FROM-THE- LIBRARY-OP
TRINITYCOLLEGETORDNTO
From the Library of
Samuel L. Pollard
Given by his family
1} Origin and History
OF
The Lambeth Conferences
OF
1867 AND 1878,
With the Official Reports and Resolutions.
EDITED BY
RANDALL T. DAVIDSON,
DEAN OF WINDSOR.
LONDON :
SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE,
NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE, CHARING CROSS, W.C. ;
43, QUEEN VICTORIA STREET, E.G.
BRIGHTON : 135, NORTH STREET.
NEW YORK : E. & J. B. YOUNG & Co.
1888.
1 1 8 2 G 9
FEB 2 1 1985
CONTENTS.
PART I.
NARRATIVE.
CHAP. I. The First Conference, 1867 page 5
CHAP. II. The Second Conference, 1878 16
PART II.
DOCUMENTS, REPORTS, AND RESOLUTIONS, ILLUSTRATING
THE HISTORY OF THE CONFERENCES OF 1867 AND 1878.
I. Letters from the Canadian Bishops : Reply of
the Archbishop of Canterbury ... page 32
II. Action taken by the Convocation of Canterbury 36
III. Official " Programme of Arrangements" issued
by the Archbishop of Canterbury for the
Conference of 1867 37
IV. Archbishop Longley s Opening Address, Sept. 24,
1867 42
V. Amended Programme adopted during the Ses
sions 48
VI. Formal "Address to the Faithful" from the
Bishops attending the Conference of 1867 ... 53
VII. Latin and Greek Versions of the Address ... 57
VIII. Resolutions formally passed by the Conference
of 1867 62
A 2
4 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
IX. Correspondence with Dean Stanley about the
use of Westminster Abbey p&ge 66
X. Reports of the Committees appointed by the
Conference of 1867 72
XI. Resolutions of the Conference adopted at the
Adjourned Session, Dec. 10, 1867 98
XII. Addresses from the Canadian and West Indian
Houses of Bishops, 1872 and 1873 101
XIII. Correspondence between the Bishops of the
Protestant Episcopal Church in the United
States and the Archbishop of Canterbury,
1874 and 1875 I0
XIV. Memorandum of the Canadian House of
Bishops, 1874 no
XV. Action of the Convocations of Canterbury and
York with reference to the proposed Second
Conference in
XVI. Circular Letter of Inquiry addressed by the
Archbishop of Canterbury to all the Anglican
Bishops. March 28, 1876 113
XVII. Letter of invitation to the Conference of 1878,
dated July 10, 1877 115
XVIIL Formal "Letter" of the Bishops attending the
Conference of 1878 117
XIX. Latin and Greek Versions of the Letter ... 145
XX. Official List of the Bishops present at the Con
ference of 1878 158
XXI. Order of precedence observed at the Conference.
of 1878 159
XXII. Invitations issued for the Conference of 1888 ... 161
NARRA TIVE.
CHAPTER I.
THE FIRST CONFERENCE. 1867.
PERHAPS it is not too much to say that a
decennial Conference of the bishops of the
Anglican Communion, under the presidency of the
Archbishop of Canterbury, has now become a recog
nised part of the organisation of our Church, and it
may be interesting to many, at the moment when
the third of these Conferences is about to assemble
at Lambeth, to recall the history and doings of the
earlier gatherings of 1867 and 1878.
The first official step in connexion with the assem
bling of such a Conference was taken, not in England,
but in Canada. The notion had, indeed, been " in
the air" for many years, 1 both in England and abroad,
and the final impulse which brought about a Con
ference was eminently significant of the changed
conditions of the Church.
It arose, strange to say, from the interest awakened
in North America by the Church affairs of South
Africa.
At the Provincial Synod of the Canadian Church,
held on September 20, 1865, it was unanimously
agreed, upon the motion of the Bishop of Ontario, to
urge upon the Archbishop of Canterbury and the
Convocation of his Province that means should be
1 A reference to some of the earlier suggestions on the
subject will be found in the Guardian of June 19, 1878, p. 857.
6 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
adopted "by which the members of our Anglican
Communion in all quarters of the world should have
a share in the deliberations for her welfare, and be
permitted to have a representation in one General
Council of her members gathered from every land." l
To a more personal appeal which accompanied this
address, Archbishop Longley replied in guarded
terms. " The meeting of such a Synod," he said, " is
not by any means foreign to my own feelings ....
I cannot, however, take any step in so grave a matter
without consulting my episcopal brethren in both
branches of the united Church of England and
Ireland, as well as those in the different colonies and
dependencies of the British Empire."
In May, 1866, the Convocation of Canterbury
appointed a committee to "consider and report
upon " the Canadian address, and the whole subject
was fully debated in Convocation in the following
spring. Obvious difficulties and dangers were
suggested, but in the end the Lower House con
veyed to the Archbishop of Canterbury "a re
spectful expression of an earnest desire that he
would be pleased to issue an invitation to all the
bishops in communion with the Church of England,
to assemble at such time and place, and accom
panied by such persons as may be deemed fit, for the
purpose of Christian sympathy and mutual counsel
on matters affecting the welfare of the Church at
home and abroad." 3
In the Upper House, Archbishop Longley took
the utmost pains to " diminish the doubts and diffi
culties" of some of his brethren. "It should be
distinctly understood," he said, "that at this meeting
no declaration of faith shall be made, and no decision
come to what shall affect generally the interests of
1 For the full text of the address and reply, see Part II., No. L,
p. 32, and Chronicle of Convocation of Canterbury, May 2,
1866, p. 286 ; Feb. 12, 1867, p. 696.
2 Chronicle of Convocation, Feb. 14, 1867, p. 793.
Invitation to the First Conference. 7
the Church, but that we shall meet together for
brotherly counsel and encouragement .... I should
refuse to convene any assembly which pretended to
enact any canons, or affected to make any decisions
binding on the Church .... I feel I undertake a
great responsibility in assenting to this request, and
certainly if I saw anything approaching to what [is
apprehended] as likely to result from it, I should
not be disposed to sanction it, but I can assure [my
brethren] that I should enter on this meeting in the
full confidence that nothing would pass but that
which tended to brotherly love and union, and would
bind the Colonial Church, which is certainly in a
most unsatisfactory state, more closely to the Mother
Church." l
A week later the Archbishop issued the following
invitation to all the bishops of the Anglican Com
munion, then 144 in number :
" LAMBETH PALACE, Feb. 22, 1867.
RIGHT REV. AND DEAR BROTHER,
" I request your presence at a meeting of the
bishops in visible communion with the United Church
of England and Ireland, purposed (God willing) to
be holden at Lambeth, under my presidency, on the
24th of September next and the three following
days.
" The circumstances under which I have resolved
to issue the present invitation are these : The
Metropolitan and Bishops of Canada, last year,
addressed to the two Houses of the Convocation of
Canterbury the expression of their desire that I
should be moved to invite the bishops of our Indian
and Colonial Episcopate to meet myself and the
Home bishops for brotherly communion and con
ference.
" The consequence of that appeal has been that
1 Chronicle of Convocation, Feb. 15, 1867, p. 807.
$ Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
both Houses of the Convocation of my province have
-addressed to me their dutiful request that I would
invite the attendance, not only of our Home and
Colonial bishops, but of all who are avowedly in
communion with our Church. The same request
was unanimously preferred to me at a numerous
.gathering of English, Irish, and Colonial archbishops
.and bishops recently assembled at Lambeth ; at
which, I rejoice to record it, we had the counsel and
concurrence of an eminent bishop of the Church in
the United States of America, the Bishop of Illinois.
" Moved by these requests, and by the expressed
^concurrence therein of other members both of the
Home and Colonial episcopate, who could not be
present at our meeting, I have now resolved, not,
I humbly trust, without the guidance of God the
Holy Ghost, to grant this grave request, and call
together the meeting thus earnestly desired. I greatly
hope that you may be able to attend it, and to aid
us with your presence and brotherly counsel thereat.
" I propose that, at our assembling, we should first
solemnly seek the blessing of Almighty God on our
gathering, by uniting together in the highest act of
the Church s worship. After this, brotherly consul
tations will follow. In these we may consider to
gether many practical questions, the settlement of
which would tend to the advancement of the kingdom
of our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, and to the
maintenance of greater union in our missionary work,
and to increased intercommunion among ourselves.
" Such a meeting would not be competent to make
declarations or lay down definitions on points of
doctrine. But united worship and common counsels
would greatly tend to maintain practically the unity
of the faith ; whilst they would bind us in straiter
bonds of peace and brotherly charity.
" I shall gladly receive from you a list of any sub
jects you may wish to suggest to me for consideration
and discussion. Should you be unable to attend,
and desire to commission any brother bishop to
Difficulties of an Agenda-paper. 9
speak for you, I shall welcome him as your repre
sentative in our united deliberations.
" But I must once more express my earnest hope
that, on this solemn occasion, I may have the great
advantage of your personal presence.
" And now I commend this proposed meeting to
your fervent prayers ; and, humbly beseeching the
blessing of Almighty God on yourself and your
diocese, I subscribe myself,
" Your faithful brother in the Lord,
"C. T. CANTUAR."
The invitation was accepted by seventy-six
bishops, and as soon as those who came from the
Colonies and the United States began to arrive in
England, a series of preliminary meetings was held
to discuss and arrange the details of a Conference for
which no precedent existed to serve as a guide. The
strong divergence of opinion upon the legal aspect
of Bishop Colenso s deposition and excommunication,
and the fact that the Bishop of Capetown had come to
England on purpose to secure, if possible, the synodical
sanction of the Conference to the course he had him
self adopted, made the agenda-paper a matter of no
small difficulty, if it was to be kept within the limits
laid down by the Archbishop of Canterbury in the
Convocation speech which has been quoted above.
Not a few of the English bishops felt so sure of the
increased confusion such a Conference must cause in
an already tangled web that they declined to attend
its deliberations. Among these were the Archbishop
of York and the Bishops of Durham, Carlisle, Ripon,
Peterborough, and Manchester. Others, including
Bishop Thirlwall, of St. David s, postponed their
acceptance until the official agenda-paper or pro
gramme should be published, 1 a fact to which they
afterwards called attention when the programme had
unexpectedly been changed.
The Conference met on Tuesday, September 24,
1 For its full text, see Part II., No. III., p. 37.
IO Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
the opening service being preceded by a Celebration
of Holy Communion in Lambeth Palace Chapel,,
with a sermon from Bishop Whitehouse, of Illinois.
The meetings of the Conference were held in the
upstairs dining-hall, or "guard-room," of Lambeth
Palace, not (as was the case in 1878) in the great
library. On the Archbishop of Canterbury s right
sat the Archbishop of Armagh, the Bishop of London,
the Presiding Bishop of the American Church, the
Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, the Bishop
of Calcutta, and the Bishop of Sydney. On the left
were the Archbishop of Dublin, and the Bishops of
Montreal, New Zealand, and Capetown. The other
bishops sat in front. The Bishop of Gloucester and
Bristol acted as episcopal secretary to the meeting
throughout its deliberations.
In his opening address, 1 Archbishop Longley again
denned, with some care, the position of the Con
ference. " It has never been contemplated," he said,
"that we should assume the functions of a general
synod of all the churches in full communion with
the Church of England, and take upon ourselves to-
enact canons that should be binding upon those
here represented. We merely propose to discuss
matters of practical interest, and pronounce what
we deem expedient in resolutions which may serve
as safe guides to future action. Thus it will be seen
that our first essay is rather tentative* and experi
mental, in a matter in which we have no distinct
precedent to direct us."
Special importance attached to the discussions of
the first day, when, in the form of a preamble to the
subsequent resolutions, the standpoint taken by the
Anglican Church was in general terms described.
All the leading bishops took part in the debate, and
its outcome will be best seen by placing the para
graph, as it was first drafted, side by side with the
form which was finally agreed upon.
1 See Part II, No. IV., p. 42.
The Alternative Preamble.
If
As originally drafted.
"We, Bishops of Christ s
Holy Catholic Church, profes
sing the faith of the primitive
and undivided Church, as based
on Scripture, defined by the
first four General Councils, 1
and reaffirmed by the Fathers
of the English Reformation,
now assembled by the good
providence of God at the Archi-
episcopal Palace of Lambeth,
under the presidency of the
Primate of all England, desire,
first, to give hearty thanks to
Almighty God for having thus
brought us together for common
counsels and united worship ;
secondly, we desire to express
the deep sorrow with which we
view the divided condition of
the flock of Christ throughout
the world ; and, lastly, we do
here solemnly declare our belief
that the best hope of future re
union will be found in drawing
each of us for ourselves closer
to our common Lord, in giving
ourselves to much prayer and
intercession, in the cultivation
of a spirit of charity, and in
seeking to diffuse through every
part of the Christian com
munity that desire and reso
lution to return to the faith and
discipline of the undivided
Church which was the principle
of the English Reformation."
1 See I Eliz. ch. i. xxxvi.
As ultimately carried.
"We, Bishops of Christ s
Holy Catholic Church, in visible
Communion with the United
Church of Englandand Ireland,
professing the faith delivered
to us in Holy Scripture, main
tained by the primitive Church
and by the Fathers of the
English Reformation, now as
sembled by the good providence
of God, at the Archiepiscopal
Palace of Lambeth, under the
presidency of the Primate of
all England, desire, first, to
give hearty thanks to Almighty
God for having thus brought us
together for common counsels
and united worship ; secondly,
we desire to express the deep
sorrow with which we view the
divided condition of the flock
of Christ throughout the world,
ardently longing for the fulfil
ment of the prayer of our Lord :
That all maybe one, as Thou,
Father, art in me, and I in
Thee, that they also may be
one in us, that the world may
believe that Thou has sent
me ; and, lastly, we do here
solemnly record our conviction
that unity will be most effec
tually promoted, by maintain
ing the faith in its purity and
integrity, as taught in the Holy
Scriptures, held by the primi
tive Church, summed up in the
Creeds, and affirmed by the
undisputed General Councils,
and by drawing each of us
closer to our common Lord,
by giving ourselves to much
prayer and intercession, by the
cultivation of a spirit of charity,
and a love of the Lord s appear
ing."
12 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
On the second day Wednesday, September 25
the president consented, notwithstanding the
strenuous protest of several bishops, to a complete
change of programme, in accordance with the wish
of the Bishop of Capetown and others, 1 and the
discussions were thus diverted into an unexpected
channel. A long day was occupied in discussing
the due gradation of synodal authority, diocesan,
provincial, and, perhaps, patriarchal, within the
Anglican Communion. After the failure of succes
sive attempts to obtain the formal sanction of the Con
ference to the definite schemes proposed, it was found
necessary to fall back upon a perfectly general reso
lution proposed by Bishop Selwyn, of New Zealand,
in the following terms : " That, in the opinion of
this Conference, unity of faith and discipline will be
best maintained among the several branches of the
Anglican Communion by due and canonical subor
dination of the synods of the several branches to
the higher authority of a synod or synods above
them."
This was carried nem. con., and a committee was
appointed to consider the whole subject.
On the following day (Thursday, Sept. 26), the
" burning question " of Bishop Colenso s position was
the subject of prolonged debate. The Archbishop
of Canterbury had declined to allow any distinct
resolution of condemnation to be put to the Confer
ence, and he ruled out of order a motion to that
effect which was proposed by the Presiding Bishop
of the American Church. After several hours dis
cussion, it was resolved, by 49 votes to 10, "that, in
the judgment of the bishops here assembled, the
whole Anglican Communion is deeply injured by
the present condition of the Church in Natal ; and
that a committee be now appointed at this general
meeting to report on the best mode by which the
1 See Part II., No. V., p. 48.
Encyclical Address to the Faithful. 13
Church may be delivered from the continuance of
this scandal, and the truth maintained. That such
report be forwarded to his Grace the Lord Arch
bishop of Canterbury with the request that his Grace
will be pleased to transmit the same to all the
bishops of the Anglican Communion, and to ask for
their judgment thereon."
The next matter dealt with was the possible con
stitution of what was described as a Spiritual Court
of Appeal ; and on this subject it was found neces
sary, after long debate, to await the report of a
committee before any formal recommendation could
be made. Such a committee was accordingly ap
pointed " to consider the constitution of a voluntary
spiritual tribunal, to which questions of doctrine may
be carried by appeal from the tribunals for the exercise
of discipline in each Province of the Colonial
Church."
It had, upon the previous day, been informally
decided that a short " Encyclical " Letter or Address
should be drafted by a Committee 1 for the signa
ture of the Bishops attending the Conference. This
Address was adopted by the whole body before the
adjournment on Thursday evening, and was formally
signed at the morning session on the following day. 2
It was suggested in the Conference that it should be
publicly read by the Archbishop from the altar of
Lambeth Parish Church ; but this course was not
adopted. After other resolutions 3 had been carried
with respect to the due notification of the establish
ment of new dioceses, the provision of Letters Com
mendatory, and the proper measure of publicity to
1 The Committee consisted of the Archbishop of Canterbury
and the Bishops of London, Winchester, Oxford, North
Carolina, Grahamstown, Ohio, Ely, St. Andrews, Cape Town,
Moray and Ross, and New Zealand.
2 The complete document, as signed, is given below.
Part II., No. VI., p. 53.
3 See Part II., No. VIII., p. 62.
14 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
be given to the proceedings of the Conference,
a second and unexpected debate arose upon the
position of Bishop Colenso, and a resolution was
carried expressing the acquiescence of the Confe
rence in certain advice given by the Convocation of
Canterbury a year before, respecting the steps to be
taken " if it be decided that a New Bishop should
be consecrated " for the Diocese of Natal.
After the Gloria in Excelsis had been sung by the
assembled Bishops, the Primate dismissed the Con
ference with the Benediction, on the understanding
that those members of it who could remain in
England should reassemble in December to receive
the Reports of the various Committees.
On the following day, Saturday, September 28,
thirty-four Bishops attended a closing service in
Lambeth Parish Church, when the Holy Communion
was celebrated by the Archbishop, and a sermon
was preached by Bishop Fulford, of Montreal. It
had originally been proposed that this service should
be held in Westminster Abbey ; but Dean Stanley,
in a correspondence published at the time, 1 gave his
reasons for objecting to the use of the Abbey in the
manner proposed, and the Conference fell back on
Lambeth Church as an alternative.
The several Committees were in frequent session
during the next two months under the direction of
Bishop Selwyn, of New Zealand ; 2 Bishop Fulford,
of Montreal ; and Bishop Cotterill, of Grahamstown,
the last-named of whom had undertaken the
onerous work of " Secretary of Committees " to the
Conference.
On December 10 a further session of the Con
ference, or such members of it as had remained in
i See Part II., No. IX., p. 66.
- Bishop Selwyn had been nominated in November, 1867, to
the See of Lichfield ; but he was not enthroned till January 9,
1868.
The Adjourned Session: December, 1867. 15
England, was held at Lambeth Palace, when eight
Reports were presented. 1 With reference to the first
seven of these, a resolution was in each case formally
passed : " That this adjourned meeting of the Con
ference receives the Report (No. ) of the Com
mittee now presented, and directs the publication
thereof, commending it to the careful consideration
of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion, as
containing the result of the deliberations of that
Committee ; and returns the members of the
same its thanks for the care with which they have
considered the various important questions referred
to them."
Upon the presentation of Report No. VIII., which
referred to Bishop Colenso s deposition, it was re
solved " that the Report be received and printed ;
that the thanks of this meeting be given to the Com
mittee for their labours, and that his Grace be
requested to communicate the Report to the Council
of the Colonial Bishoprics Fund."
The further resolutions, which will be found in
full elsewhere, 2 were for the most part of a formal
character. It was, indeed, impossible, considering
the small number of Bishops who were able to
attend, that any important motions should at this
stage be brought before them. The session lasted
for a few hours only, and it became evident that in
any future Conference some different arrangement
must be adopted. Reiterated thanks were expressed
to the Bishops of Gloucester and Grahamstown, the
Episcopal Secretaries ; and to Mr. Philip Wright and
Mr. Isambard Brunei, who had acted as their lay
assistants and advisers. The Conference had been
attended, in all, by seventy-six Bishops out of one
hundred and forty-four who had received invitations.
Of these seventy-six, eighteen were English Bishops,
1 See Part II., No. X., p. 72.
2 See Part II., No. XL, p. 98.
1 6 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
five were Irish, and six were Scotch. The Colonial
Church sent twenty-four, including five Metropolitans.
The United States sent nineteen. At no one session
of the Conference were all the Bishops present, but
the Encyclical Address received the signatures of all,
and the President was subsequently authorised to-
affix the names of several others who had been re
luctantly prevented from attending. 1
CHAPTER II.
THE SECOND CONFERENCE. 1878.
r I "*HE circumstances in which the first Conference
J_ had been held were exceptionally difficult, and
some of the interests at stake were of so keen and
even personal a sort that the Bishops found it hard
to give undistracted attention to the wider questions
of policy and practice which had been included in
Archbishop Longley s programme. The allotted
time also had been far too short for dealing ade
quately with such subjects. Eight Committees had
indeed reported ; but their Reports, as has been seen,
were presented to less than a score of Bishops at
one brief session on a single day. Due discussion
of them was thus impossible, and Bishop Selwyn,
who had been foremost perhaps among the promoters
1 See Part 1 1., No. XL, p. 98.
A Second Conference Asked for. 17
of the gathering, could only suggest the postpone
ment to a future Conference of any debate upon
these weighty documents. 1
The inquiry soon became common, Will there be
a second Conference, and if so, when ? Once again,
as in 1865, it was the Canadian Church which took
the first official step. In December, 1872, the
Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of Canada
made formal appeal to the Convocation of Canter
bury to join with them in a request to Archbishop
Tait, who had in 1869 succeeded to the Primacy,
that he would summon as soon as possible a second
meeting of the Conference. 2
Taking this Canadian letter as his text, Bishop
Selwyn, in a memorable speech in Convocation,
-endorsed and expanded the appeal. He had visited
America in 1871. He was to pay a second and more
formal visit in 1874, and his experience in every part
of the world led him to long for such confederation
and unity of action as could, he believed, be best
secured by a second Conference, or, as he called it,
" A General Council of the Bishops of the Anglican
Communion, to carry on the work begun by the
Lambeth Conference of i867/ 3
The matter was, by common consent, adjourned
for a time ; and in the following year (1874) Bishop
Kerfoot, of Pittsburgh, as representing the American
Church, was in constant communication upon the
subject with Archbishop Tait, whom he visited at
Addington, and to whom he was authorised to write
officially from America. 4 The Bishop of Lichfield s
formal attendance in that year at the meetings, first
1 See eg., "Chronicle of Convocation," Feb. 13, 1873,
p. 172.
- See Part II., No. XII., p. 101.
3 See "Chronicle of Convocation," Feb. 13, 1873, pp.
168-174.
4 See Part II., No. XIII., p. 103, and "Life of Bishop Kerfoot,"
vol. ii., pp. 581-587.
B
1 8 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
of the Provincial Synod of Canada and then of the
General Convention in New York, 1 brought the
question again into prominence, and it had now
become practically certain that a second Conference
would be held in 1877 or 1878 if the necessary con
ditions could be agreed upon.
Some of these conditions were suggested by the
Canadian House of Bishops ; 2 others were laid down
by the Archbishop himself in an important Con
vocation speech, and in his written reply to a formal
request signed by no less than 43 Bishops of the
American Church. 3 Speaking in Convocation on
April 16, 1875, he said :
" No one can doubt that very great good has
arisen from the friendly intercourse which took place
during the last Lambeth Conference. At the same
time, it must be remembered that it is a serious
matter to gather the Bishops together from all parts
of the globe, unless there is some distinct object for
their so gathering. I therefore am disposed, by the
advice of my brethren, to request that our brethren
at home, and also those at a distance, will state to
me as explicitly as possible what the subjects are that
it is desirable to discuss at such meeting. They are
of a somewhat limited character. There is no inten
tion whatever on the part of anybody to gather
together the Bishops of the Anglican Church for the
sake of defining any matter of doctrine. Our doc
trines are contained in our formularies, and our
formularies are interpreted by the proper judicial
authorities, and there is no intention whatever at any
such gathering that questions of doctrine should be
submitted for interpretation in any future Lambeth
Conference any more than they were at the previous
Lambeth Conference. My predecessor had a very
1 See " Life of Bishop Selwyn," vol. ii., pp. 319-324.
2 See Part II., No. XIV., p. no.
3 See Part II., No. XIII, p. 103.
Archbishop Taifs Speech in Convocation. 19
difficult task in defining the exact duty of the
Bishops who came together on the former occasion,
and with great firmness, and at the same time with
that remarkable courtesy and kindliness for which he
was so eminent, he steered the somewhat difficult
course which was before him, and it was distinctly
settled that matters of that kind were not to be
entered upon. Well, then, with regard to discipline,
of course our discipline is exercised by ourselves
and by the constituted Courts of the Church at
home, and the discipline of the various Colonial and
more independent Churches is exercised by these
Churches according to fixed rules which have been
established by themselves, and we have no intention
whatever of interfering with these matters of dis
cipline. We are, therefore, perhaps naturally, anxious
to know tolerably distinctly the subjects which any
would wish to bring before us Friendly inter
course must, of course, be of great value. But it is
possible that Bishops at a very great distance such
as the Bishop of Athabasca, who, I believe, can
scarcely reach his diocese under a year might per
haps, under a misapprehension, think it was neces
sarily their duty to come to such a Conference unless
it was distinctly stated what was to be done
I cannot doubt that there are many points respecting
the connection between the Mother Church and the
Colonial Churches on which a friendly Conference
would be very valuable indeed With
regard to our brethren in America, no such difficulties
exist : what we enjoyed so much during the late
Conference was the friendly intercourse and exchange
of sentiment between us and them. We have no
desire to interfere with their affairs, and I am sure
they have no desire to interfere with ours. As far as
they are concerned, I think it would be a work of
love in which we should be engaged the extension
of Christ s kingdom and that we may be able by
friendly intercourse to strengthen each other s hands.
B 2
2O LambetJi Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
But I think it important that there should be no mis
understanding, and none of that difficulty which, I
am bound to say, did exist at the last Lambeth
Conference as to what subjects might and what
subjects might not be introduced ; that we should
know what it is that our brethren wish to bring
before us, and what we wish to bring before them,
before they give themselves the trouble of coming
from the ends of the earth, happy as the results of
such a meeting are, under God s Providence, likely
to be." !
Fortified by the concurrence of the Northern Con
vocation, 3 which had held aloof in 1867, the Arch
bishop of Canterbury issued a formal letter on
March 28th, 1876, to all the Bishops of the Anglican
Communion, intimating his readiness to hold a Con
ference in 1878, " if it shall seem expedient, after the
opinions of all our brethren have been ascertained,"
and inviting an expression of opinion. 3 These letters
to the Bishops throughout the world were not, as
heretofore, sent direct from Lambeth ; but were for
warded to the various Metropolitans and presiding
Bishops, with a request that they would transmit
them officially to the Bishops entitled to receive
them in each branch or Province of the Church a
rule which has since been followed in all similar
circulars of an official kind.
Before the close of the year about ninety letters
of reply were received by the Archbishop, from all
parts of the world, showing, as had been anticipated,
an overwhelming preponderance of opinion in favour
of a second Conference, provided a longer period of
session could be arranged for than "the four short
days" of 1867.
1 See "Chronicle of Convocation," April 16, 1875, pp.
132-134.
3 For the formal resolution passed in the Convocation of
York on Feb. 26, 1875, see Part II., No. XV., p. in.
3 See Part II., No. XVI., p. 113.
ArcJibishop Taifs Invitation. 21
Most of the Bishops also suggested subjects for
discussion, and on these the Archbishop took counsel
with an Episcopal Committee, and especially with
Bishop Selwyn. After the fullest deliberation, the
following definite invitation was issued :
LAMBETH PALACE,
July ic, 1877.
RIGHT REVEREND AND DEAR BROTHER,
It is proposed to hold a Conference of Bishops of
the Anglican Communion, at this place, beginning
on Tuesday, the second day of July, eighteen hundred
and seventy-eight.
The Conference, it is proposed, shall extend over
four weeks ; the first week, of Four Sessions, to be
devoted to discussions, in Conference, of the subjects
submitted for deliberation ; the second and third
weeks to the consideration of these subjects in
Committees ; and the fourth week to final discussions
in Conference, and to the close of the meeting.
The subjects selected for discussion are the fol
lowing :
1. The best mode of maintaining Union among
the various churches of the Anglican Communion.
2. Voluntary Boards of Arbitration for Churches
to which such an arrangement may be applicable.
3. The relations to each other of Missionary
Bishops and of Missionaries, in various branches of
the Anglican Communion acting in the same
country.
4. The position of Anglican Chaplains and Chap
laincies on the Continent of Europe and elsewhere.
5. Modern forms of infidelity, and the best means
of dealing with them.
6. The condition, progress, and needs of the various
Churches of the Anglican Communion.
I shall feel greatly obliged if, at your early con
venience, you will inform me whether we may have
22 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
the pleasure of expecting your presence at the
Conference.
I am,
Right Reverend and dear Brother,
Yours faithfully in Christ,
A. C. CANTUAR.
It was evidently not without intention that the
subjects selected for discussion, though grouped
under such all-embracing headings, coincided in
some parts so closely with the Resolutions of the
Conference of 1867. The Reports presented in that
year had never, as has been seen, received adequate
discussion, nor had any one of them been " adopted "
by the Conference. By a recurrence to these sub
jects a certain measure of continuity was secured,
and a basis was laid for the practical deliberations
of 1878. The plan adopted in 1867 of drafting and
publishing beforehand the Resolutions which were
to be moved, had not worked altogether well, and it
was arranged that in 1878 the formal motion should
in each case be for the appointment of a Committee
which, after considering some branch of the selected
subjects, should report to the Conference in its final
week of session.
One hundred and eight Bishops accepted the
Archbishop s invitation. Some of these, however,
were at the last moment prevented from attending,
and the actual number present at the Conference was
exactly one hundred.
On Saturday, June 29, St Peter s Day, the pro
ceedings of the Conference began with a gathering of
Bishops at Canterbury, for what had been described
as a " Service of Welcome " in the Cathedral.
Archbishop Tait, four weeks before, had lost his
only son, who had recently returned from a visit to
America, and the fear that the Archbishop would
himself be unable to attend the Service, which would
thus be deprived of much of its interest and com-
The Welcome at Canterbury. 23
pleteness, kept away many Bishops who had intended
to be present. The Archbishop, however, went to
Canterbury as arranged, and was met by thirty-six
Bishops, 1 and an immense gathering of clergy.
A service was held in the morning in St. Augus
tine s Missionary College, with a sermon by Bishop
Cleveland Coxe, of Western New York, and at the
Special Evensong in the Cathedral at three o clock,
the Archbishop gave an official welcome to the
assembled Bishops. The ancient marble throne,
known as " St. Augustine s Chair," was moved from
its ordinary position in the south transept, and placed
in the centre of the altar steps. The Bishops were
grouped on either side of it, and the Archbishop
addressed them as follows :
" My brothers, representatives of the Church
throughout the world, engaged in spreading the
Gospel of Jesus Christ wherever the sun shines, I
esteem it a very high privilege to welcome you here
to-day, to the cradle of Anglo-Saxon Christianity. . .
I am addressing you from St. Augustine s chair.
This thought carries us back to the time when that
first missionary to our Anglo-Saxon forefathers,
amid much discouragement, landed on these bar
barous shores. More than twelve centuries and
a-half have rolled on since then. The seed he sowed
has borne an abundant harvest, and this great British
nation, and our sister beyond the ocean, have cause
to render thanks to God for the work begun by him
here. And how full of encouragement to you is St.
Augustine s work. What difficulties greater than
those that confronted him can stand in your path ?
And you have blessings that he had not. You stand
nearer the pure primitive Christianity of the Apostles.
You have a motive power to touch the heart denied
to him The varied history of the Church has
1 Nearly all of these came from abroad. Only three of the
home Diocesans were present.
24 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
recorded many failures and many successes, and \ve
learn from the past neither to be elated by the one
nor discouraged by the other. The monuments
which surround us speak of a chequered history.
They tell of dark times and of great times. But
they all testify to the superintending power of God,,
Who works all things according to the pleasure of
His will, after His own plan for the building up of
His one Kingdom in His own way
It is my privilege to welcome you to Christ
Church, Canterbury Gregory sent St. Augus
tine here that he might mark England with the name
of Christ, " that Name which is above every name."
God grant that that Name may be ever more and
more acknowledged among us ; that its glories may
shine more and more brightly here, and in your dis
tant dioceses, triumphing over all obstacles, and
reconciling all petty divisions, uniting all hearts in
the truth of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.
My Brethren from across the Atlantic, you espe
cially from the great Republic, to you a particular
welcome is due from me. Partly for our Church s
sake, partly for my sake, partly also for something
you discerned in himself, you welcomed one very
dear to me last autumn. 1 The bond that unites us
is not the less sacred because so many hopes of
earthly joy have withered and disappeared. God
unite us all more closely in His own great Family.
And now let us to prayer."
At eleven o clock, on Tuesday, July 2, the Bishops
met at Lambeth. They were marshalled in the
Guard-room, where the actual Sessions of 1867 had!
been held, and passed thence in procession to the
Chapel, the Bishops from the United States walking
alongside of the English Diocesan Bishops as their
guests, all due precedence being given in the proces-
1 The Archbishop s son, the Rev. Craufurd Tait, had been
formally welcomed by the House of Bishops assembled at
Boston on Oct. 5, 1877.
Opening of the Second Conference.
sional arrangements to the Metropolitans and pre
siding Bishops. 1 After the Veni Creator had been
sung, the Holy Communion was celebrated by the
Archbishop of Canterbury, assisted by the Bishops
of London, Winchester, Salisbury, and Rochester, as
officers of the Provincial College. With the excep
tion of the Archbishop of Canterbury s Chaplains, 3
none but Bishops were present in the Chapel. The
sermon was preached by the Archbishop of York,
the text being Galatians ii. 2 : " But when Peter was
come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because
he was to be blamed." 3
The Sessions of the Conference were held in the
Great Library, not, as in 1867, in the Guard-room.
The arrangement of hours and subjects was as
follows :
" 1 1 a.m. Holy Communion and sermon
in Lambeth Palace Chapel.
Tuesday, 1.30 p.m. Archbishop s opening address.
July 2. \ 2 p.m. 4.45 p.m. Subject I. The
I best mode of maintaining union
among the various Churches of
^ the Anglican Communion.
f 10.30 a.m. Litany in Chapel.
ii a.m. Subject II. Voluntary Boards
of Arbitration for Churches to
which such an arrangement may
Wednesday, be applicable.
July 3. -{1.30 p.m. Subject III. The relation
to each other of Missionary
Bishops and of Missionaries in
various Branches of the Anglican
Communion, acting in the same
country.
1 See Part II., No. XXL, p. 159.
- Archdeacon Fisher, Rev. F. G. Blomfield, Hon. and Rev.
W. H. Fremantle, Rev. W. F. Erskine Knollys, Rev. Randall
T. Davidson.
3 The sermon was published by Murray, under the title of
" St. Peter at Antioch."
26 LambetJi Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
Thursday,
July 4.
10.30 a.m. Litany in Chapel.
II a.m. Subject IV. The position 01
Anglican Chaplains and Chap
laincies on the Continent of
Europe and elsewhere.
1.30 p.m. Subject V. Modern forms
of Infidelity, and the best means
of dealing with them.
C 10.30 a.m. Litany in Chapel.
Friday, II a.m. and 1.30 p.m. Subject VI.
July 5. The condition, progress, and needs
of the various Churches of the
Anglican Communion.
It was decided, almost unanimously, that the pro
ceedings of the Conference should, as in 1867, be
private. A short-hand report was made of all the
speeches, and it was arranged that this should be
preserved by the Archbishop along with the other
manuscripts belonging to Lambeth Library, but
should in no way be made public. 1
The secretarial work of the Conference was again,
as in 1867, under the charge of Bishops Ellicott and
Cotterill/ assisted by Dr. Isambard Brunei, and,
unofficially, by the Archbishop s resident Chaplain. 3
For the avoidance of discussions irrelevant to the
programme it was arranged, with general consent,
that if any memorials or petitions and there were
not a few should be forwarded to the Conference,
they should be placed, without further remark than
a bare statement of their purport, in the hands of the
1 A long account of the debates which had taken place in
1867 was unexpectedly published in the Guardian of June 19,
1878, under circumstances explained in a letter from the
Rev. W. Benham to the Archbishop, which appeared in the
Guardian of the following week, June 26, 1878, p. 900.
2 Bishop of Grahamstown 1856-1871 ; Bishop of Edinburgh
1871-1886.
3 The Rev. R. T. Davidson.
The Conference Committees: 1878. 27
President, and that the memorialists should be
informed that in no case could any answer be
returned, i
In the opening debates during the first week the
formal motion was in each case for the appointment
of a Committee to consider the particular subject
under discussion, and to report to the Conference
during the closing week of Session. On the final
and very wide subject (No. VI.) " The condition,
progress, and needs of the various Churches of the
Anglican Communion," the order was varied by
the appointment of an influential Committee presided
over by the Archbishop of Canterbury, which sat
de die in diem at Lambeth, " to receive questions
submitted in writing by Bishops desiring the advice
of the Conference on difficulties or problems they
have met with in their several Dioceses."
The various Committees met at Lambeth, Fulham,
Farnham, and elsewhere during the fortnight which
intervened between the first and last groups of
Sessions, and their Reports were, for the most part,
ready when the Conference re-assembled in Lambeth
Library on Monday, July 22nd. On subject No. V.
alone " Modern forms of Infidelity, and the best
means of dealing with them," the Committee, as
was natural, announced that they had not found it
possible to prepare in the time allotted for their
deliberations a detailed Report upon so vast a
question. To judge, however, from the published
opinions of the Bishops present at the Conference 1
the debates upon this subject were among the most
useful of any that took place.
As the outcome of much discussion it was decided
that the Reports, when adopted by the Conference,
should be incorporated as a whole in a combined
1 See, for example, "The Second Lambeth Conference : A
Personal Narrative," by Bishop Stevens Perry, of Iowa,
pp. 27, &c.
28 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 aud 1878.
" Letter," and put forth to the world in the name of
the hundred Bishops assembled. This course was
rendered possible by the almost complete unanimity
with which the five Reports in their ultimate shape
received the imprimatur of the Conference. Bishop
Wordsworth of Lincoln, who, as Archdeacon of
Westminster, had in 1867 translated into Greek and
Latin the Address then published 1 undertook in like
manner to make translations of this document of
1878, condensing or omitting such portions of the
Reports as would be inappropriate or uninteresting
to those outside the Anglican Communion. 2
The final paragraphs of the official letter, which
will be found in its complete form elsewhere, 3 were as.
follows :
" These are the Reports of the Conference, and the
practical conclusions at which we have arrived.
Some of these conclusions have reference to the
special circumstances of different branches of the
One Church of Christ, according to peculiarities of
their various missionary work for the heathen, or
their labours among their own people ; some embody
principles which apply to all branches of the Church
Universal. They are all limited in their scope to
those subjects which have been distinctly brought
before the assembled Bishops. We invite to them
the attention of the various Synods and other
governing powers in the several Churches, and of all
the faithful in Christ Jesus throughout the world.
" We do not claim to be lords over God s heritage,
but we commend the results of this our Conference
to the reason and conscience of our brethren as en
lightened by the Holy Spirit of God, praying that
all throughout the world who call upon the Lord
Jesus Christ may be of one mind, may be united in
See Part II., No. VII., p. 57.
See Part II., No. XIX., p. 145.
See Part II., No. XVIII., p. 117.
Closing Service in St. Paul s Cathedral. 29
one fellowship, may hold fast the Faifhonce delivered
to the Saints, and worship their one Lord in the
spirit of purity and love.
" Signed on behalf of the Conference,
" A. C. CANTUAR."
The Letter having been thus formally signed, the
Gloria in Excelsis was sung by the assembled
Bishops, the Benediction was pronounced, and the
deliberations of the Conference were at an end.
On the following day (Saturday, July 27) a grand
closing service was held in St. Paul s Cathedral. The
Bishops who were able to be present about eighty-
five in number received the Archbishop of Canter
bury at the West door, and the hymn, " The Church s
One Foundation/ was sung as the long procession
walked up the nave. The Te Deum 1 followed, and the
Holy Communion was then celebrated by the Arch
bishop of Canterbury, who was assisted in the service
and administration by the Bishops of London, Moray
and Ross, Sydney, Montreal, Christ Church (New
Zealand), Capetown, Rupertsland, and Delaware.
The sermon was preached by Bishop Stevens, of
Pennsylvania, from the text, " I, if I be lifted up
from the earth, will draw all men unto Me " (St.
John xii. 32). 3 The service over, the Bishops
assembled in the apse of the Cathedral, when a few
farewell words were spoken by the Archbishop. " I
feel confident," he said, " that the effect of our gather
ing will be that the Church at home and abroad will
be strengthened by the mutual counsel which we
have taken together. May the blessing of Almighty
God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost
attend each one of us in our several spheres when
we depart from this place. On behalf of the Bishops
1 Stainer in E flat.
* The sermon was published in pamphlet form by Messrs.
Cassell & Co.
3O Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
of England I offer to those of our brethren who have
come hither from foreign lands our heartfelt thanks,
and bid them, in the name of God, Farewell ! "
So ended the second Lambeth Conference. It had
been attended, as has been seen, by exactly one
hundred Bishops. Thirty-five of these were English, 1
nine were Irish, seven were Scottish, thirty were
Colonial and Missionary, and nineteen belonged to
the Church of the United States. The expenses of
the Conference, so far as they did not devolve upon
the Archbishop of Canterbury, were defrayed by the
English Diocesan Bishops. A committee of laymen,
under the guidance of Mr. J. G. Talbot, M.P., under
took to arrange for all possible hospitality to the
American and Colonial Bishops. This organization,
however, as well as the visits paid to the English
Universities and Cathedral cities, lay altogether out
side the official arrangements for the Conference. 3
The foregoing narrative has dealt simply with the
two Conferences in their bare official aspect. The
indirect results which have accrued are probably at
least as great as those of an official kind. For an
estimate of these indirect results, however, and for
the impression made by the debates upon those who
attended them, the reader must turn to the accounts
which have been published in ample number in the
biographies of Bishops on both sides of the
Atlantic. 3
In the twenty-one years that have elapsed between
the first Conference and the third, the number of
Bishops entitled to receive an invitation has increased
1 Namely, two Archbishops, twenty-six English Diocesans,
three Suffragan Bishops, and four ex-Colonial Bishops holding
" permanent commissions " in England.
2 For the numbers attending the Conference of 1867, see
above, page 15.
3 e.g. Lives of Bishops Sumner, Gray, Hopkins, Ewing,
Selwyn, Kerfoot, Wilberforce, Wordsworth, &c.
Hopes for the Conference of 1 888. 3 1
from 144 to 209, and the relative increase is still
greater in the number of those who have accepted
the invitation to be present. 1 The keen interest and
the high hopes expressed with regard to the Con
ference now about to open, under a third Archi-
episcopal President, with a programme 2 at least as
ample as those of 1867 and 1878, are evidence
enough, were such required, that those who planned,
in faith and courage, the first of these decennial
gatherings, were right in believing that a solid gain
must follow, and that not to the Anglican Com
munion only, but to the Church of Christ throughout
the world.
June I, 1888.
1 The actual numbers are as follows :
Conference of 1867 ...
1878...
1888 ...
Received
Invitations.
Accepted the Invitation
and Attended.
144
173
209
7 6
100
?I43*
* (Acceptances.)
See Part II., No. XXII., p. 161.
32 LambctJi Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
PART II. LETTERS AND DOCUMENTS ILLUS
TRATING THE HISTORY OF THE LAMBETH
CONFERENCES OF 1867 AND 1878.
No. I. (See page 6.)
Addresses from the Provincial Synod of the United
Church of England and Ireland in Canada,
assembled at Montreal in September, 1865 ; with
the Reply of the A rcJibishop of Canterbury.
To the Most Reverend the Archbishop, the Right
Reverend the Bishops, and the Reverend the
Clergy of the Convocation of the Province of
Canterbury.
We, the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity of the Cana
dian Branch of the United Church of England and
Ireland, in Synod assembled, would approach your
Venerable Body with the deepest sentiments of
reverence and affection.
We are engaged, like yourselves, in endeavouring,
in this distant dependency of the Crown, to uphold
the truth of Religion, as our Common Church main
tains it, and that Apostolic Order which is so
essential a safeguard in the preservation and diffusion
of the Catholic Faith. Recent declarations in high
places in our Mother-land, in reference to the position
of the Colonial Branches of the Mother Church, have
created amongst us feelings of regret and apprehen
sion, as tending to shake the conviction, always so
dear to us, that we in the Colonies were, in all
respects, one with the Church of our parent country.
Letter from the Canadian CJiurch. 33
No statute or decision, we beg solemnly to assure
you, much as it may serve to weaken our outward
connection with the Church of our fathers, can impair
the integrity and vigour of those principles in
doctrine and fellowship which constitute her inward
life. We are one with her in the great Articles of
Christian Belief, and one with her in that Episcopal
Order which binds her members in unity throughout
the world.
In desiring most earnestly to retain this connec
tion, we believe that it would be most effectually
preserved and perpetuated if means could be adopted
by which the members of our Anglican Communion
in all quarters of the world should have a share in
the deliberations for her w r elfare, and be permitted to
have a representation in one General Council of her
members gathered from every land. Deeply affected
by the threat of isolation which recent declarations
in high places have indicated, we earnestly solicit
this measure of relief, as maintaining that test of
inward communion which is to us the most precious.
But while we look with hope to such concession,
we readily affirm our belief that the manner and
measure of the relief and encouragement we solicit
will be left most wisely to the deliberate judgment of
those ancient Convocations of the Church to whom,
under God, the cause of true religion at home and
abroad is so largely indebted.
Dated at the City of Montreal, in the Province of
Canada, this twentieth day of September, in the year
of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-
five.
F. MONTREAL, JAMES BEAVEN, D.D.,
Metropolitan. Prolocutor.
34 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 an d 1878.
To His Grace Charles Thomas, Archbishop of Can
terbury, D.D., Primate of all England, and
Metropolitan.
May it please your Grace,
We, the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity of the
Province of Canada, in Triennial Synod assembled,
desire to represent to your Grace, that in consequence
of the recent decisions of the Judicial Committee of
the Privy Council in the well-known case respecting
the Essays and Reviews, and also in the case of the
Bishop of Natal and the Bishop of Cape Town, the
minds of many members of the Church have been
unsettled or painfully alarmed ; and that doctrines
hitherto believed to be Scriptural, and undoubtedly
held by the members of the Church of England and
Ireland, have been adjudicated upon by the Privy
Council in such a way as to lead thousands of our
brethren to conclude that, according to this decision,
it is quite compatible with membership in the Church
of England to discredit the historical facts of Holy
Scripture, and to disbelieve the eternity of future
punishment ; moreover, we would express to your
Grace the intense alarm felt by many in Canada lest
the tendency of the revival of the active powers of
Convocation should leave us governed by canons
different from those in force in England and Ireland,
and thus cause us to drift into the status of an inde
pendent branch of the Catholic Church a result
which we would at this time most solemnly deplore.
In order, therefore, to comfort the souls of the
faithful, and reassure the minds of wavering members
of the Church, and to obviate, as far as may be, the
suspicion whereby so many are scandalised, that the
Church is a creation of Parliament, we humbly entreat
your Grace, since the assembling of a General Council
of the whole Catholic Church is at present imprac
ticable, to convene a National Synod of the Bishops
Archbishop s Answer to Canadian Church. 35
of the Anglican Church at home and abroad, who,
attended by one or more of their presbyters or lay
men, learned in ecclesiastical law, as their advisers,
may meet together, and, under the guidance of the
Holy Ghost, take such counsel and adopt such
measures as may be best fitted to provide for the
present distress in such Synod, presided over by
your Grace.
F. MONTREAL, JAS. BEAVEN, D.D.,
Metropolitan, President. Prolocutor.
Reply of the Archbishop.
To the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity of the Province of
Canada, lately assembled in their Triennial
Synod.
ADDINGTON PARK, December, 1865.
MY RIGHT REV., REV., AND DEAR BRETHREN,
I have duly received the Address forwarded to
me by your Metropolitan, from the late Triennial
Provincial Synod of the Province of Canada, request
ing me to convene a Synod of the Bishops of the
Anglican Church, both at home and abroad, in order
that they may meet together, and, under the guidance
of the Holy Ghost, take such counsel, and adopt such
measures, as may be best fitted to provide for the
present distress.
I can well understand your surprise and alarm at
the recent decisions of the Judicial Committee of the
Privy Council in grave matters bearing upon the
doctrine and discipline of our Church, and I can
comprehend your anxiety, lest the recent revival of
action in the two Provincial Convocations of Canter
bury and York should lead to the disturbance of
those relations, which have hitherto subsisted between
the different branches of the Anglican Church.
C 2
36 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
The meeting of such a Synod as you propose is
not by any means foreign to my own feelings, and I
think it might tend to prevent those inconveniences,
the possibility of which you anticipate. I cannot,
however, take any step in so grave a matter without
consulting my episcopal brethren in both branches
of the United Church of England and Ireland, as
well as those in the different colonies and depen
dencies of the British Empire.
I remain, your faithful and affectionate friend and
brother in Christ,
C. T. CANTUAR,
Primate of All England.
No. II. (See page 6.)
Proceedings of the Convocation of Canterbury with
respect to the Canadian Address of September \
1865.
On May 2, 1866, the Lower House unanimously
resolved, " That his Grace the President be respect
fully requested to direct the appointment of a Com
mittee to consider and report upon the Address of
the Canadian Branch of the United Church of
England and Ireland, dated at Montreal, Sep
tember 20, 1865." (Chronicle of Convocation, May 2,
i866,/. 290.)
The President having granted this request, a Com
mittee of fifteen members was appointed. The
Committee presented its report on June 29, 1866,
but the debate upon it was postponed until the fol
lowing group of sessions.
On February 14, 1867, the Lower House, after a
prolonged discussion, agreed by a majority of 29 to
the following resolution :
" That this House tenders its sincere thanks to the
Committee on the Address of the Canadian Church,
Programme for Conference of 1867. 37
for the labour which they have bestowed on the
subject, and for the Report which they have framed
and presented to this House, and desires to convey
to his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury a
respectful expression of an earnest desire that he
would be pleased to issue an invitation to all the
Bishops in communion with the Church of England
to assemble at such time and place, and accompanied
by such persons as may be deemed fit, for the pur
pose of Christian sympathy and mutual counsel on
matters affecting the welfare of the Church at home
and abroad ; and that this resolution be forwarded to
the Upper House."
A debate upon the subject took place in the Upper
House on the following day. No formal resolution
was proposed, but the Archbishop announced his
intention of acceding to the request which had been
made. {Chronicle of Convocation, February 14 and 15,
I867,//. 767-793, 800-808.)
No. III. (See page 9.)
Official Programme for the Conference of 1867.
Arrangements for the Conference of Bishops of
the Anglican Communion, to be holden at Lambeth
Palace on September 24, 1867, and following days.
FIRST DAY. Tuesday, September 24, at eleven
o clock, a.m. Prayers and Holy Communion.
Sermon, by the Bishop of Illinois.
General Subject for the Days Discussion.
INTERCOMMUNION BETWEEN THE CHURCHES OF
THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION.
Opening Address of the President : specifying
the general principles and rules of the Conference,
38 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
and inviting any introductory remarks from Home
Metropolitans and from distant Bishops.
General agreement as to the arrangement of the
time and subjects.
Resolution :
We, Bishops of Christ s Holy Catholic Church,
professing the faith of the primitive and undivided
Church, as based on Scripture, defined by the first
four General Councils, 1 and reaffirmed by the Fathers
of the English Reformation, now assembled by the
good providence of God at the Archiepiscopal Palace
of Lambeth, under the presidency of the Primate of
all England, desire first to give hearty thanks to
Almighty God for having thus brought us together
for common counsels, and united worship; Secondly,
we desire to express the deep sorrow with which we
view the divided condition of the flock of Christ
throughout the world ; and, Lastly, we do here
solemnly declare our belief that the best hope of
future reunion will be found in drawing each of us
for ourselves closer to our common Lord, in giving
ourselves to much prayer and intercession, in the
cultivation of a spirit of charity, and in seeking to
diffuse through every part of the Christian com
munity that desire and resolution to return to the
faith and discipline of the undivided Church which
was the principle of the English Reformation.
Resolution :
Notification of New Sees and BisJiops.
That it appears to us expedient, for the purpose
of maintaining brotherly intercommunion, that all
cases of establishment of new Sees, and appoint
ment of new Bishops, be notified to all Archbishops
and Metropolitans of the Home and Colonial Church
1 See i Eliz., c. i. xxxvi.
Programme for Conference of 1867. 39
of England and Ireland, the Primus of the Protestant
Episcopal Church in Scotland, and the Presiding
Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the
United States of America.
Resolution :
Letters Commendatory.
That, having regard to the conditions under which
intercommunion between Members of the Church
passing from one distant Diocese to another may be
duly maintained, we hereby deem it desirable
(1) That forms of Letters Commendatory on
behalf of clergymen visiting other Dioceses be drawn
up and agreed upon, and that no strange clergyman
should officiate in any Diocese without exhibiting
such Commendatory Letters to the Bishop thereof ;
(2) That a form of Letters Commendatory for
such Laymen as may desire to avail themselves of
them be in like manner prepared.
The Benediction.
SECOND DAY. Wednesday, September 25.
General Subject for the Day s Discussion.
COLONIAL CHURCHES.
Resolution :
Subordination to Metropolitans.
That it be a matter for the consideration of this-
Conference, and of the Bishops of the Colonial
Church especially
(1) Whether it be desirable that such Colonial
and Missionary Dioceses as have not as yet been
gathered into Provinces be formed into any Province;
and
(2) Whether any, and if so what, steps should be
taken.
4O Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
Resolution :
Discipline to be exercised by Metropolitans.
That, whereas schemes for conducting Ecclesias
tical Affairs and for the exercising of Discipline
have been embodied in the Letters Patent granted
by the Crown to the Metropolitans of Canada, India,
Australasia, New Zealand, and South Africa, it
appears to us to be desirable that the aforesaid
schemes so embodied in the Letters Patent be, for
the present, and until the local authorities, spiritual
and temporal, have otherwise provided, as much as
possible adhered to ; and that in all cases where the
power of coercive jurisdiction is not conveyed by
such Letters Patent it is desirable to provide by
voluntary agreement for the enforcement of discipline,
and that with a view to secure this end, all Bishops
at their Consecration, and clergymen of those
Dioceses at their ordination or institution to the cure
of souls, should be required to pledge themselves to
submit to the provisions of such schemes.
Resolution :
Court of Metropolitans.
That in the case of any charges being preferred
against a Suffragan Bishop of any Province, it appears
to us desirable that the Metropolitan thereof should
summon all the Bishops of his Province to sit with
him for the hearing of the case, and that he should
not proceed to the hearing of it without the aid and
concurrence of all the Bishops of his Province that
can be assembled.
The question of any charge being brought against
a Metropolitan should also be considered.
Resolution :
Question of Appeal.
That it be a matter for the consideration of this
Conference whether, in cases where no Letters
Programme for Conference of 1867. 41
Patent have been issued, any, and if any what,
Appeal should lie from such Provincial Decisions.
Resolution :
Conditions of Union.
That it be a matter for the consideration of this
Conference, in reference to Colonial Churches not
legally united to the United Churches of England
and Ireland, what safeguards as to their continued
soundness in Doctrine and Discipline be required by
the Mother Church as the condition of the main
tenance of full spiritual and ecclesiastical communion*
The Benediction.
THIRD DAY. Thursday, September 26th.
General Subject for the Day s Discussion.
CO-OPERATION IN MISSIONARY ACTION.
Resolution :
Notification of proposed Missionary Bishoprics.
That in case it should be proposed to found a
Missionary Bishopric by any of the branches of the
Church represented in this Conference, it seems to
us desirable
(1) That notification of such intention be sent to
all Archbishops and Metropolitans of the Home and
Colonial Church of England and Ireland, the Primus
of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Scotland, and
the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal
Church in the United States ; and
(2) That, so soon as any person is consecrated to
such Bishopric, the announcement of such Conse
cration be made to the same parties.
42 LambetJi Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
Resolution :
Subordination of Missionaries.
That, in the case of the establishment of any
Missionary Bishopric, and consecration of a Bishop
to the same, we deem it expedient that all Mission
aries should place themselves under the general
superintendence of such Missionary Bishop, subject
always to their obedience to such written instructions
as may be sent to them by those in authority at
home.
Concluding resolution :
That we desire to render our hearty thanks to
Almighty God for the blessings vouchsafed to us in
and by this Conference ; and we desire to express
our hope that this our Meeting may hereafter be
followed by other Meetings to be conducted in the
spirit of the same brotherly love.
The Closing Benediction.
No. IV. (See page 10.)
Opening Address delivered by the Archbishop of Can
terbury in the first Session of the first LambetJi,
Conference, September 24, 1867.
MY MOST REVEREND AND RIGHT REVEREND
BRETHREN,
In opening the proceedings of the first Conference
that has ever taken place of the Bishops of the
Reformed Church in visible communion with the
United Church of England and Ireland, my prevail
ing feeling is one of profound gratitude to our
Heavenly Father for having thus far prospered the
Archbishop s Opening Address, 1867. 45
efforts which have been made to promote this solemn
assembling of ourselves together. Many have been
the anxious thoughts and great the heart-searchings
which have attended the preparations for this remark
able manifestation of life and energy in the several
branches of our communion. Many also have been
the prayers, and fervent, I trust, will continue to be
the prayers, offered up by us, severally and collec
tively, that He will prosper our deliberations, to the
advancement of His glory and the good of His
Church. Having met together, as I truly believe
we have done, in a spirit of love to Christ, and to
all those who love Him, with an earnest desire to-
strengthen the bonds which unite the several
branches of our Reformed Church, to encourage
each other in our endeavours to maintain the faith
once delivered to the saints, and to advance the
kingdom of Christ upon earth, I will not doubt that
a blessing from above will rest upon our labours, and
that the guidance of the Holy Spirit, whose aid we
have invoked, will direct, sanctify, and govern our
counsels.
The origin of this Conference has already been
stated in the circular of invitation which I addressed
to you all. It was at the instance of the Metropoli
tan and the Bishops of the Church of Canada, sup
ported by the unanimous request of a very large
meeting of Archbishops and Bishops of the Home
and Colonial Church a request confirmed by ad
dresses from both the Houses of Convocation of my
Province of Canterbury that I resolved upon con
vening it. Further encouragement to venture upon
this unprecedented step was afforded when the peti
tion from the Canadian Church was first discussed, a
plain intimation being given by a distinguished
member of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the
United States of America, that it would be regarded
as a very graceful act, and would be hailed with
general satisfaction in that Church, if the invitation
44 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
to the Conference were extended to our Episcopalian
brethren in those States.
Fully conscious, however, of all the difficulties
which must surround the attempt to organise and
superintend an assembly of so novel a character, I
might well have hesitated to incur so great a risk ;
but to have refused to yield to wishes thus fully and
forcibly expressed, to have shrunk from undertaking
the consequent responsibility, would have been un
worthy of the position in which, by God s providence,
I am placed. In faith and prayer has the task been
undertaken, and I humbly trust it will please God to
prosper our work to a successful conclusion. The
result, indeed, has thus far more than justified the
expectations raised. We rejoice to find that so
many of our brethren from distant parts of the
globe have been moved to respond to the call, and
we welcome with feelings of cordial affection and
genuine sympathy the presence of so large a pro
portion of the American Episcopate. From very
many also, who, owing to various circumstances,
have been prevented from joining us, I have received
letters expressing the profound satisfaction and
thankfulness with which they regard the opportuni
ties afforded by this gathering for conferring to
gether upon topics of mutual interest ; for discussing
the peculiar difficulties and perplexities in which our
widely-scattered Colonial Churches are involved, and
the evils to which they are exposed ; for cementing
yet more firmly the bonds of Christian communion
between Churches acknowledging one Lord, one
faith, one baptism connected not only by the ties
of kindred, but by common formularies; and for
meeting, through their representatives, from the
most distant regions of the earth, to offer up united
prayers and praise to the Most High in the mother
tongue common to us all, and to partake together
of the Holy Communion of the Body and Blood of
our Saviour Christ.
Archbishop s Opening Address, 1867. 45
It has never been contemplated that we should
assume the functions of a General Synod of all the
Churches in full communion with the Church of
England, and take upon ourselves to enact canons that
should be binding upon those here represented. We
merely propose to discuss matters of practical inte
rest, and pronounce what we deem expedient in reso
lutions which may serve as safe guides to future
action. Thus it will be seen that our first essay is
rather tentative and experimental, in a matter in
which we have no distinct precedent to direct us.
The subjects which will be brought under your
consideration have already been laid before you in
the Prospectus of Arrangements for our proceedings.
They may be briefly comprised under the following
heads : (i) The best way of promoting the Re
union of Christendom. (2) The Notification of the
Establishment of New Sees. (3) Letters commen
datory from Clergymen and Laymen passing to
distant Dioceses. (4) Subordination in our Colonial
Church to Metropolitans. (5) Discipline to be exer
cised by Metropolitans. (6) Court of the Metro
politan. (7) Question of Appeal. (8) Conditions of
Union with the Church at home. (9) Notification
of proposed Missionary Bishoprics. (10) Subordina
tion of Missionaries. In the selection of topics
regard has been chiefly had to those which bear on
practical difficulties seeming to require solution. It
has been found impossible to meet all views, and
embrace every recommendation that has been sug
gested. Some may be of opinion that subjects have
been omitted which ought to have found a place
in our deliberations ; that we should have been
assembled with the view of defining the limits of
Theological Truth ; but it has been deemed far
better, on the first occasion of our meeting in such
form, rather to do too little than attempt too much,
and instead of dealing with propositions which can
lead to no efficient result, to confine ourselves to
46 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
matters admitting of a practical and beneficial
solution.
The unexpected position in which our Colonial
Churches have recently found themselves placed has
naturally created a great feeling of uneasiness in the
minds of many. I am fully persuaded that the
idea of any essential separation from the Mother
Church is universally repudiated by them ; they all
cling to her with the strongest filial affection, while
they are bound to her Doctrines and Form of
Worship by cogent motives of interest. At the
same time I have good reason to believe that there
are various shades of opinion as to the best modes
in which the connection between the daughter
Churches and their common mother can be main
tained ; and I trust that the interchange of thought
between those who are chiefly interested in those
important questions will lead to some profitable
conclusions. I may also state my belief that legis
lation on the subject of the Colonial Churches has
been postponed until the view taken by this Con
ference shall have been declared. These matters
have been regarded under various aspects in the
voluminous correspondence which I have ( had with
many of my Colonial brethren ; they will all, no
doubt, be fully developed in the course of our dis
cussion by those who represent these several
opinions. I trust that, under a deep sense of the
solemnity of the occasion on which we are
assembled, our discussions will be characterised by
mutual forbearance, if sentiments at variance with
our own shall be advanced, so that by the com
parison, rather than the conflict of opinions, we may
be drawn nearer to each other in brotherly harmony
and concord. With the arrangement that certain
subjects shall, after a brief consideration, be referred
to Committees, I believe that the various topics for
consideration may be profitably discussed.
Doubtless there is much in these latter days, even
Arckbishofs Opening Address, 1687. 47
as we have all been taught to expect, which is dark
and dispiriting to the mind that has not been exer
cised to discern the meaning of such signs. The
enemy is on every side, plying his insidious arts to
sap the foundations of belief, to hinder the cause of
God s Church, and prevent the Word of God from
doing its work in the conversion of the soul of
sinful man. No effort is spared to disparage the
authority of those who witness for the truth and
uphold the dogmatic teaching for which the Apos
tolic writings are at once the model and the warrant.
Though it be not our purpose to enter upon theo
logical discussion, yet our very presence here is a
witness to our resolution to maintain the faith,
which we hold in common as our priceless heritage,
set forth in our Liturgy and other formularies ; and
this our united celebration of offices common to our
respective Churches in each quarter of the globe is
a claim, in the face of the world, for the inde
pendence of separate Churches, as well as a protest
against the assumption by any Bishop of the Church
Catholic of dominion over his fellows in the Episco
pate.
Not one of us, I am persuaded, can fail to respond
to that earnest desire for unity which is expressed
in the introduction to our resolutions. It is but the
echo of the petition which the Saviour of the world
offered in behalf of His Church when He prayed
the Father that those who should believe in Him
might all be one in the Father and the Son. And
while we deplore the divided state of Christendom,
and mourn over the obstacles which at present exist
to our all being joined together in the unity of the
Spirit and in the bond of peace, this very feeling
should be our most powerful motive to urge our
petitions at the Throne of Grace, that it may please
God, in His own good time, to remove such hin
drances as at present render that union impracti
cable.
48 LambetJi Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
And now may our Almighty Father shed abroad
upon us the spirit of wisdom, peace, and love, and
inspire us with such counsels as may most tend to
edification ; so that, being knit together more closely
in the bonds of brotherly affection and Christian
communion, and animated with a more fervent zeal
for the Saviour s honour and the salvation of souls,
we may do our endeavour to prepare His Church
for the coming of Him whom we lovingly adore,
and whose advent in power and glory we ardently
took to and long for.
No. V. (See page 12.)
Amended Programme adopted during the Sessions.
SECOND DAY. Wednesday, September 25.
General Subject for the Day s Discussion.
COLONIAL CHURCHES.
Resolution I. :
Alteration of Order.
That His Grace the President of this meeting be
requested to allow the last Resolution headed
" Conditions of Union" to be first taken into consi
deration.
Resolution II. :
Conditions of Union.
(a). That in the opinion of this Conference,
" Unity in the Faith," and fellowship in the one
Body of Christ, will be best maintained among the
several branches of the Anglican Communion in the
manner already pointed out by the Convocation of
Amended Programme, Sept. 25, 1867. 49
-the Province of Canterbury : viz., by the due and
Canonical subordination of the Synods of the several
Branches to the higher authority of the Synods above
them, the Diocesan Synod being recognised as inferior
to the Provincial Synod, and the Provincial Synod to
some higher Synod or Synods of the Anglican
Communion.
Appointment of Committee.
(b). That a Committee of members (with
power to add to their number, and to obtain the
assistance of men learned in Ecclesiastical and Canon
Law) be appointed to inquire into and report upon
the whole subject ; and that such report be forwarded
to His Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury,
with a request that, if possible, it may be communi
cated to any adjourned meeting of this Conference.
Proposed Inquiry into Disunion in Natal.
(c}. That in the judgment of the Bishops now
assembled, the whole Anglican Communion is deeply
injured by the present condition of the Church in
Natal ; and that a Committee be now appointed at
this General Meeting to consider the whole case, and
inquire into all the proceedings which have been
taken therein ; and to report on the best mode by
which the Church may be delivered from the con
tinuance of this scandal, and the true faith main
tained. That such Report be forwarded to his Grace
the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, with a request
that, if possible, it may be communicated to any
adjourned meeting of the Conference ; and
Further, that his Grace be requested to transmit
the same to all the Bishops 1 of the Anglican Com
munion, and to ask for their judgment thereupon.
1 ? Convocations, Conventions, and Synods.
D
50 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
Resolution III.:
Question of Appeal,
That in the opinion of this Conference, it is very-
desirable that there should be a Board of Reference,
or a Spiritual Tribunal for final appeal and decision
in all matters of Faith ; including Representatives
from all Branches of the Anglo-Catholic Church ;
and the Bishops here assembled earnestly recommend
this most important matter to the deliberate con
sideration of the Convocations, Conventions, and
Synods of the said Anglo-Catholic Church.
Or, if Resolution II L should not be carried, tJien
Question of Appeal.
III. That in order to the maintenance of the
strictest union between the Mother-Church of Eng
land and her daughter Churches in the Colonies, it is
desirable that in questions of doctrine there should
be an appeal from the tribunals for the exercise of
Discipline in each Province to a spiritual tribunal in
England.
That such tribunal be presided over by the Primate
of all England (for the time being), and be composed
of Bishops only.
Appointment of Committee.
And
That a Committee be appointed to consider the
details of the Constitution of such tribunal, and that
their Report be forwarded to His Grace the Lord
Archbishop of Canterbury, with a request that, if
possible, it may be communicated to any adjourned
meeting of the Conference.
Circulation of Report.
And further, that his Grace be requested to trans
mit the same to the Convocations and Synods of all
Amended Programme, Sept. 25, 1867. 51
the Provinces of the United Church of England and
Ireland, and to all Bishops (if any) of the said
Church not included in any Ecclesiastical Province.
Election of Members of Tribunal.
That His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury be
requested to invite the several Provinces of the
Church to elect Bishops for the said Tribunal.
Resolution IV. :
This Meeting to befolloived by other Meetings.
That, in order to give effect to the above Resolu
tions, it is desirable that a General Synod of the
Bishops of the Anglican Communion, accompanied,
if it be thought fit, by other representatives from each
Diocese, should be assembled from time to time
under the Presidency of the Primate of all England.
Resolution V. :
Time of First Meeting, &c.
That His Grace the Lord Archbishop is hereby
requested to summon the First Meeting of such
Synod for the year 187 ; and that in the opinion of
this Conference the Primate of all England should
be authorised to summon any Special Synod within
that time, should the needs of the Church seem to
require it ; or should his Grace be requested to do
so by or more Bishops.
Conditions of Union.
Resolution VI. :
That, in order to the binding of the Churches of our
Colonial Empire and the Missionary Churches beyond
them in the closest union with the Mother-Church, it
D 2
52 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
is necessary that they receive and maintain without
alteration the standards of Faith and Doctrine, as they
are in use in that Church. That nevertheless each
Province should have the right to make such adapta
tions and additions to the services of the Church as its
peculiar circumstances may require.
Provided, That no change or addition be made
inconsistent with the spirit and principles of the Book
of Common Prayer, and that all such changes be
liable to revision by any Synod of the Anglican
Communion in which the said Province shall be
represented.
Resolution VII. :
Court of Metropolitans.
That in case of charges being brought against a
Suffragan Bishop of any Province it appears to be
desirable that the Metropolitan thereof should
summon all the Bishops of his Province to sit with
him for the hearing of the case, and that he should
not proceed to the hearing of it without the aid of all
the Bishops of the Province that can be assembled,
-who shall sit with him as judges.
That the question of any charge brought against a
Metropolitan be referred to the Committee appointed
by Resolution III.
Resolution VIII. :
Scheme for conducting Election of Bishops, when not
otherwise provided for.
That it is the opinion of this Conference that the
election of a Bishop of any Colonial Diocese should
be made by the Synod of the Diocese convened for
that purpose, with liberty to delegate this power to
others. But that no such election should be deemed
canonically valid until it shall have been confirmed
by the Bishops of the Province.
Address to the Faithful, 1867. 53
That the rules for the regulation of such elections
be made by the Synods of the several Provinces.
Resolution IX. :
Declaration of Submission to Regulations of Synods.
That all Bishops at their Consecration should be
required to make a written Declaration of adhesion
and submission to the regulations agreed upon by the
General Synod of the Anglican Communion ; and
that a form of such Declaration be prepared by the
Committee appointed by Resolution III.
No. VI. (See page 13.)
Formal Address to the Faithful from the Bishops
attending the Conference of 1867.
To the Faithful in Christ Jesus, the Priests and
Deacons, and the Lay Members of the Church
of Christ in Communion with the Anglican
Branch of the Church Catholic,
We the undersigned Bishops, gathered under the
good providence of God for prayer and conference
at Lambeth, pray for you that ye may obtain grace,
mercy, and peace from God our Father, and from
the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.
We give thanks to God, brethren beloved, for the
faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love towards
the saints, which hath abounded amongst you ; and
for the knowlege of Christ which through you hath
been spread abroad amongst the most vigorous races
of the earth ; and with one mouth we make our
supplications to God, even the Father, that by the
power of the Holy Ghost He would strengthen us
with His might, to amend amongst us the things
54 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
which are amiss, to supply the things which are
lacking, and to reach forth unto higher measures of
love and zeal in worshipping Him, and in making
known His name ; and we pray that in His good
time He would give back unto His whole Church
the Blessed gift of Unity in Truth.
And now we exhort you in love that ye keep
whole and undefiled the faith once delivered to the
saints, as ye have received it of the Lord Jesus.
We entreat you to watch and pray, and to strive
heartily with us against the frauds and subtleties
wherewith the faith hath been aforetime and is now
assailed.
We beseech you to hold fast, as the sure word
of God, all the canonical Scriptures of the Old and
New Testament; and that by diligent study of
these oracles of God, praying in the Holy Ghost,
ye seek to know more of the Lord Jesus Christ our
Saviour, very God and very Man, ever to be adored
and worshipped, whom they reveal unto us, and of
the will of God, which they declare.
Furthermore, we entreat you to guard yourselves
and yours against the growing superstitions and
additions with which in these latter days the truth
of God hath been overlaid ; as otherwise, so espe
cially by the pretension to universal sovereignty over
God s heritage asserted for the See of Rome, and by
the practical exaltation of the Blessed Virgin Mary
as mediator in the place of her Divine Son, and by
the addressing of prayers to her as intercessor be
tween God and man. Of such beware, we beseech
you, knowing that the jealous God giveth not His
honour to another.
Build yourselves up, therefore, beloved, in your
most holy faith ; grow in grace and in the know
ledge and love of Jesus Christ our Lord. Show
forth before all men by your faith, self-denial, purity,
and godly conversation, as well as by your labours
for the people amongst whom God hath so widely
Address to tlte Faithful, 1867. 55
spread you, and by the setting forth of His Gospel
to the unbelievers and the heathen, that ye are
indeed the servants of Him who died for us to
reconcile His Father to us, and to be a sacrifice for
the sins of the whole world.
Brethren beloved, with one voice we warn you :
the time is short ; the Lord cometh ; watch and
be sober. Abide stedfast in the Communion of
Saints, wherein God hath granted you a place. Seek
in faith for oneness with Christ in the blessed Sacra
ment of His body and blood. Hold fast the Creeds
and the pure worship and order, which of God s
grace ye have inherited from the Primitive Church.
Beware of causing divisions contrary to the doctrine
ye have received. Pray and seek for unity amongst
yourselves, and amongst all the faithful in Christ
Jesus ! and the good Lord make you perfect, and
keep your bodies, souls, and spirits, until the coming
of the Lord Jesus Christ.
(Signed]
C. T. Cantuar. Thomas B. Morrell, Coadjutor
M. G. Armagh. Bishop of Edinburgh.
R. C. Dublin.
A. C. London. F. Montreal, Metropolitan of
C. R. Winton. Canada.
C. St. David s. G. A. New Zealand, Metro-
J. Lichfield. politan of New Zealand.
S. Oxon. R. Capetown, Metropolitan of
Thomas Vowler St. Asaph. South Africa.
A. Llandaff. Aubrey G. Jamaica.
John Lincoln. T. Barbados.
W. K. Sarum. J. Bombay.
John T. Norwich. H. Nova Scotia.
J. C. Bangor. F. T. Labuan.
H. Worcester. H. Grahamstown.
Charles Wordsworth, D.C.L., H. J. C. Christchurch.
Bishop of St. Andrew s, Dun- Mathew Perth.
keld, and Dumblane. Benj. Huron.
Thos. G. Suther, Bishop of W. W. Antigua.
Aberdeen and Orkney. E. H. Sierra Leone.
William S. Wilson, Bishop of T. N. Honolulu.
Glasgow and Galloway. J. T. Ontario.
56 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
J. W. Quebec.
W. J. Gibraltar.
H. L. Dunedin.
Edward, Bishop Orange River
Free State.
A. N. Niagara.
William George Tozer, Mis
sionary Bishop.
James B. Kelly, Coadjutor of
Newfoundland.
S. Angl. Hierosol.
John H. Hopkins, Presiding
Bishop of Pr. Ep. Church,
in the United States.
Chas. P. Mcllvaine, Bishop of
Ohio.
G. J. Gloucester and Bristol.
E. H. Ely.
William Chester.
T. L. Rochester.
Horace Sodor and Mann.
Samuel Meath.
H. Kilmore.
Charles Limerick Ardfert and
Aghadoe.
Robert Eden, D.D., Bishop of
Moray, Ross, and Caithness,
Primus.
Alexander Ewing, Bishop of
Argyll and the Isles.
Man ton Eastburn, Bishop of
Massachusetts.
J. Payne, Bishop of Cape
Palmas and parts adjacent.
H. J. Whitehouse, Bishop of
Illinois.
Thomas Atkinson, Bishop of
North Carolina.
Henry W. Lee, Bishop of
Iowa.
Horatio Potter, Bishop of New
York.
Thomas M. Clark, Bishop of
Rhode Island.
Alexander Gregg, Bishop of
Texas.
W. H. Odenheimer, Bishop of
New Jersey.
G. T. Bedell, Assistant Bishop
of Ohio.
Henry C. Lay, Missionary
Bishop of Arkansas and the
Indian Territory.
Jos. C.Talbot, Assistant Bishop
of Indiana.
Richard H. Wilmer, Bishop of
Alabama.
Charles Todd Quintard, Bishop
of Tennessee.
John B. Kerfoot, Bishop of
Pittsburgh.
J. P. B. Wilmer, Bishop of
Louisiana.
C. M. Williams, Missionary
Bishop to China.
J. Chapman, Bishop.
George Smith, late Bishop of
Victoria (China).
David Anderson, late Bishop
of Rupert s Land.
Edmund Hobhouse, by Bishop
of New Zealand.
57
No. VII. (See page 28.)
LATIN AND GREEK VERSIONS OF THE ADDRESS.
Archdeacon Wordsworth, afterwards Bishop of
Lincoln, translated the Episcopal Address into Latin
and Greek, asfollcnvs :
EPISTOLA ENCYCLICA.
EPISCOPORUM IN ANGLIA CONGREGATORUM DIEBUS
XXIV. XXVII MENSIS SEPTEMBRIS, ANNO SALUTIS
MDCCCLXVII.
Fidelibus in Christo Jesu, Presbyteris, Diaconis, et
Laicis, cum Anglicand parte Ecclesice Catholiccs com-
municantibus, salutem in Domino.
Nos, qui subscripsimus, Episcopi, benigna Dei
providentia communium orationum et consiliorum
causd unanimiter consociati, in Palatio Archiepiscopi
Cantuariensis Lambethano, obsecrationes pro vobis
facimus, ut gratiam, misericordiam et pacem con-
sequamini a Deo Patre Nostro, et a Nostro Salvatore
Domino Jesu Christo.
Gratias Deo agimus, fratres carissimi, propter fidem
in Domino Jesu Christo, et in sanctos dilectionem r
quae abundavit in vobis ; et propter Christi agnitionem,
quae per vos inter valentissimas orbis universi nationes
dimanavit ; et uno ore supplicationes offerimus Deo
et Patri, ut potentia Spiritus Sancti virtute Sua nos
confortet, ut, quae sint apud nos depravata, emendare,
et, quae desint, supplere valeamus ; et ut nosmet ipsos
ad sublimiores dilectionis et zeli mensuras erigamus
in Illo adorando, et in Nomine Ejus declarando ;
et enixe Eum apprecamur, ut, beneplacito Ipsius
tempore, universae Suae Ecclesiae beatum restituat
donum Unitatis in Veritate.
58 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
Jam vero, fratres dilecti, vos in caritate cohortamur,
ut fidem semel sanctis traditam integram atque
illibatam conservetis, quemadmodum earn accepistis
-a Jesu Christo Domino Nostro. Obsecramus vos,
vigilate, orate, et nobiscum toto corde certate contra
fallacias atque argutias, quibus jampridem et in hoc
ipso tempore fides impugnatur.
Obtestamur vos, constanter tenete, utpote firmum
Dei Verbum, omnes Canonicas Scripturas Veteris et
Novi Testament! ; et diligenti meditatione scrutantes
haec Dei Oracula, orantes in Spiritu Sancto, quaeratis
abundantius cognoscere Dominum Jesum Christum,
Verum Deum et Verum Hominem, semper colendum
atque adorandum, Quern nobis ilia revelant, et
Voluntatem Dei in eis patefactam.
Insuper vos obsecramus, vosmet ipsos et vestros
custodite contra indies gliscentes superstitiones
atque additamenta quibus in hisce novissimis tem-
poribus Veritas Dei incrustatur ; quum in aliis, turn
praecipue per universi principals affectationem
<lominantis in clero Dei, qui Romanes sedi a nonnullis
asseritur ; et per exaltationem, re ipsa manifestam,
Beatae Virginis Mariae in locum Mediatoris, vice Filii
ipsius Divini, et per orationes ei oblatas tanquam
inter Deum et homines Interpellatoris munere
fungenti. Cavete a talibus, vos obtestamur, probe
scientes honorem Suum Ipsius non alii dare Deum
zelotem.
Superaedificamini, igitur, fratres carissimi, sanc-
tissimae fidei vestrae ; crescite in gratia et in agnitione
t dilectione Jesu Christi Domini Nostri. Manifestum
facite omnibus, per fidem, abstinentiam, puritatem et
sanctum conversationem, et per vestros labores pro
populis inter quos Deus vos tarn late propagavit, et
per Evangelii praedicationem incredulis atque ethnicis,
vos revera esse servos Illius Qui mortuus est pro
nobis ut Patrem nobis reconciliaret, et ut pro peccatis
totius mundi sacrificium Semet Ipsum offerret.
Fratres dilecti, una voce vos admonemus. Tempus
Greek Version of "Letter" of 1867. 59
breve est. Dominus venit. Vigilate, sobrii estote.
State firmi in communione sanctorum in qua vobis
Deus locum concessit Studete fide coadunari
Christo in sanctissimo Corporis Ejus et Sanguinis
Sacramento. Firma tenete Symbola, et purum ilium
Cultum atque Ordinem, quem gratia Dei a primitivd
Ecclesia haereditarium vos possidetis. Cavete ne dis-
cessiones faciatis praeter doctrinam quam accepistis.
Orate et sectamini Unitatem invicem et inter omnes
fideles in Jesu Christo. Et Dominus misericors
perficiat vos, et conservet integrum corpus, animam
et spiritum vestrum in Adventum Domini Nostri
Jesu Christi. Amen.
C. T. Cantuar. Archiepiscopus, et Metropolitanus,
et totius Angliae Primas.
M. G. Armagh. Archiepiscopus, et Metropolitanus,
et totius Hibernise Primas.
R. C. Dublin. Archiepiscopus, et Metropolitanus,
et Hiberniae Primas.
A. C. London. Episcopus.
Robert Eden, Moray, Ross, Caithness. Episcopus,
et Scoticae Ecclesiae Primas, &c &c.
EIIISTOAH.
* EirifrKoiruv iv AyyAia (rwrjOpoKrfJ.evtav, Iv ^/xe/aai s 24 27
lOU, Tl 1867.
TTta-Tois eV XpicrroS Iijuov, II peafivTepois,
/ecu Xatot9 rfj<f rov Xpccrrov EfCK\r)(ria<;,
TOV AyyXitcov /itepov? TT}? Ka6o\iKf)<; EKK\ij(ria<;,
eV Kvpip.
HyLtet? ol inroypd-^ravTes EnlcrKOTroi, rfj ajadfj rov
Seov TTpovoia ofiodvpaSov eVto-f^Y/iei/ot, KOCVWV Trpoa-ev-
ve/ea KOL <ru/i/SoyXeycre&)9, ev ra> TTJS Kavrovapia?
raXarta) AafJifirjQavq), &e6/J,eda v7Tp
iva Xa/S^re %apiv, e\eo?, teal etpjjvijv airo Oeov
60 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
ITar/Jo?, Kal TOV Kvpiov r)/Jia)V KOI Ha)Tr)po$
XpicrTov.
pto Tov/jiev TOO @ew, dSe\(f>ol dyaTnjTo}, vTrep TT}?
vuwv ev Kvpla> rjUMv Irjcrov Xpiar^, Kal vTrep rrjs
et9 roi 9 drytovs, 77x49 eTrepiacrevcrev ev V/JLIV, Kal
VTrep T>79 Xpicrrov eTTiyvoacrea)?, r) Si V/AWV e^^rai, ev rot?
dvSpeiordrois T?}? oiKOvpevrjs edvecriv Kal evl crro/uLan
Se^cret? Troiovfj.eda 7rpo<? TOV Qeov Kal Ilarepa, tva rfj
TOV Aytov Hvevfj>aTos Swd/juei, a-devwa-r) ?7/ia? TTJ Icr^vi,
AVTOV, e/9 TO eTravopOwcrai TO, TrapaTTiTTTOVTa, Kal TO.
\i7TOVTa dvaTrXypwaat, Kal eTreKTelvecrOat et9 v-^rrjXoTepa
perpa Kal %tj\ov ev TU> XaTpeveiv avTw, Kal ev ra>
cv TO ovo/j,a avTov Kal Trpoaev^p/jLeda iva ev rcS
ai>TOV Kaipw a-TroScS Trj o\r) AVTOV KK\r)o-i,a TO-
iGTov ^dpicrf^a T?}9 evoTif]To^ ev Trj aXyOelq.
Kal vvv, dSe\(J3ol, irapaKa\ovfJ,ev u/aa9 ev djaTrrj, tva
TripffTe 6\OK\r)pov Kal d$id<j)6opov TTJV aTraj; 7rapaSodelo~av
TOt9 a7/Ot9 TTLCTTiV, Ka6a>S aVTrjV 7Tapl\,1j(f)aT aTTO TOV
Kvpiov Iijcrov. ^EpwTM^ev u/xa9 iva i ypij r yoprJT Kal
Trpoaev^TjaBe, Kal dywvityjo-de evKapo ta)*} fi0 y r)/j,wv KOTO.
TWV Travovpviwv Kal fteOoSeiwv, &i (ov 77 TTICT^ TO Trplv
Kal ev TO) vvv irapovrt, xpovw TropOeiTai.
IJapaKa\ov/J,ev v/j,ds iva acr<^)aXw9 KpaTrJTe, a>9 /3ef3aiov
Oeov \6yov, 7racra9 ra9 KavoviKas rypatyas TTJS TIa\aia<s
Kal r>79 Kaivris Aiadr)Kr)<t, Kal iva, cnrov$aio)<$ epevvwvTes
TavTa ra \6<yia TOV eov, %r)TfjTe TrepicrcroTepais <yv<ovai
TOV Kvpiov Kal 2o)Tr)pa Iijaovv Xpi<TTov t eov d\r)0ivbv
xal dv0pa>7rov d^Oivbv, o5 TrdvTOTe irpoaKvvelv Sei Kal
\aTpeveiv, ov al <ypa<f>al rjpJiv dvaKaXinrTOvcriv, Kal TO-
6e\r)fj,a TOV Seov, TO ev avTals <f>avepovu,evov.
"Aua Be vfjiiv, d8e\<fiol, 8ia/j,apTvp6ue0a,
eavTOV<? Kal rov9 vyu.erepou9 CLTTO TUIV del a
Kal eiri/SX rjX rj/jidTwv, Si o>v 17 roi) eov
a\X&&gt;9 re Kal /j,d\io~Ta Sid
oiKovfjieviKf)*;, KaTaKvpievovcrr}^ TOV K\r)pov TOV eov, 779
af-totmu Trapd TIO-IV 77 Ptoaij^ KaOeSpa ert Se Sid TT}?
evepyov vrrepdpaews T7}9 fAaKapias flapBevov Mapi as et9~
TOTTOV MeffiTov, dvTl TOV Tiov avTr)<f avTodeov, Kal Sia.
Greek Version of " Letter" of 1867. 61
7rpocrein<wi> avr TrpocrpOfAevcav o>?
dv6p(t)7ra)V Trapa @eq). Upoae^eTe euro TOLOVTWV,
ort TTJV Tifj,rjv eavTOv ov^ erepw Stc coo iv 6 77X0)-
de ovv, aycnrijTol, eVt rfj ayiwrdrr] vfjL&v
* av^dvea-de ev ^dptrt, /cal yvtacrei icai dydirrj rov
Kvpiov THLWV J^croO Xpta-rov. KaraBet^are evoi>7riov
, Bta rijs Triareax;, avraTrapvijaew^, dyveias, tcai
O? dvacrTpoffis, afia Se Sia TWV vfieTepwv KOTTWV
WV \awv ev ol? 6 @eo? t/ia9 els TOCTOVTOV ei)po9
SiaTT(f)VTevK, Kal Sia Tov Kr)pvy/j,aTO<$ rov evayyeXiov
rot9 a7ri<7TOi9 ical rot9 eOvecrw, ore ro3 ovn ecrre
^E/cetvov, 69 CLTriQavev vTrep ^fj-cov, iva Kara\\dj;ij
TOV Ilarepa, Kal iva dvcriav Eavrbv dveveyKrj vTrep
o\ov TOV Kocrpov.
\(f)ol dyaTrrjTol, fiia. (f)(avfj
trui/eo-TaX/iei/09 6 Kvpios
^r^/cere eBpalot, ev Trj xoivcovia TWV dyia>v, ev
y @eo9 vplv /J.epio a /ce^aptcrraf ^retre eV Trto-ret
evovcrBai ra> Xpicrrc3 ey rcS evXoyrjfjLeva) fjLvo-Trjpiy TOV
<rc6/LtaT09 Avrov Kal at/iaro9. Kare^ere crrepe&)9 T
2vu/3o\a, Kal Trjv Kadapav dprfa-Keiav Kal Tatv, TJV
Xapiri &eov KeK\r]povofjt,r)KaTe OTTO r^9 dp^jdev eKK\r}-
<ria<s. BXerrere /i^ 8t^;ocrTacria9 Trot^re /cara r^9
StSa^s ^y efidOeTe. JSpcorare /cai Siw/cere eVor^ra eV
eairrot9, A^at e^ Traat rot9 7rtcrTot9 ey Xptcrroj J^croi) /tat
o ^p77crro9 Kvpios reXetcoirai v/xa9, /cat Typrfcrai v^Siv TO
<7<w/z.a, T^y tyvxrjv, Kal TO Tfvev^a, et9 rr/y Trapovcriav TOV
Kvpiov ) Ir)o~ov.
C. T. CANTUAR. dp^ieiri cr/coTros, cai fj.r)TpO7ro\iTT)<i,
Kal Trpwros 0X175 T^S AyyXta?-
M. G. ARMAGH. dp^ieTricr/coTro?, cat
KCU Trpwros oX?;s r^s lySepvtas.
R. C. DUBLIN. dp^U7ricr*co7ros, ^ai
Kat TrpoiTOS If3fpvia<;.
A. C. LONDON. eTrur/coTro?.
C. K. "WlNTON. 7Tt(rK07ros.
K.T.X.
62 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
No. VIII. (Seepage 13.)
Tlie Formal Resolutions of the Conference of
Sept. 24-27, 1867.
INTRODUCTION.
" We, Bishops of Christ s Holy Catholic Church
in visible Communion with the United Church of
England and Ireland, professing the Faith delivered
to us in Holy Scripture, maintained by the Primitive
Church and by the Fathers of the English Reforma
tion, now assembled, by the good providence of God,
at the Archiepiscopal Palace of Lambeth, under
the presidency of the Primate of all England, desire
First, to give hearty thanks to Almighty God
for having thus brought us together for common
counsels and united worship ; Secondly, we desire to
express the deep sorrow with which we view the
divided condition of the flock of Christ throughout
the world, ardently longing for the fulfilment of the
prayer of our Lord, That all may be one, as Thou,
Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may
be one in us, that the world may believe that Thou
hast sent Me ; and, Lastly, we do here solemnly
record our conviction that unity will be most effec
tually promoted by maintaining the Faith in its
purity and integrity as taught in the Holy Scrip
tures, held by the Primitive Church, summed up in
the Creeds, and affirmed by the undisputed General
Councils, and by drawing each of us closer to our
common Lord, by giving ourselves to much prayer
and intercession, by the cultivation of a spirit of
charity, and a love of the Lord s appearing."
Resolution I. " That it appears to us expedient,
for the purpose of maintaining brotherly intercom
munion, that all cases of establishment of new Sees,
and appointment of new Bishops, be notified to all
Formal Resolutions of Sept., 1867. 63
Archbishops and Metropolitans, and all presiding
Bishops of the Anglican Communion."
Resolution II. " That, having regard to the con
ditions under which intercommunion between mem
bers of the Church passing from one distant Diocese
to another may be duly maintained, we hereby
declare it desirable,
"(i) That forms of Letters Commendatory on
behalf of Clergymen visiting other Dioceses be drawn
up and agreed upon ;
u (2) That a form of Letters Commendatory for lay
members of the Church be in like manner prepared ;
" (3) That his Grace the Lord Archbishop of
Canterbury be pleased to undertake the preparation
of such forms."
Resolution III. " That a Committee be appointed
to draw up a Pastoral Address to all members of the
Church of Christ in communion with the Anglican
Branch of the Church Catholic, to be agreed upon
by the assembled Bishops, and to be published as
soon as possible after the last sitting of the Con
ference."
Resolution IV. " That, in the opinion of this
Conference, Unity in Faith and Discipline will be
best maintained among the several branches of
the Anglican Communion by due and canonical sub
ordination of the Synods of the several branches to
the higher authority of a Synod or Synods above
them."
Resolution V. "That a Committee of seven
members (with power to add to their number, and
to obtain the assistance of men learned in Eccle
siastical and Canon Law) be appointed to inquire
into and report upon the subject of the relations and
functions of such Synods, and that such Report be
forwarded to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of
Canterbury, with a request that, if possible, it may
be communicated to any adjourned meeting of this
Conference."
64 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
Resolution VI. " That, in the judgment of the
Bishops now assembled, the whole Anglican Com
munion is deeply injured by the present condition
of the Church in Natal ; and that a Committee be
now appointed at this General Meeting to report
on the best mode by which the Church may be
delivered from the continuance of this scandal, and
the true faith maintained. That such Report be
forwarded to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of
Canterbury, with the request that he will be pleased
to transmit the same to all the Bishops of the
Anglican Communion, and to ask for their judgment
thereupon."
Resolution VII. " That we who are here present
do acquiesce in the Resolution of the Convocation
of Canterbury, passed on June 29, 1866, relating to
the Diocese of Natal, to wit
" If it be decided that a new Bishop should be
consecrated, As to the proper steps to be taken
by the members of the Church in the province of
Natal for obtaining a new Bishop, it is the opinion
of this House, first, that a formal instrument, de
claratory of the doctrine and discipline of the Church
of South Africa should be prepared, which every
Bishop, Priest, and Deacon to be appointed to office
should be required to subscribe ; secondly, that a
godly and well-learned man should be chosen by
the clergy, with the assent of the lay-communicants
of the Church ; and, thirdly, that he should be pre
sented for consecration, either to the Archbishop of
Canterbury, if the aforesaid instrument should de
clare the doctrine and discipline of Christ as received
by the United Church of England and Ireland, or
to the Bishops of the Church of South Africa, accord
ing as hereafter may be judged to be most advisable
and convenient. "
Resolution VIII. " That, in order to the binding
o. he Churches of our Colonial Empire and the
Missionary Churches beyond them in the closest
Formal Resolutions of September, 1867. 65
union with the Mother-Church, it is necessary that
they receive and maintain without alteration the
standards of Faith and Doctrine as now in use in
that Church. That, nevertheless, each Province
should have the right to make such adaptations and
additions to the services of the Church as its peculiar
circumstances may require. Provided, that no change
or addition be made inconsistent with the spirit and
principles of the Book of Common Prayer, and that
all such changes be liable to revision by any Synod
of the Anglican Communion in which the said
Province shall be represented."
Resolution IX. "That the Committee appointed
by Resolution V., with the addition of the names of
the Bishops of London, St. David s, and Oxford, and
all the Colonial Bishops, be instructed to consider
the constitution of a voluntary spiritual tribunal, to
which questions of doctrine may be carried by appeal
from the tribunals for the exercise of discipline in
each Province of the Colonial Church, and that their
report be forwarded to his Grace the Lord Arch
bishop of Canterbury, who is requested to communi
cate it to an adjourned meeting of this Conference."
Resolution X. " That the resolutions submitted
to this Conference relative to the discipline to be
exercised by Metropolitans, the Court of Metropo
litans, the scheme for conducting the Election of
Bishops, when not otherwise provided for, the decla
ration of submission to the Regulation of Synods,
and the question of what Legislation should be pro
posed for the Colonial Churches, be referred to the
Committee specified in the preceding Resolution."
Resolution XI. " That a special committee be
appointed to consider the Resolutions relative to the
notification of proposed Missionary Bishoprics, and
the Subordination of Missionaries."
Resolution XII. " That the question of the bounds
of the jurisdiction of different Bishops, when any
question may have arisen in regard to them, the
E
66 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 an d 1878.
question as to the obedience of Chaplains of the
United Church of England and Ireland on the Con
tinent, and the Resolution submitted to the Confer
ence relative to their return and admission into
Home Dioceses, be referred to the Committee spe
cified in the preceding Resolution."
Resolution XIII. " That we desire to render our
hearty thanks to Almighty God for the blessings
vouchsafed to us in and by this Conference ; and we
desire to express our hope that this our meeting may
hereafter be followed by other meetings to be con
ducted in the same spirit of brotherly love."
No. IX. (See page 14.)
Correspondence with the Dean of Westminster respect
ing the use of Westminster Abbey in connection
with the Conference of 1 867.
i. The Dean of Westminster to the Archbishop of
Canterbury.
DEANERY, WESTMINSTER,
September 21, 1867.
MY DEAR LORD ARCHBISHOP,
I have been honoured with a communication from
your Grace, through the Bishop of London, request
ing the use of Westminster Abbey for a special
service to be held for the English, American, and
Scottish Bishops now assembled in England, to be
held, as I understood, on September 28.
On all occasions it is my earnest desire to render
the Abbey and the precincts of Westminster available
for purposes of general utility and edification, and
this desire is increased when the request comes from
your Grace.
You will kindly allow me to state the difficulty
Correspondence with Dean Stanley. 67
which I feel in the present instance. I have endea
voured to act in such matters on the rule of granting
the use of the Abbey to such purposes, and such
only, as are either co-extensive with the Church of
England, or have a definite object of usefulness or
charity, apart from party or polemical considerations.
Your Grace will, I am sure, see that, however
much your Grace s intentions would have brought
the proposed Conference at Lambeth within this
sphere, in fact, it can hardly be so considered. The
absence of the Primate and the larger part of the
Bishops of the Northern Province not to speak of
the Bishops of India and Australia, and of other
important Colonial or Missionary Sees must, even
irrespectively of other indications, cause it to present a
partial aspect of the English Church ; whilst the
appearance of other prelates not belonging to our
Church, places it on a different footing from the
institutions which are confined to the Church of
England. And, further, the absence of any fixed
information as to the objects to be discussed and
promoted by the Conference, leaves me, in common
with all who stand outside, in uncertainty as to what
would be the proposals or measures which would
receive, by implication, the sanction given by the
use of the Abbey a sanction which, in the case of a
church so venerable and national in its character,
ought, I conceive, to be lent only to public objects of
well-defined or acknowledged beneficence.
These are the grounds why I hesitate to take upon
myself the responsibility suggested. But, when
stating this difficulty, I feel so strongly the value of
the friendly intercourse to promote which has been
the chief intention of your Grace, and of, I doubt
not, many of the prelates who have concurred in
this Conference ; and I am so desirous that the
Abbey should be made to minister to the edification
of large sections of our Church, even when not re
presenting the whole, and of those outside our
E 2
68 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
own immediate pale (especially our brethren from
America), who are willing to co-operate with us in
all things lawful and good that I would gladly, if
possible, join in advancing such a purpose.
It has occurred to me, that, as the service indicated
by your Grace is to be held after the Conference is
finished, the Abbey might be granted for it, without
any relation to the Conference itself ; but either for
some specific object, such as the Society for the
Propagation of the Gospel, or for other Home or
Foreign Missions of unquestioned importance, or
else (in those general terms which, as I apprehend,
express your Grace s wishes) for the promotion of
brotherly goodwill and mutual edification amongst
all members of the Anglican Communion.
Under these circumstances, and on this under
standing, which I should wish to be made as public
as the announcement of the service itself, I should
have great pleasure in the permitting the use of the
Abbey for such a service, to be held in the morning
or afternoon of September 28th (as may be deemed
most convenient), and I trust that, if this meets your
Grace s wishes, your Grace will undertake to preach
on the occasion.
I beg to remain, my dear Lord Archbishop,
Yours faithfully and respectfully,
A. P. STANLEY.
2. The ArchbisJiop of Canterbury to the Dean of
Westminster.
ADDINGTON PARK, CROYDON,
September 25, 1867.
MY DEAR DEAN,
I laid your note before the Conference yesterday,
but it will probably not close its sittings on Friday
evening, as there is reason to believe that committees
Correspondence with Dean Stanley. 69
will be appointed to report at a future date. Under
these circumstances, it is obvious, from the tenor of
your letter, that the Abbey is not open to us. I
regret, therefore, that we shall not be able to avail
ourselves of your kind offer, under the specified
conditions.
Believe me, my dear Dean,
Yours very truly,
C. T. CANTUAR.
3. TJie Dean of Westminster to the Archbishop of
Canterbury.
DEANERY, WESTMINSTER,
September 27, 1867.
MY DEAR LORD ARCHBISHOP,
I have to acknowledge, with thanks, your Grace s
letter of the 25th, and to express my regret that
your Grace and the Bishops assembled should have
felt themselves precluded from accepting my proposal
in reply to your Grace s request to meet in the
Abbey for " some specific object of charity or useful
ness," or for the purpose of promoting brotherly
goodwill and mutual edification amongst all members
of the Anglican Communion.
I beg, however, that you will assure the prelates
assembled, especially those of our American brethren,
for whose sake, as I stated in my former letter, I
especially proposed to grant the use of the Abbey as
before mentioned ; that if they, or any of them
should wish to attend the services in the Abbey on
Sunday next (at 10 a.m. or at 3 p.m.) every accom
modation and welcome shall be afforded.
I beg to remain, my dear Lord Archbishop,
Yours faithfully and respectfully,
A. P. STANLEY.
7O LambetJi Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
4. The Dean of Westminster to the Bishop of Vermont,
Presiding BisJiop of the A merican Church.
DEANERY, WESTMINSTER,
October i, 1867.
MY DEAR LORD BISHOP,
Understanding that there has been some mis
apprehension on the part of the American bishops
as to their invitation to a service in Westminster
Abbey, I beg that you will do me the favour of
communicating the following statement, in as public
a way as you may think fit, to your Episcopal
brethren.
It was impossible for me, as guardian of a building
like the Abbey, which belongs to the whole Church
and people of England, to take the responsibility of
giving its sanction to a meeting which included only
a portion of the English bishops, and of which the
objects were undefined, the issues unknown, and the
discussions secret But I was so anxious to show
every courtesy to the bishops from the United
States, that, chiefly on their own account, as I par
ticularly specified in my letter to the Archbishop of
Canterbury, I so far deviated from the usual rules
which guide the services in the Abbey as to propose
the use of the Abbey for a service which should
gather them there, either for some specific object of
usefulness or charity or for the general promotion of
goodwill and edification amongst all members of the
Anglican Communion. I was encouraged the more
to make this offer by the pledge that I had received
that no questions exciting party differences should
be introduced into the meetings, and I was therefore
in hopes that his Grace would have felt himself able
to accept a proposal which I had reason to believe
would be gratifying to our American brethren.
The proposal was, however, declined ; and I must
therefore, through you, beg to express my regret that
such an opportunity was lost of cultivating those
Correspondence with Dean Stanley. 71
feelings of amity between the two countries which
are at all times so welcome.
The circumstances of the severe domestic affliction
which has recently befallen us, whilst they prevented
me from showing that hospitality which I should
otherwise have offered to you, make me doubly
anxious that, in a country from which we have
received expressions of such sincere sympathy, there
should be no misunderstanding as to the cordial
desire that I entertain to welcome Americans on all
occasions to our joint national sanctuary.
I trust that on some future occasion I may take
the opportunity of renewing personally my assurance
of the pleasure which it will ever give me to receive
the citizens of a nation in which we must always feel
peculiar interest.
I beg to remain,
Yours faithfully,
A. P. STANLEY.
Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
No. X. (See page 1 5.)
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES APPOINTED
BY THE CONFERENCE OF 1867.
A. Report of the Committee appointed under Re
solution V., by the Conference of Bishops of the
Anglican Communion, held at Lambeth Palace,
September 24-2; th, 1867.
The subject of the functions and relations of the
several Synods, on which the Committee is appointed
to report, appears to them to be necessarily connected
with questions as to the constitution of these bodies.
The following Report, therefore, embraces the whole
subject of Synods. In discussing it, your Committee
deems it necessary to deal with the question in the
abstract, without reference to existing laws and
usages in the several branches of the Anglican Com
munion, and to lay down general principles, the
adoption or application of which must depend on
circumstances, such, for example, as the laws which
any Church may have inherited or already esta
blished.
1 Resolution IV. "That, in the opinion of this Conference,
Unity in Faith and Discipline will be best maintained among
the several branches of the Anglican Communion by due and
canonical subordination of the Synods of the several branches
to the higher authority of a Synod or Synods above them."
Resolution V. " That a Committee of seven members (with
power to add to their number, and to obtain the assistance of
men learned in Ecclesiastical and Canon Law) be appointed to
inquire into and report upon the subject of the relations and
functions of such Synods, and that such Report be forwarded
to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, with a request
that, if possible, it may be communicated to any adjourned
meeting of this Conference."
Reports of Committees, 1867. 73
I. In the organisation of Synodal order for the
government of the Church, the Diocesan Synod
appears to be the primary and simplest form of such
organisation.
By the Diocesan Synod the co-operation of all
members of the body is obtained in Church action ;
and that acceptance of Church rules is secured,
which, in the absence of other law, usage, or enact
ment, gives to these rules the force of laws " binding
on those who, expressly or by implication, have
consented to them. 1 "
For this reason, wherever the Church is not
established by law, it is, in the judgment of your
Committee, essential to order and good government
that the Diocese should be organised by a Synod.
Your Committee consider that it is not at variance
with the ancient principles of the Church, that both
Clergy and Laity should attend the Diocesan Synod,
and that it is expedient that the Synod should con
sist of the Bishop and Clergy of the Diocese, with
Representives of the Laity.
The constitution of the Diocesan Synod may be
determined either by rules for that branch of the
Church established by the Synod of the Province, or
by general consent in the Diocese itself, its rules
being sanctioned afterwards by the Provincial Synod.
Your Committee, however, recommend that the
following general rules should be adopted ; viz., that
the Bishop, Clergy, and Laity should sit together,
the Bishop presiding ; that votes should be taken by
orders, whenever demanded ; and that the concurrent
assent of Bishop, Clergy, and Laity should be
necessary to the validity of all acts of the Synod.
They consider that the Clerical members of the
Synod should be those Clergy who are recognized
by the Bishop, according to the rules of the Church
- Judgment of Judicial Committee of Privy Council in case
of Long v. Bishop of Capetown, i Moore, P. C. C., N.S., 461.
74 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
in that Diocese, as being under his jurisdiction.
Whether in large Dioceses, when the Clergy are very
numerous, they might appear by representation, is a
difficult question, and one on which your Committee
are not prepared to express an opinion.
The Lay Representatives in the Synod ought, in
the judgment of your Committee, to be Male Com
municants of at least one year s standing in the
Diocese, and of the full age of twenty-one. It should
be required that the electors should be Members
of the Church in that Diocese, and belong to the
parish in which they claim to vote. It appears
desirable that the regular meetings of the Synod
should be fixed and periodical; but that the right
of convening special meetings whenever they may
be required should be reserved to the Bishop.
The office of the Diocesan Synod is, generally, to
make regulations, not repugnant to those of higher
Synods, for the order and good government of the
Church within the Diocese, and to promulgate the
decisions of the Provincial Synod.
II. The Provincial Synod or, as it is called in
New Zealand, the General Synod, and in the United
States the General Convention is formed, whenever
it does not exist already by law and usage, through
the voluntary association of Dioceses for united
legislation and common action. The Provincial
Synod not only provides a method for securing unity
amongst the Dioceses which are thus associated, but
also forms the link between these Dioceses and other
Churches of the Anglican Communion.
Without questioning the right of the Bishops of any
Province to meet in Synod by themselves, and without
affirming that the presence of others is essential to a
Provincial Synod, your Committee recommend that,
whenever no law or usage to the contrary already
exists, it should consist of the Bishops of the Province,,
and of Representatives both of the Clergy and of the
Laity in each Diocese. . .
Reports of Committees, 1867. 75.
Your Committee need not define the method in
which a Provincial Synod may be first constituted^,
but they assume that its constitution and rules will be
determined by the concurrence of the several Dioceses
duly represented.
Your Committee consider that it must be left to
each Province to decide whether, and under what
circumstances, the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity in a
Provincial Synod should sit and discuss questions in
the same chamber or separately ; but, in the judg
ment of the Committee, the votes should in either
case be taken by orders ; and the concurrent assent
of Bishops, Clergy, and Laity should be necessary for
any legislative action, wherever the Clergy and Laity
form part of the constitution of a Provincial Synod ;
such powers and functions not involving legislation
being reserved as belong to the Bishops by virtue of
their office.
The number, qualification, and mode of election of
the Clerical and Lay Representatives from each
Diocese must be determined by the Synods in the
several Provinces.
It is the office of the Provincial Synod, generally,
to exercise, within the limits of the Province, powers
in regard to Provincial questions similar to those
which the Diocesan Synod exercises, within the
Diocese, in regard to Diocesan questions.
As to the relation between these two Synods, your
Committee are of opinion that the Diocese is bound
to accept positive enactments of a Provincial Synod
in which it is duly represented, and that no Diocesan
regulations have force, if contrary to the decisions of
a higher Synod ; but that, in order to prevent any
collision or misunderstanding, the spheres of action
of the several Synods should be defined on the follow
ing principle, viz., That the Provincial Synod should
deal with questions of common interest to the whole
Province, and with those which affect the communion
of the Dioceses with one another and with the rest of
76
the Church ; whilst the Diocesan Synod should be
left free to dispose of matters of local interest, and to
manage the affairs of the Diocese.
From this principle your Committee draws the
following conclusions :
1. All alterations in the Services of the Church,
required by circumstances in the Province, should be
made or authorized by the Provincial Synod, and not
merely by the Diocesan.
2. The rule of discipline for the Clergy of the
Province should be framed by the Provincial Synod.
3. Rules for the trial of Clergy should be made by
the Provincial Synod ; but, in default of such action
on the part of that Synod, the Diocesan Synod should
establish provisional rules for this purpose. The
Provincial Tribunal of Appeal should be established
by the Provincial Synod.
4. In questions relating to Patronage, the tenure
of Church property, Parochial divisions, arrange
ments, officers, &c., there should be joint action of
the Diocese and the Province ; the former making
such regulations as may be best suited to develop
local resources, the latter providing against the ad
mission of any principle inexpedient for the common
interests of the Church.
5. The erection of a new Diocese within the limits
of an existing Diocese should proceed by general
rules established by the Provincial Synod.
6. The question of the election of a Bishop it is
unnecessary here to consider, as it is submitted to
another Committee.
III. The question of a higher Synod of the
Anglican Communion, and of the relation which the
inferior Synods should hold towards it, whenever it
might assemble, is one, your Committee are aware,
of much greater difficulty than any of those which
have been previously considered.
The fact, however, that a Conference of Bishops
of the whole Anglican Communion has already met
Reports of Committees, 1867. 77
together, is of itself an indication of the need which
is generally felt of united counsel in a sphere more
extensive than that of a Provincial Synod. Indeed,
the Resolutions under which this Committee was
appointed contemplate the possibility at least of
some Synod being established superior to the Pro
vincial. It is also implied in Resolution VIII. of
this Conference, that some such Assembly may be
required, in order to preserve Colonial and Missionary
Churches in close union with the Church of England,
since it is provided that all changes in the Services
of the Church made by one of their Provincial Synods
should " be liable to revision by any Synod of the
Anglican Communion in which the said Province
should be represented."
The objections that may be urged against the
united action of Churches which are more or less free
to act independently, and other Churches whose
constitution is fixed, not only by ancient ecclesiastical
laws and usages-, but by the law of the State, are
obvious ; but it appears to your Committee that the
action of this Conference has proved that the diffi
culties which are anticipated are not insuperable, and
suggests the method by which they may be overcome.
Under present circumstances, indeed, no Assembly
that might be convened would be competent to enact
canons of binding ecclesiastical authority on these
different bodies, or to frame definitions of faith which
it would be obligatory on the Churches of the
Anglican Communion to accept. It would be neces
sary, therefore, in the judgment of your Committee,
to avoid all terms respecting this Assembly that
might imply authority of this nature, and to call it
a Congress, if even the term Council should be con
sidered open to objection. Its decisions could only
possess the authority which might be derived from
the moral weight of such united counsels and judg
ments, and from the voluntary acceptance of its con
clusions by any of the Churches there represented.
78 LanibetJi Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
Your Committee consider that his Grace the
Archbishop of Canterbury, as occupying the See
from which the Colonial and American Churches
derive their succession, should be the convener of
such an Assembly. That it should differ from the
present Conference in being attended by both Clerical
and Lay Representatives of the several Churches,
as consultees and advisers, each Diocese being
allowed to send, besides its Bishop, a presbyter and
a lay member of the Church, if they should desire
to be thus represented ; and further, in the proceed
ings being more formal and, in part at least, public.
The question when for the first time, and at what
periods, this Congress or Council should be called,
your Committee deem it more respectful to leave for
the consideration of his Grace the Archbishop of
Canterbury and of the present Conference.
G. A. NEW ZEALAND, Chairman.
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary.
Reports of Committees, 1867. 79
B. Report of the Committee appointed under Resolu
tion IX. of the Lambeth Conference, on the Consti
tution of a voluntary spiritual Tribunal, to which
questions of Doctrine may be carried by Appeal
from the Tribunals for the exercise of discipline in
each Province of the Colonial Churchy
After full consideration of objections that have
been urged against the establishment of any such
Tribunal as that contemplated by this Resolution,
your Committee are of opinion that these objections
are not sufficient to outweigh the arguments in its
favour, and that most of the objections will be found
inapplicable to the particular form of Tribunal which
the Committee recommend.
Your Committee consider that such a Tribunal is
required in order to prevent the dissatisfaction which
would arise if important questions were finally decided
by those Colonial Churches, the circumstances of
which render it impossible for them to form a suffi
cient Tribunal of last resort.
It would also tend to secure unity in matters of
Faith, and uniformity in matters of Discipline, where
Doctrine may be involved.
For these reasons your Committee recommend that
such a Tribunal be established ; and, from the desire
1 Resolution IX. "That the Committee appointed by
Resolution V., with the addition of the names of the Bishops of
London, St. David s, and Oxford, and all the Colonial Bishops,
be instructed to consider the constitution of a voluntary spiri
tual Tribunal, to which questions of doctrine may be carried
by appeal from the Tribunals for the exercise of discipline in
each Province of the Colonial Church, and that their report be
forwarded to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury,
who is requested to communicate it to an adjourned meeting
of this Conference."
8o LambetJi Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
expressed by several branches of the Colonial Church,
that this should be one of the results of this Confer
ence, they believe that it will be generally accepted
by those for whose benefit it is designed.
At the same time, they are sensible of the great
difficulty of forming such a Tribunal, and of the
necessity of proceeding with caution, lest it should
interfere with the liberties of the Colonial Churches,
or should have any appearance of collision with the
Courts established by law, either here or in Her
Majesty s foreign possessions.
Your Committee now proceed to lay before the
Conference their conclusions as to the functions and
constitution of the proposed Tribunal.
They are of opinion that it should not take cogni
zance of any case which shall not have been referred
to it by some branch of the Anglican Communion
which has consented to its constitution. Thus it
would not interfere either with those Churches in
which provision is made by the State for the exercise
of discipline, or with the liberty and rights of eccle
siastical Provinces. These would be free to accept
or to decline the appeal thus offered to them, and to
withdraw afterwards their acceptance of the Tribunal,
if they should so desire. 1
Your Committee consider that this Tribunal of
Appeal should take into consideration all the facts of
the case as sent up to it in writing from the inferior
Tribunal ; that the Appeal, however, should not be
on the facts, but only on the points of Doctrine and
Discipline involved in them.
That during the Appeal the sentence of the Pro
vincial Tribunal should continue in force, so far as it
1 The decisions of such a Tribunal would be of the same
nature as those of "arbitrators, whose jurisdiction rests
entirely upon the agreement of the parties." (Judgment of
Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in case of Long -v.
Bishop of Capetown, i Moore, P. C. C, N.S. 462.)
Reports of Committees, 1867. 81
affects the present exercise of spiritual functions by
the accused.
That the judgments of the Tribunal of Appeal
should be delivered in the form of a decision that the
teaching or practice of the accused party is (or is
not) permissible.
That the Tribunal should use as the standards of
faith and doctrine by which its decisions shall be
governed, those which are now in use in the United
Church of England and Ireland ; and that as to all
matters not defined in such formularies, the judg
ments should be framed on any conclusions which
shall be hereafter agreed to at any Council or
Congress of the whole Anglican Communion :
Provided always, that no such conclusion be contra
dictory to any now existing standard or formulary of
the Church of England ; and provided further, that
the Synod of that Province of the Church from which
the Appeal shall be sent, shall not have refused to
accept such conclusion.
Your Committee further recommend, subject to
any regulations that may be made at any future
Conference of the Anglican Communion :
That, as it is a Tribunal for decisions in matters
of faith, Archbishops and Bishops only should be
judges, his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canter
bury being the President.
That each Province in the Colonial Church should
have the right of electing two members of the
Tribunal ; and that all the Dioceses of the Colonial
Church not associated into Provinces should collec
tively have the right of electing two. That each
Province of the United Church of England and
Ireland should be requested to elect two members,
but that the Province of Canterbury should elect
three, in the event of his Grace the Archbishop not
acting as President. That the Episcopal Church in
Scotland should have the right of electing two. And
v(as it appears probable that the Protestant Episcopal
F
82 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
Church in the United States would avail itself of
such a Tribunal) that Church should have the right
of electing five members.
In the judgment of the Committee, the Bishops of
the several Churches should elect those who shall
represent them on this Tribunal.
That, so soon after January I, 1869, as any ten
names shall have been forwarded to the Archbishop
of Canterbury as having been elected, the Tribunal
should be deemed to be constituted.
That of the members thus elected, seven should
form a quorum for the transaction of business, but a
smaller number should have power to adjourn from
time to time.
That the members of the Tribunal should con
tinue in office, unless their seat be vacated by death,
resignation, or removal by the electing body ; but
that, in the event of any Bishop of the Colonial or
American Church notifying to the electing body that
he is unable or declines to attend at any sitting of
the Tribunal to which he may be summoned, it
should be lawful for the body by which he was
elected to appoint, instead of him, any Bishop of the
Anglican Communion other than one of those
already elected.
That, in the event of the Archbishop of Canter
bury for the time being declining or being unable to
act as President, it should be lawful for his Grace,
if he should see fit, to nominate any other member
of the Tribunal to act as President in his room ; and
in the event of no such appointment being made by
him, that it should be lawful for the Tribunal at
its first meeting to elect one of its members as
President.
That the summons for the sitting of the Tribunal
should be issued within thirty days from the time of
the notice of Appeal being delivered by the agent of
the Appellant to the proper officer of the Tribunal.
That the action of the Tribunal should not be
Reports of Committees, 1867. 83
impeded by the absence from it of any of those
who are at liberty to sit in it, provided there be a
quorum.
That, before the assembling of the Tribunal for
the hearing of an Appeal, the President should
nominate as Assessors three theologians and three
persons learned in the law, who should be present
at the trial, and should answer any questions as to-
theological learning and law put to them by the
Tribunal through its President in writing, and
who should be at liberty to tender in writing to the
Tribunal through its President their opinion upon
any point of theological learning or law which
may arise, and that the Tribunal should be bound
to consider such opinion before coming to its
decision.
That parties before the Tribunal may be repre
sented by any counsel they may select, whether
theologians or persons learned in the law.
That the rules of procedure of the said Tribunal,,
except as here provided for, should, as far as possible,,
be those of the higher Courts of Law, and that any
necessary alterations in such rules should be made
by the Tribunal itself.
That no sentence should be passed without the
assent thereto of two-thirds of the Judges present
during the trial.
That, at the time of delivering judgment, each
member of the Tribunal who has been present
during the trial should give his decision in writing,
and may read, or cause to be read, openly in Court
his decision, and the reasons for it ; and that the
judgment of the prescribed majority should be the
judgment of the Tribunal.
F. MONTREAL, Chairman.
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary.
F 2
84 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
C. On the Courts of Metropolitans, and the Trial
of a Bishop or Metropolitan}
I. Your Committee consider that the constitution
of the Provincial Tribunal for Appeals from the
decisions of Diocesan Tribunals should be deter
mined, whenever it is not fixed by law, by the
Synod of the Province ; but it is expedient, in their
judgment, that its rules should be assimilated, as far
as circumstances will admit, to those of the proposed
tribunal of Appeal in England.
II. In the case of charges against a Bishop, they
suggest the following as general principles :
That each Province should determine by rules
made in its own Synod the offences for which a
Bishop may be presented for trial, and who should
be promoters of the charge.
That the charge should be presented to the
Metropolitan.
That it appears doubtful whether a preliminary
inquiry is expedient, provided that sufficient pre
cautions are taken that no frivolous charges should
be entertained.
That the Metropolitan should summon to the
hearing of the cause all the Bishops of the Province
.(except the accused), who should sit as judges, not
merely as assessors.
1 Resolution X. " That the Resolutions submitted to this
Conference relative to the discipline to be exercised by the
Metropolitans, the Court of Metropolitans, the scheme for con
ducting the Election of Bishops, when not otherwise provided
for, the declaration of submission to the Regulation of Synods,
and the question of what Legislation should be proposed for
the Colonial Churches, be referred to the Committee specified
in the preceding Resolution."
Reports of Committees, 1867. 85
That no trial should take place, except before
two-thirds of the Bishops of the Province, provided
that there be never fewer than three Bishops present,
including the Metropolitan.
That if three Bishops of the Province should be
unable to attend, it should be lawful for the Metro
politan to call in one or more Bishops not of the
Province.
That it is desirable that, whenever it may be
practicable, there should be Assessors, as recom
mended by this Committee for the higher Tribunal
of Appeal.
That, in case of the non-appearance of the accused
after sufficient citations, the trial may go forward
as if he were present, or he may be punished for
contumacy, according as the Province may prescribe.
That there should be no sentence except by the
judgment of two-thirds of the Tribunal, or by three
judges, whichever should be the greater number ; the
assent of the Metropolitan not being necessary to
the sentence.
That the general rules of procedure should be
framed by the Synod of the Province ; but should
be, as far as possible, similar to those recommended
by this Committee for the proposed Tribunal of
Appeal.
That an appeal to the higher Tribunal recom
mended by this Committee should be allowed when
the case is one of doctrine, or discipline involving
doctrine, if notice of such appeal be given within
days from the delivery of sentence ;
and that, in all cases, proper provision should be
made for a new trial on sufficient reason being
shown.
That there should be no contract not to appeal to-
Civil Courts ; but that sufficient provision should be
made by the Declaration of Submission (to be con
sidered in another Report) that the sentence of the
Spiritual Tribunals may be effective.
86 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
That a Metropolitan should be tried in the same
manner as any other Bishop the senior Bishop, in
that case, acting in the place of the Metropolitan.
F. MONTREAL, Chairman.
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary.
D. Scheme for conducting the Election of Bishops^
when not otherwise provided for.
Your Committee have to consider the proper
mode for conducting the election of a Bishop, when
ever it is not provided for by an existing law, and
without reference to any question that might arise
as to the temporalities connected with the See.
It is evident that there are two parties whose con
current action is necessary in such an appointment
viz., the Clergy and Laity of the Diocese, and the
Bishops of the Province by whom the person elected
as Bishop is consecrated.
Your Committee are of opinion that, in accord
ance with the ancient usages of the Church, the elec
tion as a general rule should be made by the Diocese,
and that the Bishops of the Province should confirm
the election. They consider, however, that it is con
sistent with this principle that the Diocese should
nominate two or more persons, of whom the Bishops
of the Province should select one ; or that the
Diocese should delegate to any person or body the
power of choosing a Bishop for the vacant See, it
being understood that the Diocese must accept such
choice as final.
The principle of the concurrent action of the two
parties concerned would also be preserved if the
Bishops of the Province should nominate two or
Reports of Committees , 1867. 87
more persons, from whom the Diocese should elect
one.
In the election by the Diocese it appears to your
Committee that the right of selecting the person
who shall be their Bishop belongs to the Clergy, the
Laity having the right of accepting or rejecting the
person so chosen. But it is expedient, in their
judgment, that the election should always be made
by the Diocesan Synod, wherever one is established,
and in accordance with the rules of that Synod. In
those Dioceses in which there is no Diocesan Synod,
they recommend that, for the election of a Bishop,
a Convention should be summoned by the Dean,
senior Archdeacon, or senior Presbyter of the
Diocese; that this Convention should consist. of all
Presbyters and of lay-representatives, who should be
male communicants of at least twenty-one years of
age ; that these representatives should be elected by
each parish or congregation, in such manner as
should be determined by the convener ; that the
person who should obtain the majority of votes of the
Clergy, and also of those of the lay-representatives
present at the Convention, should be accounted to
be elected to the Bishopric ; that this election should
not be vitiated by the absence of any of the parties
summoned, or by the failure of any congregation or
parish to elect a lay-representative ; that any ques
tion as to the validity of the election to the vacant
See should be submitted, prior to the Consecration,
to the Consecrating Bishops, whose decision should
be final ; and that after the consecration of a Bishop
no objection should be entertained.
They further recommend that, where the Diocese
is included in a Province, the confirmation of an
election should be by the Metropolitan and a
majority of the Bishops of the Province ; but where
the Diocese is extra-Provincial, that the confirmation
should rest with the Archbishops of Canterbury and
York and the Bishop of London ; that the power of
88 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
confirmation should be absolute the Bishops having
the right to refuse to confirm the election, without
assigning any reason for their refusal.
All further rules necessary for conducting the
election should, in the opinion of your Committee,,
be made by the Synod of the Province.
F. MONTREAL, Chairman.
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary.
E. On Declaration of Submission to Regulations of
Synod.
Your Committee recommend that, in all branches
of the Church, the government of which is not
determined by law, a Declaration should be made
by those who hold office therein. They consider
that a Declaration is necessary, in order to define
the conditions of the consensual compact, and that
it should be framed so as to secure submission to
all synodical action in its legitimate sphere, and to
the decisions of the constituted Tribunals.
They recommend the following declaration to be
made, before the Metropolitan, or some person duly
appointed by him, by all Bishops elect, either before
their consecration or, if already consecrated, before
exercising any Episcopal functions in their
diocese :
" I A. B., chosen Bishop of the Church and See
of , do promise that I will teach and
maintain the doctrine and discipline of the United
Church of England and Ireland, as acknowledged
and received by the Province of , and I
also do declare that I consent to be bound by all the
rules and regulations which have heretofore been
Reports of Committees, 1867. 89
made or which may from time to time be made, by
the Synod of the Diocese of , and
the Provincial Synod of , or either of
them ; and, in consideration of being appointed
Bishop of the said Church or See of , I
hereby undertake immediately to resign the said
appointment, together with all the rights and emolu
ments appertaining thereto, if sentence requiring such
resignation should at any time be passed upon me,
after due examination had, by the Tribunal acknow
ledged by the Synod of the said Province for the
trial of a Bishop ; saving all rights of Appeal allowed
by the said Synod."
They recommend that the following Declaration
be made (in addition to the Declaration required by
the rules of that Province or Diocese as to doctrine
and worship) by persons to be admitted to holy
orders, and by Clergymen to be admitted to the cure
of souls, or to any other office of trust in the Church.
" I, A. B. t do declare that I consent to be bound by
all the rules and regulations which have heretofore
been made, or which may from time to time be
made, by the Synod of the Diocese of ,
and the Provincial Synod of , or either of
them ; [and in consideration of being appointed
, I hereby undertake immediately to
resign the said appointment, together with all the
rights and emoluments appertaining thereto, if
sentence requiring such resignation should at any
time be passed upon me, after due examination had,
by the Tribunal appointed by the Synods of the
aforesaid Province and Diocese for the trial of a
Clergyman ; saving all rights of Appeal allowed by
the said Synod]."
(The part in brackets to be omitted when there is
no appointment to a cure of souls, or office of
trust).
Your Committee consider that it must be left to
the Province or Diocese to decide whether laymen
-90 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
who are admitted to any office or position of trust
.should be required to sign a Declaration of the same
nature.
G. A. NEW ZEALAND,
Chairman.
H. GRAHAMSTOWN,
Secretary.
F. On Provinces and Subordination to
Metropolitans.
On this subject your Committee beg to report as
follows :
They are of opinion that the association or federa
tion of Dioceses within certain territorial limits,
commonly called an Ecclesiastical Province, is not
only in accordance with the ancient laws and usages
of the Christian Church, but is essential to its
complete organization.
Such an association is of the highest advantage for
united action, for the exercise of discipline, for the
confirmation of the election of Bishops, and generally
to enable the Church to adapt its laws to the circum
stances of the countries in which it is planted.
It is expedient, in the judgment of your Com
mittee, that these ecclesiastical divisions should, as
far as possible, follow the civil divisions of these
countries.
Of the Bishops of these Dioceses thus associated,
one, in conformity with ancient usage, ought to be
Metropolitan or Primus, the functions and powers
of the Metropolitan being determined by synodical
action in the Province, except so far as Metropolitical
powers are definecj by undisputed General Councils
of the Church.
It seems to your Committee most in accordance
Reports of Committees, 1867. 91
with primitive usage that the Metropolitical see \
should be fixed, but they do not deem this to be \
essential. It appears expedient that the Provincial
Synod should have the power of changing, when
necessary, the site of the Metropolitical see.
Your Committee do not consider it necessary that
the election to the Metropolitical see should be
conducted differently from the election to other
vacant sees ; since the Bishops of the Province
possess the right of confirming or refusing to confirm
any election.
Your Committee strongly recommend that all
those Dioceses which are not as yet gathered into
Provinces should, as soon as possible, form part of
some Provincial organization. The particular mode
of effecting this in each case must be determined by
those who are concerned.
It is sufficient for your Committee to point out
that the steps to be taken for effecting this change
are two-fold, since the relations of the Dioceses in
Provincial organisation, when complete, are formed
on the one hand by the subordination of the Bishops
of the Province to a Metropolitan, and on the other
by the association of the Dioceses in Provincial
action. Any alteration of existing arrangements
would require, therefore, in the opinion of your
Committee, the concurrent action of the Diocese
which is to be gathered into a Province with other
neighbouring Dioceses, and of his Grace the Arch
bishop of Canterbury, to whom the Bishops of the
Dioceses that at present are extra-provincial have
taken the oath of canonical obedience. In the case
of the limits of an existing Province being altered,
the consent of the Synod of that Province would be
required for the alteration.
F. MONTREAL, Chairman.
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary.
92 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
G. Report of the Committee appointed under
Resolution XL of the Lambeth Conference^
Your Committee report that, after full considera
tion of the questions referred to them by the
Conference, they have adopted the following Resolu
tions :
I. That every branch of the Church is entitled to-
found a Missionary Bishopric.
II. That it is desirable that each branch of the
Church should act upon rules agreed upon before
hand by the Synod or other Church Council of the
said branch.
III. That each Missionary Bishopric should be
deemed to be attached to one branch of the Church,
and that all rules for the election of a Missionary
Bishop, and for the formation of a Diocese or
Dioceses out of the Missionary District, should be
made by the Synod or other Church Council of such,
branch of the Church.
IV. That notice of the erection of any Missionary
Bishopric, and the choice and consecration of the
Bishop, should be notified to all Archbishops and
Metropolitans, and all Presiding Bishops, of the
Anglican Communion.
V. That in appointing a Missionary Bishop, the
district within which he is to exercise his Mission
should be defined as far as possible ; and that no
other Bishop should be sent within the same district,,
1 Resolution XI. "That a Special Committee be
appointed to consider the Resolutions relative to the Notifi
cation of proposed Missionary Bishoprics, and the Sub
ordination of Missionaries."
Reports of Committees, 1 867. 93
without previous communication with that branch of
the Church which gave mission for the work.
VI. That, while peculiar cases may occur in
Missionary work, owing to difference of race and
language, in which it may be desirable that more
than one Bishop should exercise episcopal functions
within the same district, the Committee consider
that such cases should be regarded as exceptions,
justified only by special circumstances.
VII. That, with respect to the special case of
Continental Chaplaincies, the Committee suggest to
the Conference the consideration of some ecclesi
astical arrangement by which the various congrega
tions of the Anglican Communion may be under
one authority, whether of the English or American
Church.
VIII. That the conditions on which a Missionary
Bishopric should be brought within a Provincial
organisation should be :
1. The request of the Missionary Bishop, ad
dressed both to the Church from which he received
mission and to the Province which he wishes to join.
2. The consent of the Church from which he
received mission, that consent being given by the
Metropolitan or Presiding Bishop.
3. The consent of the Province he wishes to
join, that consent being given by the Provincial
Synod.
IX. That the status, jurisdiction, and designation
of the Bishop thus received into a system of Pro
vincial organisation should be determined by the
Synod of the Province to which Tiis Bishopric shall
be then attached.
X. That, as a general rule, it is expedient that
such Missionary Bishopric should be attached to
the nearest Province ; but that in certain cases it
may be necessary that some more remote Province
should be selected.
Bishop Tozer s Mission is a case to which the
94 Lambeth Conferences of *86/ and 1878.
Committee desire to draw the attention of the Con
ference, as being one in which, for the present,
Provincial organization would seem to be imprac
ticable, from the isolation of the district in which
Bishop Tozer exercises his episcopal functions, and
its remoteness from the Province of South Africa.
XI. That Missionary Bishops and their Clergy-
should be bound generally to the Canons of Doctrine
and Discipline of the Church from which their
mission is derived, or to which they may have
been united, and that all alterations in matters of
discipline be communicated to the authorities of
that Church.
XII. That when a Missionary Church shall be
received into the organisation of a Provincial Synod,,
the said Church should be bound by the acts of that
body; but that, in order to effect this, the Missionary
Church should be granted a power of representation,,
or of vote by proxy, in such Synod.
XIII. That, as a general rule, in conformity with
Church order, all Missionaries and Chaplains residing
or engaged in the exercise of ministerial duty within
the Diocese or District of a Colonial or Missionary
Bishop, should be licensed by, and be subject to the
authority of, the said Bishop.
XIV. That every Clergyman removing from one
Colonial or Missionary Diocese or District into
another Diocese ought to carry with him Letters
Testimonial from the Colonial or Missionary Bishop
whose Diocese or District he is leaving.
XV. That no person admitted to Holy Orders by
the Bishop of any Diocese in England or Ireland,
who shall afterwards have been serving under the
jurisdiction of any Scottish, Colonial, or Foreign
Bishop, should be received into any of the Home
Dioceses, without producing letters Dimissory or
Commendatory from the Scottish, Colonial, or Foreign
Bishop in whose Diocese he has been serving.
XVI. The attention of this Committee has been
Reports of Committees, 1867. 95
called to the clause in the Paper of Arrangements
for the Conference, headed " Subordination of Mis
sionaries." The Committee have failed to understand
what is meant by the words " instructions from those
in authority at home," but they can recommend no
scheme which interferes with the canonical relation
which subsists between a Bishop and his clery.
W. J. GIBRALTAR,
Chairman.
WILLIAM GEORGE TOZER,.
MISSIONARY BISHOP,
Secretary.
H. Report of the Committee appointed under
Resolution VL of the Lambeth Conference^-
By the Resolution of the Lambeth Conference
two questions were referred to the Committee :
I. How the Church may be delivered from a con
tinuance of the scandal now existing in Natal ?
II. How the true faith may be maintained ?
I. On the first question, the Committee recom
mend that an Address be made to the Colonial
1 Resolution VI. "That, in the judgment of the Bishops
now assembled, the whole Anglican Communion is deeply
injured by the present condition of the Church in Natal : and
that a Committee be now appointed at this General Meeting
to report on the best mode by which the Church may be
delivered from a continuance of this scandal, and the true
faith maintained. That such Report shall be forwarded to his
Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, with the request
that he will be pleased to transmit the same to all the Bishops
of the Anglican Communion, and to ask for their judgment
thereupon."
96 LainbetJi Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
Bishoprics Council, calling their attention to the
fact that they are paying an annual stipend to a
Bishop lying under the imputation of heretical
teaching, and praying them to take the best legal
opinion as to there being any, and if so what, mode
mode of laying these allegations before some com
petent court, and if any mode be pointed out, then to
proceed accordingly for the removal of this scandal.
The Committee also recommend that the Address
to the Colonial Bishoprics Council be prefaced with
the following statement :
" That, whilst we accept the spiritual validity of
the sentence of deposition pronounced by the Metro
politan and Bishops of the South African Church
upon Dr. Colenso, we consider it of the utmost
moment for removing the existing scandal from the
English Communion that there should be pronounced
by some competent English court such a legal sen
tence on the errors of the said Dr. Colenso as would
warrant the Colonial Bishoprics Council in ceasing
to pay his stipend, and would justify an appeal to
the Crown to cancel his Letters Patent."
II. On the second question :
"How the true faith maybe maintained in Natal?"
The Committee submit the following Report :
That they did not consider themselves instructed
by the Conference, and therefore did not consider
themselves competent, to inquire into the whole
case ; but that their conclusions are based upon the
following facts:
1. That in the year 1863, forty-one Bishops con
curred in an Address to Bishop Colenso, urging him
to resign his Bishopric.
2. That in the year 1863, some of the publications
of Dr. Colenso, viz. " The Pentateuch and Book of
Joshua critically examined," Parts I. and II., were
condemned by the Convocation of the Province of
Canterbury."
3. That the Bishop of Capetown, by virtue of his
Reports of Committees, 1867. 97
Letters Patent as Metropolitan, might have visited
Dr. Colenso with summary jurisdiction, and might
have taken out of his hands the management of the
Diocese of Natal.
4. That the Bishop of Capetown, instead of pro
ceeding summarily, instituted judicial proceedings,
having reason to believe himself to be competent
to do so.
That he summoned Dr. Colenso before himself
and suffragans.
That Dr. Colenso appeared by his proctor.
That his defence was heard and judged to be
insufficient to purge him from the heresy.
That, after sentence was pronounced, Dr. Colenso
was offered an appeal to the Archbishop of Canter
bury, as provided in the Metropolitan s Letters
Patent.
5. That this Act of the African Church was
approved
By the Convocation of Canterbury ;
By the Convocation of York ;
By the General Convention of the Episcopal
Church in the United States, in 1865 ;
By the Episcopal Synod of the Church in Scotland;
By the Provincial Synod of the Church in Canada,,
in the year 1865 ;
And, finally, the spiritual validity of the sentence
of deposition was accepted by fifty-six Bishops on
the occasion of the Lambeth Conference.
Judging, therefore, that the See is spiritually
vacant ; and learning, by the evidence brought
before them, that there are many members of the
Church who are unable to accept the ministrations
of Dr. Colenso, the Committee deem it to be the
duty of the Metropolitan and other Bishops of South
Africa to proceed, upon the election of the Clergy
and Laity in Natal, to consecate one to discharge
those spiritual functions of which these members of
the Church are now in want.
98 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and. 1878.
In forwarding their Report to his Grace the Lord
Archbishop of Canterbury, as instructed by the Re
solution of the Conference, the Committee request
his Grace to communicate the same to the adjourned
meeting of the Conference, to be holden at Lambeth
on the tenth day of the present month.
G. A. NEW ZEALAND,
December gt/i, 1867. Convener.
J. Form of Letters Dimissory for the Clergy.
To the Right Reverend the Bishops and Reverend
the Clergy, and to the faithful in Christ of the
Diocese of A. We, B, by Divine permission Bishops
of C, send greeting in the Lord.
We commend to your brotherly kindness by these
our letters, D, E, Priest (or Deacon) of our Diocese,
beseeching you to receive him in the Lord as a
brother sound in the Faith, of a well-ordered and
Religious Life, and worthy of all Christian Fellow
ship, and to render him any assistance of which he
may stand in need ; and so we bid you farewell in
Christ our Lord.
Witness our hand.
A, Bishop.
B, Secretary.
No. XI. (See page 15.)
Resolutions of the Adjourned Conference, Dec. 10, 1867.
Resolution I. "That this adjourned meeting of
the Conference receives the Report (No. I.) of the
Committee now presented, and directs the publica-
Adjourned Conference , Dec. 10, 1867. 99
tion thereof, commending it to the careful conside
ration of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion,
as containing the result of the deliberations of that
Committee ; and returns the members of the same
its thanks for the care with which they have con
sidered the various important questions referred to
them."
(The same Resolution was passed with reference
to Reports II., III., IV., V., VI., VII.)
Resolution II. "That the Report (No. VIII.)
of the Committee appointed under Resolution VI.,
laid before this meeting by his Grace the Arch
bishop of Canterbury be received and printed ; that
the thanks of this Meeting be given to the Com
mittee for their labours ; and that his Grace be re
quested to communicate the Report to the Council
of the Colonial Bishoprics Fund."
Resolution III. "That his Grace be requested, if
applied to by the House of Bishops in the Episcopal
Church in the United States of America, to allow a
copy of the Records of the Conference to be made
for them, and to be lodged in the hands of such
officer as shall be designated by the House of Bishops
to receive it, for reference by Bishops only, but not
for publication."
Resolution IV. " That his Grace the Archbishop
of Canterbury be requested to convey to the Church
in Russia an expression of the sympathy of the
Anglican Communion with that Church, in the loss
which it has sustained by the death of his Eminence
Philarete, the venerable Metropolitan of Moscow."
Resolution V. " That the thanks of this Confer
ence be given to the Bishop of Grahamstown for the
valuable services which he has rendered as Secretary
to many of the Committees appointed by the Con
ference."
Resolution VI. " That the thanks of this Confer
ence be given to Philip Wright, Esq., and to Isambard
Brunei, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, for their aid as
G 2
loo Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
Assistant Secretaries to the Committees ; and espe
cially to the latter for his valuable assistance in all
matters that required legal advice."
Resolution VII. "That we cannot close this
Conference without conveying our hearty thanks to
his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, both for
convening this meeting, and for the mode in which
he has presided over its deliberations."
Besides the preceding Resolutions,
The President reported that he had been authorised
to annex the following signatures to the Encyclical
Letter :
A. T. ClCESTR.
AUCKLAND, BATH AND WELLS.
ROBERT DOWN AND CONNOR.
WILLIAM DERRY.
EDWARD NEWFOUNDLAND.
J. FREDERICTON.
T. E. ST. HELENA.
2. The following Bishops were appointed as a Sub-
Committee, for the purpose of drawing up a Bill, in
accordance with a Report submitted by the Com
mittee appointed under Resolution IX. of the previous
meeting :
BISHOP OF LONDON.
OXFORD.
LINCOLN.
ELY.
LICHFIELD (Elect).
MONTREAL.
GRAHAMSTOWN.
BISHOP TROWER.
3. His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury laid
on the table a form of Letters Dimissory, 1 which he
had prepared, in accordance with Resolution II. of
the last session of the Lambeth Conference.
1 J. page 98.
Canadian and West Indian Addresses. 101
4. The Bishop of Illinois, at the request of the
Conference, stated that the Meeting of the Triennial
General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal
Church in the United States would be held on the
first Wednesday of October next, in the City of New
York ; and, in behalf of the Church in the United
States, offered an affectionate invitation to the
Bishops of the Conference to be present on that
occasion ; and also expressed the hope that the dif
ferent branches of the Anglican Communion would
depute one or more Bishops as Representatives of
the Mother and Colonial Churches, to be present on
that occasion, assuring all that might accept this
invitation of cordial welcome and affectionate brother
hood.
5. At the request of the Conference, the Bishop
of Lichfield (Elect) undertook the office of Corre
sponding Secretary for the Bishops of the Anglican
Communion.
His Grace the President then pronounced the
Benediction, and the Conference was closed.
No. XII. (See page 17.)
Addresses from the Canadian and West Indian Houses
of Bishops. 1872 and 1873.
I. To his Grace the President and their Lordships
the Bishops of the Upper House of Convocation
of Canterbury
We, the Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of
Canada, availing ourselves of the opportunity afforded
by the meeting of a special Provincial Synod, desire
that the following Address, touching the Lambeth
1O2 Lambetli Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
Conference, be forwarded to his Grace, the President,
and to the Prolocutor of the Lower House of Con
vocation of the Province of Canterbury.
We, the Bishops aforesaid, encouraged by the
successful results of the Address presented to his
Grace the late Archbishop of Canterbury, by the
Provincial Synod of Canada, whereby the Lambeth
Conference was convened, humbly and earnestly
petition that the Convocation of Canterbury will take
such action as may seem most expedient to unite
with us in requesting the Archbishop of Canterbury
to summon a second meeting of the Conference.
We are persuaded that such meeting will be most
efficacious in uniting the scattered branches of the
Anglican Communion, and in promoting the exten
sion of the Kingdom of Christ throughout the world ;
and we therefore pray that it may be again convened
at the earliest day that may suit the convenience of
the Archbishop of Canterbury.
A. MONTREAL (Metropolitan).
J. T. ONTARIO.
J. W. QUEBEC.
A. H. TORONTO.
J. HURON.
Montreal, Dec. 13, 1872.
2. "The West Indian Bishops [assembled at
Georgetown, Demerara, in 1873] join in the request
lately made to the Archbishop of Canterbury by the
Bishops of the Canadian Province, that he would
summon another meeting of the Bishops of the
Anglican Communion throughout the world at as
early a date as may seem to his Grace practicable
and expedient."
Correspondence with American Church. 103
No. XIII. (See page 1 7.)
Correspondence between Bishops of the Protestant
Episcopal Church in the United States and tJie
Archbishop of Canterbury. 1874, 1875.
I. The Archbishop of Canterbury to Bishop Kerfoot*
of Pittsburgh.
ADDINGTON PARK, CROYDON, Atig. 21, 1874.
MY DEAR BISHOP,
Before you leave England, I wish to say
to you that the subject of another gathering of
Bishops of our Communion at Lambeth has been
much talked of lately. If the House of Bishops of
your Church were to express their wishes on this
subject, it might help me in bringing the matter
before my brethren of this country when we meet in
January of next year.
Trusting that God will bless you in your journey
and on your return to your work,
I am, your faithful Brother,
A. C. CANTUAR.
2. The Bishop of Pittsburgh to the Archbishop of
Canterbury.
HOUSE OF BISHOPS, NEW YORK, Nov. 3, 1874.
MY DEAR LORD,
I had the pleasure not long since of
writing to you from this House, to say that the
request to your Grace to invite another Lambeth
Conference had been signed by forty-three out of
IO4 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
forty-six Bishops in attendance. I then said that I
would write again fully when the engagements of
the General Convention allowed me to do so.
The matter was introduced by me into this House
early in our session, so that the Lord Bishop of
Lichfield, who was with us for the first week of the
Convention, might speak to the Bishops on the
subject. He did this with great discretion and effect
in our House, and also in the House of Deputies.
While the Bishops generally were very favourably
disposed towards the proposal (and your Grace s note
to me of August 25th very much promoted this
inclination), some of them wished that any action of
the Bishops should be preceded by some expression
from the clerical and lay deputies that would prevent
any thought that the Bishops were acting for them
selves alone, and not also for and with the clergy
and laity It was deemed by all the Bishops
to be sufficient, and for several reasons best, that we
should express our wish and convey our request to
your Grace in the form in which it has by this
time reached you through the Bishop of Lichfield.
The Bishop of New York and myself prepared the
paper, and received the signatures of the Bishops
individually. As some of the signatures may not be
readily legible, I enclose a printed list of the names
of the signers.
It clearly appeared in the consultations of the
deputies, and even of the Bishops, that there were
not a few misconceptions about the Conference of
1867. This, I think, was due, in large measure, to
the misrepresentation of its character and manage
ment in the memoir of the late Bishop Hopkins. . . .
Bishop Hopkins himself would not, I am sure, have
approved of the sketch of the Lambeth Conference
given by his biographer. But its effects were seen,
and I hope counteracted, in the discussions.
In the consultation of the Bishops, the wish was
several times expressed that the arrangements for a
Correspondence with American Church. 105
Conference in 1876 should be such as to manifest
that the variety of the topics admitted, and the time
allowed, should be such as would seem to justify a
Convocation of our Bishops from all over the world.
There was no wish to annex terms or conditions to
our request to your Grace. The suggestions already
made by the Canadian Synod (whose action on this
subject was recited in our House of Bishops) covers
most or all of this ground. 1 As our consultations
went on, it seemed to be devolved on me, by general
consent, to make to you this informal communication
about such wishes. Two or three Bishops gave them
to me in writing ; some others in unwritten words.
The thoughts were that the Bishops attending the
Conference might propose for discussion such ques
tions as each one should deem right ; and that the
sessions should be continued long enough to allow
of the needful Conferences. Those of us who were
at Lambeth seven years ago knew quite well that
such were the real character and spirit of that Con
ference; but that it being then an enterprise and
experiment at once novel and anxious, precautions
were rightly taken and limitations wisely observed
that persons at a distance could not fully or fairly
comprehend. The invitation was even then given
in advance to the Bishops to suggest topics ; and
many of us did this, and I believe every such topic
was introduced.
I made such answers to the inquiries of some of my
brethren, adding that, of course, as then, so whenever
we should meet again, no topic should be introduced
which must elicit discussions on the State relations
of the Church of England. All the Bishops here at
once recognise this as the right rule. I said this was
the only real limitation I witnessed seven years ago.
I ventured to anticipate that on this point every
reasonable wish would be satisfied in the future
Conference.
1 See below, page no.
io6 LambetJi Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
In thus writing at, I hope, not a needless length to
your Grace, I think that I quite fulfil the promises
made to some of my American brethren, who united
heartily in the request sent to you, and I hope that I
also convey such intimations as will entirely meet
your own views in your anticipation of any such
Conference. I may also add that the careful con
sideration given to the whole scheme here of late
only confirms our convictions of the wisdom and
usefulness of the renewal of the Conference of 1867.
I am, my dear Lord Archbishop, your Grace s very
faithful and affectionate brother.
JOHN B. KERFOOT,
Bishop of Pittsburgh.
3. The following is the formal Resolution referred to
in the foregoing letter.
The undersigned Bishops of the Protestant Epis
copal Church in the United States, having had the
pleasure of listening to the statements of the Right
Reverend the Lord Bishop of Lichfield, of the Right
Reverend the Lord Bishop of Montreal and Metro
politan, of the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of
Kingston, Jamaica, and of the Right Reverend the
Lord Bishop of Quebec in reference to the benefits
to the whole Anglican Communion to be derived
from the holding of another Conference of the
Bishops thereof, do most cordially express in their
individual capacity their interest in the subject, and
their hope that his Grace the Archbishop of Canter
bury will find it consistent with his views of duty to-
take steps towards the assembling of such a Con
ference.
[The signatures of forty-two Bishops, including
the presiding Bishop, are appended.]
Correspondence with American Church. 107
4. The Archbishop of Canterbury to the Bishop of
PittsburgJi.
LAMBETH PALACE, S.W.,
April 27, 1875.
[PRIVATE.]
MY DEAR BISHOP,
As I promised, I brought the question of a second
Lambeth Conference and your kind letter before the
Bishops of the Southern Province, who met lately in
Convocation.
The holding of such a Conference in the autumn
of next year is rendered impossible, if not by other
causes, by the fact that I find that 1876 is the year
in which I must (D.V.) hold my visitation in the
autumn, and deliver my charge, and you will under
stand the impossibility of my undertaking at that
time the additional work necessarily involved on so
important an occasion as the reassembling of the
Lambeth Conference.
We cannot, therefore, look forward to the Con
ference taking place earlier than 1877, which will be
ten years from the time of the first meeting. But,,
as we know that your Convention meets in the
autumn of that year, it appears to us that the
Lambeth Conference might well be in the spring
of 1877, thus leaving time for our American brethren
to return home before this Convention.
I think I ought to add that there was a general
impression that, before steps were taken for gathering
Bishops from all parts of the world, we ought dis
tinctly to understand what the subjects are on which
discussion is desirable. There was a general feeling
that matters of doctrine which are already settled by
our formularies could not be re-opened, and matters
of discipline must be left to the authorities of each
separate Church. There remains, therefore, only
such general questions as relate to the intercourse
io8 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
of the various branches of our Church, and that
brotherly conference which was on former occasions
found so valuable.
I write this private letter, as I think you may wish
to know the feelings of the English Bishops on this
important subject with as little delay as possible, and
I hope before long to be able to return a formal
answer to the document signed by the Bishops of
the American Episcopal Church.
Believe me to be, my dear Bishop,
Very sincerely yours,
A. C. CANTUAR.
5. To the Right Rev. the Bishops of the Protestant
Episcopal Church of the United States of
A merica.
LAMBETH PALACE, S.E.,
June 7, 1875.
RIGHT REV. AND DEAR BRETHREN,
I have laid before my brethren of the Province of
Canterbury your letter on the subject of holding a
second^ Lambeth Conference, and I have had com
munication on the same subject with the Archbishop
of York, as representing the Bishops of the Northern
Province.
We entertain a grateful sense of the advantages of
"that brotherly intercourse which the last Lambeth
Conference tended to encourage, and we should look
forward with much pleasure to another meeting of
the same kind.
I am, however, instructed by my brethren to bring
before you the two following considerations, re
specting which I should be glad to have your
opinion before taking any further steps in this
matter.
i. It seems to my brethren and myself that such a
Correspondence with American ChurcJi. 109
Conference could not with advantage be held till the
tenth year after the last meeting. I am aware that
this would bring us to the year 1877, in which, as I
understand, your general convention holds its triennial
meeting; but the autumn of 1876, which has been
mentioned by the Bishop of Lichfield as a suitable
time, will, so far as I can foresee, be entirely occupied
by my visitation of the Archdiocese of Canterbury,,
and it is the opinion of those whom I have consulted
that the most convenient time would be the summer
of 1877, sav > m tne month of July, which time would
enable our brethren of the United States to return
home for the meeting of their own Convention.
2. I have also been requested to bring before you
the following point. You will at once see that I
ought not to take the step of inviting so large a body
of Bishops to leave the scene of their labours in their
distant Dioceses without being able to state to them
somewhat explicitly what the practical results are
which are expected to be derived from the Con
ference.
It appears to us that, respecting matters of doctrine,
no change can be proposed or discussed, and that no
authoritative explanation of doctrine ought to be
taken in hand. Each Church is naturally guided in
the interpretation of its formularies by its recognised
authorities. Again, respecting matters of discipline,
each Church has its own appointed Courts for the
administration of its ecclesiastical law, with which,
of course, such a meeting of Bishops as is proposed
claims no power to interfere. The present state of
the Christian Church makes men more than usually
sensitive as to any appearance even of a claim on the
part of any one branch of the Church to interfere
with the decisions or administrations of another.
Each is considered qualified to regulate its own
separate affairs, while all are united in the mainte
nance of the one faith. Therefore, if the Conference
meets, it will be necessary to exclude all questions
no LambetJi Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
which might happen to trench on the complete
independence of the several branches of the Church.
The propriety of the Bishops meeting in Con
ference must depend, I conceive, upon this whether
there appear a sufficient number of subjects relating
to the brotherly intercourse of the various Branches
of the Anglican Communion, on which a conference
of the chief Ministers of the several Churches would
be likely to throw light.
I should be greatly obliged for any communica
tion which you may be disposed to send to me,
during the next six months, as to your views on the
general desirableness of our meeting under such
circumstances as I have described. I will take care,
before the close of the present year, to lay before my
brethren in England any statement I receive as to
the particular questions which you think it desirable
for the Bishops of the Anglican Communion to
consider.
This would enable us to come to a decision re
specting the Conference, and make any arrangements
that may be required.
I remain,
Your faithful brother and servant in Christ,
A. C. CANTUAR.
No. XIV. (See page 18.)
Memorandum of the Canadian House of Bishops. 1 874.
Suggestions of the Canadian House of Bishops
made to the Bishop of Lichfield concerning the
Lambeth Conference.
i. As to the period of its meeting
We would suggest that 1 876 would be a period
very convenient and welcome to the Church in
<Tanada.
Canadian Bishops Memorandum. 1 1 1
2. As to the duration of the Conference
We are of opinion that there should be a con
tinuous Session of one month, four days in each
week being days of session ; or,
That there should be at least two weeks of Session,
with an interval between the first and last week.
3. As to the matter to be discussed
We feel that it is most desirable that the Reports
of Committees laid before the Conference of 1867
should be carefully considered, with the exception of
Report No. 8.
4. We think that it would be very convenient
to the Bishops invited to the Congress that an
opportunity should be given them of suggesting
beforehand any subject which they may wish to
have considered.
5. We feel that, if his Grace should be pleased to
grant the Bishops an opportunity of assembling
in Conference, it would be extremely desirable that
his decision on the above matters should be embodied
in the Circular of Invitation.
Signed, on behalf of the Bishops of the Province
of Canada,
A. MONTREAL, Metropolitan.
No. XV. (See page 20.)
Action of the Convocations of Canterbury and York
with reference to the proposed Second Lambeth
Conference.
The Memorials from the Canadian and West
Indian Bishops (quoted above, No. XII., page 101),
were on April 29, 1 874, referred by the Upper House
112 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
of the Convocation of Canterbury to a Joint Com
mittee of fifteen members, who, on July 10, 1874,
presented a report in the shape of the following four
Resolutions :
1. "That the relation of his Grace the Lord Arch
bishop of Canterbury to the other Bishops of the
Anglican Communion be that of Primate among
Archbishops, Primates, Metropolitans, and Bishops."
2. " That in accordance with the Memorial of the
Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of Canada,
and the resolution of the Bishops of the West Indian
Dioceses, his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canter
bury be requested to convene a General Conference
of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion to carry
on the work begun by the Lambeth Conference in
1867.
3. " That the Reports of Committees presented^at
the adjourned Session of the Lambeth Conference in
1867, but not adopted or even discussed, be taken
into consideration at the Second Conference."
4. " That the Committee recommend that his
Grace be respectfully requested to convene the
second meeting of the Lambeth Conference for the
year 1876."
" G. A. LlCHFlELD, Chairman."
The Report was received by the Upper House,
and communicated to the Lower House, July 10,
1874. (See Chronicle of Convocation, pp. 437-439.)
The Upper House of Canterbury Convocation had
also resolved, on April 29, 1874, to invite an expres
sion of opinion from the Convocation of York, and
that Convocation, on February 26, 1875, passed the
following resolution :
" That this Synod, in reply to a communication
from the Province of Canterbury, asking for an
expression of opinion upon three resolutions respect
ing certain memorials received from the Ecclesi-
Archbishop Taifs Letter of Inquiry, 1876. 113
astical Province of Canada, and from the Bishops of
the West Indian Dioceses, prays that his Grace the
President will convey to his Grace the Archbishop
of Canterbury the wish of this Synod that all
necessary steps may be taken for the assembling of
a second Conference at Lambeth, but would desire
to leave all other questions involved in these resolu
tions to be decided as may seem best to the Arch
bishops and the bench of Bishops."
No. XVI. (See page 20.)
Circular Letter of Inquiry addressed by the Arch
bishop of Canterbury to all the Anglican Bishops,
March 28, 1876.
LAMBETH PALACE, March 28, 1876.
RIGHT REVEREND BROTHER,
A wish has been expressed by many Bishops of
the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United
States of America, by the Bishops of the Canadian
Dominion, and by the West Indian Bishops, that a
second Conference of our brethren should be held at
Lambeth.
Before I decide upon the important step of inviting
the Bishops of our Communion throughout the world
to assemble at Lambeth, I have thought it right,
after consultation with the Bishops of England, to
give all our brethren an opportunity of expressing
their opinion upon the expediency of convening such
a Conference at this time, and upon the choice of
the subjects which ought to engage its attention, if
it be convened.
H
H4 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
I therefore beg leave to intimate to you our readi
ness to hold a Conference at Lambeth in or about
the month of July, 1878, if it shall seem expedient,
after the opinions of all our brethren have been
ascertained ; and I need scarcely assure you that
your advice is earnestly desired, and will be respect
fully considered. May I ask, for our guidance,
whether you are willing, and are likely to be able, to
attend the Conference yourself?
Those who were present at Lambeth in 1867
thankfully acknowledged that, through the blessing
of Almighty God, the Bishops of the various branches
of the Anglican Communion were drawn together
in closer bonds of brotherly love and sympathy.
The help and comfort which are due from the
branches of Christ s Church to each other are more
readily rendered, and more fully each is made ac
quainted with the wants of the rest. In this time of
religious activity and increased intercourse between
all parts of the world, there is greater need than ever
of mutual counsel amongst the Bishops of our
widely-extended Communion.
The Bishops of England, therefore, earnestly ask
you to join with them in prayer that we may all be
guided to a wise decision on this important matter,
and if it should be resolved to hold the Conference,
that its deliberations may issue in greater peace, and
strength, and energy to the whole Church of Christ.
Anxiously awaiting your answer,
I remain,
Your faithful Brother and Servant in Christ,
A. C. CANTUAR.
The Right Reverend the Bishop of
Archbishop Taifs Letter of Invitation, 1877. 115
" Covering letter" to tJie Metropolitans and Presiding
Bishops.
LAMBETH PALACE, S.E., March 28, 1876.
MY DEAR BISHOP,
After consultation with my Brethren the Bishops
of England, including the Archbishop of York, I beg
leave to address you as of
and request you to circulate among the Bishops of
your branch of the Church the enclosed documents,
having reference to a second Lambeth Conference.
I shall feel obliged by your favouring us at your
earliest convenience with your own views on the
questions now submitted to your consideration.
I remain your faithful brother and servant in
Christ.
A. C. CANTUAR.
No. XVII. (See page 21.)
Letter of Invitation to the Conference of 1878.
LAMBETH PALACE, July 10, 1877.
RIGHT REVEREND AND DEAR BROTHER,
It is proposed to hold a Conference of Bishops of
the Anglican Communion at this place, beginning
on Tuesday, the second day of July, Eighteen
hundred and Seventy-eight.
The Conference, it is proposed, shall extend over
four weeks ; the first week of four Sessions to be
devoted to discussions, in Conference, of the subjects
submitted for deliberation ; the second and third
1 e.g. t Metropolitan of Canada.
H2
ii6 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
weeks to the consideration of these subjects in Com
mittees ; and the fourth week to final discussions in
Conference, and to the close of the Meeting.
The subjects selected for discussion are the follow
ing :
1. The best mode of maintaining Union among the
various Churches of the Anglican Communion.
2. Voluntary Boards of Arbitration for Churches
to which such an arrangement may be applicable.
3. The relations to each other of Missionary
Bishops and of Misionaries in various branches of
the Anglican Communion acting in the same country.
4. The position of Anglican Chaplains and Chap
laincies on the continent of Europe and elsewhere.
5. Modern forms of infidelity, and the best means
of dealing with them.
6. The condition, progress, and needs of the
various Churches of the Anglican Communion.
I shall feel greatly obliged if, at your early con
venience, you will inform me whether we may have
the pleasure of expecting your presence at the Con
ference.
I am, Right Reverend and dear brother, yours
faithfully in Christ.
A. C. CANTUAR.
Official "Letter" of 1878. 117
No. XVIII. (See page 28.)
Letter of the Bishops attending the Lambeth Conference
of 1878, including the Reports adopted by the
Conference.
CONTENTS.
Introductory page 118
Report of Committee on " The best mode of maintaining
Union among the various Churches of the Anglican
Communion" nS
Report of Committee on " Voluntary Boards of Arbitra
tion for Churches to which such an arrangement
may be applicable " 125
Report of Committee on " The relation to each other of
Missionary Bishops and of Missionaries of various
branches of the Anglican Communion, acting in the
same country" 128
Report of Committee on "The position of Anglican
Chaplains and Chaplaincies on the Continent of
Europe and elsewhere " 133
Report of Committee appointed to receive questions sub
mitted to them, in writing, by Bishops desiring the
advice of the Conference on difficulties or problems
they have met with in their several Dioceses, and to
report thereon 134
Conclusion 140
Notes 141
Ii8 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
LETTER.
TO THE FAITHFUL IN CHRIST JESUS, GREETING
We, Archbishops, Bishops, Metropolitan, and other
Bishops of the Holy Catholic Church, in full com
munion with the Church of England, one hundred in
number, all exercising superintendence over Dioceses,
or lawfully commissioned to exercise Episcopal func
tions therein, assembled, many of us from the most
distant parts of the earth, at Lambeth Palace, in the
year of our Lord 1878, under the presidency of the
most reverend Archibald Campbell, by Divine Pro
vidence Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of all
England ; after receiving, in the private Chapel of
the said Palace, the blessed Sacrament of the Lord s
Body and Blood, and after having united in prayer
for the guidance of the Holy Spirit, have taken into
our consideration various definite questions submitted
to us affecting the condition of the Church in divers
parts of the world,
We have made these questions the subject of
serious deliberation for many days, and we now com
mend to the faithful the conclusions which have been
adopted.
Report of Committee on tlie best mode of maintaining
union among the various Churches of the A nglican
Communion.
I. In considering the best mode of maintaining
union among the various Churches of our Communion,
the Committee, first of all, recognise, with deep
thankfulness to Almighty God, the essential and
evident unity in which the Church of England and
the Churches in visible communion with her have
Official "Letter" of 1878. 119
always been bound together. 1 United under One
Divine Head in the fellowship of the One Catholic
and Apostolic Church, holding the One Faith revealed
in Holy Writ, defined in the Creeds, and maintained
by the Primitive Church, receiving the same Canonical
Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as con
taining all things necessary to salvation these
Churches teach the same Word of God, partake of
the same divinely-ordained Sacraments, through the
ministry of the same Apostolic orders, and worship
| one God and Father through the same Lord Jesus
[ Christ, by the same Holy and Divine Spirit, Who is
i given to those that believe, to guide them into all
truth.
2. Together with this unity, however, there has
existed among these Churches that variety of custom,
discipline, and form of worship which necessarily
results from the exercise by each " particular or
national Church " of its right " to ordain, change, and
abolish ceremonies or rites of the Church ordained
only by man s authority, so that all things be done
to edifying." We gladly acknowledge that there is
at present no real ground for anxiety on account of
this diversity ; but the desire has of late been largely
felt and expressed, that some practical and efficient
methods should be adopted, in order to guard against
possible sources of disunion in the future, and at the
same time further to manifest and cherish that true
and substantial agreement which exists among these
increasingly numerous Churches.
3. The method which first naturally suggests itself
is that which, originating with the inspired Apostles,
long served to hold all the Churches of Christ in one
undivided and visible communion. The assembling,
however, of a true General Council, such as the
Church of England has always declared her readiness
to resort to, is, in the present condition of Christen-
1 Note A, p. 141.
I2O Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
dcm, unhappily but obviously impossible. The diffi
culties attending the assembling of a Synod of all
the Anglican Churches, though different in character
and less serious in nature, seem to us nevertheless
too great to allow of our recommending it for present
adoption.
4. The experiment, now twice tried, of a Con
ference of Bishops called together by the Archbishop
of Canterbury, and meeting under his presidency,
offers at least the hope that the problem, hitherto
unsolved, of combining together for consultation
representatives of Churches so differently situated
and administered, may find, in the providential
course of events, its own solution. 1 Your Committee
would, on this point, venture to suggest that such
Conferences, called together from time to time by
the Archbishop of Canterbury, at the request of, or
in consultation with, the Bishops of our Communion,,
might with advantage be invested in future with
somewhat larger liberty as to the initiation and
selection of subjects for discussion. For example, a
Committee might be constituted, such as should
represent, more or less completely, the several
Churches of the Anglican Communion ; and to this
Committee it might be entrusted to draw up, after
,/ receiving communications from the Bishops, a scheme
of subjects to be discussed.
5. Meanwhile, there are certain principles of
Church order which, your Committee consider, ought
to be distinctly recognized and set forth, as of great
importance for the maintenance of union among the
Churches of our Communion.
(i.) First, that the duly-certified action of every
national or particular Church, and of each ecclesias
tical Province (or Diocese not included in a Province),
in the exercise of its own discipline, should be
1 Note B, p. 142.
Official "Letter" of 1878. 12 1
respected by all the other Churches, and by their
individual members.
(2.) Secondly, that when a Diocese, or territorial
sphere of administration, has been constituted by the
authority of any Church or Province of this Com
munion within its own limits, no Bishop or other
Clergyman of any other Church should exercise his
functions within that Diocese without the consent of
the Bishop thereof. 1
(3.) Thirdly, that no Bishop should authorize to
officiate in his Diocese a clergyman coming from
another Church or Province, unless such Clergyman
present letters testimonial, countersigned by the
Bishop of the Diocese from which he comes ; such
letters to be, as nearly as possible, in the form
adopted by such Church or Province in the case of
the transfer of a clergyman from one Diocese to
another.
Passing to details, your Committee would call
attention to the following points :
I. Of Church Organization
6. Inasmuch as the sufficient and effective organ
ization of the several parts of the Church tends to
promote the unity of the whole, your Committee
would, with this view, repeat the recommendation
in the sixth report of the first Lambeth Conference, 2
that those Dioceses which still remain isolated should,
as circumstances may allow, associate themselves into
a Province or Provinces, in accordance with the
ancient laws and usages of the Catholic Church.
1 This does not refer to questions respecting missionary
Bishops and foreign chaplaincies, which have been entrusted
to other Committees.
2 Note C, p. 145.
122 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
II. Of Common Work.
7. Believing that the unity of our Churches will
Le especially manifested and strengthened by their
uniting together in common work, your Committee
would call attention to the great value of such
co-operation wherever the opportunity shall present
itself ; as, for example, in founding and maintaining,
in the missionary fields, schools for the training of a
native ministry, such as that which is now contem
plated in Shanghai, and, generally, as far as may be
possible, in prosecuting missionary work, such as
that which the Churches in England and Scotland
are maintaining together in Kafiraria.
III. Of Commendatory Letters.
8 (i.) This Committee would renew the recom
mendation of the first Lambeth Conference, that
letters commendatory should be given by their own
Bishops to clergymen visiting for a time other
Churches than those to which they belong.
(2). They would urge yet more emphatically the
importance of letters commendatory being given by
their own clergymen to members of their flocks
going from one country to another. And they con
sider it desirable that the clergy should urge on such
persons the duty of promptly presenting these
letters, and should carefully instruct them as to the
oneness of the Church in its Apostolical constitution
under its varying organization and conditions.
It may not, perhapsj be considered foreign to this
subject to suggest here the importance of impressing
upon our people the extent and geographical dis
tribution of our Churches, and of reminding them
that there is now hardly any part of the world where
members of our Communion may not find a Church
one with their own in faith, order, and worship.
Official "Letter" of 1878. 123
IV. Of circulating Information as to the Churches.
9. It appears that the want has been much felt
of some centre of communication among the
Churches in England, Ireland, Scotland, America,
India, the Colonies, and elsewhere, through which
ecclesiastical documents of importance might be
mutually circulated, and in which copies of them
might be retained for reference. Your Committee
would suggest that the Society for Promoting
Christian Knowledge might be requested to maintain
a department for this purpose, supported by special
contributions ; and also that provision might be made
for the more general dissemination in each Church
of information respecting the acts and current history
of all the rest. They recommend that the Reports
and other proceedings of this Conference, which it
may think fit to publish, should be communicated
through this channel. They further think it desi
rable that the official acts, and other published
documents of each representative body of this Com
munion, should be interchanged among the respective
Bishops and the officers of such bodies.
V. Of a Day of Intercession.
10. Remembering the blessing promised to united
intercession, and believing that such intercession
ver tends to deepen and strengthen that unity of
His Church for which Our Lord earnestly pleaded
in His great intercessory prayer, your Committee
trust that this Conference will give the weight of its
recommendation to the observance throughout the
Churches of this Communion of a season of prayer
for the unity of Christendom. This recommendation
has been, to some extent, anticipated by the practice
adopted of late years of setting apart a Day of
Intercession for Missions. Your Committee would
124 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
by no means wish to interfere with an observance
which appears to have been widely accepted, and
signally blessed of God. But, as our Divine Lord
has so closely connected the unity of His followers
with the world s belief in His own Mission from the
Father, it seems to us that intercessions for the
enlargement of His Kingdom may well be joined
with earnest prayer that all who profess faith in Him
may be one flock under one Shepherd. With respect
to the day, your Committee have been informed that
the Festival of St. Andrew, hitherto observed as the
Day of Intercession for Missions, is found to be
unsuitable to the circumstances of the Church in
many parts of the world. They, therefore, venture
to suggest that, after the present year, the time
selected should be the Tuesday before Ascension
Day (being a Rogation Day), or any of the seven
days after that Tuesday ; and they hope that all
the Bishops of the several Churches will commend
this observance to their respective Dioceses.
VI. Of Diversities in Worship.
ii. Your Committee, believing that, next to
oneness in " the Faith once delivered to the saints,"
communion in worship is the link which most firmly
binds together bodies of Christian men, and remem
bering that the book of Common Prayer, retained as
it is, with some modifications, by all our Churches,
has been one principal bond of union among them,
desire to call attention to the fact that such com
munion in worship may be endangered by excessive
diversities of ritual. They believe that the internal
unity of the several Churches will help greatly to the
union of these one with another. And, while they
consider that such large elasticity in the forms of
worship is desirable as will give wide scope to all
legitimate expressions of devotional feeling, they
Official "Letter" of 1878. 125
would appeal, on the other hand, to the Apostolic
precept that " all things be done unto edifying," and
to the Catholic principle that order and obedience,
even at the sacrifice of personal preferences and
tastes, lie at the foundation of Christian unity, and
are even essential to the successful maintenance of
the Faith.
12. They cannot leave this subject without ex
pressing an earnest hope that Churchmen of all
views, however varying, will recognise the duty of
submitting themselves, for conscience sake, in matters
ritual and ceremonial, to the authoritative judgments
of that particular or national Church in which, by
God s Providence, they may be placed ; and that
they will abstain from all that tends to estrangement
or irritation, and will rather daily and fervently pray
that the Holy Spirit may guide every member of the
Church to " think and do always such things as be
rightful," and that He may unite us all in that
brotherly charity which is " the very bond of peace
and of all virtues."
Report of Committee on Voluntary Boards of A rbi-
tration for Churches to which such an arrangement
may be applicable :
i. Your Committee beg to submit the following
Report :
2. The necessity for considering the subject
which is entrusted to your Committee namely,
Voluntary Boards of Arbitration for Churches to
which such an arrangement may be applicable has
arisen from the fact that there is no appeal from the
Ecclesiastical Tribunals in the Colonial Churches to
any of the ordinary Ecclesiastical Courts of England,
or to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council,
when advising Her Majesty on appeals from Eccle
siastical Courts. No questions relating to the exer-
126 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
cise of discipline in a Colonial Church can come
before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council,
except on appeal from Civil Courts in the colony,
exercising jurisdiction in matters affecting property
or civil rights. The subject, therefore, before your
Committee is not the constitution or jurisdiction of
Provincial or Diocesan tribunals, but whether there
should be some external tribunals or " Voluntary
Boards of Arbitration " to which an appeal or refer
ence ought to be made ; how such Boards, when
necessary, should be constituted ; and under what
circumstances they should be approached.
3. Your Committee, having taken into considera
tion the whole question, especially with reference to
the action of some of the Colonial Churches since
1867, when a Report bearing upon this subject was
prepared by a Committee of the Lambeth Confer
ence held in that year, would make the following
general recommendations :
4. I. (a) Every Ecclesiastical Province, which has
constituted for the exercise of discipline over its
clergy a tribunal for receiving appeals from its
Diocesan Courts, should be held responsible for its
own decisions in the exercise of such discipline ; and
your Committee are not prepared to recommend that
there should be any one central tribunal of appeal
from such Provincial tribunals.
5. (b) If any Province is desirous that its tri
bunals of appeal should have power to obtain, in
matters of doctrine, or of discipline involving a
question of doctrine, the opinion of some council of
reference before pronouncing sentence, your Com
mittee consider that the conditions of such reference
must be determined by the Province itself ; but that
the opinion of the council should be given on a con
sideration of the facts of the case, sent up to it in
writing by the tribunal of appeal, and not merely on
an abstract question of doctrine.
6. (c] In Dioceses which have not yet been com-
Official " Letter " of 1 878. 1 27
bined into a Province, or which may be geographically
incapable of being so combined, your Committee
recommend that appeals should lie from the Diocesan
Courts to the Archbishop of Canterbury, to be heard
by his Grace with such assistance as he may deem
best. The circumstances of each Diocese must
determine how such consensual jurisdiction could be
enforced.
7. II. As regards the very grave question of the
trial of a Bishop, inasmuch as any tribunal, consti
tuted for this purpose by a Province, is necessarily a
tribunal of first instance, it would, in the opinion of
your Committee, be expedient that, when any such
provisions can be introduced by voluntary compact
into the constitutions or canons of any Church, the
following conditions should be observed :
8. (a) When any Bishop shall have been sen
tenced by the tribunal constituted for the trial of a
Bishop in any Ecclesiastical Province, if no Bishop
of the Province, other than the accused, shall dissent
from the judgment, there should be no appeal, pro
vided that the case be heard by not fewer than five
Bishops, who shall be unanimous in their judgment.
9. (b) If, in consequence of the small number of
Bishops in a Province, or from any other sufficient
cause, a tribunal of five comprovincial Bishops can
not be formed, your Committee would suggest that
the Province should provide for the enlargement of
the tribunal by the addition of Bishops from a
neighbouring Province.
10. (c) In the event of the Provincial tribunal
not fulfilling the conditions indicated in paragraph 8
of this Report, your Committee would suggest that,
whenever an external tribunal of appeal is not pro
vided in the Canons of that Province, it should be
in the power of the accused Bishop, if condemned,
to require the Provincial tribunal to refer the case to
at least five Metropolitans or chief Bishops of the
Anglican Communion to be named in the said
128 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
Canons, of whom the Archbishop of Canterbury
should be one ; and that, if any three of these shall
require that the case, or any portion of it, shall be
re-heard or reviewed, it should be so re-heard or
reviewed.
1 1. (d) In cases in which an Ecclesiastical Pro
vince desires to have a tribunal of appeal from its
Provincial tribunal for trying a Bishop, your Com
mittee consider that such tribunal should consist of
not less than five Bishops of the Churches of the
Anglican Communion, under the presidency of the
Archbishop of Canterbury, if his Grace will consent
thereto, with the assistance of laymen learned in the
law.
Report of Committee on the relation to each other of
Missionary Bishops and of Missionaries of
various branches of the Anglican Communion
acting in the same country.
i. Your Committee beg to submit the following
Report :
I.
2. Your Committee have had before them the
question of providing Books of Common Prayer for
converts from heathenism, suitable to the special
wants of various countries ; and they recommend as
follows :
3. They think it very important that such books
should not be introduced or multiplied without proper
authority ; and, since grave inconvenience might
follow the use of different Prayer Books in the same
district, in English and American Missions, they
recommend that, whenever it is possible, one Prayer
Book only should be in use.
4. It is expedient that Books of Common Prayer,
suitable to the needs of native congregations in
heathen countries, should be framed : that the prin-
Official " L etter " of 1 878. 1 29
ciples embodied in such books should be identical
with the principles embodied in the Book of Common
Prayer ; and that the deviations from the Book of
Common Prayer in point of form should only be
such as are required by the. circumstances of par
ticular churches.
5. In the case of heathen countries not under
English or American rule, any such book should be
approved by a Board consisting of the Bishop or
Bishops under whose authority the book is intended
to be used, and of certain clergymen, not less than
three where possible, from the diocese or dioceses, or
district, and should then be communicated by such
Bishop or Bishops, or by the Metropolitan of the
province to which any such Bishop belongs, to a
Board in England, consisting of the Archbishops of
England and Ireland, the Bishop of London, the
Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, together
with two Bishops and four clergymen selected by
them, and also to a Board appointed by the General
Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in
the United States of America.
6. No such book should be held to have been
authorised for use in public worship unless it have
received the sanction of these two Boards.
7. In any Diocese of a country under English
rule all such new books, being modifications or
versions of the Book of Common Prayer, should be
submitted, after approval by local authority, to the
Board in England only.
II.
8. Your Committee have considered the case of
Missions in countries not under English or American
rule, and they recommend as follows :
9. In cases where two Bishops of the Anglican
Communion are ministering in the same country, as
in China, Japan, and Western Africa at the present
I
130 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
time, your Committee are of opinion that under
existing circumstances each Bishop should have
control of his own clergy, and their converts and
congregations.
10. The various Bishops in the same country
should endeavour, as members of the same Com
munion, to keep up brotherly intercourse with each
other on the subject of their Missionary work.
II. In countries not under English or American
rule, the English or American Church would not
ordinarily undertake to establish Dioceses with
strictly-defined territorial limits ; although either
Church might indicate the district in which it was
intended that the Missionary Bishop should labour.
12. Bishops in the same country should take care
not to interfere in any manner with the congrega
tions or converts of each other.
13. It is most undesirable that either Church
should for the future send a Bishop or Missionaries
to a town or district already occupied by a Bishop
of another branch of the Anglican Communion.
14. When it is intended to send forth any new
Missionary Bishop, notification of such an intention
should be sent beforehand to the Archbishop of
Canterbury, to the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant
Episcopal Church in the United States of America,
and to the Metropolitan of any Province near which
the Missionary Bishop is to minister.
III.
15. Your Committee have had before them a
communication from the Bishop of Calcutta, dated
June 4th, 1878, containing Resolutions of the Bishops
of India and Ceylon, also a letter from Bishop Cald-
well, dated June ist, 1878, on the subject of the
relation of Bishops abroad to the Missionaries in
their Dioceses or districts.
Official " Letter " of 1 87 8. 131
1 6. The questions raised by the Bishop of
Calcutta s communication relate to the power and
authority of the Bishop in respect of giving and
withdrawing the licences, 1st, of the clergy under
his charge ; 2nd, of lay readers and catechists ; also
to the rights of the Bishop in reference to changes
in the management, order of service, and place of
worship of any congregation.
17. As regards the licensing of the clergy, it is
admitted generally that every Missionary clergyman,
whether appointed by a society or otherwise, should
receive the licence of the Bishop in whose Diocese
he is to labour ; but your Committee are of opinion
that, in case of refusal to give a licence to a clergy
man, the Bishop should, if the clergyman desire it,
state the reasons of his refusal, and transmit them
to the Metropolitan, who should have power to
decide upon their sufficiency ; such reasons should
also be accessible to the person whose licence is in
question. Where there is no Metropolitan, the
reasons should be transmitted to the Archbishop of
Canterbury, who should decide in like manner.
1 8. As regards the withdrawal of a licence, your
Committee find that in some Provinces the mode of
proceeding for revocation has been fixed by canon,
.and the jurisdiction thus created has been established
by consent. For these places it is not necessary to
make any recommendations. Where no such juris
diction exists, your Committee recommend that the
Bishop should in no case proceed to the revocation
of a clergyman s licence without affording him the
opportunity of showing cause against it, and that if
the Bishop shall afterwards proceed to revoke the
licence, he should, if the clergyman desire it, state
the reasons for his decision to such clergyman, and
also to the Metropolitan, who should have power to
sanction or disallow the revocation. In cases where
there is no Metropolitan, the Archbishop of Canter-
.bury should be regarded as the Metropolitan for this
I 2
132 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
purpose. No such revocation should take place,
except for grave ecclesiastical offences.
19. The Bishop would probably find it desirable,
where the clergyman is connected with one of the
great Missionary societies, to communicate with the
society, or its local representatives, before taking
steps for revocation of a licence.
20. With regard to lay agents, your Committee
consider it desirable that such as are employed in
more important spiritual functions should have the
licence, or other express sanction of the Bishop ; and
that other laymen employed in Missionary work
should be considered to have the implied sanction of
the Bishop, and should not continue to be so em
ployed, if the Bishop see fit, for a grave reason, to
forbid them.
21. The authority of the Bishop in appointing
places for public worship has been always admitted
in the Church. Every place in which the Holy
Communion is regularly celebrated should have the
sanction of the Bishop.
22. Your Committee have been asked for an
opinion as to Subordinate, Co-ordinate, or Suffragan
Bishops in India, to minister to native congregations,
within the limits of another Diocese. Your Com
mittee think that there are manifest objections to
the appointment of a Bishop to minister to certain
congregations within the Diocese of another Bishop,
and wholly independent of him. Your Committee
think that, for the present, the appointment of
Assistant Bishops, whether European or native, sub
ordinate to the Bishop of the Diocese, would meet
the special needs of India in this matter, and would
offer the best security for order and peace.
Official " Letter" of 1878. 133
Report of Committee on the position of Anglican
Chaplains and Chaplaincies on the Continent of
Europe and elsewhere.
i. Your Committee have to report that they have
agreed to the following recommendations :
2. I. That it is highly desirable that Anglican
congregations, on the Continent of Europe and else
where, should be distinctly urged not to admit the
stated ministrations of any clergyman without the
written licence or permission of the Bishop of the
Anglican Communion who is duly authorised to
grant it ; and that the occasional assistance of
strangers should not be invited or permitted without
some satisfactory evidence of their ordination and
character as clergymen.
3. II. That it is desirable, as a general rule, that
two chapels shall not be established where one is
sufficient for the members of both Churches,
American and English ; also that where there is
only one church or chapel the members of both
Churches should be represented on the Committee,
if any.
4. III. That it be suggested to the Societies
which partly support Continental Chaplaincies, that,
in places where English and American churchmen
reside or visit, and especially where Americans out
number the English, it may be desirable to appoint
a properly-accredited clergyman of the American
Church.
5. IV. That your Committee, having carefully
considered a Memorial addressed to the Archbishops
and Bishops of the Church of England by four
Priests and certain other members of " the Spanish
and Portuguese Reformed Episcopal Church," pray
ing for the consecration of a Bishop, cannot but
express their hearty sympathy with the Memorialists
in the difficulties of their position ; and, having heard
a statement on the subject of the proposed extension
134 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
of the Episcopate to Mexico by the American
Church, they venture to suggest that, when a Bishop
shall have been consecrated by the American Church
for Mexico, he might be induced to visit Spain and
Portugal, and render such assistance at this stage of
the movement as may seem to him practicable and
advisable.
Report of Committee appointed to receive questions
submitted to them, in writing, by Bishops desiring
the advice of the Conference on difficulties or
problems they have met with in their several
Dioceses, and to report thereon.
Attention has been called to the following subjects-
by questions submitted to your Committee :
A.
i. The position which the Anglican Church-
should assume towards the " Old Catholics " and
towards other persons on the Continent of Europe
who have renounced their allegiance to the Church of
Rome, and who are desirous of forming some con
nection with the Anglican Church, either English or
American.
2. Applications for intercommunion between
themselves and the Anglican Church from persons
connected with the Armenian and other Christian
communities in the East.
3. The position of Moravian ministers within
the territorial limits of Dioceses of the Anglican
Communion.
B.
I. The West Indian Dioceses.
(a) Their proposed Provincial organization.
(b) The position of their Diaconate.
2. The Church of Haiti.
Official " Letter" of 1878. 135
C.
Local peculiarities regarding the Laws of Marriage.
D.
A Board of Reference for matters connected with
Foreign Missions.
E.
Difficulties arising in the Church of England from
the revival of obsolete forms of Ritual, and from
erroneous teaching on the subject of Confession.
A.
The fact that a solemn protest is raised in so many
Churches and Christian communities throughout the
world against the usurpations of the See of Rome,
and against the novel doctrines promulgated by its
authority, is a subject for thankfulness to Almighty
God. All sympathy is due from the Anglican
Church to the Churches and individuals protesting
against these errors, and labouring, it may be, under
special difficulties from the assaults of unbelief as
well as from the pretensions of Rome.
We acknowledge but one Mediator between God
and men the Man Christ Jesus, Who is over all,
God blessed for ever. We reject, as contrary to the
Scriptures and to Catholic truth, any doctrine which
would set up other mediators in His place, or which
would take away from the Divine Majesty of the
fulness of the Godhead which dwelleth in Him, and
which gave an infinite value to the spotless Sacrifice
which He offered, once for all, on the Cross for the
sins of the whole world.
It is therefore our duty to warn the faithful that
the act done by the Bishop of Rome, in the Vatican
Council, in the year 1870 whereby he asserted a
supremacy over all men in matters both of faith and
136 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
v morals, on the ground of an assumed infallibility
I was an invasion of the attributes*"bf the Lord Jesus
\ Christ.
The principles on which the Church of England
has reformed itself are well known. We proclaim
the sufficiency and supremacy of the Holy Scriptures
as the ultimate rule of faith, and commend to our
people the diligent study of the same. We confess
our faith in the words of the ancient Catholic creeds.
We retain the Apostolic order of Bishops, Priests,
and Deacons. We assert the just liberties of par
ticular or national Churches. We provide our people,
in their own tongue, with a Book of Common Prayer
and Offices for the administration of the Sacraments,
in accordance with the best and most ancient types
of Christian faith and worship. These documents
are before the world, and can be known and read of
all men. We gladly welcome every effort for reform
upon the model of the Primitive Church. We do
not demand a rigid uniformity ; we deprecate need
less divisions ; but to those who are drawn to us in
the endeavour to free themselves from the yoke of
error and superstition we are ready to offer all help,
and such privileges as may be acceptable to them
and are consistent with the maintenance of our own
principles as enunciated in our formularies.
Your Committee recommend that questions of the
class now submitted to them be dealt with in this
spirit. For the consideration, however, of any definite
cases in which advice and assistance may, from time
to time, be sought, your Committee recommend that
the Archbishops of England and Ireland, with the
Bishop of London, the Primus of the Scottish Epis
copal Church, and the Presiding Bishop of the
Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of
America, the Bishop superintending the congrega
tions of the same upon the Continent of Europe, and
the Bishop of Gibraltar, together with such other
Bishops as they may associate with themselves, be
si
Official " Letter " of 1 878. 1 37
requested to advise upon such cases as circumstances
may require.
With regard to the special questions now raised
respecting Moravian Orders, 1 the above-mentioned
prelates are recommended to associate with them
selves such learned persons as they may deem emi
nently qualified to assist them by their knowledge
of the historical difficulties involved.
B.
I. (a) With respect to the West Indian Dioceses,
assuming such Dioceses to desire to be combined into
-a Province, your Committee- advise that the formal
consent of the Diocesan Representative Synods, if
free (as regards their relation to the State) to give
such consent, be first obtained.
The Bishops of the several Dioceses would then
forward such formal consent, or expressed desire, to
the Archbishop of Canterbury, requesting him to
give his sanction to the formation of the Province.
Whether the General Synod of the Province should
-consist of the Bishops, with representatives of the
1 The special questions submitted were the following :
" i. If a Moravian presbyter or deacon desires to be received
into the Anglican Ministry, ought I to (a) ordain him abso
lutely ; (b} reordain him conditionally ; (c} accept his orders as
valid, and simply give him mission in the Anglican Church ?
"2. Can I canonically and regularly commission a Bishop of
the Unitas Fratrum in my Diocese either to confirm or to ordain
for me, or to do both Episcopal acts according to the Anglican
ritual ?
" 3. Am I justified, if called on, to confirm children, or ordain
presbyters or deacons, or do both for the Moravians, in their
churches, and according to their ritual ?
" 4. May Anglican presbyters and deacons, with their Bishop s
sanction, officiate and minister the sacraments in Moravian
churches, according to their ritual, and invite Moravian pres
byters or deacons to execute the functions appertaining to their
office in Anglican churches, and according to Anglican ritual?"
138 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
clergy and laity of the respective Dioceses, or should
consist of the Bishops of the Province only ; and, in
the latter case, what limitation should be imposed
on the powers of such purely Episcopal Synod, is a
question which ought to be left to the Diocesan
Synods to decide, with the approval of the Arch
bishop of Canterbury.
If the West Indian Dioceses be formed into a
Province, it seems desirable that a Metropolitan
should be, in the first instance, elected from and
by the Bishops of the West Indian Dioceses.
(b} The questions l submitted respecting the pecu
liar circumstances of the West Indian Diaconate
appear to your Committee, upon full consideration,
to be such as can be adequately decided only in
Diocesan or Provincial Synods.
2. Your Committee desire to express their satis
faction on learning that a Church in connexion with
the Anglican Communion has been planted in the
island of Haiti ; that a Bishop has been consecrated
thereto by Bishops of the Protestant Episcopal
Church in the United States of America, and the
Bishop of Kingston, Jamaica ; and that successful
efforts are being made for the training of a native
Ministry ; and your Committee trust that God s
blessing may rest upon the Bishop, Priests, and
Deacons, and all other members of this Church.
1 These questions raised the following points ;
1. The desirableness, or otherwise, of recognising a Diaco
nate which, in certain cases, shall be practically permanent,
instead of regarding the Diaconate as the invariable step to
the Presbyterate.
2. The desirableness, or otherwise, of permitting Deacons
to engage in such secular callings as are not inconsistent with
the due and edifying discharge of sacred functions.
3. What modifications, if any, should be allowed as regards
the intellectual qualifications and tests to be required of, and
imposed on, such laymen as desire to become Deacons without
relinquishing their secular vocation.
Official "Letter" of 1878. 139
C.
With regard to those questions in connexion with
the Laws of Marriage which have been submitted
to them, your Committee, while fully recognising the
difficulties in which various branches of the Church
have been placed by the action of local Legislatures,
are of opinion that steps should be taken by each
branch of the Church, according to its own discre
tion, to maintain the sanctity of marriage, agreeably
to the principles set forth in the Word of God, as
the Church of Christ hath hitherto received the
same.
D.
With respect to what has been submitted to us on
the subject of Foreign Missions, your Committee are
of opinion that it is desirable to appoint a Board of
Reference, to advise upon questions brought before
it either by Diocesan or Missionary Bishops or by
Missionary Societies. Your Committee are further
of opinion that the details of the formation and con
stitution of such Board ought to be referred to the
Archbishops of England and Ireland, the Bishop of
London, the Primus of the Scottish Episcopal
Church, the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant
Episcopal Church in the United States of America,
with the Bishop superintending the congregations
of the same upon the Continent of Europe, and
such other Bishops as they may associate with them
selves, who should communicate with the authorities
of the various Colonial Churches, and with the ex
isting Missionary Organisations of the Anglican
Communion.
E.
Considering unhappy disputes on questions of
ritual, whereby divers congregations in the Church
of England and elsewhere have been seriously dis
quieted, your Committee desire to affirm the prin-
140 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
ciple that no alteration from long-accustomed ritual
should be made contrary to the admonition of the
Bishop of the Diocese.
Further, having in view certain novel practices
and teachings on the subject of Confession, your
Committee desire to affirm that in the matter of
Confession the Churches of the Anglican Communion
hold fast those principles which are set forth in the
Holy Scriptures, which were professed by the Primi
tive Church, and which were re-affirmed at the
English Reformation ; and it is their deliberate
opinion that no minister of the Church is authorised
to require from those who may resort to him to open
their grief a particular or detailed enumeration of
all their sins, or to require private confession previous
to receiving the Holy Communion, or to enjoin or
even encourage the practice of habitual confession
to a Priest, or to teach that such practice of habitual
confession, or the being subject to what has been
termed the direction of a Priest, is a condition of
attaining to the highest spiritual life. At the same
time your Committee are not to be understood as
desiring to limit jn any way the provision made
in the Book of Common Prayer for the relief of
troubled consciences.
These are the Reports of the Conference, and the
practical conclusions at which we have arrived.
Some of these conclusions have reference to the
special circumstances of different branches of the
One Church of Christ, according to peculiarities of
their various Missionary work for the heathen, or
their labours amongst their own people ; some em
body principles which apply to all branches of the
Church Universal. They are all limited in their
scope to those subjects which have been distinctly
brought before the assembled Bishops. We invite
to them the attention of the various Synods and
other governing powers in the several Churches, and
Official " Letter " of 1 878. 141
of all the faithful in Christ Jesus throughout the
world.
We do not claim to be lords over God s heritage,
but we commend the results of this our Conference
to the reason and conscience of our brethren as
enlightened by the Holy Spirit of God, praying that
all throughout the world who call upon the name of
our Lord Jesus Christ may be of one mind, may be
united in one fellowship, may hold fast the Faith
once delivered to the saints, and worship their one
Lord in the spirit of purity and love.
Signed, on behalf of the Conference,
A. C. CANTUAR.
C. J. GLOUCESTER AND BRISTOL,
Secretary of the Conference.
HENRY, BISHOP OF EDINBURGH,
Secretary of Committees.
I. BRUNEL, Chancellor of the Diocese of Ely,
Assistant Secretary.
NOTE A (page 119).
The Churches thus united are, at this time, the
Church of England and the Churches planted by
her in India, the Colonies, and elsewhere, most of
which Churches are associated into distinct Pro
vinces ! ; the Church of Ireland ; the Episcopal
1 There are six Provinces, viz. :
India, with six Dioceses.
Canada, with nine Dioceses.
Rupertsland, with four Dioceses.
South Africa, with eight Dioceses.
Australia, with twelve Dioceses.
New Zealand, with seven Dioceses.
And there are twenty Dioceses not yet associated in Provinces
142 LauibetJi Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
Church in Scotland ; the Protestant Episcopal
Church in the United States of America, with its
Missionary Branches ; and the Church in Haiti.
Among the external evidences of the unity of these
Churches, none is more significant than that
which frequently occurs the uniting of Bishops of
different Churches, e.g., of English, Scottish, and
American Bishops, in that most important function
by which the Episcopal succession is continued. On
more than one occasion, also, the Church in Scotland
has consecrated a Bishop in behalf of the Church of
England, when legal difficulties have impeded the
consecration in England.
NOTE B (page 120).
One of the results of the first Lambeth Con
ference was the appointment of a Committee to
prepare a Bill for placing on a more satisfactory
footing the status in England of clergy ordained by
Bishops of Colonial and other Churches outside the
Church in England.
A Bill to effect this object was introduced by
Lord Blachford into Parliament in the Session of
1873, an d became law in the Session of 1874, under
the name of "The Colonial Clergy Act, 1874."
(37 & 38 Viet., cap. 77.)
The Act does not apply to the clergy of the
Episcopal Church in Scotland. The legal disabilities
of the Scottish clergy were removed, and their
position denned, by the Act 27 & 28 Viet, cap 94.
With this exception, the Act of 1874 deals with
the status of all clergy ordained by Bishops other
than Bishops of Dioceses in England and Ireland.
It proceeds upon the assumption that all clergymen
so ordained may be admitted to exercise their
functions in the Church of England ; but that the
Bishops of that Church have a right, in respect of
Official "Letter" of 1878. 143
these clergy, to discretionary powers, analogous to
those which they have in the case of ordination.
The following are the provisions of the Act which
affect the clergy ordained by Bishops other than
those of (i) Dioceses in England; or (2) The
Church of Ireland ; or (3) The Episcopal Church in
Scotland.
" Section 3. Except as hereinafter mentioned, no
person who has been or shall be ordained Priest or
Deacon, as the case may be, by any Bishop other
than a Bishop of a Diocese in one of the Churches
aforesaid shall, unless he shall hold or have pre
viously held preferment or a curacy in England,
officiate as such Priest or Deacon in any church or
chapel in England, without written permission from
the Archbishop of the Province in which he proposes
to officiate, and without also making and subscribing
so much of the declaration contained in The
Clerical Subscription Act, 1865, as follows that
is to say :
" I assent to the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion,
and to the Book of Common Prayer, and of the
Ordering of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. I believe
the doctrine of the Church of England as therein
set forth to be agreeable to the Word of God ; and
in public prayer and administration of the sacra
ments, I, whilst ministering in England, will use the
form in the said Book prescribed and none other,
except so far as shall be ordered by lawful authority.
" Section 4. Except as hereinafter mentioned, no
person who has been or shall be ordained Priest or
Deacon, as the case may be, by any Bishop other
than a Bishop of a Diocese in one of the Churches
aforesaid, shall be entitled as such Priest or Deacon
to be admitted or instituted to any benefice or other
ecclesiastical preferment in England, or to act as
Curate therein, without the previous consent in
writing of the Bishop of the Diocese in which such
preferment or curacy may be situate.
144 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
" Section 5. Any person holding ecclesiastical pre
ferment, or acting as Curate in any Diocese in
England under the provisions of this Act, may, with
the written consent of the Bishop of such Diocese,
request the Archbishop of the Province to give him
a licence in writing under his hand and seal in the
following form that is to say :
" To the Rev. A. .,
" We, C., by Divine Providence Archbishop of D.,
do hereby give you, the said A. B., authority to-
exercise your office of Priest (or Deacon) according"
to the provisions of an Act of the thirty-seventh and
thirty-eighth years of her present Majesty, intituled
" An Act respecting Colonial and certain other
Clergy."
" Given under our hand and seal on the
day of
" C. (L.S.) D: "
And if the Archbishop shall think fit to issue such
licence, the same shall be registered in the registry of
the Province, and the person receiving the licence
shall thenceforth possess all such rights and advan
tages, and be subject to all such duties and liabilities,
as he would have possessed and been subject to if
he had been ordained by the Bishop of a Diocese in
England : Provided that no such licence shall be
issued to any person who has not held ecclesiastical
preferment or acted as Curate for a period or periods
exceeding in the aggregate two years."
The Act also contains the following provision as
to the Consecration of Bishops :
" Section 12. It shall be lawful for the Archbishop
of Canterbury or the Archbishop of York, for the
time being, in consecrating any person to the office
of a Bishop, for the purpose of exercising Episcopal
functions elsewhere than in England, to dispense, if
Latin Version of " Letter" of 1878. 145
he think fit, with the oath of due obedience to the
Archbishop."
NOTE C (page 121).
The following extract from the Report refers to-
this subject : " Your Committee strongly recommend
that all those Dioceses which are not as yet gathered
into Provinces should, as soon as possible, form part
of some Provincial organization. The particular
mode of effecting this in each case must be deter
mined by those who are concerned."
The Committee would also call attention to the
concluding paragraph of the same Report :
" In the case of the limits of an existing Province
being altered, the consent of the Synod of that
Province would be required for the alteration."
No. XIX. (See page 28.)
Latin and Greek Versions of the Bishops Letter of
1878.
EPISTOLA CENTUM EPISCOPORUM
IN ANGLIA CONGREGATORUM, IN PALATIO LAM-
BETHANO, MENSE JULIO,
ANNO SALUTIS MDCCCLXXVIII.
Fidelibus in Christo salutem in Domino.
Nos Archiepiscopi, Metropolitan!*, aliique Episcopi
Sanctae Catholicae Ecclesiae, centum numero, cum
Ecclesia Anglicana plenarie communicantes, universi
super Dioeceses jurisdictionem Episcopalem exerci-
tantes, vel ad Episcopalia munia in eis obeunda legi-
K
146 LauibetJi Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
time delegati, multi nostrum ex remotissimis orbis
terrarum regionibus, congregati in Palatio Lam-
bethano, anno salutis MDCCCLXXVIII. praesidente
Reverendissimo Praesule Archibaldo Campbell, Di-
vina Providentia Archiepiscopo Cantuariensi, totius
Angliae Primate, participes facti, in dicti Palatii
sacello, Sacrosanctorum Mysteriorum Corporis et
Sanguinis Domini Nostri Jesu Christi, et orationibus
adunati ad Spiritus Sancti directionem impetrandam,
de variis praefinitis quaestionibus consilium inivimus
ccetui nostro propositis, ad statum Ecclesiae perti-
nentibus per diversas mundi partes diffusae.
His quaestionibus serio deliberandis complures dies
impendimus, jamque determinationes earum a nobis
approbatas fidelibus in Christo commendamus. 1
Quae sit optima ratio pensitantes unitatis con-
servandae inter varias nostrae Communionis Eccle-
sias, primum omnium Deo Omnipotenti gratias
agentes quam maximas, manifestam unitatem ag-
noscimus, qua Ecclesia Anglicana, et Ecclesiae cum
ilia visibiliter communicantes, jugiter connexae per-
manserunt.
Conjunctae invicem sub Uno Divino Capite, Jesu
Christo, in unius Catholicae et Apostolicae Ecclesiae
societate, firmiter tenentes unam Fidem, in Verbo
Dei revelatam, Symbolis definitam, et a Primitiva
Ecclesia constanter conservatam, easdem Canonicas
Scripturas Veteris et Novi Testamenti recipientes,
utpote omnia continentes ad salutem sempiternam
necessaria, hae nostrae Ecclesise eundem Dei Ser-
monem praedicant, eorundem Sacramentorum, di-
vinitus institutorum, per eorundem ordinum Apos-
tolicorum ministerium dispensatorum, participes sunt,
1 In hac Latina interpretatione eorum capitulorum praecipue
delectum fecimus quae ad Ecclesiam Universalem attinere
quodammodo videbantur. In Anglico autem archetype Rela-
tiones Delegationum (Reports of Committees)^ a Coetu com-
probatae, plenarioe reperiuntur.
Latin Version of " Letter" of 1878. 147
et Eundem Deum et Patrem venerantur, per Eundem
Dominum Jesum Christum, in Eodem Spiritu Sancto
super omnibus fidelibus effuso ad ducendos eos in
omnem veritatem.
Verum enimvero cum hac unitate consociata nun-
quam non extitit ea consuetudinum, disciplinae et
rituum varietas, quae ab ilia praerogativa enasci solet,
quam quaevis Ecclesia particularis, sive nationalis,
jure sibi vindicat ; scilicet constituendi, immutandi,
atque abrogandi caerimonias vel ritus Ecclesiasticos,
humana tantum auctoritate ordinatos, modo omnia
ad aedificationem fiant.
Libenter quidem profitemur, nullam revera etiam-
num sollicitudinis causam in hac diversitate reperiri.
Constat autem, votum aliquorum animis nuper con-
ceptum vocibus quoque passim significatum fuisse,
hoc praesertim intuitu, ut rationes quaedam actu
efficaces a nobis adhibeantur, ad occasiones discordiae
praecidendas, et ad illam genuinam et essentialem
unitatem, quae nostras Ecclesias indies supercres-
centes complectitur, manifestandam amplius atque
fovendam.
Primum quidem hujus concordiae tuendae ilia in
mentem venit ratio, quae inde ab Apostolis ipsis
divinitus inspiratis originem ducens, Ecclesiis omni
bus in eadem individua et visibili unitate continendis
diu inserviit. Hodierna autem rei Christianas ea est
conditio, infausta quidem sed manifesta, ut Concilium
vere CEcumenicum, ad quod Ecclesia Anglicana se
paratam esse convenire semper professa est, convocari
non possit. Difficultates quidem quae impedimento
sunt quominus Synodus ex omnibus Anglicanis Eccle
siis conflata congregetur, re diversae et minus graves,
nimiae tamen nobis videntur, quam ut ilia ratio unitatis
conservandae a nobis commendetur.
Aliud autem experimentum, secundi jam vice
factum, congregatio scilicet Episcoporum ab Archi-
episcopo Cantuariensi convocatorum, et Eo prae-
sidente deliberantium, spem saltern suppeditat, quass
ia
148 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
tionem, quae hactenus insolubilis videbatur, rerum
vicissitudine divinitus ordinata sponte solutum iri, ita
ut Procuratores Ecclesiarum, situ et administratione
diversarum, consultandi invicem causa, in unum
ccetum coalescant.
Persuasum est nobis, ad unitatem in fide semel
sanctis tradita proxime accedere divini cultus com-
munionem, eamque societates Christianas firmissmo
nexu copulare : et probe recordantes Librum Precum
Communium, ab omnibus nostris Ecclesiis, aliqua-
tenus variatum, retineri, et eximium unitatis vinculum
extitisse, fratres nostros admonendos censemus, divini
cultus communionem immoderatis rituum diversi-
tatibus in discrimen posse adduci. Intrinsecam
Ecclesiarum variarum unitatem custodiendae earum
concordiae adjumentum allaturam esse validissimum
confidimus. Et dum libere profitemur, amplam
quandam rituum Ecclesiasticorum flexibilitatem esse
exoptandam, quippe quae latum quasi campum pate-
faciat legitimis piorum affectuum significationibus,
nihilominus ad Apostolicum praeceptum provocamus,
" Omnia ad aedificationem fiant," et ad illam Ecclesiae
Catholicae legem principalem, rectum ordinem com-
mendantis atque obedientiam, etsi cum privatorum
sensuum et propensionum abnegatione conjungantur,
tanquam subsidia Christianas Unitatis fundamentalia,
imo etiam ad fidem ipsam efficaciter conservandam
necessaria.
Nolumus huic argumento finem imponere, quin
spem nostram serio testificemur, omnes Ecclesiae
fideles agnituros fore, utcunque studiis in varia in-
clinantes, universes oportere subjici, conscientiae ergo,
in rebus ad ritus et caerimonias attinentibus, judiciis
illis auctoritatem obtinentibus, quae ab ilia Ecclesia
particular! vel national! promulgata sint, sub cujus
tutela, Dei providentia, sint constituti ; et sibi sedulo
temperatures ab omni qualicunque alienationis
vel exacerbationis occasione; et quotidie Deum
enixe obsecraturos, ut omnia Ecclesiae membra a
Latin Version of "Letter" of 1878. 149
Spiritu Sancto dirigantur ad quaecunque recta sint
excogitanda atque exequenda ; et ut nos universi
in ilia fraterna dilectione, quae pacis est ipsissimum
vinculum et omnium virtutum, adunare dignetur.
Gratias agimus Deo Omnipotenti maximas, eo quod
protestationes solennes a tot Ecclesiis et societatibus
Christianis per orbem terrarum profectae sint contra
sedis Romanae usurpationes, et contra novicia dog
mata ejus auctoritate promulgata.
Affectuum benevolorum significatio debetur ab
Ecclesia Anglicana universis, sive Ecclesiis, sive
singulis, contra hos errores protestantibus, quippe
qui difficultatibus forsitan laborent specialibus, quum
propter Incredulitatis incursiones, turn vero propter
Romanae sedis arrogantiam.
Nos confitemur Unum tantum " Mediatorem Dei
ct hoininum, Hominem Jesum Christum," " Qui est
super omnia Deus in saecula." Nos repudiamus,
utpote Scripturis Sacris et Catholicae veritati ad-
versantem, qualemcunque doctrinam alios mediatores
Ejus vice constituentem, vel aliquatenus detrahentem
ab Illius Divina Majestate, et a plenitudine Deitatis
in Illo inhabitantis, quae immaculato illo Sacrificio,
semel ab Eo in Cruce propter omnium hominum
peccata oblato, infinitum pretium impertita est.
Commonendi igitur sunt a nobis fideles, facinus
illud a Romano Episcopo patratum, in Concilio
Vaticano, anno MDCCCLXX., quo sibi supereminentiam
super omnes homines in rebus fidei et morum
vindicavit, arrogatae sibi Infallibilitatis praetextu,
attributorum Ipsius Domini Nostri Jesu Christi
manifestam fuisse invasionem.
Innotuerunt omnibus regulae illae fundamentales,
juxta quas Ecclesia Anglicana seipsam reformavit.
Nos Sanctas Scripturas sufficientem et supremam
fidei regulam esse declaramus, et omnibus nostris
diligenter scrutandas proponimus. Nos fidem nostram
150 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
ipsis Symbolorum antiquorum vocibus profitemur.
Nos Apostolicum ordinem Episcoporum, Presbyte-
rorum et Diaconorum retinemus. Ecclesiarum par-
ticularium sive nationalium libertates legitimas
asserimus. Nos Librum Communium Precationum,
necnon Administrationis Sacramentorum, populis
nostris in manus damus, vernaculo eorum sermone
compositum, et juxta optima et antiquissima fidei
et divini cultus exemplaria adornatum. Orbi uni-
verso patefacta sunt haec nostra documenta ; sciuntur
et leguntur ab omnibus.
Libenter igitur amplectimur universes sese re-
formandi studiosos ad amussim Ecclesiae primitivae.
Rigidam Uniformitatem non flagitamus ; superva-
caneas dissensiones deprecamur. Omnibus ad nos
allectis, dum jugum erroris et superstitionis excutere
moliuntur, commodare operam nostrum parati sumus,
et talia eis subministrare privilegia, qualia ipsis
possint esse gratiosa, et nostris ipsorum institutis et
formulis Ecclesiasticis consentanea.
* * *
Sed haec hactenus. Quod ad quaestiones attinet
nobis propositas quae leges Matrimonii tangunt, dum
ex animo agnoscimus angustias, ad quas nonnullse
nostrae Ecclesiae a popularium suorum legum latio-
nibus redactae sunt, censemus quoque officium esse
uniuscujusque Ecclesiae operam dare, ut sanctitati
Matrimonii custodiendae consulatur, secundum man-
data in Dei Verbo praescripta. et quemadmodum ab
Ecclesia Christ! hactenus sunt recepta. -
Rixas quasdam luctuosas de rituum Ecclesiasti-
corum quaestionibus, considerantes, quibus nonnullae
nostrae congregationes graviter perturbatae sunt, nos
affirmamus, nihil in diu usitata caerimoniarum con-
suetudine, contra Episcopi admonitionem, debere
innovari.
Denique, nonnullas novitates, quum in agendo turn
in docendo, quod ad Confessionem attinet, contem-
plantes, nos declaramus Anglicanae Communionis
Latin Version of " Letter" of 1878. 151
Ecclesias firmiter eas leges tenere, quae in hanc rem
in Sacris Scripturis sunt promulgate, primitivae
Ecclesiae professione sancitae, et ab Anglicana Refor-
matione instauratce. Et nos consulto censemus,
nulli Ecclesiae Ministro licere, ab iis, qui ad eum se
recipiunt, doloris aperiendi gratia, omnium sigillatim
peccatorum minutam enumerationem exquirere ; vel
privatam confessionem iis imperare, ante Sacro-
sanctae Eucharistiae participationem ; vel prsescri-
bere, vel etiam commendare, confessionis consuetudi-
nariae coram sacerdote exercitationem ; vel docere
talem exercitationem, vel sacerdoti subjectionem,
directionis, ut aiunt, causa, conditiones esse neces-
sarias, ad sublimissimam vitam spiritualem attin-
gendam. Nihilominus non in animo habemus quo-
quam modo terminos imponere subsidiis, quae in
Libro nostro Precum Publicarum, ad conscientiarum
sollicitarum sublevationem, provide subministrantur.
Hae sunt determinationes quaestionum nobis pro-
positarum, quatenus Ecclesiae Universalis vel Ec-
clesiarum nostrarum conditionem attingere vide-
bantur.
Ad haec inspicienda varias Ecclesiarum Synodos,
aliosque in eis Ecclesiis auctoritatem exercitantes, et
universes denique Christi fideles, per orbem terrarum
invitamus. Dominationem in cleris non affectamus :
sed has determinationes, a ccetu nostro approbatas,
rationi et conscientiae fratrum nostrorum, utpote a
Spiritu Sancto illuminatorum, commendamus, enixe
Deum apprecantes, ut omnes ubique gentium Domini
Nostri Jesu Christi Nomen invocantes, una mente
consocientur, in una Communione conjungantur,
unam fidem semel sanctis traditam firmiter com-
plectantur, et unum Suum Dominum in uno puritatis
et dilectionis spiritu venerentur. Amen.
Subscripsi, in nomine Ccetus Lambethani,
ARCHIBALDUS CAMPBELL,
Archiepiscopus Cantuariensis.
152 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
EIII5TOAH EKATON
AyyXt a (rvvr)6pota [J.f.vu>v, ev IIaXa.Tia> Aaju/J^avw, fj.rjvl
T_..\. .. - (1878).
Tot? Trio-Tols ev XpicrTM Irjaov I )(aipeiv ev
f JTyU.ei? Ap^ie7rlo-KO7roi, Jkf^TpOTroXtTat, KOI a XXot
7TicrKOTTOi Trjs djtas Ka^oXtr)? S/c/cX^cr/a?, (rvyKoivw-
vovvres oXo/cX^pco? T^ Ayy\tKavf) .E/ocX??cr/a, etcarov
ovre<? TOV apidfjwv, aTravres eiriaKOTrrjv irapoiKiwv
eTnrrjBevovTes, rj VO/U/LIO)? eTTicrKOTnica Te\r) ev aurat?
7nrerpafj,/ui6voi, avveXdovres, TroXXot e^ THJLWV airo TWV
fiaKpordrcov T?}? oiKOVfievrjs K\ipdra}V } ev ra> HaXariw
AajAflydavw, erei TT}? roO Kvp[ov evcraptcwa-ecDS awotj
(1878), TrpoeSpevovros (repaa-iAKOTdTOv ApxiftdXSov
Ka/i7r/3eXX, rrj 0elq Trpovoia ^Ap^ieTTia/coTrov
Kavrovapt as, Eincr KOTTWV o\t]S A<y<y\ia<$ irpwro-
6 povov, yu,ereiX?7<6Te<?, ev ru> vai^ TOV elp^^evov 7ra\ariov.
TWV osyiwv fj,v(TTr)pLQ)V TOV crw/iaTO? Kal TOV aijaaro? TOV
Kvplov, Kal Trpocrewxais rjvw/jLevot, vTrep TT}? TOV dyiov
xeipaywyias, e^eTao-iv TreTroirjica/jiev Sicxfropwv
rj/Jilv 7rpo^e^\ r rjnev(ov, dvrjKOVTWv et? TTJV TT}<?
^ecriv ev 8ta<>6pot<; TOV tcoo~fj,ov fjiepecriv.
Ilepl TOVTOJV TWV ^TTjfiaTcov cr7rou8a/&)9 Sia TrXeiovaiv
r)/j,ep(t)v <rvfJilBe(3ov\evK6Tes, TrapaTiOepeOa Tavvv rot?
7Ti<7Tot? ra <Tvp.Trepdcrp.aTa I J/J-LV vTrep avTwv SeSoyfAeva. 1
" Evdvp.ovp.evoi TTJV eViT^SetoTttr^i fj,e6o8ov Trpo? TTJV
Tfjp rjo iv TT}? evoTrjTOs TWV Sicupopcov TTJS ^yaerepa? KOIVW-
vlas eKK\T]o-i(t)V } TrpctiTHTTa TrdvTOiv dvafyvwpl^ofjbev, yiter
eyfcap&lov ev^apLCfTlaf TOJ IlavTOKpaTopt, Seat, Ti]V
ovcricoSrj Kal evapyfj evoTijTa, ev fj rj
1 Ev ravrr] TVJ yu-CTac^pacrei, TWV Ke^aXat wv e/cXoy7;v
T^Ka/xcv, TWV /xaXicrTa rrj KaOoXov E/cKXr^crc a Trpocr^KovTaiv* fv
^ T(3 AyyXtKw T^5 JLTTICTTOX^S dp^eTt Tra) ai TWV e7rtT/)07rwi TOV
<ru^jSoi)Xtot> eK$e creis (Reports of Committees), O.TTO TOV 2v/x-
jSovXtow ooKifj.ao-6ti(ra.i, oXoTeXtis evpia-Koirai.
Greek Version of "Letter" of 1878. 153
(Tia, Kal al KK\r)criai ycter aim}? oparwf crvyKOivwvovaat,,
SiareXovcri avvr)fi,/J<evat,. Hvaftevai VTTO
Ke<f)a\fi<;, ^Irjcrov Xpiarov, ev rfj Koiva>via
Ka6o\tKr]<; EKKXTjcrias, Kare-^ovaai TTJV piav TTICTTIV,
ev Tafc aytais Tpafyals d7roKKa\v/J,iJ,evrjv } ev rot? 2vfA-
<apia/jt,evr)v, Kal VTTO rfj? apxfjQev
Se^of^evai ra? aura? navoviKas
r?}? 7raXata9 /cat r^? Kaivfj? diadiJKrjs, 0)9 ra Trdvr
avayiccua irepie^ovaa^, avrai al
L TOV avrbv TOV 0eov \6^/ov Krjpvaa-ovcri,
&v debdev BiarerayfjievfDv jjLvcrTrjpiwv [j,6Ta\a/j,{3dvov<ri
-Sia r?}9 VTrripeaias rwv avrwv aTroaToXiKoiiv ffadfAwv, Kal
Trpocncvvovcri ra> avT<f> eoi Kal IlaTepi, Sta TOV avrov
Kvpiov Irjaov Xpicrrov, ev TCO avra> a<^(,w Kal Beta)
Uvevaari, Tracri rot9 Tncrrevovcriv eTri^oprjyov/jievM , 7rpo9
TO b^rf^elv avrovs et 9 rrdaav rrjv
/j,ev ovv /zero. rawTT/9
KK\t](ria^ eKelvrj cruvrjdeias,
Kal \eiroupjla<i Sia^opd, ^rt9 dva<yKata)<>
acrKrjareo)*; rr}9 e|-oucrta9, T?}9 eKdcrrr) fj,epiKr) rj
KK\T](rlq 7rpocrr]KOVcrr)<;, TOV Sia
Kal aKvpovv Oea-jjiov^ Kal TeXera9 eKKXrjcrtaa TiKds, vir 1
dvOpwrrlvr]^ e^ovcrias SiaTeTay/Aevas, povov twcrre TrdvTa
<yi f yvea 6at.
A<ruev(i)s fjuev opohoyov/jiev pr)Se/j,lav eiVert evpi-
aKecrOai (tepipvifi aiTLav, Sia TavTrjv Trjv 8ia<j)c0viav.
Oyu&)9 pevToi 7Tt7rd^77crt9 Tt9 vewcTTi eTTtTToXu alcrdijcrei
Kal \6yy Tre&avepwTai, 609 evvorjTea Kal irpoaairTea e lrj
opyavd Tiva, 7rpo9 TO eKKOTTTetv, el TU%OI, ci^o/o/ia?
Kal 7rp09 T^V \afjiirpOTepav dTroSeifyv Kal
d\r)&ivfj<f Kal ovcrKaSovs OfiOVoloG ev r)^e-
To TrpcoTov fjbev et9 vovv dvep^ofjuevov opyavov
wa-ews ev\,6ya)<t dv elt] e/ceti/o, oirep, dp%r)v e^ov avro
V 0eo(f)6pa)V aTTOcrToXwv, <rvveevj;v aTrd
XptcrTOv eKK\r)(ria$ ev paa dSiaipeTW Kal opaTrj
A\\d fj,ev ovv f) avvddpoKris d\r)divcO)<i
SVVOQOV, Tr/309 OTrolav rj A<yy\iKavrj EKK\rjyla TTUVTOTC
elvat avvep^ecrQai,, ev Trj crrjpepivfj
154 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
TOU Xpiariavicr/jLov xaracndcrei, 8ucrTt^w9 fiev, a XXa
(fravepws, Tre(f)VKV d/jLr) %avo<;. Al fjuev aTropiai, ami>69
TrapaKoXovdijaeiav av rfj avve\vcri crvvobov etc iraawv
TWV dyyXifcavtov e/CKX-rjaicov o-vyfceKporrj^evr]^, icaiTrep
dvo/Aoiot, Kal f^erpioirepai rwv elprjfievcav, o/i&K fievroi
eicrl /Sapvrepai r; crvy^wprjcraL Tavrt]^ T?}? f^eOoSov, ev
TW vvv "xpovw, (Tvvaiveo-iv. A\\* 77 irelpa, St? yeyovvia,
(rvu8ov\tov eTTio-KOTTMV, aTTC rov Kavrovaptas Ap-yi-
. / v r , > - r ^
avyKeKA.r}/jievcov, Kai VTT avrov Trpoeopevovros
eX,7Ti8a 77^?^ Trape^ei avro/jidrov Xi^creco?
XP 1 T v v ^ v d\vrov, SrjXovort crvv-
Kal crvp/3ou\evcr(a<i roTroTijp rjTMV eK/cX^o-iav
rf} re Qkazi Kai rf) $t,oiKij<ri SiCKpepovcrcov.
Eryyvrara yttera rrjv evorrjTa ev rfj Trlcrrei, rfj rot?
0,7/049 aTraj; irapd&oOeiar], TreireLO fji.evoi ap,ev rrjv
0pr]o-Keia<> Koivwviav la^ypOTarov eivat, avvSeafAOv
TTpO? TTjV GVVCufylV TWV ^pHTTiaVlKWV eTCil.plWV KOI
/caX&i? fAfj,vr]/jievoi on TO rjperepov TWV Sijf^oaicov
l jrpocrev )(wv fii/SXtov, perd TIVWV O LCOV S^Trore a\X,otcoo-e&)Z. (
ev 7rac7ai9 rjp,erepai^ eKK\.i)(Tiat<> Kar^o^vov, e^aiperov
evorrjTos yeyove (frvXaKnjpiov, vovdeieiv d!;iov/j,v roix;
ort avrrj r) 6pr)<TKia<; Kotvcovla KivSvvevoi
av\vfj,alvecrdai St virepfioXiKwv tepovpylas irapa^Xd^ewv.
H eaooTepiicr) fj,ev rwv KK\r)<n(ov evoTrjs ravrrj rff
OpricrKeias KOivwviq, Ka6u><; Tre7rot6afJ,ev, vTrypeTrja-ei
aXX 6 yu,w9, (/catVep evvoovvTes on roia Tt9 d/jKf>i\a(j)r)<>
~\,t,Tovp<yiK(ii)v reXercoy k\evdepLa aiperrj ecrnv, o ia
7ra<7at9 ra69 vo/Ainais BprjcrKevTifCwv alaQr^dTwv d-rro-
&elt;criv evpv^wpiav av ^aplo-airo,) TTJV
"TrapayyeXiav eTriKaXov/jLeda, " Trdvra ?rpo9
ryi<yvea6(o" KOA, rbv Ka6o\iKOv Kavova
TOV Btopi^ovTtt evra^Lav Kal TreiOap-^iav, Kainrep
avrcnrapvricrews IStaiv Trpocr/cX/aetwy Kal al<jQr]<re.wv
a7ro8t8o/ie^a9, 009 yjpKjnaviKris evorrjro^ 0e/xeXta, Kal a>9
dvayKai a? 7T/909 avTr/s rr)<> iricrrew^ viK^opov vTrep-
dcnricnv. Toiyapovv ov 7rav<r6fie0a roiavra vovBe-
Trplv eK^xavfjaaL e/CTfW9 T?/f eXTT/Sa, ori Trdvra
rjfjLerepwv e/c/cX^crtcoy refcva, OTroiaif rtalv ovv Oew-
TO K.aQr\Kov
Greek Version of " Letter" of 1878. 155-.
virordcrcrevOai, Sid rrjv a-vveiSrjcriv, ev #6071,049 Kal
reXerat? dprjaKevriKals, rals e^ova laariKalf Kplarecriv rfjs
fj,epiKff<? f/ edvtKrjs eKKXijaias, < 779 Beta irpovoia rvy%d-
VOXTI, KaryKiafAeva Kal ori d(pej;ovrat, Travros
619 d\\orplo)crtv rj fpe^tcr/ioy reivovros, /cat o
TTpocrev^ovrai, iva TO ayiov Hvevpa iravra
eX,97 0877777 49 TO \oyl%a0at Kal epyd^ea
a Set, Kal rjfids Trdvras crvvaTTTrj rfj
<f)itcf] eKeivr) dydTrrj, ^Ti9 eo-Tty aiyT09 elp^vrjf teal Tracr&v
dperwv
ra> Havroicpdropi @ew, oTt cre/ii/o-
Sia/J,aprvpia ^f)X r i rai " 7r Trdvv TroXXwi/
e/c/eX77crt<yi>, /cai OTTO KOLVOT^TWV xpicmavwv KaQ 1 o\ov
rbv KOCT/JLOV, Kara r&v rrjs Pw/ia/a9 KadeSpas TrXeoye/CTJ?-
, Kal Kara TWV vewrepiK&v So-yfidToiv, VTT e
H j. r yyiKavr] KKr)crta o>eiet Trcrav
eKK\rjcriai^ Koivfj, KOI ^picmavol^ ISla,
Kara TOVTWV Tf^avrnjidrwv, Kal a-Tevo%a)povfjievoi<? } el TV-
o/MoXoyovfjiev eva /J.OVQV Meair^v Oeov Kal
dvdpa>7TQ)V, " Av6 putTTOv Iri&ovv XpLcrrbv, 09 ecnLV ejrl
Trdvrwv @eo9 6^X0777x09 et9 TOW alwvas. ATrwOovjjieOa,
ft>9 evavriov Tat9 Ppa(j)al<f Kal rfj Kado\iKrj aKrjOeiq, irdv
oriovv Boy/jLa, OTrep Kadicrrdvai aXXoi;9 fJ.ecrira<; dvr
^EKeivov roX/jujo eiev dv, r/ dtyatpelv oriovv cnro rrjs
Betas fJ,e i ya\ei6r T)ros rov TrXrjpcoftaros TTJS Oeorrfro^ ev
Avry KaroiKovvros, Kal rifj,r]v direcpov Trape^ovros TT}
d[A(o/jL<p eKeivrj dvaia, rfj arca% vrr Avrov vrcep rov o\ov
rov K0(rp,ov djjLapnwv eVt aravpov Trpoaeve^deicn]^.
Xpea>crrov/j.ev ovv vovOerelv TOW TUG-TOW, TO epyov o
Karelpyacrrai 6 rrjs Pco/jLtj 1 ? eViWo7T09 eVefc 1870 eV rfj
.BartKavfj crvvoSq), Bi ov vTrepo^fjs dvreTroirjcraro vrrep
Trdvrcov dvOp&rcwv, rrjv re iriariv Kal rd tfurj, em rrpo-
- -" -
avrw
yeyovevai ro)v d^icofMarajv T&&gt; Kvpita Irjcrov Xpitrrp
156 Lambeth Conferences #, 1867 and 1878.
PvwpifJiOt Trdaiv elcriv ol Kavoves, Ka6 ovs 77 AyyXiKavrj
EKK\,r)crla kavrrjV fJ,Teppv6/J,icrv. AvaKrjpVTTOfiev rrjv
avTapKeiav Kal Tr]V vTrepo^rjv TWV lepwv Ppacpwv, to?
OplCTTlKrjV 7TlCTTef09 (TTdduiJV, Kal TO) r)fJ,6Tpa> X<Z&&gt; TTCtp-
ay r ye\\o/.iev a-irovftaiav ai/Twv /jLe\err]v rrjv Tricmv r^wv
rat? TWV ap%alcov 2vfi,8o\a>v (fxtivals 6f^o\ojov/jiev TO ajro-
<TTO\LKOV ray/Ad ^ETTIO-KOTTCOV, Tlpea ^vreptav Kal Aiaicovwv
Karexp/Aev rrjv evvopov e\evdepiav fiepucwv rj edviKwv
KK\ricnu>v Sia/3e{3aiov/jieda TO) XaaJ rj/AWV e<yxet,plofj,ev,
ev rf) ey^copiw avrov StaXeT&&gt;, /Si/SXt oz/ Trpoaev^cov Srj-
/Aoalcov Kal reA-ercoi , Kal TMV p^vcrrripiwv lepovpytas, Kara
ra apicna Kal irdKatorara %picmaviKf)<; Tricnews Kal
\arpeias ap^eruvra.
Tavra ra rjfM&v fjiaprvprj/AaTa evcajriov TT}? ot/coy/iey^?
fyvyvwcrKo/jieva Kal avayi^vwcTKO^eva VTTO
ovv acnrafyfjLeda Traaav irelpav /J,Tappv6fjit-
Kara TO TrapdSeiy/jia r/}9 dp%aia? eKK\.r](ria<; <rre-
peav ravTorrjTa OVK aTrairovfAev avw$>e\ei<s B^ocrTacria^
TrapaiTovp,e6a iracriv rot? Trpo? J7//.a9 e^eX/co/iezw? ev
rc3 eTn^eipetv eavrovs eXevdepSxrat avro vyov TrXdvrjs
Kal SeicrtSat/ioy/a,9 irdcrav ftorjdetav 7rpodv/jia)<; irporel-
vofj,ev, Kal ola eaurot? Trpovofiia eirj dpecna, Kal ^/ierepoi?
KavodLv, rot? ev ^//-erepai? SiarvTrcacrecnv (apta/Jievois, GV/J,-
(jxova, e0e\6vTO)<f TrpoKOfu ^o/jiev.
* * * *
Ilepl TWV fyjTrjfidTWV rjfjuv irapaTeOevTwv virep TWV
TOV TdjjiQv v6fj,(0v e^avi^o/uLev, OTI r9 aTropt a? 7rLjtjv(o-
a-KOVTes, ev at? eviai, e /c/cX^o-tat e/j,7T\eKovTat } Sid TWV
6eap,wv T^9 TOTriKrjs vo/jiodeala^j vofll^OfJt&f OTI, Set Trdaav
6KK\r)cr{av, KaTa TTJV eaurr}? ^vd>fJbr]v, TIJV TOV Tdjjiov
dyiwavvrjv Sia^fXctTretz/, /cara TO, ev TOJ pijfiaTi TOV
eov opiadevTa, Kal Katid r) TOV XpiaTov
ftexpi TOV vvv TavTa SeSeKTai.
AvaOewpovvTes TOU? \vypovs BiaXoyicrfAovs, Trepl
TWV eKK\.ria ia<TTiKWv, Si wv evia TWV rj/jLeTepwv if\.r)6r)
Te6opv/3r)VTai, Sia/3e/3aiovfj,eda TOV Kavova, opi-
LijSev Seiv vewTepi^eiv, ev Trj eidicr/J,evrj 0pr]crKcia<;
i, KaTa TT}? TOV ITTICTKOTTOV vovdealas.
Greek Version of "Letter" of 1878. 157
AOITTOV ev0vfj,ovfj,evoi KaivoTo/jLias rtvas, rfj re
Kal rfj SiSaxfj, irepl rr}<^ egofj,o\oyri<rea)<;, 8ua"xypi
T<*9 T779 Ay^iKavij^ KOivwvias EKK\ij(Ti a<; Kparelv /3e-
TOW Kavovas rrepl rfjs egofj-okoyija-ews ev rat?
Tpacpai^ aTroSeSeiyfievovs, Kal VTTO r?}? dp-yaicis
avvc0/j,o\oyr)/j,evov<t, KCU ev rfj *A>yy\i,Ky Me-
avaKeicaivw/jievovs Kal eo-/ce/Lt/zei/&)? eyvco-
/J,rj8evl r^? KK\r)<rias vtrijperr) egetvai diraireiv
7rpo9 avrbv (f)oiTa>VTa>v, Bia rr)v TT}? avrwv XVTTT??
aTracrwv rwv afiapTiwv Kara yttepo? eKdcrrwv
, fj ISlav ^Of J LO\.6 r yrj(nv eK/3acravieiv, Trpo rijs
etv^aptcrT/a? //.eTaXrJ-^rea)?, ^ eTrirdcrcreiv rj Kal
Trapaiveiv rrjv rr/<> avvr)0ov<> rc3 lepet ^0/^0X07770-60)9
eTTirijSeva tv, r) SiSdcrKeiv OTL rota eTTiTijSevcris, rj TO UTTO-
rdcro-ecrQat rfj ovTaxri /caXou/ie^ t epe&)9
dvajKald ecm TrpOTratSey/iara Trpo? r^y r?79
TrvevfjiariKrjf ^0)779 Tri/3acnv. r OfMO)<? iikirroi
evvoovpev eTnre/Aveiv rr/v ev rf) /3tyS\&) reoy
irpocreir^wv, 7rpo9 TOI/ /Sefiaprjfiev jw crvvei&ijcreajv eVt-
Kov^>tcrfjiov, eTn^ofyrj^Lav Trpovevori^ev^v.
Tavrd ecrn TO. o-u/u,7repao-//.ara et9 a KaTtjifTiJKaf^ev^
Trept TWI/ i7//.ty jrpo^eQ\^fjbevwv ^rir^^drwv, ev ol9 ra
Trdvrcov Tr<
, Kal Tracriv a7rXw9 TOt9 vrtcrTOt9 e
OVK dvTt7roiov[Ae0a rov KaraKvpteveiv ev
aXXa ravra rat rfuerepu) o-ty/,/3oi>Xi ft) dpecravra avvta-ra-
jjuev rci) Xo7to-/ic3 ^at TT; o l i etS^o et TWZ/ dSe\<f)(t)v, w?
i/Tro TOU dytov IIvevfj,aTo<; ire^>wria ^ev(i)v, e /CT6i/co9 @ea>
Trpocreu^oyaei ot, iW Traj/re? ot TO ovo^a rov Kvpiov e-TTi-
Ka\ov/J,evoi, fjiia yvtofJLrj Kal fj,ic Koivwvia rjvw^kvoi, rrjv
TTtcrriv rrjv a-nal* T0t9 071049 irapa^oOelo av /3e/3aia>$ Kpa-
roixJiv, Kal TW evl avrwv Kvpiw ev evl a<f>dapcria<;
076177779 Trvev/jLari \arpeva)criv.
ev ru> ovojjiari rov
APXIBAAAO2 KAMIIBEAA,
O Kavrouaptas
158 LainbetJi Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
No. XX. (See page 30.)
Official List of the Bishops present at the Lambeth
Conference of 1878.
The Archbishop of Canterbury.
The Archbishop of York.
The Archbishop of Armagh.
The Archbishop of Dublin.
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
Bristol.
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
The Bishop
of London.
of Winchester.
of Llandaff.
of Ripon.
of Norwich.
of Bangor.
of Gloucester and
of Chester.
of St. Alban s.
of Hereford.
of Peterborough.
of Lincoln.
of Salisbury.
of Carlisle.
of Exeter.
of Bath and Wells.
of Oxford.
of Manchester.
of Chichester.
of St. Asaph.
of Ely.
of St. David s.
of Truro.
of Rochester.
of Lichfield.
of Sodor and Man.
of Meath.
of Down,
of Killaloe.
of Limerick,
of Derry.
of Cashel.
of Ossory.
The Bishop of Moray. Primus.
The Bishop of St. Andrew s.
The Bishop of Edinburgh.
The Bishop of Aberdeen.
The Bishop of Glasgow.
The Bishop of Brechin.
The Bishop of Argyll.
The Bishop of Delaware.
The Bishop of New York.
The Bishop of Ohio.
The Bishop of Pennsylvania.
The Bishop of Western New
York.
The Bishop of Nebraska.
The Bishop of Pittsburgh.
The Bishop of Louisiana.
The Bishop of Missouri.
The Bishop of Long Island.
The Bishop of Albany.
The Bishop of Central Penn
sylvania.
The Assistant Bishop of North
Carolina.
The Bishop of New Jersey.
The Bishop of Wisconsin.
The Bishop of Iowa.
The Bishop of Colorado.
The Bishop of Haiti.
The Bishop of Shanghai.
The Bishop of Montreal.
Metropolitan.
The Bishop of Fredericton.
The Bishop of Nova Scotia.
The Bishop of Ontario.
The Bishop of Huron.
The Bishop of Toronto.
The Bishop of Niagara.
The Bishop of Madras.
The Bishop of Colombo.
The Bishop of Bombay.
Official List of Bishops Present, 1878. 159
The Bishop of Guiana. The Bishop of Bloemfontein.
The Bishop of Kingston. The Bishop of Pretoria.
The Bishop of Antigua.
The Bishop of Barbados. The Bishop of Rupertsland.
The Bishop of Nassau. Metropolitan.
The Bishop of British
The Bishop of Sydney. Me- Columbia.
tropolitan. The Bishop of Saskatchewan.
The Bishop of Adelaide. TU TV i. r*i. TP n_i j
The Bishop of North Queens- The Bishop of the Falkland
land. Islands -
The Bishop Suffragan of
The Bishop of Chnstchurch. Dover.
, n The Bishop Suffragan of
I he Bishop of Dunedm. Guildford.
, . , ,.., . The Bishop Suffragan of
The Bishop of Gibraltar. Nottingham.
The Bishop of Capetown. Bishop Perry.
Metropolitan. Bishop McDougall.
The Bishop of St. Helena. Bishop Ryan.
The Bishop of Maritzburgh. Bishop Claughton.
OFFICERS OF THE CONFERENCE.
THE BISHOP OF GLOUCESTER & BRISTOL,
Secretary of the Conference.
THE BISHOP OF EDINBURGH,
Secretary of Committees.
ISAMBARD BRUNEL, D.C.L., \ Assistant
Chancellor of the Diocese of Ely, ] Secretary.
No. XXI. (See page 25.)
Order of Bishops in the Processions at Lambeth Palace
and in St. Paul s Cathedral in 1878.
The following is an official list, as prepared for the
Processions on July 2 and July 27, 1878. The order
had to be materially changed on the occasion of the
actual services, by the absence, at the moment, of
160 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
Bishops who had been expected, but the same prin
ciple of arrangement was in each case followed. The
Archbishop of Canterbury had the Archbishop of
York and the Bishop of London on his right and
left hand, and was preceded by the Metropolitans of
the Irish, Scottish, and Colonial Provinces. The
Bishops from the United States walked, as guests,
abreast of the English Diocesans. The other Bishops
were arranged, two and two, according to date of
consecration. The processions moved, as usual, in
reverse order, the junior Bishops first, the Arch
bishops last.
Archbishop of York.
Bishop of Delaware.
,, New York.
Ohio.
Archbishop of Canterbury.
,, Armagh.
,, Dublin.
Primus of Scottish )
Episcopal Church. J
Bishop of Sydney.
,, Christchurch, \
New Zealand. /
,, Montreal.
Capetown.
Bishop of London.
Winchester.
Llandaff.
Ripon.
Pennsylvania. ,, Montreal. ,, Bangor.
,, Western New) ,, Capetown. ., /Gloucester &
York. / \ Bristol.
,, Nebraska. ,, Rupert s Land. Chester.
Bishop of Pittsburgh.
Louisiana.
Missouri.
Long Island.
Albany.
Central Pennsylvania.
Assistant Bishop of North Carolina.
Bishop of New Jersey.
Wisconsin.
Iowa.
Colorada.
St. Asaph.
St. David s.
Truro.
Sodor and Man.
Guildford.
Bishop Perry.
,, M Dougall. Bishop Ryan.
Bishop of Meath. Claughton.
And the other Bishops according to their date of consecration.
Rupert s Land.
Bishop of St. Alban s.
Hereford.
Peterborough.
Lincoln.
Salisbury.
Carlisle.
Exeter.
Bath and Wells.
Oxford.
Manchester.
Chichester.
Ely.
Rochester.
Lichfield.
Dover.
Nottingham.
Killaloe.
Invitations to the Third Conference. 161
No. XXII. (See page 3 1.)
Invitations to the Conference of 1888.
[Although the foregoing pages have dealt only
with the Conferences of 1867 and 1878, it may be of
interest to append copies of the circular letters of
invitation issued in 1886 and 1887 in connexion with
the Conference now about to assemble in July,
1888.]
LAMBETH PALACE, July, 1886.
RIGHT REVEREND AND DEAR BROTHER,
There appears to be a general desire that a Con
ference of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion
should again be held at Lambeth within the next
few years.
I have accordingly decided (following the prece
dents of 1867 and 1878) to issue next year an invi
tation to such a Conference, which would assemble,
according to our present plan, in the summer of
1888.
It will be of material assistance to myself and to
those who are good enough to co-operate with me in
making the necessary arrangements, if you can, at
your early convenience, inform me whether it seems
to you probable that you will be able to take part
in our deliberations, and whether there are any sub
jects of general importance which appear to you
specially appropriate for discussion in the Con
ference.
I am in hopes that the suggestions which may
reach me in answer to this circular letter will enable
me to issue, next spring, the formal invitations to
the Conference, together with an intimation as to the
definite subjects which will, in the following year,
come before us for discussion.
I have made these preliminary arrangements in
L
1 62 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.
conjunction with the Archbishop of York and the
English Bishops, and I am glad to be able to inform
you that the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol,
whose efficient aid as hon. Episcopal Secretary both
in 1867 and 1878 will be gratefully remembered,
has again kindly consented to act in that capacity.
We have associated with him as Hon. Assistant
Secretary the Dean of Windsor, who, as resident
chaplain to Archbishop Tait, was responsible for
many of the arrangements of the Conference of
1878.
It is not necessary that I should assure you of
our earnest desire that you will unite with us in
humble prayer to Almighty God that His guidance
and blessing may be vouchsafed in rich measure,
both to our ultimate deliberations and to the arrange
ments necessary to secure their efficiency.
I remain,
Your faithful Brother and Servant in Christ,
EDW. CANTUAR.
The Right Reverend the Bishop of
LAMBETH PALACE, gtA November, 1887.
RIGHT REVEREND AND DEAR BROTHER,
I am now able to send you definite information
with regard to the Conference of Bishops of the
Anglican Communion to be held at Lambeth, if God
permit, in the summer of next year.
In accordance with the precedent of 1878, it has
been arranged that the Conference shall assemble on
Tuesday, July 3rd, 1 888. After four days session
there will be an adjournment, in order that the
various Committees appointed by the Conference
may have opportunity of deliberation. The Con
ference will re-assemble on Monday, July 23rd, or
Tuesday, July 24th, and will conclude its session on,
Friday, July 27th.
Invitations to the TJiird Conference. 163
Information as to the Services to be held in con
nexion with the Conference, and other particulars,
will be made public as the time draws near.
I have received valuable suggestions from my
Episcopal brethren in all parts of trie world as to the
subjects upon which it is thought desirable that we
should deliberate.
These suggestions have been carefully weighed by
myself and by the Bishops who have been good
enough to co-operate with me in making the pre
liminary arrangements, and the following are the
subjects definitely selected for discussion :
I. The Church s practical work in relation to
(A) Intemperance, (B) Purity, (C) Care of
Emigrants, (D) Socialism.
II. Definite Teaching of the Faith to various
classes, and the means thereto.
III. The Anglican Communion in relation to the
Eastern Churches, to the Scandinavian and
other Reformed Churches, to the Old
Catholics, and others.
IV. Polygamy of heathen converts. Divorce.
V. Authoritative standards of Doctrine and
Worship.
VI. Mutual relations of Dioceses and Branches of
the Anglican Communion.
May I venture again to invite your earnest prayer
that the Divine Head of the Church may be pleased
to prosper with His blessing this our endeavour to
promote His glory, and the advancement of His
Kingdom upon earth ?
I remain,
Your faithful Brother and Servant in Christ,
EDW. CANTUAR.
The Right Reverend the Bishop of
WYMAK AND SONS, PRINTERS, GREAT QUEEN STREET, LONDON, W.C.
Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge,
publications on
THE CHRISTIAN EVIDENCE,
BOOKS.
Christianity Judged by its Fruits. *. d.
By the Rev. C. Croslegh, D.D. Post 8vo Cloth boards 1 6
The Great Passion-Prophecy Vindicated.
By the Rev. Brownlow Maitland, M.A. Post 8vo.
Limp cloth 10
Natural Theology of Natural Beauty (The}.
By the Rev. R. St. John Tyrwliitt, M.A. Post 8vo.
Cloth boards 1 6
Steps to Faith.
Addresses on some points in the Controversy with Unbelief.
By the Rev. Browulow Maitland, M.A. Post, 8vo.
Cloth boards 1 6
Scepticism and Faith.
By the Rev. Brownlow Maitland. Post 8vo. Cloth boards 1 4
Theism or Agnosticism.
An Essay on the grounds of Belief in God. By the Rev.
Brownlow Maitland, M.A. Post Svo Clothboards 1 6
Argument from Prophecy (The).
By the Rev. Brownlow Maitland, M.A., Author of
" Scepticism and Faith," &c. Post Svo Clothboards 1 6
Some Modern Religious Difficulties.
Six Sermons preached, by the request of the Christian
Evidence Society, at St. James s, Piccadilly, in 1 876 ;
with a Preface by his Grace the late Archbishop of Canter
bury. Post Svo Clothboards 1 6
Some Witnesses for the Faith.
Six Sermons preached, by th request of the Christian
Evidence Society, at St. Stephen s Church, South Kensing
ton, in 1877. Post Svo Clothboards 1 4
Theism and Christianity.
Six Sermons preached, by the request of the Christian
Evidence Society, at St. James s, Piccadilly, in 1878.
Post Svo Cloth boards J <J
1-10-85.]
Publications on the Christian Evidence-
Being of God, Six Addresses on the. *. .
By C. J. Ellicott, D.D., Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol.
Small Post STO Cloth boards 1 6
Modern Unbelief: its Principles and Charac-
TERISTICS. By the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Glo ucester
and Bristol. PostSvo doth boards 1 6
When was the Pentateuch Written ?
By George Warington, B.A., Author of " Can we Believe
in Miracles ?" &c. Post 8vo Cloth board* 1 6
The Analogy of Religion.
Dialogues founded upon Butler s "Analogy of Religion."
By the late Rev. H. R. Huckin, D.D., Head Master of
Repton School. Post 8vo Cloth boards 3
"Miracles."
By the Rev. E. A. Litton, M.A., Examining- Chaplain of
the Bishop of Durham. Crown 8vo Cloth boards 1 (5
Moral Difficulties connected with the Bible.
Being the Boyle Lectures for 1871. By the Ven. Arch
deacon Hessey, D.C.L., Preacher to the Hon. Society of
Gray s Inn, ice. FIRST SERIES. PostSvo. ...Cloth boards 1 6
Moral Difficulties connected with the Bible.
Being the Boyle Lectures for 1872. By the Ven. Arch
deacon Hessey, L.C.L. SECOND SERIES. Post 8vo.
Cloth boards 1 6
Prayer and recent Difficulties about it
The Boyle Lectures for 1873, being the THIRD SERIES
of "Moral Difficulties connected whh the Bible."
By the Ven. Archdeacon Hessey, D.C.L. Post 8vo.
Cloth hoards 2 15
The above Three Series in a volume Cloth boardx ti
Historical Illustrations of the Old Testament.
By the Rev. G. Rawlinson, M.A., Camdon Professor of
Ancient History, Oxford. PostSvo Cloth boards 1 (5
Can we Belieue in Miracles?
By G. Warington, B.A., of Caius College, Cambridge.
PostSvo Cloth boards 1 G
The Moral Teaching of the New Testament
VIKWEDAS EVIDENTIAL TO ITS HISTORICAL TRUTH. 15y tho
Rev. C. A. Row, M.A. PostSvo ClolhboanU 1 9
Scripture Doctrine of Creation.
By the Rev. T. R. Birks, M.A., Professor of Moral Philosophy
at Cam bridge PostSvo Clotli. board* 1 6
ioHfi ou ihc Christian Evidence.
Price.
The Witness of the Heart to Christ s . d.
Being the Hu .sean Lectures for 1878. By the Eight Rev.
W.Boyd Carpenter, Bishop of Kipon. Post Svo. Cl. boards 1 6
Thoughts on the First Principles of the Positive
PHILOSOPHY, CONSIDERED IN RELATION TO THE HUMAN
MIND. By the late Benjamin Shaw, H.A., late Fellow
of Trinity College, Camb. Post Svo Limp cloth 8
Thoughts on the Bible.
By the late Eev. W. Gresley, M.A., Prebendary of Lichfield.
Post Svo Cloth boards 1 6
The Reasonableness of Prayer.
By the Rev. P. Onslow, M.A. Post Svo Paper cover 8
Paley s Evidences of Christianity.
A New Edition, with Notes, Appendix, and Preface. By
the Rev. E. A. Litton, M.A. Post Svo Cloth boards 4
Paley s Natural Theology.
Revised to harmonize with Modern Science. By Mr. F. le
Gros Clark, F.R.S., President of the Royal College of
Surgeons of England, &c. Post Svo Cloth boards 4
Paley s Horce Paulince.
A. new Edition, with Notes, Appendix, and Preface. By
J. S. Howson, D.D., Dean of Chester. Post Svo. Cloth boardt 3
Religion and Morality
By the Rev. Richard T. Smith, B.D., Canon of St. Patrick s,
Dublin. Post Svo Cloth boards 1 6
The Story of Creation as told by Theology
AND SCIENCE. By the Rev. T. S. Ackland, M.A. Post Svo.
Cloth boards 1 6
Man s Accountableness for his Religious Belief.
A. Lecture delivered at the Hall of Science, on Tuesday,
April 2nd, 1872. By the Rev. Daniel Moore, M.A., Holy
Trinity, Paddington. PostSvo Paper cove} 3
The Theory of Prayer; with Special Reference
TO MODERN THOUGHT. By the Rev. W. H. Karslake,
M.A., Assistant Preacher at Lincoln s Inn, Vicar of
"Westcott, Dorking. Post Svo Limp cloth 1
The Credibility of Mysteries.
A Lecture delivered at St. George s Hall, Langham Place.
By the Pi, r. Daniel Moore, M.A. Post Svo .Paper cover 3
4 Publications on the Christian Evidence.
P ice.
The Gospels of the New Testament: their ,.d.
GENUINENESS AND AUTHORITY. By the Eev. E. J.
Crosthwaite, M.A. Post 8vo Paper cover 3
Analogy of Religion, Natural and Reuealed,
TO THE CONSTITUTION AND COURSE OF NATURE : to which
are added, Two Brief Dissertations. By Bishop Butler.
NEW EDITION. Post Svo Ctothboards 2 6
Christian Evidences :
intended chiefly for the young. By the Most Reverend
Eichard Whately, D.D. l 2mo Paper cvoer 4
The Efficacy of Prayer.
By the Eev. W. H. Karslake, M.A., Assistant Preacher
at Lincoln s Inn, &c. &c. Pot 8vo Limp cloth 6
Science and the Bible : a Lecture by the Right
Eev. Bishop Perry,D.D. ISmo. Paper covered., or Limpcloi/i 6
A Lecture on the Bible. By the Very Reu.
E. M. Goulburn, D.D., Dean of Norwich. 18mo. Paper cover 2
The Bible : Its Evidences, Characteristics, and
EFFECTS. A Lecture by the Right Eev. Bishop Perry, D.D.
18mo Paper cover 4
The Origin of the World according to
REVELATION AND SCIENCE. A Lecture by Harvey
Goodwin, M.A., Bishop of Carlisle. Post Svo.. ..Cloth boards 4
How I pasted through Scepticism into Faith.
A Story told in an Almshouse. Post Svo Paper cover 3
On the Origin of the Laws of Nature.
By Sir Edmund Beckett, Bart. PostSvo Cloth boards 1 6
What is Natural Theology ?
Being the Boyle Lectures for 1876. By the Eev. Alfred
Barry, D.D., Bishop of Sydney. Post. Svo Cloth boards 2 6
* For List of TRACTS on the Christian Evidences, see tlte Society s
Catalogue B.
LONDON:
SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE,
NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE, CHARING CROSS, W.C.;
43, QUEEN VICTORIA STREET, E.G. ; 26, SI OEOROB s PLACK, 3.W.
BRIGHTON : 135. MOBTB OTBBET.
J
L5L35 OF
1888
AND
118269
