Bishop Edward Cridge 1817 - 1913

“Our Lord’s Church also known as
The Church of Our Lord.”

John & Grace (nee Dyer) Cridge lived in North-Bratton Hamming, Fleming in
Devonshire, England, and it was on a bright day on December 17th, 1817 that
their son Edward was born. Grace Cridge who appeared to be frail creature
of ill health, passed away while Edward was still a child. This left the
raising and education to John Cridge, Edward’s father, who, after giving him
what he could in basic education, then entered him in the schools of North
and South Hilton grammar schools. Edward was a very promising and
enterprising person and he persevered with his learning so that at the age
of 19 he became the third master at the grammar school at Oundle in
Northamptonshire holding this office for 6 years. He studied at St. Peter’
s College in Cambridge, his specialty being mathematics and in 1848 received
his B.A. This was the year of the great Irish famine and Edward and others
of a sympathetic nature took an active part in soliciting aid for those poor
unfortunate souls in Ireland. Thus at an early age Edward shows his
compassion and love for those in need. It was during that year he passed
his theological examination at Cambridge and was ordained by the Bishop of
Norwich as a deacon. From there he was appointed Curate of the church of
North Walsam in Norfolk, and also became the second master of the school in
that city. Edward was a musician of note having been trained to play the
‘cello and he was also one of the organizers of the Cambridge Musical
Society, the others being Lord Kelvin, C. G. Coombs, W. Blow and A. A.
Pollock His religious duties began to grow and because of his compassion
and resolution in Christ, and in 1851 he was appointed to be in charge of
Christ District Church at Walsam, London. His career as a minister began to
blossom and God saw fit to place an opportunity before him of an opening in
the colonial country of Canada.

As Bishop Cridge later recalls - “On Wednesday, August 30th, 1854, the
Vicar of West Ham told me that the Chaplaincy of Vancouver’s Island was
vacant and thought that if I applied I might very likely obtain it, for
which purpose he would use his influence on my behalf: he wished me to give
him some notion of my mind and matter before the evening as Captain Pelly
who had informed him of the vacancy had also told him that the Hudson’s Bay
Company wished to make the appointment immediately.” Charles Lillard Times
Colonist August 21, 1993

Edward Cridge was 37 years of age when this offer came to him, and he was in
the prime of his life and in excellent health. We can imagine the
enthusiasm that this offer of Chaplaincy of Vancouver Island meant to Edward
Cridge. His first thought was to contact his sweetheart, Mary Winmill, and
convey the good news to her. Mary was the daughter of one George Winmill of
Romford, Essex. As he rushes to her side to relate what has happened, he
proposes marriage, and we can imagine his conversation as he says, “Mary my
beloved, I come with the joy of God in my heart to relate to you the good
news that has come our way. I have been offered the Chaplaincy of Vancouver
Island in Canada. This is the most wonderful opportunity of a lifetime, to
go to the colony of Canada and to work for Christ in the remote areas of the
world. To become a missionary in the field, it is what I have dreamt about
and the good Lord has seen fit to choose me for this position. Mary, you
know that I love you with all my heart, but I will not accept this position
without your support. You know that eventually we planned marriage, so I am
proposing to you that we wed at once and prepare for the greatest adventure
that God has placed before us. We have two weeks to gather our belongings
together, set sail, have our honeymoon aboard ship, and arrive in a new land
to do God’s work.” Mary it must be said loved Edward very much indeed, for
she accepted his proposal of marriage, and his proposal for a new life
together in foreign lands. She was aware that the long sea voyage could
take up to a year to complete, yet with all this she gladly supported Edward
in his decision, and her answer was a simple “Yes.” They are wed very
quickly, perhaps by the vicar of West Ham, who seems to have used his
influence to procure this position for Edward. It must be said that there
were other clergy that could have filled the post offered, but the vicar of
West Ham saw the great possibilities that were beginning to be awakened in
Edward, and knew right away the Edward Cridge was the man for the job. This
decision was borne out later on in Cridge’s life, when he began a hospital,
a home for orphans and the start of the Y.W. C. A., and these incidents will
be related in their proper place.

Edward and Mary only have a week to prepare for this adventure and prepare
they did. The great adventure included sailing from England on the ship the
“Marquis of Bute”, on the Atlantic Ocean, down past South America, around
Cape Horn, into the Pacific ocean and through to Fort Victoria on Vancouver
Island. The Panama Canal would come at a later date and would serve a
purpose for such travelers, cutting their journey in half, but for Edward
and Mary it was the long sea voyage. It would be only natural to assume
that during this voyage Rev. Cridge would have taken the opportunity to
minister to the people onboard in his capacity as chaplain and perform the
necessary services that are usually held each Sunday and weekdays. Edward
would never let an opportunity like this pass him by, and he always read his
bible daily, keeping the word of God before him to sustain him and Mary on
this voyage. After sailing on this sea going voyage, braving the winds,
high waves, scorching sun of the tropics, and living in cramped quarters for
8 months, they finally arrive at Fort Victoria and are greeted by James
Douglas himself. The day is April 1st, 1855. The beautiful natural and
native scenery immediately captivates Edward and Mary. The lush greens of
the forests, the abundance of wild flowers, the ocean with its sea life, all
go to make this an enchanting paradise for them. Even though their feet are
encased in the mud of Victoria, they see the beauty of God all around them
and are ecstatic in their duty to God. They are ready to put up with
anything, as they go about doing the work that they came to do, to save
souls for Christ. James Douglas greets them and welcomes them to Fort
Victoria, where they are to stay until circumstances prove them ready to
expand their ministry to a permanent church, and until proper accommodation
can be found for this newly married couple.

The living conditions at the fort are primitive compared to England, but
this does not deter them. They make friends with James Douglas and other
members of the fort, and James goes out of his way to make sure that they
are comfortable in everyway possible. When James Douglas hears that Mary
Cridge is anxious to have fresh milk for her tea, he requisitions milk from
his own personal supply to provide for the comfort and ease of the Cridge’s.
Apparently the cows that supply this fresh milk are still out to pasture,
not having been brought in from their wintering, and so we see a side of
James that is magnanimous in his character, and this will show up again and
again in his life.

Writing years after his arrival, Bishop Cridge tells us: “I know not what
the population of Victoria might be at that time, though I think two hundred
would be the outside; the population of the whole Island being 600. You
could, I think, count the houses on each side of the four principal streets,
Government, Fort, Yates, Johnson, on the fingers of one hand. I remember
three on James Bay side, to reach which, there being no bridge to connect
with Government Street, you had to go round where the Church of Our Lord now
stands.” Charles Lillard Times Colonist August 21, 1993

Two previous churchmen had filled the post of Chaplain at Fort Victoria
unsatisfactorily. The first was Rev. Henry Beaver who was very quarrelsome
and could not get along with anyone and complained bitterly about everything
at Fort Vancouver and Victoria, and is eventually sent back to England. He
undoubtedly gave bad reports about his experiences of this “primitive
colony.” The next churchman is Rev. Robert Staines, and although not much
is heard about him, he returns to England.

Unfortunately for the Rev. Mr. Staines he embarks upon a return journey to
England, but the ship sinks and he amid other, drowns. Rev. Cridge becomes
the third clergyman that the Hudson’s Bay company hires, and immediately the
change in atmosphere in the fort is noticeable, for Rev. Cridge gets along
with everyone, does not complain about their living quarters, and sets about
to perform his services to the Glory of God and to make a firm foundation in
Jesus Christ for the benefit of all concerned.

Reverend Cridge holds his first service in the Fort’s messroom April 8 1855,
just eight days after his arrival (there being no jet lag from their
traveling) and his first sermon was a “simple statement of the Gospel which
I meant to preach – ‘Go ye into the world and preach the Gospel to every
creature.’” Mark 16:15. This sermon was prophetic for Edward, for he made
it his life’s work to preach, to teach and to save souls for Christ. Rev.
Cridge also gave services on board ships that sailed into the harbour.
Transportation during these early days was by way of “shanks pony”, which
means everyone walked, or if one was fortunate to own a horse, you could
ride. The streets were not paved, and when it rained, the trails turned
into mud baths. It would be a few years down the road when suitable
roadways would be built and transportation such as carriages would be
offered.

The prominent men at the fort in those days were the Honorable John
Sebastian Helmcken, who was then the HBC surgeon, and Senator Macdonald, who
in 1851 were among the voyageurs in the “Tory.” It was the senator who at
one time, paying a genuine tribute to the friendship that began and existed
between Bishop Cridge and himself, exclaimed “the prelate was one of the
best and conscientious man living, and that his life is altogether
beautiful.” Thus is seen from this close friendship the beginning of trust
in the person of Edward Cridge, who himself trusted in the good Lord.

Mary Cridge soon opens a Sunday school at the fort, which is immediately
successful. Her manner was such that she was gentle but firm with her
students that were entrusted to her care. The children loved and adored her
and she also taught the Gospel with a firm conviction, that children who had
been in her Sunday school classes always remembered her moral teachings from
the Bible.

Rev. Cridge became a busy man at the fort and the surrounding district and
was appointed Superintendent of Education and Inspector of Schools, a
position that did not have any monitory stipend at that time, and in which
office he continued to serve until 1865 when the post was taken over by
Alfred Waddington, who was the first paid superintendent. Money was not the
great concern of Edward, who firmly believed that the Lord would provide for
His servants, and this attitude of trusting the Lord in all circumstances
was to prove a great Blessing in later years.

“For over a year service was held at the Fort whose tall palisades, frowning
bastions and sentinel at the gate, contrasted with, and even heightened the
peaceful nature of the exercises of the assembly within in which newcomers
were mingling with their praises with the devotions of the more early
adventurers.” Cridge from the Colonist, May 5, 1855

A District church was completed in 1856 for the Rev. Edward Cridge on the
site known as Church Hill, high above the town. Rev. Cridge names it Christ
Church in memory of the parish church he worked in at West Ham, London. The
architect was J. B. Pemberton and the builder William Leigh. It was a
wooden frame building of the type erected according to the design of such
churches in the colonies. It lasted for thirteen years when it succumbed to
a fire in 1869. It was rebuilt in 1872.

During those early years, Rev. Cridge holds many services outside Christ
Church, some held on board men of war ships anchored at Esquimalt and
Craigflower, as has been told earlier, and also held services in Colwood,
Esquimalt and Nanaimo. Remembering the transportation difficulties of these
early days, it would be necessary to find some means of conveying him to
these services, presumably by horse and buggy. In 1859 Edward accompanied a
missionary, a Mr. Gammage of the Propagation Society, and these gentlemen
traveled as far as Hope, from there by canoe to Yale, and then across the
mountains on horseback to Lytton and Lillooet and home by way of Douglas.
Edward taught and baptized as he went, spreading the Gospel to these far
away communities, communities that would only rarely see a minister every
few years, if then. Rev. Cridge had the distinction of being the only
Protestant Minister in this part of the country during these early pioneer
years.

The beginning of the Royal Hospital which we now know as the Royal Jubilee
Hospital

In 1858 Dean Cridge found a very sick man (his name was later established as
a Mr. Braithwaite), at the bottom of his garden lying on a mattress. When
the Dean asked why the man was there, the sick man told him that he had been
brought and left there by his friends. When Edward Cridge asked him why
they had brought him to his garden, the sick person remarked “they thought
that you were the proper man” and, says Dean Cridge “I suppose I was under
the circumstances, and so we set to work the meet the case. A cottage was
temporarily rented on the corner of Yates and Broad Street from a Mr.
Blinkhorn and placed a Mr. W. S. Seely in charge as steward and Dr. Trimble
as the medical officer in charge. Later as the hospital developed and grew,
the good Bishop supported Dr. J. S. Helmcken as one of the Directors. This
was the beginning of the Royal Hospital, the only other hospital on the
coast being located in California at this time. The Royal Hospital was
later moved to a wooden building on the Indian Reserve and later still to
upper Pandora Street. Bishop Cridge was ever active in seeing that the
hospital prospered, and it was he who organized a Sunday each year where the
proceed would go to the upkeep of this necessary building for the sick and
elderly.

The Protestants Orphan’s home now known as the Cridge Centre for the Family.

Mrs. Mary Cridge and Mrs. Senator Macdonald were the founders of the
Protestant Orphan’s Home. During the gold rush days, there were many
unfortunate ladies of the evening who gave birth to children, and then
deserted them when they could not provide for them. These ladies of
Christian Charity had compassion on these poor souls and found homes for
them at first, then as the problem continued to grow, they rented a cottage
and placed them in charge of a Miss Todd. In the course of time more and
more children were found to be orphans in need of care and a larger building
was rented on the corner of Blanchard (that is the spelling in the 1800’s)
and Rae Streets. This became too small and another move was made, this time
through the generosity of a member of Bishop Cridge’s congregation, a Mr.
John G. Taylor who donated property and money to the tune of $30,000.00 for
the present location. Bishop Cridge’s living example of Jesus Christ in his
personal life, was a beacon of love to his congregation, who responded with
thanks and blessings such as Mr. Taylor and many others.

The start of the Y.W.C.A.

Many ships were sailed from England with part of their cargo as young
Christian ladies embarking upon a colonial life as domestics and perhaps
being fortunate to marry one of the farmers or gentry in the community of
Victoria. One of the first ships to arrive with such a blessed cargo also
carried with it a disease of Scarlet Fever and unfortunately some of the
young ladies succumbed and died. The touched the heart of Mrs. Harris, the
wife of the first mayor of Victoria, and she together with Mrs. Senator
Macdonald and Mrs. Mary Cridge organized a hostel for these young ladies so
that they could be given the proper care and attention in sickness and to
establish themselves in a manner becoming Christian Ladies. Thus was born
in Victoria the beginning of the Young Women’s Christian Association.
Bishop Cridge gave his wholehearted support on these projects, they were
very dear to him, and were part of his ministry throughout his long,
industrious and prosperous life.

The Secession

Anglicanism had trouble right from the 16th Century when the leadership of
the Reformation saw themselves as reformers of Catholic Christianity and not
revolutionaries. Since that time there have been many reformers that have
had to deal with the ritualistic Catholicism of the Church of England.
Bishop Cridge was familiar with the history of the troublesome Tractarians
and their beliefs, and was also familiar with the Anglo-Catholic Movement of
1833. Suffice it to say the Bishop Cridge believed in the basic Christian
doctrine found in the Bible, which he preached and taught constantly and
with enthusiasm.

During the gold rush days, the population of Victoria took a surprising
turn, mushrooming form 400 persons to 4,000 persons overnight. When Rev.
Cridge saw the possibilities of ministering to this vast crowd of people
that God had put before him, he asked for ministerial help. The powers in
England saw an opportunity to increase their ministry by sending out a
Bishop George Hills, who was not the missionary the Edward Cridge had asked
for. However Rev. Cridge graciously worked with Bishop Hills in building up
the congregation and expanding the mission work into all the outlying
communities.

In 1872 at the opening of Christ Church Cathedral, Bishop George Hills had
Rev. W. S. Reese preach the sermon. Rev. Reese advocated ritualistic
practices that were abhorrent to Dean Cridge’s nature. So the Dean at the
conclusion of the service, instead of announcing the closing Hymn, addressed
the congregation and said, “that this is the first time since the church had
been built, and he its minister, that such doctrines had been advocated, and
with God’s help he would see that it was the last, as long as he was its
minister.”

Bishop Hills immediately brought things to a head by asking for an apology,
which Dean Cridge at first refused to do. Bishop Hills took Dean Cridge to
Ecclesiastical Court and won his case, but not receiving the apology he
asked for, then proceeded to take Dean Cridge to the Supreme Court, Judge
Begbie presiding. Bishop Hills again won his case, and the result was that
Dean Cridge was to lose his licence to preach. The proceedings of these
trials took two years, at the end of which time Dean Cridge decided to leave
the Christ Church Cathedral and begin his own church. Such was the love
felt for Dean Cridge that 75% of the congregation of Christ church left and
went with Dean Cridge, including the wardens and the vestry.

At a public meeting of all his supporters Dean Cridge on October 27, 1874,
began to organize a new church. He had just recently heard of a new
organization that was in keeping with his Christian Teachings, The Reformed
Episcopal Church, started by Bishop Cummins, a branch of which had just been
formed in Ottawa. The congregation enthusiastically decided that this was
the way to go and applied for membership, with the understanding the Edward
Cridge would be their minister. Two years later Edward Cridge was
consecrated the Bishop of Canada and from the west cost from California to
Alaska.

Sir James Douglas donated the land for the building of The Lord’s Church,
which became in common usage The Church of Our Lord, and it was also Sir
James that purchased and donated the Thomas Appelton organ for our church.
This is the oldest organ on the North American Continent and is still in
being played for all our servise.

Although Bishop Cummins and Bishop Cridge never met, they did correspond and
found that their Christian Ideals were one and the same and their message
was also the same one of Salvation.

Bishop Cridge was active all his life both physically and mentally until his
death at the age of 96 and we can imagine his arrival before his Lord and
Master, Jesus Christ, who welcomed him with those words “Well done thou good
and faithful servant.”

On November 10, 1873 the Assistant Bishop of Kentucky of the Protestant Episcopal Church wrote his letter of resignation to the Rt. Rev. Benjamin. Bosworth Smith, D.D., Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Kentucky.
"Under a solemn sense of duty and in the fear of God, I have to tell you that I am about to retire from the work in which I have been engaged in the last seven years in the Diocese of Kentucky, and thus to sever the relations which have existed so happily and harmoniously between us during the time... I, therefore, leave the communion in which I have labored in the sacred ministry for over twenty-eight years, and transfer my work and office to another sphere of labor. I have an earnest hope and confidence that a basis for the union of all evangelical Christendom can be found in the doctrine of Justification by faith. To this blessed work I devote the remaining years of my life, content, if I can only see the dawn of that blessed day of the Lord. I am, dear Bishop, faithfully yours in Christ.
George David Cummins."

Less than five days later, Bishop Cummins circulated a notice to "others of like mind and persuasion."

Dear Brother. The Lord has put into the hearts of some of His servants who are, or have been, in the Protestant Episcopal Church, the purpose of restoring the old paths of their fathers. On Tuesday, the second day of December, 1873, a meeting will be held in Association Hall, corner of Twenty-third Street and Fourth Avenue, in the City of New York, at ten O'clock A.M. to organize an Episcopal Church on the basis of the Prayer Book of 1785: a basis broad enough to embrace all who hold 'the faith once delivered to the saints', as that faith is maintained by the Reformed Churches of Christendom. This meeting you are cordially and affectionately invited to attend. The purpose of this meeting is to organize, and not to discuss the expediency of organizing. May the Lord guide you and us by His Holy Spirit...' George David Cummins.

When the appointed day arrived, the Reformed Episcopal Church came into being. Bishop Cummins then addressed the group.

"One in heart, in spirit, and in faith with our fathers, who at the very beginning of the existence of this nation sought to mold and fashion the ecclesiastical polity which they had inherited from the Reformed Church of England by a judicious and thorough revision of the Book of Common Prayer, we return to their position and claim to be the old and true Protestant Episcopalians of the days immediately following the American Revolution, and through these, our ancestors, we claim an unbroken historical connection through the Church of England, with the Church of Christ, from the earliest Christian era.' 1

The choice of the name Reformed Episcopal Church clearly demonstrates that our founders did not consider themselves as revolutionaries who were intent on overthrowing the work of the past. Instead, they saw themselves as reformers, intent on removing the corruption of the present while holding fast to the purity of the Church in prior ages. Professor D.O. Kellogg explained in 1893.

Anglicanism , the parent of the Protestant Episcopal Church, not only stamped hereditary marks on her offspring but has been imitated in all her mutations. A glance at the history of the Church of England is pertinent therefore to that of the Reformed Episcopal Church, which is only reformed incidentally, for in gist and core it is a restoration, and shall have been called the Restored Episcopal Church. If its true relation to the organization from which it was cloven is to indicated in its name. It took and strives to maintain the original position of the Church of England, when it became Protestant, and of the Protestant Episcopal Church of Bishop White's time. We have called it the reformed, but it is the Restored Episcopal Church. 2

Like the English Protestant Reformers of the Sixteenth century, Bishop Cummins "sought to prove that a national Church could indeed reform itself around the Protestant principles of sola scriptura and sola fide without sloughing off fifteen centuries of the Church's history. 3

Like Richard Hooker, early Reformed Episcopalians would have been quick to urge:"Let us be loath to change, without urgent necessity, the ancient ordinances, rites, and long approved customs of our venerable predecessors. .. antiquity, custom and consent in the Church of God, making with that which the law doth establish are themselves sufficient reasons to uphold the same, unless some notable public inconvenience enforce the contrary... We neither follow Rome in her errors nor reject what is sound simply because it is hers. Not everything that idolaters have done is to be abhorred, but what they have done idolatrously. For of that which is good even in evil things, God is the author.'4

This fundamental conservatism is revealed in comments made by Bishop Cummins in response to his critics:"We only want to take out all that can be interpreted as teaching false doctrine; the rest should remain as it is. The fewer changes we make the better; ours is an Episcopal Church, and we do not wish to do away with our offices and liturgy". 5

It was with this intention and in this spirit that the Reformed Episcopal Church was founded. At that founding , Bishop Cummins presented the Declaration of Principles of the Reformed Episcopal Church for adoption, which principles were intended to be unalterable . In other words, if the Reformed Episcopal Church failed to adhere to these principles, she would cease to exist as the Church she was founded to be.

It has been claimed by critics that the Declaration of Principles are an additional authority to the Holy Scriptures and the 39 Articles of Religion. This is not true. The Declaration of Principles are the expression of the Evangelical understanding of the Thirty-Nine Articles. In effect, what the Declaration of Principles does is establish certain clear cut boundaries which Reformed Episcopalians may not cross.

Principle One establishes the first boundary of Holy Scripture as the supreme or primary authority of the Church's faith and practice. Every practice and principle at operation in the Church must be subject to the test of whether it can be either proved by Holy Scripture or else not be contrary to what Holy Scripture teaches.

The second boundary of the Reformed Episcopal Church is that of the Apostles' Creed. Principle One appeals to the Apostle's Creed, thus making our Church creedal. Bishop Cheney explains:"If I build my house, I will consult an architect. The architect will present me the latest style, the most modern ideas. But our Church has done exactly the opposite and presented the earliest of ideas. Why? Because the water very near the fountain head is the purest. We call it the Apostles' Creed. There is an old legend that each Article was suggested by one of the Apostles. The legend is false, but the substance of the Articles does date back so near to the time of the Apostles that it represents clear the Apostles' doctrine. I do not believe a thing is better simply because it is old. But in Christianity, the nearer I get to Christ's own day, the more assured I can be." 6

In claiming to be creedal, the Reformed Episcopal Church submits herself to the wisdom of the entire Church, refusing to believe that she and she alone can learn and express the truth. It has been charged that since the Reformed Episcopal Church does not affirm the Nicene Creed in her Declaration, she omits it as an authority. This is not true. The Nicene Creed finds its source in the affirmations of the Apostles' Creed and thus it also becomes a secondary authority to Holy Scripture.

The third boundary is the Christian Sacraments. "The Divine institution of Baptism and the Lord's Supper" These two Gospel Sacraments are the organs of Christ's Body, the outward visible means through which He communicates His presence and power to us. It is a testimony to the belief of this Church in the living presence of Christ in His Church.

The fourth boundary contained in Principle 1 is "The Doctrines of Grace substantially as they are set forth in the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion". The founders of the Reformed Episcopal Church are quick to link themselves with the teaching of the early English Reformers. The essence of their teaching is found in the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion. At the Fifth General Council, held in 1887, the Rev. Mason Gallagher proclaimed:

In discussing this question, as far as time will permit, I will examine a few salient points of the doctrine of the Reformers; will endeavor to show wherein the Reformed Episcopal Church agrees with these founders of the Church of England, and wherein, at the same time, the Protestant Episcopal Church has departed from the doctrine of these same Reformers. If it can be proved that we of this Church here represented in Council have, in our work, simply restored the 'old paths' of the Fathers- our right to exist, our duty to have done this work is thereby fully and forever established; settled as decisively as the right and duty of Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley, three centuries ago, to separate from the Church of Rome. 7

Clearly the Fourth boundary of the Reformed Episcopal Church links her to the doctrine and practice of the Reformational English Church

The Second Principle in establishing the Reformed Episcopal Church has to do with the nature of her government. We are an Episcopal Church. Article XXIII states that: It is not lawful for any man to take upon himself the office of public preaching, or ministering the Sacraments in the Congregation, before he be lawfully called, and sent to execute the same. And those we ought to judge lawfully called and sent, which be chosen and called to this work by men who have public authority given unto them in the Congregation, to call and send ministers into the Lord's vineyard.

The emphasis in this Article is on the importance of being 'Lawfully called and sent'. Based on the teaching of Hebrews 5:4 , it clearly teaches that 'no one may assume the duties of the ministry without a lawful call and mission.' 8 Any man who preaches or ministers the Sacraments must be given authority through the laying on of hands. Bishop Cummins said:

'Ordination, then, confers... authority to execute the offices of the Ministry; and this, as the solemn ratification and confirmation by visible sign and seal on the part of those already in authority, of the Christian community in the election..' 9

Bishop Cummins believed in the importance of the transfer of authority and recognized the importance of episcopacy for the proper ordering of the Church. He insisted that on in the 'extremist of cases' should it be abandoned. Bishop Cheney adds: 'We might believe in Historic Succession. I know that Bishop Cummins did.'10 However, Bishop Cummins did reject the notion of Apostolic Succession. He said:
" The Doctrine of Apostolic Succession which professes to transmit the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands of men, who by an unbroken chain, reach back to the very hands of the Apostles, and by virtue of that transmit supernatural powers- a succession which secures no soundness in the faith, but lends itself to error as readily as to truth- such a doctrine we reject as a 'fond thing vainly invented and grounded upon no such warrant of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the word of God".11

He further adds: "The Ministry is not of the essence of the Gospel: it is not essential to the being of the Church of Christ. It is a necessity for its well being, for the proper administration of discipline and government, for the propagation and maintenance of the faith by an order of men set apart to this work, and whose care is to 'watch for souls as they that must give an account' to the Great Shepherd of Souls".12

To Cummins, the order of Church Government was secondary. This posture is wholly consistent with Article XIX. 'The visible church of Christ, is a congregation of faithful men, in the which the pure Word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duly administered, according to Christ's ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same.' Dr. Ray R. Sutton of Cranmer Theological House of Shreveport, LA, has said: 'Bishops are necessary for the well-being (bene esse) of the Church, but not for the Being (esse). Apostolic Succession does not reside exclusively in them. It is in the word, the Sacraments and the discipline of the Church as well as in the priesthood of all believers. Episcopacy is necessary for the best rule but its absence does not mean the Church does not exist.' 13

Principle II makes it clear that Episcopacy is both 'ancient and desirable ', even though it is not essential in order for a true church to exist, it is never the less desirable. Bishop Cheney put it well: "The Reformed Episcopalian cannot believe that within thirty years of the death of the last Apostle the universal government and polity of the Church could have become Episcopal if such a system had been repugnant to the Apostles' own teaching and practice.." 14

In other words, Episcopal Government has Apostolic approval and thus it is ancient. Secondly, it is desirable. There is practical benefit to having presiding officers in the Church.

Troubles which might grow to vast dimensions and a shameful publicity, and add to the scandals that block the progress of Christianity, if either left to themselves or entrusted to the settlement of councils or ecclesiastical courts, may be quieted and harmonized by the wisdom and godly counsel of a presiding officer (Bishop) of the whole Church. 15

The English Bishops (1661) in their response to the criticisms of the Puritans said: "Our Church doth everywhere profess to conform to the Catholic usage's of the primitive times, from which causelessly to depart argues rather love of contention rather than of peace". Their argument was the same as that of Cummins and Cheney. This is what the Church has always done. There is no compelling reason to change or alter the practice of the historic Church. Furthermore, to advocate such change is to be contentious.

The Third Principle has to do with Liturgical Worship.

This Church retaining a Liturgy which shall not be imperative or repressive of freedom of prayer, accepts the Book of Common Prayer, as it was revised, proposed, and recommended for use by the General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church, AD 1785, reserving full liberty to alter, abridge, enlarge, and amend the same, as may seem most conducive to the edification of the people, provided that the substance of the faith be kept entire.

The founding fathers had such a commitment to Liturgical Worship that they wrote into the Canons of the Church:

On occasions of public worship, invariably on the morning of the Lord's Day, commonly called Sunday, and at other times at the discretion of the Minister, the Prayer Book set forth at any time by the General Council is to be used in the congregations of this Church.16 In a sermon preached in Christ Church, Chicago, on February 8, 1880, Bishop Cheney said : "I want to speak today of a neglect of worship, not in the world, but in the Church. I desire to show how it is disregarded not by those who never darken the doors of our places of worship, but by those who do not frequent our sanctuaries. In one word, what I mean, is that our Church-going people have come to ignore and neglect the claims of God's public Worship, as distinct and separate from listening to preaching. I believe that this morning I put my hand on the weak spot of our Protestant Christianity".

Here Bishop Cheney made the distinction between merely attending preaching services and participation in worship. In a sense, this is the problem with the Church today. There is a kind of unspoken fundamental presupposition that the religion of the Old Testament centered in Worship at the Tabernacle and later at the Temple, while in the New Testament , worship is centered in preaching. This kind of thinking creates a major division between the Old and New Covenant. To this, any mindful participant in historical liturgical worship must object. For worship in the New Covenant is a equally centered in worship as the Old Covenant. Listen to Cheney's words from the same sermon:

The caterpillar weaves about itself the gossamer threads of its cocoon or chrysalis. Wonderfully delicate, rarely beautiful- these fine spun filaments serve their purpose in the economy of nature, but when it bursts through its prison walls, and spreads its wings, and soars out into a new life - the old shell with all its woven threads is left to perish as a useless thing. There is a popular idea like that in reference to worship. It is the old chrysalis which the Hebrews wove around his soul with silken threads of splendid rites and gorgeous ceremonies.. But in the summer atmosphere of the New Testament, we have broken its bonds. In the preaching of Christ, we have found wings. Worship is the dead shell that preaching has superseded.
I say, that is a common notion on this subject. But it is a woefully mistaken one. Did Christ teach that there was to be no public worship? Why! Christ gave his disciples a form of prayer. He worshipped with them over their common meals, "lifting up His eyes to heaven and blessing God". He taught the woman at Jacob's well that though worship was not tied to any one locality, or centered in any one temple, yet God sought for true worshippers who should worship Him in Spirit and in Truth....
That His worship was simpler than that which Moses instituted-that old ceremonies-splendid, indeed, but burdensome and costly-were done away, I fully admit. Bur worship was the very end and purpose of His work. He died to save men, that they might worship Him forever.
Protestant Christendom cannot forget what the Church of Rome did with the simple Gospel of Jesus Christ... Is it strange that Protestantism re-acted? Rome drove preaching from the Church. Little wonder if Protestantism has suffered preaching to crowd out worship. Rome made ritual everything. Do you wonder that Protestantism dreads ritual as the burnt child dreads the fire? It is the old story, in which History continually repeats itself, of human nature resusing to use that which it needs because of its abuse.

As you stand looking though the exquisite but broken tracery of the great window of Melrose Abbey, it is hard to forgive the old Scotch Covenanters for the ruin they wrought. They tried to cast out the idols, but in so doing they made the beautiful sanctuary itself a desolation. We have cast out an idolatrous ritualism. Let us stop there. A Church without a worship, spiritual but reverent, is a dismal ruin which no other beauty can redeem.17

His was a call not reject liturgical worship. His was a warning not to be too extreme in moving away from what was and is the worshipping practice of the historic Church. That practice is liturgical.

The Book of Common Prayer which Reformed Episcopalians use traces its lineage back through the liturgy of the Protestant Episcopal Church to the liturgy of the Church of England. The first complete Book of Common Prayer produced by the Reformed Church of England was introduced in AD 1549. In this book archbishop Thomas Cranmer sought to reform the liturgical worship of the historic Church, using Scripture as his guide while he set about examining the ancient liturgical rites. In that Book, he lays down four principles upon which the Book of Common Prayer was constructed. Worship should be Scriptural; Worship should be Edifying; Worship should be Common; Worship should be Sincere. The subsequent revisions (AD 1552, 1559, 1662) utilized those principle to further refine and improve the worship expression in the Church of England.

This Liturgy was faithfully used in the Colonies until the time of the Revolutionary War. Since it was not politically correct to use a Prayer Book which encourage prayers for a King and called for loyal submission to the king, the American Church recognized that it was necessary to create a distinctly American Prayer Book. It was this which motivated the creation of the 1785 Book of Common Prayer. While there was a certain incompleteness to it, it never the less can be clearly identified as belonging to the family of Historic , English , Protestant, Liturgical Worship. Thus it is that Bishop Cummins could say: "One in heart, in spirit, and in faith with our fathers, who at the very beginning of the existence of this nation sought to mold and fashion the ecclesiastical polity which they had inherited from the Reformed Church of England, by a judicious and thorough revision of the Book of Common Prayer, we return to their position and claim to be the old and true Protestant Episcopalians of the days immediately following the American Revolution and through these, our ancestors, we claim an unbroken historical connection through the Church of England, with the Church of Christ from the earliest Christian era". 18

This historic expression of worship is preserved in the Reformed Episcopal Book of Common Prayer. While changes have occurred over the past 120 years, no changes could be made which changed the 'substance of the faith'. Future revisions will also be subject to this provision.

The Fourth Principle is stated negatively. It contains statements which identify certain beliefs and practices as being contrary to God's word. While they are stated negatively, they do not teach positive truth. Their purpose is to prevent falsehood, not to teach truth. The Articles of Religion settle those matters. these negative statements merely clarify matters. So, while denying that the Church of Christ exists only in one order or form of ecclesiastical polity, this Article does not teach that all orders and forms are regular and /or desirable. While denying that Christian Ministers are priests in a different sense than that in which all of God's people are priests, this article does not teach that Christian Ministers are not priests at all, for there is a priesthood of all believers. While denying that the Lord's Table is an altar on which the oblation of the body and blood of Christ is offered anew to the Father, this article cannot be read to teach that the Lord's Table is not an Altar in any other sense because the Order for Holy Communion says that we do make a 'sacrifice of Praise and Thanksgiving' and the prayer is offered at the Holy Table. While denying that the presence of Christ in the Lord's supper is a presence in the elements of bread and wine, this statement does not teach that there is no presence of Christ in the Holy Supper. While denying that Regeneration is inseparably connected with baptism, this statement does not deny all connection between Regeneration and Baptism

Principle Four does not define what Reformed Episcopalians believe, but what they don't believe. and in each statement there is compatibility with the Articles of Religion.