Observer, Nov. 1, '72.

of contempt are gone, and now the day of excitement and fierce encounter has come; and, though the end may not be-will not be so distant as it once appeared, it will not be reached without a conflict, the shock of which may make the strongest reel, and will make the fainted-hearted quail and turn. On the other hand, let not a consciousness of these facts unnerve or paralyze either leaders or followers in this great movement. For against these facts are to be set others, than which nothing can be more calculated to stimulate and to strengthen us. For, so far as I am able to perceive, there is not a single tendency of the time, either on the continent or in this island, which is calculated to buttress up Church Establishments. No statesman, it is confessed, would create a new one, and few statesmen would give many years' purchase for those which already exist, and which are seen to be decayed and to have waxed old, and to be " ready to vanish away."

Present state of the English Establishment.

If the lips of anti-state-churchmen were closed from this moment, the condition of the Church of England would speak volumes in condemnation of the system we assail. For it is not an Established Church we now have: it is established chaos. Even those who are indifferent to the claims of truth are scandalised at the equivocation, the antagonisms, the bitter hate found within the pale of the National Church, and found nowhere else. And there are thousands of Churchmen whose minds at this moment, are full of apprehension, and even anguish, as they look upon the fettered, torn and bleeding Church they so fondly love. Secessions may be few, but there will be no heart in the defence of men who doubt the worth of that which they are defending; and though an open alliance with malcontent Episcopalians may not on any large scale, be practicable, there are even now many, and presently there will be many more, ready to hang the flag of truce from the battlemented walls of the Establishment, with a view to parley for an honourable surrender. These will grow in number, and in courage too, in proportion as it is seen that, as the Church's life and energy increase, confusion and dislocation increase also. And if it be true, as was lately asserted at one of those diocesan meetings which have done so much to make known the real feelings of Churchmen-if, I say, it be true that a race is going on between Church reform and Disestablishment, the Church reformers will soon discover that they are too heavily handicapped to win, and will be as much disgusted with what Parliament does, and what it leaves undone, as Parliament itself is evidently beginning to be disgusted with the necessity for regulating the affairs of the Establishment which it still upholds.

AN EVANGELICAL CLERGYMAN'S REASONS FOR

SECESSION.*

THE Rev. Capel Molyneux, one of the most distinguished ministers of the Established Church in the Metropolis, has formally announced his secession from the Established Church, in consequence of the Bennett decision. We quoted in these columns, some time since, some expressions "The Bennett Judgment. Our Duty: What is it?" By the Rev. Capel Molyneux, B.A. London: Hunt. Price 18.

Observer, Nov. 1, '72

of Mr. Molyneux tending to this issue. He has now reviewed, with some elaboration, the position of the Evangelical party with regard to it, stating, as the result of that review, that he, at least, must secede from the Establishment. Mr. Molyneux's pamphlet is written with great earnestness and religious feeling. He begins by reciting the effect of the Bennett Judgment, which is given in very plain language:

"The doctrine of the Real, Actual, Objective Presence of Christ's Body and Blood, under the form of bread and wine, at the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, is now legally recognised as a doctrine, not excluded by the Articles and laws of the Church of England.

"Since the Reformation, up to the delivery of the Bennett Judgment the Church of England positively, without reserve or modification, protested against this doctrine as unscriptural and heretical. By reason of the present legal recognition of this doctrine, her protest, on this point at least, is now virtually withdrawn. To maintain that she protests against that which she legally recognises as not excluded by her Articles, implies a contradiction too gross, and glaring, to be tolerated for a moment. The change in the Church then is great, as great as well can be; disastrous alike to her own character, and to the spiritual interests of all her members." This is followed by detailed extracts and the recitation of the terms of the judgment. This judgment Mr. Molyneux considers to be in flagrant contradiction to the interests of the Church, and holds that it is a shock to the character of religion. But it remains that Mr. Bennett is acquitted, that his doctrine is lawful, and "it may be taught and promulgated in our This is appalling," pulpits with perfect impunity by any clergyman." and "deadly virus is now introduced into our Church system." Mr. Molyneux proceeds to quote some expressions of public opinion as represented by the Times and other journals, to indicate the general view as to the effect of the judgment, which he thus summarises :—

66

"That the particular doctrine of Romanism, against which we as a Church especially protest, may now, under legal sanction, be preached in our churches.

"That the constitution of our Church as Protestant, and as a witness for the truth, is essentially changed and damaged.

"That the last barrier, to the legalisation of complete Latitudinarianism in our Church, is removed.

"That there is no longer any security for attendants at our Church, for knowing beforehand whether the teaching to which they shall submit themselves, shall be of a directly Infidel, Romanising, or Evangelical character. "Such in public opinion, and such in fact, is the state of our Church consequent on the acquittal of Mr. Bennett."

From this point Mr. Molyneux proceeds to consider the duty of the ministers of the Church. The relation of the Church to the State is thus described :

"The Church of England is a corporate body, dependent for her constitution, laws, and very existence, on the law of the land. She is what the law makes, and declares her to be. The law can alter her, unmake her, or destroy her at any time. She is established by law, and can be disestablished by law. She is absolutely responsible to the Legislature, and is bound, at the very peril of her existence, to abide by the laws which are, or may be, imposed upon her by that authority. This is the essential

Observer, Nov. 1, '7%,

constitution of a State-Church, and only so can a Church be a State, and so nationally an established, Church at all.

Now the State, or law of the State, has ruled and declared in the articles, formularies, and liturgy of the Prayer-book, or in the Prayer-book at large, what the character of the worship and teaching of the Church shall be; and to that worship, and that teaching, exclusively (as to principle), however altered, or differently interpreted, it may be at different times by the legal authority of the State, she is committed and pledged.

"This is the nature and constitution of an Established Church, and of the Church of England as so established. She is thus committed to the State. But just as the Church is committed to the State, so are ministers of a State-Church committed to the Church; and as the State gives laws to the Church, so does the Church give laws to her ministers."

Mr. Bennett's doctrine being legalised in the Church, it must be patiently endured by the clergy, for "Our connection with the Church as ministers, carrying with it assent and consent to all her laws and doctrines, necessarily involves this. There is no escape from it." In such a position he considers that things cannot be left alone. The doctrine cannot be merely protested against. The only escape is in reform, disestablishment, or secession. The primary alternative he believes to be reform, but he does not believe it to be practicable. He entertains "no hope whatever of it." As to Disestablishment he says:

"What then becomes our duty? DISESTABLISHMENT, or SECESSION, I believe them to be the only alternatives.

"Disestablishment, no doubt all will agree, is preferable to secession : but of what use to discuss their comparative merits? Disestablishment,

we may say, is at present out of the question-I say at present! It looms in the distance: the cloud gathers; the day of disruption of old and longlived institutions hastens upon us; foundations are shaking; and assuredly, among the rest, those of the Established Church give forth their tokens. But, as I think, she falls not yet; she is too deeply welded into the National Constitution-too strongly imbedded in the hearts of the people, to admit of the probability of a speedy dissolution. Something to meet present evil must precede that; and, Reformation being dismissed as impracticable, nothing remains, that I can divine, but Secession."

Mr. Molineux proceeds to vindicate the obligation of secession, closing the pamphlet with this emphatic declaration:

"If the Church of England is to abide as she is a monstrous combination of truth and error-of Protestantism and Romanism-of light and darkness of testimony for Christ and yet also testimony against Christ— if this must needs be so, then I, solemnly, seriously, and as in the sight of God, ask, What is our DUTY? Momentous question! I presume not to answer it for any other man living; nor to judge any other man living for the answer, be it what it may, which he may feel right to give; but I do presume to answer the question for myself; and that with perfect confidence and the answer is:-SECESSION is my DUTY!

"And that duty I am, God helping me, fully prepared to discharge; yea -real, radical reformation, carrying with it the revision of the Prayer-book, being impracticable-I will secede!"

Such writing and action will do their work. They may not lead to many secessions, but they must lead to great troubling of conscience, and they will hasten the great end.

Observer, Nov. 1, '72,

LIVINGS FOR SALE.

Ar the recent Birmingham Conference, Mr. Cox, of Belper, who is a Churchwarden, is reported thus:

"He regarded that meeting not merely as a meeting of Nonconformists, but as a meeting of lovers of religious equality; therefore he did not think it at all inconsistent with his position as a Churchman to find himself on that platform. The Dean of Canterbury had expressed his belief that there were as true friends of the church among the active members of the Liberation Society as could be found within the pale of the church; and he did not recognise in any way the Liberation Society as a hostile body to the Church of England, but one which would eventually serve her best and truest interests. He (Mr. Cox) felt more strongly than he could express the almost unmitigated evil which the accursed endowments were to everybody concerned. He used the word 'accursed' advisedly, because he firmly believed they tended to a very great degree to cripple the energy of the body to which he belonged. He was acquainted with instances in which this had been known to be the case. He was there as a parishioner's churchwarden for the parish with which he was connected. It would, of course, be improper on his part to enter into details as to the state of that parish. He might say that it boasted of one of the very best endowments of any living in the county. The value was a £1,000 a year. Nor would he tell them anything about the congregation which had resulted from that endowment, or anything about the very large number of Nonconformist chapels which, in the course of the last ten years, had sprung up in that part. It would be impertinent on his part to enter into all these details. He might state, generally, that an earnest churchman, 200 years ago, left that church a large sum of money, and also a considerable number of fields in the parish, to be devoted to the purposes of keeping the fabric in repair. The lands were now bringing in an income of £100 a year; and, notwithstanding that the endowment was left for the purpose he had mentioned, he could honestly say that throughout the whole county of Derby there was no church in a more dirty and digraceful condition than that parish church. When a heavy storm of rain came on, the people had actually had to remove from their seats and go to another part of the church. Nothing could be done in the way of voluntary effort for the repair of the church, because people, conscious of the fact that the church was richly endowed, would not give anything towards the object. He then referred, at considerable length, to the sale and barter of revenues, carried on to a great extent by the adherents of the church. He had spent some time during the last month in collecting all the information he could on this subject, and he was perfectly amazed at the great magnitude the matter assumed. He had obtained possession of certain circulars and papers which were privately circulated amongst the friends of the church, in which advertisements of benefices were inserted, and other matters connected with the livings of the established church. On one of the circulars they were informed that it was strictly private and confidential.' From the different circulars he found there were, in September last, 596 advertisements of livings for sale; for exchange or sale, 99: and there were others for exchange only, which made, in the whole, 1,375 livings at present in the market. He urged that clergymen who thus bartered and sold their livings must be guilty of simony. He had analysed 400 of these

Observer, Nov. 1, '72.

livings very carefully. He found that 104 were mentioned in the advertisements as having the advantage of 'good society' as one of the reasons why they should be purchesed. In other cases it was said that the clergyman would have the advantages of 'excellent society,' and be brought into contact with the best society.' He found that 56 cases were recommended on account of the picturesque scenery in the neighbourhood of the living; and in others it was said that there was 'excellent trout fishing in the neighbourhood." In 11 cases 'good shooting' was mentioned as a recommendation; and there were 9 cases in which the great advantage of the hounds meeting in the neighbourhood was mentioned. In two cases the parishes were in a very happy state, having no poor residents. In another case there was a very fine house, and the income was £600 a year; there was plenty of fishing and hunting to be had in the neighbourhood, price £8,500. Another advertisement mentioned the fact that the incumbent was 80 years of age; another living in Lancashire was described as a 'most eligible property,' the incumbent being 53 years of age, and in a very precarious state of health. In another case the incumbent was said to be 89 years of age; therefore, immediate offers were requested. A living was advertised as for sale in Shropshire, the population of the parish being only 1,740; and it was mentioned that the duty was only performed every alternate Sunday. The income from tithe-rent and glebe was £800 a year. He was not telling them this for the sake of creating a smile. He mentioned these things as being of serious moment, and things which he believed the majority of the members of the Church of England would reprobate. Where must they look for a remedy of the evil? He told them that no remedy would touch the evil except disestablishment and disendowment. Such a system as he had been trying to expose was the bane of every form of religion in this country. It was the bane of Christianity, a disgrace to the nation, and a disgrace to the church. He contended that the nation had the right of dealing with that church, because the nation at large was affected by it."

HOW TO CONQUER.

I do not mean a nation, nor a city, nor an army. To conquer in this sense is nothing; that is, it is nothing to the Christian. It is not the victory which he seeks, and therefore not a victory over which he rejoices. It may have its advantages, and often has, I doubt not, but they are not the objects of his ambition. How to conquer self is the Christian's problem. And this is metaphorical language. Figure aside, and the question is how so to live as not to sin. But this is a difficult end, rarely attained, and one which costs us much watching, and praying, and fighting. We, therefore, call it a victory. How shall we attain it? It becomes every Christian to put this question well home to himself.

In attaining this victory we must be careful that we are not found warring against a troop. If so, we are warring for defeat. We conquer sins one by one, and not by the multitude; or what amounts to the same thing, we thus conquer vices. If we would succeed, then we must take our foes one at a time. Only let us be careful that we select the most dangerous ones. These subdued, and victory over the others is easy. What single vice then shall I attack first? This question each must decide for himself,