Page images
PDF
EPUB

AND AS IT MIGHT BE.

incomes and little duty were put in the one scale, large duties and little incomes formed the equivalent in the other? Or, as Paddy said, when his noble but childless master was endeavouring to console him on the birth of his eighth child with the pious sentiment that whenever God sent the mouths he sent the food to feed them-" Arrah, my lord, that may be thrue, but he sends the mouths to one, and the mate to another." "Oh but," it will be said, "times are changed; it used to be so." Yes, and it is so still. Pluralists, it is true, are much more scarce than formerly; church dignitaries receive nominally a much smaller income than in the good old times; but who gets the benefit? Much has been done to increase the number of livings, as they are somewhat satirically styled. Gothic parsonages perk up their heads in unaccus tomed places, which cost more to maintain than the rent of an ordinary house; and a little has drained through the Commissioners' sieve, which was not required for beautifying "palaces," laying out gardens, building stables and offices attached to Episcopal residences; but what has been done for the bulk of the "fat livings?" War comes, provisions rise, the poor are out of work, the income-tax is doubled, and to whom do the poor look in the emergency? To the rich parson who luxuriates upon his fat living of say a hundred or a hundred and fifty pounds a-year!

Oh, what a bitter mockery is it to see constantly "Wanted a clergyman, &c.; he must have some private means." Or, "None need apply unless he possesses an independent income." Why not? The labourer is worthy of his hire; the clerk is worthy of his salary; the physician is worthy of his fee; the lawyer is worthy of his (at least he thinks so). But, then, theirs is work for this life; and the clergyman, the rich parson, must support himself while he is labouring to save the souls of others. Is there a funeral? Oh, perhaps the parson will excuse the fee. Is a certificate wanted? Half-a-crown is grudgingly given. Why should he not be placed above all this? Let everything be without fees, and give him an adequate income. It is a reproach and a disgrace to Englishmen, that the man who has devoted himself to the Gospel of Jesus should be placed upon a level with a groom or a gardener. Upon a level, do I say? What gardener could a nobleman get for sixty or eighty pounds a-year? What groom would get less than a guinea a-week, besides his board and lodging? But grave gentlemen, good gentlemen, pious gentlemen, can meet in their elegant drawing rooms, and discuss church matters, and talk of poor Soand-so (their rich parson) and his large family, and his want of economy, and how, when he knows his income, he ought to live within it, and how very vexing such frequent calls upon their liberality are; and one says he'll give five pounds, and another ditto, and a third, and a fourth, until at length they do manage to screw out for their "spiritual guide," for him who watches over their soul's welfare, some twenty or five and twenty pounds, which they

35

present with a severe caution to be more careful. And this is being liberal in church matters! Why the last new piece of furniture purchased for fashion's sake, or the last new horse bought to eclipse some neighbour, would have cleared off all his difficulties and made him happy!

But it may be said the laity have done much! So they have. They have built handsome churches, with the least allowable legal endowment; they have built large, fanciful, expensive houses for the clergy; they find men, also, but too glad to get an appointment; and then people say, "See what Mr. A, has done; how liberal Mr. B. is; that steeple was built entirely at Mr. C.'s expense." Yes-that is it ; these men build their own monuments, instead of leaving it to their heirs to do.

But, say some, the church ought to support itself. Very good. Granted that salvation is worth having, but not worth paying a little of this world's wealth to obtain-granted that the church funds equitably distributed might and would afford a comfortable maintainance to all her clergy. She doesn't do it, and in the meantime, what are the clergy to do? They are shut out by their profession from helping themselves-except within such very narrow limits that the help is only available to a few. Placed in small towns and villages, as the majority of them are, they are too often the victims of everybody. The parson must pay. Oh, charge him so much. By education and profession a gentleman, with refined feelings and with keen sensibilities, above chaffering, by principle, preferring to be imposed upon rather than to impose, he is fleeced in every direction. Does an impostor wish to earn a lazy sixpence ?"Oh, go to the parson, he's sure to give you something." If he doesn't he is abused. Does a starving family want a meal? Whither do they go but to him who would rather share his meal with them than send them hungry away? Is he unkindly treated? He must not resent. Is he unjnstly dealt with? He must not defend himself. Does he resist imposition? He is litigious, unchristian.

Oh, but some will say all this is a gross exaggeration. Is it so? Who will assert it? Not the hundreds who toil on in the Master's vineyard, patiently, unostentatiously, in those less favoured and more populous districts, which a man of independent means would turn up his nose at. Not the men who pioneer among the manufacturing or mining districts, or the long neglected "slums" of large towns. No: but he who is the pet and darling of some town or city congregation; who holds up his finger, and scores await his bidding; or he who looks out on life from some lovely rectory; who knows no will, among the two or three hundred farm servants, but his own. Such may set down these statements as exaggeration ; but of the majority they are not so, they are literally true.

And upon whom do Government alterations press more hardly than the working clergy? The burial ground, the clergyman's freehold, must be

36

THE POSITION OF FOOR CLERGYMEN.

shut up, because it pleases God to visit us for our iniquities with a pestilence; at the imperious nod of a Home Secretary, a portion of his scanty in come is taken away: aud what about compensation? It is not the people's matter; bread remains at its usual price-therefore, they do not interfere. It is not an Episcopal matter. Episcopal revenues are not derived from burial grounds, therefore, there is little or no Episcopal interference. It is a matter of too little importance for statesmen to trouble themselves with; and so the "rich parson" must quietly submit. The doubled incometax is, we are told, proportional to the income. But it does not seem to enter anybody's head to calculate; or it might easily be shewn that £10 is a much more serious deduction from £200 than £100 is from £2,000. The one leaves £1,900, the other £190. "The last straw it is that breaks the camel's back." And, again, how unjust has been the pressure of the poor-rates upon that invaluable Protestant Evangelical body of men, the clergy of Ireland? But, because there are no "agitators" among them-because, from their quiet habits, they do not render themselves formidable to statesmen, no one cares for them. Is some cotton lord pressed by some existing law? He agitates, and makes himself formidable, and compels the Government to listen to him. Is a dissolution of Parliament pending? Some sop must be given to the Roman Catholics, or every priest becomes a political bully, and uses all his influence to defeat the Government. But the poor "rich parson," must suffer every oppression, nor raise his voice above a whisper. And then we are cuttingly told to "practise what we preach" -that we decry wealth, yet covet it! †

We well know that our blessed Master said"In this world ye shall have tribulation;" and we expect it but not from those who call themselves Christian brethren-yet we endeavour cheerfully to endure it. He has also said-"It must need be that offences come;" but he also added—" Woe to that man by whom the offence cometh."

There can be no question that some alteration is necessary, so far as the support of our clergy is concerned. When the necessary education is taken into account, the majority of the clergy are not getting much more than interest for their money, and many a man would have been much better off as a merchant's clerk.

It is true that there are two or three benevolent men who have come forward as our advocates. Committees are appointed, reports brought up, suggestions made, alterations recommended. But, while the grass grows, the steed starves. One might certainly compare St. Paul's description of his want and sufferings with the pomp and luxury of his would-be apostolical successors. We might

[blocks in formation]

compare the humble fisherman, or the evangelical tent maker, with the unapproachable and lordly Bishop; and their "hired lodging" with the baronial palace: we might suggest that a large reduction in their income, and consequently in their "state" and style, might prevent them from becoming totally oblivious of their position "some years ago," and render them more accessible and less lordly to their younger brethren. All this we might do; but as, especially among "their lordships," plain outspoken truth is uncourteous, we will, at present, with all courtesy, refrain. Again, the clergyman is expected to speak boldly, without fear of man; and certainly, as an ambassador for Christ, it is his duty to do so. "Ah," says a poor man, roused by some sentence of the sermon, "why doesn't he preach against the rich as well as the poor? Why doesn't he tell them their duty to us, as well as ours to them? Ah, he goes to the Hall, and gets good dinners, and they send him presents, and so he lets them alone. He knows on which side his bread's buttered!" Friend, do you expect a clergyman to be more than man? If you make him a dependent, do you expect him to be independent? Can you wonder that many are sycophants and time servers? Is it every man that has the principle to enable him to resist the temptation? Is it every man that had rather see his children upon half-rations," than procure whole ones by smothering his conscience? The wonder is that so many are found faithful,—not that a few succumb. So, again, it is said, “See how Tractarianism is spreading in every direction; what a fearful thing it is!" Yes, it is fearful ; but can we wonder when we know how it is spreading in high places? A young man who enters the ministry naturally looks to his Bishop for patronage, or reckons on his influence, which is far larger than the patronage. He is a curate; he has £90 or £100 a year. Unless he gets a living he can never hope for more. He must either remain unmarried, or, by marrying, add to his cares by the maintainance of a wife and family. Give him £200, and he might manage, and lift up his head; give him £100, and he is constantly hoping and expecting that some vacancy may be offered to him. Can you wonder if he tries to please his Bishop? Can you blame him so very much?

[ocr errors]

But is not such a state of things a shame and a reproach to our nation, and, more than all, a foul blot on our church? Why must a Bishop have five, or ten, or fifteen thousand a-year? What necessity is there that one who claims to be a successor to Him who said "Call no man master," and who had not where to lay his head, and who was ministered to by a few poor women, should be called "My Lord Bishop," and dwell in a palatial residence, and be protected from the vulgar herd by liveried flunkies, who "patronise" the humble curate when he has occasion to present himself in his shabby hat, and rusty, threadbare coat, at the dwelling of him who styles himself, in

POSITION OF THE POORER CLERGY.

bitter mockery, and on paper, "your faithful friend and brother." Just follow him. With thoughts (is it wrong to say ?) of almost envy, with consciousness of talents buried, and energies crushed beneath the load of care attendant on pecuniary difficulty, and the wants of a wife and familygenerally new to that sort of pressure; passing through the lodge gate, he wends his way through the "park," beneath some stately avenue of noble trees, or through acres of rich pasture-land, until, at length, the "baronial" residence gradually reveals itself to his eyes in all its stately grandeur. Timidly he rings the bell. The porter opens-if he had not so condescended, he might have been taken for a Dean at least, so faultlessly white is his linen, so respectable his grey powdered head, so glossy his black suit, so portly his person-and with door in hand, flung wide open, but filling up two-thirds of the vacant space himself, he scans the visitor (I had almost said intruder) from top to toe, as if to make sure he is right in listening to so very shabby a person, and whether such condescension may not lessen his respectability among his fellow servants. However, he at length asks the "fellow" in, and showing him the door of the waiting room, it may be, he vanishes. In about a quarter of an hour (if the visitor is lucky) the butler appears-a counterpart, it may be, of his friend the porter, only, by reason of his closer attachment to his lord's person, a trifle sleeker, and a thought more consequential-and, with an authoritative "This way, Sir, if you please" (Anglice, "Now I please") precedes him, stopping in his way, perhaps for a minute or two, to exchange a word and a laugh with the porter, and, it may be, a pinch of snuff, to show the poor parson how thoroughly he is at home, and to increase his own importance by keeping him waiting. At length he opens a door with a swing, and informs his lordship that the intruder is the Rev. Mr. His lordship is most courteous-in words; most civil-in manner; smiles in the blandest possible way; listens with well feigned attention-for the poor man has only come to ask his lordship's advice about some parochial difficulty, which gives him great anxiety, and hampers his ministry-and, having heard him to the end with exemplary patience, offers a few words of the merest matter of fact character, apologises for having an engagement (his lordship was walking in the "grounds" perchance, when he came), and the "friend and brother" of his lordship, feeling his room is more coveted than his company, is ushered by a process the converse of the former ceremonial out of the 'Palace," without the offer of even a glass of beer and a crust of bread and cheese" (wine would be too strong for a poor parson), although he has come, it may be, many miles for the express purpose of the interview. Is this exaggerated? Some may say "yes" others, most emphatically, and from experience, "no"-their answer depending upon their position in the scale. But is this what it ought to be? Is this calculated to render the

[ocr errors]

37

Church of England efficient or beloved? Does it help to win souls ?-to heal schisms ?-to silence adversaries? Is it likely? For the working clergy are the very men, as we have heard over and over again, who constitute the connecting link between the Church of England, as a system, and her laity; and men receive it as an axiom, that "those who do the work get the worst paid."

It may be said this is all about money. Decidedly it is. It is the Scripture principle"The labourer is worthy of his hire;" and when his hire is insufficient, is he, alone, of all classes to be silent? Besides, and beyond all, too, how is he to feed his people's souls with spiritual food, while all his own energies are directed to the solution of the questions, "what is the minimum limit to which household expenses can be reduced : what is the price of butter: how much overcharge is there in the butcher's bill: how are my boys and girls to be educated ?"--while his wife, a lady by birth and education, who could render most efficient aid to her poor, overworked husband, and who longs to be engaged in parochial details, is compelled to fritter away all her valuable talents and expend her best energies in darning stockings, patching and mending her boys' clothes, and making frocks for her girls out of old things sent by friends out of charity, making pics and puddings, and studying Soyer's cookery book-to see whether bones can be got to do duty for meat, and by what process a little may go a great way.

Churchmen of England, this is a frightful picture of the position of numbers of your ministers. Is it right? Is it creditable? Are there not men enough in our Senate of sufficient sympathy to take up the subject in earnest? Granted we are to practise self-denial; where is the merit in it, if compulsory?

But why should things remain in this state? There is property enough in the Church of England to remedy it without the slightest help from free or State contribution; and in this age of utilitarianism, although we do not object to ornament, provided it be useful, we need not pay so dearly for it. Let us begin at the beginning. Assuming the annual revenue of the Church of England roughly to be twelve millions sterling, and her clergy to number 20,000, every clergyman might have an income of six hundred a year! But we have no desire for this levelling system; while we have a desire, and a strong one too, that so foul a blot be removed from England's Church.

Why might not something like the following be accomplished? Suppress all the Deaneries, Canonries, Prebends, and every other sinecure. They are all utterly useless, residentiary or not, unless as pensioned places for political friends, to purchase or reward services which, perhaps, were better not rendered. Let no clergyman, dignitary or other, have more than one cure upon any consideration whatever; and let all church property be under proper, legal, honest, supervision and control. Let every diocese be consttuted an

[blocks in formation]

shelter sleek horses to lighten the labour of Episcopal dignity. Upon this hypothesis (alas! we ought rather to say upon existing facts), his lordship is right. But if we take the Apostolic standard, and reckon so much a-year (we dare not name any sum) for Peter, James, and Jolin, fishermen and apostles, so much for Paul, tentmaker and apostle, &c., &c., we still, obstinate heretics that we are, cling to our opinion that there is ample wealth in the actual possession of the Church of England, as a corporate body, to maintain all its working clergy, and their overseers, in comfort and respectability.

Ecclesiastical division; for that division, let three | Episcopal food for Episcopal stomachs, and to commissioners be appointed; one a paid lawyer, the other two laymen of high standing and responsible position. Empower them to let all church lands, to grant all leases, receive all fines, lease or sell all minerals, and collect all rents and other monies accruing from church property within that diocese. Let a scale for the payment of the clergy be drawn up, based upon population -no Incumbent receiving less than £300 a-year, or more than £600, or at the most, £700 a-year, and every Curate £150 a-year; the two Archbishops £5,000; the Bishop £2,000; the Archdeacon £800; the rural Dean £400 a-year-in addition to their livings in the two latter cases- to be paid by the Commissioners out of the funds in their possession, in quarterly payments. This would enable the clergy to relinquish all fees, and abolish all pew-rents. All this might be done with about seven millions a-year. And if we allow three millions as the deficiency arising from loss of fees and pew-rents, it still leaves a surplus revenue of two millions. Apply this surplus: first, to remunerate the patrons of those livings which are reduced in value by reduction of income, either by present payment or terminable annuity, or annuity for life, and afterwards to supply increased church accommodation, and to keep in repair churches, rectories, etc., instead of the present system of dilapidation damages for the latter, and of church-result of a voluntary principle? How are new rates in the former case. If the surplus were insufficient at first to remunerate the patrons of diminished livings, sell all Chancellor's and Crown livings, and this would probably also enable the Government to effect a reclamation of alienated tithes, by placing a sum of money at their disposal for that express purpose.

Thus we assert that the church has elements within herself, so far as the loaves and fishes are concerned, of placing herself in her proper position, and her clergy upon at least a footing with the conference Wesleyan ministers, which at present, except in empty honour and legal statute, they certainly are not.

But we are told, by the Bishop of St. Asaph, that as far as he can venture to form a judgment, or to express it, "the funds at the disposal of the church are utterly inadequate to provide for that which is required for the well-being of the Christian community of the country." Here we are clearly at issue with his lordship. We have endeavoured to prove one thing, and he asserts the direct contrary. Whence the contradiction? If the Church of England goes on increasing the number of her Bishops at the present threatened rate, his lordship is right. For, with every new Episcopal appointment, away goes £5,000 a-year, or the support of about twenty vulgar parsons at the suggested rate, or nearly fifty at the actual; and we should not have the temerity to speak of the cost of the new palace for each new Bishop of each new diocese-the gardens and plantations, the kitchens and the stables necessary to supply

But if it were not so, if it should be found upon accurate examination, and after every excrescence in the shape of dean and chapter, sinecure and immoderate income, had been removed with unsparing hand-that there was not enoughwhat then? We fear we must appeal to the public. Oh! but that is the voluntary principle! That is contrary to the genius and constitution of the Church of England! Even if this were so, we read of the Church's Lord, that women administered unto him of their substance; of the great apostle of the Gentiles we read that, when he was in want at Corinth, the brethren of Macedonia supplied him. But we demur to it. What is an endowment but a gift? What is a gift but the

churches built, endowed and maintained, but by the application of this principle! We apprehend that the voluntary principle, or the principle of free will offerings, has been, and is, strictly in accordance with the genius and character of the Christian Church. What we do object to is the contingent principle, which holds the lash of caprice over the heads of its victims; or, to borrow from a favourite amusement, to give just so much line as the victim will run out, and no more, and by ever keeping before the eye of its spiritual servant the fear of being "starved out," succeeds in producing doctrine to order, at so much per yard, according to the demand of the majority.

If, therefore, the resources of the Church upon the reduced estimate are insufficient to meet her wants, nolens volens she must, unless she can coax some Government to grant a national church rate, condescend to appeal for voluntary aid, and to feed her sons to some extent upon voluntaryism.

With regard to a few other details to every Cathedral Church appoint one of the most popular and talented men of the day, with a staff (if the size of the town required it) of real working curates, and let duty be done in them as in other churches, where there is no need of singing men to pray for other people's souls as an amusement.

With regard to the appointment of Bishops; let every rural dean be elected by a majority of the clergy of the rural deanery. Every archdeacon, the number of whom might be increased, by the clergy of the archdeaconry, from among the rural deans; and on the see becoming vacant, let

WINTER.

the clergy elect two or three from among the archdeacons to be presented to the Crown, for its selection and appointment; such selection and appointment to be vested actually in the Crown, and not virtually in the hands of the Prime Minis. ter. The Bishops would still sit in the House of Lords; this we could not interfere with, as, rightly exerted, this influence might often be most valuable; depending for the respect of their peers rather upon their Christian consistency of character, than their wealth; their magnificent palaces and castles might be sold, and other residences furnished, fully befitting their station and require

ments.

If something of this sort could be carried out, we should indeed rejoice, and something must be done. The clergy indeed are bound by their position to remain tolerably passive, but the laity have no such fetters; and, after so many specimens of Episcopal intolerance, peculation, and imbecility, as we have recently had on the one hand, and with so many instances of successful toadyism and unsuccessful and crushed merit on the other, who can doubt but that the position of the Church would be immensely improved, and her influence incalculably extended?

But here we must speak seriously, respectfully, and earnestly—is it consistent with the character of ministers of the Church of England, of overseers of the flock of Christ, that their love of wealth and power should be such a standing reproach ? Would that our Bishops could remember the high and responsible position as before God they occupy!

39

We would not willingly be guilty of disrespect to any of those who are over us, either temporally or spiritually, but when men have to attest and enforce, if they can, their claim to respect, something must be wrong.

Let

Let not the demand be "Give us more power, my lord," but "Lord give us more grace.' us not hear of Bishops' carriages on the race-course, of Bishops' daughters at county balls; of clergymen excelling in horsemanship, or farming, or graceful dancing; of curates idolised by the ladies-realising the old jest about the sign-post; but let us hear of earnest, devoted men of God, seeking to win souls to Christ; knowing nothing among men save Jesus and Him crucified; of men dead to the world, living only to Him who died for them; of men emulous rather of apostolic doctrine and apostolic grace, than of apostolic power; let the light of Divine truth shine brightly and fervently in the lives of the ministers of our Church as it does in her inimitable liturgy and articles, and then her abuses will correct themselves; her Bishops will be but fellow presbyters in their intercourse with their clergy; her revenues will be distributed according to our Saviour's own law of doing to others as we would that they should to do unto us; and then, if after all, under this altered condition of things, her revenues are found insufficient to support those who watch and labour for souls, we confidently predict that any appeal she may make will be abundantly responded to by the voluntary efforts of those who benefit by her ministrations.

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »