Thursday 7th June 2007
|
|
|
John Fielder Mackarness |
|
|
|
Arthur P. Purey-Cust |
|
|
|
W. W. Merry |
Bishop John might have hoped for a more auspicious start.
Following a three hour consecration service at Westminster Abbey, the highlight of which seems to have been the presence, together with magnificent beard, of the Greek Metropolitan, Bishop John travelled to Oxford for the enthronement.
"Although a similar ceremony has not been witnessed in this city for a period of 25 years, comparatively little interest was excited in the proceedings and the attendance in the Cathedral was not nearly so large as might have been expected..."
W. Merry (then Vicar of All Saints, Oxford and later Rector of Lincoln college) observed that : "... both clergy and citizens were conspicuous by their absence." adding "... it should be known that the Dean and Chapter of Christ Church had not the courtesy to invite the presence of the Clergy or of others who might be supposed to take an interest in the ceremony."
Arthur P. Purey-Cust (Vicar of St Mary's Reading and later Dean and Precenter of York) ventured "some explanation of what I myself witnessed yesterday with great regret." He denied that their absence signified that the clergy were "indifferent to the subject altogether, or disinclined to welcome our new Bishop, or that affection for our late Bishop has made us forget in the loss of the individual what is still due to the office. But the fact is, that no direct notice was given to the Clergy of the Diocese ; [any] intimation that they were either expected to attend, or that there would be any place provided for them if they did attend."
Conflicting information regarding the date of the enthronement had appeared in the press but Purey-Cust suggested: "some ... of the Clergy of the Diocese felt that they should have been distinctly recognised and invited to come, and for this reason remained away."
Progress has of course been made and there was no risk of the same debacle in 2007. This time the clergy were not invited to the enthronement at all.
And what of Bishop John? Quieter perhaps than his flamboyant predeccessor, yet he went on to become a unifying force in the diocese notably amongst the clergy through the establishmnet of a regular diocesan conference. He died in 1889 a year after ill health had forced his resignation.
Portrait of John Fielder Mackarness hanging in Diocesan Church House.
Photograph of Arthur Purey-Cust © Dean and Chapter of York.
Photograph of W. W. Merry reproduced by kind permission of the Rector and Fellows of Lincoln College, Oxford.
To the Editor of the Oxford Journal
Sir, - I notice that several of the London papers, in referring this week to the Enthronement of our new bishop, remark with surprise that both clergy and citizens were conspicuous by their absence.
The fact is true and the surprise is just.
It should also be known that the Dean and Chapter of Christ Church had not the courtesy to invite the presence of the Clergy or of others who might be supposed to take an interest in the ceremony. Many wished to welcome Dr. Mackarness but the only intimation to the public was in the form of contradictory advertisements, which left even the day of the Enthronement uncertain.
I am, Sir, yours, &c.,
W. W. Merry, M. A. ;
Vicar of All Saints, Oxford.
The Guardian
SIR,-As I see that one of the daily papers this morning notices the very scanty attendance of the Clergy at the Enthronisation of the Bishop of Oxford yesterday at Christ Church Cathedral, I venture to offer, through your columns, some explanation of what I myself witnessed yesterday with great regret. I should be very sorry id the absence of the Clergy on that occasion was construed to mean either that we are indifferent to the subject altogether, or disinclined to welcome our new Bishop, or that affection for our late Bishop has made us forget in the loss of the individual what is still due to the office. But the fact is, that no direct notice was given to the Clergy of the Diocese of the date and time of the ceremony; no intimation that they were either expected to attend or wished to attend, or that there would be any place provided for them if they did attend. Two conflicting paragraphs appeared in the papers, one stating that the Enthronisation would take place on Monday, another on Tuesday, and only those who like myself wrote and inquired for themselves knew which was to be the day. Besides this, some at least, of the Clergy of the Diocese felt that they should have been distinctly recognised and invited to come, and for this reason remained away.
No doubt the Dean and Chapter had some good reason for conducting the ceremony as they did, and far be it from me to impugn what, of course, I do not know; but I am anxious that the effects should be attributed to its right cause, and I am sure that the Clergy generally of the Diocese would be very sorry if they appeared to the world in general lacking in proper respect to their new Bishop, or if he should assume from their absence yesterday that there is any want of that cordial welcome which I believe all are ready to extend to him.
Arthur P. Purey-Cust
Feb.15 Vicar of St. Mary's, Reading, and Rural Dean.
To the Editor of the Oxford Journal
Sir, - I feel sure that my Reverend Brethren generally share with me in grateful acknowledgement to Mr. Cust for his prompt defence of those who, like myself, were absent from the ceremony of the enthronisation of the Bishop of Oxford. Apart from the higher consideration of the respect due to the Holy Office, it would argue badly for those who had the great privilege of being guided by so loving and large-hearted a man as our late Bishop, if we were not ready to accord to his successor the genial reciprocation and sympathy which he himself ever gave to even the humblest fellow-helper in the work of the Church of Christ; while we of the Diocese of Oxford, ought certainly to prize the presence and person of a Bishop as he presented it to us. And when-happily for us- our new Bishop commends himself to our esteem, by the united qualifications of an able, sound-judging, hard-working, parish Priest, he might have looked for a very different reception at our hands, nor would he have looked in vain for the fitting loyal welcome which he deserves, had the opportunity been given to us, or even the day of his enthronisation been definitively known.
C. H. Travers
Stewkley Vicarage, Feb 17, 1870
See Also
Samuel Wilberforce - Diocesan Calendar
Wilberforce and his Clergy