The Oxford Movement in Australia
The Oxford Movement transformed the nineteenth-century Church of England. Stewart Brown and Peter Nockles argue that the Oxford Movement gave the Church of England ‘a renewed conception of itself as a spiritual body’ and by reminding ‘adherents of the established Church that theirs was a branch of the holy, catholic and apostolic Church, not merely a creation of the Tudor state at the Reformation’.Footnote 2 Although the Oxford Movement began in England, its presence and effect was felt more widely throughout the world as the movement influenced worship, spirituality and architecture with a revival of much of the catholic heritage of the Church of England. While the history of the Oxford Movement in England is well documented, the history of the Oxford Movement in the wider world is less well documented and discussed. The influence of the Oxford Movement spread to many places where the Church of England was present, including Scotland, the United States of America, Europe and Jerusalem as well as Australia, as Brown and Nockles detail in their book. In Australia the influence of the Oxford Movement and Anglo-Catholicism was shaped by three main influences: its dependence on the Church of England, the establishment of dioceses with particular Anglo-Catholic traditions and the specific teachings of the Oxford Movement or Tractarians establishing the Church of England as a branch of the Catholic Church but with its own reformed heritage.Footnote 3 Many of the early bishops of the Church of England in Australia were also significantly influenced by the Oxford Movement, including the first Bishop of Australia and then the Diocese of Sydney, William Broughton, the first Bishop of Tasmania, Francis Nixon and later bishops, especially in the north of Australia and in more regional areas.Footnote 4 Not all bishops in Australia were so influenced and the first Bishop of Melbourne, Charles Perry, was a staunch evangelical, as were the bishops of the Diocese of Sydney who succeeded William Broughton.
It is not surprising, then, to find early Church of England clergy in Australia showing the influence of the Oxford Movement in their work and the conduct of services in churches. This article discusses one of those clergy, William Gore, the incumbent of a Sydney parish, All Saints, North Parramatta (incumbent from 1849–1862).
William Gore and the Annual Vestry Meeting 1851
On Easter Tuesday in 1851 the annual vestry meeting of the Parish of All Saints, North Parramatta, then known as Marsfield, was held at noon. It was a stormy meeting. The Police Magistrate, John Richard Hardy, declared that he regarded the incumbent of the Parish, the Reverend William Gore, as a ‘Puseyite’, a term of insult, and he could not call the service of All Saints the service of the Church of England. This was blunt language indeed in the presence of the Rector who chaired the meeting that day.Footnote 5
This was the climax of a simmering row that had persisted from 1849 when Gore had been appointed to the parish by Bishop Broughton, and also during the brief ministry of his predecessor, the Reverend Francis Cameron.Footnote 6 Both men were accused of being Puseyites by members of the congregation. The purpose of this article is to examine that controversy as reported in the newspapers of the day, particularly the Sydney Morning Herald.
There are several questions to be explored. What was the background of William Francis Gore? What can we learn about his training for the priesthood in the Colony? Who were Gore’s critics and why did they attack his style of worship in the Parish? How did this controversy reflect the sectarian emotions of the day, especially during the episcopate of Bishop Broughton in the years 1836 to 1853?
William Gore
William Gore, the incumbent of All Saints Parish, was born in Ireland in 1819, the son of a Church of Ireland clergyman. He graduated at Trinity College, Dublin, in 1841. Soon after his graduation he came to Australia with his wealthy widowed mother, and his brothers and sisters. Bishop Broughton accepted Gore as a candidate for Holy Orders. He was trained for the ministry by the Reverend Robert Allwood, Rector of St James’, King Street, Sydney. Gore was made deacon on 11 June 1843 and ordained priest on 22 December 1844.Footnote 7
The great difficulty in researching Gore is the fact that almost no letters or sermons or other writings by him have been located. There is a fragmentary diary, now in the National Library of Australia, Canberra, written jointly by Gore and his wife Elizabeth, but much of it deals with domestic matters.Footnote 8 What is known about Gore is mainly from his critics and from various official records of his clerical career. In the various histories of the Anglican Church in the Diocese of Sydney, Gore is scarcely mentioned, even ignored.Footnote 9 However, there is a chapter on his ministry in a history of All Saints Church, North Parramatta, written by Patricia Dorsch.Footnote 10 The main source for the ‘Puseyite’ controversy in the years 1849 to 1851 is in the detailed newspaper reports. It is not clear if a reporter was present at the meetings or if members of the parish supplied details to the press after the events.
The Puseyite Controversy
An important question in relation to the controversy in the Parish of North Parramatta is the origin and source of the Tractarian convictions of William Gore and of his teacher, Robert Allwood. After their arrival in the colony, both men were clearly influenced by Bishop William Broughton who was himself sympathetic to the Tractarian convictions and teaching of Edward Pusey. Both Broughton and Allwood were supporters of the Oxford or Tractarian Movement, later known as the Anglo-Catholic Revival, which in Britain was led by Newman, until his departure to Roman Catholicism in 1845, and then by John Keble and Edward Bouverie Pusey and others. Those who were influenced by the Oxford Movement were sneered at and called ‘Puseyites’ both in Britain and in the colonies, a reference to Edward Pusey, who led the Movement after Newman and whom it was wrongly assumed was leading the Church of England back to Rome.Footnote 11
The Oxford Movement stood for a renewed emphasis on the divine origin of the Church of England, the importance of the role of the bishops in maintaining the apostolic succession of the church from the age of the apostles, and the central place of the Holy Communion in conveying sacramental grace. The sermons of Bishop Broughton are a valuable source for understanding the Tractarian thinking of the bishop.Footnote 12
When William Gore approached Bishop Broughton about being prepared for ordination, the bishop seems to have had no hesitation in placing Gore in the hands of Robert Allwood of St James. In a letter to his friend Edward Coleridge of Eton College, Broughton made clear his confidence in Allwood. Like Broughton, Allwood followed the teachings of Edward Pusey. Broughton wrote that ‘the nearest approach I have had to the support of a trustworthy friend has been in Mr Allwood’. He went on to say that Allwood was a staunch Tractarian but sound and cautious. Broughton understood very well that Tractarian views and practices might cause trouble in the colony and that caution was needed.Footnote 13
Under the leadership of Allwood, St James’ Church became the leading church in Sydney and served as the pro-cathedral for some years. Allwood had a great interest in education and trained candidates such as Gore for Holy Orders, at first in the crypt of St James’ Church, and later at the short-lived college set up by the Bishop in 1845 at Lyndhurst, Glebe.Footnote 14 In spite of his reservations about some aspects of Tractarian teaching, Broughton firmly believed that such teaching was the way to train young men like Gore for the priesthood. He was surrounding himself with Tractarian clergy such as Allwood and W.H. Walsh of Christ Church and later Robert Sconce of St Andrew’s in Sydney. At that time the main Sydney churches, except St Phillip’s, Church Hill, were all staffed by Tractarians.Footnote 15
There is little or no evidence for the actual content of the training of Gore, the content of lectures or the textbooks he used. But he would have absorbed the example of Allwood in being restrained in the changes to traditional worship patterns. While Allwood was a strong Tractarian there was no recorded Puseyite row in St James’. Even in England the early years of the Movement were marked by issues of doctrine rather than liturgy. The controversies over ritualism came much later, though critics of the Tractarian movement in the colonies were very sensitive to such issues. The press reported that in a row with Governor Sir George Gipps over taxes, the squatters accused ‘Bishop Broughton of being a Puseyite: in other words, of being a genuine Laud, reviving old rituals, and pomps and solemnities, and high churchisms, and of being therewith a necessary upholder of authority and an enemy of the liberties of the people.’Footnote 16
It is much more difficult to trace such influences in the earlier lives of these people. Gore was the son of the Reverend Thomas Gore, 1765–1834, rector for many years of the Church of Ireland Parish of Malrankin, Co. Wexford. There is no information on Thomas Gore’s theological convictions. William Gore was a graduate of Trinity College, Dublin, but again there was no evidence found of Tractarian influences on his early education.
Robert Allwood, who prepared Gore for ordination in Sydney, was born in Jamaica, the son of the Chief Justice and was a graduate of Cambridge in 1825. Recently, evidence has emerged that his family owned slaves and they were compensated for their loss after the abolition of slavery. Allwood served as a canon of Bristol Cathedral and curate of nearby Clifton until 1839 and this experience prepared him for his long years at St James’, a fashionable church in Sydney. Allwood was strongly Tractarian in sympathies but very cautious about proclaiming his views.Footnote 17 Cable explores why both Broughton and Allwood believed that the Tractarian movement validated the place of the Church of England in colonial society when it ceased to be the Established Church and became merely a denomination, but there are no links to Gore.
Both Gore and Allwood were men of wealth and privilege. The family of Gore in Ireland dated back to the Irish Army of Queen Elizabeth I and the Gore peerage began in the seventeenth century.Footnote 18 Because of his personal wealth Gore was able to largely ignore his critics in the parish and allow his faithful ministry to overcome opposition.
Perhaps the strongest colonial critic of Broughton was the MP Robert Lowe, through his newspaper The Atlas. Lowe had arrived in the colony in 1842, a lawyer and an ambitious politician but battling the threat of blindness. Lowe seized every opportunity to publicize abuses, or suspected abuses, of episcopal authority by Broughton. His biographer comments that even those who appreciated Lowe’s arguments were repelled by the violence of his language.Footnote 19
The Atlas newspaper circulated widely and William Gore would have been well aware of these expressions of bitter opposition to Tractarian views but he went ahead with his training under the leadership of Broughton and Allwood.
Cable sums up the reasons why Broughton and Allwood were supporters of the Oxford Movement in the colonies. Cable says: ‘It gave a conviction of historical validity and spiritual independence to a colonial church which, for most of its career, had been a department of the state and was now under attack from the growing Protestant and Roman Catholic churches.’Footnote 20
Sydney Protestant-minded Anglicans such as William Cowper, Incumbent of St Phillip’s Church Hill, and laymen like William Woolls of Parramatta, read in the Sydney press reports of the activities of Pusey in Britain with apprehension and even anger. The press reported in detail an Oxford sermon of Pusey, speculating that he would shortly go the way of his friend Newman to Rome.Footnote 21
The fear of Puseyism, which was central to the row in All Saints Church, North Parramatta, was based on the perceived gathering strength of Roman Catholicism in the Colony. Broughton himself shared this fear. In a letter to Coleridge written only two months after his arrival back in the colony as bishop in 1836, Broughton wrote: ‘Here therefore I am set in the front of the battle against the forces of the Roman Catholics.’Footnote 22 While he was also deeply concerned about the need for more clergy and for Anglican control of schools, it was opposition to the Roman Catholics that was central to his thinking.
The Roman Catholic Relief Act in the British Parliament in 1829 removed a number of substantial restrictions, dating back to the Reformation, on Roman Catholics throughout the United Kingdom. However, popular anti-Catholic feelings remained strong, especially on such occasions as Guy Fawkes’ day, and this appeared in the colony of New South Wales as well. The establishment of the Roman Catholic hierarchy in the colony in 1843, amid great popular rejoicing, let to Broughton protesting to the British government, and in St James’ Church on 25 March 1843, but his protests were all in vain.Footnote 23 William Gore, who was completing his studies under Allwood and would be made deacon a few months later, has left us no record of his feelings but he would probably have followed the controversy closely.
Broughton began Gore’s ministry by sending him to Muswellbrook. Newspaper reports seem to show that he had a very successful and uncontroversial ministry there. While Gore was at Muswellbrook a new Church opened and Broughton visited him but there was no hint of the later trouble over Puseyism at Parramatta.
The simmering row over the assumption that Puseyism was a cloak for a return to Rome by Anglican clergy such as Gore, and the Puseyite sympathies of Bishop Broughton and others, came to a head with the defection to Rome of two Sydney Anglican clergymen, Robert Sconce and Thomas Makinson, in 1848. Sconce had been a close friend and associate of the Bishop and also of William Walsh at Christ Church. This defection caused acute distress to both Broughton and Walsh, whose views were blamed for this crisis. Gore, who was inducted to North Parramatta the following year, would naturally be under deep suspicion, as newspaper reports soon showed.Footnote 24
The 1849 Meeting at Parramatta
No sooner had Gore arrived at All Saints Church, North Parramatta and been inducted on 1 June 1849, then the trouble started. He had been in the Parish for only nine weeks when, on 11 August 1849, a meeting of the church wardens, trustees, pewholders, and renters of sittings in the Church, was held. Gore declined to attend the meeting and the chair was taken by Matthew Anderson JP.Footnote 25
Mr Statham and Mr Ardagh reported that they had had a meeting with Bishop Broughton the previous month. The parishioners had addressed a memorial to the bishop dated 16 June (only two weeks after Gore’s induction to the parish). In that memorial they had asked the bishop to advise Gore to return to the method of performing Divine Service which was originally introduced into All Saints Church by the Reverend James Walker, and which was still adhered to in St John’s Church, Parramatta. This method of performing services concerned the reading of the Offertory Sentence in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, which Gore had begun to read at Parramatta.
Mr Shackles moved a motion that the meeting had heard with the deepest regret and apprehension that the bishop had refused to accede to their request. Shackles was convinced that if the offertory was forced on the people against their wishes, then the congregation would gradually fall away.Footnote 26 The motion was seconded and carried unanimously.
Mr Bettington moved a second resolution. James Bettington (1796–1857), a wealthy merchant and pastoralist and a trustee of All Saints Church, had married Rebecca Lawson, daughter of the famous explorer William Lawson. He announced to the meeting that he had drafted a letter to be sent to the Bishop demanding that the Bishop think again about this matter and compel Gore to return to the old order of worship. If the Bishop declined to do so then the parish should appeal to the Archbishop of Canterbury for a judgement on the matter.
Bettington saw himself as a man of authority in the parish and the wider community and that he was prepared to go to any lengths to force both the bishop and Gore to comply with his demands. The seriousness of Bettington’s concern is raised in a curious coincidence. At the very time when he was planning these actions in his conflict with the bishop and Gore, his wife and older daughters were attending what was called ‘a private ball’ at the home of Mrs Gore, mother of the Rector of All Saints. Bettington’s family were clearly close friends of Mrs Gore. The newspapers reported that on their way home from Mrs Gore’s ball, Mrs Bettington and family were involved in a serious carriage accident, but fortunately were unhurt. Bettington himself was not present at the social function because he was busy trying to have Gore disciplined or removed from the parish.Footnote 27
The motion of the 1849 meeting was seconded by Mr Staff who alluded to the memory of the late Reverend Samuel Marsden who had been a liberal benefactor of All Saints. Mr Staff asked what that revered gentleman would say if he saw the innovations in worship prevailing in the church, which he (Staff) saw as a Marsden monument.Footnote 28
Mr Edward Statham, one of the wardens, was at that time superintendent of the Invalid and Lunatic Establishment at Parramatta, and his wife was the matron. While he was critical of Gore in his liturgical innovations in All Saints, newspaper reports indicate that the two men worked harmoniously together at the Establishment, where Gore was a regular visitor.Footnote 29
The 1849 meeting of key members of All Saints Parish ended with Bettington foreshadowing that he would again communicate with the bishop and would also be writing to the Archbishop of Canterbury. He was clearly very concerned about the Puseyism of the Rector, and determined to take drastic action.
The 1850 Meeting
On the Tuesday of Easter 1850, the annual meeting of the pewholders and renters of sittings in All Saints Church was held and extensively reported in the Sydney Morning Herald.Footnote 30 As with the 1849 meeting, it is not clear whether the newspaper had a reporter present or relied on reports from those who were there. Again the Puseyite issue dominated proceedings and this time, William Gore, the Incumbent, was in the chair.
After routine preliminary matters were dealt with, the issue of salaries of the lay officers of the parish came up for discussion. Mr William Woolls took the lead in the attack on the supposed Puseyism of the Incumbent, Mr Gore. He seems to have desired to vote against the stipend of the rector but could not do so as it was paid by the government. He decided to make an issue of the stipends of the lay officers to try to force a debate on the whole issue.Footnote 31 This action gives some insight into how passionately he regarded the issue. Woolls was one of the strongest critics of the ministry of Gore and his views are expressed at length in a rare pamphlet entitled A Tract for the Times: Addressed to the Laity of New South Wales. It was published in 1849, just as the controversy at North Parramatta was gathering strength.
Woolls had clearly done extensive reading in church history, including such ancient authorities as St Cyprian’s Epistles. While the laity were very important in the early church, Woolls believed that later centuries and the rise of the power of the bishops led to a situation where the laity were not consulted and liturgical changes were forced upon them. This, Woolls claims, is what has happened at All Saints, North Parramatta. He then went on to give his version of the events that caused all the controversy in that parish.Footnote 32
Woolls listed four issues that caused particular distress to members of the congregation. First, there was an alteration in the position of the reading desk so that the minister’s back was nearly turned to the people when reading prayers. Secondly, there was the use of the surplice during the delivery of the sermon. Thirdly, there was the reading of the offertory on Sundays when there was no communion. Finally, there was the performance of Divine Service on Saints’ Days at an hour when it was impossible for the people to attend. Apparently, Francis Cameron (the previous incumbent from 1848 to 1849) seems to have yielded on the first two points and his mild manner won his critics over.
With the arrival of Cameron’s successor, Mr Gore, it was hoped that he would return to the old ways but this did not happen and, in spite of letters of protest from members of the congregation to the bishop, Broughton supported Gore. Woolls objected that the desires of the laity in reference to the services of the Church were totally disregarded.Footnote 33 One of the main issues was the so called ‘Offertory controversy’. The 1849 meeting included a motion by Shackles warning that forcing the offertory on the people against their wishes would seriously deplete the congregational numbers.
The Offertory controversy was not only about money but about the ceremonial of divine worship during the time when the offertory sentences, as contained in the Book of Common Prayer, would be read.Footnote 34 Ross Border provides valuable insight into this controversy both in Britain and in New South Wales.Footnote 35 The old Puritan tradition was that the officiating clergyman preached in an academic gown. The Tractarians wanted the clergyman to be attired in a surplice as a priest. By insisting that the rubric about reading the offertory sentences be carried out they made it impossible for the celebrant to retire to the vestry after the sermon to change, as had been the tradition. In England this became an issue called ‘the Offertory controversy’.
In Australia the issue was somewhat different but still caused trouble. The increasing financial needs of parishes led to the suggestion that an offertory of money, such as is now universal in the Church, be taken when these sentences were read. In spite of the fact that basic clergy stipends were paid by the state under the 1836 Church Act, many clergy found themselves in serious financial difficulties. The Reverend Edward Gifford Pryce, based at Cooma, was one such case, as his letter to the Reverend W.B. Clarke of North Sydney, illustrates.Footnote 36
As Cable points out, at that time clergy stipends were paid by the state, but buildings were maintained by endowments and pew rents. By the late 1840s both clergy and buildings received insufficient provision. The obvious answer was the collection of money at the time of the offertory. People, such as those at Parramatta during Gore’s incumbency, saw this innovation as an example of Puseyism and that the offertory was a tithing tax and a sign of privilege for the Church of England, supporting a claim that it was the ‘Established Church’.Footnote 37
This was the innovation that Gore was insisting on for the parish. The previous year Mr Shackles, one of the wardens, was ‘convinced that by forcing the offertory on the people against their wishes, the congregation would gradually fall away’. There were dire threats that the debt on the church would not be cleared if the people left the parish. The motion of Mr Shackles, expressing deep regret and apprehension at the attitude of the bishop in supporting Gore, was carried unanimously.Footnote 38
At the 1850 meeting Woolls quoted figures to indicate that the adoption of the offertory in All Saints had occasioned serious financial loss to pew rents. He said that many people had declared that they would never attend Divine Service there again until the old order of things was restored. It is difficult to verify such anecdotal claims but they indicate strong feelings. Woolls also objected to the cross that had been placed on the church, apparently on the orders of Gore. He further stated that the continued teaching of ‘apostolical succession’, a key doctrine of the Oxford Movement, was a very unsafe foundation for a Protestant church.Footnote 39 Bettington’s proposal of the 1850 meeting to write to the Archbishop of Canterbury had been carried out. They were still awaiting a reply. It is unlikely the archbishop had ever heard of Parramatta and what he thought of such an appeal is unknown.
The 1850 meeting ended with the rector being requested to preach a sermon in aid of the funds of the church and this motion was carried unanimously.
The 1851 Meeting
The third year of the Puseyite row in All Saints, North Parramatta, was 1851. It is clear that the attack on Gore was now being led by Woolls. Once again full reports appeared in the newspapers. Woolls stated that his position was a very uncomfortable one and, with the permission of the parishioners, he would like to resign. This was met with shouts of No! No! Woolls had apparently already circulated to parishioners a letter which may have called for the removal of Gore. Woolls was a member and trustee of All Saints. At this time he was a highly respected schoolmaster and was devoted to the scientific study of local botany. He was a very influential figure in the Sydney and wider community and clearly his resignation from All Saints was a threat not to be taken lightly.Footnote 40
At the meeting Woolls stated that the alterations to the service were contrary to the wishes of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the practice of the great majority of the clergy of England. He spoke of the changes being introduced by the Tractarian clergy who claimed justification in the rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer. Woolls said that if the principles of these rubrics were adhered to strictly then many customs would be revived which were, as he put it, decidedly of popish origin. These customs included matters such as the vestments used in the second year of the reign of King Edward VI (1547–53) and the burning of candles during Divine Service, all of which were allowed under the first Book of Common Prayer of 1549.
Woolls said that while such customs had died out in the Church of England, they were clearly permitted in the Prayer Book. Woolls admitted this but claimed that when such rites and ceremonies became a stumbling block to some worshippers they should be discontinued. The implication was that Gore had introduced some vestments, such as the surplice, and lights on the altar into Sunday services at All Saints. Some clergy in England were moving towards full Eucharistic vestments but this does not seem to have been the case at Parramatta.
At this point in the meeting the Rector stated that he believed that Mr Woolls was out of order in his remarks, but he allowed him to continue in order that everyone might have a full hearing. He said that he believed that the letter which Woolls had addressed to parishioners was ‘injudicious’. Gore was apparently patient and attempted to avoid open confrontation, while being at the same time determined to follow his convictions. For example, he would continue to teach and preach the doctrine of apostolic succession even if some people objected to it.
Captain King (Philip Gidley King, 1817–1904) was another influential Parramatta citizen, and the grandson of an early governor. His brother was an early principal of Moore Theological College. King addressed the issue of reading the prayer for the Church Militant at the Communion Table. He said that when he was a boy he had heard it from the pulpit but he did not believe that anyone could object to it being read from the Table. The offertory was still an issue but King pointed out that the collection in All Saints was taken at the door.
John Richard Hardy, Police Magistrate, said that he had attended Cathedral services in England but he had never seen anything like the services of All Saints. He went on to say that he attended All Saints because he lived in the parish, but he did not attend from inclination. He stated that if he went to church by himself he would always retire upon the reading of the offertory, but out of regard to his family he remained if they were present. Hardy said bluntly: ‘Mr Gore knew, everybody knew, that these innovations were of Tractarian origin.’Footnote 41
Another controversial issue arose when Mr Steward, a member of the local Orange Lodge, asked why service was not performed on 5 November. This of course was Guy Fawkes’ Day. On that day in the previous year serious anti-Catholic riots and even acts of violence had taken place in Liverpool and other English cities in response to the so-called ‘Papal Aggression’. Stewart would have read about these riots in the Sydney press and would see something sinister or unpatriotic in the Incumbent avoiding holding such services, while he continued to observe saints days. Captain King answered this issue by saying that such services as the service commemorating the Gunpowder Plot were not read in the colonies as they were intended solely for the United Kingdom.
The chairman nominated Mr Ardagh as warden. In accepting this nomination Ardagh made a personal explanation. He stated that he had been as much opposed as any to the offertory, but he was now a convert to Mr Gore’s opinions. This sudden conversion seems to have been greeted with cynicism. A voice in the gathering was heard to call out: ‘You said you would knock the Cross off the Church!’Footnote 42 Ardagh replied that whatever his views had been earlier he was now a supporter of Mr Gore. He did not have long to do so because he died only four months later in August 1851.
The routine business of the meeting went on and various salaries were voted for officers for the ensuing year, including a sexton, an organist and a clerk. Mr Hardy saw his chance to intervene again. He moved that a clerk’s desk be erected and put in the customary place under the clergyman. Hardy said that he had never seen a parish church without a clerk’s desk. He thought it absurd to vote a salary for a clerk without a desk in which to place him. This was greeted with great laughter.
Ardagh, perhaps conscious that he was now the warden, moved as an amendment that no clerk’s desk be erected. This amendment was seconded by Captain King but lost because it was a negation rather than a true amendment. The original motion was declared carried. Captain King, who had just been appointed a trustee by the bishop, spoke warmly in favour of the incumbent and said that he could see no Puseyism in the church.
Once again Woolls moved a resolution against the introduction of obsolete forms of worship into the Church. Mr Shackles seconded the motion. Captain King and Mr Ardagh ‘warmly opposed’ Woolls’ motion but it was ultimately carried. Mr Ardagh was apparently getting tired of the wrangling and moved an adjournment of the meeting. The meeting seemed to draw to an inconclusive close, with Captain King walking out before the end.
The row at the 1851 meeting was not followed up in later years and the issues appeared to die away. Within weeks this row over Puseyism in one Sydney parish was overtaken by news of the beginnings of the great goldrush. Now the newspapers were filled with tales of the great riches to be found along the Turon River and in many other places. Police Commissioner Hardy was appointed to be Goldfields Commissioner and with a detachment of 12 mounted and armed troopers he set out over the mountains only a short time after the vestry meeting. From then on All Saints parish would see little of him. He died at Yass only seven years later.
Conclusions
What are the conclusions to be drawn from the row in the parish of North Parramatta, which extended over three annual meetings in 1849, 1850 and 1851? Together they give us an informative case study of the tensions created in a Sydney parish by the impact of the Tractarian ideals of Bishop Broughton and his supporters. The parish was clearly thriving and in spite of rumbles of discontent William Gore’s ministry was very effective. He continued there for more than a decade and when he resigned in 1867 the press reported many warm tributes to him. In spite of Mr Woolls’ vocal resentment, Woolls continued as a trustee in the parish, and was later himself ordained to the priesthood.
The accusation of ‘Puseyism’ against Gore ranged from a well-informed approach by Woolls to the mindless objections of those parishioners who complained that it was not what they were used to or what earlier clergy had done. As in every generation, some simply disliked all change and ‘Puseyism’ was a convenient label for it. Perhaps Gore was a little high handed and failed to discuss liturgical changes or the reasons for them. But he seems to have won many of his critics over by the faithfulness of his ministry.
Behind much of the criticism of Gore was fear of the growing Roman Catholic place in the colony and a resentment of the Tractarian ideals of Bishop Broughton. When Broughton left the colony and died in England in 1853, the arrival of his successor, Bishop Barker, marked a major change in the Sydney diocese. Barker and his wife Jane were confirmed Calvinist evangelicals and his long episcopate eased the perceived threat of the Tractarian movement in the Diocese of Sydney, although the Oxford Movement has significant impacts in other parts of Australia, which continue to the present day.
Barker in Sydney began to import clergy from Ireland sympathetic to his ideals and have them trained in the newly founded Moore Theological College. Barker’s tradition has remained dominant in Sydney. The tensions between dioceses has resulted in an entrenched diocesanism in the Anglican Church of Australia, where power remains firmly in the hands of diocesan bishops and where the General Synod has very limited power under the 1962 Constitution of the Anglican Church of Australia.
With the Gold Rush from 1851 onwards, shiploads of eager miners flooded the colony from all parts of the world, bringing to an end the calm ordered world that the parishioners of All Saints, North Parramatta had known. Suddenly such issues as vestments and the offertory seemed unimportant. The Church of England in the colony was losing any status as an established church. But in many parishes and dioceses of Australia the ideals of E.B. Pusey, his stress on apostolic succession, his sacramental theology and his love of orderly scriptural worship according to the Book of Common Prayer, would gradually transform the Church of England both in England and throughout the British Empire and the wider world.
The mocking name ‘Puseyite’ died out but Pusey’s legacy endures to this day, especially in those Australian dioceses which perpetuate the doctrine espoused by the Oxford Movement and the forms of worship introduced by Anglo-Catholicism. Gore’s time at All Saints, North Parramatta and the controversies concerning forms of worship were one small part in the spread of the Oxford Movement throughout the Anglican tradition and in the Church of England in Australia.
The history of the ‘Puseyite’ row in North Parramatta parish is a case study of the challenge men like Broughton, Gore and Allwood faced in bringing the principles of the Tractarian movement to the Australian colonies. Local newspapers like the Sydney Morning Herald publicized such issues in Britain and the early colonial bishoprics reflected these tensions. The Church of England laity, as in this case, struggled to accept such changes. Change is never easy.
