THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND AND THE ENGLISH NATION.
IT will be a fortunate thing for the Established Church, if that portion of the clergy who have been most active in their resistance to the Liberation Society would consider whether the means they are employing for extending the influence of the establishment are the best that could, be desired. It seems to us that too many of those clergymen have forgotten' or wilfully overlooked, the only reasons by which it is possible to justify an Established Church. If the theory of Archdeacon Hale, supported as it is by the Con- servative party, is correct, and church-rates are to be considered in the same light as the payment of tithes, it should not be left out of sight that the Church is bound in theory, to the perform- mice of Christian duties towards the English people, which are susceptible of a very precise definition. From this point of view, the Church of England is the authorized exponent of religious truth to the English people. Every subject of Queen Victoria, in this country, can claim the right to spiritual instruction and to all such offices as the priestly caste, in every nation, is called upon to discharge. We have nothing, however, to do with the conditions imposed by the Church itself. The question we have to ask, is, as to how far the Establishment performs the duties which are im- plied in the great privileges it possesses.
Setting aside the doctrinal differences, which have driven so many persons from the Church of England, it is certain that there are numbers of Dissenters whose schism has only a nominal connexion with questions of doctrine. The accusation made by Wycliffe against the lazy monks of the day in which he lived, cannot now be made, with truth, against the English clergy. It is probable, that at no previous epoch in our history, has the Church been so active as it is at present. The sort of rivalry be- tween the different parties of High Church, Low Church, and Broad Church, is itself a sign of life, and we believe that, in other respects, there is no complaint to be made against the clergy, as a body, on the score of indolence. But, this is not enough, and the point to which we wish to draw attention, is the utter inefficiency of the present system to carry out all the objects that should be carried out by a national Church. With the immense resources lit its command, there can be no doubt that the Establish- ment might be much more effective than it is. Is it not, for instance, a crying shame and a gross absurdity, that, in our largely-populated parishes, there is not room for a tithe of those who could go to church if they would ? It is not so bad now as it used to be, but it is still true that, as a general rule, there is only a very limited space allotted to those who cannot afford to pay a rent for their seat. It is scarcely possible to conceive a greater anomaly, or so glaring a contradiction of the very notion of an Established Church. Then, again, there is that other dark feature in this wealthy Establishment—the paltry stipends of the
_,c in who, many cases, bear the chief burden of the work. n is, of course, an old story; but each year that passes only makes more completely without excuse that such obvious evils should be still permitted to exist. The other defect to which we will point, is the want of more bishops. Centuries ago, it is possible 'that the number of bishops in this country was large enough for (the work required of them. But now that our population has been 4nultiplied, now that towns contain, within their limited space, as ttnany human beings as formerly were :scattered over a county, it his idle to suppose that rather more than two score of bishops can isroperly exercise episcopal supervision. As things are at present, lit is only on rare occasions that a clergyman sees his bishop—at cthe times fixed for confirmation and so forth. And how can this (be otherwise ? For a great portion of the year, a bishop is lrequired to be in London; and, even when he is in his diocese, this duties are so vast and so enormous, that a man of very tender nionsaience, if invited to accept a bishopric, would probably irdecline an honour which is accompanied by such dreadful respon- sibilities. In the diocese of Exeter, we are told, that the pres- sure of business now on the bishop's officers is so great that, when clergymen come fresh into the diocese, they are often obliged to wait for several months before they can obtain a licence. So anomalous is the present system that it would almost seem rea- sonable either to abolish the episcopate altogether, or else to in- crease, to a very great extent, the number of bishops. What is the use of maintaining an institution which only par- tially fulfils the objects for which it was founded ? For the purposes of confirmation ordination, and the consecration of churches, the present staff is too large ; but, in England, it is scarcely possible for any one to have a proper conception of what a bishop ought to do, and could do, if he were not so terribly dverweightecl. We will not admit the plea of a want of means. The Church of England has enough, and to spare, for all that can be exacted from a national church. We do not now speak of the boundless resources which exist in the splendid charity of individuals' but may be worth while to remark, by the way, that few of those persons who are so anxious for the abolition of Church-rates are aware on how large a scale the voluntary system prevails already in the Church of England. The wealth to which we allude is the
episcopal and capitular wealth which is now so badly distributed, and the numbers of rich benefices, in whioh, too frequently, the work is light and the pay disproportionately large. In former years, the capitular property of the Church was shamefully squan- dered away. We believe that the canons of Durham were in the habit, not of course with any suspicion that they were doing wrong, of spending large sums of money as revenue which ought to have been regarded as capital. The princely incomes enjoyed by former Bishops of Durham have probably absorbed an enormous mass of wealth, the interest of which would now represent a large annual revenue. But it is all gone, and the practical question now is, as to the best means for preventing a recurrence of the like offences. There is now a bill before Parliament for placing the management of all these capitular estates in the hands of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners and there would be no great objection to this if it could be made incumbent on the Commissioners to attend to local claims before taking funds away from one Diocese to be applied to the spiritual want of another Diocese. The money that would be derived, under proper management, from these es- tates can scarcely be computed with accuracy, but it would be amply sufficient for carrying out a plan of Church Reform, on a very extensive scale. But, in addition to that, we see no reason why the rich benefices of the National Chnrch should not be utilized. The principle has already been adopted, by attaching the performance _of professorial or archidiaconal duties to canonries, and we think that it might be applied to rich benefices with very salutary results. At all events, some measures should be taken at once to give greater efficiency to the Establishment. The to which we have called attention require only to be stated in their naked simplicity, and the present moment is peculiarly opportune for taking the whole matter into serious consideration. The Church-rate party have recently achieved a comparative success in Parliament, but it will not do to count upon a repetition of their triumph. It is the duty of the National Church, as it will certainly be for her interest, to show that she "understands the epoch," and that she i3 willing to adapt her system to the in- creasing wants and complicated relations of this stirring age.
Previous page
