>, 
 
 •Av 
 
 V 
 
 1 
 
 1! 
 
 yr 
 
 %1 
 
 ^'» 
 
 .^ 
 
 .-^. 
 
 mr 
 
 
 
 k> ^'S^^tia'* . ^_Ti -
 
 LIB RA RY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 U N I VLR5ITY 
 
 Of ILLI NOIS
 
 13^ 
 
 HOME REUNION SOCIETY. 
 
 I. 
 
 THE CHURCH AND THE NONCONFORMISTS. 
 By JOHN SHELLY. 
 
 II. 
 
 THE CHURCH IN RELATION TO HOME REUNION. 
 By JOHN TREVARTHEN. 
 
 III. 
 
 THE CHURCH AND DISSENT. 
 
 By rev. canon HOLE. 
 
 W. WELLS GARDNER, 
 
 2, PATERNOSTER BUILDINGS, LONDON, E.G.; 
 
 AND AT THE OFFICE OF THE SOCIETY: 
 
 7, Whitehall, London, S.W. 
 
 1878.
 
 NOTICE. 
 
 These Papers are communicated, and printedby permission, 
 but, though subjected to the revision of the Literary Eeferees, 
 and well worthy of careful consideration, they are not held to 
 bind the Society to the views which may be put fortli l)y 
 each particular writer.
 
 THE CHURCH AND NONCONFORMISTS. 
 
 An Address to Churchmen. 
 
 It has been said, and it seems to be true, that distinct stages of 
 progress may be traced in the history of the great revival that 
 has been going on in the Church of England during the last fifty 
 years. There was first of all the revival of Church doctrine, 
 then of Church life, and then of worship. And I think that the 
 beginning of another stage may be discerned in the still more 
 recent revival of missionary ejffort. In speaking of a revival of 
 missionary efi'ort, of course I do not mean to imply that missionary 
 eff'ort had ceased before. I recognise most fully the zeal and 
 patience with which mission work was carried on, and the success 
 which rewarded it, long before and up to the beginning of the 
 recent period to which I have referred. But the work was indi- 
 vidual, isolated ; it was wanting in system, and had, I venture to 
 think, few signs of assured permanence. But there has been 
 manifest of late in the organization and management both of 
 home and foreign missions a greater regard to Church order and 
 method ; and at the same time we have seen a fresh outburst of 
 zeal and the growth of a wider, and I think more intelligent, 
 interest in the work. Missionary eff'ort has been recognised to be 
 the duty of the Church as a body. It has been more clearly seen 
 that she exists and is endowed with spiritual powers for the 
 benefit not only of her own members, but of those who are with- 
 out her pale, that she owes duties towards them and has claims 
 upon them. 
 
 As soon as this was recognised it was inevitable that the relation 
 of the Church to the various Nonconformist sects should become 
 a question of greater interest and importance. Not only was it 
 necessarily felt that " our unhappy divisions" were the greatest of 
 all hindrances to the success of missionary eff'ort both at home and 
 abroad, but the recognition of the fact that the Church as a body
 
 owed duties to those outside her pale compelled Churchmen to 
 contemplate the possibility of adopting some other attitude towards 
 Nonconformists than one of hostility or self-defence. 
 
 The whole of this latter period of the Church revival has been 
 marked therefore, as migTit be expected, by the continual mani- 
 festation of a desire for the reunion of Nonconformists and by 
 frequent efforts to promote it. These efforts have indeed been 
 directed chiefly to the reunion of the great Wesleyan Society. It 
 is only natural that this should be the first object of effort. The 
 Wesleyans still stand, as it were, nearer the Church than any of 
 the other Nonconformist bodies. Many of them are unwilling even 
 to be considered dissenters at all. Their traditional theology and 
 modes of worship are less widely different from those of the Church 
 than are the belief and practice of the Independents, for example, 
 or the Baptists. 
 
 But while various schemes have been put forth and efforts made 
 for the reconciliation of the Wesleyans, it has not been for them 
 only that the zeal of the Church has been aroused. The attitude 
 and disposition of the Church towards Nonconformists generally 
 have undergone a sensible change. If we look back to the tracts 
 and controversial books of fifty years ago, or even of a much less 
 remote period, we find the dissenter treated almost invariably, I 
 think, as an irreconcilable enemy. We find him more generally 
 regarded now as a possible convert. Attempts are now made to 
 2vin those whom efforts were formerly made only to defeat. 
 
 And there has certainly been a corresponding change among 
 Nonconformists. I do not say that their hostility to the Establish- 
 ment is diminished, but certainly their respect for the Church has 
 been increased. If any one doubts this, let him take the pains to 
 compare the recent article on Disestablishment and Disendowment 
 in the British Quarterly Bevieiv with the old Anti-State-Church 
 Tracts of fifty or sixty years ago. The object is the same : the 
 difference in tone and manner is sufficiently remarkable. 
 
 I do not wish to exaggerate either the efforts of the Church for 
 reunion on the one side, or the signs of an approach to the Church 
 by Dissenters on the other. I can only regard what has been said 
 and done on the Church's part hitherto as the first beginnings, 
 uncertain and tentative, of a great work which has yet to be fully 
 comprehended and wisely planned. On the part of Nonconform- 

 
 ists, I rejoice to see that many of the outward tokens of their 
 separation from the Church are being one by one abandoned. 
 The adoption within our own memory of the word Chapel instead 
 of meeting-house, and now very often of Church instead of Chapel, 
 as the name of their places of worship ; the free use of Gothic 
 architecture, and of some church-like arrangements ; the use of 
 organs and the introduction of chanting ; the occasional use, at 
 any rate, of set forms of service; the religious observance of 
 Christmas Day and Good Friday ; even the adoption of a more 
 distinctly clerical dress by ministers ; — some of these may be 
 trifles, and all of them taken together may not mean very much, 
 and may co-exist, as in many cases they undoubtedly do, with the 
 retention of a firm adherence to the principles of Dissent, but 
 they indicate at least the abandonment of some old prejudices, 
 they show a movement in one direction, and that the direction 
 we desire, and they make the barrier which separates Noncon- 
 formists from the Church just so much the less formidable. 
 Nothing that tends towards union can be wholly unimportant. 
 
 Nothing that tends to promote union, I say, can be wholly 
 unimportant, and, on the other side, nothing w^hich contributes 
 to maintain or aggravate division, nothing which tends to hinder 
 union can be a matter of unconcern to those who are anxious for 
 the peace and prosperity of the Church. And therefore I ask you 
 to bear with me while I point out what appear to me some faults 
 on our side that have hindered, and must, I fear, as long as they 
 exist, hinder the reconciliation of Nonconformists. 
 
 And first there is that most common of all faults in controversy 
 (that almost inevitable fault, it seems), the want of justice towards 
 our opponents. I suppose that perfect justice is really one of the 
 rarest of all virtues. In this particular case the want of justice 
 chiefly shows itself in the tacit assumption that Nonconformists 
 admit our fundamental principles. It is assumed, for instance, 
 that Nonconformists must understand particular texts, such as 
 texts relating to the kingdom of heaven, to the new birth, or to 
 Confirmation, as we do, and that they see in them the allusion 
 we see. The fact is that we interpret these texts by a Church 
 tradition, and they by a Nonconformist tradition, which makes 
 the same words mean to them and to us entirely diff'erent things, 
 and if we would be fair we must try to understand what their
 
 interpretation is, and not think we have settled the matter when 
 we have tiling a text at their heads which to our minds is conclu- 
 sive. Then, again, we are apt to forget that they and we mean 
 perfectly different things by the word " Church." In fact, if a 
 Dissenter once accepts our meaning of the word " Church " he is 
 more than half a Churchman already. To us the Church is a 
 Divine institution, to him it is a mere human organisation. Hence 
 the idea of dissent also is a very different thing to his mind and 
 to ours. To us it means separation from the institution Divinely 
 appointed for the salvation of the world : to him, a Baptist we 
 will suppose, it means no more than not being a Churchman, a 
 fact of no greater religious importance to him than not being a 
 Methodist or an Independent. We shall not and cannot be just 
 to Nonconformists unless we clearly remember all this in our inter- 
 course with them. 
 
 The distinction which many Churchmen are fond of drawing 
 between what they call religious and political dissenters also 
 a^^pears to me to be unfairly pressed. That there are some 
 dissenters who are more active as politicians than others, and 
 who take a special interest in the ecclesiastical side of politics, I 
 do not pretend to deny. Why should they not do so if they likel 
 Are there not at least as many Churchmen who take a deep inte- 
 rest and active part in political questions of the same character on 
 the other side 1 Do we not know that many of these political 
 Churchmen are thoroughly religious, devout men 1 and why do 
 we doubt that those whom we call political dissenters are the 
 same 1 The political side of the Church of England as an esta- 
 blished Church seems to me to be a fair object of attack and 
 defence irrespective of its religious aspect. It is perfectly con- 
 ceivable that one person may have a greater dislike to the political 
 privileges of the Church, and another to its religious doctrines. 
 Their dissent may rest on different grounds, but they may both 
 be equally conscientious and may equally deserve to be treated 
 with respect. I cannot imagine why the man who objects to the 
 political privileges of the Church should be met with indignation 
 or contempt as a political dissenter, while the man who objects to 
 her doctrines is treated with respect as a religious dissenter. 
 
 Again, I do not think Churchmen generally give Nonconform- 
 ists credit for the real goodness and deep devotion which so many
 
 of them possess. True and deep religious life is so sensitive, 
 shrinks so much from observation, and especially from the obser- 
 vation of those whom it supposes to be out of sympathy with it, 
 that persons belonging to different religious bodies can very rarely 
 fully aj)preciate, and sometimes can hardly even recognise, one 
 another's piety. I am afraid that Nonconformists generally think 
 Church people " worldly." I know that many converts from 
 dissent have been astonished, and I must confess I was myself, to 
 discover how much deep devotion there is existing in the Church. 
 We knew that it ought to be so because we had accepted the doc- 
 trine of the Church, but we could not believe that it was so till we 
 had entered into the Church and seen it for ourselves. 
 
 And so, on the other hand, Churchmen know so little in general 
 of the inner life of Nonconformists, that it is hard for them to 
 believe in a piety which they have no opportunity of observing. 
 But it is there, all the truer because hidden from the common 
 gaze. Oh, if these holy men and women had but the treasures of 
 sacramental grace which we neglect or wantonly waste, what 
 heights of sanctity might they not attain ! " Many shall come 
 from the east and west, and shall sit down in the "kingdom of 
 heaven, but the children of the kingdom shall be cast out." 
 
 If the real piety and devotion of dissenters were more fully 
 recognised by Churchmen it would give, I think, a somewhat 
 different character to our efforts for their reconciliation. We 
 should seek it, as the Bishop of Exeter said at the meeting of the 
 Home Reunion Society during the Church Congress at Ply- 
 mouth, " for love and not for triumph." It is in this spirit alone 
 that we must seek it if we are to be successful. 
 
 Again it is a real misfortune I think that Churchmen do not 
 take more pains to make themselves acquainted with the good 
 works that are carried on by Nonconformists. It is true that it 
 is generally impossible for us actively to co-operate with them. It 
 is true that as all our spiritual power and energy are derived 
 through the Church, we cannot use them in opposition to the 
 Church, nor can we even use them apart from the Church. Our 
 whole motive and manner of work must therefore be different 
 from those of Nonconformists. This difference is fundamental 
 and I do not see how it is ever to be removed as long as we are 
 Churchmen and they continue to be Nonconformists. But I do
 
 8 
 
 not think this difference is such as to prevent us from feehng and 
 showing a real and hearty interest in their work as long as their 
 work is positive and constructive. " He that is not against us is 
 with us." As long a» they are teaching positive truth their teach- 
 ing is good so far as it goes ; they are teaching part of the 
 Catholic faith, though not the whole of it. I suppose indeed 
 that, if they could see it, the whole Catholic faith is involved in 
 the portion of it which they hold. Their rejection of the rest is 
 really an inconsistency. But if this be so, surely they are far 
 more likely to be led to enquiry and to progress by our interest 
 and sympathy than to be driven to it by our coldness and 
 reproof 
 
 I do not say it is easy ; it is very difficult, but I think it is 
 possible to feel and to show interest and sympathy, while main- 
 taining unaltered and undisguised our conviction that all religious 
 work undertaken apart from the Church must be imperfect in its 
 conception, its execution, and its results. 
 
 I am quite sure, — indeed it is self-evident as soon as it is put 
 into words, that we are far more likely to win Nonconformists to 
 the Church by drawing them on as persons who have imperfectly 
 learned the truth, than by attacking them as persons who are 
 wholly in error. And the former course is not only the course of 
 prudence, it is the course of justice. 
 
 We cannot in justice treat what are commonly called the ortho- 
 dox Dissenters as Gnostic and Manichean heretics were treated 
 by the early Church. We must remember too that the strength 
 of the language used by the early Fathers about heresy and 
 schism may have arisen partly from a sense of the peril to 
 which they exposed an infant society by weakening it in the 
 face of the determined opposition of the heathen world, as well as 
 from the perception of their intrinsic evil. I do not of course 
 mean to say that heresy and schism are not grievous sins, or that 
 they are not just as sinful now as ever they were, but though 
 involving great spiritual loss to Dissenters themselves and largely 
 weakening the Church, still they are less directly perilous to the 
 Church now than in the comparative feebleness of her early days. 
 We may admire therefore without feeling ourselves bound to 
 imitate the fierce indignation of the early confessors and cham- 
 pions of the Catholic Faith.
 
 I have said that as long as the teaching of Dissenters is positive 
 and constructive it is generally catholic. Their errors for the 
 most part are errors of defect. And this seems to me to indicate 
 the true means of winning them to the Church. Do not attack 
 their errors. Do not argue with them at all, or argue with them 
 as little as possible about those points on which they differ from 
 the Church, but lead them to positive statements of their own 
 faith. The more positive they become, the more clearly they 
 recognize and define their own belief, the more catholic they 
 become. This is not a mere theory, it is a fact. I remember 
 very well a Churchman telling me of a long conversation he had 
 with a Wesleyan. The Wesleyan was arguing against the Keal 
 Presence, the Churchman was defending it. The longer they 
 argued, the further the Wesleyan seemed to retire from the doct- 
 rine of the Church. At last the Churchman said to him, " What 
 do you believe about it yourself? would you call it merely bread 
 and wine? The Wesleyan was driven to consider, to recognize his 
 own faith. He paused. " Well, no," he said at last, '' I should 
 not like to say that." He was more of a Catholic than he 
 thought. I was reading the other day the life of JoRn Hunt, a 
 Wesleyan Missionary in Fiji. He writes one day in his journal, 
 ^' I was led to dwell particularly on Christ's Presence in the 
 sacrament. Perhaps this truth has been so much perverted by 
 Papists, that Protestants have gone to the oj^posite extreme. 
 There is a Presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper, which is 
 real to every believer. Of course it can be only a spiritual pres- 
 ence ; for what else can be present to the spirit" (p. 2 11). He 
 is positive and constructive, and therefore so far catholic, but 
 presently he feels called upon to protest against Popery, and 
 immediately becoming negative, he falls into confusion and error, 
 and denies that there is a " bodily presence" of Christ in the 
 Eucharist, as if the presence of His Body could be anything else 
 than a bodily presence. 
 
 There is another remarkable instance showing how much more 
 nearly the positive teaching of Dissenters approaches that of the 
 Church than their negations would lead one to suppose in an 
 essay by Mr. R. W. Dale on the Lord's Supper in a volume of 
 Congregational Essays called Eccksla, where Mr. Dale argues 
 against the low views of the Lord's Supper held by some
 
 10 
 
 Nonconformists in this way. There must always, he says, be 
 some root or germ of the abuse of a thing or of false doctrine, in 
 the proper use of it, or in the true doctrine. But there is no 
 root or germ from which the highest view of the Sacrament 
 (which of course he calls an abuse or false doctrine) could grow 
 in the low views of many Dissenters. Therefore their low views 
 are not the true and primitive doctrine of the sacrament. I have 
 stated this argument from memory, but I think with general cor- 
 rectness, as it serves again to show, I think, how when a Non- 
 conformist realizes his own belief and states it in positive terms 
 he always begins to approach at least to the Catholic Faith. I 
 do not know that there would be any more likely way of con- 
 verting an Independent, for instance, who practises Infant bap- 
 tism to the true faith concerning baptism than by setting him to 
 answer the arguments of the Quakers who reject baptism alto- 
 gether. 
 
 It is important too to make Nonconformists perceive that in 
 accepting the faith of the Church they will lose no single truth 
 they now hold or ever held. The Catholic Faith, — the faith of 
 the Church, is the complete body embracing every portion of 
 religious truth. " Catholicism," as Dr. Littledale says in his 
 essay in the third series of The Church and the World, "means 
 not the rating of all religious opinions as equally tenable and 
 equally trivial, but the union and harmonizing of every element 
 of spiritual truth, wherever found, in one homogeneous body. Every 
 sect which has any spiritual vitality at all, lives by the force of 
 the fragment of truth which it possesses, not by the mass of 
 error in which that truth is embedded. And the Catholic Church 
 is able to say to every sectary. Come to me, and I will give you 
 the truth which you hold already and many others with it of 
 which you are still ignorant." (p. 60) 
 
 One result of this completeness and many-sidedness of the 
 Church is that different minds are attracted to her by different 
 portions or aspects of her doctrine or nature. But unity will 
 generally be, I think, that character of the Church which will be 
 most attractive to Nonconformists. Not always her present 
 unity, though they may recognize it as essentially existing in her 
 creeds and sacraments in spite of outward divisions between east 
 and west. More often perhaps it will be her historical unity, the 
 continuity of the past and present exhibited in her creeds, her
 
 11 
 
 orders, her sacraments, her offices, in the unbroken and universal 
 offering in all times and places of the one sacrifice of praise and 
 thanksgiving, in the communion of saints. To those who from 
 their earliest infancy have been trained in the use of the prayers 
 of the Church, it is difficult perhaps even to imagine the thrill of 
 delight and exultation with which one begins to use as one's 
 own, the words which have been consecrated, as it were, in the 
 lips of martyrs and saints and many generations of faithful men 
 and women. 
 
 It is no mere imagination, no dream of fancy, that our prayers 
 are helped and our efforts strengthened by being thus offered and 
 put forth in the power of the communion of saints. This and 
 other fruits of the unity of the Church are our Lord's great gift 
 offered alike to us and to our Nonconformist brethren ; — to them 
 we trust to be ultimately accepted, to us to be cherished and main- 
 tained as well for their sakes as for our own. 
 
 Not all at once perhaps or even speedily may we expect the 
 accomplishment of our great hope of corporate Reunion, but we 
 may at least invite individual Nonconformists to pray with us that 
 our Lord would grant unto us that 2:>eace and unity* which are 
 agreeable to His will, and it may be that the prayer will beget 
 desire, and that the desire may lead to the fulfilment of our 
 Lord's own prayer " that they all may be one." 
 
 John Shelly.
 
 12 
 
 NOTE. 
 
 The foregoing address was delivered to a meeting of Churchmen, but a 
 report of it which appeared in a local newspaper drew from a Nonconformist 
 correspondent the natural and perfectly fair remark that Churchmen ought to 
 settle their own difterences first before they appeal to Nonconformists to join 
 them for the sake of unity. I fully admit the implied reproach. No one, I 
 think, can feel more deeply and bitterly than I do the mischief of disunion 
 within the Church, as well as of separation from it. And yet, if we look at 
 the matter fairly, there is surely a great deal to be said on the other side. I 
 do not profess to be deeply learned in ecclesiastical history, but, if 1 mistake 
 not, there have always, even from apostolic days, been great diversities of 
 opinion within the Church, The mediseval controversies between Nominalists 
 and Realists, Thomists and Scotists, went deep down, almost to the very 
 heart of the faith. I think we can trace in almost every age within the 
 Church itself the existence of parties or schools of thought answering very 
 much to the High, Low, and Broad Church parties in the Church of England 
 at present. It seems to me inevitable that this should be the case, because 1 
 believe that these three great parties represent permanent varieties in the con- 
 stitution of the minds of men. The fact that the Church is wide enough to 
 embrace these varieties seems to me to be one evidence of her catholicity. 
 The unity of the Church — the ideal unity which as a Churchman I desire and 
 pray for — is not an absolute unity of opinion and sentiment. It is a unity of 
 worship, of belief, of sacramental incorporation into one body — "One Lord, 
 one faith, one baptism." To avoid misunderstanding, let me say that by 
 unity of belief I mean of divine faith, which is consistent, I repeat, with great 
 diversities of opinion and sentiment. I admit, and accept the reproach, that 
 the controversies in the Church of England have exceeded the limits of 
 charity ; I fear that in some instances they may go beyond mere opinion and 
 sentiment, and touch divine faith ; but I have no doubt whatever that the 
 Bishop of Exeter was entirely right when he said, in an unreported speech 
 during the Church Congress at Plymouth, which I quote from my own notes, 
 that " Our diflerences are nothing to our agreement ; we are all bound 
 together in the Church by a tie that cannot be broken. " 
 
 In giving the address I had no intention whatever of putting myself forward 
 as a mediator between Churchmen and Nonconformists. It would be imperti- 
 nent for me to dream of such a thing. But I felt that for me, as a convert 
 from Dissent, it was more possible than for most people to understand and 
 point out to Churchmen the hindrances, the unnecessary hindrances, to 
 reunion which are sometimes caused by Churchmen themselves. This was 
 what I endeavoured to do, and this was all that I had any right to attempt at 
 a meeting consisting of Churchmen only. I have thought, however, for years 
 past, that good might result from occasional meetings of Churchmen and 
 Nonconformists for religious conference, and not for controversy. There is 
 much misunderstanding on both sides, a good deal of it merely verbal, which 
 I think such meetings might contribute to remove. But I should desire coi;- 
 ference on matters on which we are agreed rather than on points of difference. 
 It would be the wildest enthusiasm to suppose that reunion is likely to be 
 achieved at once, or even within any period that we can forecast. But surely 
 on both sides we may desire it and may pray for it. "0 pray for the peace 
 of Jerusalem : they shall prosper that love Thee. For my brethren and com- 
 panions' sake, I will now say, peace be within thee." It seems to me that 
 such desires and prayers cannot be altogether fruitless. J.S.
 
 THE CHURCH IN EELATION TO HOME REUNION, 
 
 It is a well-known fact in the history of the Church of Christ 
 that, in its earliest days, " the multitude of them that believed 
 were of one heart and one soul" (Acts iv. 32). It must be equally 
 well remembered that the Head of the Church, in that marvellous 
 prayer left us in the seventeenth chapter of St. John's Gospel, 
 when He interceded in gracious love and wisdom for the Church 
 of the future, besought the Father " that they all may be 
 one; as Thou Father art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may 
 be one in Us : that the world may believe that thou hast sent 
 Me." 
 
 The normal condition of the Christian Church, then, is clearly 
 one of unity and love — for its own sake, and the success of its 
 work ; nor are we justified in expecting that the world will believe 
 in the, mission of the Church, unless its members strive after hold- 
 ing " the faith in unity of spirit, in the bond of peace." 
 
 This being so, what an awful responsibility lies somewhere for 
 the disunion of Christendom, now so patent to all ! Let us be 
 thankful that the Church of England is awaking to a sense of 
 her responsibility in this matter. " The Home Reunion Society " 
 is constituted in the hope of bringing about some practical efforts 
 towards that unity which must be the fervent aspiration and 
 prayer of every faithful Christian. An unmistakeable yearning 
 after unity is a sign of our times, and must surely be in answer to 
 the special prayers, which of late years have been so frequently 
 offered by Churchmen, that our blessed Lord would " grant His 
 Church that peace and unity which is agreeable to His holy will." 
 
 Let me now bring the matter nearer home, and consider the 
 duty nearest to our hand — which, as a rule, is the one demanding 
 out first attention. While we very properly lament and pray over 
 the disunion of Christendom as a whole, let us try to solve the dif-
 
 u 
 
 Acuities as they stand around us here at home. In a word, let us 
 face the great fact that the Church in England is far from being, 
 as she should be, the Church of the people of England. It is 
 matter for serious reflection, why are so many earnest-minded 
 Christian people outside our Communion 1 There can be little 
 doubt that if all our Dissenting fellow-countrymen were one with 
 us, the work of bringing in the masses of unbelievers which sur- 
 round us would be very much facilitated. 
 
 As Churchmen, we must admit that a good deal of the Noncon- 
 formity over which we mourn now, is the legacy to us of the ill-will 
 and apathy of Churchmen in times past. Dissent, having gained 
 a footing, has become hereditary ; and many of those attached to 
 Nonconformist bodies have never thought of belonging to any 
 other — have, in fact, simply inherited their religious profession. 
 This reflection should stir us up to affectionate solicitude for our 
 brethren who have lost opportuities which we enjoy, and should 
 move us to atone, as far as we can, for the errors of our fore- 
 fathers. Let us do something to leave our country, in this 
 respect, better than we found it. 
 
 Assuming, then, that Churchmen must do something towards 
 bringing about union with Dissenters, the question is, How are 
 we to go to work 1 Special efforts are necessary, and this neces- 
 sity, from the nature of the case, is a growing one. The " Home 
 Eeunion Society " issues a practical programme, to which I direct 
 earnest attention ; and on the lines laid down by that Society 
 much good may be done, and done forthwith, if Churchmen will 
 but face their duty in this matter. So great an undertaking as 
 bringing all Nonconformists within the fold of the Church of 
 England is aj)parent/y impossible, but it remembers that " with 
 God all things are possible," and cannot doubt a rich blessing will 
 follow all sincere endeavours to bring about " a consummation so 
 devoutly to be wished." The Society can, at least, strive to 
 arouse Churchmen to a sense of their duty, in a spirit of brotherly 
 love, and this it has already done to a hopeful extent. 
 
 It is evident that unity between the Church and Dissenters 
 must be attempted either by going down to the level of Dissenters 
 or by bringing them up to ours. As to the former, we cannot 
 attempt to gain Dissenters by giving up vital distinctions of doc- 
 trine and practice. " Holding the truth " is a primary duty of 
 Churchmen — but always " in love."
 
 15 
 
 Neither let it be supposed that we can win Nonconformists by- 
 undervaluing, or apologizing for, our own system. They know, as 
 well as we do, that there are matters of most important doctrine 
 and principle at issue between us ; and it would be worse than 
 folly for us to ignore such matters. Let us rather seek to justify 
 our firm attachment to the principles we represent and love, not 
 in the spirit of aggrandizement, but from a desire that others 
 should share our greater privileges. 
 
 Then as to raising Dissent to our own level, we may well 
 remember Lord Derby's advice to his friends in Lancashire the 
 other day ; namely, to be very careful when pulling our neigh- 
 bour out of a ditch that he does not pull us in. Still, this is the 
 only method we can adopt. We must first make our own footing 
 quite sure, in the possession of steadfast faith, and then put out 
 the hand of love to our less-privileged brethren. The lever for 
 this work is the inherent attractiveness of the truth, as held and 
 practised by the Church. Let us be careful to do justice to our 
 principles, by exemplifying their great superiority in our daily 
 lives, and this by God's blessing will soon prove attractive to 
 outsiders. If the Church be indeed the body of Chrigt, may we 
 not believe of her, as of her Head — " I, if I be lifted up, will 
 draw all men unto Me." We cannot doubt that the Church 
 would draw all men into it, if all her members were more faithful 
 to their Lord. The want of this has resulted in a Babel of 
 sectarianism — a bitter legacy — and so it must continue, until we 
 make men see " we are one with Christ, and Christ with us." 
 
 Let us now briefly glance at the difficulties, in detail, which 
 stand in the way of Home Reunion. They are partly on our side, 
 and partly on the side of Nonconformity. 
 
 On our side, a practical difficulty is the painful fact that in 
 these days we are confronted with a good deal of what is known 
 as " political dissent," in which the religious element is com- 
 paratively small. This, of course, is outside the sphere of Re- 
 union, and with it the Church can never negotiate. The Church 
 is assured of eventual triumph over her enemies ; — she dare not 
 make terms with them. It is a hopeful sign that other Noncon- 
 formists are deprecating this kind of Dissent in the public prints. 
 
 In the next place, a real difficulty on our side is, that the 
 Church as the guardian of God's truth, cannot make overtures to
 
 IG 
 
 heresy or wilful schism. These are things we continually pray 
 against, and we must therefore strive against them, though they 
 be ever so religious in appearance and intention. While careful 
 not to magnify differences, we cannot forget that we are face to 
 face with some active forms of false doctrine and practice. It 
 must, however, be borne in mind that Nonconformists have been 
 brought up to believe that sects and divisions are often a great 
 advantage. They have not been taught to consider separation 
 sinful. They mostly hold that any " company of faithful men" is 
 a Church. They ignore any duty of allegiance or responsibility 
 to, what we might call, the historical polity of Christendom, 
 and have no place in their systems for what we call *' church 
 authority." 
 
 Then a third difficulty on our side, and a daily increasing diffi- 
 culty is, that we have to deal with carefully organized systems of 
 ministry and worship, in contravention of what the Church has 
 held and taught in all ages. I fear the several hierarchies (so to 
 speak) of Dissent are amongst the greatest obstacles with which 
 Home Keunionists will have to contend. Overtures to bodies of 
 Nonconformists will be of little or no use ; our hope is with the 
 members of these societies individually. We shall sooner attract 
 unofficial adherents, than those who are in places of authority. 
 
 These practical difficulties from the Churchman's side must be 
 all honestly faced in the work to which we address ourselves. 
 Perhaps a consideration of the difficulties of Reunion from the 
 Dissenter's point of view, may help us to some modification of 
 what might seem a " forlorn hope." 
 
 As a native of Cornwall, a county which owes so much to the 
 great English Apostle, John Wesley, brought up in early life 
 amongst those who have, alas ! separated in so many ways from 
 the original constitution of the Society of Methodists, and having 
 had special opportunity of seeing the working of various types of 
 Dissent, I have learnt from them some of the difficulties on their 
 side in the way of "Home Reunion." 1 will not attempt to re- 
 count all their objections to the Church, but I will mention a few 
 of their candid criticisms, in matters wherein we shall do well as I 
 think, to profit by their observations from without. Let us " see 
 ourselves as others see us." 
 
 I. They say the Church is too clerical, too much " on stilts."
 
 17 
 
 The Laity have neither power nor position, say they, in the details 
 of the Church's work. Laymen have the privilege of contribut- 
 ing their substance, but their province for personal service is unde- 
 fined, almost non-existing. The Clergy carry on their work as 
 parochial autocrats, afraid to trust the Laity beyond collecting 
 alms or teaching in the Sunday School; and the Laity seem equally 
 afraid of their clergy. 
 
 They say, moreover, we are so dignified that we cannnot 
 tolerate enthusiasm, whether Lay or Clerical, but especially the 
 former — that as soon as a man begins to be thoroughly in earnest 
 about religious matters, he finds the Church uncongenial, and is 
 tempted to Nonconformity. From this, they argue, that in respect 
 to the position of the laity, dissenters would be considerable losers 
 by a transfer of allegiance. 
 
 Remembering how practically the Wesleyans, for instance, 
 utilise lay energy, and how very little the Church does so, we 
 cannot expect earnest-minded men to entertain the idea of join- 
 ing a body, in which they might be relegated to the frigid 
 corners of its stately system and condemned to comparative use- 
 lessness. There are many of our own laity, who from personal 
 experience, could tell a Dissenter that he is better off in his sect 
 for opportunities of usefulness, than he would be in the Church ! 
 This, then, is a matter, which for our sakes, and that of the 
 Church, we should endeavour to mend, before we can hope to 
 attract the earnest Nonconformist. Let us strive to learn that it 
 is true wisdom to utilise all powers and talents in the Church's 
 service. Alas ! we ignore and repress many agencies our neigh- 
 bours would glory in, and we are but slowly awakening to 
 improvement in this respect. 
 
 II. A second difficulty with conscientious Dissenters, is that 
 we are neither constitutional nor self-governing as a body. Many 
 Churchmen are indeed conscious that in matters spiritual the 
 Church is not free to manage her own affairs. This arises from a 
 variety of historical causes, and is already receiving its full share 
 of anxious attention. Our efforts in the way of Conferences, 
 Synods, and the Reform of Convocation, are proofs that the 
 Church of England realises her difficulties, and by careful mea- 
 sures is endeavouring to remove tliem. 
 
 III. A third charge is that we depreciate preaching to which
 
 18 
 
 Nonconformists attach supreme importance. It is said we do not 
 train our Clergy to preach, and so many Sermons are evidently 
 the productions of " men who have to say something, rather 
 then of men who have something to say." It must be admitted 
 that we have not always sufficiently valued the importance and 
 power of preaching. The High Church revival of the present 
 century was perhaps retarded by the low estimation in which 
 its early leaders held sermons. We have become wiser of late, 
 and moral essays or homiletics, whether long or short are becom- 
 ing happily less in number. Sermonizing has actually called 
 a Society into existence for its cultivation and improvement, 
 and while some of our pulpit effusions are unsurpassed in ancient 
 or modern times, taken as a whole they will compare very 
 favourably with those of any other Church or religious body. 
 Let us do all we can to secure the Church its needful supj^ly of 
 able, well-trained and eloquent preachers, and this will prove a 
 great attraction for Nonconformists, who in this matter simply 
 share the marvellous love of sermons which is characteristic of 
 English people. And one word more here, do let us work into 
 our preaching forces the capable laity,— of course under proper 
 regulation. The Church of England can surely raise from 
 her midst an army of Lay -preachers ^s easily as the Wesleyans, 
 and why not 1 This would be a means of multiplying Church 
 influences, the value of which it is impossible to over-estimate; 
 and considering the patent insufficiency of our ministrations for 
 the requirements of our teeming population, it would seem 
 absolutely culpa1)le to neglect the use of it. 
 
 Our various Societies of Laymen, already more or less engaged in 
 Church work, would furnish many qualified persons ; but it is the 
 duty of the Church to call them out, and not expect the men to 
 force themselves through the " hard and fast" lines at present 
 existing. We might then reasonably hope that ardent souls 
 amongst our Nonconformist brethren, would more readily believe 
 in us and our system. They have been accustomed to heart-stiing 
 addresses, and plenty of them ; we must meet this want, if we 
 desire to win Dissenters, or even retain our indifferently-attached 
 members. 
 
 IV. Another drawback, in the eyes of Dissenters, is the want 
 of opportunities for intercommunion between our members. Any
 
 19 
 
 one who knows tli(3 organization of the Wesleyans, for examphi, 
 must acknowledge that we might learn something from their class- 
 meetings, prayer-meetings, love-feasts, &c. Every member's attach- 
 ment is fostered by frequent contact with others in the work of the 
 Society. This is left to spontaneous action in the Church ; and, 
 though we have done something by the establishment of guilds 
 and kindred associations (to which I can personally bear very 
 grateful testimony), still, in this respect, we are far behind our 
 Dissenting neighbours, and should therefore lose no time in im- 
 proving our arrangements. Church people have no notion of 
 fraternizing with one another as such, whereas Dissenters gain 
 enormous strength thereby. 
 
 V. The last charge which I shall notice is perhaps a strange 
 one to come from Separatists, but it is one which carries sad con- 
 viction of truth with it, and is perhaps the greatest obstacle to 
 " Home Eeunion." They say we are " a house divided against 
 itself" — that the trumpet gives an "uncertain sound." 
 
 We are not at unity within the Church as we should be ; but 
 the " Home Eeunion Society " addresses itself to the removal 
 of this stumbling-block as one of its objects. It is, however, only 
 fair to say, that our points of agreement are many, and our dis- 
 agreements very few — far fewer than many suppose. We can, 
 and do, work well together in Congresses and Synods, and our 
 disunions are very much exaggerated because made very public. 
 Moreover, it is a far /ess evil that there should be minor divisions 
 within a body like the Church of England than that they should 
 take the shape of new organizations and sects. No matter how 
 much our clergy may differ on minor points, there is agreement 
 in all essential matters, from a formal and solemn acceptance of 
 the same creeds and formularies. 
 
 Still we shall do well to take to heart " our unhappy divisions," 
 and there is nothing more certain, than that real efforts towards a 
 more pt^rfect understanding between the various schools within 
 our Church would prove a speedy blessing to us all. An earnest 
 and pious Wesleyan who left us a few years since, " frozen out," 
 answered my entreaty to return, a short time since, by saying it 
 was quite useless inviting Dissenters while we are so divided 
 within the Church, and find so little employment for those who 
 desire to work for their Lord. While there is any truth in such
 
 20 
 
 objections, let us strive diligently to remove the cause of offence. 
 
 These are a few of the more practical reflections which must be 
 considered by Churchmen anxious to remove the sad reproach of 
 divisions in our midst. We must remember that our great appeal 
 should be to *' the Apostles' doctrine and fellowship ; " and our 
 only hope lies in the knowledge that we are working in love for 
 the honour of our Lord, Whose will concerning His Church is, that 
 it should be "a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or 
 any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish." 
 
 We may profitably remember that Dissent has grown by reason 
 of the Church overlooking or neglecting points of Christian faith 
 and practice ; and therefore we may not regard Nonconformists as 
 wholly wrong, and we ourselves entirely right. God has gracious 
 designs for all His servants, and we must be careful not to con- 
 demn our brethren too hastily. It has been well said, " Is there 
 any quarry which shall contribute none of the materials with 
 which the Church of the future, ' made perfect in one,' shall be 
 built 1 Shall any colour be excluded, when beyond the present 
 mist and storm cloud, the rainbow shall appear, of which 
 The various tints unite 
 And form in Heaven's sight 
 One arch of peace. " 
 
 We may reasonably take courage from many signs of the times, 
 and with God's blessing, the " Home Reunion Society" has a 
 grand work before it, which, succeeding, shall do very much to 
 promote " Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good- 
 will towards men." Amen. 
 
 John Trevarthen. 
 
 Redhill, Surrey, 
 
 24//i Nov., 1877.
 
 THE CHURCH AND DISSENT. 
 
 BY REV. CANON HOLE. 
 
 A TRUE desire for unity can only exist in the hearts of sincere 
 and earnest Christians, who have learned something of the mind 
 which was in Him who prayed that we might all be one ; and 
 therefore, in our considerations of reunion between the Church 
 and Dissent we must leave out all mere professors, formalists, and 
 partisans. We must eliminate, on the one hand, all those who 
 are Church people, mainly because Papa has a pew ; who go to 
 church once a week, hebdomadal Christians, to keep up appear- 
 ances, " for the sake of the young people and the servants, 
 you know ;" who go because landlords, and employers, and 
 customers, and genteel people, and carriage-folk — will be there ; 
 or because the Church is a national institution, and it is their 
 solemn conviction that if they do not patronise it now and then 
 it must decay, dissolve, and, like the baseless fabric of a dream, 
 leave not a wreck behind. And, on the other hand, we must 
 decline to notice those who are Dissenters from social and political, 
 but not from spiritual, motives. We must refuse to listen to any 
 railing accusations from one side or the other ; to the intolerant 
 parson, who tells his people that the first Dissenter was Cain ; 
 or to the Baptist leader, who, in speaking recently of the 
 Churches of Ireland and England, compared them to Ananias 
 and Sapphira, and foretold a like destruction. No, we must 
 " let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil 
 speaking, be put away from us, with all malice ; " and then, 
 when this high and holy ambition, the reunion of Christians, 
 is prayerfully, tenderly studied and discussed by those who love 
 the church or who love the chapel, only because they believe in 
 their hearts that in the church or in the chapel they can compre- 
 hend more clearly '■ the truth as it is in Jesus " — then, and 
 then only, can we await in sure and certain hope the promised 
 benediction of God All earnest Christians hate strife and
 
 99 
 
 yearn for peace. It is the unstable and tlie insincere, not 
 having the faith, nor the courage, to o;ive their life to God, 
 who are loud in controversy, and try to believe that they are 
 religious, because they are ever denouncing the weaknesses and 
 protesting against the mistakes of others. It is these men whose 
 counsel, like Moloch's, is for open war, who delight in magnifying 
 the differences between Church and Dissent, who say to all men, 
 "Be avenged of your adversary," instead of " Sirs, ye are brethren." 
 At the Church Congress, the other day, one of the speakers told 
 us, that in passing through the streets he noticed a crowd of boys, 
 evidently influenced by a great excitement, and he found on 
 inquiring that they were anxiously instigating two of their com- 
 panions to fight. So he addressed himself to the principals for 
 whom a duel was projjosed, and asked them, " Do you want to 
 fight 1 " and when they promptly answered, " No, sir," then said 
 he, '' Don't," and they didn't. They shook hands, to the disgust 
 and dispersion of those truculent young rascals, who shouted 
 for the battle. And this suggests a question, serious and sad 
 — who shall be first to hold out the hand of friendship 1 The 
 answer is plain as painful — the one who provoked the quarrel, 
 the Church of England. Let me speak of facts within my own 
 experience. In my boyhood and early youth I never even saw 
 the man to whom had been entrusted the spiritual charge of the 
 parish in which I lived. He did not reside in the same county. 
 A curate had lodgings five miles away, and came to us once a 
 week for one brief, cold, heartless service. My memory recalls him 
 as he stands, with his overcoat, hat, and riding-whip upon the 
 Holy Table, asking from the sexton whether there Avere any 
 infants to be baptised (at home, of course, in a pudding-basin), or 
 any dead to be buried in a churchyard, which was the village play- 
 ground, and where horses were turned out to graze. The sparrows 
 twittered and the bats glided silently overhead, the beetles crawled 
 over the damp, broken floor below ; prayers, canticles, psalms 
 were read by the parson and his vis-a-vis, the clerk, only ; and 
 then, as you have seen at a circus the active horseman drop his 
 outward raiment, and suddenly assume a new costume and charac- 
 ter, so was the surplice hastily doffed, and the preacher gave us a 
 sermon, old and dingy as the gown in wliich it was preached. 
 There was no visiting, no teaching, no almsgiving, no sympath}-,
 
 23 
 
 no love. The sliei)lierds ate of the fat and clothed themselves 
 with the wool, but they did not feed the flock. Was it strange that 
 the sheep should wander, when the fold was unguarded and the 
 pasture bare ? Was it strange that men who felt that they had 
 these souls to save, and had found a Saviour, should exhort and 
 encourage one another, and should assemble themselves togther 
 where they could, because the temple of the Lord was closed ] 
 I say the memory of those men is blessed ; ^and, though you may 
 affirm that their successors in many instances have not their de- 
 voted piety, that they seem very often to be influenced by preju- 
 dice rather than by principle, and that in these days, when the 
 Church is awake and putting on her strength, they cannot plead 
 the same just motives for separation, I say, instead of being de- 
 luded by Satan — instead of hating those whom she has wronged — 
 instead of denouncing and deriding, the Church is bound to regard 
 Dissent with shame and humility, to pray with all her heart, to 
 })onder with all her mind, and to work with all her might and 
 means, for reunion with those whom, had she been faithful to her 
 trust, she would not have alienated, estranged, and lost. 
 
 And, again, it must be remembered that in addressing Dis- 
 senters you accost them by a title which they do not own. 
 They will tell you that they are constant to a religion in which 
 many of them were born, and that they believe in it as firmly as 
 you believe in yours. Or perhaps they may say that you may call 
 them Dissenters, if you please, inasmuch as the history of religion 
 is the history of Dissent, the East from the West, England from 
 Rome, Geneva from England, Protestant from Catholic, Noncon- 
 formist from Churchmen, difl'erences of administration, they may 
 argue, but from the same Spirit. And though you feel sure that 
 they are wrong, and that disunion is wrong, is there not yet 
 another consideration which should make us very gentle, very care- 
 ful when we are tempted to reproach or reform. I mean the con- 
 sciousness of dissent between our own will and God's will, the voice 
 of the prophet sounding in our ears, " Your iniquities have sepa- 
 rated between you and your God." And of this I am quite sure, 
 that while all denunciations, all demands of allegiance, all satire, 
 however caustic, all mere controversial arguments will repel rather 
 than attract, tliat spirit of humility which recognises a wrong and 
 seeks to repair it, will evoke the sym2)athy for which it prays and
 
 24 
 
 works. It may be repelled by the arrogant, misunderstood by the 
 ignorant, mistaken for weakness, for cowardice, for deceit by the 
 suspicious ; but it will be appreciated by good and generous men. 
 Though the enterprise seems sometimes hopeless, and we sigh, " I 
 labour for peace ; but when I speak unto them thereof they make 
 ready to battle ;" if we will only 1 " let patience have her perfect 
 work," if we will only " learn to labour and to wait," though we 
 may not see in this world the results for which we toil (and we 
 are but as men clearing the ground from ruins, that others may re- 
 build, but as men ploughing and sowing, breaking up fallow ground), 
 be sure that there shall come hereafter, in the good time of the 
 Almighty, first the blade and then the ear, and then the full corn 
 in the ear. God encourages this faith and hope. At a mission 
 which I conducted no long time ago in this diocese, only two or 
 three Dissenters attended our first services ; but when, in one of 
 the addresses, I expressed the views which I have expressed to 
 you on the spirit in which, as it seemed to me, the Church should 
 regard Nonconformists, they came in numbers ; indeed, the last 
 night of the mission (Sunday) they closed their chapels, that all 
 might come to it. Nor can I refrain, though I be accused of 
 egotism (and yet how can one prefer facts to theories, and 
 expression to experience, without it 1), nor can I refrain from re- 
 peating a compliment paid to me by a worthy old Wesleyan, when 
 he remarked to theVicar of his parish, for whom I had been preach- 
 ing a harvest sermon, " they tell me he's one of them Romans, 
 but I like to hear the man." Why 1 because our hearts were 
 united by their love of the Lord Jesus, and this commandment 
 have we from him, " that he who loveth God, love his brother 
 also." 
 
 But while history and conscience teach us humility, they 
 bid us also to be honest, and loyal and brave. They repeat to us 
 the words which the late Bishop of Exeter addressed to the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury : "My lord, no good ever yet came from 
 the sacrifice of truth to peace." They warn us that when great 
 cracks break out in our walls and ceilings, it won't do to daub with 
 untempered mortar, and paste a pretty paper over, and say, " How 
 nice it looks ! " but we must strengthen the foundation of the 
 house. Let us be sincere, candid, outspoken to each other ; 
 let us not waste our breath and our soap in blowing bubbles which
 
 25 
 
 so quickly burst, but let us utilise them in earnest pleading for 
 the truth, and in washing our hands and faces. Don't let us 
 deceive one another with false notions that separation is strength 
 — (behold how good and joyful a thing it is, brethren, not to 
 dwell together in unity) — and that every man may do that 
 which is right in his own eyes, if it seemeth to him to be right. 
 Oh, beware of that easy, and greasy benevolence whose text is, 
 " It does not matter." "There lives more faith in honest doubt, 
 believe me, than in half the creeds ; " because so many love not the 
 truth well enough to contend earnestly for it. Men talk about 
 concessions of Church principles and Church property ; they are 
 not ours to concede. 
 
 Let me briefly illustrate my meaning : — 1st. As to principle. 
 So long as the Church of England tells us in the preface to her 
 ordination offices, that " from the Apostles' time there have been 
 three orders of ministers in Christ's Church, bishops, and priests, 
 and deacons," and in her 23rd article, that "it is not lawful for 
 any man to take upon him the office of public preaching, or 
 ministering the sacraments in the congregation, before he be 
 lawfully called and sent," we Churchmen are bound to maintain 
 that there are three Christian orders in the Church, and that " a 
 religious community is not duly and fully a Church without 
 them." They who do not regard such a ministry as essential 
 are quite consistent with their opinions in denouncing the 
 expenditure which it entails, and would be justified in asking 
 parliament for an educated religious police, in a dark uniform of 
 strong cloth at <£2 per man per week, to visit on week-a-days 
 and preach on Sundays, countenanced and assisted, it might be, 
 in towns by the Mayors and in villages by the squires, who 
 should occasionally absolve and bless the congregation from the 
 municipal or family pew. But they must not call themselves 
 Churchmen. 
 
 Let us follow the example of our heroic chief, and not be ashamed 
 of our faith. We shall be called bigots, sacerdotal despots, and 
 the like, but we shall induce thoughtful men to make enquiries, 
 and some to think with us. The Bishop of Lincoln's pastoral to 
 the Wesleyans was denounced as narrow-minded and repellent. 
 But what has been the result 1 Out of 63 students who have 
 entered the Theological College at Lincoln, with a view to taking
 
 26 
 
 holy orders, ten have come from the Nonconformists, of whom 
 seven are Wesleyans, and these have stated that many others 
 would follow their example were they not prevented by difficulties 
 which arise, not in foro conscientim, not from spiritual, but from 
 social and financial, sources.* Churchman or Nonconformist, 
 let us say what we think. When we had a meeting some two 
 years ago in the town of Nottingham, as to the reunion 
 of Christians, an esteemed member of the Baptist Communion 
 told us cordially and truthfully that the chief difficulty presented 
 itself in this question of government. " For example," he said, 
 " I call myself a bishop." I admit that this difficulty is a gigantic 
 hindrance and discouragement, so great as to make any corporate 
 return of the sects for the present hopeless ; but it is well to 
 know what the difficulty is, and if we have only faith in our 
 Church we shall move mountains. 
 
 Then, as to property ; our churchyards are not our own ; 
 they belong to our parishioners, upon conditions. Between 
 earnest Churchmen and earnest Nonconformists an arrange- 
 ment might, as 1 believe, be made ; but the matter is taken out of 
 their hands. It is not a religious, but a political question. And 
 because there is to be not only trespass but desecration (if the 
 churchyards belong to the nation, you cannot exclude the Atheist, 
 much less the Deist !) you will resist that intrusion, which is 
 sacrilege, until the law shall compel obedience. 
 
 I have spoken of the spirit in which, as it seems to me, we 
 Churchmen should regard Dissent, May I offer to you, in conclu- 
 sion, a few short suggestions which are, I hope, of a practical 
 character. Church people should read, and should be taught by 
 pastors and parents the history of the Church, and her claims as 
 the ancient Church of this land upon their obedience and love. 
 Ask the first dozen men you meet why they belong to the Church 
 rather than to any other community of Christians, and you will be 
 favoured in many cases with arguments which a clever Nonconfor- 
 mist would demolish as easily as your little brother puffed down in 
 childhood the card house of which you were so proud. And 
 Churchmen should acquaint themselves with the reasons why 
 Nonconformists do not conform, and then instead of sneer and 
 
 * The Bishop, in acknowledging a copy of this paper, writes, "by a remark- 
 able coincidence, it came to me with overtures from three Wesleyans, asking 
 Ordination in the Church."
 
 27 
 
 ridicule, and the notion that dissent springs only from the spirit 
 
 of opposition, there will be towards those who are true to their 
 
 principles, respect and a desire to conciliate. The Church should 
 
 extend her ministrations and her means of grace among the 
 
 classes with whom dissent has its chief influence. We need large 
 
 churches, free and open. We want services, solemn, reverent, 
 
 devotional, but bright, and simple, and short, to which working 
 
 men can go, if they please, before and after their work. We 
 
 want our Churches to be not houses of prayer only, nor houses of 
 
 preaching, nor houses of music only, but that which so many 
 
 churches profess to be, but are not, "places of worship." Places 
 
 of praise and thanksgiving from the hearts of men, who know 
 
 that the Lord is in His holy place, who know that the King is on 
 
 His throne, who feel His Holy Spirit in their souls, who are sure 
 
 that with angels and archangels, and all the company of heaven, 
 
 they laud and magnify the glorious name who believe and realise 
 
 the communion of saints. A few words specially as to preaching. A 
 
 man who only reads other men's sermons, has mistaken his vocation 
 
 — he is too idle, too ignorant, or too insincere to preach. ^ Dr. Dol- 
 
 linger said to Mr. Gladstone, " depend upon it if the Church of 
 
 England is to make way, and be a thoroughly national Church, the 
 
 clergy must give up this preaching from written sermons." I believe 
 
 that all honest men could do this efficiently ; because, in the 
 
 words of one of the most impressive of modern preachers, " I 
 
 think it no extravagance to say, that a very inferior sermon 
 
 delivered without book, answers the purpose for which all sermons 
 
 are delivered more perfectly than one of great merit, if it be 
 
 written and read." And why not more preachers ? Why 
 
 should not laymen be authorised to preach as of old, as the 
 
 Franciscans? The Bishops could empower laymen to preach, just 
 
 as Alexander of Jerusalem licensed Origen, before he was in Orders 
 
 not only to teach but to preach in the catechetical schools of 
 
 Alexandria. If not in churches, in mission rooms, school rooms, 
 
 and wherever else they please, so that in church and out of church 
 
 thepoor might have the Gospel preached to them — not that vague, 
 
 undefined, mysterious Gospel which so many talk about but so 
 
 few explain, which means anything or nothing, but the Gospel in 
 
 its purity, as our Lord preached it. " When thou doest thine 
 
 alms— when thou pray est — when thou fastest — Do this in remem-
 
 28 
 
 brance of Me." — "If any man will come after Me, let him take 
 up his cross and follow Me." — " He that doeth the will shall 
 know of the doctrine, ' — " I was an hungred, and ye gave Me 
 meat." Preaching His words, and following His example, we 
 must draw nearer to each other, as we draw nearer to Him, 
 because (remember this above all things) if we follow His 
 example, we shall pray for Unity; and this we can all do. Church- 
 men or Nonconformists, we can pray that He would gather 
 together in one the children of God that are scattered abroad. 
 Yes, if in a spirit of penitent humility, and yet with a courageous 
 faith, if striving earnestly to redeem the past, to lead the truth, to 
 preach the faith once delivered to the Saints, if bearing one 
 another's burdens, those burdens which oppress us body and soul, 
 we pray that we may be, like the multitude of those that first 
 believed, of one heart and one soul, in His own good time and 
 way, He will give us our heart's desire; and in that battle between 
 good and evil, faith and unbelief, Christ and Antichrist, which 
 is ever raging around and in us, the Church of England shall 
 regain the alliance she has lost by proving that she has the right 
 and the power to lead.
 
 :A 
 
 x 
 
 "•••i»% 
 
 
 <0f^' 
 
 i^m 
 
 f:% 
 
 ''■^V^- \ 
 ?**^ ^ 
 
 #.i