errors, already too numerous, among the people. In poor and thinly-inhabited villages, there is often a difficulty in maintaining a daily school. In such cases, I would recommend to the Clergyman to consider whether the benefit of a Sunday school, which I presume he would be anxious at any rate to establish, might not be materially promoted, if according to the mode prescribed by the 59th Canon, he would devote a short space, before or after the Church Service, to the examination of the children; and I think the want of farther instruction would hardly be felt, if the latter part of the Saturday could be allotted, under his immediate care, to the same purpose. This appears to have been, even in places of greater importance, the ancient practice, till the polity of the Church was dissolved by the Puritans in the great Rebellion. I am even inclined to believe, that in many situations the system of catechising in Church might at once be restored with good effect, if discretion were used in disposing the parents to enforce the attendance of their children, and the examination were judiciously interspersed with short explanations, which might be generally edifying to the congregation. But, leaving these matters to the judgment of individual Clergymen and the suggestions of local eircumstances t, I must still insist on the general necessity of providing some mode of education, which, in conformity to the plan laid down by our Church, shall unite the double advantage of training up children in the principles of sound religion, and in the habit of regarding the parochial Clergy with affection and reverence, as the only safe and lawful teachers. It is only by the personal discharge of this duty that you can hope to succeed in convincing the people, that if it is the office of the minister to teach, they are under an equal obligation to attend on his ministry and receive his doctrine. And proportioned to the effect of your endeavours in the accomplishment of these purposes, will be the proficiency of the people at large in the principles of pure religion, and their attachment to that form of doctrine, discipline, and worship, which, established as it is by the laws of our country, has still a stronger claim to their preference in its intrinsic excellence." P. 18.

We have now brought to a close our account of the leading argument and of the principal topics contained in this truly admirable, and we had almost said, apostolical address. The importance of the questions upon which it touches, the manner in which they are discussed, the general tone of the composition, would any of them be sufficient to entitle it to a

*

See Nicholls on the Common Prayer, Note (b) at the end of the Catechism."

In the former Charge, adverting to this subject of catechising as connected with the National Schools, I expressed my opinion as to the expediency of reviving the system, without the qualifications which farther consideration of practical difficulties has suggested."

more than ordinary share of attention. But when to these recommendations, we add the high and distinguished name of its author, it would almost seem like an impertinent waste of the reader's time, to offer any general remarks upon its merits. The high quarter from which it proceeds, would indeed of itself, have claimed for it a prominent station in our pages; but the reader will readily discover from the tenor of our review, that it is not this consideration which has been uppermost in our thoughts, in the process of our remarks.

Before we conclude, however we may observe, that there is one topic more upon which the Bishop touches in the opening of his Charge, and which, though distinct from the general subject of it, is yet of too much importance to be passed over by us without notice it is on the subject of the reciprocal regard which are mutually due from incumbents and curates towards each other. A nicer or more difficult matter to handle, it would not be easy to name; and it is impossible not to admire the delicacy with which the subject is managed. We should quote the passage as a specimen of refined and graceful composition, if it had not merits of a graver kind to recommend it.

There is, perhaps, no example to be found, in any case, in which public duties are in question, where the relative subordination of those by whom they are to be discharged, is so imperfectly defined, and where so many claims and rights are left to be adjusted by the individuals themselves, as in the case of curates and incumbents. The reason of this policy is not difficult to trace. Situated as society is at present, it is plainly an object of great importance to uphold the weight and influence of the unbeneficed Clergy: the more so, because their inferior position in respect to preferment, might easily lead people to look upon them as an inferior order in the Church; and because they require every aid in order to enable them to occupy that station in society, to which, in general, without the rank of their office, it would, perhaps, be difficult for them to maintain. That inconveniences have arisen, in many instances, from the absence of express regulations, cannot be made a question; but still, upon the whole, the present policy is the wisest and most expedient. It would evidently be hardly possible to devise any enactments defining the subordination of the rights and duties of the unbeneficed Clergy, as Curates, without, at the same time, assigning them a subordination of rank as members of the Establishment; and without an equal dignity, in this last respect, much of their peculiar usefulness, as we before said, would obviously be destroyed. So careful, therefore, has the

wisdom of the legislature been, to abstain from whatever might affect the respectability of our stipendiary Clergy, that in its anxiety to preserve the equality of station between them and their incumbents, it has even made them independent of each other; and has determined that the licence by which a Curate holds his office, shall not be liable to be revoked at the mere personal convenience of the Rector, but that the ground of removal shall always be subject to the judgment of their common superior. The advantages of this are obvious, not only with respect to the importance which it gives the Curate, but even to the effectual discharge of the duties which they have, in common, to fulfil. Unless harmony and good will exists between those by whom these duties are to be performed, no legal enactments would be of any effectual avail; and the only way of securing that, is to make it the interest, as well as the duty of both parties to cultivate a right understanding by mutual courtesy and respect. But although the Curate is, by law, made independent of the mere arbitrary will or caprice of his Rector, it does not therefore follow that he is independent of his advice. and wishes. The licence of the Bishop does not give the Curate a property in his stipend; it is at all times revocable; and whenever the manifest interests of the parishioners make it expedient that it should be revoked, it is plainly the duty of the Bishop to revoke it, without regard either to the interests of the Curate or his Rector. The character of the Church, and the spiritual interests of its people, must not be compromised by the indecent disputes of those who ought to support both. And since whenever such disputes unfortunately arise, the concession of the Curate, even supposing him to be right, can never involve him in the same responsi bility for the consequences, as would be the case with the Rector, upon the same supposition, the Bishop justly argues, that as a general rule, the duty of giving way plainly devolves upon the former. But all that we are now saying, is placed in so clear a point of view in the Charge before us, that the reader will be better pleased to have the Bishop's own words. What we have been saying has rather been with a view of recommending the subject to the attention of our readers, than of throwing any additional light upon it.

"On the general obligation to Residence, I will not repeat what I have said in former addresses, and have never failed to inculcate, as opportunity offered, upon individual Clergymen, in private. You cannot be ignorant that, whatever exemptions are allowed by the law, or left to the consideration of the Bishop, the responsi bility of declining the personal discharge of your duties must rest

with yourselves; and that if you would stand absolved at a higher tribunal, you must be well assured that the grounds of your proceeding are such as will abide the scrutiny of your own conscience. In determining a point of so much importance, you should be careful to understand your motives, and not be lightly discouraged by apprehensions for your health or comfort, from the performance of a bounden duty. I do not press the invidious topic of abandoning your charge to a hireling. The expression involves an affront to a highly meritorious portion of the Clergy, engaged in the active and faithful discharge of the most useful professional duty, and supplying a succession of ministers for the higher departments of the Church. The hireling' is he, whether beneficed or not, who acts on personal views of pleasure or profit, without concern for the welfare of his flock; and nothing can be less consistent with truth than the imputation of such criminal profligacy to any description of the Clergy. The distinction of beneficed and stipendiary is accidental and external, affecting in no way the intrinsical dignity of the priesthood, which is neither increased nor diminished by the proportions of honour or emolument attached to different situations in the Church: nor do I know of any inferiority of the Curate to his Rector beyond the subordination resulting from this particular relation. This view of the case supplies infallible rules for the régulation of their mutual intercourse. The beneficed Clergyman contracts an engagement with a brother, on whom he devolves a most sacred and important trust; and not, it is to be presumed, without proper regard to the requisite qualifications of attainments, temper, morals, and piety. From a fellowlabourer of such a description in the care of his vineyard, it is hardly conceivable that he should withhold the liberal treatment, the offices of courtesy, the marks of attention, which are necessary to make the situation of a Curate agreeable to himself, and respectable in the eyes of his parishioners. In return, he has a right to expect equal civility, a friendly and zealous concern for his reputation and interest, a ready attention to his advice, a respectful deference to his suggestions. The Curate is without excuse, if he loses sight of the subordination implied in his office, and of his obligation, both in.duty and decency, to comply, in all things honest and lawful, with the directions of a principal, who cannot divest himself of the right of control over his parish, or of responsibility for the conduct of his substitute.

"I have been led to these reflections, from the desire of rectifying the preposterous notion, which, I am told, has been sometimes entertained, that the Curate is rendered independent of the Rector by the Bishop's licence, and cannot be justly displaced, except for such flagrant misconduct as would render him altogether unworthy of any professional employment. The enactment of the 36 Geo. 3, since re-enacted in the Clergy Consolidation Act, empowers the Bishop of the Diocese to license any Curate actually

..R

VOL. XVIII. SEPTEMBER, 1822.

employed, without express nomination, and to revoke summarily and without process the licence of any Curate, and remove him from the curacy, for any cause which shall appear to the Bishop good and reasonable.' The obvious intent of these enactments was, on the one hand, to give protection to the Curate, with ample security against any injustice on the part of the Incumbent ; and on the other hand, to provide for the Incumbent an immediate and effectual remedy against the vexatious obstinacy of a perverse or unworthy Curate. In the exercise of the discretionary powers which are vested in the Bishop by this law, it will always be my endeavour to keep the objects in view, which I believe to have been in the contemplation of the Legislature. On no account can I shrink from the duty of protecting and sustaining the Curate in the full enjoyment of his rights, while he attends with fidelity to the duties of his cure, and to the relation in which he stands to the Incumbent. But I trust it will not be imagined, that the Diocesan's licence will uphold the Curate, who gives just cause of dissatisfaction, by insufficiency, negligence, or indecorous behaviour in his official functions, or by personal disrespect or hostility to the Incumbent, whether shewn by direct opposition, or by secret endeavours to diminish his influence in the parish. The best interests of the parishioners will suffer, when discord prevails between the ministers who have joint cure of their souls; and since regard to personal feelings must yield to considerations of public utility, it may be sometimes expedient to dissolve the connection, and thus put an end to a scandalous contest, though it may be difficult to apportion the blame between the contending parties." P. 7.

We now take leave of this excellent Charge, by joining our thanks to those of the great body of the Clergy, for the valuable service which the publication of it cannot fail to confer upon the Church. Those to whom it is more immediately addressed will learn from the perusal of it, what are the peculiar objects for which the necessity of the present times calls upon them more especially to contend; and the public at large will see in it a proof, that those objects are not exclusive or intolerant; they have simply in view the respectability, the usefulness, and the security of the Established Church, without any bigotry of opinion, or bitterness of feeling towards those who conscientiously dissent from her authority. Whether our Church establishment be an institution in itself expedient or otherwise, is a point, the discussion of which belongs not to the Clergy in particular. The question has been decided in the affirmative, by those to whose wisdom we are indebted for our Constitution, and until that decision be recalled, the Clergy have a right to take for granted that it has been decided wisely. Assuming,