Page images
PDF
EPUB

pounds a year, making upon an average near 83 pounds a year a-piece *.

The whole income of the Kirk of Scotland was in 1755, about 68,500 pounds a year. This was divided among 944 Ministers, and on an average made 72 pounds a-piece per annum.

Upon a general view of these matters, when it is considered, that all the Bishoprics, Prebendaries, Deaneries, Headships of Colleges, and best Church Livings, are occupied by a smaller number, in all probability, than an eighteenth part of these Clergy; what a deplorable situation must a large share of the remaining seventeen thousand Ministers be in, especially under the present advanced price of most of the common necessaries of life? And then, it is curious enough, that these Church Dignitaries, who are in possession of several thousands a year per man, have made laws, directly contrary to the practice of St. PAUL, that the inferior Clergy, who are destitute of all the elegancies, and many of the comforts of life, shall not be permitted to follow any other calling, whereby to improve their condition, and get bread for their families! Would there be any thing inconsistent with the character of a Minister of the Gospel of CHRIST, if the poor Rectors, Vicars, and Curates of the country, should make a common cause, and associate together in one body against their unfeeling oppressors +? Could there be any impropriety

The followers of the late Reverend GEORGE WHITEFIELD, and Lady HUNTINGDON, are said to consist of nearly an equal number in Great Britain, though, I should suppose, this calculation is rather exaggerated.

It appears from Dr. WHITEHEAD'S Lives of the WESLEY family, that the name of Methodist was first bestowed upon Mr. CHARLES WESLEY, in 1728, at Oxford, for the exact method and order which he observed in spending his time, and regulating his conduct. origin surely truly honourable, and of which no wise man need be ashamed!

An

And then, what a highly respectable compliment do the “blind mouths" of this world pay the Methodists, in calling every man by that name, whose conduct is moral, whose piety is fervent, and whose affections are set upon the things above?-Good men in all ages have been what the foolish world now call Methodists.

* See an Essay on the Revenues of the Church of England.

---

+ Every man is an Oppressor who holds that which ought to be in the hands of another. It does not appear to me, that we can justly blame any man for being a Deist, while the great body of us, the Bishops and Clergy, conduct ourselves in the manner we usually do.

L

in their conduct, if they should peaceably and respectfully address the King, who is temporal Head of the Church, or the Legislature of the land, to take their circumstances into serious consideration? One man-not a whit better than his brethren-shall enjoy 20,000 pounds a year-another 15,000; another 10,000-another 5000-another 3000-another 2000; and another 1000. One shall heap Living upon Living, Preferment upon Preferment-to a vast amount-merely because he has got access-too often by mean compliances-to some The spirit of our Hierarchy seems, in various respects, in direct opposition to the spirit of the Gospel. A conscientious DEIST, if such can be found, who worships GOD in spirit and in truth, is infinitely preferable to a proud haughty pompous Bishop or dignified Clergyman, who trades in livings and souls; and his condemnation will be far less severe. Whatever Bishops and Clergymen of this description may profess, they are Infidels at bottom. They believe nothing of the spirit of Christianity. Religion is their trade, and gain with them is godliness. They live in the spirit of the ancient Scribes and Pharisees, and they may expect to share in the fate of the Scribes and Pharisees.-Compare Isaiah lvi. 9-12.

Let the clerical reader return to the Conclusion of Bishop BURNET'S History of his Own Times, and he will find the negligent Bishops of the land very justly and smartly reprehended for their improper conduct,

Mr. OSTERVALD, in his excellent Treatise concerning the Causes of the present Corruption of Christians, attributes that corruption chiefly to the Clergy. His words are these:-"The cause of the corruption of Christians is chiefly to be found in the Clergy. I do not mean to speak here of all Churchmen indifferently. We must do right to some, who distinguish themselves by their talents, their zeal, and the holiness of their lives. But the number of these is not considerable enough to stop the course of those disorders which are occasioned in the Church, by the vast multitude of remiss and corrupt pastors. These pull down what the others endeavour to build up."--P.ii.Cause 3.

The instances of extreme blame which attaches to the higher orders of the English clergy, are very numerous. A certain gentleman, not a hundred miles from my own neighbourhood, whom I could name, is possessed of about a thousand a year private fortune. He is a married man, but without any children. He has one living in Cheshire, of the value of more than 400 pounds a year: another in Essex, and another elsewhere, the three together making a thousand a year more or less. He is, moreover, Chaplain to a Company, and private Tutor in a Nobleman's family. But what is most culpable, is, he resides upon none of his livings, and very seldom comes near them, though a lusty, healthful man. Can that Church be faultless, which permits such horrible abuses? the Bishops themselves, however, being generally guilty of holding a variety of preferments, and of most inexcusable non-residence, are disposed to connive at every thing of the kind among the superior Clergy who are under their inspection.

great man-while his more worthy brother is almost in want of bread for his children.-The late Dr. LAW, Bishop of Carlisle, if my memory do not fail me, was possessed, at the time of his decease, of ten or more different Preferments. He was Bishop-Head of a College-Prebend-Rector— Librarian, &c. &c. &c. and all this bestowed upon him-not because he was a more holy, useful, and laborious man, than ordinary; though a man of merit and talents; but because he wriggled himself into favour with certain great persons, who had influence with men in power. Instances of this kind are not uncommon. They are, however, unjust, impolitic, and unchristian. No wise Legislature ought to permit such abuses, Religion being out of the question. They are inconsistent with every thing decent and proper, while so many valuable, learned, laborious, humble, modest men, are pining in want. I know well, that reflections of this nature are calculated to disoblige those who are interested; but regardless of consequences, without the least dislike to any man living, or the smallest view to any one individual, or a wish to have any thing better for myself, and actuated only with a love to truth, and the advancement of our common Christianity, I, for one, protest in the face of the sun against all such abuses. And I moreover, solemnly avow, that the spirit of the present times is such, that unless these, and similar disorders are rectified by the wisdom of the Legislature, the ecclesiastical fabric in this country will, ere long, be as completely overturned as that in France has been*. Nothing can prevent it but a speedy and thorough reformation. If the Bishops of the land as first in dignity, would be first in this grand work: if they would make a merit of necessity, and like Bishop WILSON, resign voluntarily, what they cannot long possess in safety: If they would make an offer to their King and Country of withdrawing from the Upper Houset; resigning all their secular honours,

* The church of France, before the Revolution, consisted of 18 archbishops, 118 bishops, 366,264 clergy, regular and secular, who together enjoyed a revenue of about five millions sterling. The kingdom was divided into 34,498 parishes, besides 4,644 annexed parishes; in all 39,142 parishes.

This, I believe, is an abuse unknown in any other protestant church in Europe, and would never have been submitted to in the purest ages of Christianity. Would to GOD our Governors in Church and State could see it right to-but what shall I say? Why

and commence genuine ministers of the Gospel: Or, should this be too much to expect; if they would renounce their several pluralities, and quietly retire into their respective dioceses, should I desire changes, every thing but impossible?--It is because I wish as well as any man in England to my King and Country, that I desire every thing to be removed that may provoke the Divine displeasure against us, as a nation and people, and bring on the total dissolution of the political frame of things. The wishes of an obscure clergyman, however, will be less in the scale, than the small dust upon the balance, when weighed against the vast body of archbishops, bishops, deans, prebends, canons, archdeacons, rectors, vicars, curates, lecturers, commissaries, chancellors, proctors, surrogates, &c. &c. with which our church abounds. We Clergymen should do well frequently to study the 34th chapter of Ezekiel. It might do us much good. The following address of CoW PER is also worth our attention: "Ye Clergy, while your orbit is your place, Lights of the world, and stars of human race; But if eccentric ye forsake your sphere, Prodigious, ominous, and view'd with fear; The comet's baneful influence is a dream, Yours real and pernicious in th' extreme.”

"Oh laugh, or mourn with me, the rueful jest,
A cassock'd huntsman, and a fiddling priest;
He from Italian songsters takes his cue,
Set PAUL to music, he shall quote him too.
He takes the field; the Master of the pack
Cries, Well done, Saint! and claps him on the back.
Is this the path of sanctity? Is this

To stand a way-mark in the road to bliss?
Himself a wand'rer from the narrow way,
His silly sheep, what wonder if they stray?

"The sacred function, in your hands is made,
Sad sacrilege! no function but a trade."

Progress of Error.

* It is no uncommon thing for the Bishops of our Church to hold such preferments as are utterly incompatible with each other. The late Dr. HINCHCLIFFE was at the same time Bishop of Peterborough, and Master of Trinity College in Cambridge. As Bishop, he ought, by every law of honour, and conscience, and the gospel, to have been resident in his diocese among his clergy and people. As Master of Trinity, his presence could not, in general, be dispensed with.

We have had others, who enjoyed, at the same time, several incompatible preferments-a Bishopric-a Headship of a College-a Prebendary-a Rectory-and other emoluments. As Bishop, a man ought to be in his own diocese; as Head of a college, he must be

never appearing in the great Council of the nation, but when absolutely wanted: If they would come among their Clergy-converse with them freely, and treat them as

resident; as Prebend, certain duties are due; as Rector of a parish, his absence cannot be dispensed with. And, I might add, as a Lord of Parliament, his presence is frequently and justly required. What account their Lordships can give, either to GOD or man, for such of the preferments as are absolutely incompatible one with another, it behoves them well to consider. Such examples have a deadly effect upon the interests of religion. Were they to preach like St. PAUL, who would regard them, who sees that they do not believe their own professions? No rank, no talents, no learning, no good sense, no respectability can excuse such a conduct.-We are continually hearing of the rapid spread of Infidelity. The Bishops of London and Durham, in their late excellent Charges, are loud in their complaints. But what appears surprising to me is, that they and others should speak so strongly of the overthrow of Christianity in France. By their leave, and with all due submission, it is not Christianity which has experienced a subversion there. It is the doctrine of Antichrist; and its subversion will ultimately prove one of the greatest blessings GOD could bestow upon the nations.-But who is to blame for the spread of Infidelity? The Bishops and Clergy of the land, more than any other people in it. We, as a body of men, are almost solely and exclusively culpable. Our negligence, luke-warmness, worldlymindedness, and immorality will ruin the whole country. And when the judgments of GOD come upon the land, they will fall peculiarly heavy upon the heads of our order of men.

One word upon the situation of the unhappy Irish. We cry out against them for their rebellious conduct: and to be sure they are extremely to blame in many respects. Is there not, however, a cause, an apparent cause, at least, for their dissatisfaction? The grievances of the Protestant part of the people are many and considerable. The late Lord BRISTOL, for instance, Bishop of Derry, whose Bishopric is said to have been 15,000 pounds a year, was rambling over Europe, and did not set foot in his diocese for several years; some have reported, for twenty-four [*].

This is a specimen of the treatment which Churchmen meet with. Can we wonder, if they, as well as the Catholics and Dissenters, should murmur? Ireland would, in all probability, have been lost to England, had not the mad and bloody zeal of the Catholics, those hellish wretches, united the Protestants in their own defence, for the protection of their lives and properties.

There are twenty-two Bishops, who preside over the established church in Ireland, at the expence of 74,000 pounds a year; which is at the rate of 3,368 pounds per annum a man, besides all their other preferments. Some of them are known to be very worthy characters; but others like the one just mentioned, are extremely to blame, though surely not in the same degree. While such are the Shepherds, no wonder if the Sheep go astray. Ought we to be sur

« PreviousContinue »