In the Fullness of Time: A History of the Church of Saint Mary Magdalene, Toronto

By David Greig

The Church of Saint Mary Magdalene, Toronto, has long been known as a leading anglo-catholic parish in the Anglican Church of Canada, especially for its rich and influential liturgical and musical traditions. David Greig's history places the well known achievements in the broader context of a living Christian community responding in the fullness of time, both to its developing understanding of the Catholic faith and to the needs and demands of a wider world.
David Greig is a life-long and active member of the Church of Saint Mary Magdalene. He holds a Master's degree in History from York University, Toronto. To his work here he brings a sensitive appreciation of the life of the parish as well as the skills and insights of a trained historian.
"I commend this... as one of the best (parish histories) to come to my attention... does not gloss over differences, conflicts, or failures of vision, here, or achievement. There are even discreet references to scandals.... I wish that it had been available to me when I wrote books on national and provincial religious history." John Webster Grant, Professor Emeritus, Emmanuel College, Toronto
"I doubt that any Canadian parish has been better served by its historian... meticulous... more than a little in common with a 'Perils of Pauline' melodrama." Eugene Fairweather, Professor Emeritus of Divinity, Trinity College, Toronto; Honorary Assistant, Church of Saint Mary Magdalene (from his introduction)
(Originally published in 1990.)

• Language: English
• Publisher: Church of Saint Mary Magdalene
• Release date: Jul 14, 2015
• ISBN: 9780969434634

Book preview

FOREWORD

While the history of the Church of Saint Mary Magdalene, Toronto, is unique, it also follows a course similar to many other Catholic parishes in the Anglican Communion. Commitment, disobedience, sacrifice, conflict, faithfulness, adversity and struggle were all part of the story as Anglicans of decided Catholic persuasion attempted to gain acceptance within the Communion for their theological and liturgical position, while trying to persuade fellow Anglicans that the Catholic understanding of the Faith is more truly Anglican than is the Protestant stance.

Anglicans have carved out a unique theological, ecclesiological, and even liturgical position in western Christianity. Many people including Anglicans find this uniqueness difficult to accept but it is my belief that Christ’s re-united Church of the future will have some of that diversity which the present Anglican Communion comprehends. This must be so if the Church is to encompass Christians of different theological positions, as seems an inevitable consequence of human limitations as well as human intelligence and free will. If there is anything that has been learned from the last sixty years of church history it is that as members of Christ’s family we can live with, understand, acknowledge and even accept differing theological positions, while engaging in the common work of Christ’s Church of worshipping God, administering the sacraments, evangelizing the uncommitted or unbeliever, and serving all those who are in need.

Parishes like this one have been largely successful in winning the war for the acceptance of Catholic theology and practice within the Anglican Communion and this very success has brought the movement largely to a halt. Since so many Anglicans accept the legitimacy of Catholic liturgy and theology, parishes like Saint Mary Magdalene’s are stumped as to the future of the Catholic movement. Some have retreated to fixed positions of reaction against modern liturgies and the ordination of women as priests and bishops, while others have dissolved into a liberalism that no longer regards any tradition or rule as of any binding importance on Christians today.

The difficult position surely is one that Anglicans have long held, even before the Oxford Movement. Christians have the responsibility as individuals, and as a Christian community to decide issues by looking to the traditions of the early Church, the teachings of the Church Fathers as well as to Holy Writ.

Then they take into account the age and society in which they live, making as good a decision as humanly possible on any given issue, confident in the guidance of God the Holy Spirit, not only in the making of the decision, but also in the correction in time of a mistaken decision. Surely the Oxford Movement is the prime example to our age of a part of the work of God the Holy Spirit in correcting the theology and direction of a whole Christian community in God’s good time.

If there is any agenda now for the Catholics within the Anglican Communion and the Catholic Church, is it not the same as that set for it sixty-five years ago by the Right Reverend Frank Weston, Bishop of Zanzibar, speaking at the second Anglo-Catholic Congress in London, England: ...You have your Mass, you have your altars, you have begun to get your tabernacles. Now go out into the highways and hedges, and look for Jesus in the ragged and the naked, in the oppressed and the sweated, in those who have lost hope, and in those who are struggling to make good. Look for Jesus in them; and, when you have found Him, gird yourself with His towel of fellowship and wash His feet in the person of his brethren.

If St Mary Magdalene’s second century is about anything, surely this agenda must be an important part of it.

The Reverend Harold J. Nahabedian

Rector

Saint Mary Magdalene’s Rectory, Toronto

The Feast of the Epiphany, 1990

PREFACE

Anniversaries always cause one to reminisce, and the hundredth anniversary of a church one loves is a natural time to reflect on its history. That is the origin of this book.

This is not, however, the first time someone has given some thought to a parish history. Without the foresight of the founding rector of Saint Mary Magdalene’s, the Reverend Charles Darling, any account of the early days of SMM would be sparse indeed. As Darling explained in one of the parish registers in 1920,

As there has been no Parochial History compiled of the first Thirty years of the Parish, I have pasted into the following pages certain cuttings, which may be of interest to posterity, and written down certain statistics, and other information, as to Benefactions and Gifts made to S.M.M. during my term of office.

I do so also in case that some day a History of the Parish may be written, and some of the information I have given, be found useful.

Agnes Darling, his wife, was also historically minded. As president of the Women’s Auxiliary for many years, she used to give an address at their annual meetings to review their activities and outline their goals. She saved her handwritten copy of most of these speeches, which as she noted form quite a little history of the Branch & may be useful for reference in the future. Charles and Agnes Darling were both proud of their role in the founding of Saint Mary Magdalene’s, and it is a pleasure now to be able to record their contributions.

More recently, when SMM was consecrated in 1948, it was decided to produce an illustrated booklet of our history. A committee was appointed but stopped work after collecting a brief and somewhat inaccurate set of notes. Even by that point, it would seem, the collective memory of the parish was growing weak, and time has only served to weaken it further. Slowly, we became a church that revelled in her traditions, but with little knowledge of where those traditions had come from. The idea of recovering our past through a parish history book was picked up again as our centennial in 1988–89 approached, first by the Reverend Alexander Heron and then by the Reverend Harold Nahabedian. About four years ago I was asked to see what could be done, and I began to occupy my spare time reading documents and piecing together our story.

I was happy to do it. As a member of SMM since birth, I have a great love for the church and for the people who make it their spiritual home. Our history is also an important one. As an innovator in Anglican liturgy and worship, as a teacher of countless clergy and laypeople who have since fanned out across Canada, as the nurturing mother of Healey Willan whose liturgical music is now performed worldwide, Saint Mary Magdalene’s has had a profound influence on the life of the Anglican Church.

But I happen to think that any parish’s history is important. Every parish makes a valuable contribution to the community in which it takes root. Every parish contributes in some way to the life of the wider church; It is fair to say that studies of the wider church, both historical and sociological, have been hampered by the lack of a firm grasp of what was really going on in the parishes. I hope this book will in some small way help to address this deficiency.

I do not present a day-by-day account of the doings of SMM. The documents would not permit it, and it would not be desirable in any case. Rather, the book concentrates on two periods: the first twenty years of the parish under the Reverend Charles Darling, which saw the building of the church and the gathering of the congregation; and the decade of the 1920’s under Darling’s vicar, the Reverend Henry Griffin Hiscocks, who with Healey Willan revolutionized our liturgical and musical traditions. Each of these stands as a creative, formative period in the history of Saint Mary Magdalene’s.

There is a third focus. It takes up less space in the book, but it is the most important for us to think about. That is the contemporary period at SMM. Over the past 30 years we have had to re-evaluate and renew our traditions in the wake of changes in the church at large. This period is still unfinished, and so is difficult to analyze. Not that one can easily see the meaning, in Christian terms, of earlier periods, but at least they are much more of a closed book. The world that created SMM 100 years ago, or that sustained it as recently as 30 years ago, has in large part ceased to exist. Some may regret it, others will be delighted, but we all must come to terms with it.

The material is divided according to subject, and to a certain extent each chapter is a self-contained unit. Running through all the chapters are a small number of themes—the creation of an anglo-catholic parish, the challenge of adapting to change both in the past and in the present, the problem of fulfilling one’s dreams with only a little money—that I hope will bring some unity to the work. Above all, I have tried to write a book that could claim some integrity as a work of history. This has meant not only researching our own story thoroughly, but also placing that story in the context of what was happening in Toronto and in the Anglican Church at large. It has meant eschewing fanciful or romanticized recreations of the past, and being honest about our failings and limitations.

I’ve heard it said that Chinese scholars, to gratify their audience and keep themselves humble, used to leave mistakes in their work for their readers to discover. You will find many such opportunities here, but they are not, I’m afraid, deliberate. No doubt as I or others continue to delve into our past, our understanding of it will be sharpened and corrected. In the meantime I would like to thank my editors, Prudence Tracy, Professor William Blissett and Father Harold Nahabedian, for their advice, their encouragement and their comments on my manuscript. They are not responsible for the interpretations set out, nor for any errors of fact that I have inadvertently allowed to creep in.

Let me thank also Father Eugene Fairweather, who let me interview him for two hours in a hot room and yet still agreed to write the Introduction. Garry Lovatt spent long hours overseeing the production of this work, and we enjoyed many lively conversations along the way. Garry also served as editor, along with Julie Kretchman, and I am grateful to everyone I have pestered for information or assistance of some sort. Finally, I would like to thank all the people of SMM for their love and support over many years, and for the confidence they have shown me in entrusting the parish history to my care. I hope they will not be disappointed.

D.G.

Toronto

Feast of the Epiphany, 1990

INTRODUCTION The Meaning of SMM

David Greig has produced a learned and perceptive history of the Church of Saint Mary Magdalene, Toronto. In fact, I doubt that any Canadian parish has been better served by its historian. The author has brought high standards of scholarly research and interpretation to his task, and the outcome is most impressive.

But why should anyone take the time and trouble to read it? After all, many excellent examples of historical writing about Canada can be found in any good bookstore. Even though this is a fine study, how can David Greig hope to find interested readers beyond the present or former membership of a small Toronto parish?

To my mind, the answer lies in the distinctive role of SMM in the life and worship of the Anglican Church of Canada. Indeed, it would hardly be too bold to call that role unique. If this particular parish had never been invented, important aspects of our church’s modern history would have been significantly different.

When SMM was founded, nobody could have guessed what it would become. In 1888 an anglo-catholic enclave already existed in what is now the eastern part of Parkdale deanery. The parishes of Saint Matthias (our mother church) and Saint Thomas were already going concerns. The Sisterhood of Saint John the Divine had recently been established within the boundaries of Saint Matthias parish. Several members of the staff of Trinity College, then located on Queen Street West, gave considerable support to the Catholic revival in their neighbourhood. SMM was initially envisaged as an extension of this anglo-catholic enclave into a growing suburb — not as something new and different.

Any special hopes focussed on the new congregation had to do with its anticipated prosperity. What we now call the West Annex seemed very likely to become an upscale district. Even now, the impressive houses of Palmerston Boulevard remind us of disappointed expectations.

If SMM was to stand out at all, then, its expected claim to fame was financial. Those of us who have heard the early story and lived through the later reality may surely be forgiven for collapsing into raucous laughter at the thought. David Greig’s meticulous account of the parish’s passage through crisis after crisis has more than a little in common with a Perils of Pauline melodrama. That is just how things went, at any rate for several decades.

It seems almost miraculous that the plan for a church building — so crucial for SMM’s future — should ever have been completed, even in a simplified form. Again and again the parish found itself on the brink of bankruptcy. As late as 1940 Archbishop Owen appointed a commission to consider the church’s future (if any).

Yet two decades earlier something had happened which was to establish SMM’s ongoing role in Canadian Anglicanism. That something was the appointment of Father Hiscocks as vicar, followed by his invitation to Healey Willan to become musical director. It was the Hiscocks–Willan partnership that pointed the parish towards its unique and fruitful destiny. Successive incumbents who have guided the parish towards financial solvency, as well as ongoing spiritual influence, have built on that heritage.

It is time to explain the importance of the Hiscocks-Willan alliance, which David Greig has rightly stressed. The basic clue is to be found in the diversity of the anglo-catholic movement. Let me comment on that diversity.

The Oxford Movement, commonly dated from 1833, was a manysided effort to renew the Church of England in recovering its fundamental catholic tradition. Its original emphasis was on supernatural revelation and ecclesiastical authority, rather than on liturgical usage. But inevitably it soon moved towards the renewal of worship: the basic corporate expression of faith.

Consequently, in Canada as elsewhere, anglo-catholicism speedily identified itself as a liturgical movement. Long neglected rubrics were honoured anew; long-forgotten practices were restored. Despite determined resistance, the face of Anglican worship entered a period of slow but sure change, which we are still experiencing.

The ritualists, as they were popularly though inaccurately labelled, agreed on emphasizing certain symbols. The revival of altar lights, eucharistic vestments and incense — along with the early appearance of mitres at episcopal consecrations in Fredericton and Kingston — signified a wide-spread consensus. Nonetheless, I must add that certain seeds of liturgical disagreement had already been sown early in the Oxford Movement.

On the one hand, a weighty group — the majority of the Tractarian pioneers — appealed primarily to the Catholic nature of the received Anglican tradition, as embodied first and foremost in the Prayer Book. They opposed revision of that book, as likely to undermine their case for catholic revival. Their ritualistic offspring leaned heavily on the historic Ornaments Rubric as justifying a good deal of ceremonial elaboration. That policy could be summarized in the phrase, the Prayer Book dressed up.

On the other hand, there were radicals in the Tractarian camp from early days. These rebels — Richard Hurrell Froude and William George Ward readily come to mind — held that Anglican renewal demanded a serious criticism of the insular tradition of the Church of England in the light supplied by the larger Catholic world. Their ritualistic heirs proved to be ready — indeed, eager — to interpolate a good deal of current Roman material into the Anglican rite. Eventually, in many cases, the Prayer Book was largely replaced by Roman texts.

I should remark further that only a prejudiced controversialist could stigmatize these radical anglo-catholics as disloyal Anglicans. Their point was simply that, by definition, Anglicanism belongs within what we should now call an ecumenical context. To borrow a formula from a recent writer, they looked beyond the appeal to Anglican history to the Anglican appeal to history. Viewed from that standpoint, the English reformation was itself, in principle, a reformable episode in the Anglican tale. If the radicals queried and often disobeyed Anglican regulations, their rationale was that Anglican regulators themselves were oblivious to the demands of a larger vision.

Now let us return to SMM. Father Hiscocks obviously belonged to the second school of ritualists. He looked beyond official Anglican usage to Roman models, in rite as well as in ceremony. When particular Anglican regulations got in his way, he seems to have paid little attention to them, unless episcopal pressure became too strong for him to resist — which apparently was not very often.

Without Hiscocks’ vision and determination, SMM would at best have eked out a precarious existence as a moderate anglo-catholic parish, largely closed to ecclesiastical and liturgical values outside the Prayer Book tradition. As it was, our history turned out quite differently. Hiscocks’ instinct for Catholic worship, complemented by Willan’s musical learning and genius, placed our parish on the growing edge of liturgical change in the Canadian church.

From the viewpoint of infallible hindsight, which is so easy to assume, we can plausibly criticize Father Hiscocks and his mentors for treating post-Tridentine Roman practice as normative for the renewal of Anglican worship. It must be admitted that Hiscocks does not come across as a profound theologian or liturgical scholar. But in his time and place what better means of radical change could he have found than romanizing? Furthermore, we should recognize that he pointed, albeit unwittingly, to a future in which the Roman rite itself would be drastically reformed and SMM would adopt the reforms.

At this point, something more should be said about Dr. Willan. The value of his participation in the Hiscocks programme was incalculable. During forty-seven years he devoted infinite pains, as composer, arranger and conductor to the liturgical offering of the SMM choirs. Without his generous collaboration Father Hiscocks’ ritual and ceremonial scheme would probably have been stillborn. With his help, SMM became a power in the land.

I doubt that Willan was ever as rigid on matters of liturgical detail as many have supposed. During my long association with him, I found him quite open to change. Certainly his musical mix of plainsong (some of it congregational), polyphonic masses and motets, and congregational hymns became a norm which no sensible priest would have tried to alter. (We still maintain it today.) But within that framework he managed to live comfortably with a considerable variety of eucharistic rites, including a discreetly adjusted version of the Canadian Prayer Book of 1962. He was always quite clear about the subordination of music to liturgy.

It remains indisputable that, in his liturgical composition and direction, he was always faithful to the ideals which he shared with Father Hiscocks. The character of his masses, motets and Holy Week music consistently reflected a profound awareness of the right relation between text and song in public worship. His musical example has therefore remained a major factor in the Hiscocks–Willan heritage of SMM.

My own involvement in that heritage effectively began in 1941, when I entered Trinity College as a divinity student. By that time I was already deeply committed to the Catholic revival. For some seven years I had been a frequent worshipper in the Church of Saint John the Evangelist, Montreal —Canada’s pioneering ritualistic parish. In 1941 I was ready for SMM.

I could never speak too warmly about the role of Saint John the Evangelist in my Christian formation. It was there that I learned that Anglican worship could be splendidly and profoundly sacramental —something much richer than the stodgy dignity which most congregations seemed to regard as the acme of Anglicanism. Yet my encounter with SMM was to carry me a long step forward on my pilgrimage.

Our parish, with its austerely beautiful ceremonial and its lovely music, reinforced my conviction that corporate worship could—indeed, must—rise above the conventional Anglican style of the day. But beyond that, its example deepened my suspicion that Prayer Book Catholicism was an inadequate prescription for liturgical renewal. It became clearer to me that rite, as well as ceremony, must undergo a new reformation. That perception has stayed with me to this day, however much my view of the needed reforms may have changed in detail, as the liturgical movement has advanced.

Ever since Father Brain invited me to become an honorary assistant at SMM in 1949,1 have served happily—though not without occasional stress—as a priest in this parish. Some of my good friends have repeatedly expressed surprise at my state of mind. I can only suggest, with respect, that they may not understand SMM as well as I do.

I must admit that I have not always approved of everything we were doing in our parish liturgy. But in my long experience the saving grace of SMM has been its capacity to learn and change. Surely it goes without saying that we have changed a good deal, liturgically and otherwise, during the forty years of my public association with this parish. Most obviously, much of the eucharistic ceremonial which we accepted as normal in 1949 has been set aside as inappropriate in the light of major developments in liturgical knowledge and practice.

I do not mean to idealize the congregation of SMM. We have certainly had our rough moments. But unlike many other Catholic parishes in Canada and elsewhere, we have somehow contrived to move forward consistently, without unmanageable conflict.

To help account for that steady advance I refer once again to the Hiscocks–Willan tradition of innovative liturgy. Once a congregation has outgrown the illusion that