It was church, as far as may be, according to the drawing which is now laid before the meeting. As accurately as it is possible to calculate, it will cost about £3000 to complete the church, exclusive of the spire. It is my wish to go thus far at once, leaving the spire to be completed at some future time, when from my own resources, or by the assistance of friends, the necessary funds can be found. on this plan that the great Cathedrals were almost all erected; one Bishop generally completed one portion of the building, leaving the whole to be finished by future generations, so that frequently two, three, or even four centuries elapsed between the commencement and the completion of the work. The church, if built, will be placed near the site of the ancient hospital of St. John, and will therefore be dedicated to St. John. It will contain between five and six hundred persons, without any galleries; and all the sittings will be free of any payment whatsoever. It appears to me, (though this part of the plan must remain for future consideration,) that the most desirable rule to establish, would be to apportion the seats to the different inhabitants of the district, according to the number which they are desirous of occupying, and the order in which they should apply for them. With respect to the exact amount of the endowment which I should think necessary in order to begin the building, it would be difficult to speak precisely; I would rather leave it with those who are interested in the undertaking to do the utmost they are able; that as I mean well towards them, they may show that they also mean well- not to me, for that is nothing but to those who are in need; and may declare their gratitude to ALMIGHTY GOD. I would now beg to make a few further observations in explanation of my wish that there should be no pew-rents in the church which it is proposed to build, especially as many hold an opinion different from my own on this point, and consider pew. rents not merely as an evil necessary on account of the inadequate endowments of some of our churches, but as really desirable in themselves. As to the great principle, that it is the bounden duty of the Christian people to minister to the maintenance of their clergy, on that point there can be no question. We need only consult the texts from Scripture, which are directed to be read in our Holy Communion Service, to be convinced of this,— and there are many other texts equally conclusive: :-not that all the riches in the world can pay for the treasures communicated to the Christian laity through the ministration of their clergy, for these are beyond all price, but simply because it is God's own appointment that his ministers should be maintained by their people. This then, is beyond dispute: and the only question is, whether pew-rents are a good or a bad means of securing to them this maintenance. One argument commonly adduced in favour of this system is, that it reduces people to come to church who would not otherwise come :having paid for their seats, they feel a kind of property in them, and come to church in order to have, as they think, some return for more: their money. This may be very true, but there is a most serious consideration to be set against it on the other hand, which is this: that mere religious knowledge is by no means necessarily a blessing, for when granted to those who do not go on to love and follow what they learn, it draws down God's greater indignation and severer punishments. We must come to be taught as GOD would have us come, with a single heart; for otherwise, instead of receiving good, we surely shall receive evil; the greater the blessing, the more awful is the danger of its desecration; and to enter GOD's house with any other feeling, and on any other motive than that which is right in his eyes, is to lay ourselves under a fearful liability to His judgments. Again, the system of pew-rents appears to me to be evil, as tending to check the growth of Christian liberality. Almsgiving, if it be a living grace within us, will be, like all other Christian graces, perpetually on the increase. If we give a little this year for the love of GOD, we feel the next year that we must give - and what seems to us a large offering to-day, in a few years' time will appear to us as almost nothing. And it is this growth which the system of pew-rents, as I should think, has a tendency to check. When a person gives annually a certain fixed sum towards the maintenance of the church where he attends, he is tempted to make it an excuse to himself for giving no more, and so he stands still, where he ought to be continually advancing. There is another consideration also which makes one averse to this system, which is, its possible effect upon the clergyman himself. The treasures which we have to dispense are beyond all price, but these "treasures are in earthen vessels."-2. Cor. iv. 7. The Minister of CHRIST has the same natural passions to contend with, and the same liability to temptation, as the weakest of his flock: indeed, the more exalted his position and the more sacred his office, the more will the great enemy of souls strive to hurry him down the headlong path of sin, that with him he may ruin thousands. And surely to our natural passions the depending for our livelihood on the caprice of those committed to our charge, is a very serious temptation. If a clergyman, so circumstanced, perceives that by preaching the truth in faithfulness, he is emptying his church, it is surely a dangerous enticement to him to prophesy smooth things, And again, by establishing a fixed rental, we are introducing into religious things a principle which, while it is necessary in all earthly affairs, is surely most improper in all spiritual acts: - I mean, the idea of buying and selling. The people, as it were, purchase at the hands of their minister and the Church, a certain amount of religious instruction, which they expect to receive in return for what they have given. And can there be anything more opposed to the true spirit of the Gospel than such a notion as this? Is it not a free and wonderful gift which the minister brings to his flock from GOD? Can anything pay for it? Is it not, in very truth, beyond all valuing? Surely, as was said on on a late occasion In before the House of Lords, though the widow's mite is counted as enough by the mercy of GoD, all the gold and glory of Solomon's temple can never be too much as a return for such blessings. We, who are the Clergy of the Church, come with a free gift in our hands; and what we ask is, not to have a certain price paid before we part with the treasure, but rather that they who freely receive, shall gladly offer to God the utmost they can, as a thanksgiving for His great mercies. Once more in the House of Gop let us have no distinctions of rich and poor; no separate places for those who can pay for them, apart from those who cannot. We will not carry this world's ways into that holy place: in this life's concerns we must have differences of every variety, and degree, and state, not only for the sake of the high, but for the sake of the lowly themselves. But they must not enter into the Church of GOD: there the only difference of rank is between those who are appointed to teach and rule with authority from CHRIST, the bishops, priests, and deacons of His Kingdom, and those for whom they minister; and in a congregation, there is but one line of distinction, which is, between those who serve GOD, and those who serve Him not. all other respects, high and low, rich and poor, meet together in a Church on the same level, sinners in the sight of GOD. Let us then by all our outward acts and regulations express what we ought to feel everything that we do, everything that we see, ought to show that we are in a place belonging to another world. The very form, arrangements and decorations of a church should be a symbol of things unseen; so that the moment we entered it our whole hearts should be possessed by heavenly thoughts and cares, that the lonely should feel that there he had a home, the sorrowful be comforted by an assurance of a rest in GOD, and every assistance be given to the better desires and feelings which we are seeking to strengthen in our minds. Such, I would hope, shall be the church we are proposing to build. I have, then, now only to lay this proposal before the inhabitants of Bridgewater, and to express my earnest hope that we may all engage in the work before us, with hearts so sincere, that our offering may be accepted in the sight of GOD. It is said in the solemn words of Scripture, Except the LORD build the house, their labour is but lost that build it.' We must, therefore, put away the world from our minds, and then give to GOD's service not of our superfluities, for such gifts GoD can never accept and bless but denying ourselves that we may have wherewith to honour him. And then I would humbly trust, that while we reject all thought of succeeding by our own power and strength, in faith we may be confident that GQD will bless; and to Him be all the praise." -- Resolutions were then proposed by Sir Peregrine Acland, Mr. Ruscombe Poole, Rev. H. Parsons, Mr. Sealy, Rev. T. H. Middleton, Mr. F. Axford, the Rural Dean, Rev. J. J. Toogood. and Mr. John Sealy, and all unanimourly carried. Papers were handed round the Hall, and the persons present put down their names as subscribers to the amount of £1590 and upwards, upon the announcement of which, Mr. Capes came forward and said, that from the large amount which had already been subscribed, he should consider it certain, that a sufficient sum would eventually be raised for the endowment, and he should therefore at once direct his architect to prepare his plans, and take the necessary steps for commencing the work.The Bishop then dismissed the meeting with his blessing. To the Editor of the Christian Magazine. DEAR SIR, Many people in our town think that religious differences do not matter at all, and in conseqnence of this opinion, they send their children sometimes to a Church school, sometimes to a school for all denominations, sometimes to a Methodist school, sometimes to a Baptist school, and sometimes to an Independent or Calvinist school; and they themselves go first to one place of worship and then to another. I have often told them that they are wrong, and that such a course could be attended with nothing but misery both to themselves and their children. They have generally laughed at me, and said that I was ignorant and bigoted - that all religions were equally true and that it did not matter at all where a person went to, so that he got good. Well, sir, you will scarcely believe it, but it is very true, although very shocking, some of these people have gone so far now in these so called enlightened and liberal ways, as to send their children to a Socialist school. Yes, sir; there are positively people in our town who call themselves Christians, and yet send their children to a school, where they are taught to deny our Blessed SAVIOUR, and all the truths of revelation. When I see such results as these from liberal views on religion, I must say that I hate and detest them, and wish much that you will warn all your readers against them. The Church is either true or false. These liberal-minded people do not venture to say that she is false; and if she be true, all dissenting sects must be false; for this is involved in the very fact of the Church being true, as her doctrines are essentially different from those of dissenters. Let us, then, hear no more of religious liberalism it is a foolish and false doctrine, and will lead those that act upon it into misery. Depend upon it, sir, that those parents who send their children to schools for all denominations, where they are taught that all creeds are equally true, are but preparing them for admission into the Socialists' schools, where they are taught that all creeds are equally false. I remain, dear sir, Your obedient servant, F. D. To the Editor of the Christian Magazine. SIR,-There is a pamphlet now circulating in our town, in which the writer asserts that the Wesleyans hold the same doctrines as the Church of England. What nonsense this is.-Do they hold the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration?-Do they hold the doctrine of a Real Presence in the Eucharist?-Do they hold the doctrine of one holy Catholic Apostolic Church ?-Do they hold the doctrine of the Communion of Saints ?-Do they hold the doctrine of the Apostolic Succession? Do they hold these doctrines, I ask, in the sense in which the Church of England, following the sense of the Primitive Church, holds them? In a Wesleyan sense, possibly they may hold them; but do they hold them in the sense in which the Church holds them? I trow not. The assertion sounds very well; but it is simple assertion, incapable of proof. According to the sense of the Church of England, they have no Gospel ministry, and no sacraments. They must therefore be more reckless of their souls' salvation, than I hope they are, if they really believe that they hold the doctrines of the Church of England.-I am, sir, Your obedient servant, A MEMBER OF THE CHURCH. |