmer, whose Narrative of Events Connected with the Tracts for the Times, published in 1843, was, as I have already stated, the first effectual exposure of the Romanising party which had appeared up to that date. At the time of the Papal Aggression Mr. Palmer was very much alarmed at the prospect of the extreme division of the Puseyites, under their leader Dr. Pusey, capturing all the

THE PUSEYITE CHURCH UNIONS

327

Church Unions throughout the country. He wished these Unions to be regulated by those High Church principles which had ever guided his own conduct. The London Church Union, which was then managed by the extreme section, was anxious to become the centre of the whole of the Church Unions of the country, and thus bring them all under the guidance of men in whom moderate High Churchmen could place no trust. That Mr. Palmer's fears were not without foundation is proved by a letter written to Mr. A. Beresford Hope, M.P., by Dr. Pusey, on October 3, 1850. The Metropolitan Church Union, to which he refers at the commencement of his letter, was not, at that time-so Mr. Palmer states-under Tractarian (though it was under High Church) guidance.

"MY DEAR HOPE,-All hope of reconciliation with the Metropolitan is now plainly at an end. But something must be done to prevent their absorbing the whole Church Movement into their hands, at which they are evidently aiming. Some are ambitious for the Metropolitan; Palmer wishes to get rid of J. K.[eble] and myself; Dr. Biber to put forward himself.

'Might not the London Union unite itself more closely with some of the others? as the Bristol, the South-Eastern, the Yorks, &c.

..

"One great Union, such as Badeley suggests, which should take in all England, and have leading clergy or laity from every diocese on its Committee (the distrusts would not often be then) would be immense strength.

"The members of this great Union in each diocese might assemble in their diocese, at any time, or regularly as now, and any member in the diocese, who was a member of the Central Committee, might be the chairman.

"This (which B. suggested) would have much greater moral strength than the existing Unions.

"I wish that you would think of this, or some similar plan. I sent you Badeley's opinion, which was sent to J. K.[eble] relatively to the plan we were hoping might be carried out, that all Unions might be fused into one.-God bless you. Yours most faithfully,

"LONDON, Oct. 3."

"E. B. PUSEY."

1 A Statement of Circumstances. By William Palmer, M.A., p. 21. London: Rivington. 1850.