The Wicliffe Preachers.
—The Kensit Crusade, as it is called, held their annual meeting last month. The report was presented by Mr. J. A. Kensit. In an interesting speech he informed his auditors that, during the year, 3000 meetings had been held, and 683,000 people addressed. Tracts and leaflets to the number of 191,040 had been distributed. The year’s income amounted to over £10,000, which was £2000 in excess of last year’s. £4000 of this amount had been contributed for the College Scheme, which has in view the training of preachers whose future work it will be to enlighten the people of England as to the dangers of Romanism and Ritualism. It is encouraging to find that Mr. Kensit is being so well supported in his highly laudable efforts.
Books on the Protestant Controversy.
—Mr. Walsh, the author of the now widely known Secret History of the Oxford Movement, is giving a list of books useful to the student in the great controversy with Rome. These lists are appearing monthly in the Protestant Observer, a monthly periodical ably edited by Mr. Walsh.
“The Protestant Woman.”
—One of the most interesting and instructive monthlies published in the interests of Protestantism is the Protestant Woman. This periodical is the organ of the Women’s Protestant Union, and is edited by Mrs. Arbuthnot, a lady of social standing, and deeply interested in the Reformation cause. Each month it has a page or two devoted to cuttings from the Press, bearing on Protestant matters, to which we are indebted for some of the notes in this page. Unfortunately it has yielded to the modern taste in having a serial—high-toned and with good Protestant teaching, but, nevertheless, fiction all the same. Last month the Women’s Protestant Union had their annual meeting, and judging from the account of the proceedings in the English Churchman and the June numbers of the Protestant Woman, the outlook of the Union is of the most encouraging kind. The Protestant Woman may be had at 20 Exeter Hall, Strand, London, for the annual subscription of one shilling and sixpence.
Roman Catholics and the Education of the Young in Argentina.
—It is curious to compare the utterances of the Roman Catholic Church authorities in this country with the state of the elementary public free schools in such a country as Argentina, where, as among all Spanish-American peoples, priestly influence is all-powerful. Yet Percy E. Martin, in his recent work, “Through Five Republics,” says of the Argentine schools, “There is no religious instruction, which, as a matter of fact, is forbidden. . . . It may be that, while practical agreement as to the ends of secular education has been arrived at, there is no likelihood of unanimity in regard to religious teaching, even when the whole country’s religious faith is the same.” It would be interesting to know how this apparent discrepancy of view is to be accounted for.—Daily Chronicle.
The English Monasteries before the Reformation.
—The Contemporary Review, for April, has a remarkable article entitled, “The Truth about the Monasteries.” The writer, Mr. G. G. Coulton, has made a special study of the subject, and some of the facts he makes known are certainly damaging enough to those who shed sentimental tears over the suppression of the monasteries by the rude hand of Henry VIII. Persons interested in the Romish controversy would do well to read this article.
Inspection of Convents.
—The Rev. J. B. Nichols (Haverstock Hill), speaking on the subject of “Convents and Convent Schools” at the meeting of the Congregational Union, quoted Cardinal Wiseman’s saying, that he wanted to see London surrounded by convents. That hope has been realised. In 1800 there were only 21 convents, now there were 700. The convents should be open to inspection for sanitary and other purposes, and they should be compelled to furnish particulars as to numbers.—St. James’ Gazette.
The Bishop of Hereford on Ritualistic Practices.
—The Bishop of Hereford recently said:—”All the recent development of Ritualistic doctrine and worship within our Church has taken place under the eye of the Bishops, and as might be said in self-defence by the clergy concerned, under the ægis of Episcopal sanction or acquiescence. It is impossible as it would be unjust to ignore the fact that this movement has been largely—too largely as some of us may think, when we remember the issues at stake—fostered and promoted by Episcopal sympathy and support. Consequently, in any reflections on the subject, or on the persons concerned, we have to bear in mind the sharing or shifting of responsibility involved in the general neglect or refusal of Bishops to check or modify Ritual excesses and illegalities by using the means which have been in their hands, and exercising the personal responsibility which was specially laid upon them at every institution of a new incumbent to a benefice.”—Protestant Chronicle.