THE CHURCH AS A PROFESSION.
[To THE EDITOR OF TER "SPECTATOR,"] SIR,—It seems to me that the writer of your article on this subject, in the Spectator of December 19th, has begged the question entirely in two important points :—(1) He states as an undoubted fact that interest counts for less than it formerly did for promotion, and that many of the appoint- ments are made on the ground of merit. Now, Sir, I differ from this entirely, and I venture to say that not one benefice in ten is given for such reason, and even of those, not one-half of the appointments are made without merit plus interest. This amounts to stating that over nine-tenths of the clergy owe their promotion to money or interest. Those who become incumbents on account of pecuniary considerations may be divided into two groups,—viz., the men who accept a benefice of very small value because they can add a private income to enable them to live; and secondly, those who pay—either directly or through their friends—so much money down. This latter mode opens the door to admit any one in priest's orders who can produce so many hundreds or thousands of pounds. The most valuable living in the South of England has just been disposed of in this way, and there was nothing to prevent its being given to a man who received priest's orders a month before. I have a fairly intimate knowledge of the parish, and I know how parishioners resent such possi- bilities and such transactions. Your readers will scarcely think it necessary for me to prove how many benefices are given on account of interest. Think for a moment of those in the gift of the Lord Chancellor!
Of promotion by merit we should probably find most in-- stances if we looked to Episcopal and College patronage. It. may be readily admitted that we do hear occasionally of a, Bishop giving a living to a thoroughly deserving man; but when such a thing happens does it not usually call for remark? The dioceses of York and London have been exceptions, and possibly one or two others. There was a time when length of service in a diocese was supposed to count for something, but the late Archbishop, shortly before he died, dispelled such notions by saying, "The Bishops know no such arithmetic as is indicated by the fact that a man has been so many years here and so many there is to count for promotion." College livings have usually been given on account of merit,—not merit in parish work, but for obtaining a high place in the class list for the B.A. degree.. Many men who have been appointed to these benefices have never previously done a single day's work in a parish.
(2) All honour to those who are ordained with a view to" what they can do," regardless of "what they can get." May there be more of them ! But as a matter of fact it is well known that patrons of livings of small value find it increasingly difficult -to meet with men who will accept them. As a case in point, I was offered a living last year of about 2120 per annum, -and after it had been "hawked about" for a considerable time, I saw that the patron was obliged to advertise for an ineumbent. I question very much whether there will be found in the future a supply of suitable men with private incomes who can afford to be ordained without considering to some extent "what they can get," for even the clergy must "live." There is many a curate who has "learned to be content," and to take a cheerful view of everything, but it does not arise from his believing that even vigorous workers find competition by merit much in vogue. Does any one wish or expect the machinery of the Church to go on working for all time exactly as it has done ? If not, surely enough has .appeared in the Press to justify the assertion that the time for reform has come.—I am, Sir, &c., MA. CAMB.
Previous page
