« AnteriorContinuar »
and his gospel to the day of your death. Now I well know, that you would rather hear any other doctrine than the true gospel. The truth as it is in Jesus must offend you. You love to have ministers to feed your pride, and flatter your vanity, by preaching to you reformation instead of regeneration, free will instead of free grace, the righteousness of man instead of the imputed righteousness of Christ. You do not like to hear the law preached faithfully, for that.condemns you; you do not like to hear the gospel preached faithfully, for that offends you ; but you delight to have the law and the gospel mixed, which spoils both, and only makes men rest contentedly in a fatal security. You cannot be saved by your own righteousness, for “ then Christ is dead in vain.” So you must be saved either by Christ's righteousness, or your own righteousness and Christ's mixed. Consider whether your pride is great enough to make you think, that your own “righteousnesses, which are as filthy rags,” will be required to adorn the wedding garment prepared by Christ himself. You may be ready to say to me, that Christ told the young man, who asked him, “ what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life ?”_" If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.” Here Christ brought him to the law, that he might be condemned.-Pp. 17, 18.
Once more :--
Do you like to hear of election and free grace? or do you like to hear ministers humble God by making him man's equal, so that man may make conditions with him in this manner? That man is to do all the good he can, by attending church and the sacrament, giving alms, and being just in his dealings, and by leading a good moral life; and God on his part must grant heaven on such terms? This is the vain religion of millions, (a mere mercenary bargain for heaven,) who serve God from a slavish fear of hell, as a hard task-master. This is what man calls a reasonable religion, which thousands of strict professors will advocate.-P. 19.
that those as safe as .the true Neave it to
We take for just as much as it is worth, the charitable insinuation, that those ministers, who hesitate to tell their faithful followers that they are as safe as if they were in heaven, and who are elsewhere distinguished from “ the true ministers of Christ,” “ feed their pride, and flatter their vanity.” We leave it to the naked, the hungry, and the thirsty, to consider whether it is likely that Christ will clothe them, feed them, and give them drink, if they are “unwilling” to go to him. We will abstain also from examining the strength of the argument by which it is made out, that our Lord brought the young ruler to the law, that he might be condemned, taking it for granted that he is not conscious of the impiety of charging the Saviour with offering conditions of salvation, which it is impossible for a man to accept. But what are we to make of the assertion, that for a man to do all he can, by attending Church and the sacrament, giving alms, and, in a word, by endeavouring, through the grace of God, to be a good Christian, is “ vain religion," and a “ mercenary bargain” with the Almighty? To be sure, this is all in good keeping with the delightful tidings, that “if the Lord required even a single good thought of us, we should certainly be damned.” (P. 22.) It is not, however, so easily reconciled with the express promise of our Lord, that for every' idle word, and, of course, for every evil thought, he will bring us into judgment.
We really have no patience to proceed farther with such offensive perversions of the Scripture, supported by garbled citations from the Articles, and by texts from different parts of the Bible, tacked together without the slightest connexion, or the most distant attention to the context. Mr. T. sets out with a challenge to his hearers " to compare with the Word of God whatever he may say,” (p. 2); let them take him at his word, and we venture to say, that none, but those who are as mad as himself, will be easily led to adopt his notions. It is but justice to Mr. Parker, the Oxford bookseller, to state, that his name was inserted in the title-page without his permission, and that he would never have sanctioned the publication, directly or indirectly, of such profane blasphemy.
Art. III.- A Practical Treatise on Ecclesiastical and Civil Dilapi
dations, Re-instatements, Waste, fc.: with an Appendix, containing Cases decided, Precedents of Notices to repair, Examples of Valuations, Surveys, Estimates, fc. By James ELMES, M. R. I. A. Architect and Civil Engineer, Surveyor of the Port of London ; Author of Architectural Jurisprudence, Memoirs of Sir Christopher Wren, and several other works. Third Edition, considerably enlarged. London: Brooke. 1829. 8vo. Pp. xxiv. 288. cxxii. Price 18s.
We beg leave to apologise to Mr. Elmes for our tardy notice of his excellent treatise. The gratifying fact of its having already reached a third edition, speaks more eloquently than we can do in its praise. The author has executed his design with great judgment; and the whole of his work is deserving of approbation. Nevertheless, for obvious reasons, we would confine our remarks to the Ecclesiastical Dilapidations, as best suited to the character of our publication, and most interesting to the taste of the majority of our readers. We are not sure (and we make this observation as a friendly hint to Mr. Elmes, of which he may avail himself in his future editions) that the work might not be somewhat improved, by appearing in two volumes, with separate indexes, respectively embracing distinct topics, the one the ecclesiastical, the other the civil dilapidations. But, verbum sat.
The law of ecclesiastical dilapidations has been the source of much diversity of opinion among men of professional celebrity, and of expen
sive litigation to the Clergy. To simplify that which was complex, and to illustrate that which was obscure, in our codes touching “ the endowing, building, and supporting churches, and other ecclesiastical buildings,” is an undertaking of much importance; and we should, indeed, become obnoxious to a charge of gross ingratitude, if we forbore to thank our “ Surveyor of the Port of London" for the acceptable volume before us. Whether the law of ecclesiastical dilapidations might not be wisely revised and infinitely improved, is a question which we dismiss from our minds for the present, and confine our view, with Mr. Elmes, to the law as it is ; though we must be permitted to remark, that the unseemly litigation, and that before a lay jury, which too often occupies the attention of our civil courts, between spiritual appellants, is deeply to be regretted, and forces upon the unwilling memory the appropriate rebuke of the great Apostle of the Gentiles —"I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man amongst you ? No, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren ? But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers !”
Mr. Elmes, in the dedication of his treatise to the Bishop of Winchester, and to the rest of the enlightened Prelates and Clergy of our National Church, has truly observed, that,
A just knowledge of that part of the ecclesiastical law of this country, that was begun by the sixteen temporal and sixteen spiritual persons, under the authority of the statute of the 35th of Henry VIII. C. 16. known by the title of “Reformatio legum ecclesiasticarum," and confirmed by successive kings and parliaments, relating to the supporting and maintaining the edifices of the Church, is necessary to all classes, but particularly to those whose“ avocations" (q. vocations) " are connected with ecclesiastical business.”—Dedication, p. iv.
To impart such knowledge to his readers, our author has laboriously qualified himself by perusing a vast multiplicity of books relating to the subject, by accurate search in the library of the British Museum, and by availing himself of the opinions and corrections of many eminent men, both in his own, and in the legal profession, “who have confirmed the authorities of the two first editions, and have added” new matter" to the present.”
The treatise contains, besides an Appendix replete with cases, and sundry forms, and judicial opinions, and episcopal commissions, and divers faculties, four elaborate chapters. The first upon Ecclesiastical Dilapidations; the second upon Civil Dilapidations ; the third upon Fires, Party-walls, and the Building Act; and the fourth upon Waste. To afford our readers a correct idea of the volume which we are reviewing, we cannot adopt a better method than transcribing for their perusal the hypothesis of the first chapter from the Table of Contents.
. CHAPTER 1.
ECCLESIASTICAL DILAPIDATIONS. Definition-wherein dilapidation differs from waste-species of dilapidationecclesiastical dilapidations-dilapidation of ecclesiastical buildings often a cause of deprivation-neglect of repairing the Church, &c.successors defended against the dilapidations of their predecessors — permissive dilapidations remedies against fraudulent deeds to defeat dilapidations-Ordinary may enforce repairs-suits in spiritual courts—dilapidations must be paid before legacies, power of ecclesiastical courts-Gilbert's Act-Architects making erroneous estimates—prevention of dilapidations--power of Bishops in such cases-of Archdeacons, Deans, and Chapters-how to be valued, and by whom—money recovered for, how to be expended-incumbents of churches burnt at the fire of London not liable power of Churchwardens-opinions of various Prelates on dilapidations—Impropriators bound to repair-Prebendaries also liable-examples of remedied cases, &c. &c.—Pp. 1–79.
Ecclesiastical dilapidations are a species of waste, to which the common-law principle of waste may be said to be generally applicable, though they differ greatly " as the subject of statutory provision.” Ecclesiastical dilapidations, for which redress may be sought, either through the spiritual or temporal courts, by the successor against the predecessor if living, or if dead, against his executors, and for fraudulent deeds to defeat which the statute 1 Eliz. c. 19, has armed the successor with the same remedy against him to whom such deed is made, as if he were executor or administrator ; are either voluntary by pulling down, or permissive by suffering the chancel, the parsonage-house, or other buildings thereunto belonging, to decay.
As to the neglect of reparations of the church, the church-yard, and the like, (we are quoting the words of the author before us from page 4,) the spiritual court, says Lord Coke, has undoubted cognizance thereof; and a suit may be brought therein for non-payment of a rate made by the churchwardens for that purpose.
All this is very true, as far as it goes ; but what constitutes a legal rate, for non-payment of which the spiritual courts can supply a remedy ? The churchwardens have little more than a ministerial power; and they are bound to have the consent of a majority of the rate-payers to sanction their measures ; and that too as soon as they first enter upon their office. It is very difficult, therefore, to obtain a valid rate to REPAIR, in these days of growing schism, when hatred of the Establishment is mistaken in many cases for the love of God; and a rate to rebuild, where a church has fallen down, is a consummation however devoutly to be wished for, yet forbidden to our hopes. The diocese of Lincoln will furnish us with an illustration of this melancholy fact; and we take this opportunity of making an allusion to it for the purpose of expressing our anxious wish that such cases, disgraceful and deplorable, may be remedied at the suggestion of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, to whose report we are looking with no common feelings of anticipation !
So, who imple field Jit, and who was
Our readers will pardon us if we refuse to give a more particular detail of the excellent treatise on our table ; for in our necessarily short abstract we could afford but little of instruction or of amusement, however we might display our legal lore by quoting the “ Parergon Juris Canonici Anglicani,” or the Legatine Constitutions, * or by a critical digest of the various statutes which bear upon the subject under discussion. Doubtless the Provincial Constitutions of Edmund, Archbishop of Canterbury, passed A. D. 1236, 21st Henry III., and the injunctions of Simon Mepham, who was advanced to that dignity in the reign of Edward III., and Lyndewode's Gloss on them, would afford us an ample field of disquisition; but we think it better to refer those, who are desirous of instruction on these points, to the learned pages of Mr. Elmes. The cases, which our author has reported, on ecclesiastical dilapidations and waste, are well worthy of perusal as illustrative of the principle, which governs them. What is the constitution of the spiritual courts, before which suits for ecclesiastical dilapidations are most properly to be sued, embracing the Archdeacon's Court, the Consistory Court of the Bishop, the Court of Arches, (so designated from the place where it was anciently held, viz, in the church of St. Mary-le-Bow, Sancta Maria de Arcubus) the Court of Peculiars, the Prerogative Court, the Court of Delegates, and the Commission of Review, our author has succinctly stated ; and we refer our readers to him, in the full assurance that he will satisfy all their expectations. If it be asked why the spiritual courts, in cases of dilapidations, are now for the most part deserted, preference being given to the civil courts, we think we can find an answer in the prompt and not costly decision by a jury, which is to be had in the one court and not in the other. Again we beg leave, with all humility, to summon the attention of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners now sitting to this fact, and we crave at their hands the obvious remedy.
After all the pains, however, that labour can insure, and after all the provisions which ingenuity can suggest, there will ever be many practical difficulties to 'surmount in assessing dilapidations, and accurately determining what belongs to the clergyman, and what to the
* " These Legatine Constitutions of our church, which have still the force of law among ecclesiastical persons and affairs, were made and published in England in the time of Otho, who was legate from Gregory IX., and Othobonus (afterwards Pope Adrian V.) the legate from Clement IV., A. D. 1268. These constitutions were published in Latin, under the title of Otho et Othobonus Papæ Legatinæ in Anglia, eorum constitutiones Legatinæ, cum interpretatione Domini Johannis Athon. The Commentary, Annotation, or Glosses of John Atho, is cited as of equal authority with the text, by all ecclesiastical law writers, from his time to the present. These legatine constitutions extended their authority equally to both provinces, having been made and acknowledged in the national synods or councils held bere by the respective legates, who have given their names to them, in the reign of Henry III., about the years 1230 and 1268.”- Elmes's note at p. 19.