I need not say to you, that the immediate points in which the existing differences in our church have of late most conspicuously manifested themselves, are certain slight diversities in the celebration of divine service, which, as I do not intend to discuss the subject in detail, it is unnecessary for me to specify. And I do not intend to discuss these topics in detail, because such a discussion, unless it were full and accurate, would be worse than useless; and any attempt really to investigate the questions which have been raised would occupy in matters, trivial in themselves, a most undue portion of the time during which I can now ask your attention. And the time would be unprofitably spent, both on this account, and also because I am satisfied that on some of the points in question I could not lay down any rule, which I could either require or advise you to adopt universally. And this, not so much on account of the want of power to enforce its observance, (for defect of power, though it might prevent a command need not impede advice,) as because I am convinced that it is not by any more stringent application of rules that the wounds of the church are to be healed; and therefore, that which I do not contemplate giving myself, as regards my own diocese, I do not wish to see emanate from the united judgment of my brethren for the church at large. Still less am I willing that the civil legislature should meddle in a matter in which it does not belong to it to originate any new measure; and its attempt to do which would probably be pregnant with disastrous consequences. Nor does it even appear to me desirable that, under present circunstances, any effort should be made to do away with the possisibility of these diversities by the only legislative power which can rightfully interfere, and to call in the conjoint authority of the church in its Synodical assemblies, and the State through the Crown and the Parliament, in order to clear up by new rules everything that may be doubtful, and to enforce an universal observance of whatever may be approved. I do not say that it would not be well that, under other circumstances, and in a different spirit, the attention of the church should be directed, in the most legitimate and authoritative manner, to the questions which have been of late the occasion of difference; as I do believe that in other respects much good might be done, and much evil prevented, by the existence of a living power of government in the church, by which its system could be adapted to the changes which time works in the fabric of society, and its energies be directed, not by the mere voluntary efforts of individuals, but by lawful authority, to a fuller recognition of the privileges, and a more earnest discharge of the duties, which rightly devolve upon it both at home and abroad. I expressed an opinion to this effect in a former Charge, and to this I still adhere. But the immediate subjects which then called forth my remarks were of a different nature from those which we are now considering; and so far as I am at present advised, and without intending to fetter my discretion in any case that may arise, I may say, that I do not look to any legislative enactments for a remedy to our present distractions. I trust rather to a return to that moderation and sobriety of feeling in the community at large, which will surely result from a patient, quiet, and conciliatory course on the part of the clergy-a course which will make it manifest that the spiritual guides of the people have really at heart, before all other things, the spiritual good of those committed to them; and that they recognise the Gospel of salvation, in its purity and its fulness, as the one only means by which this is to be compassed and secured. Of course, in what I have said I imply an opinion, that the obligation on the conscience of the clergy of the letter of the Rubric in every minute particular, is not so stringent as it has been sometimes said to be; but that some modifying influence may be allowed to long-established custom; to inconvenience, amounting in some cases to necessity; and to the feelings of those for whose edification all our services are designed. Two different classes of persons, indeed, are united in pressing to the utmost extent the stringency of existing obligations, though with objects diametrically opposed; the one aiming at establishing a complete uniformity in the exact observance of existing laws, the other seeking to work out a new and further reformation, by proving the necessity of a change, in that existing laws are at once obligatory on the conscience, and impossible to be observed. Let us consider well before we give in our adhesion to either of these parties, lest we either compel changes which we do not desire, by making other men prefer them to existing inconveniences, rendered intolerable by a harsh and narrow scrupulosity, or willingly embarking ourselves in the pursuit of changes, find the remedy, when attained, worse than the disease, and haply destroy the church in seeking to reform it. The high sanction which has been given to the less rigid view by his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, in his late Pastoral Letter, may perhaps make it appear unnecessary for me to say even thus much. And yet it may not be amiss to remind you of that which those among you, who have ever had occasion to consult me, well know, that this has been the principle which I have always maintained—the principle that there are cases in which established customs are sanctions, in not departing from which the conscience of an individual need not be aggrieved; and that, though we should not be reluctant to make improvements considerately and judiciously, where existing customs are careless and bad, (and in many respects such improvements have been made, and are continually in progress,) these should be in cases in which the edification of the people is plainly concerned; whereas on a mere theory, or in matters indifferent, or of little moment, it is better not unnecessarily to disturb that order which we find existing. I hardly apprehend that I shall be misunderstood in what I have said, as though I either undervalued the importance of outward order, or were careless as to the rules by the due observance of which it is to be maintained, or were indisposed to the discussion of any questions which may arise respecting these, when it may seem expedient to consider them. I have now administered the affairs of this diocese during eight years; and whatever may have been my failings and shortcomings, (and that these have been many and great I assure you I am deeply conscious,) I am content, in these respects at least, to refer you to the experience you have had in past intercourse with me; and to abide by the judgment which very many among you have had opportunity to form. But if I should be unwilling, in any case, to enter upon a general discussion from which I could not hope that practical good would result, while it might give fresh occasion for controversial disputation, so am I thankful to say that I am not aware of anything in the state of my diocese which makes it neces- sary for me to follow a course to which my feelings and my judgment are alike opposed. Often, when harassed in mind with reflections upon the condition and prospects of the church, suggested by the bitterness of newspaper controversies, or by acts of individual indiscretion, or by the expression in one or another quarter of hasty or unwise opinion, I turn to my own diocese, and look around me, and inquire, “Where are the signs of this universal agitation and unsettlement of men's minds of which we hear so much?-where are the evidences of the weakened influence and impaired usefulness of the church?" And then I say, "I will not judge of these things from the malignant misrepresentations of those who, whether members of the church or not, do not love it, or from the alarmed apprehensions which disturb the judgments of some whose hearts are rightly fixed; but I will judge from that which I see and know, and am competent to form an opinion about. And if this presents to me the signs of improvement in all those respects in which inward life would outwardly develop itself, I will take courage, and be of good hope; and if there be troubles, I will trust that through these, too, God in his providence will bring his church, and perhaps will even purify and strengthen it by them." And in saying this, I am far from meaning that there is any especial differ ence between the state of my diocese and that of others. On the contrary, I believe that the general aspect of the church would justify the same conclusion; and that if they who are apprehensive and alarmed, instead of drawing their ideas from such sources as I have referred to, would carefully inquire into the state of things around them in their own neighbourhood, and exercise a calm and impartial judgment upon the information they would thus obtain, many a disquieted mind would be comforted, and many a faithful but anxious spirit cheered. For myself, at least, while I see many deep-seated corruptions to mourn over, many weaknesses and imperfections which we must desire, rather than hope, to remove, many technical difficulties which may be magnified by scrupulosity into serious evils, and some grave, practical embarrassments and anomalies which we must, perhaps, under existing circumstances, be content, at least for a time, to bear with,-I am yet bold to say, that in those respects which are the present subjects of apprehension, I have good hope and confi. dence for the church. I have good hope, because I believe that the members of the church, and its ministers especially, will be true to it, and to that heavenly Master who is its one supreme Head. I believe that they will not fail thankfully to remember what they have received, and what it is their bounden duty to preserve. They will recollect that, as members and ministers of the church, they have received, as a deposit, the one Catholic faith, that faith which was once delivered to the saints, fully revealed in the holy Scriptures, the sole depository of all saving truth, and embodied and set forth in the Creeds, the sure bulwarks against heretical innovation. They will recol lect, that when this truth was obscured by corrupt additions, and overlaid with an excess of ceremonial observances, it was again, by God's good provi dence, brought forth fresh from the unsullied source of the revealed word, and disentangled from the perplexities in which it had been involved by the sophistries of men. Knowing this, they will be thankful for that Reformation to which they are indebted for this blessing, and will neither themselves speak disparagingly of it, nor sanction the use of such language in others. They will distinguish between the imperfections and faults of the instruments, and the effects wrought through them by the providence of God; and they will not undervalue the Reformation itself on account of the vices of sovereigns, or the rapacity of courtiers, or even the faults which may be noted in those of our own order, whom we may most wish had been free from all blemishes, knowing how much of evil is blended in all things done by the instrumentality of men, and that it is the work of God to bring out good from mixed materials, and by erring instruments. They will, therefore, thankfully acknowledge that we are indebted to the Refor mation for the clear declaration, when it was much needed, that our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is the one sole Mediator between God and man; that his merits, and not our own works and deservings, are the only ground on which we can be accounted righteous before God; and that lively faith is the appointed means by which we are to appropriate to ourselves this justification. They will recognise, as the fruit of the same Reformation, the establishment of the supremacy of the Word of God, and its free dissemination; the vindication of their due honour to the Sacraments of our Lord, as the two only outward signs ordained by Him as means of inward and spiritual grace; and the restoration to the laity, in its integrity and purity, of that one which had been maimed and corrupted by the Church of Rome. They will count it good that the national independence of the church was successfully asserted; that the use of a reformed Liturgy was secured to us in our native tongue; and that the Clergy were restored to that Christian-liberty in respect of the holy estate of matrimony, the undue and enforced restraint of which had been the source of great evils. And, lastly, they will remember that the Articles of our church are the appointed safeguard to us of these and other blessings, and that any attempt to tamper with the plain meaning of these formularies, or with the good faith in which they are subscribed, is alike to be condemned as dishonest, and dreaded as dangerous. In speaking on this subject somewhat more than three years ago, in a Charge to the candidates of my Ordination, I laid down the rule that subscription to the Articles is to be made in the sense intended by the church, which is the party imposing the obligation, quoting the words of Waterland: "The church requires subscription to her own interpretation of Scripture; so the subscriber is bound, in virtue of his subscription, to that, and that only;" and having made some remarks on the method of ascertaining what this sense is, I concluded by saying, "We are not at liberty to evade it by nice and subtle distinctions, or to explain it away; but are bound to receive and subscribe it in the sense which we believe to have been intended by the church." I do not, on reconsideration, see any occasion to alter anything I then said. Nor would it appear needful to me, in the abstract, to add anything to it. But the extraordinary views on this subject which have of late been propounded with so much confidence in some quarters, seem to make it not unsuitable to say, that while I do not doubt that the parties who maintain such opinion think that they are justified in conscience in doing so, the adoption of such a theory is a moral phenomenon which I am unable to comprehend, and that the views themselves justly deserve the most distinct and unqualified condemnation.—pp. 1—17. DOCUMENTS. ADDRESS OF THE CLERGY OF THE DIOCESE OF KILDARE, To the most Reverend JOHN GEORGE, Lord Bishop of Armagh, and Primate of all Ireland; the Right Reverend CHARLES, Lord Bishop of Kildare ; ROBERT PONSONBY, Lord Bishop of Clogher; JOHN, Lord Bishop of Kilmore, &c.; RICHARD, Lord Bishop of Down and Connor and Dromore; SAMUEL, Lord Bishop of Cork and Cloyne; LUDLOW, Lord Bishop of Killaloe and Clonfert; JAMES THOMAS, Lord Bishop of Ossory and Ferns ; and ROBERT, Lord Bishop of Cashel, &c. WE, the undersigned clergy of the diocese of Kildare, desire, in the first place, to give utterance to our heartfelt gratitude to Almighty God, that so large a majority of the Irish episcopal body have again distinctly asserted the principles of our scriptural church, on the important subject of education. We beg leave further, most cordially and most respectfully, to offer our thanks to those venerated prelates who have lately repeated the public expression of their sentiments on this question of all-engrossing interest." Notwithstanding past disappointments, we are encouraged by the conscientious firmness of our bishops to trust that the legislature will at length comply with the oft-repeated prayer of the great body of the Irish church, lay as well as clerical; and will liberally allocate such a grant from the public funds as may be necessary for the official maintenance in our several parishes of schools, such as we can conscientiously support,-schools conducted on the principles of the united church of England and Ireland. We implore the Great Head of the Church to spare our revered prelates to witness this happy termination to their labours. We earnestly pray God, if it be His gracious will, that they may be long left over us; and that the evening of their days may be cheered by beholding the children of our people in the enjoyment of that education, according to the pure and scriptural principles of our church, which their lordships' faithful perseverance shall, under God, have been the great means of securing to them. Charles Lindsay, Archdeacon. James Gregory, Dean. Charles Crosthwaite, Vicar-General. John Browne, Treasurer of Cathedral. William Cox, First Canon and Prebendary of Nurney. Arthur John Preston, Prebendary of Lulliamore. John Digby Wingfield, Prebendary of Geashill. Charles Moore, Prebendary of Harristown. &c. Kildare, March, 1845. &c. &c. OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITIES. THE following is the amount of the annual payments to the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge charged on the land revenue of the Crown, and also of the amount of paper duty remitted to each, during the last ten years; moved for by Mr. Christie and Sir R. Inglis : It appears from this statement that the annual amounts payable out of the said Crown revenue to both universities include a sum total of 2991. 11s. 2d., of which 1517. is appropriated to the Oxford, and 1487. to the Cambridge University. These sums are paid, apparently, to preachers, professors of divinity, law, and physic; to various colleges; to the principal scholars of Brasennose College; to the master and fellows of Winchester College; to the poor scholars of Oxford; to Trinity College, Cambridge; and to five exhibi tion scholars in Oxford University, at 31. 6s. 8d. a-year each, &c. A portion of the amount is chargeable on the land revenue of the Crown, under a treasury warrant of September, 1833, and a portion under the authority of an act of Parliament (the 22nd Car. II.), entitled, " An Act for advancing the sale of fee-farm rents and other rents," and under that of the Pension Deed, 30th Car. II. The total amount of paper duty remitted to the University of Oxford for books in the Latin, Greek, Oriental, or northern languages, and for Bibles, Testaments, prayer-books, and psalm-books, amounted, in 1844, to 1,426l.; in 1843, to 2,746l.; in 1842, to 2,841.; in 1841, to 3,299.; in 1840, to 3,743/.; in 1839, to 3,0527.; in 1838, to 2,645l.; in 1837, to 1,7847.; in 1836, to 8,8831.; and in 1835, to 6,9221. The amount of duty concurrently remitted to the sister university of Cambridge was respectively (from 1844 backwards to 1835), 1,209., 5981., 500l., 1,728l., 3,4971., 1,8731., 1,507l., 2,649l., 5,290, and 3,4487. It appears, furthermore, that 500l. per annum is allowed to each university, charged on the stamps and taxes revenue, by the Act 44th of George III., c. 98. The origin and authority of such payment is thus stated: -By the Act 21st George III., c. 56, an annual sum of 500l. was directed to be paid, from the 24th of June, 1781, to each of the universities of Oxford and Cambridge, out of the almanack duty, grounded on the fact that the Crown had granted to the said universities the exclusive right of printing almanacks, upon a supposition that the power so to do was inherent in the Crown. A court of law decided that the Crown had no right to confer any exclusive privilege, and the payments accordingly ceased. Parliament enacted, under these circumstances, that a similar sum should be paid to each university out of the duties then imposed on almanacks; and the reasons for the grant are assigned in the 10th clause of the act 21 George III., c. 56. Another |