Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

hop is to appoint a referee, whose opinion is to be final; and if adverse, the incumbent must pay the costs of his appeal. He would be a bold man who would dare to appeal under these conditions, which are totally opposite to the ordinary customs of business men. What is the use of a referee, acting alone, and appointed by the party appealed against? What, too, is the use of taxing costs, when the Bishop is to nominate one of his own officials for the purpose ?

There is no grievance proposed to be remedied by this Bill, but it creates a greater. What is the inconvenience now to an outgoing or incoming incumbent, compared with a quinquennial inspection and a compulsory outlay at, perhaps, very inconvenient times? It is mere maudlin sentimentality to say that incumbents wish to relieve their widows and children of one visit of the surveyor by periodical visits and annual taxation. Do they? If they do, we can suggest a much more simple plan; though we must not be supposed to be recommending it. Let a diocesan surveyor, without salary, be appointed, and if any incumbent wishes to relieve himself of responsibility, let him, with the consent of the patron, call in the diocesan surveyor, execute the works recommended, pay the fees and commission, and receive an A 1. certificate of exemption from liabilities for five years.* Anything

*This was done in the Ecclesiastical Dilapidations Act of 1871, but the fees are overwhelming and prohibitory. The fees in the diocese of Winchester, under all sections, amount to thirty guineas.

rather than taxation, accumulated funds, and a band of extensive and costly officials.

If we examine the parsonage houses through the length and breadth of the land, and look at the air of comfort and stability which reigns everywhere, the Bill seems entirely uncalled for. There is at present sufficient machinery, in the shape of Archdeacons and Rural Deans, to do, in a gentlemanly manner and without cost, all that this Bill proposes to do by an arbitrary and expensive means. The exceptions to good parsonage houses, as a rule, are so very rare, that in these few cases it will be much better to let them fall into decay along with their possessors, as remnants of a past age, than spend. ruinous sums in propping up falling houses, and accumulating funds for a second Ecclesiastical Commission and numerous Episcopal nominees. We all know what an accumulating fund means, with all its jobbery and sinecures; and the proposed Bill does not provide for anything out of it but the payment of salaries. Under the new régime, the Archdeacon's periodical inspection of chancels, &c., would be dispensed with; but where this visit takes the form of a lunch at the rectory, and an iconoclastic view of the chancel afterwards, the omission would not be regretted.

Next after incumbents, patrons are the persons most interested in the matter; and yet, strange to say, with one exception, the rights of patrons are entirely overlooked, that single exception being when it is a

question of pulling down, instead of building up. We cannot but regard this as a most fortunate slip on the part of the promoters, as it will infallibly lead to the rejection of the Bill in either House where private patronage is so well represented. Whichever way we look at it, it must be regarded as another attempt to oppress the clergy and put them more under the power of the Bishops. Thank goodness, it is but an attempt; the eyes of all are too alive to the agressive policy of some of our Bishops, for such an attempt to succeed at the present time. Even the Times makes no secret of it, and calls it "an unprecedented interference with private property, out of all proportion with the evil it proposes to repair, which must infallibly lead to perpetual quarrelling and chronic ill-blood." Nor, indeed, is there any valid reason why the clergy should be subjected to such interference more than any other tenants for life or any who hold property on repairing leases..

THE CHURCH AND THE WORLD.

['Church Review,' September 20, 1862.]

HE interests of the Church and the World
have ever been at variance, and our own
age is no exception.
We have the open

hostility of the enemy, and the underhand working of the well-meaning but worldly-minded. The latter is, perhaps, most to be dreaded, for the friendship of the world is still enmity, and we must ever take heed to the caution of our Blessed LORD, and beware when all men speak well of us. We have a curious illustration of the peculiar sort of friendship the world holds out to the Church in one section of the newspaper press, while we have its enmity in another. In a recent instance, one treats of the dead, the other of the living. One, in a satirical sketch of the Bishop of Exeter's life,* seizes upon those points for especial vituperation which the good and consistent Church-man looks upon with the most satisfaction, as showing that there is at least one Bishop who does exerciseBishop Philpot.

authority in his diocese according to Apostolic order and Catholic rule, and does all that in him lies to banish and drive away all erroneous and strange doctrine. Thus, the praiseworthy endeavours of the Bishop to uphold the doctrine and discipline of the Church, as shown in the Shore, Head, and Gorham cases, which are particularly mentioned, are regarded as mere acts of wanton oppression. How different were the illegal proceedings of another Bishop, taking part with a profane and vile mob, regarded! The ignorance of these writers, not merely on such a subject as Baptismal Regeneration, but on all Church matters, is so palpable, the animus se plain, that little harm is done.

The friendship in the other case is more damaging and more humiliating. When, alluding to the late Primate, the writer speaks of "a prelate whose private life was irreproachable, and who commanded universal respect for the gentleness of his manners," we can fully appreciate these good qualities, and so far agree with our contemporary. But, when we are told that these are the sole qualifications required in an Archbishop, we feel that the Church must have fallen very low indeed in the estimation of the world. And yet it is undoubtedly the truth that, we quote from the article in question," those who are to fill the first of our Archi-episcopal Sees are chosen far less for their theological acquirements, their association with the great political questions of the day, and the brilliancy of their attainments in Parliament, than for modera

« AnteriorContinuar »