serve.

virtue to leave upon his mind a worse impression of his fellow-men than they deWhereas when he is permitted to read the secrets of hearts purer than his own, and of lives nobler and truer than his own, he is encouraged to fresh efforts in the service of God, and in some measure compensated for any evil that he may receive from the confidences of great offenders. It would, too, I am convinced, be most unwise, even if it were possible, to limit the frequency of such intercourse as I have spoken of, to the occasion of a Mission, and to say that it may be permitted once or twice in a life-time, but should never be repeated. For frequently the temptations which induce men to ask for help and guidance continue. Frequently, too, those who have escaped for a season from the bondage of sin are re-enslaved, and are then very apt to imagine that they are hopelessly lost. Relapses tend to beget despair, and despair is death. Every clergyman, who has in any degree won the confidence of his people, knows that when the will of a man has been weakened, or his perception of truth obscured by a long course of transgression, it would be madness to deprive him immediately on his repentance-it might be madness ever to deprive him--of any spiritual help that he has received. He is maimed (our Lord has so described him), and, consequently, may need assistance to the close of life. And let no one say that the clergyman in assisting him, puts himself in the place of Christ. God forbid. Like the Church, like the Bible, like the Sacraments, like all the ordinances of the Church, he is a means to an end; a means to bind man to Christ. In Him indeed we all are members one of another. Only to the priest it surely more especially belongs to draw others and bind them to Christ. Certainly, however, it is not every clergyman who should be allowed to fill the office of spiritual guide. Men of experience and wisdom should, I think, be selected for it, by those who bear rule in the Church. This, if I mistake not, is the opinion of the Archbishop of Canterbury; at least he implied as much in the letter, which he wrote with reference to the recent Mission of Messrs Moody and Sankey in this country. One other caution I would give. Private intercourse between a clergyman and individuals should not take place as a rule in private rooms. Against this bad practice, the English people have a perfect right most vigorously to protest. It is plain common sense that the intercourse should be as public as the nature of it will allow. Messrs Moody and Sankey have proved to us that this is quite possible. They listened to what others had to tell them, in the presence of crowds of people. Religious confidence, given in the private and informal way now suggested by some eminent men, would be fraught with mischief. I can conceive of nothing more dangerous; and I venture to say, with the utmost respect for them, that if they had been parish priests, of wide and long experience, they never would have made the suggestion. It is true, no doubt, as is contended, that a distinction must be drawn between confidence and confession. But it should be remembered that all the dangers which attach to the one attach to the other also. Does confession ever weaken the character? If it does so, it does so because it is confidence. Does confession ever promote sentimentalism? If it does so, it does so because it is confidence. Does confession ever interfere with the sacredness of home life? If it does so, it does so because it is confidence. Does confession bring priest and penitent into close relationship? If it does so, it does so because it is confidence. In short, confession is only dangerous in so far as it is confidence. To be safe at all it must be formal and religious. In other words, confession is confidence, guarded from some of its perils. For it is, believe me, one thing to listen to delicate revelations in the privacy of a study: it is quite another to listen to them in the house of God, vested as a minister of God, with everything around you to remind you of God, and with all the safeguards of a religious act.

Some years ago, a clergyman of my acquaintance was constantly solicited for advice by a young and unhappy wife. He often received her into his house. She was closeted with him occasionally for half-an-hour at a time. At length, finding that he could be of no real service to her, he succeeded in discouraging her visits, and he had reason ere long, from circumstances which transpired, to congratulate himself on having done so. Soon afterwards her husband died. The lady was in distress, and wrote to him apparently in a strain of the deepest penitence for his advice. She wished to see him; she felt how wrongly she had acted. What was he to do? One thing he was determined he would not do. He would not again admit her to a private interview in his house; and yet what right had he to refuse counsel to one who sorely needed it, and sympathy to one who might now be sincerely penitent? There was, it seems to me, only one course open to him. He wrote and told the lady that he might be found in church at a certain hour, on a certain day; if she was really contrite, she might come and seek his counsel then; but he declined, for reasons which he gave her, to have any further communication with her elsewhere. The lady troubled him no more. I mention this circumstance, as I could mention many others, to show that it is not so much confession, though it is everywhere condemned, as the informal confidences which are everywhere approved, that constitute the most serious danger incident to the awakened religious life of the present day.

I have said nothing upon the subject of absolution. Most Mission priests will, I think, admit that they have had to deal with cases in which the exercise of this power has proved invaluable. But I do not think it necessary to enter at length upon the subject. For it is not to absolution in itself, but to absolution as a means of encouraging confession, that the majority of the people of this country take exception. Comparatively few object to it when pronounced in the daily service of the Church, and these few are for the most part religious people, who must ere long come to see that it no more interferes with the prerogative of Christ to profess to forgive, than to profess to convert in His name. It is no more true to say that it is the essence of sacerdotalism that man can pardon man, than to say that it is the essence of evangelicism that man can convert man. Man, we know, can do neither, but God can do both through man. And one proof that His Church may absolve in His name, is to be found in the fact that He does give health and strength in it; He does still say to the spiritually diseased, "Arise, and walk."

DISCUSSION.

The REV. J. G. M. TOWNSEND, B.A., Vicar of Searby with Owrnby,

Lincolnshire.

THERE was, probably, never any time in the history of the Church of England since the Reformation, when this subject of religious revivals had so prominent a place in the mind of the people. Now this revival movement has been carried on upon two principles, both of which are familiar to us. One is through the earnest preaching of such men as those who have come over from America of late, and have created such a sensation among us; the other is through the agency of Mission priests using those ordinances which Christ has placed in their hands, either in the twelve days' Mission or in a permanent pastoral charge. I am not going to compare these two modes together, or to consider which is the better, but I desire to call attention to one fact connected with those two principles, and that is,

that whereas in the one case the world smiles upon the efforts of the revivalist, and smiles at itself for taking part in the revival services in the Agricultural Hall at Islington on the other hand, we have seen a Mission-priest driven, for six weeks together, by a side wind, from that position before God's altar, in which the Reformed Church of England had placed him; and this to the great satisfaction of the public, and of the "Christian world," whatever that may mean. Now, there must be some important reason for these distinctions, and why the world is stirred up against the one, and smiles upon the proceedings of the other. With the liberty which our President has conceded to us, of expressing freely our opinions, so long as they are within due bounds, I will venture to express mine as to the cause of that difference. I believe the cause to be that in the theology of the revivalist there is no right place found for those divine ordinances which Christ has ordained in His Church, and which the Church of England tells us are necessary to our salvation-of one of which our blessed Lord has declared that without it we cannot enter into the kingdom of God, and of the other, He has said that except we do it we have no life in us. Now, why, I ask, should the world be stirred up against the American, or similar revivals? ("Question.") The family lawyer would not be anxious upon hearing that there was a claimant to the family estates, if he knew that that claimant's title-deeds possessed neither signature nor seal; and the signature and the seal of the Christian covenant are the sacraments of the gospel. ("Question.") One further opinion I will venture to express, and that is as to the cause of these differences of teaching; it is because men fail to apprehend the theological fact that the spiritual life has as real an existence as the natural life, and is derived from a spiritual and real union with our incarnate Lord; and that as birth and food are in natural life but means of its existence, and as health and strength are in natural life but evidences of that existence, so also those fruits of the Spirit -Faith, Hope, and Charity—are not themselves the spiritual life, while they are necessary proofs of its vitality.

The REV. C. F. Lowder.

THE reader of the first paper described to us four different courses which might be taken with regard to anxious inquirers in the After-meetings: he finished by asking which of these is the best. I hope you will allow me to say a few words to explain why I conceive the last to be the best-namely, that which is best known by the name of sacramental confession. God forbid that I should cast any slur upon the other ways. In the hands of experienced persons, of earnest, consistent Christians, very much indeed may be done in the other ways; but when we remember that the object of the Inquiryroom, or the After-meeting, is first to help to bring souls to Jesus Christ, and to build up those souls afterwards that they may walk in the consistent way of the Christian life; and when we remember that we act as ministers of Christ's Church, and that the very idea of the Church is sacramental, for unless the Church is sacramental the Church is nothing("No, no," and cheers)—

The PRESIDENT-I must beg the meeting to understand that only five minutes are allowed to the speaker; therefore I must request that there may be no expression of opinion at all, except what may be given at the end of the address. It is too much to cut short the speaker's time by interrupting him.

The REV. C. F. Lowder-When we remember that we are admitted into Christ's Church by baptism; that we are strengthened and refreshed in Christ's Church by the Blessed Sacrament of His Body and His Blood; that we are confirmed with the sacramental gift of confirmation when the seal of the Lord is set upon us; and when we consider that in our ordination the Bishop's hands were laid upon us in that most solemn act of the priestly life-then I say that if we wish to build up souls in this the sacramental

life of Christ's Church, we naturally turn to that sacramental gift which is given in sacramental absolution. When we were ordained priests of Christ's Church, when the Bishop laid his hands upon us and said, "Receive the Holy Ghost-whose sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven, and whose sins thou dost retain they are retained," we must use that gift; it was given to us for use, and we are therefore bound to help souls by means of that sacramental gift; and if we consider that we are thus building them up, and leading them in the way of Christ's Church, in the way set before us, in the way which may best lead them to consistent lives in the Church, then we should feel that the grace of absolution is just the grace which they need, and which it is our bounden duty to impart to them. When we consider, also, that in subsequent confession and absolution we are really doing that which is our priestly work; that when persons come to us in their penitence, in their sorrow for their sins; when they come to seek us as they should find us, in the church, then that time which we devote to their spiritual comfort is the best spent time; we waste no time about trifles; we are not going about our parishes talking about worldly matters; they come to us to speak of their souls; we know they come for that purpose; we give ourselves up to them for that purpose, and that purpose is attained if God's blessing be on the work of the prudent and pious priest. I am sure that my brethren will find that such a time is really the best spent. I wish we could only have guidance in this respect. Oh! how I wish that our Bishops had embraced that golden opportunity when they were asked to regulate and to guide the priests of Christ's Church in regard to the hearing of confessions and this very arduous work. Oh! how I wish they had answered us in a kind fatherly manner, and shown us what we were to do and what we were not to do, because this is a most difficult work, a work in which we need much help and guidance.

The REV. G. W. WELDON.

I THINK we are all agreed with Mr Grier, when he says that confidential communications should not take place between our people and their clergymen in private, but should take place in as public a manner and as public a place as possible. But if the removal of confidential communications from the private study to the house of God be regarded as absolutely necessary and essential before a communicant can be admitted to the Sacrament, which was the argument of the last speaker, I, as a priest of Christ's Church, must say that there is no such thing required by our Church as sacramental confession as necessary to the Holy Communion. I hold in my hand a statement from a very distinguished clergyman of the Church of England, and I will read it to show you what I mean. It is a letter addressed by him to one of his penitents, in which he says, "I know no other way by which mortal sin committed after baptism is forgiven except by sacramental confession and absolution." I, as a priest of Christ's Church, deliver my conscience when I state that the Church of England knows no such doctrine as that, and that if we are to be true to the doctrines of our beloved Church; if we desire to defend that Church from attacks from without and from within, we must be true to the teaching of the New Testament, and the doctrines and discipline of our beloved Church, and believe that there is but one pardoning Priest, the Lord Jesus Christ; but one sacrifice for sin, that upon the Cross of Calvary; but one altar, that upon which Christ Jesus died. When Mr Grier spoke of Evangelicalism and Sacerdotalism, and gave his description of them, he was perfectly entitled, as we all are, I trust, under the spirit of honest conviction, to hold whatever opinion our consciences suggest; but I understand by Evangelicalism this, that no prayer, no praise, no confession of sin can go up to the Throne of Grace except through the mediation of Jesus Christ; and that no grace or blessing can come down to us from that Throne except

by the same line of communication. Whereas, by Sacerdotalism we understand that the priest is placed between the sinner and the Saviour. I am simply stating what is defined, and time forbids my going into it further. This is the question - How shall our souls have the love of God within them? How shall they be revived, so that they shall worship God in spirit and in truth? All revival that does not consist in introducing into the heart the love of the Lord Jesus Christ, and for His sake the love of all around us, is not worthy of the name of revival. I am devotedly attached to the Church of England; I believe that it is more in accordance with the nature of man, the Scriptures of God, the structure of society, and the Apostolic model than any other Church upon this earth. I admire its moderation, and full and comprehensive spirit: it is what our poet has applied to the noblest river in our land

Though deep yet clear, though gentle yet not dull,
Strong without rage, without o'erflowing, full.

I say that in the Church we have machinery, under the Holy Spirit, admirably adapted to reviving in our land real God-fearing religion.

DR ALLEN.

THERE are many diseases which we medical men are powerless to treat. There is many a mind weakened, with insanity staring it in the face, and the cause of that is sin, habitual sin. It is only the priest who can treat those cases. Unless the Divine Hand saves these people, we medical men are entirely powerless; and the benefit of confession, and the blessing of absolution, in those cases is very great. Therefore I would urge confession and absolution on the medical ground alone, knowing what comfort they have been to many a soul; knowing how absolution given by the priest has encouraged that soul to go on struggling against sin, and that soul, please God, has been saved. Where the sin is habitual, surely the confession must be more or less habitual, because the sinner will slip many times before he is able to get on to a sure foundation. Therefore those who are afraid of priestly absolution I would exhort not to judge of the question in the harsh way in which they seem disposed to do, but to look at it from every point of view, and to see whether there is not a great deal to be said on its behalf, as by that means both body and soul may be saved.

The VEN. ARCHDEACON REICHEL.

I HAVE not the pleasure of Mr Lowder's acquaintance, but for many years past I, with many of whom he has probably never heard, have followed with the greatest interest and the greatest admiration his self-denying and zealous life in the East of London. This meeting will therefore not believe that, if I venture to differ from Mr Lowder upon any point, I am actuated by any other motive than a zeal for truth, entirely abstracted from all party considerations. If I understood Mr Lowder aright, he made what he termed sacramental confession to depend for its authority upon the words of our Saviour, which are now repeated by our Bishop over the head of every priest whom he ordains-"Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a priest in the Church of God now committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands. Whose sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven, and whose sins thou dost retain they are retained." I