The Prayer-Book, however, in spite of the Revision of 1662, retains many vestiges of the foreign Protestant influence, which affected the Revision of 1552. With these the Conference have attempted to deal in a loyal spirit. However much they may be regretted, Churchmen are bound to accept them. For it must be clearly understood that nothing was further from the intention of the Conference, than to attempt Revision. So far from this, it was hoped by some that a careful series of notes explaining the true character of disputed Rubrics might go some way to allay the present agitation for change.

The Conference cannot be blind to the conviction that they have to face much modern prejudice. On the one hand there is still rife in the Church of England the Puritan spirit, which condemns in one and the same category things essentially Roman, and things which are really primitive, but which have been retained by Rome. On the other hand, there undoubtedly exists an occasional reaction from this Puritan spirit, which has produced a prejudice in favour of things—whether primitive or not—simply because they are Roman. The Conference have felt that to yield either to one or the other prejudice was not the right way of dealing with the Prayer-Book.

They have also been brought face to face with what are called "Legal decisions" on some questions of Ritual. Apart from the fact that the courts have given directly opposite decisions on the same question, and have given reasons in one case inconsistent with the reasons given for their decision in another; apart also from the fact that these are chiefly decisions of secular courts in purely spiritual matters; the Conference have been precluded from entertaining them, as guides or as helps, in consequence of the courts having generally acted upon principles of interpretation entirely different from those which the Conference had adopted.

They have, moreover, found themselves in opposition to much modern practice, originating in carelessness and neglect in the due performance of the Services of the Church during past generations, but alien to the spirit of those Services, though often mistaken for their exponent.

The Conference have had to investigate the origin and to consider the meaning of many practices, which appear either to be enjoined or implied in the existing Rubrics, and have, in the light of these investigations, set down unflinchingly what they believed to be the true interpretation of these Rubrics. At the same time, they have not shut their eyes to ancient customs, which, though less prominently connected with the Rubrics, appear to have held on concurrently with the Prayer-Book; being consistent with its principles, and not authoritatively condemned either by name or by implication.

The Comments, which have been the result of their discussions, the Conference have printed, in the hope that they will be received by others as suggestions towards the solution of difficulties which must press upon all who desire to obey the spirit as well as the letter of the Prayer-Book.

The entire adherence of any one to all the interpretations here offered is not to be expected. Indeed, those members of the Conference who have had experience in parish-work, are well aware that in comparatively few villages it is possible to carry out the fuller Ritual which the Prayer-Book admits: this can only be successfully adopted in large towns, or where endowments are provided, or other resources are available, for sustaining a high Ritual.

It should be said, in conclusion, that amongst the members of the Conference, some have taken part in the work to a greater extent than others, and are consequently more directly responsible for the Comments, and able to give a fuller assent to them. It was impossible to consult every member upon each individual point. All that was done to ensure the expression of the general sense of the Conference, was to determine to insert no comment which was not approved of by two-thirds of the members present. Practically, it was found that in very few cases a formal division was called for, the agreement to the final form of the comments being generally unanimous.

(Signed,)

B. COMPTON, Chairman.