General Gordon's preservation-for we hope and pray that he is preserved to his country-is due, under Providence, to the effect of his high and God-fearing nature? The prestige of such a personality is greater even than that of the British name and uniform in the best of times.

More has to be said about the tenth, or non-Muslim part of the population. The supposed fraction may be somewhat inaccurate, but it must be remembered that, in estimating it, not only the Copts but all Christians, whether Syrian, Armenian, or of European nationality, have been taken into account. It is with the Copts, however, that the English Church has of late years had more to do than with any other denomination in Egypt, and it is upon the experience of her doings in this particular respect that I would venture to make a few observations pertinent to the question now before us.

A short but comprehensive paper in the April number of the "Scottish Church Review" states the case clearly; and further interesting details on the same subject are to be found in a pamphlet, "Concerning the Coptic Church in relation to the Church of England during the Primacy of Archbishop Howley," or from 1836 to 1848, published last year by the Association for the Furtherance of Christianity in Egypt. From these we gather that with the assistance, or rather, perhaps, through the instru mentality, of two English clergymen-travelling, one in the cause of Biblical science, the other for purposes of health-Mr. Lieder, of the Church Missionary Society, was enabled, some forty odd years ago, to open in Cairo an institution for training young Copts to become ministers of their Church. The scheme, which comprised, among other provisions, the very important innovation that "the principal of this institution should be a clergyman of the Church of England," met with the sanction of both the English Primate and the Coptic Patriarch, the latter notifying his "entire approbation" by letter to the Archbishop, "because of the English Church being drawn towards the Coptic Church of St. Mark." It does not appear that any written reply was forwarded to the Patriarch; but the Archbishop's serious illness in the following year was undoubtedly the chief cause of silence. Communications were, however, exchanged on other matters. His Grace wrote an introduction for the Reverend Mr. Tattam, in August, 1842, taking advantage of the occasion to express assurance of the high respect and goodwill which he and other rulers of the English Church felt towards his Holiness and the churches under his care," and of their desire to render them all possible assistance. A few days afterwards, the venerable writer was seized with a serious attack of Asiatic cholera, and the Patriarch only delayed acknowledgment of his letter until, in February, 1843, he was enabled, at the same time, warmly to congratulate the Archbishop on restoration to health.

Here we have an illustration of a rapprochement which seemed full of promise, but which ended in disappointment. In September, 1847, Mr. Lieder stated his opinion that the institution, as then conducted, was "not worth the great expense" to which the Church Missionary Society was subject so long as it remained open. Concurring in this view, the Home Committee decided on its abandonment, and in due course the doors were closed. I have not had the opportunity of referring to the Society's Register for the years which should contain the

English Principal's reports on its working; but in my humble judgment the experiment of this academy was not without fruit. It may be that the students were not always of a class that would profit from the instruction imparted, nor likely to do credit to their teachers; but it is not said that students were wanting; and the fact that an institution, ostensibly, to use the Patriarch's own words, "for the education of youth that are fit for dedication to the order of priesthood for the Coptic Church of St. Mark," under the superintendence of an English clergyman, existed at all for any number of years in Cairo, is one which in itself calls for thankfulness from all well-wishers to the Christian community in Egypt. The high character of Mr. Lieder, to which travellers and residents in that country have long borne testimony, is sufficient to refute the supposition that he would have been satisfied with a sham establishment. Moreover, he had reported, in 1847, that in the then state of affairs, amidst "much to discourage," there was "much more to cheer," and to evidence that their great object, "the elevation, through God's grace, of the Coptic Church" was "proceeding with much success." I continue the quotations, as found at the conclusion of the letters and papers already mentioned :

"The fullest confidence is now manifested towards us by all the higher orders of the native clergy, without whose countenance all our labours would prove in vain. The Patriarch shows the kindest feeling towards the institution, and frequently gives his benediction to the pupils; while the amiable Bishop of Esneh, Amba Michael, is an almost daily visitor, inspecting and encouraging the young men in the pursuit of their studies. Amba Michael is often in Cairo on duty connected with the Patriarchate. During his last visit he brought with him his sister's son, a fine lad of thirteen years of age, and, placing my hand on his head, told me to regard the boy as my own son; that, as he had dedicated him to the priesthood, he now submitted the whole of his theological studies to me."

Briefly, then, the history of the Anglo-Coptic Institution at Cairo is that of a scheme which has in no way failed, but which needs considerable reform in the working details. This is practically the decision. passed upon it by its promoters. According to the report of the committee, the Church Missionary Society threw up their task in no despair of the cause so nobly advocated, but because there was an evident flaw in method, which either they could not or would not remedy. Continuance of the work "upon a greatly modified plan" was, indeed, put forward as an alternative to closing doors, but doors were closed, and I am not aware that there is any likelihood of their being re-opened under the former supervision. Now, as regards "England's religious duties towards Egypt," it is assuredly neither unwise nor impolitic to ask her at the present time, or at the first convenient opportunity, to renew, in some shape, if not by Government agency, by that of individuals or societies, an effort to achieve so great and worthy an end as the elevation of the Coptic Church. If this were done and compliance given, the main point for consideration would be the exact change of procedure required. Should other means of effecting the desired object be found than available in a training institution? or should the institution be accepted as of old, and modification be applied only to its rules and

machinery? I see no harm in the latter and simpler course, if we confine our attention to the Copts; though by and by I shall have something to say on behalf of other Oriental Christians. To my mind, however and I must crave indulgence for having any mind at all on a matter the discussion of which is hardly among the presumed rights of laymen-we must advance somewhat to meet our pupils and their prejudices, as well as await their approach to ourselves and our enlightenment. I am not advocating departure in one iota from the doctrinal truths of the Church of England, but such concessions as could reasonably be made by persons acting in a strictly catholic spirit. May it not be that too close an adhesion to certain forms of religious teaching, and over-fastidiousness on the part of instructors in regard to the tolerance of local practices and traditions, have already deterred the better kind of students from taking advantage of the training offered? To "become a Copt to gain the Copts," limited to the true Scriptural sense, might, as a basis of action, work wonders, without involving a more serious concession than is sometimes made upon the same principle to English congregations; and where the result is a host of willing, hopeful followers, who can assert that the end does not justify the means? From my acquaintance with Egypt, as well as other experiences, I would deferentially repeat the opinion that this experiment of an Anglo-Coptic institution might well be made again, under a liberal but discreet supervision, and with a staff of competent, high-minded, and self-denying

men.

But very recently, and since the war in Egypt, an effort has been made in more than one quarter to resume the thread of intercourse with the Coptic community, broken only as regards the educational essay. Among other results of home discussion, which may already have been made more or less public by the societies contributing to them, an association was formed, "the object of which was to ascertain if the Church of England could afford any assistance to the Copts, and if it should appear that such an opening existed, to promote the plan agreed upon in the best way practicable." One of its first acts was the despatch of representatives to Cairo to ascertain the actual state of affairs on the spot, and local feeling with reference to any further action. The report made by the members of this mission of their reception by Sophonius, the Greek Patriarch of Alexandria, and Cyril, the Coptic Patriarch; of their visits to the four convents of the Natron valley and to the Coptic churches and schools generally; and of the conferences held by them with priests, monks, and laymen, is interesting and full of encouragement; but there is no suggestion offered on the revival of a training institution, nor recommendation for any immediate work laid down, save assistance in printing a few selected pamphlets. A communication, however, is awaited from a council of laymen, whom the Copts have elected among themselves, "to undertake the management of secular business." It is to state what, in their opinion, are the chief needs and requirements of the Coptic people. The representatives of the association, in concluding a very interesting account of their mission, trust confidently that this promised report will "afford materials on which to base a more substantial plan of action." I am not sure that, in the circumstances, I should not have preferred to receive the statement of the Coptic Church to that of the laity, as the question is of an

understanding in religious rather than in secular matters.

Besides,

it is doubtful whether the proverbial dilatoriness of Orientals can be said to apply to religious bodies at all, with whom, in the way of direct intercommunication, Western diplomacy has had comparatively little experience. But it may be readily inferred that the council of Coptic laymen will not act independently of the clergy, nor be the exponents of sentiments at variance with those of their spiritual advisers, and I cannot but look forward with interest and hope to the coming expression of their views, even if it resolve itself into the old form of a request for gratuitous instruction to the rising priesthood.

There is just one suggestion of my own which I would venture to make before concluding. It involves a large scheme and a long prospectus, but an outline only will be submitted at present. I have referred to other Christians than Copts in the East; not necessarily in Egypt, but to some extent represented there. Such are the Armenians, and so-called Jacobites and Nestorians, with many others, regarding whom there is neither time nor occasion to enter into particulars; but I may state that I have some personal knowledge of most, especially of the Armenians in Persia and Asia Minor, and of the Chaldean and Syrian Christians in Asiatic Turkey, between Baghdad and Diarbekir. I may add that for the Nestorians a very great interest has been taken by our own Church in late years, under conditions not dissimilar to those which have drawn its attention to the Copts. Well, would not the formation of an Anglo-Oriental institution, designed and organised for the elevation of a church, and education of a priesthood, not in Christian Egypt only, but for all Eastern Christians, be a right worthy task for the philanthropists of this last quarter of the nineteenth century? And where could it find a better or more central position in reference to Egypt, the Levant, and Christian regions east of the Mediterranean, than the British island of Cyprus? I know no political reason for the possession of the place more cogent than this one of humanity and civilisation.

A few years ago I was requested to read a paper at the Royal United Service Institution, on the lines of communication between England and India; and I argued in favour of a railway from Tripoli to the Euphrates, eventually to become a mere feeder and outlet to the inevitable great railway of the future, uniting Constantinople to Baghdad. But the gist of my recommendation was that Cyprus should become, by purchase or otherwise, a British possession-a sort of sentinel watching over the railway terminus on the mainland opposite. Singularly enough-for I no more pretend to be in the secrets of any Government than to influence their councils-in less than a month afterwards the world was astonished by the notification that this very island had been made over to Great Britain by the Porte. Yet, much as I rejoiced in this move on the political board, I ventured to think of it rather as a step in progressive civilisation than a territorial gain to England. The geographical site of the new acquisition rendered it a kind of half-way house between England and India for passengers by the Euphrates Valley Railway; and, among many images of its usefulness, I pictured a University in Cyprus at which Indians travelling westward would find the best of European professors, with a genial and customary climate. The idea has now recurred to me in its application to a much

more important object--the union of students from different branches of the Oriental Church. I do not see why substance should not eventually be given to both notions; though at this moment advocacy must be confined to the last-named only.*

The Very Rev. DEAN BUTCHER, D.D., Cairo.

A SPEAKER on an Eastern topic who follows Sir F. Goldsmid, is like the man who lectured on the art of war in presence of Hannibal; further, I am aware that anyone who has to speak of Egypt in England labours under a disadvantage. The subject is peculiarly distasteful. We have heard so much about it already, and we have an ominous foreboding that we shall hear so much more before we are well out of it, that a feeling, which is perfectly natural, impels us to turn away when the name of the most unfortunate of countries is mentioned. Still we have certain responsibilities as a State, and if we believe the doctrine expressed in the pregnant phrase of Coleridge, viz., that the Church and the State have ends "reciprocally inclusive," then the subject of this paper "The Religious Duties of England towards Egypt," is one of the first importance. I read in a newspaper last night that the discussion of this subject was premature. It is, in my humble judgment, never premature to do right.

We face the fact that it has pleased God to bring the English and the Egyptians into close and peculiar relations. Now, for the sake of clearness, let us settle what we mean by the Egyptians. The population of the Nile Valley comprises the Fellahin, the Copts, the Beduins, the Arabian dwellers in towns, the Berbers, the Negroes, the Turks, the Levantines, and the Europeans. For religious purposes, I think I may say the Church of England may ask herself what duties she owes to three classes of persons living in Egypt. 1st, the Mahommedans ; 2nd, the Copts; 3rd, the English residents.

Ist, the Mahommedans. This is a difficult matter, but I do not think it is so difficult as it appears. Consider, England is a Christian country, but she rules a vast Mahommedan population. Egypt is a Mahommedan country, but she rules a large Christian population. It is admitted to be an essential part of the compact between England and her Mahommedan subjects, that she shall not as a nation attempt to alter their religion by aggressive proselytism; but she would be grievously forgetful of her high calling if she made no effort to show them a more excellent way. The tolerant attitude adopted towards Mahommedanism in India, simplifies the question of her action towards Mahommedanism in Egypt. If in a country where she is mistress she

Having said nothing of the work of the American missionaries in Egypt, which, however successful and disinterested, is in a somewhat different direction to that here contemplated, I cannot do otherwise than express admiration of the high-minded perseverance of these worthy labourers in a worthy field, whose colleagues and countrymen I long since visited in more than one of their stations in Asia Minor. Nor have I spoken of the points of difference in the religious belief of the Copts with reference to other Eastern Churches-a subject which will, doubtless, be treated by those professionally qualified for the discussion.