ANGLICAN CHUECHES. 



soul, united in one holy bond of truth and peace, of 

 faith and charity, and may with one mind and one 

 mouth glorify God, through Jesus Christ our Lord. 

 Amen. 



(Signed) A. C. Cantuar, W. Ebor, J. London, E. 

 H. Winton, A. Llandaff, E. Kipon, John T. Norwich, 

 J. C. Bangor, H. Worcester, C. J. Gloucester and 

 Bristol, William Chester, T. L. Eoffen, G. A. Lich- 

 fleld, J. Hereford, W. C. Peterborough, C. Lincoln, 

 Arthur C. Bath and Wells, F. Exon, Harvey Car- 

 lisle, J. F. 'Oxon, J. Manchester, E. Cicester, J. St. 

 Asaph, J. E. Ely, W. Basil St. David's, Horace So- 

 dor and Man. 



The Bishop of Salisbury (Dr. Moberly) as- 

 signed as his principal reasons for withholding 

 his signature from this address that, in his 

 view, it was too severe, and exaggerated the 

 evils which it was intended to condemn ; even 

 supposing that those evils were not over-stated, 

 he regarded it as injudicious, as tending to ir- 

 ritate rather than soothe, and to confirm the 

 impression that the legislation of the previous 

 year (1874) was directed against the whole of 

 the High Church party, and against that party- 

 only. The Bishop of Durham (Dr. Baring) 

 refused to sign it, first, because he could not 

 agree with the paragraph having reference to 

 the eastward position, believing contrary to 

 the expression of the address that that position 

 is held by those who advocate and adopt it to 

 have an important doctrinal significance ; sec- 

 ond, because he could not with any confidence 

 declare that "the vast majority of the clergy 

 and laity of the Church of England are thor- 

 oughly loyal to its doctrine and discipline ; t " 

 he believed the assertion to be true with re- 

 gard to the laity, but was in doubt whether 

 it applied to the same extent to the clergy; 

 third, his chief objection to the manifesto was 

 that it was u so indefinite in its statements, so 

 feeble in its conclusions." He objected to it 

 that it said nothing in regard to what he de- 

 scribed as " the two most serious errors which 

 are the cause of embittered controversy," which 

 it mentioned, viz., the extensive teaching of 

 semi-Romish doctrine as to the presence of 

 our Lord in the elements of bread and wine, 

 and the introduction of auricular confession by 

 a large number of the clergy." The bishop 

 added that, had the allocution been in his 

 judgment only useless, he should not have sep- 

 arated himself from his Episcopal brethren; 

 but it appeared to him mischievous, "be- 

 cause," he said, "it minimizes or ignores the 

 greatest danger, at a time whep the clergy and 

 laity need to be most distinctly warned that 

 the foe is already within the camp." 



Church Missionary Society. The seventy- 

 seventh anniversary meeting of the Church 

 Missionary Society was held in London, May 

 4th. The Earl of Chichester presided. The 

 receipts of the Society and its associations for 

 the year were reported to have been 174,340 

 18s. 3d A surplus of 922 4s. 9d. remained 

 on hand at the close of the year. Reports were 

 received from missions in Africa, Asiatic Tur- 

 key, India, Ceylon, Mauritius, China, Japan, 

 New Zealand, and Northwest America. 



The total number of mission-stations was 

 157 ; of clergymen, European, 211 ; native 

 born, 154; total clergymen, 365; of European 

 lay agents, schoolmasters, printers, etc., 23 ; 

 of European female teachers (exclusive of mis- 

 sionaries' wives), 12; of native and country- 

 born Christian catechists, and teachers of all 

 classes, not sent from home, 2,391. 



The following table was presented, showing 

 the increase in the number of communicants 

 at the mission-stations during the preceding 

 ten years: 



Number of communicants in 1866 14,155 



1866 14,688 



1867.. ....... 16,154 



1868 16,145 



1S69 17,849 



1870 17,943 



1871 20,125 



1872 21,043 



1873 22,555 



1874 24,497 



Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. 

 The one hundred and seventy-fourth annual 

 meeting of the Society for the Propagation of 

 the Gospel in Foreign Parts was held in Lon- 

 don, April 28th. The Archbishop of Canterbu- 

 ry presided. The annual report stated that the 

 income of the Society for 1874 had been 134,- 

 826 19s. 3d., the largest sum ever received in 

 one year. The greatest part of this sum had 

 been devoted to the propagation of the Gospel 

 in Asia. The Society had provided wholly or 

 in part for the support of 503 ordained mis- 

 sionaries, distributed as follows: In Asia, 127; 

 in Africa, 98 ; in Australia and the islands of 

 the Pacific Ocean, 53 ; in America and the 

 West Indies, 224; in Europe, 1. In this num- 

 ber were included first two native clergy in 

 India. There were also about 828 catechists 

 and lay teachers, mostly natives, in heathen 

 countries, and about 141 students in colleges 

 abroad. 



The Exeter Reredos Case. The Judicial Com- 

 mittee of the Privy Council gave a final de- 

 cision, February 25th, in the case known as 

 the "Exeter Reredos" case. This case origi- 

 nated in 1874, when the Dean and Chapter of 

 Exeter Cathedral, in repairing that building, 

 undertook to remove from behind the altar a 

 tablet containing the ten commandments and 

 put in its place a reredos containing sculptured 

 representations of the Ascension of our Lord, 

 his Transfiguration, and the Descent of the 

 Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost. The 

 Bishop of Exeter, supported by a judicial deci- 

 sion of a lower court, which he had sought 

 and obtained, in his favor, decided the erection 

 to be unlawful, on account of the images upon 

 it. The dean and chapter took an appeal, 

 both against the authority of the bishop, and 

 on the question of the lawfulness of the images, 

 to the Court of Arches. This court reversed 

 the decision of the bishop, pronouncing the 

 images not unlawful and declaring that he had 

 not such supervisory authority over the cathe- 

 dral as would allow him to order their removal. 

 An appeal was then taken to the Queen in 



