t V, 
 
 V*^ 
 
 -^. 
 
 
 ■»• «^^. 

 
 L I B RARY 
 
 OF THE 
 U N I VLR.S1TY 
 or 1 LLl NOIS
 
 

 
 CHARGE 
 
 DELIVERED TO 
 
 THE CLERGY AND CHURCHWARDENS OF THE 
 DIOCESE OF BATH AND WELLS, 
 
 GENERAL VISITATION HELD IN APRIL AND MAY, 1873. 
 
 ARTHUR CHARLES, BISHOP OF BATH & WELLS. 
 
 itlj l^j^peirbb. 
 
 LONDON : 
 
 JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET. 
 
 THOMAS GREEN, WELLS. 
 1873.
 
 London: 
 bradburv, aonew, & to., printers, whitefriahs.
 
 CHARGE. 
 
 My Reverend Brethren, 
 
 My Brethren the Churchwardens, 
 
 I am glad to feel that after three years of constant residence 
 in the diocese, I am not now a stranger addressing strangers. 
 With the help of our Diocesan conferences, frequent church 
 and school oijenings, confirmations, missions, and intercourse 
 of various kinds, both personal and by letter, we are, I trust, 
 sufficiently acquainted with each other to establish relations 
 of confidence and kindly feeling. I shall address to you to-day 
 what I have to say, in the full persuasion that I shall have a 
 friendly hearing, and that if in anything your own opinions 
 may not coincide with mine, distrust and suspicion, at least, 
 will not be mingled with your dissent. 
 
 The altered condition of society generally at the present 
 day, compared with that which existed in the early ages 
 of Christianity and for many subsequent centuries, has greatly 
 modified and changed the uses of Episcopal Visitations. 
 Many purj^oses, such as inquiry into abuses, or errors in 
 doctrine or practice, obtaining information as to the state 
 of Churches, Schools, and other Parochial matters, and so 
 on, are now compassed by other agencies which our im- 
 proved civilization enables us to employ; while in an age 
 when everybody thinks and judges for himself, it is obvious 
 that mere authority must have lost much of its influence. 
 
 B 2
 
 Indeed, in some quarters, it seems to be thought that the 
 highest Christian duty is to vilify and vituperate those in 
 authority, and that whatever is said or done by a Bishop of 
 the English Church must needs be either wicked or foolish, or 
 both. Certain, however, it is that the growth of democracy in 
 Church as well as State, which I take to be the inevitable 
 result of the equalizing influence of high civilization, weakens 
 what I may call the arbitrary power of authority, and has a 
 tendency to diminish even its legitimate influence. As, how- 
 ever, the existence of authority in some form is necessary in 
 every body of men, and certainly in the Church, it seems to 
 me that what authority loses of its direct power under the 
 altered circumstances of which I have spoken, it should try to 
 make up by tlie increase of two great forces —the one that of 
 Christian love binding men's hearts in a willing subjection to 
 the rule instituted by the Lord Jesus : the other that of reason 
 addressing reason, and, if it may be, binding the intellect, and 
 working a consent of judgment. A visitation offers an oppor- 
 tunity more or less for both these methods of strengthening 
 the Bishop's influence. On the one hand, in worshipping 
 together, in breaking Bread together at the Lord's Table, and 
 in friendly intercourse afterwards. Christian and kindly feelings 
 are promoted ; and, on the other hand, in his Charge a Bishop 
 can state his views and opinions on matters of interest to the 
 Church, calmly and candidly, and if there is in them the 
 weight of reason and good sense, he has a good hope that 
 the sensible and candid portion of his hearers will give him a 
 fair hearing, and yield to the influence of truth. Only there 
 must be on the Bishop's part perfect freedom of speech, and 
 fearlessness in saying what he thinks, whether it is likely to 
 please or to displease either the clergy or the laity. His one 
 object must be, not to curry favour or court popularity with 
 either high or low, cleric or laic, but to state openly what, after 
 due consideration, he believes to be the truth, and to be for the 
 
 ^uwc
 
 real and lasting welfare of the Cliurcli to be spoken. His trust 
 will be in the good sense and Christian charity of his hearers 
 to take kindly what is spoken honestly, and to weigh impar- 
 tially even what is most contrary to their own opinions or 
 prejudices. 
 
 To begin with what is uppermost in my own mind. I 
 earnestly desire to see the Church in this Diocese pure, strong, 
 active, and united. Whatever was the intention of our Lord 
 that His Church on earth should be, whatever has been the 
 practice of the Church in her best days in accordance with our 
 Lord's will and ordinance, that I desire with my whole heart 
 should be carried out among us. Private interests, private 
 tastes, private opinions, whether my own or other peoj)le's, I 
 would utterly disregard. Personal considerations, political 
 considerations, social considerations, I would have stand on 
 one side, while the inquiry is simply, " AV^hat has the Lord 
 ordained ? and what is the Lord's pleasure in regard to His 
 Church as He looks down upon her from the throne of His 
 Glory ? " To much of this inquiry the answer is obvious and 
 certain. And I would press the answer home to the individual 
 conscience of each of us. The will of the Lord is that each 
 of us, whether lay or clerical, should be contributing to the 
 utmost of his power to the welfare of the body of which we are 
 members. It is no mean privilege to be a member of the 
 Church of God, of which the Lord Jesus Christ is the Head, 
 and which is animated by His Spirit. In this body there are 
 many members, and every member has not the same office, but 
 they are all alike members of the Body, and every member has 
 an office, under the great Head. My conception then of what 
 the Church in our own Diocese should be is, that all of us, 
 Bishop, clergy, laymen of every rank and degree, whether church- 
 wardens and other church-officers, or private members, gentle- 
 men, farmers, manufacturers, tradesmen, artisans, labourers, 
 shuuld each and all realize oiu" position as members of the
 
 Cliurcli of Christ ; as such be thoroughly united in heart and 
 soul ; as such be each seeking, first and above all, the strength 
 and welfare of the Church. There is no position so high in 
 regard to wealth, or rank, or learning, but that simple member- 
 ship in the Church of God is an honour higher than any of 
 those things can confer, and entails duties and responsibilities 
 higher than they involve. And there is no position in life so 
 humble but that he who holds it is privileged, if he is a 
 member of Christ's Church, to bear his part in all that concerns 
 the well-being of that Church. I say again, therefore, that my 
 ideal of the Church is the close and thorough union of all ranks 
 and all classes in doing the Church's work. I should like to 
 feel that while all were pursuing their lawful calling, some in 
 the town and some in the country, some in the office and some 
 in the shop, some in the factory and some in the field, there was 
 in all the same solemn sense of Church-membership, uniting 
 all in a real brotherhood, drawing the loving thoughts of all to 
 Chkist the common Head of all, and making all more really 
 solicitous for the weal of the Church, than for their private 
 interests, or their private opinions : and in all the same stamp 
 and seal of their membership, a life of truth, purity, holiness, 
 and unselfish love. 
 
 In aiming at such a result as this, in desiring our Diocese to 
 exhibit such features as these, we may be sure that our wishes 
 and our endeavours are in accordance with the Lord's will. 
 And I ask the co-operation of all in the endeavour to bring 
 such a state of things about. And let me add that all who 
 have this common aim, and pursue it with singleness of eye, 
 whatever diff'erences of opinion they may have, ought to be 
 firmly joined together by the cement of brotherly love. 
 
 But in this world it is necessary to pass out of the region of 
 thought and theory into that of action and practice. The 
 Church must have an outward organization. She must have a 
 material framework. . She must have rules, a mode of OprjaKiCa,
 
 an outward and visible Religion, a system, a government, a 
 certain polity and order. These may be conceived as very 
 various, even given the common aim of glory to God, and 
 righteousness in men. Obviously too, as regards all the parts 
 of the Church system which are merely human and secondary, 
 a considerable variety is, in the nature of things, both expedient 
 and necessary, according to the varying conditions of numbers, 
 civil government, civilization, public opinion, education, and 
 so on, with which the Church is brought into relation in different 
 ages and different countries of the world. 
 
 The matter then stands thus. The doctrine of the Church, 
 and those essential parts of her ritual which, like the doctrine, 
 are not of human but of divine origin, are unchangeable. 
 They are for all time, for all place, and for all circumstances. 
 But the rules and canons and rubrics of the Church, and num- 
 berless details relating to her officers, her buildings, her 
 revenues, her ceremonies, her discipline, do vary and ought to 
 vary, and must vary, according to the circumstances of the 
 civil society with which the Church is connected by time and 
 place. 
 
 But then come the important practical questions. 
 
 I. What is the authority by which the unchangeable portions 
 of the Church's teaching (^whether doctrine or ritual) is esta- 
 blished. And 
 
 II. What is the authority by which changes may lawfully 
 be made in that which in its nature is changeable ? 
 
 I. The Church's unchangeable doctrine and ritual rests 
 solely uj)on the authority of Her Divine and Infallible Head, 
 Jesus Christ our Lord, as set forth for the Church's perpetual 
 use in Holy Scripture. The doctrine concerning God, the 
 Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost ; the doctrine of the 
 Incarnation, the Atoning Sacrifice, the Resm'rection, the Ascen- 
 sion, the coming to Judge and Reign of the Son of God, the 
 doctrine of the gift of the Holy Ghost, the doctrine of Baptism
 
 8 
 
 and of the Lord's Supper, are all revealed truths, which stand 
 fast for ever and ever, and are like the Mount Zion, which may 
 not be moved. There are also many other things which, though 
 standing as it were on a lower pedestal, have yet the authority 
 either of Christ Himself, or of His Apostles speaking and 
 acting by His Holy Spirit. I mean such as ordination, mar- 
 riage, public prayers, preaching, missionary labours, alms- 
 giving, fasting, and such like. These all derive their authority 
 from Christ Himself, either immediately or mediately through 
 the Apostles inspired by His Spirit, and are contained in, or 
 may be proved by. Holy Scripture. It is, I conceive, a funda- 
 mental principle of Christianity itself, and is distinctly laid 
 down in the Articles of Religion, that " Holy Scripture con- 
 taineth all things necessary to salvation " (Art. vi.) The 
 audacious attempt to set up as articles of faith things not 
 read in Holy Scripture, nor to be proved thereby, is anti- 
 Christian and impious. In the interpretation, however, of Holy 
 Scripture, the ministry and witness of the Church is invaluable. 
 When we have distinct evidence of viniversal consent in the 
 Churches say of the three first centuries, as to the doctrine of 
 Holy Scripture on any point, it forms a weight of argument 
 as to what the true meaning of Holy Scripture is, which none 
 but the most presumptuous and arrogant will despise. The 
 consent, for instance, of the universal Church in the Articles 
 of the Nicene Creed, the universal practice of Infant Baptism 
 from the Apostolic age, the universal diffusion over the whole 
 world of a ministry consisting of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons — 
 these, I say, are such evidence of how the first Churches under- 
 stood and received the teaching of Holy Scripture on these 
 several points, as it is impossible to over-rate. But for all that, 
 we hold these things upon tlie authority of scripture. Ecdesia 
 docet, Scriphtra 'prohat. And I may take this opportunity of 
 insisting on the great value of really Apostolic tradition. No 
 wise or prudent theologian will discard its use, or undervalue
 
 its importance. It is almost as efficient in testing the truth 
 of doctrines as Holy Scripture itself. Quod sem'per^ quod 
 ubique, quod ah omnibus, is a sound test of Catholic truth. But 
 it is a test as fatal to the innovations and corruptions of the 
 fourth or fifth centuries, as to those of the twelfth or nineteenth 
 centuries. The power claimed for the Church to broach doc- 
 trines not contained in Holy Scripture, or, in other words, 
 the co-ordinate authority of the Church to teach truths not 
 revealed in Holy Scripture, but supposed to be revealed to 
 her by the Holy Spirit in these latter days, is a thing totally 
 different in kind from her testimony to the true meaning of 
 Holy Scripture : and the value even of this testimony depends 
 u]3on its being- unbroken from the times of the Apostles. 
 Let me repeat it then, the sole authority by which the un- 
 changeable portions of the Church's doctrine and ritual are 
 established, is the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ, as set 
 forth in Holy Scripture for the Church's perpetual use. But 
 
 IL There are in the nature of things a number of rules, 
 practices, ordinances, ceremonies, formularies, which are not 
 contained in Holy Scripture, and which vary, and ought to 
 vary, and must vary, in different ages, and in different countries. 
 By whom, and on what authority, are such changes in ritual, 
 in dress, in ceremonies, in prayers, in rules and regulations, 
 to be made ? Surely it is self-evident that, as the thirty- 
 fourth article says, " every particular or national church hath 
 authority to ordain, change, and abolish, ceremonies or rites 
 of the Church, ordained only by man's authority, so that all 
 things be done to edifying ; " but that " whosoever through 
 his private judgment, willingly and purposely doth break the 
 traditions and ceremonies of the Church . . . which be 
 ordained and approved by common authority, ought to be 
 rebuked openly." The Church of England, when she cast off 
 the usurped authority of the Pope of Rome, and with it the 
 corruptions and errors of more than a thousand years, and
 
 10 
 
 resumed her inherent right, as a Church, to regulate her own 
 affairs, did deliberately, and painfully, and circumspectly, deter- 
 mine and decree what ceremonies, rites, traditions, and customs 
 she would retain, and what it was for the edification of the 
 Church that she should reject. And the result of her collective 
 wisdom, ratified by lawful authority in Church and State, we 
 have in her Book of Common Prayer, and administration of the 
 Sacraments. That Book, with the Thirty-nine Articles, is the 
 voice of the English Church. To it every Priest and Deacon 
 is bound by the most solemn declarations and promises, to 
 yield a hearty obedience. Not his own private opinion, but the 
 voice of the Prayer Book, is in all such things his rule and 
 guide. Not the practice of the Western Church, i.e.., the Church 
 of Rome, not the canons and rules of churches in Asia, or Gaul, 
 or Africa, a thousand years ago, but the Canons and Rules and 
 Rubrics of the Church of England, actually in force, are the 
 authority which he is bound to obey. For an English Church- 
 man to disobey his Prayer Book, on the plea of a so-called 
 Catholic usage which his Church has rejected, and to endeavour, 
 by sheer obstinacy, to overrule the provisions which he has 
 sworn to obey, and to substitute others for them, is to my 
 apprehension a plain act of immorality, and contrary to all 
 principles of true churchmanship. 
 
 I have thought it right to speak thus plainly, because it is 
 notorious that there are those in the Church at the present day 
 who have deliberately and avowedly undertaken the task of 
 revolutionizing the Church of England as to her doctrine and 
 her ritual, and of effecting her reunion with the Church of 
 Rome. There is scarcely a single doctrine of that corrupt com- 
 munion which it has not been attempted of late to bring back 
 among us. The depreciation of the Bible as the rule of faith, 
 and the exaltation of the Church as a fountain of revelation ; 
 the mass as a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the quick and 
 dead ; solitary masses as sacrifices by which non-communi-
 
 11 
 
 cants are benefited ; such a local presence of the Lord Jesus 
 in the consecrated elements as to be a proper object of 
 worship, a worship directed to the elements as containing 
 Him ; the invocation and worship of the Virgin Mary, 
 and prayers for her intercession ; auricular confession and 
 priestly absolution ; penance ; j)^^rgatory, and so on, not 
 one of which was taught or practised in the Anti-Nicene 
 Church. And, together with these, have been introduced 
 a whole host of practices of a minor kind, all savouring of 
 Romanism, and intended to familiarise the Anglican wor- 
 shipper with Roman ways. The English priests and deacons 
 are to be dressed as like as possible to Romish priests and dea- 
 cons ; the church choristers are to be as like as possible to the 
 acolytes and choristers in a Romish church ; the Lord's table is 
 to be made and dressed as like as possible to the altar of a 
 Romish church ; the chants and music are to be as like as 
 possible to those in the Church of Rome; the processions, 
 banners, crosses, and crucifixes, of Romish ceremonials, are to 
 be exactly imitated; the Roman use of incense and wafer 
 bread is to be adopted ; in short, in everything Anglican wor- 
 ship is to be assimilated as closely as possible to the worship 
 in Belgian, Italian, and other Romish churches. Then, again, 
 we are introduced to a variety of supplements to the Prayer 
 Book. Ofiices are provided for the consecration of portable 
 altars, for the benediction of church bells, for the consecration 
 of chrism and holy oil with which to anoint the sick, for the 
 blessing of altar-cloths, corporals, patens, pyxes, albs, chasu- 
 bles, &c. We have ofiices, too, for the admission of novices, 
 male and female ; for the profession of brothers and sisters ; for 
 the installation of superiors of brotherhoods, and mother su- 
 periors of sisterhoods ; and we have a great variety of litanies, 
 for the dead as well as for the living, all as unlike the litany 
 of the Church as it is possible to conceive. There are ofiices, 
 too, for the blessing of salt and water. And the priest (/. c.
 
 12 
 
 the English clergyman) is to throw the salt into the water in 
 the form of a cross, saying, " Let this mixture be made in the 
 name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." 
 And there are offices for blessing candles for Candlemas day, 
 and for blessing ashes for Ash "Wednesday, and for blessing 
 palms and flowers for Palm Sunday; and there are benedictions 
 of service books, of thuribles, of incense, of tapers, of cruci- 
 fixes, of medals, of church banners, &c. We are also favoured 
 with works which pass through two or more editions, in which, 
 among other things, the clergy are instructed as to what is 
 necessary to a devout celebration and communion. Among 
 them I find that he ought not to wash his teeth in the 
 morning before he communicates, for fear of drinking a drop 
 of water, and so breaking his fast, nor to cough afterwards ; 
 and that it is the celebrant's duty to rinse out the chalice after 
 celebration, and to pour water over his fingers into the chalice, 
 and then to drink the water, with much more of the same kind, 
 which it is sickening to mention. Another method largely 
 nsed for familiarising the English churchman's mind with 
 Roman Catholic doctrine, is the introduction and recommenda- 
 tion on a large scale of Roman Catholic books of devotion, and 
 especially books connected with confession, and with the (so- 
 called) sacrifice of the altar. The mind is thus familiarised 
 with the teaching of Liguori, and Ignatius Loyola, and with 
 breviaries and missals, and alienated from the language of the 
 Anglican Prayer Book and the doctrines of the Anglican 
 Church. 
 
 All this, together with the tone used by certain writers, and 
 tlie endeavour to hoot down those who resist the attempt to 
 Romanise the Church of England, as if they were not true 
 churchmen, but ignorant, uncatholic dissenters, convinces me 
 that there is a deliberate conspiracy on foot somewhere to bring- 
 back the Church of England to communion with, and obedience 
 to, the Pojjo of Rome. Indeed, if all these doctrines and prac-
 
 13 
 
 ticcs whicli I have detailed are and ought to be the practices 
 and doctrines of the English Church, I am at a loss to know 
 on what grounds our separation from Eome can be justified. 
 The question of the precise degree of authority to be exercised 
 hj the Bishop of Rome over the Western Churches is hardly 
 one of sufficient importance to create a great schism ; the 
 difference between the doctrine of transubstantiation and that 
 taught by the new school is absolutely insignificant in the 
 region of religion : and there is no other important question at 
 issue, that I am aware of, between Rome and England. So 
 that we are brought face to face with the question. Shall the 
 Church of England return to her allegiance to the Church of 
 Rome ? Shall the mighty Revolution of the 16th century be 
 undone, and shall we have a Restoration ? a restoration of the 
 Popedom on British soil ? a restoration of all those corruptions, 
 those follies, those idolatries, those perversions of the truth, 
 those wretched debasing superstitions, and that priestly 
 tyranny, which for so many centuries almost quenched the 
 light of Christianity, and annihilated the liberties of the laity ? 
 Shall we exchange our Prayer Books for breviaries and missals ; 
 close our Bibles and take u|) with the lives of saints, or the 
 " Garden of the Soul ;" in a word, submit to the decrees of the 
 Council of Trent, and the last CEcumenical Council of Rome ? 
 
 If we are not prepared to do this, if we are determined, by 
 God's grace, to stand to the Reformation, and if we are satis- 
 fied that such teaching as that of which I have given specimens 
 is NOT in harmony with the teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 and with the doctrine which the Apostles, illuminated by the 
 Holy Ghost, delivered to the churches all over the world, nor 
 with the doctrine for which the fathers of the English Reforma- 
 tion laid down their lives, and which they have handed down 
 to us, then it is time for us to make a stand against the attempt 
 to reimpose Popery ui)on the English Church. We must not 
 allow ourselves to drift gradually and unconsciously into the
 
 \ 
 
 14 
 
 communion of Rome. We must not be like the silly daughters 
 of Pelias, and allow our Church to be dismembered, limb by 
 limb, in the vain hope that in the hands of our modern Medeas 
 she will come forth in renewed youth and beauty. And I 
 appeal to you, my brethren of the clergy, and to you, my 
 brethren of the laity, to help in withstanding the astounding 
 growth of that spirit which gives birth to the kind of religion 
 which I have described. 
 
 I believe that the most efficient barrier that can be raised 
 against Popery is the doctrine, rightly understood, and the 
 system fully carried out, of the English Church. Popery is 
 a very compact and vigorous system, administered with great 
 ability, having the prestige of vast power and dignity, and of a 
 mighty and long-sustained empire ; having on its side the 
 authority of many illustrious names, aye and the adhesion of 
 many very holy men and women ; having a long pedigree and 
 the weight of antiquity, and a large mixture of truth with its 
 deadly errors, and the support of much theological learning, 
 and of much devotion and piety on its behalf. No random 
 religion, stones without mortar, separate doctrines loosely piled 
 together, will ever be able to stand against it. It is not the 
 individual piety that may be found amongst our dissenters, nor 
 the ill-regulated fanaticism of our Plymouth Brethren, nor the 
 rationalistic views of those among us who Germanise, that can 
 oppose an effectual barrier to its progress. The Church of 
 England, with her apostolic ministry, her succession both of 
 orders and sacraments, her firm hold of scriptural doctrine, 
 her consent with primitive tradition and practice, her sober, 
 sound, evangelical formularies cast in the very mould of pri- 
 mitive antiquity, her determined rejection of the superstitious 
 inventions of men, with the steady support and maintenance 
 given her by the power of the Crown and the law of the land, 
 has hitherto opposed an effectual barrier to the usurpations and 
 encroachments of Rome in this country. If she is materially
 
 15 
 
 altered in any one of these respects, I greatly doubt her power 
 to maintain such barrier. Her force of cohesion being de- 
 stroyed, and her balance of doctrinal power being weakened, 
 she would herself split up. A portion of her members would 
 at once fall into Rome by inevitable gravitation ; a portion 
 would join the different sects ; a portion would fall away into 
 Socinianisra and various grades of infidelity ; and the faithful 
 remnant would be too feeble to make head against the swelling 
 tide of Romanism. 
 
 It is, therefore, of the utmost moment to the cause of the 
 true Christian faith, I mean to its maintenance in England, that 
 we should all, clergy and laity, stand by the Church of Eng- 
 land, and maintain the principles on which she is founded. 
 To suppose that you can introduce into her the several doc- 
 trines, the practices, the dress, the ornaments, the ceremonies, 
 the whole spirit of Rome, and yet maintain her separate from 
 Rome, is a fond and silly dream. Unprotestantise the Church 
 of England, and saturate her with what men are pleased to 
 call (though most falsely) Catholic ritual and Catholic (as 
 opposed to scriptural) doctrine, and to a certainty she will 
 coalesce with Rome. I ask you all, therefore, to stand by the 
 Church of England. Hold fast the two principles which I 
 have enunciated as held by her. (1) That what is necessary 
 to salvation, and unchangeable in her doctrine and ritual, rests 
 upon Holy Scripture, and can neither be added to, nor dimi- 
 nished. (2) That rites and ceremonies and formularies may 
 be decreed or changed by the authority of each particular 
 or national Church, and by none other. Hold fast these two 
 principles and act upon them. You will then look to Holy 
 Scripture, as interpreted by the Church, for all vital and saving 
 doctrine ; and you will dutifully obey the laws and rubrics of 
 that branch of the Church of which you are members, instead 
 of presuming to substitute for them the ceremonies or for- 
 mularies of other Churches.
 
 16 
 
 If there is any one doctrine more than another on which the 
 reformed Church of England has made her meaning clear, it is 
 the doctrine of the Holy Eucharist. Following the language 
 of Holy Scripture, she calls it by names which clearly evidence 
 her conception of its real character, " the Lord's Supper " and 
 " the Holy Communion ; " and she calls the place whereon the 
 elements of Bread and Wine are placed by the scriptural names 
 of " the Table," or " the Lord's Table," or " the Holy Table," 
 terms manifestly correlative to that of " the Lord's Supper." 
 When, again, she calls it by the name of " the Sacrament of 
 the Body and Blood of Christ," though she uses a word not 
 used in Scripture, yet she uses it only to describe a thing which 
 is most clearly contained in Holy Scripture, viz. that the 
 Bread which we break is the Communion of the Body of Christ, 
 and that the cup of blessing which we bless is the Communion 
 of the Blood of Christ (1 Cor. x. 16) : for, according to the 
 Church's definition of a sacrament, it is an outward visible 
 sign of an inward and spiritual grace given unto us. And 
 still adhering closely to the language of Holy Scripture she 
 teaches us that the faithful who receive the Bread and Wine in 
 the Lord's Supper do verily and indeed take and receive the 
 Body and Blood of Christ. And so, over and over again, she 
 teaches the same blessed truth, that Jesus Christ is our spi- 
 ritual food and sustenance in that Holy Sacrament, and that 
 those who " receive God's creatures of Bread and Wine, ac- 
 cording to Christ's institution," are " partakers of His most 
 Blessed Body and Blood ; " and that we are to " feed upon 
 Him in our hearts by faith with thanksgiving." Here, then, is 
 a complete, consistent doctrine, every word of which, deep and 
 mysterious as it is, is fully borne out by Holy Scripture. But 
 not one word in the English Prayer Book, any more than in 
 the Bible, of Christ being offered in the Holy Eucharist as a 
 sacrifice for sin. There is much about this sacrifice of Christ 
 by the Priest in the Roman missal, and in the decrees and
 
 17 
 
 catechism of the Council of Trent. And in the Romish 
 Ordinal the Priest receives commission " to offer sacrifice for 
 the quick and dead" (quoted by Bishop Fitzgerald, in his 
 " Ministry of the Forgiveness of Sins," p. 17). But all this 
 is carefully excluded from the English Pi-ayer Book. Moreover, 
 all the great divines of the English Church, even those who are 
 considered to hold the highest doctrine on the Eucharist (I 
 mean such as Bishop Andrewes and Bishop Cosin, as the Bishop 
 of Ely has shown*), do carefully and pointedly repudiate and 
 exclude the idea of the Eucharist being a proper sacrifice. " We 
 will never admit (Bishop Andrewes wrote to Cardinal Bellar- 
 mine) that your Christ of Bread is sacrificed" at the Lord's 
 Table. And they deny the Presence of Christ being other 
 than, as Bishop Cosin expresses it, " a sacramental, spiritual, 
 true Presence to the souls of all that come faithfully to receive 
 Him, according to His own institution, in that Holy Sacra- 
 ment." But not only is this new doctrine, which is now so 
 vehemently forced down our throats as the only Catholic doc^ 
 trine, which whoever believes not, is no Churchman, nor true 
 Christian, not only is it utterly strange to the English Prayer 
 Book, and to the whole body of standard divines of the English 
 Church (Cranmer, and Ridley, and Parker, and Jewel, and 
 Hooker, and Andrewes, and Hammond, and Beveridge, and 
 Hall, &c), but it is equally strange to the early Church. Not 
 one single ancient Liturgy speaks of Christ being offered as a 
 sacrifice in the Holy Eucharist, or makes such a notion pos- 
 sible ; not one single Liturgy suggests the objective Presence 
 of Christ in the consecrated elements, so as to be an object of 
 worship; the bread and wine, indeed, are "offered," but prior 
 to consecration ; and, as in our own Prayer Book, there is a 
 sacrifice of thanksgiving and praise, and an offering of alms, 
 and of men's hearts and bodies to be a " reasonable, holy, and 
 
 * " Sacrifice, Altar, Priest. " By Edward Harold, Bishop of Ely, printed for 
 private circulation. 
 
 a
 
 18 
 
 lively sacrifice " unto God, acceptable through the One sncrifice 
 of our Lord Jesns Christ, offered once for all ; hut an offering 
 of Christ under the form of Bread and Wine, as a sacrifice for 
 quick and dead — never — nor any adoration of Christ as being in 
 the elements. And with the Liturgies agree the explanations 
 of the Christian apologists of the second and third centuries. 
 They explain to their heathen neighbours (to use the words of 
 Athenagoras) that the greatest sacrifice the Christians can offer 
 to God, is to know Him, and to lift up holy hands in prayer to 
 Him ; for He delights in the unbloody sacrifice, and the rea- 
 sonable service. And so Justin Martyr, in that well-known 
 minute account of the Christian worship of the second century, 
 tells us how, in the assemblies of Christians gathered from 
 town and country, after the reading of the Scriptures, and 
 prayers, and a sermon, bread and a cup of wine and water 
 were brought to the jiresident (the bishop or presiding priest), 
 who thereupon gave thanks to God at length for his gifts, the 
 people answering amen ; and then the deacons distributed to 
 the faithful and regenerate the bread and wine for which thanks 
 had thus been given : which bread and wine they received, not 
 as common bread or common drink, but as the Body and Blood 
 of Christ ; for, he says, as Jesus Christ our Saviour was made 
 flesh by the Word of God, and had both flesh and blood for 
 our salvation, so are we taught tbat that meat for which the 
 thanksgiving was made with prayer in the word that jiro- 
 ceeded from Christ, and by which also our own flesh and 
 blood are nourished by assimilation, is the Body and Blood of 
 the Incarnate Jesus : A passage very remarkable, both for its 
 antiquity and the full and unreserved statement of the acts of 
 Christian worship ; thus precluding the idea of any reserve or 
 concealment, and therefore proving to demonstration that in 
 the second century there was no notion of oifering Christ in 
 any sense as a sacrifice. Justin speaks, indeed, of offerings. 
 But it is bread and wine before consecration, and praise and
 
 19 
 
 glory to Grod, an;l alms, which are the obhxtions spoken of, 
 and he places the essence of the service in the distribution and 
 reception of the elements. This agrees exactly with the 
 liturgies, and it agrees witli the frequent expressions of Euse- 
 bius 150 years later; expressions equally full and copious, and 
 purporting to describe, not his own private opinion, but the 
 opinions and practices common to the whole Church of God. 
 In these he tells us that Christians, under the New Testament, 
 no longer offer the old sacrifices of burnt offerings and incense, 
 but offer the pure, unbloody, and reasonable sacrifice of good 
 works, and a holy life in their own homes, and a contrite heart, 
 and the sacrifice of prayer and praise and thanksgiving, and 
 the offering of themselves to the service of God. And in other 
 passages, referring more directly to the Holy Eucharist, he 
 associates the above-named unbloody and reasonable sacrifices 
 with " the awful sacrifices of the Table of Christ," which he 
 explains by teaching us how the Church keeps up the constant 
 MEMORY of the sacrifice of the Body and Blood of Christ at His 
 Table, by the symbols of His Body and Blood. For, says he, 
 Christ having offered up to the Father his wonderful sacrifice 
 of Himself for the salvation of us all, commanded us, instead 
 of sacrifice {avrl Ovaias), to offer up to God a perpetual memory 
 thereof. And in another remarkable passage, where he is sum- 
 ming up his explanation of what are the sacrifices of Christians 
 under the New Testament, he says, ^' So then we do offer both 
 sacrifice and incense : partly while we celebrate the memory of 
 the great sacrifice in the mysteries instituted by him, and offer 
 to God in holy hymns and prayers our eucharistic sacrifice of 
 thanksgiving for our salvation, partly while we dedicate our- 
 selves entirely to Him, and consecrate our souls and bodies 
 to the Word, the High Priest of God." This, then,* on the 
 authority of the learned Eusebius, was the doctrine of the 
 universal Church about the year 300 a.d., and it is exactly the 
 
 * Compare the service in the Apostol. Constit. in Bingham xv. ch. ill. 
 
 c 2
 
 20 
 
 doctrine of the Church of Enghxnd in the year 1873. Tlie 
 learned Bingham shows conclusively that the elevation of the 
 Host, and the adoration of the elements, were not practised till 
 the twelfth or thirteenth centuries after Christ. (Lib. xv. 
 ch. V. § 5.) And yet the adoration of Christ, present under 
 the form of bread and wine, and the elevation of the cup for 
 the people to worship, is one of those " Catholic " usages which 
 it is attempted to thrust upon the members of the Church of 
 England ! Well did Archbishop Cranmer say that removing 
 all other corruptions in doctrine, so long as the Popish doctrine 
 of the sacrifice of the mass remained, was but like topping and 
 lopping a tree, or cutting down weeds, while the body (of the 
 tree) was left standing, and the roots were in the ground. 
 " They will overspread all the ground again with the old errors 
 and superstitions." 
 
 I especially charge you, therefore, my Reverend Brethren, 
 both in your preaching and in your mode of celebrating, to 
 adhere strictly to the doctrine and rubrics of the Church of 
 England, which you have solemnly promised to obey. Practise 
 yourselves, and inculcate in others, as much faith, as much 
 devotion, as much reverence, as much solemnity of feeling, and 
 withal as much joy and thankfulness, as you will, at the Holy 
 Tal)le of the Lord. Inculcate, as they of old did, the reasonable 
 service, the pure ofiering, the sacrifice of praise and of a contrite 
 spirit, the self-consecration, the holy life, which God will 
 accept through the offering of Christ's body and blood, but do 
 not try and bring back errors which the Church of England 
 has deliberatel}'^ rejected, or superstitious practices which spring 
 from them. Remember that your commission is limited to 
 ministering '^ the Doctrine, and Sacraments, and the Discipline 
 of Christ, as the Lord hath commanded, and as this Church and 
 realm hath received the same." And the good Lord own and 
 bless your ministrations to the increase of His Holy Church ! 
 
 And you, my brethren of the laity, see that you rise to a full
 
 21 
 
 sense of your Christian responsibilities in all that relates to the 
 service of God and His Holy worship. I believe that much of 
 the excess in regard to ritual, and what is falsely called sacra- 
 mental teaching, arises from the utter laxity, and neglect, and 
 irreverence of times past. When our congregations thrust out the 
 Baptismal service from its proper place into an empty church, and 
 made a point of leaving the church in a body so soon as the time 
 came for receiving the Holy Communion, thus seeming to pour 
 contempt upon the two sacraments ordained by Christ himself, 
 can we be surprised if those who were shocked at such apparent 
 irreligion may have let their zeal run away with them ? Is it, 
 think you, a right condition of the Church, for nine-tenths of 
 the adults of the congregation to be non-communicants ? men 
 and women, fathers and mothers of families, masters and 
 mistresses of Christian households, never from year's end to 
 year's end to come to the Lord's Table, never to commemorate 
 the sacrifice of the death of Christ ? Is it an edifying spectacle 
 to see the very officers of the Church, the Churchwardens, the 
 guardians of the Church's property, and in some degree of her 
 discipline too, setting the example to the people of turning 
 their backs upon the Lord's Supper ? And yet this was very 
 common, and perhaps is so still. And was not this enough, 
 added to our communions three times a year, to rouse the 
 indignation of our more zealous brethren, and urge them to 
 some vehemence of action? If you of the laity think your 
 clero-y have been intemperate in their zeal, should you not 
 accuse your own coldness and neglect of Holy things of being 
 the cause of this want of moderation ? If there had been 
 frequent communions, and devout attendance, and the presence 
 of rich and poor, old and young, men and women, at our altars, 
 there would have been no room for all these novelties. Com- a 
 plaints of the mode of celebrating the Holy Communion come | 
 with a bad grace from those who never come to the Holy ( 
 Communion at all. What weight, too, or what influence
 
 can the opinions or the wishes with regard to Divine service of 
 those persons have, who show by their absence from the holiest 
 and most vital services that they have no part nor lot in the 
 matter. But take your proper place as the congregation of 
 Christ's people, and you will soon find that your opinions and 
 wishes have the weight which they will then deserve. No 
 clergyman, however self-willed, can set at nought the feelings 
 of a united and devout people. 
 
 I have dwelt too long, perhaps, upon this subject, but 1 hope 
 you will excuse me, as I feel it to be one of vital imi)ortance to 
 the well-being of the Church — that Church which, I can assure 
 my brethren, I love as warmly as they do. 
 
 But I will now pass on to another subject on which you may, 
 perhaps, expect to hear my opinion, as it has occupied so much 
 of the public mind, and which has scarcely been considered in 
 the light which strikes me as most important — I mean the use 
 of the Athanasian Creed. 
 
 And here let me at once say that I think the question how 
 to deal with this creed is a most difficult one. But because it 
 is a difficult one it ought to be handled very calmly and impar- 
 tially. We have had too much discussion in the style of those 
 controversialists of old who, for the space of about two hours, 
 cried out. Great is Diana of the Ephesians. If, whatever side 
 we take, we really want to get at truth, we must listen to, and 
 candidly weigh, our opponent's arguments, and not on the one 
 hand feel sure that we must be right, or on the other make 
 sure that our opponent is either a bigot, or a Socinian, or an 
 Atheist in disguise. There is much to be said on botli sides of 
 the question, and both parties may be equally animated with 
 zeal for the truth of God and for the integrity of the Christian 
 faith. 
 
 The observations which I shall make on the subject shall be 
 few, and they shall be directed to these two points : 
 
 I. The expediency of using such a creed at all. And
 
 23 
 
 II. The propriety or expediency of the damnatory clauses. 
 
 On both points I shall rest the main stress of the argument 
 on the practice of the Primitive Church. 
 
 I. Any one can see that the structure and method of the 
 Athanasian Creed are wholly different from those of the two 
 other creeds. Whereas the Apostle's and Nicene creeds con- 
 tain short and pithy articles in which the heads of Christian 
 doctrine are laid down chiefly in Scripture language, the creed 
 of St. Athanasius is a diffuse and argumentative statement of 
 the most abstruse points that can engage the attention of a 
 theologian and a metaphysician. It is a statement, moreover, 
 which very widely diverges from the language of Scripture in 
 its attempts to exi)lain the revelations of Holy Scripture. For 
 the first 600 years of Christianity, at least, this creed did not 
 exist, or was unknown. The universal Church of Christ 
 diffused over tlie whole world was able to maintain the faith 
 Avhich she had received, against all gainsayers, without the aid 
 of such a document. Early in the fourth century, however, 
 the assaults made by the Arian deniers of Christ's deity were 
 so vehement and so dangerous that it was thought necessary 
 to have a more distinct expression of the faith of the Catholic 
 Church on this vital doctrine than existed previously. Accord- 
 ingly the Emperor Constantino the Great summoned that 
 famous Council of Nice which gives its name to the Nicene 
 creed. Three hundred and eighteen of the most eminent bishops 
 from all quarters of the world, Europe, Asia, and Africa, met 
 together at Nictea in Bithynia, and they agreed upon the Nicene 
 creed, the chief novelty of it being those clauses which express 
 accurately the proper Godhead of our Lord Jesus Christ, " God 
 of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten not 
 made, being of one substance [oixoova-tov) with the Father. " These 
 clauses, and especially the last phrase invented and supported 
 by the great Athanasius, then a deacon iti the church of Alex- 
 andria, were adopted by the whole Church, in general council
 
 24 
 
 assembled, as the final decision of the Arian controversy, and 
 the final expression of the Church's belief in the true Godhead 
 of the Only Begotten Son. This creed was again promulgated 
 by the General Council of Constantinople (a.d. 8S1), with the 
 additional clauses which follow the words "I believe in the 
 Holy Ghost" in our present Nicene creed. And a.d. 431, 
 at the third general council (that of Ephesus) the bishops 
 assembled not only gave their assent to the confession of faith 
 issued by the Council of Nice, but expressly forbad anyone to 
 bring forward, or write, or compose any other creed besides that 
 laid down by the Nicene fathers. And so matters remained, 
 except that the additions made by the Council of Constan- 
 tinople were by general consent adopted and incorporated into 
 the Nicene Creed. But not only so. It is well known that 
 the great leaders of the Catholic party, immediately after the 
 Council of Nice, were most firmly opposed to any addition to 
 or alteration of the Nicene Creed, and no one more so than 
 Athanasius himself, Ceillier writes thus (he is showing the 
 improbability of Athanasius being the author of the creed) : 
 ^' It is well known how firmly this holy bishop always opposed 
 the making any fresh formulas of faith after those agreed upon 
 at Niciea, and how often he reproached the Arians with the 
 great number and variety of their creeds. It is well known, 
 also, that at the Council of Sardica he approved and signed the 
 decree there passed that for the future no fresh creed should be 
 made, for fear the Nicene creed should be thought imperfect 
 and insuflScient." As a matter of fact, no fresh symbol has 
 ever since been enunciated by a general council of the Church, 
 unless we admit those put forth at Trent and lately at Rome. 
 
 Well, then, here we have a decided opinion expressed both 
 by general and also by particular councils, and warmly espoused 
 and approved by no less a person than Athanasius himself, that 
 the creed of the Council of Nice ought to be the final expres- 
 sion of the Church's faith, and that it is inexpedient in the
 
 25 
 
 interests of the Cliurcli, ani4 of the faith of which she is tlie 
 keeper, to add any fresh formula to the Church's creed. I am 
 no stickler for the infallibility of councils or of bishops, even 
 though they be canonised. But, to say the least, they may 
 have been right in their view of the matter, and even if 
 mistaken, their motives were good. They may have thought 
 that a creed departing as little as possible from the very words 
 of Scripture would have more weight with heretics and others 
 than one of which the phraseology was altogether human ; and 
 I judge that they thought so because it was an objection of the 
 opponents of the Athanasian party that even the b\xoov(nov was 
 a new phrase not found in Scripture, and Eusebius himself tells 
 us that he the more readily assented to the anathematising 
 Arius because the phrases he used concerning the Son of God 
 were nowhere to be found in Scripture. And if they thought 
 so I do not see that subsequent events have not justified their 
 thought ; because no doubt the phraseology of the Athanasian 
 creed, powerful and accurate as it is, has had a tendency to 
 provoke dissent from those who in matters of faith and mystery 
 are more disposed to bow to the authority of the word of God 
 than to that of the Church. Evidently, too, the tacit adoption 
 of the Athanasian Creed, as a further development of the 
 Catholic faith, by the whole Western Church, instead of abid- 
 ing by the finality of the Nicene Creed, facilitated the intro- 
 duction of new articles of faith at Trent, and at Rome under 
 Pius IX. ; "which would have been impossible had the Nicene 
 Creed been still considered as the final expression of the 
 Church's faith, in accordance with the judgment of Athanasius. 
 However, what 1 would insist upon is that it is at least possible 
 that the view of the councils and of St. Athanasius was a right 
 one, and that it is not fair to tax those who share it with being 
 Socinians, or latitudinarians, or enemies of the fiiith. 
 
 II. The second point is the propriety or expediency of the 
 damnatory clauses. Now, to hear the language of some of
 
 26 
 
 their defenders, one would think that the notion of a creed with- 
 out the support of an anathema against all who did not accept 
 every statement of that creed was in itself a heresy, and a thing 
 utterly unknown to the Church. But what are the historical 
 facts ? The Council of Nice put forth their creed, the faith of 
 the Catholic Church. They simply recited the articles of belief 
 which, as Eusehius writes, they had received from the bishops 
 who preceded them, which they had been taught as catechumens, 
 which they had professed at their baptism, which they had 
 learnt out of Holy Scripture, and which both as priests and 
 bisliops they had ever taught ; only with the addition of the 
 oixoova-iov (of o?ie substance). And then, having declared the 
 Catholic faith, they added, after the exposition of the faith {ixeTo. 
 Tijv TTiaTLv), the anathemas against the various heretical sayings 
 of Arius and his companions. " Those who say that there was 
 a time when Christ was not, or that He is of a different sub- 
 stance from the Father, or that He was created," and so on, 
 " the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematises." 
 And so the succeeding Councils. They promulgated and con- 
 firmed the Nicene Creed, but they introduced no threats of 
 damnation against those who did not accept it. There was the 
 creed in its simple majesty. So has the Church received the 
 faith, so does the Church hold it, so does the Church teach it. 
 And when the creed came to be used as a part of the office of 
 the Church, it was recited in its simplicity without anathema 
 and without threat. The Church was content that it should be 
 so for at least 600 years. Why, then, should we now depart 
 from the Catholic usage of so many centuries, and both use 
 a new creed and intertwine the profession of our own faith 
 with the condemnation of all who in the smallest point differ 
 from it ? 
 
 These, my Reverend Brethren, are some of the considerations 
 which have occurred to me in connection with this difficult and 
 perplexing question. I do not give them as conclusive upon
 
 27 
 
 the subject, but I venture to commend them to your calm 
 reflection. 
 
 Turning next to a diff'erent class of subjects, I wish to say a 
 few words on the vital question of elementary education. The 
 persistent and vehement effort that has been and is still being- 
 made to deprive the children of England of a religious educa- 
 tion is one of the greatest jiortents of the age. Should it 
 succeed I do not think any one living can calculate the disas- 
 trous consequences to our native land. In spite of the irreli- 
 gion and the immorality which so often shock us both in town 
 and country, there is a great amount of religious knowledge, — 
 knowledge of Scripture, of the Church Catechism, of the Ten 
 Commandments, of Prayers and Hymns, — diffused amongst 
 our people, which has, at different times of their life, and under 
 various circumstances, upon the whole, an enormous influence. 
 This is due to our schools, and to nothing but our schools. The 
 attempt to deprive the children of our working classes of this 
 immense blessing, whatever be the motives of those engaged 
 in it, I look upon as one of the wickedest enterprises ever 
 undertaken by a large party in a Christian land. That any 
 man who believes the Gospel, or who believes in God, can 
 stand up and look at the 20,000 or 30,000 schools in England, 
 where the children of the less favoured classes are receiving 
 that Christian training which alone can supply them with 
 guidance and with comfort in the future trials of life, and then 
 form the resolution, " I will leave no stone unturned to deprive 
 every one of those children of the religious training which 
 they now have," is, to my mind, an inconceivable cruelty. And 
 for men to band themselves together in leagues and societies to 
 make it impossible for poor members of the Church of England 
 to have their children brought up in the faith which they love 
 and believe, is an act of tyranny and oppression more fit for old 
 Spain under the Inquisition, or the Spanish Netherlands, than 
 for a laud of freedom and toleration like England. It strikes
 
 28 
 
 me, too, as an ungrateful return for the conscience clause which 
 was conceded by the Church to the Non-Conformists. It is for 
 you, the laity of the Church of England, to resist this iniqui- 
 tous attempt, and to aid your clergy to the utmost of your 
 power to maintain that system of elementary Education by 
 which, with perfect respect to the rights of conscience in 
 others, religious education according to the tenets of the Churcli 
 of England shall be secured to the Church children in every 
 parish in the land. And you must begin each with his own 
 parish. It will require an effort, doubtless, and a measure of 
 self-sacrifice. But the object is worth an effort, and worth a 
 sacrifice too. If others are strong in the attack of our most 
 cherished institutions, you must be strong in their defence. 
 Hitherto we have kept rate schools out of the Diocese witli 
 tolerable success, which implies the adequate enlargement and 
 improvement of our Church schools. I find that, from 1870 to 
 March 1873, not less than £2632 have been voted in eighty-one 
 several grants from the special Fund and the Diocesan Board 
 Fund to assist in enabling schools to meet the requirements 
 of the Government, implying an outlay of £40,000 at least, 
 besides the numerous schools which the landed proprietors built 
 or enlarged at their own cost. I do not think there are six 
 rate-sujjported schools in the whole Diocese as yet. But I am 
 afraid of their increase. It is more difficult to keep up the 
 steady annual subscriptions for the schools than to make one 
 effort to build them. And then if one or two parishioners 
 refuse to subscribe to the denominational school, the others 
 feel it hard to pay extra because some do not pay at all, and 
 there is a great temptation to say. We will have a Rate, and 
 then all must pay alike. I ask you, my lay brethren, to resist 
 this temptation. Remember that a School-rate means, in the 
 long run, no Religion in the school, that it means, in the long 
 run, down with the Church of England, and, in the future, an 
 infidel population.
 
 29 
 
 In order, however, that onr Church scliools ma}' hold their 
 ground and supply the Educational religious wants of the 
 people, it is absolutely necessary that they be good and efficient 
 schools. Hence we have felt the necessity of supplying, what 
 the Government Inspector is no longer permitted to supply, 
 inspection in religious knowledge, and for this end a paid 
 Diocesan Inspector. 'The Rev. William Michell was appointed 
 by me Diocesan Inspector of Schools, and has entered upon 
 his second year of office. I have heard but one opinion as to 
 the value and excellent effect of this inspection from those 
 whose schools Mr. Michell has visited, and there is every hope 
 that the prize scheme which is being organised will tend to 
 give a most useful stimulus to both teachers and scholars. I 
 earnestly ask the steady assistance of the laity to maintain the 
 fund for the payment of the Diocesan Inspector. It has been 
 an immense aid to the efficiency of the scheme that the unpaid 
 inspectors have continued their labours in connection with Mr. 
 Michell ; and I beg to tender them my cordial thanks for their 
 most useful and efficient assistance, without which we should 
 have been in a fix. 
 
 I have spoken of the danger of an infidel population. The 
 fearful growth of infidelity is one of the most alarming signs 
 of the times. Together with much earnest and serious reli- 
 gion, there is a terrible increase of unblushing, boasting, unbelief 
 and atheism. Men of science, scholars, members of Parlia- 
 ment, as well as large sections of the lower classes in London 
 and our great towns_, are professed infidels. The press teems 
 with infidel publications, and in what is called society in Lon- 
 don Christianity is often openly run down. The fruits of infi- 
 delity are sure to follow : anarchy, corruption of morals, and 
 crime. When the restraining and enlightening jiower of the 
 fear of God is removed from the mind and heart of men 
 demoralisation is very rapid. The great French Revolution 
 was a memorable instance. We all know how bloodshed, lust^
 
 30 
 
 and resistance to all government, sprang up, under tlie influence 
 of atheism, with rank luxuriance. It will be so in England to 
 a certainty if atheism obtains a solid footing among us. 
 JMmighty God prevent it by the Power of His Holy Spirit! 
 But we, my Reverend Brethren, must do our part. It will be 
 well for those among us who have the ability to direct our 
 studies this way, so as to be able to meet the intellectual diffi- 
 culties of our misguided brethren, and to refute their arguments, 
 and to fortify the faith of our own flocks. Especially should 
 we be careful not to load Christianity with difficulties which do 
 not really belong to it : not to broach as revealed Truth what is 
 really only a figment of men : not to exalt faith at the expense 
 of reason : not to cultivate a superstitious turn of mind. I 
 have often thought that one of the heaviest charges that can be 
 brought against the Church of Rome is the immense encourage- 
 ment she has given to infidelity by her system of lying wonders. 
 By setting before the minds of her people as truths of Chris- 
 tianity, traditions, legends, miracles, impostures, docti-ines, 
 hopes, promises, which have no truth in them, she n\aj have 
 deluded many into a superstitious belief, but she has made 
 among thinking men an infinite number of infidels. Look at 
 France, Spain, Italy ! When men find out that they have been 
 deceived, that their teachers have tauglit them lies for truth, 
 that what had been given to them as doctrines from Heaven were 
 the corrupt inventions of deceived or interested men, they are 
 very apt to fall into scepticism, and to reject truth along with error. 
 Pious frauds, and craft, and contrivance, never succeed in the long 
 run : they do worse than not succeed : they endanger the very 
 truths which they are intended to support. It should therefore 
 be a prime object with every true minister of God's word to 
 teach as truth nothing but what is certainly true. We have 
 no need, and we have no right, to handle the word of God 
 deceitfully. By manifestation of the truth, and the truth only, 
 to every man's conscience, we can best advance the woik of
 
 31 
 
 God. The Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, loo, addresses 
 itself to the intellect as much as to the sentiments and affection 
 of man. Beware of addressing the aln-drim?, the sense, only 
 or mainly, lest when the hay and stubble is burnt there remain 
 nothing solid and durable behind. 
 
 But there is another thing which I wish to say in connection 
 with the infidelity, the waxing, strengthening infidelity, of 
 which we now see, I fear, the beginning only. How immensely 
 important it is that, in the face of such an invasion, Christians 
 should be united. While we are wrane^lino: about the vainest 
 trifles, the very foundations, not of Christianity alone but of 
 all religion are being attacked by the apostles of atheism. In 
 the face of such a danger the Church must be united if she 
 would be strong. It is not a question of copes or no copes, 
 candles or no candles, water in the chalice or no water, but 
 Christ or no Christ, God or no God, Eternal life, or the dog's 
 death. Let those who hold the great truths be united, and let 
 them be careful not to put stumbling-blocks in their brothers' 
 way. It is surely not an unreasonable hope that in the face of 
 the great danger of infidelity some — nay, many — of our Non- 
 conformist brethren who have been separated from us by trivial 
 differences, may be disposed to return to the Church of their 
 fathers, and join us in the great struggle against the tyranny of 
 secularism. We need, therefore, be very careful not to raise 
 needless obstacles to their return. 
 
 Looking back at the time that has elapsed since my last 
 visitation, I find that besides the outlay for schools above re- 
 ferred to, twenty-three grants for church restoration, or build- 
 ing, have been made by the Diocesan Board, amounting in the 
 aggregate to £1580, and representing an expenditure of above 
 £35,000. I have assisted at the opening, after restoration of 
 some kind, of about thirty-three churches. 
 
 Besides the ordinary work of the Diocese, I have thought 
 that missions, of which I had some experience in the Diocese
 
 32 
 
 of Ely, might be advantageously introJuced among us. I have 
 accordingly given such help as I was able to give" to missions, 
 first at Taunton and the neighbourhood, then at Wells and 
 Glastonbury, and last Advent at Yeovil and the neighbourhood. 
 I think they were productive generally of marked good results. 
 The services were very well attended, and in many instances by 
 persons who were seldom or never seen in church, and interest 
 was aroused in the great subject of Christianity. If health and 
 strength are given to me, I hope from time to time to hold 
 missions m other parts of the Diocese, and especially in the 
 towns, the populations of which are more apt to escape the 
 ordinary parochial ministrations than those of the country. I 
 shall be truly obliged to any of my brethren who will organise 
 a good mission, and call me in to assist in it. 
 
 I may also mention in this connection a series of sermons on 
 infidelity preached at the Abbey Church at Bath last autumn, 
 and organised by the Rector of Bath. I am told they produced 
 a considerable impression, and regret that they were not pub- 
 lished. 
 
 I put into an appendix the returns of the number of com- 
 municants extracted from the Rural Dean's returns, and also of 
 the number of persons confirmed, and I take this opportunity 
 of returning my warm thanks to the Rural Deans for their 
 invaluable services. They have the thanks, too, I am sure, of 
 the whole Diocese. 
 
 Looking back at tlie agreeable incidents of the past year 
 (and 1 shall not allude to any disagreeable ones — requiescant in 
 pace), I would single out the observance in this Diocese of the 
 20th December as a day of intercessory prayer on behalf of 
 missions. The observance exceeded my most sanguine antici- 
 pations. I believe there was scarcely a parish where it was not 
 observed somehow, and in a vast number of parishes the obser- 
 vance was of a very marked and earnest kind. As an evidence 
 of this I may mention that there were applied for of the
 
 33 
 
 Private Prayers and Meditations prepared by me 25,466, of 
 which unfortunately we were only able to supply 8000 copies. 
 Of the pastoral addresses 10,030 were applied for, and 2500 were 
 supplied. Of the special services for the Diocese of Bath and 
 Wells 38,200 were supplied, and in addition to these many of 
 the services for the Diocese of Canterbury were used in the 
 Diocese, of which I have no return. 
 
 I hope that my brethren of the clergy will not let the inte- 
 rest die away among their parishioners. I shall be very glad 
 to receive any suggestions as to the best way of keeping alive 
 this interest and turning it to account in the support of our 
 great missionary societies. 
 
 Looking forward to the future, whatever difficulties or trials 
 may be in store for us, I trust that the Bishop and Clergy and 
 Laity of this Diocese will ever be found working lovingly 
 together hand in hand, and standing in the very front of the 
 battle against infidelity, worldliness, and sin. Let us of the 
 clergy especially remember that our Lord has given us a great 
 work to do for His glory, and the weal of His Church. Our 
 pleasant palaces and our comfortable parsonage-houses, and 
 our endowments, great or small, are not given us that we may 
 lounge away our time easily and without care, but that we may 
 be able to give ourselves up entirely to our Master's service, 
 and to the service of His dear spouse the Church. Can there 
 be a nobler work entrusted to any child of man, than that of 
 reclaiming his fellow-men from sin and death, and diffusing 
 around him, by word and by example, the glorious light of the 
 Gospel of Christ ? But when we look our work in the face, 
 even in a country like England, where Christianity has so long 
 been established, it seems almost hopeless, and beyond the 
 strength of man to accomplish. And so it is. " Who is suffi- 
 cient for these things?" When we think of the ignorance 
 which has to be pierced through before the sword of the spirit 
 pricks the heart, when we think of the inveterate habits of sin
 
 34 
 
 — drunkenness, hist, dishonesty, lawlessness, — whicli have to 
 be disj^laced ; when we think of the sluggishness, the lethargy, 
 the carelessness, the inditFerence to spiritual things, which have 
 to be attacked and routed ; when we think of the sturdy world- 
 liness, the covetousness, the carnal-mindedness, which have to 
 be forced aside for the love of Christ to enter in, and of the 
 opposition and contradiction and resistance which have to be 
 encountered by those who preach God's Word fearlessly and 
 faithfully, we might well shrink from the task which belongs to 
 us, if we did not remember who it is that says to us, " My 
 grace is sufficient for thee." But remembering this we do not 
 shrink, and with God's help we never will draw back, till we 
 have finished our course with joy, and the ministry which we 
 have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the Gospel of the 
 grace of God. And you, my brethren of the laity, will I hope 
 give us your countenance and help. You will work with us 
 and for us in your proper sphere, and so shall the pleasure of 
 the Lord prosper in our hands. Labouring through good 
 report and through evil report, in sunshine and in storm, we 
 shall at least be witnesses for Christ in our day and generation. 
 But haply we shall be more than witnesses. God will perhaps 
 vouchsafe so to bless and own our several ministrations, that 
 I in my Diocese, and you, dear brethren, in your several 
 parishes, shall have much people to be our joy and crown of 
 rejoicing at the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ. And so, 
 when those unhappy men who made shipwreck of their faith, 
 and denied the Lord who bought them, shall be overwhelmed 
 with shame in the presence of the Lord when He comes in His 
 Glory, we, if by His grace we have been steadfast, unmovable, 
 always abounding in the work of the Lord — we, I say, shall be 
 unspeakably blessed, for we shall take our several places in 
 the glorified Church of God, and shall ever be with our 
 Lord.
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 P. 11, 1. i. — It is difficult, if not impossible, to express condemna- 
 tion of the practice, so alien to tlie English Church, of adoring the 
 Sacrament, in language that will not provoke the cavils of those 
 ■who practise it. But the truth is that they who contend for a literal 
 interpretation of our Lord's words. This is my Body, and yet indig- 
 nantly deny that they worship the Bread, or what seems to be the 
 Bread, are most inconsistent. If the Bread and Wine set on the 
 Lord's Table are the Body and Blood of the Lord (in the full sense 
 which such predication is capable of conveying and without «wi/ limi- 
 tation) and if the Body and Blood of the Lord are proper objects of 
 worship, it inevitably follows that the Bread and Wine ought to be 
 worshipped. There is no possible escape from this conclusion. 
 
 But when those whose instincts shrink fi-om worshipping the 
 elements seek to justify the adoration which they off'er (as they say) 
 towards the elements, as the locality within the limits of which 
 Christ's Presence is situate, they are forced to invent a new phraseo- 
 logy which has no warrant whatever, as to its words or its sense, in 
 Holy Scripture, and which involves a wide departure from the literal 
 meaning of the words which are the foundation of the whole theory. 
 For our Lord did not say I am in the Bread, or, under the Bread, or, 
 my Presence is in the Bread, but, This is my Body. To speak of an 
 objective Presence of Christ, or a real Presence of Christ, in the 
 elements, and of such a Presence distinct from the elements, as an 
 object of worship, is a purely human interpretation, and is as much 
 an explaining away of the literal meaning of the words * This is my 
 Body ' as the Zuinglian or any other explanation is. 
 
 But if it is sought to justify such phrases, and the consequent 
 worship of Christ in the elements, by the language or practice of the 
 
 D 2
 
 36 
 
 early Church, such an attempt is an absolute failure, because it is 
 PERFECTLY CERTAIN that during the three first centuries at least — 
 one might say eight or ten centuries — worship was not given to the 
 elements, or to any Presence of Christ in the elements. The 
 acknowledged silence of the Liturgies is conclusive on the point. 
 It is absolutely impossible that both in their language, and in the 
 minute rubrical directions which they contain, a complete silence in 
 regard to such worship should be maintained, if it had been the 
 practice of the Church to render it. It is equally impossible that 
 not one single allusion to such worship should be found in any 
 writer for the first three centuries and upwards, if during those 
 centuries the elements, or Christ's Presence in the elements, were 
 habitually adored. 
 
 To confound the adoration of our Lord in Heaven, which the 
 thaukful remembrance of His death in the Holy Eucharist must 
 call forth in every devout communicant, with the adoration of the 
 Sacrament itself, as Mr. Keble does in his singularly weak and pain- 
 ful work on Eucharistical Adoration, is the part either of a very 
 confused intellect, or of a very unfair controversialist. 
 
 I have said that there is absolutely no trace of adoration of the 
 Sacrament in the three first centuries and upwards. Late in the 
 fourth century we can perceive an incipient change in the language 
 used in regard to the Eucharist : a growing tendency to use inflated 
 and exaggerated language, which culminated in the doctrine of tran- 
 substantiation as decreed by the Fourth Lateran Council a.d. 1215, 
 and in the elevation and worship of the Host which came in about the 
 same time. The Arian controversy had probably something to do 
 with this change. The ancient simple forms, and the simple lan- 
 guage of ancient Creeds and Liturgies, were deemed insufficient to 
 express the Incarnation and Deity of the Lord Jesus. And so a new 
 doctrine of the Eucharist was developed, and about the same time, 
 and for the same purpose, a new doctrine concerning the Blessed 
 Virgin, " the Mother of God," was brought in, to the great injury of 
 the Church, and of the Gospel of which she was the guardian. But 
 a careful consideration of the passages adduced by Mr, Keble will 
 show how weak the evidence is even in those later centuries. The 
 passage from Cyril of Jerusalem {Cateches. Mystagog. v. xviii, xix.), 
 taken in connection with the whole Catechesis is decisive evidence 
 against adoration. Because the form of the Catechesis, which is a
 
 recapitulation of all that was done at the Eucharist — the Prayers, 
 the actions, the rubrical directions of the deacons, — makes it simply 
 impossible that if so important an action as the adoration of the 
 Sacrament was performed, the mention of it should be omitted. 
 Now, in the account of receiving the Bread (Sect, xviii.) there is no 
 mention of the kind ; and in the account of receiving the cup (Sect. 
 xix.) what is said is not the least more than might be said to an Eng- 
 lish communicant : " After you have communicated in the Body of 
 Christ, draw near to the cup of His Blood, not stretching out your 
 hands, but inclining (ninrTcov) yourself, and saying amen, adoringly 
 and reverentially (rpoTro) npoa-Kwrjcrecos /cat o-e/3d(T/iaros)." The almost 
 duplicate passages from St. Ambrose and St. Augustine, are the only 
 ones which at all favour Mr. Keble's views. The two authors are 
 expounding Ps. xcix. 5, after their fashion, and are puzzled by the lxx. 
 version, npoaKwelre tS otottoS/o) twv ttoSwv avrov, wliich they Understand 
 to mean Worshij) His Footstool. The explanation given is that God's 
 footstool is the earth (Isai. Ixvi, 1), and that the earth means *'the 
 Flesh of Christ, which to this day we adore in the mysteries ; " or, as 
 St. Augustine has it, " He gave that Flesh to us to eat . . . and no 
 one eateth that Flesh unless he hath first worshipped." But though 
 these expressions would fall in very well with " sacramental adora- 
 tion," if it could be shown from other quarters to have prevailed at 
 that time, they are manifestly insuflBcient, isolated as they are, to 
 prove it. They would find an adequate explanation in the adoration 
 that every devout communicant must needs pay to our Lord at the 
 time of celebrating '* the mysteries," and in that confession of the 
 Godhead of Christ which is a necessaiy qualification for worthy 
 Communion. 
 
 I may add that the above singular exposition of Ps. xcix. 5, by two 
 such eminent fathers as Ambrose and Augustine, may well teach us 
 caution in defen'ing too much to single expressions. Moreover, 
 Cyril of Jenisalem's language concerning the conversion of the 
 Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of Christ must be quali- 
 fied by the language which he uses of meats offered to idols, and 
 concerning chrism. " For as the Bread and the Wine of the Euchar- 
 ist before the holy invocation of the adorable Trinity were mere 
 bread and wine, but after the invocation the Bread becomes the 
 Body of Christ and the Wine His Blood, in like wise such meats 
 being in their own nature mere meats {\na ovra) by the invocation of
 
 38 
 
 devils become abominable (^(^rjXa) " Cat. 3Iijst. i. sec. 4. Concerning 
 chrism he says, " See that you do not consider it as bare oil {^Ckbv). 
 For as the Bread of the Eucharist after the invocation of the Holy 
 Spirit is no longer mere bread ()^it6s) but the Body of Christ, so also 
 this Holy ointment is no longer bare or, so to speak, common oint- 
 ment, after the Invocation, but the gift (xapia-fin) of Christ, and that 
 which by the presence of the Holy Ghost works in you the participa- 
 tion of His divine Nature (eeoTT^Tos) . . . The body indeed is 
 anointed with the ointment, but the soul is sanctified by the Holy 
 Life-giving Spirit," iii. 3. 
 
 P. 11, 1. 5. — Confession and Absolution in the Church of the first 
 seven or eight centuries were public acts in the face of the congre- 
 gation, and formed part of the public discipline of the Church. 
 They related to grave offences, such as lapse into idolatry, murder, 
 adultery, or the like. Private confession, as in the Church of England, 
 was exceptional; audit was not followed by absolution, but by "ghostly 
 counsel and advice": as in the pseudo-Epistle of Clement of Eome to 
 St. James, it is said, "ut ab ipso (the Priest) per verbum Dei et 
 consilium salubre curetur :" which seems to be the original of the 
 phrase in the first exhortation in the office for the Holy Communion 
 in the Book of Common Prayer. Confession was made obligatory by 
 the Fourth Lateran Council, a.d. 1215. Thus those who are endea- 
 vouring to force auricular confession upon the Anglican Church are 
 bringing in not a Catholic but a Romish usage. 
 
 Ih. 1. 6. — Purgatory. Of course this is not meant of the 
 private speculations of Origen and others, but of Church doctrine. 
 
 lb. 1. 24.— Offices, &c. The Friesrs Prayer Boole and the 
 Diredorhmi Anglicammi are the two books referred to here and at 
 p. 12. Since this Charge was delivered I have become acquainted 
 with another book of the same kind, " The English Catholic's Vade 
 Mecum," hound up iciih Uie Book of Common Prayer. In the Preface 
 the compiler recommends that " a picture or figure of the Crucifixion, 
 Christ in His Mother's arms, &c." be placed in the room used for 
 Prayers, and that the Office '^ be said all kneeling or standing with 
 their faces turned towards the sacred object mentioned." He notes 
 that " it has become so customary among English Catholics to insert 
 the names of Blessed Mary and all saints in the Confiteor," that it is 
 inserted in his book. Accordingly Me read at [). 2, " I confess to 
 Almighty God, to Blessed Mary, and to all saints tiiut I have sinned
 
 39 
 
 exceedingly, &c. "Wherefore I beg that Blessed ]\Iary and all saints 
 may pray to the Lord onr God for me." At p. 13," Let the inter- 
 cession of St. Mary and all Thy saints assist us to obtain help and 
 salvation from Thee, Lord." At p. 14, s. 99, is given a method 
 of " assisting at . . . the Holy Communion commonly called The 
 Mass . . , for hearers," i.e., for non -communicants. " I appear 
 before Thee to offer unto Thee by the hands of Thy Priest the 
 sacrifice of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ in union 
 with the sacrifice offered by the same our Lord at the last Supper 
 and upon the Altar of the Cross : L To the glory of Thy Name, &c. 
 5. For the remission of the sins of all Christians, living or dead." 
 At p. 17, " Reverencing the memory of the glorious and ever-virgin 
 Mary, Mother of our God and Lord Jesus Christ, and of Thy 
 Blessed Apostles and Isfartyrs, and of all Thy Saints, by whose good 
 deeds and prayers graat that we may be defended, &c." At p. 30. 
 Examination of consci mce. 1. Sins against God. . . Have I broken 
 my fast before Comr mnion ? . . . 3. Have I performed my last 
 penance ?" P. 39. * '0 my Jesus grant that all Thy blessed angels 
 and saints, and, above all, Thy glorious Mother, the ever-virgin 
 Mary, who face to face behold Thee . . . may bestow upon me the 
 assistance of their prayers and intercessions, &c." P. 42, In a 
 hymn to " the Blessed Sacrament" we read, " Had I but Mary's 
 sinless heart, to love Thee with, my dearest King, &c." and the 
 refrain of the Hymn is " Sweet Sacrament we Thee adore ! Oh 
 make us love Thee more and more," P. 53. " I thank Thee, Divine 
 Priest, for that every day Thou dost ofler Thyself upon our altars, 
 in adoration and homage to the most Blessed Trinity." Pp. 61, 62, 
 Litany of the saints and angels, " By the glory Thou bestowest 
 upon her (Mary) in Heaven, by her prayers and intercessions . . . 
 By their (the saints) continual prayers and intercessions . . . 
 Good Lord deliver us . . . That it may please Thee to aid and 
 defend us by the Prayers and Intercessions of the Holy Mother of 
 God ... to grant us to receive benefit from the prayers of Thy 
 blessed Martyrs, Confessors, Virgins and of all saints." P. 68. 
 Litany of the most Holy Sacrament. " Perpetual sacrifice, Pure 
 oblation, . . . Supernatural Bread, Word made Flesh, Sacred 
 Victim, Chalice of Benediction, . . . most high and adorable Sacra- 
 ment, most holy of all Sacrifices, True Propitiation for the living 
 and the dead, Bread made Flesh . . . have mercy upon us." 
 Pp. 77, 78. " Rosary of the most Holy Name of Jesus. The five
 
 40 
 
 mysteries of the first part." At the mention of each mystery Jesun 
 Son of David have mercy upon t(s, is directed to be repeated ten 
 times— in all fifty times ! Then follow the mysteries of the second 
 and third part, each followed by an invocation to be repeated ten 
 times — in all one hundred times ! At p. 83. " Prayers to the five 
 wounds," each Prayer followed by Our Father, and " Eail Mary:' 
 P. 108. Feast of our Lady. " It is meet that with joyful minds 
 we should bless, praise, and magnify Thee on this commemoration 
 of the Blessed and glorious ever-virgin, &c. Blessed is the Virgin 
 Mary, the Mother of God, . . . lo she is exalted above the quires of 
 angels, there may she pray for us to the Lord our God." P. 114. 
 A hymn " to the Holy Mother of God." " Ave Maria, Blessed 
 Maid, &c." Another, " None can hope a worthy anthem to that 
 Virgin's name to raise," &c. P. 117. Hymn " to all angels." *' Let 
 Mary, Mother of our God, be o'er us, all round about us be the 
 angel chorus, &c." P. 120. "Let Mary, Motlicr of God, pray for 
 us sinners now and at the hour of death." P. 143. " The Angelus. 
 N.B. — It is a common custom among Catholics to recite the follow- 
 ing prayers thrice a day. . . The angel of the Lord, &c. Hail Mary. 
 Behold the Handmaid of the Lord, &c. Hail Mary. And tlie 
 Word was made Flesh, &c. Hail Mary." 
 
 These are a few specimens of " Catholic " teaching. The reader 
 will judge whether I have spoken too severely of the attempt to 
 bring back the doctrines of the Church of Rome. 
 
 P. 16, 1. 18. — The Church's definition of a sacrament is conclusive 
 against her holding the notion of an objective Presence of the Body 
 and Blood of Christ in the Bread and Wine apart from reception. 
 A sacrament is defined to be " an outward visible sign of an inward 
 spiritual grace given unto us ; " i.e., it is a sign of something which 
 is internal to ourselves : a real thing, no doubt, most real, but 
 inward ; something which we feed upon in our hearts by faitli with 
 thanksgiving. The Bread and Wine are the outward, visible sign, 
 the Body and Blood of Christ, as the food and sustenance of the 
 soul, are the inward spiritual grace. That which is on the Paten, or 
 in the hands, is not inward. And therefore the 28th Article most 
 truly declares that Transuhstantiation. . . overthroweth the nature of 
 a sacrament. And so, for the very same reason, does the doctrine 
 of the objective Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ in the 
 Bread and Wine apart from reception.
 
 41 
 
 P. 16, 1. 33. — In the Ordo Romanus the Priest prays thus : 
 Suscipe Sancte Pater . . . hanc immaculatam Hostiam, quam ego 
 indignus famulus tuus offero tibi Deo meo vivo et vero pro innu- 
 merabilibus peccatis et offensionibus et negligentiis meis . . . et 
 pro omnibus fidelibus Christianis vivis atque defunctis. And again 
 after consecration, Offerimus prasclarse majestati tuas de tuis donis ac 
 datis Hostiam puram, hostiam sanctam, hostiam immaculatam, &c. 
 Still on the whole it is most remarkable how little in the service 
 itself is said directly of the sacrifice as being a propitiatory sacrifice, 
 or as being the offering up of Christ, doubtless because the ancient 
 Liturgies are in the main adhered to. But in the acts of the 
 Council of Trent the language is very different. Thus in the Acts 
 of the 22nd Session, Cap. ii., we read Quoniam in divino hoc 
 sacrificio . . . idem ille Christus continetur, et incruente immolatur, 
 qui in ara crucis seipsum cruente obtulit, docet sancta S}Tiodus 
 sacrificium istud vere propitiatorium esse . . . Quare non solum 
 pro fidelium vivorum peccatis . . . sed et pro defunctis . . . ofFertur. 
 Again in the first Canon de Sacrificio Missce. Si quis dixerit in Missa 
 non oflPeiTi Deo verum sacrificium . . . anathema sit. Can. ii. Si 
 quis dixerit Christum non instituisse apostolos sacerdotes . . . ut 
 oflferrent corpus et sanguinem suum ; anathema sit. Can. iii. Si 
 quis dixerit, Missa sacrificium tantum esse . . , nudam commemo- 
 rationem sacrificii in cruce peracti, non autem propitiatorium ; vel 
 soli prodesse sumenti, neque pro vivis et defunctis . . . ofiferri 
 debere ; anathema sit. And in the following decree, the mass is 
 described as tremendum mysterimn, quo vivifica ilia hostia, qua Deo 
 Patri reconciliati sumus, in altari per sacerdotes quotidie immolatm-. 
 So again in the 1st Canon de Sacramento Ordinis. Si quis dixerit . . . 
 non esse potestatem (for Priests) consecrandi et offerendi verumf 
 corpus et sanguinem Domini . . . anathema sit. 
 
 In the Catechism, Qu^est. LXXVL, we read — Sine uUa dubitatione 
 docendum est . . . sacrosanctum missas sacrificium esse non solum 
 . . . nudam commemorationem sacrificii quod in cruce factum est, 
 sed vere propitiatorium sacrificium quo Deus placatus et propitius 
 redditur. And Qusestio LXXYII. explains that it is a Propitiation for 
 the sins of the quick and the dead. 
 
 P. 18, 1. 4.— Mr. Keble fully admits that " the primitive Litur- 
 gies are almost or altogether silent as to any worship of Christ's 
 Body and Blood after consecration. We find in them neither
 
 42 
 
 any form of prayer addressed in special to His holy Humanity so 
 present, nor any rubric enjoining adoration inward or outward." 
 Euchar. Ador. p. 114. But the Roman Canon is full of rubi-ics 
 enjoining such adoration. Thus in the Prayer of Consecration after 
 the words Hoc est enim Corpus meum, the rubric says, Statim 
 Hostiam consecratam genitflexus adorat, surgit, ostetidit populo . . . 
 iterum adorat. Again after the words in mci memoriam facietis, the 
 rubric says, Gemiflexus adorat . . . ostendit populo . . . et itertmi 
 adorat. And repeatedly the direction is given Genuflectlt. The 
 absence of any such rubrics, amidst the copious rubrics of the old 
 Liturgies, is a distinct proof of the absence of such adoration in 
 the early Church, and a proof that those who are introducing these 
 genuflexions and prostrations into our English service are intro- 
 ducing Popish corruptions, not Catholic usages. 
 
 lb. 1. 11. — I have condensed the account given by Justin Martyr 
 till I come to the important words which Bread and Wine down to 
 the Incarnate Jesus, which I have rendered into English as faithfully 
 as I could. The Greek rmis thus : ov yap ds Koivbv aprov ov8e kolvov 
 
 TTopa Tavra Xap^dvofiev' uXX ov rponov bia \6yov Qtov crapKonoirjdeis Irjcrovs 
 Xpiarrbs, 6 aaTrjp fjpav, km aapKa koi aipa vnep crcoTrjp'ias rjpav ecr^ev, ovras 
 Koi TTjv St fi>XV^ Xoyou roii nap avrov (vx^apLarrjdtlcrnv rpocprjv (e^ rjs aipa koi 
 adpKes Kara pfTn^oXrjv rp€(f)ovTai fjpcov) fKfivov tov crapKonoujdi'vros 'hjcrov 
 
 Koi (rapKa Kai alpa (biddxdifiev elvai, whcrc the Comparison of the 
 change of the food eaten into the flesh and blood of the eater by 
 assimilation {kotu pfTaQoXi)v) manifestly suggests that the sacramental 
 Bread and Wine are changed into the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ 
 by an analogous process of spiritual assimilation, when we * feed 
 upon Him in our hearts by faith with thanksgiving,' I can con- 
 ceive no other reason than this for the mention of the conversion of 
 food into the flesh and blood of the eater. In one case by being 
 eaten the bread becomes his own flesh, in the other it becomes the 
 flesh of Christ. The phrase rfjv 8i eixfjs \6yov tov irap oItov 
 (vxapi(rT7]6ei(Tav is somewhat obscure. It might be rendered the prayer 
 of the Word which came from the Father, i.e., the Blessing and 
 thanksgiving which Christ pronounced when He instituted the Holy 
 Eucharist. 
 
 I ought to have added in the text that this passage of Justin Martyr 
 is also a demonstration that in his time the Church did not adore 
 the Bread and Wine, or Christ as in, or under, the Bread and Wine.
 
 43 
 
 P. 19. — The testimony of Eusebius is taken entirely from the 
 First Book of the Demonstratio Evangelim. The exact words of 
 the passage referred to in 1.15 are as follows. He is expounding 
 Ps. xl., 6 — 9, and says that the Psalmist thus plainly teaches that 
 in lieu of the old sacrifices and burnt offerings Christ offered His 
 own Body to God. He then adds, " We who have received according 
 to the laws of the Xew Testament an injunction to celebrate the memory 
 of this Sacrifice at a Table, by means of the symbols of His Body and 
 of His saving Blood, are instructed by the Pro2)het David to say Thou 
 hast prejmred a table before me, &c., ivhere the mystic chrism and the 
 auful sacrifices of Christ" s Table are plainly signified; through ivhich 
 having certainty of acceptcmce {Si&v KaWiepovvTfs) we are instructed 
 to offer to God during our whole lives the unbloody and reasonable 
 sacrifices which are well-pleasing to Him, through the supreme \% 
 
 High Priest of all." It should be observed that in all the earlier 
 writers " the reasonable and unbloody sacrifice " and " the pure 
 offering," are spoken of the sacrifice of Prayer and thanksgiving, "i 
 
 and of a contrite heart, not of the offering of tlie Bread and Wine ^ 
 
 of the Holy Eucharist. It must also be borne in mind that in the 
 language used by Eusebius and others, there is a constant reference 
 to the words of the Prophets, especially to Malachi i. 2. This will* ^ 
 be clearly seen in the last passage quoted in p. 19, from the close of * 
 the first Book of the Demonst. Evangel. 
 
 P. 2-1. — The passage from Ceillier's Auteurs Ecclesiastiques will 
 be found at Volume v. p. 292. 
 
 P. 26. — The account of the Nicene Creed in the preceding pages 
 is taken mainly fi'om Socrates' Ecclesiast. Hist., Lib. I. 
 
 P. 28, 1. 22. — I only know of four places where Church schools 
 have been superseded by Bate Schools. School Boards have been^ 
 established in four other places, but the Church Schools have not 
 been superseded. 
 
 I subjoin a Table furnished by the Diocesan Inspector, the Rev. 
 W. Michell, giving a summary of Inspections, and of the numbers of 
 children, and the state of the schools in the Diocese for the year 
 1872. 
 
 S
 
 44 
 
 CO <x> 
 
 
 MIBJ 
 
 •pooo 
 
 02 
 
 •9Sl'J9AY 
 
 O »>. -^ t--. lO 1 
 
 e<3 lo o ■<*< 
 
 rHOSt-.?0-^i-l(M OlO »Ot--.MeCl 
 
 i-H (M rH 00 
 
 li--: "M CO >o r^ !>. »o 
 
 (M lO l~. OS to O »0 
 OS 50 so lO "O O i-l 
 
 rH 1>. 
 (M CO 
 
 ic OS 
 
 CO C-1 <ffi !>• 
 O CO lO Oi 
 CO O CO lO 
 tH <M r-H i-H 
 
 •s^oog 
 "0 
 
 i-H ,-i t^ OS rH OO CO 
 to t-- OO !>. CD 07 OO 
 t^ (M 00 CO OS CO <N 
 
 O OS .-I CO 
 <M (N C<I CO 
 C; oo OS <M 
 <N <N i-H IM 
 
 •pguiuiL'x^ 
 
 r— CO T-H t^ '<< -*i (30 
 
 OS C^ O CO 00 CO 1^ 
 >0 O (M t^ oo OS (N 
 (M CO I— I CO i-H 
 
 t^ O 00 CO 
 lO CO 03 »0 
 O J^ i-H CO 
 (?^ <M tM M 
 
 •s>ioo3 
 uo U9jp{no 
 
 ■pg^oadsni 
 
 •p9;U9A9jd 
 
 Xl[B;u9piooy 
 
 •p9Uip9p 
 
 uoi:)09dsaj 
 
 ■A\VLO 
 
 yooqog Xnptrny 
 
 •looqog o^ 
 
 O O CO Tt< J-~ CO CO 
 CO I-H t^ t^ lO lO OS 
 CO r-l CO O (N <M CO 
 CO ■* 1-1 »« C^ i-l 
 
 O CO OS -* 
 CO 'O OJ lO 
 l^ CO OS oo 
 <N CO (M CO 
 
 (M >0 ■* <M O 
 
 (M lO CC lO 
 
 iCOCOCOi-H coco <M»Oi 
 
 Tji t-, 1 t^ lO C? 
 
 Axbridge 
 Gary . 
 Glastonbui 
 Frome , 
 Ilchester 
 Merston 
 L Pawlet 
 
 Bath . 
 Chew 
 
 Bridgwate 
 Crewkerne 
 Dunster 
 Taunton 
 
 •sn9AV 
 
 •xi^vri •uo^muij, JO 
 
 I-H " 
 
 (M CO 
 
 1^ 
 
 O (N 
 
 I-H 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 ,CO 
 
 
 Examined. 
 
 420 
 
 280 
 
 1 
 
 
 (T^ 00 
 
 

 
 45 
 
 ■73 
 
 p 
 
 E3 
 
 O 
 
 Q 
 
 J 
 
 ^ 
 
 /. 
 
 P^ 
 
 TS 
 
 1—1 i-H 
 
 ^ 
 
 fl 
 
 ^v 
 
 
 e3 
 
 • N. 
 
 
 
 \^^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 P M 
 
 , N. 
 
 
 ::r3 
 
 ^\ 
 
 
 ii 
 
 o SO 
 
 2'3 
 
 1870. 
 am . 
 ordauo 
 
 • 
 
 o 'S 
 
 -3^ \ 
 
 
 
 a a \ 
 
 
 gPQ 
 
 Q-3 X 
 
 "cS 
 
 o 
 
 J3 
 
 
 
 
 
 K 
 
 
 H 
 
 o 
 

 
 46 
 
 P. 32, 1. 20. — The returns of Communicants, which must only be 
 taken as approximate, for the different Deaneries, are as follows. 
 The Table also shows the condition of the Churches. 
 
 
 Churche.s 
 
 Churches 
 
 Number of 
 
 Number of 
 
 
 in good 
 
 in bad 
 
 Communicants 
 
 Comjnunicants 
 
 
 state. 
 
 state. 
 
 in 1869. 
 
 in 1872. 
 
 Axbridge Deanery . 
 
 39 
 
 2 
 
 1732 
 
 1628 
 
 Bath , 
 
 
 
 44 
 
 
 
 2039 
 
 2247 
 
 Bridgwater , 
 
 
 
 34 
 
 3 
 
 713 
 
 738 
 
 Cary 
 
 
 
 60 
 
 4 
 
 1478 
 
 1383 
 
 Chew 
 
 
 
 42 
 
 3 
 
 1137 
 
 1249 
 
 Crewkerne , 
 
 
 
 40 
 
 2 
 
 1541 
 
 1357 
 
 Duuster , 
 
 
 
 43 
 
 4 
 
 1135 
 
 1040 
 
 Frome , 
 
 
 
 54 
 
 1 
 
 1476 
 
 1248 
 
 Glastonbury , 
 
 
 
 17 
 
 4 
 
 867 
 
 1035 
 
 Ilchester , 
 
 
 
 32 
 
 3 
 
 897 
 
 829 
 
 Merstou , 
 
 
 
 21 
 
 7 
 
 730 
 
 741 
 
 Pawlet , 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 186 
 
 160 
 
 Taunton , 
 
 
 
 46 
 468 
 
 3 
 
 1703 
 
 1858 
 
 Total. 
 
 • 
 
 
 38 
 
 15,634 
 
 15,513 
 
 The number of persons confirmed was — 
 
 
 Males. 
 
 1619 
 1923 
 1785 
 
 Females. 
 
 2458 
 2515 
 1855 
 
 Missing 
 Eeturn. 
 
 59 
 
 2 
 
 Total. 
 
 4136 
 4440 
 3640 
 
 In 1870 .... 
 
 „ ]871 
 
 „ 1872 .... 
 
 Total since last Visitation. 
 
 5327 
 
 6S28 
 
 61 
 
 12,216 
 
 ECCLESIASTICAL DILAPIDATIONS ACT, 1871. 
 
 DIOCESE OF BATH AND WELLS. 
 
 Orders to inspect issued tip to the Zlst December, 1872. 
 
 On complaint ......... 1 
 
 At the request of the incumbent 12 
 
 On Motion of the Bishop 4 
 
 On vacancy .......... 39 
 
 66
 
 47 
 
 COLLECTIONS v 
 
 AT THE OFFERTORY DURING THE VISITATION, GIVEN TO THE ♦ 'f , 
 CURATES' AUGMENTATION FUND. f ' 
 
 £ s. d. ' " • 
 
 Chew Magna 5 12 2 
 
 Bath 4 15 10 
 
 Castle Caiy 412 
 
 Axbridge 3 10 
 
 Wells 2 16 Si 
 
 Bridgwater . . 2 13 6 
 
 Glastonbury 2 6 Sir 
 
 Somerton . . . ..336 
 
 Yeovil 405 
 
 Crewkeme 4 10 7 
 
 Dunster 4 10 
 
 Frome 7 10 
 
 Taunton 5 7 10 
 
 Total £54 8 7 
 
 BltADKURV, AONKW, i^' CO., PRINTmS, \VIHT1:M;I AI'.?^
 
 
 t 
 
 '<. ^

 
 «H-»