*'.-♦ 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25 
 
 |5 ' nil 
 
 f !! 
 
 12.5 
 
 2.2 
 
 I4£ 
 
 12.0 
 
 111= 
 
 U 111 1.6 
 
 6" 
 
 V] 
 
 <^ 
 
 7i 
 
 c^l 
 
 
 A^ 
 
 w 
 
 
 /i 
 
 o 
 
 7 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 

 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, a'e checked below. 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur axemplaire 
 qu'il lui a iti possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 una image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la mithode normale de filmage 
 sont indiqu^s ci-dessous. 
 
 
 
 . Coloured covers/ 
 ^ Couvarture de couleur 
 
 I I Covers damaged/ 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 
 n 
 
 n 
 
 Couverture endommagie 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaurie et/ou pelliculie 
 
 I I Cover titli missing/ 
 
 Le titre de «;ouverture manque 
 
 □ Coloured maps/ 
 Cartes giographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre da couleur (i.e. autre que blaue ou noire) 
 
 r~~1 Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 ReliA avec d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 Lareliure serree peut causer de i'ombre ou de la 
 distorsion le long de la marge intdriaure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout^es 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas iti film^es. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppldmentaires: 
 
 □ Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 □ Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommag^es 
 
 n 
 
 D 
 
 Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculies 
 
 I I Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 
 Pages ddcolor^es, tachetAes ou piquees 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages ditachees 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of prir 
 
 Qualit<k inigale de I'impression 
 
 Includes supplementary materii 
 Comprend du materiel supplementaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 I I Pages detached/ 
 
 r~~^ Showthrough/ 
 
 I I Quality of print varies/ 
 
 l~n Includes supplementary material/ 
 
 |~n Only edition available/ 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellernent 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc., ont 6t6 filmies A nouveau de facon ^ 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est filmi au taux de reduction indiqui ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 
 
 
 
 
 14X 
 
 
 
 
 18X 
 
 
 
 
 22X 
 
 
 
 
 26X 
 
 
 
 
 30X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 y 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
Tb« copy filmsd h«r« Hm b««n raproducsd thank* 
 to th« gansrotity of: 
 
 Library of Parliament and the 
 National Library of Canada 
 
 L'axampiaira filmA fut raproduit grica k li 
 g^niroaiti da: 
 
 La Bibliothftque du Parlement et la 
 Bibliothique nationale du Canada 
 
 Tha imcgaa appaaring hara ara tha baat quality 
 poaaibia conaidaring tha condition and lagibility 
 of tha original copy and in Icaaping with tha 
 filming contract spacificationa. 
 
 Laa imagaa auivantaa ont 4t* raproduitaa avac la 
 piua grand soin. compta tanu da la condition at 
 da la nattati da l'axampiaira filmi, at an 
 eonformiti avac laa conditiona du contrat da 
 fllmaga. 
 
 Original eopiaa in printad papar covara ara filmad 
 baginning with tha front eovar and anding on 
 tha laat paga with a printad or illuatratad impraa- 
 sion, or tha bactc covar whan appropriata. Ail 
 othar original eopiaa ara filmad baginning on tha 
 firat paga with a printad or illuatratad impraa- 
 sion. and anding on tha laat paga with a printad 
 or illuatratad impraaaion. 
 
 Lam axamplairaa originaux dont la couvartura an 
 papiar ast imprim4a sont fllmte an comman^nt 
 par Ic pramiar plat at an tarminant soit par la 
 dorniira paga qui comporto una amprainta 
 d'Impraaaion ou d'llluatration, soit par la sacond 
 plat, salon la eaa. Tous laa autraa axamplairaa 
 origin&ux sont fllmte an comman9ant par la 
 pramiAra paga qui comporta una amprainta 
 dimpraaaion ou d'llluatration at an tarminant par 
 la damlAra page qui comporta una taila 
 amprainta. 
 
 Tha laat racordad frama on aach microficha 
 shall contain tha symbol ^^(maaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or tha symbol V (maaning "END"), 
 whichavar appliaa. 
 
 Un daa symbolaa suivanta apparaltra sur la 
 demlAra imaga da chaqua microficha, salon la 
 caa: la symbola --» lignifia "A SUiVRE", la 
 symboia ▼ signifia "FIN". 
 
 Mapa. piataa, charts, ate., may ha filmad at 
 diffarant raduction ratioa. Thoaa too larga to ba 
 antiraiy inciudad in ona axpoaura ara filmad 
 baginning in tha uppar laft hand comar, laft to 
 right and top to bottom, aa many framaa aa 
 raquirad. Tha following diagrama iliuatrata tha 
 mathod: 
 
 Laa cartaa, pianchaa. tablaaux. ate. pauvant dtra 
 flimte i daa taux da reduction diff Grants. 
 Lorsqua la documant aat trop grand pour Atra 
 raprodujt an un aaui clichA. il aat film4 A partir 
 da I'angla supAriaur gauchi, da gaucha i droita. 
 at da haut an baa. un pranant la nombra 
 d'Imagaa n^cassaira. Las diagrammaa suivants 
 iiiuatrant la m^thoda. 
 
 1 2 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 

 >v '■>:,'. ' 
 
 
 REVISION 
 
 UK THE 
 
 Prayer Book 
 
 AMI THE 
 
 ENFRANCHISEMENT 
 
 OF THE 
 
 r 
 
 LAITY. 
 
 BY A LAYMAN. 
 
 TORONTO: 
 Dudley &. Hurns, Pkinteks, 11 Oolborne Strekt 
 
 I V 
 
 
 ! 
 
 J 
 
 
 1 
 ■ i 
 
 
 ) 
 
 ■Ttf.. -y 
 
 
 
 " ' ■ i' 
 
 
 
 r ■., ■ 
 
 ■ 
 
 t H 
 
 
 
 •_ 
 
 
 -•; # 
 
 ;>■ 
 
 Jtr- ' . •: -J- 
 
 . '* ■' * 
 
 .-C-,'- •*/ 
 

 ■ - ■ ". ) 
 
 ■ * V ■ ■ 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
 1 ' 
 
 '• 
 

 . « . > ' 
 
 REVISION 
 
 1.^ ^ 
 
 I 'I- TKK 
 
 Prayer Book 
 
 V I) TMir 
 
 ENFRANCHISEMENT 
 
 iiK THJ; 
 
 LAITY. 
 
 BY A L A Y M A N 
 
 TOHONTO: 
 l)i:i'i,i;v & Burns, I'kintkks, II ("omjornk Sti;kkt 
 
> 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 w 
 
 THK chi«if ohji'ct of this little work is to ^ive to the 
 Laity of the Clmrch of Englaml the most recent and 
 imtisfactoiy aceoimt of the Athanasian Creed, wliich " so few 
 <lo nnderstand," and to this end we ask their careful reading 
 and study of the Repor-t of the Ritual Commission, which we 
 ^ive verbatim, so far iis ie(]^ards this creed. 
 
 Another object is lo show the necessity thei-e is for a 
 Revision of tlu; Prayer Book. But as this has been talked of 
 HO long, and is still apparently so veiy distant, a more active 
 participation by the Laity in the temporal management of 
 the Church in which, as the Bishop of Manchester said, they 
 certainly have the primary interest," it is thought would, to 
 .-^ome extent at least, supply the want of it. 
 
 Our wish is not to find fault with, but rather to admire 
 the formularies of the Piayer Book, venerable for its age, 
 being now 227 years old : nevertheless, all unprejudiced 
 persons must see some few glaring imperfections in it, — con- 
 comitants of age perhaps, the removal of which would not 
 only disarm the bitterest opponents of the Church, but would 
 greatly add to its strength, populni-ity and usefulness. 
 
 October. iNHfl. 
 
To THE ('LElUiV AND L U TY 
 
 OF THK 
 
 Church of England 
 
 THIS LITTLE WORK IS KESPKOTFl'I.LY INSCRIBED 
 
 By THK Author. 
 
 1^ 
 
 '' 
 
 
•f 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 ^ 
 
 1 
 
 
 <i*> 
 
 T 
 
 Page 
 
 The First ORounienical Council or Conference, 1867 7 
 
 The Athanrtsian Creed 9 
 
 Report of the Ritual CommiKSsioii, 1870 14 
 
 The Bishop of Durham's Speech 26 
 
 The Uniformity Act, 187-2 29 
 
 The Second Conference, 1878 40 
 
 The Convocation of Canterbury, 1878 40 
 
 Revised New Testament, 1880 4:i 
 
 The Third Conference, 1888 46 
 
 Position of the Church of England in England and Canada. . 52 
 
 The Evening Service 5li 
 
 The Duty of thr Laity 56 
 
"The account fl;iveu of Athanasius' Creed appears to me iiowiho 
 satisfactory. I wish we were well rid of it. " 
 
 ARCHBiaiiop TiiiLorsoN, 1691 
 
 "The highest object, " said Erasmus, "of the revival of Philoso 
 phical studies, will be to learn to boconu* aoc^uainted with thrt 
 simple and pure Christianity in the Bible." 
 
 " I should, therefore, have deemed it a wiser course had the 
 (commission decided that the Athanasian Creed should not retain 
 its place in the public service of the Church. ' 
 
 Akchbkshop of Cantkkhitkv. 1870. 
 
KtCVlSlON 
 
 l)F THK 
 
 l^RAYBR BOOK. 
 
 FIRS'I (I'XUMKNICAl. COUNCIL OR CON- 
 FERENCE. 1867. 
 
 When it w;is proposed by the Church authorities to 
 assemble an (l^cunienical Council, to be held at Lam- 
 beth, in September, 1867, it was naturally expected 
 that those burning cjuestions which had so long dis- 
 turbed the minds of churchmen would be considered 
 and some attempt made towards a satisfactory settle- 
 ment of them. The Church's heart at that time beat 
 high with ex[)ectation. The two great parties in her 
 fold, it was said, would be brought closer together, 
 each in their views would cultivate moderation and 
 mutual toleration, and as at various times within the 
 last fifty years, our Church authorities have discussed 
 the exj)ediency of altering the Prayer Book, yet little 
 or nothing having been done, now. certainly, it was 
 again said, we shall have revision. There was, in 
 short, great rejoicing over the birth of this first grand 
 gathering of the bishops of our Church. 
 
 •"■>i 
 
 1 
 
Considering the magnitude of the interests in 
 volved in a first attempt to bring together, what might 
 prove, no one at that time could tell, very discordant 
 views in doctrine and discipline ; it was perhaps dis- 
 creet and proper to consider the great meeting a private 
 and confidential one ; and so permission to attend 
 their deliberations was refused to the representatives 
 of the press. They sat with closed doors. All, there- 
 fore, that the outside world — every anxious churchman 
 — knew of what took place, was confined to a letter 
 addressed to the members of the Church, signed by 
 three archbishops and seventy-three bishops, urging 
 " the desire for union, and the keeping whole and un 
 defiled the faith once delivered to the saints." We do 
 not find one word said about those great and impor 
 tant questions of ritual and discipline which have so 
 long and do still distract the minds of the clergy and 
 laity in general. That they were considered there 
 cannot be the least doubt. It was the prime object of 
 this great and unusual gathering of the Governors of 
 the Church. Hut /ery likely for good and sufficient 
 reasons, if we only knew them, it was thought advis- 
 able for the Conference to keep its own counsel for the 
 present. Cjreat disappointment at the result was very 
 general in Church circles, find the comments of the 
 press were .severe when at length the Conference broke 
 up. Vhe rimes wrote, "It is one of those statutes 
 that seem under a might) influence, and full of vital 
 energy, but make no advance and only ])aw the air." 
 The Conference is ended ; the bishops return to their 
 several dioceses, and we take our resj:>ectful leave of 
 them for awhile. 
 
 ' 
 
 T 
 
i f 
 
 T 
 
 9 
 
 \Vc art- glad, however, to think the pul)lic had 
 not long to wait before some useful work at this con- 
 ference became apparent. There issued shortly after 
 its close, the Ritual Commission and this was soon fol- 
 lowed by the Act of Uniformity. Hoth these meas- 
 ures we shall assume were; suggested by the confer- 
 ence, and seemed to indicate a beginning of and 
 preparation for the revision of the Prayer Book. We 
 propose to notice them a little in detail : 
 
 First, the Ritual Commission so far as it relates 
 to the Athanasian Creed, and. 
 
 Second, the division of the morning services as 
 provided by the Act of Uniformity, and we shall 
 notice the position of the laity and the action they 
 should take in these and other matters. 
 
 b'irst. The Athanasian Creed. We are oppressed 
 with a sense of shame and sorrow in contemplating its 
 history and the means resorted to, to impose on a world 
 of ignorance and spiritual bondage this complex and 
 elaborate confession of faith, which, even at the present 
 day, " so few do understand." Canon Swainson says, 
 that originally it was not a creed at all, but "a treatise, 
 or a sermon, or an address to a congregation." As 
 such tJK^n; would Ik; sliglit <)i)jecLiou to it. We do not 
 invariablv accept as true al! the remarks we hear from 
 the pulpit which are sim[)ly (;xpressi\'e of the views of 
 a learned and pious individual, however we may in our 
 own minds question his judgment in giving them utter- 
 ance, yet he is listened to attentively and with profound 
 respect and no one would presume to object. But, 
 " when we are called on to recite the; whole ot it as an 
 articki of faith," says Canon Swainson. "and proclaim 
 
10 
 
 before God, and angels, and men, not that we believe 
 so and so, but that this is necessary, and that is ne- 
 cessary, and that this is true, and that is true, the pro- 
 ceeding appears to me, as it does to others, a painful, 
 almost a thrilling act of unnecessary presumption." 
 
 It was for centuries believed to be the composi- 
 tion of Athanasius. When the Archbishop of Ham- 
 burg, A. I). 865, was near dying, "he urged on his 
 brethren the recital of the Catholic Faith composed by 
 the blessed Athanasius," who had been gathered to 
 his fathers five centuries before the creed bearing his 
 name was thought of or saw the light. If it had been 
 composed by the "blessed Athanasius," who died 
 A.D. 350, it certainly would have been well considered 
 in the 
 
 Council of Constantinople, A.D. 381. 
 Ephesus " 431. 
 
 Chalcedon " 451. 
 
 Niccea " 787. 
 
 But there is no mention of its having been the 
 subject of thought evt:n in the above or any of the 
 smaller councils. 
 
 The angry controversies which took place towards 
 the end of the eighth century, between the bishops of 
 Italy, Gaul, Germany, and Spain, as to the belief of the 
 whole Church in the doctrine of the Trinity called forth 
 from some of the bishops ve.y able and lengthy exposi- 
 tions of the faith. There is oik: by Paulinus, the most 
 influential bishop in Europe, found amongst the records 
 of the Council of Frankfort, A.I). 794, which explains 
 with great earnestness the trinitarian doctrine, and 
 which says Dr. Lumby, fellow of Magdalene College, 
 Cambridge, w<juld have been quite unnecessary had 
 
 t 
 
 •¥ 
 
V 
 
 11 
 
 the (juicunque been ihen in existence. It would have 
 answered his purpose exactly. Its whole tenor 
 shows clearly that he had never heard of it, and there 
 is not to be found the slightest notice of Athanasius in 
 the whole proceedings of the Council in which were the 
 representatives of Italy, Spain, Britain, Germany and 
 Gaul. 
 
 This exjjosition by Paulinus together with the 
 famous letter of Charlemagne — for kings and emperors 
 in those days were also great theologians — addressed 
 to the bishops of Spain to the like effect it is conjectured 
 formed the basis of the Ouicunque in A.D. 870. In 
 that year it is found for the first time in the Prayer 
 Book of Charles the Bald, Emperor of the West. Dr. 
 Lumby thinks the question of its composer will prob- 
 ably ever remain doubtful, though there can be little 
 qur'stion that " we owe it to one of the active ecclesi- 
 astics of the early part of the ninth century, and that 
 the strong expressions of its warning clauses are to be 
 traced to the fierce contests, which, at that period, agi- 
 tated the whole ecclesiastical world." 
 
 At one time it was thought tb'it its first advocate 
 was the mighty Charlemagne, but it has been proved 
 that it was not known in his day, A.D. 800. It is 
 more probable, therefore, that it was vigorously laid 
 hold of by Charles the Bald, about A.D. 870, and 
 ordered to be tead or sung every day in the Church of 
 France. From the ninth to the sixteenth centurv it 
 
 Note. — Anionj,' the points established by Dr. Lumby in his excellent work 
 are the following: That, the Quionnque was not known down to A.D. 81.'{, to 
 those who were most likely to have heard of it Iiad it been in existence. That 
 it is found nearly as we use it, A.D. 870. On every ground, both of internal 
 and external evidence, it seems to be a sound conclusion that somewhere be 
 tweeu A. 1). 81.^-850, the Oreed was brought nearly into the form in which we 
 Eow u.sc it ; that Ijeforc the earlier of tlieso dates it was not known. 
 
12 
 
 was sung every day in the Church of KngirLud. But 
 the Reformation called a halt. Priests and j)eopl<:; 
 began to think its history " nowise satisfactory," and 
 their enthusiasm in its favor waned. It was ordere'J 
 to be said onl)' six times in the year. ( )ur reformers 
 would surely have suppressed it altogether, but, as is 
 well known, the Prayer Book was a compromise and 
 it had to be retained. P)Ut what a f.dling off was there ! 
 Instead of being sung or said 365 clays in the year, its 
 few admirers were to be content with six I This great 
 fact alone at that day and ever since has condemned it. 
 
 It is not necessary to enter at large on the theo- 
 logical aspect of the question. The reasons given b) 
 the Ritual Commission whose members held ever\- 
 shade of opinion on the subject are exhaustive and t^\- 
 ceedin.gly interesting. They are {]uin; decisive as to 
 the propriety of discontinuing the recital of this creed 
 as part of our Church Service, and to these we shall 
 refer further on. But as its advocates refer es])eciall\ 
 to a text of scrijJture which they say supports it, it ma\ 
 be well in furtherance of our argument to refer to it. 
 
 Dean Stanley says, " The text which is most com 
 monly adduced in support ol the daiunatory clauses is 
 Mark xvi : 16 : 'lie that lu:lie\'('t]i and is liaptized 
 shall be saved, but he th;'.t bclii \-eth not shall be 
 damned.' But this is an exception which proves the 
 ruk;. POr, first, the Ijelief here spoken of is not the 
 belief in a serit^s of antithetical i)ropositions respecting 
 the abstract nature of tht^ 1 )(Mty ; it is not even (as is 
 sometimes supposed f)y a confusion betw(;en this ant,i 
 the parallel place in St. Matthew), a belief in the three- 
 fold name of God, but sim])ly a belief in 'the gospel,' 
 (go, preach the gos|)el), in its larger and widest accep- 
 
 
 W 
 
»s 
 
 "^k 
 
 *i 
 
 i:i 
 
 tation, wliich would include every shade of Christian, 
 orthodox or heretical. Secondly, thc^ word 'damned,' 
 when taken (as in this argument it always is taken) in 
 the w(^ll-kno\vn sense in which it is used in the coarse 
 colloquialism of modern Knglish, is not a proper repre- 
 sentation of the old Knglish word, which once meant 
 no more than • condemned,' • and thus frills altogether 
 short ol the uncjualified and extreme sev(.;rity of the 
 Athanasian denunciations. And, thirdly, if even with 
 these limitations it be acknowledged that the passage 
 has a harsh sound, unlike the usual utterances of Him 
 who came not to condemn init to save, the discoveries 
 of later times have shown, almost beyond doubt, that 
 it is not a part of St. Mark's gospel, but an addition 
 by another hand, of which the weakness in the external 
 evidence coincides with the internal evidence, in prov- 
 ing its later origin. When, therefore, this passage is 
 cited by theologians as the statement of our Lord Him- 
 self. ' our Lord's own anathema ' in defence of the 
 Athanasian curse-, they in fact surrender their cause, 
 for they rest their position on a text which is first in- 
 applicable ; secondly, mistranslated ; thirdly, in all 
 probability, not genuine." 
 
 We rejoice that we can now point to the opinions 
 of the eminent men, ecclesiastical and lay, who sat on 
 the Ritual Cc^nmission— men holding as we have said 
 every shade of religious belief and ritual, but all 
 uniting in expressing their desire that this creed should 
 cease to be enforced in public worship. Eight out of 
 the twenty-seven Commissioners, would leave the Ru- 
 
 * Since this was written the word has been so translated in the 
 revised New Testament. 
 
14 
 
 brie as it is, but on condition ot ackling to it the fol- 
 lowing note : " That the condemnations in this con- 
 fession of faith are to be no otherwise understood than 
 as a solemn warning of the peril of those who wilfully 
 reject the Catholic Faith." PVequcnt reference it will 
 be seen is made to this note in the following reasons ot 
 the Commissioners : 
 
 The explanatory note was, it is much to be re- 
 gretted and to the surprise of all, adoi)ted at a very 
 small meeting of the Commissioners. Had all been 
 present it would have been rejected by probably the 
 large majority of nineteen out of twenty-seven. That 
 such an important matter should have been decided by 
 a small minority of the whole Commission is inex- 
 plicable. 
 
 »? 
 
 V 
 
 THE REPORT <)V THE RITUAL COMMISSIOJJ ON THE 
 
 ATHANASTAN CREED ; 
 
 80 PAR AS Giving tijk Reasons of thk Following Commissio\ki;,» 
 
 IN Detail. 
 
 ;nst August, 1870. 
 
 1. TtiE Archbishop of Oantehuuhy :-" Respecting th« 
 Athanasian Creed, while I rejoice that the Commissioners have 
 thought it right to append a Rubric explanatory of the sense in 
 which * the condemnations in this Confession of Faith ' are to be 
 understood, I cannot feel entirely satisfied with this course. 
 
 " The adoption by the Commissioners of this explanation seems 
 to me to admit two things, — 
 
 '* 1st. That it was within the power of the Commission to deal 
 with the use of the Athanasian Creed : 
 
 *' 2nd. That the use of the Creed in public worship was liable, 
 from the wording of these clauses, to objection. 
 
 "I should, therefore, have deemed it a wiser course had th^^ 
 
15 
 
 b 
 
 *; 
 
 Liturgy 
 
 and a Hanger to our national 
 
 (Joni mission decided that the Creed in question, valuable and most 
 important as are its direct doctrinal statements, should not retain 
 its plaeo in the Public Service of the Church." (Report, p. viii.) 
 
 2. Eakl Staniiopk :— " In the course of our deliberations the 
 propriety of retaining the Athanasian Creed in the Public Services 
 was frequently discussed, the objection being felt more especially 
 as regards its so-called damnatory clauses. 
 
 " It seemed to very many among us that these cLiuses are both 
 a blemish in our beautiful 
 Church. 
 
 " Howevei- they may be explained to the satisfaction of learned 
 men conversant with the terms of scholastic divinity in the Creek 
 and Latin languages, it is certain that tliey are a stumbling-block to 
 common congregations ; forming a service which is wholly misun- 
 derstood by same persona, an'i in which it is observed that others 
 decline to join. 
 
 " Various proposals were made in our body to meet tlie general 
 and growing objections which these clauses in the Athanasian Creed 
 and, consequently, on them the entire Creed, have raised. 
 
 " It was moved that in the preceding Rubric the word ' shall ' 
 should be changed to ' may.' 
 
 " It was moved to omit the preceding Rubric by which the 
 use of that Creed is prescribed. It was moved to limit the use of 
 that Creed, and that it be permissive only, to our Public Services in 
 Collegiate and cathedral churches. 
 
 '* It was moved to enjoin it for only one Sunday in the year. 
 " To several of us it would have appeared a still more prefera- 
 ble plan, which, however, was not formally brought forward, to 
 declare in a new Rubric that although the Church retained the 
 Creed as a Confession of our Christian faith, the Church did not 
 enjoin its use in any of its Public Services. 
 
 "Tt was found, however, upon divisions, several of which took 
 place at divers times in the course of our proceedings, that no one 
 specific proposal could commend itself to the approval of a majority 
 among us. We have, therefore, left untouched and without any 
 suggestion for discontinuance in the appointed Services a Creed, 
 which, nevertheless, so far as regards its popular effect upon othei-s, 
 I imagine that scarce any Churchman contemplates with entire sat- 
 isfaction. Nor am I at all satisfied with the note which our Report 
 proposes to subjoin. Lender these circumstances, which I most 
 deeply regret, I altogether dissent from the very anomalous .state 
 in which, to my judgment, this question las been left." (Report 
 p. viii : 9.) 
 
 3. LoKO PoRTMAN : — " I concur in the opinions above 
 pressed." (Report, p. ix.) 
 
 ex- 
 
10 
 
 4. TnK Eakl of Hahuowuy: — *' I assent to thn stuteinent of 
 facts in rc^'ard lo tlic Atlmnasian deed j)Ut forward by Lord Stan- 
 hope, and a<;nM' ^fiic tally with thn o{)inions ho lias cxpccssed. 
 
 " I only disa<,'r(!0 so far, as that 1 do nut dissent from the con- 
 clusions come tf) liy the (Jotiunission. 
 
 " In spite of the olijections wliich I entertain to the lan<:;iiage 
 of certain clauses of tli(^ so e tiled Athanasian Creed, ami to its use 
 in public cont^re^ations, I iiave felt it my duty to concur with the 
 majority of the (Jommissioners in retaining; it as it now stands in the 
 Pray<'r IJook, on tlie <,'round that it seemed to m(^ to he beyond the 
 purpose of our Oornniis.sion to remove a Confession of Faitli from 
 the position of authority, in whicli our Cliurcli has hitherto placed 
 it." (Report, p. ix.) 
 
 f). TiiK Bisiior 01-' WiN'CiiEHTKR : — " I am not satisfied with 
 the explanatory not(; appended to the Athanasian Creed." (JSee 
 Report, }). X.) 
 
 6. TiiK Bi.siioF OF St. David's: — " I protest against the com- 
 pulsory use of the Athanasian Creed, as not only an evil, on account 
 of the etiect it produced on many of the most intelligent and 
 attached members of our Church, but a wrong in itself. It may be 
 impossiV)le to ascertain the extent of the evil, or the proportion of 
 those who are offended by the Creed, to those who acquiesce in it, 
 or even find themselves editied by it. 
 
 "But this appears to me of comparatively little moment. The 
 important question is, whether those who ar<^ ofJended by the Creed, 
 have just and reasonable ground of objection to it. 1 think they 
 have. 
 
 "It appears to me that, in adopting such a document, the 
 Church both overstept the bounds of its rightful authority, and ex- 
 ercised the usurped authority in an uncharital)le and mischievous 
 way. 
 
 " Nothing, as it seems to me, could have warranted such a step, 
 but a special revelation, placing the Creed on a level with Jrloly 
 Writ. It nifiy be possible for Theologians to show, by technical ar- 
 gumei\ts, that it is a legitimate development of doctrine implicitly 
 contained in Scripture. But this, however fully admitted, would 
 not justify the Church in exacting assent to their conclusions under 
 the penalty of eternal perdition. 
 
 "This was in fact creating a new offence against the Divine 
 Law, and introducing new tei'iiis of Salvation, on merely human au- 
 thority. Looking to the period when this innovation was first im- 
 posed on Christians, we may find much excuse for its authors. 
 
 " But viewed in the lii,'ht of the fundamental principles of a 
 Reformed Church, it appears to me, as forming part of our public 
 services, utterly indefensible. 
 
17 
 
 " I strongly disapprove of the Kxplanatory Note which hats 
 been appended to the Athanasian Creed. I believe not only that it 
 must fail to serve the purpose for which it was adopted, l)ut that it 
 will aggiTivate the evil it was designed to remedy. If the 'condem- 
 nations ' have hitherto been generally misunderstood — which J do 
 not believe to be the case — it is too late for any Commission, even 
 if it could speak with authority, to correct the error of public 
 opinion on this head ; and if this was possible, it could not be ef- 
 fected by an explanation which is vitiated by the ambiguity of the 
 term ' wilfully ' on which the whole nieaning depends. The unsuc 
 cessful attempt will, I believe, be generally regarded as the admis- 
 sion of an evil, which ought to have been treated in a ditterent 
 manner, or left untouched." (Report, p. xi.) 
 
 7. Lord Ebury "desires to concur in the above protest." (Re- 
 port, p. xi.) 
 
 8. Mr. John Ahel Smith, M.P., " desires to concur in the 
 above protest." (Report, p. xi.) 
 
 9. The Bishop of Carlisle : — "With regard to the Athana' 
 sian Creed. — It may be doubted whether the consideration of this 
 subject was within the limits of your Majesty's Commission ; but 
 the Commissioners having determined so to disregard it, I regret 
 that it was found impossible to arrive at a more satisfactory solution 
 of the difficulty which many persons feel, than the addition of a 
 note, which, I venture to think, is incomplete as an explanation, 
 and insufficient to meet the scruples of those who object to the pub- 
 lic recitation of this Confession of our Christian Faith." (Report, 
 p. xiii.) 
 
 The same Prelate proposed that the use of the Creed should be 
 prohibited in parish churches, but permitted, though not enforced, 
 in cathedral and collegiate churches. (See Report, p. xvii.) 
 
 10. The Right Hon. Spencer H. Walpole :— "The note ap- 
 pended to this Creed or Confession of Faith furnishes to my mind 
 the strongest proof that, however valuable such a document may be 
 as an historical exposition of the Church's views, the enforced use 
 of it as a symbol of faith in Public Worship is most unadvisable. It 
 seems to be very objectionable that a congregation should be required 
 to affirm and profess the articles of their Creed in language which 
 obviously and in its natural sense means one thing, when the inter- 
 pretation put upon it says that it means another." ^Report, p. xiii.) 
 
 11. The Right Hon. Sir Joseph Napier. — " With reference 
 to the annotation proposed to be made in explanation of the penal 
 clauses of the Creed commonly known as the Athanasian Creed, 1 
 
 2 
 
18 
 
 humbly submit tbat we were not authorized by your Majesty to 
 sujJK^'st any alterations in this or any other part of the services set 
 forth in the Book of Common Prayer, and least of all by the impo- 
 sition of a meaning of whi'ih the words are not susceptible." (Re 
 port, p. xiii.) 
 
 12. SiK Thavkrs Tvvih.s, thk Qukkn's Advocate.—-" 1 humbly 
 submit to your Majesty, that evidence has i)eeri given before your 
 Majesty's Commissioners, that this Confession of Faith is in practice 
 disused by many of the Clergy, partly from personal repugnance of 
 their congregations. Petitions have also been addressed to the presi 
 dent of your Majesty's Commission from Clergy, praying for relief, 
 as regards the use of this Confession of Faith. 
 
 "Under these circumstances, if the occasional use of this Con 
 fession of F'aith is still to be sanctioned, it seems to me that it would 
 be in accordance with the spirit of your Majesty's instructions, that 
 the Rubric, by which its use is made imperative on certain Festi- 
 vals, should be modified. I consider it to be beyond the province 
 of your Majesty's Connnissioners to interpret the language of this 
 Confession of Faith, and to put a constructiom, as proposed, by 
 authority upon the so-called damnatory clauses, which is at variance 
 with their plain and grammatical sense." (Report, p. xiv.) 
 
 13. Mil. Charles Buxton, M.P. — "I desire hunibly to express 
 to your Majesty r.iy deep regret that the Royal Commission has not 
 recommended such changes in the Rubric, before the so-called 
 Athanasian Creed, as could have put an end to its use as part of the 
 services of the Church of England ; because — 
 
 "1. It seems to me that there is great presumption in the at- 
 tempt made by that Creed to give a precise definition of the nature 
 of the Supreme Being ; 
 
 "2. The assertions it makes as to the nature of the Supreme 
 Being are nowhere to be found stated in such terms in Holy Writ : 
 but they are the deductions drawn from Scripture by the theologians 
 of the period in which it was written. Now, I cannot think that 
 a Christian Creed ought to consist of inferences (however logical) 
 drawn from Scripture, but only (like the Apostles' Creed) of the 
 very statement of Scripture itself, given in its own words ; 
 
 " 3. Its declaration, that those who do not accept its statement 
 of the Christian Faith, without doubt, will perish everlastingly, is gen- 
 erally acknowledged to be false, and nothing can be less fitting than 
 to invite the people to make a solemn asseveration of that which is 
 not even wished that they should believe ; 
 
 4. "It commits the Church of England to the doctrine, long since 
 exploded, that error is a crime, punishable with horrible torments. 
 " I object to the Note that it is proposed to append to the 
 
19 
 
 Athanasiau Cieed, b(?cause, in my opinion, it affirms that which Ik 
 clearly contrary to the fact. Th« Athananian (JretMi was written 
 »t a timo when all m(Mj firmly believed that erroneous doctrine would 
 he punished with everlasting^ perdition ; and it was undoubtedly in 
 tended as a rlenunciation of sueh perdition af,'ainstall those who did 
 not hold that statement of doctrine which it sets forth. Accord- 
 ingly, it prectides the statement by the words, ' which faith except 
 every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doultt he shall 
 perish everlastingly ; and the (.atholic Faith is this,' — ^it concludes 
 the statement by saying, 'This is the Catholic Faith, which except 
 a man believe faithfully he cannot be saved.' The meaning of this 
 declaration at the beginning and ending of its statement of the 
 Catholic Faith does not surely admit of any doubt whatever. Were 
 there any such doubt, it would be altogether extinguished by the 
 additional words thrown into the middle of the Creed. ' He, there- 
 fore, that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity. Further- 
 more, it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe 
 rightly.' .... 1 consider, therefore, that it is only by perverting 
 the obvious meaning of the above words, that we can aver, in the 
 language of the Note, that they are to be no otherwise understood 
 than as a solemn warning of the peril of tho.se who wilfully reject 
 the Catholic Faith." (Keport, p. xvi.) 
 
 I 
 
 14. Thk Dean of Westminstkr : — "I desire to express my 
 conviction that it was the duty of those who served on your Majes 
 ty's Commission to recommend the relaxation of the use of the 
 Athanasian Creed in the service of the Church of England. This 
 might have been effected either by the substitution of ' may ' 
 for ' shall ' in the Rubric, or by the omission of the Rubric alto- 
 gether, according to the two proposals of Lord Stanhope ; or by the 
 forbidding its use in parish churches, whilst permitting, but not en- 
 forcing it, in cathedral and collegiate churches, according to the 
 proposal of the Bishop of Carlisle : or by leaving it to be used alter- 
 nately with the Apostles' Cree I, according to the conditional propo- 
 sal of Mr. Perry ; or by 'calling attention to the question of placing 
 it with the Articles of Religion, at the end of the Book of Common 
 Prayer,' according to the proposal of the Bishop of Winchester. Any 
 one of these recommendations would have relieved the consciences 
 of those who are burdened by its use, without depriving those who 
 are attached to it of the advantage which may, in their judgment, 
 be derived from the retention of the Creed in the formularies of the 
 Church. 
 
 " I deeply regret that a change, proposed with such evident 
 endeavors to conciliate the scruples of those opposed to it, should 
 have been rejected ; and I beg to oflfer the following reasons for that 
 regret : 
 
20 
 
 " I . Because the Crtiful was received and ♦niforccd in the 
 (Jhurch of Kngland when it was helievcd to he the Creed of St. 
 AthanaHiu8, whereas it is now known to he the work of an unknown 
 author, not earlier than the fifth century, perhaps as late as the 
 eighth 
 
 " 'J. Hceause its exposition of the doctrine of the Trinity is 
 couched in hin<;uaf;e extrentely difllcult to be understood hy a general 
 coni^'rcj^'ation, in parts absolutely certain to be uiuhirstood in a sense 
 different from what was intended by the orij»inal words ; as, for ex- 
 ample, 'person,' * substance,' and ' incoMiprehensiblc' 
 
 " .'{. Mecause it is never recited in a mixed congrej^ation in any 
 other Church than our own. 
 
 "4. Because the parts of the Creed which are at once njoat 
 enjphatic, most clear, and most generally intelligible, are the com- 
 demning clauses which give most offence, and which in their literal 
 and obvious sense, are rejected by the Explanatory Note which is 
 now proposed to be appended to them. 
 
 " f). Because the use of anathemas in the public services of 
 all Churches has been generally discontinued. 
 
 *' 6. Because these condemning clauses assert in the strongest 
 terms a doctrine now rejected by the whole civilized world, viz., the 
 certain future perdition of all who deviate from the particular state- 
 ments in the Creed. 
 
 " 7. Because they directly exclude from salvation all members 
 of the Eastern Churches ; to whom, nevertheless, the clergy and the 
 bishops of the Church of England, at various times, and especially of 
 late, have made overtures of friendly and Christian intercourse, 
 entirely inconsistent with the declaration that they ' shall without 
 doubt perish everlastingly.' 
 
 *' 8. Because the passage commonly quoted from the Authorized 
 Version of Mark xvi. 16, in their defence is irrevalent ; (a) as being 
 
 much more general in its terms ; (h) 
 
 as being 
 
 of very doubtful 
 
 genuineness ; (c) as being in the original Greek much less severe 
 than in the English translation. 
 
 " y. Because the use of this Creed, and of those clauses espe- 
 cially, has been condemned by some of the most illustrious divines 
 of the Church of England, such as Chillingworth, Baxter, Bishop 
 Jeremy Taylor, Archbishop Tillotson, Archbishop Seeker, Dr. Hey, 
 Dr. Arnold, Dr. Burton, Bishop Lonsdale. 
 
 ** 10. Because the use of the Creed arouses scruples in candi- 
 dates for ordination, which can only be overcome by strained ex- 
 planations. 
 
 "11. Because it has been rejected by the Protestant Episcopal 
 Church of the United States of America, which is in full communion 
 with the Church of England, and whose clergy are authorized by 
 statute to minister in our churches, being yet under no obligation 
 to use this Creed. 
 
 
 1 
 
 i"> 
 
21 
 
 H^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 " 12. BHOHUHe it iH a >tumhliiig block in th(* way of aImiohI all 
 NoncotiforiniHtH. 
 
 *• IM. M«cauHO tlu: f/iihlio use of the Creed as a confeMsion of 
 Christian Faith, hoiiig, an it is, tlw^ compositiou of an unknown 
 author, and not oonHrnied Ity any <,'on(«ral authofity, is a inaidfest 
 violation of the well-known decrees of the Councils of Kphesus and 
 Chalcedoti. 
 
 " 14. Because the recitation of the Creed had, in many English 
 Churches, become obsolete, till it was revived some thirty years ago. 
 
 "IT). IJpcause many excellent laynxui, including King (Jeorge 
 III. ha\e, for the last hundred years at least, declined to take part 
 in its recitation. 
 
 " 1(5. Because, so far from recommending the doctrine of the 
 Trinity to unwilling minds, it is the chief obstacle in the way of 
 the acceptance of that doctrine. 
 
 " For these reason.s 1 consider that the relaxation of the use of 
 the Creed, whilst giving relief to many, ought to oflFend none. It 
 has, no doubt, a historical value as an exposition of the teaching 
 and manners of the Church between the iifth and the ninth cen- 
 turies. It has also a theological value, as rectifying certain 
 -erroneous statements ; and as excluding from the essentials of the' 
 Catholic Faith the larger part of modern controversy. But these 
 advantages are quite insufficient to outweigh the objections which 
 are recorded above, and which, even in the minds of those disposed 
 to retain the use of the Creed, have found expression in an Explana- 
 tory Note, tantamount to a condemnation of it. 
 
 " With regard to the Explanatory Note, whilst acknowledging 
 the benefit derived from the indirect but unquestionable discourage- 
 ment which it inflicts on the use of the Creed, 1 would humbly 
 state the reasons why it appears to ine to aggravate the mischief 
 which it is intended to relieve. 
 
 '* 1. Because it attempts a decision on a complex, dogmatical 
 and historical question on which the Commission is not called to offer 
 an opinion and which it has not attempted in other instances, equally 
 demanding and more capable of such explanations, such as the 
 Baptismal Service, the Ordination Service, and the Visitation of 
 the Sick. 
 
 " 2. Because this dogmatical decision was carried by a small 
 majority in a Commission of reduced numbers ; whereas, in order to 
 have any weight, it ought to have received the general concurrence 
 of those most <iualified to pronounce it. 
 
 " 3. Because the words in the Creed, which it professes to 
 explain, are perfectly clear in themselves, whilst it leaves unex- 
 plained other words, such as 'person,' 'substance,' 'incomprehen-' 
 
22 
 
 sible,' which are popularly understood in a sense different from 
 their original meaning, and which as so understood mislead the 
 mass of the congregation and even preachers, into some of the very- 
 opinions so terribly denounced by the condemning clauses. 
 
 " 4. Because the statement which it implies is historically false, 
 viz., that ' the condemnations in this Confession of Faith' do not 
 apply to the persons to whom they are evidently intended to apply. 
 
 " 5. Because the main statement which it contains is either 
 extremely questionable, or a mere truism, or else so ambiguous as to 
 be only misleading. 
 
 *' G. Because, after well considering a similar explanation given 
 in 1689, Archbishop Tillotson thus expressed himself: 'The ac- 
 count given of Athanasius' Creed appears to me nowise satisfactory. 
 [ "wish we were well rid of it.' 
 
 '* 7. Because, in most instances, it will give no ease to those who 
 are offended by the use of the Creed in public services. 
 
 " 8. Because, whilst virtually condemning the use of the Creed, 
 it still leaves the Rubric enjoining that use. 
 
 " 9. Because it will have the effect of increasing the existing 
 burden, by seeming to state that in the view of the Commission, it 
 is a surticient remedy. 
 
 " 10. Because it is one of several proposed explanatory notes, 
 which appear in the Minutes, and which are manifestly inconsistent 
 with this and with each other. 
 
 " 11. Because (in the language used by our chairman, in put- 
 ting it to the vote), it is ' illogical and unsatisfactory.' " (Report, 
 pp. xvii, xviii.) 
 
 15. TiiK Dean of Lincoln (Regius Professor of Divinity at 
 Cambridge) : — " I am unable to recommmend that the Rubric 
 which prescribes the use of the Creed should be retained : 
 
 "Because an Exposition of Faith, containing a series of subtle 
 definitions on the most abstruse points of doctrine, may be fitly 
 placed among the Articles of Religion, V)ut is ill-adapted to be 
 ' sung or said ' in the public worship of the Church. 
 
 " Because the condemning clauses which precede and follow 
 those definitions, when understood in their obvious sense, cause ex- 
 treme distress of mind to many men of unquestionable piety, who 
 unfeignedly believe all the Articles of the Christian Faith. 
 
 " Because, however desirable it may be to present an authori- 
 tative interpretation of the Creed, the Cou) mission has no authority 
 to interpret doctrinal statements ; and the Note, which it is pro- 
 posed to add, seems rather to attest the fact than to diminish the 
 force of grave and serious objections. 
 
 «:> 
 
 ^' 
 
23 
 
 «»:> 
 
 ^' 
 
 " Because the Church has omitted the anathematizing clauses 
 at the end of the Nicene Creed, as it stood originally ; and the 
 principle thus applied to a Creed which was sanctioned by a General 
 Council might, with at least equal propriety, be applied to a Creed 
 which was composed at a later age, and by an unknown author. 
 
 *' Because the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United 
 States of America, which has not only rejected the use of the 
 Athanasian Creed in its public services, but even omitted all re- 
 ference to the Creed itself in the eighth of the Articles of Religion, 
 is not the less cordially acknowledged to be in full communion with 
 the Church of England." (Report, p. xix.) 
 
 16. Thp: Rev. Canon Payne Smith (Regius Professor of Divinity 
 at Oxford) : — " I object to the note appended to the Creed commonly 
 but erroneously, called the Creed of St. Athanasius, for the following 
 reasons : 
 
 " 1. Because the Commission possessed neither the right nor 
 the authority to put an interpretation upon any of the formularies 
 of the Church. 
 
 " 2. Because the note explains the anathemas of the Creed in 
 a manner contrary to their plain grammatical sense, and thereby 
 introduces into the Prayer Book the principle of the non-natural 
 interpretation of the creeds and formularies of the Church ; a prin- 
 ciple fatal to the maintenance of any standard of doctrine whatever. 
 
 " 3. Because the note gives no ease or relief to the consciences 
 of those who are offended by the recitation of this Creed at public 
 ■worship. 
 
 " I venture, further, humbly to express my opinion that this 
 Creed ought not to be publicly recited in the Church, for the follow- 
 ing reasons : 
 
 " (1 .) Because the recitation of a Creed so intolerant is contrary 
 to the right spirit of public worship, as being destructive of that 
 calm and reverent frame of mind in which men ought to approach 
 Ood. The anathen^a appended to the Nicene Creed, is by the gen- 
 eral consent of the Church, never recited at public worship. 
 
 "(2.) Because the anathemas of the Athanasian Creed are not 
 warranted by Holy Writ, exclude apparently the whole Eastern 
 Church from the possibility of salvation, and require men to believe, 
 under pain of perishing everlastingly, not merely the plain state- 
 ments of Holy Scripture, but deductions gathered from it by human 
 
 " (3.) Because the recitation of this Creed is a violation of 
 Church principles, and condenined in the severest terms by the 
 highest ecclesiastical authority. For the Church of England professes 
 to receive the four first General Councils as next in authority to 
 
24 
 
 Holy Scripture, and accordingly the bishops of the whole Anglican 
 communion at the recent Lambeth Conference affirmed that they 
 received the faith as defined by these Councils. But the Council of 
 Constantinople in its seventh Canon, and that of Chalcedon in the 
 Definition of the Faith appended to its Acts, expressly forbid ' the 
 composing, exhibiting, producing, or teaching of any other Creed.' 
 For this they give a sufficient reason, namely, that the Nicene Creed 
 as finally settled at Constantinople ' teaches completely the perfect 
 doctrine concerning the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and 
 fully explains the Incarnation of the Lord. To guard more care- 
 fully against the imposition of new creeds, they command that every 
 bishop or clergyman so offending should be deposed, and every lay- 
 man anathematized. It was only after long and patient deliberation 
 that these Councils themselves made additions to the simpler creed 
 of the Primitive Church ; and not merely is their sentence justly 
 deserved, but the principles which guided them violated, when we are 
 required to recite at public worship a highly complex and elaborate 
 Creed, the statements of which have never been discussed at any 
 Council or Synod of the Church, and which, in so many particulars^ 
 goes beyond the Definition of the Faith as settled in the four first 
 General Councils. 
 
 " As embodying, nevertheless, that particular explanation of 
 the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity, gathered from Holy Scripture 
 chiefly by the logical mind of St. Augustine, 1 think that this Creed 
 ought by all means to be retained among the authoritative documents 
 of the Church of England, mainly because the general assent given 
 to it by the whole Eastern Church ; but only until such time as 
 both its several clauses, and also the question of its general imposi- 
 tion in the face of the contrary decision of the Undivided Church, 
 shall have been considered, if not by a General Council, at all events 
 by a Synod representing all Christians in communion with the Eng 
 lish Church." (Report, p. xx.) 
 
 17. The Rev. Henry Venn (Secretary of the Church Mis- 
 sionary Society) " is unable to concur " in the retention of the ex- 
 isting Rubric and the explanatory note affixed to it. (Report, p. viii.) 
 
 18. The Rev. W. G. Humphry (Vicar of St. Martin's) :— " I 
 disapprove of the note which has been appended to the Athanasian 
 Creed in the schedule, for the following reasons : 
 
 " 1. It is not within the province of the Commission to put an 
 interpretation on one of the formularies of the Church. 
 
 " 2. The note appears to me to put an interpretation on the 
 condemning clauses of the Creed, which is at variance with their 
 plain and obvious meaning. For, accordi g to the note, the condem 
 nations of the Creed are intended only for those persons who ' tuil- 
 
 
 <^V 
 
•>5 
 
 '> 
 
 ^J 
 
 fully rfject the Catholic Faith '; whereas, the Creed declares that 
 except every one do keep the Catholic Faith whole and nndejihd, he 
 cannot be saved ; and again, ' This is the Catholic Faith, which ex- 
 cept a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved.' The terms of 
 condemnation, as expressed in the Creed, are manifestly far more 
 comprehensive than the note represents them to be. 
 
 " 3. It appears to me that the chief effect of the note, if placed 
 in the Prayer Book, will be to offend by an unsound explanation the 
 consciences of many who at present acquiesce in the recitation of 
 the Creed. 
 
 " With regard to the recitation of the Creed in public worship, 
 1 concur generally in the opinions expressed by the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury, the Bishop of St. David's, the Dean of Westminster, 
 and Professor Payne Siuith." (Report, p. xxi.) 
 
 19. Tub Rev. T. W. Perry proposed that permission should 
 be given to use the Apostles' Creed instead of the Creed of Saint 
 Athanasius. 
 
 Of the twenty-seven Commissioners, nineteen ex- 
 pressed their opinion with various shades of difference, 
 that the use of the Creed should no longer be made 
 obligatory, and the small minority of eight were only 
 willing that it should be continued if accompanied 
 with the note of explanation, which we have seen was 
 strongly condemned by the large majority of the Com- 
 missioners; so that for all practical purposes there iscom- 
 plete unanimity as to the expediency of omitting from 
 the service this celebrated Creed ; and as Dean Stanley 
 observes, " This unanimity is the more impressive 
 from the variety of elements which have been brought 
 to bear on the subject. 1 here is here no difference 
 between bishops and presbyters. The Archbishojj of 
 Canterbury and the humblest parochial incumbent in 
 the Commission appear on the same side of relaxation. 
 Nor is it a ciuesti(ni ot political opinion. The Conser- 
 vative legislators and lawyers. Karl Stanhope, Mr. 
 Walpole and Sir Joseph Napier agree on this point 
 
2« 
 
 vvith Lord Portrririn, Lord Ebury, Sir Travis Twiss, 
 Mr. Buxton and Mr. John Abel Smith. Nor is it a 
 concord only of one ecclesiastical party. Not to speak 
 of others, it is interesting to observe, that, however 
 wide their differences on ceremony and doctrine, we 
 find in this cause of charity, justice and common sense. 
 Mr. Venn, the venerable champion of the Evangelical 
 school, on the same side with Mr. Perry, the inde- 
 fatigable champion of the Ritualists." 
 
 III. 
 
 THE BISHOP OF DURHAM/S SPEECH. 
 
 "Since the sitting of the Ritual Commission, 1870, say Dr. 
 Lumby, another attempt was made to quiet the feelings of men on 
 the subject of the damnatory clauses in the Creed. In the convo- 
 cation of the Province of Canterbury, held 1st July, 1879, it was 
 proposed and agreed to append to the Athanasian Creed a declara- 
 tion, as follows : 
 
 " For the removal of doubts and to prevent disquietude in the 
 use of the Creed commonly called the Creed of St. Athanasius, it is 
 here solemnly declared : 
 
 " 1. That the confession of our Christian faith, commonly 
 called the Creed of St. Athanasius, doth not make any addition to the 
 faith as contained in Holy Scripture, but warneth against errors 
 which, from time to time, have arisen in the Church of Christ. 
 
 " 2. That as Holy Scripture, in divers places, doth promise life 
 to them that believe, and declare the condemnation* of them that 
 believe not, so doth the Church in this confession declai-e the 
 necessity for all who would be in a state of salvation, of holding fast 
 the Catholic Faith, and the great peril of rejecting the same. 
 Wherefore the warnings in this confession of faith are to be under- 
 stood no otherwise than the like warnings of Holy Scripture; for we 
 must receive God's threatenings even as His promises, in such wise 
 as they are generally set forth in Holy Writ. Moreover, the Church 
 doth not herein pronounce judgment on any particular person or 
 persons, God alone being the judge of all." 
 
 J^ 
 
 i\ 
 
 * The revisers altered the word damned to condemned. 
 
27 
 
 >i:^ 
 
 J 
 
 The same declaration was afterwards sul)mitted to the Convo- 
 eation of the northern Province of York, but it was not accepted 
 by that body. It was then moved in opposition, "That as the 
 Creed of St. Athanasius has been received by the Catholic Church 
 for so many centuries as the standard of faith, no explanatory 
 additional rubrical note is required, and no action of Convocation 
 ought to diminish the frequency of the use of the Creed." The 
 Bishop of Durham (Dr. Lightfoot) proposed an amendment, and 
 his speech thereupon may be taken as an index of the feeling of 
 most moderate members of the Church of England at the present 
 time. 
 
 He proposed. 
 
 lendt 
 
 Iment, the substitution of the word 
 •• may " tor "shall " m the Kubric. His chiof object was to give the 
 alternative on certain days of using the Apostles' Creed, or, in other 
 words, the placing of the Athanasian Creed in the same position as 
 the Canticles. It appeared, he said, they knew not how, that the 
 Creed had never received the sanction of a General Council ; hence 
 it stood in a position different from that of other creeds. It 
 occupied a position in the Anglican Church which it had never 
 occupied in any branch of the Church Catholic. In the service of 
 the Roman Church it never appeared, but in an occasional office 
 repeated by the clergy. He had before him a tract written by a 
 Roman priest in which he explained its use, and which showed that 
 its position was wholly different from what it was in the English 
 Church. In the Greek Church it was not authorized at all ; it 
 appeared in some editions of the Horologium, but was omitted in 
 others, and that Horologium had the sanction of certain Bishops of 
 the Greek Church. By certain branches of the Anglican Church, 
 the Creed had been rejected ; whilst the American and the Irish 
 Churches had rejected it altogether. He believed the American 
 Church was, if anything, more orthodox in its adherence to the 
 Nicene Creed that we were ourselves, and he was not sure that it 
 was not due to the removal of this stumbling-block. He would 
 very gladly accept the present position of the Athanasian Creed if 
 the prominence given to the document was a real gain to the Church, 
 but he was sorry he could not think it was so. The position of the 
 Oeed should not be reti)iiied as a barrier to young men taking 
 holy orders. Wliatever interpretation was put on the damnatory 
 clauses, they were no part of the document itself, and Dr. Arnold, 
 like the present Bishop of Salisbury and others, agreed with him. 
 The great grievance was the necessity of using the Creed on the 
 great festivals of the Church, in place of the Apostles' Creed. 
 Clergymen had put their own interpretation on the damnatory 
 clauses, but somehow or other they had not succeeded in getting 
 their congregations to take the same view of the case. Whether 
 congregations were right or wrong, it was a very sad fact, which 
 
28 
 
 should lead them all to consider carefully whether their allegiance 
 to the Church of Christ did not require them to remove the stum' 
 bling-block. At the solemn festivals of the Church, that harmony 
 which it was very desirable should pervade those services, waa 
 in^'errupted by denunciations, and the reverence they desired to 
 conciliate for the great doctrines of the faith was impeded by an 
 attachment to those clauses which they could not get the congrega- 
 tion to understand in the sense in which they were put. Amongst 
 the changes possible was the appending of a note. He hoped they 
 would not take that, which he believed would be the most fatal 
 solution of the difficulty. By a note they either meant that it 
 was a counteraction of the Creed, in which case they discredited it; 
 or, that it was an explanation ; and they would see that it waa a 
 most dangerous precedent to attempt to explain important doctrinal 
 points in the Rui)rics. Besides, a note would only result in dissatis- 
 faction to those persons who at present took the document without 
 scruple, and they would thus be placing a stumbling-block in the 
 way of those who now had no difficulty. Another mode of relief 
 which might be suggested was the excision of the damnatory, 
 clauses. That would be a very good solution in itself; but it was 
 ultra vires, and in dealing with the Rubrics they had no power to 
 adopt that course. He ventured to say that those clauses were no 
 part of the confession of faith itself. The third possible alteration 
 was the rendering of the Creed optional. He would not press for 
 the absolute removal of the document from - the public services of 
 the Church, though that arrangement would be made in accordance 
 with the uses of other churches. He would have preferred that it 
 should be so removed; and, in many cases, theological education 
 had gone so far that to press for the total removal of the recitation 
 of the Creed in mixed congregations might be wise. Not many 
 years ago nearly three thousand of the clergy sent a memorial to 
 the two archbishops seeking relief in that matter. If Convocation 
 thought the subject was set at rest, they were very much mistaken. 
 They were on a volcano, whether they would recognize it or not. 
 There was a sense in which there was sincerity in using all the 
 words of the Creed ; still they were a stumbling-block to many. 
 He felt that his allegiance to his Master, Christ, to that Nicene 
 doctrine which he thoroughly and completely held, and to that 
 Church of England which he ventured to think was the noblest 
 church in Christendom, required him to do what he could to remove 
 that which was a stumbling-block in the way of many of their 
 brethren. 
 
 »<♦ 
 
 4. 
 
H'» 
 
 4 
 
 29 
 
 IV. 
 
 UNIl'ORMITY AMKNDMEN'r ACT. 1872. 
 
 The othc:r important measure which we think we 
 owe to the influence of the bishops at their first Con- 
 ference, is the Act of Uniformity, 1872. 
 
 We have had for two centuries three services in 
 one on Sunday morning. Ihe Episcopate saw the 
 injury this was doing the Church. It did not tend to 
 edifying. The three services had many parts in com- 
 mon, and the saying them together led to " vain repeti- 
 tions" the saying of the Lord's prayer four or five 
 times the reading of ten or twelve chapters from the 
 Bible and the saying of two solemn diverse confessions 
 of faith within a few minutes of each other. The 
 Episcopate therefore procured the passing of the above 
 Act, which enabled the clergy without any doubt to 
 divide the services. But unfortunately, and unwisely, 
 the division is left to their discretion, and it was very 
 soon found they could not exercise it. 
 
 These services were, long before, and remained 
 divided services long after, the Reformation. But a 
 lethargy came over the Church. It had existed' with 
 increasing force for centuries, and now^^ulminated in 
 the clergy, with a few brilliant exceptions, becoming 
 indolent, indifferent and degraded in the extreme. 
 They were fonder of hunting the deer and the fox than 
 hunting after souls. They said "These separate services 
 taike up all our time, can we not say them altogether ?" 
 and in this they were encouraged by the folly of Arch- 
 
30 
 
 bishop Laud, a man of large learning but small sense, 
 who, at their recjuest, allowed them to join two 
 of the services, and then, having this permission, they 
 by degrees, joined the three, and thus a bad custom 
 was introduced and has remained to this day a stumb- 
 ling block to all intelligent worshippers in the Church, 
 and a byword to all other denominations of Christians. 
 VVe marvel that great and good and learned men 
 amongst us in every congregation, should, Sunday 
 after Sunday, and year after year for a lifetime, per- 
 petuate, honor and revere, and cling to with such 
 tenacity, a vicious custom, introduced by an indolent 
 and degraded clergy — by men whose conduct they 
 ought rather to condemn and deplore, and seek the 
 first opportunity to avoid. 
 
 Perhaps the greatest objection intelligent laymen 
 have to the present system is the saying of the two 
 diverse creeds, we might say three creeds, for Luther 
 held the Te Deum to be a fourth creed, in almost the 
 same breath. They do not care for the snbtleties of 
 belief these enjoin, which are of no practical value 
 whatever. Surely our assembling together is not to 
 have the mind exercised in logical debate as to the 
 object and meaning of creeds ; whether there is one 
 or a "'double procession," or whether the opinion of 
 this council or that were right or wrong on some misty 
 symbols of faith — non-essentials in themselves and un- 
 intelligible to the multitude, who in truth know but 
 little and do not care to know the existence of these 
 unnecessary and almost puerile difficulties, as far as the 
 congregation is concerned, which have in the past and 
 do still so distract clerical antiquaries ; difficulties 
 
 A. 
 
:n 
 
 ^ » 
 
 J 
 
 "y^ 
 
 which intruilc themselves upon us l)y the recital of 
 diverse creeds within a few minutes of each other are, 
 we humbly submit, a great hindrance to true devotion. 
 Our peopk; of the [)resent day yearn after the simple 
 faith as taught by the good old Apostles' Creed which 
 is in almost the very words of Scripture, and which 
 embraces the leading facts of a revealed Christianity. 
 By it their minds are led to contemplate the precious 
 truths it teaches, u])on which their souls and spirits 
 (Gtic\ and by which their inner lift; is nourished and 
 suppli(;d. Erasmus wrote, that " Never was the 
 Christian faith purer or more undefiled than when the 
 world (ic. the clergy) was content with a single creed, 
 and that the shortest creed we have." And again, the 
 eminent and pious l^ishop Jeremy Taylor, about 1660, 
 " Regarding the Apostles' Creed as embodying the es- 
 seiice of Christian truth, he declares every subsidiary 
 dogma to be superfluous or indifferent, and not to be re- 
 quired as a necessity of faith.' 
 
 Paley contends that a public liturgy should con- 
 tain as few controverted propositions as possible. All 
 churches have no doubt the right to frame creeds and 
 to impose subscriptions. " But why," he asks, '^should 
 every position which a Church maintains, be woven 
 with so much industry into her forms of public worship .'* 
 Some are offended and some are excluded.* This is 
 an evil of itself at least to them, and what advantage 
 or satisfaction can be derived to the rest from the sepa- 
 ration of their brethren, it is difficult to imagine, unless 
 it were a duty to publish our system of polemic divinity 
 
 Notably by the Athanasian Creed. 
 
m 
 
 :V2 
 
 under the name of making confession of our faith every 
 time we worship (jod." ..." We ought not to shut 
 out any from our communion by mixing with divine 
 worship doctrines, which, whether true or false, are. 
 unconnected in their nature with devotion." 
 
 The only comment we have been able to find on 
 the passing of the Act of Uniformity is in the words 
 of Her Majesty on the closing of the Parliament, loth 
 August, 1872. " The measure for the amendment of 
 the Act of Uniformity, based as it is upon careful en- 
 (juiry and on a large amount of ascertained consent, 
 has without offence or shock introduced useful modifi- 
 cations into an ancient system of Divine worship to 
 which a large portion of my people are warmly at- 
 tached." 
 
 The division of the services is optional with the 
 clergy. They may divide. Had it been imperative 
 it might perhaps have given "offence or shock," to 
 weak brethren, but it would only have been a very 
 passing sensation. The best of people fume and 
 threaten for a moment when some change or innovation 
 displeases them, but they soon recover their better 
 sense. 
 
 But let us see how the good intentions of the 
 Queen, the bishops and the legislature have been real- 
 ized. On the passing of the Act all the bishops re- 
 ferred their clergy to it, and offered their best advice- 
 it was all they could do- to those who might be 
 desirous of carrying its provisions into effect ; advice 
 given now nearly twenty years ago, and we now ask, 
 How many clergymen have availed themselves of such 
 advice ? We doubt if many have. There is no church 
 
.*i8 
 
 VY 
 
 ut 
 
 )ii 
 Is 
 
 as far as wc* can learn, where one or a shortened ser 
 vice avoiding all re[)etitions of prayers and the saying 
 of diverse creeds is said on Sunday morning at the 
 usual hour. The services in several churches have 
 been n^duced from three to two, a very great improve- 
 ment and much appreciated by the congregations. 
 But these are exceptional easels and by no m(*ans cure 
 the evil. To do this the plan proposed in Synod b) 
 that much loved and respected man. the late Rev. Kdvvin 
 Baldwin, should be adopted, " Thrit the morning ser- 
 vice should be so divided or shortened as that the 
 same prayer be not repeatt.-d twice, and only one 
 solemn confession of faith be made at any one service." 
 The Act of Uniformity fully provides for this. But it 
 is essential in carrying it out that congregations be 
 consulted. 
 
 Professor Hopkins, of the great University oi' 
 that name in Baltimore, in an able paper in the Cof?- 
 temporary Revieiv a few years ago, drawing a contrast 
 between the American and English PIpiscopal Churches 
 urges that the laity of the latter should be invested 
 with "one undivided third part," in their management, 
 but he would not, we presume, carry out his desire 
 through what he is pleased to call our " hideous vestry 
 system," nevertheless, we shall take leave to make use 
 of that system in part, in our suggestions for the 
 guidance of the laity, further on. 
 
 Now the theory of our Church organization, both 
 
 in England and in Canada, has long been that every 
 
 thing is done with the full consent and approval of 
 
 this " one third part," that is, the congregation. The 
 
 bishops and others insist on this consent being ascer- 
 3 
 
hiT 
 
 :U 
 
 t. lined. The laU: i)can ot" W'c-siininsicr, in his inter- 
 osting essay on vestments, says, " That (^n no account 
 should these garbs whether legal or illegal, be intro- 
 duced into churches or j)arishes where they give offence 
 to the parish or the congregation." Mr. (iladstone, 
 alluding to the riot in lilxeter occasioned by a clergy- 
 man preaching in his sur|)lice ! and using the i)rayer for 
 the Church militant ! says, " To me it appeared at the 
 time, that their introduction, however legal, was, if 
 not effected with the full and intelligent concurrence of 
 the flocks, decidedly unwise," and in speaking of 
 any change that may be desired in the services of 
 the Church, says, " It should be enquired, will it in- 
 crease or will it limit, the active participation of the 
 flock in the service.'* Is it agreeable to the desire of 
 this particular congregation ? " and our late beloved 
 Bishop Bethune always urged that congregations be 
 consulted in every important change. Now what do all 
 these references to the importance of knowing the will 
 of a congregation mean, when there is no machinery ex- 
 isting by which that will can be ascertained ? It means 
 simply this, that the will of a congregation can only be 
 accepted and acted on when, and as it is interpreted 
 by the clergyman who by no chance ever really and 
 completely consults it. It is a one-man power feebly 
 exercised. He desires, for instance, an important 
 change and asks the opinion of his churchwarden, and 
 perhaps one or two members of the congregation. But 
 it does not necessarily follow that he will be guided by 
 such opinion. If he has strong convictions against 
 it he hardly will be. The proposed change, how- 
 ever, reaches the ears of a prominent member who 
 
'.in 
 
 oi)[)os(!S it, and, with more zeal than cliscrc^tion, inti- 
 mates ' hat if it is att('mi)tecl to be carri(!cl out, he and 
 others would leave the Church. The clergyman 
 shrinks, even if his friends do not, from offending so in- 
 fluential a member, and the subject matter not being 
 an essential, not an article of faith, thinks it prudent to 
 abandon it. Why should he make an enemv of per- 
 haps his best friend ? And so one or two members 
 
 m a large congregation, without any s[)ecial claim to 
 intelligence, can prevcmt all [)rogress and improvement. 
 In a city church, the committee on church music, 
 suggested to the rector that the responses in the com- 
 munion service, should be chanted. Leave was most 
 willingly given, and on the following Sund ly this little 
 change was made and gave very general satisfaction ; 
 but an old lady, another Jennie Geddes, of Edinburgh 
 Church fame, in the time of Charles I, vowed that it 
 was rank popery, and if continued she would leave the 
 church. The rector ordered the chant to be discon- 
 tinued. This trirting incident shows the principle which 
 pervades and guides the government of every congrega 
 tion ; a fear of offending the few at the expense of the 
 many. But let us suppose the change proposed was that 
 so clearly stated by the late Canon Baldwin, "that the 
 morning service shall be so divided or shortened, as that 
 the same })rayer be not repeated twice and only one 
 solemn confession of faith be madeat any one service," 
 as allowed by the Act of Uniformity. If attempted to 
 be carried out by the minister alone, it would cause 
 "offence or shock" and some even would threaten to 
 leave. But if he could say to the obstructing parties, 
 " I and others think such change desirable and as we 
 
s 
 
 (.1: 
 
 86 
 
 should be governed by the opinions and wishes of our 
 people I propose to ascertain clearly what they are. 
 If the proposed change is approved of by a two-thirds 
 majority, it will of course be made, if not things will 
 remain as the) are." This should be satisfactory to 
 all. In a constitutional government a majority must 
 rule. The attaining of any proposed object, is no 
 doubt more circuitous and attended with more labor 
 and expense, but it is infinitely better than a direct 
 despotism feebly exercised. 
 
 The Act of Uniformity is permissive only. The 
 service:^: may be divided, but the power to divide is 
 practically nowhere. The bishop cannot direct a di- 
 vision, he can only advise. The clergy cannot divide 
 effectually, for on the least show of opposition they 
 remain content with the accustomed usage. The 
 laity have no voice in the matter. Can we wonder 
 when our people see this want of authority that there 
 is such a lethargy, so much indifference in our congre- 
 gations ? such sullen and dumb endurance manifested 
 at the unsatisfactory morning service ? They all wish 
 it altered, but " it can't be done, and it's no use talking 
 about it." And so the Church is fast losing her hold 
 on them. They go to other places of worship or to 
 none at all. This is not a desirable position for the 
 Church to occupy in the latter part of this enlightened 
 nineteenth century. Now, if asked for a remedy, we 
 at once reply, introduce into her goverment, fully and 
 effectually, the lay element, as afterwards mentioned. 
 Make her really and truly the Church of her people, 
 beloved by them. Sidney Smith said, '* Unless you 
 liberalize, unless you popularize the Church of Eng- 
 
37 
 
 land, it will go to pieces, it will die of dignity. " The 
 prophecy is in the way of being fulfilled and nothing 
 but a radical application can prevent its entire accom- 
 plishment The Bishop of Manchester, recently at a 
 meeting held in Manchester of the National Church 
 Reform Union, amongst other things, said, " I should 
 wish the parishoners to possess, whether by the insti- 
 tution of a Church Board, Parochial Council, or other- 
 wise, more power than they now have to regulate those 
 matters pertaining to the external administration of 
 religion in their parish in which they certainly have 
 the primary interest." 
 
 We hope that it will not be supposed that we ima- 
 gine the clergy generally would approve of more 
 liberty being given to the laity than they now have. 
 There is involved in such a concession some impor- 
 tant considerations which, however, would not be with- 
 in the scope of our remarks now to consider. Yet we 
 hope that many of the clergy would gladly and grace- 
 fully trust their congregations in some of the important 
 questions which affect the temporal well-being of the 
 Church. 
 
 We have already suggested that any important 
 change should be referred to the congregation for its 
 opinion upon it, and it may be asked in what way 
 should this be done ? Mr. Gladstone, in one of his 
 essays, mentions with approval, how a question of 
 ritual or ceremonial might be settled by a congrega 
 tion. It was in the instance of a Welsh congregation. 
 The incumbent was shocked at the free and easy man- 
 ner of the singers. Some came marching into the 
 church when the service had well begun, or had even 
 
38 
 
 reached the Psalms, and went out oftentimes when the 
 singing was ended, just before the sermon ; and, more- 
 over, their conduct was marked by great levity during 
 the service. They were volunteers ; if censured, they 
 would not come at all. The incumbent thought the 
 remedy was one of order. It lay in a surpliced choir 
 of men and boys who must attend in good time under 
 the superintendence of a choir master or the organist. 
 But the plan was opposed by several of his flock who 
 threatened to leave the church if it was carried out. 
 He wisely determined to be governed by the majority 
 of his flock, whatever that might be. On a Sunday 
 morning he stated the case in a few words, and desired 
 for his guidance to have their opinion, and said that a 
 card on which was printed the question proposed had 
 been placed in each pew. The pewholder would take 
 it home, consider the matter, write on it " yes " or 
 *• no," and return it to the churchwardens. The ques- 
 tion was decided by a clear majority and order and 
 satisfaction ever afterwards reigned in that congrega- 
 tion. We think if the basis of voting were enlarged, 
 and not only pewholders but every member had the 
 privilege, greater interest would be manifested by the 
 young as well as the old, on Church matters, and the 
 position of the Church greatly strengthened thereby. 
 Various ways of taking the vote might be suggested. 
 The discussion of any important question may pro- 
 perly be had in the vestry, but the vote should be in 
 the church on a day appointed, much in the same way 
 as a vote is taken on the election of a bishop, when, 
 as in a late case, the most perfect order and the great 
 est solemnity prevailed from first to last. It is an 
 important duty and should be done well. 
 
89 
 
 A plan of this kind, besides being perfectly legiti- 
 mate and proper, would make our churches in the 
 week day of some little use, at least for perhaps a few- 
 times in the year, and relieve them, in a slight degree, 
 from that lonely, that melancholy aspect they have to 
 passers by, being shut up from one Sunday to another. 
 
 We would respectfully urge upon all our congre- 
 gations, and the young men of them especially, to take 
 more interest in their church's welfare. Let them fix 
 their attention and do their utmost to remove the 
 blemishes in the Prayer Book — some may be removed 
 at once, others may require Synodical action or a 
 formal revision, and let them cherish, as the Bishop of 
 Manchester says, "they certainly have the primary 
 interest" the attainment of the *'one undivided third 
 part" in the government of their Church. Each con- 
 gregation might agree on some such points as these : 
 
 1. Pewholders and members, men and women, who may sign 
 the roll kept by the Vestry Clerk or Churchwardens, to constitute 
 the laity. 
 
 2. The usual elections to take place at Easter. 
 
 3. The Churchwardens and Delegates to the Synod, Delegates, 
 if any, to the Provincial Synod, and two Sidesmen to form *' a Par- 
 ochial Council.'' 
 
 4. Any important change in the foim of service or ceremonial, 
 or in the general temporal government of the church, desired by 
 the Incumbent, or any six members of ihe laity, to be stated in 
 writing and presented by the Vestry Clerk to the Council for 
 deliberation. If it pass the Council unaniinouisly, and be approved 
 of by the Incumbent and the Bishop, it shall he carried into etfect 
 by the Churchwardens. 
 
 5. If the Council be not unanimous, or being unanimous the In- 
 cumbent does not give his assent, the Council shall refer the question 
 to the full church, to be voted on by a voting paper delivered to 
 scrutineers in the church on a day named by the Vestry Clerk. 
 
 6. The scrutineers having reported the result to the Council. 
 
■u 
 
 40 
 
 It the question be carried l>y a two-thirds majority, and it he ap- 
 proved of by the Incumhetit and the Bishop, it will be carried into 
 effect by the Churchwardens ; but if such approval be not given 
 the matter drops for that year, but may be renewed after the next 
 Easter. 
 
 The sad scenes so often witnessed at our vestry 
 meetings would, by some such plan, be entirely pre- 
 vented, and the best interests of a parish would be 
 better looked after and promoted when all, old and 
 young, had the opportunity of giving an intelligent 
 vote in its management. 
 
 V. 
 
 SECOND CONFERENCE. 1878. 
 
 We have seen that the first Lambeth Conference 
 was not a success in the estimation of many earnest 
 Church people, though we think it must take credit for 
 originating the two important measures we have 
 noticed. It was, however, hoped that when the second 
 Conference was announced, real work would begin and 
 would show itself After ten years of thought and 
 consideration on the questions discussed at their first 
 meeting, and especially that now they have had before 
 them the report of the Ritual Commission, and seen 
 the working, or rather the failure, of the Uniformity 
 Act, it was natural to conclude that if they had not the 
 power finally to determine, they would at least advise, 
 as with authority, the relaxation of the use, in some 
 way, of the Athanasian Creed and the amendment of 
 the Act of Uniformity. From the well-known desire 
 
 I 
 
 ■i 
 
 I 
 

 41 
 
 of the late Archbishop of Canterbury, and many of the 
 Bishops, that the former should cease to be part of the 
 morning service, and the notorious failure of the latter 
 to effectually divide the services, it was deemed quite 
 certain that some decisive action would be taken, in 
 both of these important matters, by the combined 
 wisdom of this great assembly. But as, at the first 
 Conference, "the door was shut" — and so, in a very 
 maze of ignorance and doubt we can only surmise that 
 His Grace found himself not supported by so large a 
 majority as he expected, and did not like to throw the 
 least gloom over the august assembly by dividing it, 
 and thus exposing to view, though it were only amongst 
 themselves, the ulcers and sores of the Church, to find 
 cures for which, we should have thought, was, or ought 
 to have been, if not the main, at least one of the objects 
 o^ the meeting. When the time came, it was thought 
 lest to pare down one's own particular views, and to 
 concede everything so as to preserve the appearance 
 of union, even though it might be suspected, by the 
 outside world. t(j be hollow and delusive. 
 
 Every good resolve, every good intention and 
 jHjrposc for the Church's welfare, would appear to 
 have been sacrificed to making matters pleasant and 
 agreeable to His Grace's invited guests. Fhey re- 
 ceived, we were told, as all wished they should receive, 
 and as their life-long labors in the service of religion 
 well merited, unbounded hospitality. They spent 
 much of their time with " the kindest of Christian 
 friends in their delightful homes." But still, in all 
 seriousness, we must ask. What great good did they 
 achieve? Did they in this, the time of the Church's 
 
42 
 
 extremity, advise the removal of one single griev 
 ance, of one stumbling-block especially which has 
 been in the way of the Church's progress for genera- 
 tions ? We are obliged to say, No. These one hun- 
 dred venerable Bishops, whom we all revere and love, 
 were invited to come from the utmost ends of the 
 earth, to discuss some important matters amongst them- 
 selves, and then to write a letter which, in its essence, 
 is almost a transcript of the letter written ten years 
 before, exhorting the faithful to union and submission 
 to Church authority! 
 
 Our Church rulers here lost a golden opportunity. 
 For nearly ten years they have had under considera- 
 tion the two important questions we have noticed. 
 They must have remarked the almost unanimous 
 opinion of the members of the Ritual Commission, that 
 the Athanasian Creed should cease to be read in the 
 churches — an opinion which we are warranted in say- 
 ing is entertained by the vast majority of the clergy 
 and laity — and they must have seen the failure of the 
 Uniformity Act. Had they given the advice which 
 these two questions demand, had they made a begin 
 ning of reform, they would have silenced the just com- 
 plaints of the best friends of the Church. They would 
 have placed her in a position unassailable by her 
 bitterest opponents. But it would seem that they 
 were and are irresolute. They are afraid to act in 
 anything like a commanding, or ordering, or even 
 advising spirit, lest they should offend a small minority 
 in the Church. " Their hands," said Bishop McGee, 
 at Northampton, 20th Oct., 1875, "are paralyzed. They 
 have divested themselves of power and authority. 
 
48 
 
 They are fast losing all control over the clergy of their 
 respective dioceses, who conduct the services of the 
 Church as they like, and not as the bishops and as the 
 people wish ; making her a scorn and a by-word to 
 her enemies." 
 
 There is no hope of any effectual reform or 
 amendment, unless the lay element in the Church 
 asserts itself and is brought to bear on its general 
 management, in some such way as we have mentioned. 
 We can no longer, we are sorry to say, trust the Con- 
 ferences of our Bishops. They have now returned, 
 Sept. 1 2th, 1878, many of them to their very distant 
 dioceses, and, at the end of another decade, we shall 
 see them again wending their way from earth's remotest 
 bounds to the Palace of Lambeth, when nearly the 
 same programme will be gone through, and with 
 almost the same result — a letter to the faithful. In the 
 meantime, that the Church is in rapid progress of dis- 
 integration, is clear to every thoughtful mind. 
 
 VI. 
 REVISED N E Vv' T E S T AMEN T. 
 
 IITH NOVKMBKK, 1880. 
 
 Soon after the adjournment of the second Confer- 
 ence the Revised New Testament appeared, and we 
 make one or two remarks upon it. 
 
 The Church's internal contentions during the last 
 sixty years have been fierce in the extreme, whether 
 we regard the two great parties whose differences are 
 
I' 
 
 44 
 
 mainly those (A ritual ; or that other party composed 
 of men of liberal and advanced views in Church mat- 
 ters, whose high position and great intellectual abilities 
 no one can question ; who have set themselves to ex- 
 amine and criticize, but always with the most friendly 
 eye to the Church's welfare, the very foundations of 
 our b(!lief, and the authority on which rests all Chris- 
 tian dogma. I hey are men who deem it the best and 
 most honest policy, not to hide abuses, as we have long 
 done, to the great injury of our Church and of true 
 religion, but to expose and if possible to banish them. 
 These men have been and are still much abused ; but 
 at length the Christian world is beginning tardily to do 
 them justice. The translators and theologians of a 
 former age, scrupled not to make the word of God 
 what they thought it ought to be. " Upon the pretext of 
 exposition of Scripture,"says Bacon, "they did not stick 
 (scruple) to add and alter, and to pronounce that they 
 do not find, and by show of antiquity to introduce 
 novelty." The well-informed critics of the present day 
 are endeavoring to sweep away all those incrustations 
 of useless form and error which have been fastened on 
 our practice and faith during a dark age, when a few 
 learned ecclesiastics, but whose learning and abilities, 
 says Macaulay, were habitually devoted to the defence 
 of tyranny and Imposture, had the power and could do 
 what they liked for the promulgation of their peculiar 
 views ; and they are bringing us back to the fair and 
 original form of a revealed Christianity. 
 
 The ap[)earance of the Revised New Testament 
 on iith November. 1880. fullv bears out this view. 
 We propose, among many instances of revision, to refer 
 
45 
 
 only to one, and we may at once say we do so with 
 very great reluctance, because we fear it may give pain 
 to many of our honored clergy, which we would not 
 willingly do. Hut truth is dearer than friendship, and 
 the fact we shall mention shows, in such a strong 
 light, the necessity for an immediate revision of the 
 Prayer Book, that in justice to our argument we can- 
 not pass it over. 
 
 The revisors have omitted, as indeed they had no 
 choice but to omit, the 7th verse in the ist and 5th John. 
 it has been known for ages that it formed no part of 
 Scripture at all. It is what divines and others mildly 
 call an interpolation. A learned Judge, on a trial 
 several years ago, designated an interpolation in an 
 authentic marriage register, intended to support and 
 prove a legal marriage, to be in the nature of a forgery ; 
 and if such it be in a secular document, surely in the 
 word of God it must be a forgery of the deepest dye, 
 and yet we are going on and have been going on for 
 generations, with our eyes open, not only reading this 
 spurious verse in our public service, but issuing and 
 circulating millions of Bibles with this astounding in- 
 terpolation, we might use a harder word, on the face of 
 each copy ! The New Testament Company revising 
 the vScriptures, "earnestly laboring over the text of the 
 Word of Life," have expunged this passage without, 
 we are sorry to say. any note or explanation. 
 
 What a confirmation is this " interpolation " of the 
 old aphorism that truth will in the end prevail. Here 
 is a deception, a pious fraud, practised centuries ago, 
 and until the last century considered a part of Holy 
 Scripture, but is at last detected and only now waits 
 
1ft 
 
 46 
 
 for forr^:"-l banishment ! " Cunning and deception, the 
 meteiors of the earth, after gHttering for a time must 
 pass away ; but wisdom and truth, the offspring of the 
 sky, are immortal.' 
 
 Vil 
 
 THIRD CONFERHNCK, 1888. 
 
 But another ten years have elapsed since the last 
 Conference, and our Church rulers are again on the 
 move. They have been summoned and are hastening 
 over land and sea, to the Palace of Lambeth. They 
 have now had twenty years of thought over what should 
 be done with the Athanasian Creed, and nearly as long 
 as to the Uniformity Act, and have no doubt arrived 
 at some conclusion with respect to them. Twenty 
 years of thought over any great question — and as to 
 the Athanasian Creed, they have had the advantage of 
 the opinions of many of the learned men of the last 
 two centuries one would think should be sufficient to 
 come to some conclusion with regard to it. This third 
 great Pan-Anglican Council opened at Lambeth 30th 
 June, 1888. At its close, 28th July or soon after, its 
 proceedings appeared in book form. The Ency^^i'-^al 
 Letter, with the reports of committees and the resolu- 
 tions formed thereon, furnish, no doubt, most inter- 
 esting and instructive reading, but we fear very few 
 of our people ever saw the book, whereas, had the pro- 
 ceedings, as they occurred, been made public through 
 
 JM^vii^ 
 
47 
 
 [)n, the 
 i must 
 f of the 
 
 he last 
 on the 
 jtening 
 
 They 
 should 
 as long 
 irrived 
 twenty 
 i as to 
 tage of 
 he last 
 lent to 
 s third 
 :h 30th 
 [ter, its 
 :y».i'"al 
 resolu- 
 
 inter- 
 ry few 
 he pro- 
 hrough 
 
 the press, the whole Church would have been able to 
 form some intelligent opinion on all the matters treated 
 of. 
 
 At the two former Conferences no public reference 
 was made to the Athanasian Creed, although it must 
 have bet-n seriously debated, and, as we have already 
 stated, great dissatisfaction thereat was manifested by 
 a large portion of the clergy and laity ; but now, 
 amongst the resolutions formally adopted at the third 
 Conference, we find the followino- : 
 
 o 
 
 '• 18. That tho Archbishop oP Canterbury be requested to take 
 counsel with such persons as lie may see fit to consult, with a view 
 to ascertaining whether it is desiiable to revise the English version 
 of tht Nicene Creed or of the (^uicunque Vult." 
 
 " Whether it is desirable." One. is almost inclined 
 to suppose, from the quiet wording of the resolution, 
 that the subject of it had only i';st been brought to their 
 notice, instead of having been under consideration for 
 twenty years at least. 
 
 The resolution was carried bv 57 votes to 20. 
 Now, the bishops attending thi.s Conference numbered 
 145, so on this resolution 68 bishops must have de- 
 clined to vote or were absent. Thus we have, if all 
 had voted, a probable majority result of 88 bishops 
 opposed to the resolution ! We surmise, and it is 
 almost certain, that they thought it not only a 
 trifling with, but a clear evasion of, the whole question. 
 What ! When they had before them the accumulated 
 evidence of some of the best and most learned and 
 pious men of the last two centuries ? Men of every 
 shade of religious opinion, deprecating the Creed for 
 various reasons, but all uniting in the desire that it 
 
4H 
 
 shoiilfl (Mther b(.' removed altogether from the IVayer 
 Book, or placed with the Articles of Religion, so that it 
 should not form part of the publir service. Amongst 
 a cloud of witnesses standing straight before lh(;m, we 
 may mention a few : Archbishop Tillotson, Bishop 
 Jeremy Taylor, Chiilingworth, Richard Baxter, Bishop 
 Burnet, Dean Prideaux, Francis Burton, Dr. Arnold, 
 Bishop Lonsdale, Canon Swainston, Dean Alford, the 
 late Archbishop of Canterbury, Earl Stanhojje. Lord 
 Portman, the Karl of Harrow!))-, the Bishop of Win- 
 chester, the Bishop of St. David's, Lord Ebury, Mr. 
 John Able Smithy M.P., the Bishop of Carlisle, the 
 Right Hon. Spencer Walpole, Sir Travis Twiss, the 
 Queen's Advocate, Right Hon. Sir Joseph Napier, 
 Mr. Charles Burton, M.P., the Dean of Westminster, 
 the Bishop of Manchester, the Dean of Lincoln, 
 (Regius Professor of Divinity at Cambridge), the 
 Rev. Canon Payne Smith (Regius Professor of Di- 
 vinity at Oxford) the Rev. Henry Venn (Secretary 
 of the Church Missionary Society and venerable cham- 
 pion of the Evangelical School), the Rev. W. G. 
 Humphry, Vicar of St. Martins, the Rev. T. W. 
 Perry, the indefatigable champion of the Ritualists, 
 The Bishop of Durham. And in addition to these they 
 have had before them nearly 3000 of the clergy who 
 presented memorials to the Archbishops of Canterbury 
 and York, praying to be relieved from reciting this 
 Anathasian Creed. 
 
 And let it not be forgotten that, in the early part 
 of this century, a very large part of the clergy de- 
 clined, with the full permission of their bishops, to re- 
 cite the Creed. 
 
! 
 
 part 
 de- 
 
 4d 
 
 And there is another consideration which should 
 have some weight in examining evidence. The Qui- 
 cunque is a word of an extensive meaning. It may 
 mean the whole world, but we may take it as ajjplied 
 to Christendom only. Dieterici, in 1861, estimated 
 Christendom to contain five hundred and five millions 
 of souls. Possibly we might now say five hundred 
 and twenty millions. Of these, five hundred millions 
 of Christians either do not recognize the Creed at all, 
 or do not recite it in public worship. The Church of 
 England alone, numbering only about twenty millions, 
 recites it in her public morning service. Of these 
 twenty millions, a very large majority, as we contend, 
 wish that the Creed should not retain itsplace in the public 
 service, and a very small minority that no change 
 should be made. If this estimate be anywhere near 
 the truth, and we believe it is, what a very small space 
 the Athanasian minority occupies — a mere spec on the 
 huge map of Christendom ! It should teach a lesson 
 of humility and moderation. 
 
 Now, in face of this overwhelming testimony 
 against the Creed, testimony which would satisfy any 
 court of law or equity, or any mixed jury of bishops, 
 clergymen and laymen, they would "a true verdict 
 give, according to the evidence," in five minutes ; the 
 managers of the Conference ask for some little further 
 evidence from parties they know nothing of. Perhaps 
 they are minded to send to Germany for a Martin 
 Bucer and a Peter Martyr. Is it not an evasion of the 
 whole question.'^ nay, we say it is a fair presumption, 
 from the cumulative and circumstantial evidence we 
 
 have brought forward, that it is an admission as clear 
 
 4 
 
50 
 
 as anything /can be, that the bishops as a body ac- 
 knowledge their inability to deal with it. It is, in fact, 
 a postponement of it to the Greek Calends, or at least 
 till some revolution comes along to help them to a con- 
 clusion ; a revolution, stern and rude, and rough and 
 boisterous, that will not even have the civility to say, 
 "By your leave, my Lord Bishops," but, "see now 
 that this be done without any more ado, or- " 
 
 It is a noticeable fact that no revision of the 
 Prayer Book has ever taken place (and there have been 
 five or six), except in times of revolution or great dis- 
 order in either Church or State. So our Church gov- 
 ernors have abundance of precedents for delay, the 
 course they appear to be involuntarily taking. In 
 times of excitement they seem to say it would b(^ impru- 
 dent to make any change ; in times of profound peace, 
 there is no necessity for it. Paley said, if we are to 
 wait for improvement till Church governors solicit, or 
 ministers of State propose it, I will venture to pro- 
 nounce that (without His interposition with whom 
 nothing is impossible) we may remain as we are till 
 the "renovation of all things." 
 
 We know how difficult it is in a very small repre- 
 sentative corporation to carry any important measure. 
 In a large Ecclesiastical body of 145 Bishoi)s, where 
 there are so many varied and contrary interests to 
 consider, and where the principle seems to be not to 
 do anything in the way of an important reform, unless 
 there is unanimity, the thing is simply impossible. It 
 has been said that the Church of Rome can never be 
 reformed from within ; may not this remark equally 
 apply to the Church of Pingland ? An intimate friend 
 
 
51 
 
 i 
 
 once said to Gambetta. "If you had been Pope what 
 wonderful reforms you would have made in the Church, 
 you would have revolutionized Roman Catholicism." 
 "Oh, no," he replied, " that would be quite impossible, 
 for the Pope can reform nothing. If I were Pope and 
 attempted reforms I should die a very sudden death, 
 and a wiser Pope would succeed me." 
 
 If our venerable Primate were to advise with all 
 the authority of his office, even though backed by the 
 report of a Royal Commission, that this Creed should 
 not retain its place in the public service of the Church, 
 he would not, we feel sure, meet the supposed fate of 
 Gambetta ; but, he would raise such a storm and panic 
 among certain sections of the clergy, that might pos- 
 sibly rend the very Church in twain. Possibly, but not 
 probably. The storm would soon subside, but it is 
 this imaginary result which frightens and makes afraid. 
 When the Americans banished the Creed from their 
 Prayer Book, there were then, doubtless, some severe 
 ecclesiastics ; Carlyle would have said j)eppery ecclesi- 
 astics, like those we have amongst us at the present 
 day, who cried out at the top of their voice to frighten 
 sober-minded people: " Paganism will now be substi- 
 tuted for Christianity." The good Christian people of 
 the United States have managed to do excellently well 
 without the Creed for the last one hundred long years, 
 and we believe they are not yet Pagans. Mr. Bryce, 
 indeed, in his recent very able work, the " American 
 Commonwealth," says. " Religion is respected and 
 flourishes and exerts at least as much influence as^ 
 in England ; intolerance is all but unknown, the 
 clergy are respected and respectable : works of benev- 
 
3^2 
 
 
 'f II 
 
 ol^nce are pursued with an energy not to be witnessed 
 even among the leading nations of Europe. Christian- 
 ity, though not the established, is practically recognized 
 as the national religion." 
 
 On the whole, this third Conference seems to 
 define the position of the Church of England, as 
 regards the two important subjects we have noticed, 
 to be a very singular and a very distressing one. There 
 is, for all practical purposes, complete unanimity of 
 opinion by bishops, clergy and laity. First — As to 
 the expediency of dividing the Sunday morning ser- 
 vice, so that no prayer shall be repeated twice, and only 
 one solemn confession of faith be made, at any one 
 service ; and, Second — As to the omission, on the ap- 
 pointed days, from that service, of the Athanasian 
 Creed; and yet there is no power existing, equal to 
 the occasion, of dividing the one effectually, or of 
 omitting the other. 
 
 This, then, being the unfortunate position of the 
 Church of England, in England, Is the Church of 
 England in Canada to be guided by it.-* We know 
 the love of the Canadian Church for her glorious 
 Mother Church can never, in weal or woe, suffer de- 
 cadence. If one is obliged to differ with the other, it 
 will give intense pain to both. But if the Mother 
 Church, from her peculiar position, cannot effect 
 needed and well recognized reforms, she would not, 
 we are sure, stand in the way of a Colonial Church, 
 which possibly can. We sympathize with the declara- 
 tion of the Canadian Bishops in 1861, that "We desire 
 the Church in this Province to continue, as it has been, 
 an integral part of the United Church of England and 
 
: 
 
 j 
 
 .»•) 
 
 Ireland." mikI we fully concur in the opinion expressed 
 by some clergymen of high standing in the Church, 
 whom Bishop Strachan consulted, that "we can make 
 no movement, but in accordance with her principles 
 and practice, and consequently after she has led the 
 way.' But whilst we admit this, it must be with some 
 limitation. A subject owes allegiance to his sovereign, 
 but only so long as the sovereign is able to protect 
 him in his rights. If he cannot, moralists tell us, the 
 allegiance is withdrawn. And so if, as we have 
 attempted to show, the Mother Church is unable to set 
 ' motion some organization which shall accomplish 
 « eforms needed in her own sphere, any implied 
 promise made by a branch of that Church only to act 
 when "she has led the way." is not binding. 
 
 But this is a question for our own Church rulers 
 to decide; we only wish to show that something should 
 be done, with the consent, if possible, of the Mother 
 Church, to make our Prayer Book more in accordance 
 with the wishes of churchmen generally -some few- 
 blemishes should be removed — that one especially, 
 that '"interpolation" we have referred to with so much 
 regret, and which conscientious clergymen must read 
 with pain, should not be obligator). It should be 
 passed over in the future ; but does it not show the 
 necessity for revision. 
 
 And whilst we are on this subject, and by 
 way of parenthesis, — When Prayer Book revision 
 is fairly gone into, many improvements will be sug- 
 gested no doubt ; but there is one, as it seems to 
 us, which is well worthy of consideration, and is 
 mentioned simply for churchmen to think over. It 
 
I i 
 
 1 1 
 
 ': ;m 
 
 in 
 
 .A 
 
 54 
 
 has reference to the; evening service — with very little 
 difference, it is the same as the morning. Surely we 
 might have a varied form for that service, and particu 
 larly when it is considef'ed that the evening congrega- 
 tion is, for the most part, the same as the morning. 
 We are sure the laity would cordially approve of a 
 change in this respect. It would be a most useful and 
 attractive variation from the morning service, and 
 would increase the love and veneration of every one 
 for the grand Liturgy of our Church ; or if, in the 
 meantime, the heaven-inspired Litany could be substi- 
 tuted for the evening service, and either sung or said, 
 we should be much more likelv to hear it rendered in 
 a manner befitting its high origin and intention, than 
 we ever do on .Sunday morning, smothered as it is 
 between two services, and hurried, nay, we must say, 
 in many cases slurred over, apparently without thought 
 or feeling, in order that the whole may be gone through 
 in one hour. This change of service, we submit, 
 might, even now, to a great extent, be attained, if the 
 clergy would follow the provisions of the last Uni- 
 formity Act. The " Parochial Council " might, in 
 such cases as this, be consulted. 
 
 But the question has been so well treated by one 
 of the Church's brightest ornaments. Dr. Arnold, that 
 we cannot resist the pleasure of transcribing his re- 
 marks, which, however, it should be noticed, have 
 reference to a national or established Church ; but much 
 of what he says is applicable to all our churches. 
 
 " The friends of the established Church justly 
 extol the substantial excellence and beauty of the 
 Liturgy. It can. indeed, hardly be praised too highly. 
 
 -'■♦>>. 
 
 '•^ T wiiWi ' j^ s'''^*: ■ 
 
oo 
 
 as the solemn service of the Church, embodying one of 
 the best representations of the feelings and language of 
 a true Christian, in his confessions, his thanksgivings 
 and his prayers. But as. while we reverence the Bible 
 above all other books, we yet should never think of 
 studying it to the exclusion of all others; so, and much 
 more, may we say of the Liturgy, that even allowing 
 it to be the best conceivable religious service in itself, 
 still it ought not to be the only one. The Liturgy of the 
 Church of England, with some few alterations, which 
 1 need not here specify, should be used once on ever) 
 .Sunday, and every great Christian holiday through- 
 out the year, in every parish church. But I doubt 
 whether there are not many, even amongst its most 
 sincere admirers, who, in a second service on the same 
 day, would be glad of some variety ; still more, who 
 would V. ish to vary the service according to the time 
 and circumstances, when the church was opened on 
 week days. Indeed I hardly know a more painful 
 sight than the uninterrupted loneliness in which our 
 churches are so often left from one Sunday to another. 
 The very Communion table and juilpit are dismantled 
 of their coverings and cushions, the windows are closed ; 
 the doors are fast locked, as if a Protestant Church, 
 except on Sunday, were like the Pelasgicum at Athens, 
 • best when unfrequented.' xNow, this has arisen 
 partly, no doubt, from other causes : but the necessity 
 of reading the Liturgy, and nothing but the Liturgy, 
 both at morning and evening prayer, is an immovable 
 obstacle to the opening of the churches generally, with 
 any effect, except on a Sunday. It is doubtful whether 
 our arrangement of our time and the universal pres- 
 
! % 
 
 w 
 
 1$ 
 
 I 
 
 M 
 
 56 
 
 sure of business would allow of the: attendance of a 
 large congregation at church on week days, under any 
 circumstances; but it is certain that, in order to over 
 come these disadvantages, something more attractive 
 is needed, than the mere uniform reading of the same 
 prayers, and going through the same forms day after 
 day, both in the morning and the evening. Nor 
 should I think it an evil, but a great good, that differ- 
 ent services should be performed at different times of 
 the day and week, within the walls of the same church. 
 Not only do the various tastes and degrees of know- 
 ledge amongst men require varieties in the form of 
 their religious services, but the very same men are not 
 always in the mood for the same things : there are 
 times when we should feel most in unison with the 
 deep solemnity of. the Liturgy ; there are times also 
 when we should better enjoy a freer and more social 
 service, and for the sake of the greater familiarit)' 
 should pardon some insipidity and some extravagance. 
 And he who condemns this feeling does but lose his 
 labor, and can but ill appreciate one great attribute of 
 God's works -their endless variety. Our sight, our 
 hearing and our taste are furnished with subjects of 
 gratification, not of one kind only, but of millions ; the 
 morning song of the lark is not the same with the even- 
 ing song of the nightingale ; the scenery which we 
 most enjoy in the full brightness of a summer day is 
 not that which best harmonizes with the solemnity of 
 an autumn evening." 
 
 But we must return to our subject and hasten to 
 a close. Entertaining the deepest reverence for the 
 Book of Common Praver, and an anxious wish that its 
 
 '"'Liy 
 
',1 
 
 office! should be freed from its few blemishes, we ven- 
 ture to express ;i hope that each lay member of the 
 Church may be induced, if not from a perusal of the 
 foregoing remarks, at least from his own more thought- 
 ful consideration of the subject, to consider more 
 seriously than he has yet done, whether, on Sunday 
 morning, the needless repetitions of j)rayers, and the 
 saying of diverse creeds within a few minutes ot 
 each other, really tend to his own "edifying." if not, 
 we would then further ask him to make the cause we 
 advocate his own, and talk over and promulgate his 
 views amongst his brethren, and see if some means 
 cannot be devised by which the morning service may 
 be restored to that simplicity, harmony and beauty of 
 performance, becjueathed to us by the wisdom of its 
 framers. 
 
 If the Laity are to be enfranchised they must take 
 the initiative. They must put their own shoulders to the 
 wheel. We ask their careful consideration of the sev- 
 eral points we have ventured to bring before them, and 
 especially that one which has reference to the proposed 
 '* Parochial Council." Let them keep this steadily in 
 view. It is the embodiment of their " one third part " 
 in the government of the Church. They are now a 
 rope of sand, this constitutes them a tower of strength, 
 which, in consonance with the two clerical orders, will 
 be used in promoting the best interests of the Church 
 and of religion. We hope and believe that, on full con- 
 sideration, many of the clergy will aid the laity in its 
 establishment, and that they will look upon it as the 
 best means of obtaining, amongst other improvements, 
 a more rational service than is afforded by the unmean- 
 
58 
 
 ing repetitions of prayers and the saying of diverse 
 creeds. 
 
 And finally, we again ask the laity, in any ev^ent, 
 to "do what they can" for the " Parochial Council," 
 and to do it heartily, in the spirit of those noble words 
 of the Bishop of Durham, uttered in reference to one 
 of the important questions we have had under consid- 
 eration. " He felt that his allegiance to his Master, 
 Christ, to that Nicene doctrine which he thoroughly 
 and completely held, and to that Church of England 
 which, he ventured to think was the noblest Church in 
 Christendom, required him to do what he could, to re- 
 move that wiiich was a stumbling-block in the way of 
 manv of their brethren." 
 
 I: 
 
 11^ 
 
 -fi 
 
 <:lj 
 
 (•V 
 
It, 
 
 I t 
 t 
 
 lis 
 le 
 d- 
 :r, 
 ily 
 
 nd 
 in 
 
 re- 
 of