reference to this case; the rest have to do with the creation of new
sees and missionary jurisdictions, commendatory letters, and a
“voluntary spiritual tribunal” in cases of doctrine and the due
subordination of synods. The reports of the committees were not
ready, and were carried forward to the conference of 1878.
II. Second Conference (July 2-27, 1878), convened and presided over by Archbishop Tait. On this occasion no hesitation appears to have been felt; 100 bishops were present, and the opening sermon was preached by the archbishop of York. The reports of the five special committees (based in part upon those of the committee of 1867) were embodied in the encyclical letter, viz. on the best mode of maintaining union, voluntary boards of arbitration, missionary bishops and missionaries, continental chaplains and the report of a committee on difficulties submitted to the conference.
III. Third Conference (July 3-27, 1888), convened and presided over by Archbishop Benson; 145 bishops present; the chief subject of consideration being the position of communities which do not possess the historic episcopate. In addition to the encyclical letter, nineteen resolutions were put forth, and the reports of twelve special committees are appended upon which they are based, the subjects being intemperance, purity, divorce, polygamy, observance of Sunday, socialism, care of emigrants, mutual relations of dioceses of the Anglican Communion, home reunion, Scandinavian Church, Old Catholics, &c., Eastern Churches, standards of doctrine and worship. Perhaps the most important of these is the famous “Lambeth Quadrilateral,” which laid down a fourfold basis for home reunion—the Holy Scriptures, the Apostles’ and Nicene creeds, the two sacraments ordained by Christ himself and the historic episcopate.
IV. Fourth Conference (July 5-31, 1897), convened by Archbishop Benson, presided over by Archbishop Temple; 194 bishops present. One of the chief subjects for consideration was the creation of a “tribunal of reference”; but the resolutions on this subject were withdrawn, owing, it is said, to the opposition of the American bishops, and a more general resolution in favour of a “consultative body” was substituted. The encyclical letter is accompanied by sixty-three resolutions (which include careful provision for provincial organization and the extension of the title “archbishop” to all metropolitans, a “thankful recognition of the revival of brotherhoods and sisterhoods, and of the office of deaconess,” and a desire to promote friendly relations with the Eastern Churches and the various Old Catholic bodies), and the reports of the eleven committees are subjoined.
V. Fifth Conference (July 6-August 5, 1908), convened by Archbishop Randall Davidson, who presided; 241 bishops were present. The chief subjects of discussion were: the relations of faith and modern thought, the supply and training of the clergy, education, foreign missions, revision and “enrichment” of the Prayer-Book, the relation of the Church to “ministries of healing” (Christian Science, &c.), the questions of marriage and divorce, organization of the Anglican Church, reunion with other Churches. The results of the deliberations were embodied in seventy-eight resolutions, which were appended to the encyclical issued, in the name of the conference, by the Archbishop of Canterbury on the 8th of August.
The fifth Lambeth conference, following as it did close on the great Pan-Anglican congress, is remarkable mainly as a proof of the growth of the influence and many-sided activity of the Anglican Church, and as a conspicuous manifestation of her characteristic principles. Of the seventy-eight resolutions none is in any sense epoch-making, and their spirit is that of the traditional Anglican via media. In general they are characterized by a firm adherence to the fundamental articles of Catholic orthodoxy, tempered by a tolerant attitude towards those not of “the household of the faith.” The report of the committee on faith and modern thought is “a faithful attempt to show how the claim of our Lord Jesus Christ, which the Church is set to present to each generation, may, under the characteristic conditions of our time, best command allegiance.” On the question of education (Res. 11-19) the conference reaffirmed strongly the necessity for definite Christian teaching in schools, “secular systems” being condemned as “educationally as well as morally unsound, since they fail to co-ordinate the training of the whole nature of the child” (Res. 11). The resolutions on questions affecting foreign missions (20-26) deal with e.g. the overlapping of episcopal jurisdictions (22) and the establishment of Churches on lines of race or colour, which is condemned (20). The resolutions on questions of marriage and divorce (37-43) reaffirm the traditional attitude of the Church; it is, however, interesting to note that the resolution (40) deprecating the remarriage in church of the innocent party to a divorce was carried only by eighty-seven votes to eighty-four. In resolutions 44 to 53 the conference deals with the duty of the Church towards modern democratic ideals and social problems; affirms the responsibility of investors for the character and conditions of the concerns in which their money is placed (49); “while frankly acknowledging the moral gains sometimes won by war” strongly supports the extension of international arbitration (52); and emphasizes the duty of a stricter observance of Sunday (53). On the question of reunion, the ideal of corporate unity was reaffirmed (58). It was decided to send a deputation of bishops with a letter of greeting to the national council of the Russian Church about to be assembled (60) and certain conditions were laid down for inter-communion with certain of the Churches of the Orthodox Eastern Communion (62) and the “ancient separated Churches of the East” (63-65). Resolution 67 warned Anglicans from contracting marriages, under actual conditions, with Roman Catholics. By resolution 68 the conference stated its desire to “maintain and strengthen the friendly relations” between the Churches of the Anglican Communion and “the ancient Church of Holland” (Jansenist, see Utrecht) and the old Catholic Churches; and resolutions 70-73 made elaborate provisions for a projected corporate union between the Anglican Church and the Unitas Fratrum (Moravian Brethren). As to “home reunion,” however, it was made perfectly clear that this would only be possible “on lines suggested by such precedents as those of 1610,” i.e. by the Presbyterian Churches accepting the episcopal model. So far as the organization of the Anglican Church is concerned, the most important outcome of the conference was the reconstruction of the Central Consultative Body on representative lines (54-56); this body to consist of the archbishop of Canterbury and seventeen bishops appointed by the various Churches of the Anglican Communion throughout the world. A notable feature of the conference was the presence of the Swedish bishop of Kalmar, who presented a letter from the archbishop of Upsala, as a tentative advance towards closer relations between the Anglican Church and the Evangelical Church of Sweden. See Archbishop R. T. Davidson, The Lambeth Conferences of 1867, 1878 and 1888 (London, 1896); Conference of Bishops of the Anglican Communion, Encyclical Letter, &c. (London, 1897 and 1908).
LAMBINUS, DIONYSIUS, the Latinized name of Denis Lambin (1520–1572), French classical scholar, born at Montreuil-sur-mer in Picardy. Having devoted several years to classical studies during a residence in Italy, he was invited to Paris in 1650 to fill the professorship of Latin in the Collège de France, which he soon afterwards exchanged for that of Greek. His lectures were frequently interrupted by his ill-health and the religious disturbances of the time. His death (September 1572) is said to have been caused by his apprehension that he might share the fate of his friend Peter Ramus (Pierre de la Ramée), who had been killed in the massacre of St Bartholomew. Lambinus was one of the greatest scholars of his age, and his editions of classical authors are still useful. In textual criticism he was a conservative, but by no means a slavish one; indeed, his opponents accused him of rashness in emendation. His chief defect is that he refers vaguely to his MSS. without specifying the source of his readings, so that their relative importance cannot be estimated. But his commentaries, with their wealth of illustration and parallel passages, are a mine of information. In the opinion of the best scholars, he preserved the happy mean in his annotations, although his own countrymen have coined the word lambiner to express trifling and diffuseness.
His chief editions are: Horace (1561); Lucretius (1564), on which see H. A. J. Munro’s preface to his edition; Cicero (1566); Cornelius Nepos (1569); Demosthenes (1570), completing the unfinished work of Guillaume Morel; Plautus (1576).
See Peter Lazer, De Dionysio Lambino narratio, printed in Orelli’s Onomasticon Tullianum (i. 1836), and Trium disertissimorum virorum praefationes ac epistolae familiares aliquot: Mureti, Lambini, Regii (Paris, 1579); also Sandys, Hist. of Classical Scholarship (1908, ii. 188), and A. Horawitz in Ersch and Gruber’s Allgemeine Encyclopädie.
LAMBOURN, a market town in the Newbury parliamentary
division of Berkshire, England, 65 m. W. of London, the terminus
of the Lambourn Valley light railway from Newbury. Pop.
(1901) 2071. It lies high up the narrow valley of the Lambourn,
a tributary of the Kennet famous for its trout-fishing, among
the Berkshire Downs. The church of St Michael is cruciform
and principally late Norman, but has numerous additions of
later periods and has been considerably altered by modern
restoration. The inmates of an almshouse founded by John
Estbury, c. 1500, by his desire still hold service daily at his
tomb in the church. A Perpendicular market-cross stands
without the church. The town has agricultural trade, but its
chief importance is derived from large training stables in the
neighbourhood. To the north of the town is a large group of
tumuli known as the Seven Barrows, ascertained by excavation
to be a British burial-place.
LAMECH (ּלֶמֶך), the biblical patriarch, appears in each of
the antediluvian genealogies, Gen. iv. 16-24 J., and Gen. v. P.
In the former he is a descendant of Cain, and through his sons
the author of primitive civilization; in the latter he is the father
of Noah. But it is now generally held that these two genealogies
are variant adaptations of the Babylonian list of primitive
