sort of Council of Communicants—a kind of Kirk-session in fact—to interchange thoughts and take counsel with the pastor.  I am convinced that, until we have some organization of this kind, we shall have a constant repetition of those mistakes, which are often unwittingly made by the clergy from a non-appreciation of the honest difficulties of the laity.  I cannot do more than touch this point, but I may perhaps be permitted to say that I pray to see the day, when the Bishop shall take counsel with his Presbyters in Diocesan Synod, and when each parish shall have its own little synod of communicants gathering around the parish priest.  Then we shall have less jarring, and fewer mistakes.

I must now consider shortly how we can draw out Lay-help.  The best way to draw it out is simply to state why we want it.  Beyond the claims which God’s work must make upon the heart and conscience of every Christian man, “is there not a cause?”  Take the large parish of Lambeth.  “The census of 1851 gives the population as 139,325; the church accommodation as 22,589; that of dissent 11,586; but this includes the wealthier districts of Kennington, Norwood, Brixton, and Stockwell.  Exclude these parts of the parish, and the provision for the teaching of the people is comparatively reduced, whilst the attendance is in an inverse ratio to the wealth.  The poorer the place, the fewer the people who enter any place of worship . . .  The census returns for Lambeth give one-third of the sittings as always empty; it would be more than this in the poorer parts of the parish.”  For this statement I am indebted to Canon Gregory, [11a] and I can only say, “Is there not a cause?”  “In Southwark,” says Dr. Hume, “there are 68 per cent. who attend no place of worship; in Lambeth 60½.”  This evidence was tendered on oath before the Lords’ Committee on Church-rates. [11b]  Lord Shaftesbury again calculates “that only about 2 in every 100 of the working men are found to attend any place of worship.”  I say again, looking at these awful facts, “Is there not a cause?”

Now I ask you plainly, “Can you expect the 40 clergy of Lambeth (for that, according to the ‘Clergy List,’ is their number) to cope with this unassisted?  What are the 23 clergy of Southwark to do unassisted among a population of whom 68 per cent. do not attend service?”  In saying this I am not underrating the labours of Nonconformists; but while we thank God for the honest hearty work of many among them, we have no business to take that work into calculation, if we want thereby to lessen our responsibility as members of the National Church.  Now you see the extent of the evil.  How can it be remedied?  By multiplying our bishops, no doubt, and providing more clergy in each parish.  That will do good; but it will be of no avail without a working laity.  If the working classes are to be brought to church, you must bring them; and once brought, we must keep them.  I want to tell you why you must bring them, and how you must bring them.  You must bring them, because many of them seem to think that we talk to them in a professional way; we are a sort of ecclesiastical barristers holding a brief for the Bible.  It is an unjust estimate; but there are many unjust estimates in this world.  Therefore we want laymen who will go from house to house—who will conduct prayer-meetings and Bible classes, and cottage lectures—who will come and say to the