MR. PERCEVAL'S ANSWER TO MR. GOODE'S REPLY ON

CHURCH RATES.

MY DEAR SIR,-If I understand Mr. Goode's letter aright, there is no difference whatever between him and myself as to facts in the case of church rates, only a misapprehension, on one side or the other, of certain terms; such as "civil obligation," and "common law." When

I stated that the obligation to contribute to the repairs of the parish churches, except so far as affected by the statute of 1813, is a religious and not a civil obligation, and not liable to be enforced by an action at common law, it was my intention to distinguish between the laws of the state or civil body, and the laws of the church or religious body,— the want of which distinction has been, I believe, the occasion of all the dispute which has arisen upon this subject. So far as the church and state may be regarded as one, and every member of the state may be considered as a member of the church, and under the power of her laws, which the civil government is willing to aid her officers to enforce, as by the writs de excommunicato, or as it now for the most part is de contumace capiendo, to which Mr. Goode has referred, so far any common law of the church In England, permitted and aided by the civil government throughout the length and breadth of the land, may not inaptly be called common law or England; in this sense, and in this sense only, do I believe the obligation to contribute to the repairs of the parish churches to have been affirmed to be "common law of the realm" by the authorities which Mr. Goode has cited; and in this sense I have no hesitation in assenting to the affirmation. But then I conceive that this can only be maintained by confounding the laws of church and state. When we come to distinguish between the laws of the church or religious or spiritual body, and the laws of the state or civil body, and to assign to each their proper quarter, I know no way of ascertaining to which class any law under examination properly belongs, but by inquiring in which courts the law in question can be enforced, whether in the temporal or in the ecclesiastical courts, whether in the courts civil or in the courts Christian. An obligation which can only be enforced in the temporal courts cannot properly be called an ecclesiastical obligation; nor, on the other hand, an obligation which can only be enforced in the ecclesiastical courts be called, with any regard to accuracy of speech, a civil or common law obligation, as that term is used to express the common law of the state as distinct from the church. My own inquiry respecting the obligation to contribute to the repairs of the parish churches had led me to the conclusion that, except so far as affected by the act of 1813, the obligation can only be enforced in the ecclesiastical courts. Mr. Goode's inquiry has led him to precisely the same; his words are— "previous to the act of 1813, already alluded to, the ecclesiastical court was, of course, the only proper place in which to sue a recusant for the payment of church rates, and still remains so, for sums above 10%.” He has thus aided me in shewing that according to what, under his favour, I must consider the legitimate meaning of the terms, the obligation to contribute to the repairs of the parish churches is a religious

or ecclesiastical and not a civil or common-law obligation, seeing that it can only be enforced in the ecclesiastical or religious courts, and not in the common law or civil courts.

The statute of Edward I., which is the first law of the state which treats distinctly of the subject, classes it among the "things meer spiritual," and therefore leaves it as a proper subject for "plea in the court Christian.”

Mr. Goode will perhaps now see that the extracts in my former letter were not irrelevant, as he supposed, to the point I was seeking to maintain. He objects to my calling ecclesiastical censures appeals to conscience; I can only say, that I have ever been led to regard them, especially excommunication, which is the dernier resort, as the most awful appeals to conscience which it is possible for men to make. With my best thanks to him for the copies of his pamphlets which he was kind enough to send me, I remain, my dear Sir, yours very faithfully. ARTHUR PERCEVAL.

East Horsley.

SCOTCH [PRESBYTERIAN] BAPTISMS.

SIR,-There is an expression in "T. C.'s" letter on this subject which he will perhaps do well to consider more accurately than he appears to have done. He speaks of "hundreds of Scotchmen who annually leave their own country to settle in this, and who in the great majority of instances become members of the English church, and receive from the hands of her ministers the Lord's supper." It is clear that, prior to their coming to England, he does not consider them to have been members of our church. How then did they become so? He will perhaps answer, by receiving the sacrament of the Lord's supper in our congregations. But does he not know that, according to the rules and discipline of the church of England, all communion without episcopal confirmation is surreptitious, an act of stealth? It cannot therefore, I presume, make them members of the church; for "he that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way," is reputed to be no true man. Let those who, being without episcopal baptism, desire to join our communion, be referred to our bishops for confirmation; the parochial clergy will then be clear of the dilemma which "T. C." contemplates, and the responsibility remain with the bishops, to whom it belongs either to require rebaptization (absolute or conditional), or else to admit to the church by confirmation, on the strength of "the water and the word," overlooking the defects in the authority of the administrator.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,

ALPHA.

LOANS FOR PARSONAGE HOUSES.

SIR, Some time since I applied to the Exchequer Loan Office for a loan, for the purpose of building a small chapel of ease, much wanted

by some of my parishioners, and offering as security the tithes, or rent-charge, or rent-charges, of an insulated portion of the parish of which I am patron and incumbent; intending, when the loan should be repaid, to endow from the same fund. The application was unsuccessful, on the reason assigned, "that such security could not be taken by the board." How much better the security offered on Irish ground, by an Irish Roman-catholic priest, may be, I know not; but I copy the following paragraph, and I surmise that no better security has been taken or demanded of this titular dignitary than the site and materials of this intended chapel :

"The Reverend Dean O'Shaugnessy has procured a loan of 7007. from the Board of Works, towards completing the Roman-catholic chapel in Ennis."-Church Gazette, 25th May, 1838.

"Verbum sat."

I am, Sir, yours, &c.,

RECTOR.

P.S. I avail myself of this opportunity to remark, that on looking at the list of subscribers to the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, a strictly church society, I find none of her Majesty's ministers, except Lords Morpeth and Glenelg, none of his late Majesty's, or of any ministry since 1830, except the said noblemen and Lord Ripon. It is, however, due to Lord Melbourne to remember, that he repaired, or re-edified, one church; that, if I recollect aright, in Derbyshire, in a parish from which his lordship takes his title. Lord Palmerston's purse has promoted popish glebes and chapels, and contributed to the Irish Clergy Fund. Evidence of English attachment to the doctrines and discipline of the church, by public or private acts, we look for in vain in our civil ministers.

In Gilbert's Clerical Almanack, page 144, is a list of present and late cabinet ministers, and great officers of state not of the cabinet, comprising fifty names, of persons among whom not more than about one tenth are members of any church society, while many of them frequent and make speeches at sectarian and anti-Anglican-church meetings.

MR. SHAW LEFEVRE'S INTENDED BILL.

SIR, Observing the notice of a motion given in the House of Commons by Mr. Shaw Lefevre for a bill to declare the equal liability of tithe commutation, rent charges, and other hereditaments, to be rated at the net annual value as defined by the sixth and seventh of William IV., c. 96, entitled, " An Act to regulate Parochial Assessments," I beg to call your attention to this bill, and through you, the friends of ecclesiastical property in both houses.

The mode of rating tithes, as settled by the case of Rex ". Joddrell, appears to be this-that where lands are rated at the full rent paid to the proprietor, tithes shall only be rated at one-half or less of their gross produce, and for this reason; the tenant of every farm makes a profit for himself out of the said farm equal to the rent paid to his landlord, or superior to it; but the gross amount of the tithes or the

rent-charge is the whole profit of the tithes from every source; thus, if a farm be rented at 1007. per annum, the proprietor receives 1007. per annum rent, and the farmer makes 1007.per annum as profit, making the whole produce of the farm 2007.; if the whole amount of the tithes of a parish or the rent-charge be 2007., it is evident that the produce of the farm let at 1007, is equal to that of the rent-charge producing 2001.; and if the farm be only rated in 1007., (the landlord's or proprietor's rent,) the tithes or rent-charge should only be rated, to be on an equality, at 1007. also.

Should it be argued, that the farmer must make a profit for himself out of the farm, as well as pay his rent, to enable him to live, and as a reward for his exertions; the same may be argued for the clergyman, who has undergone an expensive education, and who gives his time and his exertions to his duty, and who is just as much entitled to the one-half of the produce of his benefice for himself and family, as the farmer to the one-half of the produce of his farm.

I hope I have stated this satisfactorily, and that, should Mr. Lefevre's bill be intended to overturn the law as grounded on the case of Rex v. Joddrell, the friends of the church and ecclesiastical property will bestir themselves in time to prevent this rate-robbery from becoming law. I am, Sir, your very obedient servant, A RECTOR.

OF THE FALSE IMPUTATION OF LUTHERAN ORIGIN TO THE CENTUM GRAVAMINA OF THE DIET OF NUREMBURG IN 1522. SIR, That the faithful sons of the Roman church should at the time, and ever since, feel sore at the catalogue of grievances exhibited, and charges made, in a public assembly of the highest individuals of the German empire, against the church to whose communion they still professed to adhere, is too natural to be a subject of surprise. And it is as little to be admired, that they should take every means in their power to destroy or damage the credit of the fact and its document. This was done very early, and in the way which might be anticipated. It would have been a ruinous draft upon their reputation to deny what all the world knew. The plan therefore was, to represent the offensive act as that of enemies; and as there was no lack of odium against the Lutheran body at the time, and the language of the grievances might rationally enough be supposed to harmonize with their views and general conduct, it was a hopeful experiment, at least, to charge the accusation upon the Lutherans, and make them answerable in part, if not entirely, for what it would be desirable to hold out to society as hostile and interested calumnies against the holy Roman-catholic church.

Such a hypothesis could only impose upon such as never read with any attention the documents themselves, which attest their own character, as the voice of true sons of the papal church, but with feeling and virtue enough not to bear without resistance and remonstrance VOL. XIV.-July, 1838.

G

the exactions and public vices of the functionaries even of their own church. It could impose only upon such as were perfectly ignorant of the then present and preceding history of the time. In fact, every canon of historic criticism binds good, true, catholic parentage upon the Centum Gravamina of 1522.

It has already appeared in print that, independently of the internal evidence, the filial character sustained throughout the document, and the representation of the subjects of complaint where most disgraceful, as abuses, the testimony of Zuingle, in particular, in 1525, added to those of Claude d'Espense in a well known passage, and of Corn. Agrippa de Vanitate Scientiarum, are sufficient to satisfy any reasonable inquirer that a non-catholic, an anti-catholic, or a Lutheran origin of the German indictment against the pontifical church, is a pure and, to all appearance, not a very disinterested fiction.

Something, however, upon a subject which is obviously of no little importance, may be added to the foregoing evidence. I was long in pursuit of a work, the excellence of which I confidently anticipated, but could not gain possession of it till lately. It is a work by Jac. Frederic Georgii, in 4to, Franc. et Lips. 1725. Koecher, in his Biblioth. Theol. Symb., says that it had two titles. Mine is as follows:-"Imperatorum Imperiique Principum ac Procerum Totiusque Nationis Germanica Gravamina adversus Sedem Romanam," &c. At the close of the work is a formal discussion respecting the authors of the Gravamina, with a particular view to the attempt at giving them Lutheran origin. See pp. 501-530.

The learned writer states it as the ground of such imputed parentage by Campeggi, Surius, Maimbourg, and Cocleo, that the charges in the Gravamina were calculated to create odium against the Roman see; thereby acknowledging, as the author fairly infers, that, if true, the odium was just. He admits, that the writings and doctrines of Luther quickened the intelligence, probity, and zeal of the orders, as is expressly asserted in the Gravamina themselves. But the same grievances, for substance, were urged before the doctrine of Luther was in existence, under the reign of Maximilian; and certain it is, no Lutheran would, as in the document in question, call the monastic state religious. The Centum Gravamina were compiled with the consent of all the orders. This is proved by the recess of the diet of Nuremburg (Norici), by the answer of the nuncio Cheregato, by the prooemium and peroration of the Gravamina, and by § 2 of the edict of Nuremburg on the matter of Lutheranism in 1523, which the orders took care to have printed. The ecclesiastical states did indeed, in part, demur, as the subject-their own emendation-a prevailing regard to their own convenience, and the particular oath of papal allegiance, would dictate. But it is sufficiently clear that the Gravamina expressed the national voice. Guicciardini, c. 20, represents the general call for a council as originating in the extortion and profligate collation of benefices in the Roman church, and desired, in that view, even by the catholics of Germany. And Pallavicino himself (Ist. ii. vii.) acknowledges that by the Gravamina expressly relief