holding property by way of endowment and the like-we take the formularies to mean so and so. The law does not pretend to say that the Church or the sect, as the case may be, for its own religious or spiritual purposes means so and so by the formularies. And neither Churchman nor Nonconformist would feel that the real meaning of the formulary was any other than what he held it to mean before; for if the Church or Nonconforming body should alter the terms of its formulary it would be because the law and not itself had mistaken the true meaning.

It is therefore a serious error to suppose, as many Nonconformists do and as many Churchmen profess to do, that the doctrines of the Church of England are fixed or even interpreted by the decisions of the courts of law. These only fix the legal meaning for legal purposes. So long therefore, as a religious body, whether the Church or a Nonconformist body, holds property on trust, the State will insist on giving its own interpretation of all creeds and formularies in judging disputes between an individual minister and the body to which he belongs. The disestablished body may have greater facilities for altering its formularies to make their true meaning apparent after the adverse decision has been given, but the principle of the control of the State is the same to both.

It is often contended that Episcopacy is wrong, and that the apostolic succession is a delusion. With a view to unity they are both of some importance, as they connect us with all the orthodox Churches of the East and West, and with the Christianity of past ages even from the beginning.

All candid minds must admit that the germs and first workings of the Episcopate in direct succession to the Apostles are clearly to be seen in Holy Scripture. Dr. Binney, at a meeting of Independents at Plymouth, is reported to have said: 'I believe in the Epistles to Timothy though you do not, and I find in them the rudimentary elements of a moderate Episcopacy.' And generally among Protestant Nonconformists of the present day we find a growing feeling in favour of this form of Church government. Mr. Spurgeon's organisations among the Baptists have a wonderful resemblance to the old lines of Church government under other names. It is well known how earnestly John Wesley longed to introduce the episcopate for the ordination of his ministers, and we have extant the letters of Dr. Coke, whom Wesley in his old age attempted to set apart for this purpose, asking Bishops Seabury and White for a proper ordination.

On the other hand, the acceptance of the Primitive Episcopate as the authorised form of Church government would in no way necessitate a return to the Prince Bishops of the feudal times. And it is curious to note that the true primitive model, with its body of Presbyters to advise the Bishop, was much more like our limited monarchy than that more autocratic form which has been forced

upon our bishops by the past neglect of the use of synods and of the great chapters of our cathedrals, both of which it is now our earnest endeavour to revive.

We have an important note of unity in the common possession of a Bible received by all, and in a common appeal to Holy Scripture as the surest means of interpreting the faith as once delivered to the saints. It is only a popular misunderstanding of what this appeal means which causes any divergent teaching. The Reformed Churches. were only acting on the lines of true Catholic tradition when they availed themselves of the invention of printing to translate and circulate more fully the whole Bible. But in the interpretation of Scripture we cannot accept the casual teaching of every minister or individual student, neither may we safely accept the stereotyped views of any particular school of thought. Though individual Fathers may have been wrong, and may often be found to bear contradictory testimony, the consensus of Catholic teaching must always form a valuable aid in arriving at the true meaning of doubtful passages.

By an appeal to Scripture we mean a critical inquiry into the purity of the text and into the real meaning of the original language, and a careful comparison of Scripture with Scripture, conducted in prayer and in faith, hoping ever for the special guidance of God the Holy Ghost. It was in this spirit and in this way that Catholic tradition that form of sound words' which St. Paul urges Timothy to hold fast-was consolidated into the creeds which have been sealed by full authority of the Church, and have been received by all Christians as containing the essential dogmas of the Christian Faith. An appeal to Scripture conducted on the same lines would doubtless tend to bring us all much nearer together on most of the points on which at present there appears to be so much divergent teaching.

When we come to those great Sacramental truths, the natural outcome of the doctrine of the Incarnation, we are brought face to face with those points of divergence which exist among the different schools of thought within the Church. Even here, however, we can only venture a few remarks which, offered in a spirit of love, may tend to remove some of those bitternesses which need not of necessity form a part of controversies on matters of religion.

In considering these subjects, a true faith according to St. Paul's definition of it as the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen,' is a very necessary qualification. And yet what wonderful mistakes are made as to the possession of this grace! It is believed by many that the Catholic, from his apparent trust in outward forms, must miss this grace altogether; and that the Protestant, because he has realised certain feelings in his own heart, is the sole possessor of it. But, just as a trust in forms would naturally quench all true faith, so also may a trust in religious feelings—which are for the time as apparent as any forms can be

damp a true faith, according to St. Paul's definition of it, and end in a belief in nothing that is only hoped for and therefore not tangible, and in the rejection of everything which is unseen or unfelt and therefore hard to realise. St. Paul lived in a realisation of the unseen world, and accepted blessings which could be only spiritually discerned. So, again, we are in danger of too much individualism in our religion. Of course it is necessary that each stone of the spiritual building should be dressed and tried; that every wandering sheep should be gathered into the fold; that each member should be fashioned one by one for its appointed work; but when each soul has been built up into the spiritual temple, or has been received into the old, or has been made a member of the body of which Christ is the head, the individualism ceases, the personal pronoun I loses its place in the Christian vocabulary, and we realise not only that we are bought with a price, and are therefore not our own, but that we form one essential part of that great company which is described in Scripture as the one bride of Christ.

In considering all these sacramental teachings, we must never forget that the Christian Church was but the continuation of the Jewish; Christ came not to destroy the law but to fulfil, and he distinctly tells us that He has other sheep not of the Jewish fold: 'them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and they shall become one flock, one shepherd.' On this ground the Church founded infant baptism to take the place of circumcision, admitting the children of Christians to the benefits of the Christian covenant on the faith of their parents, even as Jewish children were admitted, on the faith of their parents, to the commonwealth of Israel. But baptism must not be looked upon as a charm, or treated apart from the Church's distinct order that the child should be carefully instructed till it is brought to confirmation, for which holy training the godparents are a guarantee.

So in respect of the other great sacrament. No Churchman would for a moment contend that there was any other sacrifice necessary than the one great sacrifice upon the cross once offered for the sins of the whole world. And as regards the memorial sacrifice the Catholic would only assert that as our Lord in heaven is daily pleading the one great sacrifice before the throne of God, so we on earth-the priesthood for all the faithful-do offer up a memorial of that sacrifice, uniting us with that service in heaven, where our great Intercessor ever pleads and receives gifts for men. As the Psalmist prophesies: The memorial of Thine abundant kindness shall be shewed, and men shall sing of Thy righteousness.'

Again, as to confession and absolution. No priest would ever claim to pronounce God's pardon as of his own power, or to take effect upon any but the truly penitent. They have been entrusted with the message of pardon to the truly penitent; only

God and the penitent know how far the repentance is true and the pardon real. So as to confession, all of every school know well that to win a soul to Christ personal intercourse is of the greatest assistance. It was well put at the Leicester Church Congress, that-if we wanted to fill a lot of narrow-necked bottles with water, you would take them up one by one and not pour the water from a height indiscriminately over all.' Why then quarrel over terms? Personal intercourse of soul with soul is a natural function of the members of the body of Christ, by whatever name it may be called. And the authoritative assurance of forgiveness of sins which the priest is empowered to offer to all true penitents often becomes a blessed means of saving a soul overwhelmed by the burden of its past sins from one of Satan's deadliest snares the temptation to despair of forgiveness.

Again, no one advocating apostolic succession for the priesthood would for a moment thereby seek to limit the free operations of God the Holy Ghost. Scripture is full of the free manifestations of the Spirit, but these are not permitted to interfere with the duly appointed methods and a fuller appreciation of Bible teaching might exhibit to the world again, as in apostolic times, the full working of a duly organised ministry side by side with the fullest manifestations of the Spirit among the individual members of Christ's body.

May these thoughts on the so-called burning questions of the day help somewhat to a return to unity, the advantages of which cannot easily be exaggerated! To judge of the views fearlessly expounded in this country at Church Congresses, and conventions, and conferences among the different religious bodies, it would seem that we are none of us particularly enamoured of the present state of things.

The very desire for unity, while bringing the different nonconforming bodies to act more harmoniously together, has a direct tendency to make them drift from their old moorings. Wesleyans are drifting away from Wesley and his teaching. Mr. Dale of Birmingham laments the falling away of many of his people from a belief in a divine institution of the sacraments as defined by the Westminster Confession. Baptists are avowedly becoming more negligent in enforcing the baptism of their adults. There are many complaints of increasing worldliness--of neglect of discipline, of increasing political to the neglect of religious zeal. The mechanical arrangements for the supply of teachers and for the regulation of their relations towards their people are often getting rusty and out of gear. And while thus drifting from our moorings or quarrelling among ourselves, infidelity is becoming daily more rampant. In a word, all must allow that the work we are called upon to do for our Lord and for His people might be better done.

There is no better remedy for these evils than a return to unity on the lines of a simple creed, with a greater recognition of the Church of the past ages and a fuller realisation of the unseen world

around us, of that great company of the redeemed by which we are compassed about to cheer us in our earthly warfare. All those confessions of faith of which Mr. Greenhough complains are but the outcome of past divisions. The breaking of unity obliged apologies and definitions; these again called for counter-propositions, till we have, as the preacher relates, the Thirty-nine Articles which contain 670 distinct propositions, the Westminster Confession and Catechism containing ten times that number, and the decrees of the Council of Trent-a number which no man can calculate.' Is it to be wondered at that there should be a longing to return to primitive simplicity of belief?

We rightly look back to the past for those creeds of the Church round which all Christians have rallied from the beginning. We look back also to connect ourselves as one body with that glorious roll of saints, apostles, prophets, and martyrs now at rest in the Paradise of God, but we also look on. The past history of the Church during succeeding ages points to great phases of growth which have risen from time to time in successive waves in higher and more beneficent influences upon the world. As the outcome of the first principles of Christianity, the position of woman was raised and honoured, and the slave, though slavery was permitted to exist, was received as a brother. The persecuting spirit and cruelties of heathen Rome were suppressed.

But with the destruction of the Roman Empire fresh nations had to be converted. This must ever be a gradual work; the old leaven of heathendom remains for a long time rampant; some of it though dormant remains among us still. And this new work was hindered by the great division of the Eastern and Western Church. The worldly ambitions of a corrupted Christianity claimed war and statecraft for its weapons, and the persecutions of heathen Rome were revived under the auspices of Christianity. Slavery and the slave trade became again prominent, and superstitions lingered among a partially converted people. But with the invention of printing and the consequent circulation of the Bible rolled in fresh waves of progress. In this work the Reformed Churches and many of the nonconforming bodies took a prominent part. The spirit of cruelty and persecution, which for a time was accepted in turn by the different religious bodies as they each obtained dominion, has been now well nigh destroyed. Under the guidance of Wilberforce, supported in this country by a revived spirit of religion in which the Church and the sects equally shared, slavery and the slave trade were put down. All these great advances were made in spite of our increasing divisions. The great promise of universal peace is still unfulfilled, and this can never be accomplished till our divisions cease, for how can we preach peace to the world while we, the representatives of Christ, are conspicuous for our loss of love as shown by our internal quarrellings? God grant that, in this our nation, as VOL. X.-No. 53.

K