which must of necessity be uppermost, or very nearly uppermost, in the mind of each one of her sons and her daughters? I qualify the phrase "uppermost " by the milder phrase "very nearly uppermost," because I would hope, nay, I feel sure, that at all periods of the history either of any particular branch of the Church Catholic or of the Catholic Church itself, the uppermost thought of all in the minds of the truest disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ would be the thought of His presence on the one hand, and the thought of what is being done to demonstrate the reality and blessedness of that presence on the other. But, bearing in mind this necessary qualification, am I wrong in saying that the uppermost thought in the minds of faithful sons and daughters of the Church of England at this epoch, and in this Congress, must be something of this kind-what is likely to be the result for good or for evil upon the Church of England of the great political change which has lately been effected, and the first fruits of which we are expecting in the new Parliament which is shortly to assemble? I know not what other subject may have suggested itself to other minds: I do not know what matters are being treated by my brethren who are preaching in other Churches of Portsmouth to-day; but to me it has seemed simply impossible to deal with any other than that which I have just announced, and upon which I propose now to offer you a few plain and practical remarks.

The great political change which has been made may be described as the giving to every man, who can be reasonably regarded as qualified to discharge the responsibility of the privilege, a voice in electing the legislature of the nation. I am not, of course, intending to discuss the wisdom of the change which has been made; but it is very much to my purpose to observe, that what has been done has not been the result of violent agitation or of revolutionary movement. Our case is quite different, for example, from that of a nation in which a dissatisfied and insurrectionary party succeeds in overturning a throne, and publishing a new constitution, and summoning a representative chamber chosen by universal suffrage. Our change has nothing in it of abruptness or violence; it has had in it much of the character of growth; it is connected very much with the spread of education; and it has been carried through with a striking consent of parties, and a unanimity of feeling, which stand out in striking contrast with proceedings of most other countries in similar matters. Consequently, without saying that all the arrangements for our new representative system are perfect, or even the best possible, and without venturing to speculate upon the balance of parties or the quality of members in the new House of Commons, I think it may be said with some confidence, and with much satisfaction, that the elections need not have, and are not likely to have, in

them any special ingredient of bitterness and irritation; there will, of course, be the usual and necessary conflict of parties; there will probably be the average amount of wisdom and folly evinced in speeches and promises and pledges; there will possibly be a good deal to regret, and I trust there will also be many brave and honest utterances of which brave honest Englishmen may be proud, but there will be, so far as I know, no special opportunities of setting class against class, or of dwelling upon grievances, or of stirring up the minds of our poorer brethren to indignation and wrath on the subject of injustice inflicted upon them. I do not say that efforts will not be made in this direction; what I aver is, that I do not perceive anything in the circumstances of the times, or in the conditions under which the people will be shortly summoned to elect new representatives in Parliament, to give any special emphasis to such efforts, or to infuse into our elections an unusual amount of bitterness and irritation.

So far, therefore, as the circumstances are concerned in which the new Parliament is elected, I do not know that there is any reason why we should fear an approaching assault of unusual severity upon the position of the National Church. And if we look from the circumstances of the election to the electors themselves, principles of general reasoning might perhaps conduct us to the same conclusion. For the result of recent changes has been to throw an unexampled amount of power into the hands of the poorer class of voters. But the Church of England, if it is anything, is the poor man's Church: it is so in its conception -every true branch of the Church of Him who came to preach the Gospel to the poor must be-but it is so likewise in fact, and has for the last half century been so from year to year increasingly; what is more, the working men, as I believe, are becoming actively sensible of this: certainly this is true of our great northern towns; and the rustic labourers must be aware that the country clergy have done more to educate them than all their other friends together. And if the Church of England be the poor man's Church, and the coming Parliament be the poor man's Parliament, it is difficult to see, on principles of general reasoning, why one should be hostile to the other; it might be rather concluded, that whatever else might be in danger, the Church of the people, the Church of the working man, the Church of the poor, would be carefully and affectionately conserved.

And I do not say that it will not be so. Nevertheless, if you ask me, "Watchman, what of the night ?-is all calm, all safe ahead, may we sleep in peace?"-I dare not answer, "All is well." For undoubtedly a strong effort will be made at no distant time to introduce a fundamental change into the position of the Church by the process which is described as liberation

from State control, but which means something more. We have been reminded lately by a high authority that "a current almost throughout the civilised world slowly sets in this direction," and of course we can hardly be surprised, as the same authority also reminds us, "if those who observe" the set of this current "should desire or fear that among ourselves, too, it may be found to operate." The operation of the current, or the attempt to bring it into operation, is aided in many ways. Erroneous views concerning the manner in which the clergy are supported are diligently propagated, and it is asserted, apparently with truth, that many persons believe that the sustentation of the clergy is a charge upon the taxes of the country. Then again, it is maintained, and I doubt not is by some earnestly believed, that the connection between the Church and the State is a thing bad in itself, that the union tends to secularise religion, and that the best office that can be done for the Church is to liberate it from State control. Besides which there is the telling cry of religious equality-why should one sect be favoured rather than another? or why should Church people be permitted to plead that they belong to no sect at all? All which arguments are much strengthened by the fact that the Church of England, regarded as a human institution, is like all human institutions, imperfect. She has her wounds and bruises and sores, and no one knows this better or smarts under the pain more acutely than does the Church herself; and I may add that no true churchman will refuse his aid to get rid of all defects and abuses, which after all the improvements and reforms of recent years undoubtedly still remain. There is one further argument, which is sure ever to be in the mouths, still more in the minds, of those who would disestablish the Church. The Church is reputed to be rich, and in one sense is so: a good deal of property is held by those who work in her service, though when you come to estimate riches by the average income of each man, you find not wealth but poverty. Nevertheless, if you choose to add up all the incomes of your twenty thousand clergymen, it comes undoubtedly to a large sum. What might not be done with this, if it were all swept into the national exchequer? What a bright vision of wealth to hold up before the eyes of needy men! I trust that English honesty may be proof against such a bribe; but when we consider this pecuniary side of the argument, and connect it with all those other arguments which I enumerated before, it is impossible not to see that a very plausible case may be made out, especially in gatherings of people whose minds are already leaning in that direction, in favour of the disestablishment and disendowment, or, if you please, the liberation and plundering of the Church of England

Hence it seems to me that he would be but a poor watchman

who should simply cry " All is well" at this epoch of the history of the Church of England; but he would be equally unworthy of his post if he should cry "All is lost," and if he should use his position to cause panic and despair, instead of endeavouring to inspire his brethren with feelings of faith in God, confidence in a good cause, and determination to do their duty in the circumstances, whatever they may be, in which, by God's providence, they find the Church and themselves placed.

I think it may be well, therefore, on such an occasion as this, just to consider what the National Church practically is, and what kind of a birthright it is, of which some politicians desire to deprive the people of this land. I say what the National Church practically is, for that is the most important view to take of any institution, whether religious or secular. We English people are essentially, and in contrast with almost all other nations, practical in all our instincts and our habits. We are not much troubled about theoretical consistency; we do not care about paper constitutions. The great question which presents itself to our minds with regard to the settlement of the throne, the government by parliamentary majorities, the constitution of the second chamber of the legislature, and the like, is this-do these things practically work well? And I think there is every reason why this same question should be asked with regard to the National Church. If it be, I shall not expect an absolutely optimist answer: I shall expect to be told that there is serious friction and difficulty in the working: that the Church cannot legislate for herself, and that Parliament is yearly more unwilling to do it for her: that the connection between Church and State is in fact rapidly growing intolerable to both parties, and that a divorce must soon take place. I quite recognise this kind of answer which may be given, and I do not entirely deny its force; but on that very account I think it is all the more desirable that the other portion of the answer should not be forgotten, and that it should be candidly recognised, that if the union of Church and State-that is, the existence of a National Church-produces friction and difficulty, it also confers benefits which it is hard to overrate, and for which it is equally hard to suggest any adequate substitute.

It is no slight consideration that a National Church declares the nation's faith in God and its allegiance to the Cross of Christ. God deals with nations as He does with individual men; and nations, like men, can assume an attitude of loyalty to God, or one of rebellion against Him, or even of denial of His being and His attributes. And a National Church is a solemn and public declaration of the soundness of the national heart with regard to the great doctrine of God. I may be told that such views as this are out of date, that in recently civilised countries a National Church is an impossibility, and that in old countries

the tide is setting steadily against them. This may be so: but in like manner royalty is impossible in a new country, and it may be asserted that a tide is setting in against royalty: yet we love our Queen, and we have seen as yet nothing in the history of other nations to persuade us that royalty is out of date. The question for us is not so much what other nations have or have not got, but rather what have we ourselves? The late General Grant is reported to have said, "I cannot understand why you English people should be trying to get rid of institutions, which we would give our ears to possess."

And I think we are bound to remember the important place which the English Church occupies in Christendom and in the world. That the world is rapidly becoming an English speaking world, or at all events that English is growing with such steady growth that it will soon become by far the most universal vehicle of thought, does not admit of a doubt. And when we take into account together English wealth and commerce, English enterprise, the extent of English dominion and colonies, and I may add the earnestness of English Missionary operations, I think it is something better than mere national vanity which leads an Englishman to believe that the prosperity and strength of the Church of England are matters of interest and importance in almost every corner of the world.

It may be said, no doubt, that this may be true, but that it does not touch the question of Church and State, that the Church of England would be stronger for foreign influence, more active, more spiritual, more likely to gain the blessing of God and the respect of men, if she were exhibited to the world in her simple garb as a Church of Christ, and not adorned with any earthly decorations. I doubt this very much; but I do not intend to argue the point; I would rather lose no time in passing on to that which seems to me to be the chief point in the practical view of the Church of England which I am endeavouring to put before you. I wish any candid person, who regards the question of disestablishment and disendowment with favour, or even as an open question, to consider what is the condition of things throughout England at this present time. We have been engaged for the last forty or fifty years in perfecting the parochial system; we have been cutting up our parishes into districts of manageable size; we have been endowing new districts, and increasing the stipends in old ones, building parsonages, and so making it possible that a resident clergyman shall be found within reach of every poor man's cottage in the kingdom. We have been building and restoring and enlarging Churches upon such a scale as, perhaps, has not been known in any century before. And this work is going on steadily; we are more than keeping up with the population; every year the land is better provided than it was before with Churches which are