It is interesting to notice that the positive principles uniting the first members of the society were as yet very indefinite. They had clearly not formulated in their own minds any very distinct doctrine of the Church. They assembled together because they had a preference for the freer form of service of Nonconformity, and wished to worship God after the manner most consonant with their own feelings. There were associated in the congregation Dissenters of many varieties of thought, and, no doubt, of differing degrees of Dissent. It was a matter of indifference to them what might be the denominational preferences of their minister. The first invitation was sent forth by the “trustees and subscribers,” and was addressed to the Rev. John Lake, M.A., of whose views as to Church Government we know nothing, but have some reason to suppose he was a Presbyterian. This lack of any positive basis of Church fellowship was a somewhat serious obstacle to the spiritual progress of the community; and, indeed, the early records of the Church are a most instructive commentary on the necessity of trying to realise the Scriptural conception. The purely business aspect of their undertaking was for some years the most prominent one. The members of the society did not meet on a purely spiritual basis: and very imperfectly realised that the great mission of the Church was not accomplished by the provision of opportunities for their particular form of worship. Hence we are not surprised that some of the first ministers were often pained by the commercial spirit that at times prevailed in the deliberations of those responsible for carrying on the work.

With the same simplicity and modesty that had characterised the initiation of the work, the chapel was apparently opened with little or no ceremony, or blowing of trumpets. Not a reference do the minutes contain to any inauguration meeting. Notice was sent to “the Right Reverend Father in God, Beilby, by Divine Providence Lord Bishop of London,” informing him that the Chapel had been erected as a place of worship for Dissenters, and requesting him to register it in his registry, “pursuant to the Act of Toleration.” Comfortable in the possession of his lordship’s nominal consent, and august episcopal sanction, the society proceeded to approach the Rev. John Neal Lake, M.A., at that time resident at Walthamstow, with a view to inducing him to undertake the ministry at Kensington. Some sixty names were attached to the invitation; and, in an admirably-worded reply, Mr. Lake accepted the position in November, 1794.

With a pastor of their choice happily settled among them, the time for entering into a closer and more spiritual bond had clearly come. The tie of a subscription to the new building was not a sufficient one for a community that was organised for the purpose of extending the kingdom of God: and hence we are fully prepared for the very simple and beautiful service held on March 8th, 1795, when “a special meeting was held at the Chapel in the afternoon of as many as were desirous of joining as members and communicants at the Lord’s Table, when Mr. Lake attended and entered into religious conversation with those present, to whom he also delivered a suitable exhortation.” To those who feel the supreme importance of the Church, as distinguished from either the outward building or the particular minister, this is a memorable record. This building of the living stones into a Church of Jesus Christ is far more significant than the erection of a chapel. And this warm-hearted brotherhood of Christian men and women has continued in the faith and service of Christ, in unbroken succession, for a hundred years. The first Communion service was evidently a very solemn and impressive time. Even the minutes of the Church book lose the atmosphere of formality. We learn how Mr. Lake descended from the pulpit to the Communion table, where “a linen cloth and elements” had been previously laid; [36] how the “great pew” and the adjoining pews were filled with communicants; how, after the distribution of the elements, Mr. Lake returned to the pulpit and delivered an exhortation. “Upon the whole, it was a good day to many present, and, it is to be hoped, a day to be remembered,” writes the Secretary, and proceeds to record the names and addresses of the “occasional communicants” who were present.

The First Communion Cups. From Photo. by Mr. S. Davie

Whether our good friend, the Secretary, exhausted himself with this description, or became less industrious than formerly, we cannot say. Possibly the unexciting but important work of the infant community seemed to him to require not even the very qualified notoriety of a minute-book. Certain it is that until May, 1798, there is but little recorded; and then “another hand” writes a short account of the monthly prayer meeting of the London Missionary Society, which, we are informed, was instituted “for the purpose of sending Christian missionaries to OtaheitÉ, Africa, and other distant places.” This prayer meeting was held “by rotation” at Kensington, and marks the beginning of the missionary interest of Kensington Chapel. Mr. Faulkner, in his notice of us, says that an auxiliary missionary society was connected with the chapel, “which, by means of contributions of one penny per week, raises the sum of nearly one hundred pounds per annum.” This excellent systematic organisation of missionary interest, enlisting the rich and poor alike in the work by means of a modest and regular subscription, was a very satisfactory application of the business traditions of the Church to the problem of increasing the offerings for missionary enterprise. Possibly, after the lapse of nearly a hundred years, there are some who might find it a helpful and valuable thing to themselves and others to revive an old tradition.

There is no account given in the minutes of Mr. Lake’s resignation, but our friend Mr. Faulkner assures us, with no doubt some inward satisfaction to himself, that he at length quitted “the Dissenting interest for a curacy in the Established Church, where he sustained a respectable and useful character to the day of his death.” It would be idle to pay even the tribute of a regret to this secession of ninety years ago. And it must be clear to all that one with Episcopal leanings was not the person needed to lead the people in the complete consolidation of a Congregational Church. Mr. Lake’s resignation prepared the way for a sounder and healthier development of Church life and government.