mm 
 

 
 The Clmrch in its Divine Constitution and 
 Office, and in its Relations with the 
 Civil Power. 
 
 ^ A CHARGE 
 
 \ 
 
 DELIVERED TO THE 
 
 CLERGY OF THE ARCHDEACONRY 
 OF MAIDSTONE 
 
 at tfte Drtiinarp Oisitation 
 
 IN MAY, 1877 
 WITH NOTES 
 
 BY 
 
 BENJAMIN HARRISON, M.A. 
 
 ARCHDEACON OF MAIDSTONE 
 
 RIVINGTONS 
 
 WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON 
 
 ©iforti anti OTamfiriUge 
 
 canterbury: a. ginder, st. George's hall; hal drury, mercery lane 
 maidstone: f. bunyard 
 
 MDCCCLXXVII
 
 ^
 
 TO THE REVEREND THE 
 
 RURAL DEANS AND CLERGY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 ARCHDEACONRY OF MAIDSTONE; 
 
 AND TO 
 
 THE CHURCHWARDENS AND SIDESMEN, 
 Cljisi CJjaicjf, 
 
 PRINTED IN COMPLIANCE WITH WISHES KINDLY EXPRESSED 
 FOR ITS PUBLICATION, 
 
 18, IN TOKEN OP BROTHERLY ESTEEM AND REGARD, 
 RESPECTFULLY AND AFFECTIONATELY 
 
 i'KEOINCTS, CANTERBURY, 
 
 MAY XIX, MDCCCLXXVU.
 
 'V 
 
 UIUC
 
 I 
 
 k 
 
 A CHARGE 
 
 My Eeyerexd Brethrex, 
 
 I regard with satisfaction and thankfulness 
 the occasion of meeting you again, assembled, with 
 our lay brethren, the churchwardens of the several 
 parishes, for the pur230ses of the Ordinary Visita- 
 tion. And I gladly avail myself of the oppor- 
 tunity, in conformity with established custom, of 
 entering with you on tlie consideration of some 
 matters which occupy a prominent place in the 
 minds of thoughtful Churchmen, of the clergy and 
 the laity alike, at the present time. The necessary 
 limits within which any address to you on an 
 occasion like this must be compressed, will prevent 
 my doing more than touching briefly on a few 
 salient points ; and I am fully conscious how 
 imperfectly it will be done : but my object will be 
 attained, and our limited time here have been 
 turned to account, if any thoughts have been 
 suggested which may, in whatever degree, help
 
 6 A CHARGE. 
 
 towards arriving at soimd and well - weighed 
 conclusions of your own minds, calmly and dis- 
 passionately applied to questions of much per- 
 plexity, amidst considerable excitement of feeling 
 and anxiety in the minds of men. 
 
 The primary subject of inquiry, on these 
 occasions of Visitation, having reference to the 
 condition of the sacred fabrics in which you, my 
 Reverend Brethren, minister, and over which it is 
 the office of the churchwardens to watch, makes it 
 my duty, in the first place, to notice what has been 
 done since we last met in the Visitation of the 
 Archdeaconry, and what works are now in hand. 
 The several undertakings which at our last meeting 
 I enumerated as in progress, have all now been 
 comj^leted, or will all have been completed very 
 shortly ; while others which I then reported as 
 designed have been carried into effect ; and, still 
 more recently, new works have been set on foot, 
 and are now going forward. Increased and im- 
 proved Church accommodation, I am happy at the 
 present moment, by a welcome coincidence, to be 
 able to state, has been provided, or is now in hand, 
 in nearly every one of the principal towns of the 
 Archdeaconry. In the centre of the Archdeaconry, 
 the important county town of Maidstone, the 
 spiritual wants of the greatly increased population 
 of the West Borough have been supplied, by the 
 consecration of the new Church of St. Michael and 
 All Angels, with a district to be attached to it and
 
 A CHARGE. I 
 
 an endowment obtained ; a good work, in regard 
 to which the difficulties which at one time beset it 
 could only have been overcome by a persevering 
 zeal and earnestness which were not to be easily 
 discouraged, and by that Christian munificence 
 which, I should be wanting in grateful acknow- 
 ledgment if I did not say, the Churchmen of 
 Maidstone uniformly exhibit, when there is a work 
 of charity and piety to be done. I ought also to 
 mention, that in the church of St. Peter's parish, 
 out of which the new district of St. Michael's is 
 taken, and which consists of a poor population, 
 there are rearrangements in hand, which will make 
 the church more fully available for the accommoda- 
 tion of the poor. In connection with these under- 
 takings, I feel bound also to call to mind, that the 
 same day on which the Archbishop laid the 
 memorial stone of St. Michael's Church, he preached 
 at the reopening of Trinity Church, where, with 
 something of a laudable resolution and courage, I 
 must say, a considerable fund had been raised for 
 the internal rearrangement of the church, with 
 greater fitness for the purposes of Divine worship, 
 at the very time when a great effort was making 
 in Maidstone for the building of the new church 
 for the West Borough. I would mention further 
 that essential improvement has been made in the 
 interior of St. Stephen's, Tovil, by the removal of 
 the gallery, and substituting new seats ; and there 
 is also a design now in hand to enlarge and
 
 8 A CHARGE. 
 
 complete St. Philip's Cbiircli, by the addition of a 
 chancel and tower, which would greatly improve 
 the church, and be an ornament to the town of 
 Maidstone. 
 
 At Tunbridge, with its increasing population, 
 drawn thither by its excellent school, I felt bound, 
 when I last addressed you, to express the opinion, 
 confirmed by a personal inspection of the district, 
 that a crying need existed for a larger supply of 
 the means of grace, pastoral visitation, and the 
 services of the Church, in the northern part of the 
 parish, by the erection of a new church or chapel 
 there ; and also in regard to a complete rearrange- 
 ment and restoration of the parish church, a 
 work which, I could not but feel, ought not to be 
 longer delayed. I had the satisfaction, within a 
 few months afterwards, of being present at the 
 laying of the foundation stone of a new church, 
 St. Saviour's ; which was consecrated last summer ; 
 built, with an endowment fund also supplied, at 
 the sole cost of the patron, who has since set on 
 foot, by a munificent contribution from himself, 
 the restoration and enlargement of the parish 
 Church of St. Peter and St. Paul. This under- 
 taking, which will involve an outlay of 10,000/., 
 has met with liberal support among the inhabitants 
 of Tunbridge, and also from the Diocesan Church 
 Building Society, and the central Incorporated 
 Society. The design which has been agreed upon, 
 preserving all ancient features worthy of preser-
 
 A CHARGE. a 
 
 vation, will sweep away what is out of character 
 and disfiguring ; adding a south aisle to the nave, 
 and also to the chancel, and removing the galleries, 
 which are unsuitable to the purposes of Divine 
 worship, and grievously encumber the interior. I 
 heartily rejoice, as every one interested in the 
 welfare of Tunbridge must, at the progress made 
 in these good designs. It cannot be doubted that 
 Tunbridge, situated as it is, and with its richly 
 endowed Grammar School, which admits now, 
 by its new scheme, of enlarged development, will 
 continue to increase in population ; and the ques- 
 tion has already arisen, whether the daughter 
 parish of St. Stejohen's, which, with its church 
 built some twenty years ago, seemed sufficiently 
 to provide for the population which had sprung up 
 near the South Eastern Railway, at the southern 
 end of the town, does not now demand some 
 further provision, by subdivision of the parish, or 
 otherwise, for the spiritual wants of the people. 
 Villas and streets are rapidly rising there, and the 
 parish is of wide extent, including widely scattered 
 cottages. It is a case in which, when the want is 
 felt to exist by persons of different ways of think- 
 ing, and schemes have been proposed accordingly 
 to supply it, the required provision will speedily 
 be made. I cannot but hope that, in such like 
 cases, Christian charity, amidst diversities, it may 
 be, of religious opinion, will find, where there is 
 the earnest will, a way to attain — and, if possible,
 
 10 A CHARGE. 
 
 as is greatly to be desired, by combined action, — 
 an important end in view ; that within the circuit 
 of our Jerusalem, wide and large, and yet secure 
 and well guarded, the work of a heavenly Builder, 
 there may be peace within her walls, and at the 
 same time plenteousness within her palaces ;^ "the 
 hungry " filled " with good things," and none 
 *' sent empty away." 
 
 At Sevenoaks, an internal rearrangement of the 
 parish church has been for some time under con- 
 sideration, and an influential Committee appointed. 
 It is a fine and spacious fabric, in which much 
 room is lost with square pews, or ill-appropriated 
 in galleries ; and a well-considered design of re- 
 storation, such as has been already approved, will 
 greatly promote the purposes of Divine worship, 
 at the same time that it will exhibit what has no 
 justice done to it at present, the size of the build- 
 ing and its architectural proportions. 
 
 In the parish church of Dartford, the work of 
 refitting the interior, which, as far as the chancel 
 is concerned, was completed some years ago, has 
 now been resumed in regard to the body of the 
 church ; reseating the nave, removing galleries, 
 taking away the modern ceiling, and reopening 
 the ancient roof. 
 
 Of designs of church enlargement and improve- 
 ment, of which, when last I addressed you, I spoke 
 
 ^ Ps. cxxii. 7.
 
 A CHARGE. 11 
 
 as more or less matured, I can now report, that a 
 thorough restoration within and without has been 
 completed at Upclmrch ; the church at Leybourne 
 restored, and the tower rebuilt, at the cost of the 
 late patron ; and the addition of a north aisle made 
 to Addington church (Surrey), the space under the 
 tower being thrown into the nave with excellent 
 effect, and new seats throughout. The internal 
 reseating at Cranbrook is, as regards the principal 
 part of the work, now nearly finished; and the 
 work at Rodmersham is begun. The comple- 
 tion of the Church of St. Paul, in Blue Town, 
 Sheerness, by the addition of the south aisle — a 
 work which, I was glad to anticipate, would soon 
 be required by the great success of this new 
 mission and church in a very important place — 
 was successfully carried into effect. In addition to 
 these undertakings, I have now to mention a 
 new church built at Beckenham; great progress 
 made in the new church in course of erection at 
 Bexley Heath; the internal restoration of Hoth- 
 field Church, a work which had been long desired, 
 and which was happily accomplished last year ; 
 Hun ton Church reseated, with the western gallery 
 taken away, and the tower opened to the nave ; 
 Boxley Church thoroughly repaired and restored, 
 with costly gifts contributed for its furniture and 
 adornment; and the little church of Bidborough 
 greatly enlarged by the building of a north aisle.
 
 12 A CHARGE. 
 
 Improvements of various kinds have been made at 
 Loose, in the rebuilt church of Murston, at Speld- 
 hurst, at Staplehurst, and elsewhere. 
 
 Of works of a like kind, lately taken in hand, 
 in addition to those which I have enumerated in 
 the chief towns of the Archdeaconry, I must 
 specify the addition of a north aisle, with other 
 works, at Erith ; and internal rearrangement of 
 seats at Kenniugton, and also at Headcorn. I 
 would also mention, with special satisfaction, the 
 opening of a temporary church, with the placing 
 of a curate in charge, at the outlying hamlet of 
 Four Elms, in the parish of Hever ; to be followed 
 in due time, as is hoped, by the building of a 
 parsonage, the erection of a permanent church, 
 and the formation of a consolidated district to 
 be taken from the parishes of Hever, Brasted, and 
 Chiddingstone ; the incumbents of these parishes 
 all now contributing a fixed annual amount to 
 the maintenance of the clergyman. The esta- 
 blishment of mission chapels, or school chapels, 
 in outlying hamlets, or scattered portions of widely 
 extended parishes, such as are some of ours in this 
 Archdeaconry, is an object scarcely less important 
 than the suj^ply of the means of grace to our large 
 towns and densely peopled neighbourhoods. 
 
 And now, my Keverend Brethren, I would say 
 that a review like that which I have thought it my 
 duty to take, on an occasion like the present, of 
 the progress making amongst us in the way of
 
 A CHARGE. 13 
 
 church restoration and improvement, may seem to 
 show that there is a real work everywhere going 
 on, whatever portion of the Church's field we chance 
 to examine in detail. And it is not merely out- 
 ward and visible work, taken in hand by minds 
 under certain influences, to the neglect of work of 
 another kind, more inward and spiritual : we see 
 in every direction tokens of substantial unity of 
 purpose, amidst whatever variety of personal char- 
 acter and individual opinion. We are reminded 
 constantly that " He which made that which is 
 without " is He who " made that which is within " 
 also ; * that the pastor who, when put in charge of 
 a parochial cure, is found anxiously exerting him- 
 self to bring about a restoration of the church in 
 which he is to minister, is none other than the 
 very person who is most intent on promoting the 
 spiritual welfare of his flock ; by bringing all, high 
 and low, rich and poor, young and old together, 
 under the influence of " pure religion and undefiled 
 before God, the Father " of all, to " ofl'er luito the 
 Lord an offering in righteousness," and to hold 
 spiritual communion with Him who " is a Spirit," 
 and to " worship him in spirit and in truth." ^ 
 The extent, moreover, of the work which is thus 
 everywhere going on declares unmistakably, that 
 the impulse, which moves so many hearts and 
 minds at once, must have a higher than a mere 
 
 1 S. Luke xi. 40. 
 
 2 s. James i. 27 ; Mai. iii. 3 ; S. John iv. 24.
 
 14 A CHARGE. 
 
 human or earthly origin ; it also bears witness 
 that the Church in our land, not resting simply on 
 her hereditary claims, but anxious to include in her 
 ministrations, and to gather within her walls, all 
 who will accept at her hands such duty and service, 
 preserves, indeed, with religious care, in her sacred 
 fabrics and in her ritual alike, all that is hallowed 
 to the minds of her children by the associations of 
 past times, but is rising also, day by day continu- 
 ally, to a higher and holier sense of what is re- 
 quired of her, if she would stem the tide of evil, 
 maintain the ancient Faith, and the truth of 
 God's holy Word, and labour, so far as in her lies, 
 " warning every man, and teaching every man 
 in all wisdom," to " present every man perfect in 
 Christ Jesus." ^ 
 
 We had the advantage last autumn of receiving 
 from our Most Reverend Diocesan, in the second 
 Visitation of his diocese, the expression of his 
 " thoughts" — to quote the title which he has given 
 to the seven addresses delivered to the Clergy 
 and Churchwardens assembled at the several places 
 of Visitation — Thoughts on the Duties of the 
 Established Church of England^ as a National 
 Church. The Archbishop considered these mani- 
 fold duties under various aspects, impressing ear- 
 nestly upon the Clergy and Laity the obligations 
 arising out of them. But, I may say, there remains 
 a question behind, and one which, in these days, 
 
 ' Col. i. 28.
 
 A CHARGE. 15 
 
 comes prominently to the front; I mean tlie question, 
 whether there ought to be such a thing at all as 
 an established national Church ? It might, indeed, 
 well have been " taken for granted," to use his 
 Grace's words, " that there is no one in England 
 who holds so lightly by the principles of the Refor- 
 mation, unless he be a Roman Catholic, as to contend 
 that there is anything unscriptural in the idea of 
 a national Church. A national Church ? " said 
 the Archbishop, " what does the phrase mean ? 
 Wherever the State, feeling its Christian responsi- 
 bilities, provides that in any way the ministrations 
 of religion shall be secured to all its people, there 
 is a national Church." But there has been of late 
 years such a drifting away from these " principles 
 of the Reformation " on the part of those who, it 
 might have been supposed, would be the most 
 jealous in maintaining them, that the maxims of 
 religious men in the age of the Reformation and in 
 the days of the Commonwealth are flung to the 
 winds ; and it is in nowise recognised as the duty 
 of a Government to make provision of any sort for 
 the spiritual welfare of the people. Religion, we 
 are told, is a matter between God and a man's own 
 conscience ; and the State cannot meddle in any 
 way with it without corrupting the purity of 
 religion, abusing the functions of government, and 
 interfering with the rights of conscience and the 
 claims of " civil and religious liberty." 
 
 That religion is indeed a sacred matter of in-
 
 16 A CHARGE. 
 
 dividual, personal concern, that " every one of us 
 shall give account of himself to God," ^ is an in- 
 disputable truth ; and one which will never be 
 forgotten by those whose responsible duty it is to 
 minister to souls. " Thou, when thou prayest," — 
 it is a point of the Divine teaching enshrined in 
 the Sermon on the Mount — " enter into thy closet, 
 and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy 
 Father which is in secret." ^ But this precept does 
 not exhaust the whole of Christ's doctrine, or the 
 entire religion of the Gospel. The Sermon on the 
 Mount had opened with the blessing promised of 
 the inheritance of " the kingdom of heaven ; "^ that 
 " kingdom of heaven " which had been declared 
 by Christ's forerunner, and then by Himself, 
 to be " at hand : " * for now " the time " was 
 " fulfilled," and " the kingdom of God," as it is 
 elsewhere called,^ was to be revealed amongst 
 men. And our Blessed Lord went on to say to 
 His disciples, in the same Divine discourse, " Ye 
 are the light of the world. A city that is set on an 
 hill cannot he hid!' ^ " The kingdom of heaven," ^ 
 — its principles, its laws,^ its *' mysteries," ^ its 
 destined progress," ordained as it was to leaven the 
 
 ' Rom. xiv. 12. '-' S. Matt. vi. 6. 
 
 ^ " And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain : and 
 when he was set, his disciples came unto him : and he opened his 
 mouth, and taught them, saying, Blessed are the poor in spirit: for 
 their's is the kingdom of heaven.^' — S. Matt. v. 1-3 ; comp. ver. 10. 
 
 * Comp. S. Matt, iii, 2 ; and iv. 17. ^ S. Mark i. 15. 
 
 « S. Matt. V. 14. ^ lb. X. 7 ; xi. 11, 12 ; xii. 28. « lb. v. 19, 20. 
 
 ^ Ibid. xiii. 11 (comp. ver. 19, " the word of the kingdom"). 
 
 »" Ibid. xiii. 24-30.
 
 A CHARGE. 17 
 
 whole mass of human society/ and to be a tree 
 overshadowing the nations and kingdoms of men,^ 
 this is the subject, in our Divine Redeemer's teach- 
 ing of sermon and parable,^ " pubHc instruction and 
 private interpretation" to His chosen disciples, — this 
 is the very characteristic and key-note, so to speak, 
 of the first Gospel. It is, manifestly, an outward 
 visible society which He designed to plant in the 
 earth : there was a " confession " of faith to be made 
 " with the mouth," as well as a belief entertained 
 in " the heart " of the faithful disciple ; * — St. 
 Peter's confession, " Thou art Christ, the Son of 
 the living God ; " — " and upon this rock," said He, 
 the eternal Son of the Father, " I will build my 
 Church ; and the gates of hell shall not prevail 
 against it." ^ There was a household^ and a 
 kingdom ^ to be formed, and " keys " ^ of its 
 heavenly treasure to be held. There was to be a 
 holy " congregation," as of Israel in the elder time, 
 an ecclesia (cK/cXr^crta), a body which was to 
 take cognisance of controversies and offences as 
 between brethren : " and if he will not hear 
 them," — the two or three, in whose mouth, as by 
 the Mosaic ordinance,^ every word should be estab- 
 lished, — " tell it unto the Church," said our Blessed 
 
 ' S. Matt. xiii. 33. ^ Ibid. xiii. 31 ; comp. verses 44, 45, 47. 
 
 2 Chap. xiii. ; xviii. 23 ; xx. 1 ; xxii. 2 ; xxv. 1. 
 * Eom. X. 9, 10. « S. Matt. xvi. 16, 18. ^ Ibid. xiii. 27, 52. 
 
 ^ The " kingdom " of " the Son of man " (S. Matt. xiii. 41), " the 
 kingdom of their Father." ^ S. Matt. xvi. 19. 
 
 ^ Comp. Num. xxxv. 30 ; Deut. xvii. 6 ; xix. 15. 
 
 B
 
 18 A CHARGE. 
 
 Lord ; " and if he refuse to hear the Churchy let 
 him be to thee as an heathen man and a publican,"^ 
 an outcast, in like manner as one cut off from 
 " the commonwealth of Israel " under the law of 
 Moses; there was to be the authoritative sentence 
 of men divinely commissioned : " Verily I say 
 unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall 
 be bound in heaven : and whatsoever ye shall loose 
 on earth shall be loosed in heaven." ^ And indeed 
 it was for asserting, in answer to the solemn 
 adjuration of the High Priest, His claim to a 
 heavenly kingdom, that our Divine Redeemer was 
 condemned to death by the Jews. " Hereafter," 
 said He, '' shall ye see the Son of Man sitting on 
 the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds 
 of heaven."^ He claimed thereby unmistakably 
 to be none other than He whom Daniel had seen 
 " in the night visions," when other great kingdoms 
 of the earth had passed away ; " one like the Son 
 of Man," who '^ came with the clouds of heaven, 
 and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought 
 him near before him. And there was given him 
 dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all 
 people, nations, and languages, should serve him : 
 his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which 
 shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which 
 shall not be destroyed." * 
 
 But if we would clearly understand and discern 
 
 1 S. Matt, xviii. 17. ^ j^j^j^ ^g^. 18. 
 
 ' Ibid. xxvi. 64. ^ Daniel vii. 13, 14.
 
 A CHARGE. 19 
 
 how this kingdom, reserved for the " Son of Man," 
 this " kingdom of heaven," was distinguished from 
 the kingdoms of earthly potentates, we must 
 follow the Divine Sufferer, from the High Priest's 
 palace and the hall of the Sanhedrin,^ to the judg- 
 ment seat of the Roman governor. It was on a 
 charge of blasphemy, an offence against the Jewish 
 law, that He had been condemned by the council 
 and the whole senate of the children of Israel,^ 
 " because he made himself the Son of God." ^ 
 But when, forthwith, " the whole multitude of 
 them arose, and led him unto Pilate," there was 
 at once a change of front in their tactics and 
 policy ; they had " found " Him, they said, " per- 
 verting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute 
 to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ a 
 King."* How entirely the reverse of the truth 
 was this accusation we know full well ; for He had 
 bidden them in fact to give tribute to Caesar of 
 what was Caesar's own : ^ but that He was a king, 
 and the King of the Jews, He freely admitted the 
 charge; "Thou sayest it."^ And Pilate as freely 
 declared at once his conviction of His innocence. 
 He said to the chief priests and to the people, " I 
 find no fault in this man." "^ In the meek sufferer 
 
 ' S. Matt. xxvi. 57-68, and xxvii. 1. ; compare S. Luke xxii. 54, and 
 66-71. ^ Compare Acts iv. 5, 6-15, and v. 21. 
 
 ^ S. John xix. 7. ■* S. Luke xxiii. 1, 2. 
 
 * S. Matt. xxii. 21 ; S. Mark xii, 17 ; S. Luke xx. 25. 
 
 * S. Matt, xxvii. 11 ; S. Luke xxiii. 3. 
 
 ^ S. Luke xxiii. 4 ; compare xxiii. 14, 15. 
 
 B 2
 
 20 A CHARGE. 
 
 that stood before him the Roman governor discerned 
 clearly, that here was no ringleader of sedition and 
 rebellion, like that other " notable prisoner " whom 
 they then had ; ^ or those others, fellow-country- 
 men with this man (for notoriously He '^was of 
 Galilee"), those ill-fated Galileans " whose blood 
 Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices ; " "^ or, 
 again, the noted Theudas, or Judas of Galilee, who 
 "rose up in the days of the taxing, and drew 
 away much people after him." ^ 
 
 But the words which passed further between 
 the Divine prisoner and His judge, when His 
 accusers pointed thus, and pressed relentlessly, the 
 charge that He was " a malefactor," or they 
 *' would not have delivered him up " to Pilate,* 
 the discourse which was held with the perplexed 
 and awe-struck governor by Him who stood at his 
 bar, is worthy of attentive consideration, as giving 
 the sacred clue to the mystery of the kingdom 
 which was to be in the world, but not of the 
 world ; not a rival of which the kings., and gover- 
 nors of this world needed to be jealous, though it 
 were indeed one of which they were to stand in 
 awe^ by reason of its heavenly character, its 
 spiritual sanctions, its destined course of victory, 
 
 * S. Matt, xxvii. 16. Compare S. Mark xv. 7 : " One named Bar- 
 abbaSj whicli lay bound with them that had made insurrection with 
 him, who bad committed murder in the insurrection." S. Luke xxiii. 
 19: "Who for a certain sedition made in the city, and for murder, 
 was cast into prison." 
 
 a S. Luke xiii. 1. ' Acts v. 36, 37. * S. John xviii. 30. 
 
 e Psalm ii. 10-12.
 
 A CHARGE. 21 
 
 and final triumph through patient suffering. 
 " Art thou the King of the Jews ? " the question 
 was asked again in undisguised anxiety/ The 
 counter-question put to Pilate, discovering the 
 inner springs of malice and envy which were at 
 work, touched the very centre of the mystery 
 involved : " Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or 
 did others tell it thee of me ? " ^ The governor 
 knew well that it was no rebellion against Csesar 
 that was concerned, no crime against temporal law 
 that had been committed. " Pilate answered, Am 
 I a Jew ? Thine own nation and the chief priests 
 have delivered thee unto me : what hast thou 
 done ? " " Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of 
 this world : if my kingdom were of this world, 
 then would my servants have fought, that I should 
 not be delivered to the Jews : but now is my 
 kingdom not from hence." Here was the dis- 
 tinctive mark : His kingdom possessed not, it 
 claimed not, the temporal sword ; " twelve legions 
 of angels," as Christ Himself had reminded His 
 zealous Apostle, when he drew the sword in His be- 
 half, might presently, at one word of His of prayer 
 to His Father, have been seen ranged 'on His 
 side ; ^ but Caesar's legions, and Pilate's guard, had 
 not been called upon, nor would they be, in His 
 case. But it was none the less truly, meanwhile, a 
 kingdom that He claimed as His own. " Pilate 
 
 ' S. John xviii. o3. " S. John xviii. 34. 
 
 ^ S. Matt. xxvi. 53 ; cuuipaic Daniel vii. 10.
 
 22 A CHARGE. 
 
 therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then ? 
 Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king." 
 He would not, were it to save His earthly life, 
 compromise that rightful claim. " To this end was 
 I born, and for this cause came I into the world, 
 that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every 
 one that is of the truth heareth my voice." ^ 
 
 But we must revert for a moment to that dark 
 scene in the garden where Christ fell into the 
 hands of His enemies, and to the mysterious words, 
 full of meaning and full of parable, which He had 
 spoken to His disciples on that solemn evening. 
 In the upper chamber, when He had eaten with 
 them His last supper, and was now ready to go 
 forth to His betrayal, He revealed to them that 
 a time was coming ujDon them, unlike that in 
 which they had once been sent forth by Him 
 " without purse, and scrip, and shoes," and yet 
 had not lacked anything. " But now," said He 
 unto them, " he that hath a purse, let him take it, 
 and likewise his scrip : and he that hath no sword, 
 let him sell his garment, and buy one. . . . And 
 they said. Lord, behold, here are two swords. 
 And he said unto them, It is enough."^ Taking 
 literally their Master's words, and not entering 
 into the spirit of them, the zealous disciple and 
 his brother Apostles not unnaturally, we may say, 
 asked the question, when the soldiers and officers 
 had surrounded Him, " Lord, shall we smite with 
 
 ' S. John xviii. 35-37. - S. Luke xsii. 35-38.
 
 A CHARGE. 23 
 
 the sword ? " ^ It was assuredly not without a 
 deep roeaniug that He, who had before spoken 
 so mysteriously to the disciples, now, in His words 
 of rebuke to Peter, corrected the earthly mind 
 which would mistake the weapons of Christ's 
 warfare, and fail to distinguish between the out- 
 ward force and violence of "the kings of the 
 G-entiles," their so-called " benefactors," and, on the 
 other side, the spiritual powers which He had 
 shadowed out, when He said to the disciples 
 gathered around Him at His supper, " I appoint 
 unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed 
 unto me ; that ye may eat and drink at my table 
 in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the 
 twelve tribes of Israel."^ 
 
 The conflict which began on that awful night, 
 the "hour of" the Evil one, "and the power of 
 darkness,"^ went on to the predestined victory. 
 " And now began to work the greatest glory of 
 the Divine providence : here was the case of 
 Christianity at stake " — I am quoting the de- 
 scription given by an eloquent bishop of our 
 Clmrch, though, necessarily, I quote it briefly. — 
 " The world," says Jeremy Taylor, " was rich 
 and prosperous; . . . the devil's city was full of 
 pleasure, triumphs, victories, and cruelty; good 
 news and great wealth ; conquests over kings, 
 and making nations tributary ; they ' bound kings 
 
 ' S. Luke xxii. 49. ■ Ibid, verses 25-30. 
 
 ^ Ibid, verse 53.
 
 24 A CHARGE. 
 
 in chains, and nobles with links of iron ;' and the 
 inheritance of the earth was theirs. The Romans 
 were lords over the greatest part of the world ; 
 . . . and all the power of the Roman greatness 
 was a professed enemy to Christianity. And on 
 the other side, Grod was to build np Jerusalem, and 
 the kingdom of the Gospel. . . . On the one side 
 there was the offence of the Cross ; on the other, 
 the patience of the saints : and what was the 
 event ? They that had overcome the world could 
 not strangle Christianity. But so have I seen the 
 sun with a little ray of distant light challenge 
 all the power of darkness ; and, without violence 
 and noise, climbing up the hill, hath made night 
 so retire, that its memory was lost in the joys and 
 spritefulness of the morning. And Christianity, 
 without violence or armies, without resistance and 
 self-preservation, without strength or human elo- 
 quence, without challenging of privileges or fight- 
 ing against tyranny, without alteration of govern- 
 ment and scandal of princes, with its humility and 
 meekness, with toleration and patience, with obe- 
 dience and charity, with praying and "dying, did 
 insensibly turn the world into Christian, and per- 
 secution into victory."^ 
 
 If now, my Reverend Brethren, we have rightly 
 drawn from the fountains of eternal truth, revealed 
 
 * Bp. Taylor's Sermon, " The Faith and Patience of the Saints, or 
 the Righteous Cause Oppressed." Works, ed. Heber, vol. v. pp. 532, 
 533.
 
 A CHARGE. 25 
 
 in the words of teaching, and the acts of suffering", 
 of Him who was Himself the Divine Founder of 
 His Church, we shall see how utterly at variance 
 with it all are the views of those who would make 
 religion to be a mere matter of private opinion, 
 in the individual exercise of personal liberty, and 
 the State, on the other hand, a purely secular 
 thing, with which religion has nothing to do. 
 Our Blessed Redeemer, it would appear, " when 
 the fulness of the time was come," and " the 
 kingdom of heaven," foretold and foreshadowed 
 through the ages long before, was to be unfolded, 
 planted in the mount Sion, thence to spread into 
 all lands, a visible Church, duly commissioned 
 His appointed ministers, gave it its laws of sacred 
 discipline, its privileges of brotherly fellowship, 
 outward and visible signs and instruments of in- 
 corporation into this spiritual society, mystic com- 
 munion with Himself unseen in ordinances of His 
 own appointment, through the gracious influences 
 and agency of His Spirit ; and promised His pre- 
 sence with it alway, even unto the end of the 
 world. He warned His Church, meanwhile, by 
 the awful lesson of His own sufferings at the 
 hands of those who sat in Moses' seat, against 
 putting that which was, in their view, " expedient 
 for" them,^ in the place of law and right, and 
 delivering over to the powers of this world the 
 exercise, in spiritual matters, of judgment which 
 
 ' S. John xi. 50.
 
 26 A CHARGE. 
 
 ought to have been kept free from the pohcy or 
 the tyranny of "the Gentiles." On the other 
 hand, in the subjection of His human nature to 
 the authority of temporal law, He humbly re- 
 cognised it as a power (for so He spake of it to 
 Pilate, as a power), a " power " that was " given 
 from above ;"^ He religiously reserved to it, to its 
 ministei-s and officers, that which He denied to 
 His Church, the wielding of the temporal sword ; 
 and explicitly condemned the spirit which, under 
 the plea of religious duty, or scruple of conscience, 
 would have claimed to set aside the lawful rights 
 of Csesar, due to him from those whom God's over- 
 ruling providence had brought under his imperial 
 sway. 
 
 And when, from meditating on the oracles and 
 ordinances of our Saviour Christ, we pass on to 
 trace the accomplishment, in the world's history, 
 of that which the Spirit of prophecy had shadowed 
 out long before, we find how unlike was the actual 
 event to that which in these days seems very 
 commonly to be assumed as what really happened. 
 From the way in which men are apt to speak, in 
 expounding popular theories, it would be supposed 
 that at some stage, — originally, I presume, when 
 human beings had fully developed themselves out 
 of inferior orders of creation into a higher grade, 
 and had reached that latest phase of existence at 
 which, we are told, the religious idea puts itself 
 
 * 8. John xix. 11.
 
 A chargp:. 27 
 
 forth, — the civil government chose, out of divers 
 theological systems, one which it preferred, en- 
 dowed it with special privileges and possessions, 
 and made it a religious establishment. The form 
 of reHgious opinion thus preferred, it is supposed, 
 in consideration of its civil advantages, parted with 
 something of its natural liberty and authority ; and 
 thus was formed a sort of alliance of the Church 
 with the State. Never was a more unsubstantial 
 and baseless hypothesis framed by pure imagination. 
 It is a theory contrary to historic fact, utterly 
 unworthy of either of the supposed contracting 
 parties, dishonourable and degrading to both ; and 
 one which, if a time comes, in the progress of 
 things, when civil governments are disposed to 
 throw off religious obligations, or to tyrannise over 
 religious convictions, tempts religiously-minded 
 men, on the other side, to fall in with the cry for 
 what we have heard so much of, of late, " dis- 
 establishment and disendowment ; " as if these 
 were to accomplish " the liberation of religion " 
 (the professed object of those who, meanwhile, are 
 avowedly the Church's bitterest enemies) " from 
 State patronage and State control." The truth 
 is, that relations between the Church and the State 
 grew up naturally, and as a matter^ indeed, of 
 obvious necessity, as soon as the rulers of this 
 world were brought to confess the faith of Christ, 
 and to own His supreme dominion. Especially 
 was this the case when the throne of earthly power
 
 28 A CHARGE. 
 
 was one like that of Borne, a city which, from the 
 days of its earHest history, had been built up under 
 the immediate sanction of religion, the rites and 
 ceremonies of which were wrought into every por- 
 tion of its system, every act of its daily life. The 
 infidel historian of Rome's decline and fall has 
 himself told us, that " a candid but rational inquiry 
 into the progress and establishment of Christianity 
 may be considered as a very essential part of the 
 history of the Roman Empire. While that great 
 body," he says, " was invaded by open violence, or 
 undermined by slow decay, a pure and humble 
 religion gently insinuated itself into the minds of 
 men, grew up in silence and obscurity, derived 
 new vigour from opposition, and finally erected 
 the triumphant banner of the Cross on the ruins 
 of the Capitol." ^ A Christian emperor could not, 
 consistently with the dictates of conscience, go on 
 bowing in the idol's temple, like Naaman's Syrian 
 master in the house of Rimmon, and compelling 
 those on whose hand he leaned to do the same.^ 
 And Christian legislation would irresistibly follow 
 upon the fact, already dwelt upon, that Christianity 
 was not a mere matter of private oj^inion, a philo- 
 sophy which might be cherished in secret, while 
 its disciple conformed outwardly to the national 
 religion which, all the time, he despised, and even 
 
 ^ Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Evman Emjnre, vol. ii. chap. xv. 
 p. 265 (ed. 8vo). 
 2 2 Kino-s V. 18.
 
 A CHARGE. 29 
 
 in his last moments, it might be, would sacrifice 
 a cock to ^sculapius.^ 
 
 Let me illustrate, by a single example, the way 
 in which Christian legislation would come in, and 
 Christianity become at once, and unavoidably, 
 " part and parcel," to use a legal phrase, " of the 
 law of the land." One of the first instances of 
 such legislation, in the interests of Christianity, 
 was in regard to the observance of the Lord's Day. 
 I need not specify, in detail, the provisions which 
 were enacted in the days of the first Christian 
 emperor ; I would simply remark, that the neces- 
 sity for such enactments arose out of the primary 
 institutions of the Church of Christ.^ His fol- 
 lowers were wont to keep, with religious observ- 
 ance, their weekly festival in honour of His resur- 
 rection ; and' obviously, they could not keep it 
 consistently or effectually, if the courts of law 
 were open, as on other days, and men compelled 
 to attend them, and the Roman world were hold- 
 ing on its course of business and pleasure, with 
 all their unsparing requirements, on that sacred 
 day. And let me remark, since this is a point in 
 regard to which questions of the present time may 
 throw light upon, or borrow light from, the past, 
 it was not that the Church desired to take up the 
 
 ^ Plaionis Phcedo. § 155 : " koi fKKa.\v\l/-dfj.evos, eveKeKaKvTTTo yap, 
 liTrev, 6 St; reXevraiov e(})dey^aTO, ^Q KpiTcov, e(f)T], ra 'Atr/cX7;7rt«3 
 6<j)eiXoix€v aXeKTpvova ' aXX' anodore koi prj d/ieXijcrijre." — 0pp. ed. 
 Bekker, torn. v. pp. 409, 410. 
 
 ^ Bingham's Christian Antiqiiitiea, book xx. ch. 2.
 
 30 A CHARGE. 
 
 weapons of persecution whicli had been wrested 
 out of the hands of the pagan State ; it was not 
 that Christians thought " to make men rehgious," 
 as the phrase now-a-days is, "by Act of Parha- 
 ment." There was no confusion between the duties 
 of the civil power and of the ecclesiastical ; it 
 was not with a direct view to the salvation of souls, 
 — the Church's end and aim, — but for the welfare 
 of the community, the protection of the interests of 
 all, maintenance, really, of the rights of conscience, 
 and above all, a supreme regard for His honour 
 by whose authority Caesar reigned, wielding the 
 temporal sovereignty, and, as a Christian king, so 
 far as his office extended in this behalf, watching 
 over the Church. 
 
 It may further be observed, that there was no 
 disposition, on the part of the Church of those 
 days, to barter away her spiritual inheritance in 
 exchange for temporal privileges. There was, in 
 fact, a great impulse not to take possession of cities 
 and enjoy the world, but on the contrary, to flee 
 into the wilderness ; there would St. Athanasius be 
 found, from time to time, in the deserts of Egypt, 
 and St. Jerome in his retirement at Bethlehem. 
 The Church had her trials in that age, as well as 
 in every other of her eventful life, a stranger and 
 a pilgrim still, and " militant here in earth ; " but 
 she did not throw away or forfeit any portion of 
 her sacred deposit when the empire became Chris- 
 tian. Constantine, no doubt, had it been left to
 
 A CHARGE. 31 
 
 him to determine Church controversies, would 
 himself have treated the question between the 
 Arians and the Church Catholic as one in regard 
 to which Christians need not quarrel ; ^ but, duly 
 recognising the true relations between the Church 
 and the empire, he declared himself to be simply 
 an ejnscopos, an overseer, in external matters of the 
 Churchy while her bishops had authority in matters 
 of faith and spiritual cognisance.^ And it is 
 worthy, above all, to be borne in mind, that the 
 age of the Christian emperors was that which 
 enabled the Catholic Church in all lands to assemble, 
 under the sanction and protection of the imperial 
 authority, and to enshrine in the confessions and 
 acts of the first four Councils the pure Faith, in 
 its integrity and fulness,^ the cardinal doctrine of 
 the Incarnation, the union of the two Natures in 
 one Person, of the Eternal Ever-blessed Son.* The 
 fact of the State becoming Christian did not 
 involve a compromise of heavenly truth, in ex- 
 change for worldly privilege or power : on the 
 contrary, it gave liberty to the Church securely to 
 meet, under the protection of the civil power, to 
 bear her solemn witness to the Faith, and, with the 
 voice of united Christendom, with authority de- 
 rived from on high, to " tell it out among the 
 heathen that the Lord is King." ^ 
 
 Thus much concerning the doctrine of the Church, 
 
 ^ EusEB. De Vita Constantini, ii. 63; Socr. i. 7 ; Soz. i. 16. 
 
 * EtrsEB. Ibid. iv. 24, ^ See Note A. 
 
 * Ibid- ^ Psalm xcvi. 10, Prayer Book.
 
 32 A CHARGE. 
 
 in relation to the temporal power of Christian 
 kings and governors. And in regard to its dis- 
 cipline, also, Christian antiquity throws light upon 
 questions which have arisen among us in these 
 latter days. If, in any matter involving discipline, 
 and possibly doctrine with it, the Church at any time 
 should seem to be hampered, in her judicial action, 
 by her relations with the civil power, the instinc- 
 tive feeling of religious-minded men, as before said, 
 is to renounce privileges and surrender endow- 
 ments, if the possession of them endangers the 
 maintenance of Christian truth. But it has been 
 often clearly pointed out, that it is not an esta- 
 blished Church alone which is, by reason of its 
 position as such, exposed to interference of the 
 State : the possession of any endowment whatever, 
 by any religious body, renders it liable, if a 
 question of discipline arise within it, and differ- 
 ence of opinion occur among its members, to have 
 its system of doctrine and discipline brought before 
 the civil courts, and decisions touching its confes- 
 sions and formularies pronounced there. " Then 
 let all endowments go," men may say; and it seems 
 a noble and self-sacrificing thing to say : and, 
 doubtless, it is perfectly competent for men, and 
 their duty, individually, if there is a question of 
 personal conscience involved, to resign that which 
 they cannot consistently hold. It is not so clear 
 that they have the right peremptorily and hastily 
 to determine the case in the behalf of the Church,
 
 A CHARGE. 33 
 
 to anticipate her judgment as to what the matter 
 of complaint really is, and in what way a remedy 
 should be sought. The privileges and the inheri- 
 tance of the Church are not theirs at once to give 
 away, cutting off, on the strength of their own 
 private judgment, the entail in which future gene- 
 rations are concerned. 
 
 But suppose the endowments cast away ; there 
 is the question of the fabrics still to be dealt with. 
 It was a case of this kind which occasioned the 
 first appeal, in the history of the Church, to the 
 civil power while it was still heathen. The bishop 
 of the great city where "the disciples were called 
 Christians first," ^ of Antioch, had been deposed by 
 his brother bishops for denying the Faith concerning 
 the Divinity of our Blessed Lord ; and a successor, 
 sound in the faith, had been appointed to his 
 bishopric. But Paul of Samosata refused to give 
 up the Church, with the buildings belonging to it, 
 in which he ministered; and the sjDiritual body 
 had no power to enforce the sentence. On the 
 principles of Christ's Church, they had no coercive 
 force ; it was not for them to constitute a band 
 of men and officers, and break open the sacred 
 building with axes and hammers. An appeal was 
 made accordingly to the temporal power ; and the 
 Emperor Aurelian, himself a heathen, had to 
 decide it. He was not qualified personally to judge 
 of such matters ; but he took the course which a 
 
 ' Acts xi. 26. 
 
 C
 
 34 A CHARGE. 
 
 sense of justice and practical wisdom suggested : 
 he referred the matter to the Christian bishops of 
 Italy, men removed from the scene of conflict, and 
 competent to report upon it, with full knowledge 
 of the Church's doctrine and discipline, and to 
 declare which was the lawful bishop. They pro- 
 nounced that Paul of Samosata did not hold the 
 Christian Faith, and that they did not hold com- 
 munion with him : and the civil power gave 
 effect to the decision of the bishops of Asia, and 
 ejected him from his Church, and from the house 
 of his see.^ 
 
 Of course, what was said of endowments may be 
 said in like manner of the fabrics in which we 
 minister; if we cannot hold them without sur- 
 render of truth, let us give them up also. We 
 should be exhorted, doubtless, to choose rather the 
 worship by the river's side where the Apostle 
 spake to Lydia and the women which resorted 
 thither ; — though that, indeed^ would rather appear 
 to have been a gathering together in a recognised 
 place of public worship, a proseucha, " where 
 prayer was wont to be made;"^ — we might say, 
 We will hold our religious assemblies under the 
 canopy of heaven, in the market-place, or in the 
 streets. But even there the guardians of the public 
 peace will break up our assembly, and command 
 our congregation to pass on their way. It is, in 
 fact, impossible for the minister of religion, while 
 
 ^ EusEB. H. E. vii. 30. ^ Acts xvi. 13. See Note B.
 
 A CHARGE. 35 
 
 he ministers on the earth, to escape out of the 
 reach of the civil power ; and for this simple 
 reason, " for they are God's ministers, attending 
 continually upon this very thing." ^ " The powers 
 that be are ordained of God ; " ^ to them is com- 
 mitted the care of the public peace, and the 
 orderly maintenance of the framework of civil 
 society. He who is the Prince of the Catholic 
 Church is also " the Head of all principality 
 and power," and " the Prince of the kings of the 
 earth ; " ^ and they, knowing whose ministers they 
 are, and duly considering whose authority they 
 have, have this for their appointed duty, to 
 " study to keep " His " people committed to their 
 charge in wealth, peace, and godliness." 
 
 It has already been said, that where any temporal 
 endowment or possession is concerned, if a con- 
 troversy arise in any religious community, the 
 matter must necessarily, in the last resort, come 
 for final decision to the temporal power. Only in 
 the case of the Church, as recognised and estab- 
 lished by the constitution of the realm, there is 
 this essential difference ; that whereas, in regard to 
 other religious bodies the only legal tribunal that 
 can deal with matters in dispute is the State 
 court, the Church has its own courts of judica- 
 ture, acknowledged and protected by the State, in 
 which these questions may be determined ; only 
 if the contending parties within the Church cannot 
 
 * Rom. xiii. 6. ^ Rom. xiii. 1. ^ Col. ii. 10; Rev. i. 5. 
 
 c 2
 
 36 A CHARaE. 
 
 close the controversy, the cause must come, by 
 appeal, to the Crown, the highest source of justice 
 when the rights of subjects are concerned. So it 
 was among the Jews under the dominion of Rome. 
 There was " the judgment " and " the council ; " ^ 
 and if there was a charge of an offence touching 
 their religion^ they might take the accused, as the 
 Roman governor told them, " and judge him accord- 
 ing to " their " law." ^ And so it has been in this 
 Church and realm of England. All through the 
 conflicts of the last eight hundred years, in the 
 Constitutions of Clarendon, alike, in the days of 
 the second Henry, and in the reformation of her 
 spiritual polity under Henry the Eighth, the order 
 of her ecclesiastical courts has been duly recognised 
 in their regular subordination to each other ; with 
 this only question disturbing the system, the ques- 
 tion whether the king should take order for the 
 determination of causes finally within the realm, 
 or whether they should be carried by appeal to the 
 Court of Rome.^ 
 
 And here came in, in the crisis of the separa- 
 tion from Rome, in the reign of Henry YIH., the 
 statuteof the realm, which has fitly been designated 
 commonly as " the great Statute of Appeals." * It 
 
 1 S. Matt. V. 22. 
 
 ^ S. John xviii. 31. Compare Acts xxiv. 5, 6: "For we have 
 found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all 
 the Jews throughout the world : . . . who also hath gone about to 
 profane the temple : whom we took, and would have judged according 
 to our law." See Note C. 
 
 3 See Note D. * 24 Henry VIII. cap. 12.
 
 A CHARGE. 37 
 
 was no ordinary act of legislation ; it was an able 
 and masterly State paper ; it is, in fact, the great 
 charter of the liberties of the reformed Church of 
 England, freed from the uncatholic, oppressive 
 dominion of the Pope and Bishop of Rome. It 
 laid down the lines of the constitution of England, 
 and also recorded its history ; " Where by sundry 
 old and authentic histories and chronicles " — so i^an 
 the wording of this remarkable Act — " it is mani- 
 festly declared and expressed, that this realm of 
 England is an empire, and so hath been accepted 
 in the world, governed by one supreme head and 
 king, having the dignity and royal estate of the 
 imperial crown of the same ; unto whom a body 
 politick, compact of all sorts and degrees of people, 
 divided in terms and by names of spiritualty and 
 temporalty, been bounden and owen to bear, next 
 to Grod, a natural and humble obedience ; he being 
 also institute and furnished, by the goodness and 
 sufferance of Almighty God, with plenary, whole, 
 and entire power, pre-eminence, authority, pre- 
 rogative, and jurisdiction, to render and yield 
 justice and final determination to all manner of 
 folk, resiants or subjects within this his realm, in 
 all causes, matters, debates, and contentions, 
 happening to occur, insurge, or begin within the 
 limits thereof, without restranit or provocation to 
 any foreign princes or potentates of the world." 
 Concerning "the body spiritual whereof" the Act 
 goes on distinctly to declare, that " when any
 
 38 A CHARGE. 
 
 cause of the law divine happened to come in ques- 
 tion, or of spiritual learning, then it was declared, 
 interpreted, and shewed by that part of the body 
 politick called the spiritualty, now being usually 
 called the English Church, which always hath 
 been reputed, and also of that sort, that both for 
 knowledge, integrity, and sufficiency of number, 
 it hath been always thought, and is also at this 
 hour, sufficient and meet of itself, without the in- 
 termeddling of any exterior person or persons, to 
 declare and determine all such doubts, and to ad- 
 minister all such offices and duties, as to their rooms 
 spiritual doth appertain.'' " For the due adminis- 
 tration whereof," the Act goes on to state, " and to 
 keep them from corruption and sinister affection, 
 the king's most noble progenitors, and the ante- 
 cessors of the nobles of this realm, have sufficiently 
 endowed the said Church both with honour and 
 possessions." The Act then proceeds to speak of 
 " the laws temporal, for trial of property of lands 
 and goods, and for the conservation of the people 
 of this land in unity and peace, without rapine or 
 spoil ; which law temporal," it is declared, " was 
 and 3'et is administered, adjudged, and executed by 
 sundry judges and ministers of the other part of 
 the said body politick, called the temporalty ; and 
 both their authorities and jurisdictions," as is 
 finally explained, " do conjoin together in the due 
 administration of justice, the one to help the 
 other."
 
 A CHARGE. 39 
 
 Thus did the whole nation of England, repre- 
 sented by the king, the lords spiritual and temporal, 
 with the commons of the realm in Parliament as- 
 sembled, lay deep and broad — or, rather, thus did 
 they exhibit to view, as laid, by former generations, 
 deep and broad — the foundations of the entire 
 fabric of the constitution in spiritual matters and 
 temjDoral, in Church and State ; conjoined together 
 in a union which duly recognised the functions and 
 rights of each, not compromised or bartered away, 
 but duly preserved and honoured. I am well 
 aware that some persons, looking with legal eyes 
 at this Act and that which followed it in the next 
 year,^ have maintained that this preamble did not 
 apply to the later Act, and that this earlier Act 
 had only a temporary and partial character. But 
 I must humbly submit that it is impossible, on a 
 large view of the history of those times, and the 
 great rupture with Rome of which this Act laid 
 the strong and stable grounds, so to narrow or 
 nullify its well-considered and weighty language. 
 And it is further to be observed, that the provisions 
 made in the later Act for completing the action of 
 the former, the arrangements for the appeal to the 
 king in Chancery, and, further, those which were 
 contained in the subsequent recommendations of 
 commissioners for the reformation of the eccle- 
 siastical laws, appointed under the provisions of 
 that Act, are perfectly reconcilable, and in full 
 
 ' 25 Ueury VlII. cap. 21.
 
 40 A CHARGE. 
 
 harmony, with the cardinal principles laid down in 
 "the great Statute of Appeals."^ 
 
 If, therefore, any difScnlties have arisen in the 
 body politic, and in the mutual relations of 
 Church and State, we have, I think, only to fall 
 back upon the declared principles of the English 
 Reformation, embodying the history and law of 
 yet older days. It is for us calmly to inquire, as a 
 Church and nation, whether, and how far, we have 
 drifted unawares, in recent times, from our ancient 
 moorings ; and how best, under j^resent circum- 
 stances, with the lights of our own Constitution, 
 of truth and reason, of history and Scripture, to 
 recover our true position, and for the future to 
 steer a safe and and right course.^ It would be a 
 more difficult matter, if the legislation of Henry 
 the Eighth's reign had been, as it might well have 
 been supposed it would be, an arbitrary setting up 
 of a new temporal Pope in place of him of Rome, 
 overriding and confounding, with Tudor prero- 
 gative, all rights and claims standing in his way. 
 Instead of this, we have a platform of civil and 
 ecclesiastical polity, recognising freely and fully the 
 rights and duties of all, in a spirit not unworthy 
 of the presumed wisdom of a later age. It may be 
 observed also, that it traces to its true source 
 Church endowment, as well as Church establish- 
 ment, as originating not in any act of the State, 
 but in the free gifts of kings and nobles. 
 
 1 Sec Note E. ■' See Note F.
 
 A CHARGE. 41 
 
 In regard to the most recent act of legislation 
 affecting the Church in judicial matters, I took 
 occasion, when I addressed you three years ago, to 
 express satisfaction that, whereas the appeal had 
 been given, in the Act of the previous session, to 
 a new Supreme Court of Judicature, provision had 
 been made that, as there would be no longer 
 ecclesiastics sitting in the Court, combined with 
 lay judges, there should be episcopal assessors 
 apjDointed, to inform the Court on spiritual ques- 
 tions. It appeared to me that the principles 
 of right reason and of the Church of Christ 
 required this.^ The new Act, however, before it 
 had been supplemented, as was requisite, by other 
 arrangements, was set aside ; and ecclesiastical 
 questions were referred, as they had been before, 
 to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. 
 Provision has been made at the same time for 
 a new arrangement, whereby a body of episcopal 
 assessors, appointed in a certain rotation, shall 
 always be present, to inform and advise the Judi- 
 cial Committee when spiritual causes are before it. 
 A right principle being here recognised, I think 
 it will be our wisdom to watch matters patiently 
 and considerately at the present time, in regard to 
 the satisfactory working of the new provisions. 
 
 With reference to another point, the mode of 
 appointment of the newly created Provincial Judge, 
 
 ' Charge delivered to the Clergy of the Archdeaconry of Maidstone, 
 iu April 1874, pp. 24-26.
 
 42 A CHARGE. 
 
 who has succeeded to the office of Dean of the 
 Arches of the Province of Canterbury, and to 
 the corresponding office in the Province of York, 
 I may observe that some of the provisions have 
 regard to this first appointment simply ; and that 
 there is nothing, as I understand, to prevent a 
 successor being appointed, with powers conveyed 
 directly, as in former instances, by the spiritual 
 authority of the Archbishop. At the same time, I 
 should not deal faithfully with the opinion which 
 I have been compelled to form, if I did not venture 
 to express my regret, that it has appeared to legal 
 minds necessary that the new Provincial Judge 
 should be invested with all the powers of the civil 
 judges ; and, in order thereto, that he must be 
 appointed with the sanction of the Crown. And 
 further, in case of difficulty in regard to a con- 
 current appointment by the two Primates — a case 
 not impossible, or it would not have been expressly 
 provided for — the entire appointment is given 
 over to the Crown ; a provision which seems at 
 variance with the principles of our ecclesiastical 
 system, which, up to the last resort, would make 
 the judge of the ecclesiastical court the direct 
 representative and commissary of the Bishop or 
 Archbishop. In the contingency thus provided 
 for in the Act, we might see the whole ritual of 
 the Church of England, in both provinces, dealt 
 with by a single lay judge, deriving his autho- 
 rity in no degree from a spiritual source ; with
 
 A CHARGE. 43 
 
 no knowledge or experience, possibly, of eccle- 
 siastical law, or the practice of the ecclesiastical 
 courts ; and with no other qualification required 
 by the Act, than that he should be a barrister of 
 ten years' standing, or one who had been a judge 
 in one of the superior courts of law. 
 
 In the view of the difficulties with which these 
 questions are beset, let me the rather say, in con- 
 clusion, my Reverend Brethren, that it is, I think 
 you will agree with me, fervently to be desired, 
 that the Public Worship Eegulation Act of 1874 
 may, by the general consent of Churchmen, become, 
 as it may by such consent become, a dead letter. 
 The bishop, as you are aware, may quash the 
 whole proceedings at the outset, stating his reason ; 
 and in any case, if both parties are willing to 
 submit to the directions of the bishop without 
 appeal, there the complaint must end. It is further 
 " provided," at the same time, " that no judgment 
 so pronounced by the bishop shall be considered as 
 finally deciding any question of law so that it may 
 not be raised again by other parties ; " hereby 
 avoiding the evil and danger which attends carry- 
 ing questions of ritual into the final court, that 
 thereby the whole Church is affected, the entire 
 body of its Clergy and Laity, by any decision 
 pronounced. Better still, if the clergyman, irre- 
 spectively of the Public Worship Regulation 
 Act and its provisions, were to act upon the 
 requirements of the Preface to the Book of Com-
 
 44 A CHAEGE. 
 
 mon Prayer, in regard to the reference of doubtful 
 or disputed points to the bishop ; protected as the 
 party concerned is by the proviso there laid down, 
 that any order which the bishop may take must 
 "not be contrary to any thing contained in this 
 book." Of course, this requires that the other 
 party shall equally submit himself to the judgment 
 of the bishop : and it is not an extravagantly un- 
 reasonable presumption, that the layman be found 
 as willing as the clergyman, in difiScult matters 
 of spiritual learning, to act on the supposition that 
 he is not absolutely iu fallible, and may by possi- 
 bility be wrong. 
 
 "Disestablishment and disendowment" are, I 
 am convinced, far from us, my Reverend Brethren, 
 with all their attendant evils and dangers to this 
 nation, — and, I am persuaded also, to this Church, — 
 if only we escape the snare and the sin of disunion 
 among ourselves ; and none of us, of the Clergy or 
 the Laity, in an impatience which cannot wait on 
 God's good providence, think to gain something 
 by an alliance with those whose aim and end is 
 avowedly the secularisation of things which belong 
 to God and to His Christ, the heritage of His 
 Church and of His poor ; dethroning Christ, so far 
 as in them lies, from His royalty over the king- 
 doms of the world, and robbing Him of the gifts 
 which, according to the word of prophets and 
 psalmists, " the kings of Tarshish and of the isles" 
 . have humbly cast at His feet ; kings falh'ug down
 
 A CHARGE. 45 
 
 l)efore Him, and nations doing Him service/ And 
 if it be in the later days of His Clinrch that our 
 lot is cast, amidst whatever new relations of the 
 civil and the ecclesiastical State, under whatever 
 empire of the world, we are called, — like them of 
 Judah of old, with " the prince of the captivity " 
 of David's house, and the successor of Aaron's 
 line, under new kingdoms of the Eastern world, 
 or amidst the conflicts of the kings " of the north" 
 and " of the south," — to restore the house of our 
 Grod, and rebuild the walls of our Jerusalem, the 
 voice may still come in audible tones to us, as 
 it came to them, " of the Lord's messenger in the 
 Lord's message unto the people:" "Yet now be 
 strong, Zerubbabel, saith the Lord; and be strong, 
 
 Joshua, son of Josedech, the high priest ; and be 
 strong, all ye people of the land^ and work : for 
 
 1 am with you, saith the Lord of hosts : accord- 
 ing to the word that I covenanted with you when 
 ye came out of Egypt, so my spirit remaineth 
 among you : fear ye not." ^ " Lo, I am with you 
 alway " — it was the last word and promise of 
 Him who came to that second temple, and filled 
 it with glory, " the Desire of all nations " — " Lo, 
 I am with you alway, even unto the end of the 
 world." ^ 
 
 From Him alone cometh all grace ; and to God 
 be all the glory, through Jesus Christ our Lord. 
 
 ^ Psalm Ixxii. ].0, 11. ^ Haggai ii. 4, 5. ^ S. Matt, xxviii. 20.
 
 NOTE A. 
 
 " In four words, a.\i]6(j)<;, rcAews, aStatpeVcos, acrvy^vrw?, truly, 
 perfectly, indivisibly, distinctly, ... we may fully, by way of 
 abridgment, comjirise whatsoever antiquity hath at large handled, 
 either in declaration of Christian belief, or in refutation of the 
 foresaid heresies." " Against these," as Hooker ^ has said, 
 " there have been four most famous ancient general councils : 
 the Council of Nice, to define against Arians ; against Aj^olli- 
 narians, the Council of Constantinople ; the Council of Ephesus 
 against Nestorius ; against Eutychians, the Council of Chalce- 
 don ; " these four councils having been held under the sanction 
 of the Emperors Constantino, Theodosius, Theodosius the 
 younger, and Marcian, respectively. 
 
 NOTE B. 
 
 Acts xvi. 13. — ov €vofJiLl,eTo Trpocrcvx^ eu'ai, where a meeting 
 for prayer was wont to be held. Perhaps there was a pro- 
 seucha, says the Bishop of Lincoln, or enclosed place for prayer 
 there.^ The Bishop refers to Epiphanius,^ " who describes the 
 proseuchae as places of semicircular form (^earpoetSets) without 
 roofs, and outside the cities.* Such Trpocrevxal were commonly 
 near the sea or rivers, as here, for the sake of the lustrations 
 and ablutions of the Levitical law.^ ... It seems that at 
 Philippi, a Eoman colony, where the Jews were hated and 
 despised,^ they had no synagogue within the walls of the city, 
 and were only authorised to have a proseuclia, and that outside 
 the city gate. Cp. Ammonius in Caten., who says: p,i) ovarr)^ 
 cKCi (TvvayojyTjs Sta to aTrdviov, Trapa tov Trora/xov e^cu t^s 
 TT o A € o) s XdOpa (TvvTqyovTo. ' 
 
 ^ Hooker, Eccles. Polity, book v. d. 54 [10], ed. Keble. 
 ^ Commentary in loc. " Hoer. Ixxx. 
 
 * Cp. Mede's Essay, book i. Discourse 18, p. 67. 
 
 * See Joseph. Ant. xiv. 10, 23 ; cp. Juvenal, iii. 11-13. 
 « See- ^'^.
 
 48 A CHARGE. 
 
 NOTE C. 
 
 " Learned men," says Biscoe, " differ not a little in their 
 opinions concerning the power left with the Jewish magistrates 
 when their country was made a Eoman province." The opinion 
 that " the Jewish magistrates in Judgea, when under the 
 Eomans, had the power of inflicting capital punishments," has 
 been fully argued, with much learning and force, by this 
 writer.^ In regard to the saying of the Jews to Pilate, " It is 
 not lawful for us to put any man to death," ho observes that 
 " it sufficiently appears from the context that the meaning of 
 this saying of the Jews could not be, that they were by the 
 Eomans deprived of the liberty of judging men by their law, and 
 putting them to death. It is remarkable that, as Pilate says to 
 the Jews in the words immediately before, ' Take ye him, and 
 judge him according to your law ; ' so the Evangelist adds, in 
 the words immediately following, ' that the saying of Jesus 
 might be fulfilled which he spake, signifying what death he 
 should die.' Our blessed Lord had not only prophesied that 
 He should die a violent death, but had named the manner of His 
 death, which was crucifixion ; and that, in order hereunto, He 
 should be betrayed into the hands of the chief priests and 
 scribes, who should pronounce Him worthy of death, and then 
 deliver Him to the Gentiles.^ The evangelist John expressly 
 observes, that by the phrase of his being ' lifted up,' our Lord 
 ' signified what death he should die.' ^ He in this place 
 remarks the fulfilment hereof, and rests it upon the Jews 
 refusing to judge and punish our Savioiu* according to their 
 law, as Pilate directed them. . . . For had He been judicially 
 tried and condemned by the Jews, He had not been crucified. 
 The law of Moses knew no such punishment. He might have 
 been stoned, or strangled, or burnt, or put to death by the sword,'* 
 according as the crime was for which He was condemned ; but 
 He could not have been crucified." ^ The policy of His accusers 
 was to make Him die by the hands of the Eomans, as a scape- 
 1 Chap. vi. pp. 113-244. ^ ^^^^^ ^^ -^^^ j^g ^^^^ 
 
 8 John sii. 32, 33. * Vide Mislina Sanhed. c. 7. 
 
 ^ Biscoe On the Acts, pp. 131, 132.
 
 A CHARGE. 49 
 
 goat and sacrifice to Roman jealousy, for the interest of the 
 whole nation.'^ " What prevailed with Pilate at length .... 
 was that saying of theirs, ' If thou let this man go, thou art 
 not Cfesar's friend;' which plainly implied a threatening that 
 they would accuse him to Caesar of remissness in his duty, .... 
 as greatly negligent in suppressing sedition. . . . This was 
 an argument Pilate could not withstand ; therefore yielded to 
 their importunity, condemned Him as guilty of the sedition and 
 treason they had accused Him of, which appeared by the title 
 he put over His head." ^ 
 
 NOTE D. 
 
 The full recognition, in the Constitutions of Clarendon, of 
 the whole system and order of the Church's Courts is the more 
 observable, because they represent the State side in the conflict 
 of those days. Archbishop Bramhall thus states the case : 
 
 " In the reign of King Henry the Second, some controversies 
 being likely to arise between the Crown and Thomas Becket, 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, the King called a general assembly 
 of his archbishops, bishops, abbots, priors, and peers of the 
 realm, at Clarendon, where there was made an acknowledgment 
 
 or memorial, ' cujusdem partis consuetudinum,' etc of a 
 
 certain part of the customs and liberties of his predecessors, 
 that is to say, his grandfather, Henry the First, son of the 
 Conqueror, and other kings ; a ' part,' but ' ex ungue leonem,' 
 from the view of this part we may conclude of what nature 
 the rest were ; ' of the customs,' the customs of England are the 
 Common Law of the land ; ' of his predecessors,' that is to say, 
 the Saxon, Danish, and Norman kings successively ; and there- 
 fore no marvel if they 'ought to be observed of all.' This 
 part of their ancient customs or liberties they reduced into 
 sixteen chapters or articles, to which all the archbishops, 
 bishops, and other ecclesiastics, with all the peers and nobles of 
 the realm, did not only give their acknowledgment and consent, 
 
 but also their oaths for the due observation of them One 
 
 was, that ' all appeals in England must proceed regularly from 
 
 ' S. John xi. 49, 50. ^ BiscoE on tire. Acts, p. 142. 
 
 D
 
 50 A CHARGE. 
 
 the archdeacon to the bishop, from the bishop to the archbishop; 
 and if the archbishop failed to do justice, the last complaint 
 must be to the king, to give order for redress." ^ 
 
 It has been said, that " it is not clear whether, by this provi- 
 sion, it vras intended that the royal power should be brought to 
 bear merely to prevent abuse of the forms of justice, or whether 
 the cause was to be heard on its merits by the king, and the 
 matter sent back, as has been always the case since the Eefor- 
 mation, to the Archbishop's Court, after decision. The form 
 now commonly used, when an appeal has been decided by the 
 Superior Court, is, ' that the cause be remitted to the Court 
 below, to the end that right and justice may be there done.' " ^ 
 The question is not practically a very important one, if, as it 
 appears clearly throughout, down to the present time, the case 
 is remitted to the spiritual Court : it would, of course, not be 
 remitted unless some cause were shown suggesting failure of 
 justice. But to suppose the king's Court sitting and judging, 
 in a case of doctrine, on its merits, would be indeed an historical 
 anachronism. 
 
 NOTE E. 
 
 The Act 25 Henry VIII. c. 21, had reference, primarily, to 
 the legislative action of the Church, in regard to the making of 
 canons ; and provided accordingly for a revision of the eccle- 
 siastical law by the aj)pointment of thirty-two Commissioners, 
 half to be of the clergy and half of the laity. It extended, at 
 the same time, the provisions of the Act of the preceding year 
 to all causes, restraining appeals to Eome in regard thereto. 
 But when the Commissioners, appointed under a renewed Com- 
 mission of Edward VI., made their final report, their recom- 
 mendation in regard to appeals was as follows : 
 
 " Quo ordine appellandum sit. 
 " Ab archidiaconis, decanis, et his qui sunt intra pontificiam 
 
 * "Just Vindication of the Church of England;" Works, vol. i. 
 pp. 143, 144. 
 
 ^ Judgments of the Judicial Committee, Introduction by the Rev. 
 W. H. Frem antic, p. xxvii.
 
 A CHARGE. 51 
 
 dignitatem, et jurisdictionem Ecclesiasticam liabent, ad Epis- 
 copiim liceat aj)pellare, ab Episcopo ad arcliiepiscopum, ab 
 archiepiscopo verb ad nostram majestatem. 
 
 " Quo cum fuerifc causa devoluta, earn vel concilio pro- 
 vinciali definire volumus, si gravis sit causa, vel a tribus 
 quatuorve ej^iscopis a nobis ad id constituendis. Quibus ration- 
 ibus cum res fuerit definita, et judicata, jDcr appellationem amplius 
 cognosci non poterit." ^ 
 
 The provisions made in tbe later Act for aj^peals from the 
 Archbishop's Courts are the consistent following out of the 
 principle laid down in the former Act, in regard to the King 
 as the fountain of justice to all his subjects. "And for lack of 
 justice at or in any of the Courts of the Archbishops of this 
 realm, or in any the King's dominions, it shall be lawful to the 
 parties grieved to appeal to the King's Majesty in the King's 
 Court of Chancery ; and that upon every such appeal a com- 
 mission shall be directed under the great seal to such persons 
 as shall be named by the King's Highness, his heirs or suc- 
 cessors, like as in cases of appeal from the Admiral's Court, to 
 hear and definitely determine such appeals, and the causes con- 
 cerning the same." 
 
 The appeal was not to any temporal Court, but to the King 
 in Chancery, i. e. to the King in his conscience, as the supreme 
 ruler of all estates ; the Lord Chancellor, the Keeper of the 
 King's conscience, being entrusted with the choice of fit persons 
 in regard to the subject matter in each case. 
 
 NOTE F. 
 
 There appears to be no small amount of misapprehension 
 in divers quarters, in regard to the course of events whereby 
 matters of clergy discipline have come into their present state ; 
 and in reference to which something, in the way of an endeavour 
 to correct misconceptions, is due both to the importance of the 
 subject itself, and to the memory of persons of high position in 
 the Church, and not less high character and principle, who took 
 a leading part, and with no little thought and care, in some of 
 these proceedings. 
 
 ' Reformatio Legum Ecchs. p. 283. 
 
 D 2
 
 52 A CHARGE. 
 
 It is commonly supposed, that by an Act passed in 1832, 
 the powers of the Court of Delegates, established by the Act 
 of Henry VIII. above referred to, were transferred to the 
 Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The question that 
 thereupon arises is a very important one. I will state it as put 
 by Canon Carter in a recent Letter, the rather because his state- 
 ments are characterised generally by care and moderation. 
 " The argument as against us," Canon Carter says, " is this : 
 the statute of Henry VIII. giving a right of appeal to the 
 Court of Delegates, and that of William IV., transferring the 
 same powers to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, 
 being accejited by the Church, and recognised by all priests as 
 the law of the English Church, binds them in conscience, so as 
 to preclude all grounds of reasonable objection to the claims 
 made upon them." " Nothing can be fairer," as he fully 
 allows, " or more consistent with a just compact between the 
 Church and State, than the declarations of the Act (24 Hen. 
 VIII. c. 12) which abolished the appellate power of the Pope 
 in this realm, and substituted for it that of the Sovereign, 
 thus reviving what the Kings of England had claimed in pre- 
 Eeformation times." But, in course of time, as he traces the 
 history onward, " the Georgian sera came, with its loss," as he 
 expresses it, " of any sense of the spiritual character of the 
 Church or its claims; and this lasted on till quite modern 
 days ; so much so, that when the appellate Jurisdiction of the 
 Crown was transferred by Parliament from the Court of Dele- 
 gates to the Judicial Committee of Privy Council, as the late 
 Lord Brougham remarked, there was no thought of Church 
 questions being affected by the change. Nor, indeed, was it," 
 he says, " till the Gorham judgment occurred that men awoke 
 to perceive the inroad of State jurisprudence, that had imper- 
 ceptibly crept in, to the general secularisation of the Church's 
 judicial system." ^ 
 
 It is said, on the other hand, that this transference of juris- 
 diction was grounded on the Eeport of a Commission which 
 had prominently in view cases of Clergy offences against the 
 laws ecclesiastical ; and it is therefore argued that the present 
 arrangements can plead the high authority of the eminent 
 ' Letter, pp. 31-36.
 
 A CHARGE. 53 
 
 men, ecclesiastics as well as others, by whom this change 
 was recommended and sanctioned. 
 
 " To secure accm-acy," Canon Carter says, he will " take a 
 list drawn up by Lord Selborno [in correspondence with a 
 Sussex priest on the Public Worship Kegulation Act ; London, 
 Hayes], of statutes since the Reformation, 'relating, more or 
 less, to matters of procedure in the provincial and diocesan 
 Courts of England.' They are thus stated [beginning with 23 
 Hen. VIII. cap. 9 (a.d. 1531), and proceeding onwards]. 
 
 " 2 and 3 Will. IV. cap. 92 (a.d. 1832). Act transferring to 
 the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council the powers of 
 the Court of Delegates, etc. 
 
 " 2 and 3 Will. IV. cap. 93 (a.d. 1832). Further provision 
 for cases of contumacy in ecclesiastical Courts. 
 
 " 3 and 4 Will. IV. cap. 41, sect. 28 (a.d. 1833). Further 
 powers given to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, 
 etc. 
 
 " 3 and 4 Vict. cap. 86 (a.d. 1840). Church Discipline Act, 
 by which the whole procedure in all the ecclesiastical Courts 
 against clergymen accused of offences against the law ecclesi- 
 astical was regulated, etc." 
 
 The list thus given — and, indeed, the common statement on 
 the subject in popular discussion — is inaccurate, in a very im- 
 portant point, and loses sight entirely of an intermediate step 
 which is necessary to throw light upon the opposing views 
 taken on the subject. 
 
 The fact is, that there was no Act directly, and at once, trans- 
 ferring to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council the 
 powers of the Court of Delegates. The Act of 1832 (2 and 3 
 Will. IV. cap. 92) repealed so much of the Act of Henry 
 VIII. as gave power to appeal to the King in Chancery, and 
 authorised instead an appeal to the King in Council ; the judg- 
 ments of the Privy Council to have the same force as those 
 of the Delegates. It was the subsequent Act of 1833 which 
 established the Judicial Committee. This Act was the special 
 work of Lord Brougham, whose statement in regard to it was 
 undoubtedly to the effect above stated. 
 
 The former Act, of 1832, was grounded, unquestionably, upon 
 the Report of a Royal Commission, appointed, July 5, 1830,
 
 64 A CHARGE. 
 
 " to make a diligent and full inquiry into the course of pro- 
 cedure, etc., and into the jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts 
 in England and Wales." The Commission included the Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury (Howley), the Bishops of London (Blom- 
 field), Durham (Van Mildert), Lincoln (Kaye), St. Asaph (Carey), 
 and Bangor (Bethell) ; and with them Lord Tenterden, Chief 
 Justice ; Lord Wynford, Sir Nicholas Tindal, Chief Justice of 
 Common Pleas; Sir W. Alexander, Chief Baron of the Ex- 
 chequer ; Sir John Nicholl, LL.D. (Dean of the Arches) ; Sir 
 Christopher Robinson, LL.D. (King's Advocate) ; Sir Herbert 
 Jenncr, LL.D. ; Sir C. E. Carrington, Stephen Lushington, 
 R. C. Ferguson, Esquires. 
 
 The recommendation in regard to " the jurisdiction of the 
 Delegates " was contained in a first and " Special Report," of 
 Jan. 25, 1831, presented in conformity with a communication 
 from the Lord Chancellor (Brougham), requiring the Commis- 
 sioners to report specially and immediately " on the jurisdiction 
 of the Court of Delegates, and the expediency of transferring the 
 jurisdiction to the Privy Council ; " the opinion of the Com- 
 missioners to that effect having been already communicated 
 to the Lord Chancellor, in answer to a question then pro- 
 posed to them. The Report stated the several grounds and 
 reasons for that opinion, in regard to the objections to which the 
 Court of Delegates, in its practical ojDcration, was liable ; and 
 proceeded to say : " Though we might have found difficulty in 
 proposing an unobjectionable substitute, if our attention had not 
 been directed to the expediency of removing that jurisdiction to 
 the Privy Council, we have no hesitation in assenting to that pro- 
 position, subject to the adoption of such suitable regulations and 
 provisions as we have before suggested for rendering the 
 Tribunal efficient for such purpose." 
 
 The first reason stated for the opinion, "that an Appeal to 
 the Privy Council would not be attended with the objections 
 and inconveniences above enumerated," was as follows : 
 
 " The Privy Council, being comjiosed of Lords Spiritual and 
 Temjioral, the Judges in Equity, the Chiefs of the Common Law 
 Courts, the Judges of the Civil Law Courts, and other persons of 
 legal education and habits, who have filled judicial sitiiations, 
 seems to comprise the materials of a most perfect tribunal for 
 deciding the appeals in question," etc.
 
 A CHARGE. 55 
 
 It was tliouglit that such an arrangement followed " the prin- 
 ciple on which the present Court of Delegates " was " con- 
 stituted ; " and " the exercise of this jurisdiction by the Privy 
 Council would be no anomaly ; for, in testamentary and other 
 Ecclesiastical matters arising in the Colonies, the ultimate 
 ajipeal " was to the King in Council. It was said further : " The 
 number of Appeals is not likely to be onerous, since the whole 
 number from both the Provinces to the Delegates for the last 
 thirty years has been only ninety-five, which gives an average 
 of little more than three in the year ; " though it was added, 
 " from the great increase of personal property, the number of 
 late years had rather increased." The mention of "personal 
 property " will suggest at once that the great majority of cases 
 was of a testamentary kind : in fact, of the cases enumerated, it 
 appears, no less than sixty were testamentary ; twenty were 
 matrimonial ; the remainder being such as for " subtraction of 
 church rate, subtraction of tithe, defamation, office of judge, 
 faculty, subtraction of legacy," etc. Since the establishment of 
 the Court of Probate and Divorce, it is forgotten what was the 
 great majority of cases which formerly came before the eccle- 
 siastical Courts ; not what people think of now exclusively, 
 questions of doctrine and ritual. 
 
 The General Eeport of the Commissioners was not presented 
 till Feb. 15, 1832. It began with a careful historical state- 
 ment respecting the origin and character of the ecclesiastical 
 laws administered in this country, and the establishment of 
 the ecclesiastical tribunals ; describing, summarily, the several 
 courts, matters of jurisdiction, and modes of proceeding 
 (pp. 10-20) ; with the alterations and improvements suggested 
 (pp. 21-53). The question as to the Court of Delegates was 
 referred to (pp. 20, 21), as already reported on. After a full 
 inquiry and report respecting the civil jurisdiction exercised by 
 the ecclesiastical Courts, the Commissioners proceeded to offer 
 some suggestions respecting the authority hitherto possessed by 
 those tribunals, of a criminal nature (p. 53). This portion of 
 the Eeport began thus : 
 
 " Our notice has been first attracted to that branch of it which 
 embraces the Correction of Clerics. It is most fitting that there 
 should exist some tribunal to which the clergy should be 
 amenable for any open viulation of morality, or disregard of the
 
 56 A CHARGE. 
 
 sacred obligations into which they have entered on becoming 
 ministers of the Church of England ; but we have had the satis- 
 faction," it was added, " of finding that, for many years last past, 
 the instances have been very rare in which it has been neces- 
 sary to resort to judicial proceedings, for the pm-pose of punish- 
 ing oflfences committed by them." 
 
 It is sufficiently evident that they were moral offences which 
 were prominently in the view of the Commissioners ; and indeed 
 it was further said, " Some cases of a flagrant nature, which have 
 occurred of late years, have attracted the attention of the public 
 to the corrective discipline of the Church, as administered by 
 the ecclesiastical Courts." One case in particular was referred 
 to, very notorious at the time, " a peculiar and extreme case, in 
 which proceedings for a prohibition were carried on in the 
 Court of King's Bench, and afterwards, by Writ of Error, in the 
 House of Lords ; and when the question of prohibition had been 
 decided against the defendant, the case was carried by appeal to 
 the Court of Delegates, where the decision of the Com't of 
 Arches was ultimately affirmed " (p. 56). 
 
 There followed a recommendation of an amended course of 
 proceeding, which showed that the eminent persons concerned 
 had not lost sight of all principles of ecclesiastical law, or of 
 the inherent spiritual claims of the Church and its ministers. 
 They said: 
 
 " Deeply impressed with the importance of the subject, and 
 the difficulties with which it is surrounded, we have endeavoured 
 to find a remedy for some of the inconveniences which attend 
 the present mode of proceeding, without prejudice to any 
 interests, and without lessening, in the smallest degree, any 
 security which may be justly claimed for the maintenance and 
 protection, either of the civil rights, or of the spiritual character 
 and functions, of the accused parties." 
 
 " With respect to the tribunal which we recommend, we may 
 remark that it will restore to the Bishops that personal jurisdic- 
 tion which they originalli/ exercised, and which was afterwards 
 A' delegated by them and their Chancellors and officials. The 
 doctrine of the Canon Law is, that although the trial of causes 
 of certain descriptions may be properly entrusted to a lay 
 Judge, to the Bishop himseK belongs ' inquisitio,' ' correctio,'
 
 A CHARGE. 57 
 
 ' punitio excessuum, seu amotio a beneficio.' Agreeably to this 
 principle," they say, " the power of deprivation is reserved by our 
 Canons to the Bishop in person ; and the same principle seems 
 to apply to the case of suspension, and to the infliction of any 
 other censure which may affect a clergyman's spiritual func- 
 tions." 
 
 Provisions are suggested, accordingly, for all proceedings to 
 be before the Bishop, who is to hear the case with the assistance 
 of one or more legal assessor or assessors, to be selected by 
 himself. In any case arising in the diocese of Canterbury, pro- 
 ceedings to be before the Bishops of London, Winchester, and 
 Rochester, or any one or two of them, to be appointed by com- 
 mission from the Archbishop ; and in like manner in the diocese 
 of York. An appeal to lie to the Archbishop of the Province, 
 who shall hear such appeal, with the assistance of one or more 
 of the Provincial Judges ; and, if he shall think fit, with other 
 legal assistance (pp. 57, 58). 
 
 I confess, I cannot see here the signs of that absolute un- 
 mindfulness or indifference to all Church princii^le which is 
 supposed to characterise everything that has been thought or 
 done in these matters, during the last fifty years or more. 
 
 In 1833, as has been already said. Lord Brougham brought 
 in the Bill which constituted the Judicial Committee of the 
 Privy Council. It was with reference to this Bill that Lord 
 Brougham made the statement above mentioned. When the 
 Bishop of London (Bishop Blomfield) laid upon the table of the 
 House of Lords, on one of the first days of the Session of 1850 
 (February 5), — more than a month before the Eeport in the 
 Gorham case was delivered, — a Bill, the same in its main features 
 with Bills which had been brought in for two or three years 
 successively, and containing a clause proposing a new Court of 
 Final Appeal, to which he invited special attention, Lord 
 Brougham " approved of the course which the right reverend 
 prelate had pursued on this subject. He had not been present," 
 he said, " at the arguments in the great case, Gorham v. the 
 Bishop of Exeter, but he had heard the echo of them at a 
 distance. Anything that could relieve the Judicial Committee 
 of the Privy Council of such cases would he a great boon to its 
 members, and icould be generally beneficial. . . , He would give
 
 58 A CHARGE. 
 
 the proposition of the right reverend prelate, when he saw it, 
 his best consideration." ^ 
 
 When, again, the Bishop of London brought in his new Bill, 
 later in the same Session (June 3), subsequently to the decision 
 in the Gorham case. Lord Brougham expressed his feeling as to 
 the peculiar position in which he stood in regard to the subject 
 of it. He said " it was his (Lord Brougham's) Bill that con- 
 stituted the Judicial Committee." " He believed his noble and 
 learned fi'iend on the woolsack would agree with him that the 
 abolition of the old Court of Eeview did take away from the 
 Church to a certain extent the security which she had possessed 
 for the soundness of her doctrines." " He could not help feeling 
 that the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council had been framed 
 icithnut the expectation of questions like that which had produced 
 the present measure being brought before it. It was created for 
 the consideration of a totally different class of cases ; and he had 
 no doubt that, if it had been constituted with a view to such 
 cases as the present, some other arrangement would have been 
 made. He was most distinctly in favour of the Judicial Com- 
 mittee being enabled to take the opinion of qualified prelates." ^ 
 
 It has been stated, in fact, that in the Act of 1833, the enact- 
 ing clause which constitutes the Judicial Committee a final 
 Court of Api^eal for certain Courts, enumerated the several 
 Courts that were to come under its jurisdiction, but omitted the 
 ecclesiastical Courts altogether. They only came under the 
 operation of the Final Court of Appeal by the general clause, 
 at the end of the Act, which comprehends them in general 
 terms, but does not specify them particularly. Were it not, 
 therefore, for that general clause, the ecclesiastical Courts 
 could never have come under the jurisdiction of the Judicial 
 Committee of Privy Council." ^ " The explanation of the 
 matter is, I believe " — said, more recently, an accurate and well- 
 informed person — " that the draughtsman, in drawing a clause 
 relating to the appeals which were then pending, added words 
 including all other appeals that might be referred to his 
 
 > Hansard, 3rd series, 1850, vol. i. col. 333-336. 
 
 == Ibid. col. 629. 
 
 * Chronicle of Convocation for 1865, p. 2033.
 
 A CHARGE. 59 
 
 Majesty in Council." ^ But, indeed, it would not, perhaps, be 
 very surprising, as regards tlie ecclesiastical operation of tlie 
 Bill, if, amidst the difficulties and dangers of the year 1833 — 
 specially the Irish Church Bill — Lord Brougham's Bill " for 
 the better ordering of judicature in His Majesty's Privy 
 Council," attracted less notice than, as events proved, it deserved. 
 It should, at the same time, be noticed that the Bill contained 
 the following clause : " Provided always that nothing herein 
 contained shall prevent his Majesty, if he shall think fit, from 
 summoning any other members of the said Privy Council to 
 attend the meetings of the said Committee." This would allow 
 of the attendance of the three episcopal Privy Councillors, when 
 any matters affecting Church doctrine or discipline were con- 
 cerned. It was by virtue of this clause that the two Arch- 
 bishops and the Bishop of London were specially summoned 
 in the Gorham case ; the ArchbishojDS and the Bishop of London 
 in the case of Liddell v. Westerton ; and the ArchbishoiD of 
 York (Longley) in the case of Poole v. the Bishop of London. 
 In more recent cases, the only prelates present have been mem- 
 bers of the Committee, conjoined therein with lay members. 
 
 In 1840 was passed the Church Discipline Act (3 & 4 Vict. 
 c. 86), the Act lastly named in the list quoted above, — by which 
 Act (as there stated) " the whole procedure in all the ecclesi- 
 astical courts against clergymen accused of offences against the 
 law ecclesiastical was regulated." It would be presumed, ac- 
 cording to the view now taken so strongly in certain quarters, 
 that this Act, as the latest in the series, would take its origin 
 from the lowest depth of Erastianism, utterly ignoring Church 
 principle, and be a precedent for such legislation. 
 
 The Bill was really the result of very full and earnest dis- 
 cussion for three years previously to its passing ; specially on 
 the part of the Bishop of Exeter. After providing for a pre- 
 liminary commission, with the opi^ortuuity given for admission, 
 by the i^arty accused, of the truth of the articles laid to his 
 charge, iu which case " the bishop, or his commissary sj^ecially 
 appointed, shall forthwith proceed to pass sentence thereupon 
 according to the ecclesiastical law," the Act goes on to provide 
 (sec. 11) that, this failing, " the bishop shall proceed to hear 
 ^ Chronicle of Convocation, ]y69, p. 86.
 
 60 A CHARGE. 
 
 the cause, with the assistance of three assessors, to be nomi- 
 nated by the bishop ; one of whom shall be an advocate who 
 shall have practised not less than five years in the Court of the 
 archbishop of the province, or a serjeant-at-law, or a barrister 
 of not less than seven years' standing, and another shall be the 
 dean of his cathedral church, or of one of his cathedral churches, 
 or one of his archdeacons, or his chancellor ; and upon the 
 hearing of such cause the bishop shall determine the same, and 
 pronounce sentence thereupon according to the ecclesiastical 
 law." There was at the same time power given to the bishop 
 to send the cause by letters of request to the Court of Appeal of 
 the province. 
 
 Then, for appeals, the Act provides (sec. 15) that " it shall 
 be lawful for any party who shall think himself aggrieved by 
 the judgment pronounced in the first instance by the bishop, or 
 in the Court of Appeal of the province, to appeal from such judg- 
 ment ; and such appeal shall be to the archbishop, and shall be 
 heard before the judge of the Court of Appeal of the province, 
 where the cause shall have been heard and determined in the 
 first instance by the bishop, and shall be proceeded in, in the said 
 Court of Appeal, in the same manner and subject only to the' 
 same appeal as in this Act is provided with respect to cases sent 
 by letters of request to the said Court ; and the appeal shall be 
 to the Queen in Council, and shall be heard before the Judicial 
 Committee, when the cause shall have been heard and deter- 
 mined in the first instance in the Court of the archbishop." 
 
 And, finally, to rectify the oversight which had been com- 
 mitted in the Act of 1833, it is provided (by sec. 16) " that every 
 archbishop and bishop of the united Church of England and 
 Ireland, who now is or at any time hereafter shall be sworn 
 of her Majesty's most honourable Privy Council, shall be a 
 member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council for the 
 purposes of every such appeal as aforesaid ; and that no appeal 
 shall be heard before the Judicial Committee of the Privy 
 Council, unless at least one of such archbishops and bishops 
 shall be present at the hearing thereof; provided always that 
 the archbishop or bishop who shall have issued the commission 
 hereinbefore mentioned in any such case, or who shall have heard 
 any such case, or who shall have sent any such case by letters
 
 A CHARGE. 61 
 
 of request to the Court of Appeal of the province, shall not sit 
 as a member of the Judicial Committee on an appeal in that 
 case." 
 
 The Act of 1840 embodied, in its essential points, the 
 " Breviate of a proposed Bill " which the Bishop of Exeter had 
 put forth, with his Charge of 1839, appending to it a Protest 
 which he had entered on the Journals of the House of Lords, 
 against the Bill of the preceding session. That Protest had 
 been grounded explicitly on j)rinciples such as these. 
 
 "Dissentient: 1. Because, though the ecclesiastical judges 
 derive their power ' in foro exteriori,' even in spiritual matters, 
 from the State, their authority is independent of, and pre- 
 existent to, the sanction of the temporal law, which merely adds 
 temporal consequences to the ecclesiastical censures, the inflic- 
 tion of which is part of the power of the Keys vested in the 
 Church by its Divine Founder, and exercised by it in the 
 earliest ages. . . . 
 
 " 2. Because . . . while the Bill thus seeks to arm a layman, 
 by authority of Parliament, with that spiritual sword which not 
 the highest lay potentate on earth can wield, it hides from the 
 Sovereign, and from the great council of the nation, that solemn 
 duty which ' He by whom kings reign, and princes decree 
 justice,' hath inseparably annexed to Christian magistracy, the 
 duty of upholding and enforcing the essential discipline of His 
 Church ; a duty which this State, so long as it acknowledges 
 our own apostolic branch of that Church, can only discharge by 
 sustaining and strengthening, in all things necessary, the 
 government by bishops ; a duty which the sovereigns of this 
 realm have hitherto religiously observed, and which the Legis- 
 lature hath repeatedly recognised in its most solemn acts, 
 especially in that great statute of 24 Henry VIII. c. 12, which 
 most eloquently, yet most accurately, sets forth the con- 
 stitution of this imperial realm, ' governed by one supreme 
 head,' " etc. . . .^ 
 
 " And again, in those more modern statutes, which are, as it 
 
 were, the landmarks of the Constitution, the 1st William and 
 
 Mary, c. 6, passed by Mr. Somers and the other enlightened 
 
 patriots of that day, and embodying the contract between the 
 
 1 Vid. sup. pp. 37, 38.
 
 62 A CHARGE. 
 
 sovereign and the people in the coronation oath ; of which con- 
 tract the ' preserving the rights and privileges of the bishops 
 and clergy ' is a prominent part ; — and the Act of Union with 
 Scotland, reciting and confirming, as a fundamental article of that 
 union, the Act for securing the Church of England, in which it 
 is especially provided, that every king and queen coming to the 
 royal government of the kingdom of Great Britain, shall take 
 and subscribe an oath that he will maintain to the utmost of 
 his power, not only ' the doctrine and worship,' but ' the dis- 
 cipline and government of the Church of England.' " 
 
 The Bill of 1839 had involved, in the judgment of the Bishop 
 of Exeter, " principles too sacred to be surrendered : " he was 
 satisfied with the Bill of 18-10, because it embodied those prin- 
 ciples in regard to the exercise of the authority and jurisdiction 
 belonging to the Church and its spiritual rulers. The main 
 question at issue was in regard to the jurisdiction of the pro- 
 vincial Court, in reference to the principles of diocesan epis- 
 copacy, and its inherent spiritual authority. 
 
 In practice, under the Act of 1840, in conformity with usage 
 in ecclesiastical causes, cases have been constantly sent at once 
 by letters of request to the Court of the province, as saving one 
 trial, and thereby avoiding delay and expense. The pre- 
 liminary commission of inquiry provided by the Act was 
 intended for the protection of the clerk against frivolous or 
 vexatious charges, and at the same time to supply a speedy and 
 summary mode of dealing with charges admitted by the accused. 
 It became, unfortunately, the practice to retain counsel for 
 defence before the commission, which thus, inconveniently, 
 assumed the character of a regular trial, to be followed by 
 another more formal one ; hence increased scandal in cases of 
 moral ofience, and additional expense. But, meanwhile, the 
 principles embodied in the Act ought not to be lost sight of, 
 or, without inquiry, to be presumed to be utterly wrong. 
 
 It was the Gorham case, undoubtedly, which awoke the 
 minds of Churchmen generally, of the thoughtful laity not less 
 than of the clergy, to what then revealed itself as the anomalous 
 and dangerous position of Church matters. Not that it is all 
 correct to suppose that no objection was felt till that decision 
 was given. It had been presumed that in all such cases the
 
 A CHARGE. 63 
 
 provisions of the Act of 1840 would, at least, apply ; and 
 spiritual persons form part of tlie tribunal. But the Gorham 
 case took people by sui-prise, arising, as it did, out of a case of 
 " duplex querela," and therefore not coming xmder the Church 
 Discipline Act. And the Committee named consisted of five lay- 
 men, none of whom need be a member of the Church of England. 
 It ought not, meanwhile, to be forgotten, that eight years before, 
 in his Charge of 1842, the Bishop of Exeter had called atten- 
 tion to the need of canons " to devise a more satisfactory 
 tribunal of appeal," or, " at least, to supply to such a tribunal 
 some better means of knowing what that doctrine is." In 
 ecclesiastical causes, the lay judges, " very learned indeed, but 
 in another faculty," were " obliged," as the Bishop expressed it, 
 " to pick their course as they can, through ways which they 
 often find very rough and very tangled." " True it is," the 
 Bishop went on to say, " that by a recent law it is enacted, that 
 in every appeal to this Court, in a cause of criminal proceeding 
 against a clergyman below the rank of bishop, some one arch- 
 bishop, or bishop, being a member of the Privy Council, must 
 be present as a member of the Committee when the appeal is 
 heard ; but " in other causes ..." the Court has not the assis- 
 tance of a solitary bishop." He called to mind that, " when 
 Heniy VIII. rescued the imperial crown of England from its 
 long and disgraceful thi-aldom to Kome, the most imj)ortant of 
 all his measures was the Statute of Appeals ; that great law 
 which," as the Bishop proceeded to say, " defines and describes 
 the constitution of this realm more expressly and more closely 
 than any other Act in the Statute Book." The Bishop ex- 
 emplified the difficulty, to which he had called attention, by a 
 reference to a case which had just before been decided by the 
 Judicial Committee, in a cause which had excited more than 
 ordinary interest throughout the land, by reason of the great 
 theological and spiritual questions which were mixed up in 
 it, and in which "final judgment was given by an ex-Lord 
 Chancellor, an ex-Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common 
 Pleas, a Puisne Judge of the same Court, and the Judge of the 
 High Court of Admiralty; four men," said his Lordship, "of 
 high character and very high attainments, but not exactly such 
 as any one man in the realm would have selected to ventilate
 
 64 A CHARGE. 
 
 the questions which they, whether necessarily or unnecessarily, 
 connected with the point they had to decide." The ex-Lord 
 Chancellor was Lord Brougham, who delivered, and therefore 
 no doubt drew up, the judgment, and perhaps derived from this 
 case (Martin v. Escott) something of the feeling which he 
 expressed on occasion of the Gorham case, as we have seen, in 
 reference to such cases coming before the Judicial Committee, 
 
 In 1847 a Bill was brought into the House of Lords by the 
 Bishop of London, prepared after deliberations of the Bench of 
 Bishops, and was referred to a Select Committee, in which it was 
 carefully amended ; it was brought in again in 1848 and 1849, 
 and again in February 1850, as above mentioned. These Bills 
 all contained provisions for a new Court of Final Appeal. 
 
 Not long after the revival of the active functions of Con- 
 vocation, the Upper House, in February 1854, appointed a 
 Committee to consider and report on what might be expedient 
 for the better enforcement of discipline among the Clergy, and 
 desired that ten members of the Lower House might be named 
 to act with them on a Joint Committee. This Committee met, 
 and agreed on a Report which was presented to the Upper House, 
 February 8, 1855. It was taken into consideration by the Lower 
 House, by the Archbishop's desire, on the following day. * 
 
 It is due to the Upper House of Convocation of the Province 
 of Canterbui-y, that it should not be forgotten altogether how 
 freely they invited the assistance of the Lower House in dealing 
 with a question of no ordinary importance and difficulty ; and it 
 is due to the Lower House to bear in mind that it was none 
 other than a painstaking and careful consideration which they 
 gave to the subject, when they were called to consider it in 
 conjunction with their Lordships of the Upper House. It was 
 indeed no merely temporary, unreasoning excitement of feeling, 
 aroused by some decision which had given offence to this party 
 or that ; it was an earnest desire to find a remedy for that which 
 was widely felt among Churchmen, clergy and laity alike, to be 
 a real source of disquiet and danger. 
 
 In regard to the Court of Final Appeal, the Report of the 
 Joint Committee of 1855 contained the following passage : 
 
 " 13. That the greatest difficulty besets the due adjustment of 
 the course of final appeals.
 
 A CHARUE. 65 
 
 " 14. That it appears to your Committee of the greatest 
 moment, whilst we maintain the just supremacy of the CroA\Ti, 
 as the ultimate source of justice and redress to every subject 
 complaining of wrong, whether in matters ecclesiastical or civil, 
 to combine therewith security that ecclesiastical questions shall 
 be decided by persons qualified, by office and acquaintance with 
 the course of law ecclesiastical, to decide thereon. 
 
 " 15. That it appears to your Committee that the acknow- 
 ledged difficulties which attach to this subject have been much 
 increased by recent legislation, which almost accidentally trans- 
 ferred the hearing of these causes from the Queen in Chancery 
 to the Queen in Council, 
 
 "16. They would suggest the expediency of considering 
 whether the best solution of this question would not be to 
 restore this jurisdiction to the Queen in Chancery ; and to 
 enable Her Majesty, when any appeals shall be presented from 
 the Court of the province in matters ecclesiastical, in which any 
 clerk in holy orders shall be a party, except in causes matri- 
 monial and testamentary, to remit the cause for re-hearing in 
 the Court of the Archbishop ; providing that there should sit, 
 under the authority of the Great Seal, with the Judge of that 
 Court, other ecclesiastical and common law Judges, to hear and 
 decide finally in the cause." 
 
 The House accepted this with an amendment as follows : 
 
 " That a certain number of the archbishops and bishops 
 be necessarily members of such Court, and the presence of a 
 certain number of such spiritual members should be necessary 
 to its proceeding ; and that all lay members of the Court shall 
 be members of the Church of England." 
 
 In 1856, in the prospect of a Clergy Discipline Bill to be 
 brought in, not by the Episcopal Bench, the Archbishop desired 
 the Lower House of the Convocation of Canterbury to take into 
 consideration the subject of Clergy Discipline, and to appoint 
 a Committee of their own body to prepare a report thereon, and 
 to present the same on the next Session.^ A Committee of 
 sixteen members was named on the day following ; and on the 
 reassembling of Convocation, on the 15th of April, their Report 
 was presented to the Upper House.^ The Eeport underwent 
 
 ' JoiirnaJ of Convocation^ vol. ii. pp. 72-P.3. ^ Ibid. ])p. 99-102. 
 
 E
 
 66 A CHARGE. 
 
 a very full discussion in the Lower House, on that and the 
 following day;^ and on the 17th the Eeport, as agreed to by 
 the Lower House, was presented to the Upper.^ 
 
 On the subject of the Court of Final Appeal, the Eeport 
 (1856) was as follows : 
 
 "19. In approaching the subject of the due adjustment of 
 the course of Final Appeals in question of doctrine, the House 
 felt that they were entering upon the most grave and important 
 of the matters referred to their consideration ; in which they 
 were required to combine full security for the doctrine and dis- 
 cipline of the Church, with the maintenance of the supremacy 
 of the Crown, as the ultimate source of justice and redress to 
 every subject complaining of wrong, whether in matters eccle- 
 Biastical or civil." 
 
 With reference to this subject, it was resolved : 
 
 " (1) That in the judgment of this House, the principles to 
 be kept in view in regard to Final Appeals are those which 
 were fully and carefully embodied at the time of the Reforma- 
 tion, in the preamble to the Statute of Appeals (24 Hen. VIII. 
 c. 12); in which it is declared, that the Realm of England is an 
 empire," etc. . . . [the words of the Act being embodied in the 
 Resolution]. 
 
 " (2) That, fully recognising the principle, that no Court of 
 Final Appeal has any jurisdiction or authority to settle matters 
 of Faith, which office belongs to the Church alone ; and regard- 
 ing the proper function of such Court to be simply that of 
 applying to the particular case in hand, in the rendering of 
 justice therein, the authoritative decisions of the Church, as 
 contained in the settled formularies of her faith and worship, 
 agreed upon in her provincial synods ; this House yet feels it 
 right to declare, that no arrangement would appear satisfactory 
 which did not give full security, in accordance with the prin- 
 ciples above recited, that all questions involving points of 
 doctrine should be dealt with, under the authority of the 
 Crown, by the spiritualty, assisted by such legal persons as 
 might be deemed necessary for the ends of justice." 
 
 There had been a very full and careful discussion of this 
 subject, and this resolution was carried by a very large majority 
 (38 to 8). 
 * Journal of Convomfion, vol. ii. pp. 185-192. ^ Ibirl. pp. 214-221.
 
 A CHARGE. 67 
 
 It was understood (pp. 264-293) tbat the "spiritualty" was 
 " not limited to the prelates and ordained priests, but consisted 
 of those who were appointed or had authority to bear rule, and to 
 deal with disputed cases in the Church of Christ. Primarily," it 
 was said, " it might be viewed as belonging to the episcopate ; 
 secondly, to the presbytery or ordained priests ; and thirdly, 
 to such laymen as they miglit call to their assistance and 
 counsel in determining such cases." "As a general principle," it 
 was maintained, the " spiritualty meant ecclesiastical officers, 
 either ordained, or, if not ordained, acting under the authority 
 of the Church of Christ." " In the controversies which our 
 great divines waged with the Church of Rome, when the 
 Church of Rome taunted the Church of England with the fact 
 of the final decision in matters of faith being vested in the 
 Crown, Bishop Andrewes, Jeremy Taylor, and Archbishop 
 Bramhall, held that it was not true that the supremacy of the 
 Crown invested the monarch with any such authority ; that ho 
 was bound to see justice done to all under his sovereignty, — 
 done in the best way, and by the fittest persons ; and as, for 
 that purpose, he made provision for. deciding temporal matters 
 by the temporalty — that was, the ordinary judges — so in spiritual 
 matters this would be entrusted to the spiritualty." 
 
 There was reference further made to Hooker, as " shewing 
 that there was a combination of lay persons with the spiritual, 
 in a way which was at the same time consistent with the 
 Statute of Appeals. Hooker said, ' Our judges in causes ecclesi- 
 astical are either ordinary or commissionary : ordinary, those 
 whom we term Ordinaries ; and such, by the laws of this land, 
 are none but prelates only, whose power to do that which they 
 do is in themselves, and belongeth to the nature of their ecclesi- 
 astical calling. In spiritual causes, a lay person may be no 
 Ordinary ; a Commissionary Judge there is no let but that he may 
 be ; and that our laws do evermore refer the ordinary judgments 
 of spiritual causes unto spiritual persons, no man which knoweth 
 anything of the practice of this realm can easily be ignorant.' 
 Again : ' We see it hereby a thing necessary to put a difference, 
 as well between that ordinary jurisdiction which belongeth to 
 the clergy alone, and that commissionary wherein others are 
 for just considerations appointed to join with them ; as also 
 between both these jurisdictions and a third, whereby the King 
 
 E 2
 
 68 A CHARGE. 
 
 hath a transcendent authority, and that in all causes, over both.' 
 He speaks of the certainty with which our laws have prescribed 
 bounds unto each kind of power. • But of this,' he says, ' most 
 certain we are, that our laws do neither suffer a spiritual court 
 to entertain those causes which by the law are civil, nor yet, if 
 the matter be indeed spiritual, a mere civil court to give judg- 
 ment of it. Touching supreme power, therefore, to command 
 all men, and in all manner of causes of judgment to be highest, 
 let this much suffice, as well for declaration of our own mean- 
 ing, as for defence of the truth therein.' "^ 
 
 Upon Hooker's principles, undoubtedly, it is absolutely 
 essential that the derivation of authority to the judge in the 
 spiritual coui-t from the sjiiritual authority, the Archbishop or 
 Bishop, should be direct and immediate, and the link as close 
 as possible. In no other way could the Church of England, to 
 his view, stand her ground against the Komanist or the Pres- 
 byterian ; the Pope of Eome, on the one hand, and the Con- 
 sistories of Calvin's discij)line on the other. 
 
 The question of the Court of Final Appeal came again before 
 the Lower House in the Sessions of the following year (1857). 
 A resolution was passed by the Upper House; desiring the 
 Lower House to consider and report, '• if it has any further con- 
 clusions which it wishes to present on the subject of final appeal 
 on points of doctrine in ecclesiastical causes." The subject, as 
 was stated by the Bishop of Oxford, had been " committed to the 
 Lower House, which made a report thereon, but expressed a 
 wish for more time to consider this important point. He 
 thought that the final judgment of the Lower House ought to 
 be brought before their lordships." The Bishop of London 
 suggested a doubt, on the ground that the other House had 
 already expressed their opinion ; and he thought it more desir- 
 able to abide by what they had reported, than to invite new 
 discussions, which might lead to a different conclusion." The 
 motion, however, was agreed to ; and the Lower House on the 
 same day resumed the consideration of the subject, following up, 
 in fact, a discussion which had begun in the last session 
 (April 17) of the preceding year. After full debate on that 
 
 ^ Journal of Convocation, pp. 278, 279. See Hooker, Eccles. Pol. 
 viii. 8 (3), (7), (9). ^ ly^^^ ^^ 349^
 
 A CHARGE. 69 
 
 day and the day following, in the course of which several 
 propositions and resolutions were negatived or withdrawn, the 
 House finally carried, without division, the following resolution ; 
 which was duly presented to the Upper House the nest day 
 (February 6) : 
 
 " The Lower House of Convocation desires to tend its respect- 
 ful acknowledgments to his Grace the President, for the com- 
 munication made to this House, desiring it to consider and 
 report whether it has any further conclusions which it wishes 
 to present on the subject of final appeal on points of doctrine in 
 ecclesiastical causes. The Lower House has taken into its 
 renewed and anxious consideration this portion of the subject, 
 with the various difficulties which beset it, and would beg only 
 earnestly to commend to the consideration of the Upper House 
 the principles embodied in the Report already presented to 
 their Lordships, as those which, in the judgment of this House, 
 are to be carefully kept in view with regard to final appeals." ^ 
 
 It had been proposed, in April 1856, that the resolutions 
 brought forward in the Lower House should include the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 " That in regard to the particular provisions by which these 
 essential principles would best be secured, this House would 
 desire to leave the question, as relating to the general polity of 
 the Church, to the consideration, in the first instance, of the 
 Upper House." 
 
 But it was not thought necessary to embody such a resolution 
 formally in the Keport ; although it was felt that, "considering 
 that, ever since the year 1845, this question of the Court of 
 Appeal had formed part of the several Bills brought into 
 Parliament on the subject of Church Discipline, and seeing there 
 had been Bills in 1845, in 1846, in 1847, in 1848, in 1849, in 
 1850, and again in May, 1850 — in addition to which there had 
 been the consultations of the joint Committee of the two Houses 
 in Convocation — the subject had been so much under the con- 
 sideration of the Bishops, that all matters of detail might 
 advantageously be left to them." ^ It was, moreover, very 
 strongly felt, and had been earnestly expressed by persons whose 
 
 * Journal of Convocation, pp. 352, 365-370. 
 2 Ibid. pp. 238, 272.
 
 70 A CHARGE. 
 
 opinionj on tlie subject were entitled to the most respectful 
 consideration, that it would be of very doubtful expediency to 
 make Convocation directly responsible for the arrangements 
 which might be suggested for a new Court of Appeal ; the re- 
 sponsibility at present, in regard to the Court of Appeal, resting 
 not with the Church, but with the State. 
 
 And thus the matter rested, in the Convocation of the Pro- 
 vince of Canterbury — so far as regards any resolution as to the 
 principles, or details of legislation on this subject, — and, in 
 fact, so it has rested to the present time. 
 
 In the Sessions, indeed, of 1865 the question came up again, 
 in consequence of petitions largely and influentially signed, pre- 
 sented to the two Houses of Convocation, Febrnary 17, in refer- 
 ence to the recent judgment in the case of Essays and JReviews.^ 
 It came before the Lower House on the same day, on the 
 Eeport of a Committee appointed in June, 1864, and gave rise 
 to a lengthened debate (February 17) ; ^ which was resumed on 
 May 16, and concluded on the following day (May 17).^ The 
 result of the debate was, that a proposition for an amended 
 Court was rejected by a majority of one (21 to 22) ; the resolu- 
 tion previously carried having been, " That the j^resent Court 
 of Final Appeal in ecclesiastical matters is open to grave 
 objection, and that its working is unsatisfactory." 
 
 In the following year (1866), in the new Convocation, the 
 question was again brought (May 1) before the Lower House. 
 Two schemes were proposed ; but the House adopted by a 
 considerable majority (35 to 14) the amendment, " That this 
 House do reafl&rm the resolution passed with reference to the 
 Final Court of Ajipeal by the late Lower House of Convocation 
 during their Session of 16th of May, 1865, ' That the constitu- 
 tion of the present Court of Appeal in ecclesiastical causes is 
 open to the gravest objections, and that its working is un- 
 satisfactory.' " * 
 
 There can be no doubt that the unfitness and anomaly, which, 
 owing to the oversight that has been spoken of, had been intro- 
 
 * Chronich of Convocation, 1865, pi'. 1981-2005. 
 
 2 Ibid. pp. 2020-2052. 
 
 3 Ibid. pp. 2061-2103, 2116-2142. 
 
 * Ibid. (1866) pp. 229-250.
 
 A CHARGE. 71 
 
 duced into the working of tlie ecclesiastical judicature by the 
 Act of which he had been the author, had strongly and per- 
 manently impressed itself on the mind of Lord Brougham. 
 When, in February, 1857 — seven years after the Gorham case — 
 the Lord Chancellor had given notice of a Bill to be brought 
 into the House of Lords on Clergy discipline, "Lord Brougham 
 asked his noble and learned friend on the woolsack, whether the 
 Bill which he contemplated introducing into this House with 
 respect to ecclesiastical discipline would contain any provision 
 for that ickich he had so frequently urged upon their lordships^ 
 attention, viz, a provision for giving to the Judicial Committee 
 of the Privy Council, as a Court of Appeal, the opportunity of 
 getting access to the opinions of the episcopal bench, or a 
 portion of that bench, upon questions of doctrine incidentally, 
 but most importantly, coming before them. He did not mean 
 to say, that the Judicial Committee was to be bound by the 
 answers they received from the ecclesiastical authorities, but 
 that they should have the benefit of the opinion submitted to 
 them, in the same manner as the Court of Chancery used to take 
 the opinions of courts of law, though not bound by those 
 opinions." In reply to Lord Brougham, " the Lord Chancellor 
 said that such a provision would be found in the Bill which he 
 should bring before their lordships. His most reverend friend, 
 (the Archbishop of Canterbury) had been kind enough to com- 
 municate to him, in conjunction with a great many of his right 
 reverend friends, a sketch of a Bill for the amendment of the 
 present law relating to the Church discipline. The Bill con- 
 tained a provision to the effect indicated by his noble and 
 learned friend, but he (the Lord Chancellor) thought it very 
 inconvenient and cumbrous. The course he proposed was ex- 
 actly that suggested by his noble and learned friend, namely, 
 that some of the episcopal bench should attend the Judicial 
 Committee as assessors, when their presence would be likely to 
 throw light upon any case brought before that body." ^ 
 
 On the earlier occasion before referred to (February 1850) 
 the Bishop of London, himself a member of the Ecclesi- 
 astical Law Commission of 1830, had said, in regax'd to the 
 Judicial Committee, that " that tribunal was not a proper one 
 ' Times, P'eb. 7, 1857.
 
 72 A CHARGE. 
 
 in questions of Churcli discipline," and that it was ew- 
 dently not ivitliin the contemplation of those ivho had constituted 
 it. . . . With respect to the discussion of questions affecting 
 matters of religion, it was quite clear that the Judicial Com- 
 mittee of the Privy Council was not the most fitting tribunal ; 
 .... and at this moment " — this, it will be carefully borne in 
 mind, was hefore the decision had been given in the Gorham 
 case — "a great number both of the clergy and the laity of the 
 Church felt their consciences burdened by the fact of questions 
 of heresy and false doctrine being ultimately referred to such a 
 tribunal. . . . With respect to these .... cases, not only was 
 it not provided that any member of the Episcopal Bench should 
 sit as a member of the Committee, but no care was even taken 
 that the members of it should be members of the Church of 
 England." 
 
 After a lapse now of twenty years since the matter was, as 
 we have seen, very anxiously and fully considered in Convoca- 
 tion, a change has been made in regard to final appeals which, 
 in the judgment of sound Churchmen, must be held, I think, to be 
 undoubtedly in the right direction. In the process of legislation 
 by the State with reference to a Court of Supreme Judicature, 
 it has come to pass, without any direct responsibility of Convo- 
 cation for the change, that, instead of a mixed Committee, the 
 Judicial Committee shall consist entirely of lay Judges, with 
 a body of episcopal assessors to inform and advise the Court 
 when spiritual causes are before it. A lay court is the direction in 
 which the wishes of Churchmen have been g'enerally tending of 
 late years. The recognised order of former times is, indeed, in 
 some sense, inverted, in that now the tribunal is lay, and the 
 assessors spiritual ; but the principle of a distinct voice of the 
 spiritualty on spiritual questions is, in a certain manner, re- 
 cognised and acted upon. It would occupy too large a space, 
 by far, to reju-esent and discuss the several schemes which have, 
 from time to time, been suggested for a reformed court. It may 
 be well, however, to refer to one scheme, advocated by Canon 
 Carter, as it has been by others, viz. to have " a body composed 
 partly of bishops, partly of theologians, chosen by the whole of 
 Convocation," to whom reference should be made as decisive 
 in matters of pure doctrine or usage, while the State Court
 
 A CHARGE. 73 
 
 would judge of matters of fact, and questions of temporalities." ^ 
 The difficulty, wliicli has been strongly felt, before now, in 
 regard to such a scheme, is, that in matters of doctrine, the 
 whole question is spiritual. It is true, there is a temporal issue 
 depending, viz. the loss of a benefice or other appointment ; but 
 the entire question before the Court is of spiritual cognisance. 
 There is to be set, on the one side, the doctrine of the Church, 
 as contained in her authorised formularies ; on the other side, 
 the statements of the individual, exhibited in distinct articles ; 
 and the question to be decided is, Are these in agreement with 
 each other, or, at least, not so divergent as to incur justly con- 
 demnation, with its consequent penalties or temporal loss ? 
 Now it requires fully as much the theological mind and 
 " spiritual learning " to judge of the real character of strange 
 doctrines and novelties in religion, as to state what is the 
 Church's doctrine. The latter is, for the most part, sufficiently 
 clear ; not so the former. It appears, therefore, impossible to 
 divide the cause into two parts : both must come before the 
 spiritual judges, or experts. Nor is it desirable that the bench 
 of bishops, with or without assistant divines, should be called 
 upon continually for fresh statements, on each emergent occa- 
 sion, what the Church's doctrine, on this point or that, is. 
 After the Gorham decision, there was a strong feeling, on the 
 part of a great body of Churchmen, that a reassertion of the 
 doctrine of baptism should be sought for, in consequence of 
 the doubt thrown upon it by the decision. It was felt by 
 others, that it was far safer to let the Church's existing 
 formularies make their voice heard, and their true force felt 
 by the better acquaintance with them, and the deeper study 
 of their meaning, which the controversy that had arisen had 
 already brought about. And there are few persons, I think, 
 who would now wish that a new definition of the doctrine of 
 baptism had been drawn up and put forth in 1850. Of new de- 
 finitions, virtually, of faith, proceeding from such a body, com- 
 plaints might soon arise from divers quarters, " Non haec in 
 fcedera veni." 
 
 Another view was strongly in favour of eliminating the 
 spiritual element altogether out of the Court, and making it 
 1 Letter, \x 42.
 
 74 A CHARGE. 
 
 entirely a lay tribunal, so that it would claim no sort of spiritual 
 authority for its decisions. It seemed to be lost sight of, on 
 this view, that the first object of any Court, and specially of a 
 Court dealing with sacred interests and Divine truth, was, that 
 its judgments should be guided by competent knowledge ; else 
 what would become of those, the poor of the flock especially, 
 who were in danger of being led astray by false teaching ? and 
 what would become of " the discipline of the Church," to which 
 " it appertaineth that inquiry be made of evil ministers," in 
 order that, " finally being found guilty," they may " by just 
 judgment be deposed ; " and being found innocent, be main- 
 tained in their innocency, and in their just rights ? 
 
 In regard to the Clergy Discipline Act of 1840, one point in 
 particular requires to be noticed. It was certainly intended, — 
 and it was supposed by legal authorities to have successfully 
 carried into effect the intention — to enable the bishop, in the 
 fii-st stage of proceedings, to protect a clerk against prosecution, 
 where the bishop was of opinion that proceedings ought not 
 to be taken. Thus Mr. W. G. Brooke observes, " In the case of 
 proceedings under the Act of 1840, it seems to be established 
 that the bishop has a discretionary power to stop proceedings 
 in limine."^ To the same efiect. Sir E. Phillimore says, "The 
 words, ' it shall be lawful,' construed with the other words, ' if 
 he shall think fit,' and the whole tenor of the Act, do not take 
 away the discretion of the ordinary as to permitting or refusing 
 his office to be promoted, or, in other words, a criminal suit to 
 be instituted against a clerk." ^ He refers to the cases, " Eeg. v. 
 Bishop of Chichester, Martin v. Mackonochie, and Elphinstone 
 V. Purchas." Mr. Brooke adds, " But the point is not expressly 
 ruled, and Mr. A. J. Stephens has given a strong opinion to the 
 contrary."^ Notwithstanding this "strong opinion," however, 
 Mr. Brooke states elsewhere unhesitatingly, " Under the Act of 
 1840, the bishop might stop proceedings in limine." He refers 
 to the same cases, specifying Mr. Justice Wightman's observa- 
 tions in the first cited case, and also the case of Sherwood v. 
 Bay." 
 
 ' Hanrlyhook of the Public Worship Regulation Act, p. 49. 
 
 » Eccles. Law, p. 1320. 
 
 ' June 13, 1871. * Eandyhook, p. 8.
 
 A CHARGE. 75 
 
 Mr. Stepliens' " opinion," I presume, is the ground on vvliich 
 doubt has been thrown on the power given to the bishop under 
 the Act of 1840, of quasliiug proceedings, as compared with the 
 power given in the new Act. Mr. Brooke, meanwhile — explain- 
 ing the provisions of the new Act in the spirit, undoubtedly, of 
 an amicus curice,^ says, "He (the bishop) now retains this dis- 
 cretionary power, but qualified ; inasmuch as, if he declines to 
 send the case forward, he must put his reasons in writing, and 
 they are to be filed in the diocesan registry " (p. 8). And when 
 he goes on " to consider how that statutable privilege " — of the 
 discretion " distinctly given to the Bishop " — " is likely to 
 work," he says, " It is plain that, through the neutralising effect 
 of one bishoj)'s line of action on another, sooner or later every 
 question of importance will be determined by the judge, and the 
 power to icithhold any case from the operation of the law — which," 
 he observes, " was of the essence of the contention on behalf of 
 the bishops' privileges" — '-for all practical purposes ivill he gone 
 for ever " (pp. 49-52). 
 
 If the two Acts are to be compared with each other, — and it 
 vi'ill be borne in mind that it is expressly declared by the new 
 Act, that " nothing in this Act contained, save as herein ex- 
 pressly provided, shall be construed to affect or repeal any juris- 
 diction which may now be in force for the due administration of 
 ecclesiastical law " (sec. 5), — it is simply right and just that the 
 exact provisions of the earlier Act should be fully and clearly 
 understood. 
 
 Again, the provision, under the new Act, for decision by the 
 bishop, if both parties are willing to submit themselves to his 
 judgment, is not new. As Mr. Brooke states it, " Under the 
 Act of 1810, the accused clerk and the party complainant agree- 
 ing thereto, the bishop sat as arbitrator, and pronounced sen- 
 
 ^ Mr. Bkooke's Handyhook of the Public Worshij) Regulation Act 
 (1874) was " meant not as a technical, but as a popular ti-eatise, the 
 object being to render the Act intelligible to the non-professional 
 reader." He says, in his preface, " The great importance of the Public 
 Worship Kegulation Act, its close connection with the welfare of the 
 national Church, and the interest which its anticipated operation has 
 already excited, may seem to -justify the attempt to throw light on its 
 provisions."
 
 76 A CHAKGE. 
 
 tence without further proceedings. This right to exercise a 
 consensual jurisdiction," he simply says, " is preserved under the 
 Act of 1874" (p. 8). The difference, meanwhile, in the Act of 
 1840, is, that the bishop, if he hear the cause in person, must 
 hear it with certain assessors ; by the new Act he is to hear it 
 " in such manner as he shall think fit." " This does not pre- 
 clude," says Mr. Brooke, " the assistance of an assessor." But 
 no such assessor is required. 
 
 Under the Act of 1840, according to Mr. Brooke's statement, 
 " two courses were open — a longer and a shorter one." " The 
 longer course," he says, " was the one usually followed " — in- 
 cluding four hearings : the preliminary commission ; the trial 
 before the bishop ; the appeal to the Provincial Court ; and 
 the final ajjpeal to the Queen in Council. The shorter course 
 enabled the bishop to dispense with the preliminary inquiry 
 and the hearing before himself, and to send the case at once 
 to the Provincial Court, from whence, as before, there would 
 be the appeal to the Queen in Council. " This exj)editiou8 
 method," he says, " was rarely adopted." I a2:)prehend it would 
 be more correct to say that the longest course, as here de- 
 scribed, was rarely, if ever, adopted. The hearing before the 
 bishop was dispensed with ; not the preliminary inquiry, in 
 most cases, inasmuch as it was to be regarded generally as a 
 protection to the accused. 
 
 The process of appeal under the Act of 1840 is altogether 
 unlike that which is provided for in the new Act. " The Court 
 of Final Appeal," says Mr. Brooke, " is to be approached by the 
 simple procedure of a special case drawn up by the judge " 
 (p. 9). " Unless both parties agree that the evidence shall be 
 taken down by a shorthand writer, and that a special case 
 shall not be stated, the judge shall state the facts proved 
 before him in the form of a special case " (sec. 9) ; and " no 
 fresh evidence shall be admitted upon appeal, except by the 
 permission of the tribunal hearing the apj^eal" (sec. 12). It 
 would seem, in fact, to be the judge, rather than the defendant, 
 who appeals to the Final Court ; drawing vq) his own case, and 
 with no further evidence admissible. 
 
 It is expressly declared in the Act. (sec. 5) as already quoted, 
 that " nothing in this Act contained, save as herein expressly
 
 A CHARGE. 77 
 
 provided, shall be construed to tij0tect or repeal any jurisdiction 
 which may now be in force for the due administration of eccle- 
 siastical law." Proceedings under the Church Discipline Act 
 (3 and 4 Vict. c. 86) are distinguished from proceedings under 
 this Act (sec. 4) ; and proceedings cannot be taken under both 
 (sec. 18). But it is impossible to conceive that prosecutors 
 would do otherwise than choose the Act which is the more 
 summary and speedy, and also the less costly ; and the de- 
 fendant does not appear to have any choice in the matter. As 
 far as regards cases of ritual, the Act of 1840 would virtually, I 
 ajiprehend, be — though not " repealed " — yet effectually super- 
 seded and abrogated. 
 
 With reference to the mode of appointment of the new judge, 
 I have said that some of the provisions of the Act have regard 
 to this first aj^pointment simply ; and that there is nothing, as 
 I understand, to prevent a successor being appointed, with 
 powers conveyed directly, as in former instances, by the 
 spiritual authority of the Archbishop. 
 
 The Act, it appears, provides for the appointment of a person 
 " to be, during good behaviour, a judge of the Provincial Courts 
 of Canterbury and York, hereinafter called the judge." It 
 further provides, that " whensoever a vacancy shall occur in 
 the office of official principal of the Arches Court of Canter- 
 bury, the judge shall become ex officio such official principal ;" 
 and in like manner in regard to the Chancery Court of York, and 
 in regard to the office of the Master of the Faculties to the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury. This clause, therefore, provides 
 for a certain anticipated event — the vacancy, by resignation, of 
 these offices ; but it is evidently inapplicable to any future case, 
 when these offices all become vacant together by the resigna- 
 tion, or death, of " the judge." The Act does not say that 
 these offices shall all be from henceforth united in perpetuum ; 
 the provision made thereby, as I am informed, and as appears 
 on the face of it, is for the particular case in which the new 
 judge, already appointed by virtue of this Act, was to have 
 right of succession to the other offices whensoever they should 
 become vacant. It is to be hoped, therefore, that whenever a 
 vacancy occurs in the office of Dean of the Arches and official
 
 78 A CHARGE. 
 
 I rincipal of the Archbishop of Canterbury, he will be duly- 
 appointed according to the ancient forms ; since there will be 
 no one into whose place he can succeed by virtue of the pro- 
 visions of the Public Worship Eegulation Act of 1874. 
 
 It is to be observed, that the Dean of the Arches occupies a 
 peculiar and singular position in immediate connection with the 
 Archbishop's office. 
 
 " As to the judge of the Court of Arches, Oughton says : 
 'Porro, ille officialis Archiepiscopi princii:)alis cum ipso archi- 
 episcopo quoad jurisdictionem cequiparatur : dicitur enim, eandem 
 esse dignitatem, et idem auditorium officialis et episcopi ; et, in 
 foro judiciali, parem esse officialem archiepiscopi ipsi arcM- 
 episcopo : quodque officialis principalis habet idem consistorium 
 cum ipso archiepiscopo, tam in eis qu?e competunt archiepiscopo 
 jure legati, quam in his quaa competunt jure metropolitico : et 
 nonnunquam, episcoporum ordinarium esse dicitur.' '' ^ 
 
 In particular, "the judge of the Court of Arches has authority 
 to deprive without the presence of the Bishop or Archbishop."^ 
 In this he is distinguished from every other ecclesiastical lay 
 judge. In the well-known case of Mr. Stone, Lord Stowell 
 (then Sir William Scott), as Judge of the Consistory Court of 
 London, concluded his judgment in these terms : " I am under 
 the painfnl necessity of considering Mr. Stone as having de- 
 clined to revoke his error, and to comply with the requisition 
 of the statute ; and I must direct the Eegistrar to record that 
 the party has not revoked his error. It is only necessary to 
 observe further, that hy the Canons of the Church ^ it is pre- 
 scribed, that when sentence of deprivation is to be passed, 
 which I must declare to have been incurred by this offence, 
 it must be pronounced by the bishop. 
 
 " The Bishop of London [Bishop Porteus] was then intro- 
 duced, attended by the Dean of St. Paul's, and two of the pre- 
 bendaries; when, having taken the Judge's chair, he was in- 
 formed by the Judge of the nature of the offence, and the 
 proceedings instituted against Mr. Stone. The bishop then 
 stated, that he had read the depositions, and was clearly satisfied 
 
 ^ T. i. Proleg. c. xi. s. 19 ; see Phillimore's Eccles. Law, p. 1205. 
 ^ See Phillimore, p. 1399, and the authorities there cited. 
 3 Canon 122.
 
 A CHARGE. 79 
 
 that the offence was proved; and proceeded to read and sign 
 the sentence of deprivation, which the Judge directed the 
 Registrar to record." ^ 
 
 The language of the canon is, "No such sentence [as depriva- 
 tion or deposition from the ministry] shall be pronounced by 
 any person whosoever, but only by the bishop, with the assis- 
 tance of his chancellor or dean (if they may conveniently be 
 had), and some of the prebendaries, if the Court be kept near the 
 cathedral church ; or of the archdeacon, if he may be had con- 
 veniently, and two other at least grave ministers and preachers, 
 to be called by the bishop, when the Court is kept in other 
 places." 
 
 "Notwithstanding Canon 122, the Court of Arches has 
 authority to deprive, without the presence of the Bishop or 
 Archbishop. Burn, vol. ii. 146, quoting Burgoyne v. Free, 2 
 Hagg., 494." Mr. Brooke inserts this note, in illustration and 
 support, as it would seem, of what he describes as penalties, 
 under the recent Act, " culminating in deprivation by a self- 
 acting process, once an inhibition order is issued by the judge. 
 Hitherto," he says, " in the absence of very aggravating circum- 
 stances, the Ecclesiastical Courts have been inclined to suspend 
 rather than to deprive. The severer penalty of deprivation has 
 rarely been exacted. ... A great change, however, has now 
 been introduced. . . . Under this Act, . . . after three years, 
 deprivation follows as a natural and inevitable consequence." 
 " The penalties," he observes, " are sufficiently severe, and easy 
 of application." 2 But the " self-acting process" would seem to 
 be an entire novelty in ecclesiastical law. The extraordinary 
 powers possessed by the Dean of Arches make it, it must be 
 evident, a very important question in what precise relation any 
 newly appointed judge, exercising these powers, stands, by 
 virtue of the mode of his appointment, to the spiritual power 
 or to the temporal. 
 
 I have referred, once more, in the foregoing Charge to the 
 rule embodied in the Preface to the Book of Common Prayer, 
 in regard to doubtful or disputed points in the rubrics. And I 
 
 ' Haggard's Co7isistory Reports^ vol. i. pp. 433, 434. 
 * Brooke, pp. 65-67.
 
 80 A CHARGF. 
 
 cannot refrain from saying, with respect to the case recently 
 decided by the Judicial Committee, — that, looking at it from 
 /f J- the point of view of Preface, which speaks with full synodical 
 authority the mind of the Church of England, — that, supposing 
 a person to have, himself, no " doubt," and to be never so con- 
 fident of the correctness of his own interpretation of the Orna- 
 ments Rubric, he can scarcely refuse to recognise in the Report 
 of the Judicial Committee, as well as in the conflicting legal 
 opinions which have been given on the subject, the fact that 
 the Rubric is " diversely taken," and therefore that it is a case 
 in which the rule of the Church applies, of reference to the , 
 bishop. However the Ornaments Rubric be interpreted, there 
 can be no doubt, assuredly, as to the meaning of the direction, 
 or of the benefit and blessing to the Church which would follow 
 on the faithful and dutiful observance of her Rule, in the 
 mutual relations of her Bishops and Clergy.
 
 Ji^- rO MEMBERS OE 
 
 The favuuy of yuiir atU 
 is respectfully asked ; and it i 
 calling attention, during the i 
 Burials Question, afforded by i 
 find the copy of the Local C 
 herewith, useftd for that desira 
 
 THE "BURIAJ 
 
 BY MB 
 
 " The defect Mr. Marten'.' 
 " of Mr. Osborne Morgan's Bur: 
 " moment be forgotten, the gene 
 " Amendment Act 'proposes wouli 
 " Morgan's Bill passed to-morrow 
 
 4. 
 
 The Past Sessi 
 
 " Burials Question " [i.e. tl 
 Parliament some 20 years, a 
 introduction of no less th; 
 nevertheless signalised by t 
 Mr. Marten, M.P., extenc 
 
 r^. F> m f f- ^ 1- 1 £i c 
 
 4-U.
 
 m 
 
 k
 
 '■;.: ■: \y I'i 

 
 m » 
 
 O.Jq' 
 
 :^-. 
 
 
 J' 
 
 V-