natural and amicable than elsewhere. They explain the fact variously; with some the secret lies in the mental stagnation of English society, its obstinate conservatism, its innate bondage to convention, its dislike of innovation; with others the explanation is found in the essential emptiness of English religion.

"The patience of the English race, the endowments of the English Church, and the respectable character of the English clergy, only mask for a while the fact, conspicuous in the rest of Europe, that the orthodoxy of the sixteenth century has worn itself out, and gives no adequate voice to the faith and piety of the present age."*

Fifty years have passed since Dr. Martineau wrote thus, and it is safe to say that his words were truer then than now; yet, if his diagnosis of the situation had been sound, his words ought to have received luminous exposition and abundant proof in the interval. For the last half-century has witnessed an intellectual revolution, more rapid, farreaching, and drastic than any since the Reformation. It has been a testing-time for the Churches. Yet, whatever else may be said against the National Church of England, it cannot be asserted that within its sphere of influence the authority of Christianity has conspicuously waned in English society. The place of the clergy in the intellectual life of the time has been distinguished and honourable; the great traditions of the Caroline epoch have been maintained, and the "sound learning" of Anglicanism vindicated in many directions.

Essays, Reviews, and Addresses, vol. ii. p. 68. The quotation is from an article entitled "The Church of England" in the Westminster Review, 1850. There was very much in the aspect of ecclesiastical politics at that time to justify the severity of language employed throughout this article. The venerable author would have been the first to recognise the salutary change which has passed over the nation in this respect, a change to which he himself in no small measure contributed,

ARCHBISHOP TAIT'S CHARGE

19

It is true that there are causes for anxiety lest the twentieth century shall not, in this respect, altogether sustain the tradition of the nineteenth; but the history of Anglicanism teaches nothing more clearly than the futility of prophecy and the folly of despair. Archbishop Tait, in his Charge, delivered at his primary visitation in 1872, dwelt on this honourable mark of Anglicanism that beyond all other varieties of Christianity it reconciled itself to the new knowledge of the age.

"It is commonly said nowadays, in many countries, that Christianity and Reason must be divorced; that Christianity and Civilisation-modern civilisation--are antagonists to each other. Certainly we, in the Church of England, have no fear lest there should be any real antagonism between God's two great lights to man-Reason and Science as its product on the one hand, and Revelation on the other."

He went on to mention the names of "famous ministers of the Church of England" whose "very presence amongst us has been a standing protest against any notion that inquiry and the fearless love of truth can be inconsistent with the Gospel which we preach." The list of names might be greatly extended. If account be taken of the eminent Englishmen of the century in every department of the national life, it will be found that the Church of England numbers most and the greatest of them among its sons. It is not so elsewhere, at least in the same measure.

"To whom does France owe that part of her civilisation which enables her at the present time to rank among other great nations?"-writes "a sincere and liberal Roman Catholic" who was an eye-witness of the Vatican Council—“I mean her culture, her science, her industry, and her material prosperity.

The Archbishop limited himself to those who were no longer living. He mentioned Whately, Arnold, Hare, Maurice, and Robertson. We may add the names of Kingsley, Thirlwall, Stanley, Hort, and Lightfoot as not less eloquent of "sound learning" and intellectual honesty.

Beginning from the encyclopædists down to the learned men of the present day, how many of the savants, and of those who have in any way assisted the growth of modern France, would have been recognised by Rome as her children? How many laws, how many institutions, and what amount of learning would of necessity have been lost to France had the voice of Rome prevailed in that country? Imagine the consequences to France as regards culture and science had her intellectual progress been subjected for a century to the corrections and revisions of the Roman Index? What part can the influence of Catholicism (using the term in the very sense adopted by its own party), what part can that influence claim in the civil glory and intellectual progress of France? So far we have considered her under the aspect in which she equals the most cultivated and civilised nations of the world; but, at the same time, what nation is more deeply affected than France by grave and serious social questions, or is in a condition less favourable for their resolution ? "*

Certainly this challenge has lost nothing in the course of the twenty-five years which have elapsed since it was first proposed. When we seek the causes of that happy "Treuga Dei" which reigns in England between the Christian Religion and modern thought we are at once led to the national establishment, as in great measure responsible. For the English establishment has declericalised the clergy beyond all precedent or parallel. It is not necessary to question or belittle the mischiefs which from this circumstance have arisen to religion at present it is more important to point out the still more considerable advantages.

"The ministers of the Established Church have a mission to the whole nation," and this fact is remembered by the parishioners when it has failed from the mind of the parish priest. In spite of himself he must grow greater

Eight Months in Rome during the Vatican Council, by POMPONIO LEti. London. John Murray, 1876. It would be an easy task to multiply similar declarations from eminent Frenchmen who were not Roman Catholics,

CHARACTER OF THE ENGLISH CLERGY 21

than his professional character may seem to require. His interests cannot be confined to ecclesiastical channels: his sympathies cannot lag behind his responsibilities, and they are co-extensive with the entire life of the people.

Three circumstances have ministered to the distinctive type of the Anglican pastor. The normal training of the English clergy, at school and university, is entirely nonprofessional. Hence they are the most theologically ignorant and the best educated ministry in existence, and the worst informed on all matters of ecclesiastical technique; but hence also they are the most vigorous and healthy in moral tone, and the sanest in political action. They think, and speak, and act in ways which are essentially similar to those of their Christian neighbours, to whom accordingly they are intelligible. Again, the clergy are, as a rule, married men.* Here also there are obvious drawbacks: marriage means necessarily secularity of tone, and a narrowing of the social connections of the clergy. The very essence of caste is hereditary succession to status: and their marriage imposes on the English clergy a quasi-caste character, which is not pleasing or helpful. The political influence of the clergy, as distinguished from that of the Church, is greatly weakened by the fact that they are drawn from a very small section

It is certain that Religion suffers great damage from (a) improvident, (8) unsuitable marriages. As to the first, it is to be feared that as the clergy are drawn from a lower social stratum, so they will tend to be poorer, and to marry at an earlier age. As to the second, there is much to be said for Elizabeth's attempt to regulate clerical marriage. "Because there hath grown offence, and some slander to the Church, by lack of discreet and sober behaviour in many ministers of the Church, both in choosing of their wives and indiscreet living with them," it is enacted that no clergyman shall take a wife without "the advice and allowance first had upon good examination" of the bishop and two justices. (v. Injunctions of 1559, No. 29.) It is astonishing with what bitterness the parson's wife is sometimes regarded, and not always without cause. On the other hand, there are numberless examples of parochial devotion among clergymen's wives. Cf. JOSEPH ARCH's Autobiography, pp. 7, 17, 50 fol.

of society, being indeed largely drawn from the clerical order itself. But here also the advantages preponderate. The moral tone of a celibate clergy is certainly harder, coarser, and lower than that of a clergy which is free to marry, and is in fact, for the most part, married. In country parishes the clergyman's household sometimes sets an example of domestic virtue before the district; and it is certain that no barrier is more effectual against certain characteristic superstitions and tendencies of the clerical order than that provided by the purifying affections and sobering cares of family life. Marriage is not excessively described by Coleridge as—

"that bond, which more than all other ties connects the citizen with his country; which beyond all other securities affords the surest pledge to the State for the fealty of its citizens, and that which... enables the State to calculate on their constant adhesion to its interests, and to rely on their faith and singleness of heart in the due execution of whatever public or national trust may be assigned to them."*

Finally, the English clergyman, trained as a layman, living essentially as a layman, ie. surrounded by the comforts and burdened by the anxieties of home, is fixed by the law in his benefice with a security which is as nearly that of absolute ownership as the case admits. Short of idiotcy, bankruptcy, or crime, the parish priest can hold his "living" against aggrieved parishioners, indignant patrons, and an outraged bishop.† It is manifest that this "freehold" in an office which carries cure of souls may easily minister to portentous scandals: it is, indeed, patently indefensible, and ought to be terminated; but none the less it would be equally foolish and false

v. Church and State, p. 91. [4th edition.]

+ Recent legislation has sharpened the sword of the magistrate against the scandalous clergy, who are happily few in number, but provides no remedy against the incompetent, who are far more numerous than is either safe or right. The "freehold" directly fosters clerical indolence.