Page:1902 Encyclopædia Britannica - Volume 25 - A-AUS.pdf/489

 ANGLICAN

ORDERS

443

Lambeth Conference of 1897, it was given to the metro- politan of India. But this is an obvious anomaly, and it politans of Hew South Wales and South Africa by their is likely that matters will be simplified in the future. (3) By degrees, also, the relations of colonial churches synods. Civil obstacles have hitherto delayed its adoption to the archbishop of Canterbury have changed. It was by the metropolitan of India. (2) By degrees, also, the colonial churches have been at first assumed, as has been said, that a colonial .rJjtuaI freed from their rather burdensome relations with the bishop was an extra-territorial suffragan of the autoaomy^ state. The church of the West Indies was archbishop. Until 1855 no colonial bishop as Freedom disestablished and disendowed in 1868 (Estab- consecrated outside the British Isles, the first instance from state lishment). In 1857 it was decided, in Regina being Dr MacDougall of Labuan, consecrated in India control. v. Eton College, that the Crown could not claim under a commission from the archbishop of Canterbury; the presentation to a living when it had appointed the and until 1874 it was held to be unlawful for a bishop to former incumbent to a colonial bishopric, as it does in the be consecrated in England without taking the suffi agan s case of an English bishopric. In 1861, after some protest oath of due obedience. This necessity was removed Jiy from the Crown lawyers, two missionary bishops were the Colonial Clergy Act of 1874 (37 and .38 Yict. c. 77, consecrated without letters patent for regions outside sec. 12), which permits the archbishop at his discretion to British territory : C. F. Mackenzie for the Zambezi region dispense with the oath. This, however, has not been done and J. C. Patteson for Melanesia, by the metropolitans in all cases; and as late as 1890 it was taken by the of Cape Town and Hew Zealand respectively. In 1863 metropolitan of Sydney at his consecration. But natural the Privy Council declared, in Long v. The Bishop of Cape as it is that the oath should be taken by a colonial bishop Town, that “the Church of England, in places where holding mission from the archbishop of Canterbury, that there is no church established by law, is in the same it should be taken by the suffragan of another province, or situation with any other religious body.” In 1865 it still more by a metropolitan, is an obvious anomaly, and adjudged Bishop Gray’s letters patent, as metropolitan .of one which will doubtless be modified in course of time. Cape Town, to be powerless to enable him “ to exercise Thus the constituent parts of the Anglican communion any coercive jurisdiction, or hold any court or tribunal for gradually acquire autonomy: missionary jurisdictions that purpose,” since the colony of South Africa already develop into organized dioceses, and dioceses aie grouped possessed legislative institutions when they were issued, and into provinces with canons of their own. But the most since there was no formal compact of obedience between complete autonomy does not involve isolation. The them, his deposition of Bishop Colenso was declared to churches are in full communion with one another, and be “null and void in law.” This apparent disaster, as act together in many ways; missionary jurisdictions and Bishop S. Wilberforce at once foresaw, proved to be “ the dioceses are mapped out by common arrangement, and charter of freedom of the colonial church. The South even transferred if it seems advisable: e.g., the diocese African bishops forthwith surrendered their patents, and Honolulu (Hawaii), hitherto under the jurisdiction of the formally accepted Bishop Gray as their metropolitan, an archbishop of Canterbury, was transferred m 1900. to example followed in 1865 in the province of Hew Zealand. the church of the United States on account of political In 1862, when the diocese of Ontario was formed, the changes. There is a strong affection for and deference the see of Canterbury, which shows itself by frequent bishop was elected in Canada, and conseciated under a to consultation and interchange of greetings; there is also royal mandate, letters patent being by this time entirely discredited. And when, in 1867, a coadjutor was chosen a strong common life which has been emphasized m for the bishop of Toronto, an application for a royal recent years by common action (Lambeth Conferences), mandate produced the reply from the Colonial Secretary and seems likely to be even more significant in the future. The Anglican Communion consists of the following: (1) The that “ it was not the part of the Crown to interfere in the Church of England, 2 provinces, Canterbury and York, with 23 and creation of a new bishop or bishopric, and not consistent 10 dioceses respectively. (2) The Church ol Ireland, 2 provinces with the dignity of the Crown that he should advise Her Armagh and Dublin, with 7 and 6 dioceses respectively (3) I he Majesty to issue a mandate which would not be worth the Scottish Episcopal Church, with 7 dioceses. _ (4) The Protestant Church of the United States, with 81 dioceses and paper on which it was written, and which, having been Episcopal missionarv jurisdictions, including North Tokyo, Kyoto, Shanghai, sent out to Canada, might be disregarded in the most Cape Palmas, and the independent dioceses ol Hayti and Brazil. complete manner.” And at the present day the colonial (5) The Canadian Church, consisting of (a.) the province of Canada, churches are entirely free in this matter. This, howevei, with 10 dioceses; (6) the province of Rupert Land with 8 dioceses, of which 2, Saskatchewan and Calgary are at present is not the case with the church in India. Here the united. (6) The Church in India and Ceylon, 1 province ot 11 bishops of sees founded down to 1879 receive a stipend dioceses (7) The Church of the West Indies, 1 province of from the revenue (with the exception of the bishop ot 8 dioceses, of which Barbadoes and the Windward Islands are Ceylon, who no longer does so). They are not only at present united. (8) The Australian Church, 1 province of dioceses and 9 (at present) unorganized dioceses, which, hownominated by the Crown and. consecrated under letters 6ever, are united under the General Synod of Australia. (9) The patent, but the appointment is expressly subjected to Church of New Zealand, 1 province of 6 dioceses togethei with the missionary jurisdiction of Melanesia. (10) The South such power of revocation and recall as is by law vested in the Crown; and when additional oversight was African Church, 1 province of 10 dioceses, with the 2 missionary jurisdictions of Mashonaland and Lebombo (11) IN early 3U necessary for the church in Tinnevelly, it could only be isolated dioceses and missionary jurisdictions holding mission nom secured by the consecration of two assistant bishops, who the see of Canterbury. worked under a commission from the archbishop o Authorities—Official Year-look of the Church of Englan .— Canterbury which was to expire on the death ot tiie Phillimore. Ecclesiastical Law, vol. ii. London, 1895. digest o/ the bishop of Madras. Since then, however, new sees have of S.P.G. Records. London, 1893.-E. Stock, Church Missionary Society. 3 vols. London, 1899. "• * been founded which are under no such restrictions, y e Tucker. The English Church in Other Lands. London, Ibbb. creation of dioceses either in native states (Travancore and A T WiRGMAN. The Church and the Civil Power. London, IM6. (w. E. Co.) Cochin), or out of the existing dioceses (Chota JNagpur, Lucknow, Ac.). In the latter case there is no legal subAnglican Orders.—The attacks which Homan division of the older diocese, the new bishop administering Catholic controversy has made upon the orders o e such districts as belonged to it under commission from its English Church have varied greatly in character, and bishop, provision being made, however, that m all matters shifted their ground from time to time; but all may be ecclesiastical there shall be no appeal but to the metro-