THE 
 LAMBETH CONFERENCES 
 or 1867, 1878, AND 1888. 
 
ye Gheologi 
 vy st παρ ΑΓ Sp Minary 
 
 a 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 
 

 
 λον ΘΝ ‘ 
 ». SS 
 a =f. 
 rs. Lm 
 a a aes 
 ᾿ a ‘> Ὁ ee Da 
 
 
 

 
Ghe Liambeth Conferences. 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2015 
 
 https://archive.org/details/lambethconferencO0lamb_0 
 
The Lambeth Conferences 
 
 OF 
 
 1867, 1878, and 1888. 
 
 With the Official Reports and Resolutions, together 
 
 with the Sermons preached at the Conferences. 
 
 EDITED BY 
 
 RANDALE if. DAVIDSON; 
 
 DEAN OF WINDSOR. 
 
 LONDON : 
 SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE, 
 NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE, CHARING CROSS, W.C. ; 
 43, QUEEN VICTORIA STREET, E.C. 
 BRIGHTON: 135, NortH STREET. 
 
 New York: E. & J. B. YOUNG & Co. 
 1880. 
 
WYMAN AND SONS, PRINTERS, 
 GREAT QUEEN STREET, LINCOLN’S-INN FIELDS, 
 LONDON, W.C. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 
 
 AS te 
 Ρ ΑΞ ἘΠῚ: ΟἽ: 
 NARRATIVE. 
 Page 
 CHAP. I.—The First Conference, 1867... see aes 9 
 CuapP. I].—The Second Conference, 1878 τς oa, ee) 
 Cuap. III.—The Third Conference, 1888. τὰ dea 534 
 ῬΆΓΕΥΙ ΤΊ: 
 
 DOCUMENTS, REPORTS, AND RESOLUTIONS, ILLUSTRATING 
 THE HISTORY OF THE CONFERENCES. 
 Page 
 I.—Letters from the Canadian Bishops: Reply of 
 the Archbishop of Canterbury ado see SE 
 II.—Action taken by the Convocation of Canterbury 55 
 
 III.—Official “ Programme of Arrangements” issued 
 by the Archbishop of Canterbury for the 
 
 Conference of 1867 ... sed ἘΣ ἜΤ cle 
 IV.—Sermon by the Bishop of Illinois, Sept. 24, 
 τοῦ. 00 Bo oe ace aco ἴῶι 
 V.—Archbishop Longley’s Opening Address, Sept.24, 
 1867 By wat τῆς 506 7) 
 VI.—Amended Programme adopted during the Ses- 
 sions a, ae Boe ar τὸς πο 832 
 VII.—Formal “Address to the Faithful” from the 
 Bishops attending the Conference of 1867 ... 88 
 
 VIII.—Latin and Greek Versions of the Address -- 02 
 
6 Lambeth Conferences. 
 
 Page 
 IX.—Resolutions formally passed by the Conference 
 Of 1867 -ἰ a Ree ἘΣ ἘΣ δρῶ. ὦ 
 X.—Correspondence with Dean Stanley about the 
 use of Westminster Abbey, 1867... cee LON 
 
 XI.—Sermon by the Bishop of Montreal, Sept. 28, 
 1867 σοῦ boc ood oe 360 ον OO 
 
 XII.—Reports of the Committees appointed by the 
 
 Conference of 1867) ... ee ae te ALLO 
 (A) Synodical System ... a Li LO 
 (B) Voluntary Spiritual THbunals 555 ace) ΠΗ 
 (c) Courts of Metropolitans ... See awe 22 
 (D) Election of Bishops τῇ wes ΖΗ 
 (E) Declaration of submission to See secu ZO) 
 (F) Provincial Subordination ... ae Be 1 
 (G) Missionary Bishoprics ace och 150 
 (H) Condition of the Church in Nata ὩΣ 1.39 
 (J) Letters Dimissory ... oe 50 ἐς 186 
 
 XIII.—Resolutions of the Conference aoe at the 
 Adjourned Session, Dec. 10, 1867... eee GO 
 
 X1IV.—Addresses from the Canadian and West Indian 
 Houses of Bishops, 1872 and 1873... any 150, 
 
 XV.—Correspondence between the Bishops of the 
 Protestant Episcopal Church in the United 
 States and the Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 1874 and 1875 ... ae wes nis οὖν LAS 
 
 XVI.—Memorandum of the Canadian House of 
 Bishops, 1874... ἘΣ ἐν» τὸ ARS 
 
 XVII.—Action of the Convocations of Canterbury and 
 York with reference to the proposed Second 
 Conference ΕΣ Εν S06 Son ‘ee, LAD 
 
 XVIII.—Circular Letter of Inquiry addressed by the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury to all the Anglican 
 Bishops, March 28, 1876 acs δε sca 61 
 
Contents. 7 
 Page 
 X1IX.—Letter of Invitation to the Conference of 1878, 
 dated July 10, 1877... τον τς wy 053 
 XX.—Sermon by the Archbishop of York, on July 
 2 Whe) ac ore noe eas aoe so allyl 
 
 XXI.—Official “Letter” of the Bishops attending 
 the Conference of 1878, including the 
 
 Reports ... 566 000 δὲ noc i LOS 
 (1) Best mode of maintaining union SO 
 (2) Voluntary Boards of Arbitration ... aan ZT 
 (3) Missionary Bishops and Missionaries ... 174 
 
 (4) Anglican Chaplains on the Continent ... 179 
 (5) Answers to questions submitted during 
 the Conference ... dee Spc -- 180 
 
 XXII.—Latin and Greek Versions of the Letter SLO 
 
 XXIII.—Official List of the Bishops present at the 
 Conference of 1878... da res wen 204! 
 
 XXIV.—Order of precedence observed at the Con- 
 ference of 1878... ΤῊ tes Hee τ 200 
 
 XXV.—Sermon by the Bishop of Pennsylvania, July 
 27. 1878 ἡ- nae τ οὐδὲ waa see) 208 
 
 XXVI.—Prayer issued for use before and during the 
 Conference dic a0¢ bac ae oq 222 
 XXVII.—Papers issued to the Bishops in connection 
 
 with the Conference of 1888 ... ae Ὡς 223 
 
 XXVIII.—Sermon by the Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 on July, 2, 1888... bod aco ono wes) 228 
 
 XXIX.—Sermon by the Bishop of Minnesota, on July, 
 PELOOOM nae OAC Sob anh wes Soo elit 
 
 XXX.—Address to the Queen, July 27, 1888, and Her 
 Majesty’s Reply... eve 500 aa oon GZ 
 
8 Lambeth Conferences. 
 
 XXXI.—Official List of the Bishops present at the 
 Conference of 1888 .... ave 50% 
 
 XXXII.—Official List of the Bishops present at the 
 Conference, arranged according to Provinces 
 
 XXXIII.—Encyclical Letter from the Assembled 
 Bishops, issued July 27, 1888... 
 
 XXXIV.—Resolutions formally adopted by the Con- 
 ference of 1888 Bee ee ων τς rac 
 
 XXXV.—Reports of Committees :— 
 (1) Intemperance 
 (2) Purity... 
 (3) Divorce 
 (4) Polygamy 
 (5) Observance of Sunday 
 (6) Socialism 
 (7) Care of Emigrants ... 
 (8) Mutual Relations of Dioceses and 
 Branches of the Anglican Communion... 
 (9) Home Reunion 600 
 (10) Scandinavian Church, Old Catholics, &c... 
 (11) Eastern Churches 
 
 (12) Authoritative Standards of Doctrine and 
 Worship 
 
 XXXVI.—Statement in regard to Ordinations per- 
 formed by Dr. Cummins, &c. 
 
 XXXVII.—Sermon by the Archbishop of York, July 
 28, 1888 se τες aes adc cas 
 
 XXXVIII.—Latin and Greek Versions of the Encyclical 
 Letter and Resolutions of 1888 
 
 Page 
 
 256 
 
 260 
 
 264 
 
 277 
 
 285 
 292 
 296 
 298 
 301 
 393 
 311 
 
 321 
 331 
 339 
 347 
 
 352 
 
 359 
 
 364 
 
 376 
 
IN GAIA ADL VLE 
 
 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 THE FIRST CONFERENCE. 1867. 
 
 ERHAPS it is not too much to say that a 
 decennial Conference of the bishops of the 
 Anglican Communion, under the presidency of the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, has now become a recog- 
 nised part of the organisation of our Church, and 
 the general attention which has been directed to 
 the third of these Conferences seems to afford a 
 suitable opportunity for recalling the history and 
 doings of the earlier gatherings of 1867 and 1878. 
 
 The first official step in connexion with the assem- 
 bling of such a Conference was taken, not in England, 
 but in Canada. The notion had, indeed, been “in 
 the air” for many years,! both in England and abroad, 
 and the final impulse which brought about a Con- 
 ference was eminently significant of the changed 
 conditions of the Church. 
 
 It arose, strange to say, from the interest awakened 
 in North America by the Church affairs of South 
 Africa. 
 
 At the Provincial Synod of the Canadian Church, 
 held on September 20, 1865, it was unanimously 
 agreed, upon the motion of the Bishop of Ontario, to 
 urge upon the Archbishop of Canterbury and the 
 Convocation of his Province that means should be 
 adopted “by which the members of our Anglican 
 
 1 A reference to some of the earlier suggestions on the 
 ge will be found in the Guardian of June 19, 1878, p. 857. 
 
 + B 
 
10 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 Communion in all quarters of the world should have 
 a share in the deliberations for her welfare, and be 
 permitted to have a representation in one General 
 Council of her members gathered from every land.” ! 
 
 To a more personal appeal which accompanied this 
 address, Archbishop Longley replied in guarded 
 terms. ‘“ The meeting of such a Synod,” he said, “ is 
 not by any means foreign to my own feelings... - 
 I cannot, however, take any step in so grave a matter 
 without consulting my episcopal brethren in both 
 branches of the united Church of England and 
 Ireland, as well as those in the different colonies and 
 dependencies of the British Empire.” 
 
 In May, 1866, the Convocation of Canterbury 
 appointed a committee to “consider and _ report 
 upon” the Canadian address, and the whole subject 
 was fully debated in Convocation in the following 
 spring. Obvious difficulties and dangers were 
 suggested, but in the end the Lower House con- 
 veyed to the Archbishop of Canterbury “8 re- 
 spectful expression of an earnest desire that he 
 would be pleased to issue an invitation to all the 
 bishops in communion with the Church of England, 
 to assemble at such time and place, and accom- 
 panied by such persons as may be deemed fit, for the 
 purpose of Christian sympathy and mutual counsel 
 on matters affecting the welfare of the Church at 
 home and abroad.’”? 
 
 In the Upper House, Archbishop Longley took 
 the utmost pains to “diminish the doubts and diffi- 
 culties” of some of his brethren. “It should be 
 distinctly understood,” he said, “that at this meeting 
 no declaration of faith shal! be made, and no decision 
 come to which shall affect generally the interests of 
 
 
 
 1 For the full text of the address and reply, see Part II., No. I., 
 p- 51, and Chronicle of Convocation of Canterbury, May 2, 
 1866, p. 286; Feb. 12, 1867, p. 696. 
 
 2 Chronicle of Convocation, Feb. 14, 1867, p. 793. 
 
Invitation to the First Conference. II 
 
 the Church, but that we shall meet together for 
 brotherly counsel and encouragement ....I should 
 refuse to convene any assembly which pretended to 
 enact any canons, or affected to make any decisions 
 binding on the Church... . I feel I undertake a 
 great responsibility in assenting to this request, and 
 certainly if I saw anything approaching to what [is 
 apprehended | as likely to result from it, I should 
 not be disposed to sanction it, but I can assure [my 
 brethren] that I should enter on this meeting in the 
 full confidence that nothing would pass but that 
 which tended to brotherly love and union, and would 
 bind the Colonial Church, which is certainly in a 
 most unsatisfactory state, more closely to the Mother 
 Church.” ! 
 
 A week later the Archbishop issued the following 
 invitation to all the bishops of the Anglican Com- 
 munion, then 144 in number :— 
 
 “LAMBETH PALACE, fed, 22, 1867. 
 RIGHT REV. AND DEAR BROTHER,— 
 
 “J request your presence at a meeting of the 
 bishops in visible communion with the United Church 
 of England and Ireland, purposed (God willing) to 
 be holden at Lambeth, under my presidency, on the 
 24th of September next and the three following days 
 
 “The circumstances under which I have resolved 
 to issue the present invitation are these :—The 
 Metropolitan and Bishops of Canada, last year, 
 addressed to the two Houses of the Convocation of 
 Canterbury the expression of their desire that I 
 should be moved to invite the bishops of our Indian 
 and Colonial Episcopate to meet myself and the 
 Home bishops for brotherly communion and con- 
 ference. 
 
 “The consequence of that appeal has been that 
 
 
 
 ' Chronicle of Convocation, Feb. 15, 1867, p. 807. 
 B2 
 
12 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 both Houses of the Convocation of my province have 
 addressed to me their dutiful request that I would 
 invite the attendance, not only of our Home and 
 Colonial bishops, but of all who are avowedly in 
 communion with our Church. The same request 
 was unanimously preferred to me at a numerous 
 gathering of English, Irish,and Colonial archbishops 
 and bishops recently assembled at Lambeth; at 
 which,—I rejoice to record it,—we had the counsel and 
 concurrence of an eminent bishop of the Church in 
 the United States of America,—the Bishop of Illinois. 
 
 “Moved by these requests, and by the expressed 
 concurrence therein of other members both of the 
 Home and Colonial episcopate, who could not be 
 present at our meeting, I have now resolved,—not, 
 I humbly trust, without the guidance of God the 
 Holy Ghost,—to grant this grave request, and call 
 together the meeting thus earnestly desired. I greatly 
 hope that you may be able to attend it, and to aid 
 us with your presence and brotherly counsel thereat. 
 
 “T propose that, at our assembling, we should first 
 solemnly seek the blessing of Almighty God on our 
 gathering, by uniting together in the highest act of 
 the Church’s worship. After this, brotherly consul- 
 tations will follow. In these we may consider to- 
 gether many practical questions, the settlement of 
 which would tend to the advancement of the kingdom 
 of our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, and to the 
 maintenance of greater union in our missionary work, 
 and to increased intercommunion among ourselves. 
 
 “Such a meeting would not be competent to make 
 declarations or lay down definitions on points of 
 doctrine. But united worship and common counsels 
 would greatly tend to maintain practically the unity 
 of the faith ; whilst they would bind us in straiter 
 bonds of peace and brotherly charity. 
 
 “T shall gladly receive from you a list of any sub- 
 jects you may wish to suggest to me for consideration 
 and discussion. Should you be unable to attend, 
 and desire to commission any brother bishop to 
 
Difficulties of an Agenda-paper. 13 
 
 speak for you, I shall welcome him as your repre- 
 sentative in our united deliberations. 
 
 “But I must once more express my earnest hope 
 that, on this solemn occasion, I may have the great 
 advantage of your personal presence. 
 
 “ And now I commend this proposed meeting to 
 your fervent prayers; and, humbly beseeching the 
 blessing of Almighty God on yourself and your 
 diocese, I subscribe myself, 
 
 “Your faithful brother in the Lord, 
 ΟΥΑΙ 
 
 The invitation was accepted by seventy-six 
 bishops, and as soon as those who came from the 
 Colonies and the United States began to arrive in 
 England, a series of preliminary meetings was held 
 to discuss and arrange the details of a Conference for 
 which no precedent existed to serve as a guide. The 
 strong divergence of opinion upon the legal aspect 
 of Bishop Colenso’s deposition and excommunication, 
 and the fact that the Bishop of Capetown had come to 
 England on purpose to secure, if possible, the synodical 
 sanction of the Conference to the course he had him- 
 self adopted, made the agenda-paper a matter of no 
 small difficulty, if it was to be kept within the limits 
 laid down by:the Archbishop of Canterbury in the 
 Convocation speech which has been quoted above. 
 Not a few of the English bishops felt so sure of the 
 increased confusion such a Conference must cause in 
 an already tangled web that they declined to attend 
 its deliberations. Among these were the Archbishop 
 of York and the Bishops of Durham, Carlisle, Ripon, 
 Peterborough, and Manchester. Others, including 
 Bishop Thirlwall, of St. David’s, postponed their 
 acceptance until the official agenda-paper or pro- 
 gramme should be published,! a fact to which they 
 afterwards called attention when the programme had 
 unexpectedly been changed. 
 
 The Conference met on Tuesday, September 24, 
 
 
 
 
 
 ‘ For its full text, see Part II., No. III., p. 56. 
 
14 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 the opening service being preceded by a Celebration 
 of Holy Communion in Lambeth Palace Chapel, 
 with a sermon from Bishop Whitehouse, of Illinois." 
 The meetings of the Conference were held in the 
 upstairs dining-hall, or “guard-room,” of Lambeth 
 Palace, not (as was the case in 1878) in the great 
 library. On the Archbishop of Canterbury’s right 
 sat the Archbishop of Armagh, the Bishop of London, 
 the Presiding Bishop of the American Church, the 
 Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, the Bishop 
 of Calcutta, and the Bishop of Sydney. On the left 
 were the Archbishop of Dublin, and the Bishops of 
 Montreal, New Zealand, and Capetown. The other 
 bishops sat in front. The Bishop of Gloucester and 
 Bristol acted as episcopal secretary to the meeting 
 throughout its deliberations. 
 
 In his opening address,” Archbishop Longley again 
 defined, with some care, the position of the Con- 
 ference. “It has never been contemplated,” he said, 
 “that we should assume the functions of a general 
 synod of all the churches in full communion with 
 the Church of England, and take upon ourselves to 
 enact canons that should be binding upon those 
 here represented. We merely propose to discuss 
 matters of practical interest, and pronounce what 
 we deem expedient in resolutions which may serve 
 as safe guides to future action. Thus it will be seen 
 that our first essay is rather tentative and experi- 
 mental, in a matter in which we have no distinct 
 precedent to direct us.” 
 
 Special importance attached to the discussions of 
 the first day, when, in the form of a preamble to the 
 subsequent resolutions, the standpoint taken by the 
 Anglican Church was in general terms described. 
 All the leading bishops took part in the debate, and 
 its outcome will be best seen by placing the para- 
 graph, as it was first drafted, side by side with the 
 form which was finaily agreed upon. 
 
 Πα See Part IL, No. IV., p. 61. 2 See Part II., No. V., p. 77. 
 
 
 
The Alternative Preamble. 
 
 As originally drafted. 
 
 “We, Bishops of Christ’s 
 Holy Catholic Church, profes- 
 sing the faith of the primitive 
 and undivided Church, as based 
 on Scripture, defined by the 
 first four General Councils,! 
 and reaffirmed by the Fathers 
 of the English Reformation, 
 now assembled by the good 
 providence of God at the Archi- 
 episcopal Palace of Lambeth, 
 under the presidency of the 
 Primate of all England, desire, 
 first, to give hearty thanks to 
 Almighty God for having thus 
 brought us together for common 
 counsels and united worship ; 
 secondly, we desire to express 
 the deep sorrow with which we 
 view the divided condition of 
 the flock of Christ throughout 
 the world; and, lastly, we do 
 here solemnly declare our belief 
 that the best hope of future re- 
 union will be found in drawing 
 each of us for ourselves closer 
 to our common Lord, in giving 
 ourselves to much prayer and 
 intercession, in the cultivation 
 of a spirit of charity, and in 
 seeking to diffuse through every 
 part of the Christian com- 
 munity that desire and reso- 
 lution to return to the faith and 
 discipline of the undivided 
 Church which was the principle 
 of the English Reformation.” 
 
 1 See 1 Eliz. c. i. xxxvi. 
 
 15 
 
 As ultimately carried. 
 
 “We, Bishops of Christ’s 
 Holy Catholic Church, in visible 
 Communion with the United 
 Churchof Englandand Ireland, 
 professing the faith delivered 
 to us in Holy Scripture, main- 
 tained by the primitive Church 
 and by the Fathers of the 
 English Reformation, now as- 
 sembled by the good providence 
 of God, at the Archiepiscopal 
 Palace of Lambeth, under the 
 presidency of the Primate of 
 all England, desire, first, to 
 give hearty thanks to Almighty 
 God for having thus brought us 
 together for common counsels 
 and united worship ; secondly, 
 we desire to express the deep 
 sorrow with which we view the 
 divided condition of the flock 
 of Christ throughout the world, 
 ardently longing for the fulfil- 
 ment of the prayer of our Lord: 
 ‘That all may be one, as Thou, 
 Tather, art in me, and I in 
 Thee, that they also may be 
 one in us, that the world may 
 believe that Thou has sent 
 me’; and, lastly, we do here 
 solemnly record our conviction 
 that unity will be most effec- 
 tually promoted, by maintain- 
 ing the faith in its purity and 
 integrity, as taught in the Holy 
 Scriptures, held by the primi- 
 tive Church, summed up in the 
 Creeds, and affirmed by the 
 undisputed General Councils, 
 and by drawing each of us 
 closer to our common Lord, 
 by giving ourselves to much 
 prayer and intercession, by the 
 cultivation ofa spirit of charity, 
 and a love of the Lord’s appear- 
 ing.” 
 
16 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 On the second day—Wednesday, September 25 
 —the president consented, notwithstanding the 
 strenuous protest of several bishops, to a complete 
 change of programme, in accordance with the wish 
 of the Bishop of Capetown and others, and the 
 discussions were thus diverted into an unexpected 
 channel. A long day was occupied in discussing 
 the due gradation of synodal authority, diocesan, 
 provincial, and perhaps patriarchal, within the 
 Anglican Communion. After the failure of succes- 
 sive attempts to obtain the formal sanction of the Con- 
 ference to the definite schemes proposed, it was found 
 necessary to fall back upon a perfectly general reso- 
 lution proposed by Bishop Selwyn, of New Zealand, 
 in the following terms :—‘“ That, in the opinion of 
 this Conference, unity of faith and discipline will be 
 best maintained among the several branches of the 
 Anglican Communion by due and canonical subor- 
 dination of the synods of the several branches to 
 the higher authority of a synod or synods above 
 them.” 
 
 This was carried ze, coz.,and a committee was 
 appointed to consider the whole subject. 
 
 On the following day (Thursday, Sept. 26), the 
 “burning question ” of Bishop Colenso’s position was 
 the subject of prolonged debate. The Archbishop 
 of Canterbury had declined to allow any distinct 
 resolution of condemnation to be put to the Confer- 
 ence, and he ruled out of order a motion to that 
 effect which was proposed by the Presiding Bishop 
 of the American Church. After several hours dis- 
 cussion, it was resolved, by 49 votes to 10, “that, in 
 the judgment of the bishops here assembled, the 
 whole Anglican Communion is deeply injured by 
 the present condition of the Church in Natal ; and 
 that a committee be now appointed at this general 
 
 
 
Encyclical Address to the Faithful. 17 
 
 Church may be delivered from the continuance of 
 this scandal, and the truth maintained. That such 
 report be forwarded to his Grace the Lord Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury with the request that his Grace 
 will be pleased to transmit the same to all the 
 bishops of the Anglican Communion, and to ask for 
 their judgment thereon.” 
 
 The next matter dealt with was the possible con- 
 stitution of what was described as a Spiritual Court 
 of Appeal ; and on this subject it was found neces- 
 sary, after long debate, to await the report of a 
 committee before any formal recommendation could 
 be made. Such a committee was accordingly ap- 
 pointed “to consider the constitution of a voluntary 
 spiritual tribunal, to which questions of doctrine may 
 be carried by appeal from the tribunals for the exercise 
 of discipline in each Province of the Colonial 
 Church.” 
 
 It had, upon the previous day, been informally 
 decided that a short “ Encyclical” Letter or Address 
 should be drafted by a Committee! for the signa- 
 ture of the Bishops attending the Conference. This 
 Address was adopted by the whole body before the 
 adjournment on Thursday evening, and was formally 
 signed at the morning session on the following day.” 
 It was suggested in the Conference that it should be 
 publicly read by the Archbishop from the altar of 
 Lambeth Parish Church; but this course was not 
 adopted. After other resolutions* had been carried 
 with respect to the due notification of the establish- 
 ment of new dioceses, the provision of Letters Com- 
 mendatory, and the proper measure of publicity to 
 
 ‘ The Committee consisted of the Archbishop of Canterbury 
 and the Bishops of London, Winchester, Oxford, North 
 Carolina, Grahamstown, Ohio, Ely, St. Andrews, Cape Town, 
 Moray and Ross, and New Zealand. 
 
 * The complete document, as signed, is given below. 
 Part II., No. VII., p. 88. 
 
 * See Part II., No. IX., p. 98. 
 
18 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 be given to the proceedings of the Conference, 
 a second and unexpected debate arose upon the 
 position of Bishop Colenso, and a resolution was 
 carried expressing the acquiescence of the Confe- 
 rence in certain advice given by the Convocation of 
 Canterbury a year before, respecting the steps to be 
 taken “if it be decided that a New Bishop should 
 be consecrated” for the Diocese of Natal. 
 
 After the Gloria ix Excelsts had been sung by the 
 assembled Bishops, the Primate dismissed the Con- 
 ference with the Benediction, on the understanding 
 that those members of it who could remain in 
 England should reassemble in December to receive 
 the Reports of the various Committees. 
 
 On the following day, Saturday, September 28, 
 thirty-four Bishops attended a closing service in 
 Lambeth Parish Church, when the Holy Communion 
 was celebrated by the Archbishop, and a sermon 
 was preached by Bishop Fulford, of Montreal. It 
 had originally been proposed that this service should 
 be held in Westminster Abbey; but Dean Stanley, 
 in a correspondence published at the time,! gave his 
 reasons for objecting to the use of the Abbey in the 
 manner proposed, and the Conference fell back on 
 Lambeth Church as an alternative. 
 
 The several Committees were in frequent session 
 during the next two months under the direction of 
 Bishop Selwyn, of New Zealand ;? Bishop Fulford, 
 of Montreal ; and Bishop Cotterill, of Grahamstown, 
 the last-named of whom had _ undertaken the 
 onerous work of “ Secretary of Committees” to the 
 Conference. 
 
 On December 10 a further session of the Con- 
 ference, or such members of it as had remained in 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 See Part II., No. X., Ὁ. ror. 
 
 2 Bishop Selwyn had been nominated in November, 1867, to 
 the See of Lichfield ; but he was not enthroned till January 9, 
 1868. 
 
The Adjourned Session: December, 1867. 19 
 
 England, was held at Lambeth Palace, when eight 
 Reports were presented.!. With reference to the first 
 seven of these, a resolution was in each case formally 
 passed : “ That this adjourned meeting of the Con- 
 ference receives the Report (No. —) of the Com- 
 mittee now presented, and directs the publication 
 thereof, commending it to the careful consideration 
 of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion, as 
 containing the result of the deliberations of that 
 Committee; and returns the members of the 
 same its thanks for the care with which they have 
 considered the various important questions referred 
 to them.” 
 
 Upon the presentation of Report No. VIII., which 
 referred to Bishop Colenso’s deposition, it was re- 
 solved “that the Report be received and printed ; 
 that the thanks of this meeting be given to the Com- 
 mittee for their labours, and that his Grace be 
 requested to communicate the Report to the Council 
 of the Colonial Bishoprics Fund.” 
 
 The further resolutions, which will be found in 
 full elsewhere,? were for the most part of a formal 
 character. It was, indeed, impossible, considering 
 the small number of Bishops who were able to 
 attend, that any important motions should at this 
 stage be brought before them. The session lasted 
 for a few hours only, and it became evident that in 
 any future Conference some different arrangement 
 must be adopted. Reiterated thanks were expressed 
 to the Bishops of Gloucester and Grahamstown, the 
 Episcopal Secretaries ; and to Mr. Philip Wright and 
 Mr. Isambard Brunel, who had acted as their lay 
 assistants and advisers. The Conference had been 
 attended, in all, by seventy-six Bishops out of one 
 hundred and forty-four who had received invitations. 
 Of these seventy-six, eighteen were English Bishops, 
 
 
 
 a sec hart ΠῚ No. XI; ps ro: 
 evee Pare ΠΝ α- ΠΡ" 136: 
 
20 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878. 
 
 five were Irish, and six were Scotch. The Colonial 
 Church sent twenty-four, including five Metropolitans. 
 The United States sent nineteen. At no one session 
 of the Conference were all the Bishops present, but 
 the Encyclical Address received the signatures of all, 
 and the President was subsequently authorised to 
 affix the names of several others who had been re- 
 luctantly prevented from attending|! 
 
 
 
 CHAPTER Tt, 
 THE SECOND CONFERENCE. 1878. 
 
 HE circumstances in which the first Conference 
 
 had been held were exceptionally difficult, and 
 
 some of the interests at stake were of so keen and 
 even personal a sort that the Bishops found it hard 
 to give undistracted attention to the wider questions 
 of policy and practice which had been included in 
 Archbishop Longley’s programme. The _ allotted 
 time also had been far too short for dealing ade- 
 quately with such subjects. Eight Committees had 
 indeed reported ; but their Reports, as has been seen, 
 were presented to less than a score of Bishops at 
 one brief session on a single day. Due discussion 
 of them was thus impossible, and Bishop Selwyn, 
 who had been foremost perhaps among the promoters 
 
 
 
 1 See Part II., No. XIII., p. 138. 
 
A Second Conference asked for. 21 
 
 of the gathering, could only suggest the postpone- 
 ment to a future Conference of any debate upon 
 these weighty documents.! 
 
 The inquiry soon became common, Will there be 
 a second Conference, and if so, when? Once again, 
 as in 1865, it was the Canadian Church which took 
 the first official step.” In’ December, 1872, ‘the 
 Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of Canada 
 made formal appeal to the Convocation of Canter- 
 bury to join with them in a request to Archbishop 
 Tait, who had in 1869 succeeded to the Primacy, 
 that he would summon as soon as possible a second 
 meeting of the Conference.? 
 
 Taking this Canadian letter as his text, Bishop 
 Selwyn, in a memorable speech in Convocation, 
 endorsed and expanded the appeal. He had visited 
 America in 1871. He was to pay a second and more 
 formal visit in 1874, and his experience in every part 
 of the world led him to long for such confederation 
 and unity of action as could, he believed, be best 
 secured by a second Conference, or, as he called it, 
 “ A General Council of the Bishops of the Anglican 
 Communion, to carry on the work begun by the 
 Lambeth Conference of 1867." 
 
 The matter was, by common consent, adjourned 
 for a time ; and in the following year (1874) Bishop 
 Kerfoot, of Pittsburgh, as representing the American 
 Church, was in constant communication upon the 
 subject with Archbishop Tait, whom he visited at 
 Addington, and to whom he was authorised to write 
 officially from America The Bishop of Lichfield’s 
 formal attendance in that year at the meetings, first 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 See e.g., Chronicle of Convocation, Feb. 13, 1873, 
 
 p. 172. 
 
 2 See Part II., No. XIV., p. 139. 
 
 3. See Chronicle of Convocation, Feb. 13, 1873, pp. 
 168-174. 
 
 Ἢ See Part II., No. XV., p.141,and “Life of Bishop Kerfoot,”’ 
 vol. 11.) pp. 581-587. 
 
22 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 of the Provincial Synod of Canada and then of the 
 General Convention in New York,! brought the 
 question again into prominence, and it had now 
 become practically certain that a second Conference 
 would be held in 1877 or 1878 if the necessary con- 
 ditions could be agreed upon. 
 
 Some of these conditions were suggested by the 
 Canadian House of Bishops ;? others were laid down 
 by the Archbishop himself in an important Con- 
 vocation speech, and in his written reply to a formal 
 request signed by no less than 42 Bishops of the 
 American Church.* Speaking in Convocation on 
 April 16, 1875, he said :— 
 
 “No one can doubt that very great good has. 
 arisen from the friendly intercourse which took place 
 during the last Lambeth Conference. At the same 
 time, it must be remembered that it is a serious 
 matter to gather the Bishops together from all parts 
 of the globe, unless there is some distinct object for 
 their so gathering. I therefore am disposed, by the 
 advice of my brethren, to request that our brethren 
 at home, and also those at a distance, will state to 
 me as explicitly as possible what the subjects are that 
 it is desirable to discuss at such meeting. They are 
 of a somewhat limited character. There is no inten- 
 tion whatever on the part of anybody to gather 
 together the Bishops of the Anglican Church for the 
 sake of defining any matter of doctrine. Our doc- 
 trines are contained in our formularies, and our 
 formularies are interpreted by the proper judicial 
 authorities, and there is no intention whatever at any 
 such gathering that questions of doctrine should be 
 submitted for interpretation in any future Lambeth 
 Conference any more than they were at the previous 
 Lambeth Conference. My predecessor had a very 
 
 
 
 See “ Life of Bishop Selwyn,” vol. ii., pp. 319-324. 
 See Part II., No. XVI., p. 148. 
 See Part II., No. XV., p. 144. 
 
 ow = 
 
Archbishop Tait’s Speech tn Convocation. 28 
 
 difficult task in defining the exact duty of the 
 Bishops who came together on the former occasion, 
 and with great firmness, and at the same time with 
 that remarkable courtesy and kindliness for which he 
 was so eminent, he steered the somewhat difficult 
 course which was before him, and it was distinctly 
 settled that matters of that kind were not to be 
 entered upon. Well, then, with regard to discipline, 
 of course our discipline is exercised by ourselves 
 and by the constituted Courts of the Church at 
 home, and the discipline of the various Colonial and 
 more independent Churches is exercised by these 
 Churches according to fixed rules which have been 
 established by themselves, and we have no intention 
 whatever of interfering with these matters of dis- 
 cipline. We are, therefore, perhaps naturally, anxious 
 to know tolerably distinctly the subjects which any 
 would wish to bring before us... . . Friendly inter- 
 course must, of course, be of great value. But it is 
 possible that Bishops at a very great distance—such 
 as the Bishop of Athabasca, who, I believe, can 
 scarcely reach his diocese under a year—might per- 
 haps, under a misapprehension, think it was neces- 
 sarily their duty to come to such a Conference unless 
 it was distinctly stated what was to be done..... 
 I cannot doubt that there are many points respecting 
 the connection between the Mother Church and the 
 Colonial Churches on which a friendly Conference 
 would ΡῈ νον valuable. indeed... 24,2 1-5 With 
 regard to our brethren in America, no such difficulties 
 exist: what we enjoyed so much during the late 
 Conference was the friendly intercourse and exchange 
 of sentiment between us and them. We have no 
 desire to interfere with their affairs, and I am sure 
 they have no desire to interfere with ours. As far as 
 they are concerned, I think it would be a work of 
 love in which we should be engaged—the extension 
 of Christ’s kingdom—and that we may be able by 
 friendly intercourse to strengthen each other’s hands 
 
24 Lambeth Conference 9) 1878. 
 
 But I think it important that there should be no mis- 
 understanding, and none of that difficulty which, I 
 am bound to say, did exist at the last Lambeth 
 Conference as to what subjects might and what 
 subjects might not be introduced ; that we should 
 know what it is that our brethren wish to bring 
 before us, and what we wish to bring before them, 
 before they give themselves the trouble of coming 
 from the ends of the earth, happy as the results of 
 such a meeting are, under God’s Providence, likely 
 tO uDeNa: 
 
 Fortified by the concurrence of the Northern Con- 
 vocation,” which had held aloof in 1867, the Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury issued a formal letter on 
 March 28th, 1876, to all the Bishops of the Anglican 
 Communion, intimating his readiness to hold a Con- 
 ference in 1878, “if it shall seem expedient, after the 
 opinions of all our brethren have been ascertained,” 
 and inviting an expression of opinion. These letters 
 to the Bishops throughout the world were not, as 
 heretofore, sent direct from Lambeth ; but were for- 
 warded to the various Metropolitans and presiding 
 Bishops, with a request that they would transmit 
 them officially to the Bishops entitled to receive 
 them in each branch or Province of the Church—a 
 rule which has since been followed in all similar 
 circulars of an official kind. 
 
 Before the close of the year about ninety letters 
 of reply were received by the Archbishop, from all 
 parts of the world, showing, as had been anticipated, 
 an overwhelming preponderance of opinion in favour 
 of a second Conference, provided a longer period of 
 session could be arranged for than “the four short 
 days” of 1867. 
 
 
 
 1 See Chronicle of Convocation, April 16, 1875, pp. 
 132-134. 
 
 * For the formal resolution passed in the Convocation of 
 York on Feb. 26, 1875, see Part II., No. XVILI., p. 150. 
 
 > See Part II., No. XVIII., p. 151. 
 
Archbishop Tatts Invitation. 25 
 
 Most of the Bishops also suggested subjects for 
 discussion, and on these the Archbishop took counsel 
 with an Episcopal Committee, and especially with 
 Bishop Selwyn. After the fullest deliberation, the 
 following definite invitation was issued :— 
 
 LAMBETH PALACE, 
 July το, 1877. 
 
 RIGHT REVEREND AND DEAR BROTHER, 
 
 It is proposed to hold a Conference of Bishops of 
 the Anglican Communion, at this place, beginning 
 on Tuesday, the second day of July, eighteen hundred 
 and seventy-eight. 
 
 The Conference, it is proposed, shall extend over 
 four weeks; the first week, of Four Sessions, to be 
 devoted to discussions, in Conference, of the subjects 
 submitted for deliberation; the second and third 
 weeks to the consideration of these subjects in 
 Committees ; and the fourth week to final discussions 
 in Conference, and to the close of the meeting. 
 
 The subjects selected for discussion are the fol- 
 lowing :— 
 
 1. The best mode of maintaining Union among 
 the various churches of the Anglican Communion. 
 
 2. Voluntary Boards of Arbitration for Churches 
 to which such an arrangement may be applicable. 
 
 3. The relations to each other of Missionary 
 Bishops and of Missionaries, in various branches of 
 the Anglican Communion acting in the same 
 country. 
 
 4. The position of Anglican Chaplains and Chap- 
 laincies on the Continent of Europe and elsewhere. 
 
 5. Modern forms of infidelity, and the best means 
 of dealing with them. 
 
 6. The condition, progress, and needs of the various 
 Churches of the Anglican Communion. 
 
 I shall feel greatly obliged if, at your early con- 
 venience, you will inform me whether we may have 
 
 ς 
 
26 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 the pleasure of expecting your presence at the 
 Conference. 
 Il am, 
 Right Reverend and dear Brother, 
 Yours faithfully in Christ, 
 
 A. C. CANTUAR. 
 
 It was evidently not without intention that the 
 subjects selected for discussion, though grouped 
 under such all-embracing headings, coincided in 
 some parts so closely with the Resolutions of the 
 Conference of 1867. The Reports presented in that 
 year had never, as has been seen, received adequate 
 discussion, nor had any one of them been “adopted ” 
 by the Conference. By a recurrence to these sub- 
 jects a certain measure of continuity was secured, 
 and a basis was laid for the practical deliberations 
 of 1878. The plan adopted in 1867 of drafting and 
 publishing beforehand the Resolutions which were 
 to be moved, had not worked altogether well, and it 
 was arranged that in 1878 the formal motion should 
 in each case be for the appointment of a Committee 
 which, after considering some branch of the selected 
 subjects, should report to the Conference in its final 
 week of session. 
 
 One hundred and eight Bishops accepted the 
 Archbishop’s invitation. Some of these, however, 
 were at the last moment prevented from attending, 
 and the actual number present at the Conference was 
 exactly one hundred.! 
 
 On Saturday, June 29, St. Peter’s Day, the pro- 
 ceedings of the Conference began with a gathering of 
 Bishops at Canterbury, for what had been described 
 as a “ Service of Welcome” in the Cathedral. 
 
 Archbishop Tait, four weeks before, had lost his 
 only son, who had recently returned from a visit to 
 4\merica, and the fear that the Archbishop would 
 himself be unable to attend the Service, which would 
 
 
 
 1 See Part II., No. XXIII., page 204. 
 
The Welcome at Canterbury. 27, 
 
 thus be deprived of much of its interest and com- 
 pleteness, kept away many Bishops who had intended 
 to be present. The Archbishop, however, went to 
 Canterbury as arranged, and was met by thirty-six 
 Bishops,' and an immense gathering of clergy. 
 
 A service was held in the morning in St. Augus- 
 tine’s Missionary College, with a sermon by Bishop 
 Cleveland Coxe, of Western New York, and at the 
 Special Evensong in the Cathedral at three o'clock, 
 the Archbishop gave an official welcome to the 
 assembled Bishops. The ancient marble throne, 
 known as “St. Augustine’s Chair,” was moved from 
 its ordinary position in the south transept, and placed 
 in the centre of the altar steps. The Bishops were 
 grouped on either side of it, and the Archbishop 
 addressed them as follows :— 
 
 “My brothers, representatives of the Church 
 throughout the world, engaged in spreading the 
 Gospel of Jesus Christ wherever the sun shines, I 
 esteem it a very high privilege to welcome you here 
 to-day, to the cradle of Anglo-Saxon Christianity. . . 
 I am addressing you from St. Augustine’s chair. 
 This thought carries us back to the time when that 
 first missionary to our Anglo-Saxon forefathers, 
 amid much discouragement, landed on these bar- 
 barous shores. More than twelve centuries and 
 a-half have rolled on since then. The seed he sowed 
 has borne an abundant harvest, and this great British 
 nation, and our sister beyond the ocean, have cause 
 to render thanks to God for the work begun by him 
 here. And how full of encouragement to you is St. 
 Augustine’s work. What difficulties greater than 
 those that confronted him can stand in your path ? 
 And you have blessings that he had not. You stand 
 nearer the pure primitive Christianity of the Apostles. 
 You have a motive power to touch the heart denied 
 
 
 
 Nearly all of these came from abroad. Only three of the 
 home Diocesans were present. 
 
 C2 
 
28 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 fom.) 72)! The varied history of the Church has 
 recorded many failures and many successes, and we 
 learn from the past neither to be elated by the one 
 nor discouraged by the other. The monuments 
 which surround us speak of a chequered history. 
 They tell of dark times and of great times. But 
 they all testify to the superintending power of God, 
 Who works all things according to the pleasure of 
 His will, after His own plan for the building up of 
 His one Kingdom in His own way...........- 
 It is my privilege to welcome you to Christ 
 Church; Canterburyec. >: Gregory sent St. Augus- 
 tine here that he might mark England with the name 
 of Christ, “that Name which is above every name.” 
 God grant that that Name may be ever more and 
 more acknowledged among us; that its glories may 
 shine more and more brightly here, and in your dis- 
 tant dioceses, triumphing over all obstacles, and 
 reconciling all petty divisions, uniting all hearts in 
 the truth of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. 
 My Brethren from across the Atlantic,—you espe- 
 cially from the great Republic,—to you a particular 
 welcome is due from me. Partly for our Church’s 
 sake, partly for my sake, partly also for something 
 you discerned in himself, you welcomed one very 
 dear to me last autumn.!' The bond that unites us 
 is not the less sacred because so many hopes of 
 earthly joy have withered and disappeared. God 
 unite us all more closely in His own great Family. 
 And now let us to prayer.” 
 
 At eleven o'clock, on Tuesday, July 2, the Bishops 
 met at Lambeth. They were marshalled in the 
 Guard-room, where the actual Sessions of 1867 had 
 been held, and passed thence in procession to the 
 Chapel, the Bishops from the United States walking 
 alongside of the English Diocesan Bishops as their 
 
 1 The Archbishop’s son, the Rev. Craufurd Tait, had been 
 
 formally welcomed by the House of Bishops assembled at 
 Boston on Oct. 5, 1877. 
 
 
 
Opening of the Second Conference. 29 
 
 guests, all due precedence being given in the proces- 
 sional arrangements to the Metropolitans and pre- 
 siding Bishops.! After the Venz Creator had been 
 sung, the Holy Communion was celebrated by the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, assisted by the Bishops 
 of London, Winchester, Salisbury, and Rochester, as 
 officers of the Provincial College. With the excep- 
 tion of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Chaplains,’ 
 none but Bishops were present in the Chapel. The 
 sermon was preached by the Archbishop of York, 
 the text being Galatians ii. 11: “ But when Peter was 
 come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because 
 he was to be blamed.” 
 
 The Sessions of the Conference were held in the 
 Great Library,not,as in 1867,in the Guard-room. The 
 arrangement of hours and subjects was as follows :— 
 (11am. Holy Communion and sermon 
 | in Lambeth Palace Chapel. 
 
 Tuesday, 1.30 p.m. Archbishop’s opening address. 
 
 uly 2. 42 pm—445 pm. Subject 7.--- The 
 δ" Ἶ 5} 7 
 
 best mode of maintaining union 
 | among the various Churches of 
 ᾿ 
 
 the Anglican Communion. 
 
 (10.30 a.m. Litany in Chapel. 
 
 I1am. Szdject /7—Voluntary Boards 
 of Arbitration for Churches to 
 which such an arrangement may 
 
 Wednesday, be applicable. 
 July 3. 41.30 pm. Subject [J/[—The relation 
 to each other of Missionary 
 Bishops and of Missionaries in 
 various Branches of the Anglican 
 Communion, acting in the same 
 ΙΕ country. 
 
 1 See Part II., No. XXIV., p. 206. 
 
 * Archdeacon Fisher, Rev. F. G. Blomfield, Hon. and Rev. 
 W. H. Fremantle, Rev. W. F. Erskine Knollys, Rev. Randall 
 T. Davidson. 
 
 ERSCemEALTC 11.. INGOs ΧΑ, Ρ. 154- 
 
 
 
30 Lambeth Conference. of 1878. 
 
 (10.30am. Litany in Chapel. 
 [1τ| πὶ. Sadzect /V.—The position of 
 Anglican Chaplains and Chap- 
 
 Thursday, laincies on the Continent of 
 
 Ι 
 July 4. ὃ Europe and elsewhere. 
 | 1.30 pm. Sadzect V.—Modern forms 
 | of Infidelity, and the best means 
 L of dealing with them. 
 (10.30am. Litany in Chapel. 
 Friday, | Iram. andi.30p.m. Swbject VI.— 
 July 5. 4 The condition, progress, and needs 
 | of the various Churches of the 
 L Anglican Communion. 
 
 It was decided, almost unanimously, that the pro- 
 ceedings of the Conference should, as in 1867, be 
 private. A shorthand report was made of all the 
 speeches, and it was arranged that this should be 
 preserved by the Archbishop along with the other 
 manuscripts belonging to Lambeth Library, but 
 should in no way be made public.' 
 
 The secretarial work of the Conference was again, 
 as in 1867, under the charge of Bishops Ellicott and 
 Cotterill,” assisted by Dr. Isambard Brunel, and, 
 unofficially, by the Archbishop’s resident Chaplain.* 
 For the avoidance of discussions irrelevant to the 
 programme it was arranged, with general consent, 
 that if any memorials or petitions—and there were 
 not a few—should be forwarded to the Conference, 
 they should be placed, without further remark than 
 a bare statement of their purport, in the hands of the 
 
 
 
 1 A long account of the debates which had taken place in 
 1867 was unexpectedly published in the Guardian of June 19, 
 1878, under circumstances explained in a letter from the 
 Rey. W. Benham to the Archbishop, which appeared in the 
 Guardian of the following week, June 26, 1878, p. goo. 
 
 » Bishop of Grahamstown 1856-1871 ; Bishop of Edinburgh 
 1871-1886, 
 
 3. The Rey. R. T. Davidson. 
 
The Conference Committees: 1878. 31 
 
 President, and that the memorialists should be 
 informed that in no case could any answer be 
 returned. 
 
 In the opening debates during the first week the 
 formal motion was in each case for the appointment 
 of a Committee to consider the particular subject 
 under discussion, and to report to the Conference 
 during the closing week of Session. On the final 
 and very wide subject—(No. VI.)—* The condition, 
 progress, and needs of the various Churches of the 
 Anglican Communion,” the order was varied by 
 the appointment of an influential Committee presided 
 over by the Archbishop of Canterbury, which sat 
 de die in diem at Lambeth, “to receive questions 
 submitted in writing by Bishops desiring the advice 
 of the Conference on difficulties or problems they 
 have met with in their several Dioceses.” 
 
 The various Committees met at Lambeth, Fulham, 
 Farnham, and elsewhere during the fortnight which 
 intervened between the first and last groups of 
 Sessions, and their Reports were, for the most part, 
 ready when the Conference re-assembled in Lambeth 
 Library on Monday, July 22nd. On subject No. V. 
 alone—* Modern forms of Infidelity, and the best 
 means of dealing with them,’—the Committee, as 
 was natural, announced that they had not found it 
 possible to prepare in the time allotted for their 
 deliberations a detailed Report upon so vast a 
 question. To judge, however, from the published 
 opinions of the Bishops present at the Conference! 
 the debates upon this subject were among the most 
 useful of any that took place. 
 
 As the outcome of much discussion it was decided 
 that the Reports, when adopted by the Conference, 
 should be incorporated as a whole in a combined 
 
 ' See, for example, “‘ The Second Lambeth Conference : A 
 Personal Narrative,’ by Bishop Stevens Perry, of Iowa, 
 pp. 27, &c. 
 
32 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 “ Letter,” and put forth to the world in the name of 
 the hundred Bishops assembled. This course was 
 rendered possible by the almost complete unanimity 
 with which the five Reports in their ultimate shape 
 received the imprimatur of the Conference. Bishop 
 Wordsworth of Lincoln, who, as Archdeacon of 
 Westminster, had in 1867 translated into Greek and 
 Latin the Address then published! undertook in like 
 manner to make translations of this document of 
 1878, condensing or omitting such portions of the 
 Reports as would be inappropriate or uninteresting 
 to those outside the Anglican Communion.” 
 
 The final paragraphs of the official letter, which 
 will be found in its complete form elsewhere,* were as 
 follows :— 
 
 “These are the Reports of the Conference, and the 
 practical conclusions at which we have arrived. 
 Some of these conclusions have reference to the 
 special circumstances of different branches of the 
 One Church of Christ, according to peculiarities of 
 their various missionary work for the heathen, or 
 their labours among their own people ; some embody 
 principles which apply to all branches of the Church 
 Universal. They are all limited in their scope to 
 those subjects which have been distinctly brought 
 before the assembled Bishops. We invite to them 
 the attention of the various Synods and other 
 governing powers in the several Churches, and of all 
 the faithful in Christ Jesus throughout the world. 
 
 “We do not claim to be lords over God’s heritage, 
 but we commend the results of this our Conference 
 to the reason and conscience of our brethren as en- 
 lightened by the Holy Spirit of God, praying that 
 all throughout the world who call upon the Lord 
 Jesus Christ may be of one mind, may be united in 
 
 1 See Part II., No. VIII., p. 92. 
 2~See Part ΠῚ No: X<xXiiep; τὰς 
 = See Parti. No; SoC pos: 
 
Closing Service in St. Paul’s Cathedral. 433 
 
 one fellowship, may hold fast the Faith once delivered 
 to the Saints, and worship their one Lord in the 
 spirit of purity and love. 
 
 “Signed on behalf of the Conference, 
 AS Cr GANTUAR.” 
 
 The Letter having been thus formally signed, the 
 Gloria in Excelsis was sung by the assembled 
 Bishops, the Benediction was pronounced, and the 
 deliberations of the Conference were at an end. 
 
 On the following day (Saturday, July 27) a grand 
 closing service was held in St. Paul’s Cathedral. The 
 Bishops who were able to be present—about eighty- 
 five in number—received the Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury at the West door, and the hymn, “ The Church’s 
 One Foundation,” was sung as the long procession 
 walked up thenave. The Ze Deum! followed, and the 
 Holy Communion was then celebrated by the Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury, who was assisted in the service 
 and administration by the Bishops of London, Moray 
 and Ross, Sydney, Montreal, Christ Church (New 
 Zealand), Capetown, Rupertsland, and Delaware. 
 The sermon was preached by Bishop Stevens, of 
 Pennsylvania, from the text, “I, if I be lifted up 
 from the earth, will draw all men unto Me” (St. 
 John xii. 32) The service over, the Bishops 
 assembled in the apse of the Cathedral, when a few 
 farewell words were spoken by the Archbishop. “I 
 feel confident,” he said, “ that the effect of our gather- 
 ing will be that the Church at home and abroad will 
 be strengthened by the mutual counsel which we 
 have taken together. May the blessing of Almighty 
 God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost 
 attend each one of us in our several spheres when 
 we depart from this place. On behalf of the Bishops 
 
 
 
 1 Stainer in E flat. 
 2 See Part II., No. XXV., p. 208. 
 
34 Lambeth Conferences of 1878 and 1888. 
 
 of England I offer to those of our brethren who have 
 come hither from foreign lands our heartfelt thanks, 
 and bid them, in the name of God, Farewell !” 
 
 So ended the second Lambeth Conference. It had 
 been attended, as has been seen, by exactly one 
 hundred Bishops. Thirty-five of these were English,! 
 nine were Irish, seven were Scottish, thirty were 
 Colonial and Missionary, and nineteen belonged to 
 the Church of the United States.*. The expenses of 
 the Conference, so far as they did not devolve upon 
 the Archbishop of Canterbury, were defrayed by the 
 English Diocesan Bishops. A committee of laymen, 
 under the guidance of Mr. J. G. Talbot, M.P., under- 
 took to arrange for all possible hospitality to the 
 American and Colonial Bishops. This organization, 
 however, as well as the visits, paid to the English 
 Universities and Cathedral cities, lay altogether out- 
 side the official arrangements for the Conference. 
 
 ChAR EER bie 
 THE THIRD CONFERENCE, 1888. 
 
 T was virtually settled at the Conference of 1878 
 that a third Conference should be held at 
 Lambeth, ten years later, and the death of Arch- 
 bishop Tait,on December 3, 1882, made no difference 
 in these arrangements. 
 
 
 
 ' Namely, two Archbishops, twenty-six English Diocesans, 
 three Bishops Suffragan, and four ex-Colonial Bishops holding 
 ** Commissions” in England. 
 
 = For the numbers attending the Conference of 1867, see 
 above, page 10. 
 
Invitation to the Conference of 1888. 35 
 
 In July, 1886, Archbishop Benson issued the 
 following formal letter, which was sent, as on pre- 
 vious occasions, through the various Metropolitans 
 and Presiding Bishops, to all members of the 
 Anglican Episcopate “exercising superintendence 
 over Dioceses, or lawtully commissioned to exercise 
 Episcopal functions therein ” :— 
 
 “RIGHT REVEREND AND DEAR BROTHER, 
 
 “There appears to be a general desire that a Con- 
 ference of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion 
 should again be held at Lambeth within the next 
 few years. 
 
 “J have accordingly decided (following the prece- 
 dents of 1867 and 1878) to issue next year an invi- 
 tation to such a Conference, which would assemble, 
 according to our present plan, in the summer of 1888. 
 
 “Tt will be of material assistance to myself and to 
 those who are good enough to co-operate with me 
 in making the necessary arrangements, if you can, 
 at your early convenience, inform me whether it 
 seems to you probable that you will be able to take 
 part in our deliberations, and whether there are any 
 subjects of general importance which appear to you 
 specially appropriate for discussion in the Conference. 
 
 “T am in hopes that the suggestions which may 
 reach me in answer to this circular letter will enable 
 me to issue, next spring, the formal invitations to 
 the Conference, together with an intimation as to the 
 definite subjects which will, in the following year, 
 come before us for discussion. 
 
 “T have made these preliminary arrangements in 
 conjunction with the Archbishop of York and the 
 English Bishops, and I am glad to be able to inform 
 you that the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol, whose 
 efficient aid as hon. Episcopal Secretary both in 
 1867 and 1878 will be gratefully remembered, has 
 again kindly consented to act in that capacity. We 
 
26 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 have associated with him as Hon. Assistant Secretary 
 the Dean of Windsor, who, as resident chaplain to 
 Archbishop Tait, was responsible for many of the 
 arrangements of the Conference of 1878. 
 
 “Tt is not necessary that I should assure you of 
 our earnest desire that you will unite with us in 
 humble prayer to Almighty God that His guidance 
 and blessing may be vouchsafed in rich measure, 
 both to our ultimate deliberations and to the arrange- 
 ments necessary to secure their efficiency. 
 
 “T remain, 
 “ Your faithful Brother and Servant in Christ, 
 “ Epw: CANTUAR: 
 
 In the twenty years that had elapsed since the first 
 Conference, the number of Bishops entitled to 
 receive an invitation had increased from 144 to 200, 
 and nine more were added before the third Conference 
 actually assembled. Most of the Bishops, in replying, 
 suggested subjects for discussion, and these sugges- 
 tions were examined with the utmost care by the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, and by other Bishops 
 whose assistance he invited. The result of this 
 examination was the following formal letter, sent 
 
 through the Metropolitans as before :-— 
 
 “ LAMBETH PALACE, 
 “oth November, 1888. 
 
 “ RIGHT REVEREND AND DEAR BROTHER, 
 
 “Tam now able to send you definite information 
 with regard to the Conference of Bishops of the 
 Anglican Communion to be held at Lambeth, if God 
 permit, in the summer of next year. 
 
 “In accordance with the precedent of 1878, it has 
 been arranged that the Conference shall assemble on 
 Tuesday, July 3rd, 1888. After four days’ session 
 there will be an adjournment, in order that the 
 various Committees appointed by the Conference 
 
Programme of the Third Conference. a7 
 
 may have opportunity of deliberation. The Con- 
 ference will re-assemble on Monday, July 23rd, or 
 Tuesday, July 24th, and will conclude its session on 
 Friday, July 27th. 
 
 “Information as to the Services to be held in con- 
 nection with the Conference, and other particulars 
 will be made public as the time draws near. 
 
 “JT have received valuable suggestions from my 
 Episcopal brethren in all parts of the world as to the 
 subjects upon which it is thought desirable that we 
 should deliberate. 
 
 “These suggestions have been carefully weighed 
 by myself and by the Bishops who have been good 
 enough to co-operate with me in making the pre- 
 liminary arrangements, and the following are the 
 subjects definitely selected for discussion :— 
 
 “T, The Church’s practical work in relation to (A) 
 Intemperance, (B) Purity, (6) Care of Emigrants, 
 (D) Socialism. 
 
 “TI. Definite Teaching of the Faith to various 
 classes, and the means thereto. 
 
 “111. The Anglican Communion in relation to the 
 Eastern Churches, to the Scandinavian and other 
 Reformed Churches, to the Old Catholics, and 
 others. 
 
 “TV. Polygamy of heathen converts. Divorce. 
 
 “V. Authoritative standards of Doctrine and 
 Worship. 
 
 “VI. Mutual relations of Dioceses and Branches of 
 the Anglican Communion. 
 
 “May I venture again to invite your earnest 
 prayer that the Divine Head of the Church may be 
 pleased to prosper with His blessing this our 
 endeavour to promote His glory, and the advance- 
 ment of His Kingdom upon earth. 
 
 ‘Tl remain, 
 “Your faithful Brother and Servant in Christ, 
 “EDW: CANTUAR:” 
 
38 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 No less than 147 Bishops signified their intention 
 of being present at the Conference. One of these died 
 after accepting the invitation.' Three others were at 
 the last moment prevented from leaving their Dioceses. 
 On the other hand, two Bishops were consecrated 3 
 during the actual month of Conference, and the total 
 number who took part in its deliberations was thus 
 145. This was proportionally a much larger at- 
 tendance than at either of the previous Conferences. 
 In 1867, 144 Bishops were invited, and 76 attended. 
 In 1878, 173 were invited, and 100 attended. In 
 1888, 211 were invited, and 145 attended. 
 
 The official proceedings began, as in 1878, witha 
 service held at Canterbury, on Saturday, June 30. 
 After hospitable entertainment in St. Augustine’s 
 Missionary College, the Bishops assembled and robed 
 in the Chapter-house, and walked in procession 
 through the cloisters to the great west door of the 
 Cathedral, where they were received by the Arch- 
 bishop, and by the Cathedral Clergy. The Arch- 
 bishop was attended by his Chaplains, but the ar- 
 rangements as to space in the choir of the Cathedral 
 did not admit of such attendance in the case of the 
 other Bishops. As the long procession, including, 
 besides the Bishops, the members of the Cathedral 
 body, the City clergy, and the Mayor and Corpora- 
 tion of Canterbury, moved up the nave and 
 choir, Psalm Ixviii. was chanted, and the hymn 
 “Onward, Christian Soldiers,” sung. The Bishops, 
 about a hundred in number, were ranged on either 
 side upon the altar-steps, and the Archbishop took 
 his place in St. Augustine’s Chair, which had once 
 again been placed for the purpose in the centre of 
 the altar-steps. The Ze Deum having been chanted, 
 the Archbishop, seated in his chair, delivered the 
 following address :— 
 
 
 
 1 The Bishop of Fond du Lac, U.S.A. 
 2 The Bishops of Bedford and Leicester. 
 
Archbishop Benson's Address. 9 
 
 Go 
 
 “ Brethren most dear, and to me most reverend, few 
 privileges of my office can surpass that which, though 
 unworthy, I exercise to-day. It is to bid you welcome 
 in the name of the Lord. Happy should my soul be 
 if it were given me to take in all that such welcome 
 means. Welcome from all continents, and seas, and 
 shores, where the English tongue 15 spoken. 
 Welcome, bearers of the great commission to be 
 His witnesses unto the end of the earth. Welcome, 
 disciples of the great determination to ‘refuse fables,’ 
 and seek the inspiration of the Church at the 
 fountain-head of inspired reason. Welcome to the 
 chair, which, when filled least worthily, most takes 
 up its own parable, and speaks of unbroken lines 
 of government and law and faith, and forgets not 
 the yet earlier Christianity of the land whose own 
 lines soon flowed into and blended with the Romai 
 and the Gallic and the Saxon strains. Round this 
 chair have clustered the glorious memorials you sce 
 through ages, none more dear than his who spoke 
 from it last with a pathos and courage quite his own 
 His simple words to you, our brethren of the great 
 Republic, ‘the particular welcome from himself, 
 which his great sorrow and your love privileged him 
 to give you, still shed a tender human light upon the 
 solemn matters we are to treat of, and the heavenly 
 enterprises to which we and our successors are 
 pledged. We know how dear to you is this sanctuary 
 of our fathers and yours,—yes, of ‘your Father and 
 our Father. And even because of the potency of 
 its deep appeal to us to be holy in worship, pure in 
 doctrine, strong in life—even for this appeal’s sake 
 we bid you here remember the pregnant words of 
 Gregory to Augustine himself, ‘Non pro locis res, 
 sed pro bonis rebus loca amanda sunt.’ Love not the 
 things for the sake of the genius of the place, love 
 the place for the good things wrought there. This 
 he said in answer to Augustine’s question—‘ The 
 faith being one, are there different customs in 
 
40 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 different Churches?’ The answer was worthy of 
 him who has been called the greatest of the Popes, 
 and called the first of the Methodists. He says, you 
 remember, ‘What thou hast found in any Church 
 more pleasing to the Almighty God, that do thou 
 solicitously choose out, and in the English Church, 
 young in the faith, pour in with excellent instruction 
 what thou gatherest from many Churches,’ For the 
 moment, while his Church was young, Augustine 
 stood in a strange, unique position, commissioned to 
 represent in one person the very Church itself which 
 sent him, and bound to represent the future Church 
 for which he was responsible. Were not the words 
 prophetic and characteristic? The task assigned him 
 has surely fulfilled itself in the manifoldness of his 
 Church, the embracingness, the comprehensiveness, 
 and the integrity of her spirit—the versatility with 
 which she enters into the life of new nations, the 
 readiness with which she receives them to herself, 
 the simplicity of the unvarying rule of her faith, yet 
 the steadfastness of the claim she makes for other 
 Churches, as well as for herself, that they may have 
 liberty in things doubtful or indifferent. We honour 
 her when we say she has all the right which the 
 most venerable Churches have to order her service of 
 God, as they did, “according to the diversities of 
 countries, times, and men’s manners,” so that nothing 
 be ordained against God’s word. We vindicate her 
 dignity when we say the right is hers, not ours. 
 It is for her to choose for us, and not we for ourselves ; 
 for her in her lasting power, not for us separately in 
 our passing weakness. We honour her when we say 
 that her right is the right of all Churches, and of no 
 individuals. If this voice of Gregory to Augustine 
 be worked into the fabric of our Church, it may well 
 be the “sermon in stones” which we shall hear to- 
 day as the last echoes of the service tremble along 
 the arches, and seem to fancy’s ear to quiver with 
 anxiety to leave one true tone with us for comfort 
 
Westminster Abbey Service, 1888. 41 
 
 and for strength. It is this,—liberty for all the holy 
 Churches of God, loyal allegiance of Churchmen 
 each to his own. 
 
 Lastly, may He inspire and bless the work of all 
 believers, be they Churchmen or no, who love the 
 Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity and truth.” 
 
 Evensong followed, the Anthem being Mendels- 
 sohn’s “ The Sorrows of Death,” and the Hymn, 
 “The Church’s one Foundation.” As the great pro- 
 cession moved outwards from the choir, the Arch- 
 bishop pronounced the Benediction a second time 
 over the multitude assembled in the nave. 
 
 A second great service was held in Westminster 
 Abbey on Monday evening, July 2nd, when the 
 Sermon was preached by the Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury, who took for his text Ephesians iv. 16, “ All 
 the body, fitly framed and knit together, through 
 that which every joint supplieth.” } 
 
 Nearly all the Bishops who had accepted the invi- 
 tation to the Conference were present at this service, 
 each attended by his Chaplain. They were mar- 
 shalled in long procession at the west end of the 
 nave, and during the service were seated in the choir 
 and under the lantern, the general congregation 
 occupying the transepts. The Archbishops and 
 Metropolitans, with their Chaplains, had places 
 assigned them in the sacrarium. The special Psalms 
 and Lessons were: Psalms civ. cxlv. Isaiah xlix. 
 1-24. Acts ii. 1-22. Sterndale Bennett’s Anthem, 
 “God is a Spirit,’ and Bishop Cleveland Coxe’s 
 Hymn, “ Saviour, sprinkle many Nations,” had also 
 been specially chosen for the occasion. 
 
 On the following morning, Tuesday, July 3rd, 
 the Conference opened with a Celebration of Holy 
 Communion in Lambeth Palace Chapel, the intro- 
 ductory sermon or address being delivered by Bishop 
 
 1 See Part II., No. XXVIII., page 228. 
 18) 
 
43 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 Whipple, of Minnesota, who had been deputed to this 
 office by the Presiding Bishop of America, at the 
 request of the Archbishop of Canterbury. The 
 closing sentences of the sermon ! were as follows :— 
 
 “To none is this Council so dear as to those whose 
 lives are spent in the darkness of heathenism, or who 
 have gone out to new lands to lay foundation for 
 the work of the Church of God. In loneliness, with 
 deferred hopes, neglected by brethren, your only 
 refuge to cry as a child to God, it is a joy for you to 
 feel the beating of a brother’s heart, and hear the 
 music of a brother’s voice, and kneel with brothers at 
 the dear old trysting-place, the Table of our Lord. 
 Let us consecrate all we haveand are to Him ; let us 
 remember loved ones far away; let us gather the 
 work we have so long garnered in cur hearts and lay 
 it at His feet. We shall not have met in vain if out 
 of the love learned of Him we give each to other 
 and to all fellow-labourers for Hima brother’s love,a 
 brother’s sympathy, and a brother’s prayers. I do 
 not know how to clothe in words the thronging 
 memories which cluster round us in this holy place, 
 what searchings of heart, what cries to God, what 
 communions with Christ, what consolations of the 
 Holy Spirit, have been witnessed in this sacred 
 place. I cannot call over the long roll of saints, 
 confessors, and martyrs, whose ‘names are written in 
 the Lamb’s Book of Life. Two names will be re- 
 membered to-day by us all. One that gentle Arch- 
 bishop Longley, who in the greatness of his love saw 
 with a prophet’s eye the mission of the Church, and 
 planned these Conferences, that our hearts might beat 
 as one in the battle of the last time. The other, the 
 wisest of counsellors,and the most loving of brethren, 
 the great-hearted Archbishop Tait, whose dying 
 legacy to his brethren was ‘love one another. They 
 
 1 See Part II., No. XXIX., page 241. 
 
Meeting of the Conference, 1888. 43 
 
 have finished their course and entered into rest. A 
 iittle more work, a few more trials, and we, too, shall 
 finish our course. We are not two companies: the 
 militant and triumphant are one. We are the 
 advance and rear of one host, travelling to the 
 Canaan of God’s rest. God grant that we, too, may 
 so follow Christ that we may have an abundant 
 entrance to His eternal kingdom.” 
 
 The historic chapel was filled to overflowing by 
 the Bishops in their robes, no one else being 
 present, except the Chaplains of the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury. He was himself the Celebrant, assisted 
 by his Provincial Officers, the Bishops of London, 
 Winchester, Rochester, Lincoln, and Salisbury. 
 
 The order of procession adopted at all these ser- 
 vices was the same, and was simpler than that of the 
 former Conferences. Due precedence was given to 
 Archbishops, to Metropolitans and Presiding Bishops, 
 and to the Bishops of London, Durham, and Win- 
 chester, all other Bishops without distinction being 
 arranged according to date of consecration.! 
 
 The great Library had been prepared, as in 1878, 
 for the sessions of the Conference, a low platform 
 having on this occasion been specially erected, with 
 places for the three Archbishops and the seven 
 Metropolitans, in a semi-circle on either side of the 
 President’s chair. 
 
 The secretarial work was, for the third time, 
 undertaken by the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol,” 
 who was assisted by the Dean of Windsor,’ and the 
 Archdeacon of Maidstone, the last-named having 
 been added as Assistant-Secretary a few weeks 
 before the Conference, owing to the unexpected 
 pressure of correspondence. 
 
 
 
 1 See Part II., No. XXXI., page 256. 
 2 The Right Rev. C. J. Ellicott, D.D. 
 % The Very Rev. Randall T. Davidson, M.A. 
 4 The Ven. B. F. Smith, M.A. 
 ID) 74 
 
44 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 A shorthand writer, as on the two previous occa- 
 sions, made a verbatim report of all the discussions 
 for preservation at Lambeth. 
 
 The proceedings during the first week of session 
 followed exactly upon the lines laid down by Arch- 
 bishop Tait in 1878. Certain speakers had been 
 selected, specially qualified to open the several dis- 
 cussions, the motion being in each case for the 
 appointment of a Committee to consider the par- 
 ticular subject, and to report to the Conference in its 
 closing week of session. Twelve such Committees 
 were appointed in all, some of the subjects being, 
 by general consent, divided into two, or varied 
 in form from the wording of the official agenda 
 paper.! 
 
 A strong “ Committee of Reference” was appointed 
 in case any important questions, not covered by the 
 programme, should be suggested, in the form of 
 questions, for consideration and reply. But its work 
 was light, and had reference mainly to the procedure 
 of the Conference itself. In accordance with the 
 unanimous recommendation of this Committee, it was 
 decided that no attempt should be made to secure the 
 “adoption ” of the various Reports presented by the 
 Committees, but that formal resolutions should in 
 each case be moved by the several Chairmen. 
 
 The memorials and petitions which arrived each 
 day were notified to the Conference by the President’s 
 direction, but it was made clear, as on former occa- 
 sions, that no answer could in any case be returned. 
 
 The Committees met frequently during the fort- 
 night which intervened between the two weeks of 
 full session. Some of them were accommodated in 
 the newly-opened “ Church House,” in Dean’s Yard, 
 which was thus put in its first days to one of the 
 most important of the uses that its promoters had 
 in view. Other Committees met at Lambeth, at 
 
 1 See Part II., No. XXXV., page 285. 
 
Sessions of Conference, 1888. 45 
 
 Farnham, at Ely, and at London House. When the 
 Conference re-assembled on Monday, July 23rd, the 
 Reports were all in print, and were circulated in 
 time for the respective discussions. 
 
 The substitution of carefully-worded resolutions 
 in place of motions for the actual “adoption” of the 
 several Reports worked very successfully. It was 
 agreed that when any of the minority desired it, the 
 numbers voting for and against the adoption of any 
 of the resolutions ultimately carried should be made 
 public. But in the case of three only, out of the 
 thirty-two resolutions of the Conference,! was such a 
 request made. Resolutions or amendments lost on 
 a division were not made public in any form. It was 
 also decided that the Reports of the Committees, 
 though not formally adopted, should, unless other- 
 wise decided by vote of Conference, be printed and 
 circulated with the official resolutions. The names 
 of the members of Committee were to be printed on 
 the Reports, which were all, however, to be prefaced 
 by a note, for the protection of minorities, pointing 
 out that the Reports had not in all cases been 
 unanimously adopted by the Committees responsible 
 for them. 
 
 The Archbishop of Canterbury was requested to 
 draft, with such assistance as he might invite, an 
 Encyclical Letter, embodying the results of the deli- 
 berations of the Conference in a form suited for 
 general circulation. This was done, and on the last 
 day of session, Friday, July 27th, the draft Encyclical 
 Letter was considered, paragraph by paragraph, and, 
 after certain alterations had been made, the Arch- 
 bishop was requested, without one dissentient voice, 
 to sign it on behalf of the Conference? An 
 Address to the Queen,’ which had lain in the gallery 
 
 
 
 1 Part II., No. XXXIV., page 277. 
 2 Part II., No. XXXIII., page 264. 
 > Part II., No. XXX., page 252. 
 
46 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 for signature during the sessions of the Conference 
 was formally read by the Archbishop, and the 
 Conference closed with the Doxology and Bene- 
 diction. 
 
 A solemn valedictory and thanksgiving service was 
 held next day in St. Paul’s Cathedral. It was 
 attended not only by the Bishops,! and their chap- 
 lains, but by the Lower Houses of Convocation both 
 of Canterbury and York, by the House of Lay- 
 men of the Province of Canterbury, and by the legal 
 and other officers of the Primate. All these walked 
 in procession from the west door of the Cathedral to 
 the choir. The service consisted of Holy Commu- 
 nion and Sermon, followed by a grand Te Deum.? 
 The Celebrant was the Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 The Bishop of Minnesota read the Epistle; the 
 Bishop of London the Gospel. The Sermon was 
 preached by the Archbishop of York, who took as his 
 text Romans viii. 19, “The earnest expectation of 
 the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons 
 of God.” 3 
 
 An enormous congregation crowded the space 
 under the dome, as well as the nave, transepts, and 
 both aisles. The service lasted more than three 
 hours. After the Ze Deum, the long procession 
 returned to the west door, and the third Lambeth 
 Conference was at an end. 
 
 Of the 145 Bishops who took part in it, 46 
 belonged to England and Wales,‘ 11 to Ireland, 6 to 
 Scotland, 29 to the United States of America, and 53 
 to Colonial and Missionary Dioceses throughout the 
 world. 
 
 
 
 1 About 130 Bishops were present. 
 
 Ξ Gounod. 
 
 3 Part II., No. XXXVII., page 364. 
 
 4 Viz., 32 Diocesan Bishops, ὃ Bishops Suffragan, and 6 
 ex-Colonial Bishops holding Commissions in England. 
 
Close of the third Conference. 47 
 
 Warm thanks were tendered to all those on whom 
 the business arrangements of the Conference had 
 devolved ; and, not least, to the Committee of lay- 
 men who had again, as in 1878, under Mr. Talbot’s 
 guidance, made themselves responsible for the orga- 
 nisation of the hospitality offered to American and 
 Colonial Bishops. Mr. Tallents acted as Hon. 
 Secretary of this important Committee. 
 
 The Encyclical Letter and Reports were imme- 
 diately published by the Society for Promoting 
 Christian Knowledge, and obtained a wide and rapid 
 circulation, more than 18,000 having been sold 
 before the close of the year. 
 
 The Encyclical Letter and the Resolutions of the 
 Conference were translated into Greek and Latin by 
 Bishop Wordsworth of Salisbury, who thus carried 
 on the work undertaken on the two previous occasions 
 by his father, the Bishop of Lincoln. These versions 
 are reproduced below.! 
 
 The foregoing narrative has dealt simply with the 
 three Conferences in their bare official aspect. The 
 indirect results which accrue from such gatherings 
 are probably at least as great as those of an official 
 kind. For an estimate of these indirect results, how- 
 ever, and for the impression made by the debates ot 
 the earlier Conferences upon those who attended 
 them, the reader must turn to the accounts which 
 have been published in ample number in the 
 Biographies of Bishops on both sides of the Atlantic.” 
 
 The keen interest aroused on every side by the 
 Conference of 1888 has given evidence enough, were 
 
 
 
 1 See Part II., No. XXXVIIL., page 376. 
 
 2 E.g., Lives of Bishops Sumner, Gray, Hopkins, Ewing 
 Selwyn, Kerfoot, Wilberforce, Wordsworth, &c. 
 
48 Lambeth Conference of 1888. \ 
 
 such required, that those who planned in faith and 
 courage the first of these decennial gatherings were 
 right in believing that asolid gain must follow, not to 
 the Anglican Communion only, but to the Church of 
 Christ throughout the world. 
 
 
 
ΡΟ ΕΣ ΣΤῚΣ: 
 
 Letters and Documents tlustrating 
 the Flistory of the Lambeth 
 
 Conferences. 
 

 
Letter from the Canadian Church, 51 
 
 No. I. (See page 10.) 
 
 Addresses from the Provincial Synod of the United 
 Church of England and Ireland in Canada, 
 assembled at Montreal in September, 1865 ; with 
 the Reply of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 To the Most Reverend the Archbishop, the Right 
 Reverend the Bishops, and the Reverend the 
 Clergy of the Convocation of the Province of 
 Canterbury. 
 
 We, the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity of the Cana- 
 dian Branch of the United Church of England and 
 Ireland, in Synod assembled, would approach your 
 Venerable Body with the deepest sentiments of 
 reverence and affection. 
 
 We are engaged, like yourselves, in endeavouring, 
 in this distant dependency of the Crown, to uphold 
 the truth of Religion, as our Common Church main- 
 tains it, and that Apostolic Order which is so 
 essential a safeguard in the preservation and diffusion 
 of the Catholic Faith. Recent declarations in high 
 places in our Mother-land, in reference to the position 
 of the Colonial Branches of the Mother Church, have 
 created amongst us feelings of regret and apprehen- 
 sion, as tending to shake the conviction, always so 
 dear to us, that we in the Colonies were, in all 
 respects, one with the Church of our parent country. 
 
 No statute or decision, we beg solemnly to assure 
 you, much as it may serve to weaken our outward 
 connection with the Church of our fathers, can impair 
 
52 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 the integrity and vigour of those principles in 
 doctrine and fellowship which constitute her inward 
 life. We are one with her in the great Articles of 
 Christian Belief, and one with her in that Episcopal 
 Order which binds her members in unity throughout 
 the world. 
 
 In desiring most earnestly to retain this connec- 
 tion, we believe that it would be most effectually 
 preserved and perpetuated if means could be adopted 
 by which the members of our Anglican Communion 
 in all quarters of the world should have a share in 
 the deliberations for her welfare, and be permitted to 
 have a representation in one General Council of her 
 members gathered from every land. Deeply affected 
 by the threat of isolation which recent declarations 
 in high places have indicated, we earnestly solicit 
 this measure of relief, as maintaining that test 
 of inward communion which is to us the most 
 precious. 
 
 But while we look with hope to such concession, 
 we readily affirm our belief that the manner and 
 measure of the relief and encouragement we solicit 
 will be left most wisely to the deliberate judgment of 
 those ancient Convocations of the Church to whom, 
 under God, the cause of true religion at home and 
 abroad is so largely indebted. 
 
 Dated at the City of Montreal, in the Province of 
 ‘Canada, this twentieth day of September, in the year 
 of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty- 
 five. 
 
 F. MONTREAL, JAMES BEAVEN, D.D., 
 Metropolitan. Prolocutor, 
 
Letter from the Canadian Church. 53. 
 
 To His Grace Charles Thomas, Archbishop of Can- 
 terbury, D.D., Primate of all England, and 
 Metropolitan. 
 
 May it please your Grace,— 
 
 We, the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity of the 
 Province of Canada, in Triennial Synod assembled, 
 desire to represent to your Grace, that in consequence 
 of the recent decisions of the Judicial Committee of 
 the Privy Council in the well-known case respecting 
 the Essays and Reviews, and also in the case of the 
 Bishop of Natal and the Bishop of Cape Town, the 
 minds of many members of, the Church have been 
 unsettled or painfully alarmed; and that doctrines 
 hitherto believed to be Scriptural, and undoubtedly 
 held by the members of the Church of England and 
 Ireland, have been adjudicated upon by the Privy 
 Council in such a way as to lead thousands of our 
 brethren to conclude that, according to this decision, 
 it is quite compatible with membership in the Church 
 of England to discredit the historical facts of Holy 
 Scripture, and to disbelieve the eternity of future 
 punishment ; moreover, we would express to your 
 Grace the intense alarm felt by many in Canada lest 
 the tendency of the revival of the active powers of 
 Convocation should leave us governed by canons 
 different from those in force in England and Ireland 
 and thus cause us to drift into the status of an inde 
 pendent branch of the Catholic Church—a result 
 which we would at this time most solemnly deplore. 
 
 In order, therefore, to comfort the souls of the 
 faithful, and reassure the minds of wavering members 
 of the Church, and to obviate, as far as may be, the 
 suspicion whereby so many are scandalised, that the 
 Church is a creation of Parliament, we humbly entreat 
 your Grace, since the assembling of a General Council 
 of the whole Catholic Church is at present imprac- 
 ticable, to convene a National Synod of the Bishops 
 
54 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 of the Anglican Church at home and abroad, who, 
 attended by one or more of their presbyters or lay- 
 men, learned in ecclesiastical law, as their advisers, 
 may meet together, and, under the guidance of the 
 Holy Ghost, take such counsel and adopt such 
 measures as may be best fitted to provide for the 
 present distress in such Synod, presided over by 
 your Grace. 
 
 F. MONTREAL, JAS. BEAVEN, D.D., 
 Metropolitan, President. Prolocutor. 
 
 Reply of the Archbishop. 
 
 To the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity of the Province of 
 Canada, lately assembled in their Triennial 
 Synod. 
 
 ADDINGTON PARK, December, 1865. 
 
 My Right Rev., Rev., dear Brethren,— 
 
 I have duly received the Address forwarded to 
 me by your Metropolitan, from the late Triennial 
 Provincial Synod of the Province of Canada, request- 
 ing me to convene a Synod of the Bishops of the 
 Anglican Church, both at home and abroad, in order 
 that they may meet together, and, under the guidance 
 of the Holy Ghost, take such counsel, and adopt such 
 measures, as may be best fitted to provide for the 
 present distress. 
 
 I can well understand your surprise and alarm at 
 the recent decisions of the Judicial Committee of the 
 Privy Council in grave matters bearing upon the 
 doctrine and discipline of our Church, and I can 
 comprehend your anxiety, lest the recent revival of 
 action in the two Provincial Convocations of Canter- 
 bury and York should lead to the disturbance of 
 those relations, which have hitherto subsisted between 
 the different branches of the Anglican Church. 
 
Convocation Proceedings. 55 
 
 The meeting of such a Synod as you propose is 
 not by any means foreign to my own feelings, and I 
 think it might tend to prevent those inconveniences, 
 the possibility of which you anticipate. I cannot, 
 however, take any step in so grave a matter without 
 consulting my episcopal brethren in both branches 
 of the United Church of England and Ireland, as 
 well as those in the different colonies and depen- 
 dencies of the British Empire. 
 
 I remain, your faithful and affectionate friend and 
 brother in Christ, 
 
 C. T. CANTUAR, 
 
 Primate of All England. 
 
 No. II. (See page ro.) 
 
 Proceedings of the Convocation of Canterbury with 
 respect to the Canadian Address of September, 
 1865. 
 
 On May 2, 1866, the Lower House unanimously 
 resolved, “That his Grace the President be respect- 
 fully requested to direct the appointment of a Com- 
 mittee to consider and report upon the Address of 
 the Canadian Branch of the United Church of 
 England and Ireland, dated at Montreal, Sep- 
 tember 20, 1865.”’—(Chronicle of Convocation, May 2, 
 1866, 2. 290.) 
 
 The President having granted this request, a Com- 
 mittee of fifteen members was appointed. The 
 Committee presented its report on June 29, 1866, 
 but the debate upon it was postponed until the fol- 
 lowing group of sessions. 
 
 On February 14, 1867, the Lower House, after a 
 prolonged discussion, agreed by a majority of 29 to 
 the following resolution :— 
 
 “That this House tenders its sincere thanks to the 
 Committee on the Address of the Canadian Church, 
 
56 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 for the labour which they have bestowed on the 
 subject, and for the Report which they have framed 
 and presented to this House, and desires to convey 
 to his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury a 
 respectful expression of an earnest desire that he 
 would be pleased to issue an invitation to all the 
 Bishops in communion with the Church of England 
 to assemble at such time and place, and accompanied 
 by such persons as may be deemed fit, for the pur- 
 pose of Christian sympathy and mutual counsel on 
 matters affecting the welfare of the Church at home 
 and abroad ; and that this resolution be forwarded to 
 the Upper House.” 
 
 A debate upon the subject took place in 1 the Upper 
 House on the following day. No formal resolution 
 was proposed, but the Archbishop announced his 
 intention of acceding to the request which had been 
 made.—(Chronicle of Convocation, February 14.and 15, 
 1867, pp. 707-793, 800-808.) 
 
 
 
 No, III. (See page 13.) 
 
 Official Arrangements for the Conference of Bishops of 
 the Anglican Communion, to be holden at Lambeth 
 Palace, on September 24, 1867, and following days. 
 
 First DAy.—Tuesday, September 24, at eleven 
 o'clock, am. Prayers and Holy Communion. 
 Sermon, by the Bishop of Illinois. 
 
 General Subject for the Day's Discussion, 
 
 INTERCOMMUNION BETWEEN THE CHURCHES OF 
 THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION. 
 
 Opening Address of the President: specifying 
 the general principles and rules of the Conference, 
 
Programme: for Conference of 1867. 57 
 
 and inviting any introductory remarks from Home 
 Metropolitans and from distant Bishops. 
 
 General agreement as to the arrangement of the 
 time and subjects. 
 
 Resolution :— 
 
 We, Bishops of Christ’s Holy Catholic Church, 
 professing the faith of the primitive and undivided 
 Church, as based on Scripture, defined by the first 
 four General Councils,! and reaffirmed by the Fathers 
 of the English Reformation, now assembled by the 
 good providence of God at the Archiepiscopal Palace 
 of Lambeth, under the presidency of the Primate of 
 all England, desire, First, to give hearty thanks to 
 Almighty God for having thus brought us together 
 for common counsels, and united worship; Secondly, 
 we desire to express the deep sorrow with which we 
 view the divided condition of the flock of Christ 
 throughout the world; and, Lastly, we do here 
 solemnly declare our belief that the best hope of 
 future reunion will be found in drawing each of us 
 for ourselves closer to our common Lord, in giving 
 ourselves to much prayer and intercession, in the 
 cultivation of a spirit of charity, and in seeking to 
 diffuse through every part of the Christian com- 
 munity that desire and resolution to return to the 
 faith and discipline of the undivided Church which 
 was the principle of the English Reformation. 
 
 Resolution :— 
 Notification of New Sees and Bishops. 
 
 That it appears to us expedient, for the purpose 
 of maintaining brotherly intercommunion, that all 
 cases of establishment of new Sees, and appoint- 
 ment of new bishops, be notified to all Archbishops 
 and Metropolitans of the Home and Colonial Church 
 
 
 
 1 See 1 Eliz., c. i. xxxvi. 
 E 
 
58 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 of England and Ireland, the Primus of the Protestant 
 Episcopal Church in Scotland, and the Presiding 
 Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the 
 United States of America. 
 
 Resolution :— 
 Letters Commendatory. 
 
 That, having regard to the conditions under which 
 intercommunion between Members of the Church 
 passing from one distant Diocese to another may be 
 duly maintained, we hereby deem it desirable— 
 
 (1) That forms of Letters Commendatory on 
 behalf of clergymen visiting other Dioceses be drawn 
 up and agreed upon, and that no strange clergyman 
 should officiate in any Diocese without exhibiting 
 such Commendatory Letters to the Bishop thereof ; 
 
 (2) That a form of Letters Commendatory for 
 such Laymen as may desire to avail themselves of 
 them be in like manner prepared. 
 
 The Benediction. 
 
 SECOND DAy.—Wednesday, September 25. 
 General Subject for the Day's Discussion, 
 COLONIAL CHURCHES. 
 
 Resolution :-— 
 Subordination to Metropolitans. 
 
 That it be a matter for the consideration of this 
 Conference, and of the Bishops of the Colonial 
 Church especially— 
 
 (1) Whether it be desirable that such Colonial 
 and Missionary Dioceses as have not as yet been 
 gathered into Provinces be formed into any Province; 
 and 
 
 (2) Whether any, and if so what, steps should be 
 taken. 
 

 
 Programme for Conference of 1867. 59 
 
 Resolution :— 
 
 Discipline to be exercised by Metropolitans. 
 
 That, whereas schemes for conducting Ecclesias- 
 tical Affairs and for the exercising of Discipline 
 have been embodied in the Letters Patent granted 
 by the Crown to the Metropolitans of Canada, India, 
 Australasia, New Zealand, and South Africa, it 
 appears to us to be desirable that the aforesaid 
 schemes so embodied in the Letters Patent be, for 
 the present, and until the local authorities, spiritual 
 and temporal, have otherwise provided, as much as 
 possible adhered to; and that in all cases where the 
 power of coercive jurisdiction is not conveyed by 
 such Letters Patent it is desirable to provide by 
 voluntary agreement for the enforcement of discipline, 
 and that with a view to secure this end, all Bishops 
 at their Consecration, and clergymen of those 
 Dioceses at their ordination or institution to the cure 
 of souls, should be required to pledge themselves to 
 submit to the provisions of such schemes. 
 
 Resolution :— 
 Court of Metropolitans. 
 
 That in the case of any charges being preferred 
 against a Suffragan Bishop of any Province, it appears 
 to us desirable that the Metropolitan thereof should 
 summon all the Bishops of his Province to sit with 
 him for the hearing of the case, and that he should 
 not proceed to the hearing of it without the aid and 
 concurrence of all the Bishops of his Province that 
 can be assembled. 
 
 The question of any charge being brought against 
 a Metropolitan should also be considered. 
 
 Resolution :— 
 Question of Appeal. 
 That it be a matter for the consideration of this 
 Conference whether, in cases where no Letters 
 E 2 
 
60 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 Patent have been issued, any, and if any what, 
 Appeal should lie from such Provincial Decisions. 
 
 Resolution :— 
 Conditions of Union. 
 
 That it be a matter for the consideration of this 
 Conference, in reference to Colonial Churches not 
 legally united to the United Churches of England 
 and Ireland, what safeguards as to their continued 
 soundness in Doctrine and Discipline be required by 
 the Mother Church as the condition of the main- 
 tenance of full spiritual and ecclesiastical communion. 
 
 The Benediction. 
 
 THirD Day.—Thursday, September 26th. 
 General Subject for the Day's Discussion, 
 CO-OPERATION IN MISSIONARY ACTION. 
 
 Resolution :— 
 Notification of proposed Missionary Bishoprics. 
 
 That in case it should be proposed to found a 
 Missionary Bishopric by any of the branches of the 
 Church represented in this Conference, it seems to 
 us desirable— 
 
 (1) That notification of such intention be sent to 
 all Archbishops and Metropolitans of the Home and 
 Colonial Church of England and Ireland, the Primus 
 of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Scotland, and 
 the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal 
 Church in the United States ; and 
 
 (2) That, so soon as any person is consecrated to 
 such Bishopric, the announcement of such Conse- 
 cration be made to the same parties. 
 

 
 Sermon of the Bishop of Llinors. οι 
 
 Resolution :— 
 Subordination of Missionaries. 
 
 That, in the case of the establishment of any 
 Missionary Bishopric, and consecration of a Bishop 
 to the same, we deem it expedient that all Mission- 
 aries should place themselves under the general 
 superintendence of such Missionary Bishop, subject 
 always to their obedience to such written instructions 
 as may be sent to them by those in authority at 
 home. 
 
 Concluding resolution :— 
 
 That we desire to render our hearty thanks to 
 Almighty God for the blessings vouchsafed to us in 
 and by this Conference; and we desire to express 
 our hope that this our Meeting may hereafter be 
 followed by other Meetings to be conducted in the 
 spirit of the same brotherly love. 
 
 The Closing Benediction. 
 
 No. IV. 
 
 Sermon of Bishop Whitehouse, of Illinois, preached in 
 Lambeth Palace Chapel, on September 24, 1867. 
 
 “Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that 
 which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his 
 body’s sake, which is the Church.”—Co/. i. 24. 
 
 There is something very startling at the first glance 
 in the leading phraseology of this verse, and we chal- 
 lenge it with almost a suspicion that it cannot consist 
 with the humility of the man who chides himself as 
 “less than the least of all saints.” 
 
62 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 “Fill up” what is behind of the sufferings of 
 Christ! “Fill up” the sufferings of the “Man of 
 sorrows!” “Fill up” the pains of poverty, exposure, 
 anxiety, betrayal, and agony which,—speaking in the 
 light of this world,—scarce left a sunny spot in the 
 life of Jesus! “ἘΠῚ up” the sufferings of One who 
 drank drop by drop the mysterious cup of the Divine 
 wrath, while mind and body agonized in the terrible 
 struggle! “Fill up” the precious sufferings which 
 bought and healed a world ! 
 
 This cannot be, and by every trait of the Apostle’s 
 character, as well as by the perfection and triumph of 
 the Cross, we are warned off from any such construc- 
 tion. Yet the words stand written for our learning. 
 There is a sense in which the spirit sealed them as 
 eternal truth, and like the other parts of the same 
 Testament they are living words for our hearts, con- 
 sciences, and lives. 
 
 What Paul did, and realized in his experience, 
 belongs, we may be assured, to the true spirit and 
 compass of our profession. The affection which 
 bound him thus to the Church and Christ must find 
 a responsive place in our hearts, as successors in his 
 calling of trust and sacrifice, which, though exercised 
 in the midst of less “ fiery trials” may still require us 
 to be “armed with the same suffering mind.” It 
 at least may show, in the deep-toned and mystical 
 relations it involves, what is the hereditary commission 
 of the Elect, and the burden on their generations of 
 discharging a long entail of “afflictions” for His 
 body’s sake, which is the Church. 
 
 I am placed to-day in one of the most trying, as 
 well as the most honourable, positions of my life. 
 The delicate courtesy of His Grace of Canterbury 
 transferred the trust of the opening sermon to the 
 American Episcopate, and the friendship of our own 
 Presiding Bishop devolved it on me, because to some 
 extent I had been identified with this plan of demon- 
 strative unity, and had been adopted into the earlier 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Illinois. 63 
 
 councils which determined and shaped it,—selected 
 thus by a courtesy, which did not stop to weigh 
 merit or estimate capacity, but regarded only the 
 antecedent of a remoter accident and privilege. 
 
 I know, brothers beloved, that I am standing in 
 the circle of my peers in the rank of ministration of 
 ‘Christ’s Church, and that officially we are equal. 
 But I cannot keep down the consciousness to how 
 limited an extent that peerage applies to an equality 
 of learning, manhood, grace, experience, and power 
 in the “rhetoric of life,’ the lovely and profound 
 graces of your “holy conversation.” I cannot clear 
 myself from an inward rebuke that I should be 
 speaking as the father of Fathers, when I ought to sit 
 in silence, learning as “a child.” Each impulse has 
 been checked, each thought has been crippled by the 
 haunting majesty of this strange secluded assembly, 
 and the vision of my own “ presence” so weak among 
 you. 
 
 But, while I have prayed and striven to “glory in 
 my infirmities” that the power of Christ may rest 
 upon me, I still cast myself upon a consciousness 
 that you have all learned through a life’s tears, no 
 matter how gifted you are, an experience taught by all 
 the huge discrepancy between the proud aggression 
 of the “young Melancthon,” daring for success, and 
 the subdued Apostle with the care of all the Churches. 
 What a sympathy we instinctively acquire with 
 words which breath of pity for sinfulness, and help 
 for labour, of a closer union with the unseen, of steps 
 guided on a great appointed course, of fellowship in 
 sufferings, begun in the holy flesh and holy soul of 
 our own Lord, and of the spirit of Grace, which is 
 continually teaching in discipline and soothing with 
 comfort, offering us sweet thorns that may be woven 
 into an angel’s crown, and transmuting each sancti- 
 fied care and struggle into a coronal, rayed with the 
 glory of Christ. 
 
 Hence then may I preach as communing with my 
 
64 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 own tried and feeble nature, to chasten and cheer it ; 
 believing that we are more nearly one on the “hidden 
 man of the heart,” then we may be divided on your 
 eminence of scholarship or well-earned human 
 dignity. I trust more to touch the finer association 
 of your experience, than afford any instruction ; but 
 in our brotherhood with the great apostle, as “ keepers 
 of the flocks” we may meditatively appreciate his 
 divine words, and sympathize with his invigorating 
 experience. 
 
 Because Paul was made an apostle and minister, 
 “the afflictions” follow of necessity; they are 
 inherent of the office, as much as are the aggressive 
 duties and systematic labours. The enduring them 
 is fruit tothe Church which is Christ’s Body ; and 
 we cannot properly estimate a labour or affliction 
 without regarding both as the ὑστερήματα which, like 
 the “fragments” supernatural in the wilderness. 
 banquet of the five barley loaves and small fishes, 
 are gathered up by apostolic hands, each in his own 
 basket, until the whole be fulfilled in the completed 
 elect. The apostle calls himself διάκονος, of the 
 Church, and for the Church, but where that Church 
 is ὀικονόμια θέου, a family to be administered, and a 
 trust involved of stewardship and implication, which, 
 even if unjustly handled, still involves relations of 
 personal profit. 
 
 But the ὑστερήματα mentioned are not the “ filling 
 up” of παθήματα, the passion and sufferings, for the 
 expiation of sin, of the Incarnate and Crucified, which 
 none could fill up and none can have, except in the 
 transferred experience of a crucified, buried, and risen 
 soul. Neither are they “sufferings” which malice 
 and violence even to martyrdom may wreak on the 
 flesh, and hurl on the quivering nerves. But, they 
 are θλίψεις, afflictions of the inner nature and the 
 heart’s consciousness, which are not to be met in the 
 bravery of a stern endurance, which casts them off as 
 a very little thing, in the anasthesia of the flesh from 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Lllinois. 65. 
 
 the inward hope of glory. They are “afflictions ” 
 which it were treachery not to feel, and loss not to 
 cherish ; where the inner man must be seared to the 
 right spiritual sensibility, if it does not respond to 
 them, not only in the pang of the sword, which goeth 
 through the heart, but in a quickened heart to casket 
 them in the tenderness, which saddens but elevates 
 the whole nature. 
 
 Christ and His ministry constitute one mystical 
 personality, and the identity runs through every 
 relation—as He is, so are they in this worid. The 
 servant is not greater than his Lord, and separation 
 even to cruelty and hate, may be a natural sequence, 
 as we carry about in our body the mortification of 
 Christ, that His life may be manifested in us. But 
 far deeper is this, a community of liegemen’ and 
 servants sharing loyally in the struggle and attainder 
 of the Lord, for Christ says, I call you not servants 
 but friends, for the servant knoweth not what his 
 Lord doeth. It is the fellowship of the inner and 
 spiritual ; the co-operative in counsel and purpose, 
 the ancestral of an ever-returning feast with hereditary 
 dignity, and the noble responsibility of a heritage 
 faithfully transmitted in integrity and honour. It is 
 the consciousness inspiring every power, that while 
 the leadership is resistless and the result triumph, 
 each individual effort exerted, and specially every 
 “affliction” garnered in the watchful breast in sym- 
 pathy with the Head, is graciously allowed as 
 contribution of individual partnership, accelerating 
 the issue and filling up the measure of the hours of 
 contest. 
 
 The sufferings of Christ are thus to be doubly taken 
 —those which He sustained in His own body, where 
 nothing remains to be fulfilled ; the other to be suffered 
 in His mystical Body to the end of the ages ;—and 
 so there remain many sufferings to be fulfilled. Of 
 this the Church as the appointed agency, the ministry 
 as the delegated headship, the members as the instru- 
 
66 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 ments of work, must, severally and incorporate, carry 
 the burthen, as the Church represents Christ fulfilling, 
 both in receptiveness and activity, the work which the 
 Father gave Him to do. But the spirit in which the 
 “afflictions” are borne and the work done, is rejoicing, 
 the “joy in tribulation,” the winnowing of the elect. 
 Hence the filling up of what is behind of the afflic- 
 tions of Christ in “my:flesh” has the two-fold 
 relation of sufferings of ours assumed by Christ, and 
 afflictions of His bequeathed to us in the grace of 
 reciprocal endurance. 
 
 The visible Church, “the body of Christ,” instinct 
 with life, guidance, and sympathy from its visible 
 Head, is now witnessing in sackcloth. At every 
 point in the million million pores of sensibility, and 
 the deep capacity of a worn and anguished soul, the 
 “body” is fulfilling through its organism, the heir- 
 loom of the suffering state imparted by Him,—who 
 touched earth “to begin to do and to teach,” who 
 lived the “ Man of sorrows,” baptized His body into 
 His own baptism of blood, and left that Body to 
 work out, in its ages of discipline and mercy, the 
 mission begun over the hills and valleys of Palestine. 
 
 The three years of the Lord’s earthly manifestation 
 were type and pattern of all to follow. Had that 
 ministry continued for centuries ; had those precious 
 feet trodden worn and bleeding all earth’s highways 
 and acres ; had that voice rung in its awful immen- 
 sity from heaven to hell, or pleaded with sweet 
 gentleness in the household ear, still would the 
 mysterious history have been the same,—afflictions, 
 rejection, crucifying afresh, and the few cross-bearers 
 following with holy chaunt the same pathway, and 
 gathering up the “fragments” of their Master’s 
 afflictions as a manna creation for earthly wants, 
 support for duty, memorial of tenderness, and earnest 
 of power, triumphant through weakness. 
 
 Such is and will be the position of the Church 
 which is Christ’s body in this world, which world in 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Ilinozs. 67 
 
 all its plans and policy, its heart and intellect, is 
 opposed to Christ ; such in some familiar or strange 
 forms will be the experience of the visible headship 
 of the undying Episcopate; such will be, in the 
 experience of the believer’s soul, the stzgmata that 
 testify his fellowship in suffering, and the pulsations 
 of the infused current of the resurrection life. 
 
 The sufferings of the Redeemer, personal and 
 propitiatory, terminated on the cross. Heaven and 
 earth, time and eternity, took the indelible record, 
 “Tt is finished.” But as He is one with the holy 
 cause of His truth and Church, given back in the 
 hour of universal dominion as Head over all things, 
 to be the living Head of His living Body, the 
 Church, the measure of suffering is zo¢ fulfilled, the 
 lien of afflictions zot discharged until the reproach, 
 persecution, and distress of the militant Church, and 
 the far sorer trials of her inner struggles have ended, 
 and her honoured faithful are the crowned conquerors 
 of the spotless church above. In the whole militant 
 Church, distributed through its offices and member- 
 ship, through its work and feeling ; under the blow 
 from without or the rending pang within ; in the 
 stern hour of fierceness, impotent to crush, or in the 
 ceaseless burthen of infirmity and sins ; in the com- 
 mon griefs, or the thorn betrayed only in the lone 
 cry of a thrice pressed anguish ; for you, for me, for 
 Christ’s ministers and Christ’s “little ones” are the 
 sufferings of Christ, one day to be “filled up,” 
 completed gloriously sealed. 
 
 St. Paul represents himself as affording his flesh, 
 —in its old nature, spiritually crucified, and, in its 
 power of labour and endurance, activity, and influence 
 freely consecrated,—to press on this consummation, 
 and hasten the coming hour of victory and peace. 
 Paul shrank neither from a suffering Messiah nor a 
 suffering Church, but, appreciating in both the highest 
 attributes of excellence and honour, cast body and 
 soul into the mould, to be used by Christ, as well as 
 
68 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 to be “formed after the image of Him who created 
 him.’ He rejoiced in his calling, magnified his. 
 office, glorified his Saviour for His work and His 
 love, discerned and cherished His mystical Body, 
 vindicated his apostleship with the might of his 
 intellect and the heroism of his gigantic mission,. 
 irradiated Judaism and subdued the heathen, preached 
 far and wide the exhaustless Gospel, and then in 
 hallowed egoism threw open his own breast, that with 
 the blood of the sufferings—love warm and joy dyed,— 
 he might still feed his precious nestlings and nourish 
 children’s children. “I now rejoice in my sufferings. 
 for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflic- 
 tions of Christ in my flesh for His body’s sake, 
 which is the Church.” 
 
 And we, successors of his ministry and heirs of his. 
 faith, glorying in our calling and moaning apart, 
 “Not worthy—not worthy to be called an apostle!” 
 we, when century has heaped on century the wrecks 
 of all human institutions, and buried them beneath 
 the dying verdure of fresh spring-times, only to be 
 crushed with more crumbling ruins, we who live when 
 material progress scorns the past,, when Mammon 
 builds Babel towers ; and science utters oracles from 
 rocks and graves, to confuse the old faiths, and dis- 
 honour old trusts,—we stand in our unbroken line, 
 witness by the same sacramental altars of eighteen 
 centuries agone, confess in the same creeds, teach 
 from the same inspired word, recognize the mystical 
 spouse ever young and beautiful, and are folded to 
 her breast as a dear and holy mother ; we find per- 
 petuated in Christ’s visible body, each function of its 
 living organism, each susceptibility of its complex 
 being and individual experience, and encounter 
 “the dangers and chances of the world” in the same 
 conflict with the same suffering Church. As we 
 catch this single gush of heart-revealing it is fresh for 
 us as a living spring to thirsty lip. We drink it in, 
 and then down among all our heart sickness and 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Illinors. 69 
 
 bewildered struggles, our wearying shame and spec- 
 ταὶ responsibility, where perhaps years have withered 
 the flowers, and dried even perennial roots, ¢here are 
 we conscious of response to joy in sufferings. 
 
 We rejoice in sympathy, because for us also, this 
 single verse is the experience of the believing soul, 
 because it explains our place in this world, because 
 it opens our sufficient consolation and because it 
 defines our honourable trust. 
 
 How much of our understanding and enjoyment 
 of Gospel righteousness depends on the proper view 
 of our real oneness with Christ. When we know 
 Him, not alone “after the flesh” as a being of singu- 
 lar and isolated excellence, of noble character, sweet 
 benevolence and lofty power, as the great Teacher to 
 a band of disciples, the bright example of purity and 
 love, standing off from us to be studied, imitated, 
 honoured, and adored—but, when we know Him in 
 the spirit as united to us, our wisdom, our righteous- 
 ness, our sanctification, our redemption, acting for us 
 and acting in us, and our spiritual nature entering into 
 the same condition as that of our great representative, 
 as it is written “If any man be in Christ he is a new 
 creature, ’—then indeed, the travail and the victory 
 of Christ are his. He is the son of God and heir of 
 the kingdom; he has become the beloved child in 
 whom the Father is well pleased. He has eternal 
 life abiding in him; he has come unto Mount Sion 
 and the new Jerusalem, and the brotherhood of the 
 living dead ; his enemies are overcome, and he is the 
 conqueror of death and hell; his portion is to be 
 where Christ is, and his progress, even now is “ from 
 glory to glory ;” already he is exercising his priest- 
 hood and his kingship, he reigns with Christ. 
 
 It doth not indeed yet “appear” what we shall be. 
 Much of this germing glory is and will be hidden. 
 The new creatures carry to outward observation the 
 soiled and beggar dress of the hedge and the wilder- 
 ness. To man they look even as others who have no 
 
70 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 such hope, and even to themselves they seem only 
 weak, unfaithful and chief of sinners. It doth not 
 appear to us, but it does appear to the Father, the 
 Lamb and the Spirit. They regard the true Christian 
 as thus transformed into Christ’s image, clothed with 
 Christ’s righteousness, united to Him in the reciprocal 
 crucifixion and the new life of the resurrection, dead 
 in Christ, in Him quickened, justified, and raised, the 
 new and heavenly being called into life within; with 
 a struggling but conquering holiness pressing him 
 towards the mark for the prize of the high calling. 
 In proportion as he sees and feels this precious 
 mystical and spiritual union, will the believer learn 
 to rejoice with “joy unspeakable and full of glory.” 
 It explains our place in the world in its perpetual 
 separation and inevitable antagonism. Oh! awful 
 vastness and penetrative subtilty of the world! We 
 are not marshalled sharp and defiant as hostile 
 armies, flaunting their standards, serried in rank and 
 battle cry. But the world is all around us, the 
 enveloping medium, and with elemental forces,—the 
 world around the Church, the world τυζΖλΖη the 
 Church, and the world in each heart of struggle and 
 grace. But no matter where, no matter in what 
 form; no matter how bold in cruelty, how seductive 
 in blandishment, how tangled in interest, and blended 
 in counsels, how co-operative in social advances, and 
 mutually dependent in the instruments, still the 
 enmity of the world is deep and permanent, according 
 to that significant saying of the Saviour,—the world 
 hated Me before it hated you. Hence our age and 
 condition will be necessarily a period of multiplied 
 and distributed “afflictions,” minutely ramified and 
 keenly penetrative, boundless in area as exhaustless 
 in ingenuity. The Church is alive and the world is 
 alive. Each grapples the other or permeates the 
 other as the case may be, on contact at myriad 
 points, with forces and influences, silent as the dew, 
 and leaping as the cloud-flash; internal as the 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Illinots. 71 
 
 blood current and sensitive as the nerves; wise ἂ5 the 
 serpent and grand in intellect and research; tender as 
 the dove and fascinating as household loves. This 
 is our heritage for “ afflictions,’ this is our treasure- 
 house for rejoicing in sufferings. 
 
 The mummy may lie in the sarcophagus, and the 
 sick cripple lie still on the couch, but the active, the 
 vigorous, the busy want space and motion, conflict 
 and antagonism. They will race hither and thither 
 to be filled. This is our “hour” and in such an age 
 “ numbers numberless ” will be the afflictions of Christ. 
 
 Not ours the time, when the light through the 
 casement or the “song in the night ” of solitary faith 
 betrayed the watcher of the Church in the wilderness 
 of heathenism or corruption ; nor ours the fellowship 
 in suffering, doing and bearing for the truth, as we 
 would in the dungeon, at the stake, in the amphi- 
 theatre or in the disciplinary solitude of the cave on 
 the mountain. Ours is the superb energy of revival, 
 when the Church God inspired, challenges, wrestles, 
 and works; when the Church claims her inheritance, 
 and vows to retrieve it ; when she moves aggressively 
 as a recognised power, rallies her men, women and 
 children for work through society, on the summits of 
 refinement, in the places of learning, in the throng of 
 cities down to their gloomiest dens, over the fields and 
 hamlets, in mines and factories, following enterprise 
 to the distant colony and reclaiming the waste; when 
 she cheers with prayers the wayfarer of the cross 
 into heathenism refined or brutal, and enlarges the 
 heart so long exiled from the brotherhood of 
 Christendom with plans and pleadings for restoring 
 unity. This is an age of vigour, materialism, science, 
 and breadth ; this is an age of thrift, refinement, and 
 liberty, which quickens the individual to intense 
 development and drives the mass with impassioned 
 tread ;—can we wonder that we of the Anglican 
 Communion have the yearnings, the griefs, the temp- 
 tations, the betrayals, the false purposes and mis- 
 
“2 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 guided minds, the inadequate resources, all the 
 indescribable conflicts which darken our atmosphere ? 
 Can we deny how much we deserve the rebuke, 
 ridicule, and correction of the sharp world around us? 
 Can we hush our sobs when we know in our poor 
 experience how Christ is wounded in the house of 
 His friends? Can we cheer ourselves in selfish 
 gladness, when there is so much to be done, so much 
 to be endured, and the strife seems so unequal with 
 our shepherd sling? No, brothers, no; we bless God 
 in our heart of hearts that He has poured around 
 light and heat, even if it does quicken spawn of evil, 
 if it does shame us in its brightness, and make us 
 faint in its glow; you wish no change in the strife 
 that tends not to victory, no higher honour than to 
 gather the fragments of the sufferings of Jesus, no 
 more sufficient consolation than the pledge which 
 covers all infirmities and reaches our heart sins. 
 “My grace is sufficient for thee.” This is for us 
 “Our song in the night,” the force of the day’s work, 
 a consciousness within not to be uttered ;—“I xow 
 rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that 
 which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh 
 for his body’s sake which is the Church.” 
 
 And these words open our sufficient consolation. 
 As Downe quaintly says, “ The joy of that text is 
 germinal and ariseth out of the bosom and womb of 
 the sorrow itself. It is not that I rejoice because I 
 am afflicted ; it is not because I shall sink in my 
 calamity and be buried in that valley, but because 
 my calamity raises me, and makes my valley a hill 
 bringing me nearer to God.” Even so! St. Paul said, 
 “1 now rejoice in my sufferings for you.’ Not that 
 suffering ceased to be such, and physically his nerve 
 did not quiver with pain or his heart sink in much 
 weariness. The “perils often” were noted and felt. 
 The “care of all the Churches” pressed sore on an 
 aching brow, and the “thorn in the flesh ” pierced 
 with its hidden point the heart of hearts. Yet wel- 
 

 
 Sermon of the Bishop of lMlinozs. 73 
 
 come all! The union with Christ in all these things 
 changed them into seeds of light, earnests of peace, 
 and the noble martyr-soul could glow and nerve 
 itself with the honourable mission and anticipated 
 victory. 
 
 Such is our earthly trial when sanctified, such our 
 labour and discipline and afflictions as ministers of 
 Christ. Received in faith, sustained in hope, handled 
 with disciplinary and bracing power, they make us 
 better and meet for rest. We are assured that our 
 Saviour sees thern, that we and ours are known and 
 regarded, that succour and recompense are alike 
 included, and so may we bear and do, “to fill up 
 these afflictions of Christ in our flesh,” fer Christ’s 
 afflictions end in glory. 
 
 Thus is defined our honourable trust, and _ this 
 union to Christ, the membership with His body, the 
 Church, and our peculiar calling of apostleship 
 culminate in our obligations to others. St. Paul’s 
 whole estimate of human nature was changed by 
 these relations to the covenant salvation. Hence- 
 forth we hear him say, “I know no man after the 
 flesh.” Once he had loved or rejected qualities 
 inherent in the individual,and,on principles of his own 
 taste or wisdom, he had admired the properties most 
 honourable and useful to society, and within the 
 restricted sphere of national prejudice and associa- 
 tion. But this was changed. All men and each indi- 
 vidual were now estimated as they were related to 
 Christ. In the good he saw the Saviour’s righteous- 
 ness and honour ; in the ignorant and impenitent, he 
 saw only that they were “afar off,’ and alienated 
 from Christ by wicked works. The whole moral 
 creation was to him not as written in the flesh but 
 in the spirit. Hence the joy was zm suffering, not in 
 the midst of it. It was for others, not for himself. 
 It was in his flesh, not in spirit and disposition, but 
 actually endured in the flesh. It was not for his own 
 salvation but for edifying the Church, and shat 
 
 EF 
 
74 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 Christ's visible body. He might have escaped it, if 
 he would have been satisfied to have had his faith, in 
 this sense to himself, before God, but he could not; 
 he read himself, “ debtor to the Greek and barbarian, 
 the bond and free,’ and, specially, his “ kinsmen after 
 the flesh,’ and through much tribulation he must 
 press to fulfil it. Hence the diffusive love of the 
 commissioned heart. All qualities are worthless, if 
 debased by unrepented sin, all distinctions nothing, 
 if they stand on the dead level of impenitence or un- 
 belief. All sorrows are small in comparison with 
 eternal danger, and the present degradation of “the 
 wrath of God abiding.” All relief is but superficial, 
 which knows only the flesh, and weeps only from 
 eyes which have been dimmed with no genuine tears 
 of a faithful repentance. To know ourselves we must 
 know Christ. To appreciate human nature in its 
 realities for good and its fearful exposures to evil, 
 we must enter into the same mind that was in Christ 
 Jesus. To minister to what is useful, kind and loving, 
 in our place of activity we must know men, not after 
 the flesh, but in the worth and woe so awfully re- 
 vealed and contrasted in the “sufferings of Christ.” 
 A living union to Him, to which we are invited, drawn 
 and changed by a tenderness which passeth concep- 
 tion, is the fountain head of just relations to the 
 world in its struggle and to our fellow-men in their 
 claims. No one goes out over their length and 
 breadth with such success and power, as the one who 
 has attained experience of that happy, thrice happy 
 state of soul, to love and forget himself in the Saviour, 
 to live and act as Christ is, all and in all, and him- 
 self a member of the great body, through which the 
 life is sent and perpetuated, by the ever-present Re- 
 deemer, in the oneness of work, suffering, and joy. 
 And no bishop will grapple resolutely with a course 
 of godly work, or adventure honestly in sacrifice of 
 charity, or plead a heart message, or gently admonish 
 in discipline, or even move on an earnest track of 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Lllinors. 75 
 
 functional duty, without finding, in and under all, 
 sufferings, which, rightly interpreted, are the “ afflic- 
 tions of Christ,’ and “implement” of the appointed 
 measure of His suffering body. 
 
 In relations which I have thus so feebly sketched, 
 does the apostolic brotherhood of to-day gather under 
 the roof which, for six centuries, has been the abode 
 in wealth and power of the highest ecclesiastical 
 dignity ; where the mitred brows have ached with 
 burthens grave enough to find large place in history, 
 and hearts have wrestled in grief and pang written 
 only in the Book of God. We meet in the solemn 
 chapel, whence from Boniface onwards the same old 
 line has defiled to the other high places of the church ; 
 and from which have deployed over the broad Atlantic 
 the four score who have verified in a new world the 
 experience of the apostle, and the colonial band which 
 is girdling the earth. Could the solemn possession 
 of that Episcopate, from the place of the departed, 
 utter their testimony, sure I am, it would be in accord 
 with the Prisoner in Rome, and whenever work was 
 true and spirit loyal, deep would answer to deep— 
 “ Filling up the afflictions of Christ »—“ Rejoicing in 
 sufferings.” 
 
 And meet it was that the first appeal for a conclave 
 of the likeminded Brotherhood should spring from a 
 sense of anxiety, hazard, and bewildered responsi- 
 bility. Canada asked in weakness—God answered 
 in strength. From the undefined and _ scattered 
 afflictions, He summoned the joy of a grand demon- 
 strative Unity. He collected the ὑστερήματα, “ frag- 
 ments,’—so that the might and majesty of the super- 
 natural creation might be disclosed,and the abundance 
 be carried back on the homeward way for fresh hun- 
 ger, and expanded multitudes. We have come from 
 afar to this Conference in humility and weakness, 
 bearing our personal and corporate griefs, and anxious 
 to find in spiritual fellowship what by God’s grace 
 may inform and strengthen us. But we have also 
 
 ly 7 
 
76 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 come to demonstrate for ever a fact, existent indeed, 
 but one never before exhibited or made foederal in 
 energy—the Co-operative Unity of the Anglican 
 Communion. 
 
 And, if we are permitted to secure the effect of the 
 first of these to the extent only, that, as we each have 
 need, our inner nature may go home refreshed in 
 holiness and peace, and our working power be in- 
 creased in confidence and extent, by the larger obser- 
 vation and more assured fraternity ;—and if we 
 should fulfil the other to the issue, that in equal and 
 loving reality we had sealed together the Holy Sacra- 
 ment the visible unity of the Anglo-Catholic Church, 
 then—however in our consciousness we might be 
 disappointed of larger results, or the world might 
 cry, “ what meaneth this waste,” or the Church might 
 chide that we had not borne home more fruits for 
 token,—still thoughtfully and in reverence, patiently 
 waiting God’s time for His uses, manifold of this 
 energized and visible potency, might we magnify 
 Him for His goodness, that had made us partakers 
 in mission thus honoured and blest. 
 
 But whether such an assembly speak trumpet- 
 tongued from the high atmosphere of foederated 
 liberty, or in tones chastened and restricted by con- 
 sciousness of personal and national prescription, there 
 will be experience of sorrow, rebuke without and 
 misgiving within. In whatever we may do or say, 
 or withhold in humble fervency of love and zeal, with 
 soul intent on the welfare and woe of Christ’s Mystical 
 Body, in recognized oneness with Him, in the “ fear 
 and trembling ” of a rejoicing heart, must there bea 
 mingling of suffering “the filling up of the afflictions 
 of Christ.” But “such grief is the mother of joy,” 
 and Bernard says, “as the cells of the honeycomb 
 wall in the honey, and the shell preserveth the kernel, 
 so that joy collected and multiplied by the grace of 
 our Lord, is prepared and preserved for the joys of 
 Paradise.” 
 
Archbishop's Opening Address, 1867. Ti 
 
 No. V. (See page 14.) 
 
 Opening Address delivered by the Archbishop of Can- 
 terbury in the first Session of the first Lambeth 
 Conference, September 24, 1867. 
 
 My Most REVEREND AND RIGHT REVEREND 
 BRETHREN, 
 
 In opening the proceedings of the first Conference 
 that has ever taken place of the Bishops of the 
 Reformed Church in visible communion with the 
 United Church of England and Ireland, my prevail- 
 ing feeling is one of profound gratitude to our 
 Heavenly Father for having thus far prospered the 
 efforts which have been made to promote this solemn 
 assembling of ourselves together. Many have been 
 the anxious thoughts and great the heart-searchings 
 which have attended the preparations for this remark- 
 able manifestation of life and energy in the several 
 branches of our communion. Many also have been 
 the prayers, and fervent, I trust, will continue to be 
 the prayers, offered up by us, severally and collec- 
 tively, that He will prosper our deliberations, to the 
 advancement of His glory and the good of His 
 Church. Having met together, as I truly believe 
 we have done, in a spirit of love to Christ, and to 
 all those who love Him, with an earnest desire to 
 strengthen the bonds which unite the several 
 branches of our Reformed Church, to encourage 
 each other in our endeavours to maintain the faith 
 once delivered to the saints, and to advance the 
 
78 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 kingdom of Christ upon earth, I will not doubt that 
 a blessing from above will rest upon our labours, and 
 that the guidance of the Holy Spirit, whose aid we 
 have invoked, will direct, sanctify, and govern our 
 counsels. 
 
 The origin of this Conference has already been 
 stated in the circular of invitation which I addressed 
 to you all. It was at the instance of the Metropoli- 
 tan and the Bishops of the Church of Canada, sup- 
 ported by the unanimous request of a very large 
 meeting of Archbishops and Bishops of the Home 
 and Colonial Church—a request confirmed by ad- 
 dresses from both the Houses of Convocation of my 
 Province of Canterbury—that I resolved upon con- 
 vening it. Further encouragement to venture upon 
 this unprecedented step was afforded when the peti- 
 tion from the Canadian Church was first discussed, a 
 plain intimation being given by a distinguished 
 member of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the 
 United States of America, that it would be regarded 
 as a very graceful act, and would be hailed with 
 general satisfaction in that Church, if the invitation 
 to the Conference were extended to our Episcopalian 
 brethren in those States. 
 
 Fully conscious, however, of all the difficulties 
 which must surround the attempt to organise and 
 superintend an assembly of so novel a character, I 
 might well have hesitated to incur so great a risk ; 
 but to have refused to yield to wishes thus fully and 
 forcibly expressed, to have shrunk from undertaking 
 the consequent responsibility, would have been un- 
 worthy of the position in which, by God’s providence, 
 I am placed. In faith and prayer has the task been 
 undertaken, and I humbly trust it will please God to 
 prosper our work to a successful conclusion. The 
 result, indeed, has thus far more than justified the 
 expectations raised. We rejoice to find that so 
 many of our brethren from distant parts of the 
 globe have been moved to respond to the call, and 
 
Archbishop's Opening Address, 18067. 79 
 
 we welcome with feelings of cordial affection and 
 genuine sympathy the presence of so large a pro- 
 portion of the American Episcopate. From very 
 many also, who, owing to various circumstances, 
 have been prevented from joining us, I have received 
 letters expressing the profound satisfaction and 
 thankfulness with which they regard the opportuni- 
 ties afforded by this gathering for conferring to- 
 gether upon topics of mutual interest ; for discussing 
 the peculiar difficulties and perplexities in which our 
 widely-scattered Colonial Churches are involved, and 
 the evils to which they are exposed ; for cementing 
 yet more firmly the bonds of Christian communion 
 between Churches acknowledging one Lord, one 
 faith, one baptism—connected not only by the ties 
 of kindred, but by common formularies; and for 
 meeting, through their representatives, from the 
 most distant regions of the earth, to offer up united 
 prayers and praise to the Most High in the mother 
 tongue common to us all, and to partake together 
 of the Holy Communion of the Body and Blood of 
 our Saviour Christ. 
 
 It has never been contemplated that we should 
 assume the functions of a General Synod of all the 
 Churches in full communion with the Church of 
 England, and take upon ourselves to enact canons 
 that should be binding upon those here represented. 
 We merely propose to discuss matters of practical 
 interest, and pronounce what we deem expedient 
 in resolutions which may serve as safe guides to 
 future action. Thus it will be seen that our first 
 essay is rather tentative and experimental, in a 
 matter in which we have no distinct precedent to 
 direct us. 
 
 The subjects which will be brought under your 
 consideration have already been laid before you in 
 the Prospectus of Arrangements for our proceedings. 
 They may be briefly comprised under the following 
 heads :—(1) The best way of promoting the Re- 
 
80 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 union of Christendom. (2) The Notification of the 
 Establishment of New Sees. (3) Letters commen- 
 datory from Clergymen and Laymen passing to 
 distant Dioceses. (4) Subordination in our Colonial 
 Church to Metropolitans. (5) Discipline to be exer- 
 cised by Metropolitans. (6) Court of the Metro- 
 politan. (7) Question of Appeal. (8) Conditions of 
 Union with the Church at home. (9) Notification 
 of proposed Missionary Bishoprics. (10) Subordina- 
 tion of Missionaries. In the selection of topics 
 regard has been chiefly had to those which bear on 
 practical difficulties seeming to require solution. It 
 has been found impossible to meet all views, and 
 embrace every recommendation that has been sug- 
 gested. Some may be of opinion that subjects have 
 been omitted which ought to have found a place 
 in our deliberations; that we should have been 
 assembled with the view of defining the limits of 
 Theological Truth; but it has been deemed far 
 better, on the first occasion of our meeting in such 
 form, rather to do too little than attempt too much, 
 and instead of dealing with propositions which can 
 lead to no efficient result, to confine ourselves to 
 matters admitting of a practical and beneficial 
 solution. 
 
 The unexpected position in which our Colonial 
 Churches have recently found themselves placed has 
 naturally created a great feeling of uneasiness in the 
 minds of many. I am _ fully persuaded that the 
 idea of any essential separation from the Mother 
 Church is universally repudiated by them; they all 
 cling to her with the strongest filial affection, while 
 they are bound to her Doctrines and Form of 
 Worship by cogent motives of interest. At the 
 same time I have good reason to believe that there 
 are various shades of opinion as to the best modes 
 in which the connection between the daughter 
 Churches and their common mother can be main- 
 tained ; and I trust that the interchange of thought 
 
Archbishop's Opening Address, 1867. 81 
 
 between those who are chiefly interested in those 
 important questions will lead to some profitable 
 conclusions. I may also state my belief that legis- 
 lation on the subject of the Colonial Churches has 
 been postponed until the view taken by this Con- 
 ference shall have been declared. These matters 
 have been regarded under various aspects in the 
 voluminous correspondence which I have had with 
 many of my Colonial brethren; they will all, no 
 doubt, be fully developed in the course of our dis- 
 cussion by those who represent these several 
 opinions. I trust that, under a deep sense of the 
 solemnity of the occasion on which we are 
 assembled, our discussions will be characterised by 
 mutual forbearance, if sentiments at variance with 
 our own shall be advanced, so that by the com- 
 parison, rather than the conflict of opinions, we may 
 be drawn nearer to each other in brotherly harmony 
 and concord. With the arrangement that certain 
 subjects shall, after a brief consideration, be referred 
 to Committees, I believe that the various topics for 
 consideration may be profitably discussed. 
 
 Doubtless there is much in these latter days, even 
 as we have all been taught to expect, which is dark 
 and dispiriting to the mind that has not been exer- 
 cised to discern the meaning of such signs. The 
 enemy is on every side, plying his insidious arts to 
 sap the foundations of belief, to hinder the cause of 
 God’s Church, and prevent the Word of God from 
 doing its work in the conversion of the soul of 
 sinful man. No effort is spared to disparage the 
 authority of those who witness for the truth and 
 uphold the dogmatic teaching for which the Apos- 
 tolic writings are at once the model and the warrant. 
 Though it be not our purpose to enter upon theo- 
 logical discussion, yet our very presence here is a 
 witness to our resolution to maintain the faith, 
 which we hold in common as our priceless heritage, 
 set forth in our Liturgy and other formularies ; and 
 
82 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 this our united celebration of offices common to our 
 respective Churches in each quarter of the globe, is 
 a claim, in the face of the world, for the inde- 
 pendence of separate Churches, as well as a protest 
 against the assumption by any Bishop of the Church 
 Catholic of dominion over his fellows in the Episco- 
 pate. 
 
 Not one of us, I am persuaded, can fail to respond: 
 to that earnest desire for unity which is expressed 
 in the introduction to our resolutions. It is but the 
 echo of the petition which the Saviour of the world 
 offered in behalf of His Church when He prayed 
 the Father that those who should believe in Him 
 might all be one in the Father and the Son. And 
 while we deplore the divided state of Christendom, 
 and mourn over the obstacles which at present exist 
 to our all being joined together in the unity of the 
 Spirit and in the bond of peace, this very feeling 
 should be our most powerful motive to urge our 
 petitions at the Throne of Grace, that it may please 
 God, in His own good time, to remove such hin- 
 drances as at present render that union impracti- 
 cable. 
 
 And now may our Almighty Father shed abroad 
 upon us the spirit of wisdom, peace, and love, and 
 inspire us with such counsels as may most tend to 
 edification ; so that, being knit together more closely 
 in the bonds of brotherly affection and Christian 
 communion, and animated with a more fervent zeal 
 for the Saviour’s honour and the salvation of souls, 
 we may do our endeavour to prepare His Church 
 for the coming of Him whom we lovingly adore, 
 and whose advent in power and glory we ardently 
 look to and long for. 
 
Amended Programme, Sept. 25, 1867. 83 
 
 No. VI. (See page 16.) 
 Amended Programme adopted during the Sessions. 
 SECOND Day.—Wednesday, September 25. 
 General Subject for the Day’s Discussion, 
 
 COLONIAL CHURCHES. 
 
 Resolution I. :— 
 Alteration of Order. 
 
 That His Grace the President of this meeting be 
 requested to allow the last Resolution headed 
 “ Conditions of Union,’ to be first taken into consi- 
 deration. 
 
 Resolution IT. :— 
 Conditions of Union. 
 
 (z) That in the opinion of this Conference, 
 “Unity in the Faith,’ and fellowship in the one 
 Body of Christ, will be best maintained among the 
 several branches of the Anglican Communion in the 
 manner already pointed out by the Convocation of 
 the Province of Canterbury: viz. by the due and 
 Canonical subordination of the Synods of the several 
 Branches to the higher authority of the Synods above 
 them, the Diocesan Synod being recognised as inferior 
 to the Provincial Synod, and the Provincial Synod to 
 some higher Synod or Synods of the Anglican 
 Communion. 
 
84 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 Appointment of Committee. 
 
 (ὁ) That a Committee of members (with 
 power to add to their number, and to obtain the 
 assistance of men learned in Ecclesiastical and Canon 
 Law) be appointed to inquire into and report upon 
 the whole subject ; and that such report be forwarded 
 to His Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 with a request that, if possible, it may be communi- 
 cated to any adjourned meeting of this Conference. 
 
 Proposed Inquiry into Disunion in Natal. 
 
 (c) That in the judgment of the Bishops now 
 assembled, the whole Anglican Communion is deeply 
 injured by the present condition of the Church in 
 Natal ; and that a Committee be now appointed at 
 this General Meeting to consider the whole case, and 
 inquire into all the proceedings which have been 
 taken therein; and to report on the best mode by 
 which the Church may be delivered from the con- 
 tinuance of this scandal, and the true faith main- 
 tained. That such Report be forwarded to his Grace 
 the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, with a request 
 that, if possible, it may be communicated to any 
 adjourned meeting of the Conference ; and 
 
 Further, that his Grace be requested to transmit 
 the same to all the Bishops! of the Anglican Com- 
 munion, and to ask for their judgment thereupon. 
 
 Resolution III. :— 
 
 Question of Appeal. 
 
 That in the opinion of this Conference, it is very 
 desirable that there should be a Board of Reference, 
 
 
 
 1 ? Convocations, Conventions, and Synods. 
 
Amended Programme, Sept. 25, 1867. 85 
 
 or a Spiritual Tribunal for final appeal and decision 
 in all matters of Faith; including Representatives 
 from all Branches of the Anglo-Catholic Church ; 
 and the Bishops here assembled earnestly recommend 
 this most important matter to the deliberate con- 
 sideration of the Convocations, Conventions, and 
 Synods of the said Anglo-Catholic Church. 
 
 Or, of Resolution 717. should not be carried, then— 
 Question of Appeal. 
 
 III. That in order to the maintenance of the 
 strictest union between the Mother-Church of Eng- 
 land and her daughter Churches in the Colonies, it is 
 desirable that in questions of doctrine there should 
 be an appeal from the tribunals for the exercise of 
 Discipline in each Province to a spiritual tribunal in 
 England. 
 
 That such tribunal be presided over by the Primate 
 of all England (for the time being), and be composed 
 of Bishops only. 
 
 Appointment of Committee. 
 And— 
 
 That a Committee be appointed to consider the 
 details of the Constitution of such tribunal, and that 
 their Report be forwarded to His Grace the Lord 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, with a request that, if 
 possible, it may be communicated to any adjourned 
 meeting of the Conference. 
 
 Circulation of Report. 
 
 And further, that his Grace be requested to trans- 
 mit the same to the Convocations and Synods of all 
 the Provinces of the United Church of England and 
 Ireland, and to all Bishops (if any) of the said 
 Church not included in any Ecclesiastical Province. 
 
86 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 Election of Members of Tribunal. 
 
 That His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury be 
 requested to invite the several Provinces of the 
 Church to elect Bishops for the said Tribunal. 
 
 Resolution IV. :— 
 This Meeting to be followed by other Meetings. 
 
 That, in order to give effect to the above Resolu- 
 tions, it is desirable that a General Synod of the 
 Bishops of the Anglican Communion, accompanied, 
 if it be thought fit, by other representatives from each 
 Diocese, should be assembled from time to time 
 under the Presidency of the Primate of all England. 
 
 Resolution V. :— 
 Time of First Meeting, &c. 
 
 That His Grace the Lord Archbishop is hereby 
 requested to summon the First Meeting of such 
 Synod forthe year 187 ; and that in the opinion of 
 this Conference the Primate of all England should 
 be authorised to summon any Special Synod within 
 that time, should the needs of the Church seem to 
 require it; or should his Grace be requested to do 
 so by or more Bishops. 
 
 Resolution VI. :-— 
 Conditions of Union. 
 
 That, in order to the binding of the Churches of our 
 Colonial Empire and the Missionary Churches beyond 
 them in the closest union with the Mother-Church, it 
 is necessary that they receive and maintain without 
 alteration the standards of Faith and Doctrine, as they 
 are in use in that Church. That nevertheless each 
 
Amended Programme, Sept. 25, 1867. 87 
 
 Province should have the right to make such adapta- 
 tions and additions to the services of the Church as its 
 peculiar circumstances may require. 
 
 Provided, That no change or addition be made 
 inconsistent with the spirit and principles of the Book 
 of Common Prayer, and that all such changes be 
 liable to revision by any Synod of the Anglican 
 Communion in which the said Province shall be 
 represented. 
 
 Resolution VII. :— 
 Court of Metropolitans. 
 
 That in case of charges being brought against a 
 Suffragan Bishop of any Province it appears to be 
 desirable that the Metropolitan thereof should 
 summon all the Bishops of his Province to sit with 
 him for the hearing of the case, and that he should 
 not proceed to the hearing of it without the aid of all 
 the Bishops of the Province that can be assembled, 
 who shall sit with him as judges. 
 
 That the question of any charge brought against a 
 Metropolitan be referred to the Committee appointed 
 by Resolution III. 
 
 Resolution VIII. :— 
 
 Scheme for conducting Election of Bishops, when not 
 otherwise provided for. 
 
 That it is the opinion of this Conference that the 
 election of a Bishop of any Colonial Diocese should 
 be made by the Synod of the Diocese convened for 
 that purpose, with liberty to delegate this power to 
 others. But that no such election should be deemed 
 canonically valid until it shall have been confirmed 
 by the Bishops of the Province. 
 
 That the rules for the regulation of such elections 
 be made by the Synods of the several Provinces. 
 
88 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 Resolution IX. :— 
 
 Declaration of Submission to Regulations of Synods. 
 
 That all Bishops at their Consecration should be 
 required to make a written Declaration of adhesion 
 and submission to the regulations agreed upon by the 
 General Synod of the Anglican Communion ; and 
 that a form of such Declaration be prepared by the 
 Committee appointed by Resolution ITI. 
 
 No. VII. (See page 17.) 
 
 Formal “Address to the Faithful” from the Bishops 
 attending the Conference of 1867. 
 
 To the Faithful in Christ Jesus, the Priests and 
 Deacons, and the Lay Members of the Church 
 of Christ in Communion with the Anglican 
 Branch of the Church Catholic,— 
 
 We the undersigned Bishops, gathered under the 
 good providence of God for prayer and conference 
 at Lambeth, pray for you that ye may obtain grace, 
 mercy, and peace from God our Father, and from 
 the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour. 
 
 We give thanks to God, brethren beloved, for the 
 faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love towards 
 the saints, which hath abounded amongst you ; and 
 for the knowlege of Christ which through you hath 
 been spread abroad amongst the most vigorous races 
 of the earth; and with one mouth we make our 
 supplications to God, even the Father, that by the 
 power of the Holy Ghost He would strengthen us 
 with His might, to amend amongst us the things 
 
“Address to the Faithful,’ 1867. 89 
 
 which are amiss, to supply the things which are 
 lacking, and to reach forth unto higher measures of 
 love and zeal in worshipping Him, and in making 
 known His name; and we pray that in His good 
 time He would give back unto His whole Church 
 the Blessed gift of Unity in Truth. 
 
 And now we exhort you in love that ye keep 
 whole and undefiled the faith once delivered to the 
 saints, as ye have received it of the Lord Jesus. 
 We entreat you to watch and pray, and to strive 
 heartily with us against the frauds and subtleties 
 wherewith the faith hath been aforetime and is now 
 assailed. 
 
 We beseech you to hold fast, as the sure word 
 of God, all the canonical Scriptures of the Old and 
 New Testament; and that by diligent study of 
 these oracles of God, praying in the Holy Ghost, 
 ye seek to know more of the Lord Jesus Christ our 
 Saviour, very God and very Man, ever to be adored 
 and worshipped, whom they reveal unto us, and of 
 the will of God, which they declare. 
 
 Furthermore, we entreat you to guard yourselves 
 and yours against the growing superstitions and 
 additions with which in these latter days the truth 
 of God hath been overlaid; as otherwise, so espe- 
 cially by the pretension to universal sovereignty over 
 God’s heritage asserted for the See of Rome, and by 
 the practical exaltation of the Blessed Virgin Mary 
 as mediator in the place of her Divine Son, and by 
 the addressing of prayers to her as intercessor be- 
 tween God and man. Of such beware, we beseech 
 you, knowing that the jealous God giveth not His 
 honour to another. 
 
 Build yourselves up, therefore, beloved, in your 
 most holy faith; grow in grace and in the know- 
 ledge and love of Jesus Christ our Lord. Show 
 forth before all men by your faith, self-denial, purity, 
 and godly conversation, as well as by your labours 
 for the people amongst whom God hath so widely 
 
 G 
 
go Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 spread you, and by the setting forth of His Gospel 
 to the unbelievers and the heathen, that ye are 
 indeed the servants of Him who died for us to 
 reconcile His Father to us, and to bea sacrifice for 
 the sins of the whole world. 
 
 Brethren beloved, with one voice we warn you: 
 the time is short; the Lord cometh; watch and 
 be sober. Abide steadfast in the Communion of 
 Saints, wherein God hath granted you a place. Seek 
 in faith for oneness with Christ in the blessed Sacra- 
 ment of His body and blood. Hold fast the Creeds 
 and the pure worship and order, which of God’s 
 grace ye have inherited from the Primitive Church. 
 Beware of causing divisions contrary to the doctrine 
 ye have received. Pray and seek for unity amongst 
 yourselves, and amongst all the faithful in Christ 
 Jesus; and the good Lord make you perfect, and 
 keep your bodies, souls, and spirits, until the coming 
 of the Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 (Signed) 
 C. T. Cantuar. Thomas B. Morrell, Coadjutor 
 M. G. Armagh. Bishop of Edinburgh. 
 R. C. Dublin. 
 A. C. London. F. Montreal, Metropolitan of 
 C. R. Winton. Canada. 
 C. St. David’s G. A. New Zealand, Metro- 
 J. Lichfield. politan of New Zealand. 
 S. Oxon. R. Capetown, Metropolitan of 
 Thomas Vowler, St. Asaph. South Africa. 
 A. Llandaff. Aubrey G. Jamaica. 
 John Lincoln. T. Barbados. 
 W. K. Sarum. J. Bombay. 
 John T. Norwich. H. Nova Scotia. 
 J. C. Bangor. F. T. Labuan. 
 H. Worcester. H. Grahamstown. 
 
 Charles Wordsworth, D.C.L., H. J. C. Christchurch. 
 Bishop of St. Andrew’s, Dun- Mathew Perth. 
 
 keld, and Dumblane. Benj. Huron. 
 Thos. G. Suther, Bishop of W. W. Antigua. 
 Aberdeen and Orkney. E. H. Sierra Leone. 
 
 William S. Wilson, Bishop of T. N. Honolulu. 
 Glasgow and Galloway. J. T. Ontario. 
 
“Address to the Faithful,’ 1867. 
 
 J. W. Quebec. 
 
 W. 1. Gibraltar. 
 
 H. L. Dunedin. 
 
 Edward, Bishop Orange River 
 Free State. 
 
 A. N. Niagara. 
 
 William George Tozer, Mis- 
 sionary Bishop. 
 
 James B. Kelly, Coadjutor of 
 Newfoundland. 
 
 S. Angl. Hierosol. 
 
 John H. Hopkins, Presiding 
 Bishop of Pr. Ep. Church, 
 in the United States. 
 
 Chas. P. McIlvaine, Bishop of 
 Ohio. 
 
 Ὁ. J. Gloucester and Bristol. 
 
 Bry Ely. 
 
 William Chester. 
 
 T, L. Rochester. 
 
 Horace Sodor and Man. 
 
 Samuel Meath. 
 
 H. Kilmore. 
 
 Charles Limerick Ardfert and 
 Aghadoe. 
 
 Robert Eden, D.D., Bishop of 
 Moray, Ross, and Caithness, 
 Primus. 
 
 Alexander Ewing, Bishop of 
 Argyll and the Isles. 
 
 Manton Eastburn, Bishop of 
 Massachusetts. 
 
 J. Payne, Bishop of Cape 
 Palmas and parts adjacent. 
 H. J. Whitehouse, Bishop of 
 
 Illinois. 
 
 QL 
 
 Thomas Atkinson, Bishop of 
 North Carolina. 
 
 enya Wien ee, 
 Iowa. 
 
 Horatio Potter, Bishop of New 
 York. 
 
 Thomas M. Clark, Bishop of 
 Rhode Island. 
 
 Alexander Gregg, Bishop of 
 Texas. 
 
 W. H. Odenheimer, Bishop of 
 New Jersey. 
 
 G. T. Bedell, Assistant Bishop 
 of Ohio. 
 
 Henry C. Lay, Missionary 
 Bishop of Arkansas and the 
 Indian Territory. 
 
 Jos. C. Talbot, Assistant Bishop 
 of Indiana. 
 
 Richard H. Wilmer, Bishop of 
 Alabama. 
 
 Charles Todd Quintard, Bishop 
 of Tennessee. 
 
 John B. Kerfoot, Bishop of 
 Pittsburgh. 
 
 J. P. B. Wilmer, Bishop of 
 Louisiana. 
 
 C. M. Williams, Missionary 
 Bishop to China. 
 
 Bishop of 
 
 J. Chapman, Bishop. 
 
 George Smith, late Bishop of 
 Victoria (China). 
 
 David Anderson, late Bishop 
 of Rupert’s Land. 
 
 Edmund Hobhouse, Bishcp of 
 New Zealand. 
 
92 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 No. VIII. (See page 32.) 
 LATIN AND GREEK VERSIONS OF THE ADDRESS. 
 
 Archdeacon Wordsworth, afterwards Bishop of 
 Lincoln, translated the Episcopal Address into Latin 
 and Greek, as follows :— 
 
 EPISTOLA ENCYCEICE 
 
 EPISCOPORUM IN ANGLIA CONGREGATORUM DIEBUS 
 XXIV.-XXVII. MENSIS SEPTEMBRIS, ANNO SALUTIS 
 MDCCCLXVII. 
 
 Fidelibus in Christo Jesu, Presbyteris, Diaconis, et 
 Latcis, cum Anglicané parte Ecclesie Catholice 
 communicantibus, salutem inDomin 
 
 Nos, qui subscripsimus, Episcopi, benigna Dei 
 providentid communium orationum et consiliorum 
 causa unanimiter consociati, in Palatio Archiepiscopi 
 Cantuariensis Lambethano, obsecrationes pro vobis 
 facimus, ut gratiam, misericordiam et pacem con- 
 sequamini a Deo Patre Nostro, et a Nostro Salvatore 
 Domino Jesu Christo. 
 
 Gratias Deo agimus, fratres carissimi, propter fidem 
 in Domino Jesu Christo, et in sanctos dilectionem, 
 que abundavit in vobis; et propter Christi agnitionem, 
 que per vos inter valentissimas orbis universi nationes 
 dimanavit ; et uno ore supplicationes offerimus Deo 
 et Patri, ut potentia Spiritis Sancti virtute Sua nos 
 confortet, ut, que sint apud nos depravata, emendare, 
 et, que desint, supplere valeamus; et ut nosmet ipsos 
 ad sublimiores dilectionis et zeli mensuras erigamus 
 in Illo adorando, et in Nomine Ejus declarando ; 
 et enixé Eum apprecamur, ut, beneplacito Ipsius 
 tempore, universe Suze Ecclesie beatum restituat 
 donum Unitatis in Veritate. 
 

 
 Latin Version of “ Address” of 1867. 93 
 
 Jam vero, fratres dilecti, vos in caritate cohortamur, 
 ut fidem semel sanctis traditam integram atque 
 illibatam conservetis, quemadmodum eam accepistis 
 a Jesu Christo Domino Nostro. Obsecramus vos, 
 vigilate, orate, et nobiscum toto corde certate contra 
 fallacias atque argutias, quibus jampridem et in hoc 
 ipso tempore fides impugnatur. 
 
 Obtestamur vos, constanter tenete, utpote firmum 
 Dei Verbum, omnes Canonicas Scripturas Veteris et 
 Novi Testamenti; et diligenti meditatione scrutantes 
 heec Dei Oracula, orantes in Spiritu Sancto, queratis 
 abundantius cognoscere Dominum Jesum Christum, 
 Verum Deum et Verum Hominem, semper colendum 
 atque adorandum, Quem nobis illa revelant, et 
 Voluntatem Dei in eis patefactam. 
 
 Insuper vos obsecramus, vosmet ipsos et vestros 
 custodite contra indies gliscentes superstitiones 
 atque additamenta quibus in hisce novissimis tem- 
 poribus Veritas Dei incrustatur ; quum in aliis, tum 
 precipue per universi principatis affectationem 
 dominantis in clero Dei, qui Romane sedia nonnullis 
 asseritur ; et per exaltationem, re ipsa manifestam, 
 Beate Virginis Marie in locum Mediatoris, vice Filii 
 ipsius Divini, et per orationes ei oblatas tanquam 
 inter Deum et homines Interpellatoris munere 
 fungenti. Cavete a talibus, vos obtestamur, probé 
 scientes honorem Suum Ipsius non alii dare Deum 
 zelotem. 
 
 Superedificamini, igitur, fratres carissimi, sanc- 
 tissimee fidei vestrz; crescite in gratia et in agnitione 
 et dilectione Jesu Christi Domini Nostri. Manifestum 
 facite omnibus, per fidem, abstinentiam, puritatem et 
 sanctum conversationem, et per vestros labores pro 
 populis inter quos Deus vos tam laté propagavit, et 
 per Evangelii praedicationem incredulis atque ethnicis, 
 vos revera esse servos Illius Qui mortuus est pro 
 nobis ut Patrem nobis reconciliaret, et ut pro peccatis 
 totius mundi sacrificium Semet Ipsum offerret. 
 
 Fratres dilecti, una voce vos admonemus. Tempus 
 
94 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 breve est. Dominus venit. Vigilate, sobrii estote. 
 State firmi in communione sanctorum in qua vobis 
 Deus locum concessit. Studete fide coadunari 
 Christo in sanctissimo Corporis Ejus et Sanguinis 
 Sacramento. Firma tenete Symbola, et purum illum 
 Cultum atque Ordinem, quem gratia Dei a primitiva 
 Ecclesia hereditarium vos possidetis. Cavete ne dis- 
 cessiones faciatis preeter doctrinam quam accepistis. 
 Orate et sectamini Unitatem invicem et inter omnes 
 fideles in Jesu Christo. Et Dominus misericors 
 perficiat vos, et conservet integrum corpus, animam 
 et spiritum vestrum in Adventum Domini Nostri 
 Jesu Christi. Amen. 
 C. T.Cantuar. Archiepiscopus, et Metropolitanus, 
 et totius Angliz Primas. 
 M.G. Armagh. Archiepiscopus, et Metropolitanus, 
 et totius Hiberniz Primas. 
 R. C. Dublin. Archiepiscopus, et Metropolitanus, 
 et Hiberniz Primas. 
 A.C. London. Episcopus. 
 Robert Eden, Moray, Ross, Caithness. Episcopus, 
 et Scotice Ecclesia Primas, &c &c. 
 
 
 
 EIKYTKAIOS ἘΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ. 
 
 ᾿Επισκόπων ἐν ᾿Αγγλίᾳ συνηθροισμένων, ἐν ἡμέραίς 24—27 
 μηνὸς Σεπτεμβρίου, ἔτει 1807. 
 
 Τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ, Πρεσβυτέροις, 4ιακόνοις 
 καὶ λαϊκοῖς τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ ᾿Εκκλησίας, συγκοινωνοῖς 
 τοῦ ᾿Αγγλικοῦ μέρους τῆς Καθολικῆς ᾿Εκκλησίας, χαίρειν 
 ἐν Κυρίῳ. 
 
 Ἡμεῖς οἱ ὑπογράψαντες ᾿Επίσκοποι, τῇ ἀγαθῇ τοῦ 
 Θεοῦ προνοίᾳ ὁμοθυμαδὸν ἐ ἐπισυνηγμένοι,. κοινῶν προσευ- 
 χῶν ἕνεκα καὶ συμβουλεύσεως, ἐ ἐν τῷ τῆς Καντουαρίας 
 ᾿Δρχιεπισκόπου παλατίῳ “Ααμβηθανῷ, δεόμεθα ὑπὲρ 
 ὑμῶν ἵνα λάβητε χάριν, ἔλεος, καὶ εἰρήνην ἀπὸ Θεοῦ 
 
Greek Version of “Address” of 1867. 95 
 
 Ilatpos, καὶ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν καὶ Σωτῆρος ’Incov 
 “Χριστοῦ. 
 
 “Εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ Θεῷ, ἀδελφοὶ ἀγαπητοὶ, ὑπὲρ τῆς 
 πίστεως ὑμῶν ἐν Κυρίῳ ἡ ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστῷ, καὶ ὑπὲρ τῆς 
 ἀγάπης εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους, ἥτις ἐπερίσσευσεν ἐν ὑμῖν, καὶ 
 ὑπὲρ τῆς Χριστοῦ ἐ ἐπιγνώσεως, ἣ Ov ὑμῶν ἐξήχηται ἐ ἐν τοῖς 
 ἀνδρειοτάτοις τῆς οἰκουμένης ἔθνεσιν: καὶ ἑνὶ στόματι 
 δεήσεις ποιούμεθα πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν καὶ Πατέρα, ἵἿ ἵνα τῇ 
 τοῦ ᾿Αγίου Πνεύματος δυνάμει σθενώσῃ ἡμᾶς τῇ ἰσχῦι 
 Αὐτοῦ, εἰς τὸ ἐπανορθῶσαι τὰ παραπίπτοντα, καὶ τὰ 
 λείποντα ἀναπληρῶσαι, καὶ ἐπεκτείνεσθαι εἰς ὑψηλότερα 
 ἀγάπης μέτρα. καὶ ζήλου ἐ ἐν τῷ λατρεύειν αὐτῷ, καὶ ἐν τῷ 
 γνωρίζειν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ: καὶ προσευχόμεθα i ἵνα ἐν τῷ 
 δεκτῷ αὐτοῦ καιρῷ ἀποδῷ τῇ ὅλῃ «Αὐτοῦ ἐκκλησιᾳ τὸ 
 μακαριστὸν χάρισμα τῆς ἑνότητος ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ. 
 
 Καὶ νῦν, ἀδελφοὶ, παρακαλοῦμεν ὑμᾶς ἐν ἀγάπῃ, ἵνα 
 τηρῆτε ὁλόκληρον καὶ ἀδιάφθορον τὴν ἅπαξ παραδοθεῖσαν 
 τοῖς ἁγίοις πίστιν, καθὼς αὐτὴν ᾿παρειλήφατε ἀπὸ τοῦ 
 Κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ. ᾿Ερωτῶμεν ὑμᾶς ἵνα γρηγορῆτε καὶ 
 προσεύχησθε, καὶ ἀγωνίζησθε εὐκαρδίως μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν κατὰ 
 τῶν πανουργιῶν καὶ μεθοδειῶν, δι ὧν ἡ πίστις τὸ πρὶν 
 καὶ ἐν τῷ νῦν παρόντι χρόνῳ πορθεῖται. 
 
 Π αρακαλοῦμεν ὑ ὑμᾶς ἵνα ἀσφαλῶς KPATHTE, ὡς βέβαιον 
 Θεοῦ λόγον, πάσας τὰς κανονικὰς γραφὰς τῆς Παλαιᾶς 
 καὶ τῆς Καινῆς Διαθήκης, καὶ ἵνα, σπουδαίως ἐρευνῶντες 
 ταῦτα τὰ λόγια τοῦ Θεοῦ, ζητῆτε περισσοτέρως γνῶναι 
 τὸν Κύριον καὶ Σωτῆρα ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστὸν, Θεὸν ἀληθινὸν 
 καὶ ἄνθρωπον ἀληθινὸν, ᾧ πάντοτε προσκυνεῖν δεῖ καὶ 
 λατρεύειν, ὃν αἱ γραφαὶ ἡμῖν ἀνακαλύπτουσιν, καὶ τὸ 
 θέλημα τοῦ Θεοῦ, τὸ ἐν αὐταῖς φανερούμενον. 
 
 “Apa δὲ ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοὶ, διαμαρτυρόμεθα, φυλάξατε 
 ἑαυτοὺς καὶ τοὺς ὑμετέρους ἀπὸ τῶν ἀεὶ αὐξανομένων 
 ἐθελοθρησκειῶν καὶ ἐπιβληλημάτων, δι᾿ ὧν ἡ τοῦ Θεοῦ 
 ἀλήθεια ἐ ἐν τοῖς ὑστέροις τούτοις χρόνοις παραπέπλασται, 
 ἄλλως τε καὶ μάλιστα διὰ τῆς ἀντυποιήσεως μοναρχίας 
 οἰκουμενικῆς, κατακυριευούσης τοῦ κλήρου τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἧς 
 ἀξιοῦται παρὰ τισιν ἡ Ῥώμης καθέδρα: ἔτι δὲ διὰ τῆς 
 ἐνεργοῦ ὑπεράρσεως τῆς μακαρῖας Παρθένου Μαρίας εἰς 
 τόπον Μεσίτου, ἀντὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ αὐτῆς αὐτοθέου, καὶ διὰ 
 
οὔ Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 προσευχῶν αὐτῇ προσφερομένων ὡς ἐντυγχανούσῃ ὑπὲρ 
 ἀνθρώπων παρὰ εῷ. Προσέχετε ἀπὸ τοιούτων, 
 εἰδότες ὅ ὅτι τὴν τιμὴν ἑαυτοῦ οὐχ ἑτέρῳ δίδωσιν ὁ ζηλω- 
 τὴς Θεός. 
 
 ᾿Εποικοδομεῖσθε οὖν, ἀγαπητοὶ, ἐπὶ τῇ ἁγιωτάτῃ ὑμῶν 
 πίστει αὐξάνεσθε ἐν χάριτι καὶ γνώσει καὶ ἀγάπῃ τοῦ 
 Κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. Καταδείξατε ἐνώπιο: 
 πάντων, διὰ τῆς πίστεως, αὐταπαρνήσεως, ἁγνείας, καὶ 
 εὐσεβοῦς ἀναστροφῆς, ἅμα δὲ διὰ τῶν ὑμετέρων κόπων 
 ὑπὲρ τῶν λαῶν ἐν οἷς ὁ Θεὸς ὑμᾶς εἰς τοσοῦτον εὖρος 
 διαπεφύτευκε, καὶ διὰ τοῦ κηρύγματος τοῦ εὐαγγελίου 
 τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, OTL τῷ ὄντι ἐστὲ δοῦλοι 
 ᾿Εκείνου, ὃς ἀπέθανεν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, ἵνα καταλλάξῃ ἡμῖν 
 τὸν Πατέρα, καὶ ἵνα θυσίαν ᾿ΕἙαυτὸν ἀνενέγκῃ ὑπὲρ τῶν 
 ἁμαρτιῶν ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου. 
 
 ᾿Αδελφοὶ ἀγαπητοὶ, μιᾷ φωνῇ νουθετοῦμεν ὑμᾶς" ὁ 
 καιρὸς συνεσταλμένος" ὁ Κύριος ἔρχεται" “γρηγορεῖτε, 
 νήφετε. Σ τήκετε ἑδραῖοι ἐν τῇ κοινωνίᾳ τῶν ἁγίων, ἐν 
 ἢ Θεὸς ὑμῖν μερίδα , κεχάρισται" ζητεῖτε ἐν πίστει 
 ἑνοῦσθαι τῷ Χριστῷ ἐν τῷ εὐλογημένῳ μυστηρίῳ τοῦ 
 σώματος Αὐτοῦ καὶ αἵματος. Κατέχετε στερεῶς τὰ 
 Σύμβολα, καὶ τὴν καθαρὰν θρησκείαν καὶ τάξιν, ἣν 
 χάριτι Θεοῦ κεκληρονομήκατε ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆθεν ἐκκλη- 
 σίας. Βλέπετε μὴ διχοστασιας ποιῆτε κατὰ τῆς 
 διδαχῆς ἣ ἣν ἐμάθετε. ᾿Ερωτᾶτε καὶ διώκετε ἐνότητα ἐν 
 ἑαυτοῖς, καὶ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ" καὶ 
 ὁ χρηστὸς Κύριος τελειώσαι ὑμᾶς, καὶ τηρήσαι ὑμῶν τὸ 
 σῶμα, τὴν ψυχὴν, καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα, εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ 
 Κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ. ᾿Αμήν. 
 
 C. T. Cantuar. ἀρχιεπίσκοπος, καὶ μητροπολίτης, 
 καὶ πρῶτος ὅλης τῆς ᾿Αγγλίας. 
 
 M.G. ARMAGH. ἀρχιεπίσκοπος, καὶ μητροπολίτης, 
 καὶ πρῶτος ὅλης τῆς Ἱβερνίας. 
 
 R. Ο. Ῥυβιιν. ἀρχιεπίσκοπος, καὶ μητροπολίτης, 
 καὶ πρῶτος Ἱβερνίας. 
 
 A. C. Lonpon. ἐπίσκοπος. 
 
 C. R. WINTON. ἐπίσκοπος. 
 
 KT. 
 
97 
 
 No. IX. (Sce page 17.) 
 
 The Formal Resolutions of the Conference of 
 Sept. 24-27, 1867. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 “We, Bishops of Christ's Holy Catholic Church 
 in visible Communion with the United Church of 
 England and Ireland, professing the Faith delivered 
 to us in Holy Scripture, maintained by the Primitive 
 Church and by the Fathers of the English Reforma- 
 tion, now assembled, by the good providence of God, 
 at the Archiepiscopal Palace of Lambeth, under 
 the presidency of the Primate of all England, desire 
 —First, to give hearty thanks to Almighty God 
 for having thus brought us together for common 
 counsels and united worship ; Secondly, we desire to 
 express the deep sorrow with which we view the 
 divided condition of the flock of Christ throughout 
 the world, ardently longing for the fulfilment of the 
 prayer of our Lord, ‘ That 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;’ and, Lastly, we do here solemnly 
 record our conviction that unity will be most effec- 
 tually promoted by maintaining the Faith in its 
 purity and integrity—as taught in the Holy Scrip- 
 tures, held by the Primitive Church, summed up in 
 the Creeds, and affirmed by the undisputed General 
 Councils,—and by drawing each of us closer to our 
 common Lord, by giving ourselves to much prayer 
 and intercession, by the cultivation of a spirit of 
 charity, and a love of the Lord’s appearing.” 
 Resolution I—‘“ That it appears to us expedient, 
 for the purpose of maintaining brotherly intercom- 
 munion, that all cases of establishment of new Sees, 
 and appointment of new Bishops, be notified to all 
 
98 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 Archbishops and Metropolitans, and all presiding 
 Bishops of the Anglican Communion.” 
 
 Resolution I].—“ That, having regard to the con- 
 ditions under which intercommunion between mem- 
 bers of the Church passing from one distant Diocese 
 to another may be duly maintained, we hereby 
 declare it desirable — 
 
 “(1) That forms of Letters Commendatory on 
 behalf of Clergymen visiting other Dioceses be drawn 
 up and agreed upon ; 
 
 “(2) That a form of Letters Commendatory for lay 
 members of the Church be in like manner prepared ; 
 
 “(3) That his Grace the Lord Archbishop of 
 Canterbury be pleased to undertake the preparation 
 of such forms.” 
 
 Resolution III.—* That a Committee be appointed 
 to draw up a Pastoral Address to all members of the 
 Church of Christ in communion with the Anglican 
 Branch of the Church Catholic, to be agreed upon 
 by the assembled Bishops, and to be published as 
 soon as possible after the last sitting of the Con- 
 ference.” 
 
 Resolution IV.—‘ That, in the opinion of this 
 Conference, Unity in Faith and Discipline will be 
 best maintained among the several branches of 
 the Anglican Communion by due and canonical sub- 
 ordination of the Synods of the several branches to 
 the higher authority of a Synod or Synods above 
 them.” 
 
 Resolution V.—‘ That a Committee of seven 
 members (with power to add to their number, and 
 to obtain the assistance of men learned in Eccle- 
 siastical and Canon Law) be appointed to inquire 
 into and report upon the subject of the relations and 
 functions of such Synods, and that such Report be 
 forwarded to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of 
 Canterbury, with a request that, if possible, it may 
 be communicated to any adjourned meeting of this 
 Conference.” 
 
Formal Resolutions of Sept., 1867. 99 
 
 Resolution VI.—* That, in the judgment of the 
 Bishops now assembled, the whole Anglican Com- 
 munion is deeply injured by the present condition 
 of the Church in Natal; and that a Committee be 
 now appointed at this General Meeting to report 
 on the best mode by which the Church may be 
 delivered from the continuance of this scandal, and 
 the true faith maintained. That such Report be 
 forwarded to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of 
 Canterbury, with the request that he will be pleased 
 to transmit the same to all the Bishops of the 
 Anglican Communion, and to ask for their judgment 
 thereupon.” 
 
 Resolution VII.—* That we who are here present 
 do acquiesce in the Resolution of the Convocation 
 of Canterbury, passed on June 29, 1866, relating to 
 the Diocese of Natal, to wit— 
 
 ““Tf it be decided that a new Bishop should be 
 consecrated,—As to the proper steps to be taken 
 by the members of the Church in the province of 
 Natal for obtaining a new Bishop, it is the opinion 
 of this House,—/firs¢, that a formal instrument, de- 
 claratory of the doctrine and discipline of the Church 
 of South Africa should be prepared, which every 
 Bishop, Priest, and Deacon to be appointed to office 
 should be required to subscribe ; secondly, that a 
 godly and well-learned man should be chosen by 
 the clergy, with the assent of the lay-communicants 
 of the Church; and, ¢hzrdly, that he should be pre- 
 sented for consecration, either to the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury,—if the aforesaid instrument should de- 
 clare the doctrine and discipline of Christ as received 
 by the United Church of England and Ireland,—or 
 to the Bishops of the Church of South Africa, accord- 
 ing as hereafter may be judged to be most advisable 
 and convenient.’ ” 
 
 Resolution VIII.—“ That, in order to the binding 
 of the Churches of our Colonial Empire and the 
 Missionary Churches beyond them in the closest 
 
100 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 union with the Mother-Church, it is necessary that 
 they receive and maintain without alteration the 
 standards of Faith and Doctrine as now in use in 
 that Church. That, nevertheless, each Province 
 should have the right to make such adaptations and 
 additions to the services of the Church as its peculiar 
 circumstances may require. Pvovided, that no change 
 or addition be made inconsistent with the spirit and 
 principles of the Book of Common Prayer, and that 
 all such changes be liable to revision by any Synod 
 of the Anglican Communion in which the said 
 Province shall be represented.” 
 
 Resolution IX.—* That the Committee appointed 
 by Resolution V., with the addition of the names of 
 the Bishops of London, St. David’s, and Oxford, and 
 all the Colonial Bishops, be instructed to consider 
 the constitution of a voluntary spiritual tribunal, to 
 which questions of doctrine may be carried by appeal 
 from the tribunals for the exercise of discipline in 
 each Province of the Colonial Church, and that their 
 report be forwarded to his Grace the Lord Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury, who is requested to communi- 
 cate it to an adjourned meeting of this Conference.” 
 
 Resolution X.—* That the resolutions submitted 
 to this Conference relative to the discipline to be 
 exercised by Metropolitans, the Court of Metropo- 
 litans, the scheme for conducting the Election of 
 Bishops, when not otherwise provided for, the decla- 
 ration of submission to the Regulation of Synods, 
 and the question of what Legislation should be pro- 
 posed for the Colonial Churches, be referred to the 
 Committee specified in the preceding Resolution.” 
 
 Resolution XI.—“ That a special committee be 
 appointed to consider the Resolutions relative to the 
 notification of proposed Missionary Bishoprics, and 
 the Subordination of Missionaries.” 
 
 Resolution XII.— That the question of the bounds 
 of the jurisdiction of different Bishops, when any 
 question may have arisen in regard to them, the 
 
Correspondence with Dean Stanley. ΙΟΙ 
 
 question as to the obedience of Chaplains of the 
 United Church of England and Ireland on the Con- 
 tinent, and the Resolution submitted to the Confer- 
 ence relative to their return and admission into 
 Home Dioceses, be referred to the Committee spe- 
 cified in the preceding Resolution.” 
 
 Resolution XIII.—*“ That we desire to render our 
 hearty thanks to Almighty God for the blessings 
 vouchsafed to us in and by this Conference ; and we 
 desire to express our hope that this our meeting may 
 hereafter be followed by other meetings to be con- 
 ducted in the same spirit of brotherly love.” 
 
 
 
 No. X. (See page 18.) 
 
 Correspondence with the Dean of Westminster respect- 
 ing the use of Westminster Abbey in connection 
 with the Conference of 1867. 
 
 1. The Dean of Westminster to the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury. 
 
 DEANERY, WESTMINSTER, 
 September 21, 1867. 
 
 My DEAR LORD ARCHBISHOP, 
 
 I have been honoured with a communication from 
 your Grace, through the Bishop of London, request- 
 ing the use of Westminster Abbey for a special 
 service to be held for the English, American, and 
 Scottish Bishops now assembled in England, to be 
 held, as I understood, on September 28. 
 
 On all occasions it is my earnest desire to render 
 the Abbey and the precincts of Westminster available 
 for purposes of general utility and edification, and 
 this desire is increased when the request comes from 
 your Grace. 
 
 You will kindly allow me to state the difficulty 
 
102 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 which I feel in the present instance. I have endea- 
 voured to act in such matters on the rule of granting 
 the use of the Abbey to such purposes, and such 
 only, as are either co-extensive with the Church of 
 England, or have a definite object of usefulness or 
 charity, apart from party or polemical considerations. 
 
 Your Grace will, I am sure, see that, however 
 much your Grace’s intentions would have brought 
 the proposed Conference at Lambeth within this 
 sphere, in fact, it can hardly be so considered. The 
 absence of the Primate and the larger part of the 
 Bishops of the Northern Province—not to speak of 
 the Bishops of India and Australia, and of other 
 important Colonial or Missionary Sees—must, even 
 irrespectively of other indications, cause it to present a 
 partial aspect of the English Church; whilst the 
 appearance of other prelates not belonging to our 
 Church, places it on a different footing from the 
 institutions which are confined to the Church of 
 England. And, further, the absence of any fixed 
 information as to the objects to be discussed and 
 promoted by the Conference, leaves me, in common 
 with all who stand outside, in uncertainty as to what 
 would be the proposals or measures which would 
 receive, by implication, the sanction given by the 
 use of the Abbey—a sanction which, in the case of a 
 church so venerable and national in its character, 
 ought, I conceive, to be lent only to public objects of 
 well-defined or acknowledged beneficence. 
 
 These are the grounds why I hesitate to take upon 
 myself the responsibility suggested. But, when 
 stating this difficulty, I feel so strongly the value of 
 the friendly intercourse to promote which has been 
 the chief intention of your Grace, and of, I doubt 
 not, many of the prelates who have concurred in 
 this Conference; and I am so desirous that the 
 Abbey should be made to minister to the edification 
 of large sections of our Church, even when not re- 
 presenting the whole, and of those outside our 
 
Correspondence with Dean Stanley. 103 
 
 own immediate pale (especially our brethren from 
 America), who are willing to co-operate with us in 
 all things lawful and good—that I would gladly, if 
 possible, join in advancing such a purpose. 
 
 It has occurred to me, that, as the service indicated 
 by your Grace is to be held after the Conference is 
 finished, the Abbey might be granted for it, without 
 any relation to the Conference itself; but either for 
 some specific object, such as the Society for the 
 Propagation of the Gospel, or for other Home or 
 Foreign Missions of unquestioned importance, or 
 else (in those general terms which, as I apprehend, 
 express your Grace’s wishes) for the promotion of 
 brotherly goodwill and mutual edification amongst 
 all members of the Anglican Communion. 
 
 Under these circumstances, and on this under- 
 standing, which I should wish to be made as public 
 as the announcement of the service itself, 1 should 
 have great pleasure in the permitting the use of the 
 Abbey for such a service, to be held in the morning 
 or afternoon of September 28th (as may be deemed 
 most convenient), and I trust that, if this meets your 
 Grace’s wishes, your Grace will undertake to preach 
 on the occasion. 
 
 I beg to remain, my dear Lord Archbishop, 
 Yours faithfully and respectfully, 
 A. P. STANLEY. 
 
 2. The Archbishop of Canterbury to the Dean of 
 Westininster. 
 
 ADDINGTON Park, CRroypon, 
 September 25, 1867. 
 
 MY DEAR DEAN, 
 
 I laid your note before the Conference yesterday, 
 but it will probably not close its sittings on Friday 
 evening, as there is reason to believe that committees 
 
104 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 will be appointed to report at a future date. Under 
 these circumstances, it is obvious, from the tenor of 
 your letter, that the Abbey is not open to us. I 
 regret, therefore, that we shall not be able to avail 
 ourselves of your kind offer, under the specified 
 conditions. 
 
 Believe me, my dear Dean, 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 C.. 1. \CAN@rUAR: 
 
 3. The Dean of Westminster to the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury. 
 
 DEANERY, WESTMINSTER, 
 Seplember 27, 1867. 
 
 My DEAR LORD ARCHBISHOP, 
 
 I have to acknowledge, with thanks, your Grace’s 
 letter of the 25th, and to express my regret that 
 your Grace and the Bishops assembled should have 
 felt themselves precluded from accepting my proposal 
 —in reply to your Grace’s request—to meet in the 
 Abbey for “some specific object of charity or useful- 
 ness,’ or for the purpose of promoting brotherly 
 goodwill and mutual edification amongst all members 
 of the Anglican Communion. 
 
 I beg, however, that you will assure the prelates 
 assembled, especially those of our American brethren, 
 for whose sake, as I stated in my former letter, I 
 especially proposed to grant the use of the Abbey as 
 before mentioned; that if they, or any of them 
 should wish to attend the services in the Abbey on 
 Sunday next (at 10 a.m. or at 3 p.m.) every accom- 
 modation and welcome shall be afforded. 
 
 I beg to remain, my dear Lord Archbishop, 
 
 Yours faithfully and respectfully, 
 A. P. STANIEENS 
 
Correspondence with Dean Stanley. 105 
 
 4. The Dean of Westminster to the Bishop of Vermont, 
 Presiding Bishop of the American Church. 
 
 DEANERY, WESTMINSTER, 
 October τ, 1867. 
 
 My DEAR LorD BISHOP, 
 
 Understanding that there has been some mis- 
 apprehension on the part of the American bishops 
 as to their invitation to a service in Westminster 
 Abbey, I beg that you will do me the favour of 
 communicating the following statement, in as public 
 a way as you may think fit, to your Episcopal 
 brethren. 
 
 It was impossible for me, as guardian of a building 
 like the Abbey, which belongs to the whole Church 
 and people of England, to take the responsibility of 
 giving its sanction to a meeting which included only 
 a portion of the English bishops, and of which the 
 objects were undefined, the issues unknown, and the 
 discussions secret. But I was so anxious to show 
 every courtesy to the bishops from the United 
 States, that, chiefly on their own account, as I par- 
 ticularly specified in my letter to the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury, I so far deviated from the usual rules 
 which guide the services in the Abbey as to propose 
 the use of the Abbey for a service which should 
 gather them there, either for some specific object of 
 usefulness or charity or for the general promotion of 
 goodwill and edification amongst all members of the 
 Anglican Communion. I was encouraged the more 
 to make this offer by the pledge that I had received 
 that no questions exciting party differences should 
 be introduced into the meetings, and I was therefore 
 in hopes that his Grace would have felt himself able 
 to accept a proposal which I had reason to believe 
 would be gratifying to our American brethren. 
 
 The proposal was, however, declined ; and I must 
 therefore, through you, beg to express my regret that 
 such an opportunity was lost of cultivating those 
 
 H 
 
106 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 feelings of amity between the two countries which 
 are at all times so welcome. 
 
 The circumstances of the severe domestic affliction 
 which has recently befallen us, whilst they prevented 
 me from showing that hospitality which I should 
 otherwise have offered to you, make me doubly 
 anxious that, in a country from which we have 
 received expressions of such sincere sympathy, there 
 should be no misunderstanding as to the cordial 
 desire that I entertain to welcome Americans on all 
 occasions to our joint national sanctuary. 
 
 I trust that on some future occasion I may take 
 the opportunity of renewing personally my assurance 
 of the pleasure which it will ever give me to receive 
 the citizens of a nation in which we must always feel 
 peculiar interest. 
 
 I beg to remain, 
 
 Yours faithfully, 
 A. P. STANLEY. 
 
 No. XI. (See page 18.) 
 
 Sermon of Bishop Fulford, of Montreal, preached 
 in Lambeth Parish Church on September 28, 
 1867. 
 
 Bishop Fulford’s sermon was not published, but the following 
 compressed report of it appeared in the Guardian of October 
 2, 1867, p. 1058 :-— 
 
 “The Bishop of Montreal selected as his text, 
 Psalm iv. 6. ‘There be many that say, who will 
 shew us any good?’ The Bishop observed : 
 
 “Tf no public notice had been given of the fact, 
 it might be perceived from the presence of so many 
 of those Bishops who had been attending the meeting 
 lately held in Lambeth Palace, that there was a 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Montreat. 107 
 
 special connection of the service of the day with 
 the meeting. The business before the Conference 
 was not entirely closed, because there were some 
 committees appointed to carry out certain details and 
 principles, especially in connection with the Colonial 
 Church, and they would have to make their report 
 at an adjourned meeting. But that, however, which 
 concerned the whole community had been discussed, 
 and a very important and solemn pastoral letter had 
 been adopted, and signed unanimously by every 
 member of the conference, to be sent out to the 
 whole world. It was thought fitting that, as the 
 Bishops had met in such large numbers, they should 
 close their conference with a special service, and the 
 celebration of the Holy Communion. He (the 
 Bishop of Montreal) had undertaken to occupy the 
 office on that occasion, at the request of the Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury, at very short notice, but he 
 should endeavour to discharge the duty imposed 
 upon him to the best of his ability. No one felt 
 more fully than he did the importance of the meet- 
 ing they had held, both as to what they had done 
 and said, and what they had left undone and unsaid. 
 And no one was more deeply sensible than himself 
 of how much they owed to the Christian courage 
 and large-heartedness which had enabled the Arch- 
 bishop to make this great venture, and of his gentle, 
 manly conduct and courtesy, in presiding over so 
 large a gathering, and in bringing it to so successful an 
 issue. How many persons had said, ‘Who will shew 
 us any good?’ But, notwithstanding the sneers of 
 the scornful, between seventy and eighty Bishops, 
 holding Office in the Church of Christ, and re- 
 presenting the Anglican branch (in former years 
 represented as confined to the British Isles), had 
 come together at the Archbishop’s invitation, so that 
 every portion of the Church in every quarter of the 
 globe had one representative or many reprcsentatives 
 present. Some had come 10,000 or 12,000 miles to 
 H 2 
 
108 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 be present, and if they had done nothing more than 
 give physical testimony to their oneness of faith and 
 resolve upon that solemn pastoral, they would have 
 done more for the unity of the Church than had been 
 accomplished for the last 100 years. The Conference, 
 however, had not confined its attention to that im- 
 portant document ; many other matters had received 
 earnest attention ; and in the interchange of thought 
 from minds of such different constitution, trained in 
 so many different schools, moulded by such varying 
 circumstances, living in such diverse positions, and 
 influenced by such various surroundings, they had 
 learnt to know and to love each other: the lesson has 
 been of incalculable importance, and he thanked 
 God for the great benefit which had thus been 
 conferred upon all of them. Invitations to attend 
 had been issued to 144 Bishops ; many were utterly 
 unable to accept it, and only a very small portion of 
 them were not anxious to attend. All of these 
 bishoprics had derived their existence and succession 
 from the See of Canterbury, and between sixty and 
 seventy were the result of the progress of the last few 
 years. As regarded Canada, he had only to look 
 back for sixteen years, when that province certainly 
 possessed Bishops and a small number of mission- 
 aries, but the Church had no system of united action, 
 and no concentrated method of order and government. 
 But there was a meeting held at Quebec, such as the 
 present gathering had been, and from it had sprung 
 a regular system of synodical action, which was now 
 in full vigour and power, and regularly constituted, 
 and which progressed harmoniously, so that there 
 was every reason to consider the Church in Canada 
 as an established branch of Christ’s holy Catholic 
 Church. Then, again, in the United States, which 
 had been so ably and so worthily represented at this 
 Conference, he could but remember with feelings of 
 gratitude the last General Convention of the Epis- 
 copal Church which he was privileged to attend. It 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Montreal. 109 
 
 was gathered together immediately after the country 
 had been torn by internal dissensions, and when the 
 whole social system had been rent by political dis- 
 turbances. It was feared that the South would not 
 again join the North; that political differences and 
 party jealousy would prevent reunion; but God's 
 providence ruled otherwise, and it was a most im- 
 posing sight, and one he could never forget, when 
 the Bishops of the South took their accustomed 
 places as before that unhappy war ;—yes, that sight 
 caused tears to flow down many a manly cheek, and 
 when the aged prelates who presided, called aloud for 
 a thanksgiving, their voices rose together even as one, 
 shouting Gloria in excelsis Deo. And so with our 
 own branch of the Church at home, it may have its 
 trials and difficulties, but it was becoming day by 
 day more instinct with energy and zeal. What ever 
 threatening aspects might hover over her, she was 
 yet a great and unspeakable blessing to the nation; 
 she was great through herself and through her 
 children ; but she would be the greatest of all if she 
 remained true to her noble mission and faithful to 
 her Lord, the great Head of the Church ; and thus he 
 trusted that both in its present and future influences, 
 the Conference just concluded might be fraught 
 with increasing blessings to her and to her faithful 
 children.” 
 
110 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 No. XII. (See page 19.) 
 
 REPORTS OF COMMITTEES APPOINTED 
 BY THE CONFERENCE OF 1867. 
 
 A.—Report of the Committee appointed under Re- 
 solution V., by the Conference of Bishops of the 
 Anglican Communion, held at Lambeth Palace, 
 September 24-27th, 18671 
 
 The subject of the functions and relations of the 
 several Synods, on which the Committee is appointed 
 to report, appears to them to be necessarily connected 
 with questions as to the constitution of these bodies, 
 The following Report, therefore, embraces the whole 
 subject of Synods. In discussing it, your Committee 
 deems it necessary to deal with the question in the 
 abstract, without reference to existing laws and 
 usages in the several branches of the Anglican Com- 
 munion, and to lay down general principles, the 
 adoption or application of which must depend on 
 circumstances, such, for example, as the laws which 
 any Church may have inherited or already esta- 
 blished. 
 
 
 
 1 Resolution IV.—* That, in the opinion of this Conference, 
 Unity in Faith and Discipline will be best maintained among 
 the several branches of the Anglican Communion by due and 
 canonical subordination of the Synods of the several branches 
 to the higher authority of a Synod or Synods above them.” 
 
 Resolution V.—“ That a Committee of seven members (with 
 power to add to their number, and to obtain the assistance of 
 men learned in Ecclesiastical and Canon Law) be appointed to 
 inquire into and report upon the subject of the relations and 
 functions of such Synods, and that such Report be forwarded 
 to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, with a request 
 that, if possible, it may be communicated to any adjourned 
 meeting of this Conference.” 
 
Reports of Committees, 1867. III 
 
 I.—In the organisation of Synodal order for the 
 government of the Church, the Diocesan Synod 
 appears to be the primary and simplest form of such 
 organisation. 
 
 By the Diocesan Synod the co-operation of all 
 members of the body is obtained in Church action ; 
 and that acceptance of Church rules is secured, 
 which, in the absence of other law, usage, or enact- 
 ment, gives to these rules the force of laws “ binding 
 on those who, expressly or by implication, have 
 consented to them.” ἢ 
 
 For this reason, wherever the Church is not 
 established by law, it is, in the judgment of your 
 Committee, essential to order and good government 
 that the Diocese should be organised by a Synod. 
 
 Your Committee consider that it is not at variance 
 with the ancient principles of the Church, that both 
 Clergy and Laity should attend the Diocesan Synod, 
 and that it is expedient that the Synod should con- 
 sist of the Bishop and Clergy of the Diocese, with 
 Representatives of the Laity. 
 
 The constitution of the Diocesan Synod may be 
 determined either by rules for that branch of the 
 Church established by the Synod of the Province, or 
 by general consent in the Diocese itself, its rules 
 being sanctioned afterwards by the Provincial Synod 
 
 Your Committee, however, recommend that the 
 following general rules should be adopted ; viz., that 
 the Bishop, Clergy, and Laity should sit together, 
 the Bishop presiding ; that votes should be taken by 
 orders, whenever demanded ; and that the concurrent 
 assent of Bishop, Clergy, and Laity should be 
 necessary to the validity of all acts of the Synod. 
 
 They consider that the Clerical members of the 
 Synod should be those Clergy who are recognized 
 by the Bishop, according to the rules of the Church 
 
 
 
 1 Judgment of Judicial Committee of Privy Council in case 
 of Long v. Bishop of Capetown. 1 Moore, P.C.C., N.S., 461. 
 
112 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 in that Diocese, as being under his jurisdiction. 
 Whether in large Dioceses, when the Clergy are very 
 numerous, they might appear by representation, is a 
 difficult question, and one on which your Committee 
 are not prepared to express an opinion. 
 
 The Lay Representatives in the Synod ought, in 
 the judgment of your Committee, to be Male Com- 
 municants of at least one year’s standing in the 
 Diocese, and of the full age of twenty-one. It should 
 be required that the electors should be Members 
 of the Church in that Diocese, and belong to the 
 parish in which they claim to vote. It appears 
 desirable that the regular meetings of the Synod 
 should be fixed and periodical; but that the right 
 of convening special meetings whenever they may 
 be required should be reserved to the Bishop. 
 
 The office of the Diocesan Synod is, generally, to 
 make regulations, not repugnant to those of higher 
 Synods, for the order and good government of the 
 Church within the Diocese, and to promulgate the 
 decisions of the Provincial Synod. 
 
 II.—The Provincial Synod—or, as it is called in 
 New Zealand, the General Synod, and in the United 
 States the General Convention—is formed, whenever 
 it does not exist already by law and usage, through 
 the voluntary association of Dioceses for united 
 legislation and common action. The Provincial 
 Synod not only provides a method for securing unity 
 amongst the Dioceses which are thus associated, but 
 also forms the link between these Dioceses and other 
 Churches of the Anglican Communion. 
 
 Without questioning the right of the Bishops of any 
 Province to meet in Synod by themselves, and without 
 affirming that the presence of others is essential to a 
 Provincial Synod, your Committee recommend that, 
 whenever no law or usage to the contrary already 
 exists, it should consist of the Bishops of the Province, 
 and of Representatives both of the Clergy and of the 
 Laity in each Diocese. 
 
Reports of Committees, 1867. 113 
 
 Your Committee need not define the method in 
 which a Provincial Synod may be first constituted, 
 but they assume that its constitution and rules will be 
 determined by the concurrence of the several Dioceses 
 duly represented. 
 
 Your Committee consider that it must be left to 
 each Province to decide whether, and under what 
 circumstances, the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity in a 
 Provincial Synod should sit and discuss questions in 
 the same chamber or separately ; but, in the judg- 
 ment of the Committee, the votes should in either 
 case be taken by orders ; and the concurrent assent 
 of Bishops, Clergy,and Laity should be necessary for 
 any legislative action, wherever the Clergy and Laity 
 form part of the constitution of a Provincial Synod ; 
 such powers and functions not involving legislation 
 being reserved as belong to the Bishops by virtue of 
 their office. 
 
 The number, qualification, and mode of election of 
 the Clerical and Lay Representatives from each 
 Diocese must be determined by the Synods in the 
 several Provinces. 
 
 It is the office of the Provincial Synod, generally, 
 to exercise, within the limits of the Province, powers 
 in regard to Provincial questions similar to those 
 which the Diocesan Synod exercises, within the 
 Diocese, in regard to Diocesan questions. 
 
 As to the relation between these two Synods, your 
 Committee are of opinion that the Diocese is bound 
 to accept positive enactments of a Provincial Synod 
 in which it is duly represented, and that no Diocesan 
 regulations have force, if contrary to the decisions of 
 a higher Synod ; but that, in order to prevent any 
 collision or misunderstanding, the spheres of action 
 of the several Synods should be defined on the follow- 
 ing principle, viz., That the Provincial Synod should 
 deal with questions of common interest to the whole 
 Province, and with those which affect the communion 
 of the Dioceses with one another and with the rest of 
 
114 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 the Church ; whilst the Diocesan Synod should be 
 left free to dispose of matters of local interest, and to 
 manage the affairs of the Diocese. 
 
 From this principle your Committee draws the 
 following conclusions :— 
 
 I. All alterations in the Services of the Church, 
 required by circumstances in the Province, should be 
 made or authorized by the Provincial Synod, and not 
 merely by the Diocesan. 
 
 2. The rule of discipline for the Clergy of the 
 Province should be framed by the Provincial Synod. 
 
 3. Rules for the trial of Clergy should be made by 
 the Provincial Synod ; but, in default of such action 
 on the part of that Synod, the Diocesan Synod should 
 establish provisional rules for this purpose. The 
 Provincial Tribunal of Appeal should be established 
 by the Provincial Synod. 
 
 4. In questions relating to Patronage, the tenure 
 of Church property, Parochial divisions, arrange- 
 ments, officers, &c., there should be joint action of 
 the Diocese and the Province; the former making 
 such regulations as may be best suited to develop 
 local resources, the latter providing against the ad- 
 mission of any principle inexpedient for the common 
 interests of the Church. 
 
 5. The erection of a new Diocese within the limits 
 of an existing Diocese should proceed by general 
 rules established by the Provincial Synod. 
 
 6. The question of the election of a Bishop it is 
 unnecessary here to consider, as it is submitted to 
 another Committee. 
 
 IlIl_—The question of a higher Synod of the 
 Anglican Communion, and of the relation which the 
 inferior Synods should hold towards it, whenever it 
 might assemble, is one, your Committee are aware, 
 of much greater difficulty than any of those which 
 have been previously considered. 
 
 The fact, however, that a Conference of Bishops 
 of the whole Anglican Communion has already met 
 
Reports of Committees, 1867." Des 
 
 together, is of itself an indication of the need which 
 is generally felt of united counsel in a sphere more 
 extensive than that of a Provincial Synod. Indeed, 
 the Resolutions under which this Committee was 
 appointed contemplate the possibility at least of 
 some Synod being established superior to the Pro- 
 vincial. It is also implied in Resolution VIII. of 
 this Conference, that some such Assembly may be 
 required, in order to preserve Colonial and Missionary 
 Churches in close union with the Church of England, 
 since it is provided that all changes in the Services 
 of the Church made by one of their Provincial Synods 
 should “be liable to revision by any Synod of the 
 Anglican Communion in which the said Province 
 should be represented.” 
 
 The objections that may be urged against the 
 united action of Churches which are more or less free 
 to act independently, and other Churches whose 
 constitution is fixed, not only by ancient ecclesiastical 
 laws and usages, but by the law of the State, are 
 obvious; but it appears to your Committee that the 
 action of this Conference has proved that the diffi- 
 culties which are anticipated are not insuperable, and 
 suggests the method by which they may be overcome. 
 Under present circumstances, indeed, no Assembly 
 that might be convened would be competent to enact 
 canons of binding ecclesiastical authority on these 
 different bodies, or to frame definitions of faith which 
 it would be obligatory on the Churches of the 
 Anglican Communion to accept. It would be neces- 
 sary, therefore, in the judgment of your Committee, 
 to avoid all terms respecting this Assembly that 
 might imply authority of this nature, and to call it 
 a Congress, if even the term Council should be con- 
 sidered open to objection. Its decisions could only 
 possess the authority which might be derived from 
 the moral weight of such united counsels and judg- 
 ments, and from the voluntary acceptance of its con- 
 clusions by any of the Churches there represented. 
 
116 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 Your Committee consider that his Grace the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, as occupying the See 
 from which the Colonial and American Churches 
 derive their succession, should be the convener of 
 such an Assembly. That it should differ from the 
 present Conference in being attended by both Clerical 
 and Lay Representatives of the several Churches, 
 as consultees and advisers, each Diocese being 
 allowed to send, besides its Bishop, a presbyter and 
 a lay member of the Church, if they should desire 
 to be thus represented ; and further, in the proceed- 
 ings being more formal and, in part at least, public. 
 The question when for the first time, and at what 
 periods, this Congress or Council should be called, 
 your Committee deem it more respectful to leave for 
 the consideration of his Grace the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury and of the present Conference. 
 
 G. A. NEW ZEALAND, Chairman. 
 H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary. 
 
Reports of Committees, 1867. 117 
 
 B.— Report of the Committee appointed under Resolu- 
 tion IX. of the Lambeth Conference, on the Consti- 
 tution of a voluntary spiritual Tribunal, to which 
 questions of Doctrine may be carried by Appeal 
 Jrom the Tribunals for the exercise of discipline in 
 each Province of the Colonial Church} 
 
 After full consideration of objections that have 
 been urged against the establishment of any such 
 Tribunal as that contemplated by this Resolution, 
 your Committee are of opinion that these objections 
 are not sufficient to outweigh the arguments in its 
 favour, and that most of the objections will be found 
 inapplicable to the particular form of Tribunal which 
 the Committee recommend. 
 
 Your Committee consider that such a Tribunal is 
 required in order to prevent the dissatisfaction which 
 would arise if important questions were finally decided 
 by those Colonial Churches, the circumstances of 
 which render it impossible for them to form a suffi- 
 cient Tribunal of last resort. 
 
 It would also tend to secure unity in matters of 
 Faith, and uniformity in matters of Discipline, where 
 Doctrine may be involved. 
 
 For these reasons your Committee recommend that 
 such a Tribunal be established ; and from the desire 
 
 ' Resolution IX.—“That the Committee appointed by 
 Resolution V., with the addition of the names of the Bishops of 
 London, St. David’s, and Oxford, and all the Colonial Bishops, 
 be instructed to consider the constitution of a voluntary spiri- 
 tual Tribunal, to which questions of doctrine may be carried 
 by appeal from the Tribunals for the exercise of discipline in 
 each Province of the Colonial Church, and that their report be 
 forwarded to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 who is requested to communicate it to an adjourned meeting 
 of this Conference.” 
 
118 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 expressed by several branches of the Colonial Church, 
 that this should be one of the results of this Confer- 
 ence, they believe that it will be generally accepted 
 by those for whose benefit it is designed. 
 
 At the same time, they are sensible of the great 
 difficulty of forming such a Tribunal, and of the 
 necessity of proceeding with caution, lest it should 
 interfere with the liberties of the Colonial Churches, 
 or should have any appearance of collision with the 
 Courts established by law, either here or in Her 
 Majesty’s foreign possessions. 
 
 Your Committee now proceed to lay before the 
 Conference their conclusions as to the functions and 
 constitution of the proposed Tribunal. 
 
 They are of opinion that it should not take cogni- 
 zance of any case which shall not have been referred 
 to it by some branch of the Anglican Communion 
 which has consented to its constitution. Thus it 
 would not interfere either with those Churches in 
 which provision is made by the State for the exercise 
 of discipline, or with the liberty and rights of eccle- 
 siastical Provinces. These would be free to accept 
 or to decline the appeal thus offered to them, and to 
 withdraw afterwards their acceptance of the Tribunal, 
 if they should so desire. 
 
 Your Committee consider that this Tribunal of 
 Appeal should take into consideration all the facts of 
 the case as sent up to it in writing from the inferior 
 Tribunal; that the Appeal, however, should not be 
 on the facts, but only on the points of Doctrine and 
 Discipline involved in them. 
 
 That during the Appeal the sentence of the Pro- 
 vincial Tribunal should continue in force, so far as it 
 
 ‘ The decisions of such a Tribunal would be of the same 
 nature as those of ‘‘arbitrators, whose jurisdiction rests 
 entirely upon the agreement of the parties.” (Judgment of 
 Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in case of Long v. 
 Bishop of Capetown, 1 Moore, P. C. C., N.S. 462.) 
 
Reports of Committees, 1867. 119 
 
 affects the present exercise of spiritual functions by 
 the accused. 
 
 That the judgments of the Tribunal of Appeal 
 should be delivered in the form of a decision that the 
 teaching or practice of the accused party is (or is 
 not) permissible. 
 
 That the Tribunal should use as the standards of 
 faith and doctrine by which its decisions shall be 
 governed, those which are now in use in the United 
 Church of England and Ireland; and that as to all 
 matters not defined in such formularies, the judg- 
 ments should be framed on any conclusions which 
 shall be hereafter agreed to at any Council or 
 Congress of the whole Anglican Communion: 
 Provided always, that no such conclusion be contra- 
 dictory to any now existing standard or formulary of 
 the Church of England; and provided further, that 
 the Synod of that Province of the Church from which 
 the Appeal shall be sent, shall not have refused to 
 accept such conclusion. 
 
 Your Committee further recommend, subject to 
 any regulations that may be made at any future 
 Conference of the Anglican Communion :— 
 
 That, as it is a Tribunal for decisions in matters 
 of faith, Archbishops and Bishops only should be 
 judges, his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury being the President. 
 
 That each Province in the Colonial Church should 
 have the right of electing two members of the 
 Tribunal ; and that all the Dioceses of the Colonial 
 Church not associated into Provinces should collec- 
 tively have the right of electing two. That each 
 Province of the United Church of England and 
 Ireland should be requested to elect two members, 
 but that the Province of Canterbury should elect 
 three, in the event of his Grace the Archbishop not 
 acting as President. That the Episcopal Church in 
 Scotland should have the right of electing two. And 
 (as it appears probable that the Protestant Episcopal 
 
120 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 Church in the United States would avail itself of 
 such a Tribunal) that Church should have the right 
 of electing five members. 
 
 In the judgment of the Committee, the Bishops of 
 the several Churches should elect those who shall 
 represent them on this Tribunal. 
 
 That, so soon after January 1, 1869, as any ten 
 names shall have been forwarded to the Archbishop 
 of Canterbury as having been elected, the Tribunal 
 should be deemed to be constituted. 
 
 That of the members thus elected, seven should 
 form a quorum for the transaction of business, but a 
 smaller number should have power to adjourn from 
 time to time. 
 
 That the members of the Tribunal should con- 
 tinue in office, unless their seat be vacated by death, 
 resignation, or removal by the electing body; but 
 that, in the event of any Bishop of the Colonial or 
 American Church notifying to the electing body that 
 he is unable or declines to attend at any sitting of 
 the Tribunal to which he may be summoned, it 
 should be lawful for the body by which he was 
 elected to appoint, instead of him, any Bishop of the 
 Anglican Communion other than one of those 
 already elected. 
 
 That, in the event of the Archbishop of Canter- 
 
 bury for the time being declining or being unable to 
 act as President, it should be lawful for his Grace, 
 if he should see fit, to nominate any other member 
 of the Tribunal to act as President in his room; and 
 in the event of no such appointment being made by 
 him, that it should be lawful for the Tribunal at 
 its first meeting to elect one of its members as 
 President. 
 ' That the summons for the sitting of the Tribunal 
 should be issued within thirty days from the time of 
 the notice of Appeal being delivered by the agent of 
 the Appellant to the proper officer of the Tribunal. 
 
 That the action of the Tribunal should not be 
 
Reports of Committees, 1867. 151 
 
 impeded by the absence from it of any of those 
 who are at liberty to sit in it, provided there be a 
 quorum. 
 
 That, before the assembling of the Tribunal for 
 the hearing of an Appeal, the President should 
 nominate as Assessors three theologians and three 
 persons learned in the law, who should be present 
 at the trial, and should answer any questions as to 
 theological learning and law put to them by the 
 Tribunal through its President in writing, and 
 who should be at liberty to tender in writing to the 
 Tribunal through its President their opinion upon 
 any point of theological learning or law which 
 may arise, and that the Tribunal should be bound 
 to consider such opinion before coming to its 
 decision. 
 
 That parties before the Tribunal may be repre- 
 sented by any counsel they may select, whether 
 theologians or persons learned in the law. 
 
 That the rules of procedure of the said Tribunal, 
 except as here provided for, should, as far as possible, 
 be those of the higher Courts of Law, and that any 
 necessary alterations in such rules should be made 
 by the Tribunal itself. 
 
 That no sentence should be passed without the 
 assent thereto of two-thirds of the Judges present 
 during the trial. 
 
 That, at the time of delivering judgment, each 
 member of the Tribunal who has been present 
 during the trial should give his decision in writing, 
 and may read, or cause to be read, openly in Court 
 his decision, and the reasons for it; and that the 
 judgment of the prescribed majority should be the 
 judgment of the Tribunal. 
 
 F. MONTREAL, Chairman. 
 H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary. 
 
122 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 C.—On the Courts of Metropolitans, and the Trial 
 of a Bishop or Metropolitan, 
 
 I. Your Committee consider that the constitution 
 of the Provincial Tribunal for Appeals from the 
 decisions of Diocesan Tribunals should be deter- 
 mined, whenever it is not fixed by law, by the 
 Synod of the Province; but it is expedient, in their 
 judgment, that its rules should be assimilated, as far 
 as circumstances will admit, to those of the proposed 
 tribunal of Appeal in England. 
 
 II. In the case of charges against a Bishop, they 
 suggest the following as general principles :— 
 
 That each Province should determine by rules 
 made in its own Synod the offences for which a 
 Bishop may be presented for trial, and who should 
 be promoters of the charge. 
 
 That the charge should be presented to the 
 Metropolitan. 
 
 That it appears doubtful whether a preliminary 
 inquiry is expedient, provided that sufficient pre- 
 cautions are taken that no frivolous charges should 
 be entertained. 
 
 That the Metropolitan should summon to the 
 hearing of the cause all the Bishops of the Province 
 (except the accused), who should sit as judges, not 
 merely as assessors. 
 
 
 
 1 Resolution X.—“ That the Resolutions submitted to this 
 Conference relative to the discipline to be exercised by the 
 Metropolitans, the Court of Metropolitans, the scheme for con- 
 ducting the Election of Bishops, when not otherwise provided 
 for, the declaration of submission to the Regulation of Synods, 
 and the question of what Legislation should be proposed for 
 the Colonial Churches, be referred to the Committee specified 
 in the preceding Resolution.” 
 
Reports of Committees, 1867. 123 
 
 That no trial should take place, except before 
 two-thirds of the Bishops of the Province, provided 
 that there be never fewer than three Bishops present, 
 including the Metropolitan. 
 
 That if three Bishops of the Province should be 
 unable to attend, it should be lawful for the Metro- 
 politan to call in one or more Bishops not of the 
 Province. 
 
 That it is desirable that, whenever it may be 
 practicable, there should be Assessors, as recom- 
 mended by this Committee for the higher Tribunal 
 of Appeal. 
 
 That, in case of the non-appearance of the accused 
 after sufficient citations, the trial may go forward 
 as if he were present, or he may be punished for 
 contumacy, according as the Province may prescribe. 
 
 That there should be no sentence except by the 
 judgment of two-thirds of the Tribunal, or by three 
 judges, whichever should be the greater number ; the 
 assent of the Metropolitan not being necessary to 
 the sentence. 
 
 That the general rules of procedure should be 
 framed by the Synod of the Province; but should 
 be, as far as possible, similar to those recommended 
 by this Committee for the proposed Tribunal of 
 Appeal. 
 
 That an appeal to the higher Tribunal recom- 
 mended by this Committee should be allowed when 
 the case is one of doctrine, or discipline involving 
 doctrine, if notice of such appeal be given within 
 
 days from the delivery of sentence ; 
 and that, in all cases, proper provision should be 
 made for a new trial on sufficient reason being 
 shown. 
 
 That there should be no contract not to appeal to 
 Civil Courts ; but that sufficient provision should be 
 made by the Declaration of Submission (to be con- 
 sidered in another Report) that the sentence of the 
 Spiritual Tribunals may be effective. 
 
 12 
 
124 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 That a Metropolitan should be tried in the same 
 manner as any other Bishop—the senior Bishop, in 
 that case, acting in the place of the Metropolitan. 
 
 F, MONTREAL, Chairman. 
 H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary. 
 
 D.—Scheme for conducting the Election of Bishops, 
 when not otherwise provided for. 
 
 Your Committee have to consider the proper 
 mode for conducting the election of a Bishop, when- 
 ever it is not provided for by an existing law, and 
 without reference to any question that might arise 
 as to the temporalities connected with the See. 
 
 It is evident that there are two parties whose con- 
 current action is necessary in such an appointment 
 —viz., the Clergy and Laity of the Diocese, and the 
 Bishops of the Province by whom the person elected 
 as Bishop is consecrated. 
 
 Your Committee are of opinion that, in accord- 
 ance with the ancient usages of the Church, the elec- 
 tion as a general rule should be made by the Diocese, 
 and that the Bishops of the Province should confirm 
 the election. They consider, however, that it is con- 
 sistent with this principle that the Diocese should 
 nominate two or more persons, of whom the Bishops 
 of the Province should select one; or that the 
 Diocese should delegate to any person or body the 
 power of choosing a Bishop for the vacant See, it 
 being understood that the Diocese must accept such 
 choice as final. 
 
 The principle of the concurrent action of the two 
 parties concerned would also be preserved if the 
 Bishops of the Province should nominate two or 
 
Reports of Committees, 1867. 125 
 
 more persons, from whom the Diocese should elect 
 one. 
 
 In the election by the Diocese it appears to your 
 Committee that the right of selecting the person 
 who shall be their Bishop belongs to the Clergy, the 
 Laity having the right of accepting or rejecting the 
 person so chosen. But it is expedient, in their 
 judgment, that the election should always be made 
 by the Diocesan Synod, wherever one is established, 
 and in accordance with the rules of that Synod. In 
 those Dioceses in which there is no Diocesan Synod, 
 they recommend that, for the election of a Bishop, 
 a Convention should be summoned by the Dean, 
 senior Archdeacon, or senior Presbyter of the 
 Diocese ; that this Convention should consist of all 
 Presbyters and of lay-representatives, who should be 
 male communicants of at least twenty-one years of 
 age ; that these representatives should be elected by 
 each parish or congregation, in such manner as 
 should be determined by the convener; that the 
 person who should obtain the majority of votes of the 
 Clergy, and also of those of the lay-representatives 
 present at the Convention, should be accounted to 
 be elected to the Bishopric ; that this election should 
 not be vitiated by the absence of any of the parties 
 summoned, or by the failure of any congregation or 
 parish to elect a lay-representative ; that any ques- 
 tion as to the validity of the election to the vacant 
 See should be submitted, prior to the Consecration, 
 to the Consecrating Bishops, whose decision should 
 be final ; and that after the consecration of a Bishop 
 no objection should be entertained. 
 
 They further recommend that, where the Diocese 
 is included in a Province, the confirmation of an 
 election should be by the Metropolitan and a 
 majority of the Bishops of the Province ; but where 
 the Diocese is extra-Provincial, that the confirmation 
 should rest with the Archbishops of Canterbury and 
 York and the Bishop of London; that the power of 
 
126 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 confirmation should be absolute—the Bishops having 
 the right to refuse to confirm the election, without 
 assigning any reason for their refusal. 
 
 All further rules necessary for conducting the 
 election should, in the opinion of your Committee, 
 be made by the Synod of the Province. 
 
 Ἐς MONTREAL, Chairman. 
 H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary. 
 
 E.—On Declaration of Submission to Regulations of 
 Synod. 
 
 Your Committee recommend that, in all branches 
 of the Church, the government of which is not 
 determined by law, a Declaration should be made 
 by those who hold office therein. They consider 
 that a Declaration is necessary, in order to define 
 the conditions of the consensual compact, and that 
 it should be framed so as to secure submission to 
 all synodical action in its legitimate sphere, and to 
 the decisions of the constituted Tribunals. 
 
 They recommend the following declaration to be 
 made, before the Metropolitan, or some person duly 
 appointed by him, by all Bishops elect, either before 
 their consecration or, if already consecrated, before 
 exercising any Episcopal functions in their 
 diocese -— 
 
 “JT A. B. chosen Bishop of the Church and See 
 of , do promise that I will teach and 
 maintain the doctrine and discipline of the United 
 Church of England and Ireland, as acknowledged 
 and received by the Province of , and 1 
 also do declare that I consent to be bound by all the 
 rules and regulations which have heretofore been 
 
Reports of Committees, 1867. 127, 
 
 made or which may from time to time be made, by 
 the Synod of the Diocese of , and 
 the Provincial Synod of , Or either of 
 them; and, in consideration of being appointed 
 Bishop of the said Church or See of 
 
 hereby undertake immediately to resign the said 
 appointment, together with all the rights and emolu- 
 ments appertaining thereto, if sentence requiring such 
 resignation should at any time be passed upon me, 
 after due examination had, by the Tribunal acknow- 
 ledged by the Synod of the said Province for the 
 trial of a Bishop ; saving all rights of Appeal allowed 
 by the said Synod.” 
 
 They recommend that the following Declaration 
 be made (in addition to the Declaration required by 
 the rulesof that Province or Diocese as to doctrine 
 and worship) by persons to be admitted to holy 
 orders, and by Clergymen to be admitted to the cure 
 of souls, or to any other office of trust in the Church. 
 
 “T, A. B., do declare that I consent to be bound by 
 all the rules and regulations which have heretofore 
 been made, or which may from time to time be 
 made, by the Synod of the Diocese of : 
 and the Provincial Synod of , or either of 
 them; [and in consideration of being appointed 
 
 , I hereby undertake immediately to 
 resign the said appointment, together with all the 
 rights and emoluments appertaining thereto, if 
 sentence requiring such resignation should at any 
 time be passed upon me, after due examination had, 
 by the Tribunal appointed by the Synods of the 
 aforesaid Province and Diocese for the trial of a 
 Clergyman ; saving all rights of Appeal allowed by 
 the said Synod].” 
 
 (The part in brackets to be omitted when there is 
 no appointment to a cure of souls, or office of 
 trust.) 
 
 Your Committee consider that it must be left to 
 the Province or Diocese to decide whether laymen 
 
128 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 who are admitted to any office or position of trust 
 should be required to sign a Declaration of the same 
 nature. 
 
 G. A. NEW ZEALAND, Chairman. 
 H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary. 
 
 F.—On Provinces and Subordination to 
 Metropolitans. 
 
 On this subject your Committee beg to report as 
 follows :— 
 
 They are of opinion that the association or fede- 
 ration of Dioceses within certain territorial limits, 
 commonly called an Ecclesiastical Province, is not 
 only in accordance with the ancient laws and usages 
 of the Christian Church, but is essentiai to its 
 complete organization. 
 
 Such an association is of the highest advantage for 
 united action, for the exercise of discipline, for the 
 confirmation of the election of Bishops, and generally 
 to enable the Church to adapt its laws to the circum- 
 stances of the countries in which it is planted. 
 
 It is expedient, in the judgment of your Com- 
 mittee, that these ecclesiastical divisions should, as 
 far as possible, follow the civil divisions of these 
 countries. 
 
 Of the Bishops of these Dioceses thus associated, 
 one, in conformity with ancient usage, ought to be 
 Metropolitan or Primus, the functions and powers 
 of the Metropolitan being determined by synodical 
 action in the Province, except so far as Metropolitical 
 powers are defined by undisputed General Councils 
 of the Church. 
 
 It seems to your Committee most in accordance 
 
Reports of Committees, 1867. 129 
 
 with primitive usage that the Metropolitical See 
 should be fixed, but they do not deem this to be 
 essential. It appears expedient that the Provincial 
 Synod should have the power of changing, when 
 necessary, the site of the Metropolitical See. 
 
 Your Committee do not consider it necessary that 
 the election to the Metropolitical See should be 
 conducted differently from the election to other 
 vacant sees; since the Bishops of the Province 
 possess the right of confirming or refusing to confirm 
 any election. 
 
 Your Committee strongly recommend that all 
 those Dioceses which are not as yet gathered into 
 Provinces should, as soon as possible, form part of 
 some Provincial organization. The particular mode 
 of effecting this in each case must be determined by 
 those who are concerned. 
 
 It is sufficient for your Committee to point out 
 that the steps to be taken for effecting this change 
 are twofold, since the relations of the Dioceses in 
 Provincial organisation, when complete, are formed 
 on the one hand by the subordination of the Bishops 
 of the Province to a Metropolitan, and on the other 
 by the association of the Dioceses in Provincial 
 action. Any alteration of existing arrangements 
 would require, therefore, in the opinion of your 
 Committee, the concurrent action of the Diocese 
 which is to be gathered into a Province with other 
 neighbouring Dioceses, and of his Grace the Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury, to whom the Bishops of the 
 Dioceses that at present are extra-provincial have 
 taken the oath of canonical obedience. In the case 
 of the limits of an existing Province being altered, 
 the consent of the Synod of that Province would be 
 required for the alteration. 
 
 F. MONTREAL, Chazrman. 
 H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary. 
 
130 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 G.—Report of the Committee appointed under 
 Resolution XI, of the Lambeth Conference. 
 
 Your Committee report that, after full considera- 
 tion of the questions referred to them by the 
 Conference, they have adopted the following Resolu- 
 tions :— 
 
 I. That every branch of the Church is entitled to 
 found a Missionary Bishopric. 
 
 II. That it is desirable that each branch of the 
 Church should act upon rules agreed upon before- 
 hand by the Synod or other Church Council of the 
 said branch. 
 
 III. That each Missionary Bishopric should be 
 deemed to be attached to one branch of the Church, 
 and that all rules for the election of a Missionary 
 Bishop, and for the formation of a Diocese or 
 Dioceses out of the Missionary District, should be 
 made by the Synod or other Church Council of such 
 branch of the Church. 
 
 IV. That notice of the erection of any Missionary 
 Bishopric, and the choice and consecration of the 
 Bishop, should be notified to all Archbishops and 
 Metropolitans, and all Presiding Bishops, of the 
 Anglican Communion. 
 
 V. That in appointing a Missionary Bishop, the 
 district within which he is to exercise his Mission 
 should be defined as far as possible; and that no 
 other Bishop should be sent within the same district, 
 
 
 
 Resolution XI.—‘“‘That a Special Committee be 
 appointed to consider the Resolutions relative to the notifi- 
 cation of proposed Missionary Bishoprics, and the  sub- 
 ordination of Missionaries.” 
 
Reports of Committees, 1867. 131 
 
 without previous communication with that branch of 
 the Church which gave mission for the work. 
 
 VI. That, while peculiar cases may occur in 
 Missionary work, owing to difference of race and 
 language, in which it may be desirable that more 
 than one Bishop should exercise episcopal functions 
 within the same district, the Committee consider 
 that such cases should be regarded as exceptions, 
 justified only by special circumstances. 
 
 VII. That, with respect to the special case of 
 Continental Chaplaincies, the Committee suggest to 
 the Conference the consideration of some ecclesi- 
 astical arrangement by which the various congrega- 
 tions of the Anglican Communion may be under 
 one authority, whether of the English or American 
 Church. 
 
 VIII. That the conditions on which a Missionary 
 Bishopric should be brought within a Provincial 
 organisation should be :— 
 
 1, The request of the Missionary Bishop, ad- 
 dressed both to the Church from which he received 
 mission and to the Province which he wishes to join. 
 
 2. The consent of the Church from which he 
 received mission, that consent being given by the 
 Metropolitan or Presiding Bishop. 
 
 3. The consent of the Province he wishes to 
 join, that consent being given by the Provincial 
 Synod. 
 
 IX. That the status, jurisdiction, and designation 
 of the Bishop thus received into a system of Pro- 
 vincial organisation should be determined by the 
 Synod of the Province to which his Bishopric shall 
 be then attached. 
 
 X. That, as a general rule, it is expedient that 
 such Missionary Bishopric should be attached to 
 the nearest Province; but that in certain cases it 
 may be necessary that some more remote Province 
 should be selected. 
 
 Bishop Tozer’s Mission is a case to which the 
 
132 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 Committee desire to draw the attention of the Con- 
 ference, as being one in which, for the present, 
 Provincial organization would seem to be imprac- 
 ticable, from the isolation of the district in which 
 Bishop Tozer exercises his episcopal functions, and 
 its remoteness from the Province of South Africa. 
 
 XI. That Missionary Bishops and their Clergy 
 should be bound generally to the Canons of Doctrine 
 and Discipline of the Church from which their 
 mission is derived, or to which they may have 
 been united, and that all alterations in matters of 
 discipline be communicated to the authorities of 
 that Church. 
 
 XII. That when a Missionary Church shall be 
 received into the organisation of a Provincial Synod, 
 the said Church should be bound by the acts of that 
 body; but that, in order to effect this, the Missionary 
 Church should be granted a power of representation, 
 or of vote by proxy, in such Synod. 
 
 XIII. That, as a general rule, in conformity with 
 Church order, all Missionaries and Chaplains residing 
 or engaged in the exercise of ministerial duty within 
 the Diocese or District of a Colonial or Missionary 
 Bishop, should be licensed by, and be subject to the 
 authority of, the said Bishop. 
 
 XIV. That every Clergyman removing from one 
 Colonial or Missionary Diocese or District into 
 another Diocese ought to carry with him Letters 
 Testimonial from the Colonial or Missionary Bishop 
 whose Diocese or District he is leaving. 
 
 XV. That no person admitted to Holy Orders by 
 the Bishop of any Diocese in England or Ireland, 
 who shall afterwards have been serving under the 
 jurisdiction of any Scottish, Colonial, or Foreign 
 Bishop, should be received into any of the Home 
 Dioceses, without producing letters Dimissory or 
 Commendatory from the Scottish, Colonial, or Foreign 
 Bishop in whose Diocese he has been serving. 
 
 XVI. The attention of this Committee has been 
 
Reports of Committees, 1867. 133 
 
 called to the clause in the Paper of Arrangements 
 for the Conference, headed “Subordination of Mis- 
 sionaries.” The Committee have failed to understand 
 what is meant by the words “instructions from those 
 in authority at home,” but they can recommend no 
 scheme which interferes with the canonical relation 
 which subsists between a Bishop and his clergy. 
 
 W. J. GIBRALTAR, Chazrman. 
 
 WILLIAM GEORGE TOZER, 
 Missionary Bishop, Secretary. 
 
 H.—Report of the Committee appointed under 
 Resolution VI. of the Lambeth Conference. 
 
 By the Resolution of the Lambeth Conference 
 two questions were referred to the Committee :— 
 
 I. How the Church may be delivered from a con- 
 tinuance of the scandal now existing in Natal? 
 
 II. How the true faith may be maintained ? 
 
 I. On the first question, the Committee recom- 
 mend that an Address be made to the Colonial 
 
 
 
 1 Resolution VI.—‘‘ That, in the judgment of the Bishops 
 now assembled, the whole Anglican Communion is deeply 
 injured by the present condition of the Church in Natal: and 
 that a Committee be now appointed at this General Meeting 
 to report on the best mode by which the Church may be 
 delivered from a continuance of this scandal, and the true 
 faith maintained. That such Report shall be forwarded to his 
 Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, with the request 
 that he will be pleased to transmit the same to all the Bishops 
 of the Anglican Communion, and to ask for their judgment 
 thereupon.” 
 
134 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 Bishoprics Council, calling their attention to the 
 fact that they are paying an annual stipend to a 
 Bishop lying under the imputation of heretical 
 teaching, and praying them to take the best legal 
 opinion as to there being any, and if so what, 
 mode of laying these allegations before some com- 
 petent court, and if any mode be pointed out, then to 
 proceed accordingly for the removal of this scandal. 
 
 The Committee also recommend that the Address 
 to the Colonial Bishoprics Council be prefaced with 
 the following statement :— 
 
 “That, whilst we accept the spiritual validity of 
 the sentence of deposition pronounced by the Metro- 
 politan and Bishops of the South African Church 
 upon Dr. Colenso, we consider it of the utmost 
 moment for removing the existing scandal from the 
 English Communion that there should be pronounced 
 by some competent English court such a legal sen- 
 tence on the errors of the said Dr. Colenso as would 
 warrant the Colonial Bishoprics Council in ceasing 
 to pay his stipend, and would justify an appeal to 
 - the Crown to cancel his Letters Patent.” 
 
 II. On the second question : 
 
 “How the true faith may be maintained in Natal?” 
 
 The Committee submit the following Report :— 
 
 That they did not consider themselves instructed 
 by the Conference, and therefore did not consider 
 themselves competent, to inquire into the whole 
 case; but that their conclusions are based upon the 
 following facts :— 
 
 1. That in the year 1863, forty-one Bishops con- 
 curred in an Address to Bishop Colenso, urging him 
 to resign his Bishopric. 
 
 2. That in the year 1863, some of the publications 
 of Dr. Colenso, viz.—‘ The Pentateuch and Book of 
 Joshua critically examined,” Parts I. and II., were 
 condemned by the Convocation of the Province of 
 Canterbury.” 
 
 3. That the Bishop of Capetown, by virtue of his 
 
Reports of Committees, 1867. 135 
 
 Letters Patent as Metropolitan, might have visited 
 Dr. Colenso with summary jurisdiction, and might 
 have taken out of his hands the management of the 
 Diocese of Natal. 
 
 4. That the Bishop of Capetown, instead of pro- 
 ceeding summarily, instituted judicial proceedings, 
 having reason to believe himself to be competent 
 to do so. 
 
 That he summoned Dr. Colenso before himself 
 and suffragans. 
 
 That Dr. Colenso appeared by his proctor. 
 
 That his defence was heard and judged to be 
 insufficient to purge him from the heresy. 
 
 That, after sentence was pronounced, Dr. Colenso 
 was offered an appeal to the Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury, as provided in the Metropolitan’s Letters 
 Patent. 
 
 5. That this Act of the African Church was 
 approved— 
 
 By the Convocation of Canterbury ; 
 
 By the Convocation of York ; 
 
 By the General Convention of the Episcopal 
 Church in the United States, in 1865 ; 
 
 By the Episcopal Synod of the Church in Scotland; 
 
 By the Provincial Synod of the Church in Canada, 
 in the year 1865 ; 
 
 And, finally, the spiritual validity of the sentence 
 of deposition was accepted by ff/ty-szx Bishops on 
 the occasion of the Lambeth Conference. 
 
 Judging, therefore, that the See is spiritually 
 vacant; and learning, by the evidence brought 
 before them, that there are many members of the 
 Church who are unable to accept the ministrations 
 of Dr. Colenso, the Committee deem it to be the 
 duty of the Metropolitan and other Bishops of South 
 Africa to proceed, upon the election of the Clergy 
 and Laity in Natal, to consecate one to discharge 
 those spiritual functions of which these members of 
 the Church are now in want. 
 
136 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 In forwarding their Report to his Grace the Lord 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, as instructed by the Re- 
 solution of the Conference, the Committee request 
 his Grace to communicate the same to the adjourned 
 meeting of the Conference, to be holden at Lambeth 
 on the tenth day of the present month. 
 
 G. A. NEW ZEALAND, 
 December oth, 1867. Convener. 
 
 J.—Fform of Letters Dimtssory for the Clergy. 
 
 To the Right Reverend the Bishops and Reverend 
 the Clergy, and to the faithful in Christ of the 
 Diocese of A. We, B, by Divine permission Bishop 
 of C, send greeting in the Lord. 
 
 We commend to your brotherly kindness by these 
 our letters, D, E, Priest (or Deacon) of our Diocese, 
 beseeching you to receive him in the Lord as a 
 brother sound in the Faith, of a well-ordered and 
 Religious Life, and worthy of all Christian Fellow- 
 ship, and to render him any assistance of which he 
 may stand in need; and so we bid you farewell in 
 Christ our Lord 
 
 Witness our hand. 
 
 A, Bishop. 
 B, Secretary. 
 
 
 
 No. XIII. (See page 19.) 
 
 Resolutions of the Adjourned Conference, Dec. 10, 1867. 
 
 Resolution I—* That this adjourned meeting of 
 the Conference receives the Report (No. I.) of the 
 Committee now presented, and directs the publica- 
 
Adjourned Conference, Dec. 10, 1867. 137 
 
 tion thereof, commending it to the careful conside- 
 ration of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion, 
 as containing the result of the deliberations of that 
 Committee; and returns the members of the same 
 its thanks for the care with which they have con- 
 sidered the various important questions referred to 
 them.” 
 
 (The same Resolution was passed with reference 
 fommeports IL. ΠῚ ΝΕ VE, VIE) 
 
 Resolution II.—“ That the Report (No. VIII.) 
 of the Committee appointed under Resolution VI, 
 laid before this meeting by his Grace the Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury be received and printed ; that 
 the thanks of this Meeting be given to the Com- 
 mittee for their labours; and that his Grace be re- 
 quested to communicate the Report to the Council 
 of the Colonial Bishoprics Fund.” 
 
 Resolution II1I.—* That his Grace be requested, if 
 applied to by the House of Bishops in the Episcopal 
 Church in the United States of America, to allow a 
 copy of the Records of the Conference to be made 
 for them, and to be lodged in the hands of such 
 officer as shall be designated by the House of Bishops 
 to receive it, for reference by Bishops only, but not 
 for publication.” 
 
 Resolution I1V.—* That his Grace the Archbishop 
 of Canterbury be requested to convey to the Church 
 in Russia an expression of the sympathy of the 
 Anglican Communion with that Church, in the loss 
 which it has sustained by the death of his Eminence 
 Philarete, the venerable Metropolitan of Moscow.” 
 
 Resolution V.—“ That the thanks of this Confer- 
 ence be given to the Bishop of Grahamstown for the 
 valuable services which he has rendered as Secretary 
 to many of the Committees appointed by the Con- 
 ference.” 
 
 Resolution VI.—* That the thanks of this Confer- 
 ence be given to Philip Wright, Esq.,and to Isambard 
 Brunel, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, for their aid as 
 
 Kk 
 
138 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 
 
 Assistant Secretaries to the Committees ; and espe- 
 cially to the latter for his valuable assistance in all 
 matters that required legal advice.” 
 
 Resolution VII.—“ That we cannot close this 
 Conference without conveying our hearty thanks to 
 his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, both for 
 convening this meeting, and for the mode in which 
 he has presided over its deliberations.” 
 
 Besides the preceding Resolutions,— 
 
 The President reported that he had been authorised 
 to annex the following signatures to the Encyclical 
 Letter :— 
 
 AoA ChCH SiR: 
 
 AUCKLAND, BATH AND WELLS. 
 ROBERT DOWN AND CONNOR. 
 WILLIAM DERRY. 
 
 EDWARD NEWFOUNDLAND. 
 
 J. FREDERICTON. 
 
 TS EST) THELEN a 
 
 2. The following Bishops were appointed as a Sub- 
 Committee, for the purpose of drawing up a Bill, in 
 accordance with a Report submitted by the Com- 
 mittee appointed under Resolution IX. of the previous 
 meeting :— 
 
 BISHOP OF LONDON. 
 OXFORD. 
 LINCOLN. 
 EY. 
 LICHFIELD (Elect). 
 MONTREAL. 
 7 GRAHAMSTOWN. 
 BISHOP TROWER. 
 
 3. His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury laid 
 on the table a form of Letters Dimissory,! which he 
 had prepared, in accordance with Resolution II. of 
 the last session of the Lambeth Conference. 
 
 
 
 1 J. page 136. 
 
Canadian and West Indian Addresses. 130 
 
 4. The Bishop of Illinois, at the request of the 
 Conference, stated that the Meeting of the Triennial 
 General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal 
 Church in the United States would be held on the 
 first Wednesday of October next, in the City of New 
 York ; and, in behalf of the Church in the United 
 States, offered an affectionate invitation to the 
 Bishops of the Conference to be present on that 
 occasion ; and also expressed the hope that the dif- 
 ferent branches of the Anglican Communion would 
 depute one or more Bishops as Representatives of 
 the Mother and Colonial Churches, to be present on 
 that occasion, assuring all that might accept this 
 invitation of cordial welcome and affectionate brother- 
 hood. 
 
 5. At the request of the Conference, the Bishop 
 of Lichfield (Elect) undertook the office of Corre- 
 sponding Secretary for the Bishops of the Anglican 
 Communion. 
 
 His Grace the President then pronounced the 
 Benediction, and the Conference was closed. 
 
 No. XIV. (Sce page 21.) 
 
 Addresses from the Canadian and West Indian Houses 
 of Bishops. 1872 and 1873. 
 
 1. To his Grace the President and their Lordships 
 the Bishops of the Upper House of Convocation 
 of Canterbury— 
 
 We, the Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of 
 Canada, availing ourselves of the opportunity afforded 
 by the meeting of a special Provincial Synod, desire 
 that the following Address, touching the Lambeth 
 
 eZ 
 
140 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 Conference, be forwarded to his Grace, the President, 
 and to the Prolocutor of the Lower House of Con- 
 vocation of the Province of Canterbury. 
 
 We, the Bishops aforesaid, encouraged by the 
 successful results of the Address presented to his 
 Grace the late Archbishop of Canterbury, by the 
 Provincial Synod of Canada, whereby the Lambeth 
 Conference was convened, humbly and earnestly 
 petition that the Convocation of Canterbury will take 
 such action as may seem most expedient to unite 
 with us in requesting the Archbishop of Canterbury 
 to summon a second meeting of the Conference. 
 
 We are persuaded that such meeting will be most 
 efficacious in uniting the scattered branches of the 
 Anglican Communion, and in promoting the exten- 
 sion of the Kingdom of Christ throughout the world; 
 and we therefore pray that it may be again convened 
 at the earliest day that may suit the convenience of 
 the Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 A. MONTREAL (Metropolitan). 
 J. T. ONTARIO. 
 
 J. W. QUEBEC. 
 
 A. H. TORONTO. 
 
 J. HURON. 
 
 Montreal, Dec. 13, 1872. 
 
 2. “The West Indian Bishops [assembled at 
 Georgetown, Demerara, in 1873] join in the request 
 lately made to the Archbishop of Canterbury by the 
 Bishops of the Canadian Province, that he would 
 summon another meeting of the Bishops of the 
 Anglican Communion throughout the world at as 
 early a date as may seem to his Grace practicable 
 and expedient.” 
 
Correspondence with American Church. 141 
 
 No. XV. (See page 21.) 
 
 Correspondence between Bishops of the Protestant 
 Episcopal Church in the United States and the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury. 1874 and 1875. 
 
 1. Lhe Archbishop of Canterbury to Bishop Kerfoot, 
 of Pittsburgh. 
 
 ADDINGTON PARK, CROYDON, Aug. 21, 1874. 
 My DEAR BISHOP, 
 
 Before you leave England, I wish to say 
 to you that the subject of another gathering of 
 Bishops of our Communion at Lambeth has been 
 much talked of lately. If the House of Bishops of 
 your Church were to express their wishes on this 
 subject, it might help me in bringing the matter 
 before my brethren of this country when we meet in 
 January of next year. 
 
 Trusting that God will bless you in your journey 
 and on your return to your work, 
 
 I am, your faithful Brother, 
 A. C. CANTUAR. 
 
 2. The Bishop of Pittsburgh to the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury. 
 
 House OF BisHors, NEw York, δου. 3, 1874. 
 My DEAR Lorp, 
 
 I had the pleasure not long since of 
 writing to you from this House, to say that the 
 request to your Grace to invite another Lambeth 
 Conference had been signed by forty-three of the 
 
[42 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 forty-six Bishops in attendance. I then said that I 
 would write again fully when the engagements of 
 the General Convention allowed me to do so. 
 
 The matter was introduced by me into this House 
 early in our session, so that the Lord Bishop of 
 Lichfield, who was with us for the first week of the 
 Convention, might speak to the Bishops on the 
 subject. He did this with great discretion and effect 
 in our House, and also in the House of Deputies. 
 While the Bishops generally were very favourably 
 disposed towards the proposal (and your Grace’s note 
 to me of August 251} very much promoted this 
 inclination), some of them wished that any action of 
 the Bishops should be preceded by some expression 
 from the clerical and lay deputies that would prevent 
 any thought that the Bishops were acting for them- 
 selves alone, and not also for and with the clergy 
 and ‘iaitys . 2.7. It was deemed by all the Bishops 
 to be sufficient, and for several reasons best, that we 
 should express our wish and convey our request to 
 your Grace in the form in which it has by this 
 time reached you through the Bishop of Lichfield. 
 The Bishop of New York and myself prepared the 
 paper, and received the signatures of the Bishops 
 individually. As some of the signatures may not be 
 readily legible, I enclose a printed list of the names 
 of the signers. 
 
 It clearly appeared in the consultations of the 
 deputies, and even of the Bishops, that there were 
 not a few misconceptions about the Conference of 
 1867. This, I think, was due, in large measure, to 
 the misrepresentation of its character and manage- 
 ment in the memoir of the late Bishop Hopkins. . . 
 Bishop Hopkins himself would not, 1 am sure, have 
 approved of the sketch of the Lambeth Conference 
 given by his biographer. But its effects were seen, 
 and I hope counteracted, in the discussions. 
 
 In the consultation of the Bishops, the wish was 
 several times expressed that the arrangements for a 
 
Correspondence with American Church. 143 
 
 Conference in 1876 should be such as to manifest 
 that the variety of the topics admitted, and the time 
 allowed, should be such as would seem to justify a 
 Convocation of our Bishops from all over the world. 
 There was no wish to annex terms or conditions to 
 our request to your Grace. The suggestions already 
 made by the Canadian Synod (whose action on this 
 subject was recited in our House of Bishops) covers 
 most or all of this ground.! As our consultations 
 went on, it seemed to be devolved on me, by general 
 consent, to make to you this informal communication 
 about such wishes. Two or three Bishops gave them 
 to me in writing ; some others in unwritten words. 
 The thoughts were that the Bishops attending the 
 Conference might propose for discussion such ques- 
 tions as each one should deem right; and that the 
 sessions should be continued long enough to allow 
 of the needful Conferences. Those of us who were 
 at Lambeth seven years ago knew quite well that 
 such were the real character and spirit of that Con- 
 ference; but that it being then an enterprise and 
 experiment at once novel and anxious, precautions 
 were rightly taken and limitations wisely observed 
 that persons at a distance could not fully or fairly 
 comprehend. The invitation was even then given 
 in advance to the Bishops to suggest topics ; and 
 many of us did this, and I believe every such topic 
 was introduced. 
 
 I made such answers to the inquiries of some of my 
 brethren, adding that, of course, as then, so whenever 
 we should meet again, no topic should be introduced 
 which must elicit discussions on the State relations 
 of the Church of England. All the Bishops here at 
 once recognise this as the right rule. I said this was 
 the only real limitation I witnessed seven years ago. 
 I ventured to anticipate that on this point every 
 reasonable wish would be satisfied in the future 
 Conference. 
 
 
 
 See below, page 148. 
 
144 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 In thus writing at, I hope, not a needless length to 
 your Grace, I think that I quite fulfil the promises 
 made to some of my American brethren, who united 
 heartily in the request sent to you, and I hope that I 
 also convey such intimations as will entirely meet 
 your own views in your anticipation of any such 
 Conference. I may also add that the careful con- 
 sideration given to the whole scheme here of late 
 only confirms our convictions of the wisdom and 
 usefulness of the renewal of the Conference of 1867. 
 I am, my dear Lord Archbishop, your Grace’s very 
 faithful and affectionate brother. 
 
 JOHN B. KERFOOT, 
 Bishop of Pittsburgh. 
 
 3. The following ts the formal Resolution referred to 
 in the foregoing letter. 
 
 The undersigned Bishops of the Protestant Epis- 
 copal Church in the United States, having had the 
 pleasure of listening to the statements of the Right 
 Reverend the Lord Bishop of Lichfield, of the Right 
 Reverend the Lord Bishop of Montreal and Metro- 
 politan, of the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of 
 Kingston, Jamaica, and of the Right Reverend the 
 Lord Bishop of Quebec in reference to the benefits 
 to the whole Anglican Communion to be derived 
 from the holding of another Conference of the 
 Bishops thereof, do most cordially express in their 
 individual capacity their interest in the subject, and 
 their hope that his Grace the Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury will find it consistent with his views of duty to 
 take steps towards the assembling of such a Con- 
 ference. 
 
 [The signatures of forty-two Bishops, including 
 the presiding Bishop, are appended. ] 
 
Correspondence with American Church. 145 
 
 4. The Archbishop of Canterbury to the Bishop of 
 Pittsburgh. 
 
 LAMBETH PALACE, S.W., 
 April 27, 1875. 
 [PRIVATE.] 
 My DEAR BISHOP, 
 
 As I promised, I brought the question of a second 
 Lambeth Conference and your kind letter before the 
 Bishops of the Southern Province, who met lately in 
 Convocation. 
 
 The holding of such a Conference in the autumn 
 of next year is rendered impossible, if not by other 
 causes, by the fact that I find that 1876 is the year 
 in which I must (D.v.) hold my visitation in the 
 autumn, and deliver my charge, and you will under- 
 stand the impossibility of my undertaking at that 
 time the additional work necessarily involved on so 
 important an occasion as the reassembling of the 
 Lambeth Conference. 
 
 We cannot, therefore, look forward to the Con- 
 ference taking place earlier than 1877, which will be 
 ten years from the time of the first meeting. But, 
 as we know that your Convention meets in the 
 autumn of that year, it appears to us that the 
 Lambeth Conference might well be in the spring 
 of 1877, thus leaving time for our American brethren 
 to return home before this Convention. 
 
 I think I ought to add that there was a general 
 impression that, before steps were taken for gathering 
 Bishops from all parts of the world, we ought dis- 
 tinctly to understand what the subjects are on which 
 discussion is desirable. There was a general feeling 
 that matters of doctrine which are already settled by 
 our formularies could not be re-opened, and matters 
 of discipline must be left-to the authorities of each 
 separate Church. There remains, therefore, only 
 such general questions as relate to the intercourse 
 
146 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 of the various branches of our Church, and that 
 brotherly conference which was on former occasions 
 found so valuable. 
 
 I write this private letter, as I think you may wish 
 to know the feelings of the English Bishops on this 
 important subject with as little delay as possible, and 
 I hope before long to be able to return a formal 
 answer to the document signed by the Bishops of 
 the American Episcopal Church. 
 
 Believe me to be, my dear Bishop, 
 Very sincerely yours, 
 
 A. C. CANTUAR. 
 
 5. Zo the Right Rev. the Bishops of the Protestant 
 Episcopal Church of the United States of 
 
 America. 
 LAMBETH PALACE, S.E., 
 
 June 7, 1875. 
 RIGHT REV. AND DEAR BRETHREN, 
 
 I have laid before my brethren of the Province of 
 Canterbury your letter on the subject of holding a 
 second Lambeth Conference, and I have had com- 
 munication on the same subject with the Archbishop 
 of York, as representing the Bishops of the Northern 
 Province. 
 
 We entertain a grateful sense of the advantages of 
 that brotherly intercourse which the last Lambeth 
 Conference tended to encourage, and we should look 
 forward with much pleasure to another meeting of 
 the same kind. 
 
 I am, however, instructed by my brethren to bring 
 before you the two following considerations, re- 
 specting which I should be glad to have your 
 opinion before taking any further steps in this 
 matter. 
 
 1. It seems to my brethren and myself that such a 
 
Correspondence with American Church. 147 
 / 
 
 Conference could not with advantage be held till the 
 tenth year after the last meeting. I am aware that 
 this would bring us to the year 1877, in which, as | 
 understand, your general convention holds its triennial 
 meeting ; but the autumn of 1876, which has been 
 mentioned by the Bishop of Lichfield as a suitable 
 time, will, so far as I can foresee, be entirely occupied 
 by my visitation of the Archdiocese of Canterbury, 
 and it is the opinion of those whom 1 have consulted 
 that the most convenient time would be the summer 
 of 1877, say, in the month of July, which time would 
 enable our brethren of the United States to return 
 home for the meeting of their own Convention. 
 
 2. 1 have also been requested to bring before you 
 the following point. You will at once see that I 
 ought not to take the step of inviting so large a body 
 of Bishops to leave the scene of their labours in their 
 distant Dioceses without being able to state to them 
 somewhat explicitly what the practical results are 
 which are expected to be derived from the Con- 
 ference. 
 
 It appears to us that, respecting matters of doctrine, 
 no change can be proposed or discussed, and that no 
 authoritative explanation of doctrine ought to be 
 taken in hand. Each Church is naturally guided in 
 the interpretation of its formularies by its recognised 
 authorities. Again, respecting matters of discipline, 
 each Church has its own appointed Courts for the 
 administration of its ecclesiastical law, with which, 
 of course, such a meeting of Bishops as is proposed 
 claims no power to interfere. The present state of 
 the Christian Church makes men more than usually 
 sensitive as to any appearance even of a claim on the 
 part of any one branch of the Church to interfere 
 with the decisions or administrations of another. 
 Each is considered qualified to regulate its own 
 separate affairs, while all are united in the mainte- 
 nance of the one faith. Therefore, if the Conference 
 meets, it will be necessary to exclude all questions 
 
148 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 which might happen to trench on the complete 
 independence of the several branches of the Church. 
 
 The propriety of the Bishops meeting in Con- 
 ference must depend, I conceive, upon this—whether 
 there appear a sufficient number of subjects relating 
 to the brotherly intercourse of the various Branches 
 of the Anglican Communion, on which a conference 
 of the chief Ministers of the several Churches would 
 be likely to throw light. 
 
 I should be greatly obliged for any communica- 
 tion which you may be disposed to send to me, 
 during the next six months, as to your views on the 
 general desirableness of our meeting under such 
 circumstances as I have described. I will take care, 
 before the close of the present year, to lay before my 
 brethren in England any statement I receive as to 
 the particular questions which you think it desirable 
 for the Bishops of the Anglican Communion to 
 consider. 
 
 This would enable us to come to a decision re- 
 specting the Conference, and make any arrangements 
 that may be required. 
 
 I remain, 
 Your faithful brother and servant in Christ, 
 
 A. C. CANTUAR. 
 
 No. XVI. (See page 22.) 
 Memorandum of the Canadian House of Bishops. 1874. 
 
 Suggestions of the Canadian House of Bishops 
 made to the Bishop of Lichfield concerning the 
 Lambeth Conference. 
 
 1. As to the period of its meeting— 
 
 We would suggest that 1876 would be a period 
 very convenient and welcome to the Church in 
 Canada. 
 
Canadian Bishops Memorandum. 149 
 
 2. As to the duration of the Conference— 
 
 We are of opinion that there should be a con- 
 tinuous Session of one month, four days in each 
 week being days of session ; or, 
 
 That there should be at least two weeks of Session, 
 with an interval between the first and last week. 
 
 3. As to the matter to be discussed— 
 
 We feel that it is most desirable that the Reports 
 of Committees laid before the Conference of 1867 
 should be carefully considered, with the exception of 
 Report No. 8. 
 
 4. We think that it would be very convenient 
 to the Bishops invited to the Congress that an 
 opportunity should be given them of suggesting 
 beforehand any subject which they may wish to 
 have considered. 
 
 5. We feel that, if his Grace should be pleased to 
 grant the Bishops an opportunity of assembling 
 in Conference, it would be extremely desirable that 
 his decision on the above matters should be embodied 
 in the Circular of Invitation. 
 
 Signed, on behalf of the Bishops of the Province 
 of Canada, 
 
 A. MONTREAL, Metropolitan. 
 
 
 
 No. XVII. (See page 24.) 
 
 Action of the Convocations of Canterbury and York 
 with reference to the proposed Second Lambeth 
 Conference. 
 
 The Memorials from the Canadian and West 
 Indian Bishops (quoted above, No. XVI. page 148), 
 were on April 29, 1874, referred by the Upper House 
 
130 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 of the Convocation of Canterbury to a Joint Com- 
 mittee of fifteen members, who, on July 10, 1874, 
 presented a report in the shape of the following four 
 Resolutions :— 
 
 1. “ That the relation of his Grace the Lord Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury to the other Bishops of the 
 Anglican Communion be that of Primate among 
 Archbishops, Primates, Metropolitans, and Bishops.” 
 
 2. “That in accordance with the Memorial of the 
 Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of Canada, 
 and the resolution of the Bishops of the West Indian 
 Dioceses, his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury be requested to convene a General Conference 
 of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion to carry 
 on the work begun by the Lambeth Conference in 
 1867. 
 
 3. “ That the Reports of Committees presented at 
 the adjourned Session of the Lambeth Conference in 
 1867, but not adopted or even discussed, be taken 
 into consideration at the Second Conference.” 
 
 4. “That the Committee recommend that his 
 Grace be respectfully requested to convene the 
 second meeting of the Lambeth Conference for the 
 year 18706.” 
 
 “G. A. LICHFIELD, Chairman.” 
 
 The Report was received by the Upper House, 
 and communicated to the Lower House, July Io, 
 1874.— (See Chronicle of Convocation, pp. 437-439.) 
 
 The Upper House of Canterbury Convocation had 
 also resolved, on April 29, 1874, to invite an expres- 
 sion of opinion from the Convocation of York, and 
 that Convocation, on February 26, 1875, passed the 
 following resolution :— 
 
 “That this Synod, in reply to a communication 
 from the Province of Canterbury, asking for an 
 expression of opinion upon three resolutions respect- 
 ing certain memorials received from the Ecclesias- 
 
Archbishop Tait’s Letter of Inquiry, 1876. 151 
 
 tical Province of Canada, and from the Bishops of 
 the West Indian Dioceses, prays that his Grace the 
 President will convey to his Grace the Archbishop 
 of Canterbury the wish of this Synod that all 
 necessary steps may be taken for the assembling of 
 a second Conference at Lambeth, but would desire 
 to leave all other questions involved in these resolu- 
 tions to be decided as may seem best to the Arch- 
 bishops and the bench of Bishops.” 
 
 No. XVIII. (Sce page 24.) 
 
 Circular Letter of Inquiry addressed by the Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury to all the Anglican Bishops, 
 March 28, 1876. 
 
 LAMBETH PALACE, JJarch 28, 1876. 
 
 RIGHT REVEREND BROTHER, 
 
 A wish has been expressed by many Bishops of 
 the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United 
 States of America, by the Bishops of the Canadian 
 Dominion, and by the West Indian Bishops, that a 
 second Conference of our brethren should be held at 
 Lambeth. 
 
 Before I decide upon the important step of inviting 
 the Bishops of our Communion throughout the world 
 to assemble at Lambeth, I have thought it right, 
 after consultation with the Bishops of England, to 
 give all our brethren an opportunity of expressing 
 their opinion upon the expediency of convening such 
 a Conference at this time, and upon the choice of 
 the subjects which ought to engage its attention, if 
 it be convened, 
 
152 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 I therefore beg leave to intimate to you our readi- 
 ness to hold a Conference at Lambeth in or about 
 the month of July, 1878, if it shall seem expedient, 
 after the opinions of all our brethren have been 
 ascertained ; and I need scarcely assure you that 
 your advice is earnestly desired, and will be respect- 
 fully considered. May I ask, for our guidance, 
 whether you are willing, and are likely to be able, to 
 attend the Conference yourself ? 
 
 Those who were present at Lambeth in 1867 
 thankfully acknowledged that, through the blessing 
 of Almighty God, the Bishops of the various branches 
 of the Anglican Communion were drawn together 
 in closer bonds of brotherly love and sympathy. 
 
 The help and comfort which are due from the 
 branches of Christ’s Church to each other are more 
 readily rendered, and more fully each is made ac- 
 quainted with the wants of the rest. In this time of 
 religious activity and increased intercourse between 
 all parts of the world, there is greater need than ever 
 of mutual counsel amongst the Bishops of our 
 widely-extended Communion. 
 
 The Bishops of England, therefore, earnestly ask 
 you to join with them in prayer that we may all be 
 guided to a wise decision on this important matter, 
 and if it should be resolved to hold the Conference, 
 that its deliberations may issue in greater peace, and 
 strength, and energy to the whole Church of Christ. 
 
 Anxiously awaiting your answer, 
 I remain, 
 Your faithful Brother and Servant in Christ, 
 
 A. C. CANTUAR. 
 
 The Right Reverend the Bishop of ..... 
 
Archbishop Tait’s Letter of Invitation, 1877. 153 
 
 “ Covering letter” to the Metropolitans and Presiding 
 Bishops. 
 
 LAMBETH PALACE, S.E., Jarch 28, 1876. 
 My DEAR BISHOP, 
 
 After consultation with my Brethren the Bishops 
 of England, including the Archbishop of York, I beg 
 leave to address you as of 
 and request you to circulate among the Bishops 
 your branch of the Church the enclosed documents, 
 having reference to a second Lambeth Conference. 
 
 I shall feel obliged by your favouring us at your 
 earliest conv enience with your own views on the 
 questions now submitted to your consideration. 
 
 I remain, your faithful brother and servant in 
 Christ, 
 
 A. C. CANTUAR. 
 
 
 
 No. XIX. (Sce page 25.) 
 Letter of Invitation to the Conference of 1878. 
 
 LAMBETH PALACE, $7tly το, 1877. 
 
 RIGHT REVEREND AND DEAR BROTHER, 
 
 It is proposed to hold a Conference of Bishops of 
 the Anglican Communion at this place, beginning 
 on Tuesday, the second day of July, Eighteen 
 hundred and Seventy-eight. 
 
 The Conference, it is proposed, shall extend over 
 four weeks; the first week of four Sessions to be 
 devoted to discussions, in Conference, of the subjects 
 submitted for deliberation; the second and third 
 weeks to the consideration of these subjects in Com- 
 mittees ; andthe fourth week to final discussions in 
 Conference, and to the close of the Meeting. 
 
 e.g, Metropolitan of Canada. 
 L 
 
154 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 The subjects selected for discussion are the fol- 
 lowing :— 
 
 1. The best mode of maintaining Union among the 
 various Churches of the Anglican Communion. 
 
 2. Voluntary Boards of Arbitration for Churches 
 to which such an arrangement may be applicable. 
 
 3. The relations to each other of Missionary 
 Bishops and of Missionaries in various branches of 
 the Anglican Communion acting in the same country. 
 
 4. The position of Anglican Chaplains and Chap- 
 laincies on the Continent of Europe and elsewhere. 
 
 5. Modern forms of infidelity, and the best means 
 of dealing with them. 
 
 6. The condition, progress, and needs of the 
 various Churches of the Anglican Communion. 
 
 I shall feel greatly obliged if, at your early con- 
 venience, you will inform me whether we may have 
 the pleasure of expecting your presence at the Con- 
 ference. 
 
 Iam, Right Reverend and dear brother, yours 
 faithfully in Christ, 
 
 A. C. CANTUAR. 
 
 
 
 
 
 No. XX. (See page 29). 
 
 Sermon preached by the Archbishop of York, in 
 Lambeth Palace Chapel, on Tuesday, July 2nd, 
 1878. 
 
 “But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the 
 face, because he was to be blamed.”—Ga/. ii. 11. 
 
 This is the first rupture amongst those who were 
 to spread the knowledge of Christ throughout the 
 world. An Apostle withstood an Apostle to the 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 155 
 
 face, because he was to be blamed.!. We all re- 
 member the facts. No direction had been left by the 
 Lord as to the treatment of the Gentiles that should 
 believe. Did their road to the Kingdom of Heaven 
 conduct through the Temple? Were the Gentiles 
 that believed to observe the law of Moses? If not, 
 what advantage had the chosen people over the scum 
 and off-scouring of the earth ? 
 
 These questions, of vital moment, and now im- 
 periously demanding a solution, were left open by the 
 divine Founder of the Church; they were to be 
 decided by the light of the Holy Spirit, working in 
 the Church itself. Decided they were, and set at 
 rest for ever. But the process of doubt and struggle 
 may be to us the most seasonable subject of reflec- 
 tion. May that Holy Spirit, who has taught and 
 guided the Church from the first, be with us all this 
 day, meditating on this significant place of Holy 
 Writ. Amen. 
 
 It was long before the Church would accept the 
 plain meaning of this passage. Was it possible, then, 
 that two such lights of the earth could fall apart in 
 strife, and this about a matter of faith? What would 
 the outside world say against the truth of God—nay, 
 what dzd it say before the spectacle of such a strife ? 
 If the founders of the Church can thus diverge, what 
 is the doctrine of the Church worth?” Thus they 
 mocked ; and the Fathers, hard pressed, adopted the 
 theory of Origen, that this dispute was simulated, 
 was nothing but a scene got up between the two 
 Apostles, who had made up their minds in concert, 
 about the position of the Gentiles, in order that a 
 strong lesson of submission might be taught to the 
 Judaising Christians in the person of Peter himself. 
 It is strange that such a theory, in which an accusa- 
 
 
 
 1 Rather “he was condemned ;” whether this means “ con- 
 demned by the very facts,” or “ condemned by some assembly 
 or body of Christians” does not appear ; the former is probable. 
 
 3 Hieron., ‘‘ Ep. ad Galat.,” Pref. 
 
 L2 
 
156 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 tion of base deceit on the part of both is substituted 
 for one of timidity on the part of one, should have 
 been able to attract even Jerome; against whom 
 Augustine rose up, and following the precedent, 
 “withstood him to the face” for attributing to these 
 Apostles a trick which would shake our faith in the 
 Holy Scriptures themselves ; since these hold up the 
 quarrel as a reality, and not as a piece of acting. 
 
 It was indeed a quarrel. On some visit to 
 Antioch, not, as I venture to think, after, but before, 
 the decision of the Council of Jerusalem on this ques- 
 tion, St. Peter, by eating and drinking in communion 
 with the Gentiles recognised their conversion and 
 their position as members of the Church. But then 
 came some from Jerusalem, where the feeling was 
 strong that the law should be observed. A fresh 
 dispute sprang up. Peter desired to avoid offence to 
 his own people, from Jerusalem, so he withdrew from 
 the Gentile converts. It was a heavy censure; it 
 wasa badexample. Barnabas himself was entangled 
 in this “hypocrisy.” A great crisis of the Church 
 had come, and such a desertion cut St. Paul to the 
 heart. His anger was great. The wrong had been 
 public, and so should the rebuke be. It does not 
 appear that he reasoned with Peter in private. On 
 some public occasion he withstood and rebuked him. 
 Not the law, but Christ,could save. Why should Peter, 
 who had once set himself free from the law, bind its 
 chains again upon other people? If salvation was to 
 be by the law, then Christ was dead in vain. We 
 have no report of this dispute; but, whatever may 
 be thought of the method of treatment, it is likely 
 that the course taken by St. Paul did much to clear 
 the ground in that momentous controversy. Bar- 
 nabas, it is plain, must have retracted ; and as for 
 Peter, if I am right in supposing that this event pre- 
 ceded the Council at Jerusalem, we know how he 
 regarded the Gentiles. God “ put no difference be- 
 tween us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.” 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 1S7, 
 
 The grace of God, which raises men’s hearts by 
 degrees into conformity with the Divine image, does 
 not suddenly destroy the old nature. St. Peter is 
 still the same impulsive man who could now confess 
 the Christ, and now, when troubles came, deny Him ; 
 who could follow him bravely into danger, yet be 
 overcome by the gossiping remark of a girl that met 
 him by chance. We must not try this case by the 
 standard of Anglo-Saxon consistency ; we sometimes 
 perhaps run the risk of purchasing too dearly that 
 favourite virtue, at the price of zeal and ardour. We 
 are not naturally indulgent towards that impulsive 
 nature, which the great Apostle, more Jewish in this 
 than the Jews, derived from his race. Anxious to 
 please, and to be in sympathy with those about him, 
 he rejoiced at first in the Gentile freedom ; until 
 those came about him who were full of prejudice 
 for their venerable law, its severe conditions of com- 
 munion, its austere separation. Let us neither praise 
 nor blame ; let us only say, Grace has not yet wrought 
 her perfect work in this Apostle’s heart. 
 
 Nor has the other great Apostle yet learned all 
 that the school of grace can teach him. Face to 
 face, before the whole Church, he rebukes and 
 humbles a brother, whom Christ had honoured, who 
 had laboured much, and turned many from darkness 
 to light. He quotes it asa proof of his independ- 
 ence amongst the Apostles, not without complacency. 
 All this is consistent with his bold and resolute 
 nature, which marched straight to its object, and 
 refused to swerve, either out of respect of persons or 
 out of fear. His steadfast resolution, that Christ 
 should be all in all, came from above ; his manner of 
 compassing it bears clear marks of his old nature. 
 That blessed change under the power of grace can 
 be perhaps more fully studied in St. Paul’s career 
 than anywhere else in Church history; the strong, 
 loving, fierce, harsh nature,—you see the faults trans- 
 formed to virtues, the angles rounded off, the strong 
 
158 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 will made obedient to the bit and bridle of love ; and 
 yet it is the same man still. You recognise the old 
 features of the portrait, but it is transfigured by a 
 preternatural light. Again, we will not praise nor 
 blame; we will rather recognise the power of the 
 mighty Spirit of God ; which cculd use for His pur- 
 poses the timid impulse of one man and the impatient 
 zeal of another, for building up the House of God ; 
 and at the same time could take in hand the timid 
 and the impatient natures alike, and give courage to 
 the one and softness to the other, thus building at 
 onetimethe great House of God and carving delicately 
 each living stone of which the House is compacted. 
 
 I need not expose before you, Right Reverend 
 Fathers, the theory of Apostolic history which has 
 been built chiefly on this passage. That a permanent 
 quarrel and schism arose from this time between the 
 two Apostles, lasting to the very end; that the 
 history of the Apostolic age is the tale of this great 
 struggle between the Apostle who would maintain 
 and the Apostle who would abolish the Mosaic law, 
 with the efforts made from time to time to make 
 peace between them; these positions have been main- 
 tained by Baur and others, with great ingenuity, with 
 wonderful exaggeration. Every page of the Gospels 
 is supposed to bear marks of the struggle: Acts and 
 Epistles are full of it. Modern criticism is as fanciful 
 at times as those simple folk that peopled every wood 
 with fays and sprites, looked for a dryad under every 
 leaf and a nymph in every brook, and made out in the 
 ordinary noises of the forest the voice of the god Pan. 
 Common sense will not find anything in the Gospels 
 that amounts even toa trace of this contention. Such 
 a rupture could not have happened without leaving 
 great marks everywhere. There are none. Luke, 
 the friend of St. Paul, records in his Gospel things 
 that tend to St. Peter's honour, which the other 
 Gospels do not quote. Silas, the companion of Paul, 
 was also the friend and companion of Peter. (1 Pet. 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 159 
 
 v. 12.) Lastly, when Peter writes his First Epistle to 
 the Churches of Asia Minor, which Paul had founded, 
 he says not a word to disparage the teaching of their 
 founder : he says, “that this is the true,grace of God, 
 wherein ye stand.” None of these things is consis- 
 tent with the theory of a feud and hatred between 
 these two chief pillars of the Church. Critics magnify 
 divergent opinions into schisms; a scratch into a 
 gaping wound. Had those two noble natures gone 
 asunder, in lasting wrath, every page of Church 
 history would have borne loud witness to the great- 
 ness of their sin. 
 
 It is very common for us to look up out of our 
 welter of troubles, our sects, and schisms, and dispu- 
 tations, and to see far back in the first ages nothing 
 but peace ; a united Church, offering its harmonious, 
 universal praise, a well-drilled army, marching in 
 obedience to a single will, a code of faith which 
 always, everywhere, all the faithful heard, and without 
 questioning believed. But as the student draws near, 
 the objects grow more distinct, the mists disperse, 
 the shadows separate, and fall into their places ; and 
 the rose-flush of the dawn ceases to conceal the true 
 colours of that primeval region. Then we come to 
 see something very different from our preconceptions, 
 and learn, what is indeed gladness to learn, that upon 
 the whole, in the old time as in the new, the Holy 
 Spirit sent of the Lord has wrought in the Church 
 in the same manner. He was a Spirit of light and 
 life and comfort to the souls of men; but then, as 
 now, the men were enlightened, not transformed. 
 And the glory of God’s great work lay in this—not 
 that the powers, wishes, and passions of the actors 
 were petrified into a lifeless uniformity, and the 
 superseding life from heaven took their place : but 
 rather that, using as His instruments men so weak and 
 perverse, He built with them the Church of God. 
 To me, I do confess, it is a comfort to know that the 
 Church in the first age grew by the same principles 
 
160 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 as it grows by in the nineteenth ; that the very divi- 
 sions amongst us have their counterparts in the age 
 of the Apostles, and that our disputes, like theirs, may 
 be but permitted struggles and aberrations of us who 
 are acting out God’s great commands, and that all 
 the while He is making perfect the circle of His 
 purpose, and accomplishing His Kingdom. The 
 Evangelists were not four scribes, inditing with 
 servile hands a manifesto for the new kingdom of 
 heaven: they were men full of the Holy Ghost, 
 whose task came upon them in the course of God’s 
 work, imposed by the march of events, yet not less 
 truly by the voice of God, by whom the events were 
 ordered. Are the Gospels less dear to you and me, 
 from our knowing that oral preaching must have pre- 
 ceded them, that other histories and treatises must 
 have been written, of greater and of less importance, 
 of which the inspired Evangelists had knowledge ? 
 That they wrote at last on account of the spreading 
 of the Church, and the gradual dispersion of the Jews, 
 and the approaching doom of the Holy City? The 
 Gospels are four green branches on the growing 
 stem of the Church; are they therefore less divine 
 to us who believe that the growth of the Church 
 was divine? Beneath that growing tree the thorny 
 branches of the old ceremonial law withered, gradu- 
 ally, and there were disputes like this one between 
 Paul and Peter, as to how and when the dead boughs 
 should be cleared away. But the question has been 
 wisely settled: it disturbs us no more, albeit the 
 settlement was gradual and not without strife. The 
 Church has grown, as all things seem to grow, by 
 the life within her striving to perfect itself amidst 
 opposing forces. So grows the acorn, pushing its 
 weak shoots through hard ground, and its strength 
 and dignity are not less that once the swinish jaws 
 narrowly missed devouring the mast, and the 
 swinish foot did actually trample it into the clay. 
 So grew the liberties of the English people: are they 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 161 
 
 less dear to us because they have been threatened, and 
 at times eclipsed in the past? So grow the mind 
 and spirit of a man, passing through trials and efforts, 
 even through falls, to the ripeness of a resolute, 
 tolerant, patient, helpful age. So grew the Church of 
 Christ ; and her life is not less real, less secure, if she 
 has passed sometimes through fears and fightings, and 
 the deep waters of the proud have seemed to go even 
 over her life. At one time Athanasius has had to stand 
 against a world; at another a Hildebrand imperils 
 the Church by making it the supreme Kingdom 
 amongst the earthly kingdoms. Worldly motives are 
 said to have tainted the reformation of religion in this 
 country ; and it is true. So much the greater is our 
 reason for blessing God, that the sweet honeycomb has 
 come from the lion’s carcase; that amid the strifes 
 and selfishness of kings, and the ignorance of peoples, 
 the truth passed safely. So even now the Church is 
 growing, and God dwelling in her gives the increase. 
 We seem in deadly peril : there is unbelief on one side, 
 and on the other that deadening system which would 
 hand over the conscience to the priest, and the priest 
 to a medizval theology, hostile to knowledge and 
 incapable of change. “The waves of the sea are 
 mighty, and rage horribly, but yet the Lord that 
 dwelleth on high is mightier.” 
 
 Yet there is one more lesson which the study of 
 the past might bring us. By the vehemence of past 
 disputes, nay by the bitter hatred that they have 
 brought in, one might think that men had lost faith 
 in the power of the Holy Ghost to keep safe the ark 
 of God upon the stormy waters. To “withstand to 
 the face” has been the common remedy for emer- 
 gencies. It may be permitted usreverently to doubt 
 whether the pulse of divine life in the Church has 
 been hastened by one beat, by the violence of the 
 zealous, who have thought well to be angry for the 
 cause of God. Through strife, but not by strife, 
 the Church has passed upon her way. And we, 
 
162 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 Right Reverend Fathers, meeting a second time 
 in conference upon the interests of that branch 
 of the Church, which springing from this little island, 
 has so spread over the earth that the sun never sets 
 upon her daughter Churches, we will never admit 
 a doubt that God is with us still. Struggle and 
 conflict, and even partial failure shall not convince 
 us that God has left us; they are the heritage of 
 the Church from the beginning. The faces that we 
 miss, and they are many, are of those that have passed 
 to rest ; but the very words remind us that for us 
 there is not rest. And whilst we are resolved to hold 
 fast the faith committed to us, we may endeavour in 
 one point to go beyond our fathers: the candour and 
 the charity that springs from a firm trust in the truth, 
 these should be our aim and special study. More than 
 one writer has been pleased to point out that in the 
 first century were three periods in which three 
 Apostles, Peter, Paul, and John, predominated in 
 succession: and they think they can trace the same 
 succession in the larger field of Church history, 
 so that the Petrine period ends at the Reformation, 
 and the Pauline succeeds it, whilst the time of 
 St. John is supposed to be beginning. There is 
 something fanciful in this arrangement. Yet pardon 
 the fancy for the truth that underlies it. And when 
 Peter falters, impulsive, and is inconsistent with 
 himself, and Paul withstands him to the face, let the 
 third Apostle enter on the scene, and remind us that 
 we can afford to use the largest charity whilst we 
 hold still the firmest trust. His contribution to the 
 eternal diapason of the Church’s faith and love shall 
 be this : ‘Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the 
 Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. 
 .... And this commandment have we from him, 
 That he who loveth God love his brother also.’ (1 John 
 iV. 155) Zi.) 
 
Official “ Letter” of 1878. 163 
 
 No. XXI. (See page 32.) 
 
 Letter of the Bishops attending the Lambeth Conference 
 of 1878, including the Reports adopted by the 
 Conference. 
 
 CONDENS: 
 
 Introductory ... : ΝΣ 1. page 64 
 
 Report of Commitee on “ The ἜΝ ΣΟΥ of maintaining 
 Union among the various Churches of the Anglican 
 Communion” ... 164 
 
 Report of Committee on “ ‘einen Boatds of Atbierat 
 tion for Churches to which such an arrangement 
 may be applicable” ἢ, Ἴ 171 
 
 Report of Committee on “The felation to Ncaehk ἘΠΕῚ of 
 Missionary Bishops and of Missionaries of various 
 branches of the Anglican Suara acting in the 
 same country” ... an d : 174 
 
 Report of Committee on “The poston of ΠΣ 
 Chaplains and eed pale on the Continent of 
 Europe and elsewhere ἢ. ane 41 ΠΗ 170 
 
 Report of Committee appointed to receive questions sat! 
 mitted to them, in writing, by Bishops desiring the 
 advice of the Conference on difficulties or problems 
 they have met with in their several Dioceses, and to 
 report thereon ... τοῦ ate See ach “80 
 
 Conclusion... 28 sa τὸς νὸς τοὶ ἘΠ 180 
 
 Notes 
 
164 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 LEDERER 
 
 TO THE FAITHFUL IN CHRIST JESUS, GREETING— 
 
 We, Archbishops, Bishops Metropolitan, and other 
 Bishops of the Holy Catholic Church, in full com- 
 munion with the Church of England, one hundred in 
 number, all exercising superintendence over Dioceses, 
 or lawfully commissioned to exercise Episcopal func- 
 tions therein, assembled, many of us from the most 
 distant parts of the earth, at Lambeth Palace, in the 
 year of our Lord 1878, under the presidency of the 
 most reverend Archibald Campbell, by Divine Pro- 
 vidence Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of all 
 England ; after receiving, in the private Chapel of 
 the said Palace, the blessed Sacrament of the Lord’s 
 Body and Blood, and after having united in prayer 
 for the guidance of the Holy Spirit, have taken into 
 our consideration various definite questions submitted 
 to us affecting the condition of the Church in divers 
 parts of the world, 
 
 We have made these questions the subject of 
 serious deliberation for many days, and we now com- 
 mend to the faithful the conclusions which have been 
 adopted. 
 
 Report of Committee on the best mode of maintaining 
 union among the various Churches of the Anglican 
 Communion. 
 
 1.—In considering the best mode of maintaining 
 union among the various Churches of our Communion, 
 the Committee, first of all, recognise, with deep 
 thankfulness to Almighty God, the essential and 
 evident unity in which the Church of England and 
 the Churches in visible communion with her have 
 
Official “ Letter” of 1878. 165 
 
 always been bound together.! United under One 
 Divine Head inthe fellowship of the One Catholic 
 and Apostolic Church, holding the One Faith revealed 
 in Holy Writ, defined in the Creeds, and maintained 
 by the Primitive Church, receiving the same Canonical 
 Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as con- 
 taining all things necessary to salvation—these 
 Churches teach the same Word of God, partake of 
 the same divinely-ordained Sacraments, through the 
 ministry of the same Apostolic orders, and worship 
 one God and Father through the same Lord Jesus 
 Christ, by the same Holy and Divine Spirit, Who is 
 given to those that believe, to guide them into all 
 truth. 
 
 2.—Together with this unity, however, there has 
 existed among these Churches that variety of custom, 
 discipline, and form of worship which necessarily 
 results from the exercise by each “particular or 
 national Church” of its right “to ordain, change, and 
 abolish ceremonies or rites of the Church ordained 
 only by man’s authority, so that all things be done 
 to edifying.” We gladly acknowledge that there is 
 at present no real ground for anxiety on account of 
 this diversity ; but the desire has of late been largely 
 felt and expressed, that some practical and efficient 
 methods should be adopted, in order to guard against 
 possible sources of disunion in the future, and at the 
 same time further to manifest and cherish that true 
 and substantial agreement which exists among these 
 increasingly numerous Churches. 
 
 3.—The method which first naturally suggests itself 
 is that which, originating with the inspired Apostles 
 long served to hold all the Churches of Christ in one 
 undivided and visible communion. The assembling, 
 however, of a true General Council, such as the 
 Church of England has always declared her readiness 
 to resort to, is, in the present condition of Christen- 
 
 1 Note A, p. 187. 
 
166 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 dom, unhappily but obviously impossible. The diffi- 
 culties attending the assembling of a Synod of all 
 the Anglican Churches, though different in character 
 and less serious in nature, seem to us nevertheless 
 too great to allow of our recommending it for present 
 adoption. 
 
 4.—The experiment, now twice tried, of a Con- 
 ference of Bishops called together by the Archbishop 
 of Canterbury, and meeting under his presidency, 
 offers at least the hope that the problem, hitherto 
 unsolved, of combining together for consultation 
 representatives of Churches so differently situated 
 and administered, may find, in the providential 
 course of events, its own solution.! Your Committee 
 would, on this point, venture to suggest that such 
 Conferences, called together from time to time by 
 the Archbishop of Canterbury, at the request of, or 
 in consultation with, the Bishops of our Communion, 
 might with advantage be invested in future with 
 somewhat larger liberty as to the initiation and 
 selection of subjects for discussion. For example, a 
 Committee might be constituted, such as should 
 represent, more or less completely, the several 
 Churches of the Anglican Communion ; and to this 
 Committee it might be entrusted to draw up, after 
 receiving communications from the Bishops, a scheme 
 of subjects to be discussed. 
 
 5.—Meanwhile, there are certain principles of 
 Church order which, your Committee consider, ought 
 to be distinctly recognized and set forth, as of great 
 importance for the maintenance of union among the 
 Churches of our Communion. 
 
 (1.) First, that the duly-certified action of every 
 national or particular Church, and of each ecclesias- 
 tical Province (or Diocese not included in a Province), 
 in the exercise of its own discipline, should be 
 
 
 
 ' Note B, p 188. 
 
Official “ Letter” of 1878. 167 
 
 respected by all the other Churches, and by their 
 individual members. 
 
 (2.) Secondly, that when a Diocese, or territorial 
 sphere of administration, has been constituted by the 
 authority of any Church or Province of this Com- 
 munion within its own limits, no Bishop or other 
 Clergyman of any other Church should exercise his 
 functions within that Diocese without the consent of 
 the Bishop thereof! 
 
 (3.) Thirdly, that no Bishop should authorize to 
 officiate in his Diocese a clergyman coming from 
 another Church or Province, unless such Clergyman 
 present letters testimonial, countersigned by the 
 Bishop of the Diocese from which he comes ; such 
 letters to be, as nearly as possible, in the form 
 adopted by such Church or Province in the case of 
 the transfer of a clergyman from one Diocese to 
 another. 
 
 Passing to details, your Committee would call 
 attention to the following points :— 
 
 1—Of Church Organization. 
 
 6.—Inasmuch as the sufficient and effective organ- 
 ization of the several parts of the Church tends to 
 promote the unity of the whole, your Committee 
 would, with this view, repeat the recommendation 
 in the sixth report of the first Lambeth Conference,? 
 that those Dioceses which still remain isolated should, 
 as circumstances may allow, associate themselves into 
 a Province or Provinces, in accordance with the 
 ancient laws and usages of the Catholic Church. 
 
 
 
 ‘ This does not refer to questions respecting missionary 
 Bishops and foreign chaplaincies, which have been entrusted 
 to other Committees. 
 
 2 Note ΟῚ Tor. 
 
168 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 TOF, Common Work. 
 
 7.—Believing that the unity of our Churches will 
 be especially manifested and strengthened by their 
 uniting together in common work, your Committee 
 would call attention to the great value of such 
 co-operation wherever the opportunity shall present 
 itself ; as, for example, in founding and maintaining, 
 in the missionary fields, schools for the training of a 
 native ministry, such as that which is now contem- 
 plated in Shanghai, and, generally, as far as may be 
 possible, in prosecuting missionary work, such as 
 that which the Churches in England and Scotland 
 are maintaining together in Kaffraria. 
 
 111.—Of Commendatory Letters. 
 
 8—(1.) This Committee would renew the recom- 
 mendation of the first Lambeth Conference, that 
 letters commendatory should be given by their own 
 Bishops to clergymen visiting for a time other 
 Churches than those to which they belong. 
 
 (2). They would urge yet more emphatically the 
 importance of letters commendatory being given by 
 their own clergymen to members of their flocks 
 going from one country to another. And they con- 
 sider it desirable that the clergy should urge on such 
 persons the duty of promptly presenting these 
 letters, and should carefully instruct them as to the 
 oneness of the Church in its Apostolical constitution 
 under its varying organization and conditions. 
 
 It may not, perhaps, be considered foreign to this 
 subject to suggest here the importance of impressing 
 upon our people the extent and geographical dis- 
 tribution of our Churches, and of reminding them 
 that there is now hardly any part of the world where 
 members of our Communion may not find a Church 
 one with their own in faith, order, and worship. 
 
Official “ Letter” of 1878. 169 
 
 1V.—Of circulating Information as to the Churches. 
 
 g.—It appears that the want has been much felt 
 of some centre of communication among the 
 Churches in England, Ireland, Scotland, America, 
 India, the Colonies, and elsewhere, through which 
 ecclesiastical documents of importance might be 
 mutually circulated, and in which copies of them 
 might be retained for reference. Your Committee 
 would suggest that the Society for Promoting 
 Christian Knowledge might be requested to maintain 
 a department for this purpose, supported by special 
 contributions ; and also that provision might be made 
 for the more general dissemination in each Church 
 of information respecting the acts and current history 
 of all the rest. They recommend that the Reports 
 and other proceedings of this Conference, which it 
 may think fit to publish, should be communicated 
 through this channel. They further think it desi- 
 rable that the official acts, and other published 
 documents of each representative body of this Com- 
 munion, should be interchanged among the respective 
 Bishops and the officers of such bodies. 
 
 v.—Of a Day of Intercession. 
 
 10.—Remembering the blessing promised to united 
 intercession, and believing that such intercession 
 ever tends to deepen and strengthen that unity of 
 His Church for which Our Lord earnestly pleaded 
 in His great intercessory prayer, your Committee 
 trust that this Conference will give the weight of its 
 recommendation to the observance throughout the 
 Churches of this Communion of a season of prayer 
 for the unity of Christendom. This recommendation 
 has been, to some extent, anticipated by the practice 
 adopted of late years of setting apart a Day of 
 Intercession for Missions. Your Committee would 
 
 M 
 
170 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 by no means wish to interfere with an observance 
 which appears to have been widely accepted, and 
 signally blessed of God. But, as our Divine Lord 
 has so closely connected the unity of His followers 
 with the world’s belief in His own Mission from the 
 Father, it seems to us that intercessions for the 
 enlargement of His Kingdom may well be joined 
 with earnest prayer that all who profess faith in Him 
 may be one flock under one Shepherd. With respect 
 to the day, your Committee have been informed that 
 the Festival of St. Andrew, hitherto observed as the 
 Day of Intercession for Missions, is found to be 
 unsuitable to the circumstances of the Church in 
 many parts of the world. They, therefore, venture 
 to suggest that, after the present year, the time 
 selected should be the Tuesday before Ascension 
 Day (being a Rogation Day), or any of the seven 
 days after that Tuesday; and they hope that all 
 the Bishops of the several Churches will commend 
 this observance to their respective Dioceses. 
 
 vi—Of Diversities in Worship. 
 
 I1.—Your Committee, believing that, next to 
 oneness in “the Faith once delivered to the saints,” 
 communion in worship is the link which most firmly 
 binds together bodies of Christian men, and remem- 
 bering that the book of Common Prayer, retained as 
 it is, with some modifications, by all our Churches, 
 has been one principal bond of union among them, 
 desire to call attention to the fact that such com- 
 munion in worship may be endangered by excessive 
 diversities of ritual. They believe that the internal 
 unity of the several Churches will help greatly to the 
 union of these one with another. And, while they 
 consider that such large elasticity in the forms of 
 worship is desirable as will give wide scope to all 
 legitimate expressions of devotional feeling, they 
 
Official “ Letter” of 1878. ΤΙ 
 
 would appeal, on the other hand, to the Apostolic 
 precept that “all things be done unto edifying,” and 
 to the Catholic principle that order and obedience, 
 even at the sacrifice of personal preferences and 
 tastes, lie at the foundation of Christian unity, and 
 are even essential to the successful maintenance of 
 the Faith. 
 
 12.—They cannot leave this subject without ex- 
 pressing an earnest hope that Churchmen of all 
 views, however varying, will recognise the duty of 
 submitting themselves, for conscience sake, in matters 
 ritual and ceremonial, to the authoritative judgments 
 of that particular or national Church in which, by 
 God’s Providence, they may be placed; and that 
 they will abstain from all that tends to estrangement 
 or irritation, and will rather daily and fervently pray 
 that the Holy Spirit may guide every member of the 
 Church to “think and do always such things as be 
 rightful,’ and that He may unite us all in that 
 brotherly charity which is “the very bond of peace 
 and of all virtues.” 
 
 Report of Committee on Voluntary Boards of Arbi- 
 tration for Churches to which such an arrangement 
 
 may be applicable. 
 
 1.—Your Committee beg to submit the following 
 Report :— 
 
 2.—The necessity for considering the subject 
 which is entrusted to your Committee—namely, 
 Voluntary Boards of Arbitration for Churches to 
 which such an arrangement may be applicable—has 
 arisen from the fact that there is no appeal from the 
 Ecclesiastical Tribunals in the Colonial Churches to 
 any of the ordinary Ecclesiastical Courts of England, 
 or to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, 
 when advising Her Majesty on appeals from Eccle- 
 siastical Courts. No questions relating to the exer- 
 
 M 2 
 
172 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 cise of discipline in a Colonial Church can come 
 before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, 
 except on appeal from Civil Courts in the colony, 
 exercising jurisdiction in matters affecting property 
 or civil rights. The subject, therefore, before your 
 Committee is not the constitution or jurisdiction of 
 Provincial or Diocesan tribunals, but whether there 
 should be some external tribunals or “ Voluntary 
 Boards of Arbitration” to which an appeal or refer- 
 ence ought to be made; how such Boards, when 
 necessary, should be constituted; and under what 
 circumstances they should be approached. 
 
 3.—Your Committee, having taken into considera- 
 tion the whole question, especially with reference to 
 the action of some of the Colonial Churches since 
 1867, when a Report bearing upon this subject was 
 prepared by a Committee of the Lambeth Confer- 
 ence held in that year, would make the following 
 general recommendations :— 
 
 4.—I. (a) Every Ecclesiastical Province, which has 
 constituted for the exercise of discipline over its 
 clergy a tribunal for receiving appeals from its 
 Diocesan Courts, should be held responsible for its 
 own decisions in the exercise of such discipline ; and 
 your Committee are not prepared to recommend that 
 there should be any one central tribunal of appeal 
 from such Provincial tribunals. 
 
 5.—(6) If any Province is desirous that its tri- 
 bunals of appeal should have power to obtain, in 
 matters of doctrine, or of discipline involving a 
 question of doctrine, the opinion of some council of 
 reference before pronouncing sentence, your Com- 
 mittee consider that the conditions of such reference 
 must be determined by the Province itself; but that 
 the opinion of the council should be given on a con- 
 sideration of the facts of the case, sent up to it in 
 writing by the tribunal of appeal, and not merely on 
 an abstract question of doctrine. 
 
 6.—(c) In Dioceses which have not yet been com- 
 
Official “ Letter” of 1878. 173 
 
 bined into a Province, or which may be geographically 
 incapable of being so combined, your Committee 
 recommend that appeals should lie from the Diocesan 
 Courts to the Archbishop of Canterbury, to be heard 
 by his Grace with such assistance as he may deem 
 best. The circumstances of each Diocese must 
 determine how such consensual jurisdiction could be 
 enforced. 
 
 7.—II. As regards the very grave question of the 
 trial of a Bishop, inasmuch as any tribunal, consti- 
 tuted for this purpose by a Province, is necessarily a 
 tribunal of first instance, it would, in the opinion of 
 your Committee, be expedient that, when any such 
 provisions can be introduced by voluntary compact 
 into the constitutions or canons of any Church, the 
 following conditions should be observed :— 
 
 8.—(a) When any Bishop shall have been sen- 
 tenced by the tribunal constituted for the trial of a 
 Bishop in any Ecclesiastical Province, if no Bishop 
 of the Province, other than the accused, shall dissent 
 from the judgment, there should be no appeal, pro- 
 vided that the case be heard by not fewer than five 
 Bishops, who shall be unanimous in their judgment. 
 
 9g.—() If, in consequence of the small number of 
 Bishops in a Province, or from any other sufficient 
 cause, a tribunal of five comprovincial Bishops can- 
 not be formed, your Committee would suggest that 
 the Province should provide for the enlargement of 
 the tribunal by the addition of Bishops from a 
 neighbouring Province. 
 
 10.—(c) In the event of the Provincial tribunal 
 not fulfilling the conditions indicated in paragraph 8 
 of this Report, your Committee would suggest that, 
 whenever an external tribunal of appeal is not pro- 
 vided in the Canons of that Province, it should be 
 in the power of the accused Bishop, if condemned, 
 to require the Provincial tribunal to refer the case to 
 at least five Metropolitans or chief Bishops of the 
 Anglican Communion to be named in the said 
 
174 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 Canons, of whom the Archbishop of Canterbury 
 should be one ; and that, if any three of these shall 
 require that the case, or any portion of it, shall be 
 re-heard or reviewed, it should be so re-heard or 
 reviewed. 
 
 11.—(d@) In cases in which an Ecclesiastical Pro- 
 vince desires to have a tribunal of appeal from its 
 Provincial tribunal for trying a Bishop, your Com- 
 mittee consider that such tribunal should consist of 
 not less than five Bishops of the Churches of the 
 Anglican Communion, under the presidency of the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, if his Grace will consent 
 thereto, with the assistance of laymen learned in the 
 law. 
 
 Report of Committee on the relation to each other of 
 Missionary Bishops and’ of Missionaries of 
 various branches of the Anglican Communion 
 acting in the same country. 
 
 1.—Your Committee beg to submit the following 
 Report :— 
 i[- 
 
 2.—Your Committee have had before them the 
 question of providing Books of Common Prayer for 
 converts from heathenism, suitable to the special 
 wants of various countries ; and they recommend as 
 follows :— 
 
 3.—They think it very important that such books 
 should not be introduced or multiplied without proper 
 authority ; and, since grave inconvenience might 
 follow the use of different Prayer Books in the same 
 district, in English and American Missions, they 
 recommend that, whenever it is possible, one Prayer 
 Book only should be in use. 
 
 4.—It is expedient that Books of Common Prayer, 
 suitable to the needs of native congregations in 
 heathen countries, should be framed : that the prin- 
 
Official “ Letter” of 1878. 175 
 
 ciples embodied in such books should be identical 
 with the principles embodied in the Book of Common 
 Prayer ; and that the deviations from the Book of 
 Common Prayer in point of form should only be 
 such as are required by the circumstances of par- 
 ticular churches. 
 
 5.—In the case of heathen countries not under 
 English or American rule, any such book should be 
 approved by a Board consisting of the Bishop or 
 Bishops under whose authority the book is intended 
 to be used, and of certain clergymen, not less than 
 three where possible, from the diocese or dioceses, or 
 district, and should then be communicated by such 
 Bishop or Bishops, or by the Metropolitan of the 
 province to which any such Bishop belongs, to a 
 Board in England, consisting of the Archbishops of 
 England and Ireland, the Bishop of London, the 
 Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, together 
 with two Bishops and four clergymen selected by 
 them, and also to a Board appointed by the General 
 Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in 
 the United States of America. 
 
 6.—No such book should be held to have been 
 authorised for use in public worship unless it have 
 received the sanction of these two Boards. 
 
 7.—In any Diocese of a country under English 
 rule all such new books, being modifications or 
 versions of the Book of Common Prayer, should be 
 submitted, after approval by local authority, to the 
 Board in England only. 
 
 II. 
 
 8.—Your Committee have considered the case of 
 Missions in countries not under English or American 
 rule, and they recommend as follows :— 
 
 g.—In cases where two Bishops of the Anglican 
 Communion are ministering in the same country, as 
 in China, Japan, and Western Africa at the present 
 
176 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 time, your Committee are of opinion that under 
 existing circumstances each Bishop should have 
 control of his own clergy, and their converts and 
 congregations. 
 
 10.—The various Bishops in the same country 
 should endeavour, as members of the same Com- 
 munion, to keep up brotherly intercourse with each 
 other on the subject of their Missionary work. 
 
 11.—In countries not under English or American 
 rule, the English or American Church would not 
 ordinarily undertake to establish Dioceses with 
 strictly-defined territorial limits ; although either 
 Church might indicate the district in which it was 
 intended that the Missionary Bishop should labour. 
 
 12.—Bishops in the same country should take care 
 not to interfere in any manner with the congrega- 
 tions or converts of each other. 
 
 13.—It is most undesirable that either Church 
 should for the future send a Bishop or Missionaries 
 to a town or district already occupied by a Bishop 
 of another branch of the Anglican Communion. 
 
 14.—When it is intended to send forth any new 
 Missionary Bishop, notification of such an intention 
 should be sent beforehand to the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury, to the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant 
 Episcopal Church in the United States of America, 
 and to the Metropolitan of any Province near which 
 the Missionary Bishop is to minister. 
 
 III. 
 
 15.—Your Committee have had before them a 
 communication from the Bishop of Calcutta, dated 
 June 4th, 1878, containing Resolutions of the Bishops 
 of India and Ceylon, also a letter from Bishop Cald- 
 well, dated June Ist, 1878, on the subject of the 
 relation of Bishops abroad to the Missionaries in 
 their Dioceses or districts. 
 
Official “ Letter” of 1878. 177 
 
 16.—The questions raised by the Bishop of 
 Calcutta’s communication relate to the power and 
 authority of the Bishop in respect of giving and 
 withdrawing the licences, Ist, of the clergy under 
 his charge ; 2nd, of lay readers and catechists ; also 
 to the rights of the Bishop in reference to changes 
 in the management, order of service, and place of 
 worship of any congregation. 
 
 17.As regards the licensing of the clergy, it is 
 admitted generally that every Missionary clergyman, 
 whether appointed by a society or otherwise, should 
 receive the licence of the j;Bishop in whose Diocese 
 he is to labour ; but your Committee are of opinion 
 that, in case of refusal to give a licence to a clergy- 
 man, the Bishop should, if the clergyman desire it, 
 state the reasons of his refusal, and transmit them 
 to the Metropolitan, who should have power to 
 decide upon their sufficiency ; such reasons should 
 also be accessible to the person whose licence is in 
 question. Where there is no Metropolitan, the 
 reasons should be transmitted to the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury, who should decide in like manner. 
 
 18.—As regards the withdrawal of a licence, your 
 Committee find that in some Provinces the mode of 
 proceeding for revocation has been fixed by canon, 
 and the jurisdiction thus created has been established 
 by consent. For these places it is not necessary to 
 make any recommendations. Where no such juris- 
 diction exists, your Committee recommend that the 
 Bishop should in no case proceed to the revocation 
 of a clergyman’s licence without affording him the 
 opportunity of showing cause against it, and that if 
 the Bishop shall afterwards proceed to revoke the 
 licence, he should, if the clergyman desire it, state 
 the reasons for his decision to such clergyman, and 
 also to the Metropolitan, who should have power to 
 sanction or disallow the revocation. In cases where 
 there is no Metropolitan, the Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury should be regarded as the Metropolitan for this 
 
178 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 purpose. No such revocation should take place, 
 except for grave ecclesiastical offences. 
 
 19.—The Bishop would probably find it desirable, 
 where the clergyman is connected with one of the 
 great Missionary societies, to communicate with the 
 society, or its local representatives, before taking 
 steps for revocation of a licence. 
 
 20.—With regard to lay agents, your Committee 
 consider it desirable that such as are employed in 
 more important spiritual functions should have the 
 licence, or other express sanction of the Bishop ; and 
 that other laymen employed in Missionary work 
 should be considered to have the implied sanction of 
 the Bishop, and should not continue to be so em- 
 ployed, if the Bishop see fit, for a grave reason, to 
 forbid them. 
 
 21.—The authority of the Bishop in appointing 
 places for public worship has been always admitted 
 in the Church. Every place in which the Holy 
 Communion is regularly celebrated should have the 
 sanction of the Bishop. 
 
 22.—Your Committee have been asked for an 
 opinion as to Subordinate, Co-ordinate, or Suffragan 
 Bishops in India, to minister to native congregations, 
 within the limits of another Diocese. Your Com- 
 mittee think that there are manifest objections to 
 the appointment of a Bishop to minister to certain 
 congregations within the Diocese of another Bishop, 
 and wholly independent of him. Your Committee 
 think that, for the present, the appointment of 
 Assistant Bishops, whether European or native, sub- 
 ordinate to the Bishop of the Diocese, would meet 
 the special needs of India in this matter, and would 
 offer the best security for order and peace. 
 
Official “ Letter” of 1878. 179 
 
 Report of Committee on the position of Anglican 
 Chaplains and Chaplaincies on the Continent of 
 Europe and elsewhere. 
 
 1.—Your Committee have to report that they have 
 agreed to the following recommendations :— 
 
 2.—I. That it is highly desirable that Anglican 
 congregations, on the Continent of Europe and else- 
 where, should be distinctly urged not to admit the 
 stated ministrations of any clergyman without the 
 written licence or permission of the Bishop of the 
 Anglican Communion who is duly authorised to 
 grant it; and that the occasional assistance of 
 strangers should not be invited or permitted without 
 some satisfactory evidence of their ordination and 
 character as clergymen. 
 
 3.—II. That it is desirable, as a general rule, that 
 two chapels shall not be established where one is 
 sufficient for the members of both Churches, 
 American and English; also that where there is 
 only one church or chapel the members of both 
 Churches should be represented on the Committee, 
 if any. 
 
 4.—III. That it be suggested to the Societies 
 which partly support Continental Chaplaincies, that, 
 in places where English and American churchmen 
 reside or visit, and especially where Americans out- 
 number the English, it may be desirable to appoint 
 a properly-accredited clergyman of the American 
 Church. 
 
 5.—IV. That your Committee, having carefully 
 considered a Memorial addressed to the Archbishops 
 and Bishops of the Church of England by four 
 Priests and certain other members of “the Spanish 
 and Portuguese Reformed Episcopal Church,” pray- 
 ing for the consecration of a Bishop, cannot but 
 express their hearty sympathy with the Memorialists 
 in the difficulties of their position ; and, having heard 
 a statement on the subject of the proposed extension 
 
180 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 of the Episcopate to Mexico by the American 
 Church, they venture to suggest that, when a Bishop 
 shall have been consecrated by the American Church 
 for Mexico, he might be induced to visit Spain and 
 Portugal, and render such assistance at this stage of 
 the movement as may seem to him practicable and 
 advisable. 
 
 Report of Committee appointed to receive questions 
 submitted to them, in writing, by Bishops desiring 
 the advice of the Conference on difficulties or 
 problems they have met with in thetr several 
 Dioceses, and to report thereon. 
 
 Attention has been called to the following subjects 
 by questions submitted to your Committee :— 
 
 ia 
 
 1—The position which the Anglican Church 
 should assume towards the “Old Catholics” and 
 towards other persons on the Continent of Europe 
 who have renounced their allegiance to the Church of 
 Rome, and who are desirous of forming some con- 
 nection with the Anglican Church, either English or 
 American. 
 
 2.—Applications for intercommunion between 
 themselves and the Anglican Church from persons 
 connected with the Armenian and other Christian 
 communities in the East. 
 
 3.—The position of Moravian ministers within 
 the territorial limits of Dioceses of the Anglican 
 Communion. 
 
 B. 
 
 1.—The West Indian Dioceses. 
 (a) Their proposed Provincial organization. 
 (4) The position of their Diaconate. 
 2.—The Church of Haiti. 
 
Official “ Letter” of 1878. 181 
 (. 
 
 Local peculiarities regarding the Laws of Marriage. 
 
 18 
 
 A Board of Reference for matters connected with 
 Foreign Missions. 
 
 E 
 
 Difficulties arising in the Church of England from 
 the revival of obsolete forms of Ritual, and from 
 erroneous teaching on the subject of Confession. 
 
 Ns 
 
 The fact that a solemn protest is raised in so many 
 Churches and Christian communities throughout the 
 world against the usurpations of the See of Rome, 
 and against the novel doctrines promulgated by its 
 authority, is a subject for thankfulness to Almighty 
 God. All sympathy is due from the Anglican 
 Church to the Churches and individuals protesting 
 against these errors, and labouring, it may be, under 
 special difficulties, from the assaults of unbelief as 
 well as from the pretensions of Rome. 
 
 We acknowledge but one Mediator between God 
 and men—the Man Christ Jesus, Who is over all, 
 God blessed for ever. We reject, as contrary to the 
 Scriptures and to Catholic truth, any doctrine which 
 would set up other mediators in His place, or which 
 would take away from the Divine Majesty of the 
 fulness of the Godhead which dwelleth in Him, and 
 which gave an infinite value to the spotless Sacrifice 
 which He offered, once for all, on the Cross for the 
 sins of the whole world. 
 
 It is therefore our duty to warn the faithful that 
 the act done by the Bishop of Rome, in the Vatican 
 Council, in the year 1870—whereby he asserted a 
 supremacy over all men in matters both of faith and 
 
182 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 morals, on the ground of an assumed infallibility— 
 was an invasion of the attributes of the Lord Jesus 
 Christ. 
 
 The principles on which the Church of England 
 has reformed itself are well known. We proclaim 
 the sufficiency and supremacy of the Holy Scriptures 
 as the ultimate rule of faith,and commend to our 
 people the diligent study of the same. We confess 
 our faith in the words of the ancient Catholic creeds. 
 We retain the Apostolic order of Bishops, Priests, 
 and Deacons. We assert the just liberties of par- 
 ticular or national Churches. We provide our people, 
 in their own tongue, with a Book of Common Prayer 
 and Offices for the administration of the Sacraments, 
 in accordance with the best and most ancient types 
 of Christian faith and worship. These documents 
 are before the world, and can be known and read of 
 all men. We gladly welcome every effort for reform 
 upon the model of the Primitive Church. We do 
 not demand a rigid uniformity ; we deprecate need- 
 less divisions; but to those who are drawn to us in 
 the endeavour to free themselves from the yoke of 
 error and superstition we are ready to offer all help, 
 and such privileges as may be acceptable to them 
 and are consistent with the maintenance of our own 
 principles as enunciated in our formularies. 
 
 Your Committee recommend that questions of the 
 class now submitted to them be dealt with in this 
 spirit. For the consideration, however, of any definite 
 cases in which advice and assistance may, from time 
 to time, be sought, your Committee recommend that 
 the Archbishops of England and Ireland, with the 
 Bishop of London, the Primus of the Scottish Epis- 
 copal Church, and the Presiding Bishop of the 
 Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of 
 America, the Bishop superintending the congrega- 
 tions of the same upon the Continent of Europe, and 
 the Bishop of Gibraltar, together with such other 
 Bishops as they may associate with themselves, be 
 
Official “ Letter” of 1878. 183 
 
 requested to advise upon such cases as circumstances 
 may require. 
 
 With regard to the special questions now raised 
 respecting Moravian Orders,! the above-mentioned 
 prelates are recommended to associate with them- 
 selves such learned persons as they may deem emi- 
 nently qualified to assist them by their knowledge 
 of the historical difficulties involved. 
 
 B. 
 
 1.—(a) With respect to the West Indian Dioceses, 
 assuming such Dioceses to desire to be combined into 
 a Province, your Committee advise that the formal 
 consent of the Diocesan Representative Synods, if 
 free (as regards their relation to the State) to give 
 such consent, be first obtained. 
 
 The Bishops of the several Dioceses would then 
 forward such formal consent, or expressed desire, to 
 the Archbishop of Canterbury, requesting him to 
 give his sanction to the formation of the Province. 
 
 Whether the General Synod of the Province should 
 consist of the Bishops, with representatives of the 
 
 
 
 1 The special questions submitted were the following :— 
 
 “1, Ifa Moravian presbyter or deacon desires to be received 
 into the Anglican Ministry, ought I to (a) ordain him abso- 
 lutely ; (4) reordain him conditionally ; (c) accept his orders as 
 valid, and simply give him mission in the Anglican Church? 
 
 “>. Can I canonically and regularly commission a Bishop of 
 the Unitas Fratrum in my Diocese either to confirm or to ordain 
 for me, or to do both Episcopal acts according to the Anglican 
 ritual ? 
 
 “3. Am I justified, if called on, to confirm children, or ordain 
 presbyters or deacons, or do both for the Moravians, in their 
 churches, and according to their ritual ? 
 
 “4. May Anglican presbyters and deacons, with their Bishop’s 
 sanction, officiate and minister the sacraments in Moravian 
 churches, according to their ritual, and invite Moravian pres- 
 byters or deacons to execute the functions appertaining to their 
 office in Anglican churches, and according to Anglican ritual?” 
 
184 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 clergy and laity of the respective Dioceses, or should 
 consist of the Bishops of the Province only; and, in 
 the latter case, what limitation should be imposed 
 on the powers of such purely Episcopal Synod, is a 
 question which ought to be left to the Diocesan 
 Synods to decide, with the approval of the Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury. 
 
 If the West Indian Dioceses be formed into a 
 Province, it seems desirable that a Metropolitan 
 should be, in the first instance, elected from and 
 by the Bishops of the West Indian Dioceses. 
 
 (6) The questions! submitted respecting the pecu- 
 liar circumstances of the West Indian Diaconate 
 appear to your Committee, upon full consideration, 
 to be such as can be adequately decided only in 
 Diocesan or Provincial Synods. 
 
 2.—Your Committee desire to express their satis- 
 faction on learning that a Church in connexion with 
 the Anglican Communion has been planted in the 
 island of Haiti; that a Bishop has been consecrated 
 thereto by Bishops of the Protestant Episcopal 
 Church in the United States of America, and the 
 Bishop of Kingston, Jamaica; and that successful 
 efforts are being made for the training of a native 
 Ministry ; and your Committee trust that God’s 
 blessing may rest upon the Bishop, Priests, and 
 Deacons, and all other members of this Church. 
 
 
 
 ‘ These questions raised the following points :— 
 
 1. The desirableness, or otherwise, of recognising a Diaco- 
 nate which, in certain cases, shall be practicaliy permanent, 
 instead of regarding the Diaconate as the invariable step to 
 the Presbyterate. 
 
 2. The desirableness, or otherwise, of permitting Deacons 
 to engage in such secular callings as are not inconsistent with 
 the due and edifying discharge of sacred functions. 
 
 3. What modifications, if any, should be allowed as regards 
 the intellectual qualifications and tests to be required of, and 
 imposed on, such laymen as desire to become Deacons without 
 relinquishing their secular vocation. 
 
Official “ Letter” of 1878. 185 
 c: 
 
 With regard to those questions in connexion with 
 the Laws of Marriage which have been submitted 
 to them, your Committee, while fully recognising the 
 difficulties in which various branches of the Church 
 have been placed by the action of local Legislatures, 
 are of opinion that steps should be taken by each 
 branch of the Church, according to its own discre- 
 tion, to maintain the sanctity of marriage, agreeably 
 to the principles set forth in the Word of God, as 
 the Church of Christ hath hitherto received the 
 same. 
 
 D. 
 
 With respect to what has been submitted to us on 
 the subject of Foreign Missions, your Committee are 
 of opinion that it is desirable to appoint a Board of 
 Reference, to advise upon questions brought before 
 it either by Diocesan or Missionary Bishops or by 
 Missionary Societies. Your Committee are further 
 of opinion that the details of the formation and con- 
 stitution of such Board ought to be referred to the 
 Archbishops of England and Ireland, the Bishop of 
 London, the Primus of the Scottish Episcopal 
 Church, the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant 
 Episcopal Church in the United States of America, 
 with the Bishop superintending the congregations 
 of the same upon the Continent of Europe, and 
 such other Bishops as they may associate with them- 
 selves, who should communicate with the authorities 
 of the various Colonial Churches, and with the ex- 
 isting Missionary Organisations of the Anglican 
 Communion. 
 
 Ε. 
 
 Considering unhappy disputes on questions of 
 ritual, whereby divers congregations in the Church 
 of England and elsewhere have been seriously dis- 
 quieted, your Committee desire to affirm the prin- 
 
 N 
 
186 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 ciple that no alteration from long-accustomed ritual 
 should be made contrary to the admonition of the 
 Bishop of the Diocese. 
 
 Further, having in view certain novel practices 
 and teachings on the subject of Confession, your 
 Committee desire to affirm that in the matter of 
 Confession the Churches of the Anglican Communion 
 hold fast those principles which are set forth in the 
 Holy Scriptures, which were professed by the Primi- 
 tive Church, and which were re-affirmed at the 
 English Reformation; and it is their deliberate 
 opinion that no minister of the Church is authorised 
 to require from those who may resort to him to open 
 their grief a particular or detailed enumeration of 
 all their sins, or to require private confession previous 
 to receiving the Holy Communion, or to enjoin or 
 even encourage the practice of habitual confession 
 to a Priest, or to teach that such practice of habitual 
 confession, or the being subject to what has been 
 termed the direction of a Priest, is a condition of 
 attaining to the highest spiritual life. At the same 
 time your Committee are not to be understood as 
 desiring to limit in any way the provision made 
 in the Book of Common Prayer for the relief of 
 troubled consciences. 
 
 These are the Reports of the Conference, and the 
 practical conclusions at which we have arrived. 
 Some of these conclusions have reference to the 
 special circumstances of different branches of the 
 One Church of Christ, according to peculiarities of 
 their various Missionary work for the heathen, or 
 their labours amongst their own people ; some em- 
 body principles which apply to all branches of the 
 Church Universal. They are all limited in their 
 scope to those subjects which have been distinctly 
 brought before the assembled Bishops. We invite 
 to them the attention of the various Synods and 
 
Official “ Letter” of 1878. 187 
 
 other governing powers in the several Churches, and 
 of all the faithful in Christ Jesus throughout the 
 world. 
 
 We do not claim to be lords over God’s heritage, 
 but we commend the results of this our Conference 
 to the reason and conscience of our brethren as 
 enlightened by the Holy Spirit of God, praying that 
 all throughout the world who call upon the name of 
 our Lord Jesus Christ may be of one mind, may be 
 united in one fellowship, may hold fast the Faith 
 once delivered to the saints, and worship their one 
 Lord in the spirit of purity and love. 
 
 Signed, on behalf of the Conference, 
 A ©. CANE UAT: 
 
 C. J. GLOUCESTER AND BRISTOL, 
 Secretary of the Conference. 
 
 HENRY, BISHOP OF EDINBURGH, 
 Secretary of Committees. 
 
 I. BRUNEL, Chancellor of the Diocese of Ely, 
 Assistant Secretary. 
 
 NOTE A (page 165). 
 
 The Churches thus united are, at this time, the 
 Church of England and the Churches planted by 
 her in India, the Colonies, and elsewhere, most of 
 which Churches are associated into distinct Pro- 
 vinces!; the Church of Ireland; the Episcopal 
 
 
 
 ‘ There are six Provinces, viz. :— 
 India, with six Dioceses. 
 Canada, with nine Dioceses. 
 hRupertsland, with four Dioceses. 
 South Africa, with eight Dioceses. 
 Australia, with twelve Dioceses. 
 New Zealand, with seven Dioceses. 
 And there are twenty Dioceses not yet associated in Provinces. 
 N 2 
 
188 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 Church in Scotland; the Protestant Episcopal 
 Church in the United States of America, with its 
 Missionary Branches; and the Church in Haiti. 
 Among the external evidences of the unity of these 
 Churches, none is more significant than that 
 which frequently occurs—the uniting of Bishops of 
 different Churches, ἐσ, of English, Scottish, and 
 American Bishops, in that most important function 
 by which the Episcopal succession is continued. On 
 more than one occasion, also, the Church in Scotland 
 has consecrated a Bishop in behalf of the Church of 
 England, when legal difficulties have impeded the 
 consecration in England} 
 
 NOTE B (page 166). 
 
 One of the results of the first Lambeth Con- 
 ference was the appointment of a Committee to 
 prepare a Bill for placing on a more satisfactory 
 footing the status in England of clergy ordained by 
 Bishops of Colonial and other Churches outside the 
 Church in England. 
 
 A Bill to effect this object was introduced by 
 Lord Blachford into Parliament in the Session of 
 1873, and became law in the Session of 1874, under 
 the name of “The Colonial Clergy Act, 1874.” 
 (37 ἃ 38.Vict, cap. 77.) 
 
 The Act does not apply to the clergy of the 
 Episcopal Church in Scotland. The legal disabilities 
 of the Scottish clergy were removed, and their 
 position defined, by the Act 27 & 28 Vict., cap 94. 
 
 With this exception, the Act of 1874 deals with 
 the status of all clergy ordained by Bishops other 
 than Bishops of Dioceses in England and Ireland. 
 It proceeds upon the assumption that all clergymen 
 so ordained may be admitted to exercise their 
 functions in the Church of England; but that the 
 Bishops of that Church have a right, in respect of 
 
Official “ Letter” of 1878. 189 
 
 these clergy, to discretionary powers, analogous to 
 those which they have in the case of ordination. 
 
 The following are the provisions of the Act which 
 affect the clergy ordained by Bishops other than 
 those of (1) Dioceses in England; or (2) The 
 Church of Ireland ; or (3) The Episcopal Church in 
 Scotland. 
 
 “Section 3.—Except as hereinafter mentioned, no 
 person who has been or shall be ordained Priest or 
 Deacon, as the case may be, by any Bishop other 
 than a Bishop of a Diocese in one of the Churches 
 aforesaid shall, unless he shall hold or have pre- 
 viously held preferment or a curacy in England, 
 officiate as such Priest or Deacon in any church or 
 chapel in England, without written permission from 
 the Archbishop of the Province in which he proposes 
 to officiate, and without also making and subscribing 
 so much of the declaration contained in ‘The 
 Clerical Subscription Act, 1865,’ as follows—that 
 is to say: . 
 
 “«T assent to the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, 
 and to the Book of Common Prayer, and of the 
 Ordering of Bishops, Priests,and Deacons. I believe 
 the doctrine of the Church of England as therein 
 set forth to be agreeable to the Word of God ; and 
 in public prayer and administration of the sacra- 
 ments, I, whilst ministering in England, will use the 
 form in the said Book prescribed and none other, 
 except so far as shall be ordered by lawful authority.’ 
 
 “ Section 4.—Except as hereinafter mentioned, no 
 person who has been or shall be ordained Priest or 
 Deacon, as the case may be, by any Bishop other 
 than a Bishop of a Diocese in one of the Churches 
 aforesaid, shall be entitled as such Priest or Deacon 
 to be admitted or instituted to any benefice or other 
 ecclesiastical preferment in England, or to act as 
 Curate therein, without the previous consent in 
 writing of the Bishop of the Diocese in which suca 
 preferment or curacy may be situate. 
 
190 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 “ Section 5.—Any person holding ecclesiastical pre- 
 ferment, or acting as Curate in any Diocese in 
 England under the provisions of this Act, may, with 
 the written consent of the Bishop of such Diocese, 
 request the Archbishop of the Province to give him 
 a licence in writing under his hand and seal in the 
 following form—that is to say :— 
 
 “< Tothe Rev. AB, 
 
 ““ We, C., by Divine Providence Archbishop of D., 
 do hereby give you, the said A. &., authority to 
 exercise your office of Priest (0x Deacon) according 
 to the provisions of an Act of the thirty-seventh and 
 thirty-eighth years of her present Majesty, intituled 
 “An Act respecting Colonial and certain other 
 Clergy.” 
 
 “« Given under our hand and seal on the 
 day of 
 
 “* CGS) ΩΣ 
 
 And if the Archbishop shall think fit to issue such 
 licence, the same shall be registered in the registry of 
 the Province, and the person receiving the licence 
 shall thenceforth possess all such rights and advan- 
 tages, and be subject to all such duties and liabilities, 
 as he would have possessed and been subject to if 
 he had been ordained by the Bishop of a Diocese in 
 England: Provided that no such licence shall be 
 issued to any person who has not held ecclesiastical 
 preferment or acted as Curate for a period or periods 
 exceeding in the aggregate two years.” 
 
 The Act also contains the following provision as 
 to the Consecration of Bishops :— 
 
 “ Section 12.—It shall be lawful for the Archbishop 
 of Canterbury or the Archbishop of York, for the 
 time being, in consecrating any person to the office 
 of a Bishop, for the purpose of exercising Episcopal 
 functions elsewhere than in England, to dispense, if 
 
Latin Version of “ Letter” of 1878. ΙΟΙ 
 
 he think fit, with the oath of due obedience to the 
 Archbishop.” 
 
 NOTE C (page 167). 
 
 The following extract from the Report refers to 
 this subject :—“ Your Committee strongly recommend 
 that all those Dioceses which are not as yet gathered 
 into Provinces should, as soon as possible, form part 
 of some Provincial organization. The particular 
 mode of effecting this in each case must be deter- 
 mined by those who are concerned.” 
 
 The Committee would also call attention to the 
 concluding paragraph of the same Report :— 
 
 “Tn the case of the limits of an existing Province 
 being altered, the consent of the Synod of that 
 Province would be required for the alteration.” 
 
 
 
 No. XXII. (See page 32.) 
 
 Latin and Greek Versions of the Lishops Letter of 
 1878. 
 
 BrIStOLA CENTUM, EPISCOPOKRUM 
 
 IN ANGLIA CONGREGATORUM, IN PALATIO LAM- 
 BETHANO, MENSE JULIO, 
 
 ANNO SALUTIS MDCCCLXXVIII. 
 
 Fidelibus in Christo salutem in Domino. 
 
 Nos Archiepiscopi, Metropolitani, aliique Episcopi 
 Sancte Catholice Ecclesia, centum numero, cum 
 Ecclesia Anglicana plenarié communicantes, universi 
 super Diceceses jurisdictionem Episcopalem exerci- 
 tantes, vel ad Episcopalia munia in eis obeunda legi- 
 
192 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 time delegati, multi nostrim ex remotissimis orbis 
 terrarum regionibus, congregati in Palatio Lam- 
 bethano, anno salutis MDCCCLXXVIII. presidente 
 Reverendissimo Przsule Archibaldo Campbell, Di- 
 vina Providentia Archiepiscopo Cantuariensi, totius 
 Angliz Primate, participes facti, in dicti Palatii 
 sacello, Sacrosanctorum Mysteriorum Corporis et 
 Sanguinis Domini Nostri Jesu Christi, et orationibus 
 adunati ad Spiritus Sancti directionem impetrandam, 
 de variis prefinitis quzstionibus consilium inivimus 
 ccetui nostro propositis, ad statum Ecclesiz perti- 
 nentibus per diversas mundi partes diffuse. 
 
 His quzstionibus serio deliberandis complures dies 
 impendimus, jamque determinationes earum a nobis 
 approbatas fidelibus in Christo commendamus.! 
 
 Quz sit optima ratio pensitantes unitatis con- 
 servande inter varias nostre Communionis Eccle- 
 sias, primum omnium Deo Omnipotenti gratias 
 agentes quam maximas, manifestam unitatem ag- 
 noscimus, qua Ecclesia Anglicana, et Ecclesiz cum 
 illa visibiliter communicantes, jugiter connexz per- 
 manserunt. 
 
 Conjunctz invicem sub Uno Divino Capite, Jesu 
 Christo, in unius Catholice et Apostolice Ecclesiz 
 societate, firmiter tenentes unam Fidem, in Verbo 
 Dei revelatam, Symbolis definitam, et a Pnmitiva 
 Ecclesia constanter conservatam, easdem Canonicas 
 Scripturas Veteris et Novi Testamenti recipientes, 
 utpote omnia continentes ad salutem sempiternam 
 necessaria, he nostre Ecclesie eundem Dei Ser- 
 monem przdicant, eorundem Sacramentorum, di- 
 vinitus institutorum, per eorundem ordinum Apos- 
 tolicorum ministerium dispensatorum, participes sunt, 
 
 1 In hac Latina interpretatione eorum capitulorum precipué 
 delectum fecimus que ad Ecclesiam Universalem attinere 
 quodammodo videbantur. In Anglico autem archetypo Rela- 
 tiones Delegationum (Reforts of Commitizes), a Coetu com- 
 probatz, plenariz reperiuntur. 
 
Latin Version of “Letter” of 1878. 193 
 
 et Eundem Deum et Patrem venerantur, per Eundem 
 Dominum Jesum Christum, in Eodem Spiritu Sancto 
 super omnibus fidelibus effuso ad ducendos eos in 
 omnem veritatem. 
 
 Verim enimvero cum hac unitate consociata nun- 
 quam non extitit ea consuetudinum, discipline et 
 rituum varietas, que ab illa prerogativa enasci solet, 
 quam quevis Ecclesia particularis, sive nationalis, 
 jure sibi vindicat ; scilicet constituendi, immutandi, 
 atque abrogandi czrimonias vel ritus Ecclesiasticos, 
 humana tantum auctoritate ordinatos, modo omnia 
 ad edificationem fiant. 
 
 Libenter quidem profitemur, nullam revera etiam- 
 num sollicitudinis causam in hac diversitate reperiri. 
 Constat autem, votum aliquorum animis nuper con- 
 ceptum vocibus quoque passim significatum fuisse, 
 hoc presertim intuitu, ut rationes quedam acte 
 efficaces a nobis adhibeantur, ad occasiones discordim 
 precidendas, et ad illam genuinam et essentialeu 
 unitatem, quz nostras Ecclesias indies supercres- 
 centes complectitur, manifestandam amplius atque 
 fovendam. 
 
 Primum quidem hujus concordie tuende illa in 
 mentem venit ratio que inde ab Apostolis ipsis 
 divinitus inspiratis originem ducens, Ecclesiis omni- 
 bus in eddem individua et visibili unitate continendis 
 diu inserviit. Hodierna autem rei Christiane ea est 
 conditio, infausta quidem sed manifesta, ut Concilium 
 veré Cicumenicum, ad quod Ecclesia Anglicana se 
 paratam esse convenire semper professa est, convocari 
 non possit. Difficultates quidem que impedimento 
 sunt quominus Synodus ex omnibus Anglicanis Eccle- 
 siis conflata congregetur, re diverse et minus graves, 
 nimize tamen nobis videntur, quam ut illa ratio unitatis 
 conservande a nobis commendetur. 
 
 Aliud autem experimentum, secunda jam _ vice 
 factum, congregatio scilicet Episcoporum ab Archi- 
 episcopo Cantuariensi convocatorum, et Eo pre- 
 sidente deliberantium spem saltem suppeditat, ques- 
 
194 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 tionem, que hactenus insolubilis videbatur, rerum 
 vicissitudine divinitus ordinata sponte solutum iri, ita 
 ut Procuratores Ecclesiarum, situ et administratione 
 diversarum, consultandi invicem causa, in unum 
 coetum coalescant. 
 
 Persuasum est nobis, ad unitatem in fide semel 
 sanctis tradita proxime accedere divini cultis com- 
 munionem, eamque societates Christianas firmissimo 
 nexu copulare : et probe recordantes Librum Precum 
 Communium, ab omnibus nostris Ecclesiis, aliqua- 
 tenus variatum, retineri, et eximium unitatis vinculum 
 extitisse, fratres nostros admonendos censemus, divini 
 cultis communionem immoderatis rituum diversi- 
 tatibus in discrimen posse adduci.  Intrinsecam 
 Ecclesiarum variarum unitatem custodiende earum 
 concordiz adjumentum allaturam esse validissimum 
 confidimus. Et dum libere profitemur, amplam 
 quandam rituum Ecclesiasticorum flexibilitatem esse 
 exoptandam, quippe que latum quasi campum pate- 
 faciat legitimis piorum affectuum significationibus, 
 nihilominus ad Apostolicum preceptum provocamus, 
 “ Omniaad edificationem fiant,” et ad illam Ecclesiz 
 Catholice legem principalem, rectum ordinem com- 
 mendantis atque obedientiam, etsi cum privatorum 
 sensuum et propensionum abnegatione conjungantur, 
 tanquam subsidia Christiane Unitatis fundamentalia, 
 imo etiam ad fidem ipsam efficaciter conservandam 
 necessaria. 
 
 Nolumus huic argumento finem imponere, quin 
 spem nostram serio testificemur, omnes Ecclesiz 
 fideles agnituros fore, utcunque studiis in varia in- 
 clinantes, universos oportere subjici, conscientiz ergo, 
 in rebus ad ritus et cerimonias attinentibus, judiciis 
 illis auctoritatem obtinentibus, que ab illa Ecclesia 
 particulari vel nationali promulgata sint, sub cujus 
 tutela, Dei providentia, sint constituti; et sibi sedulo 
 temperaturos ab omni qualicunque alienationis 
 vel exacerbationis occasione; et quotidie Deum 
 enixé obsecraturos, ut omnia Ecclesiz membra a 
 
Latin Version of “Letter” of 1878. 195 
 
 Spiritu Sancto dirigantur ad quecunque recta sint 
 excogitanda atque exequenda; et ut nos universi 
 in illa fraterna dilectione, que pacis est ipsissimum 
 vinculum et omnium virtutum, adunare dignetur. 
 
 * * * * 
 
 Gratias agimus Deo Omnipotenti maximas, eo quod 
 protestationes solennes a tot Ecclesiis et societatibus 
 Christianis per orbem terrarum profecte sint contra 
 sedis Romanz usurpationes, et contra novicia dog- 
 mata ejus auctoritate promulgata. 
 
 Affectuum benevolorum significatio debetur ab 
 Ecclesia Anglicana universis, sive Ecclesiis, sive 
 singulis, contra hos errores protestantibus, quippe 
 qui difficultatibus forsitan laborent specialibus, quum 
 propter Incredulitatis incursiones, tum vero propter 
 Romane sedis arrogantiam. 
 
 Nos confitemur Unum tantum “ Mediatorem Dei 
 et hominum, Hominem Jesum Christum,” “Qui est 
 super omnia Deus in secula.” Nos repudiamus, 
 utpote Scripturis Sacris et Catholice veritati ad- 
 versantem, qualemcunque doctrinam alios mediatores 
 Ejus vice constituentem, vel aliquatenus detrahentem 
 ab Illius Divina Majestate, et a plenitudine Deitatis 
 in Illo inhabitantis, que immaculato illo Sacrificio, 
 semel ab Eo in Cruce propter omnium hominum 
 peccata oblato, infinitum pretium impertita est. 
 
 Commonendi igitur sunt a nobis fideles, facinus 
 illud a Romano Episcopo patratum, in Concilio 
 Vaticano, anno MDCCCLXX., quo sibi supereminentiam 
 super omnes homines in rebus fidei et morum 
 vindicavit, arrogate 5101 Infallibilitatis pratextu, 
 attributorum Ipsius Domini Nostri Jesu Christi 
 manifestam fuisse invasionem. 
 
 Innotuerunt omnibus regule ille fundamentales, 
 juxta quas Ecclesia Anglicana seipsam reformavit. 
 Nos Sanctas Scripturas sufficientem et supremam 
 fidei regulam esse declaramus, et omnibus nostris 
 diligenter scrutandas proponimus. Nos fidem nostram 
 
196 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 ipsis Symbolorum antiquorum vocibus profitemur. 
 Nos Apostolicum ordinem Episcoporum, Presbyte- 
 rorum et Diaconorum retinemus. LEcclesiarum par- 
 ticularium sive nationalium libertates legitimas 
 asserimus. Nos Librum Communium Precationum, 
 necnon Administrationis Sacramentorum, populis 
 nostris in manus damus, vernaculo eorum sermone 
 compositum, et juxta optima et antiquissima fidei 
 et divini culttis exemplaria adornatum.  Orbi uni- 
 verso patefacta sunt hec nostra documenta ; sciuntur 
 et leguntur ab omnibus. 
 
 Libenter igitur amplectimur universos sese re- 
 formandi studiosos ad amussim Ecclesie primitive. 
 Rigidam Uniformitatem non flagitamus; superva- 
 caneas dissensiones deprecamur. Omnibus ad nos 
 allectis, dum jugum erroris et superstitionis excutere 
 moliuntur, commodare operam nostrum parati sumus, 
 et talia eis subministrare privilegia, qualia ipsis 
 possint esse gratiosa, et nostris ipsorum institutis et 
 formulis Ecclesiasticis consentanea 
 
 Χ Χ Χ Χ 
 
 Sed hec hactenus. Quod ad questiones attinet 
 nobis propositas que leges Matrimonii tangunt, dum 
 ex animo agnoscimus angustias, ad quas nonnulla 
 nostre Ecclesia a popularium suorum legum latio- 
 nibus redacte sunt, censemus quoque officium esse 
 uniuscujusque Ecclesiz operam dare, ut sanctitati 
 Matrimonii custodiendz consulatur, secundum man- 
 data in Dei Verbo prescripta, et quemadmodum ab 
 Ecclesia Christi hactenus sunt recepta. 
 
 Rixas quasdam luctuosas de rituum Ecclesiasti- 
 corum quzestionibus, considerantes, quibus nonnulle 
 nostre congregationes graviter perturbate sunt nos 
 affirmamus, nihil in diu usitata cerimoniarum con- 
 suetudine, contra Episcopi admonitionem, debere 
 innovari. 
 
 Denique, nonnullas novitates, quum in agendo tum 
 in docendo, quod ad Confessionem attinet, contem- 
 plantes, nos declaramus Anglicanze Communionis 
 
Latin Version of “Letter” of 1878. 197 
 
 Ecclesias firmiter eas leges tenere, que in hanc rem 
 in Sacris Scripturis sunt promulgate, primitive 
 Ecclesiz professione sancitz, et ab Anglicana Refor- 
 matione instaurate. Et nos consultO censemus, 
 nulli Ecclesiz Ministro licere, ab iis, qui ad eum se 
 recipiunt, doloris aperiendi gratia, omnium sigillatim 
 peccatorum minutam enumerationem exquirere ; vel 
 privatam confessionem iis imperare, ante Sacro- 
 sancte Eucharistiz participationem; vel prescri- 
 bere, vel etiam commendare, confessionis consuetudi- 
 Nariz coram sacerdote exercitationem ; vel docere 
 talem exercitationem, vel sacerdoti subjectionem, 
 directionis, ut aiunt, causa, conditiones esse neces- 
 sarias, ad sublimissimam vitam spiritualem attin- 
 gendam. Nihilominus non in animo habemus quo- 
 quam modo terminos imponere subsidiis, que in 
 Libro nostro Precum Publicarum, ad conscientiarum 
 sollicitarum sublevationem, provide subministrantur. 
 
 He sunt determinationes questionum nobis pro- 
 positarum, quatenus Ecclesiz Universalis vel Ec- 
 clesiarum nostrarum conditionem attingere vide- 
 bantur. 
 
 Ad hec inspicienda varias Ecclesiarum Synodos, 
 aliosque in eis Ecclesiis auctoritatem exercitantes, et 
 universos denique Christi fideles, per orbem terrarum 
 invitamus. Dominationem in cleris non affectamus : 
 sed has determinationes, a ccetu nostro approbatas, 
 rationi et conscientiz fratrum nostrorum, utpote a 
 Spiritu Sancto illuminatorum, commendamus, enixé 
 Deum apprecantes, ut omnes ubique gentium Domini 
 Nostri Jesu Christi Nomen invocantes, una mente 
 consocientur, in una Communione conjungantur, 
 unam fidem semel sanctis traditam firmiter com- 
 plectantur, et unum Suum Dominum in uno puritatis 
 et dilectionis spiritu venerentur. Amen. 
 
 Subscripsi, in nomine Ccettiis Lambethani, 
 
 ARCHIBALDUS CAMPBELL, 
 Archiepiscopus Cantuariensis. 
 
198 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 ἘΠΙΣΤΟΛῊ ἝΚΑΤΟΝ ἘΠΙΣΚΟΠΩΝ 
 
 Ἔν ᾿Αγγλίᾳ συνηθροισμένων, ἐν ἸΤαλατίῳ Λαμβηθανῷ, μηνὶ 
 ᾿Ιουλίῳ, ἔτει awon (1878). 
 
 Τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ χαίρειν ἐν Κυρίω. 
 
 ‘H μεῖς ἀρχιεπίσκοποι, ἹἱΜητροπολῖται, καὶ ἄλλοι 
 ἐπίσκοποι τῆς ἁγίας Καθολικῆς ᾿Εκκλησίας, συγκοινω- 
 νοῦντες ὁλοκλήρως τῇ ᾿Αγγλικανῇ ᾿Εκκλησίᾳ, ἑκατὸν 
 ὄντες τὸν ἀριθμὸν, ἅπαντες ἐπισκοπὴν παροικιῶν 
 ἐπιτηδεύοντες, ἢ νομίμως ἐπισκοπικὰ τέλη ἐν αὐταῖς 
 ἐπιτετραμμένοι, συνελθόντες, πολλοὶ ἐξ ἡμῶν ἀπὸ τῶν 
 μακροτάτων τῆς οἰκουμένης κλιμάτων, ἐν τῷ Παλατίῳ 
 “Δαμβηθανῷ, ἔτει τῆς τοῦ Κυρίου ἐνσαρκώσεως awon 
 (1878), προεδρεύοντος σεβασμιωτάτου ᾿Αρχιβάλδου 
 κα ΘΕᾺ: τῇ θείᾳ προνοίᾳ ᾿Αρχιεπισκόπου 
 Καντουαρίας, ᾿Ἐπισκόπων ὅλης ᾿Αγγλίας πρωτο- 
 θ ρό νου, μετειληφότες, ἐν τῷ ναῷ τοῦ εἰρημένου παλατίου, 
 τῶν Eves μυστηρίων τοῦ σώματος καὶ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ 
 Κυρίου, καὶ προσευχαῖς ἡνωμένοι ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ ἁγίου 
 Πνεύματος χειραγωγίας, ἐξέτασιν πεποιήκαμεν διαφόρων 
 ζητημάτων ἡμῖν προβεβλημένων, ἀνηκόντων εἰς τὴν τῆς 
 ᾿Ἐκκλησίας σχέσιν ἐν διαφόροις τοῦ κόσμου μέρεσιν. 
 
 Περὶ τούτων τῶν ζητημάτων σπουδαίως διὰ πλειόνων 
 ἡμερῶν συμβεβουλευκότες, παρατιθέμεθα τανῦν τοῖς 
 πιστοῖς τὰ συμπεράσματα ἡμῖν ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν δεδογμένα." 
 
 ᾿᾿Ενθυμούμενοι τὴν ἐπιτηδειοτάτην μέθοδον πρὸς τὴν 
 τήρησιν τῆς ἑνότητος τῶν διαφόρων τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινω- 
 νίας ἐκκλησιῶν, πρώτιστα, πάντων ἀναγνωρίζομεν, μετ᾽ 
 ἐγκαρδίου εὐχαριστίας τῷ ᾿Παντοκράτορι Θεῷ, THe 
 οὐσιώδη καὶ ἐναργῆ ἑνότητα, ἐν ἣ ἡ ᾿ἀγγλικανὴ > Exkd- 
 
 
 
 1°Ev ταύτῃ τῇ μεταφράσει, τῶν κεφαλαίων ἐκλογὴν πεποι- 
 ἤκαμεν, τῶν μάλιστα τῇ καθόλου ᾿Εἰκκλησίᾳ προσηκόντων" ἐν 
 δὲ τῷ ᾿Αγγλικῷ τῆς ᾿᾿πιστολῆς ἀρχετύπῳ αἱ τῶν ἐπιτροπῶι: τοῦ 
 συμβουλίου ἐκθέσεις (Reports of Committees), ἀπὸ τοῦ Συμ- 
 βουλίου δοκιμασθεῖσαι, ὁλοτελεῖς εὑρίσκονται. 
 
Greek Version of “ Letter” of 1878. 199 
 
 σία, καὶ ai ἐκκλησίαι μετ᾽ αὐτῆς ὁρατῶς συγκοινωνούσαι, 
 διατελοῦσι συνημμέναι. Ἡνωμέναι ὑπὸ μιᾶς θείας 
 Κεφαλῆς, ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἐν τῇ κοινωνίᾳ τῆς “μιᾶς 
 Καθολικῆς, ᾿Εκκλησίας, “κατέχουσαν τὴν μίαν πίστιν, 
 ἐν ταῖς αγίαις r ραφαῖς. ἀποκεκαλυμμένην, ἐν τοῖς Συμ- 
 βόλοις ὡρισμένην, καὶ ὑπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆθεν ᾿Εκκλησίας 
 κεκρατημένην, δεχόμεναι τὰς αὐτὰς κανονικὰς, Γ ραφὰς 
 τῆς παλαιᾶς καὶ τῆς καινῆς 4 ιαθήκης, ὦ ὡς τὰ πάντα ; πρὸς 
 σωτηρίαν ἀναγκαῖα περιεχούσας, αὗται αἱ ἡμέτεραι 
 ᾿Εκκλησίαι τὸν αὐτὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ λόγον κηρύσσουσι, τῶν 
 αὐτῶν θεόθεν διατεταγμένων μυστηρίων μεταλαμβάνουσι 
 διὰ τῆς ὑπηρεσίας τῶν αὐτῶν ἀποστολικῶν βαθμῶν, καὶ 
 προσκυνοῦσι τῷ αὐτῷ Θεῷ καὶ “Πατέρι, διὰ τοῦ αὐτοῦ 
 Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ ἁγίῳ καὶ θείῳ 
 Π νεύματι; πᾶσι τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἐπιχορηγουμένῳ, πρὸς 
 τὸ ὁδηγεῖν αὐτοὺς εἰς πᾶσαν τὴν ἀλήθειαν. 
 
 Apécws μὲν οὖν μετὰ ταύτης τῆς ἑνότητος, ὑπῆρξεν 
 ἐν ἡμετέραις ἐκκλησίαις ἐκείνη συνηθείας, διατάξεως, 
 καὶ λειτουργίας διαφορὰ, ἥτις. ἀναγκαίως ἐκφύεται ἐξ 
 ἀσκήσεως τῆς ἐξουσίας, τῆς ἑκάστῃ μερικῇ ἢ ἐθνικῇ 
 ἐκκλησίᾳ προσηκούσης, τοῦ διατάσσειν, παραχαράσσειν, 
 καὶ ἀκυροῦν θεσμοὺς καὶ τελετὰς ἐκκλησιαστικὰς, ὑπ᾽ 
 ἀνθρωπίνης ἐξουσίας διατετωγμένας, μόνον ὥστε πάντα 
 πρὸς οἰκοδομὴν γίγνεσθαι. 
 
 ᾿Ασμένως "μὲν ὁμολογοῦμεν μηδεμίαν εἰσέτι εὑρί- 
 σκεσθαι μερίμνης αἰτίαν, διὰ ταύτην τὴν διαφωνίαν. 
 Ὅμως μέντοι ἐπυπόθησίς τις veworl ἐπιπολὺ αἰσθήσει 
 καὶ λόγῳ πεφανέρωται, ὡς ἐννοητέα καὶ προσαπτέα εἴη 
 ὄργανά τινα, πρὸς τὸ ἐκκόπτειν, εἰ τύχοι, ἀφορμὰς 
 διχοστασίας, καὶ πρὸς τὴν λαμπροτέραν ἀπόδειξιν καὶ 
 αὔξησιν τῆς ἀληθινῆς καὶ οὐσιώδους ὁμονοίας ἐν ἡμε- 
 τέραις ἐκκλησίαις ὑπαρχούσης. 
 
 Τὸ πρῶτον μὲν εἰς νοῦν ἀνερχόμενον ὄργανον. τοιαύτης 
 ἑνώσεως εὐλόγως ἂν εἴη ἐκεῖνο, ὅπερ, ἀρχὴν ἔχον ἀπὸ 
 τῶν θεοφόρων ἀποστόλων, συνέζευξεν ἁπάσας τὰς 
 Χριστοῦ ἐκκλησίας ἐν μιᾷ ἀδιαιρέτῳ καὶ ὁρατῇ κοινωνίᾳ. 
 ᾿Αλλὰ μὲν οὖν ἡ “συνάθροισις ἀληθινῶς οἰκουμενικῆς 
 Συνόδου, πρὸς ὁποίαν ἡ ᾿Α γγλικανὴ ᾿Εκκλησία πάντοτε 
 ἐπηγγέλλετο ἑτοίμη εἶναι συνέρχεσθαι, ἐν TH σημερινῇ 
 
200 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 τοῦ Χριστιανισμοῦ καταστάσει, δυστυχῶς μὲν, ἄλλα 
 φανερῶς, πέφυκεν ἀμήχανος. Ai μὲν ἀπορίαι, αἵτινες 
 παρακολουθήσειαν ἂν τῇ συνελεύσει συνόδου ἐκ πασῶν 
 τῶν ἀγγλικανῶν ἐκκλησιῶν συγκεκροτημένης, καίπερ 
 ἀνόμοιοι καὶ μετριώτεραι τῶν εἰρημένων, ὅμως μέντοι 
 εἰσὶ βαρύτεραι ἢ ἢ συγχωρῆσαι ταύτης τῆς μεθόδου, ἐν 
 τῷ νῦν χρόνῳ, συναίνεσιν. ‘ANN’ ἡ πεῖρα, δὶς γεγονυῖα, 
 συμβουλίου ἐπισκόπων, ἀπὸ τοῦ Καντουαρίας "Apyi- 
 επισκόπου συγκεκλημένων, καὶ ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ προεδρεύοντος 
 συνηθροισμένων, ἐλπίδα ἡμῖν παρέχει αὐτομάτου λύσεως 
 προβλήματος μέχρι τοῦ νῦν ἀλύτου, δηλονότι συν- 
 αθροίσεως καὶ ΄συμβουλεύσεως τοποτηρητῶν ἐκκλησιῶν 
 τῇ τε θέσει καὶ τῇ διοικήσει, διαφερουσῶν. 
 
 ᾿Εγγύτατα μετὰ τὴν ἑνότητα ἐν τῇ πίστει, τῇ τοῖς 
 ἁγίοις ἅπαξ παραδοθείσῃ, ,πεπεισμένοι ἐσμὲν τὴν 
 θρησκείας κοινωνίαν ἰσχυρότατον εἶναι σύνδεσμον 
 πρὸς τὴν σύναψιν τῶν χριστιανικῶν ἑταιριῶν' καὶ 
 καλῶς μεμνημένοι ὅτι τὸ ἡμέτερον τῶν δημοσίων 
 προσευχῶν βιβλίον, μετά τίνων οἵων δήποτε ἀλλοιώσεων 
 ἐν πάσαις ἡμετέραις ἐκκλησίαις κατεχόμενον, ἐξαίρετόν 
 τι ἑνότητος γέγονε φυλακτήριον, νουθετεῖν ἀξιοῦμεν τοὺς 
 ἡμεδαποὺς, ὅτι αὕτη ἡ θρησκείας κοινωνία κινδυνεύοι 
 ἂν λυμαίνεσθαι δι ὑπερβολικῶν i ἱερουργίας παραλλάξεων. 
 Ἢ ἐσωτερικὴ μὲν τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν ἑνότης ταύτῃ τῇ 
 θρησκείας κοινωνίᾳ, καθὼς πεποίθαμεν, ὑπηρετήσει" 
 ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως, (καίπερ ἐννοοῦντες ὅτι τοία τις ἀμφιλαφὴς 
 λειτουργικῶν τελετῶν ἐλευθερία αἱρετή ἐστιν, οἵα 
 πάσαις ταῖς νομίμαις. θρησκευτικῶν αἰσθημάτων ἀπο- 
 δείξεσιν εὐρυχωρίαν ἂν χαρίσαιτο, τὴν ἀποστολικὴν 
 παραγγελίαν ἐπικαλούμεθα, " “πάντα πρὸς οἰκοδομὴν 
 γυγνέσθω." καὶ τὸν καθολικὸν κανόνα ἐπιμαρτυρόμεθα, 
 τὸν διορίζοντα εὐταξίαν καὶ πειθαρχίαν, καίπερ μετ᾽ 
 αὐταπαρνήσεως ἰδίων προσκλίσεων καὶ αἰσθήσεων 
 ἀποδιδομένας, ὡς χριστιανικῆς ἑνότητος θεμέλια, καὶ ὡς 
 ἀναγκαίας πρὸς αὐτῆς τῆς πίστεως νικηφόρον ὑπερ- 
 ἀάσπισιν. Τοιγαροῦν οὐ παυσόμεθα τοιαῦτα νουθε- 
 τοῦντες πρὶν ἐκφωνῆσαι ἐκτενῶς τὴν ἐλπίδα, ὅτι πάντα 
 τῶν ἡμετέρων ἐκκλησιῶν τέκνα, ὁποίαις τισὶν οὖν θεω- 
 pias διαφέροντα, μέλλουσιν ὁμολογεῖν τὸ καθῆκον τοῦ 
 
Greek Version of “Letter” of 1878. 201 
 
 ὑποτάσσεσθαι, Sia τὴν συνείδησιν, ἐν θεσμοῖς Kat 
 τελεταῖς θρησκευτικαῖς, ταῖς ἐξουσιαστικαῖς κρίσεσιν τῆς 
 μερικῆς ἢ ἐθνικῆς ἐκκλησίας, ὑφ᾽ ἧς θείᾳ προνοίᾳ τυγχά- 
 νωσι κατῳκισμένα" καὶ ὅτι ἀφέξονται παντὸς πράγματυς 
 εἰς ἀλλοτρίωσιν ἢ ἐρεθισμὸν τείνοντος, καὶ ὁσήμερον 
 θερμῶς προσεύξονται, ἵνα τὸ ἅγιον Πνεῦμα πάντα τῆς 
 ἐκκλησίας μέλη ὁδηγῇ εἰς τὸ λογίξεσθαι καὶ ἐργάξεσθαι 
 πάντοτε ἃ δεῖ, καὶ ἡμᾶς πάντας συνάπτῃ τῇ φιλαδελ- 
 φικῇ ἐκείνῃ ἀγάπη, ἥτις ἐστὶν αὐτὸς εἰρήνης καὶ πασῶν 
 ἀρετῶν σύνδεσμος. 
 
 * * * * 
 
 Εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ Tavroxparope Θεῷ, ὅτι σεμνο- 
 πρεπής τις διαμαρτυρία ἐξήχηται ἀπὸ πάνυ πολλῶν 
 ἐκκλησιῶν, καὶ ἀπὸ κοινοτήτων χριστιανῶν καθ᾽ ὅλον 
 τὸν κόσμον, κατὰ τῶν τῆς Ρωμαίας καθέδρας πλεονεκτη- 
 μάτων, καὶ κατὰ τῶν νεωτερικῶν δογμάτων, UT ἐξουσίας 
 αὐτῆς διωρισμένων. 
 
 ΕΓ Αγγλικανὴ ᾿Εκκλησία ὀφείλει πᾶσαν συμπάθειαν 
 ἐκκλησίαις κοινῇ, καὶ χριστιανοῖς ἰδίᾳ, διαμαρτυρομένοις 
 κατὰ τούτων πλανημάτων, καὶ στενοχωρουμένοις, εἰ τύ- 
 you, ὑπ᾽ ἀποριῶν ἐξάλλων, διὰ τῶν τῆς ἀπιστίας προσ- 
 βολῶν, ἅμα καὶ διὰ τῶν τῆς Ρώμης ἐπιχειρημάτων. 
 
 Ἡμεῖς ὁμολογοῦμεν ἕνα μόνον Μεσίτην θεοῦ καὶ 
 ἀνθρώπων, ᾿άνθρωπον ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστὸν, ὅς ἐστιν ἐπὶ 
 πάντων Θεὸς εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. Ἀπωθούμεθα, 
 ὡς ἐναντίον ταῖς Γραφαῖς καὶ τῇ καθολικῇ ἀληθείᾳ, πᾶν 
 ὁτιοῦν δόγμα, ὅπερ καθιστάναι ἄλλους μεσίτας͵ ἀντ᾽ 
 Ἐκείνου τολμήσειεν ἂν, ἢ ἀφαιρεῖν ὁτιοῦν ἀπὸ τῆς 
 θείας μεγαλειότητος τοῦ πληρώματος τῆς θεότητος ἐν 
 Αὐτῷ κατοικοῦντος, καὶ τιμὴν ἄπειρον παρέχοντος τῇ 
 ἀμώμῳ ἐκεινῃ θυσίᾳ, τῇ ἅπαξ ὑπ᾽ Αὐτοῦ ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὅλου 
 τοῦ κόσμου ἁμαρτιῶν ἐπὶ σταυροῦ προσενεχθείσης. 
 
 Χρεωστοῦμεν οὖν νουθετεῖν τοὺς πιστοὺς, τὸ ἔργον ὁ 
 κατείργασται ὁ τῆς Ρώμης ἐπίσκοπος ἔτει 1870 ἐν τῇ 
 Βατικανῇ συνόδῳ, δι’ οὗ ὑπεροχῆς ἀντεποιήσατο ὑπερ 
 πάντων ἀνθρώπων, τήν τε πίστιν καὶ τὰ ἤθη, ἐπὶ προ- 
 σχήματι ἀπλανησίας ἑαυτῷ ἐφαρπασθείσης, ἐπέμβασι:' 
 γεγονέναι τῶν ἀξιωμάτων τῷ Κυρίῳ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστῷ 
 προσηκόντων. 
 
 oO 
 
202 Lambeth Conference of 1868. 
 
 Τνώριμοι πᾶσίν εἰσιν οἱ κανόνες, καθ᾽ ods ἡ 4 γγλικανὴ, 
 ᾿Εκκλησία ἑ ἑαυτὴν μετερρύθμισεν. Avaxnptrropev τὴν 
 αὐτάρκειαν καὶ τὴν ὑπεροχὴν τῶν ἱερῶν Γραφῶν, ὡς 
 ὁριστικὴν πίστεως στάθμην, καὶ τῷ ἡμετέρῳ λαῷ παρ- 
 αγγέλλομεν σπουδαίαν αὐτῶν μελέτην" τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν 
 ταῖς τῶν ἀρχαίων Συμβόλων φωναῖς ὁμολογοῦμεν" τὸ ἀπο- 
 στολικὸν τάγμα ᾿Επισκόπων, ΤΠρεσβυτέρων, καὶ Διακόνων 
 κατέχομεν" τὴν ἔννομον ἐλευθερίαν μερικῶν ἢ ἐθνικῶν 
 ἐκκλησιῶν διαβεβαιούμεθα' τῷ λαῷ ἡμῶν ἐγχειρίξομεν, 
 ἐν τῇ ἐγχωρίῳ αὐτοῦ διαλέκτῳ, βιβλίον προσευχῶν δη- 
 μοσίων καὶ τελετῶν, καὶ τῶν μυστηρίων ἱερουργίας, κατὰ 
 τὰ ἄριστα καὶ παλαιότατα χριστιανικῆς πίστεως καὶ 
 λατρείας ἀρχέτυπα. 
 
 Ταῦτα τὰ ἡμῶν μαρτυρήματα ἐνώπιον τῆς οἰκουμένης 
 
 ; 
 ἀναπτύσσεται, γυγνωσκόμενα καὶ ἀναγυγνωσκόμενα ὑπὸ 
 πάντων ἀνθρώπων. 
 
 Acpevas οὖν ἀσπαζόμεθα πᾶσαν πεῖραν μεταρρυθμί- 
 σεως κατὰ τὸ παράδειγμα τῆς ἀρχαίας ἐκκλησίας" στε- 
 ρεὰν ταὐτότητα οὐκ ἀπαιτοῦμεν" ἀνωφελεῖς διχοστασία 
 παραιτούμεθα: πᾶσιν τοῖς πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἐφελκομένοις ἐν 
 τῷ ἐπιχειρεῖν ἑαυτοὺς ἐλευθερῶσαι ἀπὸ ζυγοῦ πλάνης 
 καὶ δεισιδαιμονίας πᾶσαν ,βοήθειαν προθύμως προτεί- 
 νομεν, καὶ οἷα ἑαυτοῖς προνόμια εἴη ἀρεστὰ, καὶ ἡμετέροις 
 κανόσιν, τοῖς ἐν ἡμετέραις διατυπώσεσιν ὡρισμένοις, σύμ- 
 φωνα, ἐθελόντως προκομίζομεν. 
 
 Περὶ τῶν ζητημάτων ἡμῖν παρατεθέντων ὑπὲρ τῶν 
 τοῦ Γάμου νόμων ἐμφανίζομεν, ὅτε τὰς ἀπορίας ἐπιγυγνώ- 
 σκοντες, εν αἷς ἔνιαι ἐκκλησίαι ἐμπλέκονται, διὰ τῶν 
 θεσμῶν της τοπικῆς νομοθεσίας, νομίζομεν ὅ ὅτι δεῖ πᾶσαν 
 ἐκκλησίαν, κατὰ τὴν ἑαυτῆς γνώμην, τὴν τοῦ Ta ἅμου 
 ἁγιωσύνην διαφυλάττειν, κατὰ τὰ ἐν τῷ ῥήματι τοῦ 
 Θεοῦ ὁρισθέντα, καὶ καθὰ ἡ τοῦ Χριστοῦ “Εκκλησία 
 μέχρι τοῦ νῦν ταῦτα. δέδεκται. 
 
 Avabewpotyres TOUS λυγροὺς διαλογισμοὺς, περὶ τελε- 
 τῶν ἐκκλησιαστικῶν, δι’ ὧν ἔνια τῶν ἡμετέρων πλήθη 
 χαλεπῶς τεθορύβηνται, διαβεβαιούμεθα τὸν κανόνα, ὁρί- 
 ζοντα μηδὲν δεῖν νεωτερίζξειν, ἐν τῇ εἰθισμένῃ θρησκείας 
 διστόξει, κατὰ τῆς τοῦ ἐπισκύπου νουθεσίας. 
 
Greek Version of “ Letter” of 1878. 203 
 
 “οιπὸν ἐνθυμούμενοι καινοτομίας τινὰς, τῇ τε πράξει 
 καὶ τῇ διδαχῇ; περὶ τῆς ἐξομολογήσεως, διϊσχυριξόμεθα, 
 τὰς τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας ᾿Εκκλησίας κρατεῖν βε- 
 βαίως τοὺς κανόνας περὶ τῆς ἐξομολογήσεως ἐν ταῖς 
 ἁγίαις Γραφαῖς ἀποδεδειγμένους, καὶ ὑπὸ τῆς ἀρχαίας 
 ᾿Εκκλησίας συνωμολογημένους, καὶ ἐν τῇ ᾿Αγγλικῇ Με- 
 ταρρυθμίσει ἀνακεκαινωμένους" καὶ ἐσκεμμένως ἐγνώ- 
 Kaper, μηδενὶ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ὑπηρέτῃ ἐξεῖναι ἀπαιτεῖν 
 ἐκ τῶν πρὸς αὑτὸν φοιτώντων, διὰ τὴν τῆς αὐτῶν λύπης 
 ἀνάπτυξιν, ἁπασῶν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν κατὰ μέρος ἑκάστων 
 ἐξαρίθμησιν, ἢ ἢ ἰδίαν ἐξομολόγησιν ἐκβασανίζειν, πρὸ τῆς 
 ἁγίας εὐχαριστίας μεταλήψεως, ἢ ἐπιτάσσειν ἢ καὶ 
 παραινεῖν τὴν τῆς συνήθους τῷ ἱερεῖ ἐξομολογήσεως 
 ἐπιτήδευσιν, ἢ διδάσκειν ὅ ὅτι τοία ἐπιτήδευσις, ἢ ἢ τὸ UTro- 
 τάσσεσθαι τῇ οὑτωσὶ καλουμένῃ ἱερέως “χειραγωγίᾳ, 
 ἀναγκαῖά ἐστι προπαιδεύματα πρὸς τὴν τῆς ἀνωτάτης 
 πνευματικῆς ζωῆς ἐπίβασιν. “Ὅμως μέντοι οὐδαμῶς 
 ἐννοοῦμεν ἐπιτέμνειν τὴν ἐν τῇ βίβλῳ τῶν δημοσίων 
 
 προσευχῶν, πρὸς τὸν βεβαρημένων συνειδήσεων ἐπι- 
 κουφισμὸν, ἐπιχορηγίαν προνενοημένην. 
 
 Ταῦτά ἐστι τὰ συμπεράσματα εἰς ἃ κατηντήκαμεν, 
 περὶ τῶν ἡμῖν προβεβλημένων ζητημάτων, ἐν οἷς τὰ 
 πάντων τῆς ἸζΚαθολικῆς ᾿Εκκλησίας τέκνων ἁπτόμενα 
 ταῖς συνόδοις ἐκκλησιῶν, καὶ ταῖς ἐξουσίαις καθ᾽ ἑκάστην 
 κυβερνητικαῖς, καὶ πᾶσιν ἁπλῶς τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ 
 Ἰησοῦ φιλοφρόνως σαφηνίζομεν. 
 
 Οὐκ ἀντιποιούμεθα τοῦ κατακυριεύειν ἐν κλήροις, 
 ἀλλὰ ταῦτα τῷ ἡμετέρῳ. συμβουλίῳ a ἀρέσαντα συνίστα- 
 μεν τῷ λογισμῷ καὶ τῇ συνειδήσει τῶν ἀδελφῶν, ὡς 
 ὑπὸ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος πεφωτισμένων, ἐκτενῶς Θεῷ 
 TPOTEVXOMEVOL, iva πάντες οἱ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Κυρίου ἐ ἐπι- 
 καλούμενοι, μιᾷ γνώμῃ καὶ μιῷ κοινωνίᾳ ἡνωμένοι, τὴν 
 πίστιν τὴν ἅπαξ τοῖς ἁγίοις παραδοθεῖσαν βεβαίως κρα- 
 τῶσιν, καὶ τῷ ἑνὶ αὐτῶν Κυρίῳ ἐν ἑνὶ ἀφθαρσίας καὶ 
 ἀγάπης πνεύματι λατρεύωσιν. Ἀμήν. 
 
 Ὑπέγραψα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ συμβουλίου. 
 APXIBAAAOX KAMIIBEAA, 
 ‘O Kavrovapias ᾿Αρχιεπίσκοπος. 
 
 O02 
 
204 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 No. XXIII. (See page 26.) 
 
 OFFICIAL LIST OF THE BISHOPS PRESENT AT 
 LAMBETH CONFERENCE OF 1878. 
 
 
 
 THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY. 
 THE ARCHBISHOP OF YORK. 
 
 THE ARCHBISHOP OF ARMAGH. 
 THE ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN. 
 
 THE BisHop oF LONDON. 
 
 THE BIsHOP OF WINCHESTER. 
 THE BisHop ΟΕ LLANDAFF. 
 
 THE BisHop or RIPON. 
 
 THE BisHop oF NORWICH. 
 
 THE BIsHop OF BANGOR. 
 
 THE BIsHoP oF GLOUCESTER AND BRISTOL 
 THE BISHOP OF CHESTER. 
 
 THE BisHop ΟΕ Sr. ALBAN’S. 
 THE BIsHop OF HEREFORD. 
 
 THE BISHOP OF PETERBOROUGH. 
 THE BisHop ΟΕ LINCOLN. 
 
 THE BIsHOP OF SALISBURY. 
 
 THE BIsHop OF CARLISLE. 
 
 THE BisHoP OF EXETER. 
 
 THE BIsHOP OF BATH AND WELLS. 
 THE BISHOP OF OXFORD. 
 
 THE BIsHOP OF MANCHESTER. 
 THE BISHOP OF CHICHESTER. 
 THE BisHor ΟΕ ST. ASAPH. 
 
 THE Btsnop oF ELy. 
 
 THE BIsHop oF Sr. DAVID’s. 
 THE BIsHoP OF TRURO. 
 
 THE BIsHOP OF ROCHESTER. 
 
 THE BisHop OF LICHFIELD. 
 
 THE BISHOP OF SODOR AND MAN. 
 
 THE BisHop oF MEATH. 
 THE ΒΙΞΗΟΡ OF Down. 
 THE BIsHop OF KILLALOE. 
 THE BisHop ΟΕ LIMERICK. 
 THE BIsHOP OF DERRY. 
 THE ΒΙΞΗΟΡ OF CASHEL. 
 THE BIsHoP OF Ossory. 
 
 THE 
 
Official List of Bishops Present, 1878. 
 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 
 THE 
 THE 
 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 
 THE 
 THE 
 THE 
 
 BISHOP 
 ΒΙΞΗΟΡ 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHopP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 
 BIsHoP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHopr 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 ΒΙΒΗΟΡ 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 ΟΕ 
 or 
 OF 
 Or 
 
 OF 
 or 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 
 ASSISTANT 
 
 BisHoPp 
 BisHor 
 BisHop 
 BisHop 
 
 BIsHoP 
 BISHOP 
 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHoP 
 BisHor 
 BIsHorp 
 BIsHoP 
 BisHop 
 BisHor 
 
 BIsHop 
 BisHop 
 BIsHop 
 
 BisHop 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BisHop 
 BIsHop 
 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHop 
 BISHOP 
 
 OF 
 
 Or 
 
 OF 
 Or 
 OF 
 
 Moray. Primus. 
 St. ANDREW’S. 
 EDINBURGH. 
 ABERDEEN, 
 GLASGOW. 
 BRECHIN. 
 ARGYLL. 
 
 * DELAWARE. 
 
 * NEw YORK. 
 
 * OHIO. 
 
 * PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 * WESTERN NEW YORK. 
 * NEBRASKA. 
 
 * PITTSBURGH. 
 
 LOUISIANA. 
 
 MIssoURI. 
 
 Lone ISLAND. 
 
 ALBANY. 
 
 CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA. 
 BisHop OF NORTH CAROLINA. 
 
 * NEW JERSEY. 
 * WISCONSIN. 
 
 Iowa. 
 COLORADO, 
 
 Hair. 
 
 * SHANGHAI. 
 
 * MONTREAL, Metropolitan, 
 ' FREDERICTON. 
 
 Nova SCOTIA. 
 
 * ONTARIO. 
 * HURON. 
 
 * TORONTO. 
 ? NIAGARA. 
 
 * MADRAS. 
 * COLOMBO. 
 * BOMBAY. 
 
 * GUIANA. 
 ἡ KINGSTON. 
 
 ANTIGUA. 
 BARBADOS. 
 NASSAU. 
 
 SYDNEY. AZetropolitan. 
 ADELAIDE. 
 NORTH QUEENSLAND. 
 
 205 
 
206 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 THE BisHOP OF CHRISTCHURCH. Jletrofolitan. 
 THE BisHop OF DUNEDIN. 
 
 THE BisHoOP OF GIBRALTAR. 
 
 THE BisHop OF CAPETOWN. Vetrofolitan. 
 THE BisHop OF ST. HELENA. 
 
 THE BisHor OF MARITZBURGH. 
 
 THE BISHOP OF BLOEMFONTEIN. 
 
 THE BiIsHOP OF PREVORIA. 
 
 THE BISHOP OF RUPERTSLAND. J@etropolitan. 
 THE BisHop OF BRITISH COLUMBIA. 
 THE BISHOP OF SASKATCHEWAN. 
 
 THE BISHOP OF THE FALKLAND ISLANDS. 
 
 THE BIisHop SUFFRAGAN OF DOVER. 
 THE BisHop SUFFRAGAN OF GUILDFORD. 
 Tur BisHop SUFFRAGAN OF NOTTINGHAM. 
 
 BISHOP PERRY. 
 BisHop McDOouGALL. 
 BisHop RYAN. 
 BisHoPp CLAUGHTON. 
 
 
 
 Officers of fhe Gonlerence. 
 THE BISHOP OF GLOUCESTER AND BRISTOL, Secretary of the 
 Conference. 
 THE BisHop OF EDINBURGH, Secretary of Committees. 
 
 ISAMBARD BRUNEL, D.C.L., (Chancellor of the Diocese of Ely, 
 Assistant Secretary. 
 
 
 
 No. XXIV. (Sce page 20.) 
 
 Order of Bishops in the Processions at Lambeth Palace 
 and in St. Paul's Cathedral in 1878. 
 
 The following is an official list, as prepared for the 
 Processions on July 2 and July 27, 1878. The order 
 had to be materially changed on the occasion of the 
 actual services, by the absence, at the moment, of 
 
 6 
 
Order of the Bishops in Processions. 207 
 
 Bishops who had been expected, but the same prin- 
 ciple of arrangement was in each case followed. The 
 Archbishop of Canterbury had the Archbishop of 
 York and the Bishop of London on his right and 
 left hand, and was preceded by the Metropolitans of 
 the Irish, Scottish, and Colonial Provinces. The 
 Bishops from the United States walked, as guests, 
 abreast of the English Diocesans. The other Bishops 
 were arranged, two and two, according to date of 
 consecration. The processions moved, as usual, in 
 reverse order, the junior Bishops first, the Arch- 
 bishops last. 
 
 Archbishop of York. Archbishop of Canterbury. Bishop of London. 
 
 5 Armagh. 
 Dublin. 
 Bishop of Delaware. Primus of Scottish τ Winchester. 
 Episcopal Church. 
 Ac New York. Bishop of Sydney. τ Llandaff. 
 “5 Ohio. 3 Christchurch, "ἢ Ripon. 
 New Zealand. 
 ne Pennsylvania. Ἔ Montreal. on Bangor. 
 ct Western New )\ > Capetown. " {Gloucester & 
 York. {f (Bristol. 
 Nebraska. as Rupert’s Land. ἊΣ Chester. 
 Bishop of Pittsburgh. Bishop of St. Alban’s. 
 op Louisiana. sn Hereford. 
 " Missouri. an Peterborough. 
 op, Long Island. pe Lincoln. 
 OC Albany. Ἔ Salisbury. 
 Central Pennsylvania. a Carlisle. 
 Assistant Bishop of North Carolina. rp Exeter. 
 Bishop of New Jersey. ἐπ Bath and Wells. 
 sa Wisconsin. ἊΣ Oxford. 
 55 Iowa. ae Manchester. 
 7. Colorado. Ἐν Chichester. 
 τ St. Asaph. ΓΩ Ely. 
 τὰ St. David’s. oe Rochester. 
 sy Truro. re Lichfield. 
 oF Sodor and Man. ἊΣ Dover. 
 Guildford. oe Nottingham. 
 Bishop P Perry. Killaloe. 
 >> M‘Dougall. Bishop Ryan. 
 Bishop of Meath. », Claughton. 
 
 And the other Bishops according to their date of consecration. 
 
208 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 No. XXV. (See page 33.) 
 
 Sermon preached by Bishop Stevens, of Pennsylvania, 
 zn St. Paul's Cathedral, on Saturday, july 
 27th, 1878. 
 
 “ And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men 
 unto Me.”—S¢, John xii. 32. 
 
 Most Rev. Fathers and Brethren Beloved — 
 
 It is with unfeigned diffidence that I stand before 
 you this morning. 
 
 Deeply as I appreciate the honour of having been 
 selected as your preacher, still more deeply am I 
 burdened with a sense of the responsibility which 
 rests upon me as your mouthpiece on this great 
 occasion. Not that I am commissioned to speak 
 your views, or declare what we have said or done, 
 but I am your mouthpiece as guiding your thoughts 
 in this closing hour, and summing them up in words 
 appropriate to the valedictory of this remarkable 
 Conference. May the Holy Ghost so illumine my 
 mind that I may think only those things which are 
 right, and so touch my lips that I shall speak only 
 that which shall be for the glory of the Triune 
 God ! 
 
 I shall not attempt to review the doings of the 
 Conference now brought to an end. Within this 
 present month, and within the Library of Lambeth 
 Palace, has been made a history, the record of which 
 will constitute one of the most illuminated chapters 
 in the annals of the Holy Catholic Church. Never 
 before have so many English-speaking Bishops met 
 together. Never before have all branches of the 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Pennsylvania. 200 
 
 Anglican Communion been so fully represented in 
 an ecclesiastical assembly. Such a gathering con- 
 verges to itself the eyes of the thinking world, and 
 such a gathering must radiate from itself a power for 
 weal or woe that shall reach to far-distant ages. The 
 history of that Conference is made. The result of 
 that Conference will be fully known only when the 
 record of eternity shall be revealed. We met as 
 standard-bearers of the Cross of Christ. That fact 
 has been the prominent one in all our deliberations, 
 and we separate to go back to our dioceses, more 
 impressed than ever that it is in and through an 
 uplifted Christ—faithfully held up and fully dis- 
 played, that our work can be accomplished, and all 
 men—men of all races, all climes, all countries—be 
 drawn to the feet of the Crucified and to the Church, 
 which is His Body. In this precious truth we have 
 found not only a bond of personal union, but of real 
 unity throughout the wide-spreading branches of our 
 Holy Church. 
 
 Our little diversities, personal and national, as to 
 non-essentials of faith and the accessories of worship, 
 look very small before the great essentials in which 
 we all agree. We feel that we all rest on the same 
 corner and foundation stones laid in Zion, even 
 Christ and His Apostles, and the eternal and distinc- 
 tive verities of faith revealed in God’s Holy Word. 
 
 This sacred depfosttum intrusted to the Church as 
 the keeper and witness of the faith once delivered 
 to the saints, embodied in the creeds of Christendom, 
 endorsed by the undisputed General Councils, and 
 maintained and defended by the consensus of the 
 undivided Church in the writings of the early 
 Fathers, is the blessed heritage of us all, and binds 
 us together in the oneness and unity of a living 
 organism, operating through diverse members and 
 by diverse functions, yet all holding to the one 
 Divine Head—nourished by the one Divine Blood, 
 breathing the one Divine Breath of Life. 
 
210 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 Another fact, which has grown out of the more 
 faithful lifting up of the Lord Jesus’ Christ, and 
 which this Conference has brought prominently out, 
 is the increase of spiritual life and work in all the 
 branches of the Anglican Church. The reports οἱ 
 the Bishops from every quarter testify to this 
 pleasing fact. Not only is this increase seen in 
 a more widely-spread and deeper-toned personal 
 piety, but also in the gratifying increase of reverence 
 for holy things and places, in the more life-inspiring 
 renderings of our beautiful Liturgy, in the more 
 frequent celebrations of the Holy Communion, and 
 in the multifarious forms of Church work springing 
 up in all our dioceses and missionary jurisdictions. 
 
 It is further seen in the bringing into effective and 
 judicious use agencies for the cultivation of personal 
 holiness, and the better reaching of the sick and the 
 poor, and for the wider extension of Church privi- 
 leges, which have either never been used before, or 
 which have long been disused, because abused to 
 purposes of superstition and error. We feel, and 
 I think rightly, that whatever has been done or used 
 in other ages, or by other communions, which has 
 been productive of good, even though tainted with 
 the evils of the age, or the communion using them, 
 ought not on that account to be set aside; but 
 rather should be reclaimed from wrong-doing, and 
 by wise and authoritative adaptation be made to 
 serve the right and the true in faith and worship. 
 Hence implements of spiritual tillage, hitherto neg- 
 lected or suspected, have been remodelled and rightly 
 utilised. 
 
 Methods of Church work, which were once looked 
 upon with distrust, have been prudently adjusted to 
 our own needs and times. Our Blessed Lord gave 
 to His Church that same power of self-adjustment 
 which in a higher and holier way He showed in His 
 own conduct when on earth. He gave it marvellous 
 flexibility of circumference, combined with central 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Pennsylvania. 211 
 
 fixedness and unchangeableness—flexibility, so as 
 to conform to all the outlines of human needs, just 
 as He has made the great ocean to flow as readily 
 into the little cove beside the fisherman’s hut as into 
 the magnificent bays which harbour the navies of the 
 world ; and fixedness, so that the substantial body 
 of truth shall never be changed, just as He holds the 
 same great ocean in the hollow of His Hand. The 
 multiplied agencies which the Church has set in 
 motion in the last half-century illustrate what I mean 
 as to adjustment of the Church to the demands of 
 modern society. 
 
 Specially I may mention the introduction of lay- 
 helpers, both men and women, into the active service 
 of the Church. The fact proves that the Church is 
 reviving from her languid state, when it was too 
 much the fashion to regard the clergy as the Church, 
 and rather to frown upon lay effort as trenching upon 
 clerical prerogative. It was this spirit which ‘lost to 
 the Church of England the fruit of that great 
 uprising of zeal under the Wesleys and Whitfield, 
 which, had it been recognised and _ utilised, and 
 taught to work in Churchly channels, as it’ now 
 would be, would have rooted the Church of England 
 tenfold more in the hearts of the toiling classes, and 
 kept them from drifting away into fragmentary 
 divisions; would have welded together social 
 elements which would admirably supplement each 
 other ; and would have made the disestablishment 
 and denationalisation of the Church of England 
 utterly impossibie. 
 
 The introduction of the lay element into the 
 councils of the Church, whether diocesan or Convoca- 
 tional, is a grave question, because, in some cases, 
 encumbered with serious difficulties. Therefore each 
 national Church must deal with it as a national 
 question, and settle it as shall best subserve its 
 national interests. But the patent fact is, that the 
 bringing in of the laity as a constituent part of the 
 
212 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 various working assemblies of the Church has in the 
 United States and in many of the Colonial provinces 
 and dioceses been of the highest value to the cause of 
 our holy faith. Intrust the laity with responsibility, 
 and you secure their confidence. Make them a part 
 of your deliberate counsels, and they will educate 
 themselves to discharge aright the duties of their 
 position. Let them realise that the Church leans 
 upon their wisdom as well as upon their purse, and 
 they will show that strong common sense, knowledge, 
 and discretion which shall make them as powerful 
 allies in Church legislation as they now are in Church 
 work. 
 
 It is true that with this increase of vitality has 
 been an increase of abnormal life, running out into 
 excesses, both in doctrine and in ritual. Ina 
 Church made up of imperfect beings, with all possible 
 tastes, temperaments, and idiosyncrasies, such evils 
 cannot well be avoided. Our Blessed Lord told us 
 in His parables that this would be the case. St. 
 Paul distinctly declared to the Corinthians that 
 “there must be also heresies among you, that they 
 which are approved may be made manifest among 
 you,” thus not merely recognizing in His day, and in 
 Apostolic Churches, the existence of this Church life 
 running out into wrong channels of thought and 
 action, but giving as a reason for its permissive 
 existence, that the Lord used these heresies and 
 these sects as a means of testing and manifesting the 
 true,—making the true more clearly true by placing 
 alongside of it its stimulating error. 
 
 Nor has the Church of Christ ever been free from 
 these errors, and the words of our Lord in the parable 
 of the Tares and Wheat, “Let both grow together 
 until the harvest,” and then saying that that harvest 
 was the end of the world, indicates with certainty 
 that these heresies, and this schismatic spirit, will 
 continue the earthly lifetime of the Church. 
 Lamentable indeed are these displays, splitting off 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Pennsylvania. 213 
 
 from the Church into open schism, on the one hand, 
 or raising up factions, turbulent and menacing, 
 within the bounds of the Church, on the other. 
 
 These evils can only be partially held in check 
 or corrected by any legal or technical decisions of 
 civil or ecclesiastical courts, for in some instances 
 they have fostered more scandals than they have 
 allayed. The real remedy lies in another direction. 
 It is to draw men to a common centre by preaching 
 a great central and unifying truth. That great 
 central truth is that which is both centred and 
 sphered in an unlifted Christ. When men are drawn 
 to His person, His service, and His salvation, you 
 have a basis for that real unity which alone meets 
 the conditions of our Lord’s intercessory prayer— 
 “That they all may be one, as Thou Father art in 
 me, and I in Thee.” Not organically one, but one 
 in the harmony of an interior life derived from a 
 common source, sustained by a common faith, and 
 having a common end and aim. 
 
 When the pure strength of Evangelical truth 
 welling up in life-giving freshness in the Word of 
 God shall flow more freely through the channels of 
 Apostolic order and sacramental ordinances; when 
 this Evangelical spirit, to which the Church of 
 England owed its revival of life and activity in the 
 last century, shall avail itself more of churchly 
 agencies, and address itself more to working along 
 Church lines, with the same zeal with which it has 
 so well addressed itself to the maintenance and 
 defence of doctrine, and shall thus make the clergy 
 and the parishes alive with new-born zeal and love, 
 showing by their own example that they are as 
 earnest, as sincere, as self-sacrificing, as sound in the 
 faith and as loyal to the Church as those whom they 
 condemn—then will the spirit of lawlessness, and 
 erroneous and strange doctrine, and the sickly 
 imitations of a foreign communion be met and 
 answered by a purer faith, a more Christ-like zeal, a 
 
214 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 more obedient reverence to the powers that be as 
 ordained of God, and a higher and holier aim— 
 namely, the advancement, not of self nor of party, 
 but the honour and glory of the uplifted Christ. 
 Looking in another direction, we find the Church 
 confronted by critical scepticism and scientific doubt, 
 which aim to break down the bulwarks of her faith 
 and raze her walls of salvation to the ground. But 
 while we survey this frowning evil, let us not be un- 
 duly alarmed, or make too hasty concessions, but be 
 vigilant and wise in meeting it on broad and sound 
 grounds. Holding to the Bible as our sole rule of 
 faith and practice, we must maintain the supremacy 
 of the Bible by placing it in its right position ; and 
 that is, that it is a perfectly completed book. The 
 Bible of to-day is the Bible of all the centuries of the 
 Christian era, and will be of all the centuries to come. 
 As it came from Him, it can neither be added to nor 
 taken from without incurring the anathema of its 
 Author. But the science which opposes this Bible 
 is but the science of to-day. It was not the science 
 of the last century; it will not be of the century to 
 come. These sciences, of whatever name, are vari- 
 able and uncertain. Not one is on a fixed and im- 
 movable basis. Not one that may not be altered, or 
 set aside by some new discovery, or by some new 
 generalization. It will be time enough to say whether 
 these sciences and the Bible do agree when the per- 
 fected circle of science shall be placed on the per- 
 fected circle of the Holy Scriptures. Then only can 
 we rightly measure each, and when that time comes 
 it will be found that the circumference of science and 
 the circumference of revelation have one and the 
 same periphery, because they have one and the same 
 Divine Centre, the same one living and true God. 
 In the Apostles’ day there were “oppositions of 
 science falsely so-called.” In every age since then 
 the same assaults have been renewed, but the Bible 
 has calmly held on its way. It waits patiently for 
 
Sernion of the Bishop of Pennsylvania. 215 
 
 confirmation as the ages roll on, and each advance 
 of true science does bring it more into accord 
 with revelation. What the clergy have to do is not 
 to attempt to put on Saul’s armour and go forth to 
 fight what they would call a Philistine science with 
 something that they have not proved and cannot 
 wield, but to take the smooth stones out of the brook 
 of Scripture, and in the name of the Uplifted One so 
 hurl them that even giant defiers of the Israel of God 
 shall fall before the simple truth, slung by the hum- 
 blest shepherd of the flock. This preaching is now, 
 as in Paul’s day, to the Jew a stumbling-block, and 
 to the Greek foolishness, but it is still what it was 
 then, and what it will ever be, Christ the power of 
 God and the wisdom of God. When the Apostles 
 preached this uplifted Christ, they did it not in the 
 words which man’s wisdom teacheth, lest the Cross 
 of Christ should be made of none effect, but with 
 that simple plainness of men fully imbued with the 
 truth which they heralded, and telling it out in the 
 fulness and directness of that earnestness which all 
 will feel who realize that they are bought with a 
 price, even the precious blood of the uplifted Jesus. 
 Looking in still another direction, we find the 
 Church in the midst of social evils which threaten 
 alike the well-being of the Church and of the State. 
 Can the Church deal with these manifold economical 
 questions which at times so seriously agitate the 
 whole framework of human society? Yes. The 
 uplifting of Christ will do it. The most important 
 factor in the world’s history was the coming down 
 into it of Christ our Lord. His incarnation is the 
 axle on which turn all the wheels of human life. 
 Any science of sociology which leaves Him out as its 
 central and controlling power is, like a science of the 
 solar system without the sun, erroneous at its centre 
 and erroneous at its circumference. It is the pre- 
 sence of Christ in the world that has given birth to 
 all the philanthopies of the world—is banishing its 
 
 
 
216 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 most crying evils and bringing in all that is refining 
 and elevating in mind and heart and life. This 
 being so, and no student of history can truly deny it, 
 it follows that all that is needed to meet and remove 
 the social evils of our time is the clear, true, and 
 forceful setting forth of Christ as the Light and Life 
 of men. For justin proportion as they bask in His 
 light and breathe the breath of His life will they 
 become Christlike in mind and heart, and the preva- 
 lence of the mind of Christ and the love of Christ 
 will change the moral and social aspect of the world. 
 
 Finally, God has set before the Church of this 
 age an open door into the regions beyond and bidden 
 her go in and possess the land. Never, it may truly 
 be said, has the Church been so thoroughly equipped 
 as now for missionary work. Geographical explora- 
 tion and commercial adventure have opened up to us 
 long unknown and almost mythical regions. Ethno- 
 logy and philology have brought the varying lan- 
 guages and races of men into better classification. 
 Technical art and science have put into our hands 
 implements and skill for reforming and enlarging all 
 the industrial pursuits of men. Thus these auxiliary 
 forces become in the progress of time almost apostles 
 of Christianity. 
 
 A higher and truer education in heathen lands 
 must result in breaking down the old errors based 
 on ignorance and superstitions. Science is already 
 at work through manifold ways, undermining and 
 sapping the Oriental religions—Buddhism, Brah- 
 minism, Confucianism, Lamaism — and _ preparing 
 the way for their downfall. It has not been until 
 within a few years that we have really understood 
 the doctrines, usages, and inner power of the 
 dominating religions of Asia. We have known their 
 general features, but have mostly grouped them 
 all together in one idolatrous mass of hopeless 
 superstition and cruel orgies, and as such have 
 levelled our theological artillery relentlessly against 
 
Sermon of the Bishop oy Pennsylvanta. 217 
 
 them. Now, however, through the labours of men 
 who seem to have been specially raised up for the 
 purpose, the eight great religions of the world into 
 which Max Miiller reduces the many schemes of 
 human worship have been studied and analysed, and 
 their sacred books carefully translated, annotated, 
 and compared with our own, so that almost a new 
 science—the science of comparative religion—has 
 been created by the diligent and painstaking men 
 who have made careful surveys of these Oriental 
 religions, and enabled us to weigh, measure, and 
 examine systems of belief which hold more than one- 
 half the human race in their moulding power. Thus 
 Christianity is fast acquiring all those outside forces 
 necessary to give to it a world-wide equipment for 
 its world-wide conquest. And when the evangelistic 
 forces of the Church shall go forth in their full power, 
 it will be with a momentum hitherto unknown, 
 enabling her to do in a day the work of a year, and 
 in a year the work of centuries, until, through these 
 vastly-augmented agencies, blessed and utilised by 
 the Holy Ghost, it shall be literally true as the pro- 
 phet has declared, “a nation shall be born in a day.” 
 
 Brethren, beloved, this is the great work which is 
 intrusted to us in an especial manner, to proclaim in 
 all the quarters of the world where our lot is cast an 
 uplifted Jesus. We are to lift Him up by exalting 
 the Divine Scripture, in which He is enshrined; by 
 exal)ting the sacrament which shows forth this up- 
 lifting until He come; by exalting the ministry 
 appointed by Christ Himself to be His heralds and 
 teachers; by exalting the Church, which is His 
 mystical Body,—exalting all these things, not by 
 exalting them above Him, of Whom and to Whom 
 they all testify ; but because they are all means and 
 aids for getting a better, clearer, and more life-giving 
 view of the uplifted Jesus. 
 
 All attempt to put anything between the soul 
 of the sinner and the uplifted Christ, or to raise 
 
 P 
 
218 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 anything to the same level with Him, is derogatory 
 to His honour and contrary to His Word. To what 
 purpose would the bitten Israelite have been told to 
 look at the serpent of brass lifted up by Moses in the 
 wilderness if anything had been placed by Moses or 
 the elders of Israel between the eyes of the sufferer 
 and the object to which he was directed to look? Or 
 if alongside of that serpent of brass had been placed 
 other objects to which equal efficacy was attributed, 
 and thus confused his mind and deflected his faith ? 
 
 This lifting up of Christ in all the aspects of His 
 offices as Prophet, Priest, and King can be done by 
 us only as we are taught by the Holy Ghost, for it 
 is His office to take of the things of Christ and to 
 show them unto men. Dear brethren, if there is one 
 thought more than another which presses upon me at 
 this time, in reference especially to the work com- 
 mitted to us as Bishops in the Church of God, it is 
 that we need a fresh baptism of the Holy Spirit and 
 fresh outpouring into our hearts of the love-power of 
 the uplifted Jesus. If even Apostles, the three years’ 
 daily companions of our blessed Lord when He 
 dwelt among men, had no power to preach the Cross 
 of Christ until the Holy Spirit came upon them, 
 surely we need to be sprinkled from on high, that 
 Pentecostal grace may not merely light upon our 
 heads in tongue-like flames but that, like the precious 
 ointment upon the head of Aaron that went down to 
 the skirts of his garments, the unction that the Holy 
 Spirit only can bestow may flow over our whole being, 
 sanctifying our lives, enlightening our minds, giving 
 grace to our lips, and wisdom to our acts, and power 
 to our administration, so that it may be said of each 
 of us as of the first martyr, St. Stephen, “ He was a 
 man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost.” 
 
 Our ministry of the Word and our office as Bishops 
 can only be duly and wisely discharged in and 
 through the power and guidance of the Holy Ghost. 
 Let us never forget that this is the source of all 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Pennsylvania. 210 
 
 ministerial strength and grace and influence. Our 
 constant and wrestiing prayer should be that we may 
 daily increase in that Holy Spirit more and more 
 until we come unto His everlasting kingdom. 
 
 Let us also, dear brethren, endeavour to induce the 
 clergy to be more diligent and distinct in setting 
 forth this uplifted Christ as the great sunlike truth 
 of our salvation. The real remedy for the troubles 
 within our own Church is not by repressive, or by 
 restrictive, or by punitive legislation ; isnot by courts 
 of law, civil or ecclesiastical ; is not by bandying 
 criminous and contemptuous words, and organising 
 parties in battle array under standards and principles 
 foreign to the spirit of the Gospels, but it is a more 
 faithful setting forth of Christ. 
 
 But I must stop, though many and weighty topics 
 rise in my mind, created by the occasion. 
 
 The day has arrived when this assembly of Angli- 
 can Bishops will separate. But before we separate, 
 our hearts are to be re-knit together by participation 
 in that blessed Sacrament which, while it binds each 
 to each, binds all as one to the heart of our common 
 Lord. From that altar we shall go away northward 
 to the Arctic Circle, southward to Australia, east- 
 ward to China, westward to the United States, never 
 to meet together as a body here below. Of the 
 seventy-six Bishops gathered at the last Lambeth 
 Conference in 1867, thirty are dead. Death has 
 reaped out of that assembly a rich harvest, and 
 garnered up some of the wisest, the noblest, the 
 holiest men, who ever bore the burden of the Epis- 
 copate. They rest together in the Paradise of God. 
 
 This thought cannot but give a tone of solemnity 
 to this sacred hour ; yet along with this under-tone 
 of sorrow rises up our souls’ Ze Deum that we have 
 been permitted to meet as brethren, to confer so long 
 and so lovingly together, and to part with that pro- 
 found respect and affection which intercourse has 
 engendered and which love has cemented. 
 
 Ρ2 
 
220 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 
 
 Speaking as an American Bishop, and in behalf 
 of American Bishops, I feel warranted in saying that 
 we desire thus publicly to acknowledge the manifold 
 courtesies and civilities which have been so markedly 
 bestowed upon us—that we appreciate and shall ever 
 remember the unwearied kindness and loving words 
 of our brethren of the English bench, and of all others 
 who made up this Conference. 
 
 We have learned here lessons of wisdom and zeal 
 which will influence all our future. We go back 
 richer than we came, for we return with the wealth 
 of new friendships, new plans of usefulness, new 
 aspirations after higher results, and the treasured 
 memories of Church life and home life into which, as 
 into a garden of spices, we have been so lovingly 
 invited. Our admiration of the Church of England 
 has been greatly increased. As we have walked 
 around its walls, grey with antiquity, and marked 
 well its bulwarks, scarred, but not weakened, by the 
 conflicts of the Christian centuries; as we have 
 associated with those who bear Episcopal rule in this 
 Zion, and with the band of learned and self-sacrificing 
 clergy who work therein, and with the intelligent 
 and zealous and liberal laity that form the noble 
 body of the faithful—as we have surveyed all these 
 we may have seen here and there things that are 
 strange to us, points that we should have altered, 
 defects, as we might term them, that needed correc- 
 tion, the filling up of some crevice here, and the 
 stripping off of some of the old ivy there ; but after all 
 we should be forced toexclaim, “ Beautiful for situation, 
 the joy of the whole earth is this City of our God: Her 
 foundations are on the everlasting hills. The Lord is 
 in the midst of her; she shall not be moved. God shall 
 help her, and that right early.” As I behold the 
 grand spectacle which the Anglican Church now 
 presents—bristling with its multiplied agencies 
 and vigorous with re-enkindled life and earnestness, 
 and contrast it with the impotence of its assailers 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Pennsylvania. 22% 
 
 and the envy of its rivals, I recall the magnificent 
 vision of Milton, in which he describes the rising 
 power and glory of the Commonwealth; and 
 substituting the word “Church” for the word 
 “nationy 1 seem to find in it a description. of 
 the present aspect of the spiritual commonwealth 
 of dear old England. “Methinks,” says the blind 
 bard, “I see in my mind, a noble and puissant 
 Church, rousing herself like a strong man after sleep, 
 and shaking her invincible locks; methinks I see 
 her as an eagle, renewing her mighty youth, and 
 kindling her undazzled eyes at the full midday beam, 
 purging and unscaling her long-abused sight at the 
 fountain itself of heavenly radiance ; while the whole 
 noise of timorous and flocking birds, with those also 
 that love the twilight, flutter about amazed at what 
 she means,” and, I may add, confounded at her 
 revived greatness. And so we say, with one mouth 
 and one heart, to the dear mother of us all, the 
 Church of England, “‘ Peace be within thy walls, and 
 plenteousness within thy palaces. For my brethren 
 and companions’ sake, I will wish thee prosperity.” 
 
 The next time, dear brethren, that we meet 
 together will be before the Great White Throne. 
 Such a thought warns us that we must be watching, 
 waiting, working, until the day of death comes ; and 
 when that shall come, may we each, through faith in 
 the atoning blood of the uplifted Jesus, pass in 
 through the gate into the celestial city, and hear 
 from the lips of Him who sitteth upon the throne, 
 .““ Well done, good and faithful servant, enter thou 
 into the joy of thy Lord.” 
 
 
 
222 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 No. XXVI. 
 
 Prayer for the Conference. 
 
 LORD God Almighty, Father of Lights and 
 
 Fountain of all Wisdom : we humbly beseech Thee 
 that Thy Holy Spirit may lead into all truth Thy servants 
 the Bishops now [to be] gathered together in Thy Name. 
 Grant them Grace to think and do such things as shall 
 tend most to Thy Glory and the good of Thy Holy 
 Church : direct and prosper, we pray Thee, all their con- 
 sultations, and further them with Thy continual help, that, 
 the true Catholic and Apostolic Faith once delivered to 
 the Saints being maintained, Thy Church may serve Thee 
 in righteousness of living and in all godly quietness 
 
 through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. 
 
Programme of Conference. 223 
 
 No. XXVII. 
 
 Papers issued to the Bishops before the first Services 
 or Meetings in connection with the Conference 
 
 of 1888. 
 (1) PROGRAMME. 
 
 The following are the official arrangements with 
 respect to the forthcoming Lambeth Conference. 
 
 SATURDAY, JUNE 30th. 
 3.0 p.m. * Service in Canterbury Cathedral. 
 
 MONDAY, JULY 2nd. 
 7.0 p.m. * Service in Westminster Abbey, with 
 Sermon by the Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 [Bishops and Chaplains attending this Service will enter 
 the Abbey through Dean’s Yard, by the Jerusalem Cham- 
 ber entrance. | 
 
 TUESDAY, JULY 3rd. 
 11.0a.m. * Holy Communion in Lambeth Palace 
 Chapel, with Sermon by the Bishop of Minnesota, 
 
 deputed by the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant 
 Episcopal Church in the United States. 
 
 1.30 p.m.—4.45 p.m. 
 
 First Session of the Conference in Lambeth 
 Palace Library— 
 
 (A) Opening Address by the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury. 
 
 (B) Discussion of Subject (No. II.)—‘ Definite 
 teaching of the Faith to various classes and the means 
 thereto.” 
 
 To be introduced by the Bishops of London, Maine, and 
 Carlisle. 
 
224 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, JULY 4th. 
 10.45 am. Litany in Lambeth Palace Chapel. 
 
 11.0 a.m.—1I.30 p.m. 
 
 Discussion of Subject (No. 111.)-- Zhe Anglican 
 Communion in relation to the Eastern Churches, to the 
 Scandinavian ana other Reformed Churches, to the old 
 Catholics and others.” 
 
 To be introduced by the Archbishop of Dublin, the Bishops 
 of Winchester, Gibraltar, Lichfield, Jamaica, and Bishop 
 Blyth. 
 
 2.0 p.m.—4.45 p.m. 
 
 Discussion of Subject (No. IV.)—“ Polygamy of 
 Heathen Converts —Divorce.” 
 
 To be introdued by the Bishops of Durham, Chester, 
 Zululand, The Niger, Maryland, and Bombay. 
 
 THURSDAY, JULY 5th. 
 10.45 am. Litany in Lambeth Palace Chapel. 
 
 11.0 a.m.—I.30 p.m. 
 
 Discussion of Subject (No. V.)—“ Authoritative 
 Standards of Doctrine and Worship.” 
 
 To be introduced by the Bishops of Sydney, Aberdeen, 
 Western New York, Salisbury, and Albany. 
 
 2.0 p.m.—4.45 p.m. 
 
 Discussion of Subject (No. VI.)—* Mutual relations 
 of Dioceses and Branches of the Anglican Communion.” 
 
 To be introduced by the Bishops of Capetown, Brechin, 
 and Derry. 
 
 FRIDAY, JULY 6th. 
 10.45 a.m. Litany in Lambeth Palace Chapel. 
 
 11.0 a.m.—I.30 p.m., and 2.0 p.m.—4.45 p.m. 
 Discussion of Subject (No. I.)—“ 7he Church's 
 
Programme of Conference. 225 
 
 practical work in relation to (A) Intemperance. (B) 
 
 Purity. (C) Care of Emigrants. (D) Soctalisnt.” 
 To be introduced by (A) the Bishops of London and New 
 York ; (B) the Bishops of Durham and Calcutta ; (C) 
 
 the Bishops of Liverpool, North Queensland, and 
 Quebec ; (D) the Bishops of Manchester and Mississippi. 
 
 MONDAY, JULY oth, to SATURDAY, JULY 2Ist. 
 
 Meetings of the various Committees appointed 
 during the first week’s Sessions. 
 
 MONDAY, JULY 23rd, to FRIDAY, JULY 27th. 
 
 Sessions of Conference in Lambeth Palace Library 
 to receive and consider the Reports of the various 
 Committees. Litany, each day, in Chapel, at 10.45, 
 except on Wednesday, July 25th (S. James’ Day), 
 when there will be a celebration of Holy Communion 
 at 10.0 a.m. 
 
 SATURDAY, JULY 28th. 
 
 II am. ἡ Concluding Service in St. Paul’s 
 Cathedral, with Sermon by the Archbishop of York. 
 
 At the services marked thus (*) the Bishops pre- 
 sent are requested to attend in their Episcopal Robes. 
 It is requested that each Bishop present at the ser- 
 vices in Westminster Abbey and St. Paul’s Cathedral 
 may be attended by one Chaplain (or Acting Chap- 
 lain) who will take a place in the procession. The 
 arrangements at Canterbury and at Lambeth Palace 
 will not admit of the attendance of any Chaplains. 
 If such Bishops (and Chaplains) as can conveniently 
 do so would go already robed to Westminster Abbey 
 and St. Paul’s, it would relieve the necessary pressure 
 upon the space available for robing. In the case of 
 the Lambeth Palace service, rooms will be set apart 
 for robing and unrobing—as Episcopal Robes will 
 
226 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 not be worn during the Conference Debates. Pas- 
 toral Staves will in no case be carried except by 
 the Diocesans in whose Cathedrals the services are 
 held. 
 
 The rule found necessary at the former Con- 
 ferences will be again adopted—that should any 
 petitions or memorials be presented to the Con- 
 ference, they be placed without discussion in the 
 hands of the President ; and that it be understood 
 that no answer can in any case be returned. 
 
 EDW : CANTUAR. 
 C. J. GLOUCESTER & BRISTOL, 
 Episcopal Secretary. 
 
 RANDALL T. DAVIDSON, 
 
 (Dean of Windsor.) General Secretary: 
 
 B. F. SMITH, 
 (Archdeacon of Maidstone.) Assistant Secretary. 
 
 June 23rd, 1888. 
 
 
 
 (2) LAMBETH CONFERENCE, 1888. 
 
 The following arrangements have now been made 
 in connection with the forthcoming Lambeth Con- 
 ference :— 
 
 1. In the debates of the opening week the formal 
 motion proposed will in each case be for the appoint- 
 ment of a Committee to consider the particular 
 subject, and to report in the closing week of the 
 Conference. 
 
 2. Certain Bishops conversant with the particular 
 subjects have been invited to open the several dis- 
 
Programme of Conference. LD; 
 
 cussions, but time will as far as possible be afforded 
 for the speeches of others who may wish to take part 
 in the opening debates. 
 
 3. It is requested that the names of Bishops who 
 may be regarded as specially qualified to serve on 
 the different Committees, may be handed to the 
 secretaries, either before or during the opening de- 
 bates, for the President’s consideration before the 
 Committees are nominated. 
 
 4. The invited speakers are requested, in opening 
 the discussions, to express their views by means of 
 speeches, not written papers, and it is particularly 
 hoped that no speech will exceed fifteen minutes in 
 duration, opportunity for fuller treatment of the 
 subjects being afforded in the discussions and 
 reports of the Committees. 
 
 5. A verbatim report of all the speeches will, as 
 before, be taken, and the transcript will be preserved 
 at Lambeth. No part of the debates will be open to 
 the public. 
 
 6. The rule found necessary at the former Con- 
 ferences will be again adopted—that, should any 
 petitions or memorials be presented to the Conference, 
 they be placed without discussion in the hands of the 
 President ; and that it be understood that no answers 
 can, in any case, be returned. 
 
 7. It is requested that each Bishop attending the 
 Services in Westminster Abbey and St. Paul’s Cathe- 
 dral may be attended by one Chaplain (or Acting 
 Chaplain), who will take a place in the procession. 
 The arrangements at Canterbury and at Lambcth 
 Palace will not admit of the attendance of any 
 Chaplains. 
 
 EpDw. CANTUAR. 
 
 June 9th, 1888. 
 
228 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 In reply to enquiries from several Bishops as 
 to whether the red (“ Convocation”) chimere should 
 be worn by the Bishops attending the Lambeth 
 Conference Services, the Archbishop of Canterbury 
 has recommended that, for the sake of uniformity 
 and convenience, the dress worn by all the Bishops 
 should be the ordinary Episcopal Habit—black 
 chimere with lawn rochet and D.D. hood. Chap- 
 lains to wear cassock, surplice, hood and scarf. 
 
 LAMBETH PALACE, 
 25th June, 1888. 
 
 
 
 No. XXVIII. (Sce page 41.) 
 
 Sermon preached by the Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 wn Westminster Abbey, on Monday Evening, 
 July 2, 1888. 
 
 “All the body fitly framed and knit together through that 
 which every joint supplieth.”—EPH. iv. 16. 
 
 THE well-known words—so rich, so worthy, might 
 seem a motto for this Abbey in its glorious age. 
 But they are fitter to describe this Assembly in its 
 perfect modernness. They are the Christian view 
 of the facts of the Church’s growth—facts seen from 
 within. The structural progress of the organism is 
 what the Apostle notes. 
 
 The consequent changes in the surrounding world 
 are no less notable. Her materials of beauty and 
 strength, added to the new, are in a way subtracted 
 from the old. Shaped and glorified and quickened 
 they are replaced at the service of the old. For the 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 220 
 
 Church is not a dead Temple quarried out of living 
 rock and leaving a chasm behind. It is still in the 
 world. <A living Temple into which ἃ half-dead 
 world is to be absorbed. 
 
 The world has abundant vitality to resent the 
 process. Hence, not only old persecutions, but all 
 antagonism, all dislike—save that large amount 
 which is drawn on us by our own inconsistencies. 
 
 Some thinking people still find it doubtful whether 
 the world will ever be absorbed by Christianity, as 
 Christ and the writers of the New Testament 
 evidently conceive that it will be. 
 
 But there was a time when greater thinkers still 
 would have held any theory of the unity of Man, to 
 be brought about by any cause whatever, irrational 
 and unnatural, an evident contradiction of all such 
 design as could be attributed to nature. 
 
 For instance, in the long and beautiful fragment 
 which remains to us of the Sixth Book of Cicero’s 
 greatest work—his treatise “ Of the Republic,’—he 
 sketches the physical features of the distribution of 
 man on the globe. From the Milky Way he marks 
 in vision the few, the narrow, and the scattered 
 “patches” of the earth which were habitable—the 
 waste, impassable tracts which severed the races of 
 mankind—the invincible impossibility of serviceable 
 communications. It is from these laws and cer- 
 tainties of nature, that he draws the lofty, melancholy 
 moral of the worthless narrowness of human fame. 
 “The Southern Zone bears absolutely no relation to 
 the condition of Europe. Even Europe has very little 
 nterest in the eyes of the humane world of Italy.” 
 
 This was the judgment of a mind open to all the 
 considerations which had hitherto suggested them- 
 selves in thought and literature. Yet a few years 
 later a society was summoned into existence whose 
 earliest call was to be “ Fishers of Men,” to gather 
 together in one “the children of Ged who were 
 scattered abroad.” 
 
230 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 The Statesman expressly affirms it to be “un- 
 imaginable that the mightiest Name from lands of 
 civilisation and culture should pass the eternal 
 barriers of Caucasus or be wafted over Ganges.” A 
 few years later the Apostle was writing of “Onc 
 Name to which every knee would bow.” 
 
 To the Christian it was in the nature of things 
 that scattered humanity should be welded into one 
 mass, and the uniting attraction be the human 
 Name of Jesus. The Oneness of Humanity is the 
 essence of the Faith. The One Body not yet “ fitly 
 framed together,” but, as the Apostle literally wrote, 
 “framing itself together,’ as by an hourly process, is 
 the Ideal to which all work, all energies should be 
 directed. This includes and involves every impulse, 
 every labour of the Church. This is the sum of her 
 self-offering to the Glory of the Father. 
 
 The Church looks very far forward and very far 
 behind. Missions, which in all the pressure of their 
 necessity are upon us now, are but one step. The 
 consolidating and compacting of what has been long 
 converted is a parallel, a continuous, a greater work. 
 Missions have known long pauses in their progress— 
 how long was that which followed the conversion of 
 England—centuries in which unchristian races lay 
 about Christendom and threatened its existence. 
 If Missions are vital, the conservation of Christianity 
 within our populations and the confederation of 
 Christian populations are no less of a necessity 
 for the Kingdom of God, and manifestly no less a 
 difficulty. 
 
 It has been pretended that the development of the 
 Anglican communion springs rather from the exten- 
 sion of our race than from the energy of our faith. 
 It would indeed be difficult to outrun the race-wave 
 which now sweeps all shores. Yet there are boun- 
 teous archipelagos, populous tropic wildernesses, 
 primeval churches in peril among the heathen, where 
 the English or American missioner’s is the only house- 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 251 
 
 hold which belongs to our race. And were it 
 otherwise, the mission spirit is at least now eminently 
 characteristic of the blood. Southern Europe had 
 been drawn out earlier, through its natural contact 
 with the East, and the struggles at home kept our 
 efforts low. With the Reformation came one touch to 
 our national conscience. Our Elizabethan mariners 
 dedicating continents to Christ, witness in some 
 measure to a consciousness that Gospel and Church 
 were gifts to be imparted. Yet it ought to sting us to 
 think that it is but a century since England found 
 in her heart to give her America a bishop; but a 
 century since our convict ships landed their terrible 
 freight in Australia, with no more spiritual comforters 
 than the musketeers. Alas! it is not ninety years since 
 we first began to repay the precious earthly things 
 of either Africa or Asia with a share in our spiritual 
 things. Would that it were more possible than it is 
 to identify the extension of our race with that of our 
 faith. Yet signs do still follow the footsteps of them 
 that believe ; and new churches are forming new 
 nations even as we were formed. Higher ideas 
 of the basis of society, of the marriage union, of 
 family life, of self-restraint, of truthfulness, not only 
 lift the individual but form the people. A recog- 
 nised commercial morality, an even administration 
 of justice, a conscience in dealing with subject races, 
 public action on principles not merely selfish, the 
 devotion of lives to benevolent causes, are things 
 found under Christian Governments, and scarcely 
 looked for elsewhere. Independent witnesses avow 
 these to be direct results of Christian faith, and the 
 growth of national character through these, far more 
 than numbers of adherents, or prevalence of obser- 
 vances, assures us that the Church is still the nurse 
 of nations. 
 
 We know the need of caution—how we may 
 enervate native churches by nursing them too long 
 or wreck them by launching them too soon; we 
 
232 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 know that diversity of development according to the 
 genius of the races is essential to their vitality ; we 
 know isolation may peril unity, and independence 
 risk disintegration ; still we know how Church life 
 fostered our own early nationality, how the recovery 
 of a national Church awoke all the force and fire of 
 our national spirit, and we long to see many dormant 
 peoples born to the world, by being born to Christ. 
 
 Surely we draw near to the threshold of an era 
 in which the fulfilment of such hopes will come. 
 What the Roman vision saw as wild wastes round a 
 few centres of light, are now old empires. Those 
 empires are small regions compared with the wastes 
 into which the overflowing peoples stream onward, 
 miles in a day ; those overflowing peoples arc few 
 compared with the dark races which once were 
 thought born for slavery either in their old homes 
 or their new—few compared with the labour-popula- 
 tions that surge up on many shores, or even with the 
 utterly new-born half-races owned and disowned both 
 by East and West. Will not all these follow the old 
 lines of history? Will not these be empires to which 
 what we have called colossal will be pigmy ? And the 
 Church of Christ, if she has a mission to any, has a 
 mission to all. What tremendous issues! If she 
 meets them, the Church history of the past is a mere 
 preface to the volume. 
 
 Or think of the countries where Commerce, taking 
 the field at once with capital and labour at com- 
 mand, founds harbours and marts great and fair 
 as the old world’s. Step by step with their creation, 
 their redemption, we think, may keep pace. Where 
 resources, where energies are practically unlimited 
 the spirit, we think, will not fail. Nor does it. But 
 side by side with all, arise the old world’s problems 
 in all their pain and perplexity. The old world’s 
 quarrels are perpetuated, when their origins, which 
 gave them some sad dignity, are forgotten and grown 
 meaningless. If spreading churches glory to be part 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 233 
 
 and parcel with us, and we with them, we pray them 
 at least to forget English divisions, and to be at such 
 unity among themselves that rays from their circle 
 may be focussed here. 
 
 Two such enterprises might seem vocation enough 
 —to form peoples that are no peoples into the one 
 people of God—and to weld into affectionate religion 
 the new-born communities of commerce. But there 
 is a third worthy to rank with the other two—namely, 
 to win to the cross the fully-organised civilisations of 
 remote antiquity which are saturated with religious 
 feeling. Of those primeval religions the root con- 
 viction is one of three. Either self-sacrifice on the 
 part of God is inconceivable ; or the Incarnation of 
 a God is in quest of a higher or lower pleasure ; or 
 else there is no personality in heaven or earth which 
 is worth the keeping. Were it not worth all we are 
 or have if we could contribute aught to dispel such 
 dire glooms and substitute the certainties that there 
 is no sacrifice which God has not made for man; that 
 the Incarnation means an eternity of love for all 
 humanity ; that we shall for ever be ourselves, yet 
 rising from glory to glory. 
 
 Within the bosom of Christendom itself lie pro- 
 blems no less strange. While distant difficulties call 
 only for faithful activity on the part of our own 
 churches, the nearest questions are the hardest, the 
 nearest duties most dim and indistinct. There is the 
 inevitable reformation—or inevitable decline in the 
 faith—of some western populations. There is the 
 revival of languid and oppressed churches in things 
 that belong to divine knowledge, morals, spiritual 
 diligence. Some churches are in danger of absorp- 
 tion; some have “fought” and “almost devoured 
 one another;” some rival even Israel itself in 
 dispersion and in tenacity; in some the clerical 
 order includes the most enlightened and the rudest 
 of the community; in some, a yearning to undeceive 
 the people of gross superstitions is crushed by a 
 
 Q 
 
234 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 forbidding fear of yielding up outworks which seem 
 like a fence of Faith. Intrude we may not: yet we 
 can still less refuse to touch such burdens with a 
 finger, and look on prayerless and unsympathising. 
 
 The ages lengthen out apace. The work of Christ 
 is not accomplished. The world judges by results. 
 That matters not if it be the Master’s will that His 
 chariot drive heavily; that the salvation of the 
 Gentiles linger, and the unity of man tarry. But do 
 we think it is so? or are we conscious of causes 
 purely human, of wills and factions that despise 
 peace ? 
 
 Yet the movement is onward though the pace is 
 halting. Tremblingly yet rejoicingly we do believe 
 that new charities blossom from our differences. The 
 attitude of an opponent now is almost always an 
 attitude of respect. The asperities of the present 
 are almost milder than the forbearance of the past. 
 Affection between advocates of mutually destructive 
 views is no unreal or unwonted thing. If rougher 
 tests of progress are of value, much more so is the 
 prevalence of a spirit which makes characteristic 
 diversities not merely tend towards truce, but lean 
 longingly towards unity. For this, beyond question, 
 is the working of the Spirit of Christ. 
 
 If we look back now for causes which have pro- 
 moted this growing unity of spirit, we find it in the 
 activity of those forces which rescue, which teach, 
 which guide, which comfort, which raise, which feed, 
 which warm. Whatever outside of Christianity does 
 these works, does Christ’s work. 
 
 The forces which are set forth in Christ’s two 
 Sacraments and in the two Apostolic rites of Confir- 
 mation and Ordination are these. They are the 
 forces that cleanse, and bind together; that strengthen, 
 and organize for growth. On the contrary the spirit 
 of Regulation—the intrusive meddling spirit which 
 travesties the spirit of Order—whether it exhibit 
 itself in minute prescription or minute litigation— 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 235 
 
 the spirit (to speak plainly) of so many Councils 
 since the earliest, has been often the apple of discord, 
 and often the germ of schisms. 
 
 I. The energy which within the Church has in our 
 times revived the courage and increased the activity 
 of our peoples, which has added continents and 
 islands to the conquests of the faith ; the attraction 
 which has held together many elements of division, 
 and even welded them into strong instruments of 
 work, has been found again and again to reside in 
 those Strong Centres which Apostles designed for this 
 very function of assigning work to all, and stimu- 
 lating the zeal of all. Natural analogies are perhaps 
 not mere resemblances, but the same laws of God. 
 In our own national history at any rate, and in the 
 history of the Churches, we find ourselves well 
 warned to keep our Christian groupings wide enough, 
 and our centres strong enough. Strong by position 
 to traverse, to learn from, to influence each rank and 
 class by turns; strong in councils of men, sufficiently 
 versed in the world’s thought and experience, habitu- 
 ally taught by devotional lives to refer daily ques- 
 tions to eternal principles; faithful to administer and 
 to apply far reaching organizations for the benefit of 
 the bodies and minds and spirits of men. Through 
 this strong system, however short of its ideal, still an 
 ideal influence has been exercised within Christian 
 society, and by that society on all surrounding 
 powers. 
 
 The very errors that have been made have tested 
 it. When every petty city of Africa had its bishop 
 and the doctrine of episcopacy was strongest, the 
 effectiveness of the episcopate was lowest. A Cyprian 
 had no difficulty in obtaining their unanimous vote, 
 a vote contrary to Scripture principle, Church tradi- 
 tion, and the subsequent ruling of the Catholic word— 
 a vote that heretical or schismatical baptism was void. 
 
 Vigour and character were not in hand for so many 
 posts of leaders. Poly-episcopacy ceased to be epis- 
 
 Q Ζ 
 
236 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 copacy when the diocese became so small a unit. 
 When every civil district in Phrygia and Galatia 
 became a see, failing such an imperial will as Cy- 
 prian’s to unite them, their controversies became, 
 according to St. Paul’s forecast, internecine. The 
 like multiplication in Italy converted churches into 
 cliques, and delivered Italy over to the one strong 
 see, and Europe followed the leading country. 
 
 Half a century with us has seen seven colonial 
 sees grow to seventy, and so vast still is their area, 
 that another half-century will not be too long to 
 work out the sub-division. Yet the old policy of 
 England must be nowhere forgotten, that sub-division 
 should cease before dioceses become too small for the 
 influence of each to radiate through all, before the 
 administration anywhere becomes so narrow as to 
 represent only local patriotism. 
 
 II. Yet strong central forces are not all that is 
 required to prevent a merely larger congregationalism 
 from supplanting the catholic system. Much has 
 been said, done, tested, which shows that these times 
 demand supplementary organizations. We should 
 lack either courage or intelligence if we did not 
 admit it. The three-fold ministry is complete in 
 itself for its own great ends. The seals of its 
 origin are patent. But outside those ends are 
 many functions to which it is not adapted. The 
 long attempt to adapt it brings out the inadequacy. 
 From the Apostolic text of the Epistles down to the 
 last Parochial Report of any well worked district 
 we see how much energy and blessing lives in other 
 orders in the Church. There is a vast reservoir of 
 devotion truly ministerial, which cannot possibly 
 discharge itself through that triple channel. We 
 have on a small scale the partial Dedication of lay- 
 reading, school-teaching, visiting, ‘“ Church-work,” 
 as it is called, at large. Very precious are these. 
 All of them practical uses of Spiritual Gifts. No- 
 thing less. But it is confessed that the whole Anglican 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury, 237 
 
 group is weak in the life of sisterhoods, and brother- 
 hoods, and “ armies,” as, when well trained, they may 
 be not unfitly called. The self-devotion of such 
 auxiliaries, as they elsewhere exist, is not less, but 
 more, absorbing than that of the ministry itself. 
 One church there is which candour places beyond 
 praise for the ceaseless multitudinous self-surrender 
 of men to energetic life-work, without fee or reward, 
 without property or domestic life. They multiply 
 infinitely the effectiveness of the ministry. Say that 
 that Church is careless of pure doctrine or ignorant 
 of Scripture Truth ; that makes the facts still more 
 marked for us, if Truth suggests sacrifice for the 
 Truth, or for the souls that want the Truth. Here 
 with us they would be, not as of old foreign influ- 
 ences set against the organization of diocese and 
 parish, but as already in these beginnings dependent 
 on both, and part of both, and their main work the 
 carrying of the Gospel into unreached places. What 
 is the reason that they are missing? Have abuses 
 created an eternal prejudice against the thing abused ? 
 Have we no confidence in our own safeguards? 
 Have we cut down the oak to kill the ivy? Or are 
 the centres we spoke of not now strong enough to 
 take additional strain? Or is there force, but no 
 material for it to lay hold upon ? 
 
 Or may we think there is indeed ἃ gradual 
 deepening of spiritual yearnings, a gradual leavening 
 of spiritual men into readiness to reply, “ Here I 
 am ; send me,” when the voice is heard from the 
 throne, “Whom shall we send, and who will go 
 for us?” 
 
 I incline from some signs, even from the safe- 
 guards themselves, to think this is the account of our 
 position. There are flecks of glory along our horizon, 
 and they surely are lights of dawn, not relics of 
 sunset. 
 
 But the beginning must be in some real, definite 
 spritual conquest. Let such a trained band complete 
 
238. Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 the virtual Christianisation of a town or district here, 
 or among our fellow-subjects in India, or work the 
 conversion of such an untouched land as the Corea, 
 and a new impulse would strike every home and 
 foreign mission. Men would wonder then not at the 
 smallness, but the largeness of what had been done 
 hitherto with such slight forces. They would wonder 
 still more that Church life had rolled on so many 
 days without auxiliaries, almost without voluntary 
 forces. 
 
 III. “ Some spiritual conquest,’ I said. The word 
 “spiritual” must be the keynote of all we do, 
 say, think about the Church’s daily new-born work. 
 The spirit makes itself a body to dwell in. All 
 needed material help would wait upon a spiritual 
 outburst as ever of old. 
 
 “Ye are built upa spiritual house.” Spiritual yet 
 built. Built but remaining spiritual. 
 
 Prophets and Apostles foresaw all worldly material 
 brought and built into it. Yet it was to remain 
 spiritual. When it ceases to be so it is no more 
 the building which will bear the Trial and the Fire. 
 
 We know well that spiritual life may be real 
 without apostolic form. Only we seem to see that, 
 even in its most beautiful and manifold manifesta- 
 tions, it cannot without that form propagate itself 
 indefinitely. Time after time spiritual varieties 
 surrender their separate life and merge into the 
 completer existence. 
 
 On the other hand, we know well, that there 
 may be apostolic form without spiritual life, and 
 that like any other form that lacks life, its end is to 
 break up and supply pabulum for lower forms of life. 
 
 Our own humble, hopeful confidence, lies in the 
 possession of apostolic form with fervent spiritual 
 charity and living faith. The form is secured. Our 
 every-day vigilance must be for the spiritual anima- 
 tion, the spiritual “increase of every part in that 
 which every joint supplieth.” 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 230 
 
 An unworldly church, an unworldly clergy, means 
 not a poor church or poverty-stricken clergy. A 
 poor, unprovided, dependent clergy is scarcely able 
 to be an unworldly one, and certainly cannot betoken 
 an unworldly laity. A laity which breaks the bread 
 of its ministers into smaller and smaller fragments, 
 and has none of the divine will to multiply, works 
 no miracle and has no honour. 
 
 Unworldliness is not emptiness of garners, but the 
 right and noble use of garners filled by God. An 
 unworldly clergy is not a clergy without a world, but 
 one which knows the world, uses and teaches man 
 how to use the world for God until it brings at last 
 the whole world home to God. 
 
 Never more necessary than now to use the world 
 as not abusing it. To abuse it gracefully is the 
 temptation of the age—and to gild the abuse with 
 philanthropy. The philanthropy of the Gospel 
 without its philotheism is popular. But its philan- 
 thropy will never lite without its philotheism, any more 
 than the form of a church will live without the spirit. 
 
 To say “Christianity is not a Theology” is in 
 one sense true, because Christianity is a Life. But 
 it would be just as true to say Christianity is not a 
 History, or Christianity is not a worship. But you 
 cannot have the Life without the Worship, without 
 the History, or without the Theology. The spiritual 
 life is the Life of God. As material life has its 
 science of Biology, so has spiritual life its science of 
 Theology. Without Theology, Christian Life will 
 have no intellectual, no spiritual expression, as with- 
 out Worship it will have no emotional expression, 
 without History no continuous development. Intel- 
 lectual expression is necessary to the Propagation 
 and so to the Permanence of the Faith. To know 
 it is the profession of the clergyman, and the most 
 living interest of the cultured layman. 
 
 Let us, the whole world over, where the common 
 speech is spoken, the common prayer prayed, the 
 
240 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 Scripture open, keep touch with each other, firm, 
 inseparable—find all the points of contact that we 
 can honestly with them that are in a way separate; 
 yet not risk our greater unity for the sake of smaller 
 ones, 
 
 To me it seems no fancy—it is none I trust to you 
 —that the triple voice we have caught to-night is the 
 very harmony that swells on our inner ear from roof 
 and aisle and sanctuary. Here where the historic 
 past “lives in the living present;” here, where 
 greatest, best, and sweetest are honoured so in death 
 that in a parable their shadow may fall on some of 
 us; here, where in never pausing procession sweep 
 onward Parliaments of Law, Councils of Faith, 
 Divine Orators, princely marriages, funerals with 
 sorrow of nations, commemorations, consecrations, 
 coronations—the Jubilee with its beloved Queen, its 
 lost Emperor ; here, where Edward the Confessor 
 bids Englishmen and English tribes never forget 
 that the ideal State is the Church, and the ideal 
 Church is the State, here, methinks, we well may lay 
 to heart this threefold voice. 
 
 Strong central forces: how infinitely greater their 
 operation and their impulse, than if distributed into 
 the most symmetric minor nuclei. Their very power 
 to attract, to move, to lift, to quicken, is their own 
 concentredness. 
 
 Again. How we learn from this great Abbey the 
 value of organizations that lie off the direct line of 
 action. It is the grandest organic centre, yet it 
 stands detached, favouring, labouring for every good 
 cause, yet freely on its own account. Differing even 
 in plan and structure radically from every sanctuary 
 in the land, it is the symbol of all those forces which 
 work not subordinated but in alliance. It confirms 
 by separateness. 
 
 Once more. No soul was ever lowered by the 
 sight of this wondrous fabric into material thoughts. 
 No man ever failed to see, read, hear its witnesses to 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 241 
 
 things spiritual. From mysterious triforium to 
 roadside porch “the stone cries out of the wall, and 
 the beam of the timber answers it; ‘Put not your 
 trust in man, nor in any child of man. ‘Come up 
 here, and I will show thee things that must be 
 hereafter.’ ” 
 
 And is not this the very auditory that is tuned 
 to the key of this house of power and _ holiness. 
 From zones which the Roman Seer declared could 
 never help or heed each other come the chiefs of the 
 Church to consult in one love for the welfare of all 
 men,—how they may “make all men see” the 
 intellectual, the spiritual light of the world, and the 
 perfect law of liberty. Lightly borne across barriers 
 which he said “No Name could ever overleap,” they 
 cume with no strength no pretension of their own ; 
 but in the strength of One Name to which every 
 knee shall bow, a strength perfected in our weakness. 
 
 May we catch the inspiration of the hour, the 
 place, the Name. Then may we work out our work ; 
 strengthen our centres of force ; throw out organi- 
 sations which will penetrate society, poor and great ; 
 flood every corner of our house with spiritual light ; 
 have nothing cold and “no part dark,’—“ the whole 
 body full of light” and of warm blood. This 
 is the very hope set before us, that we “ may grow 
 into Him in all things, which is the Head—even 
 Christ.” 
 
 No. XXIX. (Sce page 42.) 
 
 Sermon preached by Bishop Whipple, of Minnesota, 
 am Lambeth Palace Chapel, on Tuesday, July 
 3, 1888. 
 
 Most Reverend and Right Reverend Brethren,— 
 No assembly is fraught with such awful responsibility 
 to God asacouncil of the Bishops of His Church. 
 
242 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 Since the Holy Spirit presided in the first council of 
 Jerusalem, faithful souls have looked with deep 
 interest to the deliberations of those whom Christ 
 has made the shepherds of His flock, and to whom 
 He gave His promise, “ Lo, I am with you always to 
 the end of the world.” The responsibility is greater 
 when division has marred the beauty of the Lamb’s 
 Bride. Our words and acts will surely hasten or 
 (which God forbid) retard the reunion of Christen- 
 dom. Feeling the grave responsibility which is 
 imposed on me to-day, my heart cries out as did the 
 prophet’s, “I ama child and cannot speak.” Pray for 
 me, venerable brethren, that God may help me to 
 obey His word—*“ Whatsoever I command, that shalt 
 thou speak.” I would kneel with you at our Master’s 
 feet and pray that “the Holy Spirit may guide us 
 in all truth.” We meet as the representatives of 
 national Churches; each with its own peculiar re- 
 sponsibility to God for the souls intrusted to its care ; 
 each with all the rights of a national Church, to 
 adapt itself to the varying conditions of human 
 society ; and each bound to preserve the order, the 
 faith, the sacraments, and the worship of the Catholic 
 Church, for which it is a trustee. As we kneel by 
 the table of our common Lord we remember 
 separated brothers. Division has multiplied division 
 until infidelity sneers at Christianity as an effete 
 superstition, and the modern Sadducee, more bold 
 than his Jewish brother, denies the existence of God. 
 Millions for whom Christ died have not so much as 
 heard that there is a Saviour. It will heal no divi- 
 sion to say, Who is at fault ? The sin of schism does 
 not lie at one door. If one has sinned by self-will, 
 the other has sinned as deeply by lack of charity and 
 love. The way to reunion looks difficult. To man 
 it isimpossible. No human eirenicon can bridge the 
 gulf of separation. There are unkind words to be 
 taken back, alienations to be healed, and _heart- 
 burnings to be forgiven. When we are blind, 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 243 
 
 God can make a way. When “the God of Peace” 
 rules in all Christian hearts, our Lord’s prayer will 
 be answered—“ That they all may be one, as Thou, 
 Father, art in Me, and I in Thee that they all may 
 be one in Us, that the world may believe that thou 
 hast sent Me.” No one branch of the Church is 
 absolutely by itself alone the Catholic Church; all 
 branches need reunion in order to the completeness 
 of the Church. There are blessed signs that the 
 Holy Spirit is quickening Christian hearts to seek 
 for unity. We all know that this divided Christianity 
 cannot conquer the world. At atime when every 
 form of error and sin is banded together to oppose 
 the kingdom of Christ, the world needs the witness 
 of a united Church. Men must hear again the voice 
 which peals through the lapse of centuries bearing 
 witness to “the faith once delivered to the saints,” or 
 else for many souls there will be only rationalism 
 and unbelief—while this sad, weary world, so full of 
 sin and sorrow, is pleading for help, it is a wrong to 
 Christ and to the souls for whom He died that His 
 children should be separated in rival folds. As 
 baptized into Christ we are brothers. Notwithstand- 
 ing the hedges of human opinions which men have 
 builded in the garden of the Lord, all who look for 
 salvation alone through faith in Jesus Christ do hold 
 the great verities of Divine faith. The opinions 
 which separate us are not necessary to be believed in 
 order to salvation. The truths in which we agree 
 are parts of the Catholic faith. The Holy Spirit has 
 passed over these human barriers, and set his seal to 
 the labours of separated brethren in Christ, and 
 rewarded them in the salvation of many precious 
 souls. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the 
 renewing and sanctifying influences of the Holy 
 Ghost are the same in the peasant in the cottage and 
 in the emperor on the throne. They share with us 
 in the long line of confessors and martyrs for Christ. 
 We would not rob them of one sheaf which they 
 
244. Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 have gathered in the garner of the Lord. We rejoice 
 that Churches with a like historic lineage with us are 
 seeking reunion, Churches whose faith has been 
 dimmed by coldness or clouded by errors are being 
 quickened into new life from the Incarnate Son 
 of God. 
 
 Our hearts go out in loving sympathy to the 
 Old Catholics of Europe and America, whose names 
 always will be linked with Selwyn, Wilberforce, and 
 Wordsworth, Whittingham, Kerfoot, and Brown, in 
 defence of the faith. It is with deep sorrow that we 
 remember that the Church of Rome has separated 
 herself from the teaching of the primitive Church by 
 additions to the faith once delivered to the saints,. 
 and by claiming for its Bishop prerogatives which 
 belong only to the Divine Head of the Church. 
 While we honour the devotion and zeal of her mis- 
 sionary heroes, and rejoice at the good work of 
 multitudes of her children, we lament that lack of 
 charity which anathematises disciples of Christ who 
 have carried the Gospel to the ends of the earth. 
 
 We bless God’s Holy Name for the fraternal 
 work which has been carried on under the guidance 
 of the see of Canterbury, and which we trust will 
 lead ancient Churches toa deeper personal faith in 
 Jesus Christ. 
 
 We are sad that some of our kinsmen in Christ, 
 children of one mother, have forsaken her ways. 
 God can over-rule even this sorrow, so that it shall 
 fall out to the furtherance of the Gospel. They 
 must take with them precious memories of the love 
 and the faith of the mother whom they have for- 
 saken, and of the liberty wherewith the truth in 
 Christ has made her children free—under God these 
 may be a link in the chain of His providence to the: 
 restoration of unity. It is a singular providence 
 that at this period of the world’s history, when mar- 
 vellous discoveries have united the people of divers 
 tongues in common interests, He has placed the 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 245 
 
 Anglo-Saxon race in the forefront of the nations. 
 They are carrying civilisation to the ends of the 
 earth. They are bringing liberty to the oppressed, 
 elevating the down-trodden, and are giving to all these 
 divers tongues and kindreds their customs, traditions, 
 and laws. I reverently believe that the Anglo- 
 Saxon Church has been preserved by God’s Provi- 
 dence (if her children will accept this Mission) to 
 heal the divisions of Christendom, and lead on in His 
 work to be done in the eventide of the world. She 
 holds the truths which underlie the possibility of re- 
 union, the validity of all Christian baptism in the Name 
 of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. She 
 administers the two sacrainents of Christ as of per- 
 petual obligation, and makes faith in Jesus Christ, 
 as contained in the Catholic Creed, a condition of 
 Christian fellowship. The Anglo-Saxon Church 
 does not perplex men with theories and shibboleths 
 which many a poor Ephraimite cannot speak— 
 she believes in God the Father Almighty, Maker of 
 heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, 
 and in the Holy Ghost, three Persons and one God, 
 but she does not weaken faith in the Triune God 
 by human speculations about the Trinity in Unity. 
 She believes that the sacred Scriptures were written 
 by inspiration of God, but she has no theory about 
 inspiration. She holds up the Atonement of Christ 
 as the only hope of a lost world; but she has no 
 philosophy about the Atonement. She teaches that 
 it is through the Holy Ghost that men are united to 
 Christ. She ministers the sacraments appointed by 
 Christ as His channels of grace; but she has no 
 theory to explain the manner of Christ’s presence to 
 penitent believing souls. She does not explain what 
 God has not explained, but celebrates these Divine 
 mysteries, as they were held and celebrated for 
 one thousand years after our Lord ascended into 
 heaven, before there was any East or West arrayed 
 against each other in the Church of God. Surely 
 
246 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 we may and ought to be first to hold up the olive- 
 branch of peace over strife, and say, “Sirs, ye are 
 brethren.” 
 
 In so grave a matter as the restoration of organic 
 unity, we may not surrender anything which is of 
 Divine authority, or accept terms of communion 
 which are contrary to God’s Word. We cannot 
 recognise any usurpation of the rights and preroga- 
 tives of national Churches which have a common 
 ancestry, lest we “heal the hurt of the daughter of 
 my people slightly,” and say “ peace where there is 
 no peace;” but we do say that all which is temporary 
 and of human choice or preference we will forego 
 from our love to our own kinsmen in Christ. 
 
 The Church of the Reconciliation will be an 
 historical and Catholic Church in its ministry, its 
 faith, and its sacraments. It will inherit the promises 
 of its Divine Lord. It will preserve all which is 
 Catholic and Divine. It will adopt and use all in- 
 strumentalities of any existing organisation which 
 will aid it in doing the Lord’s work. It will put 
 away all which is individual, narrow, and sectarian. 
 It will concede to all who hold the faith all the 
 liberty wherewith Christ hath made His children 
 free. 
 
 Missions.—In the presence of brethren who bear 
 in their bodies the marks of the Lord Jesus, I hardly 
 know how toclothe in words my thoughts as I speak 
 of Missions. The providence of God has broken 
 down impenetrable barriers—the doors of hermit 
 nations have been opened ; commerce has bound 
 men in common interests, and so prepared “a high- 
 way for our God”—Japan, India, China, Africa, 
 Polynesia, amid the solitudes of the icy north, and in 
 the lands of tropic suns, world-wide there are signs. 
 of the coming of the kingdom of Jesus Christ. The 
 veil which has so long blinded the eyes of the ancient 
 people, our Lord’s kinsmen according to the flesh, is 
 being taken away. We bless God for the good 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 247 
 
 example of martyrs like Patteson, Mackenzie, Parker, 
 Hannington, and others, who have laid down their 
 lives for the Lord Jesus. We rejoice that our branch 
 of the Church has been counted worthy to add to 
 the names of those who “came out of great tribula- 
 tion, and have washed their robes and made them 
 white in the blood of the Lamb.” “A great and 
 effectual door is opened.” There is no country on 
 the earth where we may not carry the Gospel. The 
 wealth of the world is largely in Christian hands. 
 The Church only needs faith to grasp the opportu- 
 nity to do the work. 
 
 In the presence of fields so white for the harvest, 
 we must ask, “Lord what wilt Thou have me to do?” 
 
 1. There must be unceasing, prevailing intercessory 
 prayer for those whom we send out to heathen 
 lands. The hearts of all Christian nations were 
 turned with anxious solicitude to that brave servant 
 of God and his country in Khartoum. Shall we 
 feel less for the servants of Christ who have given 
 up home and country to suffer and it may be to die 
 for Him? Someof us remember that when Missions 
 were destroyed, when clouds were all around us, and 
 the very ground drifted from under our feet, that we 
 were made brave to work and wait for the salvation 
 of God by the prayers which went up to God for us. 
 When “prayers were made without ceasing of the 
 Church unto God,” the fast-closed doors of the prison 
 were opened for the Apostle. It will be so again. 
 
 2. There must be the entire consecration of all 
 unto Christ. The wisdom of Paul and the eloquence 
 of Apollos may plant, but “God alone giveth the 
 increase.” If success comes, if “the rod of the 
 priesthood bud and blossom and bear fruit,” it must 
 be “laid up in the ark of God.” He will not give His 
 glory to another. The work is Christ’s. “We are 
 ambassadors for Him.” “I have chosen you and 
 ae you that ye should go and bring forth 
 ruit.” 
 
248 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 3. They who would win sculs must have a ripe 
 knowledge of the sacred Scriptures. “They were 
 written by inspiration of God . . . . that the man of 
 God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all 
 good works.” Our orders may be unquestioned, our 
 doctrine perfect in every line and feature, but we 
 shall not reach the hearts of men unless we preach 
 Christ out of an experimental knowiedge of the 
 truths of Divine Revelation. There is but one Book 
 which can bring light to homes of sorrow, one light 
 to scatter clouds and darkness, one message to lead 
 wandering folk unto God. This blessed Book will 
 be to every weary soldier and lonely missionary 
 what it was to Livingstone dying alone in Africa, or 
 to Captain Gardiner dead on the desolate shores of 
 Patagonia, whose finger pointed to the words, “ The 
 blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin.” 
 
 4. We must love all whom Christ loves. We 
 may have the gift of teaching, we may understand 
 all mysteries, we may have all knowledge, we may 
 bestow all our goods to the poor, we may even give 
 our bodies to be burned, but without that love which 
 comes alone from Christ, we shall be “as sounding 
 brass and a tinkling cymbal.” With St Paul we 
 must say, “ Whereinsoever Christ is preached I do 
 rejoice, and will rejoice.” 
 
 5. Above all gifts we need the baptism of the 
 Holy Ghost. When ¢/zs consecration comes there 
 will be no cry of an empty treasury. We shall no 
 longer be weary with the bleating of lost sheep, to 
 whom we have to say, I have no means and no 
 shepherd to send you. 
 
 Christian Work.—We rejoice at every sign that 
 Christians realise that wealth is a sacred trust, for 
 which they shall give an account. We rejoice more 
 that they are giving that personal service which is a 
 law of His Kingdom. Men and women of culture 
 and gentle birth are going into the abodes of sickness 
 and sorrow to comfort stricken homes and lead 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 249 
 
 sinful folk to the Saviour. Brotherhoods, sisterhoods, 
 and deaconesses are multiplying. Never was there 
 greater need for their holy work. Many of our own 
 baptized children have drifted away from all faith. 
 To thousands God is a name, the Bible a tradition, 
 faith an opinion, and heaven and hell fables. But 
 that which gives us the deepest sadness and makes 
 all Christian work more difficult is that so many of 
 those to whom the people look for example have 
 given up the Bible, the Lord’s Day, the house of 
 God, and Christian faith. Alas! they are telling 
 these weary toilers whose lives are clouded by anxiety 
 and sorrow that there is no hereafter. “ They know 
 not what they do.” They are sowing to the wind and 
 will reap the whirlwind. May God show them the 
 danger before it is too late. The loss of faith is the 
 loss of everything; without it morality becomes 
 prudence or imprudence. When the tie which bends 
 man to God is broken all other ties snap asunder. 
 No nation has survived the loss of its religion. We 
 are appalled at the mad cry of anarchy which 
 tramples all which we hold dear for time and eternity 
 under its feet. We cannot look into its face without 
 seeing the lineaments of that man of sin who 
 “opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is 
 called God and worshipped.” Antichrist is he who 
 usurps the place of Christ. “ He is antichrist who 
 denieth the Father and the Son.” Our hearts go 
 out in pity for those whose mechanical ideas of the 
 universe may be ἃ revolt from a _ mechanical 
 theology which has lost sight of the Fatherhood 
 of God. We stand where two ways meet. We 
 shall take care of the people or the people will take 
 care of us. The people are the rulers ; the power of 
 the future is in their hands. Limit their horizon to 
 this life, let penury, sickness, and sorrow change the 
 man toa wolf, let him know no God and Father 
 Who hears his cry, no Saviour to help, no brother to 
 bind up his wounds, let there be on the one side 
 R 
 
250 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 wealth and luxury and wanton waste, and on the 
 other side poverty, misery, and despair—there will 
 be, as there has been,a cry for blood. We wonder why 
 men pass by the Church to found clubs and brother- 
 hoods and orders. They will have them, and they 
 ought to have them, until the Church is in its Divine 
 love what its Founder designed it to be—the brother- 
 hood in Christ of the children of our God and 
 Father. What the world needs to-day is not alms, 
 not hospitals, not homes of mercy alone. It needs 
 the spirit and the power of the love of Christ. It 
 needs the voice, the ear, the hand, and the heart of 
 Christ seen in and working in His children. No 
 powers of government, no frestige of social position, 
 no prerogatives of Churchly authority can meet the 
 issues of this hour ; we have waited already too long. 
 Brotherhood men will have, and it will be the brother- 
 hood of the commune, or brotherhood in Christ as 
 the children of our God and Father. Infidelity 
 answers no questions, heals no wounds, fulfils no hopes. 
 The Gospel will do, is doing, to-day what it has done 
 through all the ages, leading men out of sin and 
 darkness and despair to the liberty of sons of God. 
 In a day of division and unrest there will be 
 many questions which perplex earnest souls. Seme 
 will dwell on the subjective side of the faith, others 
 will think most of its manifestations in the life. 
 These questions will affect organisation for Christian 
 work, public worship, and find expression in the 
 ritual of the Church. There is no room for differences 
 if Christ be first, Christ be last, and Christ in every- 
 thing. The ritual of the Church must be the expres- 
 sion of her life. It must symbolise her faith ; it must 
 be subject to her authority. As the years go by 
 worship will be more beautiful. The “garments of 
 the king’s daughter may be of wrought gold,” and she 
 “clothed in raiment of needlework,” but “she will 
 have a name that she liveth and is dead,” unless her 
 “fine linen is the righteousness of the saints.” Lastly, 
 
Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 251 
 
 to none is this council so dear as to those whose lives 
 are spent in the darkness of heathenism, or who have 
 gone out to new lands to lay foundations for the 
 work of the Church of God. In loneliness, with 
 deferred hopes, neglected by brethren, your only 
 refuge to cry as a child to God, it is a joy for you to 
 feel the beating of a brother's heart, and hear the 
 music of a brother’s voice, and kneel with brothers 
 at the dear old trysting-place, the table of our Lord. 
 Let us consecrate all we have and are to Him, 
 let us remember loved ones far away, let us gather 
 all the work we have so long garnered in our hearts 
 and lay it at His feet. We shall not have met in vain 
 if out of the love learned of Him we give each to 
 other, and to all fellow-labourers for Him, a brother’s 
 love, a brother’s sympathy, and a brother’s prayers. 
 [ donot know how to clothe in words the thronging 
 memories which cluster around us in this holy place, 
 what searchings of heart, what cries to God, what 
 communions with Christ, what consolations of the 
 Holy Spirit have been witnessed in this sacred place. 
 I cannot cail over the long roll of saints, confessors, 
 and martyrs, whose “names are written in the Lamb’s 
 Book of Life.” Two names will be remembered to-day 
 by us all. One, that gentle Archbishop Longley, who 
 in the greatness of his love saw with a prophet’s eye the 
 Mission of the Church, and planned these conferences 
 that our hearts might beat as one in the battle of the 
 last time. The other, the wisest of counsellors and 
 the most loving of brethren, the great-hearted Arch- 
 bishop Tait, whose dying legacy to his brethren was 
 “love one another.” ‘They have finished their course 
 and entered into rest. A little more work,a few more 
 trials, and we, too, shall finish our course. We are 
 not two companies, the militant and triumphant are 
 one. We are the advance and rear of one host 
 travelling to the Canaan of God’s rest. God grant 
 that we, too, may so follow Christ that we may have 
 an abundant entrance to His eternal kingdom. 
 R2 
 
252 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 No. XXX. (See page 45.) 
 
 Address to the Queen. Signed by the Bishops present 
 at the Third Lambeth Conference, July, 1888. 
 
 May it please Your Majesty, 
 
 We, Archbishops and Bishops, gathered together 
 at Lambeth from every part of Your Majesty’s 
 Dominions, from the United States of America, and 
 from Mission Fields in all quarters of the World, 
 desire respectfully to convey to Your Majesty an 
 assurance of the earnest prayer which we offer to 
 Almighty God, through our Lord and Saviour Jesus 
 Christ, that health, peace, and prosperity may rest 
 upon Your Majesty, and upon every Member of Your 
 Royal House. 
 
 Met as we are, in the Providence of God, to con- 
 sider how we may best promote among men an 
 increase of the Christian Faith, of brotherly kindness, 
 of honesty and pureness of life, and of reverence for 
 all that is good, we would express to Your Majesty 
 our grateful sense of the debt which we owe to the 
 beneficent influence of Your Majesty’s Court and 
 Home during the fifty years of a great and glorious 
 reign. 
 
 In thanking God for the rapid and continuous 
 extension of the Anglican Church in Your Majesty's 
 
Address to the Queen. 253 
 
 Kingdom and Empire, and in the vast Continent of 
 America, we cannot forget the constant evidence 
 which has been given of Your Majesty’s earnest sym- 
 pathy with all efforts to promote whatsoever things 
 are true and pure and of good report, or tend to 
 advance among the nations of the earth the Kingdom 
 of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. 
 
 We are well assured that Your Majesty unites with 
 us in thanksgivings to Almighty God for the progress 
 already vouchsafed to His Church on earth, and in 
 
 continued prayer for the Divine blessing. 
 
 Edw. Cantuar. 
 
 W. Ebor. 
 
 R. Armagh. 
 
 Plunket Dublin. 
 
 F. Londin. 
 
 J. Fredericton. 
 
 Edward R. Calcutta. 
 
 R. Rupertsland. 
 
 W. P. Guiana. 
 
 W. W. Capetown. 
 
 Alfred Sydney. 
 
 J. B. Dunelm. 
 
 J. Hereford. 
 
 H. A. Neely (Maine). 
 
 H. Carlisle. 
 
 C. P. Meath. 
 
 Jno. Moosonee. 
 
 William Stevens 
 Bishop of Iowa. 
 
 E. H. Winton. 
 
 W. Basil St. Davids. 
 
 Allan B. Grahamstown. 
 
 Perry, 
 
 George H. North Queensland. 
 
 J. M. Rangoon. 
 
 R. Llandaff. 
 
 W. C. Peterborough. 
 G. Columbia. 
 Maurice S. Huron. 
 
 John Mitchinson, Bp. 
 
 William Derry & Raphoe. 
 
 Chas. M. Clogher. 
 
 H. B. Whipple, 
 Minnesota. 
 
 L. G. Bombay. 
 
 R. S. Colombo. 
 
 E. Dover. 
 
 C. J. Gloucester and Bristol. 
 
 E. Lincoln. 
 
 Bishop of 
 
 J. M. Trav. and Cochin. 
 
 Wm. B. Killaloe. 
 
 A. Colchester. 
 
 John Sarum. 
 
 J. J. Penrith. 
 
 Alfred Marlborough. 
 
 Alwyne Ely. 
 
 E. G. Sierra Leone. 
 
 Robert S. Cork. 
 
 Samuel Kilmore. 
 
 G. F. Popham Blyth, Bishop 
 in Jerusalem and the East. 
 
 Cyprian Saskatchewan and 
 Calgary. 
 
 J. C. Bangor. 
 
 E. Jamaica. 
 
 Andrew Burn Nelson, N.Z. 
 
 By Eee xons 
 
254 
 
 F. Nova Scotia. 
 
 Edw. Bickersteth, Bishop in 
 Japan. 
 
 Charles P. Scott, Bishop in 
 North China. 
 
 C. W. Gibraltar. 
 
 J. Manchester. 
 
 W. T. T. Brisbane. 
 
 Edward C. Waiapu. 
 
 W. D. Lichfield. 
 
 C. J. Branch, Bishop Coadj. 
 Antigua. 
 
 W. Kenneth Maritzburg. 
 
 William Hobart Hare, Bishop 
 of S. Dakota. 
 
 H. Barbados. 
 
 S. T. Dunedin. 
 
 W. W. Antigua. 
 
 G. W. Adelaide. 
 
 Cortlandt Whitehead, Pitts- 
 burgh. 
 
 O. W. Whitaker, Bishop of 
 Pennsylvania. 
 
 T. B. Lyman, Bishop of N. 
 Carolina. 
 
 B. Wistar Morris, Bishop of 
 Oregon. 
 
 W. E. McLaren, Bishop of 
 Chicago. 
 
 John T. Spalding, Bishop of 
 Colorado. 
 
 John Scarborough, Bishop of 
 New Jersey. 
 
 W. G. Rulison, Assistant Bis- 
 hop, Central Pennsylvania. 
 
 S. A. Crowther, Bishop of 
 Niger Territory. 
 
 Benj. H. Paddock, Bishop of 
 Massachusetts. 
 
 Alexander Burgess, Bishop of 
 Quincy. 
 
 C. A. Smythies, Bishop of the 
 Universities’ Mission to 
 Central Africa. 
 
 A. G. Aberdeen and Orkney. 
 
 Alex. Bishop of Argyll and 
 the Isles. 
 
 J. Edenburgen. 
 
 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 John A. Paddock, Bishop of 
 Washington Territory. 
 
 Charles Perry (Bishop). 
 
 A. W. Roffen. 
 
 Hugh W. Brechin, Primus. 
 
 Bishop Coad. of London, for 
 N. and C. Europe. 
 
 W. Cestr. 
 
 C. H. Bromby, Bishop. 
 
 Maurice N. Cashel. 
 
 F. Cramer Roberts, Assistant 
 Bishop of Manchester. 
 
 F. H. Leicester. 
 
 D. B. Knickerbacker, Bishop 
 of Indiana, U.S.A. 
 
 H. B. Pretoria. 
 
 E. Algoma. 
 
 James, Bishop of Moray and 
 Ross. 
 
 E. R. Newcastle. 
 
 Charles Niagara. 
 
 H. Tully, Coadjutor of 
 Fredericton. 
 
 Charles Limerick. 
 
 Arthur Toronto. 
 
 Arthur C. Bath and Wells. 
 
 Wm. D. Walker, Bishop of 
 North Dakota. 
 
 J. W. Quebec. 
 
 R. Cicestr. 
 
 George F. Seymour, Bishop 
 of Springfield, U.S.A. 
 
 Waite H. Falkland Islands. 
 
 William Garden, Bishop of 
 Auckland, Ν.Ζ. 
 
 G. M. Singapore ἃ Sarawak. 
 
 Thomas A. Starkey, Bishop of 
 Newark. 
 
 E. R. Tufnell, Bishop. 
 
 George H. Truron. 
 
 George Southwell. 
 
 Adelbert, Bishop of Qu’Ap- 
 pelle. 
 
 Wm. Croswell Doane, Bishop 
 of Albany. 
 
 H. C. Potter, Bishop of New 
 York. 
 
 R. C. Bedford. 
 
Her Majesty's Answer to Address. 255 
 
 Bransby, Bishop of S. John, Douglas, Bishop for Zululand. 
 Kaff. Dan. J. Tuttle, Bishop of 
 
 Wm. Walsham Wakefield. Missouri. 
 
 R. Caledonia. Llewellyn Newfoundland. 
 
 A. W. New Westminster. W. B. Ripon. 
 
 Hugh Miller Thompson, William P. Ossory. 
 Bishop of Mississippi. J. T. Ontario. 
 
 Alfred Honolulu. J. St. Asaph. 
 
 William Paret, Bishop of Hy. N. Pierce, Arkansas. 
 Maryland. E. Nottingham. 
 
 27th July, 1888. 
 
 
 
 The following is Her Mayestys answer to the above 
 Address, forwarded by the Secretary of State 
 to his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, “ for 
 communication to the Most Reverend and right 
 Reverend Prelates who signed the address :”— 
 
 “1 have received with much gratification the 
 address of the recent meeting held at Lambeth, of 
 Archbishops and Bishops of the Church of England, 
 and of Churches in communion therewith in various 
 parts of my dominions, in the United States of 
 America, and in other foreign countries, on the sub- 
 ject of the continuous extension of such Churches 
 throughout the course of my reign. 
 
 “JT thank you heartily for your expressions of good 
 will towards my Throne and person. 
 
 “You may be assured that it will ever be my 
 anxious desire to promote all measures which may 
 tend to maintain and extend the spirit of true religion, 
 and I earnestly pray that Almighty God may bless 
 your labours for an increase of Christian faith and of 
 the virtues which it inspires in all quarters of the world. 
 
 “VW ICTORIA, ἘΣ ΠΤ 
 
256 
 
 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 No. XXXI. 
 
 LIST OF THE BISHOPS ATTENDING THE LAMBETH 
 
 CONFERENCE OF 1888. 
 
 [With the exception of Metropolitans and others entitled to special 
 precedence, the Bishops are arranged, in the following list, according to 
 the date of their consecration. ] 
 
 ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY 
 ARCHBISHOP OF YORK 
 ARCHBISHOP OF ARMAGH ... 
 ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN 
 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BisHOP 
 
 BIsHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 
 OF GUIANA ... ὩΣ 
 OF FREDERICTON ... 
 OF RUPERTSLAND ... 
 OF BRECHIN... 
 OF CAPETOWN 
 OF CALCUTTA 
 OF SYDNEY ... 
 
 OF LONDON .. 
 
 ΟΕ DURHAM... 
 
 OF WINCHESTER 
 PERRY Ane ΞΕ Ξ 
 ΟΕ ST. ANDREW’S ... 
 OF NORWICH 
 
 OF COLUMBIA 
 
 OF BANGOR ... 
 TUFNELL 
 
 OF MINNESOTA 
 
 OF ANTIGUA 
 
 OF ONTARIO 
 
 OF GLOUCESTER AND BRISTOL ... 
 
 OF QUEBEC... As =e 
 IN THE NIGER TERRITORY 
 BROMBY Ξ 
 
 25th April, 1877. 
 
 15th December, 1861. 
 Ist May, 1849. 
 
 toth December, 1876. 
 
 24th August, 1842. 
 4th May, 1845. 
 
 24th June, 1865. 
 
 28th October, 1871. 
 17th May, 1874. 
 
 30th November, 1876. 
 Ist January, 1884. 
 
 21st December, 1869. 
 25th April, 1870. 
 29th March, 1864. 
 29th June, 1847. 
 25th January, 1853. 
 11th June, 1857. 
 24th February, 1859. 
 14th June, 1859. 
 14th June, 1859. 
 13th October, 1859. 
 17th May, 1860. 
 25th March, 1862. 
 25th March, 1863. 
 21st June, 1863. 
 29th June, 1864. 
 29th June, 1864. 
 
List of Bishops attenaing the Conference. 
 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHopP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHopP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHoP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHop 
 BIsHOP 
 BIsHopP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHop 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHopP 
 BIsHop 
 BIsHop 
 BIsHop 
 BisHop 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHop 
 BisHopP 
 BIsHoP 
 BIsHoP 
 BIsHop 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHoP 
 BIsHop 
 BisHop 
 BIsHop 
 (BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHop 
 BisHop 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHop 
 BIsHor 
 BISHOP 
 ‘BIsHop 
 BisHop 
 (BISHOP 
 (BISHOP 
 BisHop 
 -BIsHop 
 BisHop 
 iBIsHOP 
 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 
 WESTERN NEW YORK 
 TENNESSEE 
 LIMERICK 
 
 NELSON ... 
 MAINE 
 
 MIssourI 
 
 St. ALBANS 
 Moray AND Ross 
 DERRY ... 
 HEREFORD 
 PETERBOROUGH 
 OREGON... ae 
 MARITZBURG 
 ALBANY ... 
 AUCKLAND 
 PENNSYLVANIA... 
 CARLISLE ier 
 BATH AND WELLS 
 FALKLAND ISLANDS 
 ARKANSAS 
 DOVER... 
 CHICHESTER 
 
 Str. ASAPH 
 
 WILKINSON ... 
 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 
 GRAHAMSTOWN 
 DUNEDIN 
 HONOLULU 
 CASHEL ... 
 TRINIDAD 
 MOOSONEE 
 SouTH DAKOTA 
 
 MITCHINSON 
 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 
 MASSACHUSETTS 
 NortTH CAROLINA 
 COLORADO 
 GIBRALTAR 
 
 St. DAvIp’s 
 MILWAUKEE 
 NEW JERSEY 
 Cork 
 
 CHICAGO 
 COLOMBO 
 BoMBAY... 
 IOWA 
 MANCHESTER 
 ROCHESTER 
 NOTTINGHAM 
 WAIAPU... 
 PRETORIA 
 NEWFOUNDLAND 
 QUINCY ... 
 SPRINGFIELD 
 
 257 
 
 4th January, 1865. 
 11th October, 1865. 
 29th June, 1866. 
 
 24th August, 1866. 
 25th January, 1867. 
 Ist May, 1867. 
 
 Ith June, 1867. 
 
 24th August, 1867. 
 13th October, 1867. 
 24th June, 1868. 
 
 15th November, 1868. 
 3rd December, 1868. 
 25th January, 1869. 
 2nd February, 1869. 
 29th June, 1869. 
 
 13th October, 1869. 
 30th November, 1869. 
 21st December, 1869. 
 21st December, 1869. 
 25th January, 1870. 
 25th March, 1870. 
 8th May, 1870. 
 
 8th May, 1870. 
 
 8th May, 1870. 
 
 30th November, 1870. 
 4th June, 1871. 
 
 2nd February, 1872. 
 13th April, 1872. 
 29th June, 1872. 
 
 15th December, 1872. 
 oth January, 1873. 
 24th June, 1873. 
 
 17th September, 1873. 
 11th December, 1873. 
 31st December, 1873. 
 Ist February, 1874. 
 24th August, 1874. 
 25th October, 1874. 
 2nd February, 1875. 
 30th March, 1875, 
 8th December, 1875. 
 28th December, 1875. 
 Ist May, 1876. 
 
 roth September, 1876. 
 22nd October, 1876. 
 25th June, 1877. 
 
 21st December, 1877. 
 Ist January, 1878. 
 
 2nd February, 1878. 
 Ist May, 1878. 
 
 15th May, 1878. 
 
 11th June, 1878. 
 
258 
 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BisHoOp 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BisHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 
 AssT.-BISHOP OF CEN RAL. PENNSYLY ANIA 2 
 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 
 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 OF LICHFIELD 
 CRAMER-ROBERTS . ΞΡ 
 oF NorTH Qu EENSLAND.. 
 OF OssorY ... ; 
 
 OF TORONTO 
 
 OF WAKEFIELD 
 
 OF 
 OF CALEDONIA 
 
 OF MICHIGAN : τ: 
 OF NEW WESTMINSTER 
 
 ΟΕ NEWARK 
 
 OF LIVERPOOL 
 
 OF JAMAICA... - 
 
 IN NORTH CHINA. 
 
 IN ZULULAND 
 
 OF WASHINGTON TERRITORY 
 OF SINGAPORE AND SARAWAK 
 COADJUTOR OF FREDERICTON 
 oF PITTSBURGH Be 
 OF RANGOON 
 
 OF BARBADOS 
 
 ΟΕ COLCHESTER 
 
 OF ALGOMA.. 
 
 ΟΕ NEW CASTLE 
 
 COADJUTOR OF ANTIGUA.. 
 
 OF ADELAIDE 
 
 OF MIsSISSIPPI 
 
 OF SIERRA LEONE ... 
 
 OF LLANDAFF 
 
 OF TRURO 
 
 OF ABERDEEN 
 
 ΟΕ ST. JOHN’s, KAFFRARTA 
 OF ARGYLL AND THE ISLES 
 OF INDIANA... 
 
 oF NEw YORK 
 
 IN CENTRAL AFRICA 
 
 OF HURON 
 
 OF NORTH DAKoraA. 
 
 OF KILLALOE 
 
 OF KILMORE 
 
 OF CHESTER 
 
 OF SOUTHWELL 
 
 OF Qu’APPELLE 
 
 OF RIPON 
 
 OF MARYLAND 
 OF LINCOLN 
 OF EXETER ... 
 OF NIAGARA 
 OF BRISBANE 
 OF MEATH ... 
 OF SALISBURY 
 
 TRAVANCORE AND CocuINn oe 
 
 24th June, 1878. 
 24th June, 1878. 
 24th June, 1878. 
 29th September, 1878. 
 Ist May, 1879. 
 251} July, 1879. 
 
 25th July, 1879. 
 25th July, 1879. 
 
 17th September, 1879.. 
 1st November, 1879. 
 8th January, 1880. 
 11th June, 18So. 
 
 28th October, 1880. 
 28th October, 1880. 
 30th November, 1880. 
 15th December, 1880. 
 26th May, 1881. 
 
 oth July, 1881. 
 
 25th January, 1882. 
 Ist May, 1882. 
 
 Ist May, 1882. 
 
 24th June, 1882. 
 
 29th June, 1882. 
 
 25th July, 1882. 
 27th July, 1882. 
 
 30th November, 1882. 
 24th February, 1883. 
 24th February, 1883. 
 25th April, 1883. 
 25th April, 1883. 
 
 Ist May, 1883. 
 
 12th August, 1883. 
 24th August, 1883. 
 14th October, 1883. 
 2oth October, 1883 
 30th November, 1883. 
 30th November, 1883. 
 20th December, 1883.. 
 24th February, 1884. 
 25th April, 1884. 
 
 25th April, 1884. 
 
 Ist May, 1884. 
 
 24th June, 1884. 
 
 25th July, 1884. 
 
 28th October, 1884. 
 8th January, 1885. 
 25th April, 1885. 
 25th April, 1885. 
 
 Ist May, 1885. 
 
 11th June, 1885. 
 29th September, 1885. 
 28th October, 1885. 
 
List of Bishops attending the Conference. 259 
 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHoP 
 BIsHop 
 BIsHopP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 
 OF 
 
 ELY 
 
 IN JAPAN 
 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 ΟΕ 
 
 NASSAU ... 
 CLOGHER 
 EDINBURGH 
 
 IN JERUSALEM AND THE EAST ... 
 OF SASKATCHEWAN AND CALGARY 
 
 SoporR AND MAN 
 MARLBOROUGH... 
 SHREWSBURY ... 
 Nova SCOTIA ... 
 PENRITH 
 BEDFORD 
 LEICESTER 
 
 2nd February, 1886. 
 2nd February, 1886. 
 24th February, 1886. 
 29th June, 1886. 
 21st September, 1886. 
 23th March, 1887. 
 7th August, 1887. 
 24th August, 1837. 
 24th February, 1888. 
 24th February, 1888. 
 25th April, 1888. 
 22nd May, 1888. 
 15th July, 1888. 
 
 15th July, 1888. 
 
 
 
 
 
260 
 
 Lambeth Conference, 1888. 
 
 No. XXXII. 
 
 LIST OF THE BISHOPS ATTENDING THE LAMBETH 
 CONFERENCE OF 1888, ARRANGED ACCORDING TO 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY (Most REv. Dr. BENSON). 
 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 ΒΙΞΗΟΡ 
 ΒΙΞΗΟΡ 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 ΒΙΞΗΟΡ 
 ΒΙΞΗΟΡ 
 ΒΙΞΗ͂ΟΡ 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 OF 
 
 LONDON (RT. Rev. Dr. TEMPLE). 
 
 WINCHESTER (RT. REV. DR. HAROLD BROWNE). 
 NorwicuH (Rt. REv. AND Hon. DR. PELHAM). 
 BANGOR (RT. REV. DR. CAMPBELL). 
 GLOUCESTER AND BRISTOL (RT. Rev. Dr. ELLIcoTT). 
 St. ALBANS (RT. REv. Dr. CLAUGHTON). 
 HEREFORD (RT. REv. Dr. ATLAY). 
 PETERBOROUGH (RT. REV. DR. MAGEE). 
 
 BATH AND WRLILs (RT. REv. Lorp A. HERVEY). 
 CHICHESTER (Rr. REV. Dr. DURNFORD). 
 
 St. ASAPH (RT. REv. DR. HUGHEs). 
 
 ST. Davips (Rt. Rev. Dr. BASIL JONEs). 
 ROCHESTER (RT. REv. Dr. THOROLD). 
 LICHFIELD (RT. Εν. DR. MACLAGAN). 
 LLANDAFF (RT. Rev. Dr. LEwIs). 
 
 Truro (RT. κεν. DR. WILKINSON). 
 SOUTHWELL (RT. REv. Dr. RIDDING). 
 
 LINCOLN (RT. REv. DR. KING). 
 
 EXETER (RT. REv. Dr. E. H. BICKERSTETH). 
 SALISBURY (RT. Rev. Dr. J. WoRDSWORTH). 
 Ey (Rt. REv. Lorp A. Compton). 
 
 SUFFRAGAN OF DOVER (RT. REv. Dr. PARRY). 
 SUFFRAGAN OF NOTTINGHAM (RT. REv. DR. TROLLOPE). 
 SUFFRAGAN OF COLCHESTER (RT. Rev. Dr. BLOMFIELD). 
 SUFFRAGAN OF MARLBOROUGH (RT. REv. DR. EARLE). 
 SUFFRAGAN OF SHREWSBURY (RT. REv. SiR L. STAMER) 
 SUFFRAGAN OF BEDFORD (RT. REv. DR. BILLING). 
 SUFFRAGAN OF LEICESTER (RT. REv. Dr. THICKNESSE) 
 PERRY. 
 
 TUFNELL. 
 
 BROMBY. 
 
 WILKINSON. 
 
 MITCHINSON. 
 
 ARCHBISHOP OF YORK (MosT Rev. Dr. THOMSON), 
 BisHOP OF DURHAM (RT. REv. Dr. LIGHTFOOT). 
 
List of Bishops attending the Conference. 261 
 
 BISHOP OF CARLISLE (RT. REV. DR. Goopwin). 
 
 BisHoP OF MANCHESTER (RT. REV. Dr. MOORHOUSE). 
 BisHOP OF WAKEFIELD (RT. REV. Dr. WALSHAM How). 
 BisHop oF LIVERPOOL (RT. εν. Dr. RYLE). 
 
 BisHop ΟΕ NEWCASTLE (RT. REV. DR. WILBERFORCE). 
 BIsHOP OF CHESTER (RT. REY. Dr. STUBBs). 
 
 BisHop OF ΕΙΡΟΝ (RT. REv. Dr. BoyD CARPENTER). 
 BIsHOP OF SODOR AND MAN (Rt. Rev. DR. BARDSLEY). 
 BIsHoOP SUFFRAGAN OF PENRITH (RT. Rev. DR. PULLEINE). 
 BIsHOP CRAMER-ROBERTS. 
 
 ARCHBISHOP OF ARMAGH (Most Rev. Dr. KNOx). 
 BisHop OF MEATH (Most Rev. Dr. REICHEL). 
 
 BIsHop OF Derry (Rt. Rev. Dr. ALEXANDER). 
 BisHor OF KILMORE (RT. REV. Dr. SHONE). 
 BIsHOP OF CLOGHER (RT. REV. DR. STACK). 
 
 ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN (Most Rev. LORD PLUNKET), 
 BisHop OF LIMERICK (RT. Rev. Dr. GRAVES). 
 BIsHop OF CASHEL (RT. Rev. Dr. Day). 
 
 BisHop oF Cork (Rr. Rev. Dr. GREGG). 
 
 BisHor ΟΕ Ossory (Rr. Rev. Dr. WALSH). 
 
 BIsHOP OF KILLALOE (Rt. REv. Dr. CHESTER). 
 
 BisHoPp OF BRECHIN (RT. Rev. Dr. JERMYN), Primus. 
 
 BIsHoOP OF ST. ANDREW’s (Rr. Rev. Dr. C. WorDsworThH), 
 BisHop op MorAy AND Ross (RT. Rev. Dr. KELLY). 
 
 BIsHOP OF ABERDEEN (RT. Rev. AND Hon. Dr. DOouGLas). 
 BISHOP OF ARGYLL AND THE ISLES (RT. REV. Dr. HALDANE). 
 BISHOP OF EDINBURGH (RT. Rey. Dr. DOWDEN). 
 
 BisHop OF MINNESOTA (RT. REV. Dr. WHIPPLE). 
 BISHOP OF WESTERN NEW York (Rr. Rev. DR. COXE). 
 BISHOP OF TENNESSEE (RT. REV. DR. QUINTARD). 
 BisHor OF MAINE (Rr. Rev. Dr. NEELY). 
 
 BIsHOP OF MISSOURIE (RT. REV. Dr. TuTrve). 
 
 BIsHOP OF OREGON (Rt. REV. Dr. Morris). 
 
 BisHoP OF ALBANY (RT. Rev. Dr. DOANE). 
 
 BISHOP OF PENNSYLVANIA (RT. Rev. Dr. WHITAKER). 
 BisHop OF ARKANSAS (RT. Rev. Dr. PIERCE). 
 
 BIsHOP OF SouTH DAKOTA (Rt. REv. Dr. HARE). 
 BisHop OF MASSACHUSETTS (RT. Rev. Dr. PAppock). 
 BisHop OF NoRTH CAROLINA (RT. Rev. Dr. LyMan). 
 BisHop OF CoLorapo (Rr. Rev. Dr. SPALDING). 
 BISHOP OF MILWAUKEE (RT. Rev. Dr. WELLES). 
 BisHop OF New Jersey (RT. Rev. Dr. SCARBOROUGH). 
 BisHop oF CHIcaco (Rt Rev. Dr. McLaren). 
 
to 
 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 
 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 ΟΕ Iowa (Rr. Rev. Dr. STEVENS-PARRY). 
 OF Quincy (RT. Rev. Dr. BuRGEss). 
 
 OF SPRINGFIELD (RT. Rev. Dr. SEYMOUR). 
 OF MICHIGAN (RT. Rev. Dr. Harris). 
 
 OF NEWARK (Rt. REv. Dr. SPARKEY). 
 
 OF WASHINGTON TERRITORY (RT. Rev. Dr. PADDOCK). 
 oF PITTSBURGH (RT. REv. Dk. WHITEHEAD). 
 OF MIssIssIPPI (RT. Rev. Dr. THOMPSON). 
 ΟΕ INDIANA (RT. REv. DR KNICKERBACKER). 
 oF New York (Rt. Rev. Dr. PoTTer). 
 
 oF NortH Dakota (Rt. REv. Dr. WALKER). 
 
 Asst.-BISHOP OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA(RT. REV. DR. RULISON). 
 
 BISHOP 
 
 BISHOP 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 ΒΙΞΗΟΡ 
 BIsHop 
 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 
 BIsHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 BISHOP 
 
 OF MARYLAND (Rt. Rev. Dr. PARET). 
 
 OF FREDERICTON (RT. Rev. Dr. MEDLEY), Aletropolitan. 
 OF ONTARIO (RT. Εν. Dr. LEwis). 
 
 OF QUEBEC (RT. Rev. Dr. WILLIAMS). 
 
 OF TorRoONTO (RT. REV. Dr. SWEATMAN). 
 
 oF ALGOMA (RT. REv. Dr. SULLIVAN). 
 
 ΟΕ Huron (Rt. εν. Dr. BALDWIN). 
 
 OF NIAGARA (RT. REv. Dr. HAMILTON). 
 
 oF Nova Scotia (Rt. Rev. Dr. CouRTNEY). 
 COADJUTOR OF FREDERICTON (RT. REv. Dr. KINGDON). 
 
 oF CALCUTTA (RT. Rev. Dr. JOHNSON), Metropolitan). 
 OF COLOMBO (RT. REV. DR. COPLESTON). 
 
 OF BomBaAy (RT. REv. Dr. MYLNE). 
 
 OF TRAVANCORE & COCHIN (RT. Εν. Dr. SPEECHLEY), 
 OF RANGOON (RT. REv. Dr. STRACHAN). 
 
 OF GuIANA (RT. Rev. Dr. AusTIN), Afetropolitan. 
 OF ANTIGUA (RT. REv. DR. JACKSON). 
 
 op TRINIDAD (RT. Rev. Dr. RAWLE). 
 
 OF JAMAICA (RT. Rev. Dr. NUTTALL). 
 
 OF BARBADOS (RT. REv. DR. BREE). 
 
 or NAssAu (RT. REv. Dr. CHURTON). 
 
 CoOADJUTOR OF ANTIGUA (RT. Rev. Dr. BRANCH). 
 
 OF SYDNEY (RT. Rev. Dr. BARRY), Metropolitan. 
 OF NORTH QUEENSLAND (RT. REv. DR. STANTON). 
 OF ADELAIDE (RT. Rev. Dr. KENNION). 
 
 OF BRISBANE (RT. REV. DR. WEBBER). 
 
 OF NELSON (RT. REv. Dr. SUTER). 
 OF AUCKLAND (RT. REv. DR. COWIE). 
 OF DUNEDIN (Rt. Rev. Dr. NEVILLE) 
 oF Wataru (RT. REv. Dr. STUART). 
 
List of Bishops attending the Conference. 263 
 
 BIsHOP OF CAPETOWN (RT. REv. Dr. W. W. JONES), A/etvofolitan. 
 BIsHoPp OF MARITzBURG (Rr. REV. Dr. MACRORIE). 
 
 ΒΙΞΗΟΡ OF GRAHAMSTOWN (RT. REV. DR. WEBB). 
 
 BIsHoP OF PRETORIA (RT. REV. DR. BOUSFIELD). 
 
 ΒΙΞΗΟΡ OF ZULULAND (τ. Rev. Dr. MACKENZIE). 
 
 BisHop OF ST. JOHN’s, KAFFRARIA (Rv. REv. Dr. Key). 
 
 BIsHop OF RUPERTSLAND (RT. Rev. Dr. MACHRAY), Metropolitan. 
 BisHop OF MOOSONEE (Rr. Rev. Dr. HORDEN). 
 
 BISHOP OF QU’APPELLE (Rr. Rev. AND Hon. Dr. ANSON). 
 BISHOP OF SASKATCHEWAN ἃ CALGARY (Rt, REV. Dr. PINKHAM). 
 
 BisHop oF CoLuMBIA (Rr. Rev. Dr. HItts). 
 
 MISSIONARY BISHOP IN THE NIGER TERR?!TORY (Rr. REv. Dr. 
 
 canna. CROWTHER). 
 
 BISHOP OF THE FALKLAND ISLANDs (Rt. Rev. Dr. STIRLING). 
 
 BisHor oF HONOLULU (Rt. REv. DR WILLIs). 
 
 ΒΙΒΗΟΡ OF GIBRALTAR (Rv. REV, DR. SANDFORD). 
 
 BisHop OF NEWFOUNDLAND (RT. REv. Dr. LLEWELLYN JONES). 
 
 BIsHoP OF CALEDONIA (Rr. REV. Dr. RIDLEY). 
 
 BisHoP OF NEW WESTMINSTER (RT. REV. DR. SILLITOE). 
 
 MIssIONARY BisHop IN NorTH CHINA (Ri. Rev. Dr. Scorr). 
 
 BISHOP OF SINGAPORE AND SARAWAK (Rr. Rev. Dr. Hose). 
 
 BISHOP OF SIERRA LEONE (RT. REV. Dr. INGHAM). 
 
 MISSIONARY BISHOP IN CENTRAL AFRICA(RT. REV. Dr. SMYTHIES). 
 
 MISSIONARY BISHOP IN JAPAN (Rt. Rev. Dr. E. BICKERSTETH). 
 
 BISHOP OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND IN JERUSALEM AND THE 
 East (Rr. Rev. Dr. Biyrn). 
 
 Officers of fhe Conference. 
 
 BisHop OF GLOUCESTER AND BRISTOL (Rr. Rev, Dr. ELLicort), 
 Lpiscopal Secretary. 
 
 DEAN ΟΕ WINDSOR (VERY REy. R. T. DaAvipson), General 
 Secretary. 
 
 ARCHDEACON OF MAIDSTONE (VEN. B. F. SMITH), Asststant 
 Secretary. 
 
264 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 No. XXXIII. (See page 45.) 
 
 Encyclical Letter issued by the Bishops attending the 
 third Lambeth Conference, July, 1888. 
 
 --.-. 
 
 ΤΟ THE FAITHFUL IN CHRIST JESUS, GREETING— 
 
 WE, Archbishops, Bishops Metropolitan, and 
 other Bishops of the Holy Catholic Church, in full 
 communion with the Church of England, one hun- 
 dred and forty-five in number, all having superinten- 
 dence over Dioceses or lawfully commissioned to 
 exercise Episcopal functions therein, assembled from 
 divers parts of the earth, at Lambeth Palace, in 
 the year of our Lord 1888, under the presidency of 
 the Most Reverend Edward, by Divine Providence 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of All England 
 and Metropolitan, after receiving in the Chapel of 
 the said Palace the Blessed Sacrament of the Lord’s 
 Body and Blood, and uniting in prayer for the 
 guidance of the Holy Spirit, having taken into con- 
 sideration various questions which have been sub- 
 mitted to us affecting the welfare of God’s people 
 and the condition of the Church in divers parts of 
 the World, 
 
 We have made these matters the subject of careful 
 and serious deliberation during the month past, both 
 in general Conference and in Committees specially 
 appointed to consider the several questions; and we 
 now commend to the faithful the conclusions at 
 which we have arrived. 
 
 We have appended to this letter two sets of docu- 
 ments, the one containing the formal Resolutions of 
 the Conference, and the other the Reports of the 
 several Committees. We desire you to bear in mind 
 
Encyclical Letter of 1888. 265 
 
 that the Conference is responsible for the first alone. 
 The Reports of Committees can only be taken to 
 represent the mind of the Conference in so far as they 
 are reaffirmed or directly adopted in the Resolutions ; 
 but we have thought good to print these Reports, 
 believing that they will offer fruitful matter for 
 consideration. 
 
 In the first place we desire to speak of the moral 
 and practical questions which have engaged the 
 attention of the Conference ; and in the forefront we 
 would place the duty of the Church in the promotion 
 of temperance and purity. 
 
 Temperance. Noble and self-denying efforts have 
 been made for many years, within and without the 
 Church, for the suppression of intemperance, and it 
 is our earnest hope that these efforts will be increased 
 manifold. The evil effects of this sin on the life of the 
 Church and the nation can scarcely be exaggerated. 
 But we are constrained to utter a caution against a 
 false principle which threatens to creep in and vitiate 
 much useful work. Highly valuable as we believe 
 total abstinence to be as a means to an end, we 
 desire to discountenance the language which con- 
 demns the use of wine as wrong in itself, indepen- 
 dently of its effects on ourselves or on others, and 
 we have expressed our disapproval of a reported 
 practice (which seems to be due to some extent to 
 the tacit assumption of this principle) of substituting 
 some other liquid in the celebration of Holy 
 Communion, 
 
 Purity. On the other hand Christian society is 
 only now awakening to a sense of its active duty in 
 the matter of purity; and we therefore desire to 
 avail ourselves of an occasion which has brought 
 together representatives of the Anglican Communion 
 from distant parts of the world, to proclaim a crusade 
 against that sin which is before all others a defilement 
 
 5 
 
266 Lambteh Conference of 1888. 
 
 of the body of Christ and a desecration of the temple 
 of the Holy Spirit. We recall the earnest language 
 of the Report: we believe that nothing short of 
 general action by all Christian people will avail to 
 arrest the evil: we call upon you to rally round the 
 standard of a high and pure morality ; and we appeal 
 to all whom our voice may reach to assist us in 
 raising the tone of public opinion, and in stamping 
 out ignoble and corrupt traditions which are not only 
 a dishonour to the Name of our Master Christ, but 
 degrading to the dignity of a being created in the 
 image of God. 
 
 Sanctity of Marriage. In vital connection with the pro- 
 motion of purity is the maintenance of the sanctity 
 of marriage, which is the centre of social morality. 
 This is seriously compromised by facilities of 
 Divorce which have been increased in recent years 
 by legislation in some countries. We have therefore 
 held it our duty to reaffirm emphatically the precept 
 of Christ relating thereto, and to offer some advice 
 which may guide the Clergy of our Communion 
 in their attitude towards any infringement of the 
 Master’s rule. 
 
 Polygamy. The sanctity of marriage as a Chris- 
 tian obligation implies the faithful union of one 
 man with one woman until the union is severed by 
 death. The polygamous alliances of heathen races are 
 allowed on all hands to be condemned by the law of 
 Christ; but they present many difficult practical 
 problems which have been solved in various ways in 
 the past. We have carefully considered this question 
 in the different lights thrown upon it from various 
 parts of the mission-field. While we have refrained 
 from offering advice on minor points, leaving these to 
 be settled by the local authorities of the Church, we 
 have laid down some broad lines on which alone we 
 consider that the missionary may safely act. Our 
 
Encyclical Letter of 1888. 267 
 
 first care has been to maintain and protect the Chris- 
 tian conception of marriage, believing that any 
 immediate and rapid successes which might otherwise 
 have been secured in the mission-field would be dearly 
 purchased by any lowering or confusion of this idea. 
 
 Observance of the Lord’s Day. The due observance of 
 Sunday as a day of rest, of worship, and of religious 
 teaching, has a direct bearing on the moral well-being 
 of the Christian community. We have observed of 
 late a growing laxity which threatens to impair its 
 sacred character. We strongly deprecate this ten- 
 dency. We call upon the leisurely classes not 
 selfishly to withdraw from others the opportunities 
 of rest and of religion. We call upon master and 
 employer jealously to guard the privileges of the 
 servant and the workman. In “the Lord’s Day” 
 we have a priceless heritage. Whoever misuses it 
 incurs a terrible responsibility. 
 
 Socialism. Intimately connected with these moral 
 questions is the attitude of the Christian Church 
 towards the social problems of the day. Excessive 
 inequality in the distribution of this world’s goods : 
 vast accumulation and desperate poverty side by 
 side: these suggest many anxious considerations to 
 any thoughtful person, who is penetrated with the 
 mind of Christ. No more important problems can 
 well occupy the attention—whether of Clergy. or 
 Laity—than such as are connected with what is popu- 
 larly called Socialism. To study schemes proposed 
 for redressing the social balance, to welcome the 
 good which may be found in the aims or operations 
 of any, and to devise methods, whether by legisla- 
 tion or by social combinations, or in any other way, 
 for a peaceful solution of the problems without 
 violence or injustice, is one of the noblest pursuits 
 which can engage the thoughts of those who strive to 
 follow in the footsteps of Christ. Suggestions are 
 
 52 
 
268 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 offered in the Report which may assist in solving 
 this problem, 
 
 Care of Emigrants. One class of persons more espe- 
 ‘cially had a claim upon the consideration and 
 sympathy of the Conference. In our emigrants we 
 have a social link which binds the Churches of the 
 British Islands to the Church of the United States, 
 and to the Churches in the Colonies. No more 
 pertinent question, therefore, could have been 
 suggested for our deliberations than our duty 
 towards this large body of our fellow-Christians. 
 It is especially incumbent upon the Church to follow 
 them with the eye of sympathy at every point in 
 their passage from their old home to their new, to 
 exercise a watchful care over them, and to protect 
 them from the dangers, moral and spiritual, which 
 beset their path. We have endeavoured to offer 
 some suggestions, by: following which this end may 
 be attained, 
 
 Definite Teaching of the Faithh Recognising thus the 
 primary importance of maintaining the moral pre- 
 cepts and discipline of the Gospel in all the relations 
 of life and society, we proceed to the consideration 
 of the means, within the reach and contemplation of 
 the Churches, for inculcating the definite truths of 
 the Faith, which are the basis of such moral teaching, 
 
 We cannot escape the conviction that this depart- 
 ment of work requires great attention and much 
 improvement. The religious teaching of the young 
 is sadly deficient in depth and reality, especially in 
 the matter of doctrine. This deficiency is not con- 
 fined to any class of society, and the task of 
 remedying the default is one which the Laity must 
 be prepared to share with the Clergy. On parents it 
 lies as a divine charge. Godfathers and Godmothers 
 should be urged to fulfil the duty which they have 
 undertaken for the children whose sponsors they have 
 
Encyclical Letter of 1888. 269° 
 
 been, and to see that they are not left uninstructed, 
 or inadequately prepared for Confirmation. The use 
 of public catechising and regular preparation of can- 
 didates for Confirmation is capable of much develop- 
 ment. The work done in Sunday Schools requires, 
 as we believe, more constant supervision and more 
 sustained interest than, in a great many cases, it 
 receives from the Clergy. The instruction of Sunday- 
 School teachers, and of the pupil-teachers in 
 Elementary Schools, ought to be regarded as an in- 
 dispensable part of the pastoral work of a Parish 
 Priest ; and the moral and practical lessons from the 
 Bible ought to be enforced by constant reference to 
 the sanctions, and to the illustrations of doctrine and 
 discipline belonging to them, to be found in the same 
 Holy Scripture. It would be possible, to a greater 
 extent than is now done, to make sermons in church 
 combine doctrinal and moral efficiency, and, by illus- 
 trating the rationale of divine service, lead on the 
 congregations to the perception of the definite rela- 
 tions between worship, faith, and work—the lessons 
 of the Prayer Book, the Catechism, and the Creeds. 
 
 It is not, however, with reference to the young 
 alone, or to the recognised members of their own 
 flock, that the Clergy have need to look carefully to 
 the security of definiteness in teaching the faith. 
 
 The study of Holy Scripture is a great part of the 
 mental discipline of the Christian, and the Bible it- 
 self is the main instrument in all teaching of religion. 
 
 Unhappily, in the present day, there is a wide- 
 spread system of propagandism hostile to the recep- 
 tion of the Bible as a treasury of Divine knowledge, 
 and throughout society, in all its ranks, misgivings, 
 doubts, hostile criticisms, and sceptical estimates of 
 doctrinal truths as based on Revelation, are very 
 common. 
 
 The doubts which arise from the misapprehension 
 of the due relations between Science and Revelation 
 may be, and ought to be, treated with respect, and a 
 
270 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 sympathetic patience; and, where minds have been 
 disquieted by scientific discovery or assertion, great 
 care should be taken not to extinguish the elements 
 of faith, but rather to direct the thinker to the realisa- 
 tion of the fact that such discoveries elucidate the 
 action of laws which, rightly conceived, tend to the 
 higher appreciation of the glorious work of the 
 Creator, upheld by the word of His power. 
 
 The dangers arising from the hostile or sceptical 
 temper and attitude are increased by the difficulty of 
 determining how far our teaching and the popular 
 acceptance of it can be harmonised with a due con- 
 sideration for the views on inspiration, and especially 
 on the character of the discipline of the Old Testa- 
 ment dispensation, which, although they have never 
 received definite sanction in the Church, have been 
 long and widely prevalent. 
 
 We must recommend to the Clergy cautious and 
 industrious treatment of these points of controversy, 
 and most earnestly press upon them the importance 
 of taking, as the central thought of their teaching, 
 our Lord Jesus Christ, as the sacrifice for our sins, as 
 the healer of our sinfulness, the source of all our 
 spiritual life, and the revelation to our consciences of 
 the law and motive of all moral virtue. To Him and 
 to His work all the teachings of the Old Testament 
 converge, and from Him all the teachings of the New 
 Testament flow, in spirit, in force, and in form. The 
 work of the Church is the application and extension 
 of the blessings of the Incarnation, and her teaching 
 the development of its doctrinal issues as contained 
 in the Creeds of the Church. 
 
 Mutual Relations. ur discussion on the mutual rela- 
 tions of dioceses and branches of our Communion 
 has brought out some points which we desire to com- 
 mend to your consideration. It appears necessary to 
 draw attention to the principles laid down in the 
 Conference of 1878, and to urge that within our 
 
Encyclical Letter of 1888. 275 
 
 Communion the duly-certified action of each Church 
 or Province should be respected by the other 
 Churches and their members; that no Bishop or 
 Clergyman should exercise his functions within any 
 regularly-constituted diocese without the consent of 
 the Bishop of that diocese; and that no Bishop 
 should authorise the action of any Clergyman coming 
 from another diocese without proper letters testi- 
 monial. The neglect of these rules has led to some 
 grievous scandals. The Bishops, on their part, are 
 prepared to do their best to guard against such 
 mischiefs, by adding private advice to the formal 
 document in use, but the Clergy must resolve to 
 exercise greater caution in signing testimonials; and 
 those who require them must check all tendency to 
 over-sensitiveness, when they find themselves sub- 
 jected to inquiries as to character and identification, 
 which, however unnecessary they may deem them in 
 their own case, are certainly indispensable for securing 
 such measure of safety as we require. 
 
 This caution applies with especial force to the 
 Clergy ordained for Colonial work. We most heartily 
 recognise the principle that those who have given 
 the best years of their life to work abroad are entitled 
 to great consideration when the time comes at which 
 they want such rest or change of employment as may 
 be found at home. But to lay down any general 
 rules cn this point is impossible. 
 
 One matter has been laid before us in a more 
 formal way—the possibility of constituting a Council 
 or Councils of reference to advise upon, or even to 
 decide, questions laid before them by the authorities 
 of the Provinces of the Colonial Church. As to this, 
 we would counsel patient consideration and consulta- 
 tion, of such character as may eventually supersede 
 the necessity for creating an authority which might, 
 whether as a Council of advice, or in a function more 
 closely resembling that of a Court, place us in 
 circumstances prejudicial alike to order and to liberty 
 of action. 
 
272 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 Home Reunion. After anxious discussion we have 
 resolved to content ourselves with laying down 
 certain articles as a basis on which approach may be, 
 by God’s blessing, made towards Home Reunion. 
 These articles, four in number, will be found in the 
 appended Resolutions. 
 
 The attitude of the Anglican Communion towards 
 the religious bodies now separated from it by unhappy 
 divisions would appear to be this :—We hold ourselves 
 in readiness to enter into brotherly conference with 
 any of those who may desire intercommunion with 
 us in a more or less perfect form. We lay down 
 conditions on which such intercommunion is, in our 
 opinion, and according to our conviction, possible. 
 For, however we may long to embrace those now 
 alienated from us, so that the ideal of the one flock 
 under the one Shepherd may be realised, we must 
 not be unfaithful stewards of the great deposit 
 entrusted to us. We cannot desert our position 
 either to faith or discipline. That concord would, in 
 our judgment, be neither true nor desirable which 
 should be produced by such surrender. 
 
 But we gladly and thankfully recognise the real 
 religious work which is carried on by Christian bodies 
 not ofour Communion. We cannot close our eyes 
 to the visible blessing which has been vouchsafed to 
 their labours for Christ’s sake. Let us not be mis- 
 understood on this point. We are not insensible to 
 the strong ties, the rooted convictions, which attach 
 them to their present position. These we respect, as 
 we wish that on our side our own principles and 
 feclings may be respected. Competent observers, 
 indeed, assert that not in England only, but in all 
 parts of the Christian world, there is a real yearning 
 for unity—that men’s hearts are moved more than 
 heretofore towards Christian fellowship. The Con- 
 ference has shown in its discussions as well as its 
 resolutions that it is deeply penetrated with this 
 feeling. May the Spirit of love move on the troubled 
 waters of religious differences. 
 
Encylical Letter of 1888. 273 
 
 Relation to the Scandinavian Church. Among the nations 
 with whom English-speaking peoples are brought 
 directly in contact are the Scandinavian races, who 
 form an important element of the population in many 
 of our dioceses. The attitude, therefore, which the 
 Anglican Communion should take towards the 
 Scandinavian Churches could not be a matter of 
 indifference to this Conference. We have recom- 
 mended that fuller knowledge should be sought and 
 friendly intercourse interchanged until such time as 
 matters may be ripe for a closer alliance without any 
 sacrifice of principles which we hold to be essential. 
 
 To Old Catholics and Others. Nor, again, is it possible 
 for members of the Anglican Communion to withhold 
 their sympathies from those Continental movements 
 towards reformation which, under the greatest 
 difficulties, have proceeded mainly on the same lines 
 as our own, retaining Episcopacy as an Apostolic 
 ordinance. Though we believe that the time has not 
 come for any direct alliance with any of these, and, 
 though we deprecate any precipitance of action 
 which would transgress primitive and established 
 principles of jurisdiction, we believe that advances 
 may be made without sacrifice of these, and we 
 entertain the hope that the time may come when a 
 more formal alliance with some at least of these 
 bodies will be possible. 
 
 To the Eastern Churches. The (Conference has ex- 
 pressed its earnest desire to confirm and to improve 
 the friendly relations which now exist between the 
 Churches of the East and the Anglican Communion. 
 These Churches have well earned the sympathy of 
 Christendom, for through long ages of persecution 
 they have kept alive in many a dark place the light 
 of the Gospel. If that light is here and there feeble 
 or dim, there is all the more reason that we, as we 
 have opportunity, should tend and cherish it ; and 
 
274 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 we need not fear that our offices of brotherly charity, 
 if offered in a right spirit, will not be accepted. We 
 reflect with thankfulness that there exist no bars, 
 such as are presented to communion with the Latins 
 by the formulated sanction of the Infallibility of the 
 Church residing in the person of the Supreme Pontiff, 
 by the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, and 
 other dogmas imposed by the decrees of Papal 
 Councils. The Church of Rome has always treated 
 her Eastern sister wrongfully She intrudes her 
 Bishops into the ancient Dioceses, and keeps up a 
 system of active proselytism. The Eastern Church 
 is reasonably outraged by these proceedings, wholly 
 contrary as they are to Catholic principles ; and it 
 behoves us of the Anglican Communion to take care 
 that we do not offend in like manner. 
 
 Individuals craving fuller light and stronger spiri- 
 tual life may, by remaining in the Church of their 
 baptism, become centres of enlightenment to their 
 own people.. 
 
 But though all schemes of proselytising are to be 
 avoided, it is only right that our real claims and 
 position as a historical Church should be set before 
 a people who are very distrustful of novelty, especially 
 in religion, and who appreciate the history of Catholic 
 antiquity. Help should be given towards the educa- 
 tion of the Clergy, and, in more destitute communi- 
 ties, extended to schools for general instruction. 
 
 Authoritative Standards. The authoritative standards ot 
 doctrine and worship claim your careful attention 
 in connexion with these subjects. It is of the 
 utmost importance that our faith and practice should 
 be represented, both to the ancient Churches and to 
 the native and growing Churches in the mission-field, 
 in a manner which shall neither give cause for offence 
 nor restrict due liberty, nor present any stumbling- 
 blocks in the way of complete communion. 
 
 In conformity with the practice of the former 
 
Encyclical Letter of 1888. 275 
 
 Conferences we declare that we are united under our 
 Divine Head in the fellowship of the one Catholic 
 and Apostolic Church, holding the one faith revealed 
 in Holy Writ, defined in the Creeds, maintained by 
 the primitive Church, and affirmed by the undisputed 
 Ecumenical Councils: as standards of doctrine and 
 worship alike we recognise the Prayer Book with its 
 Catechism, the Ordinal, and the Thirty-nine Articles, 
 —the special heritage of the Church of England, and, 
 to a greater or less extent, received by all the 
 Churches of our Communion. 
 
 We.desire that these standards should be set before 
 the foreign Churches in their purity and simplicity. 
 A certain liberty of treatment must be extended to 
 the cases of native and growing Churches, on which 
 it would be unreasonable to impose, as conditions of 
 communion, the whole of the Thirty-nine Articles, 
 coloured as they are in language and form by the 
 peculiar circumstances under which they were 
 originally drawn up. On the other hand, it would be 
 impossible for us to share with them in the matter of 
 Holy Orders, as in complete intercommunion, without 
 satisfactory evidence that they hold substantially the 
 same form of doctrine as ourselves. It ought not to 
 be difficult, much less impossible, to formulate 
 articles, in accordance with our own standards of 
 doctrine and worship, the acceptance of which should 
 be required of all ordained in such Churches. 
 
 We close this letter rendering our humble and 
 hearty thanks to Almighty God for His great good- 
 ness towards us. We have been permitted to meet 
 together in larger numbers than heretofore. Con- 
 tributions of knowledge and experience have been 
 poured into the common stock from all parts of the 
 earth. We have realised, more fully than it was 
 possible to realise before, the extent, the power, and 
 the influence of the great Anglican Communion. 
 We have felt its capacities, its opportunities, its 
 
276 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 privileges. In our common deliberations we have 
 tested its essential oneness amidst all varieties of 
 condition and development. Wherever there was 
 diversity of opinion among us there was also har- 
 mony of spirit and unity of aim ; and we shall return 
 to our several dioceses refreshed, strengthened, and 
 inspired by the memories which we shall carry away. 
 
 But the sense of thanksgiving is closely linked 
 with the obligation of duty. This fuller realisation 
 of our privileges as Members of the Anglican Com- 
 munion carries with it a heightened serfise of our 
 responsibilities which do not end with our own 
 people or with the mission-field alone, but extend to 
 all the Churches of God. The opportunities of an 
 exceptional position call us to an exceptional work. 
 It is our earnest prayer that all—Clergy and laity 
 alike—may take God’s manifest purpose to heart, 
 and strive in their several stations to work it out in 
 all its fulness. 
 
 With these parting words we commend the results 
 at which we have arrived in this Conference to your 
 careful consideration, praying that the Holy Spirit 
 may direct your thoughts and lead you to all truth, 
 and that our counsels may redound through your 
 action to the glory of God and the increase of Christ’s 
 kingdom. 
 
 Signed, on behalf of the Conference, 
 
 EDW : CANTUAR: 
 
 C. J. GLOUCESTER ἃ BRISTOL, 
 Episcopal Secretary. 
 RANDALL T. DAVIDSON, 
 Dean of Windsor, 
 General Secretary. 
 
 Assistant Secretary. 
 
 27th July, 1888. 
 
Resolutions of the Conference of 1888, Page 
 
 No. XXXIV. (Sce page 43.) 
 
 RESOLGIIONS FORMALLY ADOPTED BY 
 
 No 
 
 WwW 
 
 THE CONFERENCE OF 1888. 
 
 
 
 . That this Conference, without pledging itself to all 
 
 the statements and opinions embodied in the 
 Report of the Committee on Intemperance, 
 commends the Report to the consideration of 
 the Church. 
 
 . That the Bishops assembled in this Conference 
 
 deciare that the use of unfermented juice of the 
 grape, or any liquid other than true wine di- 
 luted or undiluted, as the element in the 
 administration of the cup in Holy Communion, 
 is unwarranted by the example of Our Lord, 
 and is an unauthorised departure from the 
 custom of the Catholic Church. 
 
 
 
 . That this Conference earnestly commends to all 
 
 (A) 
 
 those into whose hands it may come the Re- 
 port on the subject of Purity, as expressing 
 the mind of the Conference on this great 
 
 subject.! 
 [ Carried unanimously. ] 
 
 That, inasmuch as Our Lord’s words expressly 
 forbid Divorce, except in the case of fornica- 
 tion or adultery, the Christian Church cannot 
 recognise divorce in any other than the ex- 
 cepted case, or give any sanction to the mar- 
 riage of any person who has been divorced 
 contrary to this law, during the life of the 
 other party. 
 
278 
 
 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 (B) That under no circumstances ought the guilty 
 
 (C) 
 
 (B) 
 
 6. (A) 
 
 (B) 
 
 party, in the case of a divorce for fornication 
 or adultery, to be regarded, during the life- 
 time of the innocent party, as a fit recipient of 
 the blessing of the Church on marriage. 
 
 That, recognising the fact that there always 
 has been a difference of opinion in the Church 
 on the question whether Our Lord meant to 
 forbid marriage to the innocent party in a 
 divorce for adultery, the Conference recom- 
 mends that the Clergy should not be instructed 
 to refuse the Sacraments or other privileges of 
 the Church to those who, under civil sanction, 
 are thus married. 
 
 That it is the opinion of this Conference that 
 persons living in polygamy be not admitted 
 to baptism, but that they be accepted as 
 candidates and kept under Christian instruc- 
 tion until such time as they shall be in a 
 position to accept the law of Christ.* 
 
 [* Carried by 83 votes to 21.] 
 
 That the wives of polygamists may, in the 
 opinion of this Conference, be admitted in 
 some cases to baptism, but that it must be left 
 to the local authorities of the Church to decide 
 under what circumstances they may be bap- 
 tized.* 
 
 [* Carried by 54 votes to 34.] 
 
 That the principle of the religious observance 
 of one day in seven, embodied in the Fourth 
 Commandment, is of Divine obligation. 
 
 That, from the time of our Lord’s Resurrec- 
 tion, the first day of the week was observed by 
 
Resolutions of the Conference of 1888. 279 
 
 Christians as a day of worship and rest, and, 
 under the name of “The Lord’s Day,” gra- 
 dually succeeded, as the great weekly festival 
 of the Christian Church, to the sacred position 
 of the Sabbath. 
 
 (c) That the observance of the Lord’s Day,as a 
 day of rest, of worship, and of religious 
 teaching, has been a priceless blessing in all 
 Christian lands in which it has been main- 
 tained. 
 
 (Ὁ) That the growing laxity in its observance 
 threatens a great change in its sacred and 
 beneficent character. 
 
 (E) That especially the increasing practice, on the 
 part of some of the wealthy and leisurely 
 classes, of making Sunday a day of secular 
 amusement is most strongly to be deprecated. 
 
 (F) That the most careful regard should be had 
 to the danger of any encroachment upon the 
 rest which, on this day, is the right of servants 
 as well as their masters, and of the working 
 classes as well as their employers. 
 
 
 
 7. That this Conference receives the Report drawn 
 up by the Committee on the subject of So- 
 cialism, and submits it to the consideration of 
 the Churches of the Anglican Communion. 
 
 
 
 8. That this Conference receives the Report drawn 
 up by the Committee on the subject of Emi- 
 gration, and commends the suggestions em- 
 bodied in it to the consideration of the 
 Churches of the Anglican Communion. 
 
 
 
 g. (A) That this Conference receives the Report 
 
280 
 
 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 drawn up by the Committee on the subject 
 of the Mutual Relation of Dioceses and 
 Branches of the Anglican Communion, and 
 submits it to the consideration of the Church, 
 as containing suggestions of much practical 
 importance. 
 
 (B) That the Archbishop of Canterbury be re- 
 
 quested to give his attention to the Appendix 
 attached to the Report, with a view to action 
 in the direction indicated, if, upon consider- 
 ation, His Grace should think such action 
 desirable, 
 
 10. That, inasmuch as the Book of Common Prayer 
 
 is not the possession of one Diocese or Pro- 
 vince, but of all, and that a revision in one 
 portion of the Anglican Communion must 
 therefore be extensively felt, this Conference 
 is of opinion that no particular portion of the 
 Church should undertake revision without 
 seriously considering the possible effect of 
 such action on other branches of the Church. 
 
 11. That, in the opinion of this Conference, the 
 
 following Articles supply a basis on which 
 approach may be by God's blessing made 
 towards Home Reunion :— 
 
 (A) The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testa- 
 
 ments, as “containing all things necessary to 
 salvation,” and as being the rule and ultimate 
 standard of faith. 
 
 (B) The Apostles’ Creed, as the Baptismal Sym- 
 
 bol ; and the Nicene Creed, as the sufficient 
 statement of the Christian faith. 
 
 (c) The two Sacraments ordained by Christ Him- 
 
 self—Baptism and the Supper of the Lord— 
 
Resolutions of the Conference of 1888. 281 
 
 ministered with unfailing use of Christ’s words 
 of Institution, and of the elements ordained 
 by Him. 
 
 (D) The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in 
 the methods of its administration to the vary- 
 ing needs of the nations and peoples called of 
 God into the Unity of His Church. 
 
 12. That this Conference earnestly requests the con- 
 stituted authorities of the various branches of 
 our Communion, acting, so far as may be, in 
 concert with one another, to make it known 
 that they hold themselves in readiness to 
 enter into brotherly conference (such as that 
 which has already been proposed by the 
 Church in the United States of America) 
 with the representatives of other Christian 
 Communions in the English-speaking races, 
 in order to consider what steps can be taken, 
 either towards corporate Reunion, or towards 
 such relations as may prepare the way for 
 fuller organic unity hereafter. 
 
 13. That this Conference recommends as of great 
 importance, in tending to bring about Re- 
 union, the dissemination of information re- 
 specting the standards of doctrine and the 
 formularies in use in the Anglican Church ; 
 and recommends that information be dissem- 
 inated, on the other hand, respecting the 
 authoritative standards of doctrine, worship, 
 and government adopted by the other bodies 
 of Christians into which the English-speaking 
 races are divided. 
 
 14. That,in the opinion of this Conference, earnest 
 efforts should be made to establish more 
 friendly relations between the Scandinavian 
 and Anglican Churches ; and that approaches 
 
 Ty 
 
bo 
 ζο 
 iS) 
 
 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 on the part of the Swedish Church, with a 
 view to the mutual explanation of differences, 
 be most gladly welcomed, in order to the 
 ultimate establishment, if possible, of inter- 
 communion on sound principles of ecclesias- 
 tical polity. 
 
 15. (A) That this Conference recognises with thank- 
 
 fulness the dignified and independent position 
 of the Old Catholic Church of Holland, and 
 looks to more frequent brotherly intercourse 
 to remove many of the barriers which at 
 present separate us.! 
 
 (B) That we regard it as a duty to promote 
 
 (D) 
 
 friendly relations with the Old Catholic Com- 
 munity in Germany, and with the “ Christian 
 Catholic Church,” in Switzerland, not only out 
 of sympathy with them, but also in thankful- 
 ness to God Who has strengthened them to 
 suffer for the truth under great discourage- 
 ments, difficulties, and temptations ; and that 
 we offer them the privileges recommended by 
 the Committee under the conditions specified 
 in its Report.! 
 
 That the sacrifices made by the Old Catholics 
 in Austria, deserve our sympathy, and that we 
 hope, when their organisation is sufficiently 
 tried and complete, a more formal relation 
 may be found possible.! 
 
 That, with regard to the reformers in Italy, 
 France, Spain, and Portugal, struggling to 
 free themselves from the burden of unlawful 
 terms of communion, we trust that they may 
 be enabled to adopt such sound forms of 
 doctrine and discipline, and to secure such 
 Catholic organisation as will permit us to give 
 them a fuller recognition! 
 
Resolutions of the Conference of 1888. 283 
 
 (Ε) That, without desiring to interfere with the 
 rights of Bishops of the Catholic Church to 
 interpose in cases of extreme necessity, we 
 deprecate any action that does not regard 
 primitive and established principles of juris- 
 diction and the interests of the whole Anglican 
 Communion.! 
 
 [! Resolutions (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) were carried emine 
 contradicente. | 
 
 16. That, having regard to the fact that the question 
 of the relation of the Anglican Church to the 
 Unitas Fratrum, or Moravians, was remitted 
 by the last Lambeth Conference to a Com- 
 mittee, which has hitherto presented no 
 Report on the subject, the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury be requested to appoint a Com- 
 mittee of Bishops who shall be empowered to 
 confer with learned theologians, and with the 
 heads of the Unztas Fratrum, and shall report 
 to His Grace before the end of the current 
 year, and that His Grace be requested to take 
 such action on their Report as he shall deem 
 right. 
 
 17. That this Conference, rejoicing in the friendly 
 communications which have passed between 
 the Archbishops of Canterbury and other 
 Anglican Bishops, and the Patriarchs of Con- 
 stantinople and other Eastern Patriarchs and 
 Bishops, desires to express its hope that the 
 barriers to fuller communion may be, in 
 course of time, removed by further intercourse 
 and extended enlightment. The Conference 
 commends this subject to the devout prayers 
 of the faithful, and recommends that the 
 counsels and efforts of our fellow-Christians 
 should be directed to the encouragement of 
 internal reformation in the Eastern Churches, 
 
 41 3, 
 
284 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 rather than to the drawing away from them of 
 individual members of their Communion. 
 
 18. That the Archbishop of Canterbury be requested 
 to take counsel with such persons as he may 
 see fit to consult, with a view to ascertaining 
 whether it is desirable to revise the English 
 version of the Nicene Creed or of the 
 Quicungue Vult.* 
 
 [* Carried by 57 votes to 20.] 
 
 19. That, as regards newly-constituted Churches, 
 especially in non-Christian lands, it should be 
 a condition of the recognition of them as in 
 complete intercommunion with us, and es- 
 pecially of their receiving from us Episcopal 
 Succession, that we should first receive from 
 them satisfactory evidence that they hold 
 substantially the same doctrine as our own, 
 and that their clergy subscribe Articles in 
 accordance with the express statements of 
 our own standards of doctrine and worship ; 
 but that they should not necessarily be bound 
 to accept in their entirety the thirty-nine 
 Articles of Religion. 
 
 
 
Intemperance. 285 
 
 No. XXXV. (Sce page 44.) 
 REPORnS OF COMMITTEES. 
 
 
 
 N.B—The following Reports must be taken as having 
 the authority only of the Committees by whom 
 they were respectively prepared and presented 
 The Committees were not in every case: 
 unanimous in adopting the Reports. 
 
 The Conference, as a whole, 7s responsible only 
 Jor the formal Resolutions agreed to after 
 discussion, and printed above, pages 277 to 284. 
 
 No. 1.—INTEMPERANCE. 
 
 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO 
 CONSIDER THE SUBJECT OF THE DUTY OF THE 
 CHURCH WITH REGARD TO INTEMPERANCE. 
 
 
 
 IT is not necessary to say much of the sinfulness of 
 intemperance in itself, or of the widespread mischief 
 that is caused by it. If it cannot be considered the 
 most sinful of all sins, it is difficult to deny that it is 
 the most mischievous. And wherever large masses of 
 the population find it difficult to obtain work at all, 
 and large masses can only obtain it at wages too low 
 
 
 
 ' Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
 Bishop of London (Chazyman). Bishop of Rochester. 
 
 : Colorado. 5 Saskatchewan. 
 a Kilmore. = Sierra Leone. 
 
 5 Newcastle. . Sodor and Man. 
 ᾿ The Niger. es Zululand. 
 
 ΓΝ Pennsylvania. 
 
286 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 to sustain healthy life, the evils caused by intemperance 
 press with heavier weight than ever they did before. 
 The Church cannot be justified in witnessing this 
 enormous amount of sin and misery without 
 endeavouring to ascertain whether any special 
 means can be discovered for effectually dealing with 
 it,or whether it must be left to ordinary agencies 
 used with more than ordinary zeal and persistency. 
 The experience of the last fifty years is strongly in 
 favour of the use of the special means which have 
 hitherto achieved whatever success has been achieved 
 in stemming the strong current of this widely- 
 prevailing sin. It may be true that, if the whole 
 Church had been thoroughly alive to the extent and 
 nature of the mischief, much might have been done 
 by more earnest efforts, both of Clergy and Laity, in 
 the ordinary course of the Church’s work. But it is 
 the perseverance and insistance of the Temperance 
 Societies that has awakened the Church, and without 
 these Societies we have no evidence to show that 
 much or even anything would have been done to deal 
 with the evil. The Temperance Societies have com- 
 pelled the attention of the public at large, and have 
 by so doing profoundly modified public opinion. . 
 There can be no doubt that drunkenness is now 
 regarded with much more severe condemnation than 
 before these Societies began their work,and the change 
 is largely, if not entirely, due to them. The Tem- 
 perance Societies have compelled the medical profes- 
 sion to study the subject with more care than before, 
 and the result of this study has greatly influenced 
 both their utterances and their practice. The science 
 of medicine is so complex and difficult, and the 
 practice of medicine has been so largely influenced 
 by tradition, that any particular question, such as that 
 of the influence of alcohol on the body, has to wait 
 its turn for examination unless some strong reason 
 forces it forward. But the urgency of the Temperance 
 Societies drew the attention of the profession, and 
 
Intemperance. 287 
 
 the result has justified that urgency. To the Tem- 
 perance Societies is due the change in the practice 
 of Insurance Offices. Fifty years ago it was their 
 ordinary rule to require higher premiums from life- 
 insurers who totally abstained from intoxicating 
 liquors. It is now proved that the total abstainers 
 live longer than other mei, And this has been con- 
 firmed by the experience of the Benefit Societies 
 among which those that make total abstinence a con- 
 dition of membership are able to show a much smaller 
 average of sickness than the others. And to all this 
 is to be added the great and still-increasing effect of 
 the Bands of Hope which though in some cases open 
 te objection, are, nevertheless, every year adding 
 largely to the number of pledged abstainers among 
 adults, and bid fair before long entirely to change the 
 public opinion of the classes that live by manual 
 labour. 
 
 And it is natural that this should be so, for the sin, 
 being one of the sins of the flesh, must be dealt with 
 as indeed all such sins must be dealt with, mainly by 
 flight from temptation. The special characteristic of 
 all temptations of the flesh is the enormous difference 
 in power between temptations close at hand and 
 temptations at a distance. Ifa man is weak in this 
 respect the one hope of his safety lies in keeping the 
 temptation from him, and him from the temptation. 
 There are no doubt many who have no need of this. 
 But those who have fallen or are approaching a fall 
 can, as a rule, be upheld in no other way. Now, 
 this is precisely a work in which men can help each 
 other, and in which that help can most effectually be 
 given by an organisation formed for the purpose. 
 Men can help each other by breaking through those 
 customs of society which now surround men with 
 incessant temptations in every transaction of life, by 
 using their influence to diminish the enormous 
 number of public-houses which now make every street 
 and road a peril to the weak, by diligently inves- 
 
288 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 tigating the effects of alcoholic drinks on the body, 
 and disproving the assertion that alcohol is necessary 
 (except in rare and special cases) to health or to 
 vigorous action. But even more can men help the 
 weak by sympathy with them in their struggle, and 
 by doing all they can to make the struggle easier. 
 A weak man is told to abstain altogether ; and, easy 
 as this is to many, to some it is exceedingly difficult, 
 and the difficulty to these is greatly increased if they 
 are to abstain quite alone, andthus, apparently, cut 
 themselves off from the rest ; if their abstinence is, in 
 itself, to be a kind of stigma, and to brand them 
 with a public exposure of their weakness. Such men 
 need to be shielded and supported by the stronger, 
 or the battle which is often hard enough in any case 
 becomes too much for their strength. 
 
 Whatever may be said concerning what might 
 have been done by other methods, it is undeniabie 
 that to organisations for the express purpose of 
 dealing with intemperance, and to these organisations 
 alone, must be attributed what has been done. And 
 if any other method of doing the work is to claim 
 precedence, it must first establish that claim by actual 
 experience before it will be possible to take cog- 
 nisance of it in determining the course that the 
 authorities of the Church should recommend. The 
 Temperance Societies are now doing the work, and 
 there is at present no sign of any other mode of 
 doing it being likely equally to succeed. 
 
 And after what has been said above it clearly 
 follows that the main weapon to be used in this 
 warfare is the practice of total abstinence from in- 
 toxicating liquors by those who desire to help their 
 fellow-men. Nothing but this has the same hold of 
 the weak or the tempted, give them the same en- 
 couragement to fight their battle in the only true way, 
 wins their affections maintains their perseverance. 
 Exhortations to total abstinence by those who do 
 not themselves abstain are always comparatively 
 
Intemperance. 289 
 
 feeble, sometimes irritating. The exhorter often fails 
 to win even where perhaps he succeeds in convincing. 
 The lesson that he teaches is that of moderation, 
 which is an excellent lesson for the strong, but not 
 the lesson which is needed by the weak. He may 
 do something to prevent some from falling who now 
 stand upright ; he can do little to save those who 
 are on the edge, or to rescue those who have fallen 
 already. 
 
 The burden of the work must be borne by those 
 who are willing to abstain entirely. But, on the 
 other hand, it cannot be said that every one is bound 
 to take up this particular burden as part of his service 
 of Christ. Some are called to one form of devotion, 
 some to another. There can be no question that 
 every one who abstains, and makes it known that he 
 abstains, for the sake of his weaker fellow-men, is 
 giving them help, and in some cases more help than 
 he knows, yet while men are all bound to help their 
 fellows, they are not all bound to help them in the 
 same manner or in the same degree or against the 
 same enemies. All are bound to help the foreign 
 mission work of the Church, but not all are bound 
 to be missionaries. All are bound to help in spiritual 
 work at home, but all are not called to the same 
 spiritual work. All are bound to help the weak in 
 their battle with intemperance, but not all to help 
 them by total abstinence in their own persons. 
 
 It seems reasonable, however, to say that those 
 who are brought much into contact with intemperance 
 should arm themselves with this weapon of total 
 abstinence in their own persons. It would be well 
 that wherever this battle with intemperance is of 
 exceptional importance, or forms for the time the 
 first duty imposed on the Clergy, total abstinence 
 should be the weapon employed. This applies not 
 only to England, but still more to many places in 
 other parts of the world where native races have to 
 be rescued from previous habits of intemperance, or 
 
290 Lambeth Conference.of 1888. 
 
 to be upheld in their struggle to resist temptations of 
 this kind. 
 
 There is, however, much work to be done in this 
 cause outside the direct battle with intemperance 
 itself. And the Church cannot stand aloof from it. 
 
 It seems to belong to the Church to use its utmost 
 influence to press on all Governments the duty of 
 diminishing the enormous amount of temptation which 
 at present hinders the work of elevating and civilising 
 the masses. There can be no doubt that wise legis- 
 lation might do a great deal in this direction. The 
 diminution in the number of Public Houses, the 
 shortening of the hours of sale, Sunday Closing, are 
 instances of legislative measures that would probably 
 be very beneficial. And a combination between 
 Governments might wipe out the grievous stain 
 which now rests on the countries that are counted 
 foremost in the world—the stain of degrading and 
 destroying the weaker races. It has pleased God to 
 make the Christian nations stronger than any other 
 —stronger than all others combined. But this 
 strength brings with it a very solemn responsibility. 
 And this solemn responsibility the Church ought 
 incessantly to press on those who bear authority. 
 It is grievous that it should be possible to say, with 
 any most distant resemblance of truth, that it would 
 be better for native races that Christian nations 
 should never come into contact with them at all. 
 
 In conclusion, it is of importance to lay much 
 stress on the essential condition of permanent 
 success in this work, namely, that it should be taken 
 up in a religious spirit as part of Christian devotion 
 to the Lord. The work must be done in His Name 
 for the sake of His children whom He has bought 
 with His Blood. A brief success may be obtained 
 by forgetting the religious character of the task, and 
 thinking only of the misery which intemperance 
 causes and of the degradation inherent init. But 
 the religious spirit alone will maintain the conflict 
 
Intemperance. 291 
 
 steadily through the obstinate resistance that will 
 have to be encountered, and in spite of the many 
 disappointments and failures that will have to be 
 borne. 
 
 It is, again, the religious spirit which can alone 
 repress the fanaticism which sometimes makes the 
 total abstainer talk of his abstinence as the one thing 
 needful ; which sometimes makes him uncharitable 
 and presumptuous; which sometimes makes him 
 think lightly of grievous sin, provided it be not the 
 one sin which he condemns. 
 
 But taken up in a religious spirit this work has 
 a double blessing. It is not only blessed in the 
 victory over sin and evil, but blessed also, and 
 perhaps still more, in the door which it opens for the 
 whole Gospel to enter men’s souls. The conscience 
 of the mass of the people speaks more clearly on 
 this point than, perhaps, on any other. The Minister 
 of the Gospel who begins with this finds that a very 
 large number are at once ready to accept his teaching, 
 because he carries their consciences with him from 
 the first. They have already learnt that intemperance 
 is wrong, and they are ready to believe in the value 
 of a Ministry which visibly and systematically wages 
 war on it. And having learnt to trust and follow 
 the Minister in this, they are far more ready to trust 
 and follow him in all else. To be all things to all 
 men, in order that he might save some, was St. 
 Paul’s rule. And as things now are in many parishes, 
 and in many parts of the world, the same rule will 
 be best kept by those Ministers of the Church who 
 make a point of showing themselves thoroughly 
 in earnest in this great battle. 
 
 Signed on behalf of the Committee, 
 Bs LONDIN: 
 
 Chairman. 
 
292 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 No. 2—PURITY. 
 
 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO CON- 
 SIDER THE CHURCH’S PRACTICAL WORK IN 
 RELATION TO THE SUBJECT OF PURITY. 
 
 IN submitting the following Report your Committee 
 would observe that they have cast it in such a form 
 that, if accepted, it may go forth as the utterance of 
 the united Conference. 
 
 We speak as those who are deeply conscious of 
 their responsibility before God for the words which 
 they utter upon a subject of tremendous moment. 
 
 Knowing, as we do know, how sins of impurity are 
 not only a grave public scandal, but are also festering 
 beneath the surface, and eating into the life of multi- 
 tudes in all classes and in all lands, we cannot keep 
 silence, although we dare not utter all that we know. 
 
 We are constrained, as Bishops of the Church of 
 God, to lift up the standard of a high and pure 
 morality, and we call upon all, whether of our own 
 Communion or not, in the name of God our common 
 Father, to rally round the standard. Especially do 
 we press upon those on whom lies the responsibility 
 of the cure of souls, to face the question, and to ask 
 
 1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
 Bishop of Durham (Chazvman). Bishop of North Dakota. 
 
 ἢ Brechin. Ὦ Shrewsbury. 
 ᾿ Calcutta. » Toronto. 
 
 sy Carlisle. Ὄ Truro. 
 
 - Marlborough. 3 Wakefield. 
 
 5 Massachusetts, 
 
Purity. 293 
 
 themselves what they are doing, or can do, to protect 
 their flocks from the deadly ravages of sensual sin. 
 
 We believe that, although the public conscience is 
 in some degree awakened, and the self-sacrificing 
 efforts of those who have laboured to this end have 
 not been wholly in vain, yet the awful magnitude of 
 the evil is but imperfectly realised. 
 
 We are not blind to the danger of dealing publicly 
 with the subject of impurity. We dread the effect, 
 especially upon the young, of any increased familiarity 
 with the details of sin. Notwithstanding we hold 
 that the time has come when the Church must speak 
 with no uncertain voice. 
 
 We solemnly declare that a life of purity is alone 
 worthy of a being created in the image of God. 
 
 We declare that for Christians the obligation to 
 purity rests upon the sanctity of the body, which is 
 the “ Temple of the Holy Ghost.” 
 
 We declare that a life of chastity for the unmarried 
 is not only possible, but is commanded by God. 
 
 We declare that there is no difference between man 
 and woman in the sinfulness of sins of unchastity. 
 
 We declare that on the man, in his God-given 
 strength of manhood, rests the main responsibility. 
 
 We declare that no one known to be living an 
 immoral life ought to be received in Christian society. 
 
 We solemnly protest against all lowering of the 
 sanctity of marriage. 
 
 We would remind all whom our voice may reach 
 that the wrath of God, alike in Holy Scripture and in 
 the history of the world, has been revealed against the 
 nations which has transgressed the law of purity ; 
 and we solemnly record our conviction that, wherever 
 marriage is dishonoured and sins of the flesh are 
 lightly regarded, the home-life will be destroyed, and 
 the nation itself will, sooner or later, decay and 
 perish. 
 
 We, on our part, as Bishops of the Church of God, 
 satisfied as to the gravity of this matter, and feeling 
 
204 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 that nothing short of general action on the part of all 
 Christian people will avail to arrest the evil, determine 
 to confer with the Clergy and faithful Laity of our 
 several Dioceses as to the wisest steps to be taken 
 for the accomplishment of the weighty enterprise to 
 which God is calling us. 
 
 We believe that we may profitably deliberate upon 
 such questions as the following :— 
 
 1. How best to bring about a general reformation 
 of manners, and to enforce a higher moral tone in the 
 matter of purity. 
 
 2. How especially to guard the sanctity of marriage 
 and to create a healthier public opinion upon the 
 subject, and, to this end, how best to make the cele- 
 bration of Holy Matrimony as reverent and impres- 
 sive as possible. 
 
 3. How most wisely to deal with this difficult and 
 delicate question as regards our children, our homes, 
 our schools, and other places of education. 
 
 4. How best to strengthen the hands of those who 
 are striving in the Army, the Navy, and other public 
 services, to create and maintain a high standard of 
 purity. 
 
 5. How best to provide safeguards for those who, 
 from inability to marry, or from other circumstances 
 of their lives, are exposed to special temptation. 
 
 6. How best to bind together, and to encourage by 
 the sense of union, all who desire to help, or to be 
 helped, in the battle against impurity. 
 
 7. How best to purify art and literature, and to 
 repress all that is immodest in language, manners, 
 and dress. 
 
 8. How best to enforce or amend the laws framed 
 to guard the innocent, to punish the guilty, to rescue 
 the fallen, to suppress the haunts of vice, and to 
 remove temptation from our thoroughfares. 
 
 We thank God for the readiness, and even enthu- 
 siasm, with which the movement in favour of purity 
 has been welcomed by young men of every class. 
 
Purity. 295 
 
 There is a generosity and chivalry among the young 
 which is seldom appealed to in vain; while large 
 numbers are deeply thankful for every aid in the 
 desperate battle against the sins of the flesh. 
 
 Once more, as witnesses for God, we would speak 
 to all whom our voice may reach. “Be strong in 
 the Lord, and in the power οἵ His might.” Live 
 pure lives. Speak pure words. Think pure thoughts. 
 Shun and abhor all that is not of perfect modesty. 
 Guard with all jealousy the weak and the young. 
 Above all pray for the sanctifying grace of the Holy 
 Spirit of God, “that your whole spirit and soul and 
 body may be preserved blameless unto the coming of 
 our Lord Jesus Christ.” 
 
 Signed on behalf of the Committee, 
 
 J.B DUNELM, 
 Chairman. 
 
 
 
206 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 No. 3—DIVORCE. 
 
 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO 
 CONSIDER THE SUBJECT OF DIVORCE. 
 
 THE Committee appointed to consider the subject of 
 “ Divorce, and the question whether it may be prac- 
 ticable to offer any advice or suggestion which may 
 help the Bishops and Clergy towards agreement in 
 their action concerning it,’ reports as follows :— 
 
 They think it necessary to call attention to the 
 fact that in very many Christian nations there is 
 evidently a growing laxity of principle and of practice 
 with regard to Divorce, and that in some countries 
 strong attempts have been made to afford further 
 facilities for it, with the result of weakening and 
 lowering, both in law and in popular sentiment, the 
 idea of the sanctity of marriage. 
 
 1. They therefore consider it important to declare 
 that, inasmuch as our Lord’s words expressly forbid 
 Divorce, except in the case of fornication or adultery, 
 the Christian Church cannot recognise Divorce in 
 any other than the excepted case, or give any sanc- 
 tion to the marriage of any person who has been 
 divorced contrary to this law, during the life of the 
 other party. 
 
 2. They would add that under no circumstances 
 ought the guilty party, in a case of Divorce for forni- 
 
 1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
 Bishop of Chester (Chazrman). Bishop of Huron. 
 
 = Bombay. » Maryland. | 
 3 Dover. »» Mississippi. 
 5 Durham. » Quincy. 
 
 " Ἐ χείευ. » singapore. 
 
Divorce. 207 
 
 cation or adultery, to be regarded, during the lifetime 
 of the innocent party, as a fit recipient of the blessing 
 of the Church on marriage. 
 
 3. They recognise the fact that there always has 
 been a difference of opinion in the Church on the 
 question whether our Lord meant to forbid marriage 
 to the innocent party in a Divorce for adultery: and 
 they recommend that the Clergy should not be 
 instructed to refuse the Sacraments or other privileges 
 of the Church to those who, under civil sanction, are 
 thus married. 
 
 4. But whereas doubt has been entertained whether 
 our Lord meant to permit such marriage to the 
 innocent party, the Committee are unwilling to 
 suggest any precise instructions in this matter, and 
 recommend that, where the laws of the land will 
 permit, the determination should be left to the judg- 
 ment of the Bishop of the Diocese, whether the 
 Clergy would be justified in refraining from pro- 
 nouncing the blessing of the Church on such unions. 
 
 Signed on behalf of the Committee, 
 
 WW. ΘΙ ΚΗ 
 
 Chairman. 
 
 
 
 
 
298 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 No. 4.—POLYGAMY. 
 
 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO 
 CONSIDER THE SUBJECT OF POLYGAMY OF 
 HEATHEN CONVERTS. 
 
 
 
 YOUR Committee have approached the consideration 
 of the subject submitted to them with an over- 
 whelming sense of their responsibilities ; inasmuch 
 as the question intimately affects the sanctity of 
 marriage, and therefore lies at the root of social 
 morality. 
 
 After considering various representations which 
 have been laid before them from divers quarters, they 
 beg leave to report as follows :— 
 
 1. Your Committee desire to affirm distinctly that 
 Polygamy is inconsistent with the law «οἵ Christ 
 respecting marriage. 
 
 2. They cannot find that either the law of Christ 
 or the usage of the early Church would permit the 
 baptism of any man living in the practice of poly- 
 gamy, even though the polygamous alliances should 
 have been contracted before his conversion. 
 
 3. They are well aware that the change from 
 polygamy to monogamy must frequently involve 
 
 
 
 1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
 Bishop of Durham (Chaiyman). Bishop of the Niger. 
 
 ἐν Central Africa. Bishop Perry. 
 
 = Chester. Bishop of Sierra Leone. 
 
 Ἔ Exeter. Ἢ South Dakota. 
 
 τ Guiana. Ἢ Travancore. 
 
 ἊΝ London. + Waiapu. 
 Meath. 45 Zululand. 
 
 Missouri. 
 
Polygamy. 299 
 
 great difficulty and even hardship, but they are of 
 opinion that it is not possible to lay down a precise 
 rule to be observed under all circumstances in dealing 
 with this difficulty. 
 
 They consequently think that the question of time 
 and manner, which must depend largely on local 
 circumstances, can only be determined by local 
 authority. 
 
 4. Your Committee recommend that persons living 
 in polygamy should, on their conversion, be accepted 
 as candidates for Baptism, and kept under Christian 
 instruction until such time as they shall be in a 
 position to accept the law of Christ. 
 
 They consider it far better that Baptism should be 
 withheld from such persons, while nevertheless they 
 receive instruction in the truths of the Gospel, than 
 that a measure should be sanctioned which would 
 tend to lower the conception of the Christian law of 
 marriage, and thus inflict an irreparable wound on 
 the morality of the Christian Church in its most vital 
 part. 
 
 5. The wives of polygamists may, in the opinion of 
 the Committee, be admitted, in some cases, to 
 Baptism ; inasmuch as their position is materially 
 different from that of the polygamist husband. In 
 most countries where polygamy prevails they have 
 no personal freedom to contract or dissolve a matri- 
 monial alliance; and moreover they presumably do 
 not violate the Christian precept which enjoins 
 fidelity to one husband. 
 
 6. In carrying into effect the principles here laid 
 down, with due regard to the dictates of love and 
 justice, serious burdens will in some cases be imposed 
 on the Churches, but no trouble, or cost, or self- 
 sacrifice, ought to be spared to make any suffering 
 which may be caused as light and easy to bear as 
 possible. 
 
 7. Difficult questions of detail which may arise in 
 following these recommendations must be left to the 
 
 U 2 
 
300 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 decision of the local authorities of the Church, 
 whether Diocesan or Provincial. 
 
 8. Throughout this Report polygamy has been 
 taken to mean the union of one man with several 
 wives; but among some tribes the union of one 
 woman with several husbands is a recognised institu- 
 tion. It will be plain that no such union can be 
 recognised by the Church. 
 
 g. It has been represented to your Committee that 
 heathen marriages in many cases do not imply a 
 mutual pledge of life-long fidelity ; and instruction 
 has been asked as to the mode of dealing with such 
 cases on the conversion of the contracting parties, so 
 as to impart a Christian character to the contract. 
 The Committee think it best to leave the local 
 authorities of the Church to determine in what way 
 this end may be best attained; but they deprecate 
 any course which would tend to impair the validity 
 (within their own sphere) of contracts undertaken 
 prior to conversion, so far as these contracts are not 
 inconsistent with the law of Christ. 
 
 10. In laying down the principles which should 
 rule the admission of Christian converts for the 
 future, the Committee have no intention of passing 
 any censure on those who have decided otherwise in 
 the past; and they desire to leave to individual 
 Bishops the responsibility of dealing with difficulties 
 which may arise in any part of the mission-field from 
 the adoption of a different line of action heretofore 
 by those in authority. 
 
 J. B. DUNELM: 
 
 Chairman. 
 
Sunday Observance. 301 
 
 No. 5—SUNDAY OBSERVANCE. 
 
 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO 
 CONSIDER THE SUBJECT OF THE OBSERVANCE 
 OF SUNDAY. 
 
 YOuR Committee have met and prayerfully considered 
 the subject of the sanctity and observance of the 
 Lord’s Day, and have agreed to the following state- 
 ments of their deliberate judgment on this momen- 
 tous question, which they submit as their report :— 
 
 1. That the principle of the religious observance 
 of one day in seven is of Divine and primeval 
 obligation, and was afterwards embodied in 
 the Fourth Commandment. 
 
 2. That from the time of our Lord’s Resurrection 
 the first day of the week was observed as a 
 day of sacred joy by Christians, and was 
 ere long adopted by the Church as the 
 Christian Sabbath or “the Lord’s Day.” 
 
 3. That the observance of the Lord’s Day as a 
 day of rest, of worship, and of religious 
 teaching, has been a priceless blessing in all 
 Christian lands in which it has been 
 maintained. 
 
 4. That the growing licence in its observance 
 threatens a grave change in its sacred and 
 beneficent character. 
 
 1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
 Bishop of Exeter (Chazrman). Bishop of Indiana. 
 " Argyll. Ἢ Liverpool. 
 5 Brisbane 3 Wakefield. 
 ἢ Cashel. £ Washington. 
 
302 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 5. That especially the increasing practice on the 
 part of some of the wealthy and leisurely 
 classes of making the day a day of secular 
 amusement is most strongly to be depre- 
 cated. 
 
 6. That the most careful regard should be had to 
 the danger of any encroachment upon the 
 rest which on this day is the right of 
 servants as well as their masters, and of the 
 working classes as well as their employers. 
 
 Signed on behalf of the Committee, 
 
 E. Hi. EXON: 
 
 Chairman. 
 
 
 
Socialism. 30 
 
 ios) 
 
 6 wpe: 
 No. 6.—SOCIALISM. 
 
 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO 
 CONSIDER THE SUBJECT OF THE CHURCH’S 
 PRACTICAL WORK IN RELATION TO SOCIALISM. 
 
 
 
 THIS Committee was directed to report “on the 
 Church’s practical work in relation to Socialism.” 
 It will be desirable therefore, in the first place, to 
 ascertain, if possible, what is the meaning of 
 Socialism. This, however, is not easy, as the word is 
 used at present in very different senses. When 
 Proudhon was asked, What is Socialism? he replied, 
 “Tt is every aspiration towards the improvement of 
 society.” Laveleye remarks upon this answer, that 
 “ Proudhon’s definition is too wide,—it omits two 
 characteristics. In the first place, every socialistic 
 doctrine aims at introducing greater equality into social 
 conditions ; and, secondly, it tries to realise those 
 reforms by the action of the law or the State.” So 
 far, however, as this definition makes the interference 
 of the State a necessary element of Socialism, it is not 
 universally accepted. Schaffle, for instance, says :— 
 “The alpha and omega of Socialism is the transform- 
 ation of private competing capitals into a united collec- 
 tive capital ;” and T. Kirkup, ina thoughtful article on 
 Socialism in the last edition of the Encyclopedia 
 
 
 
 1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
 
 Bishop of Manchester Bishop of Mississippi. 
 (Chairman). 5 Pittsburgh. 
 ἢ Brisbane. 5 Rochester. 
 5 Carlisle. 7 Sydney. 
 cr, Derry. <5 Waketield. 
 
 " Michigan. 
 
304 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 Britannica, affirms that “the centralaim of Socialism 
 is to terminate the divorce of the workers from the 
 natural sources of subsistence and of culture”; and, 
 again, he says, “the essence of the theory consists in 
 this—associated production, with a collective capital, 
 with the view to an equitable distribution.” Speaking 
 broadly, then, and with reference to such definitions 
 as the preceding, any scheme of social reconstruction 
 may be called Socialism which aims at uniting labour 
 and the instruments of labour (land and capital), 
 whether by means of the State, or of the help of the 
 rich, or of the voluntary co-operation of the poor. 
 
 Between Socialism, as thus defined, and Chris- 
 tianity, there is obviously no necessary contradiction. 
 Christianity sets forth no theory of the distribution 
 of the instruments or the products of labour ; and if, 
 therefore, some Socialists are found to be in opposition 
 to the Christian religion, this must be due to the 
 accidents and not to the essence of their social creed. 
 Some Socialists are atheists, others advocate loose 
 doctrines as to family ties; others, like the Anarchists, 
 seek to realise their aims, so far as they have any, by 
 undisguised murder and robbery; while, according to 
 some, the very possession of private property is a 
 usurpation and a wrong to the community. With 
 such men the Christian Church can form no alliance. 
 And yet at the same time with what they profess to 
 be their central aim, the improvement of the material 
 and moral condition of the poor, she must have the 
 deepest sympathy. Their methods, indeed, are not 
 hers. Spoliation or injustice in any form is abhorrent 
 alike to her sentiment and belief. She has no faith 
 in the inherent power of humanity to redeem itself 
 from selfishness. She seeks to make men prosperous 
 and wise and good, not by the force of laws or 
 bayonets, but by the change of individual hearts, and 
 the introduction of a new brotherhood in Christ. 
 
 Not the less, however, is she bound, following the 
 teaching of her Master, to aid every wise endeavour 
 
Socialism. 305 
 
 which has for its object the material and moral 
 welfare of the poor. Her Master taught her that all 
 men are brethren, not because they share the same 
 blood, but because they have a common Heavenly 
 Father. He further taught her that if any of the 
 members of this spiritual family were greater, richer, 
 or better than the rest, they were bound to use their 
 special means or ability in the service of the whole. 
 “He that is greatest among you,” He said, “shall be 
 your servant,’—and that for a special reason, because 
 each disciple was bound to imitate his Divine Master, 
 “Who came not to be ministered unto, but to 
 minister, and to give His life a ransom for many.” 
 
 The Church’s practical duty,then, towards Socialism 
 must be determined by the answer to this question, 
 will the union of labour and the instruments of labour 
 tend to improve the material, mental, and moral con- 
 dition of mankind? Experience seems to show that 
 it will. 
 
 It may still, however, be a question, what is the 
 wisest method of bringing about this union between 
 labour and its instruments? Two principal schemes 
 have been proposed :— 
 
 (1) That labourers shall be encouraged in habits 
 of thrift, in order that with the property thus acquired 
 they may purchase land, or shares in societies for 
 co-operative production. 
 
 (2) That the State shall take possession of the 
 whole land and capital of any country, with or 
 without compensation to their former owners ; that 
 the property thus nationalised, shall be held in trust 
 for the community by the State, the Commune, or 
 associations of working men; that then the State, the 
 Commune, or the association as the case may be, 
 shall take measures for the preservation, increase, and 
 employment of the common capital, requiring work 
 from each man according to his ability, and bestowing 
 property upon each man according to his needs, or 
 the value of his labour. Minor modifications of this 
 
306 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 scheme, tending to bring it into closer harmony with 
 the existing state of society, have been proposed by 
 some Socialistic teachers, but still it may be taken as 
 a substantially correct representation of the ultimate 
 aim of very many. 
 
 To this second method of uniting labour and its 
 instruments the Committee would urge the following 
 objections :—(1) If full compensation were given to 
 the present holders of property the scheme could 
 hardly be realised, while if full compensation were 
 withheld it would become one of undisguised spolia- 
 tion. (2) If Government were able to acquire just 
 possession of the whole property of a community, it 
 is difficult to see how the affairs of any great com- 
 mercial undertaking could be conducted by the State 
 or the Commune with the energy, economy, and 
 sagacious foresight which are necessary to secure 
 success. (3) If all men had to work under State or 
 Communal inspection and compulsion, it would be 
 difficult for them to retain freedom, the sense of 
 parental responsibility, and those numerous traits of 
 individuality which give richness to the human 
 character. 
 
 The Committee strongly recommend the adoption 
 of the first-named method. They believe that it will 
 be well to encourage working men to become posses- 
 sors of small farms, and of shares in societies for 
 co-operative production in trade and agriculture. 
 They are not unaware that these societies have 
 frequently failed, but they believe that the opinion is 
 not without its weight, that if due care be taken to 
 secure efficient and trustworthy managers, to pay 
 them an adequate salary, and to treat them with a 
 generous confidence, there is no reason why such 
 undertakings should not become successful, as indeed 
 they commonly are now, when their management is 
 in competent hands. 
 
 Two objections have been frequently advanced 
 against this method of diminishing the present dis- 
 
Socialism. 307 
 
 tress; Ist, that it is unjust to let any one but the 
 labourer obtain possession of any part of the products 
 of his labour ; and, 2ndly, that no man of property or 
 ability ought to seek personal profit from the employ- 
 ment of his special advantages, or ought even to be 
 allowed to become the permanent owner of either 
 land or capital. 
 
 The first objection is not tenable. The Committee 
 hold that it is just (1) to pay high wages for excep- 
 tional ability ; (2) to compensate for his abstinence 
 the man who refrains from consuming his own share 
 of the products of labour, and by so doing makes it 
 possible to maintain and increase the capital of the 
 community; (3) to allow any one to convert his 
 savings into the form of capital or estate. 
 
 The second objection is really founded upon the 
 general spirit of our Lord’s teaching—viz., that great- 
 ness, ability, or wealth should be made the means of 
 service to the poor and weak without special fee or 
 reward. The Committee fully admit that this is the 
 ideal set before us by our Divine Master, and that it is 
 the end, towards which we should press, as quickly as 
 the conquest of selfishness will allow us. But they hold 
 that there is no surer cause of failure in practical 
 affairs, than the effort to act on an ideal which has 
 not yet been realised. If the Church is to act safely 
 as well as sublimely, she must take the self-regarding 
 motives with her on the long path by which she 
 advances towards the perfect life of love. She must 
 not assume the existence of what does not yet exist. 
 She must not, like the Anarchists, destroy the whole 
 existing framework of society for the sake of making 
 experiments. Nay, more, she must not ignore the 
 fact that self-regard is the necessary condition of self- 
 preservation, and that her Master’s law of moral con- 
 duct, that each shall love his neighbour as himself, 
 implies a certain amount of self-regard. Competition 
 is not injurious in itself, it only becomes so when it 
 is unrestricted, when it takes no counsel of the 
 dictates of brotherly love. 
 
30ὃ Lambeth Conference of τ 888. 
 
 The Committee do not doubt that Government can 
 do much to protect the class known as proletarians 
 from the evil effects of unchecked competition. The 
 English poor-law has long ago provided the bare ne- 
 cessaries of life for those who cannot otherwise obtain 
 them; the institution of State Savings Banks has pro- 
 vided for the poor man a safe investment and moderate 
 return for his savings. Acts of Parliament have re- 
 quired the builders and ownersof houses to have regard 
 for the health and comfort of their tenants, while the 
 factory legislation of this country has effectually pro- 
 tected those labourers who cannot protect themselves. 
 The Committee believe, further, that the State may 
 justly and safely extend this protective action in 
 several directions. It may legalise the formation of 
 Boards of Arbitration, to avert the disastrous effects 
 of strikes. It may assist in the formation and main- 
 tenance of technical schools. It may see that powers, 
 already existing, under Sanitary Acts, are more 
 effectually exercised. It may facilitate the acquisition 
 by Municipalities of town lands. The State may even 
 encourage a wider distribution of property by the 
 abolition of entail, where it exists; and it may be 
 questioned whether the system of taxation might not 
 be varied in a sense more favourable to the claims of 
 labourers than that which now exists. 
 
 But, after all, the best help is self-help. More even 
 than increase of income, and security of deposit, 
 thrift and self-restraint are the necessary elements 
 of material prosperity. And in encouraging and 
 strengthening such habits and feelings the Church’s 
 help is invaluable. By requiring some knowledge of 
 economic science from her candidates for orders ; by 
 forming and fostering institutions for the provision 
 of practical education and rational recreation; by 
 establishing penny banks and workmen’s guilds; 
 above all, by inducing capitalists to admit their work- 
 men to profit-sharing, and by teaching artisans how 
 to make co-operative production successful she may 
 
Socialism. 309 
 
 do much to diminish discontent, and to increase the 
 feeling of brotherly interest between class and class.’ 
 The Clergy may enter into friendly relations with 
 Socialists, attending, when possible, their club meet- 
 ings, and trying to understand their aims and 
 methods. At the same time it will contribute no 
 little to draw together the various classes of society 
 if the Clergy endeavour, in sermons and lectures, to 
 to set forth the true principles of Society, showing 
 how property is a trust to be administered for the 
 good of humanity, and how much of what is good 
 and true in Socialism is to be found in the precepts 
 of Christ. The call to aid the weak, through works 
 of what is ordinarily known as charity, has been, at 
 all times, faithfully pressed by the Church of Christ, 
 and has been met by a noble response, which has been 
 the chief strength of works of beneficence in modern 
 Society. But the matter is one, not merely of Charity, 
 but of Social and Christian Duty. It is in this light 
 that the Church has to proclaim it in these critical 
 times, with some special boldness and earnestness. At 
 the same time the word of warning should not be 
 wanting. Mutual suspicion and the imputation of 
 selfish and unworthy motives keep apart those who 
 have, in fact, a common aim. Intestine strife and 
 doctrines of spoliation destroy confidence, arrest 
 trade, and will but increase misery. 
 
 The Committee believe that, in the present condi- 
 tion of thought and knowledge, they cannot wisely or 
 profitably go further than they have done above in 
 the way of detailed suggestion. There is less temp- 
 tation to over-haste in forcing on social experiments, 
 inasmuch as the history of the past shows convin- 
 cingly that the principles of the Gospel contain germs 
 from which Social renovation is surely, if slowly, 
 developed by the continuous action of Christian 
 thought and feeling upon every form of evil and 
 suffering. If all will only labour, under the impulse 
 of Christian love, for the highest benefit of each, we 
 
310 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 shall advance by the shortest possible path to that 
 
 better and happier future for which our Master 
 taught us to hope and pray. 
 
 Signed on behalf of the Committee, 
 
 J. MANCHESTER, 
 
 Chairman. 
 
 
 
 
 
Care of Emigrants. 311 
 
 No. 7—CARE OF EMIGRANTS. 
 
 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO CON- 
 SIDER THE CHURCH’S PRACTICAL WORK IN 
 RELATION TO THE CARE OF EMIGRANTS. 
 
 IN considering the question of the practical work of 
 the Church in relation to the Care of Emigrants, your 
 Committee have limited their inquiries and the 
 recommendations which they desire to submit to the 
 judgment of the Conference, to those points which 
 bear on the promotion of the religious and moral 
 well-being of our emigrants. They are of opinion 
 that the wider subject of encouraging and assisting 
 emigration is outside the scope of their deliberations, 
 and, even were this not the case, that it is far too 
 large a question to be adequately dealt with in the 
 time at their disposal. 
 
 I. In the first place, your Committee feel that they 
 cannot too strongly emphasise the vast zmportance of 
 the subject entrusted to them for consideration. They 
 believe that the problem is one of the most urgent 
 and pressing of the many problems with which the 
 Church has to deal at the present day. And they 
 cannot but think that before many years have passed 
 away, the difficulties of dealing with the problem will 
 
 
 
 
 
 ’ Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
 Bishop of Llandaff (Chazyman). Bishop of North Dakota. 
 
 ‘i Algoma ‘i North Queensland. 
 3 Liverpool. » Pittsburgh. 
 
 7 Maritzburg. * Quebec. 
 
 Ἢ Newark. τ Rupertsland. 
 
 < Niagara. Ξ Sodor and Man. 
 
ΦῈΣΖ Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 be immeasurably increased ; and thus it becomes of 
 paramount necessity that the machinery for coping 
 with these difficulties should be organised and set in 
 motion while the extent of emigration is such as to 
 render this possible. 
 
 When once the machinery is in good working 
 order, it will then be capable of almost indefinite 
 extension, to meet the increasing demands upon its 
 capacities. 
 
 (a) Foremost among the reasons which point to 
 the importance of due provision being made for the 
 Spiritual care of our emigrants is this :—Those who 
 leave the British Isles and go forth to seek their 
 fortune in new lands, choose, for the most part, either 
 the United States of America, or Canada, or some of , 
 the Colonies of Australia. Of these a very large 
 number are children of one or another Branch of the 
 Anglican Communion, and, as such, have a right to 
 expect that the Anglican Church will duly minister 
 to them in whatever part of the world their lot may 
 be cast. An enormous responsibility lies upon the 
 Church in this matter, and it is her duty, so far as in 
 her lies, to prevent estrangement, or any loss of 
 spiritual life in her children, through the accident of 
 their removal from one Branch of the Anglican 
 Church to another. 
 
 (6) The simple consideration of the very large 
 number of emigrants who have left and who are still 
 leaving British Ports, is a sufficient indication of the 
 immense responsibility of the Church towards them. 
 Since the year of the Battle of Waterloo (1815) the 
 total number of emigrants leaving the United 
 Kingdom has been 11,740,573. But a truer estimate 
 of the great increase in later years is shown from the 
 fact that, during the last ten years, since the Lambeth 
 Conference of 1878, 3,519,660 out of the above- 
 named 11 millions have left this country. This gives 
 an average of 319,566 emigrants per annum (includ- 
 ing British subjects and foreigners). The average is, 
 
Care of Emigrants. 112 
 
 however, now greatly exceeded every year, as the 
 following figures will show :— 
 Total number of Emigrants, inclu- 
 
 British and Irish Emigrants who ding British subjectsand Foreigners, 
 have left British Ports in the last who have left British Ports in the 
 
 IO years. last 10 years. 
 
 MnieiS 7S 5 h12,902 π| 18,8... 1471663 
 πΠτϑλο <1 LO4, 274 » 1970... 207103 
 LOCO --- 227,542 "1980. 352 9 332;204 
 LOOT... (243,002 WOOL 185302, 5 14. 
 1592. 279,300 By Koto] 12.289 
 τό 220,19 i 1681 --- 907 157 
 ood, τς 242,179 1 Lod: 2.2 303,001 
 Oo br at 207,044 eLOOS sa50 204.805 
 1856. 232,900 » 190... 330,601 
 LOG], - 281 7,57 "τό, τ ΠΟ 
 Πρ. 2ALWATA: Lotal 2100 0609 
 
 a poeee per Δππῦτα Average per Annum 
 
 κα ἘΝ tone | 319.566 
 
 By far the largest proportion of emigrants go to 
 the United States. The percentage, in 1887, to the 
 three chief fields of emigration, was as follows :—To 
 the United States, 72 per cent.; to British North 
 America, II per cent. ; to the Australasian Colonies, 
 IZ per cent; to all other places, 5 per cent. The 
 following table shows the distribution of the actual 
 number of emigrants in 1887 :— 
 
 Emigrants (British and Irish 
 
 only) 1887. 
 
 To the United 
 States 201,526 
 
 » British North 
 AUMETICA πὸ 32,025 
 , Australasia 34,183 
 
 , all other places 13,753 
 
 
 
 281,487 
 
 
 
 Total Emigrants (British and 
 Foreign) 1887. 
 
 To the United 
 
 States 296,901 
 » British North 
 
 America... 44,406 
 , Australasia 35,195 
 
 » all other places 19,989 
 
 
 
 396,494 
 
 4 ---ὄ--.-.----- 
 
314 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 Thus, very nearly three-fourths of the 396,494 people 
 who left the United Kingdom last year were of British 
 or Irish origin, whose spiritual interests the Church 
 cannot properly disregard. 
 
 (c) A third reason for urging the importance of the 
 care of our emigrants is the danger to which they are 
 exposed between the time of their leaving their old 
 home and the time when they are finally established 
 in their new one. 
 
 The dangers on the voyage are by no means in- 
 considerable. The impossibility, when 500 or more 
 emigrants are carried in one vessel, of separating the 
 reckless and careless from those who are thoughtful 
 and well-disposed, exposes the latter to great tempta- 
 tions. This is especially the case with young 
 unmarried women. Then, again, the dangers are no 
 less great at the port of arrival, where young persons, 
 among strangers and surroundings which are new 
 and unknown, are liable to fall a prey to the 
 unscrupulous men and women who are ever on the 
 watch, at such times, to take advantage of ignorance 
 and innocence. And, perhaps, the greatest danger 
 of all arises from the temptations to intemperance 
 and other vices to which the emigrants are exposed 
 on arrival at their new settlement. 
 
 (4) One more point remains to be mentioned under 
 this head, and that is, the enormous value of the 
 opportunity afforded by the softening influence which 
 is brought about by the severance of the associations 
 of home and early life, for awakening religious im- 
 pressions in those who have hitherto been insensible 
 to the Church’s teaching, as well as for deepening 
 the spiritual life of those who are true Christians. 
 Wherever this opportunity is taken advantage of, the 
 result is seen in the strengthening of the Church in 
 the country to which the emigrant goes. 
 
 Having thus dwelt upon some of the chief reasons 
 why the spiritual care of emigrants is of such 
 
Care of Emigrants. 315 
 
 supreme importance, your Committee proceed to 
 consider— 
 What work has already been done in this direction. 
 What work still remains to be done. 
 
 II. Work which has already been done. 
 
 Your Committee have pleasure in acknowledging 
 what has already been accomplished in the establish- 
 ment and continuance of moral and religious work 
 among emigrants. The Society for Promoting 
 Christian Knowledge has organised a plan which is 
 working with much success, and which, when further 
 developed, promises to be of the highest value to the 
 Church. Your Committee desire to express their 
 hearty sense of gratitude which is due for the 
 admirable work carried on by that Society, which 
 has always been at the head of all religious efforts on 
 behalf of emigrants. They would also acknowledge 
 with thankfulness the meritorious work which has 
 been done by other Societies, especially at the Port 
 of London, and notably that which has been under- 
 taken by the St. Andrew’s Waterside Mission. 
 
 Without being able to give a complete account of 
 every attempt made to assist and benefit emigrants, it 
 is gratifying to be able to point to the following 
 efforts, which have been successfully carried out, and 
 which have led to valuable results :— 
 
 (a) Chaplains have been appointed at all the ports 
 of departure in the United Kingdom, whose duty it 
 is to minister to emigrants; to arrange services for 
 them, both before starting and on the voyage; to 
 give them introductions to Clergymen abroad ; and 
 generally to arrange for their reception by the 
 Church in the new country to which they are 
 travelling. 
 
 (ὁ) The Church in the United States of America 
 has initiated a most important work, in having 
 appointed Chaplains at New York, Baltimore, and 
 Philadelphia, whose duty it is to give such spiritual 
 
 5 ar 
 
316 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 aid as is possible to arriving immigrants, and to 
 commend them further to the Church at their ultimate 
 destination inland. 
 
 (c) Chaplains who accompany emigrants on the 
 voyage, and who minister to them, and hold frequent 
 services on board, have also been appointed on many 
 vessels going to America, Australia, and New 
 Zealand, and the Cape. The great value of having 
 such Chaplains on board is evident, and this is 
 especially the case on the long-voyage ships to 
 Australia and the Cape. The financial burden of the 
 remuneration of these Chaplains is borne by the 
 ἘΠΕ ΘΚ. 
 
 (4) In order to provide due protection for girls and 
 single women emigrating, matrons (other than the 
 regular Government Emigrant Matrons) have from 
 time to time been appointed, who are required to 
 look after their charges during the voyage and on 
 arrival at their destination. The help derived from 
 their protection and the moral influence of the matrons 
 has been largely felt. In this branch of the work 
 your Committee desire to acknowledge the valuable 
 services rendered by the Girls’ Friendly Society. 
 
 (e) Clergymen living in all parts of the world have 
 consented to allow persons emigrating to be specially 
 commended to them by letter, and they have given 
 valuable assistance and advice to emigrants when 
 first settling in a new country. 
 
 (7) The publication of some thousands of hand- 
 books for the use of emigrants has in the past proved 
 a valuable held to them. These books contain parti- 
 culars about the various Colonies, and other matters 
 likely to be of assistance. The recent establishment 
 by the English Government of an “ Emigrants’ 
 Information Office,’ where books, leaflets, and in- 
 formation may be had, is found to be of very great 
 service. 
 
 (g) A large number of books (Bibles, Prayer-books, 
 and other books of a religious or interesting nature) 
 
Care of Emigrants. 317 
 
 have been provided for the emigrants on their 
 outward voyage. Many of these have been given 
 away, and in this manner religious teaching and 
 influence have been brought to bear upon them. 
 
 (Δ) Forms of Letters of Commendation for the use 
 of emigrants have been issued in large numbers,' 
 and it is most desirable that Clergymen should 
 provide themselves with these letters. The Clergy- 
 man of the parish in which the intending emigrant 
 resides should fill up such forms, and address to a 
 Bishop or Clergyman of the Church abroad, where 
 the emigrant intends to settle. Where these letters 
 have been given, they have been proved to be of real 
 value, as forming a link between home and foreign 
 countries, and securing for the emigrant a welcome 
 from the Church. 
 
 III. Work still remaining to be done. 
 
 Your Committee consider that, notwithstanding 
 the praiseworthy efforts made and carried out, for 
 the moral and spiritual welfare of emigrants, a very: 
 large and increasing amount of work lies before the 
 Church, which calls for immediate, earnest and 
 united action on the part of every branch of the 
 Anglican Communion. They consider that this 
 work may be attempted in two ways: (i.) asa 
 development and improvement of existing organisa- 
 tions ; and (11.) as a new departure. 
 
 (A) Under the head of the development of organisa- 
 tions which already exist, your Committee would 
 mention the following suggestions which seem to be 
 of importance :— 
 
 (1) That the English Bishops should impress upon 
 the Parochial Clergy, at Diocesan Conferences and 
 on other occasions, the solemn duty (a) of providing 
 that not one of their Parishioners be allowed to leave 
 home without being provided with a Letter of Com- 
 
 
 
 1 For a copy of this Form, see Schedule A. 
 
318 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 mendation to the Church abroad, stating particularly 
 whether they have been baptized and confirmed, 
 or are communicants; (4) of informing intending 
 emigrants that the Protestant Episcopal Church in 
 the United States of America is the only Church in 
 the United States which is in full communion with 
 the Church of England. 
 
 (2) That it is expedient that letters should be 
 sent from England (in addition to the above Com- 
 mendatory Letters), to precede the emigrant on his 
 journey out. These letters should be sent to the 
 Bishop abroad, and should give notice of the intended 
 arrival of the emigrant, adding such information with 
 regard to character and qualifications as may be of 
 assistance to the Bishop or Clergyman to whom the 
 emigrant is commended. 
 
 (3) That the Bishops in the Colonies and in the 
 United States of America be urged to press upon 
 their Clergy the duty of prompt attention-to such 
 Commendatory Letters as may be presented to them 
 from emigrants, either directly or through the Bishops. 
 
 (4) That the attention of the Church in the United 
 States be called to the extreme desirability and need 
 of at once increasing the number of immigrant 
 Chaplains at New York and other ports, where at 
 present the number of emigrants makes it impossible 
 for the existing staff to minister adequately to those 
 who arrive. At New York especially it would seem 
 that these increased Church ministrations should be 
 supplied with as little delay as possible. 
 
 (5) That, with the view of increasing the number 
 of Chaplains who shall accompany emigrants on the 
 voyage, the Clergy should be specially invited, when 
 travelling to the Colonies, to take every opportunity 
 of acting as Chaplains on board emigrant ships.* 
 
 1 Full information as to the duties of such Chaplains, and 
 of the remuneration which can in some cases be offered them, 
 is obtainable from the S.P.C.K. 
 
Care of Emigrants. 319 
 
 (6) That, in consideration of the great influence 
 exercised upon emigrants by the Government Matron 
 on board ship, it is important that care be taken in 
 the selection of good Christian women for the office. 
 
 (B) Your Committee feel that the work which has 
 already been attempted for the spiritual welfare of 
 our emigrants has been carried out by the best 
 methods, and therefore their recommendations for 
 the future have been mainly devoted to the develop- 
 ment and extension of existing organisations. 
 
 They would, however, suggest for consideration the 
 following four points of new departure, as being, in their 
 opinion, of paramountimportance atthe present time:— 
 
 (1) That the Church in Australasia and in Canada 
 be urged to provide more adequate spiritual ministra- 
 tions for immigrants at the ports of arrival, by the 
 appointment of Chaplains whose whole time could, if 
 necessary, be devoted to the work. 
 
 (2) That it is most desirable to establish homes for 
 emigrants at the ports of departure and arrival, where 
 those needing protection or care may be received. 
 
 (3) That the Archbishops of Canterbury and York 
 and the Bishop of London be requested to prepare a 
 Form of Prayer for Use at Sea, having regard to the 
 special needs of emigrants. 
 
 (4) That it would be of great service if more fre- 
 quent and regular interchange of reports of work 
 done, and of the requirements in respect of emigrants, 
 could take place between the Church in England and 
 the Church in the United States and in the Colonies. 
 
 Your Committee cannot bring their report to a 
 close without expressing their deep thankfulness to 
 Almighty God for the measure of success which has 
 hitherto attended the Church in her efforts on behalf 
 of her emigrants, and an earnest prayer for the 
 guidance and blessing of the Holy Spirit in the 
 years to come. 
 
 Signed on behalf of the Committee, 
 R. LLANDAFF, Chazrman. 
 
320 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 SCHEDULE A. 
 
 [FORM OF COMMENDATORY LETTER.] 
 
 Reverend and dear Sir, 
 
 I desive herewith to commend to your pastoral 
 
 care and brotherly good offices... ᾷΦπΦΠπΠῤΆσὸ 
 Jrom the. Parish Of pn 8 ee in the 
 τ ee eee who ts about to 
 πο τῇ sees ee τ. ...... 3 
 
 And I certify thatthe τσ αα 
 Ὁ τι. τς Jee eee 
 
 * Here state whether baptized, confirmed, or a Communicant. 
 
 [S.P.C.K.] 
 
Mutual Relations. 321 
 
 No. 8—MUTUAL RELATIONS. 
 
 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO 
 CONSIDER THE SUBJECT OF THE MUTUAL 
 RELATIONS OF THE DIOCESES AND BRANCHES 
 OF THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION. 
 
 THE Committee feel that it would be impossible for 
 them to deal in any complete and exhaustive manner 
 with a subject so extensive as that which has been 
 referred to them for consideration. They have there- 
 fore determined to confine their attention to such 
 definite and practical points as have been brought 
 under their notice, and as appear to them to be 
 worthy of being made the subject of report. 
 
 I. The attention of the Committee has been 
 directed to alleged neglect of certain important 
 principles which were laid down by the Lambeth 
 Conference of 1878. The principles are contained in 
 the following quotations :— 
 
 (1) First, that the duly-certified action of every 
 national or particular Church, and of each 
 ecclesiastical Province (or Diocese not in- 
 cluded in a Province), in the exercise of its 
 
 
 
 1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
 Bishop of Carlisle (Chazyman). Bishop of Derry. 
 
 55 Adelaide. ” Jamaica. 
 
 my Auckland. 935 Manchester. 
 
 rh Brechin. = Moray and Ross. 
 6 Calcutta. - New Jersey. 
 
 " Capetown. 95 North China. 
 
 Ἢ Central Pennsylvania. oF Sierra Leone. 
 
 5 Chester. ον Tennessee. 
 
 Colombo. 
 
22 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 own discipline, should be respected by all 
 the other Churches, and by their individual 
 members. 
 
 (2) Secondly, that when a Diocese, or territorial 
 sphere of administration, has been con- 
 stituted by the authority of any Church or 
 Province of this Communion within its own 
 limits, no Bishop or other Clergyman of 
 any other Church should exercise his func- 
 tions within that Diocese, without the 
 consent of the Bishop thereof. 
 
 (3) Thirdly, that no Bishop should authorise to 
 officiate in his Diocese a Clergyman coming 
 from another Church or Province unless 
 such Clergyman present letters testimonial, 
 countersigned by the Bishop of the Diocese 
 from which he comes, such letters to be as 
 nearly as possible in the form adopted by 
 such Church or Province in the case of the 
 transfer of a Clergyman from one Diocese 
 to another. 
 
 (See above, page 166-7.) 
 
 The Committee would urge that more attention 
 should be paid by Metropolitans and Bishops, or 
 persons temporarily administering the affairs of a 
 Diocese, to the practical enforcement of the principles 
 above enunciated ; and they would add in particular 
 the following recommendation —namely, that the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury be respectfully requested 
 to consider whether it be possible to devise and 
 suggest any means whereby it may be made more 
 easy to avoid the intrusion of unworthy or pretended 
 Priests or Deacons into the various Dioceses of the 
 Anglican Communion. 
 
 II. It has been brought under the notice of the 
 Committee that difficulty has arisen with regard to 
 the validity of orders derived from certain Bishops 
 
Mutual Relations. 323 
 
 alleged to be schismatical. It would be exceedingly 
 desirable that some definite and uniform course of 
 action should be adopted by all Bishops of the 
 Anglican Communion in dealing with persons holding 
 such so-called orders. 
 
 The Committee are of opinion that, although much 
 may have been said to the contrary, there are in 
 reality no persons claiming Anglican Orders of 
 doubtful character whose claims deserve serious con- 
 sideration. With regard to Orders alleged to be 
 derived, though irregularly, through the American 
 Church, it may be sufficient to say that the whole 
 transaction is disallowed and regarded as null and 
 void by the American Episcopate. This fact, in the 
 opinion of the Committee, may be taken as a sufficient 
 guide to all Bishops of the Anglican Communion. 
 
 III. A question has been brought before the Com- 
 mittee, based upon a Report made to the General 
 Synod of the Dioceses in Australia and Tasmania, on 
 the subject of the title of Archbishop. The Committee 
 have been asked to express an opinion as to the 
 desirability of assigning the title of Archbishop to the 
 Primate of Australia and Tasmania. The Committee 
 feel that there is great difficulty in coming to a clear 
 judgment upon a question which must, of necessity, 
 to some extent depend for its answer upon local 
 circumstances ; but taking the question upon broad 
 grounds, and looking to the general interests of the 
 whole Church, the Committee have no hesitation in 
 expressing their opinion that there are cases of im- 
 portant Provinces in which distinct advantages would 
 result from adopting the ancient and honoured title 
 of Archbishop. In the event of this course being 
 adopted weighty questions might arise with regard 
 to authority and precedence, but upon these questions 
 the Committee think that it would be unwise to 
 enter. 
 
 IV. The Committee have given anxious considera- 
 
224 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 tion to the question of the formation of a central 
 Council of Reference, to which recourse may be had 
 for advice on questions of doctrine and discipline by 
 the tribunals of appeal of the various Provinces of the 
 Anglican Communion. 
 
 With reference to this question, which has already 
 been before the Conferences of 1867 and 1878, the 
 Committee think that they cannot do better than call 
 attention to what has actually been done in the case 
 of Australia and Tasmania. 
 
 The following resolutions were adopted by the 
 General Synod of Australia and Tasmania in 
 1872 :— 
 
 If, in the opinion of the Committee of Appeal of 
 the General Synod of the Church of England 
 in Australia and Tasmania, the matter of 
 appeal concerns a question of doctrine, or 
 discipline involving a question of doctrine, the 
 Committee may, at its discretion, state a case 
 for the opinion thereon of a body in England, 
 to be called the Council of Reference. Such 
 Council of Reference shall consist of the 
 Archbishops of Canterbury and York, and the 
 Bishop of London, together with four lay- 
 men learned in the law, the first four such 
 laymen being Lord Hatherley, Lord Chelms- 
 ford, Lord Cairns, and Lord Penzance. The 
 General Synod shall have power to fill up 
 vacancies as they shall from time to time 
 occur, but in the event of a vacancy or vacancies 
 existing when a case shall be before the 
 Council, the Archbishops and Bishop shall fill 
 up the same for the purpose of disposing of 
 that particular case. The opinion of the 
 Council shall be binding on the Committee, 
 and pending the obtaining of such an opinion, 
 the appeal shall stand adjourned, with liberty 
 to either of the parties to set the appeal down 
 
Mutual Relations. 325 
 
 to be disposed of upon the opinion when 
 obtained. If from any cause it shall be imprac- 
 ticable to obtain an opinion from the Council 
 of Reference within a time to be limited by 
 the rules to be made under the resolutions, the 
 Committee of its own motion may, or at the 
 instance of either of the parties shall, deter- 
 mine the appeal; but in such case the con- 
 currence of one of the two Bishops shall be 
 requisite in any decision. 
 
 The Committee are of opinion that a plan of 
 reference to a Council in England, framed upon such 
 principles as those adopted by the General Synod of 
 Australia and Tasmania, would probably meet the 
 wants, should they arise, of other Provinces. 
 
 It has been brought to the attention of the Com- 
 mittee that, in some parts of the Anglican Communion, 
 notably, in the Province of the West Indies, schemes 
 somewhat different from that above described have 
 been adopted. It is needless to say that the Committee 
 do not desire to pass an opinion upon details, but 
 only to indicate a general method of action. 
 
 V. The attention of the Committee has been further 
 directed to the danger of important divergences with 
 regard to matters of doctrine, as well as forms of 
 worship, being introduced amongst the Anglican 
 Churches by the possible assumption on the part of 
 each Province or Diocese of the power of revising the 
 Book of Common Prayer. Such divergences might 
 be injurious to the Church at large, and would 
 certainly interfere with the mutual relations of its 
 different parts. 
 
 It is not within the province of the Committee to 
 lay down rules as to the powers of the different 
 branches of the Anglican Communion in this matter, 
 or as to the line of action which they ought to follow. 
 This remark applies with especial emphasis to the 
 Episcopal Church of America, though the Committee 
 
226 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 cannot abstain from remarking with pleasure that 
 recent changes made in the Book of Common Prayer 
 by that Church have been rather in the direction of 
 nearer approach to the English Book than of further 
 departure from it. But with regard to the branches 
 of the Church within the limits of her Majesty’s. 
 dominions, the Committee cannot express too strongly 
 the opinion which they entertain with regard to the 
 danger of alteration in existing services. They do 
 not deny in general that the Book of Common 
 Prayer may be susceptible of improvement; this 
 susceptibility may probably be predicated of all 
 things human; though it must be remembered that 
 it might be hard to find many improvements, which 
 would be generally and heartily accepted as such. 
 Neither do they wish to express an opinion unfavour- 
 able to efforts made to supplement the prayers and 
 services of the Church by others which her needs 
 demand. But the point which the Committte would 
 chiefly urge is this—that the Book of Common Prayer 
 is not the possession of one Diocese or Province, but 
 of all; that a revision in one portion of the Anglican 
 Communion must, therefore, be extensively felt, and 
 that it is not just that any particular portion should 
 undertake revision without consultation with other 
 portions, and especially with the Church at home. 
 
 VI. There appears to be a notion current that 
 Clergymen ordained for work in England, who go 
 out to labour for a time in the Colonies, are regarded 
 as more or less disqualified for subsequent preferment 
 at home. The Committee regret that such a notion 
 should be current, and they are of opinion that 
 Clergymen who have been willing to givea portion of 
 the best time of their lives to colonial work may be 
 regarded as having special claims for consideration 
 on their return home. The Committee are aware 
 that the subject is not free from difficulties, and that 
 it is impossible to lay down any general rule; but 
 
Mutual Relations. 327 
 
 they have thought it right to give it a place in their 
 Report, and that some benefit may arise from the 
 course thus adopted. 
 
 These are all the matters which have been brought 
 under the notice of the Committee, or which have 
 been deemed of sufficient importance or of a suitable 
 kind to be brought before the Conference. In con- 
 cluding their Report the Committee would desire to 
 express their sense of the extent and difficulty of the 
 subject which has been entrusted to them, and of the 
 modest character of their contribution to its treatment. 
 But they believe that the wise and perhaps the only 
 course of dealing with such a subject is not to attempt 
 to lay down rules which shall solve all possible 
 problems, but to discuss practical difficulties as they 
 arise, in dependence upon the Holy Spirit of God 
 and trusting that He who permits the difficulties will 
 give grace and strength to overcome them. 
 
 Signed on behalf of the Committee, 
 H; CARLISLE, 
 
 Chairman. 
 
328 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF COMMITTEE. 
 No. 8. 
 
 
 
 ANOTHER subject has been brought under the notice 
 of the Committee, concerning which they have felt 
 great doubt as to whether it can be regarded as 
 coming within the terms of their reference. The 
 subject, however, is so important, and the Committee 
 have felt so desirous that it should be fairly brought 
 before the Conference, that they have determined to 
 introduce it in the form of an Appendix to their 
 Report. 
 
 The question was raised in the first meeting of the 
 Conference, whether it would not be desirable that 
 some declaration should be made concerning the 
 teaching of the English Church, and of those Churches 
 which are in full communion with her. 
 
 There can be little doubt as to the existence of 
 much ignorance and misunderstanding, not only as 
 to what this teaching is, but also as to the ground 
 upon which those Churches stand, and as to their 
 relation to other Churches and Christian Societies. 
 Such ignorance and misunderstanding can scarcely 
 fail to interfere seriously with the results of their 
 teaching. 
 
 It is true that the English Church possesses a body 
 of teaching in the Book of Common Prayer, in the 
 Catechism, and in the Thirty-nine Articles, to say 
 nothing of the Book of Homilies. But these reposi- 
 tories of teaching, precious as they are, do not appear 
 to the Committee to possess the qualities which 
 ought to belong to a declaration, such as is contem- 
 plated in the remarks now made. What is wanted is 
 a plain and brief summary of the definite doctrinal 
 grounds upon which the Anglican Churches stand 
 
Mutual ΜείαΐΖολι5.--- Appendix. 329 
 
 (somewhat, perhaps, after the manner of the earlier of 
 the Thirty-nine Articles), together with a statement 
 of their relation to other Churches and Christian 
 Societies, and, perhaps, of other cognate matters 
 upon which, on consideration of the whole subject, it 
 might be considered desirable that some distinct 
 utterance should be made. The summary should 
 be such as the whole body of English-speaking 
 Bishops could adopt; it should, therefore, be free 
 from all questions of doubtful controversy ; it should 
 be a document which could be freely circulated as a 
 manifesto of the Anglican Churches concerning their 
 status and their teaching. 
 
 The proposal, undoubtedly, has its difficulties, as 
 almost every important proposal has; but we think 
 that the difficulties might possibly be overcome; and 
 certainly all danger of mischief would be avoided, if 
 the following plans were adopted :— 
 
 It is respectfully suggested : 
 
 (1) That a small committee of English Bishops be 
 appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury for the 
 purpose of drafting such a declaration. 
 
 (2) That the Committee have power to consult, if 
 they think fit, with any of their episcopal brethren, 
 and also with eminent divines outside the episcopal 
 body. 
 
 (3) That the draft declaration, having been pro- 
 visionally settled by the Committee, be submitted to 
 the Archbishop of Canterbury, with the request that 
 his Grace will forward copies to each Metropolitan 
 for the consideration of the Bishops in his Province, 
 and that he will, in conjunction with the Archbishop 
 of York, bring the declaration before the English 
 Bishops. 
 
 [The term Metropolitan includes Primates of 
 Provinces, the Primus of Scotland, and the Presiding 
 Bishop of the Church of America. ] 
 
 (4) That each Metropolitan be requested to return 
 
 NG 
 
330 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 a copy of the declaration, either approved, or with 
 suggestions of amendment, within twelve months, 
 
 (5) That the Archbishop of Canterbury, be re- 
 quested upon the return of the drafts to take such 
 further steps as the circumstances in his judgment 
 shall appear to warrant. 
 
 The Committee recommend that the declaration 
 should be in the form of a series of statements or 
 articles ; each dealing with a different subject, and 
 to be expressed in the simplest possible language. 
 
 The Committee feel that they would be going 
 beyond their province if they attempted to dictate 
 the subjects upon which statements should be framed: 
 but in order more clearly to indicate the kind of 
 declaration which they think the needs of the time 
 demand, they venture to specify the following subjects 
 which they believe might be profitably introduced:— 
 
 I. Of the Catholic Faith. 
 II. Of the Holy Scriptures. 
 III. Of the Sacraments. 
 IV. Of the Forms of Prayer and Liturgy in 
 use in the Anglican Churches. 
 V. Of the relation of the Anglican Churches 
 to the Church of Rome. 
 VI. Of the relation of the Anglican Churches 
 to the Churches of the East. 
 VII. Ofthe relation of the Anglican Churches to 
 other Christian Churches and Societies. 
 VIII. Of the relation of the teaching of the 
 Church of Christ to human knowledge. 
 
 It is almost unnecessary to state that the Committee 
 do not regard the above list as exhaustive ; nor, on 
 the other hand, do they desire to insist upon each 
 and all of the suggested subjects as essential to the 
 completeness of the proposed declaration. 
 
 Signed on behalf of the Committee, 
 
 H.. CAR.LISIGE: 
 Chairman. 
 
Home Reunion. 
 
 ῳ 
 LoS) 
 = 
 
 No. 9—HOME REUNION. 
 
 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO CON- 
 SIDER WHAT STEPS (IF ANY) CAN BE RIGHTLY 
 TAKEN ON BEHALF OF THE ANGLICAN ‘COM- 
 MUNION TOWARDS THE REUNION OF THE 
 VARIOUS BODIES INTO WHICH THE CHRIS- 
 TIANITY OF THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING RACES IS 
 DIVIDED. 
 
 THE Committee was appointed to consider “what 
 “steps (if any) can be rightly taken, on behalf of the 
 “ Anglican Communion, towards the Reunion of the 
 “various bodies into which the Christianity of the 
 “English-speaking races is divided.” 
 
 I. On entering upon their duty they had at once 
 brought to their notice evidence of a strong consensus 
 of authoritative opinion, from various branches of 
 the Anglican Communion, that the time for some 
 action in this matter, under prayer for God’s guidance 
 through many acknowledged difficulties and dangers, 
 has already come; and that the Conference—speak- 
 ing, as it must speak, with the greatest weight of 
 moral authority—should not separate without some 
 such utterance as may further and direct such action. 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
 Bishop of Sydney (Chairman). Bishop of Minnesota. 
 
 » Adelaide. », Nelson. 
 
 » Antigua (Coadjutor). » New York. 
 
 >» Brechin. » Ripon 
 
 » Edinburgh. », Rochester. 
 
 » Hereford. »  Rupertsland. 
 » Jamaica. » st. Andrew’s. 
 » Lichfield. » Wakefield. 
 
 » Manchester. 
 
332 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 In the Convocation of Canterbury the subject has 
 been under discussion, at intervals, for nearly thirty 
 years. In the year 1861 a resolution, on the motion 
 of the Rev. Chancellor Massingberd, was carried 
 nem, con. in the Lower House, praying the Bishops 
 to commend the subject of “the Reunion of the 
 divided members of Christ’s Body ” to the prayers of 
 the faithful. 
 
 In 1870, at the instance of the Lower House, a 
 Committee was appointed on Reunion, with power 
 to confer with any similar Committee which might be 
 appointed in the Northern Province. The Committee, 
 in its Report, recommended the use of the special 
 Prayer for Unity, appointed for the day of the 
 Queen’s Accession, and the consideration of the 
 propriety of communication on the subject with the 
 chief Nonconformist bodies ; and these recommend- 
 ations, after a singularly interesting debate were 
 adopted by the House. 
 
 The Report contained the following passage :— 
 “The Committee do not recommend that we should set 
 “out with proposing alterations of our existing formu- 
 “aries of faith and worship, while they by no means 
 “deny that concessions might be admitted hereafter, 
 “85 the consequence of negotiations carried on ina 
 “spirit of love and unity.” It also suggested that on 
 the day of the Queen’s Accession “all classes of 
 Nonconformists should be invited to institute similar 
 prayers” for unity, and that the subject might be 
 brought by Sermons before our own people. 
 
 In 1887 the subject was again taken up, and a 
 Resolution carried, on the motion of Canon Medd, 
 that “ His Grace the President be requested to direct 
 “the appointment of a Committee of this House to 
 “ consider, and from time to time to report upon, the 
 “relations between the Church and those who in this 
 “country are alienated from her Communion; and 
 “generally to make suggestions as to means which 
 “might tend, by God’s blessing, to the furtherance of 
 
Home Reunion. 322 
 
 “the Reunion of all among our countrymen who 
 “hold the essentials of the Christian faith.’ In 
 the speech of the mover of the resolution special 
 reference was made to the probability of the dis- 
 cussion of the subject at the Lambeth Conference. 
 
 In the Convocation of York, the Committee have 
 reason to know that similar action has been taken ; 
 but, under pressure of time, they have been unable to 
 obtain detailed information of the actual proceedings. 
 
 From various Synods of the Colonial Church 
 similar, and even stronger, expressions of a desire to 
 make some movement on the part of the Anglican 
 Communion in this direction have been brought 
 before the Committee. The General Synod of the 
 Church in Australia and Tasmania, in 1886, “ desired 
 “to place on record its solemn sense of the evils of the 
 “unhappy divisions among professing Christians, and, 
 “through His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 “respectfully prayed the Conference of Bishops, to 
 “be assembled at Lambeth in 1888, to consider in 
 “what manner steps should be taken to promote 
 “greater visible unity among those who hold the 
 “same Creed.” A Resolution was passed in almost 
 the same words by the Diocesan Synod of Montreal ; 
 and similar Resolutions by the Provincial Synod of 
 Rupertsland, and the General Synod of New Zealand. 
 At the Session of the Provincial Synod of Canada 
 in 1886, a Joint Committee was appointed, to confer 
 with any similar Committees, which might be 
 appointed by other Religious Bodies, on _ the 
 terms upon which some honourable union might be 
 arrived at. 
 
 But the most important and practical step has been 
 taken by our brethren of the American Church in 
 the General Convention of 1886, in accordance with 
 the prayer of a petition signed by more than a 
 thousand Clergy, including thirty-two Bishops. At 
 that Convention a Committee of the House of Bishops 
 presented a remarkable Report, which, after stating 
 
334 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 emphatically that the Church did “ not seek to absorb 
 “other Communions, but to co-operate with them on 
 ‘the basis of a common Faith and Order, to dis- 
 “countenance schism, and to heal the wounds of the 
 “ Body of Christ”; and that she was prepared to 
 make all reasonable concessions on “all things of 
 “human ordering and of human choice,” dwelt upon 
 the duty of the Church to preserve, “as inherent 
 “parts of the sacred deposit of Christian faith and 
 “order committed by Christ and His Apostles to the 
 “ Church, and as therefore essential to the restoration 
 “of unity,” the following :— 
 
 “1. The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New 
 Testament, as the Revealed Word of God. 
 
 “2. The Nicene Creed, as the sufficient statement 
 of the Christian Faith. 
 
 “ 3. The two Sacraments—Baptism and the Supper 
 of the Lord—ministered with unfailing use of Christ's 
 words of institution, and the elements ordained by 
 Him. 
 
 “4. The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in 
 the methods of its administration to the varying needs 
 of the nations and peoples called of God into the 
 Unity of His Church.” 
 
 The Report concluded with the following words :— 
 
 “ Furthermore, deeply grieved by the sad divisions 
 which afflict the Christian Church in our own land, 
 we hereby declare our desire and readiness, so soon 
 as there shall be any authorised response to this 
 Declaration, to enter into brotherly conference with 
 all or any Christian bodies seeking the restoration 
 of organic Unity of the Church, with a view to the 
 earnest study of the conditions, under which so price- 
 less a blessing might happily be brought to pass.” 
 
 This Report was adopted by the House of Bishops, 
 and communicated to the House of Clerical and Lay 
 Deputies ; and, at the instance of the latter House, it 
 was resolved— 
 
 “That a Commission consisting of five Bishops 
 
Home Reunion. 335 
 
 “five Clerical, and five Lay Deputies, be appointed, 
 “who shall at their discretion communicate, to the 
 “organised Christian Bodies of our country, the 
 “ Declaration set forth by the Bishops on the twentieth 
 “day of October; and shall hold themselves ready 
 “to enter into brotherly conference with all or any 
 “Christian Bodies seeking the restoration of the 
 “organic unity of the Church.” 
 
 After consideration of these significant documents, 
 and of memorials from certain Associations which 
 have already done good service in this cause, it was 
 decided by the Committee that they were more 
 than justified in recommending to the Conference 
 that some steps should be taken by it in the direction 
 specified in the Resolution constituting the Com- 
 mittee. 
 
 II. In considering how this could best be done, it 
 appeared to the Committee that the subject divided 
 itself naturally into two parts; first, the basis on 
 which the United Church might, in the future, safely 
 rest ; secondly, the conditions under which present 
 negotiations for reunion, in view of existing circum- 
 stances, could be carried on. 
 
 The Committee with deep regret felt that, under 
 present conditions, it was useless to consider the 
 question of Reunion with our brethren of the Roman 
 Church, being painfully aware that any proposal for 
 reunion would be entertained by the authorities of 
 that Church only on condition of a complete submis- 
 sion on our part to those claims of absolute authority, 
 and the acceptance of those other errors, both in 
 doctrine and in discipline, against which, in faithful- 
 ness to God’s Holy Word, and to the true principles 
 of His Church, we have been for three centuries 
 bound to protest. 
 
 But, in regard to the first portion of the subject, 
 the Committee were of opinion that with the chief of 
 the Non-conforming Communions there would not 
 
336 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 only be less difficulty than is commonly supposed as 
 to the basis of a common faith in the essentials of 
 Christian doctrine, but that, even in respect of Church 
 Government, many of the causes which had originally 
 led to secession had been removed, and that both from 
 deeper study and from larger historical experience, 
 there was in the present day a greater disposition to 
 value and to accept the ancient Church order. It 
 did not, indeed, appear to them that the question 
 before them, which was of the duty, if any, of the 
 Anglican Communion in this matter, was to be 
 absolutely determined by these considerations ; but 
 they seemed, nevertheless, to give important en- 
 couragement to the Church in the endeavour to do 
 what might appear to be her duty in furthering this 
 all-important matter. 
 
 Accordingly, after careful consideration, they deter- 
 mined to take as the basis of their deliberations on 
 this part of the subject the chief articles embodied in 
 the Report of the Committee of the House of Bishops 
 in the American Church; and after discussion of 
 each, they submit them to the wisdom of the Confer- 
 ence, with some modifications, as supplying the basis 
 on which approach might be, under God’s blessing, 
 made towards Reunion :— 
 
 1. The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New 
 Testaments, as “containing all things necessary to 
 salvation,’ and as being the rule and ultimate stan- 
 dard of faith. 
 
 2. The Apostles’ Creed,as the Baptisimal Symbol ; 
 and the Nicene Creed, as the sufficient statement of 
 the Christian faith. 
 
 3. The two Sacraments ordained by Christ himself 
 —Baptism and the Supper of the Lord—ministered 
 with unfailing use of Christ’s words of institution, 
 and of the elements ordained by him. 
 
 4. The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in the 
 methods of its administration to the varying needs of 
 
Home Reunion. 337 
 
 the nations and peoples called of God into the unity 
 of His Church. 
 
 The Committee believe that upon some such basis 
 as this, with large freedom of variation on secondary 
 points of doctrine, worship, and discipline, and without 
 interference with existing conditions of property and 
 endowment, it might be possible, under God’s gracious 
 providence, for a United Church, including at least 
 the chief of the Christian Communions of our people, 
 to rest. 
 
 III. But they are aware that the main difficulty of 
 the subject lies in the consideration of what practical 
 steps can be taken towards such reunion under the 
 actual religious conditions of the community at home 
 and abroad—complicated, moreover, in England and 
 Scotland by legal difficulties. It appears to them, 
 moreover, clear, that on this subject the Conference 
 can only express an opinion on general principles, 
 and that definite action must be left to the consti- 
 tuted authorities, in each branch of our Communion, 
 acting, as far as possible, in concert. 
 
 They therefore respectfully submit to the Confer- 
 ence the following Resolution :— 
 
 “That the constituted authorities of the various 
 “branches of our Communion, acting, so far 
 “as may be, in concert with one another, 
 “be earnestly requested to make it known 
 “that they hold themselves in readiness to 
 “enter into brotherly conference (such as 
 “that which has already been proposed by 
 “the Church in the United States of 
 “ America) with the representatives of other 
 “chief Christian Communions in the 
 “English-speaking races, in order to con- 
 “sider what steps can be taken, either 
 “ towards corporate reunion, or towards such 
 “relations as may prepare the way for fuller 
 “organic unity hereafter.” 
 
Oo 
 
 38 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 IV. They cannot conclude their report without 
 laying before the Conference the following suggestion, 
 unanimously adopted by the Committee :— 
 
 “That the Conference recommend as of great 
 “importance, in tending to bring about Re- 
 “union, the dissemination of information 
 “respecting the standards of doctrine, and 
 “the formularies in use in the Anglican 
 
 . “Church; and that information be dis- 
 “seminated, on the other hand, respecting 
 “the authoritative standards of doctrine, 
 “worship, and government adopted by the 
 “other bodies of Christians into which the 
 “ English-speaking races are divided.” 
 
 They also desire—following in this respect the 
 example of the Convocation of Canterbury—to pray 
 the Conference to commend this matter of Reunion 
 to the special prayers of all Christian people, both 
 within and (so far as it may rightly do so) without 
 our Communion, in preparation for the Conferences 
 which have been suggested, and while such Confer- 
 ences are going on; and they trust that the present 
 Lambeth Conference ‘may also see fit to issue, or to 
 pray His Grace the President to issue, some pastoral 
 letter to all Christian people, upon this all-important 
 subject. For never certainly did the Church of 
 Christ need more urgently the spirit of wisdom and 
 of love, which He alone can bestow, who is “the 
 Author and Giver of all good things.” 
 
 Signed on behalf of the Committee, 
 
 ALFRED SYDNEY, 
 
 Chairman. 
 
Old Catholics and Others. 339 
 
 No. 10. 
 
 SCANDINAVIANS—OLD CATHOLICS. 
 
 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO CON- 
 SIDER THE RELATION OF THE ANGLICAN 
 COMMUNION (A) TO THE SCANDINAVIAN AND 
 OTHER REFORMED CHURCHES (B) TO THE OLD 
 CATHOLICS AND OTHER REFORMING BODIES. 
 
 A. 
 
 YOUR Committee consider that, in view of the in- 
 creasing number of Swedes and other Scandinavians 
 now living in America and in the English Colonies, 
 as well as for the furtherance of Christian Unity, 
 earnest efforts should be made to establish more 
 friendly relations between the Scandinavian and 
 Anglican Churches. 
 
 In regard to the Swedish Church, your Committee 
 are of opinion that, as its standards of doctrine are 
 to a great extent in accord with our own, and its con- 
 tinuity as a national Church has never been broken, 
 any approaches on its part should be most gladly 
 welcomed with a view to mutual explanation of 
 differences, and the ultimate establishment, if possible, 
 of permanent intercommunion on sound principles of 
 Ecclesiastical polity. 
 
 Greater difficulties are presented as regards com- 
 
 
 
 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
 
 Bishop of Winchester Bishop of Dunedin. 
 (Chairnian). Gibraltar. 
 Archbishop of Dublin. ᾿ Iowa. 
 Bishop of Albany. Ἕ Lichfield. 
 re Cashel. Ἂ Lincoln. 
 ᾿ Central Africa. 9% North Carolina. 
 i Cork. 2 Salisbury. 
 
 ἘΞ Derry. a Western New York. 
 
340 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 munion with the Norwegian and Danish Churches by 
 the constitution of their ministry; but there are 
 grounds of hope, in the growing appreciation of 
 Church order, that in the course of time these diffi- 
 culties may be surmounted. It is much to be desired 
 that a basis of union should be formed with a people 
 who are distinguished by great devotional earnestness 
 and uprightness of character. 
 
 ἘΣ 
 
 By the name Old Catholics we understand, in 
 general terms, those members of foreign Churches 
 who have been excommunicated on account of their 
 refusal, for conscience’ sake, to accept the novel 
 doctrines promulgated by the authority of the Church 
 of Rome, and who yet desire to maintain in its 
 integrity the Catholic Faith, and to remain in full 
 communion with the Catholic Church. As in the 
 previous Conference, held in 1878,! we declare that 
 “all sympathy is due from the Anglican Church to 
 “the Churches and individuals protesting against 
 “these errors” ; and, “to those who are drawn to us 
 “in the endeavour to free themselves from the yoke 
 “of error and superstition we are ready to offer all 
 “help and such privileges as may be acceptable to 
 “them and are consistent with the maintenance of 
 “ our own principles, as enunciated in our formularies.” 
 
 Ten years have passed since this declaration was 
 issued, and we are now called to consider more in 
 detail our relations to the different groups compre- 
 hended under this general title. 
 
 I. 
 
 First of all it is due to the ancient Church of Hol- 
 land, which in practice accepts the title of Old 
 
 * Official Letter of 1878. Supra, page 181. 
 
Old Catholics and Others. 341 
 
 Catholic, to recognise the fact that it has uttered 
 energetic protests against the novel dogmas of the 
 Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, 
 and of the universal Bishopric and infallibility of the 
 Bishop of Rome. It is to this Church that the com- 
 munity, usually termed Old Catholic, in the German 
 Empire, owes in the providence of God the Episcopal 
 succession. We recognise, with thankfulness, the 
 dignified and independent position which the Church 
 of Holland maintained for many years in almost 
 absolute isolation. It has now broken through this 
 isolation, as regards its neighbours on the Continent. 
 As regards ourselves, the Church of Holland is found 
 on inquiry to be in agreement with our Church in 
 many points, and we believe that with more frequent 
 brotherly intercourse many of the barriers which at 
 present separate us might be removed. 
 
 ΤΙ 
 
 The Old Catholic community in Germany differs 
 from the Church of Holland, in this respect, amongst 
 others, that it does not retain possession of the 
 ancient Sees. The Bishop of that community has 
 wisely refrained from assuming a territorial title; we 
 are not, however, without hope that the Old Catholic 
 body may be, with the divine guidance and in God’s 
 good time, instrumental in restoring to that country 
 the blessing of a united national Church. It may be 
 noted that Bishop Reinkens, shortly after his con- 
 secration, was recognised as a Catholic Bishop by the 
 civil power in Prussia, Baden, and Hesse.' He and 
 the parochial Clergy under him have the right and 
 duty, recognised by the State, of teaching the chil- 
 
 ' The documents in question are printed at length in Der 
 Altkatholikismus, published in 1887 by J. F. von Schulte, pp. 
 405, 415, 416. The Prussian Old Catholic law is to be found on 
 pp. oe Cf. pp. 549 foll. (Staatszuschuss fiir die Altkatho- 
 iken). 
 
342 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 dren of their own confession in the public schools. 
 They are also in undisturbed possession of a number 
 of ancient churches and benefices, and receive for the 
 present a subsidy granted by Parliament. 
 
 As regards the form of doctrine actually professed 
 by this body, we believe that its return to the stan- 
 dards of the undivided Church is a distinct advance 
 towards the reunion of Christendom. We learn that 
 it formulates the fuller expression of its belief in 
 catechisms and manuals of instruction, rather than in 
 articles or confessions, because it desires to avoid any 
 methods which might create or perpetuate divisions. 
 
 We cannot consider that it is in schism as regards 
 the Roman Church, because to do so would be to 
 concede the lawfulness of the imposition of new terms 
 of communion, and of the extravagant assertions by 
 the Papacy of ordinary and immediate jurisdiction 
 in every Diocese. For ourselves we regard it as a 
 duty to promote friendly relations with the Old 
 Catholics of Germany, not only out of sympathy with 
 them, but also in thankfulness to God, who has 
 strengthened them to suffer for the truth under great 
 discouragements, difficulties,and temptations. We owe 
 them our intercessions, our support, and our brotherly 
 counsel ; and we have reason to believe that aid from 
 individual members of our Church, may be most 
 beneficially given towards the training of their future 
 Clergy. 
 
 We see no reason why we should not admit their 
 Clergy and faithful Laity to Holy Communion on 
 the same conditions as our own Communicants, and 
 we also acknowledge the readiness which they have 
 shown to offer spiritual privileges to members of our 
 own Church. 
 
 We regret that differences in our marriage laws. 
 which we believe to be of great importance, compel 
 us to state that we are obliged to debar from Holy 
 Communion any person who may have contracted a 
 marriage not sanctioned by the laws and canons of 
 
Old Catholics and Others. 343 
 
 the Anglican Church. Nor could we, in justice to the 
 Old Catholics, admit any one who would be debarred 
 from communion among themselves. 
 
 TT. 
 
 The “ Christian Catholic Church” in Switzerland, 
 which has adopted a title long used by the Church 
 in that country, has a recognised civil position of 
 much the same character as that possessed by the Old 
 Catholics of Germany. We consider that it is a body 
 now sufficiently established to receive the assurance 
 of the same sympathy and the offer of the same 
 privileges from ourselves. 
 
 LY: 
 
 The Old Catholic community in Austria has been 
 recognised by the State as a distinct religious associa- 
 tion, in accordance with the law of May 2oth, 1874.! 
 Its constitution provides for the presidency of a 
 Bishop, but no election has as yet taken place, not 
 from any indifference on the part of its members, but 
 on account of the difficulty of securing the stipend 
 required by law. Inthe mean time it has many of 
 the rights secured by law to the German body. The 
 Austrian Old Catholics have made great sacrifices, 
 and deserve great sympathy from us; which we hope 
 may be expressed in a practical manner. They have, 
 we believe, an important future before them, if rightly 
 guided. Wecannot, however, regard the organisation 
 in Austria as sufficiently tried and complete to 
 warrant a more formal relation on our part at the 
 present time. 
 
 ΝΕ 
 
 The same remark applies with even greater force 
 to the smaller groups of brave and earnest men of the 
 
 
 
 
 
 ‘Von Schulte, Der Althatholikisuits, p. 435. 
 
344 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 Latin races, driven under somewhat similar circum- 
 stances to associate themselves in separate congrega- 
 tions in Italy, France, Spain, and Portugal. We 
 sympathise with their efforts to free themselves from 
 the burden of unlawful terms of communion. We 
 have reason to believe that there are many who think 
 with them, but have not seen the way to follow the 
 outward steps which they have taken. We trust that 
 in time they may be enabled to adopt such sound 
 forms of doctrine and discipline and to secure such 
 Catholic organisation as will permit us to give them 
 a fuller recognition. We desire, in our outlook into 
 the future, to call to mind the well-known declaration 
 of the Gallican Clergy of 1862,! and also the advances 
 made by Archbishop Wake in correspondence with 
 the Doctors of the Sorbonne,” towards establishing 
 
 1 See Bossuet’s Défense de la Declaration du Clergé de 
 France, &c. 2 vols., 4to. Amsterdam, 1745, and Dupin’s 
 Manuel du Droit public eccléstastique francais, pp. 97-100, 
 ed. 5. Paris: Henri Plon, 1860. 
 
 2 Archbishop Wake wrote as follows to Mr. Beauvoir, on 
 November 18th, 1718, in regard to this correspondence :—“ If 
 ““ we could once divide the Gallican Church [from the Roman], a 
 “reformation in other matters would follow as a matter of 
 “ course. The scheme that seems to me most likely to prevail, 
 ““is,to agree in the independence (as to all matters of authority) 
 ‘“of every national Church on any others ; and in their right 
 “to determine all matters that arise within themselves ; and, 
 “for points of doctrine, to agree, as far as possible, in all 
 ‘“ articles of any moment (as in effect we already do, or easily 
 κε may); and, for other matters, to allowa difference till God shall 
 “‘ bring us to a union in those also. One only thing should be 
 “ὁ provided for, to purge out of the public offices of the Church 
 “ such things as hinder a perfect communion in the service of 
 “ the Church, that so, wherever any come from us to them or 
 “from them to us, we may all join together in Prayers and the 
 “Holy Sacraments with each other. In our Liturgy there is 
 “ nothing but what they allow, save the single rubric relating 
 “to the Eucharist ; in theirs nothing but what they agree may 
 ““ be laid aside, and yet the public offices be never the worse or 
 “more imperfect for the want of it. Such a scheme as this I 
 
Old Catholics and Others. 345 
 
 a basis for intercommunion between the Churches of 
 France and England. If some such principles 
 could now be revived, we have reason to believe that 
 they would be welcomed by many both in France 
 and Italy, and they might again form the basis of 
 hopeful negotiations. 
 
 In concluding this portion of our Report we feel it 
 our duty to express the opinion that the consecration, 
 by Bishops of our Communion, of a Bishop, to exer- 
 cise his functions in a foreign country, within the 
 limits of an ancient territorial jurisdiction and over 
 the natives of that country, is a step of the gravest 
 importance and fraught with enduring consequences, 
 the issues of which cannot be foreseen. Whilst the 
 right of Bishops of the Catholic Church to interpose 
 under conditions of extreme necessity has always 
 been acknowledged, we deprecate any action that 
 does not carefully regard primitive and established 
 principles of jurisdiction and the interests of the 
 whole Anglican Communion. 
 
 Wie 
 
 Lastly, the Committee have been asked at the last 
 moment to consider the subject of the orders of the 
 United Brethren, commonly called the Moravians. 
 At the last Conference a number of the Bishops 
 “were recommended to associate with themselves 
 “such learned persons as they might deem eminently 
 “qualified to assist them by their knowledge of the 
 
 “take to be a more proper ground of peace at the begininng 
 “ than to go to more particulars.” 
 
 The correspondence of Archbishop Wake with Mr. Beauvoir, 
 Dr. Dupin, Dr. P. Piers Girardin, and others, is printed in the 
 fourth Appendix to Dr. Maclaine’s translation of Mosheim’s 
 Church History, vol. vi., pp. 126, foll., London, 1828. The 
 above letter will be found in full on p. 172, and is quoted in Rev. 
 G. G. Perry’s History of the English Church, third period, 
 Ρ. 48, London, 1887. 
 
 Z 
 
346 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 “historical difficulties involved.”! These Bishops 
 have not been able to act upon this recommendation, 
 and no report is before the Conference. Your Com- 
 mittee, in the short time allowed them, have not 
 found it possible to inquire into the details of this 
 subject with such care as would enable them to 
 propose to the Conference any sufficient basis for the 
 expression of an authoritative opinion. 
 
 It must not, however, be overlooked that from 
 time to time, up to the present day, very friendly 
 relations have existed between Moravians and 
 members of our Communion. In their greatest 
 trials they have received from eminent English 
 Bishops and Churchmen the sympathy and support 
 due to a zealous body of Christians, imbued with a 
 primitive spirit, and claiming to possess a valid 
 Episcopate. 
 
 The labours of Moravian Missionaries are known 
 to all the world. We should therefore welcome any 
 clearer illustration of their history and actual status 
 on the part of their own divines. 
 
 The subjects committed to the consideration of 
 this Committee have embraced, as will be seen, a 
 very wide range of interests, and we have reluctantly 
 been compelled, on this account, to confine our 
 Report almost entirely to the bodies specified in the 
 terms of our commission. 
 
 Signed on behalf of the Committee, 
 
 E. HAROLD WINTON, 
 
 Chairman. 
 
 
 
 1 Supra, page 183. 
 
Eastern Churches. 347 
 
 
 
 No. 11.—EASTERN CHURCHES. 
 
 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO CON- 
 SIDER THE RELATION OF THE ANGLICAN 
 COMMUNION TO THE EASTERN CHURCHES. 
 
 
 
 YOUR Committee regard the friendly feelings 
 manifested towards our Church by the Orthodox 
 Eastern Communion as a matter for deep thankful- 
 ness. These feelings inspire the hope that at no 
 distant time closer relations may be established 
 between the two Churches. Your Committee, 
 however, are of opinion that any hasty or ill-con- 
 sidered step in this direction would only retard the 
 accomplishment of this hope. Our expectations of 
 nearer fellowship are founded upon the friendly tone 
 of the correspondence which the Archbishop of Can- 
 terbury and his predecessors have held from time te 
 time with Patriarchs of the Orthodox Church, and 
 upon the cordiality of the welcome given by the 
 Heads of that Church to Anglican Bishops and 
 Clergy, such as the Bishop of Gibraltar, who have 
 travelled in the East. Additional grounds of hope 
 are furnished by the visit of Archbishop? Lycurgus 
 to England in 1870, by the conversation which 
 passed between him and the present Bishop of 
 Winchester at Ely, by the words which Archbishop 
 
 
 
 1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
 
 Bishop of Winchester. Bishop of Limerick. 
 (Chairman). 9 Meath. 
 
 Bishop Blyth. 33 Springfield. 
 
 Bishop of Gibraltar. ἢ Travancore. 
 
 cf Iowa. 
 
 * Lycurgus, late Archbishop of Syra and Tenos. 
 Line 
 
348 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 Lycurgus used at the conclusion of the second 
 Conference held at Bonn ;! and by the request which 
 the Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem recently 
 addressed to the Archbishop of Canterbury, that the 
 Anglican Bishopric in Jerusalem should be re-con- 
 stituted, and that the head-quarters of the Bishop 
 should be placed in that city rather than at Beyrout 
 or elsewhere. 
 
 We reflect with thankfulness that there exist no 
 bars, such as are presented to communion with the 
 Latins by the formulated assertion of the infallibility 
 of the Church residing in the person of the Supreme 
 Pontiff, by the doctrine of the Immaculate Concep- 
 tion, and other novel dogmas imposed by the 
 decrees of later Councils. 
 
 We must congratulate the Christian world that, 
 through the research of a Greek Metropolitan, 
 literature has been lately enriched by the recovery 
 of an ancient document which throws unexpected 
 light upon the early development of ecclesiastical 
 organisation. 
 
 It would not be right, however, to disguise from 
 ourselves the hindrances which exist on either side. 
 The first and most formidable of these is the disputed 
 clause inserted in the Creed of Constantinople, 
 
 2 At the end of the Conference at Ely (1870), Archbishop 
 Lycurgus said :-— 
 
 “When I return to Greece I will say that the Church of 
 “England is not like other Protestant bodies. I will say that 
 “ΠΕ isa sound Catholic Church very like our own ; and I trust 
 “that by friendly discussion union between the two Churches 
 ““may be brought about.” 
 
 At the end of the Bonn Conference (1875), he said to 
 Dr. Von Dollinger :— 
 
 “In the name of all those of my own communion 1 thank 
 “you, Mr. President, for your marvellous efforts in the work of 
 “reuniting the several Churches, of bringing together again 
 “the so numerous divisions of the Rock of our Redeemer. 
 “Our joy is full; and there will be great joy in our homes 
 “also. We earnestly pray God for His further blessing.” 
 
Eastern Churches. 349 
 
 erroneously called the Nicene Creed, without any 
 Conciliar authority, by the Latin Church. This 
 clause, which has the prescription of centuries, and 
 is capable of being explained in an orthodox sense, it 
 may be very difficult to remove. Another barrier to 
 full understanding between the Orthodox Eastern 
 Church and ourselves would be the extreme im- 
 portance attached by that Church to trine immersion 
 in the rite of Baptism, which practice, however, there 
 is nothing to prevent our Church from formally 
 sanctioning. We, on the other hand, experience a 
 somewhat similar difficulty as regards the Eastern 
 rite of Confirmation, which we can hardly consider 
 equivalent to ours, inasmuch as it omits the im- 
 position of the Bishop’s hands, and is usually con- 
 ferred upon unconscious infants; yet we do not 
 regard this as requiring members of the Orthodox 
 Church to receive our Confirmation. It would be 
 difficult for us to enter into more intimate relations 
 with that Church so long as it retains the use of icons, 
 the invocation of the Saints, and the cultus of the 
 Blessed Virgin ; although it is but fair to state that 
 the Greeks, in sanctioning the use of pictorial repre- 
 sentations for the purpose of promoting devotion, 
 expressly disclaim the sin of idolatry, which they 
 conceive would attach to the bowing down before 
 sculptured or molten images. Moreover, the decrees 
 of the second Council of Nicaea, sanctioning the use 
 of icons, were framed in a spirit of reaction against 
 the rationalising measures, as they were regarded, of 
 the iconoclastic Emperors. The Greeks might be 
 reminded that the decrees of that Council, having 
 been deliberately rejected seven years afterwards by 
 the Council of Frankfort, and not having been 
 accepted by the Latin Church till after the lapse of 
 two centuries, and then only under Papal influence, 
 cannot be regarded as binding upon the Church. 
 Your Committee would impress upon their fellow- 
 Christians the propriety of abstaining from all efforts 
 
350 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 to induce individual members of the Orthodox 
 Eastern Church to leave their own communion. If 
 some be dissatisfied with its teachings or usages, and 
 find a lack of spiritual life in its worship, they should 
 be advised not to leave the Church of their baptism, 
 but by remaining in it to endeavour to become centres 
 of life and light to their own people; more especially 
 as the Orthodox Eastern Church has never committed 
 itself to any theory that would make it impossible to 
 reconsider and revise its standard and practice. 
 
 Your Committee think it desirable that the Heads 
 of that communion should be supplied with some 
 authoritative document setting forth the historical 
 facts relating to our orders and our position in the 
 Catholic Church; as much misconception appears stil! 
 prevail on this subject. Your Committee feel that 
 the position which England now occupies in Cyprus 
 and in Egypt places in our hands exceptional oppor- 
 tunities of elevating the moral and spiritual life of our 
 Eastern brethren. Especially may this be done by 
 introducing or promoting higher education: any 
 help given in this way we have reason to believe 
 would be warmly welcomed. We rejoice to know 
 that schools have lately been established at Constan- 
 tinople and elsewhere for the purpose of supplying 
 education to those who are in training for the ministry. 
 In the more general diffusion of knowledge amongst 
 the instructors of the people lies the best hope of that 
 mutual understanding and esteem for which the 
 Heads of the Orthodox Church have shown so much 
 desire. 
 
 Your Committee cannot be expected to deal 
 separately with the other Churches of the East, 
 among which the Armenian appears to be the largest 
 and most important. Approaches have been made 
 to us from time to time by Bishops and other repre- 
 sentatives of this communion, appealing for aid in 
 support of educational projects for the instruction of 
 their own people. The Armenian Church lies under 
 
Eastern Churches. 351 
 
 the imputation of heresy. But it has always 
 protested against this imputation, affirming the 
 charge to have arisen from a misconception of its 
 formularies. The departure from orthodoxy may, 
 perhaps, have been more apparent than real; and 
 the erroneous element in its creed appears now to 
 be gradually losing its hold upon the moral and 
 religious consciousness of the Armenian people. 
 
 In regard to other Eastern communities, such as 
 the Coptic, Abyssinian, Syrian, and Chaldean, your 
 Committee consider that our position in the East 
 involves some obligations And if these communities 
 have fallen into error, and show a lack of moral and 
 spiritual life, we must recollect that but for them the 
 light of Christianity in these countries would have 
 been utterly extinguished, and that they have suffered 
 for many centuries from cruel oppression and _per- 
 secution. If we should have opportunity, our aim 
 should be to improve their mental, moral, and 
 religious condition, and to induce them to return to 
 the unity of the faith without prejudice to their 
 liberty. This we take to be the purpose of the 
 Assyrian Mission set on foot by the late Archbishop 
 of Canterbury, and continued by his successor. 
 
 In conclusion, we would could call attention to the 
 fact that in the East advance is slow, and even in 
 the West we find differences perpetuate themselves, 
 owing to national peculiarities, hereditary prejudices, 
 and other causes, in spite of real wish for unity. We 
 think that Christians need to be cautioned against 
 impatience in expecting quick results. Such im- 
 patience argues imperfect trust in the ultimate ful- 
 filment of our Lord’s prayer for His people that they 
 “all may be ONE.” 
 
 Signed on behalf of the Committee, 
 
 E. HAROLD WINTON, 
 Chairman. 
 
352 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 No. 12.—AUTHORITATIVE STANDARDS. 
 
 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO 
 CONSIDER THE SUBJECT OF AUTHORITATIVE 
 STANDARDS OF DOCTRINE AND WORSHIP. 
 
 IN considering the subject of the Authoritative 
 Standards of Doctrine and Worship, which are the 
 primary means of securing internal union amongst 
 ourselves, and of setting forth our Faith before the 
 rest of Christendom, we acknowledge first of all, with 
 deep thankfulness to Almighty God, the vital and 
 growing unity of the great Communion to which we 
 belong. 
 
 We acknowledge also with the same heartfelt 
 thankfulness the increasing intercourse which is 
 taking place between our own Churches and other 
 Churches of Christendom, and the extension of our 
 own Communion into many non-Christian countries, 
 to which God has especially called us to minister by 
 the diffusion of the English-speaking race throughout 
 the worid. 
 
 The consideration of the new conditions thus 
 created seems to call for a careful statement of our 
 own position in regard to authoritative standards of 
 doctrine and worship. 
 
 1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
 Bishop of Ely (Chazrvman). Bishop of Meath. 
 
 » Aberdeen. » Nassau. 
 
 » Albany. ».Ἕ  Qu’Appelle. 
 », Arkansas. »  Rupertsland. 
 sje Derry: » Salisbury. 
 
 » Dover. 9» St. David’s. 
 ». Edinburgh. » Sydney. 
 
 » Grahamstown. >» | Western New York. 
 Bishop in Japan. 
 
Authoritative Standards. 353 
 
 This statement is divided into three parts :—first, 
 as to standards of doctrine and worship which unite 
 us with the great Body of the Church Universal ; 
 second, as to those which regulate our internal union 
 or should be imposed upon Missionary Churches ; 
 third, as to a manual of doctrine for general use, but 
 which should not be authoritative. 
 
 ΤΕ 
 
 We recognise before all things, and amidst all 
 discouragements and divisions, the great bond of an 
 essential unity which exists amongst all Christians 
 who own the one Lord Jesus Christ as their Head 
 and King, who accept the paramount authority of 
 Holy Scripture, who confess the doctrine of the 
 Nicene Faith, and who acknowledge one Baptism 
 into the Name of the Blessed Trinity. 
 
 But we cannot regard this measure of unity as ade- 
 quately fulfilling our Lord’s prayer that His followers 
 should be one, and we feel, therefore, that it is our 
 duty to explain our own principles as_ regards 
 standards of doctrine and worship, in the humble 
 hope of preparing the way, so far as in us lies, for the 
 reunion of Christendom. 
 
 We have a duty to the Church Universal ; we have 
 a duty also towards those who are now distinctly 
 within our own Communion or who may hereafter be 
 so closely allied to it as to form practically one body 
 with ourselves. 
 
 As in former Conferences,! we declare that we 
 continue “united under one divine Head in the 
 fellowship of the one Catholic and Apostolic Church, 
 holding the one faith revealed in Holy Writ, defined 
 in the Creeds, maintained by the primitive Church,” 
 and “affirmed by the undisputed” Q£cumenical 
 “ Councils.” 
 
 
 
 1 Supra, pp. 97 and 116. 
 
334 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 In defining our own position more explicitly we 
 recognise, with the general consent of the Fathers 
 that the canonical books of the Old and New Testa- 
 ment “contain all things necessary to salvation,” and 
 are the rule and ultimate standard of all Christian 
 doctrine. 
 
 In addition to the Creed commonly called the 
 Nicene Creed, to which we have already referred, we, 
 as a part of the Western Church, have a common 
 inheritance in the “ Apostles’ Creed,” confessed by us 
 all in the Sacrament of Baptism. In like manner 
 we accept the hymn Quzcungue vult, whether or not 
 recited in the public worship of our Churches, as 
 resting upon certain warrant of Scripture, and as 
 most useful, both at home and in our missions, in 
 ascertaining and defining the fundamental mysteries 
 of the Holy Trinity, and of the Incarnation of our 
 Blessed Lord; and thus guarding believers from 
 lapsing into heresy. 
 
 In relation to the doctrine of the Procession of the 
 Holy Spirit, while we believe that there is no funda- 
 mental diversity of faith between the Churches of the 
 East and West,! we recognise the historical fact that 
 the clause Fz/zogue makes no part of the Nicene 
 Symbol as set forth by the authority of the undivided 
 Church. 
 
 We are of opinion that, as opportunity arises, it 
 would be well to revise the English version of the 
 Nicene Creed and of the Quzcungue vult. 
 
 We suggest to the Conference that the President 
 be requested to appoint a Committee for this purpose. 
 
 
 
 ' The Committee beg to refer, in illustration of this state- 
 ment, to the important propositions, accepted by Members both 
 of the Eastern and Western Churches, which were agreed to 
 at the Reunion Conference held at Bonn, August 16th, 1875, 
 under the Presidency of Dr. J. J. I. von Dé6llinger. See the 
 Report of the Proceedings, &c., with a Preface by Dr. Liddon.— 
 Pickering : London, 1876, pp. 103, 104. 
 
Authoritative Standards. a5 
 
 With regard to the authority of the Gtcumenical 
 Councils, our Communion has always recognised the 
 decisions of the first four Councils on matters of 
 faith, nor is there any point of dogma in which it 
 disagrees with the teaching of the fifth and sixth. 
 
 The second Council of Nicazeza commonly called the 
 seventh Council is, however, not undisputed, and 
 while we recognise the historical circumstances of the 
 eight century, which naturally led to the strong 
 protest against iconoclasm made there, it is our duty 
 to assert that our Church has never accepted the 
 teaching of that Council in reference to the venera- 
 tion of sacred pictures. 
 
 Il. 
 
 From the standards of doctrine of the Universal 
 Church which the whole Anglican Communion has 
 always accepted,’ we now pass to those standards of 
 doctrine and worship which are specially the heritage 
 of the Church of England, and which are, to a greater 
 or less extent, received by all her sister and daughter 
 
 ' “Tet Preachers take care that they never teach anything 
 in a sermon which they wish to be religiously held and believed 
 by the people, except what is in accord with the doctrine of the 
 Old or New Testament, and what the Catholic Fathers and 
 ancient Bishops have collected from the same doctrine.”— 
 Canon of 1571, concerning Preachers. 
 
 “Such person ἄς. * * shall not in anywise have authority 
 or power to order, determine or adjudge any matter or cause to 
 be heresie, but onely such as heretofore have been determined, 
 ordered or adjudged to be heresie, by the authority of the 
 Canonical Scriptures or by the first four general Councils or 
 any of them, or by any other general Council wherein the same 
 was declared heresie by the express and plain words of the 
 said Canonical Scriptures, or such as hereafter shall be ordered 
 judged or determined to be heresie, by the High Court of 
 Parliament of this realm, with the assent of the Clergy in their 
 Convocation ; anything in this Act contained to the contrary 
 notwithstanding.” 
 
 1 Eviz.1 § XXXVI. 
 
356 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 Churches. These are the Prayer Book with its 
 Catechism, the Ordinal, and the XXXIX. Articles 
 of Religion. 
 
 All these are subscribed by our clergy at ordination 
 or admission to office, but the XX XIX. Articles are 
 not imposed upon any person as a condition of 
 communion. With respect to the Prayer Book and 
 Articles, we do not consider it an indispensable 
 condition of inter-communion that they should be 
 everywhere accepted in their original form, or that 
 the interpretation put upon them by local courts or 
 provincial tribunals should be received by every 
 branch or province of the Anglican Communion. In 
 illustration of this principle, we would refer to the 
 differences from the English Order of the Admini- 
 stration of the Holy Communion which have long 
 existed in the Scottish and American Churches, and 
 to the facts that the XX XIX. Articles of Religion 
 were only accepted in America in the year 1801 with 
 some variations, and in Scotland in 1804, and that 
 the Church of Ireland as well as the Church in 
 America, has introduced some modifications into the 
 Book of Common Prayer. 
 
 We, however, strongly deprecate any further 
 material variation in the text of the existing Sacra- 
 mental offices of the Church, or of the Ordinal, than 
 is at present recognised among us, unless with the 
 advice of some Conference or Council representing 
 the whole Communion. 
 
 With regard to the daily offices and such further 
 forms of service as the exigencies of different 
 Churches or countries may demand, we feel that they 
 may be safely left for the present to the action of the 
 Bishops of each Province. We do not demand a 
 rigid uniformity, but we desire to see the prevalence 
 of a spirit of mutual and sympathetic concession, 
 which will prevent the growth of substantial 
 divergences between different portions of our 
 communion. With regard to those Dioceses which 
 are not yet united into Provinces, we recommend 
 
Authoritative Standards. 357 
 
 that the Bishop of the Diocese should not act in the 
 way of revision of, or additions to, such offices 
 without the advice of the Archbishop of Canterbury ; 
 or in the case of foreign Missionary jurisdictions of 
 the American Church, without the advice of its 
 Presiding Bishop. 
 
 With regard to the XXXIX. Articles of Religion 
 we thank God for the wisdom which guided our 
 fathers, in difficult times, in framing statements of 
 doctrine, for the most part accurate in their language 
 and reserved and moderate in their definitions. Even 
 when speaking most strongly and under the pressure 
 of great provocation, our Communion has generally 
 refrained from anathemas upon opponents, and we 
 desire in this to follow those who have preceded us in 
 the faith. The omission of a few clauses in a few of 
 the Articles would render the whole body free from 
 any imputation of injustice or harshness toward those 
 who differ from us. At the same time we feel that 
 the Articles are not all of equal value, that they are 
 not, and do not profess to be, a complete statement 
 of Christian doctrine, and that, from the temporary 
 and local circumstances under which they were 
 composed, they do not always meet the requirements 
 of Churches founded under wholly different conditions. 
 
 Some modification of these Articles may therefore 
 naturally be expected on the part of newly-constituted 
 Churches, and particularly in non-Christian lands. 
 But we consider that it should be a condition of the 
 recognition of such Churches as in complete inter- 
 communion with our own, and especially of their 
 receiving from us our episcopal succession, that we 
 should first receive from them satisfactory evidence 
 that they hold substantially the same type of doctrine 
 with ourselves. More particularly we are of opinion 
 that the Clergy of such Churches should accept 
 articles in accordance with the positive statements 
 of our own standards of doctrine and worship, 
 particularly on the substance and rule of faith, on 
 the state and redemption of man on the office of the 
 
358 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 Church, and on the Sacraments and other special 
 ordinances of our holy religion. 
 
 iid: 
 
 In the foregoing resolutions we have confined our- 
 selves to a consideration of existing authoritative 
 formularies, and to such as may serve the like use 
 under particular conditions. We are unable, after 
 careful consideration of the subject, to recommend 
 that any new declaration of doctrine should, at the 
 present time, be put forth by authority. We are, 
 however, of opinion that the time has come when an 
 effort should be made to compose a manual for 
 teachers which should contain a summary of the 
 doctrine of the Church, as generally received among 
 us. Such a manual would draw its statements of 
 doctrine from authoritative documents already exist- 
 ing, but would exhibit them in a completer and more 
 systematic form. It would, also, naturally include 
 some explanation of the Services and ceremonies of 
 the Church. The whole might be preceded by a 
 historical sketch of the position and claims of our 
 Communion. 
 
 Such a Manual would, we believe, be of great 
 service both in maintaining the type of doctrine to 
 which we have referred, and in enabling members of 
 other Churches to form a just opinion of our doctrines 
 and worship. We suggest that His Grace the 
 President be requested to nominate three or more 
 Bishops to undertake such a work, and, if it seem 
 good to him and to the other Archbishops, Metro- 
 politans, and presiding Bishops of the Church, that 
 they. give the work, when completed, the sanction of | 
 their imprimatur. We do not suggest that the 
 Conference should be asked to undertake this work, 
 or that it should beregarded as an authoritative 
 standard of the Church. 
 
 Signed on behalf of the Committee, 
 ALWYNE ELY, Chatrman. 
 
Statement in regard to Dr. Cummins. 359 
 
 XXXVI. 
 
 A Statement in regard to Ordinations or Consecrations 
 performed by Dr. Cummins, or others claiming 
 Ordination or Consecration from him, prepared 
 by the presiding Bishop of the American Church, 
 the Right Rev. John Williams, D.D., LL.D. 
 
 “Bishop Cummins was consecrated as Assistant- 
 Bishop of Kentucky, November 15th, 1866. In the 
 autumn of 1873, he abandoned the Church, and 
 announced his intention of setting up for himself. 
 On the 12th of December, 1873, the Bishop of Ken- 
 tucky (Dr. Benjamin B. Smith) withdrew authority 
 from him, and inhibited him from the exercise of 
 Episcopal dutuies,! nder, and in terms of, Title I., 
 Canon 15, Sec. 5. 
 
 Soon after this, probably on the day following, 
 Bishop Cummins, assisted by four presbyters, went 
 through some form of Consecration, by which he 
 declared that the Rev. Charles E. Cheney, D.D., was 
 elevated to the Episcopate. 
 
 We have considered that in this, so called, Conse- 
 cration, four things must be taken into account—(1) 
 the condition of the Consecrator; (2) the act itself; 
 (3) the service used; and (4) the condition of the 
 person said to be consecrated. 
 
 1.—Bishop Cummins had not been deposed, and 
 therefore his act, however inconvenient, cannot, so 
 far as he is concerned, be counted as having no force. 
 He was, however, acting in the face of canonical 
 obligations. 
 
 
 
 An Assistant-Bishop shall perform such Episcopal duties, 
 and exercise such Episcopal authority in the Diocese, as the 
 Bishop shall assign to him.—Title I., Canon 15, Sec. 5. 
 
360 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 2.—The Consecration itself is, clearly, utterly un- 
 canonical, though, of course, not, fer se, invalid. 
 3.—How far the Ordinal was used, whether any 
 τς form was employed, we do not know. We 
 do know, from open and clear declarations of avowed 
 principles, that there was not even a pretence of 
 ordaining and consecrating a Bishop in the meaning 
 and intention of the Ordinal. We do not, of course, 
 mean in this to affirm that a secretly! held and 
 unexpressed intention ot to do what the service pur- 
 ported to do, would invalidate the act. In this 
 instance, the purpose zot to do what the service 
 purported to do was openly declared. Under such 
 circumstances, if the Ordinal were used, the use of it 
 was nothing short of a mockery. 
 4.—As to the condition of Dr. Cheney, he was at 
 that time under sentence of deposition, which sentence 
 had been canonically pronounced upon him years 
 before by his Diocesan, the Bishop of Illinois (Dr. 
 
 
 
 1In referring to the intention of Bishop Cummins, the 
 Bishops beg to be understood as not implying that an Officer 
 of any Religious Body can invalidate his official act, by a lack 
 of intention to use the Offices of that Body for the purposes for 
 which they were authorised. This is a different case. Bishop 
 Cummins had ceased to be an Officer of the Church in America. 
 He was acting for himself. And he not only did not intend, 
 but by his own statement Ae intended not to consecrate Dr. 
 Cheney to the Episcopal Order. Proof of which is found in 
 the subjoined extracts from his own sermon delivered on the 
 occasion of the so-called consecration of Dr. Cheney. 
 
 “There is no evidence from Scripture that the Apostles 
 
 “ established the Episcopate as an order in the Ministry distinct 
 ‘from and superior in rank to the Presbyterate. If there is to 
 “be found any trace of Episcopacy in the New Testament, it is 
 “only as an office exercised by one who was himself a fellow- 
 “presbyter, commissioned or set apart for the exercise of such 
 ““powers as were rendered necessary by the exigencies of the 
 “Church, and for the promotion of its well-being by a system 
 “ of general oversight and superintendence. 
 
 “What then is the true position of the Episcopate as it is 
 “retained in this reformed Episcopal Church, following Holy 
 “Scripture and the practice of the early Church? 
 
Statement in regard to Dr. Cummins. 361 
 
 Whitehouse). In regard to the capacity, so to speak, 
 of a deposed presbyter to be elevated to the Episco- 
 pate (which was the crucial question touching Dr. 
 Cheney), we found that in the well-known case of 
 Timothy Aelurus, the Bishops of Cappadocia, writing 
 to the Emperor Leo, asserted that Timothy was, as a 
 deposed presbyter, incapable “ad majorem currere 
 dignitatem” (Labbe and Cossart’s Concilia, vol. iv., 
 col. 956). Wealso found the Bishops of Galatia, writ- 
 ing to the same Emperor, that a deposed presbyter 
 was incapable ‘ad majorem gradum venire” (ut sup., 
 col. 970). 
 
 We could not but regard this view as entirely 
 reasonable and just. For, hold as strongly as we 
 may to the indelibility of Holy Orders, grant as fully 
 as we may that acts done by one, who having been 
 deposed from an office still continues to do acts per- 
 taining only to that office, though they are irregular, 
 may be valid ; it surely does not follow, that such a 
 person is capable of receiving additional power or of 
 
 “rt. It is not a continuation of the Apostolate. Bishops are 
 *‘not the successors of the Apostles. The Apostles of our Lord 
 ““could have no successors, as their office was of special 
 “appointment by Christ Himself, endowed with miraculous 
 “powers by the Holy Ghost, and could be filled only by those 
 “‘ who were ‘eye-witnesses of the majesty,’ and of the ‘sufferings 
 “of Jesus.’ Their Office ceased with their lives, and Holy 
 “Scripture contains not a suggestion indicating that others 
 ‘could ever perpetuate their Office in the Church. 
 
 “2. The Episcopate is not the depository of the Faith, the 
 “ Divinely-constituted body to which are committed all gifts of 
 “grace, as the sole channel through which they can be dis- 
 “sensed. Holy Scripture warrants us in rejecting such teaching 
 “as utterly antagonistic to the very spirit and essence of the 
 ** Gospel of the Son of God. 
 
 “2, The Episcopate is not an ordinance of Apostolic institu- 
 “tion, but it was adopted by the post-Apostolic Church as the 
 “development of the practice or custom first suggested by the 
 “Apostles, in delegating to certain of their fellow-labourers 
 “among the Presbyters the oversight or superintendence of the 
 “ Churches in certain districts temporarily.” 
 
 2A 
 
362 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 being elevated to a higher grade in the ministry. 
 The contrary conclusion would seem to be the more 
 reasonable one, especially when fortified as it is by 
 the foregoing facts. 
 
 Considering, therefore, (1) the condition of the only 
 person claiming the Episcopate who acted in the so- 
 called Consecration ; (2) the extreme irregularity of 
 the act itself, in performing which there was only one 
 Bishop—and he the one just spoken of—present ; (3) 
 the fact that presbyters were associated with him on 
 the avowed ground that they were just as competent 
 to act as a Bishop; (4) that we know not what service 
 was used ; (5) that ifthe Ordinal were used zw verbis 
 et actibus tpsissimis, it was still used not only with 
 the secret intention, but with the avowed purpose, of 
 not doing what it intended should be done; (6) that 
 on grounds of reason and of precedent, we were 
 compelled to regard Dr. Cheney as incapable of 
 being elevated to the Episcopate; we were, in a 
 manner, forced to conclude that the act of Consecra- 
 tion, so called, of Dr. Cheney, was zfso facto, null and 
 void. 
 
 But, further, on the 24th of February, 1876, Dr. 
 Cummins and Dr. Cheney, assisted by one Methodist 
 bishop, one Methodist minister, two Presbyterian 
 ministers, and six members of the so-called “ Re- 
 formed Episcopal Church,” went through some form 
 of consecration, by which they declared that the 
 Rev. W. R. Nicholson, D.D., was elevated to the 
 Episcopate. 
 
 The same questions that came up in connection 
 with Dr. Cheney’s so-called Consecration arise here. 
 It is enough, however, to say, in addition to what has 
 been already said—-(1) that the condition of the so- 
 called Consecrator had been changed—and for the 
 worse—by the fact that on the 24th day of June, 1874, 
 Dr. Cummins had been deposed by the Presiding 
 Bishop, with the consent of a majority of the House 
 of Bishops; (2) that the probabilities of an insufficient 
 
Statement in regard to Dr. Cummins. 5363 
 
 service and form are greatly increased by the char- 
 acter and positions of those whose assistance he 
 employed ; and (3) that Dr. Nicholson had been 
 canonically deposed several months previous to this, 
 so-called, Consecration. Our conclusion, therefore, 
 as to him, was the same as that to which we had 
 before come in the case of Dr. Cheney. 
 
 These two Consecrations, so called, are the only 
 ones at which Dr. Cummins ever officiated ; and all 
 later ones, as well as all Ordinations of presbyters 
 and deacons, in what is known as the “ Reformed 
 Episcopal Church,” depend on them. For the 
 reasons then, above given—without asserting that no 
 other reasons have weighed with individual Bishops— 
 the Bishops in the United States always ordain those 
 who apply to be received from, what is commonly 
 called, the “Cummins Schism,” into the Church.” 
 
 At a meeting of the American Bishops present at 
 the Lambeth Conference, the above statement of the 
 Presiding Bishop was adopted as the statement of 
 the Bishops present, and ordered to be presented to 
 the Conference with the addition of the appended 
 note, on page 360. 
 
 A. CLEVELAND COXE, 
 WM. CROSWELL DOANE, 
 
 GEORGE F. SEYMOUR. 
 
 Committee on behalf of the 
 American Bishops. 
 
364 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 No. XXXVII. (See page 46.) 
 
 Sermon preached by the Archbishop of York, in St. 
 Paul’s Cathedral, on Saturday, July 28, 1888. 
 
 “ For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the 
 manifestation of the sons of God.”—RoM. viii. 19. 
 
 THE Apostle in these grand chapters realises the 
 coming of Christ as a power in the world. Christi- 
 anity is not, with the Apostle, a saving truth, but a 
 saving power which Christ has brought into the 
 world. In chapter vii. he sees man divided and 
 distracted, with light enough to see the right, but 
 with will too weak to stand firm in it ; and then the 
 greatness of the deliverance of the human will from 
 the power of sin through Christ is contrasted with 
 it. “QO wretched man that Iam! Who shall deliver 
 me from the body of this death? I thank God 
 through Jesus Christ our Lord” (vil. 24, 25). Law 
 and peace have come through Him, and the quicken- 
 ing of the mortal body through the in-dwelling Spirit. 
 Sin is subdued and men are made children of God; 
 and if children then heirs; heirs of God, and joint 
 heirs with Christ (viii. 16,17). But it is impossible 
 for him not to contrast this ideal of freedom with 
 the continuing sufferings of the present time. The 
 creation is still waiting for a redemption, of which 
 man shall be, in a measure, the instrument. The 
 present suffering may well be borne, through the 
 strength of the hope that is before us. Rising to a 
 sublimer height of diction, the Apostle exclaims that 
 “ The earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for 
 the manifestation of the sons of God” (111. 19). 
 
 The Greek word used is a picture in itself. It is 
 the expectation of a man with head erect, looking 
 out afar towards the source from which the succour 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 365 
 
 is tocome. It presents to the eye the waiting of all 
 creatures for the manifestation, or further work of 
 the children of God; groaning meanwhile and travail- 
 ing in pain. We ourselves who have received the 
 Spirit groan with the pain of waiting for the complete 
 redemption in us. “We are saved, indeed, in the 
 way of hope” (viii. 24), for we still wait in patience. 
 Persecution, temptation, the falling away of many, 
 the martyrdom of many, the turning away of the 
 stream of grace from whole districts and churches, 
 leaving a barren wilderness in place of the dews and 
 sweet pastures of the Gospel. For this consummation 
 we pray for the complete fulfilment; but we know 
 not what to pray for as we ought, blindly stretching 
 forwards towards complete redemption. 
 
 The Spirit helps our prayers, and “with groanings 
 which cannot be uttered,” with yearnings within our 
 souls to which we could give no adequate expres- 
 sion, stretches forth towards the complete revelation, 
 towards complete love, clearer knowledge, deeper 
 peace. 
 
 Thus in the time of St. Paul the creation stood in 
 expectation, with head erect, with far-off look, waiting 
 for the dawn of that day which should make her 
 deliverance through Christ complete. St. Paul knew 
 not what would follow, that after eighteen centuries 
 the expectant creation should still so stand, waiting 
 for deliverance. Still the world is full of misery ; 
 still it waits for redemption: it is as far off from 
 peace as ever. Strife and struggle, pain and death, 
 are inscribed upon the world’s foundation-stones. 
 They are older than the fall of man. Long before 
 man lived to be tempted and to fall, we find their 
 history in the stone-book of creation. 
 
 He who subjected the creature (creation) to vanity, 
 to a progress by constant struggle and death towards 
 a higher condition, in which life, and then man and 
 self-consciousness and sin and the great redemption 
 would come to pass, knew His own purpose in so 
 
366 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 doing. The creation was made subject to vanity, 
 that is, to constant change. But He who so made it 
 knew the issue. He subjected the same in hope. 
 Only in the way of hope can we yet understand the 
 great story of the creation. 
 
 St. Paul describes three stages of progress. Until 
 the time of redemption, the whole creation groaned 
 and travailed; and the growth and entombment of 
 animal races, the geologic changes (some gradual, 
 some paroxysmal), the appearance of man, the rise 
 and ruin of Empires, the civilisations that bloomed 
 and died down into desolation were but parts of its 
 torments. There came, secondly, the time in which 
 Paul writes, when the way of holiness and love was 
 opened out, and new strength given to obey God. 
 
 And now the Spirit helps the redeemed to pray 
 for the last period, that of complete deliverance ; and 
 still they know not fully what to pray for as they 
 ought. And this last stage of waiting has been made 
 bitter by the contamination of the Church itself by 
 vanity ; that is, by strife and disunion, and loss of 
 love. Already in St. Paul’s time, strife was not 
 unknown. He did not see “ Diocletian’s fiery sword 
 work busy as the lightning;” nor the Asiatic Churches 
 of the Apocalypse swept away by Mahometan swords ; 
 nor the apathy and faithlessness in the Church itself; 
 nor the corruptions of practice which at times have 
 obscured the faith, still held in words and still pro- 
 fessed. 
 
 We have waited nearly two thousand years, and 
 the language held by those who have lost faith is 
 that they can wait no more; that the power of Christ 
 is no more seen. “ When the Hebrews,” says one 
 of these writers, “ were on their way to the promised 
 land, they perceived that God was with them. God 
 had spoken and had said, ‘It lies before you’; and 
 by night a cloud of fire kindled and marched in their 
 van. Now the celestial light is extinct. We are not 
 quite sure that we have God over our heads. We 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 367 
 
 possess no other light but our understanding, and 
 with this glimmering guidance we must direct our- 
 selves through the night. Oh! that we could still 
 be sure that there was a promised land; that others 
 besides us would reach it; that this desert would 
 end in something. This certainty is taken from us; 
 and yet we advance continually, pushed forward by 
 an indefatigable hope.”! 
 
 Beyond doubt, if the power of the Lord is gone, all 
 is gone. He is not a doctrine; but a power. Sur- 
 rounded by the sick and maimed, He heals them. 
 When He speaks of the Divine Law He does not 
 fear to complete and enlarge it. What is the power 
 which enables men to live no longer to themselves ? 
 “The love of Christ constraineth us,” replies St. Paul; 
 and the word “constraineth” denotes a real com- 
 pelling force. 
 
 Examine the history of the Church for the first 
 century, from the Day of Pentecost onwards. The 
 records are scanty; but the world vibrated to the 
 tread of that power. Historians hardly mention the 
 name of Christ ; but the power is working. If it were 
 indeed true that the power had spent itself ; that 
 Christianity, like the moon among planets, were a spent 
 region,—airless, waterless, lifeless;—we should seek 
 perforce another guide. But is itso? Gathered here 
 from all corners of the earth, we ought to be able to 
 find an answer. Has material civilisation supplanted 
 faith? Let brothers answer from America, Australia, 
 and New Zealand. They are colonies of yesterday : 
 their first years were as always a struggle for bread. 
 At first they gave refuge to our criminal class. They 
 did not start with all the apparatus of a traditional 
 religion. Now all are the scene of flourishing churches. 
 A Christian zeal more fruitful, in reference to popula- 
 tion, by far than our own, has grown up on the soil. 
 The feeling that civilisation is in itself sufficient for 
 
 
 
 i Guyan, “ Irreligion de l’Avenir,” p. 337. 
 
368 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 human progress without religion, finds no counten- 
 ance from this last chapter of the world’s history. 
 The complaint now is not that the voice of religion is 
 not heard ; but rather that the voices of jarring creeds 
 aretoomany. The air is torn with the jangling bells 
 of many churches. 
 
 Apply what test you will: the test of numbers ; 
 of holy works ; of saintly souls ; Christian progress is 
 advancing, not receding. Missions have done more 
 in this century than ever before. In a word, that 
 thought which underlies St. Paul’s account—namely, 
 that creation stood waiting for its own final redemp- 
 tion, of which man should be the instrument, need 
 not be abandoned now on the ground that man no 
 longer shares the Divine strength. 
 
 Is it then true, that the power of man is or ever 
 can be able to work out, by Divine aid, the redemp-— 
 tion of creation ? 
 
 Two lines of conquest over the powers of dark- 
 ness go on together: the one overcoming physical 
 obstacles, and the other spiritual. The physical pro- 
 gress moves at an increasing rate. It began far back 
 in history ; and depends on the mental energies of 
 man. Even the Syrian desert is not mere sand and 
 rock, but consists of excellent soil, desert only by 
 reason of man’s neglect. The barren sides of Lebanon 
 have once had beautiful terraces in high cultivation. 
 The terraces remain, but the culture has ceased with 
 man’s apathy or relapse towards barbarism. In all 
 civilised countries the soil is useful exactly in the 
 degree in which man’s energy defends it from return- 
 ing to wildness. Modern discoveries have in two 
 ways lengthened life: by preserving health on one 
 side, and by crowding into a given time far more 
 achievement. 
 
 We, who could not be heard for 100 feet, can now 
 speak under the ocean 3,000 miles. We can go and 
 return in a single day over distances which to our 
 great grandfathers would require a week ; and when 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 369 
 
 we think of what are called the Miracles of Science, 
 we are exhilarated by the conviction that the dis- 
 coveries of the next decade are likely to be more in 
 number, and more wonderful than those of the last 
 decade, over which we have not yet ceased to be 
 astonished. All these conquests are gifts of God to 
 man, and obtained through man. They are poured 
 out profusely ; and at the same time they are educat- 
 ing the race that discovers them into higher skill ; 
 and the race which produces more Newtons, and 
 Watts and Nasmyths, more Harveys and Pasteurs, 
 will become the channel of a greater flow of benefi- 
 cent inventions. 
 
 The other road of progress is the spiritual. On 
 that road the pace is slower, the results more unequal, 
 and there are intervals of heartbreaking failure, and 
 retrogression. And yet the gifts of God are great. 
 They cannot be overlooked or denied ; and they de- 
 pend upon the action of man, on the vigour of his 
 faith, on the completeness of his devotion. “ How 
 shall they believe in Him of whom they have not 
 heard ; and how shall they hear without a preacher.” 
 The Most High speaks no more to us in prophetic 
 vision, or by a voice from Heaven. He inspires souls 
 with the power of His spirit; He accumulates, if I 
 may say so, in the vessel of man the Divine electric 
 fire through which spiritual work must be done. 
 There is no other way in the present course of His 
 working. If there are no men of faith, neither faith 
 nor the fruits of faith can be upon the earth. When 
 we are twitted with the languid life of the Christian 
 Churches, as compared with the splendid activity and 
 performance of science, the inference is not that there 
 is no longer any guidance, for there is much; but 
 that men who profess to be Christian show a languid 
 and intermittent life, a hypothetical belief, instead of 
 the Apostles’ categorical conviction; a perpetual com- 
 promise with modern views ; an eyesight made false 
 and double by the endeavour to work for double 
 
370 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 ends. How shall such an engine accomplish a sub- 
 stantial share in the great reform and progress which 
 it is at once the privilege and the duty of the Christian 
 Church to carry on? The spiritual progress has 
 never preserved in past centuries a steady and equal 
 pace. No period of twenty years has ever equalled 
 the grand outpouring of life of the first twenty years 
 after the Resurrection. 
 
 No century has been like the first. In the seventh 
 century, churches that had once been faithful, had 
 become deserts, sunless and dewless; fit only, as it 
 seemed, to be visited with the destroying swords of 
 Mohammed. But the law has always been the same. 
 Churches have prospered when peopled by faithful 
 men, they have languished or died when faith has 
 languished and sin has paralysed the will. “The 
 river of grace” never runs dry it is true; but it often 
 changes its course to water new districts, and leaves 
 in its old channel nothing but arid sands. Faith will 
 never be extinct; but it is not tied to any of the 
 places which it enlightens; it leaves behind it a 
 frightful night to those who have despised the day, 
 and it carries its rays to purer eyes. 
 
 Let this be the last word which we all carry away 
 from this our conference. Christ isa power; a power 
 of faith and love, which wrought the salvation of the 
 human race. He comes to us and imparts to us His 
 nature; all the stages of his earthly history are re- 
 peated in us: the tender infant birth of faith, the 
 growth to perfect manhood, the temptations and the 
 resistance and self-denial, the crucifixion of the old, 
 and the resurrection to the new life, and the affections 
 set thereafter upon things in heaven. If this union is 
 real, if we have done nothing to weaken it, we are 
 like Him; we are of Him; weare one with Him, and 
 His power is with us. There is no other source of 
 strength. And on the other hand, a nature so united 
 
 1 Fenelon. 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 371 
 
 to the Lord cannot be hid, but must be strong and 
 prevail, and a Church where such men are found 
 must needs abound with the fruits of grace. To us, 
 if the Apostle is right, the true progress of the world 
 is committed, and the world is waiting even now for 
 the manifestation of the sons of God. We turn from 
 contemplating with pride the growth of churches, the 
 number of chief pastors added to our counsels, the 
 yearning after closer union one with another, to admit 
 once more the fact that each of us stands with regard 
 to his fellows, quite alone, either gifted with the spirit 
 of Christ, and if so, a storehouse of Divine power for 
 good ; or else having a name to live, whilst he has 
 lost hold of the love of Christ, and then nothing can 
 proceed from him, in whom is neither savour, nor 
 will, nor strength. 
 
 Now the sins and miseries which yet remain cannot 
 be overcome by mere civilisation. The tools she can 
 use suit not this work; the results she arrives at in- 
 tensify the evils. Think of a single day in London: 
 how human creatures groan and travail, knowing as 
 yet no redemption by Divine or by any love, from sin 
 and sorrow. The night closes over the day of struggle, 
 but rest comes not with the dark. Men watch round 
 death-beds, and while they sorrow feel that death, at 
 least, is rest. Houseless wanderers are fortunate who 
 can sleep unobserved under a tree ; some of them (I 
 know it) have learned to sleep upon their feet, to 
 whom the doorstep is forbidden, who are only allowed 
 such sleep as can consist with “moving on.” The 
 servants of pleasure are still astir; the pleasure that 
 is made up of drink and shameless appetite, which 
 must not be called brutal in justice to the brute. 
 Under cover of night, loves that are worse than 
 hatreds work themselves out. Between the loud roar 
 of day and the dull throbbing of night there is a 
 difference, but sin never ceases in this crowd of four 
 millions for whom Jesus did once surely die. Con- 
 sider, too, the poverty as well as the sin: wealth was 
 
372 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 never greater; poverty was never more stark and 
 grinding. Westwards there are streets and squares 
 of palaces, charged to the full with every contrivance 
 of luxury, such as no medizval queen could have 
 dreamed of. Eastward there are dwellings far more 
 numerous, upon which none of those luxurious in- 
 ventions have lighted. In many of them a few help- 
 less, shivering women try to keep continuous the 
 miserable meals which barely stave off starvation 
 upon the few daily pence which their work is judged 
 to be worth. Our boasted progress has made both 
 the wealth and the poverty. If the progress become 
 more rapid, we do not see why the riches may not 
 grow greater and the poverty more deadly. We com- 
 passionate the poor; we are indignant with those 
 who stand next them and do not seem to help; we 
 wax angry with what is called the “ sweating system,” 
 which, after all, is sometimes an attempt to brigade 
 and organise in workshops a number of helpless crea- 
 tures whose labour is so little worth that if it were 
 not organised it would earn no wage at all. We have 
 been considering, amongst other topics, the Socialism 
 which is now making itself felt in every country. 
 Socialism is not so much a system or a discovery, as 
 an outcry of hungry despair. Its idea is that nothing 
 can be worse than the present social state, and that 
 any change, even through a universal conflagration 
 of that system, must be an improvement, for what 
 exists is evil beyond conception. Many of its reme- 
 dies are childish and contradictory. A revival of old 
 experiments that have failed ; abolish heirship and 
 succession ; organise workshops without the power to 
 dismiss useless workmen, and so on. Mere hunger 
 lies at the root of Socialism. 
 
 The terrible element of this question is that our 
 present progress aggravates both extremes ; doubling 
 the pile of the rich, and halving the wages of an in- 
 creasing number of the poor. The quick progress of 
 science does not help it. Against the slower progress 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 373 
 
 of spiritual improvement it is the chief resisting ele- 
 ment. You cannot always shut your eyes to this 
 terrible problem of the poor. You may not fear that 
 they will ever destroy society, they are too weak and 
 helpless for that ; but still, even the most flaccid con- 
 science must be uneasy. We may sleep in our beds, 
 because starving hands can brandish no weapon and 
 kindle no torch; but still our sleep cannot be so 
 sound if we know that brothers and sisters are starv- 
 ing around us. Who has said, “ The murmurs of the 
 poor are just. Why this inequality of conditions? 
 Formed as we all are out of the same dust, there is no 
 way of justifying this except in saying that God has 
 commended the poor to the rich, and has assigned 
 them their maintenance out of their superfluity.” It 
 was not acommunist. The words are the words of 
 Bossuet. 
 
 Now I repeat, that in these two fields, Social pro- 
 gress is well-nigh powerless, and certainly cannot hope 
 to bring out a social system from them which shall 
 be agreeable to the law of love. Competitive trade, 
 brilliant inventions, the hope of profit, have made 
 many rich ; but in the nature of the case, the great 
 commercial machine stands sometimes still, and then 
 the capital of the rich remains ; but the labour, which 
 is the capital of the poor, lies useless, and they starve. 
 The power of Christ, on the other hand, which has 
 wrought such wonders in the past, ennobling the 
 family life, affirming the equal rights of all redeemed 
 men, building the hospital, freeing the slave, organ- 
 ising the care of the poor, exists still ; and if it seems 
 weaker, it is owing to the weaker faith of His 
 followers. Let us more actively affirm the doctrine 
 of love to others; let us apply it to thoughtless 
 marriages ; to intemperance ; to want of thrift—the 
 chief causes of the helplessness of the people. Let 
 us speak of avarice as our Lord and His Apostles 
 speak of it, as a deadly sin; let us explain the sin- 
 fulness of luxury; let us charge wealth with its 
 
374 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 proper trusts, its Christian claims; let us remind Dives 
 that it is a sin against Christ even to refuse 20 think 
 of Lazarus at the gate; and results as glorious will 
 follow as those which attended the march of the 
 Saviour in earlier times. Are there not facts to 
 prove it? The great increase of expenditure on 
 missions during this century ; the splendid examples 
 of individual philanthropy ; all these teach us that at 
 this moment we have not reached the summit of 
 human endeavour, but only the first ridge from 
 which we can see, not the downward slope, but alps 
 rising behind alps, which we may not pronounce 
 unattainable until we have tried them. Nor is our 
 power over sin diminished. A hundred years ago, 
 men classed with miracles the conversion of a Mag- 
 dalen. Now you may call it a miracle still ; but it is 
 part of the daily organised work of every complete 
 church, and is blessed with daily success. A century 
 ago the criminal class was looked on as hopeless, and 
 was only dealt with by the severest repression ; now 
 the reformatory snatches, in early boyhood, the pre- 
 destined thief and social pest, and trains them to 
 good, and loads his neck with the beneficent yoke of 
 the moral law, which he will not wish to cast off. We 
 do not discuss it as a possibility ; it is part of the 
 Church’s constant work. Every Christian man is a 
 storehouse of the power and will of Jesus Christ. 
 
 If we have failed to make Christ’s purpose known 
 and to manifest His love, we must bear our own sin, 
 and confess it; we must not say that the power of 
 Christ has gone out of the world. It is not the men 
 of high Christian endeavour, who come before us, 
 whining that there is no guidance ; it is not the man 
 of prayer, who announces that he has tried to find 
 Christ in prayer, and failed to find Him. No! belief 
 strengthens belief; fresh talents are added where 
 talents are. The complaints that religion is ex- 
 hausted come from those who have not striven to 
 shape their life according to the truth they knew; 
 weak, perplexed, exhausted, they are ready to be- 
 
Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 375 
 
 come the prey of the first who shall say, “ The world 
 is dark and lost ; evil has conquered ; God we can- 
 not know!” The power of Christ manifested in 
 believers has conquered unbelief, has won over souls, 
 in every age, in every country, against every hinder- 
 ance. Christianity once consisted of five disciples 
 that followed Christ: it has grown to a countless 
 multitude. The work has been done between these 
 two points by believing men. On the last night of our 
 Lord’s ministry all the disciples “forsook Him and 
 fled.” That is put before us, not without intention, as 
 the result of His personal teaching, to show that the 
 multitudes, whom no man can number, have been the 
 fruits of Apostles and messengers and believers, in 
 whom the power of Christ was. 
 
 Go forth! brethren, beloved, to your glorious work 
 amongst the nations of the earth. You will leave 
 behind you kindly memories for those who have 
 listened to your loving counsels. 
 
 Go forth! and tell every believer that the power of 
 Christ is his, if he will use it. We may say nay! We 
 are bound to say “ Who is sufficient for these things?” 
 We are not permitted to say that the work against 
 sin and misery can no longer go on, for that is the 
 work of God and Christ, who gives in daily proofs, 
 undeserved that He is working with us still. Go forth! 
 and when social progress makes its claim for great 
 things done, admit the claim ; but claim at the same 
 time to be workers in another field of progress, by the 
 spiritual power of Christ. Thecreation (to recall the 
 apostle’s image) stands with head erect in expectation 
 of deliverance from afar; and many a heart will fail 
 before that deliverance come, and many a weak faith 
 will wither ; many a sufferer will cry, “ How long ?” 
 many will ask, “ Art thou He that should come?” 
 
 With head erect, looking afar towards the grow- 
 ing dawn, we will stand in patient expectation. 
 “ Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a 
 crown of life.” 
 
376 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 No. XXXVIII. (See page 47.) 
 
 EPISTOLA CENTUM QUADRAGINTA QUINQUE EPIS- 
 COPORUM IN ANGLIA CONGREGATORUM IN 
 PALATIO LAMBETHANO MENSE IULIO ANNO 
 SALUTIS MDCCCLXXXVIII. 
 
 Fidelibus in Christo Tesu salutent. 
 
 Nos Archiepiscopi, Metropolitani, aliique Episcopi 
 Sancte Catholice Ecclesia, centum quadraginta 
 quinque numero, cum Ecclesia Anglicana pleno iure 
 communicantes, super diceceses proprias iurisdic- 
 tionem episcopalem exercitantes vel ad episcopalia 
 munia in eis obeunda legitime delegati, a diversis 
 orbis terrarum regionibus congregati in Palatio 
 Lambethano anno  Dominice Incarnationis 
 MDCCCLXXXVIII,_ presidente reverendissimo 
 Presule Edwardo Divina Providentia Archiepiscopo 
 Cantuariensi totius Anglize Primate et Metro- 
 politano, in dicti palatii sacello participes facti sacro- 
 sanctorum mysteriorum corporis et sanguinis Domini 
 nostri Iesu Christi et orationibus adunati ad Spiritus 
 Sancti directionem impetrandam, de questionibus 
 compluribus nobis propositis consilium inivimus, 
 ad salutem populi Dei et ad statum Ecclesiae per 
 diversas mundi partes diffusze pertinentibus. 
 
 His questionibus sedulo et serio deliberandis 
 mensem integrum impendimus, tum publico conventu 
 tum extra conventum quibuscunque res singulz 
 delegate erant. Nunc demum ea que de his rebus 
 nobis placuerunt fidelibus in Christo commendamus. 
 
 Huic epistole duplicem documentorum seriem 
 ‘adiunximus, quarum prima Sententias Conventus 
 sollemnes continet altera delegationum singularum 
 Relationes. Illud autem memoria tenendum eorum 
 solum que in priore genere continentur rationem 
 a Conventu nostro esse petendam. Delegationum 
 
Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 377 
 
 enim Relationes in tantum Conventus animum 
 exprimere credende sunt, quantum in Sententiis 
 vel rursus confirmate sint vel ipsis verbis in 
 Sententiis excipiantur. Sed operz pretium habuimus 
 has Relationes typis exprimere cum locupletem 
 videantur meditationi vestree materiam suppeditare.* 
 
 Imprimis vero questionibus moralibus ad vitae 
 regimen utilibus, que Conventui proposite erant, 
 animadverti volumus; et his omnibus praponimus 
 que dicenda sunt de officio Ecclesize ad temperan- 
 tiam et castitatem promovendam. 
 
 De Temperantia circa potus temulentos. 
 
 Multos per annos viri magnanimi, sibi minime 
 parcentes, fortiter connisi sunt ad ebrietatem abo- 
 lendam, quorum conatus ut multiplici auctu; crescant 
 sedulo optamus. Mala enim que ex hoc peccato 
 ecclesiz et genti nostra oriuntur, vix verbis supra 
 veritatem augeri possunt. Sed moneri vos oportet 
 ne sententiz falsa aures prabeatis que 51 latius 
 irrepat bono operi et magno damnum illatura est. 
 Cum enim utilissimam credamus abstinentiam circa 
 potus temulentos que absoluta vocetur (total abstz- 
 lence), Si pro instrumento ad finem bonum habeatur, 
 eas tamen voces improbare volumus quz usum vini 
 in se damnant nulla ratione habita eorum que vel 
 nobis vel aliis insequantur ; et reprehendi a nobis 
 significavimus consuetudinem quorundam, qui, ut 
 fertur, in sacris mysteriis celebrandis alio liquore 
 utuntur; qua consuetudo ex hac sententia tacite 
 concepta originem duxisse videtur. 
 
 [| Sententia II.—Pronuntiant episcopi in hoc Con- 
 ventu congregati usum succi ex uvis non fermentati 
 vel alius cuiuscunque liquoris quam veri vini, vel aqua 
 mixti vel meraci, pro elemento calicis in Sacra 
 
 
 
 * In hac interpretatione Sententias illas propriis Epistole 
 locis subiunximus, quantum necesse erat ad Epistolam intelle- 
 gendam, et Relationum tantum quod omitti non poterat. 
 
 2 2B 
 
378 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 Communione administrandi, exemplo Domini non 
 esse consentaneum et ab Ecclesiz Catholice con- 
 suetudine pervicacius recedere. | 
 
 De Castttate Vite. 
 
 Contra vero his ultimis temporibus vix tandem 
 Christiane societatis conscientia experrecta est ut 
 gnaviter agendum esse sentiat ad castitatem vite 
 vindicandam. Nos ergo hanc occasionem arripere 
 volumus, que ex distantibus terrarum regionibus eos 
 congregavit qui Communionis Anglicane personam 
 gerunt, ut sacrum bellum adversus hoc peccatum edi- 
 camus, quod ante omnia corpus Christi coinquinat et 
 sancti Spiritus templum polluit. Graves et serias voces 
 Relationis in memoriam redigimus; nihil enim nisi 
 communem omnium Christianorum operam huic malo 
 cohibendo sufficere credimus. Provocamus igitur vos 
 ut succurratis discipline sancte et severe ; et appel- 
 lamus omnes, ad quos hec vox nostra pervenerit, ut 
 coniunctis viribus iudicium hominum de his rebus 
 castigemus, et traditiones ignobiles et corruptas 
 penitus aboleamus, que non solum nomen Magistri 
 nostri Christi dedecorent, sed etiam naturam huma- 
 nam in imagine Dei factam ignominia afficiant. 
 
 [Relatio Delegatorum de hac re omnibus Episcopis 
 zta placuit ut nec addere quidquam nec detrahere 
 voluerint. | 
 
 De Sanctitate Matrimoniz. 
 
 Huic rei necessario coniuncta est conservatio sanc- 
 titatis matrimonii, de qua tota virtus publica pendet. 
 Damnum autem huic sanctitati non minimum 
 illatum est, legibus in quibusdam regionibus latis, 
 per quas pluribus de causis quam antea factum erat 
 divortium conceditur. Praeceptum igitur Christi de 
 ea re iterum a nobis asseverandum censuimus, et 
 clericis nostra Communionis consilia damus quales 
 se przstare debeant adversus eos qui contra legem 
 Domini deliquerint. 
 
 [Sextentia IV.—(A). Cum Domini nostri verba 
 
Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 5370 
 
 divortium diserte prohibeant, excepta fornicationis 
 vel adulterii causa, non alia certe de causa, preter 
 exceptam, divortium agnoscere potest ecclesia Chris- 
 tiana, neque quocunque modo ratum facere matrimo- 
 nium cuiuscunque persone, contra hanc legem 
 separate, persona altera superstite. 
 
 (Β.) Matrimonio ob fornicationem vel adulterium 
 dissoluto, nequaquam oportet personam nocentem 
 benedictione ecclesiastica in secundas nuptias haberi 
 dignam, superstite persona innocente. 
 
 (c.) Cum cognoverimus diversas semper in ecclesia 
 fuisse sententias, matrimonio ob adulterium dissoluto, 
 utrum voluerit Dominus necne a secundis nuptiis 
 personam innocentem prohibere, consilium dat Con- 
 ventus ne clerici admoneantur ut a sacramentis 
 ceterisque ecclesie privilegiis eos arceant, qui 
 civilibus legibus concedentibus ita nuptias inierint.] 
 
 De Polygamta. 
 
 Sanctitas matrimonii, quale inter Christianos con- 
 trahitur fideli coniunctione unius viri cum una femina 
 constat usquedum coniunctio illa morte dissolvatur. 
 Gentium quidem paganarum polygamicas societates 
 inter omnes constat a lege Christi damnari; ques- 
 tionibus autem multis et difficilibus dant lccum, 
 que preterito tempore variis modis solutz sunt. Nos 
 vero cum ea omnia perspexerimus que missionarii 
 ex variis regionibus diversa retulerint, nihil sane 
 de rebus pauxillis statuere voluimus, quas praesi- 
 dentibus ecclesiarum per loca constitutis decidendas 
 reliquimus, sed preecepta queedam gravioris momenti 
 dedimus, quibus solis credimus missionarios tuto 
 dirigi posse. Imprimis vero nobis cure fuit ut 
 Christianam matrimonii notionem salvam atque in- 
 columem servaremus, successus illos, qui aliter protinus 
 et cito fierent in evangelio propagando, minimum 
 valere rati si hac notione imminuta vel confusa redi- 
 merentur, 
 
 [Senxtentia V.—(A.) Conventui placuit ad bap- 
 
 2B 2 
 
380 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 tismum non admittendos eos qui in polygamia 
 vivant, sed inter catechumenos habendos, et dis- 
 cipline Christiane subiciendos donec possint se ad 
 legem Christi conformare. 
 
 (B). Conventui visum est polygamorum virorum 
 feminas ad baptismum nonnunquam admitti posse, 
 sed presidentibus ecclesie per loca constitutis iudi- 
 cium relinquendum esse quo tempore et quibus 
 condicionibus tales baptizari expediat.] 
 
 De dite Dominica. 
 
 Digna Dominice observatio, ut diei requietis cultus 
 divini et evangelice institutionis, recta via ad Chris- 
 tianz societatis salutem et incolumitatem confert. 
 Proximis vero temporibus hanc diem minus ac 
 minus diligenter observari animadvertimus, unde 
 sanctitas eius in discrimen veniat. Hoc igitur 
 maxime deprecati, hortamur eos qui otio fruuntur 
 ne commodorum suorum gratia occasiones requietis 
 et cultus divini aliis sabtrahant. Dominos et opera- 
 rum conductores hortamur ut famulis et opificibus 
 iura studiose conservent. Dies enim Dominica pro 
 hereditate inzstimabili nobis habenda est; qua si 
 quis abutitur metuendo iudicio obnoxius est. 
 
 [Sententia VII.—(A.) Conventui visum est obser- 
 vantiam religiosam unius diei ex septem, quarto 
 mandato sancitam, lege divina hominibus iniungi. 
 
 (B) Usque ab resurrectione Domini primam heb- 
 domadis a Christianis observatam fuisse, ut cultui 
 divino et requieti propriam, et Dominice nomine 
 insignitam in sabbati locum paullatim successisse, 
 cum pro festo magno a Christiana ecclesia singulis 
 hebdomadibus celebraretur. 
 
 (c). Observantiam Dominicz, ut diei requietis cul- 
 tus divini et doctrine sacre, inzestimabili bono fuisse 
 omnibus regionibus Christianis per quas obtinuerit. 
 
 (Ὁ). Observantiz huius neglegentiam, in dies cres- 
 centem, sanctitatem eius et utilitatem in maximum 
 discrimen adducere. 
 
Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 5381 
 
 (E). Maxime deprecandam esse consuetudinem 
 quorundam ordinum hominum, qui divitiis otioque 
 abundent, iam latius se diffundentem, ut Dominica 
 die ad delectationes huius mundi abutantur. 
 
 (F). Illud maxime evitandum ne quid ab illa 
 requie deroget, qua in hac die famuli aeque ac 
 magistri, et opifices aque ac operarum conductores, 
 iure frui debent. | 
 
 De Socialismo. 
 
 His ad mores spectantibus arctissime coheret 
 questio quomodo se gerere debeat Ecclesia Chris- 
 tiana adversus hodiernas de vita publica controversias. 
 Cum enim immodica varietate bona huius mundi 
 distribuantur, cum hic divitie ingentes accumulentur, 
 et illic miseranda conspiciatur inopia, necesse est 
 multis et anxiis cogitationibus turbari eum qui 
 mentem Christi induere velit. Nihil igitur consi- 
 deratione dignius, vel clericis vel laicis, quam ques- 
 tiones de Socialismo qui vocatur agitate. Meditatio 
 autem de propositis que ad equalitatem tendant 
 circa huius mundi bona, et leta susceptio eorum 
 que a quoquam vel bene suscepta vel bene gesta 
 sint, cum excogitatione rationum quibus, sive legum 
 latione, sive societate voluntaria, sive alio modo quo- 
 cunque pacifice et sine seditione aut iniuria questiones 
 iste ad solutionem perducendz sint, hac inter 
 nobilissima studia reputamus quibus viri, qui Christi 
 vestigiis insistere velint, semet ipsos dedere potuerint. 
 Presto sunt autem in Relatione que ad solutionem 
 harum controversiarum conferre videantur. 
 
 De Migrantibus. 
 
 Unum autem hominum genus pre ceteris Con- 
 ventus nostri cura et humanitate dignum esse vide- 
 batur. Migrantium enim numerus Britannicarum 
 insularum ecclesias ecclesia Americane et coloniarum 
 nostrarum ecclesiis vivo vinculo alligat. Nihil igitur 
 
382 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 Conventus nostri deliberationibus magis erat proprium 
 quam, quid huic tante multitudini debeamus reputare 
 qui communem nobiscum sortiti sint fidem. Illud 
 certe, si quid aliud, ecclesiz est officium, ut profectos 
 ex antiqua patria in novam benevolis oculis per 
 totum iter consequatur, ut cura vigili respiciat, et 
 pericula que circa viam et anime eorum et spiritui 
 insidientur avertat. Sunt vero in Relatione non- 
 nulla que credamus ad hanc finem conferre posse. 
 
 De certa circa Fidem Doctrina. 
 
 Cum igitur de his quezstionibus ita decreverimus 
 ut preceptis Domini et evangelice discipline, qua- 
 tenus aut privatorum hominum mores, aut vitam 
 publicam tangant, primum locum tribuamus, ea iam 
 perscrutemur que ecclesiz partim habeant vel partim 
 possint prospicere ad ea fidei principia tradenda qui- 
 bus illa morum disciplina fundata sit. 
 
 Nobis vero persuasum est hoc opus magna 
 diligentia et emendatione multa indigere. Iuniorum 
 enim institutioni circa religionem multa desunt, 
 presertim ubi de doctrina Christiana agitur. Que 
 incommoda non unum tantum ordinem hominum 
 tangunt, sed et laicos accingere se oportet ut cum 
 clericis huic malo medeantur. Et parentibus quidem 
 hoc opus a Deo mandatum est. Susceptores autem 
 monendi sunt ut officium in parvulos, pro quibus in 
 baptismo responderint, fideliter expleant, et caveant 
 ne indocti maneant vel minus parati ad sigillum 
 Confirmationis accedant. Catechizandi autem usus 
 in propatulo habitus et preparatio eorum sollemnis 
 qui ad Confirmationem instituuntur in maius provehi 
 sine dubio possunt. Simul et cura magis assidua 
 et studio clericorum diligentiore indigent schole quz 
 vocantur dominicales, quam ut multis in locis res 
 nunc se habet. Institutio autem eorum qui in 
 huiusmodi scholis doceant, et alumno-przceptorum 
 (pupil teachers) in scholis que feruntur elementa- 
 ribus, opus si quid aliud necessarium parocho et 
 
Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 383 
 
 pastori credendum est. Porro oportet pastorem 
 morum precepta que ex Bibliis trahit ita confirmare 
 ut discipulos iterum atque iterum ad sanctiones legis 
 divine revocet et ad congrua doctrine et discipline 
 exempla que in iisdem scripturis reperiuntur. Possunt 
 autem, etiam amplius quam nunc fit, contionantes 
 in ecclesia fidei simul et moribus consulere, et 
 rationi divinorum officiorum lucem afferendo audien- 
 tes perducere ut intellegant quali inter se vinculo 
 coniungantur cultus Dei et fides et opera—id est quid 
 doceant Liber Precum publicarum, et Catechismus 
 et Symbola. 
 
 Non tamen propter iuniores tantum, vel propter 
 eos quos gregibus suis adscriptos habent, clericos 
 oportet certz et accurate fidei doctrine studere. 
 
 Meditatio certe sacre Scripture exercitationis 
 ingenii Christianis magna pars est, et Biblia ipsa 
 precipuum omnis doctrine circa religionem instru- 
 mentum est. Miserum vero dictu, his temporibus, 
 multi ex multis locis quasi signo dato Bibliorum 
 auctoritatem impugnant, neque ut divine scientie 
 thesaurum accipi sinunt; et per omnes hominum 
 ordines increbrescunt suspiciones, dubitationes, cen- 
 sure infestee et iudicia incredula eorum dogmatum 
 que veritate divinitus revelata fundata sunt. 
 
 Quandocunque igitur talia originem traxerint ex 
 ignorantia rationis quz constare debeat inter scientiam 
 rerum nature et Revelationem Dei, possunt certe et 
 debent patienter et cum benevolentia tractari. Quod 
 si physicorum sive inventis sive effatis conturbantur 
 mentes hominum, magnopere curandum est ne 
 elementa fidei extinguantur, et regenda magis ingenia 
 quam coercenda ut veritatem perspiciant, talibus in- 
 ventis leges nature in lucem proferri, quibus recte 
 intellectis opus Creatoris magnificum, verbo virtutis 
 Eius sustentatum, amplius et equius estimetur. 
 
 Periculum vero maius ex hac oppugnatione oritur, 
 sive plane infesta sive mere incredula dicenda sit, 
 utpote difficile nobis sit definire, quatenus doctrina 
 
384 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 nostra, vel saltem populi de ea iudicium, videatur 
 satis habere rationem earum sententiarum de Sacre 
 Scripture inspiratione et presertim de Veteris Testa- 
 menti dispensatione et disciplina, qua, quamvis in 
 ecclesia nunquam diserte sancite sint, ex longo tamen 
 tempore et multis in locis obtinuerint. 
 
 Monendi sunt clerici ut caute et diligenter has 
 controversias tractent, et studiosius hortandi ut ad 
 unum quasi fundamentum doctrinam suam omnem 
 referant,ad Dominum scilicet nostrum Iesum Christum, 
 sacrificium pro peccatis nostris, impietatis nostrz 
 medicinam, vite omnis spiritualis fontem, conscientiz 
 voluntatique nostre et normam et exemplar omnium 
 virtutum. Ad Ipsum certe et ad opus Ipsius doctrina 
 omnis Veteris Testamenti confluit, ex Ipso Novi 
 Testamenti doctrina omnis derivatur et spiritu et 
 virtute et specie. Ecclesiz autem est ita operari ut 
 bona ea, que ex Incarnatione Verbi Dei fluxerint, ad 
 vite usum adhibeat et latius proferat, et doctrina 
 ecclesie propagatio est dogmatum quz super ipsam 
 Incarnationem fundata sint quomodo in Symbolis 
 coiliguntur. 
 
 De ture mutuo diversarum partium Anglicane 
 Communionis. 
 
 Ex disceptatione nostra de iure mutuo dicecesium 
 et regionum nostre Communionis nonnulla saltem 
 prodierunt quz iudicio vestro commendari volumus. 
 Primum quidem necesse videtur ad regulas a Conventu 
 anni MDCCCLXXVIII. propositas animadvertere, 
 et rursus monere intra Communionis nostre fines 
 acta cuiusvis ecclesie vel Provinciz, recte et ordine 
 significata, ab aliis ecclesiis et ab his qui in illis con- 
 versantur, in honore habenda esse; ne quis sive 
 Episcopus seu clericus in dicecesi iure constituta 
 sine permissione Episcop1 qui ibidem sit ministret ; 
 ne quis vero Episcopus clericum quemquam ex alia 
 Dicecesi venientem ad sacra ministeria admittat sine 
 litteris commendaticiis idoneis. Harum enim regu- 
 
Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 385 
 
 larum neglegentia gravium interdum scandalorum 
 occasio facta est. Episcopi quidem, quod ad eos 
 attinet, a talibus malis preecavere parati sunt consilium 
 privatim dando simul cum consuetis et formatis 
 litteris ; sed et clericos decet cautius versari, cum 
 tales litteras obsignaturi sint ; eos quoque, qui his 
 litteris utuntur, cavere oportet ne graventur si accurate 
 quesitum fuerit qui sint ipsi ut quales. Hae enim 
 queestiones, quamquam ipsis fortasse supervacanee 
 esse videantur, omnino tamen necessariz sunt ut in 
 hac re saluti ecclesiz satisfat. 
 
 Cavendum certe maxime est ubi de clericis agitur 
 ad sacra ministeria in coloniis nostris capessenda 
 ordinatis. Enimvero libentissime concedimus eos 
 qui etatis robur in peregrinos labores impenderint, 
 seu tandem in patria requiescere seu consueta opera 
 novis mutare voluerint, dignos esse quibus consulatur. 
 Sed de hac re generatim decernere impossibile est. 
 
 Illa autem questio nobis quasi maioris momenti 
 proponebatur utrum Concilium vel Concilia institui 
 possent rerum referendarum gratia, que de contro- 
 versiis consilium darent vel etiam decernerent a 
 prepositis Provinciarum Colonice ecclesiz appellata. 
 Qua de re nobis videtur diutissime et consideratissime 
 deliberandum, ne cito ac temere potestatem con- 
 stituamus que sive pro Concilio habita sive Iudicio 
 publico propior, tum discipline nostra tum libertati 
 detrimentum allutura sit. 
 
 De Christianorum apud nos domestica reconciliatione. 
 
 Post anxiam  disceptationem satis habuimus 
 articulos aliquos proponere, qui pro fundamento 
 sint a quo progressi, Deo favente, ad domesticam 
 Christianorum reconciliationem propius accedere 
 possimus. Quiarticuli, quattuor numero, in Sententiis 
 appositis reperientur. 
 
 [| Sententtia XI. Conventui placuit hos articulos, 
 Deo favente, pro fundamento fore a quo progressi 
 ad reconciliationem domesticam propius accedamus:— 
 
386 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 (A) Sacras Scripturas veteris novique Testamenti 
 utpote “omnia ad salutem necessaria continentes,” 
 cum pro regula veritatis et norma legitima in rebus 
 fidei habendz sint. 
 
 (B) Symbolum Apostolicum quod in baptismate 
 pronuntiatur, et Nicanum quod fidei Christiane 
 idoneam expositionem continet. 
 
 (C) Sacramenta duo a Christo ipso instituta— 
 Baptisma scilicet et cenam Domini—dummodo 
 Christi verba in prima institutione usurpata, et 
 elementa quibus ipse usus est semper usurpentur. 
 
 (Ὁ) Episcopatum ex antiquis seculis traditum, 
 ratione quidem administrationis gentium necessitati- 
 bus accommodatum et populorum a Deo in ecclesiz 
 unitatem vocatorum. 
 
 Sententia XII. Conventus noster prepositos variis 
 Communionis nostre regionibus enixe rogat, ut, 
 quantum fieri possit una agentes, notum faciant se 
 paratos esse ad fraterna colloquia (sicuti ab 
 Americana Ecclesia iam propositum fuerit) eos acci- 
 pere qui aliarum Christianarum societatum in gentibus 
 Anglicizantibus personas gerant consilii capiendi 
 causa, quomodo vel ad reconciliationem integram 
 progredi possimus vel ad talem invicem consuetu- 
 dinem ex qua temporis progressu arctior quaedam 
 unitas nascatur. 
 
 Sententia XI1I.—Conventus suadet, immo magni 
 momenti esse censet ad reconciliationem confirman- 
 dam, ut notitia late diffundatur de doctrine normis 
 et de formulis in Ecclesia Anglicana usitatis ; suadet 
 etiam ut simili modo divulgetur notitia de formulis 
 doctrinze cultusque divini et regiminis a ceteris 
 Christianorum societatibus receptis, in quas gentes 
 Anglicizantes divise sunt.] 
 
 ' Anglicana autem Communio, ut videtur, societates 
 hominum a se per miseras divisiones separatas hoc 
 animo respicit :— 
 
 Parati sumus ad fraterna colloquia omnes recipere 
 qui communionem nobiscum perfectiorem expetant. 
 
Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 5487 
 
 Condiciones autem ferimus quibus ex sententia et 
 persuasione nostra talis communio iniri possit. 
 Quamquam enim vehementissime cupimus fratres a 
 nobis aversos complecti, ut voluntas Domini “unus 
 grex unus pastor” ad effectum perducatur, non 
 tamen decet nos infideles esse dispensatores magni 
 depositi nobis commendati. Neque enim circa fidem 
 neque circa disciplinam loco nostro cedere possumus. 
 Concordia autem illa, neque vera fieri possit iudicio 
 nostro neque optanda que statione sic relicta fuerit 
 composita. 
 
 Libentissime tamen et cum gratiarum actione 
 agnoscimus verum pietatis opus quod a Christianis 
 extra Communionem nostram perficitur. Manifesta 
 enim et in oculis posita est gratia Dei laboribus 
 eorum propter Christi nomen susceptis impertita. 
 Ne quis autem verba nostra aliter accipiat ac dicta 
 sunt. Immo probe compertum habemus_ quibus 
 vinculis et quam forti persuasione institutis propriis 
 adstricti sint ii qui a nobis dissident. Horum 
 ergo rationem habemus, itidemque institutorum 
 nostrorum et opinionum ab illis rationem haberi 
 volumus. Verum enimvero affirmant testes idonei 
 non in Anglia tantum sed in omnibus Christianismi 
 regionibus desiderium unitatis verum exstare, homi- 
 numque corda maius quam antea factum est ad 
 societatem inter Christianos conciliandam commoveri. 
 Hac voluntate penitus se affectum fuisse et in dis- 
 ceptationibus et in sententiis ostendit noster Conven- 
 tus. Faxit igitur Deus ut super aquas turbulentas 
 discordiarum religiosarum moveatur spiritus amoris. 
 
 De Ecclestis Scandinavicis. 
 
 Inter gentes que populos Anglicizantes proxime 
 contingunt Scandinavice certe numerantur, que et in 
 multis dicecesibus nostris frequentia satis magna 
 valent. Non mediocris ergo momenti Conventui 
 nostro fuit qualem se habere deberet Communio 
 Anglicana ergo ecclesias Scandinavicas. Suademus 
 
388 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 autem in presens et familiarius versandum et mutuam 
 invicem cognitionem appetendam usque dum, occa- 
 sione oblata, arctiorem societatem ineamus nulla 
 tamen institutorum nostrorum, que necessaria cre- 
 dimus, iactura facta. 
 
 [Sententia X1V.—Conventui placuit amicitiam 
 inter ecclesias Scandinavicas et Anglicanas sedulo 
 expetendam ; et condiciones, si que proponantur, ab 
 ecclesia Suedica, ad mutuam difficultatum explica- 
 tionem spectantes, libentissime accipiendas, ut si 
 fileri possit, temporis progressu, communio invicem 
 stabiliatur, solido iuris ecclesiastici fundamento 
 confirmata. ] 
 
 De veteribus Catholicis et alits. 
 
 Neque vero qui nobiscum consociantur caritate et 
 benevolo affectu moveri non possunt erga illos qui in 
 Europa continenti ad Reformationem Ecclesie con- 
 tendunt, presertim cum difficultatibus maximis 
 impediti eandem plerumque nobiscum rationem 
 secuti sint et Episcopatum quasi institutum Apos- 
 tolicum obtinuerint. Quamvis enim nondum venisse 
 tempus censeamus ut cum ullis de illorum numero 
 societatem omnibus numeris absolutam ineamus, et 
 cum festinatam quamvis actionem valde deprecemur, 
 que antiqua et bene cognita iurisdictionis instituta 
 violaverit, credimus tamen nullo iuris ecclesiastici 
 damno posse nos amicitie dextras pretendere, et 
 speramus insuper tempore opportuno fore ut liceat 
 cum nonnullis certe illorum arctiore nosmet societate 
 coniungere. 
 
 [Sententia XV.—(A). Libentissime agnoscit Con- 
 ventus quam digne et libere se gesserit Ecclesia 
 Batava veterum Catholicorum, et crebriore fraterne 
 amicitiza usu sperandum censet ut multa ex im- 
 pedimentis, que nunc nos ab invicem dirimant, de 
 medio fiant. 
 
 (B). Nostrum esse censemus et cum veterum 
 Catholicorum Communione in Germania et cum 
 
Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 389 
 
 “Ecclesia Christiana Catholica” in Helvetia amici- 
 tiz usum augere et promovere, non solum propter 
 studiorum coniunctionem sed etiam ut Deo gratias 
 referamus qui, in magnis difficultatibus et angustiis et 
 temptationibus, roboraverit illos ut pro veritate pati 
 velint; et iura illis pollicemur que a Delegatione 
 proposita sunt, eis saltem condicionibus que in 
 Relatione significantur. 
 
 Relatio autem ista ita se habet :—*“ Nihil obstare 
 “nobis videtur quominus et clericos eorum et fideles 
 “laicos ad sacram Communionem admittamus, eis- 
 “dem scilicet condicionibus quibus apud nos nostri 
 “admittantur ; agnoscimus simul et benevolentiam 
 “eorum qua iura spiritualia etiam nostris conces- 
 “serint. 
 
 “Propter varietates autem legum matrimonialium 
 “infaustas, quas magni momenti estimamus, definien- 
 “dum est nobis a sacra Communione prohibendam 
 “esse quamvis personam, quze matrimonium contra 
 “leges et canones Ecclesiz Anglicane contraxerit. 
 “Contra vero, ius equum veteribus Catholicis red- 
 “ dentes, neminem nos posse admittere profitemur qui 
 “apud eos a sacra communione fuerit prohibendus.” 
 
 (Cc). Benevolentia nostra digna esse veterum 
 Catholicorum in Austria studium et voluntatem sibi 
 minime parcentium; speramus autem cum res eorum 
 ecclesiastica perfecte fuerit et solide constituta pleni- 
 orem cum eis societatem nosmet inituros. 
 
 (D). De Reformatoribus autem qui in Italia, Gallia, 
 Hispania et Lusitania, iugum condicionum iniquarum 
 circa communionem ecclesiasticam excutere conni- 
 tantur, speramus fore ut, cum formulas doctrine et 
 disciplinze salubres assecuti sint et rem suam more 
 Catholico constituerint a nobis liberius agnoscantur, 
 
 (E) Nolumus sane intercedere quominus episcopi 
 ecclesia Catholice, ultima necessitate cogente, in 
 rebus ecclesiasticis peregre se interponant ; depre- 
 camur tamen quamvis actionem que aut antiqua 
 
390 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 et bene cognita iurisdictionis instituta aut commoda 
 totius Anglicane communionis videatur negligere.] 
 
 De Ecclestts Orientalibus. 
 
 Sedulo se velle significavit Conventus ut benevolam 
 consuetudinem, que nunc Ecclesias Orientales cum 
 Communione Anglicana coniungat, confirmare et 
 augere possit. Etenim hae Ecclesiz Christianorum 
 hominum animos per longum tempus sibi concili- 
 averunt. Multa iam saecula persecutionem passz 
 in locis multis et tenebrosis evangelice lucis vivam 
 flammam servaverunt. Quod si hic et illic lux illa 
 languescere aut hebescere videatur, propter hoc etiam 
 magis nos decet, tempore opportuno utentes, flammam 
 hanc fovere ac conservare. Neque metuendum est ut 
 fraterna officia nostra, benigna voluntate, ut par est, 
 oblata, ab illis digne excipiantur. Agnoscimus 
 autem cum gratiarum actione nulla inter nos et illos 
 exstare impedimenta, qualia nos a Latinorum com- 
 munione prohibeant, tum propter infallibilitatem 
 ecclesiz sollemniter confirmatam quasi in persona 
 summi Pontificis inherentem, tum propter dogma 
 immaculate conceptionis Beate Virginis Marie, et 
 alia dogmata Conciliorum Pontificalium auctoritate 
 Christianis imposita. Romana quidem ecclesia soro- 
 rem Orientalem inique semper tractavit, quippe quae 
 Episcopos suos antiquis Dicecesibus ingerat, et pro- 
 selytismum strenue et constanter agat. Merito igitur 
 haec indignatur Ecclesia Orientalis, ut iniuriam passa, 
 cum institutis Catholicis plane contraria sint; nos 
 autem Anglicanos cavere decet ne simili modo 
 peccemus. 
 
 Si quis vero inter Orientales lucem clariorem et 
 spiritualis vita incrementum desideraverit, potest 
 sane in ecclesia in qua baptizatus fuerit permanendo, 
 lucem circa se aliquo modo diffundere, et civibus suis 
 opem afferre. 
 
 Sed cum a proselytismo certe nos _ abstinere 
 
Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 391 
 
 debeamus, equum tamen est iura nostra et statum 
 verum ecclesia nostre, per annorum seriem stabilite, 
 hominibus illis proponere, qui cum rebus novis 
 precipue in religione maxime diffidant, historiam 
 tamen Catholice antiquitatis magni faciant. Oportet 
 etiam nos institutioni Clericorum in Orientis partibus 
 subyenire, et ubi rerum angustia sit etiam scholis 
 communibus succurrere. 
 
 [ Sententca XVII. Conventus noster consuetudine 
 benevola lztatur qua usi sunt Archiepiscopi Cantuar- 
 ienses aliique ex Episcopis Anglicanis cum Patriarchis 
 Constantinopoleos aliisque Patriarchis vel Episcopis 
 Orientalibus, et sperare se profitetur fore ut progressu 
 temporis impedimenta que pleniorem communionem 
 iam prohibeant, usu familiari crescente, et diffusa 
 luce, e medio tollantur. Fideles autem ad orationes 
 de hac re constanter excitat Conventus, suadet 
 que eis qui Christi leges nobiscum sequuntur ut 
 Reformationi intestine ecclesiarum Orientalium 
 consilio et ope subveniant, potius quam singulos hinc 
 et illinc a Communione illarum subtrahant. ] 
 
 De formulis canonicis apud nos usitatis. 
 
 His animadversis formulas doctrine et cultus 
 divini canonicas, que apud nos recepte sunt, diligen- 
 tius a vobis perpendi volumus. Maximi enim 
 momenti est et fidem nostram et mores, cum ecclesiis 
 antiquis tum eis que per gentes a missionariis iam 
 formantur et aluntur, tales ostendi ut neque ullis 
 fastidio sint neque libertatein veram impediant, 
 neque plene perfecteque Communioni moram 
 afferant. 
 
 Declaramus igitur, priorum Conventuum exemplum 
 secuti, nos sub uno Capite divino in unius Catholice 
 et Apostolice Ecclesia Societate coniungi, unamque 
 Fidem firmiter tenere in scripturis sacris revelatam, 
 symbolis definitam, a primitiva ecclesia constanter 
 conservatam et a Conciliis cecumenicis indubitatis 
 affirmatam: agnoscimus autem doctrine simul et 
 
3092 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 cultus divini formulas proprias Librum Precum pub- 
 licarum cum Catechismo, formam Ordinationis, et 
 triginta novem Articulos—hereditatem quidem pre- 
 cipuam Ecclesie Anglice, sed plus minusve ab 
 omnibus nostree Communionis Ecclesiis receptam. 
 
 Formulas autem istas externis Ecclesiis integras 
 et sinceras ostendi volumus. Quippe libertas quo- 
 dammodo ecclesiis per gentes paganas succrescen- 
 tibus concedenda est; neque enim zquum foret triginta 
 novem Articulos integros his imponi pro condicione 
 nobiscum communicandi utpote et verbis et forma 
 rerum temporumque indole et colore circa originem 
 primam affectos. Contra autem non possumus illas 
 ut pleno iure nobiscum communicantes et prasertim 
 quoad Ordines sacros agnoscere, nisi prius testi- 
 monium satis idoneum dederint se eandem, quoad 
 substantiam eius,doctrine formam nobiscum obtinere. 
 Nec difficile esse putandum, nedum impossibile, 
 articulos cum formulis nostris doctrine et cultus divini 
 satis concordantes proponere, qui omnibus in ecclesia 
 tali ordinandis imponendi sint. 
 
 { Seztentta XVIII—Ab Archiepiscopo Cantuar- 
 iensi expetit Conventus ut consilium cum quibus 
 voluerit capiat, qui deliberent utrum expediat inter- 
 pretationem Anglicam Symboli Niczni vel formule 
 “ Quicunque vult ” quovis modo emendare. 
 
 Sententia X1X.—De Ecclesiis modo nunc consti- 
 tutis, prassertim in regionibus nondum Christianis, ita 
 iudicamus. Priusquam recognoscantur ut que pleno 
 iure communionis nobiscum frui debeant, et preecipue 
 quz donum successionis Episcopalis a nobis accipere 
 debeant, oportet eos nobis documentis certis ostendere 
 se, eandem, quoad substantiam eius, doctrine formam 
 nobiscum obtinere, et clericos earum articulis, qui cum 
 formularum nostrarum doctrine et cultus divini diserte 
 conceptis sententiis concordent, subscribere; non 
 tamen ex necessitate tales clericos cogendos esse 
 
Latin Versivn of the Encyclical Letter. 4303 
 
 triginta et novem Articulos Religionis integros 
 accipere. | 
 
 Hanc epistolam, Fratres, ad finem perducimus 
 humiles et sinceras Deo Omnipotenti gratias agentes, 
 propter magnam Eius erga nos benevolentiam et 
 caritatem. Concessit enim nobis ut hic plures numero 
 quam antea congregemur. Ex omni autem regione 
 orbis terrarum scientiz simul et experientize thesauri 
 in medium collati sunt. Ipsis quoque oculis, plenius 
 quam antea fieri poterat, proposita est magne 
 
 Anglican Communionis et amplitudo et potentia et 
 virtus. 
 
 Quantis facultatibus preedita sit, quantis temporum 
 opportunitatibus, quantis commodis fruatur intellex- 
 imus. In disceptationibus autem communi concilio 
 habitis unitatem eftus veram esse experti sumus, quan- 
 tumvis partes eius vel statu vel maturitate varient. 
 Ubi enim discordia sententiarum inter nos fuerit, ibi 
 etiam concordia spiritus et propositi unitas; itaque 
 recordationibus quas nobiscum reportamus refecti 
 roboratique et ad maiora incitati ad diceceses nostras 
 alius alia via redibimus. 
 
 Sed beneficii a Deo accepti conscientia cum officii 
 debito arcte coniuncta est. Quo magis enim ea 
 commoda sentimus, quibus in communione Anglicana 
 fruimur, eo magis incendimur ut munera nostra 
 exsequamur, que non tantum nostrates tangant, vel 
 in evangelio propagando expleantur, sed ad omnes 
 ecclesias Dei pertineant. Quippe singulari loco positi 
 ad singulare opus evocamur. Deum ergo enixe 
 apprecamur ut omnes—clerici pariter ac laici—mani- 
 festam Eius voluntatem secum reputent, et quam- 
 cumque stationem teneant summis viribus contendant 
 ut propositum Eius in finem debitum perducatur. 
 
 His verbis, salutem vobis multam  optantes, 
 ea que nobis in hoc Conventu placuerunt studio vestro 
 et considerationi tradimus, Deum insuper supplicantes 
 ut Spiritus Sanctus cogitationes vestras gubernet et 
 
 Ze 
 
304 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 vosmet ipsos in omnem veritatem dirigat, faciatque ut 
 
 consilia nostra per operationes vestras ad gloriam 
 Dei vertantur et ad regni Christi incrementum. 
 
 Subscripsi in nomine Conventus, 
 
 EDWARDUS CANTUARIENSIS. 
 
ENISTOAH EKATON 
 TEZZSAPAKONTA IIENTE 
 ENMIZKOMQN 
 
 ἐν ᾿Αγγλίᾳ συνηθροισμένων ἐν Παλατίῳ Aap- 
 βηθανῷ μηνὶ ᾿Ιουλίῳ ἔτει αὠπη΄ (1888). 
 
 Τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ χαίρειν ἐν Κυρίῳ. 
 
 Ἡμεῖς ᾿Αρχιεπίσκοποι καὶ Μητροπολῖται καὶϊἄλλοι ἐπί- 
 σκοποι τῆς ἁγίας Καθολικῆς ᾽Ἔκκλησίας, ,“συγκοινωνοῦντες 
 ὁλοκλήρως τῇ ᾿Αγγλικανῇ ᾿Εκκλησίᾳ, ἑκατὸν “τεσσαρά- 
 κοντα πέντε ὄντες τὸν ἀριθμόν, ἅπαντες ἐπισκοπὴν 
 παροικιῶν ἐπιτηδεύοντες ἢ νομίμως ἐπισκοπικὰ τέλη ἐν 
 αὐταῖς ἐπιτετραμμένοι, συνελθόντες ἐκ διαφόρων τῆς 
 οἰκουμένης κλιμάτων ἐν Παλατίῳ Λαμβηθανῷ ἔτει σωτη- 
 ρίῳ aon (1888), προεδρεύοντος τοῦ σεβασμιωτάτου 
 
 Ἐδουάρδου τῇ θείᾳ προνοίᾳ ᾿Αρχιεπισκόπου Καντουα- 
 ρίας, ὅλης ᾿Αγγλίας πρωτεύοντος, καὶ Μητροπολίτου, 
 μετειληφότες ἐν τῷ ναῷ τοῦ εἰρημένου Παλατίου τῶν 
 ἁγίων μυστηρίων τοῦ σώματος καὶ τοῦ αἵματος, τοῦ 
 Κυρίου, καὶ προσευχαῖς ἡνωμένοι ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ ἁγίου 
 Πνεύματος χειραγωγίας, ἐξέτασιν πεποιήκαμεν διαφόρων 
 ζητημάτων ἡμῖν προβεβλημένων ἀνηκόντων εἰς τὴν τοῦ 
 Θεοῦ λαοῦ εὐπραγίαν καὶ τὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας κατάστασιν 
 ἐν διαφόροις τοῦ κόσμου μέρεσιν. 
 
 Περὶ τούτων οὖν ἀκριβῶς καὶ σπουδαίως ὅλον μῆνα 
 συμβουλευσάμενοι, κοινῇ τε συνόδῳ καὶ ἰδίᾳ οἷς τὰ 
 πράγματα κατὰ μέρος ἐπετράπη, παρατιθέμεθα τανῦν τοῖς 
 πιστοῖς τὰ περὶ τούτων ἡμῖν δόξαντα. 
 
 οϑ 
 
306 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 Ταύτῃ τῇ ἐπιστολῇ δύο εἴδη ὑπομνημάτων προστε- 
 θείκαμεν, δηλαδὴ τὰς τοῦ Συμβουλίου διατάξεις καὶ τὰς 
 τῶν ᾿Εἰπιτροπῶν éxbéces.* 
 
 Γνωρίζξειν. δὲ ὑμᾶς θέλομεν ὅτι τὰ πρῶτα μόνον θεωρεῖν 
 χρεὼν ὡς ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Συμβουλίου ἀποπεφασμένα. 
 Αἱ γὰρ ἐκθέσεις ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον τὸ τοῦ Συμβουλίου 
 φρόνημα ὑποδεικνύασιν ὅσονπερ ἐν ταῖς διατάξεσιν ἢ 
 κατὰ τὴν διάνοιαν ἢ αὐτοῖς ῥήμασιν ἀνελήφθησαν. Τὰς 
 δὲ ἐκθέσεις ἐκείνας τετυπωμένας ἐκδιδόναι ἄξιον ἡγού- 
 μεθα, ὡς τοῖς ἀναγυιγνώσκουσιν καρπὸν μελέτης ἱκανὸν 
 παραστήσειν δυναμένας. 
 
 Πρῶτον δὴ τὰ ἠθικὰ καὶ πρακτικὰ ἐτάξαμεν περὶ ὧν 
 ἐν τῷ Συμβουλίῳ λόγος ἐγένετο' καὶ πρώτιστα τὰ τῆς 
 Ἐκκλησίας καθήκοντα ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐγκρατείας καὶ τῆς 
 ἁγνείας. 
 
 Ἀ a ‘ Ν Ν WS) ,’ 
 Περὶ τῆς περὶ τὰ μεθυστικὰ ποτὰ ἐγκρατείας. 
 
 Ἐὐγενῶς ἐ ἐκ πολλῶν ἐτῶν ἤδη, καὶ ἐν τῇ ᾿Εκκλησίᾳ καὶ 
 ἐκτὸς, ἠγωνίσαντο ἄνδρες αὐταπαρνητικοὶ ὅπως τὴν περὶ 
 τὰ ποτὰ ἀκρασίαν καταργήσωσιν, τοῖς δὲ ἐπιχειρήμασιν 
 τούτοις ἐπίδοσιν πολλαπλασίαν μετὰ σπουδῆς εὐχόμεθα. 
 Περὶ γὰρ τῶν κακῶν τῶν καὶ τῇ ᾿Εἰκκλησίᾳ καὶ τῷ 
 ἡμετέρῳ ἔθνει ἐκ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ταύτης συμβαινόντων 
 ὑπερβολικῶς εἰπεῖν οὐ padiov’ ἀλλὰ ἀναγκαῖον ἡγούμεθα 
 περὶ ψευδοῦς τινος ὑποθέσεως νουθετικώτερον λέγειν ἵνα 
 μὴ τὰ καλῶς εἰργασμένα παρεισδύουσα διαφθείρῃ. Τὴν 
 μὲν γὰρ παντελῆ λεγομένην ἀποχὴν τῶν μεθυστικῶν 
 ποτῶν περὶ πολλοῦ ποιούμεθα ὡς ἐπὶ τέλει ἀγαθῷ 
 ἐπιτηδευομένην᾽ τοὺς δὲ λόγους ἐκείνους ἀποδοκιμάζομεν 
 οἷς ἡ τοῦ οἴνου χρῆσις καθ᾽ αὑτὴν καταγινώσκεται, χωρὶς 
 τῶν ἀπ’ αὐτῆς ἢ τοῖς χρωμένοις ἢ καὶ ἑτέροις συμβαινόν- 
 Tov’ τὴν δὲ πρᾶξιν τινῶν, ὡς λέγεται, ἐπεμεμψάμεθα ἐ ἐκ 
 τῆς ὑποθέσεως ταύτης σιγῇ ὑποκειμένης ὡς φαίνεται 
 
 * Ἔν ταύτῃ τῇ μεταφράσει τὰς τοῦ ZupBovdiou διατάξεις ὅσον 
 χρέος ἦν τοῖς τῆς ἐπιστολῆς οἰκείοις τόποις παρατεθείκαμεν, τῶν δὲ 
 ἐκθέσεων αὐτὰ τἀναγκαιότατα μόνον δεδώκαμεν πρὸς τὴν κατάληψιν 
 τῶν δεδογμένων. 
 
Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 397 
 
 ἐκγινομένην, οἵτινες ἑτέρῳ τινὲ ποτῷ ἐν τοῖς ἁγίοις 
 μυστηρίοις χρῶνται. 
 
 [Διάταξις β΄. Οἱ ἐν τῷ Συμβουλίῳ συναθροισθέντες 
 ἐπίσκοποι ἀποφαίνομεν τὴν χρῆσιν τοῦ ἐκ βοτρύων 
 ἀζυμώτου χυμοῦ ἢ ἄλλου τινὸς πλὴν οἴνου ἀλη- 
 θινοῦ κραθέντος ὕδατι ἢ ἀκράτου, ἐν τῇ μεταδύσει 
 τοῦ ποτηρίου ἐν τῇ ἁγίᾳ κοινωνίᾳ, μὴ εἶναι κατὰ 
 τὸ ὑπόδειγμα τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ ἔκκλισιν εἶναι 
 ἰδιογνώμονα τοῦ τῆς καθολικῆς ἐκκλησίας ἔθους. 
 
 Περὶ ἁγνείας. 
 
 Περὶ τῆς ἁγνείας μέντοι νῦν δὴ πρῶτον ἄρχεται κινεῖσ- 
 θαι εἰ εἰς τὸ ἡ δραστήριον ἡ ἡ τοῦ Χριστιανοῦ πλήθους συνείδησις" 
 ἡμεῖς οὖν τῷ καιρῷ τῷδε χρῆσθαι θέλομεν, ἐν ᾧ ἐκ 
 μακροτάτων κλιμάτων πρόβουλοι τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινώ- 
 νίας συνηθροίσθησαν, ὅπως κατ’ ἐκείνης τῆς ἁμαρτίας 
 ἱερὸν πόλεμον ἀνακηρύσσωμεν, ἢ πρὸ πασῶν τὸ τοῦ 
 Χριστοῦ σῶμα μιαίνει καὶ “τὸν ναὸν τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος 
 κοινοῖ. ᾿Ανακαλούμεθα οὖν τοὺς ἐν τῇ ἐκθέσει λόγους 
 τοὺς ἐμβριθεῖς" οὐδενὸς γὰρ ἄλλου ἢ κοινῆς πάντων 
 Χριστιανῶν ἐνεργείας δεῖ ὅπως τὸ κακὸν τοῦτο παύσωμεν᾽ 
 ἐπικαλούμεθα δὲ ὑμᾶς συμμάχους ἀσκήσεως καθαρᾶς καὶ 
 μεγαλοθύμου' ἐπιμαρτυρόμεθα δὲ ἅπαντας πρὸς οὕστινας 
 ἂν ἡ φωνὴ ἡμῶν ἐφίκηται ἵνα ἡμῖν συναντιλαμβάνωνται 
 πρὸς τὴν τῆς δημοσίας γνώμης κάθαρσιν, καὶ πρὸς τὴν τῶν 
 ἀγεννῶν καὶ σαπρῶν παραδοσέων παντελῆ κατάλυσιν, 
 τῶν μὴ μόνον τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ δεσπότου ἡμῶν Χριστοῦ ἀτιμα- 
 ζουσῶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν φύσιν τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην ἐν εἰκόνι 
 Θεοῦ κτισθεῖσαν καταισχυνουσῶν. 
 
 [Ἡ ἔκθεσις τῆς ᾿Επιτροπῆς πᾶσιν τοῖς ᾿Επισκόποις 
 ἤρεσεν, καὶ ὡς πλείστης σπουδῆς ἀξία ἐπῃνέθη.] 
 
 Ν , ε ’, 
 Περὶ γάμου οσιότητος. 
 
 ᾿Αμέσως δὲ τούτου τοῦ λόγου ἔχεται, ἡ τῆς τοῦ γάμου 
 ὁσιότητος διαφύλαξις, ἀφ᾽ ἧς πᾶσα ἡ δημοσία ἀρετὴ 
 
308 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 ἀπήρτηται. Αὕτη δὲ ζημίαν ἔλαβεν οὐ τὴν τυχοῦσαν 
 ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρτίως ἐν χώραις τισὶν νενομοθετημένων, καθ᾽ 
 ἃ ἡ τοῦ γάμου διάλυσις ἐπὶ πλείοσιν αἰτίαις ἢ τὸ πρότερον 
 συγχωρεῖται. Τὴν οὖν περὶ τούτων Χριστοῦ ἐπιταγὴν 
 πάλιν ἀνακηρύσσειν ἀναγκαῖον ἡμῖν ἡγησάμεθα καὶ ποῖς 
 κληρικοῖς τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας παραγγελίας τινὰς ὑπο- 
 θέσθαι ποίους δεῖ παρέχεσθαι ἑαυτοὺς πρὸς τὰς τοῦ 
 Κυριακοῦ κανόνος παραβάσεις. 
 
 [Διάταξις δ΄, (A.) Τοῦ Κυρίου ῥητῶς τὴν τοῦ γάμου 
 διάλυσιν κωλύοντος παρεκτὸς λόγου πορνείας ἢ 
 μοιχείας, οὐκ ἐξ ἄλλης αἰτίας χωρὶς τῆς ἐξηρημένης 
 
 τὸ διαζύγιον ἀποδέχεσθαι δύναται ἡ Χριστιανὴ 
 
 ἐκκλησία, ἢ ὁτῳοῦν τρόπῳ τῷ παρὰ τὸν νόμον 
 τοῦτον διαξυγέντι γάμον συναινεῖν, ζῶντος τοῦ 
 ἑτέρου προσώπου. 
 
 (B.) T'dpov διὰ πορνείαν ἢ μοιχείαν διαλυθέντος οὐδαμῶς 
 δεῖ τὸ πρόσωπον τὸ τῆς αἰτίας ἔνοχον εἰς μετά- 
 ληψιν εὐλογίας ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἐφ᾽ ἑτέρῳ γάμῳ 
 ἀξιοῦσθαι, ζῶντος τοῦ ἀναιτίου. 
 
 (Γ.) ᾿Επειδήπερ οἴδαμεν διημφισβητῆσθαι πολλάκις 
 ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ, γάμου διὰ μοιχείαν διαλυθέντος, 
 πότερον ἐβούλετο ὁ ὁ Κύριος τῷ ἀναιτίῳ προσώπῳ 
 γώμον ἀπαγορεύειν ἢ μὴ, παραινεῖ τὸ Συμβούλιον 
 τοῖς κληρικοῖς παραγγελίας μὴ διδόναι ὅπως τῶν 
 ἁγίων μυστηρίων καὶ τῶν ἄλλων τῆς ἐκκλησίας 
 προνομίων τοὺς τοιούτους κωλύωσιν, νόμῳ πόλεως 
 γεγαμηκότας. 
 
 it ερὶ πολυγαμίας. 
 
 Ἢ τοῦ γάμου ὁσιότης ὡς ἐν Χριστιανοῖς νενομισμένου 
 ἐν συξυγίᾳ πιστῇ ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς πρὸς μίαν γυναῖκα κεῖται, 
 ἕως ἂν τῷ θανάτῳ ἡ συζυγία διαλυθῆ. Αἱ μὲν οὖν 
 τῶν ἐθνικῶν πολυγαμικαὶ συνάφειαι ὁμολογουμένως τῷ 
 νόμῳ Χριστοῦ κατεγνωσμέναι εἰσίν" ἀπορίας δὲ πολλὰς 
 ἔργῳ παριστᾶσιν, ὧν ἐν τῷ , πρόσθεν χρόνῳ διάφοροι 
 λύσεις γεγένηνται. Ἡμεῖς μέντοι τὴν πολυγαμίαν σκε- 
 
Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 399 
 
 papevor πρὸς τὰ ὑπὸ τῶν ἱεραποστόλων ἐκ διαφόρων 
 μερῶν τῆς γῆς ἀπαγγελθέντα, τῶν μὲν μικροτέρων ἀπέ- 
 χέσθαι ἠξιώσαμεν τοῖς κατὰ τόπους προεστῶσιν τῶν 
 ἐκκλησιῶν ἐπιτρέψαντες, τὰ δὲ καθόλου ὁρίσαντες τοιαῦτα 
 παρηγγείλαμεν οἷς a ἀνάγκην εἶναι νομίζομεν ἐπακολουθεῖν 
 τὸν ἱεραπόστολον, τὸν ἀσφαλῶς ἐνεργεῖν βουλόμενον. 
 Πρῶτον δὲ πάντων τούτου ἐφροντίσαμεν. τοῦ τὴν Χρισ- 
 τιανικὴν τοῦ γάμου ὑπόληψιν τηρεῖν καὶ διαφυλάττειν, 
 νομίσαντες τὰς παραυτίκα καὶ ἐν τάχει ἐπιτυχίας, αἱ 
 ἴσως ἂν πρὸς τὴν διάδοσιν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου ἐπεγένοντο, ἐν 
 μηδενὶ λόγῳ εἶναι διαφθαρείσης καὶ συγχυθείσης τῆς 
 ὑπολήψεως TUES 
 
 [Διάταξις ε΄. (A.) To Συμβουλίῳ͵, ἔδοξε τοὺς ἐν 
 πολυγαμίᾳ διαιτωμένους μὴ πρὸς τὸ βάπτισμα 
 παρίεσθαι, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς κατηχουμένους καταλέγεσθαι 
 καὶ τῇ Χριστιανικῇ διδαχῇ ὑποτάσσεσθαι, ἕως ἂν 
 οὕτω καταστῶσιν ὥστε τὸν νόμον Χριστοῦ παρα- 
 δέχεσθαι. 
 
 (B.) To Συμβουλίῳ͵ ἔδοξε τὰς τῶν πολυγάμων γυναῖκας 
 ἐνίοτε πρὸς τὸ βάπτισμα παριέναι ἐνδέχεσθαι, 
 τοὺς δὲ κατὰ τόπους προεστῶτας τῆς ἐκκλησίας 
 διαγιγνώσκειν τὰς περιστάσεις ἐν αἷς τὰς τοιαύτας 
 βαπτίζειν ἔξεσται.] 
 
 Περὶ τῆς κυριακῆς ἡμέρας. 
 
 Ἢ τῆς κυριακῆς παρατήρησις, ὡς ἡμέρας ἀναπαύσεως 
 καὶ θρησκείας καὶ εὐαγγελικῆς διδασκαλίας, τείνει TapevOds 
 πρὸς τὴν τῆς Χριστιανικῆς πολιτείας εὐταξίαν. ἸΚατε- 
 νοήσαμεν δὲ προσφάτως τῆς ἀμελείας. προκοπτούσης 
 ἀνειμενέστερον τηρεῖσθαι τὴν ἡμέραν, ὥστε κινδυνεύειν 
 τὴν ἁγιότητα αὐτῆς ἐλαττωθήσεσθαι. Τοῦτο δὲ μάλιστα 
 πάντων ἀπευχόμενοι τοὺς σχολῇ πολλῇ χρωμένους 
 ἐπιμαρτυρόμεθα μὴ διὰ φιλαυτίας ἀναπαύσεως καιροὺς 
 καὶ θρησκείας ἑτέροις ὑφαιρεῖν. “Τοὺς δὲ δεσπότας 
 ἐπιμαρτυρόμεθα καὶ τοὺς ἐργοδότας τὰ τῶν ὑπηρετῶν καὶ 
 ἐργατῶν δίκαια φιλοτίμως φυλάττειν. Κληρονομίαν γὰρ 
 ἔχομεν παντιμοτάτην τὴν Κυριακὴν ἡμέραν, ὅστις δὲ 
 ταυτῇ καταχρῆται δεινῆς κρίσεως ὑπεύθυνος γίγνεται. 
 
400 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 [4 ιάταξις Φ(ΔΣ ) Τῷ Συμβουλίῳ ἔδοξε τὴν θρησκευ- 
 
 τικὴν παρατήρησιν μιᾶς ἡμέρας ἐν ταῖς ἑπτά, ἐν 
 τῇ τετάρτῃ ἐντολῇ διαταχθεῖσαν, θεῖον ἔχειν τὸ 
 κῦρος. 
 
 (Β.) ᾿Απὸ τῆς ἀναστάσεως τοῦ Κυρίου τὴν πρώτην τῆς 
 ἑβδομάδος τετηρῆσθαι Χριστιανοῖς ὡς ἡμέραν 
 θρησκείας καὶ ἀναπαύσεως, καὶ κυριακὴν ἐπονο- 
 μασθεῖσαν τὴν ἱερὰν τάξιν τοῦ σαββάτου ἤρεμα 
 διαδέξασθαι. ὡς μεγάλην ἑορτὴν κατὰ πᾶσαν 
 ἑβδομάδα τῇ Χριστιανῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ. 
 
 (FP) Τὴν παρατήρησιν τῆς κυριακῆς, ὡς ἡμέρας ἀνα- 
 παύσεως καὶ θρησκείας καὶ θείας διδασκαλίας, 
 παντιμότατον ἀγαθὸν γεγονέναι πάσαις Χρισ- 
 τιανικαῖς χωραῖς ἐν αἷς διεφυλάχθη. 
 
 (4.) Τὴν καθ᾽ ἡμέραν αὐξανομένην ἀμέλειαν τῆς 
 παρατηρήσεως κινδυνεύειν μέγα τι ὑφαιρήσειν 
 τοῦ ἱεροῦ αὐτῆς καὶ φιλανθρώπου χαρακτῆρος. 
 
 (Ε.) ᾿Απευκτέον εἶναι τὰ μάλιστα τὴν συνήθειάν τίνων 
 τὴν ἐπεκτεινομένην, τῶν εὐπορίᾳ καὶ σχολῇ 
 πολλῇ “χρωμένων, τὸ τὴν κυριακὴν εἰς τέρψεις 
 βιωτικὰς μεταστρέφειν. 
 
 (Z.) Φυλακτέον εἶναι ἵνα μηδὲν ὑφαιρῆται τῆς ἀναπαυ- 
 σεως ἧς ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ταύτῃ οὐχ ἧττον οἱ ὑπηρέται 
 ἢ οἱ κύριοι, οὐδ᾽ ἧττον οἱ χειροτέχναι ἢ οἱ ἐργο- 
 δόται δίκαιοί εἰσιν ἀπολαύς ἢ; 
 
 Περὶ τοῦ κοινεταιρισμοῦ (Socialism). 
 
 Συνῳκείωται δὲ τοῖς πρακτικοῖς ξητήμασι τούτοις ἡ 
 σχέσις τῆς Χριστιανικῆς ἐκκλησίας πρὸς τὰ κοινο- 
 πολιτικὰ τὰ καθ᾽ ἡμέραν ἀμφισβητούμενα. Τὸ γὰρ 
 περισσῶς ἄνισον τῆς διαδόσεως τῶν βιωτικῶν χρημάτων, 
 καὶ ἔνθεν μὲν ὁ ἀποθησαυρισμὸς ἄ ἄτοπος γεγενημένος, ἔνθεν 
 δὲ ἡ ἡ ἀθλιωτάτη πτωχεία---ταῦτα τῷ ἐν ἑαυτῷ τὸ φρόνημα 
 τοῦ “Χριστοῦ κατέχοντι φροντίδα. πολλὴν καὶ μέριμναν 
 παρέχει. Οὐδὲν ἄρα λόγου ἀξιώτερόν ἐστιν, οὔτε τοῖς 
 κληρικοῖς οὔτε τοῖς λαικοῖς, ἢ τὰ περὶ τοῦ λεγομένου 
 κοινεταιρισμοῦ προβεβλημένα. Ἢ δὲ μελέτη τῶν ἐπι- 
 
Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 401 
 
 χειρημάτων τῶν πρὸς τὸ ἰσόρροπον τεινόντων περὶ τὰ 
 ἐκτὸς ἀγαθά, καὶ ἡ μετὰ χαρᾶς ἀποδοχὴ τῶν καλῶς τισιν 
 ἢ ἐπινοουμένων ἢ πραττομένων, καὶ τὸ βουλεύεσθαι ὅ ὅπως 
 εἴτε νομοθεσίᾳ εἴτε ἑταιρείᾳ εἴτε ἄλλῳ τινὶ τρόπῳ εἰρηνικῶς 
 καὶ ἄνευ στάσεως καὶ ἀδικίας αἱ ἀπορίαι αὗται λύσεως 
 τύχωσιν---ταῦτα ἐν τοῖς γενναιοτάτοις ἀριθμοῦμεν οἷς οἱ 
 τοῖς ἴχνεσιν τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐπακολουθεῖν βουλόμενοι 
 ἑαυτοὺς παραδιδόναι δύνανται. "Ἔστιν δὲ ἐν τῇ ἐκθέσει 
 
 ἃ πρὸς τὴν λύσιν τῶν προβλημάτων τούτων ἂν συμ- 
 βάλλοι. 
 
 Περὶ τῶν μεταναστάντων. 
 
 Εἰσὶν δὲ καὶ οἱ ἐξαιρέτως τῆς φροντίδος τοῦ συμβου- 
 λίου καὶ συμπαθείας ἐνδικώτατα ἠξιώθησαν. Διὰ γὰρ 
 τῶν μεταναστάντων ἡ τῶν Βρεττανικῶν νήσων ἐκκλησία 
 τῇ τῶν Ὁ μοσπόνδων͵ ἸΠολιτειῶν καὶ ταῖς τῶν ἀποικιῶν 
 ἐκκλησίαις κοινωνικῷ συνδέσμῳ δέδεται. Οὐδὲν ἄρα 
 οἰκειότερον τῷ ἡμετέρῳ συλλόγῳ ἢ τὸ ἐπισκέπτεσθαι τί 
 τὸ ὀφειλόμενον τοῖς πολλοῖς τούτοις τοῖς ὁμότιμον ἡμῖν 
 πίστιν κεκτημένοις. Προσήκει δὲ μάλιστα τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ 
 κατὰ πᾶσαν τὴν πορείαν ἐκ τῆς ἀρχαίας πατρίδος εἰς 
 τὴν νέαν συμπαθέστατα τούτους ἐπισκοπεῖν καὶ μετὰ 
 φροντίδος πολλῆς τηρεῖν, καὶ τοὺς κινδύνους τοὺς περὶ 
 τὴν ὁδὸν καὶ τῇ ψυχῇ καὶ τῷ πνεύματι ἐγκειμένους 
 ἀποτρέπειν. "Ev δὲ τῇ ἐκθέσει τινὰ ὑποτεθείκαμεν τὰ 
 πρὸς τὸ τέλος τοῦτο ὡς πιστεύομεν συμβαλούμενα. 
 
 Περὶ διδασκαλίας καὶ κατηχήσεως. 
 
 Διατάξαντες οὖν οὕτως περὶ τούτων, ὥστε ταῖς ἐπιτα- 
 γαῖς τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ τῇ εὐαγγελικῇ εὐταξίᾳ καὶ κατὰ τὸν 
 βίον καὶ ἐν τῇ πολιτείᾳ Tov πρῶτον τόπον ἀποδοῦναι, 
 ἐκεῖνα ἤδη ἐπισκεψώμεθα ἃ ἃ ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις ἕτοιμα καὶ 
 πρόσκαιρά ἐστιν εἰς τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀρχῶν τῆς 
 πίστεως αἷς πᾶσα ἡ ἠθικὴ διδασκαλία ἐπῳκοδόμηται. 
 
 Πεπείσμεθα δὲ ἀνενδοιάστως τὸ ἔργον τοῦτο μελέτης 
 ἀκριβοῦς δεῖσθαι καὶ ἐπιδόσεως μεγάλης. Ἢ yap θρη- 
 
402 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 σκευτικὴ προπαιδεία τῶν νεωτέρων ἐντελείας καὶ γνησιό- 
 τητος πολὺ ἐλλείπει, οὐχ ἥκιστα δὲ περὶ τὴν θείαν διδαχήν. 
 Ἢ δὲ ἔλλειψις. αὕτη οὐχ ἑνὶ μόνον γένει ἀνθρώπων πρόσ- 
 εστιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς λαικοὺς ἑτοιμάσασθαι δεῖ ὦ ὡς συλλη- 
 Ψομένους τοῖς κληρικοῖς πρὸς τὴν χρείαν ταύτην. Τοῖς 
 μὲν οὖν γονεῦσιν παρὰ θεοῦ τοῦτο ἐπέσταλται" τοῖς δὲ 
 ἀναδόχοις παραγγέλλειν χρὴ ὅπως τοῖς παιδίοις ἀνθ᾽ ὧν 
 τῷ Χριστῷ συνετάξαντο τὴν πρέπουσαν ἐπιμέλειαν παρέ- 
 Xoow, iva μὴ ἀδίδακτοι μένωσιν, ἢ πρὸς τὴν σφραγῖδα 
 τῆς βεβαιώσεως ἀπαράσκευοι χωρῶσιν. Πολλὴν δὲ 
 ἐπίδοσιν ἐπιδέχοιτ᾽ ἂν ἡ φανερῶς γιγνομένη κατήχησις 
 καὶ ἡ ἑτοιμασία τῶν πρὸς τὴν βεβαίωσιν τασσομένων. 
 “Awa δὲ καὶ συνεχεστέρας ἐπιστάσεως καὶ σπουδῆς ἐπι- 
 μελεστέρας παρὰ τῶν κληρικῶν προσδεῖται τὰ σχολεῖα 
 τὰ κυριακὰ τῆς νῦν πολλαχοῦ εὑρισκομένης. 'Γῶν δὲ ἐν 
 τοῖς τοιούτοις διδασκόντων καὶ τῶν νεοφυτοδιδασκάλων 
 (pupil-teachers) ἐν τοῖς δημοτικοῖς σχολείοις (elementary 
 schools) τὴν παιδαγωγίαν οὐδὲν GAXO ἢ ἔργον ἀπαραίτητον 
 τῷ πρεσβυτέρῳ καὶ ποιμένι νομιστέον᾽ τώ τε ἠθικὰ καὶ 
 πρακτικὰ παραγγέλματα τὰ ἐκ τῶν Βιβλίων βεβαιοῦν 
 δεῖ τὸν διδάσκαλον τοὺς μαθητὰς ἀεὶ ἐπανακαλοῦντα ἐπὶ 
 τὰς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀπειλὰς καὶ τὰ μετ᾽ αὐτῶν διδαχῆς καὶ 
 εὐταξίας οἰκεῖα παραδείγματα ἐν ταῖς αὐταῖς γραφαῖς 
 περιλαμβανόμενα. ᾿Ενδέχεται δὲ ἔτι πλέον τῆς νῦν 
 μεθόδου τοὺς ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ ὁμιλοῦντας τῇ πίστει ὁμοῦ 
 καὶ τῇ τῆς ἀρετῆς πράξει συμβάλλεσθαι, καὶ τοὺς 
 ἐξηγουμένους τὸ τῆς ἁγίας θρησκείας σύστημα καὶ τάξιν 
 προάγειν τοὺς συναγομένους ὅπως μανθάνωσιν ἀκριβῶς 
 οἵαις σχέσεσι πρὸς ἀλλήλας, χρῶνται ἡ εὐσέβεια καὶ ἡ 
 πίστις καὶ τὰ ἔργα---τουτέστιν οἷα διδάσκουσιν. ἥτε 
 βίβλος τῆς δημοσίας εὐχῆς καὶ ἡ κατήχησις καὶ τὰ 
 σύμβολα. 
 
 Οὐ μέντοι διὰ τοὺς »νεωτέρους μόνον ἢ καὶ διὰ τοὺς 
 φανερῶς ἐν τοῖς ποιμνίοις αὐτῶν τεταγμένους ἀσφαλοῦς 
 καὶ ἀκριβοῦς διδαχῆς ἐφίεσθαι δεῖ τοὺς κληρικούς. 
 
 ΔΕΙ͂ γὰρ τῶν ἱερῶν γραφῶν μελέτη διανοητικῆς γυμνα- 
 σίας μέρος οὐ σμικρὸν τῷ Χριστιανῷ “γέγονεν, τὰ δὲ 
 βιβλία πρῶτον πάντων | ὄργανον πᾶσιν τοῖς τὴν εὐσέβειαν 
 ὑφηγουμένοις. ᾿Αλλ᾽ ἐν τῷ παρόντι, κατὰ δυστυχίαν, 
 
Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 403 
 
 πολλοὶ πολλαχόθεν ὡς ἐκ παρατάξεως τοῖς βιβλίοις 
 ἐπιστρατεύουσιν, οὐκ ἐῶντες ἀποδέχεσθαι αὐτὰ ὡς θείας 
 γνώσεως θησαυρόν, ἐπιπολάζουσι δὲ ἐν πάσῃ τάξει τῆς 
 πολιτείας ὑποψίαι πολλαὶ καὶ ἀπορίαι καὶ ἀντιλογίαι 
 καὶ κρίσεις ἀγνώμονες τῶν τῇ ἀποκαλύψει τῆς ἀληθείας 
 ἐπῳκοδομημένων δογμάτων. 
 
 “Ὅταν μὲν οὖν τὰ τοιαῦτα ἐξ ἀπειρίας γίγνηται 
 τῆς καθηκούσης σχέσεως τῆς φυσικῆς ἐπιστήμης πρὸς 
 τὴν θείαν ἀποκάλυψιν, ἐνδέχεται δὴ καὶ εἰκός ἐστι μετὰ 
 πάσης εὐγνωμοσύνης κρίνειν καὶ ὑπομονητικῶς ἀνέχεσθαι. 
 "Hav δὲ καὶ ταραχθῶσιν αἱ ψυχαὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων διὰ τῶν 
 φυσικῶν εὑρημάτων ἢ ἐκ τῶν φυσιολόγων ἀποφάσεως, 
 φροντιστέον ὅπως μὴ τὰ σπέρματα τῆς πίστεως ἀποσβέ- 
 σομεν, μᾶλλον δὲ τοὺς οὕτως ταραχθέντας ἐπὶ τὸν 
 ἀληθινὸν λόγον προάξομεν, τουτέστιν ἐξ αὐτῶν τῶν 
 εὑρημάτων δεικτέον δηλοῦσθαι νόμους οἵτινες, τοῖς ὀρθῶς 
 κρίνουσιν τὸ ἔργον τοῦ κτίστου καὶ δημιουργοῦ τὸ ἔνδοξον, 
 τῷ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ φερόμενον, μετὰ τιμῆς 
 μείζονος διασαφοῦσιν. 
 
 Μείζονα δ᾽ ἔχει κίνδυνον ἡ παράταξις αὕτη, εἴτε σκεπτι- 
 κὴν δεῖ λέγειν εἴτε καὶ ἄντικρυς πολεμίαν, διὰ τὸ χαλεπῶς 
 ἂν διορίσαι ἡμᾶς μέχρι τίνος ἡ διδαχὴ ἡμῶν, ἢ τοὐλάχ- 
 ἐστον ἡ περὶ αὐτῆς τοῦ πλήθους ὑπόληψις, φαίνεσθαι 
 δύναται λόγον ἔχουσα ἀρκούντως τῶν περὶ θεοπνευστίας 
 καὶ περὶ τῆς ἐν τῇ παλαιᾷ διαθήκῃ προπαιδευτικῆς OLKOVO- 
 μίας ἐκ πολλοῦ καὶ πολλαχοῦ ἐπιπολαζουσῶν δοξῶν, εἰ 
 καὶ μηδέποτε ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ κυρίως κεκανονισμένων. 
 
 Ilapawveréov οὖν τοῖς κληρικοῖς ὅπως τὰ ἄμφισβητή- 
 ματα ταῦτα μετ᾽ εὐλαβείας καὶ φιλοπονίας μεταχειρίζωσιν, 
 καὶ σπουδαιότατα παρακλητέον σύνδεσμον πάσης τῆς 
 διδαχῆς ποιεῖσθαι τὸν Κύριον ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστόν, ὡς 
 θυσίαν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν, καὶ ἰατρὸν τῆς ἁμαρτω- 
 λίας, καὶ πηγὴν πάσης τῆς πνευματικῆς ζωῆς, καὶ ἀπο- 
 κάλυψιν τῇ συνειδήσει τῶν τε ὅρων καὶ τῆς προαιρέσεως 
 πάσης τῆς ἠθικῆς ἀρετῆς. Eis αὐτὸν γὰρ καὶ εἰς τὸ 
 ἔργον αὐτοῦ συντείνουσιν τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης αἱ διδαχαὶ 
 πᾶσαι, καὶ ἐξ αὐτοῦ αἱ τῆς καινῆς ῥέουσιν πᾶσαι καὶ 
 πνεύματι καὶ δυνάμει καὶ μορφῇ. Τῆς δὲ ἐκκλησίας τὸ 
 μὲν ἔργον ἐστὶν ἡ προσκομιδὴ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις καὶ ἡ 
 
404 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 ἐξάπλωσις τῶν χαρισμάτων τῆς ἐνσαρκώσεως τοῦ Λόγου, 
 ἡ δὲ διδαχὴ ἡ ἀνάπτυξις τῶν ἐπ᾽ αὐτῇ τῇ ἐνσαρκώσει 
 θεολογουμένων, ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς συμβόλοις εὑρίσκεται. 
 
 Περὶ τῶν πρὸς ἄλληλα σχέσεων τῶν μερῶν τῆς 
 ᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας. 
 
 Ἔν τῇ ζητήσει περὶ τὴν πρὸς ἀχλήλους σχέσιν τῶν 
 παροικιῶν. καὶ “μερῶν τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας ἔνια ἐφεύ- 
 ρομεν ἃ καὶ ὑμῖν ὡς ἀξιόλογα “παρατιθέμεθα. ᾿Αναγκαῖον 
 μὲν πρῶτον φαίνεται ἐ ἐπὶ τὰς ἀρχὰς τὰς ὑπὸ τοῦ προτέρου 
 Συμβουλίου ἐν ἔτει amon! (1878) καταβληθείσας ὑ ὑμᾶς 
 παραπέμπειν, καὶ κελεύειν τὰς τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας 
 ἐκκλησίας καὶ τοὺς ἐν αὐταῖς συναναστρεφομένους τὰς 
 κυρίως δηλωθείσας πράξεις ἢ ἢ παροικίας ἄλλης ἢ ἢ ἐπαρχίας 
 ἐν τιμῇ ἔχειν" ἐπίσκοπον δὲ μηδένα ἢ κληρικὸν ἐν 
 παροικίᾳ νομίμως κατασταθείσῃ, μὴ ,ἐπιτρέποντος τοῦ 
 ἐνταῦθα ἐπισκόπου, λειτουργεῖν" ἐπίσκοπον δὲ μηδένα 
 τοὺς ἐξ ἄλλης παροικίας ἐλθόντας κληρικοὺς ἄνευ συστα- 
 τικῶν ἐπιστολῶν, καὶ τοῦτο ἱκανῶν, εἰς λειτουργίαν 
 δέχεσθαι. Ἢ yap τῶν τοιούτων κανόνων παραμέλησις 
 σκανδάλων χαλεπῶν αἰτία γέγονεν. Οἱ μὲν. οὖν ἐπίσκο- 
 ποι τὰς τοιαύτας βλάβας προφυλάττεσθαι ἕ ἕτοιμοί εἰσιν 
 ἰδίᾳ τὴν συμβουλὴν διδόντες ἅ ἅμα τῷ εἰωθότι καὶ @ ὡρισμένῳ 
 συστατικῷ, τοὺς δὲ κληρικοὺς προσήκει εὐλαβείᾳ μείζονι 
 χρῆσθαι. τὰς μαρτυρίας ὑποσημαινομένους" Τοὺς δὲ τῶν 
 μαρτυριῶν δεομένους τοῦ μὴ λίαν εὐπαθεῖς εἶναι κατέχειν 
 ἑαυτούς, ἐὰν συμβαίνῃ αὐτοῖς περὶ τοῦ τίνες εἰσὶ καὶ 
 ποῖοι τὸ ἦθος ἐξετάξεσθαι" ἡ γὰρ τοιαύτη ἐξέτασις καίπερ 
 περισσὴ εἶναι δοκοῦσα πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς γιγνομένη, ἀναγκαία 
 ἐστὶν ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολὺ ὅπως τῆς προσηκούσης ἀσφαλείας 
 τυγχάνωμεν. 
 
 Εὐλαβητέον δὲ μάλιστα περὶ τοὺς εἰς τὴν ἐν ταῖς 
 ἀποικίαις λειτουργίαν χειροτονηθέντας. ᾿Ασμενέστατα 
 μὲν γὰρ συγγυγνώσκομεν τοὺς τὴν τοῦ βίου ἀκμὴν εἰς τὴν 
 ἔξω διακονίαν προθύμως ἐπιδόντας μεγάλης “σπουδῆς 
 ἀξίους εἶναι ὁπόταν δέῃ αὐτοὺς προελθόντος τοῦ χρόνου 
 
Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 405 
 
 ἀναπαύεσθαι ws ἐν τῇ πατρίδι ἢ τὴν οἴκοι | ἐργασίαν τῆς 
 ἔξω ἀνταλλάττεσθαι. ἸΚαθόλου δὲ περὶ τούτων ὁρίζεσθαι 
 ἀδύνατον. 
 
 3 a Ν᾿ δ᾽ δὲ , - , a. 
 
 Exeivo δὲ ἡμῖν προτέθειται ws μεγίστης σπουδῆς ἄξιον 
 
 Ν t der | / ἈΝ a X / » “ 
 
 τ τὸ εἰ ἐνδέχεται Βουλὴν ἢ Βουλὰς καθιστάναι ἀναφορᾶς 
 ἕνεκα, ὥστε συμβουλεύειν περὶ τῶν ξητημάτων ἃ ἃ ἂν τύχῃ 
 προβεβλημένα ὑπὸ τῶν τὰς ἐπαρχίας τῆς ἐν ταῖς ἀποι- 
 κίαις ἐκκλησίας ἐπιτετραμμένων, ἢ καὶ διαγνῶναι. Περὶ 
 δὲ τούτου ἡμῖν δοκεῖ σκέψεως τε δεῖν πολλῆς καὶ βουλῆς 
 χρονίας, ὥστε μὴ τελευτῶντας ἀναγκάζεσθαι ἀρχὴν 
 καθιστάναι δι’ ἧς, εἴτε συμβουλευτικῆς γιγνομένης εἴτε 
 δικαστηρίῳ μᾶλλον ἐοικυίας, ἡ εὐκοσμία ἅμα καὶ ἡ 
 αὐτονομία κινδύνευοι ἂν βλαβήσεσθαι. 
 
 ἈΝ Lal Sie “ , ~ lad 
 Περὶ τῆς Tap new συνενώσεως τῶν Xprotiavov. 
 
 Μετὰ φροντίδος καὶ “μερίμνης συμβουλευομένοις ἔδοξεν 
 ἡμῖν ἀρκεῖν ὅρους τινὰς προκαταβαλέσθαι ὡς ἀφορμὴν 
 ἀφ᾽ ἧς, Θεοῦ συνεργοῦντος, ἐπὶ τὴν οἴκου συνένωσιν 
 ἐγγυτέρω ἂν προχωροῖμεν. Οὗτοι δὲ οἱ ὅροι, τέτταρες 
 ὄντες τὸν ἀριθμὸν, ἐν ταῖς παρακειμέναις διατάξεσιν 
 εὑρεθήσονται. 
 
 [Διάταξις a’. Τῷ Συμβουλίῳ ἔδοξε τοὺς ὅρους τούσδε 
 ἀναδεῖξαι ὡς ἀφορμήν τινα παρέχοντας ἀφ᾽ ἧς, 
 Θεοῦ συνεργοῦντος, ἐπὶ τὴν οἴκοι συνένωσιν 
 ἐγγυτέρω ἂν προχωροῖμεν. 
 
 (A.) Τὰς ἁγίας “γραφὰς τῆς παλαιᾶς καὶ τῆς καινῆς 
 
 ιαθήκης, τὰ πάντα εἰς σωτηρίαν ἀναγκαῖα κατε- 
 χούσας, καὶ κανόνα καὶ κυρίαν στάθμην τῆς 
 πίστεως ὑπάρχουσας. 
 
 (Β.) Τὸ σύμβολον τὸ ἀποστολικόν, ἐν βαπτίσματι 
 ἐκφωνούμενον, καὶ τὸ Νικαῖον, ἔκθεσιν τελείαν ὃν 
 τῆς Χριστιανικῆς πίστεως. 
 
 ([.) Τὰ δύο μυστήρια ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Χριστοῦ κεκα- 
 νονισμένα---τὸ Βάπτισμα καὶ τὸ Κυριακὸν δεῖπνον 
 -- μετ᾽ ἀδιαλείπτου χρήσεως τῶν ἐπὶ τῇ πρώτῃ 
 καταστάσει λόγων τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ τῶν ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ 
 ὡρισμένων στοιχείων διακονούμενα. 
 
406 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 (4.) Τὴν ἐκ γενεῶν ἀρχαίων παραδεδομένην ᾿Ἐπισκοπὴν 
 ἐπιτηδείως οἰκονομουμένην ταῖς ἀεὶ κατὰ τόπους 
 χρείαις γιγνομέναις τῶν ἐθνῶν καὶ τῶν λαῶν τῶν 
 ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ καλουμένων εἰς τὴν ἑνότητα τῆς 
 ἐκκλησιας. 
 
 Διάταξις ιβ΄. To Συμβούλιον μετὰ σπουδῆς παρα- 
 καλεῖ τοὺς τὰ μέρη τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας νομίμως 
 ἐπιτετραμμένους, συνεργοῦντας ἀλλήλοις ὅσον 
 δυνατόν, ἀποφαίνεσθαι ὡς ἕτοιμοι ὑπάρχουσιν 
 συμβουλῆς φιλαδέλφου μετέχειν (οἵανπερ ἤδη 
 ἀπεφήνατο ἡ ἐν ταῖς Ὁ μοσπόνδοις Πολιτείαις 
 τῆς ᾿Αμερικῆς ἐκκλησία) μετὰ τῶν ἐπιτρόπων 
 ἄλλων Χριστιανικῶν κοινωνιῶν τῶν ἐν τοῖς 
 ᾿Αγγλογλώσσοις ἔθνεσιν, ὅπως λογίζωνται τίνι 
 τρόπῳ ἐνδέχεται προχωρεῖν εἴτ᾽ ἐπὶ ὁλοσχερῆ 
 συνένωσιν, εἴτ᾽ ἐπὶ τοιαύτην τινὰ σχέσιν ἐξ ἧς ἃ ἂν 
 ῥᾷον a εἰς ἑνότητα τελειοτέραν ἐν ὑστέρῳ χρόνῳ 
 προιέναι, 
 
 Διάταξις uy. Τὸ Συμβούλιον παραινεῖ. ὡς λόγου 
 μάλιστα ἄξιον πρὸς τὴν συνένωσιν, τὸ γνωστοὺς 
 ποιεῖν ἅπασιν τοὺς κανόνας τῆς διδαχῆς καὶ τοὺς 
 τύπους τῆς λειτουργίας τοὺς ἐν τῇ ᾿Αγγλικανῇ 
 ἐκκλησίᾳ νομιζομένους" ἔτι δὲ καὶ τοὐναντίον τοὺς 
 κανόνας τῆς διδαχῆς καὶ τῆς θρησκείας καὶ τῆς 
 πολιτείας τοὺς ἐν ἄλλαις “κοινωνίαις τῶν Χρισ- 
 τιανῶν νομιζομένους, εἰς ἃς τὰ ᾿Αγγλόγλωσσα 
 ἔθνη κατατέτμηται.ἢ 
 
 Δοκεῖ δὲ ἡ τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας σχέσις πρὸς 
 τοὺς ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς διὰ τῶν ἀθλίων σχισμάτων διακεκριμένους 
 τοιάδε τις εἶναι" -- 
 
 “Ἑτοίμους ἡμᾶς αὐτοὺς παρέχομεν πρὸς φιλάδελφον 
 συμβουλὴν μετὰ τῶν συγκοινωνίας τελειοτέρας μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν 
 μέχρι τινὸς γοῦν ὀρεγομένων. “Opous δὲ “προτίθεμεν ἐφ᾽ 
 οἷς ἐνδέχεται καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν πεποίθησιν 
 τὴν τοιαύτην συγκοινωνίαν γίγνεσθαι. Ki γὰρ καὶ τὰ 
 μάλιστα ποθοῦμεν τοὺς ἀφ᾽ ἡμῶν ἠλλοτριωμένους συμ- 
 περιλαμβάνειν, ὥστε εἰς ἔργον ἐλθεῖν τὸ τοῦ Κυρίου 
 
Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 407 
 
 “ μία ποίμνη, εἷς ποιμήν, οὐ μέντοι χρὴ ἡμᾶς οἰκονόμους 
 ἀπίστους γίγνεσθαι τῆς μεγάλης παρακαταθήκης τῆς 
 ἡμῖν παραδεδομένης. Οὔτε γὰρ περὶ τὴν πίστιν οὔτε 
 περὶ τὴν ἐκκλησιαστικὴν πολιτείαν τὴν τάξιν τὴν ἡμετέραν 
 ἀπολείπειν δυνάμεθα. Ἢ δὲ ὁμονοία ἐκείνη ἡ διὰ τοι- 
 αὐτης λιποταξίας ἐ ἐγγυγνομένη οὔτε ἀληθινὴ ἂν εἴη οὔτε 
 ἐπυπόθητος κατὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν γνώμην. 
 
 ᾿Δσμένως μέντοι καὶ μετ᾽ εὐχαριστίας, ἀναγνωρίξομεν 
 τὸ ἔργον τῆς εὐσεβείας τὸ ἀληθινὸν τὸ ὑπὸ τῶν Χριστια- 
 νῶν τῶν ἔξω τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας φιλοπονούμενον. 
 Ζ4ήλη γάρ ἐστιν καὶ ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡ ἡ χάρις ἡ ταῖς ὑπὲρ τοῦ 
 
 ριστοῦ ἐνεργείαις αὐτῶν συγχωρηθεῖσα. Τὸ δὲ περὶ 
 τούτων λεγόμενον οὐ παρανοητέον. Οὐ γὰρ περιορῶμεν 
 οἵοις συνδέσμοις καὶ ὡς σταθερᾷ τῇ “πεποιθήσει δεδεμένον 
 τῶν ἐπιτηδευμάτων τῶν εἰθισμένων ἔ ἔχονται. Ταῦτα δὲ ἐ ἐν 
 λόγῳ ἔχοντες καὶ τὰς ὑπολήψεις καὶ τὰς γνώμας τὰς 
 ἡμετέρας λόγου τυγχάνειν ἀξιοῦμεν. Μαρτυροῦσιν. δὴ 
 ἄνδρες ἀξιόλογοι ὅ ὅτι οὐκ ἐν ᾿Αγγλίᾳ μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν 
 πᾶσιν μέρεσιν τῆς Χριστιανότητος πόθος ἀληθινὸς τῆς 
 ἑνότητος. εὑρίσκεται, καὶ τὰ σπλάγχνα τῶν ἀνθρώπων 
 μᾶλλον ἢ τὸ πρὶν ὁμιλίας “Χριστιανικῆς ὀρέγεται. Τὴν 
 δὲ συμπάθειαν. ταύτην καὶ ἐν ταῖς ζητήσεσίν καὶ ἐν ταῖς 
 διατάξεσιν ἐν ἑαυτῷ πληρῶς ὑπάρχουσαν ἐνεδείξατο, τὸ 
 Συμβούλιον' εὐχόμεθα δὲ πρὸ πάντων ὅπως τὸ πνεῦμα 
 τῆς ἀγάπης ἐπιφέρηται ἐπάνω τῶν θολερῶν ὑδάτων τῶν 
 θρησκευτικῶν διαλογισμῶν. 
 
 Ἢ πρὸς τὴν Σ᾽ κανδιναυικὴν ἐκκλησίαν σχέσις. 
 
 Ἔν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν οἷς ἐπιμίγνυνται μάλιστα οἱ 4γγλό- 
 γλωσσοι ὑπάρχει, δηλονότι τὰ Σ᾽ κανδιναυικὰ, καὶ γὰρ ἐν 
 πολλαῖς τῶν ἡμετέρων παροικιῶν τῷ πλήθει ὄχλον ἱκανὸν 
 συντελεῖ. Οὐκ ἀδιάφορον οὖν τῷ Συμβουλίῳ ποία ἂν 
 εἴη ἡ τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας σχέσις πρὸς τὰς Σ κανδι- 
 ναυικὰς ἐκκλησίας. Παρῃνέσαμεν δὲ ὅπως εἰς ἀκριβεσ- 
 τέραν γνῶσιν ἀλλήλων προέλθωμεν καὶ φιλικώτερον 
 συναναστρεφώμεθα μέχρις ἂν δυνώμεθα, συγχωρούντων 
 
408 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 TOV πραγμάτων, “συμμαχίαν οἰκειότεραν ποιήσασθαι, μὴ 
 παραδόντες τὰς ἀρχὰς ἃς ἀναγκαίας ἡγούμεθα. 
 
 [4 ιάταξις ιδ΄, ᾿Εδοξε τῷ συμβουλίῳ σπουδάξειν 
 χρῆναι σχέσεις φιλικωτέρας μεταξὺ τῶν Σ᾽ κανδι- 
 ναυικῶν ἐκκλησιῶν καὶ τῆς ᾿4γγλικανῆς ἐκκλησίας 
 καταστήσασθαι, τὰς δὲ προκλήσεις τῆς Σ᾿ουηδικῆς 
 ἐκκλησίας, ἐάν τινες γίγνωνται, πρὸς ἀμοιβαῖον 
 σαφηνισμὸν τῶν διαφορῶν, a ἀσμενέστατα δέχεσθαι 
 
 ἡμᾶς, βουλομένους εἴ ποτ᾽ ἔσται δυνατόν, προελ- 
 θόντος τοῦ “χρόνου, τὴν συγκοινωνίαν ἐπ᾽ ἀρχαῖς 
 βεβαίαις τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς πολιτείας καταστή- 
 σασθαι. 
 
 Πρὸς τοὺς ἀρχαίους καθολικοὺς καὶ ἄλλους. 
 
 ᾿Αδύνατον δὲ μὴ συμπάσχειν τὰ μάλιστα. τοὺς εἰς τὴν 
 ᾿Δγγλικανὴν κοινωνίαν συντελοῦντας τοῖς ἐν τῇ ἠπείρῳ τῆς 
 Εὐρώπης εἰς μεταρρύθμισιν τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἀγωνιξομένοις, 
 τοῖς ἐπὶ μεγίσταις δυσκολίαις ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολὺ τὴν αὐτὴν 
 μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν τάξιν κατασχοῦσιν καὶ τὴν ᾿Επισκοπὴν ὡς 
 ἀποστολικὴν κτίσιν κρατήσασιν. Τουγαροῦν οὔπω 
 παρεῖναι τὸν καιρὸν ἡγούμενοι ἐν ᾧ συνθήκην πρὸς τού- 
 των τινὰς ἀμέσως γράφειν δυνάμεθα, καὶ ἐξαιφνίδιον 
 πρᾶξιν οἱανδήποτε ἀποποιούμενοι, ἀρχαίους καὶ 
 γνωρίμους κανόνας τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς πολιτείας Here 
 λουσαν παραβαίνειν, ἡγούμεθα μέντοι δύνασθαι ἡ ἡμᾶς τὰ 
 τῆς φιλίας προτείνειν, “μὴ παριδόντες τοὺς κανόνας 
 ἐκείνους, «αὶ ἐλπίζομεν ἐν καιρῷ καθήκοντι μετὰ τινῶν 
 γοῦν τῶν κοινωνιῶν τούτων συνθήκην καὶ συμμαχίαν 
 ποιεῖσθαι. 
 
 [διάταξις ιε΄. AAs ) ‘Acpéves κατενόησε τὸ > υμβούλιον 
 τὸ σεμνὸν καὶ αὔταρκες τῆς τάξεως τῆς ὑπὸ τῆς 
 ἀρχαίας καθολικῆς ἐκκλησίας τῆς ᾿Ολλανδίας 
 διατηρουμένης καὶ πρὸς συχνοτέραν καὶ φιλάδελφον 
 ἐπιμιξίαν ἀποβλέπει ὅπως ἐκποδὼν γίγνηται 
 πολλὰ τῶν ἡμᾶς καὶ αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ παρὸν διαι- 
 ρούντων. 
 
Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 409 
 
 (B.) Καθήκειν ἡμῖν ἡγούμεθα πρός τε τὴν ἀρχαίαν 
 καθολικὴν κοινωνίαν ἐν Γ᾽ ἑρμανίᾳ, καὶ πρὸς τὴν 
 “ς Χριστιανὴν καθολικὴν ἐκκλησίαν᾽" τῆς “Ελβετίας 
 φιλόφρονασυναναστροφὴν προτρέψασθαι οὐ μόνον 
 διὰ συμπάθειαν ἀλλὰ καὶ τῷ Θεῷ εὐχαριστοῦντας 
 τῷ ἐν μεγάλαις ἀπορίαις. καὶ δυσκολίαις ἅ ἅμα δὲ καὶ 
 πειρασμοῖς πρὸς τὸ πάσχειν ὑπὲρ τῆς ἀληθείας 
 ἐνδυναμώσαντι αὐτούς" καὶ τὰ προνόμια αὐτοῖς 
 παρέχομεν τὰ ὑπὸ τῆς ᾿Επιτροπῆς ὑποτεθέντα, 
 ἐπὶ τοῖς ἐν τῇ ἐκθέσει “δηλουμένοις.Ἐ 
 
 (Τ.) Συμπαθείας ἀξία ἐ ἐστὶν ἡ τῶν ἀρχαίων καθολικῶν 
 ἐν Avotpia αὐταπαρνητικὴ προθυμία, ἐλπίζομεν 
 δὲ, τῆς διοργανώσεως αὐτῶν στερεᾶς ἀρκούντως καὶ 
 τελείας γενομένης, γενικωτέραν κοινωνίαν καθισ- 
 τάναι δυνήσεσθαι. 
 
 (4.) Περὶ δὲ τῶν μεταρρυθμιστῶν τῶν ἐν ᾿Ιταλίᾳ καὶ 
 Γαλλίᾳ καὶ ᾿Ισπανίᾳ καὶ Aovavravia TOV τοὺς 
 ἀθέσμους ὅρους τῆς κοινωνίας ἀποσειομένων, 
 ἐλπίζομεν αὐτοὺς τύπους οὕτως ὑγιαινούσης 
 διδαχῆς καὶ πολιτείας δέξεσθαι, καὶ διοργάνωσιν 
 οὕτως καθολικὴν παρασκευάσεσθαι, ὥστε δύνασθαι 
 ἡμᾶς ἐντελεστέρῳ τινὶ τρόπῳ ἀποδέχεσθαι 
 
 > 
 avuTous. 
 
 (Ε) Μὴ βουλόμενοι, ἐμποδίξειν τοὺς τῆς καθολικῆς 
 ἐκκλησίας ἐπισκόπους τοῦ κατὰ τὸ δίκαιον ἐ ἐπεμ- 
 βαίνειν εἰς τὰ πράγματα ἐπευγούσης τῆς ἐσχάτης 
 ἀνάγκης, παραιτούμεθα μέντοι πρᾶξιν ὁποιανδή- 
 ποτε ἥτις ἂν δοκῇ τοὺς ἀρχαίους καὶ βεβαίους 
 ὅρους τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς πολιτείας καὶ τὰ 
 
 
 
 * "Ἔχει δὲ οὕτως ἡ ἔκθεσις ᾿--οὐδὲν ἡ ἡμῖν δοκεῖ κωλύειν μὴ παριέναι 
 τοὺς κληρικοὺς αὐτῶν καὶ τοὺς πιστοὺς εἰς ἁγίαν κοινωνίαν ἐφ᾽ οἷς 
 καὶ οἱ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν παραγίγνονται, ἀναγνωρίζομεν δὲ καὶ τὴν προθυμίαν 
 αὐτῶν τὴν εἰς ἡμᾶς προνύμια πνευματικὰ τοῖς ἡμετέροις παρεχόντων. 
 
 Διὰ δὲ τὰς διαφορὰς τὰς λυπηρὰς τῶν γαμικῶν νόμων, ἃς λόγου 
 πολλοῦ ἀξίας ἡγούμεθα, ἀποφαινόμεθα ὅτι ἀδύνατον ἡ “ἡμῖν παριέναι εἰς 
 τὴν ἁγίαν κοινωνίαν τοὺς γεγαμηκότας παρὰ τοὺς νόμους καὶ κανόνας 
 τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς ἐκκλησίας" τὸ δὲ ἴ ἴσον τοῖς ἀρχαίοις καθολικοῖς a ἀπο- 
 νέμοντες οὐκ ἂν δυναίμεθα παριέναι τοὺς τῆς κοινωνίας παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς 
 ἀπειργομένους. 
 
 2.) 
 
410 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 la , fol , a , A 
 συμφέροντα πάσης τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας μὴ 
 ἐντρέπεσθαι. 
 
 Ἢ πρὸς τὰς ᾿Ανατολικὰς ἐκκλησίας σχέσις. 
 
 Πλείστην σπουδὴν ἐδήλωσεν τὸ Συμβούλιον ὅπως 
 τὴν φιλικὴν σχέσιν τὴν ὑπάρχουσαν τῶν ἀνατολικῶν 
 ἐκκλησιῶν πρὸς τὴν ᾿Α γγλικανὴν κοινωνίαν βεβαιῶμεν 
 καὶ συμπληρῶμεν. Αὗται δ᾽ αἱ ἐκκλησίαι διὰ πολλοῦ 
 χρόνου τῆς συμπαθείας τοῦ χριστιανισμοῦ ἀξίας ἑαυτὰς 
 ἀπέδειξαν, ἀπὸ γενεᾶς γὰρ εἰς γενεὰν ἐν πολλαῖς χώραις 
 δὴ καὶ ἐν σκοτεινοῖς τόποις τὴν τοῦ φωτὸς τοῦ εὐαγγελικοῦ 
 φλόγα ζῶσαν διέσωσαν. Ei δὲ καὶ τὸ φῶς τοῦτο ἔνθεν 
 καὶ ἔνθεν ἀσθενὲς εἶναι δοκεῖ καὶ ἀμαυρόν, διὰ τοῦτο 
 μᾶλλον καθήκει ἡ ἡμᾶς, τῷ καιρῷ ὡς ἐνδέχεται χρωμένους, 
 ἐπιμελεῖσθαι τούτου καὶ περιθάλπειν' οὐδὲ yap ἐστι 
 κίνδυνος μὴ οὐ ἡ προσδεκτὰ ἢ 7 τὰ φιλαδέλφως ὑ ὑπουργούμενα, 
 ἀπ᾽ ὀρθῆς γνώμης, καὶ ἀγάπης εἰλικρινοῦς παρεχόμενα. 
 Μετὰ & εὐχαριστίας κατανοοῦμεν τοιαῦτα ἐμποδίσματα 
 κοινωνίας μὴ εἶναι οἷα πρὸς τοὺς Λατεινοὺς δηλαδὴ 
 ὑπάρχει, διὰ τὸ κυρίως ὁρισθῆναι τὴν ἀπλανησίαν τῆς 
 ἐκκλησίας ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ ὑψίστῳ Ποντίφικι κατοικεῖν, καὶ διὰ 
 τὸ δόγμα τῆς ἁμιάντου συλλήψεως τῆς μακαρίας παρθένου 
 Μαρίας, καὶ ἄλλα δόγματα τὰ ὑπὸ τῶν παπικῶν 
 συνόδων κεκανονισμένα. eel μὲν. οὖν 'Ῥωμαία ἐκκλησία 
 τὴν ἀνατολικὴν, ἀδελφὴν οὖσαν, ἀεὶ ἠδίκηκεν. Τοὺς γὰρ 
 ἐπισκόπους εἰς τὰς ἀρχαίας παροικίας εἰσβιάξεται, καὶ 
 τὸν προσηλυτισμὸν ἐνεργῶς καὶ συστηματικῶς ἐπιτηδεύει. 
 Εὐλόγως οὖν ἡ ᾿Ανατολικὴ ἐκκλησία ἀγανακτεῖ ὡς διὰ 
 τούτων ὑβρισθεῖσα ἐναντίων ὄντων διόλου ταῖς καθολικαῖς 
 ἀρχαῖς" ἡμᾶς δὲ χρὴ τοὺς τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας 
 
 ἡμῖν αὐτοῖς προσέχειν μὴ ὁμοίως πως εἰς αὐτὴν ἁμάρ- 
 τωμεν. 
 
 Εἰ γάρ τις παρὰ τοῖς ἀνατολικοῖς φωτὸς λαμπροτέρου 
 καὶ πνευματικῆς ζωῆς αὐξήσεως ἐπιθυμεῖ, δύναιτ᾽ ἂν οὗτος 
 ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ ἐν ἣ ἐβαπτίσθη ἐπιμένων φωτισμόν Twa 
 τοῖς συμπολίταις διαδιδόναι. 
 
 "ANN ἐν ᾧ τοῦ προσηλυτισμοῦ ὅλως ἀπέχειν δεῖ, εἰκός 
 
Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 411 
 
 ἐστιν ὅμως καὶ δίκαιον τὸ ἀξίωμα τὸ ἀληθινὸν καὶ τὴν 
 τάξιν τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἡμῶν ὡς ἱστορικῆς ὑπαρχούσης 
 ἀποδείκνυσθαι πρὸς τούτους οἵτινες, τοῖς καινοτομου- 
 μένοις, μάλιστα περὶ τῆς θρησκείας, σφόδρα ἐ ἐναντιούμενοι, 
 τὴν ἱστορίαν μέντοι τῆς καθολικῆς ἀρχαιότητος ἀσμένως 
 ἀσπάζονται. Ζεῖ δὲ ὑ ὑπουργεῖν ἡμᾶς πρὸς τὴν ἐκ παίδευσιν 
 τῶν κληρικῶν, καὶ δὴ καὶ ὁπότ᾽ ἂν ἔνδεια χρημάτων ἢ 
 ἔτι τοῖς κοινοῖς σχολείοις ὑπηρετεῖν. 
 
 [Διάταξις ιζ. Τὸ Συμβούλιον τοῦτο χαῖρον ἐπὶ τῇ 
 φιλικῇ συναναστροφῇ τῇ γενομένῃ μεταξὺ τῶν 
 ἀρχιεπισκόπων Kavtovapias ἄλλων τε ἐκ TOV 
 ᾿Αγγλικανῶν ἐπισκόπων καὶ τῶν Πατριαρχῶν 
 ΚΚωνσταντινουπόλεως ἄλλων τε ἀνατολικῶν 
 Πατριαρχῶν καὶ “ἐπισκόπων, ἀποφαίνεται τὴν 
 ἐλπίδα τοῦ τὰ τῆς ἐντελεστέρας κοινωνίας νῦν 
 ἐμποδίσματα, προελθόντος τοῦ χρόνου, ἐκποδὼν 
 γενήσεσθαι, προκοπτούσης τῆς ἐπιμιξίας καὶ 
 αὐξανομένου τοῦ φωτισμοῦ. ἸΤαρακαλεῖ δὲ τὸ 
 Συμβούλιον τοὺς πιστοὺς ἐπὶ προσευχὴν ἐκτενῆ 
 περὶ τούτου, καὶ ὑποτίθεται τοῖς συγχριστιανοῖς 
 ὅτι δεῖ τὰς ἐπινοίας καὶ τὰς ἐνεργείας ἐπὶ τὴν 
 ἐσωτερικὴν μεταρρύθμισιν μᾶλλον τῶν ἀνατολι- 
 κῶν ἐκκλησιῶν ἀπευθύνειν, ἢ ἐπὶ τὸ ἀφέλκειν ἄλλον 
 καὶ ἄλλον εἰς τὴν ἑαυτῶν κοινωνίαν. 
 
 Περὶ τῶν κανονικῶν σταθμῶν διδαχῆς καὶ 
 θρησκείας. 
 
 Τούτων δὲ μνησθέντας δεῖ ὑμᾶς τὰς κανονικὰς στάθμας 
 διδαχῆς καὶ θρησκείας “μετὰ πολλῆς φροντίδος σκοπεῖν. 
 Δεῖ γὰρ τὰ μάλιστα καὶ τὴν πίστιν ἡ ἡμῶν καὶ τὴν πρᾶξιν 
 τοιαύτας οὔσας δείκνυσθαι καὶ ταῖς ἀρχαίαις ἐκκλησίαις 
 καὶ ταῖς νῦν ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ὑπὸ τῶν ἱεραποστόλων ἀνα- 
 τρεφομέναις ἐκκλησίαις, οἷαι μήτε ἂν ἀγανακτήσεως 
 αἰτίαν διδῶσιν, μήτε ἀληθινὴν αὐτονομίαν ἐμποδίζωσιν, 
 μήτε, oxeveahal παρέχωσιν τοῖς ἐπὶ τὴν ἐντελῆ κοινωνίαν 
 προιέναι βουλομένοις. 
 
412 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 Τοῖς δὲ προτέροις Συμβουλίοις ἑπόμενοι ἀποφαινόμεθα 
 ἑνοῦσθαι ἡμᾶς μιᾷ Κεφαλῇ καὶ Θεῷ καὶ Σωτῆρι ἡμῶν 
 ὑποτεταγμένους, ἐν τῇ κοινωνίᾳ τῆς μιᾶς καθολικῆς καὶ 
 ἀποστολικῆς ᾽Εκκλησΐας, κατέχειν τε τὴν μίαν πίστιν τὴν 
 ἐν ταῖς «ἁγίαις γραφαῖς ἀποκεκαλυμμένην, ἐν τοῖς Συμ- 
 βόλοις ὦ ὡρισμένην, ὑπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆθεν ᾿Εκκλησίας κεκρατη- 
 μένην, καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν ἀναμφισβητήτων οἰκουμενικῶν 
 Συνόδων κεκανονισμένην" δεχόμεθα δὲ ὥσπερ στάθμας 
 διδαχῆς ὁμοῦ καὶ θρησκείας τὴν βίβλον. τῆς δημοσίας 
 εὐχῆς μετὰ τοῦ ἐμπεριεχομένου κατηχισμοῦ, τὸν δὲ τύπον 
 τῆς χειροτονίας, καὶ τὰ τριάκοντα ἐννέα ἄρθρα---κληρο- 
 νομίαν ἐξαίρετον τῆς ἐν ᾿Αγγλίᾳ ἐκκλησίας, ἃ καὶ πάντα 
 πᾶσαι αἱ τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας ἐκκλησίαι ἢ παντελῶς 
 ἢ ὡς ἐπὶ τὰ πλεῖστα ὁμολογοῦσιν. 
 
 Βουλόμεθα δὲ τὰς στάθμας ταύτας τοῖς ἐξωτερικοῖς 
 ἐκκλησίαις ἀφελῶς καὶ ἁπλῶς ἐνδείκνυσθαι. ᾿Ἐλευ- 
 θερίαν δὲ μέχρι τινὸς ταῖς ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν βλαστανούσαις 
 ἐκκλησίαις συγχωρητέον' οὐ “γὰρ εὔλογον ταῖς τοιαύταις τὰ 
 τριάκοντα καὶ ἐννέα ἄρθρα ὅλως ἐπιτάττειν ὡς ὅρους τῆς 
 κοινωνίας, ἐπικεχρωσμένα δὴ καὶ κατὰ τὰ ῥήματα καὶ 
 κατὰ τὴν μόρφωσιν διὰ τῶν περιστάσεων τῶν κατὰ τὸν 
 καιρὸν τῆς συνθέσεως αὐτῶν ἐπιπολαζουσῶν. ᾿Αδύνατον 
 δ᾽ ἂν εἴη τοὐναντίον ἡμᾶς μετέχειν αὐταῖς τῆς τῶν λει- 
 τουργῶν χειροτονίας, ὡς πληρῶς ἡμῖν συγκοινωνούσαις, 
 μήπω ἀποδεδευγμένου τοῦ τὸν αὐτὸν ἡμῖν κατά γε τὴν 
 οὐσίαν τύπον διδαχῆς κρατεῖν. Οὐ μὴν χαλεπὸν a ἂν εἴη, 
 ἵνα μὴ ἀδύνατον λέγωμεν, τὸ ἄρθρα συντάττειν, κατὰ 
 τὰς crab pas τὰς ἡμετέρας τῆς διδαχῆς καὶ τῆς θρησκείας, 
 ἐπιτακτέα ἅπασιν τοῖς ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τοιαύταις 
 χειροτονουμένοις. 
 
 [Διάταξις νη. Αἰτεῖ τὸ Συμβούλιον παρὰ τοῦ ἀρχι- 
 ἐπισκόπου τῆς Καντουαρίας, ὅπως μετὰ τοιούτων 
 οὺς ἀξίους ἕξει συμβουλεύσηται εἰ σύμφορον 
 ἔσται τὴν ᾿Αγγλικὴν ἑρμήνειαν τοῦ Νικαίου 
 συμβόλου καὶ τοῦ “ὅστις βούλεται (quicunque 
 vult) ἐπανορθοῦν. 
 
 Διάταξις ιθ΄. Περὶ τῶν νεοκτίστων ἐκκλησιῶν, μάλιστα 
 ἐν ταῖς μὴ χριστιαναῖς χώραις, δεῖ ὅρον εἶναι τῆς 
 
Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 413 
 
 ἀναγνωρίσεως αὐτῶν, ὡς πληρῶς ἡμῖν “συγκοινω- 
 νουσῶν, καὶ μάλιστα τῆς δωρεᾶς παρ᾽ ἡμῶν τῆς 
 ἐπισκοπικῆς διαδοχῆς, τὸ δεξασθαι ἡμᾶς Tap 
 αὐτῶν τεκμήρια ἱκανὰ τοῦ αὐτὰς τὴν αὐτὴν κατά 
 γε τὴν οὐσίαν διδαχὴν ἡμῖν κρατεῖν, καὶ τοὺς 
 κληρικοὺς αὐτῶν ἄρθρα ὑποσημαίνεσθαι κατὰ τὰ 
 διαρρήδην ἐ ἐν ταῖς στάθμαις ἡ ἡμῶν ταῖς περὶ ὶ διδαχῆς 
 καὶ θρησκείας ἀποπεφασμένα, ἀνάγκην δὲ εἶναι 
 μηδεμίαν δέχεσθαι αὐτὰς ὁλοκλήρως τὰ τριάκοντα 
 καὶ ἐννέα ἄρθρα τῆς θρησκείας. 
 
 Ταύτην, ἀδελφοὶ, τὴν ἐπιστολὴν εἰς τέλος ἄγομεν 
 εὐχαριστίαν ταπεινὴν καὶ ἐγκάρδιον Θεῷ παντοκράτορι 
 ἀπονέμοντες ὑπὲρ τῆς μεγάλης πρὸς ἡμᾶς χρηστότητος 
 καὶ φιλανθρωπίας. Σ υνεχώρησεν γὰρ ἡμῖν ὧδε συναθροί- 
 ζεσθαι πλείοσιν οὖσιν τὸν ἀριθμὸν ἢ ἢ τὸ πρίν. Παντα- 
 
 χόθεν δὲ τῆς γῆς γνώσεως ἅμα καὶ ἐμπειρίας θησαυροὶ εἰς 
 τὸ κοινὸν συνηνέχθησαν. ᾿Εγένετο δὲ ἡμῖν καταλαμ- 
 βάνειν μᾶλλον ἢ τὸ πρὶν ἐδυνάμεθα τό τε μέγεθος καὶ 
 τὴν δύναμιν καὶ τὴν ἰσχὺν τῆς μεγάλης ᾿Αγγλικανῆς 
 
 , 
 κοινωνίας. 
 
 Εἰς ὅσα ἐπιτηδεία ἐ ἐστὶν αὕτη, οἵαις δὲ εὐκαιρίαις καὶ οἵοις 
 προνομίοις χρῆται---ταῦτα ἡσθόμεθα. 29; ν ταῖς ξητήσεσιν 
 δὴ ταῖς ἐν κοινῇ συνόδῳ γενομέναις τὴν κατ᾽ οὐσίαν ἑνότητα 
 ἐδοκιμάσαμεν τὴν πάσας τὰς διαφορὰς καὶ καταστάσεως 
 καὶ προκοπῆς συνάπτουσαν. ἽΟπου γὰρ γνώμης διαφωνία 
 ἐν ἡμῖν ἐγένετο ἐκεῖ: καὶ πνεύματος συμφωνία καὶ ἑνότης 
 σκοποῦ" καὶ πρὸς τὰς παροικίας ἄλλος ἄλλοσε ἐπανερχ- 
 όμεθα ἀναψυχόμενοι ἅμα καὶ ἐνδυναμούμενοι καὶ ἐνθου- 
 σιάξοντες ταῖς “ἀναμνήσεσιν ἃς μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν κομίζομεν. 
 
 Ἡ δὲ τῆς εὐχαριστίας αἴσθησις ἀμέσως τῇ τοῦ καθή- 
 κοντος χρείᾳ συνδέδεται. Ἢ γὰρ ἀληθινὴ κατάληψις τῶν 
 προνομίων τῶν ἐν τῇ ᾿Αγγλικανῇ κοινωνίᾳ ἡμῖν ὑπαρ- 
 χόντων μείζονα ἡμῖν αἴσθησιν παρέχει τῆς ὀφειλῆς, οὐ 
 τῷ ἡμετέρῳ λαῷ μόνον οὐδὲ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν τοῖς ὑπὸ τῶν 
 ἱεραποστόλων εὐαγγελιζομένοις, ἀλλὰ καὶ πάσαις ταῖς 
 ἐκκλησίαις τοῦ Θεοῦ. ᾿Εξαίρετος γὰρ ἡμῶν ἡ τάξις καὶ 
 πρὸς ἐξαίρετον. ἔργον εὐκαίρως ἡμᾶς ἀνακαλεῖ. Εὐχ- 
 όμεθα δὲ ἐκτενῶς πάντας---κληρικοὺς ἅμα καὶ λαικοὺς---- 
 
414 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 
 
 τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ προαίρεσιν τὴν πρόδηλον ἐνθυμεῖσθαι καὶ 
 ἐν οἵᾳ δή ποτε κλήσει γενομένους ἀγωνίζεσθαι ὅπως ἂν 
 τὴν βουλὴν Αὐτοῦ εἰς τέλος κατεργάζωνται. 
 
 Τούτοις τοῖς ῥήμασιν ὑμῖν ἀποταξάμενοι τὰ ἐν τῷ 
 Συμβουλίῳ συμπεπερασμένα τῇ μελέτῃ ὑμῶν παρα- 
 δίδομεν, ἱκετεύοντες ὅπως τὸ ἅγιον Πνεῦμα πάντα τὰ 
 ἐνθυμήματα ὑ ὑμῶν. κατευθύνῃ καὶ εἰς πᾶσαν “τὴν ἀλήθειαν 
 κατάγῃ ὑμᾶς, καὶ ὅπως τὰ βουλεύματα ἡμῶν διὰ τῆς 
 ὑμῶν ἐνεργείας εἰς δόξαν Θεοῦ καὶ προκοπὴν τῆς τοῦ 
 «Χριστοῦ βασιλείας συντείνῃ. 
 
 “Ὑπέγραψα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ Συμβουλίου, 
 
 EAOTAPAO® O ΤῊΣ ΚΑΝΤΟΥΑΡΙΑΣ. 
 
PUBLICATIONS OF THE 
 Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge. 
 
 VI ATDAAMDAAAAAADaDT 
 
 BEING OF GOD, Six Addresses on the. By 
 
 C, J. Etticott, D.D., Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol. 
 SmiallWPOSizSVOn cacaamecsercesseeeodseacerse tc πτ|ν Cloth boards τ 6 
 
 BIBLE PLACES; or, THE TOPOGRAPHY OF 
 THE HOLY LAND. By the Rev. Canon 
 
 TRISTRAM. With Mapand numerous Woodcuts. Crown 
 VOR acctcoeriine ve nenssbiadine ves aecucatisentacisesiseis slate Cloth boards 4 0 
 
 CALLED TO BE SAINTS: The Minor Festivals 
 Devotionally Studied. By Curistina (. 
 
 RossETTI, author of ‘‘Seek and Find.” Post 8vo. 
 Cloth boards 5 oO 
 
 CHRISTIANS UNDER THE CRESCENT IN 
 ASIA, By the Rev. E. L. Currs, B.A. With 
 
 numerous Illustrations. Crown 8vo............. Cloth boards 5 ὁ 
 
 CHURCH HISTORY, SKETCHES OF, From the 
 
 First Century to the Reformation. By the Rev. J. C. 
 ROBERTSON, With Map. I2mo. ......... Cloth boards 2 O 
 
 GOSPELS, THE FOUR. Arranged in the Form 
 
 of an English Harmony, from the Text of the Authorised 
 
 Version. By the Rev. J. M. FuLLER, M.A. With 
 
 Analytical Table of Contents and Four Maps. Post 8vo. 
 Cloth boards 1 Oo 
 
 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH, In 
 
 Short Biographical Sketches. By the Rev. JuLtius 
 ΤΟΥΣ MEAT MER OStLOVO: Uvccasnnosuesns iedec τος Cloth boards 1 6 
 
 JEWISH NATION, A? HISTORY OF THE. 
 From the Earliest Times to the Present Day. By the 
 late E. H. PALMER, M.A. With Map of Palestine and 
 Numerous Illustrations. Crown 8vo. ......... Cloth boards 4 0 
 
 LAND OF ISRAEL, THE, A Journal of Travel in 
 
 Palestine, undertaken with special reference to its 
 Physical Character. By the Rev. CANON TRISTRAM. 
 With Two Maps and Numerous Illustrations. Large 
 OSU OVOWRNereeeccncas cnrivicrscessocsiecheteavesenataces Cloth boards 10 6 
 
PUBLICATIONS OF THE SOCIETY. 
 
 LECTURES ON THE HISTORICAL AND DOG- 
 MATICAL POSITION OF THE CHURCH OF 
 ENGLAND. By the Rev. W. Baker, D.D. 
 POSES VO; 25 <csaezscacwacesnvsneepronseadous snes seers Cloth boards 
 
 NARRATIVE OF A MODERN PILGRIMAGE 
 THROUGH PALESTINE ON HORSEBACK, 
 AND WITH TENTS. By the Rev. A. C. 
 SmiTH, M.A. Numerous Illustrations, and Four 
 Coloured Plates. Crown 80. ..........sceeeeee Cloth boards 5 O 
 
 PALEY’S EVIDENCES. A New Edition, with 
 Notes, Appendix, and Preface. By the Rev. E. A. 
 LITTON... “Post ϑνοι We. cicdecassceanes ceneseeneess Cloth boards 4 ὁ 
 
 PALEY’S HORA PAULINE. A New Edition, 
 with Notes, Appendix, and Preface. By the Rev. J. S. 
 HIOWSON, ND ee PosttOvOn cocccesseactneren one Cloth boards 2 O 
 
 PLAIN REASONS AGAINST JOINING THE 
 CHURCH OF ROME. By the Rey. R. F. 
 LITTLEDALE, LL.D., ἄς. Revised and Enlarged 
 Edition." Post/Svo.2 ni<.c<cccscseees snc scctepecere Cloth boards 
 
 SOME CHIEF TRUTHS OF RELIGION. By the 
 Rev. E. 1, Cutts, B.A., Author of ‘* Pastoral Counsels,” 
 <s'StGeddis Cross.) Grown GVOnn cere sesces Cloth boards 2 6 
 
 TURNING-POINTS OF ENGLISH CHURCH 
 
 HISTORY. By the Rev. E. L. Curts, B.A., 
 Vicar_of Holy Trinity, Haverstock Hill. Crown 8vo. 
 
 Cloth boards 3 6 
 
 TURNING-POINTS OF GENERAL CHURCH 
 HISTORY. By the Rev. E. L. Curts, B.A, 
 
 Author of ‘‘ Pastoral Counsels.” Crown 8vo. Cloth boards 5 0 
 
 " 
 [9 
 
 - 
 ο 
 
 
 
 Sordon: 
 
 NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE, CHARING CROSS, W.C. ; 
 43, QUEEN VICTORIA STREET, E.C.; 
 BRIGHTON: 135, NorTH STREET. 
 

 
DATE DUE 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 GAYLORD PRINTEDINU.S 
 
 
 

 
BW5015.6 .A1 
 The Lambeth conferences of 1867, 1878, 
 inceton Theological Seminary—Speer Library 
 
 | 
 
 | 
 
 1 1012 00067 8195