neously to the rural deans of the respective dioceses, authorising them to convene meetings of the clergy, churchwardens, sidesmen, and other laymen in their several rural deaneries, for the purpose of ascertaining whether the spiritual provision for the necessities of each parish were sufficient, and, if not, then to appoint a ruri-decanal committee to take other steps for the supply of the additional churches and clergy required.

Mr. J. M. KNOTT, said: I must express my delight at witnessing such a meeting as the present on Church affairs. It is refreshing to turn from Church Defence to Church Extension. These meetings are the becoming complement of truth triumphant in Parliament. Here we are concerting measures to render the work of our beloved Church still more a reality, conducting that work with the best possible kindness and brotherly feeling towards our brethren without. The laity of late years having done all they could in defending the Church temporalities in Parliament, may well feel that there is one condition without which all efforts for external defence will be vain. Both clergy and laity must turn earnestly to our internal state-must strive together to fulfil the end for which the Church is established. The end is more important than the means. Temporalities are but means. The spiritual work of the Church is the end. Reality must be given to all her ministrations--the masses must be brought in. Schoolrooms and preaching stations must be the nuclei for future churches in populous and wide-spread parishes. To this end all resources-all new voluntary efforts should be directed. The laity, as well as the clergy, have largely shown, and are showing, their readiness for church erection and endowment. Beyond all this, remaining and proved abuses should be unsparingly removed by clergy and laity unitedly. It is no time to dissemble or to trifle about these-to shut our eyes wilfully against these; we must be altogether in working order. If an honest course be pursued in this respect, we may well look up to Him from whom all good proceeds to shower upon us, as a Church, His heavenly grace, and to produce enlarged spirituality both among clergy and laity. If this be vouchsafed, and that grace be granted to all who name the name of Christ, the objections of truly religious dissenters, who, be it remembered, are recognised parishioners, will fall to the ground, and that without touching a line of the Prayer Book or formularies of our Church. We must accept the present proportion and condition of dissent as a fact. While we deprecate hostility from our nonconforming brethren, we should be considerate and forbearing towards them, especially to those we know to be religious, and desirous of extending a knowledge of the truth where it is not known, remembering who it was who said, "Forbid him not, for he that is not against us is for us." The truly religious Nonconformists will be won by reality and by consistency in our doctrine and practice as Churchmen. In support of the assertion of this hope I would, if time permitted, read extracts from the most prominent and reliable organ of the orthodox Dissenters, written in 1829, in review of a work entitled "The Church in Danger from Herself," the author being a clergyman of that day, to show that the tone of dissent had undergone an extraordinary and, as I believe, a temporary change only within the last third of a century. my privilege two years ago to read a paper at the Cambridge Congress, in which the inoculation of Dissent with political virus was described. I rejoice to believe that the religious portion of dissent has largely escaped the contagion; and my hope is that, seeing what the Church is doing, and desirous of doing, in consistency with her mission to the masses of the population in our crowded districts, the religious portion of the Independents and Baptists, who constitute some 10 per cent of the entire population, will revert to the ground they occupied some thirty years ago. Now, as then, the current of public opinion is against destructive alteration. The current of religious thought among us, despite the threatening of officious and disturbing agitators in our parishes, is in favour of union among Christians. Union can only be founded on truth and holiness. Our duty as Churchmen is to exhibit and maintain scriptural truth against all gainsayers, be they University professors or of episcopal status. Among the practical errors of our system-human in its administration, and therefore fallible—it is to be hoped that the right of patronage will be viewed more than it has been as a trust, though practically too often not so treated. Suppose I were called upon by a friend to recommend him a physician, should I send him an unqualified person because he happened to be a relative or a political partisan? Let the missionary work of the Church upon the outlying population of our large towns be entered upon with earnestness-let the Cambridge scheme, as explained by my friends Mr. Emery and Mr. Beamont, to whom the Church

It was

owes so much, be promoted by ruri-decanal action, and a demand for churches will be multiplied-let diocesan home missions become the rule, and such a . noble conception as the "million scheme" of the Bishop of London, for the metropolis, proceed as it should do-let the parochial system be rendered coextensive with manageable portions of population by a full consolidation of the existing Church Building and New Parishes Acts-let clergy and laity cooperate in all useful work-let the Church Congress become an annual institution-especially let us cultivate unity among ourselves, and many, very many of our present non-conforming brethren will join us in that truly beautiful prayer for Christian unity by which our proceedings of this day were so appropriately opened.*

The Rev. CANON HULL said he believed they had heard with much acceptance the observations made by previous speakers. He held a thorough and honest conviction that those measures, which would promote the efficiency and extend the influence of the Church of England and Ireland, would well promote the advancement of true religion amongst all orders of our Queen's subjects; and under this conviction he desired not only that Churchmen in their several places should be working efficiently for the advancement of divine truth, but also that those who in some degree might at present be alienated from the Church, might if possible be brought in. He would yield to no man in a desire to keep out all which might lead to error in religion or viciousness in practice. But looking at the numbers of our fellow subjects who were at present without the Church, he earnestly desired that we should all in our several places be ready to promote such measures as would tend to bring them within the ranks of the Church of England, and thus to advance the cause of our common Lord and Master. We must all be aware that the last settlement of our Book of Common Prayer took place at a period when men's minds were smarting from much exasperation. The treatment which the members of the Church of England had received during the civil war and Commonwealth had, as might be expected, prompted them to retaliate when they had the opportunity, and that opportunity they had in their hands at the Restoration. There was not the spirit of conciliation which there should have been at that period. It was well known that Bishop Sheldon and others were more disposed to exclude than to bring together the different bodies of Christians in

*The following are the extracts from the Eclectic Review of December, 1829, alluded to by Mr. Knott, and which he said he would consider to be recorded.

"The grounds of remonstrance, as urged by our author, resolve themselves into these particulars:-1. The ordination of men whom the bishop, if he examined them as the church requires him to do, must know to be destitute of those dispositions and endowments which the ordination service and the canons, taken in their lowest sense, suppose in the candidate for the sacred office. 2. The nonperformance of divine service and pastoral duty, as by law enacted, in a large proportion of parish churches throughout the kingdom; and this neglect attributable mainly to (3), the non-residence of a great part of the clergy, and the practice of holding pluralities; (4), the neglect and abuse of that episcopal visitation upon which the Church insists; and (5), the want, generally, on the part of the bishops, of a paternal, disinterested, and zealous concern for the spiritual welfare of the people."

Whatever of truth there may have been in these serious imputations on the working of the Established Church at the date of the article, it is highly encouraging to Churchmen to reflect that a very different state of things is apparent now; and reasonable Dissenters must feel that if such were the main objections to the Church the third of a century ago, there is little reason comparatively for the hostilty which has been recently manifested by the more political of their brethren. It is due to the candour of the reviewer to state that he considered the charges extreme, and proceeded to call upon non-conformists to aid constitutionally in their correction.

"We repeat the profession of our conviction, that a wise, undivided, and persevering protest on the part of the Christian people of England, against the perversions of ecclesiastical power which none dare to defend, would issue, and issue ere very long, in a restoration of our church establishment to the intention of its founders. And we dare to affirm, moreover, that such a restoration, even though not a phrase of the Book of Common Prayer were amended, would be followed by a reform of the national manners incalculably great."

*

*

*

*

*

*

"We say if the Dissenters generally, as Englishmen, as payers of tithes, as holders of a stake in the country, and as Christians, not sectarians, were thus minded and would thus act: If their steady moderation and active zeal are such as to convince statesmen that they were not to be suspected, and must not be trifled with, we do not hesitate to affirm our belief that they might accomplish the magnificent work of bringing back the Church from which they dissent to the purity of its written constitutions. * It is true that we have our objections, strong objections, against certain forms of the Church, and each of us has his list of phrases he much mislikes in her services, and of constitutions he thinks redundant. But we must all allow, as matter of fact, that the Church as by law established, with all her imperfections, is such that the most eminent piety may exist and flourish under her wing. We say, as matter of fact, the 'dew of the heavenly grace' is not withheld from the Church as by law established; nay, is in fair proportion diffused within its precincts. The church, it cannot be denied, professes the life-giving doctrines of the Gospel, favours every great principle rescued from Rome by the Reformers, and puts into the lips of the people a largeness of devotion unrivalled in majesty, beauty, propriety, comprehension. If the church has its faults, faults which some may deem fatal to its perpetuity, why may not the Dissenters say of her, as David said of Saul, The Lord shall smite her; or her day shall come to die; or she shall send into battle and perish; but an hand shall not be upon her.'"

After exhorting his readers to use their influences "without guile, without ulterior designs," to effect a restoration of the Church to purity and efficiency, the writer thus concludes:-"If you can do no more, desire this restoration; pray for it; speak of it to your children at home, and abroad to your neighbours, as a thing necessary and infinitely important; and whenever occasion may serve, whenever public improvements may invite you to step forward, then, with a heart fraught with unfeigned zeal and enlightened patriotism, labour to bring it about."

the land. It had been well observed by the Bishop of St. Asaph, Dr. Short, in his History of the Church of England, when he was speaking of the disastrous effects of this spirit of exasperation which prevailed when the Act of Uniformity was passed, that had a contrary line of policy been pursued, had further alterations been made in the Book of Common Prayer, had the law been allowed to stand with regard to conformity, and particularly had a wish existed and been expressed by the clergy that union might be cultivated in the Church as much as possible, many of the moderate Nonconformists would probably have joined the Establishment. He (the Rev. Canon) felt a desire himself that such men as Matthew Henry and Philip Henry, such men as John Angell James-(Applause)— in later days, instead of being arrayed against the Church, should be working with it, and working for Christ against the common enemy of our salvation. (Cheers.) It should be our desire, in our several places, firmly but charitably to seek the restoration of those who were separated from that good Church to which we felt it our privilege and our duty to belong. (Cheers.) Were we actuated by this spirit we might expect that we should succeed, for we might look for the blessing of our Lord, who had warned us against the evils of separation when he said, "Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation," and who in his inspired Word had enunciated for our instruction that there should be a desire on our parts to stand fast in one spirit, with one mind, striving together for the faith of the Gospel. God grant that it may be so with the Church of England. May God so dispose, for Christ's sake, the Dissenters of this land, that instead of seeking occasion to cavil against our liturgy, they may look at its excellences and desire to fall in with it; and may He dispose us now gracefully to come forward and make such sound and judicious concessions as to those in places of authority might seem best. (Cheers, and cries of "No, no.") Let this be done in the following spirit:--let there in all necessary matters be unity; let there be in things indifferent, liberty; but in all things let there be charity. (Applause.)

Mr. J. ALLEN said that the subject of Church Extension could be treated but in one way. If they desired Church Extension, they must extend the Church's system. That was the true way to promote this object. It was to be done not by the clergy or by the laity, but by both acting together. Every member of the Church must be ready to put his shoulder to the wheel and to do his little. We wanted much an increase of the episcopate. We wanted an increase of working bishops, who should be personally known to the clergy and to many of the laity of the diocese. (Applause.) We wanted an increased staff of clergy in every parish. We wanted also an increase of services, more hearty and more frequent, and carried out according to the Church's plan. (Hear, hear.) We also wanted a revival of the minor orders-(hear, hear)—and we wanted a restoration of Church discipline. (Applause.) These were great means, but there were more than these. We wanted to have our churches free-free to every one to enter, so that any one, however poor and however humble, might seat himself down without let or hindrance. ^(Applause.) We wanted also our churches to be open all the day-(cheers)—so that any one, however engaged in business, might be able when he passed the temple of God to drop in for one minute to offer some short prayer. (Renewed cheers.) We wanted also hearty lay co-operation. We wanted the laity to feel no jealousy of the clergy, and the clergy to feel no jealousy of the laity, but to let them work hand in hand. We wanted to make use of every one. To make use of ladies, either as sisters, or deaconesses, or parochial visitors; and to make use of men who were not willing to take holy orders, but were anxious to devote their time to advancing the Church's cause. And then we should go out among the poor and bring them into the house of God. We should make use of every means in our power, by the circulation of good sound Church literature among the poor; by having one or two good Church newspapers, which should be supported by churchmen, as they would be the means of instilling good into the people. The press had done much harm: it should do much good. We should develop Church life, feeling it was our part, as part of the church, to follow the Church's plan. The Church should educate the poor; and not only that, it should follow a man from his cradle to his grave. The Church should distribute alms, and the laity be permitted to do its deeds of charity. In this manner, by increasing the influence of the church, a great deal of good would be done.

The Ven. ARCHDEACON SANDFORD might say as the unanimous conviction of that magnificent Congress, which-met in the centre of England, would irradiate light to its utmost extremities-that the duty of the Established Church was to carry the ministrations of religion and the sound of the gospel to every man's

door, and every man's soul. (Hear, hear.) The work of the English Church must therefore be, for some years at least, of a missionary character. A suggestion was made at a meeting in the presence of the president a few years ago by his learned and illustrious friend, Dr. Arnold, that the mistake the Church had made was this: that we waited till great masses of people passed out of the world, without God and without hope, while we were collecting money to erect an unsightly building as a place of worship. Instead of this we ought to extemporise the means of grace by licensing school-rooms, and multiplying the clergy: in fact we wanted the synagogue as supplementary to the temple, and the men more than the building, and, as stated by the leading journal in the country, the gunboats to penetrate the slums and alleys of our streets, and the outlying hamlets of the land. The problem we wanted to solve was how to provide cheap and temporary fabrics, not as a substitute, but as a makeshift. He had to announce that a very excellent architect had provided him with a plan for a mission chapel of sufficiently durable materials and of ecclesiastical character, at the small cost of £1 for each sitting. He had erected one of these chapels, and the bishop of the diocese was surprised at its beauty and the accommodation it afforded. He should be happy to furnish any of his clerical or lay brethren with the plan of this temporary chapel. Some years since the nation gave a million for the erection of churches; he wanted churches for the million. (Applause.)

The Rev. W. EMERY (Cambridge) was of opinion that Church Extension depended upon getting good living agents and the mutual co-operation of clergy and laity. He thought ruri-decanal meetings would solve a part of the question. In Cambridge they had started this plan, which had been graciously received by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, the Bishop of London, and he might say, in one sense, of the whole Bench. The scheme was that there should be throughout the country gatherings of the clergy and laity, with the rural deans at the head, who should map out the spiritual wants of the respective districts, and work the local resources of the district to meet the spiritual wants. (Applause.) The Bishop of London said it was a common-sense plan, and he wanted such of the members of the Congress as believed it a common-sense plan to sign petitions in its favour. The scheme had been tried in Cambridge, and in one year, from the local funds, they practically provided for three or four clergymen; and they had erected a new church, which had now a congregation of 300 or 400 people, who, though poor, were giving £1. 12s. every Sunday at the offertory. (Hear, hear.) Something similar was going on in Warrington, where during the year the people had set themselves to work to meet local wants by local resources, and had provided five additional curates in that town. (Applause.) If such a magnificent body as the Manchester Congress would sign the petition in its favour, the bishops would be more likely to recommend the scheme unitedly. (Applause.)

The Rev. HENRY MACKENZIE (Proctor in convocation for the clergy of Lincoln) said that, with reference to the subject of the subdivision of parishes, he feared that point might be pressed too far. It had been gravely discussed in a Committee of Convocation, of which he had the honour of being appointed a member; and the conclusion that committee arrived at was embodied in the following terms, in the "Representation of the Lower House," dated 11th February, 1859 :—“ We are anxious to express our high sense of the value of that parochial organisation which we have received from our forefathers, whereby it was designed that the ordinances of religion should be offered to every individual throughout the land. We believe that those ancient parochial limits are highly regarded by great numbers amongst our people, and that they should not be lightly disturbed. We therefore think that, though in certain cases, beyond what has been thus far effected, it may still be necessary to subdivide some of the old parishes, on account of their vast extent or overwhelming population; in others, and probably the greater number, the interests of religion would be more efficiently provided for by retaining the ancient boundaries, and multiplying the agencies within these limits, in subordination to the incumbent." With those sentiments he thoroughly concurred. In reference to the general subject of Church Extension, the papers they had heard read, and the addresses that had been delivered, led them rather to look upon it as from without. He ventured to express a hope that the Congress would also look upon it as from within, and listen to a suggestion that would enable the clergy and laity to develop the Church outwardly from their own parishes, as their several centres of action. It was not so much by framing large schemes, as by using the means God had placed within the reach of all, that Church Extension was to be promoted. It had been forcibly remarked by

the Archdeacon of Coventry, that "they wanted the synagogue to supplement the temple;" and so he would suggest that, instead of subdividing parishes, and breaking their unity, they should supplement the parochial system by the construction of MISSION-HOUSES in different places, to act as feeders and helpers to the mother church in each parish. These mission-houses should consist of a small dwelling, and private room for the clergyman on the ground floor, while the whole top storey should be thrown into a "large upper room" fitted up for Divine service on the Sunday, and educational purposes during the week. A new mission-house might be erected for about £400., and existing buildings might be adapted to answer the same purpose for less than a quarter of that sum. In widely extended parishes, a mission-house of this character would meet the difficulty of distance. In his own parish of twelve miles in length he had two such missions. In densely populated parishes, the plan would cope with the difficulty of population, and act as a fresh centre of ministerial action. And in factory towns, and mining districts, and sea-ports, it would meet the difficulty of what might be called "specialties," where a peculiar class of the parishioners needed peculiar treatment, and could be served more profitably by a curate of peculiar gifts suited to their special needs. This was a simple and comparatively inexpensive proceeding, calculated to supplement the more refined and elevated services of the parish church, and to open new channels of parochial work wherever it was adopted; and, being within the reach of almost every parish to effect, would be found, when adopted, a most practical means of promoting Church Extension from within.

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13th.

EVENING MEETING.
MEETING.

MR. HUGH BIRLEY, CHAIRMAN.

CHURCH ARCHITECTURE.

Mr. BERESFORD HOPE said: I must commence with congratulating the managers of the Manchester Church Congress on the eminently practical and common-sense line which they have taken-a line which I may say is very characteristic of this great city-in incorporating the subject on which I am, by their unsolicited invitation, about to speak, among the matters which were to come within the cognisance of the Congress. In the former congresses, held in those old-world and architectural towns, Cambridge and Oxford, there were no such questions considered as architecture; but in Manchester commendable prominence is being given to it, and the Congress is acting rightly in so doing. The managers show thereby that they appreciate the world as it is, and not the world as men may deem that it ought to be. We all feel in ourselves, corporeal beings as we are, not merely spiritual essences, the sense of outward form and substance, alternately dominating over and dominated by spiritual agencies, which none of us can perceive outside of ourselves otherwise than by their action as manifested to our outward sense. It is the shallowest of all philosophy-it is the grossest ignorance of human nature-it is the grossest ignorance of the action of divine providence-to sneer down anything as being merely external or formalistic, because it is concerned with the outward shell, whether in those larger constructions—man's work-in which, by the very nature of things, we must, being civilised beings, dwell as well as worship, or with the covering and arranging of those smaller structures-God's immediate work, our own bodies-questions, that is, of dress, ceremony, and so forth. To be sure, a person might play with architecture as he might play with anything