The Bishop of Gibraltar presided at the crowded meeting in the large Hall of the Church House when the question of "Things Essential and Things Non-Essential" was discussed. The Bishop, in his opening remarks said that in view of admitted fact that disunion was a terrible evil, they were not justified in putting up barriers which would stand in the way of the most complete union and fellowship. They desired to see what were the outside limits of possible variety Not that they wished to siter their own rales in order to make others agree with them. They were bound, however, to consider what was permissible in variety within the Christian Church, Their tendency was to think that the things they had been used to all their lives were things essential, and that the things they did not like were nat essential. If they started with either of these assumptions they could only come to conclusions that were wrong. Canon Benson. of Westminster. said that Christian Society to-day had to face oval situation of extreme: and manifest difficulty. They might set aside the notion that the Creed or any single creed formed a statement of absolute truth that was final and sufficient.
The modern Church, in vi of the many blunders of the past, ought to be extremely slow in reject as inconsistent with essential Christiani tenchings which. were honestly ani reverently offered although novel and] an pleasing, Canon A. J. Worlledge (Chancellor of Truro Cathedral) was not sure thet in 19¢8 the Lambeth Conference would he able to spank so certainly as it had done at former sittings, of the general loving character of the Scriptures as containing all things necessary to, salvation. But ther coll not make any compromise in regard to the two Sacraments "generally necessary for salvation," and it was impossible to abandon the threefold ministry inherited from Apostolic times. Dr. A. W. Robinson, Vienr of All Hallows, Barking, contended that Christianity was not merely the religion of a Book, and that they must have more than the Bible and the Creeds. They must have faith and fellowship. The Rev. W. M. Grosvenor, p.D.. delegate of the Diocere of New York, argued in favour of freedom of scholarship and intellectual research, The problems of modern complex to be solved by Tt was only by " large catho they could hope to make progress. Canon G. H. Wescott, from Lucknow, the Inst selected speaker, referred to the obligation laid upon Indian Chris-tinns to accept the marriage law of England as a condition of admission to Holy Communion, as well as the acceptance of the Apostles' Creed The Bishop of Gibraltar, in ming up said he would bu quite willing to agree with those who said that the Creeds, as we had them to-day, were not in their nature absolutely sufficient, bat, as loyal and tree Churchmen, if they desired something that was not there now, they were bound in honour first to obey that which was there.
In the afternoon meeting th Episcopate." The Bishop of Gibraltar, who presided, said the subject they were to consider that afternoon went very deeply into the work of the Church, for it touched them everywhere. What were the things that they felt they should live and die by! Let them discuss the question as wisely ax they could, The first paper, by Professor Gwatkin, was read in his absence by the Rev. L. J. Percival. The writer spoke highly of Episcopal government in England, but argued that any dain that the Episeopacy, as we understood it, was of the essence of Christ was a defiance of the teaching of Christ, He was in favour of a modification of its powers and jurisdiction.
The Rev. Reginald Stephen (Canon fof Melbourne Cathedral) said whatever night be the result of this Conference they must have learned a great deal to help them on the road to re-union, In England the system of benevolent despotism might be best in practice, but it wax false in theory, and could not lo permanent. In Australia the control of the Bishops was itself controlled by the Councils and the Synods. The Res, Dr. Niver (delegate of the Diocese of Baltiviore) argued that the episcopate could not be conceived of apart from its Government and power of ordinstion. The definition which appealed ide bodies in America was tht the leadership in evclesinstial stood there on the platform of histories! faith and order, with wide liberty for and nataral aspirations. The Rev. W. H.R. Beran (Canon of Bloemfontein) wished to see the working Bishop, the working clergy, and the working laity all striving gether for the speaking of the true Gospel and the building op of the Church, In his opinion the history iscopacy was the best way of m taining religions und general respect, Earl Nelson said there was nothing in the historic Episcopate which should stand in the way of re-union, Tt wool rather tend to the preservation of unity The true line of the Fpiscopate had been preserved in our Church, and to fon such a claim would not only cut them off from other bodies, but estrange them from those portions of the Iuutheran Church which, although they had lost the direct succession, were desirous of recovering it. The Bishop of Gibraltar.|snid the debate had been of a very practical kind. that the Episeopacy was a very adapt They would need, however, the ministry was the ministry of the Church, and that it stood for the real trath. If God, however, had given them the trath He had given it also to others, and they looked forwanl to the day when all would tind that place in the Catholic Church. Not till then would alt be what God intended them to be.
The first meeting for the discussion of The Church's Duty to the Young" was opened at Zion Colle.e on the second day of the Congress. The points considered were "Resalts of Xecular Systems of Education" and " Efforts to Supplement those Systems. chairman (the Bishop of Kensington) said the organisers of the Congress would have committed an unpardonable error had they left out the subject of the Church's duty to the young. Upon
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.