fruit first in the closing the doors of Convocation, "the Church of England by representation." The account of this commonly received in England, and thought sufficient is, that the Houses could not agree; that the Lower or Priests' House was to blame, and that Government shut the doors of both Houses. This is a sample of what is called "historical fact:" I know nothing more misleading than historical fact.

The conflict between the Houses lay very deep; and the account of it, and of its issue is quite simple. The conflict was the old conflict between Temporal and Spiritual. The Bishops' House represented the first; the Priests' House represented the second: the Government sided with its natural allies the Bishops, and specially with Bishop Hoadley; and as it was politically convenient and palatable to the Crown to put down the Priests' House with a high hand, and as it left the Bishops more free to go their own way, Convocation was closed in 1717, and continued closed till 1852,-one hundred and thirtyfive years. The difficulty about its being thus disabled from granting subsidies to the Crown had been got rid of forty years before, by the Act 16 and 17 Caroli II., in the time of Archbishop Sheldon".

Secondly, the seeds bore fruit in the religious torpor of Century XVIII., when, to use the words of Mosheim, "ecclesiastical literature sank to a low ebb, and spiritual religion to a lower."

When, Wesleyanism and Evangelicalism having been tried and found wanting, Churchmen began to awake again some fifty years ago, the Parliamentary condition was fast passing into active assault and half-paralysed defence, that is to say, into the condition in which it has remained

■ Hoadley born, 1676; Priest, 1700; Bishop of Bangor, (which Diocese he never visited in the six years of his Episcopate) 1715; of Hereford, 1721; of Salisbury, 1723; of Winchester, 1734; died, 1761. Dean Hook says,— "He seems at first to have speculated in orthodoxy, and there is a work of his on Episcopacy which may even now be read with advantage. But the Whigs were in power, and their hatred of Church principles being strong, Hoadley soon perceived that the way to preferment was to assail the Church, and undermine the principles of Christianity."-Hook's Life of Hoadley.

See Appendix D, p. 416.

ever since; and which will doubtless end in its natural issue, a condition of triumphant assault and complete paralysis of defence. In 1832, the numbers and the power of those who, either as Roman Catholics or Nonconformists, were not of the National Church, had become formidable; and the mind of the English Statesman, having lost its stay and its balance, took refuge in the rule that considerations of the position and the claim of the National Church must be made to give way before the claim of social, or political, or economical expediency; and the policy of Indifferentism succeeded to the policy of "Church and State."

I do not go here into the broad question of "Church and State:" I have in other publications stated my conclusions upon it, and should only be repeating myself.

All that I say here is this, that there was in "Church and State" fifty years ago, something of the nature of a principle; something which a Statesman could appeal to without stultifying himself.

Whatever may have been its value, it is gone now; though it be often appealed to still, as though it remained unchanged and unimpaired. But it is to be observed that, of late years, men are beginning to use language compounded of fear and worldliness: "It will last my time." This is in many ways significant.

The repeal of the Test and Corporation Act in 1828: the Roman Catholic Emancipation Act in 1829, with all its weak and futile devices and contrivances for preventing the vote of a Roman Catholic member upon questions affecting the "National Church:" the Reform Act of 1832, giving an impulse to democracy, which has never ceased since to gain strength year by year, with the election of many Nonconformist members: the doing away of ten of the Irish Bishoprics: the admission of Jews into Parliament,-all these things, natural in their order and sequence, and having one common origin in the march of democracy and consequent policy of Indifferentism, combined to stir the minds of faithful men touching the great and urgent need of Catholic Revival.

The National Church had leaned far too much upon the reed of State connection, as it leans upon it still even after the costly experience of the last forty-five years, though the reed has gone into the hand and pierced it. Henceforth, the Church, if to be found faithful, must be wearing other armour, and be fighting with other weapons. And so, in the mercy of GOD, the Catholic Revival set forth, and moved slowly, but steadily upon its way.

Looking back upon the forty-five years, it is a wonderful sight. Full of sorrow, full of rejoicing; full of hope, full of fear; full of darkness, full of light.

Looking nearer and more intently, the sight has two parts; the one distinct from the other: one is that of the corporate condition of the Church as the "National Church;" the other, that of the individual condition of members of the Church, and of congregations.

On the latter side are men and women, soldiers of CHRIST, resting patiently, yea, and thankfully, under all trials in the Church of their Baptism; contending earnestly for the Faith once delivered to the Saints; committed to the Church to keep and to deliver throughout all time ready to suffer for the Faith, and, if called thereto, suffering cheerfully; knowing that it is by suffering at the hands of the world, and not by the world's "successes," that they can best serve and follow CHRIST. Faithful men and women; individuals and congregations; Priests and People; here and there, but at large intervals of time and space, a Bishop.

On the other side is the Church Corporate, bound up with, and bound by the State-subjected, and subjecting itself more and more year by year, to the will of a Civil Power of all religions and of no religion; and listening, not unwillingly, to proposals for constructing the Church anew, after man's device, and, as it is said, for "adapting it to national requirements."

On the side of the faithful there is an unearthly and fast-gathering light, filled with struggling shapes, fighting, beaten, conquering, suffering, rejoicing, smitten, crowned 3. On the other side there is the darkness that may be felt.

Let us turn from figure to fact. What have the fortyfive years seen in respect of the Church Corporate here in England?

They have seen her robbed of her Church-rate upon pretext of conscience: on the same pretext, robbed of her Schools and her Universities: robbed of her Endowments and "Charities," devised exclusively for Church purposes, and trusted to the keeping of "Church and State" by pious donors, as devised "for ever:" robbed of her Jurisdiction in things Spiritual, as guaranteed to her in Century XVI.: on the eve of being robbed of her Churchyards, on the way to her Churches: outwardly retaining power and place, privilege and possession; but no longer with any influence as a "Church" upon public policy.

They have seen the Doctrine of THE REAL PRESENCE condemned by the six Doctors of Oxford University, in the person of Dr. Pusey. They have seen the Hampden case. They have seen the Gorham Judgment. They have seen the four years' prosecution of myself for the Doctrine of THE REAL PRESENCE. They have seen in eadem materia the "Bennett" Judgment, in which the Court of Final Appeal, transgressing its own rules and limits, prescribed what is, and what is not, the Doctrine of the Church of England, and disparaged to the utmost of its powers, what it did not dare to condemn by Sentence. They have seen "Essays and Reviews." They have seen Dr. Colenso. They have seen "Inspiration of Holy Scripture" and "Eternal Punishment" made open questions." They have seen a huge wave of Scepticism and Infidelity, and of "oppositions of Science,

b "As deceivers, and yet true; as unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and, behold, we live; as chastened, and not killed; as sorrowful, yet alway rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things."—2 Cor. vi. 8-10.

• Constitution of Judicial Committee of Privy Council; 2 and 3 William IV. c. 92. August 7, 1832; entitled "an Act for transferring the Powers of he High Court of Delegates both in Ecclesiastical and Maritime Causes to His Majesty's Council." 3 and 4 William IV. c. 41. August 14, 1833; entitled "an Act for the better administration of Justice in His Majesty's Privy Council." Public Worship Regulation Act, 1874.

falsely so-called," rising in the Universities and Schools, and sweeping over the whole country. They have seen the present Master of Balliol endowed in Oxford as Regius Professor of Greek. They have seen the Divorce Act and the Divorce Court. They have seen divers prosecutions for "Ritual," that is, for restoring more or less the Law of this Church and Realm, as set out in "the Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments," in respect of the Catholic Ceremonial and Worship of the Church of England. They have seen every possible attempt made by Authorities Ecclesiastical and Civil against the revival of the Catholic element of the Church of England; no attempt made by the same authorities against the ultra-Protestant element; and this, though the first have on its side ninety parts in a hundred of all the devotion, self-denial, learning, knowledge, reverence, Worship, care for souls, to be found in the Church of England. They have seen no efforts worthy of the name against neglect of the Church's plainest and most undisputed laws on the part of Bishops, Priests, Deacons ; no crusade against the secular life of perfunctory discharge of the minimum of the Priest's duty. They have seen in these divers prosecutions for "Ritual," Judgment after Judgment of the same Court of Final Appeal, contradictory and stultifying one of them the other of them, by a process of perpetual interchange. They have seen the "miscarriage of justice" in the "Essays and Reviews" case; in the "Colenso" case; in the "Liddell" case; in the "Mackonochie" case; in the "Purchas" case; in the "Ridsdale" case; in the "Tooth" case; in the "Edwards" case. They have seen an ex-Judge of the Divorce Court selected to decide in the first instance in Spiritual causes, under an Act passed for the express purpose, as avowed by the Minister in his place in the House of Commons, of "putting down Ritual," and sitting at Lambeth Palace in the house of the chief promoter of the Act under which he sits. They have seen the desecration of the Blessed Sacrament by the Judgment of the Court of Final Appeal

d 1 Tim. vi. 20.