f k' LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. ©l|ap. ©npi]rig|i !f n. -■■. : Op UNITED STATES OF AMESICA. A Champion of the Cross ^/l pointed, signifying the coercive power of punishing those who are obstinately bad. In this particular staff the straight part is divided into three parts. The lowest of these is of ebony, signifying by its unbroken blackness our state by nature. The second is of ebony alternated w^th holly — this last being the whitest of our ornamental woods. This alternation signifies the conditions of the members of the Church here on earth, where the wicked are mingled with the good. The upper part, pointing to that future when there shall be ' neither spot nor wrinkle nor any such thing, ' is of pure and polished ivory ; and the staff is carried by being grasped by this part of it, for it is our duty to ' lay hold on eternal life. ' But since the recovery of the lost is the chief glory of Christ's work, so the highest adornment of the staff is always expended upon the crook. Here it is of ebony in- crusted with jewels : of ebony to remind us of the fallen state from which we have been redeemed ; while the jewels refer to that future glory, when the foundation of the New Jerusalem shall be of precious stones, and God shall make up His jewels — those souls that have been cut and polished by earthly trials and tribulations, so that they may reflect more brilliantly the light of the Sun of Righteousness. '^ As the gift of Episcopal consecration is conveyed with the solemn words ' receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Bishop in the Church of God,' so the number seven — the number of the gifts of the Holy Ghost — is seen everywhere. On the out- side of the edge of the crook are seven bold crockets, each being of a dark leaf enclosing a golden ball — the gold of the Gospel enclosed in human infirmity. On the same edge are seven stones of lapis lazuli, all of the same size, signifying with their deep blue tint the unchanging continuance of God's truth. On each side of the crook are seven jewels, all different, and of different sizes, growing smaller as they go further on. These signifying the varieties of personal character in God's saints, which are not done away in a future life, but are rather polished to a higher beauty. And the diminishing in size shows that the further progress w^e make in the spiritual life, the less we are disposed to make of our- selves. Besides these larger stones there are seven groups, each containing seven crystals, and one more is added, making the forty-nine up to fifty — the full Pentecostal number, the number of the outpouring of the Holy Ghost with power — ^-the number of the Jubilee. •' ' And there is the same number on the opposite side ; so that 6o A Champion of the Cross. [1843-49. both together they make up One hundred — the mystic number of the Flock of the Good Shepherd : ' What man of you having an hundred sheep,' is the sum total He gives us Himself. " The silver hoop which incloses the centre-piece of the crook gives the same number in another way — for there are fifty scallops cut on the rim of it on each side. ' ' And what can be more appropriate than the figure of the Good Shepherd Himself standing in the midst of the crook, in the midst of His Flock? And the sheep that are with Him have their meaning also. The one which is standing, and looking up signifies Europe, which is the most thoroughly Christianized. On the other side, the one partly rising signifies Asia, where the work of evangelization is only partially done. The one ly- ing on the ground at His feet, the darkest of them, is Africa, where the work is hardly yet begun. The smallest and young- est is Amei'ica — and this is the lamb in His arms, the dearest place of all. Underneath, before and behind, are the loving commands ' ^ Feed My Lambs 1^,' ' i^ Feed My Sheep »J«.' ''In a hollow of the ebony surrounding all this central group there runs in an unbroken circle the three-fold cord of the Apos- tolic Ministry — the visible evidence of the unity of that Church in which Christ is, and with v.hich He has promised to abide until the end of the world. *' Supporting the curve of the crook are two angels, one facing toward the Bishop who carries the pastoral staff, and the other on the opposite side. The one who faces the Bishop bears the Ci'oss, for that we all must bear on Earth; the one who bears the Ci'own is ' on the farther side. ' ' ' All these figures of sheep and angels are of silver oxidized, for Churches have their precious metal dulled by the atmosphere of Earth, and He ' chargeth His angels with folly.' But the figure of the Good Shepherd Himself is gilded and burnished, as are also the Cross — which is sent by Him — and the crown, which will be given by Him; while the stars over the heads of the angels reflect his light, referring as they do to the stars which are the angels of the Churches. "The largest knop, with six compartments, just above the ivory shaft, is of oak, with reference to the oak of old England, our ecclesiastical Mother. Each compartment bears the name of one of the Bishops who have shepherded the flock in this part of Pennsylvania. First is the name of the venerable White, then in order, Onderdonk, Potter, Bowman, Stevens, and Hoiue. 1843-49-] ^^f^ ^f John Henry Hopkins. 61 All these names are cut in strips of sandalwood inlaid in the oak. The sandalwood is one of the most fragrant woods in the world ; and we would thus show that " The sweet remembrance of the just Shall flourish when he sleeps in dust." '' The entire number of jewels used is one hundred and twenty-seven ; the one hundred of the Flock of God, and twenty- seven — being three times three times three — the threefold num- ber of the Ever-Blessed Trinity." The staff is in two parts, the junction being between the ivory and the mingled ebony and holly portions of the straight part. When thus separated the two pieces lit into places in a case, for convenience of carrying. Mr. Hopkins was always ready to do such work for any church that asked for his help. He would take long journeys at his own expense in order to make designs suitable to the place. What- ever was done for the Church by anyone he enthusiastically de- lighted in, and felt personally interested in. He built some lovely little churches of stones gathered on the spot, and when they were finished he went even as far as from New York to Wisconsin or Minnesota to be present at the consecration, and to tell in his own inimitable way the meaning of the whole ,vork, and to fasten the lesson in memory and heart and conscience by a few sentences. He had two or three exquisite sermons on the tabernacle and the temple and the Church which were like liv- ing pictures, but these he never wrote out, and only memories remain of his words. The New York Ecclesiological Society had to make its own footing good in a strong tide of ignorant prejudice, and there- fore interested its members in all subjects relating to the worship of the Church. Consequently the members (among whom were Reverend Doctors Haight, Creighton, John McVickar, Muhlenberg, Fran- cis Vinton, Morgan Dix, Mahan, G. H. Houghton, S. R. Johnson, Forbes, and some bishops as ''Patrons") published frequent papers on Church music. Here, too, John Henry Hop- kins was facile princeps. His father, as has been noted, had great skill and good taste, and his mother being likewise a skilful performer, and with his Irish and French and German blood and his education from early childhood, he was full of the spirit of melody. The whole 62 A Champion of the Cross. [1843-49. Hopkins family were musicians, and of them Henry was the cen- tre. Church music, bad enough now, and misunderstood, was infinitely worse forty or fifty years ago. There was no knowl- edge whatever of the true Church style, and the best things were but the debased imitations of an untaught secular taste. The English cathedral services were tainted with the same infection. Fioriture and shakes and trills and roulades were looked upon as the climax of operatic singing, and since opera in the florid Ital- ian style was the "■ best " thing known it was imitated in church. Ordinary hymn tunes were dismal imitations of Protestant-meet- ing-house tunes, and were as dull as ditch-water. Even they were used but once in the whole service. Good, hearty, congre- gational singing was not expected, and if lay people tried to sing in church they were looked upon as " queer," or, it may be, as Methodists away from home. Thus the "solemn order of the service," to use the cant ex- pression of the times, was carried out. Evangelical Churchmen did use hymns, but their heartiness and fervor discredited their use in the true-blue Church parishes, where a freezing, stupid mo- notony was looked upon as the very climax of orthodox Church- manship. The renewed life of the Church breathing from Oxford made all lovely things appear, and the singing birds came, too, in the new spring. John Henry Hopkins could not but sing. Long before he was in the Seminary he had wTitten hpnns and songs. His father had not been trained in the technical part of musical composi- tion, but his son, with a richer and a truer feeling, as was fitting in a later generation, had carefully studied harmony under com- petent teachers, and had continued his studies. He soon saw that to try to transpose the '' devil's songs," or to wTite words of hymns beneath their notes, was not to improve Church music, but rather to debase it. There are some styles and some themes which are essentially secular, and even profane, and others from association are unworthy of use in the sanctuary. It is not so hard to profane sacred music. One of the most subtle methods of making sacred things ridiculous, and of turning them from their proper use was concocted by John Knox and the other Scottish "Reformers." They heard the melodies of se- quences and hymns of the true Church on all sides, and on all sides loved. Accordingly they wrote above the notes other words, sometimes light and trifling and indecorous, and some- 1843-49-1 ^^f^ ^f John Henry Hopkins. 63 times of the most obscene character, in order to render the music of the Church contemptible. Some of those melodies are living still, and few or none when they hear " Cauld Kail in Aberdeen," ''Comin thro' the rye," or ''John Anderson my jo, John," have any idea that those tunes have sunk from the service of the sanctuary into the idle songs of carousers in a tavern. Following the traces of the best English writers of ecclesiastical music he learned the value and beauty of two great schools of Church music all but unknown, except to students of the curious, and entirely unappreciated. These were the ancient Church modes, and the German chorales, and their kindred, the psalm tunes written by Clement Marot and others for the Huguenot services early in the sixteenth century. The chorales and French psalm music had more of the Church spirit than contemporary Church music written in Church style. These last had lost their early simplicity and pure melody. Their severe outlines were overlaid with all sorts of false ornament, and they were anything but plain song. The reform effected by Palestrina had not yet been called for. Mr. Hopkins worked these rich veins with great vigor and devotion. He mastered the ancient ''modes," and was able to use them, not as mere archaisms, but as living things. Of him W. H. Walter, Mus. Doc, and the organist who probably has done more to form a correct and living Church style here than any other, says that he ' ' always regarded him as a reliable authority in Gregorian music and the ancient tones. He made those a special study." An incident is related of him, in this connection, which brings out more than one point of his character. The students of the General Seminary were divided into two antagonistic camps on the subject of Church music. The forces were marshalled as Gregorians and Anglicans. Hopkins, at this time not a student, but in Holy Orders, threw himself en- thusiastically on the side of Gregorian music, and so excited the wrath of the Anglicanists. The difference in taste reached the professors, and Dr. Turner, who was passionately fond of music, was an Anglican, while Dr. Mahan was a Gregorian. In those days the Deanery passed from professor to professor year by year. This gave each faction one year of triumph, as the respec- tive champions in turn became Dean. Rev. Mr. Hopkins was the frequent guest of Dr. Mahan, and, more than once filled the place in the chapel of the absent organist during the supremacy of Anglican music. He could 64 A CJiampion of the Cross. [1843-49. easily have driven his opponents frantic with rage by taking ad- vantage of the situation and playing plain -song for the chants ; but no, he overwhelmed them with his generosity by playing Anglican music in the best style, and in a manner far superior to their own organist. This incident, trifling in itself, shows the nobility of Hopkins' soul, his superiority to petty hates, and his magnanimity. As he was then he ever was, and he showed this greatness of soul in more weighty causes. Few men who themselves dealt heavy blows received heavier return than he did from his enemies. Many cherished their hostility to the end. He never did any- thing of the kind ; but dropped all settled matters, and forgot all said or done to his disadvantage. He published a great many things in the course of years, and many of them are used in the services of the Church. He gen- erally had some such composition lying on his desk at which he worked as he could find the opportunity, working it over and over, and polishing and retouching until it was as good as he could make it, before allowing it to be published. He wrote a setting for Veni Creator which is in most hymnals, and in ancient form. It is not so fine as the lovely plain-song melody which belongs to the hymn, but it is easily taken up by a congre- gation, and that is more than can be said for the real tune. His tune Vexilla Regis for the hymn ' ' The Royal Banners forward go," and published in one musical edition of the old hymnal is much better suited to the words than the tune by Lowell Mason sometimes used for that hymn. He wrote a considerable num- ber of anthems, and settings for the Kyrie Eleison, and all the parts of a Mass. He published a number of the noblest of the German choj'ales ; but all these works, owing to the fact that the one authorized hymnal is used in almost every one of the Church parishes in the country, are hardly known at all outside the circle of those personally interested in him, and to a few musicians. He wTote some hymns, both words and music, and a few of them are set down here, although they are all included in the last edition of his ''Carols, Hymns, and Songs," published in 1883. Of two of these Dr. Muhlenberg said that they were the very noblest hymns in the English language on their themes ; but they should be heard sung to their o^^ti music to be appreciated. One of them is for Whitsunday : 1843-49-] ^^y^ ^f John Henry Hopkins. 65 TBloto on, tf)OU migfttg OlmD* FOR WHITSUN DAY. 1. Blow on, Thou mighty Wind ! The clov-en tongues de-scend - ing. 1^-^: d^E^; -1 r, ^ i3 2:^z-^=2irrit ^ f= iS=^; I I I rr Fann'd by Thy dewy Breath, shall blaze and burn, A sacred flame un-end - ing. g: I J J, ! , J J. -^■=^-- A ^: i^^ ^ ite =?^ P I ^ S -O^ ^^^ ^=^ — ^— i^ ;ii=iiE^ ^f5-?=r -^—^—^ m Soon shall that Fire be - hold Vile earth transform'd to fine wrought gold _ I I 1 I I ,. I I fj- A -I Ef^ fe f i=T ^^ =fefiS =^=^ r-f-f ^ -- --gr And gloom of shadowy night That flame shall kindle in - to light ; d^ 1 ^^=1 There - fore, Thou might - y Wind =r :s: blow on. 66 A Champion of the Cross. [1843-49. 2. Blow on, Thou mighty Wind, i And waft to reahns unbounded ' The notes of Faith and Hope and tender Love '\ The Gospel trump hath sounded. - Those sweetly piercing tones, That charm all wars and tears and groans, Through earth and sea and sky J Upon thy rushing wings shall fly : \ Therefore, Thou mighty Wind, blow on. , 3. Blow on, Thou mighty Wind ; For, tempest-toss'd and lonely, ; The Church upon the rolling billows rides, And trusts in Thy Breath only. She spreads her swelling sails For Thee to fill with favoring gales, ; Till, through the stormy sea, ' Thou brmg her home where she would be : \ Therefore, Thou mighty Wind, blow on, \ \ 4. Blow on, Thou mighty Wind, On hearts contrite and broken, And bring in quickening power the gracious words i That Jesu's lips have spoken. | Lo ! then, from death and sleep, The listening souls to life shall leap ; Then Love shall reign below. And Joy the whole wide world o'erflow : < Therefore, Thou mighty Wind, blow on. ; 5. To God the Father, Son, By all in earth and heaven, ' And to the Holy Spirit, Three in One, \ Eternal praise be given, i As once triumphant rang ■ When morning stars together sang ; : Is now, as aye before ; ' And shall be so for evermore, j World without end/ Amen. Amen. \ -1858. i SONGS OF THE HEART. [Hexameter and Pentameter.] Drowned in the thundering roll of the organ's deep diapason, All unheard are the songs sung by the lowly of heart. Soon are the loud tones mute, all dying away in the distance j While those songs of the heart open the portal of Heaven. —1849. 1843-49-] ^^f^ ^f John Henry Hopkins. 6y The other, ''Jerusalem, My Home," is here given, without the music, which, with its plaintive and entreating open phrase, ending in a third, and its modulations into the minor key, well expresses the idea of the hymn — the meditation of the pilgrim on his distant home — and the change of the ending of the last line (the key is C) from E to A, giving the tone of assured pos- session to the very words of the beginning : Jerusalem, my Home, I see thy walls arise ; Their jasper clear and sardine stone Flash radiance through the skies. In clouds of heav'n descending, With angel train attending Thy gates of glistering pearl unfold On streets of glassy gold. No sun is there, no day or night ; But, built of sevenfold splendors bright, Thy Temple is the Light of Light, Jerusalem, my Home. Jerusalem, my Home, Where shines the royal throne, Each king casts down his golden ci"Own Before the Lamb thereon. Thence flows the crystal River, And, flowing on forever, With leaves and fruits, on either hand, The Tree of Life shall stand. In blood-washed robes, all white and fair, The Lamb shall lead His chosen there. While clouds of incense fill thy air, Jerusalem, my Home. Jerusalem, my Home, Where saints in triumph sing. While tuned in tones of golden harps Heaven's boundless arches ring. No more in tears and sighing Our weak hosannas dying. But alleluias loud and high Roll thundering through the sky. One chorus thrills their countless throngs ; Ten thousand times ten thousand tongues Fill thee with overwhelming songs, Jerusalem, my Home ! 68 A Champion of the Cross. [1843-49. Jerusalem, my Home, Thou sole, all-glorious Bride, Creation shouts with joy to see Thy Bridegroom at thy side ; The Man yet interceding, His Hands and Feet yet bleeding, And Him the billowy hosts adore Lord God for evermore, And " Holy, Holy, Holy," cry The choirs that crowd thy courts on high, Resounding everlastingly, Jerusalem, my Home ! Jerusalem, my Home, Where saints in glory reign. Thy haven safe O when shall I, Poor storm-tossed pilgrim, gain ? At distance dark and dreary, With sin and sorrow weary. For thee I toil, for thee I pray For thee I long alway. And lo ! mine eyes shall see thee, too : O rend in twain, thou veil of blue, And let the Golden City through — Jerusalem, my Home ! -1856. There are plenty of others worth quoting entire, with their music, but his own book contains them all. He wrote several carols also, some of which have the genuine ring of the true religious folk-song. One of them, " We three Kings of Orient are," is known everywhere in this country, and in England, too. He wrote its tune also, which has so strong a flavor of the antique that not only in England, where the writer was not known, but in the United States, and in Church publica- tions, it has been cited as an ''ancient carol." Some others, as the ''Roman Soldier," an Easter carol, and "Gather around the Christmas Tree," are frequently sung. Others des'erve to be. Dr. Hopkins was one of the most accomplished hymnologists in the United States, and he was in this, as in all other things, an advocate of liberty. No one ever contended more strongly for the freedom of all parish churches as to the choice of hymns, and here are some ideas from his book of " Carols, Hymns, and Songs. ' ' "The only way to test a hymn is, not merely to read it si- lently, or even aloud, but to sing it, over and over again, to its 1 843-49-] ^^f^ of John Henry Hopkins. 69 own tune. . . . The reason why we have so much unsatis- factory material thrust upon the Church, is that, for the most part, the writers of the words have known Httle about music, and the writers of music have had little taste or power in the poetic field, and therefore there was no felt organic connection betwixt the two. ''It may be asked, 'Why publish any hymns, the words of which are not in the Hymnal ? ' This question assumes that the Church has prohibited the singing of any other hymns besides those in the Hymnal. This is altogether incorrect. " The Church has set forth a Hymnal, w^hich is ' allowed to be sung,' but there are no words prohibiting the singing of any others. When the present Hymnal (superseded in 1892) was first set forth, it was by 'joint resolution of the two Houses in General Convention,' and that resolution contained a distinct prohibition of all hymns except those in the old collection, and in the new Hymnal. But, being only a ' joint resolution ' and not a canon, it was not law, and was not binding on anybody. Since that time, the law of the Church has been put into canon- ical form — ' Canon 23 of Title I. of the Digest.' And in thus giving it the form of law the prohibition was deliberately and totally omitted. Nothing, therefore, can be clearer than that the singing of other hymns is not a canonical offence ; though no such hymns can claim the same authority as the Hymnal, or are likely to come into such general use. "But, if Church hymnody is to grow and improve, this door, small as it is, nmst be left open. The singing unto the Lord ' a new song ' is a loving duty of perpetual obligation. Every gen- eration of Christians feels the impulse, and ought, in some meas- ure, to obey it. Of the Latin hymns used in mediaeval times, 90,000 have already been printed, and innumerable others still remain in manuscript. How many of these were ever canvassed by a committee, or voted upon by a Church council? A Ger- man hymn-book, now at my elbow, contains 3,067 hymns, all equally innocent of conciliar authority. The writing of hymns, and the power of composing suitable music to them, 21^ personal gifts, and do not belong to Church councils in any sense. I should like to see the General Convention go to work to compose a hymn, or watch one of its committees trying to produce a suit- able tune to a hymn ! No ; as these are individual gifts, so they appeal, not to Church councils, which are meant for very differ- ent business, but to the individual consciousness of other Church 'JO A Champion of the Cross. [1843-49. people who share in the same gifts. As spiritual things are spir- itually discerned, so the things of poetry are poetically discerned, and musical things are musically discerned. The gifts of God in these departments do not need to be tied up by committees and canons. At present they are free. They are likely to remain so. I have conscientiously done my best. Instead of writing down to the present general taste in regard to sacred music, the attempt has been made to infuse a little of the older and better and more distinctly religious style of earlier times. He who fur- nishes one good hymn as a permanent part of the devotions of the Church, has done more than he who publishes several vol- umes of sermons. And if, notwithstanding my best exertions, nothing in this book shall be found worthy to live, no one who believes in the survival of the fittest can witness the result, and see the volume die, more contentedly than ' The Author. ' " The last sentence expresses Dr. Hopkins' mind upon every- thing that he did. No sincerer words were ever uttered by him than these ; when he had done his best he left the future en- tirely with God. In his dealings with music and musicians as a parish clergy- man it might be thought that his great knowledge of the subject and his own skill as a performer would make him ''hard to get along with," or that he would be '' cranky " and fussy. Noth- ing could be further from the fact. He used to say that he knew too much about music to interfere with choir and organist. Furthermore, organist and choir all knew that he had and would express genuine thankfulness and appreciation for their honest efforts, and his presence was a stimulus to hearty endeavor. And where tastes differed, as well they might, he never made his personal taste the law, but entered into the feelings of others so warmly that they usually offered him all he asked for. Thus far, for his connection with the Ecclesiological Society, but his ecclesiological work, as has been shown, continued his whole life. I843-49-] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 71 Cfitee IKings of ©tient p ^^ ^ J^ l j ^l ^fc-^^y ^Tt-r-^ ^rt S;=fE: 1. We Three Kings of - ri - ent are, Bearing gifts we traverse a ■ 5. Glorious no-w be-hold Him a -rise, King, and God, and Sa - cri "gfe MELCHIOR. ^ ^^ 3i s:=Sr= ^S 3EZJZ^ ^ 1. We Three Kings of O - ri - ent are, Bearing gifts we traverse a • 5. Glorious now be-hold Him a - rise, King, and God, and Sa - ori BALTHAZAR. jn'l J -jlj^^l^^ ?=?^ ^ ^gj =^^^ ^^^^^ i T=eif "= g^i^ ^ = j:i r i r" ^lT^^g^^==^ i J-JU ^ ^ ^£ ?^^ far. Field and fountain, Moor and mountain, Following yon-der Star. FicE ; Heav'u sings Al-le - lu - ia : Al - le - lu - ia the earth replies. f j^U-^-iJ-J- ^s lU-^iX^ :J=J-- far, Field and fountain, Moor and mountain, Following yon-der Star, - FICE ; Heav'n siags Al-le - lu - ia : Al - le - lu - ia the earth replies. N. B.— Each of verses 2, 8, and 4, is sung as a solo, to the music of Gaspard's part In the 1st and 5th verses, the accompaniment and chorus being the same throughout Only verses 1 and 5 are sung as a trio. Men's voices are best for the parts of the "Three Kings, but the music is set in the G clef for the accommodation of children. 72 A CJiampion of the Cross. 1843-49. CHORUS. w jirr— * 0^ star of Wonder, Star of Xight, Star with roy-al beau-ty ^^ it: m^ 4^ briglit,'Westward leading, Still proceeding, Guide us to Thy per feet Gaspakd. 2. Born a King on Bethlehem plain. Gold I bring to crown Him again, King for ever. Ceasing never Over us all to reign. Chorus. — O Star, to the ex- pediency of the Chm-ch interfering with the affairs of the nation, it must be observed that personally Mr. Hopkins held to the opinions of the Bishops' Pastoral letter of 1862, and so expressed himself in the paper. And a side-light is thrown upon the mat- ter by the following leader written the week after the assassination of President Lincoln : " The happy Easter which we were anticipating last week has been horribly blurred with blood, shed by the hand of an as- sassin. The whole land was fluttering with flags on Good Friday, to be draped in universal mourning on Easter Day. Such over- whelming grief, such an overshadowing sorrow, this country has never known before. That so fearful and complicated a plot of political assassinations should have been deliberately formed, and so marvellously carried out, shows that demoralization has rotted down the national character more deeply than any of us dreamed of. It is a disgrace as well as a grief. " To-day, simultaneous services will be held over the whole land, while the funeral ceremonies of the murdered President are being celebrated in Washington : and there will be a depth and an earnestness in them far surpassing anything that has been known since the war began. "It is but natural, and yet it is most saddening to see, that this detestable crime has interrupted, with a sudden black cloud, the sunshine of good-will that was beginning to gleam forth warmly and cheerily all over the North, ushering in appar- ently an era of good feeling, which was encouraged by signs of corresponding reaction at the South. Now all is dark again. No greater misfortune to that unhappy part of our country could have happened at this time, than the murder of President Lincoln. "Political assassination only consecrates in the hearts of a nation the cause which is thus foully attacked. And there could be no greater proof of the safety of the life of the nation, than that, in the face of so startling a calamity, the reins of power passed at once to the legal hands, without a shock or even a rip- ple of disturbance or doubt. May the Providence of God bring good out of evil ! ' ' One incident of the later years of this war may be of interest for the bearing it has upon objects dear to John Henry Hopkins. Napoleon III. was maintaining the hopeless Maximilian as Em- 1865-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 109 peror of Mexico, and the presence of French troops under Ba- zaine was felt to be a covert menace to our Government, just beginning, at the cost of enormous sums of money and of more precious lives, to have hopes of a favorable ending of the war. But the administration had its hands full, and could only warn in a diplomatic way the French Government of the meaning of their acts in Mexico. . To the immense honor of Russia it should be remembered that Alexander II., in this hour of our national peril, when England was barely maintaining officially a cold neutrality while expressing openly the warmest sympathy with the Southern cause, and the French Emperor was waiting but for an unfavor- able turn to our affairs, sent a squadron to New York, and thus gave us his moral support. The Russian chaplains of the ships of war were cordially re- ceived by the Bishop of New York, and with his full consent and approval they repeatedly celebrated the Sclavonic Liturgy in Trinity Chapel. This caused a great sensation in religious circles, and gave umbrage anew to the Low Churchmen, who were just then on fire with the idea of exchanging pulpits with the " evangelical de- nominations. ' ' The music of the Russian choir quite enraptured Hopkins. Of it he used to quote Mahan's words describing the music at the Russo-Greek Chapel in Paris — '' O how lovely ! To hear that sweet and earnest Litany, becoming more and more intense at every repetition, and seeming at times to be battering the gates of heaven, the angels the meanwhile answering from within the closed doors of the sanctuary, it beats all Western uses beyond comparison ! ' ' He transcribed the Russian Litany and set it to the words of our English Litany. It is far sweeter and more beautiful than the Tallis setting to which the Litany is usually sung, and not too difficult for any ordinary choir. The last years of Hopkins' connection with the Church four?ial saw the culmination of its influence. Whether it would have kept its place as leader of the journals of the Church if the alarm over the rise of " Ritualism " had not arisen it is idle to speculate. The year 1867 saw victory for the advocates of the division of the Diocese of New York, after a steady fight on his part for eight years. In 1868 he sold the paper in order to give himself up to writing the life of Bishop Hopkins, and to save his eye- sight, seriously weakened by overwork. no A Champion of the Cross. [1865-66. The close of the rebellion saw the actual formation of a " Ritual- istic parish ' ' in New York. Such churches had been in existence some years before that date in England. There they had been called for by laymen. The ground lay a little differently here, and accordingly they did not appear quite so soon in America. But they had been expected. Long before Ritualism showed itself here the Evangelicals had dubbed the modest revived use of the surplice in the pulpit as a ritualistic abomination. The eastward position of the celebrant at the altar, to this day a matter of strife in England, and really the key to the whole position of the Cath- olic school as to ceremonial, had been adopted and used even by Evangelicals. Hopkins had for years advocated the full revival of the Reformation ornaments and ceremonial, and so he was ready for them too, and, of course, an unflinching supporter of the men who adopted them. And yet, he was never, in the vulgar sense of the word, a Ritualist. For one thing, he was a deacon, and had no rights over ceremonial in any church, and he naturally, as every gentleman will do, followed the customs of the parish priest. He used to say, '' I am not really a Rituahst ; I am a Catholic ; but as long as the word is used as a term of reproach of other men, better than I am, I will never disown it." To the end of his days as a parish priest his services were the old- fashioned "full morning service." In his church at Williams- port he introduced the weekly and feast day celebrations, which he always ministered fasting. At them he wore only the surplice and stole, ''taking the eastward position," elevating both the paten and the chalice at the consecration, and inclining pro- foundly after consecrating each kind, and by his whole bearing seemed, especially after consecration, in a sort of ecstasy of devo- tion and adoration.^ He used to do what is so often read of, but seldom seen, bow his head reverently at the holy name of Jesics wherever it occurs. The newer Ritualists content them- selves with turning to the east in the creed, and do not bow at all ! The first apparent result of the ritualistic innovations at St. Alban's was a terrible panic. The Evangelicals were frightened as a matter of course, and advertised the horrors by every device in their power. Ritualists were more and less than conspirators, * Let this writer for once speak in his own person, and say that I have seen the greater number of the best known ritualistic churches and their clergy, as well as many others, and I have never seen any man who so im- pressed me with a sense of his profound reverence for the House of God, the sacred altar, and above all, the Blessed Sacrament ! 1865-66.] Life of Jolm Henry Hopkins. in and Jesuits, they were mice, and beasts, and devils ; and their churches were menageries, as deadly as hell. Many, too, of the leaders of the advancing wing of the High Church side were swept into line with the Evangelicals. The battle changed front instantly, and all the heavy artillery was brought to bear ujoon the common ritualistic enemy. And yet the panic was as senseless as it was wide-spread. The exact changes in the manner of conducting the services had been advocated on various grounds by some of the men who were loudest in their denunciation of them when once they saw them. Furthermore they had not been made lightly or carelessly. In England the Judges Spiritual had pronounced the use of all the ornaments of the second year of Edward VL to be lawful, in the case of Westerton v. Liddell. It is true that since the lawfulness of those ornaments had not been at issue then their favorable judgment on that point was afterward declared to be a mere obiter dictum, but, notwithstanding, it was felt that for introducing them in the modern English Church there was abundant authority. And here in America their lawfulness had been conceded before they were brought into prominent use. The rector of the new church was no imaginative, romantic priestling, but a man of strong, clear, and cold and dry brain, rigid and unbending in his adherence to a rather narrow Anglican standard, and he was assisted by a young priest of great spirit- uality and deep piety. But all such considerations went for nothing, if they were noticed at all. The Evangelicals tried harder than ever to bring such force to bear against the whole High Church life as to effect an entrance for their pet idea of free exchange of ministrations with '■'• other evangelical denominations. ' ' Different clergymen '^ exchanged pulpits " with ministers, buf did not draw out any effectual answer, until one of them invad- ed the parish of a priest in New Jersey, and preached against his will in a Methodist Church. For this infraction of a positive canon he was tried by his own Diocesan, and publicly reprimanded. This punishment, which hardly arose to the dignity of " persecution," sufficed to reveal the clear purpose of churchmen that the canons were not to be wantonly broken into shivers, made them hot with anger and shame. They determined to do still more. It was a pity, in- deed, that when High Churchmen could live up to the Prayer- book they could not in peace bring it into open contempt. Still, 112 A Champion of the Cross. [1865-66. their efforts in that particular were so plainly opposed to the law, which they yet professed to love to follow, that but a few of them ventured, from whatever reason, to keep up that movement. One of their leaders let a phrase slip from him which Hopkins seized upon as a cat jumps on a mouse, and made it yield a vast amount of fun under his skilful treatment. T\vq funny part of his leader is given here ; more than three times as much, not in the least degree amusing, followed originally. ''The 'Huckleberry-Pudding Business.' — Dr. T , in his reply to the Pastoral of the Bishop of New York, says that the pamphlet was read by him to ' the Clerical Association of the Protestant Episcopal Church,' previous to its publication. But we have been informed, by one who claims to have it on good authority, that on introducing the subject, before reading his manuscript. Dr. T said : ' Now, brethren, you know that I don' t like this huckleberrypudding business myself : but I have written this to defend the enlarged interpretation of the canons, and for the sake of others.' The story is a very good one, and carries probabihty on the face of it. It has the crisp, clear, and spicy flavor of Dr. T 's mind. It expresses very adequately the real contempt with which this practical amalgamation with outsiders is regarded by a great majority of the Low Churchmen themselves. And it is in tolerably close consistency with Dr. T 's own past career : for, no matter what queer things he may have said or done on various platforms and in sundry and divers meeting-houses. Dr. T has never, we believe, felt that there was any ' moral emergency ' for asking a Presbyterian or a Methodist minister ijito his pulpit, to preach to his people. Therefore the story is a good story — a very reasonable and credi- ble story. Si non e vero, e ben trovato. " We heartily thank Dr. T for the phrases thus happily coined by him. It is much better than any that we could have hit on for ourselves. The satire is rather broader, indeed, than we should have thought to be in good taste. Excepting for the authentic information on which we receive the story, we should have felt bound to discuss au grand serieux the question of the replies to the Pastoral. We should have thought it unseason- able to treat with even deserved ridicule a controversy in which the parties who pour out long pamphlet after long pamphlet are apparently in such dead earnest. But when we find the chief- tain and leader of the responsive pamphleteers, whose face is so 1865-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 113 sober and stern to the public, cracking such a good joke upon his own friends in private, our sense of propriety relaxes, and we feel perfectly justified in being sensible rather than serious. The phrase is an uncommonly good phrase, even for Dr. T . And it will not be our fault if it does not stick. "But what has 'Huckleberry-pudding' got to do with the recognition of non-Episcopal ministers ? The spirit of symbol- ism — which is so much derided by our Evangelical friends, but by which they are so constantly animated without their know- ing it — will reveal to us a depth of meaning in this well-chosen epithet. " Huckleberries are fruits of nature, and not of cultivation: they are therefore fit types of the non-Episcopal denominations, which have indeed many good and pleasant and juicy things about them ; but — as denominations — they are the work of nat- ure, not of grace. " The dough which embraces the huckleberries in the making of the pudding, symbolizes our Low Church friends, who so lovingly embrace these denominations on the ground of ministe- rial equality. The dough is not a w^ork of nature, and those brethren are undoubtedly members of the true Church, children of grace, and leavened with the leaven of righteousness in many notable respects. ''But the dough has its chief significance from its unfinished and very pliable condition, and from its accepted meaning as in- dicating those who are ever ready to yield their position just when they ought to maintain it, and are eager to ' compro- mise ' the very principles which it is their special duty to de- fend — ' dough-faces ' is the well-known political term ; and the happy epithet of Dr. T transfers it, with much greater fitness, to the field of ecclesiastical politics. ' ' But this is not all. The ' huckleberries ' may be lovingly embraced by the 'dough,' yet the 'pudding' is not com- plete until both parties, thus united, have been plunged into hot water, and kept there a long time — a process so perfectly cor- responding to all past ecclesiastical experience on the subject as to need no further elucidation. " The eating furnishes fresh shades of meaning. ' Huckleberry- pudding ' is rather a poor dish. The huckleberries are certainly spoiled ; and the dough is very doughy still. The only thing that makes it go down is the sauce — which is furnished from the ' Strong Church ' side of the house, and is compounded of 1 14 A Champion of the Cross, [1865-66. sugar, the sweetness of gentle Charity; and butter, the smooth- ness of good-natured forbearance ; and cinnamon and spice, which are the wit and humor that always give a pleasant flavor to the controversy from their side of the question. But even with plenty of sauce, it is a dangerous dish, and damaging to one's good looks. It stains the tongue ; it stains the teeth ; and — if one be not an uncommonly nice feeder — it stains even the lips to such a degree that it makes a man look as if he had kissed his laundress's indigo bag. Everybody can see the effect of it, even afar off; and everybody that meets such a man on the street, greets him with, ' So you've been eating huckleberry pudding, have you ? ' This part of the experience symbolizes the general blackening that a man is likely to get from the ' huckleberry - pudding business,' and the rather ridiculous notoriety that it is likely to give him for a long while after ; for it is always sure to get into the papers, and be copied even into those that are published afar off", and everybody has his laugh at the expense of those who have been so free with the ' huckle- berry-pudding. ' It is a remarkable thing, moreover, that this ugly staining quality is developed in huckleberries only by the 'pudding business.' In their natural uncombined and un- boiled condition, there is no nicer berry growing, and one may eat his fill of them, yet they leave no stain at all. Thus, too, the proper intercourse with our brethren of the denominations in their natural condition — in things benevolent, social, literary, scientific, political, and what not — is very pleasant and juicy, fresh-flavored and good, and hurts nobody. It is only an im- proper mixture in things ecclesiastical that brings out the power to stain'' It cannot be doubted that such articles, for all their air of pleasantry, were most exasperating. Not to take their most earnest attacks as if they were of any moment was of all things most likely to arouse the resentment of the struggling Evangel- icals. It was quite another thing when Hopkins attempted to meet the cross-fire of the old High Churchmen. It may not be apart from the story to see how he regarded the ritualistic movement. It may be questioned whether he ever planned just such use as was made of the principle he contended for, when he wrote about elasticity and flexibility in the services, and about popularizing them. But the ritual, or to speak more correctly, the ceremonial development rose naturally from the 1865-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 115 Prayer-book, and although it could not be associated so fully as it was in England with charitable and philanthropic work, yet it was, in setting forth the rich beauty of the Prayer-book services, truly a powerful missionary agency, and rather the more so be- cause it was the corporate manifestation of a piety which had too carefully hidden itself in a sort of shamefaced dread of expression. Hopkins never followed it out in his own practice. He was in his ways more like the early Tractarians, very gentle and con- siderate with others, strict and stern in the discipline of self. He taught the old Evangelical Catholic doctrines of the inspiration and authority of Scripture, the Atonement through the Incar- nation, the doctrines of the aversion of the race from God, and of its helplessness apart from grace, the need of repentance, and, in brief, all the doctrines of redemption as they have always been taught in the Catholic Church in all its branches. He kept the fasts of the Church with exactness and severity. His fasts were fasts from meat and drink, and not a mere substitution of one meat for another ; although, indeed, his ordinary table was plainer and scantier than that of any Religioits House known by experience to the writer. But he defended the Ritualists, and battled manfully for all their rights, with more ardor than if he were writing for his own benefit. He always said he wanted the extremes of Church liberty as far apart as possible, in order that true comprehensiveness and freedom might pervade the Church, so that all the good, which in the sects could only be found by go- ing through them all, might be enjoyed in her in solidarity. He held that all this variety of ceremonial hurts no one, but is a grad- ual growth toward something better. What then was the princi- ple upon which he built his support of the advanced movement ? It was thus expressed by him at a later period : '' When our American branch of the Catholic Church was organized there was an unreasonable fear and jealousy of the tyrannical power of bishops. . . . The entire earlier generation of our American bishops felt and acknowledged the essential position of their Order in this country to be constitutional : they were not to be ar- bitrary rulers whose law was their own discretion. . . . There are some things allowed or required to be done by our American Church legislation. There is no question in regard to these. "' There are some things cyL^r^sAy forbidden ; there is no ques- tion in regard to these. The whole difficulty arises in regard to the almost innumerable points in which our American Church legislation has said nothing. Now the old and original theory of ii6 A Champion of the Cross. [1865-66. American Churchmen is that ' where there is no law there is no transgression.' The Church of England from the time of the Reformation has been doing her work under the shackles of Acts of Uniformity, which have been reinforced by a sort of oral tra- dition that there must be uniformity in public worship : and so there must be some law, by which any one who introduces singu- larities may be effectively and summarily put down. When this uneasy traditional feeling is brought face to face with the simple fact that in many branches of ecclesiastical affairs, the American Church, as far as her own constitution and canons are con- cerned, has no written law whatsoever. " Let us look at two sorts of law, and distinguish them clearly. Our American constitution and canons are clothed with coer- cive force beyond question. But is the case altogether the same with us in regard to the English canons ? [The American Bishops declared in 1808 that the English Table of Prohibited Degrees was obligatory on this Church.] So that what the Eng- lish canon forbids as incestuous the American Church forbids as incestuous. But is there a single diocese in which that law has ever been enforced as Church law ? So that the only conclusion is this, that unquestioned coercive force is to be attributed only to our American constitution and canons : that coercion based only on English canon law will not work. A strong argument may be based on the binding force of the ancient canons of the (Ecumenical Church — whenever any diocese or Church court shall think fit to enforce them. Being oecumenical, they do not need re-enactment to be binding. But the probability of a fair and equitable execution of these canons, by bishops, some of whom have been twice or thrice married, is too remote to be worth discussion. If coercive force cannot be regarded as cloth- ing the oecumenical canons, then much less does it clothe the English canons, as such : and if it does not clothe either of these it certainly does not clothe any other legislation whatsoever out- side of our own written American Church legislation. The whole ritualistic controversy in England may be said to rest upon the Ornaments Rubric oi 1662. Now, the Puritanical party refused to wear even the surplice. And on the organiza- tion of the American Church the Puritanical feeling was so strong and the Church feeling so weak, that it was resolved to make clean work of this whole business of coercion touching vestments. The entire Ornaments Rubric, which gave the maximum [of that which was allowable and which meant the full i86s-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 117 system of vestments and ornaments in use at the beginning of the reign of Edward VI.], was struck out. Not a syllable was left behind. And when they came to canons, the minimum, the '■ comely surplice with sleeves,' was struck out also. There was not a particle of American law left by which any bishop could coerce a Low Churchman into wearing anything besides his citi- zen's dress. The only exceptions were the rubrics requiring the candidates for Deacons' and Priests' Orders to be at the time of ordination ' decently habited ' ; and the mention also of the ' rochet,' and ' the rest of the Episcopal habit,' in the Order for the Consecration of a Bishop. All coercive law (with these ex- ceptions) on the subject of vestments was wiped out. To make assurance doubly sure, in the vow of canonical obedience the words are, ' Will you reverently obey your Bishop, and other chief Ministers, who, according to the Cajio?is of the Church, may have the charge and government over you, etc. ? ' If the bishop wishes obedience under that vow he must point to the canon which gives him express authority to act. So, too, as to build- ings and furniture and arrangements. The English Rubric, 'the chancels shall remain as they have done in times past,' which has been the law since the reign of Edward VI., and proves that the chancels were to remain after the Reformation the same that they did before, has no coercive force with us at all. But, though we cannot be compelled to follow it if we do not choose so to do, there is nothing to prevent our making that our guide if we have a mind to do so. Thus it is entirely open to our priests and parishes to follow every minute detail of English architecture, arrangement, ritual, adornment, and what not, if they like. If, on the contrary, they don't like any such thing, and prefer to build a church in the style and arrangement of a theatre, or a pagan temple, there is no law to prevent them. In the same way, whenever our American book has omitted any- thing, without prohibiting what is thus omitted, the difference between our people and the English is this : the English can be compelled to comply with the requirement, and we cannot ; but we are free to comply with it if we please. The English clergy- man can be compelled to wear a surplice during the celebration of public worship. Our clergy cannot be so compelled. But our clergy are free to wear the surplice if they please ; and al- most unanimously they do so please. ' ' Now this liberty of ritual is peculiarly in harmony with the characteristics of this American people. It is a necessary element ii8 A Champion of tJie Cross. [1865-66. in giving flexibility to the Church system so that it may more readily work its way in a country cursed with a greater variety of sects and religions than any other country in the world. . . . It is strange how hard it is for some amiable people to under- stand, that liberty means to do as we please, and not as somebody else pleases. The propriety, or prudence, or usefulness, of any innovation is not the question here. If a clergyman introduces, unwisely, what his people do not understand, or appreciate, or what they positively dislike or disapprove, he will soon find out that they are as free as he is. That is, at present, all the restric- tive legislation we need on the subject." Continuing, Mr. Hopkins wrote upon the contention that •'' the bishop is author- ity upon all questions of interpretation of a rubric." *' Suppose there is no rubric to interpret ? If the rubric prescribing the vestments of the second year of Edward VI. is omitted, we are told : ' Omission is prohibition — you are prohibited from wear- .ing those vestments.' Very well. Here we come to another omission. The command to go to the Bishop of the Diocese whose discretion shall appease all doubts concerning the meaning of the rubrics, has also been omitted. ' Omission is prohibition ' : therefore all who are in doubt as to the meaning of a rubric are prohibited from going to the Bishop to resolve it, and he is pro- hibited from exercising his discretion in any such matter. . . . What we object to is that the power to advise should be inter- preted to mean the power to command. ''There is another branch of this business — Diocesan legislation. In asking it is a confession that there is no coercive law in it at all. And next, all diocesan canons on the subject of ritual are not worth the paper they are written on. The only binding legis- lation is by rubric in the Book of Common Prayer, requiring the approval of two consecutive General Conventions. In secur- ing stability of liberty of ritual in public worship by the consti- tutional provision that no change can be made short of two Gen- eral Conventions, our fathers were not quite so stupid as to leave it at the same time in the power of every Diocesan Convention to make fresh changes every year." This article on ' ' Constitutional Law ' ' was not written till late in the year 1874, but he had made use of the same principle in a more concrete form in 1867, in a series of leaders entitled '' The Blank Cartridge." But at first he took but little notice of St. Alban's Church. He 1865-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 119 was very far from glorifying it, and, indeed, beyond mentioning it as an item of news when the new services were begun, he took it very much as a matter of course. Some one from the South wrote to ask him ^' What is RituaHsm ? " and he gave the answer, thus : *^ As the heavenly bodies move in elliptical orbits, and are con- stantly drawing nearer to or retiring from the objects from which their distance is measured; and as the movement of the world's education, though ever onward, is oscillatory in its mode of pro- gression, and none but a fool will suppose that the clock goes for- ward only when the pendulum swings to the right, and goes back- ward whenever the pendulum swings to the left : so is it also with movements within the Church of God, or within the sphere of things spiritual considered on a large scale. And if we would understand fully the meaning of our present position, if we would estimate aright the motion of the pendulum in its present swing before our eyes, we must go back and take our measure on a somewhat extended scale. ' ' The accumulated abuses and corruptions of the Dark Ages, the horrors of Papal massacres and persecutions, and the incalculable miseries of the wars of religion which accompanied and followed the necessity of the Reformation, all intensified by the dread of the Jesuits and the mischiefs wrought by their subtle and marvel- lously powerful system, led to a steady intensification of the spirit of Protestantism on the one side, and to a similar decay of all true religion on the other, until the sceptical, worldly, and deistical tone of the last century reached its coldest stage among Protestants, and among Romanists culminated in the incompar- ably worse excesses of the French Revolution. '' In the Church of England, the Wesleys may be said to have begun the reaction toward better things, and the Evangelical party within the Church at length took it up and carried it on. The Oxford movement was, logically, the next step of returning life, keeping everything of Evangelical truth that had been gained, and going onward to revive other important truths that had also been suffered to decay. And, as the Evangelical move- ment did not need to invent or import into the Prayer-book and Articles the essential doctrines of Gospel truth, so the Oxford party were equally free from any such necessity. In both cases it was a work of revival merely ; revival of what was there, and had been there all along, but which had merely fallen for a long time into practical disuse. 120 A Champion of the Cross. [1865-66. *' The whole Oxford movement, therefore, was developed out of the Prayer-book and the other standards, and the well-known history, of the Church of England. When this was complete as to doctrine, and when the revival of Church architecture and Church adornment proved that the hearts of the people were ripe for it, the same great principle was carried one step further, and the Rubrical Law of the Church of England is now being re- vived as carefully as the once neglected doctrines of the Gospel, and the once forgotten theory and doctrine of the Church. This rubrical law concerns the outward and visible embodiment or teaching of the doctrine of the Church, the mode of celebrating Divine Service and administering the Sacraments and Ordinances of the Catholic Church, and especially concerns itself with the Holy Eucharist as the highest act of Christian worship, the chief and transcendent means of the Real Presence of our adorable Saviour among His people on earth. '' The majestic and triumphant march of this glorious Church revival has not been wholly confined to our own communion. On the Continent of Europe it has found a response in a strong revival of ancient life among the Lutherans of Germany, a por- tion of whom once more teach the high sacramental doctrines of their founder ; and also among the Romish churches, where there is a strong, earnest, and growing party, who are struggling to become true Catholics, and are steadily working their way toward us, as we are toward them. In the Oriental Commun- ions, also, while there is no sign of their yielding an inch to Papal assumptions, dogmas, or t>Tanny, yet there is a manifest drawing toward us, as we are feeling our way toward them, with all the' hope and love that spring necessarily from a conscious Catholic brotherhood in Christ. '' Nor has the movement been unfelt among the Protestant de- nominations in England and in this country. Some of our readers may remember a series of articles on the drift toward our Church, which has been visible among the denominations in many things for many years past. It has been seen in their mode of conducting worship, in the changed style of their relig- ious edifices, in the efforts to procure liturgies of their own, in their adopting more or less of Church hymns and Church ways, in gradually but rapidly resuming the observance of Christmas, Good Friday, and Easter Day, and such like : and it is going on now more rapidly than ever. '' Now a movement is something that keeps moving. Those 1865-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 121 who begin it, generally think it ought to stop at the first stage, and are frightened if not hurt when the second generation of thinkers and movers wishes to go further. And these second commonly feel the same toward the third : for individual men are almost invariably more or less narrow or illogical ; while the great movements of God's work in the world go on, thi'ough par- ticular men at the first, over them whenever it may become necessary. '' ' Ritualism ' is the name at present given to this great Church movement of our age, wherever it is felt outside of the Oriental and Roman communions. At first it was called Oxfordism, or Puseyism ; then Tractarianism ; now Ritualism ; at all tijnes it has been denounced as Romanism, or Sertii-Romanism, or Ro- manizing, or Low Popery, or Popery in disguise, or some such thing — all these varieties of abuse having been used so long, so loudly, and so lavishly, that nobody minds them any more. This charging of ' tendencies,' and ' directions ' of movement, is now seen to be the idlest business in the world. A man who is walk- ing down Broadway is walking ' in the direction ' of New York Bay, and every step he takes has a ' tendency ' to carry him into salt water where he may be drowned : and that will certainly be his fate — if he don't stop before he gets there. Sometimes, some poor wretch plunges in, and seeks to shuffle ofi" the troubles of a world of which he knows but little, by entering unbidden that other world, of the horrors of which he knows comparatively nothing. But to make the few such incidents the excuse for stopping all who are found walking down Broadway, and turn- ing them all round and making them walk up Broadway, for fear they should walk into the Bay and get drowned, would be a course precisely as sensible as that pursued by Protestants in gen- eral in regard to the Church movement : and that is the reason why they, and their mode of argument, and their loud alarums about ' Popery ' and Popish ' tendencies,' have sunk into such utter insignificance and contempt. ^' With these very general remarks, nobody can be in any doubt as to what ' Ritualism ' is. In an ' Independent ' Bethel, if the minister begins to wear a black silk gown instead of a dress coat, it is 'Ritualism.' In a Presbyterian congregation, the introduction of chanting is ' Ritualism.' Among the Dutch Reformed, the observance of Lent is a ' Ritualistic abomina- tion.' Among the German Reformed, the new Liturgy which is framed upon the altar idea rather than the pulpit idea, is 122 A Champion of the Cross. [1865-66 loudly denounced by its opponents as 'Ritualistic' In one of our own parishes, which heretofore has had the three-decker arrangement, it is ' Ritualism ' to build out a distinct and prop- erly arranged chancel. Where there has been a table with legs, it is ' Ritualism ' to put an Altar in place of it (though S. Paul's Chapel in this city has had a proper Altar ever since before the American Revolution). Where the Altar has been bare, it is ' Ritualism ' to cover it with an Altar-cloth. Where they have had only one Altar-cloth, it is ' Ritualism ' to add one or two more of different colors. Where they have been preaching in the black gown, it is ' Ritualism ' to preach in the surplice. Where they have been preaching in the surplice and black stole, it 'is ' Ritualism ' to introduce colored vest- ments or even a colored stole. Where they have not been used to it, it is ' Ritualism ' to bow at the Sacred Name in the Creed. Where they have been used to bow only in the Creed, it is ' Ritualism ' to do it in the Gloria ifi Excelsis or on any other occasion. In some parishes it is ' Ritualism ' to have can- dlesticks on the Altar, even if the candles are not lighted. In others it is not ' Ritualism ' to have them, but \\. is ' Ritualism ' to light them, unless it be too dark to see to read without them. In some parishes it is ' Ritualistic ' to sing the Aniens ; in others even the full choral service is not ' Ritualism.' Thus we might go on, almost ad infinitum. But one short summary covers the whole — Anything, in any particular parish, no matter how slight, that indicates any movement toward an increase of Church- liness — that is to say, an increase in the beauty, dignity, edifica- tion, or attractiveness, of pubhc worship, especially if it tend to show increasing honor to our Blessed Lord or the Sacrament of His precious Body and Blood — is Ritualistic : and most clearly, if it be something which you don't happen to fancy yourself. Anything which assumes that we American Episcopalians have ' already apprehended,' and are perfect in our mode of doing things, and that our Lord and His service ought 7iot to receive any more of time, care, money, and loving reverence than we give them now, and that every parish ought to be crystallized into permanence just where it is at present, every alteration be- ing 7iecessarily a change for the worse : all such persons will join the cry against ' Ritualism,' and we shall know exactly what they mean by it. '' W^e hope we have succeeded in making our answer intelligi- ble in all latitudes and longitudes," 1865-66.] Life of Jo Jin Henry Hopkins. 1 23 He went on to ask ''do the people like it?" and he traced the outline of the development of Church life, in this way : ''It is loudly affirmed that any increase in Ritualism is utterly foreign to the tastes of the Anglo-Saxon race in general, and of the American people in particular. And there is a certain amount of foundation for it, in the opposition with which any movement in that direction is sure to be greeted from several quarters. The older people who have been bred up in the pres- ent general style of doing things are opposed. The older clergy are generally opposed. The bishops are for the most part op- posed. Therefore there is sure to be an outcry over every detail of improvement, however small. Old-fashioned High Church- men (that is, the great bulk of that party), the whole of the Low Church, and all the Protestant denominations in a body, are ranged in loud and open — even abusive — opposition. And Rome likes it least of all. She tries to make capital out of it in- deed, and clamorously insists that it indicates a wholesale move- ment toward the Papal communion ; and in making this claim, all the Protestant opponents play straight into the hands of the Romanists, reiterating precisely the same charge, at the top of their voices, all the while. Yet Rome really dislikes the move- ment, knowing that it \n\V\. prevent many persons from resorting to her fold. She knows that where she makes one convert on doctrinal grounds, she makes ten on grounds of aesthetics, of feel- ing, of impression, and of yearning for something that touches a greater number of points in the complex nature of man. The drier and duller and more cheerless our practical system is, therefore, the more surely will Rome glean a great many loose or dissatisfied people from among us. While the more attractive, the more effective, the more interesting, our services are, the less is she hkely to win. All that is left to her, therefore, is, so to speak of the movement from the outside as to increase the suspi- cion against it inside, and thus if possible choke it off entirely, or so disgust and dishearten those who are engaged in it that they may give up the battle and go over to her, in despair of main- taining a truly CathoHc position in the ' Protestant Episcopal Denomination.' " Now we ask sensible people to say what they can make of the/^^/, that, in spite of this tremendous preponderance of oppo- sition from within and from without, the Church movement — though led by so few — has steadily won every battle it has fought 124 ^ Champion of tJie Cross. [1865-66. for the past tliirty years ? Gothic architecture, stained-glass windows, deep chancels, the removal of the old three-decker ar- rangement, the revival of the more ancient patterns in vessels of the Altar, large stone fonts, the placing of the font by the door, the use of flowers on high festivals, the ' image ' of the Cross outside and inside our churches, the revival of the ancient stole instead of the scarf, preaching in the surplice, the use of em- broidery on both surplice and stole, and now the introduction of stoles of different colors (which has already made such headway that in five years or less it will be general), the introduction first of chanting the Psalter, then boy choirs, and lastly the full choral service with male choirs in surplices, the slowly but steadily increasing love for the pure old Gregorian tones, and — most important of all — the increasing reverence for the Sacra- ments, the celebration of baptism (to say nothing of marriages and funerals) in church instead of in private houses, and the greater frequency of Eucharists, together with a tendency toward early celebrations : all these things, with many more — such as the richness of polychromatic decoration — constitute the history of a great campaign, an ecclesiastical thirty years' war, in which every point of detail has been a battle-field, fiercely contested at the time ; and every battle-field has brought a fresh victory for the Church party — a victory, that is to say, for that small, de- spised, and heartily abused 7?iifiority, against that tremendous, overwhelming, and loud-denouncing majority ! Will the majority be kind enough to chew the cud over that fact, for awhile, and tell us what they think of it ? " In every case, sooner or later, the minority have been left in quiet possession of the field of battle — the great fact which, in all warfare, decides the question of victory or defeat. In a great many of the points mentioned, the opponents themselves have come, not only to cease their opposition, but to adopt them- selves, with great delight, the very things which, ten years before, they declared to be ' Popery.' Ten years ago, for instance, the decoration of the interior of churches with bright colors and gild- ing was loudly and universally denounced by the Evangelical press as the latest enormity of histrionic display on the part of the Romanizers ; and as being irreconcilable with true views of the Gospel. And now, St. George's, Stup^esant Square — the very centre of Low-Church opposition to ' Ritualism ' — is com- ing out in full strength and brilliancy, so as boldly and success- fully to cast into the shade every other building in the country. 1865-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 125 *' Now it is impossible to account for this thirty years' war of perpetual victories for the minority, except in one way. And that is, by recognizing the truth, that the great Protestant move- ment, in its eagerness to get away from everything that looked like Romanism, had do?ie a great violence to human nature, in- sisting that beauty — whether of architecture, form, color, sweet sounds, vestments, services, flowers, adornment, and what not — that all beauty should be banished from the worship of that God who hath poured out beauty with an infinite profusion over all His works. They committed themselves to the absurd position that no public services could be agreeable to God, except such as were so ugly, so dull, so dry, and so repulsive, as to be almost intolerable to man — unless through a miracle of Divine grace. Under the powerful impulse of the Reformation — and there is no greater proof of its power than the length of time that it has prevented the inevitable reaction — the concentrated energies of all Protestant bodies were united in favor of ugliness and bald- ness : until the Puritan meeting-house of New England in the eighteenth century, and the primitive type of the Methodist Bethel, and the Quaker houses of worship, indicated the point beyond which it was impossible for the ugliness of vital piety to go, in manifesting its opposition to the beauty of holiness. '' But human nature is now being revenged upon the ugliness of vital piety. Human nature takes pleasure in beauty of all sorts and kinds. It may try for awhile, under excitement and strong religious prejudice, to pull a long face and persuade itself that drab is the only truly spiritual and delightful color, or that the sight of black suggests all the sweetness and richness of Gospel grace. But the cruel self-torture is sure to break down sooner or later : and that there is a general break down going on all around us now, is as plain as the nose on a man's face. '' For, as human nature is not confined to us Church folks, so the movement is not confined to us, but is felt through every prominent portion of the Protestant denominations. From time to time for years past, we have called attention to The Drift among them, showing their increasing disposition toward churchliness in a great variety of points. They move so fast, indeed, that now and then they get ahead even of our own Low Church people, and leave them lagging ludicrously far in the rear. " For some two or three centuries, God gave the Protestants what they wanted. ' He gave them their desire, and sent lean- ness withal into their soul.'' They have at length found it out ; 126 A Champion of the Cross. [1865-66. and by a general and instinctive movement they are now earnestly at work to discover whether all that was really needed or actually gained by the Reformation cannot be fully preserved, while nevertheless restoring the beauty of holiness, in such de- gree as God Himself has sanctioned in His Word and in His works, and such as was the universal heritage of His Church be- fore the spirit of ambition and usurpation, division and schism, began to cheat her out of her birthright. "■ Our readers will now understand the solid basis of that ' audacity ' of which our opponents complain so constantly, and which actually at times almost seems to take their breath away. Thirty years of tmvarying victories on evejy field of con- test, are a tolerably solid ground for ' audacity ' in any party. Those who have thus conquered against such odds, feel that only the Spirit and power of God working in them and with them could have given them the victory : and in that strength they are equally ready for all the conflicts that are yet to come. It is no part of ' the Gospel ' as they have learned it, that all beauty of form, color, melody, harmony, fragrance, motion, ar- rangement, are so entirely consecrated to the world, the flesh, and the devil, that they cannot lawfully be used in honor of the God who made them. They find that the noblest, purest, cost- liest, and best of all these were in His Word commanded to be used in His service, and are used in His service in the Court of Heaven ; and they know that to come as near as possible to those glorious models, with an honest and faithful heart, is the nearest and the dearest approach that can be made, during our present dispensation, to the realization of a heaven upon earth." About this time the different parts of Dr. Pusey's '' Eirenicon " came out, and this work, coming as it did, when the public heart was softened, and stirred to something very like sympathy by Newman's '' Apologia," gave a keener edge to the fear that arose " like a summer's cloud " of Rome. Keble was dead, and the memories of churchmen were fresh with the spell of the thrilling voices of the earlier ' ' Tracts for the Times. ' ' The movement was daily becoming more powerful in England, and a feebler, but still an harmonious vibration from the same sweeping touch was felt here. W^hen, then, in 1866, at the request of a number of priests, among whom were Dr. Dix, and Drs. (afterward Bishops) Young and Doane, and laymen, the Bishop of Vermont pub- lished a thin volume with a smoking censer on the cover, and 1865-66. J Life of John Henry Hopkins. 1 27 bearing the title "The Law of RituaHsm " it was felt that '^ something must be done" that would have some effect in stopping the inroads of the two enemies that it was feared were working in concert — Romanism and Ritualism. Accordingly in March, 1867, a Declaration by Twenty-eight Bishops was pub- lished, which was noticed in the Church Journal by four suc- cessive leaders under the title " The Blank Cartridge " — but he shall tell his own story. "The Blank Cartridge. — Thus far we have had less to say editorially concerning ' Ritualism ' than any of our con- temporaries. Beyond the giving of the current news from Eng- land, and our notices of the Bishop of Vermont's book, a few brief paragraphs are all the editorial attention that we have given to the subject : while our contemporaries have some of them given up column after column for months together, to the excit- ing theme. But silence is no now longer possible. The Bishop of has sent to the Christian Witness the following document. It has long been expected, and the reasons for its extraordinary delay are not very clearly expressed : yet the date of its appear- ance in our columns is not altogether inappropriate. There will now be no lack of material for mortification and humiliation during Lent : " January 10, 1867. " The Committee appointed to draft this Declaration, owing to the great distance between the dwelling-places of its members and their frequent absences from their homes, were not able, very speedily, to complete their work. " It was by the unanimous advice of the Bishops assembled at Detroit, in December, that the Committee resolved to postpone this publication, until the remotest of our Bishops might be heard from ; but, even at this date, it is supposed that several of them have never received the circular of the Committee. " As in the '• Colenso Case,' several of the Bishops object to this form of meeting an evil which they deeply deplore ; but not one of the Bishops heard from has expressed any sympathy with the Ritualistic movement. The reverse is the fact. " The Committee think it proper no longer to delay the pub- lication. Secretary. " Whereas, at a meeting of the House of Bishops, held in the City of New York in the month of October, the subject of 128 A Champion of the Cross. [1865-66. Ritualism was brought to the notice of the House and considered with a great degree of unanimity ; and '' Whereas, on account of the absence of a number of the Right Rev. members of the House, and the fact that the House was not sitting as a co-ordinate branch of the General Conven- tion of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, it was regarded as inexpedient to proceed to any formal action ; and '■'- Whereas, it was nevertheless regarded as highly desirable that an expression of opinion on the part of the Episcopate of this Church should be given, with respect to ritualistic innova- tions ; Therefore, the undersigned Bishops, reserving each for himself his rights as Ordinary of his own diocese, and also his rights as a member of the House of Bishops sitting in General Convention, do unite in the Declaration following : "We hold in the language of the XXXI Vth Article of Rehgion, that ' every particular or National Church hath authority 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 ; ' and also in the language of the same Article that : ' it is not nec- essary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one, or utterly like ; for at all times they have been divers, and may be changed according to the diversity of countries, times and men's manners, so that nothing be ordained against God's Word ; ' and also, that this Church was duly organized as a * particular and National Church ' in communion with the Universal or Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ, and that this organiza- tion which took place immediately after the American Revolu- tion, was settled under the careful direction and advice, and with the cordial co-operation of godly, well-learned and justly vener- ated divines, who were well acquainted with the history of the Church of England before and since her blessed Reformation, and who thoroughly understood what was and is still required by the peculiarities of this Country and its people. " We hold, therefore, that the ceremonies, rites and worship then established, ordained and approved by common authority, as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer of this Church, are the Law of this Church, which every Bishop, Presbyter and Deacon of the same has bound himself by subscription to the Promise of Conformity in Article VII. of the Constitu- tion to obey, observe and follow : and that no strange or for- eign usages should be introduced or sanctioned by the private 1865-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkms. 129 judgment of any member or members of this Church, Clerical or Lay. "We further hold, that while this Church is 'far from in- tending to depart from the Church of England in any essential point of doctrine, discipline or worship, or further than local circumstances require,' it yet has its peculiar place, character, and duty as a ' particular and National Church ; ' and that no Prayer Book of the Church of England, in the reign of whatever Sovereign set forth, and no Laws of the Church of England have any force of Law in this Church such as can be justly cited in defence of any departure from the express Law of this Church, its Liturgy, its discipline, rites and usages. ''And we, therefore, consider that in this particular National Church, any attempt to introduce into the public worship of Almighty GOD, usages that have never been known, such as the use of incense, and the burning of lights in the order for the Holy Communion ; reverences to the Holy Table or to the Ele- ments thereon, such as indicate or imply that the Sacrifice of our Divine Lord and Saviour, ' once offered,' w^as not a ' full, per- fect and sufficient sacrifice, oblation and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world ; ' the adoption of clerical habits hitherto unknown, or material alterations of those which have been in use since the establishment of our Episcopate ; is an innovation which violates the discipline of the Church, ' offendeth against its common order, and hurteth the authority of the Magistrate, and woundeth the consciences of the weak brethren.' " Furthermore, that we be not misunderstood, let it be noted that we include in these censures, all departures from the Laws, rubrics and settled order of this Church, as well by defect as by excess of observance, designing to maintain in its integrity the sound Scriptural and Primitive, and therefore the Catholic and Apostolic spirit of the Book of Common Prayer. " Signed by the following Bishops." The House of Bishops met on the 5 th of October last, and re- mained in session on the 6th and 7th of that month, and then adjourned. In his little book called publishes, as the last of its contents, a "Letter to a Bishop," dated October, 1866." This letter thus begins : " I agree with you that the matter of ' Ritualism ' is becom- ing a serious one for us, as well as for the English. I regarded it 9 130 A CJiainpion of the Cross. [1865-66. as simply absurd, while it was presented in a single instance in New York, where the feebleness and shallowness of a foppish puerility have served the useful purpose of a caricature. But the appearance of the Bishop of Vermont's little book is a serious thing, as it opens the door for experiments which are not un- likely to be made in respectable churches, if not in some of the most important seats of the Church's dignity and strength." As this letter is proved by its date to have been written either immediately before (which is very improbable) or within a little while after, the above Dcclai-ation was sent on the rounds for signatures — and written, too, by the Bishop who has taken the leading part in that work, and who is generally understood to be the writer of the Declaration itself : we can be doing no in- justice by interpreting the Declaration in the light thus thrown upon it from . '' There were, then, only two causes for the five montlis' incu- bation that has produced the above document signed by twenty- eight Bishops. One was, the 'single instance in New York,' to wit, the little church of S. Alban in this city — which is alluded to by the Bishop with his usual dignified amenity of phrase, and is further regarded by him as ' simply absurd. ' The other was, 'the Bishop of Vermont's little book,' which was 'a serious thing.' If the Twenty-eight meant merely to condemn S. Alban's, they were undertaking to bishop it in another man's Diocese ; for the Bishop of New York — notwithstanding the urgent pressure brought to bear on him — is not one of the signers. He has never given any express sanction to ' Ritualism ' so called : but while he amiably neglects to put the law of the Church in force against sundry Low Churchmen who openly set it at defiance, he is not likely to bring the hand of authority to bear hardly upon the clergy and congregation of S. Alban's, who have broken no law at all. " The document, then, must be understood chiefly as a demon- stration against the Bishop of Vermont's book. Now, at the time of the meeting in October, that book had not been quite one week before the public, and many of the Bishops, who were the loudest in denouncing it had not yet read it. Moreover, the Bishop of Vermont is the Presiding Bishop, and though it is as allowable to differ in opinion from the Presiding Bishop as from any other Bishop, it is proper that the acknowledged chief of the 1865-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 131 Episcopal Order should be treated with a certain degree of respect by his younger brethren. If he writes an erroneous book, let some one or more of them write a reply wdiich shall dis- prove and correct the error. If he have done anything calling for even the lightest form of ' admonition, ' the Canons pro- vide for the mode of his trial, when he may have an opportunity to be heard in his own defence : and any combination of his brethren to admonish him in his absence, and in respect to a book which many of them had not even read, would have been a canonical outrage. To circulate a Declaration which shall have the effect of denouncing his book while nevertheless neither his name nor his book are specifically alluded to, may be the means of obtaining a larger number of signatures from those who do not understand the real drift of the operation : but it is an act of cowardice in one point of view ; and in another, the signa- tures thus obtained are obtained practically under false pretences. But both the concealment and the policy of it are of little use, when the '■ ' Secretary ' ' himself, while pushing the Declaration for signatures, is kind enough to let the cat out of the bag, and inform us that ' the Bishop of Vermont's little book ' was the only ' serious thing ' under consideration at the time. And, moreover, this agrees entirely Avith what we heard from Bishops themselves during the meeting of the House in October. " Now, the relation in which we stand to the Presiding Bishop makes it not only our right but our duty to stand up in his defence against this attack from so large a number of his brethren. When so many of those lift up their heel against the venerable hand that was laid upon their heads — when so many of the Fathers turn publicly against the Canonical Chief of their own sacred Order — they must expect as a matter of course that a reverence for that Order will not now be a shield to them : for they have themselves beaten it down, or thrown it away. As we have had occasion to say once before, the Bishops must learn to show due respect to one another, if they are to be properly respected themselves. ''The fact that our own Bishop, the Bishop of New York, has not signed the Declaration, is only an additional reason, to us, for exercising our rightful freedom in regard to it. Though, as we have said before, he has not expressed any approval of the so-called ' Ritualism,' nor is likely so to do, yet we are informed that, in the discussion on the subject in the House of Bishops, he ridiculed the Anti-ritualistic crusade as a " Mrs. Partington 132 A Champioft of the Cross. [1865-66. kind of business; " plainly told the Bishops that they could no more keep down the Ritualistic movement by their '' JDeclaj-a- tion ' ' than they could keep down the rising tide with a broom ; and that the general average of our parochial services in this country might yet bear very considerable improvement, with great gain to the cause of the Church. The Twenty-eight Bishops have since then been nearly five months hard at work with their broom, notwithstanding : and the above Declaration is the re- sult. Ten years, or five years, or even one year hence, we shall be willing to abide by the confession of any one of the Twenty- eight as to the comparative height of the tide, and as to the prob- able effect of their Declaration upon its rise. ' ' During the months of preparation — though the original Cir- cular was headed ' jg^^^ Tliis paper is to be regarded as private and confidential, until completed by the sigjiatures of Bishops ' — its coming was heralded, or its appearance demanded — by the Episcopalian and (we believe) by every other Church paper, as well as by the Church Review. The Church Journal paid respect to the ' private and confidential ' mark at the head of it, and made no allusion to the document whatever. For the credit of the House of Bishops, we hoped that such a document would really never appear. We knew it would do more to ad- vance the cause of Ritualism than anything else could do. But all the opponents of Ritualism felt sure that the expected Declara- tion would be a great gun, whose discharge would shatter Ritualism in pieces. It has at last been fired off, and turns out to be but a blank cartridge. It will make some noise for a short time, and then be comparatively — for the signers' sakes, would that it could be wholly — forgotten. And that will be all. ' ' We ask our readers to preserve the Decla?'ation for a close comparison with what we shall say of it hereafter, in proving our position that it is but a ' blank cartridge.' '' The Declaration set forth by the Twenty-eight Bishops is, as we have said, a mere blank cartridge. It is — so far as its main object is concerned — mere sound, with no substance whatever. '' First of all, the Whereases prove that the House of Bishops itself regarded it as ' inexpedient to proceed to any formal action ' on the subject : which is as much as to say that what is now pub- lished by the Twenty-eight does not call for any formal recogni- tion, as binding on any person whatsoever. " Next, those TVhereases prove that the Declaration does not claim to be anything more than ' an expression of opinion ; ' 1865-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 133 which amounts to nothing with anybody who feels that he has sufficient grounds for a different opinion of his own. The worth of an opinion depends entirely upon the competency of the par- ties concerned to form and express ' an opinion as is an opinion.' At the time when the Bishop of Vermont's book appeared, there were not six men in the House of Bishops who could have told the difference between a chasuble and a cope, without first being informed by somebody else. And the opinion of the Twenty- eight cannot be expected to command any general acquiescence, when the signers of it do not include those Bishops who are the highest of their Order in age, or in learning, or in the impor- tance of their Dioceses. '■'■ The Whei^eases contain a still further phrase, which nullifies the whole document, and really turns it into a palpable farce. It is this : ' The undersigned Bishops, reserving each for hiinself his rights as Ordinary of his own Diocese, and also his rights as a member of the House of Bishops sitting in General Convention, do unite in the Declaration following,' etc. That is to say, the signers of this ' opinion ' expressly repudiate the idea that any one of them is to be bound by it, either in the administration of his own Diocese, or in his votes in General Convention ! Now, if the signers themselves are not to be bound by it, in the name of common sense who else is ? Was ever such an opinion set forth before ? Do not the signers themselves here invite everybody to treat their opinion with the same contempt which they thus pour upon it themselves? '' To proceed with the substance of the Declaration. ''In the first paragraph, about Article XXXIV,, there is noth- ing to be objected to, except that ' the peculiarities of this coun- try and its people ' cannot be regarded as in all respects what they were ' immediately after the American Revolution.' ' Times and men's manners ' have manifested many shades of diversity since then. And this change has been the greatest precisely in those directions which have the closest relation to a practical in- crease of Ritualism. The XXXIVth Article, therefore, is a much better authority in favor of many and great changes, than it can possibly be for preserving the precise style of celebrating the services which prevailed ' immediately after the American Revolution.' Nay, there is hardly one of the signers who can point to a single church in his Diocese where the ritualistic stand- ard is now as low as it was in the days referred to. The Bishops themselves could not endure the baldness, coldness, and poverty 134 A Chauipion of the Cross. [1865-66. of it ; and if they tried to force it on their clergy and people, the attempt would be in vain. We have all happily advanced so far, that no Diocese in the land could bear to go back again to that. And a paragraph which logically means that, if it means anything, is only a ' blank cartridge. ' " The positive part of the next paragraph, declaring the obli- gation of the subscription of Conformity required in Article 7 of the Constitution, is well enough meant ; but it is so curiously worded as to limit the obligation to ' the ceremonies, rites, and worship then established, ordained, and approved by common authority,' — to wit, ^immediately after the American Revolu- tion.' Now, inasmuch as the American Revolution took place in 1776, and was completed by the Peace of 1783, this ^ imme- diately ' cannot — even with some stretching — be made to include more than the work of 1789, which set forth the Prayer-Book proper, down to the end of the Psalter (which is therefore the last item in its Table of Contents). The Twenty-eight, there- fore, do actually exclude from 'the Law of this Church,' the Ordinal, adopted in 1792 — sixteen yeat-s after the 'American Revolution ; ' and also the Form of Consecration of a church or chapel, adopted in 1799; the Articles of Rehgion, adopted in 1801 ; and the Institution Office, adopted in 1808 ; which were subsequent to the American Revolution twenty-three, twenty-five, and thi?'ty-two years, respectively ! And no reference is made to the Digest as being any part of ' the Law of this Church ! ' Of course they did not mean this ; but they have actually said it ; and we have a right to interpret strictly the language of a docu- ment which attempts to impose an intolerable strictness of con- struction as binding upon other people. ' ' But the negative part of that same paragraph is equally queer — if it is to be understood as it stands, that (beyond the ' usages ' which prevailed immediately after the American Revolution) ' no strange or foreign usages should be introduced or sanctioned by the private judgment of any member or members of this Church, Clerical or Lay. ' There is no coherence between this part of the sentence and the positive part that precedes it. The one refers only to law, the other only to usages. The position is, that whereas certain things were made/<2W in 1789, therefore ^//z^fr things which were not made law at that time, or at any other, ought never to change from what they were in 1789. To state a precisely similar case : The Constitution of the United States, adopted in 1787, forbids the making of sumptuary laws, so that 1865-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 135 the style of hats to be worn nowaday is not regulated by law. Thei'efore, it was wrong ever to change the style of hats worn in this country, '■ no strange or foreign ' styles of hats should ever have been introduced here from Paris or elsewhere ; and all loyal gentlemen should now wear only the cocked hats that were in use at the time when the Constitution was adopted in 1787. Verily, ' here is wisdom ! ' The old three-decker arrangement of the chancel ; the duet between parson and clerk ; the total disuse of chanting — all the canticles being everywhere read ; the total disuse of the cross as a visible symbol ; the total ignor- ance of Gothic architecture ; the celebration of the Holy Com- munion only three or four times in a year in the most advanced parishes ; the almost universal celebration of baptisms, marriages, and funerals in private houses ; — all these ' usages ' were right, and should never have been changed ! And the changes from time to time made in these and other respects — the altered cut of the surplice so that we have now half a dozen varieties at least ; the change of the old scarf into a fringed stole ; the use ^f more or less embroidery on both surplice and stole ; the preach- ing in the surplice ; the disuse of that ridiculous and flimsy ap- pendage, the bands ; the dispensing with breeches, and silk stockings, and shoe-buckles ; the chanting of the canticles ; the changes of chancel arrangement by which due prominence was given to the altar ; the introduction of large stone fonts in- stead of baptismal bowls; the introduction of the lectern for the Bible and the faldstool for the Litany ; the bringing in of Easter flowers, and Christmas-trees, and anthems, and boy choristers, and surpliced choirs, and antiphonal chanting, and choral ser- vices, and daily prayers, and weekly Eucharists, and many other things that might be named — all these are ' strange or foreign usages ' that ought not to have been ' introduced or sanctioned by the private judgment of any member or members of this Church, Clerical or Lay ' ; and yet that is precisely the way in which they all were introduced, and many other similar changes ; and the process will go on just as rapidly after this Declaration as before — if not a little more so. And what do the Twenty-eight propose to do about it ? Legislate our present liberty away ? No : they expressly repudiate that ! Enforce this their present 'opinion,' each in his own Diocese? No: they expressly repudiate that. Do they think that those Bish- ops who do not sign it will enforce the opinion any better than those who do? Hardly ! The ' Secretary ' who circulated the 1T)6 A Champion of the Cross. [1865-66. Declaration for signatures, says expressly : ' For one, I am disposed to vote, in the House of Bishops, that all questions about ' blue and purple and scarlet ' should lie on the table, to be called up only when ' the beauty of holiness ' shall be more visi- ble among us. This is just what the Ritualistic party want, and all that they want in this matter. The Church of America now leaves to her childre?i a larger libei'ty on all these subjects than is at present to be foiuid in any other branch of the Catholic Church. The Ritualists are determined to use that liberty for the restoration of 'the beauty of holiness,' to the utmost of their power. And the ringleader in getting up this implied censure upon the Presiding Bishop and the Bishop of New York — himself kindly assures the Ritualists that until " ' the beauty of holiness ' shall be more visible among us " — that is to say, until the Ritualists shall have done their ivork — lie will vote for laying on the table all measures which would tend to abridge the present liberty which is now left to them by the law. Was there ever, then, a blanker cartridge than this Declai-ation ? " But there is more, and stranger, yet to come ! " The third paragraph of the Declaration of the Twenty-eight begins with reaffirming the assertion in the Preface of the Prayer- Book, that ' this Church is far from intending to depart from the Church of England in any essential point of doctrine, discipline, or worship ; or further than local circumstances require ; ' and asserting that we are ' a particular and National Church ' : which is right enough. They then go on to say, ' that no Prayer-Book of the Church of England, in the reign of whatever sovereign set forth, and no Laws of the Church of England, have any force of Law in this Church such as can be justly cited in defence of any depai'ture front the express Law of this Church, its Liturgy, its discipline, rites, and usages.' The whole pith of this lies in the vague word ' usages ' at the end of it. The ' express Law of this Church ' does not recognize mere ' usages ' as being subject to * law ' at all. The insertion of the word in this connection is equivalent to sending the gentlemen of the present day back to the cocked hats of their great-grandfathers in the year 1787. Yet, if that word be omitted, the whole paragraph, with all its formidable sound, hits nobody, and nothing. Nobody claims the right, from merely English Law, to make ' any departure from the express Lmv of this Church.' The only question is in regard to cases where there is 7to ' express Law of this Church. ' Blank cartridge again ! 1865-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 137 ' ' We might easily dismiss this point here, but we cannot consent that the Twenty-eight Bishops shall attempt, by an in- formal opinion, to stultify the action of their own House as a House, in times when the true principles of the changes made ' immediately after the American Revolution ' were much better understood, and that by the very men who made them. ' ' The whole question turns, not on ' the express Law ' of the Church of America, but on matters which are not mentioned in the ' express Law ' of the Church of America, though they are mentioned in the ' express Law ' of the Church of England. And the House of Bishops has expressed itself at least twice on the subject, once as touching the question of the English Canons, and once as touching the question of Rubrics dropped from the American Book. " First as to the Canons : — In 1808, the question of the Pro- hibited Degrees came before the House of Bishops on a message from the Lower House. This is a subject on which our Ameri- can Church legislation is totally silent, but on which the English Canon law speaks with perfect distinctness, setting forth the ta- ble of thirty degrees which are prohibited ' by the law of God.' Some have thought that the ' Law of God ' does not so clearly forbid all \hQ degrees there enumerated: and it is evident that the House of Bishops thought that possibly some alterations might be made in it ' without departing from the law of God. ' This makes the case still stronger, for it proves that the ' obligatory ' character of that English Canon was derived simply from the fact that it was English Canon, which the Church of America had not yet seen fit to ' alter. ' We quote from the Journal of 1808: "The House of Bishops, having taken into consideration the message sent to them by the House of Clerical and Lay Depu- ties, relative to the subject of marriage, as connected with the Table of Degrees within which, according to the Canons of the Church of England, marriage cannot be celebrated, observe as follows : " 'Agreeably to the sentiment entertained by them i?i relation to the whole ecclesiastical system, they consider that Table as now obligato7y on this Clmrch, and as what will remain so ; unless there should hereafter appear cause to alter it, without departing from the Word of God, or endangering the peace and good order of this Church.' ' ' This decision was sent down to the Lower House, and was ac- 138 A Champion of the Cross. [1S65-66. cepted without one word of opposition there. So that we have the distinct authority of the whole General Convention (Bishop White presiding in the Upper House at the time), declaring that English Canons, whe?i not expressly altered by our own Church, are ' now obligato7'y ' upon ' this Church, ' and ' will remain so ' until we do ' alter ' them ; and that this is the principle upon which our ' whole ecclesiastical sysietn ' rests. So much for Canojts. " Now for Rubrics. — The English Prayer-Book has a Rubric after the third Collect, in both Morning and Evening Prayer, as follows : ^ ^ In Quires and Places where they sing, here fol- loweth the Anthem.' This Rubric is entirely omitted in our American Book. According to the principles of the Declaration, the singing of Anthems not provided for by ' express law ' im- mediately thenceforward became ' an innovation which violates the discipline of the Church, offendeth against its common or- der, and hurteth the authority of the Magistrate, and woundeth the consciences of the weak brethren.' But is that what the House of Bishops thought about Anthems in the year 18 14, when Bishop White again was presiding, and Bishop Hobart sat with him ? Let us consult once more the Journal of the House of Bishops, and see what v.as their 'resolve,' when it was sup- posed that the ' express law ' of the American Church was needed in order to sanction the acting upon a Rubric which had been dropped : '' ' Resolved, That it is not expedient, during this Convention, to go into a review, either in whole or in part, of the Book of Com- mon Prayer. It could not, however, but give satisfaction to the Bishops to recollect, that Anthems taken from Scripture, and judiciously arranged, may, according to the known allowance of this Church, be sung in congregations at the discretion of their respective ministers.' "■ This too, like the other, was formally sent down to the Lower House, and was there received without one word of remonstrance. Now, this decision touching Anthems could not have rested upon what was then the American usage, for it is notorious that at that time they had only just begun to chant some of the Canticles (an innovation which then created a greater outcry of ' Popery ' than the Choral Service does now), and Anthems had as yet been introduced nowhere on this side of the water. Therefore it is undeniable that we here have the House of Bishops declaring, and the Lower House accepting, the position that a practice 1865-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 139 which rested solely on an English Rubric dropped from the Ameri- can Book, might still be continued d& being ' according to the known allowance of this Clmrch ; ' and that, although the practice itself had thus far 7iever been known on this side of the water. " These resolutions explain fully the true meaning of the phrase in the Preface of the Prayer-Book, ' this Church is far from in- tending to depart from the Church of England in any essential point of doctrine, discipline, or worship, or further than local circumstances require.' The true meaning of this is evidently, that this Church is not only far from intending to depart from the Church of England in essentials, but is also far f'om intend- ing to depart from the Church of England in any respect ' fur- ther than local circumstances require.' The ' local circum- stance ' that Bishop Seabury had received consecration from the Scottish Bishops, signing a Concordat in regard to the Scottish Communion Office, required that certain additions from the Scottish Book should be made in our Eucharistical Canon. The local circumstance that we had been for 150 years without Bishops here, until Church feeling had so nearly died out that it was hopeless to dream of enfoi'cing the old Rubrics in all their minuteness and stringency, required that those Rubrics should be dropped, so that those who disliked their operation might be under no fear of compulsion in that direction by the discipline of the Church. Where a Rubric has been dropped, Bishops and Ecclesiastical courts cannot compel their observance. But where the observance has not been prohibited, and where nothing has been put in the place of a dropped Rubric, there the Clergy and Congregations are left free to practise the old Rubric, or not, just as they please ; and no Bishop has power to compel them either to do it or to let it alone. The observance of such a dropped Rubric is, not ' the express Law,' but ' the known al- lowance of this Clmrch.'' '' Now, what the House of Bishops thus term ' the know7i al- lowance ' of still acting upon a dropped Rubric, is the exact prin- ciple on which the whole Ritualistic controversy turns. In the English Book, just before Morning Prayer, we have the follow- ing Rubric : " ' The Morning and Evening Prayer shall be used in the ac- customed place of the Church, Chapel, or Chancel ; Except it shall be otherwise determined by the Ordinary of the place. And the Chancels shall remain as they have done in times past.' "And here it is to be noted, that such Ornaments of the 140 A Champion of the Cross. [1865-66. Church and of the ministers thereof at ail times of their Ministra- tion, shall be retained and be in use as were in this Church of England by the Authority of Parliament, in the second year of the Reign of King Edward the Sixth. " Now, we have not altered this Rubric in the American Book, We have not put something else in place of it. We have simply omitted it altogether, just as was done with the Rubric about Anthems. At that time, Anthems were practically as completely unknown in America as Albes and Chasubles and Copes. Now, if one part of the above dropped Rubric is illegal in America it is all illegal : and therefore the American clergpnan has no right to say the Morning and Evening Prayer from the Chancel, nor have we any right to arrange the Chancel itself as we do. There is absolutely not the scrape of a pen in the shape of Amei'ica7i legislation to justify what is our univei-sal practice. The Twenty- eight bishops would sweep away the lawfulness of our present custom with the besom of destruction. But happily, their posi- tion, which is as untenable in regard to the ' Ornaments of the Church and of the Ministers thereof at all times of their Minis- tration,' as in regard to all the rest — is a mere innovation, un- known to the Fathers of the American Church, who have left on record their deliberate and unanimous judgment to the contrary, both as to Canons and Rubrics. There is no doubt that the venerable Bishop White wTote with his own hand both the Reso- lutions which we have quoted above from the old Journals of the House of Bishops : Resolutions which have been the basis on which all the improvements of the past half-century in our mode of celebrating divine service have been quietly and steadily builded up. They embody the principle upon which ' our whole ecclesiastical system ' rests. They cannot be expunged now by the innovations of Bishops who seem totally to forget the past, in their anxiety to arrest the progress of the present, and block all further advance in the future. '' As rockets reserve their most brilliant coruscations for the last, and shine the brightest just before leaving nothing of their glory but the stick : so the Declaration of the Twenty-eight Bishops reserves its most extraordinary features for the closing paragraphs. With a ' therefore ' — based upon the foundation which we have totally destroyed with the Resolutions of the House of Bishops in 1808 and 1 8 14 — they go on to denounce certain * usages ' which (as they say) ' ha\'e never been known ' {sic) ! What caji the Twenty-eight Fathers mean ? If these things ' have never 1865-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 141 been known/ how happened they to have heard of them, and to have come out so strongly against them ? And as if once using this strange word was not enough, they afterwards condemn also ' the adoption of clerical habits hithei'to unknown ! ' Now as this language is perfectly plain, w^e have a right to conclude that the Twenty-eight Fathers mean to condemn only such things as '■have never been known,^ and such habits as are ^unknown hithe7'to ' ,' and of course — except by some non-natural interpre- tation — they cannot mean the doings of the Ritualistic party, for they have been known by the most general newspaper clamor of our day — in English papers and American, High-Church, Low- Church, Broad-Church, and No-Church — for some years past. How the Bishops could describe such doings as things ' that have never been known,' is beyond our comprehension, unless they were determined that their Declaration should be laughed at. And they actually specify, as things that have ' never been known,' the use of incense and lights during the Holy Com- munion — things that are notoriously almost as ancient and as universal as the Episcopate itself; and much more ancient and universal than such Bishops as these Twenty-eight. " But, as if this were not enough, they next condemn such '■ reverences to the Holy Table or to the elements thereon ' as ' indicate or imply that the Sacrifice of our Divine Lord and Saviour, ''once offered," was 7iot a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world.' When we first read this, we could hardly believe our eyes. But, concluding — as we are forced to do — that the sim- ple historical fact on the subject is one of the things ' that have never been known ' to the Twenty-eight, we do assure them, upon the honor of one who happens to know what he is talking about, that there is not now, and there never has been in any age any branch of the Catholic Church in any land, that has held that 'the Sacrifice of our Divine Lord and Saviour ''once offered," was not a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation and satis- faction, for the sins of the whole world : ' and therefore that it is a simple impossibility that any reverences or other acts or gest- ures whatsoever could 'indicate or imply' a doctrine which no Catholic Christian has ever held. The knowledge of theology indicated by this most extraordinary phrase of the Declaration is such as we should not have been surprised at in Dr. Cumming or Mr. Spurgeon : but in our own Bishops, and Twenty-eight of them ! Oh ! 142 A Champion of tJie Cross. [1865-66. '' But perhaps this was only another device to insure that the ' big gun ' should prove a blank cartridge after all. As only those ' reverences ' are condemned which '■ indicate or imply ' an impossibility, of course no censure is expressed against any ' reverences ' which are actually in use anywhere in Christen- dom. Is that it? Certainly nothing else can be made of it ! '' But no ! All the above, together with ' material alterations ' of the clerical habits ' which have been in use since the estab- lishment of our Episcopate ' are in a lump, condemned in the language of the XXXIVth Article. To introduce any one of all the above enumerated ' abominations ' is declared by the Twenty-eight to be ' an innovation which violates the disci- pline of the Church, offendeth against its common order, and hurteth the authority of the Magistrate, and woundeth the con- sciences of the weak brethren. ' What is here declared to be a thing that ' violates the discipline of the Church,' we have already proved, by the House of Bishops, to be ' according to the known allowance of this Church.' It cannot 'offend against its common order,' because it is a matter upon which the Church hath made no ' order ' at all. And as to ' hurt- ing the Authority of the Magistrate,' what can the Twenty- eight Fathers mean ? Is the Mayor of New York to send a squad of police to 'stop the singing of Anthems in Trinity Church ? Or is Governo?' Fenton to interfere to compel the clergy of St. Al- ban's to put out the lights on the altar, to give up a violet chas- uble, to preach in a black gown, and not to bow at the Sacred Name ? What can the Twenty-eight have been thinking of when they thus referred, in this connection, to the ' authority of the Magistrate ? ' We give it up in despair ! '' But is there any sufficient reason for them to speak of their ' consciences ? ' They use, in quotation marks, the language of the XXXIVth Article, as if it applied to the case. That case, be it remembered, is in regard to things of which our American ec- clesiastical law says nothing at all. Now read the language as it occurs in the Article in its proper connection : '' ' . . . Whosoever through his private judgment, will- ingly and purposely, doth openly break the traditions and cere- monies of the Church, which be not repugnant to the Word of God, and be ordai^ied and approved by common autho?ity, ought to be rebuked openly, (that others may fear to do the like,) as he that offendeth against the common order of the Church, and 1865-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 143 hurteth the authority of the Magistrate, and woundeth the con- sciences of the weak brethren.' '' Here it is as clear as daylight, that the language quoted by the Twenty-eight from the Article applies only to those who ' break ' what has been '■ ordained a?id approved by common au- thority' And the Twenty-eight, without one word of qualifica- tion, apply it solely to the case of things which have not been ' ordained and approved by common authority,' nor even so much as mentioned in the legislation of the Church ! Is that hon- esty ? Is it a fair specimen of the Episcopal ' conscience ? ' Why, it entirely beats anything to be found in Tract No. 90, or the ' Eirenicon ! ' But ' perad venture it was an oversight.' ' ' Two other proofs of the utter emptiness of this ' blank car- tridge ' yet remain to be noticed. " The last paragraph of all is devoted to Low- Church irregu- larities ; by way of trimming the boat, we suppose, and to give an impression of fairness and impartiality. The proportion of Episcopal attentions is, indeed, rather unequal. It is a propor- tion of thirteen lines belaboring and denouncing those whose only object is to render more glorious the service of God, to one line bearing upon those who have set at defiance the fundamental pre- rogative of the whole Episcopal Order, and recognize Presbyte- rian ordination as valid, and get Presbyterians to assist in con- secrating the Holy Communion in our own churches. This proportion of thirteen to one puts us in mind of Falstaff's tavern bill : ' What, only one ha' penny-worth of bread to this intoler- able deal of sack ? ' However, the Twenty-eight ' include in these censures all departures from the Laws, rubrics and settled order of this Chu-rch, as well by defect as by excess of observance, designing to maintain in its integrity the sound Scriptural and Primitive, and therefore the Catholic and Apostolic, spirit of the Book of Common Prayer. ' And this is signed by all the Low- Church Bishops in the House. The Declaration is unanimously signed by their Bishops ; yet how much will they mind it ? Does not everybody know that that part of it will be treated by the Low- Church party as a farce ? And is it to be supposed that those of the other party, whose Bishops are not unanimous, will treat it with any greater respect on their side ? And yet, with- out this transparent farce at the end, the Declaration would hardly have received signatures enough to bear publication at all. 144 A Champion of the Cross. [1865-66. '' Once more : In the original circular of the Declaration sent out by the Committee for the signatures of Bishops, there was the following address from the Committee to each individual Bishop : " ' Rt. Rev. Brother — The following draught of a paper to be signed by such of the Bishops as may approve of its purport, was made by the undersigned committee, appointed at the late meet- ing of the House of Bishops, and is now sent in order that you may, if you desire to do so, subscribe your name, and return it to the Secretary of the Committee. He will then send to each Bishop the document, with all its signatures printed, leaving to each Diocesan his own course as to its publication, or reception, in his own Diocese.' '' It is thus kindly provided, by the getters up of the Declara- tion themselves, that it shall not be considered as either 'pub- lished ' or ' received ' in any Diocese whose Bishop does not choose that it shall be published and received. It is thus certain that — whatever be its fate elsewhere — it is a perfectly ' blank cartridge ' in the Dioceses of Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and others — sixteen Dioceses, and among them the most pov/erful on the list. Indeed, as it is left to ' each Dioce- san ' to take ' his own course as to its publicatioii, or reception, in his own Diocese,' we have a right to conclude that where it has not been specially published by the Bishop of a Diocese, his merely having signed it is to go for nothing. Except the Dio- ceses of Massachusetts, Ohio, and Iowa, then, and two or three more, the Declaj-ation may be considered, in all the Dioceses of the United States, as one of the ' things that never were k/iown. ' ' ' But that original circular (which is no longer ' private and confidential ' now, being ' completed by the signatures of Bishops ') concludes with a notable proof of the fatality of style which makes this Declaration read in some parts so much like a broad joke. Not content with censuring ' usages that have never been known,'' and condemning ' clerical habits hitherto un- known,' and talking of a doctrine concerning the sacrifice of Christ that was never held anywhere, and quoting the language of the Article for the precise opposite of its real bearing, and the refusal to be bound by an opinion which they set forth expressly to influence others, and the talk about ' the authority of the Mag- istrate ' as having anything to do with Ritualism in this country, TS65-66.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 145 not content with all this, we say, that Circidai^, with singular fe- licity, closed with the following request : ^'"^^ Further delay is not desii^able, and as this may fail to 7^each many Bishops in due course of mail, telegraphic answers are requested in such cases, ' ' What could be a better cap-sheaf for such a Declaration than such a request ? It is as much as to say — Ifyotc do not receive this letter, please answer immediately by telegi-aph ! Nothing else can be made of it. Perhaps we can now guess the reason why so many Bishops did not reply. How could they answer a letter which they never received, about things which ' were never known ' ? '^ With this last shout of laughter, let us j^art with our curious Declai-ation in all good humor. It has been but a blank car- tridge all the while — -a little loud and startling to weak nerves at first, perhaps, but doing nobody any harm except the signers. And we bear such good-will to them, that — if they will let us — we shall forget all about it as soon as possible. We know they did not mean to do it ; and as the document was not framed with the benefit of deliberation in council, they had not a fair chance to do themselves justice. They must remember that we have been defending the recorded action of the House of Bishops in General Convention assembled, against the informal accident of an hour of haste. We have app ealed from Philip a little ex- cited, to Philip quite sober. And if our appeal has been trium- phantly sustained, it is so much the more to the honor of Philip sober. Nobody is hurt ; and there is no harm done ; but it would hardly be worth while for them to try it again just in that way." Perhaps it is not so strange that one who tore to shreds a seri- ous document like the Declaration of the Twenty-eight Bishops, and made it the sport of his sarcastic humor was not believed to be a very genial and warm-hearted, friendly spirited, and sweet- tempered man. Plenty of others saw the same flaws, plenty of others ridiculed it, plenty of others made light of it, even though their own Diocesans set it forth as a godly admonition, but no one else treated it in quite so cavalier a fashion. The Declaration was as ineffectual in staying the advance of Ritualism as a child's dam on the shore would be to keep back a Bay of Fundy tide.* * In 1868 when it was moved in the House of Bishops that the Declaration be adopted as an act of the House, the motion was laid upon the table, al- though a decided majority of the House then present were among the signers. 146 A Champion of the Cross. [1865-66. But the great successes were not yet ^^TOught, although it is easy enough in these later days to say that the whole ocean was advancing. Mr. Hopkins defended the whole line of the advance. All the efforts for revived use of Catholic ceremonial, for the estab- lishing of a school of true ecclesiastical music, for the building and arranging of churches in pointed style and Catholic manner, for fulness and exactness of doctrinal expression, for the revival of Sisterhoods and Brotherhoods, and all the rest, found in him a sincere, hearty, and constant advocate. He also defended the lines against the first of the Broad Church attacks upon Christian- ity. This was notably the case in the excitement over the Co- lenso affair. With Dr. Morgan Dix and Dr. S. H. Tyng, jr., he worked to secure signatures to an " Address," like the one which was signed by so many English clergymen, against Bishop Colenso. But, though he was so keen against the Broad Church attacks, he saw that they were not always made with the deliberate at- tempt to poison the springs of the Gospel, but were in m.any cases the recoil from the Calvinism which so many Low Church- men had been taught was the true Gospel. Broad Churchmen were few in number in those days in America, and he looked upon the few there were with mild toleration, because he felt they were harmless, and were only taking a roundabout road to- ward Catholicity. CHAPTER VIII. 1867-1872. The Colenso affair caused the assembling of the first Lambeth Conference in 1867, and Mr. Hopkins accompanied his father, the Bishop of Vermont, then the Presiding Bishop, to the meet- ing of the Conference. Dr. Hopkins always reckoned the Con- ference a great feature in the life of the Church. Not many seem to value it as highly as he did, although it is to be regularly as- sembled at intervals of ten years. He probably had at least as much to do with bringing about the first meeting as any other one man, if not more, and so his feeling in the matter was quite natural. He says: "It was early in the year 185 1 that my father, in replying to an invitation from Archbishop Sumner to attend the Jubilee of the S. P. G., made the first suggestion of such a gathering as the Lambeth Conference. That letter was printed in the Guardian at the time. . . . About a year later, in 1852, the learned and earnest Bishop Wittingham, of Maryland, then in England, repeated the suggestion in a public speech, which gave rise to some discussion on both sides of the water. Still later, in November, 1854, Bishop Fulford, of Mon- treal, preached the sermon at the consecration of Dr. Horatio Potter as Bishop of New York. He adverted to the new dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the B. V. M., which was within a few days to be proclaimed at Rome, and in that connection stated the yearning of earnest spirits for the meeting of our whole reformed Church in its corporate capacity. The Church Jow- nal, on December 7, 1854, said: ^ Let the Archbishop of Canterbury invite all the Bishops of the reformed Church to as- semble in Canterbury Cathedral to protest against this new blasphemous fable and to reassert in the face of the whole world the ancient Faith, pure and undefiled.' This article drew forth a very interesting letter from that well-known and influential Eng- lish layman, Mr. F. H. Dickinson, who mentioned that a friend of his, a member of the Lower House of Convocation of Can- 148 A Champion of the Cross. [1867-72. terbury ' had been thinking of bringing the subject before the House.' Other articles followed in the same paper, from time to time, keeping the idea before the mind of the Church. " Now I wrote all those articles in the Church Jonnial my sqM, being the leading editor of that paper at the time. I had de- rived all my strong convictions on the subject from my father. The reunion of Christendom was a favorite subject of longing ^\dth him. As long ago as 1835, he devoted the last chapter of his work on the Primitive Chiwch to that subject. Toward its close he drew a picture of a great universal council of all who call themselves Christians, meeting to settle their differences by the standard of Holy Scripture and Apostolical Tradition. So glorious was the thought, so entire the rapture of his spirit in dwelling on so bright a consummation, that ere he finished he found the tears running down his face as he wrote. The Pan- Anglican he regarded as only one of the preliminary steps, in- dispensable to the other — the easiest step to take, and the one to be taken first. So familiar was this idea to me that when the carrier of the Church Journal applied to me to write some verses for his New Year's Address at the opening of the year 1854, that was the chief topic to which I devoted my atten- tion, branching out from an allusion to the visit of an English Deputation of 1853 to our General Convention of that year. The description may interest some people as a close approxima- tion to a prophecy of an event previously unprecedented, and yet made more than twenty-four years in advance of the fiilfil- ment, with a very fair measure of exactness — even in details." Anticipation of the Lambeth Conference. (Written in 1853 for the first annual address of the Carrier of the Church y inside the chancel. Modern monuments, of the patriotic and loyal order, have the whole field to themselves. '' September 6th, Friday. — At the Abbey again, at Matins, and took another walk through the chapels and Poet's Corner. Service rather poor. Returning to the hotel, found the Rev. Thomas W. Perry at the door, and took him up to our room to see father. Had a very pleasant call from him, and much very interesting conversation. It was at the suggestion of Mr. Gladstone and Sir Robert Phillimore (the new ecclesiastical judge) that father's 'Law of Ritualism ' was reprinted here in a cheap edition. Dr. Pusey told him that he had learned from the French bishops things that would greatly surprise the Pope ! The movement among Romanists toward something better is broad and deep. i6o A CJiainpion of the Cross. [1867-72. '' Visited St. Alban's, Holborn, but not in service-time. It is approached only through two very narrow and crooked streets swarming with the poorest sort of people, and looks as if it were used ^SS. the time. It is open every day from 6.30 a.m. till 9 P.M. There is daily communion, and there BXQfour celebrations every Sunday; at 7, 8, 9, and 11 o'clock. The church is beautifully fitted up in the interior, the walls being of colored brick, and the chancel richly decorated. The east wall is covered with paintings of scriptural subjects, drawn by L' Es- trange, the same who painted the ceiling of Ely. The reredos is richly gilded. There are Jive priests attached to the church, at work all the time, and the work is so severe that they are soon used up. Happened into Lincoln's Inn, was greatly struck by the peculiarities of the place. '' September 7th, Saturday. — Busy all the morning. After dinner, did the Parliament House, finding much more for admi- ration than I had expected. The Victoria Tower is the finest tower in Europe ; and the Clock Tower, with its chiming quar- ters, is one of the chief pleasures of staying at the Westminster Palace Hotel. '' The wall-paintings are very fine — the two great pictures of Maclise — the Death of Nelson, and the Meeting of Wellington and Blucher after Waterloo — well worth a most patient study. Apropos of civil wars, it is instructive to see the leading spirits on both sides now represented with equal honor upon the walls of a Parliament House, whose members no longer raise a question either about the loyalty due to the crown, or the liberty which is the legal right of the subject. " Westminster Hall is a grand old chamber, rich with associa- tions from the most stirring times of England's history ; and the crypt is an exquisite specimen of ecclesiastical restoration, though not recognized as a church by the visitors, for the whole crowd kept their hats on in presence of a handsomely vested altar, with candlesticks and candles on (not lighted, of course, there being no service). In the new work now going on in the New Pal- ace Yard to complete the grand entourage, noticed some very fine modern carving, foliage undercut and animals, remarkably well done. " September 8th, Sunday (eleventh after Trinity). — Rose be- fore 6 A.M., and attended the seven o'clock communion at St. Al- ban's, Holborn. Some fifty or sixty communicants were present. After getting a cup of coffee and a roll at a cheap eating-house, 1867-72.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 16 1 walked to St. Michael's, Shoreditch, and was present at the latter part of their early celebration there. Only a few present ; but the church is situated very much as St. Alban's is, among the poor and laboring population. There is a long row of tenement- houses on one side of the church ; and at the end of it a modest- looking dwelling of the same kind of brick, with a cross over the door, and an inscription, 'Sisters of the Poor.' The church is in very much the same general style as St. Alban's, Holborn — handsome, roomy, and well appointed in every respect. Nothing looks as if it were thought to be ' good enough for the poor. ' In both, great cost and ornament, with different colored marbles, have been laid out on the font. Returned to St. Alban's (passing by Smithfield, where the martyrs were burned in the time of Queen Mary, now boarded in for the erection of a market), and, arriv- ing before the end of their nine o'clock celebration, heard Gloria in Excelsis sung to old Merbecke's melody, just as I have it in my book. The High Celebration began at 11.15, after Morning Prayer, which was choral, Gregorian, and heartily well sung. Not a cathedral in England has yet put as much life in the choral service as this free church for the poor ; and in it were four cele- brations of the Eucharist, while in Westminster Abbey, with all its splendid endowments, there was none ! " Only the two hghts were used at Holy Communion; and the incense, offered at the consecration, was very abundant, and the odor was perceived all through the church. The effect was beautiful and solemnly impressive. The sermon was by Canon Fortescue, of St. Ninian's, Perth, and extemporaneous, earnest, respectably fluent, with only one gesture, and that awkward and constantly repeated ; the subject being the Re-union of Christen- dom, that day (the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary) being the tenth anniversary of the Association for the Promotion of the Unity of Christendom. After service was over, the Rev. Drs. E. A. Hoffman and E. K. Smith made their appearance, both hav- ing been present during the service. Dined with them at the Knights Templars Coffee-house, and went with them in the afternoon to St. Paul's, where we heard Canon Melvill preach. There were over two thousand persons present, filling the whole choir very full and a large part of the rotunda besides. The ser- mon came in after the Third Collect and the Anthem. Some hundreds went out after the Anthem and before the sermon, and several other hundreds after the sermon and before the conclud- ing prayers. Took tea with Drs. Hoffman and Smith at the 11 1 62 A Champion of the Cross. [1867-72. Langham Hotel, and attended Evening Service with them at St. Andrew's, Wells Street, where the music was very good Angli- can. On our way to the hotel before tea, took a look at the ex- terior of All Saints, Margaret Street, the finest modern church in London by far ; and after Evening Service at St. Andrew's re- turned to All Saints (which is within a block) and caught a glimpse of the magnificent and highly decorated interior. " September 9th, Monday. — Attended Matins at the Abbey, and waited on Canon Wordsworth (in residence that week) for an order to inspect the chapels at my leisure, and the triforium, etc., which he kindly gave me, and I had some very pleasant conversation with him about Church affairs. He looks to the American Bishops to put life in the Council ; and says that the defeat of the Three Bishoprics bill was wholly due to the Bishop of Oxford (Wilberforce), who insists that the Bishops must all have equal chance to be Peers in Parliament ! '' Inspected the chapels thoroughly in company with a young artist or architect who was sketching there, but had not time for the triforia. After dinner went to the S. P. G. Rooms to leave father's address, and learned that the Bishops Wilmer {i.e., J. P. B., of Louisiana, and R. H., of Alabama) were at Portland Street Hotel, and called on them at once, but found they had left town for a few days. '' September loth, Tuesday. — Went by appointment to see Mr. Mackonochie, and had a good talk with him from eleven till one o'clock, which was highly satisfactory in every respect. After lunch in a chop-house went to London Tower, and was shown all through, but had not time to stop and examine one-tenth part of what I wished to see. Among the arms are some revolver guns and pistols of the time of Henry VHL, from which Colt is said to have borrowed his ideas of a revolver. Saw the Crown Jewels and the Beauchamp Tower ; but was most of all pleased with the pure Norman Chapel of St. John. Ascended the Mon- ument, commemorating London's fire in 1666, and had a fine view, though to the west the horizon was not only lost in smoke and mist but it was so thick that the lower parts of the Parlia- ment Houses were invisible, and only the towers appeared above the fog. Walked nearly across London Bridge, and returning, took one of the penny boats up the Thames to Westminster Bridge. A hard shower came up on the way, driving us all down into the stifling cabin, where there was scarcely room to move or breathe. Rain came harder and harder, until I was well wet be- 1867-72.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 163 fore I got to my room. That evening Bishop Wihiier, of Louis- iana, came to call on father, and dined with us, staying till 10.30 P.M. — a most delightful visit to us both. ''September nth, Wednesday. — Wrote editorial on the pro- posed arrangements for the Council, as published by the Arch- bishop of Canterbury, and sent by him to father. After dinner at- tended Evensong in the Abbey. Boys gabbled the Psalms abomi- nably, and organist was more than half the time behind the voices ; but the Magnificat and Nunc dimittis and the Anthem were beau- tifully sung. After Evensong delivered the Archdeacon's order to Mr. Foster, clerk of the works, who sent a young man with me all over the triforia. (In the morning received a very pleas- ant call from Mr. Thomas Ramsay, with whom all bygones are bygones.) "September 12th, Thursday. — The Bishop of Louisiana joined us at our hotel this morning, having taken the rooms next to ours — a great addition to our comfort in every respect ! Went with him and father to call on Archdeacon Wordsworth (this Archdeacon Wordsworth, whose name appears so often in this journal, was Dr. Christopher Wordsworth, afterward Bishop of Lincoln) ; but after finding our way to his door through the curious turnings of the cloisters, etc., found him ' not at home,' much to our regret. Then went to the north entrance and en- tered the Abbey, going round the chapels with father and the Bishop of Louisiana, examining everything by ourselves. ''September 13th, Friday. — At my room till 4.55 p.m., when we took the train at Victoria Station for Croydon, where the Archbishop's carriage met us, and drove us through a beautiful country to Addington Park. Fine trees by the way. The iVrch- bishop received us very kindly, took us out into the garden, and introduced us to Miss Longley (and afterward to her sister), under the great cedar (branches spread over more than one hundred feet diameter). Flower-beds of bright colors in the green lawn. Borders each side of the road like rainbows, bands of flowers, each band being of one tint. Dined at 8 p.m. The Bishop of New Zealand and Mrs. Selwyn arrived before dinner was over. Spent a delightful evening. Bright moonlight. " September 14th, Saturday. — The Archbishop unexpectedly extending his invitation till Monday morning, I went to London to get some things we had left behind us, walking all the way (a delightful walk) to East Croydon, and in the evening back again. Overtaken near Shirley Church by the Archbishop's car- 1 64 A Champion of the Cross. [1867-72. riage, and pressed by Miss Longley to take a vacant seat there, but declined, and finished my walk both ways. Rain began to fall just as I arrived at the palace. Miss Longley sang, and with a remarkable combination of excellencies — unaffected truth, good timbre, thorough cultivation, and charming taste and feeling. " September 15th, Sunday (12th after Trinity). — Saw Miss Rosamond Longley' s sketch-book, which has a great deal of merit. Received from her a photograph of the great cedar-tree. Weather clear and cloudy alternately, a perfect English day. The tender half-misty lights on the rolling hills, the walk through lawn and garden, and the road bordered by eight parallel tints of leaves and flowers on each side, and the quadruple avenue of old elms, and then another garden, to the churchyard and little parish church of Addington : all in perfect keeping. Grassy and well-kept churchyard, in which Archbishops of Canterbury are buried. The church is of split flints, with freestone dress- ings : tower, nave of three bays, south aisle, chancel in which are old Elizabethan monuments of a knight and his wife, and two other couples above, kneeling nose to nose on cushions. Three very small round-headed windows over the altar, Avith tremen- dously wide splay. Queer old desk with double face, lessons being read toward the Clerk's desk, and the rest, at right angles to the congregation. No organ. All the Canticles (except Te Deinn, which was read) chanted to the same double chant, morning and afternoon, led by a good baritone voice in the congregation, all joining in very heartily, as they did in the responses also. A good sermon from the Bishop of New Zea- land, the Vicar taking the rest of the service, the Archbishop holding a service and preaching at Croydon. In the afternoon the Bishop of New Zealand preached again, dear father declin- ing because of his cold, and I declining also, not conceiving it proper for a deacon to preach before an Archbishop and two other Primates. Sate between the Archbishop and dear father in the same pew. After service, was introduced, at the Arch- bishop's, to Mr. Sharpe, editor of the Gtmrdian, and had some pleasant talk with him. Tea under the great cedar on the lawn. Singing from Miss Longley in the evening. "September i6th, Monday. — Left Addington Park after breakfast, though kindly invited to remain till after lunch. Stopped at the Crystal Palace, Sydenham, where we lunched and remained till past 5 p.m., seeing only an infinitesimal frac- tion of what there is to be seen there. Antediluvian animals 1867-72.] Life of JoJin Henry Hopkins. 165 particularly interesting. Returned to London, dear father being very tired. ''September 17th, Tuesday. — Went to Masters' and then to Parker's, for a copy of Keble's Letter on Tract 90, to transcribe for the Archbishop of Canterbury the declaration of Convo- cation of 1 57 1, about making the Primitive Church the standard. Went with father and the Bishops of Illinois and Louisiana to the preliminary meeting of Bishops at the House of S. P. G. , and waited in the upper room until they were done, from 12 M. till 4.15 P.M. Studied maps of colonial sees, and read Parker Society's volume of Grindal's Remains. Returned with father to hotel and lunched. At 7.30 went with father to a very pleasant dinner-party at Mr. J. G. Hubbard's, 24 Prince's Gate, Kensington Road, where we met the Bishops of Cape Town and Ontario, Archdeacon Wordsworth, the Rev. Mr. Perry (who sat beside me), Mr. R. Brett, Mr. Palmer, and others. " September i8th, Wednesday. — Wrote for the Church Joicrna I an account of yesterday's meeting, which made me too late for the Oxford 10 a.m. train. Spent intervening time at Masters', selecting photographs of distinguished men. Took the noon train at Paddington Station, arriving at Oxford (distant glimpse of Windsor Castle by the way^ and views of Oxford City — be- fore we reached it — Ncwmari s views, see Apologia — ) at nearly 2 P.M. Walked down Queen Street, and the High, to the Mitre, and dined. Called on Dr. Pusey, but found him engaged, and left father's letter and my card. Attended Evensong at the cathedral, the choral service being very well done, and the Anthem elaborate, though the Minor Canon could not take an interval- of a whole tone well. Visited Christ Church, Oriel (seeing the rooms formerly occupied by father, when a guest there). Corpus Christi, Merton, and University Colleges, walking the whole length of the Broad Walk. Then Queen's, St. Peter's in the East, New College and gardens, Wadham, and the New University Museum, which is exquisite, by G. G. Scott. Looked in at the Sheldonian Theatre, the schools, the Radcliffe, Brase- nose, and St. Mary's, so to the Mitre. At 8 p.m., again called on Dr. Pusey, and once more found him engaged ; but as he de- sired me to wait, I waited for half an hour, and then enjoyed a good two hours' talk with him. He was extremely cordial, asked me to stay with him during my visit to Oxford (which I declined), and talked of many Church matters, but especially the 1 66 A CliaDipion of the Cross. [1867-72, Pan- Anglican, and its proposing to retain the word ' Protestant ' and endorse only four instead of six general councils, besides setting up our own communion as the model for all the rest of Christendom. Promised to call at 9 a.m. next day. " September 19th, Thursday. — Up at 6 a.m., and resumed my wanderings around the city by walking down High Street to Mag- dalen College, which I inspected closely on the outside, the gates not being open to strangers till eight t)' clock. Walked across the bridge over the Cherwell. Wondered at the shallowness and weediness of the water (worse in the Isis, however, at the end of the Broad Walk), which must make boating exercise ticklish business. Found the small door ajar and went in, going through several courts and getting into the gardens, when the porter overtook me and turned me back. Followed Long Wall Street to Holywell Church, which is a perfect picture of an English country church. Thence up the 'Back Way,' getting a very fine general view of a large part of the city. Doubled on my course and went up Holywell Street and Broad Street to the Turl, and so to breakfast. At 9 a.m. called on Dr. Pusey again, who had been up since 6.30 and had received letters from Bish- ops present at the Preliminary, which worried him still more. He said that if the Bishops would only let things alone and not make them any worse than they were, the Catholic party could be kept in hand ; but if they would assume the odious term Protestant (which could only mean protesting against the ' Cath- olic ' Church), and would throw over two General Coun- cils hitherto universally received, he could not be answera- ble for the consequences. Went with him at ten o'clock to the cathedral, and after Matins returned ^\-ith him to his house and bade him good-by, declining a warm invitation to return to lunch. Resumed my attempts to see the various colleges, etc. At St. Mary's Church looked in, but found Divine Service go- ing on, and left at once. Went on to the site of the new Keble College, nearly opposite the New Museum. Thence to Parker's bookstore, where I spent nearly an hour refreshing my memory as to the Acts of the 5th and 6th General Councils. Visited the Martyrs' Memorial, near St. Mary Magdalen Church, Balliol College, Worcester College and beautiful gardens, with ponds ; then down a little street to the north, running east and west to St. John's College and beautiful gardens, then to Jesus College, and Exeter, where I was specially delighted with the new work ; the chapel being entirely modern in the highest style, with stone 1867-72.] Life of Jo Jin Henry Hopkins. 16^ ceiling beautifully groined. Looked in at Lincoln College and the schools, and walked through two stories of the immense Bodleian Library, seeing several scholars sitting quietly in their alcoves, and working away as if there were no outside world to trouble them. Dr. Pusey does most of his writing here, having an alcove of his own, and being one of the Curators of the Li- brary. Peeped in at the Radcliffe, and then went up Market Street to photographers in Cornmarket, and leaving my marine glass behind me on the counter. Lost the four o'clock train in consequence, but took the five o'clock, which was twenty minutes late. Telegraphed to Archdeacon Wordsworth from Reading that I could not arrive in time for dinner. Reached our hotel shortly after father had left for the Archdeacon's, having waited for me. Went at ten o'clock for father, and waited for more than half an hour, walking up and down in the cloisters till he came out with other Bishops from the Archdeacon's. Showed him all my photographs of Oxford before going to bed. "September 20th, Friday. — Went to the bankers and drew -£^0. In the afternoon went with father to the British Muse- um, where we met Bishop Talbot (of Indiana). In the evening called on Archdeacon Wordsworth, and spent a very pleasant evening. The Archdeacon gave me a Black Letter edition of the English Prayer-Book, 1640, with Sternbold and Hopkins' Psalms, formerly belonging to the poet Wordsworth. ''September 21st, Saturday. — Started at 9 a.m. for Rochester (fine_ views of castle and cathedral before reaching station), where I visited the cathedral — the meanest I have yet seen in England, except Chester, and with less of good modern work than even Chester — and the castle, which is a superb twin. Bishop - Gundolph was a great builder. After getting pho- tographs, as usual, started at 3 p.m. for Canterbury, where I arrived at five o'clock, getting fine afternoon views of the cathe- dral before arriving at the station. Went immediately from the Royal Fountain Hotel to the cathedral, which the verger w^as just closing for the night. Persuaded him to show me round — which he did very completely before going to his tea. After I was locked out of the cathedral, spent an hour in roaming all round the outside, and up and down every walk and archway and court and gate that was accessible, and all round by the King's School, and the Norman staircase, etc. After dark stopped at the photographer's in the cathedral yard (not the best), and got the best he had, with two 'Guides.' After supper. 1 68 A Chanipioji of the Cross. [1867-72. went to Drury's (the best), and got better photographs and Stanley's book of Canterbury Memorials. Read my Guides and book till midnight. '•September 22d, Sunday (13th after Trinity). — At breakfast the Rev. W. D. Walker, of St. James the Less, New York, came into the coffee-room, to our mutual surprise and satisfaction. Went together all day : at ten o'clock to the cathedral, where we looked about a little before service. Choral service very well done — choir large and well trained, but surplices rather dirty. Congregation fair for a cathedral. The Ter Sanctus was sung for an Introit. The Rev. Mr. Bailey, Warden of St. Augustine's (the first person who has ever held office both in the cathedral and in the monastery of St. Augustine, so great was the jealousy and hatred between the two adjoining corporations) preached an excellent sermon on the ninth commandment. After the sermon nearly everybody, choir included, went out, and Holy Com- munion was celebrated by Archdeacon Harrison without one note of music, and to only one sparse railful of the faithful ! After dinner went to St. Martin's, looking all round it, both before and after service — the visible cradle of the English Church. Saw the font in which (so they say) King Ethelbert was baptized by St. Augustine of Canterbury. (Fine view of the cathedral from the church-yard — Irish crosses.) Walked by St. Augustine's on our return after service, and thence to the rapid little river Stour, and the Abbot's Mill on it, and up the lane to the railway bridge, from which we had a charming view of the cathedral. Thence back by the Stour to the West Gate and out to St. Dunstan's. Returning, looked into an old hospi- tal for three old women, old churches, and various other pieces of antiquity. Thence to the promenade along the inside of the old city walls its whole length, ascending the mound for another fine view of the cathedral. Then round by the new St. Mary Bradin, which we looked into, to our hotel, pretty well tired. After tea we went to St. Augustine's, entered the old wooden gate (so low that one must bow going in), were kindly received by the warden and subwarden, attended the 9 p.m. service in the chapel, the great body of the students filling the stalls along both sides of the chapel, being in surplices ; and " East Indians, Parsees, and Negroes being well represented. The singing was good, the Psalms were sung to Anglican chants, and the Can- ticles to Gregorians, well done, and refreshing to hear. The chapel is a beautiful one. 1867-72.] Life of Jo Jin Henry Hopkins, 169 "September 23d, Monday. — At 7 a.m. we were up and on our way to the cathedral for the effects of morning hght in the interior. Had some difficulty in getting in ; but succeeded, the verger's pretty little daughter opening the outer iron door for us. Spent nearly an hour, especially in watching the effects of the light on the splendid old stained glass at the eastern end — the finest old glass I have yet seen. Punctually at eight o'clock we were at St. Augustine's again, to breakfast by invitation in the hall. Were seated on the dais with the stibwarden and other teachers, at a cross-table ; two longitudinal tables below accommodating the students. The grace and the returning of thanks were both in Latin, with Gloria Pati^i and some verses from the sixty-seventh Psalm — all in Latin. We were thor- oughly shown round the place, first by the subwarden and then by the warden — the library and its crypt, Ethelbert's Tower (so- called), the small remains of the grand old Abbey Church, the Students' Cloisters, and all the new buildings. Went with the warden to Archdeacon Harrison's for an order to see the tri- foria, who gave it to me at once, saying he well remembered father on his visit in 1839. Attended Matins at the cathedral, the service being very well sung. Afterward ascended the triforia to\ver. Fine views from the lantern of the central tower, and from the triforium of transept. Enormous amount of tree-twigs on the steps brought in by the birds. Took a final look at the crypt, which is the highest, finest, and most exten- sive in England. Saw the little portion of it which is used by the French Protestants, and has been since the time of Eliza- beth. They are very few now — only twenty or thirty. They meet only on Sunday afternoons, and have a sermon only once a month. . On leaving the cathedral precincts, tried to find the re- mains of the old Chequer Inn, but people living on the very site ' did not know ' anything about it. Barely time for lunch and to catch the train. Lovely day of purely English weather and atmosphere, and the rolling country was exquisite in its eff"ects. Fine views of Rochester Castle in passing. Walked over to Lambeth Palace with Bishop Quintard. Went to Archdeacon Wordsworth's in the evening, to find out what the Colonial Bishops had agreed on, and had much pleasant talk wdth him and the Bishop of St. Andrews. "September 24th, Tuesday. — Day of meeting of the Council of Lambeth. Went over with father and left him at the door. Found Dr. Caswall waiting for me at the gate, with the Rev. Dr. I/O A Champion of the Cross. [1867-72. Keene, Mrs. Eames, and a number of other Americans, clergy and laity : all highly indignant that nobody could get in. Re- turned to London Bridge, and took penny-boat on the Thames to Lambeth, where I walked up and down before the inner gate- way half an hour until father came down, when we walked to our hotel over Lambeth Bridge. Poor day's work to begin with in the Council. " September 25th, Wednesday. — Walked to Lambeth with father across Lambeth Bridge and returned the same way. Spent the whole day in my own room, until I went over to meet him at 5.30. Better day's work in the Council ! Father made sev- eral telling speeches, which gave great satisfaction to the true- hearted, and helped to raise the tone of the whole assembly. In the evening went over to Archdeacon Wordsworth's to borrow for father a book containing the Act of Elizabeth referring to the Four General Councils. Found that he had gone to Fulham to dine with the Bishop of London ; but the Bishop of St. Andrew's and Mrs. Wordsworth and her son and daughters kindly helped me in the search, and I soon came back with the first volume (there are five) of Lawn's ' Ecclesiastical Statutes at Large ' (Rivington's, 1847), which gave us what we wanted. '' September 26th, Thursday. — Walked over Lambeth Bridge with father to the Palace. After returning to my hotel with the Bishop of Louisiana, went to Archdeacon Wordsworth's for him, and then over to Lambeth again with a package for him. Father has done his duty nobly in the Colenso matter ; but the Arch- bishop's bargain beforehand with the Bishop of St. David's was too strong for him. The General Councils are recognized, and a Pastoral free from objection is to be issued. Not a bad day's work on the whole, but with one bad blot, that * will not out. ' Spent the evening in our room pleasantly, with the Bishops of Alabama and Louisiana, and Dean Hines. '' September 27th, Friday. — Accompanied father to Lambeth Palace over the Lambeth Bridge. Called for father at 2 p.m., and had to wait in the great drawing-room of Lambeth for more than two hours, chatting with the Rev. Mr. Lingham, incumbent of Lambeth parish church, and the Rev. Mr. Lloyd, Chaplain of the Archbishop. Heard the concluding Gloi-ia in Excelsis sung by the Bishops in Council, at the end. Was present when they were all photographed at the door of Lambeth Palace. Father and I were walking home to our hotel when, after having crossed Lambeth Bridge, we were overtaken by cabs sent after the 1867-72.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 171 Bishops by the S. P. G., to catch them for the Conversazione in St. James's Hall, where a great crowd of people had been wait- ing for over three hours ! Father was placed in one cab and 1 in another. Was directed to an upper seat behind the Bishops, the Archbishop presiding, and father being the first called on to speak. After the meeting was over, went to our rooms for a few minutes to refit, and then out to Fulham Palace to dine with the Bishop of London (Tait) and a very large company, probably fifty or sixty, among them the Bishop of Oxford (Wilberforce). After the cloth was removed and the ladies had retired, the Bishop of London called father to one side of him and the Bishop of Oxford to the other. Was introduced to the Bishop of Oxford by his request ; and he took me aside to a vacant sofa where we had quite a nice long talk all by ourselves. Evening Prayer in the chapel before we left, the chapel being beautifully decorated in color, with embroidered altar-cloth, and in seem- ingly ritualistic style : Mrs. Tait (who is cousin to the Bishop of Oxford and a thorough Churchwoman, and has read father's ' Law of Ritualism,' and thanked him for it) playing the organ herself. Reached our rooms very late, and both of us very weary. " September 28th, Saturday. — Rose at 6 a.m., and wrote for the C/mrch Jouiiial. ''At 9 A.M. went with father to breakfast with the Rev. Mr. Lingham, next door to Lambeth Churchyard, where we met again the Bishop of New Zealand and his son. Took seat in the congregation (after seeing father to the Palace drawing-room), and was present at the closing services. .Afterward lunched with Canon Hawkins. At 4.55 started for Brighton, where father stopped - with the Rt. Hon. Colin Lindsay, President of the E. C. U., who was unfortunately too ill with bronchitis to be visible. I stopped across the street from Sillwood (Mr. Lindsay's place) with the Rev. Mr. Beaulands, incumbent of St. Michael's, etc., taking my meals at Mr. Lindsay's. At 8.30 attended a magnificent service at St. Michael's (the Rev. T. W. Perry being one of the curates). Procession, ' We march, we march to vic- tory,' all down the church and up the middle alley. Gregorian Psalter and Canticles (Helmore), and most elaborate Anthem from Mozart. Lights, flowers, gorgeous vestments, congregation crowded to the utmost. Vigil of St. Michael and All Angels, and the parochial Feast of the Dedication. Vested in white dalmatic, with apparels of red, embroidered beautifully, I sat at father's 1/2 A Champion of the Cross. [1867-72. right, a deacon similarly vested being on his left. The episco- pal throne was on the north side of the chancel, on a step, and with a canopy over it. A variety of richly embroidered copes was used, acolytes in red cassocks, etc. Church exquisitely adorned: the permanent decoration in marbles, paintings, etc., being very rich. Sermon by Canon Fortescue, of Perth. "September 29th, St. Michael and All Angels, Sunday. — At- tended early celebration at 8 a.m., two previous celebrations hav- ing taken place at 6 and 7 a.m. Found very large numbers in attendance. High celebration at 10.30, preceded by Matins (Litany omitted till afternoon). Procession, but not all the way down the church. Exquisite service, Gregorian Canticles and Psalter. Creed from Gounod, parts of it remarkably fine ; Ter Sanctus, ditto ; and Gtoria in Excehis ; but all very long. P^ather preached a very brief sermon, and gave the Absolution and Benediction. A very large number of communicants — nearly four hundred during the day. Vestments magnificent, especially the cloth-of-gold chasuble (Mr. Perry, celebrant) splendidly em- broidered and the dalmatic to match. Exquisite jewelled chal- ice, with niello in the foot, and another with engraving of the heavenly Jerusalem on the round foot. No incense ; but I saw the censer and the incense boat and spoon, and know that it is coming. In the afternoon walked with Mr. Perry and father down to the pier, and along the sea-shore street, and inspected St. Paul's, the parent of the seven High Church parishes now in Brighton, and several more in prospect. Then went to the four o'clock Litany and catechetical service in St. Michael's. At 7 P.M. another magnifk;ent evening service, crowded to the ut- most, with procession all the way down the church. ' Brightly gleams our banner. ' The Anthem of last night repeated : boys singing up to A and B§ with truth, clearness, and power truly wonderful. Sermon by the Rev. Mr. Rivington, one of the cu- rates of All Saints, Margaret Street, who paid a high compliment to father in the middle of it. All the three sermons were extempo- raneous. Mr. Rivington is a son of the London publisher, and a very earnest and effective preacher. *' September 30th, Monday. — Attended low celebration at 7.30 A.M. The extra services are to last through the octave, all the offertories going toward the enlargement of the church, which is greatly needed. Wrote editorial for the Chiwch Journal. Lunched at Mr. Lindsay's, where I had taken all my meals. In the afternoon left for Newhaven, where I finished my article in 1867-72.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 1 73 the hotel on the wharf, and we took supper and spent the night. ''October ist, Tuesday. — After breakfast went on board the Alexandra for Dieppe. Magnificent views of chalky cliffs to the east as we left the harbor, culminating in Beachy Head ; and to the west side also, of similar general appearance. Charming bright, breezy weather. More than fifty vessels in sight at a time. Dieppe was reached at about 3 p.m. French coast almost exactly like the English, chalky cliffs, splendidly perpendicular. Dieppe is in a depression interrupting the chalky line of precipice. The precipices at the left seemed to be pierced with a large num- ber of caves. Entered through masonry piers, and passed into a basin, turning to the right. The castle on the acclivity rising to the west of the city, now usc^d for a prison. Large square tower in the centre of the city, suppose it to be the cathedral. Delayed an hour and a half by custom-house, etc. Started by rail for Rouen at 4.20 p.m. Beautiful scenery, yet not very bold. Mul- titudes of tall and very slim poplars. Mounds with one or two rows of trees planted on them, separating fields. Roads only wide enough for one cart, with a row of tall trees on each side, planted close together. Brook with both sides made parallel with masonry, so as to look exactly like a canal without a towpath. Village churches mostly poor, cruciform, with tower and low, ugly spire at the intersection. Many factories and tall chimneys. ''Arrived at Rouen at dusk. Went to the Hotel de France. Ran down at once to see the cathedral, and went along the nar- row streets at either side, and inside also, the whole length of the nave, to the locked iron doors. Ascertained that there would be service at 7.30 p.m. After tea, went down with father, and at- tended the service, in the Lady chapel. Father and I took chairs on the left side, furthest back, next the railing. By and by a priest and acolyte came in. The priest entered an ugly low, square desk on the left side of the chapel, about half-way up, and led in what I suppose was a litany to the Saints and to the Blessed Virgin, all whose titles were repeated in full amplification, the people, about one hundred — containing only one man besides us, responding with much apparent devotion. The style was rapid. He then read a brief exhortation in French, and then (the aco- lyte having entered with the incense) proceeded to the altar, when the Benediction of the Host was given. The people then departed quietly. The effect in the grand old cathedral of im- mense height (eighty-nine and one-half feet to the ceiling in- 174 A Champion of the Cross. [1867-72. side), and the bold lights and shadows of the few gaslights, were very fine. After seeing father home, sallied out, and went down to the Grand Promenade by the river side. River glancing with many lights. Trees of the promenade cut away underneath. Bought Murray's and photographs, and took another glance at the cathedral on my way to the hotel. " October 2d, Wednesday. — Visited St. Ouen, with its beau- tiful grounds and statue of Rollo ; then the Musee des Antiquites ; then St. Maclou ; then the bridge, and general view. After lunch, started for Paris, where we arrived after four and one- half hours' ride through a charming country, playing hide-and- go-seek with the Seine all along. Took Dr. and Mrs. Evans by surprise, and were received with a most cordial welcome, and any quantity of inquiries about the good folk in Burling- ton. '' October 3d, Thursday. — Received a pleasant call from the Rev. Mr. Lamson in the morning ; and after lunch he drove out with us in Dr. Evans' carriage (I having before lunch had a very pleasant walk with Mrs. Evans in the Bois de Boulogne) and saw Notre Dame, and La Sainte Chapelle, wdth its crypt, with glimpses of the Hotel de Ville, Tour de St. Jacques, Tuileries, Louvre, etc. Saw the Palais Royal on our way back. Pleasant little dinner party : the Rev. Mr. Killick, of St. Clement Danes, Strand, Mr. and Mrs. Delano (Twenty-ninth Street, New York), and after dinner the Rev. Mr. Ward (of the Anglo-American Chapel), and Major Hugh Scott, of Gala. " October 4th, Friday. — Went down town in search of the friends, but could not find them. After lunch drove out with Mrs. Evans and father to the Pantheon, St. Etienne du Mont, the new Trinity Church (unfinished), etc. '' October 5th, Saturday. — Went to the exposition with Mrs. Evans and father, and remained after they had gone home. Lunched there, and in the rain took a cab to photographer's under Grand Hotel du Louvre, where I spent the afternoon. After dinner went with father, Dr. and Mrs. Evans, and the Rev. Mr. Lamson, to the Russian Church to the evening service. Mag- nificent voices, especially the basses, the deacon intoning on A and B, and another going down to c@: 1867-72] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 175 Was introduced with father to the Abbe Guettee and the Russian Archpriest. '' October 6th, Sunday. Sixteenth after Trinity. — To the Russian Liturgy at eleven o'clock, which was admirably done, but the Entrances were both rather straggling. The vestments mag- nificent, and the music exquisite. The peculiar architecture of the building, equally effective by day or night. Then went to the American Church, Rue Bayard, and assisted in the minis- tration of the Cup, father having preached. In the afternoon I preached there from i Peter iii. 18, a brief extempore sermon, the Rev. Messrs. Lamson and Duffield taking the service. Went home with Mr. Adams, and dined with him. In the evening (raining) went to the Anglo-American Chapel, Avenue Rapp, near the Exposition, where dear father preached on " I said, I will confess my sins unto the Lord, etc. ' ' I said the Creed and prayers on monotone, the Rev. Mr. Root beginning the service, and the Rev. Messrs. Weaver and Wade taking the lessons. Sat up till one o'clock talking with Dr. Evans. " October 7th, Monday. — At home all morning (raining) lay- ing out route for Rheims, etc. In afternoon went down for photographs of cathedrals and found very few, plodding about from one place to another, without any success. Parisians seem to care nothing for their finest ecclesiastical edifices, such as in England are found everywhere. Rather disgusted with a day's failure. In the evening dined at the Rev. Mr. Lamson's, with father and Dr. and Mrs. Evans ; and after dinner, the Abbe Guettee, the Russian Archpriest, Mr. Adams, the Rev. Mr. Gardner, President F. A. P. Barnard, Mrs. Barnard, and others came in. No talk of any theological interest possible. On leaving, took cab (leaving Mr. Adams at the Maison Printemps, by the way) for the Gare de Strasbourg, and the 11.35 train for Rheims. No sleeping conveniences on French trains. Arrived at Epernay at 4 a.m., and remained locked up in the salle d'attente for nearly two hours, to sleep (if possible) sitting on a hard wooden bench, with an alarm-bell (like those of our alarm clocks) ringing all the while in the next room. Arrived at Rheims at 7 a.m. on a misty, cloudy, rainy morning. Walked up the narrow crooked streets (with little or no sidewalks) till I found the cathedral, and went all round it — west, north, east, and south, and even into the archbishop's gardens, and then in- side, and carefully examined all the stained glass, which is mostly old and abundant, and very good. Having thus spent more than 1/6 A Champion of the Cross. [1867-72. two hours, went to the Lion d'Or, just opposite the west front, and got breakfast. After breakfast, went to the Church of St. Remi, which has much good Norman work, partly outside, but still more inside. Remarkably good proportions, and fine gen- eral effect. Went up through the triforia, which are very large and roomy (each bay divided into two), paved throughout, and raised in many parts above the line visible from below. Bought full stock of photographs, such as were to be had. But none of the north, south, or eastern elevations, the latter of which was as peculiar for its big and quaint animals around the throat of the apse (crowning the parapet in place of pinnacles), as the west front for its hippopotamus, rhinoceros, crocodiles, etc. The new work (under Viollet le Due) is good, but too fine — too mince. It lacks the vigor at a distance which the old work has. After dinner returned to the study of the magnificent abundance of old stained glass in the cathedral, the west rosace, in the after- noon sun, being the most marvellously splendid effect of stained glass I ever saw in my life. It is fully up to one's ideal. As- cended the triforia and the southwest tower to the top, the open staircase being in the northeast angle of the tower inside the slender open arches. jSIagnificent view under the arcades of fly- ing buttresses. The open towers at each flank of the transepts floored inside in a valley. Found the triforia walled-up at the further side of the passage to give greater strength. Magnificent views of the interior from the galleries at the west end. After supper, stole a final look at the north transept, and saw the moon streaming dimly through one of the stained windows, the great body of the church being buried in gloom, except from the light given by two candles near the door. At 6.40 p.m. left for Laon, where I arrived at about eleven o'clock. This ancient city is situated on the top of a hill several hundred feet high. As it was chilly, and the omnibus long in starting, I left it and went afoot up the hill, the ascent for foot-passengers being straight ahead, up a steep path diversified with two or three hundred stone steps, the widening prospect of streets of lamps below being more and more interesting, and the appearance of the cathedral towers — the cathedral being on the highest part of the hill — growing more and more singular the nearer the approach. At the top of the steps we were not yet at the top of the hill, but met the winding coach-road, and turning to the right followed it till it passed under an arched gateway, and turned to the left winding among narrow crooked streets, to La Hure, a hotel where I spent 1867-72.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. lyy the night. First, however, I explored further along the crooked, dark, and narrow streets, till I found the cathedral, with the moonlight resting on its western front, now almost completely restored. After examining the western and northern fronts by the dim light, I returned to La Hure well tired, and gave direc- tions to be called at half-past six in the morning. "October 9th, Wednesday. — By seven o'clock I was at the cathedral, which I examined with fresh interest by day. It was interesting in two respects. First, it was the 07ily one I had ever seen which contemplated seven towers, one at the centre of the cross and [J—' ^— F] t2vo others at the west end, and two at the end of each transept. Of these A, B, C, D, were c a. built complete, and all nearly alike. The cen- tre is rudimentary only, and the two eastern /^[9"Q^ towers of the transepts have only the founda- tion and the first stage complete. Magnificent views from above over a large extent of country, but no water. " The west front abounds with aiiimals. The hipj^opotamus and rhinoceros, and two crocodiles appear, with ever so many smaller animals, sixteen great stone oxen looking out of the open- ings in the turrets of the towers. As to internal effect, found it the only French cathedral with a square east end, and the only one where the central tower is used as a lantern, letting in a flood of light from above. In all other cases the vaulting there is carried through similar to the rest of the roof. Many queer old build- ings near it, and the bishop's palace as usual turned into a palais de justice. [Laon is not now a bishop's see, having been sup- pressed by the concordat of 1801, and never restored, as a few others were during the reign of Louis XVIII. — C. F. S.] It com- manded splendid views from the brow of the hill, looking down on that staircase. After breakfast, walked down again to the station, descending the stairs, having got but very few and un- satisfactory photographs. Lunched at Tergniers, and arrived at Amiens at about 3 p.m. Went at once to the glorious cathedral, but was disappointed in the western towers, which are but little higher than the roof-ridge of the nave, and also in thtfleche, which is of wood covered with lead. But the height and majes- tically powerful structure, with its double guard of flying but- tresses, defies description. Went all round the outside, except where the bishop's gardens prevent access on the northeast. Then ascended, with a company, the northwest tower, went out 178 A CJiampion of the Cross. [1867-72. on the galleries of the front, and found the figures of the kings to be over fourteen feet high I — a mistake, because it dwarfs all the rest of the building. Found that the apex of the wooden roof is about forty feet higher than the stone vault, which last is one hundred and forty feet above the pavement. Went between the two (looking down a trap-door to the pavement below !) and ascended the fleche as high as the steps would take us. Then down, and on the leads above and below, on south and north sides, then inside to the triforia, which are windows, and got splendid views of the interior, with the three great rosaces, west, north, and south, and of the whole length of nave and transepts. Descending, studied the effects from below, the alto relievos in transepts and around the choir, remarkably fine. The enormous height, yet majestic strength were a feast. Bought photographs at the verger's ; but very incomplete. Nothijig of east, south, or north elevations ! and such a splendid cathedral ! Oh, the barbarians ! and I told them so ! Went to the Gare through the crooked streets at the north side to get a view thence. Left at 6 P.M. for Creil, where at 9.30 p.m. I got some dinner. At 11 P.M. arrived at Beauvais, Hotel du Cygne, in the rain — raining all the evening, and so got no sight of the cathedral that night. "October loth, Thursday. — At the cathedral before 7 a.m., and a chilly, cloudy, almost rainy morning. Examined it care- fully all round, in the crooked, narrow streets. The height is wonderful (it is thirteen feet higher than Amiens), but everything else has been sacrificed to that. There is no nave, or tower, or spire. The bells are hung al fresco over the crossing of the transept, and rung from the pavement of the church by long ropes. Did not ascend the triforia, because of a High Mass which was sung, and kept the verger otherwise occupied until it was too late. The celebrant was attended by six boys in cottas over red cassocks. The chorus was only two men, who sang plainsong in unison with remarkably fine bass voices (not so fine, however, as the Russians). One old ecclesiastic sat in a stall, and took but little part in the service. The congregation — be- sides a school of some thirty or forty girls in charge of some re- ligieuses — not half a dozen persons. Worse in all respects than daily choral service in the English cathedrals. The impression of height is wonderful in this cathedral ; but even now beams are inserted horizontally between choir-piers and those of the aisles to prevent bulging. The carvings in oak on the north door are exquisite; south door later. Left at 11.05 a.m. without break- 1867-72.] Life of Jo Jin Henry Hopkins. 179 fast, taking a last look at the cathedral from the train. Got a few photographs before leaving. Hasty lunch at Creil. At Paris at 2 p.m. After dinner related my experience and showed my photographs to Father and Dr. and Mrs. Evans. Packed up before going to bed. ''October itth, Friday. — Breakfasted early, and after a very warm and affectionate parting from Dr. and Mrs. Evans started in the 7.45 a.m. train for London, Dr. Evans accompanying us to the Gare de St. Lazare. Charming morning: calm, and bright sunshine, but the morning mists spread a veil over the whole remoter landscape, heightening beautifully the effects of the aerial perspective. Exquisite little views as we played with the Seine all the way to Rouen, the autumnal tints beginning to add variety to the foliage. From Rouen the weather was cloudy, smoky, and dull. The passage across the Channel from Dieppe to Newhaven was still more so, and chilly besides, so as to take away all pleasure of watching the landscape : but though long (seven hours) *there was very little motion in the boat. Spent the time mostly in the cabin, studying Murray's France, and finding out something concerning the cathedrals of France which I did not visit. Found it a very interesting study. Landed at dark at Newhaven, in the rain. Took tea there, changed our French money to English, and started at 7.20 for London. At Croydon one of the gentlemen with us in the same carriage entered into conversation with us, proving to be a Rev. Mr. Nicholson, formerly a curate of Mr. Denton, and who went with him and received communion wdth him in Servia. He was re- turning from Paris, where he had gone the whole length of the city in the rain on Sunday night to hear Father preach, through admiration of his ' Law of Ritualism.' He had a friend, a Pro- fessor or one of the clergy at St. Sulpice, who was a Galilean of the Galileans, and had some years ago done all he could to further the establishment of Mr. Gurney's chapel in Paris as a represent- ative of the Catholic movement in England, and to help on the same movement among Romanists in France. That friend also told him that, notwithstanding the efforts of the Pope to make the Roman use supplant the Galilean, the Church of St. Eus- tache (or St. Eugene, I forget which) was the 07ily one in the Diocese of Paris where the Roman use was thoroughly followed ! Arrived in London at about 9 p.m. and went to the Westminster Palace Hotel again, rooms 178 and 180. " October 12 th, Saturday. — Took Father to the photographer, i8o A Champion of the Cross. [1867-72. Walker, 64 Margaret Street, Cavendish Square, and had him taken in his robes, in several positions. Was taken myself also, the photographer insisting on it. Showed Father All Saints, Mar- garet Street, where we met Mr. Butterfield, the architect, and the Rev. Mr. Richards, and were shown over the house kept by the Sisters. Laid in a stock of London and other photograplis. In the evening showed my new purchases to Father, and then read to him out of the papers (^Guardian, Church Times, and Church Rcviciu) I had purchased, articles touching the Pan-Anglican, and the Church Congress at Wolverhampton, till nearly mid- night. "October 13th, Seventeenth Sunday after Trinity. — Attended early low celebration at Westminster Abbey, 8 a.m. About a dozen were present. It was the day of St. Edward the Confes- sor, whose shrine — the only unviolated shrine in England — is in the abbey, east of the altar. Went to the Temple Church for Morning Prayer. Full choral service, the Tersanctus for an In- troif, and choir, music, and nearly the whole large congregation went out before the Holy Communion, leaving not two dozen persons to receive. Miserably cold and chilly — cathedral fashion. The inside of the building, though refitted and polychromed only a few years ago at great expense, is very dingy and dirty, and full of smoke. The tombs of the old crusaders — dark effigies lying full length nearly on the level of the floor — were the most inter- esting things in the church to me. The stained glass was partly too dark ; and the rest, to give light, was nearly ^^-hite glass, which killed the effect of nearly all the rest. The round part of the building is very interesting. It is in that that the old crusa- ders lie. In the afternoon went to St. Barnabas, Pimlico, and heard some very good Gregorian chanting. The children were very satisfactorily catechized. The stained glass at the east and west ends was remarkably good. The rest of the church was dark and dingy, and full of smoke, but in admirable style, with a rood screen, and with an earnest, hearty congregation of the right sort. Clergy houses and schools surround the church on three sides. Had hard work to find my way to the church, being misdirected, and the whole day being very foggy and some- what rainy, like yesterday. At 7 p.m. went to All Saints, Margaret Street. Found it so crowded ten minutes before the service began, notwithstanding the rain, that I had to stand all through the evening, in a place where nothing in the chancel could be seen. Music delightful : pure Gregorians, sung by a large body of 1867-72.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 181 men's voices, and so unitedly that the words were as distinct as if spoken by only one person. A brilliant anthem was admi- rably done, with (imitation) harp accompaniment. An earnest and powerful extempore sermon was preached by Mr. Rivington, who spoke in the highest and most hopeful terms of the work of the Pan-Anglican, and announced the formation of a new associ- ation, under the wardenship of Dr. Pusey, to pray more earnestly for the reunion of Christendom. Saw the Rev. Mr. Richards afterward, who gave me the printed slips concerning the new as- sociation. By the way, the Sisters were present at the service in a body. There dx^ forty of them in all. They have an orphan- age of forty or fifty orphans, a training-school for girls to be put out to service, a dispensary for the poor, an asylum for incurables who come to them to live and be nursed as long as possible, and then to die and be buried ; and another hospital for convales- cents. For the latter alone they are putting up a building in the country which will cost about ^350,000 of our money. And all this is only a part of the work done entirely by one parish — ritualistic, of course. Their chapel is a perfect little gem ; but all the rest of their establishment is as simple and plain as in the cottages of the poor. Walked home to the hotel alone, in the rain. '' October 14th, Monday. — Went with Father to Mason's to be photographed again, in several positions. Then to Masters', who agrees to collect the Church fournal bills for five per cent. , and then to Hart & Son for chancel furniture for St. Paul's, Burling- ton. Packed up and left London (after copying Father's letter to Dean Stanley), in the 2.45 train for Liverpool, where we ar- rived at 8.20 P.M. and went to Queen's Hotel. Dismal English weather — fog, smoke, and rain. ''October 15th, Tuesday. — Wrote communication for the Guardian, and a number of letters, to Dr. Pusey, the Right Hon. Colin. Lindsay, and others. Copied Father's letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury. At 4 p.m. went down to the wharf to wait for the tender to take us off to the vessel, the Minnesota, which was lying in the stream. She was long coming, but at length we were safe on board, and delighted to find that Captain Price, of the Chicago, had been transferred, with all his officers, to the Minnesota, so that we were among friends and at home at once. Was introduced to Mrs. Price, who was there to see her husband off. Got off at about 8 p.m. Beautiful lines of lights on the Liverpool side of the Mersey, as well as the Birkenhead 1 82 A Champion of the Cross. [1867-72. side. The lighthouses and floating lights were beautiful also — near and brilliant, with beams of lurid light over the waters ; and the moon struggled out through the clouds, giving a combi- nation of varied lights in air and water. " October i6th, Wednesday. — Spent the day in the cabin, settling the accounts of our whole tour. Very windy and rough all afternoon, and hardly half a dozen passengers able to come to the dinner-table. Reached Queenstown after dark, in a gale, and the quiet on entering the harbor was very grateful. The tender with passengers and mails not coming out in such stormy weather and so late, we stayed all night in the harbor. "October 17th, Thursday. — Still in Queenstown Harbor. The tender with the Admiral, and a large crowd of steerage pas- sengers, came out to us at about 10 a.m., taking a long time to get everything on board. By that time the tide was so low, the channel being very narrow, that the big ship could not turn round to get out to sea again. Beautiful effects of changing sunshine and shadow on the lovely hills around the harbor. About the middle of the afternoon we got off, and encountered a stiff gale outside, in the face of which we made slow progress. Very rough all night. Dear Father did not sleep at all. Arranged cartes de visite. [The voyage was a rough one. But there is nothing in the journal that calls for particular mention. Two Sundays were spent at sea ; on both of which the Church services were read by different clergymen on board — Bishop Hopkins preaching each Sunday, once.] " October 28th. SS. Simon and Jude. Monday. — Begin my forty-eighth year to-day. . . . Wrote editorials nearly all day. " October 31st, Thursday. — A bright quiet morning. Pilot boat No. 19 in sight. Landed at the Battery at a httle after 3 P.M. In the total of 865 souls on board there were no sick- nesses, no births, and no deaths. The Rev. E. M. Pecke came down on the tender which took us ashore, and gave us letters and other news. Went up to Mr. Wells' before leaving on the 6 P.M. boat, St. John, for Albany. " November ist. All Saints Day. Friday. — Breakfasted at the Delavan, then took rail for Whitehall, and on the new steamer Adirondack reached home at 5 p.m., with hearts joyful and thankful to God for all the mercies vouchsafed to us during a voyage of over 7,000 miles ! " 1867-72.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 183 Soon after the happy return to Burlington he himself went back to New York and settled down to hard work again. But early in January a telegram brought him word that his father, to whom he gave first and last the warmest and deepest love of his loving, gentle heart, was dying. The bishop, who had nearly completed his seventy-sixth year, had begun a mid- winter visitation of his diocese. Great fatigue, and exposure to a cold of twenty degrees below zero, after hours in an overheated railway car, had brought on an attack of double pneumonia, to which after a day or two of intense suffering, he succumbed. Henry received the news at an hour too late to reach the earliest train, and, almost frantic with impatience, he bore the delay as best he could, and at last reached his father's bedside, but too late to receive the blessing which the patriarch had longed to give in that supreme moment to his eldest and best-loved son. It was, afterward, a great satisfaction to Henry to know that his brother Theodore, who had ministered to his father in all the hours of pain as a true son by birth and in the priesthood, had received that blessing while the ''dear father" was yet alive. Thus, in the fulness of time, that peculiar family lost the roof- tree. Yet the songs that they had sung to the God they had been trained to love with the completest trust still arose, and their voices did not falter as they sang. To one who was then asked to share for a while the sacred circle of that family, when he expressed his wonder that their trust in God was stronger than their natural grief, it was said, with perfect simplicity and naturalness, " how can we help singing when we know that dear father is gone home ! ' ' The death of his father changed the current of John Henry's life. Bishop Hopkins had long before settled it that his biography should be written by his eldest son, and at once he began mak- ing arrangements for the sale of his property in the C/m7rh fournal. The paper was worth a good deal. It was by all odds the most influential paper in the Church, and during the '' hard times " it had not lowered its prices, as some others had done (in vain hope of keeping alive) but had even raised them. Men could not do without it, even if they disliked or mistrusted it. It had made a religious journal as interesting, and quite as entertaining as a secular journal ; and Hopkins was in his prime. 1 84 A Champion of the Cross. [1867-72. But he sold it for what he could get, and began working on his father's biography. He had given his w^hole time to the paper, and it would probably have continued to grow under his strong control. But those who took it from him were, although strong enough for good work, unable to give as much care to it as he did ; and, after taking a line of policy totally opposed ro his, after ten years more it was merged into another, and since 1877 the title of Church Journal \vd& not been seen.* * Until Dr. Hopkins began the Church Journal in 1853, there had been no journalism in the Episcopal Church worthy of the name, after Dr. Samuel Seabury had finished his career as the editor of the Churchman. His work in that paper was more that of a polemic than that of a leader. He liked controversy, and he had a theological mind, and it was the time when the two parties in the Church, the High and the Low, were pitted against each other in a terrible struggle for supremacy. Dr. Hopkins began his career as a journalist at a time when, if party spirit had not been over- come, it was possible to give the High Church party such points of lead and suggestion that it could enter upon a larger life, and much as Dr. Hopkins liked the warfare of controversy, and few men ever had such a relish for the subversion of an antagonist, he soon made the Church Journal the organ of a brighter outlook, a clearer purpose, and a better spirit than had been be- fore manifested in the Episcopal Church in tliis country. In looking over the files of the Church Journal to-day, you discover that a great part of what is now a precious and priceless possession in the Church was then for the first time introduced by Dr. Hopkins. This was the case in regard to Church polity, the management of dioceses, the greater reverence in con- ducting the service, the improvement of the ritual, and the lifting up of the priestly character as well as the improvement in Church architecture. Every one of these interests received Dr. Hopkins' earnest support, and a great many of them were first suggested by him, and he kept at the work until he had made an impression upon the Church. His paper had a purpose, and it went straight to the mark, and the younger clergy, like myself, found it a source of inspiration in Church life and an excellent educator. It made one feel that the Church had something to say and to do. Then again his writing was always crisp and clear and strong. If at times he seemed to be merciless in his attitude toward his opponents, it was the triumph of princi- ples rather than any feeling of contempt that led him to exult in his victo- ries, and it was an appropriate ending of his work in journalism when he wrote for the magazine entitled The Church and the World, his famous articles on "The Decline and Fall of the Low Church Party." He was the greatest journalist the Church has ever known. Dr. Hopkins was a genius in jour- nalism, and I have always regretted that he left his work as editor to be- pome a parish priest. He abdicated a throne of power in order to take the position where hundreds of men were his equals, but while the editor of the Church Journal he was the most powerful man in the Episcopal Church. He had a mission and a message, and he made himself widely felt. From the beginning of that paper until he left it, he was the most influential fac- tor, outside of the work of Bishop White, that the Episcopal Church in this country has ever known, Kev. Julius H. Ward, 1867-72.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 185 Until 1872, that is for full four years, he was at work upon the life of his father. This book, which no one who would be informed as to the course of American Church history can do without, is not only a beautiful example of his devotion to his father's memory, but a work of real literary ability. The way in which he wove together such a fabric from letters, and jour- nals, and Church reports, and newspapers, and made of them one story that reads as if it were the product of his own brain is won- derful. Some critics thought that some of the things therein told ought not to have been allowed to be remembered because they were a disgrace to the Church. To say this, however, is to dis- regard the warning given by the author in his preface as to his purpose. " My father's life," he says, '' was one of almost unin- terrupted controversy ; and to omit these would be like writing the life of a great general and omitting all the battles. . . . " In regard to the subject of episcopal trials, which touches some of the tenderest points herein alluded to, he says: "I have de- tailed these things, not for the purpose of reflecting upon indi- viduals, but rather, as showing some parts of the process by which, as a National Church, we have obtained our education in this most difficult and disagreeable department of ecclesiastical busi- ness ; and as some assistance toward other National or Provin- cial Churches, whose work in this direction is as yet wholly or partially to be done." The book is much more than a life of Bishop Hopkins ; it is a compendium of American Church his- tory, and worthy, besides, of ranking high in a purely literary estimate of its value. But his treatment of it was characteristic. He brought out an edition, in costly form, of, five hundred copies. He sent copies to all the bishops, as well as to friends, ■ and to very many of those who, in the nature of things would have bought them, and there let his interest in the book, as a merchantable article, cease. During the four years of his work he lived at Rock Point, Burlington ; but was a missionary also at Vergennes, Vt., and across Lake Champlain at Essex, N. Y. His missionary work was not limited to the sort of people usually ticketed as " Church people," but reached to everybody, man, woman, or child, who had no one else to care for him. He brought into the Church at Essex, with his whole family, one who, twenty years afterward, during the fourteen months of Dr. Hopkins' last illness, gave him (though three other homes were freely and lovingly opened to him by kinsmen) a home, and tender care, and medical attention as to a father. He was in- 1 86 A Champion of the Cross. [1867-72. deed a father to him, having begotten him to God ; but few men reahze the greatness of the gift of faith in God, and few men are so strong and faithful, and, at the same time, so sweet and simple and winning as John Henry Hopkins. Dr. E. D. Fergu- son and his wife and family, of Troy, must be gratefully remem- bered by all those who love and reverence the memory of Dr. Hopkins. He had, for a time, an appointment as missionary at Rouse's Point, which is in the present diocese of Albany ; and in the organization of the new diocese Hopkins, whose work for the division of the old diocese of New York had been finally crowned with success, which was due to him more than any one else, was as prominent as he felt a deacon might be. He did his best to secure the election of Dr. William Croswell Doane as first bishop, and at once began to work for a further division of the diocese of Albany ! In the first address made to his Convention by Bishop Doane, the need of this subdivision was insisted on, and for years, with every appearance of ultimate suc- cess, the movement advanced. In 1872, being elected rector at Plattsburgh, N. Y., Mr. Hopkins was induced by the bishop to consent to be ordained to the Priesthood, and accordingly he was ordained Priest on the twenty-third of June in that year ; after a service as deacon of twenty-two years I The same year (or the next) he received from Racine College, then under the care of the lamented De Koven, the degree of Doctor of Sacred Theology. Dr. Hopkins' work at Plattsburgh was full of his own love and energy. The parish grew much stronger, and he acted, besides, as missionary to all that region. He could adapt himself to any place and to any man, and every one in all the country about who had no one else to care for him was cared for by Dr. Hopkins. His knowledge and love of the Bible, and his power of express- ing himself in like simple and direct language (but never falling into the mistake of talking down to the level of an uncultivated mind) were so great that he would be taken for one who had no other vocation than to be a missionary. The same thing was true of him afterward at Williamsport, Pa. At that place it was often said that his sermons in the parish church were over the heads of his people ; but when he visited a way -side church, called ''the Church of the Good Shepherd," far back among the hills, which he had himself designed many years before he came to live in that region, he spoke v/ith such fulness 1867-72.] Life of y 0/171 Henry Hopkins. 187 of scriptural knowledge, such simplicity of style, such deep ap- preciation of our Lord's own way which made ''the common people hear Him gladly," that when the news of his death came to those seemingly uncouth Pennsylvania Dutchmen they wept and said that since he who was a very angel to them was now dead, no one would ever love them and tell them God's love as he had done. In truth his style altered considerably as he advanced in years. It was always marked by a certain compactness, even when it was lightened up by his amazing facihty of illustration. But his habit of extemporaneous preaching reacted upon his wTitten style, and gave it a sort of speech-like quality, so that his ordinary style of writing, always limpid, lost something of its literary grace, and became more like his spoken addresses. In each he was facile, and each was clear as a sunbeam. The period of his resi- dence at Plattsburgh was a stormy one in the annals of the Ameri- can Church. It marked the culmination and the rapid decline of the warfare against Ritualism, and the setting up of the Re- formed Episcopal Church by Bishop Cummins and his associ- ates. From his own residence of secluded peace, John Henry Hop- kins sent out his frequent contributions to various pubhcations. He took his side with great boldness, and advocated in every possible way the lawfulness of ritualism, both in its doctrinal and its ceremonial sides. He said many things which hurt and wounded. His openness and complete frankness alarmed even those whom he was defending. He flaunted his colors jauntily in the very face of his strongest opponents, and exasperated afresh those who might have been pacified if he had been content with a less complete victory.* This is not the place, nor these the * He wrote a letter to the New York Tribune, November 24, 1877, con- cerning the meaning of the kindly and fraternal spirit which characterized the General Convention of that year, which had recently ended its session. In this he ran over certain salient points, and summed them all up by say- ing that " the result of the long war is victory all along the line for Ritualistic advance. And this victory is so complete that the renewal of hostilities hereafter is hopeless. That is wliy we have such delightful peace and brotherly love all round our united household." Pie continues : " Nothing would be further from the truth than to suppose that all this means just so much (.f an advance toward the Church of Rome. We have insisted that it was the truest loyalty to provide our army with every sort of weapon that is found most effective in the hands of the enemy. We insist that we are a true branch of the Apostolic Church from the beginning, and that every good thing belonging to that undivided Catholic and Apostolic Church from the 1 88 A Champion of the Cross. [1867-72. times, for setting forth the history of those days dispassionately. One thing should be remembered, as to all this, and that is, that Mr. Hopkins was fighting for others, and not for himself. His service was simplicity itself in its form to the very end of his parochial work, and the form of his teaching was modelled after the style of the typical Anglican divines, except for its lack of stiffness, and for the entirely unconventional expressions which he never hesitated to use at any time, when it was better to use them than not. Although he was abreast of the most advanced churchmen in all things, at least in his sympathies, yet he never would have given offence, even to the most moderate of bishops ; and this, not from any lack of courage, or because he was double-dealing, but because of his patience with people, and his understanding of their needs and of their slowness. Very much that passes for courage in expression of unusual doctrines is really not courage at all, for it arouses little opposition, simply because it is not understood. True Church doctrines in their simplest form are as unpalatable to those who know and follow the Puritan tradition as the devel- opment of the consequences of those fundamentals. Moreover, John Henry Hopkins was clear-sighted enough to see that something greater than Ritualism was at stake, and that was the right of the children of the Church freely to carry out all her teach- ings. If the movement against Ritualism on the part of the old conservative High Church party had succeeded the Church would have been bound down to a cast-iron rigidity of worship and ways that would have so repressed the spiritual vigor of her life that a period of more than eighteenth century deadness would have en- sued by this time. The Ritualists took the matter into their own hands, and did with the Prayer-Book, while living up to its sys- tem with the utmost fidelity, what never would have been dreamed of as possible to do with it a few years ago. They acted on this simple principle that the Prayer-Book itself is our only law of worship, and that all things in it, not specifically forbidden, may be done or used. One simple illustration may show this. Ac- beginning is part of our own birthright, and we mean to have it, whether or no. We don't intend to have any differences between Rome and ourselves, except where she is clearly modern and Papal, and therefore wrong, and we are ancient and Catholic, and therefore clearly right. This is the truest loyalty to our own branch of the Church, in contesting the claim of a foreign Church, with a foreign name, to the spiritual allegiance of Americans." 1867-72.] Life of John Henry Hopkins. 189 cording to the rubric the Litany is to be said after Morning Ser- vice on Sundays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. All schools of churchmen have interpreted this to mean that it is to be so used, if there is service on those days. But the rubric does not say it shall not be said on Tuesday, or any other day ; or in the even- ing, after twelve o'clock, noon. Consequently, it can be said at any time, and on any day, if the clergyman wishes a service of penitence. So, too, there is no hour mentioned for the celebra- tion of the Holy Eucharist. The usual Anglican custom has been to have the celebration after saying Morning Prayer and Litany. But, since the Prayer-Book does not forbid the offering of the Sacrifice at an early hour, befo7'e Morning Prayer, it may be celebrated thus, if the priest shall find it convenient to do so. All men see now that the Church has gained immensely in free- dom of use of her own formularies. They have become vastly more effective, and they are used less and less as ends and more and more as means to an end — the building up of the Kingdom of Christ. If no more had been effected by those who are called " Rituahsts " in contempt or hatred, they would merit the gratitude of the Church. Yet what they did, and what they tried to do, cost the Church many of her dearest sons, some of whom went into schism because they yielded to the panic which was shaking the hearts of men who called themselves par €xcelle7ice churchmen ; others were despised and branded as traitors, and a few gave up their trust in their true Catholic mother and de- clared her to be no true representative of the Church of God. The Church suffered deeply in this time of suspicion, and anger, and controversy.* But for praise or blame in the eyes of the * It is well known that the Ritualistic controversy was really not waged over the doctrine of the Real Presence and its cei"emonial expression. Stand- ard Anglican teachers had never ceased to set forth the doctrine, but usu- ally in so guarded a fashion, and with such evident dread of overstepping the limits of safety that the natural result had been to make men think it very dangerous in itself. The revival had simply cleared up these old clouds, and set forth the doctrine, simply and clearly ; the later Ritualists had simply set forth the truth outwardly as well. Dr. Hopkins' own feeling in the matter is best shown by the verses entitled " Sparrows in Winter," written in the midst of those dreary days of strife. It shows a very different side from that he usually revealed in his struggles for the Church and her liberties, and for others. . Bread on the stones is cast. 'Tis winter ; and the stones are snowy cold : Yet fluttering past From leafless trees, the sparrows, young and old, igo A CJiampion of the Cross. [1867-72. world, the Church suffered the innovators to remain in her fold. The ceremonies they brought into the churches were not forbid- den ; and in less than a lustrum the movement, begun by a few, received a great acceleration from the coming into the country of a society of priests bound by the vows of the religious life, and acting under the orders of a superior at Oxford. Finally the growth of Ritualism became so great that one of the founders of this society, mere acquaintance with whom prevented the con- secration of one elected to a diocesan bishopric, was himself elected to a bishop's see and duly consecrated thereto. In all this movement from first to last, to say nothing of his Flock, in their hunger, to be fed ; And on the cold stones find their daily bread. Love, with a liberal hand, Throws out its crumbs ; then suddenly withdraws, Hidden to stand And watch, behind the window curtain's gauze, Lest human face, too nigh, should scare The timid l)irds from this their simple fare. And they are glad, and feed With eager eye ; and live on daily love. Yet feel none. Greed And passion stir their little breasts, and move To bickering v^^ars with wing and bill ; Yet love looks smiling on, and feeds them still. Hard is this world, and cold ; And toil, care, vyoe, and sin, are everywhere. Yet souls untold Come, from above, to find their sustenance here j And, midst the stony drought forlorn. Find manna waiting for them every morn. God gives that Bread from Heaven ; And yet His Presence not in glorious blaze Of Fire is given ; But hidden under veils, lest the bright rays Of awful light and beauty here Consume the sinful soul with deadly fear. Men feed and they are glad. They see not God, the Unseen ; and they turn, With envy mad, And o'er the very Gifts of Love, they burn. Yet, fighting, feed, and grow, and will : And patient God sees, loves, and feeds them still. -1874. 1867-72.J Life of JoJut Henry Hopkins. 191 years of preparation for it in the Church Journal, Dr. John Henry Hopkins was in the fore-front of the battle, the counsel- lor in difftculties of priests from all parts of the country, the pest of bishops, whose dearest rights he was defending by tak- ing sides against themselves, the stay for the faint-hearted and the succorer in distress. His correspondence was enormous. Hardly a priest who made any gain in the way of ritual but wrote to him to tell him of it. Sooner or later everyone who became involved in trouble with his diocesan wrote to him about the course which he might best pursue. He counselled, he ani- mated, he inspired, all who were in the tumult, and he shared to the full in all the obloquy which was heaped upon the Ritualists ; and yet he might have escaped from all if he had been content to live out his own life and go on in his own ways. But he was a churchman, and he was a soldier. He advised care, patience, moderation, prudence to those who asked his counsel. But this was in private. When those same men were careless, and im- prudent, or reckless and foolish, then he did not leave them to themselves because they had not heeded his words, but he openly showed himself on their side, and drew the fire of the enemy, and sometimes rescued them from uncomfortable situations by so doing, for he was blamed for their having done what he advised should not be done, as if he had inspired them. They were ex- cused, as young boys led away by a crack-brained agitator. Nor was his struggle for liberty in the Church one which sought for liberty for his own side alone. Where the Church had not decreed there was freedom, but not for men of one way of think- ing alone. He recognized to the utmost the full right that Evan- gelicals and old-fashioned churchmen had to follow out their ideas so long as they were loyal to the Church. Nor was he one who counselled the making of reprisals. If he was found most often defending High Churchmen from attack it was because they were most exposed. When High Churchmen in turn sought to hinder the lawful liberty of Low Churchmen he as openly defended them in their rights. Dr. Jaggar, an amiable and excellent Evangelical, was elected first Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio. High Churchmen were then in a state of bitter moroseness over the failures to confirm the elections of Drs. Sey- mour and DeKoven. It was hinted that there had been sharp practice shown in the choosing of the Diocese of Ohio (the north- ern part of the State), wherein a considerable number of High Churchmen resided who had furthered the plan of division with 192 A Champion of the Cross. [1867-72. a view of escaping the severity of the long rule of Low Churchism by the Evangelical diocesan (which, of course, he had a perfect right to do under the canon), and it was rumored about that an effort would be made to prevent the consecration of Dr. Jaggar. Mr. Hopkins came out in a letter which condemned the effort in severe terms, and showed the folly of it, and the perfect right of the diocese to choose its own bishop, and how blameworthy it was to put a mark of rejection on a priest for simply being a Low Churchman. Nothing was done. Probably it would have been a failure anyway, but the opportunity of showing how clear was his sense of justice even w^hen the air was ringing with accusation and counter-accusation on all sides, was not lost by him. The very last communication for the public eye that w^as written by Dr. Hopkins, in June, 1891, two months before his death, was in a similar and more noteworthy cause — the election of Dr. Phillips Brooks to the Episcopate of Massachusetts. However he may have misunderstood the issue, lying, as he then was, very near his mortal hour, and with a weakened system, yet his motive was of the highest, and once more his voice rang out in appeal for justice for one separated by a whole heaven in party position in the Church, he a leader by right in every battle for High Church- men, asked for fairness and right dealing toward one who mis- understood, and disesteemed the whole High Church position. Both are now in the nearer presence of the Lord they served and loved. *' There they alike in trembling hope repose, The bosom of their Father and their God." CHAPTER IX. 1874-1891. Dr. Hopkins remained at Plattsburgh until the autumn of 1876. He had been, naturally, a conspicuous figure in the new diocese of Albany from its foundation. He had done all that he possibly could do to bring about its early subdivision. He drew up a full scheme for the cathedral statutes, and his draught of the statutes became the basis upon which they were at last adopted. But there had been some trials and some disappoint- ments in his life in that diocese. It had been an object of law- ful ambition that he should be sent to General Convention. But in 1874 he was only a supplementary delegate, and had no place on the floor as a member of the House of Clerical and Lay Delegates until, by the departure of one of the regular delegates at the very end of that momentous session, he was called to take his place for a few hours. He felt that he had not been fairly dealt with, particularly in the matter of the division of the diocese, that he had been treated ungenerously, and that in order to preserve his respect and friend- ship for his diocesan he must leave, the diocese. In the latter part of the autumn of 1876 he was elected to the rectorship of Christ Church, Wilhamsport, in the diocese of Central Pennsylvania, and this election he accepted, and entered upon his work just before Christmas. The people who came to the early celebration of the Eucharist that Christmas morning were surprised to see that so notorious a Ritualist as Dr. Hopkins had not changed the vio- let altar-cloth proper for Advent for a white one ! Wilhamsport is a flourishing and pretty city on the west branch of the Susquehanna. The parish was known as a High Church parish, and it was quite willing for Dr. Hopkins to lead it still further along the ways which were then so much spoken against. But his course was not so much in the way of advanc- ing ceremonial, as in deepening and enriching spiritual agencies. The services increased in number and variety, and soon the weekly and festival Eucharist became the rule in the parish. 194 A Champion of the Cross. [1874-91. Even more frequent celebrations came later on, and doubtless, if he had not been so frequently called away from home, he would have established the daily offering of the Holy Sacrifice. But there was no unusual ceremonial at these services. There were no candles on the altar, nor were the Eucharistic vestments used. The bread was " fine usual bread," and the chalice was mixed beforehand in the vestry. Even colored stoles were not used until, after some years, they were given by lay people. The choir was but the old-fashioned mixed choir, and there were no choral services. On Sundays there was an early cele- bration, and at the usual hour followed the full morning ser- vice and sermon. But there was a depth of devotion apparent in these simple services which arose from an entire personal con- secration to the service of the blessed Saviour and a full belief in His presence in the Cathohc Church. His parochial activities were not fussy, and he was clear of that bane of modern active Church work— ^the formation of a vast machinery of guilds and chapters for doing useless and useful things with equal efficiency. But he was everybody's pastor in the parish. True as steel him- self and faithful to the spirit as well as the form of his vows, he had endless hope for others, never-ending patience with others' foibles or failings, unvarying readiness to listen to every tale of sorrow or of wrong, great gentleness in dealing with those who were trying to learn how to repent, breezy, fresh wit and good humor which blew away selfishness and downheartedness, and overwhelming force for the insincere and the hypocrites. He had none of that fault of priests — a desire to rule all things, and to keep all things in his own hands. This fault it is which makes so many parsons unmanly and mean. There was none of it in his make-up, for if a man could do a thing that needed to be done, and was willing to do it, he let him do it. And if a man had a right to do a thing, he let him have the right, and he went at least half way to tell him so. He had none of that petty dis- trust of his vestry which so many priests have. The law of the Church had given the vestry certain powers and duties, and these he gladly let them have without hindrance ; and yet he always got his vestry to do about as much as he wanted them to do. He used to say that the best way to get one's rights from others is to give them theii own. His work was a great one. It was not confined to the city or to his own missions. He was always at the service of his brother clergy as far as he could be. He vis- ited outlying and distant mission stations; he hunted up the sick 1874-91] ^'^f^ ^f John Henry Hopkins. 195 and the wretched and forlorn ; he would travel for miles and miles over mountain roads to comfort a poor woman in distress. He would preach in country school-houses, administer the com- munion at night to communicants otherwise deprived of that privilege ; at one place he was known as " the Methodist " from the fervor with which he preached. It is hardly a wonder that when he began his agitation for the setting apart of the Convo- cation of Williamsport as a distinct diocese he was suspected by some (even his own bishop among others) of a wish to be the first bishop of the new see.* For he was active to an astonish- ing degree in this scheme, which he took up in the very begin- ning of his life at Williamsport. They did not know him. He was working for the good of the Church, and he would have done the same if it had been his own father who was bishop of a diocese which was ready for subdivision. But his work in this direction all went for nought. It lasted several years, and at one time seemed almost certain to succeed. He raised a good- sized subscription for an Episcopal Fund for the proposed diocese years before it could canonically have been set up — all to no purpose. In one way or another he was thwarted, and at last an assistant bishop was chosen, and the maintenance of two bishops in one diocese has been from the beginning a greater expense to the laity than would have been if the diocese had been divided ; and yet the costliness of division was the great final argument which defeated the movement with the laity. The following, selected from his frequent letters to his mother, will tell enough of the manner of his life at Williamsport and reveal his activity. * Before he accepted the call to Williamsport he visited the parish, and, setting forth his determination to attempt the division of the diocese, he made it the condition of his acceptance that the parish should further his efforts, and also that the parish church should be offered to the bishop of the new see, he agreeing in turn to resign and leave the diocese. As regards tlie financial difficulty, the division would require the assessment to be nearly doubled, from fifty cents to about a dollar. Yet, in 18S2, it was voted to ask for an assistant bishop, whose salary was fixed at $4,000, requiring an assessment of orie dollar and thirty-five cents! And the committee which recommended this action had been appointed to consider the best means of relieving the burden of Episcopal duties, after asking certain questions of the parishes. One question was, " How do you think the need of more Episco- pal oversight can be supplied?" Only ten per cent, of the parishes replied to this — " By an assistant bishop ! " while eighteen per cent, replied, " By a division of the diocese ! " The conditions which justify division seem to have existed, but the influ- ence of the bishop prevented it being effected. 196 A Champion of the Cross. [1874-91 Extracts from Letters. February 28, 1880. — To his Mother : '' P.S. — For one funeral lately, in the Hills, I had to drive twelve miles through awful mud to the church where the service was held; then yf^'*? miles through ditto, to the cemetery ; then ten miles through the worst ditto and raiji besides, back to Williamsport — twenty-seven miles in all. I left home at 7.30 a.m. and returned at 6.10 p.m., and had service and sermon at seven, same evening ! ' ' March 23, 1880. — He writes to her : '' Last week, on Thurs- day afternoon, I went up the river twenty-seven miles to Lock- haven, where I was to lecture (on Symbolism) that evening, to help raise funds for the repairing of their church. There was a very good attendance, and they seemed well pleased. I might have returned in a midnight train, but thought it hardly kind to my friends there, and certainly not comfortable for myself. The morning train, leaving before seven o'clock, was also rather un- comfortable. So I concluded to take the 11 a.m. train, which would give me time to pay a couple of visits in the morning. The omnibus was ordered to call for me in time, and I was at my friend's house (a mile and a quarter from the station), with over- coat and arctics on, there being a tremendou.s snow-storm coming down. But he came not, and so I lost the train, and had to get a conveyance to take me to Williamsport, where one of my lect- ures on the Sacrifices of the Old Law was to be given in the evening. The roads were shockingly muddy. The snow kept coming nearly all day, the wind being just in my face. I was five hours on the road in a two-horse buggy, but got down in time, chilly, but not hurt in the slightest degree — not even a slight cold! " ^'July 13, 1880. — All last week I was with the Rev. Dr. Charles Breck, brother of Rev. James Breck, founder of Nasho- tah. He has been preparing a life of his brother, made up mainly from his numerous letters, public and private ; and the mass of material made up over one thousand pages of legal cap paper. He wishes me to put all this in a condition for the printer to go to work on. I read through the whole of it last week, and now have to go all over it, pen in hand, and make any number of corrections on every page! It is a 'job and a half,' but I suppose I shall get through it some time or other. ' ' " July 30, 1880. — Yesterday our picnic came off — parish and 1874-91-] ^^f^ ^f J'^^^^^ Henry Hopkins. 197 mission schools united, and adults besides — 540 souls ! The morning rose bright, but about eight o'clock clouded over, and a few drops fell threateningly : but we concluded to be brave, and started, and the weather was dehghtful all day long — cool, breezy, and now and then passing clouds to break the force of the sunshine. But we found that there was a ' wreck ' on the R.R., half way to ' Hall's Woods.' A cow had sent thirteen freight cars to grief, giving up her own life as a forfeit to her success. We all had to get out, and transfer all the baskets and passengers, and carry five tall tubs, each with twenty-five quarts of ice-cream, and ice too, for some distance around the wreck, and then get into another train, oi freight cars (all that could be gotten there in time for us). To hoist the ladies up into the freight cars, with no ladders, or platform, or steps, was a part of the fun not down in the programme ! But it was done, and everything passed off very pleasantly, and all got home by six o'clock, safe and sound. Then /began to enjoy the day ! " "December 21, 1880. — This afternoon I go to Danville to deliver a brief address on the Organ, at the opening of a new organ in the Mission Chapel there. Last Thursday I was at Renovo (about fifty miles up the river), to see the church there — a little timber affair which they are building from my design. I spent the greater part of the day there, made drawings for the chancel furniture, etc., went to a Church oyster supper in the evening (for the carpets), and got home again by midnight. As soon as I can get the time I am to go to Lockhaven to superin- tend the putting up of a Memorial Brass, designed by me, in memory of a previous rector, the Rev. Milton C. Lightner. I made the design while at New York at the General Convention. Since my sixtieth birthday I have begun smoking a little. I take only one cigar a day, and that at 10 p.m., when everybody else is gone to bed. So far I find it of decided benefit to my voice." " February 10, 1881. — At a little past midnight last Saturday night I returned from my western trip. The Provincial Synod business was very well done, as far as it went ; but it did not go as far as I wished and hoped. Perhaps it is wiser to move so slowly ; but it is very trying to one who sees so clearly what oiigJit to be done, and must be done sooner or later. Even what was accomplished much more than paid me for the time and trouble of going. The three bishops and all the clergy and laity treated me very kindly, and even more than kindly. On Thursday and Friday evenings I delivered two lectures to two very fair audi- 198 A CJiampion of the Cross. [1874-91. ences, and apparently to their great satisfaction. My two ser- mons, on Sunday morning and evening, seemed to be equally satisfactory, the only complaint being that they were too short. The following Friday afternoon I started for home again, but there was detention after detention, so that it was past one o'clock Sunday morning before I got to bed. But I was up at 6 a.m., had my usual early celebration at 7 a.m., with second celebration at the usual time. In the afternoon I walked out to my Mission, and had six baptisms after attending to my parish Sunday-school. Full service in the evening finished my day's work — leaving me pretty well tired out. " Bishop Seymour and many others are very anxious to get me out West ; but there is no definite offer of any post, only, they say, if I come to any of the three dioceses in Illinois they will be sure to send me to General Convention ! ' ' "March 9, 1881. — Last night I had a very important vestry meeting. On Sunday I startled the congregation with a thun- derbolt, as some of them called it, by announcing a call for a meeting of the Wardens and Vestry on Tuesday evening, to consider whether the present rector should continue his connec- tion with the parish, or not. Bishop Seymour sent me a very pressing call to join him in Springfield, to live with him in his house, at no expense for board, lodging, washing, lights, etc., and with a $1,000 a year eash besides (which would be better pecuniarily than I am doing here, besides the pleasure of living and working under a congenial bishop). He promised me, too, that so far as he eould promise, if I went there, I should si(7'e/y be sent to General Convention, as well as to the Provincial Synod. I then put it to the Vestry, so that if there was the least desire to have me leave now was the time to speak out, when I could leave them honorably and with no bones broken on either side. But they did not seem to see it in that light. They unanimously passed a resolution, earnestly pressing me to stay, and saying that they believed the desire to be equally unanimous on the part of the entire parish. Whereupon I told them I would stay — probably till we get the new diocese. They know I expect to leave them thefi. To-night in the midnight train I go to Balti- more, to preach to-morrow evening in Mount Calvary Church ; and then return in the night train from there, so as to be here again by 8 a.m. on Friday morning." '' June 6, 1 88 1. — The past week has given me the most brilliant triumph of my life, in the adoption by the Diocesan 1874-91-] ^^y^ ^y John Henry Hopkins. 199 Convention of Illinois of the Canon of an Appellate Court, drafted by me; and thus completing the organization of our first Pi'ovince, setting a model to all the rest of the Church in America. This comes after twenty years of work on my part to secure the erection of Provinces, besides all the work that dear father spent in trying to get a Court of Appeals. When I went out to Springfield last January, / di^afted that canon, but it was of no effect until enacted by the three Diocesan Conventions of Springfield, Quincy, and Illinois. Springfield adopted it unan- imously; Quincy with only ^/z^ opposing vote ; and now Illinois adopts it unanimously on a vote by orders, although the bishop came out against it ! I am now preparing for a campaign in our Convention for one or more new dioceses." ^'J^ly 5' 1881. — My trip to the West was rather hurried, but otherwise very pleasant. On St. John's Day, June 24th, Friday, I went down to Danville first, to attend the laying of the corner-stone of the new and beautiful church to be erected there. There were religious services first, at which the same clergyman preached who preached at the laying of the first corner-stone, fifty-three years ago ! He was a very old man, and his voice could scarcely be heard. The stone itself was laid by the Free Masons, as was done at the laying of the first corner- stone, fifty-three years before (and as dear father did in Pitts- burgh). And the same Grand Master laid the stone w^ho laid the other fifty-three years ago ! Certainly a most remarkable coincidence. Before the Masonic ceremonies were over I had to leave to catch the train for the West, which I joined at Sun- bury. At Harrisburg I took the main lin^ for Chicago, arriv- ing at Racine on Saturday night, about midnight. On Sunday the Baccalaureate Sermon was preached by the Rev. Dr. Court- ney, of Chicago — and it Avas a remarkably fine discourse, preached entirely without notes. On Monday at the Junior Exhibition I was put on a committee to award prizes for good reading and elocution. On Tuesday evening the Board of Trustees met, and had a stormy session lasting until three o'clock next morning ! There was a cold-blooded attempt to put Dr. Parker summarily out of the Wardenship ! But it was defeated. The Trustees who did it were so angry at their defeat that they threaten to resign their seats in the Board : and it would be a good thing for the college if they would do so." " Wednesday was the Commencement. On Thursday I started for Nashotah, which I had not visited since 1856. Professor 200 A CJiavipion of the Cross. [1874-91. Kemper and Mrs. Adams, his sister, children of Bishop Kemper, showed me quite a number of letters from dear father to their father, written during the Pennsylvania days from 1824 to 1831. They have also diaries of their father's missionary journeys in Pennsylvania from 181 2, and would very much hke to have me write his life ! But I am too busy now with other work. The next day, Friday, at eleven o'clock, I started on my return. I had not time to see anybody at Chicago, going or coming. At Erie, on Saturday morning, we received the news of the horrible attempt to assassinate the President. Telegram after telegram, at the successive stopping places, made things worse, until in the evening we were told that he died at 7.15 p.m., and that Mrs. Garfield did not arrive till half an hour after he had breathed his last ! We reached Williamsport at midnight. Next morning I was delighted to learn that the President was yet living, and long may he live ! During all this week I am having the Holy Eucharist daily at 7 a.m., owing to his con- dition, and the dangers that threaten the country should he die." '' September 4, 1881. — Do not feel uneasy about me, dearest mother ; I am somewhat better, though I had only six services last Sunday! " "October 12, 1881. — Last week I travelled only about two thousand miles — to Quincy, 111. , and back, to attend the Provincial Synod of Illinois. Yet I was disappointed. About sixty miles this side of Chicago we found a couple of freight cars off the track, which delayed us (for we could not pass till they were gotten out of the way) for two. hours and a half. This made me too late in Chicago. We ought to have reached there by 7.20 p.m. on Tues- day. We did not arrive till nearly ten o'clock, while the Quincy train left at 9.05 p.m. Instead of reaching Quincy, then, Wednes- day morning at 8.30, I did not arrive till past eleven o'clock at night, when the synod was all over. ... I found that the synod had done just right, although not all that I could have wished. Next time they may go on and do a little more. The same day at evening I set out on my return, and got home Satur- day evening. " " All Saints, 1881. — Last week I was at Providence, R. I., at- tending the Church Congress, where I had a paper to read on a subject that would not interest you at all — it was ' the relation of parishes to the diocese, and of the dioceses to the General Con- vention, in the matter of jurisdiction and representation.' I also 1874-9^-] ^^f^ ^f John Henry Hopkins. 201 ^oke as a volunteer on the subject of liturgical growth, and on theological education. As I am writing to my mother and to please Jiei-, I will tell her a fact that I would not mention to every- one. At the end of my speech on liturgical growth the little bell sounded its twenty minutes before I was done (as was the case with pretty much everyone else) ; but the audience were so interested that they kept on applauding for several minutes — in- sisting that I should finish what I had to say. At length I rose and said that I could not ask to violate the law which was laid down for all alike, and then they quieted sufficiently for the next speaker to go on. But though nearly every speaker was caught by the bell in the same way, there was no such demonstra- tion made over anybody else. I was specially thanked by the bishop and the committee for my contributions toward making the congress a success. . . . You have doubtless seen the account of the election of a new bishop for Pittsburgh. Immedi- ately after the election I received a letter from a leading layman who told me that ' my letter did it ! ' He had written me, asking me about the Rev. Cortlandt Whitehead ; and I answered him very fully. My letter was read aloud at a meeting of clergy and laity for consultation, and his election was the consequence. A clergyman has since written me the same thing ; and also another layman — President Judge of the county in which Mead- ville is. Also a letter in ih^ American Literary Churchman says the same thing so pointedly, that I am afraid it may make some trouble for Dr. Whitehead among the bishops who don't like me. While passing through New York I gave out the contract for the pastoral staff to be made from my design for my bishop here, to be presented to him by his clergy next January on the fiftieth anniversary of his ordination to the diaconate. It will be very pretty, with one hundred and twenty-seven jewels in it, the crook being of ebony, the upper part of the staff" of ivory, and the lower part of ebony, or ebony and holly alternately ; with some nice carved work besides. [The greater part of the cost of this bishop's crook fell upon him too, though it was presented in the name of all the clergy of the diocese. — C.F.S.] I think he will like that, whether he likes the notion of a new diocese or not ! " '' November 25, 1881. — My trip to Fredericksburg, Va., was z^% they have thought it necessar\^ to insist that man has nothmg to do in it but to be passive under the irresistible influences of the Spirit, They have accounted for the fact that some men believe while others do not, by saying that it was God's decree : that He elected some to salvation and others to the contrary, without the former being any more worthy of the boon than the latter. Anything short of this they have denounced as robbing God of His glory and giving it to man. The other side have been justly fearful lest a doctrine like this should make men grievously careless about ex- erting themselves in working out their own salvation ; and they have therefore enlarged so much upon the necessity of working, and of man's ability to work, and the freedom of his will to go about it, that they have run to the other extreme, and made God's grace as superfluous as their opponents had made man's good works. Thus the battle has raged, waxing from time to time loud and furious, now one party appearing to have the advantage, and now the other ; each fighting as if the existence of God's truth depended on his proving his adversary to be a fatalist or a papist, as the case might be. And all the while, the conflict has been as useless as that of the two foolish knights errant in the old fable, who fought long and hard to decide whether a certain shield were white or black ; and when they were both dying of their wounds they discovered that the shield was white upon the one side and black upon the other. " . . . An additional cause of mischief has been the disposition of many hard-headed intellects to decide spiritual truths as if they were mathematical problems ; or else treat them according to some common / Appendix. 245 philosophical axiom, rather than according to the Word of God. They have not grasped the higher Philosophy of Revelation, by which some- what of the nature of the ever-blessed and indivisible Trinity is con- veyed to those truths which that Trinity has created and revealed. The Father is God, and the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God ; yet there is but one God. So the work of our salvation is all Christ's work, and all the work of the Holy Spirit, and also it is all maiis work ; and yet there are not three works, but one only. This might be illus- trated even from the mathematics. A three-sided figure, for instance, is otie figure, yet its being a three-sided figure depends wholly upon each one of the sides, not upon any one of them more than another ; and the proof of it is, that if you take away one of those three sides it is no more a three-sided figure ; so that you could not destroy its three- sidedness any whit more completely by taking away the other two sides also. " The beautiful harmony of the plan of salvation finds its best illus- tration in the works of God, interpreted according to the indications given us in His own holy Word. In the parable of the Sower, the ground signifies viaiis part of the work in preparing for the day of judgment. And our text, if taken apart from other Scriptures, would seem to declare that man, of himself, of his own motion, and in his own strength, relying on his ow^n innate and merely natural powers, could bring forth fruit to perfection. It looks as if all other agency were expressly excluded. ' The earth,' saith our Lord, ' bringeth forth fruit of herself ; ' not by the aid of any other powder : and that not par- tially, or imperfectly, but completely, and from beginning to end : ' first the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear.' What could declare more fully the sole sufficiency of man, in and by himself, to bring forth good fruit } Where can be the need, according to this text, of waiting for the grace of God } " Yet the reference to the operations of Nature— the very taking of her most ordinary work for an illustration, implies, by unavoidable necessity, all that is needed for the correction of this deadly error. When it is said, ' the earth bringeth forth fruit of herself,' the other agencies necessary to the result are not excluded, but included. And what these are, w^e shall proceed to inquire in their order. " The very parable itself shows that sowi7ig the seed is necessary. For, as the earth does not contain the seeds of all things lying self -pro- duced in the soil, so the heart of man has no innate knowledge of the Word and Will of God ; but a Revelation is necessary, and the teach- ing and preaching of that revelation by the ministry of the Church. Thus is the seed sown in the ground — that is, brought home to the heart, so that a man can, if he will, receive it and cause it to grow and bring forth fruit. But the earth is not sufficient to do this merely of herself. Suppose a corn of wheat deposited in earth that was perfect- ly dry, would it ever sprout } Most certainly not. Except to be de- voured or to decay, there it would remain unchanged even to the world's end. And so the heart of man, even when the Word is preached, if unaided by aught but its own merely mortal and natural 246 A Chainpiofi of the Cross. powers, it could never cause the germ of spiritual life to spring ; it could never dream of bringing forth fruit unto perfection. " In the first place, then, the seed sown must have moisture from the rain and the dew. And this signifies the operation of the Spirit of God upon the heart, var}4ng, as the moisture varies, in its quantity and in the manner of application. Sometimes it is the invisible vapor in the air, the gentle breathing of a moist breath, the distilling of a silent dew upon the soul, yet without our being able to see or feel it except by its effects. At another time it is like the mist or fog — it is in the shape of doubts that come over the mind, confusing the outlines of all things. But if they only stimulate the doubting soul to a fresh study of the truth, and a renewed trust in God for the discovery of it, they are the sure signs of a clearer sunshine, and will be found to have watered the garden of the soul, like the mist that went up from the earth and watered all the Garden of Eden. Sometimes they are like soft refresh- ing showers, sometimes like hea\'y tempests that pour down almost re- sistlessly the torrents of their streams from heaven. How strikingly is this heavenly watering of God's heritage contrasted with the toilsome- ness and littleness and meanness of the watering by means of poor earthly contrivances, when Moses sets forth the difference between Eg}^pt and the Holy Land. For Egypt is the type of the world ; Pal- estine of the Church. In Eg}^pt it never rained, and the only means of supplying moisture to the soil was by the laborious drawing up of water in machines worked like treadmills, by the feet. These starveling streams were distributed along the fields in narrow channels or canals ; and so, with great labor and pains, and at great expense and trouble, a little water was obtained, which was never enough for the parched soil under the continual glare of an African sun. And is it not so with the cravings of the poor souls that wilt and parch in the glare of this world's sunshine — that depend for life and happiness on the artificial streams doled out from its machinery of tantalizing deceits ? At what cost and trouble, what pains and patient exertions, are wealth and hon- ors and distinctions obtained } What lavish outlay to secure pleasures that are absorbed in the very using, and leave rather a sting behind ! And all these paltry modes of irrigation — after all their costly labor — leave the soul as thirsty as before. But listen to the words of Moses, thus contrasting the world and the Church : ' The land, whither thou goest in to possess it,' said he, ' is not as the land of Egypt, from whence ye came out, where thou sowedst thy seed, and wateredst it with thy foot, as a garden of herbs ; but the land whither ye go to possess it is a land of hills and valleys, and dri7iketh water of the rain of heaven ; a land which the Lord thy God careth for : the eyes of the Lord thy God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year even unto the end of the year.' Thus happy is the earth of the Holy Land ; thus favored is the heart that is open to the sweet influences poured out from the treasure-house of God upon His Church. Of that earth are the words of the Psalmist true : ' Thou visitest the earth and waterest it : thou greatly enrichest it with the River of God, which is full of water : . . . thou waterest the ridges thereof abundantly : thou Appendix. 247 settlest the furrows thereof : thou makest it soft with showers : thou blessest the springing thereof.' " But is it not enough that the earth be suppHed with water, and that from heaven ? What if the seed be buried in the moist earth too deep for the light to reach ? It will then decay without ever sending up its blade to the surface. Or, what if the moist earth, with its seed duly planted, be hid away in some dark cellar or cave, where no light can penetrate } Will that earth then bring forth fruit of herself"? Nay ! the germ may sprout and may shoot forth rapidly to a great size. But the pale, sickly growth will be monstrous in shape, without color or strength, without flower, seed, or fruit, and soon rotting in premature decay. So, without the light of knowledge, without the regular shining of God's Word into the soul day by day, what profits it that some isolated truth should take root and spring up in the dark by itself } The rank and noisome heresies and errors that have at times sprung up in the Church will tell the tale ! Monstrous in their forms, as rapid as they were unhealthy in their growth, the diseased shoots have brought no good flower nor fruit to perfection, but they crumble and perish in premature decay. Light is necessary ! That gives color, and tone, and brilliance, and clearness, and strength to bring forth flower and fruit ; and without it, all the rest were vain. And so the knowledge of God's will is needful for the harvest of God's saints. Ignorance — spiritual ignorance — can never be the mother of true de- votion. But the light that gladdens the soul in Christ's Church is a growing light — the slanting rays of spring rising into the more direct and burning glow of summer, and shining more and more unto the perfect day. " But if the earth need only moisture and light, why should not the seed sprout in mid-winter? What matters it that icicles hang from the eaves, and the snow covers the soil ? If that soil be only saturated with moisture, and the frosty air be filled with the glittering sparkle of a bright winter sunshine, why should not the seed ^^r^z£/, if water and light are all it wants ? But they are not all. The showers of grace may come down abundantly, but only to be frozen by the coldness of the stone-like earth on which they fall. The sun of knowledge may shine with dazzling brilliance ; but it may be only theological knowl- edge — only a learned head, not an understanding heart. For this, a thaw is necessary — something to warm as well as to enlighten. The light of the sun in spring is no brighter than it is in winter : and the truth of God is the same at all times, shining out over all the world with proofs that are ever of dazzling brilliance, and of such strength that no proud mortal can look defiance in their face, except they strike him blind. Yet without the warmth of Love, thawing his frozen heart, — they can make nothing grow there, and they will no more profit him in bringing to life the seed of God's Word, than the wheat can grow amid the frosts and snows of winter. " And these three influences that we have enumerated — the rain, the light, and the heat — are all from heaven. The sun which warms is the same as that which shines. And the rain falls from heaven also ; and 248 A CJiampion of the Cross. although it seons not to be dependent upon the sun, yet we know that it is the sun's rays that draw up the vapor from the great deep, and form it into rain-clouds for the earth. Thus the rain also is from the sun, even as the light and the heat, only not so directly ; just as the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, is sent unto us by the Power of God our Saviour— the same who is in His own blessed Person our Light and our Love. " Now, from what has been said, it will be seen that all these are necessary ; and each one so indispensable that, without it, all the rest were nothing. Without moisture, the light and heat would make a parched drought, when life would die of thirst. Without light, moisture and warmth would only breed unwholesome forms and loathsome abortions rotting in their own slime. Without warmth, moisture and light would be but' ice-bound winter instead of balmy spring. And yet, what were all these three without the soil itself to work on } Place your seed on a stone instead of on the ground, or on a board, or on a smooth rock, and let it have rain and sunshine and warmth— but will it grow ? I trow not ! The rain will only wet it, and the light and heat onlv dry it again ; but they can never make it sprout. It is /// the earth that it springeth and groweth up, we cannot tell how. It is the earth that bringeth forth fruit of herself. " And this brings us back to our text ; in which, you remember, the whole result is attributed to the earth, although, as we have seen, heaven does three parts for the earth, while the earth does but one for herself. Now, will anyone dare to say our Lord has robbed heaven of its rightful glor}' .-* Will anyone say that His lips have de- nied that rain, and light, and heat, have anything to do with the bring- ing forth of fruit ? Surel}'' not ! And so we, if we say that man's being saved depends upon his own exertions — that his being lost is all his own fault — if you say that his well-doing or undoing, is in either case his {TlVU doing : So far from robbing God of His glory, we are only saying what our Lord has here already said : ' The earth bringeth forth fruit of herself.' Without the sowing of the seed by other hands, the earth were nothing. Without the rain, and light, and heat, the sowing of the seed were nothing ; therefore all the glory of all the han'est is due to Heaven above ! But all these, without the earth to perform its part, were also nothing — therefore, the whole responsibility rests upon the earth. This is the heavenly arithmetic, where each part carries the whole burden, and yet the burden is but one and the same throughout. That burden is like a weight hanging by a chain of four strong links, where each of the four links bears the whole weight, and yet there are not four weights, but only one. And so here. Our Lord saith : ' The earth bringeth forth fruit of herself,' and King David saith : ' Then shall the earth bring forth her increase ' : and yet it is not the earth but God that giveth the increase. The work of salvation is all God's, and it is all ours too. It is we that work : yet not we, but Christ that worketh in us. The strength is God's ; yet it is ours ; for He giveth it unto us. We are more than conquerors : yet it is Christ that giveth us the victory. The glor}' is all God's, yet it is oitrs too, for we shall shine Appendix. 249 as the stars forever. And why not ? For all things are ours, and we are Christ's, and Christ is God's. " So, then, there is no need of raising a nice and captious question be- tween what is God's work and what is man's work; and there is still less need of our stopping our work until that question be settled. The good ground that is all the while busy making its grain grow and thrive to the utmost of its power, does not, in so doing, despise or set at naught the sunshine and the rain, or rob them of their glory ; but it makes good use of them in the way that God hath ordained, which is the best glory and highest tribute it can pay them. And that lazy soil, which refuses to exert itself for fear it maybe robbing the powers of heaven of their sovereign attributes, will be found in the time of har- vest a bare and barren spot, or else, bristling all over with thistles and thorns ; and it will be given over to be burned, while the other shall be covered thick with golden sheaves. " The heavenly influences are not nieiitioried in our text — not because they are forgotten, not because they are of no consequence, not because they are <2/7- important — but only because they are the same for all. The sun shines as brightly and as warmly on the roadside, and on the stony field, and on the thorny soil, as on the good ground ; and the rain and the dew descend alike on all. Our Father, which is in heaven, maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. Therefore, if there be any differences in the results, it is the fault of the earth. She bringeth forth fruit of herself : and she must be judged by the fruit she brings forth. 'For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God ; but that which beareth thorns and briers is re- jected, and is nigh unto cursing ; whose end is to be burned. But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you.' Ye have received the good seed abundantly ; your Heavenly Father hath caused His sun to rise upon you, and hath sent His gracious rain upon you : See then that ye bring forth fruits meet for the service of Him who hath so tenderly cared for you : that ye, also, may at length receive your bless- ing from the hand of God. (Signed) " Jno. H. Hopkins, Jr." "April 6, 1851 ; two o'clock a.m." " Preached, first, that afternoon at St. George the Martyr's, New York." FOR FAMILY PRAYERS. COLLECTS FOR THE SEVEN DAYS OF THE WEEK. 1869. " Sunday. — O Light of Light, who, in the beginning of the creation of th& world, and in Thy Resurrection from the dead, and in Thy sending of the Holy Ghost, didst shine out of the darkness with great glory ; shine also in our souls, we beseech Thee, that, walking here as the children of light, we may at length attain unto Thy light eternal ; who livest and reignest," etc., etc. '" Afonday. — O God, who madest a firmament to divide the waters from the waters, and calledst that firmament heaven ; grant that Thy Church may daily extend further and further the firmament of heavenly truth, dividing asunder the dark clouds and stormy waves of this troublesome world ; through Him who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." " Tuesday. — O God of wisdom, who rejoicest in the habitable part of the earth, making the dry land to appear, and covering it with grass and the green herb, and the fruit-tree yielding fruit after his kind ; grant that we may never wander from the green pastures that grow beside the river of life, but may be like trees planted by the water-side, bring- ing forth fruit in due season unto salvation ; through Jesus Christ our Lord." " Wednesday. — O King of Glory, who madest great lights, the sun to rule the day, the moon and stars to govern the ni^ht ; grant that Thy Church, receiving all her glory from Thee, may beam forth bright as the sun, fair as the moon, and that they who turn many to righteous- ness may shine as the stars for ever and ever ; through Him who is our Sun of Righteousness. Jesus Christ our Lord." " Thursday. — O Holy Ghost, Giver of life, who didst brood upon the face of the barren waters, and they brought forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life and fowl that fly in the open firmament of heaven ; brood evermore upon the waters of Thy Holy Baptism, that innumerable souls may be born of Thee therein, and may be so blessed of Thee in this life that at the last day they may be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; through Jesus Christ our Saviour." " Friday Morm'ng. — O God of Life, who filledst the earth with living creatures, and madest man in Thine own image, to have do- minion over the works of Thine hands ; grant that the glory and power given unto him in his innocence may be restored and increased unto us in the Second Adam, by the merit of whose Cross and Passion Appendix. 251 Thou hast promised that Thy redeemed shall be made kings and priests unto Thee ; through the same Jesus Christ our Lord." " Friday Evening. — O loving Father, who, in the Garden of Eden, from the side of Adam while he was in a deep sleep, didst make woman to be the mother of all living ; and from the pierced side of Jesus while in the sleep of death upon the cross didst bring forth the water and the blood, and from these madest Thy Church to be His Bride ; grant that we, remaining faithful unto death in the bosom of that Church, may be folded in the everlasting arms of Thy Beloved, stretched forth upon the Altar of the Cross to embrace the world ; through the same blessed Jesus, our Lord and Saviour." " Saturday. — O Blessed Jesus, lover of men, who on Thine own hallowed day of rest didst lie sealed in the stony sepulchre, and in Thy victory over death and, hell madest the place of Thy rest to be glo- rious ; give sweet rest and refreshment to all the faithful who sleep in Thee ; and grant, that when our work on earth is ended, we also may be joined unto Thee in Paradise, and with them may have part in the triumphant resurrection of the just, to be separated thenceforth from them and from Thee, O Lord, no more forever ; who livest and reignest one God, world without end ; Amen." THE PROVINCIAL SYSTEM. From " Some Unwritten Books ; " Amej'ican Church Review, Januarys 1891. At the Reformation, the theory of the whole movement, so far as the Church of England was concerned, claimed to be a return to the purity of the primitive Church. And at the organization of our American Church that return was made, in some respects, more complete than in England itself. But in other points the restoration is even yet lament- ably and undeniably incomplete. Let us consider only the case of our American Church. The early Church was ever}'where divided into provinces of conven- ient size, and the rule was that the synod of each province should meet at least twice a year, for the hearing of appeals, for the correction of abuses, and for consultations concerning the general welfare. Can- ons also might then and there be passed, if there were occasion. But it was unheard of that any Diocesan Bishop, with only his own clergy and laity, should ever undertake to pass a canon. " Constitutions " were unknown ever\'where. How does our American system compare with this ? At first when we had only three or four bishops, the Church in this country was organized — to use the proper ecclesiastical term — as one Province. There was not a sufficient number of bishops and dioceses to do anything else. This province, and our National Church, were identical. So in other cases — Scotland for instance — where there was not strength enough for two or more provinces, the province and the National Church were all one. In Ireland there used to be four prov- inces ; though there are now but two. And in England, where there are but two, it would be much better if there were five or six. But as the nation and the Church have both expanded so wonder- fully within our first century, it is plain that a change is required. And the great points are : What should this change be, and how should it be brought about ? First, comparing our American organization with that of the primi- tive province, what do we find ? Instead of meeting twice every year, our General Convention meets only once in three years ! Instead of being a Court of Appeal, we have no Court of Appeal at all. If a bishop is bad enough to be put on trial, he can be tried and punished ; but the court would have no power to rectify the tyrannical abuse of authority for which he may have been condemned. Appendix. 253 General Convention can indeed pass canons ; but in subordination to them each separate diocese has its own constitution and canons, and in nearly all the dioceses these can be made and altered without the consent of the bishop himself, for which there is no precedent in the primitive Church anywhere in the whole world. Councils of bishops have made canons without the help of clergy and laity ; but that the clergy and laity should make canons without bishops is a monstrosity unknown to the primitive Church. Let us go back to the root of the matter. , When our risen Lord was about to ascend into heaven. He said to His Apostles : " All power is given unto Me in heaven and in earth. As the Father hath sent Me, even so send I you. Go ye, therefore," etc. He gave no such direct commission of authority to priests or deacons or laity. All that these last, therefore, have at any time enjoyed in the Church, they have en- joyed by gift of communication from the Episcopate, to whom, and to whom alone, the entire power was originally given. But note, that Christ gave the gift to the Apostles as a body — not to St. Peter or to any other as an individual. It is the Episcopate as a body that repre- sents Christ, and received " all power " from Him. Therefore none can make a bishop but the bishops themselves. No election, no appoint- ment, no letters-patent, no popular acclamations, can make a man a bishop. Nothing can make any man a bishop except consecration by those who themselves are bishops already. When the bishops con- cede to priests, deacons, laity, or the civil government, any share in the government of the Church, or the selection of its officers, that conces- sion is valid, for the bishops originally had " all power." Thus in the original appointment of deacons, the Apostles left it to others to choose the individuals, while reserving to themselves the power of ordination, If the multitude had chosen persons whom the Apostles knew to be unfit, doubtless they would at once have refused to ordain them. So long as the Apostles were together, and the Church had not yet spread abroad, there was no need of change. " The Apostle and el- ders and brethren " could be called together when any tough question was to be decided. But as the Church and the Episcopate extended to far distant countries, the case was changed. The whole body could not be brought together on every question. What, then, was to be done } Then the episcopate of each province — so soon as it became sufificiently numerous — was organized in a synod. The entire number of bishops represented the original College of the Apostles. All ordinary ques- tions were settled by them. There was an appeal to a larger council only in important controversies of the faith. Look at the Province of Asia — the example most fully known to us. When St. Paul first carried the full Gospel to the chief city, Ephesus, they had not yet heard of the outpouring of the Holy Ghost. St. Paul laid the foundations, tarrying and laboring there some two years. But within a few years more, look at the change ! St. John is yet alive, and writes the Epistles to the Seven Churches of Asia. Ephesus is the head, for there the good work began. But there are six other Sees clustering around it, and all in the same province, and they evidently 254 ^ Champion of the Cross. form what was soon afterward known as an ecclesiastical province. And so it was, little by little, in all the provinces of the old Roman Empire. Slowly and very sluggishly we are following the example here. The See of New York, which began with one bishop having ju- risdiction over the whole State, has grown into five dioceses (there ought to be more than a dozen !), and Pennsylvania has three (there ought to be at least seven, even now). And in Illinois we have the first thoroughly organized province, though with a very imperfect realiza- tion, as yet, of provincial powers, and with only three dioceses. But enough has already been done to indicate the general drift of the change required. And the first principle thus indicated is that the State is to furnish the boundaries of the provinces. There are only three probable excep- tions to this — Delaware, Rhode Island, and West Virginia. Delaware and Rhode Island might be permitted to attach themselves for pro- vincial purposes to any conterminous province ; Delaware to Pennsylva- nia or (better still) to Mar\-land ; and Rhode Island to either Massa- chusetts or Connecticut, although, in ancient days, Delaware would be a province by itself with at least three sees, and Rhode Island another province with four or more sees. But perhaps this is too much to ex- pect in these degenerate days. As to western Virginia, the separation* of that State was made during our civil war, and in utter violation of the spirit of the constitution, and the boundary line between that and the Old Dominion is the ugliest line on the whole map of the Union. All the other lines are either Nature's graceful lines of coast or river or mountain chain, while all artificial lines are the straight lines of peaceful development. But that ugly West Virginia line is the zigzag scar of the lightning-bolt of civil war, contradicting every other line in the whole map. It would be grateful to all Virginians who love the historic identity of the Old Dominion, to have both the Virginias, ac- cording to the old State lines, embraced in the unity of the ecclesiasti- cal province. In every other case, without exception, the diocese now embracing a State or Territory may hope to grow into a province in the course of time. The shortest and easiest way to accomplish this would be — first, to subdivide each State diocese into at least three sees when the time for subdivision has come. Two might do, as a temporary measure ; but it is unsatisfactory, for the bishops should always have their separate vote as a separate order, and with only two of them they must be unan- imous or nothing can be done. Another point is that at first the old Diocesan Convention, with clerg}'and laity from the whole State, should be continued over unchanged, with its old power of making and alter- ing constitutions and canons, only leaving to each diocese its own elec- tions. In this way, most easily, the power of making and altering constitution and canon can be restored to the provincial synod, without any felt loss or surrender on the part of the diocesan conventions. After some years, as the numbers of clerg\^ and laity become incon- veniently large, they can be reduced by the diocesan conventions elect- ing deputies in proportion to the numbers of their clerg}^ and laity, Appendix. 255 rather than have all attending the provincial synod. But this change would leave the legislative power undisturbed where it belongs, with the synod of the province. Another point that ought to be preserved in our American provinces is that the presidency of the province, or, metropoHtanate, should al- ways belong to -the chief city and original see — to New York, in the province of New York ; to Philadelphia, in the province of Pennsyl- vania, and so on. This chief city is the chief centre of influence in business, in politics, in all other worldly matters; and if it be not made the centre of ecclesiastical influence also, there will always be found there a strong clique of clergy and laity whose influence will too often be opposed to that of the official head of the province or diocese. Still another point — somewhat new in such organizations— ought to be carefully guarded. Where party spirit runs high, and the metropol- itan is of one party, while the other bishops and dioceses may be of the other, it w^ould hardly be fair to give to the metropolitan the sole appointment of committees. The better and fairer rule will be that w^hen a committee is appointed of any specified number from each dio- cese, then each bishop should appoint the member or members from his own diocese, and if any bishop be absent, then the deputies from his diocese shall freely elect from their own number the member or members called for. Of course, eventually, the bishops of each province should be the court of appeals for that province. And here two points should be provided for. In the first place, the bishops of the province should, as a body, form the court of appeals, and alone give the final sentence, whatever it may be. And they should give it in writing, each member of the court assigning his reasons, so that — if they are wrong — public opinion may have a fair chance to be heard for the benefit of future cases. In the second place, there should be one clerical and one lay assessor elected by each diocesan convention ; besides which, each bishop should have the right, if he please, to name one additional cler- ical or lay assessor, or both, because he and his convention may not be in thorough harmony, and he has the right to be advised by those in whom he has confidence. These assessors should not be merely to give advice. They would probably include those of the clergy who were the best canonists, and laymen who were good lawyers or judges ; and all interlocutory questions should be decided by them. It is not possible to insure all bishops as good canonists, and — as our past ex- perience shows — a bishop may be thoroughly conscientious when act- ing on a court, and yet may have the most extraordinary ideas of law. The bishops, therefore, need to be protected against the very real danger of making fearful blunders in matters which they do not un- derstand ; and the assessors would relieve them from the decision of all those technical points in which they would be most likely to err. But when these preliminary matters were all settled, then to the bishops alone should be reserv^ed the final sentence of the court in the matter at issue. When a State province is established, and with bishops 256 A Champion of the Cross. sufficiently numerous, there are certain other parts of the ancient sys- tem which ought to be restored. In the first place, when a bishop is elected to any diocese within the province, it should be enough to obtain the consent of the majority of all the bishops of the province, instead of asking that of all the bishops in the United States, from Florida to Alaska. The requiring- the consent of a majority of the standing committees should be dropped anyhow. There was only a temporary necessity for it at the first organization of our American Church, to make up for the lack of personal knowledge by the English bishops of those clergymen whom they were called upon to consecrate as bishops for these United States. The free voice of clergy and laity is given in the election by the diocese that makes the choice. The consent of the bishops of the province gives the ap- proval of the third and highest order. That was enough in the primi- tive days. It ought to be enough now. And the metropolitan of the province with others of his comprovincial bishops, should always per- form the consecration. If it be the metropolitan see that is to be filled, the consecration should always be by the other bishops of that same province ; as in the old days, when a bishop of Rome was chosen he was always consecrated by the Bishop of Ostia and others of the original Province of Rome. In the second place, when any diocese was to be divided and a new See erected, the consent of the Provincial Synod should be enough, without troubling General Convention. Suppose California wants to be divided, what can Maine be supposed to know on the subject so that it ought to be able to overrule California } No. Each province should settle all such questions for itself. Instead, then, of provinces being a useless, or needless appendage, we should find embodied in them the following important changes : 1. A more vigorous recognition of State lines in our Church work than is furnished by any other religious body in the land, thus giving us 2i. prima facie claim to be the National Church. 2. A provincial synod making and altering constitution (a constitu- tion is only a more permanent form of canon) and canons, relieving our diocesan conventions of all responsibility in that matter. And eventually it would relieve General Convention of a large part of the legislation — our triennial National Council confining itself mainly to questions of Bible and Prayer-book, and inter-communion, and the restoration of the visible unity of Christendom, leaving all points of ordinary practical administration to the provincial synods. 3. The working of a simple and practical Court of Appeals, before which any and every disputed question might be brought, and settled on the spot. 4. The furnishing of the ancient primary court for the trial of any bishop, with no appeal beyond its decisions except in cases involving doctrine. 5. The simplifying the process of the consecration of bishops in case of vacancy. 6. A similar facility in the erection of new dioceses. Appendix. 257 7. One great recommendation of the plan here proposed is that necessarily it must be very gradual in the process of realization. Some parts of our Church (very few) are ready for it now if they only knew it. Others will not be ready for fifty years to come. The full measure of the powers here suggested as proper for provincial synods cannot be conveyed at present. Some of them it may be wiser to withhold until a province shall contain at least (say) seven dioceses. But as one province took its place in line after another — not all at 07ice — there would be a much better chance of improvement in a line of advance as yet untried. Mistakes made in one place would be corrected in an- other ; and thus the system would become more vigorous and com- plete with its gradual adoption. But one point I would insist on with the utmost obstinacy. The idea of making the meetings of our General Convention not so frequent as once in three years, should be talked down, voted down, knocked on the head, whenever it appears. What ! We could meet once in three years just after the Revolutionary War, when there were no steamboats and no railroads, and now, with all the marvellous facili- ties of modern travel, we are to meet only once in ten, fifteen, or twenty years ! The very idea is absurd and intolerable ! Why, the Lambeth Conference of bishops from all over the world meets once in every ten years ! With our provisions against changes in constitution or prayer-book except when passing in identical verbal form through two consecutive General Conventions, we should crystallize ourselves into future immobility, just when the prospect of the reunion of Chris- tendom demands of us a greater flexibility than ever ! And we began the movement too ! And what a wickedly absurd position we should be in, if, after inviting a divided Christendom to meet us on the four points, we should adopt a legislative system which should tie ourselves up more closely hand and foot than ever we were tied before ! No, no ! Even if General Convention reserves to itself only the matters concerning reunion, it will have more than enough to do every three years, and the more the better ! 17 THE LAY ELEMENT IN ENGLAND AND IN AMERICA. (From the Contemporary Review, March, 1881.) For more than thirty years I have been a close and steady reader of the leading English Church papers, and most deeply interested in every step of the marvellous Church revival which has been gaining ground year by year during all that time, and is stronger now than ever. The same movement has been making progress on our side of the water, under very different conditions. One peculiar point of observation and thought has been to watch how the life within, on either side of the water, would modify its environment, so as to enable the new spirit to do its full work. For years I have been convinced that the key to the position on your side — the Malakoff whose capture will ensure the sur- render of the enemy — is simply to give to the laity in England as nearly as possible the same position which they now enjoy in the Church of America. There has been a steady approximation toward this, be- yond question ; but its stiffest opponents are precisely those brave men of the advanced school who ought to be its friends, and who have the most to gain from its adoption, because they have the best right. Nothing would be further from the truth than to suppose that this conviction is a mere piece of our too common American conceit and "bumptiousness." I think I see as many faults, and am as ready to try to correct them, in our American Church as in any other. Nay, it must be frankly confessed that we have no right to pride ourselves on our originality or ingenuity in this matter of the laity. We American churchmen have been guilty of every stupidity and every particle of obstructiveness that was in our power. Wherever it was possible to copy an English blunder we have been sure to do it. Some of our best changes were accomplished, humanly speaking, by accident. Our most real improvements were things into which a kind Providence drove us, so that we had no choice left. Yet, after nearly a century of experience of the advantages of our providential position, as proved by a steady gain over even our rapid rate of increase in the population, as also by a still more rapid gain in the tone and strength of churchman- ship, we have American stupids (bishops included) who, while abroad among you, talk of the " superior advantages [Heaven save the mark !J of a union of Church and State ; " and some of our dignitaries bring back with them strings and rosettes in their hats, and braided coats, aprons, and leggings, and even call one another "My Lord" on the sly, in a semi-jocular manner, when no dangerous ears are within reach. We have a natural genius for making Church blunders over Appendix. 259 here, and we have not done with it yet. The position taken in regard to the laity, therefore, is perfectly free from any national vanity. To begin at the beginning. The precise position of the laity, as an organic element in the structure of the Primitive Church, is by no means self-evident. As the entire deposit trm of spiritual knowledge and power was given to the Apostolic College, it must have been the work of time to settle what particular portions of it should be perma- nently distributed to priests, deacons, and laity. That some such con- veyance was contemplated from the first is evident from the fact that the new Apostle, in the place of Judas, was not appointed by Saint Peter (the papal theory), nor by the eleven alone (as some suppose the episcopal theory to be), nor by the eleven and the seventy alone (as some would make the clerical theory to be). The whole " one hundred and twenty " of the " disciples " took part in the election, so that there must have been some of the laity voting for the first bishop of the apostolic succession, as well as the eleven and the seventy ; there imist have been at least thirty-7iine of these laity, for eleven and seventy (if the seventy were all present) make only eighty-one of the one hundred and twenty. When the order of deacons was created, the " multitude of the disciples " were the electoral body again, though the appointing or ordaining power was reserved by the apostles. In the choice of Church officers, therefore, from bishop or Apostle, which is the highest, to deacon, which is the lowest, the laity should have a free voice. At the Council of Jerusalem we find that " all the multitude " were again present, and toward the close they " kept silence," a very significant hint that they had been doing their part of the "much disputing" which preceded. This is a strong indication that the ordinary reading : " The Apostles, and elders, and brethren," means just what we describe as " The bishops, clergy, and laity." But in the earlier ages, the bishops and clergy being the primary teachers of the new Gospel, would naturally possess so strong a direct- ing power, that the distinct share of the laity in legislation would hardly appear. Indeed, if we look to the power of giving a distinctive vote, as an order, we find it pretty much confined to the episcopate. A very rigid adherence to the model of the earlier Councils might be found to shut out the priesthood as well as the people, and leave all legislative power to the bishops alone. As the fresh leadership of early teaching settled down, however, into the well-defined tradition of the second or third generation, the stabil- ity of the pyramid was increased by the enlargement of its base. The organic share of priests and people became more highly and firmly crystallized. In the election of bishops it was sometimes manifested with such force as to show the need of further regulation. When one hundred and thirty-seven corpses were carried out of one church after the election of Damasus as Bishop of Rome, it would hardly do to say that the laity had no share in the election of bishops. In the worst of our partisan contested elections, we have never, in America, come anywhere near the liveliness of the Roman laity in the fourth century. 26o A Champion of the Cross. But with the conversion of Constantine a new element had come into play. Slowly in some points, more rapidly in others, the Govern- ment absorbed the previous right of the laity, and added other and fur- ther usurpations also. This new power was at first exerted as simply " Government tJifliicncer The forms were left untouched : the spirit only was changed. The imperial influence in favor of one candidate was generally sufficient to secure his election. After a time this hard- ened into a right to nominate, and then at last into a right to appoint and install. So also with regard to Councils. Here, where the posi- tion of the laity had been left more indefinite from the first, appropria- tion by the State, through its powerful infiicence, was more rapid and more complete than in regard to election. All the undisputed General Councils were not only called by the Emperor, but their decisions or decrees received also their xOpos — their validity as law — from ///;//. He was the " lay power " entire. We must now draw a clear distinction between things which have been more or less confused and confounded ever since the union of Church and State began. Everything touching the possession and control of property belongs of right to the civil authority. Our Lord Himself, when on the earth, though He was King of kings and Lord of lords, would not meddle with a case of secular property, even when a man had cheated his own brother out of part of his inheritance. " Man, who made Me a judge or a divider over you ? " was His unanswerable question to one who would engage Him to decide a question of prop- erty. Even while the emperors of Rome were Pagans, the Church — as in the case of Paul of Samosata — went into the secular courts for the settlement of the right of property, even church property. Now, for everything concerning the tenure and management of property, the Church is dependent upon the State, necessarily, here in America as well as elsewhere. We have no difficulty in getting the State to do for us anything we really need, in this line. In this State of Pennsylvania, for instance, any number of persons may associate themselves together for any religious purpose ; and, having submitted their articles of asso- ciation to the inspection of the judges of a certain court, and due pub- licity being secured, when the judge certifies that there is nothing therein " contrary to the Constitution and Laws of the United States or of the Commonwealth of Penns3^lvania," the applicants are forth- with recognized and recorded as a corporation at law." This is essentially distinct from the possession or exercise of any power touching questions of doctrine, discipline, or worship, or the election or appointment to office in the Church. But the union of Church and State has so far confused the two that it is not easy to unravel them. And the confusion seems to be inextricable as soon as an Englishman reaches the magic phrase " the Royal Supremacy." Now, it may startle your readers immensely, but I venture to say that the Royal Supremacy, in its true meaning and intent, exists here, in America, as completely as it does in England. The object of the Statute of Henry Vin. was to put a stop to appeals to Rome in all cases occurring in the ecclesiastical courts in England, those courts Appendix. 261 having then jurisdiction in " all testamentary and matrimonial causes, and all suits for tithes,^ oblations, and obventions ; " and all these cases were thereafter to be settled within the realm. As to America, ques- tions of " tithes, oblations, and obventions " do not occur. " All testa- mentary and matrimonial causes," so far as civil rights are concerned, are settled by the civil courts, and no Romanist dreams of appeaUng from them to Rome, any more than do the Quakers. But we go further than this. The priJiciple of the Act of Henry VIII. separates clearly between the civil and ecclesiastical jurisdiction, maintaining that, in both, England was sufficient unto herself, without becoming dependent on Rome. The statute says of England, that *' the body spiritual " thereof has power " when any cause of the law divine happened to come in question, or of spiritual learning," such cause being " declared, interpreted, and showed by that part of the body politic called the spiritualty, now usually called the English Church (which also hath been reported and also found of that sort, that both for knowledge, integrity, and sufficiency of numbers, it hath been always thought to be, and is also at this hour, sufficient and meet of itself, without the interfering of any exterior person or persons, to declare and determine all such doubts, and to administer all such offices and duties as to the administration of their rooms spiritual doth apper- tain): and the laws temporal, for trial of property, of lands and goods, and for the conservation of the people of this realm in unity and peace, having been and yet being administered, adjudged, and executed by sundry judges and administers of the said body politic called the tem- poralty ; and seeing that both these authorities and jurisdictions do conjoin together for the due administration of justice, the one to help the other ; " etc. Nothing can be more absurd than to argue, that the true meaning of all this is, that secular courts are to judge spiritual cases, or that spiritual courts are to decide secular cases, or that the king, as an autocrat, could overrule either the one or the other. It merely recognizes a fundamental and indelible distinction between civil and ecclesiastical cases, and that each of the two kinds of court is to exercise its own powers, without interference from the other within the realm, or from any power whatsoever outside. The same fundamental distinction between the spiritual and the temporal is re-asserted in more than one message sent by Queen Elizabeth to her meddlesome Parliament ; and stands permanently embodied in the Royal Declara- tion prefixed to the Thirty-nine Articles. And the reiterated quotation of all these passages, in all sorts of books, reviews, magazines, news- papers, and other publications, would, so one would suppose, have made the principle itself familiar enough to most Englishmen by this time. ^owth.\?,ftmda7ne?ttaldisti7tction between things and causes prop- erly civil, and things and causes properly spiritual, is American law as well as English law. Our Civil Courts, where a question of property depends upon the issue, will examine and decide any Church question — so far as that piece of property is concerned. But the decision concerns the Church 262 A Champion of the Cross. no farther than that particular amount of dollars and cents, and does not bind the Church in any spiritual point of view. When an Illinois secular court, after years of incubation, decided that Mr. Cheney was entitled to the possession of his church edifice, because he was yet " a Presbyter of the Protestant Episcopal Church in good and regular standing," although at the time of rendering this decision Cheney had not only been for some years deposed from the ministry, but had actually been " consecrated " by Bishop Cummins as a " Bishop " of the new "Reformed Episcopal" sect, what was the consequence? Cheney merely retained possession of a building which was heavily mortgaged, and not very desirable in any point of view ; and all the world (Cheneyites included) laughed at the absurdity of the de- cision. The very Romanists themselves, in Great Britain, recognize the Royal Supremacy without murmuring. When a Saurin case arises in England, or an O'Keefe case in Ireland, of the very sort that, before the Reformation, would have been evoked to Rome, what do your Romish ecclesiastics do about it.-^ Do they evoke it to Rome .^ No more than if they were so many Protestants. Cardinals, bishops, and priests, monks and nuns, obey the siibpcenas and other processes of the civil courts, and accept their decisions, whether they like them or not, as quietly as if there was no such city as Rome, and no such per- son there as the Pope. And it seems to be an entire mistake to suppose that the power now exercised by the Crown in regard to the conge d'ehre, and convoca- tion, and various other matters, has anything to do with the Royal Supremacy. The Royal Supremacy is an incident of the Crown, 7ieces- sarily co-extensi-ve with its jin'isdiction. Will anyone say that the Royal Supremacy has been abolished in the Dominion of Canada, or in any other of the constitutional colonies } Is it abolished in Ireland, or in Scotland ? Nay, is it abolished in England itself in regard to all persons except those who belong to the Established Church } The very asking of the question is enough. It is abohshed nowhere. It would be just as correct to say that none but members of the Estab- lished Church are " subjects " of the British Crown. This is clear enough as to the Civil Courts. As to the Spiritual Courts it is not so clear. But the positive and direct declaration of the Statute of Henry VIII. is, that spiritual questions shall be decided by Spiritual Courts only, without appeal to any power outside the realm. When the State, in process of time, recognized the existence of two or more religious organizations, with legal rights, within the realm, the principle of the Act was not thereby destroyed, but only rendered more active. The organs for the settlement of spiritual questions merely became more numerous, so as to decide those questions accord- ing to the communion in which they may arise. If it be a spiritual question among Presbyterians, the Presbyterian Spiritual Courts will settle it. If among the Baptists, then the Baptist Court. If among the Methodists, then the Methodist Court. If among the Romanists, then a Romanist Court ; each and every of them managing their own Appendix. 263 Courts to suit themselves. In any case, if property interests be in- volved, the Civil Court may review the decision so far as civil rights may be involved ; but its sentence will bind no further than that. All the particulars, therefore, in which the Crown now has more or other powers touching the Established Church than touching any other religious body in the empire, are simply outside the true mean- ing and intent of " the Royal Supremacy^' and may be entirely altered and removed by law, without touching the Royal Supremacy in any degree. In all these other matters, however, the Crown now absorbs and uses powers that originally and properly belonged to the laity as an order within the Church itself, and which oicght to belong to the laity now, if only the laity were so organized for that purpose as to be able to use them. With us, they are so organized. And let us compare the general features of the two systems. No man has an ex officio place as a lay deputy or officer of any sort in the Church of America. He must be elected. And the only ostensible ground on which he ca7i be elected, is because he is a Churchman, and is sufficiently interested in the Church to serve without pay. Your laity, in the only organization you have (your Parliament), even in its best days, when admitting only Church communicants, was composed of men chosen for secular ob- jects ; by methods of secular agitation, whose parties rose and fell on secular questions ; and to which spiritual questions or interests could scarcely at any time be more than incidental. This contrast, alone, ought to be enough to settle the whole question. But when, besides this, your only legal organization of the laity of the English Church first ceased to be communicants, then admitted a nation of Presby- terians, then another nation chiefly of Romanists, then Jews, and now Atheists, and yet still clings to the spiritual power of the lay order in the Church of England herself, while keeping the order of the clergy all the while tied up in a double-bow knot, how can reasonable men sup- pose that to be a plan preferable to ours ? Let us now compare a few details. And in so doing, the secular lay power^the government for the day — will be contrasted with the Church laity among us. As to legislation : Without a WTit from the secular lay power your Convocation cannot come together at all. Our Church laity have no such control over us. Our Conventions all meet at fixed constitutional times, as a matter of course. Special meetings are called by the bishop, or by standing committees, which generally consist of both clergy and laity. When your Convocation has come together, you cannot even discuss any matter of legislation without a Letter of Business from your secular lay power. OurChurch laity have no such gag in our mouths. When we are assembled in Convention, any member may introduce any matter of proposed legislation he pleases, and the House can discuss it as long as they like, and come to what conclusion seems good to them. When your Convocation has come to a conclusion, it is of no force 264 A Champioji of the Cross. unless your secular lay power sees fit to approve it. Here there is some nearer comparison ; for with us a vote by orders may at any time be called for (and on some subjects the vote must be taken that way), and without the consent of a majority of the lay order present nothing is done. But practically there is a vast difference between this and your way of doing (or rather 7iot doing) things. For, first, our laity are Church laity, chosen and coming there because of their interest as Churchmen, and they are therefore eminently fit to be trusted. They are also present during the whole discussion, they are compelled to hear what the clergy" have to say, and to answer it face to face if they can ; and they are protected from the pressure of secular interests, or secular en- tanglements, in coming to their spiritual conclusion. In all Church matters they are thus being continicatty educated by their membership in such a body. They there learn things concerning the working sys- tem of the Church which they might never learn in books, and which they would never hear in sermons or in private conversations. And nothing is more interesting than to watch some clear-headed layman, from General Convention to General Convention, growing continually instrength of judgment, clearness of insight, and boldness of advocacy, until he is numbered among those on whom the clergy^ rely as their constant and conscientious helpers in every Church contest, and towers of strength for the maintenance of every Church principle. On the contrar}% your secular lay power is inaccessible to Church teaching or Church argument ; the clergy^ cannot make it listen, has no control over its adjournment or consideration, and is therefore completely at the mercy of its ignorance, its caprice, or its secular interests. Whenever your discussions are at all displeasing to your secular lay power, it can prorogue your Convocation on the spot, and send you all home, willy-nilly ; or your Archbishop — generally the mouthpiece of the secular lay power rather than of the Church — can do it of his own motion. There is no such sword suspended by a thread over the head of any of our Conventions. Assembling at the stated constitutional time, so long as a quorum is present, nothing can prorogue or adjourn the session, except the free vote of the body itself. In the case of the General Convention it requires a joint vote by both Houses. Neither can terminate the session by its own sole act. But some among you lift up your hands in holy horror at the idea that we give to our laity an equal vote with the bishops and clergy in all questions of doctrine. So we do. But let us look a little more closely, and not jump too suddenly to a conclusion. Nobody among us pretends that the Lord gave His commission to teach to any but the bishops and clergy — to the bishops alone abso- lutely : to the other clergy only derivatively, but yet substantially and authoritatively. That commission was not given to the laity. Wher- ever the bishops and clergy went, in primitive times, they preached and taught, and the laity received the faith from them with meekness and docility. But how is it now.^ Have the clergy received the revelation of any neio doctrine, heretofore unheard of by the laity, and which the laity would, therefore, be likely to reject ? Certainly not. Appendix, 265 Among Romanists or Dissenters there may be room for new doctrines, or new denials of old doctrines, but not among us. The only question of doctrine that can arise, is as to the clearer statement of some things which have fallen partly out of sight in the popular apprehension. And as to these, why should we fear the laity } What are they, any- how doctrinally, to the clergy but as the armature of soft iron to the magnet.^ Who has taught them what they now hold, except the bishops and clergy } If that teaching has been faithfully given, why can we not trust the laity to echo it correctly ? If that teaching has not been faithfully given, let the bishops and clergy correct themselves first, and then, within a generation or less, they will find the laity ready to go with them. It would be most unwise to legislate afresh on doc- trine, until the picked meji of the laity — those chosen for their intelligent interest in Church matters, and those alone — are sufficiently educated by the bishops and clergy to see the propriety of it. To legislate in advance of this degree of co-operation would be to ensure schism. We say thus much as to new legislation on doctrine. But there is no great cause for alarm in this direction. What we are all most con- cerned about is, to see that we lose no part of the doctrinal treasures which we still retain. Now, on our American plan, no doctrinal change can be made without the identical action of two consecutive General Conventions, each voting by its three orders ; and the want of concur- rence on the part of any ofie order (even by a tie votej, at either of those two General Conventions, is enough to defeat the change. That is to say, suppose the whole three orders were unanimous in favor of the change in 1 880, and in 1 883 the clergy and the laity were equally unanimous for it, while the House of Bishops should be equally divided, it would /rt//. If the order of bishops can be trusted, neither clergy nor laity can do any harm. If the order of clergy can be trusted, then neither the bishops nor the laity, though unanimous, can do any harm. And there may be cases when the simple slowness of the laity may save the Church from weakness or rashness on the part of both bishops and clergy. All readers of Church history will remember those terrible Arian times when " the ears of the people were more orthodox than the tongues of the priests." There is another consideration which I commend most earnestly to the notice of thoughtful men. The laity, with us, have their say on the election of every bishop, and on the candidacy and ordination of every priest and deacon, and on the parochial call of every rector of a parish. But it is also true that the clergy have their measure of influ- ence on every part of the operations of the lay order, on the selection of vestrymen in their parish, on the appointment of lay delegates to their Diocesan Convention, and on the choice of lay deputies to Gen- eral Convention. . These last are usually chosen by concurrent vote. No man can go as lay-deputy unless a majority of the clergy vote for him, as well as a majority of the laity. Neither can anyone be chosen a clerical deputy unless he receive a majority of the lay votes, as well as a majority of the clerical votes. This looks perfectly equal, and in theory is so, so that no layman can take any exception to it. But in 266 A Champion of the Cross. practice, except on very rare and extraordinary occasions, the clerical vote is the real determining power, and the lay vote, sooner or later, coincides. If a clergyman is a person of any real weight of character, his vestry is very soon just what he chooses to make it — the lay depu- ties to Convention are those whom he wishes to be sent ; and, when there, they vote as he does. Nor is this any unfair interference with their right. They have a right to act with their clerg^^man if they like ; especially when they have called him themselves, and love him, and take pleasure in agreeing with him and helping him and his influence in every way. Thus, too, in all our Church Conventions, the clergy- take part as in their life-work, which they thoroughly understand, and in which they have the effectiveness of soldiers of the regular army. The laity, however, take their part generally with far less of ready con- fidence and effectiveness. In other words, they are rather like the militia. And unless some singular want of judgment, or some un- usually mischievous element makes itself felt, the preponderance of the clergy in all that is said and done is natural and continued. Sooner or later, on our plan, the laity must, and will, take the tone which bishops and clergy give them. Whenever there is a temporar}^ discrepancy between the two orders, it is almost invariably due to one of three causes : ist. It may be owing to temporary panic, seizing upon the comparative ignorance of the laity, and exciting them to resistance before there is an opportunity to enlighten them as to the true facts of the case. All that is neces- sary is to keep cool, have patience, let the tempest in a teapot die away, and then the whole may be easily explained, and the laity will accept the explanation. 2d. It may be due to ignorance merely, with- out the panic, in which case it is even more manageable than in the other. An absence of the worry and hurry, and a little time and pa- tience, are all that is required. 3d. There may be something in the constitutional organization which has a 7iatiiral tendency to make the laity feel that they are unfairly used ; and if this be so, it is sometimes very easy to get up a very mischievous excitement. For instance : There are two modes of electing diocesan bishops among us. The Pennsylvania and Virginia method gives to the order of the clerg>' the right to nominate a man to the laity, and the latter can only say yes or 110 to the nominee of the clergy. This is giving, apparently, a very important prerogative to the clergy; and, very curiously, it prevails mainly in dioceses which were Low Church at the time when they adopted it. The other is the New York plan, by which both orders ballot simultaneously on a perfect constitutional equality, and there is no election until some one candidate has a majority of both orders at the same ballot. This is the High Church plan, and is far preferable for the reality of clerical influence. The other plan is like the silly dog in the fable, who lost the meat in order to grasp at the shadow. And this will be clearly seen on a little closer examination. If both clergy and laity really have their minds set upon one and the same individual, either mode would work the same result. But sup- pose the clergy desire a man who at first sight is not so acceptable to Appendix. 267 the laity — how then ? The feeling that this is so would be very per- ceptible before the Convention came together. Some among the lay opponents would be sure to say that " the laity don't come here merely to register the edicts of the clergy." The laity may, by a strong ma- jority, prefer some other name than the one sent down by the clergy. But they have no way by which they can manifest that preference, except by defeating every name sent down by the clergy, until the clergy shall send down the name desired. What chance is there then for the first choice of the clergy } Simply 7ione at all. The first time it is sent down it is negatived. What shall the clergy do ? Send down the same name a second time } What is likely to be the effect of that ? It is an implied rebuke to the laity — an implied suggestion that their first action was hasty, or from want of due consideration, or was prej- udiced or unjust. Is this likely to put the laity in a better humor } They are more likely to say no the second time than the first ; and it will get worse every time until the laity become perfectly unmanage- able. The first choice of the clergy (perhaps their second or third choice as well) will be defeated, and the election will probably fall upon one whom nobody desired and nobody even thought of before the con- test began. But on the other plan, the clergy having apparently no organic advantage over the laity, the two orders come together without that artificial predisposition for a disagreement. Each order votes for the man it prefers, and can show its preference, and continue to show it, ballot after ballot, as long as it pleases, without any offence being implied to the other order. If the clergy are divided into cliques, the laity will probably carry in their man. But if the clergy understand one another (a majority of them) and stand shoulder to shoulder, the laity will soon feel satisfied with the open compliment they have paid to their candidate, and will, vote by vote, come round to the clergy's candidate, until at length he is elected. The same general principle applies to any constittitional meqnalzfy between the two orders, which is not absolutely required by essential principle. To give the laity a separate vote on doctrine cannot possibly do any harm. But it may do great good, by promoting that solidarity of feeling and interest which is of inestimable value. While on the subject of elections, I cannot resist the temptation to make two practical suggestions, though they are aside from the main subject before us. The first is, that the sooner an election is held the better. " The King is dead : Long live the King ! " is the best model. Ten days were not suffered to elapse after the Ascension before St. Matthias was in the place vacated by Judas Iscariot. And when the subject was brought up, the Apostles did not leave it open for several days to give an opportunity for electioneering and canvassing and slandering, but they went into the choice at once. In all elections of bishops, the primary instinctive action is best — based, as it must then be, on Xho. already publicly known ?X2.n^xi\g of men for ability and char- acter. The most common use made of days or weeks intervening, is to give the second- and third-rate men a chance to blackball the first-rate men, who otherwise would be the spontaneous choice. So strong is my 268 A CJiampion of the Cross. feeling about this, that, if it were in my power, the law should be that the clergy and laity should attend the funeral of the dead bishop in the morning, and, on returning from the grave, go a^ once into the election of his successor, without stopping for either meat or drink ; and that any number of the clerg}- and laity thus continuing in session without any adjournment or recess for any purpose whatsoever until an election was made, should be a sufficient quorum for ,^ valid choice. The second suggestion is, that nothing fjioi'c than a simple majority of both orders present should be required in order to elect. To require, for instance, a majority of tu>o-t/iirds merely means that a little clique of about ojic-sixth of the body shall have power to defeat the majority ; the consequence is, the defeat of the strong man and the election of some one who is weak enough to have no enemies. It is our favor- ite American way of killing off (politically speaking) the natural leaders of parties, and promoting men in their places who can be more easily used. Both these suggestions would tend greatly toward luinimizing the evils naturally incident to a popular election. In decisions about doctrine, ino7-al unanimity should be required. In the election of in- dividuals to office, a simple majo7'ity is the wisest and most efficient rule. To pass now to another matter, though one of great importance — the forming of corporations for the holding and managing of Church property. They are with us almost invariably composed largely, if not of a majority, of laymen. Sometimes, as in Pennsylvania, the State law requires this. The consequence of such an arrangement would naturally be to put an end to all projects of spoliation. " Hawks will not pike out hawks' een." The idea of plundering the clergy is very attractive to some minds ; but the plundering of corporations of lay- men is a very different matter. It is then always remembered that "the rights of property are sacred." The management of Church business might, in some respects, be thus rendered more clumsy and tedious, sometimes even sluggish ; but, in the long run, the property would be safer. Look at the fate of Church property held solely in clerical hands all over the continent of Europe, and in other countries also. Clerical management secures rapid acquisition, and often to vast amounts, but is invariably followed, after a certain lapse of time, by wholesale confiscation. And this is not the effect of doctrinal differ- ences ; but it is the laity as an order taking to themselves that control of property of which the clergy, by superior finesse, had for too long a time deprived them. This lesson is taught us as clearly by Spain and Italy in the nineteenth century as by France in the eighteenth, or by England and Scotland in the sixteenth. And if the laity thus act, or- ganized as the civil government of the day, it must be remembered that this is the 07ily organization of the laity which the Church, for ages previous, had encouraged or known anything about. We have, indeed, a protection which is unknown among you. We have a written Constitution, and a Supreme Court of the United States. Our Church property has been declared to be, in so far that of private corporations (as distinguished from public corporations), Appendix. 269 that no State Legislature can, by any act of confiscation, take it away from us. And if any such Act should at any time be passed, the Su- preme Court would declare it to be " null and void," because " uncon- stitutional." The very possibility, therefore, of such a thing as disen- dowment — that is, wholesale robbery by act of the Civil Government — is inconceivable in our American system. The existence of this dan- ger among you only makes more necessary that orgastic solidarity of interests between clergy and laity which would speedily take all dreams of disendowment out of the range of " practical politics." And now let us look at the tough subject of patronage, beginning with the lower sphere of the parish clergy, and afterward proceeding to bishops. No part of our American system has called forth more constant complaints from among ourselves, or more severe criticism from else- where, than the giving to our parochial vestries the power of calling a rector, and too often, the practical power of starving him out or of driving him off when he has worn out his welcome. " The hideous vestry system," and the terrible disease of " vestryitis," have echoed and re-echoed through our newspapers, and in episcopal addresses and platform speeches, until one would think it was the worst plan of solving the patronage problem that ever was invented. Yet, instead of being the worst, it is actually the best known at the present day in any branch of the apostolic Church. At any rate, it is incomparably better than yours in England. Our system, indeed, is yet in its infancy, and has many evils to con- tend with, which are properly its own. In the first place, the English churchmen who come over as immigrants to this country, too often bring with them the idea that beyond baptisms, marriages, and funer- als, they do not need to trouble the Church at all ; or that, as there is no Church established here by law, there is none which it is at all their duty to attend. If they do attend, they are so accustomed to a clergy supported by existing endowments, that they cannot be made to feel that there is any need for them to contribute toward current expenses. Any farther interest they may show is probably in the way of fault finding or bullying, because things are not exactly as they were in the parish they came from " at home." So the English element — where any such element is to be found — is not much of a help. And too often a large part of the American element is but lately drawn in from the much more numerous and powerful sects around us ; and persons attracted to the Church only in their maturer years, are too apt to bring with them the mental habits which were those of their previous lives. Their sectarian idea always was, that the pews were the source of power ; and that it is the first duty of the pulpit to please and fill the pews ; and that, if the preacher don't do that, he ought to quit. Hardly anywhere are there any "endowments" of any sort, for the current expenses of clergy and parish. These must, somehow or other, be paid by the congregation, or by some missionary organization ; or the clergyman must starve, or live by his own private means, or leave. Now, the problem is, to compel people to support a clergyman by their 2/0 A Champion of the Cross. vohmtary offerings, when they do not choose to do it. It is possible, indeed, to put a legal remedy in the hands of a clergyman, but when he has come to the point of suing his people and levying on their prop- erty to get his salary, what good is his subsequent preaching of the Gospel likely to do, either to himself or to them ? With ancient en- dowments, the income of which would support him, independently of the good-will of the parish, the case would be different. In parishes among us that have sufficient endowments, the tenure of the rectorship is as steady and as sure as in England. These are, indeed, as yet, very few, and for the most part they are not desirable. Suppose that a clergyman — no matter for what cause — has lost his acceptableness, so that a large part of his people will no longer attend his ministrations, and that the longer he stays the worse it gets. What is the result on you7' principle ? The clerg}'man gets his living all the same, with less and less work to do. The people neglect religion altogether ; or, after a few years, seeing no hope of any speedy change in the Church, they begin to go to the Wesleyan chapel or the Independent meeting, and after ten, fifteen, twenty, or thirty years of such a " permanent rector- ship," the bulk of the population are permanently alienated from the Church. On our plan, the rector would have been starved out or driven away (I purposely use the strongest words) in a year or two at the fur- thest, and the coming of a new man would have given a chance, at least, of better satisfaction and growth for the future. It is not often, on our plan, that dissenting congregations are built up out of the ruins of our parishes. The clerg\s indeed, sometimes have a hard time of it ; but the clerg}^ exist for the sake of the people, not the people for the sake of giving a support to the clerg}^ ; and whenever the prefer- ence 7?nist be given, the interest of the flock should prevail, and the clerg}', like their Master, be content to suffer in the service — and move on. So far as my experience goes, when there is dissatisfaction in a parish, it is quite as likely to be the parson's fault as that of the people. The being in Holy Orders is no sufficient excuse for any man to dis- pense with prudence, tact, knowledge of mankind, acceptable manners, or any other good gift. And a clerg)'man is at least as much bound to show due consideration for the feelings and convictions of his people as they are for his. A neglect of these considerations wzll work ac- cording to the laws of human nature, as surely as a priest's hand, if he thrust it into the tire, will get burned. It is not best for the clergy theinselves that their income should be entirely independent of their devotion to duty. We are all human. And that we should find, when we do our duty diligently, a little more encouragement than when we neglect it altogether, will do none of us any great harm. Of course this is written, not for exceptional cases, but for the general run. Now, as it is clear that our plan, on the whole, works less harm than yours, where the priest is personally unsatisfactory, let us next look at the other side. Suppose a priest builds up his parish to an extra- ordinary degree of health and strength ; and his being made a bishop, or his accepting a call to another post of labor, or his death, should cause a vacancy, how shall it best be filled ? On our American plan, Appendix. 27 1 the vestry — generally some seven, nine, or twelve of the leading laymen of the parish, elected annually in Easter week — can call any priest of the Church in good standing, in any diocese, and no bishop has a canonical right to refuse him if he comes with clean papers. These Easter elections of vestrymen are generally mere forms. When the parish is at peace, scarce half a dozen voters ever attend, and a little judicious influence, exercised kindly by a wise rector, will in a few years give him a vestry thoroughly in harmony with himself. In case of his death, they will surely get a successor as perfectly in harmony with his tone and spirit as they can, and 7iobody can hinde}' them. If their beloved rector has gone to another field, his influence will regulate the succession almost as a matter of course. Those astonishing calami- ties which startle us so often, as happening among you — where a united, harmonious, zealous parish is scattered to the winds, or blighted in a day, by the arbitrary appointment of a new incumbent utterly out of harmony with his predecessor — are siinply impossible on our American plan. With us, therefore, the evil that a priest may do in a parish is more transient, and the good that he may do is more surely permanent, than with you. Our plan — with all its drawbacks — is better than yours in both directions. Its excellence will be equally apparent if we try it by another test. What should we put in place of it ? The favorite plan here, with those who are dissatisfied, is to give the nomination to all vacant par- ishes to the bishop of the diocese for the time being. This might do very well in ancient days, when the bishop was the channel of the direct apostolic tradition. But in our days, when we are trying to work a true spiritual reform in the Church from within, it is a totally different question. Tradition, as we all know, is of the essence of the episcopate. The instinct of bishops is almost invariably to hand down the working system of the Church just as they received it. As they are mostly elderly men by the time they are consecrated, their effort is to perpetuate the tone of the past generation, rather than to encourage that which is advancing in the present. Every reform fro7n ivithin, therefore, 7mist count tpon the bishops for its otemies for at least a whole generatio7t ; and it will be a fortunate thing if the opposition does not continue for two or three generations. And this is well, for otherwise changes would be too easy, and all stability would be de- stroyed. If the new movement be of God, it will not die out, but will only be deepened and steadied and strengthened by opposition. The long struggle will teach humility to the human instruments through whom it is carried to success. The first generation will be kept humble by opposition, denunciation, and defeats, and possibly defections and blunders. The second generation will be kept humble by knowing that, though they may reap the fruit, they did not sow the seed, or bear the burden and" heat of the day. And the final triumph will be far more permanent than if it had been more easily gained. Look at the episcopate of England to-day, with the Primate of all England (Abp, Tait) at the head of it. They are 7iozv ready unanimously to commend 2/2 A Champion of the Cross. the wonderful Church revival that began with the Oxford movement of more than forty years ago. But the episcopate of England was equally wianijuous in condciiDiing it forty years ago. And even now, though unanimously approving it, they are almost as unanimous in condemning the Ritualistic movement of to-day, which is as insepar- ably connected with the other as the butterfly is with the caterpillar. If the nomination to vacant parishes, therefore, be given to the bishops, every possible reform of the Church from within will be smothered in embryo. To urge other considerations, from the danger of family jobs for sons or sons-in-law, or cousins, or partisan friends, or the like, is needless. You all know much more about those things in England than we do here ; not that our bishops here are any better than yours by nature ; but here a kind Providence gives them no chance to do any thing of that sort — thanks to our vestry system. Another plan of providing for the patronage is to give it to a central board, whether clergy or laity, or both, or to them jointly with the bishop. The inevitable working of this plan is, to give the preference to the mean avej-age, and to taboo all " extreme men " of every school. The tendency of this is to increasing narrowness, generation after generation. Extreme men are of the greatest value, because they keep the arms of a true comprehensiveness wide open. A bishop might possibly, now and then, be brought to regard extreme men with some favor ; but a central board, never ! The guaranty of our comprehen- siveness is, therefore, the freedom of vestries in making their own calls, just as, with you, it is an incidental benefit resulting from the present anomalous condition of Church patronage among you. But our form of it is the safer, and with less danger of abuse. We have no Dean Stanley. We have no Stopford Brooke. If the power is to be lodged neither with the bishop nor with a central board, so a combination of the two would be worse than either alone, for it would ensure all the faults of both, and give no chance for the good points which might possibly be found now and then in either the one or the other. Of course, if a bishop be of the right sort, one who knows how to win and keep the confidence of his people, he will be consulted in many, if not in all, cases of vacancies in his diocese, and his advice will be practically equivalent to a nomination. But if a bishop be of the right sort, he will have this influence anyhow, and no canon could take it away from him. If he be 7iot of the right sort, no canon ought to give it to him, for he could never be trusted to make the right use of it. In a country like ours, the idea that the right of nomination to vacant parishes should be bought and sold in open market, or run with the possession of a certain estate, is of course out of the question. Now, if the right is not to be given to the bishop, nor to a central board, nor to one private individual, to whom can it be entrusted but to a local board, the leading persons of the congregation concerned — in other words, the vestry ? They are personally the most deeply inter- ested. They are to receive their spiritual ministrations from the priest appointed. They are to benefit by, or suffer from, his personal pecul- Appendix. 273 iarities. They 3Mt to furnish his income by voluntary contributions out of their own pockets. T/icy are more directly interested, therefore, than bishop, central board, and all other parties put together. To in- trust the selection of the priest to them, therefore, must necessarily be the safest and the least liable to objection of all modes thinkable. Nor is it correct to say that this really involves the absurdity of the taught choosing their own teacher, the sheep ruling their own shep- herd. It does no such thing. No person is eligible, by any vestry, until he has been duly examined by the canonical authorities and sol- emnly ordained to the priesthood by a bishop, that ordination being, on the lowest view, the certificate of the episcopal order that that priest is canonically qualified and fit to take charge of any cure of souls to which he may be called ; and so long as that priest is "in good and regular standing," that position " is a standing, guarantee to the same effect." When any vestry calls any priest, then, they simply take the bishops at their word, that the priest is a proper man to be called. As to all the infinite variety of points touching personal appearance, voice, manner, character, tone of theology, grade of ritual, and what not — all of which are within the canonical comprehensiveness of the Church — the parish is a better judge of what it really wants than anybody else ; and to trust it to make its own selection, by its own vestry, is less likely to be seriously abused, than to trust the power of selection to any other party or parties less directly interested in making 2i good q\\o\z^. (The idea of a popular election by all the communicants of a parish, is open to objections of another kind, and has no friends on this side of the water in our Church.) But the toughest and most important part of the patronage problem is, the selection of the persons to be consecrated bishops. Now, in theory, the bishops are the rightful, original, perpetual, indefeasible chief rulers of the Church — the one channel through which alone our historic succession from the Apostles can be demonstrated — the one channel through which alone a valid ordination can be obtained by any priest or deacon. Ecclesia est in episcopo. If any true representa- tives of the Church can be found anywhere, they should — in theory — be the bishops. And the bishops themselves are never weary of re- asserting this, their traditional position, and claiming the fulness of their traditional power. But when there is a conflict of true interests between the Church and the civil government, where — since the revolu- tion of 1688 — have your bishops always been found.? Suppose that the relations between England and France were such, that all nomina- tions for promotion in the British army were to be made only by the king or emperor or president of France, and a war should break out between the two countries, how many victories would be won by the British armies ? In every such contest, except only the immortal seven in the reign of James II., your bishops have, as a body, invariably sold you out to the e7ie7ny. And nothing is more natural. The priestly power which they received from the Church, they shared equally with twenty thousand other priests. The honor of being selected to be a bishop, they owe, not to the Church, but to the Prime Minister of the 18 274 A Champio7i of the Cross. day ; and, like human beings, they are grateful to the power that made them. It is not only that they always take Caesar's side ; but it is the calm and serene unconsciousness that there ever can be any difference between Cesar's interests and those of God, that is amazing to the churchly mind. Look, for the crowning instance, at the way in which the judicial and disciplinary powers, inherent in the episcopal office from the beginning, and maintained more or less clearly through all the ages down to the year 1879, were then coolly, nay eagerly, 7nade a pj-esoit of to Parliament and a purely Parliamentary judge ! And now the whole episcopate is howling with indignation and rage at the faith- ful priests who are willing to go to jail in the hope of recovering, to these treacherous prelates, that precious jewel of their order, which they had themselves so shamefully, nay, shamelessly, thrown away ! No measure for Church Reform is worth thinking of which does not include — if indeed it does not begin at — the restoring to the Church the selection of her own bishops. And 3-et this seems to be a matter in which the waters have yet hardly begun to stir. Years ago, when the new sees were first spoken about, with an endowment to be provided by private individuals entirely, it seemed as if the time were surely at hand for a change. If the Government funds had provided the endow- ment, it would have been natural enough for the Government to nom- inate the new bishop as usual. But that Government should give not one penny, but should regnij'c an endowment to be raised of from ^20,000 to ^80,000; that all ih'xs, should be paid in out of the pockets of private individuals, and that Government should then impudently pocket the patronage created by private liberality — in advance — seemed to be inpossible. And yet it took place as easily as if it were " all right." To me, it was simply amazing. But what remedy is possible .'' It clearly will not do to restore an absolute right of choice to the cathedral chapters, reduced as they are, and appointed in such a way as to make them no better representatives of the Church than the bishops themselves. It will not do to abolish l\\t conge d'eli7-e — the last faint reminiscence of the former rights of the Church, thus kept alive as a hope for the future. It will not do to have bishops made merely by letters patent, and thus abandon the Church's ancient right altogether. To attempt to alter the law may at present be unwise, as it would probably be unsuccessful. But a sen- sible Prime ^Minister, who feels the delicate and difficult responsibility of the nomination of bishops, might easily find a way to cut the Gor- dian knot. When a see was vacant, or a new see erected, he might say, officially, that the one name presented to him before such a day by a majority of the clergy and laity of the diocese concerned, voting by orders and by ballot, should be the name inserted in the letter mis- sive that accompanied the coiige d'elire. This mode of settling Jiis own choice of the iridividual would be so popular in the Church at large, that no successor would dare to depart from the precedent thus set. And the old forms, with a new soul in them, might go on until the reorganization of the Church could make the process a little more direct. Appendix, 275 But take care not to be deluded by any proposal that the Church shall send in two or three names, of which the Prime Minister shall select oiie. So long as the selection of a name is to be left to him in any measure or degree, he is sure to choose the one that the State can rely on, rather than the Church ; and the Church will continue to be cheated in the result. Let there then be one name ; and as the Church has done all the choosing, she will have a fair chance to secure fidelity in the one chosen. Remember how the Pope manages to amuse his priests with allowing them to send him three names for a vacant epis- copate, and then he chooses one of them — or some one else whom he likes better. The actual determining as to the particular individual, en- sures the inner allegiance. This asking for a nominee on the part of clergy and laity presup- poses some organization of the laity by the vohmtary act of the Church. This is the best way for it to originate, rather than to wait for an Act of Parliament to constitute the lay body, as in the case of the Church of Ireland. If the Church begins it, she can easily insist, from the first, that none shall be eligible except regular communicants. In this point we made one of our many blunders, not corrected yet, in all our Diocesan Conventions, but amended years ago in regard to our Gen- eral Convention, which alone deals with doctrine. When the body of laity is thus constituted by the Church, and in working order, no act of disestablishment would venture to set it aside or constitute another and a different lay body. The proposal of the Convocation of Canterbury for the establishment of a " Provincial House of Laymen " is very good as far as it goes, but it would not be found as effective, if meeting and debating separately from the clergy, and only on certain points. Co-ordinate powers and position, meeting and debating in one body, but with the vote by orders as the protection to each order, is the true thing to aim for. The provin- cial idea, also, does not go far enough. One great cause of the deadlock of Church machinery in England is the existence of only two provinces, one of which is so numerous that it is constantly tempted to feel as if it were the whole ; while the other is so small, that it is tempted to pursue an obstructive course, if for no other reason than to prevent its being overslaughed altogether. If the Welsh dioceses were reconsti- tuted into a province, with an Archbishop of St. David's at their head, it certainly would not hinder the revival of Church growth, now so happily begun within that Principality. And if two or three other provinces were erected within the present overgrown province of Can- terbury, there would then be less obstruction from mutual jealousies, and every one would then feel the necessity of having one national synod in which the entire English Church should act as a unit — bishops, clergy, and laity. To this alone should the delicate work of legislatio7i be intrusted. On our American plan, where each petty Diocesan Convention makes its own "constitutions" and body of " canons " (subject, of course, to those of the General Convention), the work of so-called " legislation " is run into the ground. There is one most important point to be touched on, which I have 2/6 A Champion of the Cross. never so much as seen any allusion to, in all \'Our discussions on the subject. There has been plenty said, indeed, about the danger of an imperhun i7i imperio. Some years ago I read the report of a speech by a leading Non-conformist, who declared himself entirely opposed to the disestablishment of the Church of England. He acknowledged that it would be greatly to the benefit of the spiritual life and vigor of the Church to be set free from the State : " But," he asked, " what in that case would become of the liberties of the Stated The Church would embrace more than a majority of the people in one organization ; and religious zeal being a stronger motive generally than any ordinary political object, no Parliament of England would ever be able to resist the Church. " To preserve the independence of the State," he said, " he must continue to oppose the idea of restoring freedom to the Church." I have never seen any attempt to answer the objection. , Yet there is an answer. The history of the Church shows a general, and seemingly irresist- ible tendency, on the part of purely clerical synods, to get into conflicts with the civil power for supremacy. During the whole mediaeval period (and the Papacy is merely a prolongation of that, in its worst features) the feudal system culminated instinctively in one visible head. If two men will ride on one horse, one must ride behind. Both the Pope and the Emperor were determined to ride first ; and neither was willing to ride behind the other. The modern theory is truer and better in every way. It is to separate the spheres, so that each shall be supreme in his (nun sphere ; and that there should be wise and careful and kindly co-operation where the spheres overlap. The development of modern civilization shows, more and more, that if there is to be one master, it will not be the Pope, much less any other cleric. His ancient domineering over kings and kaisers has so far changed, that there is not now an emperor, king, or president anywhere in the whole world to lift a musket for him, or to care for all the anathemas or interdicts he may be foolish enough to utter. No purely clerical legislative body will now be tolerated anywhere in the civilized world. Now, the true operation of the laity, when admitted into fully co-or- dinate position in all Church synods with the clerg}% will be to destroy all probability of dangerous collisions beweeeji the Church and the State. And the reason will be clear^ on a little reflection. In all free countries Government necessarily assumes the form of government by party. In every National Church, the lay members, as well as the clerical, will be attached more or less to both political parties. But in the case of the clerg}', the religious interests are so entirely predominant, that it would not be difficult, on grounds of conscience (or what seems to be such in times of excitement), to produce a corporate resistance to some legitimate exertion of power on the part of the State. The case as to the laity, however, is very different. In a body of such vast im- portance as the National Synod of England, it would only be natural and proper, and mdeed inevitable, that Churchmen of great national eminence should, from both parties in national politics, be sent as lay deputies to the synod. Now, the life-calling of the laymen, in cases Appendix. 277 like these, is practical politics. They are professional experts in this direction, just as the clergy are professional experts in the direction of doctrine, discipline, worship, and Cathohc tradition generally. In case any measure were proposed that would have an undue political bearing, if it were one that the Conservatives could make something of, some Liberal laymen would be found to object instantly : and if it be one that would help the Liberals, some Conservative laymen w^ould be equally on the watch. When the laymen were all united, it would be clear that the Government ought to, and would respect the conscien- tious convictions of so large a body of the people, of both parties. The operation of this has often been most beneficially manifested in our General Conventions, where Judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, Senators of the United States, Governors of States, Members of Congress, or those who have once filled such offices, often come as simple lay-deputies from the dioceses in which they reside, and give to the Church the benefit of their experience of a lifetime. The whole- some effect of it always is to teach prudence and propriety, and to keep the Church from meddling, though with the best of motives, in that which is really none of her business. Thus, with the laity in their proper co-ordinate position, the anticipated difficulties of an imperiuni in imperio would never occur. The laity would be a perpetual y?z/.r, by which the constitutional antagonisms of the clergy and the State would be reduced, melted, moulded, moderated, compromised, or en- tirely removed. The importance of this consideration cannot be exag- gerated. The large proportion of laymen with national reputations that would be brought together in any meeting of a synod representing the entire Church of England, would at once command the perfect confidence of all Englishmen, that no such body would ever run amuck against the legitimate powers of the British Parliament. Such a position, given to such laymen, would likewise render disen- dowment — except perhaps a few cheese-parings of sinecures and such like — morally impossible. Neither party would venture to advocate it, for fear of bringing down upon them a greater loss of political power than they could possibly make up by gains in any other quarter through a policy of spoliation. With the laity in Synod, the whole nation could easily be made to see that disendowment meant really that one part of the laity should rob another part of the laity by act of Parliament. And when that was seen, it would not be done, it could not be done. And now for a few general considerations in closing. Ever since the time of Constantine, wherever there has been no form of Church organization to secure to the Church laity their proper influence, the lay power, organized as the civil government, has domi- neered over the Church from the outside, and every now and then plundered her by .wholesale, besides insisting on the right to control the promotion to all her chief offices. The natural leaders and consti- tutional rulers of the Church, in all these ages, have been under first mortgage to her most formidable enemy. The struggle to regain some- thing, has led the Church to submit to the Papacy on the continent ; 278 A Champion of the Cross. and the degradation of religion on all sides has led to continental infidelity and communism. In England, after the papal difficulty had been gotten rid of, the other was intensified, until the results — though not so deep-seated, acrid, and inveterate as on the continent — are nevertheless so vast as to stagger the power of apprehension. If she had merely retained the ground she held at the opening of the Reformation, with its natural increase, making no fresh conquests, only think what the British Church would now be ! But the terrible loss of spiritual flexibility and power involved in her " established " relations with the State, has cost her nearly the whole of Scotland, four-fifths of Ireland, nearly the entire mass of the great Protestant sects that dominate this country, and nearly one-half of the home population in England besides ! What further proof of the " great advantages of our establishment " do sen- sible men require } On the other hand, the poor little Church of Scotland, almost exter- minated by her connection with the State, is reviving to a wonderful degree, a majority of her sees having either built or begun cathedrals within the present generation. The Church of Ireland {fit experimenttim in corpore vili'), brought to an almost intolerable degree of degradation by her State connection, has been mending ever since it ceased. Remember the bear-garden at the beginning of her synodical sessions, with Lord James Butler as high-cockalorum of the Protestants on the rampage, and the terrible threatenings of what " the laity " were going to do with the " remnants of Popery " in the Prayer-book ! But being compelled to meet the clergy face to face, in equal discussion, year after year (though the clergy were nothing to boast of as a whole), the Irish laity have been learning, year by year, what nobody could make them learn before. And slowly, but steadily, the tone of the whole body has been rising, until, when the "revision" was completed, those were least satisfied with the result who themselves had set the ball in motion. And if the bishops and clergy had only been a little more firm in the use of their vote by orders, the result might have been somewhat better still. But if the experiment has worked well, even in Ireland, it cannot possibly work otherwise than well in any other part of the Church. In this country, notwithstanding our long colonial asphyxiation, when the Church was deliberately smothered by the State for State purposes ; notwithstanding the fact that she was well-nigh extinct at the close of the Revolutionary War, loaded with political as well as religious obloquy, and that it was a whole generation before even the gift of the episcopate brought back to her the signs of returning life ; notwithstanding the fact that we have faithfully copied as many of your blunders as we could, besides making others of our own ; notwithstand- ing our " hideous vestr}- system," our non-communicant membership of vestries and conventions, and faulty tenure of Church property ; notwithstanding our imperfect judicial system ; our failure, thus far, to establish provinces, our feebleness of plan in having the senior bishop by consecration as the presiding bishop of our national Church, and Appendix. 279 other drawbacks too numerous to mention — we have, nevertheless, during nearly a century since our full organization, been gaining steadily on our growth of population, even although that growth is the most rapid that the world has ever seen, and although it is so largely made up of foreign elements which are, for a generation or two, almost wholly beyond our reach. Nay, more than this : our influence has per- ceptibly modified every other leading variety of religion in this country, so that the general movement, which is more or less perceptible, is steadily and predominantly a movement toward us. We are the evi- dent centre of gravity of all the varieties of Christianity now known in the land. Your own colonial Churches all tell the same story, each in its own proportion and degree. Not one of them has failed to give the laity an organic place and co-ordinate position. Not one of them has lost in strength, zeal, power, or tone of Churchmanship. All have gained. And let me appeal specially to the experience of advanced men at home. What would the whole movement of the great CathoHc revival have been without the laity .'' Where would have been the enormous gifts for churches, church schools, and all manner of good works, that have made the Anglican Church during the past forty years the marvel of Christendom, without the laity .^ Where would have been your two " fighting " societies — the English Church Union and the Church of England Working Men's Association — without the laity } They have proved themselves, in every way, fit to be trusted. Then trust them. And how can you hesitate ? Your secular lay power now monopo- lizes — practically in entire independence of the bishops and clergy — the absolute control of Church legislation. Church discipline, and the ap- pointment to high office in the Church ; and even impudently claims the power of legislation on doctrine without consulting the Convocation ; besides constantly threatening you with that wholesale confiscation of which they have given you more than one specimen in former days. Your alternative is to grant to the Church laity, organized as such, an ttndivided third part of that power which is now tyrannically usurped in its entirety by the secular lay pow^r — an undivided third part, to be exercised at every point, under the supervising influence, and modified by the indispensable co-operation of, the two orders of bishops and clergy : and yet you hesitate ! Anyhow, whether you advocate it or not, the change is coming. It will soon be on you, whether or no. Resistance is useless. By resist- ance you may force it into some very undesirable position. By boldly and fearlessly going _/(9r it, you can ensure its being realized in its best shape, and reap the earlier benefit from its triumph. It should be the first point, the chief point, in your " plan of campaign," instead of being omitted altogether, or left to drift along at the mercy of a " fortuitous concourse of atoms." In short, with the laity properly organized by the voluntary action of" the Church, and that position subsequently recog- nized, directly or indirectly, by the State, the benefits of disestablish- ment would be substantially gained already, and disendowment would be made well-nigh impossible. 28o A Champion of the Cross. It is with the utmost diffidence that I submit these thoughts to the brave brethren who are dearest to me in England. The venture would not be made but for the reflection that one who lives close under the base of a lofty mountain seldom sees its shape, because the nearer, though lower, foot-hills shut out the sight. Only one who views it from a certain distance can truly delineate its outline of grandeur and beauty. If this thought will not plead my excuse, I would then urge that I have resisted for many years the desire to write on this subject, and only at last have reluctantly executed my task. If even this will not bring me pardon for taking the liberty to write as I have done, I shall be content to accept the rebukes of my English brethren in loving silence, and trouble them with no further intrusion hereafter. John Henry Hopkins. WiLLIAMSPORT, Pa., January 2o, i88i. LETTERS OF DR. R. F. LITTLEDALE. Dr. Hopkins was sometimes called " the American Littledale," and, in some points, there was a certain likeness between them. Yet the comparison is unjust to them both. The two carried on a regular and ver}^ frequent correspondence. Very many of Littledale's notes were written in Latin on postal cards, and signed Parva Vallis ; i.e.. Little Dale. Some of these were astonishing in the audacity of combina- tions and rhymes. The first of the letters here given relates to Dr. Hopkins' article, " Three Points," in the beginning. The latter part of it has a refer- ence appropriate to Hopkins' article on " The Laity in England and America." There was no possibility of reconciling the views of the two priests upon this point. Dr. Hopkins stood almost alone among high Churchmen in justifying the present relations of the laity toward the legislation of the Church. " 5o^a Sunday, 1888. " My Dear Dr. Hopkins : Yes, I had worked out all three of your points, the wilfulness of the Reformed breach with Episcopacy, the mainly political character of Elizabeth's penal code, and the compara- tive slightness of Anglican failures. I particularly noted that as to the last point, the respectability of Quakerism and Methodism, the two sects to which the Anglican Church has given birth, when compared with those which have sprung out of the Church of Rome — a strong point in our favor. " I can give you Roman Catholic testimony in favor of No. 2, should you wish to deal more fully with the matter on some future occasion. " I hope your move to Burlington will give you strength as well as leisure for Church work of a literar>^ kind. The Erastianism of the American Church, far more subtle, searching, and dangerous than our Appendix. 281 English Erastianism — I mean, of course, the lay synodical vote — the ' call ' system, and the power of the vestries, is the rampant evil which now most needs to be extirpated. The plea that the laity cannot carry a vote against the bishops and presbyters breaks down when stated conversely that the bishops and clergy cannot carry a vote against the laity, though the matter might be the attempted condemnation of some heresy — say spiritualism — that chanced to be widely popular amongst lay folks, and to which the Church would be virtually committed by the failure to condemn. That is the ultimate difficulty that no plaus- ible defence of the lay vote can get round ; it places the powers of teaching, binding, and loosing in the wrong hands ; wrong as uncom- missioned by Xt., wrong as incompetent for lack of necessary knowl- edge. Upset this, and your name will rank with Seabury's as a bene- factor to the American Church. I am in bad health, rather more so than usual, but I hope I may say ' Faint, yet pursuing.' " " Rogation Monday, 1889. " My Dear Dr. Hopkins : I am very glad to know that you will review my * Petrine Claims,' because you will know where the salient points really are, and will make the public know them too. Kindly emphasize what I say in my Preface of the legal nature of the argu- ment, and the relative subordination of theology throughout, as delib- erate, and not resulting from oversight. . . . " I am much interested just now in a revision of the Scottish Liturgy which is on foot. I have sent in many suggestions, but I have no guess how they will be received. The draft is more tentative and timid than I quite like, but I admit the difficulties in the way of the heroic method of treatment, especially as the English bishops have to be conciliated on issues where the English rite needs pulling up. Thanks for sending me Dr. Richey's Parables'' Ecce nova forma chartas Orientali ex parte Factae Britannorum arte, Tarn Mercurio quam Marte, Rhythmis, quos hie vides, fortas Denarii pretio et quarts (Viles census etiam spartia) Missa ab Hetrasco, Larte, Tibi, Joanni Henrico, Cui millies salvere dico, Mirandula doctiori Pico, Meo tamen et amico, Maneas ut semper talis Hie precatur parva Vallis. Dab. Kal. Julii., mdccclxxv." 282 A CJianipioJi of the Cross. Dr. Hopkins to Dr. Littledale. Felix es, O Pan^a Vallis ! Tuta semper sis a malis ! Sint tutamen tibi montes, Tibi fluant vivi fontes, Tui rores, tui flores, " Tui redolent odores, Tamenetsi tuse rosas — Manibus in Puritanis, Infidelibus, profanis, — Aliquantulam spinosae : Kal. Sep., mdccclxxv. — Plattsburg, N. Y. "THREE POINTS." An Essay read before the Associate Alumni of the General Theologi- cal Seminary, in the Seminary Chapel, New York, May 31, 1887. For many years three points have presented themselves to my mind with great force, in considering the relations of different parts of Chris- tendom to one another, and yet I do not remember having ever seen that attention paid to them which they seem to me to deserve. Nor shall I be able to do them justice now. The full consideration of them would require far more of time and of books than a country parson can command, and far more of opportunity to listen than our brief annual meeting could afford. All I can do, therefore, is to set before you a few sketch-like hints, which, perhaps, some one having more leisure and learning may work up hereafter in a manner not now possible to me. I. The first of these three points is in regard to the loss of Apostolic order in the Reformation movement on the continent — the chief point of organic difference between the Anglican Reformation and the others. It is commonly said that this loss was a matter of necessity — that they had to do without bishops on the continent because none of the bishops would take part with the Reformers. The point I would make is that, historically, this is not true. There were bishops enough to have preserved the Apostolic succession for them, if they had cared to do it ; and the neglect was, therefore, due to other causes. The full proof of this can hardly be given without a minute search of the more diffuse records of the times ; for our general historians would hardly stop to notice facts which are not in the front rank of importance from their point of view. The facts which I shall lay be- fore you are gathered mainly from Reverend Henry M. Baird's " His- tory of the Rise of the Huguenots of France " — a work in two octavo volumes, covering- the history of only sixty-two years in all, and thus affording unusual room for minuteness of detail, although Mr. Baird is not a Churchman, and does not dream of making out the point of which he so unconsciously furnishes the evidence. The two who are named first among the French Reformers are the learned Lefevre, of Etaples, and the ardent Farel. The third, he says, was Guillaume Brigonnet, Bishop of Meaux. His father had been a cardinal, as well as' Abbot of St. Germain-des-Pres, and Archbishop of Rheims, and had anointed Louis XII. at his coronation. As cardinal he had headed the French party in the Conclave, and in the service of his king had faced the dangers of an open quarrel with the Pope. 284 A Champion of the Cross. The cardinal was now dead, having left to Guillaume — born before his father had taken Holy Orders — a good measure f that royal favor which he had himself enjoyed. He was made Archdeacon of Rheims and of Avignon, Abbot of St. Germain-des-Pres, and lastly, Bishop of Lodeve and of Meaux. He showed early his reforming tendencies by his efforts to make the luxurious inmates of St. Germain observe better discipline. Brigonnet was appointed Bishop of Meaux in March, 1516, and about the same time was sent by Francis I. as special envoy to treat with the Pope. He had been at Rome on similar business in the time of Louis XII. The knowledge thus gained of the way in which things were done at Rome, convinced him of the urgent need of reform ; and he resolved to begin the work in his own diocese. He invited both Lefevre and Farel to make their home at Meaux ; and they came, followed soon by Michel d' Arande, Gerard Roussel, and others of the same sort. " A new era," says Baird, " now dawned upon the neglected diocese of Meaux. Bishop Briconnet was fully possessed by his new-born zeal. The king's mother and his only sister had honored him with a visit not long after Lefevre's arrival, and had left him, confident of their powerful support in his intended reforms, " I assure you," Margaret of Angouleme wrote him, not a month later, "that the King and Madame are entirely decided to let it be understood that the truth of God is not heresy." And a few weeks later, the same princely correspondent wrote that her mother and brother were " more intent than ever upon the reformation of the Church." The effect of the new preaching at Meaux was great. The wool-carders, weavers, and fullers accepted it with delight ; the day-laborers flocked from the neighborhood at har\^est-time, and carried back the new enthusiasm to their secluded homes. Bishop Briconnet himself was active in promot- ing the evangelical work, preaching against the most flagrant abuses, and commending the other preachers whom he had invited. He actu- ally said to his flock : " Even if I, your bishop, should change my speech and teaching, beware that you change not with me ! " Under Briconnet's protection Lefevre made and published (in 1523) a translation of the New Testament, and then of the whole Bible, into French, which was earlier than a similar work was done in England. The bishop freely supplied copies to those who were too poor to buy. He introduced the French Scriptures into the churches of Meaux, where the innovation of reading the lessons in a tongue that they could under- stand astounded the common people. The delighted Lefevre wrote to a distant friend : " You can scarcely imagine with what ardour God is moving the minds of the simple in some places to embrace His Word, since the books of the New Testament have been published in French. . . , At present, throughout our entire diocese, on feast-days, and especially on Sundays, both the Epistle and Gospel are read to the people in the vernacular tongue, and the parish priest adds a word of exhortation to the Epistle or Gospel, or both, at his discretion." All this was far stronger encouragement than the great Catholic revival of our own day ever received from any bishop in its earlier days. True, stern and formidable opposition soon arose. Briconnet was cited be- Appendix. 285 fore the Parliament of Paris to answer, in secret session, before a com- mission. He was dealt with in such wise as to break his courage, and stop the public instruction of his people in the Holy Scriptures. He was acquitted of the charge of heresy, indeed, though they made him pay two hundred livres as the expense of bringing to trial the heretics whom he had helped to make. A man converted in that way is very likely to be " of the same opinion still." But Brigonnet was not the only bishop who sympathized with re- form. He was a noble as well as a bishop ; but the same side was taken by one nobler than he, and higher both in Church and State. This was Odet de Coligny, the elder brother of Admiral de Coligny, and of D'Andelot, of the blood royal, who was created Cardinal of Chatillon at the early age of thirteen, and afterward Archbishop of Toulouse, and Bishop and Count of Beauvais. As early as 1551 he was pretty well known to be in sympathy with the Lutherans. In Easter week, 1561, there were outbreaks of violence against the Prot- estants in many parts of France, one of the most noted of which was at Beauvais, Chatillon's own cathedral. He had openly fostered the preachers of reform in his diocese. " But," says Baird, " even the per- sonal popularity of the brother of Coligny and D'Andelot could not, in the present instance, secure immunity for the preachers who proclaimed the gospel under his auspices. The occasion was a rumor spread abroad that the cardinal, instead of attending the public celebration of the Mass in his cathedral church, had, with his domestics, participated in a private communion in his own palace, and that every communicant had, at the hands of the Abbe Boutillier, received both elements ' after the fashion of Geneva.' Hereupon the mob, gathering in great force, assailed a private house in which there lived a priest accused of teach- ing the children the doctrines of religion from the reformed catechisms. The unhappy Adrien Fourre — such was the schoolmaster's name — was killed ; and the rabble, rendered more savage through their first taste of blood, dragged his corpse to the public square, where it was burned by the city hangman. Chatillon himself incurred no little risk of meet- ing a similar fate. But the strength of the episcopal palace, and the sight of their bishop clothed in his cardinal's costume, appeased the mob for the time ; and before the morrow came a goodly number of the neighboring nobles had rallied to his defence." Surely, one of the most striking incidents of those strange days was to see a Roman car- dinal receiving the Huguenot communion, and afterward masquerad- ing in his cardinal's vestments to prevent his being torn in pieces by the rabble of his own people for the act ! Again, in the preparations for the famous Colloquy of Poissy, in the same year, 1561, when the assembled bishops were about to join in the Holy Eucharist, we read that " Cardinal Chatillon and two other bishops insisted upon commu- nicating under both forms ; and when their demand was refused, they went to another church and celebrated the Divine Ordinance with many of the nobility, all partaking both of the bread and of the wine, thus earning for themselves the nickname of Protestants." Two years later, 1563, Pius IV. issued a bull, calling for summary 286 A Champion of the Cross. proceedings against sundry French bishops, Cardinal Chatillon being at the head of the Hst, followed by seven others ; but as he was rash enough to insert the name of the Queen of Navarre also, the French court made such a vigorous response that the bull was either recalled or dropped, and the proceedings against the bishops were indefinitely suspended. In the year 1565, the Pope's new Nuncio demanded that the red cap should be taken from the Cardinal of Chatillon. But the latter, who chanced to be at court, replied that " what he enjoyed, he enjoyed as the gift of the Crown of France, with which the Pope had nothing to do." And his uncle, the old Constable, was even more emphatic. " The Pope," said he, " has often troubled the quiet of this realm, but I trust he shall not be able to trouble it at this time. I am myself a Papist, but if the Pope and his ministers go about again to disturb the kingdom, my szoord shall be Huguenot. My nephew shall give up neither cap nor dignity which he has for the Pope, seeing the King's edict gives him liberty to keep them." Three years later, in 1 568, it seems that Cardinal Chatillon had been excommunicated by the Pope, condemned of schism, and was dead in the eyes of the law, and Catherine de ^ledici had promised to surrender him into the Pope's hands. Chatillon had come to court, under the King's safe-conduct, to treat for peace after the second civil war. Cardinal Santa Croce, the Nuncio, entering the council-chamber, boldly demanded the performance of Catherine's promise then and there. Catherine did not deny the promise, but said that this was an unsuit- able time for its fulfilment, owing to the King's safe-conduct. To this the Nuncio replied that no respect ought to be had toward Chatillon, for he was an excommunicated person, condemned of schism, and dead in the eyes of the law. At this point the Due de Montmorency broke out : " IVIadame, is it possible that the Cardinal Chatillon's delivery should come in question, being warranted by the King and your Majesty to the contrary, and I myself being made a mean therein ? Wherefore this matter is odious to be talked of, and against the law of arms and of all good civil policy ; and I must needs repute them my enemies who go about to make me falsify my promise once made." After these plain words Santa Croce departed, without attaining his most cruel and dishonorable request. Later in the same year, 1 568, it was in contemplation to seize Chatil- lon in his episcopal palace at Beauvais. The third civil war was then raging. But he received timely warning, and escaped through Nor- mandy to England, where Queen Elizabeth received him at court with marks of distinguished favor. He succeeded in getting Elizabeth to send substantial help to his distressed friends in France. In 1 570, about two months after the declaration of peace, Cardinal Chatillon, who had been deprived by the Pope of his seat in the Roman conclave, had also been declared by the Parliament of Paris, on motion of the Cardinal Bourbon, to have lost his bishopric of Beauvais on account of his rebellion and his adoption of Protestant sentiments. All such judicial proceedings had indeed been declared null and void Appendix. 287 by the terms of the royal pacification ; but the parliaments were very reluctant to yield obedience to the royal edict. The King sent orders to the first president of the Parliament to wait upon him with the records. And when, after a second summons, they were brought, the King, with his own hands, tore out and destroyed every page that con- tained any action against the Cardinal Chatillon. But we must be brief in other cases ; for these were not all. We find mention made of Michel d'Arande, who was Bishop of Saint-Paul- Trois-Chateaux, in Dauphiny, and yet sympathized entirely with the Reformers, and was in confidential intercourse with them ; also of Gerard Roussel, who was appointed by the Queen of Navarre to be her preacher and confessor, and rose to be Abbot of Clairac and Bishop of Oleron ; yet he remained to his death a sincere friend of the Refor- mation. In his own diocese he set the example of a faithful pastor. Even so bitter an enemy of Protestantism as Florimond de Raemond, contrasting Roussel's piety with the wordliness of the sporting French bishops of the period, is forced to admit that " his pack of hounds was the crowd of poor men and women whom he daily fed ; his horses and attendants a host of children whom he caused to be instructed in letters." Another prelate is mentioned, the Bishop of Senlis, as being so much in favor with the Queen of Navarre that he translated for her into French the Book of Hours, omitting all that most directly coun- tenanced superstition. We read also of Cardinal Sadolet, Bishop of Carpentras, who readily certified to the falsity of the charges made against the Waldenses, exerted his influence with the vice-legate to induce him to abandon an attack on one of their villages, and assured the inhabitants that he firmly intended, in a coming^visit to Rome, to secure the reformation of some incontestable abuses. Another prelate we read of, Chatellain, Bishop of Macon, who was at one time favorable to the Reformation, though his courage was not equal to his convictions. Much better known, however, was Montluc, Bishop of Valence, who, in 1 560, when the Huguenots petitioned for liberty of worship, was their warmest and most uncompromising advocate. . . . This bold and eloquent harangue of the Bishop of Valence was followed, in the same discussion, by one still more cogent from the aged and virtuous Maril- lac. Archbishop of Vienne. He urged that " it was vain to expect a General Council, since between the Pope, the Emperor, the Kings, and the Lutherans, the right time and place and method of holding it could never be agreed upon by all ; and France w^as like a man desperately ill, whose fever admitted of no such delay as that a physician be called in from a distance. Hence the usual resort to a National Council, in spite of the Pope's discontent, was imperative. France could not afford to die in order to please his Holiness. Meanwhile, the prelates must be obliged to reside in their dioceses, nor must the Italians — those leeches that .absorbed one-third of all the benefices and an infinite number of pensions — be exempted from the operation of the general rule. Simony must be abolished at once, as a token of sincerity in the desire to reform the Church," etc., etc. 288 A Champion of the Cross. Besides all these, we find Du Val, Bishop of Seez, in Normandy, mentioned in the same group with Bishop Montliic, and that Abbe Boutillier who administered the Holy Communion in Genevan fashion to Cardinal Chatillon. A very high authority gives us some other names. It is the bull of Pius W ., already mentioned, in which, after Cardinal Chatillon, he adds Romain, Archbishop of Aix ; Montluc, Bishop of Valence ; Gelais, Bishop of Uzes ; Roussel, Bishop of Oleron ; D'Albret, Bishop of Les- cure ; Giullart, Bishop of Chartres ; and Caraccioli, Bishop of Troyes, who had resigned his bishopric, and had been ordained a Protestant pastor — eight prelates in all. Besides all these, Jervis, in his " History of the Galilean Church," gives us the names of Jacques Spifame, Bishop of Nevers ; Pelissier, Bishop of Maguelonne ; Etienne Poncher, Bishop of Paris, and afterwards Archbishop of Sens, as sympathizing with the Reform, in the early pe- riod of the agitation, and Barbangon, Bishop of Pamiers, in the later. We have now enumerated no less than nineteen prelates, among w^hom are three archbishops and two cardinals, who are shown to have sympathized with the Reformation ; and of these, no less than eight are certified to us by the Pope himself, as Protestant enough to be ex- communicated. The Reform party, therefore, had bishops enough to have kept up the apostolic succession, had they chosen so to do. The plea of necessity, therefore, is utterly idle. They had them, but they would not use them. All consciousness of the importance of the question of valid orders seems to have been so utterly lost in the fierce controversies of the time that it never comes to the surface. Nay, so completely was it ignored, that we find one of the above bishops, an Italian, Caraccioli, accepting a new ordination as a Protestant pastor. [This action of Caraccioli, and of other French bishops not named by Dr. Hopkins, was in exact agreement with the Calvinistic and In- dependent theory as to " gathered Churches." The first founders of English Independents refused the title of ministers of Christ to non- conformist clerg}', as well as to the conforming prelatical clergy, because they lived in the Church of England, and did not leave it, as Separatists. Robinson said to the non-conforming clergy, " You have the same office as the mass priests, because you have been ordained by bishops." He also said to Bishop Hall, of Exeter, " Episcopal oxd\'!\2X\oVi prevents its receiver from being a minister of Christ, and it is to be renounced as a part of that sham clergy derived from Rome." Of himself, he said, that though ordained by a bishop, " I cast away v!\y popish priesthood,'' which, be it remembered, he had received from a bishop of the post- Reformation Church of England. These incidents will set forth the very basis of modern Congrega- tionalism, and show also how utterly unhistorical is the " good-natured " admission by Congregationalists that Episcopalians are good Evangel- ical Christians. If such had been the theory of the founders of their bodies, no separation from the Church of England would have been caused by them. They also show the crass ignorance of history of those among us who seek to meet them on their own ground. Such Appendix. 289 liberalism is an insult to the true liberality of the mother Church, and treason against Christ. The French bishops did not continue their orders, because they re- nounced their episcopal ministry in accordance with the Calvinistic belief. C. F. S.] 11. The second of the Three Points I am to touch upon is this : In England the Reforming party, as such, never drew the sword to defend themselves from persecution. They bore the persecution patiently, so long as it pleased God it should last. All the rebellions that were made in England during the Reformation period proper — except the personal movement for Lady Jane Grey — were made by the opponents of Re- form. As a reward for this patience and endurance, so it would seem, the good Providence of God accomplished the needed reform without disturbing a single foundation-stone of the old Church. But in France and in Germany, and in Scotland and elsewhere, impatience and per- secution provoked civil war, and that of the most obstinate and hurtful kind. This caused two great evils. First, the religious question was tangled up and lost in the political question. The other great evil is, that the going to war utterly lost all the spiritical fruit that otherwise would have been borne by persecution patiently endured. The early Church went through her ten persecutions without once resorting to armed defence against the most outrageous and cruel oppression. And this patient endurance — by the blessing of God — conquered the mighty Roman empire. So, in England, the burning of nearly two hundred of the Reformed party during the reign of Philip and Mary, patiently endured, turned the hearts of the nation so strongly, that after the accession of Elizabeth there was no serious obstacle to all the Reformation that was needed. In France the glorious martyr- doms, so bravely endured by Leclerc, Pauvan, De Berquin, Du Bourg, and innumerable others in the early part of the movement, produced a wonderful popular effect, which was spreading with astonishing ra- pidity. Even Catherine de Medici herself declared her intention to hear the Bishop of Valence preach before the young king and the court in the saloon of the castle. In that same year, 1 561, three weeks before the arrival of Beza to take part in the colloquy of Poissy, she wrote to the Pope of the " impossibility of restoring to unity (the number of those who had forsaken the Roman Church) by coercion, and de- clared it a mark of Divine favor that there were among the dissidents neither Anabaptists nor Libertines, for all held the creed as explained by the early councils of the Church. It was consequently the convic- tion of many that by the concession of some points of practice the present divisions might be healed. But more frequent and peaceful conferences must be held ; the ministers of religion must preach con- cord and charity to their flocks ; and the scruples of those who remain in the Church must be removed by the abolition of all unnecessary and objectionable practices. Images, forbidden by God and disapproved of by the Fathers, ought at once to be banished from public worship ; baptism ought to be stripped of its exorcisms ; communion in both kinds 19 290 A Champion of the Cross. to be restored ; the vernacular tongue to be employed in the services of the Church, and private masses to be discountenanced." Surely a wonderful letter to be written by such a person as Catherine de Medici, and to such a person as the Pope ! From it we may easily estimate the force of the current by which she was surrounded. Again and again the Court seemed on the very point of taking sides with the Reformation ; but every time the mixing up of rebellion with Protest- antism spoiled the prospect. A little more of patient endurance would have won the victory, and in such a way as to retain the ancient foun- dations of the national Church undisturbed. A few hundred might have been added to the number of martyrs in the meantime; but what was that compared to the tens of thousands that perished in the civil wars and massacres ? Baird defends the Huguenots in their taking up arms. Yet they had endured persecution for only about one generation, while the early Church bore it for nearly three hun- dred years. Even Baird, however, is compelled to admit that what he considers justifiable was actually destructive. He goes on to state the full consequences of this terrible blunder of his friends, which, never- theless, he attempts to justify. He says : " The first civil war prevented France from becoming a Huguenot country. This was the deliberate conclusion of a Venetian ambassa- dor who enjoyed remarkable opportunities for observing the history of his times. * The practice of the Christian virtues of patience and sub- mission under suffering and insult had made the Reformers an incredible number of friends. The waging of war, even in self-defence, and the reported acts of wanton destruction, of cruelty and sacrilege, turned the indifference of the masses into positive aversion." The same evil consequences, only to a far greater extent, followed the terrible Thirty Years' War in Germany — probably the most horrible civil war that has ever cursed any Christian country. And the same cause produced the same effects. It was not because the Reformed had no friends among the bishops, but because they were too impatient of per- secution to be willing to wait until the Lord's work should be done in the Lord's way. And the same impatience led them to overthrow the ancient authority of bishops in the Church of God and originate a new ministry of their own. Now, we have seen, in our own day, though after a much milder fashion, the operation of the same general principles. The great Ca- thoHc revival of the past half-century is one of the most wonderful that the Church has seen in any age or in any land. One great object of it was to revive the true doctrine that bishops are in the Church by Divine right, and that the powers given to them by Christ and the Holy Ghost cannot be taken from them by merely human authority. Yet at the beginning, the entire Anglican Episcopate — with much fewer excep- tions than we have found in France — was opposed to the Revival. Many were discouraged at this, lost heart, and left us. But a little re- flection ought to have satisfied them. The primary instinct of the Episcopal Order is, and rightly, to hand things down to their succes- sors exactly as they themselves received them. When, therefore, after Appe7tdix. 291 the lapse of ages, the Church has gradually accumulated errors in various directions, and the spirit of Reform is sent forth by the Holy Ghost, that Reform must always expect to find the Episcopate as a body opposed to it. The bishops, as a body, are rather more elderly men than the aver- age of the rest of the clergy. They represent the age that is just ending, rather than that which is just beginning. And with their primary instinct of keeping things unchanged, they oppose every im- provement as an innovation. The feeling of the bishops was almost unbroken for a quarter of a century after our Catholic Revival began ; and even now, when it is more than half a century old, a faithful and devoted priest in Liverpool — Rev. J. Bell-Cox — has lately been sent to prison by a bishop — a Low Church bishop, his own bishop — for that fidelity to that great Revival ; he being th&pfth priest who has cheer- fully gone to jail in the same great cause. In all these fifty years and more, all the persecution that could be brought to bear has been borne cheerfully, with no attempt to retaliate, or secede, or form a sect, or usurp the canonical authority of the bishops. Yet all the while, preach- ing and teaching, and writing, and ritual, and organization for work among the poor, and the revival of the religious orders, and much more, have gone on with unflinching energy and courage, until at length we have finally conquered the decided majority of the Anglican Episcopate itself. And that episcopate is now about as unanimous in commending the great Catholic Revival as they were forty years ago in condemning it. When one has mastered the theory that the bishops will certainly, at least for a generation or two, oppose any and every attempt at Refor- mation from within and from below, he will be less likely to lose heart and courage when he finds that the theory is borne out by the facts. And it is well that it is so. If changes could be brought about too easily, we should lose all stability— there would be nothing but change ; whereas now, when a change for the better has been slowly and pain- fully accomplished, it is a satisfaction to know that it will last. More- over, when a movement is really begun by God the Holy Ghost, and is carried on with equal courage and patience, there is no danger that any opposition by the bishops of the day will ever be able to put it down, no matter how hard they may try. In a generation or two, the Reform will be represented and maintained by the bishops themselves. Let patience, therefore, have her perfect work. With heavenly patience the new life is like leaven, that spreads its influence from soul to soul, untH the whole Church is leavened. With impatience and civil war, that new life becomes rather like the destructive forces of Nature, by which the solid mountain is rent into two opposing cliffs, which frown defiance on each other forever, and unite no more. III. I have left myself but little time for the Thii'd Point, which is not so closely connected with the other two, but which, I hope, may be helpful to some minds. When a steel bar, freely suspended, is rubbed so as to develop positive electricity at one end, it is always found that 292 A Champion of tJie Cross. the same action has at the same time spontaneously developed an equal amount of negative electricity at the other end. The amount of elec- tricity produced may thus be tested, with equal correctness, from the negative end as well as from the positive. Now, this third point is simply to compare the great communions of Christendom by their faibcres. We are all familiar with the positive comparisons — so familiar that sometimes the very familiarity makes us suspect that there must be some undiscovered fallacy about them. Let us, then, try the negative for once. But, you may say, what do you mean by the negative .'* I will explain. Let us look at the three great communions of Christendom — the Roman, the Oriental, and the Anglican. So long as we are divided no one of us has any authority from God to claim that we are oitirely right in all points of difference, and that the others are entirely wrong. We must be, all of us, right in some things, and wrong in other things. And in so far as we are wrong, we shall have our faihires, as well as our successes. Now, I propose to compare our failures. And — as one ought to do — let us begin with ourselves. Our failures, then, may briefly be described as the English-speaking Protestant denominations, so far as they have sprung out of the English Church. As for those which have sprung directly from the various Reformed bodies on the Continent of Europe, of course the Church of England is not responsible for them. All these denominations are without the historic episcopate ; and this points to a great fault in the English Church, largely owing — as are most of her faults — to her union with the State. At the time of the Reformation, Cranmer earnestly desired to increase the number of episcopal sees in England from twenty-three to forty; and King Henry VI IL gave him reason to hope that it should be done with endowments from the Church prop- erty seized by the crown. But, instead of that, only six new sees were erected — one of which soon ceased to exist, and there the increase stuck for three hundred years. If that proposed enlargement had been made, it is highly probable that dissent from the Church of England would never have amounted to much. But when — with the steadily growing population — there was no growth in the episcopate; when the time and attention of bishops were largely absorbed by their duties in Parliament ; when their spiritual duties were more and more neg- lected, visitations being made only once in from three to seven years, and in some cases not at all ; what could be expected but that a type of earnest piety should largely prevail from which bishops were entirely left out } Then again, in her catechism, the Church of England has taught nothing about Confirmation or Holy Orders, or of the organization of the Catholic Church, not one word/ What wonder then that some of her people should easily come to think that Confirmation is of no great use, and that one kind of minister of the Gospel is as good as another, and that any and every kind of sect is a Church ? Other faults might be mentioned also, especially the suspension of the synodical action of the Church for nearly one hundred and fifty years. But no matter Appendix. 293 how great the evils of these divisions and losses, with all their contro- versies and jealousies, thus much must be allowed : On the whole, and with few exceptions, these denominations all accept the Bible, and use it in the version given them by the Church ; they all profess to accept the Apostles' and the Nicene creeds ; they all claim to keep up the ministration of the two great Sacraments ; their baptism is almost universally a valid baptism ; they are earnest and zealous in a great variety of good works, and not infrequently in liberality and zeal they set us an example which we should do well to follow. They are, on the whole, a very respectable set of failures. And the separation from us is not so wide or so deep as in any other of the cases which we shall mention ; while the general confession of the evil of disunion is more outspoken and sincere, and the prospect of reunion far more promising than we shall find anywhere else in Christendom. Let us look next at the Oriental Church. Her great failure is Mo- hammedanism — a far worse and more destructive failure than ours; for Mohammedanism is rather a heresy arising out of Christianity than an original and separate religion. It includes a recognition of both the Old and New Testaments — of Abraham and Moses and Christ. The faults that provoked this terrible reaction were rather the faults of the decaying and slavish absolutism of the old pagan Roman empire, which Christianity could not save ; together with picture worship and saint worship which grew naturally out of the other, aggravated by the irrepressible dialectics of the Greek mind in defining and over-defining the nature and relations of the Persons of the Blessed Trinity. Mo- hammed threw off Christian baptism, and retained the old circumcision. He made one clean sweep of the Trinity and of the Incarnation. He made God to be a simple unit, and himself to be God's greatest and final prophet, and the sword to be the chief propagator of his religion. The later organization of the Janissaries is a horrible travesty, worthy of the Devil himself. The Turks levied a tribute on Christians of children — baptized Christian childr en — who were violently taken from their parents before they were old enough to understand the truths of Christianity, and were then carefully trained up as Moslems, and were sworn to fight — as their life-work — that very religion into which they had been baptized in infancy. No wonder that such a weapon became ultimately intolerable even to the Sultan who wielded it ! There can be no question that Mohammedanism — the great failure of the Oriental Church — is incomparably worse than ours. But the Church of Rome affords a failure far beyond either of us. As she has carried her practical corruptions, her additions to the Faith, and her passion for absolutism, both in Church and State, to such tre- mendous lengths, so in the intensity of atheistical continental com- munism she has developed a failure incomparably worse than even Mohammedanism, and beside which our Evangelical Protestant de- nominations appear like positive blessings ! The horrors of the first French revolution .were bad enough. The Commune of Paris has shown that it would improve on the old horrors, with greater ones of modern invention, the moment it should have a chance. The intense 294 A Champion of the Cross. hatred of anything like Christianity, or even of a belief in God, is start- ling. Only think what the condition of a man's mind must be who de- liberately shoots dead a priest who w^as standing at the altar and recit- ing the Apostles' Creed — his only motive being hatred of the Creed which the priest was reciting ! Roman repression has been manufact- uring the concentrated oil of vitriol which threatens to destroy every- thing that it can get a chance to touch. The comparison of our failures, then, while it ought to teach an An- glican modesty, and deep sense of our own shortcomings, has in it also an element of comfort and encouragement. We have not been so long on the wrong course, and have not driven our errors so deep, and have not brought forth such desperate results as the others ; and therefore, as to w^hat we still have to do, we may well " thank God and take cour- age." DECLINE AND FALL OF THE LOW-CHURCH PARTY. (From " The Church and the World " for April and July, 1872.) To one who looks at the present state of parties among us, and com- pares it with that which existed from thirty to fifty years ago, the change is wonderfully striking, and that in a twofold point of view. The personal alienation and bitterness are now incomparably less than they were then ; while, nevertheless, the points now at issue are so much further advanced, and of so much more importance in themselves, that one would naturally expect greater heat and violence, rather than less. And this singular decrease in real bitterness has taken place in spite of the efforts of the losing party to work themselves up into hos- tile zeal by using the most extravagant phraseology. To read their writings one would think that something terrible is going to happen ; so terrible, indeed, as utterly to frighten them out of the proprieties of speech; but when one meets them personally, one finds that these truculent writers are as pleasant and amiable a set of gentlemen as one could well meet upon a summer's day. The formidable phrases, used by them so freely in type, would seem really to be " all sound and fury, signifying — nothing." Yet they do not signify nothing. There is no need that we should be unjust toward the Low-Church or "Evangelical" party. The true Catholic, above all other men, knows that every great aberration from truth and right within the Church contains a lesson which needs to be learned by heart, if similar evils are to be avoided in time to come ; and still more, if those which exist are ever to be removed. But as there is an unbroken continuity in the history of the Church, each period bringing to maturity the seeds that were sown in the period preceding, so it is very hard to give a satis- factory review of the present condition of Church parties, from the dif- ficulty of knowing where to begin. The heart of Christianity as a power in the world — we do not mean the head work, which may be called theology ; or the bony framework, which may be called the Apostolic hierarchy ; or the flesh, which may be looked on as the general body of the laity brought in contact with the world ; or " the blood thereof which is the life thereof," which is, of course, the grace of God ; or the locomotive power, which is the missionary system ; but we mean simply the heart, that impulse of tuiU which is felt consciously or unconsciously by every fibre of the whole wondrous structure- : and this heart of Christianity, as a power in the world, has always been its Asceticism. The kingdom of God has not moved onward in this world by means of those whose grosser natures 296 A CJiampion of the Cross. are satisfied with just so much of religion as may be enough to save their own individual souls, and who care for nothing beyond this, which they regard as the prime and sole necessity ; for these selfish creatures can give no impulse to anything, except such as can be gained, by accomplished tacticians, from the skilful manipulation of mere dead w^eight. Christianity has grown by means of those who were capable of rising above what is the minimum for personal salva- tion ; who kindle with the love of Christ, until they yearn to show their love to Him in the utmost of labor and self-sacrifice of which poor human nature is capable. And this is what we here call Asceticism. A deep, all-penetrating sense of personal religion as a peculiar relation- ship existing immediately between Christ and the redeemed and loving soul, and stimulating that soul, as its chief joy, to do " all for Christ," is the root-principle of Asceticism. One such soul can give more of power to Christianity than countless swarms of those who are con- tent with merely saving their own souls, and beyond that make no further change in their previous relations to the world, the flesh, or the devil. During the early ages of persecution, the whole body of the Church might well have been regarded as Ascetics ; for even to profess as much faith in Christ as was necessary for the saving of one's own soul, was then worth a man's life, to say nothing of the chances of torture besides. As might be expected, the irresistible impulse of onward growth was great in proportion to this universal Asceticism ; and during the first three hundred years the Cross conquered the empire of the Csesars, and vast regions beyond its bounds. After the conversion of Constantine, when the world invaded the Church, Asceticism took refuge in the deserts, and soon — under the changed circumstances of the contest^the Monastic system embodied and organized the Ascetic principle, and was the life-essence of that tremendous struggle for the Faith, whose formal victories were registered, for all time, in the decrees of the General Councils. The monasteries, too, bore the chief brunt of the fight in conquering and civilizing the swarms of Northern barbarians, whose fresh forces, thus early Christianized, alone rendered it possible that the rottenness of Roman civilization should be changed into the actualities of modern Europe. They alone preserved the treasures of learning through ages of darkness. They alone contended with the kings and princes of the earth, and by their indomitable cour- age and pertinacity during ages of union between Church and State, prevented that union from rendering the Church the mere tool of secular statesmen, or the pasture-ground for the hungry cattle that are the curse of kings' courts. In their splendid success lay their greatest snare. Order after order rose by heroic self-sacrifice, and made itself a power in Christendom, soon to become rich in worldly wealth, and to find its early zeal smothered in the abundance of the good things of earth which that zeal had drawn forth as a spontaneous harvest from the hearts of the men of the world. The salt had at length lost its savor, and was cast out, and trodden under foot of men. Another sort of Asceticism then brpke forth, which undertook to en- Appendix. 297 force the three vows of Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience after a new fashion. The Poverty was made to apply to the service of God, which w^as stripped down to the utmost possible bareness. The Chastity was interpreted to mean that it was the duty of all men, especially the clergy of the three Sacred Orders, to marry as many wives in succession as they had the chance. And the Obedience meant, that all men must be compelled to obey the saints ; these new-fashioned Ascetics being the saints, the true Israel, unto whom — and unto whom alone — the Script- ure promises were made ; while all other kinds of Christians were re- garded as Moabites, Amalekites, Babylonians, or some other variety of Biblical heathen. The full triumph of this kind of Asceticism during the Great Rebellion proved it to be more intolerable than ever the old sort was, and the demonstration was made in fewer years than the other took centuries ; so that, on the restoration of the Stuarts, the people w^ere glad to get free from it by throwing off almost all sem- blance of seriousness in religion. Asceticism of every kind being dis- pensed with, worldliness in living and latitudinarianism in belief be- came more and more general. The heart of the Christianity of the land was being eaten out, until the eighteenth century made it doubt- ful whether religion were not about to disappear of the dry rot. And from this fearfully low tone the Roman Communion, and the Oriental also, from various causes, suffered quite as extensively as the Anglican, and in some respects more so. With the appearance of Methodism things began to mend in Eng- land ; and the essence of the improvement was in the reappearance of a real Asceticism, such as the origin of Methodism indisputably was. A deep, all-mastering sense of personal religion lay at the root of it, and a burning love for Christ, which could not be satisfied with merely getting religion enough to save one's own soul, but which overflowed with irresistible yearning to do something for Christ in gratitude for His great gift to us, and found the noblest field of action in carrying the glorious gift of the saving Gospel to others. The previous dead- ness, w^hile the population was still increasing, had left a steadily accu- mulating mass of ignorance, carelessness, and vice, which was rapidly gaining upon a Church whose vitality was failing because her Asceti- cism was gone. The Reformation destroyed many churches, and built none. It wonderfully diminished the numbers of the clergy. The Great Rebellion carried the work of destruction still further. Those were the years during which, as Dr. South said, one might as soon have expected stones to be made into bread, as into churches. Meth- odism believed in poverty, in so far, at least, that its chief field of labor was among the poor and neglected, and its manner of living was such as characterized the lower classes. In the qualifications of its minis- ters or preachers, in the style of its humble chapels and class-rooms, in its open-air services and camp-meetings, its desire to accommodate and benefit the poor was made palpable to a Church which had neg- lected the poor ; and the original intention was, that it should be a religious order within the Church. As to Obedience, Methodism ex- acted a compliance with rules of enforced confession, of attendance on 298 A Champion of the Cross. class-meetings and frequent services, of plainness of apparel, and of abstinence from dancing, theatre-going, and other social enjoyments, all of which savored strongly of the sternness of self-sacrifice under the old monastic system. Touching Chastity, however, Methodism had nothing to say beyond the current principle and practice of all true Protestantism — to wit, that it is every man's and every woman's right, if not duty, to be as much and as often married as the civil law will allow. The cr}'ing need of the Methodist movement, the portion of Asceti- cism which gave it the real power which it possessed, and the unfort- unate infirmities of temper and blindness which produced the gradual alienation of Methodists from a worldly and latitudinarian Church, re- sulted at length in the formation of a somewhat similar party within her pale, the Evangelical party, as it delights to call itself. In essential principle it was the same as the Methodist movement, though in inten- sity, organization, and power it was far weaker. Being a portion of the National Church, it had only the loose organization of a party, not the close and powerful organization of a religious order. Obedience, therefore, which meant something real among the Methodists, meant little or nothing among the Evangelicals in the Church. As to Poverty, the chief field of the Evangelicals was among the upper and middle classes of society, and very little among the really poor. They did not enforce confession as boldly as the Methodists did in their class-meet- ings, and thus were, in one source of moral and spiritual strength, in- ferior. Plainness of apparel, and abstinence from social pleasures, were enforced much more feebly than among the Methodists, partly because of the presence of a large aristocratic and cultivated element among the Church Evangelicals, and partly because the practical vigor of Methodist discipline was wanting. But the fundamental idea of personal self-consecration was there ; of personal love to the Lord Jesus, nourished by more frequent services than once a week, over- flowing in constant acts of love, and deriving reality from more or less of honest self-sacrifice and laborious self-denial, to say nothing of rich gifts to the treasury of the Lord. It was the first stage of revival, within the Church, from the deadness of the eighteenth century, and as such, did a noble and good work. But in proportion to the earnestness and depth of conviction with which the Evangelicals were animated, was their hatred of all who opposed them. This was intensified by their narrowness. They were narrow theologically ; for, while grasping strongly the essentials of per- sonal religion and personal devotion to Christ, they ignored to a great degree the Church and the sacraments. Wesley tried hard to preserve the reverence due to both ; but he failed ; and the Evangelicals sympa- thized heartily in the failure. They were narrow intellectually ; for no branch of culture was regarded with sympathy outside of their own range of revival reading. The architecture of an old-fashioned Metho- dist Bethel, and the music of a camp-meeting tune, fairly represented the degree to which the Wesleyans had made the arts the handmaids of religion : and the Church Evangelicals had even less originality than Appe7idix. 299 that. They were narrow socially; for, in the Church of England, the Evangelicals were a close clique, with just enough of tantalizing affilia- tion with the aristocratic classes to prevent any extensive work among the poor. All this narrowness, combined with their thorough-going earnestness and intensity, made them bitter and denunciatory to a re- markable degree. All who did not pronounce their shibboleth w^th pre- cisely their strength of aspiration, were unhesitatingly declared to be " destitute of vital piety," by which they evidently meant, were sure of eternal damnation ; for they were positively certain that nobody could be saved unless his piety was " vital," as they understood it. They did, as we have said, a noble and good work notwithstanding. Religion was, with them, the one overmastering consideration, in com- parison of which all else was as nothing. Their warm love for Christ led to vigorous action, in certain directions (whether it was always wise, is another matter). The rapid and steady growth of the Bible Society was largely due to their anxiety to diffuse the knowledge of the Word of God. The Church Missionary Society testified to their zeal for Foreign Missions. Their Sunday-schools were a means of great good at home. Their desire to affiliate — on the platform at least — with Evangelical Dissenters was, in reality, a groping for some sort of Catholicity, a confession that the entire and voluntary isolation of any small section of the believers in Christ is a self-condemnation in the sight of Him who prayed so earnestly that all His disciples might be One. They revived the idea of Asceticism in several important re- spects, though hating the word itself as being pure " Popery." Their week-day devotional meetings were a half-way house toward the res- toration of daily prayer. Their hymns were one of the best parts of their service to the Church. Glowing with real fervor, these hymns were the first that had popular strength enough to break the frozen uniformity of Tate and Brady. The Evangelicals fought for, and maintained triumphantly, the liberty to sing hymns, without first wait- ing for the approval of either Church or State ; and, outside of the reg- ular services appointed in the Prayer-book, they similarly demonstrated, in their prayer-meetings, the existence of a liberty which has since been put to good use by the Catholics. Certainly in these two points — hymns and extra services — the Evangelicals have earned a right to our grateful remembrance, which we shall always be prompt to ac- knowledge. We assure them that the liberty which they thus proved to exist, they now can never take away, no matter how much they may desire it. Let us next turn our attention to the Church in the United States. At the time of our first organization after the Revolutionary War, we had inherited mainly the lowest type of eighteenth century Church- and-State religion, which was found in nearly every part of the country where the Church was known at all, outside of New England. In Con- necticut, having from the first been free from the curse of governmental protection, and born and nourished in the wholesome air of persecu- tion, her distinctive principles were forced sharply to the front, and were sufficiently well believed in to be valiantly fought for against all 300 A Champion of tJie Cross. assailants. It was to this part of our Church that we owe. possibly, the procuring an Episcopate at all ; certainly the changes in the Euchar- istic office of our Church which make it so vastly superior to that of the Church of England. But everywhere else there was barely enough of Churchmanship to say that life was left. What shall be said of the " Catholicity " of the Churchmen of South Carolina, who only consented to come into union with the General Convention on the express under- standing that no bishop should ever be sent into that State ? What shall we say of that in Virginia, where even the bishop, for many years after the Episcopate was obtained, despaired of the revival of the Church, and where the number of our clergy even now is hardly as great as it was before the Revolutionary War broke out ? On that soil where the State Legislature had, by law, fixed the salaries of the clergy at so many pounds of tobacco /arson who was warm with Methodism, either from sympathy or previous personal con- nection ; and who manifested his fondness in a way not specially sug- gestive of a familiarity with Church principles or the Canons. They had personal fer\'or, however, a thing which it was almost impossible to discover in the public ser^'ices of their brethren as then generally conducted. With no singing of the Canticles, no responses except by the clerk, no hymns except for a few festivals and special occasions, no psalmody but Tate and Brady, no baptisms except in private, and no Holy Communion except three or four times in the year, there was really a great work for the Evangelical party to do. And under its vigor the Church of America soon began to wake up. But the weak- ness of the party at the first may be gathered from the words spoken by Bishop Mcllvaine at an annual meeting of the Evangelical Knowl- edge Society, that " he recalled the General Convention held when he was a candidate for orders. Key was the only one who was allowed to stand up in defence of Evangelical truth. Three clergymen, with the chairman, constituted the whole Evangelical force in the Lower House." It was not long after this, however, that their strength was greatly increased. In Virginia, the fervor, moral courage, self-sacrifice, and high social position of the Rev. Mr. Meade were the chief means of bringing to the Church in that State a sort of resurrection from the dead. Wherever he went, his preaching drew crowds ; and his depth of earnestness, his graceful gesture, and his voice of winning sweet- ness, gave him everpvhere a remarkable success in attracting ardent souls to the fold of Christ. In Pennsylvania, under Boyd, Bedell, and Bull, the Evangelical party rushed up into rapid life and strength ; and, in the important matter of electing an assistant and successor to their venerable bishop, they came within one vote of snatching the victory from the friends of Bishop White, and making Mr. Meade eventually the Bishop of Pennsylvania. The Recorder had been previously started by them, and became an important means of extending their affiliations all over the country. The establishment of the Alexandria Seminar}^ gave them a theological training-school entirely under their own control, and insured them a certain advantage all over the South. The wonderful success of Bishop Philander Chase, and the unfortunate complications which embroiled him with Bishop Hobart, threw all the prestige of his work into the hands of the Evangelicals, and seemed to promise them entire possession of the West. The mild influence of Bishop Griswold, with full opportunity to mould the infancy of five dioceses, rendered it apparently certain that Evangelicalism would rule all New England outside of Connecticut. Maryland was half theirs already, as was Pennsylvania. In all the horizon there was nothing clearly outside of their speedy grasp except New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, and North Carolina. Appendix. 303 We have alluded to the element of fervid Asceticism which was the one essential of true religious life in the Evangelical party. Its narrow- ness, its sad lack of theology, of Catholicity, and of knowledge of human nature, its utter ignorance both of its own true place and work, and of the relation in which they stood to the world, caused it to excel, in bitterness of feeling and expression, every party yet known among us. Every strong development of religious love must indeed have, commonly speaking, its special development of antipathy. "Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate Thee ? " is ever prominent in its feelings. Now, the Evangelical party was so situated as to be endowed with a double portion of this antipathy. The eighteenth century coldness was regarded by it as a condition, not of diminished or suspended ani- mation, but of absolute death. It was a very dull and quiet kind of Christianity, indeed; very undemonstrative, and not at all aggressive; but the Evangelicals were sure that it was " deadly," that it was "not vital piety," that it was totally destitute of " the life and power of the Gospel." It was a " preaching of mere morality," without any of the savor of "the doctrines of grace." It was hated cordially, therefore, as being mere latitudinarianism, Pelagianism, naturalism, and therefore " another gospel," deserving all the anathemas that S. Paul could utter. This was the phase of hatred that resulted naturally from the dull era, against which their revival was originally directed. But side by side with their movement against dulness and deadness, there was, as we have seen, a revival of true Catholicity beginning to make itself felt. The Churchliness which was first manifested from Connecticut, and soon after began to flourish in New York, was quite as genuine a revival as the other, and — to say the least — quite as much needed. Its love, for a time, may not have been quite so fervid ; but its culture was broader and deeper. It had some theology. It had a firm grasp of fundamental Church principles, and would by no means let them go. This drew upon it the other part of the Evangelicals' double capacity for hating. Every Church principle which the Evan- gelicals themselves ignored, was by them dubbed " Popery ; " or, if the Popery of it could not be made manifest to any reasonable understand- ing, then it was more conveniently, and even more unanswerably, labelled " Popery in disguise." That nobody besides themselves could see it, was only an additional proof of the Jesuitical art with which it was " disguised." And perhaps here is as convenient a place as any to point out some of the essential weaknesses which, from the first, rendered the decay of the Evangelical party in the Church of America only a question of time. Their fundamental points of opinion were all either unchurchly or positively anti-Church. In England, where the union of Church and State exists, and the higher Church preferments are in the gift of the State, it is of the highest convenience to statesmen to encourage the existence, within the Church, of that party which does not really believe in the Church to which it professes to belong ; for by nominat- ing such men to high office in the Church itself, they render it morally certain that, in case of a contest between Church and State, the natural 304 A CJiainpion of the Cross. leaders of the Church will be mortgaged in advance to support the supremacy of the State, or the " Royal Supremacy," as they call it there. Nominees to office in the Church who have no serious religious differences with Dissenters, will always be more popular with the nation at large when nearly, if not quite, one-half of the people call themselves Dissenters — a condition of things which no wise statesman or shrewd politician can afford to ignore in making his appointments to high office in the National Church. It is precisely this which led to the ap- pointment of Dr. Tait as Archbishop of Canterbury, by a government which professed to be the peculiar champion of the rights of the Church. Hence the necessity for such a class of Churchmen ; and hence, too, the certainty that a considerable portion of them will receive high promotion so long as the union between Church and State con- tinues, no matter how small their numerical following may be among the clerg}' and laity. The common ground between Erastianism and Dissent is this : The Erastian does not believe in the distinctive principles of the Church — does not believe that she has any spiritual powers which man can neither give nor take away ; for if so, it would be possible that the Church might be right in a contest with the State, which contradicts the fundamental principle of Erastianism. The Erastian believes it his bounden duty to obey the command, " Render to Cassar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." But he un- derstands it in a peculiar fashion. As Caesar is mentioned first in the above formula, Caesar of course is entitled to the precedence in every case of conflicting claims. And if this will not do, then it is remem- bered that " the whole heavens are the Lord's ; the earth hath he given to the children of men " — that is, to Caesar. Therefore, so long as we are on the " earth," the will of Caesar must be supreme : and in Eng- land the will of the people comes sooner or later to be the will of Caesar. The Dissenter also holds that there is nothing in the distinc- tive principles of the Church which is obligatory, provided the will of the people happens to be the other way. Only he does not wait for the formal parliamentary expression of the will of the people as a nation ; any respectable portion of the people satisfies him, in regard to matters which, as he agrees with the Erastian, do not exist by a spiritual authority which is divine. Hence, in England, there has al- ways been a strong religious affinity between the Low Churchmen in the Establishment and the Dissenters outside ; and this sympathy is one main element of the political advantages of promoting Eras- tians in the Church. But when the high places of the Church are thus filled — when the chief rulers of the Church are promoted because they do not hold her principles, but sympathize with those whose proper place is outside of the fold — we can understand what was the condi- tion of the people of God when Herod, the Edomite, was king at Jerusalem. It was while Herod was king that Christ was born at Bethlehem. It may be that a similar triumph of the Church's enemies within the Church herself may mark the nearness of the time of His second coming. Appendix. 305 In this country, however, the elements of the problem are very dif- ferent. Here there is no union between Church and State. Except some coquetting of politicians with the Church of Rome, there is noth- ing to be gained politically by affiliation with any body of Christians, much less with any one communion in preference to others. The State, as such, has no voice whatever in electing the rulers of the Church. No laymen even have any voice therein, unless they belong to some parish of the Church, and have made themselves sufficiently prominent in Church work to secure their election as delegates in the Diocesan Con- vention, or as diocesan deputies to the General Convention. The chief circumstance, therefore, which makes Erastianism powerful in the Church of England renders it impossible in the Church of America. The principle of Erastianism — which is the entire supremacy, in every- thing, of the lay power in its organized form of civil government — can- not, indeed, exist among us, except in so dwarfed and mutilated a form as deprives it of all real power for harm. As having any direct reference among us to the civil government, it has simply disappeared entirely. In its lower and weaker form — that of an appealing to the laity, or looking to the laity as a power to overrule the bishops and the clergy — it is incapable of much mischief, even in the most ex- cited times. For, though no change in Church laws can be made without the consent of the laity, the laity can make no change without the separate consent of both bishops and clergy. That the laity can withhold the support of the bishops and clergy, in order to compel their compliance, is but partially possible in the abstract ; and it is so generally impracticable in the concrete, that it may be safely disre- garded. The threat has never yet been made on any scale worth notice ; and it will be made many times before Churchmen will conquer their repugnance to the baseness of carrying it into execution. On the other hand, no lay delegation can be sent to the Diocesan Convention without good chance of clerical influence in making the election, and constant conference and co-operation with the clergy during the ses- sions, both orders debating in one body. As the clergy must gener- ally be far more familiar than the laity with the subjects under discus- sion, the representation of the laity in our Church councils is chiefly valuable as giving an excellent opportunity for the clergy to educate the leaders of the laity in many important matters not properly em- braced in sermons or homilies, and also as preventing the possibility of any serious jealousy ever arising between the clergy and laity as dis- tinct orders, both having given free assent to all the laws of the Church, and to all changes made therein. But it will be seen at once that the motives which lead to the elec- tion of our lay delegates are totally different from those which lead to making a man prime minister in Great Britain. The lay delegate serves at his own expense. He has no earthly object to gain in serving at all, and nothing to lose by staying away. Indifference to Church princi- ples will rather make a man prefer not to be elected, or will induce him, if elected, to find it personally inconvenient to attend. So also with the clergy. Where the Church is free, and on a perfect legal 20 3o6 A CJiainpion of the Cross. equality with all the sects in the land, many of which are more numerous and wealthy than she i«, why should any man wish to be a clergy^man bearing her commission, unless he really believes in her principles ? And even if a few disloyal men should obtain orders, from personal or local or temporar)' causes, how can the}' ever rationally expect that the ver}' fact of their ostentatious disloyalty should lead to their promotion by the free voices of those who do believe in what they profess ? The natural force of these plain conditions would seem to lead to the simple conclusion that a low-church party — where there is no union of Church and State — is an impossibility. And if all men were perfectly logical, it would be so. In a free country like this, there is no suffi- cient reason for any man's belonging to any Church the principles of which he does not believe in. But there are many circumstances which have combined to produce and to continue that unchurchly party among us, and which will insure its partial existence for a long while to come ; but a full consideration of them will show the reasons why that party is disappearing more and more from the councils of the Church, and why it is certain to grow weaker and weaker so long as it continues to exist. The originally low and latitudinarian tone of nearly the whole of our Church that was left after the Revolution was so deplorable that, as we have said, even partisan Evangelical life were a clear gain in many respects ; and latitudinarianism had no strength to resist the new impulse, unless by partaking of that other and better life — the revival of Church principles in their proper fulness and strength. Hence, the rapid rise and spread of the Evangelical party. But as the life of the Evangelicals was really a reflex within the Church from the greater glow without, it was impossible in the nature of things that it should be made dominant or permanent in the Church itself, all of whose dis- tinctive principles it expressty and ostentatiously ignored. This con- sideration alone would have been enough. But there was another which also was sure to be fatal of itself, and that was, that the whole Evangelical movement rested, both in theory and in fact, on mere indi- vidualism. There was no coherence, except such as should be made and kept up by an organization within the Church resting on voluntary action, and working outside of all her canonical machiner}^ ; whereas the other and better revival — recognizing the Church as a visible body, and looking upon her canonical machinery as resting on and embodying in action her own distinctive principles, which were heartily believed in — had the immense advantage of needing no party organization other than the canonical machinery of the Church herself. The Church party, therefore, labored for general and united action in all things. When unable to carry its measures, it did not withdraw and set up an opposition affair which it could control by itself, but it waited patiently and struggled bravely until better days should come, compromising from time to time, until strong enough to do better. The prestige of united action in general institutions, which its superior intelligence en- abled it to establish before it could be prevented, has, therefore, been steadily and increasingly gained by the Church party. Appendix. 307 To pursue this policy was, indeed, logically impossible for the Evan- gelicals. Individualism is their root-principle ; and even when they have a majority, they are not willing to trust themselves to that ma- jority, lest at some day it should fail them, and the mdzvidual should find himself bound in some way he should not like. They were there- sore compelled to make their sphere of action fractional. They strug- gled only fof a part ; while the Church party struggled for the whole. As a natural consequence of this, the practical influence of the one has been growing wider, and that of the other narrower, all the while. When the Church party succeeded in establishing the General Theological Seminary under the organic control of the whole Church, the Evangel- icals established the Alexandria Seminary, which is not under any such organic control; and the Gambler Seminary is equally free from it. When the Church party organized the Church Book Society on as gen- eral a basis as was in their power, the Evangelicals for a long while patronized the American Tract Society's publications, preferring those which were totally destitute of all Churchliness of tone, until it was found that this was too barefaced an ignoring of their own Church to be entirely popular even with their own people. They then organized the Evangelical Knowledge Society, in which they could still profess allegiance to the " Church of their affections," while ignoring or oppos- ing her distinctive principles. Yet, even so, the field of its literary exercise has been shrinking to such an extent that a large portion of its business has come to be the publishing of cheap editions of that very Prayer-Book, which pamphlets published from the same counter declare to be full of the germs of Popery. When the Church party succeeded in organizing the work of Missions, the Evangelicals — contrary to their primary and natural instincts — consented to come in and take part. At that time they felt but little interest in the Domestic field. It lacked the brilliant glow of romance which lent a glory to the Foreign field. The latter, too, was more wholly dependent on that individualism which lay at the root of Evangelicalism, and thus enlisted all its sympathies : while the Domestic work, entirely free from all that was exciting or im- pulsive, depended more for its success upon the quiet and careful use of ordinary means, and thus was the first care of the Church party. Whether there was at the time any express understanding to that effect, or not, it is certain, as a matter of fact, that, from that day to this, the Domestic Committee has consisted of a majority of the Church party, while the control of the Foreign Committee has been wholly in the hands of the Evangelicals, where it still remains. The natural conse- quences of this may easily be imagined. As new dioceses have been formed in the Missionary regions of the Church, they have almost uni- formly come in as staunch members of the Church party : while the Foreign field brought no accession of strength to the Evangelicals in the General Convention until the late admission of foreign missionary bishops to seats in the Upper House! These two votes, however, came too late to be of any service, and the presence of bishops from China and Africa is too uncertain anyhow to be depended on. It was not very long before some of the wiser heads among the 3o8 A CJimnpion of the Cross. Evangelicals began to see that they had made a mistake somewhere, and that the West, which had once promised to be theirs in a lump, was now looking in another direction. Gambler was managed so ill, and Nasho- tah — which had brilliantly outflanked Gambler with regard to the Great West — was doing so well that they saw mischief was ahead. The mis- sionary bishop system, too, was beginning to show its fruits, as diocese after diocese dropped in. But what was to be done ? WHile their own friends were in control of one committee of the Board, and fairly rep- resented on the other, how could they honorably set up an opposition organization in any part of the held .'' But a true Evangelical never yet allowed his honor to interfere with either his piety or his party ; and the Philadelphia Association of Evangelicals was formed to do work which already properly belonged to the Domestic Committee. It was not that the Doniestic Committee used its position for High-Church party purposes ; but it so happened that the major number of bishops who needed missionaries were of the Church party, and the large major- ity of clerg}"men available for that work were of the same sort. If a majority of the Committee had been Low-Church, the result would have been just the same, had they honestly worked under the rules laid down by the General Convention for the guidance of the Board. No question of party was ever made by that Committee in appointing a missionary. The Evangelicals, however, were never willing to do Church work after this fashion. A part of their narrowness was in their conscience ; and that conscience— so they often said — would not allow them to give money where any part of it might possibly be used to support men who were not preaching " the gospel " as they under- stood it. They were content to take part in nothing which they could not control. In the foreign work, as a general rule, they have sent out only those who were of their own way of thinking. If any foreign missionary was found to be clearly of the other school of theologv', he was made to feel so uncomfortable that at length he had to give it up and come home. The Philadelphia Association concentrated the feeble forces of Evangelicalism in the domestic field so as to make them tell ; and thus, by sharp management, they at length contrived to secure two new Western dioceses on their first organization — Iowa and Kansas ; and they may probably have another in Nevada. But " what are these among so many? " The animus of the two parties was never more plainly shown than in regard to that same Philadelphia Association. The Evangelicals were determined to occupy a ground so restricted that a number even of their own friends could not unite with them. The Church party, on the other hand, though keenly sensible of the unhandsome way in which they were treated (and some things were said which had better been left unsaid), on the whole, stretched their charity; and, saving their principles under a bare formula, made their practical system so elastic that the money contributed by Evangelicals could be used for Evangelical party work, under the direction of the Philadelphia Asso- ciation, while passing nominally through the hands of the Domestic Committee, a majority of whom were of the Church party. Appendix. 309 [It would be well if the members of the advanced wing of the High Church party now would heed this warning, for there have been de- plorable instances of exactly such refusals to work through the consti- tuted organs of the Church on the part of members of this party.] But even this was found to be too close a connection with the Church party to be as effective as the Evangelicals desired ; and the American Church Missionary Society, and still later the Evangelical Education Society, have yet further carried out the programme of the entire iso- lation of the Evangelical element from the other operations of the Church. For themselves it is a mistake. It is a confession of helpless, hopeless weakness. It is a proclamation to all the world that they cannot hold their own on an equal chance ; but must as far as possible prevent all practical contact, in order to keep their party from being gradually absorbed by that which constitutes the great majority of the bishops, clergy, and laity of the Church in America. They still retain their old control of the Foreign Committee, though one of their leaders made an effort, at the meeting of the Board in 1868, to get rid of that also, as the last link that binds them to any general organization for practical work. Even in the Evangelical parishes the interest in the foreign field had fallen off greatly, as Dr. Cotton Smith then avowed, owing to their dislike of being connected in any way with a board whose domestic work is not controlled by Evangelicals. That is to say, those Evangelicals whose zeal for Christ and the salvation of souls started the Africa and the China Missions, and had been so lavish of money to sustain them, and had gloried in the self-sacrifice of the mis- sionaries who belonged to their own party — those Evangelicals who had kindled the zeal of many thousands by the example of their laying down their lives so cheerfully in their Master's service, and for the good of the poor benighted heathen — those same Evangelicals, had run be- hindhand in their contributions more than $32,000, and w^re probably willing to starve out their own great work in foreign lands, if by so doing they could only insure one more point of total practical alienation from their brethren of the Church party at home ! The debate proved, however, that all Evangelical men were not yet ready to take this melancholy and suicidal position. The attempt at separation has never been renewed in the board ; and so the Foreign Committee goes on as before. Our sketch has shown how the conscious inferiority of strength on the part of the Evangelicals has gradually led them to abandon the whole sphere of Church work, except where they can exercise entire control ; and that is now almost nowhere, except in such voluntary as- sociations as they have started, and the basis of which they have made narrow enough to insure the exclusion of all others. Indeed, they would have worked themselves out to this result mu-ch sooner than they did, had it not been for several incidents of notable importance, which, for a time, gave them an apparent strength much greater than they really possessed. And here we must return once more to the most unpleasant part of our duty — the remarking upon the double share of bitterness which has characterized the controversial warfare of 3IO A Champion of the Cross, the Evangelicals, As they were sure that their ovm Evangelical plat- form was essential to vital piety, and that the piety of all who did not stand on it was dead, worthless, and destitute of saving grace ; and as the root of all their movement was individualism, so their opponents were in like manner individualized. As, on the Evangehcal hypothesis, all their opponents were devoid of true religion, so the Evangelicals had every reason to believe in the truth of every scandalous story that was told or made up against any individual opposed to them. What- ever blackened their opponents only proved that those opponents were in reality what, if the Evangelical platform were true, they ought to be : and, of course, the Evangelical platform was true. This element of personal bitterness would have been quite enough of itself ; but it was intensified by that combination to which we have previously alluded. The contemporaneous revival of a truer Church feeling was regarded by the Evangelicals as essentially Popish ; and, since, like all true Prot- estants, they hated the Pope even worse than the devil, so this part of their antipathy was hotter, more bitter, and more unscrupulous than the other. Ever}^ inch of advance in Church doctrine, discipline, worship, or usage, has been fought against with the utmost pertinacity ; and no pains have ever been spared to create the popular impression that every such thing was Popery, even though the perfect model of it could be found in the second or third century. In 1814 the chanting of the Canticles in morning and evening prayer (they had always been read, in this country, down to that time), was denounced as Popery; just as the same nickname has been given, with the same propriety, to the re- vival of the glorious old Gregorian tones in our own day. Gothic architecture, recessed chancels, preaching in the surplice, altar-cloths, the daily service, were all Poper}% and " taught transubstantiation," and what not. The ceaseless iteration of this stupid cry produced really deep and bitter mischief in the earlier part of the movement, because then it was believed in ; but now it is beginning to be laughed at. Our Evangelical friends have been crying " wolf " so long and so loudly, that the sensibility of the longest ears is wearing out. But when the war against " Tractarianism " first broke forth, the terror was fierce and deep. Tract No, 90 set many people fairly wild. In this frame of mind the Carey Ordination produced a genuine _/z/r(9r, a fer\'id upboiling of public feeling, in comparison with which all that has been said and done about Ritualism is a mere bagatelle. The scandals growing out of the cases of the suspension of the bishops of Pennsylvania and New York — two great pillars of the Church party — gratified both the elements of " good hating " combined in the Evan- gelical breast ; and since many who did not belong to the Evangelical party acted with them on the issues involved in those cases, it gave them, for the time being, the appearance of a great preponderance of power. The secession of Dr. Newman and so many other " Puseyites " to the Church of Rome was a never-ceasing arsenal of weapons for Evangel- ical warfare. It was not taken into consideration that the violence of Evangelical abuse and the intolerance of Evangehcal persecution were really the causes which drove many of these men out of the Church of Appendix. 311 England : and when they went they were attacked afresh for going. The Gorham Judgment was regarded as a great doctrinal triumph for the Evangelicals ; but, on careful examination, it was not very comfort- ing after all, for it only showed that Gorham might be tolerated, and not by any means that his doctrine was the true doctrine of the Church of England, However, it produced another batch of secessions to Rome, which were fresh elements of strength for the Evangelicals in irritating and keeping up popular prejudices and misunderstandings as to the real points at issue. Meanw^hile, the extraordinary unanimity of the outcry against Tract No. 90 was working out a new result. The essence of that famous tract consisted in the statement that, in interpreting the Thirty-nine Ar- ticles, " we have no duties toward their framers." This was thought to interpret those Articles in a " non-natural " sense ; to be " evading, not explaining, the Articles ; " and the hubbub raised about " dishon- esty," " Jesuitism," and what not, was enough to deafen all other voices, and almost to prevent the power of rational thought. But the idea that the private views of the Reformers as individuals should rule the inter- pretation of formularies which had passed through several revisions subsequently (the last being by the Churchly divines of 1662), stirred up the spirit of investigation into the real history of the Reformation ; and it was found that the popular Protestant traditions of the eighteenth century were one thing, and the real opinions of the Reformers in many respects a very different thing. The researches among old archives and State papers every day brought to light fresh facts in favor of the Church party, and damaging to their opponents. Especially in regard to the doctrine of the Holy Eucharist was this evidence conclusive. The suspension of Dr. Pusey for two years from the University pulpit, for preaching the ancient doctrine on this subject, was a challenge promptly and victoriously answered ; and, as a natural consequence of this victory, the disposition to set forth visibly the substance of sound Eucharistic doctrine placed the capstone on the ecclesiological revival, which, in the midst of the most vociferous and unscrupulous opposition, had steadily gained ground : the altar-cloths and other adornments be- gan to be common. The Westerton and Liddell cases— Protestant mobs having failed of their object — settled a fact, to the great astonish- ment of the Evangelicals, that, as a question of law, the Church party stood on such strong ground that they could not be touched by coercive process without fresh legislation; and this established the basis on which the present so-called Ritualistic movement has grown up. Its advocates have claimed, from the first, to be within the plain letter of the law ; and in the disgraceful series of prosecutions gotten up and pushed through by the Evangelicals against them, the decisions of the Judicial Committee are such manifest perversions of law and justice, merely in order to gratify Protestant prejudice, that each legal victory for them has proved to be a popular defeat. When 5,000 priests protest against a decision, the back of the court, as a moral or spiritual power, is fairly broken. The Evangelicals have procured a decision which makes against the Ritualists in some points ; but it compels the 312 A ChampioJi of the Cross. Low-Church deans to wear copes in their own cathedrals, and by irre- sistible implication pronounces that preaching in a black gown is illegal ; a result which has all the popular effect of a broad joke at their expense, purchased with a hea\y outlay of their own money. The party there is dwindling, as it is here, but the causes are in many respects so dif- ferent that we must drop that branch of the history altogether, or our work will spread beyond our limits.* To resume our outline of the decHne of the Low-Church party in this country : We must remember that the essential principle under- lying their whole organization was, that individually they sympathized more with the vital piety outside of the Church than with those inside who hold to her distinctive principles ; and therefore, on every occur- rence of a popular agitation among those denominations, there has been a fresh blunder made by the Evangelicals within the Church. When revivals were the rage, the Evangelicals sympathized ; and because they were partakers of a movement which interested great numbers of peo- ple, they felt that they must be adding to their own strength : but be- fore long the fervor went down, and then our Evangelicals were sur- prised to find that they were actually weaker than before. When the temperance excitement arose, they ver}' generally went into that likewise, on the same instinctive principle, and with the same general result. When anti-slavery began to ring from the pulpits of the sects, the Evan- gelicals were the only ones who even felt inclined to give the same sort of gospel among us ; but before the breaking out of the civil war, this tendency was kept under restraint by the fact that Virginia, a slave State, was the stronghold of Evangelicalism, and several other Southern dio- ceses had similar ecclesiastical sympathies. With the uprising of the North, after the attack on Fort Sumter, all this was changed; and the Evangelicals once more yielded to the primary instinct of their re- ligious life, which is, to go with the crowd of the Orthodox Evangelical denominations in every popular movement. And this, as in all previous cases, turned to their injury, only more completely than ever, because it bit deeper. The idea that successive temporary excitements, having no connection with Church principle or Church life, could really build up a solid strength within the Church, was, of course, preposterous : but our Evangelicals, who never reason correctly, took it for true wis- dom, and perpetrated the same blunder over and over again with an amusing pertinacity. They may have heard that " the Church is an anvil that hath worn out many a hammer; " and yet they always sym- pathized with the hammer, and never with the anvil. During the war, * We omit all adequate mention of the marvellous Church revival of our age, which began vt'ith the Oxford movement, and which, in less than forty years, has built ten times as many churches as were erected in the previous three hundred years, to say nothing of the extension of the Anglican episco- pate almost over the world ; while in schools, literature, the arts, and every- thing affiliated, however remotely, with the Church, the progress has been equally great. Nor can we say anything of the noble, pure, and full Ascet- icism, which is the heart of it all. Our subject is, not the growth of the Church party, but the Decline and Fall of the other. Appendix. ^ 3 1 3 therefore, they thought they had " a sure thing ; " and after the General Convention of 1862 their- triumph seemed to be complete. But there were others who saw deeper than they did. If the country w^ere to be permanently divided, then the Evangelical policy was the best ; but if the country were to be reunited, and the Church also, then the war policy, for the Church, would be fatal. Sound Churchmen, therefore, who held that as Churchmen they had no concern whatever with politics ; and those also who firmly believed that the unity of the country would be restored, and that then the greatest triumph of the Church w^ould be to give a glorious example of the spontaneous re- union of separated brethren ; all these united fought their way through the war, enduring any amount of personal abuse for " disloyalty," " sympathy with traitors," and other such bitter and crazy nonsense, until the return of peace, when their patient courage was abundantly rewarded. Those who thought they had triumphed gloriously in 1862 were left a sorry remnant in 1865, too feeble even to secure the inser- tion of a protest on the Minutes : and of all the Southern dioceses there is not one that can now be relied on as staunch to the Evangelical party. Even Virginia has lost the heartiness of her ancient devotion, and is keeping up an earnest thinking as to what all this means. Thus the most brilliant triumph of our Evangelicals was also the briefest, and the most fatal to themselves. Another piece of short-sighted unwisdom has all along characterized the Evangelical policy ; but as it is a logical necessity in their position, it is certain that they will continue it zealously to the end of the chap- ter. Their own particular party creed being very short and simple, so far as its positive teachings are concerned, and being precisely the same that constitutes the popular religion of the day, and therefore is well known to everybody ; it is simply impossible to render the col- umns of their periodicals or the pages of their books interesting at all, unless by means of the double antipathies which are so dear to them. As the larger part of their labors is thus devoted to a propagation of the gospel of hatred, which they have made peculiarly their own, they may be safely depended upon to rake up and publish, and keep pub- lishing, every extreme or unwise thing done by their opponents. Their charity, too, is so great that, as a general rule, they either assert or in- sinuate that the whole Church party is responsible for every extrava- ganza of doctrine or practice that can be discovered in any Ritualist. They delight in printing, at full length, with all the strange-looking technical words (which pass for something horrible because they do not know what they mean), the most elaborate accounts of Ritualistic services. The sympathy which exists between them and the denomi- nations, ensures the copying of these accounts in the numberless issues of the sectarian press ; and the secular press sympathizes, of course, sufficiently to add still further to the publicity of every piquant detail. Take S. Alban's, Holborn, and S. Alban's, New York, as samples ; and compare the brief and infrequent mention of them in the Church press, with the interminable columns that have been devoted to them by the Low Church, sectarian, and secular papers. The disproportion is ab- 314 -^ Champion of the Cross. solutely laughable. The opponents of Ritualism seem judicially blind to the fact that they are thus constantly giving it the benefit of an enormous amount of gratuitous advertising — an amount of advertising that hundreds of thousands of dollars could not have bought, but which they are thus making a present of to those whom they hate most. It is no wonder that the Ritualists are in very good humor with such a way of carrying on the war. They may laugh who win. The constant crowds present at Ritualistic churches are largely due to this handsome system of hostile advertising. Among the many who come expecting to be horrified, the larger part find that it is not so horrible after all. A second and a third visit render it still less obnoxious ; and finally, in many cases, the enemy is turned into a friend. And, as we have said before, there is no danger that the Evangelicals will cease this mode of building up their opponents and undermining themselves ; for if they once stop their tirades against Ritualists and Ritualism, what caji they fill their columns with that anybody will find it interesting to read .'' And as for the Church party, it ;nust continue to grow, so long as its bitterest enemies kindly persist in thus advertising it so enor- mously — for nothing. Another disadvantage of the Evangelical party, as a party, is, that its own inconsistencies have gone far to destroy its credit with precisely those plain common-sense people to whom it delights to appeal. When, after reading Evangelical editorials for years against the Popery of crosses and flowers in churches, and lights burning by day, they at length find Dr. Tyng himself crowning the spires of S. George's Church, Stuyvesant Square, with two great crosses, and adorning the interior with other crosses that cannot easily be numbered for multitude ; when they find flowers enough crowded into the chancel of the same S. George's Church to deck for a high festival half-a-dozen Ritualistic altars ; and when they find the gas-burners in full blaze all round the interior of the same S. George's Church, while the sun is brightly shin- ing out of doors ; what are they likely to think ? Moreover, after read- ing, for years, hot denunciations against the " meretriciousness " of adorning churches with colors and gold, when they at length see more than twenty-five thousand dollars spent on the inside of the walls of that same S. George's Church merely for colors and gold, what is the result as touching the godly sincerity of the Evangelical party in its fierce and wholesale denunciations } Plain, common-sense people don't see any difference in principle between having crosses on spire, font, pulpit, roof, gallery, and pavement, and having a cross upon the altar — especially as they have so long been taught that the altar is not a whit more sacred than any other part of the church. They don't see how flowers can be all right on the first Sunday after Easter in the afternoon, and all wrong on Easter-day in the morning. They don't see how fifty lights in the nave should be good Protestantism, and two lights on the altar be flat Popery. They don't see how colors and gold can be consistent with vital piety on walls, beams, stonework and woodwork, upholstery and altar-cloths, and yet be fundamental and deadly doctrinal error in a vestment of the minister. And the conse- Appendix. 3 1 5 quence is, that the louder and the more furiously these Evangelicals rave and ramp about the Popery of such things when done by the Ritual- ists, the more easily plain, common-sense people smile and shrug their shoulders, and see no occasion to be alarmed in the slightest. It is not to be supposed that the Evangelicals have been unconscious of their own decay. Even before the breaking out of the war, one of their prominent men gave privately to one of the Church party the real reason why they had organized separate Evangelical societies within the Church. It was, he said, a matter of necessity to do so, in order, if possible, to prevent their w^hole party from gradually coming over to ours. They had discovered the strong tendency in that direction, and knew that the only way to stop it was to prevent, as much as they could, all actual contact of the two parties in the practical work of the Church : an actual contact which the Church party has always sought, and by which it is sure to grow ; while the other party shuns it in- stinctively, because it has found it destructive. All that the iron pot asks is a chance for a fair bump ; while that is naturally the sort of fair- ness which the earthen pot is most anxious to avoid. The only desire of the Evangelicals, on the contrary, is to stand far enough off to render misapprehensions easy, and correction impossible. But if they were aware of this before the war, much more palpably was it forced upon their consciousness after the war was over, and when they had discov- ered the destructive consequences of their mistaken policy. The famous breakfast party at Delmonico's was intended as a formal rehabilitation of the Evangelical party in its previous position ; but the damage done is such as breakfasts cannot repair. On reckoning the diminishing num- bers of the Evangelical array in the General Convention — the only test of proportionate strength in the general legislation of the Church — the truth was visible to the most unwilling eyes. " My leanness, my lean- ness ! " was the cry of the knowing ones of the party. And in one of their most thoroughgoing organs, within less than two years after the war was over, there were open utterances of the most gloomy forebod- ings. Our limits will not permit us to give extracts ; but we state the evident drift of the remarkable articles to which we allude. . They began with a melancholy retrospect of Evangelical mistakes, laying chief stress upon their folly in assenting to the division of the Mission work which was effected on the reorganization of the board in 1835, they taking the Foreign Committee while the Church party con- trolled the Domestic. They might have known — it was said — i! they had thought a moment, that as the fruits of the Domestic work were speedily admitted to General Convention, while those of the Foreign field were not, such a division of their forces would soon make the Church party so strong in General Convention and in the Board, that they could take the Foreign Committee too, whenever they were so minded ; and that had already come to be the case. [All this was true ; but how could the Evangelicals have prevented it? In 1835 they were yet in a minority, and therefore could not dictate terms to the majority, much less insist on controlling both committees. And if they had begun thus early their now favorite plan of isolated work, it would only have 3i6 A CJiampio7i of the Cross. injured them, by this time, much more than it actually has ; for it would have been in operation just so much longer.] However, the Evangelical editorials to which we are referring went on to show the immense growth of the Church party ; that almost every new diocese organized in the mission field now came in as a High - Church diocese ; that, as fast as Evangelical Bishops died, their dioceses were almost certain to elect High-Churchmen in their places ; and that the older and larger dioceses were being put through a course of subdivision which would probably in every case add still further to the High-Church strength ; so that what with their own losses and the gains on the other side, there was every human probability that, in ten years or thereabouts, the Evangeli- cals would not have a single vote left, either in the Upper or the Lower House of General Convention ! Next came the consideration as to what could be done to cure or even modify the evil. And it was not obscurely shown that the best, and indeed the only, thing that could be done, was. to get up a Schism, while they were yet strong enough to make one ; for that in a few years, at the present rates of change, they would be too weak to be able to make a schism, no matter how ardently they might then desire it. It took some time for the brillant idea embodied in those Evangeli- cal editorials to work its way to the acceptance of the more radical leaders of the party. There were two grounds on which it was thought the needed preparation for a schism could be made. One was, to sound so loud an alarm about the fearfulness of Ritualism as to frighten some people into a readiness to seek refuge from the monster in a schism ; and the other was, to provoke, if possible, some exercise of discipline against Evangelical irregularities, upon which the cry of " tyranny " and " per- secution " could be raised, so as to command further sympathy. These were not very promising attempts, either of them ; but the case was getting to be desperate, and what else could be thought of. It has often been a cause of devout thanksgiving on our part, that a kind Providence has, for many years past, sent us opponents in the Church who have very little common sense, and no tactics at all. When their own party is already a minority, and is growing smaller day by day, they seem to think that the surest way to make it grow larger is to start some more extreme policy, which will split the few that are left, and drive the better part of them into our embraces. Then again, our position being defensive, and their programme requiring them to begin the attack, only look and see how wisely they have managed it. When an enemy is entrenched in a stronghold', with many succes- sive lines of defence, and each approach guarded by many outworks, a true and wise strategy will reduce the outworks one by one, and bring on the decisive contest as near the citadel as possible. This being the wise course, the Evangelicals instinctively took the opposite, and risked the whole campaign on the first and feeblest outpost they came to. If defeated there, the Church party had fort after fort, rampart after ram- part, to which they could retire in succession, and continue the fight ; but if the assailants were repulsed at that first outpost, good-by to them ! The outpost chosen by the Evangelicals was the canon forbidding any Appendix. 317 clergyman of the Church to officiate within the territorial limits of another clergyman's parish without his express consent ; and the famous young Tyng case arose, and roared its way through all the newspapers in the land. The consequence was a total defeat for the Evangelical party. They had secured the " tyrannical " verdict out of which they hoped to make party capital enough to serve as the foundation of a schism ; but the foundation seemed to be laid in a quicksand, and immediately disap- peared. When, in advance, there was an attempt to dragoon the whole party into an agreement upon the radical platform, the conserva- tive section of it rallied, and put an extinguisher over the blaze at its first kindling ; and in consequence the language of the Philadelphia Declaration was more mild than exciting. It was thought triumphant strategy for Dr. Tyng to declare himself entirely satisfied with " the Prayer-Book as it is." Even the Bishop of Ohio, in publicly fraterniz- ing with the Presbyterians was careful to avoid any phrase which ex- pressed a conviction of the validity of Presbyterian " Orders." There was evident motion in the water ; and yet the watched pot would not actually boil. And when, after the protracted and intense excitement of the trial, and when every art of the demagogue had been exhausted in order to enlist the public press, and bully the court, and kindle the popular passion to a readiness for an outbreak, all this formidable preparation broke into nothing, like a puff-ball, when the sentence was only an " ad- monition." It was impossible, with a straight face, to make " tyranny " and "persecution " out of that. At the meeting of indignant partisans held immediately after, and while their blood was at the hottest, there was an attempt to declare for a schism on that basis ; but it failed igno- miniously, even then and there. It appeared, even at such a moment, that if some of the clergy went into a schism, they could not depend upon their own laity to go with them ; that many of their own people did not approve of the flat disobedience of a canon which had provoked the trouble ; and that the great preponderance of voices, even among themselves, was not for a schism, unless the next General Convention should refuse to relax that canon. It was therefore agreed to " agitate, AGITATE, AGITATE," for the repeal or modification of that canon. If that were refused, terrible things would happen ! Some wished to insist on alternative forms being added to the Prayer-Book in certain places; but they were regarded as rather radical, and the party would not commit itself to so extreme a position. The only other point upon which there was anything like a general rally was upon the right to " exchange pulpits " with non-Episcopal preachers outside the Church ; in vindication of which some clergymen, who ought to have known better, broke the canon deliberately, in the hope of thereby proving that it could not mean what it says. A noble Pastoral by the Bishop of New York led to a pamphlet war, in which, as the clear result, the Pastoral was left in possession of the field. This line of business, however, culminated in the Hubbard case, in Rhode Island, of which more hereafter. The days and weeks rolled onward slowly toward the meeting of 3i8 A Champio7i of the Cross. the General Convention ; but the determination to " agitate, agitate, agitate," amounted to comparatively little. Memorials were numer- ously signed indeed ; but the signatures had to be drummed for, and when they were laid before General Convention they had not the weight of a feather. The agitation grew cooler and cooler, instead of hotter and hotter: until — not long before the ist of October — the very Evangelical papers which had made it their specialty to get up the ex- citement openly groaned over the total failure of their agitation, and confessed the entire indifference of the bulk of their own party in re- gard to it. This, of course, was fatal to any attempt to secure a relaxation of the Tyng and Hubbard canons. But our wise Evangelicals are not content to fail like other people. They must needs go about to make the assurance of failure doubly sure. And they succeeded gloriously ! It will be remembered that it was the influence of the Moderate Evangelicals which overruled the attempt of the Radicals to clamor for " an alteration of the Prayer-Book, or schism ! " The Moderates in- sisted that nothing more must be attempted than merely the relaxation of those two canons : and they claimed triumphantly that they were content with " ///^ Prayer-Book as it is." The Prayer-Book, they said, had always been EvangeHcal in its real meaning, for was it not the work of the glorious Protestant Reformers } The Evangelical in- terpretation was therefore the natural, the true, the only honest inter- pretation. But when the agitation for an amendment of those two canons was found to cool as rapidly as mutton graxy in a cold dish, then the Radical Evangelicals broke out, on their own responsibility, in the most brilliant and successful manner. An anonymous pamphlet, in a pink cover, appeared (written by an Evangelical priest since deceased), and bearing the sensational title, " Are there Romanizing Germs in the Prayer-Book? " This pamphlet is of such importance at this point of our subject, that, notwithstanding the fearful calamity in which its writer lost his life not long after, we cannot pass it by. We shall re- view it, not as representing its writer so much as the school of which he was the representative ; and as a blunder of that school, it is so sig- nificantly rich, that we hardly know how to refrain from quoting nearly the whole of it. It defines Romanizing germs to be " seeds of spiritual death to every organization in which they are allowed to root and grow. They choke, in due time, the most precious and fundamental truths of our faith. They change the sinner's sure and steadfast hope into a rope of sand." This is fearfully emphatic language, especially when applied to " the Prayer-Book as it is," with which Dr. Tyng is so entirely satisfied. Moreover, this pamphlet does not profess unlimited faith in the Reformers ; and here we gather the fruits of the fresh study of the Reformation which was made necessary by the challenge given in Tract No. 90. This pamphlet corroborates Tract No. 90 on both sides of its work. As a matter of principle, it recognizes no duty to the Reformers, but to amend their work, and reject their ideas when erroneous ; and as a matter of fact, it acknowledges that the views of the Reformers, and of the final revisers of the Prayer-Book, were what Appendix. 319 is now called " Romanizing," and were by no means identical with the popular Evangelical Protestantism of the present day. But let us go to details. The pamphlet recognizes the fact that Elizabeth retained eleven of Bloody Mary's Romish councillors, and added only eight Protestant ones of her own selection ; while for years the Papists " repaired to their parish churches without doubt or scruple," and priests officiated at the parochial altars. " The Liturgy," it says, "was published early in Elizabeth's reign, when there was hope of compromise with Rome, and hence is Romish.'' Alluding to the changes since made, it can- didly confesses : " We cannot fairly assert that the Prayer-Book which we now use is the one left us by the Edwardian Reformers ; " and adds, very properly : " When interpreting the amended portions, we cannot, of course, refer to those worthies, any more than we can prop- erly appeal to Hamilton and Jefferson to explain the amendments recently made to the Federal Constitution." And it says further : " It was a strange admission made by Dr. Bayford, Gorham's own counsel, that ' Roman Catholics might conform to the Church of England with- out violating their consciences.' " This is Tract No. 90 in full, only " a little more so," so far as general principles are concerned. As to the Rule of Faith, which Protestantism makes to be " the Bible as each man's private judgment understands it for himself," the pamphlet finds that this is by no means the doctrine of the Prayer- Book. For Article VI. (the Articles, it seems, are erroneous as well as the Prayer-Book) declares the Apocrypha to be read by the Church " for example of life and instruction of manners ; " and the Homilies are recognized in the Articles also ; and " Ancient Authors " are ap- pealed to in the same category with " Holy Scripture ; " and " the An- cient Canons " are recognized as having power to " command " us, and are " linked with the Holy Scripture to regulate owx discipline ;'' so that " morality, doctrine, polity, and discipline," are all affected by these " traditions of men." As to the Homilies, our pamphleteer is par- ticularly emphatic. In them, he says, " the Apocryphal books are de- scribed as ' the infallible and undeceivable word of God.' Baptism and justification are used as synonymous terms. Baptism is spoken of as the ' fountain of regeneration.' We are said to be ' washed in our baptism from the filthiness of sin.' Matrimony is denominated a sacrament. The Fathers are appealed to as authorities. The prim- itive Church is recommended to be followed as most incorrupt and pure." And all these passages in the Homilies, he insists, " form an integral part thereof,* and are to be read diligently and distinctly, that * These passages, we suppose, are omitted in the "abridged edition" of the Homilies published by the Evangelical Knowledge Society. The pam- phleteer seems to reflect upon the American Church Missionary Society (a purely Low-Church organization) for including " Articles, Liturgy, and Homilies" as standards of "principles and doctrines." "Accordance with them," he says, is thus "made an article of our faith." He condemns his own partisan societies for really professing to believe all that is held by the Church party ! 320 A Champion of the Cross. they may be understanded of the people." And he thus states the logical consequences of such teaching : " The ' Homilies ' of Cranmer and his associates are excellent, but are not the Homilies of Chrysos- tom and the saints of his time as weighty ? The ' Ancient Authors ' testify to the fact of Episcopacy, why should they not of its prerog- atives ? The ' Ancient Canons ' command on one point of discipHne, why not on another? " Precisely so ; and hence he thinks that Prayer- Book doctrine leads straight to such as this, which he quotes from Dr. Dix: " Divine, or, as it is called, Catholic, faith is a gift of God and a light of the soul, illuminated by which a man assents fully and unreservedly to all which Almighty God has revealed and which He proposes to us by His Church to be believed, whether written or unwritten." And he adds : " This point having been reached, it follows as a nec- essary sequence that the sacramental and sacerdotal ideas with which all patristic writings are surcharged, will be accepted and proclaimed." Just as if the same Convocation of 1 562 which adopted the Thirty-nine Articles had not expressly " accepted and proclaimed " that very thing, when they enjoined that all preachers should " in the first place be careful never to teach anything from the pulpit, to be religiously held and believed by the people, but what is agreeable to the doctrine of the Old and New Testament, and collected out of that very doctrine by the Catholic Fathers and ancient Bishops." The object of the very men who set forth the Articles is thus proved to be the special horror of the Evangelical pamphleteer ! It is amusing, too, to see the fanatical op- position of such men to the mention of the " unwritten " word of God. Why, their great Protestant tradition, that the Holy Scriptures " con- tain all things necessary to salvation " — a tradition embodied in our Constitution, and which is so far made an article of faith that no man can be admitted to Holy Orders without subscribing it — cannot itself be found in Holy Scripture at all ; and cannot be proved but by the aid of those same " patristic writings " which are so " surcharged with sacramental and sacerdotal ideas." The Evangelical Protestant who denies all " unwritten " tradition, cuts the throat of his own hobby. The three great treasures confided to the Church being the Ministry', the Word, and the Sacraments, and our Prayer-Book being thus shown to be " Romanizing " in regard to " the Word," it is next found to be no better off as to the Ministry. The Prayer-Book has the word " priest ;" and the pamphlet says that " for the real significance of ' priest ' in this rubric [before the Absolution in Daily Prayer], we must consult the reactionary spirit of 1662." And again : " Our Declaration is simply abreast of the first twelve centuries, which cover the formative period of the Romish system." And so he goes on to prove that our priests are clothed with proper priestly powers, and perform properly priestly acts, in " consecration " and " oblation " in the Holy Eucharist, in benediction, and in the forgiving and retaining of sins. He states that in our American Church, the " form most com- Appendix. 321 monly used " in ordaining priests is that which begins : " Receive the Holy Ghost for the Office and Work of a Priest in the Church of God ;" and that these words "are avowedly used because they are Christ's words." He admits that " all this is the most blasphemous frivolity, if it be not the deepest truth," though evidently convinced that it is " most blasphemous frivolity." He admits that the Prayer- Book teaches the Apostolic Succession ; and that it means thereby " a tactual succcssio7i whereby grace is communicated from one to another for the exercise of ' sacerdotal functions ' in a ' sacerdotal connection ';" that, in accordance with this view, " exchtsiveiiess is the prevailing prac- tice of our Church. All iniiiistcrs are reordained. Priests %uho are of the Succession, though they be Roman or Greek, are not reordained." The " functions " of the priest are acknowledged to be " supernatural " and " the dogma of traiismitted grace " to be " distinctly stated." Mas- kell is declared to have made only " logical deductions from the Prayer- Book doctrine " when he said : " The members of the Church of England, by God's blessing, well know that none but a priest can stand in their stead before the Holy Table, and offer in their behalf the solemn prayers and praises of the Office of the Lord; that none but a priest can consecrate the ele- ments, ... A denial of the Christian sacrifice leads easily to the denial of the priesthood." And the following form of Absolution, from the Church of England Prayer-Book, is put in the same category : " Our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath left power to His Church to absolve all sinners who truly repent and believe in Him, of His great mercy, forgive thee thine offences, and by His authority, committed to me, I absolve thee from all thy sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen." And he quotes Goode's admission concerning the Ordination for- mula, that " the existence of such language in the Prayer-Book leaves it open here (unfortunately, I think) to adopt a papistical interpreta- tion; " and yet Goode.he tells us, was " ever slow to acknowledge that anything in the Prayer-Book is not ultra-Protestant." On the subject of the Ministry, therefore, the Prayer-Book is no more to be trusted by an Evangelical than on the Word ; but its Romish errors on the subject of the Sacraments are the worst of all ! Thus he begins with Baptism : " The Romish dogma is expressed with sufficient explicitness by the current phrase Baptismal Regen- eration." In regard to the Baptismal Office in the Prayer-Book, he says, " its doctrinal statements are so integral a part of the service, that every baptized person, however illiterate, must become a party there- to." Moreover; " the service is positive in its declarations, logical in its sequent steps, and remarkably contrived to declare with great dis- tinctness the doctrine involved. Objection to it belongs to its structure 322 A Champion of the Cross. as much as to any of its expressions. It is an ecclesiastical monograph on the doctrine of Baptism." Again : " The word ' regenerate ' conveys the central idea of these offices. We cannot agree that this word has lost its ancient, or rather its orig- inal, meaning. We have failed to obtain from those who hold this view any satisfactory historic proof of such changes. It is, indeed, no longer used by all synonymously with ' baptize,' because all the Chris- tian world does not now believe, as it once did, that the ' baptized ' are 'regenerated.' . . . Moreover, the Prayer-Book does not seem to leave much room for doubt upon this point. In Article XXVII., regeneration is used synonymously with new birth, and is a translation of the Latin renati." After full quotations from the Offices, the writer says : " If, after this recital of these explanatory clauses, it is still asserted that regeneration or new birth means only some ecclesiastical change, we are constrained to inquire. What ideas of ' the state of salvation ' are prevailing among us ? " He then goes on, at length, to prove that the Office declares the vital importance of regeneration ; that it is to be sought in Baptism ; that this object is declared to be gained ; and that God is solemnly thanked for it. This, he says, implies the opus opci-aiiini. The protest of 1553 against this Romish error, he tells us, " was withdrawn in 1571 (Queen Elizabeth's reign), and has not since been restored; in which respect we have ceased to be Protestant." He concedes freely that Ambrose, Tertullian, and the whole primitive Church, taught the doc- trine he condemns ; and gives up the whole body of the Reformers, too, with equal candor : " When Dean Goode wrote to Mr. Spurgeon that the baptismal ser- vice involved questions of ' what might be called historic theology,' he seemed to us to yield everything. For baptismal regeneration was the prevailing belief among all classes of theologians for years after the Reformation. Nearly all, if not all, of the catechisms framed at that time are tainted with it." After quoting some of them, he concludes that " the Edwardian reformers, as a body, believed in baptismal regeneration." The attempt to evade the force of this by showing that they were Calvinists (Dean Goode's view) "would not help us out of our present difficulty." And the men of 1662, equally with those of 1552, " believed that 'baptism is our spiritual regeneration.' " He sets forth in order five different modes that have been employed by Evangelical men to get over, or under, or around the language of the Prayer-Book ; but dismisses them all in disgust (Mr. Gorham's included), as being totally destitute of Scriptural authority : " Here are no less than yf?'^ different explanations, all or any one of which destroys the unity of the baptismal service, and violates its plain letter." And he adds : " The laity, for the most part, are ignorant of or unwilling to accept them." Appendix. 323 As to the Holy Eucharist, the pamphlet tells us that in 1662 " a new spirit was breathed into our Communion Service " ; and the antipathy to the use of the words of our Lord — a strange antipathy for a Bible Christian — reappears : " We regard as unfortunate the use of the Script- ural language, ' Eat My Flesh and drink My Blood,' as it is used in some parts of the service." The opening words of the formula of reception are " constantly used to sanction high views of this Sacra- ment." It goes on to " object to the Consecration and Oblation of the Elements, and to the Invocation^' calling special attention to the addi- tions in our American Book, which make it, in the view of the pam- phleteer, so much worse than the English. He objects to the doctrinal phrase, " but also to be our spiritual food and sustenance in that holy Sacrament" ; and affirms that by the language of " the black rubric," concerning kneeling at the reception of the Holy Communion, " room was made for the entrance of the consubstantiation idea which now so extensively prevails among us." The grievances on this sacrament are summed up as follows : " In the use of Scriptural language in a wrong connection, in the consecration and oblation of the elements, in the invocation, in the reverent handling and eating of what remaineth, in the doctrinal phrase alluded to, in the want of explanation of the reasons for kneel- ing, and for the participation by the clergy before the people, we have seeds which, under certain circumstances, will germinate into Romish error." And as a specimen of such logical error, a quotation is given from Bishop Overall, who, on the words " we, and all Thy whole Church, may obtain remission of our sins," etc., remarks: "This is a plain oblation of Christ's death once offered, and a representative sacrifice of it for the sins and for the benefit of the whole world, of the whole Church." So the poor Prayer-Book cannot be trusted as to either the Ministry, or the Word, or the Sacraments ! But the Catechism is a special grievance besides ! " We regard it," says our pamphlet, " as a fruitful source of Romanizing doctrine, and as the instrument most useful in instilling in the minds of the young the germinal ideas of the sacerdotal and sacramentarian theories." Left to this, the poor child " would know but little of the finished salvation which is in Christ, and of the precious grace which flows from Him to every believing soul." Only think of it ! That miserable Catechism actually teaches " that there are duties to be done, rather than riches of grace to be enjoyed." And he concludes thus : " The large number of catechisms issued by the Evangelical Knowl- edge Society, and by other publishing houses, as well as by individuals, show how great ' is the want which they are designed to meet. The different character of the teaching they set forth is a standing protest against that which every clergyman is commanded to teach his children 324 A Champion of the Cross. at least once a month. Doubtless, if the Catechism were less frequently taught, our people would less easily be led into Romanizing error." After thus abandoning the whole Prayer-Book field to the Church party, our pamphlet is quite consistent in much that it says of that party : " The sacerdotal party are neither small in numbers nor aliens in our ecclesiastical commonwealth. Nor yet is their influence on the decline. They have been an integral part of our Church from its beginning. They have ever been numerous and influential enough fo vioitld its prevailmg se7tti?nents, and, as we have seen, to establish their own doctrinal status by material changes in the Book of Conini07t Prayer. Their growth, and the acceptance of their peculiar doctrines, have been at least coequal with the extension of the Church. Indeed, to the eyes of many they seem like a flowing tide gathering force, and sweeping away clergy and laity, churches, institutions, and dioceses. The Evan- gelical party, the true representatives of the Protestant Edwardian Reformation, with all their societies and earnestness, have been as impotent to stay this tide as Canute on Britain's sands. They have, on the other hand, felt the power of this overshadowing influence, and have become in some degree infected with semi-sacerdotalism and semi- sacramentarianism, which has dashed their courage, weakened the force of their convictions, and unjointed their armor of aggressiveness." And the Prayer-Book is the cause of it all ! " A ' Prayer-Book Churchman ' is a current phrase, expressive of this fact. Dr. Pusey and his friends have ever declared in all sincerity that they have ' made their way ' by the Prayer-Book. It seems like folly to assert that a large body of our people, intelligent as they are, have been led to adopt a doctrinal system the ver}' opposite of that which they believe is taught by the Prayer-Book, their much-loved formulary. The present position and influence of the sacerdotal party can, in our opinion, be accounted for in only one satisfactory way : they are built upon, and are the outgrowth of, the Romanizing germs in the Prayer-Book. So long as these remain, disciples thereof will multiply." While candidly saying, " We cheerfully accord to the sacerdotal party entire conscientiousness of conviction. Their doctrinal views doubtless seem to them in entire accorda^ice with the Bible and the Book of Coniinon Prayer,'' this pamphlet declares, of its own friends, " We are firmly convinced that clear views of Bible truth have led to the non-natural interpretation of the Offices. Yet how often have the Gospel teachings of the pulpit been neutralized by the instructions of the Prayer-Book ! " And again we read : " It is a noteworthy fact, that during three hundred years, a large and influential sacerdotal party have existed within our Church, and Appendix. 325 come down to our time in uninterrupted succession. Their rallying cry has been these very doctrines. They have vindicated them by ap- pealing to the natural interpretation of the Occasional Offices, our popu- lar theological formulas." And again : " The constant repetition of the declaration of baptismal regenera- tion has forced many to believe, at last, ivhat has been so often spoken in unbelief. Defections from Evangelical truth among us are to be traced to the insidious influence of the Offices. The testimony of the Articles has been but little felt, because they have been a sort of clerical dessert (some decline dessert), while the Offices have been daily food. . . . Humiliating as it is to confess all this, we feel that nothing is to be gained, and much may be lost, by attempting to conceal what is patent to the world. . . . One marvels to see how busy are some Sacerdotalists in plucking the blossom of Ritualism from the plant of High Churchism, as if it were of abnormal growth, and not the natural efflorescence. One grows sad while observing the many Evangelicals who try to stay the tide of High Churchmanship by quoting the Prayer- Book. In view of these facts, we are forced to regard the Prayer-Book as the fountain whence flows that stream of Romanizing influences which is rapidly growing into a mighty river, and, with its many branches, penetrating our whole Church." But while thus conclusively recognizing the honesty of the position of the Church party, and the fact that the standards of the Church clearly teach their principles, the picture drawn by the pamphlet of the position of the party it represents is pitiable in the extreme. As to the Baptismal Offices, he says there is one question which it will not do to pass by : " It is this : How can Evaiigelical men use these Offices and yet re- 7naijt faithful to the truth as it is ill Jesus? We would answer, in their behalf, that few of them administer heartily : some under protest ; some refuse ; the majority of them apologize for their action, by putting a non-natural sense upon the Offices. When asked to explain them they explain them away. . . . Every Evangelical minister, then, speaks to his congregation with a mental reservatio7i, and heartily thanks God for doing what he does not believe, in all cases, is done I Is it possible that the ser\^ants of God, who, above all others, are to provide things honest before all men, are compelled to resort to such equivocation, and that public Offices can be framed only on such a principle ? If we suppose that this hypothesis is good when applied to the minister, what has charity to do with the child's own declaration, ' Wherein I was made,' etc. Are we to teach our children to lie? " Then again, in a passage to which we have already referred, after considering the five Low-Church explanations of the Baptismal Offices, he says : 326 A CJiainpion of tJie Cross. " Here are no less than five different explanations, all or any one of which destroys the unity of the Baptismal Service, and violates its plain letter. They are so constantly obtruded as to suggest great sensitive- ness of conscience behind them. They have been unceasingly offered, but without relieving many of a sore burden which the service imposes. Some have outgrown the scruples of their consciences, but every new generation is obliged to pass through the same struggles as those who have gone before. The world is slow to believe that popular devotional formularies are so recondite in their meaning that a vast amount of his- torical lore is necessary for their right interpretation, and has been quick to style these various explanations ' traditional, evasive expedients,' bad in principle, and unsatisfactory in result." Again : " An increasing number of the clergy are struggling under stress of conscience, tortured with doubts as to their duty. . . . They do not wish to get rid of their scruples by outgrowing them. Yet they cannot, without deep pain, use parts of some of the Occasional Offices. They shrink from the continued repetition of unsatisfactory explanations. They regard with alarm the influence of the Prayer-Book upon many of the souls committed to their charge. This stress of conscience dulls their enthusiasm and abates their influence. . . . We cannot use or give a Prayer-Book without, in some sense, becoming a party to its errors." And the prospects ahead seem to be as little inviting, or rather, still less so : " Still further it may be asked. Would not a revision to-day be less Protestant than it would have been twenty years ago ? Will it not be still less Protestant if it takes place twenty years hence, supposing the policy of the future to be, as in the past, Micawber-like } * Have we power to hinder such revision if the dominant party resolve to make it ? What, then, is our hope of diffusing Evangelical truth throughout our communion, of relieving distressed consciences, of preventing a Ro- manizing revision, but in such agitation in reference to the Roman- izing germs in the Prayer-Book as will call attention to the doctrines which they naturally develop, and will prepare the way for their extir- pation? " And the opening part of the pamphlet speaks of " the thickening calamities in our body politic," admitting that the very work which is * The revision completed in 1892 has completely verified this doleful pre- diction of the Low Churchmen of 1867. Such relaxation of rubrics as was granted was made in accordance with the customs of " Ritualists," and the doctrinal statements were made stronger, while the enrichments were pre- cisely such as were asked for by High Churchmen. Appendix. 327 proposed " must increase the sad embarrassments and the weighty re- sponsibilities of the times in which we live." Poor Evangelicals ! We do not wonder that they feel blue ! This remarkable pamphlet at first was offered for gratuitous distri- bution, being widely mailed to clergy and laity all over the country. Sound Churchmen were so delighted with it, that within a few days applications from several of them were made for some five thousand copies in the aggregate, to be used as " campaign documents " for Churchmen. A dim consciousness that a mistake had been made then dawned upon some of the Evangelical leaders, and applicants were told that there were " none on hand." The second edition was marked on the title-page : " Price ten cents, post-paid." If this pamphlet had been the only thing of the sort, and if — being anonymous — it had not been issued from a responsible office, it might have passed for a High-Church hoax. But very soon after ap- peared another pamphlet, in a blue cover, evidently by a different hand, and with differences of treatment, but marvellously agreeing in the chief points we have noted. It is entitled, '' Revidenda ; or, A brief Statement of those things in the Liturgy which should be revised and altered," etc. It acknowledges that since the time of Edward VI. changes have been made " with the view of conciliating High Church- men and Romanists ; " and that " the real presence of Christ in or with the elements is not ignored." It admits that " The Baptismal Service being at the foundation of the ritual and Liturgy of our Church, we find all other parts of the ecclesiastical system built upon it, and in more or less harmony of design ; " yet he would destroy it root and branch. The author of it declares that the use of the ^K'ord priest " in any sense other than that in which any disciple may claim it, is unscriptural and sinful." As to Ordination, we are glad to learn from him that the alternative form in the ordination of priests, " Take thou authority," etc., " is now seldom used ; " and he adds : " So here we see the minister at his second ordination is invested with rights and privileges not granted to the deacon. He argues. If those priestly words are used, surely I have the right to interpret them in accordance with the well-known and straightforward meaning of them. The burden of proof that the words do not teach that I am to forgive sins, lies with those who deny the literal interpretation. So it does, etc." Touching the Declaration of Absolution in the Daily Prayer, he says: " We cannot expect members of other Churches to be posted and fa- miliar with the exceptions, explanations, rebutting evidence, and lines of argument, by which Evangelical men keep a good conscience [.''J in the use of the absolution service [sic]. Give it the ' priestly ' interpre- tation, and it is blasphemy, and many of us would never use it again if that is fairly proved. Allow that it is probably the sense, and the most 328 A Champion of the Cross. fair and reasonable view of it, then the conscience is entangled, the use of the form is attended with misgiving, weight, and regret." . Among other familiar places, the Institution Office is faulted heavily : " It is a fungus ; but like all plants of that kind, the ideas in the In- stitution Office have rapidly increased, and have spread the false and corrupting sacerdotal theor}^ until it has nearly covered the whole denomination." Of course, the writer wishes all these things to be entirely removed ; but the most noticeable things he says are in cor- roboration of the confessions of the other pamphlet as to the intolerably dishonest position of the Evangelicals at present : " The real grievance is, that we do not like to read aloud passages and words, from one point of view% under cover of some sort of mental reservation, or according to a rather far-fetched interpretation, which are generally understood by our congregations in another sense, and — as is claimed by those who are entirely satisfied with the Offices — in their plain, primar\', and literal sense. . . . It is not always pos- sible to avoid being compromised and placed in a false position, when, in connection with others, the services are used, and an interpretation by emphasis or gesture is given by the officiator. . . . The use of the expressions under consideration, and the avowed or implied position that they are taken and understood in a different sense, becomes a trainijig i?i equivocation^ After showing the evils of dishonest subscriptions to the Articles, he continues : " The same course in reference to the Liturg}' has ended in a similar result. The danger, that the habit of mind, and the practice of inter- pretation and double sense, will extend to the words of Scripture themselves, and thus the same equivocation, glossing, and practical reversal of their divine statements will be apparent, is not one merely to be apprehended. The evil has been most sadly and widely exempli- fied, and threatens to affect all religious teaching." This confession that the Broad-Church school, and the skeptical tendency, are the direct outgrowth of Low-Churchism, is very striking, and perfectly true. But the evil, our author says, will not stop with the things of religion : " The practice will be adopted in secular matters, and engender and encourage prevarication and equivocation, the result of mental reser\'e, in all the relations and business of life. There will be an entire want of reliance on the plainest and most earnest and solemn declarations, and the query will be changed from ' What is truth .^ ' to ' Where is truth ? ' Thus it will be seen that the evil principle once introduced, or allowed, spreads its contagion, and taints all the good with which it comes in contact. The double or less obvious sense becomes a cancer Appendix. 329 on the face of truth. In the name, therefore, of plain, honest speaking, in the name of pubhc morahty, in the name of true religion, let us preclude the need or the possibility of anything like equivocation." And yet once more, in his concluding summary of " plain reasons " why the Prayer-Book should be revised, he thus words one of them : " Because various formularies of the Church cannot now be read without apparent mental reservation ; and it is most undesirable that Christian ministers should even appear to understand and interpret words otherwise than in their plain and strict meaning." General Convention, therefore, is implored to give relief to the *' consciences " that are so sorely aggrieved. The Moderates among the Evangelicals are left, by this dashing movement of the Radicals, in a very uncomfortable position. They try to " explain away " the plain language of the Church, and claim that it does not mean what it plainly says. But the world is beginning to smile at so small a minority attempting to afhx new meanings to the English language. All Rom^anists, all Dissenters, all of the Church party (comprising five-sixths of all Churchmen), and now all the Rad- icals, who are the only really aggressive portion of the Evangelical party itself, are agreed that the Standards of our Church teach what the Church party holds ; and even the most pious impudence in the world will soon be shamed out of the attempt to assert the contrary. The Episcopalian is particularly severe upon the " explainers " among its own friends. It says Qanuary 13, iT ' "Some say, 'Pooh, pooh, we find no difficulty in the use of the book. We mean so and so by the words. We have wisdom — we know that an idol is nothing in the world ; ' we can sit in the idol's temple and eat things offered in sacrifice to that false god, yet it gives us no trouble ; we eat to satisfy hunger, and do not regard appearances. Others explain and explain, and try to reconcile the objectionable ex- pressions, and when a comfortable position helps them to invent, they get along pretty well. Others use the services, and suffer in mind and conscience, crying, ' Oh, Lord ! how long ? Lord, what wilt Thou have us to do ? Is it Thy voice, " Come ye out from among them, and be separate, and touch no unclean thing " ? ' Others decline their parishes, refuse to use the obnoxious services and expressions, and are censured for using the defective modes. They deny the teachings which they regard favorable to the false theory, refuse to be responsi- ble for their pernicious influence, and conscientiously suffer and wait for the day of deliverance. With these we sympathize; with these serious and anxious thinkers, feeling after God, and inquiring His will, we affiliate ; in their interest we exert ourselves. Their fortunes are ours ; their lot is pur chosen inheritance. Where they go we will go, and there we hope to remain. Their God shall be our God, and their people our people." 330 A Champion of the Cross. So the moderate Evangelicals are confessed to be not only dishonest, but mercenar}' also ! " When a comfortable position helps them to in- veftt, they get along pretty well." Is not this rather severe upon cer- tain Low-Church Bishops, to say nothing of many others whom we could name ? Well may they exclaim, on reading such articles, " Save us from our friends I " But their chagrin cannot prevent the effect of the blow. These pamphleteers will be found to have done to their own party as fatal a service as General Hood rendered to " the Lost Cause " when he turned his face northward, and undertook to " cut off General Sherman's communications." Careful readers of the pink pamphlet will have noted its clear threat of schism, if the demand for relief of " consciences " by means of re- vision were not complied with : " The Romanizing germs in the Prayer-Book are an offence to their consciences. They feel that they have a right to claim such relief as, not being unreasonable in itself, may be granted without yielding any essential of the faith, or destroying the unity of the Church. If they are denied this relief, it will be necessary for them to seek it wherever they can find it. Their stress of conscience will not allow them to rest content in their present status. . . . On S. Bartholomew's day, 1662, two thousand clergymen, including such men as Baxter, Owen, Alleine, Howell, Flavel, Poole, went out from the Church of England, because relief to their conscientious convictions was denied." This threat of a schism, as we mentioned at first, was openly made in a leading Evangelical paper, on the express ground that a schism was the only means of preventing the entire absorption of the Low- Church party.* It has been repeated again and again, in various forms, by others of their organs, especially The Protestafit Churchman and The Episcopalian. It was openly talked of, and generally agreed to, at the indignation meeting which followed the sentence upon young Mr. Tyng ; and then and there the chief point at issue was, the time at w^hich the schism should be made, some being clamorous for making it at once, and others declaring that it would be better to wait until they should see whether the next General Convention would grant them the " relief " which they demanded ; and if it would fiot, then they would go for a schism unanimously. Various suggestions for inde- pendent action, amounting, in fact, to schism, have been repeatedly * [This threat of making a schism was at last carried out, and in 1873 and 1874 the " Reformed Episcopal Church " was organized. Bishop Cummin, then Assistant Bishop of Kentucky, was the only prelate who joined the new sect. It was a great loss to the Church that any high-minded and pious clergymen and laymen should feel impelled to leave the Church ; yet they could not accept the Prayer-Book as it is, and honorably followed their con- sciences. Their places are illy filled by the Broad Church clergymen, who openly deny 'that they are bound to believe the doctrines of the Church, and even deny the Deity of Jesus Christ, the Inspiration of the whole Bible, and the need of a Redeemer from sin. — C. F. S.] Appendix. 331 made. For instance, The Protestant C/mrc/wian of April 2, 1868, in a leading- editorial on " The Liberal Branch of the Protestant Episcopal Church," said : " There are only three ways in which the relations between these parties can be adjusted. One is by the elimination from the Church of the sacerdotal party ; another is by the elimination of the party of the Reformation ; and the third is by some arrangement by which both can remain in the Church, each divesting itself as far as possible of every responsibility in regard to the other. The third method is the one we would now consider. " We take it for granted, on this supposition, that the sacerdotal sys- tem is to remain in the Church in such a form that it will be impossible to compromise with it. The first effect of this will be that the legisla- tion of the General and Diocesan Conventions must be restricted to a very narrow sphere. It would be impossible to legislate beyond the narrowest limits without interference with conscientious convictions, and without provoking resistance on the one side or the other. There will, from the necessities of the case, come to be virtually two ecclesi- astical bodies, organically connected together, each ordering for itself most of those matters which have heretofore been provided for by the General Convention. " The Liberal and Evangelical party has long since adopted the policy — which it is now too late to reverse, even if it were desirable — of leaving the organic Church institutions in the hands of the opposing party. What it needs now in order to secure for itself the prestige which the control of Church organizations gives to its opponents, is to assume itself a quasi-ecclesiastical character, and assert and maintain for itself a position of virtual independence in the Church. . . . " This much is certain, that the divergence of parties in our Church is now so gT-eat that they have not common ground to stand upon. It is impossible that both should agree in any legislation except of the most general character. It would be intolerable that one should legis- late for the other. If, then, they are to remain together, each must be permitted to order its own affairs in its own way." We give this extract, not because of any specific importance in it, but merely as a sample of the wild schemes that are passing through the brains of the few thinking men who yet cling to a dwindling and dying party. What can be more absurd, in a free country which has just tri- umphed in the greatest civil war the world ever saw, waged in order to compel the minority to submit to the majority when acting within con- stitutional forms of law — what can be more preposterously absurd, in such a country, than to assert a permanent right on the part of the minority to disobey all legislation, because it is so small a minority as to be unable to secure any appreciable weight in the legislative body that governs the whole? On the same ground, when the Republicans con- trol more than two-thirds of both Houses of Congress, the Democrats are freed from any obligation to obey the laws enacted by such a Con- 352 A Champion of the Cross. other ; " therefore the minority must " assert and maintain for itself a position of virtual independence in the countr}^ ! " This is secession doctrine with a vengeance I The old theor}?" used to be, that a Sover- eign State had the right to secede. This new theorj" is, that any num- ber of Sovereign individuals have the right to secede, though they be not numerous enough to carry a single State in the Union ; and the fewer they are, the better is their right, and the clearer their duty, to secede ! When a great party has run down into such drivel as this, it is about time to order its coffin and write its epitaph. But in order to measure the utter fatuity of this scheme of a schism, we must go back once more, and notice the great event which has really crushed out all possibility of vigorous life for a Low-Church party hereafter in the Anglican communion. We refer to the Council of Lambeth ; the full greatness and importance of which has not as yet begun to dawn upon the minds of more than a few. An absolute ma- jority of all the bishops of our Communion were there present, and all signed its Synodical letter, and agreed to its resolutions. So large a number of the absentees have since sent in their entire adhesion, that a hea\y majority of each separately organized portion of our Communion is now committed, irrevocably, to the maintenance of what was there done. Now the chief reliance of the Low-Church party is upon the Thirty-nine Articles (which they misunderstand) ; and the Council of Lambeth utterly ignored the Thirty-nine Articles. The Low-Church party glories in the being " Protestant ; " and the Council of Lambeth utterly ignored Protestantism. The Evangelicals hold themselves up as the models of all true religion, and repudiate all idea of the reunion of Christendom except upon their own party platform ; and the Coun- cil of Lambeth did not set up our Communion as the model for all Christendom, but candidly confessed our own short-comings, coldness, and need of great improvements. The Evangelicals abhor the idea of recognizing the Primitive Church as a standard, since they regard the Sovereign Individual (provided he be an Evangelical) as superior to all the rest of Christendom ; whereas the Council of Lambeth recognized " the undisputed General Councils " as the unquestionable standard of the faith of the whole Anglican Communion. There is not a plank — not even a splinter — of the Evangelical platform left standing, by the action of that Council. Low-Churchism, word and thing, is utterly thrown overboard and done for. And there were enough Low-Church bishops there present to commit their whole party, and really to sign away, for all future time, its xoxy right to existence. But besides this positive action, there was something else. Colenso is a Protestant — a pure Protestant. He believes in private judgment, and in the Sovereign Individual. He declares himself a " Liberal " Christian — thus claiming the same distinctive word which L^nitarians delight in, and which The Protestant ChiircJiniaji has proposed to take as equally appropriate to its wing of nominal " Episcopalians," whenever the schism is complete. Perhaps, if they were to send for him, Colenso would consent to come over, from Natal, where he has Appeal dix. 333 only two or three clergy and parishes to own him, and be the " Liberal " Bishop of the new " Liberal Church." They might agree happily in altering the Prayer-Book, for Colenso would heartily indorse the idea of the author of Revidenda that revision should proceed on " the prin- ciple of omission rather than of addition." " It is proposed to dimin- ish ^ he says, " rather than increase, the dogmatic assertions of our standards." Now before the meeting of the Council of Lambeth it was confidently stated that, in case of a schism, there would not be wanted among our American Evangelicals a sufficient number of bishops to keep up the Succession. But when they met at Lambeth, they jfound that Colenso was not invited, and did not dare to come. They found that although, from technical reasons growing out of the relations between Church and State in England, the Council was pre- vented from acting formally on the subject, yet that, on every ground except the Queen's letters patent and royal mandate, Colenso was utterly cast out, and no member of the Council would have anything to do with him. And American Evangelical Bishops could easily reflect that, in their case, there would be no " royal mandate " or " letters-patent " to impair or impede the universality and promptness of their rejection, in case they should go into a " Liberal " schism in these United States. Since that Council, therefore, we have seen no more public statements confidently claiming " at least three bishops " as ready to head the schism ; but privately we have heard of very edifying confessions that their Evangelical Bishops " came back from Lambeth with their mouths stuffed with cotton." It is certain that not the slightest semblance of encouragement has been given by any Evangelical Bishop to the notion of getting up a schism, Moreover, there is not a single diocese which would go, even if its bishop went ; and it does not appear that more than just one parish could be found to go with its minister, should he choose to become a schismatic. And now comes Mr. Cracraft, with his famous letter to Bishop Mcllvaine renouncing the ministry of the Church ; for, logically, here is the best place to mention it, and historically it brings us back from our Lambeth digression to a resumption of our sketch of the " agita- tion "which was to affect the General Convention of 1868. This letter appeared just after those two notable pamphlets — the Romanizing Germs and Revidenda. And it corresponds wonderfully with them in all their strong points, besides the additional interest of announcing an action in logical consistency therewith. Mr. Cracraft — who had been a priest in the Church for a quarter of a century or thereabouts, and a large part of the time in the Diocese of Ohio — writes to his " dear friend " the Bishop of Ohio, " asking to dis- solve his connection with the Protestant Episcopal Church," for sundry reasons. First, because " the plain, literal, and historical teaching of the Offices of the Prayer-Book " would make him to be " a priest, in the sacerdotal sense." " With me," he adds, " the conviction is irre- sistible that the , minister in our Church is considered a priest in this anti-Protestant sense." And he goes on to prove it. He next asserts that " the proper accompaniment of the character here defined is, I con- 334 A Champiofi of the Cross. sider, obviously furnished — an altar ; " and he proves that — u'hich is a bitter irony on the Bishop of Ohio himself, whose most strenuous exer- tions of Episcopal prerogative have been directed to the denial that we have any Altar, and who has always refused to consecrate any church which had not, in place of an Altar, a wooden table, with legs. But regardless of the bishop's feelings, the cruel Cracraft goes on next to prove that the priest and altar are not without their proper Sacrifice. A portion of the Consecration Prayer, he says, " is expressly called the • Oblatio7i.' " And he pointedly continues : " All, I suppose, clearly understand oblation to mean an offering — a sacrifice. Taken in its 7iatiiral and historical sense, this oblation prayer can only be understood to teach that the Lord's Supper is not only a memorial, but a Sacrifice. In glancing back over this, we shall find, I think, fully presented, first, a priest, in the sacerdotal sense ; second, an altar, on which the sacrifice is to be offered ; and finally, an offering, to be presented to God in the sense of a sacrifice." Next he asserts that the priest has the " priestly /^w^ for poor people, when in want of a clergyman, to hunt him up among boarding-houses down-town, or indistinguishable rows of brick or brown stone uptown. No ! There this house full of clergy would reside, on the Cathedral grounds ; none of them would be allowed more than one month's absence during the year, and not more than two to be absent at once at any one time from the city ; nor ever less than two or three left in attendance at the house at any hour of the day or night, and this house of residence would be perpetual and unchanging, so that once known it could be found again with ease. But it must not be supposed that this Cathedral will stand, like old Trinity on Broadway, with nothing but graves beside it, solitary, amidst the noises of this huge business Babel. Nowhere should this great Church abut upon the open street. But it should stand in the centre of a large inclosed ground ; protected by a complete eiitourage of other buildings, from the dust and noises of the street ; approached by its four gates, and the green grass and quiet trees filling the space — as large a space as could be gotten — between the great church and its surrounding buildings. Nor should these surrounding buildings in- close anything except what is needed for the service of the Cathedral, or the diocese of which it should be the mother-church — the very heart and centre. First there should be the Bishop's house — plain, though large and liberal, and of superior dignity to any other in the group. Next to him should be the houses of the four principal persons, fol- lowed by the common residence of the rest of the cathedral clergy. Then there should be a house for the head of the cathedral school, and school-rooms, and common rooms and dormitories for the choir-boys. The organist should have his own house also, and there should be others for the vergers or sextons and their families. Beside these there should be the chapter house. There would the House of Bishops meet and sit during General Convention or in council, while the Lower House occupied an adjoining transept. In the great surrounding circle of buildings there should be a church hospital, a sisterhood house, a dispensary, an infirmary, an asylum for superannuated and infirm clergy, where they could live upon the Church they had served during their lives, and daily attend her cathedral worship, and pray for her when they were too old to do anything else in her behalf. There should also be the cathedral library — the chief collection of books which could be found anywhere in the country ; and the muniment room, where the archives of the American Church should be kept safely, instead of in a tin box in a private residence, subject to all the chances of fire. There should be the diocesan treasury, and there the offices of every one of 368 A Champion of the Cross. the Church societies, whether diocesan or general — the more prominent position being of course assigned to the latter. The cloisters we have already mentioned as devoted to the accommodation of the candi- dates for the diaconate. Thus there would be gathered within one great circuit, every part and parcel of that which is needed for the general life and organic operations of the Church, together with a por- tion, at least, of that which is necessar}' for her work anywhere, even down to the least detail. And this complex variety of institutions, thus clustering around the base of the great Mother-Church, would furnish of itself — even without any aid from elsewhere — a large and devout and constant congregation of the faithful for the daily ser\uce and the weekly Eucharist, and for every other function which consti- tutes, or ought to constitute, any part of the Church's life. Who is there who would not rejoice to see such a sight as this } But it may be asked, even by those who would approve and admire so glorious a scheme as we have rudely sketched — where could it be possible to get the means for reahzing it ? To this I reply, that we have already all, or nearly all, the means ly- ing ready to our hand now in our very midst, only we do not see them. Or, if we have not enough to complete, we have at least enough to begin, and begin well, with the confidence that by the time the work is ready for completion, the additional means will come by the process of natural and inevitable increase. [He goes on to specify these elements of his plan : the estates of Trinity forming a basis, at least sufficient, without hurting their present use, for " a fair start." He speaks of that corporation as an immense money power, which may work with the Bishop, and may not ; but which if it does work with the Bishop should in some way do so on ac- count of his Order, and not because pleased with the Bishop person- ally. The G. T. S. ought to be brought into the Cathedral close, and thus its lack of a proper chapel could be met by the Cathedral Choir, and its library safely housed. The Episcopal Residence owned then by the Diocese, if sold, would furnish abundant means for the erection of a better one in the Close. Trinity School would be the basis of a full Cathedral School. Columbia College would furnish the full education spoken of, the Trinity School already having a large number of scholar- ships in the same. The Society for the Proniotio7i of Religion and Learning would help candidates for Orders. The City Mission So- ciety would have abundance of means, when once revived with active zeal. By its Charter it may hold unlimited amounts of property, and on this Charter full provision could be made for the support of the Ca- thedral Clergy, should no other mode be feasible. The Sisterhood House was already in existence in New York and St. Luke's Hospital and Dispensary and Infirmar}- were just rising into existence. The other Societies were in New York, too.] What, then, is wanting? The ground is covered with confused heaps of stone, all cut and squared, of timber measured and shaped, and all manner of materials for the erection of a mightier and more Appendix. 369 beautiful fabric, material and spiritual, than has ever yet been seen on this American Continent. We want nothing but The Architect — the wise Master Builder — who can see clearly when each fits into each, whose hand is cunning enough to bring together the parts already pre- pared for one another ; who can, in other words, simply pick up and put together the admirable and abundant materials that now lie scat- tered in chaotic confusion all round him on every side. Let this be once done, and the head of the Diocese will be no longer head only in name, while the substance of power and influence is in other hands. The visible array of the Church will be no longer dispersed in such wise as to be almost invisible to the world around. But after the long eclipse of her primitive and powerful system, she will once more " look forth as the morning." Not dimmed and hidden by the petty jealou- sies and suspicions, the cowardly fears and misbelieving apprehensions, which men are forever conjuring up to cloud the very light of day ; but once more " clear as the sun." Not split into disjointed fragments ; not left at sixes and sevens, as if hap-hazard were the only law of the Church's growth ; not lying in such pertinacious confusions that it was impossible that any two pieces of the Church system could ever be made to hang together ; not like an undisciplined, disorderly mob, so scattered and mixed up among the superior members of the foe as to be almost imperceptible ; but once more a compact Body, in goodly order and close array, each several man gaining strength from his union with all the others, marshalled side by side under lawful com- mand and in perfect discipline ; and through the gathering clouds that foretell the approach of earth's greatest battle and her last, flashing in bold and peerless beauty, full upon the sight of her innumerable ene- mies, "terrible as an army with banners." The spectacle presented in these later days of Columbia College, St, Luke's Hospital, and the already rising walls of the Cathedral of St. John the Divine, show how true was the outlook of Hopkins when, in 1855, he pictured this very combination of great corporations near the Cathedral Church. 24 LETTERS. *' July 27, 1891. " Dear S : Writing grows harder and harder for me, especi- ally when there is nothing to say, except to thank you for your kind letters. . . . " As to myself, there are so many others in the world who have more to suffer than I have that I ca7it help being patient. It gives me neither thought nor trouble. I am only tha7ikfnl that it is no worse. I can yet read with entire comfort, and hardly move from my seat from morning till night. I read and doze and doze until it is time to go to bed ; and there you know my whole life except when — very rarely — I write a few brief letters. Your items of news about friends are always welcome. " Ever yours, " H. (enry)." " Troy, N. Y., August 14, 1891. " Dear Miss Hall : Our dear friend passed away in his sleep shortly after midnight. " That his end should be so free from suffering, at the last, was a great comfort. " His death took place at my place near Hudson, and I am in Troy arranging for the funeral. . . . " Faithfully yours, " E. D. Ferguson." TO THE SAME. " August 22, 1891. " We have returned from conveying the body of our dear friend to its last resting place at Rock Point, and knowing the long friendship that had existed between you, I felt that you would be interested in the events at the close of his life. " By what may seem almost providential means — or at least by es- caping constantly threatened dangers, his life extended much further than I anticipated, by at least more than a year. " It had been his dread, and my expectation, that he would be ab- solutely helpless for a time preceding his dissolution, for during all this time there was a loss of strength, and he had for a long time re- quired occasional assistance. " He was able, however, to occupy his time in reading and conver- Appendix. 371 sation, though during certain feverish attacks to which he was liable he would be very sleepy for two or three days at a time. " On Monday and Tuesday preceding his death he had one of these attacks, but on Wednesday and Thursday he was bright ; read all the time when not talking, and was as comfortable as could be expected. " He was unable to lie long in one position, and the night before his death he had been rather more restless than usual, so that I went to his assistance quite frequently to get him up, and to aid him in lying down again. " The night of his death (Thursday night) he asked to go to bed quite early, and I had one of my family sit up in an adjoining room to go in and watch him. " He went readily to sleep, and lay perfectly quiet, until soon after midnight, the watcher, noticing that he did not for a few minutes make his usual noise in breathing, called me, and I found he had just passed away without a motion — without a struggle — from sleep to sleep. Knowing that you would take an interest in it all I send you this brief account of his passage from this life to life eternal. " Sincerely, "E. D. Ferguson." FROM THE SAME. TO THE SAME. " I will supplement my letter by a brief note. " I may say that he was not only brave but cheerful to the end. Only for a few times did the peevishness of invalidism show itself toward the end, and even that which might be called peevishness in him would in the average invalid have passed for good humor. " He left no special messages to anyone. All of that seemed to have been arranged. Last year, when it seemed he might soon pass away, he left some suggestions to me concerning you. " The end stole on him so that there was no time for messages — and his last words were ' that will do, dear,' as I turned him and arranged him in bed. He often spoke to me of you, and I fully understood the deep interest you took in each other, so I telegraphed you, it being the only telegram I sent except to his sister, who attended to the rest. " I do not feel that I need thanks or praise for my care of him. I was glad to do it, and would do it gladly again ; hence there is no merit in it. " Sincerely, " E. D. Ferguson." FROM MRS. FERGUSON TO MISS HALL. "... I assure you of dear Dr. Hopkins' unwavering faith until his last moments. No word of doubt ever escaped his lips, and his one remark when speaking of the future state, and his nearness to it, was, " just as 3/2 A CJiampion of the Cross. the Father wills." He frequently spoke of his death as one would speak of passing from one room to another. There was no evidence in his daily conversation that he ever had a fear or a doubt of the future or his jNIaster's inhnite love. Could 3^ou have seen how perfectly happy he was you could never have doubted his trust and confidence in God. The mfluence of his cheerful resignation and perfect trust has left an impression on our family that can never be forgotten — in fact it was felt by all who came to see him. " Yours very lovingly, " Marion A. Ferguson. " Nov. 13, 1892." "233 Clarendon St., Boston, "July 15, 1891. " Dear Dr. Hopkins : I thank you very much indeed for both your letters. They give me opportunity to acknowledge your kind and cor- dial advocacy of my election, and all the chivalrous things you have said during this prolonged discussion. I have no right to regret the discussion, prolonged as it has been, since it has led m.y friends to say so many friendly words, and has clothed the election with all the sig- nificance that could possibly be given to it. Now I shall rejoice indeed if I can receive strength and wisdom to do a Bishop's duty faithfully and well. " I hope that you will come to the consecration ; and with all best wishes for your health and happiness I am sincerely your friend and brother, "Phillips Brooks." INDEX. Addington Park, Croydon, 163, 164. All Saints, Margaret Street, 180, 181. Altar vessels, designs for, 49-61. Alms bason, gift of American Church to the Church of England, 54-57. Alumni Lectureship on Evidences, 220-222. Anglican Church, compared with Ro- man and Eastern Churches, 291-293. " Athirst for love," 39. Barker, Br, 202. Batterson, Dr. H. G. , 203, 204, 216. Battle against High Churchmen, 78. Beauvais, cathedral of, 178. Birth, I, Blank Cartridge, The, editorials, 127- 145- " Blow on, Thou Mighty Wind," hymn for Whitsunday, 65, 66. Breck, Dr. James, 196. Brigonnet, Bp., of Meaux, 283, 284. Cady, Dr. Philander K., 223. Canterbury, 167-169. Capel, Mgr. , controversy with, 217. Carey, Rev. Arthur, 21, 22. Caricatures, 34, 35. Cathedral System in the City, 359-369. Characteristics of parents, 2-5. Chester, 150. Church Journal, 83. " Church, as it is," editorial, editorials, 95-104. Church, in the face of Civil War, 105- 108. Church Music, 61-72. Clarkson, Bp., anecdote of, 216. Clerical hfe of the elder Hopkins, 5-7. Colenso, Bp. , 146, 147. Controversy about Rituahsm, 187-190. Courtney, Dr. P., 199. Dana, Charles A., 36. Death of Bp. Hopkins, 183. Death of Dr. Hopkins, 231. Decline and Fall of the Low Church Party, Appendix, 295-358. Defeat of movement to divide diocese of Central Pennsylvania, 208. Defence of Low Churchmen, 191, 192. Designs, 49-61. Diaconate, Dr. Hopkins on the, 85-87. Dieppe, 173. Diocese of Springfield, 198. Dix, Dr. Morgan, 61, 146, 213. I " Dream of a Child," 231-234. Durham, cathedral of, 151, 152. ! Ecclesiological Society of New 1 York, 49, 61. j Election of Dr. Phillips Brooks to the [ Episcopate, 198, 372. Elliott, Bp. of Georgia, 21. I Failure of Bp. Hopkins, 13-15. Family prayers, collects for, 250. Family school, 8-10. Fearlessness, 91, 94, 192. ; Ferguson, Dr. E. D. , 186, 223, 224. ; Fredericksburg, Va., 201, 202. Gallicanism, 179. General Convention, 216, 218. General Theological Seminary, 21, 22, 45-49, 93, 94, 206-209, 220-223. Goethe, translation of, 36. Graduated Representation, 239-242. Graduates from University of Vermont, 12. " Gregorians vs. Anglicans," an inci- dent, 63, 64. Hoffman, Dr. E. A., 161, 210, 222, 223. Home-making, 18-21. "Huckleberry Pudding," editorial, 112-114. Huguenots, 289-291. Hymnal ; the right to use an unauthor- ized, 69, 70. Iconoclasm, 223, 228. Illinois, Province of, 199, 200. Illness, 223-225, 231, 235. Innovations, no, iii. 374 Index. "Jerusalem, my home," hymn, 67 68. Lambeth .Conferexce, 147-149, 167-171. Laon, cathedral of, 177, 178. "Law of Rituahsm," by Bp. Hopkins, 126. Lay Element in England and America (from Contemporary Review) 258- 280. Letters, 15, 18, 21-38, 196-217, 220- 228, 370-372. Liberty and Constitutional Law, 115- 118. Liddon, Dr., 205. Lincoln, cathedral of, 154, 155. Littledale, Dr., letters from, 280, 282. London, 158, 159, 162, 163. Mackonochie, Rev. A. H. , 162. Mahan, Dr. Milo, 61, 83, 93, 103. Marriage of his parents, 3. McVickar, Dr. John, 61, 84. Montluc, Bp. of Valence, 287. Mother of Dr. Hopkins, 1-5. Murder of President Lincoln, 108. "My life is like a freighted barque," Zl^ 38. Norwich, cathedral of, 157, 158. Ordination, Deacon, t^, ; Priest, 186. Oxford, Colleges of, 164-167. Oxford Tracts, Bishop Hopkins on the, 36. Paris, 174, 175, 179. Parliament House, 160. Pastoral staff for Bp. Howe. 58-61. Pennsylvania, Federate Council of, 205-207, 211-213, 215. Perry, Rev. T. W. , 159, 165. Personal customs of Dr. Hopkins, 115. Peterborough, cathedral of, 155. Plattsburgh, 183-193. Policy of Church Journal, 84. " Print-Colorer's Lament," 43, 44. Province of Illinois, 223-225, 231, 235. Provincial system, 252-257. Pusey, Dr., 165-167. Racine College, 199. Reunion of Christendom, 218-220. Review of the history of the Church, 74-81. Rheims, cathedral of, 175, 176. Ritualism, birth of, 49. " Ritualism, what is," 1 19-126. Rock Point, 18. Roman Church, changes in, 225-227. Rouen, cathedral of, 174. Russian Liturgy in Trinity Chapel, New York, 109. Sale of the Church Journal, 184. Savannah, tutor at, 21. " Scholars and Gentlemen," editorials, 87-90. Seals, 49, 50. Sermons, 244. Seymour, Bp., 82, 84, 198, 231. " Sparrows in Winter," 189, 190. St. Alban's, Holborn, 160, 161. St. Alban's, New York, no. I St. Alban's, Peale, Pa., 214, I St. George the Martyr, 211, 249. I " Stuffed Tiger," editorial, loi. Sweet, Rev. C. F., 223, 228. j " Tenacity of purpose " on part of ] Rome, 100, loi. ! Thompson, Bp. H. M., 236, 237. Vergennrs, 185. I Vermont, Dr. Hopkins' father Bp. of, i II. ! Vermont Drawing-book, 42. ' Vermont Episcopal Institute, 11, 12. Walker, Bp. W. D., 168, 211. Walter, W. H., Mus. Doc, 63. Ward, Rev. Juhus H., 184. I Westminster Abbey, 158, 159. i " We three Kings of Orient are," carol, with music, 71, 72. I Whitehead, Bp. , 201. Williamsport, 193-195. "Wooden Turk," editorial, 103. Wordsworth, Bp. Chr. (also Archdea- con), 56, 57, 228. York, 152, 153. LIST OF DR. HOPKINS' SEPARATE PUBLICATIONS. Life of Bishop Hopkins. By one of his Sons. 1872. The Works of Dr. Milo Mahan, with Memoir. 1875. Poems by the Wayside. 1883. Carols, Hymns, and Songs. Fourth edition, enlarged. 1883. On Romanism. i8go. (The Controversy with Mgr. Capel.) . . .„-yr ■ » . . ■- LIBRARY OF CONGRESS A Ill 019 566 632 5 fv •.*>»