Conventional scholarly wisdom long held that England's established church was in a state of great disrepair during the long eighteenth century. It was a view espoused during the nineteenth century by both evangelicals and Tractarians, who offered themselves up as reformers of a moribund and spiritually bankrupt church. That view has not stood the test of time, as more recent scholarship has largely rehabilitated the church of the era. Phillip Tovey, an Anglican liturgical scholar, has written a monograph that addresses one of the areas of eighteenth-century church life that had given critics fodder for their critiques, that being the practice of confirmation.

Tovey's monograph offers the first extended discussion of Anglican confirmation practices and theologies since S.L. Ollard's 1926 contribution to Confirmation or the Laying on of Hands (London: SPCK, 1926). There have been few similar studies since then—the exception being my own much briefer essay published in Church History in 1999, which is in general agreement with Tovey's conclusions, and that of C.O. Buchanan in Anglican Confirmation (Bramcote: Grove, 1986), who follows Ollard's pessimistic view. Tovey rightly suggests that the view held by Ollard and Buchanan is “trapped in a Victorian approach to confirmation which looks for the presence or absence of a two-stage model of initiation” (5). He seeks to avoid this problem by giving attention to the variety of theologies and practices present in that day, and showing that they represent valid Anglican approaches to confirmation and communion practices. He takes note of the inherent challenges to consistent implementation of confirmation, which was generally understood to be a prerequisite for communion. These challenges included the small number of dioceses and the lack of a retirement option for bishops. An inability to fulfill one's episcopal duties did not mean that the bishops were lax in their work or were unconcerned about confirmation. It is true that prevailing circumstances often led to large numbers of candidates being confirmed at the same time, but these realities were mitigated by the emphasis placed on catechizing candidates so that they were well prepared to take their place in the church.

In the course of the book Tovey looks at a wide spectrum of confirmation theologies that ranged from Charles Wheatly's high church vision to the extreme latitudinarian understanding of Samuel Clarke. He takes note of confirmation liturgies, which were generally based on that found in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer. His chapter on confirmation liturgies begins with the predecessors to the 1662 version, including those developed during the period of the Commonwealth, when confirmation was banned. He also explores American developments after the establishment of the independent American Episcopal Church. One of the important contributions of this study is Tovey's discussion of how American Anglicans dealt with the lack of bishops in the colonies (making confirmation unavailable to all who were unable to go to England) as well as the directions taken by the post-revolution Episcopal Church. Tovey also gives attention to confirmation sermons, most of which were preached not by bishops but by local clergy tapped by the bishops to provide a foundation for a confirmation event and confirmation practices, ranging from canonical requirements to biographical examples. From these studies, Tovey concludes—rightly in my mind—that “the numbers confirmed indicate that theories of lay disinterest or clerical laxity should be rejected or highly modified. Indeed, confirmation seemed to hold a festal part in society as a whole” (110).

If the situation in England was challenging, it was even more so in the colonies, which were under the jurisdiction of Bishop of London, who needless to say did not make confirmation tours in the colonies. While confirmation was traditionally understood to be a prerequisite for communion, many clergy admitted persons to communion on the basis of catechetical study with a priest. Making use of a prayer book rubric, priests might base admission on one's being “ready and desirous to be confirmed.” The lack of bishops in the colonies, however, did lead some congregations to take advantage of the presence of nonjuror bishops Richard Welton and John Talbot, who offered confirmation in the colonies without permission from the Bishop of London. When episcopacy final arrived, with the exception of the high church Samuel Seabury, the early holders of bishoprics were latuitudinarian, a perspective that lasted well into the nineteenth century.

Tovey's work fits well into the current move toward reclaiming the vitality of the eighteenth century church. There is, as he demonstrates, great diversity from latitudinarian to extreme high church (nonjuror) perspectives. Both high and low gave significant attention to the spiritual needs of their people, and thus valued confirmation highly. There were challenges, as I demonstrated in my own essay, and these are acknowledged. He makes significant use of the extant resources, from theological essays to diaries. While this is a significant contribution to the discussion, there is room for further exploration, especially with regard to the diversity of theological interpretations, including the sacramental visions of Henry Dodwell and Thomas Deacon (both nonjurors). With this study offering a detailed defense of the Anglican practice of confirmation during the eighteenth century, the old saw about the eighteenth-century church being spiritually dead church finally should be put to rest.