tact with the world. The claim to define what was necessary for its own preservation has been widely exercised, with the result that principles of general utility and motives of temporary convenience have led to practical abrogation of some portion of the moral law. The maxim that the end justifies the means has been emphatically condemned by all religious bodies; but has been frequently acted upon by all alike. Yet a moral act must be without flaw alike in its motive, in its aim, and in the means by which it is pursued. For no outward and material result can be profitable which is won at the sacrifice of the tenderness and sensitiveness of conscience. Men cannot be permanently benefited by that which debases them in the scale of being. The moral significance of the triumph of the Cross must grow in clearness and definiteness before Christian ethics have spoken their last word.

Is not this the meaning of the high place assigned by Christ's teaching to humility, and of the catalogue of virtues enumerated in the Beatitudes as the qualification of the children of the kingdom? Motive is set higher than action. The means are set higher than the end, or rather the end itself is spiritualised; and the spiritual end, which must rest upon faith, is exalted above the material end, which pursues some immediate and tangible result. We are given a standard of judgment which goes beyond the limits of any organised system, religious, philosophical or political. We are bidden to judge things solely as they promote, or fail to promote, the sensitiveness, the delicacy, the integrity and the authority of conscience. As this high

principle is grasped, we pass beyond the region of casuistry into the region of positive truth, and escape the subtle temptation to fight the battle of the spirit with the weapons of the flesh.

The ethical force of Christianity can only be set forth by its power in training delicacy of conscience, which trembles at the approach of evil, and is keen in detecting its insidious advances. All other progress is only valuable because it testifies to moral progress, and opens up wider fields for its advance. Moral progress does not depend on increased knowledge of moral principles, but on an increased application of these principles to all relationships of life. A man , may be moral in his family life, less moral in his daily business, only conventionally moral in his public life, and unable to see the application of moral considerations to international relationships. Ethical progress means the moralising of all these spheres of judgment and action. It is the primary duty of the Christian Church so to teach, and so to act in its corporate capacity, as to impress on every one of its members the universality of moral obligation, and the unchangeable character of the imperative of duty, which cannot be explained away, which admits of no exceptions, which knows no balance of disadvantages. The practical object of its system should be to make the conscience of its members sensitive to evil, ready to detect the insidious approach of evil, and powerful to enforce the authority of conscience. It should stand before the world as the trainer of "artists in virtue," as Christian saints have lately been called, men whose consciences have been made sensitive by the operation

of the Holy Spirit, who are continually discovering by their spiritual insight new fields of moral action, which are thus opened up for the work of the Christian community. Such, in her many failures and shortcomings, has been the work of the Church. in the past. Never, I think, did the world more clearly recognise its need of the Church than it does to-day. By catching the full significance of that appeal, the Church, as the purifier of social life, can moralise, spiritualise, transform the world.

8

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS, PETERBOROUGH DIOCESAN CONFERENCE, 1893.1

IT is an easier matter for me to speak to you this year than it was last, and I trust that every succeeding year will render the task still more easy and still more agreeable. For myself, I feel that every month that I work in this Diocese brings me more and more close to an increasing number of both clergy and laity. I will only begin what I have to say to-day by remarking that I cannot express my gratitude for the kindness which I have received. I have found on all occasions that my opinion and my advice have even had undue weight attached to them, and I am proud to say that no Bishop could possess a more loyal body of clergy than does the Bishop of Peterborough. The work that we have been engaged in during the past year has been a work of steady progress. It is satisfactory to think that this has been done by means of loyal co-operation. We have had nothing of great importance to chronicle in the history of this Diocese ; in fact, I sincerely hope we never may have things. of importance to chronicle. The things which are notorious are not notorious for their merits, but for their defects. It is the tragedies which live in history,

1 This address was delivered extempore, and is printed from the reporter's notes,

and the gentle, quiet progress is unrecorded. The life of the Church ought to have no tragedies. The life of the Church ought to tell only of slow and steady progress. It is God's way, this way of slow and steady progress, the way which we see marked out on the creation of the world. Let us be content if we are working on slowly and steadily towards the goal of which we are increasingly assured.

But although the Diocese has nothing remarkable to chronicle, it has none the less been a year of great importance in the history of the Church of England. That importance arises from the expression of feeling on the part of the Church as regards a particular measure that was brought before Parliament last Session. I refer of course to that great demonstration of the Church of England which was made in London, when the two Archbishops thought it desirable to summon the Convocations of both provinces, as well as representatives from every parish in both provinces, to meet and make their views heard about the Welsh Suspensory Bill. It is quite true that that Bill has disappeared, but of course we cannot for a moment doubt that another Bill will be introduced in its place. We cannot doubt that next session will see the introduction into Parliament of a Bill for the Disestablishment of the Church in the four Dioceses of Wales. It will be a better Bill than the Suspensory Bill. It will be honest, which the Suspensory Bill was not. It will be our duty to meet it-of course we mean to oppose it. But I think we ought to be quite clear what are the grounds on which we intend to oppose it, and we ought to be able to make these