in obtaining legal powers for its formation； and it ought not to be
regarded with jealousy when formed。 Its main object should be to bring
the clergy and the laity face to face； and to enable them to consider
all matters affecting the Church's welfare； and； if necessary； to bring
them under the notice of Parliament。 Its main advantage would be； that
when it brought anything before Parliament which required legislation；
it would be able to say； 〃：Here is a matter about which the clergy and
laity of the Established Church are agreed。 In the name of that Church
we ask you to take it up； and make it the law of the land。〃
I am afraid it is vain to hope for any large measure of Convocation
reform。 Ancient and venerable as the Synods of Canterbury and York
undoubtedly are； I think no one will say that they truly represent the
Church of England。 Even if they adequately represented the clergy； it
is certain that they do not represent the laity。 This alone is an
immense and intolerable defect； and pletely prevents the laity； as a
rule； taking any interest in the proceedings of Convocation。 They feel
that they are left out in the cold； and have neither voice； nor vote；
nor place； nor part in the discussions； either at Westminster or York；
even when the subjects discussed concern themselves most intimately。 We
need not wonder that they do not like this。 According to the word of
God； they are 〃the Church〃 as much as the clergy。 They have quite as
much at stake in the Church's welfare。 They are often as well educated；
as intelligent； as well…informed； as spiritually…minded； as able to
discern〃 things that differ〃 in religion； as any clerk； man。 The words
of the judicious Hooker are worth remembering： 〃Till it be proved that
some special law of Christ hath for ever annexed unto the clergy alone
the power to make ecclesiastical laws； we are to hold it a thing most
consonant with equity and reason； that no ecclesiastical laws be made
in a Christian monwealth； without consent as well of the laity as of
the clergy。〃 （Hooker； Book viii。 chap。 6。） The simple fact that the lay
people have at present neither voice nor place in the English
Convocation； is enough to show that it is an institution totally
unsuited to the age； and behind the times。
Of course I do not forget that a house of laymen has been called into
existence in the province of Canterbury； with the express purpose of
acting as a consultative body； and an assistant to Convocation； and it
has been resolved to form a similar house of laymen at York。 No doubt
the formation of these two bodies is a great step in the right
direction。 It is a public acknowledgment that the time has e when
lay Churchmen must be asked to take a more active interest in the
affairs of the Established Church； and that their past torpid position；
as sleeping partners in the great ecclesiastical concern； can no longer
be maintained。 For this tardy recognition of the rights and duties of
laymen I am very thankful。 A great principle has been established； and
I trust the clock will never be put back。
But though I lay no claims to infallibility of judgement； I must
respectfully express a doubt whether these new Houses of Laymen meet
the wants of the day； and are anything more than a temporary makeshift。
I might say something about the extreme difficulty of getting a really
representative House of Laymen to meet at York！ But I will not dwell on
this。 I will only point out three objections which appear to me not
easily answered。
（a） In the first place； these Houses of Laymen will have no legal
status； unless they are formally authorized by the Crown and
Parliament； and will be nothing more than voluntary debating societies。
Convocation； on the contrary； is one of the oldest legal institutions
in the realm。 How these two bodies are to work together under these
conditions is not very clear。 It is an attempt to unite iron and clay。
It is sewing a new patch on an old garment。
（b） In the second place； the mode of forming； posing； and electing
these Houses of Laymen appears at present far from satisfactory。 If
they are to consist of laymen elected by the various diocesan
conferences； they certainly will not be a fair representation of the
laity of the Church of England。 For one thing； the constitution of
diocesan conferences is not uniform； and differs widely in different
dioceses of England and Wales。 For another thing； it is notorious that
in most dioceses very few lay Churchmen attend a diocesan conference；
and most of them ignore it altogether。
（c） Last； but not least； it does not seem quite clear what these Houses
of Laymen are to be allowed to discuss。 The idea which has been
propounded； that they are never to open their mouths about 〃questions
of faith and doctrine；〃 is to my mind most objectionable。 It is
unreasonable to suppose that intelligent English laymen； men of light
and leading and intellectual power； will ever submit to be practically
muzzled； and forbidden to speak of any but temporal matters。
Such prohibition； in my opinion； is sure to lead ultimately to friction
and collision。 If you call in the laity to aid in the administration of
the Church； you must trust them； and give them liberty of speech。
It is very possible that answers may be found to these objections；
though at present I fail to see them。 I am thankful for the avowed
expression of a desire to call in the help of the laity； and make use
of their opinion on Church matters。 But I have a firm conviction that
no movement in this direction will ever do much good； until we have a
real National Council； posed of the 30 bishops； and some 60
presbyters； and 120 laymen； elected from the 30 dioceses of England and
Wales； and including laymen of the middle class； as well as of the
upper ranks of society。 But I believe that the best and ablest lay
Churchmen will never join a mere voluntary assembly； in which their
discussions and decisions would be utterly destitute of any authority；
and their resolutions would carry no weight。
Above all； we want a Council in which bishops； presbyters； and laymen；
shall sit together and consider subjects face to face。 The clergy would
then have an opportunity of finding out what public opinion is； and
discovering that they are not infallible。 The laity would have an
opportunity of showing the clergy what is really going on in the world；
and introducing practical business…like wisdom into their councils。
This plan would be of immense advantage to all parties。
I leave the rights and duties of lay Churchmen at this point。 I have no
time to pursue the subject further。 I am conscious that I have advanced
opinions which are distasteful to some minds； and startling because of
their novelty。 But I have yet to learn that the reform in the position
of the laity which I have suggested is not most desirable in the
abstract； and most imperatively demanded by the times。 Between
Liberationists； Romanists； and Agnostics； the good ship of the Church
is on a lee shore； and the breakers are in sight。 Clergy and laity must
co…operate； if the ship is to be saved。 It is no time to prophesy
smooth things； and look through telescopes with blind eyes； and cry
〃Peace； peace！ Let us sit still。〃
（a） 〃Sacrilegious reform！〃 some will cry。 They think it downright
wicked to let the laity have anything to do with spiritual matters。
They wish them to be nothing but Gibeonites； hewers of wood and drawers
of water for the clergy。 They talk gravely about Dathan； and Abiram；
and Uzzah putting his hand to the ark； and Uzziah taking on himself to
burn incense in the temple。 To such men I reply； 〃Look at the Irish
Church； and learn wisdom。〃 If Disestablishment es；and many
far…sighted men say it is sure to e at last；you will be obliged to
cast yourselves on the aid of the laity； whether you like it or not。
Even if it does not e； you will never be really strong； unless you
place the laity in their rightful position。 As to the vague talk about
sacrilege； it is all nonsense。 Touch the idea with the Ithuriel spear
of Scripture； and it will vanish away。
（b） But 〃it is a dangerous reform；〃 some men will cry。 〃The laity will
take the reins into their hands； and lord it over the consciences of
the clergy。〃 Such fears are simply ridiculous。 There is far more real
danger in letting the laity sit idle； and giving them no active
interest in the Church's affairs。 I have a better opinion of the laity
than these alarmists have。 The new ecclesiastical machinery may work
awkwardly at first； like a new steam…engine； when its joints are stiff；
and its bearings hot。 The laity may not understand at first what they
have to do。 But give them time； give them time。 Show them that you
trust them； and make them see what is wanted； and I have no doubt the
laity would soon settle down in their place； and work with a will。
Remember how admirably the Irish laity set their house in order after
Disestablishment； and have more faith in English laymen。
（c） 〃But it is a useless reform；〃 some men will finally cry。 〃The laity
are unfit to advise bishops； or sit in Church councils； or give an
opinion about the fitness of incumbents。〃 I do not believe it for one
moment。 The lay members of our Church may not be critics of Greek or
Hebrew； or deep theologians； pared to many of the clergy。 But many
of them have quite as much grace； and quite as much knowledge of the
English Bible。 Above all； they have； as a rule； much more mon sense
than the clergy。 No man can be ignorant of that who knows how our best
laymen conduct themselves on the mittees of our great religious
Societies。 The observation of Lord Clarendon about the clerical body
is； alas！ only too true。 After long experience； he declared his
conviction that 〃clergymen unders