This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1920. Excerpt: ... of the heathen satirist, we will challenge criticism at the outset with a definition, and say that we propose to consider an ecclesiastical record as 'a record made by or for an ecclesiastical person in relation to his functions.' This may be reminiscent of Bishop Wilberforce's famous definition of an Archdeacon, but at least we shall have secured an attachment to a human being, and can proceed to investigate his activities, whether in an administra tive or a judicial aspect, with perhaps a class of 'documents subsidiary' as a reminder that even an archivist is subject to human weakness, and that the Lambeth Librarian not less than the Court of Chancery may be custodian of things which it would be difficult to classify. We will begin with the records of an Archbishop or a Bishop, not merely because it is the most convenient method of procedure on account of the extent of the field which will thereby be covered, but also because it is natural to suppose that such records will be better kept than those of lesser ecclesiastical dignitaries, although it must be frankly admitted that this natural supposition is sometimes found to rest upon rather a weak foundation. We are often inclined to treat records, which are, of course, notes of happenings, as though they themselves just happened, instead of being, as they are, the product of a human intelligence subject to human limitations; and we are apt also to consider them without due regard to the purpose for which they were made. No doubt to adopt any other course demands the exercise of imagination, of which we have a deep-rooted distrust, and which may, of course, easily lead us astray; but it is hard to see how we are to interpret, let us say, a Bishop's register if we leave out of account two personalities at...