I believe the Bishops will more and more connive hard as long as they see men more and more bent on real good work. They have tried within the last few years a policy of strict, rigid, and harsh conformity, but that has broken down. The Prolocutor advocated a relaxation of the provisions of the Shortened Services Act, but, unfortunately, legislation has to be done in Parliament, and without setting up for being wise or unwise, I will say that any suggestion of legislation in Parliament on behalf of the Church frightens me. You have to deal in Parliament with people who look upon reasonableness as indubitable evidence of some deep and dangerous conspiracy. The more the Church, in Congress or otherwise, urges a proposition as requisite, reasonable, and simple, the more I dread some strange explosion when that proposal reaches St. Stephen's. The Prolocutor's propositions regarded abstractedly are most valuable. We must take things as they are, and must, I fear, build our plans for the improvement of worship on the existing platform. One thing before I sit down. Î must with all the energy at my command protest against Mr. Robinson's advice to adopt those American "elegant extracts," the selections from the Psalms, as alternative with our old Catholic recitation of the whole Psalter. Every man will take the selection which he happens to fancy, and the majestic Psalms will be reduced to a dull party pamphlet.

The Rev. T. H. CLARK, Clifton.

I VENTURE to rise to call attention to a rubric in the American Prayer Book which has not been referred to, and that is one which gives permission to omit repetitions when two or three services are used together. I allude to repetitions such as the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, and the Collect for the day. We pray for the Queen many times in one service. Some would say, "divide your services. That is sooner said than done, especially in country parishes. There is one thing I must protest against, and that is the way in which the Litany is now treated in hundreds of churches in this land. Many farmers, for instance, think they are robbed of their right if they do not hear it on Sunday morning from January to December, this being the only time, perhaps, at which they can go to church. I know that some say that the Lord's Prayer comes in very appropriately at different points in the service, but that is an explanation which I do not think quite commends itself to the ordinary mind. It is the last straw which break's the camel's back, and it may be that the last repetition in the morning service produces listlessness or unreality. Nearly half of the Protestant worshippers in this country worship outside the walls of the Church of England, and I think this may be one, among many other things, which tends to repel them from worshipping in our churches. Can we not, in some way or other, obtain permission to drop certain prayers which have been already used at previous parts of the service? Should we think anything unimportant which tends to promote reality of worship?

The Rev. ED. HOARE, Vicar of Holy Trinity, Tunbridge Wells, and Honorary Canon of Canterbury.

We have a great treasure committed to us in our Prayer Book, and we must take care that we do not play tricks with it. I do not, in the least, wish to shorten the time of worship in the Church of England. The full Morning Service, with chants and hymns, occupies about an hour, and that is the only hour spent in public worship, in the course of the week, by hundreds and even thousands of people in this country, and surely that is not too much to be devoted to the Lord. At the same time I fully admit that there are some additions which we greatly need. We want more canticles, and more special and occasional services. I never can forget how ashamed I felt when the late Archbishop Langley ordered a Special Service of Prayers respecting the cattle plague. On that occasion my own church was filled to overflowing with non-conformists as well as churchmen. We went through the whole of the Evening Service exactly the same as we should have done if there had been no cattle plague at all; and there was no allusion to the subject that had brought us together till we came to that prayer just at the end. I believe that there is nothing more grand in Christendom than the old service of the Church of England, offered up with simplicity and warm-heartedness. Let anyone attend the anniversary service of the

Church Missionary Society, in St. Bride's church, with the vast congregation enter ing heart and soul into the grand old Protestant worship of the Church of England, and he will find such a holy solemnity that it will be strange if he does not go home and say, "surely this is a foretaste of heaven." Let us by all means make use of the elasticity now given us, but let us treasure the dear old book, and never forget the lines :

"The friends thou hath and their adoption tried,
Grapple them to thy soul with hooks of steel;
But do not dull the palm with entertainments
Of each new hatched, unfledged stranger."

Improve it if you can, but cling to it as the most sacred treasure which God ever gave to this country. What we want is not so much to alter the service as to put life into the use of it. Life in the services of the Church is more important than the alteration of the book. The prayers, canticles, etc., should be read in a way that people can appreciate and understand them, and if that is done we shall not want any alteration or shortening of the Prayer Book.

EDWARD J. COUNSELL, ESQ., Collector of H.M. Inland Revenue, Worcester.

I THINK we ought all to be thankful for the papers and discussion to which we have so far listened. The desire for additional services is the desire of an untiring spirit to find expression; is the result of a growing, expanding life. We heard, just now, something about the bishops conniving at the supplementary services, and as the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Beresford Hope) was referring to them, I was reminded of the special service which is to be held to-morrow in Truro Cathedral, a service of thanksgiving and prayer for the soldiers who have come home from the Soudan. This is but the outcome of special services of Intercession held in Truro, and originated by the bishop on behalf of our soldiers and sailors during the Egyptian campaign. When the Archbishop was at Truro he originated and inaugurated a special service for Christmas Eve, which was the most popular of the year. Hundreds of persons were turned away because of the incapacity of the wooden building, which serves as the temporary cathedral, to accommodate the worshippers. At this service there were short special hymns, lessons, and collects, followed by carols; the service was most successful; and if Dr. Benson, as Archbishop, can see his way to extend such special services at other seasons of the Church's year, they will be welcomed by large numbers of loyal churchmen, and, it may be that others will follow his example, and so wisely "connive" in this direction with the clergy, that there need be little, if any, fear of fault finding coming from "aggrieved parishioners." The one great secret of success is to keep "touch with the people, and this, Dr. Benson did in a marked degree during his sojourn in Cornwall.

The Rev. J. WYCLIFFE GEDGE, M.A., Winton Diocesan

Inspector.

WE have two subjects to discuss, namely, the services best adapted for those unused to public worship, and the regulation services of the Church. Most of the speakers have had reference rather to the previous subject. I will, therefore, confine my remarks to the latter. My claim to address you is that during the last five years I have taken part in services in more than two hundred different churches, and have, therefore, had unusual opportunities for seeing what is wanted. To begin with the ordinary Sunday morning arrangements. In most town churches there is now an early service of Holy Communion, and in some churches--one being St. Peter's, Bournemouth-there is a very early monthly celebration designed especially for the convenience of servants, who are often unable to attend at a later hour. When I come to speak of "Morning Prayer," I begin to consider how it is that the Children's service should always be in the afternoon. Is it a matter of wonder that so many young people, after leaving school, do not come to any service in the morning, when

in early days they were led practically to suppose that there was no morning service? I venture to think, however, that our ordinary morning service is not adapted for children. Why should there not be a special morning service adapted for children as well as an afternoon service? I am not an advocate for constantly taking them to Holy Communion, but I think if the elder children approaching Confirmation age were occasionally taken to the service they would be more likely, later on, to become communicants. In the ordinary morning service surely too much attention is paid to Matins, and too little to Holy Communion. In some churches the choral Communion service is fixed for 10.0 a.m.; which service with its joyous Creed, and solemn text, Sanctus, and jubilant "Gloria in Excelsis," with short meditation or sermon, is over about a quarter-past eleven, and then comes, what I have heard described as "Glorified Matins," and second sermon. I cannot help thinking that this is a happy arrangement. Again, why should not the Litany be said or sung in the evening? It only occupies about six minutes longer than the State collects. Then thousands of people would join in it who now never do. To pass to the afternoon service, which is especially the service for children. It is seldom, indeed, that the preacher in the morning ever remembers that there are children who sit under him week after week. The afternoon service takes the place of the Sunday school. Out of what materials can it be arranged? There are the ordinary Evensong, the Litany, Litany Hymns, Baptismal Service, and Catechising, which latter is bound to form part of our services every Sunday. Surely out of these we can produce a suitable service for children, without calling for a revision of the Prayer Book, and thus train our children to take an intelligent interest in the various Church's services. Objection has been made to the use of these Litany hymns because they are not well sung. I have taken part in hundreds of Children's services when the singing of these has been the most beautiful part, because the children have been trained in their use, either in the day school or in a special children's choir. It has also been said this evening that people do not attend the Church services because they do not understand them. Meet this objection by letting the Liturgy form a regular part of the catechetical instruction, and this objection will no longer hold good. With regard to special seasons, much may be done by special hymns, only care must be taken that the hymns chosen be really appropriate ones. I once preached a missionary sermon in a village church. The hymns used were a metrical version of the Psalms. The clerk selected the hymns, and had evidently looked out one containing the word "heathen." For before the sermon we were called upon to sing these words :

"On all the heathen lands

That have not known Thy name,
Thine indignation pour, O Lord,
And put them all to shame."

Again, why do most Harvest Festivals end with singing that otherwise beautiful hymn in which we ask the angels to sing to us while we

"Soothe ourselves with weeping,"

which we certainly are not doing at a Harvest Festival. To conclude, let us make more and better use of the Prayer Book as it is, for we shall always find that a devout and frequent use of the services of our Church is that which best fosters the spiritual development of the life of our people.

HENRY FOARD HARRIS, Esq., Brooke House, Fleet, Hants.

I AM not in favour of any alteration in the Prayer Book; it has been handed down to us for many generations, and I should be sorry to see it materially altered; but if any of the recommendations which have been spoken of to-night were carried into effect, they would be utterly useless unless the clergy would do that which they have not done with the present prayers, viz., repeat them with their whole heart. I take a practical view of these matters, and I am satisfied that the great want in the services of the Church at the present day, and one which is much felt by the laity, is the heartiness in the performance of them by the clergy. Clergymen who enter into the services with heartfelt earnestness carry the people with them; but in nine churches out of ten the want of this is very apparent. Look at Mission Rooms, and I know something about Mission Rooms, the parson there seems a different being to what he is in the

Church; he reads earnestly and preaches briefly and practically, and what is the result? The Mission Room fills; but directly he gets back to the church he regains all his dreary dullness. With regard to the sermons, the subject of them should be selected from the sins of every day life, which appeal more to the heart and mind than the great theological questions which are too frequently chosen. If I might venture to make a selection of what I think a preacher ought to be, I would point to the Lord Bishop who presides over this meeting to-night. can carry myself back to my old undergraduate days, when I used to hear him at St. Edwards' Church, Cambridge, of which he was the vicar. His sermons were exceedingly popular; the subjects well chosen, they were kept reasonably short, were full of practical points, and calculated to make people go away with some useful lesson learnt. If our clergy would make their services livelier, and put more earnestness into them; if they would read the prayers as if they really felt them; if they kept their sermons short, and made them practical; and if they had plenty of cheerful hymns, then I believe there would be an enormous increase in the attendance of the poor in our churches, and there would be no occasion to alter our Liturgy.

The Rev. J. VICARS FOOT, Curate-in-Charge of Stoke Charity The Red House, Winchester.

IN regard to what has been said, somewhat beside our main subject, about "praying the prayers right out from the heart," "throwing more life into them," etc., I suppose that means the using inflections of the voice and emphasis. But I think a clergyman has no right to play such tricks with our grand old offices and collects; for, by emphasising words and sentences according to his own sweet will, he forces his own pet points and interpretations upon the people, and seems rather to preach the prayers to the congregation than to pray them to his, and their God. Emphasis rather betrays lack of culture; and, from a merely literary point of view, is often quite wrongly placed. To pray from one's heart does not involve emphasis; and, as we have special places and special forms, so, too, it is fitting we should have a special voice for worshipping Almighty God. In conducting an unchoral service of public worship, the priest's sing-song, common, conversational voice should surely give place to that reverent monotone which has ever been observed as proper to the occasion throughout the Church Catholic. Then, as to the proposed curtailment of the Baptismal office, I hope it will never be. It seems unnecessary so to pander to the impatient and hurrying spirit of the day. Both the Holy Sacraments, generally necessary to salvation, deserved and needed the whole of our offices; and I feel very jealous of either jewel being stripped of a part of its setting. As it is, we too often see less relative reverence part to Font than to Altar; and seem to forget that, as said by the judicious Hooker, if it is Holy Eucharist that keeps a man in the Church, it is Holy Baptism that actually, and at the first, admitted him into her. With regard to the suggestion for episcopal "connivance," your lordship will not question my reverence for your sacred office, if I venture to remark that bishops are men, and that, as such some of them will connive upwards and some of them will connive downwards; so that, on the whole, I should be very sorry to see any system of episcopal " connivance set in.

The Rev. JOHN MARTIN, Curate of Killeshandra, County

Cavan, Ireland.

I HAPPEN to be a clergyman of the Church of Ireland, which Church has made some alterations in its Prayer Book. We have additions to our collects, and have made other alterations, nearly all of which are permissive; and, as a matter of fact, the English Church Prayer Book can be used in every one of our churches for our ordinary services. Very few of the alterations are made use of, as many of them are optional. A few changes have become necessary in our ordinal, but these do not affect doctrine. We make use of the permission to shorten the Burial service, because in many of the graveyards there are no churches, and we therefore find it necessary to

curtail the service in bad weather. In one respect the Church of Ireland has longer prayers than the Church of England has. For instance, instead of five State prayers we in Ireland have six. Where we have a second Communion Service on Easter Day, we have an extra Gospel and Collect for use at the second celebration, which, I think, is very useful. Among useful changes that might be made, I think that in the Communion for the Sick we might have a difference made in the Epistle and Gospel, instead of their being the same in cases of acute illness and for the infirm through age. I am also of opinion that the office for Private Baptism should be more extended, and not so much left to the discretion of the individual minister. In some places I would give more liberty to the clergy, and in others I would perhaps give them less, but I would give them a larger number of services to select from, say three or four beyond our present number. In any change that may be made let us avoid party spirit. Let us not make changes for the benefit of either the low, broad, or high Church parties. Unless changes are made with the greatest wisdom, party feeling will, undoubtedly, come in. Do not think that I wish the Church of England to follow in the steps of the Church of Ireland in all she has done. I think the action of a Synod is very frequently disastrous in the extreme, and I believe them very unfit to discuss doctrinal matters. Changes should be prepared by a select committee, and accepted en bloc by the Synod, which should go into minute details.

The CHAIRMAN.

We have now come to the end of our time. A great many of the topics which have been brought forward are very tempting to a Chairman; but I have resisted a great many temptations, and must endeavour to do so on the present occasion. If we were to go into the general question it would take up a great deal of time; but I cannot help saying that the American "Book Annexed is well worth the study of us all. I have looked into it with great interest; but I cannot give an expression of opinion on the various points contained in it, although in many respects I think it would be well worth considering if we were going to make any change in our own Prayer Book. The question brought forward this evening has been discussed in a broad spirit; and perhaps the most hopeful view of the discussion is that which suggests to us the probability that if we were to put the reformers who have spoken to-night into a room together and to lock them up and allow them to come out after a few months with a revised Prayer Book, they would have not made a single change upon which they could all agree. As to what should be the right thing to do there was a remarkable difference of opinion among the various speakers. I am not going to say whether additional services or further changes may not be introduced with advantage, but I think the general conclusion is that we may have some hope for the Prayer Book as it is. When you take the Prayer Book as it is, with the elasticity which is allowed by law, and with the further elasticity which the Bishops permit, I think most clergymen will say that they have all the freedom which they can desire. With regard to what Mr. Beresford Hope has said about the connivance of the bishops, I do not quite like the word connivance, but I confess that I should be sorry to bring any strict and stern interpretation of the law to bear upon the zeal of a hard-working clergy; and I am strongly of opinion that a great deal may be done, even without connivance. If the ordinary services of the Church are properly rendered, according to the Book of Common Prayer, I think it is an interesting problem to determine how much more may be done without breaking any rule. It is difficult to say exactly how far restriction will go. For instance, it is said that a clergyman must have no service in the church except that which is in the Book of Common Prayer. We have sometimes our Sunday schools held within our churches for lack of other buildings; and then a layman probably conducts a service of prayer before school and expounds Holy Scripture to the children. It would be hard to say that in this case there is a breach of any ecclesiastical law. Nevertheless, I am not at all sure that we have distinct authority to allow the use of our churches for such a purpose. Anyhow, I am not the man to find fault with a zealous clergyman, who uses his church too much, or even in a way in which possibly Lord Penzance, if appealed to, might say was not exactly according to law. I congratulate you on the interesting character of the papers which have been read and the speeches which have been made to us this evening.