Subscription Commission-indeed a bill was to be laid on the table of the House of Commons that evening-he thought it became the Convocation of the Province of Canterbury to proceed pari passu with Parliament. He had consulted the Government on the subject, and they had agreed that this was a constitutional mode of proceeding, and that Convocation must act on its part as the Legislature acted on its part. He need not say how very important this was on the part of Convocation, -to petition the Crown to substitute this form of subscription for that which was contained in the 36th Canon, and to alter the 37th, 38th, and 40th Canons in accordance therewith. The following was the proposed form for the new 36th Canon :-"No person shall hereafter be received into the ministry, nor, either by institution or collation, admitted to any ecclesiastical living, nor suffered to preach, to catechise, or to be a Lecturer or Reader of Divinity in either University, or in any cathedral or collegiate church, city or market town, parish church, chapel, or in any other place within this realm, except he be licensed either by the Archbishop or by the Bishop of the diocese where he is to be placed, under their hands and seals, or by one of the two Universities, under their seal likewise, and except he shall first make and subscribe the following declaration, which, for the avoiding of all ambiguities, he shall subscribe in this order and form of words, setting down both his Christian and surname, viz. :—' I, A. B., do solemnly make the following declaration-I assent to the Thirtynine Articles of Religion, and to the Book of Common Prayer and of Ordering of Bishops, Priests,

and Deacons. I believe the doctrine of the United Church of England and Ireland, as therein set forth, to be agreeable to the word of God, and in public prayer and administration of the sacra ments, I will use the form in the said book prescribed and none other, except so far as shall be ordered by lawful authority.' And if any Bishop shall ordain, admit, or license any as is aforesaid, except he first have subscribed and declared in manner and form as here we have appointed, he shall be suspended from giving of orders and licences to preach for the space of twelve months. But if either of the Universities shall offend therein, we leave them to the danger of the law and her Majesty's censure." In Canons 37 and 38 the necessary alterations would be made, and Canon 40 would provide the following declaration:"I, A. B., solemnly declare that I have not made by myself, or by any other person on my behalf, any payment, contract, or promise of any kind whatsoever, which to the best of my knowledge is simonaical, touching or concerning the obtaining the preferment of

nor will at any time hereafter perform or satisfy any such kind of payment, contract, or promise made by any other without my knowledge or consent."

The Bishop of Peterborough said he presumed the oath of allegiance and supremacy would still be taken, but under the Act of Parliament.

The President-Yes, but some time previous to ordination, before the Bishop.

The Bishop of Lincoln-And that would be case on the institution of a clergyman?

The President-Certainly.

The Bishop of London said his Grace the Archbishop had stated

so clearly the desirability of considering this question that it would not be necessary for him to add any remarks of his own.

66

He

would simply move that the following form of petition be adopted by their lordships, and submitted to the members of the Lower House: We, your Majesty's faithful subjects, the Archbishop, Bishops, and Clergy of the province of Canterbury, under your Majesty's most gracious writ in Convocation assembled, humbly address your Majesty, praying that your Majesty will be graciously pleased to grant us your Majesty's royal licence to make, promulge, and execute a new canon, the proposed form whereof we have hereunto annexed, in the place of the 36th Canon existing; and also to alter and amend the 37th and 38th Canons in the manner hereinafter described, so as to make them consonant with the new 36th Canon; and also to amend the 40th Canon, as is hereinafter set down." It seemed very important that a matter of this kind should have the sanction and authority of that ecclesiastical body, and it was undoubtedly the general wish, as far as they can judge, of persons of great variety of opinions, that such alteration as is likely to be proposed in Parlia ment should be adopted by ConVocation. Under these circumstances it would be considered right that by petition to the Queen they should give full ecclesiastical sanction to that which may be likely to receive the sanction of the Legislature.

The Bishop of Oxford, in seconding the motion, said the alteration proposed to be made in the declaration would, he hoped, carry out two great objects-that of preserving every security that exists for maintaining the doctrine of the

Church of England intact, and of removing all superfluities and ambiguities of expression. He hoped the proposed change would meet with general acceptance, as tending to accomplish those objects. The only thing which he had heard out-of-doors much objected to was the change of the oath in reference to simony into a simple declaration. It was important that the reason of that change should be made known. Simony, as a legal offence, was very difficult of definition, and it was not thought right to put persons to swear that they had not been guilty of it when they did not know in fact whether they might have committed it or not. Morally they might know they had not committed it. A person might easily make a declaration that he had no mind or intention to commit simony, and it would be a relief to many tender consciences not to be compelled to swear it on account of the legal difficulties he had mentioned. There was not the slightest idea of taking away from the Church's testimony against the grave and execrable sin of simony.

The Bishop of PeterboroughThe legal penalty will remain the

same ?

The Bishop of Oxford-Yes.

The Bishop of Llandaff said he was extremely sorry to take any objections on the matter, but at the same time there was one point on which he felt it his duty to make some observation, and to say he did not thoroughly agree with it. He understood that the object of the Commission was to consider the various forms of subscription, the declarations and various oaths to be taken by the clergy, with a view, as far as might be consistent with the security of sound doctrine, to relieve

the consciences of certain persons who were aggrieved by the existing forms. With regard to the greater number of these suggestions, he thought them admirably fitted to carry out the purposes designed, but there was one of these declarations on which he thought the Commissioners might have gone

further than they seemed to have done. In the first sentence of the report it said— "We, your Majesty's Commissioners, in execution of the duties thus intrusted to us have considered the existing forms of subscription and declaration, with a view to reducing their number and simplifying their characrer, and for that purpose we have reviewed the various circumstances which, from time to time, led to their adoption, and we have had regard to the altered circumstances of our own times." He thought there were many faithful members of the Church who would not agree with the last assertion of that sentence —namely, that the Commissioners had had regard to the altered circumstances of the times, because they knew that many changes had been made by legislative enactments in relation to the Roman Catholics and the political power which had been given to them. These changes which had taken place in the constitution of the country had caused scruples to arise in the minds of certain persons with regard to the terms of the Oath of Supremacy. Those persons, he understood, maintained that it was no longer true that "no foreign prince, person, prelate, State, or potentate hath or ought to have any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within her Majesty's said realms, dominions, and countries." They said it was now con

trary to plainly acknowledged fact that no foreign prince, prelate, &c. had power. They therefore very strongly objected to the word "hath.' If the declaration confined itself to the words " ought to have," he believed people would be perfectly contented with it. Then, in the second place, they objected not to the word "jurisdiction," which generally meant exercise of power or authority which could be enforced in one of her Majesty's courts, but spiritual authority, and there was a great difference between the two. Jurisdiction would enable a Bishop to enforce the provisions of the law, but spiritual authority implied authority over the consciences of persons belonging to the communion of which the party was a Bishop. It was contrary to fact, then, to deny that Roman Catholic prelates had spiritual authority in this country. He could not help expressing his regret that a Commission established for the express purpose of considering whether these declarations and oaths might not be modified, did not make such alterations in the 36th Canon as to retain the substance and spirit without re-enacting words which were believed to be untrue. did not entertain these scruples himself, but was merely expressing the opinions of persons who were conscientious in the matter, and who considered themselves aggrieved.

He

desir.

The Bishop of Oxford so far sympathised with the Bishop of Llandaff, and thought the wording he had alluded to was open to objection-which it was very able to avoid. If they were considering de novo the best way of wording these declarations, he should think a different course necessary; but that was not their position. Those words had stood

for a long time, and had had a uniform interpretation passed upon them that of a solemn national declaration affirming that no earthly potentate, and no spiritual potentate out of her Majesty's dominions, ought to have any sort of jurisdiction within her Majesty's dominions. He did not think they were meant to be strained to meet those cases the Bishop of Llandaff had pointed out. There were doubtless many persons in this country who acknowledged the spiritual authority of foreign Bishops; formerly that would have been a penal offence. If the nation made any alteration he should be glad to see the Church joining in the alteration; but he doubted whether while the declaration remained for the nation, it would be wise for the clergy to attempt any change.

After some remarks from the Bishop of Lincoln and the Bishop of Peterborough the motion was agreed to.

After the transaction of some other business their lordships adjourned.

After the celebration of Holy Communion at S. Alban's Free and Open Church, Manchester, on Sunday last, the collectors on emptying the offertory bags at the vestry, found an envelope containing four bank notes of £100 each; no name was given, but on a slip of paper accompanying the offering was written, "I will not offer unto the Lord my God of that which doth cost me nothing."

A thank-offering for peace and blessing received throngh S. Alban's Church."

COLONIAL CHURCHES.

THE COLONIAL CHURCH NOT THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.-A letter to the Canadian Churchman, signed "J. S.," points out the error of the Canadian Church constitution

in declaring identity with the "United Church of England and Ireland":

"The Attorney-General of England does not consider the Church. in Canada to be an integral portion of the United Church of England and Ireland. In his answer to Mr. Dunlop in the Imperial Parliament, respecting letters patent to Colonial Bishops, he used the following words: These letters patent create no legal identity between the Episcopal Church presided over by these Bishops and the United Church of England and Ireland.'

The words in italics indicate the Attorney-General's opinion that the standing of our Church in the Colonies is just the same as the standing of the Episcopal Church in Scotland. From the late judgment of the Committee of Privy Council, I feel sure that if the matter is thoroughly examined by the law officers of the Crown, they will state that the Reformed Episcopal Church in the Colonies is legally on precisely the same footing as the Reformed Episcopal Church in Scotland, in reference to the United Church of England and Ireland established by law.

"If this be so, we must alter the declaration appointed to be subscribed by electors of delegates to Synod.

66 At the late election on Easter Monday in this parish, a zealous member of our congregation was unable to take a part in the election, because he could not declare himself to be a member of the United Church of England and Ireland, and to belong to no other religious denomination,' inasmuch as he prides himself on being a member of what he called the Church of Scotland,' that is, the Protestant Episcopal Church in Scotland." (Colonial Church Chronicle for June.)

6