ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

it would be well if they could be always persons among whom the pastor-canon might find his Scripture-readers and Sundayschool teachers, and the agents of his charities in the town.

The almsmen ought, according to the intention of the founder, always to receive what is enough to be of real use to them, instead of the yearly dole of shillings which, in many cases, has remained unchanged amid all the changes in the value of money for centuries. A body of almsmen may be held in abhorrence by political economists; but, good as political economy is, there are exceptions to its rules. We do not think that the sternest political economist could grudge a maintenance to King Henry the Eighth's poor bedesmen - men borne down by poverty, or 'overwhelmed by want, broken down and mutilated in the wars, 'or worn out by old age, or otherwise debilitated and reduced to 'want and misery; whose duty it shall be, as far as their infir'mities allow, to be present daily in church at the time of 'Divine Service,' and to help in lighting and putting out the lamps, ringing the bells, and doing other useful duties connected with the Church. There is a touching respect shown to these old men in the founders' institution. It would be well that they should always have houses found for them near the cathedral. Their presence, with that of the children of the choir and school, makes the whole cathedral establishment, as described in the Statutes, resemble a large Christian family, with its head and members, including children servants, and its old depend

ents.

Truly, it is no romance or excited sentiment which makes us pronounce that our cathedrals might be a great blessing-a living protest for Christianity in its most comprehensive form, in each of our cathedral towns.

17. We subjoin one further extract from Mr. Barry (p. 16.):—

'Every cathedral in the kingdom should be as accessible to the public as the British Museum or the National Gallery. The poorest person, free of any charge whatever, should be permitted to inspect and admire every part of the building. Whatever there may be of elevation and solemnity in the internal architecture of these noble structures ought to be the common privilege of all. A national Church should throw open the doors of its cathedrals to the nation at large. The public will defend and appreciate what they enjoy

It is well to remark here that there ought to be some central control for the preservation of the monuments and other antiquities in cathedrals. The fabrics will probably never again be allowed to go to ruin public opinion may secure this, but there is absolutely no guarantee for the preservation of the smaller historical or archæological curiosities with which our cathedrals abound.

freely and as a matter of right. The more frequent the visit of the stranger or the influx of the neighbourhood, the more necessary does such liberality become. It is not surely too much to require that the servants of the Church should be entirely supported from the funds of the establishment, and not also by the fees of casual visitors. It is not unreasonable to expect from them the civility of a railway porter, or of the attendants of the British Museum. The very reverse of this liberality and civility has generally been the case. It would not be easy to calculate the damage done to the Church in the opinion of the masses by the long-delayed and incomplete opening of St. Paul's, and by the frequent rudeness of vergers generally. These may appear small things, but they are important, as they give the Church itself a repulsive instead of an inviting aspect. They are not so much the fault of persons as the system itself. The harmless loitering on Sunday and the stolen glance are regarded by the attendants as so much deducted from their means of livelihood. There is some tendency to improvement in this respect, but it proceeds but slowly, and only in few places. Any effectual change must be imperative and universal. Cathedrals, like other public places, should be thrown open by Act of Parliament.'

18. A very serious point remains. Much of what is said in the Report of the Oxford University Commission against oaths of obedience to college statutes applies with full force to the oaths taken in cathedrals. These oaths are solemn promises of obedience to rules, many of which are completely obsolete and of such a nature that it would be highly inexpedient to revive them, while the binding force of the whole code of the Founders' Statutes has been greatly modified by changed circumstances in the course of centuries, or by the injunctions of some conflicting authority, and many provisions are now even distinctly contrary to the law of the land. A cathedral dignitary, who considers the matter seriously, will probably say, that his oath to obey the Founders' Statutes means, that he binds himself to obey them so far as they have not been modified by direct Act of Parliament †, by the canons of the church, or by allowed and notorious practice-a practice which has long suffered many rules to go into such complete desuetude that it is now out of the power of the cathedral body to revive them without contravening the authoritative decisions of judges, or even Acts of Parliament passed on the tacit supposition that such rules had altogether ceased to be binding. Thus he who has taken the oath has great difficulty in saying whether it is to the letter or the spirit, or both or neither, that he considers himself bound. Meanwhile the words of the oath remain unaltered, simply * Pp. 146, 147.

† Cf. here note, p. 164. above.

promising obedience to the statutes as they stand written in the book. This is a great evil. Surely, as these many important limitations on the promise of obedience to the cathedral statutes are certainly implied in the oath, the oath ought either to be simply abolished or the limitations openly and distinctly expressed. The Church and Religion must suffer by the State maintaining in sacred places a system so likely to give reasonable scandal and so difficult satisfactorily to explain.

These then are the principal heads of alteration in the present system of our cathedrals, to which we think a wise reform ought to have respect. There are two warnings which ought to be given to the Commission and the Legislature as to the mode of effecting such reforms.

1. It will never do to leave the settlement of such reforms as we have pointed out to the several corporations to arrange for themselves. From some unfortunate idiosyncrasy, corporations are powerless for self-reform. Legislation for cathedrals has hitherto been confined too much to legislation on the subject of their revenues. There must now be definite legislation on their duties. We do not pretend to say how this may best be effected. The House of Commons is certainly not very well qualified for a patient and calm investigation of the various questions which such a reform implies. But Parliament must, of course, determine whether great changes are required, and must settle what is the best mode in which a new scheme for the regulation of cathedrals is to be put in force. There must be a definitive settlement now by some authority from without as to what the duties are which each cathedral is henceforward to perform. We trust the Commission which Lord Derby issued will do its work faithfully, and present to the nation a wellconsidered scheme for regulating duties as well as revenues.

2. It would be most unwise to insist that, in the reform now contemplated, all cathedrals should be squared alike. Each will be found on calm inquiry to have its own peculiar duties according to the circumstances of the town and diocese in which it is placed. A calm and wise consideration of all these peculiar circumstances will be required before we can legislate aright. St. Paul's and Westminster Abbey are in the centre of the teeming capital. Their business is obvious: by preaching, by schools, by encouraging every good institution, to labour that they may christianise the dense masses of heathenism that darken the approaches to their precincts. Christ Church and Ely are appendages to Oxford and Cambridge. Durham has already struck out for itself its proper sphere as the university of the north. We see not why new universities of the same kind

should not be added, as, for example, at Canterbury, where there is already a Missionary College. Wells has already gained some reputation for its School of Pastoral Theology. Many cathedrals in quiet country towns, like Lichfield, are simply to be looked upon as the centres of their respective dioceses, while others must have additional busy work, since a hard manufacturing people is springing up around them. A distinct sphere will certainly be found for the activity of each. Each must in its own peculiar way be made a centre of Christian teaching; and all, we trust, will be made places in which we may be sure to find learned men.

That cathedrals ought to be places for learned men will not, we trust, be forgotten in any reform which is attempted. There is a great rage among persons zealous in religion to multiply a hard-worked parochial clergy. This is all well. But we must urge once more, in conclusion, that a parochial clergy without learning will not reform the age.

We must renew our protest;-certainly this age wants quiet places for learned men. It certainly wants in every district what the cathedrals may supply-something to counteract its absorbing, money making, bustling interests. The quiet cultivation of sacred learning may do much to regenerate the age. If it be true that infidelity stalks abroad throughout the land, this evil, we repeat, can never be met, either among rich or poor, by an over-worked parochial clergy. No dislike of sinecures must lead us to forget this. According to the suggestions given above, in each of the twenty-nine cathedrals the dean and one canon, at least, might have ample time secured for learned leisure; and, whatever duties are laid on chapters, this important point ought studiously to be kept in view.

It may be true that those who have held the patronage of stalls hitherto have made many bad appointments, but we trust a better spirit is arising. Our parochial clergy were, a few years ago, as inefficient as our cathedral sinecurists; but they have awakened. Let distinct duties be required of cathedral dignitaries, and they will awaken too. Bishops and Prime Ministers will not dare to appoint persons utterly unfit to perform these duties. If after a fair trial it be found that there is no improvement, experience will seem then to warrant that sentence of annihilation may be pronounced. But we hope better things, and are sanguine enough to look for ages of fresh exertion from what is now certainly the most dead and useless portion of the Church.

ART. VI.-1. A Letter to the Marquess of Tweeddale. By Major-General BRIGGS, Madras Army. 1842.

2. The War in Affghanistan. By JOHN WILLIAM KAYE. 2 vols. 1851.

3. History of General Sir Charles Napier's Administration of Scinde. By Lieutenant-General Sir WILLIAM NAPIER, K.C.B. 1851.

4. Remarks on the Affairs of India. By JOHN SULLIVAN, Esq. 1852.

5. Report from the Select Committee on our Indian Territories.

1852.

WE have no intention of criticising the merits, literary or otherwise, of the works which, in their titles, stand at the head of this Article. They are full of interest, every one of them; not more on account of the importance of the subjects to which they refer, than because they are suggestive to such as read them attentively of very grave reflections. Who can doubt that for the last twelve or thirteen years the existence of the British empire in the East has been hanging continually in the balance? Who can flatter himself that the scales have even now subsided into their proper places, and that all danger is past? Had the native powers better understood one another, and the disaffected within our own provinces been more energetic in their councils, the disasters in Affghanistan might have lighted up a blaze from one end of India to another, which we should have found it difficult if not impossible to extinguish. Had Burmah been ready and the Punjab further advanced, the march of Lord Gough upon Gwalior would have been the signal for an inburst through Arracan, and across the Sutlej, and so onwards to Delhi and Calcutta. Had the Sikhs been aware that our cavalry were fleeing from the field, how many of the gallant men who stood to their arms amid heaps of dead outside the lines of Ferozeshur would have survived to speak of their escapes and their daring? And then, with Hardinge and Gough and their stout army annihilated, what was there to prevent a general rising of the whole Asiatic population, and the consequent expulsion of the English from their land? Nor are other and scarcely less alarming truths forced upon our notice by these publications. It is impossible to deny that we are indebted for the continuance of our supremacy in the East, quite as much to

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »