The Sun.
London, England, 1868-10-01 00:00:00

Fire?,

Alniighty God, a national provision for the know-
ledge of his will, and the worship of his name, was

held to to its truest wisdom and its fist duty. This is so

nolonger ; the great discovery and maxim of modern states-
men mom and more plain.ly avowed is this, that nations
as nations have no God, that for them there is neither
Divine ruler nor a Divine Judge, nor yet a Divine Saiviour ;
that religion is the affair of the individual and the indi-
vidual alone, with which the has no concein ; that
the Church, like any other club or corporation of individuals,

is to bo protected Ly the State „Life peaceable, and to La

jealously and stern]; repressed by the State the instant it

threatens to be troublesome. But tbo idea. that Church and

State are loth powers ordained of God, both parts of His
great kingdom on until, both hav;ng their only reason for

existence and authority in their relation to Him and their
relations to each other, which therefore neither may wilfully
break -vithent great peril and great sin, this is scouted as the
merest folly. lam not asking now whether this be true or
false; lum not asking whether this ideal of a crecdless,

prayerless, and Godless state be the great discovery or
the great heresy of our ago. Tans only pointing out
. _

to yc u that men aro largely discussing this possible

divorce of Church and State, while others doubt
whether the Church, as it ought to be, can continue

her connection with the State as they will it to be, and
Churchmen aro beginning to question— reluctantly beginning
to question, whether the Church can lortgcontinue its alliance
with the State, as they fear•it will be, when they aro begin-
ning to ask how long the unbelieving husband may be ennoti-
fied by the believing wife,. and at what point of tyranny, or
faithlessness, or cruelty the wife may be compelled, with

grieved and saddened heart not to seek for but to accept a
lower position than that which God designed for her."
In his inaugural address the Archbishop of Dublin said:
" The Church Congress, as such, is of no party in politico.

In regard of all those questions which divide Churchmen,

no less than others, ;t holds itself absolutely neutral. Its
members, indeed, do not abdicate or suspend their rights

for an instant to the fullest and freest expression of their
own convictions, with only such restraints on their manner
of so doing as a just consideration for the feelings of others,
must evor impose upon Christian men ; but the Congress
itself, in its corporate capacity, altogether refuses to throw
its weight into this scale or the other. This being so, we

refuse to interpret your grand gathering round us to-day
as any expression of opinion in regard of matters which

must be uppermost in the minds of many amongst us.
TLis great assembly has as little right to be regarded

as a demonstration in favour of the maintenance of
our Establishment as a demonstration against it.

But in another rei•pect we have the right to regard, and we
do regard, the presence among us of so many distinguished
members of the English Church as an expression of their
artiest sympathy with that spiritual body, that Irish
Church, Catholic and Reformed, which was a Church before
Establishments were thought of, al d which will b; even if
these should pass utterly away, and be as the things which
have never been. We do regard your presence here as the ex-
pression of your desire that the two churches should con-
tinue one, one in doctrine, one in discipline, keeping the
unity of the spirit in the bond of faith. But the Church
Congresz, as it is of no party in politics, ifs litee is it of
any in theology. There is one thing which it will not
admit, and that is any conscious infidelity to that Church.

whose dutiful children we all alike vouch ourselves to be.
Ilere its toleration ends. Nothing is more alien to the
spirit of a Church Congress - nothing would more surely
defeat the objects which it has in view, nothing would in-
volve it presently in more inevitable ruin—than any un-
worthy attempts to make capital out of it for any particular
section of the Church; to give exclusive prominence to any
one line of theological thought, to afford to some ample
opportunities of uttering their opinions which wore with-
held or scantily doled out to others."
The first subject on the paper was "Our Religious
Societies." Mr. Thomas Turner read a paper,
in which he recommended the establishment of a
National Church Assembly as the only means of in-
creasing the efficiency of religious societies. The Attorney-
General for Ireland advocated the adoption of the principle
of centralisation as the true principle of economical ad-
ministration. He illustrated the argument by reference
to the case of the Missionary Society and the Society for
the Propagation of the Gospel. He deprecated the
establishment of smaller societies* which ought to be
incorporated with either of them. He also advocated
combined and harmonious co-operation between the
clerical and lay elements of the Church. He was followed
by the Rev. C. H. Rice, who strongly objected to the
multiplication of societies, the effect of which he said must
be to bring inefficient men forward and so mar the success
of others. -He referred to the discussions and the rellec-
Cons which were cast upon the societies by their rivals,
to show how the true work of the societies _was
impeded by noisy people who were ready to speak on
all occasions. Their expenditure, he said, was excessive.
After a careful examination of societies, he found that the
Church Pastoral Aid Society had the smallest working
expenses; that was 7 4'5 per cent. The Church Missionary
Society and the Society for the Propogation of the Gospel
expended between 12 and 13 per cent. for the same
purpose. The question of expenses came under four heads,
viz., office, deputation, canvassing, and printing. He
suggested that the expenses of canvassing should be reduced,
that clergymen should act as deputations to their own
congregations, and that the reports should be abbreviated.
Mr. Gorst, M. P., thought it was not necessary to have a
voluntary association to do what was really the work of
the Church, and he blamed the Church for allowing
them to do her work. There was waste, from London to
the furthest point their missionaries worked. He con-
tended that it was their duty to place themselves in such a
position that if the framework of the national Church
were taken away they would be in possession of an
instrument whereby they would be enabled to perform
the work for which their Church existed. An allusion to the
rivalry of the Propagation Society and the Church
Missionary Society, and an insinuation that the latter
was not as " catholic " as the former, brought out an
expression of divided opinion from the meeting, and called
up the Very Rev. M. F. Day, the new Dean of Limerick,
to defend the Missionary Society, of which he is lion.
secretary. "The question has been put," said he, 'ls the
Church Missionary Society as catholic as the Church her-
self ?' I answer, without any hesitation, my lord, that it
is. (Applause.) But I desire at the same time to make
a distinction which is very important. It is as catholic as
the doctrines of -our Church, as defined by herself in
our Articles and Prayer-book. It is not catholic as is
defined by the opinions of members of our Church or
professed members of our Church. And, my lord, it is
because that there are such a number of persons in the
Church holding opinions which the Church does not war-
rant. The Church Missionary Society, and, I believe.
other religious societies, found themselves unable to cast
themselves upon the ordinary machinery of the Church,
or to accept as a genuine member of the Church, and as one
fitted to share in the government of the society,
every person who bears the name of Churchman."
Some of the meeting loudly applauded and others
as loudly hissed the very rev. dean. The Arch-
deacon of Taunton restored good humour by observing
that after hearing Mr. Turner's paper he began
almost to be afraid that since he left London the Church
had been disestablished, although he had not read of it.
He never before heard so much said against the societies,
and he did not think they were so much in fault. It was
owing to the fact that the spiritual assemblies of the
Church of England- had lain so long in abeyance that
it had been thought necessary to form voluntary
societies. He advocated a system of central organi-
sation. Mr. Tristram, as secretary to the Church Mis-
sionary Society, repudiated the charge that it had used
its means extravagantly. A paper was then read by
the Rev. Dr. Kay, " On the hindrances at home
and abroad to the progress of missions, and how they
may be overcome." The Rev. F. Meyrick attributed' the
failure of missions to want of zeal, and recommenaed
better organisation of the societies. The Rev. Dean
M'Neile, of Ripon, whose presence evoked an enthusiastic
demonstration, reviewed the home hindrances, such as
preoccupation in worldly business and pleasure, and
uncertainty as to what the message was that was to be
delivered. Pursuing this line of observation, the rev.
gentleman made some remarks which were understood to
be disparaging of the clerical office, and there were loud
expressions of dissent from a portion of the audience,
amid which he resumed his seat. The Rev. B. Bowleg
continued the discussion, and denied that the Church
missions had proved a failure.
At the evening meeting, the Rev. R. Gregory react a
paper on Education and the Church, reviewing the
different systems which are in use. He condemned
the Irish one, while he commended the one which
prevails in England. Archdeacon Denison, in a charac-
teristic speech, expressed his hostility to the conscience
clause in the English system, and wound up with
the observation that the man who was most fitted to
carry on the defence of the Church had become her fore-
most enemy. The Dean of Limerick put forward in
earnest terms the conscientious objections which prevented
Irish Protestants who supported the Church Education
Society from accepting aid from the National Board.
The Rev. James Byrne defended the National Board.
system. The venerable Bishop of Cashel, who with diffi-
culty came forward, and received a cordial welcome, took
the same view as the Dean of Limerick. Mr. Powell,
M.P., advocated religious teaching in the slay schools.
The Rev. G. Webster, (of Cork, supported the national
system, pointing out the benefits derived from it in 1 is
own parish, and the freedom which he enjoyed in giving
religious instruction. The Bishop of Oxford replied to
Mr. Byrne with a felicity and power, which
won the admiration of the meeting, and esta-
blished him in the favourable opinion of many
who had regarded him with the strongest prejudice. The
Dean of Waterford, amid strong manifestations of dissent,
took an opposite line of argument in support of the
national system. His Grace the Archbishop deprecated
the repetition of such demonstrations. Lord Oraumore
observed that there were 2,400 schools, attended by
24,000 Protestant children, scattered all over the country,
an average of ten to each school, and if the national
system did not exist, bow could it be possible for those
Protestant children to get education ? They would
be altogether excluded from the benefit of education.
"The reason," said be, "they want us to abstain from
religious teaching is because they think we shall get too
much truth into them. I have ventured always to say to
my own clergy this : 'So far as the parental trust commits
R child to you, take it, and teach it all you can, but do
not agree to take a child from a government that Would
bind you, a Christian teacher, to withhold any Christian
ttacl4l2g."l .. _