consequences. The tone and temper engendered by a body which feels that it is the guardian and representative of religion, and feels also its responsibility to the nation, as a whole, is a very calculable element at the present day, is increasingly necessary as a moderating and soothing influence, and is daily developing into greater consciousness of its national mission. After all, our English institutions depend more upon tone and temper in their use than upon their inherent merits. Disestablishment would work a more abrupt change in the principles on which national cohesion rests than any other alteration in our political system.

The existing state of things in England may be logically anomalous, but corresponds with the English conception of liberty. There is a National Church recognised by the State, and by its side stand a number of voluntary organisations. Every man's liberty is respected; and though each may wish that all were of his own way of thinking, he would be wise, in my opinion, if he recognised that that result can best be pursued by discussion and persuasion rather than by endeavours for external change. I believe that a recognition of this truth is quite possible, and that it would correspond to all that is best in the new aspirations on which the England of the future will be built. At present I am thankfully conscious of the removal of many barriers to a better understanding among different Christian bodies. I think that we, on our side, are free from any feelings of ill-will, and are ready to co-operate with all for purposes which we have in common. The chief obstacle to a more rapid

progress in friendliness lies in the fact that the question of Disestablishment has entered into an acute political stage. But I remember that many political cries have exhausted themselves in one last shout, and have remained only as feeble echoes. I have every confidence in the good sense and justice of Englishmen, when it is directly applied to any particular question. The only danger at present is that the importance of this particular question should be obscured, that it should not be definitely submitted for decision on its own merits, but should, in a limited form, appear as one element in a combination which has other and less important ends in view.

The Welsh Bill.

The proposal to disestablish the Church in the four Dioceses of Wales raises a large question in a very unfortunate way. The issue is complicated by the

existence of motives which it is difficult to discuss. The desire to revive nationality as a basis for a local government, the desire for social changes which are ill-defined, the wish to lay hands on some funds which may be used for experimental purposes-these are all of them powerful motives which lie behind the specious demand for religious equality. With these desires we are not concerned. They can all be gratified at a less cost than an organic change of the English State. In secular politics this would at once be urged; but there is a danger that the significance of an ecclesiastical change should be overlooked. Yet it is obvious that the Disestablishment of the Church in Wales must carry with it the whole question of the existence of

a National Church. It is useless to say that the Church of England is not menaced, that it stands upon a different footing, and is not affected by the complications which arise from differences of race and language. If the Church in Wales is disestablished, there is no longer any basis of principle left; the existence of a National Church is left as a matter to be settled by local convenience. An agitation in any group of counties might lead to a similar demand in other parts of England; and if the question was skilfully combined with other points of immediate political interest, its importance might be obscured.

We have a right to demand that so large a question should not be approached piecemeal, and should not be discussed in relation to merely local and temporary conditions. There is no ground on which the Church in Wales can be separated from the rest of the English Church. It has had no separate history since the eighth century. Long before Wales was politically united with England it was united ecclesiastically. There has been no breach in the continuity of that connexion. The attempt to represent the Church in Wales as "an alien Church," imposed upon a reluctant people, has no warrant in the facts of history. Welsh nonconformity is largely a creation of the early years of this century; and the ground of its present animosity against the Church is not that it is negligent of the needs of the Welsh-speaking population, but that it is too active. That there was a period of such negligence cannot be denied. And it is sadly true, in history, that the children bear the burden of the carelessness of their fathers, institutions are challenged,

not when they are at their worst, but when they are putting forth new vigour. The reproach of the past is fixed upon them lest it be forgotten. Haste is made to demand their condemnation, on evidence which is no longer true, but is still specious.

I have made these remarks to you, because I think you would all wish to have clearly before you the grounds on which you stand as regards this question. If the Nation wishes to consider whether or no it shall continue to possess a religious basis for its national life, we Churchmen do not deprecate the discussion. Let the question be clearly stated on its own merits, and let a due measure of time be devoted to setting the matter on its real basis. But we resolutely object to confusing the question of the existence of a National Church with that of the desirability of a larger measure of local self-government in a particular district. The unity of the English Church, established or disestablished, is to us a matter of supreme importance. It is useless to tell us that we in England might leave Wales to settle its own affairs. We cannot remain unconcerned when a proposal is made to dismember the National Church. We urge, and we are entitled to urge, that this is a question with which every one is concerned. I have already referred incidentally to the great moral principle on which popular government must rest that is, on the appeal to the sense of justice and righteousness which God has implanted in the heart of every man. But the appeal must be made, if the rightness of the answer is to be recognised on a clear and definite issue. Discussion and de of service only as they procure that result.

lay are We are

justified in this matter in striving our utmost to see that the question is fairly put. To endeavour to procure this is an end in itself, which lies outside party politics. The practical politician would be the first to own his dissatisfaction at the form in which many questions come within the province of his activity. We who feel strongly that a great principle is at stake need have no scruple in urging our conviction, and can appeal to all parties to sympathise with our endeavour to set that principle in the first place.

:

It is with a sense of sadness that I close my remarks on this subject. Very willingly would you and I pursue our work for Christ in peace, undisturbed by such controversy. There is perhaps no greater trial to our faith than that which comes when we realise that our attempts to do God's work in what we believe to be God's way, expose us to the animosity, not of the unbelieving and the ungodly, but of those who call themselves by the name of Christ. We are tempted to say, "Let us, at any cost, be free from this antagonism let us abandon anything that stands in the way of godly union and concord". A moment's reflection shows us that such a course is impossible, and that it would be delusive. We cannot abandon our responsibilities as trustees of a great institution, intimately associated with our national life, unless we are convinced that the change is in itself wise and right. Nor can we hope that any outward change would extinguish animosity, or that the removal of one alleged grievance would bring lasting peace. Many more questions would be raised by Disestablishment than would be settled by it; we should still be left with many posi