L I E) RARY O F THE U N 1 VLRSITY or ILLl NOIS RELIGION (P) FREED FROM ^\^^ CONTROL. Surely in vain the net is spread in the sight of any bird." A CHARGE UliLlVliUED TO THE OF THE ARCHDEACONRY OF MIDDLESEX, %\ \\% |iftl] iisitatiou, (AT THE END OF HIS SIXTH VEAll). HEtD AT St. Paul's, Covent Garden, May 11th, 1881, BY JAMES AUGUSTUS HESSEY, D.C.L., ARCHDEACON OF MIDDLESEX. LONDON: THOMAS SCOTT, WARWICK COURT, IIOLROKN. 188 L W Frice One Shilling. RELIGION (P) FEEED FROM STATE CONTROL. " Surely in vain the net is spread in the sight of any bird. A CHARGE DELIVERED TO THE OF THE ARCHDEACONRY OF MIDDLESEX, (AT THE END OF HIS SIXTH YEAR). HELD AT St. Paul's, Covent Garden, May 11th, 1881, BY JAMES AUGUSTUS HESSEY, D.C.L., ARCHDEACON OF MIDDLESEX. LONDON: THOMAS SCOTT, WARWICK COURT, IIOLBORN. 1881. Several passages in the following Charge were shortened in delivery. The documents referred to in the course of it were in many instances summarised, or, with the notes, wholly omitted. The Archdeacon thanks the Clergy for their fiUl attendance. He has desired a copy of his Charge to be sent to all whose names appear inscribed in his Visitation Book, and to all who have courteously informed him that they were unavoidably kept away. If any, through miscarriage of Citations, have not been summoned, or, though present, have, by mistake, not inscribed their names in the Book, he will, on hearing from them to either of these effects, desire copies to be sent to them. My Reveeend Bretheen, and my Beethren the Chuechwardens and Sidesmen of the Aechdeaconey of Middlesex. Perhaps, even in this matter-of-fact age, and even on so solemn an occasion as that of our periodical meeting together, I may be permitted, not without striking precedents both from the Old Testament and from the New, to commence what I have to say with a fiction or allegory. You will some of you recognise its outline as borrowed from Eogers Eclipse of Faith. On a certain morning a person, on opening his Bible as usual, found that the familiar leaves presented a perfect blank. To his great astonishment the holy words had utterly vanished, and nothing but the white paper remained. On going abroad and communicating his dismay, he found that every one was in the same condition with himself — that their Bibles, of every language, had every syllable expunged ; and more than this, that every book which had quoted a text from the Bible, presented an hiatus where the sacred words had been. This occurrence was greeted as a vast calamity. All felt that they had lost, either personally, or else for society, what, though not adequately appreciated, had been a mighty boon. What should the devout do without their support and stay — what should the indevout do who, against conscience, had hitherto not looked into the Bible, but hoped they might have another opportunity — what should the State do, without such an aid to its human authority as was provided by the Word of God ? Lamentation, however, was useless. The only thing to be done was to endeavour to restore the lost treasure, and to tessellate together such fragments as the memory of in- dividuals could supply. An assembly of divines was forthwith summoned to whom was committed the task of, if it might be, reconstructing the lost document. All possible aid was at their disposal — the jurists who might recall the particulars of the Law — the archaeologists who might recall its genea- logical and antiquarian matters — the controversialists who might offer their specially favourite texts — the philosophers who might reinstate its moral code — the holy and humble men of heart who had lived on its blessed contents. At length, something like the Original was produced. But it was not the Bible. It did not possess its prestige or authority. It did not command the general assent of mankind, as the Original had done. And there was so much questioning as to whether, after all, it faithfully replaced the Original, that differences, insignificant before, became magnified into permanent causes of disunion — in fact " the old was emphatically better." Viewed, no doubt, as a possible event, the imagination of this story is an extravagant one. But so was that displayed in Jotham's parable of the trees " going forth on a time to anoint a king over them " — in which speech is attributed respectively to the olive-tree, the fig-tree, and the vine, and not merely speech, but destructive intentions, to the energetic bramble. There, as here, the occurrences supposed could not have taken place without an alteration of what we term the ordinary conditions of nature. But that which I have adduced may serve the purpose of an allegory to point the following moral. That gifts, not sufficiently valued may be withdrawn, suddenly and unexpectedly, that universal regret may be experienced on the discovery, by the late possessors, " Nil sibi legatum, prseter plorare, suisque." HoK : Sat. 11. 5, 69. and that this regret will exhibit itself in an attempt, which, , UIUC after all, must be but partially successful, to replace what has been carelessly or indolently forfeited. But for the interpretation of all this. We are threatened, and threatened, so confident are our assailants, speedily, not indeed with an evisceration of our Bibles, and the erasure of their golden words, but with the subversion, so far as man can subvert it, of what has been for fifteen hundred years, at the very least, established as the witness and keeper of Holy Writ amongst us. A society has been for some time set on foot with a title as ingenious as it is disingenuous — it Is called a society not for destroying religion — far from it — but a society for the " Liberation of Heligion from State Patronage and Control." Could anything be kinder or more considerate than an endeavour to strike off" the fetters with which Religion is needlessly encumbered ? But wait a little, and I will tell you how the movement began and how it has taken its present form. In April 1844, an Anti-State- Church Conference was held by certain Nonconformists ; and in that year was formed what in effect was the Libera- tion Society, under the title of " The British Anti-State Church Association." For nine years it retained that some- what startling designation. But bye and bye it was dis- covered to be too startling for the purpose, and a less transparently aggressive policy seemed preferable. At a Conference held in 1853, the Executive Committee reported as follows : " In suggesting a change in the name of this Association, we have deferred to the feeling expressed in many quarters that its present designation is liable to mis- apprehension, is needlessly offensive, and is in other respects undesirable." The name was accordingly changed into that of " The Society for the Liberation of Religion from State Patronage and Control." Well, simple people, who know nothing of this little bit of history, are forsooth to imagine that it is a combination of devout and serious men, vexed in their very hearts at the secular bonds which shackle the energies of the earnest, and determined to bring back the Church to what they consider a more apostolical condition. Here and there amongst its supporters some such men may perhaps be found. There may be a few religious Non- conformists, animated with the spirit of Puritan ancestors. There may be a few Churchmen, harassed with the Public Worship Regulation Act, impatient of legal control generally, and fondly imagining that a freedom of doctrine and ritual will be allowed them under a new state of things, which they conceive themselves to be denied at present. But both of these classes, granting for the moment that they exist, should be reminded of these important points — that there is scarcely a Nonconformist sect, how insignificant soever, that does not now possess at least Chapel property* — that such property is usually held on Trust that certain doctrines shall be preached therein — that if a Minister is displaced on the ground of his not teaching such doctrines, a Court of Law must be appealed to — and that thus the tenets of the sect must come under secular arbitrament. A vast induction of cases t might be cited in support of these assertions, * It is not generally known, but is set forth in a Return to the House of Commons, on the Motion of Mr. Cuhitt, M.P., ordered May 8, 1873, and ordered to be piinted, July 10, 1873, how many these Nonconformist Endowments are. That Eeturn gives a " List of the Orders which, during the Ten Years ending on the 31st day of March, 1873, have been made by the Charity Commissioners appointing Trustees or establishing Schemes for Nonconformist Chapels or Institutions, or their Endowments, distinguishing the Dates, Name or Designation of the Chapel or Institution, and the General Objects of the Order in each Case." The number of Orders in the List is 854. But in addition to those included in it, the following numbers of Orders relating to Nonconformist Chapels or Institutions, or their Endowments, but not coming strictly within the terms mentioned in the Order of the House, have been made by the Commissioners within the period specified in that Order, viz. : — Authorising Sales ... ... ... ... ... 84 Authorising Leases ... ... ... ... 93 Authorising Transfer of Stock to the OfHcial Trustees ... 133 Miscellaneous ... ... ... ... ... 113 423 t 'S'je a List extending from 1840 to 1869, in Appendix C, to Speech of Mr. George Cubitt, M.P., July 2, 1872. Published by Ch. Def. Instit., 1871. but it may be enough to mention three. One of them is the celebrated case of Lady Hewley's Charity, which consists of large endowments for Orthodox Dissenters. A question arose, What are Orthodox Dissenters, and do Unitarians come under that denomination? It was decided, in 1842, after much litigation, that they did not. Temporal as the Court appealed to — that of Chancery — undoubtedly was, discussions on the most spiritual topics, the Divinity of our Saviour, and the like, formed necessarily part of the proceedings. The second case shall be given in the words of Sir Roundell Palmer, now Lord Selborne. He spoke thus:* "It has been my lot to be concerned professionally in settling the differences of a voluntary religious body — the respectable body of Gon- gregationalists, commonly called Baptists — upon what one might presume to be a rather critical point of their system — namely, whether or not baptism was necessary to justify a Baptist Minister in treating a person as a communicant ; and the Court of Chancery decided that it was not. I believe the Court decided, in a manner which has been acquiesced in ever since, that baptism is not indispensable among the Baptists. I do not in the least degree mean to imply anything theological ; it would be most unbecoming in me to do so ; what I mean is, that among Noncon- formists, as in the Church of England, there are different parties, some thinking one thing and some another ; they do not agree as to whether a particular thing is necessary or right to be done or held by the Minister. And then the question arises, whether the Minister, differing from some of his Congregation on a given point, has a right to hold the pulpit and continue his ministration in that Church; accordingly they come to the Court of Chancery to decide that question ; and so should we have to act if we were disestablished now. Let no man delude himself with the idea that, as long as men are citizens of the State, and * Speech in House of Commons, Tuesday, May 9, 1871. 8 carry on the services of religion by the use of temporal means, they can escape from the obligation of being governed by the laws of the land. The laws of the land cannot impose vipon any persons the necessity of believing one doctrine or the other ; if the law of the land rules questions, in which they as members of a particular Church are concerned, con- trary to their consciences, they, of course, may either acquiesce or leave that Church ; but they never can by any possibility escape from the necessity of submitting to some control on the part of the law. And, with reference to those Clergy who have been made uneasy because uniformity of ritual is enforced in a sense in which they did not expect, or in a manner more strict than they expected, I cannot but think that the great majority of them will agree, that the principle of obedience to law is of infinitely greater import- ance than any disputed form of ritual whatever ; and, at all events, they must see, that points of that sort, when disputed, must go for interpretation to the law. Certainly it ought to be understood, that they cannot obtain absolute independence of the Civil Courts by means of Disestablish- ment ; and for my own part I think the effect of Disestablish- ment would be that most points in controversy would be ruled more strictly against minorities by the Legislative Assembly of a Disestablished Church, than, as a general rule, they are likely to be by the Courts of Law." The third case is one which has been recently decided — that of Jones v. Stannard, in the Court of Vice-Chancellor Hall. Mr. Stannard was the Pastor of the Ramsden Street Chapel in the Town of Huddersfield, which belongs to the " Protestant Dissenters of the Congregational denomination, otherwise called Independents, being Paedo-Baptists." The trustees of this chapel were twenty-one persons, who held the property under the provisions of a certain trust-deed, and who were bound " to permit only such persons to officiate in the said chapel and premises" as held " the doctrines specified in the schedule of this deed." This schedule con- tained clauses which plainly enunciated the doctrines commonly called Calvinistical, including those of the total depravity of man, absolute predestination, &c. Mr. Stannard had been appointed to the charge of it, but, after his appointment, de- manded a liberty of interpreting the doctrines of the sect, which the trustees considered to be incompatible with the retention of his office. Resign he would not. He had interpreted the terms of the trust, or in other words, " the articles of the sect," according to his conscience. So, the matter was brought into Court, and after a long and elaborate argument had been heard from Counsel on both sides, and " experts" belonging to the denomination had been examined and cross-examined in due form, the Vice-Chancellor decreed that Mr. Stannard's teaching had not been in accordance with the doctrines laid down in the trust-deed, and accordingly gave judgment against him. In others words, the Civil Court ruled that Mr. Stannard must relinquish his office of Pastor of the Bamsden Street Chapel, giving him the usual opportunity of appealing to a higher Court if he thought proper to do so. If Mr. Stannard had persisted, in spite of this admonition of the Court, in officiating in the chapel, he would have been guilty of contempt, and the Court would have proceeded to enforce its judgment, in which case he would have been conveyed to prison. "We believe," says a writer,* from whose comment on the case I have extracted the above statement, " he has chosen a less heroic course, and that, with the majority of the congregation who agree with him, he will secede from the whole body, and with his followers set up a chapel of his own, in which he will teach the doctrines he holds to the full." This, however, is not the question. The real question is, will Disestablishment give unlimited freedom, or even a freedom which an Established Church enjoys? If after these proofs any persons are sanguine * In The National Church, March, 1881, p. 61. 10 enough to believe this, all we can say to them is, what the Athenians said to the Melians,* fiaKapL(Tavrelc. M.P., Sir AVilliam Rose, Sir ,J. KenuaAA^aj', Bart., M.P., Sir J.McGarcl Hogg, Bart., M.P., Sir J. R. MoAvbray, Bart., M.P., the A'ice-Chaucellor of the tlniA-ersity of Cambridge (Dr. E. H.PeroAvne), the Hon. and the Rev. E. Carr Glyn, and Rev. Canon G. H. AVilkiusou. counsels in the future, nnist not disdain the weapons which the development of our Institutions, and Avhich, therefore, we may say, without Irreverence, the decree of Providence has placed Avithin their hands. No doubt it is a far more congenial, agreeable, and dignified position to stand aside from the contest altogether. They may take the view that it is for others to decide whether the Church shall stand or fall, and that they will remain passive and receive the blow which is to come ; but do not let them think that they can combine two opposite advantages. They may have the dignity of this kind of martyrdom if they remain still. They may save the Chvu'ch if they will stir. But they cannot both save the Church and have the agreeable inci- dents of the position and the attitude which so many of them prefer. The crisis is thickening — the moment for such delicacies has passed, and those who are earnest to save the Church of England must not disdain to fight for her." The immediate effects of this language and of other speeches of a similar character, were, First^ that the Kcsolutioiis following were carried unani- mously : 1. " That in view of the strenuous and persistent efforts now being made to prejudice the public mind against the National Church, it is indispensable that a corresponding effort be made on the })art of all attached Churchmen, without distinction of religious or political party, to take such steps as may be needful for putting distinctly l)efore the country the truth as regards the Avork, history, and position of the Church of England.'' 2. " That in order to carry the above Resolution intf« effect, it is necessary to ]uake iln immediate and substantial addition to the funds of the Church Defence Institution, aiul that his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury be requested to Commend the matter to the serious attention of the Clergy and Laity of the Church.'' 24 Secondly^ that the Archbisliop mthnated his intention to issue a Pastoral on the subjeet. Thirdly^ that a considerable sum was promised in the Eoom for the purpose of strengthening the hands of the Church Defence Institution. I trust, my Brethren, that we shall see our way to prevent these Resolutions from being a mere dead letter. Meanwhile, let us examine more nearly, What the Promoters of Disestablishment are doing — that is, by what means they are striving to attain their object? And then, by what means we should counteract their operations. They boast that they have the will, and only want the powxr, which they are determined to gain, of destruction. We humbly think that, with God's aid, we have the power to resist them — let us gird ourselves, like men, to the will I It appears from the published documents of the Liberation Society, 1. That its promoters subscribed a sum of about £100,000, and that it professes to have an income of £14,000 a year.* 2. That the administration of its funds is in the hands of a Central Committee in London, which has divided the whole of England into districts for the purpose of carrying on agitation against the Church. 3. That each of these districts has salaried Superintendents, with a large body of agitators at their disposal. 4. That these agitators are abimdantly supplied with literature upon the subject of Disestablishment. And that they not merely disseminate it in the form of leaflets and pamphlets, but hold meetings and lectures regularly or occasionally, year after year, and even month after month, in various towns and villages up and doAvn the country. 5. That" in every County, as well as in important * I obscn'ed in the Times of yesterday that a Legacy of £2,500 was be- queathed by a gentleman, named Uourtauld, to " The Society for the Libera- tion of Religion from State Patronage and Control." 25 Borouglis and large Milages, there are subordinate Com- mittees in connection with that in London — and that there are intermediately local centres by which the connection is actively sustained. 6. That, wherever [it is possible, attempts arc made to enlist local newspapers in favour of the movement, and that no effort is spared to interest men of the most diverse religious views, or of anti-religious views, in the cause of Liberationism. 7. That Liberationism is studiously confounded Avith Liberalism, as if the Church were confined to one political party, and as if even advanced Liberals such as the Duke of Devonshire and Lord Ilathcrley were not among the greatest supporters of the Church. 8. That the Ministers and the periodicals of various Non- comformist bodies are in many instances in active alliance with the Liberation Society and pushing forward its work.* 9. That not merely is the literature put forth enormous in amount, or the lectures delivered numerous, (we are informed that in the year 1879 the Liberation Society circulated 3,141,767 publications, and held no less than 794 Anti-Church Lectures : from 1875 to 1879, inclusive, these Lectures amounted to 4,281), but the statements to be found in the Literature or uttered by the Lecturers are either false or misleading. A line of Juvenal may describe the utterances of the Lecturers — " Iminensa cavi spirant laciulacia foUes." Juv: 7, iii. Still those menducia have their weight with those who know nothing or little about the matter. Well, how is this ramified orgauisaticm to be counteracted, and how are all these false or misleading statements to be met? * There is a reniai-kable instance in the South of London. The Pastoi' of a well-known Baptist Chapel, who lias himself been a most bitter assailant of the Church, allows the Annual Meeting of the "Society for the Liberation of Keligion from State Control" to take place in his Chapel. Large placards proclaiming it are regularly posted about the neighbourhood. 26 Individual Clergy may do much — I do not indeed wish to recall the days when Pulpits were " tuned " to a certain note, and I want no personal denunciations of adversaries or exposure of adverse systems or religionisms or tactics to advance them, in a place where higher topics and a less irritant tone should be found to prevail. But surely the Clergy might take more frequent occasion than they do to tell their people why they are Churchmen, Avhat is the pedigree of their Church, how it became, and in what sense it became, established — and how it is what it is because their fathers set them examples of that liberality and piety, in endowing and building churches, which they themselves are every day so nobly imitating. It is astonishing how much ignorance prevails upon these important points, even among the better educated people, and if among them, among Farmers and Shopkeepers, Labourers and Mechanics. Hence they arc the prey of ill-intentioned agitators — who wishing to destroy or impair eveiy thing that is venerable and ancient, choose naturally enough, as their first object of attack, that which their hearers are least theoretically able to defend. Church principles are not too abstruse for the general comprehension, if trouble is taken in inculcating them. .Vnd it is notorious that the Laity, when they have once mastered them, are more tenacious of them, and more courageous in asserting them, than the Clergy themselves. A lesson mighty with advantage be gained from the Roman Catholics and the Nonconformists, who have reasons, such as they are, put into their mouths for standing aloof from us. Surely the Clergy should practise analogous teaching. .Vnd surely, alsoj they need be restrained by no delicacy in pointing to the Church in each place as the centre of religious affection^ and to the Parsonage as the abode of a kindly hearty and the fountain of kindly ministrations. And, if Lecturers come down as emissaries poisoning the minds of their flock, and meetings are held, and publications are issued 27 of a baneful tendency, these Lecturers might be opposed face to face, the cut-and-dried Anti-Church Resolutions, which have been prepared, replaced by triumphant assertions of the truth against the falsehoods exposed, and these publications confuted by other publications setting forth what is the real state of the case. And a band of Laymen, organised into a Committee, might be easily formed to aid a Clergyman whose heart was really in the enterprise. But a Clergyman may say, I have not the specific Information at hand, — and I am not able to provide any well- disposed Laymen with controversial statements or the materials by which these mcndacia may be met, — or, I am not able to debate in public, or summon up and marshal my thoughts and information. A reply is at once ready. An Institution exists which can (or rather could, for Its efficiency nmst depend in a great measure upon what you choose to do for it,) supply all the aid, both personal and literary, Avhich you can require. It is that to which I have already alluded, ''The Church Defence Institution.'"'^^ Its object Is to diffuse sound information on Church questions amongst all classes of people — by the instrumentality of Archldlaconal, Ruri-decanal and Town Branches, and, if necessary, even Parochial Branches. This it would effect by means of organising Secretaries and competent Lecturers in each Province, and by publications specially written and designed to meet vulgar errors and the unfounded assertions of the Liberation Society. I will just show you how it works by some instances. A Rural Deanery in my own Archdeaconry wanted information as to the tactics of the Liberation Society. The Clergy and Laity were to meet in Conference* They sent to Dr. Alfred T. Lee, the Secretary. * Its Office is 8t. Stephen's Pahico Chambers, it, Uriclgo Street, AVest- mmster, S.W., and its Secretary, the Kev. Dr. Alfred T. Lee. 28 The result was the immediate formation of a Branch Church Defence Institution. Here are some extracts from a few out of many letters of a similar character, which, I understand, have been received at the office of the Institution during- the last few months : — The first comes from an lacunibent in tlie North. — " We are all delighted with your Lecturer. Our opponents think him very clever and very courteous. We must form a Branch Church Defence Institution in this district, — an old Parish sub-divided into four or five Ecclesiastical Districts. I will subscribe a guinea a year, and as soon as we can organise, will send you all subscriptions I can get. Kindly forward me all plans for Organisation and the Liberation Society's scheme." The next from an Incumhent in Cornwall. — " I beg to enclose a P.O. order for a subscription to the Institution, which is but a small token of my gratitude for your help, and of my appreciation of the value of the work you are doing. If you could add to your work the employment of an able and well-read Lecturer to refute such Liberation Agents as Mr. , who is a very skilful and ready debater, you will add to the debt of gratitude due from Churchmen to you." The next from a Vicar in Yorkshire. — " As your iVgent lectured for us in defence of the Church, I think it only proper to write and say how pleased we were with his Lec- ture, and that wc consider it to have been most useful — it was so thoroughly convincing. The Independent Minister seconded the vote of thanks, and was evidently not in any way aggrieved with what had been said, while he could not in any way gainsay the Lecturer's position," The next from a Town in Montgomeryshire. — " I thank you most kindly for sending me the leaflets of the Church Defence Institution, and I am glad to inform you that through their aid we won the debate I told you of by 20 to 10." 29 The next from a Worlcing Man in the West. — " As I am only a working man, (compositor by trade), I am afraid I can do little. I never hear a remark made, derogatory to the Church, doctrinal or otherwise, without challenging it ; and with the aid of 3'our admirable pamphlets, I hope to do more." A Layman in the neighhourhood of Blachlieath reports^ " That at a debate held in the Congregational Chapel there, but open to the public, and at which the Treasurer of the Liberation Society presided, a resolution in favour of Dis- establishment was lost by 22 votes to 19. This result he attributes to the distribution of papers forwarded by the Church Defence Institution, and to the materials supplied to hira and others for their speeches.'' And here is an Extract from a Letter of a Country Arch- deacon who had written to Dr. Alfred T. Lee for a Lecturer, to go down to a meeting in a place which we will call B — , in order to counteract the efforts of Liberationists. It was addressed to the Assistant Secretary of the Church Defence Institution. " A full description of the meeting at B I received last Sunday from a railway porter who spent his Sunday here with my servants — an excellent Churchman, who had been present. He lives in B , and he says the eifect on the place has been marvellous, and just what you and I hoped and anticipated might be the result of your visiting the populations of our small towns and large villages." The Institution has in circulation a vast number of pamphlets and leaflets, which it is ready to place, at the smallest possible cost and even gratuitously, In the hands of those who desire information on the points with regard to which the Church has been misrepresented.* * I am glad to say that the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge has taken up the cause of Church Defence, as indeed it well hecomes it to do. "Tlie Englishman's Brief on ))ehalf of his National Ciiurch," is one of the most valuable summaries witli wiiich 1 am acquainted, hotli of objections to the Church as an Establisliment, and of the crushing answers which may be given to them. It has many other useful jjublications of a similar character. 30 It lias also a useful monthly publication, entitled The National Clmrcli^ in Avhicli may be found all sorts of intellig-ence regarding not merely the Church's enemies, but the Church's vigorous friends. Considering its resources the Institution has already done much. But its income is only some £3,000 or £4,000 per annum, and this to meet the Liberation Society's income of £14,000 per annum. And it cannot adequately carry out its designs without further resources, which I am sure the Church could and ought to supply. I gather from its pro- spectus that, I. In the Southern Province (Canterbury) it requires : Two organising Secretaries, and Two competent Lecturers. But that, of these, the Institution has at present one organising Secretary, but no salaried Lecturer. Occasional lectures are given from time to time. II. In the Xorthern Province, York) it requires : One organising Secretary, and Three competent Lecturers. But that, of these, the Institution has one excellent Lecturer by whom a series of Lectures is given in the North through- out the year, but no organising Secretaiy. The same document states that constant applications are made for grants of the publications of the Institution, which it is only enabled most inadequately to supply. And that a number of Debating Societies and Miniature Parliaments exist throughout the country, in which the Church and State question is constantly discussed. A large supply of sound publications on such occasions would be of great benefit ; but at present only a meagre parcel can be forwarded. It rests with you, my Brethren, to provide what is lacking by your influence, your subscriptions, and by your organisation. He who does not resist sacrilege, when he can, makes him- 31 self, in some sense, a parttikcr in its guilt. lie who hears a lie, and does not do his part to confute it, aids in the mis- chief caused by its circulation. The sum specially subscribed for the purposes of the Liberation Society, and its annual income, large as they appear to be, are nothing compared with what Church people could contribute by a general and generous resolve. And it is a notorious fact that the special sum was subscribed, not by many, but by a few opulent Anti-Church people. The Question before us is not a Clerical one merely. For were the Clergy dispossessed to-morrow they would receive some pension. It is a Lay Question also — for though Towns perhaps might find ministrations, Country places would be left to heresy or positive heathenism. Nay, rather it is a question for Clergy and Laity combined. They must consult, they must be brought nearer each to each than they are at present — they must concentrate their energies — in a w^ord, they must thoroughly understand each other. It is from a conviction of the necessity ot such mutual understand- ing that I have witnessed with satisfaction the establishment of Diocesan Conferences, and, as you knoAV well, have pressed the establishment of such a Conference in the Diocese of London, to which I look forward hopefully. Already a vast number of interesting subjects have been treated of at those Conferences. But, so far as I am aware, they have not, with the exception of those of Oxford, Bangor, Elv, Oxford and Winchester,* devoted themselves directly to * The followhif^ are all the efforts on the subject which appear in the Eeports of tlie Diocesan Conferences Committee to the Lower House of Canterbury : — Church an]) State. Oxford ... 1877 ... (Severance of above highly detrimental to the best interests of the Nation and Spiritual welfare of the Church, and much to be deprecated. Bangor ... 1875 ... Most effective manner of meeting the attacks of the Liberation Society in our several pRrishes. 32 the subject of Church Defence. Even in those cases little or no action seems to have ensued on the Discussions held, or Resolutions arrived at. This cannot be attribu- table to indifference. It is rather the result of ignorance of the extent of the machinations of the Church's enemies, or of the prevalence of the feeling deprecated, as we have seen already, in strong terms at the Lambeth Meeting. Besides,' good easy people are apt to say, ' Threatened corporations and threatened folks live long. A solemn decision of the House of Lords was once called by an impatient Statesman, " the whisper of a faction,'' but the House of Lords survives, and is likely to survive that and more grievous assaults. It is nearly fifty years ago, since Earl Grey apologized in the House of Lords for using the word " Monarchy " of the chief power, in a free country. Yet the Monarchy still exists. And about the same time, the same noble Earl advised the Bishops " to set their houses in order." Yet Episcopacy still exists, and not merely is this the case, but three new Bishoprics have been formed, three others are in course of formation, and many other signs of life are manifesting themselves in the Church on every hand. Church Restoration and Church Extension (in- cluding munificent Endowments as well as Building) have Ely ... 1872 ... Resolution in fovour of Chnrch Defence Associations. Oxford ... 1876 ... The avowed principles oftheCimrch Defence Institution deserve cordial support. Attacks on Church PKorERTV. Winchester ... 1878 ... That attacks on the position and property of the Chui'ch of England be resisted. I have no returns as to this matter from the Province of York. Its Convocation has not yet tabulated the Resolutions or other proceedings of its several Diocesan Conferences. But a Committee has just been appointed for this purpose. 33 ' been largely carried on lately.* These thing's make it ' difficult to believe that any attack upon the Church can be ' seriously ventured upon. Fifty years ago, Non-conformists ' clamoured for Disestablishment, because the Church was ' not adequately 2)eTformincj her functions. Can it be that any ' honest men are clamouring for Disestablishment now, when '■ she is ferformimj her functions ?' Such is the language of many worthy but not far-seeing persons. But further, the apathy of which I complain may be — I believe it is — in a great measure due to the facts that Diocesan Conferences are not as yet universal, and that even if they were, no plan exists for directing all of them to simultaneous consideration of the same matters. It is to be hoped that the Pastoral which it is understood is about to be issued by the Archbishop of Canterbury may supply this want — or, if not, that the organisation of a Central Committee, composed of deputies from all the Conferences at present formed, will do something in the desired direction. The nature of such a Central Committee and of the functions to be assigned to it is shown in the following important Resolutions passed by the Conference of Norwich last year : — "1. That a Memorial he inesented jrom this Conference to the Archhishops and Bishop of the Provinces of Canterhury and Yorh^ desiring simultaneous discussion in the Diocesan Conferences and Synods of England and Wales^ of suhjects of general and pressiiig importance^ and for concerted action in matters affecting the interests and efficiency of the Church at large^ or her relations loitli Parliament and Convocation. " 2. That the Synods and Conferences of [England and * It has been stated, and, I believe, correctly, that "since 1818, when modern Church building may be said to have commenced, no less than 3,015 new Districts or J'arishes have been formed, and this represents in round numbers the Churches which have been built (inrinf^ that period. This means nearly one Church a week." — Free and Open Church Advocate. The above statement takes no account of Church Restoration which lias been well nigh universal. 34 Wales he requested to concur in the above Memorial^ and to co-operate in estahlishing a Central Committee^ to ijrojjose questions for simultaneous discussion^ and generally to he the organ of inter-communication and joint action. The Central Committee to consist of the Secretaries of the several Diocesan Synods and Conferences^ and two elected 2Iemhers [one Clergy- man and one Layman) from each Synod or Conference.'''' Among other advantages, the carrying out these Reso- lutions AvoukI bring the Two Provinces of Canterbury and York together, so far as action goes, and obviate the incon- veniences produced by two Convocations. I may add that in view of their general adoption, Representatives to serve upon such a Central Committee have been already nominated by the Dioceses of Winchester, Bath and Wells, Chichester, Ely, Lichfield, St. Albans, St. Asaph, and Truro, in the Southern — and by those of Carlisle, Chester, Alanchester, and Ripon, in the Northern Province. It may, perhaps, take some time to bring this about. But it need take no time for individual Churchmen to con- tribute liberally towards the funds of the Church Defence Institution, which is doing their work already, so far as its means allow. The danger is urgent. Let us not be lulled into security by the comparative rareness of the cry for Disestablishment at the recent elections. We may depend upon it that the storm is gathering certainly, thougli, for the moment, silently. Pity that we should be taken, " Regardless of the sweeping whirlwind's sway That hushed in grim repose, expects his evening prey ! "* I have detained you longer than I desired upon this important subject. I will only say, before I quit it — do not think that I am an alarmist, in a bad sense, or deficient in Charity, or unregardful that Prayer is our main defence after all. If only a tenth of what I have said is correct, it is • Gray's Bard. 35 criminal for those who arc in anything like a responsible position not to sound an alarm. When the designs of an enemy arc manifest both in deeds and in Avords, to ignore them is not Charity but Fatuity. And I have yet to learn that Prayer and Precaution arc incompatible ; or that to sit still with folded liands is an essential of faithful Prayer. Such an attitude may become the Mahometan Fatalist, as he indolently murnuu's, " It is tlic will of Allah." It cannot become the Christian. And yet once more. Do not think that I confound for a moment those two very distinct ideas — the Church as a Spiritual body, and the Church established in a kingdom as a great and visible Corporation. I urge that by maintaining It in its latter aspect, we have found by experience that there are greater opportunities of evangelising our population than would exist if we permitted Disestablishment. And I venture to submit that we are no more justified in throwing these opportunities away, than an individual man would be in neglecting his physical hcaltli, because he supposes him- self to be occupied with the exclusive care of his soul. A lamented friend of mine once said, " You have but one body to Avear out. Why should you not make it last as long as you can"? " But before I conclude, I must, as my custom lias hitherto been, advert briefly to certain other topics wliicli concern the framcAVork and material interests of the Church. Some of them I have touched upon in former years, l)ut some of them arc ncAv. The Burials Bill is now an Act of Parliament. ^'^ A\"e may regret that it has become so, l)ut it Avill be our true policy to meet it Avith cheerfulness, just as Ave are meeting tlie establishment of School Boards, and the intrusion, in many * Another Act was passed on the 17th of February last, for the Eemovul of Douhts concerning the Burial and Her/istration Acts. c2 36 cases, an unwarrantable one, of Board Scliook into our Parishes or tlieir immediate neighbourhoods. In the latter case, we are, if we are wise, keeping up our Church Daily Schools as long as we can, and when this is found no longer possible, making the best terms for their surrender, and securing a paramount influence in the School Boards, besides throwing our energies into our Sunday Schools. So here. Let us abstain from starting frivolous objections or initiating obstacles to the working of the Act. With regard, however, to the Education Acts, though T counsel that the best should be made of them as long as they last, I cannot help thinking that the day must come when their unfairness to the Church and to all sects who prefer their own religious teaching to colourless or non-religious teaching will be more thoroughly recognised than It is at present. It is stated, and I believe accurately, that accommodation is now afforded in Church of England Schools for no less than 2,327,379 children — that Is, for about 400,000 more than is afforded by the Board, Wesleyan, Iloman Catholic, and other Dissenting Schools put together. The School Board System is not as yet extended over the whole kingdom. But if it were, and if the Church of England and the Denominationalists who care for their own Creeds were put on one side, and thus taxed doubly for their conscientiousness — while on the other those of less yielding conscience were taxed only once, the equity of a General School Fund, such as exists in Lower Canada, would be made manifest. The principle of that Fund is that while every parent would be allowed to choose his School, every School would receive part of the Fund, and thus no person would be taxed more than once. I spoke of this matter, you will recollect. In my Charge of 1876.* * A good deal might be said upon the economy of our Parocliial Schools, the expenditure upon which is carefully weighed, as contrasted with the profuse outlay which School Boards enter upon. But I prefer to adduce a 37 A Bill for Legalizing^ wliat is called, Marriage loiih a Deceased Wife's Sister, has been reintroduced. Let us oppose this still, for the many reasons which I have brought before you both in my Charges of 1876 and 1880. In this respect I indeed deprecate any change in the Laws of Marriage. But they require, as I stated last year, careful revision in other matters. In none of them, however, is revision more urgently required than in the direction which was indicated at a fleeting held on April 6th, last past, at the house of Lord Shaftesbury. I copy a report of it which may perhaps have escaped your notice. The fleeting was held in order to receive an account of a benevolent lady, named Leigh, of her Mission in Paris. The report says : — " Miss Leigh dwelt at some length on the French Law of Marriage, and its results to many Englishwomen. tShc letter from one of the Clergy of the Archdeaconry, which appeared in the Times, last February. He wrote thus to the Editor : — " Sir, — A local example will well illustrate your article of to-day respecting the expenditure of the London School Board on sites and l)uildings. "The last Board School was opened a fortnight ago in Aniberley-road, Harrow-road. Within five minutes' walk of these Schools are the St. Peter's National Schools, wliich have been built Avithin the last nine years, and three years ago were almost doubled in accommodation. Her Majesty's Inspector thus reported on the cnlai'gement in September, 1878 — ' The new .sclioolroom is an admirable one ;' and, in 1879, 'The teachers have every advantage so far as i)remises are concerned.' '■ Allow me to append a comjjarativc statement of the extent and cost of these two Schools : — (<(^i. r> i ' u 1 I .Vniberlev-road St. Peter .s School. ,, i^-, , Hoard School. " Extent of site ... ... ... 24,210 sq.ft. ... 22,000 sq. ft. " Number of school places provided 757 ... G03 "Total cost ... £4,432 ... £19,586 "Cost per place ... ... ... £5 17s. ... £32 9s. 6f/. "I will only add that I have taken into account the gift of sites, &c., of St. Peter's School at their estimated value as presented to the Education Department, and I leave the figures to speak for themselves. " I am, Sir, your obedient servant, "W. H. O'BRYEN HODGE, Vicar of St. Peter's, "February 19, 1881." " Paddington. 38 repeated tlic "svarniiig's she had previously given in the Times,, and elsewhere, with regard to the non-recognition by the French Law of Marriages between a Frenchman and an Englishwoman in England contracted in accordance with the English law, and she mentioned some painful cases in which French Communists who had married Englishwomen in London had, after returning to Paris, repudiated their English wives and treated them with the greatest cruelty. Lord Shaftesbury said that " as to the French law he saw no hope of improvement, the French people being apparently as much attached to their Marriage Law as the Scotch were to theirs. The only thing that could be done was to make it as widely known as possible that if an Englishwoman contracted marriage in England with a Frenchman, in accordance with the laAvs of this country, and afterwards went to live in France, the marriage could there be dissolved. The evil was a crying one, but he saw no other remedy."' This is good advice for the present, but I trust some other remedy may be found, if with our other representations as to the need of amendment in the Marriage Laws, we press this sad treatment of our young Countrywomen and fellow Churchwomen on the notice of our Government. I may mention that I have every now and then been consulted by Clergy as to the course Avhich they should take when any marriage is proposed between an English person and a foreigner. I have told them to counsel the parties not to marry Avithout applying for the best legal advice as to the law of the foreigner's nationality that can possibly be pro- cured. I have reason to know that some hazardous ventures have thus been stopped. Mr. Blennerhasset has two Bills before the House of Com- mons, which are still awaiting a second reading. One is a Marriage Law Amendment BiU., to extend the legal hours of marriage, on which Mr. C6rbett has given the following notice of amendment : — On second reading of Marriage 39 Law Amendment BUI, to move " That it is expedient, in the interest of the industrial cLasses, that facilities should be afforded them for marriap;e outside working hours, thus avoiding loss of wages ; and that it should be rendered obli- gatory on every Parson, Vicar, j\Iinister, or Curate to solemnise marriages on Saturday from eight o'clock in the forenoon to six o'clock in the afternoon." The other is a Marriage Registration Bill — " To alter and amend the law relating to the Registration of IMarriages." And he has also laid the following notice on the Table of the House. Marriage Law. — " To call attention to the Report of the Royal Commission on the Laws of Marriage, dated 1868, and, in accordance with the recommendations therein con- tained, to move the following Eesohdion: — 'That it is expedient that the law relating to the constitution and proof of the contract of marriage should be simple, certain, and uniform ; it should be embodied in a single statute applicable to every portion of the United Kingdom, and such statute should provide that legal marriage must for the future in Scotland, as well as in England and Ireland, always take place in the presence of a duly authorised ministei' of religion or civil officer.' " It will be our duty to watch carefully the course of the debates on the whole subject. The latter of Mr. Blennerhasset's Bills does not apply to the Church of England, or to Quakers or Jews. But with the former of them, and also with the proposed Resolution, which professes to be based on the Royal Commission, the Church is very nearly concerned. The Hon. E. Stanhope's Church Patronage Bill Avill, I trust, so far as its maiii provisions go^ pass into a law. Such scandals as have been recently made public as to fraudulent purchases of ilext Presentations, as to coloui-ablc resignations by means of acceptance of Donatives, and fls to appointing Clergymen to Livings who are, either from their 40 youth, without experience, or, from their great age, incapable of Avork, most urgently demand removal. And in order to prevent frauds and simoniacal arrangements, it Is absolutely necessary that there should be some authoritative Registration of the Patronage of Benefices, and that the title of no Patron should be admitted, unless his name has appeared in the Registry for a certain time before he prefers a claim to present. Mr. Monk has a Bill before the House of Commons respecting the Admission of CImrcJnoardens. It has been strongly objected to by the Lower House of the Convocation of Canterbury, in the following terms : — " Mr. IMonk's Bill allows any Churchwarden to be admitted to his office by the Incumbent, or the Rural Dean, without attending the Archdeacon's Visitation. " This will obviously tend to Churchwardens not attending the Visitation, though the Bill no doubt declares that nothing in the Bill is to interfere with such attendance, and precisely the Churchwardens of Parishes (outlying Parishes) which need looking after, will be absent. " The object of the Bill is expressly to facilitate the admission of Churchwardens, and the effect, no doubt, to avoid Visitation fees. But there is no need of such facilities. Any Churchwarden who cannot conveniently attend the Visitation can go before the neighbouring Surrogate or appear at the Registry. And the Visitation fees are not fees for the admission of the new Churchwardens, but the payment due for the maintenance of the Diocesan Registry — payable by the late Churchwardens, together with other charges for the repair of churches and supply of things required for Divine Service. " ]\[r. ]\Ionk's Bill, if it became laAV, would infallibly put an end to the gatherings of Churchwardens, with Clergy, at the Annual Visitations, which are very advantageous in every point of view. 41 " The individual CImrclnvarden, in many Archdeaconries, now personally promises the Ordinary (whose officer he is) to present such things and persons as are by law presentable. Under the Bill he will cease to do so, and will soon become the officer of the person who admits him. Instead of the officer of the Ordinary. For no sufficient reasons it will introduce a great change, which may seriously affect the relations between the Archdeacon and the Church- wardens, as well in the case of the Churches as in matters of discipline." Mr. Monk has issued a reply in which he says : — " Mr. Monk's Bill provides facilities for the admission of Churchwardens by the Rural Dean or the Incumbent — who maybe to be considered Surrogates ad lioc — so that they may acquire their legal status at once, without waiting for the Visitation, which is sometimes postponed for several months. "It is the undoubted duty of the Churchwardens to attend the Archdeacon's and the Bishop's Visitations, and to make their presentments according to law. " There is a need for such a measure. No fee can be legally exacted from a Churchwarden for his admission. But when the Visitation is delayed, the Churchwarden can only be admitted by Commission, or by attendance at the Diocesan Registry, and consequently incurs the payment of a fee to the Registrar. " Though the Churchwarden is a temporal as well as an ecclesiastical officer, Mr. Monk's Bill expressly restricts the power of admission to an ecclesiastical officer, who is empowered to act as a Surrogate ad hoc. " If a Churchwarden determines to neglect his duties and not to attend Visitations, it is not probable that he Avill be induced to change his mind by a refusal to grant him facilities for his admission to office. The gathering of Churchwardens with Clergy is undoubtedly advantageous 42 to both parties ; but it will not be rendered less agreeable by the action of Mr. Monk's Bill, if it becomes law. " The Enral Dean and Incumbent are as much the officers of the Bishop as are the Archdeacon, Chancellor, and Surrogate." Out of justice I have laid this reply before you, but I think it hardly meets the points objected to. Therefore, though I am sorry to object to a Bill brought in by a good Churchman, like IMr. Monk, I must adhere to the opinion of the Lower House of Convocation. I conceive that the grievance which the Bill professes to remedy is infinitesimal, that eveiy reasonable facility is already afforded for the admission of Churchwardens who are unable to attend Visitations personally, that the fees spoken of have nothing to do with their admission, but are connected with the Visitation, that their proposed admission by their own Clergyman, whose conduct they may have occasion to present the next year, places them in a false position towards him 5 and, generally, that the Bill is calculated to impair the very relations which we have long been desirous of strengthening, which bind together the Laity, (through the Churchwardens representing them,) the Archdeacon and the Bishop. As for postponement of Visitations, this is of comparatively rare occurrence. They generally take place very soon after the usual time of the appointment of Churchwarden. And if there Is any urgent cause for early admission to office, the Archdeacon himself, or his official Principal or Registrar in this Diocese, or, in other Dioceses, the Archdeacon's Surro- gate, can act in the matter and would act. I will not detain you by any remarks upon Colonel Barnes^ Co7m Returns Bill, or that of the Hon. E. Ashley on the same subject, (called Corn Retimis Bill No. 2). As to this latter, the Hon. Wilbraham Egerton will move, on the second reading : — " That any partial readjustment of the corn averages 43 under the Act 6 & 7 Will, iv, c. 71, is inexpedient, and that it be referred to a Select Committee to inquire what changes have taken place since the Act of 1836, which may render advisable some modification of the existing law, without any interference with the general principles of that Act." After its second reading, if it passes that, stage, Mr. J. G. Talbot will move that it be referred to a Select Committee. Mr. Inderwick has a Bill waiting a second reading called The Tithe Extraordinary Charge Bill^ and also a Motiori^ the terms of which seem to be very suspicious. It proposes to appoint a Select Committee with a very broad scope indeed, " To enquire as to the expediency of abolishing extraordinary Tithe Rent-Charges, and providing a scheme for their redemption upon equitable terms ; also to inquire into the present mode of assessing ordinary Tithe, and to report whether any, and what, improvements may be made in such assessment ; and also to inquire into and report upon the expediency of providing greater facilities for the redemption of ordinary Tithes upon equitable terms." It may be questioned whether any of these proposals Avill produce immediate action. And it is, perhaps, as well to wait the issue of the Debates to be held upon them. The prevalence of agricultural embarrassment has no doubt promoted their origination at the present time. The whole subject of Tithes is before a Committee of the Lower House of the Convocation of Canterbury. And I trust that the following alarming fact will not be overlooked by that Committee. On Tuesday, May 3, a Resolution passed the House of Commons in these terms : — " Resolved, That, in the opinion of this House, it is de- sirable to abolish the power of levying Distress for the Rent of Agricultural Holdings in England, Wales, and Ireland." Well, what have the Clergy to do with this ? you may say* 1 reply, A great deal. It is true that a Bill would be required to carry it into effect, but the Government have promised to 44 bring in such a Bill. And it would operate most disastrously upon the Clergy in this way. Under the term Rent for Agricultural Holdings may possibly be included Tithe Bent- charges. Now by the arrangements of the T'ithe Commuta- tion Act all personal liability to pay Tithe or Eent-charge is abolished. The remedy provided, in case of non-payment is, after twenty-one days' notice, a right to distrain " in the same manner as Landlords are by law able to distrain for rents in arrear, on yearly or other tenancies," or words to that effect. If then the power of Distraint ceases, how is the Tithe-owner to recover ? I do not suppose that this difficulty was thought of, or that the intention of the Resolution was such as it appears to be. But at first sight it seems to suggest a very simple mode of Disendowment. Therefore any Bill which may be founded upon it will require to be watched. I have advocated on former occasions the establishment of Church Councils in a Parish. I advocate it still. It is the first link In the chain of communication of their respective views between Clergy and Laity, of which Ruri- decanal Conferences, Diocesan Conferences, and, what I have said already has been also proposed, a Central Committee com- posed of deputies fi'om all the Diocesan Conferences, are fi.irthcr links. I repeat, I advocate it still. But I must strongly protest against any such spurious management of Church matters as is proposed by Mr. Albert Grey's Church Boards Bill. It provides for the election by the Parishioners, if they choose to adopt the Bill, of a Board of persons of which the Incumbent and Churchwardens are indeed ex officio members, but the elected members of which need not be members of the Church of England." The powers of this * A Bill was introduced to legalise Parochial Church Councils (which at present are merely voluntary arranj^ements), by Lord Sandon, some years ago (in 1871), which passed a second reading. But it differed from that of Mr. Albert Grey in many important points, and especially in its providing that elected members should belong to the Church of England. 45 Board are to be most extraordinary, and wonld snbject the concerns of the Church to a set of men who might not have the slightest sympathy with her doctrines or spirit. These are clauses 10, 11, and 12: — " 10. The Board shall have the power from time to time of making any change not contrary to law in the manner of conducting the services and ministrations of the Church, or in the vestments worn by any person officiating or assisting in such services, or in the arrangements for the seating of the Parishioners, or in the lights, ornaments, decorations, furni- ture, or fittings, of the Church. The Board shall also superintend the distribution of all moneys collected within the Church, and undertake the management of any matter of an ecclesiastical nature affecting the general interests of the Parish, which has theretofore been managed l)y the Incum- bent, or by the Incumbent and the Churchwardens. The Board shall be a body corporate, and shall have power to acquire and hold property of any kind in trust to retain or apply the same for any religious or charitable object connected with the Parish. " 11. In any Parish in which a Church Board is for the time being established no change shall be made, without the sanction of such Board, in the manner of conducting the services and ministrations of the Church, or in the vestments worn by any person officiating or assisting in such services, or in the arrangements for the seating of the Parishioners, or in the lights, ornaments, decorations, furniture, or fittings .of the Church, unless the existing practice which shall be so changed is unlawful. " 12. Subject to the power of appeal hereinafter contained the Incumbent and Cliurcliward(!ns shall respectively conform to all lawful orders made by the Church Board under this Act." An appeal on the part of the Incumbent is indeed allowed in clause 14 to the Bishop, but I think that as the 46 Cliurcli Laity would be very ill-advised if they allowed the Bill to pass, so, the Bishops would find it a very hard task to quiet matters in a Parish where they felt hound in equity to support the Incumbent, or to abet the Church Laity whose feelings were outraged by the acts of such a Board. And as for the Incumbent himself, his condition in reference to it would be by many degrees worse than that of a Minister of the Kirk of Scotland, or of a Dissenting Teacher to their respective Elderhoods or Congregations. It may be said, perhaps, that there can be no objection to the proposed Board, because the electors will be the same as those who now elect the People's Churchwarden. It should, however, be remembered that the office of Churchwarden, as Lord Stowell has declared, is " an office of observation and complaint, but not of control^ with respect to Divine worship ;" that is, so far as the Minister is concerned. — [See Burn's Ecclesiastical Law^ by vSir Robert Phillimore, D. C. L., Vol., i. p. 399.) Among their duties are the following : — To take care that order be preserved in the Church and Church- yard during Divine Service ; to watch over the due observance of the Lord's Day in their respective Parishes ; to present at Visitation such persons and things as are by law presentable ; to see that the Church, the Churchyard, and fences, be kept in proper order and repair ; to provide the Sacramental bread and wine ; to take the custody of the Church goods ; and to provide, repair, and renew, as often as there may be occasion, all things which are requisite for the decent performance of Divine Service. They are also to call A^cstry Meetings for the making of a Church Eate, and for such other Parish business as requires to be submitted to a Vestry ; and at the expiration of their year of office, to render an Account of the sums by them received and expended, to get the same passed by the Vestry, and to transfer the books and balance of moneys to their successors. But they have no power to interfere with the performance of Divine Service, or 47 with the hours thereof ; or with the proper use of the goods and ornaments of the Church ; on all these matters they should refer to the Ordinary. There are all sorts of powers allowed to this Board, and what likeness there is in the constitution of it to the constitution of existing voluntary Parochial Councils which consist strictly of members of the Church I cannot discover. The second reading of Mr. Albert Grey's Bill was pro- posed on Wednesday, April 27th, but the time of adjournment arrived before the debate upon it could be concluded, or any division taken. This gives us time for further consideration of its tendency. I deeply regret, my dear Brethren, that I should have been obliged to speak so long upon matters which are connected mainly with the external condition of the Church. My excuse, however, if one be needed, will be found in the fact that it is the direct and definite duty of the Archdeacon to advise the Clergy on whatever temporal circumstances may affect their influence with their Parishioners. Often, indeedj it is his delight and privilege to step aside, and give them counsel not merely collectively but individually, either on their method of preaching Christ crucified, or on difli- culties in their personal career. I am thankful to say that so complete has been the mutual sympathy of you and myself — that such occasions of intercourse have been far from infrequent. And I look back with gratitude upon much kindness and consideration that I have received. One circumstance in particular has occurred during the past year. You will remember that in my last Charge I brought before you the condition of the East of London, and sug- gested that perhaps you would help me in gathering a Fund to provide the Bishop of Bedford with two Missionary Chaplains for two years, at the modest stipend of £200 per annum each. In full hope that I should obtain the £800 48 required I issued in July last, to the Incumbents of some of the more opulent Parishes in the Archdeacomy, a Circular Avliich I also put into the hands of private friends. The result has been most cheering and satisfactory. Clergy placed their pulpits at the disposal either of the Bishop of Bedford or of myself — and the proceeds of our appeals were to be devoted to this special purpose. In some cases an ordinary Offertory was g-iven. In other cases friends came forward with most liberal Donations — (you will find an account in the Appendix to this Charge). And not merely have £800 been collected, but nearly £1,000, — so tliat the Bishop is able to offer not £200 but £250 per annum to the earnest and capable men whom he has enlisted in his work of Evangelisation. It should be understood also that this sum is in addition to a very large amount which has been put into his hands for general purposes. You have thus shown that no conventional or topographical limits confine your benevolent efforts. The East of London is beyond the boundaries of our own Archdeaconry. But it wanted help and you have helped it. Similar problems await our solution nearer home. Circles exist, like those described recently by the Bishop of Manchester, in which, fi'om what- ever cause, the Church is far from holding her own. One of these is to be found in the Ilural Deanery of St. Pancras. Another in the Eural Deanery of Enfield — I mean that part of it which is included in the Civil Parish of Tottenham. In the former, there are poor Districts, which a too unsparing use of Subdivision has cut off from the ^Mother Parish, and which are languishing for want of pecuniary aid, and of Missionary appliances. In the latter, the population has been incrcasiug with a rapidity that has set at naught all existing Ministrations and Church organisation. One scarcely knows what steps to take. In the former, there are two Districts without Churches, the Schools are maintained with the utmost difficulty, one of its Churches is, from faults in 49 Its original construction, In a state of utter disrepair, and local resources are not to be had. In the latter are wanted Living- Agents and Churches. Let us try whether something cannot be done. And, in what we do, let us avoid former mistakes. 1. Let us have ]\Ien first, with a Mission Room or Chapel, to work in, and Churches second. 2. Let us not build Churches too large, or assign Districts too large to be manageable. 3. If we build Churches, let us request the Bishop to insist upon a regulation, which used to exist but has now fallen Into desuetude, that before Consecration, a Capital Sum should be provided to Insure means of Repair of the Fabric. " The Incorporated Church Building Society " (No. 7, White- hall), which we ought to support more than we do. Is always ready to hold such Repair Funds In Trust. And let us also take care that, as it is now very difficult to carry on National Schools In the face of Board Schools, a good Mission Room is provided for a Sunday School as well as for other Parochial purposes. Both " The Incorporated Church Building Society" and " The Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge" will help us In this. 4. Let us act on system ; not helping one Parish exclu- sively, or simply on its own application, but taking the advice of the Rural Dean, the Archdeacon, or the Bishop. 5. Let us take our Laity Into full confidence. They furnish Funds, and are interested in knowing, and have a right to know, how they arc applied. I might mention other circles, but these two are enough to make us feel that a great and laborious work Is before us. But, though this is so, I would not close with a desponding note. Our forefathers have done much for us ; but we must not rest upon what they have done, but go on. We nmst not be content with conserving what we have, but extend our operations. We have much to bear, and various adver- saries to encounter. Let us not murmur at this. Hard as D 50 advance and conservation and endurance and conflict are, our Father sees that these things are good for us, either in the abstract, or considering our day. Whether we can see how they are good, or no, He has given them, and the exhortation remains in force, in spite of our ignorance " In every thing give thanks." * Let us bear this thought in our hearts, and exclaim, in the stirring words of a modern Poet :— t ' ' God be thanked that the dead have left still Good undone, for the living to do — Still some aim for the heart and the will And the soul of man to pm'sue ! God be thanked for the ills that endure, With the glory that's yet to be won From the hearts we may hope yet to cure By the deeds yet reserved to be done ! And thank God for the foes that remain, If they hearten us, Friends, for the fight ; And the mercy that grants to man's gain Yet a new gain for ever in sight !" * 1 Thess. V. 18. f Robert, Lord Lytton. 51 ) APPENDIX. The following is an account of the Sums which I have received in answer to an appeal which I made in July last, to the Incumbents of some few of the richer Parishes in the Archdeaconry, and to Private Friends, for aid in providing the Bishop of Bedford with two Missionary Chaplains, or, as he calls them, Chaplain- Curates, for his work in the East of London. I desired to ensure stipends of £200 per amium to each for the space of two years. This would have required £800. But the appeal has been so kindly responded to that nearly £1,000 has been raised, which will enable the Bishop to assign the more adequate stipend of £250 per annum to each for that period, without encroachment on his General Fund. Archdeacon of Middlesex (£25 for two years) Fer Archdeacon of Middlesex : — The Hon. Wilbraham Egerton, M.P., 23, Port- land Gate, Knightsbridge, S.W.... J. F. Eastwood, Esq., Esher Lodge, Surrey ... A Friend Charles Churchill, Esq., Wey bridge, Surrey ... Graham Robertson, Esq., 21, Cleveland Sq., W. E. P. Daniell-Bainbridge, Esq., Holly Brake, Chislehurst ... ... ... ... 3 3 Heniy Cazenove, Esq., Lilies, Hardwicke, near Aylesbury ... ... ... ... 21 Rev. Dr. Bellamy, President of St. John's Col- lege, Oxford ... ... ... ... 10 10 J. S. Giliiat, Esq., Charleywood Cedars, Rick- mansworth James T. Chance, Esq., 51, Prince's Gate, S.W. Rev. J. R. Oldham, Ottershaw Vicarage, Surrey Rev. BrownlowMaitland,41, Montague Sq., W. J. F. France, Esq., F.S.A., 2, Norfolk Terrace, Bayswater, W.... Peter Reid, Esq., 30, Norfolk St., Park Lane George Chance, Esq., 28, Leinster Gardens, W. An Invalid Lady ... Rev. Samuel Kettlewell, 26, Lancaster Gate, W. Louis Iluth, Esq., 28, Hertford St., Mayfair, W. Carried forward £ s. d. £ s. d. 50 20 5 5 10 10 50 25 25 20 5 5 5 10 10 10 10 10 10 6 5 10 — 247 3 « £297 3 6 d2 52 Brought forward ... Miss Stewart, 5, Cambridge Square, W., per Kev. Cecil Moore Eev. T. J. Rowsell and Members of the Congregation of St. Stephen's, Paddington (one year) Rev. Dr. Forrest, and Members of the Congregation of St. Jude's, South Kensington, ^jer Major Keith Falconer St. Mary's, Boltons— Collection in Church of, per Rev. W. H. Du Boulaye Mrs. Wood, jper Rev. W. H. Du Boulaye Rev. G. H. Wilkinson and Churchwardens : Offertory at St, Peter's, Eaton Square (being Subscrip- tions of £50 for two years) Hon. and Rev. E. Carr Glyn and Churchwardens : Offertory at St. Mary Abbotts, Kensington Anonymous Member of Congregation of St. Mary Abbotts, iKr Rev. G. Wingate Rev. G. F. Prescott and Churchwardens of St. Michael and AU Angels, Paddington: — Offertory Additions to Offertory, per Rev. G. F. Prescott : — J. A. Radcliffe, Esq. R. H. Hawes, Esq. Miss Edith Erskine Miss Lyall A Lady (Anon.) ... Rev. E. S. Dewick Sundry other additions Mr. Welch, of Stoke Newington, towards Chaplains' Stipends, per Bishop of Bedford Rev. W. Boyd Carpenter and Churchwardens of Christ Church, Lancaster Gate : — Offertory, being Sub- scriptions of £50 for two years Rev. Canon Fleming and Churchwardens of St. Michael's, Chester Square : — Offertory, being Sub- scriptions of £25 for two years, and something over Rev. Daniel Moore, of Holy Trinity, Paddington ... Offertory, from Holy Trinity, Paddington, per Rev. Daniel Moore Rev. Dr. Tremlett and Churchwardens : — Offertory, at St. Stephen's, Belsize Park 2>I.B. — Annual Subscriptions, included in above : — L. A. Tremlett, Parsonage, Belsize Park ... ... ...100 C. Tremlett, ditto ... ... 1 • — Pattison, Esq., 55, Fellows Road 10 Carried forward . . . 297 s. 3 d. 6 20 21 20 19 3 5 5 100 53 9 4 1 1 39 8 10 10 2 1 10 5 3 70 5 18 100 60 2 4 5 10 88 3 6 £876 1 1 53 £ .s. il. £ f. d. Brought forward ... 876 1 1 Rev. Sir Emilius Bayley, Bart., of St. John's, Pad- dington, out of Funds at his disposal ... ... 5 5 Rev. J. P. Waldo, St. Stephen's, South Kensington — Collection at Church, ^jer Colonel Ravenhill, R.E., Churchwarden ... ... ... ... 11 10 8 Rev. Dr. Robbins and Churchwardens of St. Peter's, NottingHill: Offertory ... ... ... • 20 19 Addition to Offertory : Miss Shakespear, 76, Lans- downe Road, Notting Hill Rev. T, Teignmouth Shore : Offertory, Berkeley Chapel 1 15 £929 15 9 Additional Sums have been promised and are expected, which will raise the Total to ... ... ... £1,000 I subjoin to this statement a letter which has been recently issued by the Bishop of Bedford to all the Incumbents under his immediate care. It will, I am sure be interesting to you, for it shows the many useful ways in which he intends to employ the Clergy with whom you have helped me to furnish him. " Stainforth House, " Upper Clapton, London, E. "My dear Brother, "Easter, 1881. " By the kind efforts of the Archdeacon of Middlesex, and the liberality of various Congi'egations appealed to, I am able to employ two Clergymen, of well-proved fitness for the work, as ' Chaplain-Curates,' or Mission Pi-eachers, for general work in East London. " I think it will probably help you to judge whether they can be of any use in your Parish, if I enumerate the principal ways in which I look forward to their being employed. Will you kindly communicate with them yourself, if you are desirous of availing youi'self of their services in any of the ways suggested, or in any other way. " Believe me ever, " Your faithful Friend and Brother, " WM. WALSHAM BEDFORD. "{Bishop Suffragan for East London.)" [r. T. o. 54 CHAPLAIN-CURATES. The Rev. C. E. T. Roberts, Gothic House, St. Ann's Road, N. The Rev. H. J. Stephens, 4, Castlewood Road, Clapton Common, N. SUGGESTED MODES OF EMPLOYMENT. 1. — Occasional Parochial Missions. 2. — Courses of Special Sermons or Addresses in Churches or Mission Rooms. 3. — The Assistance of Clergy in cases of Sickness or other emergency. 4. — Addresses to Men, whenever opportunity can be found. 5. — Work among those engaged in special employments, such as Policemen, Sailors, Cabmen, Dock-labourers, Costermongers, &c. 6. — Very short mid-day Addresses in Factories or Workshops. 7. — Open-air Addi'esses. 8. — Assistance in the formation and conduct of Bible-Classes on Sundays or Week-day Evenings. 9. — Addresses to Women at Mothers' Meetings, &c. 10.— Addresses to Sunday School Gatherings, whether of Teachers or of Senior Scholars. 11. — Special Addresses on the subject of Confirmation, or to gatherings of former Confirmation Candidates. 12. — Preaching for the East London Church Fund. The Bishop adds to this, that (as the work in his District requires very special training), Mr. Roberts will take into his house a few young men preparing for Ordination, and desirous of having their first experience of Pastoral Work with titles in East London.