pathy, and trust that the grievance may exist not much longer. In fact it may be doubted whether the extremity of the present trial of the Irish Church may not tend to set her free from this and perhaps other grievances, and whether the peril of her situation may not open a mouth which has long been dumb, just as we read the other day in the newspapers of a young man who had lost his voice by a fever, but one day, when bathing, he was in danger of drowning, and his perilous situation brought back his voice, and he shouted lustily for help. Nevertheless, it is highly desirable that, if the grievance should cease, it should not be succeeded by a sham. And I proceed, therefore, to remark briefly that in my opinion the Convocations of England, though not as efficient as we could wish to see them, and as I believe we shall see them, are yet very far from being shams. It may be true that the influence of Convocation is moral and not coercive, but it would be a strange thing to undervalue power because it was only moral; what is the influence of religion, but the highest and purest example of moral power. But not to speak merely in general terms, I would suggest two things. First, I think that even as matters are now Convocation is exerting a beneficial influence which many persons do not know, and therefore cannot estimate. Many important religious and social subjects are not merely discussed viva voce, but are made the subjects of careful reports by committees; and those reports remain and become important elements of discussion, when the subjects in question come on for discussion by the Legislature or otherwise. I will illustrate what I mean by observing that the report of the committee of the Convocation of the Province of Canterbury on the subject of marriage is printed in the appendix to their report by the Royal Commission on the Marriage Laws, and a similar report on ritualism has been printed by the Royal Commission on Ritual. Nor can it be doubted, to take an example of narrower interest, but still an important one, that legislation on the subject of ecclesiastical dilapidations will soon take place, upon the basis of the conclusions arrived at by the Convocation of the two English provinces. It is unnecessary to add that, with a large section of the Church, both at home and in the colonies, the conclusions of Convocation upon doctrinal matters have a weight which can scarcely be over estimated.

The other suggestion that I wish to make is this-that people generally would think more of the influence of Convocation if Churchmen knew more about it and believed in it themselves. Of course, there will always be a portion of the public press which will make itself merry upon clerical houses of Lords and Commons, and opposition from this side will do no harm; but unfortunately you meet continually with members of the Church-—aye, with members of Convocation themselves, who have no faith in Convocation, and who do not scruple to abuse it. These wounds received in the house of our friends are, I think, very sore and painful to bear. But can any measures be suggested for the improvement of our Convocations? I had intended to devote some little time to this part of the subject; but I shall confine myself to one or two passing remarks partly because I am afraid of appearing presumptuous, and partly because I wish to reserve a few minutes for another part which appears to me to be now rather pressing. I observe, then, as was observed by another speaker on another occasion, that we cannot reform Convocation by introducing a lay element without producing a revolution. I am most desirous that the lay and clerical portions of the Church should work together, and I am quite certain that organization for

that purpose is one of the Church's chiefest needs; but our Convocations are emphatically Convocations of the clergy, and I should be only wasting time if I discussed an imaginary reform, at once open to difference of opinion and not likely to be realised. Taking Convocation as it is, I would remark that its influence would be immensely increased if those persons who are entitled to attend allowed nothing but illness, or some such grave cause, to interfere with their attendance. I speak as one who has himself no love for public discussion, and for the anxiety, and often the labour, which attendance upon Convocation entails; but I speak also as one who believes that it is as incumbent upon Deans and Archdeacons as it is upon little children who learn their Catechism, to do their duty in that station of life to which it has pleased God to call them. Again, we want a more simple and regular co-operation between the two provinces of Canterbury and York. Putting aside all consideration of antiquity, I should be disposed to say that the wants of the Church would be best met in these days by one Convocation for the two provinces. I do not venture to propose this, much less to discuss so English a question upon Irish ground; but I do think that both in England and Ireland all that tends, as such an amalgamation would, to unity of action, tends also to strength. But, above all, Convocation needs that which I think it might fairly have, both in England and Ireland—namely, a hearty and ungrudging recognition by the civil power.

If I know myself, I am sure that there is nothing which I less desire than clerical usurpation: all history shows that there is danger in this, and the reasons of it may be found deep in the human heart; but at the same time there is such a thing as civil tyranny, and civil unjust suspicion; and, moreover, it is not agreeable or dignified to find occasionally a lively young member of the House of Commons inquiring of the law officers of the Crown what is the nature of that curious body which appears to be sitting in the Jerusalem Chamber, and calling itself Convocation—not agreeable or dignified, I say, although the answer is very simple-namely, that that body is as ancient and as constitutional as the House of Commons itself. He who claims for Convocation any exorbitant power which does not belong to it is not its real friend, but let us know precisely what place it does occupy, and then let that place be candidly acknowledged and admitted by the civil power.

But I pass on from this point, because I am expected to say something, not only about Convocation, but also about Diocesan Synods. In doing this I shall at once divest the subject of all difficulty which may arise from the use of a name. I shall not discuss the question of Diocesan Synods from the historical point of view, though of course I think it ought to be so discussed; but I shall go at once to the question of Diocesan Synods, Diocesan Conferences, Synodical Conferences, call them what you will, provided that you mean by the term employed the union of the Bishop of the diocese with his clergy and laity in common consultation for the work of Christ and the benefit of His Church in the Diocese. Referring to a sermon, to which reference has often been made, I would remind you that we were told, and told truly, that whereas the Church of England and Ireland has got the organisation of the parish, she has, to a great extent, lost the organisation of the diocese. Now, it is this diocesan organisation that we want, and which in some of the English dioceses we are endeavouring to secure. Perhaps I shall render what I have to say most useful by avoiding speculative discussion, and telling you in few words what has been done by

the Bishop in that diocese with which I am myself connected, premising merely these two things-first, that the Bishop of Ely is a man of undoubted sound head and moderate theological views; and, secondly, that being such, he has expressed himself to this effect-namely, that he regards a more complete organisation as an absolute necessity both for the Church in England and for the Church in Ireland.

This year, was held in the south transept of Ely Cathedral the Fifth Diocesan Conference. It consisted of the Bishop, the Dean and Chapter, the Chancellor, the Archdeacons, the Honorary Canons, the Proctors in Convocation, the Rural Deans, besides a number of laymen nominated by the various Rural Deaneries. This Conference had under its consideration, not only a variety of important subjects, but also the results of the discussions held during the year by the meetings of clergy and laity in the Rural Deaneries: so that the small parliaments of the Rural Deaneries met by representation in the larger parliament of the whole diocese.

I shall be told probably that this is an imperfect organization: I at once admit it—all human institutions are imperfect. Nevertheless, I think it is by no means a bad organization, and one which is capable of doing much good, and under certain circumstances might be specially valuable. But I am not careful to defend it, because I have also to say, that our good Bishop, finding that there was a desire in the diocese for something further, has undertaken to meet the desire by holding this autumn a synod or conference (call it what you please) in each archdeaconry to which every beneficed and licensed clergyman in the archdeaconry shall be invited.

I am afraid I should be stopped by the bell, if I attempted to follow these conferences into their probable future; if they do not prove to be the last pound that breaks the bishop's back, I anticipate from them much benefit, both direct, by bringing the mind of the diocese to bear upon important religious, social, and ecclesiastical questions,—and indirect, by bringing the bishop into the most wholesome contact with the clergy and laity of the diocese.

This is the way in which we are endeavouring in Ely to construct our diocesan net. In concluding my remarks let me say, that all such endeavours deserve consideration; they are confessedly experiments; they may be troublesome, or even unsuccessful experiments; still it is only in this way that the problem can be solved. Oh! what expensive and troublesome experiments we make in human affairs! We build up a target of almost incredible strength, and then we fire at it with guns more and more powerful, each bang of which consumes the annual stipend of a working curate, until at length the target yields, and then we set up another, and all this because, perhaps, at some time or another enemies may come to attack our shores. Shall we in contemplation of the Church's dangers, present and to come, grudge the trouble and anxiety necessary to increase her efficiency to prepare her to resist her foes, and enable her to hold her spiritual inheritance ?

Lastly, I must observe that we shall need eventually a joining together in harmonious working of the provincial synods and of our diocesan organizations. Perhaps the time for this is not come-but come it will; and when the time does come, and we find the parish successfully connected with the diocese, and the diocese with the province, and when clergy and laity consent to put aside all unhappy divisions and work together for their

S*

common Lord, then the work in which we of this generation are making our humble and it may be sometimes our unsuccessful experiments will be a recognized result, and the Church-net will be complete.

Rev. J. H. BLUNT:-So much has been said this afternoon respecting the details of the question before us, that I may, perhaps, be permitted to confine the few remarks which I have to make to the general subject of the synodical action of the Church. And I will begin by saying that what we have heard from previous speakers, while it shews how far we have already advanced, suggests also that we may now hope and expect to advance still further, and begin to appreciate synodical action from a new, or rather from its most ancient but long lost sight of aspect. For such gatherings as we are talking about have a value far beyond that which belongs to them as assemblies of the best men among our clergy. The true synodical gatherings of the Church are founded upon a much higher principle than that. They are assemblies in which there is a Divine element as well as a human element; and hence we may expect them to give us not only the good sense of a body of learned and wise men, but the conclusions of a body of men deliberating on the affairs of the Church under the influence of Divine guidance given for that special purpose.

From the human action of synods, if I may use the expression, we may hope for great advantages. When men of different schools are brought together they learn to know each other better, and to observe that their differences are seldom such as to be irreconcileable. Angles are rubbed off on both sides; the great principle of “ 'give and take comes into play; opponents learn to think from each other's standing points, and opposition becomes softened in character by such a habit of thought, and in short those who thus meet together learn to understand each other, to part more at one than they met, and to draw towards a common ground of opinion. We see the effort even in these congresses, although they are not assemblies for deliberation, aud we see it still more in the case of Convocation. But this is the working of the human element in the synodical action of the Church, and I claim for it still greater advantages from the action of the Divine element.

For the Divine element in synods brings us into a distinct and definite relations with Divine wisdom. Convocation and Diocesan Synods are essentially assemblies of the Clergy. Much is said about the co-operation of the laity; but to introduce the laity into these assemblies would be, as a previous speaker has said, to revolutionize the whole system, and as I venture to add, to pervert an institution of our Divine Master. No doubt it would be a very good thing to have gatherings of Clergy and Laity—we have some, and good ones too, in our annual Church congresses-but do not let us call such mixed assemblies Synods, or try to make them substitutes for Synods, or we shall be making a great mistake. Convocation, Provincial Synods, and diocesan synods, are, as I have said, essentially assemblies of the Clergy, that is, of men to whom special promises are made, and special gifts given with reference to the work of God's Church. And among the gifts so bestowed there is the gift of a supernatural wisdom for deliberation, as well as of supernatural powers for action in spiritual things. And it is because the Clergy are thus set apart, and have thus a promise of the "spirit of counsel" given them, that there is so much more value to the Church in their solemn synodical meetings, than there would be in their meetings as members of any ordinary Committee, however grave its objects. They gather for consultation, and they do so expecting that the Divine wisdom developed from

the Gift of Ordination will prevail in their deliberations, prevent them from going wrong, and guide them in the path that will lead most to the true advantage of the Church.

But, my Lord Archbishop, I will venture most respectfully and most submissively to say, that we want at the present time something more than a revival of such clerical gatherings as Convocation and Diocesan Synods. This is an age of building, and an age of fortifying; of building up our decayed institutions within-our ritual, our theology, the spiritual life of our people—of fortifying our part of the City of God against foes that are attacking us from without, especially Rationalism and Romanism. With all this in view, my Lord, in one way or another the heart of the Church of England, and, I doubt not, of the Church of Ireland also, is yearning for a voice of authority to come to her ears, to direct her members as to the path in which they should walk in these difficult days. The Church is yearning for the voice of her chief Pastors, gathered together in a solemn Episcopal Synod, and speaking to her with Apostolic authority. And I doubt not that if such a voice were heard we should all submit ourselves obediently to it, whatever our private opinions, as being the very nearest approach that we can have to the voice of God himself, speaking to us on these subjects. We remember, my lord, a former age of building and fortifying, between which and our own there are many points of resemblance. We remember the age

of the Reformation of the Church of England in the sixteenth century; and we remember that all that was great and glorious in that Reformation was the work of our Bishops assembled in synod. Our own age is one in which a new Reformation is being effected, and to be done effectually, it must be done by the same authority. There is the great question of Ritualism to be settled, the other great question of Scepticism, and, perhaps, the greatest question of the coming time, that of Roman Supremacy. As to the last, my own belief is, that the Church of England has rejected once and for ever the jurisdiction of Rome, and that even with the help of the State it can never come back again. But the claims of Rome were never more vigorously put forward than at the present time; and we want to meet them not by mere declamatory Protestantism, but by a Protestantism based on sound History, learned Theology, and grave Authority.

It may be said that a Synod of Bishops speaking authoritatively on such points would never be supported by the State. But it seems to be almost forgotten that a Concordat between Church and State was entered into 334 years ago, and that under this Concordat all the really authoritative expressions of the Church's opinion on matters of doctrine have been set forth. The "Institution of a Christian Man," the Prayer Book, the Thirty-nine Articles, the Canons, were all put together by the Bishops, with the aid of other divines, and promulgated or published by the Crown; and the Crown has never ventured to depart from this arrangement. But suppose the Crown should think fit to refuse its assent to documents compiled by the collective Episcopate assembled in Synod, would that prevent the clergy and laity from receiving them and acting upon them? I firmly believe, my Lord Archbishop, that it would not; that there are thousands upon thousands of churchmen who would take the voice of such an Episcopal Synod an utterance of Divine wisdom, and would thankfully and reverently submit themselves to it. It would be more to them than ten Privy Council judgments, or the blue books of a hundred Ritual Commissions.

It is to this view of the synodical action of the Church that I now venture to call the attention of the Congress. When we talk of reviving the dioce