some repetitions, and have rendered the argument more intelligible and convincing. For although performances, which present the appearance of professed and regular disquisition, have something in them less attractive than discourses of a loose and unstudied complexion, we are fully persuaded that, unless the matter be carried to excess, the former method has decidedly the advantage.

By these strictures, however, we would by no means be understood to derogate from the general value of the work, nor can we, upon the occasion which the discourses under consideration present, forbear to congratulate the nation upon the attention which seems to be reviving among the clergy, to the fundamental and distinguishing doctrines of our religion-doctrines, without the belief and due estimation of which, we only assume the name of Christians to disgrace it. It is our sincere desire, that the laudable exertions of Mr. Daubeny, in the publication before us, may succeed in the attainment of their proposed object; and that the clergy of every description, while they are taught to value as it deserves, and adhere with becoming firmness to the ecclesiastical constitution, with which Providence has favoured our land, may unite with that reasonable attachment a fervent zeal in the defence and declaration of those essential truths of the Christian Religion, upon which, and upon which alone, the everlasting hopes of the human race are founded.

XXXVIII. Thoughts on the Residence of the Clergy, and on the Provisions of the Statute of the 21st year of Henry VIII. c. 13. By JOHN STURGES, LL. D. Chancellor of the Diocese of Winchester. 8vo. pp. 64. Cadell, 1802.

WITH whatever disgust the public may have beheld the mode lately employed for enforcing the residence of the parochial clergy on their cures, it cannot be doubted that the increasing dereliction of that most solemn and important duty has risen to a height which calls loudly for some powerful check. We apprehend, however, that the tendency of the pamphlet now before us will not be thought so efficiently remedial as could

Dr. Sturges confesses, indeed, that there has been too much occasion to complain of the non-residence of the clergy, and that the grievance has even gone to an unreasonable extreme." This confession is followed by several considerations, which plainly point out the propriety, and we would add duty, of residence. Such as-" That the business of the world, in all its branches, may be considered as best conducted by those persons whose immediate concern it is; who are chiefly interested, and ul. timately responsible;"That the resident incumbent has great advantage above the curate, though equal to his principal in good intentions and abilities, his situation, as pastor of his parish, being permanent, while that of his curate may be but temporary, and he young in the profession, and his income enabling him better than that of a curate to be charitable and hospitable ;and that "besides the occasional assistance naturally coming from the family of a resident incumbent to those around him who want it, (in affording which assistance female attention and tenderness often bear a distinguished part) the good example of such a family, conducted with regularity and decorum, as we may suppose it to be, and possessing influence from some superiority, has a constant and very beneficial effect."

All this is just, so far as it goes, and shews that Dr. Sturges has considered the subject with attention; but we were disappointed by the absence of what we have always deemed the principal argument against the non-residence of the clergy. We expected the Author to have shewn that the great design of a religious establishment, the Christian instruction of the people, was in many instances defeated, and its general operation most lamentably impeded, by the extent to which this jobbing system is carried.

Dr. Sturges having shewn the propriety of residence on the part of the Clergy, proceeds to what seems the main design of his publication, to point

out a variety of cases, not provided for by law, in which the residence of an incumbent should be dispensed with.

His first reason for this indulgence is drawn from the insufficiency of many benefices to afford a decent provision for the incumbent. The living is a poor one, therefore the parish may be deserted by its proper pastor, and left to the care of one in whose circumstances (according to the Author's own statement) there are likely to be fewer advantages for the benefit of the flock. What sort of logic this is we will not say, but certainly it is not good divinity. Such an apology for non-residence proceeds on the supposition, that the temporal provision of one is a matter of greater consequence than the spiritual welfare of hundreds.

Another reason for dispensing with the residence of the incumbent is, that as polite congregations, such for instance as assemble in the Churches and Chapels at the west end of London, require clergymen of greater abilities than is necessary for the instruction of a remote village, the incumbent of a country parish, who may have an opportunity of following his profession in a higher sphere, should not be obliged, by the menaces of the law, to waste superior talents among peasants, when he can employ them among people of better education. Granted: but let it be recollected, that "the menaces of the law" are not directed against his officiating at the west end of the town, but against his deserting his proper charge. Let him relinquish the trust committed to him, and then the law will leave him to go whithersoever he listeth.

Dr. Sturges would have those clergymen likewise exempted from the operation of the statute in question, who are engaged in the instruction of youth. “Education,” as he justly observes, "is an important national concern ;" and for this "employment, the clergy are (collectively taken) eminently qualified."-" As public men, they are more responsible, and are entitled to more confidence than others." On all these accounts, Dr. Sturges would have such beneficed clergymen as engage in this profession, left at liberty to make choice of such a local situation as may be most

favourable to the prosecution of their important vocation.

The Author would, likewise, have those clergymen excused from the penalties of non-residence, who "travel abroad with young men of fortune, as companions and tutors ;"-those whom, "ill health," or "certain domestic circumstances," oblige to leave their parishes-and those also whose parsonages, being incommodious, live in other houses, though they do not desert their

cures.

After giving this specimen of cases, which the Author conceives have a claim to indulgence, he proceeds to impress the reader with the necessity of vesting, in some proper hands, a discretionary power to relax, as the case may require, the obligations of the law of residence. "A written law," he observes, "is in its nature a rigid, inflexible rule, which cannot adjust itself to circumstances, comply with occasions, or admit distinctions; it must pronounce its judgment generally and indiscriminately." The discretion of some superior, therefore, he conceives it requisite, to remedy the inconveniences of a written law.

The person with whom the Author would entrust such a power, is of course the diocesan; and the only fear that he conceives would be entertained of entrusting bishops with it is, that they might "make too lenient a use of it; that they would defeat the effect of the general rule, by admitting too many exceptions." After replying to this, and some other objections which he supposes may be made to the consignment of such a power to the bishops, he proceeds to animadvert on that part of the statute of Henry VIII. which prohibits the clergy from taking lands to farm. This subject, however, as has been observed by the author of an able reply to Dr. Sturges's pamphlet, is to be considered rather as an intrusion, which tends to "distract from the momentous question" of residence, "part of the entire attention to which it is so justly entitled."

We think it the less necessary to animadvert on several objectionable points contained in this pamphlet, and particularly on the proposal for leaving

a large discretion to the diocesans, as it is ably done in the publication which forms the subject of our next article. We shall, therefore, dismiss Dr. Sturges's thoughts on the residence of the clergy, with only a general remark or

two.

It has been the too common defect of many of our attempts to reform ecclesiastical abuses, that the evil is touched with too delicate a hand.Abuses which tend to defeat the great purposes of a Christian ministry, are evils of such a magnitude as ought not to be spoken of with timidity or reserve. Dr. Sturges writes indeed with great moderation and decorum, but the subject required energetic reprehension; and this we conceive he might have employed, without violating the laws of urbanity. It must be allowed that he discovers much humanity of disposition in the concern he has shewn for the temporal comfort of his brethren. But we wish it had been equally evident that, while he was pleading for indulgence, on the point of residence, towards all those whose cases he has described, he felt how much the Church was likely to suffer in her spiritual interests, by the desertion of so great a number of clergymen from their proper charges, as his various pleas of exemption would comprehend. It seems to be one of the faults of the day, to be more concerned for churchmen than for the Church itself. True piety will indeed beget a solicitude for their accommodation; but its greatest object will be her prosperity and perpetuity.

XXXIX. Observations on Dr. Sturges's Pamphlet respecting Non-residence of the Clergy; in a letter to Mr. Baron Maseres. 8vo. pp. 63. Hatchard, 1802

THOUGH the Author of these observations has taken a different side of the question from Dr. Sturges, the reader will be mistaken if he consider the pamphlet before us as the production of some envious sectary. The Author is one "who" (to use his own words) can, without pain, see an archbishop precede a duke. He can see a Bishop of Durham, or of Winchester, in pos

་་

session of ten thousand pounds a year, without supposing that revenue to be in worse hands than those of this Earl or that Esquire."

Nevertheless," continues he, "well pleased as I am that the ministers of religion should have their share in that exuberance, which, in every prosperous community is produced, beyond what is requisite for the support of the producer; I am not, therefore, to lose sight of the great purposes for which national Churches were established and endowed, or to forget that the interests of religion are paramount to those of her clergy; and that all the rights of the members of that body, as such, are derived from and held in subservience to the religion of which they are the ministers." (page 7.)

These extracts will discover to the reader the motives of the Author in bringing forward his objections to Dr. Sturges's pamphlet.

His first objection is to the manner in which Dr. Sturges speaks of the non-residence of the clergy; and as a contrast to his "cold and perfunctory strain of animadversion" on the subject, we are presented with the following extract, from a Charge of Bishop Horsley, "The evil [of non-residence] is grown to that gigantic size, that a remedy, in one way or other, can be at no great distance; and if persuasion prove ineffectual, or take not, indeed, a very speedy effect, other measures must be taken, and other remedies provided."

This extract is followed by another from the venerable Hooker. After observing that the grave topics stated by that great luminary of the Anglican Church are of universal weight and application, our Author very justly observes (page 16) "that at the present period, besides all the ordinary principles of obligation on the parochial clergy to perform their duty, they are loudly called to this performance; and the legislature, and all ranks of men, are imperiously required, in all legal ways, to compel obedience to this call; by motives arising out of the peculiar character of the times. The enemy, always active, now makes his attacks,

in a way which requires not only activity, firmness, and energy of opposition; but instant and unremitting vigilance of preparation and prevention."

We have not given the whole of the paragraph, lest we should exceed our limits in transcribing, but can assure our readers that it is an impressive statement of the dangers to which the people of this country are exposed, from the insidious industry of those who labour to corrupt the community with a pretended philosophy; and we think with our Author, that "a nonresident clergy not only deprives us of the protection" we need in such circumstances, "but furnishes a argument to the enemy, gives a new positive facility to the corrupter, and creates a new positive susceptibility in those whom he would seduce." (p. 19.)

new

"4. All heads of houses, magistrates, and professors in universities, and all others under forty years of age, residing in an university for the purposes of study. 5. All persons employed in the King's service beyond sea. "6. Chaplains of the King, the Queen, and of other members of the royal family; of archbishops and bishops, of peers and peeresses, if actually attendant in the service of those by whom they are appointed. "7. Those who hold certain parochial benefices, not coming under the description of recto ries or vicarages."

After giving us this list, the Author adds, page 21, "I hope you will agree with me in thinking, that these exemptions tend to bereave at least a sufficient number of parishes of resident incumbents."

The Author then proceeds to state his objections to any further extension of the privilege of non-residence. He begins with what Dr. Sturges has advanced in favour of clergymen employed as tutors or travelling companions.

"That several ecclesiastics are so employed, I recognise with pleasure; for, by this connection, I conceive that we attach our gentlemen to the Church, and liberalize the Church by an intercourse with the leading characters of the country. But I am not bound, therefore, to admit that they have a right to exemption from the duties of parisle priests, or that, if they had such right, the statute against non-residence should therefore be repealed." (p. 23.)

"But why," continues he, "are any paro chial clergymen thus employed?-It is notorious that there are abundance of members of

the universities, and other ecclesiastics, unatand perfectly qualified to engage in this occutached to parochial benefices, who are willing pation. Why then are the parochial clergy to be called from their bounden duties? A parochial benefice is by no means an unconditional

freehold. He who accepts it, imposes on others, the conscientious duty of residence, himself conscientious and legal duties-among and legal subjection to the penalties enacted against the breach of it. When St. Paul says that they who wait at the altar, should live of the sacrifice, he plainly implies, at the same time, the converse of his proposition, that they who live of the sacrifice, should wait at the altar." (p. 24)

Again, "The station of a parochial incumbent is his parish. He is there, not merely to run over the ritual services of religion, but to administer her instruction, her charities, her consolations, to the ignorant, the poor, and the afflicted. It is not by a weekly lecture from the pulpit, but by constant, vigilant, systematic diligence-that he is to instruct his flock." (p. 27.)

From this just view of clerical obligation, the author naturally adverts to those unworthy members of the profession, who assume it merely as the means of obtaining "a life annuity, on the clear produce of which, after defraying the charges of management, they live at large in the world, without any regard to the duties appendant to it:" observing at the same time, "that

though these men readily join in the clamour, at what they call the harsh application of a statute against themselves, they have not ordinarily been backward to employ, in all their energy, the most rigorous engines of statute, or of common law, to screw up the value of their perverted revenues. Fairly as this writer appears to us, in general, to have conducted his reply, we doubt whether the above representation be quite correct. We apprehend, that the state of things between such an incumbent and his parishioners, is generally of the nature of an iniquitous convention: he forbearing to claim the full profits of his benefice, lest they in revenge should prosecute him for nonresidence: they suffering him to absent himself from his charge, in consideration of his taking less than the known value of his living. By this shameful compromise, the revenues of the Church are injured; and the successor, who perhaps is a conscientious and diligent resident, begins his career under many disadvantages. His only wish with respect to income may be, to be able to maintain his family with decency, and to exercise those hospitalities which adorn his situation, and serve to give effect to his instructions. For these purposes the fair value of his benefice may be no more than sufficient.

He

must, however, either be contented with less than his just occasions require, yea, perhaps, than his necessities demand, or he must have recourse to a legal process in order to obtain what is his own. For being placed in this dilemma, he may principally thank his predecessor; who, instead of "screwing up the value" of the living, has given away a portion of the property of the Church, to purchase a connivance of his neglect of its duties.

In reply to that part of Dr. Sturges's pamphlet, in which he endeavours to shew the oppressive operation of the statute on those clergymen who are obliged,by the smallness of their livings, to expose themselves to its penalties by following the profession of a schoolmaster, &c. our author proposes such measures for remedying the inadequacy of their incomes, as shall render non

residence unnecessary. He conceives, however, that the poorer clergy have not much to dread from prosecution for non-residence. For as the informer's motive is generally a desire of gain, it is natural to expect that he will fly at a nobler quarry." ." But if it were otherwise" if we were reduced," says the author "to this alternative, that either poor, laborious, and meritorious clergymen must be subjected to ruinous prosecutions for non-residence, or the statute against non-residence must be abandoned; I should feel compeiled to submit myself, however painfully, to the first option. I must, in conformity to the sound well-proved principle of English jurisprudence, prefer a private mischief to a public inconvenience. (p. 35.)

In answer to Dr. Sturges's fear that too strict an enforcement of residence might deter young men of good connections and promising abilities from the clerical profession, the author expresses a persuasion that higher motives than the love of wealth or power will induce many, in future, as heretofore, to enter into the service of the Church of England. And after reminding us of the attractions which append to the dignified appointments in our Church, and of the many learned and respectable men whom the Churches of Scotland and Geneva, with much more slender revenues, have drawn into their service, he concludes this part of his reply with affirming that, "the enforcement of parochial residence never will exclude, from the service of the Church, any one man, who shall be worthy of admission into it." (p. 43.)

The author next combats Dr. Sturges's proposed remedy against the rigorous operation of a written law to enforce the residence of the clergy.

"Between the inconveniences or evils of a

definitive statute, somewhat too severe, perhaps, for some cases, and too lenient, perhaps, in others-but still fixed, intelligible, and plain

and those of a judicial discretion in the bishops, I cannot bring myself to hesitate for an instant. Individual discretion is an abomination. In the memorable words of Lord Camden, It is better to leave a rule inflexible, than permit it to be bent by the discretion of a judge. it is always unknown: it is different in different The discretion of a judge is the law of tyrants: men: it is casual, and depends upon constitution,