^^^^/i &y ■'"W *9^tr>itJi ^^mm 'fm^ m>i^- V. L I E) RARY OF THE U N I VERSITY or ILLl NOIS m t it NOTES ON CHURCH ENDOWMENTS:" A PAPER READ BEFORE THE MEMBERS OF THE ALL SAINTS' CHURCH COUNCIL, SHEFFIELD, MARCH 22nd, 1872; REV. R. V. TAYLOR, B.A., CuBATE OF All Saints', Sheffield ; Late of King's College, London; and Author of the '• Worthies of Leeds," d'c. (printed by request.) SHEFFIELD : PAWSON AND BRAILSFOKD, HIGH-STREET (CHUECH GATEs). PBIGE SIXPENCE. k % i TO THE REY. J. B. DRAPER, INCUMBENT, AND THE a^luvcb Council oi ^U faints*, ^IttUxtin, THESE ''Notes on Church Endowments" ARE respectfully DEDICATED BY THEIR MOST OBEDIENT SERVANT, THE COMPILER. [The following Notes were not originally intended for publication ; and it is only at the urgent request of the All Saints' Church Council that they are now published.] Ilotes an Cljurtlj ^ntroltrmcnts. Gentlemen, The subject of Church Endoivments, on which you have requested me to prepare, a paper, is I find quite a vohuiunous one, but still I shall endeavour to condense what I have pre- pared into as sJiort a space as possible. It is also a most important subject, and one which is now most prominently brought before the public in the various newspapers and other periodicals ; and the reason why this subject occupies so pro- minent a position at the present time, is most probably, on account of the dis-estabHshment and dis-endowment of the Irish Church — on account of the reform in the army, by the abolition of purchase — and also because dissenters are obtaining greater power, year by year, in the country and in parUament ; and if any of you should be disposed to ask the reason of this, it might be stated in reply, because the Church is at present unequal to keep pace with the rapid increase in the population, especially in the large towns/'' Another reason why this question is so * The Rev. G. Huntingdon, in his book on " The Church's work in our Large Towns," says : — " The Church has now not only to train and instruct her own members, but to conciliate and disarm her inveterate foes. She has not only to keep within her fold those who profess to hold her faitli, but to win back a lost and alienated people. Her work in our large towns is as much missionary in its character as that of evangelising the aborigines of Central Africa, or the Kaffirs of the Cipe of Gooii Hope." In a pap'^r on " Our Great Towns." by Mr. J. G. Talbot, M.P., it is stated that " the town districts have in the last ten years (1861-71) grown more than twice as fast as the country districts ; they contain nearly 1.3 millions of people. Dividing the country into parishes with more and less than 2,010 population, we have in round numbers 15,000.000 in the first, and 8.000,000 in the second group. For these 15,00;),000 in the first group, ther« are, speakiag ronghly, pr^ivided by the Church of Englan i some 8,000 incumb- uts, wh 'se endowments amount to £750,000 a year, out of which they have to su^j- port Wholly or in part 2,800 curates, at an expense of abo.it £364,000 a year. In the 8,000,000 in the second group, which represent our rural population, there are about 10,500 incumbents, with endowments amounting to £2,700,000 a year, out of which they support some 2,700 curates, at an expense of about £300,0 )0 a year. Thus to all the other difficulties of the town work, we add that of utterly inadequate endowments, whilst to all the attractions of coimtry parishes we add that of comparative wealth — the town endowments repre- senting about one shilling a head, and the country about seven shillings a head per year for each of the population." It certainly is a misfortune that so few ancient endowments are available for the exigencies of our large towns. To re-distribute these revenues has always been a favourite scheme with Church reformers; but hitherto this has only been partially effected, owing to the circumstance that the patronage of many of the large livings is private property. Besides these rich rectors and vicars of country prominently brought before the country at the present time, is the increased zeal and energy in the Church of England, and the great desire for the reform of abuses,''' and in some cases the re-adjustment of Church property. A writer in one of the Church papers, the other day, says '' That reform is necessary, absolutely necessary in reference to the temporalities of the Church of England, if her adherents are to be in a position to justify her existence. The more equal distribution of her parishes, there are the incumbents and curates of the poor and crowded dis- tricts, who with little pay, perform the arduous task of stemming the vice and irreligion of a demoralized and unchurchgoing population. In order to avert the dangers which threaten the position of the Established Church, far more energetic efforts, much bolder and more comprehensive plans are j^et needed. The tide of population is steadily ebbing away from the small country parishes, where the resources of the Church are the greatest, and where her ministers are in better numerical proportion to the people ; and it is flowing in fast up(m the town districts, where her patrimony is most scanty, her clergy worst endowed, and posted at wider intervals. The si:iritual destitu- tion of a northern manufacturing town is not mitigated by taking into com- putation the incomes of comfortable benefices in the southern counties. If the Church cannot maintain her hold of the great towns, her nationality will be at an end, and with her nationality the only souu'l basis of her establishment fails. Power goes with numbers and with wealth, and if forced to abdicate her place in the crowded centres of commerce and popula- tion, it will avail little to the Church to retain in her allegiance the rural hamlets, and to number her supporters among squires, farmers, and peasantry. The towns will be the real battle-field. In them her posts must be firmly established and strongly manned. The whole region which now lies almost waste, or not half cultivated, requires to be mapped out and sub-divided into districts of manageable extent, each endowed with an income which may at least lift the occupant above poverty and contempt, and assigned as an inde- pendent post to a responsible minister, with some provision, if it be possible, for his succeeding, after a sufficient probation in such a laborious post, to some higher and better remunerated station elsewhere. Great difficulties may stand in the way, but they are not insuperable. Mr. Salt's Bill for affoiding greater facilities ^r public worship in large parishes might be modified in passing through committee. No doubt, so far as her temporalities are concerned, the Ch rch is now fettered by the trammels of an unelastic system. But whatever the ditficulties may be, of this we are well assured, looking at the existing predicament of our Church, at the masses she is unable to reclaim from sin and ignorance, and at the elements of power which are drifting out of her reach, that a great work has to be done, or there will be a great downfall. The following statistics, referred to above, are carefully prepared from the Clergy Lists of 1851 and 1870 : — Total number of curates 3,526 .... 5,737 Curates in towns of 2,000 and upwards 1,877 . . . 2,896 Working in 1,341 parishes 1,86'J parishes. The beneficed clergy, whose average income is only £216 a year, contribute no less than £5i){),000 a year, or, deducting the amount they receive from societies and other sources, £400,000 a year, for the maintenance of assistant- curates. On every principle of justice the laity as representing the increased population and wealth of the country ought to be willing to bear the greater part of this burden. * The mildest of Church papers lately observed that " If the agitation for disestablishment is to be successfully resisted, or if satisfactory terms are to be obtained, when disestablishment occurs, the influence and usefulness of the Church must be enlarged and abuses corrected.'^ revenues/' the rectification of the anomaly, that, with all her wealth, some of the clergy are in a state of miserable penury,! while others are indulging in superabundant luxury, are matters requiring urgent and decisive action." But on this point I will say more hereafter. With respect to the orujin of Church Eudowuients, they go so far back that it is almost impossible to trace their beginning ; but we know as an historical fact, that the majority of our country churches and parishes were in existence prior to the Norman conquest, and many of them even before the landing of Augustine in Kent. J Not a little impetus was given to Church extension in the next century, by * The Revenues of the Church are not accurately known, but they are usually greatly exaggerated, from the fact of all the tithes (£5,00; », 000 on a rough estimate) being supposed to be devoted to th ;ir professed object ; but Parliamentary returns show that up to 31st December, 1866, rent-charges in lieu of tithes had been settled by the Tithe Commissioners to the amount of £4,053,000 ; of this sum, lay impropriators and schools and colleges received £962.0. 0, and clerical appropriators and lessees £679,000 ; leaving less than £2,500,000 to be divided among the parochial clergy. Some estimates have placed the Church property at the rate of £10,000,000 per year, but it is more probably put at about double the amount of the tithe (glebe, pew rents in towns, and surplice fees being taken with the account), or something less than £5,000,000. f During the past 13 years the Poor Clergy Belief Corporation has aided 2,099 cases of clerical distress, with grants ranging from £5 to £25, besides numerous parcels of clothing, blankets, sheeting, boots, &c. J It is beyond a doubt that Christianity was introduced into Britain during fhejirst century, but by whom is not known. TertuUian and Origen both inform us that Christianity prevailed in Britain during the second century. Some idea may be formed of the extent of the ancient British Church and of the existence of Metropolitans of a very early date (long before the arrival of Augustine), from the following list of Archbishops (or Metropolitans) and Bishops, whose names have been preserved: — Fagan was the first British Bishop who^e name is known to us — he and Dei-van executed the Mission of King Lucius to the Bishop of Rome, in the year 178. It is supposed that Llandaff in Glamorganshii-e, the residence of the native princes, was made an Archiepiscopal See by King Lucius in the year 180, which was the first in Britain. In the reign of Constantino, Yobk is said to have been made an Archiepiscopal See, in the year 308. Eborius, Bishop of York ; Eestitutus, Bishop of London ; and Adelphus, Bishop of Lincoln, were present at the Council of Aiies, in France, in the year 314. In the reign of Majtimus, London was erected into an Archiepiscopal SeO; in the year 385 ; and in 420, Fastidi'us was Archbishop of Loudon. St. Ninyan was Bishop of Galloway, or Wigtonshh'e. in 420 ; Duhricius, a companion of St. Germanus in his second visit, was made Bishop of Llandafi' in 446 ; Vodin was xlrchbishop of London in 456 ; St. Patrick was Bishop of Armagh in 460 ; Sampson was Archbishop of York in 487 ; in 521 St. David was Archbishop of Caer-leon, who removed the See to Menevia, now St. David's ; Id 560 St. Asaph was Bishop of Llanehvy, which was afterwards called after his own name St. Asaph; Thi-onus was Archbishop of London in 587 ; and in the same year Thadiocus was Arch- bishop of York; and it was not till 601 that Augustine was the first Arch- bishop of Canterbury. As there were so many Bishops and Archbishops in existence before the arrival of Augustine, in 597, there must of necessity have been a very large number of Priests and Deacons, and consequently of churches and parishes. 6 that great Asiatic Theodore, Archbishop of Canterbury,* who may be said to have iDtrodnced from the East into this country what has since proved its greatest benefit — the parochial system ; and the reader of Anglo-Saxon history will not be surprised that the property of the Church should, at an early period, have increased to a very considerable amount, when it is remembered how liberality in this respect was both recog- nized and rewarded by the then existing government. The Ceorl enjoyed no share in the civil administration, either general or local, but yet, " if he came to possess five hides of land, with a Church, and a mansion of his own," he was admitted to the rank of nobleman or thane. Athelstan, about the year 928, granted this rank to those, who- ever they were, who in this way provided for the religious instruc- tion of their tenantry. As early as the reign of Edgar, about the year 970, the kingdom generally was already divided into parishes, even to the distinction of mother churches ; though some have referred the origin of parishes to the fourth century. And " it seems pretty clear and certain that the boundaries of parishes were originally ascertained by those of a manor or manors." This is a very significant fact — a fact which could scarcely be accounted for upon any other theory than that of the private origin of Church property, and in some large measure of the parish system itself. Indeed the question is set at rest by the testimony of Blackstone, who says, " The Lords, as Christianity spread itself, began to build churches upon their own demesnes or wastes, to accommodate their tenants, and, in order to have divine service regularly performed therein, obliged all their tenants to appropriate their tithes to the maintenance of the one ofiiciating minister, instead of leaving them at liberty to distribute them among the clergy of the diocese in general ; and this tract of land, the tithes whereof were so appropriated, formed a distinct parish. Thus parishes were gradually formed, and parish churches endowed with the tithes that arose within the circuit assigned." The same great lawyer also says in another place that, "It is an ignorant and a false assumption that the tenure of the clergy is the same as that of military or fiscal officers: such persons are supported by taxes ; the clergy, by their own property. * Theodore, who was from Tarsus in Cilicia, a man of great piety and learning, became Archbishop of Canterbury in 669, and directed that synods should be held twice every year ; that Easter-day should be kept according to the Roman practice, i. e. on the Sunday following the first full moon after the vernal equinox. He also procured the first legal provision for the clergy, in the shape of a Kiik-scot, or tax of one penny from every house of thirty-pence yearly rent ; prior to this, tithf^ had been a religious obligntion, and volun- tnrv. Theodore founded a PcLool at Canteibnry, ai d introduced chMiitin^' in the Churches ; he also considerably extended the elliciency and influence of the Church by incre;isin<: the numl er of Bif^hoiis. and piomoting the forma- tion of paiishts by granting the patronage to the founders of their Churches. Tithes are, in the strictest sense, the property of the Church. (Bk. 1, ch. 18.)* Objections of various kinds are continually being made against our Church by a noisy and political sect of Dissenters, chiefly Baptists and Independents,! who belong to what is commonly called the "Liberation Society.";]: They object, in the first place, to our Church occupying the position she does : they wish to pull her down, not only to their own level, but even to the ground.§ Notwithstanding all the irre- * He further says : — " The law has wisely ordained that the parson shall never die, any more than the King : by making him and his successors a corporation ; by which means all the original rights of the parsonage are preserved entire to the successors for the present incumbent : and his predecessors who lived seven centuries ago, are, in the law, one and the same person, and what was given to one was given to the other. It follows, there- fore, that in the spirit of the constitution, the clergy of the present day have been presented to their livings by Henry II., and that they have the same rights which they ever had, and that no series of illegal vexations can accumulate into law against their original claims." See also Stephen's Blackstone, vol. iii., p. 115. — "When lords of manors first built churches on their own demesnes, and appointed the tithes of those manors to be paid to the officiating ministers, which before were given to the clergy in common (from whence, as formerly mentioned, arose the division), the lord who thus built a church, and endowed it with glebe or land, had of common right a power annexed of nominating such minister as he pleased (provided he were canonically qualified) to officiate in that church of which he was the founder, endower, maintaiuer, or, in a word, patron. And this power i>, by derivation of title from the lords of manors, now claimed by many other private persons, and many corporations, both lay and eccle- siastic." Compare also Soames' Anglo-Saxon Church, &c. f The Independents provided chapel accommodation for only six percent, of the population, and the Baptists provided for five per cent ; and these were the two bodies that made the most noise. + The gi-eat want of the Church at this time is the means of making its influence felt when most needed. While the Liberation Society had an income of £7700 per annum, the income of the Chm-ch Defence Institution, during the year 1871, had not quite reached to £1200. To do the important work that now lies before it, a sum equal, at least, to that subscribed by Non- conformists to their favourite Society is needed ; and there is no doubt, now that Churchmen are beginning to realise the immense importance of local organisation and the great causes at stake, there will be no lack of funds to carry on and perfect the work, both of Church defence and Church reform, which this Institution has so ably and successfully begun. § Mr. Miall, in his Xonconformist Sketch Book, pp. 16-29, says " The , Church of England is an impious pretence, a life destroying upas, and to ] shatter it, and to gixe the dust of it to the four winds of heaven, is the i sacred mission of dissenting ministers." Again, the Rev. A. Mursell, of London, says " Even in the presence of sovereigns my cry shall be, in the name of the great cause of liberty, ' Down icith the Church uf England" Mr. Spiirgeon, the great Baptist preacher, once said "I am sorry the ,' Church of England is as good as she is ; I wish she was worse, and I hope I she will get worse from day to day, until she stinks in the nostrils of men, ] and then we shall stand more chance of her overthrow." On the other hand, the celebrated Dr. DoHinger. an old Roman catholic, in his lecture on the '• English Church " at Munich last month. " says that no Church in the world | is so national, so firmly rooted in the tastes of the peop'e, so grown together I with the institutions an 1 customs of the c.)untry Daring the last 40 years the English Church, by the foundation of numerous colonial bishoprics in all 8 ligion, ignorance, and vice that prevails in our large towns, they would lower, if not destroy the Church of England, by robbing her of the property which has belonged to her for hundreds of years/'' In order to show how this property has been obtained, and when it was obtained, it will be necessary to introduce a few historical facts, and then we shall be better prepared to meet the objections that are being constantly brought against the Church by the political Dissenters. We find that, on the death of Archbishop Theodore, in 692, a code of Ecclesiastical laws was drawn up by Ina, King of the West Saxons, for the regulation of the clergy, which bear evidence to the discipline of the Church at that period. It is the first recorded code we have, and was probably a digest of previous enactments. Among them was the following respecting Church rates : ** The Church scot (or rate) for the repair of churches, and supply of all things necessary for divine worship, was to be paid by every house before Martinmas, according to a valuation made at Christmas : penalty, 40 shillings, or 12 times the amount due." From this extract we see that Church rates were established by the King of the country, nearly 1200 years ago ; but now that their compulsory payment has been abolished we need not dwell longer on this head. King Ethelvvolf, son of the celebrated Egbert, King of All England, and father of Alfred the Great, convened a synod of the Church, towards the close of this reign, at Winchester, in the parts of the world, has as much outwardly extended as iuwardly strengthened r herself. What the free energy and self-sacrifice of religious Englishmen, I moved and led by the Church, has done for christian schools, for new churches, ■ in the last 30 years, far exceeds what other nations have accomplished, ^ut the Church with her present machinery restricted and confined, finds herself quite unable to overtake the increasing mass of heathenism in the towns, and all attempts to do this, as she is now constituted, have failed." * Mr. Miall's bent and wish are the disestablishment and disendowment of the Chui ch of England. He finds that it cannot be possibly done with the thoroughness he desires, and he is mlling. therefore, to give more favourable terms to her, so that only he can carry the main point. He now announces that every church built or endowment given out of private resources, since the Toleration Act of 1689, are, in his view, not to be taken from the Church when her hour of robbery comes, as he, of course, trusts it will ; and that even the old churches should not be alienated from religious uses or from the performance of Divine worship. This is very different from what he said in a speech at Leicester a short time ago, when he went in for the entire secu- larisation of all Church property and buildings, of whatever age ; and there is no more justice in his present proposal to leave the Church all her belongings since 1689 than in selecting any other date, for all ancient cliurches would have been in ruins long since but for modern gifts and modern restorations. See " Lectures on the Established Church; its Advantages to the Nation ; its Revenues not National Property, &c. ; by the Rev. Gr. G. Lawrence, of Huddersfield." Also, " The Church of England ; its Property and its Work; by the Rev. T. Whitby, of Leeds." Also, the lectures and i)amphlets of the Rev. Dr. Massingham, 2d. each. See also an able article on " Mr. Miall and Disestablishment," in the EcUnhurgh Rcvieiv for this month. 9 year 855, when, at the instance of St. Swithin, he either made a grant of a tenth part of the Royal doraains (or as some say of all England) as tWies to the Church;''' or, he may have only renewed their payment, as mention had been made of tithes before ; or, as is thought by some, he may have merely exempted the Church lands from all secular service and taxes. The reign of Athelstan, from 925 to 940, is conspicuous for its great deeds. This King also enforced Church shot (or Church rates), and the payment of tithes of live stocky as well as of produce. During the reign of Klhelred, a Council was held at Eansham, in Oxfordshire, (about the year 1008), when Canons were put forth for the government of the Church, from which we have some idea of the Church-dues at that period. Tithe of * Selden, a learned Dissenter, tells us that tithes were paid in the Christian Church before the end of the fourth century. Blackstone says (Com. ii. 25) — ''We cannot precisely ascertain the time when tithes were first introduced into this country ; possibly, they were contemporary with the planting of Christianity among the S ixons by Augustine, about the end of the sixth centuiT ; but the first mention of them which I have met with in any written English law is in a constitutional decree made in a Synod, held A.D. 786, wherein the payment of tithes in general is strongly enjoined." Offa, King of Mercia. 755—794, made a law giving the Church a civil right in the tithes, by way of property and inheritance, and enabKng the clergy to gather and recover them, as their legal due, by the coercion of the civil power; and Ethelwolf, in 855, confirmed the decree of Offa, and made it to extend to the whole kingdom. This, you will see, was very different from ori-inating tithes — these decrees were made to enforce payment of tithes already due, just as decrees have been frequently made to enforce the payment of rent. Dr. Hook (in his Church Dictionary) says — "An Anglo-Saxon King was only chieftain of the people, not the owner of the soil. Ethelwolf could not give what he did not possess ; he simply devoted to religious and charitable uses one tenth part of his private estate." And so, too, Offa, Athelstan, and other kings and loids of manors, gave tithes of their own private property, and the example was followed by other landowners. Again, it has been said that a portion of the tithes originally belonged by law to the poor ; this was not the case in England. Augustine, and Archbishop Egbert in 7-i3, recom- mended that one-third of the tithes should be given to the poor ; but the Council of Calcuith, in 787, reprobated this division, and neither before nor since did this recommendation receive the sanction of either the Crown or of the civil law. Blackstone says — '' The poor subsisted entirely on private benevolence until the reign of Henry VIII." Another point to be noticed is, that tithes do not press upon a tenant ; for, as Ccbbett puts it, " I must say that tithes in themselves are not a hardship at all, as they are part of the expenses of the farm. If I did not ptiy to the parson I should to the land- lord, and he would have it if the parson had it not." Mr. Edward Baines, M.P. for Leeds, said in 1837, " "When a Dissenter buys an estate subject to the payment of tithes, he knows that only nine- tenths of the produce belong to him. Although there are thousands and tens of thousands of Dissenters who are tithe-payers, there are none who wish to oppose the payment of them." But times have altered, and men have altered since those words were spoken. See also a lecture by the Eev. Dr. Massing- ham on " Tithes : Proved to be the Gift of Indi^•iduala, not of the State — Ancient in Origin — Sciiptural in Character — no Burden to the People." See also an able reply to Mr W. Eagle's pamphlet on " Tithes," by the Eev. G. G. Lawrence, of Huddersfield. 10 produce was to be paid at All-hallows' or All- Saints' day; Tithe of young at Whitsuntide ; Home-shot at St. Peter's mass ; Soul- shot when a grave was opened, (this appears to be the origin of burial fees) ; and Plowjli-ahns a fortnight after Easter : also, that there was to be no trading nor public meetings on Sundays. Just before the Norman Conquest, the Church of England (or, what we might call the Anglo-Saxon Church) embraced the greater number of the parishes now existing, and comprised 2 Archbishops and 13 Bishops. William the Conqueror, about 1075, confirmed the right of the Clergy to great and small ti'hes, but subjected all the Church- lands, which then amounted to seven-fifteenths (or nearly one- half) of the Kingdom, to the payment of taxes. We now come to the First Suppression of Monasteries in the year 1536. The Commissioners for the visitation of the Monasteries, having laid their Report before King and Parliament ; the Parliament were led to pass a bill for the Suppression of all Monasteries whose incomes were under £200 a year. The inmates, however, were to be passed into the larger houses, which were better regulated, but the revenues were to be given to the King. The number suppressed amounted to 375 ; and the spoil was valued at £32,000 per annum, besides £100,000 from jewels, plate, and other moveables. By this measure 10,000 persons were thrown upon the country ; deprived of their usual subsistence ; and had therefore to get their living as they could. In 1539, another Act was passed for the seizure and suppression of the remaining Monasteries ; and confirming those lately dissolved ; granting also their revenues to the King. In the following year the Knights of St. John (of Jerusalem) were suppressed, and their property confiscated to the King. With respect to the number and value of these houses, we find, that the whole number of religious houses suppressed amounted to about 930 : of the larger 555, of the smaller 375. And the total sum of their revenues reached to about £172,914 per annum : of this sum the larger Monasteries yielded £142,914, and the smaller £30,000. The Benedictines were the the largest sufferers, losing 186 houses ; then the Austins who lost 173 houses ; and next the Cistercians who lost 101 houses ; and the Knights of St. John were the next. As regards the application of the Property, we find that the ostensible objects for which the vast revenues of these houses were given to the King, were the erection of new Bishoprics ; establishing some useful endowments ; and the construction of harbours, &c. It resulted, however, in the erection of only six Bishoprics, viz. : — Bristol, Chester, Gloucester, Oxford, Peterborough, and Westminster; 15 Cathedral Chapters; two Colleges, viz. : — Trinity College, Cambridge, and Christ Church, Oxford ; with several Hospitals and Grammar Schools. 11 And now as regards the Besult. The immediate result of this, measure, (in addition to what has been previously observed), was the enriching of Court favourites and spendthrifts at the expense of the Church, and to the injury of the poor, and the industrious agricultural tenantry, throughout the country ; thus originating Liy Impropriations' The upper classes also lost the means of providing for their younger children, and pensioning ofl' their superannuated at- tendants; leases were destroyed, rents raised, tenants oppressed, and the labourer out of employment ; moreover, the new Lay Impropriators reduced the stipends of their Vicars and Curates to the lowest rate ; and to save the pensions upon the property, the monks were put into the small livings. Many a presentation to a living was given to a surveyor, a steward, or a gardener ; to goldsmiths, builders, and other traders, at the caprice of the patron. There was, however, an ultimate ynocl resulting from all this : so vast a propert}^ passing from a slumbering and inactive body, into the hands of active and busy possessors, gave increased stitnulus to trade, commerce, and internal industry ; which soon led to the development of the great power and resources of the Kingdom ; and placed it on that pinnacle of greatness in the scale of nations, which England by an Almighty Providence now enjoys. This was followed by another Statute (1 Edward YL), in 1547, granting to the King the revenues of the remaining Chantries, Fraternities, &c., not seized and absorbed by the late King. Cranmer, in vain, endeavoured to delay this measure, till Edward came of age ; in the hope that he might then be enabled to procure the application of their revenues as a fund for the benefit of the poorer clergy. But the private interests of the Protector; of some of the executors of the late King; and others interested in the plunder, urged it on, and carried the bill through the House. There was a provision that the proceeds should be applied to the maintenance of Grammar Schools, and the increase of poor vicarages : but upwards of 2,400 of the benefactions went to liquidate the late King's debts, and to satisfy certain profligate courtiers. * There are many peers, members of parliament, and other laymen, receiving hundreds of thousands of pounds in tithes altogether as lay impro- priators, for -which they do no duty whatever. How is it that we never hear of disendowing the laymen instead of the clergy, who receive very little more than half the tithe, and yet do all the work? Look around in this country, and ask to whom do the grand old abbeys belong — to the Chm'ch ? No. ^Vho owns Kii-kstall Abbey? The Earl of Cardigan. Who the noble woods and romantic surroundinss of Bolton Abbey ? The Duke of Devon- shire. Who is the lord of Fountains Abbey nd its picturesque and fuitlul abbey lands? The Marquis of Kipon. Who belongs to Roch Abbey and its magnificent woods? The Earl of Scai-borough ; and so on. 12 Thus we see, that though in former reigns grants may have been made to the Church by the Kiug, yet at the Reformation, the King and his courtiers received back again, without doubt, a much larger sum than had ever been granted. And now with respect to the objections of Dissenters — The poHtical Nonconformists allege that they are degraded by our occupying a superior position, and by our connection with the State; and instead of raising themselves, these members of the Liberation Society wish to deliver us from our superior position, to liberate us from our connection with the State, and to deprive us of our property ! — Gentlemen, is this consistent, right, fair, and honest ? Nothing will satisfy these Liberators but liberating us from our endowments.'-' We dont see any degradation in their occupying a some- what lower position. It is a universal thing, no two persons occupying exactly the same position — and v/e are all dependent one upon another, from the highest to the lowest. If they succeed in lowering us, they will of necessity lower themselves at the same time ; and moreover, an immense impetus will* be given to the Church of Home in this country. Again, they say that Church property is National property, — and so it is in one sense. It has been left for the good of all those who are willing to avail themselves of the privileges pro- cured by it. It has been given for a special and not a general purpose — for the good of the Church, and not for her opponents. It is like the dowry of a wife ; it is for her special use. * These Liberationists have resolved that " the immense revenues of the English and Scottish Establishments alone constitute a great argument against their continuance; because those revenues, though the common property of the whole nation, are distributed among the religious teachers of half, or less than half, of the people. Enormous and disproportionate salaries and emoluments are paid to bishops and other dignitaries, while of thtit portion of the fund which is received by the parochial clergy by far the largest part falls to those who have the fewest parishioners, and the smallest to such as minister among the densest populations." In reply it may be stated, that the amount of the revenues of the Church of England is unquestionably large, but, compared with the number of persons engaged in the public service who are supported upon them, they are anything but " immense." The use of such a term, without any reference to the purposes to which such roA-enues are devoted, and the constantly increasing demands upon them, is only calcu- lated to mislead. If the incomes of all the clergy and church dignitaries were equally divided it would not give an income of £250 a year to each. This is exclusive of large deductions to be made from individual incomes, and the support of a body of more than 5000 unbeneficed clergy. Again, the magnitude of the revenues of the Church may be an argument for State control over her secular arrangements, on the ground that a corporate body so largely endowed might, without it, become dangerous to the Common- wealth ; but it can be no argument for the Church being tyrannically despoiled. The unequal distribution of Church property is a fair argument for its readjustment to meet the altered circumstances of the population of the country. Such reaf^justment is desired by none more earnestly than by many attached members of the Church of England. 13 Again, they say that we obtained the greater part of it from the Roman Catholics — whereas, by far the greater half has been acquired since the Reformation ; and the greater part of the other half was obtained before the Romish corruptions were introduced into our church. And our Church, after freeing her- self from those corruptions, has as much right to it as she had before ; although at the Reformation (as you have seen) she did not realize one-half of the property previously held by the Church ; and the majority of the old Churches have also been re-built during the last fifty or sixty years. Some ignorant people even go so far as to say that the bishops and clergy are paid by the State, and that the money is received from taxes, &c. — whereas, not a single sixpence is paid by the State to the Church, except to the chaplains in the army and navy, &c. for special services." Again, they say that our Church is not the Church of the jwor, but of the upper classes. If our Church is not the Church of the poor, we should like to know which Church, or what body of Christians is ? and what sect does more for the poor than the members of the Church of England ? It is notorious that chapels are not to be found in the poorer parts of parishes, but only in better districts, where they pay. Then again, what has the Church of England done as regards the education of the poor ? upwards of 75 per cent, of the children of the poor have been educated in Church of England schools. Doubtless there are many things in the Church that might be improved ; and the re-adjustment of Church property is one of those things, as may be seen from the following extract, which is headed, "The Wealth versus the Poverty of the Church of England." From the two following paragraphs it wall be perceived that the clergy of the Church of England receive annually more than the clergy of almost all Christendom ; while on the other hand, there are upwards of 10,000 curates and poor incumbents, out of the 18,000 clergy, who do not receive on an average more than £100 a year each, and yet have by far the greater part of the duties to perform. Surely the Ecclesiastical Commisioners have not yet finished the work assigned them, otherwise there will be need of a still greater equalisation in the Church, or a thorough re-organisation, or * It is continually being stated, that the clergy are paid by the State. "We challenge our opponents to prove that we receive one penny out of the pubUc funds. The Duke of Somerset receives £180,000 a year from Chm-ch lands, or more than -was received by the whole of the bishops and archbishops put together, but no one thought of going to the noble duke to ask him to give up his lands. We want all our old endowments, and intend to keep them, notwithstanding the noisy attacks of zealous agitators, as they are not suffi- cient for our present wants. Every deuominatiou and every church has a right to its own jiroperty, and no one has a right to take that property away. See " Sixteen Reasons why Church Property is entirely free of the State," reprinted from Church Bells for distribution, 50 copies for Is. disestablishment of the Church must follow. We are then informed that the clerg}^ of France, Spain, Portugal, Hungary, Italy, Austria, Switzerland, Prussia, Holland, Denmark, Belgium, Sweden, Russia, Turkey, the United States, South America, and in other parts of the world, making 200,000,000 of people, receive only £8,852,000 ; while the Bishops and clergy of the Established Church in England and Wales, containing 6,500,000 people, receive £8,896,000 ; and the ministers of all other denominations in Great Britain and Ireland, for 16,500,000 people, receive only £1,024,000. " Look on that picture, and now look on thisy From well-established statistics, published in an appeal by the Poor Clergy Relief Society, of 56, South- ampton-street, London, it appears that there are 5,000 curates ministering in the Church in England and Wales whose incomes do not exceed £80 per annum, many hundreds of whom have not even so much as £50 per annum ; whilst there are also no less than 5,000 beneficed clergy whose incomes from the Church are under £150 per annum ; so that it may be safely stated that 10,000 ministers of the Established Church have not more than £100 per annum for their high and holy services, their work and labour of love as " ambassadors of Christ." When dis- abled by age or sickness they are wholly destitute, and their widows and orphans are necessarily left unprovided for. With these well-known facts before them, the Committee confidently appeal to the wealthy clergy and laity for assistance in behalf of those who minister to them in holy things.* Such is a general account of the " Wealth versus Poverty of the Church of * Many of the attacks on our Church, says a writer in the Quarterly Review for 1867, rest for their basis on two propositions : one of which is absolutely false, and the other most exactly and painfully true. The first proposition, repeated over and over again under every form of false statement, is " That the Established Church is immensely rich, with a vast revenue, it may be stated at ten millions sterling per annum, &c." We shall not waste time and words in confuting these monstrous assertions. They are made in the vi-ry teeth of statistical inquiries, most wide in their extent and most searching in their minuteness, the result of which shows that the Church of England, instead of suffering under this plethora of means, could not secure a moderate competence for all ber working clergy if every res rvoir were broken down, and aU her resources poured into a common fund for re distri- bution. It may suffice for our purpose to quote the general result to be ex- tracted from the tables compiled in 1835 by the Commissioners appointed by his then Majesty to inquire into the ecclesiastical revenues of England and Wales. From these it appears that the whole net income of the Established Church, including the revenues of the archiepiscopal and episcopal sees, the cath^^dral and collegiate churches, the several dignities and benefices, amounts to £(i,495,219 ; which, if divided amongst the 25 000 clergy of England and Wales, would give to each about ±'259 a year. But false as is the first of these propositions, the second is unhappily too true, and that is, that the great body of the English clergy are shamefully underpaid. Without com- mitting ourselves to such highly-coloured statements as those put forth by the Poor Clergy Relief Society, which represent hundreds, literally hundreds of the clergy with their families as struggling in rags and penury, and many actually dying of cold and hunger, and allowing for the great increase in the income of the poorest benefices, which the judicious management of their re^ England," which clearly proves, I think, that some re-adjust- ment of Church property is very much to be desired"'. The next extract (which I will omit for want of space, &c.,) is headed ** Wealthy Bishops versus Poor Curates." In order further to show that some re-adjustment or re- arrangement of Church-property is urgently needed, take the follow- ing examples from the York Diocesan Calendar, for this year; from which we ascertain that there are 72 rich benefices in this diocese (28 of which are in public patronage), that are valued at from £500 to £1,540 per annum ; almost the whole of which are in small country villages, whilst the clergy of the vast town parishes are languishing on from £150 to £300 a year ; and thousands of Curates are receiving less than £100. Though much has been done of late years, yet more still requires to be done, judging from the following examples, especially when compared with the poor livings in our populous town parishes f: — Bources have enabled the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to effect, it still remains true that the great bulk of the English clergy are most meanly remunerated for their labours. By whatever test we try the amount of the remuneration they receive, the conclusion is still the same. If, for instance, we estimate the capital laid out in fitting an ordinary English clergyman for his work, and compare it with what he can hope to earn in his profession, the result is most startling. As regards those who have passed through the regular school and academic courses, we cannot estimate the outlay of capital, under the most favourable circumstances, at less than a thousand pounds sterling. And what, so far as this world's goods are concerned, is the return ? After a time his salary may be raised perhaps to £100 or il20 a year ; it is but seldom that a house is provided for him ; or if it is, the estimated rent is deducted from his small salary, and on that miserable pittance he may con- tinue to exist for an unlimited time, possibly for his whole li e, though his labours may be honestly and ungrudgingly given to the work of his high office. In the diocese of Exeter, it appears that there are no less tha i 68 clergymen who, after from 15 to 50 years, service, remain assistant-curates, with professional incomes scarcely averaging £100 a year, being less than is earned by a skilled artizan, or a junior clerk in a bank. It is also a signifi- cant fact, and one which should appeal strongly to the laity of England that in the same diocese the tithes held by lay impropriators amount to upwards of £160,000 a year. * It is said to be the fault of the legislature — in other words, the repre- sentatives of the people — that the organisation of the Church and the distri- bution of its revenues have not from time to time been re-adjusted and adapted to the changing circumstances of the country. It is the special province of the legislature to manage the secular affairs of the National Church ; but not to despoil it, or take away its means of usefulness. f According to the census of 1861, the population of the Country dis- tricts of England, including all towns of 2,000 inhabitants, was 7,500,000, To minister in those districts we had no fewer than 10,398 incumbents. In our large towns, on the other hand, there were 13,500,000 of population, but only 2,431 incumbents. The figures were thus given in the Times, some three years back. (See Appendix, No. I.) Population. Livings. Clergy 8,000 and upwards. 466 1,154 4,000 to 8,000 822 1.814 2,000 to 4,000 1,143 1,858 Below 2,000 10,398 13,043 Of some 24,000 clergy whose names appear in the Clergy List, 12,888 Population. Value. 457 ... . £757 877 .., . 1010 1118 ... . 1540 811 ... 895 412 ... 530 585 ... 672 502 ... 700 355 ... 595 400 ... 630 360 ... 511 333 ... 867 226 ... 580 688 ... 533 239 ... 560 349 ... 900 188 ... 500 480 ... 661 2401 ... 1100 416 ... 700 16 Bainton, near Driffield Beeford, near Hull Bolton Percy, Tadcaster Brandsburton, Beverley Brodswortli, Doncaster Crayke, Easingwold Etton, Beverley Foston, York Gilling, York Kilvington, Thirsk Kirby Underdale, York Kirk Bramwith, Doncaster Langtoft, Driffield Langton, Malton Moor Monkton, York ... Eise, Hull Scrajingham, York Stokesley, Northallerton Twing, Bridlington 11,197 £14,241 Thus, we see that the total population of 19 parishes, all of which are in public patronage, is only 11,197, while the endow- ments are more than £14,241. Again, in 17 parishes in private patronage, we find a population of only 10,561, while the endowments are over £14,414. Thus, in these 36 parishes, there is a population of only 21,758, whilst the endowments are upwards of £28,655. On the other hand, we find that in 25 parishes in this town, (Sheffield), there is a population of over 222,353, whereas the endowments are only £6,794, or less than one-fourth, while the population is 22 times greater." were incumbents, 4981 curates, and the remainder unattached. During the last ten years the population of the country has increased 2,637,884, nearly the whole of this increase having taken place in our towns. Thus we have 7,500,000 of people in our villages, with 10,398 clergy ; and some 15,000,000 in our towns, with only 2413 clergy. But even these figures do not re^Dresent the case qujte fairly ; for, whilst the 7,000,000 in the country have four times as many clergy as the 15,000,000 in large towns, they have probably at least ten times the amount of endowments. There were only 2645 curates in our large towns, as compared with 2495 in country places. In other words, the 15 millions in our towns had only just 150 more curates working amongst them than the 7^ millions in the country. * The manner in which even now the inhabitants of the country districts are flocking to the towns may serve to give us some idea of the way in which our great towns were originally formed. An illusti-ation may be taken from the Preliminary Eeport of the new Census. In 18-U, Middlesboro' , a town in the North Riding of Forkshire, had 383 inhabitants ; in 1841, they had increased to 5709 ; in 1851, to 7893 ; in 1861, to 19,416 ; and i» 187X, to 17 Again, in the diocese of Ripon, (which is about the other half of Yorkshire), we find that in 22 country parishes, some in public and others in private patronage, there is a population of only 18,747, while the endowments are upwards of £18,962. Thus, in these country parishes they receive above £1 for each person ; whereas in town parishes they only receive £1 for about 32 persons. Thus showing that the endowments might be more equally distributed. Surely some re-adjustment might be made with the rich benefices in public patronage, if nothing can be done with those in private patronage ; the majority of which are held by the relatives of those to whom they belong.''' It is very desirable that these inequahties, extravagances, and anomalies should be diminished in our Church, and that as speedily as possible, if the Church is to be preserved from the hands of the spoiler. f Parliament certainly made a grant of a iiiillion and a /*«//■ of money, in the years 1818 and 1824, towards building a number of Churches in large towns, but since that time not one farthing has been granted for Church purposes ; with the above 39,4-^4 ; for wliom there are now three churches, with a population of about 12,000 to each, whereas no parish should properly contain more than 4000 people. In the diocese of Ripon there are 35 parishes with a population of more than 8,000; seven of which contain more than 16,000 souls. In tlie diocese of York there are 23 parishes with a population of more than 8,000 ; twelve of which are in this town (Sheffield) ; one of which contains 23,425 souls, and another 16,686. In order to enable the Church to cope with the rapid increase of the population, and thus to justify her title to nationality, our efforts should be mainly dh-ected to strenghening her position and enlarging her resources in the great tovrns. In those districts in which manufacturing industry or mineral wealth have suddenly developed a prodigious increase of human beings, the feebleness of the Church's efforts and the insuffioieucy of her means, in contrast with the vast amount of service required from her, are painfully apparent. In these huge aggregations of humanity the parochial system utterly breaks dowu. And no wonder, for it was never devised to meet such an unlooked-for emergency. There is scarcely a large town in Great Britain one of whose representa- tives did not support Mr. Miall's motion for the Disestablishment of the Church of England, and herein lies the danger for the future. The creation of new districts in our large town parishes is one of the most important branches of the work of Church extension. * No fewer than 7,219 of the richest livings in England, are in private patronage, and liable to be bought and sold. The annual value of these livings is no less a sum than £2,040,{i48. + Mr. Miall's motion for disestablishment and disendowment seeks to deprive us of our National Church, and to alienate from religious purposes the endowments freely given to the Church by the liberality of our ancestors. If the endowments we now have are jcontiscated, fresh endowments as in Ireland, will have to be provided, chielly by the laity. To defend against spoliation is compai'atively easy. To re-endow after c miiscation, is a work of time, labour, and enormous outlay. Canon Miller says " That the disestablish- ment of the Church would be a revolution, fraught with m.asuivless consequences to the social, the political, and the spiritaa' interests of the whole kingdom." See also an able article on thi^ s ibjeot ia .hj urijiUu Observer, for March, 1872 ; p. 174, &c. 18 exception, then, Church-property, whether glebe, tithe, rate, or edifice, is of purely private origin and derivation. It has not been received from the State; and cannot, therefore, without the most atrocious and foul-handed sacrilege, be alienated from the Church ; nor in any way diverted to other than ecclesiastical uses. It is not in any sense the property of the whole nation, except for Church purposes ; and the State has no more right to deprive the Church of England of tithes, rates, glebes, and her other possessions, than it has to deprive the private subject of his liberty, property, or life. The fact is, that towards the sustentation of the National clergy, whether bishops, priests, or deacons, or towards the erection of parsonage-houses, chapels-of- ease, and churches, the Government has not for many years made any grant whatsoever.''' ♦ An influential layman says that " the only way to keep the Chiirch in her position as the Church of England is to reform her secular organization. Faults in this give a hanule to her political enemies. Thus reform must come by le.ii^lation — legislation, however, which will not take place if it is ojiposed by the clergy ; for our Jegislators, as a rule, care too little for the Church to figlit for reforms against the clergy, as shown unmistakably in their opposition to tlie attempt to distribute the Church revenues of the city of London for the benefit