Page images
PDF
EPUB

precedent for similar proceedings in other dioceses. Mr. Shore, it appears, is one of those clergymen who make very little of acting in defiance of episcopal authority, whenever it runs counter to their own wishes. He was anxious to obtain a license to a chapel in a particular parish, which was declined by the incumbent. After this the bishop had no power to act. Every incumbent, as the spiritual director of a parish, has a right to exercise his own discretion respecting the clergymen who may wish to occupy chapels within his jurisdiction. This right was exercised in the case in question; and because he could not procure a license in a clergyman's parish, Mr. Shore chose to proceed without one, pleading the Toleration Act, and claiming the privileges of a Dissenter. Of course such a man's principles cannot be those of the Anglican Church. At the same time, he is a clergyman in holy orders, and the question is, whether he can so far take advantage of the Toleration Act as to screen himself from the operation of the canons.

A commission was issued by the Bishop of Exeter, under the Church Discipline Bill, to enquire whether further proceedings were necessary. The object contemplated seems to be the removal of Mr. Shore from the Church by due course of law; and we cannot but think it desirable that such men should be precluded from assuming the ministerial functions in other dioceses. Mr. Shore might possibly be admitted to a cure in another diocese; but after acting in defiance of one bishop, he ought not to be permitted to exercise his office elsewhere. This may be prevented by a process in the Court of Arches, which will issue in the deprivation of his clerical character, so that he would never be able to act as a clergyman of the Church of England. We are of opinion, too, that a similar process should be adopted towards all those clergymen who are acting in defiance of episcopal authority, under the provisions of the Toleration Act. Let them enjoy the protection of the Act, but let them first be deprived of their clerical character. Such men are more consistent as Dissenters than as Churchmen.

Mr. Shore says he has no wish to remain in the Church. This is undoubtedly the truth. Why then did he apply for a license from the Bishop of Exeter? If he had no wish to remain in the Church, why act so inconsistent a part as to seek to be licensed? His principles are not changed since the application-he remains the same man still. The conclusion, therefore, to which all reflecting persons must come is this-that Mr. Shore did not apply for a license on any principle, but merely to answer some private purpose. Had he been a true Churchman at that time, he could not have quitted the Church on being

thwarted in a particular object. What, then, can be thought of a man who could apply for a license, when at the same time he did not hold the principles which he was about to subscribe?

THE CHURCH PATRONAGE SOCIETY.

Our readers are probably not aware of a society under the above designation; neither were we ourselves aware of it until very recently. The object is to procure money from charitablydisposed persons for the purpose of purchasing livings, which are to be placed in the hands of trustees, with a view to the appointment of men of particular views and principles. All this is done under the pretence of promoting the preaching of the Gospel. The Jesuits' maxim is, that the end sanctifies the means; and it appears to us that this society has adopted it in its fullest extent. Every well-disposed man must surely admit that the sale of Church patronage is an evil; yet, in order to advance the interest of a party, the supporters of this society can take advantage of the law, and do an act which sound Churchmen cannot contemplate with satisfaction. Suppose Dr. Pusey and Mr. Newman, with their friends, were to form a similar society, what an outcry would be raised against the proceeding. We should have long dissertations on the danger of the Church, and tiresome exhortations to do something to check the evil. Now we feel assured that Dr. Pusey and his friends could establish a society, and raise much more money than the society now in existence. But whatever may be the errors of that party, they will not add to them, by adopting a course which, as it seems to us, no one, on reflection, can justify. Dr. Pusey and his friends are willing to leave Church livings to the ordinary operation of the law-an example which the Patronage Society would do well to copy. Such a course would be far more consistent than the one which they are now pursuing. It is our decided opinion, that such proceedings, on the part of men professing godliness, are erroneous: it is a sort of distrust of Divine Providence. That men, who are so ready to complain of all who do not see with their eyes and walk in their steps, should be guilty of such an act, surprises us greatly. Applications are made to wealthy individuals for money, under the plea of promoting the spread of the Gospel in those parishes which can be purchased; but we warn and caution our readers against such proceedings. On no account let money be given for such a purpose. The usual arguments will have no weight with right-minded persons; they will not be influenced to do what at best must be considered as questionable, by the specious pretence, that by supporting such a society they will advance

the Gospel of Christ. Right-judging men will be content to leave all such matters in the disposal of Divine Providence. Really, if such proceedings become common, it will be necessary for the Church to interfere to prevent them. They must issue in the injury of the Church; and whatever may be argued about promoting the Gospel, all reflecting persons will perceive that the object is to promote the cause of a party. It is admitted generally, that the sale of livings is an evil, though permitted by the law of the land. Is it then consistent, in the persons who constitute the Patronage Society, to take advantage of a state of things, of which, if they love the Church, they must disapprove, under the plea of promoting the Gospel? Would it not be more consistent to leave all such matters to the ordinary operation of the law, rather than to tempt the providence of God, by dictating the way in which the Gospel is to be made known? All combinations of this kind are very suspicious; we cannot conceive how consistent men can justify them; and we trust that few persons will be found to contribute their money for such an object. There are always men who, for the sake of obtaining a paltry living, will cringe and bow to those clergymen in whom such trusts are vested; and there are always persons in holy orders to be found who, for the sake of the patronage, and the influence which they obtain over a few individuals, whose merits would never procure them preferment in the straightforward course, are anxious to undertake the charge, though they invariably plead for their conduct a regard for God's glory, and a desire to advance the interests of their fellow-men. For our part, we cannot shut our eyes to the fact, that all such combinations originate in selfish and party feelings.

THE HARVEST.

It would be wrong in us not to remind our readers of the bounties of Providence, in one of the most abundant harvests within the memory of man, and not to direct them to offer their tribute of gratitude to HIM from whom all our blessings flow. The present season has been a very remarkable one. Undoubtedly, the long-continued dry weather was injurious to the crops of grass, so that the farmer may experience some difficulty, from want of hay, in the ensuing winter; but then the abundance of the harvest is more than a counterbalance for this deficiency; and altogether the country was never, with respect to the fruits of the earth, in a more prosperous condition.

A good harvest is a matter of the utmost importance to this country. Besides the religious view which we wish to impress upon our readers, there is a political aspect in which the sub

ject is to be considered. Whatever may be our political difficulties, it cannot be denied that they would be increased to a most alarming extent by the failure of the harvest. The subject was alluded to in her Majesty's speech-a grateful acknowledg ment to Almighty God was rendered by the Government; and nothing could affect the interests of the country in a greater degree than a failure in the usual produce of the fruits of the earth. Of this the Radicals and the disaffected are fully aware. They would rejoice to see the country involved in distress and confusion from such a cause. Two years ago, it was said that even the seasons were in favour of Sir Robert Peel. It was considered, at that time, that a failure in the harvest would have produced such a wide-spreading feeling of discontent, as to have endangered the safety of any Administration; and there were not wanting reckless politicians, at that time, who hesitated not to express a hope that the crops might fail, in order that the Government might be embarrassed. This feeling was put forth in newspapers and in speeches. There was no attempt at concealing their secret feelings: they were openly confessed. disaffected of all classes were influenced by the same wicked sentiments. A friend of ours heard a knot of mechanics discussing the question of the stability of the Administration, just as the harvest two years ago was closed; and their profane and anti-national remark was, speaking of Sir Robert Peel, that "the very seasons were in his favour."

The

While, therefore, there is in the country a party holding such antichristian sentiments-while they would rejoice in any cause which might produce suffering to the country and temporary embarrassment to the Government-while they would take advantage of any circumstance to involve the nation in trouble— let us devoutly and sincerely thank God for giving us a most abundant harvest. The goodness of God has been mercifully displayed in giving us the fruits of the earth and in sending such weather as enabled the husbandman to gather them into the garner; and it behoves us, as a nation, to render our tribute of gratitude to our heavenly Father for the rich mercies of which we have been the partakers.

495

General Literature.

Persecutions of Popery: Historical Narratives of the most Remarkable Persecutions occasioned by the Intolerance of the Church of Rome. By FREDERIC SHOBERL. Two vols. 8vo. London: Bentley. 1844.

BEFORE the passing of the Roman Catholic Relief Bill our apprehensions of danger in the removal of all restrictions were. treated as chimerical-as grounded on the occurrences of ignorant and barbarous times-on a spirit of ferocious intolerance, created as much by national as by religious hostilities; and we were told that in this enlightened age, and with an empire, vast, consolidated, and undisputed as was that of Great Britain, it were weak and foolish to apprehend danger from our Catholic fellow-subjects-men as well informed, subjects as loyal as ourselves, and equally with ourselves proudly disdaining all foreign interference. Besides, we were told that we knew at once the whole amount of the concessions which were required, and had, moreover, the loyal and respectable demeanour of those who asked for the concessions as an earnest of their future good conduct; and, above all, the oaths of loyalty-not merely in a general sense, but specifically pledging them to the finality of the concessions then granted and this, not an extorted oath, in which there might be suspicion of a degree of mental reservation, but voluntary engagements, sanctioned by their hierarchy, declaring before God that no attempts would be made or connived at by them against the established religion of these lands.

We were told that the Roman Catholics only wanted the boon that was then asked for, to become the most contented and loyal of subjects; and that Great Britain then, united in heart and hand, from east to west, from north to south, would become a world within itself; that such a people-too great to quarrel with others, and which it would be madness in others to provoke-would go on increasing in prosperity, and at the same time blessing mankind, and set the example which other nations would follow, in a generous rivalry of toleration and amity; and that these halcyon days, of beating swords into ploughshares and spears into pruning-hooks, would commence from the moment of passing the Roman Catholic Relief Bill.

The present state of Ireland is the obvious, palpable, broad daylight commentary on these false and fallacious predictions

a state of things which obliges us to garrison it as if it were an enemy's territory-and where the priests, who were foremost

« PreviousContinue »