of its own which it cannot explain and make manifest as being for the highest good of all; afraid of nothing, receptive of new impulses; quick, watchful, alert; proving all things, and ever ready to give a reason for its principles and for their application; exhorting, persuading, convincing; so rooted in the past that it is strong in the present, and evermore hopeful of the future. For the great work of the Church of Christ is to mould the future, and so hasten the coming of the kingdom. Its eyes are turned to the past for instruction and warning, not for imitation. Steadfast in the faith, built up on the foundation which its Master laid, it can speak the truth in love, using such words and methods as men can best understand; so penetrated by the importance of its message that it can speak it in manifold ways, to men of varying tempers and knowledge and feelings, but striving to speak it in such a way that the method of its teaching ever elevates and invigorates the taught.

Is this only a dream, to be realised-for realised assuredly it must be at some future time, and under some other name? Or shall we enter upon the possession which is really ours, did we but know it? Our difficulties and differences arise because we have not a sufficiently lofty conception of the destiny of the English Church. If any disaster befalls it, the record that will be written hereafter will be that English Churchmen of this our day were not suffi ciently large-hearted and high-minded to recognise the greatness of the heritage which was theirs.

If I have spoken to you of large issues, it is because I feel that our meeting in the capital of England at

tance.

this particular time is an occasion of special imporOur temper and our attitude will be keenly watched. "A city set on an hill cannot be hid." But we know that we stand also in the sight of God. May He direct our thoughts and words that they may be instinct with that love wherewith He loves all the children whom He has created.

287

THE CHURCH AND THE NATION.

A CHARGE DELIVERED TO THE CLERGY OF THE DIOCESE OF LONDON AT ST. PAUL'S CATHEDRAL CHURCH ON 21ST FEBRUARY, 1900.

A BISHOP'S VISITATION is, properly speaking, an inquiry on his part into the condition of the several parishes within his Diocese. It has long been customary for him, after conducting such an inquiry by means of articles, to address his clergy upon some of the points, which the answers to such articles have suggested to his mind. I have ventured, on the occasion of my first Visitation, to depart from this practice, and to address you before issuing my inquiries, rather than address you afterwards, when the results were before me. My reason for adopting this method is, that I wished to feel myself quite free in expressing my own opinions on matters of grave importance, and I could feel this better if I were avowedly speaking from general impressions rather than particular information. I wish to avoid the appearance of addressing admonitions to particular bodies of the clergy. Further, I am in hopes that what I may say may lead some of you to consider matters which I think it desirable to put before you, and may in some degree affect the answers to the questions which will shortly be issued. On any points raised by those answers I think it best to communi

cate with you privately. In this way my Visitation may more resemble ancient methods than the more general form which has lately been substituted for them.

I am aware that this method of procedure will involve a great deal of personal trouble to myself. But when I look back on the three years during which I have been privileged to labour among you, I am conscious that the great difficulty attaching to the work of a Bishop in this Diocese, is that of gaining an intimate knowledge of all his clergy and of their parishes. It is inevitable that his attention should be given to particular cases where his counsel is needed. So many parishes are undergoing serious changes, and present particular problems, that they perforce have to occupy his attention, to the exclusion of others which are working quietly on established lines. A Bishop of London is, unfortunately, in a position resembling that of a physician. He has so many cases of urgency before him, that his time is fully occupied in attending to them. But I am glad to think that an increase in the number of suffragan bishops, and the valuable help of Bishop Barry, have allowed the formation of manageable districts, each with a head to whom recourse can be had for general counsel and advice. I trust that all parishes are aware that they are under effective supervision, and that their general conditions are constantly being brought to my notice. It must be a matter of time before I can hope to know all the clergy as intimately as I would wish to know them. But I trust that every year will add largely to the number of those who are able to regard

me as a personal friend. This is the true relation which ought to exist between a Bishop and his clergy. It is a cause of great regret to me that I have been compelled to give directions to many whom I did not know with that personal knowledge, which alone can enable them to interpret rightly letters, which have to suffer from the brevity which is rendered necessary by the pressure of business. The true mode of procedure for a Bishop is to offer friendly, even before he has recourse to fatherly, advice. His strictly official position should very rarely be needed. I am sorry that I have so often had to address you from that point of view first. I can assure you that it has been very contrary to my own inclinations. Formal and technical relationships are not those which are in accordance with the true meaning of the spiritual work in which we are all engaged.

There are a great many points on which I could have wished to address you. It is impossible for any one who comes to London not to feel keenly the peculiar problems which it raises, the differences between the work of the clergy in London and in other Dioceses where population is differently distributed. London raises questions which are unknown to experience elsewhere, questions of great complexity. There is always a danger that their solution with reference to conditions which exist only here, should react elsewhere, and form a precedent which is followed where no corresponding necessity exists. I think that perhaps this danger is not so strongly before your minds as it is bound to be before the mind of your Bishop.